Reconciling the Irreconcilable
Colonial Society prides itself on the continued evolution of humanity through scientific advancement. We have explored the depths of space, sent probes to all of the major planets, walked on the surface of the moon, unlocked the secrets of atomic energy and mapped the human genome. Through the application of our superior technology we have the ability to destroy millions of human lives in a matter of seconds and change the face of the planet to such an extent that it can be seen from space. We can communicate around the world in the blink of an eye, fly through the air and probe the deepest ocean. We travel faster than the speed of sound and are limited only by the speed of light. Apparently, we have done all of this without the assistance or intervention of divine beings in a matter of a few thousand years.
Where has this science and technology left us? What is the legacy of our record of achievement? Has the human race become more than it once was? If we look at the world around us, the behavior of our children, the condition of our environment, the lives that we ourselves lead, we cannot honestly say that we are more than what we were.
Look at the great works of the ancients. These achievements were attained without the destruction of the environment or the people who lived in it. It is simply not possible to reconcile the world we live in today with the achievements of the ancients. It is also not possible to reconcile the rhetoric of the scientific community or their patrons with the moral implications of modern society.
I am a technocrat and a computer information technology professional. I have worked as a technologist, an engineer, a programmer, designer and software architect. My great love has been the study of science and technology and probing the secrets of theoretical physics. Having studied the teachings of Einstein, Schrodinger, Dirac, and others, I have come no closer to my goal of understanding the realities of the cosmos. This is not to say that I have not come to appreciate the power and beauty of modern scientific thought, because I have. And yet, I must honestly recognize that I am no closer to my goal having studied and mastered these concepts.
In his lectures on The Meaning of Relativity, Albert Einstein states, "The object of all science, whether natural science or psychology, is to co-ordinate our experiences and to bring them into a logical system." This is a noble statement that on its face seems attainable in the context of modern society. One would guess that Professor Einstein thought this through very carefully and presented his ideas with the elegance and conviction of the preeminent scientist of his time. His work however, was doomed to failure. He would end his life marginalized in the scientific community, haunted by the responsibilities for the influence that he wielded and defeated by the task that he saw as the greatest challenge and goal of all that he struggled for.
The record of Albert Einstein's life is an excellent example of the fruits of scientific thought. Albert Einstein was a believer. He believed in a deep underlying reality behind all of the phenomena that we observe. Though he acknowledged that this reality was unknowable, he believed that a mastery of its effects was attainable. When faced with the inescapable realization that everything that his work was based on was completely nonsensical and unreal, he refused to accept it. He had the unfortunate advantage of never having any of his theories proven wrong by scientific observation. To this day, his work is unassailable by virtue of its ability to predict the events that are observed over distances and times that are on the scale of planets, stars and galaxies.
While Albert Einstein was thinking about galaxies at he ever published scale, one of the first papers that hee evey published was contributing to a revolution in the way that science was thinking of matter and energy on the smallest of scales. When the theoretical dust cleared, the scientific community had developed a self-consistent theory of the structure of The problem was, that it made absolutely no sense whatsoever. The theory was so strange that Albert Einsten refused to accept it and spent many years debating those who were the champions of it. His famous opening shot in this intellectual battle was, "God does not play dice." Strangely enough this set of theories known as Quantum Mechanics has been as unassailable as the Einstein's theories of Special and General Relativity. They have never been proven wrong by the results of experiment.
There is another problem presented by quantum mechanics in relationship to general relativity. The formulas just won't work together. If you try to make Einstein's theory of general relativity work on very small scales, it stops making any sense whatsoever. The math just kind of explodes into nonsense. If you try to make quantum mechanics work on a large scale the same thing happens. The math explodes into insanity. The two theories cannot be reconciled.
How can two theories that are so different both be correct? The answer to this question has been the holy called "Grand Unification Theory”. It would unify the theories of the very large and the theories of the very small. It would unify all of the forces of nature and unlock the secrets of gravity and allow humanity to transmute matter and master time itself. Pretty cool, but it is a task that is doomed to failure.
When I first began my initiation in the M'TAM School, I attempted to speak with my Master, Naba Lamoussa Morodenibig, about my great intellectual quest. I just knew that he, of all people, would have the key to unlock the secrets that would allow me to reconcile these two great theories. In a matter of a few minutes he pointed out just one of the simple concepts that underpins all of the mathematics of physics. This would make me re-think all that I had been contemplating for the past thirty years. Negative numbers.
Negative numbers do not exist.
Though we can create them out of thin air and use them to solve problems, they have no basis in reality. When is the last time you held in your hand a Negative Penny! You can think about a negative penny (especially when the bank charges you thirty dollars for one in your bank account) but it does not exist anywhere except in your mind (or the banks computer system, unfortunately).
How can we describe the real world with imaginary ideas? Even when I learned how to create computer systems using the most fundamental devices, I recognized that in order to represent negative numbers, I would have to literally fake the computer logic into representing them. But I was not faking the logic out; I was faking myself out. The only way that this would work is if everyone agreed to represent negative numbers in the same way. I simply joined in on the polite fiction that we all have adopted. Most technocrats don't even know that they are living this little lie, but I do, and any hardware engineer does too, if he or she thinks about it.
Grand Unification Theory can never be solved as long as science continues to base its thinking on flawed or corrupt concepts. These great theories will never be reconciled, but there is something that is even more irreconcilable than these obscure theoretical conundrums that drive well-meaning thinkers to madness. How can we reconcile the fruits of these thoughts with the intentions of the scientists who think them? Einstein was by all accounts a good and well meaning man. When he found out that the Germans were working on creating a bomb that would be based on the release of the binding energy of matter (the atom bomb) he wrote to the president and convinced him that the USA should create this powerful weapon first, and be prepared to use it for the sake of humanity.
Think about what you just read...
"The USA should create the most powerful and destructive weapon known to colonial society and be prepared to use it FOR THE SAKE OF HUMANITY!"
What was he thinking? Can we honestly consider his to be one of the greatest minds of his time?
History tells us that the Germans never succeeded in creating the atom bomb. It was the USA that succeeded and the USA is the only country that has ever used it, twice. More than an hundred thousand Japanese people, dead in an instant each time. Many more died horrible deaths due to injuries and radiation sickness. Can you imagine what it looks like for a human body to be carbonized, burned to death so quickly that nothing is left but a carbon statue? There is no justification for such an act. This, the most obvious of the fruits of science, can never be reconciled with the intentions of any human being. Even the most evil of human intentions would not seek to do such a thing. Only the human mind trying (and failing) to do good could justify such a crime.
Albert Einstein regretted that letter for the rest of his life, but we must recognize that this situation was the result of flawed thinking. The greatest flaw in the thinking of science is the idea that we can divorce ourselves from the divine world.
This was the intent of the great philosophers of Athens who formed the basis of scientific thought. It was their idea that the world could be investigated and understood as something that had absolutely no relationship to the divine. They would build a great tower of logic that would be based on observation and conjecture alone. They turned away from over one hundred thousand years of successful human civilization.
I can only speculate on why people would choose to do such a thing, but it is the people of the world today who must take the decision to reverse it. We must take this decision with the same conviction and tenacity as the philosophers of old who ultimately led so many into the corruption that we live in today. We will be ridiculed and denigrated by our families and our peers, but we must always remember that what we are doing can never be reconciled with modern colonial society.
Science is flawed because it is based on flawed concepts, but logic and reason still have as much validity as ever. We must choose to really THINK about what we are considering before we accept the ideas that have been force-fed to us by our society. The only way that we can find reality is by applying our reason and attaining a relationship with the spiritual and the divine, as our ancestors did for over an hundred thousand years before science came into the collective consciousness of humanity.
I had hoped for many years to reconcile science and spirituality. This was the goal of my life, my "great work" and my legacy to mankind. I now realize that to attempt to reconcile science and spirituality is to attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable. How can you reconcile lies with the truth? How can you reconcile corruption with purity? This new column is the result and the chronicle of my own journey and the journey of others in our attempts to understand the true nature of existence. As a technologist and avid seeker of knowledge, I have come to choose reason as the basis of my search.
I call this column " Science & Reason" because I have learned that spirituality is not a subject that can be approached by faith or belief. It cannot be attained by the application of logic or concepts that are crippled and corrupted by the patronage that molded it. It need not be reconciled with religion or with science. It is reason that is the basis for the teachings of the M'TAM education and reason that is the doorway that leads to a true understanding of the spiritual and the divine. The attainment of spiritual knowledge, wisdom and understanding is the ultimate triumph of reason.