All These Worlds Are Yours – The Appeal of Science Fiction

I’ve been fascinated with science fiction stories for as long as I can remember, although, I must confess, I never thought of science fiction as being mainstream literature. I, like many readers, pursued science fiction as a form of escapism, a way to keep up with speculation on recent scientific discoveries, or just a way to pass the time.

It wasn’t until I met with my thesis adviser to celebrate the approval of my paper that I had to think about science fiction in a new light. My adviser works for a large, well-known literary foundation that is considered to be very “canonical” in its tastes. When he asked me if I liked science fiction, and if I would be willing to select about one hundred stories for possible inclusion in an anthology that they were thinking about producing, I was somewhat surprised. When he told me it might lead to a paying gig, I became even more astounded. I went home that afternoon feeling very content: my paper had been approved, and I might get a paying job to select science fiction, of all things.

Then it hit me: I’d actually have to seriously think about some sort of a method to select from the thousands of science fiction short stories that had been written in the past century. When I considered that the ideals of the foundation would have to be reflected in the stories which I selected, something near panic set in: science fiction was not part of the “cannon.”

“While I pondered weak and weary, over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore,” I reached a decision: I’d first try to figure out what science fiction “was,” and then I’d develop a set of themes that related to the essence of science fiction. So, armed with this battle plan, I proceeded to read what several famous authors had to say about science fiction. This seemed simple enough, until I discovered that no two authors thought science fiction meant quite the same thing. Oh, great, thought I: “nevermore.” (Sorry, Edgar, I couldn’t resist).

Having failed to discover the essence of science fiction, I selected four authors whose work I liked to try to determine what they contributed to the art of science fiction. The authors were: Isaac Asimov, Robert Silverberg, Orson Scott Card, and Arthur C Clarke. At the time, I didn’t realize that two of the authors, Asimov and Clarke were considered “hard” science fiction writers, and the other two, Silverberg and Card, were considered “soft” science fiction writers.

So, you might ask: what is the difference between “hard” and “soft” science fiction. I’m glad you asked, else I would have to stop writing right about now. “Hard” science fiction is concerned with an understanding of quantitative sciences, such as astronomy, physics, chemistry, etc. “Soft” science fiction is often associated with the humanities or social sciences, such as sociology, psychology or economics. Of course, some writers blend “hard” and “soft” science fiction into their work, as Asimov did in the Foundation trilogy.

So, having selected the authors, I was ready to proceed to my next challenge, which you can read about in the next installment of the series.   “All these worlds are yours:” the Appeal of Science Fiction, Part II

In the first part of the series, I mentioned that I’d been given an assignment to select approximately one hundred science fiction short stories for inclusion in an anthology that was being considered by a literary foundation. Originally, I’d intended to find the “essence” of science fiction, and then select stories that reflected this essence. Unfortunately, this turned out to be nearly impossible, since different authors had different ideas about what constituted science fiction.

So, I took the easy way out, I selected four authors whose works appealed to me, and hoped that I could make selection based upon my familiarity with their works. My selection process resulted in four authors who have been writing science fiction for thirty years or more: Isaac Asimov, Robert Silverberg, Orson Scott Card, and Arthur C Clarke. As it turned out, two authors were considered “hard” science fiction writers, and two were considered “soft” science fiction writers.

Well, I finally had a plan. And then the wheels fell off. I still needed some sort of selection criteria, or I’d have to develop one as I read. So, I did what anyone in my place would have done. I started reading. I read, and read some more, and then… I read some more. Over three thousand pages and three hundred short stories, in fact. I was almost ready to make a stab at a selection process; almost, but not quite.

What, three thousand pages, and still can’t figure out how to start? How could this be? Okay, so I’m exaggerating a little bit. I started to break the stories up into groupings around general themes-it helps when I organize things into groups, so I can apply some sort of selection criteria for seemingly unrelated data points (who says that thirty years in business doesn’t have its rewards)? Gradually, I began grouping the stories into several broad headings: scientific discoveries; life-forms (which included aliens, man-made life and artificial life); the search for meaning (which includes the search for God or the gods); the death of a group of men, a nation, race, or system; the meaning of morality.

Now I admit, these groupings may be arbitrary, and may in fact reflect my perspective on things, but I had to start somewhere. The strange thing was that these grouping tended to repeat, no matter who the author was. When I thought about it, these same types of concerns are mirrored in the more “canonical” texts that are taught in school. So, what makes science fiction different from the mainstream texts taught in colleges and universities across the country?

Once again, I’m glad you asked that, because it is a perfect lead-in to the next part of the series.   “All these worlds are yours:” the Appeal of Science Fiction, Part III

I guess that the main difference between science fiction and the more acceptable or “canonical” type of fiction must arise either from the themes employed, or the subject matter. In part two of this series, I mentioned that the themes employed by science fiction, namely: the search for life, identity, the gods, and morality are similar to those themes employed in “canonical” literature. By the process of subtraction, that leaves subject matter as the primary difference between the two genres.

So, by subject matter, we must mean science, since we’ve already covered fiction (“when you has eliminate the impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth,” as Sherlock Holmes would say). So, we must infer that science is the factor which differentiates science fiction from traditional fiction. By this definition, several traditional pieces of fiction must be considered science fiction. As an example, The Tempest, by William Shakespeare has often been cited as a type of science fiction if we expand the category to include those works which incorporate current science into their works. But wait, you say, The Tempest does not incorporate science into its construction. Oh really, I reply, the English were just beginning to settle the New World in earnest when the play was written (“Oh, brave new world that has such people in’t.”) Besides, you reply, if anything, it is more fantasy than science fiction. Splitting hairs, I reply.

What then of John Milton, I ask? John Milton… why, he’s so boring and well, unread these days, you reply. Of course he is, but that’s beside the point. What about Paradise Lost, I rejoin? What about it, you reply (and then in a very low voice… I’ve never read it). The scene where Satan leaves hell and takes a cosmic tour before alighting on Earth and Paradise has been described by many critics as being the first instance of an author providing a cosmological view of the heavens. In fact, Milton scholars point to the fact that Milton, in the Aereopagitica claims to have visited Galileo Galilei at his home in Italy. These same critics also refer to the fact that Milton taught his nephews astronomy, using several texts that were considered progressive in their day. Still, most critics would fall on their pens (swords being so messy and difficult to come by these days), rather than admit to Paradise Lost being… gasp, science fiction.

Still not convinced; what do you say about Frankenstein? You say it made for several interesting movies, but really, the creature was overdone; bad make-up and all that. I reply: the make-up is irrelevant; for that matter, so are many of the films, which don’t do justice to Mary Shelley’s novel. She didn’t even write the novel, you reply. Oh no, not another apologist for Percy Bysshe Shelley writing the novel. Let me state unequivocally that I don’t care whether Mary or Percy wrote the novel: it is often cited as the first instance of science fiction. But where is the science, you ask: it is only alluded-to. That’s’ why it’s also fiction, I retort.

So, where are we? I think we’ve managed to muddle the waters somewhat. It appears that the element of science is needed for science fiction, but the precedents for science being contained in a fictional work, are somewhat troubling. Maybe in the next section, we should examine “modern” science fiction and try to determine how science plays a part in works of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

“All these worlds are yours:” the Appeal of Science Fiction, Part IV

Up till now, we’ve defined science fiction as part science, and part fiction. No real revolutionary concept there. I’ve tried to show how earlier works could be considered science fiction, with mixed results. I’ve also said that works of the twentieth century would be easier to classify as science fiction, because they incorporate more elements of leading-edge science into their writing.

To use two brief examples, the Foundation trilogy by Isaac Asimov is often considered a “soft” science fiction work, relying more on the social sciences than the physical sciences in the plot line. In the story, Asimov posits the creation of a foundation that relies on psychohistory, a kind of melding of group psychology and economics that is useful in predicting and ultimately molding, human behavior. Anyone who has been following the stock and financial markets over the past year can attest to the element of herd mentality which permeates any large scale human interaction. The theme of shaping human dynamics through psychohistory, while somewhat far-fetched is not beyond the realm of possibility (and would, no doubt, be welcomed by market bulls right about now).

