(March 8, 2016 at 5:36 am)Alex K Wrote:(March 8, 2016 at 5:31 am)Harris Wrote: If I write E=mc^2 in words would that change the meaning of it? Can someone change this equation by merely changing the wording?
You have written so many things on this forum, if I find on some website that say exactly the same thing using the same words as you did, does that means you have copied something? No, that says that you are talking about one and the same thing.
So what you are saying is that you are the proverbial monkey who, by mindlessly striking his typewriter, has accidentally reproduced an exact copy of a paper on noncommutative quantum field theory from 10 years ago? People, it's a miracle!!!
But in all seriousness, apart from your ethically dubious behaviour which completely discredits you as a intellectually honest scholar, the more immediate problem for this forum is that you paste large amounts of text which you do not understand nor have the ability to address or discuss. This is spamming and forbidden by the rules.
All your comments were fairly confusing until I have realised what actually happened.
Usually, I prepare a separate sheet for quotes with complete reference details which after finishing my response I place in appropriate place to support my point.
Furthermore, I always preview my response and read it thoroughly before pressing post button. You can check all my previous responses and see yourself how diligent I am in providing complete reference details whenever I made use of quotes. Even I give page number from where I have picked the quote and I do not think anyone else on this forum is doing this exercise other than me.
To your response I also had prepared the reference details but unfortunately, my last three posts I have compiled on a same sheet along with all the quotes and posted them in a hurry without giving a final look.
If I have not given the references than that was not an intentional and deliberate act. However, you may not believe my reasoning therefore, I apologise for not giving the references along with the quotes.
All that said, I am firm on my argument that virtual particles are not particles at all.