Click here to get back home

sci.astro.amateur, sci.space.policy, alt.sci.planetary
 Home | NewsGroups | Search | About
Login Password
Register Now!
 alt.sci.planetary    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content
Subject Author Date
sci.astro.amateur, sci.space.policy, alt.sci.planetary AJAY SHARMA 11-04-2006
Posted by AJAY SHARMA on November 4, 2006, 10:05 am
Please log in for more thread options
 Einstein=E2=80=99s E=3Dmc2 . Should Newton , De Pretto , Preston, Hasenohrl=
and
Soddi, Planck be given credit for discovery of E=3Dmc2. ?


The French chemist Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) was the first to
formulate a law of conservation of matter in chemical reactions. The
concept of inter-conversion of mass and energy has been studied by
various scientists qualitatively, even before Einstein.

1=2E Newton has quoted in his book =E2=80=98Opticks=E2=80=99 in 1704 that
"Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...",
After about 200 years Einstein derived mathematical equation for
Newton=E2=80=99s perception i.e. =E2=88=86L =3D=E2=88=86mc2 where =E2=88=86=
L is light energy
emitted when mass =E2=88=86m is annihilated and is speed of light. It is the
rarest coincidence in between Newton=E2=80=99s hypothesis and Einstein=E2=
=80=99s
mathematical derivation.

2=2E S. Tolver Preston proposed that a vast amount of energy can be
produced from matter in his book Physics of the Ether in 1875. Preston
determined that one grain could lift a 100,000-ton object up to a
height dmc2.=EF=82=B5of 1.9 miles. This deduction yields dE

3=2E Jules Henri Poincar=C3=A9 in 1900 applied the calculations in a recoil
process and reached at the conclusion in the form, mv =3D (E/c2)c. From
the viewpoint of dimensional analysis, E/c2 takes on the role of a
=E2=80=98mass=E2=80=99 associated with radiation, which yields E=3Dmc2.

4=2E Olinto De Pretto speculated E=3Dmc2, implying that when v=3Dc , then E=
=3D
mv2 becomes E=3Dmc2 , in 1903-04. But Pretto neither gave specific
derivation nor mathematical calculations. Bartocci claimed that
Einstein was aware of De Pretto=E2=80=99s speculation of E=3D=E2=88=86mc2 ,=
which was
published about a year before.

5=2E Fritz Hasenohrl in 1904, concluded: =E2=80=9Cto the mechanical mass of=
our
system must be added an apparent mass which is given by, m=3D8E/3c2 where
E is the energy of the radiation.=E2=80=9D In a later paper he further
improved result that mass exchanged is, m=3D4E/3c2. Ebenezer Cunningham
in 1914 in the book The Principles of Relativity showed that F.
Hasen=C3=B6hrl, had made a slight error in his calculations. If errors are
removed then the mass exchanged is m =3DE/c2 or E =3D mc2. Thus in this
regard Hasenohrl=E2=80=99s contribution is the most significant, before
Einstein.

6=2E Frederick Soddi and M. Henri Becquerel both have predicted that in
radioactive emissions the mass of body decreases i.e. energy of
radiations is at the cost of mass.

7=2E Max Planck in 1907 made an in-depth investigation of the energy
"confined" within a body, but he did not use Einstein=E2=80=99s approach at
all. Planck derived an expression m-M=3D E/c2, for heat energy and mass
and interpreted that

=E2=80=9D The inertia mass of body is altered by absorption or emission of
heat energy. The increments of mass of body are equal to heat energy
divided by square of speed of light.=E2=80=9D

Planck acknowledged Einstein=E2=80=99s previous derivation but did not agree
with correctness of Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation.
Should these scientists be given credit of doing basic work in
assisting the discovery of E=3Dmc2 ?

Today, E=3Dmc2 is regarded a sole province of Einstein.
Complied from various sources.
If some scientists is left , please add. I think one is JJ Thomson
Main sources for compilation

100 Years of E=3Dmc2
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554


_________________
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554


Posted by Impeach Bush on November 5, 2006, 3:15 am
Please log in for more thread options
--------------01B7277BADBEEE966D126B0D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE YOUR MORON!



AJAY SHARMA wrote:

> Einstein’s E=mc2 . Should Newton , De Pretto , Preston, Hasenohrl and
> Soddi, Planck be given credit for discovery of E=mc2. ?
>
> The French chemist Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) was the first to
> formulate a law of conservation of matter in chemical reactions. The
> concept of inter-conversion of mass and energy has been studied by
> various scientists qualitatively, even before Einstein.
>
> 1. Newton has quoted in his book ‘Opticks’ in 1704 that
> "Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...",
> After about 200 years Einstein derived mathematical equation for
> Newton’s perception i.e. ∆L =∆mc2 where ∆L is light energy
> emitted when mass ∆m is annihilated and is speed of light. It is the
> rarest coincidence in between Newton’s hypothesis and Einstein’s
> mathematical derivation.
>
> 2. S. Tolver Preston proposed that a vast amount of energy can be
> produced from matter in his book Physics of the Ether in 1875. Preston
> determined that one grain could lift a 100,000-ton object up to a
> height dmc2.of 1.9 miles. This deduction yields dE
>
> 3. Jules Henri Poincaré in 1900 applied the calculations in a recoil
> process and reached at the conclusion in the form, mv = (E/c2)c. From
> the viewpoint of dimensional analysis, E/c2 takes on the role of a
> ‘mass’ associated with radiation, which yields E=mc2.
>
> 4. Olinto De Pretto speculated E=mc2, implying that when v=c , then E=
> mv2 becomes E=mc2 , in 1903-04. But Pretto neither gave specific
> derivation nor mathematical calculations. Bartocci claimed that
> Einstein was aware of De Pretto’s speculation of E=∆mc2 , which was
> published about a year before.
>
> 5. Fritz Hasenohrl in 1904, concluded: “to the mechanical mass of our
> system must be added an apparent mass which is given by, m=8E/3c2 where
> E is the energy of the radiation.” In a later paper he further
> improved result that mass exchanged is, m=4E/3c2. Ebenezer Cunningham
> in 1914 in the book The Principles of Relativity showed that F.
> Hasenöhrl, had made a slight error in his calculations. If errors are
> removed then the mass exchanged is m =E/c2 or E = mc2. Thus in this
> regard Hasenohrl’s contribution is the most significant, before
> Einstein.
>
> 6. Frederick Soddi and M. Henri Becquerel both have predicted that in
> radioactive emissions the mass of body decreases i.e. energy of
> radiations is at the cost of mass.
>
> 7. Max Planck in 1907 made an in-depth investigation of the energy
> "confined" within a body, but he did not use Einstein’s approach at
> all. Planck derived an expression m-M= E/c2, for heat energy and mass
> and interpreted that
>
> ” The inertia mass of body is altered by absorption or emission of
> heat energy. The increments of mass of body are equal to heat energy
> divided by square of speed of light.”
>
> Planck acknowledged Einstein’s previous derivation but did not agree
> with correctness of Einstein’s derivation.
> Should these scientists be given credit of doing basic work in
> assisting the discovery of E=mc2 ?
>
> Today, E=mc2 is regarded a sole province of Einstein.
> Complied from various sources.
> If some scientists is left , please add. I think one is JJ Thomson
> Main sources for compilation
>
> 100 Years of E=mc2
>
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554
>
> _________________
>
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

--------------01B7277BADBEEE966D126B0D
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE YOUR MORON!
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<p>AJAY SHARMA wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Einstein&acirc;&euro;s E=mc2 . Should Newton , De
Pretto , Preston, Hasenohrl and
<br>Soddi, Planck be given credit for discovery of E=mc2. ?
<p>The French chemist Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) was the first to
<br>formulate a law of conservation of matter in chemical reactions. The
<br>concept of inter-conversion of mass and energy has been studied by
<br>various scientists qualitatively, even before Einstein.
<p>1. Newton has quoted in his book &acirc;&euro;Opticks&acirc;&euro;
in 1704 that
<br>"Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...",
<br>After about 200 years Einstein derived mathematical equation for
<br>Newton&acirc;&euro;s perception i.e. &acirc;L =&acirc;mc2 where
&acirc;L is light energy
<br>emitted when mass &acirc;m is annihilated and is speed of light.
It is the
<br>rarest coincidence in between Newton&acirc;&euro;s hypothesis and
Einstein&acirc;&euro;s
<br>mathematical derivation.
<p>2. S. Tolver Preston proposed that a vast amount of energy can be
<br>produced from matter in his book Physics of the Ether in 1875. Preston
<br>determined that one grain could lift a 100,000-ton object up to a
<br>height&nbsp; dmc2.&iuml;&micro;of 1.9 miles. This deduction yields
dE
<p>3. Jules Henri Poincar&Atilde;&copy; in 1900 applied the calculations
in a recoil
<br>process and reached at the conclusion in the form, mv = (E/c2)c. From
<br>the viewpoint of dimensional analysis, E/c2 takes on the role of a
<br>&acirc;&euro;mass&acirc;&euro; associated with radiation, which yields
E=mc2.
<p>4. Olinto De Pretto speculated E=mc2, implying that when v=c , then
E=
<br>mv2 becomes E=mc2 , in 1903-04. But Pretto neither gave specific
<br>derivation nor mathematical calculations. Bartocci claimed that
<br>Einstein was aware of De Pretto&acirc;&euro;s speculation of E=&acirc;mc2
, which was
<br>published about a year before.
<p>5. Fritz Hasenohrl in 1904, concluded: &acirc;&euro;to the mechanical
mass of our
<br>system must be added an apparent mass which is given by, m=8E/3c2 where
<br>E is the energy of the radiation.&acirc;&euro; In a later paper he
further
<br>improved result that mass exchanged is, m=4E/3c2. Ebenezer Cunningham
<br>in 1914 in the book The Principles of Relativity showed that F.
<br>Hasen&Atilde;&para;hrl, had made a slight error in his calculations.
If errors are
<br>removed then the mass exchanged is m =E/c2 or E = mc2. Thus in this
<br>regard Hasenohrl&acirc;&euro;s contribution is the most significant,
before
<br>Einstein.
<p>6. Frederick Soddi and M. Henri Becquerel both have predicted that in
<br>radioactive emissions the mass of body decreases i.e. energy of
<br>radiations is at the cost of mass.
<p>7. Max Planck in 1907 made an in-depth investigation of the energy
<br>"confined" within a body, but he did not use Einstein&acirc;&euro;s
approach at
<br>all. Planck derived an expression m-M= E/c2, for heat energy and mass
<br>and interpreted that
<p>&acirc;&euro; The inertia mass of body is altered by absorption or
emission of
<br>heat energy. The increments of mass of body are equal to heat energy
<br>divided by square of speed of light.&acirc;&euro;
<p>Planck acknowledged Einstein&acirc;&euro;s previous derivation but
did not agree
<br>with correctness of Einstein&acirc;&euro;s derivation.
<br>Should these scientists be given credit of doing basic work in
<br>assisting the discovery of E=mc2 ?
<p>Today, E=mc2 is regarded a sole province of Einstein.
<br>Complied from various sources.
<br>If some scientists is left , please add. I think one is JJ Thomson
<br>Main sources for compilation
<p>100 Years of E=mc2
<br><a
href="https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554">https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&amp;products_id=4554</a>
<p>_________________
<br><a
href="https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554">https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&amp;products_id=4554</a></blockquote>
</html>

--------------01B7277BADBEEE966D126B0D--


Posted by fakfondo on November 5, 2006, 4:29 am
Please log in for more thread options

Impeach Bush wrote:
> GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE YOUR MORON!
>
>
>
> AJAY SHARMA wrote:
>
> > Einstein=E2=80=99s E=3Dmc2 . Should Newton , De Pretto , Preston, Hasen=
ohrl and
> > Soddi, Planck be given credit for discovery of E=3Dmc2. ?
> >
> > The French chemist Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) was the first to
> > formulate a law of conservation of matter in chemical reactions. The
> > concept of inter-conversion of mass and energy has been studied by
> > various scientists qualitatively, even before Einstein.
> >
> > 1. Newton has quoted in his book =E2=80=98Opticks=E2=80=99 in 1704 that
> > "Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...",
> > After about 200 years Einstein derived mathematical equation for
> > Newton=E2=80=99s perception i.e. =E2=88=86L =3D=E2=88=86mc2 where =E2=
=88=86L is light energy
> > emitted when mass =E2=88=86m is annihilated and is speed of light. It i=
s the
> > rarest coincidence in between Newton=E2=80=99s hypothesis and Einstein=
=E2=80=99s
> > mathematical derivation.
> >
> > 2. S. Tolver Preston proposed that a vast amount of energy can be
> > produced from matter in his book Physics of the Ether in 1875. Preston
> > determined that one grain could lift a 100,000-ton object up to a
> > height dmc2.=EF=82=B5of 1.9 miles. This deduction yields dE
> >
> > 3. Jules Henri Poincar=C3=A9 in 1900 applied the calculations in a reco=
il
> > process and reached at the conclusion in the form, mv =3D (E/c2)c. From
> > the viewpoint of dimensional analysis, E/c2 takes on the role of a
> > =E2=80=98mass=E2=80=99 associated with radiation, which yields E=3Dmc2.
> >
> > 4. Olinto De Pretto speculated E=3Dmc2, implying that when v=3Dc , then=
E=3D
> > mv2 becomes E=3Dmc2 , in 1903-04. But Pretto neither gave specific
> > derivation nor mathematical calculations. Bartocci claimed that
> > Einstein was aware of De Pretto=E2=80=99s speculation of E=3D=E2=88=86m=
c2 , which was
> > published about a year before.
> >
> > 5. Fritz Hasenohrl in 1904, concluded: =E2=80=9Cto the mechanical mass =
of our
> > system must be added an apparent mass which is given by, m=3D8E/3c2 whe=
re
> > E is the energy of the radiation.=E2=80=9D In a later paper he further
> > improved result that mass exchanged is, m=3D4E/3c2. Ebenezer Cunningham
> > in 1914 in the book The Principles of Relativity showed that F.
> > Hasen=C3=B6hrl, had made a slight error in his calculations. If errors =
are
> > removed then the mass exchanged is m =3DE/c2 or E =3D mc2. Thus in this
> > regard Hasenohrl=E2=80=99s contribution is the most significant, before
> > Einstein.
> >
> > 6. Frederick Soddi and M. Henri Becquerel both have predicted that in
> > radioactive emissions the mass of body decreases i.e. energy of
> > radiations is at the cost of mass.
> >
> > 7. Max Planck in 1907 made an in-depth investigation of the energy
> > "confined" within a body, but he did not use Einstein=E2=80=99s approac=
h at
> > all. Planck derived an expression m-M=3D E/c2, for heat energy and mass
> > and interpreted that
> >
> > =E2=80=9D The inertia mass of body is altered by absorption or emission=
of
> > heat energy. The increments of mass of body are equal to heat energy
> > divided by square of speed of light.=E2=80=9D
> >
> > Planck acknowledged Einstein=E2=80=99s previous derivation but did not =
agree
> > with correctness of Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation.
> > Should these scientists be given credit of doing basic work in
> > assisting the discovery of E=3Dmc2 ?
> >
> > Today, E=3Dmc2 is regarded a sole province of Einstein.
> > Complied from various sources.
> > If some scientists is left , please add. I think one is JJ Thomson
> > Main sources for compilation
> >
> > 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
> > https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_3=
24&products_id=3D4554
> >
> > _________________
> > https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_3=
24&products_id=3D4554
>
> --------------01B7277BADBEEE966D126B0D
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> X-Google-AttachSize: 4251
>
> <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
> <html>
> GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE YOUR MORON!
> <br>&nbsp;
> <br>&nbsp;
> <p>AJAY SHARMA wrote:
> <blockquote TYPE=3DCITE>Einstein&acirc;&euro;?s E=3Dmc2 . Should Newton ,=
De
> Pretto , Preston, Hasenohrl and
> <br>Soddi, Planck be given credit for discovery of E=3Dmc2. ?
> <p>The French chemist Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) was the first to
> <br>formulate a law of conservation of matter in chemical reactions. The
> <br>concept of inter-conversion of mass and energy has been studied by
> <br>various scientists qualitatively, even before Einstein.
> <p>1. Newton has quoted in his book &acirc;&euro;?Opticks&acirc;&euro;?
> in 1704 that
> <br>"Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...",
> <br>After about 200 years Einstein derived mathematical equation for
> <br>Newton&acirc;&euro;?s perception i.e. &acirc;??L =3D&acirc;??mc2 where
> &acirc;??L is light energy
> <br>emitted when mass &acirc;??m is annihilated and is speed of light.
> It is the
> <br>rarest coincidence in between Newton&acirc;&euro;?s hypothesis and
> Einstein&acirc;&euro;?s
> <br>mathematical derivation.
> <p>2. S. Tolver Preston proposed that a vast amount of energy can be
> <br>produced from matter in his book Physics of the Ether in 1875. Preston
> <br>determined that one grain could lift a 100,000-ton object up to a
> <br>height&nbsp; dmc2.&iuml;?&micro;of 1.9 miles. This deduction yields
> dE
> <p>3. Jules Henri Poincar&Atilde;&copy; in 1900 applied the calculations
> in a recoil
> <br>process and reached at the conclusion in the form, mv =3D (E/c2)c. Fr=
om
> <br>the viewpoint of dimensional analysis, E/c2 takes on the role of a
> <br>&acirc;&euro;?mass&acirc;&euro;? associated with radiation, which yie=
lds
> E=3Dmc2.
> <p>4. Olinto De Pretto speculated E=3Dmc2, implying that when v=3Dc , then
> E=3D
> <br>mv2 becomes E=3Dmc2 , in 1903-04. But Pretto neither gave specific
> <br>derivation nor mathematical calculations. Bartocci claimed that
> <br>Einstein was aware of De Pretto&acirc;&euro;?s speculation of E=3D&ac=
irc;??mc2
> , which was
> <br>published about a year before.
> <p>5. Fritz Hasenohrl in 1904, concluded: &acirc;&euro;?to the mechanical
> mass of our
> <br>system must be added an apparent mass which is given by, m=3D8E/3c2 w=
here
> <br>E is the energy of the radiation.&acirc;&euro;? In a later paper he
> further
> <br>improved result that mass exchanged is, m=3D4E/3c2. Ebenezer Cunningh=
am
> <br>in 1914 in the book The Principles of Relativity showed that F.
> <br>Hasen&Atilde;&para;hrl, had made a slight error in his calculations.
> If errors are
> <br>removed then the mass exchanged is m =3DE/c2 or E =3D mc2. Thus in th=
is
> <br>regard Hasenohrl&acirc;&euro;?s contribution is the most significant,
> before
> <br>Einstein.
> <p>6. Frederick Soddi and M. Henri Becquerel both have predicted that in
> <br>radioactive emissions the mass of body decreases i.e. energy of
> <br>radiations is at the cost of mass.
> <p>7. Max Planck in 1907 made an in-depth investigation of the energy
> <br>"confined" within a body, but he did not use Einstein&acirc;&euro;?s
> approach at
> <br>all. Planck derived an expression m-M=3D E/c2, for heat energy and ma=
ss
> <br>and interpreted that
> <p>&acirc;&euro;? The inertia mass of body is altered by absorption or
> emission of
> <br>heat energy. The increments of mass of body are equal to heat energy
> <br>divided by square of speed of light.&acirc;&euro;?
> <p>Planck acknowledged Einstein&acirc;&euro;?s previous derivation but
> did not agree
> <br>with correctness of Einstein&acirc;&euro;?s derivation.
> <br>Should these scientists be given credit of doing basic work in
> <br>assisting the discovery of E=3Dmc2 ?
> <p>Today, E=3Dmc2 is regarded a sole province of Einstein.
> <br>Complied from various sources.
> <br>If some scientists is left , please add. I think one is JJ Thomson
> <br>Main sources for compilation
> <p>100 Years of E=3Dmc2
> <br><a href=3D"https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cP=
ath=3D23_48_324&products_id=3D4554">https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/=
product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&amp;products_id=3D4554</a>
> <p>_________________
> <br><a href=3D"https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cP=
ath=3D23_48_324&products_id=3D4554">https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/=
product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&amp;products_id=3D4554</a></blockquote>
> </html>
>
> --------------01B7277BADBEEE966D126B0D--


Are you fucked enough, Come to street,
YOU WILL BE FUCKED TO SATISFACTION.


Posted by Dono on November 5, 2006, 11:15 am
Please log in for more thread options

AJAY SHARMA wrote:
<self advertisment snipped>

But it is well known that the paper that you keep self-advertising is
all wrong, idiot.


Posted by AJAY SHARMA on November 5, 2006, 12:14 pm
Please log in for more thread options

Dono wrote:
> AJAY SHARMA wrote:
> <self advertisment snipped>
>
> But it is well known that the paper that you keep self-advertising is
> all wrong, idiot.
---------------------------------------
Dono
Can you prove it wrong ?
I will stop posting.

If somebody disagree then one can write to Editor Physics Essays
addressing the following issues.

What is Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 1905 paper?
What are conditions under which it is derived?
What is Planck=E2=80=99s observation regarding it?
Under what conditions experimentally it holds good?
Why Einstein did not generalize the same?
How to generalize it under all conditions?
What is Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s Interpretation?
How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s paper is different from Einstein=E2=80=99s Sep 19=
05
paper.
How Editors/referees who have published it are WRONG?
How Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s interpretation is incorrect (if it)?
What are the correct interpretations AND EQAUTIONS?
My paper answers all above questions.
It follows from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation under legitimate conditions,(=
in
some cases) that
when Light Energy is Emitted , mass of body INCREASES.
It is incorrect deduction from Einstein=E2=80=99s derivation.

Part IV
References.

References of Einstein=E2=80=99s work
.
A=2EEinstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein=E2=80=99s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

PartII
References of Ajay Sharma=E2=80=99s work

My work is available at
A=2E Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
=E2=80=9DThe Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation =EF=81=84E =3D Ac2 =
=EF=81=84M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology=E2=80=9D.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554


International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1=2E Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA

2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.

3=2E A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,

10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND

4=2E A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND

5=2E A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.
6=2E A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow, (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Book 100 Years of E=3Dmc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=3D23_48_324&p=
roducts_id=3D4554

( book will be published in Dec 2006 , by NOVA Science in New York ,
USA)

AJAY SHARMA 5 NOV 2006


Similar ThreadsPosted
Moderated sci.astro.amateur July 17, 2007, 8:52 pm
Arkansas Center for Space and Planetary Sciences Receives NASA Funding to Continue Operations July 31, 2006, 12:08 pm
Amateur Astronomers Make First Sighting of 2003 UB313 February 20, 2006, 11:51 pm
Re: ASTRO - Why Are Atheists Retarded? January 13, 2008, 2:26 pm
Re: ASTRO - Why Are Atheists Retarded? January 13, 2008, 7:48 pm
Re: ASTRO - Why Are Atheists Retarded? February 3, 2008, 2:58 pm
Amateur Astronomers, Professionals Combine Observations to Produce Detailed Picture of Double Asteroid March 30, 2007, 1:40 pm
Re: ASTRO: Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Monkeysuits February 19, 2008, 1:44 pm
Double Satellites to Test Futuristic Technology (ASTRO & NextSat) March 5, 2007, 2:08 pm
FA Vintage Astronomy Welsh astro telescopes Wales 1923 January 11, 2008, 6:21 am

Our other projects:

Art Dolls, Fairies and Mermaids - Sunnyfaces.net

Roy's Linux, Programming and Search Engines messages

1-Script XML SitemapXML Sitemap