Back to Home

God & Science 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 | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
To Dick

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on April 20, 2002 13:40:09 UTC

I finally started reading your paper. The math is beyond me for now. I'm reading it like a novel.

Two questions so far:

1. You say that you can add any constant to the data. But if I think of some typical examples of data, like temperature or mass or charge, you cannot add a constant to them without changing the universe as scientists seem to think. Does this possibly constrain your theory to data that can have both plus and minus values?

2. Early in your analysis you use a series of constraints and approximations, but at the end of the chapter you say your theory has no constraints. Have I missed something?

The use of the exponential to express many quantities seems fundamental to your results. When I stop reading and get down to thinking that is the first aspect I want to understand the significance of.

Regards,

Richard

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 1994-2018 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