2012daily's blog
Krauss Misunderstands Energy in General Relativity to Argue against GOD (by Philip E. Gibbs): Abstract: Stephen Hawking has a new book “Grand Design” out that claims God did not create the universe & Cosmologist Lawrence Krauss writing in the Wall Street Journal says that Hawking does not go far enough, but his argument is based on a misunderstanding of energy in general relativity. I'll explain why. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/57
GOD & Hawking (by Matti Pitkanen): Abstract: For reasons stated below, I do not find the classical physics view about God selecting initial conditions very interesting. Hawking should find himself more demanding challenges than killing for all practical purposes already dead God of classical mechanics. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/58
Song to Immanence & Transcendence (by Huping Hu): Abstract: This poem/lyrics is an expansion and adaptation of Rumi’s poem Universality. It represents the author’s hope for his fellow creatures’ transformation to arrive, in various degrees, at various aspects of the Immanence and Transcendence of Scientific GOD.
In a Nutshell (by Vaughn Balding): Abstract: It is my assertion that when we are accessing the past, when we remember an event from the past, our brain uses the quantum field to visit the actual event and likewise when we experience thoughts and ideas, conscience and inspiration, intuition and synchronicity, we are accessing actual events in our pasts and futures. Our brain is a wonderful transmitter and receiver of information, an interface with the quantum field. It is not a closed repository of stored information. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/60
How This Place Works (by Clifford White): Abstract: Our mind occupies a mixture of phase space. So, What's on your mind depends on which level of phase space your consciousness is oriented towards. This mind is not your consciousness since Consciousness goes to sleep but mind is always one phase space or another. What our consciousness does or has the ability to do is to choose which phase space the mind will be oriented towards. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/48
The Templix of GNOS (by Yale S. Landsberg): Abstract: In this essay I describe the generalities and many specifics of something I refer to as “The Templix” (Template Matrix), along with something else very basic to it that I call the “T-Ching”. The T-Ching brings together Eastern and Western notations and notions of iterative Change, whereas, The Templix simultaneously differentiates and integrates them. Both emerge via seeing the concept of Change as a matter of energetically and recursively, logically going deeper and deeper into basic concepts in order to cognitively come to higher and higher world views of them. The results of this very old, and occasionally disorienting process of thought, one which does not guarantee progress, is that asking dumb questions can be seen to occasionally produce provocative answers to basic questions related to cognitive science, quantum mechanics and computer science, and other sciences – as well as clearly explain enigmatic statements and claims within a wide spectrum of religious and philosophical literature. By the end of my essay, a way of revealing the nature of “God and Nature's Operating System” has emerged for consideration. As well as a proposed “circumstantial morality” that may be guarding and guiding all of reality: a universal ethos that is not satisfactory to anyone, but a schema for categorizing musts and must nots, shoulds and should nots that is a lot better than nothing – in the paradigm-changing way that a semi-conductor material was, and is and ever will be a poor medium for resistors, capacitors and inductors, and yet is always and in all ways an excellent “God Send” compromise for all of them. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/49
GOD, Scientists & the Void (by Himangsu S. Pal): Abstract: This is a collection of my short essays dealing with the issues of existence of GOD, circular reasoning, the void & myth about creation from nothing. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/50
‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) [by Peter Beamish]: Abstract: Here is described a second form of time. Here, it is also suggested that ‘ALL (real) TIME IS NOW TIME,’ otherwise past and future temporal concepts of the two types are scalar labels called ‘Conventional timetags’ and ‘Rhythmic Timetags.’ Additionally one’s mind is described by a new, seemingly important, dynamic concept called an ‘Essos’ (pronounced Eee-sos) and containing both one’s ‘Conventional Now’ and one’s ‘Rhythm Based Now.’ It is suggested that we use an upper case ‘TIME’ for the sum of these two mental concepts. Described also is the seemingly very important ‘Mental Vector Process’ or ‘MVP’ which appears as the Most Valuable Player, for all living organisms, in The Game of Life. The book preparation, entitled Dancing With Nature, from which this paper is a highly edited form, suggests the merging of the science of physics with the sciences of biophysics and biochemistry. http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/91
Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies (by Peter Hankins): Abstract: I run a blog entitled “Conscious Entities” at http://consciousentities.com which is devoted to short discussions of some of the major thinkers and theories about consciousness. This is another small collection of my writings on consciousness which the editor of JCER very kindly selected to appear here. It contains my short accounts of six major thinkers in consciousness studies including Daniel Dennet, John Searle, David Chalmers, Colin McGinn, Roger Penrose & Gerald Edelman. In reading the books of these writers, I found I had views which were very clear, but also completely contradictory; so these pieces are written in the form of dialogues between a character I call Bitbucket (represented by the abacus) who is a hard-line materialist computational reductionist, and Blandula (the cherub) who leans towards dualism and mysterianism. (The last few words of each article, by the way, are actually quotes from the subject himself.) http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/92
Consciousness, Mind and Matter in Indian Philosophy (by Syamala Hari): Abstract: I am very impressed by the striking similarity of concepts in the Guest Editorial by G. M. Nixon in JCER V1(6) to those of ancient Indian Philosophy on thought, time, and Consciousness. I drew only a few examples from the article to depict the similarity but I am impressed by the elegancy of expression and profoundness of concepts in the whole article. http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/87
Consciousness, Lack of Imagination & Samapatti (by Alan J. Oliver): Abstract: Let me say from the outset that in all of the material written on the issue of consciousness I have found little, if anything at all, about the presence of imagination and what part it might play in a discourse about consciousness. In view of the ubiquitous nature of imagination, at least for most people, this is hardly surprising. For people like me, lacking that faculty, it is quite a different story. Over a lifetime trying to understand why most people find the way I think a bit odd, autistic even, I have had to find my own answers, only to find that what the absence of an imagination can provide as an answer for me just deepens the puzzle. http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/88
Interactions among Minds/Brains: Individual Consciousness and Inter-subjectivity in Dual-Aspect Framework (by Ram L. Pandey Vimal)
Abstract: Previously in (Vimal, 2010a), we argued that: (i) it is necessary to link experience and function aspect of consciousness with the related structure or neural correlate(s) of consciousness (NCC); and (ii) non-conscious experiences are equivalent to relevant proto-experiences at various levels because both are precursors of conscious subjective experiences aspect of consciousness. Here, in terms of dual-aspect dual-mode PE-SE (proto-experience/subjective experience) framework (Vimal, 2008b, 2010d), we argue as follows: (I) Non-experiential consciousness is a part of functional aspect of consciousness and consciousness is more fundamental than experience because experiences and functions are two aspects of consciousness. (II) Therefore, one could argue for the continuum of consciousness, experience, and function. (III) The origin of individual consciousness could be a ‘universal background of awareness’ that is equivalent to virtual reservoir (where potential SEs are stored in superposed form, and a specific SE is selected via matching process) in the PE-SE framework. The interaction between zombies is relational but it would not lead to an individual consciousness in each zombie. The origin of intersubjective consciousness is the interaction between individual consciousnesses, i.e., interaction between ‘I’, ‘you’, and ‘she/he/it’, i.e., interactions between minds/brains and their environments. (IV) A specific SE is selected during matching process and conscious experience constructs the perception or SE of external objects. (V) The dual-aspect dual-mode PE-SE framework is consistent with classical double-aspectism in the sense of inseparability of mental and physical aspect, whereas it is consistent with double-perspectivism in the sense that the mental aspect is known via first person perspective and the physical aspect is known via third person perspective. (VI) Our conventional reality is subject inclusive or mind dependent reality (MDR), whereas the subject exclusive or mind independent reality (MIR) remains always unknown even in so called samadhi state of mind that claims to have direct perception (or consciousness as such), which may or may not be close to MIR. (VII) The hard problems are Types 1-3 explanatory gaps: Type-1 explanatory gap is how can SEs emerge from non-experiential matter (emergentism) or identical with respective neural states (identity hypothesis of Type-B materialism)? Type-2 is how can SEs pre-exist? And Type-3 is how can physicists claim that MDR is MIR? The hard problem of panexperientialism is how can experiences create the matter of mind independent reality? (VIII) The predictive behavior (developmental rhythmic call and response behavior) and then existential crisis contribute towards the emergence of consciousness. On the basis of evolution, (a) individual consciousness in rudimentary form might have occurred about 540 mya during Cambrian explosion, (b) symbolic, language-using, Homo sapiens (tribal-centric consciousness ) emerged at around 150 kya, and (iii) self-centric or object-centric consciousness might have emerged at around 10 kya. (IX) (a) The existential crisis, biological crisis, and predictive behavior can be interpreted as the motivation/cause of the formation of appropriate neural-networks, and (b) self (SE of subject) occurred in brain when self-related neural-network were formed and necessary ingredients of consciousness were satisfied. (c) The co-evolution and co-development (neural Darwinism) of mind and brain and the dual-aspect-dual-mode PE-SE framework are necessary in a complementary manner for physicalism and panexperientialism. Inter-subjectivity can modulate the attributes of already created/occurred individual-self in self-related neural-network. http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/89
Tzu-hsia said, A gentleman changes thrice. Looking up to him he seems stern; as we draw near, he warms; but his speech, when we hear it, is sharp.
第十九
BOOK XIX
1. 子張曰：「士見危致命，見得思義，祭思敬，喪思哀，其可已矣。」
Tzu-chang said, The knight that stakes his life when he sees danger, who in sight of gain thinks of right, and whose thoughts are reverent at worship, and sad when he is in mourning, will do.
2. 子張曰：「執德不弘，信道不篤，焉能為有？焉能為亡？」
Tzu-hsia said, Goodness, clutched too narrowly; a belief in the Way which is not honest; can they be said to be, or said not to be?
3. 子夏之門人，問「交」於子張。子張曰：「子夏云何？」對曰：「子夏曰：『可者與 之，其不可者拒之。』」子張曰：「異乎吾所聞：『君子尊賢而容眾，嘉善而矜不能。』我之大賢與，於人何所不容。我之不賢與，人將拒我，如之何拒人也！」
The disciples of Tzu-hsia asked Tzu-chang whom we should choose as our companions. Tzu-chang said. What does Tzu-hsia say? They answered, Tzu-hsia says, If the men be well for thee, go with them; if they be not well, push them off. Tzu-chang said. This is not the same as what I had heard. A gentleman honours worth and bears with the many. He applauds goodness and pities weakness. If I were a man of great worth, what could I not bear with in others? If I am without worth, men will push me off: why should I push other men off?
4. 子夏曰：「雖小道，必有可觀者焉；致遠恐泥，是以君子不為也。」
Tzu-hsia said, Though there must be things worth seeing along small ways, a gentleman does not follow them, for fear of being left at last in the mire.
5. 子夏曰：「日知其所亡，月無忘其所能，可謂好學也已矣！」
Tzu-hsia said, He that each day remembers his failings and each month forgets nothing won may be said to love learning indeed!
6. 子夏曰：「博學而篤志，切問而近思，仁在其中矣。」
Tzu-hsia said, By wide learning and singleness of will, by keen questions and home thinking we reach love.
7. 子夏曰：「百工居肆，以成其事，君子學以致其道。」
Tzu-hsia said, To master the hundred trades, apprentices work in a shop; by learning, a gentleman finds his way.
8. 子夏曰：「小人之過也必文。」
Tzu-hsia said, The small man must always gloss his faults.
9. 子夏曰：「君子有三變：望之儼然，即之也溫，聽其言也厲。」
Tzu-hsia said, A gentleman changes thrice. Looking up to him he seems stern; as we draw near, he warms; but his speech, when we hear it, is sharp.
10. 子夏曰：「君子信而後勞其民，未信則以為厲己也。信而後諫，未信則以為謗己 也。」
Tzu-hsia said, Until they trust him, a gentleman lays no burdens on his people. If they do not trust him, they will think it cruel. Until they trust him, he does not chide them. Unless they trust him, it will seem fault-finding.
The Duke of Chou said to the Duke of Lu, A gentleman does not forsake kinsmen, nor offend his great lieges by not using them. He will not cast off an old friend unless he have big cause; he does not ask everything of anyone.
微子第十八
BOOK XVIII
7. 子路從而後，遇丈人，以杖荷蓧，子路問曰：「子見夫子乎？」丈人曰：「四體不勤， 五穀不分，孰為夫子！」植其杖而芸。子路拱而立。止子路宿，殺雞為黍而食之，見其二子焉。明日，子路行以告。子曰：「隱者也。」使子路反見之。至，則行矣。子路曰：「不士無義，長幼之節，不可廢也。君臣之義，如之何其廢之？欲潔其身，而亂大倫。君子之仕也，行其義也，道之不行，已知之矣！」
Tzu-lu, who was following behind, met an old man carrying a basket on his staff.
Tzu-lu asked him, Have ye seen the Master, Sir?
The old man answered, Thy four limbs are idle, thou canst not sort the five seeds: who is thy Master?
And he planted his staff, and weeded.
Tzu-lu stood and bowed.
He kept Tzu-lu for the night, killed a fowl, made millet, gave them him to eat, and presented his two sons.
Tzu-lu left the next day, and told the Master.
The Master said, He is in hiding.
He sent Tzu-lu back to see him; but when he arrived he had gone.
Tzu-lu said, Not to take office is not right. If the ties of old and young cannot be thrown off, how can he throw off the liege's duty to his lord? He wishes to keep his life clean, but he is unsettling the bonds between men. To discharge that duty a gentleman takes office, though he knows beforehand that the Way will not be kept.
8. 逸民：伯夷、叔齊、虞仲、夷逸、朱張、柳下惠、少連。子曰：「不降其志，不辱其 身，伯夷叔齊與？」謂柳下惠、少連：「降志辱身矣；言中倫，行中慮，其斯而已矣！」謂虞仲、夷逸：「隱居放言，身中清，廢中權。」「我則異於是，無可無不可。」
Po-yi, Shu-ch'i, Yü-chung, Yi-yi, Chu-chang, Liu-hsia Hui and Shao-lien were men that hid from the world.
The Master said, Po-yi and Shu-ch'i did not bend the will or shame the body.
We must say that Liu-hsia Hui and Shao-lien bent the will and shamed the body. Their words hit man's duty, their deeds hit our hopes. This we can say and no more.
We may say that Yü-chung and Yi-yi lived hidden, but were free of speech. Their lives were clean, their retreat was well weighed.
But I am unlike all of them: there is nothing I must, or must not, do.
9. 大師摯適齊，亞飯干適楚，三飯繚適蔡，四飯缺適秦；鼓方叔，入於河；播武， 入於漢；少師陽，擊磬襄，入於海。
Chih, the Great Music-master, went to Ch'i; Kan, the conductor at the second meal, went to Ch'u; Liao, the conductor at the third meal, went to Ts'ai; Chüeh, the conductor at the fourth meal, went to Ch'in. The drum master Fang-shu crossed the River; the tambourine master Wu crossed the Han; Yang the second bandmaster and Hsiang, who played the sounding stones, crossed the sea.
10. 周公謂魯公曰：「君子不施其親，不使大臣，怨乎不以。故舊無大故，則不棄也。無 求備於一人。」
The Duke of Chou said to the Duke of Lu, A gentleman does not forsake kinsmen, nor offend his great lieges by not using them. He will not cast off an old friend unless he have big cause; he does not ask everything of anyone.
11. 周有八士：伯達、伯适、仲突、仲忽、叔夜、叔夏、季隨、季騧。子張
Chou had eight knights: Po-ta and Po-kuo, Chung-tu and Chung-hu, Shu-yeh and Shu-hsia, Chi-sui and Chi-kua.
The Crisis in Theoretical Physics: The Problem of Scientific Truth (by Temur Kalanov): Abstract: The problem of truth in science - the most urgent problem of our time - is discussed. The correct theoretical analysis of the generally accepted foundations of theoretical physics is proposed. The principle of the unity of formal logic and rational dialectics is a methodological basis of the analysis. The main result is as follows: the foundations (i.e. classical thermodynamics, the special theory of relativity & quantum mechanics) contain logical errors. The existence of logical errors is irrefutable proof of incorrectness of the theoretical foundations and means that theoretical physics enters the greatest crisis. The crisis in physics leads inevitably to the general crisis in science. The crisis as effect is explained by existence of the global cause: the crisis is a collateral and inevitable result of inductive method of knowledge of the Nature. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/68
In Response to Kalanov: A Crisis for Physics or Limitations of Logic? (by Jonathan J. Dickau): Abstract: The paper by Temur Kalanov “The Crisis in Theoretical Physics: The Problem of Scientific Truth” asserts that “The existence of logical errors is irrefutable proof of incorrectness of the theoretical foundations” of Physics. While Kalanov raises some legitimate concerns about how we have come to found our current theoretical edifice, it is my view that he is incorrect to assert that this constitutes disproof. His work may show that some of our cherished notions have a flimsy basis, if we believe his construction, but this is not the same as showing that these notions are incorrect. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/69
In Response to Kalanov: How Many Truths Exist in Science? (by Alexander G. Kyriakos: Abstract: During past five thousand years, scientists have used all existent approaches. Owing to their subjectivism the scientists turn each time from one approach to the other. Old theories were replaced by the new theories, which were more appropriate to modern stand of spirit of the people. Thus, what is necessary to be done now, if a modern scientific theory is not true? Is it sufficient to correct the Bacon law or is it needed something else? I think that first of all it is necessary to construct a new theory and then publish the new theory in an Open Journal System such as the Prespacetime Journal. And then maybe much patience is needed within the next 100 years to wait until the scientific society accepts this new theory. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/70
Nonlinear Theory of Elementary Particles: II. Photon Theory (by: Alexander G. Kyriakos): Abstract: In this article the photon theory is examined from the point of view of the nonlinear theory of elementary particles (Kyriakos, 2010). http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/59
Block Universe – According to the Formalism d = v x t Space-time Is Timeless (by Amrit S. Sorli, Davide Fiscaletti, Dusan Klinar): Abstract: According to the formalism d=v*t fourth dimension of space-time is spatial too. In formula X4=i*c*t symbol t represents numerical order of material change i.e. motion running in a space. Flow of time is flow of numerical order of material change that we measure with clocks. Fundamental unit of numerical order t0, t1, t2...tn of material change is a Planck time tp. Numerical order of material change tn-1 is “before” numerical order of material change tn equivalently as natural number n-1 is “before” natural number n. Flow of physical time is a flow of numerical order t0, t1, t2..tn of material change and runs in a timeless 4D space. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/60
Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics: A Critical Survey (by Michele Caponigro): Abstract: This brief survey analyzes the epistemological implications about the role of observer in the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. As we know, the goal of most interpretations of quantum mechanics is to avoid the apparent intrusion of the observer into the measurement process. In the same time, there are implicit and hidden assumptions about his role. In fact, most interpretations taking as ontic level one of these fundamental concepts as information, physical law and matter bring us to new problematical questions. We think, that no interpretation of the quantum theory can avoid this intrusion until we do not clarify the nature of observer. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/61
Relativistic Effects of Relative Velocity of Material Change Start with Massive Particles (by Amrit S. Sorli): Abstract: Constancy of the light velocity in different inertial systems and areas of space with different gravity implies that relativistic effects of relative velocity of material change start with massive particles. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/62
“Crackpots” Who Were Right II (by Philip E. Gibbs): Abstract: This is the second instalment of the series entitled “crackpots” who were right. It is a collection of my postings at http://blog.vixra.org . The cases described so far are just the tip of the iceberg. These are the scientists whose work eventually led to a paradigm shift in their discipline and in several cases the work was recognised with a Nobel Prize, though not always for the scientists who made the initial breakthrough. For every scientists who makes such a major advance in science there are many others who take smaller steps. Undoubtedly there must be many other independent scientists whose work was so completely rejected and ignored that it never garnered any recognition and has long been forgotten. Science suffers through such neglect and that is why we think viXra.org is so important. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/40
“Crackpots” Who Were Right III (by Philip E. Gibbs): Abstract: This is the third instalment of the series entitled “crackpots” who were right. It is a collection of my postings at http://blog.vixra.org. The scientists covered are Stanley Prusiner, Georg Ohm, Robbert Goddard, Carl Woese, Galileo Galilei, Barbara McClintock and J Harlen Bretz. These are the scientists whose work eventually led to a paradigm shift in their discipline and in several cases the work was recognised with a Nobel Prize, though not always for the scientists who made the initial breakthrough. For every scientists who makes such a major advance in science there are many others who take smaller steps. Undoubtedly there must be many other independent scientists whose work was so completely rejected and ignored that it never garnered any recognition and has long been forgotten. Science suffers through such neglect and that is why we think viXra.org is so important. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/63
“Crackpots” Who Were Right IV: Conclusion (by Philip E. Gibbs): Abstract: This is the fourth and last instalment of the series entitled “crackpots” who were right. It is a collection of my postings at http://blog.vixra.org. The scientists covered in this series are the scientists whose work eventually led to a paradigm shift in their discipline and in several cases the work was recognised with a Nobel Prize, though not always for the scientists who made the initial breakthrough. For every scientist who makes such a major advance in science there are many others who take smaller steps. Undoubtedly there must be many other independent scientists whose work was so completely rejected and ignored that it never garnered any recognition and has long been forgotten. Science suffers through such neglect and that is why we think viXra.org is so important. http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/87
Relativistic Energy-Momentum & Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (by Alexandru C. V. Ceapa): Abstract: The relativistic energy-momentum relationship is far more subtle than it seems to be at a first sight. As concerns the relativistic quantum mechanics, its underlying equations were deduced from, or in relation with the relativistic energy-momentum relationship by means of the principle of correspondence. Without a clear physical role and meaning associated, the matrices of the Dirac equation seemed to confirm that the principle of the physical determination of equations would not be proper to the new quantum mechanics. Therefore, we have to search for genuine physical information in the terms of the underlying equations of the relativistic quantum mechanics. This information concerns a level of structure of matter “even below that on which nuclear transformations take place.” http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/41
Subquantum Dynamics & Wavefunctions (by Alexandru C. V. Ceapa): Abstract: The undulatory phenomenon that de Broglie associated to the quantum particles seems basic for their mathematical description by wavefunctions. The Dirac wavefunctions y contains in their structural elements information on the constituents of the Dirac particles responsible for, or at least in interrelation with, the undulatory phenomenon. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/42
Subquantum Model, Caianiello’s Phase Space, Space-Time Geometry & Ether (by Alexandru C. V. Ceapa): Abstract: In the standard model of particle physics, the relativistic field theory disregards the essential subquantum information. We have built model of elementary particles consisting of two systems of subquantum particles spinning in opposite directions. We further discusss here the subquantum model, Caianiello’s phase space, space-time geometry & ether. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/43
Toward an Exciting Rebuilding of Modern Physics: Conclusion (by Alexandru C. V. Ceapa): Abstract: By disclosing the objective reality behind Einstein’s manipulation of equations in [1], we provided for the first time a rationale for the revealed knowledge. It is this rationale that scientists should give in their works for a true advancement of science to be achieved. It should be understood that science and religion are not antinomies, as they seemed to be in the break of science. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/44
Epilogue: From ‘Physics Policy’ to ‘Physics as Policy’ (by Alexandru C. V. Ceapa): Abstract: Leading physicists have become aware of the resulting lack of finality of most projects, which has scaled up the crisis of modern physics risen from the physicists’ attitude toward the role played by revelation in the act of science and the resulting uncontrolled mixture of revealed and rational knowledge in their minds. But, instead of identifying the causes of the crisis which we pointed out in Prologue), and eradicating them as we partly did in this work, they have opted for substantial funds by launching big, expensive projects with feeble experimental results. ‘Physics policy’ should define the contest for funds turning research projects into main contributions to progress. The turning of ‘physics policy’ into ‘physics as policy’ may be followed by a boom on the world market of novel technologies and products with maximum of profit for mankind. http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/45
