Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
What's new
Two years ago, Robert Bigelow and the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS) announce... more Two years ago, Robert Bigelow and the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS) announced an essay competition for the best evidence of the afterlife, i.e., the survival of consciousness past bodily death. The original purpose of the competition was to bring attention to the latest research on the question of the survival of consciousness after death and advertise its supposed scientific 'proof' (sic). The purpose of the BICS essay awards is to raise the public awareness for the Survival of Human Consciousness topic and to stimulate research. The goal of the essay contest is to award contestants for writing papers that summarize the best evidence available for the survival of human consciousness after permanent bodily death. (From the BICS webpage) Of the 204 'experts' that were allowed to enter the competition, 29 actually won cash awards and their essays will be published in special editions for libraries all over the world.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Journal for Spiritual and Consciousness Studiesdn , 2021
The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting,... more The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting, although there is a great deal of good and various levels of even better evidence when NDEs, reincarnation, new standards for verifying mediumship, death bed visions and other phenomena related to dying and the afterlife are considered. But none of these rises to the level of 'best evidence' for 'proving' the reality of the afterlife. The truth is that there is no falsifiable evidence that can distinguish between the afterlife and other paranormal phenomena, i.e., there are always alternative super-psi or general psi explanations for the data, stories and evidence gathered by parapsychologists and experienced by individuals. The afterlife hypothesis is neither falsifiable nor verifiable given the absolute best 'so-called evidence' available today. Only a valid theory could offer scientific verifiability and also distinguish whether the evidence gathered so far supports the afterlife concept or super-psi. So, with no valid theory of the afterlife available, either an independent acceptable theory based on specific phenomena or better yet as part of a greater comprehensive theory of physical reality, there is nothing on which to base a truly rigorous experiment that could verify the afterlife to the satisfaction of both the scientific and nonscientific communities. Some form of valid acceptable theory is necessary and long overdue to explain and verify the various paranormal phenomena as well as hone the scientific search for survival of consciousness and the afterlife. We must assume that at least consciousness survives as either part or the whole of any possible afterlife. All of the common paranormal examples that deal with the afterlife are in some way simply different data points that should be used to follow the scientific method and lead to some common physical concept that we identify as the afterlife, so the hypothesis can be tested and verified. Not one of these examples is based on anything other than experiences/observations for which no comprehensive scientific model has ever been developed and/or studied in enough detail to even attempt to verify even the minimum level survival of consciousness in some manner. Only one theoretical unification model in modern physics, the single (operational) field theory or SOFT, is comprehensive enough to model life, mind, and consciousness and their evolution in enough specific detail to even talk logically about survival of consciousness. Be this as it may, the only possible 'best evidence' would then be the direct experience of higher consciousness, as in NDEs and enlightenment, which are very personal experiences, but even then, it could only be used as evidence, the best evidence, when it can be analyzed and understood as a physical phenomenon within the context of SOFT, an equivalent or better theoretical model.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Toward a Science of Consciousness Conference, 2020
The first and most important problem with developing a theoretical model of consciousness is defi... more The first and most important problem with developing a theoretical model of consciousness is defining consciousness, but everyone mistakenly tries to define consciousness with respect to the individual, or 'self', when in fact consciousness can only be defined within the context of our whole physical reality relative to a person's visions of 'self'. Some thinkers and scholars even try to dismiss the physical nature of consciousness, but consciousness can only and must be physical, at some level, because it clearly interacts with the physical world through mind, brain and living material beings. Since consciousness cannot, by its very nature, be material, that leaves only the possibility that consciousness must and can only be a field effect such as an extremely complex multi-leveled field structure. This leaves only two possibilities: The electromagnetic and the gravito-gravnetic fields. Gravity is too weak so it can be eliminated, which leaves only electromagnetism. Now, of the two parts of this stronger field, magnetism rules over and can direct the flow of electricity, which dominates the body and brain, and magnetism can build extremely complex multi-leveled field domain structures. So consciousness must be magnetic in nature, with the normal scalar magnetic B-field domain structure equating to our lower level mundane consciousness and the corresponding magnetic vector potential A-field representing our higher consciousness that connects us to (is continuous with) the wholeness and oneness of the universe at the quantum level of our reality. This physical model of consciousness is fully and comprehensively compatible with a completely unified single field theory that unifies all of classical physics (Newtonian theory, Maxwellian electromagnetism, evolution theory and thermodynamics), the various popular models of the quantum theory and all of relativity theory. We can now consider consciousness to be wholly and completely explained, at least within the context of our present knowledge of physical reality and the universe, within a physical unification theory that is both falsifiable and yields specific predictions, some of which have already been confirmed.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
JASCS, 2020
The ASCSI Board is planning our annual conference for early October, in the Durham/Raleigh/Resear... more The ASCSI Board is planning our annual conference for early October, in the Durham/Raleigh/Research Triangle area of North Carolina. This will be at least a three-day conference with speakers covering all aspects of Spirituality and Consciousness, whether non-scientific, scientific or experiential, within the context of the above stated theme. Jim Beichler, a leading expert in the physics of consciousness, historian of science, President of the Academy and Editor of the Academy publications, will do one Keynote (evening) presentation and a three-hour seminar/workshop on the concepts and future of consciousness and spirituality within their physical (scientific) context. We would like to see and present a balance between valid science, practitioners and experiencers, as well as professionals and laymen in the field of spirituality and consciousness studies. This includes all areas of parapsychology and paraphysics. The ASCSI will announce other speakers as well as the final dates and venue for the conference as that information becomes available. In the meantime, though ASCSI is asking for speakers, presenters and workshop leaders to submit a one-page 500-to 800-word abstract (description) for proposed presenters. The ASCSI is also seeking co-sponsors for the conference in the form of labs, educational institutions and universities, like-minded organizations, and other groups of practitioners, experiencers and people who want to make a real difference and impact the emerging shift in consciousness and spirituality that humanity is presently experiencing. Transformation and ascension are to spirituality what evolution and revolution are to consciousness, especially in with respect to science, respectively, and this conference will cover these topics as thoroughly and comprehensively as possible in the allotted time. This conference is especially important and timely given the present state of emerging AI, the recent emergence of brain machine interfaces and the possibility of our discovery of intelligent sentient life elsewhere in the universe, as well as the impact that these discoveries will have on the further development and evolution of human consciousness. We especially welcome students and younger adults to participate and attend the conference because the subjects we are discussing will bear heavily on their future wellbeing, comfort, security, happiness and every aspect of their overall lives and living conditions. We are planning our conference in spite of the recent coronavirus scare, assuming that such a conference will be okay in the Fall after the Summer of 2020. We are also taking into consideration other venues, such as the internet, for the conference IF AND ONLY IF having 'in person' attendance to the conference is not allowed in October, or we need to cancel the conference due to the coronavirus. So please do not hesitate to send an abstract. Presenters and workshop leaders will not have to pay for the conference, and they will receive gratis e-membership in the ASCSI but will be responsible for their own room and board. We will help them in this regard as much as we are able to but cannot yet commit to helping them financially. Keynote speakers (only) will have the same as well as receive room and board for their participation, but we cannot give honorariums unless we receive some form of outside funding (specific donations) or grants. We are also seeking grant money, and if we are successful, we may be able to support others to attend the conference. We normally publish an official Proceedings for the conference, but submitting an article or paper is completely voluntary, although we encourage and highly recommend everyone to do so. Registration fees and availability will be published later, when we decide on the final venue and dates. Please send all inquiries, submissions, comments, suggestions and thoughts to Jim Beichler at jebco1st@aol.com. If Jim has not responded to your inquiries and/or submissions within ten days, please resend them to make sure that they have not gone errant in the email/internet system (spam catchers and such) and he has not received them.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Psi Con: Aspects of Consciousness, 2019
Any physical or realistic scientific theory of consciousness requires four different fundamental ... more Any physical or realistic scientific theory of consciousness requires four different fundamental elements: (1) Unification of physics; (2) A new theory of physical evolution; (3) Precise physical definitions of life, mind and consciousness; and, (4) A complete physics of the brain. When these four are finished, a complete and comprehensive model of physical reality emerges which is not only amenable to consciousness but requires consciousness to evolve. Consciousness is therefore a fundamental part of all living organisms and beings as well as the universe at large that extends beyond the three-dimensions of normal experiential space but becomes higher consciousness as the four-dimensional extension of our being into an embedding hyperspace. The existence of this fourth dimension of space is necessary to give a complete explanation of the simple principles of three-dimensional matter and ‘matter in motion’ on which the present science of physics is ultimately based. Without the fourth dimension of space, our universe could not exist as we experience it.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
JASCS, 2019
Has been finished -- Look for Next Year -- 2020
Announcing the 44th annual ASCSI Conference
PSI ... more Has been finished -- Look for Next Year -- 2020
Announcing the 44th annual ASCSI Conference
PSI CON: Aspects of Consciousness
We have a wonderful lineup of speakers including Kevin Tedeschi, Stephan A. Schwartz and PMH Atwater, to mention only a few, as well as panel discussions on various topics regarding different aspects of consciousness and spirituality
For more information on the Academy, visit our webpage at www.ascsi.org, and for updates on the conference visit our webpage at ascsiconference.com. For specialized questions contact Tyler Stevens, Tyler@ascsi.org/. Conference registration can be made online through the conference webpage or by direct mail to Tyler Stevens at the address given on the Title Page of this Journal. But hurry, the conference is fast approaching.
Announcing the 44th annual ASCSI Conference
PSI CON: Aspects of Consciousness
We have a wonderful lineup of speakers including Kevin Tedeschi, Stephan A. Schwartz and PMH Atwater, to mention only a few, as well as panel discussions on various topics regarding different aspects of consciousness and spirituality
For more information on the Academy, visit our webpage at www.ascsi.org, and for updates on the conference visit our webpage at ascsiconference.com. For specialized questions contact Tyler Stevens, Tyler@ascsi.org/. Conference registration can be made online through the conference webpage or by direct mail to Tyler Stevens at the address given on the Title Page of this Journal. But hurry, the conference is fast approaching.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Journal of Spiritual and Consciousness Studies, 2019
According to commonly accepted theories of history and the history of science in particular, a re... more According to commonly accepted theories of history and the history of science in particular, a revolutionary period of progress is presaged or preceded by crises. In the case of physics and the Second Scientific Revolution (1900), these crises were a failure to detect the luminiferous aether and the problem of blackbody radiation. But these crises were defined by the winners of the Second Scientific Revolution −primarily the quantum scientists−to propagate their own claims to having overthrown the Newtonian paradigm and replace it with their own quantum paradigm. However, within this context, the cultural movement known as 'modern spiritualism; and the reciprocal movement in science to study psychic phenomena, are considered historical aberrations and therefore unscientific. Yet these are all what I call 'phallacies in fysics' because they are wrong when the historical record is studied more closely.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
To Be published, 2019
One of the great unanswered questions in the history and philosophy of science is why science aro... more One of the great unanswered questions in the history and philosophy of science is why science arose in the West and not in the East. The Axial age, from 700 to 300 BCE, saw a Zeroth Scientific Revolution in the West, from Thales to Aristotle, Archimedes, and Euclid. Almost simultaneously, Lao Tzu and Confucius appeared in China and the era of a Hundred Philosophies began, ending only when the Imperial Age began, while Siddhartha Gautama and Mahavira began changes in India that only ended when the Veda declined with the rise of Buddhism and the Ashokan Empire conquered India and surrounding areas, spreading Buddhism farther and wider than previous beliefs had ever gone. These changes during the Axial Age established the fundamental differences in worldview that we still witness and live by today in the East and West. Yet many scholars point to early technological developments in China such as gunpowder and rockets and wonder how China failed to capitalize on these and other developments to establish a theoretical basis for science, as did western culture, while major advances in mathematics and other scholarly pursuits occurred in India, raising the same questions. But in these historical speculations, and they are no more than idle and prejudicial speculations, there is at least an inaccurate presumption if not a dangerous assumption that Eastern philosophies are somehow unscientific, a view which mistakenly places Eastern ideas and ideals in an inferior position relative to Western science. Neither the statement that Eastern cultures did not formulate sciences nor the implications of this statement can be regarded as complete or even partially accurate. That inaccuracy has now become evident with Western science since modern physics has evolved to the point where concepts such as wholeness, subjectivity, and consciousness that are more common to Eastern science have now become fashionable in the West and have raised concerns about new advances in science itself. The new single (operational) field theory, or SOFT, offers Western and Eastern sciences a chance to combine their characteristic ideals reductionism and wholism, seemingly opposite fundamental approaches to science, into a new and far more comprehensive physics of reality for the first time in human history.
Keywords: Consciousness, unification, East, West, hyperspace, the fourth dimension, three-dimensional space, Chi, Ki, Prana, higher consciousness, modern physics, point and extension, dualisms, function and form
Keywords: Consciousness, unification, East, West, hyperspace, the fourth dimension, three-dimensional space, Chi, Ki, Prana, higher consciousness, modern physics, point and extension, dualisms, function and form
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
This paper is nothing short of a positive and complete verification of the unification of current... more This paper is nothing short of a positive and complete verification of the unification of current physics paradigms of single field theory (SOFT) in light of recently published observational data in astronomy. An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled " Is Dark Matter Real?', has just appeared in the August 2018 issue of Scientific American. Every physicist, astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist as well as everyone interested in science needs to read this article because it portends one of the greatest scientific advances in several hundred years, the complete unification of physics and science in general. Due to new observational evidence in astronomy, they have concluded that " Astrophysicists have piled up observations that are difficult to explain with Dark Matter. It is time to consider that there may be more to gravity than Einstein taught us. " But they have understated the case. In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers clearly shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed Dark Matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein's general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both paradigms is at hand.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
2018 ASCSI Annual Conference
ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experien... more 2018 ASCSI Annual Conference
ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential
We, at the Academy, will be officially announcing our future plans for the growth and expansion of the ASCSI at this year's Conference. Recent historical trends indicate that both spirituality and consciousness studies are growing evermore important in our various societies, cultures and educational institutions. To keep up with these trends, the ASCSI is planning to expand its role in these fields of study, moving from a passive role to a more active role in promoting increasing levels of spirituality and consciousness individually and collectively within our societies. We are currently seeking contributions (both monetary and in-kind) to help enhance and grow our beneficial and valuable organization. Included in our expansion efforts, we have been busy in the planning of our annual 2018 conference, which, this year, is in conjunction with the Spiritual Frontiers Fellowship of North Carolina. This year’s conference will be held at Unity of the Triangle in Raleigh, NC and will run from Thursday evening, October 4 to Saturday evening, October 6, 2018. We have arranged a broad program of both workshops and lectures based on the title theme “ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS; Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential”. We have sought to offer a comprehensive representation of the subject matter and will continue to do so in the future. With this conference all set, we are already beginning to consider next year's conference and with this in mind we are issuing a preliminary “CALL FOR PAPERS”. For information about this new "CALL FOR PAPERS" for next year's conference send an email to my email,jebeichler@ascsi.org. Stay tuned for updated conference details via this site, our homepage, social media and targeted emails as well as announcements made in the ASCSI published materials that are available to Academy members on a regular basis.
James E. Beichler, President ASCSI
ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential
We, at the Academy, will be officially announcing our future plans for the growth and expansion of the ASCSI at this year's Conference. Recent historical trends indicate that both spirituality and consciousness studies are growing evermore important in our various societies, cultures and educational institutions. To keep up with these trends, the ASCSI is planning to expand its role in these fields of study, moving from a passive role to a more active role in promoting increasing levels of spirituality and consciousness individually and collectively within our societies. We are currently seeking contributions (both monetary and in-kind) to help enhance and grow our beneficial and valuable organization. Included in our expansion efforts, we have been busy in the planning of our annual 2018 conference, which, this year, is in conjunction with the Spiritual Frontiers Fellowship of North Carolina. This year’s conference will be held at Unity of the Triangle in Raleigh, NC and will run from Thursday evening, October 4 to Saturday evening, October 6, 2018. We have arranged a broad program of both workshops and lectures based on the title theme “ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS; Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential”. We have sought to offer a comprehensive representation of the subject matter and will continue to do so in the future. With this conference all set, we are already beginning to consider next year's conference and with this in mind we are issuing a preliminary “CALL FOR PAPERS”. For information about this new "CALL FOR PAPERS" for next year's conference send an email to my email,jebeichler@ascsi.org. Stay tuned for updated conference details via this site, our homepage, social media and targeted emails as well as announcements made in the ASCSI published materials that are available to Academy members on a regular basis.
James E. Beichler, President ASCSI
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled “Is Dark Matter Real?’, has just ... more An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled “Is Dark Matter Real?’, has just appeared in the August 2018 issue of Scientific American. Every physicist, astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist as well as everyone interested in science needs to read this article because it portends one of the greatest scientific advances in several hundred years, the complete unification of physics and science in general. Due to new observational evidence in astronomy, they have concluded that “Astrophysicists have piled up observations that are difficult to explain with dark matter. It is time to consider that there may be more to gravity than Einstein taught us.” But they have understated the case.
In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers simply shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed dark matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein’s general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both of these paradigms is at hand.
In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers simply shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed dark matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein’s general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both of these paradigms is at hand.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
SSE/IRVA 2018 Conference, 2018
During a well-documented period of history called the Axial Era, East and West split philosophica... more During a well-documented period of history called the Axial Era, East and West split philosophically and metaphysically along two different line of thought. Western thought followed logic, reason and analysis through reduction, while the eastern system of thought depended on intuition and spirituality, which resulted in a more esoteric Eastern science and approach to life in general. But now as all physics is being unified into one single theoretical and paradigmatic whole, these two seemingly opposite and mutually incompatible metaphysical approaches to life, mind and consciousness as well as perceiving the external material/physical world will be accepted as no different at all since they represent one mind and consciousness as they do one physical reality. The world is not split into two different parts. Our minds incorrectly split the world into two parts causing theoretical problems such as the differences between relativity and the quantum, determinism and indeterminism, and finally the most fundamental split of all between point and extension. Once knowledge of this simple truth unifies the paradigms of Western physics, the Eastern metaphysical systems can be added to Western science for a still grander, complete and far more comprehensive model of nature, physical reality, our existence and being. Eastern concepts such as spiritual/mystical enlightenment and Chi/Qi/Ki/Prana become easy to explain within standard physics, which justifies their adaptation to Western medicine, healing and health practices. New technological developments such as ZPE and FTL will also become realities as we learn better how to apply this new physics.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The Academy of Spiritual and Consciousness Studies, Inc, will hold its annual conference on "Aspe... more The Academy of Spiritual and Consciousness Studies, Inc, will hold its annual conference on "Aspects of Consciousness" in Raleigh, NC, on the 4th, 5th and 6th of October, 2018. We are inviting scientists, experimenters, experiencers, practitioners and others to submit abstracts for presentations. We cover ALL aspects of consciousness without any prejudice against those lying along the fringe area front lines of science. We expect that those chosen to present, and possibly even those who submit abstracts but don't present, will complete publishable papers for a Proceedings of the conference.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Once the positivistic/escapist interpretation that human consciousness is epiphenomenal, i.e., ac... more Once the positivistic/escapist interpretation that human consciousness is epiphenomenal, i.e., accidental, is dismissed there are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. These two approaches mark the outer boundaries of the present scientific search for a theoretical model of consciousness, even though Consciousness goes beyond science and moves into the realm of metaphysics. In any case, everything in between these two approaches is seriously muddled and clouded with speculations and metatheories that cannot be possible, which is common to the period preceding a scientific revolution. Some of those speculations and metatheories sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which allows them to appeal to many people, but they would normally be considered non-scientific by definition if they were expressed for anything other than consciousness, which in itself presents a total mystery to science and the scientists who are willing to attempt to explain consciousness. On the other hand, what little concrete information science has at its disposal about consciousness does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought and in some cases earlier western ideas in Natural Philosophy that have been rejected by science, which further muddles the scientific quest for understanding consciousness. These ideas and concepts fit the qualitative aspects of mind that science normally associates with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that such characteristics are known. Science needs to find a balance between them so it can maximize the effect of the next scientific revolution as well as the corresponding evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming, but physics must simultaneously develop a working unified field theory to better define the universe in which consciousness of any kind, shape or form can and has developed.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousn... more There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. This may sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which is normally considered non-scientific by definition, but it does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought. Yet it fits the qualitative aspects of mind that we normally associate with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that they are known. We need to find a balance between them so we can maximize the effect of the evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up ... more Abstract: There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. This may sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which is normally considered non-scientific by definition, but it does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought. Yet it fits the qualitative aspects of mind that we normally associate with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that they are known. We need to find a balance between them so we can maximize the effect of the evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The Path to understanding consciousness is its ‘self’ the path: There are two possible approaches... more The Path to understanding consciousness is its ‘self’ the path: There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. This may sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which is normally considered non-scientific by definition, but it does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought. Yet it fits the qualitative aspects of mind that we normally associate with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that they are known. We need to find a balance between them so we can maximize the effect of the evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactDrafts
Not yet deecided, 2022
The field of consciousness studies is filled with useless weeds that are preventing sturdy stock ... more The field of consciousness studies is filled with useless weeds that are preventing sturdy stock and proper theories from emerging and growing. The problem is twofold: An inability to properly define consciousness in a manner that succumbs to scientific theoretical research and an inability to develop a theoretical physics model of how the brain gives rise to the emergence of conscious awareness. These problems go beyond the normal problems inherent in physics, such as those between reductionism and generalization, but are related after their own manner to this and other dualisms in nature. By taking a wholly new approach founded upon the single field unification of physics, which has already been used to define and model life (the biofield), mind and consciousness within the context of a truly unified field theory, a model of how the brain works from sensation input to memory storage and recall, to building and storing complex memories, all the way through and up to the formation of self-concepts and worldviews, as well as the whole-brain resonance necessary for simple cognition, and beyond to whole-body coherence representing the manifestation of higher consciousness. Within this context, wholly new areas of physics are opened to science, including what ends life, death and what happens thereafter.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
To Be PUBLISHED, 2022
Global warming and cooling of the climate are functions of the earth's internal dynamics, not hum... more Global warming and cooling of the climate are functions of the earth's internal dynamics, not human activity on the surface of the earth, and how it interacts with the sun. That is why we refer to "global" climate change which includes the inner-earth beneath us and not just the atmospheric air above us. Under ordinary conditions the major parts of the earth are in a complex state (emergent complexity) of equilibrium or stability characterized by the lowest possible (and very nearly constant) energy loss to the outside environment of empty space. So, an excess of human-made CO2 in the atmosphere is naught but a very and even extremely minor player in climate change of any form or type.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactTwo years ago, Robert Bigelow and the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS) announce... more Two years ago, Robert Bigelow and the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS) announced an essay competition for the best evidence of the afterlife, i.e., the survival of consciousness past bodily death. The original purpose of the competition was to bring attention to the latest research on the question of the survival of consciousness after death and advertise its supposed scientific 'proof' (sic). The purpose of the BICS essay awards is to raise the public awareness for the Survival of Human Consciousness topic and to stimulate research. The goal of the essay contest is to award contestants for writing papers that summarize the best evidence available for the survival of human consciousness after permanent bodily death. (From the BICS webpage) Of the 204 'experts' that were allowed to enter the competition, 29 actually won cash awards and their essays will be published in special editions for libraries all over the world.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactJournal for Spiritual and Consciousness Studiesdn , 2021
The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting,... more The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting, although there is a great deal of good and various levels of even better evidence when NDEs, reincarnation, new standards for verifying mediumship, death bed visions and other phenomena related to dying and the afterlife are considered. But none of these rises to the level of 'best evidence' for 'proving' the reality of the afterlife. The truth is that there is no falsifiable evidence that can distinguish between the afterlife and other paranormal phenomena, i.e., there are always alternative super-psi or general psi explanations for the data, stories and evidence gathered by parapsychologists and experienced by individuals. The afterlife hypothesis is neither falsifiable nor verifiable given the absolute best 'so-called evidence' available today. Only a valid theory could offer scientific verifiability and also distinguish whether the evidence gathered so far supports the afterlife concept or super-psi. So, with no valid theory of the afterlife available, either an independent acceptable theory based on specific phenomena or better yet as part of a greater comprehensive theory of physical reality, there is nothing on which to base a truly rigorous experiment that could verify the afterlife to the satisfaction of both the scientific and nonscientific communities. Some form of valid acceptable theory is necessary and long overdue to explain and verify the various paranormal phenomena as well as hone the scientific search for survival of consciousness and the afterlife. We must assume that at least consciousness survives as either part or the whole of any possible afterlife. All of the common paranormal examples that deal with the afterlife are in some way simply different data points that should be used to follow the scientific method and lead to some common physical concept that we identify as the afterlife, so the hypothesis can be tested and verified. Not one of these examples is based on anything other than experiences/observations for which no comprehensive scientific model has ever been developed and/or studied in enough detail to even attempt to verify even the minimum level survival of consciousness in some manner. Only one theoretical unification model in modern physics, the single (operational) field theory or SOFT, is comprehensive enough to model life, mind, and consciousness and their evolution in enough specific detail to even talk logically about survival of consciousness. Be this as it may, the only possible 'best evidence' would then be the direct experience of higher consciousness, as in NDEs and enlightenment, which are very personal experiences, but even then, it could only be used as evidence, the best evidence, when it can be analyzed and understood as a physical phenomenon within the context of SOFT, an equivalent or better theoretical model.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactToward a Science of Consciousness Conference, 2020
The first and most important problem with developing a theoretical model of consciousness is defi... more The first and most important problem with developing a theoretical model of consciousness is defining consciousness, but everyone mistakenly tries to define consciousness with respect to the individual, or 'self', when in fact consciousness can only be defined within the context of our whole physical reality relative to a person's visions of 'self'. Some thinkers and scholars even try to dismiss the physical nature of consciousness, but consciousness can only and must be physical, at some level, because it clearly interacts with the physical world through mind, brain and living material beings. Since consciousness cannot, by its very nature, be material, that leaves only the possibility that consciousness must and can only be a field effect such as an extremely complex multi-leveled field structure. This leaves only two possibilities: The electromagnetic and the gravito-gravnetic fields. Gravity is too weak so it can be eliminated, which leaves only electromagnetism. Now, of the two parts of this stronger field, magnetism rules over and can direct the flow of electricity, which dominates the body and brain, and magnetism can build extremely complex multi-leveled field domain structures. So consciousness must be magnetic in nature, with the normal scalar magnetic B-field domain structure equating to our lower level mundane consciousness and the corresponding magnetic vector potential A-field representing our higher consciousness that connects us to (is continuous with) the wholeness and oneness of the universe at the quantum level of our reality. This physical model of consciousness is fully and comprehensively compatible with a completely unified single field theory that unifies all of classical physics (Newtonian theory, Maxwellian electromagnetism, evolution theory and thermodynamics), the various popular models of the quantum theory and all of relativity theory. We can now consider consciousness to be wholly and completely explained, at least within the context of our present knowledge of physical reality and the universe, within a physical unification theory that is both falsifiable and yields specific predictions, some of which have already been confirmed.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactJASCS, 2020
The ASCSI Board is planning our annual conference for early October, in the Durham/Raleigh/Resear... more The ASCSI Board is planning our annual conference for early October, in the Durham/Raleigh/Research Triangle area of North Carolina. This will be at least a three-day conference with speakers covering all aspects of Spirituality and Consciousness, whether non-scientific, scientific or experiential, within the context of the above stated theme. Jim Beichler, a leading expert in the physics of consciousness, historian of science, President of the Academy and Editor of the Academy publications, will do one Keynote (evening) presentation and a three-hour seminar/workshop on the concepts and future of consciousness and spirituality within their physical (scientific) context. We would like to see and present a balance between valid science, practitioners and experiencers, as well as professionals and laymen in the field of spirituality and consciousness studies. This includes all areas of parapsychology and paraphysics. The ASCSI will announce other speakers as well as the final dates and venue for the conference as that information becomes available. In the meantime, though ASCSI is asking for speakers, presenters and workshop leaders to submit a one-page 500-to 800-word abstract (description) for proposed presenters. The ASCSI is also seeking co-sponsors for the conference in the form of labs, educational institutions and universities, like-minded organizations, and other groups of practitioners, experiencers and people who want to make a real difference and impact the emerging shift in consciousness and spirituality that humanity is presently experiencing. Transformation and ascension are to spirituality what evolution and revolution are to consciousness, especially in with respect to science, respectively, and this conference will cover these topics as thoroughly and comprehensively as possible in the allotted time. This conference is especially important and timely given the present state of emerging AI, the recent emergence of brain machine interfaces and the possibility of our discovery of intelligent sentient life elsewhere in the universe, as well as the impact that these discoveries will have on the further development and evolution of human consciousness. We especially welcome students and younger adults to participate and attend the conference because the subjects we are discussing will bear heavily on their future wellbeing, comfort, security, happiness and every aspect of their overall lives and living conditions. We are planning our conference in spite of the recent coronavirus scare, assuming that such a conference will be okay in the Fall after the Summer of 2020. We are also taking into consideration other venues, such as the internet, for the conference IF AND ONLY IF having 'in person' attendance to the conference is not allowed in October, or we need to cancel the conference due to the coronavirus. So please do not hesitate to send an abstract. Presenters and workshop leaders will not have to pay for the conference, and they will receive gratis e-membership in the ASCSI but will be responsible for their own room and board. We will help them in this regard as much as we are able to but cannot yet commit to helping them financially. Keynote speakers (only) will have the same as well as receive room and board for their participation, but we cannot give honorariums unless we receive some form of outside funding (specific donations) or grants. We are also seeking grant money, and if we are successful, we may be able to support others to attend the conference. We normally publish an official Proceedings for the conference, but submitting an article or paper is completely voluntary, although we encourage and highly recommend everyone to do so. Registration fees and availability will be published later, when we decide on the final venue and dates. Please send all inquiries, submissions, comments, suggestions and thoughts to Jim Beichler at jebco1st@aol.com. If Jim has not responded to your inquiries and/or submissions within ten days, please resend them to make sure that they have not gone errant in the email/internet system (spam catchers and such) and he has not received them.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactPsi Con: Aspects of Consciousness, 2019
Any physical or realistic scientific theory of consciousness requires four different fundamental ... more Any physical or realistic scientific theory of consciousness requires four different fundamental elements: (1) Unification of physics; (2) A new theory of physical evolution; (3) Precise physical definitions of life, mind and consciousness; and, (4) A complete physics of the brain. When these four are finished, a complete and comprehensive model of physical reality emerges which is not only amenable to consciousness but requires consciousness to evolve. Consciousness is therefore a fundamental part of all living organisms and beings as well as the universe at large that extends beyond the three-dimensions of normal experiential space but becomes higher consciousness as the four-dimensional extension of our being into an embedding hyperspace. The existence of this fourth dimension of space is necessary to give a complete explanation of the simple principles of three-dimensional matter and ‘matter in motion’ on which the present science of physics is ultimately based. Without the fourth dimension of space, our universe could not exist as we experience it.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactJASCS, 2019
Has been finished -- Look for Next Year -- 2020
Announcing the 44th annual ASCSI Conference
PSI ... more Has been finished -- Look for Next Year -- 2020
Announcing the 44th annual ASCSI Conference
PSI CON: Aspects of Consciousness
We have a wonderful lineup of speakers including Kevin Tedeschi, Stephan A. Schwartz and PMH Atwater, to mention only a few, as well as panel discussions on various topics regarding different aspects of consciousness and spirituality
For more information on the Academy, visit our webpage at www.ascsi.org, and for updates on the conference visit our webpage at ascsiconference.com. For specialized questions contact Tyler Stevens, Tyler@ascsi.org/. Conference registration can be made online through the conference webpage or by direct mail to Tyler Stevens at the address given on the Title Page of this Journal. But hurry, the conference is fast approaching.
Announcing the 44th annual ASCSI Conference
PSI CON: Aspects of Consciousness
We have a wonderful lineup of speakers including Kevin Tedeschi, Stephan A. Schwartz and PMH Atwater, to mention only a few, as well as panel discussions on various topics regarding different aspects of consciousness and spirituality
For more information on the Academy, visit our webpage at www.ascsi.org, and for updates on the conference visit our webpage at ascsiconference.com. For specialized questions contact Tyler Stevens, Tyler@ascsi.org/. Conference registration can be made online through the conference webpage or by direct mail to Tyler Stevens at the address given on the Title Page of this Journal. But hurry, the conference is fast approaching.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactJournal of Spiritual and Consciousness Studies, 2019
According to commonly accepted theories of history and the history of science in particular, a re... more According to commonly accepted theories of history and the history of science in particular, a revolutionary period of progress is presaged or preceded by crises. In the case of physics and the Second Scientific Revolution (1900), these crises were a failure to detect the luminiferous aether and the problem of blackbody radiation. But these crises were defined by the winners of the Second Scientific Revolution −primarily the quantum scientists−to propagate their own claims to having overthrown the Newtonian paradigm and replace it with their own quantum paradigm. However, within this context, the cultural movement known as 'modern spiritualism; and the reciprocal movement in science to study psychic phenomena, are considered historical aberrations and therefore unscientific. Yet these are all what I call 'phallacies in fysics' because they are wrong when the historical record is studied more closely.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactTo Be published, 2019
One of the great unanswered questions in the history and philosophy of science is why science aro... more One of the great unanswered questions in the history and philosophy of science is why science arose in the West and not in the East. The Axial age, from 700 to 300 BCE, saw a Zeroth Scientific Revolution in the West, from Thales to Aristotle, Archimedes, and Euclid. Almost simultaneously, Lao Tzu and Confucius appeared in China and the era of a Hundred Philosophies began, ending only when the Imperial Age began, while Siddhartha Gautama and Mahavira began changes in India that only ended when the Veda declined with the rise of Buddhism and the Ashokan Empire conquered India and surrounding areas, spreading Buddhism farther and wider than previous beliefs had ever gone. These changes during the Axial Age established the fundamental differences in worldview that we still witness and live by today in the East and West. Yet many scholars point to early technological developments in China such as gunpowder and rockets and wonder how China failed to capitalize on these and other developments to establish a theoretical basis for science, as did western culture, while major advances in mathematics and other scholarly pursuits occurred in India, raising the same questions. But in these historical speculations, and they are no more than idle and prejudicial speculations, there is at least an inaccurate presumption if not a dangerous assumption that Eastern philosophies are somehow unscientific, a view which mistakenly places Eastern ideas and ideals in an inferior position relative to Western science. Neither the statement that Eastern cultures did not formulate sciences nor the implications of this statement can be regarded as complete or even partially accurate. That inaccuracy has now become evident with Western science since modern physics has evolved to the point where concepts such as wholeness, subjectivity, and consciousness that are more common to Eastern science have now become fashionable in the West and have raised concerns about new advances in science itself. The new single (operational) field theory, or SOFT, offers Western and Eastern sciences a chance to combine their characteristic ideals reductionism and wholism, seemingly opposite fundamental approaches to science, into a new and far more comprehensive physics of reality for the first time in human history.
