Archive for February, 2015

Not That Clear

February 28, 2015

UFT88 Read at University College of Swansea

February 28, 2015

UC Swansea was founded in 1920 and is ranked 1,402 in the world by Webometrics, 350 – 400 in the world by Times Higher Education. UFT88 is a famous paper that refutes the Einsteinian general relativity directly, by refuting the second Bianchi identity as used by Einstein. The correct second Bianchi identity is given in Eq. (105) of UFT255 and reviewed in UFT281, the first chapter of “Principles of ECE Theory”. So it is clear that staff and students within the University of Wales have accepted ECE theory in line with essentially all the universities of relevance in the world.”

Does it never occur to you Ron that some of us here sometimes log-on via our university accounts? That is how we know, as an absolute certainty, that not every ‘consultation’ denotes a believer in your claptrap. This is why your ‘scientometrics’ are totally worthless.  Why do you not send an e-mail to every physics department in the world and plead with them to canvass their staff and report how many members admit to believing you? Why not also attach a copy of your famous medical certificate, just to reassure them that you are not ‘just some nutter’? 

Missing Link?

February 28, 2015

The Ancient Genealogies of Britain

February 27, 2015

The best and most accurate site iswww.ancientwalesstudies.org which has studied thousands of genealogies and researched them exhaustively, correcting Bartrum where necessary. This is the Center for the Study of Ancient Wales in Jefferson Texas. Using this site I am able to trace the authentic pedigree of the Morgan Aubrey Family back to Beli Mawr (130 B.C.) in one line and to 285 B. C.”

We confidently expect (knowing that he has no truck with niceties concerning spear and distaff lines) that Ron will eventually trace his lineage back to Adam, just as was done with his relative Liz Tudor (viz the family-tree on display at Hatfield House).  

So How Does That Work?

February 27, 2015

University Conference on UFT213

February 26, 2015

This occurred on 24/2/15 to discuss the proofs of the antisymmetry of the Christoffel connection discussed in UFT213. The participants were: TU Berlin, Georgia Tech, Rochester Tech, University of Virginia and University of Durham. These are all world ranking universities.”

CONFERENCE (noun): a formal meeting of people with a shared interest, typically one that takes place over several days.

So how exactly does this ‘discussion’ take place? Does this also mean that buses, which notoriously arrive in groups of three (due to a well-known statistical effect), are similarly having ‘discussions’. One can forgive Ron for being fooled in this case. After all, when the phenomenon was first observed, in the horse-kick deaths of Polish cavalry officers, the Polish high-command initially attributed the coincidental deaths to disguised assassinations by enemy agents.

Ignoretur Opera

February 22, 2015

“In my Oxford days the most I ever got for a paper were about one hundred post cards for Omnia Opera 30, the rotational dynamics of water free of hydrogen bonding. I should put some of these reprint requests on the site for historical interest, they were post cards from all over the world with “Esteemed Colleague” and so on in several languages with “Avec meilleurs remercients” and “Sehr Geehrte Kollege” and so on. So I very soon exhausted my supply of offprints, about 25 free offprints.”

Did you write those postcards yourself, Ron, given that both the French and German are incorrect? It seems that the offprints mostly ended up in the bin anyway. Ah, the marvelous Opera Omnia #30. Cited only 4 times in nearly 40 years. Of these mentions, 50% were by … need we spell it out. In 1985, a Dr Conrad mentioned it …. but only en passant. In 1980, Beevers and Williams were much more effusive about it, but that was only because they were working at Ron’s old laboratory and were probably afraid to cross him. He certainly had a hand in the writing of the paper; they said so. So then, effectively only one independent and passing reference to this paper in 38 years. As we never tire of pointing out, just one work by one of our number has been cited almost 4000 times during the same period; that is what we call impressive scientometrics.  We suspect that, given enough time, we could show that this pattern of self-referencing and lack of academic influence applies to Ron’s ‘opera omnia’ as a whole.

Nescient Wits

February 21, 2015

Nothing New in “New Scientist”

February 21, 2015

The basic problem of course is lack of scholarship and literature searches, so well known facts are rediscovered over and over again and presented third or fourth hand as something new by journalists who never do a literature search and who never check the scholarship. When something really new is found it is censored, but the censorship has itself been censored.”

