home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.archives.msdos.d
- Path: sparky!uunet!newsflash.concordia.ca!mizar.cc.umanitoba.ca!blunden
- From: blunden@ccu.umanitoba.ca ()
- Subject: PHYSCSXA "tutorial" program
- Message-ID: <C0H6so.Jq4@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
- Sender: news@ccu.umanitoba.ca
- Nntp-Posting-Host: ccu.umanitoba.ca
- Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:41:11 GMT
- Lines: 51
-
- The file PHYSCSXA.ZIP which was recently uploaded to SIMTEL in the
- msdos/education directory is supposedly a tutorial on physics.
- It is in fact a forum for the propagation of some rather unorthodox
- theories (I'm being kind) of the author's construction. Going through it
- brought to mind a remark once made by the famous physicist Wolfgang Pauli:
- "It isn't even wrong"!
-
- A sampling of the contents:
-
- On Charge and Length:
-
- Charge and length are intimately bound together. A fundamental length
- can be associated with a unit charge. The separation between charges
- is always a multiple of this length. The charges seem to be "creating"
- length in multiples of "charge-lengths" or arranging themselves along
- harmonic nodes in space. Charges seem to move in discrete steps, perhaps
- displacing zero charge entities as they do.
-
- On Length:
-
- Space between interacting bodies seems to be harmonic multiples of
- FACTOR ENTITY diameters. Space appears to have three mutually
- perpendicular length-like components ... Finer measurements, in
- the future, might reveal differences in each of the space components.
-
- On Energy:
-
- An isolated, homogeneous body cannot possess energy, EVEN IF IT HAS MASS.
- Energy can only exist when there are multiple bodies separated by distance.
-
- I must admit I found it hard to keep a straight face while reading this.
- I'm not inclined to get drawn into a debate over these ideas, but I
- would like to make these points:
-
- * Physics is an empirical science. Most of the armchair philosophers
- who rail against "traditional" physics seem to forget this. As a
- result, their "alternatives" are generally constructed in complete
- disregard for observation and experiment, and make no tangible new
- predictions.
-
- * Before new ideas in physics (and all other sciences for that matter)
- receive wide circulation, they are generally subjected to the peer
- review process. This scrutiny ensures the integrity of the scientific
- method and of a minimum standard of competence.
-
- * If I were to write a mathematics tutorial program which claimed that
- 1 + 1 was really 3, should I be able to get it installed on various
- sites and distributed over a worldwide computer network? (And if so,
- then should it have a warning label: "The contents of this tutorial
- could be dangerous to your mind --- exercise extreme caution!"?)
-
-