Keywords: Consciousness, unification, East, West, hyperspace, the fourth dimension, three-dimensional space, Chi, Ki, Prana, higher consciousness, modern physics, point and extension, dualisms, function and form
Keywords: Consciousness, unification, East, West, hyperspace, the fourth dimension, three-dimensional space, Chi, Ki, Prana, higher consciousness, modern physics, point and extension, dualisms, function and form
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactThis paper is nothing short of a positive and complete verification of the unification of current... more This paper is nothing short of a positive and complete verification of the unification of current physics paradigms of single field theory (SOFT) in light of recently published observational data in astronomy. An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled " Is Dark Matter Real?', has just appeared in the August 2018 issue of Scientific American. Every physicist, astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist as well as everyone interested in science needs to read this article because it portends one of the greatest scientific advances in several hundred years, the complete unification of physics and science in general. Due to new observational evidence in astronomy, they have concluded that " Astrophysicists have piled up observations that are difficult to explain with Dark Matter. It is time to consider that there may be more to gravity than Einstein taught us. " But they have understated the case. In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers clearly shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed Dark Matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein's general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both paradigms is at hand.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact2018 ASCSI Annual Conference
ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experien... more 2018 ASCSI Annual Conference
ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential
We, at the Academy, will be officially announcing our future plans for the growth and expansion of the ASCSI at this year's Conference. Recent historical trends indicate that both spirituality and consciousness studies are growing evermore important in our various societies, cultures and educational institutions. To keep up with these trends, the ASCSI is planning to expand its role in these fields of study, moving from a passive role to a more active role in promoting increasing levels of spirituality and consciousness individually and collectively within our societies. We are currently seeking contributions (both monetary and in-kind) to help enhance and grow our beneficial and valuable organization. Included in our expansion efforts, we have been busy in the planning of our annual 2018 conference, which, this year, is in conjunction with the Spiritual Frontiers Fellowship of North Carolina. This year’s conference will be held at Unity of the Triangle in Raleigh, NC and will run from Thursday evening, October 4 to Saturday evening, October 6, 2018. We have arranged a broad program of both workshops and lectures based on the title theme “ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS; Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential”. We have sought to offer a comprehensive representation of the subject matter and will continue to do so in the future. With this conference all set, we are already beginning to consider next year's conference and with this in mind we are issuing a preliminary “CALL FOR PAPERS”. For information about this new "CALL FOR PAPERS" for next year's conference send an email to my email,jebeichler@ascsi.org. Stay tuned for updated conference details via this site, our homepage, social media and targeted emails as well as announcements made in the ASCSI published materials that are available to Academy members on a regular basis.
James E. Beichler, President ASCSI
ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential
We, at the Academy, will be officially announcing our future plans for the growth and expansion of the ASCSI at this year's Conference. Recent historical trends indicate that both spirituality and consciousness studies are growing evermore important in our various societies, cultures and educational institutions. To keep up with these trends, the ASCSI is planning to expand its role in these fields of study, moving from a passive role to a more active role in promoting increasing levels of spirituality and consciousness individually and collectively within our societies. We are currently seeking contributions (both monetary and in-kind) to help enhance and grow our beneficial and valuable organization. Included in our expansion efforts, we have been busy in the planning of our annual 2018 conference, which, this year, is in conjunction with the Spiritual Frontiers Fellowship of North Carolina. This year’s conference will be held at Unity of the Triangle in Raleigh, NC and will run from Thursday evening, October 4 to Saturday evening, October 6, 2018. We have arranged a broad program of both workshops and lectures based on the title theme “ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS; Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential”. We have sought to offer a comprehensive representation of the subject matter and will continue to do so in the future. With this conference all set, we are already beginning to consider next year's conference and with this in mind we are issuing a preliminary “CALL FOR PAPERS”. For information about this new "CALL FOR PAPERS" for next year's conference send an email to my email,jebeichler@ascsi.org. Stay tuned for updated conference details via this site, our homepage, social media and targeted emails as well as announcements made in the ASCSI published materials that are available to Academy members on a regular basis.
James E. Beichler, President ASCSI
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactAn article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled “Is Dark Matter Real?’, has just ... more An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled “Is Dark Matter Real?’, has just appeared in the August 2018 issue of Scientific American. Every physicist, astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist as well as everyone interested in science needs to read this article because it portends one of the greatest scientific advances in several hundred years, the complete unification of physics and science in general. Due to new observational evidence in astronomy, they have concluded that “Astrophysicists have piled up observations that are difficult to explain with dark matter. It is time to consider that there may be more to gravity than Einstein taught us.” But they have understated the case.
In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers simply shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed dark matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein’s general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both of these paradigms is at hand.
In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers simply shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed dark matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein’s general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both of these paradigms is at hand.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactSSE/IRVA 2018 Conference, 2018
During a well-documented period of history called the Axial Era, East and West split philosophica... more During a well-documented period of history called the Axial Era, East and West split philosophically and metaphysically along two different line of thought. Western thought followed logic, reason and analysis through reduction, while the eastern system of thought depended on intuition and spirituality, which resulted in a more esoteric Eastern science and approach to life in general. But now as all physics is being unified into one single theoretical and paradigmatic whole, these two seemingly opposite and mutually incompatible metaphysical approaches to life, mind and consciousness as well as perceiving the external material/physical world will be accepted as no different at all since they represent one mind and consciousness as they do one physical reality. The world is not split into two different parts. Our minds incorrectly split the world into two parts causing theoretical problems such as the differences between relativity and the quantum, determinism and indeterminism, and finally the most fundamental split of all between point and extension. Once knowledge of this simple truth unifies the paradigms of Western physics, the Eastern metaphysical systems can be added to Western science for a still grander, complete and far more comprehensive model of nature, physical reality, our existence and being. Eastern concepts such as spiritual/mystical enlightenment and Chi/Qi/Ki/Prana become easy to explain within standard physics, which justifies their adaptation to Western medicine, healing and health practices. New technological developments such as ZPE and FTL will also become realities as we learn better how to apply this new physics.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactThe Academy of Spiritual and Consciousness Studies, Inc, will hold its annual conference on "Aspe... more The Academy of Spiritual and Consciousness Studies, Inc, will hold its annual conference on "Aspects of Consciousness" in Raleigh, NC, on the 4th, 5th and 6th of October, 2018. We are inviting scientists, experimenters, experiencers, practitioners and others to submit abstracts for presentations. We cover ALL aspects of consciousness without any prejudice against those lying along the fringe area front lines of science. We expect that those chosen to present, and possibly even those who submit abstracts but don't present, will complete publishable papers for a Proceedings of the conference.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactOnce the positivistic/escapist interpretation that human consciousness is epiphenomenal, i.e., ac... more Once the positivistic/escapist interpretation that human consciousness is epiphenomenal, i.e., accidental, is dismissed there are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. These two approaches mark the outer boundaries of the present scientific search for a theoretical model of consciousness, even though Consciousness goes beyond science and moves into the realm of metaphysics. In any case, everything in between these two approaches is seriously muddled and clouded with speculations and metatheories that cannot be possible, which is common to the period preceding a scientific revolution. Some of those speculations and metatheories sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which allows them to appeal to many people, but they would normally be considered non-scientific by definition if they were expressed for anything other than consciousness, which in itself presents a total mystery to science and the scientists who are willing to attempt to explain consciousness. On the other hand, what little concrete information science has at its disposal about consciousness does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought and in some cases earlier western ideas in Natural Philosophy that have been rejected by science, which further muddles the scientific quest for understanding consciousness. These ideas and concepts fit the qualitative aspects of mind that science normally associates with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that such characteristics are known. Science needs to find a balance between them so it can maximize the effect of the next scientific revolution as well as the corresponding evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming, but physics must simultaneously develop a working unified field theory to better define the universe in which consciousness of any kind, shape or form can and has developed.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactThere are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousn... more There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. This may sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which is normally considered non-scientific by definition, but it does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought. Yet it fits the qualitative aspects of mind that we normally associate with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that they are known. We need to find a balance between them so we can maximize the effect of the evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactAbstract: There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up ... more Abstract: There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. This may sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which is normally considered non-scientific by definition, but it does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought. Yet it fits the qualitative aspects of mind that we normally associate with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that they are known. We need to find a balance between them so we can maximize the effect of the evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactThe Path to understanding consciousness is its ‘self’ the path: There are two possible approaches... more The Path to understanding consciousness is its ‘self’ the path: There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. This may sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which is normally considered non-scientific by definition, but it does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought. Yet it fits the qualitative aspects of mind that we normally associate with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that they are known. We need to find a balance between them so we can maximize the effect of the evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactNot yet deecided, 2022
The field of consciousness studies is filled with useless weeds that are preventing sturdy stock ... more The field of consciousness studies is filled with useless weeds that are preventing sturdy stock and proper theories from emerging and growing. The problem is twofold: An inability to properly define consciousness in a manner that succumbs to scientific theoretical research and an inability to develop a theoretical physics model of how the brain gives rise to the emergence of conscious awareness. These problems go beyond the normal problems inherent in physics, such as those between reductionism and generalization, but are related after their own manner to this and other dualisms in nature. By taking a wholly new approach founded upon the single field unification of physics, which has already been used to define and model life (the biofield), mind and consciousness within the context of a truly unified field theory, a model of how the brain works from sensation input to memory storage and recall, to building and storing complex memories, all the way through and up to the formation of self-concepts and worldviews, as well as the whole-brain resonance necessary for simple cognition, and beyond to whole-body coherence representing the manifestation of higher consciousness. Within this context, wholly new areas of physics are opened to science, including what ends life, death and what happens thereafter.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactTo Be PUBLISHED, 2022
Global warming and cooling of the climate are functions of the earth's internal dynamics, not hum... more Global warming and cooling of the climate are functions of the earth's internal dynamics, not human activity on the surface of the earth, and how it interacts with the sun. That is why we refer to "global" climate change which includes the inner-earth beneath us and not just the atmospheric air above us. Under ordinary conditions the major parts of the earth are in a complex state (emergent complexity) of equilibrium or stability characterized by the lowest possible (and very nearly constant) energy loss to the outside environment of empty space. So, an excess of human-made CO2 in the atmosphere is naught but a very and even extremely minor player in climate change of any form or type.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The physics community has seemingly been faced with an unsolvable conundrum for the past century.... more The physics community has seemingly been faced with an unsolvable conundrum for the past century. Its two fundamental theories of reality, the quantum and relativity, for all intents and purposes seem incompatible as normally defined by their discreteness and continuity, respectively. This conundrum is not an unsolvable mystery as nearly everyone believes but only a simple challenge for scientists to overcome. When this problem is considered at a lower and more fundamental level of physical reality it disappears, yet scientists swear it is already being considered at the lowest level of fundamentality so they look for nothing more fundamental. Points or point-elements are not discrete in our threedimensional Riemannian surface, which is distinguished in physics by its internal continuity, but our infinitesimally thin surface is discrete from the similar parallel three-dimensional surfaces that collectively constitute the fourth or embedding dimension of our space. Therefore, a Kaluza A-line constituting a macrostring can be constructed of discrete points relative only to the fourth dimension of space. while the three-dimensional surface of our world remains continuous. This structure then requires a change in how the different quantities and concepts are defined and understood in quantum theory for a complete unification to occur.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Aspects of Consciousness: Theoretical, Spiritual, Anomalous, Experiential, Proceedings of the 42nd Annual ASCSI Conference , 2019
The inner workings of the primal cosmic mish-mash which yields our senses of spirit, consciousnes... more The inner workings of the primal cosmic mish-mash which yields our senses of spirit, consciousness and our interpretations of nature/physics
Abstract: It is no coincidence that the many theoretical physicists are ‘suggesting’ that our final physical reality could be time, bits, a hologram, a computer program, information, 1s and 0s, mathematics, or some other intangible quantity while many consciousness scientists and philosophers suggest that human consciousness might be time, bits, a hologram, a computer program, information, 1s and 0s, mathematics, or some other intangible quality. They are making these ridiculous claims independent of each other because each group is facing their own inabilities to move forward, and they are both grasping at straws, in this case the same straws. They are both facing conundrums of thought and do not realize that they are confusing the advance of science rather than advancing science. In the meantime, neuroscientists, technicians and engineers are developing machines that read peoples’ minds and developing brain/machine interfaces and advanced computer AI that seems to render the questions regarding human consciousness and spirituality either even more important or completely irrelevant. This is the mish-mash that is the present state of science, but a revolution, not only in physics and science, but in human thought and evolution itself, that will change all of this is on the offing.
Keywords: mind, consciousness, Chi, Qi, Axial Age, thermodynamics, physical evolution, hyperspace, higher consciousness, true self, physics of consciousness, neural correlates of consciousness, microtubules, whole-brain coherence, whole-body coherence, NDEs, spiritual enlightenment, intuition, paranormal phenomena, survival after death
Abstract: It is no coincidence that the many theoretical physicists are ‘suggesting’ that our final physical reality could be time, bits, a hologram, a computer program, information, 1s and 0s, mathematics, or some other intangible quantity while many consciousness scientists and philosophers suggest that human consciousness might be time, bits, a hologram, a computer program, information, 1s and 0s, mathematics, or some other intangible quality. They are making these ridiculous claims independent of each other because each group is facing their own inabilities to move forward, and they are both grasping at straws, in this case the same straws. They are both facing conundrums of thought and do not realize that they are confusing the advance of science rather than advancing science. In the meantime, neuroscientists, technicians and engineers are developing machines that read peoples’ minds and developing brain/machine interfaces and advanced computer AI that seems to render the questions regarding human consciousness and spirituality either even more important or completely irrelevant. This is the mish-mash that is the present state of science, but a revolution, not only in physics and science, but in human thought and evolution itself, that will change all of this is on the offing.
Keywords: mind, consciousness, Chi, Qi, Axial Age, thermodynamics, physical evolution, hyperspace, higher consciousness, true self, physics of consciousness, neural correlates of consciousness, microtubules, whole-brain coherence, whole-body coherence, NDEs, spiritual enlightenment, intuition, paranormal phenomena, survival after death
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Aspects of consciousness: Theoretical, spiritual, anomalous, experiential, Proceedings of teh ASCSI/SFF 2018 Conference, 2018
It is no coincidence that the many theoretical physicists are ‘suggesting’ that our final physica... more It is no coincidence that the many theoretical physicists are ‘suggesting’ that our final physical reality could be time, bits, a hologram, a computer program, information, 1s and 0s, mathematics, or some other intangible quantity while many consciousness scientists and philosophers suggest that human consciousness might be time, bits, a hologram, a computer program, information, 1s and 0s, mathematics, or some other intangible quality. They are making these ridiculous claims independent of each other because each group is facing their own inabilities to move forward and they are both grasping at straws, in this case the same straws. They are both facing conundrums of thought and do not realize that they are confusing the advance of science rather than advancing science. In the meantime, neuroscientists, technicians and engineers are developing machines that read peoples’ minds and developing brain/machine interfaces and advanced computer AI that seems to render the questions regarding human consciousness and spirituality either even more important or completely irrelevant. This is the mish-mash that is the present state of science, but a revolution, not only in physics and science, but in human thought and evolution itself, that will change all of this is on the offing.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Aspects of Consciousness: Theoretical, spiritual, anomalous, experiential; Proceedings of the 2018 ASCSI/SFF Conference, Oct 6, 2018
This seminar/workshop will delve more deeply into and look more closely at the theoretical basis ... more This seminar/workshop will delve more deeply into and look more closely at the theoretical basis of the physical model involved, a theory of unification called single (operational) field theory or SOFT. It will also cover the biological and mental consequences of the new concept of a semi-physical pre-consciousness potential field that exists collectively in the discrete points of space (which has emerged logically from reworking the Big Bang model with respect to the new theory) on living organisms, including explanations of the survival of consciousness as a viable entity after death, the physics of paranormal phenomena, health and healing and their relationship to individual consciousness, collective consciousness, the relationship between Cosmic Consciousness and individual consciousness and how a separate but connected Cosmic Consciousness, if it exists, could manifest in our physical /material world through the human brain. All these topics would be open for discussion among the attendees after the theoretical basis of these concepts is explained. This Workshop will cover nearly everything, if not everything, that the ASCSI is about as an academic organization.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled “Is Dark Matter Real?’, has just ... more An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled “Is Dark Matter Real?’, has just appeared in the August 2018 issue of Scientific American. Every physicist, astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist as well as everyone interested in science needs to read this article because it portends one of the greatest scientific advances in several hundred years, the complete unification of physics and science in general. Due to new observational evidence in astronomy, they have concluded that “Astrophysicists have piled up observations that are difficult to explain with dark matter. It is time to consider that there may be more to gravity than Einstein taught us.” But they have understated the case.
In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers simply shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed dark matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein’s general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both of these paradigms is at hand.
A draft "letter to the editor" regarding the Hossenfelder McGaugh article can be found here at Academia at https://www.academia.edu/37129878/A_complete_unification_of_modern_physics_paradigms_A_necessary_reappraisal_of_the_state_of_theoretical_physics_in_light_of_new_observational_data.
In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers simply shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed dark matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein’s general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both of these paradigms is at hand.
A draft "letter to the editor" regarding the Hossenfelder McGaugh article can be found here at Academia at https://www.academia.edu/37129878/A_complete_unification_of_modern_physics_paradigms_A_necessary_reappraisal_of_the_state_of_theoretical_physics_in_light_of_new_observational_data.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Great changes are coming to our world as we know it as well as our worldview of ourselves, the un... more Great changes are coming to our world as we know it as well as our worldview of ourselves, the universe, how they interact and the results of their interaction. Nearly everyone agrees that we have entered a revolutionary period in science and especially in physics, but the expected revolution is thought to be based on the fundamental nature of the quantum alone when, in fact, it will only proceed by a unification of quantum and relativity on an equal basis. This unification will be so great that it affects all of physics and not just those two fundamental theories and it will be so comprehensive that it will affect all branches of science and human thought. This revolution will incorporate the mind and consciousness as active players in our reality as much as observers and interpreters of our reality. That is because the scientific revolution will be accompanied by a leap in human evolution that will see Homo sapiens evolving into Homo paradoxus, a leap resulting from a previously unsuspected consciousness initiated form of top-down evolution instead of the normal bottom-up step-wise evolution explained by Darwin and modern genetics.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
To Die For (2nd edition) - The story of everything: Physics, spirituality, consciousness and afterlife, 2018
Preliminary revision for Chapter 6, 2nd ed., "To Die For -The story of everything: Physics, spiri... more Preliminary revision for Chapter 6, 2nd ed., "To Die For -The story of everything: Physics, spirituality, consciousness and afterlife", which be published in its entirety in the next few months.
Abstract: As strange as it may seem historically, thermodynamics and biological evolutionary emerged in science at the same time out of the same Newtonian context, seem for all intents and purposes to be intimately related to open another, yet they are complete physical opposites of one another. Thermodynamics is about disorder, entropy and inanimate matter in general, while biological evolution is all about order and the complexity of very special material systems that are, in general, inanimate. It should be evident across the whole spectrum of science that these two disciplines are related, but it seems that science goes to great lengths to demonstrate how they are essentially unrelated. That is because science has over limited and restricted both disciplines by definitions and ideas that are incomplete. Science regards only the chemical/mechanical/electrical processes of life as 'life' itself, while many people believe that 'life' itself is something that goes beyond the processes that maintain and sustain life. On the other hand, some scientists believe that 'life' is negentropic and defies the rules and principles of thermodynamics, but those who do not believe this go to great lengths to 'stretch' the limits of what constitutes a 'closed' system to accommodate, but not really explain, living organisms in any scientific manner. So, evolution and thermodynamics restrict themselves to the very thinly disguised Cartesian limits and boundaries between MIND and MATTER, which are not quite so evident elsewhere in science. Science mistakenly believes that it has passed far beyond those centuries' old Cartesian limits and influences, but it has not. Given this information and understanding how nature really works, it is easy to expand the laws of thermodynamics and apply them to evolution theory in such a way that a new 'evolution of physical systems' emerges of which biological evolution (whether Darwinian or modern genetic) is just one small but significant part.
Abstract: As strange as it may seem historically, thermodynamics and biological evolutionary emerged in science at the same time out of the same Newtonian context, seem for all intents and purposes to be intimately related to open another, yet they are complete physical opposites of one another. Thermodynamics is about disorder, entropy and inanimate matter in general, while biological evolution is all about order and the complexity of very special material systems that are, in general, inanimate. It should be evident across the whole spectrum of science that these two disciplines are related, but it seems that science goes to great lengths to demonstrate how they are essentially unrelated. That is because science has over limited and restricted both disciplines by definitions and ideas that are incomplete. Science regards only the chemical/mechanical/electrical processes of life as 'life' itself, while many people believe that 'life' itself is something that goes beyond the processes that maintain and sustain life. On the other hand, some scientists believe that 'life' is negentropic and defies the rules and principles of thermodynamics, but those who do not believe this go to great lengths to 'stretch' the limits of what constitutes a 'closed' system to accommodate, but not really explain, living organisms in any scientific manner. So, evolution and thermodynamics restrict themselves to the very thinly disguised Cartesian limits and boundaries between MIND and MATTER, which are not quite so evident elsewhere in science. Science mistakenly believes that it has passed far beyond those centuries' old Cartesian limits and influences, but it has not. Given this information and understanding how nature really works, it is easy to expand the laws of thermodynamics and apply them to evolution theory in such a way that a new 'evolution of physical systems' emerges of which biological evolution (whether Darwinian or modern genetic) is just one small but significant part.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
To Die For, the story of everything: Physics, spirituality, consciousness and afterlife (2nd edition), 2018
It has been said and is well known that each generation rewrites history and that notion is espec... more It has been said and is well known that each generation rewrites history and that notion is especially true for science when science undergoes a new revolution in its fundamental concepts. As paradigms shift in the scientific revolution, ideas, concepts and suggestions that were not part of the earlier historical discourse supporting the older paradigm, make more sense and even become relevant within the context of the new paradigm, so they must be included in the new history supporting the new paradigm. This notion is truer than true for the new Third Scientific Revolution that is upon us. The unification of relativity theory and the quantum utilizing an expanded Riemannian geometry that includes both point-elements (equivalent to quantum discrete points) and the Riemann's original metric-elements to explain gravito-gravnetism and electromagnetism literally begs for a more literal and accurate history of the present situation from which the new unification emerged in science, culture and human history. How the original development of non-Euclidean geometries and hyperspaces as well as the changing fundamental role of space, time, matter and the mind and consciousness that perceive and interpret our commonly experienced physical reality to develop science has now become of paramount importance to understanding where Homo sapiens ranks in the wholeness of the universe in of all its collection of interacting (quantum entangled) parts.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness: Bottom-up consciousne... more There are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness: Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the physical universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the physical universe to the individual. This may sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which is normally considered non-scientific by definition in western science, but it does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought. Yet it fits the qualitative aspects of mind that we normally associate with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that they are known. The first clue to understanding is that consciousness, whatever and whichever it is, must be physical at some level because it interacts and intervenes either directly and/or indirectly in the physical/material world. Science needs to find a balance between the esoteric clues to the nature of consciousness and the physical results of consciousness perceiving and interpreting the external three-dimensional world, which it normally deals with, so we can maximize the effect of the new scientific revolution as well as the evolutionary leap in human consciousness that are coming. The main problem is that, in this case, the consciousness under observation is the same consciousness that is doing the observing and interpreting of itself, which opens the subject to extreme obfuscation in the minds of scientists.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Since Einstein died in 1955, very few theoretical scientists have tried to complete his work beca... more Since Einstein died in 1955, very few theoretical scientists have tried to complete his work because the pendulum of history has swung toward favoring field theories based on the quantum for the expected unification of physics. Nearly everyone now believes that the quantum (discrete point) and relativity (continuity) are incompatible and the quantum is more fundamental than relativity and continuity, so those who have sought unification have looked for new and unique quantum approaches to accomplish unification. However, the truth is that the quantum and relativity are not incompatible and the traditional differences between the two–discreteness and continuity, indeterminism and determinism–are just the outward appearances of an even deeper fundamental problem–geometric point and extension–that when solved renders relativity and the quantum completely compatible. This deeper problem is even more significant because Riemann knew of and failed to consider and even purposely ignored the problem of point-elements and based his differential geometry of surfaces on metric-elements alone. Therefore, expanding the Riemannian geometry to include point-elements, which can be interpreted as discrete points for the quantum, forms a fundamental enough foundation for developing a unified field theory.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Many scientists have come to believe that any true unification model in physics must include a co... more Many scientists have come to believe that any true unification model in physics must include a concept of consciousness as well as a model for the mind that interprets the external physical/material world. And, that number is growing. This particular physical model does just that. In fact it goes much further. Since Beichler's single field theory (SFT) includes a physical model of the neural net and explains how Mind and Consciousness can emerge from the physics of living organisms, it assimilates more intuitive models such as Andrews' 0-D point Void which witnesses and co-creates higher-dimensional Riemannian geometrical realities as well as other more generalized physical models of consciousness to form a truly synergistic model of reality. In other words, physical reality and the consciousness that perceives and interprets that reality both come from the same source, they are co-created at the very beginning of the universe. A singular discrete 0-D point/twist Void emerged within the absolute spaceless-timeless Void of nothingness that preceded everything and through a logical sequence of events produced everything that now exists as our universe. This synergistic model goes well beyond the notion of Mind and Consciousness as mere perceivers and interpreters of the external material/physical world. It clearly demonstrates that the precursors to our experience of Consciousness are fundamental elements and active participants in creating the physical world that we perceive and scientifically interpret through the application of physics. Andrews' intuitive approach to consciousness science It is well known that intuitives are often the very people who intimately experience first-hand knowledge of consciousness. Their views of consciousness and the inner workings of the world in general greatly differ from those of ordinary people and the majority of scientists. Even the word 'intuition' has been looked down upon in science as recently as a few decades ago. Most scientists consider their own worldview above reproach, believing their insights are based upon acute observations of the external world around them. In general, scientists have historically looked down upon all types of intuitive knowledge and have obstinately refused to consider intuitive knowledge of consciousness and how it works in relation to the world as a whole. They view intuitive data with suspicion as no more than anecdotal evidence, without any scientific validity. Yet that evidence or data, anecdotal or not, can provide valid observations of consciousness and how consciousness works in the world at large. So to those few scientists willing to seriously consider information from intuitives, it can seem as though conservative scientists are wrong on this issue, as well as overly biased by acting completely in an unscientific manner within the broader meaning of science itself. Keeping this in mind, it is both interesting and informative to consider insights brought forward by Sperry Andrews whose undergraduate degree in science and ongoing study has been enhanced as a Near Death Experiencer (NDEr) from the age of four, over sixty years ago. Andrews has proposed a speculative bottom-up theory in physics of everything originating from nothing.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Many scientists have come to believe that any true unification model in physics must include a co... more Many scientists have come to believe that any true unification model in physics must include a concept of consciousness as well as a model for the mind that interprets the external physical/material world. And, that number is growing. This particular physical model does just that. In fact it goes much further. Since Beichler's single field model includes a physical model of the neural net and explains how Mind and Consciousness can emerge from the physics of living organisms, it assimilates more intuitive models such as Andrews' 0-D point Void which witnesses and co-creates higher-dimensional Riemannian geometrical realities as well as other more generalized physical models of consciousness to form a truly synergistic model of reality. This synergistic model goes well beyond the notion of Mind and Consciousness as mere perceivers and interpreters of the external material/physical world. It clearly demonstrates that the precursors to our experience of Consciousness are fundamental elements and active participants in creating the physical world that we perceive and scientifically interpret through the application of physics. Andrews' intuitive approach to consciousness science It is well known that intuitives are often the very people who intimately experience first-hand knowledge of consciousness. Their views of consciousness and the inner workings of the world in general greatly differ from those of ordinary people and especially scientists. Even the word 'intuition' has been looked down upon in science as recently as a few decades ago. Scientists consider their own worldview above reproach, believing their insights are based upon acute observations of the external world around them. In general, scientists have historically looked down upon all types of intuitive knowledge and have obstinately refused to consider intuitive knowledge of consciousness and how it works in relation to the world as a whole. They view intuitive data with suspicion as no more than anecdotal evidence, without any scientific validity. Yet that evidence or data, anecdotal or not, can provide valid observations of consciousness and how consciousness works in the world at large. So to those few scientists willing to seriously consider information from intuitives, it can seem as though conservative scientists are wrong on this issue, as well as overly biased by acting completely in an unscientific manner within the broader meaning of science itself. Keeping this in mind, it is both interesting and informative to consider insights brought forward by Sperry Andrews whose undergraduate degree in science has been enhanced as a Near Death Experiencer (NDEr) from the age of four, nearly sixty years ago. Andrews has proposed a speculative bottom-up theory of everything in physics originating from nothing, including how top-down theories, such as general relativity and quantum mechanics, might approximate Jim Beichler's single field theory as well as theoretical models that posit a consciousness space or universe. Andrews asks if the solution to this question may be found in Bernhard Riemann's original conception of space curvature, whereby an n-dimensional space is embedded in an n+1 dimensional manifold: i.e., all 3-D points are united at
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
We usually think about evolution in the context of human life and revolution in the context of po... more We usually think about evolution in the context of human life and revolution in the context of politics, but neither concept is solely the concern of those contexts. Everything evolves in nature, whether living or not, and revolutions abound throughout our world in numerous different contexts, but this program is a less circumspect and seeks a far broader and more comprehensive context for both the evolution and revolution in human consciousness. It is historical in a sense, but not exactly about the history of evolution or of any particular revolution that has already occurred. It is about what we as individuals and collectively as humans can become and are becoming as well as how we can individually and collectively contribute toward and hasten that end. The program thus emphasizes what will become history in the next century or so, our present history in the making because we are now experiencing a scientific revolution as well as an unprecedented leap in our own natural evolutionary path. These two concepts, the scientific revolution and human evolution, are converging toward the same end at the same time and that is something that has never before happened in human history. Under these circumstances, we are knowledgeable witnesses to our own future and this program is designed to help us achieve and more effectively approach the twin goal of scientific revolution and human evolution while surviving and even minimizing their undesirable side effects as best we can as a species even though what will emerge will be a new and far more advanced human species.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Proceedings of the Vigier 10 Symposium, 2017
Many scientists have come to believe that any true unification theory in physics must include a c... more Many scientists have come to believe that any true unification theory in physics must include a concept of consciousness as well as a model for the mind that interprets the external physical/material world. And, that number is growing. This physical model goes even further. The single field theory includes a physical model of the neural net and explains how mind and consciousness can emerge from the physics of living organisms. Yet it is general enough to assimilate more intuitive models such as Andrews’ 0-D point Void which witnesses and co-creates higher-dimensional Riemannian geometrical realities as well as other more generalized physical models of consciousness to form a truly synergistic model of reality. In other words, physical reality and the consciousness that perceives and interprets that reality both come from the same source, they are co-created at the very beginning of the universe. A singular discrete 0-D point/twist Void emerged within the absolute spaceless-timeless Void of nothingness that preceded everything and through a logical sequence of events produced everything that now exists as our universe. This synergistic model goes well beyond the simple notion of mind and consciousness as mere human bound perceivers and interpreters of the external material/physical world by placing the physical origin of consciousness within every geometrical point in the universe itself. Although consciousness itself is not everywhere in the universe–it is not a property of every bit of matter we observe or event that we detect–the universal will of consciousness to emerge in all forms of life is everywhere in the universe. This physical model clearly demonstrates that the precursors to our experience of consciousness are fundamental elements and active participants in creating the physical world that we perceive and scientifically interpret through the application of physics.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Proceedings of the Vigier 10 Symposium, 2017
A nagging problem has existed in the way we regard the local physical world around us and the non... more A nagging problem has existed in the way we regard the local physical world around us and the non-local universe at large since the very beginning development of our philosophical and scientific attitudes toward the external world. That problem deals with the dualistic way in which we parse the physical world itself through geometry. Geometry can be based upon two different elements: the extension-or metric element of Riemann and the point-element. Riemannian geometry can be fixed by expanding it to include the point-element, but even that is not enough. A further physical advance can be made by adopting the idea of the 0-D point Void, first developed intuitively by Sperry Andrews, but understanding the physical role of the 0-D point Void can only be realized by expanding that notion by adopting the physical concept of a discrete geometrical point/twist. It is only when a discrete 0-D point/ twist Void replaces the simple point-element missing in the Riemannian system of differential geometry of surfaces that post-modern physics fulfills its promise. Understanding the concept of a point-element, of course, is necessary to understand how the Riemannian geometry has been used in general relativity as well as how it can be expanded to unify all of modern physics, including quantum theory, under a single geometrical paradigm. Whether a scientist is considering the discrete point-particles of the Standard Model or the existence of point singularities in relativity theory, the concerns are exactly the same, which forces the concept of an individual 0-D discrete point void to the center of the unification process. In either case, the human Mind and Consciousness are perceiving and interpreting the physical/material world that science is attempting to theoretically describe so the ultimate question of Consciousness and how it interacts with the Mind/brain as well as our commonly experienced physical reality also needs to be answered within the context of the 0-D point/twist. In other words, this is the point (no pun intended) where scientific logic and non-scientific intuition come together to give a complete theoretical structure of our commonly shared physical reality. Toward that end, the only logical scientific precedent to understand anything like the 0-D point/twist in all of the history of science is only found in the notion of a tesseract, which dates from the late nineteenth century attempts to 'realize' the concept of a hyperspace in the absence of being able to detect them through astronomical observations so that a hyperspace geometry could be used to explain nature. The end product of understanding these concepts is a greater insight into how the single field theory explains a much wider range of physical phenomena than any single previous paradigm of physics.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The recent detection of a gravity wave by LIGO has been marred by the revelation that a burst of ... more The recent detection of a gravity wave by LIGO has been marred by the revelation that a burst of gamma rays, not predicted by Einstein's general relativity, appeared a little more than three seconds later. Although general relativity does not allow the prediction of the gamma ray burst, a modified and expanded theory of general relativity that leads to the unification of the quantum and relativity can easily account for the gamma ray burst.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Many scientists believe that any true unification theory of physics must include a concept of con... more Many scientists believe that any true unification theory of physics must include a concept of consciousness as well as a model for the mind that interprets our three-dimensionally biased and limited sensations of the external physical/material world. And, that number is growing. The single field theory goes even further than that, in fact, well beyond the simple notion of mind and consciousness as mere human bound perceivers and interpreters of the external material/physical world by placing the physical origin of consciousness within every geometrical point in the universe itself. Some higher level permanent ‘pattern’ structure must be at work in the background of mind to lend more than temporary stability and even ‘permanence’ to the electrical field patterns that constitute the action of mind, since mind, as such, is ephemeral and would disappear (decohere or destabilize) after a few moments as individual electrical potentials neutralized or canceled each other out, positive for ...
