The Artificial Division Between Physics and Metaphysics

Originally posted by Phage
Calling someone a physicist does not make them one, nor does it add credibility to their claims.

He is a physicist in that he works on physics and he has partnered with Paul LaViolette in writing a paper, as I've pointed out:

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by Phage

 

Well, he's written a paper with Paul LaViolette entitled "Stationary Dissipative Solitons of Model G": Link

reply to post by Mary Rose

I "work on physics" too.
I guess I'm a physicist.
You "work on physics" too!

We're physicists! Yay!

Originally posted by Phage
Tesla was an inventor, not a Physicist. A lot of his ideas about physics were just flat out wrong.

Name one.

reply to post by Mary Rose

Name one.

Ok:

Terrestrial phenomena which I have noted conclusively show that there is no Heaviside layer, or if it exists, it is of no effect.

www.tfcbooks.com...

The "heaviside layer" is what the ionosphere was called in Tesla's day.
It does indeed exist. And it is indeed of effect.

I know you just asked for one but here's a bonus:

The Hertz wave theory of wireless transmission may be kept up for a while, but I do not hesitate to say that in a short time it will be recognized as one of the most remarkable and inexplicable aberrations of the scientific mind which has ever been recorded in history.

The "Hertz wave" is what we now call electromagnetic radiation...as in radio.

reply to post by Phage


According to Wikipedia, the Heaviside layer is only the E layer, the middle layer, of the ionosphere.

Are you saying that Tesla was talking about the entire ionosphere nevertheless?

reply to post by Phage


So what qualifies an artist as an artist? Their work or their diploma? Or how about an author? Their work, or their diploma? Or maybe a beautician? Work or diploma? A piece of paper does not guarantee skill, nor does skill require a piece of paper. This is the point I was making before - either this thread or another.

reply to post by Mary Rose

It was theorized that there was was a layer of ionization surrounding the Earth. A layer which would reflect radio waves. Neither Kennelly nor Heaviside included any other layers. The theory was a single layer that would reflect radio waves. In Tesla's day the Heaviside was equivalent to the Ionosphere.

Does it really matter? Tesla was convinced no such thing existed or would it behave in the way it was predicted to. The E region exists and it reflects radio waves. The Heaviside layer exists. The ionosphere exists. Tesla was wrong. His version of science led him astray.

Originally posted by Phage
Does it really matter?

It matters for my research into Tesla vs. mainstream science today.

Thanks for a clear answer. Very helpful. I have my homework assignment.

reply to post by Phage


Are you ignoring the "Stationary Dissipative Solitons of Model G" paper by Matthew Pulver and Paul A. LaViolette?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by Phage

 

Well, he's written a paper with Paul LaViolette entitled "Stationary Dissipative Solitons of Model G": Link

Download the 24 page .pdf file here.

reply to post by Mary Rose

Perhaps you can summarize it for me.
Since you're a physicist too. A little peer review of the article perhaps?
Are there metaphysics in there?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I have my homework assignment.

Here is what I found out:

1. Heaviside believed in a Hertzian “solid” ether in which transverse waves could be transmitted. The Heaviside layer apparently was a supposed layer which electromagnetic waves bounced off of between it and the earth.
   
   
2. Tesla believed there are no electromagnetic waves in free space, so you couldn’t bounce waves which did not exist. Tesla’s waves were longitudinal ones.
   
   
3. The existence of the ionosphere was of utmost importance to Tesla, since it is charged positively in opposition to the earth which is negatively charged. Were it not for the ionosphere there would be no voltage gradient between the atmosphere at sea level and the ionosphere, which Tesla often spoke of, and his inventions and experiments depended upon.
   

Originally posted by Phage
Are there metaphysics in there?

No.

