Physics in crisis?

lal...@hotmail.com

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 6:35:47 AM2/26/09

to

According to Lee Smolin, no significant advancement in physics have
been made in the last 25 years. Too many physicists are working on
string theory. I am not a physicist - I am a MBA and Computer
Engineer - although physics was my favourite subject in high school.
I would love to hear from real physicists what significant advances
have recently been made in physics, and if physics is in crisis.

Al Lal

Androcles

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 7:11:52 AM2/26/09

to

<lal...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3c364a88-f03c-48be...@r29g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...

Ok...
Recent advances in real physics:
Blue lasers for DVDs, a dead LHC, the usual boring, routine stuff.

Recent advances in theoretical physics:
We have even more ridiculous papers nobody reads!
Yippee! Isn't it exciting?

Real physics is in crisis, theoretical physics never was.
Now you've heard it.
Who the fuck is Lee Smolin and what horse did he ride in on?

Sam Wormley

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 9:48:06 AM2/26/09

to

Google is your friend--try "advances in physics". It's an exciting
time with advances almost every week!

lal...@hotmail.com

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 11:01:32 AM2/26/09

to

Lee Smolin is a theoritical physicist, and he has written a book: The
trouble with physics. In this book he claims that since the 1800's
physics has been progressing with great advances being made within
every 25 year period, that is until now. I am saying this from memory
- it has been two months since I read this book. LS also claims that
too many physicists are working on string theory, and it may prove to
be a dead end.

What are the greatest advancements in theoritical physics from 1981
(the book, if I remember correctly is from 2006) to now.

I hope you can prove Lee Smolin wrong.

Al Lal

Androcles

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 11:38:34 AM2/26/09

to

<lal...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:89b001d7-79f4-4b0c...@17g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...

Al Lal
==============================================
I wasn't being serious, I know that Lee Smolin is not a real physicist.
You specifically stated you would love to hear from real physicists.
I do not have to prove him wrong, he's just another theoretical crank,
not worth bothering with. I hope you can prove J.K. Rowling wrong,
she said Harry Potter was a young wizard and Hagrid rode a flying
motorcycle, a tale as fictional as string theory. Hogwarts is always
in crisis, that's the fun of fairy tales. The difference between J. K.
Rowling and Lee Smolin is she's sold more books, made more
money and entertained more children than he ever will. Sorry if
string theory was your favourite story and I burst your bubble,
but you did say "real physicists".

ryno

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 4:38:28 PM2/26/09

to

String Theory seems a viable stepping stone to the next major
advancement, according to Gibbs:

"Just as Einstein banished the ether as a medium for electromagnetism
we must now complete his work by banishing space-time as a medium for
string theory. The result will be a model in which space-time is
recovered as a result of the relationship between interacting strings.
It will be the first step towards a reconciliation of physics and
philosophy. Perhaps it will be quickly followed by a change of view,
to a point from where all of our universe can be seen as a consequence
of our possible experiences just as the old philosophers wanted us to
see it. What other ways will we have to modify our understanding to
accommodate such a theory? Not all can be foreseen. "

To answer his question, completing Leibniz's Monadology is the answer:

http://cloudmusiccompany.com/monads.htm

NoEinstein

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 6:07:35 PM2/26/09

to

Dear Al Lal: Those are great questions! Having a physics degree
isn't necessary for having curiosity about physics, and about science.
The past hundred plus years are what I like to call... The Dark Ages
of Einstein. Because the "unfathomable" and counterintuitive seemed
more intellectually advanced, Einstein started touting his
unfathomable space-time variation as a primary mechanism in how the
Universe works. That man (and most in physics) had zero idea what the
mechanism of gravity is. So, he just told the air-heads in academia
that his EQUATIONS were the mechanism, and the Jewish-controlled
textbook and publishing industries started reaping the rewards.

