The most important function of science is ... as myth.
More people quote "e=mc-squared”, than understand it.
Even Einstein’s understanding of it was incomplete.
Science is in essence just a set of symbols; not true.

Truth, as such, does not exist; it is a truism, always.
The notion is Truth is a generalisation, and abstraction.
Truth by definition has no context (no ... definition).
This means that truth is a tautologic oxymoron.

There are many words that we use that have no meaning.
‘Universe’, ‘gravity’, ‘infinity’, ‘god’, and many many others.
These are words that operate in language, but not as words.
They are the equivalent of Imaginary Numbers, in mathematics.

Imaginary Numbers are not defined in the normal number system.
Like the unreal numbers, they are part of the system of numbers.
Unlike the unreal numbers, they are not part of a defined reference system.
Imaginary numbers are not define in space, but as cycle(s) in time.

There are many words that we use to deal with other dimensions.
Some words deal with states within defined dimensions.
Some words address the transitions between states or dimensions.
Some words are needed to address our dealing with different dimensions.

Science, Physics, mathematics and Logic are different language sets.
Each of these deals with a different dimensionality of our realisation.
All of these serve to address our operations of realisation/dimensions.
Yet many people are not aware that the words in each language has different meaning.

Meaning derives from context, and is thus based on involvemement.
The so-called objectivity of science is a fallacy; an illusion.
This is seen when its formulations are formulated in mathematics.
Suddenly the same formulations refer to very many/different manifestations.

Science is the act/act/fact or abstraction.
Philip Zimbardo explained the grave risk which this entails.
Classical science is in that sense, as he calls it, a Luciferian construct.
Modern science which is based on classical science is thereby "hellish" also.

We see that explicitly in the belief in deterministic/classical science.
It is in effect, in fact, a model of inert/invariable/predictable/dead matter.
It means that the model does not allow for discovering learning Newness.
It is seen in the fundamentalists of science: the "Unscientists".

Unscientists are people who believe that anything is real only when described by science.
As religious fundamentalists, they choose to belief only in what is written down.
They forget that something is written down because somebody wrote it.
The purpose of science is to discover the unknown, and record it.

Learning about the unknown is based on the natural cycle of learning.
In our body, learning, immunology, digestion and cell division is 'the same'.
In science, the learning cycle is the same, in individuals and in the group.
The relationship between them is that of cell to organ to body to humanity.

In our body we can see that each level of coherence operates different consciousness.
Beta, alpha, theta and delta brain wave corresponds with conscious, sub-, un- and out-of consciousness.
We se the same in the difference of code in signal propagation from sensor to neurone to plexus to brain.,
Each level of code/consciousness/organisation corresponds with a different degree of abstraction.

Degrees of abstraction are well described in terms of degrees of freedom/bonding in matter.
We wee it in the relationship between information in formation, atoms, molecules and matter.
We likewise see it in the emergence of consensus, in individual, relationship, group and society.
Science as such is a conditional conditioned consensus construct, created in/by/for a culture.

Science as such operates at four levels of code/consciousness/realisation/manifestation.
Each different level of code, serves a different purpose; individual, relationship, science, humanity.
We see the same in the information relay from sensor to neuron to plexus to brain.
Like the heart, the brain serves for integration-distribution; for information instead of blood.

Depending on our individual involvement, the meaning/significance differs.
As researcher, peer, scientific community or human; your experience of the same will differ.
It is the difference between experience, story, hear-say and myth.
Most of the knowledge of science serves for humanity, only as myth.

There are many more people who quote Albert Einstein, than knew hum or understand his words.
Those words are quoted, not to refer to their original purpose, but to change the status of the speaker.
Most speakers quoting Einstein, or others, operate the act of idolation; subservience to heroes.
Their goal is not to convey information, but to manipulate their own status with respect to an audience.

It is known as the principle of identification, association, transfer or projection.
It is a psychologic mechanism/instrument/operation for social manipulation.
These mechanisms (reflexes) must be understood as they determine the outcome.
That is why they were described in the series of Essays, "The Bones of Belief".

However, now this series of essays "Bringing Science  to Life", takes that a step farther.
It is the equivalent of the Project entitled "Healing Health Care", for curing medicine.
"Bringing  Science to Life" is based on including observer involvement in the formulae.
This includes the difference in involvement, in consciousness, in code and in understanding.

Science as experience, story, hearsay or myth, represent involvement of the speaker.
It is necessary to discern between those, to not make an error in interpretation.
When anyone speaks about science at the level of myth, it has a different purpose.
Science as experience is indeed very rare, including in scientists doing the research...

Most of the findings of science operates at the level of MYTH.
It is at that level that science is dealt with in news papers and in schools.
Even most of the information education in universities is only at the level of hearsay.
What we need is a better platform (the Holoversity) where at least, science is a Story...