Can anyone with more info on this tell me how this earlier paper is different - arxiv.org/abs/0907.0042
I certainly don't pretend to understand the content of the England/Michaelian papers.
But after a quick scan of Michaelian's paper, I think the difference might be that England's paper rigorously quantifies the theory mathematically, while Michaelian's paper does not.
One should check with xarchive.org (and elsewhere) which ip-addresses have visited Michaelians' article.
A few years back some Spanish researchers were caught tapping original data
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09...
"But now evidence has been offered that Dr. Ortiz and his group did access the observing logs. Prompted by questions by Dr. Rabinowitz of Yale, one of Dr. Brown's team members, Dr. Pogge, who maintains the Smarts telescope Web site, decided to investigate the traffic on the site. He found that computers from an unfamiliar address had visited the Web site eight times from July 26 to 28, when the Spanish group was making its announcement. Each time the computers went straight to pages deep within the site that described the Brown group's observations of K40506A. The first three visits happened a few minutes apart early on July 26, a day and a half before the Ortiz group made its announcement. Another cluster of hits came on the morning of the July 28 before the object was observed in Mallorca and Dr. Ortiz made his more complete report to the astronomical union. Dr. Pogge was able to trace the computers through the so-called IPP numbers, which the Internet assigns to each computer on it. Those numbers eventually led him to the Web site of the Andalusian Institute. Dr. Pogge said he gasped out loud when it popped up."
These things happen.
Nonetheless, Jeremy L England's article is plain sloppy research for not finding Michaelian's paper.