As a student attending a scientific logic lecture during my youth, the class was being taught the folly of arguing from the particular to the general. The example set was about this cat with four legs that lived in the university, never going outside it. This was exactly the same situation as a table also with its four legs, the argument being that the cat was a table. I began to mentally change cat and table into highly technical terms to confuse the thinker and blurted out a physics concept, which I thought was illogical. For my brilliant interruption I was told to leave the class and report to the vice chancellor. Fifty-five years later I am able to make my point with a vengeance, having secretly sulked for over half a century for suffering such humiliation, imposed by a professor that I considered rather a dull sort of fellow.

Unbeknown to most scientists in the world, Sir Isaac Newton did not go along with the old wive’s tale about mechanical gravity causing an apple to fall on his head. A proof is now required to explain this. It is taken from Query number 28 in the second edition of Newton’s famous journal Opticks, discussing the nature of gravity acting through a mechanical medium.. It reads as follows:

‘And for rejecting such a medium, we have the authority of those the oldest and most celebrated philosophers of ancient Greece and Phoenicia who made a vacuum of atoms and the gravity of atoms the first principles of their philosophy, tacitly attributing gravity to some other cause than dense matter. Later philosophers banish the consideration of such cause, feigning hypothesis for explaining all thing mechanically. The main business of natural philosophy is to argue from phenomena without feigning hypotheses, and to deduce causes from effects till we come to the very first cause, which certainly is not mechanical’. Newton was obviously searching for a first cause generalisation because he knew that only nonsense science can eventuate if anyone deduces by not following the logic rule of arguing from the general to the particular.

The earliest known mythological-mathematical writings in the world were in the ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts. Their ethic ethos was used by the Greeks to invent the ‘Science for ethical ends,’ as a first case cause to explain gravity. Anaxagoras’ used the prime cause of emotion to deduce a theory of creation, which for some two hundred years, the Platonic tradition of Greek philosophy used to eventually invent original Western science. If that science was logical then Eistein’s quantum mechanics must be nonsense. Because of quantum mechanic’s genius complexity, it is almost impossible to detect the illogical use of arguing stupidly from the particular to the general within its structure. This is such a crucial human survival observation in the history of science, that attempts must be made to make it known to the general public in the simplest, most obvious manner possible, hence this article.

The ancient Egyptian demi-urge to cast sperm into the cosmic egg is a feeling phenomenon used to describe ancient Geek gravity. Therefore, we can add further to Descartes’ famous statement, ‘I think therefore I am’, whichwas absolutely crucial to the mechanical word-view, later established by Einstein’s quantum mechanics. We now have, ‘I feel and think, therefore I am’ as a new base from which to define the scientic world-view.

Einstein’s quantum mechanical steam engine logic, governing all of mainstream science, is certainly correct for the functioning of steam engines, but it is utter nonsense to insist that it governs human evolution, forcing it to an inevitable extinction. A steam engine wears out due to friction, but electromagnetic friction pleasure is the very thing that creates life in the first place, extending its evolutionary purpose into the future. Mathematically, the infinite fractal logic for life is the very opposite of the mathematical logic governing our nonsensical mechanical science of life. Yesteryear, this idea might well be a way of referring to a steam engine lacking an immortal soul, today quantum biologists might refer to steam engine energy lacking entanglement with the information energy of an evolving holographic universe.

In 2002 Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the Royal Danish Consulate held an international symposium to tell the world of the importance of the 19th Century’s electromagnetic Golden Age of Danish Science This Golden Age was invisible to mainstream science because most of its theories were written in Danish and were not translated otherwise. In general, scholars are not aware of the social importance of this Golden Age of Danish science, nor its association with Immanuel Kant’s electromagnetic God-like ethic for perpetual peace on earth. However, mainstream scientific logic cannot possibly grasp it’s social significance unless it first gets the fundamental message contained in this article.

One of the great hero’s of the electromagnet Golden Age was the scientist philosopher Friedrich Schelling who changed the physics principle governing the existence of the Immanuel Kant’s space-time electromagnetic ethic. A much needed human survival supra-technology can be deduced from that modification. The prime cause principle used by Shelling was the same one that Newton wrote about to complete the mechanical description of the universe within his Heresy Papers. These were published by Cambridge University in 1962 and later referred to as the work of a criminally insane Isaac Newton. The stupidity of that remark is that Newton was certainly not a lunatic when he wrote Query 28 in the second edition of his internationally revered work of genius, the journal Opticks, which completely endorses his more profound philosophy branded as insane.

In writing a scientific article one does not behave badly to one’s constantly strident critics,who for over a period of fifty years, were incensed by anyone referring to their quantum mechanics theories as nonsense. If one explains that their work becomes logical when entangled with quantum biology. then they might begin to work out how to construct the simple supra-technology associated with electromagnetic first physics principle ethics. In reflection, over all those years, I wish them to have a happy day, as I no longer wish to sulk over being told to leave the room by a hysterical professor who could not discuss the scientific difference between a four legged cat and a four legged table.

© Professor Robert Pope,

Advisor to the President Oceania and Australasia of the Institute for Theoretical Physics and Advanced Mathematics (IFM) Einstein-Galilei

Leave a Reply