WikiJournal Preprints/Under a mysterious mute marquee of “silentio universi”

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WikiJournal Preprints logo.svg

WikiJournal Preprints
Open access • Publication charge free • Public peer review

WikiJournal User Group is a publishing group of open-access, free-to-publish, Wikipedia-integrated academic journals. <seo title=" Wikiversity Journal User Group, WikiJournal Free to publish, Open access, Open-access, Non-profit, online journal, Public peer review "/>

<meta name='citation_doi' value=>

Article information

Author: Emir E. Ashursky[a][i]


The discussion article cited here casts doubt on the rightness of the Nobel Committee, which awarded its high international prize 10 years ago to a triple of American astrophysicists A.G.Riess – S.Perlmutter – B.P.Schmidt. Although let's still clarify: in this case we are not talking about a technical faults in measuring the color spectrum or luminosity of some fuzzing supernovae (which they directly dealt with), but about the subsequent too free interpretation of the results obtained, that ultimately led to a general dominant influence of the term "dark energy".

However, besides, the author in his article also makes a bold attempt to debunk (or, at least, a little "to ground”) one more eternal disturbing minds cosmic mystery, associated with the phenomenon of "magno silentium universi". Well and to what extent he succeeded really in that - is up to you, dear colleagues!

Text[edit | edit source]

As firsthand confirmed by the sad experience of Carl Sagan, Seth Shostak, Jill Tarter, Victor Schwartzman, Gregory Beskin and other active SETI-researchers, all five options of the modern interpretation of “grande silentium universi”, alas, may turn out to be untenable without involving a number of additional entities. So, let's briefly recall them here.

1) Life is an extremely rare phenomenon. (Parried by the data of paleocosmonautics and, in particular, the presence of bacteria in meteorites.)
2) All civilizations eventually come to hedonism. (However both the banal consumerity and the notorious hedonism can hardly be regarded in the form of some persistent attribute of public shapings: unless as a certain mediate stage in the structuring of the intelligent Universe).
3) All civilizations available today are non-technogenic.
4) All civilizations sooner or later come to self-destruction.
5) Though life as such is widespread throughout the Space, but on a whim of fate, our civilization was the initial (or at least the second) in this “happy-scroll”.

However, with the postulating an extra-material god, the 3rd and 5th versions can even so get a completely reasonable explanation here. In addition, item 5 entirely fits into the anthropogeocentric platform. And since the existence of high powers is indirectly confirmed by many other mysterious artifacts, then god-presence (in relation to i.5) can be interpreted transcendentally: say, as a manifestation of some parallel worlds or the "soft” dictate (seeming to us unobtrusive at all) of a priori sacralized Chronos i.e., to put it simply - time. Let’s note, by the way, that the last thing is yet equivalent to the statement of dominating astrological dependence either. And moreover, these are not even two sides of a single coin but in general two completely tantamount definitions of the same phenomenon. Thus, now the question on the immediate agenda is whether individualized high powers like UFOnauts, angels, demigods or numina (united under a common name of “pranophytes”) really exist in the world. Since the presence of the supreme extra-material substance doesn’t already cause, probably, any doubts: without it planetary progress would have been impossible at all. However such pranophytes can be imagined both in the kind of collection of special elementary particles and in the form of diverse wave emanations, let alone infusions of some spiritualized energy from parallel worlds. Shortly speaking, this philosophical question can still be relevant despite the fact that higher superindividuals almost never interfere in everyday aspects of social life (not to mention someone’s concrete human destinies). But generally, by and large, we can imagine two principled dynamic schemes of the Universe:

a) a kind of swing "from energy (Will) - to information (Reason) and back";
b) continuous experiments or even improvisations of Will itself (by the by, the old theosophical guess about the previously existed 5 discarnate races also fits into here).

In the first case, predicting events (proscopy) is possible due to the global repeatability of history; and in the second - through the management of the desirable for Will events. As for the semi-fantastic idea of parallel worlds (or, say, multidimensional space), it doesn't, apparently, jump beyond this framework but only brings some own colorful variety to the overall picture. In this way, the ability to foresight may well not be associated with those miracles we are accustomed to (or about which, at least, have been reading more than enough). For the seers contemplate not the coming perspective itself, but only astral expansion somehow coupled with it (even if they borrow all the required information from celestial contact-agents). This version is also confirmed by numerous cases from the life of twins which, developing from a single maternal ovum, have respectively a joint astral line (as a result of that are then subjected to almost identical vicissitudes of fate). And from this, in turn, it follows that above-mentioned metaphysical vector (or if you like - theosophical sheath) has the greatest impact on the subconscious thoughts and many involuntary movements of person. But still, whatever it was, knowing the essence of prediction (whether from the mouth of a palmist, parapsychologist or even simple gypsy fortune-teller), with a strong own desire it can, of course, be prevented! So that all the common pseudoscientific speculations on this theme (arbitrarily taken, for example, from biographies of Napoleon Bonaparte, queen Marie Antoinette, A.S. Pushkin, M.S. Gorbachov, Indira Gandhi, Donald Trump and others) do not have any serious evidence base.

Conclusion[edit | edit source]

So now is the time to finally summarize. If, according to Drake's formula, in our galaxy should be 10 highly developed alien communities, and there, alas, are none at all, then a trite Laplacian justification does not work here. That is, more specifically, this may indicate one of three options:

I) the etiological complexity of the origin of civilizations associated with the nonlinearity of the paths "from inanimate - to living" (which, as it were, is confirmed by the spread version of the five races that preceded us);
II) a certain planning of space exploration (but this obviously requires the creative participation of some almighty Scheduler!);
III) good location of our home planet near the very center of the Universe.

The first of these assumptions belongs to the theosophical school, the second represents the canonical idea of orthodox Christianity, but the third one reflects rather original author's point of view. And moreover only in the last variant, so called problem of dark energy can be solved without any special difficulties. For on the periphery of topologically closed Universe, an observer won’t just find a single dark erg or even an extra electron-volt in this case. After all, among other things, authorial concept also unambiguously states the illusory nature of “the universal acceleration" ostensibly recorded by the notorious American trinity Riess & Perlmutter & Schmidt.