Leibniz

In The World As Will And Representation, Arthur Schopenhauer says Immanuel Kant's idea that space is not a material object can first be found in Pierre Maupertuis.

In Volume II, Chapter IV, Schopenhauer writes:

But what are we to say when we find Kant's most important and brilliant doctrine, that of the ideality of space and of the merely phenomenal existence of the corporeal world, expressed already thirty years previously by Maupertuis? ... Maupertuis expresses this paradoxical doctrine so decidedly, and yet without the addition of proof, that it must be supposed that he also obtained it from somewhere else. It is very desirable that the matter should be further investigated, and as this would demand tiresome and extensive researches, some German Academy might very well make the question the subject of a prize essay.

Well it turns out Schopenhauer was right. It wasn't Kant or Maupertuis's original idea. It was Leibniz's and he may have gotten it from Descartes and Aristotle.

"Space without matter is something imaginary." -- Gottfried W. Leibniz, polymath, 1689

"There is no vacuum." -- Gottfried W. Leibniz, polymath, 1689

Leibniz has always been the antidote to Newton as Leibniz thought Newton's gravity hypothesis was utterly absurd (probably because it is).

"Like Huygens, Leibniz never accepted Newtonian gravitation." -- Ezio Vailati, philosopher, 1997

And Leibniz stated General Relativity in 1689 with no need for gravity:

"Since we have already proved through geometrical considerations the equivalence of all hypotheses with respect to the motions of any bodies whatsoever, however numerous, moved only by the collision with other bodies, it follows that not even an angel could determine with mathematical rigor which of the many bodies of that sort is at rest, and which is the center of motion for the others." -- Gottfried W. Leibniz, polymath, 1689

"To summarize my point, since space without matter is something imaginary, motion, in all mathematical rigor, is nothing but a change in the position [situs] of bodies with respect to one another, and so, motion is not something absolute, but consists in relation. This already follows from the Aristotelian definition of place, for motion is the change of place, and place is the surface of the surrounding body, so when this changes, motion occurs, and either the surrounding body or the thing in the place can be assumed to have moved away, leaving the other at rest." -- Gottfried W. Leibniz, polymath, 1689

"When formerly I regarded space as an immovable real place, possessing extension alone, I had been able to define absolute motion as change of this real space. But gradually I began to doubt whether there is in nature such an entity as is called space; whence it followed that a doubt might arise about absolute motion." -- Gottfried W. Leibniz, polymath, 1695 (quoted by Russell 1900)

"...to establish it [gravity] as original or primitive in certain parts of matter is to resort either to miracle or an imaginary occult quality." -- Gottfreid W. Leibniz, polymath, July 1710

Leibniz, G.W., On Copernicanism and the Relativity of Motion, 1689

Leibniz, G.W., First Letter To Hartsoeker, 1710

Schopenhauer, A., The World as Will and Idea, Volume II, 1819

Russell, B., A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz, 1900

Jolley, N., The Cambridge Companion to Leibniz, 1995

Vailati, E., Leibniz & Clarke: A Study of Their Correspondence, 1997

Schönfeld, M., The Philosophy of the Young Kant, 2000

Imagination Vs. Measurement

Math Vs. Physical Science or Imagimetry Vs. Geometry.

There was a time (back in the days of philosophy) when geometry actually meant "Earth Measure." Measurement is an empirical physical science. It's truths are determined empirically through measurement of physical material. Today, geometry doesn't measure anything. Geometry has become Imagimetry. Instead of measuring the Earth with a ruler as geometry once did, Imagimetry on the other hand measures imaginary mathematical space with a magic ruler that has no defined units of measurement.

Where did science go wrong? One word: Newton. "Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy" are not "Empirical Conclusions of Physical Science." Science went wrong when it started worshipping Newtonian "absolute, true, and mathematical time" while ignoring the fact that Kantian mathematical time is a priori and not a physical object in itself. Physical "relative, apparent, and common time" must be measured with actual units. "Absolute, true, and mathematical" time on the other hand has no units because it is imaginary.

"Nothing exists until it is measured." -- Niels Bohr, physicist, 1930

"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality." -- Nikola Tesla, physicist, 1934

"The elements of the physical reality cannot be determined by a priori philosophical considerations [aka mathematics], but must be found by an appeal to results of experiments and measurements." -- Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, physicists, 1935

Stephen Smith: What is truth?

Astronomical research in the virtual realm [aka imagination] instigates foregone conclusions [aka a priori mathematical principles].

The Thunderbolts Picture of the Day has never considered questions that involve the search for subjective meaning in the universe to be necessary when analyzing the observations that NASA and other research groups provide. It is enough in most instances to draw correspondence between the theories proposed in peer-reviewed journals and the concepts embodied in Electric Universe [EU] hypotheses. The so-called anomalies in consensus opinions tend to disappear in most cases when EU theory is brought to bear on the questions.

A recent article in the scientific press highlights the disparity between the conclusions that should be drawn from observations and those that are drawn from within the imagination.

"Jupiter has a rocky core that is more than twice as large as previously thought, researchers announced today."

On its face the headline is not unusual and seems to indicate that evidence has been uncovered supporting a previously held theory. Not only that, the previous theory is tacitly assumed to have been correct because new information is enabling them to amplify its conclusions. However, when the announcement is fleshed-out the headline has no basis in evidence at all:

"Burkhard Militzer, a geophysicist at the University of California, Berkeley, and his colleagues ran computer simulations to look at conditions inside Jupiter... With information gleaned from these simulations, the researchers developed another computer model..."

What Time Is It?

Louis, as in Louis Hissink, made a very keen Kantian observation the other day in the comments section.

"What we have thrown out is purely mathematical science with no connection to physical reality, and why we throw out Einstein's relativity theory - his initial error was to make time a physical entity - it isn't. Knock that assumption off its perch and the rest falls down." -- Louis Hissink, Nov 2008

Which got me thinking (yet again) about the unparalleled genius of my favorite scientist and philosopher of all time, Immanuel Kant, a.k.a. "The Great Chinaman of Königsberg" (Nietzsche, 1886).

"Ah-so, Grasshopper, your shaolin metaphysical training with respect to transcendental idealism in accordance with empirical realism is now complete," Kant must've been saying with folded legs and squinting eyes in Nietszche's imagination.



As you may or may not know, it was Immanuel Kant who discovered in 1754 that the Aristotelian/Newtonian concept of "absolute, true, and mathematical time" (Newton, 1687) does not exist in material reality but can only be thought of as ideal.

In order for time to be known in any absolute sense, it must be in the form of units, and in order for it to be in the form of units, it must be measured. So what units is time measured in? Days of course.

What Kant discovered in 1754 that changed the world forever is that the rotation of the Earth is being retarded due to tidal forces not to mention the radial increase of the Earth, thus the lengthening of the day.

"Kant pointed out in the middle of last [18th] century, what had not previously been discovered by mathematicians or physical astronomers, that the frictional resistance against tidal currents on the earth's surface must cause a diminution of the earth's rotational speed. This really great discovery in Natural Philosophy seems to have attracted little attention,--indeed to have passed quite unnoticed,--among mathematicians, and astronomers, and naturalists, until about 1840, when the doctrine of energy began to be taken to heart." -- Lord Kelvin, physicist, 1897

Time, according to Kant (1781), is the a priori form of our intuition and therefore not a thing in itself or a so-called "fabric" as claimed by 20th century dogmatism.

"If we...consequently take objects as they are in themselves, then time is nothing." -- Immanuel Kant, philosopher, 1781

"...As our intuition is always sensuous, no object can ever be presented to us in experience, which does not come under the condition of time. On the other hand, we deny to time all claim to absolute reality; that is, we deny that it, without having regard to the form of our sensuous intuition, absolutely inheres in things as a condition or property. Such properties as belong to objects as things in themselves never can be presented to us through the medium of the senses. Herein consists, therefore the transcendental ideality of time, according to which, if we abstract the subjective conditions of sensuous intuition, it is nothing, and cannot be reckoned as subsisting or inhereing in objects as things in themselves, independently of our intuition." -- Immanuel Kant, philosopher, 1781

If I had known about the essay contest "On The Nature of Time" and the $10,000 cash prize being offered by the Foundational Sciences Institute earlier [in time?], I would've addressed this issue in detail.

Physicist Brian Cox and others, interviewed on the BBC, agree as well.



And thus the house of cards that Einsteinian relativity is built upon comes tumbling down.

The speed of light is not a constant "c" as there is no such material thing as empty space, a vacuum, or void (the universe is filled with plasma) and the speed of light has been experimentally slowed to less than 38 miles per hour (Hau et al., 1999, 2001) in a frozen sodium ion chamber. The records continue to be broken. Therefore special relativity has been empirically falsified.

Newton, I., Principles of Math Treating Time As Absolute, 1687

Kant, I., Kant's Cosmogony: As In His Essay On The Retardation Of The Rotation Of The Earth And His Natural History And Theory Of The Heavens, 1754

Kant, I., Critique of Pure Reason, 1781

Kant, I., Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, 1786

Nietzsche, F.W., Beyond Good and Evil, 1886