Apples, Gravity and Tall Tales……

 

‘Nothing imprints a story on the public’s imagination like a good anecdote. Not all are mythological or embellished. However, some accounts of purported events are clearly exaggerated and don’t add up……’

A recent item on the local BBC news covered a story of cuttings from the Apple tree at Woolsthorpe Manor, the ancestral home of Sir Isaac Newton, being taken to keep alive the source from which the apocryphal falling Apple inspired the Natural Philosopher to formulate his theories of gravitational attraction. But several things about this legendary story don’t add up.

The story of the the Apple falling on Sir Isaac Newton’s head first appeared in the “Memoirs of Sir Isaac Newton’s Life”, written by William Stukeley and published in 1687. As a young man, Newton returned to Woolsthorpe, Lincolnshire to avoid the Plague. Newton was born on 25 December 1642. The Plague affected England in 1665/1666 when Newton was 23 years old, which leads to the conclusion that story was at least 22 years old upon publication. Newton makes no mention of falling Apples in “The Principia Mathematica”, which has led many scholars to believe it never actually happened and may have been used by Newton, first as a metaphor in lectures, and latter as an embellished anecdote at dinner parties.

Whether you choose to believe the story or not, there is still a problem with the BBC news story. The preservation of the tree which sits in a small garden at Woolsthorpe is very unlikely to be the same allegorical tree because Apple trees usually only have a life span of 80 to 120 years. The oldest recorded Apple tree is 204 years old; still not old enough to be the tree under which Newton supposedly had his epiphany that led to his theory of gravitational attraction in 1665/1666.

I don’t question the validity and genius of Newton’s work, given what was known about physics at the time. Nor do I have a problem with the story of the falling Apple being used to educate children in schools today. But to make them believe that they may have a sibling of the original tree in the school gardens is on a par with the suspect King James Bible, venerated in every RE department and purporting to be “the gospels” of Jessie Chreezies disciples, which anyone with an IQ of above 80 should know to be nonsense, had they not been lied too since childhood by bigoted self-serving zealots with their own disreputable agenda……

Perhaps they could plant them next to the tree of “forbidden fruit” from the garden of Eden next to Jack’s Beanstalk……?

 

What is Reality……

The answer to the question “What is reality?” is actually quite simple and can be put into one short sentence: it’s whatever you perceive as real. However, the simplicity immediately becomes complicated by the word ‘perceive’. Perception is subjective but there are many things we all perceive in a very similar way, but those things, such as the sky being blue are largely down to a common evolution. In the case of the sky, we agree on the colour because the receptors in our eyes are fundamentally the same in everyone (unless you are colour blind, which is a genetic defect of the eye). There is, however, a further complication to reality which is much, much deeper……

It is well known that an atom is predominantly empty space. It could be argued that it contains nothing ‘solid’ at all as we probe ever deeper. If everything we perceive as solid contains nothing at all, then how can anything exist to make our reality? This is the point at which we have to disassociate everything we think of as real and remind ourselves that perception is nothing more than an interpretation created by the sensory input to our brains. It becomes difficult to discuss, because all we have is language and mathematics to describe things, and both are coloured by our perception of reality……

Physicists ran into difficulties in the early 20^th century. Called ‘The measurement problem’, the act of making a measurement actually affects the outcome. This is easily demonstrated visually with the famous double slit experiment, is still as yet unexplained and is one of the central mysteries of quantum mechanics. Follow this link to see a demonstration and the paradox will become clear. A well known thought experiment by Erwin Schrödinger in 1935 applies the double slit experiment to the macro scale with a cat in a box. Follow this link to learn about Schrödinger’s Cat and the paradoxical nature of the measurement problem becomes abundantly clear……

As we have developed the technology to ‘see’ things on smaller and smaller scales using particle accelerators, it appears that our ‘solid’ particles vanish altogether and all we are left with are forces and ‘virtual’ particles. The illusion of reality is a consequence of those forces being slowed down by the Higg’s mechanism; a sort of cosmic treacle that slows down the forces from the speed of light, giving them mass. Without it everything in the universe would move at the speed of light and nothing would exist at all……

So, what is reality? In our daily lives it is what we see, no matter how strange it is. But we have to accept that it is an illusion and, personally, I don’t believe we will ever really know. It’s a Rabbit hole which just get stranger the further down you go……

The reality right now is that I need a coffee, a smoke and more time to scratch my head……

A Sad Day for Free Speach……

Today we have heard the sad news that fellow blogger, Avijit Roy, was murdered and his wife seriously injured by two deluded individuals.

The American born writer of Bangladeshi origin was killed in Dhaka.  His blog ‘Mucto-Mono’ (Free Mind) discussed the catastrophic repercussions of the effects of religion and other social inequalities in today’s world.

The couple were attacked by two men with machetes.

My deepest sympathy goes out to the family and friends of Avijit.  Rest assured that his great work will be carried on by the rest of us……

RIP Avijit……

Absolute Zero……

‘I was thinking about absolute zero and thought, if there’s a minimum , why not a maximum’

Not being a thermal physicist I applied what I do know and read up on the other stuff, only to find I’m not the only one seeking the answer and it gets pretty complicated. Without over complicating the issue and removing those scary equations, here are some possible answers (yes, plural…..)

First of all back to school. What is heat? (heat and temp are for our purposes the same). Gold star to anyone whose answer was ‘it’s the product of the speed at which atoms move’. Absolute zero is the point at which all atoms stop moving as do quantum mechanical effects . This happens at 0 Kelvin or minus 460 F. You can’t get colder than that. It would be like trying to go south of the South Pole. That’s Absolute zero; simple hey……

What about Absolute Hot. Surely, a similar set of equations govern that; like I said it’s not my field and had two choices; read up or blame ‘God’ (I’m starting to think I should have chosen the latter). Little did I know it but I’d opened a can of worms, the one labelled ‘The Theory of Everything; a sort of UN for physicists where String Theory, Quantum Mechanics and Multiverses go to argue their point……

I’m not actually going to try and explain the five most popular theories because they all have a fundamentally plausible reasons but involve very complicated mathematics which I was trying to avoid. I will, however, tell you what they are and my intuition as to the final answer……

There are many theories. 10 to the power of 32 Kelvin is one. That’s 100 million million million million million degrees Kelvin. It is based on the Standard Model of particle physics and relies on the Planck temperature. Max Planck’s measurements and ratios have proven accurate now we can test them and form the basis of many quantum calculations. But as one physicist put it, it’s largely accademic as it is in an order of magnitude beyond that of a Gamma Ray Burst or Quasar and makes the Sun look like a tiny spark millions of light years away. There are no sufficient words in the English language to express it. Saying it’s hot is like saying the universe is quite big……

Working Physicists at CERN think that the power of the particle accelerator which reaches 10 to the power of 17 K, is around the maximum temperature. To reach the energy needed the LHC produces 14 (Terra electron Volts, Terra meaning trillion); 15 orders of magnitude below the Planck temperature……

How about a boundless temperature that just keeps on going to infinity? It is possible but some very strange quantum effects would be observed. Anyway, much of this speculation has to do with those pesky billion billionths of a second when all conventional models break down.

In my humble opinion absolute zero and absolute hot could be the same thing. (Now he’s has lost the plot I hear you cry), but hear me out. Once a really high temperature has been reached all bets are off with regard to the behavior of matter. The known interactions between the strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetism and gravity become unpredictable and, more importantly, equal out, forcing the system to stop, just as it does with absolute zero. So, the scale maybe +0 K – +300 K – K +infinity – K -infinity – -300 K to -0 K. This also explains beautifully why infinities pop up whichever way or with whatever model you choose to calculate……

Happy pondering……

What has the Big Bang got to do with Economics……?

‘At first glance nothing but read on and all will become clear……’

 

In the early 20^th century Edwin Hubble, the Cosmologist after whom the Hubble Telescope is named, made one of the most important discoveries in science when he plotted the rate of the recessional velocity of galaxies, demonstrating that the universe was, and still is, expanding.

 

It is from Hubble’s observation that the idea of a Big Bang was born. Put simply, if the universe is expanding today, if one winds back the clock, at some point in the past the universe must, logically, have been smaller; taken to its conclusion, at some point in the past the universe had a beginning. This is now an empirical, undisputed fact in Cosmology and Physics (Monotheistic religions may disagree but that is a whole new ball game), I diversify.

 

An awful lot has happened in the 14 billion years since the Big Bang to leave us with the universe we can see today but what has this got to do with economics……?

 

First of all let’s set out some facts about banks which may not be apparent given that they have names like ‘The Bank of England’, ‘The Federal Reserve’, ‘The World Bank’, ‘The International Monetary Fund’ and ‘The Central European Bank’.

 

All of the above give the impression that they are owned and run for the benefit of the people by their respective governments. They are not. They are all privately owned institutions, given permission by governments to literally print money. They are more like a cartel than a service allowing for the convenient exchange of goods and services without carrying bags of gold or diamonds, and, most importantly, when they ‘create’ money it is a debt with interest payable upon it……

 

Back to the Big Bang……

 

Let us now imagine the application of Hubble’s Law to global economics. The 14 billion years of the expansion of the universe is akin to the interest that is created along with every unit of currency created by a bank as it expands. If we wind back the economic clock to the point at which the very first bank note was issued, that solitary note was issued with interest. Ergo, to settle the debt owed on the first ever bank note printed required the creation of more. This is why the big economic superpowers have national debts which add up to hundreds of trillions of Dollars/Pounds/Euros.

 

Wind the clock forwards and we reach the current state of global economics where more and more money has been required to settle the ever expanding debt. The practical upshot of this model is a debt that increases exponentially at an ever increasing rate; just as the universe is expanding at an increasing rate. This debt can only go in one direction and I’m sure you have all worked out which direction it is going.

 

One could consider the simplicity of the early universe as the solitary note. All of the birth and deaths of stars that created the elements we see in today’s universe is the equivalent of the increasingly complicated business deals that mask the inflationary model. The bonding of atomic nuclei inside stars and transmutation of elements in supernovae could be seen as the borrowing, lending and taxing that make economics seem as complicated as the universe……

It is a model that can never be satified. It can only expand and to keep the expansion in check, money is conveyed from the poor to the rich……

And that is what the Big Bang has to do with the Global Economy……

 

It could not be explained with any more simplicity……

 

‘With special thanks go to Sonia Greaves, the Emeritus Professor of the Inspirational Ideas, without whom the seed of this idea would not have been planted……’

Climategate……?

‘I am a climate change sceptic’.  There, I put my head above the parapet and said it.  To be precise, I am a ‘man-made’ climate change sceptic.  I do not deny that the global average temperature has risen in recent years, although not consistently and at a rate of less than 1/3^rd than the current IPCC predictions would have us believe.

Global Warming has become its own little industry over the past 25 years and supports bureaucrats, research grants and a whole plethora of Government sponsored alternatives offering generous tax breaks for the utility companies.  Up to ¼ of your gas and electricity costs comprise tax incentives.  If you see climate change conferences, attended by tens of thousands of delegates you get some perspective of just how big it has become.

I’m not the first to distance myself from the official line and some of the most respected contributors to IPCC reports, unhappy at the way their contributions were being presented, asked to be removed from the reports list of authors but this was denied to them, making their viewpoints which are completely at odds with the report appear unanimous……

In the 2007 report the global average temperature increase, based on the previous 15 years data observed an increase of 0.2˚C per year.  It extrapolated over the next 20 years a continuation of 0.2˚C based on computer modelling.  But the new report says the observed warming over the more recent 15 years to 2012 was just 0.05˚C per decade – below almost all computer predictions.  IPCC scientists accept their forecast computers may have exaggerated the effect of increased carbon emissions on world temperatures; and not taken enough notice of natural variability……

Natural Variability……

Climate change modelling is not unlike weather forecasting.  Although improvements are being made all the time, the shear quantity of variables makes it very difficult to draw accurate conclusions.  For example:  The oceans cover 1/3^rd of the World’s surface.  It would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to give an accurate figure of how much heat the oceans absorbed and radiated in one year.  It is known that the process takes in the order of thousands of years to reach stability; even if external factors remained constant.  And that is just one part of calculating climate change.

Examine the graph below which shows approximately 100 years of climate data.

One of the first things to note is the average drop in temperature before 1935; a period at which the industrial revolution was at its peak and during which fossil fuels would have been in high demand.

After the peak around 1940 the average appears to level off again until the late 1970s.  It continues to rise for 20 years and then flattens off.  This is reflected in the IPCC data where they admit that the global average temperature has in fact been stable for approximately 15 years, contrary to predictions……

Anomalies and Exceptions……

There have been warmer and colder than average temperature variations across the planet throughout recorded history.  During the ‘Medieval Warm Period’, which lasted from approximately 950 to 1250AD, vineyards were established as far north as York in the UK.  Shortly afterwards ‘The Little Ice-Age’ happened when the Thames in London froze over for extended periods of time and fares were held on it.

Sun Spot activity is well known for its effects on Earth.  It has an 11 year cycle and has proved to be an accurate predictor of temperature.  Another lesser known event is Geomagnetic Reversal (the reversal of the Earth’s magnetic poles).  These happen approximately every 450,000 years and are estimated to take between 1,000 and 10,000 years.  During a Geomagnetic event the protection from the Solar Winds can drop as low a 5%.  One assumes this must have a significant effect on climate……

Carbon Dioxide, we all assume, is the demon gas and single-handedly responsible for climate change.  Okay, lets run with it.  Carbon Dioxide accounts for 0.039% of the Earth’s atmosphere, of which only 1/3^rd is derived from unnatural sources.  The rest comes from normal like plant photosynthesis, the processes of plant decomposition and oceanic acidification.  When the many thousands of processes taking place, it would be hard for any scientist to deduce an increase in global temperatures is caused purely by the 0.013% man made CO2.

As far as any attempt made by mankind to control their contribution to CO2 is concerned, it is a case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.  Even if our contribution of greenhouse gasses was stopped immediately there is little chance of it making any difference to the outcome.  Once again we have given our anthropocentric view of the universe the credibility that the universe does not afford us.  Qué sera sera……

9/11: Facts and Fiction……

It is 13 years since the world changed forever due to an act of terrorism that was conducted on American soil.  Many unanswered questions remain regarding who, how and why it happened, or more precisely, why it was allowed to happen.

When any world changing event happens, even if it is has a simple explanation, conspiracy theories arise surrounding it.  Conspiracy theories are a useful tool for governments’ secret services, for the more the stories develop, the easier it becomes to hide the truth.  9/11 is no different.  There are numerous stories of who was behind the attack and who stood to gain from it, all of which just adds more layers of confusion to the reality of what actually happened.

However, certain things do not change.  Answers to questions for which there should only be one, if events happened as portrayed, should not be vague, should not be evasive and most certainly should not change or be factually inaccurate.

There are some questions about 9/11 that are as described above; definitive.  Any deviation from the only true answer can mean only one thing.  The person answering it is lying, and if they are lying about one thing you can bet they’ll be lying about others……

Undisputable Lies and Deception……

Jules and Gedeon Naudet where the French documentary film makers who were making a film about the New York Fire Department on 9/11.  It is they and only they who filmed the first plane hit the World Trade Centre.  This now iconic piece of footage did not reach the mainstream media until several hours after the event, yet the Commander in Chief, President George W. Bush has claimed on two occasions to have watch the event happen on live TV shortly before leaving his hotel room for the Booker Elementary School where he casually sat and listened to the children read from ‘The Pet Goat’, even when his security advisor whispered in his ear that the US was under attack.  So, right from the start the lies began.  This is not a simple mistake or confusion on the part of George Bush; it is a lie.

The lies continued to flow from senior members of the administration.  Condoleezza Rice proclaimed that they had no prior knowledge of the attack, or that an attack of the type used had even been considered.  Again, lies.  The US had been warned by many of its allies of the potential for an attack, specifying dates, and the FBI and CIA had the scenario on their security briefings.  Bush made the same claims.  More lies.

Osama Bin Laden……

Within 24 hrs of 9/11 before the dust had settled over Manhattan it was announced that the terrorist plot was masterminded by Osama Bin Laden.  There was no proof of this and nothing linking him to 9/11.  In fact, Bin Laden publicly denied any involvement.  For a man who was supposedly the leader of the biggest terror network in the world you would have expected him to take the credit even if it wasn’t him.  The ‘proof’ that Bin Laden was behind 9/11 surfaced on a grainy video tape recovered from a house in Afghanistan.  Close examination of this tape shows a man who vaguely resembles Osama Bin Laden only the man on the video is right handed when Bin Laden is known to be left handed.  He also wears a wedding ring.  Something a devout Muslim would not do.  The translation of the tape is also a cause for some dispute.  Whilst the man in the video praises 9/11, he makes no claim for its execution.  The Bush administration was clutching at straws by this time and anything linking Bin Laden to 9/11 was good enough for George W Bush.  To this day Osama Bin Laden has not been indicted for 9/11.  The FBI admits there is nothing linking him to it.  Nor was he a friend of Saddam Hussein, a point put forward by Bush in support of the invasion of Iraq.

The Smoking Gun……

As far as the 9/11 Truth Movement is concerned the failure to explain the complete collapse of the twin towers at free fall speed, and that of WTC building 7, which collapsed later that afternoon having not been hit by an aircraft and only having small fires burning on a few floors.  The 9/11 commission report did not even mention building 7 and many demolition experts agree it was a controlled demolition, something which is upheld by Larry Silverstein’s statement that they decided to ‘pull it’, a term used by demolition experts.  This begs the question how during the chaos of 9/11 a building could have been rigged for demolition; a process that usually takes weeks of planning……

Science……

The work done by Prof. Steven Jones which has identified traces of chemicals used in demolitions, has been dismissed by the administration without an explanation of where these chemicals came from……

Here is a selection of images showing steel columns with the classic 45 degree cut, molten metal running from the cuts.  These simply would not have existed in a gravity driven collapse, which, we are told, caused the collapse of WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7……

Setting Cutter Charges

On The Pile

Multiple Cut Columns

Diagonal Cut in Storage

As you can see from the many diagonally cut columns that would not have happened by chance.  As if any more proof of ‘false flag’ terrorism were needed……

Search previous 9/11 blog posts for more info and keep up the pressure and enlightenment……

Education, Stimulation, Application……

‘The homogenisation of academia is yet another example of the Authorities to place the next generation into boxes, enabling them to be represented neatly on a spreadsheet.  Intelligence takes many forms; try observing Dolphins.  Unfortunately, if you don’t fit the mould, your genius may go unnoticed……’

Education provides a platform upon which our future industrialists, economists, scientist and entrepreneurs will go on to formulate great theories, build sustainable industries and make important discoveries, but there are some major shortcomings of our current systems from elementary schools all the way up to the entry requirements for universities……

First of all is the seemingly endless interference by the Department for Education (DfE) who, for reasons which evade me, continually meddles with the requirements for attaining qualifications.  Michael Gove MP, the Secretary of State for Education, has made numerous announcements of ‘new’ policies, only to perform a U-turn on them shortly afterwards.

Dimmus Witticus Maximus

Amongst the many proposed changes was the introduction of the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), which is a performance indicator linked to GCSEs, not to be confused with the English Baccalaureate Certificate which was a proposed academic qualification to be awarded in Secondary Schools in place of GCSEs.  There was also a proposal to scrap the GCSE system, introduced in 1986 to replace the GCE/CSE system, and return to ‘O’ Level and CSE qualifications.  There was also talk of re-labelling the results of the current GCSEs.  Gove performed U-turns on all of these proposals but did, however, announce a new ‘National Curriculum’ for the UK, with the exception of Scotland.  The only problem with Gove’s ‘National Curriculum’ is that it only applies to State run Comprehensives.  Academies, Free Schools, Private Schools, Faith Schools and schools in Scotland are not required to teach it.  This means less than one quarter of schools will be required to teach Mr. Gove’s ‘National Curriculum’……

In my own experience of Comprehensive education, completed just before the change to GCSEs, not only did I not know what I wanted to do when I left but, the subjects being taught seemed to hold no ‘real world’ applications.  When would I ever need to use Calculus or Trigonometry?  What use was German or French going to be as I had no intentions of working in either motherland or their territories?  I had an interest in physics and the mathematics came in useful for that but I had no plans to become a scientist.  I was one of the many who simply lost interest; partly due to the benign nature of the subjects and partly because they were never taught with any ‘real world’ applications and enthusiasm from the tutor that might have triggered my imagination……

