Saturday, August 26, 2006

"The End of Particle Theory" JoAnne Hewett sets the Date


If the worst case scenario plays out, and the LHC discovers nothing, then that is the end of particle physics as we know it. And that includes string theory. They may think they are immune, but they are not - they will fall due to lack of funding with the rest of us.


Time to "recapitulate" some fundamental assumptions that have been projected as gospel into what is necessarily a flawed particle theory for this very reason. That makes me crazy, but of course, all hinges on the Large Hadron Collider.

I'd start with conflicts that commonly arise from direct observational evidence that makes scientists scratch their heads:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/sc_nm/science_darkmatter_dc_3
"It's very difficult to explain these observations with anything other than particle theory," Bean said. "The dark matter quandary to some extent is helped by these observations, because it helps target the theorists to try and look at particle physics, rather than gravity"

At last, a voice of reason among a sea of otherwise motivated conviction toward making something work that can't work as long as you continue to carry the flaw that prevents you from making it work!... Talk about, "circular reasoning".

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0401208

I'm just afraid that they'll make a bunch of previously unknown exotic particles during the interaction that people will use as an excuse to start chasing "technicolor" instead of Einstein.

OR... Maybe they'll just blow up the world instead, like modern day "keystone cops", considering the level of utter cluelessness that the complete collapse of modern particle physics and quantum gravity theory might seem to dictate... ;)

7 comments:

Pentcho Valev said...

HERESY IN SCIENCE

http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm :
"In Galileo's time it was heresy to claim there was evidence that the Earth went around the Sun, and in our time it is heresy to argue that there is evidence that the speed of light in space is not constant for all observers, no matter how fast they are moving, as predicted by Prof. Albert Einstein's sacred 1905 Special Relativity Theory."

In the 21st century challenging Einstein's absurdities is not heresy anymore. Since no more substantial money could come from the divine theory sycophants are massing in the only area that has remained relatively safe (quantum mechanics). The only problem is that, as a whole, science is dying:

http://www.buckingham.ac.uk/news/newsarchive2006/ceer-physics-2.html
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/francis_sedgemore/2006/08/sedgemore_says.html
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2006/04/physics_in_america_at_crossroa.html
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2006/08/perception_that_physics_is_too.html
http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051128/full/nj7068-705a.html
http://www.nyas.org/publications/UpdateUnbound.asp?UpdateID=41
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v416/n6883/full/416777b.html
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universitiesincrisis/story/0,,1851446,00.html

Sic transit gloria mundi.

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com

island said...

Good shot, but I've come to the sadening conclusion that theoretical physics is likely going to have to fall very hard before people realize that their stubborn failure to correlate theory to the observational evidence is what's killing them.

So be it.

physics guru said...

It's not over yet ... competition is still on to be allowed the privilege of spending $9 billion for the International Linear Collider. Junk science in the US could still have its day.

Pentcho Valev said...

EINSTEIN: THE GENIUS AMONG GENIUSES WHO KILLED PHYSICS

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/genius/
"Genius Among Geniuses" by Thomas Levenson
"And then, in June, Einstein completes special relativity, which adds a twist to the story: Einstein's March paper treated light as particles, but special relativity sees light as a continuous field of waves. Alice's Red Queen can accept many impossible things before breakfast, but it takes a supremely confident mind to do so. Einstein, age 26, sees light as wave and particle, picking the attribute he needs to confront each problem in turn. Now that's tough."

The genius among geniuses at the end of his career:
"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept,i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com

Pentcho Valev said...

DID MATHER AND SMOOT CONTRIBUTE TO GENERAL RELATIVITY?

http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=dn10216&feedId=online-news_rss20
"The 2006 Nobel prize for physics has been awarded to John Mather and George Smoot for their contribution to the big bang theory of the origin of the universe."

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=1516
Professor Stephen Hawking FRS - Big Bang and Infinity
"This discovery was part of Stephen's collaboration with Roger Penrose through which they used General Relativity to show that space and real time began with a Big Bang, and how they would end in black holes."

It seems a contribution to the big bang theory is at the same time a contribution to general relativity as well. Then why is this latter contribution not mentioned by the Nobel committee? Could this have something to do with the following confessions of Einstein's:

Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false."

Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept,i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com

The Emperor of the Moon said...

If the LHC doesn't find anything, it won't kill particle physics. It'll leave the theory as we know it a wreck, but there's plenty more directions to take.

Cheer up--linear and angular momentum's always conserved.

island said...

I think that Joanne's point was that funding won't be there for anymore ventures into fairy-land.