A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Research
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Fantastic News



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 19th 16, 09:20 PM posted to sci.astro.research
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fantastic News

There is nothing, that I could find, in the sources Robert L.
Oldershaw cites which contains an explicit derivation of a planetary
mass peak from DSR. In particular, there is no cite on the "Predictions
of Discrete Scale Relativity" webpage, merely a bald claim ("Discrete
Scale Relativity predicts that the exoplanet mass function will
have a primary peak at 8 x 10^-5 solar masses, or about the mass
of Neptune.")

More generally, there is nothing, that I could find, which explains
why there should be mass distribution at all, much less a particular
one ... if I have understood what's in the various sources (and
some of it is really hard to comprehend, so I may not have), all
planets should have a discrete mass; the distribution function
should be something like a delta function.

Far from "Fantastic News", I think the DSR claim being made is ~just
numeracy and irreproducible to boot; so whatever it is, I don't
think it could be called science.

I have been unable to get a copy of Mayor&Queloz (2012), so I cannot
comment on it; if anyone has a copy, would you be able to send me
a (soft/electronic) copy please?
  #12  
Old December 19th 16, 11:23 PM posted to sci.astro.research
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Fantastic News

On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 3:20:58 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Far from "Fantastic News", I think the DSR claim being made is ~just
numeracy and irreproducible to boot; so whatever it is, I don't
think it could be called science.


That should be numerology, not numeracy (grr, darn autocomplete function!)

[Mod. note: quoted text trimmed -- mjh]
  #13  
Old December 20th 16, 05:34 PM posted to sci.astro.research
Steve Willner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,172
Default Fantastic News

In article ,
writes:
I have been unable to get a copy of Mayor&Queloz (2012)


I'm not certain what article you mean, but it might be at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...87647311000443

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
  #14  
Old December 21st 16, 01:34 PM posted to sci.astro.research
Phillip Helbig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default Fantastic News

In article ,
(Steve Willner) writes:

In article ,
writes:
I have been unable to get a copy of Mayor&Queloz (2012)


I'm not certain what article you mean, but it might be at
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...87647311000443

ADS also lists one article for Mayor&Queloz (2012), the same one as at
the link above. You have to buy it in some form. It doesn't appear to
be on arXiv.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ASTRO: Most fantastic Arp yet -- 143 Rick Johnson[_2_] Astro Pictures 1 February 21st 09 08:28 PM
Fantastic Shuttle EVA shots! Pat Flannery History 4 October 6th 07 02:24 AM
Fantastic B A Loney Amateur Astronomy 2 December 19th 05 07:13 PM
fantastic Ike Amateur Astronomy 0 June 17th 05 03:45 PM
Fantastic evenings viewing Dave UK Astronomy 2 October 30th 03 02:46 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.