NEUTRINO EXPERIMENTATION MAY LEAD TO TO IMMINENT PLANETARY COLLAPSE

 

Neutrino experimentation is a very highly Earth-shaking and calamitous test, the far-reaching consequences of which the so-called eccentric experts have no idea, and therefore it is far more risky than nuclear experimentations. In the proposed neutrino experimentation in the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) within the ecologically sensitive zone in India, eccentric scientists are out to subjugate Mother Earth to use her as a ‘guinea pig’. Here I am trying to look into the overpowering role of collective stupidity in this highly catastrophic and genocidal experimentation ringing holocaust bells. Latest example is a report by the portal yournewswire.com, dated February 6, 2015 (http://yournewswire.com/cern-to-attempt-big-bang-in-march-stephen-hawking-issues-warning/ ) that CERN is due to re-open the Large Hadron Collider in March of 2015 in order to recreate the big bang, despite warnings from top scientists such as Stephen Hawking and Neil de Grasse Tyson.  (Materials for this essay is compile from my book ‘Life On Meltdown’ published in April 2014)

 

 

 

 

 

 

The India-based Neutrino Observatory Collaboration is about to construct an underground laboratory in the Western Ghats within the Idukki–Theni charnockyte aquifer. There are several dams quite close to the structure and the area is prone to hydroseismicity. No geotechnical study has been conducted for this project.

A similar observatory in Gran Sasso, Italy, built three decades ago has caused floods and severely impacted the aquifer, leading to a series of tremors and a major earthquake in 2009. The long-term impacts of the project on the aquifer and the reservoirs should be examined before going ahead with the construction.

According to an article in Current Science (http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/104/04/0414.pdf) the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) is a proposed underground facility for conducting research in particle physics and other frontier areas of science. According to the promoters, it will be located in Theni district (77°172 5.323 E, 9°562 46.203 N) of Tamil Nadu (TN), bordering the Idukki district of Kerala. This site falls within the region earmarked by the UNESCO encouraged Madhave Gadgil Committee as the so-called Ecologically Sensitive Zone where all Nature-disturbing industrial activities are forbidden.   It will house a 50,000 tons magnetized iron neutrino detector (MIND) for detection of neutrinos from the atmosphere and from neutrino factories expected to come up by the end of this decade in USA, Europe and Japan. With a finished volume of 236,000 m3, INO will be the biggest underground particle physics laboratory in the world, dwarfing the present one – the 180,000 m3 Gran Sasso National Laboratory (LNGS) in Italy.

About 800,000 tons of rock will be blasted out in 800 days, using about 1000 tons of gelatin – all in an area less than half a square kilometer. The project worth Rs 13.5 billion, is part of the mega science projects approved for the XII Five-Year Plan.

Even though basic science is depicted as absolutely necessary for `progress’ of the nation, science research should not be at the cost of lives and livelihoods of people. The Earth is a `living planet’ with acupuncture points and Idukki is one among them. In a big country like India, finding a safe site for the INO project in an area with low population density and less vulnerability should not be a problem. However, the promoters, funded by corporate interests, insist on the present site.

Now it is interesting to note the highly contradictory visions of the so-called experts and scientists with regard to their ideas on environmental problems and their solutions of proposing to declare the whole region as Ecologically Sensitive Zone, on the one hand, and undertaking the highly Earth-shaking Neutrino blasting Experiment right inside this so-called Ecologically Sensitive Zone. The highly Earth-shaking Neutrino blasting Experiment are genocidely risky even in the most ecologically hard zones.

However, in early 2014, the Government of India allotted Rs 100 crores to the Department of Atomic Energy to start the construction work of the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) in Idukki-Theni districts of Kerala-Tamil Nadu states. INO will be the biggest underground particle physics laboratory in the world and will be used to detect the high-energy collimated neutrino beams manufactured in Fermilab, Chicago. Many concerned scientists had discussed the geological, radiological and environmental impacts and weapon connection of this project at length earlier. It now appears that neutrino-gazing is only a cover story; what they are going to build there is a Deep Geological Repository for Radioactive Wastes (DGRRW), that is, for dumping the nuclear wastes from the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant. (for more on this topic, click on to http://www.asianscientist.com/topnews/indias-neutrino-project-sparks-earthquake-worry-2013)

 

The highly fatal and eccentricity-ridden Higgs-Boson hunt

 

We all know that the 99% modern knowledge of Astronomy is based on theories and imagination! There are still many aspects of Earth herself still to be discovered. Today the world of science is passing through a time when there is a growing unease with the practice of science among scientists themselves – no matter whether it is alone physics among the dysfunctional sciences – that science itself is getting dysfunctional.

In the highly published and exotic Higgs-Boson hunt, some vested interest ‘scientific’ community is reportedly chasing a highly unstable and un-see-able ‘fact’ in the micro world: such is the instability of Higgs Boson that it survives for a ridiculously small amount of time as in “100 trillionth of a trillionth of a second”. We were told that the Boson is not see-able because it disappears so quickly. As a result, graphs and statistics are required to conclude whether or not the Boson has manifested itself.

Today there is sharp skepticism and criticism of the Higgs Boson, the Big Bang theory, the Theory of Evolution, and the like. Science, as many will agree, speaks confidently at one point of time and then, decades later, speaks less confidently about the same matter. An example of this would be Einstein’s e=mc2.

For example, there are theoretical physicists who no longer believe that the Big Bang was the first event to happen and have developed mathematical equations supporting their own, various views of what happened either before BB or instead of it. This is relevant for anyone’s skepticism of the Higgs Boson in that it is believed to have come from the Higgs Field which appeared at the time of the Big Bang. So, if no BB, then no Higgs Field, and if no Higgs Field then what is this boson they have discovered at CERN?

The fact is that there is no regulator/independent scrutiny/assessor/evaluator intrinsic to the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world’s largest and most powerful particle accelerator at CERN near Geneva.

It has been studied as to how, in the early 20th century, the “cheques & dream salaries” produced Quantum Mechanics, describing the behavior of atomic matter in great detail, how the intrusion of politics and big money in the present-day “3rd age” of modern science has effectively neutered the real science.

Secrecy for commercial purposes, including patenting, used to be restricted to industry and to “applied” science in general. Today many individuals as well as institutions have become secretive. That dishonesty has become much more common in science during the last three decades can be amply demonstrated.

Deliberate dishonesty was rare during the first and second ages of modern science. By 1980, however, instances had become sufficiently common that two science journalists could suggest that it is endemic within science: William Broad & Nicholas Wade, Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science (Simon & Schuster, 1982). Their claim to trace instances back for many centuries indicated, however, that fraud had actually been quite rare in times past, becoming disturbingly frequent only in modern times, in biomedical matters in particular (book review, 4S Review, 1 [#3, Fall 1983] 17-23).

Just how prevalent fraud has become in science is also illustrated by a proliferation not only of scholarly journals but also news items, blogs, and websites concerned with the problem. Much of the media still find this astonishing: “A surprising upsurge in the number of scientific papers that have had to be retracted because they were wrong or even fraudulent has journal editors and ethicists wringing their hands” (e.g., New York Times, Editorial – Fraud in the scientific literature, 5 October 2012).

Further, there is the strong skepticism in the air that the goal of Higgs Boson research is nuclear weapon. Here hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on this from governments without any public input or objection and with all the problems of the world being generated by the rich and powerful.

In the midst of all these tumults comes the deadliest of all skepticism, that too, from one of the greatest contemporary theoretical physicists, namely Stephen Hawking, shared his concerns regarding the Higgs Boson and said that Higgs Boson could spell the end of the universe, according to National Headlines of UK on September 8, 2014. In a preface to a new book he contributed to, which is essentially a collection of lectures gives by famous scientists and astronomers called ‘Starmus’, Hawking writes:

“The Higgs potential has the worrisome feature that it might become metastable at energies above 100bn gigaelectronvolts (GeV). This could mean that the universe could undergo catastrophic vacuum decay, with a bubble of the true vacuum expanding at the speed of light. This could happen at any time and we wouldn’t see it coming. The imminent danger of that power potential is that it could end time any time soon”

The field created by the Higgs Boson is believed to give mass to other particles by slowing their movement through the space vacuum. The existence of such particle was first predicted in the 1960s by British theoretical physicist, Peter Higgs, and six other scientists. However, the hypothesis was only confirmed at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN near Geneva in 2012. (More on this topic discussed in Life on Meltdown, Chapter 6 under sub-topics: The Violent And Toxic Half-Truth, Looking For Truth In The Wrong Place And Placing Our Vision At The Wrong Direction, Higgs Boson Hunt, God Part In The Hypothesis, and The Toxic Materials Filled World – pages 259-270)

Some of the above threats, emanating from the half-truth-erected systems,   are relatively well known while others, including some of the gravest, have gone almost unrecognized. An RTI (Right To Information) reply has revealed that cancer caused almost 70% of the 3,887 health-related deaths in the atomic energy hubs across India over the last 20 years, according to a report in Times of India dated September 7, 2014. In all, 2,600 succumbed to cancer in 19 centres between 1995 and 2014. The query to the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), which, like the others, is under the Department of Atomic Energy, had another shocking revelation: 255 employees took their own lives while in harness in the same period, meaning an average of almost one every month over 20 years.

The news of deaths of scientists & technicians cannot be treated lightly. Nuclear power production is associated with higher risks of cancer and unexplained deaths. This clearly reveals the growing ignorance regarding the truth – indeed, the half-truth – surrounding atomic/nuclear energy and radiation; the toxic reality that our scientists and experts “know more and more about less and less”. This speaks volumes for the fast growing and highly frightening mismatch between hi-technology and the human factor that can widely be seen in almost all sectors of the highly pollution threatening hi-tech post-modern society and this fragile planet.

 

Higgs Boson hunt: One of the most peculiar attributes of scientific reductionism is the way in which it proceeds to diagnose a problem. A reductionist would go about gathering data using a response or feedback from source. So in scientific reduction a stimuli-response is used for data collection in research. A similar set of rules are applied to every source to extract a response which reduces the time to extract data if the number of observations are large. The problem with reductionist approach is that there is a tendency to “pre-structure”. That means for every problem a system encounters a standardized and structured methodology to adopt.

In his attempt to understand the universe – to find the ‘Theory of Everything’ – modern man has been on the pursuit of the ‘deepest nature of reality’ ever since the development of modern science or the science of reductionism. Methodological or atomistic reductionism is the simplification of a phenomenon for the purpose of study, typically by breaking it into smaller parts. What followed were revolutions of reducing or splitting the matter into its endless smaller parts and the process now stand reportedly with the minutest subatomic particle, nick-named ‘God particle’ or more precisely the Higgs Boson, which, the scientists claim, contains the ‘code’ or the ‘elementary’ model of the universe.

Can life be reduced to nothing more than an interesting arrangement of atoms and molecules? The prevailing view of science today, sometimes known as reductionism, for example, is that life results from the combination of non-living molecules.

As a discovery that crowns the global scientific community’s most challenging and comprehensive quest for the subatomic particle, rightly regarded as ‘the key to the cosmic riddle’, scientists at CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research), Geneva, announced on 4^th July, 2012 the long expected breakthrough, in the presence of Nobel laureate Peter Higgs (the British physicist after whom the particle is named), and many other scientists. The sighting of Higgs Boson has been described as the biggest leap in physics.

Now, what exactly is a Higgs Boson?

I am not a scientist, let alone any particle physicist, to scientifically explain Higgs Boson and the theory behind it. What I am trying to do here is to expose what today seems to develop as yet another instance of high science hullabaloo – like most storms and devastations that modern science has wrecked on human society, as they have lately been proved. Here I am only looking at this hi-tech gambling through the visions of holistic science which any human, who is not addicted to modernism and who has some knowledge of human history, can understand. History of the industrial civilization, incidentally, is of only about 200 years old – this is less than a split second in the millions of years long wholistic human history taken as a full day.

Fortunately, the global media, especially the scientific journals, were replete with the topic of Higgs Boson since early July, which may help me to briefly explain it in terms of reductionist modern science.

The definition of the Higgs Boson is not using a separate language, but it uses special terms that refer to instances and equations of physical mathematics. The Higgs Boson is not something that any human being ever will be able to see or feel or understand, it is a mathematical construct to make a speculative scientific theory (the Standard Model of Particle Physics) work.

As such, Higgs Boson is a hypothetical massive scalar elementary particle with zero electric charge, zero spin, and mass greater than zero, predicted to exist by the Standard Model of particle physics. The Higgs Boson is postulated to interact with other particles in such a way as to impart mass to them and its existence would explain the masses of the elementary particles. Higgs Boson is the last of the 12 particles that is supposed to have existed for a billionth of a second after the Big Bang, heralding the birth of the universe, according to the theory known as the Standard Model of physics. As the universe cooled, the theory goes, an invisible force known as the Higgs field permeated the cosmos, made up Higgs bosons. Peter Higgs had predicted the particle’s existence roughly 40 years ago and hence the particle is named after him.

The core of the present attempt is based on the ultimate Einstein’s hypothesis: matter is energy. Energy is the inevitable by-product of this massive split up process. We are all familiar with Einstein’s famous E=MC² equation, which basically states that matter is made out of energy. There is a lot of energy – like light, magnetism, nuclear energy – tied up in even the tiniest amount of matter. Science marched on in the ensuing decades and discovered a whole host of atomic and subatomic particles by splitting up matters around us. While natural split up (example, mutation through digestion) produce productive or useful or friendly energy, the mechanical/artificial split up (example, uranium split) produce destructive energy.

The problem with these definitions, which anyone can collect from Wikipedia, is their circularity: one definition leads to another question and then to another definition. It is good that Wikipedia’s definitions are hyperlinked, because the process of discovering what goes on in high-energy particle physics is unending. The result of these quests is a little knowledge, a tiny bit of insight, and a whole lot of dizziness and confusion.

All this becomes even more intriguing when one begins to question what is meant by particle. It is apparent that physicists are not referring to dust motes or grains of sand. Dust motes and sand do not have spin, probability waves, or flavors like up and down.

The realm of particle physics, the word particle is a misnomer. What is actually being referred to is a probability pattern, an abstract mathematical quantity that is related to the probabilities of finding particles in various places and with various properties. A particle is never present at a definite place, nor is it absent. It occupies a realm of transcended opposites mathematically sandwiched between existence and nonexistence. One must learn to think outside the framework of classical logic. For example, this is like hypothetically ‘discovering’ a black cat in a large dark hall, especially when there is no light and no such black cat there.

The tiniest level existence of particle is in the dual form as fermions and bosons. In this theory each boson has a superpartner fermion and vice versa. That is, bosons are males, fermions are females. A bosom particle is also very unstable, decaying almost immediately after its creation, within almost several millionth of a nano second. Here scientists are trying to find the ultimate logic of this dual existence, as to why the opposite parts of this pair is sticking together and not breaking apart. Finding the Boson in some sense is the last bit of that answer of how things are put together. It’s the final piece of puzzle in the ‘bricks and mortars’ of Nature.

In 1960, physicist Peter Higgs had postulated that he would be able to predict what a Boson would be like if he could create one under laboratory settings – literally forging a mini Big Bang. In the artificial laboratory, the ‘particle accelerator would smash beams of sub-atomic particles such as protons virtually at the speed of light, recreating conditions that existed for a billionth of a second after the Big Bang, heralding the birth of the universe. If it exists, the Higgs Boson will prove itself to be an essential and universal component of the material world. Hence, it is nicknamed God particle.

Central to the present discovery is the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world’s largest and most powerful particle accelerator, housed in a massive 27 km circular tunnel, some 175 metres underground near Geneva. More than 10,000 scientists and engineers from over 100 countries, including a team of 150 from India, collaborated to erect the superstructure. The $9 billion machine located outside Geneva has been riddled with problems and delays since its inception in 1998.

The LHC is basically a trial-and-error prone setup to find out if some speculative scientific theories like  the Standard Model of Particle Physics, String Theory, Big Bang Theory, Dark Matter Theory have any merit and can be used for developing new technologies (meaning new tools and new weapons).

Now that the great experiment has been declared reportedly successful – in the midst some growing misgivings that Higgs Boson may also turn out to be a neat mathematical trick – the question remains regarding any practical use for this discovery that costs billions of dollars. The Higgs Boson may lead to new sources of energy. It may lead to nuclear weapons that can fit inside a bullet. Some even say it may lead to a way to destroy the universe. Science is versatile that way, it can be used for good or evil. As is evident since Industrial Revolution, seeing that the history of modern science be any yardstick for the more catastrophic harms and extinction-ridden crises it has produced and brought on mankind than the many ‘benefits’ and ‘helps’. However, in that way, it is better for mankind that the whole hullabaloo may end up as a ‘neat mathematical trick’.

God part in the hypothesis: Can God be discovered in a quark? Did the universe pop out of a proton? How does one go about finding a solution to a metaphysical problem – existence of God – using empirical methods and expensive machinery? Wouldn’t such methods be inherently flawed, doomed to beset with blind alleys and dead ends, to end up as another huge waste of public funds and other resources?

Similar speculations in the past, of course, culminated in Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus, one of the world’s first cautionary tales about the dangers of science unchecked by judicious or ethical concerns. The goal of the Large Hadron Collider is no less Promethean than the ambitions of Victor Frankenstein.

Maybe we have a theory here that is worthy and capable of pursuing ‘The Absolute Truth’ – in its endless splitting and smashing capability. Even if we never ’reach’ The Absolute Truth, which to be sure, we won’t – but we can keep getting closer and closer (or think that we are) even as God/Nature/Creation continually stays a couple of million-trillion moves ahead of us. We have a lot of work still to do in order to reach the ultimate Godly Platform of ‘Perfection’ or ‘The Absolute’. Let’s say we maybe a couple of million-trillion light years away – assuming we don’t backtrack (which we most certainly will, because we are human, all too imperfectly human both in our worst narcissistic, and our worst righteous, capabilities.

In What Is History?, published in 1961 and still a celebrated book, its author Edward Hallett Carr, declared: “Before you study the history, study the historian.” In his view a historian’s background, and especially his social background, virtually determines the history he will write. Now I am introducing below the main ‘backgrounds’ or scenarios, of our present world and its so-called SCIENTISTS, by which the logic behind this Higgs Boson furor may be better understood.

Physics, the king of sciences, got kudos for the discovery of atomic energy. It was Albert Einstein who wrote a “letter of conscience’’ to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, renouncing his lifelong pacifism. He wrote: “Certain aspects of the situation call for quick action… to set up a nuclear chain reaction in a large mass of uranium, by which vast amounts of power and large amounts of new radium like elements would be generated’’ on August 2, 1939 sowing the seed of the bomb that killed thousands of human beings like us in a few minutes on that fateful day in Hiroshima and later in Nagasaki. We do not know what happened to Einstein’s conscience on that day!

Particle physicists have been accused of gambling with the future of humanity since at least the 1950s.

Max Planck, the father of quantum physics, was unhappy when his three Nobel laureate students, Oppenheimer, Neils Bohr, and Enrico Fermi were trying to split an atom. He exclaimed, ‘‘I admire the cleverness of my pupils, how I wish they had used a bit of their wisdom instead.’’ The results of his apprehensions are there for all of us to see. The stock of plutonium waste, from nuclear reactors around the globe, that has accumulated now, if released, could destroy all living things on this planet for millions of years and not even a blade of grass would grow. Do our scientists and rationalists know where and how to safe-deposit this plutonium?

Over the last 40 years, with the ever growing pressures of capitalism on science, big business has inexorably infested the scientific world. Reductionist science, which is largely patronized by the corporate interests, causes and accelerates division, splitting and isolation for energy production.

Here let us examine the basic sciences. Ever since European universities started functioning around the thirteenth century, science was following linear mathematics. Linear mathematics does not always work in this dynamic universe. Let us examine something very simple. Hydrogen is a very volatile atom while oxygen abets volatility. The two atoms combined together, the resulting molecule must be terribly inflammable and volatile! Let us take water (H2O) as a good example and set fire to it. Does it burn? The morale of the story is that the whole need not be the sum total of its parts; rather the sum of the parts is much different from the whole. . This is the essence of non-linear laws of the universe. If one concentrates just on the final outcomes of this kind of research we come across better realization of the futility of this kind of scientific pursuits.

Alfred Nobel discovered the dynamite, one of the milestone studies in chemistry and made millions, but killed millions in the bargain with his dynamite. There is no space here to talk about the dangers of chemical warfare, which is threatening to engulf the world, thanks to chemistry. The whole lot of artificial chemicals produced for pesticides and germicides have at last reached the drinking water table today, and also have already found their way into our system through vegetables and fruits. Hormones have got into us in a big way through chicken legs on the plate and the milk from cows. Today girls, even aged seven-eight start to menstruate and grow breasts! More on the catastrophic dangers of these synthetic nanoparticles and nanotechnology have already been discussed in chapter 4.

Albert Einstein once tried to write a book on physics for non-physicists but could not. Science only grew more and more abstract, specialized and compartmentalized. Today when Stephen Hawking tried a popular book on black hole he has only partially succeeded in terms of popularity for its success was only because of the curiosity attached to the concept of black hole. Scientists are simply unable to generalize and synthesize various ideas, and instead they go on this splitting trend, endlessly.

The main difference between modern science of induction and the holistic science of deduction is that while modern science uses brain to fabricate reality in controlled environment like laboratories, holistic science uses mainly the mind or conscience – wisdom – to understand reality in the natural environment.

When man was not chasing or being unmindful of truth, the ‘box of truth’ used to open all by itself and that was how man lived on his pristine planet for millions of years. Even as wisdom look forward to Nature to deliver its own logical ‘golden eggs’ – as its endless exotic fruits and truths – rationalists or ‘pure logicians’, like the proverbial greedy farmer would kill (split) the ‘the duck that lays the golden eggs’ in the ‘hypothetical’ hope of collecting all the future ‘golden’ eggs in one go.

We have seen, in earlier part of this chapter, that science ignores life in the name of verifiable facts of matter, that it misses out on 95 to 99 % of the workings, laws, and principles of existence, and that, in practical terms, modern science is filtering down to be an ideology of self-delusion and self-destruction.

During their golden age, some physicists thought seriously about what their new discoveries meant for human knowledge itself. As time went on and their reputations increased, fewer of them directed their attentions to that larger question. Werner Heisenberg, one of the most creative physicists of the twentieth century who played a pioneering role in the development of quantum mechanics, was among these few. In 1955, after the revolutionary and dramatic events of World War II, Heisenberg delivered the Gifford Lectures, summarizing what this new physics meant to our knowledge of the world. Some of his sentences were memorable. Among other things he stated that the scientific method has become its own limitation, since science by its intervention alters the objects of its investigations, “methods and objects can no longer be separated.”…. “The object of research is no longer Nature itself, but man’s investigation of Nature.”

Yet there were and are very few scientists who agreed with or were interested in Heisenberg’s epistemological statements during the last 20 years of his life. And Heisenberg too was moving, as were most other physicists, to seek a mathematical, a formulaic solution to the problem of physical knowledge, in pursuit of what is called a Unified Theory of Matter (or, by some, ‘‘a Theory of Everything’’). Another quarter century later, a number of physicists began to encompass absurdities. The decline of physics began.

All of this happened during and after three-quarters of a century when physicists, inventing and dependent on more and more powerful machines, have found more and more smaller and smaller particles of matter, affixing them with all kinds of names. Until now, well into the 21st century, it is more and more likely that not only A Basic Theory of Everything but also the smallest Basic Unit of Matter will and can never be found. Why? Because these particles are produced by scientists – human beings themselves. Every piece of matter – just as every number – is endlessly, infinitely divisible because of human mind. Some scientists will admit this. Others won’t.

Now coming to this costly exercise, the question is whether the entire issue is that much important to us – especially when the whole thing is all about the presentation of IMAGINATION as FACT?

In human history, it is almost impossible to find an epoch of greater insecurity than ours. Planet Earth is in a traumatic turmoil. The case of climate change that is wreaking havoc on the world’s population is just one among hundreds of similar or more catastrophic tip-off crises. The combined services of superpowers, hi-tech leadership of market and sciences, let alone the combined might of the UN and the related supra national agencies, could not put a dent in the problem. Here, why do our scientists fail to address these more vital problems and crises that are right in our front and staring at our face menacingly, unlike the highly invisible, hypothetical and misleading questions as the ‘Higgs Bosons’.

The one category of species that needs urgent treatment are the so-called science geniuses (scientists, exactly) who, in their long experiments and ‘discoveries’ for human progress since about the last 200 years and having already put the whole human society in a highly broken-down condition, and therefore in a highly degenerative mode of ‘development’ and who are now on a hysterical hunt to find out what they call the ‘missing truth’ by further going on in their endless splitting process.

Hunt for the half-truth seems to have gone too far on the endless compartmentalization, fragmentation, specialization of the highly linear path of decay. Here we live in a decaying industrial era. We are mired in the mythic age. And myths will not get the world through its crises. The world was much better off without these scientists for tens of thousands of years.

There is no doubt that modern science, having gone too far on the linear reductionist path and reaching the minutest ‘God Particle, has today fallen into its own BLACK HOLE. But the fear is about the imminent possibility of this Frankenstein juggernaut dragging the whole humanity into this hypothetical abyss, as modern science has already done the same in most other sectors it has taken over. Predictions that the collision of subatomic particles at the LHC might create a black hole and consume our planet, if not the entire universe, owe more to hysteria than to science. Fear has a way of expanding and exacerbating worst-case scenarios. And the history of the reductionist modern science is the creation of this kind of techniques of expanding and exacerbating worst-case scenarios and maintains its leadership through fear and blackmail.

Toxic materials filled world: Man enjoyed a pristine life on the once unspoiled Earth for millions of years without the present type of poisoning of our air, water, food and soil. The Roman Empire was defeated – not by an enemy from outside but by one from within – by the one of sheer ignorance, namely, lead poisoning through their lead water pipes. Modern civilization is badly ridden in the deadly ignorance of tens of thousands of such toxic materials that inflict massive damage to vital human life lines as what modern life style is doing – by the poisoning of our air, water, food and soil and exposing every centimeter of the Earth’s surface to toxic radiation. The world is now filled with one hundred years of toxic industrial by-products that have polluted even the most remote and inhospitable regions of the earth.

Here science is capable of only providing certain superficial solutions to most of these fundamental problems it has created in modern world, like inventing and marketing (costly) oxygen parlors for the air pollution, scientifically ‘purified’ and bottled (costly) water to meet widespread water poisoning, and so forth. Science, as the breeder of problems, solves one problem only after it has sown the seeds of two or more basic problems. Every major scientific invention or discovery has been proved false, half-truth or even toxic later, as is the case of most of the inventions of modern Cartesian medicines.

Dualism of unity in Nature: Now let us examine the logic behind this Higgs Boson hunt in the light of the holistic science or the science of deduction. We all have studied about light as the tiniest particle of matter in the universe which is only a wave of energy and has no mass. The tiniest quantum of light is photon (electromagnetism) which is the most familiar tiniest particle boson. Now this tiniest particle light has a wholesome existence: this energy wave – electromagnetism – is dualist in characteristic as it has positive and negative poles/fields.

All matters exist as pairs – as WHOLISTIC – in Nature. Pair category recognizes the universal significance of the interactive dyad, or apposition of polarities, be it proton-electron, female-male, Earth-Sun, positive-negative, north-south poles of the magnet, matter-antimatter, light-dark, Yin-Yang, Adam-Eve etc. Typically, the ‘Cosmic Egg’ is almost universally conceived as a male-female dichotomy, or division into some type of opposite or complementary polarity. The nuclear pairing is most significant for nuclear physics; the electron pairings for chemistry and the formation of molecules. Water (H₂O) and molecular gases such as H₂, N₂, O₂, and CO₂ are further examples of this simple level of atomic pairing. To be precise, matter exists as male and female in the organic world whereas it exists as matter and anti-matter in the inorganic world.

Now, in the Higgs Boson pursuit, scientists are trying to split and separate the minutest wholistic pairing (now only a hypothetical product) in the atomic world and capture the secret or ‘truth’ in the tiniest matter which, like the explosion fury of nuclear fusion event, may create a much greater catastrophic explosions in the separation process.

Modern science is the ‘particle accelerator’ – smasher – of wholistic matters in Nature: Modern science is the MILL and scientists are the MILLERS that go on MILLING everything wholistic across-the-board in Nature ever since Industrial Revolution Milling or splitting of the wholistic natural pairs in Nature result in the linear development of isolated state of existence of broken pairs as singles, leading to their premature decay and degeneration. Starting of the across-the-board DEGENERATION in Nature is the net consequence of this unprecedented and water-shedding development in the billions of years long natural evolution process. (Please refer Chapter 10: Life on Degeneration)

Degeneration Catastrophe: With the all powerful scientific tools that go on incessantly splitting, isolating and degenerating the wholistic natural world, we are poisoning ourselves at a level witnessed never before in human history. And, as we all know, science is silent on all vital issues facing mankind. The fact that degenerative/genetic diseases have become catastrophic and also identical across species, has already been discussed in Chapter 4.

 

The fast growing gap between the speed of technological advance and human understanding of its implications: Two episodes

Consider now two incidents. A repair crew disconnects a pump from service in a nuclear power plant, carefully placing tags on the controls so that the operators will know that this particular unit is temporarily out of service. Later a minor incident occurs, and as the operators attempt to deal with it, they initially diagnose it in a reasonable, but erroneous way. Eventually, the problem becomes so serious that the entire plant is destroyed: Among the factors hindering their correct recognition of the situation is that the tags so carefully placed to indicate the out-of-service unit hangs over another set of indicators, blocking them from view of operators. Could this have been predicted beforehand? May be. But it wasn’t.

The nuclear power incident is the famous Three Mile Island event, the worst accident in the history of American nuclear power that completely destroyed the power-generating unit and caused such a public loss in confidence in nuclear power that no American plant has been built since. The operators misdiagnosed the situation, leading to a major calamity. But the misdiagnosis was a perfectly reasonable one. As a result, they concentrated on items they thought relevant to their diagnosis and missed other cues, which they thought were just part of the normal background noise. The tags that blocked the view would not normally have been important.

Consider another example of things that generally goes awry in man-machine synchronization. A hospital x-ray technician enters a dosage for an x-ray machine, then realizes the machine is in the wrong mode and corrects the setting. However, the machine’s computer program wasn’t designed to handle a rapidly made correction, so it did not properly register the new value. Instead, it delivered a massive overdose to the patient. Sometime later, the patient died of the overdose. The accident goes undiagnosed, because as far as anyone can determine, the machine had done the correct thing.

Moreover, the effect of overdose doesn’t show up immediately, so when the symptoms were reported, they were not correlated with the incident, or for that matter, with the machine. When the machine’s performance first comes under suspicion, the company which manufactured it explains in detail why such an accident is impossible. The situation repeats itself in several different hospitals, killing a number of patients before a sufficient pattern emerges that the problem is recognized and the design of the machine is fixed. Could this have been predicted beforehand? May be. But it wasn’t.

In the hospital x-ray situation, the real error was in the design of the software system, but even here, the programmer erred in not thinking through all of the myriad possible sequences of operation, something not easy to do. There are better ways of developing software that would have made it more likely to have caught these problems before the system was released to hospitals, but even then, there are no guarantees. As for the hospital personnel who failed to understand the relationship, well, they too were doing the best they could to interpret the events and to get through their crowded, hectic days. They interpreted things according to normal events, which was wrong only because this one was very abnormal.

Over the past fifty years, science has built up a substantial body of experimental evidence that highlights dozens of alarming systematic failings in our capacity for reason. These errors are especially dangerous in an area as difficult to think about as the future of humanity, where deluding oneself is tempting and the `reality check’ won’t arrive until too late. How can we form accurate beliefs about the future in the face of these considerable obstacles?

Now I have pointed out the above two incidents just to bring home the general examples of a sticky situation that mankind faces today. However, what this write-up deals with is not about the problems created by the machines and systems that malfunctions, like the two above examples of machines/systems that malfunction, but about the more fatal and more catastrophic ill-effects or after-effects of the machines and systems that are proving highly detrimental to mankind and environment even when they function perfectly in order, and even when they are managed by the best professional experts and in orderly situations.

Clash of two Mismatches:  The adoption of new technology normally precedes complete knowledge of the repercussions of the technology.  For example, we adopted a new system of raising and feeding animals – only to discover that our system helped spread a prion that decayed brains (including, apparently human brains).  Imagine if prions had spread far more rapidly and had less effect on cattle and greater effect on humans – anyone who has eaten beef would be at real risk of having their brain turn to sponge. 

Likewise, new evidence continues to come to light that cell phones have a greater effect on the brain than was previously thought.  Will two or three decades of frequent use from an early age lead to widespread health problems among our youngest generation?  In a similar vein, there is speculation that cell phones may be the cause of our current bee shortage – a shortage that threatens a number of crops.  We are adopting new technologies every day – and any one of them could have unforeseen effects.  In the worst case scenario, one of these surprises could threaten our civilization.

The predicament facing us is the horrible mismatch between requirements of these human-built mechanical systems and human factors. Machines are mechanical, humans are biological. Machines are rigid and require great precision and accuracy of control. We are compliant. Humans tolerate and produce huge amounts of ambiguity and uncertainty, very little precision and accuracy. The latest inventions of humankind are those of the digital technology of information processing and communication, yet we ourselves are analog devices.

Why do accuracy and precision matter? In our natural world, they don’t. We are approximate beings: we get at the meanings of things, and for this, the details don’t much matter. Accurate times and dates matter only because we have created a culture in which these things are important. Accurate and precise measurements matter because the machines and procedures we have created are rigid, inflexible, and fixed in their ways, so if a measurement is off by some tiny fraction, the result can be a failure to operate. Worse yet, it can cause a tragic accident.

The same story is true of time, of facts and figures, and of accurate memory. These only matter because the mechanical, industrialized society created by people doesn’t match people. In part, this is because we don’t know how to do any better. Can we build machines that are as compliant and flexible as people? Not today. Biology doesn’t build: it grows, it evolves. It constructs life out of soft, flexible parts. Parts those are self-repairable. We don’t know how to do this with our machines: we can only build mechanical devices out of rigid substances like wood or steel or plastic.

People are compliant: we adapt ourselves to the situation. We are flexible enough to allow our bodies and our actions to fit the circumstances. Animals don’t require precise measurements and high accuracy to function. Machines do.