0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Enough said, pointless having sections on new theories, may as well stick up a communist banner because that is the reality of the internet.
QuoteEnough said, pointless having sections on new theories, may as well stick up a communist banner because that is the reality of the internet.Very wrong I think, I love that there was such a furore between the followers of Huygens and Newton over which theory of light was correct and I think it is very important that people are worried about something that is so fundamental to life. It is something to be passionate about and it is such a pity that so many have been befuddled by maths into accepting something so hoydenish and unacceptable. That is the reason I have theories, because to be frank, the present theories are so sketchy and unsatisfactory that surely something better could be done than that.
Money and prestige are very important in science. These two things are hoarded and can result in new theories never having a chance, if they threatened to divert these resources. Theories that are more acceptable, will not step on anyone's toes and will therefore not challenge the status quo. Specialization theories are more accepted since studying the left eye of the cockroach does not intrude on those who's study the right eye. If you theorize the visual cortex this may intrude and be resisted. A new theory, that challenges the status quo, even if valid and useful, could mean another theory will become obsolete, if they are mutually exclusive. Nobody in the horse and buggy industry wanted the horseless carriage to succeed. They know it would compete for the same resources and consumers of transportation. On the other hand, presenting new theories, although hitting the industry wall, will nevertheless help the consumer of theories realize that some traditions need to change. The horseless carriage, although different, made some people realize this form of transport allows much more speed and utility. Old dogs who don't wish to learn new tricks, will not see this because they will be preoccupied on avoiding new tricks. What I have found is, in science there are some people who are good at getting resources. However, they lack the self generation of quality theory. They know how to work the system like a salesman, but may not generate good theories to justify these resources for the longer term. They will sometimes steal theory from those who don't know how to work the system. You may see your theories in the literature, years later. Sometimes alternate theory sections are place holders for the theory black market which deals in stolen ideas. You will not get any credit, out of fear of plagiarism. However, by having it written down in these public internet records, you still own the idea.
The point you are missing is that regardless what we all think of present theory , it does work. My theories for example I am certain are the truth, however though the value of the universe k=1 and k=0 simultaneous, only k=1 has value and is what science uses making all my theory a useless thing.
The claim by Physicists that their theory can never, even in a million years, be explained in words, is particularly obnoxious, especially when the mathematics involved is so absurd, and yet at the same time the same physicists claim in extravagant and adulatory terms that the theory evolved is perfection itself, is absurd. There is no other word for it.