Specularium

Specularium

http://www.specularium.org/

Step 1: choose a name for your theory that sounds both anatomical and painful. Step 2: choose a scary clown for your logo

A site exploring the hypothesis of THREE-DIMENSIONAL TIME.  There’s your gratuitous use of all-caps.  This bold theory aims for nothing less than the whole enchilada, the Unified Field theory that would connect quantum physics with relativity, and so complete the Standard Model of Physics.  Plenty of smart people haven’t figured it out so far, but the lead dude at Specularium.org has apparently solved it.

Apparently it all has to do with THREE-DIMENSIONAL TIME.  For some reason he tacks on two more dimensions to time beyond the traditional one, favored by crusty old fogeys like me.  This apparently has all sorts of neat consequences that tie up all the loose ends, including gravity, dark matter, and how the NFL draft works.  It’s an impressive bundle of physics theory, completely incomprehensible, but to its credit incomprehensible in the way that authentic physics theory is incomprehensible.  It’s surely nonsense, but it’ll take more qualifications than I have to figure out why.  I suspect, however, that his hidden motivation is to prove enough modern physics wrong to make interstellar travel feasible again, as the current best evaluations of “warp drive”, wormholes, faster-than-light travel, and other techniques for putting around our gigantic universe have pretty much nixed the hope of any of us getting much farther off the planet than Lance Bass did.  Seems like putting the interstellar cart before the horse to me, since either the laws of physics will permit interstellar travel or they won’t.

To top it off, he’s also apparently a full-fledged Wizard — not sure how he has the time to work on the theories and search for The One Ring, but I will say the long flowing beard and gnarled wooden staff will look professional at the yearly physics conference.

The crackpot scores, Vanna?

Can you blame me for making fun of them, but not actually reading them?

1.  Terrible English:   Actually, pretty good English — he’s a pretty decent writer, probably better than me and my amateurish webpages.  No more violations of spelling, grammar, and conventional rules of writing than you’d normally see in text not about six-dimensional spacetime.  One out of ten.  (It would be zero if the concepts made sense.)

2.  All Science Is WRONG:  Coming up with two new time dimensions out of the blue qualifies as a major disagreement with modern physics in my book.  He’s got hisself a mighty purty theory here.  Seven out of ten.

3.  Irritated, emotional language:  Very little — his writing style matches fairly closely the dry, dispassionate feel of your typical science article in, say, Scientific American.  About the best I could find is his wry joke about his theory declaring the non-existence of the Higgs Boson, and the (so far) lack of evidence of this thing in the labs:  “I did e-mail them about this several years ago but they spent 1.5bn dollars confirming it.”   One out of ten.

4.  One extremely long and ugly webpage:   Actually, not terrible — he splits up his essays onto separate pages, like we do here at timeblimp.  The writing style is decent, fairly clear for an amateur writer — again not unlike this website.  Slightly strange quirks here and there (why are the “enter your comments” text boxes black?), but we’re guilty of quirks here at timeblimp too.   In fact at first glance they don’t seem much different than… uh oh…  Let’s call it three out of ten and change the subject.

5.  Completely new definitions:   In my view, complete abuse of the prefix “hyper”, which used to be for when you needed to make something sound futuristic and science-y, but now has the same effect as using “jive turkey” at a 50-cent concert.  Hyperwarp, hypersphere — let’s give it a rest, shall we? For the most part, though, he uses standard physics terms, rather than inventing his own.  Five out of ten.

How’d he do?  17 out of 50.   Specularium theories are presented just a little too clearly — clearly, he’s not lost his mind enough to break 20 points in crackpot scores.

 

>>>  Next up:  its the Primordality

© 2011 TimeBlimp Thith ith a pithy statement. Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha