Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Younger Dryas » Sun Apr 08, 2018 12:05 pm

Essentially, the view I have taken of 'theories of personality', such as those of Marx, Christianity, Freud, Einstein and many others, is not that all, or all but one, are wrong, but on the contrary that all are correct. I was, and am still, unable to escape the implications of the fact that each of the theorists in question was, after all, concerned with one and the same human being. Instead of rejecting all such views, I found myself essentially rejecting none. This shift of emphasis is, I believe, crucial. The task is changed from one of selection to one of assembly.

Also just a reminder, ya'll don't like it when a religious zealot forces their belief systems onto you. Why do the same with EU?
"I decided to believe, as you might decide to take
an aspirin: It can't hurt, and you might get better."
-- Umberto Eco Foucault's Pendulum (1988)
Younger Dryas
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:28 am
Location: Toronto ON Canada

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Morphix » Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:02 pm

This will be of interest: https://youtu.be/8DnuqNbXDvw
Morphix
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:19 pm

I am sure Eric Lerner has some interesting things to say about the response of the scientific world to his work. There is nothing quite like being on the receiving end of the hostility of these institutional paradigm keepers to aid one in coming to the mature realization that science itself has all the flaws of the people who practice it -- and maybe even more!

I read the link on cultic behavior in some professions which BeAChooser left with great interest. Thank you!

But what I was trying to "get at" is that there is an ample history of scientific theories -- esp. from the 1900s -- which ended up actually causing extensive misery and death. I am surprised at the language which converts failed science to "a religion" on this thread, because of course we all know that

    Lysenkoism,
    agricultural policies of Maoist China and Soviet Russia,
    Darwinian racism and
    eugenics
are all scientific theories. Under no stretch of the imagination can any of these be called "a religion." Or is there no agreement that these were scientifically derived and were wrong and evil? Is there no consensus that it is a matter of observation and experience that science is the choice weapon of those who claim to have a better system, but in fact just use science because they wish to eliminate many people who are their political enemies?

Now I am sure that with the broad reading and brain power we have here, a list of deadly and harmful scientific theories could be made. I gave some examples. That was what I meant when I said, "...why not be honest with the younger generations about the more dark pages of scientific history. It might serve them better if they understood that science both has, and can still, get it badly wrong." Maybe I will start a thread -- "Why are scientists and experts more vulnerable to manias, obsessions, delusions, disorders, and complexes than any one else?" Ha! But I do think there is a worthwhile thread in the offing in order to lay down some of the basics.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby BeAChooser » Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:27 pm

Brigit Bara wrote:I am surprised at the language which converts failed science to "a religion" on this thread


I'm sorry but it's the actions of those still pushing AGWalarmism and Big Bang's Plethora of Magic Gnomes after all this time and contradictory evidence that put those belief systems in the religious category. Especially when the public is now being told to have "faith" in them and the prophets (scientists and political leaders) who push them nonstop. And it's because they've left the domain of science that they've become so hard to kill. Which, by the way, is pretty much what happened to Lysenkoism, which had every bit the characteristics of a state controlled religion in the Soviet Union. Indeed, in 1948, the Lenin Academy of Agricultural Sciences announced that Lysenkoism would be taught as "the only correct theory" in the Soviet Union. And belief in it spread throughout the Communist world ... because The State needed to substitute belief in *science* (even pseudo-science) for traditional religious beliefs in a supreme entity (higher than The State). Lysenkoism only collapsed when VERY bad things happened as a result of it. Things The State couldn't hide. Like famines. Unfortunately, there is nothing as dramatic resulting from AGWalarmism or Big Bang Gnomes. Mostly just wasted money and lost opportunity. No one is directly starving as a result. YET.
BeAChooser
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:24 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Metryq » Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:04 am

@Brigit Bara: You are almost anthropomorphizing science as a self-aware and willful entity—what I call "Capital S" Science.

"Small s" science is simply a method for establishing reliable information. Problems arise when people elevate it to Science, the infallible authority. (How can a method have authority?) Invoking science in this way is a trump card equivalent to saying, "You can't argue with this." This fallacy can sway people because of all the benefits the scientific method has brought to us in the form of applied technology. This makes it a prime weapon for political propaganda.

Sometimes math is used in a similar manner. (Consider the famous anecdote about Euler using mathematical double-talk to "prove" god exists.) A mathematical argument can be flawless, yet still completely wrong if any of the original "givens" are wrong. Also, some loosely use the term "theory" for speculations that are not even polished enough to be considered hypotheses.

Perhaps it would suit you better if the term "propaganda" were used instead of "religion"? (Using "religion" as an epithet may offend others as an attack on their moral philosophy—especially if they are are a conscientious practitioner of the scientific method.) Big Bang started out as legitimate science. Later evidence revealed its flaws. Thus, propaganda was introduced to support protected interests. Researchers often have legitimate disagreements. But when evidence makes a position untenable, then one might deride it as propaganda.
User avatar
Metryq
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:31 am

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Tue Apr 10, 2018 4:36 am

The religion of science is "scientism"
It the belief that the universe is made of mathematics, that
we can know everything from its smaller parts,
and that everything is made of matter.

This is caused by the scientific method.
The rules of the methodology become the main dogmas of science.

Then we have the religion of "sceptics".
Those are people that belief that the current models and
ideas are almost perfect, and need only small adjustments.
This is combined with a belief in "experts" that know things
more and better than other people.
They like to maintain their own made "consensus".
(99% of astrologers agree that astrology is useful).
Having complex incomprehensible maths does of course strengthen
the position of the experts (just as in astrology).

There is also the false belief that more knowledge leads to
better models. This contains the logical problems that the information
is never independent of your knowledge and that with enough
fantasy you can bend the same information to any model that you like.
And this is what we see in astronomy a lot.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Osmosis » Tue Apr 10, 2018 4:37 pm

This all reminds me of the Doctor Who episode :"Logopolis", where the mathematicians keep calculating, to keep the Universe running. :D :D
Osmosis
Osmosis
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:52 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:51 am

I don't know what to do because some of the best comments are made when the thread is off-topic.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby fosborn_ » Fri Apr 13, 2018 1:06 pm

by Zyxzevn » Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:36 am

The religion of science is "scientism"


Rupert Sheldrake - The Science Delusion BANNED TED TALK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNA ... tu.be&t=39

You may be aware of Rupert S....
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov
fosborn_
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:05 pm

fosborn_ wrote:You may be aware of Rupert S....

Yes.

I have my own philosophical approach to science, at:
www.reddit.com/r/paradigmchange
The general idea is that we should not just discard observations when they don't fit in the model.

Usually these observations are discarded by attacking or gaslighting
the observers (gaslighting= claiming that they are crazy).
We should have different theories and different explanations and see how
these work out when we try to model certain phenomena.

The problem is that most scientists only want to apply one theory, and do not like
it when the theory does not work in certain circumstances.
In those cases the scientists add bullshit to the theories to keep them working.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:30 pm

We should have different theories and different explanations and see how
these work out when we try to model certain phenomena.


paradigm change


I am not speaking to any one in particular, but people who want both multiple hypotheses and a paradigm shift are a little internally conflicted.

That there should always be rational criticism and multiple hypotheses was one of the arguments which Karl Popper made in his book, The Myth of the Framework. Though he used the word framework, he was in reality criticizing and taking down Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions/Paradigm shifts. He made the argument that science would not progress under dominant paradigms. And, he should be awarded with recognition and praise for having foerseen all this trouble and having clearly warned people about all of the problems of science today. All the practitioners of science who enforce their paradigm through institutions and gov't capture are doing so with no qualms because of Kuhn's crafty justification for such behavior.

If the Electric Universe or any other alternative theory ever succeeds, it will be by extremely good arguments, criticisms, proofs, and experimentation. And that is just regarding the Electric Star model. If the EU has any other claims about any other science, say for example neuroscience or agronomy, they must fight just as hard for every single inch of scientific ground because there will be no top down shifts in science, while it still remains science.

It is an excellent book, if you can find a copy.
Last edited by Brigit Bara on Mon Apr 16, 2018 12:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Mon Apr 16, 2018 12:06 am

And in particular, one of the privileges which the practitioners of science (read the experts) award themselves when they have a paradigm shift is the right and duty to rewrite history -- to fit the new paradigm.

So that is why I feel it is quite concerning when there is such a tepid response about the real history of science. The fact is that scientific theories have lead directly to atrocities and also genocide. Over and over and over. And there is every indication that younger people know very little about that. One must at this point suspect that the practitioners of science are already writing a new history that leaves out what Mao did to those 70 million men women and children through a science-based government policy which destroyed agriculture. To this day, the Chinese government claims that every one who died during the Great Leap died because of natural disasters. Go ahead and ask any one in Beijing.

Then there was the time the Aryans tried to get rid of some inferior races and take their rightful place running the universe. Keep in mind, Darwin's book title is "the survival of the fittest race." I would just caution that more than a few people hold the view that genetic superiority is a scientific fact, when in reality it has been disproven repeatedly and is an utterly worthless and dead doctrine of the perpetrators of the past.

People actually need to repent from these evil philosophies, before they lead to disasters again. And stop whistling past the vast graveyard, calling bad science "a religion." Bad science is still science, and it has an extremely long rap sheet. We have hardly even begun.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Metryq » Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:55 am

Popper's book is available in ebook form, so it should be easy to track down.

Without addressing any particular case, scientific models have been:

  • Innocently wrong
  • Driven by a priori ideas
  • Later hijacked for political propaganda
Or some mixture of the above. For this reason both scientists and non-scientists should be self-aware, which also means "capital S" Science should not be on the pedestal many in today's world put it. Everyone should understand the scientific method.

It would be impossible for everyone to understand the full spectrum of scientific discovery. Many people have been credited with the adage that if one truly understands something, one should be able to explain it to a layperson. That interface between the trained and untrained may be the slippery slope, but we do not live in a perfect world. Nor is science a consensus matter. However, democratic republics demand that people have some understanding of the power they wield and be educated in the matters at hand.

Science does not stand apart from the rest of humanity, although some view it as an incontrovertible authority. It is a method, nothing more. The method can lead to errors, just like any other aspect of human endeavor. And like anything else in human society, the findings of science can be deliberately misused. So long as people are educated, there is hope of correcting errors and abuses.

And preserving the past.
User avatar
Metryq
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:31 am

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Webbman » Mon Apr 16, 2018 6:00 am

science is a religion in that it has a priest class whose authority is above questioning. This particular priest class answers to the money power where all its funding ultimately comes from.

Thus only projects of interest to the money power are taken on, only concepts that do not offend the money power are investigated. If you dont go along to get along you will be casted out.

at some point the money power will become your new god, if it hasn't already, and you will have to accept it whether you believe or not and whether you like it or not. There will be all kinds of settled science to justify this with a plethora of good causes to strengthen that justification.


so basically in a comparison of religions most have given up a god that doesn't interfere with anything and lets you make all the choices for one that interferes with everything and makes all the choices for you.

Does that sound like something "educated" people would do? Feel free to tell me that my math is wrong.
We shall know them by their works
Webbman
 
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums

Unread postby Brigit Bara » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:13 am

This comes to hand:

https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2018/0 ... -religion/
by David Drew

We could continue on a proper thread, instead of using "Eric Lerner is presenting his paper on PhysicsForums".
Any one?
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer
User avatar
Brigit Bara
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest