Download pdf - Nobel Prize Winners by Country, Appendix in "Cosmology, Physics & Philosophy" By Benjamin Ga-Or

All Rights Reserved to Benjamin Gal-Or, 1968, 1972, 1981, 1983, 1987, 2007, 2008

1

The Worldwide Acclaimed

Cosmology, Physics and Philosophy

Benjamin Gal-Or, Vol. 4, Scribd, July 2008

Free, Core Curriculum Course (CCC), 207 pages

What Did van Gogh Imagine When He Painted This Picture?Apparently he did not think that the field of gravitation has generated all.

Yet, his painting convey the ‘reality’ that all living and non-living systems are embedded in a 'field of brush strokes’, which, by themselves, in their very shape, direction and rhythm,

convey the presence of flux, structure, cosmos and universal field of force, which penetrates all things

and is at one with land, life, sky and the stars.

The telescope at one end of his beat,And at the other end the microscope,

Two instruments of equal hope …Robert Frost

If you can look into the seeds of time,And say which grain will grow and which will not,

Speak then to me …William Shakespeare


2

Evokes a person heart! Has generated a large number of responses from around the world, some declaring that it has turned them into “Gal-

Orians”. Since the thought presented by this book is so rich, translators of our country should recommend this book with all their intellectual

power. Chinese Academy of Sciences

A Master Piece. Any good library must have a copy of thisClassical work. The well-known author bases his philosophyon a very sound knowledge of present-day scientific theories.

Indian Journal of Physics

This is one of the most beautiful books that I have read.Outstanding Books List

Recommended by Encyclopedia Britannica, Nature, Philosophy of

This is a great book, and an exciting book; readable,worth reading and enlightening. Sir Karl Popper

We are all Gal-Orians. Foundations of Physics (Editor)

Tour de force. A magnificent and sustained piece of work !Sir A. Cottrell, Cambridge University Chancellor

Appeals to scientists of all disciplines who are prepared to open their minds. Shines a welcome light in some dark corners of science.

Sir Karl Popper, in a Foreword, correctly describes it “a great book”.New Scientist

Gal-Or’s “beauty” has always been the object of science, which, he lyrically observes as “a most fundamental aesthetic frame of mind, a

longing for the run-away horizons of truth and symmetry that we always try to reach.” M. Wickman, Order Amidst Chaos:

Enlightenment Aesthetics after Post-Modernity

I do not know a better modern expression of science, philosophyand classical humanism than that of Gal-Or’s book. Hah-Arretz Daily

The works of scientists like Gal-Or, Bohm, and (Noble Prize-Winner) Prigogine provide important resources. Prigogine's formalisms do not

really tell us how irreversible change emerges from reversible [mathematics]. (in this Gal-Or is superior). Gal-Or assigns priority

instead to general relativity and to gravity which drives the emergence of chemistry, life, and intelligence. Philosophy of Science,

Foundations of Social Progress

<----- <----- CONTINUES ON PAGE 29 -----> ----->


3

One must always look beyond earth5.3, the solar system5.1; 5.3, our galaxy5.4 and our local group of galaxies5.5, while comprehending about the dark-cold,expanding-‘voids’-Space-14.4 that wraps all superclusters of galaxies4.13

(Diagram below) and assessing its everlasting control on everyday life, and its origin (p.20; p.89).

The “Kingdom of Darkness” [‘voids’ in Figs. 1.1 & 1.2, p.4] illuminates some dark corners of science, and is more important, and interesting, as demonstrated by this book, than all the shining sources combined.

Our universe contains billions of gravity-structured galaxies (e.g., upper picture), each (e.g., right), containing billions of gravity-structured stars. Only Space-1 expands(Diagram & Figs. 1.1; 1.2, p.4). Without its expansion no process in the cosmos, including life, is possible (p.9-13, 89). Gravity and Space-1-Expansion generate all chemistry4.1, plant and animal behavior (Chapter 6), black holes4.3, time, biological time, brain-mind perceptions (p.12), orientation, written languages, socio-biological concepts [Chapters 5 & 6], gravity-natural-selection and key concepts in the ‘exact & life sciences’ and the ‘humanities’ (Chapters 1 to 8).

DIAGRAM: Space-1-Expansion is the UNSATURABLE SINK for all energy pouring into it from all shining sources (p.4). It is composed of adiabatic envelopes4.15 (a), (b), (c) that wrap all clusters and superclusters of galaxies4.13; 5.5

[Fig. 1.2 below]. Gravity and Space-1-Expansion generate all structures4.12, chemistry4.1;4.2, time-asymmetries3.4, written languages and brain-mind perceptions (Parts A to D). This worldwide acclaimed

Space 1

Non-expanding Space 3 wraps our galaxy 3

Space 2wrapsclusters


4

outlook (p.2) opens new intellectual horizons by crossing frozen disciplines and re-assessing afresh key concepts in the ‘exact & life sciences’ and the ‘humanities’.

Fig. 1.1: Space-1 Genesis. Expansion of the previously opaque universe (Chapter 1, p.40) forms the shown expanding, cold ‘voids’ [SPACE-1, (Blue)] and hotter matter emitters of radiation in Spaces 3 & 2 (p.3). Space-1 was formed below 3000K (starting at around 300,000 years post Genesis). Photons, neutrinos and anti-neutrinos3.2 then escaped from the newly-formed aggregations of nuclei, and were irreversibly absorbed in the newly-formed, unsaturable sink: SPACE-1 [Fig. 1.2 below]. About 2 billion years post Genesis, these gravity-induced, proto-massive-entities, were already condensed and heated for nuclear fusion4.2 to start. This NASA picture shows that, on a large scale, the early universe was isotropic and homogeneous in terms of distribution of cold ‘voids’, hot matter-structures-emitters and their maximum temperatures4.1. There had been no net energy flow across adiabatic envelopes 4.15 in Space-1. [Cf. Fig. 1.2 below]

Fig. 1.2: The largest portrait of the universe [NASA]. The ‘voids’ that compose Space-1 (dark-cold spaces observed in between shining filaments or clouds of superclusters), have increased in size (Cf. Fig. 1.1) These ‘voids’ are interconnected in Space-1.Uniform maximum temperatures, isotropic & homogenous distribution of ‘voids’ & galaxies are preserved (CF. Fig. 1.1). No net flow of energy from one adiabatic ‘envelope’ 4.15 to another exists. These ‘envelopes’ wrap all superclusters. Studying one is similar to the difficult study of the whole universe. As a student, in 1958, I discovered the origin of irreversibility & time-asymmetries3.4 by examining just one such envelope (Appendix IV, p. 163). Above 1028K, at black-hole’s4.3 gravitational-energy


5

density, all fields-forces-interactions in nature3.1-3.3 are unified with ‘gravitation’3.3 --the sole origin of all structures since Genesis. [p.6; Table I & Assertion 1.1, p. 47]

SYNOPSIS I________________________________________

More than ever before the recent discoveries in astronomy and space research have forced us to re-assess many of our fundamental concepts in most branches of science and philosophy. Nevertheless, the Einsteinian relativistic gravity3.3 and quantum physics3.2 remain two different physico-philosophical world outlooks that are in constant conflict with each other3.5.

The fundamental dispute splits physics into at least two unbridgeable systems of thought, each involving far-reaching implications in general science, philosophy and education.

The disputed differences are between Einsteinian gravity physics3.3, 3.5

and quantum physics3.2; 3.5. These may be referred to as Type I Disputes.

Type II disputes is mainly amongst proponents of string theories4.6 to

4.11, the ‘cosmological constant’2.1 to 2.5; 4.5; 4.16, ‘dark matter’2.1 to 2.5; 4.17,

Faust: 'Tis writ: 'in the beginning was the Word!'I pause, to wonder what is here inferred?

The Word I cannot set supremely high,A new translation I will try.

I read, if by the spirit I am taught,This sense: 'In the beginning was the Thought'.

This opening I need to weigh again,Or sense may suffer from a hasty pen.

Does Thought create, and work, and rule the hour?'Twere best: 'In the beginning was the Power!'

Yet, while the pen is urged with willing fingers,A sense of doubt and hesitancy lingers.The spirit come to guide me in my need,I write, 'In the beginning was the Deed!'

Johann Wolfgang von GoetheFaust I. Transl. Philip Wayne (Penguin Classics, London)


6

‘pre-creation physics’, ‘pre-creation universes’ and the origin of irreversibility and time asymmetries in nature3.4; 3.5.

The Central Theme

The Central Theme of both this course and world outlook include two Branches: In the ‘Exact & Life Sciences’ & in the ‘Humanities’.

The ‘Exact & Life Sciences’ Branch focuses first on failures to unify the fundamental forces-fields-interactions in nature3.1-3.5, while claiming that the key reasons for these failures are:

(i) Attempts to unify fields-forces-interactions by false mixing of symmetric with asymmetric mathematics [Assertion S.1], instead of first unifying time asymmetries around verified general relativistic cosmology and Space-1-Expansion.3.4, 3.5, 4.15

(ii) Above 1028K, at black-hole’s4.3 gravitational-energy density, all fields-forces-interactions in nature3.1-3.3 are united within gravitation3.3 --the sole origin of all structures. [Table I, Chapter 1, p. 40; Assertion 1.1, p.47, Chapters 3 to 8; Footnotes 3.4, 3.5, 4.15, 4.6-4.12 and Volume I]

Assertion S.1

At gravitational-energy density of a massive black-hole4.3, but as a massive ‘white hole’, and above 1028K, all fields-forces-interactionsin nature3.1-3.3 are unified in what has evolved to be recognized by us 13.7 billion years later as general relativistic gravitation3.3 -- the sole origin of all time asymmetries3.4 and structures; the starting theory of any attempt to unify physics. [Table I, Chapter 1, p. 40; Assertion 1.1, p.47, Chapters

3 to 8; Footnotes 3.4, 3.5, 4.15, 4.6-4.12 and Volume I]

Irrespective of any mathematical funambulism performed in a proof, or a theory, symmetry is always conserved in the equations.

If one starts with symmetric equations, the result can never be asymmetric. Space and time in fundamental physics are

symmetric3.4. So are the laws of fundamental physics, except the 2nd

Law of thermodynamics. Similarly, asymmetry is conserved.Asymmetry can neither result from symmetry, nor vice versa.

(Yet, a Nobel Prize was awarded to I. Prigogine for presenting such a false ‘proof’ in violation of the laws of mathematics. Starting from Ritz wrongly attacking Einstein [1], all subsequent ‘Authorities’ have similarly failed3.4; 3.5; 4.6 'to 4.11. Endless publications in statistical & quantum

mechanics rely on false mathematical ‘proofs’ and wrong verbal, pre-mathematical definitions[Chapter 4] that fabricate ‘proven’ origins of time-asymmetry and irreversibility in nature.)

See also Assertion S.3


7

Beyond the issue of unifying fundamental physics [Chapter 3], this branch deals with astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology [Chapter 4], gravity-induced orientation, balancing, socio-biology, biological clocks and some medical treatments. [Chapter 6; This Synopsis] as well as with the limitations of applied mathematics, mathematically-based definitions, statements, theories and computer ‘proofs’ [Chapter 8].

The ‘Humanities’Branch deals with the origins of linguistics [Chapter 6],

world history [Appendix V] and a new world outlook ranging from Abrahamic religions [Appendix VI] to a fresh look on faith [Chapter 10, p.119];

from the origin of literature to a fresh view on socio-biology [Chapters 6,

p.89 & 10]; from the origin of animal and human physiological structures to education. Nevertheless, this branch begins with gravity-induced physico-philosophical issues that are presented in the opening pages, this Synopsis and the Introduction (p.32). It then proceeds in Chapters 6[p.89] & 10 [p.119], Appendix V (p.168) and Appendix VI (p.181). Beyond these one may consult Volumes I & II. [Cf. Table of Contents, p.20]

Recent Discoveries

Recent astronomical discoveries combined with advances in gravitational socio-biology [Chapter 6, p.89 and Refs. 9, 50], have generated a revolution in our understanding of the most critical roles gravity has played from the early cosmos to the origin of life, language and brain-mind perception of the world and everyday life.

The new discoveries have triggered a fresh world outlook that illuminates some dark corners of science and causes us to re-assess almost everything that we have so far taken for granted, including the apparent conflict between Genesis via astrophysics, astronomy and modern physics, and Genesis via the Bible. [Chapter 1, p.40; Appendix VI, p.181]

In fact, the new discoveries in the remote external world, including those made in bio-satellites and the Hubble Space Telescope, have generated a revolution in our understanding of our external vis-à-vis internal world; a scientific revolution without parallel in the whole recorded history of mankind; a fresh look at nature, which opens up new horizons and generates new needs to reexamine all previous cosmological, biological, behavioral and philosophical convictions. [Assertions S.2 and S.3]


8

Assertion S.2

Expanding Space-1 [Diagram, p.3] is composed of expanding ‘voids’ [Fig. 1.2,

p.4] and adiabatic envelopes 4.15 that are interconnected. Chapters 1 to 8

explain and illustrate how all time asymmetries3.4 and irreversibilities in nature are originated and caused by Space-1-Expansion -- the universal,

unsaturable sink4.4.

This new world outlook [Ref. 13; 1958-

1972] not only helps to unify physics [Assertion S.3], but extends beyond it into the domains of socio-biology, history the realities of the arts and religions,

including the asserted kind of DUALITY between science and

religion as different manifestations of one and the same reality.[chapter 10]

At the very core of this ‘external-to-internal’ revolution, we find gravity physics, gravitational-biology, gravity-perception, gravity-induced languages, gravity-induced socio-biology, geo-biological clocks and a new, gravity-induced, essence of natural selection in the living and non-living worlds [Chapters 2 to 8]. While Einstein's general relativity3.3, 3.5 remains the cornerstone of modern cosmology and astrophysics; the indispensable theory for understanding most of the new discoveries in astronomy, it is Newtonian gravity (that is included as an approximation in General relativity) that affects much of our everyday life. [Chapter 6]

Gravity, combined with updated observations in all fields of science, will guide us in structuring this book; starting from the very large cosmological structures and proceeding to the much smaller subatomic systems in which quantum physics still fails to explain the origin of time asymmetries and irreversibility in nature.

Can The Foundations of Science Be DeducedFrom Relativistic Cosmology?

Although some of the greatest scientists (from Newton to Einstein) studied cosmology and made substantial contributions to it - until recently it had a rejecting speculative image. Indeed, most scientists used to reject its importance, using such arguments as:

Why rely on anything based on information that had originated in remote, personally inaccessible regions of space and time? Should not we first


9

Assertion S.3

All attempts to unify the fundamental forces-fields-

interactions in physics3.1 to 3.5

have, so far, failed3.5, 4.6 to 4.11.Trying to unify fields-forces by false

mixing of symmetric with asymmetric mathematics, instead of first unifying time asymmetries3.4

around verified (p.84) general relativistic cosmological asymmetry:

Space-1-Expansion.3.4, 3.5, 4.15, is asserted to be the major source of failures to unify quantum physics

with gravitation.[Assertion S.1]

complete our local physics before we use strange astronomical data to reexamine the very foundations of science?

To begin with it should be stressed that such geocentric, or rather anthropocentric conceptions, are as common today as they had been in the times of Copernicus (who had dethroned the Earth and paid with his life for that), Shapley (who dethroned the Sun, but was not killed), and Baada (who dethroned our Milky Way, and nobody cared anymore). And they make cosmology and astrophysics difficult intellectual subjects, even to intellectually mature persons.

Indeed, astronomy, astrophysics and cosmology - unlike local physics, chemistry, and biology, are observational rather than experimentalsciences, since they deal with objects at such great distances as to be beyond the reach of direct, man-made experimentation.

