Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Reality Unveiled: The Reality Unveiled Collection, #1
    Reality Unveiled: The Reality Unveiled Collection, #1
    Reality Unveiled: The Reality Unveiled Collection, #1
    Ebook105 pages1 hour

    Reality Unveiled: The Reality Unveiled Collection, #1

    By Bernardo Sotomayor Valdivia

    ()

    Read preview

    About this ebook

    This ebook is the first of a collection of monographs on the infrastructure of reality. (Contains approx. 22,000 words).

    The idea that the universe is not made up of solid matter and that all that we perceive as objects —from atoms to stars— are really waves, has been around for a long time, going back to ancient Greece.
    As you can see, the existence of matter-waves is not a new concept.  Ever since the physicist Prince Louis de Broglie formally suggested them in 1924, the modern scientific world has accepted the concept as a possibility but has not been able to rationally accept it for various reasons.
    Einstein hinted to the existence of matter-waves —while perhaps unaware of it— with his formulation of Special Relativity, which implied mass-energy equivalence.
    How can an object contract into an infinitesimal length as it approaches the speed of light and then go back to normal when it slows down without catastrophic structural damage?  Spacetime may contract, but how is the structure of matter linked to spacetime so that it also contracts without damage? 
    Einstein states that mass somehow transitions to energy and vice versa, not explaining the details of how and ignoring that energy and mass are such very different observables.  The standard reasoning is that they are different manifestations of the same thing.  But what is this “thing”, this substance that remains so infinitely malleable under special relativity and such a chameleon under mass-energy equivalence?
    Waves come to mind, but although they may be very malleable, can they be infinitely malleable and yet also have the property of forming rigid structures in order to pose as matter? What if matter and spacetime are both the same, synthesized by waves, and the "substance" that is waving is not a substance; does all of the above then become possible and rationally acceptable?
    Reality Unveiled explores, explains and justifies that possibility.

    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherBernardo Sotomayor Valdivia
    Release dateJul 8, 2014
    ISBN9781501452086
    Reality Unveiled: The Reality Unveiled Collection, #1

    Related to Reality Unveiled

    Titles in the series (1)

    View More
    View More

    Related ebooks

    Physics For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      The Split: Why We Lost Consciousness and Need to Wake Up

      Dec 15, 2020

      — Centuries ago, we lost something very precious. It radically changed the course of our evolution, progressively disconnecting us from our humanity and bringing us to the brink of destruction. Deprived of this vital nourishment, we have fallen prey

      10 min read

    • Article

      Why The Flow Of Time Is An Illusion

      Apr 25, 2019

      In his book Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality, Max Tegmark writes that “time is not an illusion, but the flow of time is.” In this month’s issue of Nautilus, which looks at the concept of flow through various port

      6 min read

    • Article

      A Hologram Shows How Space Could Pop Into Existence

      Sep 5, 2019

      I remember buying my first hologram as a college student in the mid-1980s. It showed a bed of nails. I came across it at a gallery in what was then the world’s capital of spacey trinkets, Haight Street in San Francisco. When I picked it up, the holog

      4 min read

    • Article

      Changing Minds

      Oct 28, 2019

      Changing Minds
      5 min read

    • Article

      Are Suicide Bombings Really Driven by Ideology?

      May 24, 2018

      Harvey Whitehouse doesn’t like how New Atheists like Richard Dawkins make religion out to be a mere “set of propositions” amounting to a “failed science.” In a 2013 YouTube video, Whitehouse—the director of the Institute of Cognitive & Evolutionary A

      8 min read

    • Article

      The Universe Knows Right from Wrong

      Sep 9, 2020

      Most of us, most of the time, think and act as though there are facts about good and bad, right and wrong. We think the predatory behavior of Jeffrey Epstein was abhorrent, and that the political actions of Mahatma Gandhi were admirable. Moreover, we

      9 min read

    • Article

      Duty And Loyalty

      Mar 28, 2019

      Duty And Loyalty
      5 min read

    • Article

      ‘What Seek Ye?’

      Jul 31, 2020

      ‘What Seek Ye?’
      8 min read

    • Article

      This Essentially Meaningless Conflict

      Sep 22, 2017

      MARILYNNE ROBINSON’S accomplishments are impressive by any standard: she has won the National Book Critics Circle Award for Fiction, the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, and the National Humanities Medal, among other honors. But perhaps a better measure o

      8 min read

    • Article

      Steven Pinker Has His Reasons

      Nov 17, 2021

      A few years ago, at the Princeton Club in Manhattan, I chanced on a memorable chat with the Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker. His spouse, the philosopher Rebecca Goldstein, with whom he was tagging along, had been invited onto a panel to discuss th

      19 min read

    • Article

      Remaking Morality

      Aug 31, 2021

      Remaking Morality
      5 min read

    • Article

      Nothing Solid, Nothing Separate

      Feb 11, 2020

      Nothing Solid, Nothing Separate
      9 min read

    • Article

      The Science of Gratitude: New research suggests saying thanks regularly can benefit your health.

      Nov 28, 2013

      A few months ago, I conducted an early Thanksgiving experiment on myself. I was in Reykjavik, Iceland, on a lecture trip. My morning was free, and I took it to write two pages about how lucky I am—something, I’m embarrassed to say, that I had never d

      3 min read

    • Article

      Wikipedia And The Wisdom Of Polarized Crowds

      Mar 14, 2019

      In 2013, James Evans, a University of Chicago sociologist and computational scientist, launched a study to see if science forged a bridge across the political divide. Did conservatives and liberals at least agree on biology and physics and economics?

      8 min read

    • Article

      Jamie Wheal Meaning 3.0

      Jul 17, 2022

      Jamie Wheal Meaning 3.0
      18 min read

    • Article

      The Search For Answers

      May 29, 2020

      The Search For Answers
      8 min read

    • Article

      The Science of Gratitude: Research suggests saying thanks regularly can benefit your health.

      Nov 26, 2015

      I conducted an early Thanksgiving experiment on myself. I was in Reykjavik, Iceland, on a lecture trip. My morning was free, and I took it to write two pages about how lucky I am—something, I’m embarrassed to say, that I had never done before. Here i

      3 min read

    • Article

      ‘For Your Guidance!’

      Jun 30, 2020

      ‘For Your Guidance!’
      8 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for Reality Unveiled

    0 ratings

    0 ratings0 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

      Book preview

      Reality Unveiled - Bernardo Sotomayor Valdivia

      Preface

      The idea that the universe is not made up of solid matter and that all that we perceive as objects —from atoms to stars— are really waves, has been around for a long time, going back to ancient Greece.

      As you can see, the existence of matter-waves is not a new concept.  Ever since the physicist Prince Louis de Broglie formally suggested them in 1924, the modern scientific world has accepted the concept as a possibility but has not been able to rationally accept it for various reasons.

      Einstein hinted to the existence of matter-waves —while perhaps unaware of it— with his formulation of Special Relativity, which implied mass-energy equivalence.

      How can an object contract into an infinitesimal length as it approaches the speed of light and then go back to normal when it slows down without catastrophic structural damage?  Spacetime may contract, but how is the structure of matter linked to spacetime so that it also contracts without damage? 

      Einstein states that mass somehow transitions to energy and vice versa, not explaining the details of how and ignoring that energy and mass are such very different observables.  The standard reasoning is that they are different manifestations of the same thing.  But what is this thing, this substance that remains so infinitely malleable under special relativity and such a chameleon under mass-energy equivalence?

      Waves come to mind, but although they may be very malleable, can they be infinitely malleable and yet also have the property of forming rigid structures in order to pose as matter? What if matter and spacetime are both the same, synthesized by waves, and the substance that is waving is not a substance; does all of the above then become possible and rationally acceptable?

      Reality Unveiled explores, explains and justifies that possibility.

      Introduction

      The world is just too complicated nowadays to waste one’s time.  I have asked myself many times, am I wasting my time initiating this collection of works? Obviously, the answer has mostly been no, therefore the question is rhetoric, but believe me, it is the least of my intentions to waste yours.  The entire Reality Unveiled Collection is based and probes into only one very sensitive subject, the nature of reality.  If you are a creationist who likes to dabble in philosophy, this subject is already reasonable and may even be of interest to you. If that’s the case, you are already halfway into accepting this monograph[1], at least enough to continue reading it.  If your religious beliefs may be bruised or insulted by the subject, I would understand if you closed your reader. Besides, downloading this monograph hasn’t cost you very much at all, except a little of your valuable time.  I hope there was no real harm done.

      Perhaps my previous statements are blunt and a writer should never disinvite his readers to continue reading, but this endeavor of mine has as one of its principle motivations, criticizing the common practice of proposing unacceptable beliefs to people.  In my opinion, one should never be enticed, forced, intimidated, fooled, or otherwise railroaded into accepting the unacceptable, unless it happens to be convenient for the moment.

      Perhaps you have noticed that I am writing this monograph in the first person and using the pronouns you and we, instead of referring to the author and the reader as usual.  This may not be the conventional way of writing, but I feel that to reach consensus on any subject the persons involved must feel that they are having a conversation on equal footing. I do not want you to feel that I am lecturing you, because that is not my intention, what I want is: to present my beliefs and my reasons for believing in them so that you may hopefully agree with me and somehow collaborate in expanding the effort.

      If you are still with me, let´s begin by examining the following common belief:  It is generally accepted, that one should never discuss religion or politics, because the discussion invariably will lead nowhere.  That is normally good advice, but is it true?  Obviously, it depends on the circumstances and the people involved in the discussion, but why is it normally good advice?  The reason is that most, if not all religions and political systems are inherently belief-systems and belief-systems are generally dogmatic, non-transparent, proprietary and notorious for owning the truth. This lack of openness is what makes most contemporary belief-systems questionable and at the same time unquestionable because of their dogmatic nature, leading to an apparent paradox which renders them controversial and in many cases rationally-non-acceptable.  One surprising observation at this point is that religious and political belief systems are not the only culprits of proposing rationally-non-acceptable concepts and beliefs.

      As such, it would be nice if we had more contemporary belief-systems that were truly rational instead of the dogmatic ones that we have inherited through thousands of years.  But how do we go about generating new rational and consensual ones?  Each one of us can’t or shouldn’t create one’s own belief-systems because that would only result in social chaos.  Another side of the question is... Is there a need to revise the time-proven belief-systems we have?  Should we question beliefs such as love thy brother, thou shall not kill, the earth is round, etc.?  I don´t think it is necessary to revise or reject those beliefs that have been time-tested for centuries, just because they may be dogmatic.  If they still work, we can tolerate their dogmatic aspect until we understand things better; we should find rational justifications for those beliefs and leave them as they are.  On the other hand, if the belief or belief-system in question no longer applies because it has become obsolete due to social or technological changes, we should go ahead and revise it.  But again, we can’t all develop our own beliefs independently, even the belief that beliefs should be rational and consensual, needs to be examined and accepted rationally and consensually.  That is why the need to initiate a set of guidelines to bootstrap the revision or creation process of belief-systems in general.

      The Consensual Beliefs Guidelines

      In an attempt to provide a source for rationality for contemporary belief-systems, The Consensual Beliefs Guidelines (1) were written by the author to establish a consensus-developed set of guidelines, objectives, requirements and constraints for what constitutes a consensual belief-system so that we can define belief-systems that are non-paradoxical and rationally-acceptable to those wishing to embrace or reject them.  The Consensual Beliefs Guidelines were written in the spirit of the Open Source movement of the computer software industry.  Once the CB Guidelines had been established,

      Enjoying the preview?
      Page 1 of 1