James Maxwell's Physical Model

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by StefanR » Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:34 am

Plasmatic wrote: Stefan, I'd be happy to debate/discuss the errors in that book concerning Aristotleian abstractionism!

Edit: I've been spending lots of time on dissecting the problems of Carnap's influence on the scientific method...
Hi Plasmatic,
Which of the two titles has those errors concerning Aristotelian abstractionism?
And have you come to a certain diagnosis with the dissecting? And where do you see it as problematic, his influence
that is?
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by StefanR » Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:52 am

marengo wrote:
StefanR wrote:A lot more was going on, but you missed that boat by about six years. But you might
enjoy some of it still, perusing for instance this thread. And with relevant questions
one might even get relevant answers.
The relevant question is this.
Why did Maxwell's physical model of the Aether not work?

Lets get down to some answers. I have seen none so far.
Well with an attitude like that, what would you expect?

Maybe just once more for you:
StefanR wrote:...one might have to read several other older related threads, as it was a collective motion
of minds at the time, providing a jumping board to continue in researching other adjoining subjects each
personally. Its the difficulty and wonder about forums, it can be fascinating to read back an old thread,
but one misses the flow and interconnectedness of several topics at the time they were produced.
I was actually hoping that perhaps you might have provided your view on the thread content, as a thread
title is not always wholly indicative of its content. So I hope you perhaps will do some time, as I'm curious
how you look at it, as you must have a certain study background having your own model/theory/hypothesis.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

marengo
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:40 am

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by marengo » Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:03 am

Stefan R
I take it you find getting down to answers to be a problem for you. It seems to be a problem for a lot of posters.

I will give you an example. I showed with many examples, particularly with the LHC, that Relativity is a real effect. But none of the posters believe in Special Relativity. Thus there is a big question here.
WHICH THEORY PREDICTS RELATIVITY EFFECTS?

None of you guys have an answer to that question, and what is worse none of you seem to care.
True physicists would care and would not stop until they found the answer.
Are you physicists or just armchair philosophers?
http://www.aetherpages.com
A series of scientific papers on the new Aether physics.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by StefanR » Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:37 am

marengo wrote:I take it you find getting down to answers to be a problem for you. It seems to be a problem for a lot of posters
marengo wrote:None of you guys have an answer to that question, and what is worse none of you seem to care
Dear Marengo,
you assume so much, that it seems you are full of it.
Why the antagonistic attitude? It's not inviting at all.
Please start a new thread concerning your subject, as for now
it seems this thread is not suitable for the topic you are
trying to dispute.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

marengo
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:40 am

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by marengo » Tue Nov 19, 2013 7:01 am

StefanR wrote:Dear Marengo,
you assume so much, that it seems you are full of it.
Why the antagonistic attitude? It's not inviting at all.
Please start a new thread concerning your subject, as for now
it seems this thread is not suitable for the topic you are
trying to dispute.
I am merely trying to get posters to discuss Maxwell's Physical model of the Aether, ie the topic of this thread.
That is the last thing that posters actually talk about.
You had an opportunity to properly discuss this topic but you chose to attack me instead.
When you accuse me of assuming too much would it not be polite of you to explain at the same time what it is that you think I am assuming.
http://www.aetherpages.com
A series of scientific papers on the new Aether physics.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by StefanR » Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:30 am

marengo wrote: I am merely trying to get posters to discuss Maxwell's Physical model of the Aether, ie the topic of this thread.
That is the last thing that posters actually talk about.
You had an opportunity to properly discuss this topic but you chose to attack me instead.
When you accuse me of assuming too much would it not be polite of you to explain at the same time what it is that you think I am assuming.
Let me keep it then just about assumptions pertaining to the thread.
From your first post in this thread on page 8:
marengo wrote:Too many posts to read.
Presumably the topic name refers to Maxwell's model of the Aether.
From your second post in this thread on page 8:
marengo wrote:This thread is about James Clerk Maxwell's physical model (presumably of the Aether)
I believe, and it was meant in all kindness, I pointed out to you that the threadname and content were not
quite in concordance. This is not meant as an attack.
You said you wanted posters to discuss something, but that will have less of an effect if you don't read what those
posters are asking you or telling you. And if you think that then by putting down insults to posters you will entice them to converse, I think you will only invite those that are going to play that game with you.
My opportunity of discussing this topic has been 'gone' for over 5 years now.
Once more just as an friendly advise:
Instead of answering me again in this thread, please make a new topic. For instance something like:
Marengo's critique on Maxwell's Aether model.
(Sounds wonderful no? I might even post something in such a thread, if it would exist)
8-)
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

Plasmatic
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by Plasmatic » Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:09 pm

StefanR wrote:
Plasmatic wrote: Stefan, I'd be happy to debate/discuss the errors in that book concerning Aristotleian abstractionism!

