Re: ENERGY,FREQUENCY AND FORMATION OF MASS & GRAVITY

Posted by lanecove on August 17, 2003 at 07:21:56:

In Reply to: Re: ENERGY,FREQUENCY AND FORMATION OF MASS & GRAVITY posted by quantumwhip on August 16, 2003 at 15:51:14:

Dr Ameen/quantumwhip,

I asked: "Would you be so kind as to:
a) provide some quantatitive results derived from your ideas, and the detailed comparisons of these with published experimental results and observations; and
b) make some quantatitive predictions, for example the mass of the Higgs particle, the mass of the LSSP?

To which you replied: "If you provide with some Higgs particles we would give you the quanitative results of their fictious mass and existence.So far the high energy physicist cross the enrgy levels where these fictious particles were to be observed,but the GOD PARTICLES were never found.Dr.Ameen had posted long ago in this forum:http://www.superstringtheory.com
long ago about the failure of finding the God particles(higgs particles)if you look into the archieves you would find it.

To me this reply looks like one part of an answer to b), but only in the sense that you have quantatitive results once the Higgs has been found.

To a), you replied: "2)This year's january International conference:
SPIES INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE 2003,San Jose,California(USA)
had accepted the talked to be delivered in the meeting.The full manuscript was submitted to the conference several months ago and was ACCEPTED by the referees and in that meeting an oral talk was scheduled on this Rediscovery of Photons and Fermion to Boson conversion.The program announced and published the abstract.Dr.Ameen could not attend himself due to physical threats to his life.As you must know that he has some conflicts with the Intelligence and defence establishments of certain countries.

As James says in his post, this seems to be rather strange. If my reading of the US government's response to 9/11 is correct, intelligence and defence folk would have no difficulty finding you, not least because you make posts to this forum.

Perhaps in future my replies to you posts should consist simply of:
1) a list of experimental/observational results which are inconsistent with your ideas
2) a standing request for quantatitive rebuttals of the (competing) theories which you feel are on unsound experimental bases
3) an invitation to submit quantatitive predictions based on your ideas, so this forum's readers may have a solid basis for judging your ideas.

Regards
lanecove

(Report this post to the moderator)

Follow Ups: (Reload page to see most recent)

Post a Followup