The idea of a motionless state of matter is, then, absurd, because for any object, its own visible stasis is only relative to its movement in the universe, and its own internal movement, at an atomic level. Even if we could exclude the latter, Duhring's theory requires that this could apply not only to the single object, but to the entire universe. The theory and observation of cosmic inflation proves that to be false.
Duhring's method of counting back to some initial point combines, then, with the idea that, at each intermediate point, there is cause and effect, a causal chain. If we take the Newton's Cradle, the ball dropped at one end passes its mechanical energy to the next, which passes it to the next, and so on, until the ball at the other end has nothing to transmit its energy to, leading to its motion. The example Engels gives is of a gun being loaded, but the final motion being delayed until such time as the gun is fired.
To apply this to Duhring's theory on the origin of the universe would mean assuming that all the matter existed and was then loaded with energy, as with loading a gun or pulling back the first ball of a Newton's Cradle.
“It is therefore possible to imagine that during its motionless, self-identical state, matter was loaded with energy, and this, if anything at all, seems to be what Herr Dühring understands by the unity of matter and mechanical energy. This conception is nonsensical, because it transfers as absolute to the entire universe a state, which by its nature is relative and which therefore can never be simultaneously applied except to a part of matter. Even if we overlook this point, the difficulty still remains: first, how did the world come to be loaded, since nowadays guns do not load themselves? And second, whose finger then pulled the trigger? We may turn and twist as much as we like, but under Herr Dühring's guidance we always return to — the finger of God.” (p 75)
Duhring moves from cosmology to physics and bemoans that, in relation to the understanding of heat energy, it had not moved forward from the ideas of Robert Mayer, who developed the first law of thermodynamics. He says, we must
“always remember that in the states of motion of matter static relations are also present, and that these latter are not measurable by the mechanical work ... if we previously described nature as a great worker and now construe this expression strictly, we must add that the self-identical states and static relations do not represent mechanical work. So once again we miss the bridge from the static to the dynamic, and if so-called latent heat has so far remained a stumbling-block for theory, we must here too recognise a defect which can least be denied in its cosmic applications” (p 76)
All of this, Engels says, is simply a manifestation that Duhring remains stuck, in trying to provide any basis for the transformation of immobility into movement, but “is nevertheless ashamed to appeal to the only possible saviour, namely, the creator of heaven and earth. If the bridge from the static to the dynamic, from equilibrium to motion, cannot be found even in mechanics, including the mechanics of heat, under what obligation should Herr Dühring be to find the bridge from his motionless state to motion? In this way he neatly extricates himself from his predicament.” (p 76)
No comments:
Post a Comment