Major UK & International author forced to self-publish in States

[Ransom]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Yeah...what has science ever brought us anyway?

People call it things like the idiotnet and the wierd wide web because last time I checked there were 3,800,000 google hits for "space alien", 210,000,000 hits for "UFO", 9,390,000 hits for "kabbalah", 13,800,000 hits for "wicca", 26,600,000 hits for Atlantis, 7,770,000 hits for "Nibiru", and 2,080,000,000 hits for "2012." Yeah, great science you'll find there. You might want to do what this site encourages you to do and actually pick up a book.

[Ransom]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

But cartoons made to explain science to children are allowed?

But you obviously didn't understand it, so....

I was under the impression that a photon gun will emit photons under a pretty narrow angle. An observation device well out of the way of a photon gun would have no effect on the photons, because it wouldn't be close enough to detect them.

But yet it does. Got any more great science you want to lay on me?

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by Ransom

How is it convenient? Do you know what the word means? Not being able to test a phenom has nothing in common with anyone's convenience. It helps no one.

I see no point trying to explain it to you. I'm sure everybody else knew what I meant.

[charleski]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Yeah...what has science ever brought us anyway?

The Aqueduct

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Ransom

Or we could stay away from the idiotnet and encyclopedias written by children and use common sense. My looking at a plane does nothing whatsoever to its course of flight.

Of course not, because you're not interacting with the plane, you are interacting with photons reflected from the plane and into your eyes. You are having a very definite effect on those photons: you are preventing them from hitting whatever is behind your head.

Originally Posted by Ransom

An observation device well out of the way of a photon gun has no effect on the photons in any world that isn't a dream world. Duh....

In order to observe the photons the device would either have to collect them (by being in the way) or alter their path so they can be collected by another detector.

If you're doing the experiment with something larger like a buckyball, and you were physically observing with light then you would be bouncing photons off the atoms and thus transferring a certain amount of energy and altering its course slightly.

How do you envisage that your proposed observation device that is well out of the way of the photon gun 'sees' the photons?

Graham

[JeremyR]

There's actually a US press that does nothing put publish books like this. Prometheus Books.

At least they did, now it looks like they are branching out into political and atheist books. And ironically, they have a SF/Fantasy imprint that does a lot of urban fantasy, or exactly what they used to debunk...

But yeah, not surprisingly, books actually about something are more popular than books that say there isn't anything

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

I see no point trying to explain it to you. I'm sure everybody else knew what I meant.

Yes, karma worthy.

Ransom and Beppe should get together, they seem to have some common ground.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Ransom

But yet it does.

That's because it isn't well out of the way of a photon gun.

Originally Posted by Ransom

Got any more great science you want to lay on me?

Sure. The wall where your cartoon character observes the interference pattern is in fact a detector. So the mere act of observing the electrons didn't do anything to them. On the other hand, placing a detector in front of the slits, did, because it interacts with the electrons.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Ransom

But yet it does....

Please detail your claim. Your responses so far show that you clearly don't understand the difference and applicability of quantum theory vs. everyday science.

[kennyc]

But, back on topic, it seems the (big) U.S. Publishers just didn't see enough of a market for this book, but certainly some of the smaller publishers would, seems he didn't want to go there though.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

But, back on topic, it seems the (big) U.S. Publishers just didn't see enough of a market for this book, but certainly some of the smaller publishers would, seems he didn't want to go there though.

The whole point was that he is an author with a history of selling a lot of books. So of course you do not want to go with a small publisher that cannot handle selling an author that sell a lot of books.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by tompe

The whole point was that he is an author with a history of selling a lot of books. So of course you do not want to go with a small publisher that cannot handle selling an author that sell a lot of books.

No that's not the whole point, it's one point. It's apparently a different type of book than he's done in the past and that changes everything, if the market research says it won't sell well then, some sales are better than none.

Of course an established author has a good chance of making it as a self-e-publisher. The more of those we can get the sooner we'll get past this stupid stone-age publishing industry.