Micheal Riordan- August 2003-pHysics Today


 Science > Physics > Micheal Riordan- August 2003-pHysics Today

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1
Topic: Science > Physics
User: ""
Date: 18 Aug 2004 03:08:24 PM
Object: Micheal Riordan- August 2003-pHysics Today
There is an August 2003, Physics Today Opinion
by Michael Riordan titled, Science Fashions
and Science Fact.
I can not repeat the article, but I will comment
in the fashion of the science philosopher. A
quark to test the truth is the system of
discussion.
Can the quarks be example of the dilemma of
scientific truth?
And the first postulate called the quark a
mathematical fact, but not the real fact.
Implying the dilemma as the fact, in its
fullest implication. What constitutes true
things, in science. And the word, things, is
used instead of the work knowledge.
And to sum up the dilemma is to take the place
in history that we reside at. And many scientists
are happy to reside with Galileo. And here
the troubles with the Vatican are summed up as
truth relative, rather than judgment.
Now, see. Intelligibility as a doctrine is and
always has been a school. Except social usage
is required because of Karl Popper and falsifiability
doctrine.
So it seems like all of science is thrown back to
the Galileo science and has to restart.
Riordan's primary statement is the relation of
the Book of Nature to the discovery of the quark.
And the book is held to cause the discovery, as
a truth would be expected.
That is the philosopher's analysis of the opinion.
And the social vogue in science has litterally
caused some schools to term the alpha particle's
ionization track its own event, for example.
And to give the truth of existence to the effect
independent of the cause. And from there, the next
truth is to question the temperature of the event,
rather than the effect of the alpha.
It is that simple a logic. But, the second the
third abstract algebra is allowed, the average
scientist is lost. The track as a particle itself
is allowed.
And here the reality of the term quanta is to
direct in three abstractions. And it certainly may
define the effect independently. But the scientist
must be told.
Must be told the kind of quanta to which the effect
is ascribed. And this is done using classes of quanta.
Making the class of the quark a school itself.
Implying the rather odd school that needs to relate
better.
Right now, the school blames the Book of Nature for
the quanta confusion. They have no idea.
The formulation of existence in the theory of
all particle theory is only a class itself.
And the apparent elegance of the form is the
reason for the donut form. A donut of existence.
A stupid form in reality because the relation of
the Feynman symbol to all interactions is self evident.
So write the formula of the symbol, without
relation to the universe's existence. That simple
a theory class. A class to resolve any dilemma of
the physicist, because the truth of the quanta has
always been independent of the red shift.
Douglas Eagleson
Gaithersburg MD USA
.

 

NEWER
pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER