positivism is not marxism
DESCRIPTION
Article about the debate on Positivism and Marxism.TRANSCRIPT
7/17/2014 Positivism is not marxism
http://www.uv.es/~pla/big-bang/posimarx.htm 1/1
POSITIVISM IS NOT MARXISM
Harry Nielsen says that "the method of Marxism is to first study the facts of a subject, and then to draw
out its processes and its connections. This describes not only the method of Marxism but also the method
of science", and on the contrary "The emphasis in modern physics is on deduction from axioms and on the
development of ideas through mathematical logic".
But the statement "first the facts" is not Marxist but Positivist. Real scientist are not naifs, and they approach to
reality through pre-conceptions (or implicit prejudices or explicit theories). And they can only leave a theory
when they have a better theory, with better explanation power of the reality. This is not in the present the case of
the alternative theories to the Big Bang: Alex Nichols is all right.
Harry Nielsen says "Dark matter, together with its counterpart “dark energy”, still remains undetected inany laboratory experiments" .
Well, "dark energy" is not the "counterpart" of the "dark matter". In fact, they have not relation: "dark matter" is
not visible ordinary matter (for example, clouds of dust), and it is attractive; "dark energy" would be a new type
of energy alongside gravitatory, electromagnetic, weak nuclear and strong nuclear energy, and it has to be
repulsive and to increase with the distance, in order to explain the acceleration of the cosmic expansion. This
"dark energy" can produce the Einstein's Cosmological Constant.
Yes, eventual particles connected with "dark energy" has not been detected. And particles connected with
gravitation has neither been detected, but we notice its effects, and also the cosmic effects of the possible "dark
energy".
Attacks to the theory of the Big Bang by philosophical prejudices, from the statement of being "a theory based
on false premises – that time has a beginning" are similar to attacks to the darwinist theory of the evolution
by religious prejudices, arguing that it does not explain every biological facts in order to state for the creationism
or "theory of the intelligent design".
Of course, science cannot state the eternal survival of the theory of the Big Bang. This theory can be substituted
by better future theories. But these theories does not exist in the present. And if they appear someday, they will
appear on the wave of scientific research and inside scientific institutions, not through the crutch of philosophicalprejudices.
Atheistic, marxist and scientific regards from
--
Rafael Pla-Lopezmailto:[email protected]://www.uv.es/~plaNO A LA GUERRA - STOP THE WARALTRA CONSTITUCIÓ ÉS POSSIBLEANOTHER CONSTITUTION IS POSSIBLEVIVE LA FRANCE!DAPPER HOLLAND!