Re: history of science: cases of mainstream in error

the only problem with plate tectonics, is that
there are supposed to be "currents" in the mantle,
which is known from seismology to be solid ... but
liquidus over "geological time scales."

why is the mathematical duality of particles & waves,
considered to be paradoxical, when it is just a matter
of using one formalism over another,
for certain experiments -- and not that many,
need the "bullet-aimed" paradigm.

they put Schroedinger's God-am cat in Pauli's matrical box,
and they just won't look into it, any more.

3. Whether the ultimate essence of light is particles

Newton versus Young!

thus:
so, you did your thesis on this stuff -- well,
look at the God-am cat!... I mean, yeah,
no-one really dysagrees with "the math,"
just the goofy solopsism -- and I tell ya,
Heinlein put that whole thing to bed with his last work
of fiction. like, he field-stripped the laser-canon
of "hard SF," and laid it out for fun. (all that remains
is the ghost of Sir Arthur and his offically unofficial definition
of technology-so-advanced, you become a cargo-cult "economy"
of the Chicago Boys and their "fountains of technology.")

pro-hominems about Gardener will get you no where, because
that is the most valuable thing in Sci Am, because
it is *not* the usual pop-schmeer; it's the value-added
to the digest of mainstreamism. other than that,
SA is mostly intolerable.

quite sincerely, Everett's realism has exposed
the DADA quality of the Copenhagen reification
of the probabibilites, the extreme difficulty
of quantifying any pair of related "observables" a la Heisenberg.

as with the undead cat, the EPR paradox seems
to have been absolved by these formalisms; yet,
they are square-matrically completely boxed
within the Copenhagen school. how do you know,
whether you are inside or outsiode of it, if
you don't know the shape of it?
could be a mobius strip!

" The fact, emphasized by Everett, that it is actually possible
to set-up a wave function for the experimental apparatus and a
Hamiltonian for the interaction between system and apparatus
is perfectly trivial, but also terribly treacherous... "

Everett’s damned nonsense an air of respectability by
presenting it as a refurbishing of the idea of preestablished
harmony. "

thus quoth:
Bernoulli adopted Leibniz' notation for these ideas, calling the
vertical change, dy, the horizontal change, dx, and the resulting
change in the path of the light, dz. The proportion between the
vertical and the horizontal, dy:dx, and the resulting change in the
path, dz, is a function of the rate at which the density of the
medium
is changing.
Bernoulli shows, that if the density of the medium is changing
according to the rate at which a body falls under its own weight,
(specifically, that the velocity changes according to the square root
of the vertical distance) then the resulting curve is a cycloid.
"...you will be petrified with astonishment when I say that this
cycloid, the tautochrone of Huygens is our required
brachistochrone..." he declared.
But, Bernoulli noted that this was not a discovery of a particular
physical phenomenon, but a metaphysical discovery of a universal
principle:
"Before I conclude, I cannot refrain from again expressing the
amazement which I experienced over the unexpected identity of
Huygen's
tautochrone and our brachistochrone. Furthermore, I think it is
noteworthy that this identity is found only under the hypothesis of
Galileo so that even from this we may conjecture that nature wanted
it
to be thus. For, as nature is accustomed to proceed always in the
simplest fashion, so here she accomplishes two different services
through one and the same curve, while under every other hypothesis
two
curves would be necessary the one for oscillations of equal duration
the other for quickest descent. If, for example, the velocity of a
falling body varied not as the square root but as the cube root of
the
height falalen through, then the brachistochrone would be algebraic,
then tautochrone on the other hand transcendental; but if the
velocity
varied as the height fallen through then the curves would be
algebraic, the one a circle, the other a straight line."
http://wlym.com/~boston/cartoons/slides/Mice%20Space.htm

thus:
most of Lord Berty "the peace activist" and his paradoxi,
were simple misuse of language;
I yam lying what I bean!
of what possible use is the set of all sets,
whether or not it can eventually include itself,
at the end of the list of elements --
shades of AP-adics?
so, perhaps we can blame Russell
for the Bourbaki New Math, "based upon set theory,
but see what Whitehead had to say about him,
not to say Goedl.

thus:
shouldn't it be clear that
photons are an artifact of the idea
of point-particles?... of course, iff
they exist, then they would have to be *the* particles
that actually were zero-dimensional points, but,
since they are waves, as shown by Young, Huyghens et al,
there is really no need for them,
except in the Pauli matrix formalism
of statistical bosons; eh?
Schroedinger's cat is dead --
long-live Schoredinger's cat!
We know there is an electromagnetic interaction
between material bodies. The rest is inference.

--only 24 hours to impeach Trickier *** from the N.Admin,
metaphorically typing, or Cheeny & Zbiggy, fo'mo' years;
Good Morning, Afghanistan!
.... Good Afternoon, Sudan!
http://tarpley.net/bush12.htm
http://wlym.com/campaigner/8011.pdf -- Brits hate Shakes, Why?
http://www.wlym.com/~seattle/dynamis/
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/current.html
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/plates/plates.html
http://mathdl.maa.org/mathDL/46/?pa=content&sa=viewDocument&nodeId=3163
http://wlym.com/campaigner/8011.pdf -- English, not!
.