Spinning Objects

[Chris Peterson]

http://www.osmohassi.net/pdf/FUNDAMENTA ... HOTONS.pdf

I'd approach that document with a great deal of skepticism. Some of the material is consistent with what you'd get in a beginning QM class. But other stuff is screwy. In particular, the initial assumption that Planck's constant is the product of the electric and magnetic flux of a photon doesn't follow accepted theory, and is given without justification. So that pretty much puts much of the work into the realm of pure speculation. It doesn't help that it then goes on to discuss gravitons as if they were real, when in fact they are hypothetical and remain a long way from fitting into the Standard Model.

[The Code]

thanks Chris

I'd approach that document with a great deal of skepticism. Some of the material is consistent with what you'd get in a beginning QM class. But other stuff is screwy. In particular, the initial assumption that Planck's constant is the product of the electric and magnetic flux of a photon doesn't follow accepted theory, and is given without justification. So that pretty much puts much of the work into the realm of pure speculation. It doesn't help that it then goes on to discuss gravitons as if they were real, when in fact they are hypothetical and remain a long way from fitting into the Standard Model.

I appreciate them comments Chris, as you should be aware, i take everything i see with skepticism. way up the facts, and look things up. And even then nothing is set in stone...