Tuesday, November 14, 2017



by Edward R. Close, November 14, 2017

Evil is subtle, and good is easily ignored. And right now, we are at a critical point in the history of science and our civilization. University professors have been misguidedly teaching our children that everything is matter and energy evolving in space and time for many years. They are blinded by the intellectual trap of materialism. It has become common for mainstream scientists to say things like “The more we know, the more meaningless it becomes!” And “we are just accidental combinations of matter and energy flying away from an explosion that happened 13.8 billion years ago”. And young aspiring scientists are saying: “I’m a scientist, so of course I’m an atheist!”

This is not only wrong, it is subtly dangerous; - but the danger is not so subtle any more. The belief that when my body dies I cease to exist, leads to a self-serving attitude of “This is all there is, so I can do anything I want.” This is the reason crime, violence, murder and suicide are rampant in the world today. Science must change, and it must change quickly, if we are to survive as an intelligent civilization.

Science must change soon, and science can change, because intellectual atheism is not a valid scientific hypothesis, it cannot be proved or disproved within the current scientific paradigm. And anyone who is awake and aware of the elegant wonders of nature and the mathematical beauty of the music resounding throughout the atoms and the stars, knows in his or her heart that there is much more to Reality than matter and energy randomly revolving and dissolving in space-time.

About thirty years ago, I realized that conscious awareness depends on the existence of a real, but non-physical aspect of reality. In 1996 at the university of Arizona in Tucson, I presented the case for the non-quantum receptor at Tucson II: Toward a Science of Consciousness. And in 1997 I published my third book: Transcendental Physics. In 2008, I began to work with a world-renowned neuroscientist, Dr. Vernon Neppe, MD, PhD. As you may know, we have published numerous papers and manuscripts and we have spoken at national and international conferences announcing a new consciousness-based paradigm. But that is not what this post is about.

About five years ago, we discovered that, in addition to matter and energy, there is a third something that must exist at the quantum level for there to be any symmetrically stable subatomic particles. In other words, if there wasn’t something non-physical from the very beginning, there would not be a physical universe as we know it today. This discovery allowed us to work out a way to put consciousness into the equations of science, fulfilling a dream I had had for more than fifty years! By putting consciousness into the equations, we have explained things that have puzzled mainstream scientists for decades. But even that is not the point of this post.

The point of this post is that science must change, is about to change forever, and you need to know about it.

Scientists and theologians alike have told us for years that no one can prove with science and logic, that God and the human soul or spirit do or do not exist. This assumption has kept the world of scientists, whose “theories of everything” involve only matter and energy, and the world of spiritual people, who need no proof, forever apart. But this assumption is only true when science is limited to the materialistic belief system of current mainstream science. When the basis of science is expanded to include an element of consciousness, as we have done with the discovery of the third form of reality, which we call gimmel, that is no longer true.

The real existence of the world of Spirit and its interaction with physical reality is now a mathematically proven and scientifically demonstrable fact. Science is about to enter a completely new and exciting era. The real phenomena of spiritual experience can now be explained, within a scientific paradigm that also explains physical phenomena. For the first time in modern human history, every real phenomenon can be scientifically explored and explained.

In 1856, Nikola Tesla, the genius of electrical transmission and use, said: “The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence”.

This is what the work of Neppe and Close, and the new Academy for the Advancement of Postmaterialist Science is all about. Stay tuned!

Friday, November 10, 2017


An Assessment of The Golden Hills Indian Village
by Edward R. Close

A cluster of small mounds, located in a secluded spot in the southwestern part of the Golden Hills Trail Ride acreage, is somewhat unusual for this part of Missouri because most Native American Village sites in the area either did not include mounds, or if they did, the mounds have been obliterated by farming or other human activities. I first became aware of this site in 1951 0r ’52 while hiking across a rugged wooded area near Pond Springs branch, tributary to Big Creek and the Current River in the beautiful Missouri Ozarks. I was looking for caves to explore, and I occasionally came across evidence of abandoned Native American villages or camp sites. Artifacts like spearheads, arrowheads, pot shards, flint knives and other evidence of the Native American past were sometimes exposed along streams in this area by erosion after heavy rains. But this site was not near an obvious water source, and it was in an out-of-the-way, wooded area so you would not find it unless you literally stumbled upon the mounds. I noticed a small groundwater seep covered in leaves just outside the cluster of mounds that may have been a flowing spring in the past, before settlers began digging wells on farms and residences on the higher ground to the west.
This site was probably occupied by a small Native American group (estimated to be about 25 to 50 people), most likely families of the Piankeshaw Tribe, from around 1837 until about 1855 or 1860. While a positive identification of the tribe that built the mounds and an accurate determination of the dates of their occupation are not possible without a detailed archeological investigation, these estimates are based on written accounts found in historical records in South Central and Southeast Missouri. My reasons for believing that it was the Piankeshaw that lived there during these approximate dates, are outlined below.

