Base: Giordano Bruno, selected and introduced by
Elisabeth von Samsonow into "Philosophy Now!" returned by Peter
Sloterdijk, Deutscher Taschenbuchverlag, Munich 1999, ISBN 3-423-30690-4
"About the infinity, the universe and the worlds"
(My antitheses are
coloredly removed). Nonsense is respectively:
The lines (geodetic lines) of the universe would be
straightly lined up into the metric infinity. The universal lines are curved to themselves so that the
universe forms a closed ball as a black hole.
There wouldn't be any area outside the universe. The area outside the universe cannot be
discovered with our experimental means since our coordinate system is closed
into itself.
The limitation of the senses would be the reason of the
impossibility to be able to aware the infinity. One cannot be aware of some. One nevertheless then makes use
of a kind of drawing with which the imagination is completed - these are the highly imaginative
buildings of the mathematics!
Bruno concludes then, if no matter of our understanding
was outside the world, there should be nothing and the nothing should to treat
as an object of the philosophical absurdity. Other empires lie there which obey other laws.
Aristotle already was ahead of Einstein’s ideas by
the fact that he saw the curved world closed into itself. Bruno doubted this
when he made the mistake that he wants to use just his senses for this decision.
A world closed into itself is a
black hole. Every movement leads to a curvature. The metric longest curvature in
the form of the bend of 17.6 billion light years completes the universe. One
simply cannot see this! One cannot measure this. One must take this from the
complex world model which head solutions are right.
In evaluation of Aristotle to Bruno, our world would be
in the nothingness. If one cannot
describe the outside world legally and physically from the inner world, then it
is not such a matter like ours of the residents of this world. However, no
matter is simply "nothing" - nothing which we know here, nothing which
happens here. But something else as this what we know here, other events, as our
laws allow! Therefore the primitively prudent trifle even is a little, namely
something else anyway!
Bruno cannot separate the spaces since he is missing
the fourth dimension in the knowledge. Therefore he thinks to mean that the
space were infinite to itself like the universe. And in this universe space,
there would be infinitely many worlds, with „worlds“ he will have meant our
earth worlds well. For Bruno it is
inconceivable that a space could be limited completely and that it could be able
to separate itself from other spaces of other laws by the compactness of its
coordinate system completely, through
what it would finally become finite.
Bruno thinks, this universe would be perfect by the
fact that the things of the universe would be perfect. This is wrong. All things in the universe are incomplete and
transitory, why they consist of the stable particles by combinations of them.
Just the four stable elementary corpuscles as well as the universe corpuscle are
perfect, because they are absolutely stable, when we don’t know if they even
wouldn’t get support by the outside for stability has to seem as such a
feature and has to be conserved.
Bruno equates the putative trifle with the emptiness
and no location. This is then the statement problem of a finite universe which
would be nowhere. What but prevents
us to explain that behind this universe a different kind of world lies whose
construction we cannot explain with the laws to our manner of the world. With
our imagination nobody impedes us to think God would hold the world in his hand.
Is the ignorance better than imagination? Ignorance is a hole! Must we ignore
God and his outside, so that we more simply can concentrate us to the inside?
No. The people want to philosophize about things which they will never prove
because they lie in the outside. Others will see that they cannot explain this
outside. They will refer to this inside. And they can assume or ignore the
existence of the outside. This has no influence on the outside. It is a purely
human property, to believe something or not. May we actually forbid faiths und
ignore faiths? Doesn't every invention begin with faiths? Doesn't everyone
believes in himself without any experimental certainty? Faith is ubiquitous as a
condition which isn't religious anyway. Religious faith is only a special
condition of faith. The whole inner truth in a head depends on faith conditions
for the most part.
Bruno says his ideas as PHILOTHEO, the universe would
be „altogether infinite, because it had neither edge nor limit still surface. Absolute mistake! By the fact that the
universe is a black hole, it has a radius, a size, a surface and a limit as well
as also an edge. An earthly man knows that he cannot overcome the extremely big
strength against the infinite force to go out of the edge, the limit or the
surface with his spaceship, though! From this the question surrenders for me:
With the knowledge of the Einstein's space curvature, how can today's scientists
still follow Bruno’s fantastic ideas, which do not correspond to any
scientific clues no more, because, at that time, they couldn't follow these?
He then says the universe would „not“ be „all-embracingly
infinite, because every part we can take from it ...is finite." This is the cardinal error, which all the
scientists have run behind to this day uncritically. If the universe was
metrically infinite (because the talk is of edge, limit and surface), then every
any old inner size would be infinite since you define mathematically: An
infinite number divided by any number is equal to infinite!! The philosophical
thought of Bruno is absolutely erroneously and intolerably shared by in this
point.
Bruno regards the universal causality as infinite. But inside the inferred universe, the
finite number of all things is practically a condition for the fact, that the
causality must refer to the finite things, that it has no liberty for something
resulted, but it has the compulsion
to be able to arise something willed by God. This kind of included causality is
a program like in a computer. Only arbitrariness can use the program so that it
opens the causality into the future following coincidental changes. However, who
can make arbitrariness in an inferred program if not one internal nature that
this ability got programmed? If there wasn't the nature of the arbitrariness,
the program would go off from start to end and the repetitions at once eternally.
Bruno couldn't know that the world oscillates and goes off in repetitions with
that. Only living nature - particularly the people - whose reflection ability
produces the arbitrariness is able to change the program and to influence the
causality in the smallest measure. The world however doesn't consist of
causality but of networks and discontinuities. The networking of the
finite leads to the sluggishness effect. Every change of the networking has its
influence on the whole net for welfare. This however doesn't consist of
extremely little bodies but of hierarchical structures whose stock cannot be
changed by the change of a minimal size. Well: it is insignificant in the
parable, whether the macro bodies' man has eaten a blueberry or a strawberry.
This doesn't change him lastingly. The transition of cosmos to cosmos goes
discontinuously because the coordinate system doesn't follow from everything
continuously. Only the primary has an all-embracing coordinate system in the
hierarchy. The elementary, e.g. the proton inside, at its inside, has a closed
coordinate system of its own, otherwise it wouldn't be apparently eternally
stable like also the electron particle. We shake a bag full of protons and
electrons, then in its inside no single particle changes lastingly, so that it
would change into other particles or unstable particles! Even then, if one
destabilizes a proton by core processes, it decays back into itself and into
that energy again.
Bruno has
understood the movements of the stars as rotation systems correctly. Perhaps he
must dramatize, but to explain the universe as infinite, otherwise he would have
been able to list no reasons to take the center away from our earth world.
Bruno also
correctly understood changing the things, like the life makes it. Definitely my
protocosms discovery confirms the principle of the universal life. These
transformations however aren't infinite and not inexhaustible.
Living in a finite
universe sphere, I also can notice that the information cannot be able to desert
this body. Consequently, it has to revolve or to circulate in it in the form of
light and strengths. Therefore the same laws are valid everywhere and we see the
development which follows these laws everywhere. However, we don't see the same
everywhere! A gigantic black hole as rest of the Small Bang lies in the center
of the universe. The cold gasses of the homogeneous Small Bang are stored on him.
About this the first larger collections of matter as stars and small galaxies
lie each to another in homogeneous form almost narrowly. About this the space is
more stretched before bigger galaxies are taken up in still larger distances of
each other. Above this central area, the galaxies form systems in the form of
galaxy heaps whose distances become larger and larger of each other the more you
came to the edge of the universe or the more you may leave the universe
center. The edge of the universe is an area which is held together by the
gravitation of all the masses and which forces these masses that they cannot to
fly out from a precalculated surface while their movement. The orbits of the
masses have to turn around. Only their radiations, their energies can be moved
once again beyond this edge except for the double of the edge radius. There the
radiations curve to the turning back as the inner radiations also turn around.
Returning radiations burn back the objects living there in the meantime into
black holes which fall on curved orbits to the center of the universe then.
After and after all these protocosms fall back to the center with almost light
velocity where the first and last protocosm waits to become united with all the
other protocosms and to contract. After its contraction to its minimum the primary protocosm
expands, ejects the Small Bang, (innumerable miniature protocosms, which cause
the condition of the homogeneity and which give the appearance of the big bang).
On the surface the other protocosms are flying, accelerated by the radiation of
the Small Bang forming the inflation of the universe now.
Everything of this,
Bruno could not know and not include, why his wild philosophizing mostly leaves
the impression that he simply didn't come on because he was missing the facts of
future. The greatest portion of his representations in this respect is simply
wrong.
ARCUS on February
15th, 2005