With these 184 additional citations h remains the same at 33, and g goes up from 68 to 70. This is illustrates a well known weakness of the h index, in that it is not affected by a few highly cited items. The h index is the number n of items that have been cited n or more times. It is entirely arbitrary, but has been taken up as a fashionable number. The g index is the number m of items such that the total number of citations added together of the m items is m squared. So a g of seventy means that the seventy items have generated a total of not less than 4,900 citations. The g is another fashionable number at present. Remarkably enough both h and g have been taken seriously as a measure of funding, tenure and promotion. My own data base is far more detailed, and such a data base should be used for funding, promotion, hiring and tenure. No one has yet constructed a data base anywhere near as complete as mine. It is this data base that shows the tremendous impact of my work and also that of AIAS colleagues. Without it I am still among the world’s leading chemists and physicists, but with it there is no doubt as to the objective impact, placing me at number one in terms of this impact. Another problem with h and g is that citations are often made without reading the original. For example, who read Hawking’s original papers? My data base records only actual readings. The data base is kindly woven into the pdf files of this blog by AIAS Fellow Michael Jackson, and the pdf files are archived quarterly at the British Library in London from the National Library of Wales in Aberystwyth. The next archive is scheduled for about Dec. 7th.
Archive for November, 2012
This book is well worth purchasing, recommending for libraries and course books. It has already been cited 184 times since it was published in 2007 by Abramis Academic of Suffolk (Google Scholar). It is:
Laurence G. Felker, “The Evans Equations of Unified Field Theory” (Abramis Academic, Suffolk, 2007).
I strongly recommend this biography for libraries and courses, not because it is about me, but because it is well written and contains a lot of other science history very well analysed. The book details are on www.cisp-publishing.com and on the home page of www.aias.us. The unique scientometric data base (see previous posting of this blog) shows that the interest in ECE is permanent and www.aias.us is archived quarterly at the British Library.
In a message dated 29/11/2012 22:11:36 GMT Standard Time, writes:
Einstein’s miracle year was 1905, whereas yours was 2003. It took a decade or so for the importance of Einstein’s work to be recognized by other scientists apart from Max Planck.
We are running in parallel a century or so later. We are no doubt on a cusp of full recognition by scientists around the world.
An account of this is given in the biography of MWE and the index, preface and introduction have been posted on the aias website.
This is found as usual at the end of the updated overview file (attached), recording very intense interest in all the best relevant universities, institutes and similar worldwide. For November to date there have been 18,770 distinct visits, each can be a multiple number of real visits, 82,043 files downloaded (hits), 53,504 page views, 10.902 gigabytes downloaded, 2,566 documents read or heard from 98 countries, led by USA, Mexico, Germany, Canada, Argentina, Ukraine, Australia, Britain, France, China, ……… This is only 2% of the unprecedented total impact. So this is why I am about the world number one in impact at present, and AIAS the leading institute. These are much more detailed and conclusive scientometrics than citation, h and g indices and total number of papers. So congratulations once again to the AIAS staff. The returns from www.atomicprecision.com and www.upitec.org add an estimated 50% to these figures. The final returns for November 2012 will be in tomorrow.
There were 3311 hits from 641 distinct visits, 39% spiders from baidu, google MSN, yandex, sistrix and choopa. CEFE90, CEFEL77, FPL25, LMEP16. Argentine National Technical University at La Plata UFT170(Sp); University of Quebec Trois Rivieres UFT232; University of Paderborn UFT114; Polytechnic University of the Litoral Ecuador UFT170(Sp); Boston University UFT170; Columbia University UFT46; Miami University Oxford Ohio UFT43; San Diego Supercomputer Center advances made in UFT122, …; Human Resource Center University of Chicago UFT214-b; Electrical Engineering University of California Los Angeles UFT81; University of Missouri Kansas City UFT168, UFT170; University of Southern California UFT102; Yale University UFT186; University of Barcelona UFT144; Spanish Parliament (Xunta) UFT146, UFT147 (Sp); Civil Society Research Portal Jyvaskyla University Finland flowcharts, UFT1, UFT183, UFT175; University of Poitiers general; Mathematics University of Rennes 1 UFT88, UFT109; Los Alamos National Laboratory UFT18; Trinity College Dublin, Reply to ‘t Hooft; European Space Agency Operations Centre overview of ECE theory; Libero Italy GF Basics; Guanajuato University Mexico F5(Sp); Sonora University Mexico F4(Sp); Arequipa Technical University Peru F4(Sp); National University of Singapore UFT177; Iyte University Turkey Essay24; Mathematics National Taiwan University UFT88. Intense interest all sectors, updated usage file attached for November.
The Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics has made these available for ten members of staff. The h index runs from 8 to 16, the g index from 16 to 42, citations from 244 to 1842, number of publications from 30 to 388. These compare with my g = 68 , h = 33, about a thousand publications, about seven thousand citations (Google Scholar). So AIAS is very much up there with the world leaders. In terms of detailed scientometrics it is the number one institute of advanced studies, including Princeton and Perimeter, Dublin Institute and so on. Other institutes and groups have not taken the time to build up a data bank of my type. It becomes very clear now why this data bank is so important and why I spend time and care to build it up.
In terms of number of publications I am probably in the top five in the world of chemistry and physics. In terms of impact measured with much more accurate feedback scientometrics I am the number one in the world at present. The more traditional measures are the h and g indices and number of citations. Here I am in the top few in the world. For example Hawking has published 425 articles compared with my thousand or so, has 11935 citations compared with my seven thousand, a g index of 108 compared with my 68 and an h index of 46 compared with my 33. Harold Scheraga at Cornell has 827 publications, 9778 citations, g index of 69 and h index of 41. A highly ranked British scientist such as Gary Gibbon at Cambridge has 481 publications, 5497 citations, g of 62 and h of 40. My h and g indices are likely to increase quite a lot over the next few years. Hawking’s work is largely obsolete, while ECE is just starting its run in historic terms. Higgs is way out of the running, with very few publications and low h and g indices.
They could try to argue that the true Newtonian ellipse does not go into a true precessing ellipse, or why should it and so on. That argument fails by Ockham’s Razor, the simpler of the two theories is the one based on the true precessing ellipse. For hundreds of years astronomers have referred to the precession of a perihelion as the precession of an ellipse, ever since Kepler inferred the elliptical orbit of Mars. The simplest precession of any function of the polar angle theta is caused simply by multiplying theta by x. The resulting function for the ellipse is the true precessing ellipse for ALL x. Also, it turns out that any small perturbation of Newtonian dynamics produces a small precession, but none of those precessions are those of a true precessing ellipse. So EGR is one out of an infinite number of theories that would produce a small precession, but none of them would give the true precessing ellipse. This is a well behaved mathematical function for all x, r and theta, while EGR gives a badly behaved unphysical orbit by direct numerical integration. Dogma can make people believe anything at all. Logic is rigorous.
Hello Horst: OK thanks, we are on a steep sided valley and up here it is never flooded. The river can get flooded though and the streams running off the mountains into it. In my youth here the river was often black, because it washed away coal from a tip as described in volume one of my autobiography. You could walk from one end of South Wales to another in those days underground, in the coal mines. However I was told by my family never to go down the mines.
In a message dated 29/11/2012 09:58:12 GMT Standard Time writes:
I heard in the News that there are floodings in Wales. Is your area affected? As far as I remember Craigcefnparc is situated at a hill so it may not be so serious for you hopefully.
This is UFT232 Sections 1 and 2 with background notes, giving further multiple simple refutations of Einsteinian general relativity and replacing it with the precessing conical section orbits. In all I would guess that various distinguished authors have produced fifty or sixty definitive refutations of EGR in the past century or so.