In yet another attempt to close this discussion I'll try and keep my comments to
a minimum.
David Thomson wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>>> Err, did you expect we would be giving the book away for free?
>
>> Yes, electronically. There are countless sites that freely and gladly
> allow people place their research. I use Peswiki.com.
>
> Err, funny you would say that...
> http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Aether_Physics_Model
I wish you would stop playing games with people. That 1 & half wiki page is
nothing. I for example offer all my research, free of charge.
>> IMHO here's a significant difference between you and I -->
>
>> From the beginning of my research I have placed the following statement at
> the top of my research web page:
> "Note This project and research requires no funding or payments of any kind.
>
> No payment is requested nor has any ever been accepted for this project and
> research. This researcher has the necessary equipment and money to continue
> this project and research."
>
>> You push your Aether theory, but when the poor scientist goes to your
> website they discover you are selling a book.
>
> Heaven's to mergatroids! Imagine such a diabolical scheme! I have been
> caught, go ahead and report this heinous crime to the authorities Oh Mighty
> Crusader of free books.
> Here is another difference between us, I'm smart enough to write a book and
> register it with the Library of Congress in order to protect my ideas
> without having to wait for Nature or Science to accept a theory about the
> Aether for peer review.
> Here is another difference; I was requested by a large number of scientists
> to write a book on the Aether Physics Model, which is why I have already
> sold well over 300 copies.
Indeed, you and I are very different. I would freely give all the research
away. I seriously doubt "large number" of scientists requested you charge them
money for a book. And it seems obvious all those usenet posts begging
scientists to give "David Thomson" a Nobel Prize was merely you masquerading
under a yahoo addresses. Who in their right mind would plea with the physicist
community to give Dave Thomson a Nobel Prize?!?! People don't even post such
ridiculous pleas for Ed Witten. IMHO, if true, and we all know it is, then that
discloses a very sick side to your personality.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=David+Thomson+nobel&qt_s=Search
>>>> May I ask what your APM can do that Quantum Physics cannot?
> >
>>> Apparently you can. The real question, based upon your professed dislike
>>> for Aether theories, is will you listen to the answer? I have spoken
>>> several times in this thread and other threads on this list about the APM
>>> predicting the relative strengths of the fundamental forces, predicting
>>> the 1s orbital electron binding energies, and predicting the distributed
>>> and reciprocal natures of charges. And this is just a short list.
>
>> After asking you far too many times, and you avoiding the question, one
> has to presume you are not qualified at quantum physics.
>
> Let the record show, he asked the question again and ignored the answer
> again.
Please do not lie to Vo. Where did you tell us you are or are not qualified in
the field at Quantum physics.
>> I tried by asking you if your theory predicts what QM has successfully
> predicted. I'll even take another step forward by asking what a scientist
> could do with your model? Could one use your APM in a computer software
> simulation?
>
> Absolutely, that is what the Aether Physics Model was designed for. The APM
> is a discrete model of physics, which can provide not only a geometrically
> based computer simulation, but also a dimensionally based simulation. This
> is one of our goals for development once the theory gets off the ground with
> the right crowd and sufficient funding comes in.
>
>> That may not interest the physics community as a whole, but it could catch
> my interest since I write software simulations.
>
> How ironic. You ignore the Aether, which is the very basis of the structure
> you need in order to discretely model quantum physics.
According to who? You?
> You may not have noticed all those graphics in
> the papers. But those are computer generated
> images, based upon the Aether Physics Model.
Then the obvious question is were the images created using a graphics program or
by writing custom software? I am referring to writing software written in a
computer language such as C++, not a person using a graphics program. The
difference between writing software and using a program is like comparing QM to
basket weaving.
> Those images represent a two-dimensional surface in a five-dimensional
> spatial-temporal coordinate system. The reason modern physics cannot
> properly model quantum structures is because they are stuck in the
> four-dimensional space-time coordinate systems.
Could you please explain the double slit experiment in 3-dimensional physics.
You seem to avoid real problems such as the double slit experiment, but this
could very well disprove your theory, right? ... and put and end your book
sales, right? Just asking real questions Dave.
> As I have pointed out many times, the APM has started off only as a theory
> of quantum structure. Only recently have I made progress into quantum
> mechanics using a completely new approach,
You refuse to answer my questions as to how qualified you are in the field of
quantum physics. Seems obvious you are not qualified. I don't know why you are
so evasive on so many key questions *if* you are a sincere person.
> But I can't do all this work by myself with zero dollars personal income, a
> bad leg, and many other limitations I'm currently experiencing. What I need
> is to network with other researchers who are interested in actually solving
> the mysteries of the Universe
You want people to help, but first you want their money, huh?
> Contrary to your libelous smear campaign about charging for books, I never
> took a single penny of the book sales for myself. All the funds from the
> book sales go into the non-profit organization for the purpose of promoting
> the Aether Physics Model.
We have no proof of that, and besides that's merely a business move, to use
profits to make more money.
> So far, I have had to rely on the donations of
> friends and family to keep my personal life in motion, especially after I
> suffered a compound fracture of my lower left leg and ankle, and compressed
> my spine two years ago. The only way I could sink lower into poverty at
> this point is to abandon my dilapidated old house and live on the streets.
> Is that what you think I should do to match your level chivalry?
In a heart beat I would freely publish all the work!!! BTW, I know researchers
who are also financially broke, on the verge of being homeless, but they don't
blab it out publicly over the Internet.
Regards,
Paul Lowrance
