Hi, Bholu,

Uncle Al seems to be quite knowledgeable, even his pet tape worm Kolkar
or Kelkar, has the IQ of a smart tape worm.

Yes, Uncle Al definitely does have a great depth of knowledge in both
physics and chemistry. Many of his posts give evidence of extensive
experience and a clear understanding of fundamental theories in both
fields. It is therefore surprising

Hi, Bholu,

Uncle Al seems to be quite knowledgeable, even his pet tape worm Kolkar
or Kelkar, has the IQ of a smart tape worm.

Yes, Uncle Al definitely does have a great depth of knowledge in both
physics and chemistry. Many of his posts give evidence of extensive
experience and a clear understanding of fundamental theories in both
fields. It is therefore surprising that when you search for papers by
A.M. Schwartz in ISI-listed journals, the best match is the A.M.
Schwartz at Texceed Corp, 3001 Redhill 4-104, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 ,
who appeared a lot in ChemTech about fifteen years ago, with
contributions entitled "Secrets", "Maple Syrup", "The Last Word" and
"Ask Schund". The references are 21 #1 (1991) 65, 20 #10 (1990) 642, 20
# 7 (1990) U449 and 20 #4 (1990) 193, respectively. Is that you, Al?

I am looking for references in Phy.Rev.Lett or J.Phys (A/B/C/D) of
papers published by the good Uncle. I am genuinely interested in his
scholarly publications in peer reviewed journals besides sci.physics.

I am sure he has had more qualified company than Doctor Jai Maharaj.

Of course, when you look at the manuscript on his website, his lack of
publications can perhaps be understood. Although there is certainly a
publication in there trying to get out, his written style is atrocious.
Moreover, given the clarity of thought in many of his posts, it is
surprising that he continues to bang on about Petitjean's CHI
parameter. For all that he repeats that gravity is not understood, and
I can relate to that, it is nevertheless a physical phenomenon for
which we have had a theory for the last 300 years, which is in
excellent agreement with measurements over more than thirteen orders of
magnitude of length scale. Einstein's theory is even better. There is
just no way in which a new theory giving an even better fit to reality
can have any connection to Petitjean's otherwise excellent concept.
Schulzie is correct that the manuscript just pulls the figure of 1e-13
out of thin air.

The number 1e-13 cannot be right. If there are effects related to
chirality, then they will be related in some way to typical atomic
separations of 1e-10 m. At the distances of 1e-1 m probed by Luo's kit,
there would have to be effects, even in weakly chiral materials, of
order 1e-10. Of course, we already know the result to a precision of
1e-12, so I'm not holding my breath. Either I or Al am/is missing
something, and I rather incline to the idea that it is Al. His response
to my statements about corn syrup and crystallography suggests that his
edge is getting a little blunt these days.

Moreover, given the clarity of thought in many of his posts, it is
surprising that he continues to bang on about Petitjean's CHI
parameter. For all that he repeats that gravity is not understood, and
I can relate to that, it is nevertheless a physical phenomenon for
which we have had a theory for the last 300 years, which is in
excellent agreement with measurements over more than thirteen orders of
magnitude of length scale. Einstein's theory is even better. There is
just no way in which a new theory giving an even better fit to reality
can have any connection to Petitjean's otherwise excellent concept.
Schulzie is correct that the manuscript just pulls the figure of 1e-13
out of thin air.

The number 1e-13 cannot be right. If there are effects related to
chirality, then they will be related in some way to typical atomic
separations of 1e-10 m. At the distances of 1e-1 m probed by Luo's kit,
there would have to be effects, even in weakly chiral materials, of
order 1e-10. Of course, we already know the result to a precision of
1e-12, so I'm not holding my breath. Either I or Al am/is missing
something, and I rather incline to the idea that it is Al. His response
to my statements about corn syrup and crystallography suggests that his
edge is getting a little blunt these days.