Review of: "Zeno and Einstein"

2007

Some experimental theories of quantum gravity, such as loop quantum gravity, propose a discrete or "quantized" structure for space-time at very small scales. These theories hypothesize that space-time is fundamentally made up of discrete units or "atoms" of space, in a similar way to how matter is fundamentally made up of discrete particles. In the context of space-time, the term "atomic structure" is used metaphorically to suggest a discrete or granular nature at extremely small scales. In Einstein's special theory of relativity, there is a maximum limit of speed, beyond which no point of mass in an inertial reference frame can travel. In the following, I will demonstrate that in a given inertial reference frame, in addition to the existence of an upper limit velocity of the motion of a point of mass, there are also logical reasons to think that space and time have an atomic structure. The basic idea of this argument was suggested by Zeno's well-known aporias.

2023

Some experimental theories of quantum gravity, such as loop quantum gravity, propose a discrete or quantized structure for space-time at very small scales. These theories hypothesize that space-time is fundamentally made up of discrete units or atoms of space, in a similar way to how matter is fundamentally made up of discrete particles. In the context of space-time, the term atomic structure is used metaphorically to suggest a discrete or granular nature at extremely small scales. In Einstein's special theory of relativity, there is a maximum limit of speed, beyond which no point of mass in an inertial reference frame can travel. In the following, I will demonstrate that in a given inertial reference frame, in addition to the existence of an upper limit velocity of the motion of a point of mass, there are also logical reasons to think that space and time have an atomic structure. The basic idea of this argument was suggested by Zeno's well-known aporias.

2019

Die Physik der Erleuchtung-Einstein trifft Zen-Meister Fen Yang The Physics of Enlightening-Einstein meets Zen Master Fen Yang Es soll kurz skizziert werden, wie man die Zen-buddhistische Erleuchtung-Kensho oder Satori bzw. Annutara Samyak Sambodhi-in Einklang mit Einsteins Relativitäts-Theorie bringen bzw. "erklären" kann. Dazu wird ein mittelalterlicher Zen-Meister namens Fen Yang zitiert, der die Kriterien von "Erleuchtung" kurz und knapp, aber genügend ausführlich beschreibt, um die Frage zu stellen, ob das nicht-materielle Bewusstsein, der Geist, sich etwa dabei mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit in unserer Raum-Zeit ausbreiten könnte. Interessant ist dabei folgende amüsante Paradoxie: Üblicherweise wird in der Physik aus einer Theorie ein reales Geschehen postuliert bzw. prognostiziert; dessen Eintreffen kann dann die ursprüngliche Theorie bestätigen. Hier aber beschreibt ein Zen-Meister die damaligen Erleuchtungs-Erfahrungen und viel später wird deren Glaubwürdigkeit von Einsteins Theorie bestätigt. Also eine Umkehrung der Zeiten bzw. Abfolge. ……………………………………………………………………………… We will briefly outline how Zen Buddhist enlightenment-Kensho or Satori or Annutara Samyak Sambodhi-can be "explained" in accordance with Einstein's theory of relativity. A medieval Zen master named Fen Yang is quoted, who describes the criteria of "enlightenment" briefly, but in sufficient detail, to pose the question whether the non-material consciousness, the mind, could expand at the speed of light in our space-time. The following amusing paradox is interesting: In physics, real events are usually postulated or predicted from a theory; their arrival can then confirm the original theory. Here, however, a Zen master describes the enlightenment experiences of that time and much later their credibility is confirmed by Einstein's

The present study partly supports, partly corrects, and partly complements recent discussions of Arius Didymus fr. 23 and fr. 25 Diels, Aetius I, 20, 1 and Sextus Empiricus AM X, 3-4 = PH III, 124. It proposes a comprehensive interpretation of the first text (A.I), defends the attribution of its content to Zeno of Citium (A.II), interprets the Stoic definitions of space, place and void to be found in the other sources (B.I) and again vindicates the attribution of the core definitions to Zeno (B.II). The central methodological principle is the presumption of innocence for sources. The main conclusions of (A) are: 1. Arius Didymus' fr. 23 deals only with the coherence and the structure of the cosmos, not with its immobility; 2. The coherence of the cosmos, as that of any object, is determined by its hexis which pushes its parts towards its centre; 3. The structure of the cosmos, its stratification into the four concentric spheres of the elements, is determined by the combined effect of (a) the thrust downwards they all undergo from the cosmos' hexis; (b) their own natural weight or lightness and (c) the relative quantitative values of these weights or lightnesses; 4. The reasons adduced against Zeno's authorship are not based on the evidence but on the now prevalent disparaging sceptical approach towards Stobaeus' way of excerpting from Arius. The main conclusions of (B) are: 1. There is no deep contradiction between the various definitions of space ascribed by our sources to Zeno, Chrysippus and

Zen and modern physics, quantum and particle physics

2019

We will briefly outline how Zen Buddhist enlightenment – Kensho or Satori or Annutara Samyak Sambodhi – can be "explained" in accordance with Einstein's theory of relativity. A medieval Zen master named Fen Yang is quoted, who describes the criteria of "enlightenment" briefly, but in sufficient detail, to pose the question whether the non-material consciousness, the mind, could expand at the speed of light in our space-time. The following amusing paradox is interesting: In physics, real events are usually postulated or predicted from a theory; their arrival can then confirm the original theory. Here, however, a Zen master describes the enlightenment experiences of that time and much later their credibility is confirmed by Einstein's theory. Thus a reversal of the times or sequence.

British Journal for The History of Science, 2009

Will an experimental physicist like Johan F Prins save Physics from the deadly embrace of Mathematics? Will he succeed where another distinguished scientist like Herbert Dingle failed to do it by writing his Science at the Crossroads book? This book is mainly dedicated to this task, to put Physics on the physical reality rail again, since, as is explained in details inside it, there exists a derailment after Minkowski introduced and other physicists broadly accepted the concept of a 4d spacetime. The key-point of the book is criticality of “the reference frame in which the Physics is actually occurring” and the result that we can look there from outside and use the common Lorentz transformations only to see there and not vice versa. The relativity is only unidirectional, otherwise we end up to several inconsistencies and non real physical phenomena.

Henok Tadesse, 2023

Zeno"s paradoxes of motion are four related paradoxes created by an ancient Greek philosopher in 500 B.C. In one of the well-known paradoxes, Achilles, who is a fast runner, chases a tortoise who is initially at a point P ahead of him and moving slowly forward. Zeno argued that, by the time Achilles arrives at point P, the tortoise will have moved forward to another point P 1. Although Achilles is now closer to the tortoise, he will not catch up on the second try again because by the time Achilles arrives at point P 1 , the tortoise will have moved to another point P 2 and so on. Therefore, Achilles will never catch up with and overtake the tortoise. But we know that a fast runner can overtake a slow runner in reality. This paradox has puzzled philosophers, mathematicians and scientists for millennia. This paper reveals the mystery of the universe behind Zeno"s paradoxes. There is no entity called an electron or an atom or a ball moving from one point to another point in space as we know it. It is profound that philosophers were able to probe the deep mystery of the universe by logic alone 2500 years ago!

Will an experimental physicist like Johan F Prins save Physics from the deadly embrace of Mathematics? Will he succeed where another distinguished scientist like Herbert Dingle failed to do it by writing his Science at the Crossroads book? This book is mainly dedicated to this task, to put Physics on the physical reality rail again, since, as is explained in details inside it, there exists a derailment after Minkowski introduced and other physicists broadly accepted the concept of a 4d spacetime.