Is an Anarchial Science Acceptable:

[Jzz]

I would like to state that my admiration for Einstein goes far beyond mere respect. In fact, one can safely say that a large part of present day main stream science is based upon his discoveries and ideas. That having been said, and notwithstanding the admiration, it has to be acknowledged, that in the end, the rationale behind special relativity and general relativity is the equivalent of the adoption of anarchy as a social system. An anarchial science where all ideas, providing they emerge from a small clique of scientists or fall in or reinforce ideas that have already been introduced, regardless of how outre and beyond epistemological mores they might be, is not necessarily a true science. What is astonishing is that the US Government, overawed by the possibilities of the atomic bomb, actively supported and enforced such ideas, to the extent that nothing contradictory or derogatory could be said about Einstein. Anyone who ventured to do so, lost their standing and livelihood in Academia. The example of the US Government was soon followed by other Governments all over the world. Even Russia, (former Soviet Union) discouraged any radical changes in mainstream science.

Yes, we are often overawed by the technologies that have emerged from the discovery of the working of the atom and of gaining some knowledge of its structure. Yet, in the end that was all based on empirical science. Even our ventures into space have been based almost wholly on Newton’s Laws and theories rather than on Einstein’s. Practically all of our technology is based on solid empirical, one on one, calculations performed by arithmetical logical processors rather than on wave particle duality, superposition, quantum entanglement and other such arcane ideas. The few forays that have been made into technology using such theories have failed dramatically, as for instance the idea of using quantum entanglement in cryptology, similarly quantum computers that were once based on quantum entanglement have devolved into keeping track of predictable changes in the Josephson junctions of super conductors rather than on quantum entanglement. A far cry from the exotic implications of quantum entanglement, surely?

It is time to re-think our world.

 

[Jzz]

When studying special relativity , it occurred to me that this just might have been Einstein's pet phobia. He was not really interested in whether it was accepted or not, he might have been totally obsessed with this world he had created, in which humans were the last things that mattered. It is like the creation of another alternative world, where there are answers to every possible objection.

 

[Catastrophe]

The Anarchy in Science (thecommoner.org.uk)

Cat

 

[Helio]

There's a lot, Jzz, you're presenting.

Here are some things that might help get a better view, not that I can claim to be all that knowledgable to the level you might want to know...

SR was very close to finding a discoverer with a number of scientist working on it. Lorentz is one example. This came as a result of the Michelson-Morley experiment that showed light required no medium to propogate. Before this was Maxwell's equations which calculated the speed of light without any requirement for reference frames. Einstein's brilliance beat the others to the punch.

He certainly was a bit of a rogue and anarchist because he wasn't going to let any tradition of dogma separate him from real science. [He did have a few hiccups with this, however.] He enjoyed debate, AFAIK, and I have to believe his arguments with Bohr were very exciting for him, because he would put Bohr on his heels, but then Bohr would do the same to him.

His quip when 100 German authors and other prominent individuals, including a couple of scientist, wrote that Einstein's Relativity was false, he replied, "Why do you need 100 when only 1 is necessary?" That's how science really works and ignoring any band wagon.

Einstein took a lot of abuse in his time, especially from Germany who wanted him discredited. I think he remained moderately humble and that is a very important character attribute to have if one is to be truly honored.

We all certainly need to understand what it means to say "follow the science" especially when not all the data exists to present a sound conclusion. Scrutiny of existing science should be rewarded if the scrutiny has any merit. Debate is healthy, group think is not. I've seen this view fall apart in the last few years for medical science.

 

[Helio]

Another point perhaps is that by the end of the 19th century, most people thouught physics had a great handle on how things work.

But there were a few quirks that needed attention. Once it became clear that the heavens are dynamic, then it would've become necessary to know all those motions to correct dynamical equations.

Einstein's search for a solution to this issue may have been his main reason for pursuing it. He originally called his theory the "Invariance Theory" because SR allows the same physics to work regardless of one's inertial frame. This was huge, but the media liked the term Relativity.

 

[Jzz]

SR was very close to finding a discoverer with a number of scientist working on it. Lorentz is one example. This came as a result of the Michelson-Morley experiment that showed light required no medium to propogate. Before this was Maxwell's equations which calculated the speed of light without any requirement for reference frames. Einstein's brilliance beat the others to the punch

Just a small clarification, SR was not very close to being discovered by anyone else. When you mention Lorentz, his research was an act of desperation, in order to prove the existence of the aether. His theory was that objects travelling in the aether experienced a contraction in the direction of motion. To begin with, it was a humorous statement although stated in a mathematical form that was later adopted across-the-board by Einstein.

Special Relativity was not Einstein’s brain child, the whole concept had been explored comprehensively by Poincare a brilliant French physicist and mathematician who unfortunately is little remembered today. Poincare even suggested that a whole new Geometry could be introduced to implement these ideas. An idea that Einstein later introduced in General relativity in the form of Minkowski space. Just read the link at the bottom of this page (although fair warning it is a Marxist site) you will be stunned !

https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/poincare.htm

Note the date 1897!

 

[Jzz]

Note: Poincare's mathematical proofs of these ideas are even more interesting.

Poincare's RELATIVITY OF SPACE: Annotated Edition

Essay by H. Poincare

web.mit.edu

 

[Jzz]

The Anarchy in Science (thecommoner.org.uk)

Cat

Interesting article. It is a pity that it is not more specific in its illustration of ideas and of how they relate epistemologically with acceptable norms.

 

[Catastrophe]

Jzz, thank you. I particularly mention "While a neat definition that fits on a flash card makes for a good exam question, does it accurately reflect reality?"

As General Semantics (Korzybski) stresses: "The map is not the territory".

Cat

 

[Helio]

Just a small clarification, SR was not very close to being discovered by anyone else. When you mention Lorentz, his research was an act of desperation, in order to prove the existence of the aether. His theory was that objects travelling in the aether experienced a contraction in the direction of motion. To begin with, it was a humorous statement although stated in a mathematical form that was later adopted across-the-board by Einstein.

The aether was mainstream science. I would phrase his attempt as more ad hoc than desperate. The Lorentz factor is the current equation for dilation. Length contraction as defined by Lorentz is mainstream relativity. There is very little objective evidence,IMO, for it vs. time dilation.

Special Relativity was not Einstein’s brain child, the whole concept had been explored comprehensively by Poincare a brilliant French physicist and mathematician who unfortunately is little remembered today. Poincare even suggested that a whole new Geometry could be introduced to implement these ideas.

Agreed.

 

[Jzz]

I'm surprised to read it about Einstein

What is there to be surprised about? From early childhood Einstein had been subjected to extreme antisemitism, so much so that he had to drop out of school and move to Switzerland. As he grew older, fascist antisemitism became progressively more open and more severe, culminating in the crystal night an event which was soon followed by the establishment of the death camps and the final solution. Is it so weird that Einstein would have liked to withdraw into his own world where mankind was, if not non-existent, at least side-lined to the point of being insignificant or an after thought ?

He might not even have been aware that this was what he was doing, but the result is clear to see.