E=mc2 and British Nobel Laureate Frederick Soddi

On Feb 19, 8:28 am, wrote:
On Feb 18, 3:47 am, "
wrote:





On Feb 18, 11:05 am, wrote: More drool from Ajay Sharma

I didn't post the names as all of the names are available from a
simple google search of your name physics and kooks. I found over 10
pages of physicists who have tried to make you understand your
mistakes. In each case they tried to explain to you your mistakes but
you simply ignored them or in one case contacted CERN looking for a
physicist named "I am in pain" insisting that he be fired since he
didn't understand 10th level physics. Contacting CERN provided weeks
worth of mirth across the world.

----------------
More drool from R PASKEN

(I) Firtsly you said ,
law of conservation of momentum is not obeyed in my derivation.
YOU COULD NOT JUSTIFY, simply it is 11th class physics.
a
(ii) Then you gave another rubbish written by someone.
You could not justify the same as well.

(iii) Now you say I have seen 10 postings on the web.

ALL are incorrect and I have given replied.

(iv) About CERN , there was a foosh who was posting that he is at CERN
boastfully, but he was not there.

Kindly let know are a labourer who collects others articles and
post.
and argue without brain.

If you some understading of physics , pick up a point say conservation
of momentum
and discuss.
Everything is correct, and described on

www.ajayonline.us

AJAY SHARMA

I am now certain your are fool! I did point out your mistakes. I gave
you a very specific example of your mistakes. I pointed out that by
changing the direction of the emitted wave you could either gain or
lose mass. That is inconsistent with the conservation of momentum and
mass. Explain why a change in direction should change the sign of the
mass change. On the other hand if we correct your math and logic
errors, we have the same results that every other physicist in the
world has arrived at. Strange that you are the only person in the
world that arrived at an answer which is inconsistent with
observation. Therefore there is no change in mass when a wave is
emitted I didn't bother to type a response showing your errors,
because it was simpler to copy one of the other posters correction of
your math and logic errors.

No I didn't say you had ten postings on the web. I said I googled your
name e=mc^2 and errors. Google gave a list of URL's that was so long
that they didn't fit on a single web page. In point of fact that the
list when onto more than 10 web pages of URL's. All of these web pages
are people who have tried to get you to realize your mistakes.

Of course Dr. Alexander "I'm_in_Pain" doesn't work at CERN. It is a
play on words. The physicist at CERN was "In Pain" after trying to
carry on a conversation with you about physics. I pointed that out to
you and so did many other posters, but you contacted CERN and DEMANDED
they fire Dr. Alexander "I'm_in_Pain"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

------------
Now I am very much certain you dont know what you say.

So it act of a senseless person.
You dont have your scientific standing on the topic.
Forget about [[ inpain ]] and [[with pain]].
Come and discuss basic science.

(i) Your first copies objection was about LAW OF CONSERVATION OF
MOMENTUM.
This objection was raised by some one else.
I have said it 100th time , it is obeyed in my paper.
Do you want discussion on it.
I am ready.

www.ajayonline.us

AJAY SHARMA