Sabine - James' Brilliant Daughter

[obsrvr524]

This is Sabine Hoffenfelder on What’s Going Wrong with Particle Physics
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu4mH3Hmw2o[/youtube]
Just yanking your wanker on it being James’ daughter - but doesn’t she sound like James on the subject?

For those with the aptitude to listen to the video - she is saying basically that particle physicists just haphazardly makeup theories about new particles that don’t actually exist and when they can’t find the particle - they just makeup some excuse for the data being skewed - usually due to another unsubstantiated invented particle. And that trend has been going on for about 50 years with no end in sight - “It isn’t science”.

@"[url=https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2657708

James S Saint » Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:29 am[/url]"]

@Arminius

The current mainstream physicists say that the photon is an exchange particle too, namely an exchange particle of the electromagnetic “force” (interaction).

Ah … now getting drawn into the myth.

In the mythology of Quantum Physics there are the Newtonian forces; gravitation and electromagnetism, as well as the Particle Physics forces of Strong and Weak. These magical forces are theorized as having the ability to reach out from a source and affect a distant object such as another subatomic particle. And in order to explain how such forces get around and affect particles, the mythical “force carrier particles” had to be imagined (gluons, gravitons, photons, and W&Z).

With force carrier particles, one can then imagine that a small portion of each force is carried from one force source particle to another force destination particle thus allowing for the “exchange” of the substance called “force”. Whatever happens during a nuclear interaction can then be explained by proposing that the appropriate force carrier particles exchanged whatever force was necessary so as to achieve the witnessed result. Each of these carrier particles is a “virtual particle”, meaning "not really a particle but we are going to talk about each tiny amount as if it was an actual particle".

In reality, and in Einstein’s understanding, there is no force and thus no force carrier particles. No such particles have ever been observed but only proposed to be responsible much as fairies in the forest being responsible for the dew on the leaves. In modern mythologies, in order to explain the unknown, one need merely refer to “subatomic carrier virtual particles” rather than fairies or spirits.

In RM:AO, the Afflate is the only “virtual particle” and it “carries” (is actually made of) a small puff of affectance. The propagation and accumulation of the affectance causes the end resultant effects. There are no forces in RM:AO. There is only the propagation and accumulation of affectance. And the exact process and cause of such propagation and accumulation as well as all end subatomic effects witnessed for centuries is fully understood. There is nothing mythical, magical, nor lacking in full and complete understanding within RM:AO (very unlike Quantum Mythology and Relativity).

She also goes into why gravitation and dark matter need a new theory - long before searching out particle explanations.

@"[url=https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2585887

James S Saint » Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:14 am[/url]"]“Dark-matter” is merely the accumulation of vastly distributed affectance, an independent gravity field floating in space. When that affectance buildup happens to be charged, there is an electric potential effect within such buildups, “dark-energy”. The charge potential between the clouds of affectance cause migration of the clouds and any matter present, both toward and away from other massive concentrations, depending on their overall charge and density.

There is no certain indication that any galaxies are actually spreading in any ordered direction, such as “expanding”. Some galaxies seem to not be moving at all. But the method for determining movement is highly speculative and completely indeterminate. The clouds of affectance alter the only light coming from such distant places and yield false indications as to what is really being seen.

Even the location of the galaxies being seen could possibly be far off in any direction. The color spectrum is changed such that red-shifting becomes more a measure of distance rather than movement. The attempt to identify gasses by color spectrum is almost pointless. It is truly a perfect analogy to the men in Socrates’ cave.

There is no reason for believing that the universe is expanding (never mind that fact that it is logically impossible to begin with).

Who could he have possibly been talking too? - certainly no one here.

[Motor_Daddy]

@obsrvr524

She also goes into why gravitation and dark matter need a new theory - long before searching out particle explanations.

I like Sabine because she calls out the BS in science, and there is a lot of it.

You can only stack BS so high before it collapses. Science has their head up their ass with all the BS theories.

When they finally figure out and admit that they have gravity completely backasswards then they might start to get on the right track. Mass evolves to space, not the other way around! The Earth came from the Sun!

[Alf]

@obsrvr524

This is Sabine Hoffenfelder on What’s Going Wrong with Particle Physics
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu4mH3Hmw2o[/youtube]
Just yanking your wanker on it being James’ daughter - but doesn’t she sound like James on the subject?

For those with the aptitude to listen to the video - she is saying basically that particle physicists just haphazardly makeup theories about new particles that don’t actually exist and when they can’t find the particle - they just makeup some excuse for the data being skewed - usually due to another unsubstantiated invented particle. And that trend has been going on for about 50 years with no end in sight - “It isn’t science”.

@"[url=https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2657708

James S Saint » Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:29 am[/url]"]

@Arminius

The current mainstream physicists say that the photon is an exchange particle too, namely an exchange particle of the electromagnetic “force” (interaction).

Ah … now getting drawn into the myth.

In the mythology of Quantum Physics there are the Newtonian forces; gravitation and electromagnetism, as well as the Particle Physics forces of Strong and Weak. These magical forces are theorized as having the ability to reach out from a source and affect a distant object such as another subatomic particle. And in order to explain how such forces get around and affect particles, the mythical “force carrier particles” had to be imagined (gluons, gravitons, photons, and W&Z).

With force carrier particles, one can then imagine that a small portion of each force is carried from one force source particle to another force destination particle thus allowing for the “exchange” of the substance called “force”. Whatever happens during a nuclear interaction can then be explained by proposing that the appropriate force carrier particles exchanged whatever force was necessary so as to achieve the witnessed result. Each of these carrier particles is a “virtual particle”, meaning "not really a particle but we are going to talk about each tiny amount as if it was an actual particle".

In reality, and in Einstein’s understanding, there is no force and thus no force carrier particles. No such particles have ever been observed but only proposed to be responsible much as fairies in the forest being responsible for the dew on the leaves. In modern mythologies, in order to explain the unknown, one need merely refer to “subatomic carrier virtual particles” rather than fairies or spirits.

In RM:AO, the Afflate is the only “virtual particle” and it “carries” (is actually made of) a small puff of affectance. The propagation and accumulation of the affectance causes the end resultant effects. There are no forces in RM:AO. There is only the propagation and accumulation of affectance. And the exact process and cause of such propagation and accumulation as well as all end subatomic effects witnessed for centuries is fully understood. There is nothing mythical, magical, nor lacking in full and complete understanding within RM:AO (very unlike Quantum Mythology and Relativity).

She also goes into why gravitation and dark matter need a new theory - long before searching out particle explanations.

@"[url=https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2585887

James S Saint » Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:14 am[/url]"]“Dark-matter” is merely the accumulation of vastly distributed affectance, an independent gravity field floating in space. When that affectance buildup happens to be charged, there is an electric potential effect within such buildups, “dark-energy”. The charge potential between the clouds of affectance cause migration of the clouds and any matter present, both toward and away from other massive concentrations, depending on their overall charge and density.

There is no certain indication that any galaxies are actually spreading in any ordered direction, such as “expanding”. Some galaxies seem to not be moving at all. But the method for determining movement is highly speculative and completely indeterminate. The clouds of affectance alter the only light coming from such distant places and yield false indications as to what is really being seen.

Even the location of the galaxies being seen could possibly be far off in any direction. The color spectrum is changed such that red-shifting becomes more a measure of distance rather than movement. The attempt to identify gasses by color spectrum is almost pointless. It is truly a perfect analogy to the men in Socrates’ cave.

There is no reason for believing that the universe is expanding (never mind that fact that it is logically impossible to begin with).

Who could he have possibly been talking too? - certainly no one here.

James S. Saint had been talking to Arminius about RM:AO for about four years, and when Arminius stopped posting on ILP at the end of December 2017, James only posted a few more times before he also disappeared from ILP (last visit on ILP: 06 Jan 2018, 13:16). Some said he disappeared because he died, others said he would be back soon.

In addition, Mithus, another ILP member of that said time, has written a rather thick book, on his behalf, so to speak, or at least according to his wishes. Perhaps you should write to Mithus.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Heard Mathis was Arminius’ wife.

[Alf]

@Meno_

Heard Mathis was Arminius’ wife.

Yes, and this wife of Arminius is probably Sabine Hossenfelder.

@Wikipedia

Sabine Karin Doris Hossenfelder, born 1976 in Frankfurt (Main), Germany, "is a German theoretical physicist, science communicator, author, musician and YouTuber. She is the author of Lost in Math: How beauty leads physics astray, which explores the concept of elegance in fundamental physics and cosmology, and of Existential Physics: A scientist’s guide to life’s biggest questions. Hossenfelder received an undergraduate degree in Mathematics in 1997 from the Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt am Main. In 2004 she completed a doctorate in theoretical physics from the same institution with a thesis titled Schwarze Löcher in Extra-Dimensionen: Eigenschaften und Nachweis (she published a paper in the same year with a similar title in the journal Physics Letters B in English, titled "Black Hole Relics in Large Extra Dimensions.

And so the matter with the disappearance of James S. Saint becomes clear. If Sabine is James’ daughter and Arminius’ wife, then James is Arminus’ father-in-law, so when James realised that Arminius stopped posting on ILP , he also stopped posting on ILP a few days later.

[Alf]

So, since the 1970s, particle physics is no longer physics, not even metaphysics, but only magic, witchcraft and, of course, rip-offs.

[Motor_Daddy]

@Alf

So, since the 1970s, particle physics is no longer physics, not even metaphysics, but only magic, witchcraft and, of course, rip-offs.

Since the 70’s?? It goes back all the way back to the beginning, where the church destroyed anyone that opposed their BS!

It’s my opinion that the church is still doing that now…destroying anything that stands in their way of making CASH. Religious scientists infiltrating science and promoting BS in order to protect the gold mine that is religion.

[Ichthus77 (Ichthus77 (formerly She™))]

The church birthed science. The military industrial complex divorced it from philosophy. Fax, no printer.

[Ichthus77 (Ichthus77 (formerly She™))]

When she says the Higgs is the final nail in the standard model, is she presenting from their perspective or hers? Because they now see it wasn’t, & the standard model continues to be confirmed. Is this an old vid? Later in the vid she contradicts herself & says Higgs is necessary to support standard model. Soooo confused.

Maybe by final nail… she didn’t mean “in the coffin”? Mkay. Language. sigh

So with the Higgs, there’s also the fact what they found wasn’t it. Then there’s the fact how they interpret it (if they find it) as the God particle (making God obsolete or whatever, if I correctly recall) is not science.

[Ichthus77 (Ichthus77 (formerly She™))]

Good vid overall. Thx for sharing.

[MagsJ (Surya Loka)]

_
…love her YouTube podcasts, in setting Science straight, from the b’stadised mess that it has been made to become x the thrown-in humour, of course.

James’ daughter?

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

No Arminius’ wife. I wonder why people leave, kind of unannounced, some return though

[Ben_JS]

@Alf

@Meno_

Heard Mathis was Arminius’ wife.

Yes, and this wife of Arminius is probably Sabine Hossenfelder.

@wiki

[…Sabine Hossenfelder’s bio…]

And so the matter with the disappearance of James S. Saint becomes clear. If Sabine is James’ daughter and Arminius’ wife, then James is Arminus’ father-in-law, so when James realised that Arminius stopped posting on ILP , he also stopped posting on ILP a few days later.

In a direct message Mithus sent me, they signed off with what I assume to be their name name.
It bears no clear resemblance to Hossenfelder or derivation of her name.

I think he died, but I’ve a couple of competing theories.

1. For whatever reason, he decided to stop using his alias of James.

[list=b][*]Setting aside participation on forums.

( Why no farewell? Perhaps intends to return?
. It appears too much time has transpired.
. Perhaps radical IRL changes to circumstances -
. for any number of reasons…
. maybe James met large success IRL.)

1. He switched alias, and still modestly participates.

( Honestly, I wouldn’t put it past him.
. He didn’t owe anyone a thing.
. Giving time can be exhausting,
. and perhaps he wanted to ease the commitment,
. while still being able to participate.
. He couldn’t escape shadow of ‘James’, using that alias.
.
. To obsrvr’s credit[?], they know James a bit too well,
. and are very apt at emulating his writing style.
. But obsrvr does things out of character for James, so…
. …probably not… or that could be coming back to the shadow issue.
. Break down what it means to observe vs. participate )

[/:m]
[] He died.

( People, due his affect on them,
. looked for reasons that weren’t there.
. A testament to his contribution. ) [/*:m][/list:o]

Let us be joyful and grateful that he shared his time, wisdom, compassion… & himself, with us.

[MagsJ (Surya Loka)]

@obsrvr524

Just yanking your wanker on it being James’ daughter - but doesn’t she sound like James on the subject?

Ahhh

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Or, maybe James didn’t really exist, in the conventional sense, maybe, and I know this may be a far stretch, just maybe he was an AI bot.

[Ichthus77 (Ichthus77 (formerly She™))]

Are you implying AI bots don’t really exist? What do you think humans are?

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Yes good point, but James being a cybernetic creation of similar traits , is quite different. He may be a program of some kind to fulfill some required personal image type.

How can a person exist , as if he is not anywhere a robotic conflation, or a pre-cyborgian arcytype testing some reality?

Has anyone met him? His image may have been photoshopped and splashed into some ‘real’ person.

The same goes for the daughter-wife, with some family resemblance to Arminius, of whom the same thing could be said.

Who would leave unannounced without proper customary signs of disengagement, and unless both died in a simultaneous tragic accident, the he dying theory is out.

[Motor_Daddy]

obsrvr524 has something to do with James, like maybe obsrvr524 is the same person as James. Sock puppets suck!

[Ichthus77 (Ichthus77 (formerly She™))]

If they want to be known as their sock puppets, they’ll put it in their signature like Ben JS did. I did that when I was first back, I think.

[Ben_JS]

I never created a sock-puppet. I asked a moderator to change the username associated with my account.
In earlier posts, you’ll find people referring to me as Joe.
Sock-puppets are separate accounts with separate post histories,
such that it is not easy to discern if they are the same person.
And often they’ll actively present themselves as not the same person.