Why Scientific 'Truth' So Often Turns Out Wrong.

This post is motivated with John Allen Paulos's article The Decline Effect and Why Scientific 'Truth' So Often Turns Out Wrong.

In AWT this phenomena can be of real emergent nature and it manifests itself with switching of intersubjectively accepted opinion into dual perspective, whenever the density of facts increases up to certain level. It's analogous to dispersive spreading of waves at the water surface, which is switching its character with distance from longitudinal into transverse waves and back into longitudinal waves again. It corresponds the layered fractally nested character of Universe and observable reality.

For example, from terrestrial perspective the epicycle model of solar system appears relevant. With increasing scope this model has been replaced with heliocentric model but now the evolution of galactic arms can be described with epicycle model again. It's just the number of observable objects, which makes epicycle or heliocentric model more relevant.

After all, the acceptation/refusal of aether model is of the same emergent evolution. Before some time old Greeks believed in Aether, later (Newton) this concept has been replaced with concept of absolute space. In 19th century the aether based models were quite popular again, but they're were replaced later with relativity model of space-time. Now the aether model is returning into physics again with model of Higgs field, which is responsible for particle mass.

The emergent character of observable reality can be understood by example of compression of gas, which is changing into fluid or even solid during this. The  density fluctuations of newly formed phase are behaving like another generation of gas particles and when the compression continues, they're condensing and changing into nested fluid phase and solid again. The newly formed phase is embedded into previous generation of matter and this process can be repeated many times.

I presume, the same evolution occurs during pilling and condensation of facts into theories in hyperdimensional causal space. I Czech we have a proverb: "Stokrát nic umořilo osla" which roughly means "A hundred times nothing killed the donkey". The meaning of this proverb is, even the smallest chores are tiresome (if there is too many).

Clever individuals do not make the group smarter

This post is a reaction to the recent article (more details) in which individual brainpower contributes little to collective smarts. Instead, it’s social awareness -- the ability to pick up on emotional cues in others -- that seems to determine how smart a group can be.

When we write something new in internet discussion, we just get negative voting usually, because people aren't prepared to get new generally valid information from individuals at all. Instead of this, the more irrelevant and widespread is the internet meme in your answers, the higher score you get - because it's considered "witty". Actually you're just repeating things, which most of people are already expecting to listen unconsciously. Most of people don't expect to hear some revolutionary ideas at all - instead of this, they're feeling confounded, if not confused when being confronted with them. It should be pointed out, the poor language skills are making the sharing of emotions much more difficult, then the sharing of logical information. In addition, socially successful people tend to ignore logical arguments.

In another words, if you want to convince people for something clever or good, you have to manipulate them for it emotionally... Emotions, emotions, emotions...

Unfortunately it works in both directions, as Joseph Goebels knew already.

Actually, in dense aether theory a rather simple wave spreading model can be applied to this situation. This model renders human society like particle system, where every particle exhibits it's own surface gradient of information density, i.e. the intelligence. Theories, i.e. well accepted paradigms of human thinking correspond the density gradients at the water surface and the intelligent ideas are corresponding causual, i.e. tranverse waves in causual space, similar to ripples at the water surface. The emotional feelings correspond the longitudinal waves instead, similar to underwater sound waves.

The underwater waves are weaker but they're spreading in much faster way - whereas surface waves tend to bounce from every gradient of information density (i.e. intelligence). Very bright people are behaving like black holes in this model - they're collecting all informations freely, but their experience cannot be shared easily, because of total reflection mechanism at their surface gradient of intelligence density. With compare to it, very dumb people are behaving like mirror-like bubbles with respect to transverse waves instead: they're empty and they're even reflecting all causal information coming from outside.

A well known kind of symmetry between formal (IQ) and nonformal intelligence (EQ) exists here, though: dumb people are often quite sensitive emotionally and they can be manipulated easily in this way, whereas logical argument doesn't count very much for them. Instead of it, formally bright people are rather emotional nuts and they lack EQ and social skills often - compare the Sheldon Cooper character from The Big Bang Theory sitcom.

The only way, in which black hole can radiate it's information to outside is the gravitational waves, which appear like Howking radiation. This mechanism is relatively subtle though, which explains, why really intelligent ideas are propagating slowly to the rest of society. Nevertheless, they can be supported with sufficiently emotional propaganda. For example, string theory (which is actually quite incomprehensible for laymans) is promoted with shots of beauty violinists in play at Nova TV show.

Should journalists second guess the scientific truth?

This post is a reaction to recent article of Lubos Motl of the same name. It's not surprising, Motl supports his restrictive stance, regarding the rights to expression of private opinion from the side of journalists. But we shouldn't neglect the fact, with respect to climatic science Lubos is just an educated journalist like everyone else and he violates his own rules flagrantly, because he is trying to influent public meaning massively all the time. He is just trying to dispute rights of journalists to the same activity, which he dedicated most of his time - and because he uses Google Adsense on his blog, he's even earning some money for it like professional journalists.

In general, opinion of experts matters from intrinsic perspective only. But just because experts are specialized to narrow area of their private interest, they're not overmuch qualified in judging of their opinions in wider context - on the contrary, they tend to occupy their stances rather blindly - the more, the more they feel being an experts in given area. In this context the reading of articles The era of expert failure by Arnold Kling,  Why experts are usually wrong by David H. Freeman and Why the experts missed the crash by Phill Tetlock (in Czech) may be useful not only for Lubos Motl.

Niels Bohr: "An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field".

Mainstream physics and Cargo Cult science.

From Richard Feynman’s “Cargo Cult Science” (also included in Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!):

"There have been many experiments running rats through all kinds of mazes, and so on–with little clear result. But in 1937 a man named Young did a very interesting one. He had a long corridor with doors all along one side where the rats came in, and doors along the other side where the food was. He wanted to see if he could train the rats to go in at the third door down from wherever he started them off. No. The rats went immediately to the door where the food had been the time before.
The question was, how did the rats know, because the corridor was so beautifully built and so uniform, that this was the same door as before?
Obviously there was something about the door that was different from the other doors. So he painted the doors very carefully, arranging the textures on the faces of the doors exactly the same. Still the rats could tell. Then he thought maybe the rats were smelling the food, so he used chemicals to change the smell after each run. Still the rats could tell. Then he realized the rats might be able to tell by seeing the lights and the arrangement in the laboratory like any commonsense person. So he covered the corridor, and still the rats could tell.
He finally found that they could tell by the way the floor sounded when they ran over it. And he could only fix that by putting his corridor in sand. So he covered one after another of all possible clues and finally was able to fool the rats so that they had to learn to go in the third door. If he relaxed any of his conditions, the rats could tell.
Now, from a scientific standpoint, that is an A-number-one experiment. That is the experiment that makes rat-running experiments sensible, because it uncovers that clues that the rat is really using– not what you think it’s using. And that is the experiment that tells exactly what conditions you have to use in order to be careful and control everything in an experiment with rat-running."

The similar mistake was done before 130+ years when comparing Michelson-Morley experiments concerning light spreading in vacuum to spreading of waves in material fields. By using of these experiments was deduced, vacuum doesn't behave like material field, because it doesn't exhibit a reference frame for motion (in fact it does it via weak Lense-Thirring effect in Aether density gradients and/or various supersymmetry phenomena due space-time expansion - but this is another story). But the conditions of both experiments weren't equivalent. The observation of light wave spreading by using of light waves in Michelson-Morley experiment is NOT an equivalent of observation of material wave by using of light waves, because two kinds of waves are involved in later experiment with compare to former one.

In such way, mainstream science did the similar mistake when interpreting M-M experiment, like Mr. Young did, because these two experiments weren't done in analogous way, i.e. under consistent arrangement. The physicists just believed, they're doing analogous experiments in similar way, like native people engaging in imitative behavior of "cargo cult". Only one person in Einsteinian era was supposedly capable to spot the difference, i.e. Oliver Lodge - but his opinions were widely ignored both by aetherists, both by mainstream science due his tendency to occultism and paranormal phenomena in his later age.

Anyway, it's crazy situation - at least from present perspective of the future of science history..

Continental Europe bans USA invention

Starting from Tuesday, September 1st, 2009, European Union is banning the production of incandescent light bulbs above 80 Watts in a bid to introduce compact fluorescent models, widely known as energy-savings bulbs. In 2012, only "efficient" light bulbs will be allowed and by 2016, they want to ban even the halogen lamps. EU contend that the average family will save $64 per year on electric bills, and carbon emissions could be cut by 15 million tons. On the flip side, some 3,000 jobs could be lost since most incandescent bulbs sold in Europe are made in the region, while the fluorescent variety come from elsewhere.

This can be perceived as temporal victory of energy over matter, as the compact fluorescent models are five to seven times more energy efficient, then incandescent light bulbs. But this balance can be easily reversed in near future, because fluorescent lamps are more demanding on irrecoverable sources in form of rare earth elements (REEs), used in luminophore production. 95% of output production of rare earth elements comes from China and China is now considering a ban on certain rare earth elements. The solution may be organized recycling of these luminophores or the replacement of rare elements by another ones or increased usage of LED-based sources for illumination. This example illustrates, the replacement of power hungry solution is always followed by increasing consumption of material sources, thus demonstrating universal matter-energy duality.

Because younger son of Czech president Vaclav Klaus is top manager of CEZ, main energetic company of Czech Republic, his wife, economist Livie Klaus was member of the CEZ supervisory board until 2002 and another son got four million euros donation from CEZ for his private school last year, it's logical, Vaclav Klaus himself is well known lobbyist of CEZ company and promoter of energetic dependence of Czech Republic to Russian fossil fuel import. Therefore it's very not surprising, Vaclav Klaus boycotts environmental politics of EU and he is openly promoting the consumption of energy hungry incandescent light bulbs in public.

Preprint servers and string theory evolution

Server arXiv.org is a vast online repository of physics papers, most of which are uploaded before they have passed muster by refereeing. Recently, increasing amount of scientists, testified that none of their papers are accepted and others are forcibly recategorized by the administrators of the arXiv either due to the controversial nature of their work, or it not being canonical to string theory, in what amounts to intellectual censorship. We should realize, the main (if not the only reason) of preprint servers is to maintain priority of scientific work - without it all ideas could be presented in private blogs for the sake of recency without problems. From these and possibly another reasons (1, 2) a viXra.org portal has been launched recently by "independent physicist" Phil Gibbs as a functional alternative to arXiv.org.

What happened here? The following lines are illustrating my private understanding of the whole story at general level from exsintric perspective of outer observer:

Because string theory was never accepted by mainstream in its entirety due the "lack of falsifiability", string theorists have started to use arXiv portal as their alternative publishing platform like squatters, thus by-passing standard process of peer-review of mainstream physics. They claimed on public, the dynamic character of string theory development requires faster public exchange of ideas, then the standard peer-review process can provide. Now string theory is forty years old theory (like "..old woman wearing way too much lipstick.." by Robert B. Laughlin) and arXiv server was always considered as an alternative publishing platform, especially by mainstream peer-reviewed journals (Science or Nature journals in particular), which were often hostile to preliminary publishing of scientific articles from apparent "conflict of interests" reasons (1, 2, 3).

As the result, former squatters have begun to consider arXiv server as their native or even private publishing platform and they started to displace proponents of another alternative theories by general paradigm "young anarchists - old conservatives". It's significant, well known proponent of string theory Lubos Motl is both opponent of squatters, both opponent of viXra.org due the "lack of credibility" by now - i.e. from the very same reason, from which string theorists were forced to publish their work on arXiv server before some time - although squatting chaos corresponds well the conceptual chaos of string theories and Mr. Motl himself was in strong opposition to mainstream (Google translation) represented by Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic in his young age.

Now we can observe formation of new opposition and we can expect, whenever such alternative becomes significant, a new independent publishing group will be established on its base - and so on.. Such evolution is quite common in social groups and it fits the AWT model of nested condensation of Aether particles well - so we can consider it as easily predictable in AWT context. While we should appreciate the responsibility, rigorousness and acuracy of formal approach represented by string theory, we shouldn't overlook the conceptual vagueness of this approach based on internal inconsistency of postulates and the lack of understanding of subject at general level. Instead of it, Aether concept is based on deep insintric plurality of concepts and mainstream scientists, some string theorists in particular should learn plurality in thinking by now. From this perspective, formation of vi@Xra server is the first step in this direction.

List of censors

Bellow you can find a list of sites, from where I was banned at least five times in sequence. This list is of informative purposes only and it will be updated gradually.

Blogs:

• Sean Carroll: Cosmic variance
• Lubos Motl : The reference frame
• Peter Woit : Not Even Wrong
• ZapperZ : Physics and Physicists

Forums:

• Aldebaran Forum (in Czech)
• BAUT Forum
• Physics Forums
• PhysOrg Forums
• SciForums

Journals:

• NewScientist
• OSEL (Objective Source E-learning, in Czech)
• ScienceWorld (in Czech)

"...They can't help it. Some people are just born with a lack of oxygen..."

AWT and collective guilt

Recently I've read about case of web executive working for TF1, Europe's largest TV network, who sent an email to his Member of Parliament opposing the government's law proposal of Internet disconnections for those who repeatedly infringe online copyrights. His MP forwarded the email to the minister, who forwarded it to TF1. The author of the email soon received a letter saying he is fired for "strong differences with the company's strategy" in a private email sent from a private address (French corporations and government are entangled in ways that people in other countries might find unfamiliar). The point was, MP people were passing the e-mail along for informational purposes reportedly - though if that were true, one wonders, why the identifying information wasn't stripped out of the message. No one "meant" for this to happen - but happened it has, anyway - just because of careless approach of responsible people chaining the sensitive information, which was supported by their own biased stance.

The above case reopens the question of collective guilt. This is subconsciouses emotional reaction, that results among a group of individuals, when it is perceived that the group illegitimately harmed another people. It just illustrates, how sensitive indicator of morality our conscience is - especially in western society, which is "guilt-based" rather then "shame-based". By AWT such morality becomes a manifestation of emergent phenomena in system, when only slightly biased stance of individual components may lead to the fatal results and phase transforms. We can illustrate this situation by large group of people, waiting for opening of discount shop. Even though every member of crowd exerts only weak force to its neighbors, some of people at the head of crowd will get trampled by this crowd.

AWT explains emergence of such action inside of multiparticle field by the assumption, every system of finite sized consists of large number of particles, circumscribed by their surface density gradient, which is manifestation of internal spin in hidden dimensions. In space with even number of spatial dimensions the particle spin is compensated by the same way, like the mutual motion of particles, because of lack of chirality of such system.

But in 3D the situation becomes different. The translation momentum of particles remains compensated at the sufficient distance, whereas the momentum of their internal motion (i.e. the spin) not. Such system behaves like spin field of cellular domains, analogous to Weiss domains of ferromagnetic material. Due the nonzero surface curvature of individual particles the resulting spin of whole system will remain always unbalanced and it undergoes so called spontaneous symmetry breaking. This is because of hairy ball theorem, which states, that there is no nonvanishing continuous tangent vector field on the sphere ("you can't comb a hairy ball flat without creating a cowlick"). From this reason a field formed by system of 3D spherical particles would always exhibit a nonzero vorticity, which would cumulate with distance and it manifest itself in lattice of vorticity cells at the distance. Which basically means, we cannot have a 3D space without black holes separated at distance in less or more regular domains. This is the reason, why our space-time appears filled by black holes even at the most distant view of Hubble ultradepth field without apparent limit. Just the existence of space-time in limited numbers of dimensions is the reason, why its symmetry becomes violated in presence of many higher dimensions undeniably.

The principle of collective guilt has its practical application at the case of particle physics, when mainstream physics insists on safety of LHC experiments , although official safety analysis ignores many apparent risky factors because of biased stance of mainstream physics toward LHC. The subtle bias of physical community can lead to the same result, like carefully planned conspirative activity of mad terrorist just because of cumulative effect of individual ignorance. As another case can serve the politically motivated refusal of Aether theory at the beginning of 20th century, the rise of Nazi party and Nazism in Germany before WW II or the blind adherence to peer review principles, which has lead to ignorance of cold fusion or antigravity experiments. The memo is, we should never underestimate collective ignorance, when more individuals are involved without public feedback by Czech proverb: "A hundred times nothing killed the donkey".

Would Galileo pass peer review today?

The case of Galileo Galilei, who was condemned for promotion of heliocentric model is usually interpreted by propaganda of mainstream science as a manifestation of superiority of so called scientific method over reactionary stance of Holy Church up to level, every notion of Galileo in different context is considered a direct manifestation of crackpotism. But under more thorough view we can identify many common points between reactionary stance of Holy Church and approach, which proponents of mainstream science are applying against promoters of Aether concept:

1. Heliocentrism was as an ancient Greek model by the same way, like Aether concept, so called plenum. It was thrown away later mostly from ideological reasons in both cases.
   
2. Holy Church was dominant meritocratic organization in Galileo era by the same way, like mainstream science today. Quantity criterion plays a role in AWT models of sociology, because majority mostly adheres to more conservative stance, then isolated souls due at the beginning of social cycle due the mutual compensation of progressive ideas (mutations) inside of larger groups.
   
3. Mr. Galileo has used an intuitive logical arguments without formal math to support heliocentric model (i.e. the order of Venus phases, orientation of lunar craters shadows, etc.), but they were ignored by his opponents on behalf of formal models by the same way, like mainstream science ignores logical arguments of Aether proponents on behalf of formal models - just because of their lack of formal math.
4. From the above reasons, Galileo was considered a controversial - if not naive - crackpot by the rest of people of his time by the same way, like many proponents of Aether concept today.
5. Both Holy Church at Galileo era, both mainstream science today have developed a tools for fast classification of renegades and crackpots without deeper analysis of their ideas, for example Malleus maleficarum handbook or famous crackpot index.
   
6. Heliocentric model was opposed by lack of stellar parallax regarding to Earth absolute motion, Aether model was opposed by lack of reference frame motion regarding to Earth absolute motion. This connection renders Aether model controversy as a direct analogy of heliocentric model controversy, just at different space-time scale.
   
7. While lack of parallax is was quite relevant argument against heliocentrism, the lack of Aether reference frame is result of pure misunderstanding of particle environment concept, as the motion of no environment can be observed by its own waves. This point renders mainstream science even more biased against logic and confused, then the proponents of geocentricism at Galileo time.
   
8. Geocentrists have ignored real life physics, the inertial physics in particular, which excludes the motion of heavier Sun around Earth on behalf of epicycles model by the same way, like space-time oriented model of contemporary physics ignores many real life connections of inertial character of vacuum, leading to wave character of light and many other phenomena.
9. Geocentric model was Platonism based on ad-hoced numerical regression of observation and ad-hoced geometrical constructs (deferents and epicycles) without deeper understanding by the same way, like mainstream physics today, which prefers formal theories based on ad-hoced postulates, abstract geometric constructs (strings, manifolds and branes of M-theory) and overly complex formal regression of reality, which nobody can understand at intuitive level too.
   
10. Geocentric model was used for calculations of motion of planets in Galileo times, although we know by now, these observations belongs into dual, i.e. heliocentric model. Analogously, mainstream science is blindly using relativity for interpretations of many phenomena (like gravitational lensing), which belongs into dual models by their very nature. We can consider this paradox a sort of supersymmetry phenomena (a formal model of theory is serving for confirmation of T-dual theory).
11. Formal models of geocentrists were of infinitesimal practical significance at Galileo times, they served mostly for calculations of horoscopes, based on periods of solar eclipses and planetary conjunctions, which gaved them the sign of authenticity. Many scientists today are using an Aether based models on background and Newtonian physics formalism (the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian calculus in particular) to give the predictability and notion of authenticity to their theories.
12. Many astronomers earned money like astrologers by bullshitting of layman people by their calculations without deeper understanding of their subject by the same way, like promoters of many scientific theories today, the promoters of string theory in particular.
13. Background motivation of negativistic stance of promoters of geocentric model was the fear for lost of their informational monopoly for interpretation of reality by mainstream paradigm (a theology in particular). The motivation of the negativism of mainstream scientists toward Aether model is the lost of their monopoly for interpretation of reality by so called scientific method.
14. The sectarian approach of both mainstream science, both Holy Church and other closed communities is characterized by so called novitiate period, during which new adepts are brainwashed by mainstream approach, before they're allowed to continue in further education and productive work. We can face this in contemporary educational system, where the formal approach to physical lectures prevails instead of more intuitive nonformal one.
    

It's apparent, history of science just repeats in social cycles at more advanced level of human understanding. Science just switched its progressive role with Holy Church of Galileo era. AWT explains this stance switching by inertial model of nested phase transforms, which is occurring inside of every large particle system during its gradual condensation/compactification.

When such system becomes sufficiently dense, its free-thinking particles will change into correlated, self-censored continuum, i.e. fluid or waves of energy. After then the density fluctuations of this fluid will behave like new generation of particles, while the former generations of particles are behaving like space-time or like energy wave by now. It means, the matter/particles and energy/space will switch their roles gradually and this evolution can repeat many times.

It may be interesting to follow, whether proponents of Aether theory will become such a brake of further evolution of science by the same way, like Holy Church of Galileo era or the proponents of mainstream science today. Thorough understanding of AWT pluralism should prohibit the formation of bias in ideology, though. We'll see. If nothing else, dense Aether concept could define a new era of ethics, tolerance and humanity understanding.

AWT and monetary economy

This post is a reaction to recent attempt of Prof. Dr. Lee Smolin to define economy on background of agent model of gauge invariance in article named Time and symmetry in models of economic markets (PDF), which is important for AWT by its consideration of Newtonian physics in explanation of economical models:

"It is apparent that time is treated in a way analogous to one aspect of its treatment in Newtonian physics. In classical mechanics, we say that time has been geometrized or spatialized in that the time coordinate is treated just like one of the other coordinates. Motion in a d dimensional space is treated as a geometrical curve in a d + 1 dimensional space. Following this, it is natural in Arrow-Debreu (model of an economy) to treat time the way space is treated. ... The prices are treated as being set at one time, so that goods to be delivered in the future may have a different price today than the same good delivered today. Making use of this, we can say that time, like space, is treated like just another feature of a commodity."

As a LQG proponent, Prof. Smolin avoids description of multidimensional and temporal aspects of this model. Therefore his general line of reasoning still appears somewhat formal/ad-hoced for me, but it still has a good meaning in the context of AWT, which considers the spatialized definition of time, too. By AWT every concept, including time is just a manifestation of nested gradients of Aether density. Despite wonderstricken irony of some comments, here exists many apparent analogies between evolution of life, inorganic matter or human society, including economy.

For example, we can experience a gradual inflation, which is an analogy the inflation in Linde's cosmology, where it is consequence of gradual increase of vacuum density. This increase corresponds the gravitational collapse of collapsar, whose interior the vacuum appears to be formed. From insintric perspective of observer, formed by density fluctuations of such environment the space-time would expand with distance in accordance to Hubble law. This is not so surprising, because economy is energy density driven, so it can be described by dynamics of particle environment. And the energy spreading in particle environment exhibits a gauge invariance by the same way, like geometry of vacuum and particle fields.


We can illustrate it by formation of monetary economy in context of cosmic inflation. At the very beginning no money existed at all - just the exchange of various kinds of goods. By the same way, like the exchange of gravitons at the very beginning of our Universe. By quantum field theory gravitons are considered as a dual particles, playing a role of both fermions, both bosons at the same time. In primitive communism society the good has played both the role of subject of material exchange, both energetic exchange at the same time.

As the density of energy/goods exchange increased, the system did undergo a phase transition as the result of spontaneous symmetry breaking, which was followed by specialization. A two kinds of particles - bosons and fermions - emerged during inflation by the same way, like the exchange of values has separated into exchange of material gods and exchange of money, i.e. energy and the monetary economic has appeared. As the result, the density of exchange density has increased remarkably inside of human society, because it's quite easy to transfer a big amount of value via money at distance.

Even evolution of monetary economy can be understood as a process of symmetry breaking of goods condensate. The goods in primitive communism society served both like subject of trade, both like subject of exchange by the same way, like gravitons were serving both like fermions and bosons. During evolution of society in Sumerian empire 3500 - 3000 BC has separated into money (a bosons) and a goods as such. Another degree of condensation (a hadronization) of money has occurred under evolution of more complex financial derivatives (stock exchange derivatives, swaps, forward rate agreements, etc.). From this point of view, formation of money and monetary economy evolution is just a repeating of the old well-tried practice of universe, not a human invention at all.

We can see many other analogies here. The exchanging of money is followed by exchange of material stuff or services in free market economy. The falling of matter into gravitating body is always followed by radiation of energy (an accretion radiation, the meteors or radiation of matter in magnetic field of magnetars are similar effects from this perspective). If the exchange of matter isn't balanced by radiation of energy - which occurs typically for very dense bodies with small surface - a gravitational collapse may occur. Now we are experiencing a financial crisis, i.e. gravitational collapse of stock markets of high density of energy exchange, we are saying, the financial market was overheated. This situation can be predicted by appearance of tiny fluctuations, in analogy to luminosity changes of giant bright stars before their collapse. Therefore the particle based theory can serve as a tool for predicting and avoidance of stock market crashes, which makes it significant from practical reasons.

Money should be understood as a mean of value in its abstract meaning here, not as a currency. We aren't exchanging money or goods in fact, but time/energy required for their earning. Which basically means, total value of money cannot exceed man-hours of people, who have produced them under given level of technology. This connection has an important consequences for macroeconomics and further evolution of human society, as we can demonstrate later. The nonlinear ("money are attracting/earning money") and quantum wave aspects of particle models in economy we will dispute later as well.

From AWT model follows, primitive communism society is dual to "laissez-faire" capitalism, they're indistinguishable by the same way like fermion and bosons inside of graviton quantum foam. Free market economy can exist just under strong incubator of government, which carefully removes all weak or strong mutations (a monopolies, for example). Just under these artificial situations market can remain freely driven by supply-demand equilibrium.

Because individuals aren't usually willing to see/pay their global needs, their personal motivations and intelligence compensate mutually like interactions inside of large system of particles. At sufficiently general level the silly particle models can describe market society quite well even under consideration of low number of dimensions. This is partially because free market economy can handle actual prices only, it doesn't reflect future - so it's principally metastable and it undergoes a business cycle by the same way, like perceived evolution of observable Universe.



Therefore monetary inflation is tightly related to central government and legal actions by the same way, like expansion of space-time. Gradual expansion inflation of Universe prohibits the Big Bang event to occur too often, so that intelligent life has a sufficient time to develop in it. By analogous way, to keep free market stable we are forced to allow some permanent dissipation in it - or we're risking a "big bang" event, i.e. market crash. This is usually done both by centrally driven legal interventions of government, both by anti-dumping policy of private companies.

Splendors and Miseries of Conservatism

This post is an reaction to public news, by which fourteen years old Jonathan Krohn formulated the manifest of conservatism in his book Define Conservatism. The common criticism of conservatism is based on the vagueness of this philosophy, in relation to liberalism in particular.

By this this page (which is somewhat biased against liberalism) the conservatism is defined by following six apparently nontransparent principles:

1. Belief in natural law.
   Here we can met with biased stance often, because proponents of conservatism tends to neglect just these laws, which are supporting a synergies and evolutionary advantages of collectivism and strong central government.
   
2. Belief in established institutions
   Belief in institutions, the government in particular makes a belief in individual somewhat problematic, just because established institutions tends to subdue individual freedom very often. Here's no intersubjectively accepted criterion of level, by which institutions can affect the life of individual safely without violation of individual freedom.
3. Preference for liberty over equality.
   This may sound well, but by principle, the freedom of individual begins exactly where freedom of others ends the maximal freedom of individual exists just in completely egalitarian society.
4. Suspicion of power—and of human nature.
   This is vague stance as well, because just the established institutions are dispersers of true power. Human nature can lead to misuse of conservative principles by the same way, like misuse of libertarian ones.
5. Belief in exceptionalismus.
   This belief manifest often in biased meritocratic elitism, which defies the individual right very often.
6. Belief in the individual.
   The general reason, why individuals are organizing itself into "established institutions" is just to promote the collective opinion (groupthink) over the opinion of individuals.

It's evident, all principles of conservatism are rather weekly defined and supersymmetric by their very nature: the abuse of some of them leads to violation of other conservative principles immediately. Generally high tendency to manipulation and hypocrisy in conservative stance manifests itself by various ways. From AWT follows, the only relevant stance from long term perspective is strictly balanced one, which considers both individual, both democratic principles of social arrangements. As the density of society increases, the need of balanced approach becomes more pronounced gradually, and it converges to the duality of conservative and liberal approach in 1:1 ratio. Which practically means, the "Tax Free Day" ("The Cost of Government Day") should converge to end of July, for example.

With respect to the above definition main principles of conservatism, as postulated in Krohn's book appear even more vague and childish, if not manipulative. They're implying on background, the opponents of conservatism doesn't believe in "life" or "personal responsibility" or "founding principle", thus becoming a sort of naive demagogy. For example, communism relies strongly just on personal responsibility and its founding principles, thus becoming an utopistic ideology by the same way, like definition of conservatism by Jonathan Krohn. The idealization/ideologization of conservatism can be perceived as a natural defensive reaction to undergoing financial crisis, which implies a temporal need of public interventions and it illustrates, how deeply guardians of traditional "conservative values" become confused by recent situation.
“...Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more of expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until their debt becomes unbearable. The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalized, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism...”— Karl Marx, 1867, Das Kapital (a hoax?)

AWT and socioeconomic structures

This post is a reaction to defensive stance of many objectivists, monetarists in particular, which are getting into conceptual troubles with contemporary financial crisis. Aether model of particle density fluctuations enables us to understand the mutual relation of socioeconomic structures, the dual character of communism and free market society in particular. By AWT free market society or "laissez-faire" capitalism, as proposed by some subjectivists corresponds the primitive communism society, which is behaving like thin sparse gas with high degree of symmetry (i.e. the space time of low number of spatial dimensions on behalf of temporal ones). Such particles are moving here rather freely and they're collide mutually via low distance interactions by simple and transparent set of individual probability driven rules.

When population density of such particle system increases, an emergent spontaneous symmetry breaking occurs and the energy/value spreading (i.e. the economy) of this system becomes driven by less or more apparent and global microscopical structures (i.e. (mem)branes of foam), which are obtaining a nested hierarchical structure gradually. When the system becomes sufficiently dense, the scope of foamy structures determines the motion of all particles - participants of this system by totalitarian way.

When social pressure inside of such system exceeds certain limit, a new emergent structure of individual density fluctuations inside of such dense system appears, which is serving as a promoter of subsequent phase transition, so called social revolution, which has often avalanche like character. And the whole social cycles repeats again, until society doesn't exhausts its sources. After then the social transition goes by opposite way back into free market or primitive communism economy.

While the analogy of social evolution and phase transitions is quite apparent, just common ignorance of Aether model has prohibit the scientists to model the evolution of society by easy, general and transparent way. This is the reason, why Aether concept was ignored both left, both right camp ideologies, because no ideology can like ballanced, duality based approach of AWT. It's a pity, as it would help to understand the physical mechanism of social crisis, wars and financial instabilities better. For example AWT explains origin of macroeconomic cycle by limited speed of information spreading through society or it explains wars as a consequence of social gradient in space-time, not just in space: the situation, when some country becomes richer or poor fast is much more dangerous, then stabilized neighbourhood of poor and rich countries. As the result, sociology and economics are still in very rudimentary stage of general understanding of human society, despite of high number of less or more formal models, which are trying to describe their subject locally.

From above model follows, AWT considers communism as a dual case of free market society, because utopistic character of both social systems depends on altruistic belief in human ability cooperate fairly without tendency to abuse system. It means, here's nothing wrong on communism or "laissez-faire" free market economy, with the only subtle, but crucial problem: both theories are ignoring social interactions and the "selfish" tendency of people to follow shortest path of energy density gradient due limited speed of information. As the result, both socioeconomic structures requiring support of high level social structures, i.e. government and their interventions to remain free and stable.

By AWT free market is a boson state of society, based on utopistic belief in human ability cooperate fairly without tendency to abuse system, by the same way, like communism. It's a dual ideology to communism. Paradoxically both they can survive just under adequate care of government - the more stronger, the more superfluous the social relationships are expected to be, so that the ratio of profit and taxes converges to 1:1 with increasing of money density exchange and Lafer curve becomes symmetric. Because people are simply undisciplined and self-seeking individuals - that's all. Therefore the tax freedom day defines well the overall state of macrosocioeconomic evolution.

Here's still subtle spontaneous CP symmetry violation, as the free market exhibits a rudimental set of principal microeconomic rules (the principle of supply and demand equilibrium in particular), while communism is only subjectively driven, which makes it more viable from evolutionary reason. Free market operates with current prices only, it doesn't reflect past or future by itself - so it's principally unstable and it undulates between financial boom and crisis. While these undulations may appear fatal for someone, they can drive the evolution of social system forward, until the external sources of society aren't depleted.

On the other hand, communism is dissipating it's sources by short distance interactions, so it behaves well under low energy density conditions, being more primitive. Centrally controlled system handles better long-term problems, like global warming or the life environment protection, because free market economy cannot evaluate well the price of extinct species, until they're not significant for economy (as a source of cancer cure, for example, or various biotechnologies). From this reason, society evolution converges to mixed arrangement, not pure communism or free market economy, despite of wishfull thinking and occasional propaganda of their opponents.

Now we could ask - whether free market didn't exist a well before the very first government has appeared? Yes, it did - but the energy density of such free market exchange was very low with compare to the present state, so its behavior was analogous to primitive capitalism. Now the civilization has collapsed into rather dense money and energy exchange state, so that the free market relationships can persist in very short distance interactions inside of families and close sectarian groups.

The contemporary financial crisis illustrates clearly, the keeping of bursa and highly derived financial products of advanced economy requires the strong patrolling role of state as well. And who didn't realize it is just an dangerous idealist. Most of political troubles of modern civilization were caused just by ideologies supported by various idealists, both proponents of free market society, both communism. Shooting the fanatics is probably not a really good way to expand tolerance, but we do need to keep pushing.

Danger of positive approach

Few weeks ago, Lubos Motl has won the 2008 Weblog Award price for Best European (Non UK) Blog, which may become a surprise for someone, proponents of dual theories in particular. Whereas AWT is rather invariant/symmetric with respect to string /LQG duality, we can make an attempt for independent analysis of this result. The positive thing may be, Lubos is compatriot of mine, we even both born in the same city - which is not so difficult, after all, as the Czech Republic is really tiny country. Czech Republic is birthplace of many brilliant and intelligent people and beautiful women as well, which is partly due its location in central Europe on the crossroad of many trade routes, along which the mixing of various races can occur.



On the other hand, I'm not very sure, whether Lubos is a typical representative of Czech science, society the less - which is traditionally rather balanced in its opinions, if not opportunistic due it's sensitive geopolitic role of small boundary country between zones of interest of East an West Europe blocks. Buffer countries are often playing a role of branes, which leads to the fragmentation of state boundaries in this area. Aether foam gets more dense at place of density gradient due the potential energy content, where two dual space-time branes/gradients intersects/interfere mutually.



Whereas Weblog Award is rather representative competition, it's still based on results of surprisingly limited number of votes, because the first place in Best European Blog category was a matter of just some 700 voices. Which isn't really too much in the world of anonymous proxies, whereas Goggle is doing a lot more than 1000 queries per second (about 25 queries per second per server). Anyway, Motl's price is well deserved for his frenetic activity and it's even logical in certain extent, because his postings are often quite entertaining and informative and Reference Frame blog is one of few ones, which I'm visiting regularly. Because modern people are basically consumers, Motl's graphomania plays well with their needs, because average visitor can always find something new in his blog everyday.

If so, where's the problem?

Even if we ignore the excentric and subjectively ugly design (typical for Motl's sites) and sometimes unstable behavior of scripts on his site (the purpose of which is to prohibit Motl's opponents in visiting and posting at times), we shouldn't neglect the fact, popularity of this blog is partially based on strongly biased opinions and ad hominem attacks, followed by personally motivated censorship of discussions, which manifest itself by sectarian character of people, which are allowed to post there (simillia simillibus curantur). From these reasons, Motl is often perceived as a controversial person in blogosphere. Personally, I do not believe, most of people, who voted in Weblog Award Poll didn't realize autistic and asocial character of "humble correspondent's" blog - the problem is, the system of voting didn't enable them to express their opinion. Negative voices simply don't count here.

This is a general property of contemporary voting systems, which enable only positive votes, which leads to high degree of populism in side of politicians and ignorance and lack of interests about negative aspects of politics on the side of publicity. Even morally controversial politicians may become successful in this system, if they're is sufficiently active in another areas, in self promotion of personality cult in particular. I believe, this MAY be one of reasons of society problems with its own political representations: voters simply have no veto privilege - they can be only partly responsible. In natural evolution such unbalanced approach to fitness function would suffer consequences, because it violates the equilibrium of supply and demand.

As I'm not expert in social sciences, I'm not informed, whether such approach was proposed or even tested in history and which reasons has lead people to consider only positive voting approach in anonymous elections. Maybe it could have adverse effects and it would lead to undesirable level of opportunism between politicians, I don't know. But as I've met in many cases, most trivial ideas were often ignored for long time just because of their simplicity or generally low asset, which can manifest only under high civilization density. Maybe it could even save Germany from nacism in the mid of 30's of the last century, which was rather inclined to Hitler's populism. If so, maybe the time of more dualistic/symmetric voting system just come up.

Are we getting dumber in our Universe?

This post is a reaction to recent report about a new study by James Flynn, by which teenagers in Britain should have lower IQ scores than their counterparts did a generation ago (via Reference Frame blog log, where dual opinion of Lubos Motl is presented), you can consider another study. It brought me another few recent reports in mind: the information about evaporation of kilogram meter prototype, dilatation of iridium meter prototype and Pamela Gay's report about violation of standard candle supernovae and many other speculations, too.

How all these apparently different areas MAY be related together? In concept of omnidirectional space-time expansion a strange thing appears: such expansion accelerates gradually, until light isn't able to follow it anymore. We can consider the remote Universe boundary or black hole event horizon as a place, where the light effectively freezes in gradually expanding universe.

By AWT we can imagine a consequences of Universe expansion easier from exsintric perspective dual to space-time expansions: every piece of matter appears like less or more dense blob of Aether density here, i.e. like piece of pre-expanded space-time from classical insintric perspective. The space-time expansion can be interpreted like compactification of vacuum foam as well. After then the difference between density of matter and density of vacuum would decrease during space-time expansion, the observable matter would dissolve in vacuum, because the surface tension forces keeping the particle together will not be strong enough to keep the particle of matter together anymore.



Such insight has a number of testable implications. Every material object will expand in gradually expanding space-time the more, the more compacted space-time it contains, i.e. the more dense is as well. The speed of light, as measured by standing photon waves in solid objects would decrease with compare to values, measured by standing wave in vacuum. This can be interpreted as a slowing of time. And every material object would dissolve into energy of vacuum, i.e. radiation in less or more distant perspective: the faster, the more heavy is - which is commonly observed at the case of massive stars. We can consider a nonzero speed of proton decay, as predicted by some theories in this connection.

As the result, observable matter would become more lightweight with compare to matter in distant past and it would expand as a consequence of gradual decrease of gravity constant. The Expanding Earth theory may emerge immediately, but this concept can be verified even by look into distant past. The frequency if cepheid supernovae explosions, considered as a standard candles will increase gradually, while luminosity of will decrease, because it proportional to total mass converted into radiation in each explosion. This dependence can explain the dark energy phenomena naturally, because the Hubble constant measurement depends on the measurement of relative brightness of cepheid supernovae explosions.



The above phenomena can be related to IQ declination problem of English population. Maybe IQ didn't decrease, but it was transformed into higher dimensions/low distance scope interactions accordingly to increased civilization mass/energy density. Inside of dense gas the interaction scope of particle decreases too: the particle interactions are much faster, but more temporal as well. The social and family relations of members in society would become weaker as well and more promiscuite.

The fast reactions and social IQ becomes more important for survival of each individual, then in the more sparse society. For example, most of teenagers can chat and to send SMS a much faster, then I can do. But theirs knowledge is both more superficial, both more specialized. Our civilization changes into single large nest of giant ants.



After all, we can observe it even in theoretical physics. Many contemporary physicists are brilliant specialists - but their knowledge of various subtleties of Victorian physics are very schematic and superficial. They're separated from reality by the same way, like from the rest of society. Without math support they cannot estimate and predict (nearly) anything correctly. The ability of non formal thinking is sadly lacking. Which is sad sometimes, as they're believe, their level of specialization gives them a qualification to advice people in other areas (like politics, economy, global warming and so on). While exactly the opposite becomes true often from obvious reasons.

By my opinion, this specialization is not a result of laziness or dumbness, but rather sort of adaptation to increasing volume of informations. Nearly nobody requires hand writing or mental arithmetic like square rooting today, to solve algebraic equations the less. After all, these tasks can be handled by hand computers and software tool easily, so I don't see a large problem here - we cannot simply handle everything. This situation increases importance of simple general ideas, from which many subtleties can be derived easily on demand. The importance of overcomplicated theories will decline by the same way, like the significance of command line and assembly languages decreased under income of moder high level object languages and GUI based operational system.

So experts have developed various IQ tests, the purpose of which is to measure an IQ in general way, but their metrics didn't change with time so fast, like the preferences of society. Therefore we are facing the same effects inside of our society like inside of our Universe - just in perspective few dimensions closer to human brain perspective. From internal perspective we can see, how our IQ grows, while it still collapses from exsintric perspective.

AWT and definition of intelligence

By AWT correct - i.e. physically relevant - definition of intelligence is rather important, as it can give us a clue about direction of psychological time arrow.

From certain perspective every free particle appears like quite intelligent "creature", because it can find the path of the optimal potential gradient unmistakably even inside of highly dimensional field where interactions of many particles overlaps mutually. Whereas single particle is rather "silly" and it can follow just a narrow density gradient, complex multidimensional fluctuations of Aether can follow a complex gradients and they can even avoid a wrong path or obstacles at certain extent. They're "farseeing" and "intelligent". Note that the traveling of particle along density gradient leads into gradual dissolving of it and "death". The same forces, which are keeping the particle in motion will lead to its gradual disintegration of it.

The ability of people to make correct decisions in such fuzzy environment is usually connected with social intelligence. We can say, motion of particle is fully driven by its "intuition". They can react fast in many time dimensions symmetrically (congruently), whereas their ability to interact with future (i.e. ability of predictions) still remains very low, accordingly to low (but nonzero) memory capacity of single gradient particle. Nested clusters of many particles are the more clever, the more hidden dimensions are formed by. Electrochemical waves of neural system activity should form a highly nested systems of energy density fluctuations.

Neverthelles, if we consider intelligence as "an ability to obtain new abilities", then the learning ability and memory capacity of single level density fluctuations still remains very low. Every particle has a surface gradient from perspective of single level of particle fluctuations, so it has an memory (compacted space-time dimensions) as well. Therefore for single object we can postulate the number of nested dimensions inside of object as a general criterion of intelligence. The highly compactified character of neuron network enables people to handle a deep level of mutual implications, i.e. manifolds of causual space defined by implication tensors of high order. Such definition remains symmetrical, i.e. invariant to both intuitive behaviour driven by parallel logics, both conscious behaviour, driven by sequential logics.

Every highly condensed system becomes chaotic, because intelligent activities of individual particles are temporal and they're compensating mutually here. By such way, the behavior of human civilization doesn't differ very much from behavior of dense gas, as we can see from history of wars and economical crisis, for instance. The ability of people to drive the evolution of their own society is still quite limited in general. We can consider such ability as a criterion of social self-awareness. The process of phase transition corresponds learning phase of multi-particle system.

Interesting point is, individual members of such systems may not be aware of incoming phase transition, because theirs space-time expands (the environment becomes more dense) together with these intelligent artifacts. At certain moment the environment becomes more conscious (i.e. negentropic), then the particle system formed by it and phase transition will occur. The well known superfluidity and superconductivity phenomena followed by formation of boson condensate can serve as a physical analogy of sectarian community formation, separated from the needs/feedback of rest of society. Members of community can be internally characterized by their high level of censorship (total reflection phenomena with respect to information spreading) and by superfluous homogeneity of individual stance distribution, followed by rigidity and fragility of their opinions (i.e. by duality of odd and even derivations in space and time) from outside perspective.

AWT explains, how even subtle forces of interests between individuals crowded around common targets cumulate under emergence of irrational behavior gradually. Because such environment becomes more dense, the space-time dilatation occurs here and everything vents OK from insintric perspective. As the result, nobody from sectarian community will realize, he just lost control over situation.

For example, people preparing LHC experiments cannot be accused from evil motives - they just want to do some interesting measurements on LHC, to finish their dissertations, make some money in attractive job, nurse children, learn French, and so on… Just innocent wishes all the time, am I right? But as a whole their community has omitted serious precautionary principles under hope, successful end justifies the means.

Particle model explains, how even subtle forces of interests between individuals crowded around common targets cumulate under emergence of irrational behavior gradually. For example, nobody of this community has taken care about difference in charged and neutral black holes in their ability to swallow surrounding matter. As a result, nobody of members of such community realizes consequence of his behavior until very end.

And this is quite silly and unscouscios behavior, indeed.

AWT and surface curvature symmetry violation

In physics the reality is divided into particles of matter (i.e. fermions) and the particles of space and energy, (i.e. bosons). It's quite surprising, this asymmetry wasn't never disputed in terms of woman and man principle in modern physics, albeit it's quite apparent . The reason is probably political, because this analogy has too sexist connotations in its consequences: it leads to the conclusions, women will never completely equal to mans, or even worse: the situation, when they become converge in their social roles, will indicate phase transition in society, a social revolution...

When explaining the evolution of Universe and observable matter, the Aether Wave Theory is inspired by phase transition in dense particle systems, the condensation of supercritical fluids in particular . Such transition is the most subtle phase transition inside of most dense particle system, which we can study in terrestrial condition - so that most of dualities and less or more general concepts can be observed right here directly.

By AWT the general explanation of symmetry violation is, everything in observable Universe is of particle nature, including us. But we are always smaller then the rest of Universe, so we are observing particles, which are forming spacetime with oposite chiral perspective, then the particles, which are sharing this space-time together with us by the same way, like we are observing objects in mirror. At {very distant places / beginning} of our Universe generation, the space-time {appears like / has condensed into} supersymmetric form of so called graviton foam, which corresponds the first generation of density fluctuations inside of supercritical fluid. The geometry of this foam is interesting by fact, it's completelly supersymmetric, i.e. it has no difference between outer or inner surface developed, i.e. its surface curvature is infinite and all particles (a gravitons) plays a role of both bosons, both fermions.

In real cases the symmetry of graviton foam is violated less or more lately and it will separate to the racemic mixture of matter and antimatter fermions and corresponding supersymmetric bosons, while the fermion surface will condense into particles of matter, while the rest will evaporate into energy, forming the rest of space. We can observe this for example during rain droplet condensation, where the newly created racemic mixture of droplets will separate by their critical size, given by oversaturation: after then the smaller droplets will evaporate on behalf of those larger ones, which will become condense into chiral droplets. Inside of anthropic Universe generation (i.e. the level of Aether fluctuations observable by human), the matter bellow human neuron scale (dual to CMB wavelength scale) tends to gradual evaporation, while the larger particles tends to gradual condensation instead.

The reason is, by Hairy ball theorem every tiny droplet consist from Cooper pair of quantum vortices, forming the surface of droplets - at the moment, the size of droplet increases, this symmetry is violated, while the droplets formed by odd number of vortices are preferred. This symmetry violation plays a quite significant role, until droplets remains small (analogy to neutrinos in physics), while it manifests by rather subtle way, when fermion droplets become larger (the difference between particles and antiparticles of matter is rather subtle for heavier particles) - but it never disappear completely.

Therefore the fermion droplets (a female) are always slightly heavier, quiet, more stable and social particles, while the boson droplets (a) are somewhat lightweight, movable and straightforward ones. Somewhat asocial character of bosons manifests in their competitive nature. Both kinds of particles have their structure defined by chiral spiral structure inside, which is splitted and exchanged during matting under production of children particles. We can observe this process at the case of collision of vortex rings (see the videos 1, 2 from this page), during which the daughter vortices (particles) are formed, note that the total chirality of resulting vortices is always retained during this transform by Noether theorem, which follows from momentum conservation law:

The particle interactions aren't never quite spontaneous, they exhibit an activation energy like mercury droplets during merging, due their surface tension energy. The merging of object with positive curvature requires the temporal formation of thin neck with positive surface curvature, which is the source of repulsive force. The interactions between fermions and bosons are always more stronger, then between fermions and fermions or bosons and bosons mutually. The reason is, antisymmetric motion of Aether and Aether density compensates mutually at the case of isotropic particles, when they're appears in proximity - while at the case of supersymmetric particles it increases a causality density of Aether foam due increased energy density inbetween (a "shaking" of Aether foam between pair of particles leads to formation of gauge bosons here). This symmetry is the origin of so called charge interaction.

The formation of supersymmetric interactions we can observe at many levels inside of our Universe. During Bang Bang the graviton foam has separated into matter and energy, during so called inflation the matter has separated further into matter and antimatter, which has evaporated gradually due its anti-gravity component, while the particles of matter condensed into atoms, forming the planet, stars and galaxies. The lepton remnant of antimatter evaporated were trapped by omni-directional expansion of space-time into clouds of so called dark matter, surrounding the observable matter.

By AWT the evolution of life is just a continuation of condensation of inorganic matter. During life formation, the first organism were formed by liposome foam, which has separated from the surface of ancient oceans. The hydrophobic surface of foam collected the matter neutral surfactants, while the chiral more polar molecules (sacharides) we cumulated inside like source of energy. Whole biosphere collect the energy of sun, converting it into matter of fossil fuels, stored beneath the Earth surface of positive curvature, while dissipating the matter of Earth into atmosphere. The formation of family can be interpreted as another degree of condensation of matter into foam or liposome condensate, where the females which prefer more social interactions prefers to move in proximity, while the movable and far seeing males prefers to stay outside of their homes. While the division of labor following from sexual dimorphism may sound well for many male sexists, feminists can feel payed by compliment, which renders females as creatures of somewhat higher degree of condensation, i.e. material evolution.

In accordance with this, the boson particles (males, electrons) tends to collect living matter from larger distance for food, while less movable fermion particles (females, protons) collect the inorganic matter and energy sources (fuel) from proximity like gatherers. It corresponds the social role of womans, which are giving birth and they don't like the animal killing more, then males, who are hunters by their very nature. As a boson particle, the mans have a better relations to material world, as they're producing tools, while consuming energy, while females are rather tools consumers, they cater to warm house and they have stronger relationship to animals - especially these non-carnivorous ones (horses).

In relation to neighboring material world, females are more convex (and complex) particles then males, animals are less convex, then males, but more convex, then inorganic matter and inorganic matter is more convex, then energy. Albeit at the Planck/cosmological scales we can face some supersymmetry here, because for example the most lightweight particles are behaving like most curved ones in respect to both ends of space-time curvature scale, while from the human scale perspective they're more close to photons, instead. We'll discuss later, how the surface curvature of particles affect their behavior and mutual interactions later in more details.

Is science like democracy?

This post is a reaction to TED lecture of Lee Smolin from 2003, which was republished recently at YouTube. In fact, I was quite surprised, how deeply Mr. Smolin recognized the connection between society and spin network of Aether fluctuations, on which the Aether independent logic of LQG theory is based.

Of course, the title question is highly political, because for many mainstream science proponents is rather unpleasant to admit, such proclamativelly objective organization like science is driven by inter-subjective meaning of scientists like sectarian community, rather then by bare facts - despite of their origin. Such stance is somewhat idealistic or even hypocritical, indeed - because just these members are refuting or even proactivelly denying the introduction of new ideas into mainstream from outside, especially from so-called cranks. These proponents are labeling the opponents purportedly by this (often quite rude) way, and they've developed a various lists of ad-hoced criterions (1, 2), analogous to Malleus maleficarum handbook from medieval times, which could help them to distinguish the harmful people violating the scientific integrity without having familiar with their ideas at all. These proponents are often masquerading like proper skeptics, while exhibiting one or more symptoms of pathological disbelief. The sectarian character of mainstream community is feeded by educational system, as we can demonstrate somewhat later.



Unfortunately mainstream science - the theoretical physics in particular - is rather close to sectarian society being the non-profit organization dependent on mandatory fees more, then other parts of free market society. But the stance, the science is dependent to inter-subjective meaning like democracy follows directly from so-called scientific method based on peer-review and Popper's methodology, by which theories simply have no place in science, only facts - because theories could be never considered proven with certainty. But the decision, what is still fact and what is just a theory is fully arbitrary here and it depends on the inter-subjective consensus of scientific community. It can be demonstrated easily by number of boundary phenomena, like the homeopathy, various psychic phenomena or cold fusion, which are refuted by mainstream science proponents for years - not saying about Aether concept and many others.

For example, mainstream science decided before years, Aether doesn't exist, because its motion should be observable by using of light - which wasn't confirmed experimentally with sufficient precision. But the analogy of light waves in vacuum are waves at wave surface and by using of such waves surface can be never observed, because is serving as a space for them already. Therefore the negative result of M-M experiment and others cannot serve as a ultimate evidence against Aether concept.

Therefore, Mr. Smolin is right in large extent and mainstream science still depends on inter-subjective opinion heavily, thus exhibiting a character of democracy or even meritocracy. Simply because facts are rarely considered by science, only interpretations of facts - exactly the opposite, what the scientific method should be. This is logical consequence of tautological character of symmetry in Poppers methodology, where each negation of some theory becomes another theory, which should be tested independently. From this perspective Poppers methodology doesn't bring any ultimate criterion of the validity of so-called scientific approach and Mr. Smolin is quite right in his point, something like scientific method doesn't exists, in fact.

In analogy to previous example, the famous M-M experiment "proving the absence of Aether reliably" should by still handled with caution, because the absence of Aether wasn't, what the M-M experiment has measured, exactly - such conclusion is just a weak interpretation of its result and this interpretation can be mistaken by the same way, like whatever other interpretation or theory. Unfortunately, many mainstream science proponents are driven by tendency of pathological disbelief to deny, rather than doubt, their approach to reality is biased - so that Aether concept was thrown out of science for more then one century.

With compare to above, AWT introduces a concept of so-called pluralities, which are generalization of dualities used in quantum field theories. Dualities are originally a concept of projective geometry, which can be called an "perspective of interpretation" or "point of view". The significant point here is, the things often appear reciprocal from reciprocal perspective. The simplest example is Maldacena duality: when you're sitting inside of gravitational lens, the path of light appears straight, the space-time appears curved for you and everything appears OK from relativity perspective.



But whenever we are observing the same phenomena from outside, everything will change: here no signs of time dilatation and curved space - but the path of light appears curved, instead. This leads to the Lorentz symmetry violation, the causality violation (you can see a multiple images/consequences of the same phenomena) and other effects following from quantum mechanics. The nested Aether foam concept introduces a concept of pluralities here. This doesn't mean, the causality of scientific thinking is violated - it just means, it strictly depends on the observational perspective, the postulate set chosen in particular. By AWT every rule violates itself in less or more global scale, the progressive approach of mainstream science becomes brake of the further evolution less or more lately and the roles of intuitive and formal thinking alternates during such evolution, thus forming a nested phases of Aether foam. Such behavior can be demonstrated by relation of interactions inside of nested fields of density gradients to Goedel incompleteness theorem and the liar paradox. By such way, AWT reconciles the positivistic philosophy of many mainstream proponents with constructivism of Lee Smolin and others independent scientists.


Mr. Lee Smolin basically said, most difficult thing in science is to admit, someone else could have his piece of truth. By AWT the theories is behaving like condensate of neural waves inside of human brains, which are intensifying the information spreading by such a way, we can compare it to density blob, focusing the information spreading around it like optical lens. But the very same effect makes a communities of different theorists mutually intolerant, because such gradient exhibits a "surface tension", which leads to repulsive interactions, which we can observe at the case of mercury droplets easily. Occasionally, such community can close itself into sectarian informational singularity due total reflection phenomena, occurring at the surface of such causality blob. thus changing itself into boson condensate. Such singularity is formed by systematic censorship and personal relationships (a biased view attracts another people with biased view and their actions are synergistic) - so that only single-minded opinions will prevail at the end by selection. Such selection occurs even during fall of matter into black holes, which are collecting just a denses parts of matter, while radiating the rest at the form of so called accretion radiation. Most groups in blogosphere exhibit the very same behavior.

"Autoritätsdusel ist der größte Feind der Wahrheit," Albert Einstein, 1901

If it's so, isn't it strange, why just mainstream science is meritocracy driven?

AWT and free market instability

Professor Johnson explains function of capitalistic economy by the following way:

Income differences tend to increase by mobility in space, skill and knowledge, but differences are not allowed to become arbitrarily large through control by progressive taxes, interest rates, limitations of work hours et cet intended to decrease difference. We understand that this control is necessary; a completely free capitalistic system collapses.

This is fully relevant - though sociology based - view, as the true reason of free market instability wasn't recognized yet. From AWT perspective this instability is of physical nature and it has the very same origin, like the instability of the whole Universe, which is collapsing gradually. This is because the free market with many subjects can be described as a multi-particle system with interactions, which leads to the periodic instabilities inside it by following humorous scheme:



Bursa instability can serve as an illustration of fundamental market problem by most pronounced way, being the most dense phase of market by the same way, like the behavior of collapsars illustrates the behavior of Universe. Free market is always operating with actual prices, so it cannot predict the future well and the information spreading inside of it is always limited, because the concurrent subjects aren't interested about free information exchange very much. Due the limited speed of information/energy spreading the free market is behaving like gradient-driven system (PD controller with time hysteresis), which is principally unstable. With respect to information spreading, the centrally planned market appears much more stable, being over-controlled at the price. This is because centrally planned market requires a boson condensate state of totalitarian society, which dissipates a lotta energy at low level of control. Therefore the optimal market strategy is somewhere between fully liberal and centrally controlled economy.

This is why, we cannot expect, free market will effectively control strategic decisions of society, like the prevention of fossil fuel depletion and/or global warming prevention, because it cannot evaluate risks and assets from long-term perspective, especially when these values cannot be calculated/converted into currency price at the moment of decision. After all, "free market" as such doesn't exist in society, at least from Wall Street Crash of 1929, which has lead into many forms of market regulation by governments and central banks.

By AWT the belief is in equillibrium with rational stance by the same way, like capitalism is in equillibrium with central government and like the longitudinal waves are in equillibrium with transversal waves inside of every multicomponent system/environment. One cannot exist without another. This concept is extended in more details here.