What Does it Feel Like to be a Bat?
It is a sensible question: What does it feel like to be a bat? Although we can never really know […]
Debates and Discussions on http://www.anti-relativity.com/forum.
(My writings only.)
It is a sensible question: What does it feel like to be a bat? Although we can never really know […]
This last post in the series explains why I believe it is time to say goodbye to Einstein, and why I look forward to how our worldview develops in the light of this CERN discovery of material superluminality.
This second post in my series on the superluminality observed (or suspected) at CERN looks at why we cannot accept it.
This post is an expanded version of a Web interview regarding my blog. It attempts to answer the question why I blog. And why one should take philosophy seriously. Seriously!
I recently made my first book available on Amazon. I thought I would post this article, which is a good summary of the book. This article was published in a magazine in Singapore.
When philosophers look at anything, it becomes a bit technical. Their technical analysis may sound boring and irrelevant. Here is an attempt to tilt things in their favor.
This post is a collection of reviews of my first book The Unreal Universe. As I’m beginning to work on my second book (Principles of Quantitative Development, commissioned by Wiley-Finance), I felt that these thoughts on my first book might be of interest to some of you.
This post is a continuation of my earlier musings on the Big Bang theory. This one looks at the foundational assumptions of quantum gravity. In management speak, it is a high level overview, which sounds like I understand it. In a physicist’s lingo, it is merely a layman description or a hand-waving argument. In other words, the management types out there may like it better than the smart ones. You be the judge!
This unpublished article is a sequel to my earlier paper (also posted as Are Radio Sources and Gamma Ray Bursts Luminal Booms?). This blog version contains the abstract, introduction and conclusions. The full version of the article is available as a PDF file.
This post is the blog version of my article published in the International Journal of Modern Physics D (IJMP-D) in 2007, soon to become the Top Accessed Article of the journal by Jan 2008. Although it might seem like a hard core physics article, it is in fact an application of the philosophical insight permeating this blog and my book.
People present the Big Bang theory in physics pretty much like Evolution in biology. But I feel that it is disingenuous to do that. To me, it looks as though the Big Bang theory is so full of patchwork, such a mathematical collage to cook up something that is consistent with GR that it is hard to imagine that it corresponds to anything real. Here is a short list of my trouble with the theory.
This post is an abridged online version of my article that appears in Galilean Electrodynamics in November, 2008. [Ref: Galilean Electrodynamics, Vol. 19, No. 6, Nov/Dec 2008, pp: 103–117]
It can be viewed as a good summary of my book, The Unreal Universe, with all the gory mathematical details. Originally written for a professional audience, this post may interest my physicist friends, especially those with a philosophical openness in their beliefs.