🚀 go-pugleaf

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20003949-71.html
"Hawking suggests that Einstein's theories of relativity will become
as relatively obsolete as, who knows, the home phone."

Compare with this:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
Jos Uffink: "The historian of science and mathematician Truesdell made
a detailed study of the historical development of thermodynamics in
the period 1822-1854. He characterises the theory, even in its present
state, as 'a dismal swamp of obscurity' and 'a prime example to show
that physicists are not exempt from the madness of crowds'. He is
outright cynical about the respect with which nonmathematicians treat
the Second Law: "Clausius verbal statement of the second law makes no
sense [. . . ]. All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition; a century of
philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this commandment; a
century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted their eyes from
the unclean. Seven times in the past thirty years have I tried to
follow the argument Clausius offers [. . . ] and seven times has it
blanked and gravelled me. [. . . ] I cannot explain what I cannot
understand." From this anthology it emerges that although many
prominent physicists are firmly convinced of, and express admiration
for the Second Law, there are also serious complaints, especially from
mathematicians, about a lack of clarity and rigour in its formulation.
At the very least one can say that the Second Law suffers from an
image problem: its alleged eminence and venerability is not perceived
by everyone who has been exposed to it. What is it that makes this
physical law so obstreperous that every attempt at a clear formulation
seems to have failed? Is it just the usual sloppiness of physicists?
Or is there a deeper problem? And what exactly is the connection with
the arrow of time and irreversibility? Could it be that this is also
just based on bluff? Perhaps readers will shrug their shoulders over
these questions. THERMODYNAMICS IS OBSOLETE; for a better
understanding of the problem we should turn to more recent,
statistical theories. But even then the questions we are about to
study have more than a purely historical importance. The problem of
reproducing the Second Law, perhaps in an adapted version, remains one
of the toughest, and controversial problems in statistical
physics.....This summary leads to the question whether it is fruitful
to see irreversibility or time-asymmetry as the essence of the second
law. Is it not more straightforward, in view of the unargued
statements of Kelvin, the bold claims of Clausius and the strained
attempts of Planck, to give up this idea? I believe that Ehrenfest-
Afanassjewa was right in her verdict that the discussion about the
arrow of time as expressed in the second law of the thermodynamics is
actually a RED HERRING."

Pentcho Valev wrote:

Beautiful dead science:

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hutchison/080616
"Like bronze idols that are hollow inside, Einstein built a cluster of
"Potemkin villages," which are false fronts with nothing behind them.
Grigori Potemkin (17391791) was a general-field marshal, Russian
statesman, and favorite of Empress Catherine the Great. He is alleged
to have built facades of non-existent villages along desolate
stretches of the Dnieper River to impress Catherine as she sailed to
the Crimea in 1787. Actors posing as happy peasants stood in front of
these pretty stage sets and waved to the pleased Empress. (...) The
science establishment has a powerful romantic desire to believe in
Einstein. Therefore, they are not only fooled by Einstein's tricks,
they are prepared to defend his Potemkin villages. A Potemkin village
is a pretty picture to fool the gullible romantic. Einstein was
romantically infatuated with pretty pictures. He deliberately sought
theories that were aesthetically beautiful in their harmony, symmetry,
and simplicity. He romantically believed something akin to Keats'
famous poetic summation: "Beauty is truth and truth, beauty."

Beautiful dead science institutionalized (but "no longer getting the
kind of support it needs"):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b558kjihQQg&feature=PlayList&p=27DFC0155A909EEF
Silly Walks Applicant: "Well sir, I have a silly walk and I'd like to
obtain a Government grant to help me develop it....I think that with
Government backing I could make it very silly." Silly Walks Director:
"Mr Pudey, the very real problem is one of money. I'm afraid that the
Ministry of Silly Walks is no longer getting the kind of support it
needs. You see there's Defence, Social Security, Health, Housing,
Education, Silly Walks ... they're all supposed to get the same. But
last year, the Government spent less on the Ministry of Silly Walks
than it did on National Defence! Now we get 348,000,000 a year, which
is supposed to be spent on all our available products."

Selling beautiful dead science:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218
Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong
with it?
Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead,
that's what's wrong with it!
Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.
Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm
looking at one right now.
Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the
Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!

Beautiful dead science's hymns:

http://slidingscalemusic.com/articles/Physics%20Today/vol58no7p56.pdf
When Isaac Newton wrote
The laws that we all quote,
It's now extremely apparent that he
Neglected to consider -- Relativity.
What focused our attention
On the fourth dimension?
(We'd been doing so well with just three.)
'Twas Mister Einstein's brainchild -- Relativity.
And who would think
And who'd forecast
That bodies shrink
When they go fast?
It makes old Isaac's theory
Look weary.

http://www.haverford.edu/physics/songs/divine.htm
No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein
Not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr!
He explained the photo-electric effect,
And launched quantum physics with his intellect!
His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel --
He should have been given four!
No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein,
Professor with brains galore!
No-one could outshine Professor Einstein --
Egad, could that guy derive!
He gave us special relativity,
That's always made him a hero to me!
Brownian motion, my true devotion,
He mastered back in aught-five!
No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein,
Professor in overdrive!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.
Yes we all believe in relativity, 8.033, relativity.
Einstein's postulates imply
That planes are shorter when they fly.
Their clocks are slowed by time dilation
And look warped from aberration.
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.
Yes we all believe in relativity, 8.033, relativity.

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com