The following is a copy of my presentation to the founding members of the Academy for the Advancement of Post-Materialist Science, August 26, 2017

**MATHEMATICS, PHYSICS AND CONSCIOUSNESS**

**A Presentation by Edward R. Close, August 2017**

First, I want to thank Dr. Gary
Schwartz, Dr. Marjorie Woollacott, Dr. Charles Tart, and all who have worked so hard to
make the Academy for the Advancement of Post Materialist Sciences and this
meeting possible, including our anonymous benefactor. This meeting is the
beginning of something I have dreamed of for many years.

I am struck by the
similarities among the intellectual and psychic experiences of those gathered
here today, but this should not be a surprise! It is evidence for what Erwin
Schrӧdinger
declared in his wonderful little book “What is Life?” published by Cambridge
University Press in 1967, when he said: “There is no evidence that
consciousness is plural.” Many of us know that all things are connected at a
fundamental level, and, my friends, it is time for the first

*real*scientific paradigm shift since relativity and quantum physics!
I want to start by
sharing an experience I wrote about in my first book, “The Book of Atma”, published
in 1977. It reveals the motivation that has propelled me throughout my life:

It was the summer of
1951. I was fourteen. I found a little book on analytical geometry written in
German among some old books. Reading it, I had the distinct awareness that I
already knew this mathematics. It was as if I were remembering, not learning. Also,
I had just discovered the work of Albert Einstein, which had opened a whole new
world for me.

One evening, in the
twilight just after sunset, I walked out of the little house on my parent’s
farm in the Southern Missouri Ozarks, past a line of catalpa trees, to the bank
of a pond. I had been thinking about the “electrodynamics of moving objects” as
described in Einstein’s special theory of relativity, and I had reached a point
beyond which I could not go. Frustrated, I looked up at the sky and complained:
“God, I want to know everything!”

What followed was totally
unexpected, but so real that I knew it was completely natural. Suddenly, I could
“hear” the silence around me. My surroundings took on a glow, as if

*everything*were alive. My conscious mind seemed to melt, and the distinctions between my physical body and the surrounding landscape seemed to fade. I was filled with an all-pervading feeling of well-being. I knew I had received my answer! I would be a theoretical physicist!
I could spend my twenty
minutes describing the series of psychic experiences and epiphanies that led
Dr. Vernon Neppe and me to develop the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP), and list the paradoxes it has resolved and the phenomena it
has explained that are not explained by the current materialistic paradigm, but
that would only scratch the surface. Instead, I want to address Dr. Gary
Schwartz’s last item in his list of important questions: “Do we need an
expanded mathematics, as Close and Neppe propose, to advance Post Materialist
Sciences?”

Of course my answer is
yes; but let me illustrate and emphasize this answer with a short history of
the development of the new mathematics that unites number theory, geometry,
relativity, quantum physics, some aspects of string theory, and the
consciousness of the observer.

A paranormal experience
in 1957 resulted in my discovery of the work of Pierre de Fermat. My College
roommate, now Dr. David Stewart, and I were carrying out experiments in which
we obtained verifiable information not available to us by normal sensory means.
One of the most successful of these experiments was submitted to Dr. J.B. Rhine
at Duke University. During one of our early experiments it was revealed that I
had access to memories of the life of Pierre de Fermat. We obtained
mathematical representations of concepts that far exceeded my training at the
time, but were verified by my physics professor.

In 1637, Fermat wrote in
the margin of his copy of a book on Diophantine equations, that he had found a
“marvelous” proof that the equation

**x**has no integer solutions for n >2. But his proof was never found. After receiving my degree in mathematics and physics in 1962, while teaching mathematics, I spent considerable time trying to access Fermat’s marvelous proof. Sometime during that period, I realized that Fermat’s Last Theorem, considered by most to be nothing more than a hypothesis in pure number theory, had important implications for quantum physics if x, y and z represent the radii of elementary particles that combine to form what we experience as ordinary physical reality.^{n}+ y^{n}= z^{n}
This led to the realization
that a quantum mathematics was

*urgently**needed*for describing the quantized reality we live in. The differential and integral calculus of Newton and Leibniz are inappropriate for describing quantum phenomena because they depend on a continuity of the variables of measurement that does not exist in a quantized world. I believe that the inappropriate application of Newtonian calculus to quantum phenomena gives rise to much of the ‘weirdness’ of quantum physics that physicists like to talk about.
I found the basis for the
needed quantum mathematics in G. Spencer Brown’s calculus of indications
published in his 1969 book “Laws of Form.” And it was obvious to me from the
results of the Aspect Experiment resolving the Einstein/Bohr debate, that we
have to have a mathematics that incorporates the consciousness of the observer.
I published the basic concepts of an adaptation of Brown’s Calculus which I
called the Calculus of Distinctions in my book, “Infinite Continuity,” in 1990.
The Calculus of Distinctions is different from Brown’s Calculus of Indications
in several ways that I do not have time to go into here. Unfortunately, that
book is now long out of print, but the basic logic is published in an appendix
to my 1996 book, “Transcendental Physics.”

In those references, I
show that the drawing of a distinction is comprised of a triad:

1.
the object of distinction

2.
the features distinguishing the object
from everything else, and

3.
the consciousness of the observer.

Thus, a distinction is
inherently triadic, and the consciousness of the observer is implicit in the
logic of the CoD. Therefore, application of these basic concepts inherently includes
the consciousness of the observer in the equations of science. I later adapted
the CoD to reflect the multi-dimensional geometry of finite distinctions and
the differentiation of existing distinctions from conceptual distinctions in
the Calculus of Dimensional Distinctions (CoDD).

With the help of
Russian-born mathematician Vladimir Brandin in 2003, and Dr. Vernon Neppe, from
2008 to the present, application of the CoDD has allowed me to develop the
definition of a true quantum equivalence unit that I call the Triadic
Rotational Unit of Equivalence (TRUE), and the discovery of the third form of
the substance of reality, necessary for the stability of atomic structure. This
third form cannot be measured as mass or energy, but is detectable in the total
angular momentum of any rotating physical system. Dr. Neppe proposed the name
gimmel for the third form for a variety of interesting reasons.

We decided to call the
new paradigm TDVP: Triadic because that was the nature of the underlying
structure of mass, energy and consciousness. Dimensional, because to be consistent,
the mathematics had to incorporate extra dimensions beyond three of space and
one of time. Vortical, because of the spinning nature of elementary particles,
and Paradigm to emphasize that it is a shift from the current materialistic
metaphysics of modern science.

Physicists talk about a
“theory of everything”. But you can’t have a theory of everything if everything
is not included in it. I see the discovery of gimmel as the fulfillment of my
efforts over the past 30 plus years to put consciousness into the equations of
science. Gimmel has all the earmarks of consciousness, or at least of an agent
of consciousness, acting through what I call the conveyance equations, to bring
the logic of the multi-dimensional substrate of Primary Consciousness into the
3 Spatial dimensions, 1 Time dimension, and 1 dimension of Consciousness, i.e.,
the domain of physical observation.

**The discovery of gimmel eliminates materialism as a viable metaphysical basis for science**. It eliminates materialism because gimmel is inherently non-material, and because I have proved that it is necessary for the stability of quarks and subatomic structure. Without it there would be no physical universe. The discovery of gimmel answers Gottfried Leibniz’s unanswered first priority question: “Why is there something rather than nothing?”

I believe that gimmel is
the manifestation of consciousness in physical reality. This view is justified
in part because the elements and compounds supporting organic life forms prove
to have the highest levels of gimmel. TRUE units and gimmel provide the
necessary basis to analyze and quantify consciousness working within our
physical/spiritual/conscious reality.

Through the use of TRUE
unit analysis and LHC data, and applying the principles of relativity and
quantum physics, several unexplained phenomena have been explained quite
elegantly by TDVP. Because TDVP includes consciousness in the equations of
science, and therefore is more comprehensive than materialistic theories, it
can provide the mathematical basis for investigating and describing psi
phenomena like those experienced by virtually everyone in this room.

My answer to Gary’s question
about whether the Academy needs an expanded math is this: It is my personal
belief, based on over 50 years of explorations of mathematics, physics and
consciousness expansion techniques, that mathematics is not merely a tool,
mathematics reflects the actual structure of reality. And if you look at the
history of science, every real scientific paradigm shift of the past has been
accompanied by new mathematics. The paradigm shift to the primacy of consciousness
can be no exception. It is my opinion that, in this case, a new mathematics is even
more crucial than ever before because of the magnitude of this shift.
Post-Materialism Science cries out for a new more comprehensive mathematical
paradigm, and in my opinion, that new paradigm is TDVP, and the new math is the
Calculus of Dimensional Distinctions.

As stated numerous times before, Ed, and appreciated by you, the above is certainly well suited to the 'One' of my mystically-inspired calculus formula, Y (Universal Intelligence) = X Squared (Basic Evolutionary Elements: 0,1,2,3,4) + One (The Ultimate Force) - I hopefully still look forward to your sometime, sooner rather than later, introducing this concept to your peers to further serve the fundamental nature of your own TDVP treatise.

ReplyDeleteThe following URL, once again, provides full details: http://www.vigiltrust.lk/ultimate-forces-fundamental-calculus-revised-according-brian/