Expanding universe or shrinking space(-time)

  • #26
252
0
Mr Ich.
I will not respond to personal attacks.
When I mentioned his papper I explicity mentioned those calculations and explicitly not the other considerations on the papper, because I do not agree whith several aspects that he presents. He is doing his best, I presume, and it appears to me better than what I see from you.

Those calcs are easy to do, no fancy operators, nothing different from basic electromagnetics. It must be easy to show me if those are wrong. I did not spot any problem. Can you show us your oppinion, besides that 'ad hominem' attack ?

(english is not my natural language, and I write whitout a spell check. It is expected errors. I hope to see no attacks on that.
And I can tell you that I am a Portugueese fellow, not german as Einstein, and here we have thousands of teachers, good and bad, as usual. I am saying that to prevent your work trying to track my backgrounds)

But I've already said that the Evanescent hypothesis dos not needs to provide a mechanism. It was an addition of my own, because someone will say : why ? , my answer is a guess.
when refering to the usual BBH the answer is known : Do not know !
I think my answer is better.

Please tell us what is wrong with the calculations I've presented ( after him ). I think that among us there exists enough expertise to validate or not those calcs.

The calcs have an intrinsic validation (true/not true/who knows, error/no error/I dont know)
I'm expecting to see your comments on the calculations.
Anyway, tankyou.
 
  • #27
Ich
Science Advisor
1,931
1
There seems to be a misunderstanding. I have no interest whatsoever in discussing this subject, as it is outside the scope of this forum.
As to Herr Turtur, I'm confident that noone else here has ever heard of him. You threw in his personal status and profession to boost his paper's credibility, so I wanted to put things into perspectve.
 
  • #28
252
0
Mr Chalnoth can you elaborate on your saying " is overstating the facts when you state there is "no scientific basis" for the atoms being unmodified in time"
It would be fine some links, some reason .. to prove, otherwise it is an irrelevant statement.
Your saying seems without fundation.
--------------------------------------

Mr Chalnoth : your saying (my bold)
"I'm almost certain that your idea here is completely wrong."

The word 'almost' do not go along with the word 'completely'.

You had the opportunity to read those few pages, read and think on my reasonning and find anything more than those depreciative words. I love to discuss ideas. Give us an informed discussion.
--------------------------------------

Mr Ich: "and he is not emerited. Extremely unusual."
Contrary to your saying It would be really unusual that an 'emerited' produce pappers, as Emerited are RETIRED from work.
You have tryed to demerit "Prof. Dr." but as we can http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professor" [Broken] a "Prof. Dr." has a post-doctoral habilitation i.e. a second academic work beyond the doctorate. More than usual!

--------------------------------------
Mr Ich: as to your saying "as it is outside the scope of this forum" I do remember times of my youth when I lived under a dictatorial regime. No good for anyone. Asking for the 'red pencil' It's a shame.
I recommend you the attentive reading of this PF blog entry :https://www.physicsforums.com/blog.php?b=1473" [Broken]
"Mainstream" is not the same as "consensus ... and "So what is NOT mainstream?..."

--------------------------------------

A few words from a friend (a writer and also electr. eng. (*) ) :
"an addicional parameter is like borrow more money to rescue an old debt."
--------------------------------------

Can anyone help Mr. Chalnoth, or take his place ?

I argue with strict physics. Of course that I can be wrong, as anyone can be. Show me please why do you think that Evanescence Hypothesis is wrong.

--------------------------------------
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
Chalnoth
Science Advisor
6,195
443
I'm not really interested in going into this in more depth, unfortunately. Let me just say that it has all of the hallmarks of a crackpot idea. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
 

Related Threads on Expanding universe or shrinking space(-time)

Replies
23
Views
16K
Replies
21
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
7K
Replies
18
Views
12K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
788
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
908
Replies
26
Views
5K
Top