Dipoles do not have two poles - German physicists drop out of the search for unification

In Germany, dipoles do not have two poles. At least if you believe the German physical society.

In the rest of the world, a dipole is the limiting case of putting two opposite poles, of same strength, at the same place.

This definition is valid in all cases. Not in Germany. In Germany you are allowed to use this definition in all cases, except one: for magnetic dipoles. In this case, poles are not allowed to be thought about, says the German physical society:

Teachers and pupils should not think that magnetic dipoles are made of two poles.

Remember the 1920s? Einstein, Heisenberg, Born? German male physicists were world class. Hundred years later - nothing and more. Why?  Because they use their energy to tell students that dipoles do not have two poles. And they add more nonsense.

The big problem of quantum gravity, and of unification, is to understand the microscopic degrees of freedom of the vacuum. However, the German physical society has explained in the same expert opinion that:

Vacuum is not a medium.

How can you find the microscopic degrees of freedom of the vacuum, if you are not allowed to think that vacuum has such degrees of freedom?

We will have to continue to wait for an Asian woman to achieve unification. Maybe a Swiss woman. For sure, German males have no chance!

From intelligent design to unintelligent physicists

In Switzerland and in Europe we often shake our heads about the discussions of intelligent design, which seem a mostly American exaggeration from here. Wrong.

First, German physicists must believe the following idea:

Electromagnetic waves do not need vacuum as carrier medium. 

There is no way to make this sentence into a correct one, or to interpret it in a way that is correct. It is dead wrong. Ok, everybody is entitled to have opinions, even wrong ones. But now comes the German side of the story: the German Physical society wrote an official letter to all ministers responsible for public schools.

The German physical society wants all teachers to teach this false idea to all pupils in secondary school / high school. 

The German Physical Society has now come down to the level of the intelligent design people, who also want teachers to teach false statements to children.

German Physical Society dismisses laws of physics and is candidate for Nobel Prize

This is more fun than I ever imagined. In February 2013, the German Physical Society published a committee report written by 9 physics professors and several senior physics teachers - all male - with the following statements:

Momentum flow is not the same as force. (page 2)

Reason, experiment, Newton with his definition F = dp/dt, relativity, and quantum field theory books say the opposite, but why care?

The attempt to put only temperature and entropy at the center of thermodynamics must be seen as misleading. (page 10)

Reason, experiment, Gibbs, and thermodynamics books disagree, but why care? There is much more nonsense that I leave out. And then there is the highlight:

Electromagnetic waves do not need vacuum as carrier medium. (page 12)

In contrast with quantum field theory and with all experiments performed so far, the committee is able to make experiments where light does not go through vacuum! Nobody has ever achieved this before! This groundbreaking result should be awarded with the Nobel Prize.

Update: Many physicists are appalled and many agree.

Physics is different at the University of Illinois

A very good friend told me a bizarre story loosely related to the topics of this blog. She once wondered why there where around the internet, a number posts where Christoph Schiller's physics book is said to contain mistakes, but no mistake is usually mentioned. And all are under different name, but with the same animosity and the same sentences. When my friend asked Schiller, she got the answer that all those posts are written, every time under a different name, by the same person.

She then asked a computer expert and he quickly found out that these posts are by a student-physicist from the University of Illinois. This student-physicist usually calls Schiller a 'crackpot', but gives no reason. I searched a bit around, and I found some real funny physics statements from this guy:

Elementary particles can have infinite momentum and energy values. 

He really insists on this: not just very big values, but actually infinite values.

Special relativity is valid in regions where space is curved.

Classical electrodynamics is valid even in quantum theory.

He also regularly adds that his professors agree with him. Well, a real man and scientist does not talk that way, you know. Does GPS navigation not work in Illinois? Are there no photons at that university? It really looks as if at the University of Illinois the laws of physics differ from those in the rest of the world.

Bu the best thing is that this guy is jealous about Schiller! He even says that the strand model is wrong, but does not say why. He sounds like a gay man whose sexual wishes were rejected by Schiller. My usual advice to get a good wife and finally find happiness will not work on him. And if you are not gay, sorry, man, but I am already happily married.

Ex vero quodlibet?

Lee Smolin has written a new book. In the introduction he writes:

I’m inclined to believe that just about everything we now think is fundamental will also eventually be understood as approximate and emergent: gravity and the laws of Newton and Einstein that govern it, the laws of quantum mechanics, even space itself…

As readers of this blog know, I agree, because the statement is correct. Particles and spacetime are the two sides of the same basic elements of nature.

Then the trouble starts. Smolin concludes that the laws of nature change, that the universe is fundamentally irreversible, that math is not important, and a lot of other nonsense.

Peter Woit, instead of simply criticizing the mistaken conclusions, also criticizes the correct statement above.

What do we learn from this debate? These two very different men, and probably many around them, both think whatever they want. They do not care about nature or truth; they only care about their personal preferences. They do not care about truth any more. This is especially sad about Peter Woit.

Women are the reason that the theory of everything has not been found

A  well-known male ex-particle physicist is really funny:

• I was searching for the theory of everything since my youth, but I stopped when I read in some newspaper that the head of the university where I worked was fired.  

• I was searching for the theory of everything all my life. Then I started to blame leftist women for my failure to find it. In fact, I blame such women for all bad things on Earth. 

• Instead of pursuing my childhood dream, I cultivate my aggressions towards everybody who disagrees with my opinions on the weather.  

• My only fault is my excessive humility. 

• Instead of pursuing my childhood dream, I prefer faking a deadly disease on my blog. 

• Instead of pursuing my childhood dream myself, I bash people who still pursue the same dream. 

• Instead of pursuing my childhood dream, I prefer being aggressive towards people who state that facts and data are more important than mistaken physical theories. 

• All my aggressive behavior is the fault of leftists and of women. It's all their fault, not mine.

A therapist somewhere is getting really rich with this loser.

Are the Planck length and the Planck time fantasies?

There is no chance to ever measure Planck lengths or Planck times. They have no experimental effects whatsoever. Are they useless concepts?

Let me assume for a while that we drop these two concepts. It would mean that we keep quantum theory and gravity separate. We drop unification. What happens? Not much. Quantum theory and particle physics remain valid. Also general relativity remains valid. We know of now experiment that requires both theories at the same time.

In practice, avoiding unification has no effect, because the standard model of particle physics and the concordance model of cosmology agree with all experiments.

So, do we need unification? My answer: yes. We need it to understand the parameters of the standard model and of the concordance model.

Do we need unification for other reasons? My answer: no. But many researchers would answer yes. They add anomalies, instabilities, fine tuning, dark matter and more reasons.

Are the Planck length and the Planck time essential for unification? My answer: just a tiny bit. Other ideas are more important. Is nature really a bowl of noodles? Is nature really a huge gut full of moving intestines? These proposals are, if they are correct, more shocking than the Planck length and the Planck time.

String research - the story of the modern maze

Witten's paper, mentioned in the previous post, still touches me. The paper is written by an excellent mathematical physicist. His and the paper's story is the story of a man that enters a maze, sent by many people who trust in his abilities. But instead of looking for the exit, he remains enamoured with what he find in the hallways. In a dead end, he finds an old machine. He starts exploring his machine. After a while he understands what the machine does. He then walks back the maze along the way he entered it, and tells everybody about the machine and about what it does.

He is proud of the machine that he found, and is proud of solving the mystery of its workings. His ego swells. He is admired by thousands of people. He wins prizes.

Then a few people start asking about the exit he was supposed to find. He avoids the answer. He points to his achievements. A sense of disappointment starts to spread.

-

The exit of the maze is unification, the machine is string theory. String research is good for your fame and ego. But string theory is useless for unification. 

Strings - and dinosaurs

The newest paper by Witten is http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.2832.pdf. Have a look at it. It is pure propaganda for strings, and really bad one as well.

This is the start:

String perturbation theory is based on a generalization from point particles and Feynman graphs to strings and Riemann surfaces. It has the remarkable property of preserving the general properties of relativistic quantum fi eld theory, while eliminating the ultraviolet region and forcing the inclusion of gravity.

This is the last sentence:

As a result, the correlation function under study and hence also the matrix element for the supercurrent to create the gaugino from the vacuum is proportional to (Vi), with a universal coefficient.

It is not hard to notice that the paper has no conclusion. This master of physics is unable to write a conclusion!

It is not hard to notice that the paper speaks about gauginos. But they do not exist!

It is not hard to notice that the start is fantasy, not science.

We have the "successor of Einstein" writing nonsense. Yes, also Einstein made mistakes. But he corrected them after a year or two. Witten repeats the same mistakes since 30 years. What a tragedy.

Dark matter: particle physics' answer to astrology

As predicted some posts ago, particle physicists need a new "mystery" to get funding. Supersymmetry is dead, strings are dead, so now they need something else. What is left? Only dark matter.

In the coming years, we will see a huge marketing campaign for this concept. Of course, every astronomer knows that "dark matter" is just a name for the stuff they have not yet detected because their detectors are not good enough. But the money-hungry particle physicists are falsely promoting this form an experimental issue to a fundamental mystery. (Remember the "Voyager deceleration mystery"!)

This means that we will see articles in Scientific American, programs in US mass media, prizes by Russian oligarchs, contests by the FQXI foundation and the Templeton foundation, and special funding programs by US science foundations within the federal government. We will hear that understanding "dark matter" is essential to ensure that US science is competitive and has a future.

Indeed, we will read, hear and see a lot of nonsense in the coming months. The command center will not be the IAS in Princeton, because the IAS has already disqualified itself as an institution promoting string theory. The command center of the delusion will be some other institution, which will then do a wonderful job to disqualify itself in the next 20 years.

When all the involved particle physicists hill have retired or died, around 2030, particle physics might start to become a healthy discipline again. Until then, being a particle physicist is as valuable as being an astrologer: both tell lies to get money.