Page 1

Did Prigogine Fool the Nobel-Prize Commettee? All rights reserved to Benjamin Gal-Or

Did Prigogine  Fool  the   Nobel-­‐Prize  Committee?   False  Prigogine's   Formulations   awarded  the     Nobel  Prize.          

Figure 1:    SPACE-­‐"2"  wraps  around     all  galaxies,  inside  which    SPACE-­‐"3"           rules,  and  where  all  interstellar  winds   eventually  flow  out  to  SPACE-­‐"2",  from     where  winds  irreversibly   dissipate  inside  dark,  coldest,     EXPANDING  VOIDS  termed  SPACE-­‐"1",       claimed  the  sole  base  of  the  new,     non-­‐anthropomorphic,     astrophysical-­‐cosmological,     entropy-­‐free,   2nd   Law   of   Thermodynamics,   expressed   in   terms   of   Einstein's   stress-­‐energy   tensor   in   General   Relativity   applied   to   Einstein-­‐Hubble   expanding   universe   with   energy   gradients   leading   to  the  coldest,  expanding  voids  [Figs.  2  and  3],  which  are  uniformly   distributed  throughout  the  observed  universe.                                                                                              Prigogine's   thermodynamics   harbors   a   fundamental   mistake   addressed   below.   Against   warnings,   it   was   awarded   the   Nobel   Prize.   It   deems   timely   to   reassess   the   right,  most  fundamental  2nd  Law  of  thermodynamics  &  its  bylaws  in  science.  [1]     ___________________    [1}           Ref.  10,  "Cosmology,  Physics  and  Philosophy",  Volumes  I  &  II,  pages   i-­‐viii  (orldwide  acclaiming    

Reviews), 159, 224,  250,  257,  Fig.  VI.1  at  283,  302,  446-­‐448,  466.  

By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

FIGURE 2.   Terminology:   Expanding   Voids/SPACE-­‐1   is   marked   by   Hubble   Law   Ur   =   H0r,   and   the   claim   that   it   is   unsaturable.   Spaces   "2"   &   "3"   and   Super-­‐clusters   are   further   identified   by  Figs.  1  and  3.  Observed  super-­‐clusters  of  galaxies  are  represented  here  as  2  simple   "CLUSTERS"   vs.   "RADIATION   ENERGY   DENSITY",   in   ev   per   cubic   centimeter   vs.   relative   distance   and   universal   "sinks"   of   dissipated   energy   are   partially   marked   "?"   inside   Space-­‐"2".  The  lowest  cosmic  temperature  in  mid  SPACE-­‐"1"  is  270  Degrees  below  C,   as   evidenced   by   left-­‐over   from   the   "Big-­‐Bang"   expanding-­‐cooling   cosmic   radiation   energy.    

                SPACE-­‐"2"   wraps   around   all   galaxies,   inside   which   SPACE-­‐"3"   rules,   and   where   all   interstellar   winds   eventually   flow   out   to   SPACE-­‐"2",   from   where   winds   irreversibly   dissipate  inside  dark,  coldest,  EXPANDING  VOIDS  termed  SPACE-­‐"1",  claimed  the  sole   base   of   non-­‐local,   non-­‐anthropomorphic,   astrophysical-­‐cosmological,   entropy-­‐free,   2nd   Law   of   Thermodynamics,   expressed   in   terms   of   dissipated   energy   in   Space-­‐1,   a   valid   component   of   Einstein's   stress-­‐energy   tensor   in   General   Relativity   applied   to   expanding,   Einstein-­‐Hubble   universe   with   energy   gradients   leading   to   the   coldest,   expanding   voids,   which   are   uniformly   distributed   throughout   the   observed   universe.   Fig.  3.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

Main Proofs  and  Claims:   v Dark,  coldest,  expanding  cosmic  voids  [Fig.  2  and  NASA-­‐Recorded  Fig.  3]  are  more   important   to   comprehend   the   foundations   of   modern   physics   than   all   the   shining   stars  and  galaxies  put  together.     v There  is  something  that  does  not  even  rise  to  the  level  of  being  wrong,  of  being   universal   and   non-­‐anthropomorphic   associated   with   the   common   use   in   science   of   concepts   like   "order-­‐disorder",   "entropy",   "information"   because   these   must   first  and  foremost  submit  to  and  be  agreeable  with  the  most  verifiable  theory  of   nature   –   well-­‐verified,   Einstein   Gravity   Physics,   General   Relativity,   Einstein   Field   Equations,  without  the  "cosmological  constant".  [1]   v If  the  expanding  voids,  "by  miracle",  stop  expanding  tomorrow,  the  temperatures   in   all   Spaces   1   to   3   would   gradually   rise   to   the   shared   core   temperatures   in   all   stars   and   galaxies   –   eventually   a   universal   thermal   equilibrium   would   be   established,  whereby  all  processes  in  the  universe  come  to  a  full  stop.  Cf.  Thought   Experiment  provided  below.   v Some   reasons   behind   the   following   claims   may   not   be   easy   to   follow,   even   by   mature  physicists,  astrophysicists,  cosmologists  and  theorists.   v Reason-­‐I:   No   star,   supernova,   chemistry,   planet,   life,   can   ever   emerge   without   coldest,  expanding-­‐voids-­‐based  sink-­‐gradients  demonstrated  by  Fig.  2.     v Reason-­‐II:   Energy   density   inside   these   voids,   and   temperatures   drop   down   because  expansion  itself.   v Reason   III:   The   so   based   2nd   law   of   thermodynamics   is   non-­‐anthropomorphic,   astrophysical-­‐cosmological  and  can  be  formulated  by  entropy-­‐free,  stress-­‐energy   tensor   of   Einstein's   gravity   physics,   General   Relativity,   as   applied   to   observed,   expanding  Einstein-­‐Hubble  universe  driven  by    two  simultaneous  laws  of  physics:   (i)   momentum   conservation   by   which   all   incoming   radiation   flows/jets   composed   of   inter-­‐galactic   and   interstellar   winds   and   entering   each   homogeneously   and  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

uniformly distributed  cosmic  voids,  from  all  directions  [Fig.  3]  "push"  the  material   "walls"  of  ALL  super-­‐clusters  of  galaxies  that  are  around  each,  away,  resulting  in   acceleration   in   addition   to   left-­‐over-­‐inertia   expansion   of   the   universe   since   the   Big-­‐Bang.   v Claims   of   a   mysterious   "Dark   Energy"   that   is   "needed"   to   account   for   1998-­‐ discovered   acceleration   of   the   expansion   of   the   universe,   are   therefore   nothing   but  chimera,     v The  observed  homogeneous  and  uniformity  of  the  cosmic  voids  translate  into:  (i)   No   net   force   between   one   void   to   another,   (ii)   Adiabatic   virtual   surfaces   that   mean  that  a  study  of  one  void  is  equivalent  to  the  study  of  all,  (iii)  All  active  stars,   including   supernovas   before   their   end-­‐of-­‐life-­‐explosion,   can   radiate-­‐out   their   generated   fusion-­‐induced   energies,   via   stellar   and   galactic   winds   illustrated   by   Fig.  1,  can  function  only  because     v All  expanding  voids  remain  un-­‐saturated  with  respect  to  the  pouring-­‐in  radiation   flows  from  all  directions.  *   ______________     *

