Back to Home

General Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Misc. Topics | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Don't Think Harv Is Moving To Support My Views.

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard D. Stafford, Ph.D. on December 21, 2004 11:33:32 UTC

Hi Mike,

I think rather that Harv's purpose was to support the idea that a large number of people "derive known relationships" from assorted starting points.

I looked at a number of those papers and what they show is the fact that there are many intertwined relationships not thought about by most professional physicists. Why not? Well because most of them provide little of value. They are all rather complex analytical views of the situation.

My position is, compared to theirs, quite simple (oh, I know Harv wouldn't agree since something one does not understand will seem complex even if it is simple). In addition to that, substatially more physics may be deduced from my "fundamental equation" than any of these people derive from their positions.

I am afraid I have it all over them by a long shot.

Have fun -- Dick

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins