big snip
Art et al.
I am not aware if this reference has been posted to this newsgroup.
http://n-t.ru/tpe/ng/gvg.htm
It seems to concern research conducted in Russia and to be relevant
to what
Art is trying to explain.
The article and references appear genuine as far as I can ascertain,
but the
English translation leaves a bit to be desired.
Strictly a neutral bystander in this discussion
Regards
Mike G0ULI- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Mike, How you came across this and why is something
I could not possibly have done myself. I find it unbelievable
that somebody in Russia would collect all this information
and place things in their correct order and where the
information came from and it arrives in some wierd way
at this newsgroup at this specific time.
Much of what he is stating is relavent to Gauss and
his input to science and what use was made of his input.
He has explained things so much better than I ever could
but then he is a scientist with authority where as I am
just a retired engineer blindly finding a way thru science and
radiation. This paper is a keeper for me and will be valuable
to me in so many ways. I note that you are neutral but
you have obviously have been reading my posts for you to
make the connection and sharing it with the group.
I can't thank you enough for doing what you have done
and it is certainly no problem to me that you are neutral.
What is important that views that I hold have now been published
on the other side of the pond that gives a modicom of credability
to what I have been sharing. Thanks again
Regards
Art Unwin....KB9MZ.....XG
Nikolai Noskov. He thinks Einstein's ideas on relativity are
total bunk.
There is always contention regading ideasduring the century or more
that they are made. Einstein idea is a composition of ideas provided
by other scientists which provided a path for him to follow.
Obviously other ideas are in the format stage which will conclude
in further ideas on which to build a building block. You as a
scientist
are just one of many that have ideas on this aspect of science and
if you live another 100 years so that you could study incomming data
you could possibly state if I knew that earlier I would not have taken
up my previous position. Hawkins and others are also involved with
the universe trying to match their logic with prior scientists and
mathematical laws that have survived the test of time but all
aditions
must also pass the testof time to the satifaction of all. Actually
one could compare your position on the ascertion that the world
was flat while taking comfort with the thought that those who
would disagree would proclame the opposite only after one was dead.
If twisted logic was in the majority then twisted logic always wins
until it becomes a minority which requires the adition of time.
If you take the position that particles collide while travelling
with the same velocity and in the same direction ala within
the confines of a Gaussian field, you also can make a disclosure
that can add to the general discussion on radiation and be considered
as you say 'an honest attempt to understand the physical universe.
I for one will not call you nuts.
Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG
He does have a nice paper on the propulsion
mechanism of flying saucers, though. That seems to fit with
much of the material on this newsgroup, lately. I guess it was
inevitable that the twisted logic of insanity would eventually prevail
here. It's much easier to just be nuts than to make an honest attempt to
understand the physical universe.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tom
I prefer to think that the Russians adopt a more pragmatic approach to
physics than in the West. They seem to be far happier to work with observed
phenomena without necessarily bothering with total understanding of how it
works. It probably isn't good science from a Western viewpoint but in the
main, their stuff seems to work better than some over engineered Western
designs. With a country covering 18 time zones it is inevitable that a
degree of Far Eastern philosophy will influence their scientic thinking. If
it works, don't fix it and accept that there are some things we are not
currently in a position to understand. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try
though.
Einstein's ideas are the best predictive theories we have to date but they
are certainly considered incomplete in the light of current research. Not
complete bunk by any means, but not the whole story either.
Mike G0ULI