Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
kahea na hoku i ka poe koa i ka aina hou
#21
(11-01-2022, 05:42 AM)TomK Wrote:
(10-31-2022, 12:18 PM)iquetzal Wrote: I've written scientific papers on this stuff but I'm not a mentored PhD Astronomer, so no journal will touch it. You need three mentors to publish and academics are too terrified of being cancelled to risk looking at anything without a 'big name' and 'big school' attached to it.


That is simply untrue. Papers are accepted for publication by reputable science journals all the time without big names or big schools attached to them. You are making this up.
Making this up?
You are so full of shit brah.
So how many scientific papers have you tried to publish?
All 'reputable science journals' require three vetted academics with PhDs in the field the paper addresses. They must officially agree to review your paper prior to publication. That is why it is called peer reviewed. But academics will not touch papers from unknowns for career reasons. If you cannot come up with three PhD caliber academic reviewers in astrophysics no journal will even look at an astrophysics paper. I contacted probably 20 astrophysicists. The only response I got was a warning from one of them that he would sue me if I tried to associate his name with my work. I could for sure publish in garbage journals that publish crap for money, but I don't go there.
Try having an original idea instead of spewing your Astronomy 101 BS.
So fuck off.
Reply
#22
(11-01-2022, 07:46 AM)iquetzal Wrote: You are so full of shit brah.
So how many scientific papers have you tried to publish?
[...]
So fuck off.

I've published several papers in reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals as either lead author or co-author. I've gone through the process of publishing a scientific paper many times. You are wrong.

But why not post your scientific papers to https://arxiv.org/? They accept papers and will publish them on the internet before peer-review for whatever journal you submitted your paper to. It gives the rest of the scientific community a chance to review your paper while it is going through the review process. It's free and a fine way of showing your research even if you think some people are full of sh*t and need to feck off.
Reply
#23
How did a thread about navigation - - get lost in the weeds?

I know little about interstellar motion, or mapping, or publishing scientific papers, but what I have seen is that with most things you have to start somewhere, often small and unhearlded. 
iquetzal, you've clearly put a lot of effort into your research, and it would seem to me that finding someplace, anyplace to publish your conclusions would be worth the small amount of additional work involved.  It may not be Scientific American, or Nature, but perhaps something is better than nothing?

The Beatles didn't work hard at writing their songs, honing their craft, only to refuse gigs in Hamburg and at the Cavern Club because they wanted to start out playing Shea Stadium and the Hollywood Bowl.  If they had you would probably be saying to yourself right now, who the heck are the Beetles?
Reply
#24
(11-01-2022, 08:35 AM)TomK Wrote:
(11-01-2022, 07:46 AM)iquetzal Wrote: You are so full of shit brah.
So how many scientific papers have you tried to publish?
[...]
So fuck off.

I've published several papers in reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals as either lead author or co-author. I've gone through the process of publishing a scientific paper many times. You are wrong.

But why not post your scientific papers to https://arxiv.org/? They accept papers and will publish them on the internet before peer-review for whatever journal you submitted your paper to. It gives the rest of the scientific community a chance to review your paper while it is going through the review process. It's free and a fine way of showing your research even if you think some people are full of sh*t and need to feck off.
Well, why not tell the journals that won't look at my stuff without 3 academics signing off on it that they are wrong, instead of calling me a liar, asshole.
But as for arxiv.org, that is a good idea.
Be on the lookout for 'A Plausible Mechanism for the Velocity of Hyperfast Pulsars with Applications for Interstellar Propulsion'
It even has some equations you might like.
It has been rotting on my hard drive for over a year. I do art too. And write sci fi. And I'm drunk a lot.
The general theory of Relativity is based upon a realist ontology that Einstein refused to back away from to his death. That same realist ontology dictates that space must warp in the presence of information density that exceeds the Holovo Bound. 
Or maybe Einstein was wrong.
Why don't you do a paper on what an idiot Einstein was? This is your big chance.
He invented quantum mechanics with his paper on the photoelectric effect and spent the rest of his life saying that quantum mechanics is incomplete. Here is your big chance to drag Einstein through the mud and I don't give a shit about Bell's Theorem. He proved nothing but that Alice and Bob are still talking to each other.
Reply
#25
I'm not going to tell journals about your stuff because I don't have a clue what you've tried to publish so it would be a waste of my time. Secondly, it's not my job to do that, I have other things to do. Why don't you take it up with journals and post the discussion here? However, despite your rather aggressive tone toward me, I'm glad you've taken my advice about publishing on arxiv.org - I'm trying to be helpful despite your insults. And no, I'm not going to write a paper on Einstein as my specialties, interests, and responsibilities lie elsewhere.
Reply
#26
PS.

