Hi Bruce,

"Dick Doesn't Understand The Basic purpose of a physical theory. Harvey explained this, I've explained this, folks at sci.physics have explained this, and Chroot explained this"

You may have claimed it, but you haven't explained it. Please tell me what the basic purpose of a physical theory is, and then point me to where Harv and you have explained how Dick demonstrates his lack of understanding of the purpose of physical theory.

"Dick said his theory was a bridge between QM and GR."

Can you tell me where Dick said that? In particular I doubt that he used the word "bridge" or the word "theory".

"So how would you conclude the comments made about Dick's work are not competant?"

Comments can be correct or incorrect, but I don't think they can be competent or incompetent. Commentators, on the other hand, can be competent or incompetent. And as I told you before, I will not sit in judgement on the competence of a comentator. So, to answer your question, there is no way that I would "conclude the comments made about Dick's work are not competant [sic]".

"Apparently you want folks to wade through his derivation"

Yes, I would like that.

"the premise is totally bogus?"

Exactly what premise are you referring to? (Please be specific.)

"Never happen"

Never is a long time.

Warm regards,

Paul

• The purpose of a physical theory.. - bruce - January 8, 2004 - 20:46 UTC
  • Attacks without support! - doctordick - January 27, 2004 - 01:50 UTC
    • Actually you initially... - bruce - February 1, 2004 - 07:58 UTC