@Adrian Sfarti claims to know what I wrote in my article. He will be discussing with me the content, predictions, hypotheses contained in my article.
You might realize that Adiran is not really qualified to read the article. That said, he is the only one who would provide feedback. I will do the best I can to help you laugh at his mistakes and to use them in a pedagogical way.
##########################################
Adrian provided tremendous insight (irony) about the topology of particles in my model.
He told us that the topology of my particles is laughable without realizing that that is how those particle are seen from the top (view from a radial direction perpendicularly to our 3D Hypersurface).
All four fundamental particle (electron, proton, positron and antiproton) are points. The Neutron is formed of an electron, a proton and two transmutation chords (half-antineutrinos). Remember that in HU, matter is made up of polymers of the Fundamental Dilator.
Neutron model is shown below:
Since there are two possible solutions (two phase), this is associated with a dimer and it rotates around the center as it travels along the radial direction. Rotation polarizes space and thus the topological view (view from the top) is a segment. Similarly, charged pions are triangles etc.
Adrian somehow cannot read the text or understand the context.
##########################################
He also cannot understand a simple recasting of Newton's Laws into a Stress-Strain Paradigm. He arrogantly states that I made a mistake in units...:) on converting from F=m.a to the equivalent Stress=Area*Strain (where stress and strain refers to the Fabric of Space).
Had Adrian know how to read, he would had learned that ALL TIMES ARE DIMENSIONALIZED BY MULTIPLICATION BY C.
That would had saved him from the shame of not being able to recognize Newton's equation in a slightly different form
##################################################
Moronic Adrian wrote that my Gravitational Lensing and Mercury Perihelion tests are not part of my article.
I beg to differ. They are in pages 90-92 on Appendix A.
https://issuu.com/marcopereira11/docs/huarticle
it is boring to correct this fellow. All his objections are there because he cannot read.
##################################################
I didn't choose this adversarial approach to paper reviewing. That said, I will not run away from a scientific argument. Of course, I am always ready to meet half-way. Please feel free to ask questions, Adrian.
This pertains to censorship of HU
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-become-a-professor-of-theoretical-physics-without-supporting-failed-theories-such-as-string-theory-inflation-and-the-multiverse/answer/Marco-Pereira-1
Below are examples of the "peer-review" my work has been subjected to. Do scientists think it is OK telling me that "we do not publish articles that are not authored by members of astronomical research institutes."?
I might conclude that I am been censored and the incompetent people behind it will eventually just steal my ideas and not face up to their inappropriate behavior. That is Dark, but it is certainly realistic. Just look at Adrian Sfarti boorish behavior and how he avoids getting any close to answering my question about Hyperspherical Acoustic Oscillations in early Universe.
This is very simple.
Conclusion: Scientists are colluding to bury my work, although I have to confess that some idiotic scientist might just be idiotic (incapable of colluding or thinking...:)
My solution to this problem is to write questions and see if I can find a single scientist who will be honest and support the right of HU to be discussed... I simply say HU because the theory will defend itself.
#################################################
Dear Dr Pereira,
Thank you very much for having submitted your manuscript entitled :
"Hypergeometrical Universe Theory Supernovae High Z Predictions"
to Astronomy and Astrophysics.
I regret to inform you that your manuscript cannot be considered for publication in Astronomy and Astrophysics because we do not publish articles that are not authored by members of astronomical research institutes.
Sincerely,
Thierry Forveille A&A Editor in Chief
#################################################
Los Alamos Archives - INAPROPRIATE!!!!!!
#################################################
PLOS ONE
Jul 28 at 2:58 PM
Message body
PONE-D-16-27507 Hypergeometrical Universe Theory Supernovae High Z Predictions
Dear Dr. Pereira,
The above-mentioned manuscript has been withdrawn from the review process at PLOS ONE.
Sincerely, PLOS ONE
@ Marco Pereira;;
my dear Marco Pereira.....your opinion on Adrian Sfarti is absolutely correct ....
@ Marco Pereira;;
my dear Marco Pereira what i want say is Adrian Sfarti is a narrow minded, stupid (he is not ready to accept new things though they are purely scientific) fellow why are you wasting your valuable time asking question about your good theory to him?
Sorry, I totally misunderstood your comment, Hussainsha ..you can see my paranoia kicking in...Sorry...:)
I have been beaten up twice by the likes of Sfarti. Not that many people have no common sense and give so little thought before commenting on a scientific article..
On the other hand, Sfarti comments play a positive role. It shows to everyone who reads them, the weakness of the arguments against my theory. It was like drive-by peer-reviewing..:)
Also, if he were able to provide any significant objection to the theory, I would benefit greatly. It is better to have an adversarial peer-review than no peer-review or criticism... One can only improve by strong criticism. In fact, there is nothing wrong with adversarial review...I think they are the best (for the theory) because the reviewer becomes passionate..:)
If the theory is wrong, has a fundamental flaw, I would be the first to want to abandon it.
There is always a chance that an interesting or fundamental objection would appear. That is why I value the interaction with Sfarti or anyone who is willing to criticize the theory. I would also value if a positive reviewer where to provide support to this endeavor.
@ Marco Pereira;;
my dear Marco Pereira carry on your valuable research and keep it up...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Composition Studies
- Articles