The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: The physical education.  (Read 6761 times)

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« on: 16/10/2008 21:50:18 »
The physical education.

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.
=====.
After reading some comments and ideas.


 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
The physical education.
« Reply #1 on: 17/10/2008 00:01:00 »
It's axiomatic that the more you know, the less you know.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #2 on: 17/10/2008 09:39:28 »
=====.
Some years ago I told with young physicist (!).
He said:” You cannot be physicist (!) if you cannot
understand the beauty of Minkowski mathematics.(!)
======.
It seems that he is right, because physicists must know
mathematics very well. The problem is that nobody
knows what is real physical meaning of “ 4-D negative
 space continuum.” in the Nature. SRT is correct theory
 but Minkowski space  continuum is abstract. And together
they are paradoxical. More than  100 years we live with
 this paradox. Nobody confuses.
==========.
During our conversation I understand that this young physicist
 is strong and clever man and he want to reach success. And
 I think  he will do it. So, in the future he will create new
 D/ M-spaces  or new symmetries or discover new particles.
 And one day he  will be a professor and will teach new
 generation ( your son or your daughter) in order that they also
 have possibility to create new D/ M-spaces or new symmetries
 or discover new particles.
Our small Orwell’s world.
==========
If in the beginning the abstract ideas were put into the fundament
of physics then ……we can create  new and new theories for
1000 years but the result will be the same - paradoxical.
=============…
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #3 on: 20/10/2008 17:57:27 »
One camment.
==============.
SR is wrong theory. it is deductively inconsistent and so it is
empirically inconsistent.

Prof. Grynmore of CMU wrongly claimed that as Minkowsi metric theory
is consistent, SR is consistent. The truth is that Minkowski's
theory has nothing to do with Einstein's SR. Einstein was correct
when he protested that Minkowski made it impossible to understand
physics. The proper interval theorem of SR which maps Einsteinian SR
inot Minkowski's theory is not one to one mapping. This means, we
cannot translate the prediction of Minkowski's theory to Einstein's
original SR.

The cruel fact is that Einstein's theory is inconsistent and
Minkowski's theory has nothing to do with physics. The latter is a
stupid mathematics too. All mathematicians with decent training knows
that functions and graph of functions are exactly the same. Minkowski
represented functions which formulate motions as graphs. This is what
4D is all about. It is a mathematical trivia and it is amusing to see
that relativists cult takes this as their big pride. Trivial
mathematics for trivial minds. It is totally stupid to assume that
one can get something revolutionary from this equivalent
representation of functions. This stupidity crystalises later when GR
was developed as maniforld of 4D Riemann space. They thought that
they made motion stationary by defining it as geodesic in the
maniforld over 4D Riemann space. These stupid people did not
understand a simple fact that when masses move, the geometric
distribution of masses change and thus geodesic cannot really
represent motion. Motion is dynamic even in the 4D. Then what is the
point of making origianl 3D space 1D time into 4D? it appears all
intellectual masterbation of relativists cult that they took 4D
nonsense so seriously. Never mind, think about economists for
example, they are working on many hundreds dimensional vector spaces.
So do engineers. Mathematics for physics is most simple minded.

Dr. Kanda
 

lyner

  • Guest
The physical education.
« Reply #4 on: 20/10/2008 19:26:19 »
The more 'known unknowns' we find out about, the more 'unknown unknowns' we are aware that there must be. As dear old Donald said.
But it isn't the arriving that counts - it's the JOURNEY.
Anyone who thinks different is heading for a big disappointment.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #5 on: 21/11/2008 16:52:55 »
About " The third Newton's law ".

One no imagine story about " The third Newton's law ".
=========..
" The action is equal to counteraction." was the great scientific discover.
In a wood it was spoken only about it.
Every animal suddenly became brave and run to the king Lion
Every animal cried to him: "strike me." And as the animals begged
as the king began to beat.  Many animals were wounded.
"It is not under the law", the animals were indignant,
"Under the law the king must also be wound "
But Lion beat and he spits on their law.
All animals scientists worried and began to search why the law doesn’t work.
And when one old scientist Badger has found the answer.
He said:
" The law of action is equal to counteraction is true only in static situations .
But there, where the physical force works, the law is inactive ".
==============.
I am sure, you can now apply this Badger’s concept to many physics areas.

==========
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #6 on: 22/11/2008 06:10:13 »
To every action there is NOT an equal and opposite reaction.
Why?
Because in QT " The third Newton's law " must submit to
“ The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle ”.
=====================================
 

lyner

  • Guest
The physical education.
« Reply #7 on: 23/11/2008 23:32:09 »
Are you saying that momentum is not conserved in QT?
That doesn't seem quite right.
« Last Edit: 24/11/2008 14:56:10 by sophiecentaur »
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #8 on: 25/11/2008 06:18:10 »
To every action there is NOT an equal and opposite reaction.
Why?
Between action and opposite reaction must go time.
The time can go with speed of light quanta c=1.
So " The third Newton's law " in QT in quantum action
doesn’t work. Because if
 “ to every action there is an equal and opposite  reaction.”
 the structure and symmetry of space doesn’t change.
Generally nothing will be change in Universe.
And the creation of Nature and the creation of Life began
 only when the symmetry of space and action were changed.

====================..
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #9 on: 26/11/2008 05:04:31 »
"The third Newton's law " as right as “The first Newton's law ".
=========.
From an article:
“An old professor of mine used to say
that anyone who can answer that question
what inertia is , would win a Nobel Prize. “
===============.
If we want to understand Physics laws without abstractions
we need new interpretation.
 

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6890
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
The physical education.
« Reply #10 on: 26/11/2008 08:32:46 »
The more we learn, the more we see there is to learn.

If ignorance is bliss, why do we seek the font of all knowledge?
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #11 on: 30/11/2008 20:28:39 »
Einstein : Science and Religion.

/ Book: “ Ideas and opinions by Albert Einstein”
Edited by Carl Seeling. 1996.
Part: About religion. /

Page 46.

“The situation may be expressed by an image:
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Though I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict
between religion and science cannot exist “

Page 47.

“The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres
 of religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God.”

Page 48

“ To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God interfering with
natural events could never be refuted, in the real sense, by science,
for this doctrine can always take refuge in those domains in which
scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot.”

Page 48.

“…. , teachers of religion must have the stature to give up
the doctrine of a personal God,… “

“ After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated
 they will surely recognize with joy that true religion has been
ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge.”

Page 49.

“ And so it seems to me that science not only purifies the religious
 impulse of the dross of its anthropomorphism but also contributes
 to a religious spiritualization of our understanding of life.”

/Source:  Science, Philosophy and Religion.
A Symposium, published by the Conference on
Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their
Relation to the Democratic Way of Life,
Inc., New York, 1941./
====================….
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #12 on: 19/12/2008 07:45:19 »
‘ I believe because it is absurd. ‘
/ Tertullian. (ca.160 – ca.220 AD) /
=======..
‘I believe in Physics because it’s absurd’
Would you ever say such a thing to a modern man ?
I doubt it.
Most of us would be asking God’s forgiveness for even thinking it.
But.
=============…
The basis of the physics consists of:
1.
Abstract separated absolute space and time of Newton.
2.
 Abstract ‘ideal gas and ideal particles.’
3.
Abstract ‘black body.’
4.
Abstract negative  4 -  dimensional space of SRT,
abstract 5D, …….and 11 - dimensional space.
5.
Abstract ‘virtual particles’, ‘dark matter’, ‘dark energy’..
6.
Abstract ‘ inertial movement’.
7.
 Abstract ‘big bang’.
8.
Etc.
=========..
And therefore we can read.
#
We don't know what we are talking about"
/ Nobel laureate David Gross referring to the current state of string theory./
#
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)
#
When asked which interpretation of QM he favored,
Feynman replied: "Shut up and calculate."
#
When I was first learning quantum mechanics as a graduate student
at Harvard, a mere 30 years after the birth of the subject.
"You'll never get a PhD if you allow yourself to be distracted
by such frivolities," they kept advising me, "so get back to serious
business and produce some results."
"Shut up," in other words, "and calculate."
And so I did, and probably turned out much the better for it.
/ N. David Mermin /
#
The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex?
Paul Dirac .
#
“ Young man, in mathematics you don't understand things,
you just get used to them.”
/ John von Neumann ./
#
Since the mathematical physicists have taken over,
theoretical physics has gone to pot.
The bizarre concepts generated out of the over use and
misinterpretation of mathematics would be funny if it were not
for the tragedy of the waste in time,
manpower, money, and the resulting misdirection.
/ Richard Feynman./
#
" I feel that we do not have definite physical concepts at all
if we just apply working mathematical rules;
that's not what the physicist should be satisfied with."
 /Dirac /
#
In his 1997 book ” The End of Certainty” Nobel Laureate
Ilya Prigogine wrote:
"The more we know about our universe, the more difficult
 it becomes to believe in determinism."
And “ The quantum paradox  is real nightmare for classic mind ”
#
In his  book ” Quantum theory “  ( published in 2002 )
John Polkinghorne wrote:
 “Quantum theory is certainly strange and surprising,…”
/ chapter 6, part “ Quantum hype”, page 92 /
#
Etc.
======================..
#
Conclusion from some article:
" One of the best kept secrets of science is
that physicists have lost their grip on reality."
 ==============..
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #13 on: 20/12/2008 14:00:48 »
About an Electron.
1.
The energy of electron is: E = hw  (E = hf).
In interaction with vacuum electron has infinity energy: E= ∞
Is it possible? No. Because it is against
‘The law of conservation and transformation energy’.
So, what is happen? How to understand this situation?
What means ‘The law of conservation and transformation
 energy’ according to one single electron?
How can electron escape its infinity?
#
Robert Milliken told, that he knew  nothing
 about “ last essence of electron”.
#
"The electron that can be told is not the true electron."
/ David Harrison /
#
If an electron emits a photon, it doesn't mean the photon was
inside the electron to begin with. If an electron absorbs the
photon, that doesn't mean the photon is now inside the electron.
/ From an article. /
Nobody knows what ‘ duality of photon’ or “virtual photon” is.
Nobody knows where the electron hides its “virtual photon”.
Does ‘The law of conservation and transformation energy’.
allow or forbid an electron to emit a photon?
So, on one hand electron must have “friend - virtual photon”
and  “girl-friend  - positron”. And on the other hand when
electron interacts  with vacuum he doesn’t have any friends.
All his parameters become infinite. So, what is really it means?
#
Cooling an elementary particle like an electron to Absolute
 zero ( Vacuum) still leaves you with the zero point energy
 and the invariant (rest) energy. So, zero point energy (local)
or infinity energy can electron  have  in interaction with
vacuum?   
#
Electron spin turns out to be a relativistic quantum property
 arising from Dirac's equation, one which behaves like spin,
 but nobody really knows how it is "spinning".
The use of a "spinning top model" for the electron
 is only figurative, it is not meant to suggest that electrons
 are like tiny hard balls spinning. It's much more exotic than that.
/ From an article./
So, what is really ‘spinning’?
=======..
Formal modern physics says;
 many particles as electron or photon have not structure,
but there are many reasons that we should believe that
they have structure.
I think attention to structure of photon and electron
lead us to resolve many physical problems.
===================…
========================================…
 

lyner

  • Guest
The physical education.
« Reply #14 on: 20/12/2008 21:53:55 »
If you edited your posts down a bit, you might get some more responses. Or do you just like writing?
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
The physical education.
« Reply #15 on: 21/12/2008 05:11:11 »
If you edited your posts down a bit, you might get some more responses. Or do you just like writing?
=============================================
Thank you for advice.
S.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

The physical education.
« Reply #15 on: 21/12/2008 05:11:11 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums