An Investigation of Modern Physics by Brian Williams
RSS icon Home icon
  • Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth – 2 The Earth Mechanics

    Posted on September 28th, 2010 Brian No comments

    Although I am writing this with a particular point in mind, I do not expect it to be right, it is only hypothetical. You can add your arguments against it, which, if pertinent I will add into the post itself. Or you may add your queries that I will attempt to answer, or a reader may be able to answer. (Please state if you want your name included in the additions). Although there has been a lot of research done on this subject, most of the conclusions published are, at best, guesses. We just do not have enough evidence. Possibly, between us, we can arrive at a better hypothesis that will help the science along.

    Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth.

    One point that is occasionally brought up relating to the dinosaurs is the problems that they would have due to the force of Earth’s gravity. The argument is that their bodily structure was insufficient to allow them to function successfully. We are therefore forced to conclude that one of the following must apply:-

    1. They were unsuccessful

    2. The assessment of their bodily structure is wrong

    3. The gravity was different then than it is now

    Archaeological finds indicate that the dinosaurs were the most successful category of animal life on Earth. I cannot comment on the arguments relating to their biological structure, but I assume that competent people were involved. (See Stephen Hurrell’s web site “Dinosaurs and the expanding Earth”) He is offering free downloads of much of the background to his book, worthwhile looking.


    (I have recently come across an item on YouTube that is quite interesting.  This is a video showing the probable course of Earth under expansion. Although not really addressing the mechanics it is a very useful video, that I wished I’d done. 13/05/2011))

    We are left with the argument that Earth’s gravity was different.

    To satisfy the requirements of the dinosaurs Earth’s diameter would have to be about 4,300 to 5,000miles.

    This means that Earth would have to have increased its diameter by approximately 3,000 to 3,700 miles since the dinosaurs died out!

    But, the remains of the dinosaurs were found in the Earth’s crust, so how could they be there, they should be buried under 1,850 miles of new soil or rock (Assuming an original diameter of 4,300miles!

    However, the accretion of space debris is an unlikely cause of the increase in diameter, even the occasional meteorite would not make more than a minor difference. The meteor that is blamed for destroying the dinosaurs hardly caused much of an increase in the Earth’s diameter, and the dinosaurs survived for millions of years in which no comparable meteor landed on Earth.

    An alternative hypothesis.

    What if the Earth’s crust floated on top of the increasing diameter?  The scientists state that the landmasses are moving apart. OK, but the only way they can spread out is if the Earth is expanding. The present hypothesis is that all the present land was part of a single land mass surrounded by a large ocean.

    Let us assume that the present land mass was approximately equivalent to the total surface area of the Earth millions of years ago. There would still be lakes of varying sizes and small rivers.  This would give the Earth’s diameter as 4,300 miles, about the same diameter as Mars, with a gravity of about (Very roughly) half of Earth’s present gravity. This would make the dinosaurs quite happy and be close to their ‘design’ parameters.

    If the landmass ‘floated’ what would happen on expansion of the Earth? Well, the crust would crack like an eggshell. As the Earth expanded the crust sections would tend to try and retain their original curvature, but would start to sag under their mass. They would crinkle, bulge and shear. Water in lakes and streams would gradually be displaced and run off the damaged landmasses. Water would fill the cracks surrounding the landmasses. As the Earth continued its expansion these cracks would widen until they became seas. The original lakes would leave evidence of the fish and reptiles that originally inhabited them.

    Of course all this would need some action that would create the excess stresses, otherwise the Earth would just accumulate space debris over many billions of years and just gradually increase its size and end up as just another rock ball such as the moon or Mercury.

    A likely culprit is the Moon. It is possible that the acquisition of the Moon coincided with the acquisition of the meteor that destroyed the dinosaurs. Possibly the meteor was a satellite of our moon! Another possibility is that the ‘meteor’ that destroyed the dinosaurs was actually an Earth satellite itself, displaced by the acquisition of the moon. There are many possibilities. The arguments for saying that the Moon was created at the same time as the Earth is a very weak hypothesis with virtually no scientific evidence.

    To return to the time of the dinosaurs. There is plenty of evidence that at that time the Earth was lavishly covered in plant life, and that there was an abundance of animal life. This situation had been around for millions of years during which the Earth was not plagued by millions of meteors intent on destroying Earth. In other words the Earth had a very stable environment for many millions of years. Since then the Earth has almost doubled in size. It requires a huge change in circumstances to bring this about.

    If the dinosaurs were destroyed 64 million years ago and the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, this means that the Earth has doubled in size in the last 0.014% of its existence! Admittedly, the claims and mathematics of the scientists are highly suspect, but even so, this is an explosion in geological terms.

    Although the time scales are probably wrong due the many ifs and buts involved in geological dating, even if the Earth is only 1 billion years old, it is still an astounding increase in the Earth’s diameter. You would have to push back the date of the dinosaur’s demise to about 3 billion years ago to arrive at an ‘acceptable’ figure for the rate of expansion of the Earth, i.e. a figure that would probably not be so worrying.

    Of all the scientific research into geological time scales, the change in size of the Earth as required to account for the dinosaurs success is the most important, the most scientifically sound, and gives the most accurate assessment of what is happening. The main doubt is whether the date of the dinosaurs demise is accurate.

    Whether or not a pterodactyl could fly under specified conditions is an engineering question, involving aerodynamics and structural analysis. There is a lot of proven expertise and knowledge about these subjects. The specified conditions include both gravity and atmospheric density. Could a greater atmospheric density than our present one help with solving the problem. Only marginally, a greater percentage of oxygen would help but not enough. Possibly the dinosaurs operated on a different chemical mix than we do today but this would only made a small difference. No, the atmospheric density would have to be significantly higher, which would mean a higher gravity not a lower one.

    Accretion of space dust and debris would not account for much of this in the 64 million year time scale. Assuming that the Moon has been around for the same period, the space dust there is less than 20cm, and there is no reason to assume that the Earth would receive 1850 miles thickness in the same time period. If the solar system had passed through a gigantic cloud of space dust over a long period of time, there would be signs on both the Earth and moon that this had happened.

    What is the greatest depth that man has penetrated? To date, this is a depth of about 7.5 miles (the Russian Kola Superdeep Borehole). (The deepest ocean depth is 6.22 miles.) [The Deepest Hole by Alan Bellows – from]

    In the Kola hole only micro fossils were found, indicative, but not conclusive, that at this depth that life forms were not very advanced, and they long preceded the dinosaurs. It can therefore be argued that all life-form fossils are likely to be contained in the outer 10 miles of the Earth’s crust. We have the situation that any increase in the Earth’s diameter apart from a (possible) 10 mile skin, must have occurred below the Earth’s crust.

    The Earth/Moon gravitational attraction exerts billions of tons of stress force on the Earth.

    For the Moon this not much of a problem, because this force is relatively constant, the Moon keeping one face always towards the Earth. Note that there are statements on some technical sites that the Moon suffers from ‘tidal stresses’ due to its interaction with Earth. This is extremely unlikely as the tidal effect would require that the Moon rotates relative to the gravitational forces, which does not happen with the Moon, although there are some tidal stresses due to the Sun but these are quite small. Note; There is a ‘tidal’ affect due to the small oscillation of the moon relative to Earth but this is too small to be significant.

    On Earth the force sweeps across the Earth’s surface creating varying stresses, not just on the seas causing the tides, but also on the land surfaces.

    These ‘land tides’ are lifting and dropping the Earth’s crust every 24 hours.

    The crust doesn’t lift as much as the water, the crust being a lot heavier than the water, and doesn’t have the same flexibility. Without this flexibility the crust is subjected to enormous stresses.