A second example from Asimov, that of the three laws of robotics, has taken on a life of its own. Asimov began developing the laws of robotics to explain how a robot might work. The three laws were postulated as a mechanism to protect humans and robots. He did not expect the laws to become so ingrained into the literature on robots; in fact, the laws have become something of a de facto standard in any story or novel written about artificial life, as Asimov has noted in several essays.

The case of Asimov’s three laws of robotics influencing other writers is not unusual. In the case of Arthur C. Clarke, his influence is felt beyond writing and extends to science as well. Clarke is the person responsible for postulating the use of geo-synchronous orbit for satellites, and the makers of weather, communications, entertainment and spy satellites owe him a debt of gratitude for developing this theory. He anticipated the manned landing on the moon, and many discoveries made on Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and their many moons.

Consider also, Orson Scott Card, whose novel Speaker for the Dead, postulates a world-wide communication network that is uncannily similar to the world-wide-web and predated the commercial internet by some fifteen to twenty years.

It appears then, that science fiction writers popularize science, provide their readers with a glimpse of the possibilities of new inventions and theories, and sometimes, anticipate or even discover new uses for technology. But there’s still an element missing in our definition of science fiction, that of the fiction side of the equation. We’ll explore the fiction side of science fiction in the next installment.   “All these worlds are yours:” the Appeal of Science Fiction, Part V

Good literature requires a successful plot, character development, and an emotional appeal in order to be successful. Science fiction is no different than traditional forms of fiction in this regard. We’ve talked about plot and content (science) in earlier installments. In this installment, I’d like to talk about the emotional reactions generated by science fiction.

Broadly speaking, I think science fiction appeals to the following emotional responses: terror, the joy of discovery, awe and wonder, a lassitude born of too many space flights or too many worlds, and a sense of accomplishment. The instances of terror in science fiction are well documented: for anyone who has seen Alien for the first time, terror is a very real emotion. Many science fiction and horror writers as well, make good use of the emotion of terror. An effective use of terror is important, however. Slasher movies use terror, but they sometimes degenerate into an almost parodic exercise of who can generate the most gore per minute. True terror is a case of timing and the unexpected. That’s why Arthur C Clarke’s story entitled “A Walk in the Dark” is so effective. The author sets-up the BEM (bug-eyed monster, from Orson Scott Card) as a pursuing agent; the protagonist has no idea that the monster will actually wind-up in front of him.

As to the joy of discovery, this emotion can work in reverse. In Orson Scott Card’s brilliant short story and novel, Ender’s Game, the child protagonist learns that the war games he was practicing for were actually the real thing. His surprise, remorse and confusion have profound effects on his psyche, and set the stage for his attempts later in life to attain some sort of recompense for the race which he and his cohorts destroyed.

Robert Silverberg’s works evoke a feeling of dj-vu, a sense of being on too many worlds or too many travels; a moral ennui not found in many writers. Yet somehow, he transcends this eternal boredom to reveal with startling clarity that something lies beyond; if only a sought after end.

Perhaps no other science fiction author offers a sense of wonder and discovery, a sense of joy de vivre, as does Arthur C Clarke. In story after story, Clarke expounds on new worlds, new discoveries, new possibilities (“all these worlds are yours…”). His love of the cosmos is rooted in his love of astronomy and physics, and is bundled together with a love of mankind that makes his work so inspiring and evergreen.

But what of our final category, that of a sense of accomplishment? Each of these writers talks in some way to the human experience. In bridging the worlds of science and fiction, in writing to our fears, hopes, joys and sorrows, each of these authors stakes a claim to be included among the list of canonical authors. In “Nightfall,” Arthur C Clarke writes of the effects of an atomic war, and thinks back to an earlier time. He is staking his claim to posterity when he writes:

Good freed for Iesvs sake forbeare,

To dig the dvst enclosed heare

Blest be ye man yt spares thes stones,

And cvrst be he yt moves my bones.

Undisturbed through all eternity the poet could sleep in safety now: in the silence and darkness above his head, the Avon was seeking its new outlet to the sea.

For Sir Arthur was paying his respects to the Bard, and claiming his place in the pantheon of the great English writers.

Author Biography

Peter Ponzio, the author of Children of the Night, is a CPA with over 30 years experience in Corporate Finance, holding positions as divergent as Treasurer, VP of Sales Administration, Vice President of IT, and General Manager of an internet start-up company in the late 1990s, and CFO at a subsidiary of a Fortune 100 company.

Platonic Fullerene Chemistry, Nanotechnology, Liberty, Freedom, Science and the US Constitution

Dear reader, this Ezine article has been written for perusal by over 6000 nano-scientists. Its theme suggests to the general public that ethical nanotechnology has an important role to play in bringing about a new age of global liberty and freedom. It can be argued that this can come about if nanotechnology is developed in liaison with a medical science, to guide ennobling government for the betterment of the global human condition. While the article is about the fractal nature of Mesopotamian mythological mathematics, it is fully realised that other ancient cultures, including Indian and Chinese civilisations, contributed infinite fractal mathematical concepts into the formation of the ancient 3rd Century BC Platonic tradition of Greek science.

Discussions about politics, sex and religion tend to provoke intense controversy. However, this paper is about a broad generalisation of all three of these contentious issues. They are so complex that only a supercomputer, given thousands of years of data could adequately explain their functioning in the great game of life, which is related to healthy human evolution.

During the 1990s, the Science-Art Research Centre of Australia had its supercomputer papers about seashell life-form energies reprinted by the world’s leading technological research institute, IEEE., and an American Institute for Basic Research. These papers were internationally acclaimed for the discovery of new mathematical and physics laws governing optimum biological growth and development through space-time. The aim of this article is to help in the construction of a second supercomputer program, which can be referred to as the Fuller-Snow ‘World Game Cooperative Theory’ for human survival.

China’s most highly awarded physicist, Kun Huang, provided the research methodology used to make the discovery of the new physics laws possible. He argued personally with Albert Einstein over the issue. Now, nanotechnology has confirmed that his seashell advice in 1979 applies directly to the human condition.

The ancient Egyptians used the sacred geometries of life to give an intuitive expression of the working of an infinite universe. Mainstream science now realises that they were using aspects of fractal geometrical logic extending to infinity. However, our present global science and technology forbids that geometrical logic to belong to any living evolutionary process. Einstein’s genius can now be truly immortalised by modifying it so that his universal energies of chaos are shown to entangle with these long lost ancient infinite life energies.

The 20th Century Einsteinian world-view was governed by a law of universal chaos that demands that all life in the universe must become extinct. Therefore, under these circumstances the living process cannot possibly extend to infinity. However, nanotechnology has demonstrated that the ancient Greek science was correct.

The human molecule of emotion, discovered in 1972, now part of quantum biology’s entanglement with Einstein’s quantum mechanics, is, in fact, an infinite fractal expression. Our emotions function in complete contradiction to the laws governing our present destructively imbalanced science and technology.

This means that, as was discovered only last century, emotions belong to Sir Isaac Newton’s more profound natural philosophy to balance his mechanical description of the universe. It is important that his world-view is freed from any further Christian classification of this being a criminally insane heresy. Newton held to his more profound concepts of an infinite universe, when he wrote his great theories of science. This is evident in his personal letters to Richard Bentley, in which he linked gravity with light, to provide evolutionary instruction to the human metabolism. It is unreasonable to insist that mercurial fumes from his alchemy laboratory resulted in a criminally insane mind, at the same time when he was accomplishing such things.

The modern day unbalanced scientific world-view constitutes a political nightmare of global proportions. With modification, this can be adequately addressed in the form of a medical supercomputer program, functioning to guide ennobling governments throughout the world. The resultant technology, for the betterment of the human condition, is beyond the conception of present unbalanced mainstream science. However, given the opportunity, there are enough learned scholars to compose the computer program, thanks to the scientist Kun Huang. It is now possible to extend the seashell research in order to obtain the quantum biological blueprint for human survival.

During the 6th Century BC the Greek geometer, Thales, travelled to Egypt to study political ethics. Following him in the 5th Century BC, the mathematician, Pythagoras, also studied political ethics in Egypt. They brought back to Greece the mathematical structure of Western Democracy. The Greek philosopher Anaxagoras had derived a theory of creation from the mythological-mathematical theories of the Egyptian creator god Atum (Atom), mentioned in the ‘Pyramids Texts’. Then, for over two hundred years the Platonic tradition of Greek philosophy fused ethics into Anaxagoras’ theory of creation. This was in order to invent science so that civilisation would not become extinct, as had other life forms discovered as fossils.

Aspects of nano-science show that the resultant science had successfully linked mathematics to the living process, in line with the workings of an infinite universe. This is contrary to the ethos of Einstein’s theory of relativity, which he derived from Babylonian mythological mathematics.

During the 3rd Century BC two Greek life-sciences came into existence. one was called the ‘Science for ethical ends’ incorporating atomic Platonic love and the other was the ‘Science of universal love’, based upon Epicurean emotional atomic theory. These sciences came about to guide ennobling government, so that humans could play their part within an infinite ethical universal purpose, thus avoiding extinction. Nearby, in the Mystery Schools of Babylon, worship of the sacred geometries was motivated by the teachings of Ishtar, the Goddess of sexual prostitution and warfare.

Plato understood that once a physical atomic science totally ruled civilisation, as it does today, the prehistoric arms race legacy would one day accelerate, triggering the emergence of the destructive properties of ancient Egypt’s understanding of primordial universal chaos. Plato’s concept ‘evil’ was about the anti-life properties of nuclear unformed matter spreading as an obsession into the psyche of civilisations. Various national governments, powerless to stop the nuclear arms race because of governmental national security laws, would eventually bring about the chaos of total destruction upon civilisation. Nanotechnology on the other hand, could step in to provide a medical science, free energy, food and water, across the globe, in order to prevent this nightmare situation from happening.

Harvard University Press advises that the rebirth of the lost Greek atomic sciences was instigated by Marcilio Ficino, during the 15th Century. He used the book, ‘Plato’s Theology’ to create what is now called the Great Italian Renaissance. Leonardo da Vinci, contrary to popular belief, was not a central figure to that Renaissance.

The mathematician, Fibonacci, taught Leonardo the sacred geometrical mathematical ethos belonging to the Mystery Schools of Babylon, which worshipped warfare. On the other hand, the inclusion of Platonic love as a property of the atoms of the soul (the molecule of emotion discovered by Candace Pert in 1972) had placed atomic ethics into the mathematical equations that Fibonacci obtained from the Babylonian Mystery Schools.

The American engineer, Buckminster Fuller, who wrote the book ‘Utopia or Oblivion’ fully understood the nature of Plato’s grim warning and realised that we must modify the Einsteinian understanding of universal energy, or perish. Harvard University’s Novartis Professor Amy Edmondson, in her on-line biography entitled ‘A Fuller Explanation’, wrote that in his excitement to write his theories, Fuller neglected to explain to the public that his ideas for humanity’s survival were derived directly from Plato’s mathematical research.

The molecular biologist, Sir C P Snow, also wrote a book about the need to save civilisation from collapse, due to the prevailing Einsteinian understanding of universal energy. He considered it imperative to link modern science back to the culture of the Platonic Humanities. In 2008 the Times Literary Supplement published that it considered Snow’s book to be among the 100 most important books written since World War II.

The Christian Church, during the 5th Century AD, destroyed the Great Library of Alexandria and murdered its custodian, the mathematician, Hypatia. Saint Augustine then banished Plato’s mathematics as being the work of the Devil, mistaking it for the mathematics associated with the teachings of Ishtar, the Babylonian Goddess of war and prostitution. Augustine had translated the evil of unformed matter in the atom as the evil of female sexuality, later used as an excuse for the horrific sexual rites that the Christian Church lather condoned.

The sadistic torturing and burning alive of countless numbers of women and girl children as witches was practised for three hundred years until the mid 17th Century. In the 18th Century the Church’s fanatical opposition to ancient Greek mathematical atomic science, as the work of the Devil, was transferred into the very fabric of the Constitution of the United States of America, without the American people realising what had happened.

Giordano Bruno, considered to be the father of modern science, taught about the science of universal love, at Oxford University. For doing this, upon returning to Rome he was imprisoned, tortured and burnt alive by the Roman Church in 1600. During the 20th Century, the unpublished papers of Sir Isaac Newton were discovered, in which Newton expressed his conviction that a more profound natural philosophy existed to complete the mechanical description of the universe. Newton’s model of the universe was infinite and its functioning was upheld by the same physics principles that upheld the ancient Greek science for ethical ends and the science of universal love. Newton’s balancing physics principles were exactly those used by the philosopher Schelling when he corrected Immanuel Kant’s electromagnetic ethic for perpetual peace on earth.

Isaac Newton, a contemporary of Bruno, aware of his fate, dared not publish those same ideas. As it was, his infinite universe theories remain classified today as Newton’s Heresy Papers. This may help explain why a 50 million pound research program at Cambridge University, to look for its associated technology, was cancelled outright by the British Government. Nonetheless, nanotechnology has revealed the incredible magnitude of that technology’s capacity to benefit the global human condition, well beyond the scope of entropic science.

The Constitution of the United States of America came into existence in 1787, based upon the ancient Platonic tradition of Greek philosophy. Within the Christian culture, Sir Isaac Newton’s banished heresy physics principles were completely omitted. Alexander Hamilton, during the framing of the Constitution, defined ‘Liberty’ as being ensured by the design of government based upon physics and geometrical principles. The physics principles used to construct the American Constitution belonged to the published physics of Sir Isaac Newton and the geometrical principles belonged to the geometry of Euclid. The current blockbuster film, ‘Lincoln ‘ depicts the President of America explaining that the abolishment of slavery was fused into Euclidean geometrical logic. In fact it was tied into the infinite geometrical logic upholding the functioning of the Platonic universe. If the will of the people wish it so, the American Constitution can now be amended to become the true symbol of liberty for all the world.

The ancient Greek intuitive understanding about the anti-life properties of nuclear chaos predicted the way our state of emotion interacts with physical reality. In 2011 two Chinese scientists used mathematics to prove how the Fullerene dance of life of protein enfolding in DNA, functioned outside the laws governing Einstein’s world-view. This was pre-empted ten years earlier when the Science-Art Research Centre published a lecture delivered at Yangzhou University in China. The paper stated that this protein dance of life in DNA caused Fullerene carbon-signalling to generate the geometrical construction of emotion-forming substances influencing mental functioning.

The Centre reasoned that because Einsteinian mathematics was unable to generate healthy seashell growth through space-time, it was innately carcinogenic. The 1937 Nobel Laureate in medicine, Szent-Gyorgyi, also argued that the scientific refusal to allow any interaction of consciousness with Einstein’s chaos energies, brought about an unnatural conflict between emotional intuition and unbalanced scientific rationalism, considered to be associated with cancer. In 1998, cancer researchers in America associated Szent-Gyorgyi’s theories to carbon signalling within DNA.

Be this as it may, the anti-life conflict within the human biological system, where natural emotional intuition is forced to conform to the dictates of our unbalanced science, does prevent healthy evolution from occurring. People at present are virtually powerless to prevent the effects of what Plato described as uncensored art, where mind pleasing forms along with irresponsible music, provides an illusionary belief in reality, while the entropic engineering mindset prepares for continual warfare.

Nanotechnology can provide us all with water, food, energy and raw materials from virtually nothing. Instead, we are contented to maintain a stock-market job enslavement obsession, in order to pollute the planet and the energy system belonging to the living process. The entropic dictatorship of global economic rationalism, obeying total chaos logic, might be considered rational for those controlling the money system, but it is certainly not based upon ethical scientific principles. If nanotechnology directs the function of artificial intelligence to wage war, then the deployment of invisible undetectable nano weapons of mass destruction will become humanity’s common enemy.

The mathematical sacred geometrical concepts of mercy, compassion and justice, can be found depicted in wall paintings of the Egyptian 1st Kingdom. These mythological-mathematics became political law in the 2nd Kingdom, explaining the origins of such things as modern hospitals and old age pensions. The ancient Greeks used these mathematical virtues to develop an infinite science for human survival, which we are forbidden to debate within the fixed confines of 20th Century science and technology.

The seriousness of a hidden fanatical religious act contaminating Newton’s physics principles during the framing of the American Constitution is easy to demonstrate. It prevented the Platonic spiritual (now holographic) optical human survival engineering technology from being developed.

