This paper is based on two presentations under the auspices of thf Edinburgh Medical Group in 1976. Dr Noble and Professor Mason, explore the incidence of incest and society's attitudes to it from legal, anthropological, medical and social viewpoints. They place this in a world context by looking at the universal prohibition of incest and the theories related to that taboo. In conclusion, they suggest that there seem to be sufficient sensible grounds on which to base a reappraisal of attitudes (...) to incest. Their conclusions are in turn appraised by brief commentaries from a moral philospher and a psychiatrist. (shrink)
Using an original approach, Mauro Dardo recounts the major achievements of twentieth-century physics--including relativity, quantum mechanics, atomic and nuclear physics, the invention of the transistor and the laser, superconductivity, binary pulsars, and the Bose-Einstein condensate--as each emerged. His year-by-year chronicle, biographies and revealing personal anecdotes help bring to life the main events since the first Nobel Prize was awarded in 1901. The work of the most famous physicists of the twentieth century--including the Curies, Bohr, Heisenberg, Einstein, Fermi, Feynman, Gell-Mann, (...) Rutherford, and Schrödinger--is presented, often in the words and imagery of the prize-winners themselves. Mauro Dardo is Professor of Experimental Physics at Amedeo Avogadro University. He has served as Dean of the new Faculty of Sciences at the University of Turin in Alessandria, Piedmont, and has also served as Director of the university's new department of Sciences and Advanced Technologies. (shrink)
There have been two Japanese Nobel laureates in chemistry, three in physics, and one in the category of medicine or physiology. This relatively small number has been attributed to shortcomings in Japanese science. The award of the Physics Prize in 1949 to Hideki Yukawa and to his colleague Sin'itirô Tomonaga in 1965 gave public evidence of how Japanese could make outstanding individual contributions to science. Paradoxically, the Prize also reinforced a belief that such men formed part of a traditional (...) hierarchical system. This essay examines how the Nobel Prize has been represented in Japan. (shrink)
Having laid the groundwork in his critically acclaimed books Neural Darwinism (Basic Books, 1987) and Topobiology (Basic Books, 1988), Nobel laureate Gerald M. Edelman now proposes a comprehensive theory of consciousness in The Remembered ...
The seventeen seminal essays by Robert J. Gordon collected here, including three previously unpublished works, offer sharply etched views on the principal topics of macroeconomics - growth, inflation, and unemployment. The author re-examines their salient points in a uniquely creative, accessible introduction that serves on its own as an introduction to modern macroeconomics. Each of the four parts into which the essays are grouped also offers a new introduction. The papers in Part I explore different key aspects of the history, (...) theory, and measurement of productivity growth. The essays in Part II investigate the sources of business cycles and productivity fluctuations. Those in Part III cover the effects of supply shocks in macroeconomics. The final group presents empirical studies of the dynamics of inflation in the United States. The foreword by Nobel Laureate Robert M. Solow comments on the abiding importance of these essays drawn from 1968 to the present. (shrink)
From Nobel Laureate Robert M. Solow comes this second edition of his classic text, Growth Theory, to which he has added six new chapters. The book begins with the author's Nobel Prize Lecture "Growth Theory and After", followed by the six original chapters of the first edition. The author maintains that basic growth theory is still best summarized in these chapters.The publication of the first edition in 1970 coincided with a worldwide productivity slowdown; during that time very little (...) work occurred on growth theory. It wasn't until the 1980s that a surge of new research appeared, including the work of Roemer, Lucas, Grossman/Helpman, Aghion, and Howitt. The second half of the book deals with this relatively recent surge, often referred to as "the new endogenous growth theory." As a bridge to the six new chapters, Solow includes an essay entitled "Intermezzo" in which he discusses this transition. The author recasts his model to help the reader compare the relationships among all models; he deals rather tersely, for reasons explained in the book, with "AK" theory, convergence, and international cross-section studies rather tersely. The author concludes by drawing some lessons from the new growth theory and suggests where gaps may be filled in future research. Although Solow disagrees strongly with much of the recent research, he is quick to acknowledge some of its outstanding contributions.This second edition is essential reading for graduate courses in macroeconomics as well as courses on growth theory at both undergraduate and graduate levels. No other book provides this broad overview of the whole field and its evolution. (shrink)