Moreover, until recently these observations have been too scarce, and the ratio of speculation to fact too high, for cosmology, astronomy and astrophysics to qualify as "hard sciences."

Recent discoveries in space, however, have transformed the situation by yielding solid new data and drastically circumscribing both speculations and physico-philosophical outlooks and models.

This transformation is due largely to NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, new infrared, radio and X-ray techniques, including the use of gravitational lens to study the ‘dark-age’ epoch of our cosmos when it was 200,000 to 500,000 years old.

The new discoveries of supernovae4.1, quasars4.14 and black holes4.3 in the centers of galaxies4.5, and before, in 1964, the background black-body radiation4.12, have stimulated new interest in astrophysics, general


10

relativity, relativistic cosmology, remote planetary systems, the formation of stars, galaxies, clusters and super-clusters of galaxies4.13.

Indeed, of late, we have witnessed a new revival of astronomy, general relativistic cosmology and astrophysics, a renaissance sustained by an almost daily inflow of verified empirical information on the dynamic universe around us.

To deny today the central role of astronomy, cosmology and astrophysics in modern science is to deny the very methodology of science, and to reject a large portion of its empirical evidence. Most important, gravitation3.3 is the most universal, all embracing, field-force-interaction in nature. Unlike quantum physics 3.2, it is scale-free, namely, it is not confined, or limited to any scale, as quantum physics is3.2; 3.5.

Gravity Vs. Heart FailureAnd The Biology of Our Musculoskeletal System

The evolution and everyday functioning of our skeleton -- bones, legs, hips, joints, cartilages, ligaments, femurs, tibia, pelvis and muscles [64], has been "in response" to the force and direction of gravity.

Heart Failure vs. Gravity, say, in swollen legs, or flooded lungs cases involves the use of the gravity vector in medical treatments [64]. Nevertheless, the cardinal role gravity plays in the treatment of gravity-induced disorders in human biological systems, perception, health and longevity has been largely overlooked by health providers and bio-medical researchers, partly because the key role of gravity as the universal generator of all bio-structures, physiological forms, locations, disorders, orientation and organization has not yet been well appreciated. [9, 50, Volume I]

Gravity-Induced Socio-Biology & Brain-Mind Perception

Gravity penetrates all space and all physical and biological structures. It affects all cells in our body-brain, as well as plant growth and animal and human orientation and behavior in everyday life [Assertion S.1; Parts A &

B]. It also controls all ecological systems, while affecting the origin, growth and performance of cells in living organisms.


11

We are the ashes of dead stars, the remnants of a supernovae4.1 that had exploded when the universe has already passed more than half of its present age. Except hydrogen and helium, all chemical elements in the cosmos, and in our body, had been originated inside supernovae. The sin of these exploding massive stars was to convert, by nuclear fusion4.2, their light chemical elements, (hydrogen and helium) to heavier ones [oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, etc.], more quickly than do smaller stars, like our sun. It is always gravitation that plays the central role in the "selection" of the structures to be produced: First in controlling the cosmic expansion of inter-superclusters Space-14.4, then in forcing chemical evolution through a succession of specific reactions in which evolution means the development of complex elements from simple ones, i.e., of oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, silicon, etc. out of the hydrogen and helium in the stars4.1. [Hydrogen and helium make up about 99% of all observable matter in the universe. Hence, we and the planets in the solar system5.1, constitute just a little dirty stain in the vast ‘clean’ universe.]

Gravity is the only 'suitable' force that can build all the elements in the chemical periodic table by successively adding, in the hot interiors of active stars, small increments of mass and electric charge in selected combinations that are controlled by its force4.2. Thus, the building blocks of life had been originated by gravitation, and the entire evolution of life has since been controlled by it. [p.89]

Following such cosmological expansion and massive stars explosions4.1, the newly formed chemical elements cool and may combine to form molecules in deep-cold space, which is not entirely ‘empty’. In fact, the first local "aggregates" of matter in the solar system already contained some simple molecules, including some based on carbon. Again it was gravity that stratified all chemical compounds in ‘horizontal’ layers according to their specific gravity. Indeed, the geological strata of layers of rocks composed of one material, e.g., shale or limestone, lying between rock beds of other materials, have been structured by the "selective force of gravity”. Life is strongly affected and shaped by gravity. Some specific organelles and nuclei in biological cells are "heavier" than the rest of the cell, and serve as prime gravity-orientators. Such gravity orientators-pointers also allow plants to grow "vertically upward". Thus, gravity controls the direction of growth in roots, leaves, branches, etc. It also affects the movement of animals [50] in the sense


12

of giving a common reference for orientation, 'balancing', ‘coordination’ 'walking', and space perception. The response of living organisms to gravity may be initiated by changes in the distribution of pressure on sensitive locations, exerted either by the entire cell content, or by particles (statoliths) heavier or lighter than the surrounding cytoplasm. Gravity perception may also be caused by movements, or reorientation of such particles. Acceleration, by gravity, causes stresses to be set-up in cell membranes, or in the organ as a whole, which, in turn, generates a response vis-à-vis the gravity vector.

The Origin of Life and of Primitive Learning

Since all plants and animals have evolved under the influence of gravity, their form and structural development are strongly shaped by this pointed force. In turn, they have "learned" to exploit it and even to cope with it - learned in the evolutionary as well as in the ontogenetic sense of the development of the organism.

The sensing devices which plants and animals use for "gravity perception" ("gravity receptors", "g-perception", "bio-accelerometers", "gravity-induced biological clocks", etc.) are not yet well understood, even though a voluminous literature has been published on this subject.

But what we already know justifies the central role we expect gravity to play in life origin, control, orientation and adaptive processes. For instance, we know that if a growing higher plant is displaced with respect to the "upright" position, some tens of minutes later it will adapt its growth in such a way as to restore its original orientation in coincidence with the gravity vector. (If it is displaced only briefly and then restored to its original orientation well before the growth response can set in, it still responds to that displacement.) Indirect, gravity-induced orientation-adaptation of an organism may also occur when an organism orients itself by a gradient of density differences, or hydrostatic pressure.

The connection between gravitation and the origin of life, on one hand, and between gravitation and form, adaptive structure, growth rate, growth direction, adaptive behavior, navigation, and adaptive space perception, on the other, must therefore be studied. Indeed, a considerable empirical evidence has been accumulated so far on these


13

subjects [50, Volume I] by biophysicists, biologists, plant physiologists, botanists, zoologists and neuro-physiologists.

The Origin of Life, Biological Clocks and Innate Perception

The origin of temporal behavior in animals can be traced back in time and out to external physical influences. Even “innate patterns" are frequently associated with simple orientation movement in the field of gravity, i.e., as "upward-downward" ordering of biological systems in reaction to gravity. Consequently, gravity and geophysical periodicities emerge as prime sources of ordering, reproduction and simple orientation movements. Animals low on the evolutionary scale have a lesser adaptability to changes in the environment. Consequently, their dependence on heredity-geophysical-gravitational origins is high in proportion to animals high on the evolutionary scale.

Arrows of Time

It takes us some measurable time 'to read' a word, a sentence, a page, or a book, and even more so to 'comprehend' its meaning. I term this elapsing time, and its pointed direction, the 'Linguistic Arrow of Time'and maintain further that each word and each sentence, generates an irreversible 'Structural Space-Time Arrow' in our mind and/or a 'Space-Aggregated-Asymmetric-Picture' which points from the written-typed, form-configuration, or 'beginning', to their 'end' at the ‘right’ for Greek, Latin and English, etc., at the’ left’ for Hebrew and Arabic and ‘down’ for Chinese. Each letter-symbol, each word and each sentence is, therefore, an aggregated, configuration-boundary, gravity-oriented asymmetry on a page-space or on a computer display. Each generates an aggregated, configuration-boundary, gravity-oriented asymmetry in our brain-mind, where it is irreversibly recorded and associated with meaning introduced by education – the force that always controls the fate of nations, religions and civilizations. [Chapter 6, p.89 ]

Gravity-Induced Space-Time Perception

Our perception of time, space, symmetry, asymmetry and direction are similarly controlled by various gravity detectors (Chapter 5, p.89). These include displacement of cell parts, or of portions of multicellular structures, and intercellular structures. Much experimental evidence


14

collected in spacecraft proves that there is a loss of orientability in growing seeds under weightlessness ['zero gravity']. Animals are no exception. Each of us is 'conscious' of the common "up-down" surroundings, and about "weight" and acceleration [Ref. 51].

We are born with innate gravity-sensors. Gravity-sensors also tell trees how to grow vertically up, even on steep mountainsides. All these are normal external experiences directly controlled by gravity. More specific examples range from inertial changes of the fluid in the vertebrate inner ear to a crystallizing suspension of organic spheres in water. The earth's gravitational field produces an elastic deformationthat is readily observed through its asymmetric effect on the evolving crystal structure [Volume I]. These elastic forces play an important part in crystallized virus systems. Hence, the gravitational force provides not only a reference axis, but also a useful biological function that excludes foreign particles, such as antibodies, from a crystal. [Volume I].

Gravity-Induced Biosphere and Life

The gravity-induced life envelope of earth, comprising a very thin layer (surface and lower atmosphere), was created by the "selective force of gravity". It is therefore gravitational selection that puts carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, water vapor and lightning at one and the same layer for the generation of the first DNA and the beginning of biological evolution. And it is gravitational selection that protected the early products of this evolution from damaging external radiation by supplying the upper protective layer of ozone. [Volume I] Biological detectors of sound modulation have much to do with sensors for earth gravity; both are special kinds of bio-accelerometers. In other words, gravity, bio-accelerometers and the various ways organisms are affected by vibration are interrelated. [Volume I].

Our Brain-Mind Perception

As one reads this sentence, a corresponding aggregated asymmetry is generated inside his or her brain-mind. To conform with innate [Kantian-like] and external experiences, and to communicate with our society, we introduce 'grammar' - that which keeps universal 'space-time-order-of actions': What happened first, later, and in a 'universal-future-tense order-of-things'. What is past for one person must be valid, fixed and confirmed by all else. In short; each word and each sentence,


15

is equipped with an 'arrow of time' that 'forces order in our speech and life' and always points 'from past to future', and never in reverse.

To Conclude: Gravity generates structures and controls all geological layers and global phenomena ranging from mountain crests, tectonic folds, valleys, village and city structures, transportation systems, oceans and lagoons, to springs, wells, swamps, glaciers and rivers, as well as the ecological-systems connected with them.

Synopsis II

How To Use This Book________________________________________________________

There is hardly any good reason to select a level prior to reading the first pages, Synopsis I and the 9 Assertions in the Introduction (p. 32).

Level I. This multiple level is composed of a few sub-levels that can be adapted to local cultural-educational needs according to the guidelines presented in the Introduction and Appendix I: Homework and Grading, especially if used in ‘Adult-Education’, or even in a ‘High-School-CCCC’ [Cultural, Core Curriculum Course]. Readers may range from high-school pupils to adults interested in updating and advancing their education by self-help [Assertion IN.3].

Level II: The ‘Undergraduate Level’ is suitable for a two-semester course that includes the use of Volumes I and II [See Table of Contents, p.20).Comprehending the footnotes is recommended.The autodidactive methodology [Assertion IN.3] should be used when there is no qualified CCC-Coordinator.

Level III. The Central Theme (p. 6) crosses frozen disciplines in both the ‘exact sciences’ and the ‘humanities’. For graduate students this level is suitable for a two-semester course that includes selective parts of Volumes I and II, the footnotes andthe Appendices provided here. It is in Volume I where one finds mathematically-based theories, refutations of false ‘proofs’, critique of various ‘established’ theories, derivations of Einstein’s Field Equations [general relativity], quantum-statistical thermodynamics, Quantum Chromo-Dynamic [QCD], higher levels of philosophy and re-assessment of the nature of time, time arrows, linguistics and current studies of brain-mind aggregations-perceptions. Volume II: Critique of Western Thought, provides six Lectures, mainly in the domain of the ‘humanities’. The autodidactive methodology[self-help] is best used when there is no qualified CCC-Coordinator, or when this book is used by faculty, independent scientists, people of the arts, theists, or dropouts, for themselves.


16

The Origin of the Deepest Crisis in Education

This broad subject is introduced in the Introduction and in its 9 Assertions. It traces past educational cultures in order to formulate

the aims, scope and foundations of this unified CCC.

Pedagogical Features

In writing this Volume IV, I continue the effort to simplify and update Volumes I & II and make them more suitable for a wider circle of readers,

researchers, faculty and students. For that purpose I include new pedagogical features that help support the integration of this CCC

with the new world outlook presented here.

The 1958 Discovery

In 1958, by adopting the Einsteinian minority position as a student, I asserted that proponents of quantum statistical and probabilistic

thermodynamics smuggle into their thermodynamic theories the result that they wish to prove, without declaring the contraband3.4. Similar charges are

aimed today against proponents of string theories4.6 to 4.11.[Appendix IV],

The Time Paradox

To rise to the status of a scientific theory, a candidate must be supported by verifiable observations. Yet, in the actual world, there is a clash

between theoretical, time-symmetric fundamental physics, and time-asymmetries observed in nature.3.4

The ‘exact sciences’ can be reduced to physics, and fundamental physics, at high energies, to just three fundamental forces-fields: The electroweak

3.1, the strong 3.2 and the gravitational 3.3.Over the last 100 years or so many have tried to develop ‘final’ proofs that

would bridge these conflicting worlds of science. All in vain. Theorists select only prediction while ignoring the time-symmetric retrodiction, final

conditions, etc.Fig. 1.2 shows the expanding, cold ‘voids’ between shining superclusters of

galaxies [Space-1, Diagram]. Uniform maximum temperatures, isotropic and homogenous distribution of voids/galaxies (on large scales) are preserved

(Cf. Fig. 1.1). There is no net flow of energy from one adiabatic ‘envelope’4.15 to another. Such

adiabatic configurations wrap superclusters of galaxies.

In 1958 I discovered the origin of irreversibility and time-asymmetries3.4 in nature by examining just one such envelope -- but around a cluster, not

superclusters of galaxies [Fig. 1.2], which have been confirmed later –as explained in this book and in Volume I.


17

Being a student, and, later, an un-experienced professor, none wanted to listen to my central theme and non-conventional,

general relativistic world outlook.

Most refrained to do that because it was based on general relativity and cosmology, both far beyond their knowledge.

That situation has changed in 1969 during the International Conference on Classical and Relativistic Thermodynamics[Pittsburgh, Ref. 13] that I had organized with the participation of some

Nobel-Prize winners.

Worldwide acclaims started slowly after my Science and Nature papers in 1972 and the awarded Gold Medal from The New York Academy of

sciences.[Ref. 13]. For more information see Appendix IV.

Full worldwide acceptance has been delayed until the 80’s, with the publication of Volume I, and its subsequent editions.

(About Einstein's opposition to probabilistic quantum outlook of the world) Many of us regard this as a tragedy, both for him, as he gropes his way in loneliness, and for us, who miss our leader. Max Born

You sadist. You make people think.

Ezra Pound

People are born ignorant, not stupid;It is education that makes them stupid.

Ancient Dictum published by Bertrand Russell

Man to the Universe: I Exist ! The Universe to Man: “So what ?”


18

Putting a Frame AroundDoes Not Make it a Unified Theory

[From Am. Sci., Sigma Xi]

Do most professors take closest to their heart the moneybox?

Priority in Parts A & B is assigned to relativistic gravity physics3.3 as applied to cosmology and to determinism over indeterminism. It is an unpopular thesis in which Einstein had been practically left alone.

To begin with, I visit his world outlook and use it to assess some new developments such as gravitational lens, new supernovae4.1 and string theories 4.6 – 4.11.

String theories are popular but are not science. They cannot

even pass Popper’s principle for being part of it. They cannot be verified by experiment and thus cannot even rise to the scientific status of being wrong [51, 53]. They justify Einstein’s claim: Quantum theory is not a complete theory.

Eventually realizing that Einstein has been right, armies of theoretical physicists work hard since his death to bridge quantum theories with general


19

Quantum Physicists Attack Symmetry Breaking Discovered in

Quantum Kaonic Systems [CPT Breaking]

relativity by inventing various kinds, types and brands of unverifiable string theories4.6 – 4.11. All in vain.

The essence of Space-1-expansion[Diagram; Figs. 1.1; 1.2],and of relativistic gravity cosmology, are not easy to grasp. I shall therefore assume the position of a tourist guide of a Virtual Deep-Space Tour [Chapter 7] aimed at discovering the ORIGIN and CAUSE of radiation-energy gradients around stars, galaxies, clusters and super-clusters of galaxies4.13; gradients4.13 that generate all irreversible processes in nature, including those that lead to life. The key mission during the Tour is to search for ‘adiabatic envelopes’4.15 that wrap filaments or clouds of clusters or super-clusters of galaxies. These clusters and superclusters are like islands of non-expanding, gravity-bounded aggregations, in expanding, unsaturable sink. It is to this sink that all ‘solar-wind-type’ of radiation-energy in the universe is irreversibly pouring in. Local quasars4.14 and black holes4.3 form additional, local sinks. Their ancestors, the massive gravitational aggregations4.1; 4.2; 4.5; 4.14, also had come into being by Space-1-Expansion. [Diagram p.3; Figs. 1.1; 1.2, p.3]. The universal sink is composed of a large number of interconnected ‘voids’ and adiabatic cells4.15

[Diagram, sites (a), (b),

(c,] each imaginary adiabatic envelope ‘encages’ a super-cluster or superclusters of galaxies by no-net-flow of energy across its isotropic and homogeneous, large-scale, geometrical boundaries. [Fig. 1.2, p.4, p.3]

During the tour I must cross frozen disciplines and bring home the evidence about the MASTER ARROW OF TIME [Volume I].

Back to earth I re-assess how gravity and Space-1-Expansion-Inducedgradients (Diagram, p.3) cause not only all irreversible processes and time-asymmetries, but how they control ‘Gravity Selection’ and orientation that, in turn, control plant and animal behavior, languages and key concepts in the ‘exact sciences’ and the ‘humanities’ 1.1


20

CONTENTS OF THE FOUR VOLUMES

VOLUME I

Worldwide Acclaims ……………………………………...……… iiSIR KARL POPPER, Foreword ……………….……………..…. xxSIR ALAN COTTRELL, Foreword ………………….………..... xxi Preface ……………………………………..….……….…..……... xxii

Introduction …………..………………………..…………………. 2 1.1 The Revival of Relativistic Cosmology vs. Modified Concepts in Physics and Philosophy …………………...….… 2

1.1.1 The problem of ordering ……………………...….… 31.1.2 How did it all start? ………………………………... 5 1.1.3 The first seven stages …………………………….... 7

Assertion 001

A ‘precise definition’ is often slippery, distorted or misleading. Contrary to intent, it may cause a large error. (Chapter 8, p.106). Nonetheless, we usually assume that we know exactly what we are defining, or talking about, until

someone starts wondering, if at all: What is its complete meaning?Our scientific-educational practice often begins a lesson, or a theory, by

defining a symbol, axiom, or an object – the act that a priori erects a ‘fence’ around each: Anything outside that fence is, a priori, lost.

There is no fence outside the cosmos. [S. Hawking and his club (Appendix III, p.160), have claimed that they had invented ‘The Theory of Everything’. Indeed, it accepts no fence for there is no one below their smallest ‘thing’ (10-35 meter) or outside the biggest one: the Cosmos. Nevertheless, they had to retract from that claim. Moreover, their ‘string theories’4.6-4.11 are not scientific [51, 53]. Their smallest scale is more than 15 orders of magnitude below any verification scale of any current --and expected -- experimental technique in science (10-19 meter).Hence, it is better to begin this course and worldoutlook with key verified facts about the cosmos, and we already possess them. [Cf. Figs. 1.1, 1.2,

p.4, and Table I, p.40], We can then work back and forth between these reliable facts and general relativistic cosmology, instead of with

microphysics and then proceeding up the scale to explain the overall cosmic facts, for, unlike the strong force3.2 in quantum physics,

gravitation3.3 penetrates all, is scale-free and constitutes the greatest macro builder in the universe. Moreover, according to the great Greek

philosopher Plato: Everything is connected with everything else.Therefore, any reliable definition must begin with 'the whole universe', or

fail. [Chapter 4, p.70].Mathematically-based theories that predict a new entity that is verified by

independent experimentation, or astronomical observations, is an essential part of verifiable science. Otherewise it is neither complete nor

in verified science. (Chapter 8, p.106]


21

1.1.4 The present matter-dominated era …………………….. 11 2.1 The Einsteinian Methodology: A Preliminary Remark . 11

2.2 The Withdrawal of Philosophy From Physics (and ofPhysics From Philosophy) …………………………….…...… 13

2.3 The Greatest Ambition of Physics ……………………..…...... 162.3.1 Unification of initial-boundary conditions first?

Unification of fields second? …………………...….... 162.3.2 Should unification begin with differential equations? …………………..…….…...… 17

2.4 The Great Physico-Philosophical Gains FromThe Discovery of the Cosmic Background Radiation ……….. 19

2.5 The Expanding Universe ………………………….…….…... 222.6 The 1977 “Aether Drift” Discovery ……………..………....…. 232.7 Verification of Physical Laws by Astronomy and

Astrophysics ……………………………………….……….… 243.1 Some Tentative Assertions …...……………………..…...….. 263.2 The Skeptic’s Outlook .……………………...………..…...….. 69

PART I: Preliminary Concepts

1. From Terrestrial Gravitational Structures To Black Holes and Neutrinos in Astrophysics ……...….. 74

1.1 Gravitation, Asymmetry and Structure ……………….…… 801.1.1 A fallacy associated with current theories ……..…. 80 1.1.2 Gravity-induced sedimentary structures ………….. 81

1.2 Stellar Structures and the Hertzsprung-Russel Diagram …. 881.3 Supernovae, Gravitational Collapse,

Neutron Stars, Pulsars ……………………………………. 921.4 X-Ray Astronomy, Binary X-Ray Systems, and Gravitational Clocks ……………………………………... 1001.5 Black Holes …………………………………………….… 1061.6 Gas, Dust and the Formation of Stars in Our Galaxy ….… 1131.7 How Are Cosmic Distances Measured? ………………… 1161.8 Neutrino Astronomy and Astrophysics ………………… 1301.9 The Emergence of Gamma-Ray Astronomy ……………. 1321.10 Exploration of Extra-Solar Space By Unmanned Spacecraft ……………………………….. 134

2. From “Conservation” in Classical Physics To Solitons in Particle Physics ………………………..…… 136

2.1 Aim and Scope …………………………………………... 138


22

2.2 Limitations of Theory …………………………………… 1402.3 The General Macroscopic Equation …………………….. 1422.4 Continuity Equation (Total Mass Conservation) ………... 1462.5 Conservation of Linear Momentum and Gravity.………… 1472.6 The Navier-Stokes Equations and Gravity ………………. 1492.7 Kinetic-Energy Equation and Dissipation Function in Gravitational Fields ……………. 1522.8 First Law of Thermodynamics or Energy

Conservation Equation …………………………………… 1542.9 First Law and Enthalpy ………………………………….. 1562.10 First Law In Terms of Temperature Field ……………….. 1572.11 Entropy Balance Equation ……………………………….. 1592.12 Beyond Classical Physics:

Solitons, Antisolitons and Conservation …………………. 1602.13 Neutrinos and the Powerful Role Conservation Equations Play in Subatomic Processes (Addendum) …… 163

3. From General Relativity and Relativistic Cosmology To Gauge Theories ………………………….……………….. 166

3.1 Introduction ……………………………………………….... 1673.1.1 Einstein’s field equations in general relativity ……….….. 1693.1.2 Confirmation of Einstein’s Theory of Gravitation ………. 172

3.2 Principles and Formulations of General Relativity andRelativistic Cosmology ………………...…………………… 181

3.3 Observations, The “Age” of the UniverseAnd “Equivalent Local Cells” …………………….……….… 200

3.4 Timekeeping, Accelerated Observers and thePrinciple Of Equivalence …………………………………… 204

3.5 From General Relativity to Unified Field Theories ………… 205

PART II: From Physics to Philosophical Crossroadsand Back

4. The Arrows of Time …………………………………..….…... 2144.1 Time and The Arrow of Time:

The Most Distorted Of All Ideas? ………………………….. 2154.2 Asymmetry-Symmetry-Space-Time and The Unification of The Laws of Physics …………………… 2164.3 Methodology, Aim and Scope ……………………………… 2174.4 Confusing Concepts of Time and Time Asymmetries ……… 2194.5 The Entropic Arrow of Time ……………………………….. 2224.6 Causality, Causation and Time Asymmetries ………………. 226


23

4.7 Causation and Determinism in Relativistic Theories ………………………………………… 227

4.8 Cosmological Arrows of Time and Cosmic Time …………. 2304.9 A Few Remarks …………………………………………….. 2324.10 Time-Reversal Invariance and Irreversibility …………….… 2364.11 Microscopic Time Asymmetries in “Elementary Particles” ………………………….……….. 2404.12 The Death of Scale-Based Physics ……………….………… 2424.13 The “Dual” Quantum-Geometrodynamical

School and “Superspace” ………………………………….. 2434.14 Tachyons and Causal Violations …………………….……… 2464.15 Macrocausality and Microcausality in Quantum Mechanics … 2474.16 Fading Memory in Classical Physics ……………………….. 2474.17 Doubts As To The Universality of Entropy ………………… 2494.18 Entropy-Free Thermodynamic Arrows of Time ………….…. 250

5. The Crisis In Quantum Physics ………………………….…… 254 5.1 Preliminary Review …………………………………….……. 255

5.1.1 The effect of gravitation and the outside world on quantum physics …………………………..…. 258

5.1.2 The three main schools of thought ………………….… 2615.2 Einstein’s Objections to the Uncertainty Principle ………….. 2625.3 The Heresy of a Few Skeptics …………………………….…. 2655.4 Mythologized Concepts of Quantum Physics …………….…. 2655.5 The Failure of Classical and Quantal Statistical Mechanics to Deduce Irreversibility and Time Asymmetries ……………………………………………….… 2675.6 The Emergence of Quantum Chromodynamics

And Super-Symmetry ………………………………………... 2725.6.1 Spatio-Temporal Approach to Quantum Physics …….. 2725.6.2 From Weinberg-Salam Theory to

Quantum Chromodynamics …………………………... 2735.6.2.1 Conservation laws as symmetry principles;

and vice versa …………………………………... 2735.6.2.2 Global, exact, approximate, isotopic and SU(3) symmetries ………………………..… 2745.6.2.3 From SU(3) to renormalizable gauge

theories ……………………………………….... 2765.6.2.4 Quark confinement asymptotic freedom

in gauge theories ……………………………. 276-15.6.2.5 QCD and the search for higher symmetry

principles …………………………………… 276-1


24

5.6.3 From Quantum Field Theories to Super-SymmetrySuper-Gravity …………………………………….… 276-3

5.6.3.1 On the limits of super-gravity‘unified field theories’ ………………………... 276-4

PART III: From Physics to Cosmological Crossroadsand Back

6. Cosmology, Physics and Philosophy ……………………. 2776.1 Reduction of Thermodynamics to Gravitation ……… 277

6.1.1 Methodology …………………………………. 2776.1.2 Dialectical gravitism: Definition of the

first problems ………………………………… 2786.1.3 Gravitation as super-asymmetry …………….. 279

6.2 The Earliest and Most Universal Asymmetry: Observational Evidence …………………..………….. 279

6.2.1 Which space expands and which does not? …… 2826.3 Gravitation-Asymmetry Principle of Equivalence ….. 2846.4 Can Intercluster Space Be Saturated With Radiation? . 2876.5 Derivation of the Master Asymmetry

From Gravitation Theories …………………………. 2906.6 Irreversibility in the New Gravitational

Cosmological Thermodynamics ……………………. 2936.7 Origin of Dissipation in Newtonian Fluids …………. 2976.8 Terrestrial Thermodynamics ………………………… 2996.9 Connections With Classical and Continuum

Thermodynamics ……………………………………. 3016.10 Electromagnetic Irreversibility

And the Master Asymmetry ……………………...….. 303

7. Cosmological Origin of Time and Evolution ……………… 3087.1 Time: The All-Embracing Concept ………………….. 3097.2 Cosmological Origin of Time ………………………. 3107.3 Cosmological Interpretations of Newton’s

Laws of Motion …………………………………..…. 3147.4 Gravitational Origin of Structure and Evolution .…… 3167.5 Gravitation and the Outflow of Energy Into

Un-Saturable Space ………………………………… 322 7.6 Stellar Evolution ……………………………………. 3247.7 Terrestrial Evolution ………………………………... 325 7.8 Some Open Questions ……………………………… 326

7.8.1 Microscopic T-Violation and the Master


25

Asymmetry: A possible Connection? ………..… 327

8. Black Holes and the Unification of Asymmetries ……… 3298.1 Introduction ……………………………………….. 3308.2 Observational Evidence …………………………… 3318.3 Schwarzschild Solution and Black Holes …………. 3328.4 Black Holes Mechanics and Entropy ……………… 3408.5 Can Black Holes “Evaporate”? ……………………. 3418.6 Primordial Black Holes? …………………………... 3418.7 Back to the Melting Pot of Unification? …………... 341

PART IV: Beyond Present Knowledge

9. Havahayism – The Science of The Whole …………..…… 3489.1 The Futile Quest for Final Answers ……………….. 3499.2 An Example in Havahayism ……………………..…. 3509.3 From Cosmology to Irreversible Structures and Memory ……………………………………..…. 3659.4 The Skeptic Outlook ……………………………..…. 415

VOLUME II

Critique of Western Thought

Introduction ………………………………………………….... 420

10. A Few Historical Remarks on Time, Mind and Symmetry ………………………………………..… 437

11. The Philosophy of Time & Change: Some Historical Notions …………………….………… 455

12. Structuralism and the Divided American Thought: A Short Glossary of Terms …………………………….. 467

13. Policy and Publicity: A Critique ………………………. 483

14. Thought-Provoking and Thought-Depressing Quotations ………………………………………………. 495

15. Critique of Western Methodology …………………….. 530


26

VOLUME III

THE FIRST ONLINE DRAFT OF THE FREE CORE CURRICULUM COURSE


Dec. 15, 2007, MSN SCRIBD

1. Introduction ………………………………………..…………… 11

2. From Cosmology to the Foundations of Physics ………..…….. 29

3. Gravity-Induced Brain-Mind Perception Vs. Everyday Life …44

4. How Did It All Start? …………………………………………… 55

5. ‘Gravitational Selection’ Vs. 'Natural Selection' ……….……... 64

6. Condensed World History …………………………………...… 69

7. The Skeptic Outlook ……………………………………….….. 94

8. Beyond Present Knowledge …………………………………… 100

9. CCC Homework ……………………………………………….. 103

References and Further Reading …………………..………….. 122


27


Benjamin Gal-Or, Vol. IV [This Vol. 4]

Free, Core Curriculum Course (CCC), MSN SCRIBD, July 2008

Worldwide Acclaims [Part 1] ……………………..………..….....…… 2

Illustrated Preface ……………………………………………………… 3

Synopsis I ………………….……………………………………….….…. 5

Synopsis II: How to Use This Book ………………………….….... 15

ContentsVolume I ……………………………………………………..………………...…. 20Volume II ……..………………………………………………………………....… 25Volume III ………………….……………………………………………...…..….. 26Volume IV ……………………………………….………………………….….… 27

Worldwide Acclaims [Part 2] ………………… …………..….….….. 29

INTRODUCTION

Notes to Readers, Students, Mentors and Professors ….… 32Knowledge Is One. Its Division is Human Weakness;The Crisis In Education; The Temples of knowledge; Assertions I.1 to I.9

PART A

From General Relativistic Cosmology to Unified Physics

1. How Did It All Start? General Relativistic Cosmology ……….… 40 The New Astrophysical Time; TABLE I, Figs. 1.1 & 1.2 of the Universe

2. How All Life Would End? ………………………………………… 55 Recent discovery: The expansion of Space-1 is accelerating to a cold death of all life

3. The Greatest Ambition of Physics …………………………….... 60Gravity, Electro-Weak, Quantum Physics; String Theories; Thermodynamics


28

PART B

From Cosmic Structures to Everyday Life and Back

4. Can The Foundations of Science Be Deduced From General Relativistic Cosmology? ……………………. 70

5. The 1958 Discovery of The Origin of Time-Asymmetries & Irreversibility ……………………………...………………………….. 81

PART C

Language, Brain-Mind Perception and Gravity

6. Test Your Mind; Bio-Sociology and Everyday life ……… 897. Virtual Deep-Space Expedition To Discover

A New World Outlook ………………………………………… 101

PART D

The Skeptic Outlook

8. Limitations of Mathematically-Based Theories ………... 1059. The Biggest Clash between Science and Religion ……… 11310. Dualities in Science, the Arts and Religions ……….……. 119

APPENDICES

I: Homework and Grading ……………………………………..... 123

II: List of Nobel-Prize Winners by Country ……….….….…...... 125

III: The Pipa Prize to Stephene Hawking ………………………. 160

IV: Personally-Encountered Instructive Lessons ……………... 163

V: Condensed World History TABLE II …………….………... 168

VI: The Origin of Writing, Time, Religion and Literature … 181

VI: Names & Codes of God in Abrahamic Religions …….….. 191

References ….…………………………………………………..….……. 201

Credits & About the Author ………………………………………… 207


29

Worldwide Acclaims CONTINUES FROM PAGE 2

"The Judeo-Christian Tradition” is in accord with Gal-Or’s conclusions states Weisskopf and quotes:

"Most astrophysicists, cosmologists and astronomers agree that the biblical account of cosmic evolution, in stressing `a beginning´ and the initial roles of `void,´ `light´ and a `structure-less´ state, may be uncannily close to the verified evidence with which modern science

ha already supplied us"V.F. Weisskopf, Scientific American

Gal-Or launchs a new spirit of inquiry by his excellent and thought provoking writings. I would recommend awarding a prize and would hope

that this would serve to focus attention on a most important subject. T. Gold, Cornell University

One noted scientist [B. Gal-Or], even affirms that the stress placed by Genesis, Chapter one, on ‘beginning’ and the initial roles of ‘void’, ‘light’

and a ‘structure-less’ state, “may be uncannily close to the verified evidence with which modern science has already supplied us.”

Christian Apologetics, Journal

A comprehensive explication of a large area of science which the reader may study in many subjects. Highly recommended to the philosopher of science. Contemporary Philosophy

An interesting and original book, easy to read, interesting and fascinating. Nouvo Cimento

This book has a wide-ranging scope. Dr. Gal-Or develops a philosophy of science which he calls Havahyism. Space Science Reviews

Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data Systems

A book like this should be in all libraries and in the hands ofmany astronomers.

Cornelis De Jager, Laboratory for Space Research, Utrecht,The Netherlands, Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data Systems

Interesting to read, integrating much of scientific material.Deutsche Literaturzeitung

One of the best books on the totality of the sciences & the universe/ It was one of the favorite books of Sir Karl Popper. It looks at physics and

the universe as a totality of the mathematical philosophical understanding. It also combines the physical concept of time with human

psychological perception and brain understanding of languages.Robin (forumhub.com/expr/@202.54.92.222


30

Einstein's time-symmetric tensor was elevated by Gal-Or’s “New Astronomical School of Unified Thermodynamics” to the status of the

source of “Master Asymmetry” controlling not only irreversible thermodynamics, but all physical and biological phenomena!

Gal-Or calls “GRAVITISM” (his philosophy) that gravitation is the prime cause of structures, irreversibility, time, geo-chemical and biological

evolution -- that the expansion of the universe is the cause of the second law of thermodynamics -- that microscopic physics, and thermodynamics

in particular, cannot be understood without reference to cosmology.

He ties “irreversibility” to the “expansion of space itself”, i.e. as far as space is expanding, the contribution of all kinds of radiation in space is

weakened “irreversibly” due to the expansion phenomenon itself.

Such loss, or “degradation” of energy in the depth of inter-cluster expanding space, may then be considered as a universal sink for all the radiation flowing out of the material bodies in the expanding universe.

Advancement of Physics, APEIRON

I have in the meantime studied your book, with great interest, and made pages of notes on it. I feel as if I had been on numerous walks and talks with you on the great questions, and know that would be great to go on

with them!Who cannot be impressed by your love for the great men of all times

and all countries, by your phrase “working back and forth between theory and fact”, by your belief that philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers, by your concern for where thought and language lie in the

scheme of things – and by so much more!

I continue to reflect, again and again, on your central thesis that expansion is the origin of all asymmetry in time. What an ingenious phrase is your,

“smuggle irreversibility in without declaring the contraband”!

I regard your book as seeking to accomplish two tasks – and being two books – at the very least.

One is the exposition of your central thesis, with clarity, and careful mustering of every argument pro and con that can lead to testable

consequences.

I don’t see how it is possible to do proper justice to a thesis of such importance by mixing it in with the other great task. That is to give students

an appreciation of the unity of philosophy and modern physics. You do both tasks far better than I could hope to. I give you my personal thanks for

putting the two books into a package that I personally have found most thought-provoking.

John A. WheelerInstitute for Advanced Studies, Princeton


31

Gal-Or's remarkable book [Parts A & B] sees and seizes the world whole. He emphasizes that all scientists operate under some set of

philosophical prejudices, and that failure to acknowledge this is self-delusion. Furthermore, he argues that a failure to attend to the

philosophical base of physics leads to an empty scientism.

His work is challenging on many levels, constituting a review 'with derivations' of general relativity 'as applied to

cosmology', thermodynamics, the current state of theoretical particle physics, astrophysics, as well as a summary history of western philosophy, 'especially the philosophies of time and mind' and

critiques of western society, the intelligentsia and the relationship between academic science and government.

One 'and perhaps the central' theme explored, is that of the interplay between symmetry and asymmetry. His primary interest is not in the

recent progress in the unification of forces in gauge theory, although he finds support in it for his Einsteinian outlook, but is rather time, time's arrow, and the asymmetry between past and future. Around time are accumulated discussions, both mathematical and philosophical, of

thermodynamic reversibility, time reversibility, the nature of causality, and the use of advanced and retarded solutions to wave equations.

The second major theme is that of gravity and its overwhelming domination of the actual form of the universe, at all scales. The

combination of these themes is not accidental; they are point and counterpoint to his thesis that the time asymmetries are connectable to

and perhaps even determined by the master asymmetry given by the gravity of general relativity: the remorseless cosmological expansion. He argues that only the expansion can provide the unification of time

asymmetries.

The expansion provides, among other things, an for radiation, which, in turn, permits the establishment UNSATURABLE SINK of

gradients in temperature and density, which provide the basis for the physical process that leads to life.

He also criticizes the sloppy and improper use of the concepts of entropy 'and the related notions in information theory' and quantum

indeterminism, especially as covers for an inadequate understanding of temporal asymmetries. Taking an Einsteinian position on the

interpretation of quantum mechanics, he looks forward to revitalization of Einstein's quest for a deterministic interpretation of quantum events.

The value of this book lies in the challenging combination of ideas which Gal-Or presents, which goes far beyond what can be

sensibly described in a review. [This] work may be too large to digest as a text in these days of the decline of academic institutions "as Gal-Or describes them", but that will be the loss of both the faculty and the

students.

AMERICAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICS


32

Introduction

Notes to Readers, Students, Mentors and Professors

I.1 The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions

At the beginning of my first professorship position (at the Johns Hopkins University), I was so absorbed in polishing and re-polishing my first lecture that I completely forgot to go to the classroom and teach it.

About 30 minutes past the time, while I was still working hard in re-polishing the lecture, a shy student opened the door of my office to politely inform me that 5 minutes ago all students had left the classroom. The whole university laughed.

Years ago, I tried to simplify Volume I and adapt it for easier reading by all readers and by students outside the domains of physics and philosophy. Being a prisoner of the style, quest and mission of Volumes I, it was almost impossible to simplify and abridge the 300 mathematical equations and 520-pages. That draft was therefore abandoned and forgotten.

In December 2007, a shy student informed me that he could not understand the physico-mathematical themes presented in Volume I, and therefore signed-out of the CCC where it was used.

My immediate reaction was to publish, on December 15, 2007, the unfinished draft as a Free, Online Volume III. Six months later this revised version has become this online book. However, it has not yet been polished and re-polished. Anyway, all mistakes are mine.

* * *

Until around the mid-Thirties of the previous century, Core Cultural-Curriculum Courses (in Europe!) were made as ‘scientific’ as possible, and science propped up its foundations by turning to philosophy. This attitude was in part motivated by the desire to


33

Assertion IN.1

Knowledge is One.Its division, a human weakness;

its aim, a universal beauty;an aesthetic frame of mind;a longing for the run-away

horizons of truth and symmetry that we always try to reach.

Modern physics is a picture of reality; not the house-in-itself.

It is a man-painted picture of Knowledge awaiting

to be discoverd.

Assertion IN.2

The origin of our aspirations to advance interconnected thinking

is not known. What we know is that it is not

rooted in “well-fenced” traditions and “accepted” disciplinary

sciences.

Our educational mission is to bridge fragmented courses in modern curriculum courses,

with an all-embracing outlook, and adapt it to face the ever-growing needs of narrowing

specialism.

appropriate the sciences with the great ‘prestige’ of philosophers, and for the philosopher the fast-growing ‘status’ of science.

Hence, European professors vied with one another in presenting science based on high philosophical grounds, and philosophy as a ‘science among sciences’, or even as the ‘sum of the other sciences’.

A ‘PhD’ was then a bona fide Philosophy Doctor, a person of advanced core knowledge and eloquence outside his specialism.

Western education has since withdrawn from the game.

Empty specialism has since gained the highest prestige, especially in the U.S.; no longer do professors need borrow it from philosophy, nor to teach Core Curriculum Courses [CCC].

Indeed, contemporary teachers and professors vie with one another in presenting fragmented, technical lectures devoid of interconnected content, for they can no longer hope to achieve popularity by injecting updated core knowledge into what has gradually become an ever narrower, disciplinary professionalism.

This turn of events has resulted in overvaluation of technical professionalism, empty academicism, absolutation of ever-narrower


34

disciplines, and the common inclination to reject bona fide core knowledge from the class. A pity. For these trends only push the young into cynicism, nihilism and feelings of emptiness in education and in society at large.

I.2 Interconnected Thinking, Teaching and Research

Although most academic teaching and research must be distributed amongst various departments of a university, there is an objective need to regenerate an old tradition that cannot be associated with any specialism, because the ideas with which it deals are common to all studies, or not involved in any. Accordingly, the selection of interconnected kernels of updated knowledge to be included in this book is based on an interconnected approach to what I consider a much needed, simplified CCC book for all.

The Current Crisis in Educationis not subsiding. More than ever before it demands answers, re-assessments, a neo-philosophy and acts: How to teach mutual interactions instead of linear causality; structured complexity instead of summation of events; structured historical buildup of facts, instead of summation of isolated events.

Modern skepticism is usually the negation of a core, interconnected, educational methodology. Not so with Einstein's skepticism.

Assertion IN.3

The greatest challenge in aquiring updated, verified knowledge and the ability to be intellectually independent, is self-removal of externally-imposed disciplinary borders while working hard,

often alone, as an AUTODIDACT.


35

Assertion IN.4

Without a Guiding-Structuring Theme, or at least a Unified World Outlook for gaining an all-embracing, interconnected culture-

knowledge that crosses frozen disciplines, any CCC is nothing but a pity encyclopedia

displayed by a specialist nominated by “Organizers” as the“CCC-Coordinator”, who remains helpless in teaching the alluring beauty of mathematics, physics, the life sciences,

and comparative religions but fails to perceive their profound educational implications to all, as a whole.

To start with, Einstein advocated the total removal of borders between traditional disciplines.

The current academic crisis, especially in the U.S., may be moderated by using the Einsteinian methodology, at least as properly adapted CCC series provided in high-schools and, on structured higher levels, in undergraduate and graduate schools.

Such a methodology may lead to new, interconnected fertilization between the most promising kernels of fundamental knowledge, and, thus, to the potential to rejuvenate educational methodology by resorting to an old-new world-outlook and practice.

Assertion IN.5

Structuring an all-embracing CCC-Outlook is a matter entailing far more ambiguity than the technicalities of the application of

any disciplinary course and its “Academic Credit Regulations”.

Assertion IN.6

Students are often discouraged by their professors and mentors from asking fundamental, interdisciplinary questions in class,

as a result of which inconsistent, or outright incorrect premises, are given a better chance of perpetuating themselves.


36

Literary intellectuals at one pole – at the other scientists,

and as the most representative,the physical scientists.

Between the two a gulf of mutual incomprehension –

sometimes (particularly among the young) hostility and dislike,

but most of all lack of understanding.

C. P. Snow, The Two CultureCambridge University Press [33]

Assertion IN.7

Students flood colleges and universities with the hope

of finding there the grand outlook of a spacecraft.

Entering our temples of knowledge they settle for that of an eagle, but what they often find

is that of a specialist gopher.

I.3 Our Temples of Knowledge

Literary intellectuals, the ‘humanists’, people of the arts and most educators are currently ignorant of modern advances in the ‘exact sciences’, of their mathematical formulations, experimental, observational and verification methods. They are likely to resort to an a priori, or superficial answers to complex problems whose detailed implications are beyond them.

Similarly, faculty, ‘experts’ and professionals in the “exact sciences”, via their past, ever-narrowing, disciplinary education, are currently ignorant of the wide-span knowledge, literature, arts and history that are needed to share their thinking and aspirations with other thinking persons.

The resulting gap can hardly be bridged despite the fact that our globe is currently an interconnected village, internationally linked by what might be expected to bridge old gaps between cultures, languages, religions and educational disciplines.

Nevertheless, the facts are that deep divisions keep deepening and deserts of narrow specialism keep spreading more than ever before. A sad fact. A dark future.

I.4 From General Relativistic Cosmology to Re-Assess

The Foundations of Science, or Vice Versa?


37

Assertion IN.9

Thanks to the subdivision of knowledge into fragmented

‘disciplines’ and ‘territories’, we often fail to perceive the

interconnectedness between ‘self-centered’, or conflicting outlooks,

to judge their collective importance and to estimate their

inherent structure, inner logic and ordering.

In trying to overcome this lacuna, I begin this book with cosmology and its distorted image among

scientists and laypersons.[Assertion 001,

p.20]

Assertion IN.8

Large cosmological systems dominate smaller ones, not vice

versa. [ASSERTION 001, P.20]

Vindicated by empirical data that span a broad range of modern

astronomy, astrophysics, physics, biophysics, socio-biology, history and archeology, this assertion is employed here to arrive at some new concepts in a fresh world

outlook on science, philosophy and beyond.

In selecting knowledge kernels to be included here, I am simultaneously faced with subjectivistic and objectivistic discourses; subjectivistic, because all thought is, to some extent, ordered by personal bias; objectivistic, because all rational empirical knowledge singles out regularity and order ranging from the objectivistic origins of anything in the world, to the subjectivistic perception of the individual ‘Here-Now’.

Nevertheless, the following issues may also need to be encountered:

Should this course be directed from ‘innate’, or ‘a priori ideas’ of subjective human knowledge, to ‘external’ objective concepts? Or vice versa?

Should a bona fide CCC begin by updated, key, verified facts and discoveries and their origins and vindications by modern empirical knowledge? or by unverifiable string theories4.6-2.11 that attempt to unify all fundamental forces-interactions in physics? 3.1-3.3

Einstein’s failed attempts to unify [deterministic] gravity physics3.3 with [non-deterministic] quantum physics3.2, have played a major role in structuring this book. Both drive the (unpopular) philosophy to rejuvenate and bring closer together interconnected educational methodologies in the ‘humanities’ and the ‘exact sciences’.


38

Conclusion: The guiding philosophy and practice of bona fide CCC-Series are too important to be left to the sole care of disciplinary experts.

I.5 Survival of a Civilization and Education

Culture and a civilization are precarious. Their survival depends on innovation and inner morality a splendid minority maintains with incalculable effects these have had upon all well being of academia, government and socio-economic of each country at all times. It is therefore pertinent to investigate how, where and when such rare developments occur or are subdued.

The origin of this problem is intimately linked to the non-interconnected moral roles played by some scientists, politicians, large companies lobbyists and law manipulators in our civilization today.

A contemporary lobbyist can only deal with problems by applying those disciplinary methods and non-interconnected moral codes that are familiar to him or her through the non-philosophical (and sometimes anti-intellectual) methods of current education.

The resulting vicious cycle opens unbridgeable gaps between the ‘professionals’, and, gradually, isolates each. It is this separatism that causes declining standards, empty government and the current crisis in education.

Most students today participate in fragmented courses of disciplinary professionalism that leave them with a feeling of inner cultural emptiness in academia. In fact, what they find in the temples of knowledge is bureaucracy, inertia, nihilism, careerism, populism and irresponsibility of the faculty to provide them with what would make them bona fide cultured persons.

Wondering about their lost dream in the temples of knowledge, some promising students ask:

Has the Time for Cultured Mentors in Academia Passed?


39

An ambitious student, who commences his/her studies in the firm belief that much of the fundamental-core knowledge of our civilization is comprehended by at least most faculty, is extremelyperplexed to discover, sooner or later, that the professors are uncertain about the fundamental, interconnected meanings of what they teach in class.

Other, who seek explanations about the world at large in which they live or about the worlds at small that compose the world at large, realize that it entails sub-terrainian links between an undeclared philosophy of fragmented education as adhered to nowadays by most.

That mundane philosophy of education is bound to confront intellectually starving students. Sensing that, the intellectually-starving students often give up, or blame themselves unnecessarily for their inability to grasp what their mentors dismiss as trivial.

A splendid minority of bright students dare to continue, by themselves, the interminable search, which calls for questioning, re-examination, screening, and at times radical rejection of ‘accepted’, or ‘established doctrines’ that fail to justify themselves through their own logic, consistency, universality and testability.

Int.1 Footnotes presented in this volume are often interconnected. They have been included to detail or illuminate some specific subjects, disputes and issues that are related the Central Theme. But no footnote can be considered as “Introduction to”, “Review of”, or “History of” the “Disciplinary Domain” it deals with, or refers to.

Without resorting to any mathematical equation, a few footnotes dealing with specific subjects stand about ‘midway’ between mathematically-formulated concepts provided in Volume I, and the abridged-simplified ones adopted here. Reference to them is marked as: […] 1.1, 1.2, …, 2.1, 2.2, …, or as […]AII.1; AII.2, …, namely, located in Chapters 1, 2, … etc., or in Appendix II, etc., respectively.

Int.2References are minimized for reasons elaborated below. The few provided at book-end are

marked as […][1, 2, …] or Ref. 11, etc.. Selection of what to read and what to study, and in what order, depends on the reader’s interests, background and on a qualified CCC-coordinator, if there is one.

Adding extensive bibliography may be confusing or misleading; there is always a temptation to be “in” regarding what has recently attracted popular attention. There are also the ‘name droppers’, the ones who wish to impress others, or put them down, if they have not heard about their last peer-circle annual meeting, or what the ‘name dropper’ had picked up in a party, committee, a club, or the media.

No science is immune to the infection of politicsand the corruption of power.

Jacob Bronowski


40

APPENDICES I and II

Homework and Grading

Start with the Works of

Nobel Prize Winners, Listed by Country

All scientists operate under some set of personal philosophies, whether declared or not. A failure to acknowledge that is self-delusion8.4.

Accordingly, I open this Appendix by stressing my own subjectivistic approach and guidelines while aiming at objectivistic ones.

But when it comes to homework selection and grading it may be a different kind of personal responsibility. There are at least two categories of students, faculty and general readers.

The first one may select homework themes and sources according to their own personal philosophy. They may need minimal guidance, or none at all.

The second category may rely on sources that are recommended here. The potential problem with this category may originate from the reliability and objectivity of some the selected sources.

Hence, according to my experience, one must a priori be informed about potential subjectivistic interpretations associated with any GROUP of sources. At this point my selection priorities and general guidelines are:


41

1. Nobel Prizes are pre-supposed to minimize subjectivistic

selections and interpretations. But as all scientists are, they also

harbor no immunity against making biased mistakes, or errors

2. Most important, they do not include important domains of

science and philosophy such as mathematics, astronomy,

archeology, geology, history, anthropology, biology, bio-

engineering, engineering, aerospace, sociobiology, ecology and

philosophy of science.

3. Nevertheless, a selection of a Nobel-Prize-Committee’s

Description of the subject for which a Nobel Prize had been

awarded, may be relatively safer than using other sources.

[Obviously, it may be found wrong or misleading at a later

time. But that is part of the history of science.]

4. Hence, the source list provided in Appendix II is recommended.

5. A mathematically based theory, by itself, is not safe.

6. “Authorities” quoted by anyone may not be safe.

7. A long list of “Authorities” is not safer than a small one.

8. Using wide-scope common sources like Wikipedia and

Britannica may not be safe, but see below.

9. Using articles published by ‘top’, ‘peer-reviewed’ journals,

periodicals and patent offices may not be safe.

Homework on a Subject for Which a Nobel Prize Was Awarded

By clicking a name on the list provided in Appendix II one is linked to Wikipedia, where a published review on the subject for which a Nobel-Prize was awarded, had been provided by a Nobel-Prize selecting body.


42

The articles published by Wikipedia contain an (Edit) LINK. At the end of your work you may be able to contribute to the subject that you had selected for study, research and homework. Good luck!

Appendix II_____________________________________

List of Nobel-prize Winners By Country

The latest Nobel-Prize Winners in each country are listed first. Homework may best be based on the latest discoveries as described by the awarding committies.

Biographies are interesting and may be included in an assay as a brief background. Nonetheless, any homework assay intended for grading should mainly be based on a scientific topic.

Peace Laurates are interesting, but are outside the scope of this book.

A star* may be added below next to a name when the Laurate has been associated with more than one country.

The Nobel-Prize Commitees have provided the Free EncyclodepdiaWikipedia with data on each Laurate. By typing or clicking below on the Laurate name, one can get the data from Wikipedia, or use Google for internet search engines, or quality book libraries.

Data typed into the Google search engine should be inside quotation marks, for instance, “Albert Einstein”, “A. Einstein”, or “Einstein, Albert”. Good Luck!

Argentina

César Milstein*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1984

Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, Peace, 1980

Luis Federico Leloir, Chemistry, 1970

Bernardo Houssay, Physiol. or Medicine, 1947

Carlos Saavedra Lamas, Peace, 1936


43

Australia

Barry Marshall, Physiol. or Medicine, 2005

J. Robin Warren, Physiol. or Medicine, 2005

Rolf M. Zinkernagel*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1996

Peter Doherty, Physiol. or Medicine, 1996

John Warcup Cornforth, Chemistry, 1975

Patrick White*, Literature, 1973

John Carew Eccles, Physiol. or Medicine, 1963

Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet, Physiol. or Medicine, 1960

Sir Howard Florey, Physiol. or Medicine, 1945

William Henry Bragg*, Physics, 1915

William Lawrence Bragg*, Physics, 1915

Austria

Elfriede Jelinek, Literature, 2004

Eric R. Kandel*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2000

Walter Kohn*, Chemistry, 1998

Friedrich Hayek, Economics, 1974

Konrad Lorenz, Physiol. or Medicine, 1973

Karl von Frisch*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1973

Wolfgang Pauli, Physics, 1945

Otto Loewi*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1936

Victor Franz Hess, Physics, 1936

Richard Kuhn*, Chemistry 1938

Erwin Schrödinger, Physics, 1933

Karl Landsteiner, Physiol. or Medicine, 1930

Julius Wagner-Jauregg, Physiol. or Medicine, 1927

Richard Adolf Zsigmondy*, Chemistry, 1925

Robert Bárány*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1914


44

Alfred Hermann Fried*, Peace, 1911

Bertha von Suttner*, Peace, 1905

Belgium

Ilya Prigogine*, Chemistry, 1977

Christian de Duve*, Physiol. and Medicine, 1974

Albert Claude, Physiol. and Medicine, 1974

Georges Pire, Peace, 1958

Corneille Heymans, Physiol. and Medicine, 1938

Jules Bordet, Physiol. and Medicine, 1919

Henri La Fontaine, Peace, 1913

Maurice Maeterlinck, Literature, 1911

Auguste Beernaert, Peace, 1909

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Vladimir Prelog*, Chemistry, 1975

Ivo Andric*, Literature, 1961

Brazil

Peter Medawar*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1960

Bulgaria

Elias Canetti, Literature, 1981

Canada

Robert Mundell, Economics, 1999

Myron Scholes*, Economics, 1997

William Vickrey*, Economic Sciences, 1996

Bertram N. Brockhouse, Physics, 1994

Michael Smith*, Chemistry, 1993

Rudolph Marcus*, Chemistry, 1992

Richard E. Taylor, Physics, 1990

Sidney Altman, Chemistry, 1989


45

John C. Polanyi*, Chemistry, 1986

David H. Hubel*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1981

Saul Bellow*, Literature, 1976

Gerhard Herzberg*, Chemistry, 1971

Charles B. Huggins*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1966

Lester B. Pearson, Peace, 1957

William Giauque*, Chemistry, 1949

John James Richard Macleod, Scotland, Physiol. or Medicine, 1923

Frederick G. Banting, Physiol. or Medicine, 1923

China

Gao Xingjian*, Literature, 2000

Daniel C. Tsui*, Physics, 1998

Edmond H. Fischer*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1992

Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama*, Peace, 1989 [now India]

Chen Ning Yang, Physics, 1957

Tsung-Dao Lee, Physics, 1957

Chile

Pablo Neruda, Literature, 1971

Gabriela Mistral, Literature, 1945

Colombia

Gabriel García Márquez, Literature, 1982

Costa Rica

Oscar Arias Sánchez, Peace, 1987

Croatia


Ivo Andric*, Literature, 1961

Lavoslav Ružička, Chemistry, 1939


46

Czech Republic

Peter Grünberg*, Physics, 2007

Jaroslave Seifert, Literature, 1984

Jaroslav Heyrovský, Chemistry, 1959

Gerty Cori*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1947

Denmark

Jens Christian Skou, Chemistry, 1997

Niels K. Jerne, Physiol. or Medicine, 1984

Ben Mottelson, Physics, 1975

Aage Bohr, Physics, 1975

Johannes Vilhelm Jensen, Literature, 1944

Henrik Dam, Physiol. or Medicine, 1943

Johannes Fibiger, Physiol. or Medicine, 1926

Niels H. Bohr, Physics, 1922

Schack August Steenberg Krogh, Physiol. or Medicine, 1920

Henrik Pontoppidan, Literature, 1917

Karl Gjellerup, Literature, 1917

Fredrik Bajer, Peace, 1908

Niels Ryberg Finsen, Physiol. or Medicine, 1903

East Timor

Carlos Felipe Ximenes Belo*, Peace, 1996

José Ramos-Horta*, Peace, 1996

Egypt

Mohamed ElBaradei, Peace, 2005

Ahmed H. Zewail* Chemistry, 1999

Naguib Mahfouz, Literature, 1988

Anwar Sadat, Peace, 1978


47

Faroe Islands

Niels Finsen, Physiol. or Medicine, 1903

Finland

Ragnar Granit*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1967

Artturi Ilmari Virtanen, Chemistry, 1945

Frans Eemil Sillanpää, Literature, 1939

France

Albert Fert, Physics, 2007

Yves Chauvin, Chemistry, 2005

Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Algeria, Physics, 1997

Georges Charpak, Physics, 1992

Pierre-Gilles de Gennes, Physics, 1991

Maurice Allais, Economics, 1988

Jean-Marie Lehn, Chemistry, 1987

Claude Simon*, Literature, 1985

Gerard Debreu, Economics, 1983

Jean Dausset, Physiol. or Medicine, 1980

Roger Guillemin*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1977

Seán MacBride*, Peace, 1974

Louis Néel, Physics, 1970

René Cassin, Peace, 1968

Alfred Kastler, Physics, 1966

François Jacob, Physiol. or Medicine, 1965

Jacques Monod, Physiol. or Medicine, 1965

André Lwoff, Physiol. or Medicine, 1965

Jean-Paul Sartre, Literature, 1964

Saint-John Perse*, Literature, 1960

Albert Camus*, Literature, 1957


48

Andre Frederic Cournand, Physiol. or Medicine, 1956

François Mauriac, Literature, 1952

Léon Jouhaux, Peace, 1951

André Gide, Literature, 1947

Roger Martin du Gard, Literature, 1937

Frédéric Joliot, Chemistry, 1935

Irène Joliot-Curie, Chemistry, 1935

Ivan Bunin, Russia, Literature, 1933

Charles Nicolle, Physiol. or Medicine, 1928

Henri Bergson, Literature, 1927

Ferdinand Buisson, Peace, 1927

Aristide Briand, Peace, 1926

Jean-Baptiste Perrin, Physics, 1926

Anatole France, Literature, 1921

Léon Bourgeois, Peace, 1920

Romain Rolland, Literature, 1915

Charles Richet, Physiol. or Medicine, 1913

Alexis Carrel, Medicine, 1912

Paul Sabatier, Chemistry, 1912

Victor Grignard, Chemistry, 1912

Marie Curie*, Chemistry, 1911

Paul-Henri-Benjamin d'Estournelles de Constant, Peace, 1909

Gabriel Lippmann*, Physics, 1908

Alphonse Laveran, Physiol. or Medicine, 1907

Louis Renault, Peace, 1907

Henri Moissan, Chemistry, 1906

Frédéric Mistral, Literature, 1904

Antoine Henri Becquerel, Physics, 1903


49

Pierre Curie, Physics, 1903

Marie Curie*, Physics, 1903

Frédéric Passy, Peace, 1901

Sully Prudhomme, Literature, 1901

Germany

Gerhard Ertl, Chemistry, 2007

Peter Grünberg, Physics, 2007

Theodor W. Hänsch, Physics, 2005

Wolfgang Ketterle, Physics, 2001

Herbert Kroemer*, Physics, 2000

Günter Grass, Literature, 1999

Horst L. Störmer*, Physics, 1998

Christiane Nüsslein-Volhard, Physiol. or Medicine, 1995

Reinhard Selten, Economics, 1994

Bert Sakmann, Physiol. or Medicine, 1991

Erwin Neher, Physiol. or Medicine, 1991

Hans G. Dehmelt*, Physics, 1989

Wolfgang Paul, Physics, 1989

Johann Deisenhofer, Chemistry, 1988

Robert Huber, Chemistry, 1988

Jack Steinberger*, Physics, 1988

Hartmut Michel, Chemistry, 1988

J. Georg Bednorz, Physics, 1987

John Charles Polanyi*, Chemistry, 1986

Ernst Ruska, Physics, 1986

Gerd Binnig, Physics, 1986

Klaus von Klitzing, Physics, 1985

Georges J.F. Kohler*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1984


50

Georg Wittig, Chemistry, 1979

Ernst Otto Fischer, Chemistry, 1973

Karl Ritter von Frisch, Physiol. or Medicine, 1973

Heinrich Böll, Literature, 1972

Gerhard Herzberg*, Chemistry, 1971

Willy Brandt, Peace, 1971

Bernard Katz*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1970

Max Delbrück*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1969

Manfred Eigen, Chemistry, 1967

Hans Albrecht Bethe*, Physics, 1967

Nelly Sachs*, Literature, 1966

Feodor Felix Konrad Lynen, Physiol. or Medicine, 1964

Konrad Bloch*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1964

Karl Ziegler, Chemistry, 1963

Maria Goeppert-Mayer*, Physics, 1963

J. Hans D. Jensen, Physics, 1963

Rudolf Mössbauer, Physics, 1961

Werner Forssmann, Physiol. or Medicine, 1956

Walther Bothe, Physics, 1954

Hermann Staudinger, Chemistry, 1953

Fritz Albert Lipmann*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1953

Hans Adolf Krebs*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1953

Albert Schweitzer*, Peace, 1952

Otto Diels, Chemistry, 1950

Kurt Alder, Chemistry, 1950

Herman Hesse*, Literature, 1946

Ernst Boris Chain*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1945

Otto Hahn, Chemistry 1944


51

Otto Stern*, Physics, 1943

Adolf Butenandt, Chemistry, 1939

Gerhard Domagk, Physiol. or Medicine, 1939

Richard Kuhn*, Chemistry 1938

Carl von Ossietzky, Peace, 1935

Hans Spemann, Physiol. or Medicine, 1935

Werner Karl Heisenberg, Physics, 1932

Otto Heinrich Warburg, Physiol. or Medicine, 1931

Carl Bosch, Chemistry 1931

Friedrich Bergius, Chemistry, 1931

Hans Fischer, Chemistry, 1930

Thomas Mann, Literature, 1929

Adolf Otto Reinhold Windaus, Chemistry, 1928

Ludwig Quidde, Peace, 1927

Heinrich Otto Wieland, Chemistry, 1927

Gustav Stresemann, Peace, 1926


James Franck, Physics, 1925

Gustav Ludwig Hertz, Physics, 1925

Otto Fritz Meyerhof, Physiol. or Medicine, 1922

Walther Nernst, Chemistry, 1920

Johannes Stark, Physics, 1919

Fritz Haber, Chemistry 1918

Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck*, Physics, 1918

Richard Willstätter, Chemistry, 1915

Max von Laue, Physics, 1914

Gerhart Hauptmann*, Literature, 1912

Wilhelm Wien, Physics, 1911


52

Otto Wallach, Chemistry, 1910

Albrecht Kossel, Physiol. or Medicine, 1910

Paul Johann Ludwig Heyse, Literature, 1910

Karl Ferdinand Braun, Physics, 1909

Wilhelm Ostwald*, Chemistry, 1909

Rudolf Christoph Eucken, Literature, 1908

Paul Ehrlich, Physiol. or Medicine, 1908

Eduard Buchner, Chemistry, 1907

Robert Koch, Physiol. or Medicine, 1905

Philipp Lenard*, Physics, 1905

Adolf von Baeyer, Chemistry, 1905

Hermann Emil Fischer, Chemistry, 1902

Theodor Mommsen*, Literature, 1902

Emil Adolf von Behring, Physiol. or Medicine, 1901

Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Physics, 1901

Greece

Odysseas Elytis, Literature, 1979

Giorgos Seferis, Literature, 1963

Guatemala

Rigoberta Menchú, Peace, 1992

Miguel Ángel Asturias, Literature, 1967

Hungary

Imre Kertész, Literature, 2002

George Andrew Olah*, Chemistry, 1994

John Charles Harsanyi*, Economics, 1994

Georg von Békésy*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1961

George de Hevesy, Chemistry, 1943

Albert Szent-Györgyi, Physiol. or Medicine, 1937


53


Philipp Lenard*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1905

Robert Bárány*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1914

John Charles Polanyi, Chemistry, 1986

Iceland

Halldór Laxness, Literature, 1955

India

Amartya Kumar Sen, Economics, 1998

Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar*, Physics, 1983

Mother Teresa*, Peace, 1979

Har Gobind Khorana*, Medicine, 1968

C. V. Raman, Physics, 1930

Rabindranath Tagore, Literature, 1913

Rudyard Kipling*, Literature, 1907

Ronald Ross*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1902

Iran

Shirin Ebadi, Peace, 2003

Ireland

John Hume, Peace, 1998

David Trimble, Peace, 1998

Seamus Heaney, Literature, 1995

Mairead Corrigan, Peace, 1976

Betty Williams, Peace, 1976

Seán MacBride, Peace, 1974

Samuel Beckett, Literature, 1969

Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton, Physics, 1951

William Butler Yeats, Literature, 1923


54

Israel

Robert Aumann*, Economics, 2005

Aaron Ciechanover, Chemistry, 2004

Avram Hershko, Chemistry, 2004

Daniel Kahneman, Economics, 2002

Yitzhak Rabin, Peace, 1994

Shimon Peres, Peace, 1994

Menachem Begin, Peace, 1978

Shmuel Yosef Agnon, Literature, 1966

Italy

Mario R. Capecchi*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2007

Riccardo Giacconi*, Physics, 2002

Dario Fo, Literature, 1997

Rita Levi-Montalcini*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1986

Franco Modigliani, Economics, 1985

Carlo Rubbia, Physics, 1984

Renato Dulbecco*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1975

Eugenio Montale, Literature, 1975

Salvador Luria*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1969

Giulio Natta, Chemistry, 1963

Salvatore Quasimodo, Literature, 1959

Emilio Segrè, Physics, 1959

Daniel Bovet*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1957

Enrico Fermi, Physics, 1938

Luigi Pirandello, Literature, 1934

Grazia Deledda, Literature, 1926

Guglielmo Marconi, Physics, 1909

Ernesto Teodoro Moneta, Peace, 1907


55

Giosuè Carducci, Literature, 1906

Camillo Golgi, Physiol. or Medicine, 1906

Japan

Masatoshi Koshiba, Physics, 2002

Koichi Tanaka, Chemistry, 2002

Ryoji Noyori, Chemistry, 2001

Hideki Shirakawa, Chemistry, 2000

Kenzaburo Oe, Literature, 1994

Susumu Tonegawa*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1987

Kenichi Fukui, Chemistry, 1981

Eisaku Sato, Peace, 1974

Leo Esaki, Physics, 1973

Yasunari Kawabata, Literature, 1968

Shinichirou Tomonaga, Physics, 1965

Hideki Yukawa, Physics, 1949

Kenya

Wangari Maathai, Peace, 2004

Latvia

Wilhelm Ostwald, Chemistry, 1909

Lithuania

Aaron Klug, Chemistry, 1982

Mexico

Mario J. Molina*, Chemistry, 1995

Octavio Paz, Literature, 1990

Alfonso García Robles, Peace, 1982

Myanmar

Aung San Suu Kyi, Peace, 1991


56

The Netherlands

Martinus J.G. Veltman, Physics, 1999

Gerardus 't Hooft, Physics, 1999

Paul Crutzen, Chemistry, 1995

Simon van der Meer, Physics, 1984

Nicolaas Bloembergen*, Physics, 1981

Tjalling Koopmans, Economics, 1975

Nikolaas Tinbergen*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1973

Jan Tinbergen, Economics, 1969

Frits Zernike, Physics, 1953

Peter Debye, Chemistry, 1936

Christiaan Eijkman, Physiol. or Medicine, 1929

Willem Einthoven, Physiol. or Medicine, 1924

Heike Kamerlingh Onnes, Physics, 1913

Tobias Asser, Peace, 1911

Johannes Diderik van der Waals, Physics, 1910

Pieter Zeeman, Physics, 1902

Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, Physics, 1902

Jacobus Henricus van 't Hoff, Chemistry, 1901

New Zealand

Alan MacDiarmid*, Chemistry, 2000

Maurice Wilkins*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1962

Ernest Rutherford*, Chemistry, 1908

Nigeria

Wole Soyinka, Literature, 1986

Norway

Finn Kydland, Economics, 2004

Trygve Haavelmo, Economics, 1989


57

Ivar Giaever, Physics, 1973

Ragnar Frisch, Economics, 1969

Odd Hassel, Chemistry, 1969

Sigrid Undset, Literature, 1928

Fridtjof Nansen, Peace, 1922

Christian Lous Lange, Peace, 1921

Knut Hamsun, Literature, 1920

Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson, Literature, 1903

Pakistan

Abdus Salam, Physics, 1979

Poland

Wisława Szymborska, Literature, 1996

Józef Rotblat*, Peace, 1995

Lech Wałęsa, Peace, 1983

Czesław Miłosz, Literature, 1980

Isaac Bashevis Singer*, Literature, 1978

Tadeus Reichstein*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1950

Isidor Isaac Rabi*, Physics 1944

Władysław Reymont, Literature, 1924

Marie Skłodowska-Curie, Physics, 1903 and Chemistry, 1911

Albert Abraham Michelson*, Physics 1907

Henryk Sienkiewicz, Literature, 1905

Portugal

José Saramago, Literature, 1998

Egas Moniz, Medicine, 1949

Romania

George E. Palade*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1974


58

Russia

Alexei A. Abrikosov, Physics, 2003

Vitaly Ginzburg, Physics, 2003

Zhores I. Alferov*, Physics, 2000

Mikhail Gorbachev, Peace, 1990

Iosif Aleksandrovich Brodsky*, Literature, 1987

Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa, Physics, 1978

Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov, Peace, 1975

Leonid Kantorovich, Economics, 1975

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Literature, 1970

Michail Sholokhov, Literature, 1965

Nicolay G. Basov, Physics, 1964

Aleksandr M. Prokhorov*, Physics, 1964

Lev Landau*, Physics, 1962

Boris Pasternak, Literature, 1958

Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov, Physics, 1958

Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm, Physics, 1958

Ilya Mikhailovich Frank, Physics, 1958

Nikolay Semyonov, Chemistry, 1956

Ivan Bunin*, Literature, 1933

Ilya Mechnikov*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1908

Ivan Pavlov, Physiol. or Medicine, 1904

St Lucia

Derek Walcott, Literature, 1992

Sir Arthur Lewis*, Economics, 1979

South Africa

J. M. Coetzee, Literature, 2003

Sydney Brenner*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2002


59

F.W. de Klerk, Peace, 1993

Nelson Mandela, Peace, 1993

Nadine Gordimer, Literature, 1991

Desmond Tutu, Peace, 1984

Allan M. Cormack*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1979

Albert Lutuli, Peace, 1960

Max Theiler, Physiol. or Medicine, 1951

South Korea

Kim Dae Jung, Peace, 2000

Spain

Camilo José Cela, Literature, 1989

Vicente Aleixandre, Literature, 1977

Severo Ochoa*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1959

Juan Ramón Jiménez, Literature, 1956

Jacinto Benavente, Literature, 1922

Santiago Ramón y Cajal, Physiol. or Medicine, 1906

José Echegaray, Literature, 1904

Sweden

Arvid Carlsson, Physiol. or Medicine, 2000

Alva Myrdal, Peace, 1982

Sune Bergström, Physiol. or Medicine, 1982

Bengt I. Samuelsson, Physiol. or Medicine, 1982

Kai Siegbahn, Physics, 1981

Torsten Wiesel*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1981

Eyvind Johnson, Literature, 1974

Harry Martinson, Literature, 1974

Bertil Ohlin, Economics, 1977

Gunnar Myrdal, Economics, 1974


60

Ulf von Euler, Physiol. or Medicine, 1970.

Hannes Alfvén, Physics, 1970

Ragnar Granit*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1967

Nelly Sachs*, Literature, 1966

Dag Hammarskjöld, Peace, 1961 (posthumously)

