physics jokes ala Stephen Hawking and more..

These come from The Nature of Space and Time.

p21: I would have liked to draw you a four dimensional picture. However, government cuts have meant that Cambridge university can afford only two dimensional screens.

p39: One could imagine that particles and information could fall into these holes and get lost. Maybe that is where all those odd socks went.

p40: Cosmology used to be considered a pseudo-science and the preserve of physicists who may have done useful work in their earlier years but who had gone mystic in their dotage.

p57: Instead of cups falling off tables and getting broken, they would mend themselves and jump back on the table. If only real life were like that.

p59: Cups would mend themselves and jump back on the table. People would get younger, not older, as the universe got smaller again. It is not much good waiting for the universe to collapse again to return to our youth because it will take too long. But if the arrow of time reverses when the universe contracts, it might also reverse inside black holes. However, I wouldn’t recommend jumping into a black hole as a way of prolonging one’s life.

Now some jokes on my part. ;) .. As a preface, i admire Mr. Hawking Greatly; i don't see him as a 'gimp'; he's probably one of the greatest thinkers of our time .. Someday, perhaps within his lifetime, we may develop a cure for his physical condition - perhaps something to do with stem cells .. We won't know unless we try .. So if i joke below "Mr. Hawking walks into a bar..", i'm assuming a future where we've cured his physical condition.

Stephen Hawking walks into an English pub. He sits down at the bar. He looks at the bartender. He clears his throat. The bartender asks: "Good morning Mr. Hawking, what can I get ya?" He replies: "I'll have a blackhole please." The bartender just stares at him. He speaks up: "It's a drink." The bartender just stares: "Um .. Sir, we only have antiphotons here."

He walks to another pub .. He enters. He sits down at the bar. He looks at the bartender. He blurts out before the bartender can say anything: "Got any blackholes here?" The bartender just stares .. "Sorry Sir, only antiphotons here.." Scowling, Mr. Hawking rushes out..

Mr. Hawking finds a pub down a gritty alley in a redlight district. There are hookers standing outside the bar. They eye him admiringly. One of them puts her arms around his neck tickling his stomach playfully. He glares at her. "They got any blackholes here?!" She giggles and hugs him. "Sure honey. We got blackholes here: charged, rotating, bare,.. take your pick." He sighs in relief. She pulls him into the darkened pub..

As i was discussing with my family. There's one possibility Mr. Hawking didn't consider in his theoretical investigations of blackholes: the possibility they don't exist (in the way we currently surmise). He's spent a considerable portion of his professional career on them. Perhaps it might be an actual relief to him if they didn't exist. He'd be free to do whatever he wanted .. From one perspective, he 'wasted' his life .. From another, he's totally free to spend the rest of his life on more tangible things..

i've written to him about the framework that suggests we may be looking at quantum phenomena 'the wrong way' (assuming inherent randomness and virtual exchange). He's not replied to me, i'm guessing, for two reasons: he gets at least twenty 'crackpot' letters a day, every day, and he's too busy working on 'his own ideas' to consider others.. i respect this, but.. These 'crackpot' ideas have been around for a long time.. At least their bases. And it simply took someone to 'carry the ideas' for long enough - to realize they have potential for explaining quantum phenomena and more..

The ideas are exceedingly simple and conservative:

0. things interact only when they have something in common

    (charges interact, masses interact, magnets interact,..

    and perhaps 'most importantly': photons and masses interact)

1. space is Euclidean, flat, continuous, inelastic, and explicitly 3D

2. what we think of as curved space, GR, is actually curved time: TR

    TR explains mass, inertia, gravitation, and strong force

3. conservation of curvature is perhaps the most fundamental law in our universe

    as a consequence of this, there must be antiphotons,

    photons with very slight negative curvature; they immediately become the preferred

    mechanism for electromagnetic interactions

4. consistent with this proposal: photons are transverse electromagnetic waves oscillating

    out of phase with temporal curvature: explicitly real entities with exact specifications;

    these entities must be describable as spacetime wavelets / spacelets

5. electrons, protons, and the like must also be describable as spacelets

Of course, there are many implications (some are directly testable) of this perspective. Blackholes become curiosities - nothing more. Gravitational waves become unlikely. Higgs become pure fantasy. W/Z bosons are simply intermediate decay products.. This rational, realistic, and explicitly causal framework has been labeled as 'fringe' and 'incoherent' by Wikipedia editors.

Let's propose a realistic scenario why Wikipedia editors might push for deletion of an article explaining the features above:

1. Wikipedia represents convention on the internet

2. it takes money to run servers and maintain them

3. my article threatens public perception of convention's adequacy

4. take the article down - eliminate the threat - or else 'we pull the plug' on Wikipedia

From one perspective, my article makes conventional physicists look like 'a bunch of stooges and opportunistic conmen' for promulgating an incorrect theory for 100 years. This is what convention's trying to avoid by 'auto deleting' the article.

On my side, i've been very respectful to Wikipedia editors, respectful to Wikipedia's intent, but at the same time - for objectivity in science, the article should remain up.

The links can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_realism   [this link is now dead - article deleted]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Quantum_realism

Please visit the second site when you have time and 'cast your vote', salvatore gerard micheal