Edit: I've been spending lots of time on dissecting the problems of Carnap's influence on the scientific method...
Hi Plasmatic,
Which of the two titles has those errors concerning Aristotelian abstractionism?
And have you come to a certain diagnosis with the dissecting? And where do you see it as problematic, his influence
that is?

Hey Stefan, I was referring to the book you recommended promoting platonic idealism. Have you not read it? If not it doesn't really make too much sense for me to try to dissuade you from its errors... ;)
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle

marengo
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:40 am

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by marengo » Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:11 am

StefanR wrote:Let me keep it then just about assumptions pertaining to the thread.
From your first post in this thread on page 8:
marengo wrote:
Too many posts to read.
Presumably the topic name refers to Maxwell's model of the Aether.

From your second post in this thread on page 8:
marengo wrote:
This thread is about James Clerk Maxwell's physical model (presumably of the Aether)
Well, no-one was kind enough to correct my presumptions (so presumably I was correct)
StefanR wrote:I believe, and it was meant in all kindness, I pointed out to you that the threadname and content were not
quite in concordance. This is not meant as an attack.
You said you wanted posters to discuss something, but that will have less of an effect if you don't read what those
posters are asking you or telling you. And if you think that then by putting down insults to posters you will entice them to converse, I think you will only invite those that are going to play that game with you.
My opportunity of discussing this topic has been 'gone' for over 5 years now.
Once more just as an friendly advise:
Instead of answering me again in this thread, please make a new topic. For instance something like:
Marengo's critique on Maxwell's Aether model.
(Sounds wonderful no? I might even post something in such a thread, if it would exist)
My point is that most posts on this thread do not seem to be relevant to the thread topic. Hence what is the point of reading them.
Have I insulted posters? I am merely trying to get posters to stick to the topic.
Why, instead of attacking me do you not post some thing of relevance.

Criticising my Aether physics is for others to do. Like you for instance. A good starting point is the thread The Aether Theory of Relativity. I await your queries with interest.
http://www.aetherpages.com
A series of scientific papers on the new Aether physics.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by StefanR » Thu Nov 21, 2013 4:25 pm

Plasmatic wrote: Hey Stefan, I was referring to the book you recommended promoting platonic idealism. Have you not read it? If not it doesn't really make too much sense for me to try to dissuade you from its errors... ;)
Hi Plasmatic,

Yes I have read the book. I'm just curious about the opinion that you brought forward in relation to
"the errors in that book concerning Aristotleian abstractionism!" .
No need for dissuation per se, but elaboration, yes please.
8-)
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by StefanR » Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:00 pm

marengo wrote:
Well, no-one was kind enough to correct my presumptions (so presumably I was correct)

Well that is just a shame and pity.

My point is that most posts on this thread do not seem to be relevant to the thread topic. Hence what is the point of reading them.
I have been wondering about that myself as well.
Have I insulted posters? I am merely trying to get posters to stick to the topic.
Glad there is someone making sure we are all in line. This forum could use some
proper moderation, it's all getting out of hand. They ought to make rules or laws for it, I say.

Why, instead of attacking me do you not post some thing of relevance.
I'm not sure what relevance you are refering to so I combined it with some
seeming 'positivism' from this thread and my devious attacks on you.
http://www.positivityblog.com/index.php ... rful-tips/


Criticising my Aether physics is for others to do. Like you for instance. A good starting point is the thread The Aether Theory of Relativity. I await your queries with interest.
What a good idea, I will meet you there then.
cheerio.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by StefanR » Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:45 pm

Otherwise relevant is a lecture series following this link:
Foundations of Physical Law
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGAopIzAjyk&gl=CA
A series of lectures delivered by Dr Peter Rowlands
The principles which underpin physical law are at the heart of science. New ideas and new concepts are examined and evaluated in terms of how they lead to new insight into present paradigms. The lectures discuss methodology, important mathematical structures and various aspects of symmetry, how they lead to consistency, or otherwise, with present understanding, and how also they can facilitate quantitative analysis.
http://liv.ac.uk/physical-sciences/events/fpl/

I have to confess, I just recently stumbled upon it and haven't seen it all. But I think at least the first video
gives something to think about this idea of principles. Not saying this is correct or not, but it is interesting
nontheless, partially as well in relation to what pln2bz is talking about in the scientific discourse topic.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

marengo
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:40 am

Re: James Maxwell's Physical Model

Unread post by marengo » Mon Nov 25, 2013 3:23 am

To fellow posters,
I made the mistake of thinking that other posters would be interested in modern Aether physics.
I have attempted to show that Relativity is explained by Aether physics rather than by the Special Theory of Relativity.
To say the least it has been an uphill struggle with finally complete failure.
Posters prefer instead to post on airy-fairy philosophy than on real physics.
My apologies for having disturbed you.
http://www.aetherpages.com
A series of scientific papers on the new Aether physics.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest