The institution began in 1883 as the Oakland Observatory, through a gift from Anthony Chabot to the City of Oakland. The original Oakland Observatory was located in downtown Oakland and provided public telescope viewing for the community. For decades, it also served as the official timekeeping station for the entire Bay Area, measuring time with its transit telescope.

The observatory moved to its Mountain Boulevard location in 1915 due to increasing light pollution and urban congestion. In the mid-1960s, the facility was expanded considerably. Throughout this time, the Chabot Science Center, as it was renamed, was staffed mainly by Oakland Unified School District personnel and volunteers. In 1977, seismic safety concerns terminated public school students’ access to the original observatory facility. The observatory building remained open to the general public, but school activities were limited to outlying classroom buildings and the planetarium.

Recognizing the need to restore full access to the facility, either by repair or relocation, in 1989 Chabot Observatory & Science Center was formed as a Joint Powers Agency with the City of Oakland, the Oakland Unified School District, and the East Bay Regional Park District, in collaboration with the Eastbay Astronomical Society, and in 1992 was recognized as a nonprofit organization. The project was led by Chabot’s Executive Director and CEO, Dr. Michael D. Reynolds, breaking ground for the facility in October 1996 with construction of the new Science Center beginning in May 1998.

In January 2000, anticipating the opening of the new facility, the organization changed its name from Chabot Observatory & Science Center to Chabot Space & Science Center. The new name was chosen to better convey the organization’s focus on astronomy and the space sciences, while communicating both the broad range and the technologically advanced nature of programs available in the new Science Center.

Opened August 19, 2000, the new Chabot Space & Science Center is an , state-of-the-art science and technology education facility on a site in the hills of Oakland, California.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Chabot Space and Science Center, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

By: Michael D. Watson

It’s been written about in hundreds of books, the subject of fantasy for everyone at one time or another, and the government has actually devoted research at one time or another on the subject. If you do a search on the Internet for time travel you will find millions of entries on it, and hundreds of websites fully devoted to talking about it. Wouldn’t it be cool if you could travel back in time? You could correct mistakes you’ve made in your life, study any period of time that interests you, not to mention build a financial empire on your foreknowledge of events. Beginning with H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine, the concept of time travel has been one of the main staples of science fiction. Some of my favorite reads are David Gerrold’s The Man Who Folded Himself and The Light of Other Days by Stephen Baxter and Arthur C. Clarke.

So is it really possible to travel in time?

First of all we are all already time travelers in the sense that time moves forward, and at the same apparent rate of speed, for all of us. There seem to be no obstacles in physics to accelerating the forward momentum of time in one way or another. Cryogenics is a concept much written about as one method of “forward” time travel; lowering the body temperature to a little above absolute zero to nearly stop the metabolism as a way to sleep away millennia. The practical hurdles to this put any possibility of this far into the future. Although simpler organisms have been successfully frozen and returned, the human body is too complex to yet survive the process because of water crystallization and other factors. Another method of accelerating time is time differentials due to the relativistic effects of high velocity.

According to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, as an object approaches the speed of light one of the effects is time dilation. As a relativistic object’s speed increases the passage of time slows for it in relation to a non-moving object. Take for example a spacecraft traveling at 10% of the speed of light, or 18,628 miles per second. If this imaginary spacecraft maintained this speed consistently for 24 hours (according to our clocks back home), then at the end of that 24 hours only about 23 hours, 53 minutes would have passed onboard the spacecraft. Much higher speeds to within a fraction of a percent of the speed of light have to be achieved to get a really noticeable effect. Take that same spacecraft and accelerate it to .999999 light speed (or to 186,281.81 miles every second) and something really bizarre happens, achieving something more like time travel. If you take that spacecraft out on a joyride at that speed for 24 hours of your traveler’s time and return home, you will find that almost two years have past on Earth.

In actuality, this has been observed in experiments done when atomic clocks were sent on jetliners to observe the effects of time dilation. The difference was observed as predicted, helping to support Einstein’s theories. Naturally the difference was small, measured in nanoseconds. Unfortunately for any aspiring time travelers, the kind of speeds needed for relativistic effects are still well outside our technology. The fastest spacecraft yet launched were the Helios spacecraft sent to study the sun in the 70s. They achieved speeds of about 158,000mph, or about 44 miles per second; this is about .02% light-speed, still not close to relativistic speeds.

And what about the possibility of travel back in time?

This makes great material for science fiction, but the data here doesn’t seem promising. Physicists have been able to envision certain circumstances under which time travel MAY be allowable under the laws of physics, but the energy levels and exotic matter requirements seem to be well beyond anything we are likely to achieve anytime soon. Some have suggested that wormholes may be bridges to other universes, distant parts of this universe, or other times. Wormholes remain a theoretical concept, neither proven nor dis-proven to exist. It seems that for all practical purposes the universe has (at least temporarily) denied us the opportunity to revisit our past directly. So let us turn to a discussion of what the possibilities would be if time travel did exist.

First of all we must look at the fact put forward by modern physics that space and time are related aspects of the topology of our universe. In other words, our universe consists of the three observable dimensions of space and one of time. Putting together a theory that explains the existence of our universe required combining time and space into one continuum. Assuming this to be true, it follows that there should be a parallel measurement in space equivalent to measurements in time. It may seem nonsensical to talk of measuring space in seconds or time in miles, but the two are tied together through the speed of light. Therefore it follows that to convert one second of time into distance, we simply look at how far light travels in one second. That would be approximately 186,282 miles or three quarters the distance to the moon. This means that traveling one second back in time would be equivalent to traveling nearly the distance to the moon. Then there is the fact that a change in temporal position would mean having to adjust for the motion of the earth, sun and galaxy as they rotate and revolve. A lot harder than it looked, huh? Ok, let’s pretend we overcome this obstacle and achieve real, meaningful time travel. Could you go back in time and kill your grandfather early in his life, assuring that you will never be born? Time travel is full of paradoxes such as this. For the most part this can be overcome by incorporating quantum mechanics into the concept of time travel, and branching realities.

Quantum mechanics is a field of theory which developed in the first quarter of the twentieth century through the work of Niels Bohr, Pauli, Planck, Heisenberg, and Schrodinger. It’s basic tenets are that at a fundamental level matter exists as a cloud of uncertainty and probability. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle states that one cannot measure both the position and momentum of an elementary particle because the act of observation changes the outcome. In this branch of physics cause and effect is said to break down and one can only state the probability of something being true. The most famous example of what quantum mechanics means in the real world was given as a thought experiment by Erwin Schrodinger and is known as Schrodinger’s Cat. Here it follows:

A cat is placed in a sealed box. Attached to the box is an apparatus containing a radioactive nucleus and a canister of poison gas. This apparatus is separated from the cat in such a way that the cat can in no way interfere with it. The experiment is set up so that there is exactly a 50% chance of the nucleus decaying in one hour. If the nucleus decays, it will emit a particle that triggers the apparatus, which opens the canister and kills the cat. If the nucleus does not decay, then the cat remains alive. According to quantum mechanics the unobserved nucleus is described as a superposition (meaning it exists partly as each simultaneously) of “decayed nucleus” and “undecayed nucleus”. However, when the box is opened the experimenter sees only a “decayed nucleus/dead cat” or an “undecayed nucleus/living cat”.

The paradox of this experiment is that the cat is said to be both dead and alive until someone opens the box. (*No cats or animals of any kind were harmed in the writing of this article). This paradox can be resolved if we say that instead of both being true in one reality, that reality actually branches into two. In one universe the cat is alive and in the parallel universe it is dead. In this way our universe is constantly splitting into alternate universes in which every possibility is encompassed. This also solves the paradoxes of time travel. When our time traveler returns and makes changes in the past he would be creating an alternate universe without destroying the other. In this way, as he or she continued to make changes, our time traveler would never be able to return to their original timeline, although he could create one similar to it with the right changes. All of the possibilities and repercussions of a scenario such as this are spectacularly presented in the science fiction novel The Man Who Folded Himself, by David Gerrold.

In summary, time travel is a highly entertaining concept for science fiction, and actually holds some plausibility in certain concepts of modern physics. But as a practical application, it is not likely to become a part of our lives anytime soon. Of course, not being a time traveler myself, I cannot speak with certainty.

Time will tell.

Michael D Watson is a free-lance writer and editor/webmaster of [http://future-seek.com], a futurist/science site featuring science forums, a science fiction bookstore, science articles, and science links.

No related posts.

When we think of astronomy, we may be inclined to think that it only deals with scientists and astronomers looking up at objects in space with a telescope. However, there is far more to astronomy than simply looking at objects in space. In this article, we will look into the science of astronomy.

The countdown has started, and astronauts in are preparing for a journey that will take them to our Moon. The button is pressed and the space shuttle begins on its assent.

At this point, we may start to imagine that astronomy is not just about telescopes and taking pictures of objects in space. As that space shuttle begins to go, it needs fuel to go. And here we find our first science – chemistry.

The mixture of fuel which includes oxygen is one which needs top chemists to figure out what is needed to safely propel and bring back those astronauts. There is a need for mathematicians to figure out with the weight and all the other information and data, how much fuel is necessary to make that space shuttle go.

But, what about the space shuttle? We have forgotten about the engineers that had to make up this fine specimen of engineering. What materials they would have needed to be made out of. And what about those who had to make those parts?

We can forget that there is a lot to astronomy today, and that a lot of different sciences had to go into making the space shuttle do the famous Neil Armstrong landing on the Moon. But, how did we get Neil Armstrong onto the Moon?

Space has no oxygen, and any human that tries to go into

We have just looked at the space shuttle and have uncovered many different branches of the sciences that go into making a space shuttle, and its expeditions to be successful.

We have almost forgotten that it needed creative people who were not necessarily scientists. For example, the artists who had to make up designs for certain things which are necessary in the beginning, before the space shuttle was even made.

The sciences in astronomy also have other aspects such as those required to make radio telescopes possible. The computer technicians, programmers, and even the electronics professionals that have to possibly make up the equipment for the telescope.

As we can see there are many different areas that go into making astronomy what it is today. There is more to astronomy than telescopes. And there is more to astronomy than simply looking out into space. The field of astronomy helps in knowing when brownouts may occur on Earth, and other things about Earth which we never knew before.

Do you want to see what the planets look like? Discover more about astronomy telescopes and astronomy binoculars by now visiting these links: buy telescopes | Meade telescopes [http://www.meadetelescopesales.info]

No related posts.

It is common sense that in the so-called “Dark Ages” of the medieval Europe, theology predominated in all the area from theocracy to regalia and became the absolute authority in the spiritual world of European. Science was left no space in the magnificent palace ruled by theology and was seen as heterodoxy. At that time, the conflict in relations between science and theology was serious, or more exactly, the oppression theology put on science was cruel. For instance, Italian philosopher and scientist Bruno because of his insistence on scientific truth was burned at the stake by the Inquisition in Rome in 1600. Great physicist Galileo, for believing in and publicizing Copernicus’ heliocentricism, was put into prison for life.1 Under the great pressure and in the context of Western European fanaticism, there was hardly possibility and space for science to emerge. Up to 17th and 18th centuries, science began to advance rapidly and defeat theology eventually. God became “master not at home” and Newton became “chamberlaine in the world”. Why did it happen in Europe? The key is to find out the origins for the rise of modern science. To see it, we first look into Western traditional weltanschauung.

Western traditional weltanschauung is a kind of dualism. Toward no matter what in nature, morality or religion, Western people often has a dualistic attitude. For example, the classical two-valued logic based on true or false duality founded by Aristotle continued to use today. Moreover, the dualism of mind and body, s

Plato’s theory of Forms asserted that the realm of Forms and the realm of things are opposed.3 “The Forms are those changeless, eternal, and nonmaterial essences or patterns of which the actual visible objects we see are only poor copies.”4 Although Aristotle tried to overcome Plato’s system of the dualism of Forms and actual things, he didn’t give up the dualistic idea of reality and phenomenon5, e.g. the distinction between matter and form.

Another element of Western traditional dualistic worldview is Christian theology. It is obvious that the city of God and the city of the world as well as faith and reason are resolvedly distinct in the Bible. Christian theology assured that any values and ideals that could not be fulfilled in the world could be achieved in paradise only if you affirm the existence of God and believe in God piously. If compared to the absolute Christian beliefs, any ethical or moral value or temporal ideal shows immediately insignificance in itself. For instance, Jesus’ response to the questions about paying tax – “Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”(Matthew 22: 22) typically represented the dualism of Christian theology.

The Christian theological thought above mixed with Plato’s theory of Forms and Aristotle’s metaphysics latter constructed the voluminous system of scholasticism. In more than a thousand year of the medieval ecclesiastic system, the Christian theology was the dominant ideology of Western European.

In this context, although the scientific researches were never stopping completely, the scientific seeking and the exploring of nature and even all the secular concerns confronted with such a perfect, pure and transcendental realm constructed by Christian theology were suffering despisal, neglect and oppression. Christian theology became the unique absolute standard of Western people and persecuted those disobedient. Despite that theology nearly held all the power over all the secular and holy affairs and science seldom had space to develop, the theological worldview could not be necessarily ever-victorious and ever-valid. Once coming across holistic changes or encountering the assault of heterodox thought, the faiths of Western people would be lax, which would shake and even destroy the whole Christian theological worldview.

Renaissance in the 15th and 16th century first revolted. The sense of self-awakening catalyzed by humanism and the revival of ancient Greek and Roman cultures broke down the unified complexion under the reign of theology. Man as a scientific master instead of God in the theological world became the center of social life and academic researches so that science gained a valuable chance to grow.6 Then Reformation, against the moral corruption of the Catholic Church and the sham of the dualistic opposite of soul and body, advocated “justification by faith” and religious tolerance and rejected the absolute authority of and the spiritual control by the Church.7 Therefore, science got rid of the spiritual restriction of theology. Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th century in Europe further fulfilled the ideological liberation of Western European.8 Reason replaced faith and theology receded into the background. Modern science emerged as the times require.

The intellectual revolutions above are the main causes for the rise of modern science, but in the final analysis, the origins are from the collapse of Christian theological worldview and the rise of the scientific worldview. It is obvious that the collapse of Christian theological worldview was going with a series of the intellectual revolutions-Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment. But generally speaking, it could be explained in terms of the inherent problems of Christian theological worldview within and the assault of “heterodox” thoughts from outside.

First, the system of medieval scholasticism that wholly made a stand for Christian theology, although it tried to shorten the huge gap between reason and faith, yet because of its insistence on “faith superior to reason”, finally could not keep the balance and harmony between faith and reason. On the one hand, J. D. Scotus’ theory of “double truth” accelerated the departure of faith and reason.9 On the other hand, mysticism contended a direct encounter and mystical union with God, such as J. Eckhart said “God and soul were neither unaquainted nor far away, so soul was not only consistent with God, but identical with God.”10 Mysticism distained all secular affairs, consequently, theological dualistic worldview was transformed into a transcendental monistic worldview which refused any intervention of human reason. W. Ockham’s nominalism argued against the doctrines made up by scholasticism and the arguments of God’s existence. His principle of simplicity known as “Ockham’s razor” contended that “what can be explained on fewer principles is explained needlessly by more”11, which became a “prodder putting medieval theological system into disintegration.”12 Consequently, Western European in the late Middle Ages lost their confidence in Christian theological worldview and began to resort to reason.

Secondly, Copernicus’ heliocentricism affected the worldview of the current scientists and philosophers in Renaissance and geocentricism of the theological worldview was seriously challenged. Human lost the superiority constructed by Christian theology in the cosmos and the dualistic relation between heaven and the world was loose. Scientists at that time e.g. Galileo only regarded God as prime efficient cause of the physical world and deprived God of the title of final cause. Therefore, the power and the omnipotence of God were questioned. Other scientists such as Bruno because of the influence of scientific explore, mostly adopted a pantheistic position as a substitute of the theological dualistic worldview. Meanwhile, a tendency in modern philosophy gradually emerged to cooperate with science to rationalize the world. For example, Descartes “first made use of God’s existence for the objectivity and actuality of the physical world and then locked God into coffer and explained the structure of the world in a scientific view.”13 As for the problem of the transcendental world in theology was “hanged” and became a “pseudo-problem”. The pantheistic metaphysics of Spinoza excluded the existence of the transcendental world, which also gave a deathblow to the dualistic theological worldview. On the other hand, the empiricism initiated by Locke developed to Hume became a radical positivism of skepticism, which ultimately denied spiritual substance and the existence of causal necessity and denied all the attempts of the arguments of God’s existence through human reason and empirical facts, which greatly fluctuated the basis of theology. Kant’s theory of the antinomies and critical rational theology contended that the transcendental world or noumenal world, the existence of God and the immortality of soul could not be proved, consequently, theology was excluded from human knowledge. Hegel’s rationalistic dialectic metaphysics regarded the variational process of the real world as the self-unfolding of absolute spirit and transformed the dualistic worldview into absolute idealism. The dualistic worldview was eventually discarded and Christian theological beliefs were evanesced in Hegel’s system. Thus, reason won the advantage over faith and the scientistic worldview instead of the theological dualistic worldview became the dominant ideology of Western European.

The rise of modern science could not begin until the traditional dualistic worldview was transformed, because weltanschauung is the ultimate understanding of the world or human life of people, which is able to potentially predominate the ultimate attitude toward and activities in life of thinkers, social workers and even the masses in a region. That is, only if the traditional theological worldview was replaced by a new reason-based worldview viz. the scientistic worldview, the rise of modern science could have ultimate assurance. In a word, the origins for the rise of modern science were the collapse of the theological dualistic worldview and the predominance of the scientific worldview.

The conversion from theology to science has both positive and negative impacts on Western history. After walking up on the fast lane of scientific development, the realistic life of Western European was greatly improved, the material civilization was rapidly progressed, the explore of nature and geography was continuously advanced and technology was dramatically reformed. Thence, Western countries made a continuous progress whereas Eastern countries fell far behind. The influence of the conversion from theology to science is unmeasurable, just as historian H. Butterfield pointed out on this problem: “The impact on the world culture of the rise of modern science in the 17th century could only be mentioned in the same breath with the rise of Christianity in the first century.”14 However, it does not mean that this conversion doesn’t have any negative impact on Western European. “Weltanschauung can be thought as a sort of comprehensive experience that most potentially affects the cultural atmosphere e.g. academic ideas, life styles, living attitudes and so on of any country and sociaty.”15 Accordingly, when the weltanschauung of the people in a region undergoes a right-about or fundamental conversion, the academic culture and life attitudes and behaviors will have holistic changes.

Because the traditional dualistic worldview was the dominant ideology from the Aristotle to the late Middle Ages, in which Western European soaked themselves and took it for granted all the time, the spiritual crisis of Western European was coming on the just day the theological worldview collapsed. In the context that the theological worldview nodded to its fall and nihilism was widespread around, Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky and Nietzsche etc. in 19th century inaugurated the philosophical ideas of existentialism in coincidence to save the spiritual crisis and get back the lost psychic home of Western European.

Danish philosopher Kierkegaard’s existentialistic thought was a critical reaction to Hegel’s rationalism, which rejected Hegel’s neglect of theology and the problem of faith and contended that theological knowledge and Christian beliefs are subjective truth that can not be evanesced in universal objective knowledge. He thought that rationalist Hegel and the like holded the position of the supremacy of reason and reduced the transcendental world into abstract idea, which obliterated the paradoxicality (truth as subjectivity) of theology and the non-rationality (not congruent with reason but with feelings and faith) of the dualistic worldview. Russian novelist Dostoevsky discovered the problem of fate of existence after the collapse of the theological worldview. In his novels from Crime and Punishment to The Brothers Karamazov, he discussed how to seek the spiritual way out after the comedown of faith in God. He implied that except Christian theology and beliefs, Western people could not find a savior for their spiritual crisis. Another initiator of existentialism and also a representative figure of philosophy of Will Nietzsche, though likewise criticizing rationalism, pushed the theological dualistic worldview into collapse at the same time. From the assumption of “God is dead” (Nietzsche really believed that Western European had lost the theological worldview.), he claimed that all traditional morality, philosophies and theologies must be revalued with the collapse of the dualistic worldview. New values and ideals should be established by the Superperson who can harmonize the animal nature with the intellect and keep a balance between Dionysian and Apollonian elements. His theory of the Will to Power is the foundation of his philosophy of the Superperson.16

From the argument above, it is obvious that the conversion from theology to science, though brought high material civilization to the Western world, yet also produced deep spiritual crisis for Western people. The scientistic worldview in the extreme would regard reason as the unique standard to evaluate all values and exclude any other “unscientistic” worldviews, which would further reject the value and meaning of faith and affection and completely alienate people from the consciousness of existence. Furthermore, the development of scientific theories would have stimulated the improvement of productive technologies, which would increasingly enhance the danger of the scientific technicalization. And the maximum danger of the scientific technicalization is to eliminate reason of value by value of instrument and let people to forget the problem of existence of themselves and become the average “massman” or the “common herd” degenerated from the true and individual existence in the mathematically mechanical process. In the context of religious externalization and secularization, the true Christian beliefs disappeared while the theological dualistic worldview lost its original meaning.

It is undoubted that there exist some incompatibilities between theology and science. Science (in narrow sense natural science) is the knowledge of the physical world, which mainly explains phenomena and laws of things; while theology is the knowledge of the immaterial world, which chiefly resolves the problem of faith and the transcendental world (God and heaven). Since the late Middle Ages especially modern times, “the contradiction and conflicts in relations between science and theology have been so serious that people always oppose them with each other that apparently cannot coexist.”17 We do not deny the cruel oppression on science exerted by theology in the Middle Ages and the tremendous impact on theology made by science in modern times, however, science and theology are not always “oil and vinegar” and not capable of being conciliated. In fact, a number of eminent scientists- Isaac Newton, M. Faraday, C. Maxwell, Albert Einstein and many academicians of the Royal Society etc. all have deep faith in Christian belief or interest in theology. Some scientists even consider that science and theology are coherent and they fulfill the same mission through distinct approaches.18 In recent years, the dialogue between science and theology have been paid increasing attention to both by scientists and theologians or philosophers of religion and various theories of the relations between science and theology or religion have been presented successively. Wang Pisheng of Hong Kong Baptist University claims that the dialogue between science and theology in recent years is not a new and rare phenomenon but a long and continuous tradition.19 He also indicated that many top scientists today are aware of the importance to learn from philosophy and theology, not only to have a deeper insight into the significance of the scientific work, but also to seek a breakthrough in their scientific research. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that science and theology have a basis of coexistence and harmonization. If the two both understand their limits and the conjunct significance to human existence, a phase of science and theology in harmony is hopefully to come.

After experiencing the tragedies of the two World Wars and the spread of nihilism and hedonism after the Wars, people in the New Century can still not enjoy the peaceful life from the flying development of science. The threats of the weapons of massive destruction and nuclear warfare and the crime of terrorists who killed the innocent through modern scientific technology, all of these have strengthened the uneasiness, insecurity and anxiety of people directly or indirectly. And that the tsunami aroused by the earthquake on the Indian Ocean devitalized thousands of lives at the end of last year and a trail of disasters-Pakistani earthquake, hurricanes in North America, hog cholera and birds’ flu and so on latter, have made it clear that science is not omnipotent confronted with those fearful disasters; while the global humanitarian succors unprecedented since the beginning of this year have just indicated that faith and affection are the spiritual springs of human peace and solidarity. It gives us a profound revelation: the tensions and conflicts between science and theology are not beneficial to human peace and development while the mutual-complement and reconciliation between them are probably the best salvation to help people above water. Just as Paul Tillich says in his Culture of Theology, “They should not be separated from each other; they should be aware that their isolated existence is dangerous.”20

A. N. Whitehead thinks that religious symbols endow human with the meaning of life; scientific modes endue people with the capability to reform nature. The influences of religion and science are so tremendous that the orientation of human history in the future is decided by how modern people look on the relations between science and religion. It shows clearly that theology and science are both the spiritual pillars indispensable of human development. We need ‘God’, as well as ‘Newton’. Both of them are rooted in the basis of human inner world and point to the ultimate concern for human beings. Been aware of this, conflicts between science and theology would be overcome and science and theology both would rediscover their true existence in the mental life of human and endow man with ultimate meaning, creative wisdom and courage to love.

Note:

1 F. Engels in Dialectic of Nature(zi ran bian zheng fa): “Natural science sent its martyrs to the stake and the prison of Inquisition.” Exactly speaking, it is Christian church that sent scientific martyrs to the stake and jail.

2 Fu Weixun, From Western Philosophy to Zen Buddhism, 1989, p158.

3 As Bertrand Russell says in A History of Western Philosophy: “Plato’s philosophy is based on the distinction between reality and phenomenon.”

4 Sammuel Enoch Stumpf & James Fieser, Socrates to Sartre and Beyond A History of Philosophy, Seventh Edition, 2003, p55.

5 Aristotle believed that God as pure idea, happiness and complete self-actualization is eternal and doesn’t have any purpose that is not fulfilled; contrarily, the sensible world is unperfect, has life and desire, and belongs to the impure idea. The idea as well represents his dualistic outlook.

6 It is asserted in A History of Europe written by 11 European historians that God and heaven were seen as the center of thought in the Middle Ages, but Renaissance drew the attention of people to man and the real world. This conversion had an impact on science. Since then, theology lost its superiority and the interest in human and nature prevailed.

7 Luther says: “Each Christian can interpret the Bible in his own way”, which is against ecclesiastical authority, because only the Church has the power to interpret the Bible and its interpretation is the unique right one.

8 It is claimed in A History of Europe that nature according to its own law of development will result in a perfect world, so the religious and political interventions of human should be minimum…reason requests man to develop in nature, which shows the importance of reason in the research of nature.

9 Wollf comments on Scotus’ theory of “double truth” that it undoubtedly promoted the worldly research enterprise.

10 Paul Tillich, Theology of Culture, 1988.

11 Samuel Enoch Stumpf & James Fieser, Socrates to Sartre and Beyond A History of Philosophy, 7th Edit., 1966, 2003, p. 185.

12 Fu Weixun, From Western Philsophy to Zen Buddhism, 1989, p.161.

13 idem, p. 162.

14 Wang Pisheng, “Science seeks God: the new phenomena of the dialogue between science and theology”, Report of the Research Center of Chinese Christian Religions, Second Issue, 2002.

15 Said by Fu Weixun.

16 Nietzsche writes, “I regard Christianity as the most fatal and seductive lie that has ever yet existed – as the greatest and most impious lie”, which is a fatal blame on the slavish morality of Christianity.

17 Dong Xiaochuan, “Science and theology: the two pillars of Modern American Civilization”, [http://xueshu.newyouth.beida-online.com/data/data.ph3]

18 idem.

19 Wang Pisheng, “Science seeks God: the new phenomena of the dialogue between science and theology”.

20 Paul Tillich, Theology of Culture.

Alex Mingchuan Tu, Postgraduate of Research Institute of Chinese Intellectual and Cultual History, Wuhan, China P.R. 430062

No related posts.

By: Magrietha Du Plessis

Do you want your kids to love science? If so, make sure they do science fair projects kids will find fun. Kids will not be interested in projects that are not very visual and that are not very easy to do. They want to see the results in a very short time, I’ve seen that over and over again with my little granddaughter Anabel. She loses interest very soon if things are moving too slow!

So, here is a science fair projects kids will find fun and easy. It actually is two experiments that can be done, first the one and on the next day the other so it does not take too long.

Does air take up space?

The case of the dry tissue paper

After you have done this experiment you should be able to answer the following questions:

• How does the tissue paper feel after the first part of the experiment?
• What do you see when you turn the glass slightly?
• What causes these bubbles?
• What happens to the tissue paper now?
• What do you think stopped the tissue paper from getting whet the first time?
• What was there between the tissue paper and the water?
• Look around, is there air around you?
• Can you see the air?

