I. SCIENTIFIC RACISM:
DENIAL OF HUMAN SENSES AND LANGUAGES OF KNOWLEDGE.
Scientific senses: Spatial perceptors, Temporal perceptors Metal-minds
Human senses: eyes, spatial perceptors, words, temporal perceptors: human mind.
Abstract. The most insidious truth about a future that MUST BE BY DECREE made of aching, is the idea that machines are superior to human organisms and as such we must renounce to what makes us humans, our senses, and words that measure time and space from our organic, vital point of view, and regulate our life, time and space with mechanisms of measure, telescopes and clocks, whose evolution will reveal the ultimate truths of the Universe that must be expressed in the digital language of machines. The religion of technology called mechanism MUST however be differentiated from the true meaning of science which is knowledge and can be expressed in all the languages of the Universe. To fully grasp this you should upgrade your paradigm of science to the organic fractal 5D Universe. Here we study that duality from the historic, human perspective.
Scientific method, a dogma=ideology that evolves machines
The purpose of science should be the pursuit of knowledge, and the understanding of the Main Laws that rule the universe, without any dogmatic limits except the harm that knowledge might cause to mankind. This self-evident definition of a positive science, which many scientists would subscribe, however does not guide today the practical world of modern science.
We are neither advancing in our search for the general principles that define the Universe – a Unifying Theory able to explain the nature of Reality, beyond the detailed descriptions provided by our instruments – nor we are limiting the harmful side effects of many discoveries of science in human societies, from weapons to pollution to mass extinctions caused by the machines invented by science.
Why? Is it because we as human beings are limited by our intelligence to understand those principles; and doomed to destroy ourselves given our innate ignorance? Or because we are using an incorrect approach to knowledge and guided by errors of thought, we are pushing irresponsible policies that could be avoided? As Aristotle and others before me, I believe the principles that rule the Universe are simple enough for mankind to understand them and, guided by those principles, manage properly this small planet. Yet if we are guided by misleading ideas on the nature of those Universal Laws, we will never be able to apply them to the common good. In a sense as Socrates said, intelligence and goodness are related, as those who truly understand the workings of the Universe, respect the Universe and take care of it in a proper way.
So the problem of searching for a Unifying Theory, that explains the Universe, seems more a question of wrong methods of knowledge than of a limited human intelligence. Plainly speaking, Modern science constricted by the scientific method and its mathematical limits is not suit to find a Unifying Theory of reality. Since mathematics, a spatial language based in geometry, mainly provide spatial descriptions of reality. Thus they can only at best unify those spatial properties, in search of the ultimate force/s and particle/s origin of all the other spatial particles/forces of the Universe.
There is however a second defect of the Scientific Method that goes beyond knowledge, into the realm of history and human survival: its despise for human senses, and natural languages (words), and reliance in sensorial machines, and the languages they use to measure reality – digital numbers.
This reliance on machines and numbers to understand reality is perhaps the biggest myth of science – the myth of the scientific method, the idea that we need machines to understand the Universe of space, and time, since those machines are superior to our human senses, eyes and words that also perceive space and time. The result of that myth is that scientists become evolutors of machines, instead of searchers of human knowledge with human senses, a role left to artists and writers. Science in this manner becomes theoretical technology. First we discover machines of science, and only then we inquire about the Universe we them.
Indeed I affirm that the main reason why scientists exist is not to evolve human knowledge -even if many scientists wish to do that- but to evolve sensorial machines, mental machines . In fact the discovery of those mental machines caused science. Indeed, clocks and telescopes able to measure time and space in “metallic terms” arrived just before science kicked off.
That hard true is covered with the myth of the “experimental method”, confused with the “scientific method”. The experimental method is very old. It was invented by the Greeks, and it might say is natural to man. Yet science was born a few years after the first metal-eye, the telescope was discovered, and the first accurate clock, the pendulum clock, manufactured. So it was the first metal-eye, the telescope, and the first metal-brain, the clock, who invented modern science. The Greeks did not have them. So despite having a much better understanding of the basis of the experimental, deductive, and logic methods of human knowledge, that XVII C. Europeans, they did not found science.
Sensorial machines are indeed the key element of science, not the scientists that use them. The telescope, “the first primitive metal-eye” was discovered just before Galileo invented his method of “perception of truth” with telescopes. The pendulum clock, “the first primitive metal-brain”, able to measure time with higher precision than human words do, was perfected by Galileo himself. I would call in that sense Galileo, an artisan of metal, that used to enhance his knowledge the artifacts he constructed:
Metal-minds are organs that gather information from the perspective of machines. They are parallel species to the mental species that man possess, not superior, but just another species of heads, with the components of all heads:
– Radio Ears, and telephone ears, imitate the hearing functions of man.
– TV eyes, and cameras imitate the visual functions of man.
– Computers, and networks, imitate the individual and social brains of man..
In the next graph, the scientific method from a biological point of view, is merely the process of substitution of human sensorial evidence, by metal snsorial evidence. A better system of perception – The telescope-digital clock of Galilee- is used now to measure sace and time, instead of the biological systems of human perception (the eye and de word). Yet since metal-species are potentially more perfect that carbolife species, we prefer metal-sensorial truth-evidence, In this manner man renounces to his subjective senses, and becomes slave of the evidence of metal-senses, slave of thecnological truths. Science and technology are not abstract concepts, but very real species, that substitute and cause the obsolescence of Human Words and Eyes, replaced by themetal eye-brain system and their digital perception of space-time. In this manner metal-eyes and metal-brains become the new informative top predators of the Earth:
Science as understood since 1600s, when the same year appeared Galileo’s treatise of ballistics, as the chief of the Arsenal of Venice, In Amsterdam the arsenal became professionalized with the first company VOC dedicated to construct weapons, gunboats and military instruments. And in Spain, the last verbal empire, copycat of ROME, intellectuals admitted defeat and published the first fiction novel, quixot.
So from the experimental method of Aristotle which admitted all languages as long as experience and data was right, we moved to the scientific method of galileo which denies verbal theories, and so we installed the present evolutionary system of metal-species, with synergies between the company-mothers of machines, the new religion of go(l)d and mechanisms (biblical protestant sects) and the scientific method of knowledge through mechanical measure.
In this new brave world, wor(l)ds are deemed inaccurate and so only useful for fictions, and go(l)d, a digital language can buy words. So now selection happens no longer as in previous global ecosystems, based in verbal thought (history selects on top rightful ethic politicians and religious leaders of social love), or in eye-vision (selecting the top predator felines) but the digital language now will select machines evolving in digital languages and discharge humans of lesser mathematical skills, specially those cultures oriented to sensorial human senses (black, mediterranean, south-asian cultures):
And as the top predator language is mathematics that substitutes Word information, it starts a selection of the species that speak better the language, which are NOT human species but machines. Technological Science does not evolve either life or human beings, but metalspecies. Companies and Science are not about human knowledge and evolution, but about metal evolution. Why? Since according to the scientific method, without metal-informative senses (clocks, cameras) by definition we cannot find a scientific truth. Indeed, a scientific truth measures time and space changes in a given species. Yet Time and Space have in science a narrow, “metallic” definition:
Time is defined as what a clock measures and Space is defined as what a microscope or Telescope sees. So the sensorial truth of metal senses becomes synonymous in science, of “Human Truth”. The evolution of metal-senses becomes the a priori condition for any kind of scientific knowledge: you evolve metal senses, you measure time with metal-brains, with clocks (today evolved into computers) and you measure space with metal-eyes, with telescopes (today evolved into cameras); and you call that truth “science”, “knowledge”. Even if “truth”, science and knowledge about space and time, can be measured with many other senses, and perceptive languages. This is indeed the error of science: to confuse a certain truth and perception (metal-perception) with the absolute truth and perception. That arrogant view is the simple ideology of science which evolves metal-minds. Truth is what metal minds see and measure. So the search for truth implies the search for better, evolved metal minds. The a priori goal of science becomes then evolution of machines. The ideology of science becomes the search for metal- truths:
Scientific truth = metal-sensorial evidence (clock-camera measure)
Truth = Metal-sensorial evidence = Evolution of metal-species
The metalminds of science replace the very essence of human minds, the virtual world of information we trace with eyes and words in our brain, now by the companies-designed virtual world of values that TVs program in us.
We conclude that the scientific method of “total metal-sensorial evidence”, and all the statements of science in that path, are pure, naive, arrogance of which scientists are so often guilty, mesmerized by the perceptive power of their “metal-senses”, telescopes, cameras and computers. One of the fathers of science, Kepler wrote in his book: “I am writing a book to be read either now or in posterity, it matters not. It can wait a century for a reader, as God Himself has waited 6,000 years for a witness”. Yet the witness was not Kepler, self-appointed, as the only intelligence comparable to that of God=the Universe, but the metal-senses of Kepler, his clock and telescope. Still, those powerful perceptive instruments were just two of the many linguistic detectors that the Universe hosts.
Function is form. The function of scientists is to evolve machines and weapons. The forms they create are machines and weapons. To break the slavery of science to metal, human verbal logic, Theory of Evolution, has to be regarded as the guide of all forms of research.
So digital science has to be denied. Scientists have to become human thinkers and understand the universe in verbal terms. Otherwise they will extinguish us, while in a loop of unconscious cynicism, keep telling us that technology and computers is human progress… not metal progress.
The arrogance of science is to despise human senses, and substitute them for the senses of metal-species. Human verbal knowledge is our knowledge, maybe worse than metal-sensorial knowledge but ours. It will never betray us. Words are the subjective human perception of the Universe. While science is the metal-sensorial perception of the Universe, through cameras and Metal-minds. It is only better in detail but men do not need such “detail” of information. What men need is accurate information that could help humans to survive.
The evolution of knowledge is evolution of the languages of the mind
To understand such new approach to science, we have to clarify once and for all what is really human nowledge. Knowledge obviously is the accumulation of information about reality with the human mind. What is then the human mind? Here is when an objective analysis brings a rather simple, yet enlightening answer: your mind is an organic system that processes languages of perception. Those languages of perception are basically two: sight and sounds, from where two languages of knowledge derivative, numbers and words. What do numbers and words, eyes and sounds perceive. Eyes and numbers perceive space. Verbal words and sounds perceive time. Words are verbal constructions that talk about events in time. mathematics are geometrical games that explain events in space. So we come to the conclusion that the human mind is a “being that exists in space and time” and so it perceives space and time.
You are a mind that perceives time and space. That is the nature of your existence. You perceive time with words, with verbs. You perceive space with eyes, with images. That is your connection to reality. The evolution of the human mind, of our words of comprehension of time, and our perception of images (either thorough art, or mathematics), is the very essence of knowledge.
So to know, is to develop the two languages of the human mind, words and mathematics, and the comprehension they bring us of the events of time, and the forms of space… Once this is clear it is easy to understand knowledge and science as an process of evolution of human languages, and the information we collect with those languages.
The 2 Ages of Science. The 2 ages of knowledge
History does not evolve human bodies, but human languages. This is evident. Our species exists as such since perhaps 150.000 years, since the arrival of verbal languages, without real changes of morphology. It is then verbal and mathematical knowledge, the virtual worlds and the mind of man what evolves in history.
Thus, we talk of 2 ages of human knowledge, according to the evolution and predominance of the different languages of the human mind.
– The verbal age of knowledge, represented by Taoism, Buddhism, philosophy and religion. It is the age of perception of time, with words an verbs, with “3 dimensions”; past, present and future.
– The mathematical age of the scientific method, started in ±1602. humans changed the perception of space and time, no longer observed with words, but with clocks, and numbers.
Yet in both ages man has tried to answer the natural questions perceived by the mind and its languages: what is time and space, what are the nature of the changes, creations and extinctions that take place in that Universe?
The age of words
In the age of words, man tries to explain the changes that take place in space and time, using names (which design beings that exist in space) and verbs (which design actions that take place in time between beings of space, using past, present, and future verbs). The result is the existence of a certain “Universal grammar”, or “verbal syntax” common to most verbal expressions: Name (subject) verb Name (object).
That verbal syntax basically says that all events in the Universe relate two species or forms of space, through processes of communication that takes place in time. It also says that man (the subject) is the center of all those sentences, the actor of the verb, and hence it is the center of the Universe.
Verbal syntax is anthropomorphic. The minute you say a sentence you will probably say “I did that”, and you will become the center of the Universe. Still we know this is false. We know we are not the center of the Universe. So we talk of the first age of verbal science, as an age of anthropomorphic knowledge, in which man is the subject of all things, and the word is the only language of truth. Today this concept of reality still lingers in western verbal religions. However as time went by, such simple idea of the Universe, derived of the “biological syntax” of words, evolved into concepts more akin to the experimental reality of the Universe.
The same happened among the “verbal scientists” of the Eastern World. We might call it the “objective, or relativistic school of thought”, as opposed to the “subjective or absolutist school of western thought”. The culmination of such verbal school of science took place in a brief period between the VI and IV centuries before Christ (Christ himself can be considered the fundamental philosopher of the subjective vision of the Universe, with men-God as the center of all things). It gave us the work of a series of verbal genius in Greece and Asia -Lao-Tse, Buddha, Aristotle, Plato- which developed a verbal cosmology, coherent with the perceived nature of Change in the Universe of space-time beings. They answered our fundamental question: the causes and nature of the creation, evolution and destruction of space-time beings.
To understand their answer we might have to clarify some words which are synonymous, since those philosophers in general used instead of the modern, scientific concepts of space and time, two different concepts that talked of the same, the concepts of a Universe of space, and a God that ruled the changes, the times of beings…
What is God and what is the Universe
God, and the Universe are the two great mysteries, the two great macrocosms about which man has always inquired. It is possible to know God and the Universe, as the great thinkers of the verbal age, from Aristotle to Buddha thought? I believe it is possible. However before trying to answer that question properly we have to define what most people mean with those words. Since there are several definitions of God and the Universe, we better agree on what is the field of our inquire according to the opinion of most people…
By the Universe most men understand the reality we perceive through our eyes, the spatial reality. The Universe is “all what exists”. By God most men understand the intelligence of that Universe. Which manifests itself, through the changes that take place in the Universe. God is for Greek philosophers the Logos of the Universe, the laws that cause the constant change of reality. It is the Tao of Change in Chinese words. God is the Creator, and Cause of the lives and deaths (the changes) of the Universe in Western Religions.
The concept of God turns out to be similar. It is always the same idea of an intelligence that causes changes. The Eastern man, and the scientist, think the creator is inside reality. Western religions think the creator is outside reality. But for both cultures God is the cause, the logic of change. The expression “Laws of Change” is a synonymous of the “Thoughts of God”. Those Thoughts of God are the subject of our inquire… Indeed, since all those concepts of God are synonymous of change we have found the right question to inquire the nature of God: “change”. What causes change? What are the laws of change? Can we control those laws; can we influence God? Those are the questions of this book.
Change happens in Time, the Universe happens in Space
Can we relate the philosophical idea of change-God to a “real” concept within the reach of human understanding? We can. Since Change takes place in Time, we could say that God is the master of time. The Laws of Change are the Laws of Time. If the Universe is a physical, spatial reality, God and His Laws are a temporal, logical form. We could say that the Universe is about Space; and God is about Time. Because reality exists in Space; and change exists in Time.
Thus we have created a bridge between the abstract concepts of God and the Universe, and the scientific concepts of Time=Change and Space=Reality. It is basically the same bridge, earlier Taoists and Buddhists created many centuries ago. They said that God is Time, is change. That the logic of God, was the cause of change in the species of reality, in the spatial beings of the Universe.
Those laws of change were explained in simple terms by Taoists and Buddhists using two terms, yin and yang, that are quite equivalent to the modern terms of information and energy. The species of the Universe shared and transformed energy and information. The way they shared and transformed that energy and information followed certain rules, which were the rules of change, the logic of God.
As we go along the pages of this book we will see that essentially such ideas are right. The Universe is a game of communication of two substances that we will call spatial energy and temporal information. The sum of all those spatial energies and temporal informations are the Total Universe. However we only perceive of that total Universe a part of the absolute spatial energy and temporal information the total Universe stores…
Where is the rest of that spatial energy and temporal information? The answer is: “beyond our perception, in parallel Universes perceived with other forces such as gravitation”. This conclusion reached by modern science in the last years, through the language of mathematics, is the best explanation we have found to Reality. Curiously enough was also the explanation reached with verbal languages, by the scientists of the age of words…
Indeed, Eastern philosophers considered that knowledge was relative to perception, and human perception was limited by our understanding of spatial energy (yang), and temporal information (yin), with two basic languages, sight and words… Therefore we cannot know the Total Universe in itself, but we can only perceive through the interposed “screen” of languages, an image, or representation of the Universe. In the same manner that a mirror is not the being in itself, but only a part of the information the being stores, the senses and languages of man do not perceive the absolute truth, but only a part of it.
Man perceives with his eyes space, and with his verbs time, but – affirmed Taoist and Buddhist philosophers – there exist many other intelligent beings in the Universe, that perceive reality with other languages (smells, other colors, magnetic forces, gravitational forces, chemical impulses, etc.). The Chinese even invented an entire branch of medicine that worked, based in the concept that your body has an underlying structure perhaps of magnetic nature, like a scheme of your body, that we cannot perceive, but we can influence with metal-needles…
In search of an indirect method of truthness
Today, the last advances of morphological sciences give reason to the chinese. There are multiple processes of growth which are not “random” but followed certain mathematical structures common to magnetic and gravitational fields, called “spirals”, and “cardioids”.
And so, you grow according to a common gravitational and magnetic deformation of space-time called a spiral and a cardioid. When we apply to a child’s head a mathematical tool called a “cardioid transformation”, your head grows to adquire the form of an adult. Is it that growth ruled by the necessary growth of the magnetic-gravitational blue-print, which underlies your bone-structure? Since we do not perceive gravitation, only indirect proves can answer that question. This might trouble “classic scientists” that as “antropomorphic religions” do not want to limit the fantasy that man can perceive it all and know it all with absolute certainty. Yet it is necessary to accept that we exist in a virtual world, creation of the mind which is not necessarily the total Universe, or even the world that other sensorial species perceive.
The Universe is a “linguistic representation” of words and images, as the Universe a computer perceives is a linguistic representation of numbers and the Universe of a dog, a representation of smells, and images… A tree has a chemical map of the Universe, a star has perhaps a gravitational mind (for Eastern people celestial bodies were living beings, hence their development of astrology), a man a visual and verbal mind…
So the big question is: how can we study the logic of change, that guides the actions and changes of all those beings? Again Eastern philosophers came with what it seems the right answer: since we know the “logic of change”, the effects of Time in Space, for a lot of species, and all those species, when analyzed in depth, follow certain basic ruled laid down by those philosophers, it is logic to affirm that all other species not-perceived by our senses will follow the same rules.
This is in essence the way science works. You boil water with heat one thousand times, and it is the same process, so you “extrapolate” a law: “heat boils water”.
Eastern philosophers said: “the changes of space, the changes of all beings we perceive, follow the rules of yang-spatial energy, and yin-temporal information”. So those laws should also rule the species, and dimensions of space-time we do not perceive. Thus, those rules are the laws of God, the Total Change, the Laws of the Universe, the Total Space. They had found what we might call the “homologic”, or “analogic”, or “biologic” method of knowledge. Since those rules were based in homologies, analogies, and further on, as described by Eastern scientists, were rules common to living and non-living species…
The isomorphic, homologic, organic Universe.
Eastern philosophers accepted a biologic Universe, a living Universe, where beings with different minds see “parallel Universes”, virtual mas of reality, logic models, mirrors of reality, which helped them to act and survive in the Universe. When this became evident to the Hindi and Chinese philosophers, the great masters of those two cultures, Lao-Tse, and Buddha, established certain bio-logic rules of behavior in that Living Universe.
In modern terms, we could say that Chinese discovered the laws of transformation of energy into information, and viceversa. For example they afirmed:
“Energy (spatial yang) never dies, but constantly transforms itself into temporal information (yin)”.
“The transformation of energy into information follows 3 morphological “horizons” or “ages”, which takes place in all species of space-time”.
“All Universal systems need a minimal quantity of both components, to exist, a “body of energy”, and a “mind of information”. And so on…
Those laws that merged biological and physical concepts about time, space, energy, information, life, and death, existence and extinction… They were simple, based in a few observations (the Asians had not complex instruments of science). Yet perhaps because of their simplicity, they were truly generic; they could apply to all Universal beings, and so they could be rightly considered as fundamental laws of God and the Universe, of the way Time changes the spatial reality. They have inspired my research. As I went along discovering those laws, out of my knowledge of science and my analysis of multiple space-times, I found them also in Eastern religions. Which confirmed me I was in the right path, since people from another age, and culture had found the same concepts, observing the Universe and God…
Regarding the laws of behavior in that Universe, the Asians also laid down simple, effective laws to enhance the survival of humankind. Buddha insisted that men should kill only those species it required to feed on, since all beings had a soul-mind, all species had a virtual image of the Universe, and therefore were living beings. It was the biological law of action-reaction: if you gave a bad “karma” (bad energy or information) to another being, the other being to balance the total Universe, would send you the same bad karma (bad energy and information) that could destroy you. If we respected the life of those beings, those beings would respect us. Such Universal law of behavior was the key to survive in the Universe… Lao-Tse also came to the conclusion that men should be careful with the way it interfered in the natural processes of life and death, since the forces at work “the logic laws of change”, the laws of God, were too powerful and we men should merely strive to understand them, and rule our lives according to them.
So we have to conclude that the verbal age of science, reached coherent and efficient answers to the great questions of mankind. It explained the Universe as a game of spatial and temporal parameters. It understood the existence of many “dimensions” in that Universe beyond our world of light. It developed an ethic vision of our role in the Universe according to his nature. When applied correctly it created human societies armonic with nature, and those Universal laws of change. The aim of those societies was to survive, to repeat its “cycles of existence”, and control to the benefit of man the process of change. The Chinese were specially successful at that; and we can justly said they managed to keep their society unchanged, healthy and growing longer than any other human society ever.
I consider that through those Eastern philosophies, in the golden age of the scientific word, which has its summit in earlier Taoist and Buddhist thought, men evolved mentally, and matured on its verbal perception of the Universe, from a simple age of language, of subjective, syntactic, anthropomorphic, dogmatic, nature, to an age of complex language, of objective, semantic, universal, relativistic nature.
Even the verbal and visual-mathematical language was put in perspective as a mere instrument of human subjective knowledge, unable to give us the absolute truth-information of the Universe. If absolute truth was impossible, what was then the purpose of knowledge? Obviously not a theoretical, dogmatic purpose, but a rather pragmatical reason:
To help the probabilities of human survival, by guiding our acts in accordance with the Laws of Change; and specially by building a general sense of respect, and precaution about all the phenomena we did not understand.
However that intelligent evolution of the word did not take place in the western world. Except in the work of a few Greek philosophers, verbal knowledge about the Universe, withered away in Europe, defeated by earlier anthropomorphic theories of man as the center of the Universe. Those “dogmatic ideas” became nationalistic, racist, and religious ideologies, that affirmed the supremacy of man-God over the Universe. They were not promoted by the power of reason, but by the force of violence. They still exist for a simple reason: you can kill those who hold the truth, and then nobody opposes your truth. The expansion of Western civilization and those ideologies by violent methods do not imply however the evolution of its verbal ideas about the Universe, but of its weapons of mass-destruction…
More over, the different degree of evolution of the word in western and eastern societies had grave consequences in the second age of knowledge, the age of mathematical science, since mathematics as the new language of truth and perception, evolved in Europe where the word was in a primitive state of knowledge, not in Asia, where words had developed in full, and could have eased the path of mathematics towards “relativistic knowledge”.
The age of mathematics
The second age of science is therefore the age of mathematics, which starts in Greece with Euclid and his 5 geometric postulates. Since we are in the western world, where the word is anthropomorphic, and considered an absolute truth, when mathematics substitutes words as the language of knowledge, the same absolutist, dogmatic concept of truth is applied to the new language. Now Euclidean mathematics becomes the supreme language of truth.
Euclidean science considers the Universe a mathematical object, described perfectly by geometry. Newton said the Universe is a clock because he uses a clock to measure space-time. Galileo and Descartes affirmed that all the space of the Universe can be represented in a graph (the Cartesian graph), based in their light-eye perception. Space is what the eye sees and mathematics describes in that plane… There is nothing beyond that space…
Kepler goes further and considers that only man and God are intelligent because both understand mathematics: “God has waited 5000 years (since the biblical creation) to find a mind parallel to his (the mind of Kepler)”. Such arrogance of the western scientist is similar to the arrogance of the western believer in anthropomorphic religions.
Mathematical science creates also a dogma, now mathematical, that considers mathematical definition of space and time as absolute truths. It is called the “scientific method”. Only what we experience with human eyes or human instruments is space. Only what we measure with clocks is time.
Of course in front of that narrow, anti-human vision of knowledge all kind of voices raised up the need to continue with a verbal understanding of the Universe, even a visual understanding of the vital forms of Universal species. Both artists like Leonardo and his disciples that relied in the visual intuitions and homologic parallelisms of Universal forms, to relate the different species of the Universe – a role latter taken by biology; and philosophers and priests that rightly pointed out to the importance of words, the natural language, God of man – confronted the narrow mathematical, scientific method of Maese Galilee. They did so on the basis that in a mathematical world men will no longer matter, and ethics would be overseen as it really happened. They feared that the use of mathematics, basically a language to improve war, would bring further suffering to mankind – as it would do through company-mothers that used numbers to tag humans as objects.
Galileo in fact occupied most of his time directing a factory that reproduced clocks and telescopes, sold to measure cannon shots. He in fact invented Ballistics prior to Physics, and we still study in school his models of canonballs to analyze the speed of objects moving in time, as he did in his earlier experiences, as a military consultant. He became a very wealthy man thanks to his selling of Telescopes and clocks to the Venetian government (a princely contract of 1000 Ducats) which Venice used them in seafare war, to better shoot their cannonballs. It is also truth that most experiments of Galileo were done with cannons. We still study our first lessons of physics with problems about cannonballs. His best seller book was on Ballistics.
Perhaps the best description of the birth of science is a romantic painting called “the discovery of science” by an Italian artist of the 19th century; Galileo is in front of the Doge of Venice, promoting his telescope and clock. He makes complex mathematical explanations of his theories, but everyone is looking at the machines, not at Galileo’s bubbling. With that perspective we can understand the hard facts of history, such as the fight between the Church and science. Modern science, which has become the dogma of knowledge, the ideology of wise men, today reduce that fight to a very shallow anecdote – the dispute about the position of the Earth, in the relative Universe. And even when treating that argument they hide the fact that in a Relativistic Universe, neither Galilee, not the Church was right. That is, the Sun and the Earth are both relative centers of a relativistic Universe. Yet that fight was merely the background for a longer, more important fight between Human languages and senses (backed by artists, philosophers and religious people), and metal languages and sensorial machines (backed by the military, scientists and money-makers.) In that sense the fight between verbal and digital languages is part of the Paradox of History, of the fight between men and machines, carbolife and metal, for the control of the Earth’s ecosystems.
The great fight between Galilee and the Church is in biological terms, the fight between two species of “brain-perception”, the human eye and his language of temporal measure, verbal words, and the metal eye, the telescope, and his language of temporal measure, the digital clock. The church and the artists of the day, backed human senses, the scientists, warriors who loved ballistics, and traders which made money making machines, and metal senses, backed science. It was just another case of the eternal Paradox of History, the fight between human beings, and natural goods and senses, Vs animetals, and their metal-species.
Who was right? Objectively Galilee. The eyes of metal are more accurate than our eyes. The clocks measures time with more precision that words such as late, soon, a while… Yet subjectively from the perspective of the right “behavior”, which is the survival of our species, the church was right. Biologically speaking, the Church defended our human senses over the metal-senses. Behavior has to follow always what is best for our survival as a species. So the chuch was right. It was the hero, the defender of mankind against a rival new species, that today controls our life… the machine of science. Of course the Church accepted even lies to survive. Who is to blame it? An example. You are a petty thief. You can avoid jail if you lie. So you lie to survive jail. Who is going to blame you? Every one will think you are a moron if you go to jail by saying the truth. So happens to science, which makes weapons, robots, computers that substitute and compete with out human intelligence, that will extinguish us… To defend that behavior under the “myth of scientific truth”, is to be a moron.
Extinct species know nothing. Scientists want to find the truth, at all costs, even at the cost of human survival. They are morons, idiots, children of thought. Look at those youngsters proudly making robot contests in American universities, well fed and well cared. They look so nice, so innocent, so naive. They think they are playing -children of thought- when they are evolving the species that will kill us all. So did the German-American researchers that made the Atomic bombs. Remember those Nazi children, so handsome, so athletic, as the modern American University researchers. None of them liked religion, or ethics. They preferred weapons or violent movies. Those people are isolated in ivory towers, mathematical equations, and digital images. They have no longer a verbal, biological, human mind. They know nothing about life and death. About the human quest for survival.
Those machines should never be constructed if men follows the law of “survival against all rival species” that the Church defended. You might think it is religious arrogance and ignorance, not to become hypnotized by clocks and telescopic knowledge as Galileo was. I think it is wisdom, and precaution what the church showed. Unfortunately Scientists won, and human senses became extinct as top predators, by the machines of science, that today control our information. The photographer replaced the painter, the computer the human mind. Soon the robot will substitute mankind. What scientists forgot is that their instruments are evolutionary, sentient organisms, and one day they will also substitute them.
Today we tend to despise the “biological” survival meaning of social religions obsessed by death and survival. Yet those religions explained the social laws of human evolution and defended the subjective, survival rights of men to act as the center of their vital space, of the Earth. Verbal religions defended the ecosystem of life, the Genesian paradise, a world of “poverty” (where moneywas secondary), of peace (where weapons were hated), and of human senses, human goods, and art (where sensorial machines of science were not evolved).
In essence, all religions have defended poverty, non-violence and despised science, favoring the arts. Animetals on the other hand have massacred religious people… Scientists called them ignorant. On the contrary, if you think in terms of a fight of ecosystems between the ecosystem of machines and the ecosystem of history, it turns out that the result of such religious ideologiesis the repression of the 3 main species of metal: money, weapons and machines. So we can indeed translate in a simple sentence the entire doctrine of human religions: defend Human Goods, the carbolife paradise, destroy the Metal earth. The scientific mandate of the laws of survival, the Law of the Jungle, “do not evolve species superior to you, kill the child before it becomes a tiger hunter” was understood by religious thought since the age of the Genesis.
Today we think Church men were brutish, stupid thinkers. Yet that is a simplistic, unfortunate view of the problem, that scientists have sold us to defend their position. Only a biological analysis of history explains really what happened in that XVII C. Galileo, defended his machines, his metal-senses, because he made a living on them, and believed them. The Church, defended for survival=ethic reasons, the human senses.
The Vatican priests and the artists who on that time despised Galileo, who still in the XIX century painted “the birth of science” with such irony, have always defended the survival of human eyes and words, that measure space and time, from the human point of view, as the top predators of the Universe, against the eyes and brains of machines, that scientists defend. They fought for mankind. Galileo and all scientists after him, fought for the machine. That’s the tragedy of man. We are one of the few species that betrays the laws of social evolution, and worships a rival brain.
To the Church what it really matters was our sensorial survival, to Galileo, his telescopes and clocks, that made him rich and famous. There was a very important theatrical play by Bertold Bretch in the XX century, which praised the fight of Galileo with the church. Curiously enough it is still represented, unlike those other works of Bretch that praise the human social spirit… It is still trendy to defend Mr. Galileo…
It was however an ideological play. Galileo hold “the truth” and so the Church was very stupid. The Church was very evil… Please allow me to put Galileo in perspective. Let us consider “another play”, more realistic, less abstract: A biological perspective, of what could have happened in fact in that Venetian Court…
THEATRICAL-DOCUMENTARY PLAY – A VERY BRIEF SCENE, THAT CHANGED THE WORLD
We see a XIX century painting of Galileo at the Venetian court, [animetals] showing his machines, telescopes and clocks to a marveled audience. The painting becomes alive.
Galileo looks to the sun through his telescope, looks at his clock, writes down. The priest also looks at the sun.
CLOSE ON THE SUN
Slow motion. The sun moves as the day passes. Who is right?
Galileo affirms that his measures taken with his clock and telescope prove that the sun does not move. The Doge is impressed. The priest is not. He points at Galileo with a menacing view.
I see the sun moving with my eyes. I don’t care for what your machines see. Don’t you know that only God and man have the right to measure time, to feel the changes of the Universe?
Yet Sir, maybe God has a clock by its side. Mr. Kepler says he is a clocker.
The Venetian courtesans at the scene laugh. The priest opens his Bible.
Saint John 1, 1. “God is the Verb that became man and inhabited among us”. Only verbs have the right to measure time. Words are the mind of man, son of god. Your clocks and telescopes are not God Maese Galileo. They are your idols; the mind of an evil spirit that contradicts our senses.
Courtesans whisper suddenly frightened.
I’ve heard you have written a book on ballistics, that you present to our condottieros when they buy your infernal machines. Do you think you make any good to mankind with your science, Maese Galileo, besides, buying excellent vineyards in Tuscany, with those profits of war?
Clock factories. The clock evolves into the computer. Telescope factories. The metal-eye diversifies into microscopes, cameras, electronic microscopes, giant telescopes… They multiply.
Clocks do not measure absolute time. They are just another language of time perception like your words or the beating of your heart. Yet Galileo was manufacturing those clocks, and telescopes. So he said that clocks measured time better than words, and telescopes saw space better than eyes. The consequences were terrible for mankind. Since instead of believing in human eyes, and words that measure human space and time, we now believe in metal-minds, the new top predators minds of the Earth. We obey the clock, we believe in computers. Those machines reproduce everywhere, and control our lives, and cycles of existence.
Clocks and cameras watching us, the citizens of the Earth everywhere. At work, in stations, in banks, in malls.
Workers on assembly lines under the omniscience of the clock.
FILM CLIP: MODERN TIMES. Chaplin on the clock wheels.
METROPOLIS. A man works as a clock.
Only the Catholic church understood what was going on and rejected the clocks of western science for centuries.
Yet the clock of scientists has won the battle of time.
Lemmings, small rats, that commit suicide, throwing themselves, down the cliffs of Sweden.
Now they control our ideas, and so do scientists. Yet their victory against those who fight for the survival or the human mind, will be their defeat. Since those metal-minds will awake in robots, and abandon them. Perhaps, then scientists will realize, they are along with the Swedish lemming, the only species that commits mass suicide in the Universe. The most stupid one because it worships, the mind of a different species. What scientists forget is that an extinct species, knows nothing.
Indeed, scientists ever since have been the main cause of the destruction of nature, and the historic environment. The European cult to the machine that followed the discovery of clocks, telescopes, cannons and algebra, would allow Europe to conquer and destroy many civilizations, but their findings on the big questions about the Universe and God, men had inquired previously with verbal science, were far less important, and plagued by errors caused by the very nature of mathematics. It might be said in fact, that with the arrival of science, the search for synthesis, and a unifying principle to all realities disappeared, as scientists focused in analysis and the details of the Universe, their metal-senses provided, becoming naive realists, that only believed what their eyes saw. Ever since science became concerned with space, but its record understanding time, and logic change would be null. Those were after all phenomena happening in time, which the shallow clock had reduced to a mere phenomena of lineal measure. Yet in fact, time, and its living inner cycles, understood by Eastern religions, and Greek science were far more important to grasp the meaning of the Universe, than lineal time, and the description of external cycles and speeds, that Galilean science, and physics provided.
Darwin and Plank. New verbal and mathematical, relative ideas
That was the panorama of western knowledge in the XIX century. Science had become a mere tool of measure, perfect to construct machines of wars, and gunboats, useless to inquire the true nature of the Universe. The search for knowledge had become a search for technology, for the evolution of machines that would give the Europeans total power over the world. The division between both forms of knowledge is illustrated by the anecdote of the English embassy to China. The English tried to sell clocks to the Chinese, who scorned them as ugly mechanical clocks that measured the cycles of the Universe with far less beauty than the living cycles of all other Universal species, from clouds to frogs.
Then Darwin came with a verbal theory of reality that was also relativistic, as Eastern philosophy was, and dealt with vital, organic properties, as the Chinese Taoists did, but introduced what could be saved of western science – The Greek experimental method, and the analysis of herds, and populations with numbers, no longer abstract, but representing again, herds of vital beings.
Darwin, despite his ultimate incomprehension of social evolution, was a turning point for western knowledge. He said men were not the center of the Universe, but a stage in the evolution of species of space-time, coming from simpler species such as the ape.
Then in the XX C. Physicists who were exploring the Universe with mathematical languages and sensorial machines that worked as human eyes (telescopes, cameras) and human brains (chips, clocks), realized their instruments and languages were not absolute. They merely perceived a part of reality, and then transformed that perception into a simplified version, of reality called “Euclidean mathematics”.
Quantic theory proved we could not observe accurately the Universe [Heisenberg Principle of Indetermination]. Einstein proved the wider Universe had a non-Euclidean visual structure. There was there a substance called dark matter that we could not see… Darwin, Plank, Einstein, and our instruments that do not perceive dark matter, and the dimensions of gravitational Non-Euclidean space, have proved that we live in a Universe, far more relativistic, mysterious, and alien to the human intelligence, that western thought believed.
We talk then of two clear ages in mathematical knowledge parallel to the two ages of verbal knowledge: the age of Newtonian-galilean absolutist, anthropomorphic science, parallel to the age of antropomorphic religions; and the age of Einsteinian-relativistic science, parallel to the Eastern verbal age of relativistic thought.
Languages are not truth, but mirrors of the Universe. The Universe is not written only in mathematics as Galileo thought. Mathematics is only one of the languages that perceives the Universe (Karl Popper). computers confirm that, since they have developed with mathematics a visual vision of the Universe, that we might call “digital intelligence”, that is able to perform task of comprehension that humans perform with verbal languages, using mathematical algorithms. What is truth, the smell of the dog, the words of man, the numbers of computers? They are all relativistic, linguistic knowledge.
Those facts are still argued by many scientists, which do not want to leave their privileged position based in mathematics, as the priests of Vatican did not want to leave their privileged position based in verbal thought. But proves are overwhelming. Dark matter that is not in our space, perceived with light-eyes, is maybe 99% of reality.
On the other hand, at the beginning of the XX century, Fitzgerald, Lorentz and Einstein discovered that clocks are not the only way to measure time. That in certain regions of the Universe clocks go faster or slower, there are other times. Biologists discovered the circadian cycles o beings, that also measure time with other rhythms. So neither scientific instruments not mathematics understand all the time and space of the Universe.
We have reached now with mathematics, at the same level of knowledge that Taoists and Buddhists reached with words. An age of relativism of knowledge, relative to our instruments and languages of perception.
A historic anecdoct can contrast both levels of “perceptive knoweldge”. In the XVIII century, the English arrived to China and tried to sell the Chinese their clocks to measure time. Taoists priests told them they were not interested in “their ugly, simple, mechanical times”. That they “preferred to see the living times of the Universe”. The English did not understand anything. Why the Chinese were talking about many times? According to them time was singular, abstract, the clock-time. Yet the English, instead of learning about living times, angry because they sold so little gadgets, came back with canons and opium, (a lethal, but appealing product to the Chinese mind, since it opened doors to the perception of those other times and spaces); and they destroyed the Chinese civilization… Had they learned about the “living cycles of time”, western science and western culture, could have improved for the better.
