"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.04.23.22.27.09.301815@tepidmail.com...

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:38:18 +0000, mukyuk wrote:

"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.04.23.21.31.57.180724@tepidmail.com...

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 02:20:13 +0000, mukyuk wrote:

Professor James McCanney M.S. is a physicist who has spent decades
promoting
his theoretical work showing that the solar system is ever changing and
is
electrically active. These theories have been confirmed with space
probe
data and prove that there are definite Earth effects resulting from our
sun's electrical activity. He has openly opposed NASA's view that outer
space is electrically neutral.

McCanney was a faculty member of the Physics and Mathematics
departments
of
Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. He has researched theoretical
Celestial
Mechanics and Plasma Physics (for the layman, these are the studies of
planetary motion and electrified gases in outer space), and has
presented
his theories at the Los Alamos National Laboratories and American
Geophysical Union.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guests/554.html

I think there may be a wee bit of resume padding going on there, or at
least not being entirely upfront. Universities of Cornell's caliber have
been requiring PhDs to be hired as faculty members for decades. This is
not necessarily true of low-ranked 4 year colleges and is not true for
2-year colleges. Perhaps he was an Instructor as a PhD candidate while
at
Cornell, but I highly doubt he was a "professor" there - and if he's a
professor anywhere, it's more than likely at some 2-year school (not
much
research going on at 2 year schools).

But did he solve the primes?
That's worth an instant PhD acording to my thinking, even if he never
spent
a day in any University anywhere.

There's a lot more involved in getting a PhD than writing a unique thesis,
mondo - and this person hasn't even proven that he's done that.

Besides, what I was pointing out that he may not be being entirely honest,
so his claim itself is brought into question. He certainly gives no proof
that he's done anything - he just wants people to buy his book (which,
suspiciously, is written for the layperson, not someone who could possibly
disprove his claim).

So you're saying that if I buy the book, I might be disapointed. It might
be a hoax and he doesn't solve anything about primes at all? I was going to
buy the book. That would make me angry if the book didn't have what I
expected! Am I being that nieve? I kinda wondered why there isn't more
attention to this if he is telling the truth. That would be a major
discovery. Maybe the joke was is on be. I still feel it's true though.