Right from the beginning adult male have been in chase of acquiring knowledge. Initially he did it with the observations of the surroundings. Subsequently this survey of milieu was named as science. The scientific disciplines explained how the events take place, what are the causes and personal effects of peculiar events. This development of scientific discipline took topographic point in the background of spiritual beliefs where the rites were mainly related to some unobservable results. For illustration the spiritual beliefs asked people to make good to acquire wealthiness in heavens. Sciences asked them to follow a peculiar series of Acts to acquire wealthiness in this world. The religion asked for unobservable consequences mainly based on faith while the scientific disciplines asked for observable results based on achievements. Person psychological science preferred the later. People establish scientific disciplines more convenient to them.
This penchant was based on the observation of people that this human race is aim which have an ultimate reality. They thought that this ultimate world could be discovered through the scientific discoveries. This belief of people that the ultimate world is discoverable through some scientific processes was strengthened by those processes themselves. When the scientific discipline broke a atom a new sub-particle degree was found. It was, therefore inferred that one twenty-four hours as the engineering supplies a suitable appliance the ultimate sub-level volition be discovered and thereafter the scientific disciplines will attain their ultimate peak. This optimism of people about the ultimate world through the scientific methods made them develop a psychological mental model regarding the high quality of sciences, matter, objectivity, ground etc.
Today people pull their heritage based on this mental framework. This is how the people comprehend this world. They comprehend that scientific discipline set about experimentations on matter; aim consequences are obtained; these consequences have got grounds behind them.
The human race bes and return independently. Some perceivers name it a creative activity of God and the others name it a merchandise of Big Bang. This human race without being thwarted by people's reading and perceptual experience bes and goes on in its ain mode. The difference is extended only to the perception. The procedure of the human race makes not hold to wait for one or the other perception, this maintains proceeding on. However, in the epoch of Copernicus, Galileo, then Newton, Maxwell, Faraday, Marquis De Laplace etc. this model of objectivity, philistinism etc. was additional substantiated and enhanced. For them the human race was composed of substance and the substance was the lone reality.
Then it came the twentieth century. A scientific revolution also came along with. Einstein, Heisenberg, Dirac, Plank, Bohr, Bose, Schrödinger and a batch more men of science joined the stride. Albert Einstein told people that it was not the substance only but the energy was also equally important. Substance and energy were inter-convertible. When this all was on, Werner Karl Heisenberg set forward his radical idea. He said that the place and speed of a atom both cannot be ascertained simultaneously with the same precision. He gave a peculiar figure that the impreciseness would always be greater than that number. As per Prof. Dave MacCallum, November 20th, 2000 future it was realized that Heisenberg's uncertainness rule applied not only to the human relationship between impulse and position, but between non-continuous observables. If the spin of a atom in the omega way is known, then the spin in the yttrium way cannot be known. This is like to the probabilistic facets of measure mechanics demonstrated in the Stern-Gerlach measurings and in the Kobenhavn reading of the wave-equation. These probabilistic consequences are quite distressing for a belief in absolute truth. Please recollect it, that it was the scientific discipline itself which propagated the thought of the absolute truth at some bomber - sub- atomic degree of the matter. That thought was set at the interest by the scientific theories themselves.
Not only Werner Karl Heisenberg was shaking this belief of absolute truth but others were also doing something similar to that. The Gallic research scholarly person de De Broglie proposed that the substance can be a atom and moving ridge both simultaneously. This was something similar to saying that the life can be a true cat and a vacuity simultaneously. The first clip scientific disciplines were facing a problem. This was the job of deficient enunciation of the language. This was the same job which was initially felt by Ludwig Wittgenstein and then shrouded A Joule Ayer and his Austrian Capital circle of logical positivists. Nevertheless this job was encountered through the other subject of cognition i.e. the philosophy.
Coming back to the science, Schrödinger is known for his declaration regarding the death of the matter. Another contemporary, Neil Niels Bohr was also saying the same thing but in different words. Neil Niels Bohr proposed the Kobenhavn reading of measure theory, which asseverates that a atom is whatever it is measured to be (for example, a moving ridge or a particle), but that it cannot be assumed to have got specific properties, or even to exist, until it is measured. In short, Niels Bohr was saying that a atom may or may not be at the same time. In other words he states that the aim world makes not exist.
