Does Socratus write an unintelligent garbage?

[socratus]

Does Socratus write an unintelligent garbage?

Another inane post by Israel Sadovnik/Socratus.

You have been banned from how many forums for posting
this unintelligent garbage? Yes you are a legend on the net
you even surpass our mate Preearth as I am pretty sure
you hold the record for the most forum bans.

At 68 you think you would have learnt how to communicate
or has the devil and your madness got to you?

Most on the forum here are happy to discuss almost
anything but the key is discuss.

So I will ask you one more time if you have something
to discuss tell us in CLEAR language.

I do not want to see another pile of drivel and quotes
masquerading as something meaningful.
Orac

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbth ... #Post44488
========…

[socratus]

For example I say:
Quantum Theory become clear and logical
then we take as a fundament T=0K.

Is this opinion ‘an unintelligent garbage’ ?

===.

[Cerveny]

For example I say:
Quantum Theory become clear and logical
then we take as a fundament T=0K.

Is this opinion ‘an unintelligent garbage’ ?

===.

Some "physicists" do not like unpleasant question. If you claim "TR is wrong" they behave as children, their only toy is taken away. They miss global logic and health sense :( Such poor boys rise to give you a ban only…
BTW, Socratus, can vacuum with a zero temperature carry a photon? How (logically) differ 0K vacuum and our real vacuum, in fact?

[socratus]

For example I say:
Quantum Theory become clear and logical
then we take as a fundament T=0K.

Is this opinion ‘an unintelligent garbage’ ?

===.

Some physicists do not like unpleasant question.
If you claim "TR is wrong" they behave as children, their only toy is taken away.
They miss global logic and health sense :
( Such poor boys rise to give you a ban only…
BTW,
Socratus, can vacuum with a zero temperature carry a photon?
How (logically) differ 0K vacuum and our real vacuum, in fact?

=.
1
One SRT postulate says about photon movement in vacuum.
2
There is two (2) papallel worlds:
a) T=0K and
b) T not equal to zero Kelvin.

We need to understand their interaction.
==========.

I don’t think that to understand my ideas is difficult.
I try to explain my ideas as simple as possible.
For example:

Why we cannot understand Quantum Physics.

The problem is that physicists draw the Quantum Physics
with ‘ math point-particle’ and therefore they ‘kill the picture
of ultimate reality.’
Of course, physicists know very well that the particle isn’t a
math point, but any another model of particle brought difficult
which they could not solve. Therefore physicists preferred
to think about particle as a structureless point
===.
At last from 1968 physicists decided that instead of a
‘point particle’ they will use ‘a string – particle’ and developed
‘ string theory’. The problem is that there are 5 or 6 ‘ string
theories’ in 10 or 11 dimensions .One theory is better than
other one. And they decided to unite them in one
‘ M-string theory’ . This theory is still in a cultivation.
=.
So, now we don’t know what elementary particle is and
therefore we don’t have the Philosophy of Physics.
=.
Is my opinion difficult to understand , is it ‘an unintelligent garbage’ ?
=.
Socratus

[Cerveny]

Sorry Socratus, I am special case, physicist barbarian and linguistic analphabet :)
I do not rely upon Theory of relativity, String theory, M-theory at all. They are obscure, nearly useless, sterile construction. They do not solve any of essential problems of the physics:
- Structure of empty physical space (vacuum)
- Matter/antimatter unbalance
- Inertial motion mechanism/reason (where is saved the information about direction of particles)
- (In)determinism, time arrow, initial entropy
- Relationship between electromagnetic properties of vacuum and common speed limit
- Dark matter
- Supposition of non-physical singularities
- Using of metric that do not meet triangular inequality
- …
So you can see I share your dissatisfaction about present mainstream physics. On the other hand I do not have serious problem with quantum mechanics… - elementary particle is, by my opinion, some defect in regular structure of the vacuum (physical space)...
It does make any sense to argue with fundamentalist “physicists”, they are without phantasy, creativity, imaginations, global (holistic) logic/feeling. They will quantize Einstein gravitation still after on hundred years … From their point of view is garbage everything that is not taught in high school :(

[socratus]

Sorry Socratus,
I am special case, physicist barbarian and linguistic analphabet
I do not rely upon Theory of relativity, String theory, M-theory at all.
They are obscure, nearly useless, sterile construction.
They do not solve any of essential problems of the physics:
- Structure of empty physical space (vacuum)
- Matter/antimatter unbalance
- Inertial motion mechanism/reason
(where is saved the information about direction of particles)
- (In)determinism, time arrow, initial entropy
- Relationship between electromagnetic properties of vacuum and common speed limit
- Dark matter
- Supposition of non-physical singularities
- Using of metric that do not meet triangular inequality
- …
So you can see I share your dissatisfaction about present mainstream physics.
On the other hand I do not have serious problem with
quantum mechanics… - elementary particle is, by my opinion,
some defect in regular structure of the vacuum (physical space)...

It does make any sense to argue with fundamentalist “physicists”,
they are without phantasy, creativity, imaginations, global (holistic) logic/feeling.
They will quantize Einstein gravitation still after on hundred years …
From their point of view is garbage everything that is not taught in high school

You touched three problems:
1.
String –theory.

My opinion is on this link :
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=5016

2.
elementary particle is, by my opinion, some defect in regular structure
of the vacuum (physical space)...

In my opinion ' some defect in regular structure of the vacuum (physical space)...'
is vacuum polarization

3.
It does make any sense to argue with fundamentalist “physicists”,


Well, that's Philosophy I've read,
And Law and Medicine, and I fear
Theology, too, from A to Z;
Hard studies all, that have cost me dear.
And so I sit, poor silly man
No wiser now than when I began.

/ Faust, lines 354–59. /
==.