The dominate indigenous people of Southern Missouri and Northern Arkansas when the European settlers arrived, were the Osage, the largest tribe of the Southern Sioux. But their villages were typically located along major streams, were much larger, and when they built mounds they tended to be elongated because they lived in lodges, not wigwams or teepees. They may have had hunting camps in this area, where they would have built smaller shelters, but typically, the temporary shelters of hunting camps were not built on mounds. The time and effort it took to build mounds was expended where occupation was intended to be year-round, not seasonal, as in the case of hunting camps. So, for these reasons, I believe it is very unlikely that this was an Osage site.

Indigenous tribes east and southeast of this area, the Illini, Quapaw and Chickasaw, most likely could not have built this village, because the Osage were fierce defenders of their hunting territory until they were forced to move west by European settlers. This area would have been even less accessible to the indigenous Missouria, Ioway and the Oto tribes who lived farther away north and northwest of the Osage territory. It is therefore very likely that this site was built by a non-indigenous group of native Americans who had been forced out of their native lands farther east by European settlers in the late 1700’s or early 1800’s.

Tribes known to have moved into the Missouri Ozarks in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s, hoping to settle there, at least temporarily, were the Miami, Shawnee, Cherokee, Delaware, Kickapoo, Sac and Fox. A temporary Shawnee village was known to still exist as late as the early 1900’s a few miles southwest of this site, on Big Creek above the Route 17 bridge. But the Shawnee and Delaware, who were related Algonquian speaking tribes, built long houses unlike the dwellings indicated by the size, shape and grouping of the mounds at the Golden Hills site. Because of this, and the probable time frame of the sites, it is unlikely that the two sites are related, and so, it was probably not the Shawnee or Delaware who built these mounds.

The Cherokee trail of tears in 1838 split into two branches about 100 miles east of Texas County, one group going northwest through the Salem Missouri area, the other going south into Arkansas. For this reason, and because the location, type of mounds and size of the Golden Hills site are not consistent with the temporary encampments of the forced march of the Cherokee, it is unlikely that the site was built by the Cherokee.

The site layout is not unlike that of the small villages of the Kickapoo, Sac and Fox, but I can find no evidence that these tribes ever built villages this far south in Missouri, or anywhere in Osage territory. This leaves the Miami. And we do have records of small bands of Piankeshaw, a branch of the Miami Nation, moving from Indiana and Ohio into southeastern Missouri around 1800. Like the Kickapoo, Delaware, Sac and Fox, they were Algonquian-speaking natives and they built small villages in secluded locations that would match the physical characteristics of the Golden Hills site. They built dome-shaped wigwams by burying the larger end of flexible poles in the ground, around a 10 to 15 ft. diameter circular mound, bending the upper ends of the poles over to meet above the center of the mound, and covering them with animal skins, grass mats and bark. Inside, the ground was covered with grass mats on top of evergreen boughs, except for a rock-lined fireplace in the center. The entry door would be covered with an animal skin flap, and a hole would be left at the highest point of the structure to allow smoke from a cooking and/or heating fire to escape.

As the Osage were being pushed westward, and other tribes from farther east were being forced to move by the pressures of the European settlers, dwindling groups of the Piankeshaw sought out sheltered areas in Southeast Missouri. From about 1805, a Piankeshaw village was known to be located in what is now known as Arcadia Valley. Taum Sauk Mountain, the highest elevation in the state, just west of Arcadia Valley, is named after the Piankeshaw chief who lived there. But, in 1836, high-grade iron ore was discovered in hills around the valley, and European immigrants from Germany, Ireland, and Eastern Europe poured into the valley to work in the mines. The Piankeshaw, who had sided with the British in the Revolutionary war, moved on west.

From all the historical records that I’m aware of, and the circumstantial evidence presented above, it is my opinion that the mounds at the Golden Hills site were probably built by the Piankeshaw as one of their last efforts to find a safe haven, away from routes travelled by the European intruders. They would have arrived at this sheltered location, now part of the Golden Hills Ranch, around 1837, and may have remained there until after the Piankeshaw treaty with the US Government in 1854. Eventually, the Piankeshaw, along with the illini, Wea and Kaskaskia, remnants of the Algonquian-language-speaking Miami tribes, merged with the Peoria, a larger Miami tribe, in Oklahoma. Present-day descendants of the Piankeshaw are part of the Native American culture in and around Miami Oklahoma.

Edward R. Close, PhD, November 10, 2017

Monday, October 30, 2017


©Edward R. Close 10/30/2017

OK, let's put our thinking caps on, and see if we can use a little more of our brain capacity than we normally do. People on both sides of the question concerning whether there is a supreme intelligence behind the reality we experience, seem to think that this is not a proper question for science to ever even consider asking. Philosophers and theologians consider the question as exclusively on their turf, and most mainstream scientists think that there is no way to determine the answer to this question using the scientific method. In my opinion, they are both wrong. Why? They are both wrong because there can be no boundaries for real science, science must go wherever the evidence leads, and the scientists who refuse to even consider the question are doubly wrong because there is plenty of hard evidence now to warrant addressing this question scientifically.

In this country, Dr. J.B. Rhine began the long road to making parapsychology, still considered by some to be pseudoscience, a legitimate subject for scientific study in 1931 at Duke University. In quantum physics, since about 1935, more and more refined versions of the double-slit and delayed-choice experiments have revealed the fact that the consciousness of the observer is somehow directly involved in shaping what we observe at the quantum level. And more recently, meticulous scientific studies by scientists like Dean Radin, Chief Scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), and Gary Schwartz at the University of Arizona, have consistently produced more and more significant experimental evidence that psi phenomena like remote viewing, psychokinesis and even mediumship are real. 

It is past time to investigate this question seriously. So, how do we go about testing the hypothesis that the universe has an intelligent design with meaning and purpose? Anyone who has had direct personal contact with the intelligence behind reality has all the proof anyone could ever need. He or she knows. But words cannot adequately convey such knowledge, and that is not the kind of proof I’m talking about here. I am talking about scientific proof. Any legitimate question can be addressed scientifically in three steps:

1)    State the question as a hypothesis.
2)    Express the hypothesis or its consequences in primary mathematical logic, thereby turning the hypothesis into a theorem, and then
3)    prove the theorem to be either true or false.

The question of whether God exists can be stated either as a positive hypothesis or as a negative hypothesis. Positive: God exists. Negative: There is no God. This brings up some ideas that may confuse some readers, so we will take a short, but important side trip. I once heard a minister, discussing an atheist’s blunt statement that “there is no God,” state authoritatively that you cannot prove a negative! While his argument may have been otherwise persuasive, when he said this, he was dead wrong! The once widespread belief that a negative can’t be proved may have come from the fact that negative statements are often much harder to prove than positive statements, but negative statements can be proved. Mathematicians do it all the time. For example, take the statement that there are no prime numbers between 113 and 127.

For those not much accustomed to thinking about numbers, a prime number is any number that is only divisible by itself and 1. The numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, and 17, for example, are prime numbers. The other numbers in this series: 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, and 16, are not. The statement “There are no prime numbers between 113 and 127” is a negative statement that can be easily proved by looking at the 13 numbers between 113 and 127. If you do, then you’ll find that they are all divisible by smaller numbers, and you will have proved a negative statement to be true.

So, if the negative statement “there is no God” is open to proof or disproof, then the positive statement “God exists” is open to proof or disproof. But this brings up another question: Just because a statement seems to make sense, does that mean that it can be proved to be true or false? Maybe a statement can simply be unprovable. Is our hypothesis unprovable? Many have said that it is. But they are wrong. To prove this, we will have to consider something called Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems.

In 1931, an Austrian mathematician, Kurt Gödel, published one of the most important papers in the history of mathematics and science. It contained theorems with profound and far-reaching consequences. And yet, many, probably even most people have never heard of Gӧdel or his theorems. This is true at least partly because the proofs of the incompleteness theorems are complex and subtle, - not accessible to anyone without considerable training in mathematics and symbolic logic. Fortunately, their meaning is understandable. Gӧdel’s incompleteness theorems prove that in any logical system, there can be true statements that cannot be proved within the system. Could our statements regarding the existence or non-existence of God be such statements, statements that cannot be proved within the logical systems known as the current scientific paradigm? Yes, that could very well be the case.

Does that mean that they are forever unprovable? No! - Let me explain. At first, many people, even some mathematicians, misinterpreted Gӧdel’s theorems to mean that there are true statements that can never be proved. In the case at hand, e.g., they could conclude that even though one of our statements, either the positive or the negative, must be true, it can never ever be proved. But, this is not what Gӧdel’s incompleteness theorems say. They do say that there can be true statements that are not provable within a logical system like the current scientific paradigm. But they also say that no logical system is complete. So, if the current paradigm can be expanded into a larger logical system, then statements that are unprovable in the current paradigm may be provable in the new expanded paradigm.

This brings us back to our question of the existence or non-existence of God. Step one is easy. We have our hypothesis. Step two is a little more difficult. It is much like the word problems you may remember encountering in high school algebra. A verbal hypothesis can be translated into the language of mathematical logic to avoid the ambiguity of words. The word God, for example, may have a different meaning for every reader of this post, but, if you can translate the consequences of the existence or non-existence of God into terms of the primary mathematical logic in an expanded paradigm, then proof or disproof may be possible. It is important to note that turning a hypothesis into a mathematical theorem changes it from a theory, subject to endless debate, to a theorem that can be proved or disproved.

Of course, the three steps listed above are much easier said than done; but they have been done, and I will present the outline here of how they were done.

During the past 40 years, I have developed a primary mathematical logic that is capable of describing the phenomena experienced by sentient beings like us.  It is a calculus that is logically prior to conventional mathematics into which hypotheses can be translated for proof or disproof. It is called the Calculus of Dimensional Distinctions (CoDD). It re-unites number theory and geometry, and by deriving the basic units of the CoDD from data for elementary particles, provided by the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the primary mathematical logic is united with physics. The quantum units whose values are derived from the LHC data for the three elementary particles: the electron, which, among the elementary particles that make up the natural atoms of the periodic Table of elements, has the smallest rest mass and volume, and the quarks that make up the protons and neutrons of atoms.

These units, used as the basic units of measurement for the CoDD, are called the Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence (TRUE), or true quantum units. They are called rotational equivalence units because the particles are rotating, and because they embody the volumetric equivalence of the parameters of mass, energy, space, and time, as expressed by the equation E = mc2. The physics and mathematical details of the derivation of true quantum units from LHC data, applying relativistic principles have been published in several technical papers and in posts on this blog.

In the process of describing, in true quantum units, the combinations of the quarks that form protons and neutrons, we discovered that no stable protons or neutrons, and thus not one atom, could form without the existence of a third something that is neither mass nor energy. This means that in the debris of a big-bang explosion, nothing stable could ever have formed without this third non-physical something being present. This means that materialism is not a viable basis for scientific inquiry!

But, what is this third form that is part of every atom, and thus responsible for the existence of the universe? It cannot be matter or energy, because then electrons and quarks would not have the masses revealed by statistical analysis of the many terabytes of data from the LHC. Since we have no name for it, my research partner, Dr. Vernon Neppe and I decided to represent it with gimmel, the third letter of the Phoenician and Hebrew alphabet. The discovery of gimmel, and its representation as multiples of the basic units of the CoDD in the equations of science led to another discovery: The atoms that have the largest percentage of gimmel are the elements that support organic life, Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen, Sulfur, etc. So gimmel causes the physical universe to form in the very specific fine-tuned way that allows the existence of conscious organic life forms.

Gimmel had to exist prior to the formation of any particle of the physical universe, otherwise, no stable atoms and molecules could form. This means that the non-physical logic that shapes the universe pre-existed the matter, energy, space and time that make up the universe. Logic is not associated with random accidents. Logic is associated with mind.

Max Planck, the father of quantum physics said: As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you, as a result of my research about the atoms, this much:  There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds … the atom together. … We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Spirit. This Spirit is the matrix of all matter. - The Nature of Matter, a speech delivered in Florence, Italy in 1944.

Discovery of the existence of gimmel proves that he was right. A conscious and intelligent mind is behind the force that holds the atoms of the universe together in symmetric vibration, and our hypothesis is proved. There is a conscious intelligence behind all reality. Some have called it God.

Friday, October 27, 2017



page 4:
Transcendental Physics proves that a pervasive form of consciousness, (God) not only exists, but necessarily preceded the creation of physical reality."

Pp 59-60:
“With proof that materialism is an incomplete and inadequate theory, science can no longer use it as a basis for understanding reality. Ironically, it is not a thought experiment or theoretical consideration that has brought about the downfall of materialism, it is a meticulous empirical experiment. Scientific materialism has literally been hoisted on its own petard! And the blow is final. The assumption that physical reality exists independent of the conscious observer is simply incorrect. Still, because of ingrained belief in this assumption, the death of materialism is not yet general knowledge.”

In a recent review of Space, Time and Consciousness, an unpublished manuscript by this author, that elaborates on some of the points made in Transcendental Physics, a reviewer said:

“I'd say that your refutation of materialism may constitute one of the biggest philosophical breakthroughs in the last 2500 years… -- a world historic event.”

