|
|
|
x2009:
你不过是个混混而已! 你不过是个方舟子类混混! 你引用的方舟子混混言论说明什么了? 蒋春暄的论文我未看到,不作评论。你x2009看到蒋春暄的论文了吗?你以数理逻辑指出其数学错误是什么了吗?你不作任何实质性批驳,就是方舟子类混混! 方舟子横说“另一位科学狂人李映华著的《物理学的几个重大理论问题》”,他指出李映华《物理学的几个重大理论问题》中什么地方错误了吗?为什么错误了吗?方舟子有任何数学表达进行否定吗? |
|
楼上的几位,我是数学系的博士生。
我看过蒋的论文,真是狗屁不通。 数学家之所以不来反驳他,是因为这种民科实在太多了。 他证明黎曼猜测的文章里的推论就是所有COS(X)>=0 我想你是大学生,学过高等数学的就知道问题了吧。 你们骂方舟子的,拜托先去看看论文吧。 |
|
哥白尼、伽利略质疑权威理论的论文能在权威的学术期刊发表吗?肯定不能!
我的论文能让美国《物理评论A》主编Gordon W.F. Drake(加拿大温莎大学物理系主任)、《物理评论A》编委委员Mikhail V. Fedorov(俄罗斯科学院普通物理研究所研究员)、美国物理学会总编Gene D. Sprouse(美国纽约大学教授)审稿数月,无法指出任何问题,这等于默认我的论文是正确的,相对论是错误的。但是他们不肯承认相对论是错误的,只好用滑稽的理由拒稿。 ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |
|
对【8楼】说: 这位朋友,你说的肯定不是事实的全部!你显然不了解国际学术界的审稿规则,我为美国《物理评论》审了十几年稿,也在上面发表了几篇论文,审稿是匿名的,作为作者是不可能知道他的稿件是谁审的。《物理评论》要枪毙一篇稿件太容易了,编辑可以以你的论文无法引起广泛兴趣为由拒稿,对于质疑相对论的论文,他们肯定比较谨慎,但是要找一个冠冕的拒稿理由应该不难,不会弱智到无法指出任何问题的地步。(要证明你说的都是事实,可以把所有的审稿材料贴上来。) |
|
这是当我指出Mikhail V. Fedorov搞错了对象,PRA主编Gordon W.F. Drake也觉得说不过去,于是发起第二次appeal后,总编Gene D. Sprouse的回信。看看多么可笑,他竟然说审稿人是公平和负责任的,因此他必须维持审稿人的裁判。
Re: LY11626A Can the principle of constancy of light velocity be proved by Michelson-Morley experiment? by Xinwei Huang Dr. Xinwei Huang Equipment Department Dongfeng Motor Corporation Frame Plant Shiyan 442000 Hubei, CHINA Dear Dr. Huang, I have reviewed the file concerning this manuscript which was submitted to Physical Review A. The scientific review of your paper is the responsibility of the editor of Physical Review A, and resulted in the decision to reject your paper. The Editor in Chief must assure that the procedures of our journals have been followed responsibly and fairly in arriving at that decision. On considering all aspects of this file I have concluded that our procedures have in fact been appropriately followed and that your paper received a fair review. Accordingly, I must uphold the decision of the Editors. Yours sincerely, Gene D. Sprouse Editor in Chief ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |
|
这是PRA主编Gordon W.F. Drake的拒稿信,可以看出,没有给出任何理由。他建议我上诉。
Re: LY11626A Can the principle of constancy of light velocity be proved by Michelson-Morley experiment? by Xinwei Huang Dr. Xinwei Huang Equipment Department Dongfeng Motor Corporation Frame Plant Shiyan 442000 Hubei, CHINA Dear Dr. Huang, Your paper has been rejected. Further consideration can only be given if you decide to exercise the option, available under this journal's Editorial Policies (copy enclosed), of appealing the decision to reject the manuscript. Adjudication of such an appeal is based on the version of the manuscript that was rejected; no revisions can be introduced at this stage. Yours sincerely, Gordon W.F. Drake Editor Physical Review A Email: pra@ridge.aps.org Fax: 631-591-4141 http://pra.aps.org/ ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |
|
没有任何审稿意见,这就是事实。
如果有,Mikhail V. Fedorov就不会抨击我的过去发表的文章作为拒稿理由了。 ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |
|
我的论文没有经历过匿名审稿,始终没有经历过Under Review,而是两次Under Appeal。等我把所有通信发出来你就明白了。 ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |
|
这是我回答了他的问题,并请他仔细思考我的问题后,他的回信。显然,此时他的态度有所改变。
Re: LY11626A Can the principle of constancy of light velocity be proved by Michelson-Morley experiment? by Xinwei Huang Dr. Xinwei Huang Equipment Department Dongfeng Motor Corporation Frame Plant Shiyan 442000 Hubei, CHINA Dear Dr. Huang, In your last letter, you asked me to consider your alternative explanation for the negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment by invoking the concept of ether drag. The problem is that one cannot consider just this one experiment in isolation from the many other outstanding successes of the special theory of relativity. In proposing an alternative explanation for the Michelson-Morley experiment, it is incumbent upon you as the author to show that the alternative theory does not lead to contradictions elsewhere. One of the most important examples is the energy levels of atomic hydrogen. These are in precise agreement with experiment when the special theory of relativity is included via the Dirac equation (together with higher-order quantum electrodynamic corrections), but not when they are omitted. If one abolishes the special theory of relativity in favor of a picture involving ether drag, then you must find some other way of restoring agreement between theory and experiment for the energy levels of atomic hydrogen. Unless you can do so, your proposal is incomplete and cannot be accepted for publication because it leads to a contradiction with the high-precision spectroscopic data for atomic hydrogen. You must similarly take into account the many other tests, such as the relativistic dynamics of particles in high energy accelerators, and the conversion of mass into energy. Particle accelerators would not work if the relativistic dynamics did not work correctly. It is not sufficient just to quote famous people who speculated about alternative theories. None of their speculations included ether drag as a serious alternative. I might suggest that you submit your paper to a journal that specializes in publishing speculative ideas. Yours sincerely, Gordon W.F. Drake Editor Physical Review A Email: pra@ridge.aps.org Fax: 631-591-4141 http://pra.aps.org/ Physics - spotlighting exceptional research: http://physics.aps.org/ ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |
|
Mikhail V. Fedorov抨击我的代替相对论的理论,而对我的要发表的 Can the principle of constancy of light velocity be proved by Michelson-Morley experiment? 没有任何人指出任何问题。
因为这篇论文是无懈可击的,将终结相对论。 ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |
|
刚回的一个帖子被审核了。等等看能不能出来。
是的,现在就是没有话语权。 我后来不客气的批评他们。 ※※※※※※ 欢迎光临黄新卫挑战相对论的博客http://blog.163.com/hubeihxw@yeah/blog |