UFOs, String Theory, Quantum Gravity
Physics has become as discombobulated and goofy as “ufology.”
String Theory for Dummies by Andrew Zimmerman Jones and Daniel Robbins [Wiley Publishing, Indianapolis, 2010] presents a pithy overview of string theory and quantum physics; an overview that shows just how crazy the study of physics has become, and how physicists have resorted to mathematics as a kind of abracadabra to help them find an answer to the mysteries of the Universe that discombobulate them.
Ufology, that faux research sobriquet use by UFO hobbyists to provide cachet for their irrational attempts to uncover the nature of UFOs, is loopier than string theory, but is also encumbered by overt pathological participants whereas physicists keep their pathology suppressed, masking it with calculus and other mathematical formulae.
Physicists are trying to discover the reality of the Universe.
Ufologists once tried to uncover the mystery of flying saucers and then generic UFOs, but have since devolved into a babbling clique of pseudo-researchers who are so flummoxed by the enigma they once hoped to explain that they are now babblers of nonsense that borders on total insanity.
The UFO phenomenon is not amenable to mathematics, it seems – but who has tried to use math to provide a theoretical paradigm?
Moreover, UFOs have attracted crazies of all types, while physics (quantum, string, and classical) attracts brilliant loonies who see beyond the prosaic and mundane to theoretical models of the Universe that may provide profound truths of our existence.
The study of UFOs takes us nowhere and thus far has only provided babbling of a pathological kind. (See Alfred Lehmberg’s ditherings for example.)
One holds out hope for a rational denouement in the realm of physics (string theory notwithstanding).
But in the realm of UFOs? One should keep their distance, remaining aloof and disconnected, if only to remain compos mentis.
posted by RRRGroup at
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
13 Comments:
Stanton Friedman and David Rudiak are both physicists. Moreover they and they alone really understand and can get to grips with that most famous case of all - Roswell. Whether either of them understands, or goes along with, string theory, I just don't know.
By
cda, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Friedman and Rudiak?
You surely jest, Christopher.
Rudiak is an optometrist of some sort.
Friedman has been away from theoretical physics, if he ever was so disciplined, for so long that his views are Neanderthalian.
And you were jesting, right?
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Jesting? Maybe, but here is a serious question:
Who do you suggest would make the best author of a book entitled "UFOs For Dummies"? And would it be a suitable addition to the 'Dummies' range of books?
Or are so many ufologists a load of dummies anyway that an amalgamation of 90 - 95 per cent of all the existing UFO books, suitable edited, would suffice to fill the gap? We would need an expert English teacher with a rich vocabulary to provide the foreword. You can guess who this is.
By
cda, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Christopher:
I'm in touch with Adrienne Fontaine at Wiley, the Global Publicity person, and can make the suggestion.
But I surely hope you're not recommending that AL guy.
His grammar and word usage is scandalously egregious, a blow-hard actually.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
A well constructed, properly maintained database would certainly be useful to provide information, but not an answer to the ultimate UFO question, and even if that answer is ever arrived at, it would raise even more questions.
By
Frank Stalter, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Frank:
Quantum mechanics, and classical physics use mathematical formulae to come to conclusions of fact.
Databases are merely an accumulation of points of data, not offering the same kind of conclusivity that physicists insist their mathematical machinations provide.
Math gyrations prove nothing, is my point, and are a kind of numerical con game used by physicists to enhance their ivory towers.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
"Databases are merely an accumulation of points of data, not offering the same kind of conclusivity that physicists insist their mathematical machinations provide."
Depends on the data.
http://www.ptable.com/
By
Frank Stalter, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Frank:
I think you lost me....and a few others too.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Databases have lots of scientific uses. Let's say an astrophysicist wanted to know how many G-class stars were within 50 light years of Earth. If he had the right database, he could get that answer in a minute instead of going through some old timey catalog. Databases are great and if properly designed and managed, they can tell you things worth knowing.
If there ever are any patterns to UFO sightings that might lead to an accurate prediction on where you might see one next, a good dbase might be able to get you that answer.
By
Frank Stalter, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Yes, Frank, we've worked on a predictive system, plotting accidents and disasters, that should tell when the next accident or disaster might occur, and it has worked in a way that exceeds the probability factors.
Such a system could also work for UFOs perhaps.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, March 30, 2011
CDA wrote : "We would need an expert English teacher with a rich vocabulary to provide the foreword. You can guess who this is."
I'm the man of the situation, CDA. ^^
By
Gilles. F., at Thursday, March 31, 2011
Gilles:
You are perfect for the job, as your English would mesh ideally with the nonsense that passes for research in the UFO community.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 31, 2011
I couldn't disagree more. If the author had read about ufology he/she wouldn't have ended up babbling about something they know nothing about. UFOs/aliens are absolutely related to string theory. Contact experiencers have been talking about "vibrational rates" for decades.. long before anyone outside of the academic community talked about strings. Vibrational rates can explain a host of cosmological questions as well as ufos/aliens. So the fact that the author has not drawn this connection is simply him/her not doing their homework.
By
Unknown, at Friday, September 30, 2011
Post a Comment
<< Home