The title " Theology of Science" implies some opposition to the religion. It still ex­presses a reaction in the bias, that the Science is not involved with Theological and Philo­sophical questions. The term "Theology" it remains because the Existence of God is not rejected. On the contrary, as somehow the title implies, the existence of God becomes acceptable after a rational approach and new deter­mination of the significance about God, through the formation of a cosmological theory. From an other view, it is implied that the Science with the Theology do not have perfectly otherwise or irrelevant fields of search.

Clarification: Any concrete religion or philo­sophical theory of past does not acce­ptable and constitute a base. The writer and theorist of this work accepts more easily they chara­cterize him " atheist " than to he gets involved in religious juxta­positions and does not want religious or anti­religious reactions. (Cf. more in the page Religion & Reliability).

In that book - where was published in limited number of copies in 2000 (Dodoni publications, ISBN 960-385-019-5, number of pages 448) -, a persistent attempt has been made to an­swered the big questions of Philo­sophy in concise manner and as questions of an overall issue, avoiding ready-made thoughts or previous theories. A multitude of random and fragme­ntary obser­vations in the expe­rience and a multitude of separate expla­nations can result more fast, more easily and not accidentally. They can, through the theo­retical analysis of some concepts and correlation of few general notions and with our possibility we know all things through observation of some relations and resem­blances in the nearest and most usual things of our expe­rience. This view I aimed to prove with the book "Theology of Science" and I became tedious and little compre­hensible. With multi­annual, daily and unselfish search, without an advantage that the com­puter offers and without the briefing from the Internet.
 

In that book, an original cosmological theory was published for first time complicated with tedious analyses of meanings and with a lot of ambiguities. This theory on the beginning of the Universe comes contrary to sovereign theory of the “Big Explosion” and brings aptly the special title “Theory of Finished (Total) Time and Relativity of Energy ”. More briefly - but with some inaccuracy I call it " Theory of a Simultaneous Universe ". It is a bold theory, that explains and describes unified the existence of matter and relation between time, space and with the appearance of Life. This theory, with usual and daily voca­bulary achieves to enters in scientific que­stions creatively which they are presented in physics from a different course.

In parallel with the cosmological theory was attempted answers in the two other central and direct related questions of Philosophy. The formation of views about the meaning of know­ledge and on the verification of its reliability led to the concise formulation of an intro­ductive theory on the knowledge, gene­rally. This theory explains the relation of intel­lect with senses and the possibility of know­ledge beyond our most direct personal expe­rience. (I call it also, Theory of Ab­straction).

I call this theory "of Abstraction" because as I explain, the intellect makes abstraction of traits from pictures (impulsively) and creates the notion of words not only with con­scious and reasonable way. The abstra­ction of traits and the summary view of things begin from data of senses and this process

shows, that senses are intellectual activity with "raw material" outside of intellect. First data of our senses already are extra­cted traits of things and pictures constitute short views of them!

Finally, the search round the question of destination of Life and about human behavior led in cogitations for the formulation of a moral Theory of Mental and Inner Orien­tation, such as I have call this theory.

Our time is limited and precious. If you do not like brainteasers or have not free time, read the best-aimed and interesting lines of the book. Skip lines and thoughts which are vague, obscure, unin­terested and meticulous. If we take into consi­de­ration, how we are exhausting our mind in order to under­stand and retain thoughts from novels, about ephe­meral que­stions and insi­gnificant things, then we will not find so much obscure this theo­retical approach. The imperfections and ambi­guity that chara­cteri­zes the philo­sophical que­stions should not over­shadow the main thoughts and origi­nality of this meditative effort. More­over, if we think, that the book orientates us to dia­chro­nically and "any­where" que­stions and explains us, the close relation among the Universe with time and Life, then we will not demand this book is more compre­hensible than a school book. Soon, when they will need to describe and explain the begin­ning and sub­stance of things in science with the simpler expre­ssions, concisely, with­out mathe­matics and magical dimensions, then they will not find better-aimed and quick way to do.*

Since ancient times up today, many thinkers and philosophers with their important works reacted to biases, foolishness, fri­volity and human egocentricity with the most brilliant and powerful thinking. They were ap­proached wanting truths, placed a brake in uni­lateral opinions and extremities of thinking, high­lighted the wealth of human spirit and defended a philo­sophical way of life. I feel to express my admiration and optimism and together my sorrow for those who, it did not happen or I could not  study until now, still.

My excessive optimism about the possibility of knowledge does not aim in appointment of my own thoughts and it does not come with ignorance of the efforts that has happen of many other thinkers and in science. On the contrary, it comes from long formation of my thoughts, which began in young age, when  my edu­cational level was still incredibly discoura­ging and I did not expect this possibility of human thinking. With this expression again, I do not want to say that my own intellect achieved approaches close to the asked big answers, but that this possibility existed in human from more ancient times. I consi­der very impor­tant this fact, that Philo­sophy exists historical. Even more, given that the human thought in Philo­sophy achieved enormous jumps and reached almost in the all likely solutions of theoretical pro­blems.

I thank you and I wish you to find satisfactory answers and if no these, then my own work to constitutes a source for inspiration and encou­ragement for your own efforts!

©2000, ISBN 960-385-019-5

It does not exist prospect re-print !

only in Gr  language