The Trials and Tribulations of an Independent Ideator

There are a very few forums where an independent physics and cosmology ideator can contribute. Publication is unlikely as journals look askance on people who are not in the field as well as on grand new ideas. On scientist’s blogs you will often get banned. On Reddit you will get banned. Likewise they will go after you on Quora according to another ideator I know. On most Discord servers I’ve encountered you will either get banned or if you are lucky you can post in a channel for speculative ideas. You’ll take a beating there though. You can try Twitter, but conversations are few and far between and most physicists or cosmologists will mute you or block you. For all your efforts sometimes you will run across defenders of GR-QM-ΛCDM era science who will try to get you canceled across social media. They seem to take some pleasure in trying to squash you like a bug. From what I can tell almost all of those who are hostile or bullying are men, but that’s probably not a surprise.

I’ve already written several blog posts about the experiences of an independent ideator. In this post I thought I would include a long rambling comment I just made on Dr. Stacy McGaugh’s Triton Station blog. He has been kind enough to allow me to post comments in the past. He occasionally responds to me which I appreciate, but its not the true engagement that I feel will help me get NPQG some serious consideration from the field. Nevertheless, I’m having fun, even if I am often frustrated with the fields of physics and cosmology, so I will persevere.

[This is my response to discussion mentioning the crisis in physics and cosmology as well as the pejorative term ‘crackpot’.]

I’ve read Lee’s more recent book but I’ll think about ordering The Trouble with Physics.

As to the term crackpot and the hostility of some physicists/cosmologists towards independent ideators, it greatly disturbs me. I get it that physics/cosmologists/astronomers get peppered with ideas which are largely nonsensical, but I still don’t think that should be a license to be a bully. These ideators are people too and they are excited and they do genuinely think they are on to something, even if they aren’t. And then they get crushed by their heroes. Wow, it is such a bad look for the fields.  Plus, if you think every paradox and open problem is an indicator that something major is wrong, and if you listen to Sabine, Lee, Roger and others that THEY think something is wrong then it’s gonna be really bad for the field when that is discovered and all those mistaken interpretations come to light.   Also, I think that the intellectual superiority and hostility is a carry down from the early days of physics and while ideators like me do get the heck beaten out of us, I can’t really imagine what it must be like inside the field as a new person with ideas and being told directly or indirectly “shut up and calculate” or any of the other intellectual mind games people play. No wonder so many new entrants to STEM feel like the deck is stacked against them, and often they are right.  

There are so many more neutral or kind ways to deal with these eager ideators. 1) ignore them, 2) mute them, 3) block them – although blocking is sort of aggressive if the enthusiast can see that, 4) if you feel compelled to respond, just have a short canned answer something like “Thank you for sharing your ideas, but I will not be engaging because I am entirely focused on my own work.”  That’s not hurtful. 5) The field could even have some fun with it – create a reddit forum for the ideators with some rules that they must state their idea in M words or less, with no appeal to myth, and as scientifically or logically as they can muster. Let the ideators themselves rate the ideas and a few scientists agree to look at the top ones each quarter or year. You never know, a gem might appear. 6) #5 with an entry fee and the proceeds go some to the reviewers of the top M (again let the ideators winnow down the mass of entries) and some of the proceeds go to a good cause. Everyone is happy.

As for me, I have been ideating on a TOE for 2.5 years and have a unique approach of starting where Planck left off, with Planck scale point charge particles that can carry from 0 to Planck energy and are charged, immutable and conserved. Take duos of those particles and toss them into a 3D Euclidean void at a certain particle density and energy density (two free parameters) and the universe will emerge.  Using just logic alone you can come to some fantastic ideas. If they are immutable, there is no singularity. Then what happens?  Well maybe those SMBH are jetting them out? So you go through all the outreach material and you find out that bang theory doesn’t require a single place or time. And you find out that inflation must still be going on, but we can’t see it. And you find out about pocket universes and multiverses from Dr. Guth.

And then you have to deal with some of the issues. What about the event horizon? Surely a core of Planck particles at Planck energy in an SMBH could overpower an event horizon of its own making, right? Maybe spin is involved, maybe the frame dragging around the polar axis creates a vortex that allows lower energy spacetime aether to approach the event horizon and bang, the jet breaches.  Ok, so what about expansion?  Ok, you scratch your head on your fledgling ideas and it dawns on you, hey wait a second, if spacetime is an aether and each galaxy AGN SMBH occassionally and independently erupts in a bang and if Planck plasma inflates from Planck density to what we can observe, then you struggle and it dawns on you – what if expansion is galaxy local! Sure, that makes sense, if inflation comes from the jet each galaxy will expand INTO its neighbors. So now you have repositioned the bang, crunch, and expansion local to galaxies.  And galaxies are your ‘pocket universes’ in the multiverse. Much more parsimonious. Oh, and you get crunch for free because it is a black hole and that is nice for all the bright scientists who’s math shows a crunch (Roger, Lee, etc.).  And you have expansion but not universe outward, galaxy outward, so it’s in opposition and nothing is going anywhere fast and now the Hubble tension goes away and you realize that oh, those measurements vary because photons take different paths through different galaxies, each of which is in a different stage of a general recycling process.  Yeah, you still have some issues to work out with the idea of an ‘accelerating’ universe but you have enough mechanisms now that you will chip away at that issue.

Spacetime aether is an assembly made of point charges and it provides a Riemannian geometry, except at the smallest scales. So you happen across UV divergence, and IR divergence, and renormalization and you think — uh oh, those integrals bounds don’t go to zero or infinity. There are cutoffs where things are going to get chunky and discrete.  Meanwhile, since you started with a Euclidean void, you realize that Einstein’s inertial observer needs to be repositioned from low energy spacetime into the Euclidean void. And you realize that nature is a trickster to provide two overlapping geometries sandwiched together like that. And you realize you will need to rewrite the basic equations from the perspective of the Euclidean observer. Since it is an aether, you realize the Euclidean observer will see a variable speed of light, while the Riemannian observer IN the aether will see a constant speed of light because the particles of the aether must guarantee a relationship between their radius and their frequency. That relationship is sort of counterintuitive because at higher energies, those aether particles get smaller and their frequency decreases – but that fits with Einstein and curvature and dilation and contraction.  Oh, that means that the aether has a permittivity and a permeability from the point of view of the Euclidean observer and that is nice for the formula c^2 = 1/sqrt(permittivity * permeability) if they vary with the energy in the aether and that makes sense.

Every once in a while you pop your head up to share what you are finding with the physicists and the cosmologists and they beat the crap out of you.  So, you are like, well ok, if you don’t want to be involved picking all this low hanging fruit, then no problem. Unfortunately it delays the benefits for intelligent life and the environment. So back to picking fruit. You think more about your Planck core in a SMBH and you realize that as speed of light slows in the Euclidean reality that ingested particles will not be moving in the Planck core. All the energy will be in electric field of attraction and repulsion. No magnetism (not moving), no kinetic energy. Oh that’s why the temperature is zero!.  Oh, that’s only one microstate, therefore no entropy. Oh there’s certainly no information in a Planck core.  Well arguably one bit, Planck core or not Planck core.  So you think well that knocks down a few more paradoxes and open problems. Might also mean we need to adjust the Second Law to an equality considering we haven’t been accounting for the aeither.  Of course, you realize, the aether is the grand accountant for all things conserved! So you think about how physicsists are all wrapped up in their issues with some kinds of symmetries not being conserved, yet they don’t understand the aether, and you think well, that math is way over my head, but I wonder if the aether is actually doing the conservation and they don’t know it. Set that aside, too much intense math.  Can’t pick all the fruit.

So you surface again to tell folks and again they greet you with hostility and bullying.  You can not do physics without our 10^-20 math! You cannot do physics without understanding everything we have done! Really?  Well your outreach stuff is actually pretty good. I don’t have a career to worry about. I have the luxury of listening to all the tells when scientists aren’t sure about things and how they each tell a somewhat different narrative. And I recognize that narrative is interpretation and is a degree of freedom I have as long as I preserve the observations and most of their math. And when you come back kindly and say, but don’t you understand emergence they just get madder. And when you say, don’t you understand you are looking at structure that is 15 orders of magnitude above where I am ideating, they just get madder. And then you try to give examples, like thinking about probing around the outside of a computer and what could you discover about the CPU chip, and if you took off the cover and probed around the circuit board what would you know, and if you probed around the CPU’s pins and developed techniques to probe the ball grid array what would you know, and if you figured out how to take off the package and keep it running what would you know with your probe? Do you know anything yet about semiconductors or junctions or gates. Nope. Still it doesn’t get through because they are in so deep.   So then you say things like you are climbing K2 or Everest the hard way, I found a nice heated paved gently sloped path on the other side.  No dice.

So you go back to cosmology and think about all the new mechanisms that could explain galaxy rotation curves. First you have this spacetime aether generator erupting every so often for however long it erupts. So you have this inflationary aether wind. Maybe that has an effect.  And you have this kind of interesting observation that the point charges in a Planck core have no way to transmit their gravitational mass since all their neighbor particles are maxed out. Wow, so that means that as matter is ingested, that if a Planck core has formed and the ingested matter-energy joins it, it falls off the accounting books for a while, until it jets out if it ever does. So that’s interesting for the orbitals of the stuff in the galaxy that had been attracted to that stuff which is no longer gravitating.  You think well the surface of the Planck core is still presenting it’s mass and that core must grow while the SMBH is not jetting and shrink when it is jetting and that’s interesting because the surface area is varying over large time scales, but you don’t know what to do with that. Can’t pick all the fruit. And you realize that when those jets blow that is a lot of mass that all of a sudden reappears and probably does something to galaxy dynamics, but haven’t figured out what yet. 

So you redouble your efforts to keep working at it, in hopes you can find something numerical or mathematical that is new and convincing, because it is already clear that simplicity and logic are not doing the trick. And so goes the life of an ideator….hopefully to connect sometime if they are right because it would be unfortunate to croak before the idea gets out and then it takes another 100 years for scientists to figure it out.

Best, Mark

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California

p.s. December 21, 2020 :

Another physicist wannabe tried to intellectually bully me on social media today saying NPQG was nonsense. I should have saved the messages – they were so condescending, rude, haughty, and faux intellectual. It was hilarious in retrospect. At the time, I was annoyed, then dismayed, and then bummed out, because I’ve been confident my evolving model was directionally correct since mid-2018 and it has progressed rapidly. Yet after a short mindfulness session, which might have included a few moments of afternoon power nap, the ideas have been flowing like a torrent. That physicist had the nerve to demand that I tell him what QM spin means and if I didn’t answer I would ‘prove’ myself to be a purveyor of nonsense. Little did he know I was on the Euclidean flip side of the Universe, looking in, and starting to get a true idea of what QM spin means. Ha!

This attitude and behaviour from aggro physicists (a subgroup) needs major adjustment. It’s brutal. I deal with it by disengaging from these bullies. Yet, I am very concerned for people in the field, if some treat each other that way, or worse and repeatedly in the ‘professional’ environment. I can’t even imagine how awful that must be for early career scientists who are repelled by that behaviour. What happened to collegial atmosphere?

I hope the fields take the NPQG ‘paradigm shift’ as an opportunity to rethink and redesign how they want their organizations of people to operate. The goals should be to foster the advancement of science while also ensuring the professional well-being of the scientists. Some of that may happen naturally as investments flow into corporate research around pure and applied NPQG.