What you need for your project:

• One tissue
• A glass
• A bowl
• Water

How to do this experiment:

1. First you have to crumple the tissue and place it in the bottom of the glass making sure there is a relatively big space between the rim of the glass and the tissue.
2. Now you have to turn the glass up side down and submerge it in the water making sure you keep it completely vertical.
3. Take the glass out of the water and feel the tissue.
4. Now do the same, but turn the glass slightly so the air can escape.
5. Take it out again and feel the tissue.
6. Now and try all the questions on top.

Conclusion:

Air takes up space and it is all around us.

The tissue stays dry in the first part because the air between the water and the tissue prevent the water from reaching it and making it whet.

In the second part you allowed the air to escape and water could fill that space left by the escaping air. The air was not there to form a layer between the water and the tissue any more, so the water reached the tissue and made it whet.

The case of the airlock

After you have completed this, one of our science fair projects kids will love to do, you should be able to answer the following questions:

1. What do you do when you seal the opening of the bottle with the adhesive clay?
2. What happens when you pour the water in the funnel while the bottle is sealed?
3. Why do you think it happens?
4. Why doesn’t the air escape through the opening in the funnel?
5. Why do you keep the top opening of the straw closed at first?
6. What happens when you take away your finger after you have inserted the straw in the opening of the funnel?
7. Why do you think it happens?
8. What does it tell you about the properties of the water as well as the air?

What you need for this experiment:

• A funnel with a short stem
• A bottle with an opening that the funnel fist snuggly in
• Adhesive clay
• A straw
• A jug
• Water

What to do:

1. Place the funnel in the bottle
2. Seal the rim of the bottle with adhesive clay making sure it is completely sealed and no air can escape
3. Put the water in a jug and pour some of it into your funnel and observe what happens.
4. Now you take the straw and while keeping one end closed with your finger, push it into the funnel.
5. Remove your finger
6. Observe what happens now

Conclusion:

The air in the bottle is trapped and prevents the water from running into the bottle. No air can escape through the water as the water molecules in the opening of the funnel because of the surface tension in the water. (What is this?) When you insert the straw in the bottle, you hold one opening closed to prevent the water from the funnel to go into the straw. When the straw is through the water layer and you remove your finger, the air in the bottle can escape through the straw and the water starts pouring into the bottle.

These two science fair projects kids will love to do can be turned into a very good science fair project. Pay attention to the scientific method and your display.

Do you know all the steps for science fair projects kids can do? Do not fear, you can get all the info you need, have a look at Magrietha’s site. For even more info you can also have a look at our blog for science fair projects kids can do.

No related posts.

By: Rosie W

Firstly I will start by explaining Ein-O Science before I move on to the tanks. Ein-O Science is a great range of toys or kits designed for children to discover science and have fun doing so. They are manufactured by TEDCO in the USA. The company is owned by Marjorie Teetor Meyer, the Meyer family and some of the employee’s are shareholders. The company places great emphasis on manufacturing scientific and educational toys like the original TEDCO Gyroscope. As a company they are committed to developing top quality toys that promote creativity, education, and fun. So you can be reassured that when you purchase an Ein-O Science Discovery Tank you are getting a well-researched, quality product. In fact the discovery tanks are considered one of their classics and they remain a popular choice.

The Ein-O Science Discovery Tanks are boxes measuring 6.8 x 3.2 x 8.8 inches and they are available in 6 themes:

1. Marine
2. Space
3. Mechanics
4. Magnetism
5. Nature
6. Optics

Each box has different contents related to the particular science theme your young scientist can explore with that tank. One item they all have in common is the “Ein-O I know Science Guide”specific to each topic and providing a great introduction for beginning scientists. These discovery science kits are an excellent resource for homeschooling families as they can be used multiple times and by younger siblings. They are also useful for children who need to present at school science fairs. The manufacturers recommended age is for 7 years and up, however a bright younger child would have no problems particularly if supervised.

So what exactly is in the tanks?

In the Optical Insight tank you get the pieces to build your own telescope and periscope as well as play a variety of optical games. Learn about all things magnetic with the Magnet Science Discovery Tank, iron filings, magnets and building pieces. The Space Science tank would not be complete without models of an astronaut, a satellite, and of course the essential star chart. To learn about Mechanical Science you need the essential scale and weights. Dive into Marine Science and study the 3D model fish, shells, and use specimen boxes with magnifying lids to study your own collected specimens. A favourite tank with children is the Nature Discovery Tank because kids love being outdoors. The bug net, jars and specimen containers with lids will allow your little scientist to get busy in the outdoors learning about their environment.

Visit website for these and more great ideas from Discovery Science Toys

No related posts.

Space fancy dress costumes, which are worn at costume parties throughout the year, come in two main categories: those that are science based and those that are science fiction based.

By science based, I mean space fancy dress outfits that have been inspired by real life events, such as the space race and the moon landings. Meanwhile, science fiction based outfits are those space fancy dress costumes that have been inspired by books, films, television series or other works of fiction.

Below are three space costume ideas that are out of this world, two of which are science fiction based, followed by one that is based on real events.

Star Trek – Spock Outfit

Based on the outfit worn by Mr. Spock in the 2009 blockbuster film, Star Trek, this iconic blue science fiction top, with its embroidered chest badge and golden braid on the cuff, is an extremely authentic looking costume.

There are of course some great accessories to go with your Mr. Spock outfit, including an officially licensed Star Trek Spock wig and a pair of official Mr. Spock ears.

Star Wars – Stormtrooper Outfit

The official Stormtrooper costume is based around a black jumpsuit, which has been embellished with cream coloured EVA moulded pieces across the front. Also included with the Stormtrooper costume is a matching cream coloured EVA moulded belt, which can be fastened with adjustable white material ties around the waist.

The Stormtrooper outfit is completed by a two-piece black and white helmet, whi

Space Race – White NASA Astronaut Suit

The National Air and Space Museum (NASA) outfit is based around a deluxe one-piece white jumpsuit with a faux-leather padded collar, chest and waist harness buckles, and embroidered badges on the chest and sleeves, which include a ‘NASA’ logo and a United States flag.

Accessories that you can buy to go with this awesome space fancy dress costume include a sturdy PVC helmet, with a push button retractable visor, a communication receiver, a mock boom microphone and an oxygen vent.

You can also purchase a realistic looking NASA bag, for holding all your space gear in, and a pair of realistic looking space boot covers, with NASA logos and patches and a special zipped compartment.

So where should you go for these space fancy dress outfits?

The Space Fancy Dress section of Fancy Dress UK reviews a range of space costumes, including those mentioned in this article.

A Word Or Two About The Author

Dan Fresh is a lifelong fancy dress aficionado who regularly writes for the popular Fancy Dress UK website.

No related posts.

If you have been trying to sell your timeshare for a few months without luck, there are probably a couple of things that you have been doing wrong:

1. Asking too much for your property
2. Advertising it in the wrong places
3. Depending on real estate agents to take care of it

You see, when it comes to selling a property, location is the most important factor and then the asking price for the sale. It is obvious that a timeshare in Cancun will sell easier and for more money than one in Colorado simply because it has wider appeal. But even when your resort is not in a prime location, you can still manage to sell it fast by pricing it correctly.

Without a doubt, the most powerful tool you have when it comes to selling your timeshare is the internet. The truth of the matter is that 2 out of 3 people who sell their timeshares fast have used the web in order to do so:

• You can find the current market value for your property simply by entering your contact information and resort name. These services are free, but very valuable indeed.
• You can use auction sites in order to advertise your property in having thousands of potential buyers look at your property. You must be able to show photos and have accurate description of all the amenities though.

Look, using the previous 2 tips, plus getting help from a realtor that specializes in timeshare sales, you can get out of your timeshare commitments in a matter of weeks instead of

The next step is to Click Here to find out what your timeshare is worth and Get Cash For Your Timeshare Fast. This is 100% FREE and you will get great information from a trusted reputable company dealing with timeshare sales.

No related posts.

The time has come to re-evaluate unexplainable and “unscientific” discoveries and disciplines with radically new paradigms that better reflect the needs of modern man. The current principles of technological science must be examined to see if they still function in Humanities best interest. To apply Newtonian concepts and three dimensional logic to disciplines like Astrology of discoveries like ESP, neutrinos and black holes is going to cause science to blunder into a philosophical cul-de-sac where it will have to draw useless and ridiculous conclusions that will make good Sci-Fi plots but will retard human evolution.

Our needs at this point in Humanity’s evolution are not for more and more sophisticated missiles, computers, and electronic gadgets but rather for a purpose and reason for man to continue to evolve on earth. The main paradigm of science since Newton has been to dominate and control out total environment for our own needs and desires. The fact that these desires were usually selfish, nationalistic and petty has not stopped science (and its handmaiden technology) from pushing humans to the brink of extinction. It is apparent that science in its 200 year quest to create a world of good and plenty has neglected to set any conceptual goals of limits in its search.As the myth of man’s superiority over his environment crumbles, science has neglected to look for a replacement, and consequently it continues to use the same old solutions for an entirely new set of problems.

As the 20th century comes to an end, the scienti

Potentially valuable disciplines like Yoga, Astrology, and acupuncture are discarded using this logic.This thought is further reinforced by a corollary principle that says if something does not have the potential to either make someone rich of fulfill a paranoid need for collective protection it is not worth pursuing. Solar energy suffers under the former and the Pentagon thrives on the latter.A more esoteric and obsolete principle of science that is rarely defined is the assumption that present knowledge is the culmination of a long trail of experimentation and error. The scientists of Galileo’s time felt that the earth was the center of the solar system. They “proved” it according to their subjective notions, and felt that the idea was “right”.We smugly look back and consider the acceptance of the heliocentric solar system as a naive but necessary step in our attempt to understand the solar system, which we now consider completely understood. It is obvious if you think about it that our current knowledge is no more complete in an absolute sense than that of Copernicus. His theory was a big step above Galileo just as Galileo was a big step above Cro-Magnon’s.

There is no real reason to believe that a different model of the solar system might not be discovered which will make our present knowledge seem just as naive as Galileo.Another paradigm that is obsolete is the statement that an observable fact is more valid than a subjective one. The word valid in this context is defined as being useful for social or personal growth enhancement.One fact that comes to mind that is not particularly valid is that the earth is round. We all know it’s round, but subjectively, seeing it as flat is just as valid. Deep down we do not believe that is round anyway, otherwise we would be afraid of going to Australia; as we might fall off into space. Considering the world subjectively as flat has no disadvantages and in fact is more useful for our functional conception of the world.Another related fact that has no practical meaning to our everyday life is that the sun is the center of the solar system and the earth revolves around it at 17,000 mph. A moments thought will convince anybody that we are forced by our senses to deny this as we see the sun revolving around the earth and consider the earth as being stationery.Any fact has to be looked at in this manner. As the meaning of facts is relative to our sense of reality. Considering the earth as the relative center of the solar system enabled humanity to utilize the earth’s biosphere in a functional practical manner, as the concept of day, month, and growing season are easier to conceptualize assuming the sun revolves around the earth. It turns out that the only use a heliocentric conception of the solar system has is in esoteric technological abstractions such as launching space ships and satellites.

