Archive for June, 2014

Petty Jealousy

June 30, 2014

We all know that Ron has a ‘thing’ about CERN and the Higgs boson. Ron pretends that his dislike stems from the fact that they do not fit in with his crackpot theory. We suggest that there is a much more down-to-Earth motive: envy. While one Welshman (Ron) was being passed around like a hot potato, another Welshman was found to be so valuable that he was grabbed during a temporary assignment and forged a successful career.  How ironic it is that they both started out as chemists but, while one became a pretend physicist, the other became a real one working at the cutting edge of the field. What are we talking about? Read about the Evans that Ron could have been if he were not so obnoxious:

Note that Evans-the-Atom would nevertheless be as unknown as Ron if it were not for the tabloid scare-stories to the effect that the LHC was going to produce a mini black hole and destroy Earth. That idea of course came from a Ron-type ‘dissident’ (aka insane) ‘scientist’.




Hoist with Own Petard

June 30, 2014

Origin of the Gravitational Red Shift in Newtonian Dynamics

June 30, 2014

This can be worked out with one of the equations I remember from school:

u squared – v squared = 2 g r”

Yes, and reversing the argument shows that a body can be so massive that photons fired upwards will not escape to infinity but will always fall back to the surface. That is, the object is a black hole. Well done, Ron, you have rediscovered a proof (of the existence of black holes) which was first published in the 18th century. 

Idea Thief

June 28, 2014

“Posting the letter is meant to encourage the pupil and the school and to give credit where credit is due. In fact, David Herbert discovered the petal orbits first. ”

So why is he now forgotten? It should be called Herbert Theory, not x-theory. Yet another example of dishonesty from Ron. 

Learn Some Physics

June 28, 2014

“Just as the velocity of light reduces when light passes through a solid/ liquid / gas. It is only a constant c in a vacuum. ”

Evans-the-Sewage is obviously still using his old school text books. The ‘slowing-down’ concept was invented for children. How exactly would light speed-up again on exiting the solid/liquid/gas? It is ironic that clowns who claim to have overthrown relativity have only a 19th-century child’s understanding of light. By the way, c in a vacuum is not only constant: it is now a defined constant.


Another Undeserved Gong

June 27, 2014

One of our fans recently made a comment, under our Back to Kopernik post, which deserves wider publicity. As our fan wrote,

“Strange awards seem to be becoming increasingly common: just look at”

We look forward to the time when tabloid journalists take a similar interest in Ron, and subsequent public anger forces him to give up his undeserved CLP. 




Government Dime Update

June 27, 2014


Sent: 27/06/2014 13:45:53 GMT Daylight Time
Subj: Re: The electron g Factor

They are not measuring what they think they are measuring much of the time. They pull things out of the “noise” to support ideas and make nonsensical claims.

Sent from Samsung Mobile”

The previous messages today from Evans-the-Sewage might have been sent during his lunch-break, but this one seems to be rather late in the day. We doubt that Ceredigion County Council has a ‘contact any loony that  you like Friday’ scheme in place. Ron is very fond of trying to get his critics into trouble with their employers so – following his lead – we shall be collecting together every loony-related message sent by Sewage when he was at his handsomely remunerated work, paid from the public purse, and post photocopies to the relevant authority. Hmm, which political party might want to make a case out of that sort of thing?

Government Dime

June 26, 2014

Looking at the timings of some of the comments made by Evans-the-Sewage via his smart-phone, we conclude that they may well have been sent during office hours. If this is so, we would like to remind him that he is a local-government employee and should not be wasting public money on pseudoscience. 


June 26, 2014

Treatment of Steve Crothers

June 26, 2014

This is disgraceful treatment of a leading scholar, and I call for international condemnation of those responsible.”

But he is not a leading scholar, is he? He is a notorious crackpot. What else can one expect when a middle-aged private detective decides to try to fulfill the requirements of a physics PhD? Finding that he cannot understand the subtleties of General Relativity, he decides (just like Ron) that it is all wrong. How to explain the fact  that nobody sane sees it that way? Simple: it must all be a huge conspiracy to keep physicists in their high-salary posts. Perhaps Ron has not noticed that physicists are, in fact, poorly paid in comparison with less qualified persons in other fields (law, banking, etc.). We think that the University has been ridiculously tolerant. Just look at how long this fiasco has been going on:

The mythomane also claims to be a body-builder,

Given that the adjectives which spring most readily to mind when contemplating him include ‘sickly’ and ‘diminutive’ , we wonder whose body he built.




Last Nail in the Coffin

June 26, 2014

“To University of New South Wales,

The grave miscarriage of justice in the case of Stephen Crothers is well known internationally, it would not surprise me if Stephen Crothers were awarded an honorary degree. He is a highly respected AIAS Fellow and a leading thinker in avant garde physics. He is well known throughout the world as an able scholar of the utmost integrity, a man with the courage of his convictions. His treatment by the University of New South Wales is disgraceful, one of the worst miscarriages of justice in the history of physics, and that is saying something.”

It is rather touching that Ron should think that his intervention is a good thing, but just imagine how it will look to the university if it bothers to try to find out who he is. It will be found that he has been unemployed for years, churns out incorrect mathematics with the barely concealed aim of supporting perpetual-motion and antigravity inventors (not to mention criminal backing of quack cancer-cures) and lies endlessly about the level of academic interest in his work. The only miscarriage of justice here is the award, of a Civil List pension to a crackpot, over the heads of more worthy candidates.  


June 21, 2014

“Such effort never stops of course, and I enjoy the work tremendously. ”

The beneficial value of occupational therapy is well-known; it gives a sense of pride and social worth to the halt and lame of society. It is particularly good for the depressed unemployed.

“It is work in the sense of art, creative work. ”

It reminds us of the work of Jackson Pollock. The only difference is that, in the case of AIAS, one wonders which end of the brush (or paint can) is associated with the biggest drips.

“In previous UFT papers the x theory was inferred, but x was not known exactly. Now it is known exactly.”

We seem to recall that x-theory was instigated by a letter from a schoolboy. How come that it is not named after him? Have you ever tried to contact Master Herbert, Ron?  And if not, why not?

“I have no idea why Marion and Thornton got the result they claim, I just leave it at that. ”

Perhaps chemists should not delve into physics textbooks if they lack the  noûs.

“The dogmatists have made a pig’s breakfast out of science and there is no purpose in talking to a brick wall or a block head or a hateful troll.”

You are lucky to have such fiendishly clever critics; nobody else cares.

“The work of AIAS is directed at open minded intellectuals around the world.”

It is of interest only to other crackpots, as proved by the fact that nearly 100% of the references to it (see Google Scholar) are made by a lone nutter calling himself “MW Evans” or, occasionally, “HMC List”. 

Subscription News

June 20, 2014

We have been eagerly awaiting the latest issue of Journal of Foundations of Physics and Chemistry, only to find that our subscription has been cancelled. The journal has also been expunged from the CISP website. What has happened? Surely no journal founded by Ron, edited by Ron and containing papers written by Ron, peer-reviewed by Ron and cited by Ron could have foundered.  Did Riecansky finally wake up and realize that he was damaging the reputation of his company by being associated with pseudoscientific pond-life? 

Letting the Side Down

June 20, 2014

“Interestingly, there is a book where such ideas are described in great detail: “The awsome lfie [sic] force” of Joseph Cater:

Although this book spans a wide range of aspects not only restricted to physics, I strongly recommed [sic] to read this book. The author gained some credibility by me because he criticises general relativity just in the same way as we do at AIAS, and makes statements quite similar to ECE theory. Nonetheless it took me about two years to read the rest of the book because the content is very strong meat for a physicist, but finally he could be right.”

Just as we were thinking that that bunch of crackpots could not sink any lower,  they come up with this! Cater’s book is just about the most pathetic rag-bag of pseudoscientific tripe ever to appear in print. His chapter about Searl, and his non-existent ‘effect’, looks almost sensible in comparison to all of the nonsense about telepathy, dowsing and the rest. You really should not make it so easy: the incorrect mathematics must look quite impressive to non-mathematicians and might even start them down the dead-end of believing you, but citing the likes of Cater undeniably marks you out for the loonies that you are.

No Need to Thank Us

June 20, 2014

“There were also two visits from the BBC yesterday, interested in Essay 24 and other material on In May and June 2014 to date there has been very intense interest in Essays 24 and 25. I have not been able to trace the source of this interest yet, ”

Oooh, ooh, we know the answer to that: it was because of our post, ‘Audio Monkey’. Our records show a peak of interest as well. We also regularly try to draw the attention of the media to that sad little gang of crackpots, but they just will not bite.  It is a pity because, if the general public ever gets to hear about it, that cabal of perpetual-motion and antigravity nuts will be laughed out of existence.


June 19, 2014

“This is very exciting and obviously important. My view has always been that if there was the slightest chance of these developments then I should help them as one of the best known British / U. S. scientists. It looks as if the Luddites have been routed. ”

You are certainly the most notorious pseudoscientist, now that that awful crackpot Harold Aspden is dead. As for routing ‘Luddites’, remember what happened with the Podkletnov antigravity scam. ‘Luddite’ physicists said that Podkletnov’s results were experimental artefacts. NASA ‘engineers’ thought that they knew better, and wasted some $10M on trying to replicate the ‘effect’. There was no effect. Any conmen out there looking for suckers with more money than sense could do worse than ask NASA to fund their scam. We bet that those thicko NASA engineers would even fall for LENR. Oh dear, they already have! How on Earth did ‘rocket scientist’ ever become a synonym for cleverness?

Million Moron March

June 19, 2014

“By googling LENR anyone can see that there are or were plans by E Cat to manufacture a million domestic LENR devices which will be six times cheaper than ordinary devices. There can be no reasonable doubt that LENR devices work. ”

And by googling  ‘searl effect’ one finds that a levitating perpetual-motion machine was invented by a pig-ignorant Barnado-boy in poverty-stricken Britain nearly 70 years ago. Just look at all of the glossy websites, check Searl’s entry in Marquis. Read how he built 41 flying saucers for NASA, marvel at how he managed to test-fly his prototype secretly from Mortimer during the Cold War, even though that village is right next to a (then) top-secret nuclear-weapons assembly plant.  How can one possibly doubt the veracity of anything that one sees on the disinformation highway? Ron certainly believes Searl: there is a link to Searl on (originally owned by a friend of Searl) and Ron has suggested that the British government should back Searl financially. And why not, that government (which also rewards scientific nonentities) has already handed a quarter of a million pounds to an antigravity inventor; an inventor who then managed to turn that bounty into a debt of similar magnitude. It looks more and more as though Ron is nothing more than a shill for investment-conmen. Come on, Ron, tell us just how much the E-Cat conmen need to finance that ‘last little research effort’ . No need to divulge your cut.



June 19, 2014

“This is still an open question for any scientist, prepared to accept that new data mean changing old theories. ”

What new data? A theory which has been contrived so as to fit existing data is not data, and is worthless unless it subsumes all other related theories and proposes new critical tests which will distance itself from closely competing theories. We are still waiting for answers concerning the incorporation of tidal effects and why, even if the GR prediction of black holes is wrong, their existence was already deduced in the 18th century by making purely classical assumptions. By the way, Ron, your fellow crackpot’s name is Miles Mathis; not Myles Mathis. Is there no end to your incompetence?


Audio Monkey

June 18, 2014

Essay Broadcast 24 in May 2014

June 18, 2014

This was heard 924 times in May. So there seems to be a systematic use of the essays for teaching, which is an excellent thing. Essay 24 is on the derivation of the Pauli Exclusion principle from Cartan geometry, ”

Some of us have  listened to this quite a few times ourselves. We just cannot get enough of the ‘monkey see, monkey do’ aspects, in audio form, of this travesty. The non-standard pronunciation of proper nouns and technical terms, and the continual putting of stress on the wrong syllables, makes the whole thing quite hilariously entertaining. We do wonder sometimes where Tugboat acquired his affected ‘posh’ voice; surely not in the merchant navy. And one would imagine that it could be a drawback for a public-house entertainer. Perhaps it has something to do with his ‘Basil Fawlty’  period of guest-house management.


More Film Fun

June 17, 2014

Here is Eckardt talking pidgin-physics.

How appropriate it is that the curved lettering behind him says, ‘Sanatorium’. Is he lecturing to inmates?

Film Fun

June 17, 2014

First up, Ron’s microwave oven:

Second-up, Fucilla and ‘energy from water’ (check image at 30s)

‘Water as fuel’ is one of the oldest scams*, of course. Rodriques works for Fucilla, which is why we have no respect for him; even though he proves that Ron’s math is nonsense. Hey, want to see how Fucilla reacts if one suggests politely that one cannot run a car on water?

Dear sir
I told you not to write to me !!
I do not know you or want to know you !!
I have no business with you !!
I will ask you for the last time NEVER TO WRITE TO ME AGAIN !!
i can prove your malafede and criminal intent by the simple logic ( BY THE WAY YOU HAVE NONE )
 to me !!
Who are you !?
What is your name !?
Why are you writing to me !?
Do I know YOU !?
What is your business address !?
What is your telephone Number !?
My Name is Francesco Fucilla my telephone number is 07894262399
my work address is : Airport House Purley way Croydon  surrey CROOXZ
   Francesco Fucilla  =   BONAFEDE    inversely proportional
to yyour MALA FEDE for you are NOT disclousing WHO YOU ARE !!
I have known him in 2007 and remove him from the list of my associates in 2008 
when I discovered that his ideas and mine are worlds apart !!
Going back to you…………………
I give lectures to Physicists, Geoscientists, Engineers and criminal and civil lawyers daily !!
If you need a lecture on the theory of everything   ie
on a convoluted integral understanding of all sciences  ie
 crossrelated and unrelated fields of science
………….such as Finance, Law, Geology, Physics, Dialectis, Filosophy
Chemistry, Biology, Taxonomy, etc etc etc PLEASE 
came to airport house and get to me your GOD !!
To be a Physicist  ( I CAN ASSURE YOU ARE NOT ) you need first to be a Logician
and from the emails you have been doing I can assure you
that you are AUTISTIC and illogical ( by the way I am the best Phychoanalist that as ever lived )  !!
you need to be a Philosopher, a geoscientist, an economist a financier
a Biologist, a Chemist, a cosmologist and many other things before you
can call yourself a physicist !!
I hope this ends our correspondance
If you wish to CERTIFY that you are Maliciously slandering
our company effort in the Hydrogen Boosters technology
by way of false and illogical assumptions,
Now for a point of Law
the reasons why it can prove that your only intention you have is to Harrass me
and my company are as Follow
You failed to Introduce yourself
You have failed to establish that We have common interests
You have failed to disclouse why you are writing to me, “J.Smith”
you have introduced discussions that do not concern you for
we do not know who you are
You are making idiotic innuentos without having entered
into any business association that could have given your ground for
writiung to me
You have failed to tell me who you are, your telephone number
your address and the business you have with Global
In the last email, it can clear be proven that the motivation that
have triggered the harrasment has nothing to do with Global or I
but with a FEUD kind of intellectual play you may have
with Raucher and santilli !!
Having proven to you that you are Illogical and in Malafede

[sent to us by a fan]. He makes Ron look almost sane, does he not?

*The scam of electrolyzing water to give hydrogen and oxygen, and then exploding the mixture to drive a motor, first surfaced in about 1856. It is a scam because no energy is gained (lost in fact), so the apparent energy input is not really coming from the water, but from whatever source charged the battery. The Fucilla scheme is slightly different, in that the hydrogen alone is added to conventional fuel as a ‘booster’. Nevertheless, it is still a fatuous concept because any extra energy is coming from the battery and not from the water (it would be simpler to carry a cylinder of hydrogen gas). Of course, one cannot expect a mere mathematician such as Rodrigues to realize that.

More Foot-Shooting

June 17, 2014

Online Open Source Publishing Coming of Age

June 17, 2014

AIAS has been a world leader in this type of publishing, we publish, and, in cooperation with on new energy devices. In the past eleven years AIAS publishing has been a famous success, running up tens of millions of readings as recorded by computer feedback with high accuracy.”

This is certainly a boon to the lunatic fringe, whose inhabitants can get their pet obsessions into print without any pesky interference from pre-publication referees. All that they have to do is to pay $10/page. We note that one contributor, with no known scientific affiliation, gives as his address a £1M house in Guildford, so he at least will not be put off by the charges. The editors, of course, are not ‘names to conjure with’ and one of them claims strangely to have studied in “New South Wales (UK)”. The papers are, of course, indexed only by Google Scholar (which does not discriminate on quality) rather than by, say, Scopus or ISI. Nevertheless, the real point here is that this sort of publishing escapes the usual controls on scientific rectitude. So why are Ron and ECE still not mentioned? Academically unaffiliated persons living in £1M properties are not going to be intimidated by the ‘dogmatists’, which is Ron’s usual excuse for the non-referencing of his nonsense. How odd that he should draw attention to yet another swath of people who will studiously ignore him. One paper does refer metaphorically  to ‘crystal spheres’ , but does not mention Penderghastly.

Blog on Fire!

June 13, 2014

Views of our blog are currently running at 28 times the usual hourly average! Was it something we wrote?

Another Rabid ‘Scientist’

June 13, 2014

“These are reviewed online in a paper by J.- P. Petit, Mod. Phys. Lett A, 1988.”

Is that not J.P.Petit the ufologist? Oh yes, it is! You know, Ron, it is really not a good idea to remind readers that certain academically qualified people, who have managed to do a few valid things in legitimate science, may be complete loonies in other respects. Intelligent readers will make extrapolations that do not benefit you.   


Knighted Nutter

June 13, 2014

“The big bang theory was rejected by Einstein himself and also by Sir Fred Hoyle, who thought that the theory was a joke and left Cambridge for Cardiff. Hoyle coined the words “big bang” as a joke. ”

Hoyle himself then became a joke. As a Creationist, he used dubious mathematical arguments to claim that Darwinian evolution was impossible. Cardiff was a hotbed of anti-evolution nutters at that time: the main creationist group was based in Penarth (a suburb of Cardiff) and even the student almoner at the university was an anti-Darwinian (who wrote a booklet – printed on the university’s press(!) – which rubbished carbon-dating). Hoyle also colluded with other creationists in Cardiff to ‘prove’ that Archeopteryx (the fossil linking dinosaurs to birds) was a fake. The fact that several identical examples exist, scattered over various countries, did not deter him.  As if that were not bad enough, he then started on his ‘germs from space’ theory. This was truly hilarious and seems to have been based upon nothing but extreme class-consciousness (Hoyle, like Ron, was another ‘poor kid who did good’). Noting that there had been two simultaneous but localised outbreaks of flu in Cardiff, he deemed that the viruses could not have been spread from one location to the other, but had arrived separately from space. Why did he want this to be so? Because one outbreak centered on a public* girls’  school in up-market Llandaff, and the other was in decidedly down-market Ely. Presumably he was not a fan of D.H.Lawrence or inter-class intimacy. In his book on the theory, he goes to comical lengths to preserve the girls’ reputations: even mapping the precise positions of their beds at the (boarding) school.  We also have reason to believe that Hoyle’s main claim to academic fame (the resonance route to element-synthesis in stars) was also dubious (plagiarised). It is strange that Ron should see Hoyle as being a reliable reference.

*For American readers, that means private.

Back to Kopernik

June 12, 2014

Copernicus had a good method for explaining orbits. The problem was that it was too good: as the saying goes, “that which explains everything … explains nothing”. Copernicus imagined that planets did not orbit the Sun itself but instead orbited imaginary points which in turn ‘orbited’ the Sun. If someone had ever claimed to have observed a perfectly square orbit, complete with sharp corners, the equant method of Copernicus could have fitted that square orbit perfectly. It was therefore useless: one object of a good theory is to discriminate.  Ron is pulling a similar trick, but one which is far less sophisticated than that of Copernicus. What Ron has done is, in effect, to draw a line through a few points and then claim that merely doing that ‘explains’ the points. Such double-counting is not allowed in science. Sure, one fits a theoretical model to some experimental data but one must then show that the theory can explain  other related data and also  predict new results.  His theory is no better than numerology. As we never tire of pointing out, he does not mention tidal effects. And he has to, because of the Correspondence Principle. This states that a new theory must  subsume all previous theories: at least over the range of conditions for which the original theories were formulated. For instance, Einstein’s predictions had to correspond to Newton’s at low relative velocities, and quantum-mechanical predictions had to agree with classical predictions for macroscopic objects. It is because of his failure to adhere to these basic criteria that his post-breakdown work remains unreferenced by everybody.

Reference Frames

June 12, 2014

What a mess Ron is getting himself into over fictitious forces such as the centrifugal and Coriolis; just as all schoolchildren and pseudoscientists do. Nevertheless, it is all very simple. Imagine a sphere in outer space and, within it -located near to the interior surface – a small object: let us a say a teapot. To observers inside or outside of the sphere, the situation is clear: there are two things (sphere and teapot) juxtaposed in space. Now imagine that the sphere is set into rotation about its centre by using small tangentially oriented rockets. To the outside observer, there is now a rotating sphere plus a teapot which has not moved from its original position … and has no reason to do so. But what does an observer holding onto the inside of the sphere observe?  The rockets accelerated him to a certain velocity, and the outside observer can see that (according to Newton’s first and second laws) the internal observer would travel in a straight line if he were not constrained by the sphere’s surface (which exerts a centripetal force). The internal observer will (naively using Newton’s third law) attribute his newly-acquired ‘weight’ to a fictitious centrifugal force. It is fictitious because it cannot influence the rest of the universe: it exists only in the sphere-constrained observer’s limited world. It cannot, for instance, be used to propel the sphere (although many hundreds of crackpot  inventors have tried to patent that concept).  The situation is slightly more complicated with regard to the teapot. What will the internal observer see? He will see a teapot which is apparently piloted  by a computer (or small alien) and which uses an undetectable propulsion method to allow it to follow – with perfection – the curve of the sphere. In fact, in order to explain the curious motion of the teapot (the external observer requires no such explanation) he has to postulate the action of two forces: centrifugal and Coriolis. The internal observer will feel the Coriolis force only if he sits down or stands up; whereupon he will find himself tending to fall over. If, for some reason, the spinning of the sphere were not steady a whole series of higher-order forces would then seem to be needed in order to explain the teapot’s motion. To the outside (Newtonian inertial) observer, nothing about the teapot  ever changes: it just stays put.  You see, folks, frames of reference are very important in physics. One can deduce, that Ron does not grasp this fact, from his discussion of the gravitational force law. He says that Newton used an inverse law while Hooke used an inverse-square law. He then concludes that Newton was wrong and Hooke was right. What Ron seems to be totally unable to comprehend is that both laws are correct: it all depends upon the reference frame that one uses. Why does a Civil List scientist not understand this?

Moron, Leave Those Kids Alone!

June 6, 2014

“Best wishes to the family! This kind of stuff always happens in the history of science but plenty of schools visit I would direct them to the essay broadcasts by Robert Cheshire and myself, they are designed to be understandable in schools and by the general public.”

There is already enough online pseudoscience to mislead them, without adding your nonsense as well. They can, for instance, look at all of conman Searl’s glossy websites. By the way, why is it that you have a link to Searl on the website (originally owned by a friend of Searl) but you do not mention him – together with Rossi and Hill – when listing ‘successful’  perpetual-motion conmen? After all, Searl claims to have demonstrated it over 60 years ago, claims to have obtained a BA degree at the age of 14 (makes you look pretty stupid) and has been in Marquis longer than you have. And he does not have to lie about the level of feedback. He also has 3 companies based in tax-havens and even his brother (whom he hates) screwed £40000 out of a British quango by using the same non-existent perpetual-motion machine:

Joule was a company run by Searl’s brother. In spite of the £40k hand-out, it closed voluntarily in 2008 with a nett worth of  minus £20k. An enquiry has been called for. And just look at how mention in an engineering journal means nothing. They ‘rubber-stamp’ any sort of nonsense.

Note: PEPS is also an acronym of Searl frere‘s full name. The Searls (children of petty-criminal parents) love acronyms.

Note: GFS Projects also failed soon afterwards. The invention was a highly derivative Coanda-effect aircraft, but the inventor, Hatton, is an antigravity crackpot.

See, Ron, not only are you a crackpot; you are an unsuccessful crackpot compared to these. Sure, the companies go under but you can bet that they hang onto some cash.

PS: The third beneficiary, Probe Scientific, is still in business in spite of having a nett worth of minus £1.2M.


Still Catching Up?

June 6, 2014

“This note answers the long standing question of why two different force laws (2) and (10) give precessing orbits. ”

We pointed out, on the 21st November 2012, that Newton had already explained this. See our post, “Go Argue with Newton”. 

Puffs From the Magic Dragon

June 4, 2014

Rossi scam news

Ignorance Personified

June 4, 2014

The Coriolis and Centripetal Forces in ECE Theory

June 4, 2014

These were first developed in UFT55, “Generally Covariant Dynamics”. They are now known to be generated by the covariant derivative of the momentum in ECE theory. ”

This is where Ron demonstrates his unfamiliarity with physics. He has twisted his theory to fit only the fictitious forces that he knows about; i.e. the ones in M&T. Any real physicist knows that there are any number of fictitious forces, but only the first two have generally accepted names; the ‘next-one-up’ has no agreed name but is variously known as the jerk, transverse or Euler force. Ron won’t know this, of course, but there is a jerk component to the Kepler orbit. This higher-order fictitious force is commonly felt when a (vertically) circular part of a fairground ride meets a straight part. We note here yet again that Ron makes no attempt to incorporate tidal effects into his theory. Go on, Ron, give us the ECE calculation of the Roche limit for an approaching spinning sphere.  That is, put up or shut up (and stop pretending that you ignore us – who else from the UK would be so eager to read our blog at 6am?)


False Dawns

June 4, 2014

“I waited a quarter century before accepting that LENR is reproducible and repeatable, and in the new book “Principles of ECE Theory” (publications section of a chapter is devoted to Alex Hill’s energy devices and to LENR. ”

We can remember when a certain Stanley Meyer was in the ascendant: he was ‘inserted’ into a BBC documentary on cold fusion, his car-that-runs-on water was verified by three professors (including a Professor M.A.Laughton of London) and he was invited to present his invention to a special-interest group at the House of Lords (probably at the insistence of an energy-from-water crank who also happened to be a former comptroller [sic] of the British Navy). Unfortunately, Meyer never made it to the Lords, because he was indicted for fraud. And then he dropped dead; lying must be so stressful.  Sic transit fraudatio mundi.  We wonder how Hill feels about Rossi: how many perpetual-motion machines does the world need? Ron should check his loyalties: Hill is hand-in-glove with Ron, but Rossi seems to have nothing good to say about Ron. 


June 3, 2014

“The time has come to declare the existence of two main schools of thought in modern physics.”

There are lots of schools of thought in physics and they all interact with each other in the common aim of choosing the best model. ECE just hides away, declares that it is correct and refuses to accept criticism. That is not a scientific school of thought. That is mere pseudoscience.

“The ECE theory is irrefutable mathematically, and has succeeded in providing multiple explanations where the old physics fails. ”

ECE theory is flawed from the outset. There are plenty of competing explanations for puzzling observations, but pseudoscientists are afraid to compete.

“I am focused in on the geometry, I don’t bother with the media, having a huge following already. ”

And you had better hope that the media do not bother with you. If the man in the street cared about science, he would want an enquiry into why a crackpot was given the same accolade as Faraday. You have no following; nobody refers to your post-breakdown work and the feedback is clearly inflated and of unknown intent.

“On a personal level I have nothing against Hawking and Penrose, and hardly know them because I am a chemist. The converse is also true, there has been no personal animosity of any kind from them. ”

It is below their dignity to comment on pseudoscience.

“No one has been able to refute the commutator theorem that proves an antisymmetric connection. ”

It has been refuted again and again, and you follow Carroll only up the point where he disagrees with you … whereupon you deduce that he is wrong. Chemist versus mathematician; what are the odds?

“I don’t lightly write that Einstein is totally wrong, it took years of study to come to this conclusion.”

Wasted, wasted years. 


Not That Old Rubbish Again?

June 3, 2014

Foucault Pendulum Anomaly during Solar Eclipse

June 3, 2014

Many thanks, I think I will have a look at this in UFT263. Horst and I did some relevant work back in about 2007:”

Allais and Saxl were amateurs. Neither were physicists. Allais was a Nobel prize-winner, but in economics. Saxl was an engineer. Neither used normal pendula. None of their results have been replicated by bona fide physicists.

Fair Comment

June 3, 2014

Penrose Dismisses Standard Physics

June 3, 2014

Having developed twistor theory Penrose should be familiar with Cartan geometry, but again he misses the importance of the commutator and antisymmetric connection. ”

The trouble is, Ron, he likes you even less: when he heard about your Civil List Pension he was heard to remark, “the Queen is obviously no physicist”.


Wrong Yet Again

June 2, 2014

” In the seventeenth century the idea of a centrifugal force was not known. So in the Newtonian point of view m would fall into M. The reason is that Newton used static Cartesian coordinates, whereas the rotation of the plane polar coordinates is needed for the centrifugal force. ”

Rubbish, as usual. Newton did not need centrifugal force; that was dreamed up by D’Alembert so that observers in a rotating system could continue to use Newton’s laws. Its fictitious nature has confused schoolchildren and pseudoscientists ever since. The letters between Hooke and Newton clearly show that they both handled orbits as a computer-program might, by breaking down each step around the path into a straight line movement (first law) and an attraction towards the central body; added vectorially. They challenged each other with more and more complicated situations; such as orbits inside a hollow Earth. Can your nonsense theory handle that? By the way, your favourite author, Koestler, made a glaring error concerning orbits in one of his books … but one cannot expect much of a mere journalist. How come you did not spot the error? Hey, perhaps you are incapable of spotting it. After all, you are not a physicist.