scientists as superstars

On a sunny day (Mon, 22 Jun 2020 14:12:07 -0700 (PDT)) it happened snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in :

US already has close control over what is sold (standards), a legal system that hits back if stuff does not work as advertised, etc etc, what side of the road to drive on, what emissions are allowed, what money you can use, where you go via cellphone monitoring, what you eat, and taxes, I repeat TAXES, oh and TAXES, and do not forget value added TAXES, and where you are allowed to go (for example not to free Cuba) ..

Not much I can do about that :-)

Many years ago I did see a picture in what was it some photo magazine, it showed IIRC a farmer on his land, written under it: .. working his land that he owns for a while ..

So look a bit further than your own purse and the world you 'own' belongs not to you but to your children: the next generation.

Sometimes the most criminal and fake are the richest .

Did you follow the news lately????

Happiness is not about having 'more stuff'. Look how sad and frustrated donald is.

There can be many reasons....

On a sunny day (Mon, 22 Jun 2020 18:36:18 -0700 (PDT)) it happened whit3rd wrote in :

Of course not.

Time and time again experiments showed (often small) effects where theories had to be modified or abandoned all together. THAT is how science progresses, by experiment.

Any mathemagician can write down an equation that fits observation. You can even think of a mathematical system that will, by adding more 'dimensions' make theory that explains everything, one of those theories is called 'string theory'. It is not testable and if anything ever failed just add some dimensions. A ten year old kid can come up with that, also a patent clerk :-)

Science an progress works very differently, steam engine as example:

Now we see the refining in the last centuries with electronics, electricity.

When designing electronics I hardly ever use math, me I am a neural net the 'knowledge' is in the weights (not my weight ;-) so to speak. Look up neural nets, The net has been trained by decades of design experience. I know very well that the pure math will fail as does every application of 'spice' in the real world, especially in RF.

There is no glory in only doing simulations, you NEVER will escape the illusionary world of its incomplete equations and models. On top of that once your slimulation works, chances are 99% that in reality it does not and you have nothing on the table to use anyways,

That is the worst part!

You seem to misunderstand the fundamentals:

1) *observe* 2) form *hypothesis* about cause and effect 3) make *predictions* leading from the hypothesis 4) do *falsifiable test* to see if predictions are valid 5) go back to (1) in the light of experiences

Einstein did all of those, very successfully. Some test/predictions were completed relatively quickly. Some have been completed after a long time.

No, it isn't the worst part.

Even *reality* is incomplete: the uncertainty principle defines that, along with some limits.

All of that is absolutely basic; I was taught it at school and it is still true :) How did you miss that?

On a sunny day (Tue, 23 Jun 2020 16:17:47 +0100) it happened Tom Gardner wrote in :

That is correct. But still if a theory gives the right predictions there is no way it must be true. You can come up with a theory of elves doing the work for most things... :-)

I have been told things at school that I knew were false, but did not want to take up a fight with the teacher about it, Then many years later MANY years later found the right explanation by accident.

Except for missing the "cause and effect" bit.

You do realise the flying spaghetti monster and its noodly appendages are a joke, don't you?

So what?

Whatever you might or might not have been told about how aircraft generate lift, that has no bearing on the validity of the uncertainty principle.

Where theories are 'modified', they are growing. Where they are abandoned, they were only hypotheses (and the replacement is the theory). That's a breakthrough, where you get a new theory, and the new theory is just as real a bit of progress as any experiment.

True; most such are trivial, though. A good theory does more than that, it is rich (makes predictions), it is compact (can be made portable in succinct form, unlike a tabulation of observations), it is much more productive to work with a theory than with raw observations.

Fit to observation is important (that's the test of a theory); theory is important (it's how you THINK of the world). You can't compare the two for 'importance'.

On a sunny day (Tue, 23 Jun 2020 10:37:37 -0700 (PDT)) it happened whit3rd wrote in :

OK, I agree with all that you wrote, that brings me back to the OneStone 'SupperStar' in simple words: He never provided a mechanism It is, in fact, like Ohm's law without electrons. Oh I have heard about gravitons etc..

But something is wrong there.

I like Le Sage's idea, but it has its problems:

's_theory_of_gravitation#Later_assessments Feynman also had a go. Yet a so basic universal force... should be possible to see experimental effect of it in many things And it should be compatible with the other forces of nature.

One interesting prediction from a Le Sage theory is that when all particles are absorbed in an object of enough size and density then there is a maximum to gravity, so black holes as infinite dense objects are out, no 'singularities'! The other thing is the prediction that if the LS particles originate in stars for example then the universe will be expanding ever faster.

Very long time ago I wrote some simulations for a simple system that showed Le Sage works,

Reason: we know nothing about what these particles are. There are all sorts of exotic particles with very strange behavior, would not rule any out at this point.

So I did some thinking how to do an experiment to detect that effect. I will not give detail here, but looking back found similar effects, a failed confirmation and a difference in how the confirming experiments were done, the difference was my idea for a test! And then DOD had a go.. After that lots of fuzzy rumors, so classified. Most is on google but anyways I may just setup an experiment and donate it to Russia when it works of course ;-)

Work in progress.

On a sunny day (Tue, 23 Jun 2020 17:52:35 +0100) it happened Tom Gardner wrote in :

Thank you Tom for your deep insight.

Well, he's right. Everyone agrees that the aircraft pushes air down to keep itself up, but people actually disagree about *how* is does that

Actually, 2/3 of the lift comes from the part-vacuum above the wing.

I heard that the SG38 glider does not fly. It is so ugly that the earth pushes it away.

cheers, Gerhard

Yeah, the wings mostly pull air downwards instead of push, but the result is the same. downwards force on the air, upwards force on the wing.

--
  Jasen.

That's a good one, I've not heard before. :-)

I thought it was Einstein ;) who once said, it's all relative.

Here applied to push up/down except for birds that use "ground effects" flying low over the ocean. Isn't it just a relative force, tangential to drag.

Jokes aside, Scientists may be better in theoretical and/or practically applied physics.

Both may be brilliant. (superstars)

.. at least to those who absorb and appreciate this light.

er

:

That's not addressing the issue. Ok, there's a vacuum above the wing. Jus t as it is pulling the wing up, it is pulling the air down and so the air p ast the end of the wing has a downward velocity. The force producing the l ift also pushes down on the air... action - reaction. Something has to fal l under the force of gravity, just not the airplane.

--

  Rick C. 

  ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Am 24.06.20 um 14:13 schrieb Gerhard Hoffmann:

Actually, I meant the Ka8.

The SG38 was what my mom was flying in 1938 as a teen, rubber rope starts from a hill with 20 people pulling included.

I was not allowed to as a teen when she saw the winch starts at a nearby glider port. No discussion ever.

But then, during the German re-unification, I was exploring the east with my GF. There were some gliders somewhere and I was allowed a flight. Less than a week later I was a member of the (west) Berlin- Spandau flying club, founded in 1924. My mom gave up after 3 minutes of more formal protest. :-)

cheers, Gerhard

On a sunny day (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 13:44:18 -0700 (PDT)) it happened snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in :

I do not think 'capitalism' equals freedom. As I tried to point out some of the rich in that system enslave the poor as workers, people living on the streets.. now with less jobs due to 'corona' that will likely increase.

A more socialist system (where everybody gets for example medical care, like Obamacare) and housing and everybody is given fitted work is in my view to be preferred.

Here in in the EU where I am we are not doing so bad. Sure there is capitalism, but in a different way than in the US. And yes anybody can start a company here too, you need some qualifications though, as we say here: 'You need a piece of paper for everything', but that sort of guarantees less disaster so is not so bad.

Not exactly what I mean, In my view the US government ruled by agents from the weapon factories uses public money (taxes) to build weapons to start and maintain wars far away from the US for imperialist reasons, and sacrifices the younger generations in those wars never gaining anything but aversion worldwide. I mentioned Korea, and look :

In my younger years I was reading strips featuring Buck Danny as fighter pilot \u20131979 against MIGs.

So how many were sacrificed, and after that Vietnam, when people finally got sick of it and dumped their own helicopters of the aircraft carriers, nothing new though:

There was a documentary yesterday on n24_docu (German language FTA satellite channel for the German readers) about WW1 in Europe, where more than half a million people were killed shooting at each other in France (UK against Germany) while in fact the front line hardly ever moved.. This involved Russia too, and although Russia gained territory the discontent of the troops the with the Tsar there was at the basis of the Russian revolution if I understood the documentary right. And then there is WW2, Vietnam, etc etc. So a war industry for what ? for "my system is better?" One ant heap against the other with huge losses. Now extrapolate with US policies and everybody having (they do) nuclear arms. The only way out is cooperation Just like in the jungle one small group fought the other, later the scale increased and it was one country against the other,, putting up borders Putting up tariffs, goes back to the jungle times and those wars. Best way to have China nuke US is to keep making life hard for them, ideology will help motivate somebody (some leader) to press the button, one side or the other. That is why donald t is a danger. He is a precursor to global destruction, and with that the destruction of the US population. As simple as that

On a sunny day (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 16:55:53 +0100) it happened Martin Brown wrote in :

Yes I now about the Casimir effect, but that has, as I am sure you know, nothing to do with airplane lift.

No

Thats is silly, I do not despise mamamagics, it is just that some of those who practice it have no connection to reality. Divide by zero is what they, in their first day at school?, learned, and practice and then pop up singularities by the dozen, string theory, quantum crap, and what not.

Applied mathematics is something very useful,

But what is more useful is understanding.

As to the neural net I am it is making its way into everything from self driving (almost) cars to research in chemistry, medicine, medical diagnosis and even into cosmology.

If you want people who divide by zero without even a second thought isotope ratio geologists are a good choice. They like their ratios to be in the range 0.5 to big and so divide two noisy measurement numbers with the smallest and noisiest one usually as the denominator. There is some source flicker noise on both beams but the weaker signal is invariably dominated by Johnson noise. A big ion beam in this context is 0.1nA.

By comparison QCD theorists really do know what they are doing when they subtract unwanted infinities from their very finite answers. Even if they have the pure mathematicians crossing themselves and running out of the room in abject horror at the way they tend to do it.

Mathematics is just a more precise way of expressing understanding that avoids all the inherent ambiguities of natural language.

Whenever new pieces of modern mathematics come along they invariably find their way into theoretical physics if they have any real world applicability at all (and sometimes get looked at just in case).

They are getting pretty good now. I never expected to see an AI entity that could beat top human Go players arise so suddenly as Alpha Go did. I don't think even the Google researchers expected it to do so well.

The one that could bootstrap itself up from the rules in a couple of months Alpha-Go-Zero was even more impressive in that respect.

--
Regards, 
Martin Brown

On a sunny day (Sun, 28 Jun 2020 11:45:09 +0100) it happened Martin Brown wrote in :

LOL Yea, and 're-normalization'...

My view: math is just a subset of neurons that simplifies reality by a phantasy. (oops, accusing nobody).

There is a problem here, this morning (I am avid reader of science daily)

axion, oops, what was that again exactly?

So worked myself through it and got none the wiser, neither does anybody know. It is fascinating though, and in that context the ever growing accelerator experiments

make me wonder, STATE: "if you cannot do it with such small particles at the desktop, then you cannot do it in a machine the size of the universe".. But it is a job creation program for OneStone's devotees.

I am on a personal score about 2700? I think it was on my xiaomi cellphone bars game. No idea if that is good or bad...

They find bigger than expected black holes short time after the bang. Why not have something big (not singularity) explode into pieces and those throwing out matter,,,, Yesterday I watched a documentary about Pluto, always fascinated me, but they found it was hotter than expected (so far from the sun) has volcanic activity... Nice pictures BTW.

The jive 'nuclear processes inside the planets heat those up' replaced by the effect of a Le Sage type particle? (not at all sure we sit on a nuclear reactor).

And that MOND (not our satellite) modified Newtonian .. the outer galaxy arms consisting of matter spewed out by the rotating original pieces of the bang mass, pieces we call black holes, slowed by the Le Sage particles, nothing is in orbit, it is like a garden sprinkler output that is slowed by the air around it. And that is what I mean by 'they got it all upside down in cosmology' and that is just a small fraction of the crap today.

We need a mechanism for gravity, burning candles for Ohm without ever discovering the electron would not have given us cellphones, TV. I = U / R for R = 0 ...

Hey just some ideas, still working on an experiment.

Or Deep Thought: "so amazingly intelligent that even before the data banks had been connected up it had started from 'I think therefore I am' and got as far as the existence of rice pudding and income tax before anyone managed to turn it off ?"

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics 
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 

http://electrooptical.net 
http://hobbs-eo.com