Transcript Slide 1
NPA Conference 2013 College Park, MD Philosophy: More than the Middle of NPA Robert Bennett [email protected] Why Philo? •Why not love wisdom? •Communicate with meaning and effect •Establish common ground of agreement •Eliminate empty dialogues , with no resolution •Correct misconceptions.... a key MS error •A tool for truth discovery and validation The best reason? a Firm Philo Foundation Positive Unification and Confidence in Beliefs & Cures Anti-MS Disarray Rejection of some mod philo is justified... Proposed: - a NPA custom-designed set of premises - applied to current science beliefs - to catalog common fallacies - in MS (and some NPA) thinking. Build a solid base of axioms Use philo realism and sci method to forestall endless debates Challenge mainstream dogma Train members to: - recognize logical fallacies -WIN ARGUMENTS Intended result Form Formaaphilo philoforum/thread forum/threadasasfollowup followup Archive Archiveany anyusable usableresults results Unify Unifyresponses responsestotoMS MSclaim claims Defuse Defusedialogs dialogsdoomed doomedtotofailure failure Sci Method Violations Testability/repeatability puts limits on space particle physics: unobservables astrophysics : starlight speculations Sun a star? Solar anomalies... limits on time chronons: smallest unit?? Pre sci history .... Geology, Genetics, Archaeology, Anthropology, All the Paleologies Misconceptions re Philo Science is superior in.... scope content truth details All false but the last Sci phi not needed? refute: All have a worldview Need formal ed? Nah....a few hours Modern philo stinks! Agreed... If mod = rationalism idealism nihilism scientism naturalism Philo - Nothing but epigrams?... “.... it does not follow that we must adopt the very poor philosophies which scientific men have constructed. In philosophy they have much more to learn than to teach. Dean Inge The theme of this talk! Philosophy a worldview response to universal ultimate questions Sci Phi covers assumptions, foundations,methods, implications and use of science. Sci Knowledge Domain- KD division of knowledge limited to study of nature. KD Branches Metaphysics - self-evident and unproven premises Epistemology – sources of truth Logic – rules of reasoning Ontology – properties of being Rhetoric- argument tactics Input: Sensory data from energy, matter and motion tests Process: Scientific method – test iterations and interpretations Output : Natural laws or predictions KD law: info-out <= info-in Raw info is organized and converted to useful form. Sufficiency axiom Nothing can give what it doesn’t already have.. Intro to metaphysics ... and school of realism!! Limits of the Physics KD Exclusion of: single non-repeatable events extra-natural or supernatural events events not accessible to observer in space or time human testimony ..need self-testing Philo INCLUDES all but #3 More KD limits abstraction of certain features ignoring others subjective test design/ unknown variables non-realistic test interpretations So why so much sci method abuse?? Desperate to advance, so limits are ignored! (like Heliocentrism and CMBcentrism) Sci fact Sci fiction No events are technically repeatable.. Irreversible flow of time! And exact duplication of original environment in the test protocol? Sci can’t explain the difference between a living and dead animal or the mind and the brain! ...nothing beyond materialism /naturalism. Assumptions of pre-modern science(pre-Galileo) included Realism. .. an objective world exists outside the mind this world is governed by cause and effect regularities the senses are capable of faithfully representing the world to the mind the human intellect can uncover and accurately describe these regularities KD Hierarchy MSP Hierarchy Sci accepted its limits & was neutral on religion... prior to Galileo. Then sci became the KD King . .... GUT & TOE! Metaphysics – self-evident fundamental beliefs... the strategic support axioms. Everyone has a metaphysics, a worldview of reality; rejecting it IS itself a metaphysical position! Logic – A tool for validating consistency and truth. Math uses axioms instead of nature to form theories. Logic is used to test axiomatic consistency. Epistemology - the sources and discovery of truth; for the NPA: realism plus the scientific method, including logical consistency and testability. Note: Consistency must be established before testing – Escape hatch of relativity! Hi Sci Phi If you get a good wife you will become happy, and if you get a bad one, you will become a philosopher. – Socrates The origin of philosophy is sheer wonder. ....There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance. ....All things in moderation. - Aristotle True science teaches, above all, to doubt and be ignorant. –Hippocrates Philosophy of science is as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds. Scientists are explorers. Philosophers are tourists - Richard Feynman ...the MS majority opinion of philo… it’s too late to ask Feynman the basis for his statement. Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. –William of Ockham ... The real Occam’s Razor Principle I think therefore I am. –René Descartes …doubted everything in order to figure out what he could know with absolute certainty. Although he could be wrong about what he was thinking, that he was thinking was undeniable. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? –Bishop George Berkeley Realist says... What? (more quotes in paper) Modern types of sci philosophy : Scientism – all world aspects can be completely explained by science. Materialism – only matter exists; no immaterial world. Naturalism - only nature exist; denies a spiritual world. Humanism - man is the measure of all things… the humanistic view. Scientific modernism – a blend of materialism and humanism. Agnosticism - believes there is truth, but no human way to find it. Nihilism- There is no truth..... What are the limits of a system that uses axioms? Gödel’s theorem ….No axiomatic system can prove itself correct or complete! Or .....All logical systems have unproven premises - not provable within the system. EG: Dictionary to find a word, you must already know a minimum set of words ....the dictionary’s metaphysics! (also – the spelling anomaly) All human KD are incomplete.....Except theology ....why? Nothing is outside the theo KD.... Metaphysical Realism Assumptions - Axioms –Assertions – Premises Remove self-referential contradictions (Bertrand Russell ) EG: There is no absolute truth! If this is true or false it is self contradictory. Discuss until a common ground for NPA is found. 1) Principle of non-contradiction/logical inconsistency It is impossible that the same thing be and not be at the same time and in the same respect. Corollary - There is nothing between existence and nonexistence, being and non-being. EG: No virtual particles... 2) Causality: Every effect has at least one cause. Does everything have a cause?..... NO Theorems: - Actions/events are connected by cause and effect. - Action at a distance (AAAD) with no intermediate causes (media) is totally denied. AKA ...non-locality...non fingo! - The cause is greater than the effect. - Without the cause there can be no effect. 3) Ontology : properties of being: All beings have both existence and essence. Existence: that which is. Essence : that within being that makes it what it is. 4) Behavior follows nature/being. Actions come from the essence. - Actions follow from the essence of being. 5) Sense knowledge: Nothing is in the mind that did not enter through the senses. A rejection of idealism 6)Source of knowledge: Everything in the mind has a foundation in reality. 7)Reliability of the senses: The sense faculties are reliable, relative to their proper object. The eye cannot hear, the ear cannot taste. 8)Universals: The intellect handles universals ; the senses particulars. 9) Self-causality: Nothing causes itself. Nothing can give what it does not have. ....rejects an uncaused origin of the Big Bang expansion. 10)Reality and existence : Nothing can act if not in existence. A rejection of quantum mechanics/probability waves? 11) Consistency of causes: In the same circumstances the same causes produce the same effects. There is no truly random process, contrary to QM. 12) Crux of the scientific method : Theory guides; experiment decides. Application of philosophical principles MS claims geocentrism is false. Claim: Venus phases and Jovian moons Fallacy: Strawman The false model of Ptolemy makes all cosmic objects primary or direct satellites of Earth. Tycho’s model is geocentric, hierarchical like HC and compliant with observations. Claim: Geocentrism is as false as Flat Earth-ism Fallacy: Red Herring ....the two beliefs are independent. (Fallacies are invalid arguments ..... not conclusions) Claim: Earth’s motion is seen in videos from spacecraft or Moon. Fallacy: False Assumption ....assumes camera is at absolute rest. Claim : Earth always moves(HC) and relativity is true. Fallacy: Logical contradiction; inconsistent premises. (I have examined ALL the published MS HC proofs, found them ALL to be false, or found credible alternate causes –like aether - for the alleged HC effects. ... GWW book and ALFA model. Parallax Claim: Parallax proves Earth moves and the Sun is at rest. Fallacy: Circular argument; Premises contain conclusion. Parallax : perceived relative motion between two objects seen from a third fixed reference object. EG: the apparent motion of a near and far object when one eye is open.... then the other. In the diagram on next page, the fixed fiducial line is SNF. GC and HC have the same geometry same distances The HC model assumes the Sun is fixed and proves that... surprise - the Sun is fixed! ...Assume Earth is fixed ...proves GC! Another very common MS fallacy... assuming a single cause for parallax and the uniqueness of that cause. Linear equation vs. a quadratic! ........Uniqueness requires logical equivalence! MS Psycho-analysis How many have ever seen the GC diagram? Why not? Public is duped by this fallacy - Appeal to authority How does this patently false argument gain credibility with MS? MS demagogues .. Some don’t realize the illogic themselves... Others ignore the conflict, because - HC parallax theory works in our culture, and - they want it to be true for personal and subjective reasons .... Exposure as incompetent would be fatal... Modern mainstream physics has the credibility of .. a used-car salesman... a snake-oil charlatan... a politician! MSP is an intellectual Ponzi scheme, a pyramid of worthless value! Claims: Equatorial bulge /Foucault pendulum prove Earth spins. Fallacy: Not a unique cause. (Is this even true? NASA photos from space? ) Aether motion at equator causes pressure drop by Bernoulli’s Principle. Defense with sci method... 1) Mic-Gale found E-W light anisotropy Earth rotates Fallacy: AAAD - Effect without cause Rotating aether causes same effect.... Same spin as the stars. 2) GPS comm. needs E-W correction.... An aether effect.. 3) Westbound radio signals are slower than eastbound ... Same aether effect Foucault pendulum: N_S swing sees a greater aether wind S than N. Nothing and infinity...... Meet realism! Deep MS confusion concerning.... Physical vacuum: space that is empty of all matter IS NOT Nothing or nihil: the absence of anything; non-being: non-esse Deep space vacuum must contain at least stellar and CMB radiation, and a few sparse H atoms. And if EM radiation exists everywhere, then so must its medium … aether. Physics – under the SM rule of testability, has no way to verify ‘nothing’. Aristotle affirmed aether and causality....” ...from nothing comes nothing”. With nihil, there’s nothing – literally – to trigger the senses. We have no mental image of what ‘nihil’ means … except as a negation of what we can perceive! Lawrence Krauss, a popular MS promoter, ventured into philosophical turf with – A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing This limited view of a physicist was formal analyzed by a trained philosopher in Not Understanding Nothing - A review of A Universe from Nothing by Edward Feser This excellent review displays how a modern physicist struggles when the basics of knowledge are missing.... or dismissed with hubris ; selected portions are covered in my paper.... A recommended read. More MS confusion Infinity: something without any limit or end; unboundedness. Finity: something with limits or boundaries The contents of space – objects – are limited now to having an actual location, shape, etc., but have the potential to change these limits. And they will always have potential to change at least one of these limits. Space –the container of objects - also has potential to change its limits. So space cannot be infinite... without any limits ...Its limits are mutable . Time is the measure of change in space (motion) so it too is finite . Realism (potency and act) shows that space and time are finite..... There are no physical infinities. A BB MUST BE FINITE! To be infinite is to be without change –immutable.... and eternal ... and homogeneous...and ubiquitous.. Proven by the scholastics .... five centuries ago. Scientism revealed Sect 9 in paper Antithesis of realism a form of modernism called scientism. Philosopher Ed Feser applies philo rules to this modern blight on scientific thinking. Some talking points : Scientism: ALL real knowledge is scientific knowledge—there is no rational, objective form of inquiry that is not science. .......“science” is synonymous with “reason.” True scientific inquiry itself rests on a number of assumptions: - there is an objective world external to the minds of scientists; - this world is governed by causal regularities; - the senses faithfully represent the world to the mind - the human intellect can accurately describe these regularities Familiar? Recommended , of course. 10. A Realism Apologetic Realism on the attack! We will micro-analyze ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905 a classic original source of relativity fallacies and illogic.... the origin of many MS delusions... Only a summary of the paper’s details will be given... 1-It is known that Maxwell’s electrodynamics.....when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries.... The ‘asymmetries’ in Maxwell’s laws are due to performing tests only in the lab and assuming a stationary aether. The EM theory of Hertz removes the ‘asymmetries’ by including motion of the charge through the aether using the total time derivative. (see Old Physics for New, T.E. Phipps ,Jr.) Fallacy: False Assumption... That Maxwell’s laws are complete 2- ….unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of the earth relatively to the “light medium,” suggest that [EM] and mechanics possess no properties corresponding to absolute rest. But no specific attempts are cited. Fallacy: Shifting the burden of proof In 1905 some tests supported absolute rest. ...if a mobile aether was included in the model. - Stellar aberration by Bradley - Michelson and Morley non-zero ‘null’ result’ - Newton’s mechanical test of a spinning bucket All suggest the Earth frame is at absolute rest. Fallacy – Ignoring counter-evidence After 1905 Sagnac’s EM test of light speed variation suggested that the Earth frame is at absolute rest. 3- ..position can be defined relatively by the employment of rigid standards of measurement..... ‘Rigid’ is undefined. If ‘rigid’ means a fixed shape, then within rigid body, no sound/stress waves are possible (periodic distortions of shape). Fallacy – Undefined concept; Contradiction with reality 4- ...time values [can be] determined by an observer with the watch at the origin... This simultaneity description doesn’t define a physical clock/watch... Fallacy: Another undefined concept 5 an observer ...coordinating the ...positions of the hands with light signals, .....reaching him through empty space. Fallacy: AAAD... No causality 6- ...this co-ordination .... is not independent of the standpoint of the observer with the watch or clock, as we know from experience. Astronomical time is independent of the observer (local conditions). First, establish GMT by observing a standard stellar position. The time at any other location is its longitude*sidereal day/360. This is a universal or absolute physical time. 7- ..we establish by definition that the “time” for light to travel from A to B equals the “time” it requires to travel from B to A. The time for Two Way Light Speed (TWLS) can be determined from T = d/(c+v) + d/(c-v) = 2d/c where v is the aether speed in the direction of c. Fallacy – violates multiple causality… in this case, a change in c due to aether motion. 8- The laws by which the states of physical systems undergo change are not affected [in inertial reference frames] Refuted by Newton’s bucket and Ruyong Wang’s FOC Fallacy – ignores experimental disproof 9- Any ray of light moves in the “stationary” system of coordinates with the determined velocity c, .... But the stationary system is any chosen ref system. Let 2 light beams travel from the source in opposite directions. The 2 wavefronts separate from the source at c, but at 2c relative to each other. SR postulate 2 says the beams separate at c. Logic : c + c = 2c STR: c + c = c or 2=1 Fallacy – violates principle of non-contradiction 10- The length to be discovered ... we will call “the length of the (moving) rod in the stationary system.” ....we shall find that it differs from l[length of stationary rod]. If the lengths of the rod change in relativity, how can the rod be rigid? Fallacy – violates principle of non-contradiction 11- Observers moving with the moving rod would thus find that the two clocks were not synchronous,.... Observers using universal time will find the clocks are synchronous. Fallacy - ignores multiple causality 12- ...it is clear that the equations must be linear on account of the properties of homogeneity which we attribute to space and time. A space containing a dynamic aether that varies in optical density (n) and speed (real space) cannot be homogeneous. Fallacy – False premise/metaphysics 13- .. we have not as yet furnished proof that the principle of [a constant] velocity of light is compatible with the principle of relativity. The two principles are incompatible and inconsistent. Fallacy – violates principle of non-contradiction 14- If we assume that the result proved for a polygonal line is also valid for a continuously curved line.... This assumption by Einstein means STR holds for curved motion and specifically – for circular motion…. which is accelerated motion. So STR can be used in curved motion by projecting use of a large number of inertial frames. This contradicts all modern relativists who claim STR does not include circular or accelerated motion… Fallacy – Modern STR contradicts 1905 STR... source of light of frequency n, …. A light source at infinite distance from an observer can never be seen/detected, since light speed is finite…. Fallacy – violates principle of non-contradiction 16- No references to experiments; no references cited at all. Fallacy: violates sci method testability. Total fallacies detected: 16 ...... 8 relate to contradictions or non-causality Can we now test SR??? NO! Mathpages : proof of math takeover MS courses – training the next gen Conclusion The intent was to introduce basic philosophical principles to NPA members who will be self-motivated to form a discussion group or philosophy forum to modify and extend the principles of realism and scientific method to develop an NPA standard. This philo forum would consider both NPA and MS theories that are current and proposed from a common world view, an NPA Weltanschauung, Key issues Do you subscribe to the NPA realism philosophy? That is: Do our worldviews agree? Do our science worlds agree? Be Realistic, Be a Realist!