පරිශීලක:Gawesaka – විකිපීඩියා, නිදහස් විශ්වකෝෂය

Source: පරිශීලක:Gawesaka – විකිපීඩියා, නිදහස් විශ්වකෝෂය


Understanding reality


The following quotes on Space (from some famous philosophers and physicists) makes us realize how close Humanity has been to understanding reality for the past several hundred years

(Spinoza, Ethics, 1673) But if men would give heed to the nature of substance they would doubt less concerning the Proposition that Existence appertains to the nature of substance: rather they would reckon it an axiom above all others, and hold it among common opinions. For then by substance they would understand that which is in itself, and through itself is conceived, or rather that whose knowledge does not depend on the knowledge of any other thing.

(Gottfried Leibniz, 1670)
Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general.

(David Hume, Treatise Concerning Human Understanding. 1737) If you insist that the inference is made by a chain of reasoning, I desire you to produce that reasoning. The connection between the two is not intuitive. There is required a medium, which may enable the mind to draw such an inference, if indeed it be drawn by reasoning and argument. What that medium is, I must confess, passes my comprehension; and it is incumbent on those to produce it, who assert that it really exists, and is the origin of all our conclusions concerning matter of fact.

(Immanuel Kant, 1781) Natural science (physics) contains in itself synthetical judgments a priori, as principles. … Space then is a necessary representation a priori, which serves for the foundation of all external intuitions.

(Michael Faraday,1830) I cannot conceive curved lines of force without the conditions of a physical existence in that intermediate space.


(James Clerk Maxwell, 1876) In speaking of the Energy of the field, however, I wish to be understood literally. All energy is the same as mechanical energy, whether it exists in the form of motion or in that of elasticity, or in any other form. The energy in electromagnetic phenomena is mechanical energy.
(Bradley, 1846-1924) We may agree, perhaps, to understand by Metaphysics an attempt to know reality as against mere appearance, or the study of first principles or ultimate truths, or again the effort to comprehend the universe, not simply piecemeal or by fragments, but somehow as a whole.
(Hendrik Lorentz, 1906) I cannot but regard the ether, which can be the seat of an electromagnetic field with its energy and its vibrations, as endowed with a certain degree of substantiality, however different it may be from all ordinary matter.
(Albert Einstein, 1928) According to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. … Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended … thus the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part.

(Lee Smolin, Life of the Cosmos, 1997) A successful unification of quantum theory and relativity would necessarily be a theory of the universe as a whole. It would tell us, as Aristotle and Newton did before, what space and time are, what the cosmos is, what things are made of, and what kind of laws those things obey. Such a theory will bring about a radical shift – a revolution – in our understanding of what nature is. It must also have wide repercussions, and will likely bring about, or contribute to, a shift in our understanding of ourselves and our relationship to the rest of the universe.
It can no longer be maintained that the properties of any one thing in the universe are independent of the existence or non-existence of everything else. It is, at last, no longer sensible to speak of a universe with only one thing in it.

(Milo Wolff, Exploring the Physics of the Unknown Universe, 1994) The Wave Structure of Matter (the Structure of fundamental ‘Particles’) evolved over five years. It began with a simple speculation that waves in Space could explain the de Broglie wavelength. It continued to agree with more laws and observations than I first expected and I was amazed.

The ‘Particle’ is two identical spherical waves traveling radially in opposite directions so that together they form a spherical standing wave. The wave which travels inward towards the center is called an In-Wave, and the wave traveling outward is an Out-Wave. The nominal location of the ‘Particle’ is the Wave-Center, but as must be true for any charged Particle, it has presence everywhere in Space because the charge forces extend throughout the Universe.

Solid Bodies from Waves – The solid crystal array is a matrix of atoms held rigidly in space. How are the atoms suspended in space? We must conclude that the crystal’s rigidity derives from fixed standing waves propagating in a rigid wave medium. Calculations for diamonds and nuclear structure yields an enormous rigidity. This is really a separate argument about the rigidity of space, which is one of its properties.

Light ‘Photons’ – Two Spherical Standing Waves (SSW) oscillators exchange energy much like classical coupled oscillators, such as electric circuits or joined pendulums. The coupling provided by the non-linear centers of the resonances (high mass-energy density of space Wave-Centers) allows them to shift frequency patterned by the modulation of each other’s waves. Since significant coupling can only occur between two oscillators which possess the same resonant elements, the frequency (energy) changes are equal and opposite. This we observe as the law of conservation of energy. When opposite changes of frequency (energy ) takes place between two resonances, energy seems to be transported from the center of one resonance to another. We observe a loss of energy where frequency decreases and added energy where it increases. The exchange appears to travel with the speed of the In-Waves of the receiving resonance which is c, the velocity of light. When large numbers of changes occur together, we can sample part of it and see a beam of light (which causes the continuous electromagnetic waves of Modern Physics). When single exchanges occur we see “photons” as discrete Standing Wave interactions. Thus the transitory modulated waves traveling between two resonances create the illusion of the ‘photon particle’

Alien asks “What is space?”

Most remarkably though, Milo Wolff and Geoff Haselhurst have independently discovered what exists (Space) and what matter is (the Wave Center of Universally large Spherical Standing Waves in Space)
Hence we can complete this explanation to the alien in the following way, which I think is satisfactory to philosophy;

“Protons, electrons, and neutrons are caused by the Wave Centers of Spherical Standing Waves in Space.”

Alien asks “What is space?”
I point to the world about me and say; “That is Space!”
Alien asks, “What are waves?”
I reply, “Space exists as a Wave Medium for waves.
Alien asks, what is a Wave-Medium.
I reply; “Space is a nearly rigid but slightly elastic substance that allows wave Motions. Waves are oscillating motions of Space where the energy of Motion is balanced by the energy of elasticity of Space.


Wittgenstein: “For naming and describing do not stand on the same level: naming is a preparation for describing. We may say,: nothing has so far been done, when a thing has been named. It has not even got a name except in the language-game. This was what Frege meant too, when he said that a word had meaning only as part of a sentence.”

…once gave you yourself most headache, the part about the general form of propositions and of language.”
“And that is true. – Instead of producing something common to all that we call language, I am saying that these phenomena have no one thing in common which makes us use the same word for all, – but that they are related to one another in many different ways. And it is because of this relationship, or of these relationships, that we call them all ‘language’.”

Wittgenstein: “The fluctuation of scientific definition: what today counts as an concomitant of a phenomena will to-morrow be used to define it.”

Wittgenstein: “But then how does an explanation help me to understand, if after all it is not the final one? In that case the explanation is never completed; so I still don’t understand what he means, and never shall!”

” Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language.”

Wittgenstein: “The aspects of things that are most important for us are hidden because of their simplicity and familiarity. (One is unable to notice something – because it is always before one’s eyes) The real foundations of his enquiry do not strike a man at all. Unless THAT fact has at some time struck him. And this means: we fail to be struck by what, once seen, is most striking and most powerful.”

Wittgenstein: “That is, the game with these words, their employment in the linguistic intercourse that is carried on by their means, is more involved – the role of these words in our language other – than we are tempted to think. This role is what we need to understand in order to resolve philosophical paradoxes.”
“In our failure to understand the use of a word we take it as the expression of a queer process. As we think of time as a queer medium, of the mind as a queer kind of being.”
“For we say that there isn’t any doubt that we understand the word, and on the other hand its meaning lies in its use.”