Modern (theoretical) PHYSICS seems to be in deep crisis today as many of its core aspects are not empirically well-confirmed. Heated exchanges among physicists on the scientific status of physical theories with little or, at best, a tenuous connection to possible experimental tests is highly visible in the popular scientific literature. Some physicists (e.g., Carroll 2014, 2019; Ijjas et al., 2017) argue that science must discard empirical testability as one of its defining properties and the highly explanatory theories of present-day PHYSICS should be exempted from experimental testing, while others (e.g., Ellis & Silk 2014) spot in these arguments (for softening the testability or falsifiability requirement for modern PHYSICS) a dangerous tendency to undermine science. The philosopher of science who naturally draws most attention in these current debates is Karl Popper (1902-1994). His views, however, are often misrepresented in these debates. The prime objective of this paper is to explain how a more enlightened perspective on the ongoing debates can be obtained by a careful scrutiny of the Popperian criterion of falsifiability. As a first step in achieving this objective we will analyze the two major (conceptual) failures on which the current controversies rest. Our next step will be examining the controversial string theory to see whether the criteria of falsifiability is a ‘blunt instrument’ for determining its scientific status.

Accurate knowledge of the basic principle of imaging PHYSICS helps better understanding of normal anatomy and pathological imaging findings of the diseases.This is more necessary in advanced imaging techniques like MRI because of the complexity of the basic PHYSICS of the technique. In basic MRI PHYSICS workshop, we discuss about this technique from the primary concepts. The content is very simplified and is showed by slides, animation and easy pictures for better understanding. In the beginning of the lecture, the structure of atoms and their magnetic characteristics are explained and then step by step, we learn how to use this character to produce signal and usages of it to make an image. Also basic pulse sequence will be explained subsequently. This workshop is recommended for all radiologists, residents of radiology, technologists and anyone who wants to know more about MRI.

Hempel's Dilemma is among several arguments posed against physicalism. Physicalists can respond to this dilemma in several ways. The present article aims to analyze Andrew Melnyk and Janice Dowell's responses based on their specific accounts about the conception of the term "physical". Melnyk's account is based upon a scientific realist's approach to natural sciences. We will focus on and discuss about that weather we can adopt such an approach to the present science and in particular the present PHYSICS or not. Dowell, however, defends an account according to witch ideal future PHYSICS should be replaced by an ideal science that has hallmarks of a scientific theory and differs in its subject matter. The author wants to show that these accounts, each one in respect to particular aspects, cannot play the given role in formulation of the physicalism thesis.

In this research, we introduce fundamental hypergroups and dependent hypergroups then we investigate a connection between hypergroup theory and nuclear PHYSICS and fundamental particles. We show that interaction process such as Lepton actions in fundamental particle PHYSICS and nuclear fusion Stars forms a fundamental hypergroup.

Algebraic hyperstructures theory is a natural extension of the classical ‎ ‎ algebraic structures ‎. Because of importance and new viewpoints in this theory, we try to apply this theory to the elementary particle PHYSICS and nuclear PHYSICS presenting the definitions and the concepts of the algebraic hyperstructures. In this work we intend to use this new branch of mathematics to describe the interaction between leptons in the elementary particle PHYSICS and the fusion processes in the nuclear PHYSICS.

The PHYSICS is one of sciences about nature, which investigated objective characteristics of the material world. It investigate the characteristics of environment and common law conformity of all moving of there events. All living and non-living objects what we feeling called as physic bodies or bodies. Mathematic investage the tasks and features of real life. Differential equations theory of relativity and the same tasks is the sraight attributes of space and quantity. The object of investigations of philosophy is the foundation and inner matter of environment and essence. At the everyday life we see more things and we take in account these all things as existences. For this reason, we say: Earth exist, sky exist, human exist and I have affirmed all existent things. But considering the means of environment occuring the necessity to investigate thia object and its attributes. The sciences, which investigate the characteristics of this object, are the PHYSICS and metaPHYSICS. Some science learning the phenomens and being autside of PHYSICS has the wrong perception. The metaPHYSICS or philosophy mean about essences which are free from conventionalities. This science does not investigate transPHYSICS phenomenes and other events which we called as “non material essences” For this reason consider the conception “essence” in spesial or narrow frame aspects has deprived of metaPHYSICS its true places into row of sciences.

Causality is of paramount importance in metaPHYSICS, as can be understood from the fact that it has for long constituted the basis of philosophers" arguments. Hume"s critique of this major philosophical foundation propounded that causality was not as sound a principle as philosophers supposed. Extending Hume"s criticism to the whole of metaPHYSICS, Kant made the criticism more intense and declared metaPHYSICS impoverished. Metaphysicians, nonetheless, didn"t give up their firm belief in causality. In the twentieth century, some discoveries in PHYSICS, especially in nuclear PHYSICS and quantum mechanics, weakened firm belief in causality, motivating philosophers to conduct more research into the issue. Apart from philosophers, physicists themselves were divided into supporters and opposers of causality. Much research in the twentieth century has been concerned with the analysis of causality and its philosophical consequences. It can be said that causality has been taken away from its once metaphysical ivory tower and become more down-to-earth and observation-based. This article is a brief discussion of causality in twentieth century PHYSICS and its philosophical consequence.

According to the role of ʿ Abd al-Ghaffā r Najm al-dawla in the introduction of modern sciences to Iran, we will know PHYSICS is one of the sciences that he has influenced on transition of it. ʿ Abd al-Ghaffā r had essays and tranlations in this field of study. Some of his works in PHYSICS are: Jarr-i Thaqῑ l (translation from Poinsot), Takā fū ʾ-i Quwā (statics), PHYSICS and chemistry and ʿ ilm-i bukhā rā t. Until now we achieved two transcriptions of his works. First, the book ʾ Uṣ ū l-i ʿ Ilm-i Sitā tῑ k, which he translated into Persian on 1277 A. H. On the first page of this book he said: “ the meaning of statics is ʿ ilmi muwā zinih-i ʾ ajsā m” . The other book is PHYSICS that was written at request of Mukhbir al-dawla, minister of sciences and mines, on the 1293 A. H. for the use of public, not only for educated people. Najm al-dawla in this book expresses different concepts of modern PHYSICS in a simple word, and does not use numerical and parametric issues. These two books are transcripts and have not been published. Also a French printed book named Nouvelles Ré cré ations Physiques et Mathé matiques written by M. Guyot and is kept in Library, Museum and Document Center of Iran Parliament was at ʿ Abd al-Ghaffā rʼ s disposal that may help us to have better perception. The purpose of this article is review and presentation of above books as a part of first works of modern PHYSICS in Iran and especially because of their relation to ʿ Abd al-Ghaffā r Najm al-dawla.

The purpose of this paper is the introduction of molecular biological mechanisms that the biology of body is affected by the beliefs and faith. The study of molecular biology scientists about processes which cells receive information has shown that the cells receive signals originating from external electromagnetic fields of religious beliefs through the cell membrane protein. Then it changes in gene expression and the biological control of the body. The biology of belief is a groundbreaking work in the field of new biology. The implications of this research radically change our understanding of life. It shows that genes and DNA do not control our biology; that instead DNA is controlled by signals from outside the cell, including the energetic messages emanating from our positive and negative thoughts. Prayer as energy fields can affect gene expression and affect cell physiology. Recent research in cell biology and quantum PHYSICS led to a major advance in the scientific explanation for religious belief in the efficacy of treatment of diseases.