TOTALITARIAN SCIENCE (POSTSCIENTISM)

According to Beautiful Totalitarian Science, thermodynamics is both "a
disaster" and "a dismal swamp of obscurity". Also, the word "entropy"
means "the same to everyone: NOTHING". Also, "the discussion about the
arrow of time as expressed in the second law of the thermodynamics is
actually a RED HERRING":

ftp://ftp.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/pub/SI...orts/06-46.pdf
"From the pedagogical point of view, thermodynamics is a disaster. As
the authors rightly state in the introduction, many aspects are
"riddled with inconsistencies". They quote V.I. Arnold, who concedes
that "every mathematician knows it is impossible to understand an
elementary course in thermodynamics". Nobody has eulogized this
confusion more colorfully than the late Clifford Truesdell. On page 6
of his book "The Tragicomical History of Thermodynamics" 1822-1854
(Springer Verlag, 1980), he calls thermodynamics "a dismal swamp of
obscurity". Elsewhere, in despair of trying to make sense of the
writings of some local heros as De Groot, Mazur, Casimir, and
Prigogine, Truesdell suspects that there is "something rotten in the
(thermodynamic) state of the Low Countries" (see page 134 of Rational
Thermodynamics, McGraw-Hill, 1969)."

http://www.beilstein-institut.de/boz...nishBowden.htm
ATHEL CORNISH-BOWDEN: "The concept of entropy was introduced to
thermodynamics by Clausius, who deliberately chose an obscure term for
it, wanting a word based on Greek roots that would sound similar to
"energy". In this way he hoped to have a word that would mean the same
to everyone regardless of their language, and, as Cooper [2] remarked,
he succeeded in this way in finding a word that meant the same to
everyone: NOTHING. From the beginning it proved a very difficult
concept for other thermodynamicists, even including such accomplished
mathematicians as Kelvin and Maxwell; Kelvin, indeed, despite his own
major contributions to the subject, never appreciated the idea of
entropy [3]. The difficulties that Clausius created have continued to
the present day, with the result that a fundamental idea that is
absolutely necessary for understanding the theory of chemical
equilibria continues to give trouble, not only to students but also to
scientists who need the concept for their work."

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
Jos Uffink: "This summary leads to the question whether it is fruitful
to see irreversibility or time-asymmetry as the essence of the second
law. Is it not more straightforward, in view of the unargued
statements of Kelvin, the bold claims of Clausius and the strained
attempts of Planck, to give up this idea? I believe that Ehrenfest-
Afanassjewa was right in her verdict that the discussion about the
arrow of time as expressed in the second law of the thermodynamics is
actually a RED HERRING."

On the other hand, according to Beautiful Totalitarian Science again,
the law that entropy always increases holds "the supreme position
among the laws of Nature". Also, "without some understanding of what
entropy means it is essentially impossible to comprehend what is going
on in the environment and to make the right decisions for its
defense":

http://web.mit.edu/keenansymposium/o...und/index.html
Arthur Eddington: "The law that entropy always increases, holds, I
think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone
points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in
disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much the worse for
Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation
- well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your
theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics, I can
give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest
humiliation."

http://www.worldscibooks.com/environsci/6684.html
THE ENTROPY CRISIS by Guy Deutscher
"In elementary and even high school education, a great deal of time is
spent teaching students the basic notions of force, energy and power,
but the word "entropy" is often not even pronounced. It is only those
who specialize in the sciences who will become familiar with it. This
is a dramatic shortcoming of our education system, as without some
understanding of what entropy means it is essentially impossible to
comprehend what is going on in the environment and to make the right
decisions for its defense."

Pentcho Valev

On Jan 6, 8:07*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://exilestreet.com/?p=1337
"In the most notorious trial in the history of science, the
Inquisition condemned Galileo in 1633. The aged scientist was forced
to recant his life’s work. The fact that the earth revolves around the
sun threatened the church establishment's doctrine. Galileo was worse
than right - he was inconvenient. Since his trial, scientists have
mythologized him as their secular saint. How times have changed: With
the Climategate scandal, we now find scientists in the role of
inquisitors - suppressing inconvenient facts and persecuting
researchers who challenge the doctrine decreed by the Global Warming
clergy."

Yes, but ... it was not so long ago that the GW lobby was the
inconvenient fact.
Now the politicians have found good "political" reasons to promote GW
- it has been adopted by the world.




http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig10/bauer1.1.1.html
"You begin to wonder, don't you, how many other cases there could be
in science, where a single theory has somehow captured all the
resources? And where competent scientists who want to try something
different are not only blocked but personally insulted?"

It has been know for 100 years that viruses were linked to cancer.
However, as it flew against the current orthodoxy the information lay
dormant for over 50 years. Now there is more fruitful research that
links cancer and viruses.

If you are interested in this problem you should read Thomas Kuhn's
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.




http://www.suppressedscience.net/physics.html
"Science is in a state of crisis. Where free inquiry, natural
curiosity and open-minded discussion and consideration of new ideas
should reign, a new orthodoxy has emerged. This 'new inquisition', as
it has been called by Robert Anton Wilson (2) consists not of
cardinals and popes, but of the editors and reviewers of scientific
journals, of leading authorities and self-appointed "skeptics", and
last but not least of corporations and governments that have a vested
interest in preserving the status quo, and it is just as effective in
suppressing unorthodox ideas as the original."

This has always been the case. Until the 20th Century science was
conducted primarily by Great Men working mainly alone.
The 20th century has seen the rise of the team, committee, and
research group. Whereas different ideas were once resolved by 2 guys
like Newton and Liebniz, now developments are carried on by committee,
research grants are awarded by results (before the work is done), and
this tends to channel work down a particular road. Both paradigms have
problems.





http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/con...ent=a909857880
Peter Hayes "The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock
Paradox" : Social Epistemology, Volume 23, Issue 1 January 2009, pages
57-78
"The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities and
research institutes are disinclined to support or employ anyone who
raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity. A
winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of
Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are
then able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics.
Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of
elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing
question of why this had not been noticed earlier. Under these
circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on
scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of
realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the
theory and their own reputations by shutting their opponents out of
professional discourse."

Indeed. Worse than that, money is allocated to find something.
Research tends to do its best to find that thing rather than
demonstrate that that thing is invalid or limited.
SO when a piece of bad science - like the famous "hockey stick" of GW
supports the research interests of a particular group and will support
a further cash injection then they tend to not bother too much with
criticising the methods that the bad science used.





http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hutchison/080616
"Like bronze idols that are hollow inside, Einstein built a cluster of
"Potemkin villages," which are false fronts with nothing behind them.
Grigori Potemkin (17391791) was a general-field marshal, Russian
statesman, and favorite of Empress Catherine the Great. He is alleged
to have built facades of non-existent villages along desolate
stretches of the Dnieper River to impress Catherine as she sailed to
the Crimea in 1787. Actors posing as happy peasants stood in front of
these pretty stage sets and waved to the pleased Empress. This
incident reminds me of the story of Eleanor Roosevelt's Moscow tour
guide who showed her the living quarters of communist party bosses and
claimed that these were the apartments of the average Russian worker.
The incredibly gullible first lady was delighted. Like Catherine, the
sentimental Eleanor was prone to wishful thinking and was easily
deceived. *What has all this to do with Einstein? The science
establishment has a powerful romantic desire to believe in Einstein.
Therefore, they are not only fooled by Einstein's tricks, they are
prepared to defend his Potemkin villages."

The Potemkin effect is common. Many people say that the Presidnet and
the Queen of England think the world smells of
wet paint.
I can't see how you think this all related to Einstein.




http://web.mit.edu/keenansymposium/o...und/index.html
Arthur Eddington: "The law that entropy always increases, holds, I
think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone
points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in
disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much the worse for
Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation
- well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your
theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics, I can
give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest
humiliation."

Do you have a reason to post this piece of fluff?




Beautiful totalitarian science for sale:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218

http://orangecow.org/pythonet/pet-shop.html

Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong
with it?
Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead,
that's what's wrong with it!
Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.
Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm
looking at one right now.
Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the
Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!
........................
Mr. Praline: No, I'm sorry! I'm not prepared to pursue my line of
inquiry any longer as I think this is getting too silly!

Note the desperate state Mr. Praline is eventually in: when things get
too silly fighters for truth get paralized and lies and absurdities
rule forever.

Pentcho Valev

On Jan 6, 9:19*am, "
wrote:
On Jan 6, 3:07*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:





http://exilestreet.com/?p=1337
"In the most notorious trial in the history of science, the
Inquisition condemned Galileo in 1633. The aged scientist was forced
to recant his life’s work. The fact that the earth revolves around the
sun threatened the church establishment's doctrine. Galileo was worse
than right - he was inconvenient. Since his trial, scientists have
mythologized him as their secular saint. How times have changed: With
the Climategate scandal, we now find scientists in the role of
inquisitors - suppressing inconvenient facts and persecuting
researchers who challenge the doctrine decreed by the Global Warming
clergy."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig10/bauer1.1.1.html
"You begin to wonder, don't you, how many other cases there could be
in science, where a single theory has somehow captured all the
resources? And where competent scientists who want to try something
different are not only blocked but personally insulted?"

* Plenty. The idiot Catholic Church is also why the
* people who understand Post Cathedral Farming invented Helicopters.


Eh? What is Post Cathedral Farming? And who exactly do you think
invented helicopters?


* It's why the people who understand Post Caesar Economics
* invented Digital Computers.

It is still the Catholic church??? What the hell do you mean here?



It's why the people who
* understand post-Newton education invented AI. It's why
* the people who understand Post Galileo Evolution
* invented Weather Satellites.

And what the **** is post Galileo evolution??


It's why the people who understand
* DNA invented Holograms, rather than RNA. It's why the
* people who understand Engineering invented UAVs, rather than the
Med.
* It's why the people who understand time, invented
* Atomic Clock Wris****ches, and Self-Replicating Machines,
* rather than The Big Bang.





http://www.suppressedscience.net/physics.html
"Science is in a state of crisis. Where free inquiry, natural
curiosity and open-minded discussion and consideration of new ideas
should reign, a new orthodoxy has emerged. This 'new inquisition', as
it has been called by Robert Anton Wilson (2) consists not of
cardinals and popes, but of the editors and reviewers of scientific
journals, of leading authorities and self-appointed "skeptics", and
last but not least of corporations and governments that have a vested
interest in preserving the status quo, and it is just as effective in
suppressing unorthodox ideas as the original."

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/con...ent=a909857880
Peter Hayes "The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock
Paradox" : Social Epistemology, Volume 23, Issue 1 January 2009, pages
57-78
"The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities and
research institutes are disinclined to support or employ anyone who
raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity. A
winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of
Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are
then able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics.
Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of
elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing
question of why this had not been noticed earlier. Under these
circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on
scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of
realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the
theory and their own reputations by shutting their opponents out of
professional discourse."

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hutchison/080616
"Like bronze idols that are hollow inside, Einstein built a cluster of
"Potemkin villages," which are false fronts with nothing behind them.
Grigori Potemkin (17391791) was a general-field marshal, Russian
statesman, and favorite of Empress Catherine the Great. He is alleged
to have built facades of non-existent villages along desolate
stretches of the Dnieper River to impress Catherine as she sailed to
the Crimea in 1787. Actors posing as happy peasants stood in front of
these pretty stage sets and waved to the pleased Empress. This
incident reminds me of the story of Eleanor Roosevelt's Moscow tour
guide who showed her the living quarters of communist party bosses and
claimed that these were the apartments of the average Russian worker.
The incredibly gullible first lady was delighted. Like Catherine, the
sentimental Eleanor was prone to wishful thinking and was easily
deceived. *What has all this to do with Einstein? The science
establishment has a powerful romantic desire to believe in Einstein.
Therefore, they are not only fooled by Einstein's tricks, they are
prepared to defend his Potemkin villages."

http://web.mit.edu/keenansymposium/o...und/index.html
Arthur Eddington: "The law that entropy always increases, holds, I
think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone
points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in
disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much the worse for
Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation
- well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your
theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics, I can
give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest
humiliation."

Beautiful totalitarian science for sale:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218

http://orangecow.org/pythonet/pet-shop.html

Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong
with it?
Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead,
that's what's wrong with it!
Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.
Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm
looking at one right now.
Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the
Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!
........................
Mr. Praline: No, I'm sorry! I'm not prepared to pursue my line of
inquiry any longer as I think this is getting too silly!

Note the desperate state Mr. Praline is eventually in: when things get
too silly fighters for truth get paralized and lies and absurdities
rule forever.

Pentcho Valev