Brian,

After reading your initial e-mail, I was very skeptical, but your
correspondence since then has shown an honest curiosity, masked by pessimism
from seeing too many theories that do not drive physics forward.

I do not know if you will ever feel satisfied that the WSM will be the next
logical step in physics, but in my opinion, it is worth a discussion so that
we can get feedback from you on what parts of it may still need work.

No one (that I am aware of) working on the WSM feels that physics theory
development will stop with the WSM, but it does tie together many branches
of physics with a single way of looking at everything, and in all of the
areas that I have had time to examine, it works at least as well as current
theories.

The fact that the WSM doesn't require different assumptions from
case-to-case means a lot to me. We still have a lot of work to do to make
sure that the WSM can derive the majority of current physics results at
least as well as the currently accepted theories.

I appreciate your situation since there are thousands of personal "physics"
theories on the Internet and in books, (I may be vastly under-estimating the
number,) and there isn't enough time to disprove each one of them thoroughly
to find the few that truly benefit science. The fact that you are going to
read Milo's other book proves to me that you are interested in finding a
more complete truth, and I encourage you to ask questions after you have
read his book. I will answer with my take on the WSM and try to help you
see the value in this theory.

Mike Weber

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Josephson [mailto:bdj10@....uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 11:56 AM
To: martinkokus@yahoo.com; Jennifer Wolff; Wolfgang Fischer
Cc: BreakForNews.com; Denys Lépinard; Kregg Quarles; Milo Wolff; jack
fogarty; Jan Frijters; Tom Gehrels; WSM - IU; WSM Group; Gwen Davies;
Michael Harney; Geoff Haselhurst; NANCY KOLENDA KOLENDA; Antonina
Kolokolova; Ludmilla Kolokolova; Jefferson Law; lindaglord@verizon.net;
michelle; William Miller; Megan Moffitt; David Mueller; nergis; John Nugan;
Dale O'brien; Paul.Johnsson@fysik.lth.se; aengebretson@pancan.org (Anitra
Engebretson <aengebretson@pancan.org>)Gloria Petersen; ram ramchum; Doris
Rhodes; brian sallur; Arlene Sanders; Patricia Savadove;
schafer@phys.lsu.edu; Carolyn Seling; Ray Staines; Michael Studencki; Victor
Tang; Ian Tepoot; Kenneth Udut; Mark Watt; Mike Weber; Tertius Wehmeyer;
Cynthia Whitney; Doug Wolff; Winston Wolff; Zeus
Subject: Re: Book: Schroedinger's--my 2 cents

I'd like to suggest that now we wait till I've received that book from 
Amazon (which it appears may not be the case for a couple of weeks), and 
had a chance to review it.

Brian

--On Wednesday, April 8, 2009 9:16 -0700 martin kokus 
<martinkokus@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Milo Wolff sent me his first book in 1994 after I already had 7
> courses in modern, quantum and particle physics. It completely changed
> my view of the micro world. Anyone who thinks that Wolff is merely
> rehashing traditional quantum physics doesn't understand what he is
> trying to say.

* * * * * * * Prof. Brian D. Josephson :::::::: bdj10@....uk
* Mind-Matter * Cavendish Lab., J J Thomson Ave, Cambridge CB3 0HE, U.K.
* Unification * voice: +44(0)1223 337260 fax: +44(0)1223 337356
* Project * WWW: http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10
* * * * * * *