Hi Miles,
A number of discussions and comments regarding your work have been
posted in the mailing list vortex-l, unconventional physics
<http://amasci.com/weird/wvort.html>. See by example this thread
<http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg40360.html>, and
also the ones called "Mercury's perihelion
precession"(http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg40083.html)
and "Anyone recognizes this astronomy integral"
(http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg40233.html).
Maybe you'd want to join the list, to comment directly on your work and
the issues raised.
Regards,
Mauro Lacy
On 10/14/2010 06:18 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
> In reply to OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson's message of Thu, 14 Oct 2010
> 10:10:10 -0500:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>
>> FYI,
>>
>> A couple of days ago I sent a message off to Miles Mathis, mentioning
>> the fact that I just finished reading his paper on "The Electron
>> Orbit."
>>
>> See: http://milesmathis.com/elorb.html
>>
> Unfortunately this is wrong. He talks about electrons appearing to "swim
> upstream" because they are smaller and lighter than protons, however positrons
> and electrons also attract one another, and they have equivalent mass.
>
> Also, he fails to ask the question: "What would happen if the electron did hit
> the proton?".
>
> The answer of course is that it would be deflected, and keep right on going.
> The
> only other options are that it sticks to the proton (impossible because of
> conservation of energy and momentum), or that it combine with the proton to
> form
> a neutron, also impossible because the two of them combined don't have enough
> relativistic mass to form a neutron.
>
> So his entire spiel is irrelevant.
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>
>
>