We cannot understand why Ron does not like New Scientist. It is by far the worst popular-science magazine in the world, due to the fact that it is run by tabloid journalists and that its scientific advisers are tenth-rate. The spirit of the magazine has always been anti-science and pro-crackpot; almost every article (and often even the covers) try to give the impression that some well-established scientific law or belief is about to be overturned. We have frequently tried to persuade the rag to take an interest in Ron, but with no luck; even New Scientist has some standards it seems. Not convinced by our assessment of the magazine? Consider this: two of its scientific advisers have received Ignobel Prizes (and that is not a good thing, apart from probably being a record), another one wrote a book claiming that an alignment of the planets would cause devastation on Earth, and a fourth wrote a book claiming that AIDS is not caused by a virus. In the guise of ‘scientific openness’, the magazine promoted the early careers of Uri Geller and Rupert ‘morphic resonance’ Sheldrake. It once announced that dowsing had been proved to work by a ‘double-blind’ experimental study.The magazine was forced to retract that claim when skeptics proved that the experiments had been performed by someone working alone!  More recently, the magazine plastered a purported antigravity machine across its cover. The article was written by Justin Mullins (author of the 42nd-street paradox [actually first noted in Munchen] article mentioned by the antipodean fool). This crackpot machine (the Emdrive) was being backed by HM Government, and received some £250000 in funding. The company currently reports a £250000 deficit. That is what happens when one goes against Newton’s third law on the word of an electrical engineer. Soon after the antigravity-cover edition, the magazine promoted the lunatic antigravity  theory of Heim; a Nazi who accidentally blew his own hands off and whose ‘work’ is usually discussed only in the lunatic fringe. The latter has been enormously aided by New Scientist over the years: who else would give public access to crackpots such as Harold ‘I verified Uri Geller’ Puthoff and George ‘LENR’ Miley?

Oh Really?

February 21, 2015

“To: EMyrone@aol.com

Sent: 21/02/2015 09:21:05 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Glass beads elevated by light

I recall an experiment long ago in which liquid drops were elevated by light so this is nothing new. Just the establishment slowly accepting the inevitable.”

Evans-the-Sewage ‘recalls an experiment long ago’; nothing of course to do with our recent (30th ant.) link to such an experiment!

Freie Energie Spinös

February 17, 2015

Important Role of Dr Horst Eckardt

February 17, 2015

Fully agreed, I have been working with Horst since late 2006 and his input is of key importance. The scientometrics show that all the best in the world appreciate his work, and that of Douglas Lindstrom and all the staff of AIAS.

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 17/02/2015 14:53:51 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Discussion of the Challenge for Spectroscopy and Quantum Theory

Yes, Horst is a great scientist. He has always been able to see the signifance of your work and adds to it with his meticulous checking and making his own contributions and predictions. He does not seek the limelight but deserves the best accolades himself. His name, like your own, will be recorded in hisrory.

Sent from Samsung Mobile”

Nope, Siemens Stain plays Goebbels to Ron’s Hitler and is, as subtly hinted at, a disgrace to the name of a great German company, just as Ron is an ugly stain on the list of Civil List scientists.  SS is of course a stalwart of the German perpetual-motion bund:

http://www.borderlands.de/net_pdf/NET0111S24-25

http://www.borderlands.de/net_pdf/NET0110S25-27.pdf

http://www.dasgelbeforum.net/forum_entry.php?id=156125

http://home.arcor.de/h.eckardt/Physik/

http://wowsecurity.net/security/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=26

http://firma-24.de/horst-eckardt-personalcomputer-arbeitsgruppe-pcag-siemens-m%C3%BCnchen-e-v-c-o-dr-eckardt-kafkastra%C3%9Fe-m%C3%BCnchen

http://svrswiss.org/pdfs_aso/Eckhardt-190212.pdf

SS serves only to rubber-stamp Ron’s lunatic theories by involving …  gasp … computer algebra. But the latter cannot detect pseudoscientific cant and incompetence. Forget all of the ECE nonsense, and imagine Ron and SS trying to calculate the depth of a well by dropping stones and listening for the splash. Ron will think up a theory for accurately calculating the depth; he might even trust Newton for that purpose. SS then checks Ron’s calculation and declares it correct. Of course, no experiments will be performed in order to check the calculation. But then a real physicist arrives and laughs at their pathetic efforts. “You have not allowed for air resistance”, he will smirk. “You have not allowed for the time-delay due to the finite speed of sound”, he will snigger. In fact, SS, that is quite a problem: just try to come up with a closed-form solution involving time-delay.  After all, one depends upon hearing the splash in order to know the depth, but one needs to know the depth in order to calculate the delay!  That, in a nutshell of analogy, is what Ron and Siemens Stain are doing in more advanced domains: using computer algebra to validate incorrect, incompetent and insufficient mathematical models.

