History of science

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: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: History of science

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Sun Nov 25, 2018 5:12 pm

formerlycbragz wrote:And let us not forget that "c=186,000 miles per second"is only in a VACUUM...there are no vacuums in the universe...


According to mainstream there is no space/time.
So if there is no space, how can there be a vacuum?
And if there is no space and no time, how can there be speed?
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: History of science

Unread postby Roshi » Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:34 am

We know about refraction here on Earth. But outside, in space all light path bending is caused by, and is proof of relativity. Even if there is "hot gas" as they say, practically everywhere.

Because there is no way to tell if relativity or refraction did the bending, and relativity has to always be praised, they just ignore refraction in space. There is no refraction in space, it's an unique phenomenon, it happens only on Earth. I dare anyone to ask about refraction in space on a mainstream forum. There isn't any. And if there is, someone can surely differentiate refraction from relativity, and we are stupid to ask.
Roshi
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:35 am

Re: History of science

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:34 pm

Roshi wrote:We know about refraction here on Earth. But outside, in space all light path bending is caused by, and is proof of relativity. Even if there is "hot gas" as they say, practically everywhere...


Yes. Space is special, and very different from earth.
That is why there are no electrical fields, nor electrical currents in space.
No refraction and reflection either.
And all normal matter is visible.
And light-frequencies are never affected by anything, even when we can do it on earth.

And because of that we know that dark energy exist, dark matter, and impossibly huge structures in space.
Black holes and big bangs.
No proof needed, because space is special.

Space is so special, that even the astronomers have become special. :mrgreen:
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: History of science

Unread postby Bin-Ra » Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:16 pm

The issue that I see is whether mainstream or officially acceptable Science has in effect been captured and controlled by the means and will to do so.
This is the idea that the theories that 'win', do so by their usefulness to power or people and institutions of influence.

Because power struggle is the very nature of a split mind (polarised separation as the seeming independent self-other), the nature of our consciousness is predicated on possession and control - which is of marketising and weaponising the new as an upstream advantage by which to capture or dominate under the guise of a progress serving humanity.

Of course there is the love of truth and of our fellow Man - that is represented in scientists and others who follow their curiosity and intuition to challenge and explore beyond the current sense of self and reality. These are generally denied in their own time. While those who are celebrated while alive tend to be adopted and aligned with power, prestige and privilege.

Pasteur set a course for 'germ theory' that largely ignores the terrain or environmental context. Beschamp was sidelined. Eventually the wrong turning will be revisited - but against the momentum of invested energy, identity and reputations that stand on the shoulders of giant mistakes.

Ancel Keys - a chemist - set the cholesterol con and the demonisation of saturated fats in motion - very conveniently for the sugar lobby - and with heavy Media support. High carb malnutrition and toxicity became 'health guidelines'.

It isn't that there are not learned critics to new ideas that become officially 'true' but that a persistent and cleverly crafted PR can and does override any reasoned argument.

Celebrity status carries more weight than facts - for the same reason that fantasy fulfilment distorts the mind to want it true and not want truth to get in the way of a good story.

Knowingly or otherwise - the presentation of science - along with its adoption or applications in human affairs remains a politically directed narrative - not in terms of left or right - but in terms of power, possession and control.

At a level of a greater perspective I see the incremental expansions of our consciousness as a guided or supported process of reintegration. And so that for which we are not ready, does not come through - although its precursors or foundations may well be seeded by those who seem to be 'before their time' or denied acceptance in idea and contribution.

The Electric Universe opens technologies of a capacity to influence for good and ill.
Are we in a playpen or straitjacket because we have not owned our full consciousness - and are thus re-enacting destructive 'greed' and 'power' as subconsciously acquired conditioning?

I am well aware that deceit plays a much larger role than the deceived usually ever come to realize - and yet I am also aware that the wish not to know is, an expression of freedom - even though it effectively abnegates responsibility to 'beliefs' that mask or substitute for true by the intensity of the wish that feared truth remains hidden.
Bin-Ra
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:20 pm

Re: History of science

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Wed May 15, 2019 8:12 pm

I saw a TV-lecture about Einstein yesterday.
It was a mixture of theories and short movie-clips.
Relativity was not explained clearly.
It was very chaotic and left each spectator dumbfounded.
It also said that the resistance against Einstein were only the Nazis.

