20200127

A celebrated physicist against the Big Bang Theory (somewhat)


PSI Blog 20200127 A celebrated physicist against the Big Bang Theory (somewhat)

Thanks to Ed Mason for this heads up:

Top cosmologist's lonely battle against 'Big Bang' theory



[GB: Note this is only a reformist job. Peebles doesn’t seem to realize all that “rock-solid data” are interpreted based on the cosmogonists’ assumption of finity.]



20200120

More on the Casimir Effect and aether denial


PSI Blog 20200120 More on the Casimir Effect and aether denial

Guest Blog by Jesse Witwer:

The Wikipedia is illuminating on the ad hoc disconnect:





In quantum field theory, the Casimir effect and the Casimir–Polder force are physical forces arising from a quantized field. They are named after the Dutch physicist Hendrik Casimir who predicted them in 1948.. The Casimir effect can be understood by the idea that the presence of conducting metals and dielectrics alters the vacuum expectation value of the energy of the second quantized ...


First, they admit that all "mediums" produce an analogue of a Casimir effect.

“Any medium supporting oscillations has an analogue of the Casimir effect. For example, beads on a string[3][4] as well as plates submerged in turbulent water[5] or gas[6] illustrate the Casimir force.”

Then, they go on to puke out the ad hoc required.

“The causes of the Casimir effect are described by quantum field theory, which states that all of the various fundamental fields, such as the electromagnetic field, must be quantized at each and every point in space.”

I suppose, it shouldn't be surprising. There are many normal and well-established phenomena that have well established equations even such as the Newton Laplace that they go on to rebrand in some way.


20200113

Financing the birth of regressive physics


PSI Blog 20200113 Financing the birth of regressive physics and cosmogony

Last week I hinted at the relationship between ideologies and economics. Like everyone else, regressive physicists and cosmogonists do not live on air. In the USA, money for science must go through Congress, the executive branch, or rich donors almost all of whom are extremely or at least moderately religious. The USA government is not going to finance the downfall of religion, which patriotically supports their military endeavours.

Here I once again present the interesting anecdote by John Chappell, who is widely regarded as the “founder of dissident physics in the USA”:

Here is part of #3 in the founding principles of the Natural Philosophy Alliance written by Dr. Chappell:

"DO NOT ASSUME THAT IF SPECIAL RELATIVITY WERE INVALID, THIS FACT WOULD LONG AGO HAVE BEEN DISCOVERED WITHIN ESTABLISHMENT PHYSICS.

The reason it has not been is that almost everyone with a sufficiently bold and critical view of the subject to develop sound arguments against SR has not been allowed to flourish within the establishment. Great numbers of reliable accounts of such intolerance have been told.

One of the most recent comes from a new NPA member who, when doing graduate work in physics around 1960, heard the following story from his advisor: While working for his Ph.D. in physics at the University of California in Berkeley in the late 1920s, this advisor had learned that all physics departments in the U.C. system were being purged of all critics of Einsteinian relativity. Those who refused to change their minds were ordered to resign, and those who would not were fired, on slanderous charges of anti-Semitism. The main cited motivation for this unspeakably unethical procedure was to present a united front before grant-giving agencies, the better to obtain maximal funds. This story does not surprise me. There has been a particularly vicious attitude towards critics of Einsteinian relativity at U.C. Berkeley ever since. I ran into it in 1985, when I read a paper arguing for absolute simultaneity at that year’s International Congress on the History of Science. After I finished, the Danish chairman made some courteous remarks about dissidents he had learned about in Scandinavia, and then turned to the audience for questions. The first speaker was one of a group of about 4 young physics students in the back. He launched immediately into a horrible tirade of verbal abuse, accusing me of being entirely wrong in my analysis, a simplification of the Melbourne Evans analysis–” Evans is wrong; you are wrong,” he shouted. He accused me of being way out of line to present my “faulty” arguments on his prestigious campus. When I started to ask him “Then how would you explain…”, he loudly interrupted me with “I don’t have to explain anything.” The rest of the audience felt so disturbed by all this, that the question session was essentially destroyed."

