Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

References for ZapperZ

  1. Aug 30, 2006 #1
    Since another thread was killed without any good reason, here I give some references concerning the ideas I was talking about:

    http://streaming.ictp.trieste.it/pr...rut self field account of atomic transitions" (for barut)



    (for Bohm de Broglie)

    and references therein and so forth and so forth.

    May we all rest in piece.


    PS: Both are peer reviewed in prestigious mainstream journals.
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 30, 2006 #2
    What causes a thread to get locked? I'm new to this forum.
  4. Aug 30, 2006 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Welcome to PF, Roger. Generally a thread will get locked or deleted for a violation of the PF posting guidelines:


    I'm not familiar with the thread that the poster is referring to, but I am familiar with the quality of ZapperZ's posting and mentoring.
  5. Aug 30, 2006 #4
    I concur the quality of ZapperZ's postings about
    those issues he is familiar with are of high standard.
    Unfortunately, the issues he is not familiar with get no fair
    treatment while he clearly shows not to even master the basic lines
    of thought in the latter and neither to be aware of their
    achievements (despite of numerous citations which - if he reads them
    - should make this clear). In contrast to what he thinks, I feel no
    obligation to type out all equations (which would take much time) in
    detail when I think the ideas expressed are clear enough for the
    reader to proceed; supplemented with some papers anyone can find
    using google. Actually, Zapper does the same, as soon as an idea requires some work,
    he refers to papers. There is a difference between uttering a sound idea
    worked on by some part of the community and a singleton presenting
    his theory of everything. The guidelines you refer to apply to the
    latter and not the former. The material presented here has been worked on by some of
    the best researchers of their time.

    I wish this kind of behavior would stop, there is clearly to be gained something from thinking deeper
    about QM and QFT as another mentor, Vanesch, acknowledges.

    Last edited: Aug 30, 2006
  6. Aug 30, 2006 #5


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    You WILL note that in the closed thread, I asked this specifically:

    Yet, you refused till now to produce anything substantial. I gave you not one, not two, but at least 4 separate opportunities to either explictly show the equation of motion OR to make a citation. This isn't a "FAIR" opportunity to you? Again, you have decided to somehow IMAGINED a series of things, not the least of which is the accusation about my "comments" about phonons (which you STILL have failed to produce any evidence of).

    The thread isn't about a discussion of QFT, non-locality, etc. And the thread was locked because of your attempt at hijacking it. You are MORE than welcome to create your own thread to push whatever it is you're pushing, and as I've recalled, there have been plenty of threads on this very subject. Thus, your incursion into that thread, AND, under a very false premise of some "non local phonon" supposedly said by me, is astoundingly weird.

    And oh, this thread, just like the other one, is done. If you have complaints about my actions, you can submit that to the Feedback forum or the Administrators.

Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: References for ZapperZ
  1. Reference frames? (Replies: 2)