Information Wants To Be Free

\bulletBut these SOBs will play dirty to be sure it gets paid for.
\bulletZeno on “successiness”.


  1. Do mathematicians understand Physics?
    == ==
    Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
    Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
    This simple fact has been forgotten in science.
    After the war, in Russia, there were many thieving
    gangs and I , as a boy, rotated among one of them.
    They had their own language, thieves’ jargon.
    No one could understand them.
    Now I read some mathematical articles and they remind me
    of that forgotten thieves’ slang.
    Are you laughing? Is this ridiculous?
    For me it isn’t ridiculous because mathematicians stole
    the picture of reality from us. Because they make us poor and stupid.
    Why do I say so?
    I will try to prove it and explain my point of view.
    It began in 1905 when Einstein created SRT,
    (theory of photon/electron’s behaviour).
    Minkowski, tried to understand SRT using 4D space.
    Poor young Einstein, reading Minkowski’s interpretation,
    said, that now he couldn’t understand his own theory.
    “ Einstein, you are right, it is difficult to understand SRT
    using 4D space. But it is possible using my 5D space”
    – said Kaluza in 1921.
    This theory was tested and found insufficient.
    “Well”, said another mathematicians, – “maybe 6D, 7D,
    8D, 9D spaces will explain it”. And they had done it.
    But the doubts still remain.
    “OK”,they say, “we have only one way to solve this problem.
    We must create more complex D spaces”.
    And they do it, they use all their power, all their super intellects
    to solve this problem.
    Glory to these mathematicians !!!!
    But there is one problem.
    To create new D space, mathematicians must add a new parameter.
    It is impossible to create new D space without a new parameter.
    And the mathematicians take this parameter arbitrarily
    (it fixed according to his opinion, not by objective rules).
    The physicist, R. Lipin explained this situation in such way:
    “Give me three parameters and I can fit an elephant.
    With four I can make him wiggle his trunk…”
    To this Lipin’s opinion it is possible to add:
    “with one more parameter the elephant will fly.”
    The mathematicians sell and we buy these theories.
    Where are our brains?
    Please remember, many D spaces were born as a wish
    to understand SRT (theory of photon/electron’s behaviour).
    But if someone wants to understand, for example, a bird
    (photon/electron)itself and for this he studies only
    its surroundings, will he be successful?
    If I were a king, I would publish a law:
    every mathematician who takes part in the creation
    of 4D space and higher is to be awarded a medal
    “To the winner over common sense”.
    Because they have won us over using the
    absurd ideas of Minkowski and Kaluza.
    I asked some mathematician:
    Are there many different D spaces in the math/physicist’s works.
    Are there limits to these D spaces?
    Maybe is 123 D spaces the last and final space?
    He answered:
    “I think there are as many opinions on this as there are people
    giving thought to the issue.” My own opinion is that since the more
    immediately obvious 123 D option
    (either parabolic, flat or hyperbolic) did not allow,
    despite all efforts, reconciling the various theories,
    then there is a need to try something else.
    Maybe the time has come to try something else.
    And what is mathematical opinion about the photon itself?
    Here is one example how mathematician tries to solve the problem.
    Russian scientist professor V.P. Seleznev created a “toro model”
    of light quanta. According to this model, the light quanta is a constant
    volume ring (like bublik). The speed of it is different and this fact gives
    a possibility to understand all the natural phenomena of light,
    to overcome all contradictions in physics and to offer a new
    technology. So it is written in the book .
    The secrets of Universe, 1998, V.D. Demin. Page 377
    Glory to this scientist!
    Glory to this professor!
    But I have only one question – Can this toro volume ring model
    (like a bublik) have volume in the vacuum?
    The answer is NO.
    According to J. Charles law ( 1787), when the temperature falls down
    to 1 degree, the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
    temperature reaches -273 degrees, the volume disappears
    and particles become flat figures. Charles law was confirmed by
    other physicists: Gay-Lussac, Planck, Nernst, Einstein.
    So, according to Charles law the “toro volume ring model ”
    is only a mathematic illusion.
    There are many different models of photon.
    To choose the correct one, we needs to ask a question.
    Which geometrical form can a photon have in a vacuum?
    Some scientists say:
    “The darkest subject in the science is light quanta.”
    Maybe now some my readers will better understand the way
    which we must go. Now mathematics goes ahead of science
    and physics follows it. Mathematicians carry the posters
    “Forward to abstraction”, “Forward to the absurd”
    and we all follow them. We march bravely on the dinosaur’s path.

  2. the above, assuming it’s by the creator of “socratus”,
    appears to be the work of one Israel Sadovnik, who
    evidently likes to work at reconciling science & the bible.

    “dinosaur’s path”, eh?

  3. For vlorbik:
    Don’t pay attention on the bible.
    Try to understand 4-D negative ” Minkowski space “.

    SRT doesn’t have a gravity field. If there is no gravity
    field , the space will be flat ( Pseudo- Euclid’s space),
    but usually this space is called “Minkowski space ”
    (negative 4-D united space/time continuum).
    Is the ” Minkowski space “abstract continuum, as everybody says?
    I think this space is a real one.
    I think this space is Vacuum.
    1. ” Minkowski space “has no gravity field, but negative parameter.
    2. Only Vacuum space has negative parameter : T= – 273.
    3. And this negative parameter is united with space/ time ,
    which are joined together absolutely .
    4. And the second SRT postulate tells about moving
    light quanta in Vacuum.
    5. It is impossible SRT to be the right theory
    and space around SRT to be an abstract theory.
    6. If in our brain abstract and real ideas are mixed together
    then the interpretation of physics must be paradoxical.
    SRT is a right theory .
    But ” Minkowski space ” is an abstract theory.
    Our planet Earth is home for us.
    We live and act in this planet.
    And ” Minkowski space ” is home for SRT.
    All SRT particles live and act in this
    ” 4-D negative continuum – Minkowski space ” .
    But nobody knows what ” Minkowski space ” is.
    These two ideas are mixed together and therefore
    the interpretation of physics is paradoxical.
    ========= ===========
    The SRT is a real theory.
    The bombs of Nagasaki and Hiroshima proved it.
    But ” 4-D Minkowski space ” is an abstract theory.
    There isn’t any proof of its existence.
    And if we mix these two theories then we are
    surprised with its paradox.
    What does the man usually do in such situation?
    It is clear, he must understand
    what ” 4-D Minkowski space ” is. I say, it is Vacuum.
    But somebody can say: ” You are wrong,
    4-D Minkowski space is only a part of 11-D space.”
    Maybe this argument is correct. Then we must suppose
    that the 11-D space will be a part of some 47-D space
    in 50 years. And who knows where its end is.
    Perhaps in 123-D space the physicists will find the God there.
    In another words, if we don’t know what ” 4-D Minkowski
    space ” is, so it is impossible to take SRT as a finished one.
    The proof of SRT isn’t over yet. We must give a real
    interpretation to ” 4-D Minkowski space “. I only hope that
    a simple, usual logic will help a man to understand its essence.
    ====== =========
    SRT has only one space – “Minkowski space “.
    But in 1915 Einstein put a ” MASS ” in the
    “Minkowski space ” and it curved.
    In 1921 A. Freedman put ” TIME ” in the
    “Minkowski space ” and it also curved.
    And Einstein had to agree with Freedman’s idea.
    What is the reason of “Minkowski space ” change?
    I forgot that all Universe began from ” apparent big bang “.
    So I must add the ” apparent big bang ” to ” D-space”
    …………..or to ” the God “………………….
    Then ……………
    The atheist will say : ” There isn’t any God. There is only
    big band which destroyed all “D- spaces” and therefore
    we see background radiation T=2,7K now.”
    And religious man will say: ” The God exists.
    He sits at his ” D- home” and plays with all things.
    For example.
    The action, when the God compresses all Universe
    into his palm, we have named ” a singular point”.
    And action, when the God opens his palm,
    we have named the “Big Bang”.
    I don’t know who is right.
    But I came to conclusion:
    ” If I, as a peasant, think like modern physicists,
    I will never gather my harvest . Because if I plant ,
    for example, an electron I will get ……a positron, ….
    …..D- spaces …. and in the future centaurs and sphinxes.”
    ======= ======
    If mathematician makes a small mistake in the
    beginning of his calculations then after some
    operations it grows into a big one.
    And if in the beginning of sciences birth (Newton )
    the abstract ideas were put into its fundament ,
    then now we are surprised with its paradoxes………
    ……and we can create new and new theories for 1000 years
    but the result will be the same – paradoxical.

