I agree we don’t need the equations to understand these things, but if they predict/describe known phenomena, it’s confirms the understanding, and I don’t have the math to double check what he’s saying rigorously, His claim is this isn’t just theory and philosophy but that it’s rigorous because the equations bear it out.

Seems A LOT has been surpassed. I used to love physics when I was young, but was dissuaded from really getting into it because it was presented as boring and only possible to make incremental progress in some uselessly specialized aspect. Told my wife today that within our daughter’s lifetime (and hopefully ours), think we will have unimaginable technological advancement — 1000-years worth.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I was much the same way. Things will get very interesting in the coming years. There's a lot more than this that will be exposed.

"What's popular is rarely true, and what's true is rarely popular."

I don't think so. Until the current establishment falls. Incentives are "missing".

then 🚀

it's collapsing in real time IMO

I certainly hope so

but I was wrong many times

I will add, math is descriptive but not explanatory. A heavy reliance on equations does not necessarily make for a good representation of reality. Most of these things are theoretical and cannot be adequately explained by those who base their understanding on math alone.

yeah, I don’t think he’s implying the math alone explains it, but if you were to put your theory to the test by using known equations for the things about which you were theorizing, and the math checked out, it’s a good way to confirm you’re on track.

I'm not trying to be disagreeable lol, there's truth here. There is a fine line though, where people like Einstein applied physical properties to concepts (space and time). Even if the maths checks out in such an instance, it is based on fallacious logic and I am forced to reject such theories on that basis.

But I'm all for people doing this work, it will get us to the truth eventually.

you think Einstein is wrong?

I do. He stole his work from Henre Poincare, and as mentioned, you can't apply physical properties to concepts.

Gravity is an effect of magnetism and dielectricity. We can manipulate objects and make them go up or down using electrostatics. Magnetism is a much stronger force than gravity is claimed to be, and it can be experimentally validated by anyone. Warping and bending of spacetime? Heh.

I think it makes more sense to adopt the views of people like Tesla on this basis. He, among others, was responsible for the basis of the AC motor that gave us our electrical grid. He wasn't a fan of Einstein either.

how about quantum computers. they are a rality now. I'm far from comprehending all things involved, I don't see how to explain that without Einstein's work.

It's a lot to get into through text alone. I think it's worth understanding quantum vs aether as explanatory frameworks for the universe. Have a look here:

https://youtu.be/0_Qn3y0V1BY

https://youtu.be/aq-oluWt_kY

One more, perhaps more apt: https://youtu.be/1Y0yIMZgt6E