Banner
    5 replies [Last post]
    Hank's picture
    Offline
    Joined: Oct 28 2006
    More than a year ago, scientists found the Higgs boson, and this morning, two physicists who 50 years ago theorized the existence of this particle got the Nobel, the highest prize in science.

    For all the excitement the award has already generated, finding the Higgs — arguably the most important discovery in more than a generation — has left physicists without a clear roadmap of where to go next. While popular articles often describe how the Higgs might help theorists investigating the weird worlds of string theory, multiple universes, or supersymmetry, the truth is that evidence for these ideas is scant to nonexistent.

    No one is sure which of these models, if any, will eventually describe reality. The Standard Model is supposed to account for all known particles and their interactions, but scientists know that it’s incomplete.



    Higgs Boson Gets Nobel Prize, But Physicists Still Don’t Know What It Means By Adam Mann, Wired

    Comments

    Zoran S. D.'s picture
    Offline
    Joined: Jan 14 2014
    "There are two kinds of geniuses: the 'ordinary' and the 'magicians'. An ordinary genius is a fellow whom you and I would be just as good as, if we were only many times better. There is no mystery as to how his mind works. Once we understand what they've done, we feel certain that we, too, could have done it. It is different with the magicians. Even after we understand what they have done, it is completely dark. Richard Feynman is a magician of the highest calibre." Mark Kac (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Kac)
    „Hell, if I could explain it to the average person, it wouldn't have been worth the Nobel prize.“ https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman))

    Actual fundamental physics is the mysticism of the worst kind.
    Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture
    One could describe it appropriately by paraphrasing the title of your book, Hank:
    "Sapience (nous/reason) left behind"

    (Zoran)

    Zoran S. D.'s picture
    Offline
    Joined: Jan 14 2014
    Why is the actual fundamental physics "the mysticism of the worst kind", and why is that dangerous?

    The string-theory emerged, in fact, as an attempt to avoid difficulties of QM-approach (quantum mechanical approach) to fundamental reality. ‘Stringers’ have tried to go deeper (to the sub-Planck-level), and to set (to invent) there some CERTAIN structures/entities (in order to avoid UNCERTAINTY, and to find the way to model the reality in significantly less complicated way than QM-way). Actually, they wanted to avoid absurdities: “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.” (Richard Feynman). (Terrible/horrifying attitude. “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities” (Voltaire)).
    And, of course, they wanted to unify physics (the gravitation and the rest of physics).
    But, they have made everything even more complicated.

    The fundamental mistake, which is common for all kinds of approaches (both official (accepted) and unofficial approaches), is ‘educated guess (speculation)’:
    - “Light propagates always with the speed c, from whichever reference frame we measure it.”
    - Postulating the tensor equation for space-time.
    - Postulating the equation known as Schrödinger’s equation (presenting the world as a 'sea' of waving probability distributions of appearance/occurring of things).
    - Inventing the sub-Planck-level things/entities (strings, superstrings, branes, …)
    Ideas, ideas, ideas (postulates, inventions). “Go deeper, into undetectable level”. “Make it more abstract”. “Invent the fundamentals of the world”. Vanity. Conceit. Arrogance. Super-stupidity. (Plain stupidity is the lack of intelligence. Super-stupidity is the vanity/conceit-driven-intelligence. It is far more dangerous. Globally dangerous).
    The world cannot be invented, it can only be discovered.
    Dear elite-physicists:
    Get out of the world of ideas, get back to reality, to the facts. Get back to rational, reasonable thinking. „A man may imagine things which are false, but he can only understand things that are true, for if the things be false, the apprehension of them is ’not understanding’“. Stop to imagine things, and try to see/recognize the basic facts, among that what is already discovered. Not indirectly but directly, really, truly discovered and detected.
    How? Make one step back. Go before the advent of relativity and QM. Watch for the facts. Think about that what the giants of science of that time have discovered.
    „One should look for what is, and not what one thinks should be“. (A. Einstein) (Unfortunately, Einstein himself did not do that)
    „Observe and think in order to discover the truth. Never believe what is contrary to reason, and never deceive yourself or others“.
    Observe and think REASONABLY, RATIONALLY, COMPREHENSIBLY. Stop to deceive yourself and others.
    Try to see what did you miss to consider, try to see what did you misinterpret.
    “Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, that when we grasp it - in a decade, a century, or a millennium - we will all say to each other, how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid?” (John A. Wheeler)
    It is not ‘an idea’, but the facts, the already discovered phenomena:
    - electric permittivity and magnetic permeability of SPACE. They are the properties of SPACE. Can’t you see that simple, obvious fact?
    - and photons.
    and their interaction(s).
    [Even the Higgs boson, particle which 'emerges' under extreme energy conditions, is, in fact, the two photons whirl:
    http://profmattstrassler.com/2016/03/18/the-diphoton-excess-improves-a-bit/ ]
    That is the very essence of universe. Nothing else is needed to explain EVERYTHING in universe.[Exactly as Newton said: “We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.”

    When I say ‘to explain’, I mean ‘to really explain’, I mean ‘to really understand’. EVERYTHING. Read ‘The gem’ texts at http://www.science20.com/forums/theories_everything

    By studying the history of science, one can see that the mistakes which elite-physicists have made were not the so called honest mistakes. These mistakes were made by vanity/conceit driven intelligence. Hypocrisy. Yearn/fight for glory and for prestige (economy, military, scientific, national), masked with the noblest possible thing: “search for truth”.
    Just one small illustration: “Einstein and Edington“ movie, dialog among Max Planck and Koppel:
    K: This is the Einstein you speak so highly of?
    P: Yes.
    K: What does he offer us?
    P: He has a truly original, probing mind.
    K: Questions don't win wars.
    P: You have plenty of scientists who can help you practically. He is a theorist.
    K: What good is theory to me?
    P: After two centuries, he might just prove Isaac Newton, the greatest ever English scientist, the man who set down the laws that describe the workings of the whole universe, wrong. That's what he can give us.
    That was the WW I.
    WW II: Catholic church has ‘recognized’ the Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, and bishop&physicist George Lemaitre’s modification of theory of relativity (Lemaitre is the ‘father’ of Big-Bang) as “scientific ‘confirmation’ of religious ‘teachings’”, (uncertainty principle = 'inconceivable/incomprehensible is the God’s creation'; Big-Bang = 'God creates the world'), and Catholic church started the ‘under cover’ support of Nazi-Germany in creating of the new world order. And after Nazis were crashed, they even helped members of Nazi-elite to escape (mostly to South America). 

    And, what happens next? Just in short, with a few illustrative highlights:
    German scientists were highly respected (that was not the true respect, but rather alert, even fear, fear to lose sumpremacy/prestige) by the scientists from the rest of the world. And what other scientists did? They tried to beat Germans in ‘new physicses’ (relativity and QM) which Germans ‘discovered’. Some kind of gold-rush, fight for ‘eternal places in history, eternal glory’ and prestige. New physicses were incomprehensible, and old super-power (GB), and new super-power (USA) wanted to show that they can do even ‘better’: ‘bold’ idea (upgrade of ‘uncertainty’ blunder) of P.A.M. Dirac: there exist antimatter (entities which have negative energy)! And, despite positron (and each and every other detected ‘antimatter’-particle) has positive energy, it was promoted as ‘confirmation’ of ‘antimatter’.
    http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/55186/why-is-it-called-annihilation
    And then comes even bolder idea: Richard Feynman: “positrons (and other ‘antimatter’) are particles which move backwards in time”!
    And, where are we today?
    http://news.yahoo.com/dont-understand-universe-scientist-ideafestival-210306739.html
    So, “We don’t have a clue what we are doing, but we are doing hard, and we make big steps forward!”

    "Concepts that have proven useful in ordering things easily achieve such an authority over us that we forget their earthly origins and accept them as unalterable givens. Thus they come to be stamped as 'necessities of thought,' 'a priori givens,' etc. The path of scientific advance is often made impassable for a long time through such errors." - Albert Einstein
    But, there are no „earthly origins“ in „uncertainty principle“ – She (the nature) is absurd, said Feynman (’one of the greatest physics-authority ever’). God’s ways are inconceivable. So, go on, bravely (boldly) into absurdities, develop that further!

    "I remember reading, some time ago, in a few places, that a Lagrangian having metric curvature terms in quadratic combinations would give rise to a “renormalizable” theory while the regular Lagrangian (which involves simply R) of the standard GR theory does not give a “renormalizable” theory. And this was considered by the writers to be very important in connection with attempts to form a theory of quantum gravitation. But I don’t myself understand either renormalization or the general theory of quantization. (To me it seems like “quantum theory” is in a sense like a traditional herbal medicine used by “witch doctors”. We don’t REALLY understand what is happening, what the ultimate truth really is, but we have a “cook book” of procedures and rituals that can be used to obtain useful and practical calculations (independent of fundamental truth).)" - John F. Nash Jr

    http://sites.stat.psu.edu/~babu/nash/intereq.pdf, page 4.

    Science? Or mysticism? Pure mysticism, of the worst (most dangerous (and scandalous)) kind.

    Now the physicists make even worse mistake: they refuse to admit their mistakes. They hide behind the ignorance of majority of people. I thought that, in this case, hiding will not be possible. But, I see that most of non-physicists who participate in discussions/writing on Science2.0 do not know secondary-school math and physics. I think that this is unacceptable for any educated woman/man who participates in any section of Science2.0.
    Hence, the truth presented in “The gem” texts is ignored. Because those who read it are ignorant. Sad? Horrifying. “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” (Max Planck). And that is so only because of vanity, conceit, arrogance of experts, and because of ignorance of all others. Super-stupidity. Who knows how many new generations of brilliant young minds will be wasted. And billions of dollars wasted, on the projects of experts … experts for mysticisms (QM, QED, QCD, QFT, RQFT, …, strings, superstrings, branes (P, D, M, holographic M), … , a variety of relativistic theories, … , black holes, … , dark matter, dark energy, … ).
    And, society will be led by leaders who have “visions”, who can see things which ‘plain’ minds, ‘constrained’ with reason/sapience cannot see. “Only visionary can cope with “uncertainties”, “ambiguities”, “spontaneities”, “relativities” which future brings”. Perfect demagogues and demagoguery, rooted as deep as it is possible, by the “giants of science” of the 20th and 21st century. “Genuine, original Giants”, who do not stand on the shoulders of the giants before them – those before (Newton, … , Maxwell) were “naïve”.
    The scandalous story of the mightiest species which inhabits the Earth, and which calls itself Homo sapiens, and which, in fact, is Homo Vanus, led by the “best of them”: Homo Perfidus.
    The species eager to misuse, species inclined to mysticism, species which values pomp, empty rituals and profusion, that is, the species which prefers forms/formalities and disdains essence, and which prefers incomprehensibility and complexity, and disdains comprehensibility and simplicity.
    Homo-irrational, Homo hypocrite.
    That is why the history repeats. Namely, each previous ‘elite’ is replaced with the next, which is more cunning, perfidious, than the previous one. The next has greater knowledge, develops more deadly weapons, and ends in more devastating wars and massacres. The last open, global war, was the WW II. Today, such war would mean the end for everybody. Elites are aware of that, so they wage perfidious wars, using all available means to spread demagogies, to induce local hostilities and local wars. Elites play perfidious ‘games’ (social, economy, political, military). Elites, which make 5% of population, play perfidious ‘games’ with 95% of population. They develop more and more sophisticated and effective ways of control. They feed their ‘game-theory’ algorithms, ran on super-computers, with data from all local war/hostility areas around the world (i.e. there where ‘colored revolutions’ were performed/conducted/induced), test the control-limits. And then they know how much they can push and repress their own citizens in their own countries. And/or: they know which algorithms/strategies to use if the things start to escalate so much that the position of elites becomes threatened.

    And, what is the origin of ‘game theory’, of that modern, most sophisticated means for ruling the world?
    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/A_Beautiful_Mind_(film)
    Hansen: Recall the lessons of Adam Smith, the father of modern economics. "In competition …"
    Everybody: "… individual ambition serves the common good."
    John: [after thinking] Adam Smith needs revision.
    Hansen: What are you talking about?
    John: Adam Smith said the best result comes from everyone in the group doing what's best for himself. Right? That's what he said, right?
    Hansen: Right.
    John: Incomplete. Incomplete, okay? Because the best result will come from everyone in the group doing what's best for himself … and the group.
    Hansen: Nash, if this is some way for you to get the blonde on your own, you can go to hell.
    John: Governing dynamics, gentlemen. Governing dynamics. Adam Smith … was wrong!

    So, “the best result will come from everyone in the group doing what's best for himself … and the group.”
    Any reasonable person understands that this is essential definition of socialism. John F. Nash Jr. has mathematically proved that socialism is better social organizing than capitalism. Cooperation is better than competition.
    How does capitalism gets out of crisis? Well, with socialistic measures:
    http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/timeline/depwwii/newdeal/

    And why did John F. Nash Jr. get Nobel? For misuse of his discovery: the groups are formed AGAINST other individuals or group. Instead cooperating with other groups, to make things good for all groups, they apply Adam Smith theory again, on a higher level, in more dangerous way, in a selfish-group-way: “a group does that what is best for that group”. That is how mafia works. And capitalistic states are, actually, state-level-mafias.
    Capitalism is all about exploiting people, for the over-benefit of a few.  
    Socialism is about making people to be as they should be: ethical, moral, reasonable, broadly and well educated – in a word: good. And to live well. Decently. To be hard-working, to work cooperatively, in harmony, for the benefit and social security for all. To take care for each other, and for their environment. It is not utopia. I have lived in such society, until USA and their allies have destroyed it (http://socialistworker.org/2008/08/20/how-yugoslavia-was-destroyed).
    There are such comunities in USA, too:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post,_Texas
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_Oaks_Community,_Virginia
    GB used to be socialistic country, until Margaret Thatcher came to power:
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2332801/
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spirit_of_%2745
    Norway, Sweden, Denmark are socialistic countries.
    Until the fall of Berlin-wall, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, were capitalistic, but with strong socialistic elements.

    USA used the period of 25 years, when it was dominant super power, to push the world backward, into wild-capitalism: neo-liberalism. And it is still pushing. I wish that Bernie Sanders becomes president, but that is utopia: socialism is so thoroughly demonized by perfidious USA propaganda, that I am amazed that Bernie Sanders managed at all to show so high up there. The “system anomaly” in USA-Matrix (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/)? I hope so. I hope that USA will manage to peacefully transform into human society, the society led by reasonable people (people whose intelligence is driven by love(goodness, moral, ethics))
    http://www.businessinsider.com/what-americans-dont-understand-about-nord...

    Zoran S. D.'s picture
    Offline
    Joined: Jan 14 2014

    The part of the document https://zordim.wordpress.com/article/kvantna-teorija-relativnosti-i-zacetak-19vofb93pe1rk-10/ , which is here (at TheoriesOfEverything forum) presented in an expanded and more readable form: ‘The gem’ texts, was published in January 2011, in one Serbian scientific journal

    Зборник радова I (Scientific Proceedings I), ISSN 2217-4362, page 255, title: "Увод у фотонску фундаменталну физику" ("Introduction to the photonic fundamental physics")]

    of one local, small academic institution (faculty), placed in Kosovo (http://www.vtsurosevac.com).

    Publishing was enabled by Др. Дамњан Радосављевић (http://www.damnjanradosavljevic.com)

    But, he told me that it is most probably the only place where I will have it published, because, as he said:

     

    "You have substantially disturbed everything what was done in fundamental physics during the last 100 years. And you did it in the 'horrifying' way:

    'Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, that when we grasp it - in a decade, a century, or a millennium - we will all say to each other, how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid?' (John A. Wheeler)

    Even 'worse': fundamental physics, as you have explicitly showed, has nothing to do with ideas, but is totally within the realm of measurement instruments, that is, it is totally discoverable.

    And, even more 'worse': you have explained everything on the basis of already discovered things, known already in the year 1900., and which were just not recognized/understood properly. And they missed to do that only because instead to think carefully, humbly, rationally, 'earthly', they kept their heads (minds) 'high above the clouds'.

    And, not only Wheeler, but nobody would have ever guessed that the solution will be found by somebody who is not the member of the physics elite.

    So, they are completely left out, totally wiped out.

    They won't accept that. They won't allow that. (note by me: for example, see the review at the end of this text)

    You asked me 'What about ethics? Moral? (Respect for truth, responsibility for future generations?)'.

    Unfortunately, when their glory/prestige is in danger, all that turns out to be only their mask.

    That what you did will (perhaps) be accepted in the next century, when the actual physics elites are gone (just as Max Planck said: 'A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.'). But, only if your work becomes widely known. But, how? Putting it on internet? People are interested in what elite physicists say, and not in what you say. That what you say nobody wants to hear/know. People do not value reasonable things much. They like extraordinary, incomprehensible things. People love mysteries. They love magicians. There is an old Latin saying: 'Mundus vult decipi'.

    Mark Kac (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Kac) said:

    'There are two kinds of geniuses: the ordinary and the magicians. An ordinary genius is a fellow whom you and I would be just as good as, if we were only many times better. There is no mystery as to how his mind works. Once we understand what they've done, we feel certain that we, too, could have done it. It is different with the magicians. Even after we understand what they have done, it is completely dark. Richard Feynman is the magician of the highest calibre.'

    Both the 'magicians' and their admirers, like to think that 'magicians' are 'chosen', that their mind is 'lead by God's hand'. Incomprehensibility of that what they do is expected. Even desirable. Because 'God works in mysterious ways', 'beyond human capability known as reason/sapience/nous'.

    In my opinion, the way that the truth which you have discovered may be accepted in the near future, is that some very powerful/influential person - who IS NOT the member of the current physics elite, and who is moral, ethical, honorable, who values and understands the importance of truth - understands what you did, and supports it.

    But, such persons are extremely rare. Even if you find such person, how to reach him/her? You are - so to say - nobody. Me, too. Even if you reach him/her, how to make him/her to take you seriously?

    The good thing is that everybody who possesses good secondary school level knowledge of math and physics can, on his own, understand what you did, in a very short time (by patient and careful reading of that what you wrote).

    The bad thing is that, as Einstein said, 'Education is that what remains after one has forgotten what one has learned in school.' Powerful/influential people are people who have finished school long time ago.

    But, if they are willing to know/understand, they can engage people who can help them in that.

    It would be best if that powerful/influential person would let you (or/and me) to expose/explain all that to him/her, in the presence of another engineer of electrotechnics and another physicist. But, I'm afraid, there is not much hope that this scenario happens."

    ---------------------------------------------------

    Zoran S. D.'s picture
    Offline
    Joined: Jan 14 2014
    Dear reader,use your internet-browser and search for:
    two photons whirl

    Follow the links, read, think, share, discuss. 
    That is something that your descendants will learn and understand in primary and secondary school already. And they will wonder how comes that it did not become the part of standard primary and secondary school teaching-programs in, i.e., 1910 already. Mildly speaking, they will not be proud of their ancestors. Ancestors who were intelligent, but so conceited and - instead to rational, reasonable thinking - inclined to mysticism, and therefore unable to see simple and most important truths - the very truths which they, allegedly, "searched for" (in fact, they just wanted titles, glory, prestige, money, power). 
    Five years already, the current physics elites refuse, conceitedly, arrogantly, to enable better future for our descendants, try to keep our descendants in the darkness of their terrible prejudices, which are the result of vanity, conceit, arrogance, impudence.
    In the review above (the last text-paragraph), they say: "base that what you did on our work".
    And, I told them explicitly: I'd love to, but isn't it obvious that there is, simply, nothing in recent literature which I could have referenced? And I have offered that they present my work as their joint work (that elite physicists contact each other, make one big conference, and announce there that they have, jointly, found the solution). And that proposal was, simply, ignored.
    The Science 2.0 'says':  http://www.science20.com/about_science_20_%C2%AE_and_scientific_blogging_%C2%AE-33670
    that one of its aims is to 'Create an infrastructure where actual collaboration can occur using customized tools.'

    I did not see any collaboration, though. (Not only about my articles, but in general).
    I have even initiated it, via internal mail system of Science 2.0, but without success.
    I have tried to provoke it. Without success.


    I am in the situation "Those who have the privilege to know have the duty to act." 
    My goal is the better future for my children, and for our children. And that it starts soon.

    Add a comment

    • Allowed HTML tags: <span> <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite><TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe><u><font>
    • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
    CAPTCHA
    If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.