 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Fractals Science Forum » Talk explores theory of the universe... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Roger Bagula... |
 Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
http://communications.uwo.ca/com/western_news/stories/talk_explores_theory_of_the_universe_20091021445026/
Talk explores theory of the universe
Print
By Communications Staff
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Lori Gardi, Senior Software Developer, Fenster, Imaging Research Group
at Robarts Research Institute, will present her theory that the
universe is a fractal at a public lecture at the London Public
Library, Central branch on Friday, Oct. 23.
Doors open for the free event at 6:30 p.m. in the Wolf Hall and the
presentation will begin at 7 p.m. Gardis talk is titled Close to the
Edge: Event Horizons, Black Holes and The Mandelbrot Set.
Gardi will present her Grand Unified Theory of the universe which
claims the universe is a fractal and she will provide evidence in the
form of images and animations to support her theory. She also claims
the Mandelbrot Set is a black hole from which much information can be
learned about how the universe was created by studying this fractal
and its associated equation.
There will also be an art show featuring Gardis current and past
works and refreshments.
For those that cant make it to the talk, a virtual presentation will
be available on Gardis website at www.butterflyeffect.ca.
For a Western News article on Gardi, click here. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Robert L. Oldershaw... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 21, 6:43 pm, Roger Bagula <roger.bag... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]http://communications.uwo.ca/com/western_news/stories/talk_explores_t...
Talk explores theory of the universe
Print
[/quote]
Hi Roger,
Thanks for alerting us to this talk.
Below are some suggestions for for talking points when audience
members are given a chance to ask questions.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the difference between science and "The Glass Bead Game".
SCIENCE:
1. Study nature.
2. Discover a new pattern or relationship.
3. Use proposed pattern/relation to generate a definitive prediction,
which is unique to the hypothesis, quantitative [or very high quality
qualitative], NON-ADJUSTABLE, and feasible.
4. Test your prediction empirically [not with thought experiments].
5. Accept nature's verdict.
THE GLASS BEAD GAME [Hesse, a good read]
1. Study mathematics [after all, nature and empirical evidence are
only "anecdotal"].
2. Construct an abstract theory with ad hoc model-building; the more
hermetic the better.
3. Use the abstract theory to generate pseudo-predictions, which are
non-unique, quantitatively "plastic", highly adjustable, usually
unfeasible.
4. Avoid real testing and apply copious arm-waving or heavy fudge to
any "unwanted" empirical results.
5. Assume nature is wrong [it couldn't possibly be your "intuition"].
-
There you have the past and the present. Do you prefer the science of
Democritus, Bacon, Galileo, and Einstein? Or are you happy with the
post-modern physi-babble, of which the Nielsen-Ninomiya papers are
archetypal examples?
If it's real science, why can't they even predict the specific
properties of the dark matter? That's an easy one to answer.
Yours in science [the testable kind],
RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:04 pm
|
|