Integral Science

The very important and well-known harmonic series i.e. 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 +... is especially associated with Pythagoras who reputedly found in these simple fractions definite links with the manner in which musical notes sound. This pattern of the simple natural fractions, in particular, seemed to correspond perfectly with - what we would recognise as - a harmonious sequence of notes and thereafter it has become known as the harmonic series. So we have here a very clear link as between simple mathematics and musical harmonics. Subsequently it was shown that this series (and its associated series where the dimensional power of each fraction itself can vary from 1 and ultimately alter over the entire range of complex numbers) has intimate connections with the prime numbers! So in a certain valid sense there is music in the primes. So just as we are accustomed to give a wave form to musical sounds likewise there is a wave pattern associated with each prime number. Indeed we could go...

In a post on my blog on the Riemann Hypothesis, I referred to a new Mathematical series on the BBC hosted by Marcus du Sautoy called "The Code". I have already seen several such programmes with du Sautoy who I enjoy watching for his enthusiasm and obvious love of the subject. I also enjoyed greatly reading his books "The Music of the Primes" which played a large role in pushing me on to develop my own own insights on the primes. More recently I read his later book on Symmetry - an area in which he specialises - "Finding Moonshine". Now the code that du Sautoy is referring to to relates to the quantitative use of numbers that is so wonderfully successful in helping to clarify so many of nature's secrets. However Mathematics equally contains another marvellous code in the qualitative interpretation of these same numbers. However, seemingly there is as yet little or no recognition of the potential significance of this latter code. I have frequently explai...

I was reading Paul Allen’s “The Idea Man” recently which I found fascinating on several levels (especially with respect to his relationship with Bill Gates and the founding of Microsoft). Clearly both Allen and Gates were extremely talented individuals with a special gift for programming. What I did not realise however was the extraordinary amount of work that they put in before eventually leading to the founding of Microsoft. In Jungian personality terms, whereas Gates would have been an S, Allen clearly was more of an N type. Though the relationship between them was never easy, the combination of Gates’ pragmatism and ruthless realism allied to Allen’s creative vision and shrewd reading of technical developments effectively led to the founding of Microsoft. However as regards the survival of the fittest with respect to Microsoft ultimately only one person would assume control which inevitably meant Bill Gates. In the end whereas Gates was intent on making Microsoft his life, ...

As always we can provide a complementary psychospiritual account of the phenomenal activity (corresponding to what in physical terms lies below the Planck length). As we have discussed before with increasing contemplative activity, phenomena of form take on a more transparent elusive quality. This ultimately relates to the dynamic manner in which the basic polarities of experience increasingly interact. So - quite literally - experience becomes of a higher dimensional nature. Ultimately therefore the relationship between polarities becomes so rapid that it is no longer possible - in explicit terms - to follow their movement. So at this stage it is thereby not possible to provide a coherent refined rational interpretation of the subtle inter-relationships implied by these dimensions. In other words as the very attempt to provide such an interpretation would itself interfere with the dynamic level of interaction already attained, one must abandon formal interpretation in any explicit man...

I have often marvelled at the enormous significance of the numbers 1 and 0. Not alone are these sufficent in quantitative terms to provide a means for potentially encoding all information, but likewise in qualitative forms they provide the basis for holistically encoding all transformation processes. I have even suggested in previous blogs that there is a strong case for suggesting that all reality is number through the dynamic interaction of both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of these digits (that ultimately represent both form and emptiness). It is therefore tempting to extend this perspective to both the prime and natural numbers to see clearly how they are involved at a more detailed level of investigation in creating the reality that we share. This is also intimately related to the problem of explaining how original emptiness (which is likewise the potential for all phenomenal form) gives rise to the continually changing universe that we inhabit. So emptiness (that holi...

In physics the Planck length is the order of magnitude of the vibrating strings that form the physical particles. It is then postulated that it is not meaningful to probe below the Planck length. However it seems to me that this masks a considerable degree of philosophical confusion with respect to the very notion of strings. For if it is not in principle possible to give physical meaning to distances less than the Planck length which is incredibly small at about 10^(- 20) the size of a proton, then how can strings themselves be given a physical meaning? As I have stated before there are inherent philosophical difficulties with the manner in which physicists attempt to define strings. Indeed from one valid perspective, what they are attempting to do is to achieve the reductionist fallacy of defining the ultimate constituents of the universe in merely quantitative terms (devoid of any qualitative meaning). So from this perspective physical particles (which necessarily have qualitative ...

I have already written quite a lot regarding the conceptual difficulties surrounding String Theory. As it stands I would say that from a qualitative perspective, it presently does not constitute a meaningful physical interpretation of the Universe. However once some of its key ideas are properly decoded we can begin to appreciate what it really is all about. Conventional Science is heavily based on the linear rational approach which is thereby 1-dimensional in qualitative terms. This attempts to give one unambiguous direction to understanding e.g. interpretation that is (merely) objective, space distances that are (merely) positive, propositions that are (merely) true etc. Not surprisingly - in terms of this approach - the most fundamental constituent of matter i.e. the string is viewed likewise as 1-dimensional in quantitative terms. Common sense notions of the nature of space and time likewise reflect the 1-dimensional qualitative approach. Here we view 3 dimensions as spatial (with ...

One issue that needs to be clarified here is the relationship as between number and other mathematical symbols.  On the one hand it would be valid to maintain that the fundamental nature of reality (as phenomenally revealed) is mathematical. However I would also contend that it is more precisely related to number. Basically I would maintain that number in fact implicitly requires other key mathematical symbols and relationships. For example I have frequently identified 1 with the (straight) line and 0 with the circle.  So there are intimate links here as between key numerical and geometrical notions.  Also the important operations of addition and subtraction are again implied by the most basic of numbers (1 and 0).  The very recognition of form in any context implies 1. So for example if one distinctly recognises an object this implies the corresponding inherent recognition of 1. So without such recognition one would not be even able to differentiate objects in exp...

In the last contribution I suggested that - what we know as - reality at its most fundamental level represents a simple binary digital number system operating interactively in both an analytical (linear) and holistic (circular) manner.  The importance of this digital system in analytical terms is well recognised in IT technology where it has the capacity to successfully encode all information.  The corresponding importance of this same system in holistic terms - though not as yet recognised - is that it has the capacity to successfully encode all transformation systems i.e. as the dynamic interaction of both linear and circular logic.  However the most startling revelation comes from the incorporation of both systems whereby reality itself in all its diverse and complex intricacies (both physical and psychological) thereby represents both the encoding and decoding of the combined two systems.  So one way of looking at the nature of reality is as a dynamic computer pr...

It should be apparent in the first instance that number is essential in quantitative terms. The very notion of quantity implies some form of numerical ordering! What is not however so obvious is the realisation that number is equally essential from a qualitative perspective where it plays a holistic role complementary to what is accepted in conventional (quantitative) terms. To appreciate this important point we can initially confine ourselves to the two most fundamental numbers 1 and 0. As we know these two digits can be used - as in modern computers - to successfully encode all information (in quantitative terms). However what is not commonly appreciated is that the same two digits can be potentially used to encode all transformation processes when used with respect to their holistic qualitative meaning. So, as I have repeatedly stated, 1 in this context relates to the linear use of logic in the analysis of form and 0 to its corresponding circular use (as an indirect expression of t...

Following on my last contribution it would be instructive to demonstrate futher important points regarding the "true" nature of physical reality (through corresponding reference with the complementary psychological connection) . In physical terms we have (partial) physical objects that dynamically exist through interaction with a (holistic) dimensional framework of space and time. In corresponding psychological terms we have (specific) perceptions that dynamically interact with (universal) conceptual classes. So for example a specific electron perception necessarily interacts with the universal conceptual class of electron. In other words an electron as quantitatively perceived thereby must relate to the qualitative concept of "electron". The psychological dimensional framework of each electron in space and time is provided through its conceptual appreciation. However as we can have many different types of object perceptions, likewise we can have many correspon...

It seems that the BBC has now found their answer to Stephen Hawking through their own series “The Wonders of the Universe” hosted by Professor Brian Cox. Now Brian Cox, a former member of the 90’s pop band D-ream is something of a wonder himself as he looks far too young to be a professor. However there is no doubting his communication skills and his undoubted knowledge and love for his subject. Indeed I found his programme demonstrating how elements here on Earth have emerged from the high temperature processes within stars compelling viewing as it clearly showed how we are all truly children of the Universe (and indeed of the original Big Bang which is believed to have started it all)! The following programme "Falling" on gravity proved of equal interest as he showed how this mysterious force is responsible for the structure of all phenomenal forms in the Universe. Initially he confined himself - which accepting that it was not fully satisfactory - to Newton’s concepti...

I have just been completing four articles that seek to outline a new vision of physics (which I believe is greatly needed at the present time). For very good reasons, I do not share the present optimism regarding physics, which seemingly assumes that at last we are on the threshold of unveiling a Theory of Everything . Rather than finding this illusionary TOE, we are about to painfully discover how limited in truth is the present scientific framework! So as I would see it comprehensive scientific understanding will require at least three great phases. What we are witnessing therefore at present is but the peaking of the first great phase that is geared merely to the specialised quantitative interpretation of physical reality. However properly understood science possesses an equally important holistic qualitative aspect (which I refer to as Integral Science) . However this aspect has remained for all practical purposes entirely undeveloped. In fact most scientists would have g...