Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

songjoong df: on 12/27/17 at 7:16am UTC, wrote KLIK DISINI KLIK DISINI KLIK DISINI KLIK DISINI KLIK DISINI KLIK...

Steve Dufourny: on 10/19/10 at 17:33pm UTC, wrote Don't worry ,dear Zeeya It's logic, Hhihihi I will pay my ticket.The theory...

Zeeya: on 10/19/10 at 17:24pm UTC, wrote I have no ticket to give you, I am afraid Steve. So you will just have to...

Steve Dufourny: on 10/19/10 at 9:17am UTC, wrote Well can I have a ticket and I will go and of course we shall laugh ahahah ...

Zeeya: on 10/18/10 at 18:43pm UTC, wrote For those of you in New York that missed this opera first time around, but...

Ulrich: on 1/10/10 at 4:41am UTC, wrote "Ulrich: "Everything there is" is perfectly isolated from everything else,...

Jason Wolfe: on 1/8/10 at 7:40am UTC, wrote Who is the Anonymous who wrote "About 3,000 years ago the greeks dicovered...

Anonymous: on 1/8/10 at 4:46am UTC, wrote About 3,000 years ago the greeks dicovered a method for separating fact...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: ""The motion of the solar system, and the orientation of the plane of the..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Jim Snowdon: "On the permanently dark side of the Earth, the stars would appear to stay..." in The Nature of Time

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Jorma, some thoughts; You mention mutual EM connection. I think you..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

akash hasan: "Some students have an interest in researching and space exploration. I..." in Announcing Physics of the...

Michael Jordan: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Anonymous: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Constructing a Theory of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi BLOGS
May 26, 2019

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Witten meets Wagner? A Review of a Physics Opera [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Blogger Rob Morris wrote on Jan. 3, 2010 @ 17:22 GMT
Before I begin, I should say that “The Theory of Everything” by Encompass New Opera Theater hasn’t opened yet. It’s in the final stages of reviews and workshops, and I had the chance to attend one of these a few weeks ago. One might think that with a title like “The Theory of Everything” you run the risk of trying to do too much. The new work by Encompass New Opera Theater though has the opposite problem. It’s a protracted three hours of gorgeous, haunting music and a thin, scattered plot peppered with physics buzz words and idioms.

If I wasn’t a physicist and I was watching this opera in Italian—a language that I do not speak—then it would have been a magnificent production. The sparse, diminished dissonance of John David Earnest’s music set a tone of urgency and heartbreak throughout the piece. The mostly young cast gave wonderful, spirited performances. The two stand-out performances were given by Samantha Grenell-Zaidman as Carla, the physics grad student of statistically-unlikely beauty, and Hannah Fuerst as Cassy, the wide-eyed daughter. The entire cast clearly put their heart and souls into the production and their effort truly paid off. If you are an opera lover, I recommend this one if for only these reasons.

Unfortunately, when anyone with even meager physics training hears the lyrics or reads the plot, they will immediately be put off. Though the title may have you imagining Witten meets Wagner, the work really has as much to do with physics as “Autobiography of a Yogi”.

The show centers around Tomas, the Bohm-and-Incan-obsessed generic theoretical physicist, and his documentary filmmaker wife, Rachel. Tomas is obsessed with Bohm’s holographic paradigm; views that cause his superior to ridicule and undermine him. This friction could have produced fruitful dialog about the tensions between traditional science and more “creative” paths, but in the end just makes one wonder why David Bohm was ever hanging around neuroscientists and psychiatrists in the first place. Rachel inexplicably lives 4000 miles away with their daughter Cassy—a scenario which could have probed the difficulties of marriage with a work-obsessed scientist, but flatly makes you wonder why someone with no office or contractual commitments doesn’t just move.

To add to this coerced conflict, the characters have a seemingly endless supply of mixed metaphors and gratuitous bastardizations of physics jargon. When Rachel tells the story of a life changing boat ride, she laments “gravity always attracts / takes the path of least resistance”. When Tomas inadvertently causes Cassy’s death by not allowing her to visit, he goes to seek out a tribe of Andean natives with “a special spiritual knowledge about time, space and alternate universes”. He vows: “Oscillating patterns in space will bring my daughter back to me,” and “The link is in the Andes / a tear in the fabric of time.”

In the end, Tomas, Rachel and even for some reason a thirteen year old part-time shop keeper all venture into the Andes where they are greeted by the native tribe and encouraged to step through a portal into an alternate reality. It goes without saying that this opera makes “What the Bleep” look like Landau and Lifschitz. It’s less “E=mc^2” and more “Namaste, Einstein.” If you’re an ardent lover of opera who can look past plot holes and gross abuses of language, this is a show for you—the warmth of the cast and the depth of the music will reward your patience. Otherwise, you have been warned.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Florin Moldoveanu wrote on Jan. 3, 2010 @ 22:25 GMT
I really don’t know what to think. Is this good art, is it bad art? I will live this to the critics, but the point is that physics does create powerful emotions as it stating to tackle problems formerly the purview of religion and philosophy.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


General Omar Windbottom wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 03:25 GMT
When testable science morphs into untestable post-modern pseudoscience, the artistic depictions of science become proportionally banal. The root problem lies with the post-modern scientists and their invisible strings, invisible dimensions and invisible multiverses. Not to mention their invisible logic and non-working empirical flashlights. The blind have led the blindly credulous into benightedness.

OW

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 12:52 GMT
Hi all ,

Dear General ,

I agree !

The sciences indeed are not a play .

The theory of everything in this line of reasoniong is a big joke and that s all in fact .

They shall continue to send their books ,it is so important for them to win monneys .I am laughing .

Dear friends ,look this water drop ,this galaxy ,....SPHERISATION EUREKA .

Quanum spheres ....cosmological sphere....universal sphere ...the gauge is made .It is too late .Now let' improve inside this gauge in 3D in this time constant .

I think many confounds the cinema ,the films with the foundamental sciences .

But we evolve fortunally .

Best Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 13:42 GMT
This sounds to be a form of moo-shoo physics, or an idea of physics. The play "The Proof" concerning mathematics seems a little firmer on its artistic portrayal of mathematics than this does with physics.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 14:37 GMT
Hi dear Lawrence ,

I can understand your point of vue about maths .That said I can't understand your utilization of maths in this road .

These extrapolations are a lost of time ,a pure business of nothing with a theory of nothing .Even with the better computer ,this theory will disapear in the time ,like just an instant in the universal evolution thus like a chaotic moment ,a simple...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dr. Cosmic Ray wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 17:23 GMT
Does the music contain a lot of stringed instruments? Steve - Go play your guitar and remind yourself how useful strings can be.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 17:44 GMT
Dear Steve,

You said, "oh yes the monney ,this stupid human invention ...shall imply a kind of little fight about the credibility ,it is logic a theory gives monney ,of course jobs and sales..."

Yes, money is such a pain in the neck. Unfortunately, what underlies our need for money is that we have these biological bodies that need food, shelter, ... We also have a nervous system within our bodies that compels us to desire things that make us feel good and avoid things that make us feel bad. Technically, I don't need to waste money on munchies, but my nervous system tells me it wants it so that I can feel better. As it turns out, a lot of my money goes towards paying for my education. It is a pity that I use that education to mock general relativity.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 18:18 GMT
Steve,

I must confess I have a hard time making much sense out of what you write.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 19:11 GMT
Lawrence,

I think what Steve is saying is that super-strings are a mathematical construct as opposed to something that we observe in nature. Certainly there are lots of things in nature that are spherical: stars, planets, apples, eyeballs. But nobody has ever observed a super-string.

There seems to be a lot of concern that string theory and M-theory are a bit overextended mathematically. Over-extended in the sense that theoretical physics has become 99% math and 1% observation.

In defense of M-theory and string-theory, we're simply running out of things to test or the ability to experimentally probe deeper degrees of physics. Mathematics at least lets us probe what could be possible.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 19:30 GMT
Hello dr Cosmic Ray,

Happy for your favorite team ,here in Belgium I like a lot playing soccer and my favorite team ,Anderlecht this year plays very well .I wait the new season .They have very important match.

Let's go anderlecht ,dear Ray ,you see even the favorite sports of humans are with spheres .

Yes indeed ,I love playing guitar and piano but I think always what a string is divisible ,a sphere no ,the balance of forces is not divisible in an universal point of vue and spherization .

I consider the waves like sphericals .When I play guitar or synthe or piano or djumbe ,the waves are sphericals ,we can have the same frequences with a string instrument or a computer .Thus the spherical waves are more logics .Le waves lenghts are numerous between the gauge and more the evolution ,thus the superimposings in sphericality are relevants .The strings and the modes ,or the spheres and their frequences since the begining of the Big Polarization .The rotating spheres sing and dance in a beautiful music where the rotations and its frequences and modes are on the road .

I d like insist on the fact what my critic in about the whole and the tools ,the limits ,the lack of physiclity ,but I respect the skills of people who work about these extrapolations .Sure some works can be used in some topics or methods but only in fact if the synchronization with the rational is the main reality .

