IF I SEEK US

Imminent FulfillmentImmortality,  Safety, Empowerment, Equality, KnowledgeUnity, Society

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to
  one who is striking at the root."
- Henry David Thoreau
Site Sections, Subject List, Reading Sequence, and Article Synopses

Modern Myth Articles

Importance of Catastrophism
Origin of Modern Geology
Parable about Electromagnetism
Modern Reification
Scientific Intellectual Responsibility
Scientism Religion
The Great Pyramid
Ancient Civilizations
The Modern Mythology
Foreword-Pythagorus' Trousers
Some Science Myths
Einstein Genius Myth
Warped Space-Time
Velikovksy' Ghost Returns
Velikovsky Biography
Lecture & Video Links
Pensée Journal Issues

 

"In the sphere of thought, absurdity and perversity remain the masters of the world, and their dominion is suspended only for brief periods." - Arthur Schopenhauer

The Nature and Definition of Space:
Space, Aether, Nothing and Infinity

My first new paradigms article segment dealt with the nature and definition of time and why our thinking about it has been misguided. As I see it, another “fundamental” problem is prevalent thinking about space.

Heidegger said, “Nothing nothings!” In other words, “nothing” doesn’t DO anything, it can’t contain anything, like the universe, and it doesn’t make up real space or volume in the physical universe. There IS NO SUCH THING AS NOTHING! It is just a mental reference point. The philosopher Michael Miller says,

"As Parmenides pointed out about 2500 years ago, and as Ayn Rand reminded us more recently, there is no nothing. To say that a void exists is to say that there is a place where non-existence nevertheless exists. Void is absurd—an epistemological error, a figment. There is something everywhere; reality is full. It has no 'gaps.'"

And,

"The universe is not in space; space is in the universe."

I wish we could do away with this word “space”! The term is only good for a vague reference to a region out beyond the observational point. There is the real VOLUME of the universe, which we often call space, and then there is the imaginary infinite extension of the Cartesian coordinates, xyz, which we call “space” and which we confuse with the volume of the real universe. But these are not the same thing! This false idea of space cannot be validly reified, but neither can “volume” be reified, for that matter, but only specified. Neither volume nor space can be reified into something that stretches, shrinks, curves, warps, or ripples.

Given that there can be no voids of nothingness, the EU paradigm hasbecause of both sound evidence and reasoningconfidently settled on the conclusion that the volume of the physical universe is filled with an aether. In other words, the existence of an aether is all but axiomatic. Currently the thinking is that this aether is composed of polarizable neutrinos where there can be no such thing as voids of “nothing”. Again, the philosopher Michael Miller has paved some of the way to this model:

"Curved space" is a staple of 20th Century thought. Space warps are a cliche of science fiction. Generations of science students have tried to make sense of curved space, and succeeded only in warping their minds. Curved space is taken for granted among the learned; if you protest that curved space is absurd, they roll their eyes and shake their heads pityingly.

But what the heck does 'curved space' mean, and how does it measure up against the principle of immutable units?"

Bottom line? The whole monstrous, mathematical edifice of Einsteinian thinking about relativity and there being no aether has a false foundation, and mainstream science is wandering in fantasy land when they invoke space-time, a double reification.

On the other end of things, “infinity” may be a useful mathematical construct but it cannot be applied to any countable aspect of the tangible, physical universe. It is misguided to think of "space" being infinite, The physical universe may be vast beyond our scope of visualization but it is equally misguided to think of it being infinite in its particulate makeup. The number of galaxies, stars, planets, atoms and sub-atomic particles including aether particles CANNOT be infinite. To think otherwise violates our foundational logic and opens the door to mysticism and intellectual and spiritual chicanery.

So, does the physical universe have a boundary? Of course it does. Think of this boundary as a limit of what is INSIDE, not what is outside. The non-sequitor question is often asked, "What is on the other side of the boundary of the universe?" The obvious answer is "nothing". NOTHING! The definition of the universe is that it includes everything that exists, and there can be no thing outside of it.

A poem by Michael Armstrong

Scientists have a large particle tree,
on which they drape with abandoned glee,
all the particles they need to be.

Electrons and Protons and Neutrons laid bare,
all hung on the branches with exquisite care
in hopes that some sense soon will be there.

Photons glistening, what a sight!
Produced in minds ever so bright,
supposedly make up what is light.

Are they like bullets, or are they waves?
Accordingly each view is the one that saves
a theory about which someone raves.

Particles virtual and particles real,
metaphysical minds wheel and deal
to see if they are, or maybe just feel.

I surely wouldn't be telling you lies,
in this particle feast for our eyes,
there is always to be another surprise.

If this dilemma has Lepton your back
and of holes in the scheme you have no lack,
add some more particles to the rack.

For some have found in this particle race,
it's easy to get Pion your face,
or even be put in your anti-place.

But if you think it will do no harm,
Tryon a Quark with color and charm,
(Tardyon you may go to the funny farm)

Or maybe one with spin or flavor,
a great delight for the mind to savor,
and then you don't ever even waver.

Is all this enough? Not quite!
Tachyons are going faster than light,
and yet, how can that be possible or right?

They spend billions looking for Higgs,
instead these scientist wigs
find fruit that amounts to figs.

Even out West where the Bosons roam
and the cattle Muon the way home,
Neutrinos pass through the Meson loam.

They never get Baryon boot hill,
but some Hyperon scientists certainly will,
unless they find a new particle still.

What more can they possibly Gluon this tree,
or what could the ultimate particle be?
I'm Moron Positron it's a Puton, you see!

Home   Site Sections   Complete Article Map   Contact   Store   Contributions