"Logic is the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.", "Logic is a branch of philosophy.", "Logic concerns the structure of statements and arguments, in formal systems of inference and natural language. Topics include validity, fallacies and paradoxes, reasoning using probability and arguments involving causality. Logic is also commonly used today in argumentation theory.". Excerpts from Wikipedia on "Logic".
Although description logic[w] can address questions by its critical and generally systematic approach that relies on the reasoned arguments in conventional law of thought[w], it is fundamentally based on its specific branch of philosophy[d] that draws conclusions in its postulated abstract with what it posits.
As thus, if scientists in consensus agreed on the propositional knowledge[w] of a scientific theory is correct, evaluated with its validated logical basis that was construed in its postulated objective reality, it would mean they believed the theory is correct.
See the UVS subtopic on "Critical analysis of the scientific method on its intrinsic flaws" that elaborates on the follies of the fallaciously validated hallmark scientific theories.
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” - Richard Feynman
A proposition for the actuality of a natural phenomenon merely concluded with the deductive logic[w] of its hypothetical construct[w], therefore does not make it true when referred to reality[w]; the proposition at best could only be valid for its logically deduced conclusion construed in its subjective reality[g] that emulates the objective reality.
Nonetheless, as a result of the paradoxical effect of the cosmos[uvs] that renders observation delusions with its subliminal[d] natural negations[w], the logic and belief system of a validated theory could be logically construed in a state of delusion with its cognitive paradox[g].
See an example of a resolved cognitive paradox in a UVS topic that illustrates a transcendental perception for resolving its cognitive paradox.
A tiny wrong assumption could lead to its huge misadventures.
questions of science, the authority of a thousand
is relentless and unchangeable, and it is indifferent as to whether
In the worldview[w] of the Copernican heliocentrism[w], the Kepler's laws of planetary motion[w] can illustrate with mathematical logic that orbits are elliptical, and these laws have had thus invalidated the postulation of circular planetary orbits. Despite logical analysis with mathematical principle can invalidate or disprove with the know-how[w] proposition of its validated a posteriori[d] postulation, it cannot prove its posits for its claims of facts; it is known in modern astronomy that the Sun is not motionless nor is it anywhere near the center of the universe[w] as were also posited for the Kepler's laws.
See the UVS subtopic on "The cognitive paradox fallacy in Copernican heliocentrism" that illustrates the spiral nature of the Solar System.
A self-reference[w] analysis of its belief could be fundamentally asserted by its consilience[w], and thus can be jointly exhaustive in its manifold of deductive reasoning to validate its proposition for its pragmatic theories of truth[w]. With such tautology, it therefore could irrefutably validate its proposition from its premise, and infallibly conclude it in its postulated reality for asserting its belief.
One can persistently fool himself in a delusion that paradoxically and consistently asserts his fallacious belief, and therefore persistently believes in what is not true.
With the postulations for the cosmos[w] is or is not filled with an all-pervasive physical entity of aether corpuscles, its posits[d] for variant or invariant dimensions of space[w], and variant or invariant dimension of time[w], these could have eight possible paradigms[w] for explicating the objective reality.
Each of these paradigms on the nature[w] of reality[w] with the postulations of its conceptual framework[w], can be the basis for its hypotheses for all empirically observed natural phenomena. And at their best, all postulated paradigms of the cosmos could logically, coherently, quantitatively, and consistently explicate their propositional knowledge[w] of the empirical observed natural phenomena in their worldviews.
Howsoever, any quantitatively concluded a posteriori proposition[g] for any of the above eight paradigms for the reality of the cosmos, at its best it can be logically valid for the physical laws[w] or axioms[w] of its a priori proposition[g] for what it predicates, which could be consistently proven in its worldview by self-referencing[w] with all conceivable ways of circular reasoning[w].
With logical tautology for what it predicates, any predication could be deemed valid by its self-fulfilling prophecy to assert its validated logical reasoning in its belief system. This is despite the tautology can never actually prove its posits, which in the first place is its belief of the objective reality postulated for proving its predications with the logic construed in its premise.
