Who is for whom?

[socratus]

Who is for whom?
============.
Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
This simple fact is forgotten in the science now.
1.
After war, in Russia there were many thieves' gangs
And I, as a boy, rotated among one of them.
They had their own language, thieves' jargon.
Not anyone could understand them.
Now I read some mathematical articles and they
remind me forgotten thieves' slang.
Are you laughing? Is it ridiculous ?
For me it isn’t ridiculous .
Why?
Because , mathematicians stole the picture
of reality from us . Because they make us
poor and stupid.
Why do you say so?
OK. I will try to prove it and explain my point of view.
=========..
2.
It began in 1905 when Einstein created SRT,
( theory of photon/ electron’s behaviour ).
Minkowski, trying to understand SRT, used 4D space.
Poor young Einstein , reading Minkowski interpretation,
said, that now he couldn’t understand his own theory.
" You are right, it is difficult to understand SRT, using 4D space.
But using my 5D space it is possible" - said Kaluza in 1921.
This theory was checked up and recognized insufficient.
" Well, - said another mathematicians, - maybe 6D, 7D, 8D, 9D
spaces will explain it". And they had done it.
But the doubts still stay.
"OK,- they say, - we have only one way to solve this problem,
we must create more complex D spaces " .
And they do it, they use all their power, all their
super intellectuals to solve this problem.
Glory to these mathematicians !!!!
But……….
But there is one nuance. To create new D space, mathematicians
must take a new parameter. It is impossible to
create new D space without a new parameter.
And the mathematicians take this parameter arbitrarily
( it fixed according to his opinion not objective rules ).
The physicist R. Lipin explained this situation in such way :
“ Give me three parameters and I can fit an elephant. With four
I can make him wiggle his trunk…”
To this Lipin’s opinion it is possible to add :
“ with one more parameter the elephant will fly. “
The mathematicians sell and we buy these theories.
Where are our brains?
Please, remember, many D spaces were born as a whish
to understand SRT ( theory of photon/ electron’s behaviour ).
But if someone wants to understand, for example,
a bird ( photon / electron) itself and for this he
studies only surroundings will he reach success ?

If I am a king , I will publish a law:
every mathematician who takes part in the creation
of 4D space and higher - to award with a medal
" To the winner of a common sense ".
Why?
Because they have won us, using absurd ideas
of Minkowski and Kaluza.
=======..
P.S.
I asked some mathematician :
There are many different D spaces in the math/ physicist’s works.
Are there limits of these D spaces?
Maybe is 123 D space the last and final space ?

He answered:
I think there are as many opinions on this as there
are people giving thought to the issue.

My own opinion is that since the more immediately
obvious 123D option (either parabolic, flat or hyperbolic)
did not allow, despite all efforts, reconciling the various
theories, then there is need to try something else.

Maybe has this time
“then there is need to try something else” come ?

3.
And what is mathematical opinion about photon itself ?
Here is one example how mathematician tries
to solve the problem.
Russian scientist professor V.P. Seleznev created "toro model "
of light quanta. According to this model the light quanta is a
constant volume ring ( like bublik) . The speed of it
is different and this fact gives possibility to understand
all light natural phenomenones, overcome through all
contradictions in the physics and to offer a new technology.
So it is written in the book.
/ Book “The secrets of Universe” 1998.
V.D. Demin. Page 377./
Short explanation is given on 4 pages.
Glory to this scientist .!!!!
Glory to this professor !!!!
But….
But I have only one question .
Can this "toro volume ring model "
( like bublik) have volume in Vacuum ?
The answer is “ NO “
According to J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
temperature reaches -273 degrees the volume
disappears and particles become "flat figures ".
The " Charles law" was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac, Planck, Nernst, Einstein .
So, according to Charles law
the "toro volume ring model " is only
mathematic illusion .

There are many different models of photon.
To choose the correct one we needs to ask
a question: “ Which geometrical form can
photon have in vacuum ? “
4.
Some scientists say:
" The darkest subject in the science is light quanta."
Maybe now some my readers will understand
better the way on which we must go.
5.
Now mathematics goes ahead science and physics follows it.
Mathematicians carry the posters " Forward to abstract”,
" Forward to absurd” and we all follow them.
We go bravely on dinosaur’s path.
=============.
My thanks to gentlemen : Jim Whitescarver ,
Andre Michaud, Richard Gauthier, “ R.A.” and “ Si “
for helping me to understand the alphabet of mathematical slang.
=============.
http://www.socratus.com

[bottomlander]

Who is for whom?
============.
Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
This simple fact is forgotten in the science now.
1.
After war, in Russia there were many thieves' gangs
And I, as a boy, rotated among one of them.
They had their own language, thieves' jargon.
Not anyone could understand them.
Now I read some mathematical articles and they
remind me forgotten thieves' slang.
Are you laughing? Is it ridiculous ?
For me it isn’t ridiculous .
Why?
Because , mathematicians stole the picture
of reality from us . Because they make us
poor and stupid.
Why do you say so?
OK. I will try to prove it and explain my point of view.
=========..
2.
It began in 1905 when Einstein created SRT,
( theory of photon/ electron’s behaviour ).
Minkowski, trying to understand SRT, used 4D space.
Poor young Einstein , reading Minkowski interpretation,
said, that now he couldn’t understand his own theory.

=============.
http://www.socratus.com

Dear socratus,

You started a very refreshing thread.

Actually, mathematics follows some rules of game. Theoretical mathematics has the intellectual rights to achieve whatever it logically achieved. However, mathematical physicists should not say that our Nature really behaves like those mathematical worlds.

Those follow flawless rules of game will bring out a true physical world. Those rules altered with favoritism will bring out only mathematical worlds.

Best Regards. Bottomlander

[MJA]

And Einstein said: "God does not care about our mathematical difficulties, he intergrates emperically."

If this is true,

and, God is nature or everything, and intergrates is unite, and emperically is experience,

then, to know TOE is to experience the truth of nature's unity.

And if mathematical unity is =, and emperically unity is equal,

then, if we practice mathematically or emperically the unity of equality , we will experience the nature's truth or TOE!

MJA

[sharon333]

Another good point.