Wednesday, March 01, 2006 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

Jack Sarfatti's citation

The moderators of may sometimes have a rather difficult life.

For example, Jack Sarfatti succeeded in submitting a paper to the gr-qc archive. More interestingly, Jack Sarfatti has inspired research in his area and a new paper by Waldyr A. Rodrigues "A Comment on Emergent Gravity" has appeared on the same gr-qc archive. Unfortunately for Jack Sarfatti, the new paper explains why every single sentence of Sarfatti's paper is a nonsense (an exercise for students).

Together with Brian Josephson and others, I just received a copy of Sarfatti's e-mail to the moderators of that asks them for the following:


Will I be able to post a polite response to in due course? Or does the archive discourage that sort of exchange? I am cognizant of not placing papers on the archive that are not of fundamental importance. Please advise.

Thank you :-)

Jack Sarfatti, PhD (physics UCal)

Needless to say, it is not just Jack Sarfatti who would like to fill with material like that. Some blogs chose the strategy to fill the arXiv with trackbacks rather than papers.

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (1) :

reader Jack said...

For the record, Waldyr has a pattern claiming that many authors on the physics archive are publishing mathematical nonsense. Technically he is perhaps correct. However, quantum electrodynamics with its renormalization is mathematical nonsense according to Waldyr's criteria. Also Waldyr's comments were taken into account in revisions of the paper and the main physical ideas still stand - that Einstein's GR is emergent in the same way that the frictionless supercurrents are emergent. This is an interesting idea and it's too bad that some resort to personal attacks rather than deal with the ideas.