Re: Should we have listened to the concept of Ampere rather than to that of Faraday?

Will it successful?

"mike" <m.fee@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 写入消息 
news:MPG.2304eadcf1ff34d698968a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 article <23ccd85f-66a7-4e85-9736-
fd6a5d2f482a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, bjacoby@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 says...
> On Jul 29, 1:01 pm, fitz <zeus...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Heres a person that thinks we should have.
> >
> > (Click link below:)
> >
> > http://www.rbduncan.com/schrod.htm
> >
> > This book was written by a mathematical physcist who was one of that
> > group who got us on the moon.
>
> You mean one of the group who faked the moonshot? :)
>
> It clearly is the theory of a mathematical physicist alright given
> that it is the largest load of rubbish I've ever seen.

But weren't you intrigued to attempt to understand the different nuances
that fitz was attemptinmg to apply to the text by his rather unique
typography? For example, is bold type more significant than italic? Is
red greater or lesser emphasis than green (or blue)? What about
underlining - where does that fit in the scale of emphasis? He may write
rubbish; but he does write it with brightly coloured crayons.

Mike