🚀 go-pugleaf

"Uncle Ben" <ben@greenba.com> wrote in message 
news:d933c9b2-e332-4286-ba2e-00dc1d0ce286@n31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 25, 9:27 am, GSS <gurcharn_san...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 24, 11:55 pm, maxwell <s...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 10 2009, 1:01 pm, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ......
> >>> These types of mediumless fields remind me of the grin of the Cheshire
> >>> Cat.
> >>> For the rest of us: no cat, no grin.
>
> >> Well, the "rest of us" is a rather small but cranky minority,
> >> apparently, who have difficulty when nature resists pigeonholing.
> >> Space that isn't devoid of properties, wave phenomena outside of
> >> media, objects that are neither particles nor waves, fields that
> >> aren't made of stuff, properties of objects that don't have a unique
> >> and frame-independent value, causality that doesn't require strict and
> >> time-ordered determinism -- all of these are threats to favorite
> >> comfort toys and cuddle bears that are difficult to let go of, even
> >> when it becomes plain that nature is not as simple as we thought in
> >> our cuddle-bear days.
>
> >> PD
>
> > You have that rare ability, shared by many of today's theoretical
> > physicists, to talk about logically self-contradictory concepts and
> > imagine that these contradictions actually form the basis of reality.
> > It is no surprise that modern theoretical physics is lost in
> > "Wonderland"?
> > Space = nothing AND has properties;
> > waves = variations in a medium AND in empty space;
> > fields = variation in a component of reality AND not made of anything;
> > object properties = invariant defining characteristics
> > AND values varying by viewpoint;
> > causality = invariant determinism across time AND anything goes.
>
> > No, Mr Draper, it is you who are still stuck in the nursery - the
> > childlike world where any contradiction is allowed and where logical
> > consistency is not required.
> > Time to grow up and recognize that when your ideas are so muddled and
> > contradictory, you have not created a theory of the world (physics)
> > but a self-indulgent, fools paradise, funded by gullible
> > governments.
>
> Well said 'maxwell', I agree with you.
> Yes, today's theoretical physicists do talk about logically self-
> contradictory concepts. Perhaps in the grand maze of the unknown,
> theoretical physicists have somewhere missed the right track and are
> now approaching a dead end. They have been steadily indoctrinated into
> believing that due to the complexity of physical reality, they can
> not demand logical consistency in physical concepts and can not even
> demand mental visualization of basic phenomena in quantum mechanical
> world. In this regard let me quote from "The Farce of Physics" by
> Bryan G. Wallace.
>
> "In 1963, P. A. M. Dirac, in his paper, `The evolution of the
> physicist's picture of nature', [65] writes: `one can make a safe
> guess that uncertainty relations in their present form will not
> survive in the physics of the future'. Andr� Mercier reports [121] a
> conversation with Werner Heisenberg, in which Heisenberg argued `that
> even major modifications of present physical theories would not
> transform them into the desired new theory, as quite different and
> novel ideas are required. Secondly, the impact of quantum theory and
> relativity theory on the minds of those scholars who helped found them
> during the first half of our century is conceivably such that they are
> imprisoned by these theories and thus cannot help but reason
> conformably, that is, in terms of traditional concepts; whereas the
> need is for a whole revolution of thought, which can only be carried
> through by nonconformists.'..."
>
> GSShttp://book.fundamentalphysics.info- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yet the facts are that in a two-slit experiment in a vacuum in which
only one electron (or photon) goes through at a time, if you leave
both slits open, you get a two-slit interference pattern on the end
screen.  If you cover up one slit, you get a one-slit pattern.  (And
if you cover both slits, you get nothing.)

These phenomena occcur whether you believe in them or not.

Ben
www.greenba.com
===================================
A physicist like myself would explain it, a shitheaded numbskull
like you would try to make a mystery of it, Bonehead Green,
redneck of science.