Pär Lagerkvist, Literature, 1951

Arne Tiselius, Chemistry, 1948

Erik Axel Karlfeldt, Literature, 1931

Nathan Söderblom, Peace, 1930

Hans von Euler-Chelpin, Chemistry, 1929

Theodor Svedberg, Chemistry, 1926

Karl Manne Siegbahn, Physics, 1924

Hjalmar Branting, Peace, 1921

Carl Gustaf Verner von Heidenstam, Literature, 1916

Gustaf Dalén, Physics, 1912

Selma Lagerlöf, Literature, 1909

Klas Pontus Arnoldson, Peace, 1908

Svante Arrhenius, Chemistry, 1903

Switzerland

Kurt Wüthrich, Chemistry, 2002

Rolf M. Zinkernagel, Physiol. or Medicine, 1996


Richard R. Ernst, Chemistry, 1991

Karl Alexander Müller, Physics, 1987

Heinrich Rohrer, Physics, 1986

Georges J.F. Kohler*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1984

Werner Arber, Physiol. or Medicine, 1978


61


Daniel Bovet, Physiol. or Medicine, 1957

Felix Bloch, Physics, 1952

Tadeus Reichstein, Physiol. or Medicine, 1950

Walter Rudolf Hess, Physiol. or Medicine, 1949

Paul H. Müller, Physiol. or Medicine, 1948

Herman Hesse*, Literature, 1946

Leopold Ružička*, Chemistry, 1939

Charles Edouard Guillaume, Physics, 1920

Carl Spitteler, Literature, 1919

Alfred Werner, Chemistry, 1913

Theodor Kocher, Physiol. or Medicine, 1909

Henry Dunant, Peace, 1901

Taiwan

Yuan T. Lee, Chemistry, 1986

Samuel C.C. Ting, Physics, 1976

Turkey

Orhan Pamuk, Literature, 2006

Ukraine

Georges Charpak*, Physics, 1992

Roald Hoffmann*, Chemistry, 1981

Ilya Mechnikov*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1908

United Kingdom

Doris Lessing, Literature, 2007

Sir Martin J. Evans, Physiol. or Medicine, 2007

Oliver Smithies*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2007


62

Harold Pinter, Literature, 2005

Clive W. J. Granger*, Economics, 2003

Anthony J. Leggett*, Physics, 2003

Peter Mansfield, Physiol. or Medicine, 2003

Sydney Brenner, Physiol. or Medicine, 2002

John E. Sulston, Physiol. or Medicine, 2002

Tim Hunt, Physiol. or Medicine, 2001

Paul Nurse, Physiol. or Medicine, 2001

V.S. Naipaul, Literature 2001

John Hume, Peace, 1998

John Pople, Chemistry, 1998

David Trimble, Peace, 1998

John E. Walker, Chemistry, 1997

Harold Kroto, Chemistry, 1996

James A. Mirrlees, Economics, 1996

Joseph Rotblat*, Peace, 1995

Richard J. Roberts, Physiol. or Medicine, 1993

Michael Smith*, Chemistry, 1993

Ronald Coase, Economics, 1991

James W. Black, Physiol. or Medicine, 1988

Niels Kaj Jerne*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1984

César Milstein*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1984

Richard Stone, Economics, 1984

William Golding, Literature, 1983

Aaron Klug, Chemistry, 1982

John Robert Vane, Physiol. or Medicine, 1982

Elias Canetti, Literature, 1981


63

Frederick Sanger, Chemistry, 1958 and 1980

Arthur Lewis, Economics, 1979

Godfrey Hounsfield, Physiol. or Medicine, 1979

Peter D. Mitchell, Chemistry, 1978

James Meade, Economics, 1977

Nevill Francis Mott, Physics, 1977

Betty Williams, Peace, 1976

Mairead Corrigan, Peace, 1976

John Cornforth, Chemistry, 1975

Christian de Duve*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1974

Friedrich Hayek, Economics 1974

Antony Hewish, Physics, 1974

Nikolaas Tinbergen, Physiol. or Medicine, 1973

Patrick White*, Literature, 1973

Geoffrey Wilkinson, Chemistry, 1973

Brian David Josephson, Physics, 1973

Rodney Robert Porter, Physiol. or Medicine, 1972

John Hicks, Economics, 1972

Dennis Gabor, Physics, 1971

Bernard Katz, Physiol. or Medicine, 1970

Derek Harold Richard Barton, Chemistry, 1969

Ronald George Wreyford Norrish, Chemistry, 1967

George Porter, Chemistry, 1967

Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin, Chemistry, 1964

Andrew Huxley, Physiol. or Medicine, 1963

Alan Lloyd Hodgkin, Physiol. or Medicine, 1963

John Kendrew, Chemistry, 1962


64

Max Perutz, Chemistry, 1962

Francis Crick, Physiol. or Medicine, 1962

Maurice Wilkins*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1962

Peter Medawar*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1960

Philip Noel-Baker, Peace, 1959

Frederick Sanger, Chemistry, 1958 and 1980

Alexander R. Todd, Baron Todd, Chemistry, 1957

Cyril Norman Hinshelwood, Chemistry, 1956

Max Born*, Physics, 1954

Winston Churchill, Literature, 1953

Hans Adolf Krebs*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1953

Archer John Porter Martin, Chemistry, 1952

Richard Laurence Millington Synge, Chemistry, 1952

John Cockcroft, Physics, 1951

Bertrand Russell, Literature, 1950

Cecil Frank Powell, Physics, 1950

John Boyd Orr, Peace, 1949

Patrick Blackett, Baron Blackett, Physics, 1948

T. S. Eliot*, Literature, 1948

Edward Victor Appleton, Physics, 1947

Robert Robinson, Chemistry, 1947

Martin Ryle, Physics, 1946

Ernst Boris Chain*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1945

Alexander Fleming, Physiol. or Medicine, 1945

George Paget Thomson, Physics, 1937

Robert Cecil, 1st Viscount Cecil of Chelwood, Peace, 1937

Norman Haworth, Chemistry, 1937


65

Henry Hallett Dale, Physiol. or Medicine, 1936

James Chadwick, Physics, 1935

Arthur Henderson, Peace, 1934

Norman Angell, Peace, 1933

Paul Dirac, Physics, 1933

Charles Scott Sherrington, Physiol. or Medicine, 1932

John Galsworthy, Literature, 1932

Edgar Adrian, 1st Baron Adrian, Physiol. or Medicine, 1932

Arthur Harden, Chemistry, 1929

Frederick Hopkins, Physiol. or Medicine, 1929

Owen Willans Richardson, Physics, 1928

Charles Thomson Rees Wilson, Physics, 1927

Austen Chamberlain, Peace, 1925

George Bernard Shaw*, Literature, 1925

John James Richard Macleod*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1923

Francis William Aston, Chemistry, 1922

Archibald Hill, Physiol. or Medicine, 1922

Frederick Soddy, Chemistry, 1921

Charles Glover Barkla, Physics, 1917

William Henry Bragg, Physics, 1915

William Lawrence Bragg*, Physics, 1915

Ernest Rutherford*, Chemistry, 1908

Rudyard Kipling*, Literature, 1907

Joseph John Thomson, Physics, 1906

John Strutt, 3rd Baron Rayleigh, Physics, 1904

William Ramsay, Chemistry, 1904

William Randal Cremer, Peace, 1903


66

Ronald Ross, Physiol. or Medicine, 1902

United States of America

Leonid Hurwicz*, Economics, 2007

Eric S. Maskin, Economics, 2007

Roger B. Myerson, Economics, 2007

Al Gore, Peace, 2007

Mario R. Capecchi*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2007

Oliver Smithies*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2007

Roger D. Kornberg, Chemistry, 2006

John C. Mather, Physics, 2006

Edmund S. Phelps, Economics, 2006

George F. Smoot, Physics, 2006

Andrew Z. Fire, Physiol. or Medicine, 2006

Craig C. Mello, Physiol. or Medicine, 2006

Robert H. Grubbs, Chemistry, 2005

Richard R. Schrock, Chemistry, 2005

Thomas Schelling, Economics, 2005

John L. Hall, Physics, 2005

Roy J. Glauber, Physics, 2005

Irwin Rose, Chemistry, 2004

Edward C. Prescott, Economics, 2004

David J. Gross, Physics, 2004

H. David Politzer, Physics, 2004

Frank Wilczek, Physics, 2004

Richard Axel, Physiol. or Medicine, 2004

Linda B. Buck, Physiol. or Medicine, 2004

Peter Agre, Chemistry, 2003


67

Roderick MacKinnon, Chemistry, 2003

Robert F. Engle, Economics, 2003

Anthony J. Leggett*, Physics, 2003

Paul C. Lauterbur, Physiol. or Medicine, 2003

Alexei A. Abrikosov*, Physics, 2003

Daniel Kahneman*, Economics, 2002

Vernon L. Smith, Economics, 2002

Jimmy Carter, Peace, 2002

Raymond Davis Jr., Physics, 2002

Riccardo Giacconi*, Physics, 2002

Sydney Brenner*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2002

H. Robert Horvitz, Physiol. or Medicine, 2002

William S. Knowles, Chemistry, 2001

K. Barry Sharpless, Chemistry, 2001

Joseph E. Stiglitz, Economics, 2001

George A. Akerlof, Economics, 2001

A. Michael Spence, Economics, 2001

Eric A. Cornell, Physics, 2001

Carl E. Wieman, Physics, 2001

Leland H. Hartwell, Physiol. or Medicine, 2001

Alan Heeger, Chemistry, 2000

Alan MacDiarmid*, Chemistry, 2000

James J. Heckman, Economics, 2000

Daniel L. McFadden, Economics, 2000

Jack Kilby, Physics, 2000

Paul Greengard, Physiol. or Medicine, 2000

Eric R. Kandel*, Physiol. or Medicine, 2000


68

Ahmed H. Zewail*, Chemistry, 1999

Günter Blobel*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1999

Walter Kohn*, Chemistry, 1998

Robert B. Laughlin, Physics, 1998

Daniel C. Tsui*, Physics, 1998

Robert F. Furchgott, Physiol. or Medicine, 1998

Louis J. Ignarro, Physiol. or Medicine, 1998

Ferid Murad, Physiol. or Medicine, 1998

Paul D. Boyer, Chemistry, 1997

Robert C. Merton, Economics, 1997

Myron Scholes*, Economics, 1997

Jody Williams, Peace, 1997

Steven Chu, Physics, 1997

William D. Phillips, Physics, 1997

Stanley B. Prusiner, Physiol. or Medicine, 1997

Richard E. Smalley, Chemistry, 1996

Robert F. Curl Jr., Chemistry, 1996

William Vickrey*, Economics, 1996

David M. Lee, Physics, 1996

Douglas D. Osheroff, Physics, 1996

Robert C. Richardson, Physics, 1996

Mario J. Molina*, Chemistry, 1995

F. Sherwood Rowland, Chemistry, 1995

Robert Lucas, Jr., Economics, 1995

Martin L. Perl, Physics, 1995

Frederick Reines, Physics, 1995

Edward B. Lewis, Physiol. or Medicine, 1995


69

Eric F. Wieschaus, Physiol. or Medicine, 1995

George Andrew Olah*, Chemistry, 1994

John Charles Harsanyi*, Economics, 1994

John Forbes Nash, Economics, 1994

Clifford G. Shull, Physics, 1994

Alfred G. Gilman, Physiol. or Medicine, 1994

Martin Rodbell, Physiol. or Medicine, 1994

Kary B. Mullis, Chemistry, 1993

Robert W. Fogel, Economics, 1993

Douglass C. North, Economics, 1993

Toni Morrison, Literature, 1993

Russell A. Hulse, Physics, 1993

Joseph H. Taylor Jr., Physics, 1993

Phillip A. Sharp, Physiol. or Medicine, 1993

Rudolph A. Marcus, Chemistry, 1992

Gary S. Becker, Economics, 1992


Edwin G. Krebs, Physiol. or Medicine, 1992

Elias James Corey, Chemistry, 1990

Merton H. Miller, Economics, 1990

William F. Sharpe, Economics, 1990

Harry M. Markowitz, Economics, 1990

Jerome I. Friedman, Physics, 1990

Henry W. Kendall, Physics, 1990

Joseph E. Murray, Physiol. or Medicine, 1990

E. Donnall Thomas, Physiol. or Medicine, 1990

Sidney Altman*, Chemistry, 1989


70

Thomas R. Cech, Chemistry, 1989

Hans G. Dehmelt*, Physics, 1989

Norman F. Ramsey, Physics, 1989

J. Michael Bishop, Physiol. or Medicine, 1989

Harold E. Varmus, Physiol. or Medicine, 1989

Leon M. Lederman, Physics, 1988

Melvin Schwartz, Physics, 1988

Jack Steinberger*, Physics, 1988

Gertrude B. Elion, Physiol. or Medicine, 1988

George H. Hitchings, Physiol. or Medicine, 1988

Charles J. Pedersen*, Chemistry, 1987

Donald J. Cram, Chemistry, 1987

Robert M. Solow, Economics, 1987

Joseph Brodsky*, Literature, 1987

Dudley R. Herschbach, Chemistry, 1986

Yuan T. Lee*, Chemistry, 1986

James M. Buchanan, Economics, 1986

Elie Wiesel*, Peace, 1986

Stanley Cohen, Physiol. or Medicine, 1986

Rita Levi-Montalcini*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1986

Jerome Karle, Chemistry, 1985

Herbert A. Hauptman, Chemistry, 1985

Franco Modigliani*, Economics, 1985

Michael S. Brown, Physiol. or Medicine, 1985

Joseph L. Goldstein, Physiol. or Medicine, 1985

Bruce Merrifield, Chemistry, 1984

Henry Taube*, Chemistry, 1983


71

Gerard Debreu*, Economics, 1983

William A. Fowler, Physics, 1983

Barbara McClintock, Physiol. or Medicine, 1983

George J. Stigler, Economics, 1982

Kenneth G. Wilson, Physics, 1982

Roald Hoffmann*, Chemistry, 1981

James Tobin, Economics, 1981

Nicolaas Bloembergen*, Physics, 1981

Arthur L. Schawlow, Physics, 1981

David H. Hubel*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1981

Roger W. Sperry, Physiol. or Medicine, 1981

Walter Gilbert, Chemistry, 1980

Paul Berg, Chemistry, 1980

Lawrence R. Klein, Economics, 1980

Czeslaw Milosz*, Literature, 1980

James Cronin, Physics, 1980

Val Fitch, Physics, 1980

Baruj Benacerraf*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1980

George D. Snell, Physiol. or Medicine, 1980

Herbert C. Brown, Chemistry, 1979

Theodore Schultz, Economics, 1979

Steven Weinberg, Physics, 1979

Sheldon Glashow, Physics, 1979

Allan M. Cormack*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1979

Herbert A. Simon, Economics, 1978

Isaac Bashevis Singer*, Literature, 1978

Robert Woodrow Wilson, Physics, 1978


72

Arno Penzias, Physics, 1978

Hamilton O. Smith, Physiol. or Medicine, 1978

Daniel Nathans, Physiol. or Medicine, 1978

Philip Anderson, Physics, 1977

John H. van Vleck, Physics, 1977

Roger Guillemin*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1977

Andrzej W. Schally*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1977

Rosalyn Yalow, Physiol. or Medicine, 1977

William Lipscomb, Chemistry, 1976

Milton Friedman, Economics, 1976

Saul Bellow*, Literature, 1976

Burton Richter, Physics, 1976

Samuel C. C. Ting, Physics, 1976

Baruch S. Blumberg, Physiol. or Medicine, 1976

Daniel Carleton Gajdusek, Physiol. or Medicine, 1976

Tjalling C. Koopmans*, Economics, 1975

Ben R. Mottelson*, Physics, 1975

James Rainwater, Physics, 1975

David Baltimore, Physiol. or Medicine, 1975

Renato Dulbecco*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1975

Howard Martin Temin, Physiol. or Medicine, 1975

Paul J. Flory, Chemistry, 1974

George E. Palade*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1974

Wassily Leontief*, Economics, 1973

Henry Kissinger, Peace, 1973

Ivar Giaever*, Physics, 1973

Christian Anfinsen, Chemistry, 1972


73

Stanford Moore, Chemistry, 1972

William H. Stein, Chemistry, 1972

Kenneth J. Arrow, Economics, 1972

John Bardeen, Physics 1972

Leon N. Cooper, Physics 1972

Robert Schrieffer, Physics 1972

Gerald Edelman, Physiol. or Medicine, 1972

Simon Kuznets*, Economics, 1971

Earl W. Sutherland Jr., Physiol. or Medicine, 1971

Paul A. Samuelson, Economics, 1970

Norman Borlaug, Peace, 1970

Julius Axelrod, Physiol. or Medicine, 1970

Murray Gell-Mann, Physics, 1969

Max Delbrück*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1969

Alfred Hershey, Physiol. or Medicine, 1969

Salvador Luria*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1969

Lars Onsager*, Chemistry, 1968

Luis Alvarez, Physics, 1968

Robert W. Holley, Physiol. or Medicine, 1968

Har Gobind Khorana*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1968

Marshall Warren Nirenberg, Physiol. or Medicine, 1968

Hans Bethe*, Physics, 1967

Haldan Keffer Hartline, Physiol. or Medicine, 1967

George Wald, Physiol. or Medicine, 1967

Robert S. Mulliken, Chemistry, 1966

Charles B. Huggins*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1966

Francis Peyton Rous, Physiol. or Medicine, 1966


74

Robert B. Woodward, Chemistry, 1965

Richard P. Feynman, Physics, 1965

Julian Schwinger, Physics, 1965

Martin Luther King, Jr., Peace, 1964

Charles H. Townes, Physics, 1964

Konrad Bloch*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1964

Maria Goeppert-Mayer*, Physics, 1963

Eugene Wigner*, Physics, 1963

John Steinbeck, Literature, 1962

Linus C. Pauling, Peace, 1962

James D. Watson, Physiol. or Medicine, 1962

Melvin Calvin, Chemistry, 1961

Robert Hofstadter, Physics, 1961

Georg von Békésy*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1961

Willard F. Libby, Chemistry, 1960

Donald A. Glaser, Physics, 1960

Owen Chamberlain, Physics, 1959

Emilio Segrè*, Physics, 1959

Arthur Kornberg, Physiol. or Medicine, 1959

Severo Ochoa*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1959

George Beadle, Physiol. or Medicine, 1958

Joshua Lederberg, Physiol. or Medicine, 1958

Edward Tatum, Physiol. or Medicine, 1958

William B. Shockley, Physics, 1956

John Bardeen, Physics, 1956

Walter H. Brattain, Physics, 1956

Dickinson W. Richards, Physiol. or Medicine, 1956


75

André F. Cournand*, Physiol. or Medicine, 1956

Vincent du Vigneaud, Chemistry, 1955

Willis E. Lamb, Physics, 1955

Polykarp Kusch*, Physics, 1955

Linus C. Pauling, Chemistry, 1954

Ernest Hemingway, Literature, 1954

John F. Enders, Physiol. or Medicine, 1954

Frederick C. Robbins, Physiol. or Medicine, 1954

Thomas H. Weller, Physiol. or Medicine, 1954

George C. Marshall, Peace, 1953

Fritz Lipmann, Physiol. or Medicine, 1953

E. M. Purcell, Physics, 1952

Felix Bloch, Physics, 1952

Selman A. Waksman, Physiol. or Medicine, 1952

Edwin M. McMillan, Chemistry, 1951

Glenn Theodore Seaborg, Chemistry, 1951

Ralph J. Bunche, Peace, 1950

Philip S. Hench, Physiol. or Medicine, 1950

Edward C. Kendall, Physiol. or Medicine, 1950

William Giauque, Chemistry, 1949

William Faulkner, Literature, 1949

T. S. Eliot*, Literature, 1948

Carl Cori, Physiol. or Medicine, 1947

Gerty Cori, Physiol. or Medicine, 1947

Wendell M. Stanley, Chemistry, 1946

James B. Sumner, Chemistry, 1946

John H. Northrop, Chemistry, 1946


76

Emily G. Balch, Peace, 1946

John R. Mott, Peace, 1946

Percy W. Bridgman, Physics, 1946

Hermann J. Muller, Physiol. or Medicine, 1946

Cordell Hull, Peace, 1945

Isidor Isaac Rabi*, Physics, 1944

Joseph Erlanger, Physiol. or Medicine, 1944

Herbert S. Gasser, Physiol. or Medicine, 1944

Otto Stern*, Physics, 1943

Edward A. Doisy, Physiol. or Medicine, 1943

Ernest Lawrence, Physics, 1939

Pearl S. Buck, Literature, 1938

Clinton Davisson, Physics, 1937

Eugene O'Neill, Literature, 1936

Carl Anderson, Physics, 1936

Harold C. Urey, Chemistry, 1934

George R. Minot, Physiol. or Medicine, 1934

William P. Murphy, Physiol. or Medicine, 1934

George H. Whipple, Physiol. or Medicine, 1934

Thomas H. Morgan, Physiol. or Medicine, 1933

Irving Langmuir, Chemistry, 1932

Jane Addams, Peace, 1931

Nicholas M. Butler, Peace, 1931

Sinclair Lewis, Literature, 1930

Frank B. Kellogg, Peace, 1929

Arthur H. Compton, Physics, 1927

Charles G. Dawes, Peace, 1925


77

Robert A. Millikan, Physics, 1923

Albert Einstein*, Physics, 1921

Woodrow Wilson, Peace, 1919

Theodore W. Richards, Chemistry, 1914

Elihu Root, Peace, 1912

Albert A. Michelson*, Physics, 1907

Theodore Roosevelt, Peace, 1906

References

1. W. Ritz, Phys. Z. 9, 903 (1908); A. Einstein, ibid. 10, 185 (1909); ibid. 10, 323 (1909); A. Friedman, A: Über die Krümmung des Raumes, Z. Phys. 10 377–386 (1922), (English translation: Gen. Rel. Grav. 31, 1991–2000 (1999)); E. Hubble, A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity among Extra-Galactic Nebulae, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp. 168-173 (1929)

2. E. Schrödinger, Space-Time Structure, Cambridge University Press (1950)3. C. W. Kilmister, Eddington's search for a fundamental theory. Cambridge

Univ. Press (1994)4. H. F. M.Gönner, On the History of Unified Field Theories. Living Reviews in

Relativity (2005)5. D.J. Schwarz and B. Weinhorst, (An)isotropy of the Hubble diagram:

comparing hemispheres", Astronomy & Astrophysics 474: 717–729 (2007)6. D. L. Wiltshire, Exact Solution to the Averaging Problem in Cosmology, Phys.

Rev. Lett. 99: 251101 (2007).7. D. Zwillinger, Handbook of Differential Equations (3rd edition), Academic

Press, (1997) 8. A. D. Polyanin and V. F. Zaitsev, Handbook of Exact Solutions for Ordinary

Differential Equations (2nd edition), Chapman & Hall/CRC Press (2003)9. J. Tou, et al, Models to Study Gravitational Biology of Mammalian

Reproduction, Biology of Reproduction Vol. 67. (2002)10. S. Perlmutter et al. (The Supernova Cosmology Project) Measurements of

Omega and Lambda from 42 high redshift supernovae, Astrophysical J. 517: 565–86 (1999).

11. Adam G. Riess et al. (Supernova Search Team) Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant

I shall make you love books more than you love mother,and I shall place their excellence before you.

A scribe is the task-must of everyone.

Father to Son in the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (Papurus Saller I)


78

Astronomical J. 116: 1009–38. (1998); M. Gasperini, et al, The pre-Big Bang Scenario in String Cosmology, Physics Reports, Vol. 373, 1-212 (2003)

12. On HYPATIA: Grand Commentaire, de Théon d'Alexandrie aux 'Tables faciles' de Ptolémée, Livre II, III, Vatican City (1985, 1991); Commentaries de Pappus et de Théon d'Alexandrie sur l'Almageste Tome III. Théon d'Alexandrie, Rome (1943); The calculation of an eclipse of the sun according to Theon of Alexandria, in Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, 1, 209-219, (1950), Providence (1952); de notre ère (Marinus de Naplouse - un commentaire au 'Petit commentaire' de Théon), Janus 63 (1-3), 167-184 (1976); Théon d'Alexandrie et les 'Tables faciles' de Ptolémée, Arch. Internat. Hist. Sci. 35, 114-115, 106-123 (1985); 'Commentaire à l'Almageste' de Théon d'Alexandrie, Antiquité Classique, 56, 201-218 (1987); O. Neugebauer, A history of ancient mathematical astronomy, New York, (1975); A. Khan, Hypatia; Authorhouse, (2001); M. Dzielska and F. Lyra, Hypatia of Alexandria, Revealing Antiquity, No. 8, Kessinger Publishing, (1997); K. Chares, Hypatia: New Foes with an Old Face, Kessinger Publishing (1997); A. Margaret, Hypatia’s Heritage: A history of Women in Science from Antiquity Through the Ninetheenth Century; Hypatia: A Journal of feminist philosophy, Indiana University Press; I. Mueller, L.S. Grinstein & P.J. Campbell Women of Mathematics: A Biobibliographic Sourcebook. New York: Greenwood Press, (1987); M. M. Mangasarian, The Martyrdom of Hypatia (1915); J. Bregman, Synesius of Cyrene: Philosopher-bishop, University of California Press (1982); A. Fitzgerald, Letter of Synesius of Cyrene to Hypathia, London (1926); M. Dzielska, Hypatia of Alexandria. Oxford Press (1996); J. J. O'Connor & Edmund F. Robertson Hypatia of Alexandria,MacTutor history of mathematics; M. B. Ogilvie, Women in science: Antiquity through the nineteenth century. MIT Press (1986); Hypatia -Physics, culture and sense of duty, Spanish university association that defends science, knowledge, public university and public policies (2006); T L. Heath, A History of Greek Mathematics, Oxford (1921); A. Tihon, and I. Le Livre (eds.), Notes sur l'astronomie grecque au Ve siècle; W. Müller, Das isoperimetrische Problem im Altertum mit einer übersetzung der Abhandlung des Zenodoros nach Theon von Alexandrien, Sudhoffs Arch. 37 39-71 (1953); P. Pingree, An illustrated Greek astronomical manuscript: Commentary of Theon of Alexandria on the 'Handy tables' and scholia and other writings of Ptolemy concerning them; J. Warburg, Courtauld Inst., 45, 185-192 (1982); Recently published Reports by the Department of Mathematics, St. Andrews University in Scotland, UK.

13. B. Gal-Or, [Editor] A Critical Review of the Foundations of Relativistic and Classical Thermodynamics, Pittsburgh, Pa. April 7-8 (1969), Mono Book, (1970); Cosmology, Physics and Philosophy (CPP), Springer Verlag, NewYork (1981, 1983, 1987 editions); On The Origin of Irreversibility, Science, 176, 11-17 (1972); 178, 119 (1972); Nature 230 (1971); 234, 217 (1971); Entropy, Fallacy, and the Origin of Irreversibility: An Essay on the New Astrophysical Revolutionary School of Thermodynamics. Annal. N.Y. Acad. Acad. Sci., 196 (A6) 305-325 (1972); Cosmological Origin of Irreversibility, Time and Time-Anisotropies- I, Found. Phys. 6, 407 (1976); 6, 623 (1976); 7, 50 (1977)


79

14. M. Hadley, The Logic of Quantum Mechanics Derived from Classical General Relativity, Foundations of Physics Letters, 10, No. 1, 43 (1997)

15. I. Prigogine, A. C. Eringen, P. Fong and B. Gal-Or, Panel Discussion, pp. 505-507, “A Critical Review of Thermodynamics”, Proceedings, International Symposium, A Critical Review of the Foundations of Relativistic and Classical Thermodynamics, Pittsburgh, Pa. April 7-8, 1969, Mono Book, (1970)

16. A. Strominger and C. Vafa, Microscopic Origin of Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy, Phys. Lett. B379 1996; J. D. Bekenstein, Black holes and entropy,Phys. Rev. D 7, 2333 (1973); Ph.D. Thesis, Princeton University 1972; S. W. Hawking, Annal. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 224, 268 (1973)

17. M. Sachs, Quantum Mechanics and Gravity, Springer, 200418. T. de Chardin, Pierre Teilhard. The Making of a Mind: Letters From a

Soldier-Priest 1914-1919. Harper & Row, Publishers (1961) 19. H. de Terra, Memories of Teilhard de Chardin. Harper & Row, Publishers

(1962)20. M. Devitt, Realism & Truth. Princeton University Press (1984) 21. R. Penrose, Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of

Consciousness. Oxford University Press (1994)22. H. Reichenbach, The Rise of Scientific Philosophy, University of California

Press (1951)23. C. D. Rollins, Editor. Knowledge and Experience, University of Pittsburgh

Press (1966) 24. L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics (Addison-Wesley,

Reading (1969)25. A. Pais, Subtle is the Lord: The Science and Life of Albert Einstein Oxford

(1982)26. B. Zwiebach, A First Course in String Theory, Cambridge University Press

200427. A.S. Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World, MacMillan, NY,

Cambridge (1929),28. J.A. Wheeler and R.P. Feynman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 157 (1945); 21, 425

(1949)29. A. Benson, The True Origins of Christianity and the Bible, Prudential, Clovis,

CA, 199930. P. N. Strearns et al, The Encyclopedia of World History, 6th Edition31. J. Hartley, Contemporary Physics, Vol. 45 (6) ( 2004)32. C. P. Snow, The Two Cultures and A Second Look, Cambridge University

Press (1964)33. K. Gödel, Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und

verwandtr Systeme, I. Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik, 38: 173-98 (1931).

34. J. van Heijenoort, From Frege to Gödel: A Source Book on Mathematical Logic. Harvard University Press: 596-616 (1967).

35. G. Boolos, A New Proof of the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem, in Boolos, G., Logic, Logic, and Logic. Harvard University Press (1998).

36. H. Putnam, Minds and Machines in Sidney Hook, ed., Dimensions of Mind: A Symposium. New York University Press (1960).

37. J. B. Rosser, Extensions of some theorems of Gödel and Church, Journal of Symbolic Logic 1: 87-91 (1936).


80

38. J. van Heijenoort, Gödel's Theorem in Edwards, Paul, ed., Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 3. Macmillan: 348-57, (1963).

39. D. Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid. Vintage Books (1979).

40. R. Rucker, Infinity and the Mind: The Science and Philosophy of the Infinite. Princeton Univ. Press (1995).

41. R. Smullyan, Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. Oxford Univ. Press (1991).42. H. Wang, A Logical Journey: From Gödel to Philosophy. MIT Press (1997)43. S. Peter,. An Introduction to Gödel's Theorems. Cambridge University Press

(2007).44. E. J. Masoro and S.N. Austad (eds.): Handbook of the Biology of Aging,

Academic Press (2006).45. J. D., Rowe and R. I. Kahn, Human Ageing: Usual and Successful. Science,

237, 143-149 (1987)46. F. Philip, Einstein: His Life and Times, Alfred Knopf (1953, 1972)47. J. E. Lidsey, et al, Physics Reports, Vol. 337, 343-492 (2000)48. A. Vilenkin, Many Worlds in One: The Search for Other Universes. New

York: Hill and Wang, 235 (2006)49. R. Serway and J. Jewett, Jr., Physics, for Scientists and Engineers, with

Modern Physics, 6th Edition, Brooks/Cole, pp 1273-1275 (2004)50. R. H.Anken, Gravitational Zoology: How Animals Use and Cope with Gravity,

Hinrich Rahmann (2001)51. L. Smolin, The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a

Science, and What Comes Next. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 392 (2006).52. B. Gal-Or, Vectored Propulsion, Supermaneuverability and Robot Aircraft,

Springer Verlag (1990)53. P. Woit, Not even wrong: the failure of string theory and the search for unity

in physical law, New York: Basic Books (2006)54. Adam G. Riess et al. (Supernova Search Team) "Observational evidence

from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant", Astronomical J. 116: 1009–38 (1998)

55. R. G. Crittenden & Turok N., "Looking for Lambda with the Rees-Sciama Effect", Phys. Rev. Lett., 76, 575 (1966)

56. J. Hogan, "Unseen Universe: Welcome to the dark side", Nature 448 (7151): 240–245 (2007).

57. S. Weinberg, Anthropic bound on the cosmological constant, Physical Review Letters 59 (22): 2607–2610 (1987)

58. J. Polchinski, String Theory, Cambridge University Press (1998)59. P. Binétruy, Supersymmetry: Theory, Experiment, and Cosmology, Oxford

University Press (2007) 60. Dine, Supersymmetry and String Theory: Beyond the Standard Model,

Cambridge University Press (2007)61. M. Gasperini, Elements of String Cosmology, Cambridge University Press

(2007)62. C. Johnson, D-branes, Cambridge University Press (2003)63. K. Becker, et al, String Theory and M-Theory: A Modern Introduction,

Cambridge University Press (2007)


81

64. M. H. Beers (ed.) MERK Manual of Medical Information, 2nd Home Edition, pp. 15, 138, 300-308 (2003)

Credits

Most photographs are acknowledged as due to the general courtesy of NASA’s FREE-TO-THE PUBLIC service, as this volume IV is. Some pictures were taken by the author. Most figures, diagrams and caricatures are taken from the unabridged VOLUMES I and II [Ref. 13]. The List of Nobel Prize Winners by Country has been provided free by Nobel-Prize Selection Committees and has been reproduced by Wikipedia – The Free Encyclopedia.

Some sections of this book have not yet been completed.

These are intended to be

published in due time on this site.