It is 30 years since I sat in a classroom and cannot vouch for the way in which subjects are taught today, but if it is anything like my experience I’m sure just as many kids loose interest and become the NEETs of tomorrow.  My niece goes to an academy school and from the very first day the focus appears to have been on getting to university (there are the obligatory letters asking for donations toward projects they are working on; purely voluntary but do you want your kid to be the only one who has to hand in the ‘opt-out’ form?)  I’m sure a lot of kids want to go to university, but others don’t, and it is they who are allowed to fall through the net.  It is not through a lack of talent.  Many could be the next James Dyson or Richard Branson but all that matters to the school is the league tables that future parents will use to get their cherubs into the ‘best’ schools.

The reality of the academy systems is that they are a commercial enterprise and, just like any of the other commercialised public services it is money, and not well adjusted young adults with a feeling of self worth and accomplishment, that drives them.  If it was up to me there would be only one state run education system for all children, thereby abolishing the league tables.  It is not a coincidence that half of the Cabinet and a large majority of top Civil Servants just happen to have been educated at Eton and ‘chums’ with the PM……

Since deciding that the system had nothing to offer me I have developed an interest in physics; from the grandeur of Cosmology to the strange microscopic world of the Quantum.  I have read many text books, scientific papers and watched documentaries about the subject and, yes, some of that boring old Calculus and Trigonometry has eventually come in useful but at the age of 43 I am unlikely to achieve a Doctorate in the subject.  Perhaps, had it been taught with a little enthusiasm, instead of the ‘copy this down from the black-board’ method, I might have been the scientist that I feel it is now too late for me to be?

Of course, not all of the blame can be placed at the teachers’ doors.  It must have been hard enough back then when a well established curriculum existed.  It must be even harder now for teachers whose jobs are on the line if their department doesn’t feature high up in the league tables and, made harder still by an incompetent Minister who operates under Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle……

Genius comes in many guises not always labelled A thru E or 1 thru 5.  One wonders what marks would have been attained by Copernicus, Galileo or Euclid……?

An Improbable Result……

It is easy to comprehend the current viewpoint of the ‘Creationists’ who, under the weight of indisputable empirical evidence have had to admit defeat with regard to the biblical account(s) of creation given in Genesis and accept that all ‘life’ evolved slowly over an inconceivably large amount of time, but in order to ‘save’ God have staked their entire argument on the strong anthropic principle.  The weak anthropic principle essentially states that the conditions we observe in the universe are consistent with the conditions needed for us to exist.  This appears to be pretty obvious and self explanatory; in another universe or an unobservable, distant part of our own universe where the conditions are incompatible with supporting life, then clearly there would be no-one to observe it.  The weak anthropic principle holds some philosophical and, some would argue, scientific validity.  Although highly improbable, the evolution of an organism with the capability to consider its own existence, even if was unimaginably different from us, it would still hold that the conditions required to bring about that eventuality are consistent with the weak anthropic principle.  However, the Creationists rely on the strong anthropic principle which is an altogether different proposition, and one which is difficult to argue for even in the forgiving area of philosophy and has no place in the realms of science, even as a hypothesis.  The strong anthropic principle states that, not only is the universe in which live and observe compatible with life, but that the initial conditions were ‘set up’ to purposely evolve to that end.  This is quite obviously so highly improbable that it cannot possibly hold any validity as a scientific theory and immediately throws up the ‘Creator Paradox’.  If the initial conditions were ‘set up’ with purpose, they would require an entity to carry out that task, which begs the question “who created the creator”?  [Ad infinitum]……

There is, however, some common ground between Physicists and Creationist in that most reasoning is inherently and, to a degree, inescapably anthropocentric.  This is for the simple reason that ‘we’, by which I mean the Human race, exists within the universe we are observing, making measurements of, and developing theories about.  As we cannot step outside of our universe, almost all theories will, at some point, fall foul of the basic assumptions developed from our own experiences.  When given careful consideration, almost all of our scientific knowledge makes certain assumptions.  For an example of how we tend to apply what we think we know; take Einstein’s Theories of Special and General Relativity.  I recently re-read his revolutionary papers (for the 6^th, 7^th or possibly 8^th time).  Many people have some understanding of the basic principles underlying them but when given some serious thought all notions of ‘place’ and ‘time’ are, in reality, meaningless, no matter how counter intuitive it seems.  Admittedly, at the velocities we move, and the restrictions of being glued to the surface of a planet, we can still agree the meaning of ‘the café on the high street at 11am’, so it doesn’t cause us too much inconvenience, but ‘time’ and ‘space’ are not only malleable but only measurable by an arbitrary system of co-ordinates that could not adequately convey information to an observer in another part of the galaxy.  Similarly, our perception of time is governed by our experience.  Try to explain to a friend what ‘time’ is?(but assume they are light years away with a good mobile signal!)  I guarantee you’ll come unstuck before the end of the first sentence, because we are only able to describe time by our anthropocentric experience.  According to the laws of physics time and space are symmetrical, reversible and favour no particular direction, which runs contrary to our everyday experience.  Have you ever seen a scrambled egg spontaneously un-scramble?  Probably not; but wait long enough and theoretically it will happen.  The idea that time is reversible is not disallowed, just incredible hard to achieve.  In principle all you need to know is the position and velocity of every particle in the universe and put them back where they were.  Clearly, this is astoundingly unlikely to be achieved but it is possible just improbable.  One of the fundamental obstacles to any kind of time reversal is the measurement problem.  Not unlike Einstein’s theories, the measurement problem throws an inescapable spanner in the works.  For it says that it is impossible to know both the velocity and position of a particle at the same time with enough accuracy to ‘reverse time’……

It is when we get into the realm of Quantum Mechanics that our existence and consciousness really start to make things difficult.  This not just because the sums are complicated but because we simply do not have the language or cognitive ability to visualise what is happening at the atomic level and below.  It transpires that the fundamental particles that make up everything in the observable universe do not have a locality, not even if you attempt to assign an arbitrary co-ordinate system.  They are spread out in ‘space’, in more than one place at once and, to further complicate matters, the act of observation (making a measurement) affects their behaviour……

To a scientist seeking concrete answers to questions about the universe in which we live, the nature of time and space and the ‘rules’ upon which it operates, these things can be profoundly unsettling which may well be one of the reasons that many of the worlds brightest, pioneering scientists have ended up in mental institutions or worse……

Even taking everything I have learned into consideration I remain convinced that we are simply the highly improbable statistical outcome of the second law of thermodynamics and the ever increasing entropy that eventually results in life given an infinite amount of ‘time’.  We serve no purpose and are most definitely not guided by the hand of ‘God’……

To even think about the universe from our point of view is to credit ourselves with a degree of importance that we simply don’t have.  The universe doesn’t consider us and it will go on increasing in entropy long after we are gone.  Maybe at some time in the very distant future another thinking organism will doubtless be asking the same question and they will know as much about us as we do about them……

News Travels Fast……

‘In an age of instant communication through text messages, Twitter, Facebook and other gadgets, governments have lost control over the flow of information.  To ‘survive’ in the digital age they have had no choice but to join in; sometimes to their detriment……’

Conspiracy Theories……

Conspiracy theories used to develop over time as the media were drip fed information through ‘official’ channels and small groups speculated in the pub or maybe on the phone.  Now they begin briefing the press almost as soon as the incident that brought them into existence.  Just as the general public have access to instant communications so do the bourgeoisie.  Not wanting to be left behind in the chatter those in power are just as quick as the masses to be heard even when what they have to say fuels the fire……

Conspiracy Theory Defined……

Con–spir–a-cy  The-or-y  Noun.

A belief that some covert but influential organisation is responsible for an unexplained event.

That’s the dictionary definition but I feel there is something to add.  Events from history that were labelled as crackpot conspiracy theories have later been proven to fit the definition given above.  They are too numerous to list but as an example there is the infamous Gulf of Tonkin incident which was used as the justification for the United States of America to join the Vietnam War and, as history was later to show, never happened.  This oversight cost 58,000 American lives and approximately 2.5 million civilian Vietnamese.  Sadam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction never materialised and the ’45 minute warning’ was clearly nonsense.  George W Bush’s comic ‘no weapons under there’ routine was nothing short of an insult to the thousands of innocent lives their lying cost.

