This Science News Wire page contains a press release issued by an organization and is provided to you "as is" with little or no review from Science X staff.

If Einstein Were Alive Today…

May 30th, 2014

July 4, 2012 physicists around the world held their breaths while the announcement regarding evidence in the search for the Higgs particle sent shock waves throughout the scientific community. Speculation suggested experimenters at the Large Hadron Collider found something, but no one clearly knew, with full certainty, what the presented evidence would be. It was prestigiously announced the decay evidence of a subatomic particle in the suspected mass region of the Higgs Boson was discovered by two independent teams using separate particle detectors, Atlas and CMS. The evidence was presented innocuously as a bump on a green and yellow graph like an ultrasound image indicating the presence of life. At the time, the culmination of this ambiguous bump, supported by the statistical data of a 5 sigma threshold, possessed the capabilities to ultimately change the world and subsequently solidify a perceived notion concerning our understandings of an infinite universe.

Two years after a collage of applause, accolades, and champagne bottles fizzing corks high into the air, we have sobered into the slalom of our discontent. The generous resolution of a fifty year speculation did not satisfy our unquenchable thirst for knowledge nor did it damper our motivation to pursue a better understanding of what we assumed we already knew. Curiosity was not absolved by the declaration of this confirmation, it lingered and revealed a mysterious paradox, or should I say Pandora's Box of inquiry. To many, with a keen sense of intrinsic intuition, something about this discovery did not resonate harmoniously.

With an adorned facade of approval, many physicists dare not illicit any bold arguments to smite the accomplishments of out jovial colleagues, nor would we utter any hypocritical discontent against the statistical approach used in presenting the merits of factual evidence in the discovery of these sacred boson particles. However, this particular explanation of our universe, using the Higgs Boson as its basis, as rich and robust as it may appear quantitatively, its rigid structure did not present itself as the well consummated suitor of nature's merciful soul. It continues to persist as a counterfeit solution to an otherwise misguided pursuit of a final resolution. Quietly billowing amongst the shadows of the murmured allegory concerning rumors touting dissonance, this idea somehow arrogantly stood vindicated and became the inconsistent contradiction to the simplicity of truth.

Within the passing two years I have continuously asked myself, if Einstein were alive today, would he approve of these achievements or deem them the advancement of fool hearted folly. Einstein did not like the direction in which Quantum Mechanics was going nor did he approve of how it changed his intuitive perception of reality. Although Einstein himself challenged others like Newton's classical work and modified Newton's original ideologies, one could envision the minds of these great titans in congress debating the vital virtues of their theories, but shortly thereafter, an effective collaboration of pragmatic sensible progression of simplicity, continuity, and logical reason would soon prevail in symphonic harmony.

"Quantum mechanics is very impressive. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory yields a lot, but it hardly brings us any closer to the secret of the Old One. In any case I am convinced that He doesn't play dice" – Albert Einstein.

This bold universal and egregious acceptance of our proclaimed sense of knowledge of fundamental physical laws using the Higgs Boson as its basis was boastfully flawed from its inception and continues to persist out of desperation. Since when do we derive a fundamental theory in physics by proclaiming the discovery of a particle as the sufficient substitution to the power unleashed using basic mathematical laws? Sure we may describe an object or event using mathematics, but it is the foundation of mathematics that inevitably dictates the principles of the physical laws we must interpret. How and why did this paradigm change? Are we so benevolent in our composition of theory and assumptive discovery that we ignore reasonably we have disclosed nothing from overlooking the obvious? Understanding illicit explanations regarding how, not what!

Our theoretical laws in physics should be motivated by our understandings of mathematical laws within the confines of the physical realm in which we exist. Describing the attributes of any predicted observation says nothing concerning how that object of observation operates or functions. Should we conclude our investigations on flight by suggesting birds fly because they have wings? Discovering wings on a million species of birds says nothing to the dynamics of flight. Dismembering the wings and describing feathers says nothing as well. It is not until we can describe a phenomenon in terms of its fundamental mathematical constituencies that we may claim we have arrived at a solution.

If Einstein were alive today, I believe he would be impressed at all we have accomplished and how far we have progressed technologically, but he would also suggest, in our endeavors into the vast journey of the unknown, we have gone nowhere and accomplished very little with regards to knowing where we are going, what we are doing, and where we should proceed.

More information:
Demond C. Adams
PO Box 25705 Tamarac, FL 33320
954-990-3805

Citation: If Einstein Were Alive Today… (2014, May 30) retrieved 29 March 2024 from https://sciencex.com/wire-news/162917531/if-einstein-were-alive-today.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.