Re: Articles on Adelman and E=mc(2)

[zimm@alumni.caltech.edu (Mark Edward Zimmerman)]

re Hal Puthoff et al.'s "unconventional" theories on the nature of
matter, tnx for pointer to article, but a caveat: they are very
probably wrong, as are virtually all such attempts to overturn big
chunks of physics.  Does the article mention that Hal is most famous
for his SRI work on remote viewing & spoonbender/magician Uri Geller
some years ago?  That doesn't disprove his current notions (and I've
tried to read some of his technical papers, which he occasionally gets
published in mainstream peer-reviewed physics journals, but I don't
have the time or talent to poke holes in them; my Ph.D. is in
astrophysics and general relativity) but perhaps raises some
questions, if you're a skeptic by nature....

To give this msg a wee bit of crypto content, any news on the "quantum
cryptography" front?  Although that subject does seem to me to be
legitimate physics, my current perception is that it's almost entirely
an intellectual exercise, and that the proposed applications
(key-distribution or the like) are contrived examples without
plausible real-world use (and with many security holes to boot).  Am I
wrong?

Best,  ^z  (Mark "no relation" Zimmermann)