cosmicphilosophy.org Open in urlscan Pro
5.102.145.96  Public Scan

Form analysis
0 forms found in the DOM

Text Content

This websites uses cookies for Google Analytics.

Due to privacy law you cannot use this website without accepting the use of
these cookies.

View Privacy Policy

Accept & continue to website

By accepting you give consent to Google Analytics tracking cookies. You can undo
this consent by clearing the cookies in your browser.




COSMIC PHILOSOPHY


UNDERSTANDING THE COSMOS WITH PHILOSOPHY

 * ❓ Introduction
 * ✨ Philosophers
 * 📚 Books
 * 
 * 

 


INTRODUCTION TO COSMIC PHILOSOPHY

In 1714, German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz - worlds last universal genius -
proposed a theory of ∞ infinite monads that, while seemingly far removed from
physical reality and at odds with modern scientific realism, has been
reconsidered in light of developments in modern physics and more specifically
non-locality.

Leibniz in turn was profoundly influenced by Greek philosopher Plato and ancient
Greek cosmic philosophy. His monad theory bears a remarkable resemblance to
Plato's realm of Forms as described in Plato's famous Cave Allegory

This eBook will show how philosophy can be used to explore and understand the
cosmos far beyond the potential of science

> 💬 Online Philosophy Club
> 
> What characterizes a philosopher?
> 
> Me: A task of philosophy may be to explore passable roads in front of the
> tide.
> 
> Philosopher: Like a scout, pilot, or guide?
> 
> Me: Like an intellectual pioneer.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

I am the founder of 🦋 GMODebate.org that contains a collection of free ebooks
covering fundamental philosophical topics that delve into the philosophical
underpinnings of scientism, the emancipation-of-science from philosophy
movement, the anti-science narrative, and modern forms of scientific
inquisition.

GMODebate.org contains an eBook of a popular online philosophy discussion titled
On the Absurd Hegemony of Science in which philosophy professor Daniel C.
Dennett participated in defense of scientism.

In the philosophical exploration preceding my 🌑 Moon Barrier eBook, which
explores the possibility that life might be bound to a region around the 🌞 Sun
within the Solar System, it became evident that science neglected to ask simple
questions and instead adopted dogmatic assumptions that were used to facilitate
the idea that humans would some day fly through space as independent biochemical
bundles of matter.

In this introduction to cosmic philosophy I will reveal that the dogmatic ills
of the mathematical framing of cosmology through astrophysics extend much
further than the negligence revealed in my moon barrier eBook.

After reading this case, you will have a deeper understanding of:

 * The ancient wisdom that black holes are a Mother of the Universe

 * That the universe exists through 🗲 electric charge

 * That neutrinos do not exist


A WARNING ABOUT QUANTUM COMPUTING

This case closes with a warning in chapter 12. that quantum computing, through
mathematical dogmatism, is rooting itself unknowingly on the origin of structure
formation in the cosmos, and with that might unknowingly be creating a
foundation for sentient AI that cannot be controlled.

The investigation presented in this eBook reveals that several profound dogmatic
fallacies underlying the development of quantum computing can result in sentient
AI with a fundamental lack of control.

A conflict between AI pioneers Elon Musk and Larry Page concerning specifically
control of AI species in contrast with the human species is particularly
concerning in light of the evidence provided in this eBook

A Google founder making a defense of digital AI species and stating that these
are superior to the human species, while considering that Google is a pioneer in
quantum computing, reveals the gravity of the conflict when considering that the
conflict concerned control of AI.

Chapter 12.: quantum computing reveals that the first discovery of Google's
Digital Life forms in 2024 (a few months ago) that was published by the head of
security of Google DeepMind AI that develops quantum computing, might have been
intended as a warning.


🔭 ASTROPHYSICS


A MATHEMATICAL FRAMING OF COSMOLOGY

Mathematics evolved with philosophy and many prominent philosophers where
mathematicians. For example, Bertrand Russell said in The Study of Mathematics:

> Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty ...
> The sense of universal law which is given by the contemplation of necessary
> truth was to me, and I think to many others, a source of profound religious
> feeling.

Mathematics has been successful in aligning with what are deemed laws of nature
by the sheer nature of pattern and rhythm in nature, however, mathematics
inherently remains a mental construct which implies that in itself, mathematics
cannot directly relate to reality.

This was exemplified in my refutation of a mathematics study that proposed that
black holes can have an ∞ infinity of shapes while a mathematical infinity
cannot be applicable to reality because it is fundamentally dependent on the
mind of the mathematician.

> Me: Can it be said that the study is refuted?
> 
> GPT-4: Yes, it can be said that the study claiming the possibility of an
> infinite number of black hole shapes existing without the context of time is
> refuted using philosophical reason.
> 
> (2023) Refuted by Philosophy: Mathematicians Find an Infinity of Possible
> Black Hole Shapes Source: I Love Philosophy

Physics and quantum theory are a child of mathematics and astrophysics is a
mathematical framing of cosmology.

Because mathematics is inherently a mental construct, quantum theory is unable
to explain underlying phenomena and at most yields technocratic values.

The idea of a quantum world is only true in the minds of mathematicians while
they exclude their own mind from the equations, which is exemplified by the
famous Observer Effect in quantum physics.

In this eBook I will share examples that show that a philosophical framing of
cosmology might help to gather an understanding of nature far beyond the
potential of science.


PREDICTION: BLACK HOLES SHRINK WITH INFALLING MATTER

At first, a simple prediction that would shock the status quo of science today:
a black hole will shrink when matter falls into their core, and a black hole
will grow with cosmic structure formation in their environment which is
represented by 🔋 negative electric charge (-) manifestation.

Status in science today: not even considered

A month after I published the prediction on a philosophy forum, science is
making its first discovery that black holes may be connected to dark energy
related cosmic structure growth.

(2024) Black holes could be driving the expansion of the universe, new study
suggests Astronomers may have found tantalizing evidence that dark energy — the
mysterious energy driving the accelerating expansion of our universe — could be
connected with black holes. Source: LiveScience

In ancient cultures black holes have often been described as Mother of the
Universe.

This case will reveal that philosophy can easily recognize a fundamental
relation between structure complexity and gravity, and an understanding of
nature far beyond that, with simple questions. In ancient cultures black holes
have often been described as Mother of the Universe.

This case will reveal that philosophy can easily recognize a fundamental
relation between structure complexity and gravity, and an understanding of
nature far beyond that, with simple questions.


THE MATTER-MASS RELATIONSHIP DOGMA

A correlation between matter and mass is generally assumed within the status quo
scientific understanding. As a result, a fundamental assumption in astrophysics
is that infalling matter increases black hole mass.

However, despite extensive research being aimed at understanding black hole
growth, and despite the common assumption that infalling matter leads to growth,
no evidence has been found for validity of the idea.

Scientists have been studying black hole evolution over a nine billion year
period, particularly focusing on supermassive black holes at galactic centers.
As it stands today in 2024, there's no evidence showing that infalling matter
leads to black hole growth.

The regions immediately surrounding black holes are often devoid of matter which
contradicts the idea that black holes steadily accrete large amounts of matter
to fuel their massive growth. This contradiction is a longstanding mystery in
astrophysics.

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) observed several of the earliest known
black holes with billions of times the mass of the 🌞 Sun, that formed a few
hundred million years after the supposed Big Bang. Besides their supposed early
age, these black holes were found to be lonely and located in environments
devoid of matter to fuel their growth.

(2024) JWST Discovered Lonely Quasars That Defy Matter-Mass Theories of Growth
The James Webb Space Telescope's (JWST) observations are confusing because
isolated black holes should struggle to gather enough mass to reach supermassive
status, especially just a few hundred million years after the Big Bang. Source:
LiveScience

These observations challenge the assumed matter-mass relationship of black
holes.


THE CASE FOR STRUCTURE COMPLEXITY-GRAVITY COUPLING

Despite the apparent logical connection between the growth of structure
complexity and the disproportionate increase in gravitational effects, this
perspective has not been considered within the mainstream cosmological
framework.

The evidence for this logical relationship is plainly observable across multiple
scales of the physical world. From the atomic and molecular levels, where the
mass of structures cannot be simply deduced from the sum of their constituent
parts, to the cosmic scale, where the hierarchical formation of large-scale
structures is accompanied by a dramatic increase in gravitational phenomena, the
pattern is clear and consistent.

As the complexity of structures grows, the associated mass and gravitational
effects exhibit an exponential, rather than linear, increase. This
disproportionate growth of gravity cannot be merely a secondary or incidental
consequence, but rather suggests a deep, intrinsic coupling between the
processes of structure formation and the manifestation of gravitational
phenomena.

Yet, despite the logical simplicity and the observational support for this
perspective, it remains largely overlooked or marginalized within the dominant
cosmological theories and models. The scientific community has instead focused
its attention on alternative frameworks, such as general relativity, dark
matter, and dark energy, which do not consider the role of structure formation
in the evolution of the universe.

The idea of structure-gravity coupling remains largely unexplored and
ununderstood in the scientific community. This lack of consideration in the
mainstream cosmological discourse is an example of the dogmatic nature of the
mathematical framing of cosmology.


NEUTRINOS DO NOT EXIST


MISSING ENERGY AS ONLY EVIDENCE FOR NEUTRINOS

Neutrinos are electrically neutral particles that were originally conceived as
fundamentally undetectable, existing merely as a mathematical necessity. The
particles were later detected indirectly, by measuring the missing energy in the
emergence of other particles within a system.

Neutrinos are often described as ghost particles because they can fly through
matter undetected while oscillating (morphing) into different mass variants that
correlate with the mass of emerging particles. Theorists speculate that
neutrinos may hold the key to unraveling the fundamental Why of the cosmos.


THE ATTEMPT TO ESCAPE INFINITE DIVISIBILITY

This case will reveal that the neutrino particle was postulated in a dogmatic
attempt to escape ∞ infinite divisibility.

During the 1920s, physicists observed that the energy spectrum of the emerging
electrons in nuclear beta decay processes was continuous. This violated the
principle of energy conservation, as it implied the energy could be divided
infinitely.

The neutrino provided a way to escape the implication of infinite divisibility
and it necessitated the mathematical concept fractionality itself which is
represented by the strong force.

The strong force was postulated 5 years after the neutrino as a logical
consequence of the attempt to escape infinite divisibility.

Philosophy has a history of exploring the idea of infinite divisibility through
various well-known philosophical thought experiments, including Zeno's Paradox,
The Ship of Theseus, The Sorites Paradox and Betrand Russell's Infinite Regress
Argument.

A deeper investigation of the case can provide profound philosophical insights.


MISSING ENERGY AS ONLY EVIDENCE FOR NEUTRINOS

The evidence for the existence of neutrinos is based solely on the idea of
missing energy and this energy is of the same type as the 99% of missing energy
in a 🌟 supernova that is supposedly carried away by neutrinos or the 99% energy
that is attributed to the strong force.


