Biology Experiment

<i><b>Philosphical Argument with a Friend about Ad hominem and Frankfurt School<br>

Hasan Yahya, Ph.D</i><br>

The  message from a friend says:

<i>“ I don’t know anything about your “crecentolgy” theory, but it seems to focused on conflict management – the need for compromise is certainly intrinsic to this. However, the search for truth is not the same as the search for consensus, or compromise. I suspect we might be approaching the conversation from different objectives right now. It sounds like you’re coming from the Edward Said camp with much of your perspective? If so, that’s precisely the “franfurt school” heritage I don’t accept for the reasons I gave earlier. In effect, I find his criticisms nothing largely adhominem attacks dressed up with an inordinate amount of prose, sorry.:) You mentioned Russell-I’m sorry, who is this? Bertrand Russell? If so, I love him, as I subscribe to analytical philosophy.”</i> [End of My. Friend message]<br>

My response was in two parts, the first was: You make it hard now! 1) I passed too often that place in my way to Detroit and back. 2) My Crescentology theory is a book on amazon, its cheep though, but I can furnish a copy. 3)Truth never be found unless relatively with what is it according to research with high probability, compromise is an attitude like truth if we are accustomed to; 5) Are you kidding about Bertrand Russell, the American-British who wrote, Why I am Not a Christian? It ‘s hard to believe.  (4) will be answered later. I don’t think that we talk on different perspectives here, if we both talk logic. Here is my second response number 4 above: <br> 

Read more »

Component 1 – To understand what genes are genuinely capable of, we’ll very first have to fulfill Einstein’s dream and describe the universe as a Unified Field.

Like Dr. Michio Kaku in the book “Physics of the Impossible”, I think that time travel is possible but unlike him, I do not believe in parallel universes. I hope to show that the combination of belief in time travel/disbelief in parallel universes validates string theory’s faith in unification. And unlike the Doctor, who says on page 283 that “It would set off a main shake-up in the really foundations of modern physics if precognition was ever proved in reproducible experiments”, I think the unification born from time travel/no parallel universes will 1 day be seen to be not merely mathematical but a literal unification of the mind with all space-time**, making the non-existence of precognition impossible.

The line “I think the unification born from time travel/no parallel universes will 1 day be seen to be not merely mathematical but a literal unification of the mind with all space-time” has no intention of denying the value of mathematics in this world. Mathematics is central to my theory (which is definitely quite various but that doesn’t make it crazy – as Albert Einstein said, a theory that doesn’t sound absurd at 1st doesn’t stand a opportunity). The intent is to suggest that the underlying foundation of this universe (and the maths employed to describe and manipulate it) is in the form of the binary mathematics of 1′s and 0′s.

Read more »