  4. I believe because it is absurd.
    / Tertullian. (ca.160 – ca.220 AD) /
    ‘I believe in Physics because it’s absurd’
    Would you ever say such a thing to a modern man ?
    I doubt it. Most of us would be asking God’s
    forgiveness for even thinking it.
    The basis of the physics consists of:
    Abstract separated absolute space and time of Newton.
    Abstract ‘ideal gas’ and ‘ideal particles.’
    Abstract ‘black body.’
    Abstract SRT negative 4 – dimensional space,
    abstract 5D, …….and 11 – dimensional spaces.
    Abstract ‘virtual particles’, ‘dark matter’, ‘dark energy’.
    Abstract ‘ inertial movement’.
    Abstract ‘big bang’.
    Abstract ” method of renormalization”.
    A fine structure constant:
    ‘ by the god given damnation to all physicists ‘.
    / Feynman. /
    10. . . . . . . . . .Etc.
    And therefore we can read.
    We don’t know what we are talking about”
    / Nobel laureate David Gross referring to the current state of string theory./
    It is important to realize that in physics today,
    we have no knowledge of what energy is.
    We do not have a picture that energy comes in little
    blobs of a definite amount. ”
    ( Feynman. 1987)
    When asked which interpretation of QM he favored,
    Feynman replied: “Shut up and calculate.”
    When I was first learning quantum mechanics as a graduate student
    at Harvard, a mere 30 years after the birth of the subject.
    “You’ll never get a PhD if you allow yourself to be distracted
    by such frivolities,” they kept advising me, “so get back to serious
    business and produce some results.”
    “Shut up,” in other words, “and calculate.”
    And so I did, and probably turned out much the better for it.
    / N. David Mermin /
    The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
    is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
    describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
    of something more complex?
    Paul Dirac .
    “ Young man, in mathematics you don’t understand things,
    you just get used to them.”
    / John von Neumann ./
    Since the mathematical physicists have taken over,
    theoretical physics has gone to pot.
    The bizarre concepts generated out of the over use and
    misinterpretation of mathematics would be funny if it were not
    for the tragedy of the waste in time,
    manpower, money, and the resulting misdirection.
    / Richard Feynman./
    ” I feel that we do not have definite physical concepts at all
    if we just apply working mathematical rules;
    that’s not what the physicist should be satisfied with.”
    /Dirac /
    In his 1997 book ” The End of Certainty” Nobel Laureate
    Ilya Prigogine wrote:
    “The more we know about our universe, the more difficult
    it becomes to believe in determinism.”
    And “ The quantum paradox is real nightmare for classic mind ”
    In his book ” Quantum theory “ ( published in 2002 )
    John Polkinghorne wrote:
    “Quantum theory is certainly strange and surprising,…”
    / chapter 6, part “ Quantum hype”, page 92 /

    The physical education.

    The more I study the more I know.
    The more I know the more ideas I have.
    The more ideas I have the more they abstract.
    The more they abstract the less I know the truth.
    Some years ago I told with young physicist (!!!).
    He said very confidently: ” You cannot be physicist (!)
    if you cannot understand the beauty of Minkowski
    It seems that he is right, because physicists must know
    mathematics very well. The problem is that nobody
    knows what is real physical meaning of “ 4-D negative
    space continuum.” in the Nature. SRT is correct theory
    but Minkowski space continuum is abstract. And together
    they are paradoxical. More than 100 years we live with
    this paradox. Nobody confuses.
    During our conversation I understand that this young physicist
    is strong and clever man and he want to reach success. And
    I think he will do it. So, in the future he will create new
    D/ M-spaces or new symmetries or discover new particles.
    And one day he will be a professor and will teach new
    generation ( your son or your daughter) in order that they also
    have possibility to create new D/ M-spaces or new symmetries
    or discover new particles. But if in the beginning the abstract
    ideas were put into the fundament of physics then ……..
    we can create new and new theories for 1000 years but
    the result will be the same – paradoxical.
    Physicists and Laws.

    Physicists do not dictate to Nature their laws.
    Laws of nature are reality, which exists independently
    from the researcher. The Nature cannot be arranged so
    strange, as the physicists think of it. Their thoughts
    are so strange, that they offer paradoxical ideas.
    Einstein wrote: “ In the Science the man has freedom
    to solve well made crossword. ” In this crossword
    physicists don’t know what Light quanta, Electron, Energy are.
    ( “ It is important to realize that in physics today,
    we have no knowledge of what energy is.
    We do not have a picture that energy comes in little
    blobs of a definite amount. ” / Feynman. 1987/ ,. . . .
    “The electron that can be told is not the true electron.”
    / David Harrison / , . . . . . . . . ..Etc.)
    And instead to understand what Light quanta, Electron,
    Energy are, the physicists try to add to the crossword of the
    Universe new cells and fill them with new abstract models.
    For example;
    on horizontal – dark matter
    (The Dark Matter is another official dogma
    of our astronomy. /V. H. Vergon/)
    or ‘ dark energy”
    ( Dark energy may be vacuum )
    and on vertical – string theory
    ( We don’t know what we are talking about”
    / Nobel laureate David Gross referring to the current state
    of string theory./ )
    Or on horizontal – quark,
    and on vertical – Higgs boson or Higgs mechanism.

    This is reason that I wrote:
    The more I study the more I know.
    The more I know the more ideas I have.
    The more ideas I have the more they abstract.
    The more they abstract the less I know the truth.

    And as a result conclusion from some article:
    ” One of the best kept secrets of science is
    that physicists have lost their grip on reality.”
    ============ . .
    Best wishes.
    Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
    ===================== . .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: