THE LARGE HADRON COLLIDER: the beginning of the end for postmodern physics

[Enishi]

Edited November 2, 2009 by Enishi

[Marblehead]

Yeah. And if they can't get the darn thing to work properly we will never know one way or the other.

 

Peace & Love!

[witch]

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-r...-2009/brian-cox

 

From the horse's mouth

[Marblehead]

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-r...-2009/brian-cox

 

From the horse's mouth

 

I like Brian. I have enjoyed every program I have seen that he has hosted.

 

I'm glad he got published. It is important in the scientific world the PhD's publish a few works.

 

Peace & Love!

[joeblast]

Edited November 2, 2009 by joeblast

[Marblehead]

 

obviously this author has an issue with string theory...but reinventing history isnt the way to go about "defeating" it.

 

 

I don't like string theory either. I can't tell you why because my knowledge is too weak to say anything - it just didn't sound logical the few times I have heard someone speak on it.

 

Have fun reading. Hehehe.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited November 2, 2009 by Marblehead

[Creation]

obviously this author has an issue with string theory...but reinventing history isnt the way to go about "defeating" it.

 

I'm going to have to do a little reading in order to comment further...

 

and I'll conclude after reading string theory 1 & 2, weak, & electric charge that the author mr mathis is rather full of himself and considers his logic to be rather...more than it really is. Stunning...non-dismissal, mish-mash of semantic arguments...while a point or two is valid, if we all thought like this guy, nobody would ever make any progress on anything whatsoever.

Don't waste too much time reading this guys stuff. Yikes. One of those people who knows just enough to think they know what they are talking about but from an expert's vantage point they are clueless.

 

Maybe I am such a person too. As far as Taoism goes I sure am.

 

There are some very valid criticisms of the standard models of particle physics and cosmology and attempts to go beyond them (sting theory, etc.). I would even argue that there are still gaping holes in physicists' understanding of basic relativity theory and quantum theory. But railing on about how "curved math" lets you get away with sloppy reasoning is not one such valid criticism.

 

Tangentially, here is a funny physics story I recently came across. Enjoy:

 

One day during their walk Bloch excitedly and proudly announced, "I now know what the space is." Heisenberg turned and said, "Tell me so I can know too." Bloch, who had just finished reading Linear Vector Spaces by David Hilbert, a famous German mathematician, proudly declared, "Space is a set of linear vector operations." "Nonsense," Heisenberg retorted. "Space is blue and birds fly through it"

[Marblehead]

"Nonsense," Heisenberg retorted. "Space is blue and birds fly through it"

 

That's my kind of thinking. Hehehe.

 

Peace & Love!

[luis sancho]

Edited November 4, 2009 by luis sancho

[King Kabalabhati]

WHOAAA THE LARGE HARD-ON COLLIDER!!!

 

sorry, go on..

[joeblast]

Black holes are fractals of quark condensates and the chances CERN will do them is 100%, the same that you obtain in any deterministic law of the universe. The day you heatwater and doesnt boil that probability will diminish

tons of words there, but I dont see anything that could be considered proof that CERN will make black holes. even if it does, they will decay almost instantly before having much of a chance to swallow much at all.

[goldisheavy]

Enishi, your post is lucid, a quality which in th baroque age of any social organism (civilization) about to collapse by an excess of yin/information, (the cause of death in all complex systems) is remarkable. But i will try to reply you with the jargon of your science, physics, which is NOT the primus inter pares,

 

blah blah blah blah yadda yadda without any paragraph breaks, etc.

 

 

Epic troll is epic. And lazy too. What a lousy cut and paste effort.

 

http://topics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/27...geneva-goes-on/

 

Look here first comment.

[luis sancho]

Edited November 4, 2009 by luis sancho

[JustARandomPanda]

Someone posted several months ago that there is a popular science book out that explains where current understanding is at the moment. I can't even remember the guy who posted or the name of the book he recommended. But one reason he pointed to it was because it clearly showed the demarcation between what scientists currently know based on being backed up by experiments and where it has moved on to theory because we can't or haven't yet proven these hypotheses and theories experimentally.

 

Does anyone remember what that book and who the author was?

[Creation]

I think you are referring to a post of mine in which I referenced The Road to Reality by Roger Penrose.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Road-Reality-Complet...e/dp/0679454438

 

But to call it a popular science book is a bit misleading. It was written so that you can get some idea about how a mathematical physicist actually thinks about modern mathematics and physics. Sir Roger spends the first 300-400 pages trying explain the math behind modern physics. With equations. The next 300-400 pages is about the part of modern physics (analytical mechanics, relativity and classical field theory, quantum theory) that is well established. Once again, with equations. The last 300-400 pages is about cutting edge physics where Penrose gives his critical analysis of the theories currently under investigation in physics and cosmology.

 

An absolute tour de force, and one of my all time favorite books.

 

However, if you do not have training in math and physics it will frustrate you. I know this because I have training in math and physics and it frustrated me . You can completely ignore the equations and just try to absorb whatever ideas you can. To get something out of it this way you will have to really want it, get used to feeling completely lost and confused, think hard, and then you can milk out some real gems despite not understanding all the math. Oh and make copius use of the index, frequently go back and re-read sections to pick up things you missed. Actually, this is the way to read this book even if you do know a good deal of math and physics. It will just be that much harder if you don't.

 

Preview it on google books, and if you get it try to get a hardcover. [EDIT: Apparently you can't preview it on google books. Try to find it at a library.]

Edited November 4, 2009 by Creation

[Machin Shin]

This planet orbits around the sun.

 

This planet spins while orbiting the sun.

 

The LHC is not in the same position in the winter as it is in the summer of any given year.

 

I think that the particle misses the target since it isn't aimed.

(movement through time and space Kashmir by Led Zeppelin)

 

 

Celestial Masters write esoteric teachings

 

Planetary Lords record those teachings and transmit them to whomever they feel like.

[joeblast]

hehe road to reality, good book, on my shelf. indeed NOT a popular science book - you'd better have some time and a whole lotta curiosity, otherwise, find it at the library and peruse to understand why you dont really need to buy it kinda like saying "if you like music, check out Helmholtz's On The Sensations Of Tone" it is a huge tome of esoteric knowledge that most people wont find entertaining in the least. (I do like penrose's "thought examples" for the reader to try de-tangling.)

 

you just have to keep in mind that penrose has his own ideas and at some point they start diverging from this persons or that persons, or the 'mainstream'. I like his emphasis on chirality, although I dont take quite as much issue with extradimensional theories like string theory as he does - I'm of the opinion that approaches from either side of the aisle should prove fruitful in their own context, even though quantum gravity people and string theory people tend to generally piss on each other's theories to an extent.

[doc benway]

I think you are referring to a post of mine in which I referenced The Road to Reality by Roger Penrose.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Road-Reality-Complet...e/dp/0679454438

 

But to call it a popular science book is a bit misleading. It was written so that you can get some idea about how a mathematical physicist actually thinks about modern mathematics and physics. Sir Roger spends the first 300-400 pages trying explain the math behind modern physics. With equations. The next 300-400 pages is about the part of modern physics (analytical mechanics, relativity and classical field theory, quantum theory) that is well established. Once again, with equations. The last 300-400 pages is about cutting edge physics where Penrose gives his critical analysis of the theories currently under investigation in physics and cosmology.

 

An absolute tour de force, and one of my all time favorite books.

 

However, if you do not have training in math and physics it will frustrate you. I know this because I have training in math and physics and it frustrated me . You can completely ignore the equations and just try to absorb whatever ideas you can. To get something out of it this way you will have to really want it, get used to feeling completely lost and confused, think hard, and then you can milk out some real gems despite not understanding all the math. Oh and make copius use of the index, frequently go back and re-read sections to pick up things you missed. Actually, this is the way to read this book even if you do know a good deal of math and physics. It will just be that much harder if you don't.

 

Preview it on google books, and if you get it try to get a hardcover. [EDIT: Apparently you can't preview it on google books. Try to find it at a library.]

This is a fabulous book but extremely difficult to understand for the non-physicist/mathemetician (ie me).

Brian Greene wrote 2 excellent books on current astrophysics and string theory.

I find string theory to be extremely interesting, plausible, and very consistent with alot of Daoist and related energetic descriptions of reality.

Greene's books are very easy to digest -

I'd recommend The Elegant Universe

[luis sancho]

clueless books, first 'the languages of god are infinite' mathematics is only the languae of space, the anguage of time is logic, physicists are only the high priests of space.; They eve spatialize time. WHen einstein says time is the 4 dimension of space, he is only referring to v=s/t, the study of 'motions' in space.

Time is tao, change, and the 2 modes of change ae change in motion or physical tme andchange in form, or biological time. This ws already aid by Aristotle.

Now physicists are so deeply ignorant and arrogan as the masters of yang energy and the creators of weapons, energy instruments, that kill, that they really think that all the changes of the Universe are motions, spatial change. SO the are clueless about morphological, bological, evoltionary change.

Ask a physicist ho if time is only the 4 dimension of space, time evolves life.

TIme is change,a taoist knew more of time thatll the retarded physicists of the XX century.

. Penrose book is just a book on all the maths of all the bizarre theories of physics that nevvr go beyond what physics study, 1/2of the Universe, yang, energy entropy space. We are dealing with a sect of high priests who as the kings of the middle ages that could say anyhing because they hadswords, are allowed to utter full nonsense, full time, about their spatial idiocies, ad when you tel them, all this comes from V=s/t, a formula of time that glileo discovered shooting cannonballs, but time is much more than this, they look at you

I normally deal with all kind of scientists, this is truly an arrogant ignorant baroque group of self-promotd big mouths bubbling nonsense, subventione by the military industry, con artists who should justdedicat their lives to do electronic gagets and shut up about the big questions. QUantum physics is about electrons NOT about the meaning of it all. Had no they make te A-Bomb nobody would listen to their idiocies.

 

They are clueless about time, yin information, order. And then you put together both time and space, yin and yang. This is duality complexity (see my posts on scientific taoism) the XXI century science. String theory is just one of the many possible codes of cycles oftime and lines of energy c losed and open strings and as such oneof the many self-parallel languags that can explain realty but not more or less real than the zeros and ones of tis computer. All are mirrors of the absolute yinxyang game, the inormation x energy function, ExI=ExT=k, in that sense, the best of XX cenury physics is that formula of EInstein's and Heisenberg principles stillmisunderstood is from where you must depart to understand it all in the world f physcs. But physics is only the first scale of the complex universe, the simplest game of tao, what truly matters is to know how to buildfrom tha initial game all the scales:

www.unificationtheory.com

This kind of talk, which uses verbal and visual languages/codes of course is beyod the understanding of clueless computer-atachments, the so-called physicists, who only talks helanguage of machines maths, and yet he cant even understand te conceptual meaning ofwhat he says on those equations Ask a pysicist to edefine conceptually time or space or a wave THose are words they use and cant even explain. space/yang/energy/lineal motion and time/yin/information/cyclical motions have been understood by Leibniz, a philosopher better than all the pysicists combined. Now they are going to blow the planet, seeking the absolute yang/energy'/death/entropy/bigbang, and they really think that this is knowledge. 'Physicists are only interested inthe canvas not in the painter and the paint' Nietzsche. What is knowledge is to understand how from those 2 eternal motions, the game of in/form'/ation and energy, the two arrows of time=change combinedcreates the complex, fractal infinite beings of existene. The game i have been studying for 25 years, the taoist/dualist/dialectic gme of creation NOT OF DESTRUCTION. Those barbarians who will kill us soon are just boys with big toys. mostly germ(ans), the dicoverer of the iron sword people who entered history self-calling themselves goths, gods by theart of death, who kill life ever since and invented the quantum entropy theories that will kill us all. I SHOUT, i dish out my cosmic anger against all of you damned, eviL anti-LIve bums get out of the tao of existence i you wishbut dont drag all of us in your ignorance

if you want to see it all in a film go to www.lhcdefence.org

Now any physicist who disagrees, come on put up a fight, try to explain me what is time and space what s a wave, what is mass, what is energy, what is information, what is light, so i can laugh t you You have no idea whatyouare talking about, what the bleep you know? Nothng, only entropyand death because you are not the highpriestsof science, just mechanists who made weapons and invented theories of the Universe self-simiolar to the enrgetic weapons you were making, called mecanism, entropy and big bang

Edited November 4, 2009 by luis sancho

[Creation]

This is a fabulous book but extremely difficult to understand for the non-physicist/mathemetician (ie me).

Brian Greene wrote 2 excellent books on current astrophysics and string theory.

I find string theory to be extremely interesting, plausible, and very consistent with alot of Daoist and related energetic descriptions of reality.

Greene's books are very easy to digest -

I'd recommend The Elegant Universe

Steve,

 

As far as popular accounts of string theory go, I recommend Hyperspace by Michio Kaku. It will stretch your mind in many more directions than Greene's stuff and does not go as deep down the string theory rabbit hole, which I personally think is a dead end. Well, I should clarify. Edward Witten is quoted as saying string theory is "a piece of 21st century physics that fell by chance into the 20th century." Well, as far as I am concerned, string theory is a piece of 21st century mathematics that fell by chance into the 20th century. The mathematics is really quite incredible, and not at all understood. But it does not, as Einstein would say, bring us any closer to the secret of the Old One. I am convinced that any perceived connections to the actual workings of the universe will later be seen to be coincidental, in the sense that most all really cool math has some connection to physics somehow.

 

you just have to keep in mind that penrose has his own ideas and at some point they start diverging from this persons or that persons, or the 'mainstream'. I like his emphasis on chirality, although I dont take quite as much issue with extradimensional theories like string theory as he does - I'm of the opinion that approaches from either side of the aisle should prove fruitful in their own context, even though quantum gravity people and string theory people tend to generally piss on each other's theories to an extent.

joeblast,

 

What is the mainstream? I am not familiar with this term.

 

Seriously though, I really like that Penrose voices the criticisms that he does, even if that puts him outside the "mainstream." That is why I brought his book up in the first place in the post that Serene Blue mentioned. I don't necessarily agree with his perspective (my above comments about string theory applies almost as well to his twistor theory, and I don't like his complexify (in the mathematical sense) everything in sight philosophy), but he has thought as deeply about the foundations of physics as deeply as anyone alive today and I have tremendous respect for him for being willing to go outside the mainstream.

 

Another great physicist who thought as deeply about the foundations of physics as Penrose and was equally comfortable being outside the mainstream was David Bohm. He was also a good friend of J. Krishnamurti. If you tackled The Road to Reality, his books would be no problem.

 

http://www.amazon.com/David-Bohm/e/B000APPUV4/ref=sr_tc_2_0

[Machin Shin]

I think that the LHC would get much better results if it was built at an L point.

 

Wikipedia has a page for L points

Lagrangian Points

Edited November 4, 2009 by Machin Shin

[joeblast]

luis, in your jumble of words I'm not really finding a starting point that ends with cern making black holes. it seems like you are overstating the commonly accepted bounds of applicability with regards to physics. no quantum entropy? vague references arent making much ground. the unification theory site I will have a look at more deeply but at first glace it appears to be a general holisitic universe idea...

 

 

 

creation...I was just using the term as a reference marker, nothing more I wouldnt go so far as to say I've entirely tackled the road to reality, but bohm's stuff looks interesting. hyperspace was a decent book but kaku is a bit kookoo by the end of the book.

[luis sancho]

Steve,

 

As far as popular accounts of string theory go, I recommend Hyperspace by Michio Kaku.

 

 

Michio Kaku is just an opportunist who likes to treat science fiction themes a la hawking Tv celebrity.

And off course, as per my last post, he 'spatiallzies time' and just cant understand as every other physicist

non sense bum that there is more to the Universe that space, energy, entropy V=st (with -ct in einstein's relativity). This 'shivaite' sect which soon will destroy the world obviously cannot be stopped because manufactures all the weapons of mass destruction of history, but their pretension of understanding anything

transcendental is exactly the same than a king for 'the grace of god', who are you kidding, grow up

minions of thought.

 

'Penrose I have tremendous respect for him for being willing to go outside the mainstream.

 

Penrose twistor's theory is more of the same bulls*it about spatialized time. he better would do reading aristotle. Your tremendous respect only shows your 'believer's' attitude, i believe there are still shivaite tribes in India who burn virgins. Hopefully you will be in the frontline at CERN to get your asshole *trou noir in french means black hole and asshole, not insult here* digested

 

Another great physicist who thought as deeply about the foundations of physics as Penrose and was equally comfortable being outside the mainstream was David Bohm. He was also a good friend of J. Krishnamurti. If you tackled The Road to Reality, his books would be no problem.

 

 

Here there is some truth. Bohm did sniff something about leibniz, relational time and the fact we are all made of fractal space/energy/yang and fractal information/yin/time clocks.

'Physicists are often wrong but never in doubt' Landau

'2 things i deem infinite the Universe and the stupidity of physicists and im not sure about the former' Einstein

'Physicists are only interested in the canvas, not in the painting or in the painter' Nietzsche

'physicists think they are much more intelligent than they are because they can look the Universe with a machine they call a telescope' Goethe

'My biggest pride is to die virgin' Newton

'Women only reproduce their stomach' Einstein

'If my theory is wrong God should change the Universe' Einstein

' God is a clocker that have waited 5000 years to find an intelligence like his' Kepler's 'beautiful mind' thinking the Universe was a clock because he measured i with a clock. If he had been a shoe maker the universe would be a shoe maker.

retarded,, clueless people my friend, big boys with big toys, children of thought, perfect monsters... this is a post on the LHC and taoism so stop bull$hiting shoemaker's musings and stick to the theme.

Discharge: given the fact that CERN'S people will likely blow me up in a few months without my consent, i allow myself to trash this shivaite sect with words which do not harm anyone, it is my morning exercise of negative energy exorcism, nothing personal steve...

[Andrei]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=59223213350926692#