Abstract
The doctrine of reality and a
new paradigm of science are proposed. The unity of formal logic and rational dialectics is the
correct methodological basis for the solution of the problem of reality. The main result is the
following system of conceptions: (1) reality represents the unity of opposites: the
controlling (governing) aspect and the controllable
aspect. The controlling (governing) aspect is God, and the controllable
aspect is the Universe; (2) the principle of existence and of uniqueness of God reads as
follows: the scientific object “Absolute, Creator, and Governor of essence
(information) and of material manifestation of essence” exists. This scientific object is the unique and
correct theoretical model (identifier) of the religious object “God (Creator
and Governor of the World)”; (3) the Universe
represents the informational-material system: the unity of essence
(information) and of material manifestation of essence. The manifestation of
information is matter. The material structure of the Universe represents the
set of states of matter: the physical vacuum, the system block, the ether, and
the discrete objects; (4) God created the system block,
the ether and the objects, entering information into the physical vacuum. God governs
the Universe by means of information; (5) the correct science of the 21st century should research
the fundamental relation between the controlling (governing) information
and the material manifestation of the controlling (governing) information in the Universe.
Keywords
Physics, biophysics, astrophysics,
cosmology, UFO science, parapsychology, metaphysics, formal
logic, dialectics, philosophy.
Introduction
As is known,
the achievements of science in the 20th century seemed so significant that scientists
did not question the foundations of science within the framework of the correct
methodological basis: the unity of formal logic and rational dialectics. The
correct methodological basis is a criterion of truth. In the 21st century, the
fact becomes obvious that many problems of science cannot be understood and
solved outside the framework of the correct methodological basis.
In the works [1-121], it was first shown
within the framework of the correct methodological basis that the foundations
of theoretical physics, mathematics, and materialistic dialectics (dialectical
materialism) contain formal-logical errors. In other words, the foundations of
the sciences do not satisfy the criterion of truth. The elimination (removal)
of the errors leads to the abolition of standard theories. This implies that
science enters into the greatest crisis. This fact proves that the standard
paradigm of science must be revised and replaced by the correct paradigm. A
correct paradigm of science can be formulated only within the framework of the
correct methodological basis (i.e., the criterion of truth). The methodological
basis determines the paradigm; paradigm characterizes the methodological basis.
Human knowledge represents an expression of reality within the framework of the
methodological basis (paradigm).
The purpose of this work
is to propose a new, correct paradigm of science within the framework of the
correct methodological basis: the unity of formal logic and rational
dialectics.
I. The
unity of formal logic and rational dialectics as a doctrine of reality
The unity of formal logic
and rational dialectics represents the correct doctrine of reality, the correct
criterion of truth and, therefore, the framework of the correct paradigm of
science. The foundations of the correct doctrine of reality are as follows
[1-121].
1. The rational dialectics
is the corrected materialistic dialectics (dialectical materialism). The
rational dialectics contains the following main laws of existence [28, 33,
35-37, 46, 47, 54, 56, 59, 95, 107-111]: the law of eternal existence and the
uniqueness of God as the scientific object “Absolute, Creator, and Governor of essence (information)
and of material manifestation of essence”; God is an aspect of reality; the
law of the eternal existence of matter and information; the law of the
existence of the relation (interconnection, interdependence) of matter and
information; the law of existence of set of states of matter and information.
These laws should be
supplemented with three known laws of materialistic dialectics: the law of the
unity and struggle of opposites (i.e., the law of the unity of stability and changeability);
the law of transition of quantitative changes into qualitative changes (i.e.,
the law of the existence of a measure); the law of negation of negation (i.e.,
the law of direction of change). Also, paired categories as methodological
principles of materialistic dialectics should be used: for example, the essence
and phenomenon; content and form; birth and extermination.
2. The main
epistemological principle of rational dialectics is the principle of existence.
The principle of existence expresses the principle of logical completeness: (a)
if “World (Universe)” exists, then “Non-World (Non-Universe)” exists; if “Non-World
(Non-Universe)” exists, then “World (Universe)” exists; (b) “Non-World
(Non-Universe)” is God. The principle of existence and of uniqueness of God reads as follows:
the scientific object “Absolute, Creator, and Governor of essence (information)
and of manifestation of essence (phenomenon)” exists. This scientific object is
the unique and correct theoretical model (identifier) of the religious object
“God (Creator and Governor of the World)”; (c) if “Matter” exists, then “Non-Matter”
exists; if “Non-Matter” exists, then “Matter” exists. “Non-Matter” is not
emptiness. “Non-Matter” is information; (d) if “Matter that has properties
(information)” exists, then “Matter that has no properties (information)”
exists; if “Matter that has no properties (information)” exists, then “Matter that
has properties (information) exists; (e) if “Discrete state of matter (a set of
discrete objects)” exists, then “Non-discrete state of matter (i.e., a field)”
exists; if “Non-discrete state of matter (i.e., a field)” exists, then “Discrete
state of matter (i.e., a set of discrete objects)” exists.
The principle of
non-existence (absence) of emptiness results from this. The principle of
non-existence (absence) of emptiness reads as follows: emptiness as the absence
of matter does not exist. The proof is as follows. One should make the
following inverse assumption: if matter exists, then emptiness (as absence, non-existence
of matter) exists.
In this
case, the following contradiction arises: if matter exists, then matter does
not exist. Therefore, the assumption made is erroneous. The correct relation between concepts of matter and emptiness represents the relation of disagreement:
concepts of matter and emptiness are contradictory concepts. There exists
either matter or emptiness. This means that emptiness as the absence of matter in the Universe does not exist, and the bound
of matter does not exist.
3. There is no general
form of the formal-logical definition
of matter. A proof
of this assertion is as follows. According to formal logic, a concept is defined in general form via indication of the proximal (nearest) genus and the species difference (specific
difference). Logic determines the following method of definition, which does it
possible to indicate the essential features (signs) of the definable objects.
The definable concept is led (brought) under the other, more general,
concept. Moreover, the definable concept is subordinated to a more general
concept. The volume
(scope) of
the definable concept is part of the volume (scope) of the more general
concept. Thereafter, the feature (sign) which expresses the difference of the
definable concept from other concepts is indicated. The volumes (scopes) of the
other concepts which are also subordinated to this general concept enter into
the volume (scope) of this general concept. Such method of definition is
called definition by means of indication of the proximal (nearest) genus and the species difference
(specific difference) (in Latin: “definitio per genus
proximum et differentiam specificum”). This implies the following assertion. If one wants to
define an object, one must, first of all, find the proximal (nearest) genus (in Latin: “genus
proximum”), i.e., directly a wider class of objects into which the objects under
consideration enter as a species. Then one must find a species difference (specific
difference) (in Latin: “differentia specifica”), i.e., that feature (sign) which
distinguishes (differentiates) the objects under consideration from objects of
other species of the same class (genus). Thus, the definition by means of indication of the proximal (nearest) genus and species difference (specific
difference) implies that all features (signs) of the definable object are not
enumerated (listed), but only two features (signs) are indicated: the generic
(the proximal (nearest) genus) and species features
(signs).
But the highest genus cannot be defined by means of
the proximal (nearest) genus and species difference (specific
difference) because the higher genus for the highest genus does not exist. The concept (category) of matter represents
the highest genus. Consequently,
the general form of the formal-logical
definition of the concept of matter does not exist.
The concept (category) of
matter would be a meaningless concept if there were no genetic definition of
matter.
4. The genetic definition
in formal logic is a special form of definition that shows how a given object,
a given phenomenon arises. The genetic definition of the concept (category) of
matter is as follows: matter is the manifestation of the essence (information).
The genetic definition of the concept (category) of matter would be a
meaningless definition if the concept (category) of the World (Universe) did
not exist.
5. From the formal-logical
point of view, the concept of the World (Universe) is a single and concrete (specific)
concept. The concept of the World (Universe) can be defined as follows: the
World (Universe) is the unity of essence and phenomenon (i.e., manifestations
of essence) where essence is information, and manifestation of essence is
matter. Consequently, the concepts of World (Universe) and matter are not
identical concepts.
6. The World (Universe) represents
a set of states of information-matter. The World (Universe) is “reality
mentally-divisible into aspects” [47, 54, 56, 59]. In other words, the World
(Universe) is the system that has a structure. (Structure is a set of the stable
connections between the elements in the system. These connections ensure the
integrity of the system and identity to oneself, i.e., conservation of the
basic properties under various changes).
God is the “reality
mentally-indivisible into aspects” [47, 54, 56, 59]. Reality is defined as
follows [47, 54, 56, 59]:
7. The material structure
of the Universe represents a set of states of matter [33, 37, 46, 47, 54, 56,
59, 95, 96]. These states are not mutually exclusive states, but are mutually
complementary (supplemental), mutually connected, mutually dependent, mutually
necessary states. The states are as follows.
a) The state “physical
vacuum” is the zero state of matter, containing zero information. Therefore,
matter in the zero state has no properties. Matter that does not contain
information is matter at rest (i.e., matter without movement) because
information is the cause, the source of movement. (Movement is change in
general).
b) The state “system block”
is the state of matter (organ) which collects, stores, keeps, processes,
transmits information and performs informational commands of God. God controls (governs)
the system block. The system block controls the Universe by means of
information. (The Universe is an informational-material system. Therefore, the
informational-material elements of this system are the informational-materially
connected elements). The “system block” contains all the information about the
past, present and future of the Universe. The “system block” has an
informational impact on the Universe. Informational impact is manifested in the
material form. (The informational
impact can materialize (i.e., reproduce in a material form) the events of the
past, present and future time).
c) The state “ether” is a
state that has a single (unique) property: continuity. Continuity as the single
(unique) property of matter is a nonphysical (i.e., mathematical) property of
matter. “Ether” is a material field in general. The material field in general
represents a non-physical field. In other words, the material field in general has
no physical properties at all (for example, gravitational property, energy
property). The only property of this non-physical field is mathematical
continuity. Therefore, the “ether” is the passive and immovable state.
d) The state “objects” is
a set of discrete informational-material objects (electrons, protons, atoms,
molecules, people, planets, galaxies, etc.). The objects have physical and
other properties due to information. Therefore, the objects are active and
changing (i.e., moving) objects. In other words, the “object state” of matter
is a set of discrete informational-material objects (micro-objects and
macro-objects, including biological (stable and unstable) and non-biological
(stable and unstable) objects (for example, UFO).