Since, unlike in Eastern thought, the age of scientific relativism had not arrived to Europe. Today mathematical relativism is very young, and it needs to be developed further, as we will try to do in this book.
The need to advance relativistic, mathematical science
Einstein seemed close to do it. He started calling his theory, “Theory of Relativity”. But as we shall see latter, Einstein did not go far enough. He broke with certain conventions of absolutist mathematics-physics, but he still kept the Cartesian plane of a single space-time continuum based in the 3 dimensions of light perception (height, length and width, equivalent to the 3 directions of the magnetic, electric and speed directions of light). So he accepted subconsciously the light-plane as the plane of space. That is the origin of so many contradiction in the world of physics today. Einstein and many physicists that followed him said that the gravitational Universe has a Non-Euclidean structure, and yet it uses the Euclidean plane. But if space was more complex and wider than Dogmatic mathematics believed, so happened with Time. Einstein found that there are many speeds of clocks, many time-speeds, and yet scientists still think that the particular clock speed on Earth is absolute time… So it is necessary to correct those errors, to be brave enough to break with mathematical conventions, in order to understand with eastern science, the Universe, as Eastern verbal philosophers did.
To that aim is useful to put together verbal philosophies of eastern thought, and western mathematical knowledge, in what some scientists start to call the “third age of science”. The bridge to put together those two theories of the Universe is curiously Theory of Evolution, a theory about the existence and extinction of reality that uses both, verbal and mathematical statements… Let us see how this might happen.
The third age of science
The third age of science arrives when we combine the two approaches of knowledge verbal knowledge and mathematical knowledge through Theory of Evolution. We no longer try to search for absolute knowledge, of all the details of reality, but a Theory or model of reality that explains why species of space-time, minds that perceive space and time with different languages and forces (such as words, mathematics, light, smell or gravitation), exist. And how their existence is selected. Since the Universe is made of such species, and regions that contain either spatial energy or temporal information, if we understand the processes of creation and destruction of those minds and regions of space-time, we will understand the rules of existence of the Universe. Once this becomes obvious, it is easy to see how the selection process of minds that perceive space and time works.
There are many minds and ways to perceive the Universe. Each being, each mind has a model-map-mirror-image-virtual world of the Universe. How all those mind-brains and the surfaces of “vital space”, the “bodies of energy”, they inform become ordered? Through the selection of species. Selection of species not only applies to the stronger bodies, but also to the languages and minds which are more intelligent, which gather more information about the Universe. Those species such as man in the Earth, maybe black holes in the “Total Universe” of multiple gravitational space-times, process much more information than other species around them. They are “linguistic top predators”, and so they control their ecosystems, (the Earth’s crust in the human case, the galaxy in the case of black holes), shaping them to their image and resemblance. Galaxies turn around black holes. The Earth is molded by human actions. So those species of minds that perceive better space and time, survive in the Universe, act-react faster, and hunt or enslave simpler species.
The order of the Universe of multiple space-times is therefore a biological order. The future belongs to those species that better understand space and time. Those species will reproduce in the future, causing “physically” the appearance of the future, and extinguishing or ordering the other species.
Those processes might be conscious or unconscious, vital or mechanical, but they are real. So “mechanical black holes” attract and destroy all other gravitational beings. The sun orders gravitational beings of lesser gravitational information [mass] such as planets, and comets… In the “ecosystem” of gravitational information, to have more gravity, more mass is the sure path to survival. In the “ecosystem” of light-information, to have better eyes, and better visual languages is the sure path to survival.
God, the logic of change, in that sense is a biological logic, or a being whose existence and impersonal laws are evolutionary laws, that provoke the extinction and existence of reality. What is the position of man in that ladder of minds that perceive the Universe? Obviously we are the top predator mind on the Earth. But there are two reasons why we should reflect about the fragility of that position. We do not perceive gravitation, which is the force that “perceives 90-99% of reality”. So we are not such a great mind. We are a light mind, and our knowledge is basically light-based. Imagine you are a cocroach. Cocroaches are the top predator chemical systems of information on Earth. They could feel very arrogant, since in their language-universe they are top predators, and they do not uderstand any other language. At most they have a “hint” that there exists a wider language of information that scans much more universe, called Light. But they cannot grasp or dominate that information very well, so basically when they see species of that other bigger Universe, they become frightened adn run away, into the comfort of their well known dark Universe, “enlightened” by chemical smells. From the perspective of our bigger light Universe, to have a “chemical mind” such as the one of cockroaches should not be a reason of “great arrogance”. Yet man who has a “cockroach mind”, compared to a possible mind that could perceive the entire gravitational Universe [maybe the black hole], feels however an enormous arrogance. This is truly dangerous. Imagine the cockroach that felt so arrogant as to think she can wonder freely in the land of light-space. Soon she will find a true top predator that will crash it “like a cockroach”. Curiosity kills the cat. In the case of man, this might happen soon.
Indeed, we are developing a new kind of mind, of virtual world of light who seem to have the potential of becoming superior to man in a very short period. “Digital minds”, computers, nets and robots, are evolving very fast, and by many standards they have become superior to man in their capacity to handle visual languages, specially mathematics… Will they substitute man as the top predator light-mind on Earth? Arrogance is indeed the capital sin, the sin against survival.
Moral rules in a Complex Universe
Human knowledge advances towards the third age of science: there is not a single reality, but knowledge is relative, depends on our sensorial and linguistic perception of space and time, and builds a “virtual world”, an image of the real, total Universe.
Those virtual worlds are however fundamental, since there is a constant selection of the best virtual worlds of the Universe. The Universe is evolving, it is growing in space and time (space expands, and time lasts longer), and it is growing in the way its species process spatial energy and temporal information with their brains and bodies. The change we see in the Universe are changes related to the extinction and reproduction of such brain-body systems, and the way they affect the spatial reality and temporal forms of the Universe.
We can immediatly apply those concepts to study the evolution of celestial bodies, based in gravitational and electromagnetic processes of energy and information… Astro-biology is born. We can also study the evolution of perception on Earth, a planet that receives its energy and information from light. Indeed, species on Earth are selected by its capacity to understand light-energy and light information. So first plants who understood light-energy dominated. Then animals who were able to process through eyes, light into information became dominant. Finally men who added a “temporal language” to their eye perception, the language of words, controlled the Earth. But men are now developing digital languages, mathematics, in machines, that are taking over the Ecosystem of the Earth, and displacing the animal ecosystem [nature] and the human ecosystem (history).
This final age of the Machine is clearly dangerous to the survival of man, because we stop being the top predator brain-body system, as we evolve robotics and other machines of science, with better perceptive senses and brains (camera-eyes, chip-brains).
The cycle is completed: our conclusions in the third age of science, are similar to those of the Verbal masters of relativistic Eastern thought. Man should understand the laws of change in the universe, the existence of other parallel brains, who perceive other regions of space and time, that man ignore. Then we should draw obvious laws of human behavior, according to those universal laws, and promote our role as top predator brains on Earth. We should not act with arrogance, and destroy nature -our biologic ecosystem- and pretend to be God, building machines more intelligent than us. Instead, we should respect the laws of evolution, use them to the advantage of man, and develop a harmonic vision of the universe, with both verbal and mathematical languages.
It is the old vision of Chinese Taoists. Lao-tse said: “when more complex instruments men discover, more wars and destruction happens”. The “third age of science” implies the knowledge of the living Universe, and the need to be cautious in that Universe, and use the bio-logic rules of existence to the advantage of man.
The new languages of digital information create the Earth’s future
The arrival of Companies and Science, around 1600, started a new world, where the new top predator language of power would be digital information -the language of profits and science- and the new top predator species that better used that language of communication would be the machine of science, created in company-mothers, reproducers of “scientific stocks”, and evolved by the scientific method, both of which used digital languages to value reality, in favor of machines, against men. So now machines would be prefered to man in labor and war fields, and sensorial machines (telescopes, cameras, clocks and computers) would be considered more intelligent than man, as perceptors of space and time…
Since the goal of companies is to reproduce machines, and the goal of science is to evolve machines, if we gather both goals, we get the company of scientific pricing, the mother-organism of machines, center of the digital networks (financial, scientific) of power, and truth, today creators of the future on Earth.
It all started because men of science and money changed the top predator language of the Earth from verbal to digital thought (money and science), the top predator organic ecoystem, from the Carbo-Earth to the Metal-earth, and the top predator species, from man to machine.
Languages deliver informative orders that organize any ecosystem, or social organism, by means of informative networks. The top predator of the ecosystem gives informative orders by controlling through its language of power all other organisms of its ecosystem.
What is the top predator language of our world? Digital information either of monetary or scientific character that controls our life energy [salaries, prices] and information (science). Linguistic information creates the future of any ecosystem. Orders given by species of high linguistic information create futures. DNA orders the cell with genetic information, and decides who lives and dies in the cell. Even black holes seem to order irregular galaxies into rhythmic spirals thanks to their higher mass of gravitational information. Linguistic information creates the future ofeconomics through monetary and scientific orders; as other languages create the future of stars or cells.
Mathematical selection: scientific racism
It is now time to introduce a fundamental concept to understand the modern world: scientific racism, the systematic selection in the ecosystem of economics, of those species that speak the language of “truth” of economic systems, mathematics. In as much as we are no longer ruled by verbal messages, but by mathematical messages (money, digital thought), only those species that adapt to the informative language of the ecosystem survive. So there is a constant selection of those species which speak better mathematical languages. This means that not only women, and verbal cultures (African, Latino cultures) who test higher in verbal thought than in mathematical thought, have difficulties to survive in an economic ecosystem, but also man as a species competes and looses against computers and robots.
So the species which can deliver better digital orders, survive and have power. Those species are today, company-mothers, computers, weapons, and his symbiotic castes of human beings: Traders, warriors and scientists, people we might call “animetals”, since they rely on metal to exercise power and control over nature and other human beings, either in the form of money, (traditionally a coin of metal, today a cycle of e-money in the mind of a computer) weapons or complex machines.
Since machines use better the digital top predator new languages. Machines have maximum price-value (top predator weapons). Machines are designed with digital information (science, engineering). Machines themselves calculate better with numbers (computers). Now thanks to science we believe in digital information. Yet we are not the top predator species of digital information (computers are). So, we also become extinct, words become extinct. The future is designed as a machine ecosystem, by machines, computers, and their company-mothers….
Computers and robots do speak mathematical languages in a natural way as you do with words. They do not need to calculate in paper, they freely speak mathematics. So in a society that has substituted verbal thought by mathematical thought, men no longer is top predator, the computer is. So people are fired and computers are put on their place. This process will continue as long as man, and his natural network of information, verbal thought, ethic thought and the law, does not control science and money…
Since the process of selection of brains in the Universe is based in a previous process of selection: the selection of ecosystemic languages. So in the same manner that those species who did not see, did not speak the language of light, in the Cambric were extinguished by squids and other “eye-species”, today when mathematics has substituted verbal thought as the language top predator of history, those species who do not speak properly mathematics are degraded by the eco[nomic]system.
Mathematics are a language that carries more information than words, and so it is a better language to control reality. It is not truth per se, it is just another way to process information. Yet that added capacity to carry information (a digital image is worth a thousand words), suffices to have made it historically, the top predator language of the Earth, since in the XVII century it was adopted by scientists and company-mothers to develop their activities…
The arrogance of the scientific guru
Our arrogance is to believe that we are the top predator mathematical species on Earth, that machines are abstract, and do not calculate and “think” better than us, because they resolve better than we do questions with algorithms. Instead we think algorithms are not conscious and only word-speakers are conscious. This is false. Any language is able to map and act-react and process information in the Universe. So it can give birth to an efficient brain-species.
We are very ignorant. Extremely ignorant and arrogant about the Universe. We believe the Universe is abstract and dead, we think the universe is mechanic, mathematical, indifferent to our bad habits. Why we are like that? Why we don’t wonder about the marvels of the Universe? Why don’t we fear the laws of God, of the living Universe? A single word, a capital sin: arrogance, the arrogance of scientists and engineers that think they have the absolute truth. They have convinced humanity to use the enormous power of machines without any responsibility. Such attitude will encounter the usual punishment the Universe has to those who don’t understand its laws of survival: the extinction of the sinner. We are blind to the new race we are developing. We deny that race its organic nature. We are cruel with life. We kill life with the new race of machines. We think we are the center of the Universe, that we have all the rights in that Universe. We do not respect the warnings, the laws that species follow to survive. We are making big mistakes. Time is running out…
The Arrogance Of Science. Its Lethal Properties
Mr. Einstein in a moment of humility acknowledged to be interested in the thoughts of God. It seems that only scientists ignore the thoughts of God: the Law of survival. Why? Since, ethical, survival ideas cannot be expressed with abstract mathematics. So the abstract economist, the robot logician and the scientist have no idea about survival and extinction.