But there is a metaphysical side to subquantum kinetics, which Paul LaViolette explores in his book Genesis of the Cosmos. Link

Excerpt from a nine page August 2007 review by Ray Lynch in DharmaCafé magazine:

. . . LaViolette, in fact, displays a capacity to think clearly in both a scientific sense and a metaphysical sense. While we would expect a scientist as competent as he to do the science with aplomb, it is uncommon to find this coupled with metaphysical sensibilities. His study of ancient mythology and cosmology has served him well. It is encouraging to see the coherence of ancient thought concerning origins taken seriously by a contemporary scientist, especially when these principles are then incorporated into a serious and full-blown theory . . .

reply to post by Mary Rose

Good.

Tesla believed there are no electromagnetic waves in free space, so you couldn’t bounce waves which did not exist. Tesla’s waves were longitudinal ones.

Yes, he was wrong. His longitudinal waves were the flow of electrons through earth, electricity, not electromagnetic radiation. That what his dreams of wireless power transmission were based on.

He just couldn't wrap his head around electromagnetic radiation though. Hands on sort of guy.

Red Ice Creations notes a bridge of science and spirituality:

Ibrahim Karim & Pier Paolo Alberghini - BioGeometry
June 7, 2013

With his experience as an architect and a scientist Ibrahim Karim has synergized aspects of Pythagorean harmonics, subtle energy sciences, radiesthesia, geobiology, building biology, sacred architecture & modern wave theories to produce a new Physics of Quality from which the science of BioGeometry has emerged. Since 2002 Pier Paolo Alberghini has been working with a new approach to achieve well-being for the users of the buildings he designs, by applying the science of BioGeometry. Alberghini and Karim have collaborated successfully in BioGeometry projects in Europe and North America. We’ll discuss how BioGeometry bridges science and spirituality to produce a natural harmony into the environment. In the first hour, Ibrahim and Pier Paolo explain how BioGeometrical shapes interact with Earth's energy to produce a balancing effect on all energy levels of biological systems. Karim talks about his research into shapes of body organs which led to the discovery of the relationship between organ function, energy pattern, and shape. These patterns called "BioSignatures" produce, through resonance, a balance of energy and immunity that support orthodox and alternative medicine. We’ll discuss how BioGeometry provides a viable solution in transforming the quality of the effect that electromagnetic radiation has on living systems. In the second hour, we’ll discuss the Physics of Quality in more detail. We’ll also hear about the relationship between electromagnetic fields and morals. Karim and Alberghini discuss their solutions to rebalance with nature. Link

reply to post by Phage


How do you wrap your head around electromagnetic radiation? You believe in an all pervasive electromagnetic field that exists connectedly at every planck point in the universe, which matter with a charge, disperses this field as it moves in an accelerated direction? I have a hard time wrapping my head around EM radiation too, What do you think the EM field is made of?

The following quote is from Kindle Locations 558-561 of the book published March 12, 2011 The ABC's of the New Physics - A Workbook Based on The New Physics Derived From a Disinverted Metaphysics by Norberto R. Keppe. The workbook was created by The Department of Trilogical Energetics of the International Society of Analytical Trilogy:

. . . Aristotle suggested that in order to understand energy we needed to study matter. But it’s simply impossible to understand energy that way. Keppe has made a fundamental correction of this inverted orientation by asserting that everything we can sense in nature, whether physical or biological, comes from something superior, which is immaterial, metaphysical, and consequently beyond the physical realm.

Also from The ABC's of the New Physics, on the next page:

. . . the metaphysical perspective we are considering identifies the atom as a vortex that draws in the immaterial, essential energy and then transforms it into the energy ('E') that Einstein was referring to in his equation.

In this book the expression "essential energy" is used to denote a superior or first cause energy in the universe.

The mathematical connection between metaphysics/mysticism and particle physics (quarks, M-theory, superstring theory) may be found here
The division between metaphysics and physics has now been proved to be an illusion. Mathematics has provided the bridge.

reply to post by micpsi


Mathamatics depends on the physical to exist. Physical items existing is a physical expression of what symbolic math depicts and represents.