The God particle is a fraud
- Geordie Ross
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: May 4th, 2013, 5:19 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell
- Location: Newcastle UK.
Re: The God particle is a fraud
And no, ether was proposed as a medium to describe how light travels in a vacuum, before they discovered its self propagating.
And please, tell me the difference between ether and space, does it have different properties? Or are you just calling it ether for the sake of arguing?
-
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: April 14th, 2013, 4:30 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Stephen Hurrell
- Location: Australia
Re: The God particle is a fraud
Science is not about being fair and it doesn't care if you spent a lifetime studying the 4th dimension. Its a logical impossibility, so no amount of clever thinking is going to make it real. Dimensionality can only exist in 3 dimensions in our reality but does also exist in inner and outer dimensions in other realities which we can't have access to. Time scale is an impenetrable barrier which prevents us from observing the inner and outer dimensions. Light travels via the inner dimension. This is why it appears to us to be going so fast, but light may in fact be travelling very slowly within is own reality.Infinitesimal wrote:
That's very unfair to your fellow thinkers who have spent lifetimes struggling with these problems. Einstein was a pretty smart dude - and very humble and sincere. I'm sure he would disagree with you. Me, not nearly so smart, also have to disagree... I've spent decades of painful study and a lot of self-introspection to do the best I can not to fool myself. Yes, I do know for certain 4D spaces (and higher exist) - but that is not the only possible explanation! It's just one of the modern, and currently most workable ones.
Teachers just teach what the system tells them to teach. Any teacher that deviates from the system will be expelled from the system. Consensus based science is what is mostly taught in universities. Consensus is not science. Note - They are only "good people" because they do what they are told. (They are obedient to the system and play by the rules, regardless of how crazy those rules might be.)I am sorry, that you see the world this way in such a cynical way makes me truly sad. Have you ever taken a real physics class? Did your teacher strike you as a demigod of intimidation? The vast majority of "academicians" are good people. Sure, some may stab each other in the back to get tenure, but for their students, they usually care a great deal.
-- Updated October 20th, 2013, 9:45 am to add the following --
The concept of an ether has been around for hundreds of years and even persists to this present day. The politics of science doesn't allow scientists to us the direct name 'ether', because it is considered old fashion. Modern day versions of 'the ether' are - space-time continuum, Higgs field, virtual photons, wimps, dark energy and dark matter.Geordie Ross wrote:Define "anything" Didn't I just say it has dimensions and volume? They most certainly qualify as "anything". It has quantifiable measures, and values.
And no, ether was proposed as a medium to describe how light travels in a vacuum, before they discovered its self propagating.
And please, tell me the difference between ether and space, does it have different properties? Or are you just calling it ether for the sake of arguing?
-
- Posts: 886
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
- Location: The Evening Star
Re: The God particle is a fraud
I do admire the way that you can say this:
and this:Its [4th dimension] a logical impossibility, so no amount of clever thinking is going to make it real. Dimensionality can only exist in 3 dimensions in our reality...
in the same breath....but does also exist in inner and outer dimensions in other realities which we can't have access to.
I love the way that you blithely dismiss all unobservable abstractions with the single exception of your own.
-
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: April 14th, 2013, 4:30 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Stephen Hurrell
- Location: Australia
Re: The God particle is a fraud
I'm sorry that the universe is not designed the way that you like it. Hopefully, God will be more considerate next time he decides to create a universe, right?Dolphin42 wrote:DarwinX:
I do admire the way that you can say this: (Nested quote removed.)
and this: (Nested quote removed.)
in the same breath.
I love the way that you blithely dismiss all unobservable abstractions with the single exception of your own.
-
- Posts: 886
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
- Location: The Evening Star
Re: The God particle is a fraud
-
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: April 14th, 2013, 4:30 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Stephen Hurrell
- Location: Australia
Re: The God particle is a fraud
It looks like I've turned your consensus built science world upside down and inside out. Now you don't know what is up and what is down any more!Dolphin42 wrote:No relevance to what I said.
-
- Posts: 886
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
- Location: The Evening Star
Re: The God particle is a fraud
Incidentally, how's the research into your exponential decay of gravity theory coming along? I had high hopes for that one because it's the only theory that you've mentioned so far that is actually testable.
-
- Posts: 5963
- Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
- Location: Cornwall UK
Re: The God particle is a fraud
So you are attempting to turn a lack of anything into something of value.Exactly like the aether. There is no difference between the aether and your dimensional nothing.They both exist because of the same problem. Both can not accept that the conventional description of EM radiation requires a field to permeate through. Ol Bills ropes do not require an aether nor a dimensional void capable of bending.Geordie Ross wrote:Define "anything" Didn't I just say it has dimensions and volume? They most certainly qualify as "anything". It has quantifiable measures, and values.
And no, ether was proposed as a medium to describe how light travels in a vacuum, before they discovered its self propagating.
And please, tell me the difference between ether and space, does it have different properties? Or are you just calling it ether for the sake of arguing?
- Geordie Ross
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: May 4th, 2013, 5:19 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell
- Location: Newcastle UK.
Re: The God particle is a fraud
Stick to what you're good at Xris, dodging questions and churning out rhetoric.
-
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: April 14th, 2013, 4:30 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Stephen Hurrell
- Location: Australia
Re: The God particle is a fraud
It appears that your Victorian Era gravity theory which pulls from a distance, isn't doing so well either!Dolphin42 wrote:Absolutely.
Incidentally, how's the research into your exponential decay of gravity theory coming along? I had high hopes for that one because it's the only theory that you've mentioned so far that is actually testable.
So........... the horse is still pulling that cart??????? Silly horse!!
-
- Posts: 886
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 8:05 am
- Location: The Evening Star
Re: The God particle is a fraud
Another Darwin classic.Victorian Era gravity theory
-
- Posts: 5963
- Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
- Location: Cornwall UK
Re: The God particle is a fraud
Not dodging anything Geordie. It is you that appears incapable of differentiating between two impossible concepts.You tell me how you can deny an aether but want an invisible something to divert the passage of light?Geordie Ross wrote:Yea, I thought so.
Stick to what you're good at Xris, dodging questions and churning out rhetoric.
- Geordie Ross
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: May 4th, 2013, 5:19 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell
- Location: Newcastle UK.
Re: The God particle is a fraud
But as ever, you answer questions with questions, and fall back on rhetoric. You're getting very predictable.
-
- Posts: 5963
- Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
- Location: Cornwall UK
Re: The God particle is a fraud
I have no idea what you are saying Geordie. I do not believe in the aether, so how in hell can I tell the difference between two concepts that I do not believe exist. The point I was making.If you can invent something out of nothing for your waves to bend in, how can you deny an ether for waves to permeate through? What in hell is the difference? Simply calling it a dimension is bull ship.Geordie Ross wrote:I asked you to tell me the difference between ether and space? Or any other field for that matter, what makes this ether different? or are you just calling it ether for the sake of arguing? I also asked if you consider the volume and dimensions of space to be "nothing".
But as ever, you answer questions with questions, and fall back on rhetoric. You're getting very predictable.
- Geordie Ross
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: May 4th, 2013, 5:19 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell
- Location: Newcastle UK.
Re: The God particle is a fraud
Are spacial dimensions and volume "nothing"? Do they "not exist"? Would a change in the dimensions ultimately change the geometry and therefore the trajectory of anything moving through it?
Asserting that it doesn't exist, just doesn't cut it.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023