Today's Elites

Thursday, December 31, 2020

Mankind's Manifest Destiny of Space Colonization

Forty four years ago, in 1976, the Soviet Union returned a sample of lunar soil. The Chinese just returned another sample from the far side of the moon. America failed in its leadership and mission in those two generations that were lost to an abiding cultural pessimism. As I recall, the battle of the elite establishment against the mission for humanity to enter an unprecedented era of prosperity and achievement was waged on multiple levels from the 1960s onward. 

The simple minded and utterly false refrain was that money that was being wasted in space was needed to alleviate poverty here on earth. However, the less obvious, yet just as malign subversion came from the "entertainment industry." This was the new age paradigm shift as it spread its noxious contagion of pessimism throughout the pores of society. 

Barring cataclysmic events precipitated by the authors of the geopolitical "Great Reset" and its "Green New Deal" lunacy, humanity is yet again on the precipice of the age of space colonization and reason. All the power that our putative elites have in the end is the destruction of the universal desire in the imagination of the people of this planet to make a future worthy of our undying quest for discovering and conquering the untold power of the stars that we see unfurling ahead of us. 

What the elites fail to comprehend is that this mission cannot so easily be snuffed out because it is the indissoluble and essential nature of us all. So, it is with that thought and Beethoven's Choral Fantasy that I wish you all a Happy New Year.



Beethoven - Choral Fantasy op 80 - Brendel, Haitink, LPO (1977)



Monday, December 14, 2020

Open Letter to John Tresch Esq. of the Warburg Institute Regarding His Defamation of Edgar Poe

 I read with interest your essay "Matter No More": Edgar Allan Poe and the Paradoxes of Materialism. Your framing of the meaning of the arabesque in Poe (by the way using his middle name should be put aside due to the taint of being on the same footing as an assassin or mass murderer) was certainly interesting. But the avoidance entirely of Poe's politics and mischaracterization of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes as based upon Dupin are telling. For Holmes was no Dupin, but rather totally of the deductive "creeping and crawling" (to cite Poe) method. My ears pricked up at that point. 

And yes, Poe's Eureka did identify the "Hoggian" method with Francis Bacon. But you left out that Hogg was also a reference to James Hogg, the murderer and so called Ettrick Shepherd Bard sponsored by none other than Sir Walter Scott. 

Finally, the imputation that Poe's Eureka was somehow an eternal recurrence cum pantheistic obscurantism finally quite burned my same ears...

It was only after I finished reading the essay that I found you are with the Warburg Institute. Then it all made sense. I recalled a presentation I attended many years hence by Gerald Rose of the Schiller Institute entitled: How The Venetians Took Over England and Created Freemasonry In it the Warburg Institute of  your colleague Frances Yates is exposed as nothing more than a Delphic branch of the Rosicrucian cabalistic mumbo jumbo of the likes of John Dee (007) of British Imperialism. 

So it all came together for me at once. You needn't deny any of this. It is an all too transparent hit job on Poe.

Yours truly.

Robert Arnold 


Thursday, December 10, 2020

Riemann's Uber die Hypothesen and the Non Commutativity of Forces

As is evident from Riemann's great roadmap for scientific progress "The Hypotheses that are the Foundations of Geometry," Riemann, in spirit, followed Kepler's injunction against reliance on algebra for determining physical causality. Riemann, as well, avoided the error of Cartesianism that Leibniz warned against.   

The which is encompassed in especially two main ideas from that work that operate together in the fashion of a musical dialogue in a great fugue. One that asserts "The questions about the infinitely great are for the interpretation of nature useless questions. (...)We are therefore quite at liberty to suppose that the metric relations of space in the infinitely small do not conform to the hypotheses of geometry; and we ought in fact to suppose it, if we can thereby obtain a simpler explanation of phenomena." 

In other words, there is evidence of a breakdown in the infinitely large and infinitely small of normal geometrical relationships. Indeed, isn't this precisely what the quantum world challenges us with? Our normal assumptions based upon reasoning from our macroscopic world break down. For how can a thing be simultaneously a wave and particle as well as participating in superposition. This violates our geometrical assumptions based upon our visual manifold of what an identity of a "thing" is, after all.

At the other end of the spectrum in the infinitely large, we are confronting another daunting paradox. It seems that unknown forces are propelling galaxies to rotate out of synch with gravity. Additionally, the very fabric of spacetime itself is measured to be constantly expanding by a factor denoted as lambda. 

The other principle that Riemann appended to his great Gedankenexperiment was that one must set aside all prejudices when embarking upon the realm of physics, "Researches starting from general notions, like the investigation we have just made, can only be useful in preventing this work from being hampered by too narrow views, and progress in knowledge of the interdependence of things from being checked by traditional prejudices. This leads us into the domain of another science, of physic, into which the object of this work does not allow us to go today."

Now it is the case that Einstein, in his breakthrough relativity theory, did precisely as Riemann had supplied in the body of his hypotheses by adopting a curved spacetime in a particular four dimensional manifold by challenging "traditional prejudices." However, Einstein encountered a roadblock in attempting to formulate a "unified field theory."

Now, it occurs to me that when speaking of forces qua geometrical relationships in the realm of the physically non-living, at the level of the infinitesimal, we have a breakdown of the principle of Cartesian "empty" metrical space. Otherwise, how can we justify the strong and weak nuclear forces as operating disparately in a continuous manifold. And at the same time that we can prove that the quantum realm is itself discontinuous? 

Likewise, at the realm of the infinitely large the rotational forces holding together galaxies operate in a somehow different fashion than our conception of conventional gravity, or we must imagine the influence of unknown and hidden non luminous particles. But perhaps there is another type of strong force at this infinitely large realm analogous to that which holds the nucleus together? Likewise the weak force of radioactive decay might find a physical analogy somehow in the lambda expansion. 

Now all of this foregoing returns me to Kepler, who approached the geometry of our solar system from a principle that there must be an overall unity of lawful harmony in the planetary elliptical orbits. It is from this standpoint that Leibniz developed his own Monadological approach to unification of what Vernadsky would later further refine as the realms of Lithosphere, Biosphere and Noosphere.

Because, echoing Riemann's warning above, when attempting to unify forces, one must depart the framework of the inert non living. This is so because the living lesser monads have a sort of primitive force, a connatus, that separates themselves hermetically from the non living. For while being constituted from the same atoms as the non living, the living force is radically non commutative, in an analogous manner that there are distinct transfinite numerical orderings as demonstrated by Georg Cantor. Likewise, within the realm of the Noosphere of creative human mentation there is a transfinite boundary separating all other lifeforms. We humans have the unique capacity of reason. However, this capacity is not some mystical substance. Rather it is our willful capability to overcome physical and biological limits of the lower realms of reality. 


Friday, December 04, 2020

The Continuing Relevance of Leibnizian Science

Leibniz stringently demonstrated a physical geometric basis for harmonic action across the domains of universal reality. The qualitative differences among these were defined as associated with lower and higher monads. 

A very recent brilliant study on sound wave propagation through a fermionic "perfect fluid" illustrates the remarkable foresight of Leibniz' enduring contribution to scientific methodology. The state of this lab created fluid was achieved by creating a condition where all individual fermions operate as strongly interacting lithium-6 atoms of extremely low viscosity. Such man made systems are models for extreme anomalous naturally occuring exotic conditions such as neutron stars. This type of research includes Bose Einstein condensates and superconducting materials.

The connection to Leibniz is just this: at the level of harmonic interaction of individual monads there are higher monads, the highest being the indivisible human "soul," and lower monads. A system of such monads that resonates harmonically, Leibniz characterized as a pre-established ordering. Thus evidence of a universal lawfulness that must partake of a continuing process of unfolding or becoming toward more, not less, perfection concomitant with the ongoing progress of human economic interaction with nature.

This harmony extends to all realms of physical reality. Indeed in the referenced experiment, the fermionic monads are among the very lowest order possible to the extent that they almost have totally lost their individual differences. This is what gives them their near quantum frictionless fluidity. The ability to create a resonance of soundwaves in this laboratory created gas is a technological achievement in the footsteps of Leibnizian science that will allow humanity to further progress.


Credit: Christine Daniloff, MIT

Blog Archive