While the spectators were impressed, it appeared to me as pure propaganda.
Nobody had learned anything.

You have to believe these theories that you can "never comprehend",
because you are never as smart as Einstein.
Not because they were explained so badly.

And if you are doubting Einstein, then you are a Nazi.

The lecture also told why this was:
And Germany was a scientifically very advanced state.
But due to the tensions, Einstein had fled Germany.
And he was immediately given an important place at a University.
He was also made very popular in many newspapers.

So it seems to me that this scientific promotion was not due to
his scientific results, but due to the propaganda machine that
made the UK and US ready for another war.

It had nothing to do with science.

Another related link:
The only thing that baffled Einstein was his own popularity
https://spectator.us/baffled-einstein-popularity/
"Einstein’s War: How Relativity Triumphed Amid the Vicious Nationalism of World War I"
"No Shadow of a Doubt: The 1909 Eclipse that Confirmed Einstein’s Theory of Relativity"
(where is the actual down-to-earth science?)

More political history:
Here is a talk about the history of World War 1, and how its
real history was destroyed to hide who really had created
the war.
History Is Written By The Winners

I think that the same propaganda machine has promoted Einstein to god-status.
And did later the same with Feynmann and Hawkins.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: History of science

Unread postby Webbman » Thu May 16, 2019 5:09 pm

Sam Tolver Preston was an interesting guy.
We shall know them by their works
Webbman
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: History of science

Unread postby crawler » Thu May 16, 2019 8:17 pm

Zyxzevn wrote:I saw a TV-lecture about Einstein yesterday.
It was a mixture of theories and short movie-clips.
Relativity was not explained clearly.
It was very chaotic and left each spectator dumbfounded.
It also said that the resistance against Einstein were only the Nazis.

While the spectators were impressed, it appeared to me as pure propaganda.
Nobody had learned anything.

You have to believe these theories that you can "never comprehend",
because you are never as smart as Einstein.
Not because they were explained so badly.

And if you are doubting Einstein, then you are a Nazi.

The lecture also told why this was:
And Germany was a scientifically very advanced state.
But due to the tensions, Einstein had fled Germany.
And he was immediately given an important place at a University.
He was also made very popular in many newspapers.

So it seems to me that this scientific promotion was not due to
his scientific results, but due to the propaganda machine that
made the UK and US ready for another war.

It had nothing to do with science.

Another related link:
The only thing that baffled Einstein was his own popularity
https://spectator.us/baffled-einstein-popularity/
"Einstein’s War: How Relativity Triumphed Amid the Vicious Nationalism of World War I"
"No Shadow of a Doubt: The 1909 Eclipse that Confirmed Einstein’s Theory of Relativity"
(where is the actual down-to-earth science?)

More political history:
Here is a talk about the history of World War 1, and how its
real history was destroyed to hide who really had created
the war.
History Is Written By The Winners

I think that the same propaganda machine has promoted Einstein to god-status.
And did later the same with Feynmann and Hawkins.
Yes & no, its much worse than u think.
crawler
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: History of science

Unread postby Webbman » Fri May 17, 2019 3:14 am

since science is the investigation into the truth there is a certain inevitability to it.
We shall know them by their works
Webbman
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: History of science

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Fri May 24, 2019 8:30 am

The man who made Einstein world-famous
Describes the situation around that time, when wars were going on.
Eddington helped Einstein into Britain.

The movement of stars near the sun was misinterpreted as proof for Einstein's gravity theory.
It assumed no plasma near the sun, so they thought that that gravity bends space.

Something that was later falsified with gravity probe B, and with
the absence of rings near the heavy (?) centre of galaxies.
Due to the wars his theory became part of the propaganda machine.

That is why it is ok to doubt quantum mechanics, but not relativity.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: History of science

Unread postby crawler » Fri May 24, 2019 7:57 pm

And then along came world war two started by Churchill's friends & Einstein then said that all Nazis should be killed.

But WT's verbiage in that footage is very interesting.
Electric currents i suppose include the flow of negative electrons & positive positrons, & also the flow of (heavy) positive protons, ie plasma.

Are there (heavy) negative protons? In other words are there anti-protons?

Does plasma include (heavy)(neutral) neutrons?
Are there anti-neutrons?

Do electric currents involve photons? In other words do electric currents require free-photons?
I dont think that free-photons are needed. What is needed is confined-photons (ie electrons & quarks etc).

Can quarks exist alone? If they could then an electric current might include the flow of free quarks.

Can electric currents flow in two directions at the same time & place?
Can one of these involve negative charges & the other involve positive charges?
crawler
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: History of science

Unread postby webolife » Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:32 pm

crawler wrote:Can electric currents flow in two directions at the same time & place?
Can one of these involve negative charges & the other involve positive charges?

According to "hole theory" that is precisely what happens in an electrified wire. The paradox [but not for me] is that this infers instantaneous action at a distance, as the "ground" end of the wire "sends" a positively charged hole "wave" in the opposite direction at the moment the "source" end is turned on... In my view, this is to be expected, as the connection of source to ground is already established in the unified interconnectedness of all things.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: History of science

Unread postby crawler » Mon Jun 10, 2019 4:10 pm

webolife wrote:
crawler wrote:Can electric currents flow in two directions at the same time & place?
Can one of these involve negative charges & the other involve positive charges?

According to "hole theory" that is precisely what happens in an electrified wire. The paradox [but not for me] is that this infers instantaneous action at a distance, as the "ground" end of the wire "sends" a positively charged hole "wave" in the opposite direction at the moment the "source" end is turned on... In my view, this is to be expected, as the connection of source to ground is already established in the unified interconnectedness of all things.
Ivor Catt explains that in a circuit we hav a pseudo IAAAD, due to the continual presence of a continuous Heavyside slab of em energy flowing in both directions & reflecting off ends (eg open switches) & off restrictions (changes in size or material or geometry), whereby when a switch is closed the Heavyside slab is allready at that point & hencely instantly continues on instead of reflecting.

Forrest Bishop has papers adding to Catt's ideas.
crawler
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: History of science

Unread postby webolife » Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:34 am

:roll:
Last edited by webolife on Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: History of science

Unread postby webolife » Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:35 am

crawler wrote:Ivor Catt explains that in a circuit we hav a pseudo IAAAD, due to the continual presence of a continuous Heavyside slab of em energy flowing in both directions & reflecting off ends (eg open switches) & off restrictions (changes in size or material or geometry), whereby when a switch is closed the Heavyside slab is allready at that point & hencely instantly continues on instead of reflecting.

A simpler analog is Newton's cradle.
The history of science is replete with side trips into uncharted territories and "weirdness", of which post-modern science has its fill. IAAAD is not actually wierd, being that it is regularly observed; but the objectivists have headaches over anything non-mechanistic, as though the universe will stop functioning if something "immaterial" is injected into it. Too bad... :P
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: History of science

Unread postby Lims Tims » Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:24 am

From my point ov view E=mc² feels similar to "emperors new clothes".
He had to "invent" some subtheorys / formulas, to support his own theory.

I would like science more, when it would reveal something about our ancient roots, understandable for everyone.
There are many riddles visible on earth and science helps not to explain some of those, not even trying.

It looks for me, that we do not use science, to solve civ problems in a "good" way.
Humans have hard time learning from errors made in the past, when we do not know it for sure.
Science does not prevent wars.

Some scientists are very smart, when it comes to their personal "research area" but outside of it, they are "not so smart".
Science seems to be a fight over positions, but not to uncover the truth.
Earth is an interesting planet and we should take care of it, but science is not really helping with that.
Humans have to talk together not fingerpointing at others, calling them wrong.
Decades of tests and research and we get a new theory out of it, not more or less.

Many scientists are prostitutes for personal cash (in my eyes) and human civ makes no real profit out of them.
They have to stick to "orders / theories" to stay in the job, even when they must know, they are drifting away from truth.
User avatar
Lims Tims
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:13 am

PreviousNext

Return to The Future of Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest