This preprint talks about "monopolium detection at the LHC". It is written by four resarchers from Spain and Argentina.
Were they sober? There is no final confirmation yet.
21 July 2011
19 July 2011
Entropic gravity and its critics
The paper by Kobakhidze, http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.5414, discusses an apparent contradiction between entropic gravity and neutron bounce experiments. It contains the wonderful statement (towards the end):
"Thus, if E. Verlinde’s idea is correct, the neutrons would have to travel through the slit without substantial losses even if λ < h <<< z1."
The author arrives at this conclusion using the obvious method: he did not understand entropic gravity, assumes that entropic gravity is something different from what the proponents say it is, and then shows that his assumed wrong idea is indeed wrong.
The fun thing is that he managed to publish this complete nonsense in Physical Review D. In the comment section of an earlier post, somebody wants me to stop calling it nonsense because it is "in PRD", and "peer-reviewed". In the next email, he will probably ask me to believe that the world was made in 7 days, because this nonsense is written in a "famous" (and also peer-reviewed) book.
Some people still live in the middle ages, when authority counted more than facts.
"Thus, if E. Verlinde’s idea is correct, the neutrons would have to travel through the slit without substantial losses even if λ < h <<< z1."
The author arrives at this conclusion using the obvious method: he did not understand entropic gravity, assumes that entropic gravity is something different from what the proponents say it is, and then shows that his assumed wrong idea is indeed wrong.
The fun thing is that he managed to publish this complete nonsense in Physical Review D. In the comment section of an earlier post, somebody wants me to stop calling it nonsense because it is "in PRD", and "peer-reviewed". In the next email, he will probably ask me to believe that the world was made in 7 days, because this nonsense is written in a "famous" (and also peer-reviewed) book.
Some people still live in the middle ages, when authority counted more than facts.
18 July 2011
No Gluinos - still no supersymmetry
This summer is fun. The extremely conservative predictions of the strand model are being confirmed: no susy, no Higgs, no new particles, no microscopic black holes, no new interactions - nothing new at all. Almost every day, a new confirmation comes up.
Today, it is the lack of gluinos in the search by CMS. The standard model seems indeed complete, just as the strand model predicts. Go on, strands!
Today, it is the lack of gluinos in the search by CMS. The standard model seems indeed complete, just as the strand model predicts. Go on, strands!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)