Philosophy/Physics
Home Up Philosophy/Physics Sailing Master Swimming Aeromodelling

 

This page contains considerations about philosophy, psychology and physics which are my favorite areas of mental gymnastics.

Universe  Books

At the beginnig of my carreer I have been an experimental physicist, envolved with the electrical properties of Nitrogen  in the pre-ignition state - gas physics - research which had been done at my time (1960) by four or five individuals in the world, only. I was so lucky as to proove the Fucks-Rogowsky root laws for the pre-ignition in Nitrogen, but my achievements were never published, because they were supposed to be the base of a doctor's thesis, as agreed with my teacher, professor Fucks of the Aachen Technical University. The thesis was never defended, because in the meantime I fell in love with a beautiful girl, a Brazilian chemist, reason why I live till today in Rio de Janeiro.
Many years later, after my father's death, who was a very practical engineer, there came a time when I was happy with a piece of paper and a pencil, making considerations about me and the world, from theoretical physics to psycology and poetry. Mathematics delivers wonderful logical tools for the proof of physical postulates, fascinating toys, but useless when it comes to basic human questions: Why do I exist? Where do I come from? Where do I go to? Human reality is just contained in the very INSTANT, before and after are mere speculations. This is pure buddhism, I know, ".... just thoughts....", as a buddhist friend, the orthodox monk Anuruda,  once said. Astrophysicists, physicists, mathematicians and other related researchers should always keep in mind that the universe and all in it integrated phenomena are a HUMAN REALITY, "... just thoughts... " as Anuruda said. But what is a non-human or absolute reality? Perhaps it may be the vicinity of the universe. This vicinity is characterized by No-energy, No-materia, No-space, No-time, a perfect generalized Nirvana in absolute static darkness, contrary to the ever dynamic and light filled universe. The (fun)model which I will talk about below is mainly concerned with space and time, but I have created also another model, more complex, englobing also energy, materia, the dynamics of transformations, life and consciousness. (see my books below: WARUM? or Die Einheitsphilosophie).
But now first to considerations about the universe:

Does the Universe expand?

According to our actual knowledge the Universe is filled with materia and energies, that means distinct celestial bodies, black holes, which are still somewhat misterious, electro-magnetic fields and all kind of radiations.
Most of the knowledge comes to us via observations, specially of light and radio waves emitted from the Universe.
Light has the dual nature of consisting of corpuscules (photons) and at the same time of an oscillating radiation, depending on the instruments we use for observation.
Seen as photons, they have a defined mass und impulse c x m where c is the light speed, the highest possible speed in Universe, according to Albert Einstein ( The Special and the General Theory of Relativity).
What interests here is the wave nature of the light. When the light coming from nearby and from very distant celestial objects was measured and compared there was found a certain shift of the spectrum of the more distant objects to the red waves, called and known as the "red shift", which could not be explained initially.
The nowadays accepted explanation is that celestial objects, the farther they are, the faster they move away from us. (interpretation of the Red Shift by Georges Lemaître, Friedmann, Hubble and George Gamov as Doppler effect)
This consequently led to the Expansion Theory of the Universe, to a beginning of the Universe (commonly called The Big Bang) and to an age of our Universe.

In the meantime the nuclear physicists discovered some aspects of the nature of materia, a break-down of materia into components, starting from the most basic, as quarks and electrons, supposedly present in the hot primordial mass, and the forming of more complex compositions called Hadrons, whereas 3 quarks form a Barion and 2 quarks form a Meson. A conjunction of Barions form the Protons and Neutrons, which joining and capturing electrons become Atoms (believed by the ancient greeks to be the smallest indivisible parts of materia) and the later possibility of forming molecula, the bricks of world construction. This is a beautiful edification of materia, missing at this time just an explanation about the missing spin of the sum of quarks to complete the spin of a proton, but science will surely find a solution.
One important aspect of these materia components is, that they do not stay alive alone, a stable existance starts only in the form of moleculae, f.i. H2, the hydrogenium gas.

The Big Bang theory leaves some important questions open, as there are:

- the begin of the Universe at the time Zero, what was before?

          - a begin asks for an end, how will this be?

- according to the Special Theory of Relativity an infinitely great mass concentration (the whole mass of the Universe !) , corresponding to a time Zero, cannot be imagined, because of a lot of physical implications.

- if there was no movement, what caused the initial "ignition"?

There exist some answers for the justification of the expansion theory. One is, that before the Big Bang there existed a "negative" time and anti-materia and that the union of materia and anti-materia caused the explosion, leaving a positive balance of materia.
This seems wrong with respect to an equilibrium in a mass-energy balance.
There are also some theories of a pulsing Universe, which would avoid a Big Bang, but stipulate only a strong concentration followed by an expansion as long as the world mass coools down. This cooling down would also determine the end of the actually observed expansion.

Now there exists an anti-thesis of the Universe in Expansion, based on some already proven observations.
The main claim is that the Red Shift is subject of an interpretation error. The Red Shift actually exists but it is due to the shift of the wave spectrum of the photons by action of gravitational fields crossed by the photon on its long jouney to the earth (Werner Holzmueller). This would have the following consequences for a new world understanding:

Our Universe is in constant movement, but not expanding.

The Universe is eternal

Time is eternal without beginning or end, but of course variable depending on the observers standpoint

Universe is composed of materia and energies with possible transformations from one into the other

The energy-materia sum is finite and constant

Universe has possibly a defined form, such as f.i. an elipsoide (leaving again the question, what happens off its borders?)

Questions never cease and I fully agree with Sokrates, that wisdom is only achieved by incessant asking. I invite all physicists to send me further suggestions. My address is: priv@kwmrio.com

 

Jürgen Wolff                                                                     Rio de Janeiro, february 23rd, 2009.

 

Considerations about modern mathematics and theoretical physics

-Mathematics

As I said before, mathematics may be a wonderful instrument of mental gymnastics, if it is not directed to any aim, but it may be also a very useful tool to explain results of physical and chemical experiments or to give more scientific strength to new theories.
In the latter case there must be given much thought to the limit conditions of the mathematical model. Theoretical physicists have a strong belief in mathematics, but any extensions of mathematical theories exceeding the limits of the basic experiment are mere speculations and do not constitute a scientific truth, unless they are supported by new experiments. Specially zero or infinite conditions are critical points, f.i. zero time in the Theory of Special Relativity of Albert Einstein, which led to the dubious conclusion of a Big Bang. All trials to justify the Big Bang theory, such as the Red Shift and Background Noise are highly dubious and may be based on false understanding of these phenomena. (see: "Does the Universe expand?")

-Theoretical physics

Being a physicist (I was a pupil of Prof Wilhelm Fucks, the founder of the german research center Juelich) I just love this discipline, but having worked for years as an engineer I am able to see achievements from a certain distance. There are enormous amounts of statistical data and great envolvement of computer processing. Take care, computers do not judge! Who judges, is the programmer! Maybe this explains in part the reigning of so many different opinions about the interpretation of experiments and theories.
One may divide the world of physics into distinct periods:

a) Macrophysics, which constitutes the "classical" period, with its eminent representatives Galileo Galilei, Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton.Albert Einstein was a revolutionary transition physicist, whose theories were used also in the next period, microphysics.

b) Microphysics with the outstanding physicists Niels Bohr, Max Planck, Heisenberg and many, many others, still acting, amongst them Steve Hawkins, who still chase the unifying "World Formula"

Microphysics is where the great confusion started. What initially seemed a repetition of the macrocosm with "particles" instead of "celestial bodies" turned out to be indefinable, escaping completely conventional concepts and experimental methods. It is clear that a "macro"measurement device, composed of an enormous number of particles is not very adequate to measure a small number of particles (or only one). 
The confusion increased  with the dicovery of the light dualism, this means the wave character of the light particles. Other incredible aspects were the invariable speed of light, being the highest possible speed in universe, electromagnetic wave fields and their interaction with light, curved space and n-dimensional space. 
These aspects transceeded completely the comprehension capacity of normal minds. They simply had to be accepted or believed. Thus microphysics acquired a strong touch of religion. The believers of Reductionism (= the discovery of always smaller elements of our universe) and of the Big Bang act like religious sectionists. Only their belief represents the truth, all others are wrong.

Now there is a new theory called "Emergence" represented by Robert B. Laughlin, a Stanford physicist and Nobel Price winner. This theory claims that universe has an auto-organizing property, starting at the aleatory chaos of microparticles, emerging as visible laws in reasonable numbers of materia elements. This sounds very reasonable and explains a lot of phenomena in the material world, but also in biology, sociology and other disciplines.

We are human beings and the eternal questions of "Why" and "How" are better explained by "Emergence" than by "Reductionism".

Since my childhood I am observing nature and trying to understand it. I always came to the conclusion that there exists a selforganization in nature. Religious people call it God, scientists call it a law or principle. I gave a description of these ideas already in 1999 in my book "Warum?"

Jürgen Wolff                                                                            Rio de Janeiro, july 1st, 2009.

- Speculations about the form of Universe.
      
(A fun model for non-physicists)

Expressions like "Infinite" or "Universe" are incomprehensible for the structure of human thinking. To bring the incomprehensible nearer to a touchable vicinity we may work with models.
Thus I created a model which shows interesting results for mathematical and physical as well as for philosophical and metaphysical considerations.
We know that a straight line is the shortest way to connect two points and that light represents ideally a straight line. This is valid for usual dimensions in our small world. But we also know, that light is curved by the influence of electromagnetic fields. This inspired me to create a model of a limited elipsoidal universe, where any cut through it, rectangular to the surface or oblique, produces elipsae, which are straight lines in infinite dimensions, running back in themselves.

The definitions for this model are:
- The Universe is limited and has the form of an elipsoide.
- Reality exists only on the interior surface of the elipsoide.
- The exterior space, the interior space and the exterior surface do not exist.
For a 2-dimensional geometry on the internal surface of the elipsoide results that a straight line curves in the infinite and runs back in itself.
A point (=event) on this line is aleatory.
A chosen point "Zero" on the line corresponds to an equidistant (in both directions) point "infinite" on the opposite side of the elipse.
A direction in the sense of a vector is not defined, any movement on the line can happen either in one or in the other direction.
For a 3-dimensional geometry result rather reduced dimensions for the z-axis in relation to the x and y axis, of course always having in mind near infinite dimensions, as there do not exist the interior and exterior spaces of the elipsoide. The space defined by the z-axis forms a kind of layer over the interior surface of the elipsoide. This space englobes "reality" and all possible fenomena in Universe.
A 4-dimensional geometry (x, y, z and t-axis) shows a time which returns in itself without beginning, end or a defined direction. Models of the time as a directed vector with a beginning ("Big Bang") and a consequently logical end(?) have always awoke my mistrust.
The present model with a time without beginning, end and direction and without definable equal
segments of events (always thinking in near infinite dimensions!) shows us an eternal pulsing Universe including the possibility that the Universe in a determined moment of contraction resides practically in one point (dimensionless, no materia = pure energy), expanding till the infinite and then contracting again in a cyclic movement. Thus the Big Bang is explained as a repetitive event.
For a philosophical standpoint result also some interesting facts. A pair of opposed terms on the same line (see Zero and Infinite) belong to each other and have existance only as a pair. They form practically an unit.
Philosophical or cientific controversies with opposed opinions form thus also a pair where one can not exist without the other and where the two in the end are only parcial aspects of the global truth. The global truth is represented by the enclosed elipse.
The above model permits still a great number of applications and considerations.
It is an experimental balloon launched into space, but it is just a fun model, not intended to withstand serious theoretical physics. I will be grateful for complimentary comments and suggestions, but as already mentioned before, this model has application only for nearly infinite dimensions.

 

- Publications:
I have written two books, unfortunately available only in German language. The titles are:

"WARUM? Ein Leitfaden zur Selbsterkenntnis"
published 1999 at  HAAG+HERCHEN Verlag GmbH, www.haagundherchen.de, #2701 ,

This book describes the human structure and gives some guidelines for acquiring a better knowledge of oneself, followed automatically by a higher level of wellness and a better understanding of the world. There are some teachings of Buddhism incorporated, like "the correct observation" and "the correct understanding", but most teachings are proper achievements of the author.

"Die Einheitsphilosophie",
published 2001 at HAAG + HERCHEN Verlag GmbH, www.haagundherchen.de, # 3087,

This book outlines ideas about the Universe, life, the human being, the dynamics and the integration and interaction of all these components.

Only after having written these books, I started to read more about the Greek philosophers, the classical European philosophers and the great religions of the world. My great surprise was that most of my personal achievements and understandings were already present in the ideas of these great men who lived so many years before me. On the other side this confirmation of ideas was a great satisfaction and a proof that one should not read and simply copy ideas, but try to develop them personally.

What is the difference? The first way will be much faster.

The difference is a deeper very personal understanding and integration in this world which in the end has not so many rules and which have not changed much for thousands of years.