Blog 20151202
Regressive physics--Calculations show that the universe should not exist
Another great
heads up from George Coyne:
"Hi Glenn:
I find this article
from Tech Times quite amusing. Here is an excerpt:
‘Based on a new
cosmological theory, we-our planet, our solar system, our entire universe-should
not exist.
Researchers are
trying to understand what some astronomical theories mean in light of the
latest Higgs-boson discovery. The conclusion they drew is that, if all the
theories proved to be true, we are a massive impossibility according to the
present models of particle physics and the beginnings of our universe. While
not a comforting thought, it's certainly intriguing one.’
What I find
most interesting is that the scientists would rather come to the conclusion
that the existence of the universe is impossible, rather than the more logical
conclusion that their theories are in serious error. My question to you is: Am
I seeing this rationally and how common is this kind of strange behavior
amongst regressive physicists? Do you have some other humorous examples?”
[GB: George:
You are definitely the rational one. Your logic is impeccable. Einstein and his
religious promoters faced such contradictions all the time. They were not fazed
by the concepts of massless particles, immaterial fields, virgin birth, walking
on water, living after dying, and, ultimately, the whole universe exploding out
of nothing. Real scientists hate contradictions. That is why the "The Ten
Assumptions of Science" are consupponible. And, like you suggest,
contradictions always mean that something is wrong in the train of thought. The
best that can be said for contradictions that arise during attempts at
performing science is that they point the way to further research.
Regressive
physicists are so well founded on indeterministic assumptions that they never
question them. I suggest that Mr. Hogan be given his Ph.D. immediately. He
appears eminently prepared for the fantasy world in which the Higgs
“god particle" is a prominent actor on the comedic stage. The best
that can be said for the Higgs is that, despite its chunky size and miniscule lifetime,
it has gotten physicists to consider the macrocosm. Maybe someday they will
even rediscover the aether.
Thanks George, I
consider regressive physics to be one big humorous contradiction in the face of
material reality, but always welcome new examples of the weirdness. Maybe we should
write a book in which we try to collect them all in one place. It will be hard
to keep up though, with pandering magazines such as New
Scientist producing one almost every week.]
Posts
2 comments:
I agree that the Standard Model is a bad joke, but equally humorous is the media's persistent misrepresentation of what the theory claims.
1. The "Higgs particle" isn't a particle, it's momentary "excitation" of the Higgs Field;
2. The Higgs excitation isn't the God that gives everything mass, it is the Higgs Field;
3. The Higgs excitation doesn't prove the existence of the Higgs Field, only that there is a spurious energy pulse that actually contradicts the Higgs Theory.
I wonder whether physicists joke about their own theories after a few drinks ... bought with their Pulitzer prize money.
Not only do regressive physicists maintain that it is impossible for the universe to exist, they also are convinced that quantum particles “can exist simultaneously in two or more places.” How incredibly weird is that? Does this make any logical or rational sense to anyone other than true believers of the standard QM model? To me it seems profoundly unscientific. These QM physicists of the Copenhagen group try to deflect any attention from the absurdity of their belief systems by confidently claiming that the universe is very weird. Would try the same tactic in a court of law if charged with a crime that they had committed . Would they tell the jury that they accepted that their alibi was completely implausible and totally impossible, nevertheless it is valid and should be believed? Would they argue that it is just the due to how the universe works that makes it seem that they are guilty? They would only try such a tactic if they were attempting to make a case for insanity.
As a result of the misguided belief is space- time, come the concept of gravity waves which have never been detected despite a great deal of waste resources in this search. The erroneous claim on March 17,2014 by astronomers at the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics that "they had detected and produced "the first direct image of gravitational waves across the primordial sky" was later disproved .By Jan 30,2015 a news item in Nature stated "Gravitational waves discovery now officially dead". On the night of December 2,12015 the European Space agency launched LISA on a mission "designed to make test measurements for a technique that will be used to detect gravitational waves." These waves according to Einstein's predictions are "ripples in space time". But since space-time is only imaginary, it does not actually exist, and thus it can not have ripples.
Glenn Borchardt's explanation of gravity as being "produced by variations in aether pressure, as we suggested as the neomechanical cause of gravitation" does not violate any scientific principles and is the best one i that I have ever encountered..
Post a Comment