physics jokes ala S tephen Hawking nd more.. a These come from The Nature of Space and Time.

p21: I would have liked t o draw you a four dimensional picture. H owever, government cuts have meant that Cambridge university can afford only two dimensional screens. p39: One could imagine that particles and information could fall int o these holes and get lost. M aybe that is where all those odd socks went. p40: Cos mology us ed to be cons idered a pseudo-s cience and the preserve of physicists who may have done useful work in their earlier years but who had gone mystic in their dotage. p57: Instead of cups falling off tables and getting broken, they would mend themselves and jump back on the table. If only real life were like that. p59: Cups would mend thems elves and jump back on the table. People would get younger, not older, as the univers e got s maller again. I t is not much good w ait ing for the universe to collaps e again to return to our youth because it will take too long. But if the arrow of time reverses when the universe contracts, it might also reverse inside black holes. However, I wouldnt recommend jumping into a black hole as a way of prolonging ones life. Now some jokes on my part. ; .. A s a preface, i admire M r. Hawking G reatly; i don't see him as a ) 'gimp'; he's probably one of t he greates t thinkers of our t ime .. Someday, perhaps within his lifetime, we may develop a cure for his physical condition - perhaps something t o do with st em cells .. We won't know unless we try .. So if i joke below "M r. H awking walks into a bar..", i'm assuming a future where we've cured his physical condition. Stephen Hawking walks into an English pub. He sits down at the bar. He looks at t he bartender. He clears his throat. The bartender asks : "G ood morning M r. Hawking, what can I get ya?" He replies: "I'll have a blackhole please. " The bartender just st ares at him. He speaks up: "It's a drink. " The bartender just stares: "Um .. Sir, we only have antiphotons here." He walks to another pub . H e enters. He sits dow n at the bar. H looks at the bartender. H e blurts e out before the bartender can say anything: "Got any blackholes here?" T he bartender jus t stares .. "Sorry Sir, only antiphotons here." Scowling, M r. Hawking rus hes out.. . M r. Hawking finds a pub down a gritty alley in a redlight dis trict. There are hookers standing outside the bar. They eye him admiringly. O ne of them puts her arms around his neck tickling his stomach playfully. He glares at her. "They got any blackholes here" She giggles and hugs him. "Sure honey. We got blackholes here: charged, rotating, bare,.. take your pick." H e sighs in relief. She pulls him into the darkened pub.. As i was discussing with my family. There's one poss ibility M r.H awking didn't consider in his theoretical investigations of blackholes: the possibility they don't exist (in the way we currently surmise). He's spent a considerable portion of his professional career on them. Perhaps it might be an actual relief to him if they didn't exist. He'd be free to do whatever he wanted .. From one

perspective, he 'wasted' his life .. F rom anot her, he's totally free to spend the rest of his life on more tangible things. . i've written to him about the framework that suggests we may be looking at quantum phenomena 'the wrong way' (assuming inherent randomness and virt ual exchange). H e's not replied t o me, i'm guessing, for two reasons: he gets at least twenty 'crackpot'letters a day, every day, and he's too busy working on 'his ow n ideas' t o consider others.. i respect this, but ..These 'crackpot' ideas have been around for a long t ime.. At least their bases. And it simply took someone tocarry t he ' ideas' for long enough - to realize they have potential for explaining quantum phenomena and more.. The ideas are exceedingly simple and conservative: 1. space is Euclidean, flat, continuous, inelas tic, and explicitly 3D 2. what we think of as curved space, G R, is act ually curved time: T R TR explains mass , inertia, gravit ation, and s trong force 3. cons ervation of curvature is perhaps them ost fundamental law in our univers e as a consequence of this, there mus t be antiphot ons, photons with very slight negative curvature; they immediately become the preferred mechanis m for electromagnetic int eract ions 4. cons ist ent wit h this proposal: photons are trans verse electromagnetic w aves oscillating out of phas e w ith t emporal curvature: explicit ly r eal entities with exact specifications; these ent ities must be describable as spacetime w avelets / s pacelets 5. electrons , protons, and the like must als o be describable as s pacelet s Of course, there are many implications (some are directly testable) of this perspective.Blackholes become curiosities - nothing more. Gravitational waves become unlikely. Higgs become pure fantasy. W/Z bos ons are simply int ermediate decay products .. This rational, realistic, and explicitly causal framework has been labeled as 'fringe' and 'incoherent' by Wikipedia editors. Let's propose a realistic scenario why Wikipedia editors might push for deletion of an article explaining the features above: 1. Wikipedia represents convention on the internet 2. it t akes money t o run servers and maint ain t hem 3. my article threat ens public percept ion of convent ion's adequacy 4. take the art icle down - eliminate the t hreat - or else 'we pull t he plug' on Wikipedia From one perspective, my article makes conventional phys icist s look like 'a bunch of idiots and conmen' for promulgating an incorrect theory for 100 years. This is w hat convention's trying to avoid by 'a uto deleting' the art icle. On my side, i've been very respectful to Wikipedia editors , respectful to Wikipedia's intent , but at the same time - for objectivity in science, the article should remain up. The links can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_realism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Quantum_realism Please visit the second sit e when you have t ime and 'cast your vot e s alvatore gerard micheal ',