|
An Essay
Mutual Influence of the
Metaphysical and Physical
By: Ziauddin
Ahmed
Reviewed By: Javed
I. Chaudry
A claim has been made by the
author that the essay is not a scientific paper but relies heavily on
common sense, derived logic and some conjecture.
It is true,
it is not a scientific paper. Of course, every paper does not have to be
scientific but at a minimum, a logical coherence of its statements must
lead to a viable conclusion. I had difficulty in finding the cohesion in
various parts of the section. Well established areas of science and
philosophy appear to have been misused or misinterpreted in order to arrive
at the desired outcome.
For example, the triad of body,
mind and soul is a metaphorical description used to describe and discuss
certain human behavioral aspects or characteristics. The word ‘mind’ refers
to the capacity of human thought process and a rough measure of
intelligence and decision making capability while the word ‘soul’ refers to
a spiritual concept derived from religious thought. Both the words are
intangible and far from matter such as the ‘body’. Mind and Soul are not
physical entities, hence considered metaphysical.
The essay states ‘soul’ as an
offshoot of the Universal Cosmic Force that seeps into all living bodies.
This would include the plant life I suppose and I wonder what view the
biologists would hold on this claim?
While the essay supports the
famous mass-energy relationship, E = mC2, and yet ‘energy’ is considered to
be an intangible and non-physical entity which I have difficulty to
support.
The essay more or less revolves
around the premise that energy is an metaphysical entity which lead the
author to the relationship: T = kE,
Where T stands for Thought, E for
energy.
In my opinion this represents the
climax of incoherent thought process, highly inconsistent with any known
science, logic or rationality. Pure conjecture of the type, for example, as
given below:
Since 0 x 1 = 0
And 0 x 2 = 0
Therefore 1
= 2
It is not my intention to
discourage imagination and the affinity to think out of the box, but in
doing so, one cannot tear down the basic facts of life which have already
been established beyond a shadow of doubt. The term ‘energy’, for example,
has already been defined as a property of matter, the capacity of matter to
do work. It cannot therefore be considered an intangible or a non physical
entity. The essay is imploding under the weight of self contradiction
rendering it an utter bewilderment of words.
The proposed relationship: T = kE is in clear contradiction of the well
know physics law of ‘conservation of energy’ which states that energy
cannot be created nor can it be destroyed. In the mass-energy relationship, E = mC2, the
mass m is being transformed into energy, E, which is not the case in the
relation T = kE.
Where the energy E is being created out of nothing or out of T (Thought)
which has no mass or energy.
I am afraid, I find this essay a
collection of disjointed description of thoughts and ideas which have
little to do with common sense or a known science of any description; they
do not follow any of the established logic or science but relies heavily on
conjecture and on times implodes under the weight of intrinsic
contradictions and demolishes basic scientific rules. The thesis appears to
be building on false premise of equating or relating the non-tangible
entities such as mind and thought with well defined entity, energy.
This is only a short summary of
the problems and objections that I have with this essay. I found
unrealistic assumptions and assertions on every page. Its
ironic, but the verse from Ghalib’s poetry
included at the end of the essay expresses it quite well, that is, an
(intricate web of) eerie imagination.
Javed I. Chaudry
March 16, 2009
|