Abstraction and reality in the science.

Back.

There are two points of view on conditions of occurrence and development of the Universe: religious and scientific. Religious version has arisen at an early stage of development of the man. Our far ancestors described a picture of Genesis proceeding from the assumption, that consist of two worlds: Material and Spiritual exist. However, in order to prove their religious belief they could result only legends, myths, any symbols and to refer to personal experience of religious authorities - the prophets. In addition, it is natural, when science began to develop gradually; these proofs stopped to satisfy a logically conceiving man. He began to consider them being unpersuasive, primitive, childish, fantastic, and vestige of primitive superstitions. In ancient Greece Pythagoras has opened the first scientific schools. The traditions of school said: "Everything known should be connected to number; nothing can be clear without number". Following these traditions, first scientists, being pious people, considered that they could much better explain and prove a divine plan of a structure of the world, by basing on physics, mathematics, geometry. However, by studying the micro world, their followers were convinced in groundless efforts to find this divine essence in the laws of physics. And gradually, atheistic tendency began to dominate firmly in science. The religion has ceased to be a subject of science. Instead of belief in religion, there belief in science has come. From a school bench they convince a person, that there is no connection between science and religion, that the science and religion is two opposite, contradicting between themselves sides of outlook. However, what is strange? Let us suspect that religious world outlook is abstract and false. Then there is need to expect that the criticizing side - modern science - will explain exactly and clear the Picture of Genesis. But physics basically, consider only separate "pieces of the picture of nature": from the sphere of thermodynamics, electromagnetism, gravitation, and nuclear structure. There is no theory uniting all sections of physics so that to construct from them the Uniform Theory of Existence.

* * *

Physics do not dictate the laws to the nature. Laws of nature are a reality, which exists independently from the researcher, and the person only perceives them. The nature develops from simple to difficult; the evolution of the world goes from the lowest condition to the highest one. Therefore, initial conditions of the origin of Genesis cannot be complex. They should be elementary and simple, as a multiplication table: 2x2=4, 2x3=6 etc. Such simple laws of nature can and should be realized by each person from a school bench. The complexity of scientific knowledge and comprehensions arises only at further development and complicating of structure of the matter, and then a special professional knowledge already is required. From what do people start to build the house? Certainly, from a draft, schedule, model. And how do the builders of science act? It sounds amazing and incredibly, but it is the truth: the sources of physics are abstract. To steep regret, the modern science takes as model not a precise actual image, but abstract idealized suppositions. I shall give an example of some abstract models that lie in the basis of the building of Science. In 1687, the book "Mathematical beginnings of natural philosophy" by Isaac Newton was printed out. This book has become the fundamental scientific textbook. In the foreword to this book, Newton has written: "All the difficulty of physics, as it will be seen, is in recognizing forces of the nature by the phenomena of motion, and then to explain other phenomena according to these forces". "The First Newton's law" breaks on the spot this well formulated logical thought. It states: "Any body, until it remains insulated, saves its state of rest or rectilinear motion". This law of motion is considered fundamental in classic physics. However, it permanently causes critics of initial positions of mechanics. Because in earthly conditions it is defaulted. This law does not take into consideration influence of external forces; it also says nothing about internal forces. The reason on which the body is moving or rests is not clear. This law is abstract. Newton perceived illusiveness of this law. His scientific slogan was: "I do not invent hypotheses". He said: "I shall not mix conjectures with reliability". He aimed to build a building of science without hypotheses. Therefore, he wanted to correct somehow, to change his formulation. But all attempts were unsuccessful. However, this law is useful and necessary to explain then accelerated motion. For this reason, this postulate of Newton was forced and wrongfully erected to a rank of the law. And from a school bench the person learns this postulate as the law (unproved supposition). Here we have the paradoxical situation. The Bible begins with the unfounded statement "In the Beginning there was a Word ", and classic physics begins with the unfounded statement " In the Beginning there was the First Newton's law ". The science states that the origin of the World according to the religious version is not reliable, and builds the scientific foundations based on abstraction. As a result, both formulations (religious and scientific) are unsatisfactory from the point of view of logic.