Detractors of a theory, especially the creationist imbeciles who still insist that mankind shared their hunting grounds with the dinosaurs, will always point out that a theory is only an idea.  Well, I have bad news for anyone who thinks in this limited and uneducated way.  It is now accepted that a proposal which may have been originally called a theory can be deemed fact once there is overwhelming evidence to support it.  Ergo, the theory of evolution by natural selection is considered fact by anyone capable of processing the evidence supporting it.  Perhaps it should be called the fact of evolution.  Similarly, Quantum Theory, though almost impossible to get your head around, has been demonstrated to yield accurate results in every experiment which sets out to test it and, without which, the creationists would not have access to the technology to spread their deluded opinions……

The Speed of Information……

In the recent Boston bombings, which I wholly condemn, mobile phone videos were available online within hours, if not minutes, along with ‘tweets’ and other sources of information.  Back in ‘the old days’ the official response would have been one of sympathy and condolence and, whilst accepting that it was unlikely to have been accidental, carefully considered caution as to whom was responsible and any possible motive would have been shown.  However, in a very short period of time, in the race to keep up with social media, official details were emerging.

President Obama, unlike his predecessor, gave an unusually restrained first press conference in which he did not use the words ‘terrorist’ or ‘extremist’ and was careful not to apportion blame to either left or right, domestic or foreign; most unusual for a US president, who never normally misses the opportunity to stoke the political fires, would have at the very least implied that a certain non-geographic, comandless and disparate enemy like al-Qaeda may have plotted such an attack from their caves using what limited resources they happened to have to hand.

On the Scene……

Unprecedented amounts of information were being released in the immediate aftermath of the Boston bombings.  We were told that the devices comprised ‘home made’ explosives packed with shrapnel in the form of ball bearings and nails.  We were also told that they had pieces of the devices, including circuit boards.  All of this within 24 hours of the event.  We were also told that they were most probably contained in pressure cookers.  Some of these details do not make sense.  First of all the ‘home made’ explosives?  Now I am no expert in explosives but I do know that, on the whole without an expert chemist, highly efficient explosives are hard to make from ‘off the shelf’ materials, particularly in small effective quantities, hence the need for ‘truck bombs’ often surrounded by gas canisters.  Let us suppose that the perpetrators were able to make a half decent explosive, why place it in a container such as a pressure cooker which, by design, is made to contain high pressures.  This would surely hinder the success of a ‘home made’ bomb by helping to contain a blast and certainly to use up valuable energy destroying the container rather than spreading its lethal contents i.e. the shrapnel.  From the Youtube footage of the explosions I have seen they do not show the characteristics of a ‘home made’ explosive.  And not forgetting that all of these details were made public within 24 hours of the event.  Even in our ‘CSI’ coloured world of forensic science it is unlikely that all of the details released by the media could have been established in such a short period of time, particularly as at the moment the press were being briefed crime scene investigators were still searching for clues in the rubble.

When the perpetrators had been identified they were apprehended whilst robbing a convenience store.  Not the most sensible course of action for a terrorist lying low during a high profile police investigation.  One of them was killed during the arrest during which they were apparently throwing ‘explosive’ devices at the officers from their vehicle.  The other survived even though he was shot in the throat and is now conscious, able to answer questions by writing them down.

Another strange coincidence was the training operation taking place on the same day as the attack less than a mile away.  In almost every terrorist event that has taken place in recent years, from 9/11 to 7/7, there has always been a training operation taking place nearby.  This is also relevant to the list of agencies that were on the scene almost immediately; state troopers, the FBI, Homeland Security,  the CIA, FEMA and others.  Again, strange that all of the agencies involved in a terrorist event should be within range at short notice……

Conclusions……

I haven’t heard any specific conspiracy theories about the Boston bombings but I’m sure they are out there.  I’m not even suggesting that there is any reason to believe that it is anything other that what it appears to be; a cowardly attack on civilians by deranged individuals with an axe to grind.  I am simply pointing out that conspiracy theories do not need much of a fuse to set them off and, when the authorities join in with the scramble to be heard in the age of instant communications, they only fuel the conspiracy fires, but maybe that’s the point…..?