STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
Individuals, Not Governments, Drive Scientific Progress
By Daily Bell Staff - May 03, 2016

Was it a blip, or a breakthrough?  Scientists around the globe are revved up with excitement as the world’s biggest atom smasher — best known for revealing the Higgs boson four years ago — starts whirring again to churn out data that may confirm cautious hints of an entirely new particle. Such a discovery would all but upend the most basic understanding of physics, experts say. –Washington Post

Here we go again. We are supposed to be excited by the return of the Hadron Collider, a particularly obnoxious form of Big Science.

We’ve written on this subject a good deal: In the 21st century, only large government projects are to be seen as advancing technology and creating breakthroughs.

Our point of view is that most significant advances are made by individuals not crowds. It’s an inverse phenomenon. The more scientists there are, the less originality exists.

It’s no coincidence that two “Steves” in a garage refined the defining technology of the past 50 years – the “personal computer.”

This sort of argument is not ordinarily made in the modern media. Instead, we are exposed to endless adulatory profiles of corporate breakthroughs and the creative genius clustered around government funded projects.

This Washington Post article, excerpted above, is a good example of the latter. The Hadron Collider is doing the good, patient work of advancing the Theory of Relativity.

But then there is this statement from idiosyncratic electrical engineer, Eric Dollard, who has written a tract entitled The Theory of Anti-Relativity:

Einstein is a false prophet. The Theory of Relativity as the “Holy Scripture” is like a televangelistic sales pitch. Nikola Tesla regarded Relativity as the greatest historical aberration of scientific thought. Relativity is no more than a philosophical standpoint, a virus to infect a “New Age”.

Einstein is a kind of Big Science icon. After all, he was instrumental in suggesting what would ultimately become the Manhattan Project that employed thousands to develop the nuclear bomb.

And yet perhaps the Manhattan Project was hyped too. There are significant questions as to whether atomic bombs were even dropped on Japan. We reported on that HERE.

We have plenty of reasons to be skeptical these days. The US government developed the atomic bomb and went to the moon in the span of 30 years with laughably primitive technology. We have trouble recognizing that government.

We’re only familiar with the one that couldn’t even produce a health care website with much more advanced tools.

Big Science is a kind of trap, producing groupthink. That’s one of the reasons we’ve ended up with the Hadron Collider and its endless attempts to buttress the seemingly misguided ideas of modern, gravitational physics.

Look at the night sky through a telescope and study galactic spirals. Does gravity create spirals?  Thunderbolts.info.com tells us that:

Laboratory experiments, together with advanced simulation capabilities, have shown that electric forces can efficiently organize spiral galaxies, without resorting to the wild card of gravity-only cosmology–the Black Hole.

And what about plasma? One of the most brilliant men of the 20th century, Nikola Tesla, believed the universe was composed considerably of light and plasmatic energy – aether.

Tesla was responsible for popularizing alternating current, suggesting the fundamentals of radar and refining wireless energy among other achievements.

It was Albert Einstein who came along and basically debunked the concept of plasma/aether. Today of course in the place of plasma we have “dark matter.”

In simplest terms, Einstein’s theories proposed (at least partially) that gravity is a fundamental organizing force of the universe. And yet there are those who question not just Einstein’s theory but his claim to discovering the concepts that made him famous.

Here is an excerpt from a 1999 UK Guardian article:

E=mc2 ‘was Italian’s idea’ … The mathematical equation that ushered in the atomic age was discovered by an unknown Italian dilettante two years before Albert Einstein used it in developing the theory of relativity …

After failing to gain entrance to higher education, Einstein took a job at a patent office that dealt with the subjects on which he soon published.  In fact, he was still working at the patent office when he issued groundbreaking papers in the field of theoretical physics and quantum mechanics.

Some have questioned Einstein’s “miracle year.” Einstein finally explained that his best ideas came to him in his sleep.

Tesla was no fan. From The New York Times (July 11, 1935):

[Tesla] described relativity as “a beggar, wrapped in purple, whom ignorant people took for a king.” In support of his statement he cited a number of experiments he had conducted, he said, as far back as 1896 on the cosmic ray. He has measured cosmic ray velocities from Antarus, he said, which he found to be fifty times greater than the speed of light, thus demolishing, he contended, one of the basic pillars of the structure of relativity, according to which there can be no speed greater than that of light.

We are told Tesla in his later years had become unbalanced and prone to hearing the voices of Martians. Still, when he died, the FBI came to his hotel room in Manhattan and confiscated his notes and other private items.

Tesla was an example of what individuals can do to advance technology in ways that large organizations usually do not. Unfortunately, the hallmark of Western science and technology in the 21st is Big Science.

In a previous article we explained the problems with this sort of “big science.”

Apparently, one must throw billions at science to achieve anything of note these days. Maybe there is nothing left for the future but ever more expensive superstructures presenting diminishing returns.

Is Big Science indeed merely a smokescreen for Big Military expenditures? Is the Hadron Collider actually being used for more specific and targeted war research? What exactly are they promoting? And why?

Conclusion: We don’t know where the next big idea is coming from. But the chances are it will be developed by an idiosyncratic genius not a cluster of government funded researchers. If you are serious about funding and benefiting from significant breakthroughs and have an appetite for risk, try to find the next Tesla. The modern media expects Tesla-like breakthroughs to emerge from facilities like the Hadron Collider. We don’t think so.

Tagged with:
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • Bruce C.

    This is an evocative piece.

    I tend to agree with you (as does Ayn Rand and others) that everything comes down to and out of the individual. Groups are literally groups of individuals so anything that comes out of a group must come, originally, from an individual.

    I was just talking to someone today about how astounding the works of Western civilization are (or have been.) BY TODAY’S STANDARDS many of them seem incredible if not impossible for all practical purposes. The time and effort and intelligence and ingenuity that has been expended in many areas is so amazing that – referring to your appeal to the Neanderthal governments and institutions that we have now – seem impossible. (Also, the Muslim world hasn’t done s— since Islam came along, and I mean it stopped cold.)

    You ask how could men have walked on the moon using “laughably primitive technology”, and I would say in the same way that a lot of other things have been done throughout history. Almost anything that has been built from watches to cathedrals contain an amazing amount of “work”. I think it was due to the values and motivatations – the cultures – of the individuals who did those things.

    Lastly, to a budding scientist the idea of becoming an individual genius like Tesla or Einstein is probably like a budding actress or artist wanting to be a celebrity. The chances of it seem slim and yet the only way to fulfill that is to learn the craft and try. Those who succeed in discovering something new become recognized unique individuals and those who don’t remain part of an amorphous group.

    • robt

      Groups operate under the paradigm syndrome; any original thought by an individual presented in the context of a group or committee which contravenes current doctrine will be rejected and the worst outcome could well be that the individual will be ostracized and ejected from the group. Many of us who have worked in business or other institutions know this well.
      The lone wolf, literally working alone, in many or most cases is the originator of original thought. The supporters of the monolitic paradigm first attacks the lone individual’s theories until the original paradigm can no longer be supported and the new paradigm takes its place. Think about Wegener, and how his ideas were rejected until the 1950s; today we have Tectonics, the renamed Continental Drift of Wegener.
      The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas H Kuhn, written in the 1950s is an excellent study of this, and sheds light on the nature of scientific and educational bureaucracy, and even any bureaucracy.

      • Bruce C.

        I know what you mean. The same thing happens in trying to sell a new product or idea to a company, or in trying to get a patent.

        That said, your comment makes me curious now of how and why things seemed to evolve so rapidly during early 20th century physics. That “story” as I learned about it is a model in intellectual honesty. New ideas were rapidly introduced, reviewed, and then rejected but also ACCEPTED quickly. Einstein might have received his Nobel for the photoelectric effect even sooner (paper came out in 1905, Nobel in 1921) had he not been Jewish at that time in Germany (and relativity wasn’t “proved” until 1915, but light quanta were readily accepted).

        • robt

          I don’t think being Jewish in Germany was a problem for Einstein; he was director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics for about 18 years, until 1932, and was an honored member of the scientific community in that country.
          The Nobel prize of 1921 was not specifically awarded for the paper of 1905 (Special Theory) nor the paper of 1915 (General Theory), but was awarded to Einstein “for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”, so, as much a career recognition award, though the photoelectric paper was from 1905. Nobel prizes are very often recognition for distinguished careers.

          • Bruce C.

            Okay, but my main point is that a lot of theories were proposed that didn’t seem to get buried, and that seems unusual by today’s standards.

  • robt

    The Manhattan Project was not necessarily developed under the abstract concept of ‘government’, but was under the direct control of Lieutenant General Leslie Groves, not a scientist (but an administrator par excellence), who had autocratic authority to coordinate and direct the activities of the scientists involved and to take decisions as he saw fit, from the theoretical to the practical. One amusing practical decision was when there was a copper shortage to wind magnets he borrowed a huge amount of silver from the Treasury, drew it into wire, and wound the magnets using it. It’s just one small example of his resourcefulness, but also an indication of his virtually unlimited authority granted for this project.
    Had the project been under the ‘government’, it’s possible that the project would still be underway and incomplete at 100x the original expenditure, with everyone blaming everyone else.

  • Jim Johnson

    HooRah. Am I glad to read this! Gravitational sciences seriously propose a dust particle (Sol) affects another (Antares) 41/2 miles away. NASA insists surprise at something Thornhill described to them in writing 10 years before. Why is it every new “suspected breakthrough” arrives on the eve of funding searches? This Internet is rapidly bypassing these obstructionists, showing me a universe full of marvel and wonder. And guess what? You can understand what is being found. What a change from being a simpleton incapable of grasping LSD induced mathematics. A world where observation matters…

  • alaska3636

    We have replaced an ether with a “fabric of space and time”. What is space and time? It is all based on a relative continuum. Huh? Exactly.

  • alaska3636

    I will eat my hat if “big science” ends up being capable of reproducing the astounding results of the electricity mavericks: Tesla, Maxwell, Hertz and others. “Big music” suffers a similar in ability to synthesize interesting sonic structures.

    “The more scientists there are, the less originality exists.”
    Steve Sailer does a great job of pointing out this phenomena in the social sciences.
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-replication-crisis-is-psychology-more-like-astronomy-or-marketing-research/

    More and more social scientists conduct experiments that are hopelessly aimed at spotting trends and calling them truths.

    Sailer aptly categorizes these experiments as marketing research.
    “Malcolm Gladwell discovered a goldmine in recounting to corporate audiences findings from social sciences. People in the marketing world like the prestige of Science and the assumption that Scientists are coming up with Permanent Laws of the Universe that will make their jobs easier because once they learn these secret laws, they won’t have to work so hard coming up with new stuff as customers get bored with old marketing campaigns.

    That kind of marketing money pushes psychologists toward experiments in how to manipulate behavior, making them more like marketing researchers. But everybody still expects psychological scientists to come up with Permanent Laws of the Universe even though marketing researchers seldom do. Psychologists don’t want to disabuse marketers of this delusion because then they would lose the prestige of Science!”

  • dsaulw

    Not only will government-sponsored science not produce anything innovative to speak of, it will do its best to destroy anyone who is trying to advance science that runs counter to the party line. Just think about what it has done to global warming dissidents, and to those who have come up with treatments for cancer outside of the sanctioned box.

    • I feel you should say corporate-governance. The corporate sector long ago ‘captured’ and subverted most of any power in government from behind the scenes. So called ‘trade deals’ like TPIP are only seeking to ‘legalize’ this openly.
      If there were somehow ‘free trade’ restored to idea exploration and development then would we all not simply recreate the same hierarchical power struggle because our relation to idea is exploitative rather than truly creative?
      As for science – its foundations define its limits and although the model can be tweaked around the edges and minutiae of details filled in – they will all be conformed and interpreted through the core foundational intent – and so the dots are joined up to ‘validate’ what the core intention is set to – regardless the forms it takes.
      ‘Trojan horse’ is an idea of hiding agenda in a seemingly sacred or benign and auspicious or acceptable and respectable form. Once you have ‘swallowed the bait’ your identity is compromised – or replaced – with something not unlike a cuckoo’s egg, where the emergent chick sucks your resources and protections while destroying your true offspring. Not unlike the forms of many cancers
      The reversal or undoing of deceit operates from a true foundation rather than becoming baited into conflict. The growing or rising of wholeness and health within the body politic is through the witnessing of its living qualities regardless appearances and assertions to the contrary.
      You (anyone) may observe the patterns you ascribe to ‘government’ in your own mind so readily as to be almost stating the self-evident – that has somehow been rendered invisible by a ‘collectivist’ hatred of oppositional or rival power that is demonized when inconvenient to the furthering or masking of one’s own.
      Innovations as such, may have far reaching consequences that may be much harder (or impossible) to put back in their box than release – such as genetic engineering or AI in their ability to replace humanity and the environment with hacked versions carrying agenda that even their proponents may be ignorant of.
      The idea of progress is according to What and Who and Why. A lust for power over Life that does not know the root of its own drive to possess it – has a different notion of progress than the desire to embracing Life.

      “Ironically, ever since we “scientized” nutrition, the state of our health has declined. Decisions about what to eat and drink have gone from habits of culture and heritage to calculated choices based on shortsighted nutritional theories, with little consideration of how human beings reached modernity in the first place.” (~ Pearlmutter: Grain Brain)

      ‘Scientizing’ is weaponizing or marketising – in short it is operating a command and control power agenda under the guise of ‘serving humanity’, ‘progress’, evolution and of course to make a ‘better world’ or even a new world order – but for who exactly? The anti-Nature element in science has an arrogant undertone of deep seated rage and distrust – as if “Never Again!” to suffer such hurt or loss as has become collectively associated with what such distrust frames as our ‘original’ or given nature.

      Seeking to make ‘sense’ of experience arises when we know not what we do – and don’t recognize ourselves in Creation – and so mind that operated as if disconnected calls upon itself to justify itself in denial of its own reflection.

      The ‘meanings’ given cancer and used as currency by society are almost all those of the rogue cell or the symptom as the disease to be warred upon, eradicated or managed because it cant be trusted not to flare up and kill you. This is not a biological practicality so much as the original imprinting from which we have not evolved regardless clothing it in technological sophistry. However – on a biological level:
      http://www.westonaprice.org/modern-diseases/cancer-to-the-rescue/
      Seneff offers a welcome shift of perspective that does not automatically assign or dump guilt and causality on the body as a ‘rogue agent’ but recognizes relationship with environmental nutrients and toxicities as the point at which accepted but false ‘truths’ have undermined a natural discerning OF mind by the confusion of identifying within such thinking.
      This thinking is so deeply embedded and emotionally charged so as to make a cancer diagnosis a ‘voodoo’ that can trigger a deeper guilt and powerlessness of Life that often collapses to accept any directions of ‘help’ that are generally emphatically asserted as an immediate step without pause to question or challenge any of the information and what it actually means.
      The ‘sin’ – and punishment – is then projected to anyone who ‘deprives’ or misleads with ‘false’ hope in place of ‘official treatment’ that is more often than not more destructive than the disease.

  • Dimitri Ledkovsky

    Great DB edition today!

  • As framed in human experience, we seem to be explorers and discoverers – struggling against not only adversities of the ‘human condition’ but the ignorances and arrogances of human conditioning.

    The covering over or ‘forgetting’ of Knowing – operates another ‘identity’ than that which is innate to our Individuality of Life Expression – and undercurrent to its masked persona or role in presentation is a running away or avoidance of the core separation trauma or conditioning that has imprinted and set up the patterns of relationship that are all forms of power struggle within a pervasive threat that allure as the desire to take the power position that is absented by the loss of Knowing – which is full feeling presence and not a ‘divide and rule’ fragmented assertion or imposition against free-willing.

    Individual free willing has been subverted by the redefining of will as power -over rather than as alignment-within the power of love – recognized and recognisable as a wholeness and balanced quality of spirit, feeling, mind and body.

    Everything has thus been subverted and redefined from its original native language of recognition to ‘currencies’ of dissociation that operate a primary role in maintaining the block on such true communication so that power-struggle can persist as the only ‘power on Earth’ and the determining guide and protector to our life on Earth.

    The process of Re-wakening or Re-membering from and as a deeper recognition of Felt Being rather than ‘assertion of an emotion-backed thinking’ and struggling among its reflections, is of releasing a particular form of fear-based control that blinds – or operates as the darkness or lack of Knowing – as attempt to fill a LACK of presence with an imposed narrative identity.

    Conflict that feeds upon itself becomes paralysis – masking as ‘order’ of limitation in which ‘control’ seems to hold perceived or believed ‘chaos’ at bay. Balance of inner communication is a required foundation for re-opening an expanded participation of energetic relationship beyond the ‘gravitic’ model that ‘separates’ the ‘Living Universe’ by reducing a communication of Totality to a teeny force acting at a distance between remote bodies.

    Yet no instant or experience of anything or anyone but is of the Whole – regardless the frameworks of meaning that can be applied as filters and distortions to meet the demand of the ‘mind’ currently accepted and projected as your own.

    Living Communication is of an energetic nature that will never altogether fit or conform to any model or definition – BUT our models and definitions can be aligned with our true willing so as to be guided and supported in that energetic – and embody it.

    Without more alignment – opening the ‘Doors of Perception’ is opening a destructive reversal to the possibility of a truly embodied Humanity – of which only tiny glimpses have thus far leaked into ‘Plato’s Cave’. For no ‘man-minded substitute for Knowing can abide in the presence of the Source of all Thought, Feeling and Form. False currency is revealed.

    Yet the veils ARE lifting or disintegrating – regardless the concerted focussing in collective ‘identity’ and so as see it, we are obliged – as in a crash-course of necessity – to find and live such alignment. Not because an unloving edict demands it – but because the persistence of an unloving edit costs so much in terms of the pain of life denied. And the true desire uncovered is for life in Life’s terms and not on what I previously identified and defended as ‘me’.

    The underlying pattern of consciousness is itself the censoring, limiting and controlling power – that has all the power we give it by operating blindly as its embodiment – in all its various roles. One key role of which is of hatred and opposition – for this is where we get a sense of ‘power’ from in place of being perfectly identified in a true relational willingness – which is not given or accepted by rote or as programmed – but is a truly felt and acted event. It is reclaiming your life back from alignment with a false sense of power.

    Growing the communications of a true resonance in Life is different than feeding off the seemingly self-righteous forms of power that persist in ancient patterns of role-play. It is not waiting for Life to come and validate its new world order – in fact it is not identifying primarily in the forms of its expression at all – but as the underlying communication of Idea that is Alive – and re-Minding us by operating through us and reflecting to us – each within the Whole and therefore within each other.

    The scientific expansion of perspective that HAS been revealed has not yet been accepted in its Consciousness implications and obligations – because the core imprinting of limitation via division and control is not itself recognized – in act. This is an individual responsibility that no amount of ‘teaching theory’ or associating in ‘identity’ woven of such theory can substitute for. Yet the mind in ‘rehearsal’ does substitute for Life – as if to bring safety while seeming to work towards resolving or regaining lost power.

    False currency is a key phrase I use here on Daily Bell – for in an extroverted form – you are aware of the device by which to own the system by which all else has been brought to depend on. Expansion of Consciousness is the recognition within Mind of perspectives that were already present but effectively hidden or denied by one’s current sense of self-definition.

    All definitions bring consequences or fruits of identity-experience. But only those that align with who you truly know and feel yourself to be – are belonging in you. If you persist in attempting to become who you are not – you will succeed in forgetting who you are. This is a moment by moment responsibility. You cannot ‘go to mind’ and get a formula for how to live your life. You are an individual at root regardless the fragmentations that are reflecting as experience – but this is a fruit to be savoured and appropriately shared, not a mind-identity to sacrifice true presence of Life to – so as to ‘replace it’.

    My comment here responds to the energetic that the article communicates within me – not merely the forms. In an ‘Electric Universe’, Everything is Communication – bar none. But the act of definition operates some quality of differentiation and limitation within the Idea of focusing in true desire.

    To be the ‘puzzle piece’ that I truly am is to meet the alignments of Life regardless that others have their own freely unfolding experience. This is my individuality – for no role is invalidated – just because it is not my current choice. We do not gain power by invalidating the power of others – we lose it. But power here means something different to what it is currently colluded in meaning.

    Redeeming meaning from false or falsely framed meanings is a true accounting. It is only by a false accounting that pain and destruction can be outsourced to ‘others’ while playing out an elitist or exclusive and Life-rejecting ‘individualism’.

    The idea of a ‘need to know’ uncovering its desire fulfilled is also the need or desire to be who you are – regardless of any obstructions, persecutions or limitations encountered. Indeed these are part of the unfolding and not really as the sense of lack defines them, but this has to be realised to be true. It cant just be asserted true as if to gain a superior commentary position within the identity in lack.

    We (each) – and on that basis – together have to find ways to use apparent obstruction or adversity so as to restore and reintegrate to living purpose rather than fragment into polarized reactivity. Unless that is in fact the purpose that is accepted as your living will.

    We are conditioned to seek greater force of leverage – but I invite a greater perspective upon our active definitions. Imagination is freedom – and in freedom to imagine other perspectives is an arbitrary set of mind replaced without war – although the symptoms of an old pattern may persist while the core of new insight grows within.

    Emotionality is not free feeling – and in a sense is the fear of intimacy or full feeling. The ‘resistance’ to looking within is generally held in place by emotionally backed conditioning. But to exclusively ‘look out’ – without true insight is a state of dissociation and denial – regardless how ‘normal’ its consensual camouflage.

loading