Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Physicists lost reality in Mathematics

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • socratus
    replied
    Why some scientists say physics has gone off the rails
    ---
    "All of the theoretical work that's been done since the 1970s
    has not produced a single successful prediction," says Neil Turok,
    director of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada.
    "That's a very shocking state of affairs."
    This doesn't mean physicists aren't busy; the journals are publishing
    more research than ever. But Turok says all that research
    isn't doing much to advance our understanding of the universe —
    at least not the way physicists did in the last century.
    #
    1 - Lots of activity, little progress
    2 - Seduced by math?
    3 - In search of simplicity
    ---
    / June 2, 2018, By Dan Falk /
    https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science...ils-ncna879346
    ===

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    I don't know why I'm commenting here socratus except that I know you're an intelligent person. The way I see the problem scoratus is science is first a tool and not a science as imagined: A detective, a lawyer, a judge, or even a lowly policeman are all people whom undoubtedly have a much finer grasp of the scientific method than 99.9% of all self proclaimed scientists.

    Scientists aren't trained in investigative science and applied law and so they cannot claim to know what science is. The difference in understanding between the two is the difference between hanging innocent people and or discovering the truth. We have hundreds of years refining the method under the judicial system; when correctly applied it has a far greater chance of finding the truth than any other method known.

    It is no wonder that the biggest quacks are also the biggest icons in today's criminally operated education systems. Being a mathematician does not make one a scientist any more than it makes them qualified to be the lead investigator in a criminal case. The idiocy of science today is the failure to grasp the true nature of the forces behind their own work. The first thing to recognize is that education is big business, it's an economy in it's own right, and so now what do you do when the basis of that business is to keep it going or else face exposure, and which would collapse the whole? It is naive to think that many varied ideas which encompass so-called science are merely the consequence of creative minds. Remember this is first a business and not a science, and so the science of business is how to make it look like it is science.

    See, the issues run deep and are far outside the bounds of science. The system cannot now put in place a requirement for police science or Pre~law as a prerequisite for a masters in science. That would introduce a requirement for critical reasoning skills as prerequisite area of study before even beginning a study of any other field of science. The system is now too dependent on an already existing field of science under Einstein; which is almost certain to have fundamental errors that would require an entire revamping, and so now we are back to $$$ once more for all sorts of reasons, and of course not forgetting the fact there are no " certified rubber stamped" professors of the new science to hire as replacements anyways, so that means the complete destruction of revenue doesn't it?

    This is a problem, a very big problem, and so the solution is to continue paving over the increasingly glaring error's in the hopes that by the time revolution arrives the organized collapse of civilization and knowledge will make the issue moot.

    Civilizations rise and fall according to the desires of those whom control the monetary systems, and the reason they fall is that all nations are created for their eventual final use in an endless game of rulership passed from generation to generation. There is good reason to believe that you are right now living in a time where another collapse of civilization may take place. Western Civilization seems right now to be heading for another repeat of the same kind which destroyed the Roman Empire and for the same reasons.
    https://michael-hudson.com/2018/08/a...m-their-debts/
    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    A detective, a lawyer, a judge, or even a lowly policeman are all people
    whom undoubtedly have a much finer grasp of the scientific method than
    99.9% of all self proclaimed scientists.
    '' A detective, a lawyer, a judge, or even a lowly policeman are all people''
    wouldn't take an abstract scientific method to solve a concrete incident,
    but modern scientists have another opinion.

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    Scientists aren't trained in investigative science and applied law and so
    they cannot claim to know what science is.
    The difference in understanding between the two is the difference between
    hanging innocent people and or discovering the truth.
    Yeah, most scientists aren't following the way of judicial system.

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    We have hundreds of years refining the method under the judicial system;
    when correctly applied it has a far greater chance of finding the truth than
    any other method known.
    The judicial system is much older than a modern scientific system . . .
    The judicial system doesn't use abstract ideas, scientific system allow that.

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    The idiocy of science today is the failure to grasp the true nature of the forces
    behind their own work.*
    Physicists can manipulation with light and electron and know how a quantum
    process is going but they don't know what a light (as a force) or an electron
    (as a force)* is and therefore they can solve concrete, practical problem,
    but the whole picture of incident is hidden, the truth is hidden.
    That is reason that Feynman said:
    " I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics."
    #
    “[Quantum mechanics] describes nature as absurd from the point of view
    of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment.
    So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd.”
    /* Feynman /

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    It is naive to think that many varied ideas which encompass so-called science are
    merely the consequence of creative minds. Remember this is first a business and
    not a science, and so the science of business is how to make it look like it is science.
    Yeah, science is not motivated solely by the search for truth.

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    The system is now too dependent on an already existing field of science under Einstein;
    which is almost certain to have fundamental errors that would require an entire revamping,
    and so now we are back to $$$ once more for all sorts of reasons, and of course
    not forgetting the fact there are no " certified rubber stamped" professors of the new science
    to hire as replacements anyways, so that means the complete destruction of revenue doesn't it?
    Do you know a judge who can reconsider Einstein's SRT and GRT ?

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    This is a problem, a very big problem, and so the solution is to continue paving over
    the increasingly glaring error's in the hopes that by the time revolution arrives
    the organized collapse of civilization and knowledge will make the issue moot.
    In my opinion Einstein's SRT and GRT are correct but philosophical
    interpretations are wrong. One abstract opinion created a new abstractions.
    For example: Minkowski's an abstract* 4-D opened the door for abstract
    5-D, 11-D, 27 -D . . . .** and multiverse . . . big-bang . . . black holes . . .

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    Civilizations rise and fall according to the desires of those whom control
    the monetary systems, and the reason they fall is that all nations are created
    for their eventual final use in an endless game of ruler ship passed from
    generation to generation.
    Those who control the monetary, economic, political, scientific,
    religion systems don't like changes.

    Originally posted by Gambeir View Post
    There is good reason to believe that you are right now living in a time
    where another collapse of civilization may take place.
    Western Civilization seems right now to be heading for another repeat
    of the same kind which destroyed the Roman Empire and for the same reasons.
    I share your view on today's political situation.
    =====

    Leave a comment:


  • Gambeir
    replied
    Originally posted by socratus View Post
    Five things physicists hate about physics
    12 July 2017
    By Richard Webb
    https://www.newscientist.com/article...about-physics/
    =====
    I'm not sure I understand where you stand but to me this is pure propaganda of the worst kind and then there's this fine grammar;
    " you’ve done all the hard maths."

    Maths huh? Not mathematics: I mean good God seriously? But wait, there's more....unfortunately....

    "Einstein’s general relativity is a case in point. It’s the best theory of gravity we have."

    I think rather that it's the only theory of gravity Richard Webb is allowed to write about in the New Scientist because it certainly is neither the only or even best theory available.
    Good Lord and this is what passes for a science publication? Just check out their psycho mind control mag-rag cover. Notice the subheading on "Spider Milk."
    Where is my illuminati birds nest head piece and antlers when I need them?
    https://images.newscientist.com/wp-c...8-800x1052.jpg
    Last edited by Gambeir; 12-12-2018, 07:46 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gambeir
    replied
    Originally posted by socratus View Post
    Science is built up of facts, as a house is with stones.
    But a collection of facts is no more a science than
    a heap of stones is a house.
    / Henri Poincare /
    Originally posted by socratus View Post
    Why some scientists say physics has gone off the rails
    Has the love of "elegant" equations overtaken the desire to describe the real world?
    by Dan Falk / Jun.02.2018 / 5:13 PM ET
    ===
    "People can believe in the multiverse all they want — but it's not science."
    #
    "Theoretical physicists used to explain what was observed.
    Now they try to explain why they can't explain what was not observed.
    And they're not even good at that."
    * /* Sabine Hossenfelder, /
    https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science...ils-ncna879346
    ====
    I don't know why I'm commenting here socratus except that I know you're an intelligent person. The way I see the problem scoratus is science is first a tool and not a science as imagined: A detective, a lawyer, a judge, or even a lowly policeman are all people whom undoubtedly have a much finer grasp of the scientific method than 99.9% of all self proclaimed scientists.

