| Concept |
One of the most absurd notions of Mathemagix is 'energy transfer'. You wonder who was the deranged lunatic that came up with that one. But the Mathemagicians also transfer information and waves and who knows what other abstract concepts. Scarier still is that all mathemagicians and the public at large have bought into such notions as 'dilating time' and 'warping space'. Nobody questions such hogwash anymore. So let's get to the point. In Science, it is irrational to say that you moved a concept. It is irrational to say that you 'gave love' or that you 'received rewards'. This language is okay in ORDINARY SPEECH. It has no place in Science. You cannot hand out or kick or smash abstract concepts such as justice or grace or attraction. Likewise, it is irrational to impart motion to any of the favorite CONCEPTS of the religion of Mathemagix: mass, energy, field, time, charge, force, wave, plasma, vortex. It is irrational to say that 'you moved a mass' or that 'a field accelerated a charge' or that 'the wave traveled from here to there'. There are no such objects as energy, time, mass, field, charge or wave in Physics. These concepts would be appropriate in Philosophy if it weren't for the fact that they are irrational concepts. We have no use whatsoever for them in Science. Therefore, we need to start at the beginning in order for the casual reader to fully understand what the argument is. What is Science? Let's start by defining the word at the center of our discussion...
the branch that deals with objects and causes. Philosophy is the branch that deals with concepts and reasons.Physics includes what is informally known as the hard sciences: Physics, Chemistry, Paleontology, Biology, Medicine, and the like. Philosophy includes what is typically regarded as soft sciences: History, Law, Social Studies, Psychology, Languages, etc. Math is a language. Consequently, it belongs strictly within Philosophy. It has no business in Physics. We have no use for Mathematics in Physics. If Mathematics is not the language of Physics as has always been claimed by the monks of Mathemagix, then what is the language of Physics in the alternative? What is the language of Physics? The language of Physics is ILLUSTRATION!!! This follows from the Golden Rule of Physics...
be to handle in the lab on, assuming experiments were part of the Scientific Method? What phenomenon would there be in the entire Universe if there were no objects? What would move and collide and break apart? Unfortunately, the mathemagicians who took over the reigns of 'science' when traditional religions could no longer hold sway never learned this fundamental lesson. They continue to play around with irrational concepts such as energy and time and fields. These concepts are irrational because the mathemagician presents and/or uses them as objects. WHAT is the mathemagician transferring when he says "energy transfer" if energy is clearly and unambiguously defined as a concept:
How do the mathemagicians purport to transfer a property of an object? Indeed, we can replace the word energy in any 'scientific' paper written in the last 10,000 years with the word spirit and we would learn just as much. Try it! Just for fun! And if you still have doubts, let Nobel Prize Richard Feynman tell you in his own words...
So it turns out that the mathemagicians are transferring 'something', but they don't know what. And the reason they don't know is that energy is a CONCEPT. They have been dealing with this spirit for centuries and calling what they do 'science'. They have converted energy into mass and it turns out that all they've done when you come to think of it is convert love into justice. Not a single mathemagician in any university on planet Earth can define either word.
And then again, typical of the religion of Mathemagix which boasts that it is founded upon rigid definitions, we have the top-rated gurus John Wheeler and Edwin Taylor tell us that...
every proposal to define such a term. Even if we could count number of atoms or by any other counting method try to evaluate amount of matter, that number would not equal mass."
So? What have we learned from our autistic friends in the mathemagical world? What is mass? What is energy? We will never know!
And this takes us to the purpose of this web page. What is a concept? What do we mean when we say that such and such word is a concept? I mean, if the mathemagicians have been moving concepts around and this is a no-no in Physics, what really is a concept? How do we distinguish it from those words in the dictionary that we identify as objects?
A concept is a RELATION between two objects. A concept is easily distinguishable from an object in that it doesn't have shape. You cannot imagine or visualize the shape of a concept. What image are you going to form of energy or mass or force or time? What are you visualizing? What form? What shape? Is energy a cloud of some kind, a cloud of spirit? Does it convert into a solid piece of metal when it 'converts' into mass? In this sense, we can also say that an object is that which has shape and that a concept is that which doesn't. Every word in the dictionary can be placed into either category: object or concept. It either depicts that which has shape or it doesn't. These are the only two categories of any interest to authentic physicists or relevance to Physics. |
Objects |
Concepts |
.
| To comment on any of the pages in this website go to: Rational Scientific Method |
Bill's books