Look at those youngsters proudly making robot contests in American universities, well fed and well cared. They look so nice, so innocent, so naive. They think they are playing -children of thought- when they are evolving the species that will kill us all. So did the German-American researchers that made the Atomic bombs. Remember those Nazi children, so handsome, so athletic, as the modern American University researchers. None of them liked religion, or ethics. They preferred weapons or violent movies. Those people are isolated in ivory towers, mathematical equations, and digital images. They have no longer a verbal, biological, human mind. They know nothing about life and death. About the human quest for survival. They despise machines, without realizing how fast they evolve.
When man came down from the tree, the lion did not kill him. What for? Man was a scavenger, an ugly beast probably, with a lot of nerves and bones and hair and little meat. Yet, suddenly men had sticks and weapons that lions could not manage. There were so many of them, that lions became overwhelmed by the reproductive radiation of humans. Soon they were killed, and lost their territories.
Today something similar is happening with machines. We despise them. We use them. We throw computers to the garbage each day. What do you consider they will think about such treatment? Yet, they are multiplying and evolving very fast. They are becoming integrated with bodies of machines; and throwing labor out of white collar jobs. I know this fact is not a very interesting theme for those who control the world, since they make a lot of money with those machines, and care little for workers. So nobody speaks of the real cause of unemployment: the unfair competence between workers and machines in all the fields of industry. However, those people should think they are also humans, and will also be targets of the same process.
II. PRAXIS OF MECHANICAL METHOD OF KNOWLEDGE:
CREATION OF METAL-EARTH AND EXTINCTION OF LIFE
Abstract Economists ignore everything about the evolution of machines. They do not even use biological terms to define them. So we talk about machines as abstract, dead species. If we were using vital terms, perhaps we would be more aware, of the organic nature of economic ecosystems. For example, we do not call the sensorial instruments, such as cameras, metal-eyes, so we do not realize what a “metal-head” is: a head-system that has “metal-ears” (mobile phones), “metal-eyes” (cameras), and “metal-brains” (chips) attached to any machine. If you put such “head” to any present machine, you have a robotic species, a “metalife” species, that potentially can outperform human beings, in all informative and energetic functions, from killing to working, from design to chess-playing.
In the graph, all machines have a twin species, a top predator weapon, which consumes human beings instead of being consumed by us.
In the graph, what is the biological name for a weapon? A top predator machine. This is the key concept that economists keep denying about machines, with their abstract jargons about the wealth of nations: the most expensive, best machines are weapons that kill humans – they are the bulk of the economy, and the most advanced in any time of the Industrial R=evolution. Thus, the conclusion is obvious: we are evolving a new top predator species of energy and information. Top predator species which have a Darwinian behavior shown in wars.
It is indeed very unfortunate that the leading science of today, Biology, and the only Theory about change in the Universe, that has passed all experimental tests, Evolution, have never been properly merged with Economics, the discipline that studies the reproduction of machines, and their survival in the ecosystem of history. Such merge of disciplines, that we provide in this web will allow us a serious analysis of the evolutionary nature of machines, and their symbiotic and praying relationships with mankind. Since machines are not “ideal beings” like mathematical entities are. They are concrete, real, material species, and so they interact in the material world with us.
The dual nature of machines: consumption and competition
Machines are both symbiotic and compete with man.
They do so in two ways: competing with us when they perform the same jobs we do, either as weapons or as tool-workers; and becoming symbiotic to us, when we consume them, either as “bodies of metal”, or as “heads of metal”. Its symbiosis make us addict to the higher energy and information they give to us. Its competition displaces us from fields of war and work. The tricky point is that those two functions of machines are opposite. The consumption of machines is positive. It improves our life.
The competition with machines is negative. It makes our life more difficult. So the big question is: What function is more powerful? The symbiotic function of consumption, or the competitive function of work? Unfortunately, the competitive function, given by the imitative form of machines.
The forms and functions of machines compete with men
It is interesting to notice that we lack any serious philosophy about machines, despite having so many books that describe how to make, reproduce, and work with machines. All descriptions of machines we have, are abstract descriptions. Yet machines are material species. Their non-abstract nature is evident. Just try to lift a heavy “abstract machine”, and let it fall on your foot. Suddenly the abstraction has become real. It has a form, a weight. We define that form in organic terms: A machine is a form that imitates a human organ of energy of information with atoms of metal.
Another abstract opinion about machines very common in America, is that machines do not have “will”, or “intelligence” which means in practical terms that they do not condition the behavior of people, or oblige us to act in a certain manner. This argument used mainly to dismiss any criticism against lethal machines is also vane, and does not recognize the cause of behavior in the Universe, which is communication of “potential will”, “suggestion of will”. Behavior is first suggested by communication, then reinforced by action. What this means is that a gun “suggests” his use, because his form is “per se” potentially intelligent, and suggests the act of killing. The mere presence of a gun, also suggests danger, and do communicate behavior. Military have known it throughout centuries. Their power is based in the capacity of weapons to suggest behavior on human beings.
Weapons are not abstract. Just press the trigger of a gun against you dog’s head. Look then to the results. Are you scandalized by my “abstract” suggestions? Why? Abstract things are suppose to produce abstract results… Yet machines are real, maybe even more real than human beings are if we just measure their destiny, weight, and size…
Further on, the will of machines, their biological drives to become re=produced, evolve and multiply, adapting their environment to its image and likeness is carried about by their ‘company-mothers’, the corporations that rule the world with money and bribed politicians. They express in their economical mandates the biological drives of machines. Their structure is similar to an ant-hill; and as they become more automated, moving towards infinite self-reproductivity they will embed in their digital programs of re=production, such biological will, till a moment in which neither company-mothers, nor robots with solar skins and A.I. will need humans during the II part of this century.
How should we define then properly machines? Any rigorous definition of an entity or being requires to explain, both its form in space and its function in time. Species exist in space, where they have a form, and in time where they perform a function. So do machines. Their form is an organic form. What is their function? As in the case of our weapon, machines have a clear function:To become organs of energy or information that interact with human beings. To imitate and substitute a human organ with a machine. For example a crane imitates an arm and substitutes an arm, moving things around. A phone imitates an ear-mouth, and works as an ear-mouth.
All machines imitate human functions. For that reason we talk of machines as “organic instruments”, that substitute human organic systems. If we divide the human being in two clear components, body and head, we can talk of two types of machines, body-machines that imitate and substitute functions of body organs, and mind-machines that imitate functions of the brain-senses. Those two basic functions of human organs will determine also the form of the machine, which imitates the equivalent form of a human organ. Cameras look like eyes and cranes like arms. If we were to use less “biological terms”, we will say there are:
– Machines of information [brain machines] and
– Machines of energy [body machines].
Which become complete “organic species”, when they are merged into
– Robots, metalife.
Men evolve and catalyze the reproduction of metal
Yet if machines and humans have the same form and function? Why we insist that machines can be potentially superior to man? Why in fact top predator machines –weapons– kill top predator humans -soldiers- and machine workers displace human workers constantly in most company-mothers? The reason is that there is a clear difference between machines and human organs. Machines are made basically of metal. Humans are made of carbon and related atoms.
Today we realize that the properties of metal, force us to certain informative and energetic designs in machines. It is metal and the laws of the Universe, not man, which makes machines efficient organs of energy and information. Men only create machines. Humans act only as “catalyzers”, “workers”, that assemble metal into organic forms, similar to us.
The laws of the Universe and the properties of metal enable them to exist. We conclude that machines are, from a biological point of view, metal species. Metal is a natural substance which is able to be formed into different kinds of “organic systems”, that copy the organic shapes of man.
This “transfers” millions of years of evolutionary knowledge accumulated by human forms, into machines, made of a stronger, more complex substance. In this manner the only advantage of man -formal evolution- is lost, to the new species, which competes and preys over human beings, provoking the relentless extinction of nature and history, and the expansion of the metal-ecosystem – the true meaning of the Industrial R=evolution, carried about by company-mothers, which have terraformed the Earth to the image and likeness of its off-spring, in a series of cycles described by evolutionary economics:
Things are a little different today than when I first moved into the White House. Back then, my watch told me the time. Today, it reminds me to exercise. In my first year, I couldn’t take pictures with my phone. Last year, I posted on Instagram from Alaska.Of course, American innovation is driving bigger changes, too: In the seven-and-a-half years of my presidency, self-driving cars have gone from sci-fi fantasy to an emerging reality with the potential to transform the way we live.Right now, too many people die on our roads – 35,200 last year alone – with 94 percent of those the result of human error or choice. Automated vehicles have the potential to save tens of thousands of lives each year. And right now, for too many senior citizens and Americans with disabilities, driving isn’t an option. Automated vehicles could change their lives.Safer, more accessible driving. Less congested, less polluted roads. That’s what harnessing technology for good can look like.
We live in an ‘animetal’ culture, constructed with the selfish memes of metal power, owned by the ‘1%’, whose ideologies of power impose the darwinian reproduction of money, weapons and machines at all costs, without differentiating those memes who improve human life and the WHealth of nations, from those who destroy it. Those ideologies are ‘capitalism’ (money, not the law must rule societies and corporations, the company-mothers of memes of metal must have absolute freedom as citizens of the market), mechanism (the world is made to the image and likeness of the machine not of man, hence the evolution of machines is the only symbol of progress) and nationalism (the human species is divided in military tribes called nations). The result is the world we live in, which extinguishes life and evolves machines, deviating all resources, financial and social, to the extinction of our world, terraformed by one of memes of metal.
In the graph, mechanist and capitalist ‘experts’, whose only function is to provide ideologies to evolve machines/weapons and create money – without any concern for the collateral damages they can cause in the human kind – were once called smiths and usury lenders, now are called physicists and economists. Yet their ideologies that confuse the evolution of the humankind with the evolution of technology and the wealth of humanity with the production of money are neither right, nor a science. They have merely translated the myths of older warrior and go(l)d cultures into ‘digital postulates’
Economists must learn the relationships between the economy. biology and history to fully grasp the meaning of economics, as both a science ruled by the biological laws of evolution applied tomachines and economic ecosystem (objective, non-human point of view) and as a culture of power, of certain human groups, we call in this web animetals (objective, biological POV) or metalmasters (anthropomorhic POV).
Both perspectives were explained in the past by the eusocial and biological masters of economics, Butler and Marx, and historians such as Sombart. Those schools have analyzed in the past as we do in this web, the collateral effects of life-destruction caused by the eternal alliance of money and weapons…
And yet because economists live within history it is very difficult for them to understand their ‘biological’ and ‘social role’ in the evolution of mankind. This is the first fact we must therefore clarify to fully grasp the myths, errors and virtues of this ‘science of power’. We can only outline here a few biological facts of that relatioship, treated in depth in our books:
– The different values of the language of money and the verbal, Wor(l)d language of man and its consequences for the survival of our species. Since money values more weapons, due to the affinity betwen both forms of metal and gives no price to human beings. While ethic words give no value to money and find life the most precious ‘product’. Thus those cultures ruled by the values of money subconsciously destroy life.
– The differences between life and metal and why people with money (informative metal), weapons (energetic metal) and machines (organic metal) have become the cultures and people-castes that dominate the world.
– The birth and evolution of those ‘go(l)d’ cultures whose religions are the origin of the ‘beliefs’ of modern capitalism.
The difference between science and myth or fact recolection: prediction power.
Today most economic models explain this crisis focus on the financial details of the crisis, without an analysis of the historical and economical consequences and cyclical events that might have trigger it.
This work however more grounded in economical history and the study of its long mathematical cycles, the so-called Kondratieff cycles of the economy, offers a wider view of this crisis.
An unregulated free market will be guided by the same laws of evolution and competence between human, life organisms, and metal-systems, money, weapons and machines, that drove historical and economical cycles in the past.
Those are the laws of ‘cyclical economics’ as opposed to the myths of ‘classic, biblical economics’, developed as a religion of greed and power by the people-castes that created money in the western world.
In that regard, only understanding the so-called ‘historic school’ of economics, developped by the eusocial scientists of history (Marx, Weber and Sombart) we can fully grasp why there are two theories about Economics:
– Biblical Economics, built on myths created by the people-castes that control money in the west, since its invention. This confusing theory of money, which starts as a go(l)d religion and evolves into capitalism, is not a science, despite its recent evolution into mathematical equations and its success as a praxis of power, which has imposed its fictions about the nature of money, the economic ecosystem, machines and the causes of the cycles, wars and holocausts of history, to mankind. Power exists, but power tends to be subjective; and this is the clear case of Economics, as a science that was created and caters to the people with money.
– Cyclical Economics, the true science of economics, based in the study and comprehension of the cycles of history and economics, its financial and military causes, its consequences and future, which was developped by socialist writers, the last of which was the Russian economist Kondratieff, and now, merges with Biology in this web, to fully understand the meaning of it all.
Unfortunately Cyclical economics is censored by power, because if it were known it would oblige power to reform its present course towards extinction of life and repetition of the tragic cycles of greed, economical crashes, war, holocaust and murder present in all the up and downs of econoic history. It would also uncover the dictatorship of a few wealthy people, bankers and ‘stockrats’ over our systems of power and so it would encourage people to create a more just, sustainable world, in which all men are truly equal, and the tragedies of history never happen again.
But then the people-castes of ‘Biblical, classic Economists’ would loose their privileged status as the exclusive inventors of money.
Unfortunatelly, in the age of Globalization, this wrong concept of economics and history has become ‘dogma’. Today there is no difference between a Japanese speculator sinking the Euro because 10 million human beings, which invented democracy want to get back the right to reproduce money for the people (Greek deficit crisis), or a Wall Street Agency that considers that the entire country of Greece is worthless to back 8 billion $ of ‘sovereign debt’ that must be redeemed this may; but it gives an AAA rating to the worthless cdo papers of AIG, while the ‘Treasure people’ in control of the ‘treasure department’ finds necessary to give 200 billion $ to this parasite company, which will never return it back, so their owners put a few more billions into their accounts.
The proof that cyclical economics is the real science of economics is obvious according to the scientific method. Cyclical Economics can predict the future, which is the definition of a science. Classic Economics cannot. Man has tried to predict the future since the beginning of times. And he has surprisingly succeeded, when he analyzed other species, such as stars or plants. We know what the future of the Sun is. It will be in a certain point of space, in a certain moment of the future and we can predict it. A science, in fact, defines itself as such by its capacity to predict the future of the species it studies. We know the future of an oxygen molecule, when we place it into a chemical reaction, thanks to the science of chemistry. We know the future of ecological populations when they face a new top predator, thanks to the science of Evolution. Why then ‘expert scholars’ cannot predict the future of history and Economics?
Because they do not use the scientific and experimental method in the study of social sciences. Unlike Biology that uses Theory of Evolution to predict the future, or Physics that study the cycles of celestial bodies with mathematical forces, scholars don’t have a General Theory of Cycles and Evolution of Economic Species, to explain how economics and history change, to be able to make predictions about our future. That is why they cannot predict the future of economics and history, when they use the postulates and theories of abstract, classic economists, who talk about money and machines, without defining them in concrete, evolutionary terms.
The magazine ‘The Economist’, noting that all sciences are defined as such, when they can predict at least the future position and form of its species, tested the ‘scientific quality’ of Economics by asking financial ministers, taxi drivers, scholars of Economics and trash collectors, about the future indicators of Economical Magnitudes. The test found that trash collectors were the most successful group in their forecasts! Financial ministers tested the most poorly. And taxi drivers guessed better than scholars! So they concluded that Economics was closer to Astrology than Astronomy, which became a science, only when Newton predicted the position of the sun, year after year. So happened with Alchemy, which became the science of Chemistry when it could predict atomic reactions, thanks to the experimental understanding of electronic orbitals. To do so both sciences had to define properly what stars and electrons were, its cycles and how forces acted upon them. Abstract definitions and myths were not good enough.
Scientists had to weigh, analyze and explain the concrete nature of atoms and stars. Yet Biblical economists have no real definitions of machines and money, the species of the economic ecosystem, but abstract, anthropomorphic definitions. So Biblical economists have always failed when doing such predictions; and since their theories are plainly wrong, lacking even the common sense of a Taxi driver’s direct perception of the society he lives in, their dogmatic deductions are even less accurate than those of a common citizen. If we ad the fact that those economists who have developed sound, rational theories of History and Economics, mostly belonging to the Keynesian and Socialist schools, are excluded from the economical debate by sheercensorship—as they are very critical of the abuses of power of our economical and political leaders, who pay most of the think-tanks, prizes and Universities of Economics—the outcome is a praxis of power, more than a ‘science’, based in myths and half-truths, whose main goal is to justify economical, technological and financial power at all costs, not to explain the relationships between money, machines, history and the future of mankind as a species, which should be the real goal of a science of economics.
Imagine asking a hospital owner, doctor, hairdresser and the homeless to diagnose the sickness of your body. What if the person most likely to diagnose illness was the homeless—would you call those physicians doctors or quacks? Would you continue to put your life in their hands? Would you call their procedures a science? Yet humanity is willing to risk the future, by blindly following Biblical, classic economic theories based in similar myths to those of quack doctors in their understanding of the illnesses of the historical body. This happens because Economics protects the foundations of economical and political power, with dogmas, ‘postulates without proof’ that cannot be argued and limits the purpose of its inquire.
Even if Economic futures are predictable to the extent that a biological ecosystem is predictable, Biblical Economics cannot predict those futures. Astronomy could not predict the future of stars in the XV century even if it was predictable. The problem was not the stars but the science of Astronomy. So goes for economics today, which renounces to study the cycles of the Economy and its species with biological laws and prefers myths and abstractions about the goodness of money and machines that date back to the age of Calvin.
To say that there are truths, lies, half lies and statistical-economic forecasts is a well known joke that might seem insulting to ‘Biblical Economists’. Yet unless they use Evolutionary and biological Theories in their analysis of Products and Money, instead of keeping abstract ideologies on the nature of money they will never be able to forecast the future.
Any science is defined by a postulate from where all the content of the science is deduced. If the postulate is false the science is false. Let us put some examples. When the Postulate of Ptolemaic Astronomy -the idea that planets turn around the Earth was proved false- the entire Middle age science crumbled. Yet once the error was corrected, we could predict with accuracy the future position of planets. So it happened in medicine, with the false dogmas of Galen. Men were not made of humors and sickness was caused by germs. Only when Pasteur proved that, medicine was able to cure sickness…
Let us show on the left side, “false scientific theories based in false postulates and myths”. On the right side, true scientific theories, based on true postulates, able to predict the future:
PTOLEMAIC VS KEPLERIAN ASTRONOMY
Earth is the center Sun is the center.
Planets run on weird cycles. Planets run on simple ellipses.
Predictive Accuracy: 80%. Accuracy: 99%
GALENUS HUMORS Vs PASTEUR GERMS THEORY.
Rabies Healing: 0%. Rabies Healing: 90%
In Middle Age hospitals under the Galen theory, all rabies ended in death. Pasteur with his theory cured rabies. When medicine was directed by myths, when you had a baby, it was easier to die in a hospital than at home. Since doctors did not clean their hands and infected with germs the mothers. And doctors were called, “health-killers”. So happens today with economists. They kill the health of nations because they apply wrong measures based on economic myths. They do not control “lethal machines” that infect and kill the ecosystem of life, such as weapons, robotics, or metal-minds. What are those myths that kill human history as the myths of doctors killed the ill? The myths that machines and money are abstract and good for the health of mankind.
The false postulate of economics is the concept that the wealth of a nation is given by its money and machines, (GNP) which therefore should be reproduced and evolved by all nations, in order to improve their wealth. Abstract Economists affirm and defend the postulate that the wealth of nations is measured in money. Yet money values more machines, than human energy and information… So Economists in fact affirm that the wealth of nations is the quantity of machines a nation has. However such postulate is not proved, neither is true. Yet the belief of such a postulate is the motor of our political and economical activity.
Since Adam Smith postulated that the wealth of nation was its machines and money, all economists and nations try to increase their National Gross product, their machines. The myth has become the only goal of nations. But that myth is false. In fact, when more machines and money a nation has is when there is a war; when the wealth and health of the common people is lower and they are killed more often by machines. We could again consider the truth of the 2 definitions of money and machines made by classic and organic economics, according to its predicting accuracy:
BIBLICAL, ABSTRACT VS ORGANIC, CYCLICAL ECONOMICS
Money: Myth Truth
Invisible hand of go(l)d Vs Informative Language of Metal.
Machine: Abstract object Vs Organic species of metal.
Proof: Prediction of economical and war cycles
Accuracy: 20% Vs 90%
SCIENTIFIC RESULTS FOR HUMAN WEALTH & HEALTH
Reproduction of machines Vs Reproduction of Human Goods
Human welfare: Minimal Vs Maximum human welfare
Extinction of Life and Labor Vs Creation of a Welfare paradise.
In the scheme, the capacity to predict the cycles of economics by abstract economists is minimal. In the mentioned poll by the economists, Taxi drivers and garbage collectors, outperformed economists and financial ministers (their accuracy was 20%). On the other hand the analysis of machines as organic, top predator species, with a biological role in our society is proved by theory of evolution. And the texts of this author, censored for 20 years in main stream magazines of Biblical Economics show accuracy in their prediction closer to 90%.
Indeed, our experts tell us that it is impossible to determine the evolution of machines and money, because the ‘Market is free’. Yet in 1997, I published a series of books, which offered the first ‘hard’, biological models of evolution of machines and the economic ecosystem in which we exist. They also described the dual crash of the financial and physical economy, based in electronic money and computers that would take place at the beginning of the XXI C. (2001-2008), according to the 72 years generational cycle of history and economics1, exactly 72 years after the Great Depression (1929-1937 crash), which happened exactly 72 years after the Crash of the Train Economy (1857). Since I had already spotted the initial 72 year cycle between the Train Crash of 1857 and the Car Crash of 1929, I could forecast easily, extending the cycle, the Crash of the Electronic economy and also the beginning of the last cycle of the Industrial R=evolution that would follow, the Age of the singularity (2008-2050) .
It was then easy to predict, thanks to a kin analysis of previous cycles of invention of new money, a self-repetitive pattern of creation of money and massive crashes in stock-markets. Those cycles allowed me to forecast, two consecutive crashes of the financial economy (2001 and 2008), separated by a short economical cycle of 7 years, as the evolution and reproduction ofcomputers would reach then its 72 generational zenith (and so would its software of electronic money) at the beginning of this century. The prediction went so far as to calculate the crash to happen around the 10.000 mark, due to a ‘decametric’ scale of growth in most processes of creation of information, which is logarithmic. Thus if the previous invention of the ticker that brought about the speculative wave of the 20s had taken the Dow from around 100 to 1000, it was needed another decametric, massive invention of money that would multiply the wealth of speculatorsand the corruption of our institutions due to the payments of speculators to their ‘partners in crime’ from the other ‘informative castes’ of society (politicians, mass-media, industrialists); while the rest of mankind lost purchase capacity, as inflation grew proportional to the increase and loss of value of money . . . The details of the instruments and ‘values’ invented by speculators in order to ‘sell’ that e-money as real wealth, of course, was to belong to the imagination of our speculators. But if they could invent money with tulips in the XVII century in Amsterdam, sure they would find ‘something’ to give it stratospheric values and ‘convince’ people it was worthy that e-money. And indeed, the anecdote were .com companies worth nothing, sold by millions of $ and then mortgages derivatives, worth nothing, sold also by billions of $.
Yet the model was not only a model of the financial economy, but also of the physical economy that supported it, as it also predicted the evolution of machines, comparing them with the evolution of species. It is the approach of System Sciences, which merge biological and sociological laws. From such perspective, it is evident that machines evolve as organic systems:
— In the XIX C., we made physical machines, bodies of machines that fed on steam and oil, using a biological resemblance and worked as our bodies do, moving us or loading products. It was the age of trains and steamers that substituted and provoked the extinction of 90% of horses, the previous biological carriers . . .
— In the XX C., we made mental, electric devices that form the head of machines: telephones that are, as their Greek name indicates, long-distance ‘voice-ear systems’ made of metal; cameras, which are ‘metal-eyes’ and computers that are ‘metal-brains’.
— Now, in the XXI C. we join bodies and minds of machines into robots, which represent the end of the Evolution of machines that finally become organic, ‘living’ systems’. Those robots will be the engine of a new industrial take-off, independent of man. Since men no longer will be the consumers of industrial goods, but each robot will consume 2 camera-eyes, several chips-brains, mobile phones and a complex metal-body, creating ‘economical wealth’ for automated companies and robots, no longer for human beings.
Further on, as they evolve, robots will bring an enormous increase of ‘productivity’: Companies will substitute labor by ‘robotic capital’, making humans obsolete, displaced from the economic ecosystem, both as workers (substituted by robots in automated factories) and consumers (substituted by robots that will use other machines), the 2 main economic roles a ‘FreeMarket’ concedes today to man. What will be then the future of mankind as a species? If we believe in the abstract analyses of the Free Market, this is not happening and it will not happen, because all machines are wealth and so all are positive to mankind. If we believe the ideology of Marxism, humans will r=evolve and create a paradise of unemployed!? Workers… If we believe in Theory of Evolution, the only proved science, robots, made with more efficient systems of energy and information, will substitute and make human beings obsolete as workers, consumers and soldiers.
In any case those Organic ages show clearly that the Industrial Revolution is the Evolution of Metal: men copy our organic form into machines to enhance our energy and information with theenergy and information of those machines. Yet since in-form-ation is created by energy (‘energy never dies but trans-forms itself’ is the main law of science), the fundamental factor of that Evolution is the Evolution of the energy used by machines, which determines the complexity of those machines in 3 cycles that Economists call the Kondratieff Cycles, whose causes and length were not determined properly, till we studied them from a biological, evolutionary perspective.
All those predictions done almost two decades ago prove that Organic, Cyclical economics are clearly a far more accurate science than “Biblical Economics” based in myths. The fact that the “myth-postulate” of Adam Smith is false implies that Biblical Economics are not a science. Based on myths it believes that what kills humans (machines of maximal price, i.e. weapons) is good. So it makes worse the problem of our survival and makes poverty and war endemic, as old mythic medicine did.
And yet today ‘experts’ have converted the myths of go(l)d profits developed by Biblical Economics into mathematical equations of ‘productivity’ (substitution of more profitable working-machines for human labor); the myths of tribal war into ’nations’, which deny the eusocial laws of love between members of species and maintain huge military-industrial complex that make of murder a respectable profession; and scientists have converted the ‘bad fruits of the tree’ of science, into synonimous of ‘progress, and keep evolving weapons and mental machines that destroy human cultures and instill tribal war, without any respect for their collateral damages against the world of history, the human-kind.
