Ontological Mathematics Versus Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity

Download or read book Ontological Mathematics Versus Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity written by Dr. Thomas Stark and published by Magus Books. This book was released on with total page 111 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: You support a principle of relativity. Why not a principle of absolutism? You support the abolition of a spatial aether. Why not support the existence of a non-spatial aether? You believe that things can be stationary. Why not that they must be in a state of absolute motion? You believe that space and time are the proper stage in which reality should unfold. Why not in a Singularity of non-space and non-time? Is that not a mind, even a "Mind of God?" Don't you want to hack the Mind of God? You think everything should be about particles in a void, as the ancient Atomists said. Why not waves in a Singularity? Waves are dimensionless "atoms" with an atomic number of zero. You think everything should be about matter, with atomic number of one and greater. Why are you so afraid of zero? Why does it torment you so? Why shouldn't everything start with light – massless, and maximally length contracted and time dilated? You think everything should be about science. Why not about mathematics? You think everything should be about the senses. Why not about reason and logic? Should the scientific method start with exercising the senses or exercising reason? What kind of "rational" subject begins by claiming that something else – sensing – is more important than reasoning? Welcome to science! Science told you a story about sensory stuff. And you believed it. Why shouldn't concepts be truer than percepts? Why shouldn't mind be truer than matter? Why shouldn't reality be a self-solving intellect rather than a lurching, mindless body, blind and dumb? Why are you so scared of belonging to a smart universe? Why do you prefer reality to be stupid? What does that say about you? Why is eternal and necessary mind rejected in favor of temporal and contingent matter? Why is a priori thinking rejected in favor of a posteriori sensing? Why shouldn't light be the master of the show? The light of reason. Light is reason. It's the carrier of the cosmic intellect. Do you have good reasons for what you believe? Do you really even know what you believe? Why shouldn't mathematics have an ontology? Why shouldn't mathematics exist as light, as waves, as dimensionless sinusoids with zero mass and atomic number zero? Why are you so horrified by reality being made of mathematics, existing as light? There is only one subject that has the capacity to provide a definitive answer to existence. That's mathematics. All the rest is shinola.