From: jyablon@nycap.rr.com   
      
   On Wednesday, June 7, 2017 at 5:27:38 AM UTC-4, John Heath wrote:   
   > On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 11:15:52 AM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote:   
   > > On 6/4/17 6/4/17 - 1:47 AM, John Heath wrote:   
   > > > It has been my observation that in physics there seems to be   
   > > > two types, a noodle head and a bean counter. [...]   
   > >   
   > > In my experience, ESPECIALLY on the Internet, there is another type:   
   > > people with no experience or understanding of physics or physicists,   
   > > but who attempt to write about them anyway.   
   > >   
   > > Tom Roberts   
   >   
   > Hmmm an emotional need for a social pecking order. I was not prepared   
   > for this and it is somewhat off topic. Back to physics.   
   >   
   > I made a statement that electrodynamics does not use length contraction.   
   > Do you agree ? If not why?   
   >   
   > A bolder statement was made that a pion and a kaon can be derived from a   
   > Koide formula. Do you think this is possible? Are you curious as to how?   
   >   
   > It would please me to no end to address these question.   
      
   I am game to know how.  But I would caution that just getting numbers   
   alone while necessary is not sufficient.  There needs to be some   
   underlying theory as to why the approach would make physical sense.   
   While I do credit the Koide mass formula as being indicative of   
   something deeper, the reason it does not garner more attention is   
   because there is no physical theory attached. Same thing with the   
   recursive DeVries formula for the fine structure number.   
      
   I agree that electrodynamics does not use time and length contractions.   
   But it should.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)