| |
Main
Date: 05 Nov 2006 17:41:29
From: AJAY SHARMA
Subject: To Dr Pasken , Dept of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, SLU
|
Dr PASKEN,
Robert Pasken
Department of Earth and AtmosphericSciences
Saint Louis University
3507 Laclede Avenue
St.Louis, MO 63103
Part I
Your OBJETION was momentum is not conserved in my paper.
It is conserved, you are absolutely wrong. It is simple interpretation
of 11th class physics.
I have pasted my reply in number of posts, but you failed to respond. I
will again put it here..
See one link
http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-in=
ventor-of-second-postulate.htm
Kindly address this issue. Also see that I am polite in my posts , if
someone goes out of way , then things are different.
Defend on the comments you have made made. This work is published in
international journals and conferences.
It is correct.
Part II
Well , I respond politely number of time. But if someone does not
understand that language , then answer in his language,
(i) Dr Inpain , is not a CERN at all. He boasted THAT HE IS AT CERN
and runs Nuclear Reactors SO THAT HIS his wrong arguments are accepted
.
ON 28th Sep 2006 , I clarified then Head TP CERN said he is not at all
associated with CERN.
For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
He used absurd language, and he was served in that. AN YOU SEE THE
WORDS HE USED, FIRST When you are able to defend YOUR own WRONG
comments, now you remember him.
How you are wrong see the link ,
http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-in=
ventor-of-second-postulate.htm
Number of ties I asked him to write to the Editor of the journal, but
he did not.
HE COULD NOT DEFEND HIS ARGUMENTS SCIENTIFICALLY.
(ii) Your other quotation rambus2005@yahoo.com,
He too made absurd remarks. Now you talk about his NAMELESS
POST , where there is no mention of place he works and what is his
actual place.
God Bless you Dr Pasken,
This post is NOTHING nut my equations. Just put value of phi =3D98
then equations in the pot reduce to my equations.
This post confirms my equations and deductions.
What do you want MORE . Juts try to read and understand.
Par III
If You disagree then one can write to Editor Physics Essays
addressing the following issues.
What is Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 1905 paper?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
What is Planck=E2=80=99s observation regarding it?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
Why Einstein did not generalize the same?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s paper is different from Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 19=
05
paper.
How Editors/referees who have published it are WRONG?
How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations AND EQAUTIONS?
My paper answers all above questions.
It follows from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation under legitimate conditions,(=
in
some cases) that
when Light Energy is Emitted , mass of body INCREASES.
It is incorrect deduction from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation.
Part IV
References.
References of Einstein=E2=80=99s work
.
A=2EEinstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
PartII
References of Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s work
My work is available at
A=2E Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
=E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac2 =
=EF=81=84M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1=2E Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA
2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.
3=2E A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,
10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND
4=2E A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND
5=2E A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.
6=2E A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
=E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac2 =
=EF=81=84M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past ,present and future of E=3Dmc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
( book will be published in Dec 2006 , by NOVA Science in New York ,
USA)
AJAY SHARMA 6 NOV 2006
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Nov 2006 06:05:03
From: AJAY SHARMA
Subject: Re: To Dr Pasken , Dept of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, SLU
|
AJAY SHARMA wrote:
> Dr PASKEN,
> Robert Pasken
> Department of Earth and AtmosphericSciences
> Saint Louis University
> 3507 Laclede Avenue
> St.Louis, MO 63103
> Part I
> Your OBJETION was momentum is not conserved in my paper.
> It is conserved, you are absolutely wrong. It is simple interpretation
> of 11th class physics.
> I have pasted my reply in number of posts, but you failed to respond. I
> will again put it here..
> See one link
> http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-=
inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
>
> Kindly address this issue. Also see that I am polite in my posts , if
> someone goes out of way , then things are different.
> Defend on the comments you have made made. This work is published in
> international journals and conferences.
> It is correct.
> Part II
> Well , I respond politely number of time. But if someone does not
> understand that language , then answer in his language,
> (i) Dr Inpain , is not a CERN at all. He boasted THAT HE IS AT CERN
> and runs Nuclear Reactors SO THAT HIS his wrong arguments are accepted
> .
>
> ON 28th Sep 2006 , I clarified then Head TP CERN said he is not at all
> associated with CERN.
> For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
> He used absurd language, and he was served in that. AN YOU SEE THE
> WORDS HE USED, FIRST When you are able to defend YOUR own WRONG
> comments, now you remember him.
> How you are wrong see the link ,
> http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-=
inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
>
>
> Number of ties I asked him to write to the Editor of the journal, but
> he did not.
> HE COULD NOT DEFEND HIS ARGUMENTS SCIENTIFICALLY.
>
> (ii) Your other quotation rambus2005@yahoo.com,
> He too made absurd remarks. Now you talk about his NAMELESS
> POST , where there is no mention of place he works and what is his
> actual place.
> God Bless you Dr Pasken,
> This post is NOTHING nut my equations. Just put value of phi =3D98
> then equations in the pot reduce to my equations.
> This post confirms my equations and deductions.
> What do you want MORE . Juts try to read and understand.
>
> Par III
>
> If You disagree then one can write to Editor Physics Essays
> addressing the following issues.
>
> What is Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 1905 paper?
> What are conditions under which it is derived?
> What is Planck=E2=80=99s observation regarding it?
> Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
> Why Einstein did not generalize the same?
> How to generalize it under all conditions?
> What is Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s Interpretation?
> How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s paper is different from Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep =
1905
> paper.
> How Editors/referees who have published it are WRONG?
> How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
> What are the correct interpretations AND EQAUTIONS?
> My paper answers all above questions.
> It follows from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation under legitimate conditions=
,(in
> some cases) that
> when Light Energy is Emitted , mass of body INCREASES.
> It is incorrect deduction from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation.
>
> Part IV
> References.
>
> References of Einstein=E2=80=99s work
> .
> A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
> . DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
> UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
> Weblink is
> Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
> http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
>
> PartII
> References of Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s work
>
> My work is available at
> A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
> =E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac=
2 =EF=81=84M; and
> its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
> http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
>
> For details
> https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324=
&products_id=3D4554
>
>
> International Conferences
> It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
> world
> --------------------------------------few of them
> 1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
> Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
> August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA
>
> 2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
> (
> Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.
>
> 3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,
>
> 10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
> University of Warwick , ENGLAND
>
> 4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
> ENGLAND
>
> 5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
> Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
> (2003) 585.
> 6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
> Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
> plus more
> --------------------------------------
> Journals
> This paper
> =E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac=
2 =EF=81=84M; and
> its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
> is published in journal
> Physics Essays , CANADA
> www.physicsessays.com
> The paper
> The past ,present and future of E=3Dmc2
> will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
> USA.
> In parts it is published in various others journals.
> ----------------------
> Book 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
> For details
> https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324=
&products_id=3D4554
>
> ( book will be published in Dec 2006 , by NOVA Science in New York ,
> USA)
>=20
> AJAY SHARMA 6 NOV 2006
|
| |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 07:08:42
From: ma
Subject: Re: To Dr Pasken , Dept of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, SLU
|
AJAY SHARMA wrote:
> AJAY SHARMA wrote:
>
> > Dr PASKEN,
> > Robert Pasken
> > Department of Earth and AtmosphericSciences
> > Saint Louis University
> > 3507 Laclede Avenue
> > St.Louis, MO 63103
> > Part I
> > Your OBJETION was momentum is not conserved in my paper.
> > It is conserved, you are absolutely wrong. It is simple interpretation
> > of 11th class physics.
> > I have pasted my reply in number of posts, but you failed to respond. I
> > will again put it here..
> > See one link
> > http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-i=
s-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
> >
> > Kindly address this issue. Also see that I am polite in my posts , if
> > someone goes out of way , then things are different.
> > Defend on the comments you have made made. This work is published in
> > international journals and conferences.
> > It is correct.
> > Part II
> > Well , I respond politely number of time. But if someone does not
> > understand that language , then answer in his language,
> > (i) Dr Inpain , is not a CERN at all. He boasted THAT HE IS AT CERN
> > and runs Nuclear Reactors SO THAT HIS his wrong arguments are accepted
> > .
> >
> > ON 28th Sep 2006 , I clarified then Head TP CERN said he is not at all
> > associated with CERN.
> > For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
> > He used absurd language, and he was served in that. AN YOU SEE THE
> > WORDS HE USED, FIRST When you are able to defend YOUR own WRONG
> > comments, now you remember him.
> > How you are wrong see the link ,
> > http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-i=
s-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
> >
> >
> > Number of ties I asked him to write to the Editor of the journal, but
> > he did not.
> > HE COULD NOT DEFEND HIS ARGUMENTS SCIENTIFICALLY.
> >
> > (ii) Your other quotation rambus2005@yahoo.com,
> > He too made absurd remarks. Now you talk about his NAMELESS
> > POST , where there is no mention of place he works and what is his
> > actual place.
> > God Bless you Dr Pasken,
> > This post is NOTHING nut my equations. Just put value of phi =3D98
> > then equations in the pot reduce to my equations.
> > This post confirms my equations and deductions.
> > What do you want MORE . Juts try to read and understand.
> >
> > Par III
> >
> > If You disagree then one can write to Editor Physics Essays
> > addressing the following issues.
> >
> > What is Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 1905 paper?
> > What are conditions under which it is derived?
> > What is Planck=E2=80=99s observation regarding it?
> > Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
> > Why Einstein did not generalize the same?
> > How to generalize it under all conditions?
> > What is Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s Interpretation?
> > How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s paper is different from Einstein=E2=80=99s Se=
p 1905
> > paper.
> > How Editors/referees who have published it are WRONG?
> > How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
> > What are the correct interpretations AND EQAUTIONS?
> > My paper answers all above questions.
> > It follows from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation under legitimate conditio=
ns,(in
> > some cases) that
> > when Light Energy is Emitted , mass of body INCREASES.
> > It is incorrect deduction from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation.
> >
> > Part IV
> > References.
> >
> > References of Einstein=E2=80=99s work
> > .
> > A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
> > . DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
> > UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
> > Weblink is
> > Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
> > http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
> >
> > PartII
> > References of Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s work
> >
> > My work is available at
> > A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
> > =E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D =
Ac2 =EF=81=84M; and
> > its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
> > http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
> >
> > For details
> > https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_3=
24&products_id=3D4554
> >
> >
> > International Conferences
> > It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
> > world
> > --------------------------------------few of them
> > 1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
> > Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
> > August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA
> >
> > 2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
> > (
> > Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.
> >
> > 3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,
> >
> > 10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
> > University of Warwick , ENGLAND
> >
> > 4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
> > ENGLAND
> >
> > 5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
> > Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
> > (2003) 585.
> > 6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
> > Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
> > plus more
> > --------------------------------------
> > Journals
> > This paper
> > =E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D =
Ac2 =EF=81=84M; and
> > its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
> > is published in journal
> > Physics Essays , CANADA
> > www.physicsessays.com
> > The paper
> > The past ,present and future of E=3Dmc2
> > will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
> > USA.
> > In parts it is published in various others journals.
> > ----------------------
> > Book 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
> > For details
> > https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_3=
24&products_id=3D4554
> >
> > ( book will be published in Dec 2006 , by NOVA Science in New York ,
> > USA)
> >
> > AJAY SHARMA 6 NOV 2006
-----------------------------------------
Here is the reply
http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-in=
ventor-of-second-postulate.htm
|
| |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 20:56:21
From:
Subject: Re: To Dr Pasken , Dept of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, SLU
|
Ajay Sharma's sock puppet wrote
> > > > Part II
> > > > Well , I respond politely number of time. But if someone does not
> > > > understand that language , then answer in his language,
> > > > (i) Dr Inpain , is not a CERN at all. He boasted THAT HE IS AT CERN
> > > > and runs Nuclear Reactors SO THAT HIS his wrong arguments are accepted
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > ON 28th Sep 2006 , I clarified then Head TP CERN said he is not at all
> > > > associated with CERN.
> > > > For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
> > > > He used absurd language, and he was served in that. AN YOU SEE THE
> > > > WORDS HE USED, FIRST When you are able to defend YOUR own WRONG
> > > > comments, now you remember him.
Even though I have repeatedly explained to you: There is NO Dr. Inpain
at CERN. It is an alias for a Ph.D. (Dr.) scientist at CERN who is IN
PAIN (get it! Dr. Inpain). You indicated just how little you understand
when actually contacted CERN to look for a Dr. Inpain (just as a
reminder again: he is a Ph.D. scientist at CERN who is IN PAIN after
reading your drivel).
You are absolutely correct when you state:
For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
You are the cheat and liar. You resort to racial slurs
|
| |
Date: 07 Nov 2006 18:06:54
From: tom
Subject: Re: To Dr Pasken , Dept of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, SLU
|
ma wrote:
> AJAY SHARMA wrote:
> > AJAY SHARMA wrote:
> >
> > > Dr PASKEN,
> > > Robert Pasken
> > > Department of Earth and AtmosphericSciences
> > > Saint Louis University
> > > 3507 Laclede Avenue
> > > St.Louis, MO 63103
> > > Part I
> > > Your OBJETION was momentum is not conserved in my paper.
> > > It is conserved, you are absolutely wrong. It is simple interpretation
> > > of 11th class physics.
> > > I have pasted my reply in number of posts, but you failed to respond.=
I
> > > will again put it here..
> > > See one link
> > > http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein=
-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
> > >
> > > Kindly address this issue. Also see that I am polite in my posts , if
> > > someone goes out of way , then things are different.
> > > Defend on the comments you have made made. This work is published in
> > > international journals and conferences.
> > > It is correct.
> > > Part II
> > > Well , I respond politely number of time. But if someone does not
> > > understand that language , then answer in his language,
> > > (i) Dr Inpain , is not a CERN at all. He boasted THAT HE IS AT CERN
> > > and runs Nuclear Reactors SO THAT HIS his wrong arguments are accepted
> > > .
> > >
> > > ON 28th Sep 2006 , I clarified then Head TP CERN said he is not at a=
ll
> > > associated with CERN.
> > > For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
> > > He used absurd language, and he was served in that. AN YOU SEE THE
> > > WORDS HE USED, FIRST When you are able to defend YOUR own WRONG
> > > comments, now you remember him.
> > > How you are wrong see the link ,
> > > http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein=
-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
> > >
> > >
> > > Number of ties I asked him to write to the Editor of the journal, but
> > > he did not.
> > > HE COULD NOT DEFEND HIS ARGUMENTS SCIENTIFICALLY.
> > >
> > > (ii) Your other quotation rambus2005@yahoo.com,
> > > He too made absurd remarks. Now you talk about his NAMELESS
> > > POST , where there is no mention of place he works and what is his
> > > actual place.
> > > God Bless you Dr Pasken,
> > > This post is NOTHING nut my equations. Just put value of phi =3D98
> > > then equations in the pot reduce to my equations.
> > > This post confirms my equations and deductions.
> > > What do you want MORE . Juts try to read and understand.
> > >
> > > Par III
> > >
> > > If You disagree then one can write to Editor Physics Essays
> > > addressing the following issues.
> > >
> > > What is Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 1905 paper?
> > > What are conditions under which it is derived?
> > > What is Planck=E2=80=99s observation regarding it?
> > > Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
> > > Why Einstein did not generalize the same?
> > > How to generalize it under all conditions?
> > > What is Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s Interpretation?
> > > How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s paper is different from Einstein=E2=80=99s =
Sep 1905
> > > paper.
> > > How Editors/referees who have published it are WRONG?
> > > How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
> > > What are the correct interpretations AND EQAUTIONS?
> > > My paper answers all above questions.
> > > It follows from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation under legitimate condit=
ions,(in
> > > some cases) that
> > > when Light Energy is Emitted , mass of body INCREASES.
> > > It is incorrect deduction from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation.
> > >
> > > Part IV
> > > References.
> > >
> > > References of Einstein=E2=80=99s work
> > > .
> > > A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
> > > . DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
> > > UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
> > > Weblink is
> > > Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
> > > http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
> > >
> > > PartII
> > > References of Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s work
> > >
> > > My work is available at
> > > A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
> > > =E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =
=3D Ac2 =EF=81=84M; and
> > > its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
> > > http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
> > >
> > > For details
> > > https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48=
_324&products_id=3D4554
> > >
> > >
> > > International Conferences
> > > It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
> > > world
> > > --------------------------------------few of them
> > > 1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
> > > Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
> > > August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA
> > >
> > > 2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Syste=
ms
> > > (
> > > Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.
> > >
> > > 3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005=
,
> > >
> > > 10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
> > > University of Warwick , ENGLAND
> > >
> > > 4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
> > > ENGLAND
> > >
> > > 5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
> > > Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
> > > (2003) 585.
> > > 6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
> > > Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
> > > plus more
> > > --------------------------------------
> > > Journals
> > > This paper
> > > =E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =
=3D Ac2 =EF=81=84M; and
> > > its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
> > > is published in journal
> > > Physics Essays , CANADA
> > > www.physicsessays.com
> > > The paper
> > > The past ,present and future of E=3Dmc2
> > > will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
> > > USA.
> > > In parts it is published in various others journals.
> > > ----------------------
> > > Book 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
> > > For details
> > > https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48=
_324&products_id=3D4554
> > >
> > > ( book will be published in Dec 2006 , by NOVA Science in New York ,
> > > USA)
> > >
> > > AJAY SHARMA 6 NOV 2006
> -----------------------------------------
> Here is the reply
>
> http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-=
inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
---------------------------------------
100 Years of E=3Dmc2
(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)
http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-in=
ventor-of-second-postulate.htm
1=2E What is E=3Dmc2? What is its importance?
E=3Dmc2 is the most wonderful and significant equation is physics. In
1945 the explosion of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were base
upon this equation. According to this mass (m) can be converted to
energy (E) and energy can be converted to mass.
Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
2=2E This equation is doing well since past 100 years then where is the
inconsistency?
The inconsistency lies in its mathematical derivation (a method to
obtain a mathematical equation). In his 1905 paper Einstein did not
derive it mathematically but in true sense speculated it. Einstein
earlier derived L =3D mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then
Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is
true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=3Dmc2, such a
significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical
derivation and not on speculation.
3=2E Is Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation of L =3Dmc2 correct?
The derivation of L=3Dmc2 is incomplete or true in special conditions
only. Einstein took just handpicked parameters out of numerous
possible, to obtain the equation. Einstein was aware of the reality so
he left in midway after getting the desired result. If all valid
values of parameters are taken, then results are contradictory in
nature.
4=2E What are contradictory results?
Some UNDISCUSSED predictions of Einstein=E2=80=99s 29 Sep. 1905 derivation
blatantly contradict Law of Conservation of Matter. I have
scientifically confirmed the same. No limitation can be bigger than
this in science.
5=2E Was E=3Dmc2 or similar ideas existed before Einstein?
Yes, E=3Dmc2 existed before Einstein. An Italian Olinto de Pretto
published E=3Dmc2 in valid scientific journal Lettere ed Atti, Feb. 1904,
two years before Einstein. But Pretto died in 1921, before its
experimental confirmation in nuclear physics.
6=2E Einstein speculated E=3Dmc2 from L=3Dmc2. What is the problem here?
Firstly derivation of L=3Dmc2 is incomplete or under special conditions
only.
For examples there are many variables in Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation e.g.
number of light waves emitted by body, magnitude of light energy, angle
at which light energy is emitted and relative velocity v. Einstein just
took handpicked values of variables.
If general values of variables are
taken then results are contradictory to experiments.
Secondly Einstein originated E=3Dmc2 on the basis of speculation only
without any conceptual and mathematical basis. Basically Einstein
replaced L by E in equation L=3Dmc2 to get E=3Dmc2.
7=2E Then how did you derive new equation, dE =3DAc2dm (or DE =3D Ac2 DM =
)?
I have derived new equation between mass-energy conservation by simple
calculus method. In dE =3DAc2dm, A is a co-efficient of proportionality
like numerous others in science. It is dimensionless variable.
Sharma June 2004 paper is available
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
8=2E How do you compare these two equations?
Firstly dE =3DAc2dm is based upon a conceptual and mathematical
derivation. On the other hand E=3Dmc2 is a speculation, it is bitter
truth. Secondly dE =3DAc2dm is a general equation and E=3Dmc2 is its
special case. Energy emitted by new equation can be less, equal to or
more than predicted by E=3Dmc2.
9=2E How did you justify your equation experimentally?
In Nuclear Physics there are some anomalous results which cannot be
explained by E=3Dmc2 . Like this there are some instances in
astrophysics where my equation is extremely useful.
10. Is your work recognized by international scientific community?
Yes, it is completely recognized, as published in peer review journals.
11 Have you got any recognition certificate from the scientific
community?
The only way to get scientific recognition is that to get the work
published in peer review international journals and conferences. My
research papers are either published in international journals from
America, England and Canada or being published. I have got invitation
from at least 55 International Conferences to present my work. I have
presented my research in international conferences in USA, England,
Germany, Taiwan Ukraine etc. I have invitation from France and Italy
to present my work this year.
[b]Still there ANYONE is welcome to COMMENT on the work in Physics
Essays giving the facts e.g.
What is Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 1905 paper ?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s paper is different from Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 1=
905
paper
How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations?
I HAVE ANSWERS TO ALL QUESTIONS.
If Editor Physics Essays and his Editorial Board finds your
interpretation and published the paper it is OK.
All the references are given below for the purpose.
There may be back door critics but none of the scientists have dared to
write to scientific bodies or journals Editors , that Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s
work is incorrectly published.
12. Can this work be introduced in Schools and colleges?
Yes my wok is scientifically approved in journal in USA, CANADA and
England. Hence it can be so done by any country. IT IS THE IMPORTANCE
OF THE WORK.
13. How do you counter the opposition of the people which has come in
you your way?
Science is the international language. For this, I take seriously the
logical conclusions of the critics. I completely ignore the
irresponsible critics, as they don=E2=80=99t exist.
The critics when understand the things become my supporters.
14. What about your book, 100 Years of E=3Dmc2?
This book will be published in Dec. 2006
It will bring clear and unbiased picture of the facts.
The contents of book are already approved by expert scientists after
PEER REVIEW and published in international journals and conferences
.The book is meant for general public who is interested in basic
science. This book will status as Newton=E2=80=99s Principia or Galileo=E2=
=80=99s
Dialogue have in science.
Book Link :
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
Interviewer Rajesh Thakoor Email mc2.book@gmail.com
References of Einstein=E2=80=99s work
.
A=2EEinstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
PartII
References of Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s work
My work is available at
A=2E Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
=E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac2 =
=EF=81=84M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
For details
100 Years of E=3Dmc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1=2E Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA
2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.
3=2E A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,
10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND
4=2E A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND
5=2E A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.
6=2E A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
=E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac2 =
=EF=81=84M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past, present and future of E=3Dmc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
Email ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com
0091 94183 09989, 0091 177 2804546
|
| |
Date: 08 Nov 2006 04:06:57
From: tom
Subject: Re: To Dr Pasken , Dept of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, SLU
|
rpasken@eas.slu.edu wrote:
> Ajay Sharma's sock puppet wrote
> > > > > Part II
> > > > > Well , I respond politely number of time. But if someone does not
> > > > > understand that language , then answer in his language,
> > > > > (i) Dr Inpain , is not a CERN at all. He boasted THAT HE IS AT C=
ERN
> > > > > and runs Nuclear Reactors SO THAT HIS his wrong arguments are acc=
epted
> > > > > .
> > > > >
> > > > > ON 28th Sep 2006 , I clarified then Head TP CERN said he is not =
at all
> > > > > associated with CERN.
> > > > > For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
> > > > > He used absurd language, and he was served in that. AN YOU SEE THE
> > > > > WORDS HE USED, FIRST When you are able to defend YOUR own WRONG
> > > > > comments, now you remember him.
>
> Even though I have repeatedly explained to you: There is NO Dr. Inpain
> at CERN. It is an alias for a Ph.D. (Dr.) scientist at CERN who is IN
> PAIN (get it! Dr. Inpain). You indicated just how little you understand
> when actually contacted CERN to look for a Dr. Inpain (just as a
> reminder again: he is a Ph.D. scientist at CERN who is IN PAIN after
> reading your drivel).
>
> You are absolutely correct when you state:
>
> For CHEATS AND LIAR THEERE IS NO PLACE in scientific discussions.
>
> You are the cheat and liar. You resort to racial slurs
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
rpasken@eas.slu.edu , You have made comments that Momentum is not
Conserved in my PAPER. It is not CORRECT. It is explained in 100 Years
of E=3Dmc2
rpasken@eas.slu.edu Robert Pasken
Department of Earth and AtmosphericSciences
Saint Louis University
3507 Laclede Avenue
St.Louis, MO 63103
See how Momentum is conserved in my paper. All references are given in
the end.
http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-in=
ventor-of-second-postulate.htm
Part I
General meaning , explained in 11th class Physics.
The law of momentum conservation,
* In an isolated system, the momentum of system must be conserved.*
Mathematically implies that
Initial Momentum =3D Final Momentum
mu=3Dmv (1)
As mass remains same in classical mechanics.
So u=3Dv
which is Newton=E2=80=99s First law of motion.
Application of momentum conservation.
When body emits energy ( in this cases light energy)
then it recoils .Thus it is used to calculate the velocity of recoil.
It can be applied to following two cases.
------ Light bullet fired from TOY Gun, system remains at rest.
( body does not recoil with noticeable velocity, it tends to recoil)
The velocity cam be calculated but may be of the order of
1/100000000000000000000000000000000000 m/s or 10-^40m/s
This case resembles with Einstein=E2=80=99s two waves of equal energy emitt=
ed
in opposite directions.
-----Shot fired from gun, gun moves backward.
the velocity can be calculated from conservation of momentum i.e.
initial momentum =3Dfinal momentum
Vrecoil =3D mv/M ~ 5m/s (say)
Thus after emission of energy BODY MAY REMAIN AT REST OR MOVE, the
Momentum is Conserved. It is basic physics of 11th standard.
If some one does not want to understand this then it his problem.
Einstein did all calculation under Classical conditions of velocity (v
<<c, her v is relative velocity between two systems i.e. system in
which body emits light and second system in which energy is measured.
Part II
The law of conservation of momentum is obeyed in my paper.
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
When two waves are emitted. The body recoils with velocity v , with
magnitude of the order of 10^-32 m/s i.e.
V (recoil)=3D1/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
It can be easily calculated.
When two waves of different energies are emitted. If body emits two
light waves of slightly different energies i.e. 0.5001L and 0.4999L
(Einstein has used light waves of energy 0.5L and 0.5L) in opposite
directions. Now using the law of conservation of momentum, it can be
easily justified that in this case body remains at rest.
Let the body of mass 10kg emits light energy in two waves in visible
region equal to 7.9512=C3=9710^-19 J, this energy corresponds to TWO light
waves in visible region having wavelength 5000=C2=BAA or energy, 2hc/=CE=BB=
or
7=2E9512=C3=9710^-19 J.
Let towards the observer the body emits light energy 0.5001L i.e.
3=2E97639512=C3=9710^-19 J i.e. will have momentum ( p1 =3D E/c)
1=2E32546504=C3=9710^-27 m/s.
Secondly, the body emits light wave of energy 0.4999L i.e.
3=2E97480488=C3=9710^-19 J, away from the observer (=CF=86=3D 180=C2=BA) i.=
e=2E will have
momentum ( p2 =3D E/c) 1.32493496=C3=9710^-27 m/s. Let us assume that when
the body emits light waves of energy and moves (if it actually does)
with velocity Vb , then according to law of conservation of momentum we
get
0 =3D p1 +p2 +MbVb or Vb =3D -(p1 +p2) /Mb =3D =E2=80=935.3=C3=9710^-32 m/s=
(2)
0 =3D p1 +p2 +MbVb or Vb =3D -(p1 +p2) /Mb =3D =E2=80=935.3=C3=9710^-32 m/s=
(3)
Thus conservation of momentum requires that body should move with
velocity =E2=80=935.3=C3=9710^-32 m/s opposite to observer. Thus body will =
tend
to move with velocity 5.3=C3=9710^-32 m/s ( away from the observer) which
is immeasurably small by all means, hence the body remains at rest. Due
to this uniform relative velocity v of the system (=CE=BE, =CE=B7, =CE=B6 )=
will
not change, if body moves then v will vary accordingly.
References of Einstein=E2=80=99s work
.
A=2EEinstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
PartII
References of Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s work
My work is available at
A=2E Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
=E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac2 =
=EF=81=84M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
For details
100 Years of E=3Dmc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1=2E Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA
2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.
3=2E A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,
10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND
4=2E A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND
5=2E A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.
6=2E A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
=E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac2 =
=EF=81=84M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past, present and future of E=3Dmc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554
Email ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com
0091 94183 09989, 0091 177 2804546
|
|
