IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Science in the News [same thing updated]

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Wed Jan 26 01:40:01 EST 2000

one of these days, i'll be happy to find myself caring to reread what i've
written before i post it. CORRECTIONS below.

kenneth Collins wrote:

> the "Science Times" section of today's (25Jan2000) _New York Times_ is worth
> immesurably-more than the $1.00 cost of the issue of the paper, so if you
> can track down a copy, buy it and give it a read.
> i'll comment, here, on copule of articles.
> first, with respect to "Physicist Ponders God, Truth and 'a Final Theory'",
> by J. Glanz, pD1, my comments can be read as an open letter to Dr. Weinberg,
> who recently (quoting from the NYT article) "received the Lewis Thomas
> Prize, awarded to the researcher who best embodies 'the scientist as poet.'"
> Lewis Thomas is one of my Heroes, so, good for you, Dr. Weinberg. i assure
> you, reason can explain how 'music' and 'poetry' move the 'spirit', and i
> hope you'll be interested in finding out about such.
> quoting from the NYT article, pD1: "[...] Dr. Weinberg saw that the same
> equations could describe the [electromagnetic and weak nuclear] interactions
> if a kind of energy, called a scalar field, permeated all of space. The
> field would in effect nudge the interactions in different directions, so
> that the underlying symmetry of the equations was broken, or hidden."
> it was only when i read this passage, today, that i gained an understanding
> of what a "scalar field" is, which gave me a smile because Tapered Harmony
> (TH) has incorporated a seemingly-similar concept all along, the "Universal
> Energy Supply" (UES). i've briefly discussed the UES in prior msgs.
> but no 'scalar fields' exist in nature. all energy flows [continuously], so
> all
> representations of energy have to be represented vectorially.
> in my recent work in TH, i've seen that all "dimensions" (stuff like
> "Joules", "ergs", "MEv", "Watts", "volts", "time", etc. (all of them)),
> orher than the 3 spatial dimensions are =superfluous=, if an 'abstract'
> dimension that cross-correlates energy-content at every 'point' in space is
> invoked.

> in doing things this way (which, as i've been discussing for years, is NDT's
> post-AoK position), as the abstract, cross-correlation 'dimension' is applied
> to 3-D space, all energy is represented as continuous gradients in 3-D space,
> which makes everything much more simple than has been the case.

NDT's pre-AoK, and the position described in AoK, are almost the same. as i've
discussed in the past, the only difference is that, in the post-AoK synthesis,
what's been referred to as 'time' has been eliminated as a dimension.

> of course, attaining this useful simplicity requires the rest of TH, in
> which what's been referred to as "gravity" has been integrated for most of
> the last decade, and in which what have been referred to as "atoms" are
> integrated as harmonic interactions of energy that is "trapped" in [...]
> interaction with the UES, also be invoked.
> before continuing, i'll quote from near the end of the NYT article, pD2:
> "And then there are [Dr. Weinberg's] pronouncements on religion and deism,
> including his much-quoted aphorism, 'The more the universe seems
> comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless.'"
> Precisely-Correct :-)
> the Universe is an energy =continuum= in which nothing "point"-like (that
> is, [nothing like] so-called "particles") exists, which has been TH's position
> all along.
> now, on[ ]to a sorrowful matter. quoting from the NYT article, pD2: "Today,
> one
> of [Dr. Weinberg's] major battles is with postmodernist thinkers and
> philosophers of science who maintain that scientific theories reflect not
> objective reality but social negotiations among scientists. In its rawest
> form, this philosophy would say that the theories of the most persuasive or
> politically powerful scientists become accepted fact."
> i'm sorry, Dr. Weinberg, your thesis, [implicit in what is] reported in what's
> quoted above, is flat-out indefensible. it ignores almost all of what's in the
> History of
> Science, in which stuff like the work of Copernicus and Newton is "denied",
> by this or that scientific in-group, for a century, or more.
> it's always been the case, not only in Science, but in all things Human,
> that the work of the one who comes up with the "new" synthesis has been
> 'ostracized' by the folks who 'hold-power' in this or that field of
> endeavor.

the degree of such ostracization has always been proportional to the size and
scope of the 'new' synthesis. relatively-small 'newness' tends to be welcomed
be-cause, as is explained in AoK, Ap5, relatively-small novelty activates the
biological reward mechanisms.

> how and why this sort of things has occurred ubiquitously within Human
> affairs is explained in NDT (Neuroscientific Duality Theory). it occurs
> be-cause 'learning' is founded in the energy-flow local to individual
> nervous systems (brains). that is, all 'learning' is activation-dependent.
> because all 'learning' is activation-dependent, in the absence of
> understanding of how nervous systems process-information individual nervous
> systems tend, strongly, to be 'blind' to anything that's transpired outside
> of their individually-unique experience.
> the result is that which is referred to as "prejudice", and it wreaks havoc
> within the full spectrum of Human affairs, whether on the parts of folks
> who've experienced this or that 'religion' or 'political' view, relatively
> exclusively, or on the part of folks who'd Dictate 'political' and
> 'societal' matters in order to 'preserve' the things with which they've
> become 'familiar', on the parts of 'profit-seekers' who Dictate that which
> their 'fellow' Humans will be allowed to know, so as to preserve their
> 'abilities' to 'seek-profits', and on the parts of Physics Professionals who
> actively Censor work that's been done by folks who are outside of their
> group. (if you doubt, Dr. Weinberg, i'll not be 'happy' to do so, but i can
> provide you with more-than-sufficient examples of the last, and more general
> examples than i've left 'time' in my life to speak, even if i do nothing
> else.)
> the examples of how 'prejudice' has inflicted tragedy within Human affairs
> are myriad, but they all reduce to the Same-Stuff: the fact that the way
> that nervous systems process-information, in an activation-dependent way [was
> not generally comprehended].
> Dr. Weinberg addresses such while being quoted in the NYT article, pD2: "As
> for conventional religion, though, his views are uncompromising: it is not
> only silly but damaging to human civilization. 'The whole history of the
> last thousand years has been a history of religious persecutions and wars,
> pogroms, jihads, crusades,' [Dr. Weinberg] said. 'I find it all very
> regrettable, to say the least.'"
> if one only looks-and-sees, one sees, clearly, that Jesus agrees.
> the 'problem' has been that 'religion', like =all= other Human endeavor that
> has occurred in an absence of understanding of how nervous systems
> process-information, has tended to be the Same-Stuff that derives, not in
> anything of God, but in the merely-familiar stuff that's converged upon
> within the activation-dependent neural information-processing dynamics of
> nervous systems.
> and if anyone only endeavors to escape the 'tyranny' of their own
> activation-dependent neural information-processing, by ranging-widely, while
> daring to study the Teaching of Jesus, they will see that Jesus Understood
> all of this stuff, and Taught with specific respect to it.
> that 'religion' strays from what Jesus Taught is the fault of Ignorance,
> perpetuated, as above, in the activation-dependent neural
> information-processing that derives in individual experience that knows
> very-little of Jesus.
> which, forgive me, please, Dr. Weinberg, is what you do when you correctly
> 'bemoan' the tragedy that Ignorance has inflicted upon Humanity, while,
> simultaneously, ignoring the Solution that's been-there for 2000 years.

it's  a 'simple' matter of being Forthright with respect to Priority, with
respect to which all who do Science are Bound by Honor.

> just more 'prejudice' toward that which has become 'familiar', via the
> activation-dependent neural information-processing of a b[r]ain that 'thinks'
> that the neural activation that's occurred within it is all there is in the
> Universe.
> forgive me again, Dr. Weinberg, but if you don't want to work toward the
> solution, you should, at least, temper your 'criticism' with respect to that
> with respect to which you obviously remain ignorant.
> K. P. Collins (with 'heart' aching because of the necessity of what's above)
> the other article that appeared in the "Science Times" section of today's
> _New York Times_ that i will comment, briefly, on is, "Russian Plutonium
> Research Raises Nuclear Questions", reported by W. J. Broad, pD2.
> the plutonium instability stuff that is discussed in this article is
> very-serious, but it's =not= the stuff that prompted me to ask that i be
> allowed to brief National Security folks.
> the the stuff of my request is much-more serious.
> it is that, because of the work i've done trying to win a hearing for NDT's
> stuff, all over the 'place', folks've gotten an overly-simplified,
> incomplete, 'picture' of NDT's stuff.
> as i've discussed repeatedly in the past, such incomplete understanding of
> NDT's stuff is the most-Dangerous stuff imaginable, because it tends to
> induce folks to 'take-action' without their being able to comprehend the
> consequences that will, =necessarily=, follow from their having
> 'taken-action'.
> i expect that most folks cannot see such, but dynamics correlated explicitly
> with incomplete understanding of NDT's stuff are unfolding all over the
> 'place'. An example is the 'stalling' of the Mid-East Peace process.
> try to see things from my perspective. NDT's understanding stands-against
> the dynamics that have raveged Humanity since the beginning. because of
> that, i had to work to get the understanding communicated.
> but because my efforts have been 'thwarted' in almost every imaginable way,
> the result is that folks all over the place have acquired incomplete
> understanding.
> i've discussed, in the past, why such is Dangerous. incomplete understanding
> tends to induce folks to go into the 'zone of randomness' (AoK, Ap4) without
> the ability to find their ways out. when such happens, folks tend strongly
> to 'go-amygdalar', inflicting savagery upon others.
> quoting discussion by Dr. S. S. Hecker, from the NYT article: "'We're doing
> what no foreign nation could do to us', [Dr. Hecker] rued. 'We're crippling
> ourselves.'"
> folks should =not= think they're 'using NDT's understanding' in their
> decision-making processes until they receive =all= of NDT's understanding,
> when, if, the 'Censors' ever allow the understanding to be communicated.
> K. P. Collins

if anyone 'wonders' all of the effort that's gone into my 'funny style' has been
my attempt to deal, simultaneously, with the need to get NDT's understanding
communicated, and the need to prevent folks from 'flying off the handle' because
they'd wandered into the 'zone of randomness' without having, first, acquired
complete understanding of NDT's stuff.

it's been 'difficult', and i'm really 'worn-down' by the effort, but the way
i've worked derives in the unavoidable Obligation that comes with the

in light of the necessity of it, the fact that no one will meet with me to
discuss NDT's stuff has been hell-on-Earth stuff.

for goodness' sake, it's old long since that it's been obvious that, if there
was anything that could be 'held against' NDT's stuff, some 'gun-slinger' type
would've stepped-up to claim the 'prize' that would've been inherent.

that no one has done so speaks volumes.

how much longer will the 'charade' that slaughters Innocents be allowed to

K. P. Collins

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net