AshEse Journal of Physical Science
Vol. 4(4), pp. 055, July, 2020
© 2020 AshEse Visionary Limited
Adib Ben Jebara
Received July, 2020; Accepted July, 2020
New axioms do not have to be something completely new
The existing axioms are sometimes too general and we mistakenly believe that it is towards more generality that evolution is advised. Some particular cases may turn out to be more interesting than expected. Most academic people think that there are no more great discoveries to be made. That means that they are not able to make any great discoveries. Axioms can become no more axioms but become deducted from new axioms. It is also the case in physics but what are considered are not axioms but principles and laws. As it is not every day that a new principle is found, people rather seek deductions, but most of the time deductions do not give something new enough.
Why is it very difficult to find a use in physics for some mathematical theories?
Is it that some theories do fit in a puzzle (of physical reality)? Why some mathematical theories look more of a mathematical reality than others? That leads us until the issue of truth of an axiom. The issue does not exist for people who do not seek to solve problems.
The theoretical world associated to the physical world is remarkable among theoretical worlds
Physical world has some remarkable features which enable the existence of human brains. An infinity of physical universes is unlikely to exist except successor one to another. The most remarkable feature of the physical world is however that it is much linked to the mathematical universe in all eternity with neither universe giving birth to the other. The mind is neither in the physical world nor in the mathematical universe. The mind is a spiritual energy.
No need to wonder whether new principles can be found in physics or not
There is a need for new principles about time. Time is less known than space. If time expands (dilates) in quantum cosmology, it does so at the level of elementary particles. As time is discontinuous, the unit of time would become of a bigger size. A moment would be something less precise. Our knowledge of time would not improve. Does time expand (dilate)? Does space expand (dilate)?
That the knowledge of time is less and less precise is not the tendency
It may even be considered a consequence of the existence of God that knowledge can be improved. A negative evolution of the knowledge would be rather paradoxical but may the dilation of time be neglected over centuries?
It is not enough to have a great knowledge of science or philosophy; one has to contribute new ideas
Posterity will be harsh with people publishing without really new ideas.