Are you skeptical of the
physical interpretations that
the mathematical idiots at
Cambridge and Harvard
give you?

If so, read on...
Adapted for the Internet from:             Why God Doesn't Exist


     Home                    Book WGDE                    Glossary                    Extinction   

    Last modified 02/20/08

        Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008

    They usurp grand titles such as  'physicist' and 'scientist', but do not be misled. The members of the
    establishment are just mathematicians. The mathematical physicists have become the priests of the
    modern world, listening to your petty confessions about how you think the world works and then
    setting you straight, telling you how the Universe 'really' works. Authority no longer emanates from
    the Bible. It now flows from variables, equations, and numbers.

    However, as it turns out, Mathematics is NOT the language of Physics or of Science! In fact, Math has
    absolutely nothing to do with Physics and very little to do with Science. Mathematics is a language
    like Mandarin is a language. Would it make any sense to say that Mandarin is the language of Physics?
    A mathematician has no more authority to draw conclusions about the physical world from a set of
    functions than a medieval priest had of prescribing indulgences pursuant to his particular interpretation
    of the Bible. In fact, Mathematics is a language that makes people stupid. By definition, a stupid person
    is someone with no common sense, and all relativists, mechanics, and string theorists freely admit that
    they have long ago surrendered their collective common sense. A mathematical physicist is an individual
    who has placed all his faith in equations at the expense of rationality. He no longer has the ability to tell
    fact from fantasy. The layman follows his lead and holds him in high regards merely because the
    mathematician is a celebrity.  

    Don't misunderstand me. I am not saying that there is something wrong with the equations and
    functions that the mathematicians use to describe physical phenomena. I am saying that they are
    irrelevant. You can describe the motion of a ball with a set of symbols... but only if you know first that
    the invisible entity is a ball. If what your equation is describing really looks like a spring or a rubber
    band, or we are unwittingly describing the signal propagating along a barber's pole, your equation is
    meaningless (Fig. 1). The equation that you use to characterize the motion of the end of a rubber band
    may be the same one you use to describe the motion of a ball, but the physical interpretation will
    necessarily be different. Without a qualitative interpretation, an equation by itself is not science.

    2.0   The three pillars of Mathematical Physics

    Contemporary Mathematical Physics is comprised of three pillars: General Relativity (GR), Quantum
    Mechanics (QM), and String Theory (ST). The establishment regards these disciplines with absolute
    reverence, but don't be misled. GR, QM, and ST are actually more like Andersen's proverbial
    Emperor's Clothes tale. The mathematician points to an invisible entity and tells you what you are
    observing. Suspiciously, the idiot of Mathematics always ends up with his beloved point. An atom is
    a particle. An electron is a particle. A photon is a particle. An event is a particle. And a string is made
    of particles.
    When you insinuate that his interpretation borders on the irrational, the moron goes absolutely
    bonkers! He urges you to set aside your common sense and intuition and trust his equations and
    calculations. He throws a list of who's who at you to reinforce his claim. All the celebrities of Nobel
    and Templeton fame believe in the particle. So who are you to question so much authority?

    But I have just shown that you can provide different physical interpretations to an equation.  So what
    compels you to switch your intellectual allegiance? Why should you trust his interpretation of a physical
    phenomenon when it is also based on intuition?

    The results are on the table. After centuries of raving lunacy, the mathematicians of this world have
    absolutely nothing to show for their abstract theories. We have yet to see a mockup of space-time or
    a picture of a single particle of the Standard Model or a sculpture of the 1-D Planck Length theorists
    claim the Universe is made of. Not a single mathematician on Earth can tell you WHAT  light IS. Not a
    single mathematician working at NASA or CERN can tell you how a simple magnet works or WHAT
    the invisible lines of force that surround it ARE. Not a single mathematician at Cambridge or at Harvard
    can illustrate  mass or energy for you. And certainly numbers and equations will not help them in any
    of these quests.

Fig. 1
Assume that you see an equation that says that the
speed of an invisible entity is so many meters per
second:  x m/s.  Can you say unambiguously what
the entity looks like?

The lazy mathematicians have never bothered to
investigate the architecture of subatomic entities
further. They routinely use the point (or the point
particle) to model their equations because it is the
simplest entity they can imagine and the easiest

to use to simulate their equations. It is not
surprising, therefore, that they conclude that the
entire universe is made of point particles, or as the
idiots of relativity call them: events.

Unfortunately, the 'useful' point has come at a great

price. The morons of Mathematics have sacrificed
understanding (i.e., explanation) at the expense of
a description.

    The underlying problem is that the mathematicians have never defined the word science unambiguously
    and have yet to grasp the nature of the scientific method. The establishment has erroneously concluded
    that  experimentation and Math are necessary components of the scientific method. A mathematician
    models the path of an invisible particle with an equation, runs a test to prove his hunch, and then boasts
    that the experiment has proven his theory. [1] Yet, when you go back to check, the infamous particle was
    merely an assumption. If the invisible thing at the center of his experiment is not a particle, his alleged
    'proof' disintegrates before your very eyes. The mathematicians mistake assumptions for proofs and
    confuse hypotheses with theories.

    After 2500 years of research, the disciples of Pythagoras and Euclid have nothing to exhibit at their trade
    shows, nothing to show during their show-and-tells. The mathematicians are still in the Dark Ages as far
    as their understanding of nature is concerned. They have merely modified the language of Plato and
    Augustine. The members of the establishment continue to talk about spirits and ghosts and miracles, but
    today allude to such phenomena using scientific-sounding names like 'singularity' and 'carriers of force'
    and 'uncertainty.' The irony is that the mathematicians believe that the development of technology proves
    that the inventions we enjoy today confirm their theories.

    The language of Physics and of Science is called visualization.  In order for the prosecutor and the juror
    to be on the same wavelength, they must both watch the same movie. If the prosecutor is talking about
    rocks and the juror imagines trees they cannot possibly be communicating. We don't understand rocks
    and trees. We see them with our eyes! There is only one way to guarantee that everyone visualizes the
    same thing: the presenter should be able to make a movie of his theory. A theory is an explanation of
    how or why something occurred. If the presenter cannot put his ideas on the Big Screen for everyone
    to watch (the same thing), he is not doing Science. And in order for the theory to be converted into a
    movie, an even more fundamental requirement is form. Without shapes, the prosecutor has nothing to
    film and the juror has nothing to watch. The first requirement of science and of the scientific method is
    to produce the physical objects. We cannot make a film with abstract concepts! We cannot do science
    with the idiotic words of Mathematics: energy, mass, time, force, or field. These are not physical objects.
    These words do not represent things that have shape.

    Science is not about running experiments or  proving theories. Science is about communicating ideas.
    Afterwards you can infer whatever you like, run experiments in the lab, and reach your own conclusions.
    In order to communicate ideas precisely, the presenter absolutely needs to define his words rigorously.
    A precise definition of the words tat make or break a theory is the second requirement of the scientific

    Mathematical Physics fails both of these requirements.  Not a single mathematician in the world can
    make a movie of his presentation. What is he going to put on the screen? A picture of energy? A scene
    where mass jumps up and down? And not a single mathematician on Earth defines the words that make
    or break his theory rigorously. The contemporary mathematicians:
           tell you that their crucial words are primitives (i.e., undefinable) (e.g., point, line,
    mass, energy, time)

    ...and then wish you to believe that they are doing Science. The mathematicians of Mathematical Physics
    are the first to attempt to give a physical interpretation to their equations. When you call their bluff and
    show that the explanation is irrational, relativists defend themselves by saying that you are raising a
    philosophical issue and not one that concerns Science (meaning Physics). But it was they who
    introduced 'philosophy' (i.e., give a physical interpretation) to the equations in the first place. In other
    words, the mathematician wants you to believe that he is authorized to provide a physical interpretation
    to a series of variables or to a function because he is backed by Math and celebrities. When you question
    his logic, he accuses you of relying on subjective intuition and common sense at the expense of objective
    Mathematics. He dismisses your attack as petty philosophy, meaning that it's just your opinion. If this fails
    to persuade you, he produces next a list of celebrities from the 'scientific' community who believe in the
    same idiocy he does. These people are backed by Nobel Prizes (which their peers gave to them). Look
    behind you. Who votes for your version?

    This site has the purpose of exposing Mathematical Physics for what it is: an irrational religion. The most
    natural place to start the discussion is by telling you a little bit about who these latter-day astrologers and
    alchemists are, what they believe in, and what they do. Let's see how much they really know and settle
    once and for all whether they have any authority to interpret the physical world for you.

    I argue that Mathematics is not only NOT the language of Physics, but that it has absolutely nothing to
    do with Physics... Mathematics is a language like Chinese is a language. Would it make sense to say that
    Swahili is the language of Physics? The language of Physics is visualization. If a mathematician cannot
    make a movie of his theory, he is not doing Science, let alone Physics. Period! He has not explained the
    phenomenon. Unfortunately, we have delegated the task of uncovering the nature of our Universe to
    idiots that laymen mistake for geniuses. I can find no better word than idiot to qualify an individual who
    has a Masters Degree or a PhD and offers irrational and fantastic physical interpretations for natural
    phenomena. Anyone who invokes such ridiculous concepts as space-time, Big Bang, black hole,
    parallel universe, field, energy, mass, wave-packet, point particle, time travel, tunneling, warped space,
    or annihilation to explain a phenomenon of nature should be kicked out of Science and locked up in a
    mental institution. The official scientific world is a farce. The establishment has gone completely mad.

    The mathematicians have become the priests of the modern world. They 'describe' a phenomenon  for
    you with variables and urge you to believe their physical interpretations on the authority of their
    calculations. Actually their interpretations of the real world have as much to do with their equations as
    the Bible with the existence of God, but naive people have gradually willed themselves to believe the
    experts. They stand respectfully in awe of the nonsense coming out of the universities and think tanks.
    The result is that we have made a 180 turn. We are back to the middle ages as far as understanding of
    nature is concerned.

    If, like me, you suspect the physical interpretations of the mathematical sages of our world, the following
    pages contain material that will provide you with solid arguments in your heads-to-heads with relativists,
    mechanics, and string theorists. I have simplified concepts and theories of Mathematical Physics and
    illustrated wherever possible to make the site accessible to the average visitor. You don't need to know
    Math to realize that relativity is 100% poppycock. A good dose of common sense will do!
Well guys! Our research of the
Old Testament is complete.
There is nothing in there about a
God particle, a photon, or a
Higgs Boson. Let's now start
with the New Testament.  
Hey Joey? Will you
lend me your string? I
think I just got an idea!
You seem to have trouble grasping
our abstract, mathematical
theories, Bill. Therefore, we are
through with words. Perhaps it's
time for something a little more
pragmatic. We decided that the
time has come to demonstrate our
theories to you empirically.