In one of the letters written to the Infeld group in Warsaw Einstein wrote:
"A new manner of thinking is essential if humankind is to survive."

  
         Foundations in Physics

========================================================
PRECIS OF RD. EXTERNAL FOUNDATIONS IN PHYSICS.
========================================================
REFERENTIALS AND POLARITY

Galileo measured the speed of falling objects with 
reference to a conveniently chosen object neutral with 
respect to the experiment, i.e. immobile: the tower of 
Pisa.  Yet, is it really immobile? It is certainly 
immobile with respect to the earth crust, which we 
propose to call the REFERENTIAL of the experiment (see 
ref1: Glossary). Yet, the earth crust itself is far from 
absolute immobility: it turns around the earth axle, 
together with the earth around the sun, together with the 
solar system around the galactic center, etc. Rather than 
some single object moving with respect to some other 
immobile one, we seem to face a series of objects, or, as 
we proposed to call them, referentials moving with respect 
to one another.
 
Consequently, Galileo's experiment is not absolute, but 
relative to the referential earth crust which itself is 
moving, but whose movements are disregarded. Therefore, 
in absolute terms it's conclusions are wrong: we cannot 
be absolutely sure about a value which we measure with 
help of some inexact reference. Reliable knowledge seems 
to require an absolute referential. But we have just seen, 
that such referential, absolutely immobile, absolutely 
neutral with respect to all kinematic experiments does 
not exist in practice. Should we conclude that reliable 
knowledge is impossible?
 
Now, in the case of Galileo's experiment the error 
resulting from assuming earth crust as immobile is 
negligible. We may loosen the requirement of referential's 
absolute neutrality by accepting it to be pertinent when 
the errors resulting from its participation in a particular 
experiment are negligible. Such acceptable referential 
may be called PERTINENT. For many current experiments the 
referential earth crust is pertinent. This assumption is 
the base of our daily praxis. It maintains its validity 
for restricted areas of science, such as low speed 
mechanics. Now we may say that, while absolute knowledge 
is impossible, reliable approximate knowledge is possible 
as long as it refers to pertinent referentials.   
========================================================

POLAR DIPOLE AND DIALECTIC DICHOTOMY.
What we just said for physical experiments can be 
generalized over the whole human existence: an absolute 
phenomenon cannot be conceived, let alone experienced. 
It coexists necessarily with some other phenomenon:
the phenomenal structure is POLAR.

The concept of polarity may be very simply illustrated 
with the example of magnetism. A magnetic pole, say the 
positive one, is a concrete entity with specific physical 
properties: it attracts or pushes away other poles, 
respectively negative and positive, it generates, when
moved, electric field, etc. Nevertheless, it is not 
autonomous and exists only in connection with a negative 
pole. A magnetic bar with a positive and a negative 
extremity, when cut in the middle does not produce a 
negative and a positive half-bar, but two smaller 
magnetic bars, each provided with both opposite poles.

We shall see in further chapters that polar dipole is 
a fundamental structure of human existence and cognition.
Still, POLARITY and (POLAR) DIPOLE do not always sound
well: they seem to imply a `hard` scientific or 
technological context.
 
In the `soft` human context we will usually replace them 
with better sounding, more `human` synonyms, respectively 
with DIALECTICS and (DIALECTIC) DICHOTOMY.

Thus "Dialectic" will be for us synonym of "Polarity", 
"Dialectic Dichotomy" - synonym of "Polar Dipole", "Term 
of Dialectic Dichotomy" - synonym of "Pole of Polar Dipole".

Let us note that "dichotomy" is often confused in kitchen
language with "antinomy" denoting logical contradiction 
between two statements. Dichotomy is not restricted to
statements, but encompasses all phenomena and its terms
are not contradictory, but complementary. Compass needle
is not an antinomy of contradictory poles, but a dipole 
(dichotomy) composed of two complementary poles (terms).

We call one of the terms of Dichotomy "referential", but
did not yet find the name for its counterpart, the 
"principal" term on which the perception directly 
concentrates. For want of a better name we propose to call
it "Core".

Phenomena have no exceptional status and the choice of
a particular term as core or referential is arbitrary.
To say that an apple is moving with respect to the Pisa 
tower, or indeed with respect to the earth crust is 
equivalent with saying that the earth crust is moving 
with respect to the apple.  Apple and earth crust are 
two equally worthy terms of the Dichotomy "Galileo's 
Experiment".

However, Ockham's Razor suggests to choose in most cases 
the more complex term as referential. Galileo was perfectly 
entitled to choose apple as referential. However, cosmology 
build upon earth crust falling on apple would be a bit too 
complex. Galileo preferred to use earth crust as 
referential and formulated a simple, consistent and 
reliable theory: the earth crust confirmed itself as an 
epistemologically pertinent referential.
========================================================
DICHOTOMY AS ATOMIC ELEMENT OF RD
 
RD deals with "Core, Referential and Dichotomy(= Meaning,
as we shall see subsequently).
 
Thus symbolically : (Core / Referential) == Dichotomy
or symbolically:
(A / B) == D
"A" (first symbol in brackets): a particular Core
"B" : a particular Referential
"D" : a particular Dichotomy.
 
For instance:
(Observer / Observed) == Observation
which is synonymous as we shall see with
(Subject / Object) == Situation
 
As we can see in 'Foundations in Ontology", RD considers
Dichotomy as elementary, atomic structure of "Awareness".
Thus, I am aware of the full structure
[(A / B) == D]
and cannot split it into A or B by itself.
 
We can symbolize it as:
 
[(A / B) == D] <--> X
 
where "X": Awareness    
========================================================
FUNDAMENTAL DICHOTOMY: SITUATION (SUBJECT / OBJECT) 

Contemporary physics reduced on the one hand its universe 
to phenomena and, on the other hand, determined its element- 
the observation as the dipole: Observer / Observed. These 
terms put in our opinion too much stress on the passive, 
perceiving aspect of the observation. We suppose that a 
physicist will most probably qualify this statement as 
pedantic and argue that nobody takes the term "observer" 
at its face value and that the ability to conceive, to plan 
and to organise an observation is implied by the term at 
least as strongly as that to actually carry it out. 
Still, in our context, more general than that of physics, 
it may lead to misunderstandings, so that we prefer to 
replace "Observation", "Observer" and "Observed" 
respectively with: SITUATION, SUBJECT and OBJECT.

The element of the Human Universe of Discourse (UH) is, 
consequently, an individual human situation comprising two 
terms: subject and object. As we said above either one may 
be chosen as core or referential. Choosing subject as 
referential is equivalent with examining the core-object 
and vice versa.

Subject is the elementary foundation of "objective" 
physical type investigation and object - that of 
psychological introspection. 

Subject founds objectivity and object founds subjectivity.
 
Surprising as it may seem at the first glance, this 
statement describes one of the most essential features of 
human reason. 

========================================================
TEMPORALITY IN UH 

Situation is a multidimensional structure. Subject and 
object are positioned in time and space, perception of 
the object postulates some sort of "sensorium", or a 
#space whose dimensions coincide with the types of 
sensations conceivable for the subject. At this place 
we shall consider just one of the involved dimensions, 
that of time.
 
With respect to time only the currently present or 
current situation may be considered as elementary. One 
may of course conceive past and future situations, 
but they have a higher degree of complexity.
 
A past situation is a recollection experienced as related 
to the current one, as one of its components. However, 
at the time of its own presence the past situation had 
not been related to the current, which at this time did 
not yet exist. Thus, recollection is more complex than 
presence. Similar reasoning holds for future situations 
or projections.
 
Present moment divides time into two distinct areas: 
past and future. What can be said about these areas with 
respect to the basic polarity subject / object of the 
situation?  Past appears to the present awareness as 
something which exists as such, which cannot be changed 
in any way, but which can be known. In other words past 
coincides with the object-term of the situation and the
elementary knowledge is identical with awareness of the 
past.
 
On the contrary, future does not exist yet as such. 
It exists only as subject's projection. Future coincides 
therefore with the subject-term and the awareness of it 
is perceived as subjective belief and volition.
 
Consequently, past and future correspond to the basic 
polarity of the situation, respectively to object and 
subject. 
========================================================
COMPLEX EXTREMITY OF THE UH: VIEW.

The opposite extremity, the most complex conceivable 
referential of UH is theoretically unlimited. In practice 
UH is "covered" by a collection of nodes, each of which 
truncates a particular series or branch, as the galaxie in 
our example. This "cover" represents the "state of the art" 
of the considered human class. It is by no means single 
valued. UH is subject to constant development carried out 
by individuals and by different scientific, political, 
artistic and religious communities. Consequently, it 
comprises various competitive branches culminating in 
different cover nodes, which may be called "views". 
Different collectivities consider different views as 
pertinent. UH of a culture is a changing, dynamic structure 
of often competing views. As long as the development and 
the transition among competing views is smooth, the 
culture is in the state of synchrony, or evolution, 
otherwise it passes through a period of diachrony or 
revolution. 
========================================================
WARNING OF CONFUSION
 
We should beware of confusing Relativistic DIALECTIC with
Hegelian DIALECTIC, because of their homonymity. We don't
confuse 'bow' (= bend at the waist) and 'bow' (= weapon),
so why should we confuse human, rational, axiomatic
Relativistic Dialectic with inhuman, irrational, dogmatic
Absolute Dialectic of Hegel?
There are no Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis in RD, but Core,
Referential and Dichotomy (= Meaning, as we shall see
subsequently).
 
Hegel based his famous dialectics on the following entirely
speculative argument:
 
"Whatever we assert about the Absolute, our assertion will
not be adequate and will call for negation. When we say
that Absolute is a Pure Being we do not attribute anything
to it, our statement is equivalent with saying that
Absolute is Nothingness. Thesis "Absolute is Being" leads
to antithesis "Absolute is Nothingness" and to synthesis
that Absolute is some composition of the two."
 
Andree Breton, or Salvadore Dali would probably say that
Absolute is a very small bird. We say that not a single
term of the argument has any meaning at all (ref1:
"Meaningless Generalities") and that the whole assertion
is empty noise void of any signification.
 
There are many Dialectics. RD may be critically compared
with Sartre's Dialectic ("Critique de la Raison
Dialectique"), but not with the Hegelian. Not because they
are opposed or contradictory, but because the Hegelian is
a meaningless, indeterminate, empty noise. Noxious too,
as via Engels, Lenin and Mao it presided the extermination
of 100 million people.
========================================================