"Be on the lookout for 'A Plausible Mechanism for the Velocity of Hyperfast Pulsars with Applications for Interstellar Propulsion'"

I did find this, published by an open source journal I know nothing about:

https://www.tsijournals.com/articles/a-p...ulsion.pdf

Of course, I have no idea if this is iquetzal or not, but it does discuss some correct info before delving into Star Trek and the occult. I note there are no equations iquetzal wanted me to see.
Reply
#27
PS.

https://www.tsijournals.com/articles/a-p...ulsion.pdf

Please note there is no mention of Polynesian/Hawaiian wayfinding in that paper nor any other mention of wayfinding. Not only was the paper published in an open-source journal, so it was published in a journal (even if I'd never heard about it before), it clearly didn't require three PhD mentors for that to happen. So iquetzal's claims really need to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Reply
#28
If you want to know how to propel a starship, all you have to do is go to axriv.org and use the following code to get them to accept my work. All these places are behind firewalls to keep out people who lack 'credentials'

---- requests your endorsement to submit an article to the
astro-ph.HE section of arXiv. To tell us that you would (or would not)
like to endorse this person, please visit the following URL:

https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=73ZA4R

If that URL does not work for you, please visit

http://arxiv.org/auth/endorse.php

and enter the following six-digit alphanumeric string:

Endorsement Code: 73ZA4R

The name of my paper is 'A Plausible Mechanism for the Velocity of Hyperfast Pulsars
With Application for Interstellar Propulsion'

The abstract reads as follows:
Hyper-fast pulsars are a class of neutron star with extreme velocity relative to the stellar background that eludes existing theories of neutron star synthesis in supernovae. Of relevance to their understanding is the emergence of Information as a fundamental principle in Physics and Astrophysics. This suggests a review of Einstein’s lifetime insistence that Quantum Mechanics is an incomplete description of physical reality due to his Realist ontology of ‘hidden variables’. An examination of the Holevo Bound of Information transmission through the Quantum vacuum, Information Theory, and General Relativity reveals a plausible scenario where Magnetodynamics of neutron star coalescence may define a directional Information Field that approaches the Holevo Bound. A physical interpretation of Information Theory and Einstein’s Realist ontology of Hidden Variables requires that Information density approaching the Holevo Bound must result in spatial dilation in a static inertial frame. Spatial dilation manifests as an acceleration, and this is hypothesized as the physical mechanism imparting the extreme velocity of hyperfast pulsars. A physical experiment is described that may yield controlled spatial dilation and a detectable acceleration upon a bench-top supermagnet apparatus. Astrophysical supercomputer simulations of supernovae are in a mature state of development. These may be refactored to use a Lorentz factor based upon the Holevo Bound that may reveal hyperfast ejection of a neutron star in a simulation. In such an event, magnetodynamic principles may be isolated and physically duplicated on a specialized supermagnet at much reduced energy and scale. A physical acceleration upon the apparatus, if detected, will support Einstein’s prescient conjecture regarding Information in the universe, and the incompleteness of Quantum Mechanics. Upon refinement, such a device may also serve as an acceleration pod.

It is time to cut the bullshit. These places are all firewalled and people like me are locked out of the exchange of ideas. You can open the door, or you are a poser and you can shut the fuck up.

Obviously, you need a starship before you need to worry about navigating one.
The Physics of starship propulsion (and the math) is described in my paper. In a nutshell, Einstein was right, and Bohr was wrong.
That done, I have moved on to the Navigation problem.
And I stand by Polynesian Navigation as the only plausible methodology that could form the foundation for an operational discipline of Interstellar Navigation.
I am very frustrated by gatekeepers who see their jobs as keeping new ideas out of discussions.
If that frustration shows, that is how it is.
I would be very and sincerely grateful if you would kindly open the door to axriv.org to my work.
Please do not tell me you have 'better things to do'. That fools no one at this point.
Reply
#29
Among other things, iquetzal wrote " ... And I'm drunk a lot. "

This is something few would argue against or debate.
Reply
#30
"And I stand by Polynesian Navigation as the only plausible methodology that could form the foundation for an operational discipline of Interstellar Navigation."

So you are going to follow migrating birds ?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)