By the way, folks, note yet again that Evans-the-Sewage has apparently been pursuing his pseudoscientist hero-worship during work-time. Does this mean that CCC also supports Ron’s ‘great work’. We shall have to ask.

Victim of Dementia, or Plain Loony?

February 16, 2015

“My former co author and good friend Vigier (a prominent French Statesman) was not allowed to enter the United States because he was a Member of the democratic French Communist Party (about the same as a democratic Bevanite Socialist like myself in Britain). Einstein gave the post to John Wheeler, with whom I corresponded about B(3). Wheeler was very curious about B(3) and sent me an immensely long fax message from Princeton. Vigier was awarded France’s highest honour, Membership of the Legion of Honour (Legion d’Honneur). He worked with the Nobel Laureate Frederic Joliot-Curie and resigned in protest over the French atomic bomb. He later worked with the Nobel Laureate Louis de Broglie, one of the founders of the quantum theory.”

But all of that is irrelevant because he then descended into pseudoscience and ended up being given equal billing,

http://www.guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/conference/Weinfelden/

with your conman friend, Searl; not to mention other notorious nutters such as Valone (who managed to keep his post at the US patent office [sic] by claiming that perpetual-motion was his religion) and Dr Dr Dr Gruber (how many doctorates does one have to acquire before it actually ‘takes’). Come to think of it, it was only pseudoscience that brought you and Vigier together.

Classic Scam Techniques

February 16, 2015

Discussion of Switch-on spike in transformers

February 16, 2015

Good idea.

: 15/02/2015 18:38:37 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Switch-on spike in transformers

Dear Franklin,

I am glad that Dr. Ide’s papers can be published now. Perhaps they can be accompanied by an additional paper of Kurt’s confirmative measurements.

Best,
Horst”

As we have mentioned several times in connection with the Hill con, spiky outputs are one of the favourite tricks used by free-energy crooks to fool laymen into thinking that output is greater than input. Another trick is to play around with power-factor and phase effects. The simplest trick is just to argue in terms of power rather than energy (power is not a conserved quantity). Induction effects constantly baffle non-physicists, and this probably explains why electrical engineers are disproportionately represented in the lunatic fringe. The most popular device is the Faraday homopolar generator/motor. It confuses non-physicists because it does not obey the simplistic flux-cutting and flux-linking reasoning used by electrical engineers, and some idiots claim that (because of electromagnetic hidden momentum) it does not obey Newton’s third law and therefore is a route to not only perpetual motion but also antigravity. Siemens Stain has of course written about the homopolar generator in connection with Ron’s spin-connection resonance nonsense. Another standard trick used by ‘academic’ free-energy conmen is to choose their ground very carefully. When one has a gadget that has no chance of fooling a physics conference, one simply presents it at a chemistry conference instead. Similarly, we know of a crackpot biologist who managed to get loony papers published in optics journals. On the strength of this, he eventually went on to patent (pre-Futurama) a ‘Smaser’:  a laser-like device which supposedly projected smells. No, don’t laugh at the afflicted. Of course, the patent was published, but not granted. This is a subtle distinction which is also enthusiastically exploited by conmen such as Edwin Gray … in whose footsteps Ide is plodding. 

Ron at Cornell

February 15, 2015

Is this a typical example of Ron’s success at Cornell? 

http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josab/abstract.cfm?uri=josab-9-7-1020

This paper has been cited only twice in 22 years, and both references were by … oh, you have guessed. The funny thing is that Ron puts an entirely different spin on it. In 2007, it was:

Award Winning Evans Pelkie Animation on web

Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:00:53 EDT

But then he later

Animation by Chris Pelkie and Myself on www.aias.us

July 1, 2010

let slip that,

“This animation was awarded an honorable mention  … Chris’s animation is a work of art, and was easily the best of the whole competition, so it is unclear why we did not win a first prize. Probably academic politics again, a phenomenon which rarely agrees with scholarship.”

Or perhaps it was just not as good as Ron wanted to believe. This seems to have been the pattern for all of his work: both pre- and post-breakdown..