Function Follows Form in Quantum Mechanics and Astronomy. The need for a NEW Black Hole.
April 14, 2006 2:21 AM   Subscribe

Function Follows Form in Quantum Mechanics and Astronomy. The need for a NEW Black Hole. A Weblog.
posted by nthdegx (22 comments total)

 
So some semiparseable crackpot weblog is now worthy of a FPP?
posted by edd at 2:57 AM on April 14, 2006


Oh whee, another semilucid stab at a theory of everything. This guy even has poorly written manuscripts complete with unlabled diagrams. Plus, he mentions the higgs boson. Extra points!
posted by [expletive deleted] at 3:16 AM on April 14, 2006


Lovin' your FPPs, edd. I'll take your comment on board.
posted by nthdegx at 3:21 AM on April 14, 2006


This leads to one question, of two...

Am I an idiot, and thus cannot understand this blog?

Is this guy an idiot, and thus my intelligence is neither here nor there?

I suppose I'm enough of an idiot that these two questions are worthless.

Yeah.

I feel crappy, now.

By the way, I think it's wonderful that [expletive deleted] used the word "semilucid." I must work that into a conversation.
posted by brundlefly at 3:28 AM on April 14, 2006


I don't trust blogs whose content resembles consipracy theorists. ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY INSIST ON CAPITALIZING EVERYTHING.
posted by unmake at 3:45 AM on April 14, 2006


brundlefly, I didn't get it either.

I think it was Einstein who said that if you _really_ understood something, you could explain it to a janitor.

In this context, I'm definitely a janitor, and I'm not feeling terribly enlightened. :)
posted by Malor at 4:31 AM on April 14, 2006


Before you completely dismiss this guy, I looked into it a little and I have to report:

-He is a Dutch architect (not a physicist)
-Being Dutch, I think we can excuse a few English mistakes.
-He has been at this since 1996

This is not a conspiracy theory. It is an attempt to link quantum theory with relativity theory. Whether or not it is lucid, we should respect his interest. I'd love it if someone with actual knowledge of quantum physics would give us an opinion of his work.

Einstein may have said that Malor, but thank goodness that much of his work wasn't comprehensible to janitors, or we'd really have a problem with nuclear proliferation.

Science has always been done by gifted amateurs, there is no reason to put him down.
posted by notmtwain at 4:42 AM on April 14, 2006


I'm a cosmologist and therefore should have some idea what he's on about, and it makes no sense to me.
posted by edd at 4:47 AM on April 14, 2006


OK, edd, so where are the best cosmology for janitors sites? Seriously, my daughter is a sophomore in high school and has expressed interest in astrophysics. Where could she learn more about what is going on in that field now and what skills are necessary to participate? I keep telling her that it's all math, but I'm not sure what type of math and whether or not it is a field where PHD's are a dime a dozen and there are 10 applicants for every available position.
posted by notmtwain at 4:54 AM on April 14, 2006


Well, it's turning into an AskMe, but:
This FAQ is turning into my standard reference for explaining Big Bang related cosmology. There's a wealth of pop science books about that are great reading, but the ones I read are probably out of date now so I can't recommend many.
I'd get a subscription to something like Scientific American if you've not already got one. She might find herself preferring some other bit of physics or another science altogether by the time she gets round to a PhD, and that's a good way of tracking everything else that is going on. For websites, I'd keep an eye on what NASA is up to, and look into individual experiments and telescopes, and they'll often link to other related stuff so you can follow it through from there.
Skills: mathematics is essential, but I got what I did as part of my physics courses. You'll pick up other necessary computer skills etc. in the process. Picking up some bits of statistics is helpful too, but that will also probably naturally come along the way.
I don't know quite how bad the competition for PhDs is in some places, but it's not a bad thing to aim for, and it's not ludicrously competitive I don't think. In the worst case you'll find yourself with a great education up till then that will get you into all sorts of other jobs. I'd definitely encourage it if she's keen.
posted by edd at 5:21 AM on April 14, 2006


He's quoting SCIENCE!
posted by Balisong at 5:54 AM on April 14, 2006


Lovin' your FPPs, edd.

That's extremely lame. If the best response you can find to a complaint about your post is to mock the complainer for not making posts, you should really just keep quiet. That, or actually make a case for why this is worth our while. (Hint: genuine physics = worthwhile; crackpot = not.)
posted by languagehat at 6:18 AM on April 14, 2006


To quote from the site: "Being an architect, with small math education, I am not able to bring these new Polar Ring atom-nucleon number sequences under ONE grand Methematical Formula.
Perhaps you are!!"

Ah yes, the architect/crackpot theory of everything or how-I-found-evidence-for-a-new-type-of-black-hole-by-misinterpreting-superimposed-star-images-from-the-Hubble-Space-Telescope. Lots of pretty architectural drawings of made up stuff, though.
posted by mooncrow at 6:58 AM on April 14, 2006


GRAVITY DEPENDENT LIGHTSPEED EXTINCTION DISTANCE OF THE EARTH IS 70 MILLION KM !!!

You honestly mean to tell me your day wasn't turned on its head by this shocking revelation, languagehat? You did see that he wrote it in capitals, right?
posted by nthdegx at 7:03 AM on April 14, 2006


You mean just anybody can put one of these "weblogs" up on the web and type whatever they want?

This is stunning news. This will change everything. Commercial publishing will be dead within 5 years!
posted by Ynoxas at 7:39 AM on April 14, 2006


This is Art. I love how it reads as if he read all of arxiv.org and is trying to regurgitate it all up. I love it - all the attention to detail, the references and links - its like a beautiful parody.

Also, the fact that people are asking people with physics backgrounds to weigh in just drives home the point that physics can be so abstruse that real physics and crackpottery are indistinguishable.

There should be an Internet Quiz: Real physics or crackpottery??
posted by vacapinta at 8:04 AM on April 14, 2006


Science has always been done by gifted amateurs, there is no reason to put him down

Yes, but.. not really: A Little Bit of Knowledge: "Bob Berenz had a good job as an electrician. But he wanted to do something bigger. He came up with an idea for an invention. But as he studied physics texts to see if his invention could work, he happened upon the biggest idea of his life: a revelation about physics that would disprove Einstein, and Newton."

There's sort of a huge difference between amateurs dabbling-in and contributing-to, much less understanding. It's no that any pronouncement concerning physics (or math, or biology, etc.) by someone lacking a degree in a related field is worthless, just that most of them happen to be so.
posted by unmake at 9:45 AM on April 14, 2006


At least the pictures are pretty.
posted by Hicksu at 9:59 AM on April 14, 2006


This blog has educated me stupid.
posted by spiderwire at 11:39 AM on April 14, 2006


Tell a tale that's pretty good, and as new thoughts challenge the tale, tweak it here and there; make it fit. The evolution of the story is a story about the tellers.
posted by sluglicker at 1:27 PM on April 14, 2006


notmtwain - I've enjoyed Black Holes and Time Warps - Einstein's Outrageous Legacy. (It's a little old now, written in '94, though.)

This book is based upon a combination of firmly established physical principles and highly imaginative speculation, in which the author attempts to reach beyond what is solidly known at present and project into a part of the physical world that has no known counterpart in our everyday life on Earth.

As long as you're aware of when the author drifts into speculation, he (Kip S. Thorne) does a good job of explaining theories and concepts of physics, sometimes with really good "thought exercise' examples. It's won an American Institute of Physics Science Writing Award, fwiw. Hmm, their associated journal, Physics Today, looks interesting and at a impact factor of 5 (2002) is far from a crackpot journal.
posted by PurplePorpoise at 4:22 PM on April 14, 2006


This reminds me of treknobabble from the various Star Trek shows; they use words from real physics to make it sound real, but the sentences don't actually mean anything.

It's a mess. I can't understand half of it, but I know what the words mean; it just doesn't make any sense and he doesn't take any effort to back up his claims. Maybe it's just a language barrier issue, but I'm willing to bet we have a crank here. Look at this quote:

"Is Saturns moon Hyperion THE example of an abandoned Shell of an Evaporated Micro Black Hole Comet nucleus? The Peculiar radial structure and the Globular shape in the middle of the Moon could be the tell tales of a Nucleus evaporation."

Somehow, I don't think Hyperion is an evaporated black hole. Maybe it's because black holes, according to theory, evaporate into pure energy. Maybe it's the part where Hyperion is composed of, as far as anyone can tell, perfectly normal matter in roughly the same relative composition as the rest of the Solar System (it might differ some but if it differed massively we'd have noticed.) I just don't see how a black hole could possibly decay into a moon; it doesn't even begin to make sense.

He also tries to ascribe quasar and black hole jets on some weird repulsive force:

"This New Black hole gravity in combination with propeller shaped Fermions creates a second consequence: the existence of a FERMION REPULSIVE HORIZON around the NEW BLACK HOLE , which is visible as polarized negative charged gas clouds around so called "Lobes" of lots of Quasars, HH- objects, AGNs etc. like Cygnus A."

There are jets emerging from things we KNOW are stars. Jets seem to be a feature of things with rotating clouds around gravitational objects and are common around protostars and T Tauri stars. So, they are not a feature unique to black holes. Unless the two kinds of jets have different origins that would seem to break this theory.
posted by Mitrovarr at 10:35 PM on April 14, 2006


« Older Get 'em while they're hot....  |  A collection of NFB Vignettes ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments