Physicist Anthony Valentini

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Serafina_tikklya, Jun 21, 2009.

  1. Serafina_tikklya Registered Member

    Messages:
    6
    Has anyone read the article in Science cited below from whatsnew @ Bobparks.org

    "physicist Anthony Valentini of Imperial College London and his attempt to straighten out the mess left by Bohr and Heisenberg 80 years ago. Valentini is co-author with Guido Bacciagaluppi of "Quantum Theory at the Crossroads," to be published later this year. It continues a debate that has gone unresolved. It was put on hold because scientists were just too busy using quantum mechanics, to worry about why it works. Measured by the incredible range of phenomena it permits us to calculate and the technologies it has spawned, quantum mechanics must surely be the most successful scientific theory in history.
    It is, unfortunately, also wrong. Valentini's theory could spawn a revolution in physics."
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    If you skip peer review in journals to publish a book aimed at the more uninformed and scientifically uneducated laymen than it's a sign your work wouldn't get pass critical peer review so you're a scammer.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    I don't understand how the statement

    could possibly be consistent.

    If we don't judge theories by their ability to show us what we'll see experimentally, what can we judge them by?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. kurros Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    793
    Wrong in physics doesn't necessarily mean it gives the wrong results (though this kind of wrong also exists). Wrong may mean that a 'better' theory can be found which incorporates the existing correct results of the 'wrong' theory and goes further, sometimes with profound philosophical shifts in interpretation. Like how Newton's laws are wrong, yet they are still widely used.

    Valentini's theory has exactly the same experimental results (most of the time) as regular QM, it just involves some different interpretation. There are lots of interpretations of QM, and it's pretty impossible to say which is correct.
    He seems to be working on some predictions involving the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background though, and for that he should be congratulated. Its a lot better than any other alternative view of QM has been able to do (and lets admit it, the Copenhagen interpretation isn't much less unsettling than the others)
    I wouldn't say he's a scammer just because he published a book rather than in journals (which he has done as well), these aspects of his work are largely philosophical and aren't perceived as being terribly useful, thus they are difficult to publish. Books are generally a better place for that kind of philosophy. However if he does make some interesting predictions about the CMB you can bet those will be published.
     

Share This Page