JUL 20, 2014  

JUL 13, 2014       JUL 6, 2014       JUN 29, 2014       JUN 22, 2014       JUN 15, 2014       JUN 8, 2014       JUN 1, 2014         EARLIER

 

to avoid address abuse, please type it yourself

many free parameters and even more theories

For the last thirty or so years I was lucky being able to avoid conflicts related to the string theory, Big Bang and similar brain products. Conflict with myself as a physicist, I mean. When teaching, I would dodge the freshmanís question about black energy by pointing out that he is not familiar with the concept of energy in the first place. When asked about Big Bang by laymen at barbecue, I would replay that Iím always on guard when it comes to new stories of creation. Then, retirement broke my evading shield: no more teaching, no more lab research, plenty of free thinking time.

Actually, the shield broke rather easily. there was a lot of dark energy under it. In this very department, GR weekly, starting in 2010 with a ridicule at Big Bang [100627] up to recent comments on lost reality in physics [140601] and math [140706], through a number of related comments ([101031], [110130], [110313], [111120], [130127], [130616], [130901], [131215]), Iíve tackled my disappointment and bitterness with contemporary theoretical physics and cosmology done by those theoreticians. Iíve even used a term religious physics, with some reluctance. Iíll admit [NW05]. Now, look to the right!

Now, while reading Bankrupting Physics by Alexander Unzicker and Sheilla Jones (Palgrave, 2013), you can understand mu joy and satisfaction - I was right, I am right in defending physical principles which were built into all scientific research. AU&SH do it systematically, with a good narrative, and I can recognize my thoughts in their text.

I said: "... contemporary theoretical physicists, in their unfortunate marriage with cosmologists (or running them out of business?), continue to build monstrous space-time realities". Look what AU&SH say:

"Their problem is that for decades particle physicists have become comfortable describing nature with arbitrary numbers instead of relying on basic principles, as Einstein did. Those who have forgotten to wonder are easily satisfied by superficial concepts such as dark matter and dark energy. At the risk of annoying more than a few people, I would say that our understanding of the universe has not advanced due to this guest performance by particle accountants. Rather, particle physics has suffered from a bubble of meaningless numbers, and this inflation is bleeding over into cosmology, dooming it to the same fate. Particle physicists have exported their crisis to astrophysics by trying to sell it their worthless "free parameter" currency. There is, sadly, no sign of a bailout in the near future."

 

bankrupting physics

I said: "The very credibility of physics, the science which introduced the scientific method into the inquirers of real world, could be jeopardized."AU&SH state very clearly in the subtitle of their book:

"How todayís top scientists are gambling away their credibility".

And the future doesnít look bright, according to a Chinese proverb:

One fool can affirm more nonsense in one day

than seven wise men can disprove in a year.

 

WEBSITE  EDITOR:
Krešimir J. Adamić