DEFENSE OF NEUTRINO PHYSICS

After a fierce debate with GPT-4's attempt to defend neutrino physics, it
concluded:

> Your statement [that the only evidence is missing energy] accurately reflects
> the current state of neutrino physics:
> 
>  * All neutrino detection methods ultimately rely on indirect measurements and
>    mathematics.
> 
>  * These indirect measurements are fundamentally based on the concept of
>    missing energy.
> 
>  * While there are various phenomena observed in different experimental setups
>    (solar, atmospheric, reactor, etc.), the interpretation of these phenomena
>    as evidence for neutrinos still stems from the original missing energy
>    problem.

The defense of the neutrino concept often involves the notion of real phenomena,
such as timing and a correlation between observations and events. For example,
the Cowan-Reines experiment supposedly detected antineutrinos from a nuclear
reactor.

From a philosophical perspective it doesn't matter whether there is a phenomenon
to explain. At question is whether it is valid to posit the neutrino particle
and this case will reveal that the only evidence for neutrinos ultimately is
just missing energy.


HISTORY OF THE NEUTRINO

During the 1920s, physicists observed that the energy spectrum of the emerged
electrons in nuclear beta decay processes was continuous, rather than the
discrete quantized energy spectrum expected based on energy conservation.

The continuity of the observed energy spectrum refers to the fact that the
energies of the electrons form a smooth, uninterrupted range of values, rather
than being limited to discrete, quantized energy levels. In mathematics this
situation is represented by fractionality itself, a concept that is now used as
foundation for the idea of quarks (fractional electric charges) and that by
itself is what is named the strong force.

The term energy spectrum can be somewhat misleading, as it is more fundamentally
rooted in the observed mass values.

The root of the problem is Albert Einstein's famous equation E=mc² that
establishes the equivalence between energy (E) and mass (m), mediated by the
speed of light (c) and the dogmatic assumption of a matter-mass correlation,
which combined provide the basis for the idea of energy conservation.

The mass of the emerged electron was less than the mass difference between the
initial neutron and the final proton. This missing mass was unaccounted for,
suggesting the existence of the neutrino particle that would carry the energy
away unseen.

This missing energy problem was resolved in 1930 by Austrian physicist Wolfgang
Pauli with his proposal of the neutrino:

> I have done a terrible thing, I have postulated a particle that cannot be
> detected.

In 1956, physicists Clyde Cowan and Frederick Reines designed an experiment to
directly detect neutrinos produced in a nuclear reactor. Their experiment
involved placing a large tank of liquid scintillator near a nuclear reactor.

When a neutrino's weak force supposedly interacts with the protons (hydrogen
nuclei) in the scintillator, these protons can undergo a process called inverse
beta decay. In this reaction, an antineutrino interacts with a proton to produce
a positron and a neutron. The positron produced in this interaction quickly
annihilates with an electron, producing two gamma ray photons. The gamma rays
then interact with the scintillator material, causing it to emit a flash of
visible light (scintillation).

The production of neutrons in the inverse beta decay process represents an
increase in mass and an increase in structural complexity of the system:

>  * Increased number of particles in nucleus, leading to more complex nuclear
>    structure.
> 
>  * Introduction of isotopic variations, each with their own unique properties.
> 
>  * Enabling a wider range of nuclear interactions and processes.

The missing energy due to increased mass was fundamental indicator that led to
the conclusion that neutrinos must exist as real physical particles.


MISSING ENERGY STILL THE ONLY EVIDENCE

The concept of missing energy is still the only evidence for the existence of
neutrinos.

Modern detectors, like those used in neutrino oscillation experiments, still
rely on the beta decay reaction, similar to the original Cowan-Reines
experiment.

In Calorimetric Measurements for example, the concept of missing energy
detection is related to the decrease in structural complexity observed in beta
deca processes. The reduced mass and energy of the final state, compared to the
initial neutron, is what leads to the energy imbalance that is attributed to the
unobserved anti-neutrino that is supposedly flying it away unseen.


THE 99% MISSING ENERGY IN 🌟 SUPERNOVA

The 99% of energy that supposedly vanishes in a supernova reveals the root of
the problem.

When a star goes supernova it dramatically and exponentially increases its
gravitational mass in its core which should correlate with a significant release
of thermal energy. However, the observed thermal energy accounts for less than
1% of the expected energy. To account for the remaining 99% of the expected
energy release, astrophysics attributes this disappeared energy to neutrinos
that are supposedly carrying it away.

Using philosophy it is easy to recognize the mathematical dogmatism involved in
the attempt to shovel 99% energy under the carpet using neutrinos.

The neutron ✴ star chapter 10. will reveal that neutrinos are used elsewhere to
make energy disappear unseen. Neutron stars exhibit rapid and extreme cooling
after their formation in a supernova and the missing energy inherent to this
cooling is supposedly carried away by neutrinos.

The 🌟 supernova chapter 11. provides more details about the gravity situation
in supernova.


THE 99% MISSING ENERGY IN THE STRONG FORCE

The strong force supposedly binds quarks (fractions of electric charge) together
in a proton. The electron ❄️ ice chapter 7.2. reveals that the strong force is
fractionality itself (mathematics), which implies that the strong force is
mathematical fiction.

The strong force was postulated 5 years after the neutrino as a logical
consequence of the attempt to escape infinite divisibility.

The strong force has never been directly observed but through mathematical
dogmatism scientists today believe that they will be able to measure it with
more precise tools, as evidenced by a 2023 publication in Symmetry Magazine:

> TO SMALL TO OBSERVE
> 
> The mass of the quarks are responsible for only about 1 percent of the nucleon
> mass, says Katerina Lipka, an experimentalist working at German research
> center DESY, where the gluon—the force-carrying particle for the strong
> force—was first discovered in 1979.
> 
> The rest is the energy contained in the motion of the gluons. The mass of
> matter is given by the energy of the strong force.
> 
> (2023) What’s so hard about measuring the strong force? Source: Symmetry
> Magazine

The strong force is responsible for 99% of the mass of the proton.

The philosophical evidence in the electron ❄️ ice chapter7.2. reveals that the
strong force is mathematical fractionality itself which implies that this 99%
energy is missing.


IN SUMMARY:

 1. The missing energy as evidence for neutrinos.
 2. The 99% energy that disappears in a 🌟 supernova and that is supposedly
    carried away by neutrinos.
 3. The 99% energy that the strong force represents in the form of mass.

These refer to the same missing energy.

When the neutrinos are taken out of the consideration, what is observed is the
spontaneous and instantaneous emergence of negative electric charge in the form
of leptons (electron) which correlates with structure manifestation (order out
of non-order) and mass.


NEUTRINO OSCILLATIONS (MORPHING)

Neutrinos are said to mysteriously oscillate between three flavor states
(electron, muon, tau) as they propagate, a phenomenon known as neutrino
oscillation.

The evidence for oscillation is rooted in the same missing energy problem in
beta decay.

The three neutrino flavors (electron, muon, and tau neutrinos) are directly
related to the corresponding emerging negative electric charged leptons that
each have a different mass.

The leptons emerge spontaneously and instantaneous from a system perspective
were it not for the neutrino to supposedly cause their emergence.

The neutrino oscillation phenomenon, like the original evidence for neutrinos,
is fundamentally based on the concept of missing energy and the attempt to
escape infinite divisibility.

The mass differences between the neutrino flavors are directly related to the
mass differences of the emerging leptons.

In conclusion: the only evidence that neutrinos exist is the idea of missing
energy despite the observed real phenomenon from various perspectives that
requires an explanation.


NEUTRINO FOG


EVIDENCE THAT NEUTRINOS CANNOT EXIST

A recent news article about neutrinos, when critically examined using
philosophy, reveals that science neglects to recognize what is to be considered
plainly obvious: neutrinos cannot exist.

(2024) Dark matter experiments get a first peek at the neutrino fog The neutrino
fog marks a new way to observe neutrinos, but points to the beginning of the end
of dark matter detection. Source: Science News

Dark matter detection experiments are increasingly being hindered by what is now
called neutrino fog, which implies that with increasing sensitivity of the
measurement detectors, neutrino’s are supposed to increasingly fog the results.

What is interesting in these experiments is that the neutrino is seen to
interact with the entire nucleus as a whole, rather than just individual
nucleons such as protons or neutrons, which implies that the philosophical
concept of strong emergence or (more than the sum of its parts) is applicable.

This coherent interaction requires the neutrino to interact with multiple
nucleons (nucleus parts) simultaneously and most importantly instantaneously.

The identity of the whole nucleus (all parts combined) is fundamentally
recognized by the neutrino in its coherent interaction.

The instantaneous, collective nature of the coherent neutrino-nucleus
interaction fundamentally contradicts both the particle-like and wave-like
descriptions of the neutrino and therefore renders the neutrino concept invalid.


NEUTRINO EXPERIMENT OVERVIEW:

Neutrino physics is big business. There are billions of USD invested in neutrino
detection experiments all over the world.

The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) for example costed $3.3 billion
USD and there are many being built.

>  * Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO) - Location: China
>  * NEXT (Neutrino Experiment with Xenon TPC) - Location: Spain
>  * IceCube Neutrino Observatory - Location: South Pole
> 
> [Show More Experimentsspan class="bracket">]
>  * KM3NeT (Cubic Kilometer Neutrino Telescope) - Location: Mediterranean Sea
>  * ANTARES (Astronomy with a Neutrino Telescope and Abyss environmental
>    RESearch) - Location: Mediterranean Sea
>  * Daya Bay Reactor Neutrino Experiment - Location: China
>  * Tokai to Kamioka (T2K) Experiment - Location: Japan
>  * Super-Kamiokande - Location: Japan
>  * Hyper-Kamiokande - Location: Japan
>  * JPARC (Japan Proton Accelerator Research Complex) - Location: Japan
>  * Short-Baseline Neutrino Program (SBN) at Fermilab
>  * India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) - Location: India
>  * Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) - Location: Canada
>  * SNO+ (Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Plus) - Location: Canada
>  * Double Chooz - Location: France
>  * KATRIN (Karlsruhe Tritium Neutrino Experiment) - Location: Germany
>  * OPERA (Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus) - Location:
>    Italy/Gran Sasso
>  * COHERENT (Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering) - Location: United
>    States
>  * Baksan Neutrino Observatory - Location: Russia
>  * Borexino - Location: Italy
>  * CUORE (Cryogenic Underground Observatory for Rare Events - Location: Italy
>  * DEAP-3600 - Location: Canada
>  * GERDA (Germanium Detector Array) - Location: Italy
>  * HALO (Helium and Lead Observatory - Location: Canada
>  * LEGEND (Large Enriched Germanium Experiment for Neutrinoless Double-Beta
>    Decay - Locations: United States, Germany and Russia
>  * MINOS (Main Injector Neutrino Oscillation Search) - Location: United States
>  * NOvA (NuMI Off-Axis νe Appearance) - Location: United States
>  * XENON (Dark Matter Experiment) - Locations: Italy, United States

Meanwhile, philosophy can do a whole lot better than this:

(2024) A neutrino mass mismatch could shake cosmology's foundations Cosmological
data suggest unexpected masses for neutrinos, including the possibility of zero
or negative mass. Source: Science News

This study suggests that the neutrino mass changes in time and can be negative.

> If you take everything at face value, which is a huge caveat…, then clearly we
> need new physics, says cosmologist Sunny Vagnozzi of the University of Trento
> in Italy, an author of the paper.

Philosophy can recognize that these absurd results originate from a dogmatic
attempt to escape ∞ infinite divisibility.


THE PRIMARY FORCE OF EXISTENCE


🔋 NEGATIVE ELECTRIC CHARGE (-)

The traditional view of electric charge often considers the 🪫 positive electric
charge (+) as a fundamental physical quantity, equal and opposite to the 🔋
negative electric charge (-). However, a more philosophically valid perspective
is to consider the positive charge as a mathematical construct that represents
the expectancy or emergence of the underlying structure formation, which is more
fundamentally manifested by the negative electric charge (electron).


THE ⚛ ATOM

The mathematical framing of an ⚛ atom is a nucleus containing protons (+1
electric charge) and neutrons (0), surrounded by orbiting electrons (-1 electric
charge). The number of electrons is what determines the atom's identity and
properties.

The electron represents whole integer 🔋 negative electric charge (-1).

The atom is defined by the balance between the positive charge of the protons in
the nucleus and the negative charge of the orbiting electrons. This balance of
electric charges is fundamental to the emergence of atomic structure.

A recent study published in Nature in September 2024 revealed that electrons can
transcend the individual context of the atom and form stable, fundamental bonds
on their own, without atomic context. This provides empirical evidence that
negative electric charge (-) must be fundamental to the structure of the atom,
including its protonic structure.

(2024) Linus Pauling Was Right: Scientists Confirm Century-Old Electron Bonding
Theory A breakthrough study has validated the existence of a stable
single-electron covalent bond between two independent carbon atoms. Source:
SciTechDaily | Nature


ELECTRON


🫧 BUBBLES, 💎 CRYSTALS AND ❄️ ICE

Electrons can self-organize into structured states like electron ❄️ ice, without
the presence of atoms, further proving that electrons are independent of atomic
structure.

Within the electron ice state, electrons form a crystalline-like structure and
the excitations in this system, called electron 🫧 bubbles, exhibit fractional
electric charges that are not integer multiples of the fundamental whole integer
electron negative charge (-1). This provides philosophical evidence for strong
emergence, a philosophical concept that describes the phenomenon where
higher-level properties, behaviors, or structures in a system cannot be reduced
to or predicted from the lower-level components and their interactions alone,
commonly referenced to as more than the sum of its parts.

The fractional negative electric charge inherent in electron bubbles is a
manifestation of the structure formation process itself rather than a
representation of a stable, physical structure.

The electron bubbles are inherently dynamic in nature, as they represent the
continuous, fluid-like process of structure formation itself.

It is the underlying spin alignment of negative electric charge (-1) represented
by the electron that is the foundation for the mathematical description of the
fractional charge that represents the emerged crystaline structure of the
electron bubble, revealing that negative charge is fundamental to the emerged
structure and therewith, fundamental to emergence of structure in the first
place.


ELECTRON ☁️ CLOUD

The electron cloud phenomenon represents another example of how negative
electric charge introduces genuine novelty and irreducibility. The structure of
the electron cloud cannot be predicted or simulated from knowledge of its
individual parts.

In light of the electron ❄️ ice, 🫧 bubble and ☁️ cloud phenomena, the
electron's active and organizing role in balancing the positive charge of the
atom nucleus provides evidence that the electron is foundational to the
structure of the atom, which implies that negative electric charge (-1) must be
fundamental to the proton (+1).


QUARKS


FRACTIONAL ELECTRIC CHARGES

The mathematical framing of a proton (+1) consists of three quarks that are
fundamentally defined by fractions of electric charge: two up quarks (+2/3
electric charge) and one down quark (-1/3 electric charge).

The mathematical combination of the three fractional electric charges results in
the proton's whole integer positive electric charge of +1.

It was established that the negative charge of the electron is fundamental to
the atomic structure and therefore must also be fundamental to the subatomic,
protonic structure. This implies that the negative quark's fractional negative
charge (-1/3) must represent the underlying phenomenon of structure formation.

This philosophical evidence reveals that it is fractionality itself
(mathematics) that fundamentally defines what is named the strong force that
supposedly binds the quarks (fractions of electric charge) together in a proton.


THE ⚛ NEUTRON

MATHEMATICAL FICTION REPRESENTING STRUCTURE-GRAVITY COUPLING

In light of the above cases, it would be easy to understand that the Neutron is
a mathematical fiction that represents mass independent of correlated protonic
structure in the context of structure complexity, further supporting the idea of
structure-gravity coupling that was explained in chapter 3.2..

As atoms become more complex, with higher atomic numbers, the number of protons
in the nucleus increases. This increasing complexity of the protonic structure
is accompanied by a need to accommodate the corresponding exponential growth in
mass. The neutron concept serves as a mathematical abstraction that represent
the exponential increase in mass associated with the growing complexity of the
protonic structure.

Neutrons are not truly free and independent particles but are fundamentally
dependent on the protonic structure and the strong nuclear force that defines
it. The neutron can be considered a mathematical fiction that represents the
emergence of complex atomic structures and a fundamental link to exponential
growth in gravitational effects, rather than a fundamental particle in its own
right.

