The Randa Minor Origin, Part 2, Vol 1, Issue 1.45, Page 2
A Recent History of Mathematics and Physics
Since the time of Isaac Newton the mathematician has enabled the sciences and technology to rapidly flourish. Following the pivotal production of Newton�s grand, efficient, shiny new machine, the mathematical physicist told us, that from this point forward, he alone can figure it all out. This could have been a clue, but seeing the clear evidence of the value of mathematics and the rationality of a mechanistic universe, the academic humanist accepted the compelling conceptual interpretation of physical phenomena put forward by the mathematician. For two hundred years mankind evolved under the guiding hand of rational mathematics. God and the mathematician were at parity in the eyes of many men.
History reveals that whenever any man obtains a parity with God in the eyes
of other men, the divine right of kings will follow as a natural premise.
When many men obtain such a parity as a group, the natural premise is checked
by number. This results in self introspection accompanied by subjective and
objective analysis by the numerous members of the group. During the two hundred
years of rational supremacy the mathematician was given free reign as to
the choice of his research and studies. Self introspection occurred and the
foundations of Euclidean geometry were challenged. The problem with parallel
lines
Following the romantic years for mathematics, Newton�s machine lost some of its sheen. As rust began to set in, conceptual comprehension did not continue to develop in a clear and rational manner, The generations of mathematicians that followed had a difficult time of it in the adaptation of Newton�s machine to atomic phenomena. A measurement disparity attendant to a poorly defined, but scientific quantity called "visible light" was noted. Its significance was elevated to the highest level, as a controlling principle for the universe and man�s perception of it. Man�s sense of duration, with the aid of the regular economic cyclic motion of stable systems, and the behavior of physical systems used to measure the cyclic regularity, was included in the new mathematical reference frame for the universe, as a dimension called time.
The new mathematician raised the rust to the status of a physical principle, and with the adaptive modification of the new theoretical geometry�s, redefined the ground rules for physical action in the universe, and man�s measure of it. The mathematician lost his certainty and stumbled around a bit, grumbling about shrinking meter sticks and slow moving clocks. He threw his hands up into the air as he abandoned reason and any attempt to rationally explain physical phenomena. Once time dilation and length contraction were accepted as physical principles, a door had opened. The bizarre could thereafter freely be entertained and applied to the economic orders of form as needed.
Subsequently the physical mathematician constructed grandiose conceptual castles in the sky, based on the operational quantities within these mathematics. The castles in the sky became a focus for the new science, and is the home where humanity now lives. These castles are barren and devoid of any conceptual tie to reality and reason, and the mathematician claimed that the distinct absence of reason was not his fault, but again, a matter of physical principle.
The new mathematical disciplines were operationally effective but remained without a rational conceptual message. No bridge existed for the rest of humanity to cross, enabling comprehension. Even so, technology continued to advance and the mathematician continued to rule. The operational success of the mathematics, its bizarre interpretation, and the lack of a communicative bridge, caused the mathematician to amplify his disdain for reason, and his disdain for normal descriptive language. Defensively laying the blame for the lack of conceptual clarity on the shortcomings of language and reason, the mathematician held that normal communicative language is not precise enough, and to understand natural phenomena one must learn the mathematics. The general belief held by mainstream academia today, is that to understand natural phenomena, one must first understand the mathematics, even though, and apparently because of the fact, the mathematician does not understand natural phenomena outside the mathematics. It has something to do with the real world.
We have voluntarily
The mathematician through good times and bad has acquired and retained total unchallenged control over the study of what we think our universe is about. There have been great benefits to mankind during these times, but in the process the mathematician has eliminated any approach to the science, that is not strictly in terms of his operational quantities and his mathematics. His misguided disdain for our normal communicative, but highly complex and richly descriptive language, and his formerly uncharacteristic, reactionary disdain for reason, and his elevation of the conclusions compounded from the assumptive error, to the level of principles of natural law, together with his exalted and unchallenged academic and social position, and the ease by which mathematics can represent stable system action, diminishes the likelihood that he will be instrumental in any future resolution of the problem.
One can only conjecture as to how many brilliant minds have turned away from natural philosophy and the physical mathematics as a result of the principled absence of reason and the conceptual nonsense that today passes for scientific truth.
The Physics Preview
is intended to resolve this dilemma. I will argue that seminal operational quantities used by the physical science mathematician are founded on assumptive error and as a result, the mathematician has been unable to put forward any coherent conceptual view of the universe. Although this has had an adverse effect on mankind, up until the publication of The Physics Preview, no avenue has existed, and no one has put forward, a meaningful and comprehensive challenge, aimed toward the greater resolution of the problem.
The conceptual understanding of physical phenomena using reason absent any sophisticated mathematics, must nevertheless benefit from the interpretation of that mathematics. It is the wire frame support for the conceptual construct presented in this publication. Existing mathematical and experimental results have been synthesized, boiled down, and translated into English. The translation has been held within a logical, consistent, non contradictory, conceptual framework.
The purpose of this issue is to set the stage for further argument in order to justify a principle for atomic structure that provides an intuitive base from which to reason. The academic humanist is my main intellectual target, for he and she have voluntarily, although in cases, reluctantly, abandoned the science of natural philosophy, leaving it solely as the domain of the mathematician. The Physics Preview will argue that the mathematician is not qualified for such a role. However, deposing the mathematician as the sole authority in the science of natural philosophy is not to lessen his importance, but to affirm it. It is the mathematician that is the final arbiter of the value of any work on natural philosophy. He may not be able to �rationally interpret it, clearly imagine it, or conceptually synthesize it, but he alone can qualify or disqualify it. It has something to do with the real world.