© Oleg Oka, 2017

ISBN 978-5-4485-8497-8

Created with Ridero smart publishing system

“Imagination runs ahead of reality

and shows the way…”

1 BOOK “WHAT IS”

“… The scientific worldview is not

scientific a true insight

The universe – we don’t have …”

In. And. Vernadsky

1…

Everything I tried so far to benefit humanity – nonsense on vegetable oil. I’ve invaded someone else’s territory, and it is at least funny. Where am I poking around in a ten-dimensional space, where titans like Stephen Hawking was confused…

The only thing I found is God and the primordial space.

Of course, it was not my idea, it is impossible to come up with something that was always there, but I tried to look at these things differently… but that’s not probably to 12 billion people (think about many people have lived on this Earth for our foreseeable at the moment, the story.) already considered many possible options, what’s new to come up with not possible. Okay. You can at least flatter myself…

A good name for a book “The man who invented God.”? (Even Maestro Muldashev – Einstein’s near me!). That is the truth.

Brian Greene “the ELEGANT UNIVERSE” – a book that explains the modern world? And I’m completely lost…

They have EVERYTHING laid out on the shelves and weighed. On stage the SOUL and GOD are already TALKING about it. The latest fashion – the string theory… or Rather FIVE string theories. (The distinction is quite vague, but they are mutually exclusive).

Or I’m going crazy…

(“Occam’s razor” or the principle of brevity of thought, requires a scientist, so he tried to explain every possible phenomenon in a simpler way, without introducing “additional entities”, that is unnecessary hypotheses.”)

I understand fully, there is BICARINATE build a picture of the WORLD.

And for the sake of the process are themselves scientists are on DETAIL COMPLEXITY at the expense of CLARITY. The “discovery” of any new fact applies to the WHOLE picture.

Black holes are sized from particles to galaxies, is the same thing with “strings” – or are considering using the Collider, or with the naked eye in the sky overhead … (each from physics – just in case – warns of possible refutation of another controversial theory. A safety net …)

“Holographic nature” of threshold events!!! “Folded strings” hiding in the folds (!!!) space… As I understand it, these “folds” can hide EVERYTHING from particles to the Universe. Message Datetimetest (instead of SIX!) throws in delighted shock the scientific community … (AND ALL this is clothed in a toga mathematical reasoning – there is nothing you can do about it …)

At the end of the book gives a vague message about the limits of knowledge (thank GOD!!!) but there also triumphant March – the possibility of infinite extension of the limit… the scientific world does not give up…And why would he give up? Not all disassembled… And yet there are people who understand something in their builds, they will not rest.

Here’s what I learned – NEED a NEW CONCEPT of KNOWLEDGE that exists.

The world is sufficiently simple, and if all this wisdom is really almost necessary, LET THEM have FUN… But to follow the path of ever-increasing complexity is a mistake that will inevitably lead to a standstill of knowledge … (There is such a law – the more complex a system is, the more vulnerable she is …) LOGIC, MEANING, and APPROPRIATENESS should be major criteria for the truth (Again.) All this is missing in the present scientific worldview.

As knowledge lying at the basis of the present scientific worldview does not meet the requirements of true knowledge (Consistency-permanence-timelessness; does not have a strong rationale, it is not rational and impractical), and the other science now to offer are not able to, it seems that true knowledge now to be considered INTUITIVE.

And maybe even SPECULATIVE…

2…

First of all, two questions :

“What?” and

“Why?”

I want to Express with this Scripture and why do I need it? Actually at first I wanted to create something mythic, like the monumental Moduleusage work – “Where did the people.” … (From Shambhala the same!)

And I started… then started again, then again… until I realized that no one needs it. And including me… And recently dawned on me that just simply exists I have such a need at the end of life to determine where I lived (in what world), why and how. So I have to write some kind of summary about my existence. A philosophical treatise? If you take into consideration that we are all philosophers, then so be it. But I do not want anybody to learn or review some established forms and systems.

I just want to understand AT THEIR level what I learned from this life about the world and about yourself. For this there are a variety of ways: in the form of some entertaining works (“Gulliver’s Travels …"), or didactic texts, as “the Revolt of the angels”. France, or scientific treatises, as “the Treatise on the heavens” of Aristotle, or the form of a dialogue, i.e. a live conversation, like Fontenelle’s “plurality of worlds”. All opportunities not listed.

Moreover, I don’t want to didactically formulate any provisions that are no doubt formulated in different ways by many philosophers, according to their systems and teachings.

First of all I don’t like or understand mathematics, people tend to fear what they do not understand. Moreover, I do not understand is not the object itself (though that too), I don’t see these clever formulas make sense and expediency. I can’t IDENTIFY them with anything from the surrounding world of things and events… And consequently, mathematics seems to me a thing artificial, UNNATURAL, not belonging to our world.

Better than I said why I don’t like math – Derrida, “Dissemination”: – “… mathematics do not know what they are talking about, and… they are also a little worried about how it is written corresponds to any reality…”

“Newton tried to construct a General picture of the Universe, however, with all hands, she would inevitably shapefiles under the force of gravity.

Einstein strongly believed in the beginning and the end of the universe and therefore came up with the eternally-existing static Universe. To do this he needed to introduce in his equations a special component which is created “antigravitation”, and thereby formally assuring the stability of the world order. This Supplement (the so-called “cosmological term”), Einstein considered inelegant, ugly, but all the same necessary (the author is General relativity not in vain believed my aesthetic sense – it was later proven that the static model is unstable and therefore physically meaningless).” —

AS SUCH A FOCUS?

Philosophy takes a variety of forms, i.e., a philosopher can only think so, and nothing else. But others should perceive it to build adequately different? Philosophers are human beings too, and no two are similar (and can be). The consciousness of each individual. Can be affected by acquired experience, can be all the same destiny…

On the one hand it is good, but too much variation methods puts these people are often on different sides of the fence and prevents understanding…

An example of the imposition of mathematics on the philosophy; – the Russian philosopher, mathematics teacher Kallistrat Zhakov “Logic” (section titles) :

values of figures and translating them into one another

on the use of mnemonic images of syllogisms

– on the possibility of all modes of syllogism

one form of output;

This is when a person can not think mathematically, all logical reasoning is expressed by algebraic formulas, when the subject and the thought depersonalized masks of the characters, and for me, for example, the perception of the logic of his thinking is, to put it mildly, difficult.

(– “Oh, look at the math, said Logik. – He observes that the first ninety-nine numbers are less than a hundred, and hence, by means of what he calls induction, concluded that any number less than a hundred.

Physicist believe, ‘said the mathematician,” that 60 is divided by all the numbers. He observes that 60 is divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. He checks a few other numbers, such as 10, 20 and 30, taken, as he says, at random. Since 60 divided them, he considers the experimental data is sufficient.

– Yeah, but look at the engineer, – said the physicist. The engineer suspected that all odd numbers are Prime. In any case, 1 can be regarded as a simple number that proves it. Then there are 3, 5 and 7, all, of course, is simple.

Then, going 9 – an unfortunate incident; apparently, 9 is not a Prime number, but 11 and 13, of course, is simple. Go back to 9, “he says,” I conclude that 9 must be an error of the experiment.” (From the book, Etc. Polya. Mathematics and plausible reasoning, IL, 1957.)

“Development of existential question therefore means: flashing certain things – asking – in its Genesis. Asking this question as the modus of existence of certain things is itself essentially determined by what it is asked – being. It’s things that we ourselves always of the essence and which among other things has the existential possibility of asking, we grasp the terminology as presence. Clear and transparent formulation of the question about the meaning of being requires a prior adequate explication of certain things (presence) in the aspect of his existence.” Martin Heidegger “Being and time”. Here is a quite different matter; – the classical language of philosophy. Logic and meaning, vitality and feasibility… Someone here is understand what is said in this passage? (Not counting the professionals, dog ate …)

And the third example – “… hybrid forms matters svoemesto fill the deformation space, in which synthesis occurs. The synthesis process continues as long as the crumple zone does not fill completely, as if falling asleep with the stones of the pit, the surface of the dirt road is smooth. Hybrid of matter neutralize the crumple zone space. And that can only mean one thing – they affect the dimension of the space with the sign opposite to the sign of the deformation space in which the synthesis of these hybrid materials. Atoms create the secondary curvature of micropotenza…” – here and rushing “scholarship,” standing on wobbly stilts pseudo-scientific terms… And behind them – the emptiness and nonsense. Of course this is academician Levashov…

Know comments …

So I will try to put the language of “household” used, and it is not for the sake of the intended reader, as such, is not intended to, and only to not get confused.