APPENDIX Z13: Major Problems in Science
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:56 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z13: Major Problems in Science.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z13:
Major Problems in Science
[Selected Quotes from
ON BEING*
a
by Dr. Peter Atkins*
b
]
“The rst great question of being is one that has probably
entertained us all at one time or another: where did
it, the
it, the
universe, all come from? How did it begin?…” (p.
1)
1)
“There are, in fact, three
related profound questions to
related profound questions to
address in the context of creation. One is the mechanism
of the coming into being of the universe: what
actually
actually
happened at the beginning? Another is whether
there
there
is any meaning to the question of what preceded
the
the
universe and had, in some sense, the potential to
become
become
a universe. Here we are
confronted by the linguistically
confronted by the linguistically
and conceptually engaging question of whether
absolutely
absolutely
nothing can have potency to become something. The
third is whether an agent was needed to trigger
the
the
process of cosmogenesis, the process of turning that
nothing into what is to all appearances something,
or can
or can
nothing turn itself into something on its own? All
three
three
questions sound as though they might fall within
the
the
range of science to answer.
A fourth question, why
A fourth question, why
there is a universe, is rather different, but still apparently
very interesting….” (p. 2)
“As a result of their intrinsic caution, almost
every
every
scientist is wisely unwilling to express a view
about the
about the
events accompanying the inception of the universe.
Quite honestly, they
haven’t a clue….” (p. 5)
haven’t a clue….” (p. 5)
“The task before science in this connection will be
to
to
show how something can come from nothing without
intervention. No one has the slightest idea whether
that
that
can happen and, if so,
how it can come about….” (p. 11)
how it can come about….” (p. 11)
“The unfolding of absolutely nothing—what out of
reverence for the absence
of anything, including empty
of anything, including empty
space, we are calling Nothing—into something is a
problem of the profoundest
difculty and currently far
difculty and currently far
beyond the reach of science. It is, however, a target at
which science must aim even though to some, even
to
to
scientists of a pessimistic or perhaps just
realistic bent,
realistic bent,
it would seem to be for ever out of science’s reach….”
(p. 12)
“Presumably before the
creation, when there was
creation, when there was
Nothing, there was no charge; so the coming into
being
being
of the universe was accompanied by the separation
of
of
‘no charge’ into opposites. Charge was not created
at
at
the creation: electrical Nothing separated into
equal and
equal and
opposite charges….” (pp. 13-14)
“I promised to return to the question of why there is
a universe. What is its purpose? Something so big,
complex, and all embracing some hold, must be
there
there
for a reason….” (p. 18)
“…science is a ceaseless probing with a view to
overturning authority….science, though delighted
by the glorious complexity of the world, seeks the
simplicity that lies beneath it….science is
extraordinarily
extraordinarily
difcult, as it seeks covert mechanism….science is
ever thrusting forward, wriggling into new modes
of
of
understanding,…science gives an opportunity for
humanity to achieve the aspirations it already has
and
and
opens its eyes to new ones….” (pp. 26-27)
“A scientist, the arch-descendent of Occam, looks
rst
rst
for the simplest explanation, then builds
elaborations
elaborations
only if the explanation’s
barren, rocky simplicity proves
barren, rocky simplicity proves
inadequate….” (p. 33)
“One problem with evolution is how it began.
Competition between primitive organisms is all
very
very
well, the triumph of one message over another,
but how did matter step across the national bridge
from the inorganic to the organic in the rst
place?
place?
…It would be much more satisfying—satisfying of
curiosity, intellectually
satisfying, and possibly spiritually
satisfying, and possibly spiritually
satisfying—if we could nd a physical process by
which
which
that gap was bridged, presumably without the
apparent
apparent
intervention of an agent….” (pp. 38-39)
“…Scientists are still puzzled about how this
complexity
complexity
[of life] emerged under the impact, presumably, of
natural selection, and it remains a problem of evolution.
That is not to say that there are not many ideas about
how it came about. Just as for the origin of life
itself,
itself,
which is still a real puzzle, evolutionary
biologists are not
biologists are not
without ideas, but have not yet identied which, if
any, is
any, is
valid….” (pp. 60-61)
*a
Peter Atkins, On Being
(Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2011), pp.1-2,
(Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2011), pp.1-2,
5, 11-14, 18, 26-27, 33, 38-39, 60-61.
*
b
Scientist Peter Atkins is the author of almost 70
books, including
books, including
Galileo’s Finger: The Ten Great Ideas of Science, Four Laws
That Drive the Universe, and the world-renowned textbook
Physical Chemistry. A Fellow of Lincoln College, University of
Oxford, he has been a visiting professor in France, Israel, New
Zealand, and China, and continues to lecture
widely throughout
widely throughout
the world.
APPENDIX Z12: Cosmic Level: Individual Level
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:52 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z12: Cosmic Level: Individual Level.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z12:
Cosmic Level: Individual Level
Current scientic guestimates
gure 100 billion+
galaxies in the observable universe
and
then, the same number, a
100 billion
100 billion
stars in the Milky Way
Galaxy
Galaxy
and then, a third layer –
the same 100 billion
( 10
11
)
neurons in the human brain
Now,
the 100 billion neurons in the brain
in turn yield 100 trillion ( 10
14
) synapses
which generate thought, creativity, emotion etc.
Thus,
the cosmos ( Q4P
∞
) presumably calculates that
100 billion (or thereabouts)
is the efcient
CRITICAL MASS number
to seek/pursue/extend/force-multiply
Q4P
∞
/EXTRAORDINARIATION !
on multiple levels
cosmic > individual
as it thunders-on towards Innitude….
and Extraordinariaton.
APPENDIX Z11: Birnbaumian Panentheism
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:50 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z11: Birnbaumian Panentheism.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z11:
Birnbaumian Panentheism
Quest for Potential
∞
is at the core of the Innite Divine.
The Innite Divine is synonymous with the
unfolding
unfolding
cosmic order.
Panentheism in Judaism*
“While mainstream Rabbinic Judaism is classically
monotheistic
monotheistic
and follows in the footsteps of the Aristotelian
theologian Maimonides,
theologian Maimonides,
the panentheistic conception of God can be found in
certain Jewish
certain Jewish
mystical currents. A leading scholar of the
Kabbalah, Moshe Idel
Kabbalah, Moshe Idel
(“Hasidism: Between Ecstacy and Magic,” SUNY, 1995, pp. 17–18),
ascribes this doctrine to the kabbalistic system of
Rabbi Moses
Rabbi Moses
Cordovero (1522–1570) and
in the eighteenth century, Rabbi Israel
in the eighteenth century, Rabbi Israel
ben Eliezer, the Baal
Shem Tov, founder of the Hasidic movement,
Shem Tov, founder of the Hasidic movement,
as well as his contemporary, Rabbi Menahem Mendel, the Maggid of
Bar. There is some debate
as to whether Lurianic Kabbalah, with its
as to whether Lurianic Kabbalah, with its
doctrine of tzimtzum, can
be regarded as panentheistic. According to
be regarded as panentheistic. According to
Hasidism, the Innite Ein Sof is incorporeal (has no body) and is both
transcendent and immanent….”
*Wikipedia online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism#Panentheism_in_Judaism
(accessed September 20, 2011)
APPENDIX Z10: “The Free Lunch?”
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:47 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z10: “The Free Lunch?”.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z10:
“The Free Lunch?”
The estimable physicist/cosmologist Stephen
Hawking
Hawking
posits*
a
that “there is no God.” His (alleged) truism is
that
that
“there is, indeed, a free lunch.” What Hawking means
and articulates is that the entire universe more-or-less
spontaneously popped out of nothingness.
Hawking’s reasoning, as he explicitly articulates it, is that –
(A) since when one factors-in newly-hypothesized
dark energy*
b
(c.1998), positive and negative energy
mathematically balances-out the universe, then
(B) one can (allegedly) consequently conclude that
there is
there is
no God (necessary for Creation).