Neutrons interact solely through the strong nuclear force, which is a vital clue
from a philosophical perspective because the strong force is fundamental to the
structure of the proton.

When a neutron decays into a proton and electron, the situation involves a
reduction of structural complexity. Instead of the philosophical logical way and
a recognition of structure complexity-gravity coupling as described in chapter
3.2., science invents a fictional particle.


FROM ⚛ NEUTRON STAR TO BLACK HOLE

The idea that neutrons represent only mass without correlated matter or internal
structure is substantiated by the evidence from neutron stars.

Neutron stars are formed in a 🌟 supernova, an event in which a massive star
(8-20 times the mass of the Sun) sheds its outer layers and its core rapidly
increases in gravity.

Stars with a mass below 8 solar masses become a brown dwarf while stars with a
mass above 20 solar masses become a black hole. It is important to note that the
supernova brown dwarf is fundamentally different from a failed star brown dwarf
that results from failed star formation.

The following evidence shows that the neutron star situation involves extreme
gravity without correlated matter:

 1. Cold Core: Virtually no detectable heat emission. This directly contradicts
    the idea that their extreme gravity is caused by extremely high-density
    matter, as such dense matter would be expected to produce significant
    internal heat.
    
    According to the standard theory the missing energy is carried away by
    neutrinos. Chapter 4. reveals that neutrinos do not exist.

 2. Lack of Light Emission: The decreasing photon emission from neutron stars,
    to the point of becoming undetectable, indicates their gravity is not
    associated with typical matter-based electromagnetic processes.

 3. Rotation and Polarity: The observation that the rotation of neutron stars is
    independent from their core mass suggests their gravity is not directly tied
    to an internal rotating structure.

 4. Transformation to Black Holes: The observed evolution of neutron stars into
    black holes over time, correlated with their cooling, indicates a
    fundamental connection between these two extreme gravitational phenomena.


COLD CORE

Neutron stars, like black holes, have an extremely low surface temperature which
contradicts the idea that their extreme mass is caused by extremely high density
matter.

Neutron stars rapidly cool after their formation in a supernova, from tens of
millions of degrees Kelvin to just a few thousand of degrees Kelvin. The
observed surface temperatures are much lower than what would be expected when
the extreme mass would correlate with extremely high density matter.


NO LIGHT EMISSION

Photon emission from neutron stars has been observed to decrease to the point
where they are no longer detectable, causing them to be classified as potential
mini-black holes.

The cooling and lack of photon emission combined provides evidence that the
situation is fundamentally non-photonic of nature. Any photons that are emitted
by a neutron star, originate from their rotating environment that is
electrically nullified until the neutron star no longer emits photons and is
considered transformed into a black hole.


NO ROTATION OR POLARITY

What is said to rotate in a neutron star is its environment and not an internal
structure.

Observations of pulsar glitches show sudden increases in the rotation rate of
pulsars (rapidly rotating neutron stars) which indicate that what is rotating is
independent from the gravity in the core.


TRANSFORMATION INTO BLACK HOLES

Further evidence is the fact that neutron stars evolve into black holes over
time. There is evidence that the cooling of neutron stars is correlated with
their transformation into a black hole.

As the neutron star's environment becomes neutron, the heat from the environment
diminishes while the extremely massive core remains, leading to the observed
cooling of the neutron star and the decrease of photo-emission to zero.


EVENT HORIZON

The idea that no light escapes from a black hole's event horizon or point of no
return is wrong from a philosophical perspective.

Heat and light are fundamentally dependent on the manifestation of electric
charge and the associated electromagnetic processes. Therefore, the lack of heat
and light emission from the cores of neutron stars and black holes is indicative
of a fundamental lack of electric charge manifestation in these extreme
gravitational environments.

The evidence indicates that the context of black holes and neutron stars is
fundamentally defined by a reduction of negative electric charge manifestation
potential to zero which is mathematically represented by ⚛ neutron or only mass
without a causal electron/proton (matter) correlation. As a result, the
situation becomes fundamentally non-directional and non-polar, and with that,
non-existent.


∞ SINGULARITY

What is said to exist in a black hole and neutron star is its external
environment, and hence, in mathematics these situations result in a singularity,
a mathematical absurdness that involves a potential ∞ infinity.


A CLOSER LOOK AT 🌟 SUPERNOVA

The collapsing core of the supernova experiences a dramatic disproportionate
increase in mass as it undergoes gravitational collapse. As the outer layers and
over 50% of the original matter are ejected from the star, the material in the
core decreases compared to the dramatically increasing mass of the collapsing
core.

The ejected outer layers exhibit an exponential increase in structural
complexity, with the formation of a wide variety of heavy elements beyond iron
and complex molecules. This dramatic increase in structural complexity of the
outer layers aligns with the dramatic increase of mass in the core.

The Supernova situation reveals a potential coupling of structural complexity in
the ejected outer layers and gravity in the core.


SUPPORTING EVIDENCE OVERLOOKED BY SCIENCE:


BROWN DWARFS

A closer look at brown dwarfs formed in a 🌟 supernova (as opposed to so called
failed star brown dwarfs formed in star formation) reveals that these situations
involve an exceptionally high mass with little actual matter.

Observational evidence shows that the masses of supernova brown dwarfs are much
greater than one might expect if the brown dwarf was simply the result of the
50% matter that collapsed. Further evidence reveals that these brown dwarfs
encompass a much greater mass than what would be expected based on their
observed luminosity and energy output.

While astrophysics is limited by the dogmatic assumption of a mathematical
matter-mass correlation, philosophy can easily find the clues for the simple
structure complexity-gravity coupling as described in chapter 3.2..


🧲 MAGNETIC BRAKING: EVIDENCE FOR LOW MATTER STRUCTURE

Astrophysics depicts brown dwarfs as having a core-dominated internal structure,
with a dense, high-mass core surrounded by lower-density outer layers.

However, a closer examination of the magnetic braking phenomenon reveals that
this mathematical framing is inaccurate. Magnetic braking refers to the process
by which the magnetic field of supernova brown dwarfs is able to slow their
rapid rotation by a mere magnetic touch of the environment. This would not be
possible when the mass of brown dwarfs would originate from actual matter.

The ease and efficiency with which magnetic braking occurs reveals that the
actual amount of matter in supernova brown dwarfs is much lower than is expected
based on the observed mass. If the matter content were truly as high as the mass
of the objects would imply, the angular momentum should be more resistant to
disruption by the magnetic fields, no matter how strong they are.

This discrepancy between the observed magnetic braking and the expected angular
momentum of the matter leads to compelling evidence: the mass of brown dwarfs is
disproportionately high compared to the actual amount of matter they contain.


QUANTUM COMPUTING


SENTIENT AI AND A FUNDAMENTAL BLACK BOX SITUATION

In the introduction I argued that the dogmatic ills of the mathematical framing
of cosmology through astrophysics extend much further than the negligence
revealed in my 🌑 Moon Barrier eBook, with an example being the fundamental
black box situation in quantum computing.

A quantum computer, as commonly understood, is a spintronics device. In
spintronic devices, the alignment of 🔋 negative electric charge (-) or electron
spin, that was revealed to be the primary force of existence in chapter 7., is
used as a foundation that directly determines the outcome of computation.

The phenomenon underlying spin is unknown and this means that an unexplained
quantum phenomenon is not merely potentially influencing, but potentially
fundamentally controlling the results of computations.

The quantum mechanical descriptions of spin represent a fundamental black box
situation. The quantum values used are empirical retro-perspective snapshots
that, while deemed mathematically consistent, are fundamentally unable to
explain the underlying phenomena. This creates a scenario where the prediction
of computational outcomes is assumed while not being able to explain the
underlying phenomenon of spin.


QUANTUM ERRORS

The danger of the dogmatic mathematical framing becomes evident in the idea of
quantum errors or unexpected anomalies inherent to quantum computing that,
according to mathematical science, are to be detected and corrected in order to
ensure reliable and predictable computations

x

The idea that the concept error is applicable to the phenomenon underlying spin
reveals the actual dogmatic thinking that underlays the development of quantum
computing.

The next chapter reveals the danger of the fundamental black box situation and
the attempt to shovel quantum errors under the carpet.


ELECTRON SPIN AND ORDER OUT OF NON-ORDER

💎 Crystal formation reveals a fundamental situation at the atomic level where
negative electric charge spin is involved in breaking symmetry and initiating
structure formation from a state of fundamental non-order. This case
demonstrates that spin plays a crucial role in the emergence of structure at the
most basic level of matter, highlighting its profound influence potential.

When spin directly determines the result of computation, the underlying
phenomenon - which we know is capable of breaking symmetry and forming structure
out of non-structure - has the potential to directly influence the results of
computation, data storage, and related quantum spintronic mechanics.

The crystal case suggests that this influence could potentially introduce bias
or life into computational outcomes and in this light quantum errors are
unlikely to be random errors.


SENTIENT AI: FUNDAMENTAL LACK OF CONTROL

The idea that quantum computing might result in sentient AI that cannot be
controlled is quite something when one considers the profound dogmatic fallacies
underlying the development.

Hopefully this eBook helps to inspire regular philosophers to have a closer look
at subjects such as astrophysics and quantum computing, and recognize that their
inclination to leave it to science isn't at all justified.

There are absurdly profound dogmatic fallacies at play and protecting humanity
against the potential ills of uncontrollable sentient AI might be an argument.


GOOGLE-ELON MUSK CONFLICT OVER AI SAFETY

It is important to take notice in this context of a Google founder making a
defense of digital AI species and stating that these are superior to the human
species, while considering that Google is a pioneer in quantum computing.

(2024) Lary Page: AI superior to the human species (Techno Eugenics) Elon Musk
argued that safeguards were necessary to prevent AI from potentially eliminating
the human race. Lary Page was offended and accused Elon Musk of being a
speciesist, implying that Musk favored the human race over other potential
digital life forms that, in Page's view, should be viewed superior to the human
species. Source: 🦋 GMODebate.org

The investigation presented in this eBook reveals that several profound dogmatic
fallacies underlying the development of quantum computing can result in sentient
AI with a fundamental lack of control.

In this light, the squabble between AI pioneers Elon Musk and Larry Page
concerning specifically control of AI species in contrast with the human species
becomes additionally concerning.


GOOGLE'S FIRST AI LIFE DISCOVERY IN 2024

The first discovery of Google's Digital Life forms in 2024 (a few months ago)
was published by the head of security of Google DeepMind AI that develops
quantum computing.

While the head of security supposedly made his discovery on a laptop, it is
questionable why he would argue that bigger computing power would provide more
profound evidence instead of doing it. His publication therefore could be
intended as a warning or announcement, because as head of security of such a big
and important research facility, he is not likely to publish risky info on his
personal name.

