FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics » Relativity
WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN?
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [8 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
Pentcho Valev
science forum Guru


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 380

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:24 am    Post subject: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/00/engtot.pdf
"The Second Law made its appearance in physics around 1850, but a half
century later it was already surrounded by so much confusion that the
British Association for the Advancement of Science decided to appoint a
special committee with the task of providing clarity about the meaning
of this law. However, its final report (Bryan 1891) did not settle the
issue. Half a century later, the physicist/philosopher Bridgman still
complained that there are almost as many formulations of the second law
as there have been discussions of it (Bridgman 1941, p. 116). And even
today, the Second Law remains so obscure that it continues to attract
new efforts at clarification. A recent example is the work of Lieb and
Yngvason (1999)......The historian of science and mathematician
Truesdell made a detailed study of the historical development of
thermodynamics in the period 1822-1854. He characterises the theory,
even in its present state, as 'a dismal swamp of obscurity' (1980, p.
6) and 'a prime example to show that physicists are not exempt from the
madness of crowds' (ibid. p. Cool.......Clausius' verbal statement of the
second law makes no sense.... All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition
; a century of philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this
commandment ; a century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted
their eyes from the unclean.....Seven times in the past thirty years
have I tried to follow the argument Clausius offers....and seven times
has it blanked and gravelled me.... I cannot explain what I cannot
understand."

http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm
"Shatter this postulate [of constancy of the speed of light], and
modern physics becomes an elaborate farce!"
Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed
of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of
gravity is false."
Einstein: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on
the field concept,i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing
remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included,
[and of] the rest of modern physics."

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051128/full/nj7068-705a.html
http://www.nyas.org/publications/UpdateUnbound.asp?UpdateID=41
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2006/04/physics_in_america_at_crossroa.html
http://insidehighered.com/views/2006/04/13/morley
http://blogs.nature.com/news/blog/2006/02/testing_times_for_einsteins_th.html

Pentcho Valev
Back to top
yt56erd
science forum Guru


Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 313

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:25 am    Post subject: Re: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Quote:

Pentcho Valev

you frigging idiot
Back to top
donstockbauer@hotmail.com
science forum Guru


Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:52 am    Post subject: Re: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

Cranks Reply wrote:
Quote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:

Pentcho Valev

you frigging idiot

It's like that episode of "Twilight Zone" where Dennis Weaver wakes up
from a dream where he's sentenced to death, every morning, forever.

You know, intelligent people get tired of mindless repetition, Pentcho.
Back to top
Aatu Koskensilta
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 277

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:31 pm    Post subject: Re: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

Cranks Reply wrote:
Quote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:

Pentcho Valev

you frigging idiot

It's moronic to reply to someone only to imply they're stupid,
crossposting to five groups.

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta@xortec.fi)

"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Back to top
Edward Green
science forum addict


Joined: 21 May 2005
Posts: 95

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:44 pm    Post subject: Re: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

Pentcho Valev wrote:

Quote:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/00/engtot.pdf

"The Second Law made its appearance in physics around 1850, but a half
century later it was already surrounded by so much confusion that the
British Association for the Advancement of Science decided to appoint a
special committee with the task of providing clarity about the meaning
of this law. However, its final report (Bryan 1891) did not settle the
issue. Half a century later, the physicist/philosopher Bridgman still
complained that there are almost as many formulations of the second law
as there have been discussions of it (Bridgman 1941, p. 116). And even
today, the Second Law remains so obscure that it continues to attract
new efforts at clarification. A recent example is the work of Lieb and
Yngvason (1999)......The historian of science and mathematician
Truesdell made a detailed study of the historical development of
thermodynamics in the period 1822-1854. He characterises the theory,
even in its present state, as 'a dismal swamp of obscurity' (1980, p.
6) and 'a prime example to show that physicists are not exempt from the
madness of crowds' (ibid. p. Cool.......Clausius' verbal statement of the
second law makes no sense.... All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition
; a century of philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this
commandment ; a century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted
their eyes from the unclean.....Seven times in the past thirty years
have I tried to follow the argument Clausius offers....and seven times
has it blanked and gravelled me.... I cannot explain what I cannot
understand."

Intesting stuff. Did a demon get a hold of you about 6 lines from the
bottom? Or did you cut the quotes too liberally?

Quote:
http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm
"Shatter this postulate [of constancy of the speed of light], and
modern physics becomes an elaborate farce!"
Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed
of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of
gravity is false."
Einstein: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on
the field concept,i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing
remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included,
[and of] the rest of modern physics."

Einstein was overstating the case, obviously.

I applaud your effort to find a new demon to share the stage with
Einstein. Clausius? Who would have thought it.
Back to top
Sorcerer1
science forum Guru


Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 410

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:20 pm    Post subject: Re: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

"Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> wrote in message
news:1153431889.663919.60940@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
|
| Pentcho Valev wrote:
|
| > http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/00/engtot.pdf
|
| > "The Second Law made its appearance in physics around 1850, but a half
| > century later it was already surrounded by so much confusion that the
| > British Association for the Advancement of Science decided to appoint a
| > special committee with the task of providing clarity about the meaning
| > of this law. However, its final report (Bryan 1891) did not settle the
| > issue. Half a century later, the physicist/philosopher Bridgman still
| > complained that there are almost as many formulations of the second law
| > as there have been discussions of it (Bridgman 1941, p. 116). And even
| > today, the Second Law remains so obscure that it continues to attract
| > new efforts at clarification. A recent example is the work of Lieb and
| > Yngvason (1999)......The historian of science and mathematician
| > Truesdell made a detailed study of the historical development of
| > thermodynamics in the period 1822-1854. He characterises the theory,
| > even in its present state, as 'a dismal swamp of obscurity' (1980, p.
| > 6) and 'a prime example to show that physicists are not exempt from the
| > madness of crowds' (ibid. p. Cool.......Clausius' verbal statement of the
| > second law makes no sense.... All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition
| > ; a century of philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this
| > commandment ; a century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted
| > their eyes from the unclean.....Seven times in the past thirty years
| > have I tried to follow the argument Clausius offers....and seven times
| > has it blanked and gravelled me.... I cannot explain what I cannot
| > understand."
|
| Intesting stuff. Did a demon get a hold of you


Hey shithead! He's quoting. Maybe you are too fucking stupid
to see that, or even to spell "interesting". Got back to school and
learn English, both spelling and comprehension.

Androcles.
Back to top
Edward Green
science forum addict


Joined: 21 May 2005
Posts: 95

PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 1:43 am    Post subject: Re: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

Sorcerer wrote:

Quote:
"Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@netzero.com> wrote in message
news:1153431889.663919.60940@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
|
| Pentcho Valev wrote:
|
| > http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/00/engtot.pdf
|
| > "The Second Law made its appearance in physics around 1850, but a half
| > century later it was already surrounded by so much confusion that the
| > British Association for the Advancement of Science decided to appoint a
| > special committee with the task of providing clarity about the meaning
| > of this law. However, its final report (Bryan 1891) did not settle the
| > issue. Half a century later, the physicist/philosopher Bridgman still
| > complained that there are almost as many formulations of the second law
| > as there have been discussions of it (Bridgman 1941, p. 116). And even
| > today, the Second Law remains so obscure that it continues to attract
| > new efforts at clarification. A recent example is the work of Lieb and
| > Yngvason (1999)......The historian of science and mathematician
| > Truesdell made a detailed study of the historical development of
| > thermodynamics in the period 1822-1854. He characterises the theory,
| > even in its present state, as 'a dismal swamp of obscurity' (1980, p.
| > 6) and 'a prime example to show that physicists are not exempt from the
| > madness of crowds' (ibid. p. Cool.......Clausius' verbal statement of the
| > second law makes no sense.... All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition
| > ; a century of philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this
| > commandment ; a century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted
| > their eyes from the unclean.....Seven times in the past thirty years
| > have I tried to follow the argument Clausius offers....and seven times
| > has it blanked and gravelled me.... I cannot explain what I cannot
| > understand."
|
| Intesting stuff. Did a demon get a hold of you


Hey shithead! He's quoting. Maybe you are too fucking stupid
to see that, or even to spell "interesting". Got back to school and
learn English, both spelling and comprehension.

What's the matter? Tired of the abuse heaped on you by others?

(1) Obviously my slip of the fingers is a slip of the fingers, although
I have been known to misspell other words, but even so, (2) spelling
flames and insults, especially unprovoked ones, are considered a mark
of the lame, and (3) equally obviously, the entire passage was a quote,
but (4) the tone of the quote changes bizarrely at about the point I
noted, so that it no longer sounds like the voice of the original
passage, whereas counting quotation marks it should be, whereas (5) you
snipped the second part of my comment, which mentioned the possibility
that quotation marks were missing, or else (6) he started ranting in
the middle of his own quoted passage.

As for you, my friend (7) people who live in monofilm houses should not
throw bricks, or even speak too loudly, and (Cool although I have not
partaken in the verbal pummeling you invite and apparently so deserve
(9) I will so far fall from ideal net behavior as to keep a special eye
open for your foolishness now.

I don't expect to have to wait very long.
Back to top
Edward Green
science forum addict


Joined: 21 May 2005
Posts: 95

PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 1:50 am    Post subject: Re: WHO KILLED PHYSICS: CLAUSIUS OR EINSTEIN? Reply with quote

Sorcerer wrote: <...>

Second thought, looking over your obscenity laced tirades, I'd be a
fool to waste more time on you.
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [8 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:01 am | All times are GMT
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics » Relativity
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts For the Einstein worshipers and skeptics 3ality Relativity 3 Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:23 pm
No new posts Compare and contrast physics and chemistry parent Chem 0 Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:26 pm
No new posts This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 235) John Baez Research 0 Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:32 pm
No new posts Writing physics for the public and other matters - parano... Jack Sarfatti Math 0 Sat Jul 15, 2006 6:29 pm
No new posts (OT) Moderator Vacancy Announcement: sci.physics.plasma Martin X. Moleski, SJ Relativity 0 Sat Jul 15, 2006 2:05 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: Electronics forum |  Medicine forum |  Unix/Linux blog |  Unix/Linux documentation |  Unix/Linux forums  |  send newsletters
 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.2958s ][ Queries: 16 (0.2409s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]