🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 20, 12:41 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> It seems you can never define the silliest string theorist: there is
> always a sillier one:
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/03/23/sv_michiokaku.xml
> "The importance Prof Kaku places on childishness in theoretical
> physics extends to science fiction, and this, in part, is the subject
> of his new book, Physics of the Impossible. It argues that because
> there is no law of physics preventing the existence of concepts such
> as time travel, teleportation and invisibility, physics has to take
> their possibility seriously."

Lubos Motl is definitely sillier than Professor Michio Kaku:

http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/05/varying-speed-of-light-vsl-theories.html
Motl: "The meter is moreover defined as 1/299,792,458 of a light
second, so according to current definitions, a varying speed of light
is simply a contradiction."

String theorists are the silliest Einsteinians but extreme silliness
can be found everywhere in Einstein criminal cult. Steve Carlip (who
is not a string theorist) is just as silly as Lubos Motl:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_of_light.html
Steve Carlip: "Is c, the speed of light in vacuum, constant? At the
1983 Conference Generale des Poids et Mesures, the following SI
(Systeme International) definition of the metre was adopted: The metre
is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time
interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second. This defines the speed of light
in vacuum to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s.  This provides a very short
answer to the question "Is c constant": Yes, c is constant by
definition!"

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com