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The Searchlight Newsletter, Vol. 28, No. 6, 2019
First Interview Question:
"There are a great many different takes on
consciousness, how it works... more First Interview Question:
"There are a great many different takes on
consciousness, how it works and what it ultimately
turns out to be. How is your approach different
from all the others? "
"There are a great many different takes on
consciousness, how it works and what it ultimately
turns out to be. How is your approach different
from all the others? "
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Science, as it now defines itself, will never accept paranormal and related phenomena, let alone ... more Science, as it now defines itself, will never accept paranormal and related phenomena, let alone the possibility of an afterlife, no matter how much evidence is gathered and no matter how convincing that evidence is, because science has never developed the conceptual and intellectual tools or the vocabulary to handle such possibilities. Science will only accept the paranormal and the possibility of an afterlife when a new theory of physical reality emerges, such as a unification of general relativity and the quantum theory in physics, that directly and logically implies the existence of them from its fundamental properties.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
I think that relevance is just the wrong word to use. It is not so much that psi phenomena and th... more I think that relevance is just the wrong word to use. It is not so much that psi phenomena and the afterlife are relevant to one another, but rather that they exist at the same level or order of physical reality with regard to the physical universe as a whole. They can be related theoretically, which indicates a physical relationship between the two concepts.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Science does not " wander " , it is not like the proverbial drunken sailor who let go of the ligh... more Science does not " wander " , it is not like the proverbial drunken sailor who let go of the light pole that is holding him up and tries to walk away, and it certainly does not wander toward any 'specific' goal. Science does not 'specifically' know what hand nature will deal it in the future explorations. The general goal, if it can be called that, is to describe nature as truthfully as possible. Science goes where nature and the universe lead and explains what nature and the universe present to science. Science is a straightforward logical process by which human thought evolves and sometimes revolutionizes how we view our world. In general, the only thing that could be construed as a goal in science is a complete understanding of how nature works and presents itself to us. In other words, science answers to nature, nature does not answer to science and especially not to any specific goal in the minds of scientists or others. Given this, once the obtuse nature of the given question is determined and the given question is translated into common English, the answer is just as easy as the question is ridiculous. The answer is simply that mathematical laws cannot give rise to aims and intentions which are normally considered aspects of consciousness. However, this raises the new question of why the given question is so obtuse in nature and needs to be translated to an answerable question, while answering this new question is significantly telling.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
WISE Journal, 2017
Many scientists believe that any true unification theory of physics must include a concept of con... more Many scientists believe that any true unification theory of physics must include a concept of consciousness as well as a model for the mind that interprets our three-dimensionally biased and limited sensations of the external physical/material world. And, that number is growing. The single field theory goes even further than that, in fact, well beyond the simple notion of mind and consciousness as mere human bound perceivers and interpreters of the external material/physical world by placing the physical origin of consciousness within every geometrical point in the universe itself. Although full blown consciousness itself is not everywhere in the three-dimensional universe–it is not a property of every bit of matter we observe or event that we detect–the universal will for consciousness to emerge in all forms of life is everywhere, point-by-point in the universe. This physical model of creation clearly demonstrates that the precursors to our experience of consciousness are fundamental elements and active participants in creating the physical world that we perceive and scientifically interpret through the evolution, revolution and application of physics and science.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The idea of the 0-D point Void was first developed intuitively by Sperry Andrews, but understandi... more The idea of the 0-D point Void was first developed intuitively by Sperry Andrews, but understanding the physical role of the 0-D point Void and the discrete geometrical point/twist associated with it is necessary for understanding the logical concept of a point-element, as opposed to the metric-element, for a fuller development of the Riemannian system of differential geometry of surfaces and thus post-modern physics. Understanding the concept of a point-element, of course, is necessary to understand how the Riemannian geometry has been used in general relativity as well as how it can be expanded to unify all of modern physics, including quantum theory, under a single geometrical paradigm. Whether a scientist is considering the discrete point-particles of the Standard Model or the existence of point singularities in relativity theory, the concerns are exactly the same, which forces the concept of an individual 0-D discrete point void to the center of the unification process. In either case, the human Mind and Consciousness are perceiving and interpreting the physical/material world that science is attempting to theoretically describe so the ultimate question of Consciousness and how it interacts with the Mind/brain as well as our commonly experienced physical reality also needs to be answered within the context of the 0-D point/twist. In other words, this is the point (no pun intended) where scientific logic and non-scientific intuition come together to give a complete theoretical structure of our commonly shared physical reality. Toward that end, the only logical scientific precedent to understand anything like the 0-D point/twist in all of the history of science is only found in the notion of a tesseract, which dates from the late nineteenth century attempts to ‘realize’ the concept of a hyperspace in the absence of being able to detect them through astronomical observations so that a hyperspace geometry could be used to explain nature. The end product of understanding these concepts is a greater insight into how the single field theory explains a much wider range of physical phenomena than any single previous paradigm of physics.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The greatest problem in all science and even human thought has been differentiating between the r... more The greatest problem in all science and even human thought has been differentiating between the reality of the external world and the mind that is interpreting the external reality of the world. In fact what is external to what? Science cannot be complete until this task has been accomplished. During the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century, the line of separation was made between Mind and Matter by Descartes. However, over the past few decades as the science of the brain, neuroscience, and physics became more sophisticated, new attempts have been made to develop a physical theory of at least how mind and conscious awareness emerge in the electro-mechanical brain, if not a full blown physical theory of consciousness. These goals have now been accomplished, or at least a first physical theory has been developed.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The fact that every generation rewrites history does not mean that the history itself or that the... more The fact that every generation rewrites history does not mean that the history itself or that the historical record changes all that much, but rather reflects how different groups at different times choose to regard different parts of the historical record and determine which is more important and significant for the present state of science. In other words, what is really significant in the previous history of science is a reflection of then current beliefs, attitudes and paradigms of science. Since the present dominant paradigm of physics is the quantum, the emphasis in the history of physics has been to de-emphasize or neglect any long term historical trends that lead to the alternative of relativity, continuity and the single unified field interpretation of physical reality. This does not reflect a conscious effort made by historians and scholars, but more of a realistic assessment of what is more interesting to the greater number of scientists at any given time. In other words there is no conspiracy to hide the historical truth. However, history can be subconsciously and unintentionally used to promote one scientific worldview as opposed to another.
Since the quantum theory is the dominant paradigm in physics, those issues that deal more directly with the opposing worldview of relativity have been unnecessarily downplayed and important parts of history have been ignored and nearly lost. In spite of the importance of general relativity there are far fewer, and the numbers are staggering, histories of the development and philosophy of relativity theory than there are of the development and philosophy of quantum theory. Scientific issues that pertain more to relativity than the quantum are also shortchanged in the historical research and publications that follow from that research. In particular, the emphasis on the historical development of the concepts of space and time which have been considered to be continuous rather than discrete throughout the history of science, have been neglected. Furthermore, since the quantum presents a completely new and original idea that is unique in history, there is no real call to lend it a more historical countenance.
Within physics itself, the quantum does not make any reference to the pre-history of individual events in its own realm of action and reaction. Each event is unique to a particular time (instant) and place (location) and that the notion of extended space and time are not absolutely necessary. However, what the longer history of science has well demonstrated is that the general concepts of space and time are essential and crucial to both the past and present development of science, a fact that quantum theory implies could not be true. Also, when the trends to develop and understand the physical nature of space are studied in depth and detail, the development of relativity and even general relativity look as if they were inevitable, a fact which seems at most to be at odds with the development of the quantum point-of-view of reality if not completely anti-quantum since relativity is based on continuity and the quantum is discrete. This view of nature cannot stand the test of time because nature is not two different things; it is one thing and thus necessitates only one fundamental theory to explain physical reality. Since science always moves toward a more theoretical version of physical truth, if the discrete quantum viewpoint does not truly represent the ultimate nature of reality, as now seems highly probable, not only science in the future will change, but how we regard the historical development of science, past and present, will also change to conform to new and coming changes in science. The new attitudes toward the ultimate nature of reality that are now changing science have now led us to the point that the past accepted history of science needs to be rewritten more accurately to better explain the direction that science is now taking and when this is done fundamental phallacies and other incorrect beliefs in both physics and its history emerge.
Since the quantum theory is the dominant paradigm in physics, those issues that deal more directly with the opposing worldview of relativity have been unnecessarily downplayed and important parts of history have been ignored and nearly lost. In spite of the importance of general relativity there are far fewer, and the numbers are staggering, histories of the development and philosophy of relativity theory than there are of the development and philosophy of quantum theory. Scientific issues that pertain more to relativity than the quantum are also shortchanged in the historical research and publications that follow from that research. In particular, the emphasis on the historical development of the concepts of space and time which have been considered to be continuous rather than discrete throughout the history of science, have been neglected. Furthermore, since the quantum presents a completely new and original idea that is unique in history, there is no real call to lend it a more historical countenance.
Within physics itself, the quantum does not make any reference to the pre-history of individual events in its own realm of action and reaction. Each event is unique to a particular time (instant) and place (location) and that the notion of extended space and time are not absolutely necessary. However, what the longer history of science has well demonstrated is that the general concepts of space and time are essential and crucial to both the past and present development of science, a fact that quantum theory implies could not be true. Also, when the trends to develop and understand the physical nature of space are studied in depth and detail, the development of relativity and even general relativity look as if they were inevitable, a fact which seems at most to be at odds with the development of the quantum point-of-view of reality if not completely anti-quantum since relativity is based on continuity and the quantum is discrete. This view of nature cannot stand the test of time because nature is not two different things; it is one thing and thus necessitates only one fundamental theory to explain physical reality. Since science always moves toward a more theoretical version of physical truth, if the discrete quantum viewpoint does not truly represent the ultimate nature of reality, as now seems highly probable, not only science in the future will change, but how we regard the historical development of science, past and present, will also change to conform to new and coming changes in science. The new attitudes toward the ultimate nature of reality that are now changing science have now led us to the point that the past accepted history of science needs to be rewritten more accurately to better explain the direction that science is now taking and when this is done fundamental phallacies and other incorrect beliefs in both physics and its history emerge.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
This paper is excerpted from a prepublication copy of my upcoming history book
Phallacies in F... more This paper is excerpted from a prepublication copy of my upcoming history book
Phallacies in Fysics: Volume 2
Modern Physics: A fresh look and reappraisal of the Second Scientific Revolution
Einstein and his colleagues developed valid arguments against the quantum theory in the EPR paper of 1935 that have never been successfully or completely answered by science or philosophers. Through the gross misunderstanding of those arguments, experimental tests of spin and polarity entanglement have been used in attempts to convince scientists that EPR was wrong, but it is not. These experiments do not answer or even address the central issue raised by EPR and no valid test of the EPR paradox has ever been developed. EPR was about the simple mechanics of motion, not about electromagnetism or purely quantum effects. But Einstein and his colleagues were also wrong. They argued against the discrete nature of reality and the particle worldview, neither of which really address the real weaknesses of the quantum theory and the Copenhagen Interpretation. If they had taken a different approach and sought compatibility between relativity and the quantum they would have been able to demonstrate that the quantum theory does not depend on either a discrete view of nature or the particle worldview.
Both relativity and the quantum favor neither discreteness nor extended particles alone, so debates whether nature is deterministic or indeterministic are both misleading and irrelevant to the advance of physics. The whole issue can be settled by finding the physical conditions for compatibility and the material consequences for fulfilling those conditions. In this respect, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can be interpreted in a manner that is not at odds with relativity theory and Planck’s constant can be defined as the minimum measurable limit for which the physical reality of space and time can be taken as separate thus rendering Planck’s constant a space-time coupling factor. By taking this interpretation of the quantum into account the unification of physics within a single paradigm cannot be not far behind while the emphasis of the history of physics on the revolutionary nature of the quantum and the overthrow of Newtonian physics becomes less of a factor than previously thought. In fact, Newtonian physics was so successful by the beginning of the twentieth century that it fostered the new revolution with Newtonian relativity of space and time falling to Einstein’s relativity of space-time at the extremes of speed and gravitational mass and Newtonian absolute space and time falling to quantum space-time at the lower extreme of physical size where the geometry of points becomes physically relevant.
Phallacies in Fysics: Volume 2
Modern Physics: A fresh look and reappraisal of the Second Scientific Revolution
Einstein and his colleagues developed valid arguments against the quantum theory in the EPR paper of 1935 that have never been successfully or completely answered by science or philosophers. Through the gross misunderstanding of those arguments, experimental tests of spin and polarity entanglement have been used in attempts to convince scientists that EPR was wrong, but it is not. These experiments do not answer or even address the central issue raised by EPR and no valid test of the EPR paradox has ever been developed. EPR was about the simple mechanics of motion, not about electromagnetism or purely quantum effects. But Einstein and his colleagues were also wrong. They argued against the discrete nature of reality and the particle worldview, neither of which really address the real weaknesses of the quantum theory and the Copenhagen Interpretation. If they had taken a different approach and sought compatibility between relativity and the quantum they would have been able to demonstrate that the quantum theory does not depend on either a discrete view of nature or the particle worldview.
Both relativity and the quantum favor neither discreteness nor extended particles alone, so debates whether nature is deterministic or indeterministic are both misleading and irrelevant to the advance of physics. The whole issue can be settled by finding the physical conditions for compatibility and the material consequences for fulfilling those conditions. In this respect, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can be interpreted in a manner that is not at odds with relativity theory and Planck’s constant can be defined as the minimum measurable limit for which the physical reality of space and time can be taken as separate thus rendering Planck’s constant a space-time coupling factor. By taking this interpretation of the quantum into account the unification of physics within a single paradigm cannot be not far behind while the emphasis of the history of physics on the revolutionary nature of the quantum and the overthrow of Newtonian physics becomes less of a factor than previously thought. In fact, Newtonian physics was so successful by the beginning of the twentieth century that it fostered the new revolution with Newtonian relativity of space and time falling to Einstein’s relativity of space-time at the extremes of speed and gravitational mass and Newtonian absolute space and time falling to quantum space-time at the lower extreme of physical size where the geometry of points becomes physically relevant.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: Great strides have been made in the neurosciences over the past few years, especially i... more Abstract: Great strides have been made in the neurosciences over the past few years, especially in the areas of neurophysiology and neurophysics. In fact, the area of research called neurophysics has only emerged as a viable branch of physics in the past decade. The object of these researches goes beyond just discovering how the brain functions, but to actually discover the neural correlates of mind and consciousness. On the other hand, developing physical models of consciousness from a theoretical rather than an experimental or observational approach has also become popular over the past few decades. Together, these two approaches have raised the possibility that science will soon understand enough about mind and consciousness to answer important questions that have haunted philosophical thought and metaphysical speculations for several millennia, the most important of which might be ‘How does human consciousness emerge within the brain? And ‘What is the relationship between consciousness and the greater universe?’ These questions represent perhaps the greatest and the most important mysteries of all science because they define who we are, where we have been and where we are going as an intelligent species.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The ultimate goal of science is to find truth in its understanding of nature. Science progresses ... more The ultimate goal of science is to find truth in its understanding of nature. Science progresses toward this goal by making accurate observations of events and phenomena in nature and developing hypotheses and theories to explain the observations. In a very real sense, there is only one nature and one universe, so all observations are tied together such that science is one even though it may be split into many different academic disciplines. So it should come as no surprise that the smallest and simplest things in nature are intimately related to the largest and most complex things in nature. It is the goal of science not just to explain all of these individual things by the most accurate and simplest theory possible, but also to explain their intimate relationships. As different as they may seem, life, mind and consciousness are intimately related to the birth and death of stars and galaxies as well as the whole of the universe. The deepest mysteries of physics, Dark Matter and Dark Energy, are intimately related to the simplest forms of life imaginable as well as the most complex and elevated consciousness that could ever be conceived. However, science has a major problem in trying to understand such concepts. It is limited by the human consciousness that stores and interprets the observations and data regarding all of physical and material reality. So in the end, science cannot understand the most basic and fundamental principles of reality, such as what is the nature of matter, unless it also understands the consciousness that is sensing, observing and interpreting the data it collects on matter and the world around it as well as the limits that each imposes on the other. Everything in science is intimately related because everything in nature is ultimately connected. There are no exceptions.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
It might seem that the unification of physics within a single paradigm has been the primary goal ... more It might seem that the unification of physics within a single paradigm has been the primary goal in science for only the past few decades, but this would not be true. Unification was the original goal of Einstein and a few other physicists from the 1920s to the 1960s, during a period of time when quantum theorists were ironing out their own unique problems. Their original notion of unification was based on relativity theory rather than the quantum. Unification in the guise of the quantum paradigm only emerged during the 1970s and has since overshadowed all other attempts to unify physics. Quantum theorists believe their work is more accurate, fundamental and even more practical than relativity even though there is little or no evidence to support that belief. For all intents and purposes, the two theories seem mutually incompatible, so the unification of physics has recently proceeded along the lines of an either/or strategy: Either the quantum theory is correct and relativity is wrong, or relativity is correct and the quantum theory wrong. In fact, quantum theorists have been very aggressively trying to replace the space-time curvature of general relativity with gravitons, quantum gravity, other mythical particles and equally speculative gimmicks for several decades and all of their attempts have been futile. In reality, both approaches are basically flawed because both theories are incomplete as they are now understood. Had either side of the controversy just simplified their worldview and sought commonality between the two instead of concentrating on false made-up differences, unification could have been accomplished long ago. The point is, literally, that the discrete quantum, continuous relativity, basic physical geometry and classical physics all share one common characteristic – a paradoxical duality between a dimensionless point and an extended length in any dimension – and if the problem of unification is approached from an attempt to understand how this problem relates to each paradigm all of physics could be unified within a single new theoretical model. Unfortunately, there has traditionally been no method by which a three-dimensional space can be generated from dimensionless points, raising the question – how can dimensionless point particles be extended to account for the three-dimensional space in which the physical interactions they describe occur? This very question is basic to both the quantum theory and relativity, but neither has attempted to answer it although Einstein and others’ attempts to develop classical unified field theories have come closest to the answer. The unification of physics is impossible until this question is answered, but once it is answered the unification follows naturally and easily.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
"Atlantis Rising," No. 113, (Sept/Oct 2015), Reader Forum: 7, 9. , Sep 2015
In your recent article “Physics with a Twist” (AR, #110) by Brendan B. Murphy, the statement was ... more In your recent article “Physics with a Twist” (AR, #110) by Brendan B. Murphy, the statement was made that torsion theories date back to the work of the Russian scientist N. P. Myshkin in the late nineteenth century. Information on Myshkin is difficult to find and the only work referenced in the sources found indicate a 1906 article by Myshkin published in Zhurnal Russkogo fiaiko-himicheskogo obschestva (“Dvizheniye tela, nakhodyashegosya v potoke luchistoi energii." 1906, # 3, p.149), which is certainly not an easily available or influential scientific publication. However, the statement linking Myshkin to the origin of the notion of torsion is hardly true. Torsion theories of space and geometry actually date back to the work of William Kingdon Clifford in 1873, although he used the word ‘twist’ rather than ‘torsion’ to describe individual geometrical points in space. Since the word ‘twist’ was first used to describe the torsion associated with geometrical points in space by Clifford, it’s ironic that the author gave credit for the concept to another person and then titled his article “Physics with a Twist”.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The “war” between science and religion is quite well known, but it is probably not as extensive a... more The “war” between science and religion is quite well known, but it is probably not as extensive and overwhelming as most people might believe. Religion has far more problems with science than science has with religion. These two disciplines have coexisted for several centuries, at least since the scientific revolution in the seventeenth century, without either overcoming the other or thus winning the war. So it would seem that they are both necessary elements of the human endeavor as well as civilization and society as a whole. However, there is a fairly recent movement to bring science and religion together by finding a common ground for spirituality within science. Spirituality is usually equated to religion, but it really need not be tied inexorably and only to religion. Spirituality can be studied in a more general context outside of the traditional religions and within the context of science. Scholars and scientists have both found many common points of focus between science and spirituality and it was such common points that were explored by the conveners of the seminar and the learners attending the seminar.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
It is generally believed in the scientific community that no changes in the physical concept spac... more It is generally believed in the scientific community that no changes in the physical concept space occurred during the period of time just before the onset of the Second Scientific Revolution except for Mach’s successful logical argument against the possibility of Newton’s absolute space. This belief is untrue. The concept of space in general and absolute space in particular was undergoing a complete rehabilitation during the era. The proliferation of new wave of aether theories that were initiated by Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory were merely a side issue to the question of absolute space. This scenario fits well the foregone conclusions that Newtonian science had reached its zenith but had begun to stagnate. The stagnation was marked by wild speculations regarding the aether that were being thrown around the scientific community prior to the coming revolution. Therefore, when experiments to detect the aether failed and explanations of the emission spectra of atoms and molecules could not be explained within the Newtonian paradigm, the next logical step was the scientific revolution. At least this is the general story of late nineteenth century physics that is perpetuated by the early winners of the Second Scientific Revolution. This story is necessary to demonstrate the corruptness of the Newtonian paradigm with regard to the new physics and show how the new physics of the twentieth century is superior to the Newtonian paradigm. So this story is grossly incomplete on many issues if not outright untrue.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
During the early 1970s, science began to change as did the cultural outlook in America and the we... more During the early 1970s, science began to change as did the cultural outlook in America and the west. Science had always been extremely objective and rigid. The word intuition was not well accepted as a way of conducting or thinking about science. W.I.B. Beveridge went against the grain and wrote a book titled The Art of Scientific Investigation in 1950 that began to elevate science to an art form based on intuition as much as a strictly philosophical endeavor based on logic. Yet by the early 1960s, a new television program called Star Trek still epitomized science as a completely logical philosophical study in the person of a character named Spock, the ultimate scientist, totally devoid of anything to do with emotion, spirituality, mystical thought and intuition. Yet cultural and scientific thought had begun to loosen and change. The space program of the 1960s opened our imaginations to new possibilities while political situations in China and the Far East, including a war in Vietnam, opened the door in western culture to new ways of thought and brought home new ideas from the Far East, especially to America.
These were accompanied by philosophical changes in science itself. Einstein had died in 1955 and with his death a whole line of research that tried to unify the quantum and relativity all but ended. Yet new advances in quantum theory changed physicists’ perspectives on the concept of unification and philosophical changes in quantum theory itself started to appear. The idea that consciousness collapses the wave function and creates reality began to take hold and the twin concepts of mind and consciousness, with all of their non-logical aspects, began to reappear in science as something important that had to be accounted for. Words like holistic and holism began to surface in science and science began to reshape itself in a form not quite as logically reductionist as it had been before. By 1975, several books comparing science to mystical thought had appeared, but none was a popular as Fritjof Capra’s "The Tao of Physics", except perhaps Lawrence LeShan’s "The Medium, the Mystic and the Physicist", both of which exposed scientists and non-scientists alike to new ways of thinking. And science has not been the same since.
This particular essay was written for a 1977 class at San Francisco State University, Beyond the Mechanistic World View, taught by Capra. The assignment was to make comparisons in other academic disciplines similar to that made by Capra between modern physics and eastern mysticism. Having just returned to America from a two and a half year trip around the world, I was interested in languages and how they represented differences in human thought. So I made a comparison between the development of language in a person and how language affected worldview, mysticism and modern physics, which has influenced the development of my own worldview in science ever since. This paper represents a slight revision of the original paper, but only in the wording and not the original content or arguments made within the text.
These were accompanied by philosophical changes in science itself. Einstein had died in 1955 and with his death a whole line of research that tried to unify the quantum and relativity all but ended. Yet new advances in quantum theory changed physicists’ perspectives on the concept of unification and philosophical changes in quantum theory itself started to appear. The idea that consciousness collapses the wave function and creates reality began to take hold and the twin concepts of mind and consciousness, with all of their non-logical aspects, began to reappear in science as something important that had to be accounted for. Words like holistic and holism began to surface in science and science began to reshape itself in a form not quite as logically reductionist as it had been before. By 1975, several books comparing science to mystical thought had appeared, but none was a popular as Fritjof Capra’s "The Tao of Physics", except perhaps Lawrence LeShan’s "The Medium, the Mystic and the Physicist", both of which exposed scientists and non-scientists alike to new ways of thinking. And science has not been the same since.
This particular essay was written for a 1977 class at San Francisco State University, Beyond the Mechanistic World View, taught by Capra. The assignment was to make comparisons in other academic disciplines similar to that made by Capra between modern physics and eastern mysticism. Having just returned to America from a two and a half year trip around the world, I was interested in languages and how they represented differences in human thought. So I made a comparison between the development of language in a person and how language affected worldview, mysticism and modern physics, which has influenced the development of my own worldview in science ever since. This paper represents a slight revision of the original paper, but only in the wording and not the original content or arguments made within the text.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Every living organism is characterized by two different classes of complex physical field pattern... more Every living organism is characterized by two different classes of complex physical field patterns. These constitute (1) the ‘life force’ or biofield and (2) the mind-consciousness complex. The biofield deals with the normal biological functions of anatomy and physiology, which can be represented by a complex three-dimensional matter/energy field pattern within the overall quantized space-time continuum. But the particles, atoms and molecules that comprise that material body can also be associated with a pattern of changing electrical charges and associated fields that generate an even more complex pattern of magnetic field variations (constituting magnetic domains in various groupings) around them. Together these complex field patterns of electric scalar and magnetic vector potential constitute the mind and consciousness that are characteristic of all living organisms. This physical model has grave consequences because it directly implies the survival of consciousness/mind beyond material body, a new form of non-traditional top-down evolution from consciousness to the organism and DNA and the necessity of new as yet unrealized higher senses that are a result of directly realizing and experiencing the higher embedding fifth space-like dimension that is required by the physics of our commonly experienced four-dimensional space-time continuum. The awareness of ‘self’ that normally characterizes the present level of human consciousness is a product of the normal three-dimensional world of experience and evolved according to the physics of the four-dimensional space-time continuum some forty to one-hundred thousand years ago, therefore the existence of a higher embedding physical (though non-material) dimension implies that we either have evolved or are presently evolving a second higher self that can take advantage of the embedding space just as our material awareness utilizes the four-dimensional space-time continuum and that we are still evolving an even higher level of consciousness. The human species is not just still evolving, but the rate of evolution is accelerating which strongly implies that we are on the threshold of a new evolutionary leap forced on us by a newly emerging higher level complexity of consciousness.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Masters Thesis in the History of Science at University of Maryland, College Park, 1985, 2013
According to the commonly held simplistic view of the history of science, Isaac Newton’s concept ... more According to the commonly held simplistic view of the history of science, Isaac Newton’s concept of absolute space was accepted without change until replaced by Albert Einstein’s special and general theories of relativity. Ernst Mach had successfully challenged the concept of an absolute space in the 1870s for the first time, while the concept of relative space slowly eroded the foundations of Newtonian absolute space during the final decades of the nineteenth century. Speculations were made by William K. Clifford and Bernhard Riemann that anticipated Einstein’s relativity, but neither amounted to much and had little or no influence on the science of the day. However, this common historical point of view is wrong as well as misleading, which calls into account what really happened during the Second Scientific Revolution. Riemann and Clifford did not just anticipate Einstein’s general relativity. Riemann suggested a specific mathematical program for changing the scientific concept of absolute space. This change represented a great advance over Newton’s concept of physical space without detracting from the rising influence of relative space in physics in the late nineteenth century. Riemann proposed that physical space had an infinitesimal structure that was quite possibly different from that expected by the physical investigation of macroscopic geometries and only experiment could verify which of several geometries was true. In this respect, he suggested that absolute space had real physical properties that should be studied in physics. Only Clifford and a small number of other investigators developed theories following and expanding upon Riemann’s suggestions, but everyone knew about them. Their ideas contended with other concepts of space, especially the aether theories, until Einstein finally established the dominance of relative space in 1905 and thereafter. Understanding Riemann’s program will change the way historians and scientists view both the physics of the late nineteenth century as well as the changes that science underwent during the Second Scientific Revolution.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact![Research paper thumbnail of PARAPHYSICAL PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY [The ParaPrincipia]](/jarvisscript/passion-https-web.archive.org/web/20230319170449im_/https://imgv2-2-f.scribdassets.com/img/word_document/238460972/111x142/b4e724917d/1409693372)
Doctoral Dissertation for The Union Institute and University, 1999, 2013
It is a common error to equate paraphysics with parapsychology since they are entirely different,... more It is a common error to equate paraphysics with parapsychology since they are entirely different, although related, disciplines. Paraphysics is concerned with natural phenomena that physics does not normally cover in its day to day business and this obviously includes the paranormal and so much more. After all, paranormal is still natural and physics studies the realm of all that is in nature and thus natural. Paraphysics is a branch of theoretical physics and should include any physical phenomena not normally sensed and conveyed to the human mind by way of our five normal senses, not necessarily material phenomena alone. This would include any possible life force that go beyond the normal bio-chemical interactions normally associated with life as well as mind and consciousness itself, at least as long as they are not just material epiphenomena. Within this context, paraphysics would include not only paranormal phenomena, but any natural phenomena dependent on the existence of higher-dimensional spaces than our normal three-dimensional material space. This book offers a comprehensive overview of the science of paraphysics including analytical arguments why it should be considered a legitimate science as well as definitions and histories of the subject. Furthermore, the book outlines the initial development of a new unification theory of physical reality that can easily explain paranormal phenomena as well as mind and consciousness.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Phallacies are scientific ideas, hypotheses and theories that may have once been considered true ... more Phallacies are scientific ideas, hypotheses and theories that may have once been considered true but should no longer be considered completely true. They are more than just fallacies since they control science and its history to such a high degree that they have become 'phallic' symbols that are very difficult to overthrow - Thus the name 'phallacies'. As a matter of historical accuracy and modern scientific truth, physics is now full of such 'phallacies' and some of them are considered our most cherished scientific 'truths'. For example, common history tells us that the Second Scientific Revolution resulted from two specific experimental crises and the revolution overthrew Newtonian physics. Both of these presently accepted historical truths are 'phallacies'. The twentieth century revolution in science resulted from the successes of Newtonian physics, not its mistakes, and Newtonian science is every bit as alive today as it was one or even two centuries ago. It was never overthrown, but modern quantum theory must say it was overthrown to justify its own existence in the face of severe problems of its own making. The two experiments that scientists cite as the causes of the revolution were nothing more than the 'flotsam and jetsam' of deeper underlying physical principles that raised questions about the Newtonian concepts of space, time, matter and mind. The revolution was as much about mind as it was about matter, but that simple straightforward fact is almost never mentioned in the histories of the revolution and its emergence. The first Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century was not the first, it was really the second. The period of classical Greek natural philosophy from Thales to Aristotle was actually the first revolution in human scientific thought, so it should now be called the Zeroth Scientific Revolution. These and many more such 'phallacies' shape our modern scientific worldviews and thereby limit the further evolution and development of science. The scientific and academic communities must identify and accept the reality of these 'phallacies' if it is to continue the phenomenal successes of the past.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
This is the fascinating story of William Kingdon Clifford, a Cambridge mathematician and geometer... more This is the fascinating story of William Kingdon Clifford, a Cambridge mathematician and geometer who tried to develop a unified field theory based on a Riemannian geometry several decades before Einstein. He died the same year Einstein was born. His theory accounted for both electromagnetism and gravity more than a century before theories of everything (TOEs) became popular in science. Yet he was talking about the same thing, although he did not use the term quantum to describe the microscopic world of physics. Instead he developed a new point-based geometry of biquaternions and twists to explain curved space and physical phenomena. As early as 1870, Clifford stated that matter was merely curved space and the motion of matter was no more than ripples or waves across that curvature. This was almost a century before Einstein developed the general theory of relativity which makes the same claim. But Clifford thought in grander terms and meant all types of motion while Einstein only used the concept of space-time curvature to explain gravitational motion. Clifford was a philosopher, mathematician and physicist who is well remembered in history for his purely mathematical accomplishments, but equally well forgotten for his greatest accomplishments in the physical application of his mathematical systems. His “space-theory of matter” is considered no more than an “untenable” speculation that pre-dated Einstein’s later discovery. Paradoxically, the closer present science comes to unifying the quantum and relativity, the closer it comes to realizing some of Clifford’s original concepts regarding the curvature of space.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Evo is a science fiction novel, but it is also far more than just that. It is a thinking person’s... more Evo is a science fiction novel, but it is also far more than just that. It is a thinking person’s science fiction story as well as a teaching experience. The single truth of nature is that everything evolves or dies away if the niche that nature has provided for it fills without its evolving beyond that niche. In some cases, different evolutionary trends come together and a revolution occurs as they leap forward together and something totally new emerges. That is what this book is about. The storyline is based upon an actual scientific prediction of that the human species is about to undergo its next step in evolution. That step will coincide with the coming scientific revolution because science has just about run its course with the brain structure and the mind that the human species has been given thus far to work with. And yet this is still not enough because we are still undergoing a technological and economic revolution based on the computer as well as a cultural evolution based on overpopulation of our home planet and advances in transportation, and communication and biological technologies. The story takes place about thirty years in the future when all of these advances have come to a collective tipping point. Humans live in a dystopian society run by a single world gov, although there are still many factions representing old national and cultural groups within the world gov. Quite simply, society is quite near the breaking point as the gov social experiment is failing. Something must happen, something very chaotic, before a new level of consciousness can be reached since this step in evolution will be consciousness driven. Something terrible does happen in the form of an invasion of sorts. Most humans have migrated to the megalopolises and mega-cities since all farming and food production is done at the corporation and factory levels. Small farms and medium sized cities have died throughout the world, but a small and persistent minority of people still lives independently in towns and smaller cities. They are only connected to the rest of the world through computer wifi since the only land lines for communication are run by the gov and mil. These people represent only a few percent of the total population, but that small percentage belies the fact that these people have not succumbed to the new cultural and societal experiments of the world government. These people are not only independent but consciously more evolved than most of their brethren in the mega-population centers where life is regimented and strictly controlled by the world gov. When the crisis hits and world war becomes a reality the smaller cities and towns are the last to go, but a small group of children and young people set out across a mountain range in the Rockies when their charismatic leader is killed. They only seek to get as far away from the unknown enemy as possible and lick their wounds, but learn that getting away and surviving do not go together as they discover who the real enemy is. They then accept a destiny over which they seem to have no control and choose to head across the mountains to the nearest population center only to find that they have been followed into the mountains and their destination is on the verge of falling to the enemy. So they choose to fight for their existence, the existence of humanity and the existence of all life on the earth.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Science is a work in progress, although the progress that science has made over the past few deca... more Science is a work in progress, although the progress that science has made over the past few decades has been vastly limited by the narrow, limited and dogmatic worldviews representing the major paradigms of physics. It is not hard or even overwhelmingly original to conclude that science has followed the wrong direction at a fork in the road and led itself into a corner with little to no room for escape. Both the quantum theory and general relativity have made spectacularly accurate predictions, nearly all of which have been verified, but these two paradigms remain mutually incompatible while the standard model of particles used within the quantum paradigm keeps predicting the existence of particles that are not falsifiable and completely beyond verification. Newer physical models such as the superstring and brane theories have not lived up to their promise and show no signs of settling the problems of unification for which they were designed. This book takes a different route and tells the story of a new form of unified field theory that combines or merges the best parts of the quantum theory and relativity together within a single field theory structure. It covers four primary areas of scientific inquiry: the macrocosm, the microcosm, the everyday world of life, mind and experience, and the abstract world of theoretical and philosophical mathematics and science. In so doing, this book offers the best chance for an alternative physics worldview that is nothing less than the science of our future, a preview of the science that will carry us into a brave new world of being and becoming our own future.
Keywords: Future physics, theory of everything, unified field theory, quantized space-time, consciousness, evolution, paraphysics
Keywords: Future physics, theory of everything, unified field theory, quantized space-time, consciousness, evolution, paraphysics
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Hyperspace was a Masters Thesis at San Francisco State University, 1980, Continuum added in 2012, 2012
Modern physics is based on two paradigms that emerged from the Second Scientific Revolution - rel... more Modern physics is based on two paradigms that emerged from the Second Scientific Revolution - relativity and the quantum. Since their inception these two theoretical giants have advanced science and society far beyond anything that their originators could have even dreamed up, but in a sense they seem to be progressing in different directions and are regarded mutually incompatible. Yet they come to a point in history where the next step in their own advancement would be to unify into a single overwhelming physical paradigm. The concept of unification is well known in relativity theory with many attempts dating from just a few short years after Einstein first developed relativity. But the hyperspace unification that seems to have originated with Kaluza in 1921 and was modified by Klein a few years later has become the best known attempt. This book has two parts. The first, Hyperspace, deals with the original Kaluza theory in all of its aspects and incarnations up until the 1960s. After the 1960s the idea of unification was adopted by quantum theoreticians based on their belief that the quantum is more fundamental than relative space-time. However, since the 1980s Klein’s adaptation of Kaluza’s theory has been used to unify physics under the quantum banner as has the purely quantum theory Standard Model. Yet both of these quantum attempts have fundamental problems that can only be solved by returning to Kaluza’s original theory as modified by Einstein and Bergmann in the 1930s. So the second part of the book, Continuum, tells the rest of the story and offers a new theory, a five-dimensional single field theory, the merges the best of both paradigms together. By merging the two paradigms instead of replacing one by the other, single field theory preserves all of the many successes of both theories. This is the book that every physicist, physical scientist and non-professional science advocate should read and every theoretical physicist and physics students must read.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Among the greatest questions ever asked, perhaps the greatest is whether some part of us survives... more Among the greatest questions ever asked, perhaps the greatest is whether some part of us survives death of the body. Whole religions, individual philosophers, scholars of all types, scientists and ordinary people have all tried to answer this question, so far without any verifiable success. Yet most people continue to believe that some form of a soul survives, but not much more than that is known. This book describes in general terms a new fundamental theory of physics based on a five-dimensional space-time continuum that includes new scientific definitions of life, mind and consciousness, Given these, the book explains a scientific model of the survival of consciousness and mind when the physical body dies. Other cultural beliefs about death are described and their essential points are compared to this new physical model of the afterlife.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The consciousness studies movement needs to be placed within its proper historical context. Hist... more The consciousness studies movement needs to be placed within its proper historical context. History has a very unique and special role to play in consciousness studies in that it can be an active player in the development of a theory of consciousness rather than a passive recorder of the details of that development. According to the original Cartesian separation of mind and matter, any questions concerning life, mind and consciousness were relegated to religion. So Newtonian science was not at first concerned with consciousness and did not develop any conceptual models of life, mind or consciousness. However, Newtonian physics became so successful by the middle of the nineteenth century that concepts of mind and consciousness were again considered fair game for scientific inquiry. This expansion of the boundaries of science led to the development of psychology as the new science of mind just as the Second Scientific Revolution in physics unfolded. Unfortunately, science was not yet ready to deal directly with mind and consciousness, so a positivistic compromise overwhelmed the new science of psychology: Behaviorism, rather than consciousness, then became the basic theory and guiding principle for psychology. Psychology and science literally lost consciousness after 1913 and did not begin to regain consciousness for several decades. By the 1970s, consciousness had become so relevant to scientific speculations on the ultimate nature of physical reality that consciousness could no longer be ignored and a renewed scientific interest in the subject of consciousness emerged. The new ideas of consciousness that emerged were interdisciplinary and concerned many different academic disciplines, both inside and outside of science. Yet in the new quest for a theory of consciousness, physics has taken a lead. The interest of physicists in consciousness coincides with other problems in physics that seem to be leading to a new Scientific Revolution out of which a definition and theory of consciousness should emerge. Quite simply, the recent advances in consciousness studies are revolutionary. Consciousness has become so important in science that any physical theory of reality that scientists develop must consider the role of consciousness in reality. The history of our attitudes toward consciousness can act as a guide to identify specific properties of consciousness as well as identify new problems in how science interprets consciousness and its role in physical reality.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
This is the second part of the presentation "The dark side of galactic formation".
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
The ‘subtle’ energy’ that scientists and psychics talk about may be easily supported by a five-di... more The ‘subtle’ energy’ that scientists and psychics talk about may be easily supported by a five-dimensional universe based upon an Einstein-Kaluza model of physical reality. In nature, all physical energies are either kinetic or potential, but in the five-dimensional model all energies are just potential energies. All potential energies are just relative positional effects within the Einstein-Kaluza five-dimensional field that fills all of five-dimensional space-time. Life, mind and consciousness can be described as extremely ‘subtle’ and complex potential field variations within the single field according to this physical model.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Quantum theory emerged the victor of the last Scientific Revolution even though relativity theory... more Quantum theory emerged the victor of the last Scientific Revolution even though relativity theory had a more progressive view of reality to offer science. As a result, the physical aspects and properties of the gravitational field were never fully explored or exploited and science went through several decades of denial concerning the relevance of general relativity and its physical implications. The only small victory that relativity theory could claim before the 1960s was in cosmology with the expanding universe. The victory was small because the expanding universe was far from the everyday needs of a science more concerned with the atom and the nucleus. Under these circumstances, the theory of relativity had no practical applications in the everyday real world, so its theoretical implications were largely ignored. However, the 1970s brought something of a resurgence of good fortunes and everyday relevance for relativity theory and quantum theorists finally accepted the possibility that unification was the primary goal of physics, albeit a unification based upon the quantum concept of discrete particles rather than the Einsteinian concept of field continuity: According to quantum field theory, the gravity field could be reduced to an exchange of gravitons. But what at first seemed a resurgence of general relativity under the quantum paradigm in the 1970s has slowly evolved into a surge of physical relevance resulting in the emergence of general relativity as a dominating field of research in physics. And the story does not end there. The recent discoveries of Dark Matter and Dark Energy are about to push physics and relativity theory into a Third Scientific Revolution in which a unification with the quantum will be made on relativity’s terms. The quantum will not emerge out of the mathematics as a constraint on the continuous field as Einstein had hoped, but it will emerge as a field constant that limits the continuous field as described by general relativity.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: Modern science fiction and fantasy fiction movies can be considered new forms of mythol... more Abstract: Modern science fiction and fantasy fiction movies can be considered new forms of mythology because they play the same role in modern culture that older forms of mythology played in earlier cultures. In this respect, these new mythologies offer us a way to look deeper into our own personalities and consciousness as well as physical reality itself than we could normally explore by purely scientific and logical means. When we look more deeply into the mythical scenarios presented by science and fantasy fictions, we can find that they offer a way of exploring how we believe that our own human consciousness is evolving.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Science investigates phenomena in nature that are either experienced or observed by people. Howev... more Science investigates phenomena in nature that are either experienced or observed by people. However, one special class of phenomena is generally considered unscientific, i.e., unworthy of scientific investigation, by the majority of scientists. Science generally ignores any phenomenon associated with the possibility of an afterlife, which amounts to a scientific bias against this possibility. This shortcoming of science is actually a historical artifact that our present science inherited from the earlier break between science and religion and the separation of human thought into the two realms of MIND and MATTER. The bias is so strong that science, as it now defines itself, will never accept the reality of the afterlife and associated phenomena no matter how strong or persuasive the evidence is to the contrary. But new research does point directly to a conclusion that the afterlife is real or at least that consciousness in some form survives death; so science must change in order accept this new reality and progress.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: While the confirmed existence of Dark Matter (DM) and Dark Energy (DE) forms a serious ... more Abstract: While the confirmed existence of Dark Matter (DM) and Dark Energy (DE) forms a serious and indeed revolutionary problem for physics, they are actually easy to explain if the reality of a fourth macroscopically extended spatial dimension is assumed. The four- dimensionality of space is best portrayed in the case of galactic formation in the early universe, where the DM halo that surrounds spiral galaxies can be modeled. DM is nothing more than spatial curvature in the higher fourth dimension that is not associated with local matter (matter inside the spiral galaxy itself), but is instead the result of an interaction between local matter and the overall curvature of the universe. This model yields a definition of DE that also depends on curvature in the fourth dimension in that it predicts the increasing expansion rate of the universe. The model is strictly geometrical and it does not readily reduce to a simple algebraic formula. Yet the geometry does lead to testable predictions rendering the model falsifiable and a classical algebraic formula that adequately describes the gravitational source of the DM in the geometry of the fourth dimension does emerge upon further consideration of how galaxies evolve by the accretion of material bodies gravitating toward the central core. This formula can also be quantized and relativized and thus leads to a complete unification of physics that once again establish the fundamental nature of relativity.
Keywords: galactic rotation problem, halo, Dark Matter, CDM, HDM, Dark Energy, General Relativity, Kaluza, Klein, five-dimensional, fourth dimension, space-time, Einstein, positive curvature, extrinsic curvature
Keywords: galactic rotation problem, halo, Dark Matter, CDM, HDM, Dark Energy, General Relativity, Kaluza, Klein, five-dimensional, fourth dimension, space-time, Einstein, positive curvature, extrinsic curvature
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: Modern science has been plagued by a dualistic view of nature for some time. This duali... more Abstract: Modern science has been plagued by a dualistic view of nature for some time. This duality could be called the Cartesian Paradox because its origin dates back to the work of René Descartes during the Scientific Revolution and his separation of the world of nature into two parts, mind and matter. This dualism was necessary at the time for the development as well as the later evolution of science, but has become far too limiting in modern science. Science has now come to a crossroad where it must solve the Cartesian Paradox and this dualistic
approach to understanding nature or retreat in its path of progress. However, in most cases this dualism has been grossly overlooked and even rejected as real by modern science because it is so fundamental and deeply embedded in the human and scientific psyches that it is easily overlooked as a problem.
approach to understanding nature or retreat in its path of progress. However, in most cases this dualism has been grossly overlooked and even rejected as real by modern science because it is so fundamental and deeply embedded in the human and scientific psyches that it is easily overlooked as a problem.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Everyone seems to have some innate idea that there is an afterlife. Developing a mental picture o... more Everyone seems to have some innate idea that there is an afterlife. Developing a mental picture of the afterlife seems quite natural to us and seems be as old as humankind, more than likely predating even the earliest development of religions. However, religions have taken the initiative in dictating our most commonly held views of the afterlife over the past few thousand years even though there is no hard and fast rule stating that only religions have the right to develop views of the afterlife to the exclusion of all other forms of human knowledge. In fact, a concept of the afterlife is more fundamental to religions as a whole than belief in a Supreme Being, God or gods. Some of religion’s grasp on concepts of the afterlife have recently slipped as moviemakers have taken the initiative in representing how we picture the afterlife. On the other hand, science has been conspicuously absent from this whole process even though science has developed more and more complex paradigms about life, mind and consciousness, just those concepts which would seem important with regard to any possible afterlife. The very silence of science on this issue is simply deafening. However, the present lack of scientific worldviews that include some form of an afterlife will soon change as science takes a greater interest in the concept of consciousness and develops working theories to explain consciousness. Only then will science begin to consider the possibility that consciousness, at the very least, could survive death of the body and brain and only then will science consider the possibility that the afterlife is another part of our physical reality requiring explanation.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
This is a PowerPoint presentation that was latter published as a full article of the same name.
... more This is a PowerPoint presentation that was latter published as a full article of the same name.
Over the last century and a half, the successes of science in explaining our normally sensed world have led to further attempts to expand science into the realm of the para-normal and explain the para-normally sensed world of psychic phenomena. These attempts have helped to establish a greater and growing variety of psychical experiences as well as offer a real challenge to our traditional concepts of religious experience. Within this context, science first came into contact with the paranormal with modern spiritualism, then to parapsychology and finally to paraphysics and a new interest in consciousness and spirituality. At each stage of this evolutionary process, changes in the scientific attitude toward the paranormal coincide with changes in the evolution of attitudes in normal science as well as changes in religious attitude.
Over the last century and a half, the successes of science in explaining our normally sensed world have led to further attempts to expand science into the realm of the para-normal and explain the para-normally sensed world of psychic phenomena. These attempts have helped to establish a greater and growing variety of psychical experiences as well as offer a real challenge to our traditional concepts of religious experience. Within this context, science first came into contact with the paranormal with modern spiritualism, then to parapsychology and finally to paraphysics and a new interest in consciousness and spirituality. At each stage of this evolutionary process, changes in the scientific attitude toward the paranormal coincide with changes in the evolution of attitudes in normal science as well as changes in religious attitude.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: Ghosts and apparitions come in many different forms and their existence has been report... more Abstract: Ghosts and apparitions come in many different forms and their existence has been reported for as long as humans have been around. While a great deal of ‘superstition’ and outright silly beliefs have surrounded the phenomena for much of human history, some people, including a few scientists, have taken them seriously. During the past few decades, the question of the reality of apparitions has become even more urgent as science has matured and more scientists are considering the possibility that something or some part (at least) of human consciousness and/or personality survives bodily death. Science now needs to determine whether apparitions represent real physical ‘things’ or projections of a person’s subconscious on their perceived physical reality before it can move forward and explain them. Yet this question is almost impossible to answer with any certainty given the present paradigms of science. Science simply doesn’t know how to detect the physical presence of apparitions necessary to verify their reality. So the real question that scientists should ask is ‘how do we detect apparitions if they exist as real independent ‘things’ or entities, independent of any particular observer’s possibly biased sightings of them?’ Without anything else to go on, science needs some form of theoretical basis for the existence of apparitions to use as a guide to how to detect their ‘reported’ existence.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
This workshop concentrates on understanding, experiencing and conceptualizing the fourth dimensio... more This workshop concentrates on understanding, experiencing and conceptualizing the fourth dimension of space. Although my theoretical work in physics is based on the reality of a fourth spatial dimension, this workshop is independent of my theoretical work: The knowledge imparted in this workshop will be helpful to anyone who wishes to understand any physical theories based on higher-dimensional realities as well as expand an individual’s own consciousness. This workshop deals directly with the intuitive geometrical notions that we all use to perceive our commonly sensed world. Questions such as ‘What is the concept of space’, ‘Why only three dimensions’, ‘Why or why not more dimensions’, and ‘What is dimension?’ are considered. Different simple methods of how to visualize a fourth spatial dimension and how they can be used as forms of meditation are also discussed. The first method dates back to the 1880s, when it was developed by Hinton, but newer methods use other visualization techniques. The ability to visualize the next higher dimension is enlightening experience if not the next step in the ongoing evolution of human consciousness, while just trying to do so expands an individual’s consciousness. Furthermore, if physical theories that use a higher dimension of space to explain survival (Beichler, Zoellner and others) are accurate, then the conscious visualization of the fourth dimension of space will help prepare each of us for what comes when our material bodies die. This knowledge should familiarize us with the local environment ‘where’ we could end up when we die. Many people who have experienced NDEs have reported that wherever they were, the geometry was different from the geometry that they were taught in school, which is a very good description of how four-dimensional geometry relates to our commonly sensed three-dimensional geometrical world.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
At present, science cannot accept and therefore rejects the notion of an afterlife because it doe... more At present, science cannot accept and therefore rejects the notion of an afterlife because it does not have the conceptual tools or vocabulary to accept the survival of consciousness. The possibility of an afterlife was relegated by science to religion during the Scientific Revolution, so the scientific tools to develop a theory of the afterlife as well as the nature and meaning of life, mind and consciousness were never developed. However, the scientific field of physics deals with the physical reality that we all experience, so if we experience physical phenomena that deal with the afterlife it would be the scientific duty of physicists to expand their models of physical reality to include the possibility of an afterlife. Under the present paradigms that seem to rule physics, no matter how much evidence is found to support the possibility of an afterlife and no matter how convincing that evidence might be, science cannot accept such a reality unless it changes the fundamental concepts of reality upon which it is based and that would entail a new and complete scientific revolution
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: An analysis of historical trends in science indicates that the study of the paranormal ... more Abstract: An analysis of historical trends in science indicates that the study of the paranormal is not only valid from the scientific perspective, but has been an integral and important part of science since the birth of science. This conclusion is based upon a consideration of the Cartesian Paradox of mind and matter, which sets the boundaries between the scientific and non-scientific parts of our perceived world. Study and belief in the paranormal is not now and has never been either a popular fad or a trendy fashion. In fact, recent trends in science clearly demonstrate that a new revolution in science is approaching and that the paranormal will be explained as science changes in the near future.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Presented at the annual ARPR meeting, Philadelphia, Summer 2002
Abstract: The practice of medium... more Presented at the annual ARPR meeting, Philadelphia, Summer 2002
Abstract: The practice of mediumship, in one form or another, is as old as human history itself. Moreover, The human race as a whole has shown a keen interest in the prospect of communicating with its dead ancestors, relatives and friends even though mediumship has been at odds with science and the scientific worldview ever since science first began to eradicate the hold of superstition on human thought, so the human interest in communication with the dead poses a paradox for our modern society which cherishes and favors its scientific ideals. This begs the question: Why, in the face of open skepticism, scientific criticism and common sense does this paradox persist? Perhaps because we have an innate intuitive sense that ‘life’ is more than just the sum of the physical components of the living body. Therefore, some part of life must survive the death (cessation of electro/chemical action) of the material body. This intuitive notion is seemingly devoid of scientific or logical support, but it still persists. The logical conclusion then is that the scientific community will never accept mediumship until life is defined and it is PROVEN that some physical portion of ‘life’ survives the death of the living body.
Abstract: The practice of mediumship, in one form or another, is as old as human history itself. Moreover, The human race as a whole has shown a keen interest in the prospect of communicating with its dead ancestors, relatives and friends even though mediumship has been at odds with science and the scientific worldview ever since science first began to eradicate the hold of superstition on human thought, so the human interest in communication with the dead poses a paradox for our modern society which cherishes and favors its scientific ideals. This begs the question: Why, in the face of open skepticism, scientific criticism and common sense does this paradox persist? Perhaps because we have an innate intuitive sense that ‘life’ is more than just the sum of the physical components of the living body. Therefore, some part of life must survive the death (cessation of electro/chemical action) of the material body. This intuitive notion is seemingly devoid of scientific or logical support, but it still persists. The logical conclusion then is that the scientific community will never accept mediumship until life is defined and it is PROVEN that some physical portion of ‘life’ survives the death of the living body.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Annual Meeting of the U.S. Psychotronics Association, 16 to 18 July 2004, Columbus, OH
Abstract:... more Annual Meeting of the U.S. Psychotronics Association, 16 to 18 July 2004, Columbus, OH
Abstract: Life has been considered “something extra” by many scholars and academics since at least the earliest days of the Scientific Revolution, something more than the sum of the mechanical (Newtonian) parts of a living body or organism. In general, science has tried to steer clear of such issues, relegating them to metaphysical speculation if not to religion, being guided by Descartes’ dictum of a separation between mind and matter. Mind was associated with life while matter became the realm of science through the methods of objective reduction, fully instituted within science by Newtonian physics. In the early days of Newtonian physics, that ‘something extra’ was referred to as a ‘life force’, ‘vital force’ or ‘elan vital’ among other names. These names were meant to lend scientific stature to the principle of life even though no theories of life were forthcoming. The general principle or nature of life was never isolated or reduced by science. And, except for some notable exceptions in the late nineteenth century that followed on the heels of the Darwinian Revolution, questions regarding the true nature of life have only become of more general interest in the scientific community in the last half of a century. It is certainly no coincidence that physicists have begun to search for a ‘theory of everything’ (a TOE) in earnest during this same period of time while the possibility of a hyper-dimensional reality has become popular as well as a search for a definition and theory of consciousness. Any such TOE, by necessity, would have to explain life and consciousness, while the notion of a hyper- or higher-dimensional reality than we could normally sense could account for the ‘something extra’ that is associated with life, or as it has become more popularly known, the Biofield
Abstract: Life has been considered “something extra” by many scholars and academics since at least the earliest days of the Scientific Revolution, something more than the sum of the mechanical (Newtonian) parts of a living body or organism. In general, science has tried to steer clear of such issues, relegating them to metaphysical speculation if not to religion, being guided by Descartes’ dictum of a separation between mind and matter. Mind was associated with life while matter became the realm of science through the methods of objective reduction, fully instituted within science by Newtonian physics. In the early days of Newtonian physics, that ‘something extra’ was referred to as a ‘life force’, ‘vital force’ or ‘elan vital’ among other names. These names were meant to lend scientific stature to the principle of life even though no theories of life were forthcoming. The general principle or nature of life was never isolated or reduced by science. And, except for some notable exceptions in the late nineteenth century that followed on the heels of the Darwinian Revolution, questions regarding the true nature of life have only become of more general interest in the scientific community in the last half of a century. It is certainly no coincidence that physicists have begun to search for a ‘theory of everything’ (a TOE) in earnest during this same period of time while the possibility of a hyper-dimensional reality has become popular as well as a search for a definition and theory of consciousness. Any such TOE, by necessity, would have to explain life and consciousness, while the notion of a hyper- or higher-dimensional reality than we could normally sense could account for the ‘something extra’ that is associated with life, or as it has become more popularly known, the Biofield
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Abstract: Life has been considered “something extra” by many scholars and academics since at leas... more Abstract: Life has been considered “something extra” by many scholars and academics since at least the earliest days of the Scientific Revolution, something more than the sum of the mechanical (Newtonian) parts of a living body or organism. In general, science has tried to steer clear of such issues, relegating them to metaphysical speculation if not to religion, being guided by Descartes’ dictum of a separation between mind and matter. Mind was associated with life while matter became the realm of science through the methods of objective reduction, fully instituted within science by Newtonian physics. In the early days of Newtonian physics, that ‘something extra’ was referred to as a ‘life force’, ‘vital force’ or ‘elan vital’ among other names. These names were meant to lend scientific stature to the principle of life even though no theories of life were forthcoming. The general principle or nature of life was never isolated or reduced by science. And, except for some notable exceptions in the late nineteenth century that followed on the heels of the Darwinian Revolution, questions regarding the true nature of life have only become of more general interest in the scientific community in the last half of a century. It is certainly no coincidence that physicists have begun to search for a ‘theory of everything’ (a TOE) in earnest during this same period of time while the possibility of a hyper-dimensional reality has become popular as well as a search for a definition and theory of consciousness. Any such TOE, by necessity, would have to explain life and consciousness, while the notion of a hyper- or higher-dimensional reality than we could normally sense could account for the ‘something extra’ that is associated with life, or as it has become more popularly known, the Biofield
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Why, despite all efforts to the contrary, have attempts at unification based on the supposedly mo... more Why, despite all efforts to the contrary, have attempts at unification based on the supposedly more fundamental quantum theory failed miserably? The truth is that the essential idea or concept of the quantum itself has never been fully understood. What is the quantum, or rather, what is its ultimate nature? Science may be able to work adequately with the quantum; in a sense science is quite articulate in the language of the quantum, i.e., its mathematical interpretation of the quantum mechanics, but science has no idea of the true physical nature of the quantum. Scientists and philosophers have wasted energy and efforts on irrelevant issues such as the debate over determinism and indeterminism instead of carefully analyzing the physical source of the quantum. Only with a true understanding of the physical nature of the quantum will the unification of the quantum and relativity ever become a reality.
Keywords: Quantum, change, unification, space-time, relativity, hidden variables, five-dimensional, Einstein, Kaluza, Clifford
Keywords: Quantum, change, unification, space-time, relativity, hidden variables, five-dimensional, Einstein, Kaluza, Clifford
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
Many physicists believe that the unification of physics within a single paradigmatic theory has b... more Many physicists believe that the unification of physics within a single paradigmatic theory has been the primary goal in science for only the past few decades, but this would not be true. Unification was the original goal of Einstein and a few other physicists throughout the 1920s to the 1960s during a period of time when quantum theorists were ironing out their own unique set of problems. The unification of physics under the guise of the quantum paradigm only emerged during the 1970s and has since overshadowed all attempts to unify physics from the fundamental principles of relativity. Today too many physicists believe, without any supporting evidence, that the concept of the quantum is far more fundamental than relativity so earlier attempts based on the continuity of relativity have been all but abandoned. However, both approaches are basically flawed because both relativity and the quantum theory are incomplete as they now stand. Had either side of the quantum versus relativity controversy just simplified their worldview and sought commonality between the two, unification would have been accomplished long ago. The point is, literally, that the discrete quantum, continuous relativity, basic physical geometry and classical physics all share one common characteristic – a paradoxical duality between a dimensionless point (discrete) and an extended length (continuity) in any dimension – and if the problem of unification is approached from an understanding of how this paradox relates to each paradigm all of physics could be unified under a single new theoretical paradigm. Unfortunately there has never been a method, either mathematical or physical, by which a three-dimensional space can be generated from two or more dimensionless points. This shortcoming raises the question – how can the dimensionless point-particles of the Standard Model which presently dominates physics be extended to account for the three-dimensional space in which the physical interactions they describe occur? Fortunately, this question can now be answered, but the answer does not favor the Standard Model of the quantum as it is presently interpreted. Instead, a unified field theory based on continuity that completely unifies the quantum and relativity and completely incorporates the Standard Model as well as the Superstring, Brane and commonly accepted classical theories has been completed.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
A complete theoretical model of how consciousness arises in neural nets can be developed based on... more A complete theoretical model of how consciousness arises in neural nets can be developed based on a mixed quantum/classical basis. Both mind and consciousness are multi-leveled scalar and vector electromagnetic complexity patterns, respectively, which emerge within all living organisms through the process of evolution. Like life, the mind and consciousness patterns extend throughout living organisms (bodies), but the neural nets and higher level groupings that distinguish higher levels of consciousness only exist in the brain so mind and consciousness have been traditionally associated with the brain alone. A close study of neurons and neural nets in the brain shows that the microtubules within axons are classical bio-magnetic inductors that emit and absorb electromagnetic pulses from each other. These pulses establish interference patterns that influence the quantized vector potential patterns of interstitial water molecules within the neurons as well as create the coherence within neurons and neural nets that scientists normally associate with more complex memories, thought processes and streams of thought. Memory storage and recall are guided by the microtubules and the actual memory patterns are stored as magnetic vector potential complexity patterns in the points of space at the quantum level occupied by the water molecules. This model also accounts for the plasticity of the brain and implies that mind and consciousness, like life itself, are the result of evolutionary processes. However, consciousness can evolve independent of an organism’s birth genetics once it has evolved by normal bottom-up genetic processes and thus force a new type of top-down evolution on living organisms and species as a whole that can be explained by expanding the laws of thermodynamics to include orderly systems.
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course serves as an introduction to the ideas, concepts and practices wh... more COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course serves as an introduction to the ideas, concepts and practices which form the basis of modern science. In this first section of the Integrated Science course, the areas of physics, astronomy and geology will be covered. Science began nearly two and a half millennia ago in ancient Greece. Physics was the first of the sciences and is still considered the most basic of all the sciences. In physics, the phenomena, events and happenings of which our physical environment consists are logically analyzed into their most fundamental components; matter and motion against the common background of space and time. Ancient philosophers carefully observed all in the world around them, including the stars in the night skies. Observational astronomy was one of the motivating factors in the earliest development of concepts of change and motion in physics and science in general, even though astronomy is an independent science in our own time. The separation of science into many different branches is a later development. That part of astronomy which involves an explanation of the motions of planets stars and other heavenly bodies is also called astrophysics. So, after our study of the basic concepts of motion, the forces which make material bodies move, the energies involved in such processes, the electromagnetic forces and light, we will study structure of the basic units of matter, the atom and the nucleus. Such a study of the microscopic elements of our physical reality actually brings us back the the structure of the universe as a whole as well as the nuclear processes which fuel the stars themselves. So we will then study the astronomy of the universe, galaxy and solar system. After we study the planets in our own solar system, we will continue to specialize our study on our own planet, the earth. In particular, we will look at the forces which shape the surface of our earth as well as how the rocks which make up our immediate environment came to be formed. This will complete our course, but Integrated Science will not be finished. All of the sciences are related in a single whole, yet chemistry and biology have been left for the second course of Integrated Science. That particular separation of the sciences is completely articifial, made as a convenience for our studies, since all of the sciences form a single comprehensive whole. GRADING METHOD: This course will consist of two internet lectures per week over an eight week period. After the eighth lecture, a midterm exam will be given over the internet. A final exam will be given in a common area with a proctor present at the end of the eight week course. In the text of each chapter of the textbook, "activites" are listed. These "activites," as well as others to be posted by the instructor over the internet, will be completed individually by the students and written reports submitted to the instructor for correction, comment and grading. These activites are provided to replace the laboratory exercises which usually accompany a science course such as this one. Problems from the textbook as well as new problems posted on the internet will also be completed by the students with the answers submitted to the instructor. And finally, each chapter of the textbook includes a section on "questions for thought." These questions, and others posted by the instructor, will form the basis of an ongoing internet discussion by the students and instructor. Student responses and contibutions to the discussion for these threaded questions will also be considered in determining the student's grade for this course. Handouts and further explanations of requirements and procedures will be given during the course as necessary. So, there are four parts to this course which the student will need to complete for a grade:
Readers Related Papers MentionsView Impact
JSCS, 2021
The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting,... more The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting, although there is a great deal of good and various levels of even better evidence when NDEs, reincarnation, new standards for verifying mediumship, death bed visions and other phenomena related to dying and the afterlife are considered. But none of these rises to the level of ‘best evidence’ for ‘proving’ the reality of the afterlife. The truth is that there is no falsifiable evidence that can distinguish between the afterlife and other paranormal phenomena, i.e., there are always alternative super-psi or general psi explanations for the data, stories and evidence gathered by parapsychologists and experienced by individuals. The afterlife hypothesis is neither falsifiable nor verifiable given the absolute best ‘so-called evidence’ available today. Only a valid theory could offer scientific verifiability and also distinguish whether the evidence gathered so far supports the afterlife concept or super-psi. So, with no valid theory of the afterlife available, either an independent acceptable theory based on specific phenomena or better yet as part of a greater comprehensive theory of physical reality, there is nothing on which to base a truly rigorous experiment that could verify the afterlife to the satisfaction of both the scientific and non-scientific communities. Some form of valid acceptable theory is necessary and long overdue to explain and verify the various paranormal phenomena as well as hone the scientific search for survival of consciousness and the afterlife. We must assume that at least consciousness survives as either part or the whole of any possible afterlife. All of the common paranormal examples that deal with the afterlife are in some way simply different data points that should be used to follow the scientific method and lead to some common physical concept that we identify as the afterlife, so the hypothesis can be tested and verified. Not one of these examples is based on anything other than experiences/observations for which no comprehensive scientific model has ever been developed and/or studied in enough detail to even attempt to verify even the minimum level survival of consciousness in some manner. Only one theoretical unification model in modern physics, the single (operational) field theory or SOFT, is comprehensive enough to model life, mind, and consciousness and their evolution in enough specific detail to even talk logically about survival of consciousness. Be this as it may, the only possible ‘best evidence’ would then be the direct experience of higher consciousness, as in NDEs and enlightenment, which are very personal experiences, but even then, it could only be used as evidence, the best evidence, when it can be analyzed and understood as a physical phenomenon within the context of SOFT, an equivalent or better theoretical model.
Keywords: afterlife, best evidence, NDEs, enlightenment, fourth dimension, hyperspace, four-dimensional space-time, five-dimensional time-space, unification, 0-D point/twist, psi, paranormal phenomena, consciousness, higher consciousness, A-fields, physical evolution, unification, psi, ‘pattern matching’
Keywords: afterlife, best evidence, NDEs, enlightenment, fourth dimension, hyperspace, four-dimensional space-time, five-dimensional time-space, unification, 0-D point/twist, psi, paranormal phenomena, consciousness, higher consciousness, A-fields, physical evolution, unification, psi, ‘pattern matching’
Readers Related Papers MentionsView ImpactRelated Authors