Financially, this has worked out extremely well for U.C. Berkeley, which is arguably “the best public university in the USA” where the Physics Department is famous for developing nuclear weapons and filling out the periodic table with the heavier elements (e.g., californium). It has been in the forefront of propagandizing the Big Bang Theory. This from the former chair of the Astronomy Department:

 Silk, Joseph, 1973, Cosmological theory: Science, v. 181, p. 1038-1039.

Silk, Joseph, 1980, The big bang: The creation and evolution of the universe: San Francisco, Freeman, 394 p.

Silk, Joseph, 1988, The Big Bang (2nd edition): New York, Freeman, 485 p.

Silk, Joseph, 2002, The big bang (3rd ed.): New York, W.H. Freeman, 480 p.

Those financial constraints still hold. I doubt U.C. Berkeley will drop its support of creationism any time soon:


‘Saul Perlmutter, of the University of California, Berkeley, and the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, said that a breakthrough in dark energy research “feels like a natural thing to occur soon.”’ Credit: R. Kaltschmidt/Berkeley Lab

The philosophical naivety of cosmogonists knows no bounds. Here is the latest on how your tax dollars are being wasted by U.C and Prof. Perlmutter:


Readers know dark energy does not exist. Welcome to the latest cosmogonical goose chase!  



20200106

Why do ideologies exist?


PSI Blog 20200106 Why do ideologies exist?

It should be clear from last week’s PSI Blog that weird ideas like the Big Bang Theory serve some important societal and cultural function. As in ideologies, in general, the outright dismissal of opposing ideas is mandatory for the survival of the relativity and Big Bang paradigm. Dissidents can point out Einstein's errors all they want, but that does not trump the “Einstein is always right” trope taught to youngsters for generations. One can point out there are better interpretations of data said to “confirm” relativity.[1] One can repeat Newton’s Second Law of Motion demanding that every acceleration of something (such as gravitation) simply requires a corresponding deceleration of something.[2] All that remains futile, because there is something else going on.

I have been aware of that “something else” for some time. Now comes a particularly excellent essay written by Richard Koenigsberg, which I just received in an email. He writes:

“Social theory rarely addresses the reasons why certain ideologies exist. Scholars write about "dominant discourses," but the question is why particular discourses become dominant. To answer the question of why particular ideas are embraced and perpetuated, I suggest a psychological approach: What does this ideology do for the people who embrace it? What role does the ideology play in the psychic life of its adherents?”

Dr. Koenigsberg is a psychologist who is Director of the Library of Social Science. He specializes in the ideological causes of violence. I would broaden his last sentence by removing the word “psychic.” All causes involve univironments: microcosms and their macrocosms. In other words, the development of mental states result from interactions with the environment. Fascists live with fascists; cosmogonists live with cosmogonists; regressive physicists live with regressive physicists. Above all, economic conditions are paramount. No one can live on air alone.

Do read this essay. It is a good start at understanding why folks are encouraged to believe the entire universe (of over 2 trillion galaxies, no less) exploded out of nothing:

Richard’s email introduces the essay with this:

“The current President may be narcissistic, delusional, even occasionally psychotic. However, this explains nothing. The question is what is he saying that causes tens-of-millions of people to embrace his ideas?

Politicians articulate their own emotions and fantasies through the vehicle of ideas put forth upon the public stage. If a politician is to become successful, the ideas he conveys must resonate with the populace. The leader's words must evoke emotions and fantasies within his audience not unlike the emotions and fantasies his words evoke within himself.

Metaphors and images within the rhetoric of political leaders contain, evoke and bring forth latent fantasies into reality. An ideology constitutes a modus operandi, allowing unconscious fantasies to be activated and externalized into the world. Ideologies "capture" or harness energy contained with latent desires or fantasies, making this energy available for concerted, societal action.”






[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2017, Infinite Universe Theory: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 327 p. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/IUTebook].
[2] Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The Physical Cause of Gravitation: viXra:1806.0165.