²The mangled diction is the authors'.

³The working scientist may sense that I am committing a violation here, without being able to articulate what the violation is. But I know what it is. Modern science rests on Francis Bacon's principle that one must submit to science's best answer, no matter how deficient that answer may be. That is why Darwinian Evolution is taught in secondary school as science, for example. It is also why Quantum Field Theory was granted acceptance. Bacon wanted to suppress the tradition of disputation in philosophy, as he believed that it had prevented natural philosophy from progressing. My own program embodies a situation which Bacon did not anticipate. One zigzags between dissecting science, on the one hand, and inventing post-scientific intellectual modalities, on the other. In the end, the answers we need will have a new basis; and science will have been superseded as a culture. Bacon would have thought that impossible.

⁴A. d'Abro, The Evolution of Scientific Thought (1950), p. 450.

⁵Ibid., p. 215.

⁶This is a statement about the intellectual structure of physics, not a profession of faith by me.

⁷What they had was Aristotle's "natural place" teleology, which by today's standards is not credible.

⁸Boltzmann addressed this problem by adducing "certain fictitious laws" to mechanics. See Ludwig Boltzmann, Theoretical Physics and Philosophical Problems (translation 1974), p. 230.

⁹An implicit premise of homogeneity of space.

¹⁰d'Abro, op. cit., p. 454.

¹¹J.S. Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (1987), pp. 170-171.

¹²Cosmology, History, and Theology, ed. Wolfgang Yourgrau and Allen Breck (1977), pp. 99.

¹³"Accepting Scientific Ideas," The New York Times, April 28, 1982.

¹⁴Physical Review D, 42:1928.

¹⁵Physical Review D, 47:5345.

¹⁶Physical Review D, 42:1928.

¹⁷Ibid., p. 215.

¹⁸In Cosmology, History, and Theology, ed. Yourgrau and Breck (1977).

¹⁹At the N.Y.U. physics colloquium of November 18, 1993.

²⁰Leibniz' particular version of rationalism was said to have been overturned by the developments in QM which I listed. But that was posturing: as I have noted repeatedly, classical physics is never erased.

²¹A. d'Abro, The Evolution of Scientific Thought (1950), p. 212.

²²The garbled exposition is d'Abro's.

²³Cf. F. Dyson, Symmetry Groups in Nuclear and Particle Physics (1966).

²⁴Physical Review 47:777.

²⁵Comments on Nuclear and Particle Physics 20:352.