Why No Understanding in Classical and Modern Physics

Subtitle: A Discourse on Predictive and Explanative Sciences

Sometimes, and in some of my articles, you must have heard me say unequivocally that there is no understanding in relative science, which is the science of classical and modern physics. This may come as a surprise to you since you have always been taught to believe that science gives us a rational explanation of the universe.

Well, this article has not come to confront this your belief, not at all, at least this blog is a science blog, so how can I be against science. However, what this article confronts is a kind of science, which I have identified in the above paragraph as relative science.

And if you are used to this blog, then the concept of relative science would not be new to you. I have discussed relative science and its counterpart absolute science in some of my articles in this blog. Therefore, this article seeks to raise or make more substantive your awareness of these two kinds of science.

So, in this article, when I say that there is no understanding in classical and modern physics, I am speaking of a kind of science and not the entire edifice of science as you may have hurriedly and wrongly assumed. Please, don’t.

Now, we must ask ourselves how classical and modern physics have assisted us to advance fundamental science. In what way or ways have these two eras of physics been helpful? We can really resolve these questions by realizing that both classical and modern physics deal with a kind of science called relative science.

Classical and modern physics deal with relative science because they do not address the true nature of space and time. In both eras of physics, space and time are reduced or taken as physical quantities with pure mechanistic operations.

Classical and modern physics do not show us how to distinguish between the true nature of space and time and the means by which we measure them. This is the core reason why I stated that there is no understanding in classical and modern physics. We cannot understand the universe without understanding the true nature of space and time.

Even the crisis in physics was a crisis that confronted out understanding of space and time. The true understanding of space and time would naturally expose to us the unity of the universe. So, now and in this article, we must place emphasis on the fact that the true nature of space and time has not been exposed in classical and modern physics.

This oversight can no longer continue and for this reason, post-modern physics has come. In post-modern physics, we find the exposition of the true nature of space and time independent of the means by which we measure them. In other words, in post-modern physics, we reach to the true nature of space and time beyond what meter sticks and clocks tell us.

The true nature of these entities which lie beyond mechanical operations are what post-modern physics exposes, and this results in a new kind of science called absolute science. In absolute science, we treat space and time in a manner you are not familiar with. While we still place both space and time in their true natures in a mathematical framework just like we had done in classical and modern physics, we, however, preserve their underlying transcendent behaviour.

hostgator

The true, absolute natures of space and time which post-modern physics captures are transcendent, unlike their false, relative natures which classical and modern physics capture. In exposing the true nature of space and time we come into contact with the quantitative and qualitative aspects of space and time. This is markedly distinct from classical and modern physics where we are concerned with the (superficially) quantitative nature of space and time.

Now, it is because of the sole quantitative nature of space and time in classical and modern physics that these two eras of physics have presented to us a powerfully predictive kind of science. And because classical and modern physics succeeded as predictive sciences, we were deceived to erroneously concluded that they can provide sufficient explanations for the inner workings of the universe, but this is not true. There is another kind of science. 

By taking into consideration the quantitative nature of space and time, classical and modern physics deny us of the opportunity to understand the universe. But by absolute science taking into consideration the quantitative and the qualitative aspects of space and time we are afforded the opportunity to understand the universe. There is quality in numbers which classical and modern physics cannot reflect or reveal.

There is quality in numbers which classical and modern physics cannot reflect or reveal.Click To Tweet

So, you must now know that there is no understanding in classical and modern physics because they are predictive sciences. Whereas there is understanding in post-modern physics because it is an explanative science. We must now become very critical and philosophical about how we do the science.

And the power of post-modern physics goes even further, in that the predictive components of classical and modern physics are found as derivatives of the first principles taken into account by post-modern physics. So, a post-modern scientist is engaged in a new kind of science that is a mixture of explanative and predictive components (even though the new kind of science is explanative at its base).

This article calls us to embrace absolute science or post-modern physics and realize the intellectual limits of classical and modern physics. The unity of the universe can only emerge from explanative science and not from predictive science. The kind of science which we have been practising and have held dearly to cannot show us the unity of all things.

The unity of the universe can only emerge from explanative science and not from predictive science.Click To Tweet

Classical and modern physics which are based on relative science are not well-fitted to make us understand the universe in any length. We need to ascend to a whole new stratum of scientific knowledge based on explanative science which can expose to us the nature of space and time. There is no other way we can advance fundamental science without probing and realizing the true nature of these entities.

If you look closely, you will find that classical and modern physics seem to underestimate the importance of the true nature of space and time, and they have made us blindly contented with our approximate descriptions of space and time. This can no longer continue. We must now seek the true nature of all things because we can comprehend the universe.

We have unintentionally been building a scientific edifice that has defeated its purpose to provide us with true scientific knowledge, and cannot in any way achieve this feat. We must now know that relative, physical science which is a predictive science is different from absolute, metaphysical science which is an explanative science.

Understanding can only be found in metaphysical science because of its explanative nature. We really have to start looking at the metaphysical dimension of reality if we ever wish to understand the universe. We really have to look at metaphysics, which is the physics beyond physics. This article, therefore, raises your awareness of the existence of explanative science through which we can understand all things.

It is important to now know that classical and modern physics despite their predictive power do not furnish us with the understanding of the universe. True scientific knowledge is based on explanative science which is what post-modern physics exposes to us. Post-modern physics is giving to us the answer to the true nature of scientific knowledge even though we hadn’t bothered to ask ourselves this question.

Absolute, explanative science is giving us answer to the question: can we understand the true nature of space and time, and if so, can we insert these their true attributes into a satisfactorily mathematical framework? The answer is a bold YES WE CAN. Despite how transcendent the absolute natures of space and time are, they are still sufficiently mathematical just as Newton had thought in the Scholium of the Principia.

So, on one hand, we have relative, predictive science presenting a physical description of space and time and these physical descriptions are inserted in a sufficiently mathematical framework, and on the other hand, we have absolute, explanative science presenting a metaphysical description of space and time and these metaphysical descriptions are also inserted in a sufficiently mathematical framework.

Thus, this article confronts the question: which of these two different but satisfactorily mathematical sciences gives us the understanding of the universe? The answer is absolute, explanative science. So, it is against classical and modern physics that they are founded on relative, predictive science.

In absolute, explanative science, numbers or proportions take up both quantitative and qualitative properties. This is unlike relative, predictive science where numbers or proportions take up only quantitative properties. In absolute, explanative science we discover the quality of numbers and of the extensive universe.

I will discuss further the quality of numbers or proportions in a future article on simultaneity in the universe. I will like you to watch out for this article. Besides the notion of the quality of numbers or proportions is an old tradition which even the early Pythagoreans talked about. We can no longer ignore vital aspects of the universe and still expect to understand it.

The balanced recognition of the quantitative and the qualitative aspects of numbers or proportions in absolute, explanative science gives us the understanding of the universe. This shows us that true scientific knowledge is a result of the complete recognition or investigation of these two aspects of the universe. When either of them is neglected then we are plunged into a deep darkness and conceptual crisis like the one physics had in the modern era of science.

To understand the universe we only have to employ the kind of science that can reveal to us the true nature of space and time, and this kind of science is absolute explanative science. Classical and modern physics neglect this kind of science, and they do not attempt to decipher the true, transcendent nature of space and time. My friend, it’s all about space and time.

In post-modern physics, to achieve a kind of predictive outcome for explanative science we only have to consider its quantitative aspect and keep the qualitative aspect aside. In post-modern physics, predictive science is a derivative of explanative science and does not represent the true and complete body of scientific knowledge. This is how classical and modern physics are viewed in post-modern physics.

A Rocket_classical and modern physics

Pixabay

When we want to really explain the nature of natural phenomena and their origins we look into absolute, explanative science, but when we want to analyze and probably predict data resulting from scientific research we may look into relative, predictive science as a derivative of explanative science. Absolute, explanative science is the kind of science that reveals to us the origin of out data or where our data during scientific research come from.

This is what we really need right now! We need a kind of science that can tell us why the universe is the way it is, why we have this data and not that data! We need a kind of science that reveals to us what determines the boundary conditions of the universe. In short,  we really need a physics beyond physics which is metaphysics, and which is the purview of absolute, explanative science.

At this juncture, you should now realize deep within yourself that true scientific knowledge is metaphysical and not physical. This answers the age-old question about the nature of knowledge. Man cannot establish true scientific knowledge within the boundaries of physical science. This is an impossible feat.

Man cannot establish true scientific knowledge within the boundaries of physical science. Click To Tweet

We have tried that for the past 400 years of physical science, and in hindsight, we have failed miserably. No phenomenon of nature has been properly or adequately explained by classical and modern physics which are the appurtenances of physical science. What I am informing you in this article may seem untenable to you until you grasp The Theory of the Universe. There are really two kinds of science in the universe, and only one of them can give us the understanding of the universe.

Classical and modern physics are predictive sciences because they do not take into account the true nature of space and time, and for this reason, they cannot provide us with the true understanding of the universe. We now have to turn to post-modern physics which is an explanative science and which takes into account the true nature of space and time to give us the understanding of the universe which we desperately seek.

I want to end by stating that this article does not dismiss classical and modern physics, rather it shows us their limits and what comes next.

Until next time.

For explanative science!

– M. V. Echa



M. V. Echa

M. V. Echa

My message is the universe, my truth is the universe, and this blog contains all you need to know about the universe, from the true nature of reality to the long-sought unity of the cosmos — which is the big picture!