James Putnam Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 My position on the origin and operation of the universe is: I believe we are here by intelligent design. I believe life evolved by intelligent design. I believe there is a cause for the operation of the universe and, it is not represented by the materialist, mechanical, inventions of the mind usually referred to as natural causes. The study of mechanical physics is the detection of patterns in effects involving motion. It does not include learning the physical natures of any causes. Theoretical mechanical interpretations, i.e. natural causes, even if they are assumed to be correct, cannot predict or explain life and intelligence. I believe mechanical causes are artificial, invented, theoretical stopping points that allow theorists, with no proof, to proceed forward as if their theories describe the nature and operation of the universe. I believe these mechanical theories are self-inflicted obstructions, like mental blinders, that hinder our ability to see and learn the true nature of the universe. I believe the nature of the universe, from its beginning, will be understood when we understand the nature of intelligence. Mechanical theoretical physics is not the key to understanding the universe. It is a facade that separates us from observing the real nature of the universe. It clouds our scientific vision so we cannot see the real fundamentals of the universe. Nevertheless, its artificiality is laid bare by its lack of relevance to life and intelligence. Mechanics offers only imagined possibilities of non-life, non-intelligent causes for the patterns found in empirical evidence of the motion of matter. Mathematics is not the language of the universe. It is a tool for the mechanical interpretation of the universe. Whatever meaning becomes attached to our equations is in the thoughts of the theorist. If the theory is wrong then the equations will reflect our wrong ideas and their complications back to us. To overstate the importance of mathematics is to leave us vulnerable to blindly following equations whose interpretations have acquired unreasonable and even absurd meaning. If theoretical physicists do formulate a theory-of-everything, it will represent only a rudimentary interpretation of the operation of the universe. It would be rudimentary by virtue of its being mechanical. Their theory-of-everything would not be a theory of everything. It would be an attempt to unite mechanical theory. It would not advance our understanding of the most important effects of the universe, life and intelligence. James A. Putnam http://newphysicstheory.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAHD Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 Well there's an interesting introduction. I'm shure you'll be a good member of the forums. Bit of advice:- you can put your website in your profile: User CP > Edit Porfile > Optional information: Home Page URL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 Welcome to Hypography! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishEyes Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 FINALLY, you've posted! I've been seeing your name on the 'users who've visited today' list for a while. I even checked out your web site, since it was listed in your file. But I didn't know when you would make your first post. Thanks for finally doing so, and I hope you get involved in some of our discussions. I am also interested in how you came to your conclusions. Did you have a really great professor, are you self-taught, or just a genius? :) Please share!! Again, good to see your post, and we look forward to hearing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.