|
|
|
Although it is not too obvious at a first seeing, the implications of the acceptance of this principle on the concepts regarding the world are very numerous and they cover all the cognition fields.
First of all, this principle postulates the divisibility in other systems of the abiotic material systems already known as “elementary”, without mentioning a limit for this divisibility (maybe even up to infinity). Secondly, at the opposite end of cognition, towards more and more large systems, this principle postulates the spatial finity of our Universe as an object, but it does not contradict the simultaneous existence of other similar universes which are spatially disjoint and also organized in larger systems. But, pay attention, we are not talking about the so-called “parallel universes” from SF slang, but about some entities which are similar to our universe, with clear spatial boundaries, yet located at unthinkable distances, unthinkable as the real dimensions of our own universe are, from which only a small fraction is visible.
Comment 1.4.1: The problem of accepting the idea of the existence of other universes is similar with the problem of the simultaneous existence of other planets, besides Earth, in our solar system. There was a time in the history of human cognition when this existence was denied, obviously due to lack of information (knowledge). Nowadays, since this problem was solved, we are now in the early stage of accepting the simultaneous existence of other planetary systems within our galaxy, acceptance which is rather difficult because there are no direct data concerning these particular objects, and the current scientific philosophy does not provide any clue in supporting the prediction on the existence of this kind of objects around each observable star.
Another consequence of SOP application is the prediction on the existence of other media generation, (also belonging to the abiotic category), made-up from much smaller systems as compared to any EP, the set of this elements being a generating set for {EP} set. These media, which are called “proximate basic media” (PBM)1 are the components of the universe, in the same way as NM are the components of AB. We are using the term “media” instead of “medium” because (according to the objectual philosophy) these media can also exist in various states (just like NM), either solid, liquid or gaseous. The acceptance of the existence of these media2 is currently a difficult task, the most significant disproof coming once with the release of the results of Michelson-Morley experiment and continuing up to the present. Unfortunately for the human cognition, the hasty interpretation of this result which has led to this disproof, was (according to the author) a huge step backwards, step which led to the drastic limitation of the mankind access to the space, by only using the inertial propulsion equipment for space ships.
1 There were called proximate because if their existence would be demonstrated, this fact is itself a proof that there will also be other “much more basic” hierarchical media levels. The “proximate”attribute refers to the proximity to NM (in hierarchical order), the only types of abiotic media which are known so far.
2 Media whose existence was not contested in the 19-th century (under ether state), and even the existence of the ether as fluid and of the analogy between the fluid mechanics law and the laws on electromagnetic phenomena have led to the elaboration of Maxwell’s equations, which are the basis of electrotechnics, and we might say, are the basis of current technical civilisation.
Copyright © 2006-2011 Aurel Rusu. All rights reserved.