“You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created.” - Albert Einstein
Any hypothesis extrapolated from a foundation that was based on an incorrect paradigm of reality would be fallacious at its best, this is despite its valid conclusions deduced in its abstract can be analytically true, and can also pragmatically work. Nonetheless, the fallacious paradigms of the postulated cosmos despite could be validated, they would inevitably flop under the law of noncontradiction[w] in their epistemic theories of truth[w].
realizing the cognitive paradoxes that negate to cause delusions in the
If obsessed with logically consistent and coherent a posteriori propositions for a deterministic[d] theory, axiomatically[d] established on any of the paradigms with the rigors for precise quantitative predictions[w], one could persistently fool himself in the delusion construed in its artificial cognitive paradox. This is as a result of ignoring the qualitative evaluation for the a priori propositions in the subjective reality of its cosmic paradigm, which merely asserts its validated quantitative analyses of the empirically observed natural phenomena with the endorsed scientific model[w] for its exact science[w].
The artificial cognitive paradoxes of such deterministic theories would result to their physical paradoxes[w], and this is as a result of their fallaciously contrived posits that render their forms of science delusions.
Such science delusions in the worldviews of their scientific models, are stemmed from the cognitive paradox fallacies[g] of their a priori proposition asserted with all possible means of self-referencing in their fallacies of definition[w]. These could render the subjective knowledge in their pragmatic theories of truth[w] with all possible ways of circular reasoning, speciously[d] validated by their self-fulfilling prophecies[w] for asserting their posits with the pragmatically workable quantitative predictions of their a posteriori knowledge.
scientist of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane
The foundations for such spurious[d] deterministic theories established with the assumptions for their belief systems of the objective reality, could be validated with their logical interpretations of the empirical observed natural phenomena perceived in the worldviews of their fallaciously contrived objective reality.
A mathematically proven deterministic theory that is analytically and logically deduced to be valid with its hard science[w] in its postulated objective reality, although could be made unassailable by substantiating with deductive proof that has true value[w], its conclusion is merely analytically true for its a priori propositions.
A fallaciously validated a priori proposition construed with its artificial cognitive paradox, would inevitably render its physical paradox of the empirical observed natural phenomenon.
The fallaciously endorsed posit of a scientific model, is the mother of all its science delusions.
The propositions of such interpretations in their fallacy of misplaced concreteness[w], can be logically established with philosophical rigors and precise quantitative predictions in all possible forms of science delusions. And these could be construed with all possible types of artificial cognitive paradox for perceiving the cosmos in the belief systems of their contrived worldviews.
“By denying scientific principles, one may maintain any paradox.” - Galileo Galilei
A fallacy[w] of its metaphoric proposition derived in its contrived belief system that renders its illusion of knowing in its delusion, could be logically stemmed from the fallacious postulation in the worldview of its conceptual metaphor.
A fallaciously endorsed conceptual metaphor of a metascience, is the mother of all its fallacies.
Delusion is the mother of all its illusions of knowledge.
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” - Daniel Joseph Boorstin
See an externally linked topic on "Allegory of the Cave" that elaborates on obfuscated perceptions by perceiving reality with shadows in its subjective reality.
See the UVS subtopic on "The apparent retrograde motion of a planet" that illustrates a fallacious conceptual metaphor of geocentrism, which had incorrectly concluded the actuality of a typical type of apparent observations with its superior quantitative predictions.
To relate with an example of systemic negation that is constructed on a logical basis, one can explore the synergetic functions of logic gates[w] with Boolean logic[w] in the field of digital electronics[w], which are involved with modern technologies in devising of electronic products through designing and making of digital circuits.
The propositional logic of a digital system, is absolutely subjected to the tautology[w] of its logical construct that could incorporate all types of logical negation for the system to pragmatically work for serving its purpose, and thus its logical propositions are merely valid for the application of its logical construct.
The truth tables (figure 1) listed below are the outcomes of its logical operators (Logic gates, figure 2) in the order of AND gate, OR gate, NOT x OR y gate and XOR gate, are some of the Boolean algebraic functions that can also be represented with other logic gate equivalents in other configurations (figure 3), or in Venn diagrams (figure 4).
In binary numbers, the functions for AND and OR gate are quite easy to understand, and these are very similar to the manner it is used in common languages. However, for a complex logical operator such as the XOR[w] logic gate, its logic function is apparently counterintuitive. In a straight forward logical sense when a set of sequential inputs is applied, it apparently has a counterintuitive set of logical outcomes through its function of logical negation[w], which is obtained with a logic gate configuration of universal gates arranged for its specific negated function.
This is a category of digital logic gates that implements exclusive disjunction[w] for its logical outputs, and can be physically constructed in different configurations using only NAND[w] or NOR[w] gates. NAND and NOR gates are universal gates that can be used to derive 16 possible Boolean algebraic functions[w]. NAND and NOR logic gates are the two pillars of logic in digital electronics, in that all other types of Boolean logic gates that each has a specific digital logic function (i.e., AND, OR, NOT, XOR, XNOR, etc), can be created from a suitable network of only NAND or NOR gates.
