Doowop

As a follow up to the article on http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... tml?page=1

"Gravity and mathematics alone, Palmer suggests, imply that the invariant set of the universe should have a similarly intricate structure, and that the universe is trapped forever in this subset of all possible states."

"Many details still need to be fleshed out, says Coecke. "Palmer manages to explain some quantum phenomena," he says, "but he hasn't yet derived the whole rigid structure of the theory. This is really necessary.""

"Because black holes destroy information, Palmer suggests that the universe has an invariant set too, though it is far more complicated than the pendulum."

"Ever since Einstein, many physicists have hoped that a new approach might go beyond quantum theory and find a way to restore belief in objective and independent properties."


My repudiations:
1. Firstly, the universe cannot destroy information, but that information only changes forms.
2. A rough sketchy idea doesn't constitute a breakthrough in the field, particularly judging by mainstream physics' anal-retentive fabrications. The deceptively pleasing outcome that the universe ought to have a single invariant set represented by some weird, unimaginable fractal is ludicrous. The universe IS every fractal, every vibration and everything ever conceived by us (or any races of greater intelligence).
3. The trouble with science is that it is riddled with the same extremist dogmas as religion, only on the opposite side of the spectrum. Why this dogged belief in the objective? Our culture, social idiosyncrasies and humanity are worth nothing, all owing to our unwavering quest to agree on a shared reality with maximum objectivity. Does that make the acid raver's hallucinations or the psychotics delusions any less real, when viewed from within their frame of reference?

I'd welcome a debate about this!
skand1nsky
hunter

Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:34 am
Location: London