For your information: I have totally and completely disproved
Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity! The former
violates the Law of the Conservation of Energy; and the latter was
just a labored empirical ANALOGY which Einstein wrote to modify
Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation (sic) to match the very precise
orbital data for the planet Mercury. Any mathematician worth his salt
could have done what Einstein did in 1/10th the time. "Morons" tend
to be slow. The following links to some of my apt posts should better
explain WHY physics is so totally screwed up. — NoEinstein —

Eric Gisse

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 6:13:14 PM2/26/09

to

Everything you write is wrong.

[snip]

Tim BandTech.com

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 6:23:46 PM2/26/09

to

I do think the accurate image is in this context of depicting
theoretical versus experimental, real versus imaginary,
philosophically coherent versus a lacking in this department.

Please do go and read some digest like science news and you'll see
strange stories such as conglomerations of atoms of one element
behaving as a singular atom of another, aluminum I believe was one of
the constituents.

Mass disappearing from old mass standards locked away in vaults.

Dark Matter- a likely misnomer whose age is still tender yet
mainstream.

TOE- a term that I use as infrequently as possible but in whose
direction I believe you will find the simple answer to your puzzle,
whether one exists or not. Granting the TOE we should then follow the
TOE since it is the TOE. This behavioral apparatus then would not
finish until the TOE is finished and even then such a finish cannot
necessarily diminish futher study. In that modern theory is a failed
TOE then we already have the existential form of the counterTOE
(CTOE), though some will even dispute this and claim that their branch
is the TOE and so to come and follow them down their rabbit hole,
which I do highly reccomend; just try to keep track of the cocoa puffs
versus the rabbit's crap.

I have one such rabbit hole with cocoa puffs which is purely
arithmetic and of such a childish nature that any relaxed mind can
likely pick up the game. Especially since the parts have already been
built and I just reuse them from a more primitive place. Yet spacetime
with unidirectional time emerges from this very primitive math which
takes little more than a twelve year old mind. Hah, if only I was
twelve again and could be taught this math.

- Tim

Androcles

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 7:16:31 PM2/26/09

to

"Tim BandTech.com" <tttp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b2c7f9c9-d695-4714...@p11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

What all high schools teachers should know:
Geography: GPS receiver.
Cartography: Google Earth.
Biology: Carpal tunnel syndrome from too much typing.
Sex: Never mind, they know instinctively.
Chemistry: see sex above.
History: Never mind, it will repeat itself.
Real physics = rabbit faeces best left to biologists.
Theoretical physics = counting cocoa pops and multiplying by gamma.
Mathematics = counting cocoa pops, rabbit faeces are too difficult.
Engineering = stepping in dog shit to pull theoretical physicists out
of Easter Bunny warrens.
Art = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJAXJWm8G4A

Benj

unread,

Feb 26, 2009, 7:55:56 PM2/26/09

to

On Feb 26, 6:35 am, lal...@hotmail.com wrote:

> I would love to hear from real physicists what significant advances
> have recently been made in physics, and if physics is in crisis.

Um, some of those are a theoretical understanding of ESP along with
practical applications such as training for "remote viewing", the
development of unidirectional force generation as was found to power
alien UFOs, the proof of the existence of not only alien lifeforms,
but alien civilizations far in advance of ours, time travel and a
correct theoretical understanding of time and space upon which such
activities are based, the discovery of hidden dimensions the
suggestion of which have formed the basis of major religions for eons,
and of course understanding and development of practical free energy
devices which could totally eliminate any dependence on smelly, nasty,
polluting coal, gas and oil. These are just a few.

Of course, all these developments are highly classified to prevent
"widespread panic" among the general population (ordinary guys like
you) so none of these things can be discussed here. Look us up when
you get a high enough clearance. A nice high level job at NSA ought to
go far for boosting you into within striking range of this
information...

:)

NoEinstein

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 4:46:35 AM2/27/09

to

> [snip]- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Dear Eric: You hide behind grandiose generalities. If you are "such
a scientist", please choose anything that I have said (about science)
and explain WHY you think I'm wrong, and what you suppose the
"correct" explanation to be. Can you do that? — NoEinstein —

Y.y.Porat

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 5:25:19 AM2/27/09

to

------------------
as long as physicists will go on
with things like 'virtual particles' without mass
Higgs bosons
W particles without mass etc etc
*there will be no advance in physics ***
so
NO MASS- NO REAL PHYSICS
it means as well
that dealing with curved soace time
as a cuase of curved movement
is another dead lock on physics

ATB
Y.Porat
--------------------------

PD

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 9:56:21 AM2/27/09

to

Lee Smolin is working in a particular area of physics and that area of
physics (quantum gravity) is pretty dysfunctional, though I don't know
that I'd call it critical. Particle physics is languishing, and those
scientists have over-invested in one basket for all their eggs, but it
looks like some kind of rejuvenation must be just around the corner
(within 3 years) because of the data that will come from that one
basket. Fusion physics is in a complete state of disaster. Other areas
of physics -- surface physics, quantum optics, astrophysics,
scattering theory -- appear to be reasonably healthy. But the exotic
stuff --gravity and particle physics -- is what makes the papers.

doug

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 9:58:21 AM2/27/09

to

NoEinstein wrote:

Lets see, you do not know any math, you do not know any physics, you
do not know about the experiments that have been done. You continue
to post nonsense that you do not understand. You have had your mistakes
pointed out to you. Yet you come here and pretend that no one has
refuted your nonsense? You need to have a talk with your ego.

PD

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 10:05:53 AM2/27/09

to

On Feb 26, 5:07 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> On Feb 26, 6:35 am, lal...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > According to Lee Smolin, no significant advancement in physics have
> > been made in the last 25 years. Too many physicists are working on
> > string theory. I am not a physicist - I am a MBA and Computer
> > Engineer - although physics was my favourite subject in high school.
> > I would love to hear from real physicists what significant advances
> > have recently been made in physics, and if physics is in crisis.
>
> > Al Lal
>
> Dear Al Lal: Those are great questions! Having a physics degree
> isn't necessary for having curiosity about physics, and about science.

I absolutely agree. Note that curiosity and competence do not go hand
in hand.
Notice also that an architecture degree isn't necessary for having
curiosity about architecture and design.

> The past hundred plus years are what I like to call... The Dark Ages
> of Einstein. Because the "unfathomable" and counterintuitive seemed
> more intellectually advanced, Einstein started touting his
> unfathomable space-time variation as a primary mechanism in how the
> Universe works.

There is absolutely nothing that is unfathomable about what Einstein
produced. It's actually a *simplification* over the preceding physics,
which one recognizes very quickly after studying it for just a little
bit.

And being intuitive has NEVER been a figure of merit in science.
Copernicus' heliocentric solar system was completely counterintuitive.
Kepler's planetary orbit laws were completely counterintuitive.
Galileo's claims about motion lasting forever without requiring a
constant push were completely counterintuitive. Newton's laws of
motion were completely counterintuitive. Faraday's connection between
electric and magnetic fields was completely counterintuitive. Darwin's
theory of the generation of species was completely counterintuitive.
Mendeleev's table of elements was completely counterintuitive. The
moment you rely on truth in science being nailed to intuitiveness, you
abandon all hope of progress. Revelations in science that lead to
progress are counterintuitive BY DEFINITION.

Sue...

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 10:39:10 AM2/27/09

to

On Feb 26, 6:35 am, lal...@hotmail.com wrote:

Suppose your income and professional career depended
on your students passing an examination. Which subject
would you choose to test the young minds that hold your
career in their hands?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem
-OR-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral#Some_practical_applications

Recipe for a crisis? ;-)

Sue...

Y.y.Porat

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 10:53:08 AM2/27/09

to

---------------
it seems that something is changing
in PD .....
(in the good direction .....)
ATB
Y.Porat
---------------------

Ivan Gorelik

unread,

Feb 27, 2009, 10:54:47 AM2/27/09

to

On Feb 27, 12:25 pm, "Y.y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 26, 1:35 pm, lal...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > According to Lee Smolin, no significant advancement in physics have
> > been made in the last 25 years. Too many physicists are working on
> > string theory. I am not a physicist - I am a MBA and Computer
> > Engineer - although physics was my favourite subject in high school.
> > I would love to hear from real physicists what significant advances
> > have recently been made in physics, and if physics is in crisis.

Yes! Physicists will soon explode the Earth.
http://darkenergy.narod.ru/civilen.html
http://darkenergy.narod.ru/argen.html
http://darkenergy.narod.ru/magtren.html

> > Al Lal
>
> ------------------
> as long as physicists will go on
> with things like 'virtual particles' without mass
> Higgs bosons

What is Higgs boson? The particle of God or particle of Devil?
http://darkenergy.narod.ru

Autymn D. C.

unread,

Mar 1, 2009, 4:21:57 AM3/1/09

to

Not theoretical, but applied--See the end of the [four-million-year
old] timeline in my Google Groups profile. There are two new
materials in the world, and both their elds (ages) began in 2006. One
of them is the formalisation of new nuclear matter: nuclear halos,
clusters, compounds, polýmers, pollamers. I'v been a'hoping these
will bring the world new shelves for the perihodic tabul. The other
material is radioisotopes/isomers with a variabil lifetime or
suppressed decay.

(By the way, superstrings are wrong too. The spatial world is at
least 3D--I like 6D--and yet superstrings are 1D. They are not
spatial elements as motes are. They make no sense, when branes do;
but as they are 1D, they are the easiest to forge mathematic models
with. They are the cartoon-equivalent of matter. Sorry, Kaku.)

-Aut

Androcles

unread,

Mar 1, 2009, 5:03:42 AM3/1/09

to

"Autymn D. C." <lysd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:2751f605-8e44-482e...@o2g2000prl.googlegroups.com...

============================================
You have a four million year old timeline in your profile?
So it was YOU that stole the asteroids!
To think I blamed Tom Davidson.

zzbu...@netscape.net

unread,

Mar 1, 2009, 5:09:12 AM3/1/09

to

Well, that's also because 50% of all Physicists consistently
vote Hamilton as the greatest Phycist *EVER*.
And also why the real Engineers invented Post Watt Robotics, Pv
Cell Energy,
DSP, CD, DVD, HDTV, Fiber Optics, On-Line-Banking, On-Line-
Publishing,
Lasers, Masers, Laser-Guided Phasors, Holograms, Holographic
Memory,
All-In-One Printers, Digital-Terrain Mapping, GPS, USB, XML,
Optical Computers,
Microwave Ovens, Cell Phones, RISC, C++ Parallel Processing,
Biodiesel, Autonomous Vehicles, Adaptive A.I., Post Qwerty Keying,
Drones,
and Post Ford Batteries for the wanks too.

>
> What are the greatest advancements in theoritical physics from 1981
> (the book, if I remember correctly is from 2006) to now.
>
> I hope you can prove Lee Smolin wrong.
>
> Al Lal
> ==============================================
> I wasn't being serious, I know that Lee Smolin is not a real physicist.
> You specifically stated you would love to hear from real physicists.
> I do not have to prove him wrong, he's just another theoretical crank,
> not worth bothering with. I hope you can prove J.K. Rowling wrong,
> she said Harry Potter was a young wizard and Hagrid rode a flying
> motorcycle, a tale as fictional as string theory. Hogwarts is always
> in crisis, that's the fun of fairy tales. The difference between J. K.
> Rowling and Lee Smolin is she's sold more books, made more
> money and entertained more children than he ever will. Sorry if
> string theory was your favourite story and I burst your bubble,

> but you did say "real physicists".- Hide quoted text -