Take a scenario of one who does not understand the tautology of a logic gate configuration, or the negations used in the propositional logic with De Morgan's laws[w] for a systematical model constructed in Boolean logic, which is derived with the truth tables for those logic gates. Be it ignorance, inability to understand it, or refused to blindly follow in a religious manner for the truth tables for the functions of the logic gates, therefore uses only limited types of logic gates that are comprehended, and omits those logic gates with complex logical negations that apparently have contradicting functions, or are counterintuitive and therefore are not correctly understood. In such manners, the attempts for development of digital circuit to arrive at a solution for a digital logic application is obviously a lame approach. The electronic system devised in such simplified manners would have crippled functionalities, and its logical workability is bound to breakdown under certain logical operating circumstances.
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” - Albert Einstein
On another hand, without understanding the applied logical tautologies and negations in the digital system to troubleshoot a logic circuit of an electronic device, is also a lame approach. With moot reasoning this would cause misinterpretations for the functions of circuitry unwarily with partial understanding and limited knowledge of the logical operators, and therefore could only do guesswork in a trial and error[w] process, and thus makes all sorts of fallacious deductions with a belief system of his own delusion.
“You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created.” - Albert Einstein
In another scenario, one who can design an electronic logic circuit according to an application requirement, accomplished by using appropriate logic gates based on faith in the truth tables under their known limited circumstances. With this logic circuit development method, one can effectively apply an efficacious digital logic solution efficiently for its pragmatic application in digital electronics. One does not need to know the complex details for the logic gates used, as in whatever logic gate configuration that constructs the required logic gate circuit as an end product, nor the p-n junctions[w] in the assembly of semiconductors[w] as an integrated circuit[w] that forms the mechanism to trigger the logic gate function. This is an example of religiously incorporating a belief system in a process for its technical developments, which can efficiently derive effective and workable solutions for their digital logic applications, and it is simply based on the truth tables for pragmatic applications of the digital logic gates.
See an externally linked article on "Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Semiconductors" that elaborates on p-n junction.
However, this approach is based on faith religiously in a belief system that within known parameters, one can productively conceive solutions for digital circuit designs regardless of its fundamental working principles on a higher or lower level. On a higher level the working principle is concerning the systematical model derived in Boolean algebra[w], and the details of its logic gate configuration. On a lower level, it is concerning the physics of semiconductors. Anyone in this category although may know how to pragmatically develop any electronic logic circuit effectively and efficiently, but he can be blind to the fundamental working principles that are involved on higher and lower levels.
In digital logic applications by religiously based on the truth tables for the developments of digital electronic devices, the applications can be boundless within the limits of digital logic functions, which are designed within the properties of the semiconductor devices, available resources, and as much as one can ever imagine.
“Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.” - Albert Einstein
However, if one is ignorant of the fundamental working principles that govern digital electronics, and therefore does not have the necessary knowledge that is required for research and development works to materialize a digital device for attaining some crucial logical functions in extreme circumstances, such as in sub-zero temperature environments, or extreme vibration situations, henceforth, any ingenious design or development of logic circuit device in an act of blind faith could be unrealistic and impractical. This would be so when the design is conceived beyond the known capabilities and properties of digital electronics that the required logical functions could not be pragmatically implemented.
In the digital logic sense, applying logic without religiously following an adopted logical function model based on faith is lame, and it is blind to follow the logical function model religiously without really knowing the underlying working principles, but has faith in it just because it had always worked for serving its purpose.
“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” - Albert Einstein
See the UVS topics on "Overviews of the UVS research" that elaborates on a ground breaking visual grounded theory to evaluate the actuality of natural phenomena, "The cosmological model of UVS" that explicates on the underlying vortical structure and mechanism of the cosmos, "The unisonal vortical motion of the cosmos" that systematically hypothesizes on the ontology of the universe,.
The philosophy of science[w] of the UVS research with the reality[w] paradigm shift[w] of the UVS model, is grounded on its transcendental perspectivalism[w] that explicates with coherence theory of truth[w].
In the UVS worldview, the entire structure of the observable universe[uvs] is formed in a nested vortical hypersphere of the cosmos[uvs] that obfuscates, it is thus intrinsically imbued with the paradoxical effect of the cosmos[uvs].
All its harmonically resonated manifestations of natural phenomena[w] are therefore inherited with the traits of its paradoxical characteristic.
Peculiarly, in a typical obfuscated[d] manner, the paradoxical effect of the cosmos subliminally[d] negates[d] to manifest all possible forms of natural cognitive paradox[g] in the apparent observations of the paradoxically rendered natural phenomena.
Evidently, the observed natural phenomena in the entire observable universe[w] is overwhelmingly paradoxical.
Heuristically[w], the UVS research methodology with its transcendental perspectivalism, could enlighten[d] to efficaciously resolve the naturally caused cognitive paradoxes of the paradoxically rendered natural phenomena.
To cogently resolve the natural cognitive paradoxes of the apparent observations in their subliminally negated circumstances, this requires the coherently induced transcendental[d] perceptions in the conceptual framework of UVS for perceiving the underlying structures and mechanisms of the natural phenomena that are based on the UVS model.
By inducing the transcendental perceptions to reveal the actualities[d] of the natural phenomena, the enlightenments[g] could inspire the insights[d] that elucidate[d] their observational delusions[d].
See an example of a resolved cognitive paradox in a UVS topic that illustrates a transcendental perception for resolving its delusory observation.
These transcendental perceptions could elucidate the delusions of the natural phenomena that are being subliminally rendered by the paradoxical effect of the cosmos, which manifests its observational negations[d] in a typical obfuscated manner.
The actualities of the delusory observations revealed with the UVS visual inductive resolutions, could also transpire the enlightenments[g] to further induce the insights to elucidate the negations of the paradoxically rendered natural phenomena.
Science with enlightenment renders revelations for actualities with the transcendental perceptions of natural phenomena in the realism of objective reality.
In a nutshell, these generalizations[w] are the basis for the philosophy of science of the UVS research.
Note: The philosophy of science of the UVS research was independently conceived with no prior knowledge on the Age of Enlightenment. Despite some works of the UVS research closely resembled the works of the earlier philosophers who influenced the Enlightenment, such as those works of Descartes, Francis Bacon, Locke, Spinoza, and Joseph-Louis Lagrange, the UVS research methodology nevertheless is unique and original. Nonetheless, the treatise of UVS as it is now presented, has had incorporated the notions and terminologies of epistemology, empiricism, and paradigm shift at a later stage for structuring its presentations. The UVS topics are also furnished to enrich with the later developments of the most influential publication of the Enlightenment: the Encyclopédie.
As a result of the paradoxical effect of the cosmos[uvs] that subliminally[d] manifests in a topsy-turvy[d] nested vortical hypersphere of the cosmos[uvs], it could negate[d] empirically observed natural phenomena to render their observational delusions[d] with all possible forms of cognitive paradox[g].
Therefore, to accurately establish the knowledge[w] of any natural phenomenon for its actuality[d] that refers to reality[w], it is necessary to cross-examine its propositional knowledge[w] with a multidisciplinary approach[w]. This involves and overlaps the trilogy of metaphysics[w], physical science[w], and theoretical physics[w] for its criteria of truth[w].
As a qualitatively refined scientific method for checking the wholeness and integrity of any propositional knowledge on the predicated actuality of a natural phenomenon, in the reality paradigm shift[w] of the UVS model, the trilogy can be applied to rigorously evaluate its predication with metaphysics for its ontological proposition, with physical science for its a priori proposition, and with theoretical physics for its a posteriori proposition.
See externally linked topics on "The Tripartite Theory of Knowledge" that elaborates on justified true belief, "Scientific realism" that elaborates on the view of the universe described by science is real regardless of how it may be interpreted, and "Baconian method" that elaborates on the inception of the original scientific method of modern science.
Firstly, for its evaluation in metaphysics, it would require to invoke the hypothetical construct for illustrating the underlying vortical structure and mechanism of the natural phenomenon that is coherently based on the UVS model. This process with its coherently established hypothesis[w] and discernable[d] circumstantial evidence[w], evaluates the ontological[w] proposition of the natural phenomenon with metaphysical rigors for its belief[w] in its theory of justification[w]; this is the process for coherence theory of truth[w] for its ontological actuality perceived in the nature of reality.
See the “Metaphysical inspirations of UVS" for some concepts of UVS that emphasized on the essential metaphysical aspects of UVS.
Secondly, for its evaluation in physical science, it would require to invoke the transcendental perspective for its apparent observation of the natural phenomenon in the conceptual framework of UVS with the epistemic process and methodology of the UVS research. This process with its observational[w] evidence and justified posits, evaluates the a priori proposition on the predicated actuality of the natural phenomenon with qualitative rigor for immutable truth[w] in its coherently grounded transcendental perspectivalism[w]; this is the process for correspondence theory of truth[w] for its qualitative actuality in objective reality[m].