Using as a springboard a three-way debate between theoretical physicist Lee Smolin, philosopher of science Nancy Cartwright and myself, I address in layman’s terms the issues of why we need a unified theory of the fundamental interactions and why, in my opinion, string and M-theory currently offer the best hope. The focus will be on responding more generally to the various criticisms. I also describe the diverse application of string/M-theory techniques to other branches of physics and mathematics which render the (...) whole enterprise worthwhile whether or not “a theory of everything” is forthcoming. (shrink)
Discussion on financial ethics increasingly includes the problem of exclusion of the poorer segments of society from the financial system and access to credit. This paper explores the ethical dimensions surrounding the concept of a human right to credit. If access to credit is directly instrumental to economic development, poverty reduction and the improved welfare of all citizens, then one can proclaim, as Nobel Prize Laureate M. Yunus has done, that it is a moral necessity to establish credit as (...) a right. Arguments both supporting and opposing the concept of a right to credit are presented. While there may be general agreement that access to financial services may provide a pathway out of poverty, granting a universal right could induce perverse effects such as overindebtedness. Bearing in mind the ultimate goal of proponents of this right as well as the potential harmful consequences, this paper offers a new perspective on the question of access to credit based on a goal-right system. (shrink)
Robert Rosen’s (M,R)-systems are a class of relational models that define organisms. The realization of relational models plays a central role in his study of life, itself. Biology becomes identified with the class of material realizations of a certain kind of relational organization, exhibited in (M,R)-systems. In this paper I describe several realizations of (M,R)-systems, and in particular alternate realizations of the replication component.
Ethics of Richard M. Hare is widely considered as a classical example of the strong internalistic theory of motivation: he is thought to believe that having a moral motive is a sufficient condition to act accordingly. However, strong internalism has difficulties with explaining the phenomenon of acrasia and amoralism. For this reason some critics charge him with developing a false theory of moral motivation. In the article I present Hare's answer to these questions by dividing the discussion about motivation into (...) three levels: semantical, epistemological, and ontological. I also explain his concept of internal motivation and argue that his theory, contrary to what his critics assume, may be called a weak motivational internalism. (shrink)
The aim of this paper is to discuss the “Framework for M&S with Agents” (FMSA) proposed by Zeigler et al. [2000, 2009] in regard to the diverse epistemological aims of agent simulations in social sciences. We first show that there surely are great similitudes, hence that the aim to emulate a universal “automated modeler agent” opens new ways of interactions between these two domains of M&S with agents. E.g., it can be shown that the multi-level conception at the core of (...) the FMSA is similar in both contexts: notions of “levels of system specifi cation”, “behavior of models”, “simulator”and “endomorphic agents” can be partially translated in the terms linked to the “denotational hierarchy” (DH) and recently introduced in a multi-level centered epistemology of M&S. Second, we suggest considering the question of “credibility” of agent M&S in social sciences when we do not try to emulate but only to simulate target systems. Whereas a stringent and standardized treatment of the heterogeneous internal relations (in the DH) between systems of formalisms is the key problem and the essential challenge in the scope of Agent M&S driven engineering, it is urgent too to address the problem of the external relations (and of the external validity, hence of the epistemic power and credibility) of such levels of formalisms in the specific domains of agent M&S in social sciences, especially when we intend to introduce the concepts of activity tracking. (shrink)
The “representation problem” in abstract algebraic logic is that of finding necessary and sufficient conditions for a structure, on a well defined abstract framework, to have the following property: that for every structural closure operator on it, every structural embedding of the expanded lattice of its closed sets into that of the closed sets of another structural closure operator on another similar structure is induced by a structural transformer between the base structures. This question arose from Blok and Jónsson abstract (...) analysis of one of Blok and Pigozzis’s characterizations of algebraizable logics. The problem, which was later on reformulated independently by Gil-Férez and by Galatos and Tsinakis, was solved by Galatos and Tsinakis in the more abstract framework of the category of modules over a complete residuated lattice, and by Galatos and Gil-Férez in the even more abstract setting of modules over a quantaloid. We solve the representation problem in Blok and Jónsson’s original context of M-sets, where M is a monoid, and characterise the corresponding M-sets both in categorical terms and in terms of their inner structure, using the notions of a graded M-set and a generalized variable introduced by Gil-Férez. (shrink)
China does not seem to believe the existence of universally acknowledged values in science and fails to promote the observation of such values that also should be applied to every member of the scientific community and at all times. Or, there is a separation between the practice of science in China and the values represented by modern science. In this context, science, including the pursuit of the Nobel Prize, is more a pragmatic means to achieve the end of the (...) political leadership – the national pride in this case – than an institution laden with values that govern its practices. However, it is the recognition and respect of the latter that could lead to achievement of the former, rather than the other way around. (shrink)
The opening argument in the Metaphysics M.2 series targeting separate mathematical objects has been dismissed as flawed and half-hearted. Yet it makes a strong case for a point that is central to Aristotle’s broader critique of Platonist views: if we posit distinct substances to explain the properties of sensible objects, we become committed to an embarrassingly prodigious ontology. There is also something to be learned from the argument about Aristotle’s own criteria for a theory of mathematical objects. I hope to (...) persuade readers of Metaphysics M.2 that Aristotle is a more thoughtful critic than he is often taken to be. (shrink)
Roderick M. Chisholm (1916-1999) was one of the most important philosophical thinkers of the 20th century. His influence on epistemology (the theory of knowledge) and metaphysics cannot be understated; indeed, it is difficult to conceive of what these fields would be like today without the impact of Chisholm. Were there a Nobel Prize in philosophy, Chisholm surely would have won it.
An examination of the early history of Nobel Committee deliberations, coupled with a survey of discoveries for which prizes have been awarded to date – and, equally revealing, discoveries for which prizes have not been awarded – reveals a pattern. This pattern suggests that Committee members may have internalized the received, biomedical model and conferred awards in accord with the physicalistic premises that ground this model. I consider the prospect of a paradigm change in medical science and the possible (...) repercussions of such a change on the distribution of Nobel prizes within the domain of physiology or medicine. For expository purposes, I contrast a model based on a science of pathophysiology with one based on a science of pathopsychophysiology. I propose a means whereby members might minimize the potentially blinding effects of model-dependence and come to evaluate medical discoveries from an inter-model rather than an exclusively intra-model perspective. By bringing to light questions rarely asked and proposing answers, I seek to open a dialogue and furnish a vehicle by which the putative delimiting effects of model-dependence might be overcome. (shrink)
Kinetic models using enzyme kinetics are developed for the three ways that Louie proved that Rosen’s minimal (M-R)-System can be closed to efficient cause; i.e., how the “replication” component can itself be entailed from within the system. The kinetic models are developed using the techniques of network thermodynamics. As a demonstration, each model is simulated using a SPICE circuit simulator using arbitrarily chosen rate constants. The models are built from SPICE sub-circuits representing the key terms in the chemical rate equations. (...) The models include the addition of an ad hoc semi-permeable membrane so the system can achieve steady state fluxes and also to illustrate the need for all the efficient cause agents to be continually replaced. Comments are made about exactly what is being simulated. (shrink)
In this note we develop a method for constructing finite totally-ordered m-zeroids and prove that there exists a categorical equivalence between the category of finite, totally-ordered m-zeroids and the category of pseudo Łukasiewicz-like implicators.
In this paper we pursue the study of the variety of m -generalized Łukasiewicz algebras of order n which was initiated in . This variety contains the variety of Łukasiewicz algebras of order n . Given , we establish an isomorphism from its congruence lattice to the lattice of Stone filters of a certain Łukasiewicz algebra of order n and for each congruence on A we find a description via the corresponding Stone filter. We characterize the principal congruences on A (...) via Stone filters. In doing so, we obtain a polynomial equation which defines the principal congruences on the algebras of . After showing that for m > 1 and n > 2, the variety of Łukasiewicz algebras of order n is a proper subvariety of , we prove that is a finitely generated discriminator variety and point out some consequences of this strong property, one of which is congruence permutability. (shrink)
For the few scientists that earn a Nobel prize, the im-, D.J. Scalapino, G. Parisi, pact and relevance of their research work is unquestion- S.G. Louie, R. Jackiw, F. Wilczek able. Among the rest of us, how does one quantify the, C. Vafa, M.B. Maple, D.J. cumulative impact and relevance of an individual’s sci- Gross, M.S. Dresselhaus, S.W. Hawkentific research output? In a world of not unlimited reing. sources such quantification (even if potentially distaste- I argue that h is (...) preferable to other single-number cri-. (shrink)
The problems of the social responsibility of the scientist became a subject of public debate after the World War II in Japan, thanks to the activities and publications of Yukawa and Tomonaga. And such authors as J. Karaki, M.Taketani, Y. Murakami, and S. Fujinaga continued discussion in their books. However, many people seem to be still unaware of the most important source of these problems. As I see it, one of the most important treatments of these problems was the Franck (...) Report (June 11, 1945) submitted to the US government by James Franck (chairman) toward the end of the war. This Report contains many important ideas and suggestions as regards the responsibility of the scientist, the morality of the use of atomic bombs, the prospective nuclear armaments race, and the possibility of international control of nuclear power. However, I should like to concentrate only on the first topic in this paper. Why did Franck and his committee at Metallurgical Laboratory of the University of Chicago feel the urgent need for writing and submitting this Report? According to the Report, "in the past, scientists could disclaim direct responsibility for the use to which mankind had put their disinterested discoveries. We cannot take the same attitude now because the success which we have achieved in the development of nuclear power is fraught with infinitely greater dangers than were all the inventions of the past." (I. Preamble) This passage seems to contain the crux of our problem: These scientists clearly recognize the "new" responsibility for them, and the ground of this responsibility is also clear enough; i.e., when a new scientific discovery or invention turns out to have grave bearings on human interests, the scientists who became aware of that are responsible for notifying people of this and advise to look for suitable means for avoiding prospective dangers. In the rest of the paper, I elaborate the reasoning behind the preceding passage, and confirm that basically the same idea and reasoning has been repeated and developed in Russell-Einstein Manifesto (1955), by Pugwash Conferences (first in 1957), by Tomogana, and by Rotblat (the long-time Secretary of Pugwash, who received the Nobel Peace Prize together with the Conference in 1995). (shrink)
This paper aims to present a critique of naturalistic theories of violence. The context of this critique concerns the naturalization of violence, which induces the assimilation power as a form of violence. Therefore, we resumed the theses of Hannah Arendt and Michel Foucault on power and violence. The goal is not to list the differences between these authors on the subject, which are explicit in the development of the test, but show their concordance regarding the critique of power as something (...) synonymous with violence. (shrink)
"A person is not explainable in molecular, field-theoretical, or physiological terms alone." With that declaration, Nobel laureate Gerald M. Edelman goes straight to the heart of Nature's Imagination, a vibrant and important collection of essays by some of the world's foremost scientists. Ever since the Enlightenment, the authors write, science has pursued reductionism: the idea that the whole can be understood by examining and explaining each of its parts. But as this book shows, scientists in every discipline are reaching (...) for a new paradigm that accounts for the whole--from the individual person to the universe itself. Nature's Imagination gathers together the work of thirteen leading mathematicians, astronomers, neuroscientists, and philosophers, as they discuss the revolution sweeping the sciences. Here Roger Penrose, Oliver Sacks, John Barrow, Gregory Chaitin, Maragret Boden, and others explore how and why classic reductionism is falling by the wayside in their own fields. As Freeman Dyson writes in the introduction, science is an art form, not a philosophical method, and it is always in search of new tools. Reductionism has done its work, and scientists are in search of another. Roger Penrose offers a fascinating account of irreducibility in mathematics, starting with the example of an impossible triangle--a drawing of a triangular object twisted so that could not exist in three dimensions. He breaks the triangle into three parts, showing that each corner is physically possible; only in combination is the triangle impossible. Both Penrose and mathematician Gregory Chaitin explore Godel's incompleteness theorem--as does John Barrow, who explains that Chaitin's proof of the theorem shows that, if we ever arrive at a Theory of Everything, there may be a still deeper and simpler unifying theory beyond that. Other contributors discuss the changing thinking in neuroscience, and the limitations of a mechanical view of the mind: as Oliver Sacks writes, "if we are to have a model or theory of mind as this actually occurs in living creatures in the world, it may have to be radically different from anything like a computational one." In addition, this volume includes staunch defenders of the classic scientific approach, such as Peter Atkins ("The omnicompetence of science, and in particular the simplicity its reductionist insight reveals, should be accepted as a working hypothesis until, if ever, it is proved inadequate"). The advance of science has been so startlingly swift in the last century that it has begun to approach limits never dreamed of before. This remarkable volume captures the latest thinking on where we must turn if we are to truly understand oursevles and the universe we live in. (shrink)
In this important new study, Hamilton establishes and develops innovative links between the sites of postcolonial literary theory, the fiction of the South African/Australian academic and Nobel Prize-winning writer J.M. Coetzee, and the work of the French poststructuralist philosopher Gilles Deleuze. Centering on the key postcolonial problematic of representation, Hamilton argues that if one approaches the colonial subject through Gilles Deleuze’s rewriting of subjectivity, then a transcendent configuration of the colonial subject is revealed. Importantly, it is this rendition of (...) the colonial subject that accounts best for the way in which the colonial subject is able to propose and offer instances of resistance to colonial structures of subjectification. In elucidating this claim, the study turns to the fiction of Coetzee. Offering unique Deleuzean readings of three of Coetzee’s most theoretically beguiling novels – Dusklands, Waiting for the Barbarians, and Foe – On Representation will prove to be essential reading to those interested in Coetzee studies, the literary terrain of Deleuze’s philosophy, and those engaging with contemporary debates in postcolonial literature and theory. (shrink)
My aim in this paper is to attempt a philosophical reading of M. Karagatsis’ novel Kitrinos Fakelos (1956), focusing my analysis on the passions and the emotions of its fictional characters, aiming at demonstrating their independence as well as the presentation of their psychography in Karagatsis’ novel where the description of the emotions caused by love is a dominant feature. In particular, I will examine the expression of desire, love (erôs) and sympathy in this novel – passions and emotions that (...) play an important role to moral life and human existence in general. I will be approaching these issues from the point of view of moral philosophy, analyzing the passions and the emotions expressed by the fictional characters in Kitrinos Fakelos, and in particular of the fictional character of Manos Tasakos. At the same time, I will attempt to show the philosophical influences that M. Karagatsis has received in his literary work, and especially in his novel Kitrinos Fakelos, by the philosophical thought of Friedrich Nietzsche. In addition, I will try to demonstrate the contrast between the Nietzschean moral model and that of both ancient and contemporary virtue ethical theory, in relation to the traditional interpretation of the work of Nietzsche’s that Karagatsis adopts, along with many of his contemporaries in Greece from the beginning of the 20th century until the 70’s at least. (shrink)