Feeling not much satisfied with this measure theory Albert Einstein was busy with theories of relativity. After his particular theory he gave his general theory of relativity. Here he concluded that the speed of visible light was the upper limit speed for any physical object to attain. He also postulated that when the speed (velocity) of an physical object is increased some unusual personal effects begin to ensue. The mass of the physical object begin increasing, its length gets catching and for it the clip would start dilating. At a velocity equal to that of the visible light its mass would be infinite, its length would be zero and there would be no clip passing play for it. At a velocity comparable to that of the light- mass, clip and length they all lose their usual meanings, as you cognize them now.
These decisions of Albert Einstein onslaught the "Reality" in two ways. Firstly, as no action can travel faster than visible light therefore the world is always constricted to have got a very limited glimpse of the universe. They can not cognize the existence as it is "Now and Here". If a space station have got a signaling from a celestial organic structure 10 billion visible light old age away then it intends that they see that celestial organic structure as it was 10 billion old age back and they have no agency to cognize how it is now. Today's image would be available 10 billion old age henceforth. This is a chemical mechanism in the nature itself that it have not allowed you to look it "all at once".
Secondly, the mass, length and clip will be in a different being at the relativistic speeds. Some learned 1s state that at the velocity of visible light as no clip travel throughs therefore any 1 can go any where and no clip would go through for him. He may cover any distance within no clip as the clip would infinitely dilate for him. They state that this would be additional easy by the muscular contraction of length. At the relativistic velocity all great distances would be reduced to zero and hence there would be no job to cover them. But the nature is not so accessible. As soon as the velocity goes relativistic its mass attacks to go infinite. Hence no physical organic structure can ever achieve the velocity of light.
This have one more than aspect. Mass, length and clip the three basic dimensions would be in different type of being at the relativistic speeds. This theory scientifically demoes that the being can be there in different and more than than one form, which you are acquainted with. This may be a great scientific lesson for those who are prostrate to rebut things if these are not familiar things. Albert Einstein is instruction a lesson that acquaintance should not be put as a pre-requisite to accept new knowledge.
Contemporaneously, after Heisenberg's moving ridge challenge to the atom theory of substance de De Broglie a Gallic scientist, as declared above came forward and submitted his Ph.D. thesis postulating that at the sub-atomic flat a atom can be both - a atom and a moving ridge simultaneously. Science did not happen anything incorrect with this postulate. This theory of "Dual Nature of Matter" opened a new view for the minds that a linguistic contradiction is a hurdle only before the languages. The being of nature have no jobs with contradictions. For the first clip in the human history "Contradictions in terms" were assigned a suitable topographic point in the dust bin of knowledge.
Those who accept the new cognition only if it is "contradiction - free", should now reconsider their premises. The scientific discipline never takes resort of logic. It prosecutes observations. It then generalizes those observations and this abstraction is called a scientific law. Logic is used by those who are not scientists, and desire to detect the ultimate cognition with the aid of linguistic communications they use. They presume that their linguistic communication is all capable.
To chase away there such as belief see one example. In Songhay, a linguistic communication of African Sahara Desert region, there are about 87 words pertaining to sand and 34 words for oasis. Each of these words have a specific mention to its individuality. If 1 have to interpret a paragraph from Songhay linguistic communication to a European linguistic communication having almost single words for each of the sand and the oasis, then the 1 have to lose some information each clip one so translates. This is a drawback of the linguistic communications and not of the being i.e. the sand or the oasis. Languages are generated by the past experiences of that subdivision of population. It incorporates only those verbal descriptions which this society have already encountered in the past. For a new incident, the linguistic communications always waver as they are unequipped.
Logic return on syllogism. In syllogism a decision is deducted from the human relationship of two earlier sentences called premises. It is all about the relationship, harmoniousness and concurrence of these 3s sentences, however they are called propositions. The father of syllogism Aristotle himself defines syllogism as "a discourse in which, certain things having been supposed, something different from the things supposed consequences of necessity because these things are so." (24b18-20). This syllogism detects nil new. It merely analyzes the internal harmoniousness of the "premises" and the "inference". It is only analytic. It states nil new. It is merely an effort to find, make and suggest such as sentences of linguistic communication which are devised to avoid contradictions. Logic makes nil more than this.
Prior to touching another facet of this article 1 more reply is required to be given to the logists. They state that Logic is the fine art of conforming one's ideas to the Law of Identity. The law of Identity, as propounded by Aristotle states that everything existing bes with a alone identity. This alone personal identity is composed of properties of that thing. Two different things cannot have got all the same attributes.
It is sufficient here to state that this is nil more than an estimate of this macro instruction human race where Aristotle, John, Plato, Ramesh, and their households and animate beings etc. be and come up under the horizon of Law of Identity. Probably the big scale of measurement production of mills producing commodity with the same parametric quantities go againsts this law of identity. It is not clear if Aristotle could be able to propound the same law had he seen the million of pieces of a merchandise of a plaything produced by a Chinese factory, producing five million pieces per twenty-four hours for a length of six months. Some people might happen some emotional job here, so let's travel to another instance.
There are two types of subatomic atoms - fermions and bosons. Fermions have got some feature values assigned to them (called their measure numbers) while the bosons make not. No two bosons are distinguishable from each other. Are they all 1 - as per the Law of Identity? If not, is this some illusion? Scientists state that these bosons lend more than than the part of fermions in this universe. Then, for being violative of the Law of Identity, is this human race a hallucination? Those who mention Aristotle even for curing a icky tooth will not happen a appreciated reply here. Leave them.
Now come up to "reason". (As per Wikipedia) The conception of ground is connected to the conception of language, as reflected in the significances of the Grecian word "logos", later to be translated by Latin "ratio" and then Gallic "raison", from which the English word derived. As reason, rationality, and logic are all connected with the ability of the human head to foretell personal effects as based upon presumed causes, the word "reason" also denotes a land or footing for a peculiar argument, and hence is used synonymously with the word "cause".
A few things about "Reason" should be made clear. "Reason" is associated to those things which are the past experience. No ground can be addressed to some new situations. No organic structure can reason out the behavior of a human organic structure on a new planet. For that he necessitates to cognize the pressure, temperature, O etc. over there and then he would associate those variables to his past experience as to how a varied composition of these variables impacts a human body. No organic structure can turn to a ground for a planet Ten having an ambiance of gas Yttrium and a temperature Deoxythymidine Monophosphate and pressure level Phosphorus unless some pre-known values are given to these variables X, Y, T, P. You can not trust upon a ground until choice to be rotating in a given fringe of already known situations.
What have been seen so far is that the logic is nil but a linguistic game like a game of conundrums and puzzles. Reason do you go around unit of ammunition in a given fringe and by its nature it is deaf for the unknown region circumstances, may it be of unknown hereafter or of unknown experience. It is useless there. The logic and the ground both follow the languages. They stop where the linguistic communications end. The linguistic communications are not natural. They are artificial. The logic and the ground base even on a lowere base simply because they necessitate that unreal linguistic communication for their ain life.
Only the scientific discipline stays to research new things. It uncovers new facets of the being but not through the logic or the reason. It makes so through the observation and the explorations. That is why sometime on a new find they make not have got a diction-backup and usage some ad-hoc words like Young's modulus, Raman effect, Chandrashekhar bounds or Edwin Hubble Telescope. The scientific disciplines make not follow languages. They follow the existence. But here again there is a problem, however of different kind.
Sceinces set a restriction on the ultimate attempt of disclosure of "THE EXISTENCE". One cannot travel down breaking the substance beyond a peculiar degree fixed by Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. One can not travel beyond a peculiar distance in space and that bounds is already there in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. The being is not available to you at all degrees and all distances.
The being is to be explored below the Heisenberg's bounds and beyond the Einstein's limit. Science is not able to traverse this scientific limit. New ways are to be devised. Age old tools of logic and reason, both made up of tautological material, are to be abandoned. New ways are to be evolved. But how? And what?
We will discourse it in the adjacent article - "In The Pursuit Of Higher Consciousness".