[mad aetherist (OP)]

I love his stuff re the liquid metallic Sun.

Then you are on the wrong web site.

I look forward to your critique of Robitaille's errors.

Well, for a start he thinks the Sun's a metallic liquid...

I think that his LMH theory for the Sun (as opposed to the standard gaseous hydrogen Sun) is the main reason why he has produced his sky scholar series of videos. No it was probly re the silly CMB & the silly BB that got him going.  He is a genius. So much good stuff in his videos.

[Bored chemist]

So much good stuff in his videos.

If you like sci fi.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

So much good stuff in his videos.

If you like sci fi.

I like that term sci-fi.  I hadnt seen it used like that, but its so good i dont know how i missed it myself.  Of course Einstein's SR & GR could be said to belong in the fiction section of the library.  But i  think that Einstein would have been happy to simply use his SR & GR as they should be used, as a goodish mathtrick model to give goodish numbers very simply & easily.  And if u want accurate numbers then u have to use the slightly more complex neoLorentz gamma etc (needing an estimate of the aetherwind kmps & deg). And we could all live happily ever after. And make much better science progress.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

24 January 2019 
Professor Panayiotis Frangos,  Editor, Journal of Applied Electromagnetism (JAE), Athens, Greece
Dear Sir,
You will no doubt recall our very recent correspondence (below for reference) regarding the paper, Herouni P. About Self Noises of Radio-Optical Telescope ROT-54/2,6 Antenna, Journal of Applied Electromagnetism, Athens, 1999, V. 2., N 1., P. 51-57, missing from the electronic archive of JAE, and that upon your advice that you did not know about the paper and had no JAE record of it, suggesting that I perhaps had incorrect citation, I said that I would look into it. I subsequently located the niece of professor Herouni, professor Arevik Sargsyan, and informed her that her uncle's paper was not in the JAE electronic archive and asked her if she had a copy of it. She has informed me that she asked Dr. Tamara Knyazyan from the Laboratory of professor Hovik Baghdasaryan to search the laboratory library shelves for the hard copy of JAE, V. 2. N 1, 1999. Dr. Knyazyan found the hard copy of the issue. Professor Sargsyan has sent me photographs of the cover of the JAE issue and her uncle's paper therein, proving its existence.

Professor Sargsyan has informed me that she contacted you about her uncle's missing paper. According to professor Sargsyan, you wrote to her “this paper by your uncle P. Herouni does not appear in Vol. 2, No. 1 issue (year 1999) of our ‘JAE Journal’ (I have this copy both in hardcopy form, and also in electronic form, in our ‘JAE archive’, as this appears in our ‘web site’, http://jae.ece.ntua.gr).” You informed me that you became Editor of JAE in 2007. I have ascertained that your predecessor was professor Nikolaos Uzunoglu. It appears that professor Uzunoglu published professor Herouni's paper in JAE, V. 2. N 1, 1999. Professor Sargsyan has advised me that you wrote to her, “The matter of its registration to our ‘JAE archive’ is still a ‘mystery’ for me....(I still can not understand that....In any case....).”

I was aware of the importance of professor Herouni's paper by virtue of his abstract, which he presented at a conference in St. Petersburg in 2006, which recently came to my attention: hence my reason for seeking it and my writing to you in the first instance, when I could not find the paper in JAE records. From the photographs of the paper I have been able to study it, and reaffirm that it is the most important paper ever published on cosmology. The so-called Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) was first reported at ~3 K by Penzias and Wilson in 1965, their detection from the ground. They subsequently shared a Nobel Prize for this. In 1989 NASA's COBE satellite reported detection of the CMB at ~2.725 K, at ~900km above Earth. Both John Mather and George Smoot of the COBE Team shared a Nobel Prize for this alleged CMB detection. In 2001 NASA's WMAP satellite to L2 reported detection of anisotropies in the 'CMB'. The WMAP Science Team shared the lucrative 2018 Breakthrough Prize – Fundamental Physics for their 'anisotropies', i.e. “detailed maps of the early universe”. In 2009 the European Space Agency launched its PLANCK satellite to L2 and also reported detection of CMB anisotropies, supposedly in much greater refinement than WMAP.