* * *

The same abstract principle is also seen in thermodynamics. It is based on the Theory of ideal gas (TIG). In this theory, the scientists have refused many actual conditions in order to study in the easiest way the properties of elementary "imaginary" ideal gas and from it to proceed to actual, more complex gases. But simplifying a problem and covering an eye on the facts and phenomena, complicating the task, the scientists "have thrown out also child together with a basket". They have paid for it by loss of a road to the reality. With full confidence, the scientists state that there is no ideal gas in the nature. Although "it is absent", it does not hinder them then to proceed to explanation of properties of customary gases. But is it possible to take for initial conditions abstract model and from it to proceed to reality without the logical substantiation of their correlation? The reality should follow the reality. And if fiction turns into reality, does not a problem arise then: "what is hidden behind this imaginary, abstract model?" Therefore, without understanding the model of ideal gas, it is impossible to realize its essence and reality at constructing the whole building of science. When physicists explain separate natural phenomena precisely, but build them on abstract speculations, it resembles to me the story of a child to whom parents inoculate realistic behavior. But asking question: "Where am I from?" a child receives the answer: "you were brought by a stork". If he will acquire this truth and will not change it even becoming adult, what will he be? That is just the level of modern teaching and exposition of physics and that is just the level of scientific thinking which is not answering the person on question: "Where is he from? Where is everything from?" There is one more illusionary model (from set of others) in physics and that is the notion of a material particle as of "point". Mathematically it is convenient to imagine, that as if all weight of a body is concentrated in center, in "point" and, outgoing from this, to solve a problem. Together with that, the scientist is not interested in the inner pattern of object. The sun is "point", the Earth is "point", and electron is "point". The abstract doctrine about "point" continues to develop and nowadays. The whole Universe is already considered as a "point". It is a " last cry of fashion" in theoretical physics - the creation of the world owing to a "Big-bang" of a small "point". This hypothesis assumes that all mass of the Universe was once concentrated in "point", it is true that this "point" is not simple but "singular point". It means that either electromagnetic, gravity waves or last atom - everything, everything, all - were concentrated in "point" having endlessly large density. And approximately 20 billions years ago this "singular point" exploded. Its splinters scattered to all directions with huge speed. Step-by-step the world surrounding us was formed from these drilling breaks of "singular point". Many scientific articles and popular books are written about that. They do not write only that this "Big-bang" should take place and hereinafter to be distributed in some space. The structure of this space is not analyzed anywhere. If this "Big-bang" has taken place in infinite space (Vacuum), the scientists simply neglectfully render little attention to Space Vacuum and its condition is not analyzed logically seriously. Many sections of physics are connected to the problem of Vacuum, but it seems as though some evil spirit has imposed prohibition of the logical analysis of its structure. Except the exclamation that Vacuum is not emptiness, that there is something there (virtual particles), they do not give any serious proofs about an essence and structure of Vacuum. And in order to understand processes of macro and micro cosmoses, there is necessarily a concrete need to take into account the existence of Vacuum. The concept of Vacuum as infinite, eternal, absolute, homogeneous space, speaks nothing to the scientists, causes them bewilderment and "horror". They do not perceive how to derive some concrete actual values from these characteristics. Not perceiving it, they look as bewitched at Vacuum. The concepts such as "more, "less", "equal", "similar" do not conform to the word "perpetuity/eternity". The perpetuity/eternity is something that has not boundaries and discontinuity, it could not be compared with anything. Having reasoned so, the scientists conclude that the perpetuity/eternity defies physical and mathematical definition and cannot be taken into account in actual processes. Therefore, they proclaimed the stringent requirement (at a level of the censor of the law): "Perpetuity/eternity should be removed in order for theory to be exact". And all mathematical abilities, all mental energy they direct to the removal of perpetuity. They invent different mathematical "dodges" - " method of renormalization", "mechanism of Higgs", etc. But it is "labor of Sizief". It is "battle of Don Quixote with a windmill". They deceive both themselves and believers in science. All phenomena of micro cosmoses require taking into consideration the structure of indefinite/eternal Vacuum. Denying the fact of perpetuity scientists deprive hope to create the Unified Theory of Geneses. Therefore, it is necessary simply to understand and realize an essence and importance of the structure of perpetuity/eternity. Let us take an indefinitely decimal fraction 0, 99999999.... No matter how much times We would add 9 after comma, this number will never become a unit: 0, 9999... 1. Such unlimited repetition of the same has received the name of " bad perpetuity". And really, it is impossible to deduce something concrete, actual from it. Nevertheless, not such a "bad perpetuity" is seen in Vacuum, which plays the relevant role in a Picture of Geneses. And it finds its reflection in Theory of ideal gas, in SRT, in Quantum Theory.

* * *

Nowadays many scientists consider that for much comprehensive knowledge of the world it is necessary: a) To construct even more powerful boosters in order to find new fundamental particles. b) To improve the physical and mathematical vehicle in order to find new laws of nature. c) To expand horizons of astronomical researches by starting space vehicles. But they are not those methods, which can help to construct and to explain the Unified Theory of Geneses. Let us look at Science from the other point of view. The nature is built from simple to complex, the evolution of the world develops from the lowest condition to the highest one, then at once there a questions arises: "Is there such an order in the nature that would allow to say: here is the initial law, and all the others are its consequence?" How then to select this basic initial fundamental law that to remove all the remaining from it? How to combine a chain of the laws in order to observe the process of construction of Geneses sequentially and logically? It is clear that the initial fundamental law that is an index point of counting cannot be selected arbitrarily. The initial conditions of Geneses should be argued strictly physically and mathematically. If someone wants to tell about the origin of Geneses without physical and mathematical vehicle, it is just chatter. By describing the Unified picture of Geneses, it is necessary to confirm each word with the formula, equation, law. How have the scientists begun to study the World? In the beginning, they studied a macro world. Thus, they began to use the illusionary models. Then, when they have penetrated into micro cosmos, they were surprised by its impossibility from a position of simple vivid logic. They began to accuse the nature of paradoxical behavior. However, Nature and the laws of the Nature are not paradoxical. The thinking of the man who is not understanding the device of a Nature can be paradoxical only. Therefore, it would be right to begin to study the Nature "from the other end" - from micro cosmos, from the initial conditions of the origin of life. These conditions should be simple. Then systematic, "step-by-step", logically to observe the further development of the Nature. Such schedule of analysis of the nature is good by the fact that the critical wisdom of the Person can find out at once violation of logic. This book is constructed just according to this scheme. Let the one having reason understand.

Guestbook.

Name: URL: Email: Location: Comments: