Church of the Collective Delusion
Knecht
I think the theoretical physics community should be renamed "The
Church of the Collective Delusion"
Why would I open this vial of hydrogen sulfide at the Faculty Tea
Party?
Here is why.
The discrete fractal cosmological model, www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
, has made considerable advances in the past 2 years. For example, if
one adopts the empirically-motivated fractal scaling for gravitational
interactions, as predicted by the discrete fractal model, you get the
following benefits.
1. A very sensible and unified Planck scale closely related to the
mass and radius of the proton. This solves the "Hierarchy Problem",
which is related to the bizarre and unnatural value for the Planck
mass that you get with the conventional "substandard" model.
2. You get a really elegant and natural explanation for the meaning of
the fine structure constant, an enigmatic phenomenon for over 80
years.
3. You can solve the full Kerr-Newman solution of the Einstein-Maxwell
equations for the proton and get a radius of 8.13 x 10^-14 cm and a
mass of 1.67 x 10^-24 g..
4. You get a real physical explanation for the distinction between
leptons and hadrons, based on the Kerr-Newman solutions of the
Einstein-Maxwell equations.
5. You get a really interesting new model for the electron based on a
Rossner-Nordstron solution from the Kerr-Newman family of solutions.
6. A whole lot more, but you get the point.
How has the theoretical physics community reacted? Total ignorance:
Hear no knowledge, see no knowledge, speak no knowledge. They prefer
their Ptolemaic fictions of quarks, the 8-fold way, the bogus Planck
scale, magnetic monopoles, imaginary dark matter particles, and on and
on with one epicycle added after another. They made a bad assumption
about how gravitation scales (that it does not when it clearly does)
and ever since theoretical physics has been a slow-motion train
wreck. An ungainly, thoroughly Ptolemaic, construction that is very
ugly to any natural philsopher who is not blind.
So that is why I sugest that theoretical physics be renamed The Church
of the Collective Delusion. They promote bad science and they ignore
good science. Ignorance is their key to maintaining their current
stranglehold on theoretical physics.
Change is coming,
Rev. 11D Meow!
"Knecht" <rlold...@amherst.edu> wroted...
>
> I think the theoretical physics community should be renamed "The
tl,dr
So, your kneecaps fired-up
a bong hit gone wild, nest pause.
Knecht
> "Knecht" <rlolders...@amherst.edu> wroted...
Would you care to enlighten the readership on any specific
shortcomings of the Discrete Fractal Cosmological Paradigm? Or is
rational, scientific discourse not one of your strengths?
Rev. 11D Meow!
"Knecht" <rlold...@amherst.edu> wroted...
Knecht
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ah, so your troll begat an actual response you cannot deal with.
25 words or less, what were you saying?
What are you saying now?
How many days until what you will say disflavors into a pine-scented
aromatic lack of attention span thing?
I am not arguing with you.
The title of your treatise interests me.
On USENET, we give the hint of a glimmer of an idea
lay down the Basic Principles, provide some URL for further
in-depth exploration, in our own time.
LAYING DOWN
the law, so to speak,
in an apparently endless batch of text
doth not any interest in the topic at hand
provide.
Just saying.
Oh, it was funny also, to respond in the manner I chose at that time.
In my personal particpation in/with Discrete Fractal Cosmological Paradigm.
See? The funny part is when MeHums divorce themselves
from the intrinisic connective tissues.
No matter which way how or why
they/we describe what is real
and where it all arrive through/from at now.
Yeah, I am crazy.
Crazy for new ideas.
That's the even funnier part.
MeHums coming up with
New Ideas how stuff works.
As if MeHums ever have a chance
at catching-up with The Mysterious Engine Called Reality.
ever
::)))
I {heart} the Maths!
Rev. 11D Meow!
Knecht
> PS. Have you and your ilk run all this by Lee Smolin?
These are interesting posts that you have been contributing. However,
you seem to have neither knowledge of who/what I am nor what the
discrete fractal paradigm is all about.
Might I suggest you study up a bit at www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
before proceeding. You might be very pleasantly surprised.
I have definitely attempted to make Smolin aware of my work. On at
least two occasions I have sent him preprints and encouraged
communication between us. The response: total ignore-ance. It is
interesting to compare this with the large amount of attention he gave
to the E-8 charade (which may be fascinating mathematics, but the
crude application to particle physics was pathetic [theoretical
physics' "cold fusion"?]).
It is nice that you like math, Reverend, now how about devoting some
serious study to nature?
Best,
Rev. 11D Meow!
its intrinsic desire to transform itself
from poorly written piss-poor fiction
into a way of life is not only laughable
but presupposing any method could
ever be found for what makes
all this 'stuff' actually happen.
This choir is definitely not
the one you need to preach to,
deer in the headlights one.
I'd invite you in,
but you are so far removed from reality
it amazes me that it is even possible for you
and i to converse at all. ::)))
25 words or less, dude.
Explain it to us all...
Then it may become a topic worth considering.
Until then...
You are speaking in tongues, dude.
In the Biblical sense, at that.
Babel On!!!
"Knecht" <rlold...@amherst.edu> wroted...
Knecht
> I read enough of that for me to know
> its intrinsic desire to transform itself
> from poorly written piss-poor fiction
> into a way of life is not only laughable
> but presupposing any method could
> ever be found for what makes
> all this 'stuff' actually happen.
>
> This choir is definitely not
> the one you need to preach to,
> deer in the headlights one.
>
> I'd invite you in,
> but you are so far removed from reality
> it amazes me that it is even possible for you
> and i to converse at all. ::)))
>
> 25 words or less, dude.
>
> Explain it to us all...
>
> Then it may become a topic worth considering.
>
> Until then...
> You are speaking in tongues, dude.
> In the Biblical sense, at that.
>
> Babel On!!!
>
"way of life"?! You must have typed the wrong address in, or maybe you
use "invented reading".
I can determine from your comments that you are science-challenged, to
put it mildly.
If you do not like science, and avoid learning about the real world of
nature, that is your choice.
However, if you make that choice, then it is hypocritical and
misleading to make disparaging comments about something you know
nothing about.
Emotional thinking is probably your thing; it certainly is not
rational thinking.
Best of luck,
Rev. 11D Meow!
Believing some weird-ass pseudo science crap!
Oh, you totally have me pegged inversely proportional
to the ear wax stuffed between you and the real world.
A whole army of Q-Tips cannot help you
in your dismal attempt at replacing Reality
as it exists with the lamest effort
i have personally witnessed... nearly ever.
You and this guy would be good bunk-mates.
Heavy emphasis on BUNK!
http://www.cubicao.tk/theory/index.html
have fun in your version of what's real.
or not.
pi^e/i
ha ha ha
"Knecht" <rlold...@amherst.edu> wroted...
Knecht
> See how delusional you've become?
> Believing some weird-ass pseudo science crap!
>
Out of curiosity: What would you consider to be NOT "pseudo science"?
Tell us about your specific paradigm for reality. Do you ascribe to
the standard models of particle physics and cosmology? Some form of
hermeneutics? Or 'Something Completely Different'? Might it be that
drugs play a big role in your world view?
Best,
Knecht
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw