People of the World, show your vigilance!...
Shall we learn to think
or become extinct like mammoths?
may copy Word-file of article in zip , rar
Translation of the Theory into any language
is possible here
“The most serious need of humans
is the need for the cognition of truth”.
Scientific discoveries in the sphere of paleontology testify that mammoths
became extinct from the Earth, most evidently, in one moment. To all appearance, something of a global nature occurred on the planet,
which caused the environment temperature to suddenly drop by a hundred degrees, accompanied by a huge amount of water precipitations;
and powerful glaciation over their entire habitat followed. In glaciers scientists excavate intact carcasses of mammoths, in whose abdomens
they find well-preserved green grass.
Astronomical research often shows that in outer space stars, planets and galaxies blow up, collapse, disappear and perish. The Sun manifests
the activity of unprecedented intensity. The Earth’s magnetic pole was displaced by more than ten kilometers. Not so much time has passed
since Asia was hit by a devastating tsunami. Recently earthquakes struck Haiti, Chile, Italy, Japan, the Philippines, Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan.
They killed hundreds of thousands of people. Chile's earthquake moved the Earth’s axis by three inches; in 2004 the earthquake in Sumatra
displaced it by almost the same distance.
All this gives cause for scrupulous thinking. The fact that everyone who reads these lines is a Homo sapiens, i.e. "the wise, or thinking,
human", goes without saying. But, what really matters is whether we know how to think. Let us ask ourselves a simple question: What
is thinking? Or, to be more precise: Thinking means doing…what?
What was your answer to yourself? ... Try to ask others the same question.
Some one will give you an everyday-life situation as an example of thinking: “Say, a fellow-passenger traveling with me by the same
public transport treads on my foot. Ouch! What a pleasure it would be, I think, to punch you on the nose!”
The second will give you a vague explanation: “For me thinking is more convenient, when I am lying or when I am relaxed, and
my thoughts wander mixed up with images. Then, all of a sudden, they join each other producing something integral, which, however, does
not necessarily mean, it would be a sentence, or some image. Sometimes you are puzzled at what comes to your head”.
The third will give you a definite, prompt answer:
Thinking means using one's brains, or convolutions.
And if a person, at the moment of mediating upon a problem, starts walking back and forth?
Then it also means using the feet.
To crown it all, we may state, that an individual has received at his disposal a huge resource, but with no directions for use. This is
the reason why this resource is used irrationally, at times even beside the purpose. Working out scientific recommendations for people
regarding which algorithm of thinking would be best to follow in urgent situations may be of great value to each person, as well as may
give way to an unexampled leap forward along the path of human progress. Let me propose, as an example, a working version of such recommendations
of my own, to whose rationality I can personally attest.
So, thinking means formulating questions to oneself, contemplating them in a purposeful, comprehensive manner and finding rational answers
All is simple: formulate clearly and consider the question from every angle, meditate on it.
As is well known, there exist no problems without a solution. However, each individual perceives the world in a way as it reflects
in his sensorium, where sometimes it gets turned to a mirror image. Finding a correct solution may not be an easy task. Therefore, in
considering problematic questions a whole set of iterations is required, i.e. a set of interrelated search successions, including the
return to a preceding step for the purpose of its results’ analysis and verification.
Based on the wise publication of I. Yanushkevich (reputation-ltd, “100 ways of treating problems”, http://www.newsland.ru/Blog/View/user/1021876/id/48122/
- In Russian), as well as on my own experience, we recommend here to use, at minimum, the following steps in working out problems:
to investigate: familiarize, fix, make clear, review, examine, analyze, consider, comprehend, interpret, discuss, evaluate,
to change its state: raise, stir up, awaken, convert, transform;
to change its scope: exaggerate, diminish, bring into correspondence;
to change its form: divide, connect, combine, reconfigure, place in other conditions;
to find: grasp, dig out, pick open, pull out, highlight, refine, understand, prove, describe.
Deliberate performance of these subject and thought iterations will make you advanced every time, however, it may not be a guarantee to
an immediate solution of the question at your first attempt, as in the course of going through each step the core essence may
escape from you, i.e. you may: disregard, neglect, omit, overlook, let it slip by, splash out, muff it, fail, blow it, ignore, delay,
avoid, put off, conceal, close, remove, drown, distract by talking, kill, bury, substitute, replace, reject. Besides, you may appear
biased against the subject of investigation, i.e. you may: like, adore, appreciate, believe, become close or related, disapprove,
Any mistake allowed will produce an effect of a wrongly buttoned coat: if the first button of a coat is wrongly buttoned, then the whole
coat will be out of alignment. If this is the case, then you need “reloading”. That is, you need to go through the whole chain of reasoning
from the beginning, to empty the “main memory” from those accumulations that have led to a “hang up”. This is the most complicated part
of mentation, as something wrongly memorized earlier often stays one’s disaster for good. K. Marx said at his time: “The strongest
fortress is a human head: the traditions of the dead generations weigh like a nightmare upon the minds of the living”. According
to A. Einstein, "the significant problems we face cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them."
Nonetheless, all good things come to he who seeks. When the decision is ultimately found, you will have to show: elucidate,
isolate, separate, taxi out, settle, fix up, share, report, submit, declare, explain, convince, await.
So, Henry Ford (a well-known American engineer, inventor and industrialist, one of the founders of automobile industry) was right saying
that “Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason why so few engage in it”. There are times when we do
not even think over the problems, which our life is dependent on. Even when it comes to the fate of the planet! Attitudes towards these
problems are often exhibited long before we look into them. And instead of analyzing the problems, we just debate emotionally about our
initial feelings, arisen in connection with them.
In this foreword I want to draw attention to the consideration of very important issues relating to everyone. Let us focus on a little
piece of information.
I. Lacatos (1922 – 1974), a well-known analyst in science methodology, came to the following conclusions as a result of his research:
“after 1925 'new’ quantum theory shifted to the ‘anarchist position’, while modern quantum physics, in its ‘Copenhagen’ interpretation,
became one of the major citadels of philosophical obscurantism… Starting from 1925, Bohr and his associates moved to new unprecedented
downfall of critical standards for scientific theories. Reason in modern physics retreated, and the ‘anarchist cult of inconceivable chaos’
Earlier, A. Einstein, a leading authority in modern physics, had been no less accurate: “Quantum theory’s first outstanding progress
failed to make me believe in a dice game as its fundament… Physicists take me as an old fool, but I am convinced, in the future physics
will go in another direction”.
So, what is the outcome?
Probably, everyone is aware that there exists the law of energy conservation and other laws of nature. If this is known to each of us,
how is it then, that people could base the foundation of the entire science of the Universe on the presumption, stating that the Universe
originated as a result of a ‘Big Bang’ out of a microscopic dot, in contravention of all laws of physics without exception.
Even the counteraction of widely reputed scientists was fruitless. Here are the comments on the said hypothesis made by Í. Alfven, a popular
physicist and astrophysicist, awarded the Nobel prize (1970) ‘for fundamental works and achievements in magneto-hydrodynamics and their
efficient application in various spheres of plasma physics’, also awarded the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society in London (1967)
and the Lomonosov Gold Medal of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1971), Member of the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences, London Royal Society
and other academies: “Modern cosmological theory is nothing more than barefaced absurdity – it asserts that the entire Universe originated
at a certain moment in a way reminding the atomic bomb explosion… It seems, in today’s intellectual atmosphere the unsurpassed privilege
of ‘Big Bang’ cosmology is that it presents an outrage against common sense: credo, guia absurdum (‘I believe for it is an absurd’)”.
Murphy's Law states: "If there are two or more ways to do something, and one of those can result in catastrophe, then someone will
Having scrutinized the said "big bang" hypothesis (primeval-fireball hypothesis), the physicists of the European Centre for Nuclear Research
constructed on Earth a Large Hadron Collider (LHC). They have already launched the plant and are now escalating the power, in order to
reproduce and test on the inhabited planet the conditions of the first moments of the Universe origination! Why do they need that?
According to those ardent investigators, they hope ‘in search of unknown phenomena never observed before’ to make, in the
course of ‘experiments, whose results may not be predictable in principle’, ‘such discoveries, which are not yet even conceived,’
in order to ‘overcome a barrier faced by fundamental physics today’. Other scientists, physicists included, show a great many reasonable
concerns, warning that the LHC experiments may lead to the destruction of the planet. Nor is anyone concerned about M. Nostradamus’ predictions,
which quite often have come true. With reference to 2010, there is a warning in his quatrains described as a ‘devilish rage bow’,
which may cause the ‘horror of the terrestrial globe combustion’. He predicts that the whole of Europe will vanish, there will
be neither vegetation, nor animals left, and afterwards, in followup of precipitations, every existing thing on Earth will be contaminated.
Based on the aforementioned method of thinking, the theory (hypothesis) of the Universe origination has been developed . It is available
to everyone on the author’s site in Russian and English, with an option of express translation to any other language. Hundreds of people
have already left their signatures in support of it. In accordance with the law of energy conservation, laws of thermodynamics and other
laws of physics, it clarifies the origination of matter, the phenomena of gravitation, inertia, mass of bodies, light propagation mechanism,
naturalness of the results shown by the experiments of A. Fizeau (1851), A. Michelson and G. Morley (1887), as well as other phenomena,
scientifically unexplained before. But the most important thing is that, based on this theory, we can conclude that colliders may really
provoke the ‘horror of the terrestrial globe combustion’. It seems, that the continuation of the LHC experiments, ‘whose results
may not be predictable in principle’, must be reviewed by NATO and the UN Security Council. As we can instantly disappear, as mammoths.