Although Plato’s spiritual optical engineering principles were later corrected by ‘History’s Father of Optics’, Al Haitham, during the Golden Age of Islamic Science, the issue is quite obvious. Plato, Al Haitham, and other philosophers such as Philo, Plotinus and Hesoid, had warned that by using the senses, in particular the eye, as the source of cosmic knowledge, the destructive properties of unformed matter would emerge from the atom to destroycivilisation. Da Vinci, Descartes and Sir Francis Bacon, pivotal figures in bringing in the mechanistic industrial age, used the eye as the source of all knowledge.

Albert Einstein made exactly the same mistake. During 1924 to 1927 the world-view of quantum mechanics was that visual observation affects reality. Einstein’s E=Mc squared did indeed allow the ancient unformed matter to emerge from the atom. We are approaching the point where Humanity’s common enemy will be the anti-life ethos of artificial intelligence, masquerading as a benevolent Diabolis, the God of Chaos, that we now worship globally via the stock market.

The Science-Art Research Centre’s book ‘The 21st Century Renaissance’, points out that Einstein developed his world-view from the use of the sacred geometries associated with the mythological-mathematics used in the worship of ancient Babylon’s Goddess, Ishtar. Her sexual mathematics are very complex, but it appears that Einstein’s colleague, the Nobel Prize winner and mathematician Lord Bertrand Russell, was influenced by Ishtar’s teachings. During the 20th Century Russell became Britain’s best known advocate of free love and sex. His first three marriages became sordid sexual dramas in the British courts and in 1940 his professorial position at the College of New York was annulled by a police court order, as being immoral.

Bertand Russell’s most famous essay was entitled ‘A Freeman’s Worship’ in which Russell insisted that we have no other choice but to worship Einstein’s entropic death sentence upon all of life in the universe. In 1957 the New York University Library of Science, published a book entitled, ‘Babylonian Myth and Modern Science’, in which Einstein is shown to have developed his theory of relativity from the mythological-mathematics of ancient Babylon. Plato, on the other hand, had developed mythological mathematics from the Mystery Schools of ancient Egypt, which were about preventing the universe from reverting back into its original chaos. Nanotechnology proved that the Platonic atomic science was correct and the engineer Buckminster Fuller had adequately upgraded it. It is now possible to upgrade Fullers solution to the human survival theories of Sir C P Snow.

The solution to the global energy crisis is simple. Buckminster Fuller alluded to it with his ‘Cooperative World Game Theory’ for the betterment of the global human condition. In Fuller’s own words, ‘Make the world work, for 100% of humanity, in the shortest possible time, through spontaneous cooperation, without ecological offence or the disadvantage of anyone’.

IBM’s supercomputer, Deep Blue, beat the world’s chess champions and their supercomputer Watson, beat America’s players of the more complex game Jeopardy. Such a computer game, based upon medical science ethics, will bring into human consciousness the methodology advocated by the Fuller-Snow cooperative world game of life.

The Science-Art Research Centre of Australia is now only interested in helping to create the Fuller-Snow super computer program. The new game containing thousands of years of relevant negentropic speculations, will instantly and collectively raise our chaotic consciousness into a comprehension of Fuller’s infinite synergistic universe. People can then play the game of life unimpeded with conflicting religious dogmas, in order to upgrade human survival consciousness. The governing Platonic Fullerene Chemistry medical science, given legal status, can then guide ennobling government based on the issue of global security and nanotechnology supra-wealth for all.

The three 1996 Nobel Laureates in Medicine, established a new medical chemistry based upon the negentropic properties of Fullerene carbon molecules. As Buckminster Fuller had derived his balanced model of universal reality upon the mathematics of Plato, the Science-Art Research Centre of Australia renamed it as Platonic Fullerene Chemistry, now influencing the education of chemistry throughout the world.

All revenue from Science-Art Paintings, sold through the Centre’s non-profit research organisation, goes to the project, to help bring the Fuller-Snow supercomputer into existence. This funding model of ethical science through the arts was published in 1993 by LEONARDO, the ‘International journal for the Arts,Sciences and Technology.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén