The stream of philosophy from Heraclitus through Democritus, Leucippus, Epicurus, Spinoza to Hegel; biology since Darwin and Engels; physics after the recognition of the revolutionary quantum phenomena; have collectively established the fact that any existence (at all) ranging from the quantum to the cosmic, in the infinite, eternal and ever-changing universe, is mediated by dialectical chance and necessity. Chance is blind only when not realized in a necessity and necessity is barren only when not fertilized by a chance.

The deterministic cause with a definitive effect leading to the mystery of a “First Cause” of metaphysics – the pabulum on which official science nourishes itself; is valid only within the very limited sphere of the practical necessity of life (even in its most primitive form) and of human social/historical practice and needs; which have given rise to the good old common-sense of everyday life experience; acted as the epistemology of official science and created the myths as the ruling ideas in class societies.

Official science has become an essential part of the economic assembly line, since about 120 years; the modern consumer (client) was also created by the advent of the assembly line.

This monopolization of knowledge for (re) production and life implies also the unconscious, i.e. a collection of knowledge and imagery that every person is born with and is shared by all human beings due to ancestral experience, in the understanding of CG Jung.

Like an iceberg, the most important part of the mind is the part you cannot see. Our feelings, motives and decisions are actually powerfully influenced by our past experiences, and stored in the unconscious.

——-—

Only a few individuals succeed in throwing off mythology in a time of a certain intellectual supremacy--the mass never frees itself.

Carl Gustav Jung, Beatrice M. Hinkle (2003). “Psychology of the Unconscious”, p.30, Courier Corporation

——————————-—

Imo, the advent of the Information Age is already eroding the economic assembly line model of science and life, because new production models and methods are emerging, with respect to a next generation economic system.

H Chris Ransford : Thanks for raising the important issue of Nobel Awards in this discussion. In fact, the Nobel Committee and the Vatican have become respectively, the (most forceful and effective) cultural and moral apologists of monopoly capitalism, as the primary authority and guardians; offering benediction on the myths of official theoretical physics and cosmology. Please see the following RG question:

“How Noble Is the Nobel Physics Award?”

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_Noble_Is_the_Nobel_Physics_Award

And the following press reports: On the Influence of Big Money and Theology on "Big Science":

The British newspaper, "The Guardian" report: The MIT-Epstein debacle shows ‘the prostitution of intellectual activity’. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/07/jeffrey-epstein-mit-funding-tech-intellectuals

BBC reports:

Big Bang and religion mixed in Cern debate

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-19870036

Big Bang: Is there room for God?

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-19997789

More on how Big Money, Beauties, "Big Minds" and Big Science converge:

https://www.edge.org/conversation/lawrence_m_krauss-the-energy-of-empty-space-that-isnt-zero

https://slate.com/technology/2019/08/jeffrey-epstein-science-eugenics-sexual-abuse-researchers.html

Dear Abdul Malek ,

We haven't spoken to each other in a long time. The text connected to your question:' How Scientific Is Modern Official “Theoretical Science” (of Nature and Man)?' very nice logically and literary formulated text.

But a bit utopic-idealistic, because society is made up in the following way the largest part (approx. 80-90 %) is made up of the rather low-educated masses (including the poorest class, even the well-to-do) a smaller part is the leading class, which are well-educated... Your writing, only with this can be brought into contact with an educated layer, with those who are interested in the questions you raised... Most of them have an incorrect perception of the objective world, thanks to the fact that they received an education that has become more and more distant from reality in the last 200-300 years.

I would like to know what you mean by this expression:

'The most fundamental essence of humanity is to strive towards "the freedom of the will", based on real knowledge of the world and of itself– a subjectivity and the dialectical unity of the opposites of the objectivity of blind Nature (and as a part of Nature itself); in this infinite, eternal and ever-changing universe.'

Let see in parts:

'The most fundamental essence of humanity is to strive towards "the freedom of the will" is '(same like the case of animal desire: to exist without financial problems in a balanced society and and reproduce.) 'based on real knowledge of the world itself' (very few people in society are capable of this) - 'a subjectivity and the dialectical unity of the opposites of the objectivity of blind Nature '(a subjectivity and the disharmonic, dialectical unity of the opposites of the objectivity of blind Nature) '(and as a part of Nature itself); in this infinite, eternal and ever-changing universe.')

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear László Attila Horváth : Thanks for your interest in this question and for your contribution to it. As I see it, a response to your comment can take two forms. One, a short and superficial one and another a long and substantial one. For lack of time, I will go for the former version, at this time and hope that others following this forum will add some more.

The first part of your comment questioning the value of my work; which presumably will be irrelevant to the vast majority of the intended audience, because of the condition of their existence and that a small fraction of the elite who are capable of reacting would (consciously or unconsciously) not care about something that goes against their narrow and short-term interest; indeed, has some truth.

But my counter question would be, do you want things to be this way? I must point out that (as Engels did in the booklet refereed to in the introduction above), it is not only that labour created all wealth ("value") that Adam Smith realized; that the “surplus value” of the working-class labour, enriched the modern capitalist class, which Marx discovered; but more importantly, man created himself (as Engels asserted) through his labour! The transition from ape to man came because of the evolutionary leap in the subjectivity of man, which was achieved through labour (both physical and mental)! So, all the productive forces of modern civilization, everything including the elite class, you, me etc., are nothing but the products of collective human labour as the historically evolved mighty force; including those of primitive men, savages, slaves etc., up to now, “the rather low-educated masses” of the present time as you say! The alienated elite – your “smaller part of the leading class”; more often than not, only had parasitic existence, and with their myth-making, education, culture, comfort etc., acted as the obstacle to the development of the productive forces of humanity and still does; in the most pervasive, monstrous and efficient way than the old times!

Do you not want to give the productive forces more freedom to develop further, progressively through history; to attain relatively better “freedom of the will” and to act with better judgments for their own good? Only this way, men’s subjectivity can progressively and dialectically reduce the contradiction with Nature and within themselves; which came into force following the chemical origin and the evolution of life. Subjective life (even in its most primitive form) evolved in contradiction against objective and blind Nature and by gaining increasing mastery over Nature for its growth. Men, during their historical evolution, did once live in relative harmony with objective (lifeless) Nature and within themselves during primitive communistic societies; but at a very low level of positive knowledge and primitive condition of existence. Total mastery over Nature, with the vast increase in the potential of the creative and productive ability and the "freedom of the will"; now forces men (for their own continued existence) to live in relative harmony with themselves and with objective Nature. like before; but at a vastly higher level of positive knowledge of himself and of the objective world; than the primitive communistic societies! And who else other than labouring man (the creative force) can achieve it! As Karl Marx said, “The philosophers (the elite) have interpreted the world, in various ways; the point however is to change it”.

There is nothing “utopic-idealistic” in what is said above; it is just a conscious and conscientious recount of historical evolution of man, his mind and his thought; based on the objective and positive knowledge of historical developments. May be Frederick Engels could state it in a more passionate and articulate way than me: “… however many millions of suns and earths may arise and pass away, however long it may last before the conditions for organic life develop, however innumerable the organic beings that have to arise and pass away before animals with a brain capable of thought are developed from their midst, and for a short span of time find conditions suitable for life, only to be exterminated later without mercy, we have the certainty that matter remains eternally the same in all its transformations, that none of its attributes can ever be lost, and therefore also, that with the same iron necessity that it will exterminate on the earth its highest creation, the thinking mind, it must somewhere else and at another time again produce it.” F. Engels, “Dialectics of Nature”.

For a more direct example for the relevance of my works, please see the reader's comments near the bottom of the page of the following Internet link:

https://www.amazon.ca/Dialectical-Universe-Some-Reflections-Cosmology/dp/9840414445

Best regards,

Abdul

Stephen I. Ternyik > “Like an iceberg, the most important part of the mind is the part you cannot see. Our feelings, motives and decisions are actually powerfully influenced by our past experiences, and stored in the unconscious”.

With my research publications and comments on theoretical physics and cosmology, I am trying to give a practical demonstration of the relevance of the above statement and of the acute validity of following assertion by Karl Marx, in “German Ideology”: “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, consequently also controls the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are on the whole subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relations, the dominant material relations grasped as ideas; hence of the relations, which make one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. … ”

I wanted to show how the Copernican revolution in Europe; one of the greatest revolutions in human history that freed Europe from medieval despotism and led to the great scientific revolution (brilliantly described by Engels in the introduction of “Dialectics of Nature”); was subverted (within about two hundred years) at the behest of the newly emerging capitalist class; through the inductive metaphysics of Isaac Newton – the so-called father of modern natural science! And how with his subjective mathematical/logical scholasticism (thought experiments), Albert Einstein (subverted the implications of the discovery of the revolutionary quantum phenomena) and solidified Newtonian metaphysics into the ethereal ruling idea of theoretical physics and cosmology. Thus Newton’s deceptive declaration, “Physics, beware of metaphysics”, in practice was turned to its opposite! It was for nothing that Hegel rejected the Principia's 'proofs' of Kepler's laws - proofs which he characterized as "demonstrational jugglery and counterfeiting" and Frederick Engels called Newton an “Inductive Ass”!

With their inductive method of transferring their model beyond everyday life experience of good old common-sense, to totally different realms, only with the help of their subjective and reductionist mathematical/logical categories; both Newton and Einstein led physics (and generations of “physicists” indoctrinated by official science) to catastrophic ignorance, fantasy and endless and impotent scholasticism that we see even in these pages of RG.

Let’s take a simple example. It is common knowledge that anything above the surface of the earth (an apple on a tree) falls to the surface due to “universal gravitational attraction” of Newton. Galileo already (through experiment) gave a quantitative relation of this “free fall” of a test object, in terms of length (L) covered in time (t) as L/t^2. But beyond terrestrial Nature, in the case of the solar system, Kepler (with the help of the long and tedious empirical work of Tycho Brahe); found that the motion of a test object around the sun follows an elliptical path and the quantitative relation of motion is not L/t^2 that Galileo found on earth, but is given by L^3/t^2. The ratio of the two L^2 means that the induction of terrestrial gravity to the extra-terrestrial case is wrong, which means that there is a dialectical contradiction in the gravitational force. It is not only attractive but there is also a repulsive force designated by Leibniz as the centrifugal force; giving rise to the non-uniform motion of the elliptical orbit of Kepler! Leibniz called the centrifugal force vis viva and gave a quantitative relation of that motion, which (and not Newton’s equation) is now used in practice in space exploration.

But that was not to be! God’s creation must be perfect circular orbits for the planets as Ptolemy thought ; and perfect mathematics must be the language of physics as Greek idealism asserted. So, Newton’s Induction must be right and Leibniz’s centrifugal force is just an illusion and remains an illusion till now! The dominant world economic power England, the Church and the Royal Society (of which Newton himself was the President) settled the dispute in favour of Newton and the rest is history. It was made out that the discrepancy in Kepler’s relation can be corrected (ignored) with the a perfect mathematical model (of a circular orbit) and a First Impulse from God ; in other words metaphysics ; just the opposite of “Hypotheses non fingo”. Einstein’s general relativity (as a supplement of “Newton’s universal gravitational attraction“) was similarly and subjectively established with exact 10% accuracy by Arthur Eddington - the scientific representative of the same dominant economic power – an exercise that Stephen Hawking said, “the results they wanted to get“! (A Brief History of Time).

Please see:

"KEPLER -NEWTON -LEIBNIZ -HEGEL Portentous and Conflicting Legacies in Theoretical Physics, Cosmology and in Ruling Ideas".

Article KEPLER -NEWTON -LEIBNIZ -HEGEL Portentous and Conflicting Le...

"The Mystery of the Lorentz Transform: A Reconstruction and Its Implications for Einstein's Theories of Relativity and cosmology". Article The Mystery of the Lorentz Transform: A Reconstruction and I...

Cosmology since then got its wings of fantasy, on which now every Tom, Dick, Harry and Mary can be endlessly preoccupied by adding and arguing in favour of their own innovation, modification or new additions (like the priests in medieval scholasticism) in the universities (churches) and capitalism can happily live ever after!

So, the boastful proclamation of our theoretical scientists that they do not care about politics or philosophy, but are “objective” and devout themselves in pursuit of objective truth; is nothing but conscious or unconscious delusions. Gone are the days of the free thinkers, the passionate and creative giants who pursued their profession for the mere thirst of knowledge under the most severe conditions and more often under the threat of persecution and death. They are now replaced by troops of conformed scientist serfs (a term borrowed from the Bengali poet Rabindranath Tagore) who are totally dependent on monopoly capital for their livelihood, career and crafts and who toil mightily to bring out only expected and acceptable results.

The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, consequently also controls the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are on the whole subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relations, the dominant material relations grasped as ideas; hence of the relations, which make one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance…

Imo, my dear Abdul Malek , this is a true statement=Charly ( the prophet from Trier) was right.

However, we cannot force the objective logic of history.

In the meantime, we have to be patient and study.

———-—

Bourgeois scientists make sure that their theories are not dangerous to God or Capital.   Georgi Plekhanov

The real scientist is ready to bear privation and, if need be, starvation rather than let anyone dictate to him which direction his work must take.

Albert Szent-Gyorgyi

Stephen I. Ternyik> " this is a true statement=Charly ( the prophet from Trier) was right."

It would be a great injustice and even an offence to Marx to call him a “prophet” and an absolute misreading of his science! This will only give fuel to the efforts of the ideologues of all kinds to drag a scientist Marx down to their level of fundamentalism!

Marx and Engels consciously avoided saying anything of substance about the future; even their vision of future communist society, based on the collective ownership of the means of production; was based on the primitive communistic societies; but only as a dialectical process without any definitive end or a perfection in the future! As the world (objective reality) as a process (for dialectics) can never come to an end, so is human knowledge (a reflection of objective reality), incapable of knowing any final, absolute etc., truth of the world! It is only the foolish preoccupation and the aim of causality-based metaphysics - i.e., theology and modern theoretical physics, hunting for a "theory of everything"!

For Engels for example, “Mankind therefore finds itself faced with a contradiction; on the one hand, it has to gain an exhaustive knowledge of the world system in all in its interrelations; and on the other hand, because of the nature both of man and of the world system, this task can never be completely fulfilled. But this contradiction lies not only in the nature of the two factors – the world, and man – it is also the main lever of all intellectual advance, and finds its solution continuously, day by day, in the endless progressive evolution of humanity just as for example mathematical problems find their solution in an infinite series or continued fractionations. Each mental image of the world system is and remains in actual fact limited, objectively through the historical stage and subjectively through the physical and mental constitution of its maker”. ( Frederick Engels, Anti-Dühring)

It is the nature of dialectics as an epistemology (in opposition to crude classical mechanistic view and idealist mathematics that arose from it) that it can deal only with what has happened already. A dialectical process is always mediated by chance and necessity and can never predict the future or a fixed ideal state, even in principle! A dialectical process can end only by the two opposites of a contradiction simultaneously going out of existence; since any existence is a dialectical contradiction.

Even idealist Hegel, who as the official philosopher of the Prussian monarchy had to create a convenient “system” as a ruling idea; by bringing his dialectics to an end, in his “Absolute Idea” and against the essence of his dialectics; wrote the following about the relation of the REAL and the IDEAL (that one can predict of the future): “Philosophy, as the thought of the world, does not appear until reality has completed its formative process, and made itself ready. History thus corroborates the teaching of the conception that only in the maturity of reality does the ideal appear as counterpart to the real, apprehends the real world in its substance, and shapes it into an intellectual kingdom. When philosophy paints its grey in grey, one form of life has become old, and by means of grey it cannot be rejuvenated, but only known. The owl of Minerva takes its flight only when the shades of night are gathering”. G.W.F. Hegel, Philosophy of Right (1820), "Preface"; translated by S W Dyde, 1896

Please see the following article:

"The Infinite - As a Hegelian Philosophical Category and Its Implication for Modern Theoretical Natural Science": Article The Infinite - As a Hegelian Philosophical Category and Its ...

Imo, KM definitely shows the traits of a Hebrew Bible prophet, dear Abdul Malek

His maternal grandfather was a Dutch rabbi, while his paternal line had supplied Trier's rabbis since 1723, a role taken by his grandfather Meier Halevi Marx.

He prophesied the transition from an industrialised to a financial society, the passage from wealth created by entrepreneurial production to wealth accumulated through `finance capitalism.” Furthermore, Marx predicted the middle classes and businesses would dissolve in the wake of finance-capitalism, and this too has become a reality only in our times. With the emergence of the financialised economy, ownership and production are separated — in contrast to entrepreneurial capitalism, where individual producers own privately; the paradoxical consequence is that the capitalist mode of production goes through the annihilation of private capitalist industry. The place of the capitalist producer is taken by the financial speculator, and while the former risked his own money and accumulated capital, the latter risks the wealth of others and expects others to save on his behalf. In this sense, true science is necessarily prophetic, so truly so, that the power of prophecy is the test, the infallible criterion, by which any presumed science is ascertained to be factually science. Consequently, I see a clear secular intersection between science and prophecy.

All sciences originated among the sons of Israel, the reason being the existence of prophecy among them, which made their perfection in the sciences amazing.

Averroes

Science has not yet mastered prophecy. We predict too much for the next year and yet far too little for the next 10.

Neil Armstrong.

Stephen I. Ternyik : I respect your views on Marx and your research on his ancestry ; but I very strongly disagree with your assertion that he, ”definitely shows the traits of a Hebrew Bible prophet”!

The tendency towards the concentration of capital or monopolization was already apparent at Marx's time, specially in the fastest growing economies of the US and UK, as Marx showed in his writings (including as a reporter of the ”New York Herald Tribune”), based on the statistical reports of these two countries. It is a scientific fact that in an uncontrolled isolated system (like a physical or a thermodynamic one), the uniformity of the properties of the constituents can never be maintained but undergoes statistical stratification, like Gaussian distribution. Just consider the variation in the kinetic energy of the individual molecules in steam, liquid water and ice as the temperature is gradually lowered from 100 to 0 degree. The extent in the variation of the property of individual constituents is proportional to the extent of order (regulation) against chaos. So, it was from the evidence-based economic and scientific consideration and not from the power of a prophet that Marx speculated about the eventual monopolization of capitalism. This is the very reason why the spontaneous and unregulated primitive communist societies broke up in the historical development of humanity! I hope that someone following this discussion and with better knowledge of Marx's economic writings (than me) can tell us more about this issue!

Marx’s religious Jewish heritage does not mean that he was influenced by religion in his scientific work. The Zionist supremacists denounce Marx as ”a self-hating Jew”! Marx was a scientist in the strict sense of the term, atheism was a part of his scientific stance. Marx's atheism was not like the bombastic charlatan atheists like Richard Dawkins ; who is involved in a crusade against God, but traces his ”science” back (in a deterministic way) to the Big Bang Creation by God!

This is what Marx had to say about religion, ”Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions”. Karl Marx, "A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right".

Dear Abdul Malek , I see a clear secular intersection between science and prophecy as already mentioned. Am not able to understand the line of your arguments:

neither your reference or attribution to the failure of 'real existing socialism' nor to your calling for experts (?) on Marx's economic writings or your disconent with religion per se.

KM proposed testable explanations of empirical phenomena, that is science.

I am not willing or motivated at all to convince you about the vital element of prophecy in science.

Stephen I. Ternyik > “I am not willing or motivated at all to convince you about the vital element of prophecy in science”.

I am sorry to say that this absolutely is a false notion and is behind the usurpation of theoretical physics and cosmology by monopoly capitalism and theology and also, mostly the cause of crisis in modern theoretical natural science and cosmology!

This prophecy of “testable prediction”, the so-called falsifiability of theory etc. was the unholy trick invented by the science Guru (and an opportunist of a philosopher) Karl Popper - a turncoat “Marxist” to give benediction on the esoteric theories of physics that popped up after theoretical physics was in turmoil with the discovery of the quantum phenomena and the breakdown of much venerated causality. Official physics is using this trick (and in the name of a “Marxist”) with impunity to validate their unholy ruling ideas!

An esoteric theory (like the existence of God) can never be “scientifically” falsified, because it has nothing to do with reality. Also, only the ruling authority have the resources to “test” an esoteric prediction of something beyond human tangible experience and practice; such as the macrocosm and the microcosm. What is more, one can add new parameters to an esoteric theory as need arise to make it valid for ever!

Einstein’s general relativity is being "proved" for over a century and in numerous ways, many times and every test (according to the scientists) “proved this theory with flying colours”! But still more “proofs” are necessary and continuously planned! Why? Did the theories of classical physics need even a single “proof” to validate them? Those theories arose out of practice or accidental discovery during practice and are “proved” millions of times each hour through (technological) practice of men in their everyday life!

Positive knowledge of objective reality never comes from “testable prediction” or from thought of men, but only from their social/historical practice, technology etc., that men gained after they separated themselves from the animal kingdom through labour! “The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth -- i.e. the reality and power, the this-sidedness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking that is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question”. K.Marx. Theses on Feuerbach.

The crisis in modern physics – is a repeat of what David Hume and Emmanuel Kant faced in philosophy. Kant saved causality in philosophy by (honestly) denying knowledge of objective reality and by taking resort to brain-cooked “subjective logical categories” that he imposed on reality. Following Kant; Einstein and Co., try to save causality in physics by imposing their similarly brain-cooked “thought experiments” and “ideal mathematical categories” on objective reality. These are passed off and “proved” as the laws of reality by using deceptive, contrived or even false claims, inspired by the lure of fame, fortune and funds; by monopoly capitalism!

Please see my comments above and in other RG forums, particularly the following one: "Is the modern approach to cosmology fundamentally flawed?"

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-the-modern-approach-to-cosmology-fundamentally-flawed

"Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation is Challenged by Controversial New Astrophysics Discovery"

https://thedebrief.org/newtons-law-of-universal-gravitation-is-challenged-by-controversial-new-astrophysics-discovery/

Please note: It was challenged long ago, by the dialectical physics of Leibniz, then by Hegel and much later by the astrophysicists Victor Ambartsumian and Halton (Chip) Arp; from the studies of the "open star clusters" and the redshifts of the quasars, respectively!

"Ambartsumian, Arp and the Breeding Galaxies":

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V12NO2PDF/V12N2MAL.pdf

And now by Abdul Malek :

"KEPLER -NEWTON -LEIBNIZ -HEGEL Portentous and Conflicting Legacies in Theoretical Physics, Cosmology and in Ruling Ideas":

Article KEPLER -NEWTON -LEIBNIZ -HEGEL Portentous and Conflicting Le...

No one so far even in RG, including a Nobel Laureate in theoretical physics, showed the temerity to counter this challenge!

Hi there Abdul,

this is very interesting: Which physics Nobel laureate do you mean, who - as you put it - didn't show the "temerity" to counter this challenge?

Thanks,

Julius

Julius Riese > "Which physics Nobel laureate do you mean, who - as you put it - didn't show the "temerity" to counter this challenge?"

Hi Julius, I welcome to this forum on behalf of all others. But I am sorry to say that it would be unethical and against my cultural values, to directly identify a person and name him/her in public about such an unpleasant issue. But someone who followed my comments in RG forums on theoretical physics and cosmology for the last few years, would know who that person is!

I have been much denounced, demonized (also ad hominem) by even some well-known scientists in RG for speaking and writing against the theories of official physics and cosmology. The vitriol was so intense that the RG authorities had to prohibit commenting in one of the forums initiated by me, on Einstein’s theories of relativity; after it ran for about 2 years and generated much interest from many! I can now see that someone has kindly made a collage of my views in that forum and posted it online at the following link :

"Physics cooked up in ones brain" :

https://www.muzsik.org/blog/2021/04/physics-cooked-up-in-ones-brain/

But after my two publications refuting the gravitational theory of Newton cited above, and Einstein’s theories of relativity cited as the following link ; all abuse against me (I am happy to say) are now silenced.

"The Mystery of the Lorentz Transform: A Reconstruction and Its Implications for Einstein's Theories of Relativity and cosmology" :

Article The Mystery of the Lorentz Transform: A Reconstruction and I...

I could see from my profile that the persons who denounced me before, including the Nobel Laureate read my articles ; but no one said anything about these published articles since these were posted in my RG profile.

Best regards,

Abdul

"No ejection! No two galaxies connected by a luminous bridge. Halton Arp is a gadfly, only creating nuisance for pristine Big Bang cosmology only with accelerated expansion" - yapity, yapity yapity yup ...!!!

"Hubble inspects two galaxies connected by a luminous bridge"

https://phys.org/news/2022-11-hubble-galaxies-luminous-bridge.html

Chip Arp finally has something to laugh at his tormentors, even if in his grave! RIP my friend - like the Galileo of the quantum age, you have the last laugh! You will live on for ever!

"Ambartsumian, Arp and the Breeding Galaxies":

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V12NO2PDF/V12N2MAL.pdf

Halton C. Arp - The Official Website.

Communicating information on galaxies, quasars and cosmology which ordinarily would not be available in professional journals or the public media.

"Science, 11 Oct. 2002, p. 345, ran a small article on the statements from both sides, but most science magazines just accepted the NASA release as refutation of the connection. Personally I can say that after more than 30 years of evidence disputed by widely publicized opinions that the bridge was false, I was saddened that not one prominent professional has now come forward to attest that it is, in fact, real." H.C. Arp

http://www.haltonarp.com/articles/rebuttals

After Emmanuel Kant’s “Unknowable thing-in-itself” and after he “found it necessary to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith" (Critique of Pure Reason); it fell on Hegel to restore the honour of philosophy as the science of all sciences, the soul of all knowledge, by pulling it out of its intractable problems and the lowest moment it reached by the time of Kant. And strangest of all, this he accomplished by embracing the very same elements, namely the ideas of evolution and contradictions etc., which hitherto known metaphysics (“the view of understanding”) abhorred the most. On the contrary, he put them at the very heart of his new philosophical system – the dialectical method.

Hegel unambiguously rejected the law of non-contradiction of theology, old idealism, rationalism and classical materialism, the “excluded middle” of Aristotle and the thing-in-itself of Kant. For Hegel absolutely everything depends on “the identity of identity and non-identity.” Opposites reside together in the very element of a thing or a process in simultaneous unity and opposition to each other and a resolution of this logical contradiction and conflict provides the dynamics for change, motion, evolution, development etc.

Theoretical natural science and cosmology has to catch up with materialist dialectics to be worthy of any scientific merit: The following links are only meant to justify this extraordinary claim.

"Dialectics Not Metaphysics Of Nature: From The Quantum To The Cosmic":

https://www.amazon.de/dp/B0BF5W9Q1N?asin=B0BF5W9Q1N&revisionId=9ebf1d7b&format=1&depth=1

[Please note: Only the free preview alone may be enough for a general picture of the book]

https://www.amazon.ca/Dialectical-Universe-Some-Reflections-Cosmology/dp/9840414445

[Note: Please see the reader’s comment near the bottom of the web-page]

No. The question sounds like an attempt to believe whatever one likes combined with an ignorance of what science actually is.

When it is not corrupted, Modern Official “Theoretical Science” (of Nature and Man) perfects the correctly deduced ideas that further knowledge of objective reality, with full potential to aid human creativity and aspiration for the responsible “Freedom of the Will”?

Now if by Official you mean by the weight of the body of scientists or science-usurpers, then there are certainly cases, and important, large ones, that amount to a corruption originated for/leading to such things as Man exploiting, or at least abusing, Man. Usually, these trace back to money or power or (typically misplaced) sense of justice rather than personal fancy.

It remains that elaborate, fantastical, and fun philosophical self-supporting systems may be created and written about at tremendous length, but nothing about that offers any weight per objective truth.

More useful in the present vein is to ask whether installing or choosing beliefs as to their profitability rather than objective correctness is the most wise course. If so, it would be more appropriate to recognize the sleight of mind is in this chooser, not Science. As my favorite auto license plate says, "What has reality ever done for me?"

No. This question points to an objective truth as revealed in the intense discussion in the following forum of many qualified theoretical physicists, mathematician, philosophers etc.. https://www.researchgate.net/post/Were_some_scientists_right_in_showing_that_the_Lorentz_Force_brings_to_a_paradox/14

The conclusion that clearly came out of this debate is that objective truth hurts, but only where, when and to whom it must! The present status and the potential future of theoretical physics and cosmology is stated in the following copy of a comment from that forum:

[Abdul Malek added an answer

2 days ago

Frederick David Tombe > “The physical interpretation is perhaps tricky,”

Please read the article cited. There is nothing tricky or ambiguous in the published article. It very clearly exposes the tricks involved in the fabrication of the Lorentz Transforms and even derives gamma and “spacetime” fantastic manifold from very simple geometry alone! Even a Nobel Laureate in theoretical physics who read this article from my profile did not dispute my claims.

Through only a few publications so far, now summarized in the recent publication cited above; dialectical physics achieved 1) the demolition of Newton’s extraterrestrial gravitational theory of one-sided universal attraction (which necessarily led to the Fairy Tales of Big/Black/Dark cosmic monsters); achieved with the help of Kepler, Leibniz and Hegel; 2) exposed the mystery of Lorentz’s Transforms and the trickery of 'spacetime' "Castle in the Air”, with the help of (Late) friends Chip Arp and Wolfgang Engelhardt, and 3) exposed the nakedness of the Emperor in its totality.

Kant negated Aristotelian metaphysics (“the view of understanding”) because Kant's causality-based metaphysics turned the objective reality to an “unknowable thing-in-itself” and a dark entity; blunting positive knowledge! Any conscious navigation in this darkness is possible only with the candle of subjective idealism (“logical/mathematical categories”), cooked up in the brain. Hegel performed the dialectical “the negation of the negation” of Kant; thereby illuminating the objective reality again; with his dialectics (“the view of reason), to search for further positive knowledge.

Newton negated Aristotelian physics and Copernican revolutionary cosmology; by bringing back Ptolemaic Epicycles in a modified form, reflected in the very first sentence of the "Foreword" of Newton’s Principia, “Now that (since Bacon) the substantial forms (of the Aristotelians) have been abandoned from natural philosophy, mathematics should replace them to the maximum possible extent”. [T. Posch, Hegel’s Criticism of Newton's Physics: A Reconsideration “, Oxford Conference on “Hegel and British Thought; 2nd-3rd Sept. (2004). https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/12236749.pd]. And Albert Einstein perfected Newton’s task by reviving early Greek mathematical idealism in theoretical physics and cosmology.

It must now be the task of revolutionary dialectical physics to achieve “the negation of the negation” of Newtonian/Einstenian physics (what Hegel achieved in philosophy) to open the way for positive knowledge of the universe, again!]

With respect to social science or society science Abdul Malek ,we have still not arrived at the methodical level of a natural science of human society and mind, e.g. physics of social systems or socio-biology of living systems. Most dominating theories are struggling with tedious intellectual puzzles (hermeneutics)and are not directed at solving practical social problems, e.g. energy efficiency and societal (systems) sustainability, epi-and pandemics of mental health issues (pathologies), cognitive growth of human-made systems.

——-—

The knowledge that has not come down to us is larger than the knowledge that has. Ibn Khaldun,

The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History.

Respected Abdul Malek

Every human being in the world strives for the identity it makes difference in society that makes one power and another powerless. There is difference in thought but not what's happening there. As we going into the truth the modern scientific research can't know the facts of living of existence since we are not live here for survive and make peace.Every one wants identity over worldwide.until there is no division in society it happens.

Regards

Ankam lokesh Kumar

Science is built like a wall and each contribution (book, chapter, paper, data, model, idea, thesis, anti-thesis, paradox, and even, inconsistency and imposture...) represents in science "Another Brick In The Wall", Dixit Pink Floyd. And as such, this brick only makes sense if other bricks can lean against it. The same applies to academic research, which, as "a brick in the wall", should support new research works. Thus, IMHO, academic citations could represent a fair measure of the value of whatever scientific work.