October 10th 03
posted to sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics,sci.math
|
|
|
Legget talks about the 2003 Nobel in Superconductivity Self created current
In message , Archimedes Plutonium
writes
And it is a nice coincidence that my return to Superconductivity theory
in the last week is also
received attention in the prizes market, where the 2003 Nobel prize was
awarded for work in
superfluidity and superconductivity. But it seems as though the Nobel
Committee is falling into a trap
of sorts. Call it a shotgun effect where they give the prize to just
about anything in
superconductivity or superfluidity where the long march of history will
look back and say "what minor
details were given the highest awards" or in the case of the BCS theory
with its Cooper pairing as an
utterly false theory that makes the Nobel Committee look bad. So the
shotgun approach to making a past
mistake ameliorated is by giving out so many Nobels in the area of
superconductivity to drown out the
initial mistake and flaw of the BCS theory.
And at the rate of the mistakes of the Nobel prize, it maybe
frightening prospect in the future that
1/2 of the Nobel awards had reached a point of becoming science
mistakes and false science. And should
that Committee start awarding for black holes, wormholes and other
exotica would accelerate the
reaching of 1/2 of the Nobel prizes were given for false science.
About the only way that the Nobel Science awards can have a record of
being 90% or more of true science
and the other 10% for falsehoods is if the Committee stuck tenaciously
to awarding for Experimental
science.
The amazing thing about the Nobel prizes in physics was that in the
early part of the 20th century, the
Committee went out on a limb by awarding for Quantum Mechanics to a
large extent, and they got it
correctly. But then about 1950 to 2003 the theoretical physics awards
were mostly error or false
physics. Perhaps the Committee became lax with its success of awarding
Quantum Physics from
1900 to 1950, that this laxness made the Committee feel it could spot
theoretical true physics from
1950 to 2003, but instead, its luck had run out and it was awarding far
too many false science theories
where BCS and Cooper pairing come to mind. Neutron stars is another
falsehood. And although Prion
theory is not physics but biology, a case of another falsehood in
science being awarded.
And the entire Quark theory is at best a mere scaffolding. Not even
architects and the general public
would award a scaffold structure as one of the 7 wonders of the world.
The Nobel Committee tries to get it right for 100% of the time, but
they are fallible as any human
organization becomes prone to error. It would behoove the Nobel
Committee and for TV to run a
documentary on the historical fallibility and errors that the Nobel has
thus far committed. If an
organization becomes so arrogant that they never seem to admit any
wrong, then they only increase their
error rate, rather than reducing it.
I should mention Dr. Legget discussing the Nobel on TV. He mentions the
fact that high-temperature
superconductors seem to have no theory to explain them.
As far as I am concerned, the supercold superconductors such as pure
lead can be explained by
Conduction Band theory and to experiment seeing whether a Self Created
current can be gotten by
lowering the temperature. As for high temperature Superconductors, the
idea of Electronegativity versus
Electropositivity maximized would explain them.
Archimedes Plutonium,
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Many experiments remain to be attempted...
If you stuck your head in a bucket of liquid helium would your brain
become super-conducting?
--
Jeremy Boden
|