I find it disturbing that professor Herouni's paper is not in the JAE archive and that you could not find it in the hardcopy of JAE, V. 2. N 1, 1999 held in the JAE records. Possibly the answer to your surprise that it is not in JAE records is that professor Herouni's paper proves that the CMB does not exist, and, consequently, that Big Bang cosmology is false. In his paper professor Herouni wrote:

“This very low level of our measured self noises of ROT Antenna rises the query to well known cosmogonic theory of 'Big Bang'. … But the presented above results of our measurements shows that either this 2.8K is a relict background, then self noises of ROT is equal zero (what is impossible) or this is self noises of Antenna, and then the relict background is absent (or almost absent). In this case it has sense to return to the earlier 'quantes aging' theory which explains also the known 'red shift'.”

Such revelations are anathema to astronomers and cosmologists who have built many careers and reputations on Big Bang and CMB, in a very public international fashion. It seems that a person or persons unknown may have therefore removed professor Herouni's paper from the JAE electronic archive, and substituted the hard copy of the journal issue in your records with one that does not contain professor Herouni's paper, strange as it may seem.

But the question now is: What to do about it? I suggest that JAE republish professor Herouni's paper with editorial comment that the original 1999 paper has gone missing. In any event professor Herouni's paper must surely be reinstated in the JAE records. Perhaps professor Uzunoglu can assist you, since it seems that he originally published professor Herouni's paper in JAE.
Please keep me informed of developments.
Yours faithfully,  Steve Crothers  (Australia)  3rd February 2019

Professor Panayiotis Frangos,  Editor, Journal of Applied Electromagnetism (JAE),  Athens, Greece
Dear Sir,
Pursuant to our previous correspondence (see below) regarding the mysterious disappearance of the paper Herouni P. About Self Noises of Radio-Optical Telescope ROT-54/2,6 Antenna, Journal of Applied Electromagnetism, Athens, 1999, V. 2., N 1., P. 51-57 from electronic and harcopy records of JAE, I note that the paper has been reinstated, at my instigation. You will recall that I requested you to keep me appraised of developments, but you did not do so. I however kept a watchful eye on developments and noted that on the of 30th January 2019 professor Herouni's paper was reinstated, thanks apparently to the intervention of professor Uzunoglu; but not in its original index. It is now, as you know, located in Journal of Applied Electromagnetism, Athens, 1999, V. 2., N 2., where it is appended as the final entry (No.7) in a zip file, without the editorial comment I requested from you. The paper there is a pdf file of scanned images of the original paper that I obtained from Armenain scientists, which reaffirms that JAE had no record of the paper in any format whatsoever. I also note that in V.2 N.1 the page numbers originally assigned to professor Herouni's paper are now occupied by a paper by a different author. Clearly the removal of professor Herouni's paper from JAE records was perpetrated with deliberation by the unknown offenders.

I now ask if you intend to inquire as to how this paper was removed from JAE records in the first place, and if you intend to attempt to identify the person or persons responsible for deleting it from the journal's records. I am compiling a full record for historical purposes as professor Herouni's null measurement of the so-called 'CMB', at 8mm (proving that the 'CMB' does not exist), will come to stand as a magnificent edifice in the history of astronomy and cosmology.

Professor Robitaille in the USA and me in Australia have in the meantime not been idle. Here is our latest development (with much more to follow):
The Herouni Antenna - The Death of the Big Bang!

I will keep you informed of developments, even if you decide to continue to keep me in the dark.
Yours faithfully,  Steve Crothers  (Australia) 

[mad aetherist (OP)]

https://www.facebook.com/stephen.crothers.7?epa=SEARCH_BOX

[Bored chemist]

... (Australia) 

https://www.facebook.com/stephen.crothers.7?epa=SEARCH_BOX

So, no actual science then?

[mad aetherist (OP)]

So, no actual science then?

Lots of science. Lots of censorship. Imagine, going back & deleting the electronic record, & replacing the journal library hardcopy with a different paper to fill the censored pages.  And then reinstating the original paper but in a different journal which is for technicians not scientists. The sh1t will hit the fan.

[Bored chemist]

So, no actual science then?

Lots of science. Lots of censorship. Imagine, going back & deleting the electronic record, & replacing the journal library hardcopy with a different paper to fill the censored pages.  And then reinstating the original paper but in a different journal which is for technicians not scientists. The sh1t will hit the fan.

I look forward to your proof that this was conspiracy, rather than cockup.

In any event, what you posted not actually science.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

So, no actual science then?

Lots of science. Lots of censorship. Imagine, going back & deleting the electronic record, & replacing the journal library hardcopy with a different paper to fill the censored pages.  And then reinstating the original paper but in a different journal which is for technicians not scientists. The sh1t will hit the fan.

I look forward to your proof that this was conspiracy, rather than cockup. In any event, what you posted not actually science.

Certainly a conspiracy, unless it was done by one person of his-her own volition. Re the science, i daresay that we will soon see an English translation of the full Armenian paper.

[Kryptid]

I look forward to your proof that this was conspiracy

So do I. I'm not holding my breath, though.

[Bored chemist]

Certainly a conspiracy, unless it was done by one person of his-her own volition. Re the science, i daresay that we will soon see an English translation of the full Armenian paper.

I look forward to your proof that this was conspiracy, rather than cockup.

In any event, what you posted not actually science.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

I look forward to your proof that this was conspiracy, rather than cockup.

Lots of censorship. Imagine, going back & deleting the electronic record, & replacing the journal library hardcopy with a different paper to fill the censored pages.  And then reinstating the original paper but in a different journal which is for technicians not scientists. The sh1t will hit the fan.

[Bored chemist]

Certainly a conspiracy, unless it was done by one person of his-her own volition.

I look forward to your proof that this was conspiracy, rather than cockup.

In any event, what you posted not actually science.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

English version of i think 1988 paper.
http://elib.sci.am/2007_1/10_1_2007.pdf

[Bored chemist]

English version of i think 1988 paper.
http://elib.sci.am/2007_1/10_1_2007.pdf

Well, let's have a look...
"The Large Antenna of ROT is the new type [1]. Its Main mirror (54m) is fixed
in ground and has hemispheric shape. Using aperture is 32m in diameter (surface
using factor 0,6). The spherical aberrations of Main mirror are recompensed by
special shape of Secondary (Small) mirror"
How new is that?
Not very
i  think it's a simplified version of one of these.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klevtsov%E2%80%93Cassegrain_telescope

And what else does it have to say?
How about the table headed "The ROT Antenna Comparison with the World Other Largest Antennas "
Well, they are missing some.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovell_Telescope
for a start.


And what else do they say?
Well there's this
"The main advantages of ROT Antenna are the highest accuracy of mirror
surfaces (50 micron), shortest wavelength (1mm) and very low level of Self Noises
(2,6 K), i.e. highest sensitivity. "

So, they quote the noise figure for their 'scope as 2.6K
And then the pretend that you can use such an instrument to measure the CMBR which corresponds to a temperature of 2.7K

Fat chance.

So, their claim that "So there is only one explanation, that Relict radiation is absent in Universe,
and it is that there never was any Big Bang in Universe."
is made by people who don't know about the real world, and don't understand that you can't use an insensitive telescope to measure complicated things.

They fail to address the big obvious problem.
If the CMBR is not due to to the Big Bang, then what did cause it?

I wonder if this document was "hidden" because it's embarrassing to the authors and their nation.

[Kryptid]

So, they quote the noise figure for their 'scope as 2.6K
And then the pretend that you can use such an instrument to measure the CMBR which corresponds to a temperature of 2.7K

Nice catch. That's like trying to measure the speed of a snail using a police radar gun.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

English version of i think 1988 paper.
http://elib.sci.am/2007_1/10_1_2007.pdf

Well, let's have a look...
"The Large Antenna of ROT is the new type [1]. Its Main mirror (54m) is fixed
in ground and has hemispheric shape. Using aperture is 32m in diameter (surface
using factor 0,6). The spherical aberrations of Main mirror are recompensed by
special shape of Secondary (Small) mirror"
How new is that?
Not very
i  think it's a simplified version of one of these.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klevtsov%E2%80%93Cassegrain_telescope

And what else does it have to say?
How about the table headed "The ROT Antenna Comparison with the World Other Largest Antennas "
Well, they are missing some.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovell_Telescope
for a start.


And what else do they say?
Well there's this
"The main advantages of ROT Antenna are the highest accuracy of mirror
surfaces (50 micron), shortest wavelength (1mm) and very low level of Self Noises
(2,6 K), i.e. highest sensitivity. "

So, they quote the noise figure for their 'scope as 2.6K
And then the pretend that you can use such an instrument to measure the CMBR which corresponds to a temperature of 2.7K

Fat chance.

So, their claim that "So there is only one explanation, that Relict radiation is absent in Universe,
and it is that there never was any Big Bang in Universe."
is made by people who don't know about the real world, and don't understand that you can't use an insensitive telescope to measure complicated things.

They fail to address the big obvious problem.
If the CMBR is not due to to the Big Bang, then what did cause it?

I wonder if this document was "hidden" because it's embarrassing to the authors and their nation.

The Armenian noise was 2.6 K & they were looking for a nett CMB of 2.7 K (ie a reading of 5.3 K), but had a reading of 2.6 K (ie nett CMB = 0.0 K).
Robitaille says that the Armenian antenna is well away from the oceans & seas, & is in a hollow at high altitude which shields the antenna from the ocean's microwaves, & i think that the Armenian detector itself faces downish which gives extra shielding (not sure)(i aint a scientist).

Other's antennas i think had noise of say 2.8 K & had readings of say 5.5 K which they said showed a nett CMB of 2.7 K (but which Robitaille says is due to Earth's water, ie CMB is 0.0 K).

Why would Armenia's antenna be unsuitable for getting a reading of 5.3 K??
Are u suggesting that if someone came up with an antenna with zero K of antenna-noise then that would be totally useless?

[mad aetherist (OP)]

So, they quote the noise figure for their 'scope as 2.6K
And then the pretend that you can use such an instrument to measure the CMBR which corresponds to a temperature of 2.7K

Nice catch. That's like trying to measure the speed of a snail using a police radar gun.

No, a radar gun would for a snail give a reading of 00 kmph.  Radar guns usually read to the nearest 1 kmph.  No problems here.  But if u want to know the speed of the snail to 0.1 kmph then u would of course have to get a more sensitive gun. 

But if the Armenian antenna is not sensitive enough then it would give a reading of say 1 K or 2 K or 3 K or 4 K or 5 K or 6 K.  But it got 2.6 K.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

The Armenian antenna might be given a new life.
https://www.mediamax.am/en/news/special-report/32323/?fbclid=IwAR1sgjK0UmnaZh4cnSrAoTf_Q2eRPyX2HLPlnK3_9l2ZM876aLR0bQfUq1k

[Paradigmer]

Prof Pierre-Marie Robitaille -- re P Herouni's antenna & the  Death of the Big Bang.

The Big Bang theory is simply a fairy tale that paradoxically postulates the extremely small, dense, and hot state of the primordial universe manifesting in its first few seconds, is now being seen in its time dilation image of being extremely large, sparse, and cooled state.

The primordial universe, can now be empirically observed in its primodial timeline at the edge of the vast observable universe, which is not at all an extremely small, dense, and hot little ball. These supra contradicting postulations are just being plain silly for reifying its mythology.

It's amazing such a myth is still being faithfully accepted, advocated, and advanced by the so called elites, and echoed to the rank and file levels.

It must be the extremely contagious power of the modern physics cult science that still manages to corrupt with its overwhelming obfuscations.