--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" <yifux...@...> wrote: > > Preliminary notes: Auth objects to Vaj's overuse(?) of Wiki to bolster > viewpoints. Fine, given that, I contacted a REAL physics genius - a true > expert in Quantum Mechanics, not in any way associated with MUM, or TM. > Since SU(5) is the lynchpin of virtually the entire MMY-Hagelin theories > relating PC, the question of "unified fields" and any possible > grand-theories, relating either to GUT's or TOE's; the lynchpin imo has > collapsed. > As far as I'm concerned, Hagelin's contribution to Quantum Spirituality has > been discredited, whether it be the initial or later "flipped" SU(5). Here's > the reply by the physicist on top of my initial question:
It might be still too early to make a judgement on Hagelin's theory. From what I've seen in the physics community, theories appear to come and go like the tide. Physicists change their minds and theories like Hawking, Roger Penrose and others. Some physicists would jump on the bandwagon supporting a certain theory if the current data support it. In other words, no one is exempt from scrutiny. Even the theories of Einstein and Newton are still being tested for validity throughout the entire universe. Specifically, it is now fairly widely accepted that Newtonian laws of physics do not apply at the atomic and subatomic levels. With the discovery of dark energy, do Newtonian laws apply for objects at the edge of the universe? > ... > to Quote: > " > Unless something truly remarkable has ensued under the radar, I think your > assessment is probably spot-on. > > > We are emerging (I hope) from a decades long Zeitgeist of make-believe. > > > I'm not sure what "flipped" means. Perhaps, "flipped-out" would be a better > description." > > End of quote. > [my initial question below] > > > On Oct 18, 2009:...My inquiry: > > > > I have an article (at http://www.tinyurl.com/yh2kd4f) in which the author, > Dr. David Scharf, Associate Prof of Physics at MUM), states that: > > "John Hagelin is a Harvard-trained physicists and an an acknowledged > authority in unified quantum field theories. His prominant role in the > development of the highly successful grand unified theory based on the > mathematical strucutre called flipped SU(5) is widely acknowldged. For > example, (Ellis, Hagelin, Nanopoulos, Olive and Srednicki, 1984) had a > remarkable 589 citations as of mid-2007" > > "Although predominantly theoretical, this model, as developed by Hagelin and > his collaborators, has provided significant support for grand unified theory, > and, indeed, for superstring theory as well.". > > I have a suspicion that when it comes to the supposed "distinguished > representation among both physicists and philosophers", this probably amounts > to Scharf's associates right down the hall and no further. > > I can find no support whatsoever among any mainstream physicists or > encyclopedias in support of the importance of "flipped SU(5)" (of Hagelin, > Ellis, et al). > > In all likelihood, Scharf is making up the idea of support for such ideas > merely in order to bolster a cultish batch of preconceptions and a phoney > theory of the universe. > (but not being a phycicist, I could be wrong). > > What do you know about this...as to the "support among phycicists" for > Hagelin's flipped SU(5). Is there anything to this, or not. > Thanks a lot for your help >
