Random Quote Generator

THE POET AS SCIENTIST

THE POET AS SCIENTIST, THE POET AS SCIENTIST

Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source

The Geek's Raven
[An excerpt, with thanks to Marcus Bales]

Once upon a midnight dreary,
fingers cramped and vision bleary,
System manuals piled high and wasted paper on the floor,
Longing for the warmth of bedsheets,
Still I sat there, doing spreadsheets:
Having reached the bottom line,
I took a floppy from the drawer.
Typing with a steady hand, I then invoked the SAVE command
But got instead a reprimand: it read "Abort, Retry, Ignore".

Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source

Form input - by Günter Born

Monday, June 26, 2023

Observations on Relativity

I think, perhaps, in an effort to make my basic points, I am oversimplifying a little. Bear in mind, it's very much in the interest of bureaucracies to appear omniscient, and that includes in their understanding of science. Galileo Galilei, as you may be aware, completely rejected the concept of theory, all theory, for precisely this reason. Galileo was an empiricist, and like all true empiricists, he saw theory as an obstacle to the perception of truth. The Holy Inquisition, however, was aware, that data alone were no basis at all for control, or political power. Galileo was not condemned for supporting Copernicus, but for failing to develop a meaningful theory of the Universe to explain the Copernican doctrine. Galileo did not develop what Isaac Newton did, a full explanation of astronomical phenomena. Similarly, I would argue that the mere concept that Einstein's theories can explain everything is extremely useful to academics, or people in power in general, to give them confidence in exerting power and control. Hence, there will be a tendency to select data to support the theory, and ignore data that opposes the theory, and ignore any potential confounds that might tend to discredit the data, or the experiments involved. Whether this is brainwashing, doublethink, lying or simply self-interest is open to discussion. With regard to the GPS data that gravity has very small effects on atomic clocks, I would argue that this need not, at all, prove effects on time. Merely on the effects of the clock mechanisms themselves. With regard to the fact that particle accelerators cannot accelerate particles to faster than the speed of light, I would argue that this is simply because the particles themselves used to perform the acceleration themselves cannot go faster than the speed of light. The Parker Solar probe should currently be showing time dilation of several seconds a year according to the Lorentz Factor, but, no one seems to be able to show the detailed data from NASA proving this important fact. So, I tend to reject the Special Theory of Relativity.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home