The thing is, criteria for being in the list of physicists you pointed to is so ill-defined that any physicist with a wikipedia entry pretty much automatically qualifies.
In the case of John Hagelin, both of his main co-authors are included in that list and their wikipedia pages mention those papers that he co-wrote. It would be hard to argue that they should be included and John shouldn't be. L. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > [...] > > > > John's career THESE days involves the TM organization. In his early > > > > days, he was very well respected as a theoretical physicist and this > > > > included much of his time at MIU (before the name change). > > > > > > > > > Funny how you never see this world renowned physicists name anywhere > > > outside of TM publications. Nor does he appear here: > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_physicists > > > > > > When even Brian May from Queen does! > > > > > > > No-one bothered to add him (until now). > > > > Check again. > > Proof. It aint what you know, it's who you know. > > > > L > > >
