=== .
I like to read his books because they raise many questions.
And these questions give information for brain to think.
John Polkinghorne took epigraph of his book ‘ Quantum theory’
the Feynman’s thought : ‘ I think I can safely say that
nobody understands quantum mechanics. ‘
Why?
Because, he wrote:
‘ ,we do not understand the theory as fully as we should.
We shall see in what follows that important interpretative
issues remain unresolved. They will demand for their
eventual settlement not only physical insight but also
metaphysical decision ’.
/ preface/
‘ Serious interpretative problems remain unresolved,
and these are the subject of continuing dispute’
/ page 40/
‘ If the study of quantum physics teaches one anything,
it is that the world is full of surprises’
/ page 87 /
‘ Metaphysical criteria that the scientific community take
very seriously in assessing the weight to put on a theory
include: . . . .’
/ page 88 /
‘Quantum theory is certainly strange and surprising, . . .’
/ page92 /
‘ Wave / particle duality is a highly surprising and
instructive phenomenon, . .’
/ page 92 /
Togetherness.
John Polkinghorne, as a realist, want to know
‘ what the physical world is actually like’, but until now
physicists don’t have the whole picture of Universe.
And in my opinion John Polkinghorne was right writing
what to understand the problems of creating the Universe:
‘ They will demand for their eventual settlement not only
physical insight but also metaphysical decision ’.
So, maybe, Aristotle was right separating the knowledge of Nature:
on two parts: Physics and Metaphysics.
=== .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
Co creators , what a bunch of new age hogwash! Yes the new post modernism with its moral relativity is the scam of the century that is thousands of years old! Talk about archaic dogma!
Hogwash! Co creation is just another catch phrase that promotes the anti christian agenda of the rockefellian new world religion! You are not a god or a demi god and you are not a co creator!!!!
I mostly ignore you guy's ,and wouldn't have confronted innercalm guy if he hadnt attacked christian family values while promoting new age dogma! You been pretty good , I see you have settled some of your blame issues!
Do you believe in Physics ?
You won’t have to be so sure. Why ?
How does Physics look now?
#
The basis of the Physics consists of:
1.
Abstract ‘ inertial movement’.
2.
Abstract ‘ideal gas and ideal particles.’
3.
Abstract ‘absolute black body.’
4.
Abstract ‘entropy’
5.
Abstract SRT negative 4 - D space,
abstract 5D, …….and 11 - dimensional spaces. .
6.
Abstract separated absolute space and time of Newton.
7.
Abstract ‘virtual particles’, ‘dark matter and dark energy’.
8.
Abstract ‘big bang’.
9.
Abstract " method of renormalization ". . . . . . etc.
=========..
And therefore we can read.
Conclusion from the book ‘ The Holographic Universe ’
by Michael Talbot.
‘ Science is not always as objective as we would like to believe.’
#
Conclusion from some article:
‘ One of the best kept secrets of science is
that physicists have lost their grip on reality.’
============ . .
In my opinion to understand the paradoxes we must
reconsider the old basis of the Physics.
=== .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
Correct. Vatican was correct!
It goes even further.
Physics is based upon metaphysics.
This is precisely what dimensional analysis says.
We cannot make physics of time, space and mass etc,
namely most basic (prime) quantities.
We cannot define metaphysical concepts using physical concepts.
This is where things went wrong with contemporary physics
QM defines time from momentum.
Relativity theory defines time and space using speed and acceleration.
This is all nonsense. All of this led us to inconsistency.
Where is the ‘Spiritual’ in Atheism?
What exactly is a religious experience?
Scientific Paranormal Investigative
Research Information and Technology
David M. Rountree, AES
1
Question in the XXI centure:
Who needs "mental telepathy" when we have Cell Phone s?
2
Question in the XXII century.
Who needs "men" when we have ‘robots‘ ?
#
Functioning Synapse Created Using Carbon Nanotubes:
Devices Might Be Used in Brain Prostheses or Synthetic Brains
ScienceDaily (Apr. 22, 2011) —
Engineering researchers the University of Southern California have made
a significant breakthrough in the use of nanotechnologies for the
construction of a synthetic brain. They have built a carbon nanotube
synapse circuit whose behavior in tests reproduces the function of a neuron,
the building block of the brain.
The team, which was led by Professor Alice Parker and Professor
Chongwu Zhou in the USC Viterbi School of Engineering Ming
Hsieh Department of Electrical Engineering, used an interdisciplinary
approach combining circuit design with nanotechnology to address the
complex problem of capturing brain function.
In a paper published in the proceedings of the IEEE/NIH 2011 Life Science
Systems and Applications Workshop in April 2011, the Viterbi team detailed
how they were able to use carbon nanotubes to create a synapse.
Carbon nanotubes are molecular carbon structures that are extremely small,
with a diameter a million times smaller than a pencil point. These nanotubes
can be used in electronic circuits, acting as metallic conductors or semiconductors.
"This is a necessary first step in the process," said Parker, who began the looking
at the possibility of developing a synthetic brain in 2006.
"We wanted to answer the question:
Can you build a circuit that would act like a neuron?
The next step is even more complex. How can we build structures out of these
circuits that mimic the function of the brain, which has 100 billion neurons and
10,000 synapses per neuron?"
Parker emphasized that the actual development of a synthetic brain,
or even a functional brain area is decades away, and she said the next
hurdle for the research centers on reproducing brain plasticity in the circuits.
The human brain continually produces new neurons, makes new connections
and adapts throughout life, and creating this process through analog circuits
will be a monumental task, according to Parker.
She believes the ongoing research of understanding the process of human
intelligence could have long-term implications for everything from developing
prosthetic nanotechnology that would heal traumatic brain injuries to developing
intelligent, safe cars that would protect drivers in bold new ways.
For Jonathan Joshi, a USC Viterbi Ph.D. student who is a co-author of the paper,
the interdisciplinary approach to the problem was key to the initial progress.
Joshi said that working with Zhou and his group of nanotechnology researchers
provided the ideal dynamic of circuit technology and nanotechnology.
"The interdisciplinary approach is the only approach that will lead to a solution.
We need more than one type of engineer working on this solution," said Joshi.
"We should constantly be in search of new technologies to solve this problem." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110421151921.htm
1.- How it all started - in Russia
Scientists in pre-Revolutionary [Russia] were studying the area
of parapsychology as did later such Soviet scientists as
V.M. Bekhterev, A.G. Ivanov-Smolensky and B.B. Kazhinsky
in the twenties and thirties.
In the beginning there was Aristotle,
And objects at rest tended to remain at rest,
And objects in motion tended to come to rest,
And soon everything was at rest,
And God saw that it was boring.
Then God created Newton,
And objects at rest tended to remain at rest,
But objects in motion tended to remain in motion,
And energy was conserved and momentum
was conserved and matter was conserved,
And God saw that it was conservative.
Then God created Einstein,
And everything was relative,
And fast things became short,
And straight things became curved,
And the universe was filled with inertial frames,
And God saw that it was relatively general,
but some of it was especially relative.
Then God created Bohr,
And there was the principle,
And the principle was quantum,
And all things were quantified,
But some things were still relative,
And God saw that it was confusing.
Then God was going to create Furgeson,
And Furgeson would have unified,
And he would have fielded a theory,
And all would have been one,
But it was the seventh day,
And God rested,
And objects at rest tend to remain at rest.
Home
Physics and Metaphysics. 
