Thursday, February 10, 2011

Trashing Quantum Physics (Chabad) AND On the Finite Universe (Fresh Air)

Trashing Quantum Physics (Chabad) AND On the Finite Universe (Fresh Air)

by Craig Hamilton on Saturday, January 22, 2011 at 4:00pm

Trashing Quantum Physics (Chabad) AND On the Finite Universe (Fresh Air)

Some of my collected comments at www.chabad.org

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/39528/showfeedback/true/jewish/Have-We-All-the-Answers.htm

Most popular names in science, philosophy, and what not have some truth. There is a lot of sifting to do, but there is usually something there. For example, I am completely against the popularity of quantum physics. However, that is not to say that there are no uses for the study of quantum physics. The tyranny of the exactness of this foolish mathematical religion is stupid. In that range, it is hard to tell what influences what. With the rout use of the scientific method, this would most likely never have occurred. Eventually, either the math crumbles in exactness or the experimenter realizes the spiritual forces that allow these experiments to occur, with or without the scientific method.

Quantum physics is essentially variable matrix reality, which easily suffices to create science fiction.

2 and 3. One example; there are no straight lines in biology and everything else for that matter. Everything at the minute level becomes subject to trivial electromagnetic mixing currents, which might be called spiritual forces; inclusive of an idea such as whether or not one is blessed. That is, having a GPS is not enough. It also has to work for you. If there is not enough resistance in circuit between you and the GPS, it is likely to collapse and getting you nowhere.

The "straight lines" I mention are literal. The only place a straight line actually exists is in imagination. They can also be calculated with the mathematical formula y = mx + b, but they aren't realistic.

Take for instance a bow and arrow. The string, when pulled tight is a straight line, no? No, it is not a straight line because it is subject to density/buoyancy. That is, because the string is a more dense liquid, then air, also a liquid, the string becomes curved, as part of it sinks more than other parts. That is, I also disagree when science calls air a gas. Air is a liquid. Throw out gravity too. That is what got us in this mess.

The evidence of the electromagnetic mixing currents may be observed by simply pouring water through a funnel. The swirl is an elaborate pattern that is a mixing current. The swirl is an electrical current. It is not quantum indeterminacy that causes the results of your quantum physics experiments, but complex electromagnetic mixing current.

I am not the only one that criticized gravity. Einstein criticized his own theory. He sought to disprove it because thought it was wrong. If you consider him to be just anybody...

The point of the straight line argument was to show you that mathematical representations are not even close to full proof. I shouldn't use math to disprove math, as you wanted me to do. Perhaps, it is because we humans have DNA based on a four letter alphabet that we can understand the concept of a straight line or math in imagination. It takes an alphabet or 2 to understand math. It arises from a discontinuous mind.

And you are wrong about water pouring through a funnel not being an electrical current. Water is a bent molecule where negative charge collects near the oxygen of it, such that it is negative near the center and positive at the ends.. Water is most certainly charged. It's properties, such as the swirl when you pour it through a funnel arise because of charge.

You ask me to give a firm mathematical foundation where the very nature of the foundation of quantum physics, the one you believe (believed?), while rooted in mathematics, is not firm and is doublethink. Reasonably, if the nature of quantum physics is rooted in mathematics, then mathematics is not a firm foundation, especially if you believe in quantum physics.

“One of the few perceptive readers of Planck’s early quantum theory papers was the junior patent examiner in Bern, Albert Einstein. To Einstein, the postulate of the energy elements was vivid and real, if appalling, “as if the ground had been pulled from under one, with no firm foundation seen anywhere upon which one could have built.” As it happened, the search for a “firm foundation” occupied Einstein for the rest of his life.” - William H. Cropper

“Everything in the quantum world occurs at random and there is no direct cause for quantum events.” – Roland Omnes

What does, “God does not play dice,” mean to you?

Search the New York Times database for the word, "Gravity." You will come up with at least four articles that question it. The most recent is a 2010 article.

[The 2010 article says that based upon the calcutions of Stephen Hawking, the idea of gravity is actually thermodynamics.]

  • · Fresh Air with Terry Gross

Time to put on your thinking caps folks. On Monday, we're going to dive deeply into the possibility that parallel universes exist. Your homework: study and understand string theory, by Monday morning. Oh, who am I kidding? Physicist Brian Greene is going to walk us through what he studies, what it means, and why it could mean parallel universes exist.

My First Comment:

The universe is finite. Go into a room. Shut off the lights. It is dark. At nighttime we see that it is dark. Given that, what reason do we have to believe that the universe is not contained? Matter darks the universe. Grey matter is the matter that is reflecting light. The lights in the sky are probably links to other universes.

My Second Comment:

More on the same subject. Sometimes we see what is outside our eye, while sometimes we see inwards, thought, our mind's eye. We see both waves of darkness and waves of light and their intermediates. When we see a star what we are seeing ...is a portal to the inside and the outside, in the same way that when we see an eye, what we are seeing is a portal to the inside and outside. Both light and darkness are portals made up of electromagnetic mixing currents, which are ox/redox reactions. Matter emits darkness.Light receives darkness.

last, if you like this check out my note/blog "On The Manifestation of Light and Darkness"

1 comment:

  1. Gravity

    This is late in the comment game, but I was talking about Einstein's Gravitational Theorum and not Newton's. That should have been evident, as I was not suggesting walking off the top of a building to test the theory of gravity. Einstein, himself, didn't like the equation in question even though he thought of it. He did not like it because there is the gateway to absurd quantum matrix reasoning, which when Einstein, realizing what he had done; he spent the rest of his years searching for a theory of everything and a way to correct this mistake.

    Craig Hamilton
    Sandwich, MA

    ReplyDelete