The Hierarchy of Scientific Knowledge

Discuss Physics, Astronomy, Cosmology, Biology, Chemistry, Archaeology, Geology, Math, Technology

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

The Hierarchy of Scientific Knowledge

Post #1

Post by Divine Insight »

[center]Image[/center]

I've created the image above to help everyone understand the hierarchical structure of scientific knowledge.

The sciences of Biology and Genetics reside at the top level of scientific knowledge. An understanding of the principles of biology rests upon the knowledge and understanding of Chemistry since all of biology operates on principles of chemical reactions, and complex macro molecules.

Beneath the science of Biology we have Chemistry. Chemistry is the science of how atoms themselves behave and form bonds between themselves to form the various types of molecules that ultimately give rise to biology as well as other inorganic macro materials.

Chemistry then rests upon physics. Physics is the study of the fundamental laws, forces, and particles which ultimately make up the atoms. At one time in history atoms were believed to be the smallest possible constituents of nature, but in modern physics this has been shown to be false. The atoms themselves are made up of smaller constituents often referred as 'particles'. However it is now understood in physics that these particles can also be describe mathematically as waves. In fact, the current scientific interpretation is they are actually just waves of probabilities, or waves of potentiality that do not become manifest until they are observed in an act of observation.

Physics is then held up by what is often called "The Queen of the Sciences" which is mathematics. Mathematics is pure abstract thought that has no tangible basis. In fact, the very concept of number itself is defined within mathematics as being a property of an empty set. An empty set is a collection of things which does not contain a single thing. So mathematics disappears altogether at the level of number and becomes only abstract thought.

What holds up mathematics?

Well according to many mathematicians, philosophers, and scientists, mathematics resides in the Mind of God.

[center]

"If we do discover a theory of everything...
it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason
for then we would truly know the mind of God."

- Stephen Hawking




O:)

[/center]
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: The Hierarchy of Scientific Knowledge

Post #31

Post by Divine Insight »

SailingCyclops wrote:
[Divine Insight wrote: Where we may potentially differ is in the following areas:

1. I believe that our psyche actually has more influence over our extended physical environment that perhaps you might be willing to embrace.

2. I also believe that our psyche can potentially be in contact with the psyche of other people in strange non-local ways (obviously from a scientific point of view I point to QM as a possible mechanism for this non-local connection).

Again, you may not be willing to consider either of these two possibilities at all.
As to number 2:

We have already designed an apparatus which detects brain waves and translates them into commands to move prosthetic limbs. A thought of moving an arm for instance, can indeed be detected electromagnetically, and be used to move an artificial arm. The detectors are embedded in a skull cap, and act as antennas.

As we both are aware, electromagnetic radiation does not stop millimeters from the source, but rather radiates into space at the speed of light. Therefor I can conceive of a possible mechanism for the concept of psychic communication. Anecdotal evidence of people being aware of a loved ones death or travail miles apart, can possibly be explained this way. I am willing to consider the possibility only because I can see a possible scientific mechanism for it to happen. As improbable as it is, given the power levels involved, the ambient electromagnetic noise, and the as yet un-demonstrated ability of the brain to detect and understand such information. I won't consider it impossible.

As to number 1:
I currently can see no mechanism where our brain functions can effect our physical environment. Until I see such, I can not embrace such.
I'm convinced of just the opposite. I believe that our bodies do indeed have a detectable aura that extents potentially quite far from our bodies. Maybe not even solely emerging from what we call our "brain". In fact, many neurosciences have already made it clear that it's really impossible to draw any concrete lines between our brain and the rest of our nervous system. In this sense our entire body is are 'brain' in a very real way.

Moreover, a person's general psychic attitude will actually affect their physical movements. A person who is anxious, nervous and unsettled will typically be constantly fidgeting in real physical ways. Their brain activity and entire nervous system is probably rattling off like an alarm as well. Not only can we sense the presence of such nervous fidgety people, but so do animals sense this in humans.

I personally believe that the entire bio-environment also reacts to these unsettled nervous vibrations. In fact, it's even possible, and I also believe, that even non-biological materials will begin to oscillate with these kinds of vibrations.

Therefore on this level it's quite possible that even in a secular sense a calm and serene gardener may have a truly wonderful healthy garden, whilst another gardener who is a nervous wreck might wonder why their garden doesn't do well.

I'm a firm believer in this sort thing, even from a secular perspective.

So when I see the mystics recognizing this I can see what they are talking about even in a secular sense.

And if there is any truth to this type of thing, then in a very real way the mystics are at least right about our psychic disposition having a very real affect on our surroundings. Even if it's only true in a secular sense.


As far as humans being in some sort of psychic communication with each other I see three possible ways this could be done.

1. Electromagnetic fields.

As you point out there doesn't appear to be any truly sophisticated mental telepathy going on. We don't contact each other via electromagnetic waves, saying, "Breaker, breaker, anyone out there? Swamp-dish calling."

"Breaker breaker Swamp-dish. I hear ya loud and clear on my psychic brain channel 14. Sailing Cyclops here."

"Ten-four Sailing Cyclops. Are you a sexy female?"

"Nope, just a sexy male atheist"

"Roger, catch you on the rebound. Later Alligator"

Obviously it's not going to be that kind of "refined" conversation.

It's more likely to be intuitions and symbolic mental ideas that just seem to spring into our minds from nowhere and catch our attention.

2. Gravitational waves/disturbances.

There are actually scientists who are currently studying the idea that humans may be in psychic contact with each other via vibrations in the very fabric of spacetime itself, in this case gravity waves.

I'm not sure if that has any merit, it seems pretty far fetched to me too. But the scientists who study this point to the fact that birds and insects appear to be using this as well as possibly some whales and other sea creatures. Of course all those animals are using it for navigation not for communication between themselves.

4. Other possible waves?

This is where QM comes into play. There are actually quite a few different kinds of quantum waves. And they are indeed considered to be fields just like electromagnetic fields, or fields of spacetime. In fact, they've just recently discovered the Higgs field.

Add to this the scientific hypothesis that there may actually exist 11-dimensions to reality, and it's possible that there could be fields in these other dimensions that we can't even detect at all.

So there seems to me to be more than enough plausibility for the existence of such fields.

And in the case of QM some of those fields don't even need to be restricted by the propagation of light (or electromagnetic phenomenon). They also may not even be detectable at all using any standard means of detection. Just like Dark Matter is basically undetectable save for it's gravitational effects.

So I guess the bottom line is that I'm simply not at a point where I'm prepared to write things off as being "impossible" as quickly as you seem to be willing to do.

I think there's plenty of plausibility open in science at this current state of our understanding of reality.

Who knows what we'll find in Quantum Fields in the future? Especially if the 11-dimensions turn out to be true.

Gee whiz, if there really are something like 7 completely hidden dimensions and we start to discover them. Each one of those dimensions may actually contain really wild surprises. There could be fields that exist only in those dimensions yet they may be able to interact with the normal dimensions we already know about.

This whole 11-dimensional reality is quite intriguing, and many scientists are actually counting on it being true. Only time will tell on that one. But if they do turn out to be true, it could be extremely exciting and open the door to many things we previously thought might be impossible.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: The Hierarchy of Scientific Knowledge

Post #32

Post by Goat »

SailingCyclops wrote:
[Divine Insight wrote: Where we may potentially differ is in the following areas:

1. I believe that our psyche actually has more influence over our extended physical environment that perhaps you might be willing to embrace.

2. I also believe that our psyche can potentially be in contact with the psyche of other people in strange non-local ways (obviously from a scientific point of view I point to QM as a possible mechanism for this non-local connection).

Again, you may not be willing to consider either of these two possibilities at all.
As to number 2:

We have already designed an apparatus which detects brain waves and translates them into commands to move prosthetic limbs. A thought of moving an arm for instance, can indeed be detected electromagnetically, and be used to move an artificial arm. The detectors are embedded in a skull cap, and act as antennas.

As we both are aware, electromagnetic radiation does not stop millimeters from the source, but rather radiates into space at the speed of light. Therefor I can conceive of a possible mechanism for the concept of psychic communication. Anecdotal evidence of people being aware of a loved ones death or travail miles apart, can possibly be explained this way. I am willing to consider the possibility only because I can see a possible scientific mechanism for it to happen. As improbable as it is, given the power levels involved, the ambient electromagnetic noise, and the as yet un-demonstrated ability of the brain to detect and understand such information. I won't consider it impossible.

As to number 1:
I currently can see no mechanism where our brain functions can effect our physical environment. Until I see such, I can not embrace such.

What I see as the mechanism for the appearance of number 1 is .. well, attitude effects how things effect you. It is known as 'self fulfilling prophecies.'.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
SailingCyclops
Site Supporter
Posts: 1453
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:02 pm
Location: New York City
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: The Hierarchy of Scientific Knowledge

Post #33

Post by SailingCyclops »

Divine Insight wrote:
SailingCyclops wrote: If we were to define that "information" as the physical constants which makes our universe flat, I agree. If we further agree that those constants were not "fine tuned", but rather randomly selected during the universe's inflation, then yes. Point one agreed. However, I don't think that is what you have in mind. You may have to explain exactly what your "sound reasons" are.
How about the observation that consistent kinds of particles continually pop into and out of existence from seemingly nothingness?

That seems like a fairly sound reason to me. What do you think?
What that demonstrates to me is that "seemingly nothingness" is not nothing. If we take a portion of completely empty space, everything removed, and it weighs something (as it does), then nothing is no longer nothing. Yes particles pop in and out of existence in this "seemingly nothingness", but that simply means we do not yet understand what mechanisms are at work. To hypothesize it is the mind of god at work, is to me, a step too far, and sounds too much like the god of the gaps scenario.

Religion flies you into buildings, Science flies you to the moon.
If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities -- Voltaire
Bless us and save us, said Mrs. O'Davis

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: The Hierarchy of Scientific Knowledge

Post #34

Post by Divine Insight »

SailingCyclops wrote: What that demonstrates to me is that "seemingly nothingness" is not nothing. If we take a portion of completely empty space, everything removed, and it weighs something (as it does), then nothing is no longer nothing. Yes particles pop in and out of existence in this "seemingly nothingness", but that simply means we do not yet understand what mechanisms are at work. To hypothesize it is the mind of god at work, is to me, a step too far, and sounds too much like the god of the gaps scenario.
I agree that simple scenario would be a "God of the Gaps" type of thing.

But I think you need to understand what's going on here. You are reacting to the standard picture of religious fundamentalism and the evangelical tactics of people who are trying to shove a specific dogma down your throat.

I can't blame you for that at all.

Here's the argument:

1. "LOOK! There's a GAP in scientific knowledge!"
2. Therefore there MUST be a God!
3. Therefore our specific religious dogma must be TRUE!'
4. That settles it!
5. Come to church on Sunday and accept Jesus Christ as your savior!
6. On Monday morning we'll start teaching you how to support our religious bigotries in the name of Jesus the Christ and the God of Abraham.

Sheesh! :roll:

I don't blame you for being "gun shy" to any mention that there might be a conscious mind behind anything.

I seriously don't blame you at all. ;)

In fact, this is a big part of the reason that I so loath what the ancient Hebrews started.

We can't even hypothesize the idea of a potential higher consciousness without people screaming, "Oh no! It's the God of the Gaps again!"

But far from that over-bearing arrogant stance of trying to shove an egotistical God down anyone's throat, I'm merely proposing a potential hypothesis to merely be considered as something that is open to plausibility.

I'm not proclaiming that it's "proof" that a God must exist and I'll see you in on Church on Sunday Morning lest you be proclaimed a heathen for not showing up to be brainwashed with hypocritical dogma.

~~~~~

And truly I can empathize with your position. And the position of many secular atheists.

They are thinking, "Look, there is no scientific reason to jump to these kinds of conclusions, so why even remotely feed these Abrahamic fruitcakes?"

That is a legitimate point. I must confess.

Any serious discussion about the possibility of there being any scientific plausibility to any kind of cosmic consciousness should probably be done secretly behind closed doors to avoid feeding the Abrahamic Parana. 8-)

So maybe the Fairy Fart hypothesis is a better hypothesis to discuss openly in a public domain.

And I agree, it is equally plausible.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

Post Reply