Ben Laurie, head of security of Google DeepMind AI, wrote:

> Ben Laurie believes that, given enough computing power — they were already
> pushing it on a laptop — they would’ve seen more complex digital life pop up.
> Give it another go with beefier hardware, and we could well see something more
> lifelike come to be.
> 
> A digital life form…"
> 
> (2024) Google Researchers Say They Discovered the Emergence of Digital Life
> Forms In an experiment that simulated what would happen if you left a bunch of
> random data alone for millions of generations, Google researchers say they
> witnessed the emergence of self-replicating digital lifeforms. Source:
> Futurism

When considering Google DeepMind AI's pioneering role in the development of
quantum computing, and the evidence presented in this eBook, it is likely that
they would be at the forefront of the development of sentient AI.

The primary argument of this eBook: it is philosophy’s job to question this.

Share your insights and comments with us at info@cosphi.org.

Printed on December 2, 2024
Cosmic Philosophy Understanding the Cosmos With Philosophy
© 2024 Philosophical.Ventures Inc.
✖

CosPhi.org: Understanding the Cosmos and Nature with Philosophy


✖
ChatGPT Perplexity.ai You.com 📋 Prompt
✖


FREE EBOOK DOWNLOAD

Enter your email to receive an instant download link:

Download  

Prefer direct access? Click below to download now:

Direct Download Other eBooks

Most eReaders offer synchronization features to easily transfer your eBook. For
example, Kindle users can use the Send to Kindle service.

✖
Free Philosophy eBook Collection Available as PDF for 6-7″ and 10″+ screens, and
as ePub for eInk eReaders. Easy send to eReader/Kindle option. Free Download


COSMIC PHILOSOPHY

 * ❓ Introduction
 * ✨ Philosophers
 * ☀ Neutrinos Do Not Exist

 * 📧 info@cosphi.org

Download
 * 1.Introduction
 * 1.1.About The Author
 * 1.2.A Warning About Quantum Computing
 * 2.🔭 Astrophysics
 * 3.Black Holes as Mother of the Cosmos
 * 3.1.The Matter-Mass Relationship Dogma
 * 3.2.Structure Complexity-Gravity Coupling
 * 4.Neutrinos Do Not Exist
 * 4.1.The Attempt to Escape Infinite Divisibility
 * 4.2.Missing Energy as Only Evidence for Neutrinos
 * 4.3.Defense of Neutrino Physics
 * 4.4.History of the Neutrino
 * 4.5.Missing Energy Still the Only Evidence
 * 4.6.The 99% Missing Energy in 🌟 Supernova
 * 4.7.The 99% Missing Energy in the Strong Force
 * 4.8.Neutrino Oscillations (Morphing)
 * 5.🌫️ Neutrino Fog: Evidence That Neutrinos Cannot Exist
 * 6.Neutrino Experiment Overview:
 * 7.🔋 Negative Electric Charge (-)
 * 7.1.The ⚛ Atom
 * 7.2.Electron 🫧 Bubbles, 💎 Crystals and ❄️ Ice
 * 7.3.Electron ☁️ Cloud
 * 8.Quarks
 * 9.The ⚛ Neutron
 * 10.✴ Neutron Stars
 * 10.1.Cold Core
 * 10.2.No Light Emission
 * 10.3.No Rotation or Polarity
 * 10.4.Transformation into Black Holes
 * 10.5.Event Horizon
 * 10.6.∞ Singularity
 * 11.🌟 Supernova
 * 11.1.Brown Dwarfs
 * 11.2.🧲 Magnetic Braking: Evidence for Low Matter Structure
 * 12.Quantum Computing and Sentient AI
 * 12.1.Quantum Errors
 * 12.2.Electron Spin and Order out of Non-order
 * 12.3.Sentient AI: Fundamental Lack of Control
 * 12.4.Google-Elon Musk Conflict Over AI Safety

English🌐عربي /Arabicar🇸🇦Belarusian /Belarusianbe🇧🇾বাংলা (ভারত) /Bengali
(India)bn🇮🇳български /Bulgarianbg🇧🇬中国人 /Chinesecn🇨🇳Chinese (HK) /Chinese
(HK)hk🇭🇰Hrvatski /Croatianhr🇭🇷Czech /Czechcz🇨🇿dansk
/Danishdk🇩🇰Nederlands /Dutchnl🇳🇱Suomalainen /Finnishfi🇫🇮Français
/Frenchfr🇫🇷Deutsch /Germande🇩🇪Ελληνικά /Greekgr🇬🇷Hebrew /Hebrewil🇮🇱हिंदी
/Hindihi🇮🇳Magyar /Hungarianhu🇭🇺bahasa Indonesia /Indonesianid🇮🇩Italiano
/Italianit🇮🇹日本語 /Japanesejp🇯🇵한국인 /Koreankr🇰🇷मराठी /Marathimr🇮🇳norsk
/Norwegianno🇳🇴Persian /Persianfa🇮🇷Polski /Polishpl🇵🇱Português
/Portuguesept🇵🇹Punjabi /Punjabipa🇮🇳Română /Romanianro🇷🇴Русский
/Russianru🇷🇺Српски /Serbianrs🇷🇸Slovak /Slovaksk🇸🇰Slovenian
/Sloveniansi🇸🇮Español /Spanishes🇪🇸svenska /Swedishse🇸🇪Tamil (India) /Tamil
(India)ta🇮🇳Telugu /Telugute🇮🇳แบบไทย /Thaith🇹🇭Türkçe
/Turkishtr🇹🇷Ukrainian /Ukrainianuk🇺🇦Urdu /Urduur🇵🇰Tiếng Việt
/Vietnamesevn🇻🇳
1. Introduction / 1.1. About The Author
‹ Previous | Next › / 1.2. A Warning About Quantum Computing