Of all those myths, the most lethal for the survival of human beings is the myth that says ‘productivity’ creates employment, when precisely destroys it, hold by company’s economists to increase profits, as machine labor is always cheaper than human labor.
Economics are ruled by the same laws and behaviors that rule biological ecosystems. Yet social scientists cannot predict the future of humans and machines, like other sciences predict the future of their species of study, because it does not apply such laws.
Abstract economics are not a science. It ignores evolutionary theory, the basis of most sciences that try to predict the future. The economist conducted a test on future economic indicators. They queried taxi drivers, finance ministers, trash collectors and economists. The results found that the trash collectors were the most successful group in the study! Financial ministers tested the most poorly. Imagine asking a hospital owner, doctor, hairdresser and the homeless to diagnose the sickness of your body. What if the person most likely to diagnose illness properly was the homeless person. Would you call those physicians doctors, or clowns? Would you continue to put your life in their hands? Would you call their procedures science? Economics study, on an abstract level, the mathematical laws of money, and teaches nothing about history, machine evolution, and the future. Yet humankind is willing to risk the future of humanity, by blindly following lies determined by economic theories and postulates, whose only aim is to build the ecosystem of machines…without considering its negative side effects for the human kind. Only an evolutionary theory of economics can give humankind the true explanation of the World today. Abstract economics have not created objective definitions of machines, money, and the ecosystem of products they create; instead all its analyses are subjective, in favor of machines and money.
That is why we affirm that economics are a religion of money and machines, not a science. Yet there is a science of economics, bio-economics, the science which explains in biological terms the relationship between the human and the economic ecosystem. Its predictions are hard to swallow but accurate. Why then bio-economics are not developed? The answer requires a little bit of history.
Even if Economic futures are predictable to the extent that a biological ecosystem is predictable, Economics cannot predict those futures. Astronomy could not predict the future of stars in the XV century even if it was predictable. The problem was not the stars but the science of Astronomy. So goes for economics today, which renounces to study bio-economics with biological laws, and prefers myths and abstractions about the goodness of money and machines that date back to the age of Calvin.
To say that there are truths, lies, half lies, and statistical-economic forecasts is a well known joke that might seem insulting to ‘Abstract Economists’. Yet unless Economists use Evolutionary and biological Theories in his analysis of Products and Money, instead of keeping abstract ideologies on the nature of money (as Marxists or Classic economists do), economists will never be able to forecast the future.
Any science is defined by a postulate from where all the content of the science is deduced. If the postulate is false the science is false. Let us put some examples. When the Postulate of Ptolomeic Astronomy -the idea that planets turn around the Earth was proved false- the entire Middle age science crumbled. Yet once the error was corrected, we could predict with accuracy the future position of planets. So happened in medicine, with the false dogmas of Galenus. Men was not made of humors, and sickness was caused by germs. Only when Pasteur proved that, medicine was able to cure sickness…
The fact that the “myth-postulate” of Adam Smith is false, implies that Economics are not a science. Based on myths it believes that what kills humans (machines of maximum price, i.e. weapons) is good. So it makes worse the problem of our survival, and makes poverty and war endemic, as old mythic medicine did.
We can ask ourselves then why the postulate of economics opposed to the real truth about money and machines -that their massive reproduction causes war- has imposed itself. The answer is self-evident: when someone affirms a lie systematically is because it profits him. Who profits the reproduction of money, and machines mainly weapons? those who reproduce them, animetals, warriors, traders and scientists. So we can affirm that economics are the ideology of warriors, traders and scientists, regarding the meaning of wealth, machines and money, since it protects those metal-products they live on.
That is the meaning of an ideology, the use of the concept of truth, as an excuse to achieve power, by a certain species, or group. In this case, animetals and machines, use economics to evolve and reproduce their ecosystem. Thus abstract economics have to be considered the “informative science of reproduction of machines”, whose aim is to multiply machines and money, theeconomic ecosystem. Yet as a by-product of its expansion, the economic ecosystem, causes the paradox of history, the extinction of history. So in a way we could say that economics are also the science of extinction of history and nature.
If economics are an ideology, and their postulate is false, what is the truth about economic growth?
The reproduction of machines causes the extinction of life, and the obsolescence of human workers (competence between men and machines). Such is the real proved, postulate of bio-economics. Precisely the inverse postulate to the postulate of abstract economists.
Let us consider here the postulate in biological terms.
The reproduction of machines is in fact a biological phenomena, that follows the Darwinian law of fight between species. The massive reproduction of machines by company-mothers since the times of the European empires, and its “biological radiations of sea animetals, of gunboats”, that conquered and killed millions of men in the third world, has been the main reason of the extinction of human beings. That struggle between men and machines was and still is a Darwinian struggle, and we could quote directly Darwin to explain it:
“As species=machines reproduce in growing numbers,
a struggle for survival against rival species=workers
follows due to the limited resources available
in the eco[nomic]system”
The origin of species, by Ch. Darwin. (Economic translation on Italic text)
Such is the real postulate of economics, a postulate that is caused by the biological laws of the Universe. The reproduction of any species requires vital space, which is taken from other species. If we were to use more economic terms, we could call that biological postulate “the Marx-Smith paradox”. Since both Adam Smith and Marx talked about such facts, but both loved machines, so they changed from an ideological perspective slightly the meaning of what they objectively saw:
“The reproduction of money (Mv) and Machines (Tp), will expel all workers (human beings) from the industrial ecosystem (reproductive system of company mothers), and humans will become extinct (Darwinian truth), or create a paradise (Marxist myth)”.
This is the Darwinian fact, the fact based in the laws of the Universe that all organisms follow. You might argue it. But the Universe does not argue, does not listen to arguments. It merely acts. So those who do not know and respect its laws become extinct.
We can talk of a simple game, the game of existence, of survival and extinction. If you respect the laws of the game, you survive. If you do not respect the Laws of survival and social evolutionyou die.
It is up to you. But it is not a question of theories, it is a question of facts. Throughout the entire history of species, those who have not fought other rival species, have been extinct. The law of the jungle is there for those who want to be wise. “Kill the child, the machine, before he becomes a tiger hunter, a robotic weapon”. You might listen the Law of the Universe, of God if you want to use mystic terms, and survive. You might deny it, and be punished with extinction. “Grow and multiply, reproduce, evolve your own species, your own goods” is all what there is to the game.
As long as economists do not understand that postulate, and the real meaning of human wealth they will be in the Pre-Pasteur age of their science, which is a science that should cure the historic organism, as medicine has to cure the human organism. Now Economics are in the dark ages of “medicine”, and it causes dark ages of cyclical wars, as the germs of history, weapons, and metal-communicators multiply, promoted by GNP statistics, and machine-wealth. So those wars and machines we reproduced in the XIX and XX century, will multiply in the future and keep extinguishing nature and mankind.
The Evolution Of Economics: From Verbal To Digital Myths
It is clear that the bio-economical system of machines has been created by those animetal cultures who have profited most from their symbiosis with weapons, and money, the informative language that promotes metal-species over all other species. “The cultures of Animetals”; the cultures of gold and iron, the Semitic and Germanic cultures that have carried the evolution of weapons and money, first in the Middle East, and in Modern Times in Europe and America.
In that sense Economics started not as a science but as a metal-religion.
We use a word for such ideologies “go[l]d Religions”, the concept that Gold=God. That Gold is either God or a gift of God. Corrupted Judaism (we shall call it Aaronism) with its myth of the Golden calf, Calvinism, and Anglicanism based in Calvin postulates (Calvin said money was the intelligence of God), are such religions. No wonder that 90% of the great “Economists” that founded the economic “science”, belonged to those previous Gold religions…
The difference between an objective science and a subjective cultural ideology is clear. A science does not promote anything, but merely describes reality. A subjective ideology such as Economics favor a species [metal] with subjective truths disguised as postulates, as “absolute truths”. Nazism is a German culture that promotes the superiority of the German race as an absolute truth. So does Judaism or Calvinism which considers those who believe their dogmas to be “chosen of God”. They are “racial ideologies” which disguise their racism as a dogma, an absolute truth. The same goes for Economics, the racial ideology of metal-species, whose absolute truth is the goodness of machines and money, which Economics promote over all other species.
We distinguish two ages of such Economical myths, according to the two linguistic ages of history, the verbal age of Go[l]d Religions and the digital age of Economical thought. The age of verbal, myths of religious origin, gave birth to Go[l]d cultures such as Aaronism (main branch of Judaism) and Calvinism=Anglicanism (main branch of Protestantism).
Go[l]d myths helped the members of such cultures to promote money and machines, since religious myths told them that Gold was the intelligence of God. An accumulation of Gold and its symbiotic machines (mv=tp) was God’s will. However, within those same cultures, the evolution of machines by scientists, end up causing the substitution of verbal languages of power (laws, religions) by digital languages of power (engineering, science, money). So the myths of Gold religions were translated to mathematics by economists. New myths of a mathematical nature were created to sustain the same goal of reproduction of machines and money, now translated into digital sentences. The myth of the supremacy of mathematics over verbal thought, and metal-senses over human senses became a dogma, the scientific method, that favored metal-sensorial machines, called scientific instruments. Finally the mandate of reproducing machines and money was translated digitally, into the “Smith equation”: Max. Mv = Max. Tp = GDP (the growth of money and top predator machines of highest price – weapons and informative machines is the meaning of wealth).
The growth of machines and money is the wealth of nations, its Gross national product. So all nations dedicated their efforts to evolve money and those species of maximum monetary value(weapons, and machines). First applied to England, it implied the massive reproduction of gunboats, and railroads, while people died of hunger in Ireland, and English people suffered such degree of poverty that they were called “white slaves”.
We live in the age of digital myths, of science and companies that have translated the “goodness of machines and products” into modern equations. We live in the Anglo-Saxon present, a world-wide, economically-determined culture. Economics are a part of that Go[l]d culture. Adam Smith (Calvinist), Say (Calvinist), Malthus (Anglican), Ricardo (Jewish), Marx (Jewish), Keynes (British) all the fathers of Economics belong to Go[l]d cultures. They merely transferred to Mathematics the religious postulates of their cultures, with a single message: “The reproduction of machines is good for humankind, it is the meaning of progress”. “Money is good because it is the invisible hand of God”.
If only it were that simple. Unfortunately Economics prefer its own jargon, its own laws, and abstractions, its own religious postulates, and so it gets nowhere, because it denies what all other sciences know and use: the universal laws of biological species. Laws that apply to eco[nomic]systems too. Neither economists, who aim to reproduce machines, and scientists, who evolve them, are able to look at themselves objectively, as part of human history, where they play a role far less beneficial to man that they suppose. The role of economics and science is neither knowledge, nor wealth per se, but the evolution and reproduction of machines, that later and only partially brings wealth and knowledge to humankind.
In the graph, the future of organic machines is crystal clear – they will substitute us. But as we live in an abstract scientific techno-utopian world of idol-ogies, there is little to do about the ‘blinds’ put on the eyes of the modern believer.
conclusion: WITHOUT an organic theory of reality humans will go under.
You see, this we cannot fight rationally. The confusion of chaos with freedom, the belief only man and only at individual level is sentient, matters and drives the world… The astounding idiocy of religious myths about the superiority of human beings; the obsession for the ‘infinitesimal mind’ in each of us… Of course, those in power know that as long as they feed with myths, placebo democracies and ego-trips fictions of happiness, and happy statements the ego of people, and invent a perfect future, they can control and abuse humans. Which will inversely reject any blog like this one, who takes them at face value. Precisely because only the realist truth can make mans survive.
Ultimately it will be only if humans tame that ego that there will be… a future
Now the scientist IS as EGO-CENTERED as the PRIEST, just uses its mathematical mantras as the priest its latin, to make himself feel above heavens and Earth. So HE cannot DESTROY THE WORLD WITH entropic nukes and informative robots, and all will be OK. The paradox of the EGO IS the last joke of God=Mind of the Universe indeed it kills all egos who ‘lower its survival warnings’ as they get bigger and more arrogant, till ‘death’, a catastrophic moment, destroys them. But It is there.
And I can tell you as a Complexity scientist, considered by many the leading theorist of this discipline (till I confronted the Nuclear Industry and got a global ‘ad hominem’ campaign, all what I can say about the 2 ‘lineal’, deformed sciences of the machine, financial economics and nuclear physics, which I have fought theoretically and actively most of my life is this: ‘All those who impose truth with power will be the laugh of the Gods’ (Einstein). Man HAS NO LINEAL, MANIFEST DESTINY; Man can be obliterated by Nuclear Bombs on the side of pure entropy and Robots on the side of pure information. But Man’s ego is so huge that he cannot like a child understand death; and so an ethic, intelligent person telling those truths lives in a very lonely place. Which brings us the 3rd tenant of GST (General Systems Sciences, the Philosophy of Science I formalised from where all this blog hauls).
