关于方励之教授的学术# Joke - 肚皮舞运动
d*f
1 楼
On the academic work of Professor L. Z. Fang
Dear T. M.:
Thank you very much for forwarding the articles on the late Professor L. Z.
Fang in memorial of him. I am very ignorant on politics. So, I cannot really
comment on his activities on politics. However, as many oversea Chinese, I
come to know that he is known for his advocating of academic freedom and
democracy. However, as a scientist, I cannot say things that are really
positive on his work in science.
I first knew about Professor Fang through an article of my classmate
Professor Au, who has coauthored the article with Fang [1]. This article
clearly showed Fang's deficiency in general relativity and physics [2]. I
met L. Z. Fang in 1991 in Japan. Professor L. Z. Fang impressed me as a very
good speaker for a general public, but I was puzzled for his lack of depth
as a scholar in private conversations.
Academically as many theorists in cosmology, Professor L. Z. Fang followed
the views of the Wheeler School and the work of Hawking & Penrose, both of
which have been proven incorrect. In fact, I have personally asked him again
later in 2007 about general relativity, and discovered that he still does
not understand general relativity. His earlier book coauthored with Ruffini
on general relativity confirms this clearly. He did get a reward for an
article from a foundation on gravity that always keeps the names of judges
for the awards undisclosed; and this is also a foundation that advocated the
erroneous views of the Wheeler School.
In particular, he misunderstood Einstein's equivalence principle, and the
work of Professor Zhou Pei-Yuan on general relativity. His view made me
misunderstood the work of Zhou for a long time. Fang’s view probably also
has an impact on the error of C. N. Yang, who incorrectly considered Zhou
was wrong in general relativity. Based on what I know, I concluded that
Professor Fang’s academic achievements are greatly inflated because his
essentially follows the popular errors. I doubt whether he had anything that
can be considered as significant in science in the future.
I am sorry that I may have disappointed you.
Best regards.
C. Y. Lo
p.s. My recent paper, "Rectification of General Relativity, Errors and
Distortions of the Wheeler School" is attached for your perusal.
Reference:
1. C. Au, L. Z. Fang, & F. T. To, in Proc. 7th Marcel Grossmann Meeting
On Gen. Relat., Stanford, 1994, ser. ed. R. Ruffini, 289 (World Sci.,
Singapore, 1996).
2. C. Y. Lo, Physics Essays, vol. 13, no. 4 (2000).
Dear T. M.:
Thank you very much for forwarding the articles on the late Professor L. Z.
Fang in memorial of him. I am very ignorant on politics. So, I cannot really
comment on his activities on politics. However, as many oversea Chinese, I
come to know that he is known for his advocating of academic freedom and
democracy. However, as a scientist, I cannot say things that are really
positive on his work in science.
I first knew about Professor Fang through an article of my classmate
Professor Au, who has coauthored the article with Fang [1]. This article
clearly showed Fang's deficiency in general relativity and physics [2]. I
met L. Z. Fang in 1991 in Japan. Professor L. Z. Fang impressed me as a very
good speaker for a general public, but I was puzzled for his lack of depth
as a scholar in private conversations.
Academically as many theorists in cosmology, Professor L. Z. Fang followed
the views of the Wheeler School and the work of Hawking & Penrose, both of
which have been proven incorrect. In fact, I have personally asked him again
later in 2007 about general relativity, and discovered that he still does
not understand general relativity. His earlier book coauthored with Ruffini
on general relativity confirms this clearly. He did get a reward for an
article from a foundation on gravity that always keeps the names of judges
for the awards undisclosed; and this is also a foundation that advocated the
erroneous views of the Wheeler School.
In particular, he misunderstood Einstein's equivalence principle, and the
work of Professor Zhou Pei-Yuan on general relativity. His view made me
misunderstood the work of Zhou for a long time. Fang’s view probably also
has an impact on the error of C. N. Yang, who incorrectly considered Zhou
was wrong in general relativity. Based on what I know, I concluded that
Professor Fang’s academic achievements are greatly inflated because his
essentially follows the popular errors. I doubt whether he had anything that
can be considered as significant in science in the future.
I am sorry that I may have disappointed you.
Best regards.
C. Y. Lo
p.s. My recent paper, "Rectification of General Relativity, Errors and
Distortions of the Wheeler School" is attached for your perusal.
Reference:
1. C. Au, L. Z. Fang, & F. T. To, in Proc. 7th Marcel Grossmann Meeting
On Gen. Relat., Stanford, 1994, ser. ed. R. Ruffini, 289 (World Sci.,
Singapore, 1996).
2. C. Y. Lo, Physics Essays, vol. 13, no. 4 (2000).
