🚀 go-pugleaf

Example of an anomaly which should have produced a pre-revolutionary
situation in Kuhnian sense but which, in the era of Postscientism, can
only favor the career advancement of a few postscientists:

http://www.fqxi.org/community/articles/display/116
"In addition, some quantum-spacetime models predict a particular
relationship between the speed of photons in gamma rays and their
energy. There have already been tantalizing hints of these effects. In
2007, for instance, the MAGIC gamma-ray telescope collaboration based
on La Palma in the Canary Islands announced that they had measured a 4-
minute time difference between the arrival of high and low-energy
gamma rays released at the same time in a flare from the Markarian 501
galaxy, some half a billion light years away (Physics Letters B, 668,
253-257, 2008). Standard theories suggest that the photons should have
arrived simultaneously. Along with Lee Smolin at the Perimeter
Institute in Waterloo, Ontario, Amelino-Camelia has begun analyzing
new gamma-ray data from NASAs Fermi Telescope, launched in June 2008
(see image above right). The new data show similar delays in the
arrival times of photons, which they believe will help physicists
discriminate between these models."

Whether or not the experimental data are correct is not so important;
what is important is that nobody cares. If the speed of light is not
constant, as the experiments suggest, the postscientific community
will continue singing "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity,
relativity" and getting their salaries regularly. If the experimental
data prove incorrect, the postscientific community will continue
singing "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity" and
getting their salaries regularly.

On Aug 16 Pentcho Valev wrote:
> For the sake of argument, let those who are still waiting for a
> revolution of Kuhnian type try to imagine anomalies that may some day
> undermine the supreme law of Nature:
>
> http://web.mit.edu/keenansymposium/overview/background/index.html
> Arthur Eddington: "The law that entropy always increases, holds, I
> think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone
> points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in
> disagreement with Maxwell's equationsthen so much the worse for
> Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by
> observationwell, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes.
> But if your theory is found to be against the second law of
> thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to
> collapse in deepest humiliation."
>
> They will fail. Historically the deduction of the supreme law involved
> so much obscurity, invalidity and falsehood that the final words
> "entropy" and "increases" are devoid of any meaning. On the other
> hand, postscientists vulgarize the supreme law in such a way (e.g.
> "Air molecules never gather spontaneously in the corner of the room")
> that falsifying experiments are not even imaginable.
>
> Postscientism implies absurd theories that are INHERENT in our
> civilization. They are dying but this does not mean that a young
> developing society is getting rid of its imperfections. Rather, dying
> absurd theories characterize the senile decay of the civilization.