Dear Stephen
I think it is because the big bang theory combined with thermodynamics is the
material foundation of the received scientific view and trust in that we are at
the brink of knowing all the fundamental laws of nature including the laws of
the DNA, of language and now the brain. This view is deeply connected to our
view of rationality and the way we develop technology. It is a “view from
nowhere” that does not include subjectivity, phenomenology and hermeneutical
concepts of meaning. It is a disaster for this paradigm if the ground under
their feet is falling apart. They might even be obliged to integrate semiotics,
which most of them considers to unscientific!
Cheers
Søren
Fra: Stephen Jarosek [mailto:sjaro...@iinet.net.au]
Sendt: 4. juni 2014 08:26
Til: Søren Brier; 'Helmut Raulien'; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Emne: The edifice of scientismic cosmology is showing some cracks
Thanks Soren, for the reference to Nicolescu’s work (From modernity to
cosmodernity) – the outlines on google look interesting. While we are on the
topic of modern cosmology (“cosmodernity”?) the following link is relevant:
http://www.nature.com/news/big-bang-blunder-bursts-the-multiverse-bubble-1.15346
Some of us from the biosemiotics forum may remember my occasional post
expressing doubt about the established paradigm as it relates to cosmology. I
have always found multiverse theory to be particularly cringe-worthy. And the
Big Bang model is based on assumptions that have not been established to my
satisfaction. For example, some variation of the “tired light hypothesis” can
account for the redshift of galaxies.
Yes I am aware that the mainstream has “debunked” the tired light hypothesis...
or at least believes it to be debunked, but this is the same mainstream that
entertains multiverse theory – does the mainstream have credibility issues or
what?
But the edifice continues to crack. February it was Stephen Hawking (see
below). Now it’s this. May the crumbling of the edifice continue apace...
though will they listen? Heck no, it’s a religion!
Best,
sj
As per the following excerpt from my email of the biosemiotics forum:
From: Stephen Jarosek [mailto:sjaro...@iinet.net.au]
Sent: Saturday, 1 February 2014 8:46 PM
To: 'biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee'
Subject: RE: [biosemiotics:5060] Re: Peirce's cosmology
2) [...] I am, however, a sceptic of both relativity theory and big bang
cosmology, and my scepticism continues to be borne out in contemporary “fixes”
(dark matter, dark energy, etc, etc) to address a cosmology that is looking
increasingly broken (to me). Stephen Hawking now tells us that there are no
black holes... I predicted precisely this outcome years ago, though my surprise
is that it is Stephen Hawking himself who is now rejecting it! Quantum theory
is inconsistent with relativity theory, and one of them has got to go... exit
relativity theory (taking big bang theory with it), methinks. So that leaves
only quantum theory to contend with.
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