    Reading   about   the   Expanding   Universe,   Gravity   &   cooling   down   of   left-­‐over   radiation   from   the   "Big   Bang",  

predicted to  currently  be  268  degrees  below  zero  C,  had  caused  in  1957,  as  a  student,  a  life  search  for  physical   links  between  this  expansion,  Gravity  Physics  and  the  asymmetric  2nd  law  of  thermodynamics.                With   that   conviction   Mr.   S.   Zeidman's   final   "Thermo   Exam",   was   refuted   by   claiming   that   the   2nd   law   of   Thermodynamics   is   based   on   dissipating   radiated   energy   from   all   stars   &   galaxies   into   expanding,   cold   dark   space,  a  claim  that  he  considered  a  bad  joke,  and  failed  me,  only  to  cause  a  scandal  at  the  Technion,  claiming  a   Dr.  Degree  should  not  be  granted  due  to  said  FAILURE  TO  PASS  HIS  "THERMO  EXAM"  in  1957.                  At   that   time,   in   1963/4,   the   cosmic   background   radiation   was   discovered,   proving   not   only   the   prediction,   but  overthrowing  the  steady-­‐state  theory  of  Fred  Hoyle,  Herman  Bondi  and  Tommy  Gold.  My  contested  thermo   was   thus   presented   before   a   committee   headed   by   Professors   William   "Bill"   Resnick   and   Reuel   Shinaar.   Dr.   Degree  was  next  granted  with  "Flying  Colors".              


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

 FIGURE  3:  NASA  RECORDS  of  dark,  cold,  EXPANDING  VOIDS   Note  the  100  million  light  years  scale,  and  a  few  pink-­‐colored  voids   The  2nd  law  of  thermodynamics  is  based  on  claims  stated  in  Fig.  2..      




By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

Published Worldwide  Acclaims  RE  Said  Claims  

"Gal-­‐Or   launches   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.”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Gold  Award  by  N.Y.  Academy  of  Sciences     "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)."                                                                                                                                                                        The  Crisis  of  the  Sciences     "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

"This is  a  great  book,  and  an  exciting  book;   readable,  worth  reading  and  enlightening."                                                                                                        Sir  Karl  Popper,  the  Greatest  Philosopher  of  Science      

"I do   not   know   a   better   modern   expression   of   science,   philosophy   and   classical   humanism  than  that  of  Gal-­‐Or’s  book."                                                      HaAretz,  Israeli  News  Paper     "We  are  all  Gal-­‐Orians  !  "                                                                                                Editor,  Foundations  of  Physics    


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

"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.   The   well-­‐known   author   bases   his   philosophy   on   a   very   sound   knowledge   of   present-­‐day  scientific  theories.  "                                                                                        Indian  Journal  of  Physics      

"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.”                                                                                                                                    Order  Amidst  Chaos,  Enlightenment  Aesthetics               Recommended by Encyclopedia Britannica, "Nature, Philosophy of" "This is one of the most beautiful books that I have read." Outstanding Books List "Tour de force. A magnificent and sustained piece of work! Gal-Or’s net is widely cast – it reaches as far as science policy and political philosophy." A. Cottrell, V. Chancellor, Cambridge University "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 Magazine AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICS: “Gal-Or's remarkable book 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


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

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   unsaturable   sink   for   radiation,   which,   in   turn,   permits   the   establishment   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.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

         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.”     AMERICAN  JOURNAL  OF  PHYSICS     “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                “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   pacackage  that  I  personally  have  found  most  thought-­‐provoking.”                                                        Prof.  John  Wheeler,  Inst.  Of    Advanced  Studies,  Princeton  University    


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

"Most astrophysicists,   cosmologists     and     astronomers     agree     that     the     biblical   account   of   cosmic  evolution,  in  stressing  `a  b      eginning´  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"                  Scientific  American;    Victor   F.  Weisskopf  from  MIT,  also  quotes  Volume  I     “Lecture   one   [in   Volume   I]   affirms   that   the   stress   placed   by   Genesis   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     The  Catholic  Church  has  recently  confirmed  that  there  is  no  co   ntradiction  between  the  Bible,  astrophysics  and  modern  cosmology.   Cf.  2014  Pop  Declaration.   As   chair   of   the   1969   International   Conference   on   Classical   and   Relativistic   Thermodynamics,   Refrences,   I   invited   Prigoigine   to   preset   his   much   published   and   globally   lectured   thermodynamic   theory   about   what   he   claimed   to   be   the   universal   origin   of   irreversibility  in  nature  –  namely,  on  the  origin  of  the  2nd  law  of  thermodynamics,,  in  which   FORMULATIONS       I  had  discovered  a  fundamentaL  MISTAKE  THAT  HE  IS  Intentionally  HIDING.   Thus  we  had  an  uneasy  talk  there  about  the  validity  of  his  worldwide  acclaimed  theory.   That  was  partly  repeated  in  1974  at  the  State  University  of  New  York  in  Buffalo,  post  his   invited   lecture   there.   While   Prigogine   did   not   object   to   my   following   proposed   axioms-­‐ dictums  in  1969,  he  has  not  followed  them  since  1969.  These  are:     v Conservation  of  symmetry  and  asymmetry  -­‐-­‐  If  you  start  a  theory  with  symmetric   mathematics  it  can  never  change  to  a  asymmetrical  result,  unless  you  smuggle-­‐in   asymmetry  without  declaring  the  contraband.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

v v v v

Same with  asymmtery.[1]   Prediction  is  symmetric  with  retrodiction.  If  you  a  priori  select  only  prediction  you   fool  yourself  that  a  proof  was  made.   Initial   conditions   are   symmetric   with   final   conditions.   If   you   a   priori   select   only   initial  conditions,  you  fool  yourself  that  a  proof  was  made.   Linguistics  foolings  are  common:  E.g.,  "the  particles  were  "un-­‐correlated"  and  then   "correlated",   therefore   ….,   or   other   linguistic   manipulations   that   had   been   well-­‐ reviewed   and   published   as   articles   of   top   science.   This   includes   the   Boltzman   Theorem,  and  endless  statistical  and  quantum  theories  claimed  "proofs".      

Home Bath  Thought  Experiment   Imagine   that   your   bath-­‐tub   is   made   from   a   highly   elastic   rubber   and   that   it   is   constantly   being   inflated   and   increasing   its   volume.   (In   analogy   to   the   expanding   SPACE-­‐1.  [Fig.  2]).       Imagine  further  that  your  bath-­‐tub  expands  faster  than  it  is  filled  up  with  hot  water.   (In  analogy  to  expanding  SPACE-­‐1,  which  is  expanding  at  a  faster  rate  than  it  is  filled   up   with   radiation   energy   streaming   out   of   shining   stars   and   galaxies   like   the   one   shown  on  the  right.).     Now,   if   you   had   started   inflating   your   bath-­‐tub   from   a   high   hot   water-­‐level   mark   –   in   analogy  to  the  hot  initial  state  of  SPACE-­‐1  -­‐-­‐  that  water  level  would  go  down  with  the   expansion-­‐inflation.  Under  such  conditions  your  bath-­‐tub  cannot  be  filled-­‐up.     Space-­‐1   temperature,   or   radiation   energy   density   [Fig.   2],   cannot   but   decrease,   as   proved  by  all  updated  records  of  the  cosmic  black-­‐body  radiation.     This  expanding  bath-­‐tub  represents  the  dark-­‐cold  night  sky  that  you  can  observe  by   stepping   out   of   your   home   at   a   non-­‐cloudy   night.   Since   SPACE-­‐1   is   UNSATURABLE   to   streaming-­‐in  radiation,  no  inflowing  mass-­‐energy  from  nearby  and  far  away  clusters   or   super-­‐clusters   of   galaxies   can   fill-­‐it-­‐up,   as   far   as   it   keeps   expanding   fast   enough,   and  so  it  does,  as  proved  by  the  2.7  deg.  K  of  the  background  black-­‐body  radiation   and  the  dark-­‐cold  night  sky.     It  also  causes  electromagnetic  irreversibility  and  the  electromagnetic  arrow  of  time.   [Volume  I]  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

In case   the   inflation-­‐expansion   of   your   bath-­‐tub   stops,   the   water   level   (the   temperature  of  the  background  black-­‐body  radiation)  would  start  rising  and  the  bath   will   be   filled   up   (the   night   sky   would   become   hotter   and   hotter   until,   eventually,   it   can  reach  the  maximum  fusion  temperature  of  the  interiors  of  stellar  objects  like  the   sun,  or  the  galactic  system.)     The   ‘Arrow   of   Time’   is   a     fundamental   expression   of   the   second   law   of   thermodynamics.   Hence,   the   three   symmetric   fundamental   forces,   and   the   entire   world   that   is   constructed   on   ‘top’   of   them,   are   always   subject   to   thermodynamics   when   a   comparison   with   fact   is   needed   in   the   macro   world.   Moreover,   thermodynamics   is   not   confined   to   physics.     It   is   a   key   fundamental   tool   (‘theory’   according   to   some)   in   engineering,   cosmology,   geology,   ecology,   linguistics,   physiology,  brain-­‐mind  perception,  aesthetics,  economics,  population,  etc.       Therefore,   in   the   ‘exact’   sciences,   the   2nd   law   constitutes   a-­‐stand-­‐apart   ‘fact-­‐of-­‐ nature’  that  controls  all  physical  manifestations  (observations)  of  the  first  and  third   fundamental   forces,   and   some   key   concepts   of   all   three   forces   (symmetry-­‐ asymmetry,  symmetry-­‐breaking,  supersymmetry.).     There   are   different   time   asymmetries:   The   cosmological,   thermodynamic,   electromagnetic,  linguistic  and  other  gravity-­‐induced  asymmetries  (arrows  of  time).       Despite   many   claims   for   success,   none   has   yet   succeeded   to   prove   the   origin   of   irreversibility   in   nature   –   of   time   asymmetry   -­‐-­‐   from   the   symmetric   mathematical   equations   of   statistics,   probabilities,   where   retrodiction   is   symmetric   to   prediction   and  from  symmetric  partial  differential  equations,  say  of  electromagnetism  (see  also   Reference   to   Einstain-­‐Ritz   controversy   [1])   and   their   integro-­‐differential   equations   only   in   the   positive   time   direction,   namely,   using   INITIAL   CONDITIONS   and   a   priori   rejecting   FINAL   CONDITIONS   (ending   ‘up’   with   retarded   solutions   in   electromagnetism,   which   agree   with   observations   of   emitter   vs.   absorber),   while   rejecting,  or  intentionally  avoiding,  the  ADVANCED  SOLUTIONS  (which  do  not  agree   with  observations).  See  Prof.  John  Wheeler's  notes  below.     This   a   priori   mental   act,   or   will,   is   what   I   call   SMUGGLING   THE   RESULTS   THAT   a   false   SCIENTIST  WANTS  WHILE  NOT  DECLARING  THE  CONTRABAND.    See  Prigoigine.     In   Volume   1   (and   earlier   publications)   I   had   replaced   these   smuggling   acts   with   space-­‐1-­‐expansion  as  the  origin  and  cause  of  irreversibility  and  time  asymmetries  in  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

nature, while  basing  (unifiying)  this  origin  and  all  irreversible  processes  in  nature,  on   general   relativistic   cosmology,   which,   in   turn,   is   based   on  general   relativity,   which,   in   turn,   accepts   no   static   cosmological   solution   (a   symmetric   fundamental   force-­‐field   interaction   that   contains   time   asymmetry   when   applied   to   cosmology,   namely   the   proper  home  (mother)  for  thermodynamics)       Our   CENTRAL   THEME   is   therefore   THERMODYNAMICS,   TIME   ASYMMETRIES   and   IRREVERSIBILITY   BASED   ON   SYMMTERIC   GENERAL   RELATIVITY   that   causes   a   asymmetric  expansion.       Our  thermodynamics  is  thus  UNIFIED  WITH  THE  REST  OF  PHYSICS,  partly  via  Einstein's   Gravity  Physics.  See  Einstein-­‐Hubble  Expansion  below.   Moreover,   CLASSICAL,   STATISTICAL   and   PROBABILISTIC   THERMODYNAMICS   (and   Information  theories  that  are  based  on  them)  are  history.       No   attempt   to   rescue   the   falling   status   of   the   aforementioned   failed   ‘proofs’   has   succeeded  in  the  last  30  years  or  so,  including  at  least  one  that  has  been  awarded  the   Nobel  Prize  for  a  false  ‘proof’.      

NOTES on the 100 Years of Einstein Universe & New Physics Did Social  Media  Force  Einstein  to  Err?    

Einstein  published  his  Gravity  Physics,  known  as  General  Relativity,  in  November  1915,   post   checking   if   it   correctly   predicts   published,   irregular,   precise,   motions   of   the   planet   Mercury.   He   found   total   agreement   with   said   astronomical   observations,   agreement   that  no  other  theory  had  accomplished  before.     About  three  years  later,  in  1918-­‐1919,  Einstein's  gravity  field  equations  were  confirmed   again  by  correctly  predicting  gravity-­‐induced,  bending  of  light  passing  near  a  large  mass,   in  this  first  test  in  Australia,  by  the  Sun.  Instant  world  celebrity  followed.    


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

Next, a   Russian   mathematician-­‐cosmologists-­‐Professor,   Alexander   Friedmann,   proved   that   Einstein's   Field   Equations,   when   applied   to   his   universe,   Cannot   make   it     stay   stable,   it  must  expand  or  contract.       Einstein  was  horrified.  The  Social  media  forced  him  to  abandon  trust  in  his  well-­‐verified,   gravity  field  equations,  yielding  to    media-­‐public-­‐fellow-­‐scientists-­‐wisdom,  by  forcing  a   simple,   out   of   nowhere,   artificial   number   -­‐-­‐   wrongly   defined   by   all   as   a   "Cosmological   Constant"   -­‐-­‐   onto   his   original,   tested,   well-­‐verified,   gravity-­‐physics-­‐field-­‐equations,   to   stop   that   "public-­‐un-­‐acceptable"   expansion   or   contraction   of   our   centuries-­‐old-­‐stable-­‐ world,  to  rule  it  "stable",  again.       Peace   and   tranquility   had   thus   returned   to   the   minds   of   editors,   laymen   &   fellow   scientists,  only  to  be  disturbed  again  by  an  American:  Hubble,  who  proved  that,  indeed,   our  universe  is  expanding,  that,  in  fact,  all  galaxies  run  away  from  each  other.       Einstein's   1915-­‐gravity-­‐physics-­‐equations   unequivocally   predicted   what   Hubble   discovered  later.  Hubble  himself  was  deeply  disappointed  for  the  denial  of  the  Nobel   Prize  for  his  great,  mental  reversing,  winning  discovery.     BIBLE-­‐IS   BACK:   Since   our   world   is   expanding,   it   harbors   a   "beginning",   in   agreement   with  the  BIBLE  GENESIS.  The  media  and  public  did  not  really  appreciate  that  expansion,   calling   it   a   "Big   Bang",   for   what   should   be   termed   "Einstein-­‐HUBBLE   Genesis",   or   "Einstein-­‐HUBBLE  Bang".       RECAP:  Einstein  should  have  thus  been  granted  FOUR,  not  one,  Nobel  Prizes:     v  For  the  reasons  the  first  and  only  one  granted.   v  For  Special  Relativity.   v  For  predicting  the  Expansion  of  the  Universe,  and  its  Genesis.     v  For  Gravity  Physics,  General  Relativity,  with  David  HILBERT.  ***,  ****       ______________ ***