    Scientists aren't trained in investigative science and applied law and so they cannot claim to know what science is. The difference in understanding between the two is the difference between hanging innocent people and or discovering the truth. We have hundreds of years refining the method under the judicial system; when correctly applied it has a far greater chance of finding the truth than any other method known.

    It is no wonder that the biggest quacks are also the biggest icons in today's criminally operated education systems. Being a mathematician does not make one a scientist any more than it makes them qualified to be the lead investigator in a criminal case. The idiocy of science today is the failure to grasp the true nature of the forces behind their own work. The first thing to recognize is that education is big business, it's an economy in it's own right, and so now what do you do when the basis of that business is to keep it going or else face exposure, and which would collapse the whole? It is naive to think that many varied ideas which encompass so-called science are merely the consequence of creative minds. Remember this is first a business and not a science, and so the science of business is how to make it look like it is science.

    See, the issues run deep and are far outside the bounds of science. The system cannot now put in place a requirement for police science or Pre~law as a prerequisite for a masters in science. That would introduce a requirement for critical reasoning skills as prerequisite area of study before even beginning a study of any other field of science. The system is now too dependent on an already existing field of science under Einstein; which is almost certain to have fundamental errors that would require an entire revamping, and so now we are back to $$$ once more for all sorts of reasons, and of course not forgetting the fact there are no " certified rubber stamped" professors of the new science to hire as replacements anyways, so that means the complete destruction of revenue doesn't it?

    This is a problem, a very big problem, and so the solution is to continue paving over the increasingly glaring error's in the hopes that by the time revolution arrives the organized collapse of civilization and knowledge will make the issue moot.

    Civilizations rise and fall according to the desires of those whom control the monetary systems, and the reason they fall is that all nations are created for their eventual final use in an endless game of rulership passed from generation to generation. There is good reason to believe that you are right now living in a time where another collapse of civilization may take place. Western Civilization seems right now to be heading for another repeat of the same kind which destroyed the Roman Empire and for the same reasons.
    https://michael-hudson.com/2018/08/a...m-their-debts/
    Last edited by Gambeir; 12-12-2018, 07:11 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    Five things physicists hate about physics
    12 July 2017
    By Richard Webb
    https://www.newscientist.com/article...about-physics/
    =====

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    The impossibly stubborn question at the heart of quantum mechanics
    / by Jim Baggott / August 2, 2018 /

    Everybody knows by now that quantum mechanics is an extraordinarily
    successful scientific theory, on which much of our modern,
    tech-obsessed lifestyles depend. It is also completely mad.
    Although the theory quite obviously works, we’re left to puzzle over what
    we think it’s telling us, with all its ghosts and phantoms; its cats that are
    at once both alive and dead; its collapsing wavefunctions; and its seemingly
    “spooky” goings-on.
    It leaves us with a rather desperate desire to lie down quietly in a darkened room.. . .

    https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/s...ntum-mechanics

    ============
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    @Thank you, Arto.
    =====
    To create, at first, you must be.
    Then you need a reason to do something.
    It means to have a set of laws / rules of mathematics
    So it follows -
    1 I am (who am I: object / subject ?)
    2 Need of creation (why?)
    3 Science as creation: Physics + Mathematics: (object + math idea)
    4 Art, Engineering, Physiology, Psychology , . . . . . etc . . . etc
    ====
    Modern Mathematical Physics had its birth with Minkowski / Einstein,
    with conceptions of negative time, many dimensions, space-time . . . . etc
    and if somebody doesn't adopt these dogmas he cannot enter
    in the church of scientific "Theoretic Math/Physics"
    The puzzle is:
    Nobody knows what negative time is,
    Where can the many dimensions (4-D, 11-D, 27-D) be found in Nature ?
    Where is the absolute space-time ?
    Conclusion:
    The Minkowski / Einstein's ''scientific bible'' must be rewrote.
    ==============
    Attached Files
    Last edited by socratus; 08-29-2018, 09:04 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • artoj
    replied
    Ideolgical March

    To create you must first have a real need or reason to do so.

    Recreation is what we do when we know that particular creation was successful.

    So to recreate, you measure your functioning creation and you commit it to
    set of plans, instructions or rules. To be more precise you use mathematics
    so the error of poor judgement is minimized.

    Now you have a process, you can now call this art a science and the
    reproducible is engineered by your accuracy of measure. Thus Mathematics
    follow the science, which followed the creativity of what you call artistry,
    which in turn was preceded by a reasonable need.

    So it follows -
    1 Need
    2 Art
    3 Science
    4 Engineering
    5 Mathematics

    So once you codified and refined this simple process, the bureaucrats and politicians wanted to control it, as they found out it was not that simple, but given enough time and indoctrination it could be accomplished.

    So a physiological methodology of deconstruction began and the first target to be destroyed was the visual arts, where the most imaginative were clustered. As you can see it was was second on the list processes. Need can be eventually eliminated when they tell us what we need and we don't question it.

    This destruction of the Artist was accomplished fairly quickly, as they took control of the institutions and directed the output to conform to a de-contructionalist agenda, this is what we now know as modern art.

    The march of this ideological poison took hold in the US universities and was reborn as Cultural Marxism in the 60's and 70's where the all stem fields were also being infected.

    Mathematical Physics had its birth with Einstein and by the same slow march of deconstructions and codification in all the Sciences we arrive at the present "Theoretic Physics" as if it is something we must believe in or you will be cast out the the Scientism Church.

    It is now a complete and multi-disciplinary mathematical fantasy land where unicorns pop out of black holes in eleven dimensions by the use of a God equation. The computer revolution has accelerated the disassociation people have with the real world, where every equation can be a pretty pattern on your screen. The feedback loop is now established by the re-enforcement of the unreal via CGI and Hollywood in general, where MSM lies must be believed or you are a racist and evil Nazi.

    Regards Arto.

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    In nature, in evolution of nature, in mathematics, in physics . . .
    something complex was made from something more simple
    Nothing new.
    But if we take mathematics then, . . .* the evolution of mathematical nature
    didn't start* from natural numbers* 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 . . .
    The evolution of Nature started from transcendental and imaginary numbers.
    Then complex numbers appeared and at last natural numbers 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 ...
    This is a mathematical model of evolution ''something'' in Nature.
    (my opinion)
    ====
    Attached Files
    Last edited by socratus; 08-25-2018, 09:27 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    In the real Nature every piece of math is a model of something in Nature.
    ===
    Let's say math describes* nature by transcendental, complex and real numbers.
    Let's say physics uses* these transcendental, complex and real numbers to describe nature.
    Let's say transcendental numbers must be described not only by the mathematical
    formulas but also must have a real image in the physical world.
    And if we take the number (pi) then the first thing we have in brain is a circle: c/d=pi=3,14 . . . .
    Can quantum particle have geometrical form of circle-membrane ?
    =======
    Math without physics is med subject.
    Physics without Math if dead subject.
    ======.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    About ''real'' imaginary numbers in mathematics
    and ''not-real'' imaginary numbers in physics.
    #
    Imaginary numbers are a fine and wonderful refuge
    of the divine spirit almost an amphibian between
    being and non-being.
    / Gottfried Leibniz /
    #
    One might think this means that imaginary numbers
    are just a mathematical game having nothing to do
    with the real world. From the viewpoint of positivist
    philosophy, however, one cannot determine what is real.
    All one can do is find which mathematical models
    describe the universe we live in. It turns out that
    a mathematical model involving imaginary time
    predicts not only effects we have already observed
    but also effects we have not been able to measure yet
    nevertheless believe in for other reasons.
    So what is real and what is imaginary?
    Is the distinction just in our minds?
    * / Stephen Hawking /
    #
    Pi is not merely the ubiquitous factor in high school
    geometry problems; it is stitched across the whole
    tapestry of mathematics, not just geometry's little
    corner of it. Pi occupies a key place in trigonometry too.
    It is intimately related to e, and to imaginary numbers.
    Pi even shows up in the mathematics of probability
    / Robert Kanigel /
    #
    The more science I studied, the more I saw that physics
    becomes metaphysics and numbers become imaginary
    numbers. The farther you go into science, the mushier
    the ground gets. You start to say, 'Oh, there is an order
    and a spiritual aspect to science.'
    / Dan Brown /
    ======
    Can imaginary numbers be real in physics ?
    Can imaginary numbers show real substance in physics ?
    =================================
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    A math point - particle
    =
    A point particle is an ideal particle (not real image of particle in nature)
    A point particle is mathematical idealization of particle heavily used in physics

