US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

The Boston Underground (archive)
Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
Hidden with code "Other"
()
Commentary :: Education
dichotomy
03 Feb 2013
Challenge to authority from a deeper truth
Not only is this a direct challenge to the authority of science and math, but it also provides these professional communities with solutions to their most difficult problems, yet the world is lost in its own concept of bullying, which is the only behavior which the current Empire allows within its social institutions, ie bullying to protect and serve the elite (selfish) interests.
Human-value is about knowledge and creativity, and humans seem to really be, in relation to the trap of materialism, a part of an abstract creative context.
This is a positive statement, it is constructive criticism (the solutions to math and science’s most difficult problems are provided), it is not anger from a failed spirit, though the bullies (in their realm of selfish conceit) will interpret that way, but this is like saying Copernicus was a failure, which in its harsh reality of extreme social violence, one could say it was [where the US revolution, basing law on equality, was a weak attempt at opposing the extremely violent traditions of western thought, and trying to push the west into a civilized and reasoned state, allowing widely diverse creative expressions].
Either
There is many-dimensions partitioned by stable shapes with existence dependent on resonances between metric-space-shapes and the finite spectral set of the partitioning stable shapes (where the stable metric-space shapes [contained in a greater sized and one-higher-dimension {containing} metric-space] are the smaller material-components which are contained in a metric-space whose dimension is one-dimension-greater than the dimension of the material components and whose size (of the material containing metric-space shape) is greater than the size of the stable metric-space shapes, or material components, it contains). This structure allows for the many-body systems, (systems with relatively few bodies) which possess the properties of stability to be solved.
Or
There is materialism, which is simply given (or assumed), and randomness (to fit data) and non-linear models of (material) interactions, but with no valid models for stable many-body material systems (though, many-body material systems, with only a few bodies).
Randomness is simply a data-fitting technique associated to a set of data which, in turn, is associated with random-event properties (in space). It is a data-fitting technique which appears to be more sophisticated…., based on operator and function space math techniques which nonetheless gives no valid model which measurably describes the stability of many-bodied systems based on randomness…, than the data-fitting epicycle structures of Ptolemy, but, in fact, both (data-fitting) constructs allow one to say that their models are measurably verified and precise descriptions.

More generally there is: existence and creativity, the opposite poles within which life (experience) is defined.
If one tries to make current physics analogous to these universal opposites there would be material and force-fields, or the basic Fermions (hadrons and leptons) and the (Bosonic) field-particles of (defined on) metric-spaces (defined by local unitary transformations of the, so called, Fermionic particle states), but nothing is actually described in this old context.
Whereas, in the new descriptive structure it would be the stable discrete hyperbolic shapes and the force-field structure of discrete Euclidean shapes, which, in turn, relate a metric-space geometry (related to material components, ie shapes) to the local coordinate transformations found within the fiber group, and related to the local interaction geometry, and where the local coordinate transformations are placed in a unitary context, but it is an interaction structure which allows for stable properties to emerge (or might emerge), ultimately determined by resonances.

The many-body systems (with relatively few bodies) which possess the properties of stability have been solved.
This over-turns the math-science context of the current science-math authority associated to materialism, randomness, and non-linearity (and irrelevant data-fitting).

The new ideas change the context of “materialism vs. a context beyond materialism” since material is shown to be a subset of the new math containment construct, where the new math construct goes beyond the idea of materialism, eg it is many-dimensional [contained in an 11-dimensional hyperbolic metric-space, or equivalently contained in a 12-dimensional space-time metric-space]. Furthermore, in the new context:
1. material is defined, and its usual properties of
2. prevalent randomness, and
3. prevalent non-linearity,
are derived (within the new descriptive context).

In the new containment set one must assume a natural construct for containment which implies that stable patterns can be identified, and where these patterns can remain stable, and creativity requires knowledge, arrangement, and organization so as to cause a new structure to form into a new stable pattern (or form in a stable causal manner).
This is about set-containment, metric-space properties, eg both stable shapes and (physical) properties which exist within a new context for containment, eg position in space and stable patterns conservation laws “continuity in time.”

This is more like a real-world adventure into philosophy (which is a part of everyone’s life) (or a real abstraction, just as D Juan tried to lead C Castaneda into a real abstraction), than a quest into the material world whose forms and realizations are determined by extreme violence, but whose descriptions are both irrelevant and descriptions of illusions and of fleeting, unstable patterns.

By whom are these new ideas (new ways of using language) opposed?
Answer: The lying thieves, who effectively own society, always oppose individual creativity which is not directed at increasing their own power. That is the social construct based on violence, wherein the so called experts express “truth” within the media, but they really express “the truth that the owners of society require that they believe” if they want to be (well-paid) experts, where the owners of society want truth expressed in the form of materialism, randomness, and non-linearity, since this suits their interests just-fine. This is an arbitrary authority, which is built into an unequal society, and it is upheld by extreme violence.
For example, the large salaries given to the policeman (and the institutions of justice) who torments and follows a person who stole some bread for humanitarian reasons.
The experts are placed into a social context of being intellectual bullies, and protected by the owners of society, so that no aspect of the revered media dares challenge that authority, eg virtually all the well meaning radical (or progressive-liberal, or conservative anarchist) voices which are allowed onto any of the media (including most of Indy media, which is supposed to support free speech) seem to protect science and math without realizing (1) science and math have failed and should be challenged (2) the basis for all social creativity, ie creativity related to investment, and the basis for a wage-slave social structure (where the rights of the owners of loaves of bread are sacred), has its origins in the failed authorities of the current beliefs of the (far too narrow) “professional (wage-slave)” science and math communities.
This is really a choice between staying technologically within a inventive context of 19th century science, a context of ever increasing violence, or expanding intellectually into new contexts, where intent and creativity is directed to mankind’s true heritage (of an adventure into the abstract, a context associated [accessible] to everyone).

The propaganda system is best suited for identifying itself as the sole voice of an authoritative truth (but protected by law), ie it is the voice of the society’s true religion (we must worship our paymaster, by law) where one of these religions is the authority of the professional math-science communities a group of people who are required (by their careers) to be faithful to their narrow dogmas [expressed as peer-review].
The propaganda system, though it is the seat of modern religion, expresses the two religions the two authoritative dogmas of society:
(1) the authoritarian voice of hierarchical religions, whose authority is subjective [similar to economics where there are solitary players who can control the whole game, ie the quantitative models of economics mean virtually nothing], and
(2) the measurably verified voice of science and math; where randomness is associated to rates of nuclear reactions, and non-linearity deal with the improperly defined context of feedback systems (guidance systems); but other than coupling quantum properties to classical systems the descriptions of science and math are irrelevant to the development of new technologies, or irrelevant to identifying new contexts for creativity. Peer-reviewed physical science is (now, 2013) only about illusionary worlds, and the literary contexts associated to “Physical Review” (and other professional journals of its ilk) and to Star-Trek.

Extreme violence, shrouded by high-minded institutions, upholds a delusional world of ineffective but very authoritative science (community) and social inequality, and this is done by means of propaganda, where experts are allowed to use their partial truths so as to develop technologies whose only possibility (whose only possible fate) is destruction of the planet, eg nuclear energy yet the nucleus has no valid model; manipulating DNA yet there are no valid models of an entire living-system.

Go to Scribd.com see author mconcoyle (or martin concoyle, and his seven publications there)

This work is in the public domain