Classical and modern science

(work against the mainstream)

Author : Luis Biarge Baldellou – Email:


This page explain the differences between classical and modern science, why?, from where?, the errors, … from this new sect called modern science.

This could be called modern physics but this modern sect affect to all sciences, begining with maths, …


All the modern science could to be resume in 3 asks, and their impossible.

Why scientist not admit creation from nothing less in Universe expansion and Big Bang theories?

Why scientist not admit maximum in any magnitude less in speed? – base of Relativity theory. According to this all magnitudes n + n = 2n less in c (lightspeed) where speed of c + c = c

Why scientist not admit that energy is matter less in quantum theory? – base of Quantum theory: imagine that electricity is at same time matter, they say that light is energy (wave) and matter (quantum).

All this 3 theories (a theory has none proof) have more of near 100 years without 1 proof (Quantum and Relativity have more of 100 years)

The last question: Why none scientists reject these 3 theories?


Until near 1900 there was only 1 science, today that science is called classical science for contradiction to modern science. In that moment say that there are “TWO CLOUDLETS ON THE CLEAR SKY… – Sometimes in 1900 Lord Kelvin, the famous physicist, elaborated an article to announce the new century of Physics”  and this so called “TWO CLOUDLETS” is the born of Quantum theory and relativity theory. Or also here ” in 1900 Lord Kelvin wrote: almost everything is OK in physics, only two small clouds remained on the clear sky. The task is to dissolve the last 2 cloudlets [27]. One of the cloudlets was the problem of the blackbody radiation.”

According to this credulous born both Quantum and Relativity theories, I say credulous becuase this is like a group of people that say that “magic tricks are all know but there are 2 magic that we not know the trick”.

In same form that all magic has a trick without Gods and miracles, also if you don’t know it, in same form all physics has solution in classical physics without impossibles, but a credulous that doubt in this open a door to the belief. Really this is so born any sect, from any believer or naughty and many credulous that end in believers.

The other branchs of science like maths, … not reject this impossibles and so maths admit that the universe expand equall in all directions and positions that is against any geometrical figure, that the universe is created from nothing and expand (or is created continously) from nothing, this in math form is: 0 = 1 = 2 = all, … And against a science and according to a sect mathematicians admit this impossibles.

Anothers impossibles: from Relativity theory is that speed is the only magnitude with maximum, … from Quantum theory that light is particle. and many mores from the 3 theories.

Remember: a theory has not 1 proof. In this case also are impossibles.

So, I affirm that this so called by Kelvin “2 cloudlets” really are not, only where solution not knows but not the begin for a belief and a sect like really occurs. This seem that solving 2 problems is the end of story. What credibility can give a person affirm this? same this is Kelvin?

In this point I need to say that front an impossible there are 3 reaction: who say that is impossible and the solution not is magic, the credulous and the believers. A credulous many times end in an belief and their belief in a sect, this is also the modern science.

Actual science, really is classical science in all the advances, mostly the scientists thing in classical science and only say any information over modern science in their metaphysics notes.

Really Lord Kelvin was mistaken, there was not only 2 clouds, there was more, but this seem to concentrate in that points. If where true today not more discovered exist: ether, electricity, particles, …

This so called 2 clouds only were not know solutions, but this not give a solution impossible. Today we can consider in impossible zone of modern science: quantum theory, relativity theory, expansion of the universe and Big Bang. All theirs are only impossibles, and impossible only can accept a believer and create sects.


We go to see from where is this stupidy that create the sect of modern science

Quantum theory origin

“One of the cloudlets was the problem of the blackbody radiation. While this journal was printed, Planck made something with this cloudlet”

Like in all in the modern science here all is error. In more or 100 years without any proof, by that is only a theory.

According to the “cloud” the theory in that moment say that with more frequency the emission increase – this stupid theory was against the conservation of energy and would to give infinite energy increasing energy. Imagine, this impossible is 1 of the clouds of Kelvin and the born of Quantum theory.

Plank so give a solution to 2 theories with error (both in same impossible) and according to that the emission increasing the frequency is increasing until a moment it decrease, in form of bell like you can see here:

Classical physic sometimes has errors, probably my hypotheses also, but to tell that an error like this theory impossible that would give infinite energy to say that classical physic not give the solution and need quantum theory is stupid.

In general is easy to understand, also for example white light is in middle of frequency scale of light and it’s the maximum radiation.

In their formula Planck make relation hv – “photons are usually symbolized by h?, the energy of a photon, where h is Planck’s constant and the Greek letter ? (nu) is the photon’s frequency” – and according to this an error and a solution give born to Quantum theory.

They also say that hv is energy or E = h v – – this is impossible, like in the same error more frequency give infinite energy – This relation between the energy and frequency is called the Planck relation or the Planck–Einstein equation: – like I say in my hypothesis the frequency need to see near a resistance.

In none equation appear the frequency: e=mc2, w=va, …

According to Quantum theory the rain water (in water we speak over suface tension) is quantum because not fall until make a quantity (photon), the treble sound that crash a glass and also a Zen Bamboo Fountain like this

Why a easy case like surface tension, Zen fountain, … need to be considered out of classical physic when they like and invented a quantum theory for near atomic size? Why in classical physic and normal word can to be a solution so easy like surface tension to speak over quantity to fall a drop of water and in other side say there is a cloud and create an impossible quantum theory? What type of hidden interest or stupidy can go to this?

What would to be the relation between frequency and emission (continuos value) and quantum (discontinuous value)?

From this bell of blackbody radiation this believers (sect) add many more like a believer in UFO that all seem to their evidence from Ufos, so the electrons in the atom, but this any other reason has, for example without this zones the atom would not be stable like I say in my hyphotesis.

What can to be the relation between the blackbody radiation (not quantum) and photons quantum or how from an error can to obtain a true? – or “What would have been a good story anyway is now a demonstration of big historical accidents”

Planck’s constant (6.63 × 10-27 erg-seconds or 6.63 × 10-34 joule-seconds) – really is only a number like pi (3.14), … but considered for particles physic.

Today really the Quantum theory or commonly called Quantum physic is the jumble or hodgepodge where go all that seem quantum and all that has not other explanation. In quantum is considered particles physic, quantities, ….

They also say that Quantum physic is for very small units, this is cover also by particles physic, nanotecnology, … and in same form that a planet has not the same effect that a little stone, in same form a planet or little stone has not the same  properties that an atom of the same material.

An example: you believe in any belief, then all you not see any explanation probably you say is for your belief: ufo, martians, expansion of the universe, miracles, astrology, gods, …

Imagine so big success, a solution for a emission of energy in relation with frequency is also solution for photons, later assert for electrons into the atom, also later assert for excited photons (“In quantum mechanics an excited state”) , …. really is a very big jumble or hodgepodge.

Also Planck constant also is usefull for emission of energy by frequency like to consider a so little size for atomic propierties. ????????

Duality wave – particle : this is near the center of quantum theory, the duality wave – particle, this is false, they say that a photon (light) has compond of particle, if this would true a bulb would need to lose mass (false).

Against that particles have also duality as wave, so:

– 1924 Broglie hypothesis ” introduced his theory of electron waves.. This included the wave-particle duality theory of matter” “For this he won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1929” say that “This theory set the basis of wave mechanics. It was supported by Einstein, confirmed by the electron diffraction experiments of Davisson and Germe”according to this experiment the electrons act like waves . I affirm also that also the ships in the sea also act like waves, also the bullets, and many more. The electrons need to be visible, the light is wave, …

According to this impossible and believers, the hypothesis is given without any proof, later a particle that act like waves (not the real particle, the emission) is considered like a proof in same form that a believer in UFOs consider any light in sky like an possible UFO.

Bullets, ships, .. it’s not necessary go to atomic to obtain the same diffraction, but bullets and ships are not according to Quantum.

But this stupidy is for a believers sufficent for obtain the proof for duality.

Relativity theory origin

“The second cloudlet on clear sky was the negative result of the Michelson interferometry. A twenty year old problem.”

Like in all in the modern science here all is error. In more or 100 years without any proof, by that is only a theory.

“In the Universe everything is moving. New York is rotating around the center of Earth with cca. v=0.35 km/s. But the center of Earth is revolving around Sun with 30 km/s. In the same time Sun goes on his orbit in Milky Way Galaxy with cca. 200 km/s. And the Milky Way Galaxy? Is it orbiting an even greater center, or the galaxies are already independent?”

Yes, but the speed of a wave not depend of the emissor, so if would deppend cannot exceed sound speed, also in this case you could not speak in a airplane that exceed sound speed. But also depend in the reference system, so into the plain the sound travel like the plain is stopped (without this the people into the plain could not speak) and out of the plain in relation to a static Earth (adding wind speed). So, if sound speed depend in the system of reference: Why light speed need cannot take the same system?. More: in light traveling in galaxy there are differents gravitational systems, we are in Milky Way Galaxy and solar system from Sun.

“Considering that she orbits Sun with 30 km/s, such an exact cancellation would be rather improbable.” : this is a relation from 30/300,000 or 0,0001 and without consider that in the universe there are not static places, …

That any is the solution, yes, but this say that c (lightspeed) is more speed is near ridiculous. This means that c + c = c and also there are proofs against this affirmation (remember this is the base or origin of all the Theory of the relativity of Einstein).

In our solar system there are a gravity level that make that anything seem not moving like I say in my hypothesis and maybe also many other options (that you don’t know the solution not means admit an impossible solution).

Proofs against that lightspeed (c) is maximum speed:

  • 1 – When 2 cars crash against the speed is add, so n + n = 2n, but according to this theory an space with 2 light in front the center not would be light at middle time because c + c is not 2c, is only c (also c/2 + c/2 = c)
  • 2 – zero + zero = zero in all magnitudes, in a train another train traveling over the speed would be the addition, but according to this theory a light over another would be speed zero
  • 3 – “A new laboratory experiment at the NEC Research Institute in Princeton claims to have achieved propagation speeds of 310 c (c = speed of light)” – is clear they say this is not against Relativity theory (very well, a proof against this theory is considered not proof against).
  • 4 – “Faster-Than-Light Pulsar Phenomena” – ” Researchers say as the polarization currents in these emissions are whipped around with a mechanism likened to a synchrotron, the sources could be traveling up to six times light speed, or 1.8 million km per second. However, although the source of the radiation exceeds the speed of light, the emitted radiation travels at normal light speed once it leaves the source.” – and – “And Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity is not violated.” – sure, light speed not exceed light speed.

The so speaked this time over neutrinos is probably less that c, because: Do you make an accelerator for exceed lightspeed if you belief that is maximum speed? If the reaction not exceed this speed there is not reason to that later neutrinos accelerate for exceed that speed.

Note: if only from admit that c is maximum speed obtain conclusion in 1)- e=mc2, 2)- that time with speed is slowly and 3)- that size with speed is less, imagine the quantity of conclusions we can obtain if admit that all magnitudes have maximum.

Proofs against Relativity Theory:

  • 1 – This theory say also that near lightspeed the time travel infinitely slowly and also that size are infinitely less, this is not for waves, is for particles, curiously neutrinos and other particles sub-atomic travel near this speed in the particle accelerators but none say this ocurrs (less size in form near infinite), this would not be a proof, but an affirmation of the theory, but in the negative form (not happens) is a proof. So that this particles are not infinitelly more little is a proof that this theory is false.
  • 2 – They say that in the satellites the time is delayed, true, but this is to say that a light in the sky is a UFO. For example: a fly flying in a yet travel at more speed that the yet?. Against this (without proofs) is proved that gravity change time or frequency in the experiment of excited photons like I say in my hypothesis.

From a base false cannot obtain a true. And the base of the Relativity Theory is that c (lightspeed) is maximum speed.

E=mc2 origin and/or history

Einstein also say in their theory that e=mc2, this is say in 1905 with the rest of the Theory of relativity special.

In that time none knows the effect with the radiation, so Einstein join to Curie in 1927 Solvay conference without thing in the problems of radiation. So in this formula where is radiation problems?

Einstein at least join with Madame Curie in 1927 Solvay conference, also in 1911 and he not take none precaution with a radioactivity woman (today many people not so wise like is considered Einstein would take cautions). This is because nothing thing in problems with radiation.

“Curie died in 1934 of aplastic anemia brought on by her years of exposure to radiation ” – “The damaging effects of ionizing radiation were not then known” – then: how is possible that Einstein would to know theirs in 1905?

In E=mc2 there is not place to place the mass that is moved to the environment, the environment radiation, … In same form in a car crash of 2 cars we could weight the 2 cars after the crash (without count the pieces that lose in the environment) and conclude that the lose mass has been converted in energy in the crash.

If really e=mc2 would a conversion from mass to energy, Why nuclear plants produce worn-out combustible?: In a real conversion the mass would lose and only would need to refuel the lose combustible like with gasoline. Produce worn-out combustible because the mass lose energy in same case that a collision. See my hypothesis O15

Really e=mc2 is a collision formula and not conversion from matter to energy like I say in my hypothesis and in relation with formule of kinetic energy, this say that E=mv2/2

Expansion of the universe and Big Bang theories origin

This is not 1 of the 2 clouds but also is impossible and according to modern science. Also the title of my web.

When you see farther is showed red shift in relation with distance (more exactly after comoving = equalize in actual distance) and also other facts.

Here a list of facts: red shift, visual expansion, the light is curved by gravity, time delay, Hubble’s law, homogeneity and isotropy, the universe is flat visually (A flat space has Euclidean geometry, where the sum of the angles in a triangle is 180º and parallel lines stay parallel).

With this facts (may another more) they consider the universe expand in all places and direction in all time and born in a Big Bang. – all this without 1 proof and only impossible.

An example: a person more far seem more little and also when speak I hear less, by that I can affirm that that person at more distance is more little. That this is impossible and also is an optic effect called perspective has not importance.

I offer in all parts of my web proofs that is only an optic effect, and proofs that the visual expansion of the universe cannot to be real. In my homepage I give 5 proofs.

Really it’s easy to understand, in the universe there are gravitational lens (proven), a gravitational lens make that the light travel is more longer that the real distance and create and angle like in a triangle, like the gravity in the universe grow all time the gravitational lens also grow in angle and by that the way that travel the light is growing all time.

Also is easy to prove, only a visual effect is equal in all directions and points like perspective and visual expansion of the universe by gravitational lens growing, but against to this, a real expansion is impossible in all forms: science only admit this for universe expansion, create space or all in Big Bang is impossible and only in relation with miracles and Gods, against geometry (there are not geometrical figure, …). This is really near a coup d’etat in science and by that the moderm science is only belief, sect and impossible.

Science errors

Science all time make errors and many times reject the true.

Errors: ether, flat Earth, Earth in centre of universe, alchimists, Copernicus arrange that the Earth is not the center of the universe but take the error to say that the center of the universe is the Sun, Newton told that the light is particle, …

Trues rejected by science: continental drift “The theory of continental drift was not accepted for many years”

Endosymbiotic theory of Lynn Margulis “rejected by about fifteen scientific journals,” Margulis recalled.[5] It was finally accepted by The Journal of Theoretical Biology and is considered today a landmark in modern endosymbiotic theory”

duck-billed platypus “some considering it an elaborate fraud”

Martians from Mart because in Mars are visible  – “Mars has been featured in science fiction media, and one theme is intelligent “Martians”, responsible for the speculated “canals” and “faces” on the planet”

Egypt pyramids belief made by slaves: “were not slaves, as was previously thought. The myth of slaves building the pyramids was popularized by Hollywood films based on the belief that they could not have been built without forced labor” – “In 1990, tombs belonging to the pyramid workers were discovered alongside the pyramids with an additional burial site found nearby in 2009. “

Stones of Egypt pyramids during many time was believed that they was from far of the pyramids but today know that “Much of the stone was cut from a plateau near the pyramid site”

first fossils, first dinosaurs,

I also make errors, but in actual modern science I go in the correct direction.

Really many … many errors and rejection of true, but today they admit impossibles theories with more of 100 years without any proof and only impossibles.

I make science, same if actual scientist reject it.

Definition of wise and intelligent

Normally you read that a wise is a person very intelligent, but really this another definition is many near to real: a wise or intelligent person is who sometimes say stupid things. Really all people say many times stupid things but a wise and an intelligent person sometimes not say stupid things.

Believer – agnostic – atheist or Believer – credulous – skeptic

From an impossible there are 3 subjects: the believer is that belief in the impossible without any proof, the credulous is that can believe or not (in religion also called agnostic) but not need proof for believe, the skeptic only belief in proofs.

In a magic trick there are the 3 subjects: belief – believe in that is true, the credulous not thing really in yes or not, the skeptic know that the magic has a trick.

In modern science many impossible are considered trues, from credulous (without obtain the true that only are impossibles) and converted in believers, like I tell here.

When you kow that  the magic all have tricks it’s not necessary to know each trick to understand all are tricks and all is false. Here is the error of actual scientists that have consider probably the impossible and later true, with the 2 options of stupid that are used by swines like in any other belief and from there proselitysm in actual universities, …


For all this I give you Welcome to Newphysics , for the Newton physics or classical physic, see my page and soon all the modern science will obtain total discredit and all scientists.


Tags: accelerated expansion of the universe, Big bang, Big rip, galaxies, universe, universe expansion, mathematics, physics, astronomy, astrophysics, expansion, infinite, magic, creation, creationism, belief, believer, sect, Nobel prize, the Theory of relativity, relativity theory, Einstein, pseudoscience, quantum theory, credulous.


Author: Luis Biarge Baldellou


Copyright ©2012 Luis Biarge Baldellou – You can copy all or part of this work giving this web page direction.