Everything That is Wrong With Modern Science

[junglelord]

Particles by their definition, are points.
I don't buy that in any form.
Electrons are not points.

[StevenO]

Particles by their definition, are points.
I don't buy that in any form.
Electrons are not points.

Where did you get that nonsense? From the mainstream?

Anything with mass has an extension, so every particle with size has mass and vice versa, even electrons and photons.

When you deliberately start to assign mass to something without extension aka. your point you are getting yourself into trouble (you will get divides by zero all the time). A point only exists in math.

[altonhare]

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... atter.html

Check out this impeccable illogic:

Claim:

by observing a massive collision between two large clusters of galaxies, astronomers have detected what they say could only be the signature of dark matter.

Two Premises for Claim:

During the collision, the hot gas was slowed by a drag force similar to air resistance and separated from the rest of the cluster, the team explains.

But scientists knew from earlier observations that dark matter—if it exists—will not be slowed by such a drag force, because it does not interact with itself or the gas except through gravity.

The mass was determined using a phenomenon called gravitational lensing, which occurs when, as predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity, the path of light is distorted by gravity. The amount of mass can be calculated from the amount of distortion.

The first premise is related to how observed objects should behave. It states that past observations, which assumed dark matter, gave us knowledge about how dark matter behaves! So, the researchers have used information that is only true under the assumption of dark matter to prove the existence of dark matter. Logic is knocking, it wants its circle back.

The second premise is related to how we measure parameters that describe how what we observe behaves. It uses gravitational lensing to measure a key parameter called "mass". However gravitational lensing is the result of a theory which fails catastrophically if dark matter doesn't exist! Using gravitational lensing in this way assumes a theory that is consistent with dark matter.

The editors-in-chief of Astrophysical Letters should be knocking, wanting the space in their publication and hours of their lives back!

[StevenO]

Is'nt that a prime example of what Physics is these days? Glorified heuristics. It works like that in most cases, so why not here? Bending of light in a prism is caused by a "refractive index" and the refractive index is the causing the bending of light...that's no explanation, it is a heuristic. We are so trained to accept these kind of circular explanations that we don't notice them anymore.

So, kudo's to Alton for his vigilance!

[altonhare]

Is'nt that a prime example of what Physics is these days? Glorified heuristics. It works like that in most cases, so why not here? Bending of light in a prism is caused by a "refractive index" and the refractive index is the causing the bending of light...that's no explanation, it is a heuristic. We are so trained to accept these kind of circular explanations that we don't notice them anymore.

So, kudo's to Alton for his vigilance!

Thanks Steve. It's just a crying shame that crap like this gets perpetrated on lay people who assume they don't "know enough" to properly evaluate the claims themselves.

[Hermes]

the wrong with Modern Science is that they don't think about the future. They discover new thing, conduct experiment after that if they fail their waste are throw any where. They don't think the effect of what they are doing,.I know that because of science our life become easy. but as people grow and inventing new things our nature is the one who sacrifice because of the toxic and gasses in the air. if they don't think our nature it is not far that we all gone.

[kiwi]

Hi ... I enjoyed the terminology used in this article by Dr Richard Fisher of the Heliophysics Dept NASA...

Dr Richard Fisher, director of NASA’s Heliophysics division, told Mr Reneke the super storm would hit like "a bolt of lightning”,

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/sun-s ... z0xhgiuIpB

http://www.news.com.au/technology/sun-s ... 5909999465

[Phorce]

I saw this article and this thread immediately came to mind.

The truth about talent: Can genius be learned or is it preordained? - As children sit their GCSE exams, Matthew Syed argues that we are foolish to believe excellence is only for the few.

A few years ago, Carol Dweck, a leading psychologist, took 400 students and gave them a simple puzzle. Afterwards, each of the students were given six words of praise.

Half were praised for intelligence: "Wow, you must be really smart." The other half were praised for effort: "Wow, you must be hard-working." Dweck was seeking to test if these words could make a difference to the student's mindsets. The results were remarkable. After the first test, the students were given a choice of whether to take a hard or an easy test. A full two-thirds praised for intelligence chose the easy task: they did not want to risk losing their "smart" label. But 90 per cent of the effort-praised group chose the tough test: they wanted to prove just how hard working they were. Then, the experiment gave the students a chance to take a test of equal difficulty to the first test. What happened?

Maybe this does not just apply to school children !

[Goldminer]

Plans for new Einstein Telescope unveiled in Europe

"The Einstein Telescope is expected to be capable of making precise measurements of gravitational waves, which are predicted to emanate from cosmic catastrophes such as merging black holes, collapsing stars and supernova explosions. "

"To achieve such a high degree of sensitivity, the observatory will be built underground at a depth of about 330 to 650 feet, which should reduce the interfering effects of residual seismic motion, researchers said. This should also enable the detector to sense the entire range of gravitational wave frequencies that can be measured on Earth, they added."

"It consists of three detectors, each connecting to two arms more than a mile long. When a gravity wave passes through, it will stretch and shrink the arms' lengths slightly, depending on their alignment with the direction of the wave. A series of laser pulses will measure the arms' lengths with high precision to detect the tiny changes (far less than the size of an atomic nucleus) that occur when a gravity wave has passed through."

"The current estimated price of the observatory is $1.42 billion.

Hell, let's get two of them, then! A "telescope" buried 650 feet underground, indeed! It doesn't even receive any known type of radiation!

.

[Goldminer]

Dark energy DOES exist and it's increasingly driving our universe apart, scientists claim

'Using entirely independent methods, data from the Galaxy Evolution Explorer have helped increase our confidence in the existence of dark energy."

If gravity were the culprit, then we wouldn't be seeing these constant effects of dark energy throughout time.'

Dark energy is thought to dominate our universe, making up about 74 per cent of it. Dark matter, a slightly less mysterious substance, accounts for 22 per cent. So-called normal matter, anything with atoms, or the stuff that makes up living creatures, planets and stars, is only approximately 4 per cent of the cosmos.

The idea of dark energy was proposed during the previous decade, based on studies of distant exploding stars called supernovae. Supernovae emit constant, measurable light, making them so-called 'standard candles', which allows calculation of their distance from Earth.

Observations revealed dark energy was flinging the objects out at accelerating speeds.

The more it flings, the stronger it gets!

"The results tell us that dark energy is a cosmological constant, as Einstein proposed." Yep. If Einstein proposed it, there is no doubt it exists!



.

[altonhare]

Mysterious undetectable gobbledygook, or a new gravitational law that fits the empirical data?

We can search for the former forever, we'll take that!

[Phorce]

I wrote a little blog piece about publishing "theories" ... "there is one "theory" and all others are thrown out".

If It’s a “Theory” of Planetary Formation Then Where Are The Other Theories ?



You may agree or disagree with the above image – a theory of planetary formation – but that’s not the point. At least it is another theory ! Look at the way the Science of planetary formation is taught. I don’t know about you but I have this fixed process in my mind to do with “accretion disks” of dust and so forth, that eventually forms into planets. This is presented as “a theory”. If this is so, THEN WHERE ARE ALL THE OTHER THEORIES ?!

This “theory of … <insert “mainstream” scientific view here>” is actually fallacious. In our “theory” of planetary formation, it’s a not a theory at all. In fact it’s a case of “you will accept this version … or else”. In fact we are being meticulously and carefully controlled even to the point where any “alternative” theory (all theories are equally valid in a way so how can there be an “alternative” to an unproven theory?) appears exotic or bizarre. This has nothing to do with the content of the theory. It is simply the case that we are presented with an incredibly narrow bandwidth of information from birth. The assumption is that most people “can’t cope” with the first class information that only trained and “responsible” bright lights of our society can deal with. The situation is the one described by Umberto Eco in the book The Name of the Rose. ( read more ... )