A Rational Cosmology: Why Predictive Power Does Not Imply Correctness in a Scientific Theory

Essay LXXXVIII

G. Stolyarov II
This is Essay LXXXVIII of Mr. Stolyarov's series, "A Rational Cosmology," which seeks to present objective, absolute, rationally grounded views of terms such as universe, matter, volume, space, time, motion, sound, light, forces, fields, and even the higher-order concepts of life, consciousness, and volition. See the index of all the essays in "A Rational Cosmology" here.

Using the evidence in previous essays, a man of reason can see that, whatever their useful practical applications, the conceptual core of relativity, quantum mechanics, modern "cosmology" (i.e., the same apocalyptic dogma about the "end of the universe" rehashed in modern, scientific-sounding terms), and "string theory," is riddled with contradictions, inconsistencies, and sheer impossibilities that strive to blatantly violate the reality which man observes with his senses during every moment of his life.

What the orthodox contemporary scientists refuse to understand is, simply because some theory has produced useful practical results, does not mean that the theory is correct. Consider that the healing properties of certain herbs, for example, were known for millennia among certain extremely backward tribes of the Amazon.

Let us presume that a hypothetical Western visitor to one of those tribes were to be met by the local shaman and told of a powerful theory that has never failed to heal a certain type of wound. The theory is called "Spirit Dance."

Whenever somebody is injured, the shaman takes his magic pouch (filled with the herb) and places the afflicted person in a special ceremonial circle made of an exotic stone that had to be pounded into the ground exactly twelve times to get its remarkable properties from the Great Spirit.

Then, the shaman must wear the hide of a beast slaughtered exactly thirteen days prior to the injury, and hop around the circle for six hours on one foot, chanting praises to the Great Spirit. Subsequently, he sprinkles his magic herbal powder onto the victim's wound, and punches the victim in the stomach three times to infuse the Great Spirit's strength into him. Behold the great miracle: the victim's wound will become healed!

The shaman will object with indignation to the visitor's claim that all of his services are in fact unnecessary, that a moment's application of the herb powder by any individual would itself suffice to cure the wound, by a theory that rules out the superfluous, mystical, illogical, and simply absurd.

It is true that his theory works within the given context, but it works far less effectively than a theory which is grounded solely in the nature of reality and the existents involved in the process. While the six-hour delay might not severely harm a patient with a minor cut, it will kill somebody injured more severely and capable of bleeding to death during that time.

Aspects of the false theory can also be harmful: punching most people in the stomach will not result in injury, but it could kill a pregnant woman, for example. The Great Spirit could also be used as a justification for other, less benevolent acts, including human sacrifice and the establishment of an authoritarian social hierarchy whereby the shaman uses his exclusive "bond" with the Spirit to render the populace dependent on him and believing that he has divine authority to govern their lives and stifle dissent.

Similarly, the contemporary empiricist-positivist scientists, and their all too eager collectivist allies in the humanities, seek the same sort of impregnable dominance over others in the creation of arcane "refutations" of reason and common sense. Relativity and quantum mechanics, because of their certain useful practical results, are often invoked to disqualify the absolute views of space and time, i.e., views which are implicit and self-evident in our daily lives.

But which theory predicts the world around us more accurately? Is it the theory that states that all entities are material, or one that posits entities with zero mass, or with infinite density, or with zero volume? Is it the theory that recognizes only three spatial dimensions or the one that posits eleven? Is it the theory that views force fields as mere convenient abstractions, or as an infinity of infinitely overlapping entities with infinite expanse? Let the reader try living life based on the theoretical underpinnings of post-Classical physics, and he will see how absurd and incompatible with the real world such theories are.

Read other parts of "A Rational Cosmology" by clicking here.

Published by G. Stolyarov II

G. Stolyarov II is a science fiction novelist, independent essayist, poet, amateur mathematician, composer, author, and actuary.   View profile

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.