XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math   
   From: physfitfreak@gmail.com   
      
   On 4/10/25 10:12 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   > On 04/10/2025 05:02 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >> On 4/4/25 2:37 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   >>> On 04/04/2025 12:29 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It's sort of like Born's "Restless Universe",   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Hehe :) That book is not that unfamiliar to me. What a coincidence.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> And now that I think about it, I can kind of make informed guesses as   
   >> what caused him to write it.   
   >>   
   >> Born deserved a Nobel earlier but they hadn't given him one by 1935   
   >> while one of his students (Heisenberg) had got it. Who knows, Born may   
   >> have even been the one who gave the right idea to Heisenberg, letting   
   >> him do the job.   
   >>   
   >> He had done, way earlier, the same thing with Einstein's GR too. Born is   
   >> the one who was supposed to develop GR and he had started it too, but   
   >> soon found out Einstein is working on it also, so in a favor to Einstein   
   >> he stopped his own work on GR.   
   >>   
   >> He later said he could finish it much earlier than Einstein did, if he   
   >> had not stopped the work.   
   >>   
   >> I think the same thing may've happened with Heisenberg.   
   >>   
   >> Anyway, without a doubt, Born was a top physicist of his time, at the   
   >> least at the level of Einstein and Heisenberg. This is my point. Yet, he   
   >> hadn't gotten a Nobel.   
   >>   
   >> So he decided to make money in some other way, I guess. But how?   
   >>   
   >> Jews had already successfully shoved communism up cro-magnons' asses to   
   >> fuck those bastards up for treating them bad for centuries, and this had   
   >> destroyed the appeal that cro-magnons' "religion" had for them. And the   
   >> 1800's cro-magnons who had sold crap to people in the name of new   
   >> religions were also fast dying off in the 1930s. No market value. So a   
   >> kind of niche must've formed in those years to use cro-magnons   
   >> imagination and desire for strange baloney and make money by that. Some   
   >> chose writing science fiction stories and were successful.   
   >>   
   >> But what would Jewish scientists do to make money off of the   
   >> cro-magnons? The lousy ones resorted to write psychology books packed   
   >> with bogus theories about sexuality and fucking, just so to sell well,   
   >> and made good money too. But top scientists would not do that sort of   
   >> things. That kind of fraudulent work was beneath their dignity.   
   >>   
   >> So what would a man like Born do now that he was being denied the Nobel   
   >> Prize money? I think he chose to write this book, The Restless Universe.   
   >> I get a hint at least by the title of it. It is for selling something to   
   >> the maximum number of ordinary people hungry for stuff that are to some   
   >> degree strange to them and are true as well :)   
   >>   
   >> I happened to read this book way back in early 1970s cause someone had   
   >> translated it to Persian and one copy of that was for reasons unknown to   
   >> me in our house, I think purchased by one of my elder brothers falling   
   >> for its title. The book was being spotted by me here and there in the   
   >> house for at least a decade, along all sorts of other books and   
   >> magazines that I had nothing to do with them.   
   >>   
   >> In the 1960s, we high schoolers would see much more of George Gamow's   
   >> popular physics books which almost all of them had been translated to   
   >> Persian in late 1950s. But somehow, somebody in the same period of years   
   >> had chosen this book also to translate. I don't know why. I cannot   
   >> imagine Born was a known figure in Tehran as a top physicist. I   
   >> personally heard of his work only in early 1970s when studying physics   
   >> at Tehran University. And only then, it had clicked in me that this same   
   >> man was also the author of this "  جهان ناآرام  " book that   
   here and   
   >> there I'd seen in the house for years.   
   >>   
   >> So after starting physics in university, and soon after my physics   
   >> background got strengthened a bit, I naturally began reading it at last.   
   >> I don't remember much, but the impression that the book had made on me   
   >> was that it was like a long story but in physics concepts, spoken to the   
   >> reader in a friendly manner, which was a great relief compared to how   
   >> physics was covered in the university - our physics texts in the   
   >> university were mostly translations of French physics books which were   
   >> all quite rigorous and formal and presented in somewhat sadistic ways   
   >> for students who were being exposed to them for the first time. The   
   >> French usually first treat everything rigorously, and only then may do   
   >> the explanations. It is not so in the United States, and thanks god for   
   >> that!   
   >>   
   >> That's the only expression of the Born's book that I still remember.   
   >> Gamow books were a bit too informal and for a wider audience. We had   
   >> begun reading them in high school.   
   >>   
   >> Anyway, when you referred to it, it took me a quite a few seconds to   
   >> realize and remember all that about it and make sure the book was the   
   >> same thing we had back then in the house :-) Still don't know who bought   
   >> it. Both my brothers are still alive, I can ask them that; they may   
   >> remember.   
   >>   
   >> Hehe :) I read that before even you were in existence :)   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >   
   > Same words / different lens   
   >   
   >   
   > A lot of it is about his consideration and for Born what was   
   > a sort of dread of the continuous, as that being too rigid   
   > to make for chance, that then his shaky sort of lens made   
   > all the chance, or opportunity and possibility, that mostly   
   > he was about being able to make branches, instead of addressing   
   > the issue of why the origin's everywhere/anywhere/everywhere,   
   > that chance and uncertainty are constantly being created and   
   > destroyed, and otherwise his straight-and-narrow sort of   
   > linear narrative yet couched in the language of quantum   
   > mechanics, has he was missing out on a continuum mechanics,   
   > and things like the Zollfrei, and Poincare plane, as   
   > with regards to what later and further is about the continuous   
   > manifold, yet pretty about that mathematics _owes_ physics   
   > more and better mathematics about continuity and infinity.   
   >   
   >   
   > Then, Born rule and then the Copenhagen conference and that,   
   > arriving at a probabilistic explanation instead of things   
   > like Bohm and de Broglie and super-classical models of real   
   > wave mechanics, with probabilistic observables, has that   
   > pretty much for Bohm and de Broglie is the real wave collapse   
   > to fill the particle conceit, then that functional freedom   
   > is sort of like for a model of Dirac/Einstein's positron/white-hole   
   > sea, i.e. like Zollfrei metri, i.e. like Poincare's rough plane,   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)