Matti Pitkanen (matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi)
Mon, 30 Aug 1999 15:34:04 +0300 (EET DST)
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> Dear Matti,
>
> Matti Pitkanen <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Aug 1999, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Bill and All,
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <WDEshleman@aol.com>
> > > To: <time@kitada.com>
> > > Sent: Sunday, August 29, 1999 5:31 PM
> > > Subject: [time 637] Fwd: Paul Marmet reply #3
> > >
> > >
> > > > In a message dated 8/27/99 11:15:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > > > Paul.Marmet@Ottawa.com writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Subj: Re: Delay
> > > > > Date: 8/27/99 11:15:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time
> > > > > From: Paul.Marmet@Ottawa.com (Paul Marmet)
> > > > > To: WDEshleman@aol.com
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear Bill,
> > > > > I have been told by the head of the physics department here, that I
> > > cannot
> > > > > keep questioning the fundamental principles of physics. They say
> that it
> > > > > is wrong to do that. Everything is already known. The director told
> me
> > > > > that I cannot discuss that subject with students.
> > > > > Since I am still doing it, I have been ordered to clear my office
> before
> > > > > the end of August. In other words, I am expelled from the
> university.
> > > > > Consequently, I am moving everything home. You can understand that
> for
> > > > > some time, I will not have enough time to participate to discussion
> on
> > > > > fundamental physics.
> > > > > At home, I will have the same e-mail address which is:
> > > > > Paul.Marmet@Ottawa.com
> > > > > I hope to get some contacts with you and your group later.
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > Paul Marmet
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Anybody,
> > > > I guess that the North American Continent is sheltering its kids again.
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Bill
> > > >
> > >
> > > I feel something unusual or incredible are going there. I do not have
> > > information about the academic society of US or Canada. Is there anybody
> who
> > > can explain recent state of the society there?
> > >
> >
> > Sad to say but in my own country 'thinking not allowed' has gradually
> > become a self-evident truth.
>
> This situation quite resembles that at the age of Galileo when he received
> rejections from Church and authorities at the age. Maybe we are confronted
> with the same situation as his, while the problem now is Galilei's attitude
> toward nature. Once a view is fixed, the west seems to want to keep it
> forever: The law of inertia is correct with the western society.
>
> To the degree that very few academic persons
> > see anything wrong with it. Even I have gradually accepted this as
> > self-evident as law of gravitation.
>
> Then why are you questioning physics? If you have accepted it, it seems that
> you need not pursue it further as you have been doing.
What I meant that I have accepted that it is hopeless to even try
to change the attitudes of decision makers. Of course, I am working
seven days aweek to develop my theory but I do not spend time
in futile attempts to communicate it my colleagues in Finland or
attempts to publish it in respectable journals. I just accept
it as a fact that also theoretical physics is one possible Tao and
also it represents many levels of personal development.
>
> What this means that people with
> > new ideas who are full of enthusiasism and vigour have no hope of
> > getting financial support. I have again and again heard to comment 'all is
> > done' from my particle physics colleagues.
>
> My view is nothing has been done. Just what the west did is to have found the
> way to control quite a small part of the outside. If it wants to pursue nature
> to its depth, it needs to be modest and should not be content with its
> achievements.
>
> Another thing is that the west is very unconscious about the inisde world.
> They are content with their power/ability of controlling the outside. But
> there is a world which should not be controlled but should be understood as it
> is. Controlling should not be the final goal. It gives just self-approval. The
> final goal of science should have been the understanding of ourselves, not as
> a materialistic understanding.
>
> But this seems not the object of science as has been seen from the western
> activities these hundreds years. This is the reason that I propose the study
> of meta-science that means the "after science."
>
> It is my luck
> > that I am stubborn theoretician with ability to bear loneliness
> > and insulation. It would be however nice to have some people with whom to
> > discuss ideas face to face(;-).
> >
> >
> >
> > > In my country, Japan, also there might be a possibility that something
> like
> > > that might happen in the future due to the INFLUENCE of such recent state
> of
> > > US. But for the time being, such a possibility seems small because physics
> is
> > > not ours, not a part of our culture. Just it is a part of our education
> > > necessary to pass some examinations and to become professors of
> universities.
> > > For the western people, it might be that physics is a sort of religion,
> > > hearing what treatment Paul had received from the head of the physics
> > > department: i.e. the head told him
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > that I cannot
> > > > keep questioning the fundamental principles of physics. They say that
> it
> > > > is wrong to do that. Everything is already known. The director told
> me
> > > > that I cannot discuss that subject with students.
> > >
> > > This means that the head ordered Paul NOT to think about physics. The head
> > > told him "Just believe physics." If physics is a thing to believe, there
> is no
> > > need to open universities nor to hold any conferences, symposiums, and so
> on.
> > >
> > > I think the problem of the today's physics lies in the starting points
> that
> > > Descartes, Newton, Galileo, etc. had set several hundreds years ago. We
> have
> > > been arguing in this list about those subjects with considering the
> relations
> > > of them with today's physics context. What is necessary are such
> activities,
> > > NOT to believe in today's physics without asking any questions blindly.
> >
> > Materialistic science is the religion of west.
>
> Is this religion on the same level of Christianism? I feel some common between
> the materialistic science as a religion and the Christianism that the
> materialism seems to deny. The situation looks like that the west is just
> oscillating like a pendulum between the two extremities. I see this also in
> your discussions of the competion between Body and Mind in [time 573]. You
> look it as a competion, not a collaboration. The west alwasy ses things as
> struggling against the opponents. Why does the west see things like that. We,
> Asians, see things as collaborating/complementing each other, never see them
> competing.
>
Science becomes religion when some assumptions become dogmas.
Everyone has strong need to believe in dogmas. I indeed see
competion as real, it is! As a scientist I am happy that my theory of
consciousness predicts it. It also predicts also other modes of
consciousness. Asymptotic selves are selves whose all subsystems have
entanglement for which p-adic entanglement vanishes. No competion inside
this Buddha like self anymore!(;-)
Amusingly, the geometric counterpart of S=0 self (by ontology
recapitulates phylogeny metaphor) is closed 4-surface having finite
time duration. Classically and quantum mechanically this kind of surface
represents vacuum ('emptiness' of enlightened states of mind), pure mind.
Since these surfaces have no boundaries they cannot generate
join along boundaries bonds with other spacetime sheets
and hence have excellent opportunities to stay unentangled (to
stay wake-up). Since these spacetime surfaces are vacua, there are no
upper bounds for their density form physics. Universe might be full of
enlightened Buddhas!(;-)
Best,
MP
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:31 JST