by **Joy Christian** » Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:33 am

Heinera wrote:I see that Richard Gill is still [trying to refute] your paper on the internet (as the only one who bothers to do this). I agree that he must have some issues.

I couldn't agree more. Richard D. Gill seems to have some serious psychological problems. But some participants of this forum already knew that from our past interactions with him here.

He has no expertise or peer-reviewed publication record in geometric algebra, division algebras, differential geometry, topology, fiber bundles, or general relativity on which my papers are founded. Consequently, his mistakes and misunderstandings are easy to recognize. Since there are no mistakes in my latest paper whatsoever, let alone "mathematical mistakes", it is not surprising that no one with required expertise in Geometric Algebra has published a criticism of my work (or supported Gill's claims of mistakes in it) even though he has been relentlessly trying to undermine it for the past eight years all over the Internet. On the contrary, to date there have been at least 1,941 PDF downloads of my published paper according to the official records of the Royal Society of London:

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/ ... ticle-infoNot to mention additional PDF downloads of my paper from the physics arXiv, Academia.Edu, ReseachGate, and LinkedIn websites. Surely, with more than 2,000 PDF downloads of the paper, someone with the required expertise would have noticed the alleged mistakes claimed by Gill.

***

[quote="Heinera"]I see that Richard Gill is still [trying to refute] your paper on the internet (as the only one who bothers to do this). I agree that he must have some issues. [/quote]

I couldn't agree more. Richard D. Gill seems to have some serious psychological problems. But some participants of this forum already knew that from our past interactions with him here.

He has no expertise or peer-reviewed publication record in geometric algebra, division algebras, differential geometry, topology, fiber bundles, or general relativity on which my papers are founded. Consequently, his mistakes and misunderstandings are easy to recognize. Since there are no mistakes in my latest paper whatsoever, let alone "mathematical mistakes", it is not surprising that no one with required expertise in Geometric Algebra has published a criticism of my work (or supported Gill's claims of mistakes in it) even though he has been relentlessly trying to undermine it for the past eight years all over the Internet. On the contrary, to date there have been at least 1,941 PDF downloads of my published paper according to the official records of the Royal Society of London:

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/5/5/180526.article-info

Not to mention additional PDF downloads of my paper from the physics arXiv, Academia.Edu, ReseachGate, and LinkedIn websites. Surely, with more than 2,000 PDF downloads of the paper, someone with the required expertise would have noticed the alleged mistakes claimed by Gill.

***