Re: Einstein's relativity, the postmodern patch to physics, must be neglected

On Feb 13, 6:41 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 13, 11:47 am, Albertito <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Feb 12, 10:12 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 12, 4:47 am, Albertito <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Einstein's relativity (SR and GR) is the paradigm of postmodern patch.
A patch always presupposes the existence of the object to be patched.
You can't perform relativistic corrections if there is nothing to be
corrected. Postmodernism has only any sense if there were ever a
thing
called modernism. Einstein's relativity is then the postmodern patch
fixed upon the Emperor's old garment in order to repair it and cover
an awful hole. The funny thing is that patch is not made of the same
material the cloth of the garmet is made of, but of the fabric of the
hole, in such a way that the patch is intended to be fixed, not upon
the hole, but upon the rest of the garment. Once the patch is fixed,
the Emperor owns a New and Postmodern Garment!

Let's see what Noam Chomsky said when he was criticizing some aspects
of postmodernism,

"There are lots of things I don't understand, say,
the latest debates over whether neutrinos have mass
or the way that Fermat's last theorem was (apparently)
proven recently. But from 50 years in this game, I have
learned two things: (1) I can ask friends who work in
these areas to explain it to me at a level that I can
understand, and they can do so, without particular
difficulty; (2) if I'm interested, I can proceed to
learn more so that I will come to understand it. Now
Derrida, Lacan, Lyotard, Kristeva, etc. even Foucault,
whom I knew and liked, and who was somewhat different
from the rest --- write things that I also don't understand,
but (1) and (2) don't hold: no one who says they do
understand can explain it to me and I haven't a clue as
to how to proceed to overcome my failures. That leaves
one of two possibilities: (a) some new advance in
intellectual life has been made, perhaps some sudden
genetic mutation, which has created a form of "theory"
that is beyond quantum theory, topology, etc., in depth
and profundity; or (b) ... I won't spell it out."
-Noam Chomsky

Now I ask,
Is Einstein's relativity (a) option? Some advance in intellectual
life,
perhaps a sudden genetic mutation, which has created that form of
"theory"
that is beyond quantum theory, topology, etc., in depth and
profundity?
or is it (b) option, whose word Chomsky doesn't want to spell it out?

IMHO, the correct option is (b), and I'll spell that damned word out
for him: B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T.

Well, since relativity is easily an application of (1) or (2), then
the recourse to the evaluation (a) or (b) don't really apply.

If you are having difficulty with (1) or (2), perhaps it's time to
question the quality of the resources that you've chosen to bring to
bear.

PD

Go to a layman and tell him that A clock is ticking
slower than B clock, and also B clock is ticking slower
than A clock. Then, explain to him why is that true.

You don't understand. There is absolutely NO REASON why nature should
conform to common sense.


You don't understand. There is absolutely NO REASON why nature should
conform to SR.

If there is a confrontation between common sense and what experiment
shows as the real behavior of nature,

Wrong. Experiments can never show us the real behavior of nature.
The best an experiment can do is to falsify a theory, but never to
prove it is right. So, Nature will be always hiding some subtleties
that we will unable to address by any model. It is in those
subtleties
that nature could show its real behavior.


then it is ALWAYS the case that
what backs down is common sense. Or, to put it another way, if nature
tosses up a surprise, then it is common sense that has to change in
order to accommodate this new discovery.


Common sense should dictate how experiments have to be performed
and arranged. There are lots of silly experiments (not guided by
commom sense) that should have not been performed.

Some people are more eager to do that than others. Those that aren't
also adapt less quickly and end up with a survival disadvantage.

PD

As I said, you are more a humanist than a scientist
You should try this forum
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.philosophy.humanism/topics
:-)






.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast