Peer-Reviewed Publications
...thank God for "peer-reviewed publications".
If it weren't for the referees working at APS, I bet the author (David Larkin) would have published dozens of articles reasoning why the greatest contributors to science were all wrong ... and why he is right.
Mr. Larkin's text is an obstacle in the path of education. As he puts it, his work is "targeted towards the non-scientific reader". This is the problem. It is unfair of Mr. Larkin to masquerade as a scientist in front of those who can't tell the difference. If Mr. Larkin wanted a fair fight, he would spend his time submitting such works to organizations who employ physicists to sort through the good and the bad.
Notice that he had to publish the text himself - this is a clear signature of pseudo-science. An even scarier thought is that people buy these books and encourage him - I hope this isn't the case and that he has a stockpile of unwanted books in his garage...
I would bet that John Wiley, Prentice Hall, and other publishers spend a lot of money sorting through manuscripts written by people such as Mr. Larkin.
To all who read this thread, please use discretion when deciding what to believe and what not to believe that is posted on a public forum. This forum serves as a great medium for physicist look-alikes to have their say.
I would suggest that people spend time reading what is acknowledged by professionals to be authentic, rather than works by individuals such as Mr. Larkin, THERE ARE MANY LIKE HIM.
If you are ever curious about physics, e-mail (or phone) a professor at a local college/university. Most will be happy to answer a question in the interest of science education. They recognize that if they don't answer your question, you may turn to someone else (potentially a Mr. Larkin) who will communicate to you rejected, unverifiable, non-scientific theories.
