🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 1, 10:25 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 9:51 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Astronomy/Cosmology/...
> > The Life of the Cosmos
> > Lee Smolin
> > "Lee Smolin offers a new theory of the universe that is at once
> > elegant, comprehensive, and radically different from anything proposed
> > before....Natural selection may guide the appearance of the laws of
> > physics, favoring those universes which best reproduce.....Offers an
> > intriguing blend of the ideas of Einstein and Darwin. Argues that the
> > laws of nature may themselves be subject to natural selection."
>
> > In fact, Lee Smolin has initially discovered that Einstein's idiotic
> > "law of nature" according to which the speed of light is constant does
> > not allow Einstein zombie world to reproduce successfully anymore:
>
> >http://edge.org/3rd_culture/smolin03/smolin03_index.html
> > Lee Smolin: "Now, here is the really interesting part: Some of the
> > effects predicted by the theory appear to be in conflict with one of
> > the principles of Einstein's special theory of relativity, the theory
> > that says that the speed of light is a universal constant. It's the
> > same for all photons, and it is independent of the motion of the
> > sender or observer. How is this possible, if that theory is itself
> > based on the principles of relativity? The principle of the constancy
> > of the speed of light is part of special relativity, but we quantized
> > Einstein's general theory of relativity. Because Einstein's special
> > theory is only a kind of approximation to his general theory, we can
> > implement the principles of the latter but find modifications to the
> > former. And this is what seems to be happening! So Gambini, Pullin,
> > and others calculated how light travels in a quantum geometry and
> > found that the theory predicts that the speed of light has a small
> > dependence on energy. Photons of higher energy travel slightly slower
> > than low-energy photons....A very exciting question we are now
> > wrestling with is, How drastically shall we be forced to modify
> > Einstein's special theory of relativity if the predicted effect is
> > observed? The most severe possibility is that the principle of
> > relativity simply fails....But there is another possibility. This is
> > that the principle of relativity is preserved, but Einstein's special
> > theory of relativity requires modification so as to allow photons to
> > have a speed that depends on energy. The most shocking thing I have
> > learned in the last year is that this is a real possibility. A photon
> > can have an energy-dependent speed without violating the principle of
> > relativity!"
>
> > Fortunately, Smolin has also discovered that Einstein's 1905 false
> > light postulate, like any other law of nature, is subject to natural
> > selection. So a new species called "Einstein zombie world with
> > variable speed of light" will emerge soon and this new species will
> > reproduce so well that, in the struggle for survival, all other
> > species will disappear forever.
>
> Smolin has even discovered how exactly the speed of light differs from
> what Einstein's false principle of constancy of the speed of light
> predicts:
>
> http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/~colloq/Talk2006_smolin/smolin-oct06.pdf
> Lee Smolin: Energy dependent speed of light. v=c(1 + a lp E + b lp^2
> E^2 + ...)
>
> Needless to say, in "Einstein zombie world with variable speed of
> light" the Perimeter Institute can no longer be just "Ministry of
> Silly Walks".  Rather, it will become "Ministry of Supersilly Walks":
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqhlQfXUk7w
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

xxein:  So?  What is the physic?

I think the problem with identifying the physic is that everybody
comes into it with a set of core beliefs from past beliefs.  I used to
have that until I applied a physical logic, not a belief logic.  It
sounds simple (it may have been for me) and I'm hardly done.  But the
physic should be understood as pristine - not guided by extraneous
issues.

Understanding a quantum gravity is not that hard at all --- once
gravity is understood.  But that only makes it 'easier' to fathom
larger issues like how the universe presents itself to us and what we
should do to 'objectivize' our subjectively-based measurements out of
a math theory and into understanding the physic, itself.

I remain mystified by how steadfastly a belief is clung on to while
our continual and deeper observation of the physic keeps telling us to
make modifications to our math as if only the math needs to be changed
without a change in the physical concept for/in which the math can
more easily apply.

Just give us a dirt pile and some grass (or weeds) and our math can
make a Cadillac out of it.  That is where we are in explaining the
physic.  We simply use our own terms to declare an understanding of it
through a math.

Of course I exagerate, but the difference needs to be exagerated.  I
don't know if anyone will 'pick up' on these differences between
'objective' and 'subjective' reality, but I'll put money on the
aggregate of 'belief before a physic'.

So many theories pop up.  Why?  I can only hope that we are breaking
away from ancient beliefs.  But they are few and weak and mostly ill-
founded compared to the stoic body of belief.  But by the same token,
if any of them were the core belief, SR-GR would be the folly.  The
concept driving the math of any such 'good enough' theory would
preclude the SR-GR viability of the/it's math.  And yet such a math
(SR-GR) is already in question by even those who profess their faith
in it.  Thank goodness for small favors.

Scientists are human.  The universe is not.  A 'real' scientist should
not be influenced by humaness.  Don't put human words into a non-human
mouth.  Get the physic and don't embellish the human part of the
understanding of it through prior belief.  I can do that.  I did
that.  But I am talking to humans.  Go figure it all out.