 Ref.  1,  W.  Isaacson,  "Einstein,  His  Life  and  Universe",    SIMON  and  SCHUSTER.  Com,  2007,  page  221  RE  David  

HILBERT].  ****  

Post   1969   Relativistic   Thermodynamics   Conference,   chaired   by   the   author,   and   his   1971-­‐1972   publications   in  

NATURE &  SCIENCE  on  'GRAVITISM',  'HAVAISM'  and  'NEW  Astrophysical  School  of  Thermodynamics"  -­‐-­‐  Gold  Medal  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf Award from  the  NY  Academy  of  Sciences  -­‐-­‐  Summary  provided  in  Figures  1  to  3  herein  -­‐-­‐  U.S.  Einstein's  memorial   supporters   approached   the   Technion   –   Israel   Institute   of   Technology,   proposing   that   I   handle,   edit   &   publish   Einstein's   Life   Records   [1].   But   due   to   reaserch-­‐teaching-­‐loads   I   had   to   decline,   proposing   to   transfer   this   great   historical  task  to  the  Hebrew  University  in  Jerusalem,  as  done  since.    

Lecture XIV    

Academic Decline:  Did  it  Originate  in  EUROPE?    


ntil 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   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   academia   has   since   withdrawn  from  the  game.      

Empty specialism

has  since  gained  the  highest  prestige;  no  

longer do  professors  need  borrow  it  from  philosophy,  nor  to  teach  a  bona  fide  CCCC.   Indeed,   contemporary   professors   today   vie   with   one   another   in   presenting   fragmented  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

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  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   society   at   large.       Assertion 1


he Current  Crisis  in  Education  is  not  subsiding.  More  than  

With hope  of  finding  the  grand   outlook  of  a  spacecraft,  students   ever  before  it  demands  answers,  re-­‐assessments,  a  revised   philosophy  and  acts:  How  to  administer  mutual  interactions   enter  our  universities.  Entering   instead  of  linear  causality;  structured  complexity  instead  of   the  temples  of  knowledge  they   summation  of        events;  structured  historical  buildup  of   settle  for  that  of  an  eagle,  but   facts,    instead  of  summation  of  isolated  events                                               what  they  find  is  that  of  a   and  narrow  academic  Departments.   specialist  gopher.         Assertion  2   Although  most  academic  teaching  and  research  must  be  distributed  amongst  various  Schools  and            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.    

Assertion 3 Without  a  guiding-­‐structuring-­‐unifying  methodology  aimed  at  gaining  an  all-­‐embracing,   interconnected  knowledge  that  crosses  frozen  disciplines,  any  Core  Curriculum  Cultural  Course   [CCCC]  is  nothing  but  a  pity  encyclopedia  displayed  by  a  specialist  nominated  by  “Organizers”  as   the  “CCCC-­‐Coordinator”  who  remains  helpless  in  teaching  the  alluring  beauty  of  mathematics,   physics,  astronomy,  history,  the  life  sciences,  and  comparative  religions,  but  fails  to  perceive                                             their  profound  educational  implications  as  a  whole.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

Modern skepticism

is   usually   the   negation   of   a   core,  

interconnected, educational  methodology.  Not  so  with  Einsteinian  skepticism.     Einstein  advocated  the  removal  of  imposed  borders  between  traditional  disciplines  and   university  departments  and  faculty;  stating  that  knowledge  is  one;  its  division  is  human   weakness.              

Assertion 4   Structuring  an  all-­‐embracing  Core-­‐Outlook  is  a  matter  entailing     far  more  ambiguity  than  the  technicalities  of  the  application  of  any  disciplinary   course  and  its  “Academic  Credit  Regulations”.

The   Western   crisis,   today   more   than   ever   before,   may   be   repaired   by   resorting   to   Einsteinian   vision,   in   high-­‐ schools   and   constantly   upgraded   and   updated   for   undergraduate   and   graduate  schools.  Such  a  methodology   leads   to   interconnected   fertilization   between   the   most   promising   kernels   of  fundamental  knowledge,  and,  thus,   to   the   potential   to   rejuvenate   the   “system”.    

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  Cultures   Cambridge  University  Press  

Assertion   5 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.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

The Temples  of  Knowledge  Yesterday,  Today   L

iterary intellectuals,   the   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   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  traditional  cultures,  languages,  religions,   political  systems  and  a  unified  educational  philosophy  of  humanity.    Yet,  the  facts  are   that   deep   divisions   keep   deepening   and   deserts   of   narrow   specialism   keep   spreading   more  than  ever  before.            


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

Empty "Thinkers"   W

hat was   a   two-­‐semester  

half-­‐life of  a  textbook  is  today  one   day  or  less.  Sources  of  studies  are   millions   of   online   blogs   with   uneven   quality   and   little   or   no   reliable   references.   A-­‐million-­‐a-­‐day   posts   confuse   the   young;   generating   one-­‐line   thinkers;  a  tsunami  of  Tower-­‐of-­‐Babel  Kalthure;  a  kalthure  where  scholars  secure  same   weight  as  one-­‐line  thinkers;  Eulogies  are  heard  over  the  smoking  ruins  of  the  classical   temples  of  knowledge  –  new  layers  of  ruins  on  top  of  the  destroyed  Academy-­‐Library   of  Alexandria.  [Ref.  4  &  Lecture  6].    

Limitations of  Theories  and  Definitions   There  is  something  provisional  about  all  scientific  theories  

They must  be  re-­‐confirmed  by  fresh  verified  information  from  any  sub-­‐ field  of  science,  hence,  are  subject  to  constant  revision  and  even   replacement;  -­‐-­‐  in  this,  each  succeeding  generation  takes  a  measurable   step  beyond  the  position  of  its  predecessors.    


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf


losely related   to   the   unrestricted   content   of   modern   science   is   its   unrestricted  

questioning of  all  earlier  convictions  in  light  of  verifiable  evidence  that  refutes  extant   axioms,  definitions,  assertions,  outlooks  and  theories.     Thus,  every  item  of  carefully  recorded  experimental  or  observational  information  is  a   proper   object   for   analysis.   A   drive   towards   novelty   and   discovery   impels   inquiry   to   explore   all   corners   of   the   universe.   These   tenets   are   the   central   pillars   of   Gravitism.   But  there  is  more  to  it.  The  outlook  includes  constant  re-­‐assessments  of  the  theory  -­‐-­‐   of  any  theory  -­‐-­‐  and  analysis  of  the  errors  involved  as  one  updates  and  improves  it.        

Tarski's Indefinability  Theorem    


ccording to   this   theorem   no   sufficiently   powerful   language   is   strongly-­‐

semantically-­‐self-­‐representational. For   instance,   any   arithmetical   truth   cannot   be   defined  by  arithmetics.         According  to  Smullyan  [42],  Tarski's  Indefinability  Theorem  is  somewhat  superior  to  the   famous  Gödel's  Incompleteness  Theorems,  which  are  more  related  to  mathematics  and   less   to   philosophical,   scientific,   and   linguistic   issues.   Tarski's   theorem   is   not   directly   about   mathematics   but   about   the   inherent   limitation   of   any   formal   language   that   is   strongly-­‐semantically-­‐self-­‐representational   when   it   contains   predicates   and   function   symbols  defining  the  semantic  concepts  specific  to  that  language.      

Gödel's Incompleteness  Theorem    


ödel [34-­‐43]   has   demonstrated   that   conventional   mathematics,   which   we   tend   to  

consider as   our   supremely   logical   and   consistent   system,   involves   paradoxical,   self-­‐


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

referential statements   about   itself,   i.e.,   a   conventional   mathematical   system,   say,   the   mathematics  of  flat  space  in  the  Euclidian  geometry  -­‐-­‐  an  ‘absolute  stage’  upon  which   Newtonian   gravity   and   physics   stands,   can   be   incomplete   because   one   has   not   discovered   all   its   necessary   axioms.     In   other   words,   no   matter   how   many   physico-­‐ mathematical  issues  theoretical  physicists  solve,  there  always  will  be  other  issues  that   cannot  be  solved  by  any  known  laws  of  physics;  and  since  these  laws  constitute  a  finite   set  of  rules,  and  are  based  on  mathematics,  Gödel's  theorem  restricts  them.     Even   in   computer   science   one   cannot   create   a   complete   and   consistent   finite   list   of   axioms,  or   an   infinite   list.   Each   time   one   adds   a   statement   as   an   axiom;   there   are   other   correct  statements  that  cannot  be  proved,  even  with  the  new  axiom.                                   Moreover,   if   the   system   can   prove   that   it   is   consistent,   it   is   not.   As   might   have   been  expected,  this  idea  has  been  much  debated  by  mathematical  philosophers:      

v  How  can  a  theory  be  both  correct  and  unprovable?   v    Is  mathematics  a  loop  of  our  mind?     v    Is  the  mind  a  self  referential  loop?     Gödel's   first   incompleteness   theorem   shows   that   any   system   that   allows   one   to   define   the   natural   numbers   is   necessarily   incomplete:   it   contains   statements   that   are   neither   provable   correct,   nor   provably   false.   Some   scholars   therefore   argue   that   this   refutes   the   logicism   of   Gottlob   Frege   and   Bertrand  Russell,  who  had  aimed  to  reduce/define  the  natural  numbers  in  terms  of  logic.  

        Not  all  axiom  systems  satisfy  these  hypotheses,  even  when  these  systems  have   models  that  include  natural  numbers  as  a  subset.  For  example,  there  are   axiomatizations  of  ‘flat’  space  that  do  not  meet    the  hypotheses  of  Gödel's  theorems.       Another  limitation  applies  only  to  systems  that  are  used  as  their  own  proof  systems.     Gödel's   theorem   has   another   interpretation   in   the   language   of   computer   science.   Theorems   are   computably   enumerable:   one   can   write   a   computer   program   that   will   eventually   generate   any   valid   proof.   One   can   then   ask   if   it   has   the   stronger   property   of   being  recursive:    


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

v      Can  one  write  a  computer  program  to  definitively  determine    if  a  statement  is  true  or  false?     Gödel's   theorem   says   that   you   cannot.   His   theorems,   however,   are   confined   to   sufficiently  strong  axiomatic  systems,  i.e.,  that  a  theory  contains  enough  arithmetic  to   carry  out  the  proof  of  the  incompleteness  theorem.     Some   scholars   claim   that   Gödel's   incompleteness   theorems   have   provided   a   deadly   blow   to   David   Hilbert’s   program   towards   a   universal   mathematical   formalism.   Nevertheless,   the   essence   of   these   issues   is   much   more   complicated,   as   indicated   below.  

Undecidable Statements:   A   statement   is   neither   provable   nor   refutable.     Hence,   some   scholars   resort   to   the   concept   "independent".   However,   that   concept   is   also  ambiguous.    

Meta-­‐Language: A   sufficiently   developed   language   cannot   represent   its   own   semantics.   Any   meta-­‐language   includes   primitive   notions,   axioms,   and   rules   absent   from   an   object   language.   Theorems   provable   in   a   meta-­‐language   are   not   provable   in   the  object  language.    

“Truth”: Some  of  the  aforementioned  theorems  may  presuppose  that  mathematical   "truth"  and  "falsehood"  are  well-­‐defined  in  an  absolute  sense,  rather  than  relative.  If  an   axiomatic  system  can  be  proven  to  be  consistent  and  complete  from  within  itself,   then   it  is  inconsistent.      

Minds and  Machines:   Gödel's   incompleteness   theorems   may   also   reflect   on   human  intelligence.  While  Gödel's  theorems  cannot  be  applied  to  humans,  since  they   make   mistakes   and   are,   therefore,   inconsistent,   it   may   be   applied   to   the   domain   of   science.    

Sets of  expressions  are  considered  as  coded  as  sets  of  numbers.  For  various  syntactic   properties   (such   as   a   formula,   a   sentence,   etc.),   these   sets   are   computable.   And   any   computable  set  of  numbers  can  be  defined  by  some  arithmetic  formula.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

There are   various   additional   theorems   and   sub-­‐theorems   34-­‐49.   I   do   not   intend   to   expand   on   them   in   these   pages,   for   these   pages   are   mainly   written   for   the   general   reader,  without  resorting  to  any  mathematics.    

We  therefore  move  next  to  elaborate  on  some  more  practical  domains  in   the  mined  fields  of  verifiable  scientific  theories  and  proofs.  

“Pure Mathematics”   is   human   attempt   to   stay   aloof   and   beyond   emotions,   traditions   and   ambitions.   It   may   protect   one   from   making   mistakes,   prior   to   and   aft   writing  down  any  mathematical  equation.    


ow mathematics   -­‐-­‐   combined   with   verifiable   observations   -­‐-­‐   help   protect   the  

human mind   from   falling   into   unverifiable   traditional   dictums   of   ‘intuitively’   generating   mistakes?   This   may   be   best   demonstrated   by   the   most   dramatic   event   in   the   history   of   science;  when  Einstein  lost  trust  in  the  most  verified  gravity  field  equations  of  general   relativity3.3,   the   most   accepted   theory   of   the   universe,   which   harbors   no   mistake.   To   correct  sociallly  accused  ‘mistake’,  he  had  to  force  on  this  universal  reality  an  empty,   ‘correction  factor’,  wrongly  termed  a  "cosmological  constant".       Luckily  his  tensorial  gravity  field  equations  were  flawless,  despite  the  fact  that  a  cult   has  evolved  to  demand  adding  this  factor  to  fit  its  ulterior  needs  to  operate  under   some   set   of   philosophical   prejudices.   Most   important,   the   failure   to   acknowledge   this   is   not   only   self-­‐delusion,   but   a   failure   to   attend   to   the   philosophical   base   of   physics,  a  failure  that  leads  to  Empty  Scientism.              


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

Space-­‐Time v.      Symmetry-­‐Asymmetry  


he essence   and   fundamental   meaning   of   curved   space-­‐time,   symmetry-­‐

asymmetry, statistics  and  probabilities  are  understood  only  by  a  portion  of  scientists.   A  much  smaller  portion,  or,  in  fact,  a  splendid  minority,  maintains  that  probabilities,   statistics  and  quantum  postulates  provide  them  with  no  ‘free  will’.  [Volume  I].  

            Differential  Equations  vs.  Observations  


time-­‐symmetry, reversibility   and   the   symmetrical   laws   of   physics   serve   us   as   key  

tools to  better  understand  nature,  despite  the  limitations  mentioned  above.  And  it  is   only   by   combining   (conceptual,   reversible,   analytic)   time-­‐symmetry   with   (factual,   aggregated,   observational)   time-­‐asymmetry,   or   by   combining   reversible   equations   with   a   priori   known,   factual,   initial   and   boundary   conditions,   that   one   may,   mathematically,   arrive   at   a   reliable   world   outlook   in   agreement   with   observations/experimentations.       While   symbols   and   analytical   concepts   may   be   symmetric,   words   and   sentences   (in   order,  syntax,  phoneme,  form,  sound  modulation  or  other  modes),  or  ‘useful’  physico-­‐ mathematical   equations,   are   basically   asymmetric.   Mathematics,   gravitation,   symmetry-­‐asymmetry,   aggregation,   time   and   meaningful   sentences   are   coupled.   While   some   minor   reservations   are   justifiable,   there   is   an   overwhelming   "word   of   evidence",   derived   from   physics,   the   languages   and   the   studies   of   linguistics,   cybernetics,  information  and  mathematics  that  fortifies  this  contention.    

A theory

may  be  a  “set  of  statements”,  some  of  which  are  taken  as  valid  

without proof  (axioms),  and  others,  the  theorems,  are  taken  as  valid  because  they  are   implied  by  the  axioms.    


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

A complete   and   consistent   set   of   axioms   for   all   mathematics   is   impossible.     "Provable   by   a   theory"   means   "derivable   from   the   axioms   and   primitive   notions   of   the   theory,   using  logic.”    

The Popperian   Falsification  Principle   Sir   Karl   Popper,   has   introduced   the   Falsification   Principle  about  the  ability  of  mankind  to  establish  what   is  science  and  what  is  non-­‐science,  in  addition  to  what   might  be  ‘true’  within  the  domain  of  a  given  theory,  or   a  set  of  ‘facts’,  axioms  or  definitions.     Applied   mathematics   is   often   used   as   unverifiable   covers   to   advance   subjectivistic   claims,   ‘proofs’   and   ‘theories’.   Lectures   3   and   4,   and   this   one,   illustrate   how   -­‐-­‐   by   a   priori   selecting   only   the   time-­‐asymmetric   mathematics,   or   time-­‐asymmetric   mathematical   solution   that   fits   with   their   desired   ‘proof’   –   scientists   easily   fool   themselves,  and  others.       Applied   mathematics   is   the   key   tool   of   the   ‘exact   sciences’.   It   constitutes   a   special   kind  of  'intelligent  thinking’  that  is  integrated  with  its  ‘universal  grammar'  -­‐-­‐  a  sort  of   critical   thinking   which   has   been   partially   developed   to   safeguard   our   minds   from   prejudices  and  inconsistencies.  Yet,  consistency,  by  itself,  is  a  two-­‐sided  issue.    ‘Pure   mathematics’   is   often   developed   for   its   own   sake,   without   a   priori   harboring   intentional  applications,  although  they  may  be  ‘un-­‐covered’       According  to  Einstein,  when  we  predict  the  behavior  of  a  specific  or  confined  set  of   natural   phenomena,   we   usually   mean   that   we   have   found   a   ‘constructive   theory’   covering  this  set.     When  we  find  that  other  sets  of  phenomena  are  incompatible  with  that  theory,  we   tend  to  either  generalize  or  modify  it,  or  failing  that,  seek  an  alternative  one.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

To this  ‘constructive’  category  Einstein  opposes  the  so-­‐called  “theories  of  principles”   (exemplified,   according   to   Einstein,   by   thermodynamics   and   the   general   theory   of   relativity),   whose   point   of   departure   and   foundation   are   not   hypothetical   constituent,   but   empirically   observed   general   properties   from   which   mathematical   formulae   are   deduced   so   as   to   apply   to   every   case   of   observation   which   presents   itself.   Thus,   according   to   Einstein,   the   merit   of   “constructive   theories”   lies   in   their   comprehensiveness,   adaptability,   and   clarity   for   a   given   set   of   phenomena,   while   that  of  the  “theories  of  principles”  -­‐-­‐  in  their  logical  ‘perfection’  and  universality  and   in  the  vast  observational  spectrum  of  their  formulation  at  any  scale  and  time.   Yet,   Einstein   did   not   trust   some   semi-­‐hidden   aspects   of   his   own   general   theory   of   relativity2.5.  Two  such  events  are  described  next:     The   failure   of   statistical   mechanics   (both   classical   and   quantum)   to   deduce   and   explain   the   origin   of   irreversibility,   time-­‐asymmetries,   cosmic   and   local   structuring,   generation  of  order  and  what  is  called  “entropy  growth”  -­‐-­‐  as  well  as  its  philosophical   and   applicative  limitations  and  lack  of  large-­‐scale  universality   -­‐-­‐  has   been   explained   in   footnotes  2.5,  3.4  and  3.5  as  well  as  in  Volume  I.  (See  Table  of  Contents,).     Einstein   had   not   suspected   that   his   general   theory   of   relativity   already   incorporates   another  ‘theory  of  principle’:  Thermodynamics,  especially  the  so-­‐called  Second  Law  of   Thermodynamic.   Namely,   the   foundations   of   thermodynamics   should   NOT   be   a   separate,  stand-­‐alone,  theory  of  science;  it  should  NOT  be  fragmented  from  the  rest  of   physics.   It   constitutes   an   integral   part   of   gravity-­‐induced,   interconnected,   unified   physico-­‐philosophical  knowledge.                      


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf


Against Fooling Yourself and Others by Nobel Laureate   Feynman   “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself – and   you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very   not fooled yourself, it’s careful about that. After you’ve easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way.”


“You should not fool the layman when you’re talking as a scientist."

Towards the  End  of  Theoretical  Physics?       Present  a  proof  that  a  theory  harbors  a  mistake  is  one  of  the     old-­‐new  dangers  facing  all  Award  Committees.   In  this  case:    (i)    Prigogine  theory   (ii)  Mysterious-­‐Dark-­‐Energy-­‐Clan     (iii)    String  Orchestra  Members TV  and  Social  Media  v.  the  Armies  of  'dark  energy'  Claimers  

Of a  sort  of  resurrection  of  Einstein-­‐Hubble-­‐Rejected  'Cosmological  Constant'  :  

SUPPORTING: Sean Caroll, an academic-tenure-denied, relentless producer of hoax-after-hoax videos on undetected Dark-Energy, is   a   verifiable-­‐science   impostor   claiming   Einstein  Gravity  Physics,  general  Relativity  is  wrong  and  publishing  wrong  papers   on  thermodynamics  and  the  arrows  of  time  resorting  in  part  to  Prigogine's  fooling  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

methods discussed   above   and   Ehsan   Sadri,   MSc   Thesis   Azad   University,   Tehran,   Iran.   On   our   world   controlled   by   dark   energy   and   dark   matter.   DARK   ENERGY   IS   REAL;   Swinburne   University   of   Technology,   19   May   2011.   Also   University   of   Innsbruck,   Austria; supported by U.S. National Science Foundation and various main-media Editors.

