Only read the first few pages, but as a non-physicist, but who went through grad school, it appears the author is advertising their own prior work quite a bit. I generally associate this behavior with a) cranks b) stubborn people who lost an ideological turf battle
> it appears the author is advertising their own prior work quite a bit
Not only that, but it's prior work that is based on a false premise. The author's proposed "solution" is based on Unruh radiation, but Unruh radiation is zero for an object in a free-fall orbit. To get nonzero Unruh radiation, you need proper acceleration, i.e., some non-gravitational force has to be acting on the object. Unless the author is claiming that Proxima Centauri has a rocket attached to it, his model fails at step one. I believe other physicists have pointed this out but the author prefers not to mention or address this criticism.
Comments
Only read the first few pages, but as a non-physicist, but who went through grad school, it appears the author is advertising their own prior work quite a bit. I generally associate this behavior with a) cranks b) stubborn people who lost an ideological turf battle
> it appears the author is advertising their own prior work quite a bit
Not only that, but it's prior work that is based on a false premise. The author's proposed "solution" is based on Unruh radiation, but Unruh radiation is zero for an object in a free-fall orbit. To get nonzero Unruh radiation, you need proper acceleration, i.e., some non-gravitational force has to be acting on the object. Unless the author is claiming that Proxima Centauri has a rocket attached to it, his model fails at step one. I believe other physicists have pointed this out but the author prefers not to mention or address this criticism.