On Mar 1, 6:03*pm, wrote:
On 1 mar, 10:35, higis wrote:





On Mar 1, 11:01 pm, wrote:

Does your web site have summary of it or free chapters?

Here is the page describing the book

http://pages.globetrotter.net/srp/geomax2a.htm

The intro is there, as well as the presentation speech at
congress-2000, and one appendix on the state of physics.

So you live in Canada. Well. How about this. I'd send
you amazon email gift cheque as payment then you
sent it to my country.

I'm afraid I don't use amazon much. Where do you live ?

Near the amazon jungle.

What do you mean you couldn't explain this without
very extensive set up. It means your book has
details of them that you can't share in short
messages?

Not at all. Only that I don't really care spending
hours at the keyboard explaining every detail from
the ground up.

This is a complete model. Not just some patchwork
of disjointed ideas.

Would you consider explaining all of SR and GR
on a newsgroup to someone who doesn't have
the faintest idea of curved geometry ?

I did discuss just about every aspect of it here
over the course of the past 10 years. Never made
any secret about it.

Ok. If I have time. I'll go over your 10 years of debates
with all the physicists.

Well, have fun then.

You won't be disappointed. They all said that what
I said was bull and that I was a crackpot, when not
worse.

Actually, I seldom discussed with them as you will
see, and definetely never with uncivil jerks. I warned
them once and if they persisted (they can't control
their bad manners apparently) they were excluded
for good.

Bad manners seems to be an integral part of the
Copenhagen bunch training. None of them seems to
have skipped even one lecture.

They typically barged into my conversations
with others to warn them of my ignorance and not
to listen to me.

Maybe you are the greatest genius who ever lived
who has overtaken Dirac, Heisenberg, Born,
Pauli, Gell-man, and other physics giants.

No sirry bob. Just a regular Joe that simply doesn't
go for irrationality. The stuff has been there for
decades for all in the community to see. If only
even one of them had used common sense he
would have come up with it.

There is only one shortest way for going from A to B.

I mentioned great genius because you beat all of them
in one stroke. Anyway.

Come on! Heap of baloney.





Right now I have to learn some new cooking technique
from my mentor because there is a big reception
coming up in 2 weeks so I'm quite busy.

Well. If that's the case I only need
to know this initial fact for startup (before
getting your book in weeks). The proton has
2 up quarks.

Yes.


You bet.

André Michaud- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

--------------
how can a 'point particle '
rotate around an axis ?? (:-)

and more peculiar arounf two axis??
2
as you told me the quark is only about 3 persent mass
of the nucleid
so do you callit a complete theory
while 90 percent is mumble jumble abou tthe missing 90 percent of
mass??

i has a glimps in th e link you quoted from youself
you didnt innovate anything new
the only thing i agree with you is your
end conclsutions;
that the existing situation is
far far from the real story !!
and just apoor mathematical model

ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------