... of large-scale isotropy." (Birch, P., "Is the Universe Rotating?" Nature, 298:45l, 1982.) Comment. Since Birch's indicators of rotation are positive in one half of the sky and negative in the other, are we really seeing an entire universe rotating about the earth (and humankind) as a center? What an anti-Copernican thought; we are the focus of everything after all! Reference. Other evidence for universal rotation may be found at ATB4 in our Catalog: Stars, Galaxies, Cosmos. This Catalog volume is described here . From Science Frontiers #23, SEP-OCT 1982 . 1982-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 37: Jan-Feb 1985 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects What does it all mean?W.G . Pollard, a distinguished physicist, has written a very philosophical, almost mystical article on the nature of the cosmos. Let us begin with his abstract: "There are several hints in physics of a domain of external reality transcendent to three-dimensional space and time. This paper calls attention to several of these intimations of a real world beyond the natural order. Examples are the complex state functions in configuration space of quantum mechanics, the singularity at the birth of the universe, the anthropic principle, the role of chance in evolution, and the unaccountable fruit fulness of mathematics for physics. None of these examples touch on the existence or activity of God, but they do suggest that external reality may be much richer than the natural world which it is the task of physics to describe." Pollard then elaborates: Example 1. Quantum mechanics, a mathematical formulation of reality, has been extraordinarily successful in describing and predicting many things in the microscopic world. Pollard notes that quantum mechanics contains no hint of God per se and possesses no numinous quality, but its great complexity and multidimensionality provide evidence for "the reality of the transcendent order in which the natural universe is embedded." Example 2. The singularity at the beginning of the universe. Science is at a loss to explain creation and what happened before. (Pollard assumes that creation occurred like most scientists.) ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 56: Mar-Apr 1988 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects The new holism -- but is it whole enough?In the short space of two weeks, the New Scientist printed two articles that confront the obvious complexity of nature. Not only is this complexity persistent under the attack of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, but it seems to actually increase with time. Do formative or guiding principles exist that science does not take into account? The two articles have very different answers. The creative cosmos. "Most people accept without question that the physical world is coherent and harmonious. Yet according to the traditional scientific picture, the Universe is just a random collection of particles with blind forces acting upon them. There is, then a deep mystery as to how a seemingly directionless assembly of passive entities conspire to produce the elaborate structure and complex organisation found in nature." The author of this introductory paragraph, P. Davies, asks, as we all do, "What is the origin of this creative power?" In groping for an answer, he presents first a common example of "blind" organization: the hexagonal convection cells in a pan of heated water. Using for a stepping stone the cooperative action of atoms in a laser, he leaps to the development of an embryo from a single strand of DNA! All such systems are "open"; that is, energy can flow in and out. They are also nonlinear, which means that chaotic, unpredictable action ...

... Of Generalization No one can contest that quantum mechanics has been extremely successful in describing the phenomena of physics. This fact does not mean that it is easy to understand. In fact, there are eight competing "interpretations" of quantum mechanics, none of which is completely convincing. No wonder, because quantum mechanics implies four characteristics of the universe that are seriously at odds with our everyday experience: The quantization of the properties of matter; The probabilistic nature of physical measurements; Entanglement; that is, the mysterious instantaneous connection of objects and processes across immense distances; and Superposition; for example, an electron is both here and there until we look at it! A. Zeilinger, University of Vienna, advances the idea that we can truly understand quantum mechanics only when we discover an underlying principle -- something akin to the concept of energy which led to the quantification of the laws of thermodynamics. (Incidentally. we only think we know what energy is, but it is a human construct and is not a physical dimension like mass or distance.) Zeilinger asserts that the underlying principle of quantum mechanics is the quantization of information. Every inquiry science makes into the nature of the universe, says Zeilinger, can be reduced to a yes-or-no question; i.e ., a 1 or 0. To a scientist, nature is really like a person on a witness stand being hammered by a prosecutor (i .e ., a scientist) with yes-or-no questions. In other words, nature appears quantized because our knowledge of it ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 74: Mar-Apr 1991 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects The Mechanical Paradox In Thrust Faulting In many parts of the world, older rocks are found on top of younger rocks. Ob-viously the Principle of Superposition is contradicted in such situations. Two possible explanations exist for these inverted strata: (1 ) The dating of the rocks is incorrect; or (2 ) Geological forces somehow slid the older rocks over the top of the younger rocks. Few mainstream scientists give any thought to the first possibility because it implies that evolution did not proceed as presently envisioned. (Rocks are often dated by their fossil contents.) So, geologists are left with the problems of sliding great masses of rock over rough surfaces for great distances. Sketch of the forces acting upon a thrust block being pushed by a wedge-shaped driver Low-angle thrust faulting is not a trivial geological process. To illustrate, the Lewis Overthrust in Montana and adjacent Canada involves the shoving of a block of old strata hundreds of feet thick, hundreds of miles long, over younger rock for a distance of possibly 50 miles. In contemplating such overthrusts, one immediately comes face to face with the Mechanical Paradox. Brief-ly, given the coefficient of friction between the layers of rock, the weight of the thrust block, and the mechanical strength of the rock being pushed, it can be shown that pushing the thrust block at the rear edge will crush it long before it begins to slide. For ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 43: Jan-Feb 1986 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects 1500-POUND ICE CHUNK FALLS FROM SKY June 26, 1985. Hartford, Connecticut. "Scientists yesterday tried to determine the origin of a 1500-pound sheet of ice that mysteriously dropped from the sky and smashed into a backyard fence. David H. Menke, directory of the Copernican Observatory and Planetarium, said the ice was probably 6 feet long, 8 inches thick and moving at about 200 mph. 'It's unusual in the fact that it fell from the sky,' said Craig Robinson, curator at the planetarium. 'That does not happen often.' A 13year-old boy was in his backyard Monday with a friend when the ice came 'whirling' from the sky and smashed into the fence about 10 feet away from them." The remainder of the article gives the opinions of some scientists who were contacted about the fall. The director of the observatory thought the ice probably fell off the wing of an aircraft. The director of the American Meteor Society suggested a cosmic origin, providing the ice were pure. An astronomy professor assured everyone that it couldn't be cometary, because the sun would melt particles of ice in outer space. Instead, he opted for strong thunderstorm winds picking the ice up from "somewhere" and dropping it on Hartford! (Anonymous; "1 ,500-Pound Ice Chunk Falls from Sky," Manchester (NH) Union Leader, June ...

... A . Berezin bravely proclaimed that science needs more rather than less research in parapsychology, citing specifically the work of H. Schmidt and R. Jahn. Further, he maintains that the major science journals should be open to high quality research in parapsychology. He wrote: "One cannot exorcise unorthodox claims by repeating mantras that they are 'pseudoscience.'" A second letter from S. Malin begins by noting that physics has undergone two major paradigm shifts during its history: (1 ) Aristotelian to Newtonian physics; and (2 ) Newtonian to contemporary physics. Additional shifts are likely, and the next one might well involve the relation of consciousness to the physical world. In support of his intuition, he quoted from E. Schroedinger's 1958 book Mind and Matter on the "principle of objectivation." "By this I mean what is also frequently called the 'hypothesis of the real world' around us. I maintain that it amounts to a certain simplification which we adopt in order to master the infinitely intricate problem of nature. Without being aware of it and without being rigorously systematic about it, we exclude the Subject of Cognizance from the domain of nature that we endeavor to understand. We step with our own person back into the part of an onlooker who does not belong to the world, which by this very procedure becomes an objective world. [Our] science... is based on objectivation, whereby it has cut itself off from an adequate understanding of the Subject of Cognizance, of the mind. But I do believe that this is precisely ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 39: May-Jun 1985 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects The Coming Revolution In Planetology "Current ideas about the moon appear to be mistaken on two fundamental points. First, at least within certain large classes of lunar craters, internal origin (i .e ., some form of volcanism) predominates over impact; this result raises questions about the reality of the 'era of violent bombardment.'Second, the origin of tektites by meteoric impact on the earth cannot be reconciled with physical principles and is to be abandoned. The only viable alternative is origin by lunar volcanism, which implies the following: continuance of (rare) explosive lunar volcanism to the present time; existence of silicic lunar volcanism and of small patches of silicic rock at the lunar surface; a body of rock in the lunar interior, probably at great depth, which is closely similar to the earth's mantle and which contains billions of tons of volatiles, probably including hydrogen; and the origin of the moon from the earth after the formation of the earth's core." " Editor's Note . This article by John O'Keefe puts forth a viewpoint with which most planetologists disagree strongly. On the ground that a fresh airing of the long-standing discussion on lunar volcanism is appropriate, Eos offers this article, untouched by editors or referees, and awaits reply by readers." O'Keefe's article reviews considerable evidence supporting his two points: for Point One; crater ...

... rapid field changes. Three possibilities have been advanced -- all of them unpalatable to geophysicists: The Steens Mountain rocks are not faithful recorders of the main geomagnetic field. Should this be actually so, the whole field of paleomagnetism, including plate tectonics, is undermined, for it depends upon similar measurements. The earth's molten core can change rapidly, at least in some regions, in response to forces still unrecognized. This, of course, is not really a satisfying "explanation." The dynamo theory of the origin of the geomagnetic field is incorrect. (Coe, R.S ., et al; "New Evidence for Extraordinarily Rapid Change of the Geomagnetic Field during a Reversal," Nature, 374:687, 1995. Merrill, Ronald T.; "Principle of Least Astonishment," Nature, 374:674, 1995.) Reference. More puzzles of the geomagnetic field are provided in: Inner Earth. For details, visit: here . From Science Frontiers #101 Sep-Oct 1995 . 1995-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... of the order of the quotient of the electron time scale and the gravitational fine structure constant; and that only at the present time are physical conditions in the universe favorable to the existence of life-as-we-know-it! The surprising number of coincidences that have been identified suggests that we exist and are aware of the universe around us only when certain coincidences prevail among physical constants. Is "now" a magic moment in the history of the universe during which we have "happened" as a natural coincidence of blindly drifting physical constants, or did some metaphysical force tune the universe specially for us? This long, rather mathematical article is redolent with metaphysics and mystery. (Carr, B.J ., and Rees, M.J .; "The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physical World," Nature, 278:605, 1979.) Comment. One might speculate that at other times different coincidences prevail that would permit life-as-we-do-not-know-it or something equally unimaginable! From Science Frontiers #8 , Fall 1979 . 1979-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... ESP. S. Phillips has now summarized their discoveries in a compact little paper. He concludes as follows: "This article has presented a few examples of the many correlations between modern physics and psychic descriptions of sub-atomic particles published over seventy years ago. Scientists and laypersons alike may find it difficult to believe that Besant and Leadbeater could in some way unknown to science describe the structure of objects at least as small as atomic nuclei, which are about one ten-thousand-billionth of an inch in size. But they cannot in all sincerity dismiss the Theosophists' claims as fraudulent for the obvious reason that they finished their investigations many years before pertinent scientific knowledge and ideas about the structure of sub-atomic particles and the composition of atomic nuclei became available to make fraud possible in principle. "Nor can critics plausibly reject their claim to possess micro-psi powers at its face value and interpret, alternatively, their observations as precognitive visions of future ideas and discoveries of physics. If they had been merely looking into the future, they might reasonably, have been expected to describe atoms or atomic nuclei or both, not more exotic objects formed from two nuclei. The Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom was formulated after they had finished most of their work on MPAs. Yet none of its features can be found in their publications (this, indeed, is the main problem that Occult Chemistry presented to scientists for seventy two years). How can one, therefore, account for the remarkable research of these two people except by admitting that they did, truly, ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 120: Nov-Dec 1998 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects Bye-bye Mercury, and Maybe Mars During the 1950s, the campaign of mainstream science to discredit Velikovsky assured the public that the solar system was the epitome of stability -- wayward planets were impossible. Then along came chaos theory which implied that the flight of a butterfly in Brazil could, in principle, affect weather in Canada. In effect, a slight change in initial conditions could, in the fullness of time, have very large effects. Now, it is generally admitted that the solar system is chaotic after all. Each planet is subject to the tiny, butterfly-like gravitational tugs of the other planets, especially Jupiter. Given enough time, these gravitational nuances can result in the ejection of a planet from the solar system -- and may already have done so in the past! Mercury and Mars are the most vulnerable on a billion-year time scale. In the case of Mercury, its orbit will become more and more elliptical according to computer simulations. Eventually a close gravitational encounter with Venus is possible. This could send Mercury careening off into deep space. The probability of this happening is only 1 in a 1000 over 5 billion years, but it is not zero. Mars might likewise be ejected by a passing nudge from earth. However, this encounter could go the other way. Depending upon the celestial dynamics of the encounter, Mars might gravitationally fling earth out into the Galaxy, and ...

... scatter most of the light and eliminate shadows. To add to these difficult circumstances, JPL-MIPL [Jet Propulsion Laboratory-Mission Image Processing Laboratory] personnel, apparently judging that the controversy over artificiality would not be ended when the actual photo was released, processed the image through two filters having the effect of flattening and suppressing image details. This step is documented at a JPL web site. Here we do image processing correctly and present the results of computer corrections to compensate for the poor lighting and low viewing angle. The actual image shows clearly the impropriety of the JPL-MIPL actions because the visual impression of artificiality persists. However, appearances after a discovery are not a valid basis for drawing conclusions, but only for forming hypotheses for further testing. This is called the a priori principle of scientific method. The 1976 Viking imagery allowed the formation of competing hypotheses, natural vs. artificial origin, and tests to distinguish them. When applied to the high-resolution MGS image of the Face, all artificiality predictions were fulfilled despite a lack of background noise. The combined a priori odds against the natural origin of the Face on Mars are 1021 to 1. (Van Flandern, Tom; "Proof That the Cydonia Face of Mars Is Artificial," Meta Research Bulletin, 9:22, June 15, 2000. Journal address: P.O . Box 15186, Chevy Chase, MD 20825-5186.) Comment. Will conspiracy buffs suspect that something is awry in all this? You bet they will! (Left) The Face as actually photographed by ...

... and professors of biology and geology speak confidently of the fossil record. Darwin may have expressed concern about its incompleteness, but, especially in the context of the creation-evolution tempest, evolutionists seem to infer that a lot of missing links have been found. Some scientists, however, are facing up to the fact that many gaps in the fossil record still exist after a century of Darwinism. One has even dispaired that "the stratigraphic record, as a whole, is so incomplete that fossil patterns are meaningless artefacts of episodic sedimentation." D.E . Schindel, Curator of Invertebrate Fossils in the Peabody Museum, has scrutinized seven recent microstratigraphical studies, evaluating them for temporal scope, microstratigraphical acuity, and stratigraphical completeness. His first and most important conclusion is that a sort of Uncertainty Principle prevails such that "a study can provide fine sampling resolution, encompass long spans of geological time, or contain a complete record of the time span, but not all three." After further analysis he concludes with a warning that the fossil record is full of habitat shifts, local extinctions, and general lack of permanence in physical conditions. (Schindel, David E.; "The Gaps in the Fossil Record," Nature, 297:282, 1982.) Comment. This candor makes one wonder how much of our scientific philosophy should be based upon such a shaky foundation. From Science Frontiers #23, SEP-OCT 1982 . 1982-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... that a falling rock will fracture into pieces, one of which will look human-made. Maybe only one falling rock in 10,000 will fracture "unnaturally;" make it one in 10,000,000; it doesn't matter. Anthropologist D. Meltzer writes: "Of course, no matter how rare the chances, given sufficient time and raw material - Pedra Furada had plenty of both - nature can magnify even the slimmest odds to the point where geofacts occur in detectable frequencies." In this argument, you see how our title "Darwinism in Archeology" came to be. Random events (rock falls or mutations) plus a sorting mechanism (human selection or natural selection) can produce geofacts or new species. This sort of explanatory mechanism can, in principle, explain just about anything! (Meltzer, David; "Stones of Contention," New Scientist, p. 31, June 24, 1995.) R. Dennell and L. Hurcombe, two archeologists faced with the geofact problem at their Pakistan dig, tried to solve it experimentally. They deliberately dropped quartzite rocks from heights onto hard surfaces. They concluded: "While conceding that had we conducted the experiment with a thousand, ten thousand, or a hundred thousand stones, a few might have fractures, we would nevertheless maintain that the chances of any showing multiple, multi-directional flaking and all with bulbs of percussion are as remote as the proverbial monkey typing Shakespeare." (Dennell, Robin, and Hurcombe, Linda; "Comment on Pedra Furada." Antiquity ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 32: Mar-Apr 1984 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects Thou canst not stir a flower, without troubling of a star This poetic title from Francis Thompson tries to express the unity of nature from the smallest to the largest realms. One characteristic of the realms even smaller than that of the flower is the quantization typical of the subatomic world -- that is, microscopic nature. At the human locus in the dimensional scheme of things, quantization is difficult to detect outside the physics laboratory. Daniel M. Greenberger, perhaps with the above title in mind, asked whether quantization might not also exist in astronomy and cosmology -- that is, macroscopic nature. He has applied the principles of quantum mechanics to nature in-the-large where gravitational forces are dominant. (Gravitational forces are negligible in the subatomic world.) His math cannot be reproduced here. Suffice it to say that Greenberger has applied his findings to the absorption lines of quasars and the elliptical rings surrounding normal galaxies. Now, quasars and galaxies are far from atomic nuclei, being vast assemblages of diverse matter. Somewhat surprisingly, his equations are successful in predicting some features of these two macroscopic entities. (Greenberger, Daniel M.; "Quantization in the Large," Foundations of Physics, 13:903, 1983.) Comment. At the very least it is mindstretching to find that complex systems with millions of stars may exhibit quantum effects. With some relief, we note that like microscopic quantization effects ...

... Science Frontiers ONLINE No. 65: Sep-Oct 1989 Issue Contents Other pages Home Page Science Frontiers Online All Issues This Issue Sourcebook Project Sourcebook Subjects How fares benveniste?J. Benveniste is in the news again! The July 20 issue of Nature has a news item entitled emphatically "INSERM Closes the File." (INSERM is the French institute of health and medical research.) Two INSERM committees recommended that Benveniste cease his work on high dilutions; work that seems to support the principles of homeopathy. The directory-general of INSERM, P. Lazar, however, did not endorse these recommendations. Benveniste was asked to look for errors in his experiments that might account for his "unusual results." Without question Benveniste is under the gun and future funding in jeopady. (Coles, Peter; "INSERM Closes the File," Nature, 340:178, 1989.) The headline in Science's news item was less emphatic: "Benveniste Criticism Is Diluted." Here, Lazar is reported as saying that he did not want to stifle research on new ideas and that Benveniste had been treated badly by Nature. Benveniste has not remained silent. In Le Monde , he stated that the results he had published in Nature have now been confirmed by two French teams, two American teams, and one in the USSR. (Dickson, David; "Benveniste Criticism Is Diluted," Science, 245:248, 1989.) From Science Frontiers #65, SEP-OCT 1989 . 1989-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... possibly simplistic observations supporting a much broader view of genetics. Mammalian DNA contains fewer bases than amphibian DNA, even though mammals are considered more complex and "advanced." The implication is that "DNA-as-a -message" must be a flawed metaphor. Wings have been invented at least four times by divergent classes (pterosaurs, insects, birds, bats); and it is very unlikely that there is a common DNA sequence that specifies how to manufacture a wing. The connections between the nerve cells comprising the human brain represent much more information than can possibly be encoded in human DNA. A caterpillar has the same DNA as the butterfly it eventually becomes. Ergo, something more than DNA must be involved. [This observation does seem simplistic, because DNA could, in principle, code for metamorphosis.] Like DNA, this "something more" passing from parent to offspring conveys information on the biochemical level. This aspect of heredity has been by-passed as geneticists have focussed on the genes. Cohen and Stewart summarize their views as follows: "What we have been saying is that DNA space is not a map of creature space. There is no unique correspondence between the two spaces, no way to assign to each sequence in DNA space a unique animal that it "codes for." Biological development is a complicated transaction between the DNA "program" and its host organism, neither alone can construct a creature and neither alone holds all the secrets, not even implicitly." (Cohen, Jack, and Stewart, Ian; "Our Genes ...

... is easily explained by evolution. However, often the newly evolved (or "adapted") bacteria are also resistant to several other antibiotics that work by different mechanisms. All of the multiple gene changes needed for the several different defense mechanisms are controlled by a single site on the same chromosome. (Levy, Stuart B.; The Antibiotic Paradox , New York, 1992, p. 99. Cr. A. Mebane.) Comments. How can bacteria prepare defenses against antibiotics they have not been exposed to? Luck, prescience, or some unrecognized mechanism? In his Ever Since Darwin , S.J . Gould acknowledges that "preadaptation implies prescience although in actuality it means just the opposite! His explanation of "preadaptation is not easy to grasp. "In short, the principle of preadaptation simply asserts that a structure can change its function radically without altering its form as much. We can bridge the limbo of intermediate stages by arguing for a retention of old functions while new ones are developing." From Science Frontiers #124, JUL-AUG 1999 . 1999-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... life must have evolved on a cosmic scale, where there has been more time and much more room for shufflings. (Hoyle, Fred, and Wickramasinghe, Chandra; "Where Microbes Boldly Went," New Scientist, 91:412, 1981.) Comment. Could not the "new" bacteria that appeared in the Mt. St. Helens area, as described in LIFE'S ORIGIN WITHIN THE EARTH? , have drifted down through the atmosphere into the lakes and ponds -- a sort of modern, ever-continuing panspermia? It is interesting to note here that even Hoyle, who has espoused the Steady State theory of the cosmos, seems to require the creation of life followed by evolution. This need for an origin of life is a human philosophical weakness. In principle, matter and life, too, could have always existed. From Science Frontiers #18, NOV-DEC 1981 . 1981-2000 William R. Corliss ...