Scientists also argue that mathematics is not science since it can’t produce new scientific discoveries. However, scientists fail to admit that Math, which is the hallmark of science and technology, produces new discoveries based from scientific data and empirical formula. Calculations, graphical models and equations have been the essential mathematical instruments that helped science produce new discoveries. Without these mathematical and technological tools, science is helpless and useless.
The claim that mathematics has never produced any new discoveries is ridiculous. The fact that Math diversified into different branches; from number system to algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus, statistics, topology, kinematics, dimensional analysis, units of measurements and binary algorithm provides a good proof to disprove this misleading claim. In other words, since time in memorial Mathematics was producing new different disciplines of study that leads to new discoveries and inventions. These by-products from the first counting system to the higher math of today were once individually considered as new discoveries at their own pace and time. Math has been producing new discoveries. It even discovered science.
In addition, equations like in the laws of motion could not have been formulated if calculus was not first discovered by Newton. And the great pyramids in egypt could not have been built if the “pythagorean formula” was not first discovered. Computers could not been invented if mathematical electronics was not precisely calculated. These are just proof that mathematics produces new “scientific” discoveries every now and then.
Remember also that primitive and ancient civilizations, through trials and errors, discovered and developed new inventions through simple math and raw technology in order to fill up humans needs; and science was out of the picture at that time. This shows that mathematics and technology can exist even without science. But, science can never exist without mathematics.
Mathematics is the language of logic and reasoning and science leans on it to be credible. It is not susceptible of proof and disproof but universally 100% self-evident. Few examples that comes to my mind are points, lines, distances, volumes, weights, angles, the Pi, the Pythagorean Theorem and the Inverse square law. In math, we usually study the fundamental laws of nature through measurements and use this set of rules in discovering new things. The results of these rules are always precisely fixed and correct. The mathematical laws, which are copied from natural laws, are universally true.
On the other hand, science is not always self evident. First, this discipline simply attempts to answer “how things work” but could not explain “why things work”. Second, almost all scientific theories are metamorphically revised from time to time. This means most scientific theories are not universally received because they don’t work when certain parameters are changed. Some exceptions are the law of gravity and the speed of light or maybe not since scientific ideas can’t absolutely be proven without measurements. On the contrary, mathematical laws are always present universally and they precisely work without exceptions. Mathematics can even answer both the questions of “hows and whys”. And, mathematical ideas can absolutely be proven.
Science usually speaks with pride about the scientific method. But this form of systemization or methodology has been in existance since ancient civilization started. This method is a set of steps religiously followed in experiments like in the investigations of some imaginary elements such as atoms, forces, black holes, dark matters and other mysterious scientific phenomena. This list of procedures has basically eight parts, namely:
1. Define the problem
2. Gather data or information,
3. Form a hypothesis (an intelligent guess)
4. Test the hypothesis (experiment),
5. Analyze the data,
6. Publish conclusions (peer review),
7. Retest results (repeatable),
8. Falsify (disprove the hypothesis).
However, this list of procedures can also be used as well to contradict the scientific methodology.
Let us examine the origin of the universe. Scientists guessed that the birth of the cosmos started from the Big Bang which produced imaginary particles, fields or even strings overtime. They formulated this hypothesis by observing patterns and investigating cause and effect. However, there is no way that the origin can be reproduced nor repeated in a laboratory. The original event is not testable and therefore not directly observable. This theory evolved without supportive evidence or even contrary evidence. If the birth of the universe cannot be tested, repeated, observed and falsified, then it becomes obvious that scientists also harbor fallacious assumptions, incompetent assertions and deceptive expositions. These distinctive characteristics are the hallmarks of pseudo-science.
In addition, science was also built on religious foundation. Most of its forerunners were either practicing mysticism and magic or had been indoctrinated by religious beliefs. The heart of alchemy was accepted by christianity as spiritual. In astronomy, Galileo, who was responsible for the birth of modern science, claimed that his theory on heliocentrism does not contradict the bible. Other msytical fields of study that eventually transformed into science overtime are listed below.
Alchemy to chemistry
Astrology to astronomy
Accupuncture to medicine
Phrenology to neuroscience
Palmistry to psychology
Theology to science
Aside from the realistic incapabilities of the scientific method, there were also many examples of infant pseudosciences perpetrated by well-known scientists in the academe, universities and scientific societies that failed to reach adulthood.
The Study: Witchcraft
Conducted by: Joseph Glanvill, Fellow of the Royal Society; Henry More of Cambridge University; and Robert Boyle, founder of modern chemistry.
Conclusion: About every one out of twenty reported cases worldwide on levitations, possessions, and broomstick riding were noted to be authentic that provided proof of the reality of the phenomenon.
The Study: Phrenology
Conducted by: Dr. Franz Joseph Gall one of the leading authority of his day on the anatomy and physiology of the human nervous system.
Conclusion: He discovered a correlation between certain bumps on the head and ones character traits by carefully measuring the shapes of the skull.
The Study: Homeopathic Medicine
Conducted by: Dr. Samuel Hahnemann upon the idea that like cures like: a drug will supposedly cure a disease if the same drug administered to a healthy person will produce symptoms similar to those of the disease. Conclusion: The study attracted a wide scientific recognition and was widely taught in medical colleges for many decades. A large statue of Dr. Hahnemann was even erected with the degree of scientific respectability which a crackpot can achieve.
The study: Odic Forces
Conducted by: Baron Karl Von Reichenbach, a respected chemist and metallurgist and a member of the Prussian Academy of Sciences.
Discovery: In 1845 he announced the discovery of a new, totally unknown physical force called Od.
The study: N-Rays
Conducted by: M. Blondlot, a distinguished phycisists and the recipient of many professional honors.
Discovery: Fifty years later, the Od episode was repeated by Dr. Blondlot and discovered a new force called N-rays which could be reflected and polarized by well-defined wavelengths.
The Study: Orgone Energy
Conducted by: Dr. Wilhelm Reich, a leading disciple of Sigmund Freud.
Conclusion: Orgone energy is considered the energy of the sexual orgasm. It was also said to be the cause of the sky being blue and why stars twinkle at night.
The Study: The String Theory
Conducted by: Werner Heisenberg, a german theoretical physicist.
Conclusion: Fundamentals particles in nature smaller than protons, neutrons and electrons behave like musical notes, where these notes must be stretched to tension like in a stringed guitar in order to be excited. His theory was abandoned due to the fact what or who stretches the string to tension.
The Study: The Wormholes Theory
Conducted by: John Archibald Wheeler, an American theoretical physicist.
Conclusion: A spacetravel shortcut into the fabric of spacetime where hypothetically a tunnel connects two black holes warped into the universe. Exotic matters, which are great amount of imaginary forces that will hold up the walls of the tunnel, have not been found yet even on the drawing board.
I could go on and on to list more academic researches that did not survive. What did all these scientific studies have in common? All of them followed the scientific method but failed.
History of the Scientific Method:
300 BC — A geometrical system of theorems logically developed by Euclid from axioms.
1021 — Experimental method combined with observations, experiments and rational arguments introduced by Alhazen
1590 — Controlled experiments by Francis Bacon
1600 — First dedicated laboratory
1637 — First Scientific method by René Descartes
1638 — Thought experiments published by Galileo
1650 — Experimental evidence established as the arbiter of truth by the Royal Society
1665 — Repeatability established by Robert Boyle
1675 — Peer review begun
1687 — Hypothesis/prediction by Isaac Newton
1934 — Falsifiability popularized by Karl Popper’s
1937 — Controlled placebo trial
1946 — First computer data analysis
1950 — Double masked experiment
Backed up with the principle behind Originemology and the intelligence Konstant, I have proven Einstein did not even used complex scientific reasoning in the derivation of E = mc². He was just intellectually shrewd and knew the tricks of his trade just like most scientists do. Einstein well known mass-energy equivalence formula actually originated from someone else ahead of his generation. The two notable original proponents of this theory were Sir Isaac Newton and Giovanni Coriolis. These two great scientists were the source of his formula and deserved the honors to be called the greatest minds on earth ever lived.
The various formula presented in my book, Creation by Laws, were traced back from how variables and numbers, units of measurements and dimensions have come together to form equations. The roots of the famous equation: E = mc² were even explored too. I figured out that the formula E = mc² was derived from Newton F= m x a and Coriolis’ W = F x d. By combining both equations by dimensional analysis and units of measurements, the origin of the formula E = mc² was determined using the following solution:
W = F x D >>Eq1 – Coriolis equation
F = (M x A) >>Eq2 – Newton’s equation
W = (M x A) x D >>replace F from eq1 with eq2
W = (kg x m/s²) x m >>substitute dimensions w/units
W = (kg x m x m) / s² >>apply laws of exponents
W = ( kg x m² ) / s² >>( X)^A x (X)^B = (X)^A+B
W = kg x (m²/s²) >>combining
W = kg x (m/s)² >>simplifying
W = M x V². >>subsitute Kg for M, m/s for V
W = m x c². >>c = velocity of light, m=mass
E = m x c² >>since Work(W) = Energy(E)