Letter to Wired - The Society for the Advancement of Autodynamics

Letter to Wired

Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 1999 8:14 AM

To: newsfeedback@wired.com
Subject: RE: Shedding Light in the Dark

Dear Wired:

I want to commend you on your recent article

"Shedding Light in the Dark":

http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/20663.html

It was very well written. I want to also commend Kristen Philipkoski and John Gartner for their ground-breaking insight that such a subject merited coverage in a respected publication such as Wired Magazine online. Your magazine is truly a pioneer in its efforts to touch on a cutting edge subject such as Autodynamics.

I would however like to respond to a few quotes in the article. This is in no way a criticism of the Magazine or author. These are simply comments about quotes from others in the article that we in the SAA feel need responses.

"'As far as I was concerned autodynamics was disproved. Special relativity is correct,' said Pierre Noyes, professor in the theoretical physics section at SLAC, and lead researcher of the 1984 experiment."

We have an explanation as to what the experiment was flawed, not the the theory and the information has been published and sent to Pierre Noyes who refuses read or acknowledge the material. Since the flaw in the experiment has been found, a new experiment has been proposed.

The flaw is explained at:

http://www.autodynamics.org/new99/Experiments/1984Expl.html

The new experiment is found at:

http://www.autodynamics.org/new99/Experiments/NewRaE2.html

"'There's pretty good experimental evidence against the idea that gravity changes over time,' said David Noever, the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center physicist who will lead the eclipse research."

Autodynamics does not claim gravity changes over time, only mass. The comment and implied criticism is moot according to Autodynamics.

"'There is no serious attempt [by the autodynamics supporters] to make an argument or to discuss the mountains of experimental data that refute their basic claims, for example, in which people every day produce and detect neutrinos in laboratories.'"

This couldn't be farther from the truth. We have written many papers refuting specific examples of neutrino claims. For every neutrino experiment where we could find raw data, we have shown that the neutrino is not necessary. The "serious attempts" can be found in the Autodynamics book and on the website at:

http://www.autodynamics.org/new99/Neutrino/index.html

It is typical of the physics establishment to make sweeping remarks about Autodynamics without knowing or reading the information themselves.

Once again, thank you for you excellent article and we thank you for the opportunity to send our feedback.

Sincerely,

-David de Hilster
SAA President
david@autodynamics.org
http://www.autodynamics.org

Log In