| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
08 Apr 2006 02:23:56 AM |
| Object: |
Creating fundamental theories |
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
.
|
|
| User: "CWatters" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 03:43:54 AM |
|
|
<fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144481036.527124.271490@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
Find a problem.
Make conjecture
Integrate with existing theories to make a new theory
Use new theory to make predictions
Confirm predictions by observation/experiment
Missed any steps?
.
|
|
|
| User: "FrediFizzx" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
09 Apr 2006 04:33:30 PM |
|
|
"CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote in message
news:eJKZf.361085$BI3.10825858@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
<fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144481036.527124.271490@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
Find a problem.
Make conjecture
Integrate with existing theories to make a new theory
Use new theory to make predictions
Confirm predictions by observation/experiment
Missed any steps?
Yes. As far as fundamental physics goes...
Give up everything else and study and research like hell until your eyes
pop out of your head and your brains explode. ;-) And more than once...
FrediFizzx
http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.pdf
or postscript
http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.ps
http://www.vacuum-physics.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Hexenmeister" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 06:26:32 AM |
|
|
<fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144481036.527124.271490@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
| I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
| possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
|
Sure. Be persuasive.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 01:40:14 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
Consider the mathematical transform.
There are many contexts to perceive which may roughly or perfectly map
to each other.
To split these into right or wrong is not valid.
Math is an open system.
Physics is an open problem.
You are free to construct.
Take the gamble knowing that you may fail.
Then you can truly go forward.
Skepticism is a useful tool.
Invalid assumptions are often the base of misunderstanding.
Physics is a cryptic word for nature or reality.
Refresh your fascination with reallity.
The awe is universal.
Modern physics is loaded with contradictions and competing theories.
The math is complicated and cobbled together around emperical results.
By the nature of your question you seem to be a theoretician.
If you believe that a cleaner theory exists why not give it a try?
I have some new and fundamental mathematics that needs a lot of
development:
http://bandtechnology.com/PolySigned/PolySigned.html
It derives spacetime. It's not so easy to do physics in it but I am
getting started.
I have just gotten a fairly fundamental result of a generic particle
that posesses binary(i.e. charge) and angle (i.e. axis) straight out of
the spacetime representation. The usual spin model (half integer style)
seems to line up with four-signed numbers quite well. It's fairly
abstract so far. Someone who has a blank slate would be good at it.
Even if it just spawns other ideas please take a look.
Don't be afraid to try to break rules and turn things upside down.
If the rules are true then they will not break.
-Tim
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 04:50:02 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
Prof. Rachael Ray has a book out with a complete, step-by-step
methodology to suite your taste of fundamental idea contributions:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1400082544/ref=pd_bbs_null_4/104-5072527-6152761?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
Mike
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?=" |
|
| Title: _True_ theorists are skeptical metaphysicists. |
08 Apr 2006 11:52:48 PM |
|
|
Hi Fraternity_Disposal, You asked:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics ?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics.
Einstein believed _True_ theorists are skeptical metaphysicists, saying:
Every _True_ theorist is a kind of tamed metaphysicist,
no matter how pure a positivist he may fancy himself.
[ ... He believes in ]
a conceptual system built on premises of great simplicity.
He also believed randomness indicates a lack of measurement, saying:
But the scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation.
The future, to him, is every whit as necessary and determined as the past.
See WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Albert_Einstein#Religious_views
While the spin of the earth and it's path around the sun are well known,
a priori, the spin of a photon and its path are _Never_ fully known,
even after it's, ahem, measured.
So... The key to understanding cosmology and TOEs is noting that
nothing is intrinsically random; instead, some things are simply unknown,
given _Today_'s best observations/theories.
^^^^^
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: _True_ theorists are skeptical metaphysicists. |
09 Apr 2006 01:38:57 AM |
|
|
Jeff...Relf wrote:
[snip usual Relf droppings]
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS
STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO SCI.PHYSICS STOP POSTING TO
SCI.PHYSICS
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 07:55:03 PM |
|
|
In article <1144481036.527124.271490@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
fraternitydisposal@gmail.com <fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
No. Fundamental ideas are not an inference, induction, deduction, or
conclusion of any kind. They are an inspiration, a creation of the
imagination. They can come from any source whatsoever. There is no
sequence of steps you can follow that will reliably produce a fundamental
idea. But there are things you can do that will make the generation and
recognition of good new ideas more likely.
--
"Let us learn to dream, gentlemen, then perhaps we shall find the
truth... But let us beware of publishing our dreams before they have been
put to the proof by the waking understanding." -- Friedrich August Kekulé
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
13 Apr 2006 07:38:01 AM |
|
|
"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:e19m17$k5$5@rainier.uits.indiana.edu...
In article <1144481036.527124.271490@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
fraternitydisposal@gmail.com <fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
No. Fundamental ideas are not an inference, induction, deduction, or
conclusion of any kind. They are an inspiration, a creation of the
imagination.
"fundamental ideas in physics" arise
when people observe an unexplained
set of "effect events".
When this happens
people try to find a set of "cause events",
that can be associated with the set of "effect events".
When no correlation can be found
to explain a set of "effect events"
some folks call it God's will,
and some folks call it random.
When a correlation is found between
a set of "effect events",
and a set of "cause events",
different sets of folks
construct models of the correlation
in various languages.
(Spoken, written, maths, computer, etc.)
Models are simply ways of COMPRESSING
and EXCHANGING information about the correlation found.
Physical models and other data
can be compressed and exchanged in many
lossy and non-lossy forms
such as ASCII, ZIP, GIF, JPG,
BASIC, Pascal, C++, Fortran,
various maths, etc.
In other words,
models of "sets of events"
can be transformed from one language to another
(One math to another math,
one computer language to another,
one spoken or written language to another,
and between these various language classes.),
in lossless and lossy modes.
The best models are efficient and universal,
and accessible to the people who use the model
to interface with the real world.
Although it is hyped and worshipped,
General Relativity is a non-viable, in-efficient model,
as it wastes enormous amount of time, money and minds
on such pursuits as time travel, worm holes, gravity waves,
distorted spaces, etc.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
--
Tom Potter
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 08:09:36 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 00:55:03 +0000 (UTC),
glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
In article <1144481036.527124.271490@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
fraternitydisposal@gmail.com <fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
No. Fundamental ideas are not an inference, induction, deduction, or
conclusion of any kind.
I can't believe you have a PhD. What do they teach you in school these
days? Chicken feather voodoo? ahahaha...
Making phun of "physicists" is so much phucking phun. ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Bailey" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 07:30:50 AM |
|
|
On 8 Apr 2006 00:23:56 -0700, "fraternitydisposal@gmail.com"
<fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
"TIPS" is the acronym for "Theory of Inventive Problem Solving," and
"TRIZ" is the acronym for the same phrase in Russian. TRIZ was
developed by Genrich Altshuller and his colleagues in the former USSR
starting in 1946, and is now being developed and practiced throughout
the world. http://www.triz-journal.com
From my superficial knowledge of TRIZ and comparativly profound
knowledge of physics: inventory the multiple contradictions to be
found in current theory and the conflicts of theory with experiment.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/where_we_stand/ is a good starting
point.
Then try the TRIZ principles using the contradiction matrix
(ref--http://www.triz-journal.com/matrix/index.htm) and find
comparable contradiction/resolutions in analogous fields. Then map
the mathematics to physics.
If you work within this framework, I recommend reading Richard
Feynman's paper CARGO CULT SCIENCE, Caltech commencement address, 1974
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/cargocul.htm
Besides making it clear how superficiality sucks, Feynman cites the
experiments following Millikan's measurement of the charge on the
electron. He claims Millikan made a fundamental error and many
subsequent experimenter's fudged their results so they appeared closer
to Millikan's result than they should have. How do you detect
contradictions in such a situation?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Creating fundamental theories |
08 Apr 2006 08:06:22 PM |
|
|
On 8 Apr 2006 00:23:56 -0700, "fraternitydisposal@gmail.com"
<fraternitydisposal@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any methodology for inventing fundamental ideas in physics?
I always fascinated of giving a fundamental idea to physics .Is it
possible? Folks ..what do u think? Please post your comments..
Yes. You can start by asking fundamental questions about the universe?
What is matter (substance)?
Has matter always existed?
How does matter come into existence?
Is there such a thing as space (distance)?
Is there such a thing as time?
Is the relative abstract or physical?
Is the absolute abstract of physical?
What is motion?
What causes a particle to move?
What is an interaction?
Why do particles interact?
You can find some of these questions answered at the link below.
More Nasty Little Truths About Physics:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Crackpots/nasty.htm
ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
