Kudos to Fred Frees
for this heads up on the latest embarrassment for regressive physics and those
who actually fund this stuff:
The headline reads: “Physicists Send
Particles Of Light Into The Past, Proving Time Travel Is Possible?”
I think that the only thing correct about this headline is the question
mark. The article has more BSPL (BS per line) than anything I have read outside
of The Onion, which at least does not pretend to contain anything factual.
Note that these guys did not send “particles of light” anywhere at all,
much less through “wormholes” to meet their former particle selves. The whole thing is merely
theoretical nonsense based on indeterministic assumptions. It is a total mathematical
fiction, like most of quantum mechanics. Readers know that light is not a
particle. It is a wave in a medium filled with particles, which is a big
difference. Many of the weird effects proclaimed here and in QM in general are
simply what you must have if you are in aether denial. Put aether in the
interpretation and the actual experimental data are what we would expect.
Be aware that whenever “time travel” is mentioned, you are either
enjoying a sci-fi movie or experiencing the travails of regressive physics.
Readers know that time is motion and that universal time is the motion of
each microcosm with respect to all other microcosms. That is why we can only
measure specific time, the motion of one single thing with respect to another
single thing. Thus, by convention, we select the rotation of Earth with respect to the Sun. Claims to disprove the Seventh Assumption of Science, irreversibility (All processes are
irreversible) invariably overemphasize the microcosm and ignore
the macrocosm. The analysis in the article is typical of systems philosophy,
which tends to be myopic, focusing on a microcosm without considering its
macrocosm. The disproof of time travel and its required reversibility is
simple: the night sky is unique for each date. To “travel back in time,” one
would have to move all the galaxies and all their stars into the positions they
would have had on the date you select for your fantasy. Good luck with that!
There are numerous transgressions of "The Ten Assumptions of
Science" in the article. Anyone care to list them all?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment