Types of physical representation

Physics lives on tropes, puns and platitudes. All these things, we may call them propaganda, are backed up as absolute truths by the ancient authority of the scholastic corporation that employs physics. One of these is the propaganda that physics is based on mathematics and models nature with the precise language of mathematics. This is like an old lady still clinging to her youthful photo. She was beautiful. She no longer is. Physics may have used equations once. Not anymore. Of course, papers are still written that contain equations. In fact all do. But in practice representation of nature is no longer done strictly with equations. No need to. Here are a selection of types of representation used by physics. In fact looking at these, it appears that, equations, are actually, the language of physical philosophy that physicists practice.

1. Pictorial
tracks of particles in a buble chamber
2. Simulation
computer simulation of non-existent things, such as dark matter
3. plots
mathematical fit of data
4. equations
symbolic manipulation of semantic physical quantities
5. proportionality
since the main tool used to compare quantities in physics is equation (a broken proportionality) and not proportion physicists usually confuse a proportionality, an equation, a definition and an identity

The Evil Symbiont

Christ drives the money changers from the temple by Rembrandt

Do you know who owns your body? You may think that you are the owner of your own body but you are not.

Your body is owned by your evil symbiont. Who is your symbiont? Let’s explain.

Humans live in symbiosis with a species of legal-born organisms that do not have a well-defined surface and therefore are not perceivable in its entirety by human senses. Your body is owned by this bodiless legal organism. Since this organism has not yet been identified as a life form it does not have a name.

Every human individual is either a pet or a slave of humanity’s invisible master. The master of human beings is also the landlord of the Earth. Since land is the source of all power and your master also makes the laws for you to live by on the land that it owns, your master is all powerful and has full control over you. Now that you know who your owner is, be in awe and show proper respect where respect is due.

* * *

Every human baby is born as a slave in this human plantation known as the planet Earth. The parents of the baby relinquish all natural rights of the baby to the master in return for protection and the right to live in the land owned by the master.  How come humans lost the ownership of land? At some point in history, these unhuman legal organisms took the ownership of the land from the human feudal lords and made the entire humanity their indentured servants. We are witnessing the historic transfer of the ownership of land still owned by human dynasties to the unhuman organisms.

Upon its birth the baby is assigned a serial number and recorded in the database owned and maintained by the master. Your master who has no flesh and bones body and therefore no senses cannot perceive you as a human being with natural rights but perceives you only as a number in its database. For the master the value of the baby is proportional to the amount of tax it can extract from this baby during its lifetime. Money is the essential nutrient of this unhuman bodiless organism and without a constant circulation of money it would expire. Everyone in this database is expandable and can be sent to die during the lovemaking of this unhuman species with its peers which we humans perceive as war.

Humans are aware of the war-torn, divided and tragic state of their species but no one appears to be aware that humans live in symbiosis with a being without body. Their symbiont have become their master. The symbiont is also a parasite preying on the human body. It somehow became dominant and enslaved the human species. Humans are unable to perceive their master as a living organism because human beings are programmed to perceive nature as material. But existence is not matterful, existence is definitional. New life forms appear only by networking among existing life forms, not by evolution. The way cells combined to form the human organism as a new species, humans formed the legal organism as a new species.

* * *

Once you become aware that you are a servant, pet or slave of the master (colloquially known as “The Man”) all you can do is to deny it and rationalize it by believing that you are a free-born. But you are not free until you pay off all of the debt you were born with. Once the master can no longer extract taxes from you and decides that you are old and useless it will set you free, then you are free, not before then.

You were born as an indenturer, you paid your debt all your life and when you are finished you were kicked out of the society and sent into a sunny location to “enjoy” your withering existence!

Humanity has been groping to perceive and name this unhuman and bodiless legal organism for a long time. I called it the Org before, now I call it the Evil Symbiont or the Big Parasite in homage to Orwell’s Big Brother; man in the street calls it The Man… but no one realizes that this organism is a real living being and it is a biological species like any other known species. What the human master is to a cat, this unhuman legal organism is to humans. The cat can only perceive an instance of the human species — the owner of the house the cat lives in — but we should be able to perceive this organism as a species because we perceive it in time, across generations.

* * *

We have no choice but to live by fooling ourselves that we are free-born people living freely in the land of the free forgetting that we must pay our rent to the global landlord for everything of value that we pretend to own and that we are not allowed to trespass any land owned by another unhuman organism without asking for written permission. Considering that we cannot form couples without asking written permission from the agents of our master…. how can you still pretend that you are a free-born living freely in the land of the free? All evidence proves without a doubt that the human individual is a slave of its evil symbiont. When you are aware of all this evidence, how can you still pretend to yourself that you are a free individual?

The One Straw Revolutıon

Masanobu Fukuoka wrote:

There are two paths of human knowledge — discriminating and non-discriminating**.

[**This is a distinction made by many Oriental philosophers. Discriminating knowledge is derived from the analytic, willful intellect in an attempt to organize experience into a logical framework. Mr. Fukuoka believes that in this process, the individual sets himself apart from nature. It is the "limited scientific truth and judgment" by which Mr. Fukuoka means "the world as perceived and constructed by the human intellect. He considers this perception to be limited to a framework defined by its own assumptions." Non-discriminating knowledge arises without conscious effort on the part of the individual when experience is accepted as it is, without interpretation by the intellect.]

People generally believe that unmistaken recognition of the world is possible through discrimination alone. Therefore, the word “nature” as it is generally spoken, denotes nature as it is perceived by the discriminating intellect.

I deny the empty image of nature as created by the human intellect, and clearly distinguish it from nature itself as experience by non-discriminating understanding. If we eradicate the false conception of nature, I believe the root of the world’s disorder will disappear.

In the West natural science developed from discriminating knowledge; in the East the philosophy of yin-yang and of the I Ching developed from the same source. But scientific truth can never reach absolute truth, and philosophies, after all, are nothing more than interpretations of the world. Nature as grasped by scientific knowledge is a nature which has been destroyed; it is a ghost possessing a skeleton, but no soul. Nature as grasped by philosophical knowledge is a theory created out of human speculation, a ghost with a soul, but no structure.

There is no way in which non-discriminating knowledge can be realized except by direct intuition, but people try to fit it into a familiar framework by calling it “instinct”. It is actually knowledge from an unnamable source. Abandon the discriminating mind and transcend the world of relativity if you want to know the true appearance of nature. From the beginning there is not east or west, no four seasons, and no yin or yang.

Physics defines our perception of nature

Do you agree with this statement?

Physics defines our perception of nature

Or more generally,

Physics defines our perception

If it is true that physics defines our perception, it follows that

  1. our perception is learned, not innate
  2. there is no one true perception
  3. there is no true nature


nature appears to us the way we define it or, nature is an illusion

Who teaches us how to perceive nature?

We learn to perceive nature as material; materialism is the doctrine of physics.

Who teaches us this doctrine of materialism? First our parents then our teachers when we are sent to school.

School teachers indoctrinate students with Newtonian materialism.

School teaches us that Isaac Newton discovered the true laws of the true nature and the true nature is  made of matter and obeys Newton’s laws. In short, school teaches us that

nature = matter

and matter is set into motion by an occult force discovered by Newton.

School teaches us the Newtonian doctrine of atomic materialism as the unquestionable true description of nature; we learn that nature is material and forceful and obeys Newton’s laws. Teachers do not tell us that this is just one of the infinite number of possible world views.

The occult doctrines of this British Doctor of Philosophy (a scholastic Learned Doctor) who died over 300 years ago still define our perception of nature not because it describes the true nature (which does not exist) but because Newton’s disciples who nowadays call themselves physicists perpetuate Newton’s doctrine of atomic materialism as the true nature.

Do you see anything wrong with this picture?

God particle in Newton’s temple

What evidence do you need to convince yourself that Newtonism is a cult?

What is Newtonism?

Newtonism is a religious cult whose revealed faith is atomic materialism. This old British cult presents itself to the world as “physics”.

There is no doubt that Newtonism doing business as physics assumes atomic materialism as its unquestionable faith. Once you agree that atomic materialism is the sacred hidden faith of physics that Newton claimed God revealed to him, then, it becomes obvious that Newtonism is a cult.

* * *

You’ve heard about Newton’s laws and you are told that nature is Newtonian and Newton the mortal closest to Gods discovered the laws of nature that lay hidden until Newton revealed them to humanity.

But have you ever heard about Newton’s Zeroth Law? No, you haven’t. Physics textbook will never mention this fundamental hidden assumption of physics.

Newton discovered no law of nature; Newton assumed the doctrine of atomic materialism as a revealed truth and tried to fit nature to his materialist and occult doctrines by defining his faith as laws of nature.

To believe that nature is matterful and that there are absolutely hard surfaces in nature is not different than believing in the occult. Physicists believe in the occult; and more importantly, physicists control the education system and they teach their occult faith as the only scientific truth. Do you want your child indoctrinated by these priests of the cult of Newton?

This is Newton’s Zeroth law:

God in the beginning formed matter in solid, massy, hard, impenetrable movable particles.

Newton claims, in the name of God that nature is discontinuous; there are absolutely hard surfaces and he calls these absolute indivisible discontinuities “matter” and endows matter with a quality he calls “mass”.

This doctrine of atomic materialism supposedly revealed to prophet Newton is the fundamental and unquestionable hidden faith of physics.

Atomic materialism is the revealed faith of physics that every physicist believes as his faith without question. No physicist can deny or even question his faith in the cult of Newton and remain a physicist. When a physicist repeats the official physics propaganda that as a physicist he always upholds the authority of mathematics and experiment, he is lying.

The last 300+ years physicists have been trying hard to fit nature into their absurd atomic materialist faith. But nature is not matterful. Nature is not occult.

* * *

Physics is based on atomic materialism; physicists made the occult the fundamental quantity of physics and they even defined a unit for the occult and named the unit of the occult with the sacred name of their Grand Master Newton.

By trying to explain nature with their occult faith physicists corrupted the old science of physics and filled it with absurdities and then claimed these absurdities generated by their physics belonged to nature. Physicists market bugs in their esoteric language as features of nature. What charlatans!

What other evidence do you need that physics is the cult of Newton!

Physics is the cult of Newton.

Physicists are ultra-fanatic, radical, and extremist anti-science priests of the cult of Newton who will defend the occult doctrines of their cult and the sacred authority of their Grand Master Newton at all cost.

Physicists built a 4 billion dollar machine to save Newton’s sacred authority.

Yes, you should be in awe of Newton. His disciples built a giant temple to their prophet Newton to save his sacred authority by using miracles they will coax out of a machine. LHC is the newest cathedral of the cult of Newton.

LHC exists because to this day physicists will not give up their unquestioning faith to Newton’s Zeroth’s law. If God revealed to their prophet Newton that he created matter in solid and “massy” particles, for physicists, nature must be matterful and massy regardless of what experiments and physicists’ own theories say.

* * *

What does their own Standard Model tell physicists? Standard Model tells physicists that particles that they observe are not massy as revealed to Newton and there are no particles.

The Standard Model is not just any theory; physicists claim that their standard model is the most beautiful theory ever and it explains all their particles and their interactions perfectly. This is true by definition because physicists built the Standard Model over 50 years by fitting observations to it, in other words Standard Model is “phenomenology” or a model that saves the phenomena.

Standard Model saves the observations and tells physicists that particles have no mass.

But Newton says that God revealed to him that particles are massy.

Can you guess what physicists will do? As cult members of the cult of Newton what would they do?

Unlike physicists, what would scientists do?

Scientists will reason scientifically, like this: here’s a theory that we built; it is so good that it explains all observations perfectly and it tells us that what we observe as particles have no mass; particles we observe are not massy as Newton claimed; forget Newton and his divine revelations; physics is a science, divine revelations and sacred authority of a prophet have no room in physics; our theory and experiments say particles are not massy therefore we are living in a world without matter regardless of what that self-annointed prophet Newton claims. Amen!

What do Newton’s disciples the physicists say: Wait a minute, forget the Standard Model and experiments; Newton’s authority is sacred and it cannot be challenged; Newton is always right therefore we must invent a field impersonating a particle impersonating mass so that Standard Model will give all massless particles mass.

And this is what physicists did and they built the LHC to save Newton’s authority.

Are you yet convinced that these people are fanatic priests of the cult of Newton and they built a huge machine to prove that nature is occult and matterful to save Newton’s authority?

Probably not. Then, let me tell you that this kind of charlatanism to overrule experiments and theory to save Newton’s authority is not the exception in physics, it is the rule.

* * *

The best example of how physicists uphold the authority of Newton over the authority of experiments is how they defined the Cavendish experiment of 1798 as the first observation of Newton’s occult force.

Newton’s disciples the physicists tried for over 200 years after their Master’s death to observe experimentally this occult quality Newton called “force”. Physicists could not find such a force in 200 years of trying.

What would you conclude? I would conclude that the force is occult, I would say, physicists tried 200 years to find the occult in nature and they failed and they could not find a trace of the occult in nature; so nature is not occult, Newton is lying.

What would physicists do? Physicists in the 19th century named the old Cavendish experiment posthumously as the first observation of the occult force!

Experiments say nature is not occult; physicists say nature must be occult because Newton says so, and they defined an old experiment as the first observation of the occult.

Never mind that Cavendish did not measure force and he did not intend to measure it, he just computed the mean density of the earth. But in order to save Newton’s sacred authority physicists redefined an experiment to fit their doctrines. Physicists could not observe the occult so they defined an old experiment as verifying the occult because the sacred authority of Newton must be saved.

You are still not convinced?

Physicists built another absurd edifice to save Newton’s sacred authority when they realized that the way they wrote Newton’s force definition resulted in division by zero at r=0. So what physicists do? Do they say, Newton’s force is absurd, we could not observe it in 300 years, and now the same occult and absurd definition of force results in division by zero, so enough is enough, let’s dump this force and forget about that self-annointed prophet Newton… Not a chance. Physicists are the priests of the cult of Newton and charlatans. Physicists are not scientists.

So what do physicists do? They invent elaborate mathematical procedures and mathematical gimmicks and mathematical polemics to divide by zero without appearing to divide by zero. And they dub the charlatanism of dividing by zero without dividing by zero “normalization”. When mathematics warns them again and tells them “don’t normalize me,” fanatic physicists don’t listen and increase the dose of their polemical sophistry and re-normalize and re-re-normalize until they got what they want and Newton’s sacred authority is saved.

Physicists Steven Weinberg and company are given a Nobel Prize for inventing subtle mathematical sophistry that overruled the authority of mathematics with Newton’s sacred authority.

* * *

These charlatans who corrupted the old science of physics with absurdities to save the sacred authority of their Grand Master Newton overruled experiments, overruled theory, and overruled mathematics with Newton’s authority… these people are continuing to corrupt what used to be the science of physics with their occult faith.

How can you let these charlatans and extreme priests of the cult of Newton to teach your child the occult doctrines of an 18th century British Grand Master of the Occult?

* * *

Newton was the agent of the British colonialism to impose British standards and colonize the continental Europe in the name of the Crown. Newtonism is now exposed as what it is: A British cult of the occult. Newtonism doing business as physics is a cult because it is based on the claims of a false prophet who claimed his corrupt materialist doctrines was revealed to him by God.

Newton the Grand Master of the British cult of Newtonism was invented to extend British political colonialism to human mind and it has run its course. Newtonism is now exposed.

Question the occult doctrines that Newton’s fanatic priests are teaching your child.

Join the campaign to stop teaching the Cavendish experiment lab as the observation of the Newtonian occult.

Axes of nature

The focus of physics is motion.

But motion is a limited case of change. To limit nature to motion by ignoring change and then claim to explain nature in its entirety by motion, and specifically, as motion on the axes of a coordinate frame, is arrogant ignorance of nature.

Physics accepts motion but denies change.


Physics is based on the doctrine of atomic materialism and atomic materialism explains nature with infinitely dense units that move but do not change.

Physics at its very core embraces the supernatural over natural.

Physics can only describe nature by casuistry and sophistry.

Nature is rational

How do we know that nature is rational?

We know nature by measuring.

Measuring is counting the unit.

What is a unit?

All measurements are done with a rule. A rule is an equality of ratios of similar quantities. For example, Kepler’s Rule is a rule that measures orbits.

In order to measure with a rule we keep one of the ratios constant. This term that we keep constant is the unit.

Since we can choose any ratio as our unit, measurement is independent of chosen unit. There are no absolute true units.

There are no exceptions to the rule that measurement is independent of chosen unit. There are no absolute and true units in nature.

I cannot imagine any physicist to agree that nature is rational and that there are no true units in nature; that would be denying the sacred branded units of physics.

If you eliminate the sacred branded units named after dead physicists there will be no physics left.

Nature is rational; physics is legal.

Physics is legal because it tries to legislate nature with absolute true units defined by physicists. Physicists call the units they define “constants of nature”.

Rational = measured with ratios = science

Legal = measured with equations made of branded and sacred units = physics

Jane Doe v. Board Of Education of the City of New York

Jane Doe is the mother of little Jane Doe who is being taught at a New York City public school the doctrines of a British religious cult. We identify this cult as “Newtonism.”

A quote from a physics textbook (page 101) shows how Newtonian doctrines of occult force and atomic materialism (mass) is taught as true science:

5.6.1 Newtonian Gravity
Gravity is the attractive force between two objects due to the mass of the objects. When you throw a ball in the air, its mass and the earth’s mass attract each other, which leads to a force between them.

Jane Doe is suing NYC Board of Education because textbooks used by the Board indoctrinates little Jane Doe with a British religious cult by teaching that

Gravity is an universal attractive force discovered by the great British physicist Sir Isaac Newton, the mortal closest to Gods, and that this force is proportional to the mass of the bodies.

Jane Doe claims that this is a lie; more than a lie; it is a systematic indoctrination of young minds of our nation with the doctrines of a British religious cult.

Teaching Newtonism is religious indoctrination. But our constitution forbids religious indoctrination in public schools. As a patriotic citizen and as a concerned mother Jane Doe is suing the New York City Board of Education to stop the teaching of the unverified doctrines of an 18th century British occultist to little Jane Doe as a scientific fact.

The occult force supposedly discovered by Newton and taught by the NYC Board of Education as a scientific truth was never observed in nature.

Let’s repeat what Jane Doe is claiming and display it in bold font so that the reader does not miss the point of this case:

The occult force supposedly discovered by Newton and taught by the NYC Board of Education as an absolute scientific truth was never observed in nature.

That this occult force was never observed in nature is proved — by physicists themselves — who claim that

Newtonian force of gravity was superseded by Einstein’s General Relativity theories.

Physicists themselves proved that Newtonian force does not exist in nature.

Repeat in bold:

Physicists themselves proved that Newtonian force does not exist in nature.

Repeat in bold and all caps:


Then why is the Board indoctrinating poor little Jane Doe with the doctrines of a British religious cult that teaches blind acceptance of a nonexistent occult force as the true law of nature?

What does this mean?

It means that physicists themselves concede that experiments such as the famous Cavendish experiment that physicists claim proved the existence of the Newtonian force were — faked — by physicists to save Newton’s sacred authority.

If the Newtonian force were ever measured experimentally with the Cavendish experiment it could not be superseded by Einstein or anybody else.

Physicists concede that they faked experiments that they claim proved Newton’s occult force; because now they claim that Newton’s force does not exist.

How would the court decide this case?

The court does not know anything about the Cavendish experiment or the subtleties of the Newtonian force or if it exists or not.

The court decides that the subject of force belongs to physics and that only a physicist can settle the question of the existence of the Newtonian force and therefore the court orders the parties to bring in physics professors as expert witness to defend their case.


Counsel for Jane Doe hired an impeccable expert witness who is a tenured professor of physics in a brand name university. The prof testifies that “Newton’s force does not exist in nature because it was superseded by Einstein’s General Relativity.”

And this prof is not lying.

Legal and conventional physics teaches that Newtonian force was replaced by Einstein’s General Relativity. This is textbook stuff.

The prof offers the court to display standard physics equations to prove that Newtonian force does not exist but the court refuses the offer as unnecessary and the prof’s testimony that Newtonian force does not exist enters the records.


The counsel for defense is not worried. He also hired a physics professor from an equally brand name ivy league university. The defense prof is a showman who wrote several popular physics bestsellers and knows how to manipulate the minds of laymen by using the ancient authority of physics.

The prof brings with him an apple and with the confidence of great trial attorneys he shows the apple to the jury and tells them that he will now conduct a physics experiment to prove that the Newtonian force exists and then he drops the apple and asks the jury what they saw.

The plaintiff counsel objects to this blatant manipulation of the jury; but to no avail.

The prof knew that “apple” is a visual pun for “Newton’s force” and that the jury cannot help itself but “see” in this experiment the Newtonian force emanating from the center of the earth pull Newton’s apple and make it fall according to Newton’s force of gravity laws.

The jury members have been indoctrinated since childhood with Newtonism and they believe that they “saw” with their own eyes the force attracting the apple even though there is no such force visible to the jury or to any mortal except to physics profs who are priests of Newtonism.


The jury’s “vision” of a non-existent force is the proof of how successful Newtonism has been as a religious cult shaping our perception of the world.


The prof hired by the defense is confident that he got the jury on his side and testifies that Newtonian force exists and he just proved it. The apple was attracted by the Newtonian force and the jury saw it. He rests his case.


So two profs of physics with equal academic authority come to court; one testifies that Newtonian force does not exist and the other testifies that Newtonian force does exist.


Dear reader, suppose you are the plaintiff counsel. How will you defend your client? Do you mind sharing your strategy with us?


If the same question about the existence of force is evaluated by an independent group of scientists working outside of physics; what would they find?

To me, both profs are wrong. Because both of them actually repeat Newtonian doctrines as legalized in physics. It is true that the Newton’s occult force does not exist – not because it was replaced by General Relativity – but because it was never observed by a proper experiment; and because Newtonian force and mass do not enter orbit computations. How much of these technical issues would the court want to hear?

Do you find the above court scenario realistic? How would you defend this case? Do you know any similar cases?

And finally, what is the most important inducement for you, as a lawyer, to take this case? This is not a pro bono case but you should only take this case for the intellectual satisfaction of solving a new and interesting legal challenge for the good of humanity.


Slides for Jane Doe v. Board of Education of the City of New York

It’ll never work

It’ll never work!

Mathematics is inadequate to describe the universe, since mathematics is an abstraction from natural phenomena. Also, mathematics may predict things which don’t exist, or are impossible in nature. – Ludovico delle Colombe [Criticizing Galileo (paraphrased).]

Ludovico delle Colombe got it right. Mathematics is as good as any other abstraction invented to define nature.

Beware of the professional

Professionals program human individual for the unhuman organism

We are educated by professionals who program us from the earliest times with the doctrine that we must obey professional authority. We are taught that all professionals are experts in their field and they have a monopoly in their field protected by a license and we must never question or doubt the professional opinion of a professional. According to this doctrine civilization exists thanks to professionals.

Human individual is rewarded only if he gives up his individuality

If we are interested in a subject we must never investigate that subject on our own by freely thinking on our own but we must yearn to enter that professional field by giving up our individuality and dedicate ourself in moving up the hierarchy and sacrifice our natural curiosity to serve the objectives of the hierarchy.

The education tells us that after studying the professional language of our chosen profession and after showing our proficiency of it we must obtain our license and practice that profession until we retire. During our practice we must vehemently protect our profession from infringement from outsiders so that our professional authority is not diluted and our monopoly remains firm.

The old European system enforces submission to the unhuman

This is the old European doctrine established to perpetuate the compartmentalized European society where every citizen is taught to know its place and never dare to question the absolute authority of the ruling unhuman organisms.

Professionals exploit confusion and confuse to exploit

Throughout human history, as our species has faced the frightening, terrorizing fact that we do not know who we are, or where we are going in this ocean of chaos, it has been the authorities – the political, the religious, the educational authorities – who attempted to comfort us by giving us order, rules, regulations, informing — forming in our minds – their view of reality. To think for yourself you must question authority and learn how to put yourself in a state of vulnerable open-mindedness, chaotic, confused vulnerability to inform yourself.

The main objective of education — designed and operated by professionals — is to kill individual curiosity that may lead to the questioning of authority and teach how to find comfort in professional mythology.

Respecting professional authority serves the professional

Respecting professional authority serves the professional classes and helps them perpetuate their monopoly. We on the other hand never look forward to dealing with professionals and we know that whenever we trust a professional we will always be the loser.

Lawyers, medical doctors, church professionals, politicians and physicists are professionals who see their customers as preys to be exploited for their own professional gains. Everyone knows that for a medical doctor a patient is a walking dollar sign.

Academic physics is irrelevant

Physics is apparently different than other professional fields because academic physics is totally irrelevant. No one ever goes to a physicist with a practical problem to be solved. All problems solved by academic physicists are academic.

Of course, if you want to build mass destruction weapons you will have to require the services of physicists but probably you don’t because building mass destruction weapons is not nice and contributes negatively to human well-being.

So academic physics is irrelevant and academic physicists spend their time writing commentary on each other’s commentary on old scholastic topics such as time, space, gravity and cosmos.

Applied physics is evil

The practical side of the physics profession — applied physics — is harmful to the well-being of human individual but physics professionals have been contributing happily to the destruction of humanity and the deterioration of human standard of life more than any other type of professionals. The more a physicist will serve the unhuman organism and deliver weapons to be used against human individual the more he will be marketed as a genius by the marketing arm of the unhuman.

Maybe it is possible to defend destructive and evil physics because it may have some useful side effects at the end. I don’t know. There must be a way to do research without paying such a deadly price for humanity. I cannot justify as easily as physicists can that collaborating with the enemies of humanity hoping that some good may come out of it is good.

Questioning leads to understanding

In order to evaluate physicists’ theories we must question them. I refuse to accept academic physicists’ authority. They are nothing more than licensed practitioners of a legal code called physics. They claim that their authority comes from their knowledge of a language. That’s not the kind of authority that impresses me.

I am not interested in what is already known. I am interested in learning what I don’t know. Learning means questioning, not accepting physics dogma by faith.

Fundamental is simple

I believe that anyone can speculate on fundamental questions as well as physicists because nature is simple.

Archimedes did not know physics. Galileo did not know physics. Newton did not know physics. Yet they contributed nicely to human understanding of nature by using simple methods.

Model meets nature at a single point

If physics claims to model nature then all physics statements must be intelligible to non-physicists. An intelligible statement has a single meaning.

If experiment is asking questions to nature obviously nature will not reply to a question which will have many answers. This is the fundamental rule of experimenting: Ask a well defined single question. Physicists don’t know this fact.

Therefore, what is not intelligible to a non-physicist will not be intelligible to nature either.

What is intelligible to physicists only will be intelligible to physicists only and to no one else, including nature.

And indeed the proprietary professional language physicists use to communicate among themselves is intelligible to no one but to themselves. Nature ignores it.

Yes, nature rejects scholastic and elegant symbolism produced by physicists because model touches nature always on a single point. All superfluous symbolism invented by physicists to practice their scholastic philosophy must be eliminated if any measurement can result from their symbolism. Nature understands only simple proportions.

Measurement compares unit to measured

Measurement compares a unit to what is measured. Measurement is counting. Therefore, elaborate philosophical symbolism physicists call physical theories are never measured.

Nature ignores academic physics

As expected from professionals who are concerned about protecting and perpetuating their monopoly physicists defined this proprietary communication language that they use to build theories to be science and the only true language understood by nature.

Physicists hide information by encoding it in proprietary languages. The same method is used by Microsoft and any corporation to protect their brands.

All professionals profit from knowledge they’ve hidden

Statements with hidden assumptions are intelligible only to professionals but a statement that has only one meaning is intelligible to everybody.

In order to hide information physicists load every statement with as many hidden meanings as possible so that only they can parse it.

No professional can pretend to have authority if what he says is understood by a non-professional. This is the law professionals will never tolerate to be violated. Why do you think physics professionals to be an exception to this law?

Hoarding information wholesale and selling it retail is the oldest one in the book of scholasticism. Physics professionals are masters of this method.

Physics is not suitable to study fundamentals

In order to speculate on fundamental questions we don’t need to understand physicists’ professional language. Fundamental questions cannot be studied by studying high level languages.

Let’s look at LHC, an experiment that will supposedly reveal the most hidden secrets of nature to physicists who will then reveal them to us.

LHC is a black box experiment and we have no hope of ever understanding the processes of LHC.

Furthermore, there is no one physicist who understands how LHC works or how data is reduced. Every physicist knows her little section of the code that his supervisor tells her to work on, and no more.

There are no absolute discontinuities

We are ignorant of physicists’ professional language but as free thinking independent researchers we know that there are no absolute discontinuities in nature.

Therefore, there are no infinitely hard and absolutely indivisible particles.

When physicists claim to observe “elementary building blocks of nature” we know that they are lying or at least repeating professional dogma.

Initial assumptions are independent of models

We don’t need to understand how physicists reduce data to know that they are lying about observing absolute indivisibles.

What is complicated and not intelligible to outsiders is the way physicists reduce data and how they communicate their research. That’s not physics anyway. That’s computer programming and professional bureaucracy.

Nature is definitional

Anyone can evaluate fundamental propositions because fundamental propositions are simple. If a proposition has more than one meaning then it is not simple therefore it is not fundamental.

Physicists as scholastic doctors will always claim to prove their hidden assumptions by their method of data reduction and modeling. This goes as far back as astronomers who owned the Ptolemaic model. They asserted that the Earth must be stationary because their model worked and made good predictions. Physicists assume that nature is particulate and then prove it with their standard model. Nothing much changed in scholasticism since Ptolemy’s time.

A field becomes science when professional practitioners give up their authority on their professional code and accept that their models cannot prove their doctrine.

Academic physics is still at the primitive stage where practitioners prove their assumptions with their models. And they don’t yet realize how silly that is.

Why do physicists conflate academic physics with technology?

And why are physicists so proud of their achievements? They conflate academic physics with technology and take credit for technological advances.

Physicists take credit for new technology based on electricity as if they’ve discovered electricity. They say without physics there would be no computers, no cell phones, no GPS and so on.

Let us note that the science of electricity was discovered and developed by amateurs and not by professional physicists. And today technological advances are achieve by engineers not by academic physicists.

We are living in a world designed by engineers and inventors such as Edison, we are not living in a world designed by academic physicists. Academic physicists are concerned about the properties of the unmeasurable past and the unmeasurable future.

Why this post?

So what’s the point of this article? To demean academic physicists?

No. This is a note to myself:

question professional authority.

What do you think? Is there a grain of truth in what Tim Leary said?