    Definitions:
    zero-dimensional, a point- mass, a point- charge, a nonzero charge ,
    an elementary particle, with no internal structure, occupies a nonzero volume

    Atom:
    A proton do have internal structure ( made of quarks - ? ! )
    An electron doesn't have internal structure
    That is impossible because electron takes part in many different
    actions that are reflected by many different laws and formulas
    ( E=h*f and e^2=ah*c , +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2 ,
    E=-me^4/2h^2= -13,6eV and E= ∞ . . . . . )

    From far enough a way, any finite-size object will look like and behave as
    a point-like object, but when we will come nearer, we discover out our error.

    Until today we are still far a way, to see the structure of an electron.
    =========
    Last edited by socratus; 08-09-2018, 03:32 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    Einstein wasn't satisfied with his SRT because the theory
    doesn't take in account*concept of ''gravity'' and therefore
    he* involved masses in the theory.
    So, at first, the SRT (as a flat spacetime) was absent of gravity-masses,
    (zero gravity) and only later Einstein put masses in this absolute spacetime.

    As a result of this idea, the ''absolute spacetime'' changed
    its* Pseudo - Euclidean geometry into the beautiful theory
    of Riemannian geometry.
    Two expeditions from different places,*at one and the same day
    proved Einstein's prediction. The triumph of GRT started to run.
    On the basis of GRT many new theories were created.

    In my opinion most these theories are paradoxical because
    the two expeditions showed that only in local region of*
    ''an absolute spacetime''* (where there was masses of Sun)
    the* Riemannian geometry takes place.
    Without masses Riemannian geometry would change to
    the Pseudo - Euclidean geometry.
    =====
    P.S.
    '' A world without masses, without electrons, without an
    electromagnetic field is an empty world. Such an empty
    world is flat. But if masses appear, if charged particles
    appear, if an electromagnetic field appears then our world
    becomes curved. Its geometry is Riemannian, that is, non- Euclidian.''
    / Book 'Albert Einstein', the page 116, by Leopold Infeld. /
    ===========
    Last edited by socratus; 08-07-2018, 04:37 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • socratus
    replied
    Originally posted by wayne.ct View Post
    Some people have the ability to talk fast and don't always make sense.
    They put forth a bunch of claims as if they were facts and what happens then?
    If you are skeptical, you question the claims and facts.
    And, if you are gullible, you accept the claims and facts at face value.
    Science is built up of facts, as a house is with stones.
    But a collection of facts is no more a science than
    a heap of stones is a house.
    / Henri Poincare /

    Originally posted by wayne.ct View Post
    So called main line physics has lost its bearings and it is largely the focus
    on mathematics that is the cause.
    I agree on that, Socratus, if that is your view.
    Why some scientists say physics has gone off the rails
    Has the love of "elegant" equations overtaken the desire to describe the real world?
    by Dan Falk / Jun.02.2018 / 5:13 PM ET
    ===
    "People can believe in the multiverse all they want — but it's not science."
    #
    "Theoretical physicists used to explain what was observed.
    Now they try to explain why they can't explain what was not observed.
    And they're not even good at that."
    * /* Sabine Hossenfelder, /
    https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science...ils-ncna879346
    ====

    Leave a comment:


  • spacecase0
    replied
    Originally posted by socratus View Post
    Maybe this problem is not mathematical but psychological;
    ''Old habits die hard''
    ===
    clearly it is a psychological issue,
    I was trying to point out that it was not a math problem by showing that you can't solve social issues with with math.
    I like math and all, use it when it applies,
    but I don't get lost in it either

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X