Premature or excessive demands of the scientific method that all hypotheses be measurable and verifiable before extrapolating from those hypotheses may unnecessarily retard scientific progress. Many practical benefits were derived from the hypotheses of quantum physics before those hypotheses were conclusively evidenced. Infinity may preclude a final answer to the quest for ultimate causality. Yet that quest has yielded many answers to the causes of that perceived as reality that have practical application. While infinity implicitly argues for an unlimited multiverse, in the least, it also implicitly argues that reality cannot exist under the scientific method's demand that all existence be measurable, as the infinite of anything cannot be measured in totality. That fact suggests that perceived reality is the projected thought of formless mega mind or a universal intelligence and that science explores the processes by which mega thought justifies itself. However, since the totality of infinite thought cannot be quantified, it cannot exist under the scientific method's demands either and that perceived as life is illusion without verifiable cause or explanation. This conundrum confronted the first inquiries into the ultimate cause of reality before that inquiry branched into science and religion. Despite the different conclusions of both, they both remain confronted by the same unknowable. Science cannot identify the cause or source of universal energy and religion cannot identify the cause and source of godly omnipotence. Neither disciplines can answer why either should occur. However, our perception of reality entails that we must act out our roles in the scheme of life by negotiating that perception with pragmatism while reconciling the observable and measurable with the unknowable for that perceived as practical purpose. Science has always advanced accordingly and is consigned to do so until it evidences otherwise.
Science & The Unknowable
- Edited
Lee Havens
An extremely important essay, good fundamental questions for discussion in search of a "physical (metaphysical) beginning", its ontologically grounded structure. That is, the solution to the problem of the ontological justification of knowledge is the representation in the mathematical symbol of the triad "being-nothing/otherbeing-becoming".
You write:
<<As the genesis of scientific and religious inquiry was the desire to understand existence, there was no fundamental chasm between them. Pure religious theory, as opposed to the theory of religion, still shares science’s quest to explore and explain ultimate causality. The two distinguished themselves when propositions of causality were required to be systematically tested for truth, becoming the scientific method, and when comparable propositions were accepted as true based on an unverifiable cause of the observable, becoming religion.>>
A very important conclusion, while recalling the philosophical advice of John A. Wheeler, "tunsung paragon of science":
"We are no longer satisfied with insights only into particles, fields of force, into geometry, or even into time and space. Today we demand of physics some understanding of existence itself."
<<The unknowable presented by infinity and omnipotence appear to indicate that matter cannot logically exist and that existence is an abstraction of formless thought, confounding science and religion.>>
Disagree. We need a new, holistic understanding of matter as a dialectical eternal generative process, "grasping", and then building its ontological structure. Here we need a methodology of dialectical-ontological construction. To do this, it is necessary to rethink all dialectical ideas in philosophy from Heraclitus and Plato, to Cusa, Hegel, Whitehead and Losev. Especially the idea of Kuzansky about "coincidence of opposites", "coincidence of maximum and minimum". A good testament to understanding matter as a holistic generating process was left by Albert Einstein:
“I like to experience the universe as one harmonious whole. Every cell has life. Matter, too, has life; it is energy solidified."
Here I agree with you:
<<These questions about the fundamental constituents of reality contributed to the conundrum of existence that infinity is.>>
Then you conclude:
<<Because the inquisitive human mind asks why the earliest source of all that can be contemplated should exist, and then again questions the cause of that earliest source, the question of original causation self-perpetuates ad infinitum without a possible conclusion.>>
The ontological construction of "the earliest source" structure can be built on the basis of the proposed methodology of the dialectical-ontological construction of the existence of the Universe as an eternal holistic process of generating more and more new meanings, forms and structures (material and ideal).
In fact, this task, but in a different way, was set by the mathematician and philosopher Vasily Nalimov - the construction of "a super-unified field theory that describes both physical and semantic manifestations of the World." ("The Self-Aware Universe")
[https://web.archive.org/web/20111205183605/http://v-nalimov.ru/articles/111/395/]
<<Thereby, God is arguably pure energy with a capacity to will itself into motion and form and there is no fundamental separation between theoretical science and doctrine-free religious theory on that point other than semantics and terminology.>>...
<<As infinite form, space, and time can never be completely quantified, infinity implicitly argues that energy, matter, and time only exist as abstract thoughts and contemplations of a formless mega mind or intelligence.>>
I believe. that first it is necessary to "unravel the thought of the Creator before the Act of creation", to build an ontological construction (SuperStructure - Primordial (absolute) generating structure), and then comprehend the concept of "God". I think that the second stage (understanding God) should be done independently by every seeker of truth. Here to help the philosophical testament of P. Florensky:
"The problem of space lies at the center of the worldview in all emerging systems of thought and predetermines the composition of the entire system. With certain restrictions and explanations, one could even recognize space as its own and primary subject of philosophy, in relation to which all other philosophical topics have to be evaluated as derivatives. And , the more closely this or that system of thought is worked out, the more definite the peculiar interpretation of space becomes as its core. We repeat: worldunderstanding is spaceunderstanding.”
<<Asking what begets and sustains illusion cycles back to the question of ultimate causality and the inability to answer it.>>
But why "illusion"? Yes, science must continue to seek an answer to the question of "absolute causality". This is the Fundamental Question of the entire system of knowledge and cognition, the problem of the ontological justification /substantiation of knowledge, primarily the ontological justification /substantiation of mathematics - "problem of the millennium No. 1".
<<Without discrediting infinity, life may be an illusion of a universal intelligence powered by an unknowable and reality may be our individual or collective recognition and interpretation of that illusion.>>
Disagree about "illusion".
<<Indeed, all scientific advancement has occurred under a penumbra of a yet unverified ultimate cause, and there is no valid reason to restrict further exploration of the unknown due simply to the tenets of that inquiry not being readily verifiable.>>
I agree with you and the philosophical precept of Fields Prize winner Vladimir Voevodsky (1966-2017):
"What we now call the crisis of Russian science is not only a crisis of Russian science. There is a crisis of world science. Real progress will consist in a very serious fight between science and religion, which will end in their association."
[http://baaltii1.livejournal.com/198675.html]
I think there will be a "serious fight" here: Meta Axiom "In the Beginning was the Logos…/ Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος" VS. Hypothesis "In the Beginning was a" Big Bang ..."
where "LOGOS" is a META-LAW that governs the Universe (in the spirit of Heraclitus).
By the way, the concept of "meta-law" is used by Lee Smolin in "Time Reborn: From the Crisis in Physics to the Future of the Universe".
John Archibald Wheeler:
"To my mind there must be, at the bottom of it all, not an equation, but an utterly simple idea. And to me that idea, when we discover it, will be so compelling, so inevitable, that we will say to one another, 'Oh, how beautiful. How could it have been otherwise?'"
"Philosophy is too important to be left to philosophers."
Dear FlaxMole,
A beautifully written essay and deserves the highest praise. I caught myself thinking that this is all I know and would like to say so, but you said it so beautifully!
“Despite the astonishing discoveries scientists have made, there remains many unanswered foundational questions, some of which can’t even be asked within this paradigm”.
“The Truth cannot be perceived, however, the interpretation of our perceptions can lead us towards, or away from truth, depending on our purpose”.
“Within our present paradigm, science, in principle, cannot answer any ontological questions about the world we experience”.
“A paradigm provides the questions for what should be asked, what phenomena should be observed, and how the observations are to be interpreted”.
In my essay, I just focused on specific interpretations of observations in which the paradigm did not see new phenomena and laws of nature that could change the paradigm.
Thank you for a wonderful essay. But, unfortunately, not many people on this site will understand our essays.
I wish you success!
You have to think big!
It is known that Newton determined the gravitational coefficient through the parameters of the orbits of the planets of the solar system. If the gravitational coefficient is determined in a similar way from the parameters of the orbits of electrons in the Hydrogen atom, then the gravitational coefficient of the planetary system of the Hydrogen atom becomes 40 orders of magnitude greater than in the solar system. Then the Planck parameters of the Hydrogen atom are the parameters of an electron with its radius equal to the radius of the Compton wave of the electron. Those. each level of fractal matter has its own “Planck parameters”, and the generally accepted Planck parameters are an abstract delusion and have no real meaning at all. Indeed, what relation does the gravitational coefficient from the parameters of the Solar system have to the parameters of the planetary system of the Hydrogen atom? None!!!
You have to think big!
The fine structure constant can be easily calculated with an accuracy of up to 7 digits, assuming that all elements of matter have a fractal structure. Then, therefore, "black holes" do not exist, and there is no event horizon. Those. inside putative "black holes", there is deterministic matter that obeys the simple quantum laws of fractal matter, which unify gravity and quantum phenomena of the deterministic functioning of matter on all scales of the universe [ appendix: https://s3.amazonaws.com/fqxi.data/data/essay-contest-files/16/reference_id_2304.pdf
https://qspace.fqxi.org/competitions/entry/2304#control_panel ].
Bravo!!... .as a thought-provoking examination of the foundational instability underlying Science and Religion, it throws open the door for a paradigm to shift.
In that science has not identified "... the cause or source of universal energy and religion cannot identify the cause and source of godly omnipotence...." the formalisms of Science and Religion are not derived from a fundamental Fact, and to reason from the general to the specific, is akin to verifying the form of a mega term equation from the result.
An "... inability to ascertain causality beyond their respective postulates that energy and Godly omnipotence are sources of all existence." necessitates a conceptual reassessment of "energy" and "God".
IF "universal energy" is made referent to a composite of Spaceless-Timeless Energy and Space-Time Energy, AND "cause" and "source" are only applicable to conceptualization of Space-Time Energy... i.e. as spatial-temporal logic operatives, "cause" and "source" are NOT applicable to a Spaceless-Timeless Logic Domain... any rationale for Science or Religion, as a consequence of inability to conceptualize an "... unknowable with bearing upon the observable and measurable...", to retard investigation of Space-Time Energy emergence from "formless energy, is eliminated.
IF science acknowledges that "the source and cause of formless energy" is unknowable from within the Space -Time Logic Domain it does not necessarily result "... in blind faith in God's power and purpose to justify existence".
To acknowledge the "unknowable", as a Spaceless-Timeless Logic Domain, and differentiate it from the "knowable", as a Space-Time Logic Domain, mitigates the terminology conundrums that an "unknowable" places on investigation of "cause" and "source" of Space-Time Energy, utilizing Space-Time Logic Domain operators.
An initial state reduction process that differentiates a Spaceless-Timeless Logic Domain from a Space-Time Logic Domain facilitates an option for a Fact based distinction between "physical" and "metaphysical", or a Fact based unification of "physical" and "metaphysical".
IF physical is differentiated from metaphysical... i.e. physical being within the Space-Time Logic Domain, and metaphysical being operatives of the Spaceless-Timeless Logic Domain, THEN metaphysical processes can only interact with Space-Time as a Spaceless-Timeless Energy injection mechanism.
IF physical and metaphysical are unified by the conceptual reduction of measurement unit, THEN all prior processes presumed metaphysical can be conceptually perceived as having physical measurement in theoretical terms of QI as the minimum/indivisible quanta of space, Q-Tick as the minimum/indivisible source pulse rate, and QE as the minimum/indivisible quanta of Energy.
In that 'Infinity" and "eternity are not logical operators in a Spaceless-Timeless logic domain... i.e. "infinity" implies a spatial differentiation and "eternity" implies a temporal differential... it does not prohibit Spaceless-Timeless Energy, as causal of Space-Time Energy.
Within a Space-Time Energy Logic Domain, "infinity" is merely an implicit symbol/icon of the existence of a Spaceless-Timeless Logic Domain and man's inability to process Spaceless-Timeless Logics... i.e. it is not a logic operator and can not argue... and one need not be constrained in exploring the possible mechanism by which Spaceless-Timeless Energy is resolved as Space-time... i.e. the fundamentals of Space-Time emergence.
IF "thought" as choreograhies of QE, THEN "thought" occupies Space AND "Infinite thought" implies space... i.e. is a symbol/icon, as is "infinite space" or "infinite time", not a scientific method compliant logic operator.
Science "...might progress more readily if it accepts that there might be an unknowable with bearing upon the observable and measurable and factor that into scientific inquiry."
IF one's model of the universe is inclusive of a Spaceless-Timeless Energy Domain as an objectifiable entity, Space-Time has a source of substance... i.e. a fundamental Fact from which to abstract substance as spatially defined minimum/indivisible quanta... but to perceive the effect of an "unknowable" upon Space-Time requires a conceptual lens.
ILLUSTRATION REF: (http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSMarcelMLTD.jpg)
Given a source, to develop a "coherent conception of reality that does justice to the full content of quantum theory" as discussed in the 2023 FQXi Essay “Future Science, Future Scientist: Reconnecting with the Reflective and Contemplative Modes of Being” (https://s3.amazonaws.com/fqxi.data/data/essay-contest-files/16/essay_id_2322.pdf,) requires objectification of the fundamental elements of emergence... i.e. momentum mechanism, unit of substance, and a distribution structure/intelligence... within a non-pertUrbative analysis environment.
Although my 2023FQXi Essay: "Digital Science: Emergence of Quantum Consciousness" (http://uqsmatrixmechanix.com/2023FQXiEssay4pdfconv.php) was intended as a demonstration of how a non-perturbative analysis structure would change science, the demonstration objectified a momentum mechanism as a single point pulse sourced emission of substance, as spatially defined minimum/indivisible quanta of Energy (QE), which inherently resolves all forces as derived of a single force, and consequently FQXi rejected my essay as being an ""alternative ""theory of everything"", not an essay about how science could be different"".
In that "... the origin of energy and the cause of, or reason for its initial transformation into observable effect and matter are beyond the ability of the human condition to ascertain, and beyond any instrument's ability to do so that humans have so far invented." one can make "... an argument for a primordial force variably named energy or God ".
However, IF Space-Time Energy is a substance, that derives momentum from a pulse sourced emission that converts Spaceless-Timeless Energy into spatially defined minimum/indivisible quanta of Space-Time Energy (QE)... i.e. energy as substance is only perceived as a force as a consequence of a fundamental momentum mechanism... "God" is a process... i.e. not an entity... and the formalisms of Quantum Theory would benefit from incorporating a fundamental momentum mechanism.
Spontaneous Harmonious Resolve (SHR) of distribution of spatially defined minimum/indivisible quanta of potential momentum (QE), wihin minimum/indivisible units of space (QI), throughout the.entire universe on every Q-Tick of a pulsed momentum mechanism, necessitates an emerging intelligent network... i.e. logic inferred from emergence of a networked intelligence must resolve QE/QI distribution throughout the entire Space-Time Energy component of the universe,, to configure QE/QI of the NEXT TICK.
In that as you suggest, ".. The search for causality, and curiosity in general, might be a component of the drive for survival." then "... pursuing causality free of the constraint that every postulate must ultimately be verified before substantially advancing theory." is certainly justifiable.
Although the scientific method may imply that all hypotheses be measurable and verifiable before extrapolating from those hypotheses, and measurement is typically quantified in phenomenal units... e.g. ev as an event effect... or in geometry defined spatial units... i.e. as facilitated by observable resolve of spatial differentiation, the scientific method also tolerates theoretical units... e.g. Planck's length as a conceptualized spatial differentiation... and as you point out, "Science accepts theories about that which is not directly observable and measurable based on their effect on that which is observable and measurable."
Although I agree that "... extrapolating from the unverified that was inferred by the observable and measurable " can facilitate accomplishment, in that science does not incorporate a theoretical unit of space, time, or energy as derived from a Space-Time Energy emergence process, within a non-perturbative analysis environment, "significant advances" do not necessarily verify validity of the inference at QE scale.
An "... ultimate power underlying all existence that science now calls energy..." and measures as phenomenal energy (PHE), without resolve of fundamental process, warrants no greater confidence than postulates of spirit, as promoted by indoctrinated religion.
"Physics defines energy as ‘the quantitative property that is transferred to a body or to a physical system, recognizable in the performance of work and in the form of heat and light.’ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy) "... i.e. an event effect as PHE, not a spatially defined unit of substance... and Einstein Physics asserts that "energy cannot be created or destroyed ".
In that a temporal differentiation of "begin" and/or "end" do not apply to a Spaceless-Timeless Logic Domain, the Spaceless-Timeless Energy component of the universe must continually express itself as Space-Time, thus from the perspective of this Space-Time Logic Domain observer, Spaceless-Timeless Energy is creating, has always been creating, and will always be creating, the Space-Time Energy Domain... i.e. energy as spatially defined minimum/indivisible quanta (QE), being pulse sourced into the field is the most fundamental causality of the Space-Time Energy Domain... and its distribution is being Spontaneously Harmoniously Resolved (SHR) by an emerging networked intelligence... i.e. the Cosmic Consciousness.
In that cosmic intelligence is accessible to the individual human logic processor, utilizing the evolving logic operatives of an emerging Space-Time Logic Domain, science can promote the well-being of the species.
ILLUSTRATED REF: "Digital Science: Emergence of Quantum Consciousness" (http://uqsmatrixmechanix.com/2023FQXiEssay4pdfconv.php)
Thank you for the much needed input from the Philosophy of Physics perspective.
S. Lingo
UQS Author/Logician
(http:www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com)