Table of Contents
- 1 The Post-modern Descriptions of the Science a Priori and the Science a Posteriori
- 2 The Two-Fold Unification of the 21st-Century
- 3 The Exploration of Forms and Principles in the 21st-Century
- 4 The Origin of the Constants of Physics
- 5 The 21st-Century and the New Consciousness
- 6 Summary
Subject: The 21st-Century and the Science a Priori
The Post-modern Descriptions of the Science a Priori and the Science a Posteriori
What is the true nature of science? This is somewhat a surprising question, considering the fact that we have been practising science for years now. So, the nature of science is probably already defined.
But can we really agree that our current scientific practice does not leave ample rooms for unharnessed potentials? Are there crucial aspects of knowledge necessary for today’s science?
These questions above capture the purpose of this article, which is to show you how science will be practiced from this 21st century and beyond. But before I come to this, I want us to briefly look at how we have been doing science for the past 400 years. I want to show you the missing wisdom in our scientific practice unlike as I have done in my other articles.
Science for the past 400 years has majorly been quantitative. We have judge reality based on what we can physically quantify of it. By following physical quantification, we have proceeded to mathematically model these quantities based on common results and the observable and definable inter-relationships that exist among them.
So, basically, our mathematical laws are based on hidden patterns in the physical quantities we measure, and we model and describe the universe according to these patterns. Science for the past 400 has only sought to find hidden patterns in the phenomena of nature and from these hidden patterns we derive what we call scientific laws and principles.
In summary, we have been deriving our scientific principles from quantitative science. The principles which we have so far derived from quantitative science are what I usually call relative principles.
These are principles derived without regard for the qualitative nature of the universe. One of the core relative principles of science is the relative principle of inertia, which also has its absolute form which I have discussed before.
The derivation of scientific principles from an entirely quantitative science is what we call the science a posteriori. This is the science based on observations or experiences and it has been impartful so far.
But is there really another means of deriving scientific principles that is not based on physical observations? Yes, there is, and while this sort of science is called the science a priori, it is not firmly established in the old scientific method, but in the new scientific method.
The science a priori, distinct from the science a posterior, is defined as the science in which its principles are derived from reasoning and not direct observations. Now, in this article, I want us to extricate these definitions of the science a priori and the science a posteriori from their relationship to reasoning and observation respectively.
How? In this new era, what we call the science a posteriori is the kind of science derived solely from the quantitative study of the universe. This is the kind of science that we have been doing for so long.
So, the science a priori is now defined as the kind of science derived from the qualitative and the quantitative study of the universe. I really hope that you can see how the definitions of both sciences alter in this post-modern era.
It is now important that we understand the science a priori and the science a posteriori as such, for I have arrived at certain a priori principles, seven of them in total, because I began to investigate the qualitative and quantitative nature of the universe.
This new understanding of these two sciences takes us to the very method of the Great Mind. The science a priori is the science of the 21st-century, so we all should be prepared and ready to re-engage our minds in newer ways.
The extrication of the science a priori and the science a posteriori from reasoning and observation respectively is not so that I can force my scientific views down your throat, but so that I can draw you closer to the truth about all things.
Our continuous collection and gathering of data cannot give us the true understanding of the universe. We need some way to go beyond our data and appearances in order for us to know the true laws and principles that produce them.
Having settled with our new understanding of the science a priori and the science a posteriori, you must now know that the principles derived from the science a priori are what I call absolute principles.
So, in this new era, the kind of science which we shall practice is the true science a priori which has produced different results in relation to our understanding of the universe. One of the major results of the science a priori is the true theory of the universe.
We now have our own scripture of the universe. The Theory of the Universe: Absolute Relativity is the central theory of this new way of doing science which has produced the two-fold unification of science.
Let me describe the two-fold unification of science in this 21st century and how it changes our understanding of the universe and also our perspective of modern relativity. We have not been able to criticize modern Einsteinian relativity properly because we did not have a better theory until now. This is no longer the case.
The Two-Fold Unification of the 21st-Century
In The Theory of the Universe, we now have a new conception of space and time not just as quantities but also as qualities. In the science a posteriori, space and time only have quantity and no quality.
However, in the science a priori, space and time have both quantity and quality. The science a priori now informs us that there are two forms of space and time in the universe. They have been conceptualized and mathematically applied in The Theory of the Universe: Absolute Relativity.
