It is imperative to the educational development of our children that an expanded understanding of science must be taught in the public schools.
True science is not a narrow-minded creed, but rather an opening of the mind to ideas which unwitting prejudice may previously have blocked. Often the concepts which are least questioned and most widely accepted turn out to be wrong. Only by learning to open our minds and consider every possibility – no matter how unacceptable it may be to those currently in power – can we develop the mental acuity and critical thinking which will be so important to the generation which will soon be making the decisions for our society.
It is in this spirit, that the Center for Open Minds In Classrooms will be making recommendations to local school boards, and for the setting of standards for No Child Left Behind.
One of the recommendations which promises to be somewhat controversial involves additions to the curriculum of earth science. Unfortunately, we have become so indoctrinated by the idea that the world is round, that this concept had become an unquestionable dogma. The idea that the earth is round has become so widely accepted that people are afraid to openly question it, even though the notion is clearly counter-intuitive. Put quite simply, our daily experience tells us that the world is flat, yet we have been thoroughly brainwashed into denial. (Of course in this discussion “round” does not mean perfectly spherical, and “flat” does not mean without hills or valleys.)
In rationalizing their theory – and let’s not forget, it is only a theory – the round-earthers’ biggest argument is that a traveler can “circumnavigate” the world. This argument rests upon a Euclidian foundation. Without the underlying geometric assumptions, the round-earth argument falls faster than Galileo’s stones. And yet, those who claim “science” as their Holy Grail, do not even consider alternative explanations for why a traveler can set off in one direction and yet return to the same spot. This, despite the fact that Euclidean Geometry has been discredited since 1905, and is no longer taken seriously by scholars and other academics.
It has long been established that non-Euclidean geometries best described the true nature of the Universe. Besides Lobachevskian and Riemannian geometry, there are actually an infinite number of possible geometries (see http://www.mssm.org/math/vol1/issue1/lines.htm). These alternative geometries are not merely intellectual exercises: They have repeatedly demonstrated their necessity for understanding the world, not as we may wish to see it, but as it actually is. In actual practice, non-Euclidean formulations have shown their effectiveness when applied to the quadratic distribution of flow rates as observed in nuclear waste canisters. (http://www.vtt.fi/pro/pro1/feftra/gwflow/mod_canister.html)
Of course every educated person is well aware that “the straight-line” geometry – Euclidean – though useful in carpentry and other daily purposes, in fact is erroneous when applied to the real world. In the workshop or home, Euclidean errors are so small as to be harmless. But when applied to larger areas, the use of Euclidean geometry leads to linear thinking. That is how the idea that "circumnavigation” proves that the earth is round got started.
In fact, when we describe a voyage, such as that of Magellan as “circumnavigation” we are engaging in circular reasoning. By definition, “circumnavigation” means traveling around a round world; so, in reality, use of this term explains nothing: It is merely a tautology.
But when we put aside our bias for round-earthism, and look at the question with fresh, open-minded intelligence, it becomes clear that we are not really so sure why it is that it is possible to head north, yet end up going south.
If we lived in a Euclidean world – as they thought they did in 1492 – then it would be a no-brainer: Magellan’s voyage would have proven that the Earth is round. But in 1492, they did not realize that the real world is non-Euclidean, and that therefore Magellan’s voyage did not prove that the Earth is round, but in fact proved just the opposite.
In the non-Euclidean world in which we live, another explanation must be found. Fortunately the application of non-Euclidean geometry explains the phenomena very well on the basis of a flat earth. Researchers in flat-earth science have worked out the equations. Currently textbooks have been published and are awaiting distribution to our schools.
In the Middle Ages, people had a rigid idea of a flat, Euclidean world in which a ship going out to sea without turning back would fall off the edge. It must have been terribly difficult for them to re-think their ideas after Columbus’ voyages. Today, we are facing a similar challenge: Liberal thinking has become so imbued throughout the culture, that we seldom realize how deeply it has permeated our own minds. It will take courage and honesty for those of us who grew up being brainwashed, to critically examine the assumptions we have swallowed, such as the round-earth theory.
But if we truly believe in open-mindedness, a free-flow of information and dialogue, then we must separate ourselves from our prejudices, and not fall victim to our own worst instincts to hold on to old ideas and prevent the truth from being taught in the schools.
It will not be easy for us to overcome the past 500 of years round-earth brainwashing, but we must not stand in the way of progress: We owe it to our children.
- 30 -