This is a preview (Copyrighted Material)
The number of sections displayed is limited
Are physicists looking for the universal keys in the right place?
Let one consider that if there is something alive in (souled) man, this could only be his immaterial spirit. The material body is lifeless, while the coexistence of these two situations – Matter and spirit – are incompatible. Therefore, it is obvious that the (material) body and the spirit would not be able to coexist.
After strenuous efforts, physicists resorted to the renaming of fundamental forces into fundamental reactions emerging from Matter. However, physicists are wondering if it is about the egg of a cuckoo. For this reason, they are doing research in CERN on the boson Higgs or on other particle of God, in their agonizing effort to discover what actually creates the (non-existent) Matter.
Physicists are not in the position –although they are exceedingly eager- to do something much better. The powerful way of perceiving the world and their working model doesn’t allow them to penetrate in the sanctuary of “To be”. This working model obliges them to be searching for the keys to the universe always under the lamp post. They are seeking the causes of the perceived “phenomena”. The phenomena are actually “results” of the root causes and not the causes themselves. How could then the sought causes be tracked down in the phenomena?
In my 2nd book –physics or metaphysics?- numerous and great surprises are awaiting the physicists as in it, the riddles of space, time, movement, relativity and of other physical and philosophical subjects (topics) are thoroughly interpreted, losing their oracularity in this way. It is self-evident, that all the findings are securely anchored to the three metaphysical laws –as this foundation only takes place with the simple method of clear logic. Only through these three laws the absolute truth can be expressed. (I am talking about the “truth ”and not about “reality” because in the Environment of the Infinity there aren’t any “things” or “objects” so as to be able to talk about “reality” or “objectivity”, when we refer to (this environment). Philosophers must come up with new words which will define the real “to be”.)