The new theory now informs us that there are four states of motion in the universe. These four states of motion will radically change the way we do science from this century onwards.
Interpretational and Mathematical transformations
Also, the science a priori informs us that absolute relativity is the conceptual framework upon which the universe was designed. The absolute relativity of post-modern physics is different from modern relativity in two aspects.
One is in how it transforms the principles of relativity from uniform frames to accelerated frames and the other is in how it transforms the principles of relativity for ponderable (non-charged) bodies and for electrical (charged) bodies. Modern relativity exhibits only a transformation of its mathematical descriptions of uniform and accelerated frames.
To make it simpler, let’s conceptualize the two conceptual transformations present in absolute relativity. The transformation of the principles of relativity between uniform frames and accelerated frames should simply be referred to as mathematical transformation.
1. Mathematical transformation refers to the transformation of the principles of relativity between uniform frames and accelerated frames.
The second form of the transformation of the principles of relativity which is as equally important as the first is what I call the interpretational transformation. Let me quickly define interpretational transformation.
2. Interpretational transformation is the transformation of the principles of relativity between ponderable (non-charged) bodies and electrical (charged) bodies.
As I have inferred, modern relativity only exhibits mathematical transformation of the principles of relativity. Modern relativity exhibits mathematical transformation when we move from special relativity to general relativity.
The mathematical transformation of modern relativity is mainly geometrical, and it is concerned with the transition from Euclidean geometry for uniform frames to Riemann geometry for accelerated frames.
The issue of fundamental dynamics is settled in modern relativity where luminal transformations are applied to both uniform and accelerated frames. Light is the limit of motion for both uniform and accelerated frames. This is particularly important as I show you the new and converse way absolute relativity reveals.
The mathematical transformation of absolute relativity is concerned with the fundamental dynamics of the transition from luminal transformation for uniform frames to superluminal transformations for accelerated frames.
The issue of geometry is settled in absolute relativity where Euclidean laws apply to both uniform and accelerated frames. Light is the limit of motion for uniform frames, while the gravi-electromagnetic wave is the limit of motion for accelerated frames.
I want you to look at the difference between the mathematical transformation of modern relativity and that of absolute relativity. It will help you understand better the two theories that are pinnacles of the science a posteriori and the science a priori respectively.
The second form of transformation in absolute relativity is interpretational transformation. Interpretational transformation is mainly concerned with how the essence of light changes between ponderable (non-charged) bodies and electrical (charged) bodies.
The interpretational transformation which is absent in modern Einsteinian relativity informs us that light maintains a constant speed relative to ponderable (non-charged) bodies and accelerates relative to electrical (charged) bodies.
This change in the essence of light is absent in modern relativity and it is the key to unifying the physics or dynamics of the atomic world with the physics of the macro world. Physics has been in need of this twofold unification.
In modern relativity, the interpretational transformation is absent as it argues that light maintains a constant speed for both ponderable (non-charged) and electrical (charged) bodies. This is not true. Light does not maintain a constant speed in the entire universe.
So, looking closely at both modern relativity and absolute relativity, you will see that the principles of relativity were applied in modern physics to achieve a one-fold unification, whereas in absolute relativity, the principles of relativity were applied to achieve a two-fold unification.
The mathematical transformation was applied to achieve the first unification of uniform and accelerated motions while the interpretational transformation was applied to achieve the second unification of the dynamics of ponderable and electrical bodies.
Absolute relativity is obviously more encompassing than modern relativity. In absolute relativity, uniform and accelerated frames are unified and also the dynamics of motion of ponderable bodies and electrical bodies are also unified.
Modern relativity has only been concerned about the first unification of uniform frames and accelerated frames, which it failed to achieve and had brought us to the crisis in physics. Modern relativity is an upside down view of the universe which absolute relativity has come to set upright.
Now absolute relativity has opened our minds to the true understanding of the universe and of the problems of science. It equips us with new mental tools to tackle any conceptual problem of science.
The Exploration of Forms and Principles in the 21st-Century
Through the qualitative aspect of the science a priori, man comes into contact with the principles of the universe in a remarkably new way. Man realizes that space has two forms and he wonders what can he do with this great scientific truth.
He also realizes that those core principles of the universe such as the principle of inertia which he had thought apply in all domains, both in the ponderable world of heavenly bodies and in the electrical world of the atom, only applies in the ponderable world and exclusively to uniformly moving ponderable bodies.
He comes to know that the principle of non-inertia applies exclusively only to accelerated frames. There are qualitatively defined limits to the principles of the universe which no one had known before now.
For the first time he is now realizing the qualitative patterns in the universe just as he had also realize the quantitative patterns in the universe. He also comes to the blissful realization that true scientific understanding comes from the perfect blend of these qualitative and quantitative patterns in the universe, and not from the study of only quantitative patterns.
Now, by his sole investigation of the quantitative patterns of the universe, he has been able to achieve tremendous feats in technology and so he wonders what he could accomplish with the investigation of the qualitative patterns of the universe.
He would think, is it possible that I can explore and control within defined limits the qualitative nature of the universe just as I can explore and control within defined limits the quantitative nature of the universe?
This new thought propels him with the ambitious desire to interact with the principles of the universe and to bend them according to his will. This will be the central goal of 21st-century science. Man will come into contact with the base of the principles of the cosmos.
To be further precise about this goal, we observe an atomic particle go past two slits and we now know that it is because of the strong phase of the principle of non-inertia. So, how can we bring this principle to act on macro bodies outside the atom?
How can we tweak the boundary of the principle of non-inertia? Also, how can we tweak the boundary of the principle of inertia? If mankind has so far been allowed to explore the quantitative nature of the universe, then it is my firm belief that the qualitative nature which is about forms and principles will also be explored in like manner.
The science a priori brings mankind to the unprecedented exploration of forms and principles. Our practical exploration of principles would immensely change the way we see ourselves in the universe. Formerly, we thought the principles are what they are and cannot be touched, but not anymore. They can now be touched!
We shall make use of forms and principles just as we make use of quantities, we only have to realize and begin to pursue the qualitative nature of the universe. Our first step would be to alter the purpose of particle physics.
In one of my future articles, I will discuss the next evolution of particle physics. Particle accelerators like the Larger Hadron Collider (LHC) would be the birthplace of post-modern technologies. They shall be the hallowed grounds upon which we shall explore forms in all its aspects.
In the exploration of forms and principles, we shall tweak and adjust rightly the boundaries of application of the core principles of the universe. Man would end up becoming the only principle in the universe.
The Origin of the Constants of Physics
In The Theory of the Universe, you will find that only three constants of physics are used or applied. They are c which is the speed of light, G which is the gravitational constant and k which is the Coulomb constant of electromagnetic interaction.
All three are either related to light or gravity and with only these three constants the complete understanding of the universe was weaved for you in The Theory of the Universe. I have said it before that light and gravity are all we need to understand the universe.
These three constants are the only true constants of physics, any other constant is superfluous, nevertheless, we would still have to explore them. So, in this article, these three constants are the constants that I am referring to and not any other.
Einstein once said that his main concern is to know if “God had any choice in creating the universe.” Did God have to set light at a particular speed and also go about setting all the constants of physics?
First of all, God was only concerned with defining light and gravity as the limits of inertia in the universe, so all the other constants of physics even the observed speed of light are results of this, and in this true sense are not absolute fundamental constants.
The constant speed of light emerges from the fact that it is a limit of inertia. So, while we can deduce what the speed of light is, we can never know what the inertia of light is unless by direct experience.
In simpler terms, the unmeasurable inertia of light produces the measurable speed of light. We can know what the speed of light is, but we cannot know what the inertia of light is. So, since we cannot know what the inertia of light is, we cannot question in any physical way whether God had a choice in creating the universe.
It therefore follows that all constants of physics are direct results of the hidden truth that light and gravity are the limits of inertia. We can never directly know or experience light and gravity as limits of inertia.
These are aspects of light and gravity beyond the domain of quantitative science. What we call the constant speed of light and the constant acceleration of gravity are shadows, they are indicators of the underlying essences of light and gravity as limits of inertia.
So, even if God had a choice in creating the universe, it is not as a scientist stuck in quantitative science would think. God was not concerned in setting the speed of light and the other two constants of physics in a physical way.
He was not even concerned in setting in any physical way the inertias of light and gravity at particular proportions, but in defining in a personal way their essences as limits of inertia in the universe.
No matter the possible variations in the inertia of light and of gravity, both entities remain the limits of inertia in the universe. It is innately what they are irrespective and independent of their variations or any external conditions.
Light and gravity have constant unchanging personalities in the universe (in the ponderable and electrical universes) and not necessarily constant unchanging proportions.
Light and gravity are not constants based on their physical properties that can be observed, but based on their personal attributes that can be attested to. This is one of the reasons why I call light and gravity cosmic entities, so as to give them some sort of personification.
I want us to begin to see light and gravity as entities just like we are. Man was birthed from them, so if we can give ourselves personal attributes and self-awareness, how much more light and gravity. So, when I refer to light and gravity as limits of inertia, I do so in the same sense that I can say that a man is kind.
We are no longer looking at light and gravity as cosmic phenomena with physical attributes, but as cosmic entities with personal attributes. It is the constancy of their personal attributes that manifest in our physical observations as some of the fundamental constants of physics.
The three fundamental constants of physics are due to the constant personal attributes of light and gravity. Please understand this. Light and gravity should no longer just be reduced as physical phenomena, they are personal phenomena.
What do I want you to understand about light and gravity? You know when I began to comprehend to a large extent the nature of a priori science, a deep awe filled my mind when I realized that light and gravity are not just cosmic phenomena separate from matter. No.
Light and gravity are the very cosmic substance from which matter was formed. This unique mix of light and gravity which constitutes matter is called the gravi-electromagnetic wave. The unified field is so real, and matter is not separate from light and gravity at all.
Light and gravity are inseparable constituents of my being. This realization elevated the essence of light and gravity before my eyes. They became a vital part and an extension of my personality.
In this new era, we shall begin to see light and gravity as components or extensions of what we are. They are the true alchemic dust from which man and all living and non-living things were formed.
So, when I say light and gravity are limits of inertia, I hope you understand the deep sense of awe with which I say that. I no longer see them as physical phenomena, but as personal entities that are inseparable aspects of my self-awareness.
And being inseparable aspects of my awareness, these entities are therefore self-aware of their essence and roles in the cosmos. The three physical constants of physics all point to the constant personal attributes of light and gravity.
The 21st-Century and the New Consciousness
I want our consciousness of the universe and the world around us to be transformed by these new teachings that have come down to us. For as we continue in this new tradition, anything will becom possible. We will begin to do science in the purest form, while embracing the spirit of the universe.
In this 21st-Century, man will do away with the cold science he has long practiced as he becomes more aware of the organic, self-aware universe. Science is no longer about all we can measure, but also about all we can discern about the cosmos.
It is only a matter of time before this new science which is the science a priori becomes a full tradition, and when that happens the unexplored capacity of the human mind for comprehension will come to light.
The human mind has missed its qualitative aspects which are necessary for a complete understanding of the universe. In the 21st-century, we are no longer looking at our clocks and meter sticks so as to understand the universe.
We now seek a higher perception of space and time. We now seek the real space and time of the universe, and this new consciousness will only further ascend in proportion to how our perception of true space and time increases.
We shall harness the gravi-electromagnetic wave. I am enthusiastically looking forward to this. I really can’t wait to see how it changes our perception of the universe. In this case, I mean a kind of visual perception which is communicated by the G-wave and not light or the E-wave.
How we harness the gravi-electromagnetic wave will go a long way in determining our new consciousness or perception of space and time. We shall break free from the consciousness or perception of space and time based on light which we can see to that based on the gravi-electromagnetic wave which we cannot see.
Interesting times ahead for the science a priori! In this newly burgeoning science, it will no longer be about mind versus matter but about the unity of mind and matter. Both the physical and metaphysical aspects of the universe will be interwoven in theory and in practice, just as I have begun on this great blog.
Mind and matter science is the new scientific consciousness. The cold science we have long practice that has elevated matter above mind will give way for the warm science which recognizes the unity of mind and matter.
I have talked about the nature of the mind in my book and soon on this blog, I will further enlighten you about the mind. We now have to make real progress and true scientific knowledge should fill the Earth.
The 21st-century science shall be the science a priori which is concerned with the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the universe. It has achieved a twofold unification of physics and the laws of the universe.
From the 21st-century onwards man shall explore the qualitative nature of the universe in like manner as he has explored the quantitative nature of the universe. A whole new approach to science based on the unity of mind and matter shall be practised in this century onwards. Science in the 21st-century onwards promises this and so much more!
This is the age of man!
Until next time.
Remain a visionary scientist,
– M. V. Echa