"Ole D. Rughede" wrote in message
k...

"Sam Wormley" skrev i en meddelelse
news:wd4Ye.355887$_o.184434@attbi_s71...
Ole D. Rughede wrote:
I wonder who has deleted my postings "Aetherphysics, Quantumgravity"
less than 5 days and nights after my sending of two messages on the
15th. September this year?

Are we back in the Middle Ages where books, pamphlets, essays, and
written messages of scientific contents were burned or destroyed
publicly when not in agreement with the commnonly held opinions of
religious believers. Now facing a clandestine anonymous opposer, who
secretly, without any note of reason or logical arguments, destroys
what
he may fear could disturb the orthodox believers' souls and their
salvation on the Day of Judgment?

I appeal to the moderator of these newsgroups to investigate this
matter
and come forward with a proper explanation about who has deleted my
postings, and when and why it possibly happened.

I intend to give rigorous proof to these newsgroups and to whom it
may
interest of the unification of the strong nuclear force, the
electrostatic Coulomb force, and the Newtonian force of gravity,
based
on the Aether Theory I described in the deleted postings. And since
the
weak nuclear force has alredy been described by Abdus Salam, we
hence
may look forward to GUT, the Grand
Unified Theory about the four fundamental forces in nature, thanks
to a
simple and undeniable theory of the aether from which was predicted
the
correct temperature of the aether T(Aether), equal to the best
observations in the COBE measurements of T(CMBR) even before the
results
of the COBE measurings were published.

It will therefore be necessary to re-transmit the original postings
with
the complete theoretical apparatus needed for the proof of
unification
of the fundamental forces, and indispensable for the future
development
of GUT.

Please don't bother.

Dear Sam Wormly, please don't bother yourself about this subject if you
can't bear with it.

The point is Sam has investigated the concept of the aether - and what you
prattle on about is not it.

Forgive me, but I don't think you are the right one
to decide what is science or not.

Neither are you. In the final analysis each person reading this will form
their own opinion based on what is written.

Bill

Your following references are
completely irrelevant. You THINK wormly? That's OK!



I consider the deletions and the thereof following delays in
communication a severe crime against the international freedom of
science and as a disdainful action, comparable to mean terror, to
which
scientists and learned scolars should be superior, whether they
agree to
and understand the theory of the aether or not.

Ole D. Rughede



Some Scientifically Inaccurate Claims Concerning Cosmology and
Relativity
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/wrong.html#aether

Albert Einstein, in his essay On the Aether (1924), made some
injudicious comments to the effect that relativity theory could
be said
to ascribe physical properties to spacetime itself, and in that
sense,
to involve a kind of "aether". He clearly did not mean the kind
of
"aether" which had been envisioned by Maxwell and others in the
nineteenth century, but his remarks have been seized upon ever
since,
by various cranks and other ill-informed persons, as evidence
that
"gtr is an aether theory".

Luminiferous Ether
http://www.google.com/search?q=aethe...aip.org+update
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Ether.html

Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml
No aether