Here I would like to present a summary of some things that my wife has written on the topic; she has a much clearer and complete picture of the history than I do. She spends all her time researching it, while I spend most of my time doing equations. We actively collaborate with each other: she looks at history as a quantum system writ very large, thanks to my input; I learn a great deal about science, and possible clues to where solutions may be hidden thanks to her input.
Science took a serious wrong turn in the middle of the nineteenth century, about the time Darwin published his Origin of Species and that is why we do, indeed, live in a Dark Age as a consequence. It wasn't that Natural Selection was wrong, per se, but the way the principles have been applied has been disastrous. Natural Selection was seized upon as the one and only underlying law of the Universe - and this seizing was done by individuals with a very particular psychological make-up1 … The same kinds of people that become fanatically religious and kill people in the name of their god, can - and often do - become adherents of the religion of science.
In the nineteenth century, certain discoveries that enhanced technology led to economic and political considerations, and that is when Science took the wrong turn because the Authoritarian type of individual also has other character traits that include a need to dominate others, as well as a strong tendency to greed. The pursuit of science thus was taken over by politics and an army of scientific workers was sought to serve the agendas of what was to become known as the Military-Industrial Complex.
We know from our review above that the authoritarian follower is quite capable of holding entirely contradictory beliefs. And this is how they are easily controlled by those in positions of power who desire that Science serve only their interests. Over and over again it is seen, in retrospect, of course, that irrational beliefs that are promulgated by authorities who desire to maintain control, and which are believed by the followers who want to be 'good', trump True Science; and here I mean the mode of Scientific Cognition, not just 'science' since the so-called Enlightenment.
Over and over again, throughout history, going back even to ancient times, you can note that there were a number of really intelligent free thinkers who made observations, drew useful inferences from those observations, and suggested solutions that were ignored, ridiculed, reviled, buried; and often, the thinker who dared to voice his ideas was destroyed by one means or another because Authoritarian Followers are also aggressive against anything that is not pronounced to be 'okay' by their leaders. Most often this destruction was - and is even today - due to power considerations: the individual has an idea that, in some way, threatens the political/social power structure.
The fact is, if you read enough history, you will discover that in war, killing the intelligentsia first is the aim of all invaders and conquerors because it is through the elimination or suppression of competent thinkers that any oppressive regime takes hold. This has been done so regularly and extensively throughout history that it staggers the mind to consider it. What it means, essentially, is that over and over and over again, Authoritarians have systematically eliminated from the human population, the best and brightest minds, removing their DNA from the human gene pool, and it is ALL of humanity that is suffering. It could very well be that this single strategy is the reason that humanity may be on the verge of extinction right now, as is proposed by a number of eminent thinkers.
The Malthusian Darwinists, of course, will say that it is just 'survival of the fittest'. I guess that depends on what you understand the 'fittest' to be. In the animal kingdom, where fitness is measured by strength and power, the ability to wallop the heck out of all rivals to your possession of food and sexual partners, selection of this type might be useful. But in the human species, where fitness and progress and even survival, depend on brain power, killing off all the brainiest people in any given culture can only lead to degradation and devolution of the species as a whole. And when that species holds in its hands the ability to destroy all life on the planet, well, I think you can see where that kind of selection will lead: a lot of power and not enough brains to know that it ought never to be used.
1To quote from “The Cambrige Companion to Darwin”: “… only in Germany would Darwin come to be widely read as vindicating an active programme of extermination of the physically and racially ‘unfit’”
And as today is the anniversary of our first meeting, here is the song that brought us together. I dedicate it to my wife.
P.S.1.
Those who are deficient in the free, full and intelligent observation of a self-imposed law, must be placed in subjection to the will of others. This is one principal cause of the subjection of nations. After their disturbing egoism has been trampled under the feet of a master, they are given or, if they have force in them, attain a fresh chance of deserving liberty by liberty.
Sri Aurobindo
P.S.4. 17:42 . New version of my notes on the conformal group. Added Proposition 7 with a proof.
Added Proposition 7 at the end with a proof. Removed unnecessary stuff.
ReplyDeleteUpdated the file. Added a long paragraph at the end. There may still be typos there.
ReplyDeleteAfter the construction is successful, hopefully tomorrow, we will do an example, using coordinates, to see how it relates to what we have already been through. The example will be split into a series of exercises.
DeleteStrona 7, wiersz 10 : zbędny nawias.
ReplyDeleteStrona 11, wiersz 9 od dołu : brak prima przy x.
Strona 12, wiersz 9 : jest L(A) powinno być L(a).
Thanks. Will take care of it tomorrow. Also tomorrow will change the notation in the freshly added part. Will replace tau by pi. I will use tau_p,q in the next proposition that is still in my head.
DeleteFixed, replaced. Thank you.
DeleteCoś mi nie pasuje na stronie 17 (dwa pierwsze zdania punktu 7.3). Może nad literami tau powinny być daszki (wcześniej trzeba by zdefiniować je jako rzuty).
DeleteFixed, updated. Thanks.
DeleteSam dół strony 22 : coś nie jest dobrze z tym wzorem.
DeletePod wzorem (112)
DeleteWe denote by O(Q) the group of linear isometries of Q ->
of N ?
Thanks, fixed. Isometries of Q was ok. Isometries of a quadratic form is a well defined concept. But to make it even more clear I changed it to "of (V,Q)" - isometries of a vector space endowed with a quadratic form defined on this space.
DeleteCzy w dalszym ciągu ostatnie zdanie na stronie 22 jest niejasne?
DeleteChanged. Is it clear now?
DeleteNie do końca. Czy iloczyn X.Y jest na podstawie formy biliniowej wynikającej z formy kwadratowej Q ?
DeleteYes. It follows from the condition Q(X)=(X,X). Scalar product and bilinear product are, de facto synonyms, except that a bilinear form is usually given a name and is written as B(X,Y), while scalar product has no name (when there is only one in question) and written as (X,Y).
DeleteAdded Proposition 8. Now working on its proof. It should be accompanied with a graphic illustration. Will work on the illustration later.
ReplyDelete" But since we accept world-existence, and for us all world-existence is Brahman and full of the presence of God, these things can have no terrors for us; whatever dangers of distraction there may be, we have to face and overcome them. If the world and our own existence are so complex, we must know and embrace their complexities in order that our self-knowledge and our knowledge of the dealings of Purusha with its Prakriti may be complete. If there are many planes, we have to possess them all for the Divine, even as we seek to possess spiritually and transform our ordinary poise of mind, life and body."
ReplyDeleteSri Aurobindo, "The Synthesis of Yoga".
And interesting and far reaching idea
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/cambriasunh/status/1672365228921585665
Finished the proof of Lemma 3. There may be typos and other little problems. Now working on the proof of Proposition 8.
ReplyDeleteFinished the proof of Proposition 8.
ReplyDeleteAdded beginning of Section 8.2 - geodesics. Will continue tomorrow.
ReplyDelete@Ark
ReplyDeleteNapisz proszę coś więcej na temat wzoru (118) bo go nie rozumiem.
ι(p) to funkcja z argumentem p będącym kierunkiem.
ι(p⊥) to funkcja z argumentem w postaci zbioru?
If f is a map of some set S into itself, and if S1 is a subset of, then by f(S1) we understand the set of points f(x) where x runs through S1. Thus writing f(S1)=S1 means that for every x in S1 its image f(x) is also in S1, and that aevery point of S1 is an image of some point in S1. The map f is allowed to move the point inside S1, but the whole set S1 itself does not move.
DeleteDziękuję.
DeleteWzór (126) jest jakiś taki niedokończony.
Thus over each pointp ->
brak spacji przed p
Fixed. Thank you!
DeleteNad wzorem (113) :
DeleteWe define PN as ->
From now on we define PN as
Right! Thank you!
Delete