Jump to content
coffeesippin

Accusation of anti-semitism (split from quantum fluctuation origin)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Strange said:

So that article may have been irrelevant, but it wasn't accusing Jordan of anti-semitism. 

Okay, we'll drop discussion on why Jordan didn't get the Nobel, but we need to clear some things up:  BeeCee posted the inclusion on anti-Semiticsm directly as we discussed why Jordan did not get a Nobel.  BeeCee made it LOOK like Jordan was anti-Semitic.   That's one of the reasons I don't want to see his stuff .. look at how many posts took away from the topic, as you pointed out.

BeeCee was not answering the points brought up in the articles supporting the Speculation, rather totally ignoring all articles, and went off about creating anti-matter or DE in the lab, and the anti-Semitism stuff, along with his insults of 'Nonsense' rather than discussing the Speculation, and comments like, "I got that. Coffeesippin, obviously didn't."  I didn't get it because it wasn't there to get.  BeeCee also tried to spin off into GR instead of discussing the speculation despite I highlighting in red "Today, we know the theory of general relativity permits a non-singular cosmology, with no Big Bang, at least in theory.”    More reasons I don't want to see his stuff.

The following is not discussion on why Jordan did not get the Nobel even though Einstein nominated him twice for it, it is an example of DeeCee twisting the thread:  "He, coffee was asking why this Jordan never received the Nobel for what was is no more then  a possible hypothetical situation."   That statement is untrue and totally misleading.  I speculated that he never got the Nobel because his work which so stunned Einstein showed no need for a Singularity or Big Bang, that position conforming to the speculation of this thread, and not Off Topic.   In using the term, "this Jordan" BeeCee shows he probably never heard of Jordan before my post.  

I wanted to clear those points because BeeCee will be pretending I can't keep up with his science, when it's crystal clear he's NOT interested in reading the articles and discussing the topic.  And I may as well post here I've blocked his messages as well, because he's invited me to discuss religion in the past, then reported me for doing so.  

End of This Story.   But hopefully I'll see some discussion on the topic, which despite, Strange, your lack of enthusiasm for it, "...CERN ALPHA project which will probably falsify this hypothesis before too long..." is becoming surrounded by evidence as shown this early in the topic, so much evidence it should be bumped up out of Speculation.  But I'm content with it here until someone with more paper on the wall pushes it up.  Let it be known though, I first proposed this idea 10 or more years ago, before Villeta.

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, swansont said:
!

Moderator Note

There was no accusation. You misread the post. If you want to discuss the details of this, make a post in "suggestions, comments and support" 

 

Your post came after my last post, so I was not ignoring this Moderator Note in posting about needing to clear some things up.  Also, I no longer have access to BeeCee's original statement in the format it appeared, as I've blocked his access, so there's no way I can discuss it further.

Edited by coffeesippin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

 Your post came after my last post, so I was not ignoring this Moderator Note in posting about needing to clear some things up.  Also, I no longer have access to BeeCee's original statement in the format it appeared, as I've blocked his access, so there's no way I can discuss it further.

Understood

 

Here is the post in question (emphasis added):

___

 

Quote

 

We have many scientific papers based purely on hypotheticals or science that  we are as yet unable to actually experiment with or observe. Jordan's paper is one such hypothetical. Einstein if you recall did not get his Nobel for relativity....why you may ask? "Einstein's failure to win a Nobel until 1921, and that prize's not being awarded for his work on relativity, is generally ascribed to these factors:

  1. Lack of sufficient experimental proof for the theories at the time (some distrust in the early results on the precession of Mercury, and the Eddington starlight observations).
  2. Failure by some members of the committee to understand relativity
  3. anti-Semitism
  4. skepticism generally about the utility of relativity, and whether it was physics at all.

If these factors were in fact the reason that the relativity work did not garner a prize in 1921, why didn't the relativity work merit a second Nobel prize after, say 1945? Surely the work on cyclotrons and the bomb provided firm experimental support for the validity of the theory, and by then the overall utility would have been understood as well".

https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/6106/why-didnt-einstein-win-a-second-nobel-prize-for-relativity

 

You might note that the topic is why Einstein did not get a Nobel. Further, it is quoting another source.

There is no reasonable interpretation of this post ascribing the motivation to Jordan. 

11 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

 BeeCee was not answering the points brought up in the articles supporting the Speculation, 

The point was that Einstein didn't get a Nobel for Relativity, but one can't get worried about this, because the prize isn't awarded for the theoretical work until after experimental corroboration. But he didn't get it afterward, either, and there was a discussion of possible reasons why.

The post is on-topic as far as that particular issue (why someone might not have gotten a Nobel) goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, swansont said:

Understood

 

Here is the post in question (emphasis added):

___

 

You might note that the topic is why Einstein did not get a Nobel. Further, it is quoting another source.

There is no reasonable interpretation of this post ascribing the motivation to Jordan. 

I remember it differently as a little inclusion immediately after the mention of Jordan with no mention of Einstein .. though It's possible I DID misread it, but not likely, and in any case there was no reason for BeeCee to go off topic with it, it had no relevance to Jordan.   And those deceptions and insults and refusal to discuss the topic are why he's off my topic.  End of Story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

I remember it differently as a little inclusion immediately after the mention of Jordan with no mention of Einstein .. though It's possible I DID misread it, but not likely, and in any case there was no reason for BeeCee to go off topic with it, it had no relevance to Jordan.   And those deceptions and insults and refusal to discuss the topic are why he's off my topic.  End of Story.

You may remember it differently, but I have reproduced the quote, and your memory is clearly incorrect. The explanation is clear, and follows along a discussion of why someone might not have gotten a Nobel, which is something that you included (That Jordan never won a Nobel Prize in physics is a puzzle) in your first post. It's hard to make the case that such a correction is off-topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some facts:
Pascual Jordan is not listed as a committee member (wikipedia.org/Nobel_Committee_for_Physics)
He has not submitted nominations according to the nobel database (www.nobelprize.org)
Nominees and nominators are listed but not their political opinions. But someone interested may be able to cross reference other sources to see what kind of bias (political, national or other) there are to be found in early times*.

Jordan was nominated twice. As a comparison Einstein is listed for 62 nominations.

 

*) The names of the nominees cannot be revealed until 50 years later. (https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

Some facts:
Pascual Jordan is not listed as a committee member (wikipedia.org/Nobel_Committee_for_Physics)
He has not submitted nominations according to the nobel database (www.nobelprize.org)
Nominees and nominators are listed but not their political opinions. But someone interested may be able to cross reference other sources to see what kind of bias (political, national or other) there are to be found in early times*.

Jordan was nominated twice. As a comparison Einstein is listed for 62 nominations.

 

*) The names of the nominees cannot be revealed until 50 years later. (https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/)

      I never intended for anyone to think Jordan was a committee member.  It never entered my thoughts.   It's significant that Jordan was nominated by Einstein himself twice.   My thought is that he was not accepted because his ideas showed easily BB was not essential to the creation of matter .. that it was accomplished through quantum fluctuations, even as Inflation is said to demonstrate, but Jordan moving it into the 'arise from absolutely nothing' space.  Some of the other Founders of QM thought Jordan was not a Physicist, but a mathematician, that attitude was also said to work against him.  Maybe there were only so many Nobels to go around for Physics, and the competition was too intense for friendship.  Jodan and Einstein remained in touch though.

 

Edited by coffeesippin
Clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

I never intended for anyone to think Jordan was a committee member

I never thought or said that you intended it. I just tried to provide some facts stating that Jordans political views or bias seems to have limited impact on nominations.

2 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

 It's significant that Jordan was nominated by Einstein twice. 

Jordan was not nominated by Einstein, where did you read that?
I found:
Physics 1951 Pascual Jordan nominated by K Wagner
Physics 1963 Pascual Jordan nominated by R Liljeblad

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

My thought is that he was not accepted because his ideas showed easily BB was not essential to the creation of matter .. that it was accomplished through quantum fluctuations, even as Inflation is said to demonstrate, but Jordan moving it into the 'arise from absolutely nothing' space. 

I think if someone showed that the Big Bang mode were wrong or unnecessary, that would guarantee them a Nobel Prize.

I don't think anyone has received a Nobel Prize for purely speculative ideas. So maybe there were just better candidates in the years he was nominated. There 

 He clearly wasn't anti-semitic, so I don't see how that could have played a role.

Quote

He supported the Nazis' nationalism and anti-communism but at the same time, he remained "a defender of Einstein" and other Jewish scientists. Jordan seemed to hope that he could influence the new regime; one of his projects was attempting to convince the Nazis that modern physics developed as represented by Einstein and especially the new Copenhagen brand of quantum theory could be the antidote to the "materialism of the Bolsheviks". However, while the Nazis appreciated his support for them, his continued support for Jewish scientists and their theories led him to be regarded as politically unreliable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascual_Jordan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

I never thought or said that you intended it. I just tried to provide some facts stating that Jordans political views or bias seems to have limited impact on nominations.

Jordan was not nominated by Einstein, where did you read that?
I found:
Physics 1951 Pascual Jordan nominated by K Wagner
Physics 1963 Pascual Jordan nominated by R Liljeblad

 

It's in the original posts .. I'm too tired to find it right now. I'll look for it later.

9 minutes ago, Strange said:

I think if someone showed that the Big Bang mode were wrong or unnecessary, that would guarantee them a Nobel Prize.

I don't think anyone has received a Nobel Prize for purely speculative ideas. So maybe there were just better candidates in the years he was nominated. There 

 He clearly wasn't anti-semitic, so I don't see how that could have played a role.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascual_Jordan

Maybe I'll win it then?   Not likely though, I put the idea on the internet freely a decade or more ago.  It's going to be a cumulative prize anyway if it happened, as it was for QM, several people sharing.  Another thought though, if someone proved BB unnecessary it could get them seriously disengaged from the Consensus community and rights to publich .. but hahaha that's just a conspiracy theory, right?

28 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

I never thought or said that you intended it. I just tried to provide some facts stating that Jordans political views or bias seems to have limited impact on nominations.

Jordan was not nominated by Einstein, where did you read that?
I found:
Physics 1951 Pascual Jordan nominated by K Wagner
Physics 1963 Pascual Jordan nominated by R Liljeblad

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=did+einstein+nominate+pasucal+jordan+for+the+Nobel+prize&rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA803CA812&oq=did+einstein+nominate+pasucal+jordan+for+the+Nobel+prize&aqs=chrome..69i57.20484j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8     

"In 1928, Albert Einstein nominated Heisenberg, Born, and Jordan for the Nobel prize in Physics, however it was decided that the nobel prize in 1932 should be delayed until 1933. ... Many people believe that it was because Jordan had joined the nazi party and hence become a storm trooper."

The second one is probably on that page too .. but it will have to wait.  Don't forget that Jordan's name was almost expunged from publicity because he had been a Nazi, and after the war he became a member of parliament who advocated nuclear arms for Germany because of the threat from Russia.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

Maybe I'll win it then?   

It would need to be demonstrated along with convincing evidence, not just be a speculative idea.

52 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

Another thought though, if someone proved BB unnecessary it could get them seriously disengaged from the Consensus community and rights to publich .. but hahaha that's just a conspiracy theory, right?

Yep. Totally deranged. Why would there be a conspiracy like that? It would make scientists jobs pointless.

54 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

https://www.google.com/search?q=did+einstein+nominate+pasucal+jordan+for+the+Nobel+prize&rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA803CA812&oq=did+einstein+nominate+pasucal+jordan+for+the+Nobel+prize&aqs=chrome..69i57.20484j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8     

"In 1928, Albert Einstein nominated Heisenberg, Born, and Jordan for the Nobel prize in Physics, however it was decided that the nobel prize in 1932 should be delayed until 1933. ... Many people believe that it was because Jordan had joined the nazi party and hence become a storm trooper."

There is little point linking to a search. I couldn't see the text you quote in a couple fo the search results I looked at.

55 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

Don't forget that Jordan's name was almost expunged from publicity

And yet, here we are talking about him. There is no conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

Highlight by me:

Ok! Before I try to find the source, are we discussing the same person? Pascual Jordan?

 

yes, but one of you seems to have an agenda.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, swansont said:

Thanks! I had to review this, there's room for misunderstandings. The nomination for a Nobel price starts a year before the ceremony so a 1928 nomination could mean a nomination for the 1929 prize.
I fail to see the connection between a nomination 1929 and a failure to receive the price due to political connections during 2nd world war. Note that the Jordan wikipedia page talks about 1950's:

Quote

Had Jordan not joined the Nazi party, it is conceivable that he could have won a Nobel Prize in Physics for his work with Max Born. Born would go on to win the 1954 Physics Prize with Walther Bothe.[10][11]

Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascual_Jordan

I haven't had to track down original sources for the nomination procedure but I do not think Einstein could have submitted a nomination for 1954 price back in 1929. I also have not access to the source(s) listed for the Wikipedia claims regarding nominations by Einstein 1929.

 

Einstein seems to have been an active nominator:
Nominator in 9 nominations:
Physics 1919 for Max Planck
Physics 1924 for James Franck, Gustav Hertz
Physics 1926 for Arthur Compton
Physics 1932 for Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger
Physics 1933 for Erwin Schrödinger
Physics 1940 for Otto Stern, Isidor Rabi
Physics 1945 for Wolfgang Pauli
Physics 1954 for Walther Bothe
Chemistry 1929 for Carl Bosch

Source https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/redirector/?redir=archive/

Above is an extract from the digital nominee archive available from the Nobel Foundation. Since the organisation  manages the Nobel price I have reason to believe they have pretty good access to reliable original records. Obviously there may be errors in the data (or in my research of the data).

Conclusion: The official records does not support the statement made on wikipedia.

I leave to other members to evaluate the reliability of the material I have provided.

 

 

Edited by Ghideon
Bad sentence fixed; I made it look like Swansont claimed things he did not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think regardless of the veracity of the claims about whether Einstein nominated Jordan, it seems clear the issue that raised this discussion is clear: any potential anti-semitism that might have occurred would have been on the part of the Nobel selection board, and the inference that this was ascribed to Jordan is unfounded. Further, discussion of why one might not get a Nobel is on-topic, as it was a point made in the OP.

 

I think further discussion of Nobel prizes should take place in a different thread, as they have nothing to do with the details of running SFN.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Strange said:

It would need to be demonstrated along with convincing evidence, not just be a speculative idea.

Yep. Totally deranged. Why would there be a conspiracy like that? It would make scientists jobs pointless.

There is little point linking to a search. I couldn't see the text you quote in a couple fo the search results I looked at.

And yet, here we are talking about him. There is no conspiracy.

 

 

 

  Deleted a bunch of stuff because of Swanson's direction towards a different thread.  I'm not sure where to open the thread though.  

1 hour ago, swansont said:

I think regardless of the veracity of the claims about whether Einstein nominated Jordan, it seems clear the issue that raised this discussion is clear: any potential anti-semitism that might have occurred would have been on the part of the Nobel selection board, and the inference that this was ascribed to Jordan is unfounded. Further, discussion of why one might not get a Nobel is on-topic, as it was a point made in the OP.

 

I think further discussion of Nobel prizes should take place in a different thread, as they have nothing to do with the details of running SFN.

 

 

 

I just saw this after posting additional on Jordan and the Nobel.  I'm trying to fix that problem. 

Edited by coffeesippin
Compliance with Swanson's directions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.