Page 272: “Once it is understood that reality is much more than matter and energy interacting in time and space, and that this greater reality can be investigated objectively, the doors will be thrown open for science to grow as never before,”

I published several original poems at the beginnings and endings of some of the chapters of Transcendental Physics For example, on page 260, at the beginning of Chapter Ten, you’ll find:

The Cosmic Whole

Bathed in diurnal rays both day and night,
We sleep, always blinded by the light.

What’s new is old, what’s old is new,
Once discerned, what’s one is two.

The simple seed becomes a tree,
The atom’s speed, - eternity.

Both time and space
Enshroud the soul,
‘til we embrace

The Cosmic

P 199:
“It is now time to turn back, investigate consciousness in an objective manner and develop a scientific understanding of consciousness comparable to our current understanding of physical reality.”

Transcendental Physics is available from Barnes and Noble and other book handlers and on Amazon.com. Anyone who wants an autographed copy, can send a check or money order for US $40.00 (to cover the cost of the book plus handling and shipping) to:

EJC Advantage, LLC
P.O. Box 368
Jackson, MO 63755

Wednesday, October 25, 2017


A two-page article in a recent issue of the prestigious science magazine EXPLORE is hailed as "a bombshell". The lead authors of this article are three of the founding members of the new Academy for the Advancement of Post-Materialist Science. I was invited to become a member and met with the lead authors of this article and six other members of the Academy at Canyon Ranch near Tucson Arizona in August. We are currently working on the first book to be published by the Academy, a 10-chapter volume entitled Is Consciousness Primary?
Click on the title below and follow the link to read the article and see what others have to say about it.


Monday, October 23, 2017


Picture taken about 2005 or 2006

Marble Hill, 2008

2008: Singing a Christmas Cantata with the Bollinger County Community Choir, directed by Mrs. Lee Stewart. Jacqui is in the front row, on the right end, and I’m on the right end in the back row. That’s Dr. David Stewart second on my right.

2010: With Cherie Ross, in make-up for the second day of filming in Egypt of the Young Living documentary film the Frankincense Trail.

With my trusty camel, I was the Physician/Priest in the Frankincense Trail Caravan in the Ancient City of Petra, Southern Jordan, 2010.  

Jacqui in Brisbane, October, 2011

2011: Here we are in the sky-lift up into the Rain forest near Cairns Australia in 2011, a few days after we had been guest speakers at a Young Living Regional Convention in Brisbane. Below: Feeding a wallaby kangaroo. 

2011: Living in Tucson Arizona.

2011- 2012: A tree fell on our house in Missouri. The Pythagorean Conference was cancelled five days before opening date, and on Black Friday, November 26, 2012, Jacqui had acute kidney failure. I almost lost her. She was in St. Joseph's Hospital in Tucson for 11 days, and we had to move back to Missouri. She has been on dialysis ever since. But life goes on; it's not about waiting for the storm to stop, it's about learning to dance in the rain!

2013: At the International Conference on Science and Spirituality, Puebla Mexico with Drs. Neppe, Sagi and Lazlo.

Young Living Convention 2014, we achieve the rank of Gold!

Here I am, October 23, 2017, just a few minutes ago, I'll have a haircut and beard trim tomorrow, and I may still look like the 2007 picture! Or maybe not!

Sunday, October 22, 2017



I was pleased and honored to be among the group of scientists invited by the founding members of the Academy to write a chapter for this volume. We were asked to focus on the primacy of consciousness hypothesis and explain, based on our individual experiences, both professional and personal, how and why we came to consider it as a valid scientific hypothesis.

In my chapter you will find a brief account of a double life: By day, I earned a living by applying the scientific method as a systems analyst, mathematical modeler and professional engineer, while by night and on weekends, I single-mindedly sought to understand the meaning of existence and the true nature of reality by studying what is known as the perennial philosophy, practicing time-honored consciousness expansion techniques and pursuing independent research in several major universities.

As someone who has spent many years passionately seeking to understand the nature of reality at its deepest level, I can tell you this much:

I am quite certain that there is no reality without consciousness. Nothing would exist without it, and nothing can be known without it: CONSCIOUSNESS IS PRIMARY.

I can state this unequivocally because I have proved it to my satisfaction by personal experience and by using hard scientific evidence, valid experimental data and rigorous mathematical proof. In my chapter of the Academy’s first volume, I hope to exceed all expectations by presenting an outline of this proof, along with disclosure of a significant discovery that provides answers to, and explanations of many issues that have puzzled mainstream scientists for decades.

Ed Close, October 22, 2017