111–120 of 179 posts
The author is a well-known crank. See post #10 here, for instance: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/strand-model-published... Proceed with caution.
With several recent PRDs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if that is so, a quantum description of human behavior is fairly useless in terms of practical application. How does knowledge of the standard model cure the infirm, prevent crime, and so forth?
When we exhibit behaviors. Our context is derived from our visual/auditory field processing from birth. Those waves implant magnetic field signatures on our neurotransmitter morphologies. We are almost explicitly operational in quantum activity. Many if not all disabilities or health complications are resonant to your mind body homeostasis. Challenge the quantum spectral development process of a person you solve the…
Can somebody with knowledge in biology and/or physics take a look at (one of) his book and comment if it's decent as in if the science is solid? I browsed https://www.motionmountain.net/motionmountain-volume5.pdf and I'm intrigued (there are no reviews in Amazon).
Real equations are introduced without defining any terms or notation and then quickly abandoned for discussion of other things. For instance, the QED Lagrangian is brought up on page 126 without defining any of the highly-specialized notation involved (the slashed partial derivatives) and then the discussion moves on from it without _doing_ anything with it.
The QED Lagrangian gets only slightly more words than "the three lightbulb scams" (p114). The term "spinor" is used several times but defined exactly zero times.
The truly "wat"-inducing parts are the "Challenges" sections, for instance the first one on p29. An example: "Challenge 12: Do birds have a navel?"
> Lines 1, 2 and 3, together, uniquely determine special and general relativity, cosmology, the Hilbert Lagrangian and Einstein's field equations, as told here. This is a huge exaggeration. For example 1 says "W=∫L" but L is never defined. The definition of L hides a lot of details, in particular that each point of the universe is equivalent, so there is translation invariance that using the Noether's theorem implies…
These kinds of comments block me from doing a physics dive; I don’t know where to start/am worried about starting from a bad point. I don’t know whether to follow some of the trails the linked author has laid out if I want to learn more, whether you’re nitpicking, or whether you’re advocating for a much better approach that starts with the details you say this obfuscates. When I was younger and had more time I’d be w…
Start from the basics. You will get plenty of ability to analyze real-world problems from learning Newton's laws. Lagrangian mechanics rarely even applies in engineering contexts because it can't do friction, air resistance or other dissipative terms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When we exhibit behaviors. Our context is derived from our visual/auditory field processing from birth. Those waves implant magnetic field signatures on our neurotransmitter morphologies. We are almost explicitly operational in quantum activity. Many if not all disabilities or health complications are resonant to your mind body homeostasis. Challenge the quantum spectral development process of a person you solve the…
Right, but how is this fact in any way helpful in dealing with the phenomenal world?
The author is a well-known crank. See post #10 here, for instance: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/strand-model-published... Proceed with caution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I sort of agree with the book on highlighting and underlining. If you don't jot a note down in the margin, you'll forget your state of mind and have no idea what made some underlined section meaningful. A false comfort.
When I taught LaTeX classes, I would often see students highlighting whole pages of the class notes I passed out. I often said that I should just print them on yellow paper to save them the trouble.
I remember one of my teachers saying he needs some books like Goethes Faust about every 10 years because of new understanding makes him mark different passages (in a different color) than on a previous reading. And after teaching and using the books for about 10 years he needs a fresh page to mark.
> Lines 1, 2 and 3, together, uniquely determine special and general relativity, cosmology, the Hilbert Lagrangian and Einstein's field equations, as told here. This is a huge exaggeration. For example 1 says "W=∫L" but L is never defined. The definition of L hides a lot of details, in particular that each point of the universe is equivalent, so there is translation invariance that using the Noether's theorem implies…
These kinds of comments block me from doing a physics dive; I don’t know where to start/am worried about starting from a bad point. I don’t know whether to follow some of the trails the linked author has laid out if I want to learn more, whether you’re nitpicking, or whether you’re advocating for a much better approach that starts with the details you say this obfuscates. When I was younger and had more time I’d be w…
Eventually you'll need some undergrad level math. To get a few very concrete (hehe) examples maybe look into a bit of structural dynamics (resonant frequency, tuned mass damper, mass distribution described by a matrix).
Then eventually you need to be able to solve simple differential equations and know what Fourier has to do with radios, and how mechanics depends on calculus of variations.
The more examples you work through the more you'll know what you want to learn about.
My recommendation is don't try to deep dive into one topic, instead start to look for similarities in other topics, basically do a breadth-first search.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Do not use a marker, a pen or a pencil to highlight or underline text on paper. It is a waste of time, provides false comfort and makes the text unreadable. What a load of elitist BS (pardon my French). When I was at University we were trained early on to cut the notion of a book being sacred. We should mark, note, create meaning on the pages with pens. I would not have been able to learn as much in my life if I ha…
I think the author does have a point though it clearly doesn't apply to everyone. 'Elitist BS' is rather strong. You take a different view but perhaps you've never studied in a part of the world where books are in short supply and one expensive copy is shared. I underlined passages in books in the past and now regret imposing my then partial view via permanent marking. Just a thought but a cataclysmic extinction even…
What I discovered was that I could trace my understanding and my development towards concepts through the times when I returned to a book that I already had worked with before. My older notes and highlights were often the starting point but with my then current understanding I built on them, contradicted them in parts and sometimes laughed about my former ideas. It made me more humble towards knowledge generation.
To me it were a blessing to have different layers of marks, notes & highlights.