Comments on: Africa Stands behind the Planet

By: Niccolò Tottoli

Niccolò Tottoli — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:51:32 +0000

Dear Anthony L. My only motivation is the safety of all creatures and the continuation of history. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Niccolò

By: AnthonyL

AnthonyL — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 06:55:11 +0000

Previous comments are to be found at http://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/01/africa-stands-behind-the-planet/comment-page-1 and http://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/01/africa-stands-behind-the-planet/comment-page-2

By: AnthonyL

AnthonyL — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 06:51:45 +0000

Tottoli you seem to be up to speed on all this material, congratulations. Like Houston, you set a very good example. You have actually read what CERN has said, unlike most here. What was your motive?

My research has found that most people do not read the literature of the topic they discuss in science, which is why bad ideas can rule far past their date of expiry.

By: Niccolò Tottoli

Niccolò Tottoli — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:33:28 +0000

Intuition is a gift of God, but it is not always reliable and leads to the truth. Theories must not refer to reality and the reality may not always be explained with theories. Various theories contradict each other, because they are based on different assumptions. In physics this is sometimes the case also. Truth is transformed into an error and in some cases the error into the truth again. Hawking radiation and the velocity of neutrinos are mentioned as two examples.
Regarding the experiments of CERN it is important to know, that there are various important differences between the cosmic ray collisions and the collisions at the LHC. Therefore the general safety argument of CERN/LSAG “that it happens all the time on earth” is invalid and untrue.
The safety report “LSAG” of CERN should be revised since many years and an open and continuous safety assessment with the critical scientists should be held, to discuss many issues.
http://www.lhcsafetyreview.org/

By: Anthony L

Anthony L — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:13:56 +0000

Yes, paying up indicates a boundary. But there is no reason to assume a priori that it means an article is complete rubbish, at least not for certain. There is a percentage likelihood, but it is not 100%. Anyone outside the groupthink that rules fields nowadays can still be right and is usually blocked rather strenuously by those in position in the game of paradigm musical chairs, at least till the music starts up ie outsiders review the situation.

But I agree that genius is usually recognized by really experienced editors who value the truth and are politically independent. The question these days is, Where are they?

By: Niccolò Tottoli

Niccolò Tottoli — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 02:44:12 +0000

Ok one more question: What means s ? Thanks.

By: Niccolò Tottoli

Niccolò Tottoli — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 02:32:14 +0000

Dear TRMG, dear all
Your interesting reply (January 15, 2012 6:02 am) is printed in my hands. I just try to understand the issue step by step, therefore let me ask you only one question to begin, please.
So is it generally true that dR/dt=constant along light rays?
Thank you very much for your help.
Sincerely yours, Niccolò Tottoli

By: Tom Kerwick

Tom Kerwick — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:16:34 +0000

Peter Howell — I would like to point at you specifically in as to why you consider me a follower of anothers opinion rather than a leader of my own which happens to overlap.. Might I ask what are your credentials? I wonder about your stature as a scientist when you fail to advertise it alongside your opinion.

By: PassingByAgain

PassingByAgain — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:02:33 +0000

Anthony, no serious scientific journal relies on fees from the authors to cover its costs. The reason is so obvious that I won’t ever bother explaining it to you…
And poor contributors who wrote good papers can publish them for free in any of the top-tier journals that I listed in an earlier post.

By: Peter Howell

Peter Howell — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:32:14 +0000

Let me do the “I told you so dance”…;-)

Roessler is paying an internet only self-publishing firm to print his paper. This is not a scientific journal. But good enough for Tom and the rest of the Roessler cult.