Mr. Pamfiloff's work, "The Order of The Forces with The Grand Unifying Theory and The Fundamental Particle," presents an entirely new approach to particle physics. His is a theory that combines an elegant, yet powerful simplicity that is consistent with all experimental evidence. He challenges the current and generally accepted theories of the Standard Model in the same way Copernicus challenged the generally accepted theories of the universe of his day.

In the case of the standard model of the universe in the early 1500's, there was a basic theory of how the stars and planets moved around the heavens. Unfortunately, each time the methods of observation improved, new contradictions to the standard model of the day were observed. Rather than question the fundamental suitability of the theory, the scientists of the day "adjusted" the model with layers upon layers of amendments, each one adding complications upon complications, wheels within wheels. Copernicus completely refuted the standard model and offered a far simpler and ultimately proven correct theory to replace it. At first, his theory was rejected, not because there were errors with it but rather because it contradicted the articles of faith and belief.

Today, the Standard Model of particle physics is a theory that has been contradicted with every advancement in the ability to look deeper into the structure of matter. Each new contradiction has been explained away with the addition of a new theoretical member, or set of members, of the particulate zoo. Rather than question the fundamental suitability of the current theory of matter and elemental forces, the scientists of today adjust the Standard Model with layers upon layers of amendments, each one adding complications upon complications, wheels within wheels. Currently, there are, I believe, 419 different elementary particles and forces that must come together to create four not-so-simple particles that have withstood the tests of time: the proton, neutron, electron, and photon. Imagine, 419 "things" required to build only four "things," and nothing is left over. It seems counter-intuitive. God must have been very busy on creation day.

Mr. Pamfiloff states that there is only one fundamental "thing," with a limited number of properties, that is required to make the four not-so-simple particles that have withstood the tests of time. He has shown how combinations of that one fundamental particle can explain all of the properties of matter and all of the forces known in the universe. He has applied his theories to the results of numerous experiments in the realm of particle physics and has found perfect matches between predictions and results. His theory is consistent with Occam's Razor that the simplest solution is usually the right one.

Unfortunately, if history is any guide, Mr. Pamfiloff's theory will be rejected, at least initially, by most of today's scientists, not because there were errors with it but rather because his theory contradicted the current articles of faith and belief. Those who refuse to consider, to test, and to fairly evaluate his theory fall into the category of those many other justly forgotten "scientists" of history who ridiculed Copernicus, Columbus, Galileo and others who challenged the dogma of their days. With luck, there may be some scientists who would rather be correct than stubborn and loud, even if they do have to backtrack a little to get on the right path.

Daniel A. Daly, Systems Scientist, Litton Data Systems (Retired)

I have just completed the reading of THE ORDER OF THE FORCES WITH THE GRAND UNIFYING THEORY AND THE FUNDAMENTAL PARTICLE and I am amazed at the brilliance of the author and his ability to explain these complex theories so clearly. "Revolutionary" is an understatement. Heretofore our experts in physics have laboured within the confinements of antiquated thinking, now we have an innovator who has presented the academic community a challenge. Will the scientists and professors be able to expand their scope? I truly doubt it! Change evolves slowly and will be resisted by ignorance, shortsightedness and self-serving arrogance. Unfortunately, I see this scholar/author long dead before this work becomes the "bible" in this field. GRAVITY, MAGNETISM: the WHY has never been explained before in any university, in any other book with this specific subjectmatter. Mr. Pamfiloff has done this and made his offer of proof. I am amazed that it has taken centuries for one man to finally find the answers. It takes vision, intelligence and courage to explore the theoretical world and to present it as a gift to mankind, knowing that the response may be rejection. Perhaps I will revise my pessimistic outlook regarding the ability of the academic community to comprehend the importance of this work. But that revision will only occur after observing their response. There is an optimistic note, however, I can see practical application for these theories which can revolutionize the world in terms of power and reduction for the dependency on fossil fuel. In these pages there is the clear hint of application; the business community will see this and there is a possibility, no, a probability that the principles will be put into action and the academic community will trudge along after the fact. I look forward to further works by Mr. Pamfiloff, or a revision of this book with substantial labratory proof which could not be ignored. I thank this author for opening my eyes and for the hope of immense progress he presents to our world.

What is the ultimate goal of a society? Two possible answers are: Work and Leisure. The goal of current US culture appears to be work, at least for the majority of people. Why shouldn't it be leisure instead?

This book, written in the very early 1960s, is still relevant today for the questions it asks, which are very neglected but of utmost importance, viz., is the "good life" solely constituted of work? This question is analyzed from a 1960s perspective so it is, sadly, fairly dated in that respect (though it is interesting in its analysis of how people spent leisure time four decades ago). The book is also a little plodding, and the argument is presented in a very disjointed and sometimes overly statistical fashion. I had to literally struggle through some of the later chapters. Nonetheless, the issues are still very relevant, and the questions De Grazia asks are still worth asking today (in fact, they may be more pressing today than they were in the 1960s).

