Galileo (NOT Einstein) is inventor of Second postulate of Re

[PeterD]

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com>
wrote:

John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
===============================================

See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

Geeze, you're an idiot... OK, I guess I'll answer the question for
you: yes you paid to have your book published... Right?

 

[PeterD]

On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:08:04 -0600, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
===============================================

See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
I am interested in none of that.

All I want is a simple "Yes" on "No" answer to the question:

"Are you paying to have the book published?"

John,

He won't answer because he knows that as soon as he admits he paid to
publish it he'll (in his limited mind) loose credibility. He's such a
simple minded dolt that he thinks he has some credibility (can
anything be further from the truth?)

And, as a second thought he also knows that admitting he paid to
publish it he'll be admitting to this long spam trail.

The guy's a wacko, 100%.

 

[AJAY SHARMA]

PeterD wrote:

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
==============================================
See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

Geeze, you're an idiot... OK, I guess I'll answer the question for
you: yes you paid to have your book published... Right?
==================+++Idoit I also the language you USE.

Idoit I try to be polite upto huge extent.
I dont reply to odiots.
Idoits NEVER UNDERSTAND. ++++
If you do then read, there os answer of every question.

100 Years of E=mc2
(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

1. What is E=mc2? What is its importance?
E=mc2 is the most wonderful and significant equation is physics. In
1945 the explosion of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were base
upon this equation. According to this mass (m) can be converted to
energy (E) and energy can be converted to mass.
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

2. This equation is doing well since past 100 years then where is the
inconsistency?

The inconsistency lies in its mathematical derivation (a method to
obtain a mathematical equation). In his 1905 paper Einstein did not
derive it mathematically but in true sense speculated it. Einstein
earlier derived L = mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then
Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is
true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=mc2, such a
significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical
derivation and not on speculation.

3. Is Einstein’s derivation of L =mc2 correct?

The derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or true in special conditions
only. Einstein took just handpicked parameters out of numerous
possible, to obtain the equation. Einstein was aware of the reality so
he left in midway after getting the desired result. If all valid
values of parameters are taken, then results are contradictory in
nature.

4. What are contradictory results?

Some UNDISCUSSED predictions of Einstein’s 29 Sep. 1905 derivation
blatantly contradict Law of Conservation of Matter. I have
scientifically confirmed the same. No limitation can be bigger than
this in science.

5. Was E=mc2 or similar ideas existed before Einstein?

Yes, E=mc2 existed before Einstein. An Italian Olinto de Pretto
published E=mc2 in valid scientific journal Lettere ed Atti, Feb. 1904,
two years before Einstein. But Pretto died in 1921, before its
experimental confirmation in nuclear physics.

6. Einstein speculated E=mc2 from L=mc2. What is the problem here?

Firstly derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or under special conditions
only.
For examples there are many variables in Einstein’s derivation e.g.
number of light waves emitted by body, magnitude of light energy, angle
at which light energy is emitted and relative velocity v. Einstein just
took handpicked values of variables.
If general values of variables are
taken then results are contradictory to experiments.
Secondly Einstein originated E=mc2 on the basis of speculation only
without any conceptual and mathematical basis. Basically Einstein
replaced L by E in equation L=mc2 to get E=mc2.

7. Then how did you derive new equation, dE =Ac2dm (or DE = Ac2 DM )?

I have derived new equation between mass-energy conservation by simple
calculus method. In dE =Ac2dm, A is a co-efficient of proportionality
like numerous others in science. It is dimensionless variable.

Sharma June 2004 paper is available
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

8. How do you compare these two equations?

Firstly dE =Ac2dm is based upon a conceptual and mathematical
derivation. On the other hand E=mc2 is a speculation, it is bitter
truth. Secondly dE =Ac2dm is a general equation and E=mc2 is its
special case. Energy emitted by new equation can be less, equal to or
more than predicted by E=mc2.

9. How did you justify your equation experimentally?

In Nuclear Physics there are some anomalous results which cannot be
explained by E=mc2 . Like this there are some instances in
astrophysics where my equation is extremely useful.

10. Is your work recognized by international scientific community?

Yes, it is completely recognized, as published in peer review journals.

11 Have you got any recognition certificate from the scientific
community?

The only way to get scientific recognition is that to get the work
published in peer review international journals and conferences. My
research papers are either published in international journals from
America, England and Canada or being published. I have got invitation
from at least 55 International Conferences to present my work. I have
presented my research in international conferences in USA, England,
Germany, Taiwan Ukraine etc. I have invitation from France and Italy
to present my work this year.
Still there ANYONE is welcome to COMMENT on the work in Physics
Essays giving the facts e.g.

What is Einstein’s Sep 1905 paper ?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma’s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma’s paper is different from Einstein’s Sep 1905
paper
How Ajay Sharma’s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations?
I HAVE ANSWERS TO ALL QUESTIONS.
If Editor Physics Essays and his Editorial Board finds your
interpretation and published the paper it is OK.
All the references are given below for the purpose.
There may be back door critics but none of the scientists have dared to
write to scientific bodies or journals Editors , that Ajay Sharma’s
work is incorrectly published.

