i) by demonstrating that the "irreducible complexity" of matter and psychophsycal space-time are created from the ‘vacuum’ *ex nihilo* (i.e. directly out of the twelve-dimensional matrix).
ii) Billions of years later, at a yet higher level -- but still from this self-same twelve-dimensional matrix -- the "irreducible complexity" of Life (and so DNA) can be shown to be created.
iii) Finally, the proof that the model represents QUANTUM gravity is that the one-dimensional bits (in the first-dimension) can also be seen to emanate from the same twelve-dimensional template, as "extra-corporeal ‘DNA’" -- i.e. the "irreducible complexity" of language as revealed in printed book-form (e.g. the works of Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Aristotle, Plato, Goethe, Tolstoi, Bernard Shaw, Melville, Hawthorne, Emily Bronte, Jane Austen, etc., etc.).
Ian keeps asking where my eight extra dimensions are. It is very clear from my site that they are to be found here, in the works of these great authors, at the highest level. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the twelve psychophysical dimensions is required to write a book (and each book will still be best elucidated through a bimodal-psya exegesis). What a wonderful tribute to the insight of Sigmund Freud, Robert, that he should have intuited the solution to the riddle of the Sphinx!
I intend to reply to Ian. But for the present, the essence of his note to me dated 25th February was: "The real universe has four dimensions ... If you don't have a good reason to postulate extra dimensions then the fact that your model predicts certain features of the real world could be unimportant."
Hmm. In fact, it is self-evident that the PSYCHOPHYSICAL dimensions I adduce comprise the very quintessence of our existence; and that we cannot do without a single one of them (the aforenamed authors could not have written their books if just one of these dimensions happened to be 'missing').
I know that for some the very thought that they might be at the centre of the (psychophysal) universe is terrifying in the extreme; indeed, I myself have experienced this fear, as I have previously mentioned. But that this PSYCHOANALYTICAL theory is absolutely correct, in every jot and tittle, there cannot now be any doubt. It is quite impossible to get 'gradual evolution' and 'irreducible complexity' at these three extraordinarily disparate levels "by chance" ... UNLESS the model is absolutely correct. Is it?
But the reason for my writing is to copy an article that appeared in yesterday's Sunday Times. It is about the most recent exciting discoveries by Brian Greene, an American physicist, regarding the Theory of Everything. (You will probably have seen the piece, but others will not have.) Greene and his colleagues have got stuck at eleven dimensions; but this is inevitable with a dead mathematical model, isn't it? Poor devils, if only they had started out from the discipline of psychoanalysis -- don't you agree? How fortunate we are to be able to SHARE the same comprehensive model in common.
You see, although I am sure this theory is correct, I could send it to the two authors of the ST article (below), and they might well say: "But how do we know that this is based on real psychoanalysis?" If I reply: "But Albert Einstein was only a Clerk Grade III in the Swiss Patent Office when he published his theory on the photo-electric effect (for which he won his only Nobel prize) and theory of special relativity", they are likely to respond: "But that was real falsifiable science!". What do I say to them, if I fail to get the powers-that-be in the field of psychoanalysis to speak up for the specifically psychoanalytical aspects of the theory?
I spent most of the first five years of my life in air-raid shelters in Highbury, N.5., just up the road from you; and that experience of the blitz plus parents who did not often stop arguing had the kind of effect that perhaps only a Kleinian might understand. Anyway, the following words of Erdmann and Stover (which I've quoted before) always speak to me very powerfully. "A unifying mind-brain theory, a theory acceptable to science and the humanities and religion, must be the center point of a unifying worldview, one able to eliminate the war of world-views within as well as without. Not only would unifying contradictory belief systems lead to peace among human beings by providing agreed-upon basic assumptions about which a meaningful debate could occur; it would also lead to peace within human beings -- and through this inner peace would emerge a more rational approach to the problems themselves" (Beyond A World Divided - Human values in the Brain-Mind Science of Roger Sperry (1991).
Best Regards,
Barron
===============
The Sunday Times (UK), 7th March, 1999
IN SEARCH OF THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING
by Tom Rhodes & Steve Farrar
It was on a windy day in Oxford 14 years ago that Brian Greene first heard about string theory. Walking past the darkened windows of the university bookshop, the young American Rhodes scholar spotted a poster advertising a lecture on the "Theory of Everything". He went.
Within days, Greene was working round the clock to discover more about a concept that seemed to hold the key to the universe’s most intangible secrets: the possible solution to a problem that had eluded even Einstein.
Greene, 36, now a physics and mathematics professor at Columbia University, New York, has continued his research since. Last week, his first book "The Elegant Universe", was published in Britain. It has already taken America by storm.
Not since the extraordinary success of "A Brief History of Time", the best-selling volume by Stephen Hawking, the wheelchair-bound Lucasian professor of mathematics at Cambridge, has a scientific book caused such a stir.
Greene’s recent public appearances have been packed with fans; a signing at the Museum of Natural History in Manhattan was moved to a larger auditorium to accommodate 500 extra people. Sales of the book, in its third American edition after one month, eclipsed those of the latest John Grisham thriller at Amazon.com, the Internet distributor for three days last week.
Greene promotes himself as a happy-go-lucky kind of polymath. At five, he was multiplying 30-digit numbers, but he was no one-dimensional child prodigy. He won academic competitions and judo tournaments. At Oxford, he preferred the company of George Stephanopoulos, former aide to President Bill Clinton, to fellow scientists. Not long ago he performed in a Pinter play. He is an unusually telegenic physicist.
But the truth is there is only one thing that really matters. And that is string theory.
It is the most important development in physics since Hawking first looked into a black hole, and even by Hawking’s own admission, this could be far more significant.
This is a theory that may provide a unified explanation for the existence and behaviour of everything -- from the smallest particles of matter to the movement of the largest galaxies. Greene describes it as the ultimate theory.
In his New York apartment, Greene said nobody guessed that the book would be so successful. But he can understand why people are curious: "When I first heard about the theory I thought, ‘My God, how can anyone work on anything else?’"
In Hitch-hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the computer Deep Thought proposes after millions of years of painful processing that the answer to life, the universe, and everything is 42. It was a joke because the idea that a mathematical formula might solve such a problem seemed absurd. What would happen if it were a real possibility?
This is what string theory offers: a prospect of the ultimate equation. [SEE THE PSYCHOPHYSICAL EXEGESIS OF E = MC^2 ON MY SITE, JUST FOR STARTERS.]
The theory, also known as superstring theory, is regarded as the most complex problem in physics. But on one level it is actually remarkably simple.
Most people are familiar with the fact that matter, from a block of wood to a planet, is made up of atoms and molecules. And they may even know that a close examination of the atom will reveal electrons circling around a nucleus which itself is made up of protons and neutrons. Like a Russian doll, the atom subdivides further into quarks.
Until recently, scientists assumed these were among the essential building blocks that made up the universe. String theory, however, reveals another level of substructure inside quarks and their more exotic cousins -- gluons, photons, and neutrinos: tiny "strings" that vibrate in patterns corresponding to different particles around them.
In the words of Greene, it is as if the cosmos were a "shimmering Aeolian harp". The electron plays one note; the quark another. If one could find a [PSYCHOANALYTICAL] way to listen, one could understand them.
The idea was first mooted in the late 1960s but in the mid-1980s scientists working on both sides of the Atlantic (Britain has produced a number of key theorists) started to produce data which made their peers sit up.
For years, physicists have searched for a theory capable of explaining the operation of the universe at its most basic level and then building it up piece by piece, in an elaborate mathematical jigsaw, until it could predict and explain the behaviour of planets, stars and the universe itself; Einstein dedicated the latter half of his life to the quest for a unified theory. He failed.
The first test for such a perfect theory is that it harmonise the two incompatible pillars of modern physics. On the one hand is Einstein’s theory of general relativity, which describes the behaviour of very large elements in the universe, such as stars and galaxies. On the other is quantum mechanics, which involves the smallest particles such as molecules, atoms and electrons.
Relativity says that space is like a smooth and gently curving rubber sheet; quantum mechanics implies its fabric is unpredictable, like a pot of boiling water.
String theory can reconcile the two [NO, IT CAN *ALMOST* RECONCILE THE TWO! -- TWELVE-DIMENSIONAL BIMODAL-PSYCHOANALYSIS ALONE RECONCILES THE TWO!!] "Everything we know is for the first time painting a consistent theory which could provide a final formulation of how the universe works," Greene said. "It may be 100 or 1,000 years before we have the power to manipulate it [SIC!] but when you really understand how something works, you gain mastery over it."
Although the theory has produced unexpected results, it indicates, for instance, that we do not live in a three-dimensional world as our senses suggest.
The current focus of research points to an 11-dimensional universe that is populated by all kinds of esoterically shaped "strings".
To explain the complexities, Greene likes to imagine a garden hose stretched between two posts. On top of the hose is a tiny ant. From a distance, it seems that the ant can only move right to left on a horizontal plane. Up close, however, the observer can see that the ant can move in another dimension (around the girth of the hose).
In the universe, he says, there can be additional spatial [no, psychoPHYSICAL] dimensions, like the girth of the hose, that are tightly curled up and, at the moment, smaller than anything magnifying instruments can possibly detect.
"String theory requires that beyond there is much more -- extra dimensions that nobody has seen." he said. [NO, SEE THE TWELVE-DIMENSIONAL BIMODAL-PSYCHOANALYTICAL MODEL FOR THESE "EXTRA DIMENSIONS".] "It opens up the possibility of wormholes or tunnels in space." [NONSENSE! Listen to Freud, Klein, Bion, and (last but not least) C.G. Jung on 'space' and 'time'!]
In some far distant future, these may provide the quickest means by which man is able to travel to other galaxies. "They already use them in Star Trek," Greene said. [BEAM ME UP, SCOTTIE!]
The notion that the universe is held together by infinitely thin strings of matter is not universally accepted. One Nobel laureate has asked whether the apostles of string theory should be allowed to "pervert impressionable students" with their lectures.
This is, after all, a field in which no experimental proof exists. The technology does not currently allow confirmation of the existence of the strings. "String theory is a part of 21st century physics that fell by chance into the 20th century," said Ed Witten, one of the pioneers of the new science. Greene says it is as if the Victorians had been presented with a supercomputer and lost the instructions.
But despite the practical difficulties, the mainstream is increasingly coming over to the theory. Michael Turner, chairman of the astrophysics department at the University of Chicago, said it has become the most competitive in science. "It’s our best hope and our first hope for trying to find a theory of everything".
There are more than 10 papers on the subject published each day around the world. Neil Turok, Stephen Hawking’s closest collaborator at Cambridge, said last week that a final proof would be "more important than Einstein’s theory of relativity". [YES, BUT HAWKING HIMSELF HAS SAID: "....IF WE DO DISCOVER A COMPLETE THEORY, IT SHOULD IN TIME BE UNDERSTANDABLE IN BROAD PRINCIPLE BY EVERYONE, NOT JUST A FEW SCIENTISTS. THEN WE SHALL ALL, PHILOSOPHERS, SCIENTISTS, AND JUST ORDINARY PEOPLE, BE ABLE TO TAKE PART IN THE DISCUSSION OF THE QUESTION OF WHY IT IS THAT WE AND THE UNIVERSE EXIST. IF WE FIND THE ANSWER TO THAT, IT WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE TRIUMPH OF HUMAN REASON -- FOR THEN WE WOULD KNOW THE MIND OF GOD." - STEPHEN W. HAWKING (A Brief History of Time)]
Greene, the son of a voice coach and vaudeville performer, is not shy of being the spokesman for a science most of his peer believe is so complex it cannot be understood by ordinary people [SEE STEPHEN W. HAWKING supra]. His book proves them wrong: it is genuinely engrossing and very clear. Hawking may have been the first household name in theoretical physics, but his book was far less accessible.
This is not Greene’s first foray beyond his blackboard. He has helped actor, John Lithgow, star of the television comedy Third Rock from the Sun, to make his dialogue scientifically accurate.
When he wrote The Elegant Universe, some of his peers were disapproving. Greene says their fears are misplaced. It is the equations that matter. "Who needs popular acclaim when the prizes offered by the science itself are so enticing."
Ultimately, string theory may hold the key to solving the greatest riddle in science: how it came to pass that a microscopic speck far smaller than a grain of sand could have given birth to the universe in the instant of the Big Bang. To describe, in other words, the beginning of time.
"It would be the crowning achievement of 2,000 years of scientific investigation, ever since the Greeks first asked what the universe was made of," said Michio Kaku, a string theory pioneer based at the City University of New York.
The first step towards this is understanding the nature of space and time [DOES HE IMAGINE THAT SPACE AND TIME ARE DEAD, MATHEMATICAL ENTITIES?] -- how could everything have been compressed so tightly in the micro-moment before the cataclysmic explosion which gave life to the universe"
Greene has already made some mind-boggling projections. After months of research, he and a colleague recently concluded that space itself can tear and reform.
This suggests, in turn, that the strings have constructed an elaborate illusion and that we live right inside it. Space and time do not exist in anything like the way we imagine. [CORRECT, SEE MY SITE.]
"If we truly understand what time is we could give a satisfying answer to where it came from, why it has the properties it does, and perhaps where it will end," he said. [SEE <www.maximus.dircon.co.uk> FOR THE PSYCHOPHYSICAL ACCOUNT.]
"I believe we are working towards the final step in our multi-thousand-year journey to understand the workings of the universe".
"The Elegant Universe" is published by Jonathan Cape at 18.99 pounds (sterling).
www.dampt.cam.ac.uk user gr public/cs_home.html Cambridge string theory page.
www.wbalfree.org explorations Michio Kaku’s homepage.