Before you explore the whodunit, and jump to conclusions, please ask yourself if you are interested in what is regarded here as the next questions in (plant) science, even if you disagree with the suggested answers on the website.
The first one is: Why is nobody interested in the data showing a plant is NOT growing exponentially in the beginning, whereas this a broad spread idea in plant science (since 1915). It is puzzling and is an example of science not checking the data enough and jumping to conclusions. A lot of plant growth modelling starts from this wrong assumption. It is extra puzzling, because biology tends to get the tiniest detail right in describing individual phenomena. Why is this not the case in this generalization?
A second question arose while trying to get interest in the first one and is now, at least from a philosophical viewpoint, the real next question in science:
Why do we explain the dead world with fundamental forces so totally different from those in the living world? This is especially peculiar as the dead world scientists, the physicists, are convinced that they will discover the Universal Theory……without explaining live. They define 4 fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetic, weak nuclear and strong nuclear force) to explain the physical dead world from the smallest particles up to the largest stellar constructions. In between, on a medium scale, life emerges and suddenly these 4 forces are forgotten and 5 other fundamental forces give a physical phenomenon, what life still is, a direction in time: (Evolution Theory) The will to be, the will to grow, the will to compete, the will to reproduce, the will to transfer information.….. and they have to appear at the same time by change. This wonder, this idea of an accident, is maybe supported by the fact that we did not find other life yet in the universe. But even the dead world physicists don’t accept, according their newest insights, the idea of coincidence fully. They use another force.……a not (!?) fundamental force, dissipation, to make the emergence of life almost inevitable. How the five forces of life emerge in this so-called change of entropy stays unclear. So, we have 4 fundamental forces needing a not fundamental force to create the 5 fundamental forces of life.
It makes urge to answer the second question only bigger: Don’t we need a side hypothesis to investigate if it is possible to explain both the dead and living world as driven by the same fundamental forces? Of course, a biologist will propose to start with the evolution forces: They are more expressed as starting point for existence: the force to be, the force to be more, the force (the other) not to be, the force to reproduce, the force to transfer information. They would rephrase the second question as follows: Is Evolution Theory also applicable to the dead world?
Notice, if you judge this idea to be ridiculous, consider, first, Einstein’s quote “If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it”. Secondly, a proof is almost necessary in the development of the Universal Theory, to show that Evolution Theory is not essential input, but just an accidental output; It implicates for example that the dead world, while not doing itself, generated …. a competing world (often until death): life. Why? How?
Notice, maybe you already guessed it: The questions are combined, see the website.
The whodunit is much less interesting: He is one person, having a degree in a biological science. He worked his entirely life in another area. Near retirement he is trying to answer two questions bothering him since his graduation. Maybe some people (preferably working in science) will help him.
If you want to do so, please email to:
email (use this link for an email).
Note: If the link doesn’t work (e.g. in Outlook) use the address after mailto in the link as the send-to address in your email application.
Please, a serious discussion is requested, preferably with scientists, in a serene atmosphere. In this respect the following privacy statement is operational.
Serious emails will lead to a dialogue and personal contact. Emails and email adresses will only stored to proceed with these serious dialogues. Other emails will be deleted as soon as possible. At any time you can stop a dialogue and ask to delete the relevant emails and addresses. Your emails will not be forwarded without your permission. Itisatobe is not collecting individual data about visits. It is only counting visits as a total per page.
Of course, the idea is to move the discussion to the right scientific environments.