Why are there so many unsolved problems in physics?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: SERC: Forests are growing faster, climate change appears to driving accelerated growth
Next: 'Marshall' is a disgusting troll
From: Benj on 5 Feb 2010 04:36 On Feb 3, 9:13 pm, Get lost <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Because LIBERALS and their cohorts in schools have downplayed the > importance of science in elementary and high schools in order to > promote their leftist agendas through social sciences. America > continues to fall behind in REAL fields of science. Sorry NOT a "liberal" thing but a political thing. Don't you know that dumb people are so much easier to rule than smart people. And the principles of science which involve the careful inspection of data to draw conclusions doesn't fit well with the blind acceptance of propaganda by the masses so needed for easy rule. Do you think it's by CHANCE that science teaching in the U.S. sucks? Look. In colleges "education major" is synonymous with "dumbass loser". Only the students who can't make it in say art history end up there. The kind of science they learn is "physics appreciation" which is to say physics without math. An education major couldn't graduate if they had to understand mathematics. So I waited my whole schooling as a kid for the schools to teach me some science. Especially physical science. No dice. Time dragged on and on as we discussed frog and flower parts (any teacher and understand the simple naming of things) as I waited with anticipation for us to get to the physical science part of our book. Fergeddaboudit. When we finally get there, the teacher decides to skip that chapter. No doubt because she had no clue about what was in there. And yet the many Nobel prize winners I've met throughout my life, are all prohibited by law from teaching a grade school science class. Politics. And all the best and brightest schoolteachers I've ever known were all fired for "incompetence". You know, horrible infractions like not keeping all the room window shades at the same height so it looked nice from the street! The point is that the principles of science are well known and have been for centuries. But to teach them weakens ones political position. So they aren't taught. Instead the reputation of science is used as as political propaganda. Salient examples are AGW and Evolootion. There are also many other topics where objective investigations are not allowed. They would have the public believe that scientific "truth" is determined by the officers of medical and scientific organizations and political appointees to "committees". It's not science. It's a political take-over at the "top". The bottom line is that when various bogus theories are promoted as "true" and alternative ideas are not permitted to be discussed, there is no science, only politics. And politics "explains" NOTHING. If one cannot seriously debate topics, how can there ever be even reasonable guesses let alone explanations? Just look at the debate here. In certain well-defined areas you see no science being discussed. Just name-calling and ridicule designed to STOP scientific debate. So ask yourself: WHY?
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Feb 2010 09:31 Benj wrote: > On Feb 3, 9:13 pm, Get lost <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Because LIBERALS and their cohorts in schools have downplayed the >> importance of science in elementary and high schools in order to >> promote their leftist agendas through social sciences. America >> continues to fall behind in REAL fields of science. > > Sorry NOT a "liberal" thing but a political thing. Don't you know that > dumb people are so much easier to rule than smart people. And the > principles of science which involve the careful inspection of data to > draw conclusions doesn't fit well with the blind acceptance of > propaganda by the masses so needed for easy rule. > > Do you think it's by CHANCE that science teaching in the U.S. sucks? > Look. In colleges "education major" is synonymous with "dumbass > loser". Only the students who can't make it in say art history end up > there. The kind of science they learn is "physics appreciation" which > is to say physics without math. An education major couldn't graduate > if they had to understand mathematics. So I waited my whole schooling > as a kid for the schools to teach me some science. Especially physical > science. No dice. Time dragged on and on as we discussed frog and > flower parts (any teacher and understand the simple naming of things) > as I waited with anticipation for us to get to the physical science > part of our book. Fergeddaboudit. When we finally get there, the > teacher decides to skip that chapter. No doubt because she had no clue > about what was in there. And yet the many Nobel prize winners I've met > throughout my life, are all prohibited by law from teaching a grade > school science class. Politics. And all the best and brightest > schoolteachers I've ever known were all fired for "incompetence". You > know, horrible infractions like not keeping all the room window shades > at the same height so it looked nice from the street! > > The point is that the principles of science are well known and have > been for centuries. But to teach them weakens ones political position. > So they aren't taught. Instead the reputation of science is used as as > political propaganda. Salient examples are AGW and Evolootion. There > are also many other topics where objective investigations are not > allowed. They would have the public believe that scientific "truth" is > determined by the officers of medical and scientific organizations and > political appointees to "committees". It's not science. It's a > political take-over at the "top". > > The bottom line is that when various bogus theories are promoted as > "true" and alternative ideas are not permitted to be discussed, there > is no science, only politics. And politics "explains" NOTHING. If one > cannot seriously debate topics, how can there ever be even reasonable > guesses let alone explanations? Just look at the debate here. In > certain well-defined areas you see no science being discussed. Just > name-calling and ridicule designed to STOP scientific debate. So ask > yourself: WHY? The short answer: It is politically correct to be proud to refuse to learn. /BAH
From: john on 5 Feb 2010 10:50 On Feb 4, 4:00 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...(a)hate.spam.net> wrote: > john wrote: > > > On Feb 4, 9:44 am, Uncle Al <Uncle...(a)hate.spam.net> wrote: > > > Urion wrote: > > > > > Here is a list of unsolved problems in modern physics from wikipedia: > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsolved_problems_in_physics > > > > > Why are so many problems? Don't you think there is something seriously > > > > wrong with our understanding of physics and the universe or are we > > > > just overcomplicating things? > > > > To criticize is to volunteer - propose empirically valid solutions. > > > The proton is a standing wave of energy > > that perfectly resonates with the > > frequency of space, absorbing energy from it > > thus creating gravity > > idiot > And that standing wave which is the proton, Al, has rotation at 1 in the first plane and rotation at 2 in the orthogonal plane. And what happens when it is formed, is the space within its 'event horizon' is all expelled to the outside in the form of an electron. And that electron, Al, as per my idiot Galaxy Model, is formed of hundreds of millions of radiating bodies (suns), each of which is made from gazillions of teensy-tiny standing waves, each of which expels its own bit of spacetime in the form of yet more complexity. Think of it as more Uncle Als. :-) It's the great circle of life! :-) john
From: glird on 5 Feb 2010 11:44 On Feb 4, 7:36 pm, Mike Jr <n00s...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > I agree that if science can't make contact with >experiment then it is not science at all but rather >philosophy, fiction, or religion. How bout "nonsense"?
From: glird on 5 Feb 2010 11:56
On Feb 5, 12:44 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Let's see if you can name one aspect of the big bang > theory that has not been tested. It says that all the matter and energy in the universe originated at a point about 13 billion years ago. That directly contradicts the law that matter and energy cannot be create or destroyed. Where, when, and how was that aspect of the big bing theory tested? glird |