Talk:Louis Essen

what embarrassment?

"caused some embarrassment to his employers" -

1. according to what source, and

2. according to that source, what did these employers claim to be embarrassing about such a criticism? Harald88 10:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No good source? Thus I'll modify that phrase. Harald88 18:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KraMuc edits

Please note that KraMuc (talk · contribs · block log) has been permabanned at both the English and German language Wikipedia for making anti-semitic remarks. He should not be editing the Wikipedia at all. This user has created several sockpuppet accounts and continues to edit as an anon from various domains, most often (as of October, 2006) the dipt.dialin anon from the Munich area; see for example the recent edits to this article by 84.153.118.38 (talk · contribs), which appear to push KraMuc's idiosyncratic point of view. Therefore, I partially reverted to an earlier version, keeping two minor changes made my non-KraMuc editors. Unfortunately, this article and the others which KraMuc frequently edits will need to be watched continually for more such edits.---CH 16:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing and reverting that. However, you apparently overlooked that your revert removed some valuable references, one of which even relates to a sofar unsourced claim for which I demanded sourcing; and KraMuc has shown to be a reliable contributor of references. Thus, if it was KraMuc or not (or even the Devil in person), it's wise to delete with intelligence.

Probably it was Kramuc who reinserted the passages and references again. Thus I'll revert it but in the near future I plan to improve the article accordingly with the newly supplied references.

Meanwhile I'll just park deleted but possibly useful references here:

Essen, L. (1971) The Special Theory of Relativity: A Critical Analysis, Oxford University Press (Oxford science research papers, 5). , booklet in which he questioned the modern interpretation of the special theory of relativity.

Essen, L. (1977) "Atomic Clocks - Coming and Going", Creation Research Society Quarterly 14, p. 64. (1972 Häfele and Keating exp.)

Essen, L. (1978) "Relativity and Time Signals", Electronics and Wireless World, Oct. 1978, p. 14.: "No one has attempted to refute my arguments, but I was warned that if I persisted I was likely to spoil my career prospects. ... ... the continued acceptance and teaching of relativity hinders the development of a rational extension of electromagnetic theory."

Essen, L. (1988) "Relativity - Joke or Swindle?", Electronics and Wireless World, No. 94, pp. 126-127.: "Insofar as (Einstein's) theory is thought to explain the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment I am inclined to agree with Soddy that it is a swindle; and I do not think Rutherford would had regarded it as a joke had he realised how it would retard the rational development of science."

Atomic clocks: Louis Essen

Harald88 12:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I had overlooked these:

Essen, L. (1977) "Einstein", THE ECONOMIST , 19 March 1977, p. 4. (letter):

"I studied Einstein's thought-experiment and found that it was incorrectly performed and that if correctly performed it could not give the result he obtained. This finding led me to study the whole paper in detail and other errors were disclosed. My booklet contains my criticisms in full and concludes with the suggestion that the theory consists simply of a number of contradictory assumptions".

Essen, L. (1955) "A new aether drift experiment", Nature `175, p. 793.

Essen, L., and Perry, J. V. (1955), "An atomic standard of frequency and time keeping", Nature 176, p. 280.

McCourby, A. O. (1961) "Frequency Control by Microwave Atomic Resonance", Microwave Journal, November 1961, pp. 7 - 11.

McCourby, A. O. (1966) "A Survey of Atomic Frequency Standards", Proc. IEEE 54, No. 2, February 1966, pp. 116 - 135.

McCourby, A. O. (1967) "The Relative Merits of Atomic Frequency Standards", Proc. IEEE 55, No. 4, June 1967, pp. 805 - 814.

Audoin, C., and Vanier, J. (1976) "Atomic frequency standards and clocks", Journal of Physics E: Scientific Instruments 9, pp. 697 - 720.

Harald88 17:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. This is a not unusual dilemma. What to do with banned users, when they do constructive edits? AFAIK this is known as admin teasing and should always be reverted on sight. After that, contributors may decide whether to to recycle some of the deleted edits.

I'm willing to discuss this with interested parties, including KraMuc, off Wikipedia, i.e. via e-Mail or IRC.

Pjacobi 20:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hillman's anti-Semitism lamentations and Pjacobi's "inclination"

Under "KraMuc edits", user Chris Hillman, who recently had a nervous breakdown and went slightly mad [1] [2], asserts here that KraMuc has been internationally permabanned from Wikipedia because of "anti-Semitic remarks". Hillman's assertion, however, is not correct and misleading. In Germany, KraMuc has been banned by the non-physics student Marcus Cyron Bücherbörse who quite generally claims that all critique of the special theory of relativity developed by H. A. Lorentz, Henri Poincaré and Albert Einstein is principally "anti-Semitic". Perhaps somebody should explain to user Cyron that, first, physics has little to do with religions and, secondly, that Lorentz and Poincaré probably were non-Semits. Apart from this, from the English language version KraMuc has been banned by an enthusiastic Einstein fanatic, the Berkeley student of elementary particle physics SCZens, but, contrary to what Hillman wants to make believe, from entirely different reasons.

User Hilman was overwhelmed by fits when he read the articles "Inertial Reference Frame System" and "Temptative Galilean Synthesis of the Optical Doppler Effect" by W. Krause, which had sometimes been mentioned by KraMuc, e.g,, in the article "Modern Galilean relativity" [3] (compare refs. no. 17 and no. 32 in that article). Hillman completely lost his mind when he discovered that the so-called "relativistic Doppler effect" does follow also from Galilean physics, a terrible threat to modern relativity. Hillman was now everywhere seeing "anti-Semitism" and relativistic Mafia structures, also in the case of a 76 years old British lady [4] [5]. The poor lady, rude and respectless Chris Hillman called a "crank fringe physicist". He linked also a lot of other persons together with KraMuc, who have to do absolutely nothing with KraMuc.

Obviously, this is a serious case of mental illness, and sick Chris Hillman needs the help of all of us. People knowing Chris Hillman should keep an eye on him and should watch him carefully in order to avoid that similar things happen to him as to Prrti at the Red Sea.

Although this all sounds like a joke, it is not really for laughing, because crazy Hillman's anti-Semitism campaign attracts criminals. KraMuc operates from Internet Cafés. When some time ago he was the only PC user in an Internet Café, when leaving it he was demonstratively threatened by some chaotic man, who had been waiting for him near to the exit, with a knife (although KraMuc was not directly attacked with that knife). When KraMuc reported this to Pjacobi, he answered: "I am not inclined to discuss this". Pjacobi reverted the corresponding talk page with the argument that the information does not go lost, because it can be found again in the history. When some time ago I googled for "Pjacobi" I found that many messages of Wikipedia users addressed to Pjacobi had been published on the Homepage of Peter Jay Salzman [6]. Meanwhile these messages have been removed from that Homepage. At several occasions, also in Italy, police authorities had found ist necessary to supervise Internet cafés durimg my presence there in order to protect me. P. J. Salzman has left physics and is now a programmer on Wall street. For his company, Fitch Ratings, he is implementing algorithms fo quantitative finance.---84.154.40.181 17:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]