O'Barr: The purpose of science.

O'Barr: The purpose of science.
Gerald L. O'Barr (globarr)

The very purpose of science, and the research
associated with science, is to make our reality
understandable. When things are seen that do not
make sense, then science is used to make them make
sense. This is what progress is all about.
These things that do not make sense might all be
facts, but just because they are known facts do not
mean they make sense. Whether it is the sun that
comes up every morning, or tides, any fact can be
mysterious or unexplainable. Science is used to
bring understanding and comprehension to our minds so
that they are no more mysterious.
Take a pencil that 'bends' when you stick it into
a glass of water. What is observed is a fact, but
just because it is an observed fact, it is physically
impossible. Water does not have the power to bend a
pencil as it appears to be bent. So we expect an
explanation. We demand an explanation! And if
anyone cannot give an explanation that is
understandable, then we know that they do not know
what they are talking about!
And if in SR, there are things that are mysterious
or impossible, we expect an explanation! We do not
get an explanation from SR experts. We get even more
mystery than what originally existed. It does not
make sense. Therefore, it is obvious that SR experts
do not know what they are talking about.
There is no such thing as a 4-D spacetime
continuum, as a physical cause of anything. Thus, SR
expert are fooling us. They are mainly fooling
themselves.

Take an inertial reference line upon which two
observers are moving with relative velocity between
them. Let a photon pass along this line from one end
to the other. The actual relative velocities between
this one photon with each of these observers have to
be different. Any and all independent observers will
confirm this. Logic demands it. Yet, in SR, these
two observers will each measure the velocity of the
photon going by them to be the same. This is not
logical. This is not reasonable. This is a mystery
that needs to be explained and justified. And no SR
expert has the means to explain it.
The only thing that an SR expert can say is that
this is what will be measured. No physical
explanation can be given. Thus, SR is a weak theory.
It has no power to explain. It is, in fact, a sick
theory. It needs to be replaced! QED

Thanks for reading.
Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr...@xxxxxxxxx>
+ Remove 3 dots for e-mail.


P.S. In LET, there are full and complete
explanations that are offered. And everything is
done in simple 3-D space. There is no mystery at all
as to why these moving observers measure what they
measure.
Now I do not really care if SR experts like their
own theory. I think they like it because it is
mysterious and impossible. They have the right to be
as dumb as they might want to be. But they are
unscientific when they are not willing to admit the
reasonableness of LET. They are being, in fact,
evil, not to allow LET to be seen as a scientific
theory that gives explainable and correct predictions
for our reality!

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What is a software engineer?
    ... provide any explanation of why the experiment "works", ... As to whether this is indicative of some correlation between its theoretical concepts and reality at some level, opinions are divided, from those who claim it gives 'strong evidence' that reality is in fact like science says it is, to those who claim it says nothing at all about the real nature of reality, Its only a means of foretelling how that will behave. ... The question is what is a software engineer? ... You should note that this is why computer *scientists* are such an infernal waste of space. ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • Re: Is physics a science?
    ... science tries to explain WHY and how. ... Simply incomplete, needing further explanation. ... that's just the nature of biology is' ... a physicist - he will only tell you what physics does. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is physics a science?
    ... science tries to explain WHY and how. ... Simply incomplete, needing further explanation. ... that's just the nature of biology is' ... a physicist - he will only tell you what physics does. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Lightspeed exceeded
    ... Other implications are developed into predictions of *measurable* ... If the predicted value of the measurement matches within ... science is *defined* by the scientific method and the ... however, without explanation. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • The ID-only hypothesis - - yet again
    ... part of the designer, ... ultimately has the same answer in mainstream science - ... compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, ... "Naturalism" isn't a scientific theory. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading