Archive for May, 2020

Is Plutocratic Violence Hiding Behind Racism?

May 31, 2020

So three police officers sit on a man for nine minutes. He dies. This is interpreted as, first of all, a problem with racism. Ex-officer Chauvin is white, but the officer watching nervously the smothering, is Asian. 

This is a hint that racism may not be the main problem. Racism is just an assumption which is rolled out as a motivation all the time, by manichean self-described “liberals” (they are supposed to be pure, like the puritan of old). Such a traditional assumption, that everything has to do with evil, obvious racism is so traditional, precisely because of racism. 

Federal Security Guard killed by deliberate automatic gunfire at the Oakland federal Court House, May 30, 2020. His colleague was grievously wounded. Dave Patrick Underwood was a Bay Area native from Pinole. The US Department of Justice determined the assassination was “Domestic Terrorism”

Assuming other people are racist, is metaracism. This is compounded by holier than thou attitude, namely, I am so good, I can tell you you are bad, even if I don’t know you, because, you see, I know you, based on the color of your skin. This sounds as an attitude is straight out of a comedy, but it’s not, it kills. It’s the same attitude which enables a white woman in finance to threaten a law abiding citizen (when she is not), by telling the police he is threatening her life, when all he is doing is asking her to abide by the law.

The most effective adaptation of racism over time,DiAngelo claims, “is the idea that racism is conscious bias held by mean people.This “good/bad binary,” positing a world of evil racists and compassionate non-racists, is itself a racist construct, eliding systemic injustice and imbuing racism with such shattering moral meaning that white people, especially progressives, cannot bear to face their collusion in it. (Pause on that, white reader. You may have subconsciously developed your strong negative feelings about racism in order to escape having to help dismantle it.) 

What DiAngelo is saying is the penultimate step before what I am saying, which goes much further. Racism from the police is not as much the problem as outright violence by the police and justice system to buttress the established order.

Police, in the USA is very well treated as far as salary and total compensation is concerned. Here is San Francisco, for basic police officers: 

Salary $89,856 – $135,096/year

A Police Officer works 40 hours per week on different shifts and overtime may be required. San Francisco offers excellent benefits and the current starting salary is $89,856 per year. After seven years of service a Police Officer may earn up to $135,096 per year. You will receive comprehensive training, at your full starting salary.

After age 58, an officer can retire on 90% of last salary.

The police chief of San Francisco is a very black African-American, by the way. In the same city, Mayor Breed, who is also “African-American” earns a base salary of more than $338,000…

Thus the servants of the establishment are well paid… So well paid that, like the Bidens, Obamas and Clintons, they do little more than pay lip service to justice. Biden was actually the author of extremely de facto racist laws in the 1990s. But such is the control of the establishment through perverse media that older “blacks” are persuaded of the opposite… 

So there is racism, but as Di Angelo said, it’s camouflaged, hidden as its opposite. Very few US families, outside of multiracial areas, and even then, are genuinely multiracial…  

Both the killer and the victim worked as “bouncers” in the same nightclub. The owner said that Chauvin, the killer, had been violent in the past, and that she told him she will not tolerate it anymore. A violent occupation, fitting well in a violent society. Racism is enabled by violence… which takes many aspects, one of them consisting in having to pay for basic rights, be it habeas corpus, or health care, or the right to an education. 

Thus racism may only be a fig leaf hiding the plutocratic phenomenon. There is a precedent: Rome. Rome had many emperors who were not Italian. A dynasty was even from Africa. An emperor was an Arab (Philip the Arab). Rome was not racist, but declined and died from plutocratism gone rabid.

Evil Power (Pluto Kratia) is more subtle than goodness, this makes it invisible to the vast mass of the gullible, and how it rules. Obsessing about racism is a shiny object which enables to forget what is worse about the order of things, and thus core to said source of most evil.

Divide et imperare: divide and rule, the Romans used to say. Divide with racism, rule with plutocracy. What could go wrong? A thousands infernos, this is what could go wrong…

Patrice Ayme

Diminishing The Majesty Of The Republic, A Crime In Rome, Enforced Stupidity

May 30, 2020


Rome fell into plutocracy, and fell and fell, and fell… the famous case of the Saxons who committed suicide rather than becoming gladiators, show that some who arrived in Rome were deeply revolted by the Roman plutocracy, and absolutely refused to play along. But the Romans themselves were so dull that they didn’t revolt until the mid-Sixth Century in Constantinople, against emperor Justinian, and that happened just once, and utterly failed (although the Arbogast struggle against Theodosius should be viewed as another revolt, it is telling that it was led by a Frank, not a genuine Roman… And it failed in part because Theodosius bought some of Arbogast force… Another example of greed superseding all other values in Late Rome.)

The comparison with the European Middle Ages is enlightening. After the terrible “Black Plague” of 1348 CE, which killed around half of Europe, workers, now fewer in numbers, asked for higher wages. The French and British monarchies passed laws cancelling the rises and forcing people to work. Extremely ferocious revolts ensued, complete with noble families roasted on spit like vulgar pigs. No less than 1,000 revolts would happen on the next two centuries. They soon got entangled with major wars. However, real progress, in all sorts of dimensions, came out all of these rebellious spirits…. whereas the Roman intellectual life, supposing it ever existed, seemed to have died long before it turned to Christian Derangement Syndrome. Why were the Romans so dull?

Why was Rome so intellectually lackluster, and Athens so bright? A factor was the ancient nature of Greek civilization: by the time (753 CE) Rome was founded, Minoan-Greek civilization was 23 centuries old, and was re-emerging after the Bronze Age civilizational collapse. It had been closely entangled with many civilizations just as old in Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Phoenicia, Egypt…  Athens was resting on a colossal accumulated civilizational base. 

One thing clear in Homer is that intelligence is the most human, most domineering quality, and triumphs from adversity best. Intelligence is born of debate. Intelligence is also born out of adversity. Thus Athens went all out for Direct Democracy, fostering debate, increasing intelligence. 

Athens was not ruled by the enforced respect for the greatness of the state as much as by the greatness of reason, directly. Even Socrates pretended this [1]… 

In Republican Rome, the respect for the “greatness of the state” was imposed. By law.  It was a criminal offense to adversely affect the greatness of the state: major + status; MAJE-STA = greatness-state [2]. This meant, in particular, not making fun of elected Roman officials, let alone criticizing them (that worked well until Tiberius Gracchus tried to enforce the limit on wealth). Whereas Aristophanes pursued a relentless war against the major demagogue Kleon…

In the Roman Republic the word “majestos” (biggest) was used in the case of major magistrates and We The People. The title “Majesty” transferred from emperor to emperor, but Trajan, one the best emperors refused to use it, contenting himself with “Optimus”, the best.

Ulpian (170-228 CE) was a top jurist and top adviser of emperor Severus Alexander. Ulpian (Dig. 48 tit. 4 s1), defined crimes against majesty to be “crimen illud quod adversus Populum Romanum vel adversus securitatem ejus committitur.The crime that is committed against the Roman People or against its security.

Further, “crimen majestatis” was defined as “crimen laesae, imminutae, diminutae, minutae, majestatis.” That is: “crime against majesty as any offense which hurt, reduced, diminished, minimized the greatness of the state (majesty).

Ulpian glorified in Belgica. It is interesting to see modern states (here is the Belgiae Palais de Justice) glorifying fascist imperially stupid Rome… An unwitting symbol of the continuity of plutocracy.

The expression “minuere majestatem” consequently signifies any act by which this majestas is impaired; and it is thus defined, 250 years earlier, by Cicero (de Invent. II.17), “Majestatem minuere est de dignitate, aut amplitudine, aut potestate Populi aut eorum quibus Populus potestatem dedit, aliquid derogare.” (See Cic. ad Fam. III.11. “Majestatem auxisti.”)

Minimizing majesty is any lessening of the dignity, or greatness of People power, or of those to whom the People gave power to.” [Personal translations.]

Reporting crimes, such as attacking the majesty, the greatness of the state, was encouraged under the Republic. In the late republic patriotism waned and so those who reported grave crimes were encouraged with the potential reward of acceding to the position of the suspect, if convicted. Thus the domination by the majesty of the law was replaced by greed.


Under Augustus, self-described son of a god, the respect for majesty was transferred to his person, and not just for affairs regarding his safety. Any disrespect, of whatever excited his caprice, jealousy, disquiet or frustration, even relating debauched intrigues women of his household engaged in, were viewed as treason.

Inquisitors and informers kept the salacious suspicion flowing up, in the hope to extract more advantages from confiscated property. 

Emperor Domitian insisted to be called a master and god (dominus et deus). He was stabbed, starting in the groin, and, although he killed his hired special force assaillant, he died from his wounds. 

Domitian seemed to have been a good, fastidious emperor in many ways. He pushed the legions all the way to Azerbaijan. He also heavily prosecuted corruption among public officials, removing jurors if they accepted bribes and rescinding legislation when a conflict of interest was suspected. 

However, Domitian ensured that libellous writings, especially directed against himself, were punishable by exile or death. Actors were likewise regarded with suspicion, as their satire at the expense of the government was feared. Mimes were forbidden from appearing on stage in public. It’s too bad, because Domitian was (contrarily to repute) a relatively good emperor. Had he learned to suffer humor, he would have been more open to philosophy beyond stoicism (the only philosophy Domitian liked) … and his complete tolerance of Judaism and Christianism (contrarily to future Christian lies, there was no persecution whatsoever). 

In the Dominate, or Late Empire period, the emperors eliminated the Republican trappings of their predecessors and began to identify the state with their person. Although legally the princeps civitatis (the emperor’s official title, meaning, roughly, ‘first citizen’) could never become a sovereign because the Roman Republic was never officially abolished, emperors were deified as divus, first posthumously but by the Dominate period, while reigning. Deified emperors enjoyed the same legal protection that was accorded to the divinities of the state cult; by the time it was replaced by Christianism, emperor Constantine modestly adopted the title of “13th Apostle”, and what was in all but name a sacred monarchical tradition had already become well-established.

Could it have been different? Could Rome have acquired a sense of humor? Possibly. Caesar, disembarking in Africa for war against his Optimates enemies, falls on the beach, flat on his belly. According to Roman religion, a very bad omen. But the general grabs the sand with both hands and exclaims:”Now I hold you, Africa!”. But that was Caesar (was that one of his mini strokes?) Two centuries earlier, a Roman high lady was caught in a traffic jam. She got infuriated. Her brother was a famous admiral. His fleet, the entire Roman fleet, had been completely sunk in action against Carthage. Hundreds of ships sunk, dozens of thousands of sailors and soldiers, drowned. The irate lady exclaims:”How come there are still so many Romans? Couldn’t my brother have killed more?” 

So there was some hope for Roman humor and thus, transcendence of the spirit.

However, the crime of Lèse-majesté (hurt majesty) prevented the expansion of the mind. It was one thing for the grandees of Rome to dare to joke. Lesser orders couldn’t risk it: Roman magistrates were “majestos”, and it was crime to risk a joke. Early Roman playwrights Plautus and Terence were careful to present their plays as mostly translated from the Greek and happening in Greece, lest they be accused of having offended the Roman Republic. 

The final prosecution for lèse-majesté occurred in 1715 CE in the United Kingdom. In France it partly survived as “offense contre le président de la République” until 1898, when it was used to re-establish Dreyfus. Zola and company accused the president of being a liar, ensuring a trial which would demonstrate for all to see the shaky evidence on which Dreyfus had been convicted. The plan worked perfectly well, except that a lunatic chimney sweep took it on himself to kill Zola with carbon monoxide by blocking his chimney. By 1908, Dreyfus was retired with great honors, and would become a lieutenant-colonel in WW1… while Zola enjoyed the dubious pleasure to be buried at the Pantheon (the original Pantheon is in Rome, and is smaller). 

Fundamentally, Rome died of a lack of appetite for high mental performance, the call of the honor of the human spirit. This was no doubt forged by centuries of criminalizing, under the Republic any demonstration of “esprit”. In other words, the Republic imposed mental fascism, through its humorless magistrates… for centuries.

The opposites happened in France, from Rabelais to Saint Just… and actually, one could go back as early as Clovis who seemed to have enjoyed making fun of Catholicism, in the guise of celebrating it. Certainly, in the century preceding the Revolution of 1789, avoir de l’esprit, making fun of others, came to be seen as the highest art… It prepared the revolution, because that form of humor criticized all authority. In a way, humor directed against others, is the opposite of the self-deprecating humor which is viewed as the highest refinement in the USA. Of course, with self-deprecating humor, one only lowers oneself relative to the masters… whereas, to resist masters, especially the humorless, abominable sort, one first has to learn to enjoy disrespecting them, in such a way that they are completely defenseless.  

Confronted by a host of problems, defenseless after the assassination of Caesar, the betrayed Populares were excluded from the leadership of the state, leaving the army and the wealthiest to fight, and help, each other for the control of the empire. Neither of these actors worried a bit about the honor of the human spirit, the only thing which could have saved Roman civilization. Roman civilization, or lack thereof, had to be burned; something Christianism did very well. Thus the better angels of the Greco-Roman world could be reborn like phoenixes, but not all of them have spread their wings of wisdom have not fully spread yet. 

The fundamental lesson from the failure of Rome is that civilization has to be led, not by plutocracy, but by optimal thinking, the best thinking which can be achieved at the time. And that thinking always originates from outside of the box of privilege and the establishment.

Middle Age Europe understood this need for the highest thinking, after the fall of Rome. Examples abound, here are a few. Look at Bathilde, the highly educated queen who outlawed slavery, but originally, a slave captured in Kent. Look at Charlemagne, surrounded by philosophers, some, like Alcuin, from the British isles (not yet part of the Frankish empire then). And the French and British monarchs would keep on being advised by intellectuals: several French kings took advice from Buridan, François I used Leonardo Da Vinci (a top physicist, among other things) as a substitute father, and of the deeply iconoclast writer, physician and Pagan philosopher François Rabelais (?1494 – 1553 CE). Henri IV and Margot, queen of France and Navarre were so close to Montaigne she co-worked on his essays (and thus Henri IV was one the very best kings, his passions moderated by the other two)… Even the dreadful Louis XIV would fund many intellectuals, including the top Dutch physicist Huyghens, author, among other things, of the wave theory of light.

Top intellectualism feeds revolution in science and technology, necessary to insure not just the progress, but the survival of civilization. Because no civilization can stand still, not anymore than a bicycle can, be it only because of the back reaction its own success brings. The short of it, is that Rome didn’t have enough brains to survive… or even to distinguish itself from the invading Barbarians.

Patrice Ayme


P/S: Plutocratic authorities can be publishers such as Twitter, and other social platforms, deciding what’s tolerable, and what’s not, and being a law onto themselves. Many have, behind my back, decided what they would show of my work, to whom… Thus some religious terrorists published by, say, Twitter, can get away with fatwas to prevent publications of others, such as yours truly…


[1] Two cases are opposed here: Aristophanes, and the one he harshly criticized and ridiculized, Socrates. Aristophanes said whatever, about whoever, including the greatest politicians. Socrates ended with hemlock… Well, Socrates was fundamentally accused of the greatest betrayal: having taught his students to become dictators. So he was a special case (and the only one to whom the general amnesty was not applied!)


[2] maiestas) “greatness, dignity, elevation, honor, excellence

Silicon Valley Inquisition “Refutes Inaccuracy”

May 28, 2020

New York Times is crowing: OAKLAND, Calif. — Twitter added information to refute the inaccuracies in President Trump’s tweets for the first time on Tuesday… (Trump had said that “No wayMail-In Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent…. “… In most states and nations, mail-in ballots are illegal… But in California they are systematic and now with something really shocking, “vote harvesting“…)

Tell us, New York Times, the “newspaper of record in the USA“, how does one “refute an inaccuracy“? That reminded me of the Catholic Inquisition, an expert in refuting inaccuracies… Now the half intelligent editorialist at the NYT is viewed as an authority of the Silicon Valley, land of the monopolies for which Obama changed the Patent Law to make them even stronger.

I sent the following comment right away, it was of course blocked (by the purely rotten). That was 15 hours ago. My comment should have been the second one. Then more than a thousand comments full of hatred for Trump were published. Hatred is a sacred concept in American politics. This way, the NYT cultivates hatred, and the love of vile, one sided rush to anger.

It’s hilarious to see the pseudo-left glorify weasel language from plutocrats (in this case Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter, another of these multibillionaire owner of a company which always lost money… Doesn’t that sound fishy?). [1]

Trump could have expressed himself more accurately by condemning “Vote Harvesting”, which is legal in California [2]. I personally vote my mail, sort of, but I think “Vote Harvesting” should be illegal. Here is my comment:


Depending upon one plutocrat, or even a herd of them, to ascertain truth, is the road to hell, whether paved with the best intentions, or not. Moreover, accusing people of “inaccuracy” is an even deeper moral and mental failure exhibiting an inability to comprehend how mental creativity, and outrageous blindness works. Incompleteness theorems in logic show that, absent deliberate “inaccuracy”, no progress towards truth can be accomplished.  This is a matter of (meta) logic, not “opinion”.

Those who want to castigate “inaccuracy” seem to be saying that their all-seeing eye has determined what is accurate, and what is not. Also construing into moral rectitude the power of one man determining what can be published, or not, is to accept the sort of mental dictatorship human history and the history of infamy, is riddled with, and propelled by.

Unfortunately, we saw it all before: consider the Catholic Inquisition, or the Puritans doing away with those heathens they pretended to be praying for. Too much purity, too much certainty, to much conviction that one defines the truth, while ignoring other perspectives, is the road to extremism, mental racism, alienation, and the deepest error. History is full of these seductive, yet most terrible angels, and the holier than thou mentalities inspiring them. Exciting them further is no way to accomplish spiritual, let alone intellectual, or civilizational progress. It’s high time to understand that progress towards better understanding is intrinsically messy, not something adjudicated by censors, let alone the wealthiest.[3]


Apparently, massive use of VOTE HARVESTING flipped most of Orange County to “Democrats” in 2018. The GOP has noticed.

Now the NYT mixed the story of a multimillionaire in salary, an ex GOP Representative, who runs a rabidly anti-Trump show with his wife, the daughter of the guy who organized secretly the attack on Afghanistan in 1979 (!) I don’t make these things up, they are incredible. Here, a sacred icon of the pseudo-left is the daughter of a “Democrat” guy who organized the death of what… Five millions?  The information was, of course, CENSORED in the USA!

Joe Scarborough laughed approvingly at Imus’s description that he “had sex with an intern so he had to kill her” (listen to the tape, link below). Where do they find such vile people to educate We The People with? Vile Joe calls this “vile”. To report his laughter. Looking very dignified, Joe says: “Delete”.
You want accuracy, Silicon Valley? Until last year, Twitter lost money. Still the head of Twitter, Dorsey, is a great multibillionaire… He just claimed that he will be giving a billion dollars to charity. “Democrats” love this sort of lion of finance. When you go to their parties, you can, literally, I have done it, call it devotion to critical analysis, eat… gold.

Patrice Ayme



[1] Here is an extract from the piece of philosophical trash at the New York Time:

Brad Parscale, a manager of the Trump 2020 campaign, said, “We always knew that Silicon Valley would pull out all the stops to obstruct and interfere with President Trump getting his message through to voters.”

[That part is accurate… The Impeachment Hoax derailed the change in the Patent Law, back where it should be. Right now Chinese citizens have more Patent Rights than US citizens… NYT goes on:]

“A Twitter spokesman said Mr. Trump’s tweets about mail-in ballots “contain potentially misleading information about voting processes and have been labeled to provide additional context.”

[All discourse containing potentially misleading information shall be “labeled”? Why not censor it as the NYT does, when it doesn’t like it?]

Disinformation experts said Twitter’s move indicated how social media platforms that had once declared themselves neutral were increasingly having to abandon that stance.

“This is the first time that Twitter has done something that has in some small way attempted to rein in the president,” said Tiffany C. Li, a visiting professor at Boston University School of Law. “There’s been a gradual shift in the way that Twitter has treated content moderation. You see them taking on more of their duty and responsibility to create a healthy online speech environment.”

What’s healthy about censoring others by accusing them of “inaccuracy”? When the NYT censors comments like mine above, is it because I was inaccurate quoting the First and Second Incompleteness theorems in second order logic? Do monkeys understand calculus? Or is it, simply, because the NYT wants a readership which hates?


[2] I have semi-voted by mail myself. I filled in the ballot, then dropped it in person. However, since 2018, some states like California have enabled “VOTE HARVESTING”: paid operators go around with ballots, have them filled and drop them. It’s hard to see why this should be legal. According to the GOP 26 races were they were ahead for weeks were lost after the mail-in ballots came in…

Here are the “inaccurate” tweets. Twitter sent to links to “correct” Trump… Links to the Washington Post and CNN, two media owned or founded by billionaires who hate Trump because they fear his unpredictable anti-monopolistic tendencies… Under Obama, the Patent System was reorganized to make the monopolies much more powerful.

Donald J. Trump


There is NO WAY (ZERO!) that Mail-In Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent. Mail boxes will be robbed, ballots will be forged & even illegally printed out & fraudulently signed. The Governor of California is sending Ballots to millions of people, anyone…..
….living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there, will get one. That will be followed up with professionals telling all of these people, many of whom have never even thought of voting before, how, and for whom, to vote. This will be a Rigged Election. No way!
Twitter added the link (somehow, it didn’t copy, perhaps because it’s embarrassing that it sends to the WashPo/Bezos and CNN…!)
Get the facts about mail-in ballots
California changed its rules before the 2018 midterm elections to allow persons other than family members to collect and submit ballots. Last-minute submissions of votes in the election delayed results and some argued that it altered the outcome of several elections.[7][8][9] At a Washington Post event[10] in late November 2018[2] (a few weeks after the elections[10]), Republican then-Speaker Paul Ryan said that “California just defies logic to me” and that his party was “only down 26 seats the night of the election and three weeks later, [it] lost basically every California race. This election system they have—I can’t begin to understand what ‘ballot harvesting’ is.”[10][2] Meanwhile, Republicans seek to improve their own use of the practice.[11]
[3] If they do that to Trump, they do way worse to little people such as yours truly, and they have. I am nearly more censored than published… Some media and search engines have blocked me totally, for life… Same story as the Fatwa in Pakistan, but more discrete, thus efficient…

Is All Motion Relative? No!

May 26, 2020

Some Motions Are Relative… Most Are Not.

Fundamental ideas can be simple, yet subtle. Take the “Higgs” Field idea. Dirac’s simple first order PDE for the electron (QED, Quantum ElectroDynamic) had to be modified to incorporate the “weak” nuclear force. But that worked with massless particles. Yet, particles had mass. What to do? The solution was to make the equations even more complicated by introducing a “Higgs” field, which, once it is non-zero on average, can give the electron a mass by interacting with the electron field without messing up the workings of the “electroweak” force. Basically the interaction with the Higgs Field acts like a glue, giving an inertial mass.

Complications on top of complications… Not necessarily a bad thing: after all we got away from the magical world by introducing extremely complex explanations elaborating from a few concepts, sort of all biology from DNA and RNA… A danger, though, is to start from erroneous concepts. As Henri Poincaré put it:

C’est même des hypothèses simples qu’il faut le plus se défier, parce que ce sont celles qui ont le plus de chances de passer inaperçues.


  • It is the simple hypotheses of which one must be most wary; because these are the ones that have the most chances of passing unnoticed.


    • Thermodynamique: Leçons professées pendant le premier semestre 1888–1889 (1892), Preface

The principle of relativity, first proposed by Galileo, was stated thus by Newton:

“The motions of bodies included in a given space are

the same among themselves, whether that space is at

rest or moving uniformly forward in a straight line.”

That says nothing about how to define “uniform”, except circularly. Nor does it says all inertial frames are equivalent, just that they “are the same among themselves”…

Quantum Vacuum Fields Radiate Under Acceleration (Un. Chicago 2019 picture).

A great progress attributed to Einstein was the disappearance of any absolute motion. The irony, hidden to the profane, was that Einstein set on developing General Relativity (GR) precisely to explain the “Mach Principle” that he was obsessed with… That thing of Mach was actually discovered by Newton. Put water in a pail hanging from a rope, said Isaac. Twist the rope slowly, rotation after rotation. Release. Pail starts to rotate, water climbs on the side of the pail. Why a rotation relative to the fixed stars would have such an effect is a mystery (Mach observed, Einstein tried to elucidate with GR).  

So the idea of GR, as far as Einstein was concerned, was to find a mechanism to explain absolute motion! Indeed the standard Lambda Cold Dark Matter (LCDM) Big Bang model defines, de facto, an absolute state of motion… the one relative to which the Cosmic Background Radiation looks isotropic… Except, oops, it’s not (latest news).


But let’s go back to Relativity. It was named thus by Henri Poincaré, and rested on the notion of LOCAL TIME. In Fast Moving frames, time runs slow. That immediately led to the so-called “Twin Paradox” launched by Paul Langevin in 1911 (Einstein had mentioned the slowing of the moving clock in his 1905 paper). Langevin describes the story of a traveler making a trip at a Lorentz factor of γ = 100 (99.995% the speed of light). The traveler remains in a projectile for one year of his time, and then reverses direction. Upon return, the traveler will find that he has aged two years, while 200 years have passed on Earth. Langevin attributed the effect to ABSOLUTE acceleration (that’s reproduced by Richard Feynman, in his Lectures on Physics, but it’s not correct, I feel).

However, looking at the math more carefully, what really matters is how long the world-lines are, not how bent they are. The bending (acceleration) enables the length. The length referred to here is the Lorentz-invariant length or “proper time interval” of a trajectory which corresponds to the elapsed time measured by a clock following that trajectory. Basically the fast frame exchanges time for space: it covers lots of space, thus leaving little energy to spend on time: one can literally see the effect by looking at light wiggling back and forth between two mirrors. If the two mirror assembly goes fast, the wiggling is slow.

A related question is mass (like in “proper mass”). I have argued that it is time which slows down, not mass which goes up (as some texts have it, erroneously). Related to this is the Force-Acceleration law which involves now a (gamma)^3 factor… from multiple divisions by slow infinitesimal time…

All of this will leave some scratching their heads. Am I saying there is a notion of absolute motion? Well, the evidence is overwhelming. It’s time to remember the philosophy of  Henri Poincaré: if it looks like a duck in all ways, it’s a duck. Poincaré was actually saying that if all experiments give a speed of light equal to c then the speed of light c is a constant of nature (ironically, that’s true only locally… that is “infinitesimally”. In GR the speed of light is all over the space and, although locally constant, certainly not nonlocally constant… you see physics can be more subtle than basic logic…)

A notion not usually considered is that any manifold, or pseudomanifold, of dimension n can be embedded in manifold or pseudo manifold, of dimension (2n+1)… If one applies that to the curved spacetime of the LCDM, one gets an absolute reference frame… As de facto observed: the tapestry of galactic clusters is pretty much static…


Where am I drifting with these pseudo-idle considerations? Well, I am reinstating in catimini the honorability of space and time absolutism… Comrade Poincaré, a colossal topologist, seems to have been aware of much of this… but he died at 58 in 1912, before GR was finished (Henri had introduced gravitational waves in 1905), and long before De Broglie came up with his ubiquitous Matter Waves. Matter Waves necessitate derivation relative to time… Which local time is that? Differently from Relativity, which starts with a non-accelerated frame, the class of uniformly moving ones, Quantum Physics is indifferent: any time will do. How could that be? Accelerated time is slow time, says General Relativity (this is actually an independent, most simple piece, a building block of GR, which doesn’t require the full theory). Quantum Physics doesn’t care about time as defined by light. It differentiates as if there was one and only one time, as In Newton’s time.

Why? An obvious explanation could be that the architecture of Quantum Physics implicates a much higher speed, the collapse/entanglement/Quantum Interaction speed…  In any case, to go from our class of uniformly moving frames to any others implicates Quantum fireworks, as pictured above… No uniformities are accessible, but for the one we enjoy…

Patrice Ayme

Lesson From Evil Germany? Global Plutocracy Causes Evil Insanity

May 23, 2020

In Germany’s Lessons for China and America, Roger Cohen philosophizes that:

Better to love your country with a broken heart than love it blind

Well, good try. Germany is a country created in the second part of the Nineteenth Century, in Versailles, France. It’s not an old entity such as France and its vassal England, which were both parts of the Greco-Roman empire… And France was basically the Second Foundation of the “Renovated Empire”… Which included unifying Germany. However, Germany became a nation-state 14 centuries after France, and eight centuries after Britain…

Thus it’s not that simple to compare France, the core of the Renovated Empire, and a country which was created… to fight France (its own mother, in a way).

Our fascist masters, the arrogant, deranged so-called “Democratic Representatives” told us we can’t go the beach, because they said so, a virus in their heads told them. And what they say is the law (they have not read the Constitution of the Republic). Instead, we the free, should put them in prison for abusing their powers, and applying them in an anti-scientific way.

German history is actually a festering cave of decomposing wiggling monsters, many of them poisonous. Vigorous criticism has not handled them all as deserved yet. And it gets worse: both the First World war, and the Second World War went the disastrous way they did, because the USA, child of the bickering union of France and Britain, did not just refuse to help them in a timely manner (it helped, in an untimely manner, most self-serving, after others had done most of the suffering and dying)… It was way worse than that:US plutocracy actually actively helped the crazed militaristic, racist, German plutocracy to achieve its self-defeating rampages. Result; the “American Century”.

But back to that crazed German culture, mostly an anti-culture defined as an opposition to the Greco-Romans and their Franks (the latter having built Germany, and even the language, it’s completely masochist for Germans to be anti-Franks…)

Breaking the spirit which made Germany criminal, is of the essence. Military victory is not enough. Barbarity has to be vanquished in the hearts, souls, and cognitive systems. A whole series of German master-thinkers were despicable and dumb. Starting with the traitor Arminius (“Hermann”) who betrayed the Roman army in 9 CE… Yet celebrated in the Nineteenth Century… A traitor, adulated.

The Gallic opponent of Rome, Vercingetorix, however stupid and rebellious to his own family, was not launched by perpetrating a stabbing in the back. So it does something to the soul when one erects as an example to follow someone who betrayed his comrades… fatally. And the captured Roman troops were not made prisoner or enslaved, they were tortured to death: Auschwitz, anticipated… Martin Luther, one protestants out of many in the period from the eleventh to the seventeenth century, was not nice either: whereas five millions assassinated Cathars advocated purity and veganism, Luther advocated to torture Jews (below his house). Luther was following “Saint” Louis… But not fully. Although Louis IX of France said nothing would please him more than planting a knife in the belly of an atheist or a Jew… He couldn’t do it, because it was against the law. Luther omitted the prominence of the (secular) law. For Luther, his fanaticism was the law. 

Lesser minds may object that they don’t see the connection between plutocracy and Luther. Well, they don’t know history. Luther succeeded because many Germany princes found him very convenient to assuage their thirst for power. Plutocracy, evil power, loved Luther fanaticism. Add Catholic fanaticism and, a century later you get the monstrous “Thirty Year War”, which ravaged much of Europe.

Catholicism itself was invented to give the fascist Roman emperors the metaphysics they needed to terrorize everybody during what one now calls the “Dominate” (which collapse the empire in less than a century…)

So Lutheranism, just as the crazed anti-Judaism of the Christian founders, are actually plutocratic effects, to further mental fascization, hatred and sadism (Luther’s despicable sadism is completely obvious, to whoever read enough of him).

Then, to build on Luther’s madness, Hitler, unelected, Germany had a whole slew of grandiose tribal fanatics, still all too much admired, to this day: Herder (who loved herds), Hegel, Wagner… While most Germans got indoctrinated in the military attack dog role (but not Nietzsche and Einstein, both good Europeans).

An important figure of the deplorable German intellectual landscape is the despicable Kant, a much admired philosopher, whom the Nazis, including Eichmann at Jerusalem, used as a defense to justify killing millions because they were following orders, the highest order of morality according to that Prussian military robot. Kant was so pro-slavery , he wrote about to West Indies leaders to not outlaw the institution…

Warning: Nazis, the Kaiser, enemies of the Roman republic, and Xi, were promoted by global plutocracy (= evil-power). 


Roger Cohen informs us with wisdom from up high: Stephen Heintz, the president of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, has written of a crisis “that stems from the growing obsolescence of three core operating systems that have shaped civilization for the past 350 years: capitalism, fueled by carbon since the dawn of the Industrial Age and increasingly driven by global financialization; the nation-state system, formalized by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648; and representative democracy, a system of self-rule based on Enlightenment ideals of freedom, fairness, justice and equality.

Well, the representative of the plutocratic brothers forgets that “Enlightenment ideas” were the ideas from, and published by an oligarchy which had forgotten the meaning of the word “democracy”.  

Representative democracy is neither representative, nor democracy, or then what it represents is plutocracy, or, at best, oligarchy.

The problem is that “our practice of capitalism is both putting the planetary ecosystem at risk and generating vast economic inequality.” The nation-state is “inadequate for managing transnational challenges like global warming.” And “representative democracy is neither truly representative nor very democratic as citizens feel that self-rule has given way to rule by corporations, special interests and the wealthy.

It’s not just an economic equality. It’s an inequality of power, and an inequality of public expression, and an inequality of legislative enactment, also a health care inequality, etc. 

The financialization is also completely out of control. Actually the global financial system seized up on March 16, 2020, in a way it had never done before. Suddenly all financial values were threatened to go down to… zero. That includes all retirement systems… Why it happened is the same old same old: self-interested idiots of finance, making huge amounts of money, the sort of people Obama and Biden and Clinton eat in the hands of, and Trump has learned to milk, had decreed that some situations would never, ever, occur. But of course, when all financiers believe something, they make the opposite unavoidable…

I am not making this up because I am a maniac. I am not a maniac, but we are managed and led by maniacs, and they are ignorant and stupid. Most of their expertise is to be like the moronic Bush or Obama, and read off a teleprompter, what their bosses wrote for them, posturing with consummate gravitas, and wisdom. To see the enormity of what we are overlorded by, please read:

Cohen adds: The virus and accompanying economic collapse have only redoubled the urgency of these reflections. This is the Age of Undoing — of world order, of international law, of truth, of America’s word. It is a dangerous time, as Germany knows better than any nation. Autocracy feeds on fear, misery, resentment and lies. It did in the 1930s; it does now. Better to love your country with a broken heart than to love it blind.

Corruption means; what comes with the rupture. This is the age of rupture, the age of corruption. Look at any center of power, nowadays, and you will see corruption. Not just a little bit. Instead, astronomical amounts. And now the corrupt ones tell you: don’t go to the beach, don’t swim in the sea. You know what? I did both, in full lockdown, and so did my ten year old daughter. Teaching the young means teaching not to respect the orders of corrupt, malevolent, power crazy idiots. 

Because that’s the fundamental problem with so-called “representatives”. Free people don’t need to be led by the nose by “representatives”. Since they have so much power, the positions tend to attract those who are the most greedy, the basest, most grotesque… and malevolent. Direct democracy is not just a political solution, it’s a moral solution… So we don’t have to be ruled by evil (Pluto) power (kratia).

Patrice Ayme

Biden: If You Have To Decide Between Me And Trump, “You Ain’t Black”… But “I will Beat Joe Biden”!

May 22, 2020

By selecting Biden, the quintessential plant for the plutocracy, not too bright, but very greedy, the so-called “Democrats” have provided us with serious comedy. (BTW, I am a registered Dem, so I have a bias towards comedy.) Very greedy? His son Hunter flew with him as vice President to China, in Air Force Two… and walked out with a billion and a half deal. This is not corruption but business as the Romans used to say in the Late Empire. Ah, and how come the Democratic voters are so corrupt? Because they have been programmed by the plutocratic media. The New York Times in particular has been controlled by the same (originally Jewish) family since the Nineteenth Century.

Arthur Hays Sulzberger (September 12, 1891 – December 11, 1968) was the publisher of The New York Times from 1935 to 1961.  His parents were Cyrus Leopold Sulzberger, a cotton-goods merchant, and Rachel Peixotto Hays. They came from old Jewish families, Ashkenazi and Sephardic, respectively His great-great-grandfather, Benjamin Seixas,brother of the famous rabbi and American Revolutionary Gershom Mendes Seixas of Congregation Shearith Israel, was one of the founders of the New York Stock Exchange. His great-grandfather, Dr. Daniel Levy Maduro Peixotto, was a prominent physician, director of Columbia University’s Medical College and a member of the Philolexian Society. His great granduncle was Jacob Hays, the High Constable of New York from 1801 to 1850.

NYT Arthur Hays Sulzberger Hitler’s Friend and Collaborator. Some will say: Oh, just a publisher… but most influential, and of Nazi propaganda.

You would think that with so much Jewishness piled up, the NYT would be very keen to save the lives of Jews. Well, think again. Greed beats breed.

AHS became publisher when his father-in-law, Adolph Ochs, the previous Times publisher, died in 1935. In 1929, AHS founded Columbia’s original Jewish Advisory Board and served on the board of what became Columbia-Barnard Hillel for many years. He served as a University trustee from 1944 to 1959 and is honored with a floor at the journalism school. He also served as a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation from 1939 to 1957

All of this to say that, when the Nazis, financed by the likes of Henry Ford, JP Morgan’s agents, etc. appeared, and started to kill Jews, Arthur Hays Sulzberger had his newspaper publish only lies on the most important subject: because lies are greedy, and so was the US plutocratic society engaged with Hitler… In many ways comparable to the present US plutocratic society engaged with Chinese dictator Xi. Actually plutocracy 2020 is mostly a direct descendant of plutocracy 1940.

Make no mistake: many were screaming the truth, including the French and Polish governments (what was left of them, anyway), and various Jewish organizations. bu the New York Times didn’t tolerate discordant voices. Just as now, when they censor a long time subscriber such as yours truly… as they did it during the Pelosi-Biden driven Iraq war invasion preparation. In other words, they did not learn the most important lesson: harmony comes from dissordance mastered, not from discordance, ignored.  

So Biden said he had 40 years of experience, enough to beat… Joe Biden. Right, very deep, for once, but… didn’t sound very good. Hence the New York Times immediately published an article certifying that Biden had said he was going to “be” Joe Biden. Biden did not say he would “beat” Joe Biden. Get it? It’s in the NYT, it has got to be true, this side of Hitler.

But then, well, reality intruded grossly and the NYT had to print: Mr. Biden also made clear that he felt there was no reason black Americans would consider voting for Mr. Trump.“If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump then you ain’t black,” Mr. Biden said.”

I sent a little comment right away, which was not published, or then maybe published next week, when nobody reads it (so the weasels can feel they are tolerant of the smirky mouse). Imagine thousands of censor beavers, all over the US media, trying to make the Biden-Xi system look good, never mind Hong Kong being enslaved 27 years early…. Here is my censored comment:

It’s clear that Joe Biden is going to “beat” Joe Biden. In any case, when people realize that, among other things, in 2002, being the chair of the Senate Foreign Relation Committee, Biden invented the Weapon of Mass Destruction argument to justify the invasion of Iraq… which was, after a few months, adopted by Bush, who had just as disingenuously claimed Hussein supported Al Qaeda. The Bush Al Qaeda argument to invade Iraq got no traction, but the Biden WMD argument worked… because Democrat Nancy Pelosi, who was then the Ranking Member of the Congress Intelligence Committee did not reveal that she was explained in great detail that the argument was a complete lie, and just a fake reason to go to war.

4,500 US troops died in Iraq, 32,000 were wounded, and up to 2.4 million Iraqis killed… Once this, just this little Iraq adventure is known, and meditated upon, being Joe Biden will smell very differently… 

Some will ask what the motivation could be for invading and destroying Iraq? Well, Iraq’s oil reserves, the second largest in the world, were then removed from the market (and have mostly stayed this way). That made fracking in the USA, which was financed by Wall Street, very profitable. (Only if oil was above $60/barrel.) Fracking was developed massively under the Obama-Biden administration. 

It’s not just the dignity and intelligence of blacks which is demeaned, but of the whole population.


As far as the game with Xi is concerned, just watch Bill Gates going all around for Xi. Precedent? Watson, the head of IBM, going all out for Hitler. Watson managed Nazi IBM from New York, throughout the war, because IBM had a monopoly on computation and Hitler couldn’t have done anything without IBM. Meanwhile, the NYT had spent the crucial first nine years of Hitler’s Reich denying that the Jews were getting killed by the minions of US plutocracy.

Oh, and how did Billy boy, the college drop-out make his money? Well, he got the contract from IBM to use the operating system called DOS (Disk Operating System) basically stolen from universities (that is, whether private or not publicly financed institutions [1]). And who was on IBM’s board? His mom! of course, the world’s most generous person. Plutocracy is hereditary, or is not.

Hitler repeating itself? Not really: we have nukes now. They work faster than ovens.

Patrice Ayme




Ooopsss… turns out the guy who wrote the preceding article was paid by Microsoft, and IEEE didn’t know about that until well after publishing it.

Microsoft stole the “86-DOS” operating system, owned by Seattle Computer Products, and written by Tim Paterson. Bill Gates conned Tim Paterson into signing over all the rights to 86-DOS for only $5,000, without telling him that it was for what would become the most famous operating system in the world. Plutocrats, those with Evil-Power, are tricky, that’s why the devil is called “le Malin” in French, the crafty one, who is… malignant…


P/S: I didn’t say I would vote for Trump, BTW…


What’s Wrong With All Too Particular Particle Physics Vs Doing Foundations Right

May 21, 2020

What’s Wrong With All Too Particular Particle Physics, What’s Right With Foundations

A famous particle physicist was particularly proud of this statement, which she impregnated her students with: “to be happy as a model builder in particle physics, I had to be O.K. with something like mounting a moose head on a wall and putting a purple scarf on it and not worrying about why it was wearing a purple scarf.” Yeap! 

She fell to her death on a hiking trail in August 2019! Of course she was the moderator of a gigantic group of hikers, more than 100, 000 of them. Not that I would make fun of people who fall off cliffs, as it happened to me more than once, and I was saved by the rope or a miracle… Simply, some people are born leaders, born to “moderate” others. And I hate “moderators”: the truth is always viewed as immoderate as some point, especially when it starts to emerge, like a fragile bud. “Moderators” have always been anxious to crush me. I still remember a long exchange with an electronic magazine publisher, who explained to me that he absolutely agreed with me, and that truth always win, so I didn’t have to worry, in the long run. But those European bankers who were so respected absolutely wanted me removed for suggesting bankers had helped Hitler… That was a bit more than a decade ago…

Lots of vegetables in that soup

So the moderating super genius physicist lady fell off her trail. Do we need high energy “modellers”, are they essential workers? Yes they are (but they can work from home). They are certainly more essential than plain old fashion models… But they shouldn’t have become that fashionable… Nor should they have been allowed to fashion physics into generalized modelling (presumably to look pretty to scientific advisors who are themselves advised to develop preferably science which can turn into death rays of some sort; the Pentagon is deploying combat lasers… Table top accelerators of fermions would be most welcome…)

Physics, and thinking in general, should be about brains, deepest and most immoderate. Fortunately, the COVID crisis is showing that thinking at warp speed is not just useful: there is nothing like it.

Instead, modelling physics has turned into a morass of moose heads with pretty bows of different flavors, colors, and, let’s say it outright, smells. And it smells funny, indeed. The “Standard Model” (SM) groups together fifteen or so “elementary particles”. To make it work, it needs something called the Higgs field. It’s a field which permeates space and “gives mass” to the otherwise massless particles of the SM. That’s all fine, except for one fact. We already have E = mcc… Poincare’ s energy has inertial mass observation. So one can generate mass from just energy… And this is what is happening with nucleons, inside which gluons and quarks zoom around. The zooming around of the putative gluons and quarks generate most of the mass.

So here we have the same philosophical problem as with the Big Bang and “cosmic inflation”: one effect, two independent causes. Let me repeat slowly: we have a way to generate mass, from energy directly. Why do we need another effect to generate mass? Oh, because it’s a consequence of the Standard Model, which otherwise would give no mass to particles. Besides the “Higgs” boson (so-called “Higgs”, from one of seven discoverers, not all Anglo-Saxon, of the idea… but it’s a good Anglo-Saxon sound: Higgsss…) was “found”.


And therein another question: what is an elementary particle? A bump on a graph. Which is bumpy enough. In the eye of the beholder. Smaller than that, and it’s “virtual”. Actually the computations mostly involve “fields”, which are like fields of wheat, except the individual plants are continually shimmering in and out of existence and prominence… That’s why it’s called “Quantum Field Theory” (QFT)… What does “Quantum” means? It means energy is transferred “particle” to “particle” in lumps (Hertz-Planck-Einstein)… But also, everything, during transfers, is about waves (Wave theory of light, Huyghens-Young-Arago-Faraday-Maxwell and “Matter Waves”, De Broglie). Waves of what? We don’t know, we have to do with… waves of probability said Born (he got the Nobel for this interpretation). Waves of probability makes reality tears its hair, full of dead live cats…

One would think that physics, properly done, would consist into finding out what the “particles” and “waves’ and all the metaphysics around both… as the main field of inquiry. But not really, for most physicists. better to decorate moose heads to impress the Beotians. The head of CERN’s theoretical physics division in the 1960s, begged to differ and derived the Bell Inequalities (named after himself, but here deserved). That showed Quantum Physics, in some circumstances, was NONLOCAL. 

The simplest argument for nonlocality is philosophical: Quantum Physics is about waves, waves are intrinsically non local. 

Now nature is also about points; the “particles”. Energy may transfer as waves, it ends up at points. How to go from the wave to the point? That’s called the collapse, the famous Quantum Collapse. Related to the collapse, and a simpler example, are Quantum Jumps. 

One would guess that physics, at its best, would inquire about those notions… And that means not just through thought experiments, but actually experiments. 

Research from Yale University, led by Michel Devoret, a senior french physicist, newly published in Annals of Physics, established that we can reconcile how we describe measurements in classical physics and what is really going on in quantum physics. This has opened a new world: Quantum Jumps go through a preparation period, and such preparation can be inverted, it seems. 

Revealingly, Devoret is from the APPLIED physics department… Although what he does is most fundamental![1]

In SQPR, Sub Quantum Physical Reality, the obvious is proposed: the waves are “real” (not just knowledge waves as in the cat paradox). Although extremely fast, the transition from extended wave to point is progressive, it involves a Quantum Field. And such transitions could be reverted. The general picture also fosters an understanding of what is really going with QFT…    

Physics, and thinking in general, should be about brains, deepest and most immoderate. Fortunately, the COVID crisis is showing that thinking at warp speed is not just useful: there is nothing like it.

Patrice Ayme



[1] It is revealing that Devoret research is implicitly looked down by the Optimates of theoretical physics. It should not be the high energy particle zoo which should be the first focus of research, because it uses and takes for granted Quantum Physics notions which have not been as examined as they deserve.

It is also telling that Frenchmen working in top US universities are not financed in France: the French establishment , the government, the Deep State, the higher spheres of conniving academia and the increasingly unsophisticated population, product of this miasma, does not view ultimate research as crucial to the survival of civilization. They learned nothing most important from French history.        

LIGHT AS A BLACK HOLE: PLANCK LENGTH, Or How To Find What Matters In Physics

May 18, 2020

The following show what is important in physics, and what is not. Some may object to the following: how come I don’t use Quantum Field Theory (QFT) and General Relativity? Well first, nobody knows how to use QFT (except in reduced and admirable circumstances which brought zillions of Nobel Prizes). 

However the two most basic axioms of QFT will be used. They are the basic Quantum of Energy axiom: E = hf, which is tied in with the Quantum Wave axiom. What does that represent? h is Planck constant, and “f” the frequency of the “particle”… Here a photon [1]. Frequency? To all particles is associated a wave [2]. Here that’s the plain old electromagnetic wave. So we have: rf = c… where “r” is just the photon wavelength, and c the speed of light. We will use “r’ to squeeze the photon inside itself.



(1) Gravitation law. (2) Energy as the integration of Force over Distance. (3) Quantum Energy. (4) Definition of Speed of Light. (5) Mass = Energy. End Result: PLANCK LENGTH = square root of (Gh/ccc)

Another ingredient is the old F = G m M/ rr, the universal attraction law, older than Newton.

Here we will use it as self gravitation: m = M = “mass” of photon. Self gravitation is nothing surprising: that’s what holds all celestial bodies together, and not just stars and planets, but also galaxies and clusters of galaxies (so-called “virial” theorem). So here I just apply it to light. 


Another possible controversy is whether a photon has “mass”. That was demonstrated by the French Henri Poincare (and stolen by Einstein). The root of the proof is as old as Buridan (and the big difference with Aristotle ridiculous physics). What Buridan said was that force = change of impetus. This is the so-called Second Law of Newton, F = ma… except in the slightly more general notion F = m dp/dt… where p is the “impetus” aka ‘momentum… [3]

Thus, according to Buridan, whatever exerts a force has an impetus, and the instantaneous force is the quotient of the infinitesimal change of impetus by the infinitesimal change of time. As electromagnetic radiation (“light”) exerts a pressure (Poynting vector, light sails), thus a force, it has impetus, thus mass… “inertial” mass. But then observations tell us inertial and gravitational masses are the same (“Principle of Equivalence”). So photons have gravitational mass m, given by E = mcc. Hence m = E/cc = hf/cc.   

Now we squeeze the photon inside its own wave. So “r” will be both the scale at which the gravity is used and from which distance one had to make light work against itself to expand to infinity (so we expand from a particular r, R(index zero in the drawing). So “r” is a variable, gives rise to an infinitesimal, dr, and we have

F = F(r) = G mm/rr.

So the total energy to escape to infinity from R is the integral of   (Gmm/rr) dr = Gmm/R = G hhff/cccc R =


and that has to be less than the energy contained in the light to start with, namely: hf = hc/R. 

So we get: G h/(c^3) (R^2) < 1, or: R = square root of (Gh/c^3).  

Notice I used no fancy General Relativity, no Schwarzschild Radius…. And still I get the same result as if I had! It is as if General Relativity didn’t matter! How come?  Because, in truth it doesn’t indeed matter very much.
In a full relativistic treatment, the force-acceleration relationship is different from the classical one. Full relativity shows: Force = m ((GAMMA)^3) a… [3]… However, this Relativistic Force is irrelevant here, as the Force used is the gravitational force… which is, in General Relativity, the same good old one used by Newton.

Also I didn’t use the Uncertainty Relationship(s)… as some treatment of the Planck Length do. But there again, this is because the Quantum Wave Principle contains it already (QWP –> UR).  hence we can see what principles are important, and which ones are less so. General Relativity is not a deep theory, just a slight modification of Classical Mechanics: time slows down near large masses, so forces are exerted longer. That force = curvature is an idea from Riemann, already nearly explicit in Buridan (who said planets were inertial on their circular orbits around the Sun).

Now the Planck Length tells us that gravity and the inner geometry of elementary particles are intimately tied in. Also there should be an absolute energy transfer limit…

Reconstructing basic physics from basic principles is a valuable exercise…

Patrice Ayme



[1] The remarkable idea of E = hf came from Planck, and then was used spectacularly, but very simply, by Einstein to explain the photoelectric effect… to Planck’s anger (!), and was then expanded by De Broglie to all particles… As a Principle.


[2] what I call a QUANTUM wave. Traditional names are “matter waves”, or “De Broglie waves”… because De Broglie invented the idea, beyond light. Here of course the Quantum wave is just the plain old electromagnetic wave. 


[3] The difference between F = ma and F = m dp/dt is inexistent in classical physics… but NOT in Relativistic Physics… In relativistic physics, the momentum p, the impetus, is not just (mv), momentum multiplied by speed, as Buridan had it, but (GAMMA) mv. Where GAMMA is the usual inverse square root of (1-vv/cc).


P/S: Virtual particles, that is, roughly the corrections QFT does to Field Theory, rests on time energy uncertainty (DeltaE)(Delta t) > h      


On Traditional Stupidities In Obama Speeches

May 17, 2020

To think well one has to be intelligent and honest. On May 16, 2020, Obama gave two commencement speeches which illustrate traditional shortcomings in that respect.

There is a lot that is good and correct in what Obama said. Do what you think is right. Don’t do like little kids, just feel good. Ground yourself in higher values. For example “do what you think is right. Doing what feels good, what’s convenient, what’s easy — that’s how little kids think. Unfortunately, a lot of so-called grown-ups, including some with fancy titles and important jobs, still think that way — which is why things are so screwed up.

I hope that instead, you decide to ground yourself in values that last, like honesty, hard work, responsibility, fairness, generosity, respect for others.” Too bad Obama forgot to mention that’s all based in figuring out how one figures out what is true. Without cult of truth, there can’t be cult of virtue.

Obama recognizes the folks in charge don’t know what they are doing. Right, that was why his presidency ended up achieving pretty much the opposite of progress; augmentation of inequalities (relative to predecessor Bush), failed health care system (more expensive than ever), failing lifespan (as it never failed before)…. 

Obama called his “Obamacare” his “signature achievement”. It was: the victory of greed over lifespan. Notice US lifespan collapsing under Obama The Great, while US healthcare vultures, like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, much admired by “Democrats”, made more money than ever. In truth, “Obamacare” was invented by Romney, a Mormon once “Republican” governor of Massachusetts, who became a major plutocrat through vulture capitalism (a technical term). Romney is a Senator, was candidate to the presidency, was beaten by Obama, and hates Trump, because, among other things Trump became “Republican” president… after being a (relatively) leftist “Democrat” most of his life… Without kissing as much ass… Basically Trump did everything a bit better than Romney, and that drives Romney crazy. Meanwhile, that “Obamacare” was actually “Romneycare” to start with, something invented by a vulture, leave the average “Democrat” cold: why should they know anything about vultures? Smarts ain’t their art, they are little kids.

The solution? Find out what to do. How? Debate! As We The People. And vote! As We The People! Not through a few hundreds unavoidably corrupt individuals with, individually, too much power. So push for more direct democracy (referenda).

Obama rightly calls in avoiding (stupid) things which divided us like sexism, ageism… But then he calls himself an old man, implying of no consequence, nor wisdom… So why does he speak if he has nothing valuable to say, according to himself?

In the “tough times before”, Obama forgot to mention the world wars. And other wars. The US lost more than 400,000 citizens killed in combat in world war two… that’s 150 times 9/11 (which Obama mentions)… And thus was able to forget mentioning other wars he supported, and is still supporting (like the Iraq) invasion, by forgetting to mention them…. and, a fortiori, criticizing them (including the Biden engineered invasion of Iraq). The Biden led invasion of Iraq killed millions, “9/11” less than 3,000…  

Finally to say that the high school graduates have already started to lead, as Obama claimed, is pandering to them, and disinformation. It’s old plutocrats, old billionaire politicians and media owners who lead… and there are plenty of those.

As an elected representative, once ordering the deaths of people he knew were innocent (think about it), potentially capable of killing billions, Obama’s business model is to serve The Man… such as Bill Gates, Bezos, the many heirs of the Walmart Family, and countless extremely wealthy heirs all around the US and the world, many with their money and power in anonymous companies, and foundation: Xi and the Pritzker family being examples… to see Obama kiss a plutocrat, consider him with Penny Pritzker who he had put in charge of US commerce. Her brother, worth only five inherited billions of dollars, is presently “Democratic” governor of Illinois.

So whatever he says, Obama’s essence is to serve The Man. To serve, one can simply mislead, dissemble, disinform… and confuse, like a squid making a screen of ink.

A simple life form. No magnificence of mind.

Patrice Ayme



P/S: Obama claimed that the Trump administration doesn’t know what it’s doing about the Coronavirus. But that virus is really new, nobody knows really what to do, and the giant US is no dictatorship. Overall, Trump may have done better had he did, if he had not been distracted by the Impeachment hoax, so the “Democratic” Party should adopt a low profile, with its billionaire Senator (California’s Feinstein) selling for many millions of dollars of stock from secret information just before the markets tanked.

Large countries which are not dictatorships do less well in this pandemic… at least officially: this can readily be observed. Apparently social distancing and masks are the best way to jugulate it. There are now demonstrated cases of REINFECTION… within weeks of formal cure. This has never been seen before.

Barbarian Invasions and the Fall of the Western Roman Empire

May 15, 2020

Why did the Roman Empire end in the West during the Fifth Century? Let’s assume it did (in truth, it didn’t: zombies don’t die easily). According to The Eighteenth Century historian, Gibbon, “instead of inquiring why the Roman empire was destroyed, we should rather be surprised that it had subsisted so long.”

A simple, directly observable reason for the fall was a domino effect causing a military-economic avalanche propelled by Germanic invasions.

The domino effect occurs when dominoes on their sides, one next to another, knock one after the other, starting with the first one in the line over into its neighboring domino. This creates a chain reaction and all of the dominoes fall down, one after another. For the fall of Rome, it was the Huns invading from the east who launched the domino effect; they invaded (pushed into) the Goths, who then invaded (pushed into) the Roman Empire. The Huns had composite bows with tiny supplements added at the extremities which augmented their power. The Huns learned to transform this apparently small advantage of weaponry into an entire industry of invasion of western central Asia. 

If one looks in more detail, as the professional Roman army had to be paid, and its equipment was expensive, the army depended heavily upon tax receipts. As those diminished, because territories were lost, domino style, the army was less paid and less equipped, had to be withdrawn, and became weaker. All the north-west (Britannia, the two Germania and Gallia) were evacuated by the legions, to save money.

Notice that the money problem occurs more in  a fascist empire organized around and from greed, which, in its most developed form, is called corruption. In a Republic, the problem would not have arisen: no corruption because of the law, and soldiers could volunteer, because they were patriots, and making money was secondary. Roman republican soldiers were paid, since 405 BCE, but, as the republic became a fascist empire, and military dictatorship, the pay became much more important was tripled by Augustus. Actually, the perverse revolution headed by Octavian/Augustus was mostly motivated by pay.

Vast Was The Empire. Actually, at full extent, the empire was even larger, as it owned or controlled the Black Sea shore, including Crimea. the Franks would reconquer the entire north west corner, plus Germany and Eastern Europe, creating a more defensible ensemble, which was indeed never invaded again in the following 16 centuries…

The fall of the Western Roman Empire is a great lesson of an exponentiating cause and effect chain. A cause leads to an effect, but the cause-effect relation can EXPONENTIATE, when the effect creates more of the same cause.

The Romans hired barbarian mercenaries to guard the borders… Not just this, but the Germans were motivated to serve in the Roman military than the Native Romans were. Just below the emperor Gratian, the main commanders in Occident were all Franks: Richomeres (who became Consul), and then Flavius Arbogast and the king of the Franks Mellobaudes (comes domesticorum).

Because, to save money, the Franks were put in charge of defending the Germano-Gallic frontiers (the local legions having been sent to Italy to defend against invasions there), and there were not enough Franks, or they were surprised by the weather, the German nations galloped across the frozen Rhine on December 31, in 406 CE. Because Roman legions evacuated Britannia in AD 410, the Anglo-Saxons moved into Britannia. You could also say the word “so” in between the cause and effect, like this: The Huns pushed other groups westward, so the Vandals invaded Spain, north Africa, set-up a maritime empire, cut off the grain supply to Rome, and sacked Rome in 455 CE.

Here is a brief (criticized) list of the generally admitted internal causes for the Fall of Rome:

Christianism was less tolerant of other cultures and religions, than had been the norm with religions under Republican and Principate Rome. Constantine imposed it, of course, precisely because it was less tolerant. Somebody who had his wife steamed and his son and nephew executed, for obscure reasons he was unwilling to describe, didn’t view tolerance has an asset. 

Starting with Gratian and Theodosius, state imposed Christianism made everybody stupid, under the penalty of death, if one didn’t join the exponentiating stupidity by “exerting choice” (heresy, Greek hairesis “a choosing for oneself).

This fanatical cult conducive to tyranny didn’t hesitate to cut into the muscle. Example: Emperor Theodosius ended the Olympic Games, a purely sportive event, 12 centuries old… officially because the olympiades honored Zeus. A petty reason hiding a much sinister truth: the Christian theoreticians hated the body… as the body is the source of common sense… and the essence of Christianism was to refute reason, thus, common sense! Thus, Christianism cut into not just the bone, but the brain. It was like a praying mantis eating the brain of a hummingbird: pretty clever at feeding itself.

As Gibbon put it:

“The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world [before Christianism] were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosophers as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally useful.”

(Hearing of such accusations about the fanaticism of their sect, the Christians generally whine disingenuously that they were persecuted by Pagans, and died in great numbers. Well, not really. There was deliberately no prosecution under Trajan whatsoever. Six (6) Christians died under Marcus Aurelius, in twenty years… And under the most terrible persecution organized (and then lifted) by Galerius in the early Fourth Century, maybe a grand total of 3,000 (and this only for those who refused to take an oath to the State).

Whereas, soon enough the Christians, directly or indirectly, would kill millions. They warmed up by hunting and killing intellectuals (something they would do again in the late middle ages and renaissance).  

The split of the empire into two parts and many emperors and an unelected miasma of powerful officials weakened the empire: it was all too often not clear who was in charge. Successful generals were often executed, lest they become a threat to those in power above them. The more honest, the greater the threat, the more executed valuable generals were.

Roman soldiers were loyal to their military leaders, who often paid them, or decided if they could sack a city, not necessarily the emperor, or whoever, or whatever was supposedly in command. This problem of dependency upon the local commander started with Marius, seven times Consul, under the Republic, and was itself a reaction to the fact that Roman farmer-soldiers were treated very poorly… Something Tiberius Gracchus condemned as early as 150 BCE.

From 211 CE through 284 CE, there were at least twenty-seven emperors (and even more “usurpers”). Only four of these emperors died of natural causes. One cause for his turnover being that drastic problems, such as pandemics, inflation shrinking the real economy, and invasions could not be solved, so there was great dissatisfaction. There was no calm way to remove an emperor, so most were murdered. Loyal soldiers picked emperors by murdering them and placing their prefered general on the throne. This weakened Rome, and signaled the decline of its Empire. Diocletian re-established the aura of the emperor by closing the gap between God (Sol Invictus) and monarch. Constantine went further, inventing Christianism as we know it (“Nicene Creed”), full of unreason, and reverence for “The Lord” (implicitly, the emperor himself).

Legend has it that Romans had become lazy and all too comfortable. There is some elements of truth in this, but this despondency was engineered by the Roman plutocracy, which wanted to achieve such a despondency. Actually, the failing economy of the middle class in Italy was greatly due to a Machiavellian maneuver, one which can be observed today: jobs were sent overseas, Italians were paid to do nothing.

The idea was that, this way, the 99% would not rebel against the 1%, at least where it mattered, in the richest part, Italy. It worked. After a few centuries of this feeding for nothing, to make sure that they really would never rebel, the Roman plutocracy, that is, the Senate, decided that Italians couldn’t serve in the army. So italians couldn’t even defend themselves. Once the richest part, Italy became poorer.

Peripheral zones of the empire, archeology has shown, stayed wealthy… as long as they were not invaded.

The Roman army in the Late Empire was paid from high taxes. There was little respect for the state, and there was little sense of patriotism (differently to what happened under the Roman Republic). All the more as local democratic councils were dependent upon local wealthy elected officials, the Curiae. As the hyper rich became wealthier, complete with a bishop in the family, the lower upper class disappeared, and nobody could, or was willing to serve in the Curiae.

Nowadays, everybody admits that the fall(s) of the city of Rome and the Western Empire did not put an end to the entire Roman Empire. The Eastern Empire survived for another thousand years. The Eastern Empire is sometimes called the Byzantine Empire, after the ancient capital city of Byzantium, a city-state crucial ally of Athens, guarding the entry to the Black Sea, where Athens got grain.

Greek was the main language in the Byzantine Empire, not Latin. Yet, those Greeks called themselves “Romans”. And they were. So were the Franks in the West, busy rebuilding, “renovating” the empire, just better. The Franks in the West were all speaking latin by 600 CE, and every citizen was a Frank. A generation later, slavery was outlawed. Slavery had caused enormous problems to the middle class in Republican Rome, as the usage of slaves had made the hyper wealthy even wealthier, thus ever more powerful and perverse. 

Right, the violent Muslim invasion of the Seventh Century nearly put an end to this beautiful adventure. Yet, the city of Constantinople on one side, and the empire of the Franks on the other, were able to resist the onslaught. Frankish armies and their proxies or allies were able to reconquer much of the West (but not North Africa), and domesticate Eastern and Northern Europe. In the Tenth Century the Saxons conquered by Charlemagne would become lead two-third of the empire, defending Europe against the Avars. Meanwhile, the Greco-Romans expanded their Christian Cesaro-Patriarchism into Russia.

One of the reasons suggested for the Fall of the West has been that it was impoverished relative to the Orient. This is false (in spite of vast transfer of art east by Constantine). Quite the opposite. Indeed, recent genetic studies have hinted the opposite: there was little immigration of Western Europe into Italy during fascist imperial Rome. But there was an ultra massive Oriental immigration, to the point that Rome became full of Orientals. Generally people migrate towards richer areas.

In truth, as we will see, the reasons for the Fall of the West are purely military: it was easier to invade, geographically… and, curiously scrupulously ignored by traditional historians, Occidental Rome had no more army. Why was that not noted? Because Christian fanaticism has everything to do with the disappearance of the Occidental army.  

Amazingly, and very tellingly, many comprehensive treatises on the history of Rome, or even the fall of Rome fail, to mention the battle of Frigidus, where the Occidental Roman army was annihilated. Although, the following campaign season, in 395 CE, the Barbarians  attacked the core of the empire massively and Stilicho, the half-Vandal, by then Regent of the entire Roman empire had to scramble against them with whatever (victorious) forces  were left after Frigidus (a battle Theodosius should have lost… But there was this Bora wind, Arbogast made several mistakes in commandment… and Theodosius had offered the empire to the Goths, so they were motivated…)

Christianism and Oligarchism are biases against reason profitable to the worst, which keep on going, once well launched… And this is why books, for millennia, keep on representing them to their best advantage: powers that be prefer books which make them look good. Dissecting the ideologies which support them do not please the powers. Hence the superficial explanations for the fall of Rome, when the simplest and the earliest is for all to see: a takeover by the wealthiest, those “Optimates”… Just like Tiberius Gracchus said.

Patrice Ayme