It must be stated that I am not advocating the re-acceptance of the geocentric solar system, rather, I am presenting the idea that both views are valid for different things, and for science to totally disregard the subjective aspects of observable phenomena is not in humanities best interest.Another attitude of science that is no longer functional is that present knowledge is always valid and anything new must be subjected to years of proving and analysis to be accepted. The introduction of antiseptic procedures and anesthetics into medicine are two of the most famous examples.The paradigms that I have mentioned are not all inclusive, as science has many more that could be changed. It must be understood that I am not advocating the examination and editing of every scientific axiom, but rather a change of perspective about scientific discoveries that would put the accent on what humanity needs a opposed to what it wants.The elimination of these various principle and axioms automatically implies establishing new ones.

The ones I just mentioned were relevant and useful in their time frame, and grew out of the experience of humans during different periods that make this period ideal for reformulating our most basic scientific concepts.The first new principles I propose is that a discovery of theory will be accepted and disseminated if it shows a definite potential to fulfill a social need. Society as an entity often asks questions in its own way. The answer to these questions is best met by the symbol. A theory should be judged by its symbolic power to either alter humanities perception or to fulfill a collective need. The idea of ” proving” it should be secondary. As a corollary to this principal, I propose that a scientific discovery or theory be submitted to other disciplines for analysis. If artists and philosophers could have had a say in the use of napalm, a lot of human suffering might have been avoided.Another principle that I feel would enable science to arrive at more valid conclusions to today’s phenomena would be to accept the idea that our three dimensional world is real, but does not encompass reality. This statement has been accepted as fact for years by all occult societies, some religions, and many philosophers. The scientists have dealt with it by ignoring it.

The physics of sub-atomic particles would be the obvious place for this principle to be applied. Two of the established conclusions of this discipline already postulate that atoms, which compose ” solid” objects are mostly space, and are moving rapidly and that matter is not an actual substance but rather a particular form of energy.Throughout history, visions, ideas, and dreams, although not ” real ” have altered the world and its people. Concepts like the Jewish state, Christianity, and Communism are three of the best examples. If science could accept ideas like ESP and telepathy without insisting on three dimensional proof, our world might progress differently.A companion to the above principle is that phenomena that is experienced by senses other than the obvious five be considered to have an equal potential for becoming valid and useful. Carl Jung’s dream analysis and the ideas of Robert Assagioli offer tremendous potential for improving psychology’s usefulness if they could be applied with a more pragmatic attitude.These new principles of science would only be a start. Using them would cause a weakening of the uniqueness of the scientific method.

The positive aspects would be to make science more closely aligned with the other evolutionary disciplines of art and philosophy. The potential of such a synthetic discipline formed from the best aspects of art, philosophy, science and mathematics would be tremendous. Such a discipline could be called homosynthesis and would be ideal for humanities apparent future needs.As things stand now, the implications of today’s discoveries will become more and more unreal and fantastic if we continue using present phenomena, the further examination of such ” scientific” discoveries as black holes and quarks must be done within a less rigid framework in order for them to ever become meaningful for humanity. At present, the conclusion that ” modern science” has drawn from them sounds ridiculous. Black holes imply a disappearance of time, matter, and space itself out of the universe possess a quality so exotic that it is referred to as “charm”, for want of a better word. Neutrinos have no mass, no charge and do not leave a trail in a bubble chamber, yet science admits their existence.

Using some of the principles I have postulated would be a good start to make some sense out of the apparent nonsense described above.People look to science for many of the myths we use to give subjective meaning to our existence. The myth that humans have the wisdom and ability to distort natural processes without any negative effects has strongly defined our reality over the last fifty years. Another one is that humans have an infinite capacity for wisdom, and that the rapid application of every scientific discovery, regardless of our understanding of the affects of the implications, is in our best interest.The new principles that I have proposed could lead to new myths. The idea that an individual is part of something beyond his comprehension can lead to an intelligent humility that would convert man from a paranoid antagonist against an unknown foe to an enlightened part of a vast cosmic whole. Instead of seeing things like black holes and quarks as fantastic outside concepts attacking our cherished notions, we could accept them as doors that open into a higher level of cosmic integration. We could become conscious cooperators in our own evolution, with each new discovery leading us to another in a never ending path toward our ultimate destiny.

William Rice

No related posts.

Space and Planetary Sciences definitely sounds like an interesting study. The study focuses on universes, planets, moons, Solar system and planet systems. Those who want to pursue a PhD in Space and Planetary Sciences, the subjects that need to be covered are advanced studies of statistical physics, geochemistry, geophysics, planet science theories, space physics and observational astronomy. Other subjects in the doctorate may also include space exploration, aerospace engineering and astrobiology. It should be clarified that it is a different and specified field from astronomy. One who desire to take up this PhD must have a background in physics studies. This doctorate is a difficult study yet it also allows the student face the challenges in exploring and developing skills. One should also be expected to practice many problems solving and analysis.

Those who earn a PhD in Space and Planetary Sciences could land themselves in jobs like astronomer, geophysicist, spacecraft engineer, scientist or researcher. They would either work with the government or private businesses that are related to space science and planetary science. Other may choose jobs like research advisor or professor in universities which one still makes use of the knowledge of space and planetary sciences.

Those who earn a PhD in Space and Planetary Sciences do benefits humankind by the exploration of space and the planets. Currently there are still many efforts to find life other than on earth. Such mission is important in planning for the future of human race. Discoveri

Dennis enjoys writing on wide range of topics such as Space Sciences PhD and PhD Space Sciences. You may visit for more details.

No related posts.