No, that's what you've called it. Since I've already said I've never seen you post anything even remotely correct, my use of the word in quotes should be taken as a sign of singular contempt and derision.
Theory of Everything
- Thread starter hansda
- Start date
No, that is not a sufficient condition to decide that.
But, I personally understand TOE is false in any form. But, I do not want to rain on you parade.
This is stupid.
There are many papers on that site that are published. There are some also that are false.
But, that is true for all journals.
You folks have no idea what you are talking about in this thread.
Saharon Shelah
We tried to show in this paper that CH implies: there is a homogeneous family of subset of omega which is maximal with respect to inclusion. The paper is currently "withdrawn", since a mistake has been discovered.
http://arxiv.org/abs/math/9501207
Saharon Shelah is arguably the best mathematician live today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saharon_Shelah
Shelah is one of the most prolific contemporary mathematicians. As of 2012, he has published around 1000 mathematical papers .
Saharon Shelah
We tried to show in this paper that CH implies: there is a homogeneous family of subset of omega which is maximal with respect to inclusion. The paper is currently "withdrawn", since a mistake has been discovered.
http://arxiv.org/abs/math/9501207
Saharon Shelah is arguably the best mathematician live today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saharon_Shelah
Shelah is one of the most prolific contemporary mathematicians. As of 2012, he has published around 1000 mathematical papers .
Good journals don't publish science that's obviously FALSE. Vixra is a place scientifically illiterate folks can publish the smoke they've blown up there own ass.
Where the herd is now is the real science. The nonsense folks like you and hansda are definitely not part of a herd that has anything to do with science. Subsequently if you're confused enough to think you have any science to write about vixra will help you do so for a price.
The herd was flat earth at one time and maggots spontaneously emerged from rotting meat.
Is that the herd you are in?
No. He, like the rest of us who have studied at least a minimal amount of physics, is in the "herd" of evidence-based science. Crackpots and conspiracy theorists are quick to compare the modern "mainstream" to supports of, for example, the geocentric model and Aristotelian philosophy. However, there is an enormous, momentous difference between these two groups. The "herd" you refer to was dogmatic, religious, and evidence-rejecting. Then, actual scientists such as Galileo, Descartes, Newton, Kepler, and Copernicus brought intellectual thought into the realm of modern science through the use of physical evidence (Kepler's observations, Newton's Laws, etc.), and mathematics. However, detractors of modern science do no such thing - they cling to useless analogies and a false understanding of basic physical concepts. To compare yourself to these great scientists is simply pure arrogance.
Last edited:
Yup. This is why science is not a herd (though you've linked to a mathematics paper). Errors actually get found. And fixed, or the work retracted, as needs be.
Do you not see how you're undermining your own point here?
You're not complaining that there's a "herd mentality" in science. You're complaining that it's not the herd mentality you want it to be.
Anyway, I apologize for calling you a retard, handsa, but I would like to take a gander at what you would submit. I've only skimmed this thread earlier on and would like to see if time travel is a major obstacle in the validity of your... work?
So, don't be a chicken!
:m:
So, don't be a chicken!
:m:
...in equally crank "journals".
Just take a look at the section on high-energy particle physics:
http://vixra.org/hep/
Featuring great works including "The Theoretico-Physical Essay. in Three Parts.", "A New Picture In The Particle under The Frame of Three Dimensional Einstein Theory", and "The Four Dark Phenomena Theory" right on the front page. Yeah, no crackpots there.
Just take a look at the section on high-energy particle physics:
http://vixra.org/hep/
Featuring great works including "The Theoretico-Physical Essay. in Three Parts.", "A New Picture In The Particle under The Frame of Three Dimensional Einstein Theory", and "The Four Dark Phenomena Theory" right on the front page. Yeah, no crackpots there.
Indeed, hansda would fit right in.
Just take a look at the section on high-energy particle physics:
http://vixra.org/hep/
Featuring great works including "The Theoretico-Physical Essay. in Three Parts.", "A New Picture In The Particle under The Frame of Three Dimensional Einstein Theory", and "The Four Dark Phenomena Theory" right on the front page. Yeah, no crackpots there.
One of my favourites, from the /quant section: http://vixra.org/abs/1304.0168. Abstract:
I think the place is a goldmine.
At one point ViXra boasted that one of the preprints they hosted had been published in Physical Review D. Specifically, this one. Turns out the same preprint was uploaded on ArXiv at around the same time and passed through just fine: http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.0240.
It's complete disrespect for one's own intellectual honesty and personal integrity. The level of disrespect kinda correlates with degree of crankiness [scientific sociopathy].
It's so telling when they don't understand the importance of history over the path to understanding the universe in a technical way. You know when theory and experiment walk in the same shoes.
Last edited:
...in equally crank "journals".
So, why not prove your statement.
Show any paper published in vixra is only published in a "crank" journal.