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 > > >