Original poster: Jim Lux <jimlux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> At 04:23 PM 3/11/2007, you wrote:
Original poster: "Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz" <acmdq@xxxxxxxxxx> Tesla list wrote:Really impressive how long this madness can go... A quick look at the site shows obvious nonsense in so many places that I imagined that the subject would be simply ignored. But no, this never ends so simply...Original poster: Paul Nicholson <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Leith Aitchison wrote: > Site that may be of interest explaining Einstein Cartan Evans > grand unified field theory , simply amazing !!! Amazing! You'd think by now that retired chemistry professors should know better than to try their hand at physics! The site reeks of pseudoscience - the self styled 'institute', the appeals to authority (Tony Blair no less - renowned for his credulity). Try these links instead, http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html http://www.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/GCUFT.html
Anything that is not immediately tangible and requires an mental conceptual model tends to foster this sort of thing. Consider, for instance, the long running "discussions" among hams about forward and reflected power/waves or active/reactive power in a transmission line vis a vis ways of measuring same (e.g. what does that Bird 43 watt meter really do). There's several complementary ways of considering what's going on with a source, transmission line, and load, and the various measurement techniques throw in another set of variables (bridges, directional couplers, point samplers of instantaneous I and V, etc.)