Re: Physicists and Laws.
- From: jcon <cirejcon@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 08:26:23 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 28, 10:56 pm, socratus <israel...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Physicists and Laws.
Physicists do not dictate to Nature their laws.
Laws of nature are reality, which exists independently
from the researcher. The Nature cannot be arranged so
strange, as the physicists think of it. Their thoughts
are so strange, that they offer paradoxical ideas.Einstein wrote:
“ In the Science the man has freedom to solve
well made crossword. ”
In this crossword physicists don’t know what Light quanta,
Electron, Energy are.
#
“ It is important to realize that in physics today,
we have no knowledge of what energy is.
We do not have a picture that energy comes in little
blobs of a definite amount. ” / Feynman. 1987/ . . . .
#
"The electron that can be told is not the true electron."
/ David Harrison /
#
Etc.
And instead to understand what Light quanta, Electron,
Energy are, they try to add to the crossword of Universe
new cells and fill them with new abstract models.
For example;
on horizontal – dark matter
I suggest you educate yourself on the scientific
method and the history of science. Much scientific
advance is made by postulating
unobserved entities to explain otherwise anomalous
observations. In many cases, this results in a
discovery. Examples:
Neptune (to explain anomalous orbit of Uranus)
"displacement current" -> EM waves (consequence of
making EM equations mathematically
self-consistent)
Neutrinos (to explain apparent momentum non-
conservation in beta decay. Was
"dogma" for 26 years before being
observed.)
antimatter (postulated as additional solution
to Klein-Gordon and Dirac eqns.)
charm quark (to explain low rate for K->mu+ mu-
decay)
b quark (need third generation of quarks to have
observed CP violation in K decay)
W & Z (consequence of EW symmetry breaking
in a way that doesn't "blow up the
equations")
top quark (needed to fit precision data,
particularly from LEP)
In some cases it doesn't:
"Aether" - most parsimonious interpretation
of Maxwell's Eqn., but wrong
"solar quadrupole moment" - alternative
to GR to explain anomalous
precession of Mercury's
perihelion.
etc, etc
In science, negative results are very important
too. Sometimes more important than positive
results.
The jury is still out on dark matter, dark energy,
and the Higgs. Results, positive OR negative,
will move science forward.
-jc
(The Dark Matter is another official dogma
of our astronomy. /V. H. Vergon/)
and on vertical – string theory
( We don't know what we are talking about"
/ Nobel laureate David Gross referring to the current state
of string theory./)
Or on horizontal – quark,
and on vertical - Higgs boson or Higgs mechanism.
Etc.
This is reason that I wrote:
The more I study the more I know.
The more I know the more ideas I have.
The more ideas I have the more they abstract.
The more they abstract the less I know the truth.
And as a result conclusion from some article:
" One of the best kept secrets of science is
that physicists have lost their grip on reality."
========= .
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Physicists and Laws.
- From: socratus
- Re: Physicists and Laws.
- From: socratus
- Re: Physicists and Laws.
- References:
- Physicists and Laws.
- From: socratus
- Physicists and Laws.
- Prev by Date: Re: In the News: Origin of Darwin's theory in dispute
- Next by Date: Re: Commentary: The ability to see what is there, and to see what is
- Previous by thread: Re: Physicists and Laws.
- Next by thread: Re: Physicists and Laws.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
