🚀 go-pugleaf

Einsteiniana was partially paralysed in 2008 when John Baez,
Einsteiniana's most famous educator, sent this signal to Einsteinians
all over the world who had been learning by rote every word of his
teaching:

http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_5.html
John Baez: "On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to
explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics
into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which
tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into
account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track but
until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both,
our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic.....I realized I
didn't have enough confidence in either theory to engage in these
heated debates. I also realized that there were other questions to
work on: questions where I could actually tell when I was on the right
track, questions where researchers cooperate more and fight less. So,
I eventually decided to quit working on quantum gravity."

And now the end of the story: Divine Albert's Divine Theory of
Everything, that is, Divine Albert's Divine Money-Spinner, is a
Mistake:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article5683551.ece
"PROFESSOR Stephen Hawking is to publish a controversial new book
suggesting Albert Einstein’s lifelong search for a “theory of
everything” was probably a mistake.....Hawking said in a recent
lecture, published on his website, www.hawking.org.uk: "Some people
will be very disappointed if there is not an ultimate theory. I used
to belong to that camp, but I have changed my mind. I'm now glad that
our search for understanding will never come to an end."

Curiously, French Einsteinians discovered this a few years ago and now
all of them are "les héritiers de Maxwell, de Boltzmann et de
Poincaré". No-one in France knows what the words "Albert Einstein"
could possibly mean:

http://www.rehseis.cnrs.fr/spip.php?article304
"L’étonnante diversité des descriptions théoriques utilisées dans la
physique d’hier et d’aujourd’hui est souvent perçue comme une
faiblesse temporaire qu’il faudra corriger dans un état plus avancé de
cette science. A l’opposé de cette attitude, les héritiers de Maxwell,
de Boltzmann et de Poincaré soulignent les vertus épistémiques d’une
diversité des descriptions et considèrent que décrire est un acte dont
la dynamique transcende les objets originels de la description. Nous
proposons de les suivre en explorant la manière dont les divers modes,
niveaux et ordres de description dépendent des cultures scientifiques
dans lesquels ils apparaissent et affectent notre capacité à résoudre
des problèmes concrets, nous poussent à étudier de nouvelles sortes de
phénomènes et suggèrent de nouveaux objets physiques."

In 10 years relativity and Einstein's 1905 false light postulate will
be referred to in the way "classical" thermodynamics and its second
law are referred to in the following text:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
"In the eyes of many modern physicists, the theory has acquired a
somewhat dubious status. They regard classical thermodynamics as a
relic from a bygone era... Indeed, the view that thermodynamics is
obsolete is so common that many physicists use the phrase 'Second Law
of Thermodynamics' to denote some counterpart of this law in the
kinetic theory of gases or in statistical mechanics."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com