Prev: WHAT’S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Apr 10 Washington, DC
Next: galactic density & distribution; speed of light derived pure math & a log-spiral-radius #29; ATOM TOTALITY
From: Y.Porat on 25 Apr 2010 04:04
On Apr 25, 4:13 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
> > When you plot a histogram of particle masses from 100 MeV to 1800 MeV,
> > and then adjust the peak heights to reflect the particle "widths",
> > i.e., stability, you get a very unqiue spectrum that the "standard
> > model" is completely unable to explain.
>
> You'll find that physics always has a hard time 'explaining' numerology and
> general data juggling to the satisfaction of certain people.
>
> [...]

------------------
so it means that YOU know it
??!!
and how about explaining it you you
pompous disturbed fucker

Y.P
------------------------------
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 25 Apr 2010 14:55
On Apr 25, 4:01 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> EVEN IS YOU WRITE IT IN 'SCI.PHYSICS.RESEARCH   IT IS WRONG
>


Goodness, the signal to noise ratio in this newsgroup is a tad low.
From: Matt on 25 Apr 2010 15:35
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:07:33 -0700 (PDT), Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:

>When you plot a histogram of particle masses from 100 MeV to 1800 MeV,
>and then adjust the peak heights to reflect the particle "widths",
>i.e., stability, you get a very unqiue spectrum that the "standard
>model" is completely unable to explain.

I didn't read the first sentence as literally as it seems to be
intended:
"When _you_ plot ..."

I didn't find graph one in the linked paper.

In what way is the spectrum "very unique?"

If you have made this histogram, please post it somewhere and provide
a link.


>Using the (sqrt n)(revised Planck mass) relation derived from GR and
>QM in my recent paper, I can reproduce a unique and statistically
>significant 1st approximation fit to the unique and enigmatic particle
>mass spectrum. You cannot call this numerology. It is the physics of
>the new paradigm, which will make the "standard model" look
>exceedingly Ptolemaic. Paper can be read for free at:
>http://journalofcosmology.com/OldershawRobert.pdf , or
>http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0701/0701006.pdf .
>
>I would have thought that any physicist would be highly interested in
>what I am doing.

I would have thought that someone making claim to a revolutionary
discovery would have made their plot available.


>Imagine my surprise!

Ditto.
From: BURT on 25 Apr 2010 16:32
On Apr 25, 11:55 am, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu>
wrote:
> On Apr 25, 4:01 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > EVEN IS YOU WRITE IT IN 'SCI.PHYSICS.RESEARCH   IT IS WRONG
>
> Goodness, the signal to noise ratio in this newsgroup is a tad low.

God created first space, time and mass. He is now creating gravity.
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 25 Apr 2010 21:32
On Apr 25, 4:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> God created first space, time and mass. He is now creating gravity.

Or is it levity?

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: WHAT’S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Apr 10 Washington, DC
Next: galactic density & distribution; speed of light derived pure math & a log-spiral-radius #29; ATOM TOTALITY