All matter photons?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by John J. Bannan, Aug 11, 2008.

  1. DieDaily Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    In summary...

    Emotions run a bit high...let's try to be more factual. I'm an outsider in that I have thoroughly perused Vern's site and have enough mathematical skill to understand and vouch for everything I read there. This was so surprising to me (since I only have 3rd-year honours Physics training) that I imagined that the average PhD Physicist would see his/her own demise in Vern's theory and, consciously or not, be virtually incapable of a rational peer review. Please prove me wrong, dear fellow scientists! The convergence of religion and modern science is embarrassing me in front of my children, who are asking be about Photonics. At present I'm inclined to present it as a perfectly valid theory, and the one that would be the clear survivor in a dual by Occam's razor.

    If one of you supposedly cool, rational, systematically self-sceptical priests of the scientific method would kindly help me out in some concrete way, I could inform my kids with relative confidence that standard theory is safe.

    Incompleteness: Any argument about incompleteness is absolutely not going to help me. All theories are incomplete. If they weren’t, we could all quit doing Physics.

    Peer review: Statements from Ben like "No. If Vern were right he would have linked to an article in a peer reviewed journal." are not going to help me at all. They are evasive at best, cultish at worst. Lack of peer review is no excuse, as Vern has submitted his papers and then been declined a peer review. His claims that he was additionally told his theory is "dangerous to science" is as upsetting as it is believable and well-precedented. (Again, we see a startling convergence of science and religion, of string theory with post priory theology that is intrinsically un-testable AND vastly complicated than Vern's rival theory). There is no way out but to directly rebut Vern, and this has not happened.

    Evidence: Vern's system is inherently 'Quantum Mechanical'. Relativity effects are natural consequences of it. Photon-to-mass conversion is well established experimentally so arguments like Ben's "Photons are massless, so they can't explain mass." need some sort of rigorous, non-simplistic expression in order to have teeth.

    I should point out that I like Ben's posts in several other threads and think he's a good guy...the Photonics thing is maybe something that could grow on him if after an actual, serious look at it he can’t defeat any specific element?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.

Share This Page