<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Book Review: The Mystery of the Missing Antimatter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.universetoday.com/2008/04/28/book-review-the-mystery-of-the-missing-antimatter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/04/28/book-review-the-mystery-of-the-missing-antimatter/</link>
	<description>Space and astronomy news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun,  8 Nov 2009 08:15:54 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/04/28/book-review-the-mystery-of-the-missing-antimatter/comment-page-1/#comment-19546</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 00:50:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=13605#comment-19546</guid>
		<description>How do we know that the antimatter is missing. We have such a narrow view of the universe. There is much that we don&#039;t know. For all we know there could be whole clusters that are made up of antimatter. We can never really be sure. Antimatter could even be the primary type of material. We humans are always so ignorant. We think just because our corner of the universe is made up of matter that the entire universe is made of matter. We should embrace the new discoveries instead of putting in our own perspective. I am going to have to check out the book it seems somewhat intresting.

P.S. Its spelled &quot;Bologna&quot; LOL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How do we know that the antimatter is missing. We have such a narrow view of the universe. There is much that we don&#039;t know. For all we know there could be whole clusters that are made up of antimatter. We can never really be sure. Antimatter could even be the primary type of material. We humans are always so ignorant. We think just because our corner of the universe is made up of matter that the entire universe is made of matter. We should embrace the new discoveries instead of putting in our own perspective. I am going to have to check out the book it seems somewhat intresting.</p>
<p>P.S. Its spelled &#034;Bologna&#034; LOL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tom ray</title>
		<link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/04/28/book-review-the-mystery-of-the-missing-antimatter/comment-page-1/#comment-19182</link>
		<dc:creator>tom ray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=13605#comment-19182</guid>
		<description>I read in your review of The Mystery of the Missing Antimatter: &quot;it proudly trumpets the lack of any equations or math&quot;. Proud? What moron would read a science book that has no equations? Are we so stupid that the thought of an equation in a book makes us shun that book? I&#039;ve read some of those &#039;mathless&#039; books and they stink. They pile one analogy on top of another until the idea conveyed is lost in the jumble. A simple explanation of an appropriate equation would be far easily understood. Authors must start showing some courage and stand up to those nitwit publishers who claim that an equation cuts the readership in half. Balone!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read in your review of The Mystery of the Missing Antimatter: &#034;it proudly trumpets the lack of any equations or math&#034;. Proud? What moron would read a science book that has no equations? Are we so stupid that the thought of an equation in a book makes us shun that book? I&#039;ve read some of those &#039;mathless&#039; books and they stink. They pile one analogy on top of another until the idea conveyed is lost in the jumble. A simple explanation of an appropriate equation would be far easily understood. Authors must start showing some courage and stand up to those nitwit publishers who claim that an equation cuts the readership in half. Balone!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
