Bohr supposedly said variants of: We are all agreed that your theory is crazy.
The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of
being correct.https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Niels_Bohr
As regards the mess in physics; Bohr, Heisenberg, Feynman etc were all working
from Unified field theory that was published in 1758 in Boscovich's book "A
theory of Natural Philosophy..." It used to be taught to physics students in
19th century, but was cut-out in the 20th century to make room for new topics.
It is the modern atomic theory: that matter made mostly out of space and a few
particles; and physics students are not told whose theory that is.
latest talk by Dragoslav explains Quantum physics been misunderstood:
Stoiljkovich Dragoslav: Charge percolation mechanism of olefins polymerization
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
Stoiljkovich Dragoslav: Charge percolation mechanism of olefins polymerization
Stoiljkovich Dragoslav: Charge percolation mechanism of olefins polymerization
Paper: The charge percolation mec... | |
|
|
previous talk explains what is missed out from physics education:
>From Boscovich's theory to modern quantum theory: Prof Dragoslav Stoiljkovic
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
>From Boscovich's theory to modern quantum theory: Prof Dragoslav Stoilj...
"From Boscovich's theory to modern quantum theory": talk by retired Professor
Dragoslav Stoiljkovi... | |
|
|
So, its most physicists having amnesia; not being aware of the history of their
own subject.
Ioan Has paper: electromagnetism connected to gravity by Boscovich's theory:
A Theoretical Confirmation of the Gravitation New Origin Having a Dipolar
Electrical Nature with Coulomb Law Corrected
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
A Theoretical Confirmation of the Gravitation New Origin Having a Dipolar E...
By Ioan Has The paper starts by analyzing the actual justification of the
separation existing between electrical and gravita... | |
|
|
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017, 19:44, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>
wrote:
Nigel Dyer <[email protected]> wrote:
I've sat through a number of talks at fringe science conferences that were
modelled on the two excellent you tube videos. The speakers usually give every
impression that they fully believe the nonsense that they are presenting is
correct.
They probably do believe it. But you should bear in mind that the problem might
be on your end. Unfamiliar ideas often sound like nonsense, yet they sometimes
turn out to be right.
Regarding ideas that seem wrong and turn out to be wrong, see the marvelous
quote at the end of this essay, p. 13:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf
See also this book, which I recommend: "Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin
of Error," by Kathryn Schulz. This begins with a quote from Franklin, which I
think describes one of the reasons people are seduced into believing errors:
Perhaps the history of the errors of mankind, all things considered, is more
valuable and interesting than that of their discoveries. Truth is uniform and
narrow; it constantly exists, and does not seem to require so much an active
energy, as a passive aptitude of soul in order to encounter it. But error is
endlessly diversified; it has no reality, but is the pure and simple creation
of the mind that invents it. In this field, the soul has room enough to expand
herself, to display all her boundless faculties, and all her beautiful and
interesting extravagancies and absurdities.
—Benjamin Franklin, Report of Dr. Benjamin Franklin, and Other Commissioners,
Charged by the King of France, with the Examination of the Animal Magnetism, as
Now Practiced in Paris (1784)
- Jed