    As the crust lifts, water and gases and many other elements are sucked under the crust. As the crust falls these are subject to very high pressures that can change their atomic structure. Gases will be liquefied, sand and silt will be compressed into a rock like consistency, helped by the high temperatures and pressures. (Note: – At a depth of 7 miles the Russians found that the rock became plastic and tended to seal the borehole up again.)

    This happens every day, 365 days per year. If we say that 1 million tons/day are treated this way, this means that 365,000,000,000 tons are added under the Earth’s crust every 1000 years.

    Note: – The microfossils found by the Russians could have been drawn in their position due to the above actions, their small size enabling them to pass through small crevices without difficulty.

    In 64 million years a total of = 23,360,000,000,000,000,000 tons would be added below the Earth’s crust!

    Note that 1 million tons/day is a very conservative guess; it should be a considerable amount more than that. (This equates to about 0.6kgs for every square kilometre of the Earth’s land area, a very miserly amount.

    We only need an average lift in the Earth’s crust of less than 0.001mm to arrive at the above figures.)

    Note; I have found various figures for the actual crust lift on Earth, one sensible one being being about 13centimetres.

    It should be remembered that although the Earth’s gravity 64 million years ago may have been half of what it is today. it is doubtful that the Moon has changed much in that time. This means that the Earth’s crust would weigh approximately half of what it weighs now and therefore the lift on the earth’s would be much greater many millions of years ago..


    Some of you may be considering that if all this liquid and silt etc was sucked under the crust on the crust lifting, then it would all be forced out when it drops. It just doesn’t work that way. Under suction the flow is made easier because the material at the suction end is cleared first, making way for the following material. Under pressure the inertia of the silt and liquids drastically reduces the flow, in a similar way that happens with a sink plunger. A sink blockage is usually cleared on the upstroke (suction), the down-stroke (pressure) only compressing the blockage and making it worse.

    If you have worked on vacuum systems you will realise how difficult it is to seal against vacuum. A joint that will retain pressures of 5.000psi will leak like a sieve under a vacuum of a few pounds. [See Understanding Pressure and Vacuum]

    Also, we are not considering huge apertures under the crust, but billions of small cracks and cavities through which liquids and silt will travel through quite quickly under suction. This acts like a one-way valve (Non-return valve) allowing material to pass under the crust but preventing its return.

    Is there another option?

    It would be possible for the Earth’s gravity to increase without adding much to the Earth’s diameter. This would depend on how the effect of the Moons gravity acted deeper within the Earth. If we consider that the Earth is a huge butter churn, with the core as the butter, the churning action would tend to create very heavy material under the high temperatures and pressure. This would increase the density and therefore increase the gravitational forces.

    Scientists have a hypothesis that the Moon was a lot closer to Earth in the past. If so, the gravitational forces would be a lot higher and the effects would happen more rapidly. However the evidence is rather weak. It should be remembered that the geological sciences are at a very early stage and evidence is very sketchy. Most published information is based on very weak hypotheses, (very much like mine on this subject, but I am at least trying to find a way through the confusion).

    The Russian scientists were confused at what was found in the Kola hole, which was not as expected by the present hypotheses about the structure of the Earth. When considering the billions spent on geological research to find oil, it is obvious that current knowledge is extremely limited even to just a few miles below the Earth’s surface. Yet we are constantly presented with hypotheses masquerading as facts. The Kola hole showed that the scientists were wrong about the Earth’s structure at a depth of 7 miles,  only 0.00175% of the Earth’s diameter. We really don’t know anything about the structure of the Earth.

    Unfortunately, this lack of knowledge is then applied to the other planets in the solar system, of which we know even less.

    Yes, I am aware that you want to know where all the material came from to build up the Earth. At this stage I will just say that it comes from the same source that created the suns and stars, and is in ample supply.  Hydrogen has been claimed to have been ‘discovered’  in a few places, but the fact that rest of space itself is not a vacuum means that there must be something there. Note;- I have serious doubts about the accuracy of optical experiments relating to colour, especially relating to optical spectra. The physicists interpretations of optical phenomena are quite ludicrous in many cases, as demonstrated elsewhere on this web site. The Fraunhofer lines in spectra are certainly not caused in the way stated by physicists, and these are the main ‘proof’ of their hypotheses.

    NOTE:-SEE ALSO STEPHEN HURRELL’s WEB SITE Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth, that I have just spotted on the web. (2nd September 2010).

    At present his web site has a lot of the background information on this subject and is certainly worth visiting, (and no, he is not paying for saying this.) (13/05/2011)

    Extract from BBC News 4th Jan 2011



    Extract from

    Dinosaurs and the Ancient Earth:

    Science Avoiding a Mystery by G. Lee Zimmerman, PhD (

    Originally written October 2006

    In the summer of 1972, a graduate student from the University of Texas, Douglas A. Lawson, made a discovery in Big Bend National Park. He found the fragmentary fossilized remains of a wing. It belonged to a giant pteranodon — twice the size of any previously found. This beast was probably the largest flying animal that had ever lived. It had a conservatively estimated wingspan of 15.5 meters (about 50 feet) – about half the wingspan of a Boeing 737.[1]

    Lawson published his findings in 1975 and immediately started a controversy. Aeronautical engineers had recently shown that the physics of flight set a hard limit on the size of a flying animal. They had calculated the maximum limit was a 25 foot wingspan and a body weight under fifty pounds. According to this, if an animal were larger, it simply couldn’t fly.[2]

    This limit seems to ring true. The heaviest bird able to fly today is the great bustard. It can weigh up to 46 pounds but can only stay aloft for very short time, much like a chicken. The longest wingspan of a bird living today is the albatross, a little over 11 feet from tip to tip. One of the largest creatures able to take wing today—the Berkut eagles of Kirghiz, Russia—weigh a maximum of 20 pounds with a 7-foot wingspan. Tellingly, at this size, the Berkut eagle can only take off from flat ground with great difficulty. It has been bred close to the point at which flying creatures need more musculature for flying than they are able to carry.

    Britain also feels the effects of earthquakes in the North Sea. Here, the crust is much thinner and it is also marked by large numbers of faults.

    The earth beneath our feet is never completely static. The crust is constantly on the move. For example, much of the UK is still rebounding after the melting of the great mass of ice that covered the country thousands of years ago.

    And even on a daily basis, the crust will move up and down by many millimetres as the tides roll around the island nation.

    The Deepest dinosaur bone Ever Found

    From the News 24/04/2011

    To claim the country’s first dinosaur discovery, Norwegians had to dig more than a mile down.

    An oil drilling operation uncovered the knuckle-bone of a Plateosaurus. Well, actually, the knuckle-bone is now crushed. And it’s not actually in Norway proper, but below the North Sea.

    Whatever the case, it’s a neat piece of record-setting, accidental paleontology. The fossil is the deepest dinosaur remain ever found. The knuckle-bone was found in a hollow gravewithin sediment 1.4 miles (2,256 meters) below the seabed. The area was once dry plains with rivers running through them.

    Researchers said it’s quite possible there are many more fossils down there.

    The finding was announced today by the Research Council of Norway. The work was led by Jorn Hurum, said to be Norway’s only dinosaur researcher.

    Comments From Brian.

    North Sea Max Depth = 2300ft = 700 metres, Average depth = 312 ft. = 95 metres.

    Therefore the fossil was found at a depth of

    A, 2.256 + 700 = 2.956 km below present day sea levels.


    B, 2.256+ 95 = 2.361 km below present day sea levels.

    There is enough evidence to say that the present North Sea was dry land long after the demise of the dinosaurs. The bone “was found in a hollow grave within sediment It could therefore have arrived there by being sucked under the crust in the same way as previously stated.

    Obviously, if they find a complete dinosaur at the same depth this would present a problem. I cannot visualise a complete 9 metre dinosaur passing through 13 mm crevice.

    Author, Brian Williams


    General Interest Dinosaurs, Expanding Earth, vacuum

  • The Hero

    Posted on September 26th, 2010 Brian No comments


    At a fund-raising dinner for a school that teaches children with learning disabilities, the father of one of the students delivered a speech that would never be forgotten by all who attended.

    After praising the school and its dedicated staff, he offered a question:

    ”When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does, is done with perfection. Yet my son, Shay, cannot learn things as other children do. He cannot understand things as other children do. Where is the natural order of things in my son?”
    The audience was stilled by the query.

    The father continued. “I believe that when a child like Shay, who was mentally and physically disabled comes into the world, an opportunity to realize true human nature presents itself, and it comes in the way other people treat that child.”

    Then he told the following story:

    Shay and I had walked past a park where some boys Shay knew were playing baseball. Shay asked, “Do you think they’ll let me play?”

    I knew that most of the boys would not want someone like Shay on their team, but as a father I also understood that if my son were allowed to play, it would give him a much-needed sense of belonging and some confidence to be accepted by others in spite of his handicaps.

    I approached one of the boys on the field and asked (not expecting much) if Shay could play. The boy looked around for guidance and said, “ We’re losing by six runs and the game is in the eighth innings. I guess he can be on our team and we’ll try to put him in to bat in the ninth innings.”

    Shay struggled over to the team’s bench and, with a broad smile, put on a team shirt. I watched with a small tear in my eye and warmth in my heart.

    The boys saw my joy at my son being accepted. In the bottom of the eighth innings, Shay’s team scored a few runs but was still behind by three.

    In the top of the ninth innings, Shay put on a glove and played in the right field. Even though no hits came his way, he was obviously ecstatic just to be in the game and on the field, grinning from ear to ear as I waved to him from the stands.

    In the bottom of the ninth innings, Shay’s team scored again. Now, with two outs and the bases loaded, the potential winning run was on base and Shay was scheduled to be next at bat.

    At this juncture, do they let Shay bat and give away their chance to win the game?

    Surprisingly, Shay was given the bat. Everyone knew that a hit was all but impossible because Shay didn’t even know how to hold the bat properly, much less connect with the ball. However, as Shay stepped up to the plate, the pitcher, recognizing that the other team was putting winning aside for this moment in Shay’s life, moved in a few steps to lob the ball in softly so Shay could at least make contact.

    The first pitch came and Shay swung clumsily and missed. The pitcher again took a few steps forward to toss the ball softly towards Shay.

    As the pitch came in, Shay swung at the ball and hit a slow ground ball right back to the pitcher.

    The game would now be over.

    The pitcher picked up the soft grounder and could have easily thrown the ball to the first baseman.

    Shay would have been out and that would have been the end of the game.

    Instead, the pitcher threw the ball right over the first baseman’s head, out of reach of all team- mates.

    Everyone from the stands and both teams started yelling, ”Shay, run to first! Run to first!”

    Never in his life had Shay ever run that far, but he made it to first base.

    He scampered down the baseline, wide-eyed and startled.

    Everyone yelled, “Run to second, run to second!”

    Catching his breath, Shay awkwardly ran towards second, gleaming and struggling to make it to the base.

    By the time Shay rounded towards second base, the right fielder had the ball, the smallest guy on their team, and who now had his first chance to be the hero for his team.

    He could have thrown the ball to the second-baseman for the tag, but he understood the pitcher’s intentions so he, too, intentionally threw the ball high and far over the third-baseman’s head.
    Shay ran toward third base deliriously as the runners ahead of him circled the bases toward home.

    All were screaming, “Shay, Shay, Shay, all the Way Shay”.
    Shay reached third base because the opposing shortstop ran to help him by turning him in the direction of third base, and shouted,

    Run to third! Shay, run to third!”

    As Shay rounded third, the boys from both teams, and the spectators were on their feet screaming, “Shay, run home! Run home!”

    Shay ran to home, stepped on the plate, and was cheered as the hero who hit the grand slam and won the game for his team.

    That day”, said the father softly with tears now rolling down his face, “ the boys from both teams helped bring a piece of true love and humanity into this world ”.

    Shay didn’t make it to another summer. He died that winter, having never forgotten being the hero and making me so happy, and coming home and seeing his Mother tearfully embrace her little hero of the day!

    This came by e-Mail, original source unknown, I have re-typed it to ensure that it is clean. No other comments necessary, but it may help you in some strange way.


  • Intellectual Rights

    Posted on September 21st, 2010 Brian No comments

    The author claims full intellectual rights for the technical contents of this web site, with the exception of those parts that are clearly marked as originated by others or are generally in the public domain.

    Graphics are copyright, having been created by the author, but are usable by readers unless to be republished. In that case the author must be contacted before use.

    All articles under general interest (Unless advised otherwise) are copyright of the author.


    Note that the photograph used in the post ” Dense Media” is of unknown (to me) origin, and any republication of this could cause legal problems.  I have cropped the photograph quite severely to enable the originator to prove ownership rights.)

    The two photographs in “How physicists ‘Find’ their particles” are public domain, but are also used for ‘critical analysis’.

    Note; Critical Analysis allows the use of extracts of published works to demonstrate faults in logic or statements made by the original author.

    The photograph in “Brownian Motion” is copyright of the author.

    NOTE; Attempts by others to claim authorship for articles on this web site would only be treated in contempt and derision by most of the World countries.

    Author – Brian Williams.

  • Understanding Vacuum and Pressure.

    Posted on September 12th, 2010 Brian No comments

    Understanding mechanics is nothing to do with mathematics, it is the reality of what is actually happening and why it is happening.

    A vacuum is the complete absence of any gas or any other substance that could exert a pressure. A diamond in a vacuum chamber would not effect the vacuum in any way. Most other substances and gases would. Note: Total absence of pressure has never been achieved.

    Luckily we very rarely have to consider such a tight meaning, because we are usually only considering a partial vacuum and its effects. Note that intergalactic space is not a vacuum, it is just at a much lower pressure than we are used to. If it was a vacuum our atmosphere would disappear like dust up a vacuum cleaner hose.

    Note:- The reason we retain our atmosphere is that although you would expect it to be sucked into the partial vacuum of space, this is balanced by the gravitational force of the Earth acting on the gases forming our atmosphere.

    I have worked on the design of pressure systems operating up to 30.000 pounds per square inch, (including B.O.P s and other oil and gas equipment, to be topical.)  but the problems of designing vacuum systems is a lot more difficult, especially considering we are only dealing with a maximum pressure difference of about 14 pounds per square inch. This indicates that something strange happens at low pressures.

    Very low pressure systems are difficult to make and costly to run. The difficulty is due to the problems of sealing against leaks. Joints that seal perfectly at pressures of 10,000 pounds per square inch may leak like a sieve under very low pressures. Materials of the vessels  themselves will leak under vacuum, meaning that special materials must be used. Even with the best materials there is some leakage, which means that the vacuum pumps must be run continually to sustain any vacuum attained.

    At low pressures, atoms and molecules that retain their stability at normal atmospheric pressure, begin to act oddly. As the pressure reduces they expand. (They are a in compressed state whilst a normal pressure.) This expansion means that the they take up more space in the containing vessel and also weigh less,. (The mass decreases, but please note that the individual atoms/molecules still have the same mass, but there will now be less of them taking up the same space, therefore the weight for each cubic centimetre is less)

    Note:- Removing the atoms/molecules is rather like removing a flock of sheep from a field. Initially you have no difficulty removing large groups of them, but as the numbers reduce you have difficulty in rounding up the few remaining ones.

    Why does a partial vacuum work better than pressure in certain cases?

    Normally you are taught that a suction pump operates due to the pressure difference, and that by removing the pressure on the suction side, the the atmospheric pressure forces the gas or liquid to move. In general, this is a working principle that includes most normal situations.

    However, consider a pipe with a suction pump at one end, the other end lying in a tank of sludge. When you switch on the pump the partial vacuum at the pump end allows the liquid at that end to expand and become lighter, making it easier to move and it will start to move through the pump. This expansion of the fluid will in itself cause some of the fluid to pass through the pump.

    The expansion effect will pass back through the pipe until the effect of the reduced pressure reaches the sludge tank, when atmospheric pressure takes over. Even if you close off the pipe at the sludge tank end, the liquid expansion will still continue until you stop the pump.

    This is why, when attempting to unblock the sink, it is the upstroke that finally clears the blockage, the expansion of the water molecules effectively breaking up the blockage. The downwards pressure of the plunger in most cases applying far more force on the blockage than the differential pressure set up by suction, but in most cases without shifting it.

    Another apparently strange thing is that a car tyre with 30 psi pressure in it will stay up for years  (Mine don,t). However, if you place it in a vacuum chamber at (say) 8psi absolute, it will leak. This not due to the increased pressure difference, (cars tyres can take a considerably higher pressure than that without leaking) but due to the atom/molecule changes under low pressures.

    Note:- To be effective suction pumps should be of the positive displacement type. Vacuum cleaners, water pumps etcetera. are only capable of creating a relatively small vacuum effect.  A sink plunger creates a far more effective vacuum.
    A problem with many pumping systems which use non-positive displacement pumps is cavitation, which has the same cause, creating vapour or gas within the pump, which ceases to run correctly or even not work at all.


    The old washing machines that used a central paddle arrangement that moved one way and then the other way, depended on vacuum for their cleaning efficiency. When the paddles reversed direction a partial vacuum was created which sucked water through the washing. Later washing machines are unable to do this and although the wet washing gets moved about, only a very small amount of water actually passes through the washing. Unfortunately the old system generally required top loading which is difficult to fit in modern kitchens.

    Also read Dinosurs and the Expanding Earth – 2 -The Earth Mechanics

    Author – Brian Williams


    Posted on September 1st, 2010 Brian No comments

    This site has only two primary functions,

    1. To sell my book.
    2. To disseminate scientific knowledge.

    I am not interested in selling other products or services and I will not have any advertising for other products or services on my site.  To maintain the integrity of this site even family web sites are excluded even though I trust them.

    At one time goods sold due to their obvious good quality, and generally by recommendations from other people.

    My spam detector is fairly fierce but I occasionally rescue a comment from the scrap bin.

    Any subtle attempts to pass spam through are checked by me. If they have something of interest despite being spam, I delete all sales or spam content and publish. The only changes I ever make to text is to correct any spelling mistakes or faulty grammar. In other word what you see on my site is what I received less the spam. Most of the spam I receive at present is pornography  related (which is rather sad really).

    On bad days when a lot of spam arrives I will check for technical comments and just delete the remainder.  (It takes a lot of time to check out the validity of comments. They have to be copied to another computer, converted to text only format to check for embedded nasties, web sites checked and e-mail addresses verified)

    Generally, if you are posting comments from an obviously commercial web site, the chances are that they will deleted. If comments are posted that are obviously just ‘standard’ comments, then again they will probably be deleted.

    If you send comments through your own web site and your web site includes adverts for pornography or obvious scams, they are automatically deleted, because by allowing this type of advertising you have become part of the world-wide web’s worst problem.

    Preferred comments are for or against the contents of my posts from a technical point of view. Both types will be given the same importance and are very helpful, both to me and the readers. Any other type of comment will be published if I think it of interest or amusing. Many comments have to be deleted because I have been unable to read the contents due to my limited command of foreign languages and I have been unable to get them translated. Most Spam is deleted before I see it.

    Comments relating to help relating to computer related problems on this web site should be submitted through the ‘HELP PAGE’, this ensures that readers who need help and readers who are able to help, have a forum.

    Technical queries relating to to the web site content I am happy to answer.