Blog 20150902
Until now, this Blog has been mostly
pedagogical. Along with others in the Progressive Science Institute, I have
been teaching the fundamentals of neomechanics and univironmental determinism.
Now we need to advance by continuing to use neomechanical assumptions to
prepare explanations for phenomena for which regressive physicists have no
logical answers. We could argue endlessly about whether there is free will
(there isn’t) or motion without matter (there isn’t) or whether time can dilate
(it can’t). What we want to do is go beyond all that, choosing the
deterministic (scientific) assumptions that clear up all the confusion
engendered by the determinism-indeterminism philosophical struggle. To that
effect let me first repeat the Ten Assumptions of Science[1],
which provide the foundation and guiding light for our deliberations:
1. First Assumption of Science, materialism (The external world exists after the
observer does not).
2. Second Assumption of Science, causality (All effects have an
infinite number of material causes).
3. Third Assumption of Science, uncertainty (It is
impossible to know everything about anything, but it is possible to know more
about anything).
4. Fourth Assumption of Science, inseparability (Just as there is no
motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion).
5. Fifth Assumption of Science, conservation (Matter and the motion
of matter can be neither created nor destroyed).
6. Sixth Assumption of
Science, complementarity (All things are subject to divergence and
convergence from other things).
7. Seventh Assumption of Science, irreversibility (All processes are
irreversible).
8. Eighth Assumption of Science, infinity
(The universe is infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions).
9. Ninth Assumption of
Science, relativism (All things have characteristics that make them
similar to all other things as well as characteristics that make them
dissimilar to all other things).
10. Tenth Assumption of
Science, interconnection (All
things are interconnected, that is, between any two objects exist other objects
that transmit matter and motion).
As long-time readers
know, these assumptions have indeterministic opposites that cannot be proven either.
We favor the deterministic assumptions because we feel that they are most
logical and have the best chance of overthrowing relativity and its associated cosmogony.
From now on, I will limit my responses to reader comments based on indeterministic
assumptions. Thus, for instance, you will hear less from those who believe in perfectly
solid matter, perfectly empty space, matterless motion, time dilation, or universal
expansion. There are numerous other blogs that take such stuff
seriously. As much as I like a good debate, the time has come to develop the
finer points of neomechanics in the interest of efficiency.
As I have said before, neomechanics
and the infinite universe have an infinite number of possibilities as well as an
infinite number of impossibilities. Next week I will list the impossibilities of
which I am aware.
[1] Borchardt,
Glenn, 2004, The ten assumptions of science: Toward a new scientific worldview:
Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 125 p.
---, 2007, The Scientific
Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 411 p. [ http://www.scientificphilosophy.com/The%20Scientific%20Worldview.html ]
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment