Mathis the scientist
Thu 4:31 pm +01:00, 7 Dec 2023 1
“At the top of the list of earth-shattering things Mathis has done let’s start with his diagramming
of all the nuclei of the elements. It would be impossible to overstate the important of this or
the sheer genius of it. With one paper Mathis destroyed the entire subfield of physical
chemistry and all those textbooks are now up for a general pulping. Making the nucleus a
channeler of charge changes absolutely everything in dozens of fields not just physics but
chemistry, biology, astronomy, medicine etc. This is so big it dwarfs all other scientific
discoveries in the past two centuries, possibly ever. I can’t honestly think of anything Newton
did that is bigger and yet it is being utterly ignored. The mainstream hasn’t even found it
worthy of comment.
Blowing my Top
I would like to begin by apologizing to all readers and to myself for writing this anonymously. I
find it as infuriating as anything else here that I have to, but there is no way around it. I am a
professor in the hard sciences at an Ivy League university, and many of my colleagues and
some of my superiors hate Mathis with an insane fervor. They would not overlook any
promotion of him by me if they found out about it. My life would become a living hell. I have a
career and family and I cannot jeopardize that at this time. However, I also cannot continue
to keep quiet. I think I at least have the courage to state things as they beg to be stated.
Let me state for the record that I don’t know Mathis. Never met him, never talked to him on
the phone, never emailed him before this. I just wrote this up in a fit of anger a few nights ago
and sent it to him, mostly for my own benefit. I needed to get it off my chest. Plus, it occurred
to me after writing it that at least I could claim to be the first one to say it, even if I got no
credit for it. At least I could get the credit for it in my own mind, which is something.
This was recently brought to a head for me when I saw a youtube video by Sabine
Hossenfelder on the subject of science coming to an end. I can always rely on Hossenfelder
to infuriate me since she is so consistently disingenuous, but this one really took the cake.
She is selling John Horgan’s 1996 book The End of Science, accepting his ridiculous claim
that science is almost finished. Horgan is one of those Scientific American stuffed shirts that
Mathis so loves to skewer, and that book was so bad it tends to confirm Mathis’s claim that
these people are actual agents, locking the field down on purpose to suit their masters.
Horgan couldn’t have been doing that with Mathis in mind in 1996 since he wasn’t publishing
in science then, but I think Hossenfelder is using this subject to bury Mathis on purpose. She
claims that all the sciences have spun down and nothing has really happened in the last
twenty years.
No, nothing, Sabine, except Mathis coming out of left field and rewriting all of physics back to
the time of Galileo. We have just witnessed the greatest revolution in the history of science
and these people like Hossenfelder are paid to stand around at Youtube and pretend it didn’t
happen. I mean, c’mon, let’s be honest, nothing like this has ever happened, or even gotten
close to happening. I don’t know who Mathis is or where he came from, but the papers speak
for themselves. Any one of the best ones would be enough to make him the greatest
physicist of the 20/21 centuries but there are literally hundreds of them.
I have to admit that at first I thought Mathis was AI. This is the kind of thing they have been
promising from AI for decades: machines that are so smart they make us look like a bunch of
chimps. A computer program with an IQ of 500 that would rewrite all of science overnight,
leaving human achievement in tatters. Some cyborg that could enter any field with no prior
knowledge of it, but due to speed in collating facts it would see things no one ever had,
cleaning up centuries of mistakes in a few nanoseconds. But I no longer think that. Although
that is basically what we have seen from Mathis, it took years, not nanoseconds, and it was
done with a human flair I don’t think any machine could fake. Deep Blue and then Stockfish
made the world’s greatest chess players look like idiots, but it didn’t do that while cracking
jokes, preening, and accusing them of being frauds and agents. If Mathis had been created
as some sort of computer project there would be no reason to make him a political
revolutionary as well, an artist, or a conspiracy theorist. In fact, there would be every reason
NOT to do that. AI is obviously a government project so there is no chance they would make
their lead science cyborg wildly anti-government. You will say they lost control of him but how
do you lose control of a computer program? You can always pull the plug.
And then there’s the fact that AI has been such a crushing disappointment in all other ways.
Nothing AI has done or is doing is on this level. An AI that had just rewritten all of physics
should be doing similar things in other fields but we don’t see anything like that.
If Mathis was created by a roomful of computer guys do you think they would allow his sites to
look like they do? His sites are so old-school it is laughable. He has no graphics and even
his diagrams are pre-1990. We have seen him draw some of his diagrams by hand, with a
pencil! On his art site he constantly promotes the Amish. No way this came out of Google or
IBM.
with him on an untraceable line. I have a big IQ myself, having scored 800 on math on both
the SAT and GRE. My fluid intelligence has been tested at 150+, and I have read all of
Mathis’ papers, many of them a dozen times each. I put him through his paces and he didn’t
drop or even bobble the ball once. If he is a project front he has memorized all these papers
down to the last word, which seems unlikely if he is just a pretty-boy artist. I have to admit I
got the feeling of being in the presence of a greater intelligence, something I have never said
before. One other thing may interest you: although he knows his own stuff cold, when he
doesn’t know something he doesn’t know it AT ALL. Not really surprising, since we could all
say the same. But I see that as another indication he is human and not a project. If he was
being fed information from an earpiece for instance he should be able to come up with
something on just about any topic immediately. But there were large parts of my field he
knew absolutely nothing about. Just what we would expect from an artist that came into
science from the outside.]”
Continues for 6 more pages………
Source: http://milesmathis.com/ivy.pdf
Why mention all the deceptions? Just state simply what the truth is.