Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Fringe Science, huh?

I've been hearing the term, "fringe" lately from a "few" people who actually know enough about the subject to know better than to completely deny real physics when they see it, but who don't seem to understand a few things about how science works in this case, per the scientific method, to determine the preferred theory:

The anthropic physics will obviously carry different meanings, depending upon which cosmological model is actually in effect, so that's the reason that the interpretation of the anthropic physics that is commonly discussed here is anything but "fringe", because Einstein's General Theory with a cosmological constant is still the most conservative mainstream approach to explaining an expanding universe, contrary to popularized hype about whatever speculated exotic energy, like, "quintessence" or whatever other craziness.

There also seems to be some misunderstanding of what is expected of me because of advanced math which can still be done from this that appears to be directly relevant to quantum gravity.

Well, that's wrong, because I don't have to prove a damned thing about quantum gravity to make my point, and so anybody that wants to write down that part of it will surely get the credit, and all I can say, given the current lack of progress in quantum gravity, is, that's... "your loss"... because I don't need it.

It's one thing if there is no indication for it, but I have repeatedly demonstrated to the relevant powers that be that there is good reason to look.

Regardless of any of that, I've given very clear evidence that the most natural extension of Dr. Einstein's general theory with a cosmological constant is and always was valid, until proven otherwise, so it isn't me that's violating the scientific method, kids.

And as Dr. E would no doubt tell you... the anthropic physics in that cosmological model derives that his very own concept of purpose in nature had been vindicated, and "god"... damned sure does not throw dice!'.

So I really don't see where or how the ball is supposed to be in my court to do a damned thing, because I'm not the one that has made a bunch of otherwise unfounded assumptions.

It is a fact as it stands now that you guys are all dead-wrong and looking real stupid in Einstein's eyes, until you prove HIM wrong, since I have repeatedly demonstrated that this is not just my imagination.

I really wish that some nice PhD that may be looking-in again would speak-up to explain to me why modern physics treats Einstein's with such disrespect, considering that they are apparently much further from being correct than he ever was.

0 comments: