Freedom of Science

The rule describing orbits does not contain a term for matter or mass.
This rule is R^3 = T^2.
The rule relates radius of the orbit to its period.
The relation is not between radius and period and matter. The relation is between radius and period and nothing else. Matter, mass, body, object… these are not part of […]

According to Numerology and gravity “Newton’s constant G does not have quite the stature as c and hbar” but c and hbar are “quite fundamental.”
Look at the Lagrangian in that post. How did G enter that Lagrangian?
G was added by hand as an ad hoc decorative term by physicists themselves. G is decorative because its value […]

In scholasticism there exists forms. Scholastic doctors pick one form and write a commentary on it. For each commentary they write and publish in an official organ they earn professional points.
The points are computed according to the rules of the oldest PageRank in existence. Much like Google’s PageRank the inner workings of the Scholastic PageRank […]

Timothy Gowers proposes a “wiki-style website” to bring closer the day when “mathematicians will cease to bother about print journals.” This will be a wiki where people will post reviews of mathematical papers.
What a noble cause!
Yet Gowers sees a major problem with such an open access publication:
To avoid the site filling up with junk one […]

Flip tomato writes:
A searchable arXiv made the `chore’ of literature reviews much easier, allowing researchers more hours-per-week to critique, amalgamate, and synthesize new ideas.

I am not sure that this will hold if flip tomato does a real research and gives us actual numbers. It seems to me that it is easier to search arXiv for literature […]

I have been trying to find a numerical solution to the non-linear differential equation describing torsion pendulum motion:

I y’’ + R y’ + K y = F / (a - y*d)^2

I = moment of inertia
R = damping constant
K = torsion constant
F = 2 GMmd
d = moment arm
y = theta = excursion angle 
(prime denotes time derivative of y)
I posted […]

Chris Oakley writes:
This is how it works. In the way that quantum field theory is done - even to this day - you get infinite answers for most physical quantities. Are we really saying that particle beams will interact infinitely strongly, producing an infinite number of secondary particles? Apparently not. We just apply some mathematical […]

Let M1 to M8 be types of representation of phenomena:
M1 = Faith
M2 = Belief
M3 = Guess
M4 = Conjecture
M5 = Speculation
M6 = Hypothesis
M7 = Theory
M8 = Model

Therefore, the list is ordered by
S_n = M_n/E

where S = Science and E = Evidence.
Example 1:
S1 = M1/E is division by zero.

This proves that where there is faith there is […]

From1 Lie Groups in Physics:  
Many systems2 studied in physics show some form of symmetry.3 In physics this means the following: We consider some transformation rule like rotation, displacement, reflection and we compare the original system with transformed system.4 If this shows resemblance5 we have symmetry.
A snow flake looks like itself6 when we rotate it by 60 degrees. […]

In a scientific theory the assumption of an occult virtue as an experimental quantity is not possible. Physics harbors and nurtures occult virtues such as the Newtonian force. Physicists measure the occult in miracles they call experiments. This fact reduces physics to para-science and physicists to charlatans. I cannot think of another word that better […]