In creating this site my primary goal is to better understand HTML and web-design – the content is simply notes I have compiled from the various sources listed – MUCH OF THE MATERIAL IS TRANSCRIBED DIRECTLY FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCES.
When producing an index, although I did the background reading – as an example I was aided by the referenced ‘Discarded Science’ that provided a detailed account of some of the more bizarre ideas of pseudoscience, helping to distinguish between the accepted versions of ‘Truth’ and mere opinion or theory (Ideas based upon Darwinian evolution and the alternative theories serve readily to illustrate this dichotomy) – when compiling the text I chose to use the original authors’ words.
There is no intention to produce anything more than a list of ideas, ranging from the ancient to the modern, which could assist the reader in an understanding of the origins and development of a contemporary view of science, without introducing the esoteric or advanced concepts which are the logical development of the basic ideas explored. It is not meant to be a finalised introduction to modern thinking on science, nor a text to illustrate the concepts as applied practically with the attendant mathematics or proofs.
In editing the material, I have inevitably introduced my view of the world and I emphasise that is all that is produced here – the interested reader must conduct further research into the topics covered, via the links provided and beyond. I insist that this is essential and necessary before an understanding of any of the science is to be gained. None of the material is original and it is not presented as scientific fact, the student must conduct further research and investigate experimental evidence before forming their own conclusions – I simply wish to raise some of the questions that have intrigued me and present some of the theoretical answers I have stumbled across in my own investigations, hopefully without ambiguity or bias.
While developing this site I increasingly became aware of the need to clarify the use of scientific English.
It was initially as a means of refreshing acquaintance with the mathematics that I embarked on the project, for before I could move on to the concept of force, or to studies of electricity, magnetism or Maxwell’s field equations, I wished to know, well exactly what are the forces of gravity or electromagnetism? In order to tackle the equations of power and energy and before I could be happy with given calculations of experimental results, I felt a need to update my understanding of the definitions of such terms as energy; power; or work. Although I am fully aware and respectful of the use of mathematics as the language of science, there is little, or no, mathematics here. (In part because my HTML exercise threw up the problems inherent in presenting scientific equations in web-pages without error or the use of graphic images.)
Whilst all good popular science primers will outline the difference, for example, between speed and velocity; as a non-scientist I realised that perhaps my ideas of exactly what – as another example – heat IS, could not be answered without recourse to the mathematics. In my spare time I thus embarked on the quest to investigate some of these ‘commonly understood’ concepts and to compile the results of my research in English, without using maths to elucidate by example. During the course of compiling notes, I could not avoid referring to some basic mathematical models – but I hope that I have introduced these only as an interesting adjunct to the main text, without appearing to obfuscate. By turning to Greek philosophy I hoped to be able to clarify where ideas on atomic theory in chemistry and material science may have originated, and finally, with such a wide-ranging study, theology raises its own questions. geoff neilsen March 2016.