However, the Hawking logic
is fatally awed, as is more or
is fatally awed, as is more or
less obvious.
For (A) can be true, without (B) being true.
Meaning, (B) does not necessarily ow from (A).
Summa Metaphysica (rst volume 1988) along with
many
many
predecessor metaphysics formulations, some pre-dating it
by thousands of years, hypothesizes*
c
a net-
zero-balanced universe.
d
Some, if not the overwhelming
majority, of these
“net-zero” metaphysics, along with
“net-zero” metaphysics, along with
Summa Metaphysica, embrace a transcendent force
and/or a Divine in the creation equation. Even if
we are
we are
cumulatively hypothesized as being integral to the
Divine,
Divine,
as per Summa.
With due respect to
Hawking, not even a rock, let alone a
Hawking, not even a rock, let alone a
universe, spontaneously pops-out of nothingness.
Respectfully, giggling ve
years old girls frolicking at the
years old girls frolicking at the
seashore on a balmy June day, tip-toeing through the
foamy surf where ocean wavelets lap onto the beach,
did
did
not simply pop out of nothingness.
Respectfully.
***
*a
Summer 2011, see Hawking interview/feature on Wormhole Series on the Science
Channel. See his inter-related
book The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking and
book The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking and
Leonard Mlodinow, Bantam
Books, a division of Random House, NY 2010
Books, a division of Random House, NY 2010
*b
a hypothesis which started emerging in the contemporary scientic community in
the past 40 years, but mainly started gaining
traction since ~1998, when scientist
traction since ~1998, when scientist
Michael Turner
(University of Chicago) coined the term.
(University of Chicago) coined the term.
*c
see Summa Metaphysica: Volume I: God & Evil 1988: Unied Formulation
*
d
i.e. positive and negative energy balance-out the
universe
universe
APPENDIX Z9: Potential/Possibility
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:46 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z9: Potential/Possibility.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z9:
Potential/Possibility
Perhaps, our particular universe came into being
because
because
it potentially had the most extraordinary denouement
–
–
and the cosmos optimizes.
APPENDIX Z8: The Soul of the Universe
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:45 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z8: The Soul of the Universe.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z8:
The Soul of the Universe
One can hypothesize that –
the soul of a child has a 1:1 correspondence
with the soul of the universe
As a child’s spirit bursts
with love and potential and hope,
with love and potential and hope,
so does the spirit of the universe.
As a child embodies all of
our cumulative aspirations
our cumulative aspirations
and hopes, so does the universe encompass
all of our
all of our
aspirations and hopes.
And as a child is but one
(nested) link in the ever–
(nested) link in the ever–
morphing and advancing interlinked chain of Quest
for
for
Potential, so does a snapshot of the universe at any
moment in time, represent
but one (nested) link….
but one (nested) link….
APPENDIX Z7: Anima mundi*
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:44 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z7: Anima mundi*.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z7:
Anima mundi*
The world soul (Greek: ψυχή κόσμου, Latin: Anima mundi)
has been a component of several systems of
thought.
thought.
Its proponents claim that it permeates the cosmos
and
and
animates all matter, just
as the soul animates the human
as the soul animates the human
body. The idea originated
with Plato and was an important
with Plato and was an important
component of most Neoplatonic systems:
Therefore, we may
consequently state that: this
consequently state that: this
world is indeed a living being endowed with a
soul and intelligence… a single visible living
entity
entity
containing all other living entities, which by
their
their
nature are all related.
[1]
The Stoics believed it to be the only vital force in
the
the
universe. It also features in systems of eastern
philosophy
philosophy
in the Brahman-Atman of Hinduism, and in the School
of
of
Yin-Yang, Taoism, and Neo-Confucianism as qi.
1
Plato, Timaeus, 29/30; 4th century BCE
*Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima_mundi (accessed February 1, 2011)
APPENDIX Z6: Modern Evolutionary Synthesis*
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:43 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z6: Modern Evolutionary Synthesis*.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z6:
Modern Evolutionary
Synthesis*
Synthesis*
a
The modern evolutionary synthesis is a union of
ideas
ideas
from several biological specialties which provides a widely
accepted account of evolution. It is also
referred to as the
referred to as the
new synthesis, the modern synthesis, the evolutionary
synthesis, millennium synthesis and the neo-darwinian
synthesis.
Some key points are –
• Evolution is gradual:
small genetic changes regulated
small genetic changes regulated
by natural selection
accumulate over long periods.
accumulate over long periods.
• Natural selection*
b
is by far the main mechanism of
change; even slight
advantages are important when
advantages are important when
continued.
*
a
Wikipedia Online, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_evolutionary_synthesis
(accessed February 6, 2012)
*
b
No scientic community consensus as of May 2012 as
regards the precise modality
regards the precise modality
of selection
from the author –
What is the actual modality of Natural Selection?
Is it perhaps Quest for Potential
∞
continuously super–
selecting from a plethora of mutations served-up
by
by
nature ongoing over the millennia?
APPENDIX Z5: Cosmic Nesting (Iterativeness)
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:40 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z5: Cosmic Nesting (Iterativeness).
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z5:
Cosmic Nesting (Iterativeness)
Q4P
∞
– is hypothesized in Summa Metaphysica to exist
and to nest:
Q4P ( Q4P ( Q4P
(In formal mathematical terms:
innite self-similar progression-regression
is suggested)
Mandelbrot Fractiles nest:
The geometry of
[Mandelbrot set] fractiles
[Mandelbrot set] fractiles
[developed by Polish/French/American Jewish
émigré mathematician Benoit Bernard Mandelbrot
heavily c. 1970-1982 during his thirty-ve year
(1958-1993) tenure at IBM]
deals with the creation of ever-repeating,
“self-similar patterns” nested within each
other.
other.
Nature nests:
the pattern on twigs on a branch resembles
the pattern of limbs branching off the trunk
the pattern of a major river looks like the
pattern of
pattern of
its smaller tributaries
the fractile pattern of the bronchus of the human
lung, keeps repeating in the smaller and smaller
bronchioles
Natural water frost crystal growth shows fractile
branching
Generations nest:
Son of the son of the son of the son, etc….
Consciousness, Anger, Love
and Sexual Arousal
and Sexual Arousal
(among other dynamics)
all possibly have nesting dimensions
meaning, layer upon nuanced-layer ratchets-up the
particular dynamic.
APPENDIX Z4: Where is Option B?
Published on 24 Jun 2016 at 12:38 pm.
Comments Off on APPENDIX Z4: Where is Option B?.
Filed under Uncategorized.
APPENDIX Z4:
Where is Option B?
Summa proposes a unied metaphysics….
call it Option A
But, where is the competing Option B?
Obviously, we have
questions with regards Option A.
questions with regards Option A.
But, with Option A, we do seem to have an elegant,
overarching, seemingly seamless, powerful, crisp
metaphysics which seems to elegantly nesse an
almost
almost
endless series of issues – cosmology, cosmogony,
theodicy, theology, evolutionary biology, teleology – and
on and on….
Option A happens to nicely dovetail as well with
components of the Torah
and with key components of
and with key components of
Lurianic Kabbalah – aside from being universalistic
and
and
humanistic and empowering – to all.
So, therefore the next
obvious step might be to stack our
obvious step might be to stack our
Option A against Option B.
But, what is Option B?
And, where is Option B?
And, where is Option B?
Which is the salient –
contender, challenger, old champion?
contender, challenger, old champion?
You might say that there
are 100+ contenders?
are 100+ contenders?
And that they are too numerous to count?
OK, but which is the salient contender?
No salient contender?
That is the point.
While Summa makes numerous assertions, they all
dovetail
dovetail
nicely into the Potential framework – its unifying
‘spinal
‘spinal
column’ – and the overall construct is
philosophically
philosophically
elegant.
It is not clear which other metaphysics challenges
it.
it.