AGAINST or  DOUBTING:   Merali,   Zeeya   (March   2012).  "Is   Einstein's   Greatest   Work   All   Wrong?   Discover   magazine.     Mattsson,   Teppo   (2007).   "Dark   energy   as   a   mirage";   Khoshbin-­‐e-­‐ Khoshnazar,   M.R.   (2013).   "Abandoning   Einstein   for   a   Discretized   Three–Torus;   Clifton,   Timothy;   Ferreira,   Pedro  "Does   Dark   Energy   Really   Exist?".  Scientific   American;   Gray,   Stuart.   DARK   QUESTIONS   REMAIN   OVER   DARK   ENERGY;   ABC   Science  Australia.  

Hawking  Fooling  Festival  with  the  Media     at  the  Cost  of  Honesty Hawking  in  particular  is  dishonestly  pushing  the  image  of  science  far  into  mysticism   and  a  misleading  populism  that  exploit  the  layperson  ignorance  of  what  verifiable   science  is  based  on  and  what  is  chimera  or  lying.     Armies  of  theoretical  physicists  now  support  and  even  exploit  such  abuses  of   verifiable  science.  Without  their  support  the  media  editors  would  have  failed  to  make   an  icon  out  of  this  false  prophet;  may  at  least  resort  to  the  audacity  of  truth:   The  entire  Hawking  festival  does  not  even  rise  to  the  level  of  being  wrong  in  the   domain  of  verifiable  science.  **         __________    


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

   **    The  journal  Nature  was  among  the  first  to  publish  a  review  on  my  Volume  I,  Cosmology,  Physics   and   Philosophy,   Springer   Verlag   1981,   1983,   1987,  which  contains   strong  criticism  of  his  theories  as   lacking  verification  and  some  are  not  his  but  of  J.  D.  Beckenstein.       That   review   was   written   by   Hawking,   who   hinted   there   that   instead   of   my   not-­‐easy-­‐to-­‐understand   book   [incorporating,   inter   alia,   hundreds   of   general   relativity   and   classical   physics   mathematical   equations   he   would   write   a   popular   one   with   jokes   for   the   masses,   which   he   next   did,   while   adopting   much  of  the  book’s  general  approach  and  omitting  all  mathematical  equations,  but  adding  mysticism   and   personal   opinions.     Some   key   Hawking's   claims   were   first   ridiculed   by   professor   Yuval   Neeman,   Department   of   Physics,   Tel-­‐Aviv   University,   Israel.     Published   on   Nov.   12,   2010   by     “NOT   EVEN   WRONG”   website   maintained   by   P.   Woit,   following   the   publication   of   his   famous   book     “Not   Even   Wrong:    The  failure  of  string  theory”.    New  York:  Basic  Books  (2006).    

REFERENCES 1. Publication by and on Albert Einstein: Folgerungen aus den Capillaritätserscheinungen (Conclusions Drawn from the Phenomena of Capillarity), Ann. Phys. 4: 513 (1901); A. Einstein, On a Heuristic Viewpoint Concerning the Production and Transformation of Light, ibid, 17: 132 (1905); A. Einstein, new determination of molecular dimensions, PhD thesis (April 30, 1905); A. Einstein, On the Motion Required by the Molecular Kinetic Theory of Heat of Small Particles Suspended in a Stationary Liquid, (Brownian Motion), ibid., 17: 549–560 (1905); A. Einstein, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, (on Special Relativity) Ibid, 17: 891 (1905); A. Einstein, Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?, (on Mass-Energy equivalence), Ibid, 19: 639 (1905); A. Einstein, On the Influence of Gravity on the Propagation of Light, ibid, 35: 898 (1911); A. Einstein, ibid. 10, 195 (1909); ibid. 10, 323 (1909); W. Ritz, (Wrongly Attacking Einstein’s Origin of Electromagnetic Irreversibility), Phys. Z. 9, 903 (1908); A. Einstein, Die Feldgleichungen der Gravitation (The Field Equations of Gravitation), Koniglich Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften: 844 (1915); A. Einstein, Kosmologische Betrachtungen zur allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie (Cosmological Considerations in the General Theory of Relativity), Koniglich Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1917); A. Einstein, Zur Quantentheorie der Strahlung (On the Quantum Mechanics of Radiation)", Physikalische Zeitschrift 19: 121 (1917); A. Einstein, Nobel Lectures, Physics 1901–1921, Amsterdam: Elsevier (1923); A. Einstein, Quantentheorie des einatomigen idealen Gases (Quantum theory of monatomic ideal gases) Sitzungsberichte der Preussichen Akademie der Wissenschaften Physikalisch—Mathematische Klasse: 261 (1924); A. Einstein, Die Ursache der Mäanderbildung der Flussläufe und des sogenannten Baerschen Gesetzes (On meanders in the courses of rivers) Die Naturwissenschaften 14: 223


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

(1926); A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen, Nathan, Can QuantumMechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?", (The EPR Paradox) Physical Review, 47 (10): 777 (1935); A. Einstein, Lens-Like Action of a Star by the Deviation of Light in the Gravitational Field, Science 84, 506 (1936) (Gravitational Lens, Einstein Rings); A. Einstein, On Science and Religion, Nature 146: 605 (1940); A. Einstein, et al. To the editors, New York Times (4 December 1948); On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation, Scientific American (4): 13 (1950); E. Hubble, A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity among Extra-Galactic Nebulae, Proc., Nat. Acad. of Sciences (U.S.), Vol. 15, Iss. 3, (1929); A. Einstein and L. Infeld,, The World As I See It (1934); A. Einstein, The Evolution of Physics, (1938); Out of My Later Years (1950); A. Einstein, The Meaning of Relativity, Princeton University Press (1956); A. Friedman, A: Über die Krümmung des Raumes, Z. Phys. 10 377 (1922), (English translation: Gen. Rel. Grav. 31, 1991 (1999); A. Alain, D., Jean and R., Gérard, Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using time-varying analyzers, Phys. Rev. Letters, 49 (25) (1982): Nobel Foundation, Albert Einstein — Biography; D. Howard and J. Stachel, Einstein: The Formative Years, 1979-1909, Springer (2000); P. A. Schilpp (Ed.), Albert Einstein — Autobiographical Notes, Open Court Publishing (1979); P. A. Schilpp, (Ed.), Albert Einstein: PhilosopherScientist, Harper Torchbook (1951); R. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times, Harper-Collins (1984); F. Golden, Person of the Century: Albert Einstein, Time (Jan 3, 2000); About Zionism: Speeches and Lectures by Professor Albert Einstein (1930); Why War? (1933, with Sigmund Freud); P. Galison, Einstein's Clocks: The Question of Time; A. Pais, Subtle is the Lord. The Science and the Life of Albert Einstein, Oxford University Press (1982); J. Crelinsten, Einstein's Jury: The Race to Test Relativity, Princeton University Press (2006); H. Kant, Albert Einstein and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics in Berlin; J. Renn, (Ed), Albert Einstein — Chief Engineer of the Universe: One Hundred Authors for Einstein, Wiley-VCH. (2005); J. Schmidhuber, Albert Einstein (1979–1955) and the 'Greatest Scientific Discovery Ever' (2006); Einstein archive at the Instituut-Lorentz, NL; G., Goettling, Einstein's refrigerator, Georgia Tech Alumni Magazine (1998); U.S. Patent 1,781,541 , Albert Einstein and Leó Szilárd (refrigerator), November 11, 1930; Brian, Dennis Einstein: A Life, New York: John Wiley & Sons (1996); Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman (eds) Albert Einstein, The Human Side, Princeton University Press (1981); A. Einstein, The World as I See It. New York: Philosophical Library Albert (1949); Zionism and Israel Information Center, Albert Einstein and Zionism; American Museum of Natural History (2002), Einstein's Revolution; Rowe, David E.; Schulmann, Robert, Einstein on Politics: His Private Thoughts and Public Stands on Nationalism, Zionism, War, Peace, and the Bomb, Princeton University Press (2007); Einstein Archives, History of the Estate of Albert Einstein, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (2007); Princeton Online Einstein in Princeton: Scientist, Humanitarian, Cultural Icon, Historical Society of Princeton;J. Stachel, et al,


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

(Eds.) The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vols. 1–10, Princeton University Press; The Atomic Heritage Foundation, Einstein’s Famous Letter to the U.S. President about the need to survive by developing the atomic bomb before the Germans would do it; W. Isaacson, Person of the Century: Why We Chose Einstein, Time, (3 January 2000). Walter ISAACSON, Einstein, His Life and Universe, SIMON and SCHUSTER. Com, 2007, cf. page 221 RE David Hilbert . 2. Sean Caroll, an academic-tenure-denied, relentless producer of hoax-afterhoax videos on undetected Dark-Energy, is a  verifiable-­‐science  impostor  claiming   Einstein   Gravity   Physics,   General   Relativity   is   wrong   and   publishing   low-­‐quality   papers   on   thermodynamics   and   the   arrows   of   time   while   resorting   in   part   to   Prigogine's   fooling   methods   discussed   above   and   Ehsan   Sadri,   MSc   Thesis   Azad   University,   Tehran,   Iran,   RE   our   world   controlled   by   dark   energy,   also   in   line   with   Swinburne   University   of   Technology,   19   May   2011.   Also   with   University   of   Innsbruck,   Austria; also supported by U.S. National Science Foundation and various main media Editors.   3. Merali,  Zeeya  (March  2012).  "Is  Einstein's  Greatest  Work  All  Wrong?  Discover   magazine.     Mattsson,   Teppo   (2007).   "Dark   energy   as   a   mirage".  Gen.   Rel.   Grav.  42(3):   567–599.  arXiv:0711.4264 .  Bibcode:2010GReGr..42..567M.doi:10.1007/s10714-­‐009-­‐0873-­‐z   Khoshbin-­‐e-­‐ Khoshnazar,   M.R.   (2013).   "Abandoning   Einstein   for   a   Discretized   Three–Torus   Poset.     A   Proposal   on   the   Origin   of   Dark   Energy".  Gravitation   and   Cosmology.  19  (2):   106–113.  doi:10.1134/s0202289313020059.   Clifton,   Timothy;   Ferreira,   Pedro   (April   2009).  "Does   Dark   Energy   Really   Exist?".  Scientific   American.  300  (4):   48–55.doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0409-­‐ 48.  PMID  19363920;   Gray,   Stuart.   DARK   QUESTIONS   REMAIN   OVER   DARK   ENERGY;  ABC  Science  Australia.   4. On  HYPATIA:    A.  Fitzgerald,  Letter  of    Synesius  of  Cyrene  to  Hypathia,  London,   (1926);   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,  19;  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;  Marinus  de  Naplouse  -­‐  un  commentaire  au  'Petit  commentaire'   de   Théon,   Janus   63   (1-­‐3),   167-­‐194,   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-­‐219,  1987;  O.   Neugebauer,  A  history  of  ancient  mathematical  astronomy,  New  York,  (1975);  A.  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

Khan, Hypatia;   Authorhouse,   (2001);   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;   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.   Berkley:   University   of   California   Press   (1982);   M.   B.   Ogilvie,   Women   in   science:   Antiquity   through   the   nineteenth   century.   MIT   Press,   (1986);   Hypatia   -­‐   Physics,  culture  and  sense  of  duty,  Spanish  university  (2006);  T  L.  Heath,  A  History   of  Greek  Mathematics,  Oxford,  (1921);  W.    Müller,  Das  isoperimetrische  Problem   im   Altertum   mit   einer   übersetzung   der   Abhandlung   des   Zenodoros   nach   Theon   von   Alexandrien,   Sudhoffs   Arch.   37   (1953),   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,   195   (1982);   Reports   by   the   Department   of   Mathematics,   St.   Andrews   University   in   Scotland;   Carl   Sagan,   Cosmos;   Maria   Dzielska,   Hypatia   of   Alexandria;   Hypathia:   A   Journal   of   Feminist   Philosophy;     Wessel,   Susan.  Cyril   of   Alexandria   and   the   Nestorian   Controversy:   The   Making   of   a   Saint   and  a  Heretic.  Oxford,  2004.  ISBN  0-­‐19-­‐926846-­‐0;    Subjects  presented  by  other  Lectures   and  published  by  2015-­‐2016  ISSUU  bookles.  

5. Benjamin Gal-­‐Or;   Chairing   the   international   Conference   on   Critical   Review   of   the   Foundations   of   Relativistic   and   Classical   Thermodynamics,   Pittsburgh,   Pa.   April  7-­‐8,  (1969),  Published  by  Mono  Book.   6. Benjamin   Gal-­‐Or,   "Cosmological   Foundations   of   Entropy-­‐Free   Thermodynamics  and  Time  Asymmetries",  Nature  230,  (1971);  234,  217  (1971);   7. Benjamin  Gal-­‐Or,  On  The  Origin  of  Irreversibility  in  Nature,  Science,  176,  11   (1972);  178,  119  (1972).   8. Benjamin  Gal-­‐Or,    Gold  Medal  Award  for  the  '"The  New  Astrophysical  School   of   Thermodynamics   and   Time   Asymmetries";   Annal.   N.Y.   Acad.   Acad.   Sci.,   196   (A6)  305  (1972).   9. Benjamin   Gal-­‐Or,   On   Cosmological   Foundations   of   Entropy-­‐Free   Thermodynamics   and   Time   Asymmetries,   the   Arrows   of   Time,   Foundations   of   Physics,  6,  407  (1976);  6,  623  (1976);  7,  50  (1977);   10.  Benjamin   Gal-­‐Or,   Cosmology,   Physics   and   Philosophy,   Springer   Verlag,   1981,   1983,   1987,   522-­‐page,   Hard-­‐Cover.   1987   edition   includes   published   worldwide   acclaimed,   mathemitical   derivations   of   Einstein's   gravity   field   equautions,  


By Benjamin Gal-Or, All Rights Reserved, ISSUU, 2016, pdf

general relativity,'"The  New  Astrophysical  School  of  Thermodynamics  and  Time   Asymmetries",   Entropy-­‐Free-­‐Thermodynamics,   "Gravitism   Philosophy",   "Havaism   Philosophy",   The   Fallacy   of   Entropy   "Science",   Falacy   of   past   derivations   of   the   origin   of   Irreversibility   and   time   asymmetries,   Thought-­‐ Provoking  and  Thought-­‐Depressing  Quotations.  

11. Benjamin   Gal-­‐Or,     "Vectored   Propulsion,   Supermaneuverability   and   Robot   Aircraft,  Springer  Verlag,  1989,  1990.  Also,  as  Editor-­‐in-­‐Chief  of  the  INTERNATIONAL   JOURNAL   of   TURBO   and   JET   ENGINES,   VARIOUS   EDITORIALS,   1983-­‐2016.   Subjects   treated  by  other  Lectures  and  published  by  said  Journal  and  a  few  2016  ISSUU  booklets.  Also  

Benjamin Gal-­‐Or,  90  ISSUU  booklets,  2015-­‐2016  


Did Prigogine Fool Nobel Prize Committees?  
Did Prigogine Fool Nobel Prize Committees?