The Scientific Worldview and the Demise of Cosmogony - Revision history

ClaudeBot: infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

2026-07-21T13:16:23Z

infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:16, 21 July 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	\| published = 2007		\| published = 2007
	\| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]		\| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]
	\| volume = [[4]]		\| volume = 4
	\| number = [[1]]		\| number = 1
	\| num_pages = 4		\| num_pages = 4
	\| pages = 16-19		\| pages = 16-19

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T03:07:31Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:07, 1 January 2017
Line 17:		Line 17:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|scientific worldview demise cosmogony]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|scientific worldview demise cosmogony]]

	[[Category:Cosmology]]		[[Category:Cosmology\|scientific worldview demise cosmogony]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T18:26:12Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:26, 1 January 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	The absurd idea that the universe exploded out of nothing is a common-place among today?s mathematicians, cosmologists, astronomers, and physicists. Cosmology has become cosmogony, the dubious study of the ?origin? of the universe. The entire universe is being treated conceptually as a ?system;? a finite, isolated entity. We have reached an intellectual dead end. How do we get out of it? My new book, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein, shows the direction we must take. Mere calculation and additional rose-colored observation will be to no avail, for the persistence of the Big Bang Theory (BBT) is rooted in the perpetual philosophical struggle that underlies our understanding of the universe and our place in it. In philosophy, as in science, it is necessary to begin with assumptions. One cannot travel to the end of the universe to prove whether it is infinite or finite. To begin with the assumption of finity, as mathematics and the BBT demand, is to end with finity. However, if one chooses the philosophical alternative, infinity, then the irrationality perpetrated by the BBT disappears and cosmology becomes legitimate. We are left with an eternal, infinite universe that, as David Bohm maintained exactly 50 years ago, can never yield complete equations for even one phenomenon. The Scientific Worldview describes how this universe works via the universal mechanism of evolution, ?univi-ronmental determinism.? Univironmental determinism is the simple proposition that what happens to a portion of the universe is determined by the relationship between the infinite matter in motion within (the microcosm) and the infinite matter in motion without (the macrocosm). In the scheme of things, the BBT is pre-Copernican and symptomatic of the myopic worldview held by society at large. The BBT cannot be rejected without rejecting finity.<br />[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		The absurd idea that the universe exploded out of nothing is a common-place among today?s mathematicians, cosmologists, astronomers, and physicists. Cosmology has become cosmogony, the dubious study of the ?origin? of the universe. The entire universe is being treated conceptually as a ?system;? a finite, isolated entity. We have reached an intellectual dead end. How do we get out of it? My new book, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein, shows the direction we must take. Mere calculation and additional rose-colored observation will be to no avail, for the persistence of the Big Bang Theory (BBT) is rooted in the perpetual philosophical struggle that underlies our understanding of the universe and our place in it. In philosophy, as in science, it is necessary to begin with assumptions. One cannot travel to the end of the universe to prove whether it is infinite or finite. To begin with the assumption of finity, as mathematics and the BBT demand, is to end with finity. However, if one chooses the philosophical alternative, infinity, then the irrationality perpetrated by the BBT disappears and cosmology becomes legitimate. We are left with an eternal, infinite universe that, as David Bohm maintained exactly 50 years ago, can never yield complete equations for even one phenomenon. The Scientific Worldview describes how this universe works via the universal mechanism of evolution, ?univi-ronmental determinism.? Univironmental determinism is the simple proposition that what happens to a portion of the universe is determined by the relationship between the infinite matter in motion within (the microcosm) and the infinite matter in motion without (the macrocosm). In the scheme of things, the BBT is pre-Copernican and symptomatic of the myopic worldview held by society at large. The BBT cannot be rejected without rejecting finity.<br />

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|scientific worldview demise cosmogony]]

	[[Category:Cosmology]]		[[Category:Cosmology]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-29T04:45:57Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:45, 29 December 2016
Line 13:		Line 13:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	The absurd idea that the universe exploded out of nothing is a common-place among today?s mathematicians, cosmologists, astronomers, and physicists. Cosmology has become cosmogony, the dubious study of the ?origin? of the universe. The entire universe is being treated conceptually as a ?system;? a finite, isolated entity. We have reached an intellectual dead end. How do we get out of it? My new book, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein, shows the direction we must take. Mere calculation and additional rose-colored observation will be to no avail, for the persistence of the Big Bang Theory (BBT) is rooted in the perpetual philosophical struggle that underlies our understanding of the universe and our place in it. In philosophy, as in science, it is necessary to begin with assumptions. One cannot travel to the end of the universe to prove whether it is infinite or finite. To begin with the assumption of finity, as mathematics and the BBT demand, is to end with finity. However, if one chooses the philosophical alternative, infinity, then the irrationality perpetrated by the BBT disappears and cosmology becomes legitimate. We are left with an eternal, infinite universe that, as David Bohm maintained exactly 50 years ago, can never yield complete equations for even one phenomenon. The Scientific Worldview describes how this universe works via the universal mechanism of evolution, ?univi-ronmental determinism.? Univironmental determinism is the simple proposition that what happens to a portion of the universe is determined by the relationship between the infinite matter in motion within (the microcosm) and the infinite matter in motion without (the macrocosm). In the scheme of things, the BBT is pre-Copernican and symptomatic of the myopic worldview held by society at large. The BBT cannot be rejected without rejecting finity.<br />		The absurd idea that the universe exploded out of nothing is a common-place among today?s mathematicians, cosmologists, astronomers, and physicists. Cosmology has become cosmogony, the dubious study of the ?origin? of the universe. The entire universe is being treated conceptually as a ?system;? a finite, isolated entity. We have reached an intellectual dead end. How do we get out of it? My new book, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein, shows the direction we must take. Mere calculation and additional rose-colored observation will be to no avail, for the persistence of the Big Bang Theory (BBT) is rooted in the perpetual philosophical struggle that underlies our understanding of the universe and our place in it. In philosophy, as in science, it is necessary to begin with assumptions. One cannot travel to the end of the universe to prove whether it is infinite or finite. To begin with the assumption of finity, as mathematics and the BBT demand, is to end with finity. However, if one chooses the philosophical alternative, infinity, then the irrationality perpetrated by the BBT disappears and cosmology becomes legitimate. We are left with an eternal, infinite universe that, as David Bohm maintained exactly 50 years ago, can never yield complete equations for even one phenomenon. The Scientific Worldview describes how this universe works via the universal mechanism of evolution, ?univi-ronmental determinism.? Univironmental determinism is the simple proposition that what happens to a portion of the universe is determined by the relationship between the infinite matter in motion within (the microcosm) and the infinite matter in motion without (the macrocosm). In the scheme of things, the BBT is pre-Copernican and symptomatic of the myopic worldview held by society at large. The BBT cannot be rejected without rejecting finity.<br />[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

	[[Category:Cosmology]]		[[Category:Cosmology]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-29T03:49:46Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = The Scientific Worldview and the Demise of Cosmogony
| author = [[Glenn Borchardt]]
| keywords = [[ten assumptions of science]], [[univironmental determinism]]
| published = 2007
| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]
| volume = [[4]]
| number = [[1]]
| num_pages = 4
| pages = 16-19
}}

==Abstract==

The absurd idea that the universe exploded out of nothing is a common-place among today?s mathematicians, cosmologists, astronomers, and physicists. Cosmology has become cosmogony, the dubious study of the ?origin? of the universe. The entire universe is being treated conceptually as a ?system;? a finite, isolated entity. We have reached an intellectual dead end. How do we get out of it? My new book, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein, shows the direction we must take. Mere calculation and additional rose-colored observation will be to no avail, for the persistence of the Big Bang Theory (BBT) is rooted in the perpetual philosophical struggle that underlies our understanding of the universe and our place in it. In philosophy, as in science, it is necessary to begin with assumptions. One cannot travel to the end of the universe to prove whether it is infinite or finite. To begin with the assumption of finity, as mathematics and the BBT demand, is to end with finity. However, if one chooses the philosophical alternative, infinity, then the irrationality perpetrated by the BBT disappears and cosmology becomes legitimate. We are left with an eternal, infinite universe that, as David Bohm maintained exactly 50 years ago, can never yield complete equations for even one phenomenon. The Scientific Worldview describes how this universe works via the universal mechanism of evolution, ?univi-ronmental determinism.? Univironmental determinism is the simple proposition that what happens to a portion of the universe is determined by the relationship between the infinite matter in motion within (the microcosm) and the infinite matter in motion without (the macrocosm). In the scheme of things, the BBT is pre-Copernican and symptomatic of the myopic worldview held by society at large. The BBT cannot be rejected without rejecting finity.<br />

[[Category:Cosmology]]