tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.comments2023-03-28T15:27:45.192+01:00Physics Satire About the Theory of EverythingClara, once known as Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931393389874902234noreply@blogger.comBlogger584125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-27489483495604229662019-01-13T17:21:04.979+00:002019-01-13T17:21:04.979+00:00Hi, I have a reasonably good set of ideas for a TO...Hi, I have a reasonably good set of ideas for a TOE. Would you like to try collaborating? If so, please contact me at johnmarkmorris@gmail.com. My ideas are very straight forward. Nothing nutty.John Mark Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00603837401855771543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-27875582896615543542018-05-22T18:21:32.963+01:002018-05-22T18:21:32.963+01:00Incidentally, this old friend here seems to have f...Incidentally, this old friend here seems to have found a way to get rid of hbar entirely without "throwing the baby"...<br />http://www.pspchv.com/Abstract-PJMPA/PJMPA%20Vol.%205,%20Issues%201-2,%202014,%20Pages%201-53.pdfTheophanes Raptishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01269614280130174555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-28826534647171780302018-01-25T09:16:40.813+00:002018-01-25T09:16:40.813+00:00Like your style ,Clara. Like your style ,Clara. Belfast188https://www.blogger.com/profile/03759045540205713729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-23725569077809865742017-09-06T11:14:09.128+01:002017-09-06T11:14:09.128+01:00My exchanges with Woit and Baez showed me that the...My exchanges with Woit and Baez showed me that they are stuck in defensive roles (because they are being attacked by many in an unfair way) that they have lost the lightness of being that they had in their youth.Clara, once known as Nemohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931393389874902234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-8242461327387134402017-09-06T11:09:53.612+01:002017-09-06T11:09:53.612+01:00Bar, you are entitled to your opinion. However, po...Bar, you are entitled to your opinion. However, points 1 to 5 are repeated since decades. Points 6 is irrelevant and point 7 is unclear.Clara, once known as Nemohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931393389874902234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-54159722384393650602017-06-20T22:21:31.829+01:002017-06-20T22:21:31.829+01:00Even accepting that the supersymmetry would natura...Even accepting that the supersymmetry would naturally break at energies near the LHC : 1. The parameter space has not been exhausted 2. Another power of 2 in energy may reveal it 3. The trigger and data sieving may need further work 4. The data itself needs further scrutiny 5. Well there is not really anything except our demand for beauty and naturalness that calls for supersymmetry to appear at accessible energies 6. Supersymmetry is called for by most maths the creation of a consistent string theory but it is not fundamental. 7. A dynamic mechanism like strings is needed and has not been falsified<br />Barhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00964494372792180918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-81202301292567560442017-05-24T06:35:53.909+01:002017-05-24T06:35:53.909+01:00Hey, I just came across this blog and like this pa...Hey, I just came across this blog and like this particular post very much. Say it like it is... I only disagree about people who should do research instead of criticizing: *No* for people who do it really well (like the ones you mention). Their presence is one of the most important tools we need in this bullshit-dominated field. (And before I get misunderstood, yes, one can't call bullshit on a field that has produced the standard model, one of humankind's crowning achievements; but what I mean should be pretty obvious.) tulpoeidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-65937866459166933742016-10-23T20:03:27.891+01:002016-10-23T20:03:27.891+01:00Thank you for providing your article. I come from ...Thank you for providing your article. I come from a non-physics background. Interested in 'the Electric Universe' model. Quite sceptical about quantum physics, multiverse theory - curious about the role this propaganda plays in society. Seeking truth about human space exploration.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00702628759566720864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-54620345218996957522016-08-15T06:45:46.745+01:002016-08-15T06:45:46.745+01:00Dear Clara
I agree with you that SM is probably tr...Dear Clara<br />I agree with you that SM is probably true up to Planck energy (PE not included).Fundamental considerations show that all elementary particles,irrespective of their rest masses,reach a relativistic mass/energy equal to PE when their speed reaches the speed of light.Likewise,all physical space intervals contract to planck length when accelerated to the speed of light,irrespective of their rest reference values.This means that something should happen over the last order of magnitude or so, before reaching planck scale.Also,at v=c something happens to what we call mass,which somehow disintegrates or "evaporates",becoming energy or maybe a mix of energy and other elementary particles(see e.g.Hawking radiation from micro-black holes).<br />Also,we know that neutrinos have a nonzero rest mass,while travelling at a speed indiscernible from the speed of light. Also,the need for renormalization acrobatics in SM means that probably a solution to above issues might be to postulate only nonzero or non-infinite entities in physics.Probably near and at PE, Lorenz invariance and Lorenz group properties will not be respected.In short,something should be corrected in SM near planck scale,while it probably being a good theory till there.I chose to fix this by appropriately correcting the relativistic gamma,which leaves SM true up to almost PE(see my paper in JOP on my Finiteness Principle).<br /><br />Yours sincerely<br /><br /> Abraham<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Abrahamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17132565346757944780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-90280050878988099782016-06-14T15:47:15.127+01:002016-06-14T15:47:15.127+01:00Dear Clara
How are you?
AbrahamDear Clara<br /><br />How are you?<br /><br />AbrahamAbrahamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17132565346757944780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-22494077216274910562016-06-13T22:11:59.210+01:002016-06-13T22:11:59.210+01:00You may be right
Still,he merits our prayers
He ...You may be right<br /><br />Still,he merits our prayers<br /><br />He really needs them<br /><br /><br />So why not give him a break ?<br /><br />Welcome back<br /><br />AbrahamAbrahamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17132565346757944780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-16748626197999703902016-06-13T07:25:15.278+01:002016-06-13T07:25:15.278+01:00Dear Clara
Welcome back
Where have you been all t...Dear Clara<br /><br />Welcome back<br />Where have you been all this time?<br />I was really worried<br /><br />AbrahamAbrahamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17132565346757944780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-75284548971028808752016-03-23T13:57:01.644+00:002016-03-23T13:57:01.644+00:00Gauge invariance is since long understood to be ne...Gauge invariance is since long understood to be necessary for having a consistent Poincaré covariant theory of massless particles (see Weinberg). That is the best motivation we have. johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06523031889979043404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-69195937632461342712015-11-10T17:56:19.044+00:002015-11-10T17:56:19.044+00:00"Rovelli adds one meaningless statement after..."Rovelli adds one meaningless statement after the other"... maybe we could start from here. Which statements? Pietronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-8678187745362987662015-08-27T07:51:41.729+01:002015-08-27T07:51:41.729+01:00Anonymous, ¿Didn´t explain you that authority prin...Anonymous, ¿Didn´t explain you that authority principle is not valid in science? Well, don´t worry, they explain it when you enter to the UniversityAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10870051608775584076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-82087053664602612372014-04-17T09:42:11.770+01:002014-04-17T09:42:11.770+01:00Dear Clara
How are you?
AbrahamDear Clara<br /><br />How are you?<br /><br />AbrahamAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-70312769574020273112013-12-29T14:15:50.143+00:002013-12-29T14:15:50.143+00:00Pretty...Pretty...Clara, once known as Nemohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931393389874902234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-86845167838332742542013-12-23T09:14:55.177+00:002013-12-23T09:14:55.177+00:00"A final, unified theory must be unmodifiable..."A final, unified theory must be unmodifiable. A final, unified theory must be an explanation of general relativity and the standard model. Because the supersymmetry, the superstring conjecture and loop quantum gravity do not explain the standard model of particle physics, they are neither final nor even unified theories. In fact, at least one of these two aspects is lacking in every candidate final theory proposed in the twentieth century. We will discover below that the strand model is unmodifiable. Its fundamental principle cannot be varied in any way without destroying the whole description. Indeed, no modification of the strand model or of the fundamental principle has been found so<br />far. We will also discover that the strand model explains the standard model of particle physics. The strand model is thus a candidate for the final theory."<br />-- Christoph Schiller, Motion Mountain, vol.6<br /><br />I think a wise person would read on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-55100434232385811112013-11-23T09:42:20.862+00:002013-11-23T09:42:20.862+00:00Clara, nobody can be good if not funded. Worse, fu...Clara, nobody can be good if not funded. Worse, funding is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition ;-)Vladimir Kalitvianskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16310670038267361671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-13435413864308453092013-11-23T07:16:54.416+00:002013-11-23T07:16:54.416+00:00Vladimir, that is a good point. So a physicist can...Vladimir, that is a good point. So a physicist cannot be good if he is not funded?Clara, once known as Nemohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931393389874902234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-56713939665582943382013-11-22T19:21:19.116+00:002013-11-22T19:21:19.116+00:00There are no funds to fund this direction.There are no funds to fund this direction.Vladimir Kalitvianskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16310670038267361671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-32806908217587860042013-11-18T11:36:47.852+00:002013-11-18T11:36:47.852+00:00Something about SO(10). Why? Lots of little reason...Something about SO(10). Why? Lots of little reasons but no principle.<br /><br />I can't help feeling that this whole grand unification business might be mistaken. Wanted is physics that tells what happens when both gravitational and quantum effects are strong. Maybe they never are.<br /><br />All those virtual particles in the vacuum don't curve spacetime even one bit. Black holes are black -- nothing to see there at all (let alone of a quantum nature). Maybe the idea that it should be otherwise proceeds from incorrect assumptions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-86541409752252024712013-11-15T11:29:33.491+00:002013-11-15T11:29:33.491+00:00Babbling of a fanatic physicist:
http://motls.bl...Babbling of a fanatic physicist:<br /><br /> http://motls.blogspot.com/2013/11/state-of-art-non-susy-so10-grand.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-45706462670567038862013-11-15T10:56:31.270+00:002013-11-15T10:56:31.270+00:00That's a good one, Clara: supersymmetry to sup...That's a good one, Clara: supersymmetry to supercemetery. Catchy.<br /><br />So if not symmetries in general, then why any gauge symmetries at all?<br /><br />Christoph Schiller says it's because of the three Reidermeister moves: twist for SU(1), poke for SU(2), and slide for SU(3), and it looks like he has worked out quite a few of the details (or at least attempted to -- I can't judge). Has anybody else even got a suggestion of how to account for SU(1), SU(2), and SU(3)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5237654928835551390.post-46808263945883708832013-11-12T04:38:23.257+00:002013-11-12T04:38:23.257+00:00Feynman said that every good physicists thinks abo...Feynman said that every good physicists thinks about alpha. There do not seem to be many good physicists these days...Clara, once known as Nemohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931393389874902234noreply@blogger.com