See the “Philosophical inspirations of UVS” for the excerpts of some all-encompassing sculptural ideas that were inspired in the UVS worldview.
And thirdly, for its evaluation in theoretical physics, it would require to invoke the scientific modeling[w] of its hypothesis. This process with its empirical evidence[w] and its justified a priori proposition, evaluates the a posteriori proposition on the predicated actuality of the natural phenomenon with quantitative rigors for its justification[d] in quantitative research[w]; this is the process for pragmatic theory of truth[w] for its quantitative actuality construed in its emulated reality.
In a nutshell, this is the theory of knowledge[w] in the UVS research for cross-examining the propositions of knowledge with these criteria of truth[w] in the multidisciplinary approach. And this is the basis for the epistemological paradigm shift of the UVS research for its scientific revolution[uvs] to advance our knowledge for the empirically observed natural phenomena as perceived in the observable universe[w].
Despite the visual inductive resolutions[uvs] for the case studies of natural phenomena in the UVS research are mostly in their qualitative forms, many of the evidently verified and proven a priori propositions[uvs] with their elucidated delusions and resolved cognitive paradoxes, unequivocally are the well-justified true beliefs that are free of cognitive paradox. And thus by themselves, the predications of these verified and proven a priori propositions, are already significant contributions as the a priori knowledge[m] for the actualities of the qualitatively evaluated natural phenomena.
have often made the hypothesis that ultimately physics will not require
a mathematical statement,
Nonetheless, the followings examples are some significant revolutionary discoveries[uvs] that have had applied the qualitatively refined scientific method of UVS that are completed with quantitative analyses for substantiating their a priori propositional knowledge[w]. These analyses of the UVS research established their a posteriori propositional knowledge with their well-justified true beliefs, and thus they further extend the knowledge of the empirically observed natural phenomena:
~ This section on "The functions of logic gates with Boolean logic" in this web page, was written in appreciation to David Appleton for his very immersive lectures on semiconductor device, digital logic, and as my mentor.
~ With special thanks to Dean Ward (aka junglelord) for his support of UVS, his posts on Synergetics in Thunderbolts Forum for a thread on "Tensegrity Creates Matter!", and his assertion with "Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated".
and animation credits:
The classified denotations with URL links for the individual words and specific phrases denoted in the UVS treatise:
The inception of this UVS topic was on 19th June 2007 with ongoing updates since.
Some resonated remarks received that are relevant to this Universal Vortical Singularity (aka UVS) topic:
really like your page you have on your site great tips!”
found your web page very interesting” (30th
“Your work is really amazing.” (18th
a brilliant treatise that credibly extends modern human scientific knowledge
and awareness of "How The Universe And Everything In It Truly Works".'
a doubt, someday your theory will be the way of science!”
(23rd July 2012)
took the imaginary point singularity and made a dot.
speaking, even in its present mostly qualitative form, UVS makes a significant
contribution to the discovery of spiral nature of the universe. No person
holds a complete truth about the nature of the universe, and UVS brings
attention of scientists to an interesting path of solving this very challenging
is the future of science.”
Disclaimers: The treatise of Universal Vortical Singularity (UVS) in its epistemological paradigm shift, is fundamentally unconventional. Its hypotheses grounded on a generally unheard-of UVS model, bound to have shortcomings, such as loose ends, errors, and omissions errors. Many details and assumptions in its propositions have yet to be further researched, probed, evaluated, validated, or verified. Its implicit explanations are for casual understanding of the UVS topics presented in the UVS worldview, so if any term or statement is offensive in any manner from whatsoever perspectives, is most regretted. Links to other sites do not imply endorsement of their contents; apply appropriate discretion whenever necessary. Also, the content of the UVS topics, from time to time could be arbitrarily modified without any notice.
Viewing tips: Despite the presentations of the UVS web pages has went through much accommodation for their viewings on smart phones, they are still not entirely friendly to these mobile devices. For the best experiences, use a MS Windows based PC or computer system with Java enabled browser for running its interactive applets. (Such as Java Applet of Moiré pattern, JPL Small-Body Database Browser, and Planet Finder.)
Copyright information: This UVS web site is for non-profit purposes and not for commercial use. Wherever possible, direct credits to the origins of the works or images were provided, be it on fair dealings, with explicit permission from their owners, or the materials were believed to be from the public domain.