Re: We are, a mass extinction event.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0767908171/102-2696129-0016966?v=glance&n=283155

A short History of Nearly Everything - Bill Bryson.

Yet another where we ar at, available in audio book form wherever you
find such things.

So I listened to a couple sections of this today, and it is not as
interesting even as the one at the beginning of this thread, simply
because the narator does not have the same talent for reading.

The content is good however, but it exposes so much, that is just plain
wrong in science today it is embarassing.

This would be colse to accepted text book science and with modern
advances listed in a rather incogruent higilly piggily pashion here and
there.

The other story is more linear where this one tries to cover more
ground.

And the physics in it, is well sad really. And somewhat contradictory.

But it does try to address this particle zoo stuff and goes on to say,
that although no one believes that electrons are little planets
orbitting a bigger planet the nucleus, CERN still uses that image of
the atom as its logo.
And well of course they would, because that is what they are selling.

And the dexcription of what an electron is, and the explanations of
what Heisenberg said and all that is sooo pathetic really and shameful,
as it exposes what physicists do, they make things up, and try to make
it sound so strange, that only a physicist doing calculus, could
possibly understand, and in that way, their own knowledge is protected,
and their incomes protected as well.

An electron which is everywhere at the same time.
An electron that is more like a fan, than a little ball orbitting the
nucleus.

And then all the explanations of well mankind is not intelligent to
grasp what it actually is.

We are not intelligent enough, to imagine a spherical wave eminating
from the nucleus, to the shell radius.

We will never be that smart, it is a wonder that we are able to tie our
shoes actually.

And it is sadly filled with all that nonsense, or non science, as it
should be called, which atttempts to make simple physics look like
fairy magic, when it is nothing of the sort.

Heisenberg and the uncertainty principla.

You can not tell the speed and the position of a partcile at the same
time.

Well mr. genius, if it has speed, it is moving, and you would have to
stop it, to say it is at a postion would you not?

So you can either stop it, and say it is here, or measure it moving and
say it went that away.

And with that simple, truth, what do physicists build with it?
Piles of bs that would equal the leaning tower of pizza in height and
go on to say how the universe is soo mysterious, and unknowable, and
irrational, and unpredictable, and you will forever be uncertain about
anything!

And then, after all that, they strut and look for accolades and hope to
have something named after them.
Well that is not science, that is a community building excersize and
fun club activities which passes itself off as science. And worst then
they lord over those doing real science and poo poo them, calling them
charlatans, and cranks.

I wish another space ship would crash somewhere because it looks to me,
that without that,k we are going nowhere in the field of physics. If we
didn't have things to reverse engineer, we would be still in the 40's.
You can't possibly come up with anything new, no real invention in the
field of physics when it is all bs.

And it started because of the bomb.
Did they want to turn out 10,000 physicists a year who knew how to make
the bomb when there was an arms race?
No they didn't.
So they made things up and taught them that.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dogma and New or Different EM Concepts
    ... Oh, physics can only be ... The difference between you and him was he knew that science takes ... Fizzle every time you open your mouth you just show more ignorance. ... You have NO idea what an electron is. ...
    (sci.physics.electromag)
  • Re: Is physics a science?
    ... science and technology. ... It is whatever physics wants it to be. ... >>>aether would do, as long as it has certain basic properties, and test ... >> physicists to explain it to them. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult? [ scientific methods ]
    ... > That may be true for your science, and for some possibly Post Modernist ... of physics are like that eg the law of conservation of energy is no more ... should not be used - its context is not well defined. ... >> training but not of the type used in philosophy which is along the lines ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult? [ scientific methods ]
    ... > That may be true for your science, and for some possibly Post Modernist ... of physics are like that eg the law of conservation of energy is no more ... should not be used - its context is not well defined. ... >> training but not of the type used in philosophy which is along the lines ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Explaining Time Dilation
    ... >> SNIP ... > presumably 'non math construct'. ... > agree with Newtonian physics) and G = T a math construct. ... However science does not deal ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)