12. Can this work be introduced in Schools and colleges?

Yes my wok is scientifically approved in journal in USA, CANADA and
England. Hence it can be so done by any country. IT IS THE IMPORTANCE
OF THE WORK.

13. How do you counter the opposition of the people which has come in
you your way?
Science is the international language. For this, I take seriously the
logical conclusions of the critics. I completely ignore the
irresponsible critics, as they don’t exist.
The critics when understand the things become my supporters.

14. What about your book, 100 Years of E=mc2?

This book will be published in Dec. 2006
It will bring clear and unbiased picture of the facts.
The contents of book are already approved by expert scientists after
PEER REVIEW and published in international journals and conferences
..The book is meant for general public who is interested in basic
science. This book will status as Newton’s Principia or Galileo’s
Dialogue have in science.
Book Link :
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Interviewer Rajesh Thakoor Email mc2.book@gmail.com


References of Einstein’s work
..
A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
.. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

PartII
References of Ajay Sharma’s work

My work is available at
A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

For details
100 Years of E=mc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA

2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.

3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,

10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND

4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND

5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.

6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past, present and future of E=mc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=mc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Email ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com
0091 94183 09989, 0091 177 2804546

 

[krw]

In article <o932l2d6o119irc8ab39qd4ta1jdgv7s2q@4ax.com>, peter2
@hipson.net says...

On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:08:04 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
===============================================

See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
I am interested in none of that.

All I want is a simple "Yes" on "No" answer to the question:

"Are you paying to have the book published?"

John,

He won't answer because he knows that as soon as he admits he paid to
publish it he'll (in his limited mind) loose credibility. He's such a
simple minded dolt that he thinks he has some credibility (can
anything be further from the truth?)

Of course. That's the whole point of trying to force him to admit
the obvious. His refusal to answer is the only answer needed.

And, as a second thought he also knows that admitting he paid to
publish it he'll be admitting to this long spam trail.

Sure.

The guy's a wacko, 100%.

When did you notice? ;-)

--
Keith

 

[AJAY SHARMA]

krw wrote:

In article <o932l2d6o119irc8ab39qd4ta1jdgv7s2q@4ax.com>, peter2
@hipson.net says...
On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:08:04 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
==============================================
See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
I am interested in none of that.

All I want is a simple "Yes" on "No" answer to the question:

"Are you paying to have the book published?"

John,

He won't answer because he knows that as soon as he admits he paid to
publish it he'll (in his limited mind) loose credibility. He's such a
simple minded dolt that he thinks he has some credibility (can
anything be further from the truth?)

Of course. That's the whole point of trying to force him to admit
the obvious. His refusal to answer is the only answer needed.


And, as a second thought he also knows that admitting he paid to
publish it he'll be admitting to this long spam trail.

Sure.

The guy's a wacko, 100%.

When did you notice? ;-)

--
Keith
---------------------------

100 Years of E=mc2
(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm



1. What is E=mc2? What is its importance?
E=mc2 is the most wonderful and significant equation is physics. In
1945 the explosion of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were base
upon this equation. According to this mass (m) can be converted to
energy (E) and energy can be converted to mass.
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

2. This equation is doing well since past 100 years then where is the
inconsistency?

The inconsistency lies in its mathematical derivation (a method to
obtain a mathematical equation). In his 1905 paper Einstein did not
derive it mathematically but in true sense speculated it. Einstein
earlier derived L = mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then
Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is
true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=mc2, such a
significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical
derivation and not on speculation.

3. Is Einstein’s derivation of L =mc2 correct?

The derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or true in special conditions
only. Einstein took just handpicked parameters out of numerous
possible, to obtain the equation. Einstein was aware of the reality so
he left in midway after getting the desired result. If all valid
values of parameters are taken, then results are contradictory in
nature.

4. What are contradictory results?

Some UNDISCUSSED predictions of Einstein’s 29 Sep. 1905 derivation
blatantly contradict Law of Conservation of Matter. I have
scientifically confirmed the same. No limitation can be bigger than
this in science.

5. Was E=mc2 or similar ideas existed before Einstein?

Yes, E=mc2 existed before Einstein. An Italian Olinto de Pretto
published E=mc2 in valid scientific journal Lettere ed Atti, Feb. 1904,
two years before Einstein. But Pretto died in 1921, before its
experimental confirmation in nuclear physics.

6. Einstein speculated E=mc2 from L=mc2. What is the problem here?

Firstly derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or under special conditions
only.
For examples there are many variables in Einstein’s derivation e.g.
number of light waves emitted by body, magnitude of light energy, angle
at which light energy is emitted and relative velocity v. Einstein just
took handpicked values of variables.
If general values of variables are
taken then results are contradictory to experiments.
Secondly Einstein originated E=mc2 on the basis of speculation only
without any conceptual and mathematical basis. Basically Einstein
replaced L by E in equation L=mc2 to get E=mc2.

7. Then how did you derive new equation, dE =Ac2dm (or DE = Ac2 DM )?

I have derived new equation between mass-energy conservation by simple
calculus method. In dE =Ac2dm, A is a co-efficient of proportionality
like numerous others in science. It is dimensionless variable.

Sharma June 2004 paper is available
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

8. How do you compare these two equations?

Firstly dE =Ac2dm is based upon a conceptual and mathematical
derivation. On the other hand E=mc2 is a speculation, it is bitter
truth. Secondly dE =Ac2dm is a general equation and E=mc2 is its
special case. Energy emitted by new equation can be less, equal to or
more than predicted by E=mc2.

9. How did you justify your equation experimentally?

In Nuclear Physics there are some anomalous results which cannot be
explained by E=mc2 . Like this there are some instances in
astrophysics where my equation is extremely useful.

10. Is your work recognized by international scientific community?

Yes, it is completely recognized, as published in peer review journals.

11 Have you got any recognition certificate from the scientific
community?

The only way to get scientific recognition is that to get the work
published in peer review international journals and conferences. My
research papers are either published in international journals from
America, England and Canada or being published. I have got invitation
from at least 55 International Conferences to present my work. I have
presented my research in international conferences in USA, England,
Germany, Taiwan Ukraine etc. I have invitation from France and Italy
to present my work this year.
Still there ANYONE is welcome to COMMENT on the work in Physics
Essays giving the facts e.g.

What is Einstein’s Sep 1905 paper ?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma’s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma’s paper is different from Einstein’s Sep 1905
paper
How Ajay Sharma’s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations?
I HAVE ANSWERS TO ALL QUESTIONS.
If Editor Physics Essays and his Editorial Board finds your
interpretation and published the paper it is OK.
All the references are given below for the purpose.
There may be back door critics but none of the scientists have dared to
write to scientific bodies or journals Editors , that Ajay Sharma’s
work is incorrectly published.

12. Can this work be introduced in Schools and colleges?

Yes my wok is scientifically approved in journal in USA, CANADA and
England. Hence it can be so done by any country. IT IS THE IMPORTANCE
OF THE WORK.

13. How do you counter the opposition of the people which has come in
you your way?
Science is the international language. For this, I take seriously the
logical conclusions of the critics. I completely ignore the
irresponsible critics, as they don’t exist.
The critics when understand the things become my supporters.

14. What about your book, 100 Years of E=mc2?

This book will be published in Dec. 2006
It will bring clear and unbiased picture of the facts.
The contents of book are already approved by expert scientists after
PEER REVIEW and published in international journals and conferences
..The book is meant for general public who is interested in basic
science. This book will status as Newton’s Principia or Galileo’s
Dialogue have in science.
Book Link :
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Interviewer Rajesh Thakoor Email mc2.book@gmail.com


References of Einstein’s work
..
A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
.. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

PartII
References of Ajay Sharma’s work

My work is available at
A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

For details
100 Years of E=mc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA

2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.

3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,

10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND

4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND

5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.

6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past, present and future of E=mc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=mc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Email ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com
0091 94183 09989, 0091 177 2804546

 

[JoeBloe]

On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com> Gave
us:

John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

Hahaha... what a joke! ALL the references are authored by him.

Tooting one's own horn, I think it is called.

Problem is, the bat's turd is off key!

 

[JoeBloe]

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com> Gave
us:

True , can you understand this,

Answer his fucking question, you retarded spamtard!

 

[Daniel]

AJAY SHARMA wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:

John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:

John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted


AJAY SHARMA
That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
===============================================

See how many questions I have replied,

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

Geeze, you're an idiot... OK, I guess I'll answer the question for
you: yes you paid to have your book published... Right?
===================
+++Idoit I also the language you USE.
If you use the same language that others here use, how come you don't

answer their question.

Idoit I try to be polite upto huge extent.
To ignore people is to be very impolite

I dont reply to odiots.
Idoits NEVER UNDERSTAND. ++++
So this explains why you don't reply, you don't understand, you idiot.

If you do then read, there os answer of every question.
Except the question that everyone here (except you, Ajay)

wants answered:-

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Daniel

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[AJAY SHARMA]

JoeBloe wrote:

On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com> Gave
us:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA


Hahaha... what a joke! ALL the references are authored by him.

Tooting one's own horn, I think it is called.

Problem is, the bat's turd is off key!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

100 Years of E=mc2
(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)


http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

1. What is E=mc2? What is its importance?
E=mc2 is the most wonderful and significant equation is physics. In
1945 the explosion of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were base
upon this equation. According to this mass (m) can be converted to
energy (E) and energy can be converted to mass.
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

2. This equation is doing well since past 100 years then where is the
inconsistency?

The inconsistency lies in its mathematical derivation (a method to
obtain a mathematical equation). In his 1905 paper Einstein did not
derive it mathematically but in true sense speculated it. Einstein
earlier derived L = mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then
Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is
true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=mc2, such a
significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical
derivation and not on speculation.

3. Is Einstein’s derivation of L =mc2 correct?

The derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or true in special conditions
only. Einstein took just handpicked parameters out of numerous
possible, to obtain the equation. Einstein was aware of the reality so
he left in midway after getting the desired result. If all valid
values of parameters are taken, then results are contradictory in
nature.

4. What are contradictory results?

Some UNDISCUSSED predictions of Einstein’s 29 Sep. 1905 derivation
blatantly contradict Law of Conservation of Matter. I have
scientifically confirmed the same. No limitation can be bigger than
this in science.

5. Was E=mc2 or similar ideas existed before Einstein?

Yes, E=mc2 existed before Einstein. An Italian Olinto de Pretto
published E=mc2 in valid scientific journal Lettere ed Atti, Feb. 1904,
two years before Einstein. But Pretto died in 1921, before its
experimental confirmation in nuclear physics.

6. Einstein speculated E=mc2 from L=mc2. What is the problem here?

Firstly derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or under special conditions
only.
For examples there are many variables in Einstein’s derivation e.g.
number of light waves emitted by body, magnitude of light energy, angle
at which light energy is emitted and relative velocity v. Einstein just
took handpicked values of variables.
If general values of variables are
taken then results are contradictory to experiments.
Secondly Einstein originated E=mc2 on the basis of speculation only
without any conceptual and mathematical basis. Basically Einstein
replaced L by E in equation L=mc2 to get E=mc2.

7. Then how did you derive new equation, dE =Ac2dm (or DE = Ac2 DM )?

I have derived new equation between mass-energy conservation by simple
calculus method. In dE =Ac2dm, A is a co-efficient of proportionality
like numerous others in science. It is dimensionless variable.

Sharma June 2004 paper is available
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

8. How do you compare these two equations?

Firstly dE =Ac2dm is based upon a conceptual and mathematical
derivation. On the other hand E=mc2 is a speculation, it is bitter
truth. Secondly dE =Ac2dm is a general equation and E=mc2 is its
special case. Energy emitted by new equation can be less, equal to or
more than predicted by E=mc2.

9. How did you justify your equation experimentally?

In Nuclear Physics there are some anomalous results which cannot be
explained by E=mc2 . Like this there are some instances in
astrophysics where my equation is extremely useful.

10. Is your work recognized by international scientific community?

Yes, it is completely recognized, as published in peer review journals.

11 Have you got any recognition certificate from the scientific
community?

The only way to get scientific recognition is that to get the work
published in peer review international journals and conferences. My
research papers are either published in international journals from
America, England and Canada or being published. I have got invitation
from at least 55 International Conferences to present my work. I have
presented my research in international conferences in USA, England,
Germany, Taiwan Ukraine etc. I have invitation from France and Italy
to present my work this year.
Still there ANYONE is welcome to COMMENT on the work in Physics
Essays giving the facts e.g.

What is Einstein’s Sep 1905 paper ?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma’s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma’s paper is different from Einstein’s Sep 1905
paper
How Ajay Sharma’s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations?
I HAVE ANSWERS TO ALL QUESTIONS.
If Editor Physics Essays and his Editorial Board finds your
interpretation and published the paper it is OK.
All the references are given below for the purpose.
There may be back door critics but none of the scientists have dared to
write to scientific bodies or journals Editors , that Ajay Sharma’s
work is incorrectly published.

12. Can this work be introduced in Schools and colleges?

Yes my wok is scientifically approved in journal in USA, CANADA and
England. Hence it can be so done by any country. IT IS THE IMPORTANCE
OF THE WORK.

13. How do you counter the opposition of the people which has come in
you your way?
Science is the international language. For this, I take seriously the
logical conclusions of the critics. I completely ignore the
irresponsible critics, as they don’t exist.
The critics when understand the things become my supporters.

14. What about your book, 100 Years of E=mc2?

This book will be published in Dec. 2006
It will bring clear and unbiased picture of the facts.
The contents of book are already approved by expert scientists after
PEER REVIEW and published in international journals and conferences
..The book is meant for general public who is interested in basic
science. This book will status as Newton’s Principia or Galileo’s
Dialogue have in science.
Book Link :
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Interviewer Rajesh Thakoor Email mc2.book@gmail.com


References of Einstein’s work
..
A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
.. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

PartII
References of Ajay Sharma’s work

My work is available at
A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

For details
100 Years of E=mc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA

2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.

3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,

10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND

4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND

5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.

6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past, present and future of E=mc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=mc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Email ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com
0091 94183 09989, 0091 177 2804546

 

[krw]

In article <1162952167.719129.19820@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
devianju@gmail.com says...

PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:

+++Idoit I also the language you USE.

"Idoit"?

Did you perhaps mean "I do it"?

"I also the language"?

Idoit I try to be polite upto huge extent.

"Idoit"? [again]

"upto huge extent"?

I dont reply to odiots.

"dont"?
"odiots"?

Idoits NEVER UNDERSTAND. ++++

"Idoits"?

If you do then read, there os answer of every question.

"If you do" what?
"os answer of"?

100 Years of E=mc2

Yep, and it existed long before and will long after. ...or did you
perhaps mean the discovery of this connection?

(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

Back to the question... DID *YOU* pay to have this dreck
published? Answer this simple question, or take your crap and go
away.

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

No one cares about this crap. Answer the question, yutz!

--
Keith

 

[krw]

In article <1162960569.771050.280100@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
devianju@gmail.com says...

<repetitive nonsense deleted>

ANSWER THE QUESTOIN!

--
Keith

 

[AJAY SHARMA]

JoeBloe wrote:

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com> Gave
us:

True , can you understand this,

Answer his fucking question, you retarded spamtard!
------------------------here is the answer, read

carefully-----------------------------------------
100 Years of E=mc2
(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

1. What is E=mc2? What is its importance?
E=mc2 is the most wonderful and significant equation is physics. In
1945 the explosion of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were base
upon this equation. According to this mass (m) can be converted to
energy (E) and energy can be converted to mass.
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

2. This equation is doing well since past 100 years then where is the
inconsistency?

The inconsistency lies in its mathematical derivation (a method to
obtain a mathematical equation). In his 1905 paper Einstein did not
derive it mathematically but in true sense speculated it. Einstein
earlier derived L = mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then
Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is
true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=mc2, such a
significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical
derivation and not on speculation.

3. Is Einstein’s derivation of L =mc2 correct?

The derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or true in special conditions
only. Einstein took just handpicked parameters out of numerous
possible, to obtain the equation. Einstein was aware of the reality so
he left in midway after getting the desired result. If all valid
values of parameters are taken, then results are contradictory in
nature.

4. What are contradictory results?

Some UNDISCUSSED predictions of Einstein’s 29 Sep. 1905 derivation
blatantly contradict Law of Conservation of Matter. I have
scientifically confirmed the same. No limitation can be bigger than
this in science.

5. Was E=mc2 or similar ideas existed before Einstein?

Yes, E=mc2 existed before Einstein. An Italian Olinto de Pretto
published E=mc2 in valid scientific journal Lettere ed Atti, Feb. 1904,
two years before Einstein. But Pretto died in 1921, before its
experimental confirmation in nuclear physics.

6. Einstein speculated E=mc2 from L=mc2. What is the problem here?

Firstly derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or under special conditions
only.
For examples there are many variables in Einstein’s derivation e.g.
number of light waves emitted by body, magnitude of light energy, angle
at which light energy is emitted and relative velocity v. Einstein just
took handpicked values of variables.
If general values of variables are
taken then results are contradictory to experiments.
Secondly Einstein originated E=mc2 on the basis of speculation only
without any conceptual and mathematical basis. Basically Einstein
replaced L by E in equation L=mc2 to get E=mc2.

7. Then how did you derive new equation, dE =Ac2dm (or DE = Ac2 DM )?

I have derived new equation between mass-energy conservation by simple
calculus method. In dE =Ac2dm, A is a co-efficient of proportionality
like numerous others in science. It is dimensionless variable.

Sharma June 2004 paper is available
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

8. How do you compare these two equations?

Firstly dE =Ac2dm is based upon a conceptual and mathematical
derivation. On the other hand E=mc2 is a speculation, it is bitter
truth. Secondly dE =Ac2dm is a general equation and E=mc2 is its
special case. Energy emitted by new equation can be less, equal to or
more than predicted by E=mc2.

9. How did you justify your equation experimentally?

In Nuclear Physics there are some anomalous results which cannot be
explained by E=mc2 . Like this there are some instances in
astrophysics where my equation is extremely useful.

10. Is your work recognized by international scientific community?

Yes, it is completely recognized, as published in peer review journals.

11 Have you got any recognition certificate from the scientific
community?

The only way to get scientific recognition is that to get the work
published in peer review international journals and conferences. My
research papers are either published in international journals from
America, England and Canada or being published. I have got invitation
from at least 55 International Conferences to present my work. I have
presented my research in international conferences in USA, England,
Germany, Taiwan Ukraine etc. I have invitation from France and Italy
to present my work this year.
Still there ANYONE is welcome to COMMENT on the work in Physics
Essays giving the facts e.g.

What is Einstein’s Sep 1905 paper ?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma’s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma’s paper is different from Einstein’s Sep 1905
paper
How Ajay Sharma’s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations?
I HAVE ANSWERS TO ALL QUESTIONS.
If Editor Physics Essays and his Editorial Board finds your
interpretation and published the paper it is OK.
All the references are given below for the purpose.
There may be back door critics but none of the scientists have dared to
write to scientific bodies or journals Editors , that Ajay Sharma’s
work is incorrectly published.

12. Can this work be introduced in Schools and colleges?

Yes my wok is scientifically approved in journal in USA, CANADA and
England. Hence it can be so done by any country. IT IS THE IMPORTANCE
OF THE WORK.

13. How do you counter the opposition of the people which has come in
you your way?
Science is the international language. For this, I take seriously the
logical conclusions of the critics. I completely ignore the
irresponsible critics, as they don’t exist.
The critics when understand the things become my supporters.

14. What about your book, 100 Years of E=mc2?

This book will be published in Dec. 2006
It will bring clear and unbiased picture of the facts.
The contents of book are already approved by expert scientists after
PEER REVIEW and published in international journals and conferences
..The book is meant for general public who is interested in basic
science. This book will status as Newton’s Principia or Galileo’s
Dialogue have in science.
Book Link :
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Interviewer Rajesh Thakoor Email mc2.book@gmail.com


References of Einstein’s work
..
A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
.. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

PartII
References of Ajay Sharma’s work

My work is available at
A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

For details
100 Years of E=mc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA

2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.

3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,

10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND

4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND

5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.

6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past, present and future of E=mc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=mc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Email ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com
0091 94183 09989, 0091 177 2804546

 

[PeterD]

On 7 Nov 2006 18:16:07 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com>
wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
===============================================

See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

Geeze, you're an idiot... OK, I guess I'll answer the question for
you: yes you paid to have your book published... Right?
===================
+++Idoit I also the language you USE.
Idoit I try to be polite upto huge extent.
I dont reply to odiots.
Idoits NEVER UNDERSTAND. ++++
If you do then read, there os answer of every question.

Tons of meaningless verbage from a self delusional man clipped, till
the *answer* to my question! (see, I *was* right, he paid!) I asked
"did you pay to publish your book" and Sharma said:

Yes,

And more meaningless talk snipped.

And Sharma, thanks for *finally* clearing up that one!

 

[AJAY SHARMA]

PeterD wrote:

On 7 Nov 2006 18:16:07 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
==============================================
See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

Geeze, you're an idiot... OK, I guess I'll answer the question for
you: yes you paid to have your book published... Right?
==================> >+++Idoit I also the language you USE.
Idoit I try to be polite upto huge extent.
I dont reply to odiots.
Idoits NEVER UNDERSTAND. ++++
If you do then read, there os answer of every question.


Tons of meaningless verbage from a self delusional man clipped, till
the *answer* to my question! (see, I *was* right, he paid!) I asked
"did you pay to publish your book" and Sharma said:


Yes,

And more meaningless talk snipped.

And Sharma, thanks for *finally* clearing up that one!

=== Peter, do know the manner how to ask information ?.===========Why you want to know this?
If you have some of understanding the answer is here,
Read , understand , everything is here.

100 Years of E=mc2
(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm


1. What is E=mc2? What is its importance?
E=mc2 is the most wonderful and significant equation is physics. In
1945 the explosion of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were base
upon this equation. According to this mass (m) can be converted to
energy (E) and energy can be converted to mass.
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

2. This equation is doing well since past 100 years then where is the
inconsistency?

The inconsistency lies in its mathematical derivation (a method to
obtain a mathematical equation). In his 1905 paper Einstein did not
derive it mathematically but in true sense speculated it. Einstein
earlier derived L = mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then
Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is
true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=mc2, such a
significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical
derivation and not on speculation.

3. Is Einstein’s derivation of L =mc2 correct?

The derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or true in special conditions
only. Einstein took just handpicked parameters out of numerous
possible, to obtain the equation. Einstein was aware of the reality so
he left in midway after getting the desired result. If all valid
values of parameters are taken, then results are contradictory in
nature.

4. What are contradictory results?

Some UNDISCUSSED predictions of Einstein’s 29 Sep. 1905 derivation
blatantly contradict Law of Conservation of Matter. I have
scientifically confirmed the same. No limitation can be bigger than
this in science.

5. Was E=mc2 or similar ideas existed before Einstein?

Yes, E=mc2 existed before Einstein. An Italian Olinto de Pretto
published E=mc2 in valid scientific journal Lettere ed Atti, Feb. 1904,
two years before Einstein. But Pretto died in 1921, before its
experimental confirmation in nuclear physics.

6. Einstein speculated E=mc2 from L=mc2. What is the problem here?

Firstly derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or under special conditions
only.
For examples there are many variables in Einstein’s derivation e.g.
number of light waves emitted by body, magnitude of light energy, angle
at which light energy is emitted and relative velocity v. Einstein just
took handpicked values of variables.
If general values of variables are
taken then results are contradictory to experiments.
Secondly Einstein originated E=mc2 on the basis of speculation only
without any conceptual and mathematical basis. Basically Einstein
replaced L by E in equation L=mc2 to get E=mc2.

7. Then how did you derive new equation, dE =Ac2dm (or DE = Ac2 DM )?

I have derived new equation between mass-energy conservation by simple
calculus method. In dE =Ac2dm, A is a co-efficient of proportionality
like numerous others in science. It is dimensionless variable.

Sharma June 2004 paper is available
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

8. How do you compare these two equations?

Firstly dE =Ac2dm is based upon a conceptual and mathematical
derivation. On the other hand E=mc2 is a speculation, it is bitter
truth. Secondly dE =Ac2dm is a general equation and E=mc2 is its
special case. Energy emitted by new equation can be less, equal to or
more than predicted by E=mc2.

9. How did you justify your equation experimentally?

In Nuclear Physics there are some anomalous results which cannot be
explained by E=mc2 . Like this there are some instances in
astrophysics where my equation is extremely useful.

10. Is your work recognized by international scientific community?

Yes, it is completely recognized, as published in peer review journals.

11 Have you got any recognition certificate from the scientific
community?

The only way to get scientific recognition is that to get the work
published in peer review international journals and conferences. My
research papers are either published in international journals from
America, England and Canada or being published. I have got invitation
from at least 55 International Conferences to present my work. I have
presented my research in international conferences in USA, England,
Germany, Taiwan Ukraine etc. I have invitation from France and Italy
to present my work this year.
Still there ANYONE is welcome to COMMENT on the work in Physics
Essays giving the facts e.g.

What is Einstein’s Sep 1905 paper ?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma’s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma’s paper is different from Einstein’s Sep 1905
paper
How Ajay Sharma’s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations?
I HAVE ANSWERS TO ALL QUESTIONS.
If Editor Physics Essays and his Editorial Board finds your
interpretation and published the paper it is OK.
All the references are given below for the purpose.
There may be back door critics but none of the scientists have dared to
write to scientific bodies or journals Editors , that Ajay Sharma’s
work is incorrectly published.

12. Can this work be introduced in Schools and colleges?

Yes my wok is scientifically approved in journal in USA, CANADA and
England. Hence it can be so done by any country. IT IS THE IMPORTANCE
OF THE WORK.

13. How do you counter the opposition of the people which has come in
you your way?
Science is the international language. For this, I take seriously the
logical conclusions of the critics. I completely ignore the
irresponsible critics, as they don’t exist.
The critics when understand the things become my supporters.

14. What about your book, 100 Years of E=mc2?

This book will be published in Dec. 2006
It will bring clear and unbiased picture of the facts.
The contents of book are already approved by expert scientists after
PEER REVIEW and published in international journals and conferences
..The book is meant for general public who is interested in basic
science. This book will status as Newton’s Principia or Galileo’s
Dialogue have in science.
Book Link :
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Interviewer Rajesh Thakoor Email mc2.book@gmail.com


References of Einstein’s work
..
A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
.. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

PartII
References of Ajay Sharma’s work

My work is available at
A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

For details
100 Years of E=mc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA

2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.

3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,

10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND

4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND

5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.

6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past, present and future of E=mc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=mc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Email ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com
0091 94183 09989, 0091 177 2804546

 

[PeterD]

On 8 Nov 2006 07:21:48 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com>
wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 18:16:07 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
===============================================

See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

Geeze, you're an idiot... OK, I guess I'll answer the question for
you: yes you paid to have your book published... Right?
===================
+++Idoit I also the language you USE.
Idoit I try to be polite upto huge extent.
I dont reply to odiots.
Idoits NEVER UNDERSTAND. ++++
If you do then read, there os answer of every question.


Tons of meaningless verbage from a self delusional man clipped, till
the *answer* to my question! (see, I *was* right, he paid!) I asked
"did you pay to publish your book" and Sharma said:


Yes,

And more meaningless talk snipped.

And Sharma, thanks for *finally* clearing up that one!

=== Peter, do know the manner how to ask information ?.============
Why you want to know this?

I already have the information... (and notice, I always clip your
trolling spam.)

Why do I want to know? Just to comfirm you are as big a looser as you
appear to be...

We're talking a poll: is Sharma a total looser? Results to be
published on the reply to his next troll/spam message.

 

[Master of Desaster]

AJAY SHARMA wrote:

SNIP

Hey little man !

When did you step down from your tree ?

Remember, you HAVE TO take 5 of the green pills and ABSOLUTELY DO NOT
take 5 of the red ones

Btw., remember Einstein ? He was recognized for his work, many people
did recognize him.
He had no newsgroup that time, people simply recognized him for his
ideas and work.

And now no one recognizes you, little man ?
You believe, spamming newsgroups will help ?
Doubt it.

Take the right pills and your brain farts will get better soon.

Ludwig

 

[John Fields]

On 7 Nov 2006 18:16:07 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com>
wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

---
I'm confused.

So far, I don't care anything about the technical aspects of what
you're trying to push, since it sounds a lot like "Ajay Sharma 1,
everyone else zero." I suppose it's possible that you might have
found a chink in Einstein'a armor, much as he found in Newton's, but
the fact remains that you refuse to disclose whether you paid to
have your book published or not, so you're not being honest.

Why? Are you ashamed to admit that no one would support your effort
but yourself? There's no shame in that, as Ron Popeil has shown
over and over again, so why are you so reluctant to admit that
you're running your own show?


--
JF

 

[daestrom]

"AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162992534.843974.228230@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...

JoeBloe wrote:

On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com> Gave
us:

True , can you understand this,

Answer his fucking question, you retarded spamtard!
------------------------here is the answer, read

carefully-----------------------------------------

You are not answering *his* question, you're posting the same drivel over
and over.

If you've been published in USA scientific journals (as you claim in your
posts), can you tell us which journal and which issue it appears??

Put up some plausible credentials, or shut up.

You're paying to have your own book published. You *LIE* about having been
through peer reviews in respected scientific journals. You SPAM this same
drivel to dozens of *UNRELATED* news groups.

You're a pain the ass, spamming nut case. Go back in the corner and
contemplate your navel while the nurse wipes away your drool.

daestrom

 

[AJAY SHARMA]

PeterD wrote:

On 8 Nov 2006 07:21:48 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 18:16:07 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 7 Nov 2006 06:50:47 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 17:30:15 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


PeterD wrote:
On 6 Nov 2006 07:44:17 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 5 Nov 2006 09:01:39 -0800, "AJAY SHARMA" <devianju@gmail.com
wrote:


(Book will be published in Dec. 2006 , By NOVA Science, New York,
USA)

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

---
Are you paying to have the book published?


--
JF
------------------------------------------
Kindly see the answer ( complete ) here posted

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

AJAY SHARMA

That's not an answer to the poster's question! He asked:

ARE YOU PAYING TO HAVE THE BOOK PUBLISHED?

Answer it!

Oh, I forgot, you are a trolling SPAMMER... You don't answer
questions, do you?
===============================================

See how many questions I have replied,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

---
If you can't understand a simple, straightforward question well
enough to respond with a simple, straightforward answer, I doubt
whether you can understand Einstein's work well enough to criticize
it.


--
JF
------------------------------
True , can you understand this,

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

Geeze, you're an idiot... OK, I guess I'll answer the question for
you: yes you paid to have your book published... Right?
===================
+++Idoit I also the language you USE.
Idoit I try to be polite upto huge extent.
I dont reply to odiots.
Idoits NEVER UNDERSTAND. ++++
If you do then read, there os answer of every question.


Tons of meaningless verbage from a self delusional man clipped, till
the *answer* to my question! (see, I *was* right, he paid!) I asked
"did you pay to publish your book" and Sharma said:


Yes,

And more meaningless talk snipped.

And Sharma, thanks for *finally* clearing up that one!

=== Peter, do know the manner how to ask information ?.============
Why you want to know this?

I already have the information... (and notice, I always clip your
trolling spam.)

Why do I want to know? Just to comfirm you are as big a looser as you
appear to be...

We're talking a poll: is Sharma a total looser? Results to be
published on the reply to his next troll/spam message.

--------------------------------------------------
PeterD
Part I

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm
WHAT IS YOUR ADDRESS ?
You could not raise a single scientific objection in many posts, so
you call it spamming.
It is not spamming,
You call that thing spamming, WHICH YOU DONT LIKE.IT IS SPAMMING.
You laugh or weep it is your sweet will.
I know how deal with disgruntled people. I have interacted with people
all over world regarding this work in past 24 years both personally
and by mail
IF INSTEIN IS MODIFIED THEN IT IS SPAMMING.
Sue me for this ( about 100 Years of E=mc2) I will reply ?
Call at 0091 177 94183 09989, I will give my address.

Why are you worried WHO IS PAYING FOR BOOK ?.
How are you concerned with this.
This book is proposed to published in many languages.
Come on scientific terms. Have you caliber to understand this. YOU ARE
FREE TO CONTRADICT THE CONTENST IN INTERNATIONAL JOURNALS AND
CONFERENCES.
Part II

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

Ajay Sharma will reply the questions as long they raised on this GOOGLE
FORUM.
If you don't like then write to GOOGLE then stop my account. There
is provision for this.
I quote the references of all my papers published in international
journals and conferences.
I feel you are sensible enough, when a paper is published in journal ,
then IT IS PEER REVIEWED by expert in the field.
So this work is published.
Einstein's work has SERIOUS UNSEEN limitations, hence it published in
conferences and journals all over the WORLD.
Now let me know , what do you want ?
Also mention you AFFILIATIONS completely here. So that I may take
further step.
Again further you want ( for spamming)
Sue me for this ( about 100 Years of E=mc2) I will reply ?
Call at 0091 177 94183 09989, I will give my address.

AJAY SHARMA Nov. 9, 2006

http://physicsajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/galileo-not-einstein-is-inventor-of-second-postulate.htm

 

[Daniel]

We're talking a poll: is Sharma a total looser? Results to be
published on the reply to his next troll/spam message.

--------------------------------------------------
PeterD
Part I

You could not raise a single scientific objection in many posts, so
you call it spamming.

No, we are all just trying to find out who paid for this truly excellent
work of logic to be published, so that we can thank that person.

It is not spamming,
You call that thing spamming, WHICH YOU DONT LIKE.

Has anybody said they don't like it?

IT IS SPAMMING.

We know you are spamming!

You laugh or weep it is your sweet will.
I know how deal with disgruntled people. I have interacted with people
all over world regarding this work in past 24 years both personally
and by mail

and you still don't know how to deal with people about it! Gee, you must
be very slow!

IF INSTEIN IS MODIFIED THEN IT IS SPAMMING.

Who's INSTEIN??

Why are you worried WHO IS PAYING FOR BOOK ?.
How are you concerned with this.

We wish to see that he gets the praise he deserves!

This book is proposed to published in many languages.

How many have been sold? Has it made the New York Time Top 100 books, yet?

Ajay Sharma will reply the questions as long they raised on this GOOGLE
FORUM.

So that's the problem! The reason Ajay is not answering these questions
is because they're in a Google Newsgroup not a Google Forum! All is
explained.

If you don't like then write to GOOGLE then stop my account. There
is provision for this.

But we want the answer! (We all need a good laugh.)

I quote the references of all my papers published in international
journals and conferences.

Good, but you cannot answer our question.

I feel you are sensible enough, when a paper is published in journal ,
then IT IS PEER REVIEWED by expert in the field.

I though papers were Peer Reviewed BEFORE they are published.

So this work is published.
Einstein's work has SERIOUS UNSEEN limitations, hence it published in
conferences and journals all over the WORLD.

Sorry, I cannot follow you here. Einstein's works are published all over
the world BECAUSE it has limitations!

Now let me know , what do you want ?

We want you to answer the question "Are you paying to have the book
published?".

Also mention you AFFILIATIONS completely here. So that I may take
further step.

I've got no affiliations, so, please, take all the further steps you want.

Daniel

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com