Hi Peter,
I spent some weeks in sci.physics last year, to no
avail.
I've been 'locked-out' of sci.physics.research, without
ever having posted any discussion of the work I've
done, which is 'curious'. I posted one msg - trying to
get a discussion started - and, even though it was
not 'big-deal' stuff, I was 'locked-out' [it's a 'mod-
erated' NG.
Before that, after long discussion, I was 'locked-out'
of CompuServe's "Science Forum", even though no
one there ever posted a sustainable argument against
the stuff I'd been discussing. [I was 'locked-out' of
CSi's SF 'because' I spoke openly of God - an "in-
verted" [AoK, Ap4] instance of Galileo's ordeal
before the Inquisition :-]
I've wondered why I was so quickly 'locked-out' of
sci.physics.research, and, in Truth, I've wondered if
there's a connection between these two 'lock-outs'.
It's part of why I've been so 'inconsolable' during all
of the 'time' I've spent here in b.n - Physics was, and
remains, my First [earthly] Love, and it's as if I've been
'disowned' by my 'family'.
Hurts like Hell.
Post "questions", Peter?
I've worked in Physics for more than 45 years. I have
a Physics Library. I've never read anything posted in
Physics NGs that's not fundamentally-explained in the
books. [Yes, periodically, there's this or that supposedly-
'new' stuff that comes out, like the "accelerating cosmic
expansion", this or that 'new particle', and/or a 'new'
quest for it, or the "galactic angular velocity" abberation,
but, when I look, all of the supposedly-'new' stuff is
right-there, explained in the books - if only one does not
carry-through the 'quantum' Error.
What's a man to do in the face of those who 'bow-down'
to 'quantum' as if it's some all-determining 'deity', and, so,
will not even consider what a man, who does not join them
in so 'bowing-down', to what the man sees as nothing more
than a mis-take?
I do what I do, Grateful that I am allowed to do it here in b.n.
Cheers, Peter,
ken [k. p. collins]
"Peter F." <effectivespamblock at ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:gZUGb.209$ma.6349 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> I suggest that you bring **tiny snippets** of your theory to
> sci.physics.research IN THE FORM OF QUESTIONS. And, if you get *really
> lucky*, then people like Lubos Motl (IMHO a smarter and/or more
> knowledgeable modern 'version' of a young Albert Einstein) will answer
you,
> informatively.
>> Then, if answered, "hold your horses" in order to learn whatever there is
> for you to learn from the answer - and if need be by put forth still more
> carefully contemplated questions.
>> For now, that is the only feedback I feel qualified to give you, in
respect
> of your Tapered Harmony theory.
>> Best wishes,
>> Peter
>>