Alphysics Home | Freedom of Science | Alphysics | ___ | Densytics | Polls

Comments

Anger is Freedom…or something…

Every time someone makes a comment, I have to approve it. Coincidentally, a few of you might have your posts marked as “spam” by this automatic bayesian inference spamometer program, and I’m trying to work around it. But if your post hasn’t shown up lately, that’s probably why.

Anyways, I couldn’t help but notice one quote from another site:

I am really impressed by the openness and independence and mental energy of angryphysicist. I wish he/she would continue to write this blog and continue to evaluate physics as a free thinking insider.

How flattering, I couldn’t resist going to this fellow’s website and look at what s/he had to say. It was shocking to say the least.

Are calculations in General Relativity difficult? No. What is complex is the notation. Do you understand this? You need to eliminate the complex and cabalistic notation of General Relativity in order to make simple calculations. Calculations are not complicated, it is the notation which is complicated. And the notation obstructs easy calculations.

No, I don’t understand this. Since the calculations are so easy, perhaps you could enlighten us physicists with a large number of complex solutions to the Einstein field equation? Pretty please? The notation is irrelevant to the actual calculations, you could use various smiley faces if you wish.

Imagine someone who is so obsessed with the authority of IBM that he is still using vintage 1950 punch card driven IBM mainframe! This is your modern physicist. For physicists the authority of NewtonEinstein is sacred.

Hmm…I don’t think this fellow understood my criticism that String theory requires a prior geometry at all because the terrible irony is that I argued “Einstein is sacred, therefore there is no prior geometry by virtue of general covariance.”

My approach to quantum gravity is not by proposing outrageously nonsensical ideas (what do you take me for, a string theorist?). It’s the very opposite of that: be as cautious and conservative as possible! (This was actually impressed upon me back when I was studying with the retired rocket scientist in the CalTech library; he drilled this philosophy into me, and in retrospect that was a good thing.) Heck, I criticized the theory of the graviton as being too radical, and all it boils down to is simply applying the current QFT paradigm to General Relativity!

It’s not justified to criticize scientists who stick to theories that have not been falsified yet because they stick to theories that have not been falsified yet! Obviously Newton and Einstein were right at certain levels of approximation…otherwise we wouldn’t be taught their theories! When one can criticize scientists is when they stick to theories that have been falsified (another valid point of criticism is when a theory contradicts scientific materialism in my book).

Just a little tangential rant about falsifiability and “faith” in current theories…

Nature works “as if” they were right at certain levels of approximation, so it’s “safe” to assume that they were correct until new unexplainable phenomena arises. Then it’s time for a paradigm shift. That’s what quantum gravity researchers are working on, because Einstein’s general theory breaks down at certain scales… most unsatisfactory!

Where things typically go awry is when there are two theories, A and B. A has more unnecessary premises than B and is reducible to B after certain manipulations…but offers no new predictions. That brings the important crucible question: “So what?” If there is no difference between the two, go with the one with fewer unnecessary assumptions. A contemporary example of a theory with more unnecessary premises that makes no new predictions is String Theory, making it impossible to falsify in a bad way.

Physicist is stuck in the 18th century because even Einstein is Newtonian physics.

You mean Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler lied to me?! General Relativity is really Newtonian gravity?! Those mean geniuses! They hurt my feelings!

After studying General Relativity and moving indexes up and down according to Einstein convention for two decades poor physicists become science dead. After so much index tai chi no physicist can show any sign of science. I am just sorry for these doctors of physics.

But Kip Thorne has studied General Relativity for ages and he’s done very good work recently. Steve Carlip, too, is doing good work on Black Holes. And what about Wheeler?

There are always exceptions to the rules.

And I don’t really plan to stop doing General Relativity until I’m long gone… whether I do anything new and useful with it is still an open question. I doubt that I’ll make a difference (yeah, I’m cynical even with myself!)…given my rather odd entrance to the physics community online involving criticizing current theories and not offering a suitable alternative (I am, however, working naively on an alternative!) it’ll be hard to “make amends” with my faux pas. Such is life.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 16th, 2007 at 11:49 pm and is filed under How...odd....