<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 2:02 AM Giulio Prisco via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:</span><br></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> <i></i></span><i>"Although Penrose praises the new work, he thinks it’s not really</i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-style:italic;font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> </span><i>possible to test his version of the model.</i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><i> </i>[...] </span><i> He has spent the pandemic lockdown creating a new and</i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-style:italic;font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> </span><i>improved model. “It doesn’t produce a heating or radiation,"</i></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4">It's usually a bad sign when the creator of a theory starts adding epicycles and other complications to his previous simpler theory<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> when experiments show that the simpler unmodified theory just doesn't work. </span></font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> John K Clark</span> </font></div></div></div>