You know Ray ,like I said you before ,I am impressed by your skills ,You ,Lawrence ,Jason ,Florin....I must admit I am frustrated with some things ,like when Lawrence speaks about Time machine (The discussions with Jason was very interesting furtehrmore )or when you speak about extradimensions....You know I accept always a foundamental law ,but I don't arrive to insert them with the foundamentals .On the other side I have learn a lot with both of you in maths and news ideas and too about physics .That permits me to evolve quickly in physics with your skills and thus permitted me to complete my young works about the Theory of Spherisation and its rotating spheres .You know this number of cosmological spheres and the ultim division (fractal)of the central sphere make me crazzy .

How can I calculate correctly the number of spheres dear Dr Cosmic Ray ,How ??? My method of the serie is false I am persuaded .The prime numbers have a specific physical serie different than the serie of primes .Likle just a part of the serie .The begining with the main sphere ????? WHAT IS THE SERIE BETWEEN 1 and our number of planets....the serie seems more short than the primes serie?

What do you think ,how can we arrive to make the sorting correctly ?

If somebody has an idea to find this number ,but a sure thing is the limit 1 and x.The volumes and tha rotations are correlated .

Friendly to all FQXi addicts....well said Jason ,addicts by the sciences ,the researchs ,the quests......

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 19:44 GMT
Dear Lawrence ,

Don't take that bad please ,I am like that ,transparent and always direct and sincere .One day hope we shall can drink a cup of coffee together and discuss about others things than physics ,the politics for exemple ,hihihi .

I can understand your words because we have a very different point of vue about the Universe .But Like I said before in several discussion ,I respect you and your skills .It will be a honor for me if you help the sciences center with your skills in the future .

Hi Dear Jason ,it exists still many things in the sphericality .The equation must have this spherization to be in the continuum .Without the spherisation ,all is chaotic in fact .The ubiquity of the spherization seems universal .All goes towards the spherization .All is composed by spheres ....it exists an ultim aim of interactions between mass and lifes and intelligences and consciousness....it is evident .Of course we can't see a strings but a quantum spheres too we can't see them .

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ray Munroe wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 20:15 GMT
Dear Sphere-keeper Steve,

You have given me hints of your ideas for nearly a year, but I do not understand the specifics. I do not understand why you are working with the prime number sequence. In my opinion, this should be a simple quantized integer, or the number of Kissing Spheres in a certain number of dimensions, or special Lie algebras, or the like. I also do not understand your spinning spheres. Spinning Spheres *MAY* be a good thing because they introduce intrinsic spin, which is a fundamental property of matter. In my opinion, these extra degrees of freedom (intrinsic spin) may actually imply new dimensions both in your theory and in our Universe. Is your model 3-dimensional, 4-dimensional, or have you introduced the effects of higher dimensions without recognizing the higher dimensions (I read Cristi's essay last week. It is a good essay, but I think it implies extra degrees of freedom/ curvatures that effectively represent extra-dimensions). Your model may have similar implications. Remember that my lattices provide the geometrical framework for a String/ Sphere duality that may have similarities to a Wave/ Particle duality. I thought the little blue spheres helped you see multiple dimensions more easily.

Back to the current thread. I do hope this opera's musical score contains lots of stringed instruments.

Have Fun!

Dr. Cosmic Ray

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dr. Cosmic Ray wrote on Jan. 4, 2010 @ 20:38 GMT
p.s. At the U. of Texas, the Physics Dept had our own intramural soccer team. Some of the players were pretty good - our Goalie was an American who spent his youth in France, and a couple of our Forwards were Latin American. They played serious soccer. I was barely good enough to play Fullback, but they let me on the team because I helped organize it as President of the Society of Physics Students.

In America, Football is still more popular than Soccer. I have two favorite College Football teams - Florida State beat West Virginia this past Friday and let Coach Bobby Bowden retire on a high note. My other team, the U. of Texas plays for the National Championship on Thursday (although everyone in this part of the country tells me that Alabama is gonna stomp us). Colt McCoy (Texas Quarterback) has a record number of College Football wins. I will be wearing my 'burnt orange' team colors on Thursday - HOOK 'EM HORNS!

Have fun kicking your sperical balls and playing your stringy guitar.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 5, 2010 @ 11:57 GMT
Hello dr Cosmic Ray ,

You know dear Ray ,At the age of 6 ,I began the soccer .It is very likeable to play soccer .Here in Europ ,it is the main sport .I like basket ball too .When I was more young I look always the USA final and now too .

I know indeed what the football is more popular .Here it exists some teams but people prefers soccer .

I wish you all the best with your team.

About this thread .

The prime numbers seems be the primordial sequence ,the physicality goes in the complexification by products or adds ...of prime numbers thus the serie is specific but the begining of this fractal seems far of Us and thus difficult to find .

I just try to find the corect number of cosmological spheres .After the serie before the universal center could be approached in my opinion .

Like I said before I am persuaded about the same number for one quantic architecture .The volumes of spheres too is correlated .

I remember several months ago ,I asked what do you think about this universal constant mv....the velocity of rotations spinals of all spheres ,quant or cosm,is proportional with its mass ..(density ,volume,.....)

Of course if we consider this universal link ,thus the velocity of light seems more important but one thing very essential is this one ,the linear velocity of the light is different than a gravitational stable system .Thus this velocity is logic or we must alance at the limit of the light .If the velocity of rotation of the light is the same for the main central sphere thus the 2 gauges are evifdent about the difference between the linearity and the gravity ,the electromagnetism due to the gravity permits simply to build the stability .

Let's take for exemple the velocity of rotation of Jupiter ,its density gaz,its mass ,its volume ,and after let's take our Earth ,and still an other for exemple an electron.......the question of the day ,all is in the universal constant of mv x .The evolution seems important too about the increase of mass .Thus the Universal sphere at the max mass doesn't turn but all turns inside around the universal center .

Probably thus the light has two senses of gauge at the max .Thus all is light ,thanks Eisntein .

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 5, 2010 @ 12:14 GMT
Dear Ray ,

when you have calculated this velocity ,what is the x to adapt with the light gauge velocity .On the other side ,it could be the only way to go faster than light ,the velocity of rotation implies the linear velocity too .Thus if we check the rotations we check all ,the mass ,the energy ,the velocity ....thus the discovery of our Universe .

Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ray Munroe wrote on Jan. 5, 2010 @ 13:52 GMT
Dear Spherekeeper Steve,

The fact that your model is able to represent intrinsic spin is a good thing. As far as any of us know from a theoretical perspective, you could represent spin with 9 quantities: -2, -3/2, -1, -1/2, 0, 1/2, 1, 3/2, and 2. The units here are h-bar if you are worried about specific 'spinning speeds'. Prime numbers may tie into GUT/ TOE through Clifford algebras. Read Sections 5.5 and 7.1 of my book. At the bottom of page 46, I asked "Are there higher levels of Grand Unification? The ultimate GUT group may be similar to an infinite onion with a new layer for every new prime number multiple."

Have Fun!

Dr. Cosmic Ray

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


FQXi Administrator Brendan Foster wrote on Jan. 5, 2010 @ 17:23 GMT
I'd like to find out if Lisa Randall's show will be more scientifically satisfying. Does anyone have tickets?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 5, 2010 @ 18:03 GMT
Hi all ,

Dear Mr Foster .

I can't go because I have already my tickets for the extra dimensions opera from Mr Witten.The princeton symphony I think in 7 acts under 5 dimensions .

And now Harvard too which sings the Opera ,.....really I am composer ,musician since several years and if the sound implies extradimensions thus there I am already in an other Universe .The physicality has 3D I repeat 3D ,and still one 3D .The physicality is the physicality and even our creativity is inside a 3D I repeat a 3D .I think that many confounds the unknew with the physicality .Incredible ,that has no sense .

Dear Ray ,

Thanks dear Ray ,I know in fact what the spherization by rotating spheres is foundamental and thus the explaination of the mass too with these intrinsic spins .The GUT is evident .Inside the gauge many things are still to do .

About the infinity ,you know my point of vue ,it is just an extrapolation .The number is specific and finite .I think it is the real problem with your ideas to all .

Each people has his method but it exists only one reality .

In all case ,it is interesting .

Dear Dr Cosmic Ray ,why 9 quantities ,it is due to our limits of perception or due to an international unity system .Why ?

Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jan. 6, 2010 @ 02:48 GMT
OW: "When testable science morphs into untestable post-modern pseudoscience, the artistic depictions of science become proportionally banal. The root problem lies with the post-modern scientists and their invisible strings, invisible dimensions and invisible multiverses. Not to mention their invisible logic and non-working empirical flashlights. The blind have led the blindly credulous into benightedness."

Brendan Foster: "I'd like to find out if Lisa Randall's show will be more scientifically satisfying."

------------------------------------------------
-------

I hear she is selling crystals and giving tarot card readings during the intermissions.

Gotta love that post-modern pseudo-science!

OW

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 6, 2010 @ 10:35 GMT
Dear OW ,

hahahaha yes indeed and too she and her team study the lines of the hand at the end of the hyper music .

The next opera will be at Oxford .

Pseudo science is still a weak word .

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


General Omar Windbottom wrote on Jan. 7, 2010 @ 05:49 GMT
SD,

Garbage-----------Pseudoscience-----------Speculation

See?
"Pseudoscience" is less rude than "garbage" but more candid than "speculation". Just right, in some cases.

OW

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jan. 7, 2010 @ 13:12 GMT
Yes indeed ,a bizare planet .....the speculations about sciences are interestings but evidently with pseudo sciences that becomes ironic speculations of nothing ,even exceptionally of nothing .The vanity and the monney are evidently too two parameters of the pseudo sciences .

Two teams ,one universal and the other,earthian .....

Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jan. 8, 2010 @ 03:29 GMT
Is it just me or does anyone else notice an odd similarity between DNA pairs and mesons/quark:anti-quark/color charge... How do these building blocks just...HAPPEN?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jan. 8, 2010 @ 04:46 GMT
About 3,000 years ago the greeks dicovered a method for separating fact from garbage. You should try the scientific method some time.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jan. 8, 2010 @ 07:40 GMT
Who is the Anonymous who wrote "About 3,000 years ago the greeks dicovered a method for separating fact from garbage. You should try the scientific method some time. " My guess is: General Omar Windbottom.

Who is he talking to? Mmmm... I've already admitted to reverse engineering FTL physics. If it did exist how would it fit into the physics. So I don't think he's going after me.

But if he is, here is the thing. The FTL propulsion physics idea allows us all to try to understand physics a little bit better, from a more conceptual point of view. It is certainly a thought provoking line of speculation. It is fun, and it might even lead to more serious consideration.

But I admit, as I've admitted in the past, that I don't have any real evidence for FTL propulsion physics. This is just an ongoing thought experiment.

By the way, why would you reference a culture from the stone/bronze age to further your physics point of view? Is that where you're trying to keep us?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ulrich wrote on Jan. 10, 2010 @ 04:41 GMT
"Ulrich: "Everything there is" is perfectly isolated from everything else, since it's damned hard to interact with nothing. Best, B."

If you give it a little more thought, you may be forced to concede that the "perfectly isolated" assumption lacks any rigorous scientific meaning. Certainly no empirical proof in sight.

By the way, you and your colleagues:

(1) Do not know what the dark matter is [and that's = or > than 90% of your "everthing"].

(2) Do know what physical process give rise to "dark energy" phenomena.

(3) Do not have an empirical clue about the size of the Universe.

(4) Do not have more than description and arm-waving when it comes to explaining the existence and unique properties of galaxies.

Wake up! Stop swaggering around like arrogant twits, pretending to a comprehensive knowledge that you most certainly do not possess.

Einstein spoke the truth when he said: "All our science when measured against reality [read nature] is primitive and childish, and yet it is the most precious thing we have."

THAT is the right attitude, and it is a two-part attitude, and both parts are mandatory for all scientists.

Real change is on its way,

Ulrich

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Zeeya wrote on Oct. 18, 2010 @ 18:43 GMT
For those of you in New York that missed this opera first time around, but still want to see it, there will be highlights as part of a 2-day Science & the Arts Conference at The Graduate Center, CUNY, on Sat Oct 30 at 1pm. Nancy Rhodes will speak on Music: Bridging the Soul and Science and Encompass will present highlights from The Theory of Everything, music by John David Earnest and libretto by Nancy Rhodes, with baritone Dominic Inferrera singing the role of a Brazilian quantum physicist, and pianist Tony Bellomy. Following will be a panel discussion with scientists, musicians, and John David.



http://www.sciartconference2010.com/

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 19, 2010 @ 09:17 GMT
Well can I have a ticket and I will go and of course we shall laugh ahahah

The theory of everything ahahahah

beautiful pub dear Zeeya ....good job ahahahah

Mr Witten I wait you here, we shall speak about our foundamentals in transparence and of course with rationality.

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Zeeya replied on Oct. 19, 2010 @ 17:24 GMT
I have no ticket to give you, I am afraid Steve. So you will just have to laugh from afar.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Oct. 19, 2010 @ 17:33 GMT
Don't worry ,dear Zeeya It's logic, Hhihihi I will pay my ticket.The theory of everything hahaha it's comic and funny. fortunally it exists strings on violons and pianos.

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


songjoong sdfsd df wrote on Dec. 27, 2017 @ 07:16 GMT
KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

KLIK DISINI

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.