From the point of view of the widespread positions of the hitherto favoured physics or cosmology, there are naturally a number of contradictions in the contact with the ideas of the radial field hypothesis, which result from the juxtaposition of the underlying basic assumptions of reality necessarily.
In order to enable a fruitful discussion and absorption of knowledge it is therefore inevitable to prevent misunderstandings that arise from the quasi materialistically oriented view of reality of the hitherto prevailing view of physics and cosmology or some alternative ideas and concepts.
- One criticism repeatedly voiced is, for example, that of the alleged,"poeticQuality" (here of course meant in a pejorative sense) of the statements of Helmut Friedrich Krause in "Baustoff der Welt", e.g. by Werner Heisenberg in his reflection on the knowledge of the radial field hypothesis. Read Krause's statements in "Baustoff der Welt" in peace and quiet. One will certainly notice that he refrains from formalizations, the last step in the formation of reality images, without excluding them or declaring them unnecessary. The question here, however, is whether the representation follows an inner logic - it does - and whether reality is touched here or not, and whether ground is prepared for a review of the 'thesis'. The latter is done quite explicitly. So if you want to bump into the form of a scientific statement (the radial field hypothesis has other aspects, too), you can do so - but this does not release you from a serious mental examination and an initially unbiased comprehension of Krause's thoughts. When a theory is newly introduced, comparatively simple language may also be used in order to avoid misunderstandings in the reception of basic ideas as far as possible. As a rule, Krause endeavours to present his basic ideas from a radially radiating primeval field, in which all phenomena are embedded, by which they are energetically carried.