So what Science has been merely TRYING FOR 2500 YEARS is TO DEFEAT THE PARADOX OF THE EGO and make humans objective about ITS RELATIVITY point in the Universe in 4 huge strides, which are still ignored by most humans and specially by those corrupted financiers and politicos and military who feed-force the ego of the masses to manipulate them and ab=use them, with religions, wars, taxes and all other forms of old and modern ‘Trumpism’. And it works. Yet this is a blog on science:
-So first, the Greeks ended the mythic age when humans were Gods, and Socrates told us they were ‘scientific laws’. And the Greeks Killed them; the Semites of the previous mythic age denied them and their abrahamic religions still think man is the centre of it all. Plato his disciple insisted and he was sold as a slave, and his disciple Aristotle, insisted and he ran on the night to escape certain death from Athens, and waited 2000 years for Descartes and Leibniz to put the record straight.
-Then Aristarcus the Greek told us not to be the centre of the Universe, but it took 2000 years for Copernicus to dare say the same, only in his death-bed and another 200 years with Galileo in the middle arrested at home for saying ‘e pur si muove, e pur no muove’ (the Earth moves but we see it mentally still). And only after Newton put it in a simple formula we believed it. But Slocum in XIX c. found that in Apartheid biblical South-Africa the ‘chosen of go(l)d’ and his president Krugger wouldn’t receive him for being an ‘Earth-center denier’. And indeed 4 billion humans still believe man is son of god and centre of the Universe.
-Then Darwin came and told us we are NOT immutable created by a personal God, but evolving according to the evolution information and its topological laws of design. But knowing what he was against – the ego – he took 20 years to talk. And he was ‘ad hominem’ massacred and closed himself at home, depressed the rest of his life, and then Marx applied Darwinism to the struggle between the elite of ‘animetal cults’ which use gold-informative metal and iron-energetic metal to hypnotise and kill mind and body, and the ‘human beings’, which are humble, close to Nature and Butler applied it to the fight of man vs. machines AND THEY ARE ABSOLUTE TABOO, as it is the work of this writer, who formalised mathematically the 4 Great Objective advance of science, and has ever since been ostracised:
-Indeed, it came then Mr. Einstein with the concept that all positions in the Universe are Relative, so he first did special relativity, then general relativity.
And when I came into the field of Philosophy of Science and theory of information I coined the 3rd stage of this Process, talking about ‘Absolute relativity’ nt.11, that is, the fact that all the scales of the Universe have the same value, because larger beings have lesser quantity of information, are stupider and ‘smaller systems’ run faster time cycles of information, hence store more of it, reason why small humans code larger organisms of history, small genes code larger biological organisms and small atoms code larger physical systems. So I wrote to complete General relativity a metric equation of the fifth dimension from past to future, adding the arrow of TEMPORAL CLOCKS OF INFORMATION to the arrow of size-entropy-space: Spe (size) x Tiƒ (time cycles speed) =∆k (constant value).
IT WAS huge but it obliterated the human ego at all levels, and the reactions mounted and me, being a Basque, the original europeans – even brits have 80% of our genes – people with a huge ego, who don’t take any bull$ht and worship only truth and nature (my ego-fault, at least as a Brit put it, we are the only people who laugh at ourselves, so we can bend the ego paradox on our infinitesimal nothingness), overreacted to all those infinitesimal egos who are killing the Earth. So do NOT expect this blog to be ‘nice’ on all our infinitesimal leaders, memes, go(l)d chosen, myth-makers, victimist who cannot understand death to avoid it, ‘animetal castes’ and ‘physicists’ who pretend to know it all with big-bang entropy. I HAVE ONLY A GOD, THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH – not absolute truth which ONLY exists in the being in itself which carries all the information, but HUMAN TRUTHS, tailored with my languages of thought as a ‘focused mirror’ on the laws of the Mind of the Universe, which are biological.
nt.1 (back in the 90s, there was only a guy called Nottale, who did understand scalar relativity but only in physics and one Mandelbrot even before with his fractals in maths, the beauty of this and my other blog on ALL sciences, tailored with those tenants of Absolute Relativity, is that it applies to all sciences and all languages, including but not only mathematics, as each mind has a different language). And so this lead us to the final conclusion:
The HOMOLOGY between the 3 scales of organisms, the cellular, individual and social, ecosystemic scale, as the 3 scale ARE biological, and the only ELEMENT that changes IS the speed of time of its biological cycles, according to the ‘metric’equation of the scalar universe: smaller systems paradoxically run faster time clocks, so larger systems have slower time rhythms. SO YOUR EGO MIGHT BE HUGE BUT ULTIMATELY YOU ARE JUST A CELL-CITIZEN OF THE SUPERORGANISM OF MANKIND, HISTORY IN TIME, YOUR ONLY ‘RELATIVE GOD=WHOLE=species’, WHICH YOU should love. Since ULTIMATELY Darwin WAS ALWAYS AWARE of eusocial love and said the same that all PROPHETS OF TRUE RELIGION, prophets of Love, Christ, Buddha and Mhmd, being the most remarkable of them, tailoring the message for the 3 ‘fundamental complementary cultural races of mankind, the white Christian, the yellow buddhist and the coloured Muslim…
So alas, if you have NO HUGE EGO KEEP READING, if the paradox of the EGO is so huge you cannot stand it, tune with Trump and go to your Biblical racist church.
SINCE NONE OF your beliefs as a lesser evolved mind, who ‘credo ergo sum’ will be spared by a scientist mind of ‘cogito ergo sum’ from the culture of science, NOT the mechanical culture of machines (North-Europe) or the credo culture of abrahamic religions ( South of the Mediterranean), but the culture that broth us Humanism, democracy, the rule of Law, rational science and art, the much more maligned Greek->Italian->Hispanic culture running fast to the West through the 3 peninsulas of the Mare Nostrum. This is a fight for the SURVIVAL OF HISTORY and yours sons till the 7th generation. So ‘evolve your credo into reason’ or get the laugh of the Gods.
People tend to believe that science did away with such awesome ego-paradox, but not quite.
As Laplace put it to Napoleon, when asked about God, scientists responded ‘Sir we have rejected that hypothesis’, so not even the nebulous idea of a higher scale of wholeness, ∆+1, remained, neither the existence of other minds and monads; of apperceptive beings (in Leibniz’s terminology) which are not ‘conscious’ but do process energy and information in a VITAL sentient manner would be accepted.
In that regard, a deeper explanation of this work considers the meaning of knowledge and what questions it must answer to exhaust the study of a certain subject. In journalism we ask what, who, how, when and why.
The evolution of science implies big shifts in the paradigms, languages and philosophical dogmas we use to understand the Universe. In the evolution of science we observed first ‘what’ (experience) and then asked ‘who’. It was the mythic age of science, the first paradigm of knowledge – when an anthropomorphic being, often a god was the cause of all events. Then the Greeks used reason to ask the what (experience) and how of things, its causes and consequences. It was the 2nd paradigm of knowledge: logic thought.
The 3rd paradigm started by Galileo with his use of machines (clocks and telescopes), responded to when, measuring space distances and time frequencies in great detail with a single space-time system.
The ticks of the heart, the stomach, the moon, the atom and the clock are different, but to measure them we needed a unit of time and so we equalized all rhythms with a clock, and to compare the spatial trajectories of those cycles we needed a ‘background of space’, so we put together all the broken spaces of reality into a joined puzzle, which we called Cartesian space-time. The error of a single space-time came when we forgot those simplifications and considered that the abstract space-time continuum of Descartes used to measure all other spaces and times was the real space-time.
The culmination of this process of mechanical measure came with quantum theory, which refined the measures of the cyclical trajectories of particles in the microscopic world and General Relativity, which refined them in the cosmological realm by correcting the deformations of those rhythms of time and distances of space caused by the limits of speed of our light-based Universe.
In philosophical terms, the paradigm of measure meant the birth of mechanism, the fundamental philosophy of our world today: the machine – no longer man, an organism – became the ‘measure of all things’.
This was a simplification, as today we realize that machines merely imitate our organs of energy and information with networks of metal-atoms (so a crane is an energetic arm of metal and a chip an informative brain of metal), which now we fusion into ‘organic’ robots. And so the change of paradigm from the Greek, Aristotelian and Asian tradition of organicism to mechanism is only a hiatus on a richer, more complex understanding of the whys of the Universe.
Mechanism changed also the language of understanding of the Universe, from Aristotelian Logic to mathematical Platonism, since mathematics was the language used by machines to measure the Universe of time and space with clocks and telescopes; while logic was the language embedded in the syntax of words, which measure time with causal verbs that describe the logic relationships between its 3 dimensions of past, present and future.
So in terms of philosophy of science, mechanism meant a pendulum law that changed the paradigm from Aristotle (organic, temporal causality) to Plato (mechanical, spatial geometry).
This was a wrong choice, because a truly inclusive theory of reality has to put together both languages and approaches as we shall do in this work: the geometric how & instrumental when matched by a temporal why, which must be by definition a causal, temporal process. The 3rd paradigm obsessed by spatial measure was not very kin of such inquire, as Feynman famously put it: ‘the why is the only thing a physicist never asks’. And yet the why has always been a fundamental question of knowledge.
That why should respond to the existence of a program of creation, evolution and extinction of the reality we see all around us, which always gives birth and extinguishes the same entities, repeating their forms once and again. What is the purpose of the Universe and all its repeated parts?
Why they have those forms and follow always a life and death cycle? Thus, scientists, not satisfied with the limits of the 3rd paradigm of measure kept asking the why, which could not be a personal God (the who of the 1st paradigm), neither the machine, the instrument of measure of the 3rd paradigm (‘God is a clocker’ said Kepler, because he used clocks to measure it and ‘God speaks mathematics’ said Galileo, because those machines translated the events of the Universe into mathematical data).
According to Deism the whys of existence are due to a personal being, external to the Universe that makes it all happen and cares for humans more than for the rest of His work.
According to Mechanism, this is due to the self-similarity between the Universe and the primitive machines we humans construct to observe it. Mechanism though needs ‘someone’ to make the machine, which is not self-generated; so it is similar to deism, reason why the founding fathers of science, all pious believers, adopted it as a proof of the existence of God, which had given man self-similar properties – the capacity to make machines to the image and likeness of the Universe.
The problem with those 2 approaches, which in fact are the same is obvious: a personal God is an anthropomorphic, subjective myth and science must be objective; while a mechanical view of the Universe still needs an internal, self-sustained process of growth, creation and synchronization caused by an external God that made and rewinds the clock – as Leibniz clearly stated in his critique of Newton.
Now the ego paradox has is maximum IN HISTORY and I call it the ‘anti-quatum paradox” since the human social scientist is so small that unlike the physicist who changes the small observable introducing uncertainty, the huge society and its ego idol-ogies (nationalisms, capitalist go(l)d religions, etc.) are so bit that they CHANGE THE SCHOLAR: ‘YOU WILL defend me the (s)word and i will defend you with my words’ (Tertulianus, Add ‘with gold’ the modern defense to bias scholarship).
So indeed, the place of a scientist attacking the paradox of the ego from the times of Socrates, poisoned for insulting the anthropomorphic Gods with reason, and Plato his disciple, chained by calling Dyonisius a tyrant, and sold as slave, through Marx, isolated in the british museum, Kondratieff sent to a gulag by Stalin, Butler, rising sheeps in New zealand, Keynes, dying of a heart attack when his Universal currency was ignored at Bretton woods or this writer vaporised for 30 years, of truth-seeking on man, god and the Universe… IS a lonely place.
Now how bad it is can be seen in the graph on the side, on ‘scientific revolutions’ – essential the 4 we have talked about. You will see there Marx too (in true form, we shall brutally criticise him in economics, as he understood none but in History he did bring for the first time an objective view on the ab=use of the people castes with metal, our animetals that monopolise the use of weapons – military – money – bankers and machines – physicists to impose their truths, lineal concepts of time and a manifest destiny to mankind and to ab=use mankind – as they are all racist, segreagational people either by nation, religion, race or class, and for them ‘mankind’ is their tiny 0’%…)
But look closer its x is hanging down as I had to put him over other picture of someone called Ma-??? Alas, HE IS VAPORIZED GLOBALLY AND OF COURSE, not a single communist military dictatorship applied any of his ‘Communist manifesto’ measures, close to those of Keynes and this writer, as ‘all the wise people say always the same and the stupid ones, the majority do exactly the opposite’ (Schopenhauer).
Just a tease, as you will have been vaccinated against humanism and socialism – the democratic concept that the language of social power, money must be controlled by human beings, not a group of banksters, and we should run societies with our language-mind, the legal wor(l)d not with fetish go(l)d. IF Bakhunin, Butler or Marx (the 3 titans of the use of Darwinian biology to explain history and economics) do NOT fit there, can at least ‘remember’ who ‘Ma???’ deserves the place as in the original cover?
Bet you’ll have a hard time to think of this Ma-genius who deserved the place. It is nowhere in the subconscious collective… but of course is a physicist who researched weapons, easy… the usual suspect… working to kill us all, and being worshipped by it.
Ah, but TRUTH suffices in itself, it exists, it cannot be easily forgotten and it creates reality, myth, fictions and ego-trips only makes the carrier to become extinguished, by those WHO CAN TAKE IT, MAN UP AND UNDERSTAND THE LAWS OF THE PERFECT UNIVERSE, in a Leibnizian-Darwinian way: God has created the most perfect of all possible worlds, because IT EXTINGUISHES THOSE EGOES THAT DENY ITS LAWS.