The much-anticipated anthology on Plato’s_Timaeus_—Plato’s singular dialogue on the creation of the universe, the nature of the physical world, and the place of persons in the cosmos—examining all dimensions of one of the most important books in Western Civilization: its philosophy, cosmology, science, and ethics, its literary aspects and reception. Contributions come from leading scholars in their respective fields, including Sir Anthony Leggett, 2003 Nobel Laureate for Physics. Parts of or earlier versions of these papers were first presented at (...) the _Timaeus_ Conference, held at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign in September of 2007._ To this day, Plato’s _Timaeus_ grounds the form of ethical and political thinking called Natural Law—the view that there are norms in nature that provide the patterns for our actions and ground the objectivity of human values. Beyond the intellectual content of the dialogue’s core, its literary frame is also the source of the myth of Atlantis, giving the West the concept of the “lost world.” From Platonic space to Presocratic vortices, from Philosopher-Kings to Craftsman-Gods and from modern physics to the myth of Atlantis, _One Book, The Whole Universe_ presents in one volume the most up-to-date and penetrating scholarship on Plato’s _Timaeus_ by some of the greatest minds alive today. Contributors__ _Ann Bergren Gábor Betegh Sean Carroll Alan Code Zina Giannopoulou Verity Harte Thomas Kjeller Johansen Charles H. Kahn Anthony J. Leggett Anthony A. Long Stephen Menn Richard D. Mohr Kathryn A. Morgan Alexander P.D. Mourelatos Ian Mueller Thomas M. Robinson Barbara M. Sattler Allan Silverman Jon Solomon Anthony Vidler Matthias Vorwerk Donald Zeyl. (shrink)
Polarization in Western democracies and the collapse of centrally planned economies have led to calls for a redefinition of the state's core functions. This volume explores shifting conceptions of constitutional political economy anchoring the state from the viewpoints of theory, systems, and applications. It suggests why changes may be desirable and how these might be implemented. Part I addresses the writing of constitutions, the dynamic between constitutional order and civil society, the struggle between competitive and protectionist interests, the conflict between (...) protecting expectations and moral evolution, and the role of cultural explanations of constitutional development patterns. Part II explores the interplay between electoral systems and constitutional engineering, the internal costs of political coalitions, and campaigns in pluralistic elections. Part III investigates the quest for stable, dynamic federal states with particular attention to opportunities and pitfalls in Europe. With a foreword and contributions from Nobel Laureate James M. Buchanan. (shrink)
CONTENT Some preliminary comments Introduction of my approach epistemologically different worlds”: paragraphs of my works 2002-2008 -/- I. PHYSICS, COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY Chapter 1 Did Sean Carroll’s ideas (2016) (California Institute of Technology, USA) (within the wrong framework, the “universe”) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2010) (within the EDWs framework) on quantum mechanics, the relationship between Einstein relativity and quantum mechanics, life, the mind-brain problem, etc.? Chapter 2 The unbelievable similarities between Frank Wilczek’s ideas (2016) (Nobel Prize in Physics) and my (...) ideas (2002-2008, etc.) (Philosophy of Mind and Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 3 The unbelievable similarities between Hugo F. Alrøe and Egon Noe’s (Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Denmark) ideas (2017, USA) and my ideas (2002-2008) (Bohr's complementarity extended to ontology) Chapter 4 Similarities between Adam Frank’s ideas (2016 or 2017?, University of Rochester in New York , USA) (“Minding matter - The closer you look, the more the materialist position in physics appears to rest on shaky metaphysical ground”) and my ideas (2005, 2008) Chapter 5 (June 2017) (June 2017) Strong similarity between Carlo Rovelli’s ideas (Italy) in two books (2015) to my ideas (2002-2008) Chapter 6 The unbelievable similarities between Simon Friederich’s ideas (July 2017, University of Groningen, University College Groningen, Faculty of Philosophy the Netherlands) and my ideas (2002-208-2016) -/- II. PHYSICS Chapter 7 The unbelievable similarities between Radu Ionicioiu (Physics, University of Bucharest, Romania) and Daniel R. Terno’s ideas (2011) (Physics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia) and my ideas (Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 8 The strong similarity between Pikovski Igor, Zych Magdalena, Costa Fabio, and Brukner Časlav’s ideas (June 2015) and my ideas regarding the Schrodinger’s cat’s interactions with its environment (the gravitation of Earth) (both entities being macro-objects) (Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 9 The strong similarity between Elisabetta Caffau’s ideas (2015, Center for Astronomy at the University of Heidelberg and the Paris Observatory) and my ideas (2011, 2014) regarding the appearance of Big Bang in many places (Cosmology) Chapter 10 Did Wolfram Schommers (2015, University of Texas at Arlington, USA & Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany) plagiarize my ideas? (Physics) Chapter 11 The strong similarities between Dylan H. Mahler, Lee Rozema, Kent Fisher, Lydia Vermeyden, Kevin J. Resch, Howard M. Wiseman, and Aephraim Steinberg’s ideas (2016, USA) and my ideas (Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 12 The unbelievable similarities between Bill Poirier’s ‘Many Interacting Worlds’ (2016) and my EDWs (Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 13 Unbelievable similarities between R. E. Kastner’s ideas (2016) (Univ. of Maryland, USA) and my ideas (2002-2008) Chapter 14 Christian de Ronde (2017), Quantum Superpositions and the Representation of Physical Reality Beyond Measurement Outcomes and Mathematical Structures -/- III. COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF MIND Chapter 15 Did David Ludwig (2015, Philosophy, University of Amsterdam) plagiarize many of my ideas? (Philosophy (of Mind) Chapter 16 Did Georg Northoff (2011-214, Psychoanalysis, Institute of Mental Health 9 Chapter 17 The unbelievable similarities between Kalina Diego Cosmelli, Legrand Dorothée and Thompson Evan’s ideas (2011, USA) and my ideas (Cognitive Neuroscience) Chapter 18 Did Theise and Menas (2016, Department of Pathology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA) and Kafatos C. Menas (Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; Schmid College of Science & Technology, Chapman University, Orange, CA, USA) plagiarize my ideas of Physics and Cognitive Neuroscience and Philosophy (the mind-brain problem, quantum mechanics, etc.) from 2002-2008? Chapter 19 Did David Bourget (forthcoming 2018) (Director, Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University (or University of Western Ontario) plagiarize my ideas? -/- IV. PHILOSOPHY (of Science) Chapter 20 Did Markus Gabriel plagiarize (2013, Philosophy, Bonn University, Germany) my ideas (2002-2008)? (Philosophy) Chapter 21 The unbelievable similarities between Andrew Newman’s ideas (University of Nebraska, at Omaha, USA) (2013) and my ideas (Ontology) Chapter 22 The unbelievable similarities between Alexey Alyushin (2010, Moscow, Russia) and my ideas (Ontology) Chapter 23 Did Jani Hakkarainen (June 2017, University of Tampere, Finland) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2008)? Chapter 24 The unbelievable similarities between Dean Rickles’s ideas (2017, HPS, Univ. of Sydney) and my ideas (2002-2008) Chapter 25 Did Sebastian de Haro (2017, forthcoming 2018 , HPS, Cambridge, UK) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2008) -/- V. OTHERS Chapter 26 The unbelievable similarities between other people’s ideas (after 2013) (for instance, Tahko E. Tuomas (University of Helsinki, Finland 2016), Côté B. Gilbert (Sudbury, Ontario, Canada 2013), Dan Siegel (Mindsight Institute, USA, 2016) and my ideas (2002-2008) -/- Conclusion [Obviously, there are other “specialists” that published UNBELIEVABLE similar ideas to my ideas but I have not discovered them yet…] Bibliography [Some people haven't read my works but they claim my ideas can be found in other works. Soon, they will discover EDWs in Shakespeare, Bach, Sophocles and ET's letter sent 10 million years ago... me vs. people who have plagiarized my ideas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ciFTP_KRy4 ] . (shrink)
CONTENT Some preliminary comments Introduction of my approach epistemologically different worlds”: paragraphs of my works 2002-2008 I. PHYSICS, COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY Chapter 1 Did Sean Carroll’s ideas (2016) (California Institute of Technology, USA) (within the wrong framework, the “universe”) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2010) (within the EDWs framework) on quantum mechanics, the relationship between Einstein relativity and quantum mechanics, life, the mind-brain problem, etc.? Chapter 2 The unbelievable similarities between Frank Wilczek’s ideas (2016) (Nobel Prize in Physics) and my ideas (...) (2002-2008, etc.) (Philosophy of Mind and Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 3 The unbelievable similarities between Hugo F. Alrøe and Egon Noe’s (Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Denmark) ideas (2017, USA) and my ideas (2002-2008) (Bohr's complementarity extended to ontology) Chapter 4 Similarities between Adam Frank’s ideas (2016 or 2017?, University of Rochester in New York , USA) (“Minding matter - The closer you look, the more the materialist position in physics appears to rest on shaky metaphysical ground”) and my ideas (2005, 2008) Chapter 5 (June 2017) (June 2017) Strong similarity between Carlo Rovelli’s ideas in two books (2015) to my ideas (2002-2008) II. PHYSICS Chapter 6 The unbelievable similarities between Radu Ionicioiu (Physics, University of Bucharest, Romania) and Daniel R. Terno’s ideas (2011) (Physics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia) and my ideas (Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 7 The strong similarity between Pikovski Igor, Zych Magdalena, Costa Fabio, and Brukner Časlav’s ideas (June 2015) and my ideas regarding the Schrodinger’s cat’s interactions with its environment (the gravitation of Earth) (both entities being macro-objects) (Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 8 The strong similarity between Elisabetta Caffau’s ideas (2015, Center for Astronomy at the University of Heidelberg and the Paris Observatory) and my ideas (2011, 2014) regarding the appearance of Big Bang in many places (Cosmology) Chapter 9 Did Wolfram Schommers (2015, University of Texas at Arlington, USA & Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany) plagiarize my ideas? (Physics) Chapter 10 The strong similarities between Dylan H. Mahler, Lee Rozema, Kent Fisher, Lydia Vermeyden, Kevin J. Resch, Howard M. Wiseman, and Aephraim Steinberg’s ideas (2016, USA) and my ideas (Quantum Mechanics) Chapter 11 The unbelievable similarities between Bill Poirier’s ‘Many Interacting Worlds’ (2016) and my EDWs (Quantum Mechanics) III. COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF MIND Chapter 12 Did David Ludwig (2015, Philosophy, University of Amsterdam) plagiarize many of my ideas? (Philosophy (of Mind) Chapter 13 Did Georg Northoff (2011-214, Psychoanalysis, Institute of Mental Health 9 Chapter 14 The unbelievable similarities between Kalina Diego Cosmelli, Legrand Dorothée and Thompson Evan’s ideas (2011, USA) and my ideas (Cognitive Neuroscience) Chapter 15 Did Theise and Menas (2016, Department of Pathology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA) and Kafatos C. Menas (Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; Schmid College of Science & Technology, Chapman University, Orange, CA, USA) plagiarize my ideas of Physics and Cognitive Neuroscience and Philosophy (the mind-brain problem, quantum mechanics, etc.) from 2002-2008? Chapter 16 Did David Bourget (forthcoming 2018) (Director, Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University (or University of Western Ontario) plagiarize my ideas? IV. PHILOSOPHY Chapter 17 Did Markus Gabriel plagiarize (2013, Philosophy, Bonn University, Germany) my ideas (2002-2008)? (Philosophy) Chapter 18 The unbelievable similarities between Andrew Newman’s ideas (University of Nebraska, at Omaha, USA) (2013) and my ideas (Ontology) Chapter 19 The unbelievable similarities between Alexey Alyushin (2010, Moscow, Russia) and my ideas (Ontology) Chapter 20 Did Jani Hakkarainen (June 2017, University of Tampere, Finland) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2008)? V. OTHERS Chapter 21 The unbelievable similarities between other people’s ideas (after 2013) (for instance, Tahko E. Tuomas (University of Helsinki, Finland 2016), Côté B. Gilbert (Sudbury, Ontario, Canada 2013), Dan Siegel (Mindsight Institute, USA, 2016) and my ideas (2002-2008) -/- Conclusion Bibliography [I am sure there are many others that I have not discovered yet!] . (shrink)