Banner
Stephen Hawking's Final Theory On Many Worlds

Like sex, Stephen Hawking was and is mainly a cheap way to obtain publicity. They still publish...

Phil/Evo Fundaments Of Our Deceiving In Denial, Justifying With Obvious Lies II: The Very Bottom

Any justification is fundamentally deception because there is no link from fundamental meaninglessness...

Symmetry & Relativity, Sexy Virtual Reality (VR) In Modern Relativity Theory - All For Everybody

Relativity is a form of symmetry and for that reason already of fundamental importance for science...

Energy Is Not A Substance And How To Easily Understand This

Energy is not a substance, not something in the sense of “some thing”. Energy often appears...

User picture.
picture for Tommaso Dorigopicture for Ilias Tyrovolaspicture for Quentin Rowepicture for Robert H Olleypicture for N. Sukumarpicture for Chris Delatorre
Sascha VongehrRSS Feed of this column.

Dr. Sascha Vongehr [风洒沙], physicist and philosopher, studied phil/math/chem/phys in Germany, obtained a BSc in theoretical physics (electro-mag) & MSc (stringtheory) at Sussex University... Read More »

Blogroll
Small Is Ugly

Small Is Ugly

Oct 08 2012 | comment(s)

The small is weird. No – I do not mean supposed "quantum weirdness", which is not* about small stuff. The non-quantum behavior of the small is counterintuitive enough. Many misconceptions could be avoided with some awareness about how the surfaces of objects, even smooth looking metal surfaces, look like at small scales (think mountainous battle fields).

Science writers eagerly disseminate falsehoods about the peer-review system, for example that critiques are published in the same journal as the criticized article. In truth, critical papers are rejected, whistleblowers blacklisted. “Criticism” in academia is a show-dance that increases the citation count of established players. True criticism is silenced; it may land in some very low impact factor journal, like for example with the takedown of the fake 2008 memristor discovery, because insiders know that nobody reads such journals; they are excess dumps stabilizing the publish-or-perish system.

While many fields realize that modernity comes to an end like any epoch eventually does, the “hard sciences”, especially physics, still rest in relatively naïve stages, still proud of their “modern” status like a teenager loving his first car. Attempts to advance beyond adolescence are countered with references to the Sokal Affair, although that affair has long since been understood in more enlightened ways and even Alan Sokal himself in the end concluded that the affair proved the enormous bias due to pure status in all sciences, news perhaps to the physicist Sokal, but certainly not to social constructionists.

The idea that we are inside a simulation is true anyway (if we define “simulation” as being described as emergent from a computational substrate). Nick Bostrom, director of Oxford University’s 'Future of Humanity Institute', and others became famous with such more than 2000 years old ideas warmed up in fashionably modern lingo, see Simulation Hypothesis on Wikipedia.


The holographic universe: A “simulation” anyway!

The James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) famously offers $1000000 to anyone who can demonstrate paranormal abilities.  Its has helped to stem the spread of pseudoscience.  The Quantum Randi Challenge is quite similar (although its main purpose for you personally is to teach you quantum mechanics intuitively):  The large reward it offers is instant fame.  Whoever overcomes the challenge would deserve a Nobel Prize in physics!  But the Quantum Randi Challenge does not depend on a foundation that is

Instead of getting any public support, increasingly the mob starts to get out their pitchforks. Now I came across this gem over at the FQXi site – it is down on the comment thread, but it is written by the author of the article there, a technical writer and editor by trade (consistent with the terrible state of science writing for sure), Thomas Howard Ray: