Ether model

I had a thought about this kind of post on Sciforums.

Where do the scammers find customers… On a science site.

Michael maybe an innocence victim or fishing. Of course I may be wrong.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

https://www.onlinescientificresearch.com/membership.php

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If he paid that much to... Whatever you'd call it.

I mean, I had some guy steal my telescope that I paid 10,000 cdn dollars for. (He was on camera so I got it back pretty easy.) He is over 59 but, has the maturity of a 10 year old. I don't know if I can hold a grudge against him if he has some disability.

:EDIT:

Or, is this some kind of religious thingy?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don’t believe there is any reason to doubt Michael’s good faith. But I don’t think the same can be said for this “journal”

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There are a lot of predatory sites out there. If you are willing to pay, chances of publication are not hampered by things like rigorous peer review.

 

In Michael's defense, I did go looking for JoP&OS in the common 4 or 5 predatory publications lists. I did not find it. Doesn't mean it's not predatory, but I didn't find it.

 

I only know Beall's that was posted on another sie. Could not find it either.

 

Yes I looked on Beall's List too. But it may too new, or too insignificant, to feature.

It costs almost nothing to set up these web-based things: they pop up like mushrooms, only limited by the finite market of cranks and charlatans desperate to be able to say they have published, somewhere. This one is barely a serious commercial operation. They can't even afford someone who can write decent English.

 

Yes, imagine this as the abstract.

"The authors propose a new Ether Model of the universe, Quantum Entanglement represents radiated packets of etheric energy which have the same vibratory pattern. Elemental ether units are the only actual participants in this phenomenon, with the pair of quantum units kinetically walled off like cool arms of a quiet, purring, universal ether mechanism."

The big guys are not immune to garbage though, Springer had to retract around 50 papers fairly recently. The Titles alone should have been a red flag. Someone not doing their job.

 

An example https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12517-021-08728-2

From the article.

"Then there’s “Neural network–based urban rainfall trend estimation and adolescent anxiety management,” by Mengjiao Liang, of Jiujiang University.

Another, “The characteristics of rainfall in coastal areas and the intelligent library book push system oriented to the Internet of Things,” was purportedly written by Hailing Chi, of the library at the Zibo Vocational Institute in Shandong — which we loosely summarize as: “The rain in Spain falls mainly on my new smart refrigerator.”

And, perhaps our favorite, “Distribution of earthquake activity in mountain area based on embedded system and physical fitness detection of basketball,” which sounds like it might be the poorly-written elevator pitch for a new animated movie in which The Smurfs meet a volatile Shaq.

Click here for a complete list of the papers

 

A key part of my ether model of quantum entanglement you left out (possibly because I didn't include it in this citation you make from an old Post of mine) is that a (universal) ether matrix exists between the two quantum units, a matrix composed of identical elemental ether units, which enables a connection between the elemental ether units inside the two quantum units, and which also represents the original "Yin and Yang" units that initiated formation of the quantum units. This is the only sensible model out there for quantum entanglement.

I think the Journal being questioned had its heart in the right place. They wanted to see fair treatment of a rational non-mainstream viewpoint.

 

I think that the publishers green-lit a paper that has God was Creator of the Universe as one of its foundational premises is a pretty telling indicator of how legit a science publication it is.

 

You mentioned model, is there any mathematics behind this?

 

OK.

Did you pay anything to get you're pdf posted? Is that the only one you had? Do you plan on having more?

 

As it happens, this article was flagged today, on another science site I subscribe to: https://theconversation.com/rising-...search-and-public-trust-in-scholarship-213107

Predatory journals seem to be a growing problem all right.

 

Michael has a disability? Keep him posting (footfall), kerching for Sciforums via its ads.
Poor Michael, I have sort of called him a scammer and now he's turning out to be someone with a mental disability.

 

Beer w/ Straw did not say Michael has a disability.

It is not clear what Beer w/ Straw is talking about - or how his alleged $10, 000 stolen telescope factors in.

 

Nothing in this thread about telescopes up until now, so why a need to imply someone with a mental age of a 10 year old?
It seems Beer made a connection about someone on this thread even if you don't see it in Beer's post.
Why not ask Beer?

 

Lordy no.

 

But, that's actually not an answer to a question I didn't ask you.

Don't say you're internet ninja moves are getting too old.