charleskmhui@yahoo.com
Jun11-08, 05:00 AM
Is MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) beaten to death yet? This theory
is tried to explained dark matter without resolving to any new theory
or new physics. It basically tries to apply two different standard at
different scale of physics. If people cannot propose any consistent
deep thought and elegant mathematical equations, please drop their
papers. Don't create papers for sake of creating papers!!! String
theorists has done a much better mathematical job than this kind of
physics, at least they have created a branch of new math.
Lately, I read an article "Dark Energy without Dark Energy". I am not
convinced by the author approach. Again, applying different definition
of word at different stages and different assumptions at different
phenonmena. I really doubt what kind of scientific standard at the
first place?
Does anyone know any model that can be consistently derived from early
stage of Universe to the current phenomenal Universe, without
switching principle, without switching assumptions at different stages
of the evolution of the Universe, and without switching interpretation
of conventional operational terms. It can derive consistently from
quantum gravity to classical gravity descriptions. If no one can do
that then I am not convinced that anyone can claim oneself understand
gravity. Classical gravity is insufficient to explain dark matter and
dark energy. Don't give a cheap explanation; otherwise so-called
physicists just try to humuliate Mother Nature. Mother Nature needs
not our permission to operate consistently.
I can only accept switching assumption at different scale or even
changing physical laws for one set of phenomena if someone can
formulate their "assumptions" in a dynamical way in their model such
that this assumption is no longer implicit in one's model but
explicitly expressed as dynamical constraints, and no switching of
defintions/terms. For example, we can accept Uncertainty Principle but
then accept that Newtonian Mechanics is an approximation to Quantum
Mechanics...etc. Again, an author that is unable to recognize his/her
own theory short-fall is just trying to fool us and Mother Nature.
is tried to explained dark matter without resolving to any new theory
or new physics. It basically tries to apply two different standard at
different scale of physics. If people cannot propose any consistent
deep thought and elegant mathematical equations, please drop their
papers. Don't create papers for sake of creating papers!!! String
theorists has done a much better mathematical job than this kind of
physics, at least they have created a branch of new math.
Lately, I read an article "Dark Energy without Dark Energy". I am not
convinced by the author approach. Again, applying different definition
of word at different stages and different assumptions at different
phenonmena. I really doubt what kind of scientific standard at the
first place?
Does anyone know any model that can be consistently derived from early
stage of Universe to the current phenomenal Universe, without
switching principle, without switching assumptions at different stages
of the evolution of the Universe, and without switching interpretation
of conventional operational terms. It can derive consistently from
quantum gravity to classical gravity descriptions. If no one can do
that then I am not convinced that anyone can claim oneself understand
gravity. Classical gravity is insufficient to explain dark matter and
dark energy. Don't give a cheap explanation; otherwise so-called
physicists just try to humuliate Mother Nature. Mother Nature needs
not our permission to operate consistently.
I can only accept switching assumption at different scale or even
changing physical laws for one set of phenomena if someone can
formulate their "assumptions" in a dynamical way in their model such
that this assumption is no longer implicit in one's model but
explicitly expressed as dynamical constraints, and no switching of
defintions/terms. For example, we can accept Uncertainty Principle but
then accept that Newtonian Mechanics is an approximation to Quantum
Mechanics...etc. Again, an author that is unable to recognize his/her
own theory short-fall is just trying to fool us and Mother Nature.