Zap! (“hello” in EU-speak
First, I would like to give my thanks to the Thunderbolts team and community. Thank you for making my view of the universe so much brighter and interesting!
Even if I'm not someone whose conversion to EU brings much benefit to it as I'm not a member of scientific community and can't really contribute anything substantial to it, I would like to share how I was converted to EU. This is not 100% on thread topic, but not worthy of its own thread so will use this one as it relates.
I used to be a member of (Finnish) astronomical association and as a devout lover of space I was fascinated by black holes, neutron stars, dark matter and all that relativistic space jazz. The nature of reality has interested me since I was a little kid and for many years I devoured without questioning everything the science magazines were telling me. (I eventually canceled my membership after I was ridiculed by trying to start EU related discussion, even if I did my best to present it in as non-confrontational manner as possible)
The first wakeup call didn't come from EU, but philosophy. At one lecture I was given something to ponder about. Modern physical science has three foundation stones it stands on and utilizes in describing reality: (1) Newton’s mechanics, (2) Einstein’s theory of relativity and (3) quantum mechanics. And the curious part to ponder about was:
If (1) is true, it follows that (2) and (3) cannot be true.
If (2) is true, it follows that (1) and (3) cannot be true.
If (3) is true, it follows that (1) and (2) cannot be true.
All three theories are
incommensurable with each other. They describe reality with concepts that just don't translate to another theory. Einstein’s relativistic space is not the same space as Newton’s absolute space. Three different, incommensurable descriptions of reality.
I was bit shocked and vastly confused, but then I learned about Thomas Kuhn whose theory of paradigms helped me to understand better what was going on. Most of what follows are tagged ‘imho’ as I can’t remember what I read etc. to arrive at these conclusions, but they have been major part of my view towards science and the nature of scientific knowledge for past 10 or so years.
Current paradigm governing physical sciences is able to include (1), (2) and (3) by also adopting a set of rules and standards how they are utilized and in which context. Paradigms are not just a collection of theories!
Paradigms also include rules regarding how theories that it contains can be used. Paradigms dictate what can be observed and by what methods. And most important thing regarding observations and current paradigm is the concept of
theory-ladeness of observation. For example when a cosmologist observes anything, the possible (=limited by paradigm) conclusions drawn from it are dictated by the theories involved, including the theories the observational instrument used is built on. No matter what is observed, the current paradigm won’t allow EU interpretation.
And then I learned about EU. So much more simple, so much more elegant, so much more coherent! A theory that makes sense and is not resting on inconsistent foundation. I was converted. I am still hesitant to say anything about the truth of EU theory as a whole since I do not have the required expertise regarding electricity and such, but the methodological approach and inherent rationality of EU has been enough for me to keep on following everything EU related. One very heart-warming aspect of EU to me is how it acknowledges that there are still many unanswered questions. EU knows it has limitations unlike the opposition who are armed with virtually omnipotent mathematical prowess and theoretical entities that they can use to make pretty much every observation to fit in their paradigm, unfortunately often losing connection with the actual physical reality in the process. I do have a suspicion that mathematics and use of theoretical entities might overpower the Kuhnian pressure for revolution and paradigm shift since the governing paradigm is too well adapted to deal with inconsistencies and anomalies. At the very least it should have entered crisis phase quite some time ago, but at least to me it seems that it is just shrugging off all damage done by anomalies and inconsistencies.
And to make a point on the thread topic itself. Engaging in conversation with the 'opposition' is often doomed to fail. The concept EU brings to the table cannot be understood through their paradigm. EU paradigm is incommensurable with their paradigm. I was easily converted since I wasn’t bound by opposing paradigm that I first had to free myself from.
When we consider someone who is deeply bound by current paradigm governing cosmology, proponents of the EU engaging in discussion with them should keep in mind just how strong the paradigms grip can be. It is very difficult to even come to consensus regarding the concepts used in EU vs. Modern Cosmology etc. discussions. Just look at the ongoing electric comet – discussion at international skeptic forum. Another good example would be the past discussion regarding setting up a debate with Nereid here on thunderbolts forums.
Another thing to keep in mind is that EU ideas attack the very core beliefs of the members of opposition. If EU is trying to convince professional astronomers that EU has it right, it is also suggesting that years and years of studying, dedication and passion of the professional astronomer has been in vain.. it is quite a hard thing for him/her to accept and quite understandably easily ends up in frustration and the style of communication can reflect that. It is certainly easier for EU proponents to keep their composure as there is less at stake compared to professionals of the opposing team. EU has everything to win, they have everything to lose.
EU proponents should certainly refrain from aggravating their opponents further than the topic (“you have it wrong”) does by itself. However, certain amount of academic aggression is probably necessary to point out the failures and inconsistencies of ruling paradigms. I am confident that the thunderbolts team knows what they doing and I have my popcorn ready to celebrate the scientific revolution that is on its way.. even if it is still behind the event horizon.
Oh.. one more reason to keep it civil on forums and elsewhere! Little bit into the future forum discussions about EU ideas will be a true gold mine for science historians and sociologists etc. who try to figure out how it was possible for science to be on such obviously wrong path for so long.