8. The informational-material objects
are a material manifestation of the essence (information). Each object has the
measure: the unity of qualitative and quantitative determinacy. The movement of
an object is a material manifestation of information. (The movement of an
object is change in general). Therefore, the energy of the informational-material
object is a form of manifestation of the movement of the informational-material
object. Information determines movement (energy); movement (energy)
characterizes information. In other words, energy is a measure of the movement
of an information-material object.
An important example is the collision of two
elementary particles in a collider. Any elementary particle is an informational-material
object. The act of collision of two informational-material particles leads to a
qualitative change (transformation) of informational-material particles: two
particles turn into many other informational-material particles. Each specific
energy region of the colliding particles corresponds to a certain set of
nascent (generated) particles. But this does not mean
that the colliding particles are composed of a set of nascent (generated) particles. The set of nascent (generated) particles characterizes the act
of annihilating (exterminating) the colliding particles; the act of
annihilating (exterminating) the colliding particles determines the set of
particles being born. In other words, a change in information leads to the
birth and extermination of informational-material particles.
9. Discrete informational-material
objects affect informationally on the ether (non-physical field), generating
local informational-material (physical, biological, etc.) fields (for example,
gravitational, electric, magnetic fields) in the ether. These local
informational-material fields in the ether are associated with generating
objects. Local informational-material fields are moved in immovable (fixed)
ether. The local informational-material field “looks like an object's shadow, a
reflection of an object in the ether, an ethereal image of an object”.
10. Man (as a discrete
informational-material (psycho-physical) object) can generate mentally (i.e., by
introducing information (thoughts) into the ether) a field phantom (ghost): an
unstable informational-material object. (The process of thinking is one of the
many forms of human movement as movement of informational-material object).
11. There exist local field creatures, beings (for example, angels, and
devils) and local field effects (for example: telepathy, telekinesis,
levitation, teleportation). The existence the local field beings and the local
field effects can be detected by man if the consciousness of man is in certain state. (The consciousness of man can be in
various (different) sates). For example, self-ignition of man (i.e., ignition of
physiological body, not clothes) is that the psychical body of man obliterates
(destroys) its physiological body by introducing information (thought) into the
ether. (In other words, the psychical body burns one's physiological body,
leaving the man's clothes in inalterable condition).
12. Informational-material
objects (for example, UFO as “Luminous Ball”) are characterized by form and content.
“Luminous Ball” (as the content of the informational-material, rational, intelligent,
intellectual, thinking object), interacting informationally with
“informational-material Matrix”, can consciously take the form (shape) of the
“informational-material Matrix”. In other words, “Luminous Ball”, consciously reaching the
region of the matrix “Birth (nativity) of Form”, can consciously
take the form of another informational-material object. If this object reaches
the region of the matrix “Extermination (destruction) of Form”, then the object
turns into the “Luminous Ball”. For example, if the “Luminous Ball” reaches
consciously the region of the image of the bird at the Nazca Valley, the “Luminous
Ball” turns into the living bird. And this living bird, consciously reaching
the region of Stonehenge, loses the form (shape) of a bird and turns
into “Luminous Ball”. (Analogy: Sperm, reaching the region of the uterus (like
a matrix), turns into a man). In addition, the “Luminous Ball” can take the
form of a man, an angel, a devil, a rational, intelligent, intellectual, thinking airplane or
spacecraft, etc.. Also, all known pyramids (for example,
the pyramid of Cheops) - as informational-material objects - were constructed by
means of informational control. The pictograms on the wheat fields are constructed by means
of informational control.
Thus, all anomalous (in
the point of view of man) objects and phenomena are material manifestations of
controlling (governing) information.
II. The correct paradigm of science
1. Reality as a
scientific truth is an expression of human knowledge of the Universe within the
framework of the correct methodological basis: the unity of formal logic and
rational dialectics.
2. The criterion of truth
represents the unity of formal logic and rational dialectics.
3. The goal of science is
the search, comprehension,
ascertainment, fixing and development of truth. The solution of the
epistemological problem of the relation between absolute and relative truth is as
follows. The existence of relative truths is a consequence of the existence of
absolute truth. Absolute truth is not the sum of relative truths. Absolute
truth determines relative truths; relative truths characterize absolute truth.
4. Rational dialectic is
the corrected materialistic dialectics (dialectical materialism). The basic
idea of the rational dialectics is as follows: Creator, Governor of the
Universe is God. The existence and uniqueness of God is the Absolute Truth. The principle of existence and
of uniqueness of God reads as follows: there exists the scientific object
“Absolute, Creator, Governor of information and of material manifestation of
information”. The scientific object “God” represents the unique and correct
theoretical model (identifier) of the religious object “God (Creator, Governor
of the World)”.
5. God created the system
block, the ether and the objects, introducing information into the physical
vacuum. God governs the Universe by means
of information. This statement shows the existence an analogy with the
functioning of the “man-computer” system: a computer is the Universe; the blank
screen of the computer monitor is a field in general; the objects on the screen
are objects in the object state of matter; a programmer and an operator (like
God) control (govern) objects by means of the system block (unit); objects do
not know about the existence of a programmer and an operator.
The destination (purpose)
of the science of the 21st century is to research the fundamental relation
between governing (controlling) information and the material manifestation of governing
(controlling) information in the Universe.
III. Discussion
1. As is known, the problem of
building a scientific picture of the world was actively discussed by scientists
in the 20th century. In the 21st century, scientists probably already
understand that neither physical, nor mathematical, nor chemical, nor
biological, nor any other special-scientific picture of the world can be built
because: (a) all special sciences contain formal-logical and dialectical
errors. In other words, the existing special sciences do not satisfy the
correct criterion of truth; (b) the set of special sciences is not a system (i.e.,
is not unified science of the world (Universe)). Consequently, unified scientific
picture of the world cannot be created. This fact means that the standard paradigm
of science enters the greatest crisis.
2. Human knowledge is a
consequence of the paradigm (i.e., the methodological basis of science, the
criterion of truth). By definition, the paradigm is the initial conceptual
scheme, the model of problem statement and of solution of problems, the set of research methods used by
the scientific community during a certain historical period. The conception is
a way of understanding, the interpretation of any phenomena, the main point of
view, the guiding idea, the constructive principle of various activities.
As is known, the starting
point and the basis of the standard paradigm of science is the statement that:
(a) God does not exist, (b) Humanity is the highest stage (step) in the
development of Nature. Therefore, the world can be cognized by Humanity; (c)
the solution of the epistemological problem of the relation between absolute
truth and relative truth is as follows: absolute truth is the sum of relative
truths; the Human tendency to comprehension of absolute truth is an infinite (endless)
process; (d) the inductive method (way) of cognition leads to the attainment of
absolute truth; (e) the “whole” can be divided into “parts”; the cognition of
the “part” leads to the cognition of the “whole”. But the standard paradigm
does not contain a formal-logical criterion of truth. Recently, it has become
obvious that many phenomena in the world cannot be researched (cognized) within
the framework of the standard paradigm. This proves the fallacy of the standard
paradigm which is not a consequence of the correct methodological basis. In
other words, the standard paradigm does not meet the criterion of truth.
3. The theory of systems
(systems approach, systems analysis as a concretization of the laws of
dialectics) reads as follows: the properties of the system of the elements
determine the properties of the elements of the system; the properties of the elements
of the system characterize the properties of the system of the elements. In
this point of view, the research of the elements of the system “Universe”
cannot lead to the cognition of the system “Universe”; cognition of the Universe
as a “whole” can lead to the research of the elements as “parts”.
4. Important examples.
The study of collisions
of elementary particles in a collider cannot provide information about the
structure of elementary particles because the result of a collision
characterizes only the informational-material act of the qualitative change of
the colliding particles. In other words, elementary particles born as a result
of a collision are a material manifestation of a change in information.
Elementary particles (in the exact meaning of this term) are not constituent
elements (“tiny bricks”) of matter. Therefore, scientists who are looking for
elementary particles as constituent elements (i.e., “tiny bricks”) of matter
are dreamers (fumblers).
The dreamers (fumblers) in science existed at all
times. The great dreamers (fumblers) of the 19th and 20th centuries created, for example, statistical physics,
the special theory of relativity, the general theory of relativity, quantum
mechanics, and quantum electrodynamics, the theory of “Big Bang”. The dreamers (fumblers) of the 21st century are
trying to create a unified field theory. But the theories proposed by the dreamers
(fumblers) do not satisfy the
correct criterion of truth. The dreamers cannot think, analyze and create theories
within the framework of the correct methodological basis. They can mislead the scientific
community. Therefore, science enters into the greatest crisis.
5. The system “Universe”
(as a “whole”) cannot be cognized in parts (piecemeal). The system “Universe”
(as a “whole”) cannot be cognized in the analytical, inductive way (i.e., in the
way “from particular to general”). The system “Universe” (as a “whole”) can
only be cognized in a meditative (non-analytical) way. The meditative method of
cognition leads to the recognition of the existence of God. Recognizing the
existence of God leads to a deductive approach to researching the Universe. A
deductive approach to researching the Universe is possible if scientists
acknowledge the existence of God as the scientific object “Absolute, Creator, Governor of essence
(information) and of material manifestation of essence”. In this case, the existence of
God would mean and explain the limitless multiformity of aspects of the
Universe, the limitless variety of life forms (organic and inorganic forms),
the limitless variety of mind forms, the existence of Higher (Superior) Intellect (Intelligence),
the boundedness (finiteness) of the Human Mind and the boundedness (finiteness)
of science.
The
scientific recognition of the existence of God would be the greatest
achievement of the Human Mind: the establishment (ascertainment) of the Absolute Scientific Truth. The
recognition of the existence of the Absolute Scientific Truth is the starting
point and the basis of the correct paradigm of science.
Thus, the goal of the
correct science of the 21st century is to research the fundamental relation
between controlling information and the material manifestation of controlling
information in the Universe.
Conclusion
Thus, the critical
analysis of the foundations of modern science shows that: (a) science enters
into the greatest crisis because science contains gross methodological errors;
(b) scientific researches are not carried out within the framework of the
correct methodological basis: the unity of formal logic and rational
dialectics. This means that the standard paradigm of science should be replaced
by the correct paradigm. The proposed science paradigm as the content of the
correct methodological basis represents the following conceptual system:
1. Reality is the unity
of opposites: the controlling (governing) aspect and the controllable
aspect. The controlling (governing) aspect is God, and the controllable
aspect is the Universe.
2. The principle of existence
and of uniqueness of God reads as follows: the scientific object “Absolute,
Creator, Governor of essence (information) and of material manifestation of
essence” exists. This scientific object
is the unique and correct theoretical model (identifier) of the religious
object “God (Creator, Governor of the World)”.
3. The Universe represents the
informational-material system: the unity of essence (information) and of
material manifestation of essence. The manifestation of information is matter.
The material structure of the Universe represents the set of states of matter:
the physical vacuum, the system block, the ether, and the discrete objects.
4. God created the system block, the
ether and the objects, entering information into the physical vacuum. God
governs the Universe by means of information.
5. The correct science of the 21st
century should research the fundamental relation between the controlling (governing)
information and the material manifestation of the controlling (governing) information
in the Universe.
References
[1] T.Z. Kalanov, “Theoretical analysis of Einstein’s relationship of detailed balance. I”. Reports of
the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 11 (1990), pp. 22-24.
[2] T.Z. Kalanov, “Theoretical analysis of
Einstein’s relationship of detailed balance. II”. Reports of the Academy of
Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 1 (1991), pp. 21-23.
[3] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the statistics of the photon
gas”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Vol. 316, No. 1 (1991),
p. 100.
[4] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the statistics of the
electron gas”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Vol. 316, No. 6
(1991), p. 1386.
[5] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the quantum-statistical
theory of ideal monatomic gas. I”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, No.
4 (1991), pp. 20-22.
[6] T.Z. Kalanov, “On statistics of the systems
with variable number of particles. I”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of
the Republic of Uzbekistan,No.
7 (1991), pp. 26-28.
[7] T.Z. Kalanov, “On statistics of the systems
with variable number of particles. II”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of
the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 8 (1991), pp. 23-25.
[8] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the quantum-statistical
theory of ideal monatomic gas. II”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, No.
8 (1991), pp. 23-25.
[9] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the quantum-statistical
theory of thermal radiation.”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, No.
2 (1992), pp. 20-22.
[10] T.Z. Kalanov, “Physics without Boltzmann’s
“statistical entropy””. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of
Uzbekistan,No. 4-5 (1992), pp.
43-45.
[11] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the problem of
substantiation and formulation of unitary basic principles of statistical
physics and physical kinetics”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, No.
10-11 (1992), pp. 44-46.
[12] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a approach to the problem
of substantiation and formulation of unitary basic principles of statistical
physics and physical kinetics”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, No.
1 (1993), pp. 24-26.
[13] T.Z. Kalanov, “The correct theoretical analysis
of the Michelson-Morley experiments”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic
of Uzbekistan,
No. 11-12 (1995), p. 22.
[14] T.Z. Kalanov, “Proof of non-correctness of the
Lorentz transformation”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of
Uzbekistan, No.
1-2 (1996), p. 32.
[15] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the theory of relative motion”.
Reports of
the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 12 (1997), p. 15.
[16] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the theory of time”. Reports of the Academy of
Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 5 (1998), p. 24.
[17] T.Z. Kalanov, “Kinematics of material point:
Modern analysis”. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 7 (1999), p. 9.
[18] T.Z. Kalanov, “
: The most urgent problem of our time”. Reports of the Academy of
Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 5 (1999), p. 9.
: The most urgent problem of our time”. Reports of the Academy of
Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, No. 5 (1999), p. 9.
[19] T.Z. Kalanov, “Correct quantum-statistical
description of ideal systems within the framework of master equation”. Proc.
XXVth ICPIG, Nagoya, Japan. Ed. By
Toshio Goto / Japan: Nagoya Univ., Vol.
3 (2001), p. 235.
[20] T.Z. Kalanov, “On logical errors lying in the
base of special theory of relativity”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April
Meeting), Vol. 46, No. 2 (2001), p. 99.
[21] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a solution of the problem of
unitarization of the elementary principles of statistical physics and physical
kinetics”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 47, No. 2
(2002), pp. 163-164.
[22] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the main errors underlying
statistical physics”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol.
47, No. 2 (2002), p. 164.
[23] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the essence of time”. Bulletin
of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 47, No. 2 (2002), p. 164.
[24] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a new basis of quantum theory”.
Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 47, No. 2 (2002), p.
164.
[25] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the problem of the
correspondence principle”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting),
Vol. 48, No. 2 (2003), p. 153.
[26] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a new theory of the system of
reference”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 48, No. 2
(2003), pp. 153-154.
[27] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the essence of space”. Bulletin
of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 48, No. 2 (2003), p. 154.
[28] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the problem of knowledge of the
Universe”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 48, No. 2
(2003), pp. 154-155.
[29] T.Z. Kalanov, “The theory of relativity: An error
of the transformation of coordinates”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April
Meeting), Vol. 48, No. 2 (2003), p. 155.
[30] T.Z. Kalanov, “On logical errors underlying the
special theory of relativity”. Journal of Theoretics (USA). Vol. 6-1 (2004).