The book does include a good historical survey of how the world has looked at leisure since the time of Aristotle. This is how the book begins, and it is completely engrossing for the first few chapters. De Grazia discusses the sticky issues surrounding leisure and slavery in a society, and outlines a history of how we have been gradually progressing "toward the work society."
This could easily have been a book in itself. Unfortunately, the book begins to drag later on. It gets bogged down in details and hard to follow arguments that contrast strongly with the book's beginning. There is, nonetheless, plenty to sink one's teeth into as the book's pace slows (the pace never stops, and it never becomes outright boring, it just doesn't maintain its momentum).

You will not get answers to any difficult questions in this book. What you will get is insight into the issues raised. In short, it is a rewarding but arduous read.

If you look at Van Gogh's My Room at Arles wondering why you wish your life were that simple... here's a 500 page explanation. It's a little hard to follow at times, often out of focus and it ends in poorly justified optimism. I'd be surprised if it helped anybody figure out whether mankind is moving forward or backward. Yet, the issue is essential in the USA, at least for those still struggling to understand the rhythms of this country. Of course, the book has a wider and deeper scope (geographically and otherwise) but you'll find you can apply its thoroughly documented (i.e., based on facts, figures, statistics and historical trends) logic to your own little world... (Where little is not used derogatorily. Non multa sed multum.) Finally, unforgivable as it may be, here's a quote that could come from this book but it doesn't: "the average American should be portrayed as a victim of the advertising and marketing industry, which has suckered him into buying a lot of junk that he doesn't need and that is very poor compensation for his lost freedom". If you know who wrote the above, you'll agree that this book's ending revery is completely pardonable.

Sadly, I was disappointed by this novel. First, the fine British author Ian McEwan's name is dropped on the rear cover, which raises an automatic comparison, and tricks anyone who has enjoyed McEwan's work into being interested in this book. (They got me.) The cover art bears a stylistic resemblance to Ian McEwan's books also, which I'm sure was the result of intelligent marketing strategy. I have read all of McEwan's work, and I find him talented, skilled in both the novel and short story forms, and relevant, even though a not too slight cultural difference exists for Americans who read British fiction.

This was my first reading of Paul Griner. I found his primary characters (Jean, Steve, and Claudia) less interesting and more incompletely drawn than McEwan's, and lacking in either real conflict or motivation. Maybe it was the author's intention that the character's motives remained unclear, and, that they be drawn in a more superficial manner, a la the short story form. But this did not work for me. The backstory of Jean's and Claudia's childhood, including the traumatic incident they shared, was not of elemental importance to the present-day events Jean experienced, unless I "missed the boat."

I was interested in finishing Collectors only because I believed it would build momentum and get better. I did not find that to be so. Maybe it will take a second reading, and I am willing to do that.

I suggest readers check out The Cement Garden, The Innocent, and The Comfort of Strangers, all by Ian McEwan. Mr. Griner's Collectors is most similar in plot and theme to The Comfort of Strangers, I think. (I have recommended or spoken admiringly of The Cement Garden and The Innocent on at least one hundred occasions. I regard each of them as "the book I wish I'd written.")

The one thing I got from this book was: as an aspiring novelist, this novel is proof that maybe it is not so difficult to break through and get published after all.

She collects fountain pens, and he collects binoculars. Two collectors whose paths cross. Destiny? It would seem so, and the players seem to play out their roles dutifully. Jean Duprez meets handsome Steven at her friend Claudia's wedding. As children Jean and Claudia used to dare each other to do some frightening things, death-defying things. And now Jean takes up with Steven, a mysterious man who seems to like her yet is indifferent to her. Is this relationship an extension of Jean's risk taking behavior? And there is the strange fetish the author has with perfumes and colognes. People seem to be identified by smell rather than appearance.

When you read this book you keep wondering where the story is going. That's the intriguing part. Well, you will know soon enough where the plot is leading as this is a short story that is literally writ large. Our clever book publishers have once again found a way to puff a novella up to look like a full-length novel. Wide spacing causes your eyes to make a giant leap from one line to the next. Actually it does have the flavor of a good short story, a form the author is very familiar with. It's a fine read that will easily fill up a lunch break, providing yours is an hour long. After reading it you can put the book on your coffee table to impress people with your ability to spend lots of money on a small book.

The elegant, hypnotic prose is marred by an utterly unbelievable female main character. The underlying message here seems to be "the victim was asking for it." A nasty, cold little book that will leave the reader dashing out to find something else to read that will take away the lingering aftertaste of this one.

I am very disappointed in this clipart. You can do better!

I ordered the GifArt CD-ROM a little while ago, and I have to say this CD-ROM is a must have for any webmaster or any one who likes to build his/her own web site. Plus, when I bought the CD-ROM I got 1 year free to their member section. I had access to all the images I needed and they update their member section constantly. What a great deal! All I can say is Whow!