Re: Science Mag's top 125 unanswered questions

Edward Green wrote:
>
> Uncle Al wrote:
> > Sam Wormley wrote:
> > >
> > > Science Mag's top 125 unanswered questions
> > > http://www.sciencemag.org/sciext/125th/
> > [snip]
> >
> > > What is the nature of gravity?
> > > It clashes with quantum theory. It doesn't fit in the Standard Model.
> > > Nobody has spotted the particle that is responsible for it. Newton's apple
> > > contained a whole can of worms.
> >
> > > What is the origin of homochirality in nature?
> > > Most biomolecules can be synthesized in mirror-image shapes. Yet in
> > > organisms, amino acids are always left-handed, and sugars are always
> > > right-handed. The origins of this preference remain a mystery.
> >
> > It might be 123 questions by mid-September. The full parity Eotvos
> > experiment is running.
>
> Best of luck to you, Al, but I don't see how any positive or negative
> result to your experiment is going to answer either of those questions.
> The first is ridiculously vague, while the second is silly.
>
> We already knew something about the "nature of gravity" after Newton,
> considerably more after Einstein, and in the future presumably more
> still. Your experiment may be provocative and even potentially
> startling, but will not light up a bulb which says "Aha! Now we know
> the nature of gravity".

You are terrifically wrong. Both Newton and Einstein's metric
gravitation are parity-even maths (tensors). Weitzenböck/Weitzenboeck
affine gravitation can be parity even (General Relativity as the
special case of the Equivalence Principle) or parity-odd
(pseudotensors). If the parity Eotvos experiment is not null output
within experimental error

1) General Relativity is then founded upon a falsified postulate.
GR is empirically wrong.

2) If space is chiral then Lorentz Invariance is falsified. Space
is empirically anisotropic. Quantum mechanics loses a founding
postulate. QM is wrong.

3) If space is demonstrably anisotropic then Noether's theorem does
not enforce conservation of angular momentum. Even mechanics is wrong
for parity masses.

4) Only heterotic string theory survives in M-theory.

As with Newton vs. Einstein, real world corrections would be very
small under modest circumstances. The Golden Gate Bridge will not
suddenly collapse, but all of physics theory must be rewritten to
correspond to observation. What we have now is demoted to heuristics.

Physics is at an impasse not because we don't know something, but
because we know something that really isn't true.

What is the chance of a parity Eotvos experiment non-null output?
50:50 straight up. There is no prior observational bias in any venue
at any scale in either direction at the experiment's sensitivity.
However,

1) No more than 0.2% of a composition Eotvos experiment test mass
can be active mass. For spin-polarized masses it is ppm at most.
Parity test masses are 100% active mass. The potential output
amplitude in the latter case is 500X that of any prior effort. Parity
is the only non-Noetherian, non-Poincare symmetry. It's a
fantastically good experiment.

2) Almost without exception, weak forces (and, of course, the Weak
Interaction) show parity violation. Gravitation is the weakest force
by far.

3) Biology is homochiral. All chiral protein amino acids are
left-handed; all chiral sugars are right-handed. Folks need a reason
for the selectivity. What they have now is execrable,

Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 41(24) 4619 (2002)
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 41(7) 1139 (2002)
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 39(22) 4033 (2000)
Chem. Phys. Chem. 2(7) 409 (2001)
Phys. Rev. Lett. 84(17) 3811 (2000)


> The second question is simply one of symmetry breaking: possibly aided
> by an incomplete symmetry if it turns out one set of enantionmers was
> marginally more stable because of incomplete mirror-symmetry -- which
> we already have, with or without a chiral component to gravity -- but
> no mystery regardless: unless every time we flip a coin the outcome is
> an unfathomable mystery. We don't know the details, but that doesn't
> mystify us.

You had better read some of the above vs. your analysis. The real
world numbers are damning.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.

Relevant Pages

  • Force of
    ... what is the force of gravity on your planet? ... force of nature same ol' thing ... yugioh force of the breaker ... impact force of falling object ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Survival of the Fittest: What was Darwins pragmatics?
    ... The same logic could be applied to gravity: ... me the same story nomatter what you find in nature. ... flawed but because you are on the side of the evolutionists, ... No transmogrification, no transmutation, no morphing, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Our greatest problem!
    ... claim that the MMX in the same gravitational will detect fringe shift. ... The laws of nature are symmetric: ... If car A is moving 5 km/hour westward relative to car B, ... Gravity Probe B adding its voice to the multitudes, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Survival of the Fittest: What was Darwins pragmatics?
    ... On Jul 3, 11:00 am, Timberwoof ... The same logic could be applied to gravity: ... me the same story nomatter what you find in nature. ... flawed but because you are on the side of the evolutionists, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Curing Einsteins Disease (is Copyrighted)
    ... Laws of Nature by many ... destruction-causing effects of falling objects, ... from gravity a greater force than a slower object of the same mass. ... The errant M-M experiment had ruled out ether. ...
    (sci.physics)