[31] T.Z. Kalanov, “The correct theoretical analysis
of the foundations of quantum mechanics”. Journal of Ultra Scientists of
Physical Sciences (International Journal of Physical Sciences, India), Vol. 16,
No. 2 (2004), pp. 191-198.
[32] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct theoretical
analysis of the foundations of quantum mechanics”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys.
Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 50, No. 2 (2005), p. 65.
[33] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a new theory of physical vacuum”.
Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 50, No. 2 (2005).
[34] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a new approach to the solution
of the problem of quantization of energy”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc.
(April Meeting), Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006), p. 62.
[35] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a new theory of the black
hole”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006),
p. 62.
[36] T.Z. Kalanov, “The problem of the SETI: A
methodological error in cosmology and astrophysics”. Bulletin of the Amer.
Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006), p. 60-61.
[37] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the hypothesis of Universe's
"system block"”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting),
Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006), p. 61.
[38] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the
first law of thermodynamics”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting),
Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006), p. 60.
[39] T.Z. Kalanov, “The second law of thermodynamics:
Mathematical error”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 51,
No. 2 (2006), p. 60.
[40] T.Z. Kalanov, “Bose's method: A logical error”.
Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006), p. 61.
[41] T.Z. Kalanov, “Dirac's theory of physical vacuum:
Continuation of Bose's logical errors”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April
Meeting), Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006), p. 61.
[42] T.Z. Kalanov, “Bose-Einstein statistics and
Fermi-Dirac statistics: A logical error”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc.
(April Meeting), Vol. 51, No. 2 (2006), p. 61.
[43] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct analysis of Maxwell
distribution”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 51, No. 2
(2006), p. 61-62.
[44] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct analysis of the
foundations of the special theory of relativity”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys.
Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 52, No. 2 (2007), p. 120.
[45] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct analysis of the
foundations of theoretical physics”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April
Meeting), Vol. 52, No. 2 (2007), p. 120.
[46] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the hypothesis of control of
the Universe”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 52, No. 2
(2007), p. 121.
[47] T.Z. Kalanov, “Theoretical model of God: The key
to correct exploration of the Universe”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc.
(April Meeting), Vol. 52, No. 2 (2007), p. 121.
[48] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the special
theory of relativity”. Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences, Vol. 26D, No. 1
(2007), pp. 1-15.
[49] T.Z. Kalanov, “The correct theoretical analysis
of the foundations of classical thermodynamics”. Bulletin of Pure and Applied
Sciences, Vol. 26D, No. 2 (2007), pp. 109-118.
[50] T.Z. Kalanov, “The correct theoretical analysis
of the foundations of classical thermodynamics”. Indian Journal of Science and
Technology, Vol. 2, No. 1 (2009), pp. 12-17.
[51] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the Boltzmann distribution”.
Galilean Electrodynamics, Vol. 21,
Special Issues 1 (2010), p. 2.
[52] T.Z. Kalanov, “The correct theory of photon gas”.
Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 2, No. 2 (2009), pp. 1-10.
[53] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a new analysis of the problem
of Planck constant”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 54,
No.4 (2009).
[54] T.Z. Kalanov, “Theoretical model of God: proof of
existence”. Indian Journal of Science
and Technology, Vol. 2, No. 3 (2009), pp. 80-88.
[55] T.Z. Kalanov, “On a new analysis of the
foundations of classical mechanics. I. Dynamics”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys.
Soc. (April Meeting), Vol. 55, No. 1 (2010).
[56] T.Z. Kalanov, “The theoretical model of God:
Proof of the existence and the uniqueness of God”. Scientific GOD Journal, Vol.
1, No. 2 (2010), pp. 85-97.
[57] T.Z. Kalanov, “The modern analysis of the problem
of multisecting an angle”. Prespacetime Journal, Vol. 1, No. 3 (2010), pp.
468-474.
[58] T.Z. Kalanov, “The crisis in theoretical physics:
The problem of scientific truth”. Prespacetime Journal, Vol. 1, No. 5 (2010),
pp. 824-842.
[59] T.Z. Kalanov, “The critical analysis of the
foundations of theoretical physics. Crisis in theoretical physics: The problem
of scientific truth”. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing. ISBN 978-3-8433-6367-9,
Paperback (2010).
[60] T.Z. Kalanov, “Analysis of the problem of
relation between geometry and natural sciences”. Prespacetime Journal, Vol. 2,
No. 1 (2011), pp. 75-87.
[61] T.Z
Kalanov, “On the critical analysis of classical electrodynamics”.
Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc. (APS April Meeting), Vol. 56, No. 4 (2011).
[62] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of differential and integral calculus”. MCMS (Ada Lovelace
Publications), (2011), pp. 34-40.
[63] T.Z.
Kalanov, “Logical analysis of the foundations of differential and integral
calculus”. Indian Journal of Science and
Technology, Vol. 4, No. 12 (2011).
[64] T.Z. Kalanov, “Logical analysis of the
foundations of differential and integral calculus”. Bulletin of Pure and
Applied Sciences, Vol. 30 E (Math.& Stat.), No. 2 (2011), pp. 327-334.
[65] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of differential and integral calculus”. International Journal of
Science and Technology, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2012), pp.80-84.
[66] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of Bose–Einstein
and Fermi–Dirac statistics”. Elixir (Statistics), No. 45 (2012), pp. 7657-7659.
[67] T.Z. Kalanov, “On rationalization of the
foundations of differential calculus”. Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences,
Vol. 31 E (Math. & Stat.), No. 1 (2012), pp. 1-7.
[68] T.Z. Kalanov, “The Boltzmann distribution: a
logical error”. Elixir (Adv. Pow.), No 49 (2012), pp. 9935-9936.
[69] T.Z. Kalanov, “The correct analysis of theory of
photon gas”. Elixir (Nuclear & Radiation Physics), No. 50 (2012), pp.
10197-10205.
[70] T.Z. Kalanov, “On logical error underlying
classical mechanics”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting), Vol.
57, No. 3 (2012).
[71] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
mathematical formalism of theoretical physics. I. Foundations of differential
and integral calculus”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting), Vol.
58, No. 4 (2013).
[72] T.Z. Kalanov,
“The critical analysis of the Pythagorean theorem and of the problem of
irrational numbers”. Basic Research Journal of Education Research and Review,
(ISSN 2315-6872, http//www.basicresearchjournals.org), Vol. 2, No. 4
(2013), pp. 59-65.
[73] T.Z. Kalanov, “The logical analysis of the
Pythagorean theorem and of the problem of irrational numbers”. Asian Journal of
Mathematics and Physics, (ISSN 2308-3131, http://scienceasia.asia), Vol. 2013
(2013), pp. 1-12.
[74] T.Z. Kalanov, “The critical analysis of the
Pythagorean theorem and of the problem of irrational numbers”. Bulletin of Pure
and Applied Sciences, Vol. 32 (Math & Stat), No. 1 (2013), pp. 1-12.
[75] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the logical analysis of the
foundations of vector calculus”. International Journal of Scientific Knowledge.
Computing and Information Technology, Vol. 3, No. 2 (2013) pp. 25-30.
[76] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the logical analysis of the
foundations of vector calculus”. International Journal of Multidisciplinary
Academic Research, Vol. 1, No. 3 (2013).
[77] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the logical analysis of the
foundations of vector calculus”. Journal of Computer and Mathematical Sciences,
Vol. 4, No. 4 (2013), pp. 202-321.
[78] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the logical analysis of the
foundations of vector calculus”. Journal of Research in Electrical and
Electronics Engineering (ISTP-JREEE), (ISSN: 2321-2667), Vol. 2, No. 5 (2013),
pp. 1-5.
[79] T.Z. Kalanov, “The critical analysis of the
Pythagorean theorem and of the problem of irrational numbers”. Global Journal
of Advanced Research on Classical and Modern Geometries, (ISSN: 2284-5569),
Vol. 2, No. 2 (2013), pp. 59-68.
[80] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the logical analysis of the
foundations of vector calculus”. Research Desk, (ISSN: 2319-7315), Vol. 2, No.
3 (2013), pp. 249-259.
[81] T.Z. Kalanov, “The foundations of vector
calculus: The logical error in mathematics and theoretical physics”. Unique
Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 1, No. 4 (2013), pp. 054-059.
[82] T.Z.
Kalanov, “On the logical analysis of the foundations of vector calculus”.
Aryabhatta Journal of Mathematics & Informatics, (ISSN: 0975-7139), Vol. 5,
No. 2 (2013), pp. 227-234.
[83] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
mathematical formalism of theoretical physics. II. Foundations of vector
calculus”. Unique Journal of Engineering and Advanced Sciences (UJEAS, www.ujconline.net), , Vol. 01, No. 01
(2013).
[84] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
mathematical formalism of theoretical physics. II. Foundations of vector
calculus”. Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences, Vol. 32 E (Math & Stat),
No. 2 (2013), pp.121-130.
[85] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
mathematical formalism of theoretical physics. II. Foundations of vector
calculus”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting), Vol. 59, No. 5
(2014).
[86] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
mathematical formalism of theoretical physics. III. Pythagorean theorem”.
Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting), Vol. 59, No. 5 (2014).
[87] T.Z. Kalanov,
“On the system analysis of the foundations of trigonometry”. Journal of
Physics & Astronomy, (www.mehtapress.com),
Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014).
[88] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the system analysis of the
foundations of trigonometry”. International Journal of Informative &
Futuristic Research, (IJIFR, www.ijifr.com), Vol. 1, No. 6 (2014), pp. 6-27.
[89] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the system analysis of the
foundations of trigonometry”. International Journal of Science Inventions
Today, (IJSIT, www.ijsit.com), Vol. 3, No. 2 (2014), pp. 119-147.
[90] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the system analysis of the
foundations of trigonometry”. Pure and Applied Mathematics Journal, Vol. 3, No.
2 (2014), pp. 26-39.
[91] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the system analysis of the
foundations of trigonometry”. Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences, Vol. 33E
(Math & Stat), No. 1 (2014), pp. 1-27.
[92] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of the theory of negative number”. International Journal of Informative & Futuristic
Research (IJIFR, www.ijifr.com), Vol. 2, No. 4 (2014), pp. 1132-1143.
[93] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
mathematical formalism of theoretical physics. IV. Foundations of trigonometry”.
Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting), Vol. 60, No. 4 (2015).
[94] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
mathematical formalism of theoretical physics. V. Foundations of the theory of
negative numbers”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting), Vol. 60,
No. 4 (2015).
[95] T.Z. Kalanov, “Where are the logical errors in
the theory of Big Bang?”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting),
Vol. 60, No. 4 (2015).
[96] T.Z. Kalanov, “Where are the logical errors in
the theory of Big Bang?”. Scientific GOD Journal, Vol. 5, No. 5 (2014), p.
432-433.
[97] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of the theory of negative numbers”. International Journal of
Current Research in Science and Technology, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 1-12.
[98] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of the theory of negative numbers”. Aryabhatta Journal of
Mathematics & Informatics, Vol. 7, No. 1 (2015), pp. 3-12.
[99] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the formal–logical analysis of
the foundations of mathematics applied to problems in physics”. Aryabhatta
Journal of Mathematics & Informatics, Vol. 7, No. 1 (2015), pp. 1-2.
[100] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the formal-logical analysis of
the foundations of mathematics applied to problems in physics”. Bulletin of the
Amer. Phys. Soc., (April Meeting), (2016).
[101] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of pure mathematics”.
Mathematics and Statistics (CRESCO, http://crescopublications.org), V.
2, No. 1 (2016), pp. 2-14.
[102] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of pure mathematics”. International Journal for Research in
Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, V. 2, No. 2 (2016), pp. 15-33.
[103] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical analysis of the
foundations of pure mathematics”. Aryabhatta Journal of Mathematics &
Informatics, V. 8, No. 1 (2016), pp. 1-14 (Article Number: MSOA-2-005).
[104] T.Z. Kalanov, “Critical Analysis of the
Foundations of Pure Mathematics”.
Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, ISSN
1465-2978 (Online). Editor: Paul Ernest), No. 30 (October 2016).
[105] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the
law of the external photoelectric effect”. Journal of Review in Sciences
(Scientific Research Gate), V. 1, No. 1 (2016), pp. 1–9.
[106] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the
law of the external photoelectric effect”. International Journal of Informative
& Futuristic Research (IJIFR), V. 4, No. 1 (2016), pp. 4801-4811.
[107] T.Z. Kalanov, “Man vs. computer: Difference of
the essences. The problem of the scientific creation”. Journal of Review in
Sciences (Scientific Research Gate), V. 1, No. 1 (2016), pp. 10-34.
[108]
T.Z. Kalanov, “Man vs. computer: Difference of the essences, The problem of the
scientific creation”. International
Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science, Engineering and Information
Technology (IJSRCSEIT, ISSN: 2456-3307), V. 1, No. 2 (2016), pp. 120-143.
[109] T.Z. Kalanov, “Man vs. computer: Difference of
the essences. The problem of the scientific creation”. International Journal of
Contemporary Research and Review (http://ijcrr.in/index.php/ijcrr), V. 7, No. 12 (2016).
[110] T.Z. Kalanov, “Man vs. computer: Difference of
the essences. The problem of the scientific creation”. International Journal of
Multidisciplinary Education and Research (ISSN: 2455-4588), V. 1, No. 9,
(2016), pp. 15-31.
[111] T.Z.
Kalanov, “Man versus computer: Difference of the essences, The problem of the
scientific creation”. BRAIN: Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and
Neuroscience, (ISSN: 2067-3957), V. 8, No. 2 (2017), pp. 151-178.
[112] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the
law of the external photoelectric Effect”. Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc.,
(April Meeting), (2017).
[113] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the formal–logical analysis of
the foundations of mathematics applied to problems in physics”. Asian Journal
of Fuzzy and Applied Mathematics, V. 5, No. 2 (2017), pp. 48-49.
[114]
T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct
formulation of the starting point of classical mechanics”. International journal of Chemistry,
Mathematics and Physics (IJCMP, AI Publications, www.aipublications.com),
V. 1, No. 1 (2017), pp. 27-47.
[115] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the starting point of classical mechanics”.
Advances in Physics Theories and Applications, V. 64, (2017), pp. 27-46.
[116] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the starting point of classical mechanics”.
International Journal of Advanced Research in Physical Science. V. 4,
No. 6, (2017), pp. 1-22.
[117] T.Z.
Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the starting point of classical
mechanics”. Physics & Astronomy (International Journal). V. 2, No. 2,
(2018), pp. 79-92.
[118] T.Z. Kalanov, “On the correct formulation of the
starting point of classical mechanics”. International educational
scientific research journal. V.
3, No. 6, (2017), pp. 56-73.
[119] T.Z. Kalanov, “On new foundations of theory of
atom”. International Journal of Advanced
Research in Physical Science (IJARPS), V. 5, No. 1, (2018), pp. 1-9.
[120] T.Z. Kalanov, “The formal-logical analysis of
the foundation of set theory”. Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences, V. 36E,
No. 2, (2017), pp. 329 -343.
[121] T.Z. Kalanov, “The formal-logical analysis of
the foundation of set theory”. Scientific Review, V. 4, No. 6, (2018), pp.
53-63.
Temur Z. Kalanov
Home
of Physical Problems, Yozuvchilar (Pisatelskaya) 6a, 100128 Tashkent,
Uzbekistan.
tzk_uz@yahoo.com,
t.z.kalanov@mail.ru, t.z.kalanov@rambler.ru
