THE
STORY OF THE DISCOVERY OF THE TRUE NATURE OF REALITY.
A
MAJOR PARDDIGM SHIFT
© 2018, Edward R. Close
The history of this story goes back at least 5000
years, with concepts originating in the East, Middle East, Arabia, and Northern
Africa, inspiring Diophantus of Alexandria around 250 BC, Pierre de Fermat
around 1640 AD, and Max Planck and Albert Einstein from 1900 to 1935, to look
at the nature of reality in terms of multidimensional models. Modern
mainstream science has had no major paradigm shift with regard to expanding the
dimensional domain of science since quantum physics and general relativity were
proved valid around 1935. Advances have happened, but they were within the
scientific paradigm known as the Standard Model (SM). The new shift is from the
SM based on materialism to a paradigm in which consciousness is primary,
revealing the true nature of reality. It is difficult to do justice to the
importance of the discovery of the true nature of reality in a short essay, but
I must try. I have neither the time nor
the patience to wait for the media and mainstream science to catch up.
I introduced the concept of the nonquantum receptor
in a poster presentation at Tucson II (the second Toward a Science of
Consciousness Convention) at the University of Arizona in 1996, and published
it with an introduction to the calculus of distinctions in my third book, Transcendental Physics in 1997,
rereleased in 2000. Discussing these ideas in the Science Within Consciousness
Journal and the Karl Jaspers Forum online, in 2000 to 2005, someone asked:
“Putting forth such revolutionary ideas on line, aren’t you afraid someone will
steal your ideas?” Someone else responded: “If you are introducing truly new
science, no one in mainstream science will understand it even if you push it
down their throats!”
The person making the second comment was right. The
history of western science shows us that a truth outside the boundaries of the established
paradigm, however valid, is initially almost universally ignored, and condemned
as unscientific nonsense. That was the case for paradigm breakers like Copernicus,
Planck and Einstein, and it is now the case for ideas introduced by Close and
Neppe. As Max Planck said:
“A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its
opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents
eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it”.
The purpose of this post is not to convince the
believers in the current materialistic paradigm, it is simply to present a
scientific truth as simply as possible and hope that the new generation of
scientists will be open to going beyond the box of the current mainstream
paradigm.
AN
UNAMBIGUOUS DESCRIPTION OF OUR UNIVERSE AND THE COSMOS
(A
Comprehensive Description of Everything)
Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, that
when we grasp it
 in a decade, a century,
or a millennium  we will all say to each other,
how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid?
how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid?
– John A. Wheeler, theoretical physicist
We know now that the physical universe available to
our five senses and their physical extensions is only a very small part of
reality. If we call all of reality the cosmos,
then the physical universe we perceive through our senses is to the cosmos as a
single sentence is to a 1000page book, or as one novel is to all the books in
all the libraries in the world. It is virtually a single unfolding thought in
the infinite mind of God.
The Triadic Dimensional Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) is a
major shift in the basis of scientific thought from a narrow materialistic view
of reality limited to consideration of the physical universe, to a comprehensive
description of everything. But, it is not a theory of everything (TOE). To clarify this, and present an
unambiguous description of everything (DOE), it is necessary to define some
basic terms.
DEFINITIONS
There are some basic terms that most people interested
in science, and even many professional scientists, often use ambiguously, so
they need to be defined accurately and carefully for the purposes of this
discussion. The definitions given below will clarify what the words mean in the
new description of reality presented here. It makes no difference whether or
not these definitions agree with dictionary definitions or with your personal understanding
of what the terms mean. The definitions given below specify their meanings in
the discussion that follows. Please refer to them any time the discussion seems
unclear.
SCIENCE:
The formal, organized effort to understand the nature of the reality we
experience.
THE
SCIENTIFIC METHOD: The practice of the process of proposing
reasonable hypotheses, also called theories,
and testing them against the experience of direct knowledge through observation
and measurement. If a hypothesis is validated by experience, it is accepted, if
not, then it should be discarded.
SCIENTIST:
A person who engages in the practice of science.
TDVP:
The Triadic Dimensional Vortical Paradigm.
TRIADIC:
Consisting
of three components, or a multiple of three components.
VORTICAL:
An adjective describing a vortex spinning in three or more dimensions.
DIMENSIONAL:
An adjective describing domains of extension.
PARADIGM:
A comprehensive understanding of reality based on empirical data and
mathematical proof.
DIMENSION:
A measure of extent, like length, width or height. This term is often used
incorrectly to mean a dimensional domain.
DIMENSIONAL
DOMAIN: A specific welldefined extent of spacetime and
consciousness. For example, a line, extending infinitely is a onedimensional
domain; a plane, extending indefinitely in two mutually orthogonal directions
is a twodimensional domain; a volume extending indefinitely in three mutually
orthogonal directions is a threedimensional domain; and, in general, a volume
extending indefinitely in n mutually
orthogonal directions is an ndimensional
domain.
EXTENT: The
measure of the variable distance, area or volume, of a dimensional domain.
CONTENT:
That which occupies a dimensional Domain of three or more dimensions. Note that
dimensional domains of less than three dimensions have no capacity for content.
ORTHOGONAL
DIMENSIONS: Dimensions separated by an angle of
rotation of 90 degrees, given that one complete rotation is 360 degrees.
VORTICAL
SPIN: The rotation of a vortex.
INTRINSIC
SPIN: The increase in vortical spin caused by simultaneous rotations
around more than one axis, i.e., in more than one plane.
FIELD: A
field is a dimensional domain of finite extent in three or more dimensions, with
a welldefined distribution of massenergyconsciousness content, for example,
the gravitational field of a planet, the energy field of a magnet, or the extent
of an individual’s consciousness.
MASS:
The resistance to motion due to vortical spin.
ENERGY:
Any force capable of creating, sustaining and altering a vortex, or distorting
the distribution of a field.
UNIVERSE:
A finite domain of three or more dimensions along with all its contents.
COSMOS:
The
infinite sum of all possible universes, past, present and future.
PRIMARY
CONSCIOUSNESS: The Infinite Reality within which all
things are embedded. The Source of all of the logical patterns of reality.
INDIVIDUALIZED
CONSCIOUSNESS: Finite manifestations of specific limited
fields and image content originating in Primary Consciousness.
THEORY:
A
hypothesis to be proved or disproved.
THEOREM:
A hypothesis that has been expressed mathematically and confirmed by
mathematical logic based on known axioms expressing direct experiences of
reality.
CALCULATION:
The process of transforming the form of a given representation of a known
feature of reality to a different, equivalent form.
CALCULUS:
A system of logical operations that transform the form of a given description
of a known feature of reality to a different equivalent form. For example, the
fundamental operations of arithmetic transform expressions of numerical values
as in: 1+1=2, and (3 x 4)+1=13. Other examples include algebraic
transformations such as: (x + y)(x – y) = x^{2} – y^{2}, and
differential and integral calculations like: d/dx(x^{n}) = nx^{n1},
∫nx^{n1} = x^{n} + C, etc.
DISTINCTION:
Any form that can be distinguished from the rest of reality in some way.
THE
CALCULUS OF DISTINCTIONS: The logical system of calculations
that changes the form of a distinction or combinations of distinctions into different,
but equivalent forms.
THE
CALCULUS OF DIMENSIONAL DISTINCTIONS (CoDD): The logical
system of calculations that transform the form of a dimensional distinction
occupying a volumetric domain or combinations of volumetric distinctions into different,
but equivalent forms.
DIMENSIONAL
ANALYSIS: In a series of calculations involving mathematical expressions
describing a stable physical relationship (most often expressions of one or
more of the known laws of physics) in terms of distinctions measurable in units
of mass/energy, space and time, the number and symmetry of the basic units of
the final expression must match exactly the number and symmetry of the units of
the initial expression prior to the series of mathematical transformations.
Otherwise, there is an error either in physical conceptualization or mathematical
logic. This a very useful analysis usually taught to firstyear university
physics students.
VOLUME: The
extent of a dimensional domain of three or more orthogonal dimensions.
THE
TRIADIC ROTATIONAL UNIT OF EQUIVALENCE (TRUE):
The basic quantum equivalence unit of the CoDD, derived from the mas/energy
equivalence of the electron.
QUANTUM:
The smallest possible measurable unit of reality.
THE
QUANTUM EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE: All observable and
measurable objects in the universe consist of integral multiples of the quantum
equivalence unit (TRUE).
DIMENSIONAL
EXTRAPOLATION: The projection from an ndimensional
domain into an (n+1)dimensional domain. The process of dimensional
extrapolation from an ndimensional domain where the numerical types of the
dimensions are known, results in the definition of the mathematical nature of
the (n+1)^{th} dimension. For example, extrapolation from a
3dimensional domain into a 4dimensional domain reveals that the 4^{th}
dimension is measurable in the primary type of complex numbers, i.e., integer
multiples of the socalled imaginary unit, the squareroot of negative one
(√1).
THE
DIMENSIONAL INVARIANCE PRINCIPLE: An ndimensional domain
can only be observed and/or measured from an (n+1)dimensional domain.
DIOPHANTINE EQUATIONS: Diophantine equations are polynomial equations, usually in two or more unknowns, such that only the integer solutions are sought or studied (an integer solution is a solution such that all the unknowns take integer values). They are named after Diophantus of Alexandria (210 294 AD).
DIOPHANTINE EQUATIONS: Diophantine equations are polynomial equations, usually in two or more unknowns, such that only the integer solutions are sought or studied (an integer solution is a solution such that all the unknowns take integer values). They are named after Diophantus of Alexandria (210 294 AD).
Don’t
worry if you don’t understand all of the details of the definitions of the
terms listed above. They will become clear and meaningful as they are used in
this discussion.
DISCUSSION:
THE TRUE NATURE OF REALITY
Introduction
I will begin by explaining how the practice of science
based on belief rather than knowledge leads to erroneous conclusions about the
nature of reality. Then I will explain how replacing belief with an analysis of
experience replaces belief with knowledge and leads to a new paradigm. This
will be followed by a broadbrush description of the nature of reality revealed
by the new paradigm, and a description of how the new paradigm was discovered. Finally,
I will list some of the major problems with the current mainstream beliefbased
paradigm that are explained by the new experiencebased paradigm. I will
provide references to publications containing the detailed derivations from
empirical data and mathematical proofs of the basic parameters establishing the
new paradigm that describes the true nature of reality and explain some of the
conundrums and paradoxes of the current beliefbased paradigm of mainstream
science.
The Beliefbased Standard Model of
Reality
The current mainstream model promoted by most modern scientists
is based on the metaphysical belief system of materialism, also called physicalism.
In this belief system, the entirety of reality is believed to consist of matter
and energy in the form of combinations of elementary particles and weak and
strong forces evolving and interacting in the arena of a universal relativistic spacetime domain.
Consciousness is believed to be an epiphenomenon of physical evolution, i.e.,
something secondary to physical reality, arising when a sufficiently
sophisticated level of physical
complexity is attained. Mainstream scientists have not explained how this complexity
could evolve from particles flying apart in a universe expanding from a
bigbang explosion. They have not discovered what consciousness is, or how it
arises from matter, but they express confidence that it will all be explained
when a real “theory of everything” based on physical principles is finally discovered.
But a physical theory of everything is an unachievable goal, because not
everything we experience is physical.
The job of science is to explain everything we experience. Materialism is an attractive hypothesis
because of its simplicity, but should not be used as the basis of scientific
investigation because it fails the test of falsifiability. The hypothesis that
a physical universe can exist without consciousness cannot be tested. To
discover what is wrong with the mainstream theory, and understand why it leads
to puzzles and paradoxes at both the quantum and cosmic levels of measurement,
we only need to return to what we actually experience. Recall that the first
definition listed above identifies science as the effort to understand the
nature of the reality we experience, not what we believe or imagine might exist. The physical theory of
everything envisioned by mainstream science is not really a theory of
everything, because it does not include everything we experience in its
axiomatic basis. Limited to physical reality, science cannot explain more than
about 5% of everything we experience, and produces no answers for our most
important questions concerning the ultimate nature of reality, the source of consciousness,
and the meaning or purpose of existence.
All of the observations and measurements of scientific
experimentation are possible only because of the conscious drawing of
distinctions, not because of the preobservation existence of an independent physical
universe assumed by physicalists. The first distinction drawn is the
distinction of self from other, the direct conscious
experience of the separation of ‘inhere” from ‘outthere’. The first mistake of materialism occurs when reality is
assumed to be binary, leading them to focus on the distinction between an
object of observation and its surroundings, ignoring the third component, which
is the conscious entity drawing the
distinction. By relegating consciousness to a dimensionless point outside
the domain of scientific observation and measurement, physicalism misses the
key to understanding the nature of reality.
In fact, mainstream science is not science as defined.
It has, however, played a very important role in the slow development of human
civilization. By limiting the goal of research and experimentation to
understanding the mechanics of physical reality, mainstream science has been
very successful solving practical problems related to physical survival and the
manipulation of the physical environment. But, that is not science as defined
above; it is pragmatic technological engineering. By focusing on the mechanics
of physical reality, mainstream science has ignored the ontological connection
of consciousness with reality, and has therefore no effective way to study the
nature of the relationship of consciousness to physical reality.
On the other hand, the limited practical approach of current
mainstream science has served us well in one respect. Because of the successes
of engineering technology, we no longer have to fight wild animals and the
environmental elements to survive. We have created a safety buffer called modern
civilization, creating a comfortable physical existence and providing the
leisure time needed for a deeper look into the nature of reality. It is
critical that we do this now, because if we squander the anxietyfree time
provided by laborsaving devices produced by engineering technology in the
pursuit of shortterm gratification, the lack of a deeper understanding of the
nature of reality will result in the decay and selfdestruction of
civilization.
Consciousness is actually the only thing that we
experience directly, so it must be included in any serious scientific endeavor
to understand reality. Everything else is perceived indirectly through the
senses. To think of consciousness as less real
than the objects it perceives indirectly is a fatal mistake, dooming mainstream
science to the pseudoscience of physicalism and the dead end of materialism. This
shortsightedness has led to loss of meaning, decadence and the decay of modern
civilization. With an understanding of what is at stake, it is of paramount
importance that we rectify the errors of materialistic science and physicalism
as soon as possible. How do we begin to do that? By including consciousness in
the equations describing reality. This is what is done in Close & Neppe's TDSVP. Let me
explain how.
The Road to a Reality Paradigm
If the bricks of the yellow brick road leading to the
Land of Oz were the elementary particles of particle physics, the Emerald City would
be the mainstream paradigm. When the light of scientific inspection is expanded
to the scope of the reality we experience, the hypothetical particles of
mainstream science fade away and disappear like the bricks of Dorothy’s dream. When individualized consciousness
dons the ruby slippers of the calculus of dimensional distinctions and clicks
its heels, it awakens from the dream of materialism and returns to the reality
of the greater cosmos. The discoveries of relativity and quantum physics reveal
quantized building blocks at the bottom of physical reality, but, as Planck
indicated when he said “there is no matter
as such”, they are not physical particles at all. Instead, TDVP shows us that they are energy vortices,
spinning simultaneously in multiple dimensions. To understand how and why this
is true, we must apply the calculus of dimensional dimensions (CoDD) to analyze experience.
Going back to experience, then, we realized that conscious
experience is triadic, not binary as assumed by the scientists who developed
the standard model. We experience , the resistance of mass (1.), the impact of
energy (2.) and the mutable image of a finite volumetric expanse of space and
time as our field of awareness (3.). To properly describe quantized reality, we
must have a set of unitary quantum distinctions to use, just as we use units of
size, weight, and time, e.g., inches, pounds and minutes, to measure any normal
size physical object. But, these conventional units are far too large to use to
measure quanta. Trying to do so is like trying to measure the diameters of
dust particles in units of light years, the distance between galaxies!
Planck defined quantum units for quantum reality by
naturalizing certain fundamental constants of physics: the speed of light, the
Coulomb constant, Boltzmann’s constant, and the gravitational constant.
”Naturalizing” them means setting the unit values of these constants equal to
one. This is not some arcane definitional concept done for mysterious reasons. We
unitize measures of physical objects all the time: We measure distances in
multiples of one inch, or one meter, mass in multiples of one pound or one
gram, and time in multiples of one second. However, the unitary length of one inch,
the weight of one pound, and the duration of one second, are arbitrarily chosen
for convenience of measurement and calculation. Setting fundamental constants
of nature to unity at the quantum level provides “natural” units of
measurement, which physicists call Planck units in honor of Max Planck.
The
table below shows the relationships between these fundamental universal
constants and conventional international units of measurement.
Constant

Symbol

Metric units

Types
of Units

Dimensional
Analysis

Speed of light

c

meters/second

L/T

U/U = 1

Gravity

G

m^{3}kg/s^{2}

L^{3}/M∙T^{2}

U^{3}/U∙U^{2} = 1

Coulomb (electric charge)

K_{e}

m^{3}kg/s^{2}q^{2}

L^{3}M/T^{2}Q^{2}

U^{3}U/U^{2}U^{2}
= 1

Boltzmann (temperature)

K_{B}

m^{2}kg/s^{2}ϴ

L^{2}M/T^{2 }ϴ

U^{2}U/U^{2 }U = 1

Planck’s Constant

h

m^{2}kg/s^{2}

L^{2}M/T^{2}

U^{2}U/U^{2} = U

Where L implies units of length, M→ mass, T→ time, Q →
electrical charge, and ϴ → temperature in degrees, m = meters, kg = kilograms
and s = seconds.
Notice that the basic unit types for measurement of
the speed of light are length and time, and for the gravitational constant, they
are length, mass and time. Considering the mathematical equivalence of mass and
energy (E – mc^{2}), these unit types, M, L and T, (mass, length and time) are all that are
needed to describe physical reality. All other measurable variables can always be
expressed in mathematical combinations of these three basic units. For example,
density is mass per unit volume (M/L^{3}), Force = mass times
acceleration = Ma = ML/T^{2}, etc. The reader can verify this for other
physical parameters. The other two constants, K_{e} and K_{B},
contain linear measures of electrical charge and temperature that may vary over
the field of observation.
The CoDD requires naturalized units of measurement for
use in calculation, just as the standard model does. So, one might ask, why not
just use Planck units? To answer this question, we turn to TRUE, the quantum
equivalence unit of the CoDD, combined with dimensional
analysis (see definitions above. In the CoDD, we have defined the TRUE, the
quantum equivalence unit derived from the physical characteristics of the
electron, as the basic unit of the calculus. For this application of dimensional
analysis, let U represent the TRUE, the quantum equivalence unit.
Looking at the fourth column of the table above, we
see that the dimensional analysis of four of these universal constants shows
that they are symmetric. That is, in quantum equivalence units, the dimensional
domains of 1, 2 or 3 dimensions cancel out in the dimensional analysis, making
the constant dimensionless. This means that c, G, K_{e}, and K_{B}
are unitary regardless of the size of the units used, whether inches, meters,
grams, pounds, etc. when they are quantized and naturalized. Thus they are
verified as being universal constants in the CoDD, just as they are in the
standard model. The fifth constant, h, Planck’s constant, however, proves to be
asymmetric, because the dimensional domains do not cancel. Thus h is not a
universal constant, because its value depends on the units of measurement
chosen.
This is not the only thing that makes the TRUE (quantum
equivalence units) different than Planck units. The TRUE, the ultimate quantum
units used in CoDD calculations, are natural quantum units based on the mass
and volume of the electron, the elementary object with the smallest mass in the
stable components of the natural elements. It is thus the true building block of
the physical universe, and the Quantum Equivalence Principle (see definition
above) implies that if the TRUE is the true quantum building block of the
universe, then all real objects will contain integer (whole number) multiples
of the TRUE, and thus the equations describing real phenomena will be
Diophantine equations with integer solutions.
The fact that the Planck constant is not an integer in
any system of units, tells us that Planck units are not quantum units, while
triadic rotational units of equivalence (TRUE) are. This conclusion is verified
by the many explanations of empirical observations and agreements with
experimental data obtained by applying the CoDD with the TRUE as the basic
distinction. These verifications with real data and logical explanations of
observed phenomena that are not explained in the standard model paradigm,
establishes TDVP as a valid scientific paradigm, not just a theory.
With the
mathematical proofs provided in our published papers, TDVP attains the status
of a theorem. It is no longer just a theoretical hypothesis. The following examples
of successful solutions of some of the paradoxes and puzzles of the standard
model, with references to the detailed presentations of derivations and proofs are
offered as evidence of the validity of TDVP.
PROBLEMS
SOLVED BY TDVP
1.) Why
are protons and neutrons combinations of three quarks and not some other
electrically neutral combination? Applications of the CoDD with TRUE to the
Diophantine combinatorial equations show that other combinations are
mathematically and dimensionally impossible because they would violate Fermat’s
Last Theorem. The proof has beeen published in several of the references below.
2.) Why
do fermions like protons have an intrinsic onehalf integer spin? In standard
model physics, intrinsic spin is considered part of quantum weirdness that
cannot be explained in classical terms. The halfinteger spin of fermions and
wholeinteger spin of bosons are postulated as numerical features of the
quantum states of elementary particles, that cannot be derived from first
principles and have nothing to do with physical rotation, even though they
contribute to the total angular momentum of the particle. However, the
application of 9D spin dynamics in TDVP explains intrinsic spins perfectly
well as the direct result of simultaneous rotation in multiple dimensions. Dimensional
mathematical proof has been published. See References.
3.) Why
do protons and neutrons have so much more mass than the combined mass of the
quarks of which they are composed? The standard model posits particles called
gluons that hold the quarks together and impart the extra mass to the combination
even though in theory, they themselves have zero mass. TDVP derives the mass of
the proton and neutron from CoDD applications with TRUE that agree exactly with
the results of exhaustive statistical analysis of experimental data from the
LHC. See these derivations in published reference listed below.
4.) The
standard model does not explain from theory or from first principles why the
Cabibbo quark mixing angle is 13.04 degrees, while TDVP provides a
straightforward derivation from 9D CoDD dynamics calculating the angle at 13.0392
degrees. See References.
5.) The
standard model does not explain why there is something rather than nothing. The
standard model scientist assumes that consciousness is an epiphenomenon of
matter that has no direct causative relationship in the formation, evolution
and ultimate nature of reality. Because of this assumption, consciousness has
no place in the equations used to describe reality in the theories of mainstream
science. TDVP, on the other hand, by following the data of quantum physics experiments
where they lead, found that there would be no physical universe if some form of
primary consciousness did not exist prior to the formation of protons, neutrons
and the natural elements. With the discovery of gimmel, the third (nonmass,
nonenergy) form of the essential substance of reality, TDVP explains why there
is something rather than nothing. See References.
6.) Gimmel,
the third form of reality discovered by applying the logic of the CoDD to the
mathematical description of the combination of quarks that form stable protons
in the 9D dimensional domain of the finite cosmos, is the link between
physical reality and primary consciousness, the substrate of reality, in which
the 9D finite domains of the physical universe and the cosmos are embedded.
This is only the beginning of a long list of fiftysome phenomena,
paradoxes and puzzles not explained by
the standard model, that are
explained by TDVP using CoDD Diophantine integer mathematics with the TRUE
quantum unit derived from data on the electron and quarks from DHC data. See
References.
Max Planck discovered the quantization of energy, and
Albert Einstein provided the equations expressing the equivalence of mass and
energy. The Large Hadron Collider, the largest, most sophisticated machine
developed by mainstream science so far, has produced mega terabytes of physical
data defining the mass and energy of the building blocks of physical reality,
providing very accurate estimates of the mass and energy equivalence of
electrons and quarks for use as the
basis for defining the true quantum equivalence units needed for the calculus
of dimensional distinctions.
Reality is triadic, consisting of three sequentially
embedded dimensional domains: space, time and consciousness, which are describable in
variables of extent, and three forms of the essence of reality: mass, energy
and consciousness, describable in variables of content.
Since the new paradigm has been validated with
empirical data from the Large Hadron Collider and mathematical proof, as prerviously statedit is no
longer a theory. Thus, since it is not a theory, TDVP is not a theory of
everything, instead, it is a description of everything.
REFERENCES
(A partial list of relevant publications)
1. Close, ER: Transcendental Physics, Gutenberg
Richter, 1997, iUniverse toExcel, 2000.
2.
Neppe VM, Close ER: The first conundrum: can the standard scientific model be
applied to develop a complete theory of reality? IQNexus
Journal 7: 2; 1520, 2015.
3. Close ER, Neppe VM: Translating fifteen mysteries
of the universe by applying a nine dimensional spinning model of finite
reality: A perspective, the standard model and TDVP. Part 1. Neuroquantology 13: 2; 205217, 2015.
4. Donoghue JF, Golowich E, Holstein BR: Dynamics of the standard model.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 1994.
5. Oerter R: The
theory of almost everything: the standard model, the unsung triumph of modern
physics. New York: Person Education. 2006.
6. Pokharna S: Is
the modern science finally approaching Jainism? (original in Hindi).
Ahmedabad: Jinendu. 2018, March 25.
7. Pokharna SS: The modern science appears to be approaching
towards Jainism: Strong evidence that direct knowledge through consciousness is
possible. 2018, in press.
8. Pokharna SS, Prajna C: Jain concepts and TDVP model
for the theory of Everything: Some remarkable parallels. Transactions of International School for
Jain Studies II: 2, 2018, In press.
9. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality begins with consciousness: a paradigm shift that works (5th
Edition) Fifth Edition. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com. 2014.
10. Close ER, Neppe VM: Putting consciousness into the
equations of science: the third form of reality (gimmel) and the “TRUE” units
(Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence) of quantum measurement IQNexus Journal 7: 4; 7119, 2015.
11. Neppe VM. Understanding Gimmel with Vernon Neppe.
(YouTube). New Thinking Allowed, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhV96ShslU4.
2018.
12. Close ER, Neppe VM: Speculations on the “God
matrix”: The third form of reality (gimmel) and the refutation of materialism
and on gluons. World Institute for
Scientific Exploration (WISE) Journal 4: 4; 330, 2015.
13. Neppe VM, Close ER: Key ideas: the third
substance, gimmel and the God matrix. Part 1. World Institute for Scientific Exploration (WISE) Journal 4: 4;
34, 2015.
14. Neppe VM, Close ER: The gimmel pairing:
Consciousness and energy and life (Part 13D). IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 122126, 2015.
15. Close ER, Neppe VM: Derivation and application of
TRUE quantum calculus for the analysis of quantized reality, including
empirically verifiable new approaches to mass, neutrons, protons, law of
conservation of gimmel and TRUE, TDVP and Deuterium. 2018 In submission.
16. Neppe VM, Close ER: Relative nonlocality and the infinite, in Reality begins with consciousness: a paradigm shift that works (5th
Edition). Edited by. Seattle, WA: Brainvoyage.com. 376379 2014.
17. Neppe VM, Close ER: The discrete finite contained
in the continuous infinite: some speculations (Part 13C). IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 120122, 2015.
18. Neppe VM, Close ER: The infinite (Part 13B). IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 117120, 2015.
19. Neppe VM, Close ER: Special concepts in the finite
and infinite anomalous process (Part 13). IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 114122, 2015.
20. Neppe VM, Close ER: A proposed Theory of
Everything that works: How the NeppeClose Triadic Dimensional Distinction
Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) model provides a metaparadigm by applying
ninedimensional finite spin space, time and consciousness substrates and the
transfinite embedded in the infinite producing a unified reality. IQNexus Journal 16: 3; 154, 2014.
21. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Triadic Dimensional
Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP): The ninedimensional finite spin
metaparadigm embedded in the infinite Dynamic
International Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1401: 1401;
40014041, 2014.
22. Morgart E: The theory of everything has nine
dimensions: The sparkling diamond and the quanta jewel turn quantum physics and
the ninepronged world of consciousness— on its ear. USA Today Magazine: 1 (January); 6668, 2014.
23. Smullyan R: Gödel's
incompleteness theorems. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1991.
24. Berto FJ: There's
something about Gödel: the complete guide to the incompleteness theorem.
New York: John Wiley and Sons. 2010.
25. Eddington A: The
philosophy of physical science. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. 1938
(republished 1958).
26. Neppe VM, Close ER: The important Eddingtonian
analogy: Part 1 IQNexus Journal 8: 1;
2122, 2016.
27. Neppe VM, Close ER: The second conundrum:
Falsifiability is insufficient; we need to apply feasibility as well Lower
Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification (LFAF) as a scientific method IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 2123, 2015.
28. Einstein A: Fundamental ideas and methods of the
Theory of Relativity, presented in their development Papers 7: 31, 1920
29. Einstein A: Relativity,
the special and the general theory—a clear explanation that anyone can
understand (Fifteenth Edition). New York: Crown Publishers. 1952.
30. Eddington A: The
expanding universe: astronomy's 'great debate', 19001931. Cambridge: Press
Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. 1933.
31. Koestler A: The
Sleepwalkers. London: Hutchinson. 1959.
32. Planck M: Max
Planck: Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers, in. Edited by. New York:
Harper 33–34 (quotation) 1949.
33. Planck M. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/111818scienceadvancesonefuneralatatime.
circa 1950.
34. Planck M: There
is no matter as such, in Web notepad: Everything noticed and interesting.
1918
35. Neppe VM, Close ER: Fifty discoveries that are
changing the world: Why the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm
(TDVP) makes a difference. IQ
Nexus Journal 9: 2; 739, 2017.
36. Close ER, Neppe VM: Introductory summary
perspective on TRUE and gimmel (Part 1) in Putting consciousness into the
equations of science: the third form of reality (gimmel) and the “TRUE” units
(Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence) of quantum measurement IQNexus Journal 7: 4; 815, 2015.
37. Close ER, Neppe VM: Empirical exploration of the
third substance, gimmel in particle physics (Part 10). IQNexus Journal 7: 4; 4547, 2015.
38. Close ER, Neppe VM: The TRUE unit: triadic
rotational units of equivalence (TRUE) and the third form of reality: gimmel;
applying the conveyance equation (Part 12). IQNexus Journal 7: 4; 5565, 2015.
39. Neppe VM, Close ER: Speculations about gimmel Part
5. World Institute for Scientific
Exploration (WISE) Journal 4: 4; 2126, 2015.
40. Neppe VM, Close ER: The fourteenth conundrum:
Applying the proportions of Gimmel to Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence
compared to the proportions of dark matter plus dark energy: Speculations in
cosmology. IQNexus Journal 7:
2; 7273, 2015.
41. Neppe VM, Close ER: Applying consciousness,
infinity and dimensionality creating a paradigm shift: introducing the triadic
dimensional distinction vortical paradigm (TDVP). Neuroquantology 9: 3; 375392, 2011.
42. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Infinite: essence, life
and ordropy Dynamic International Journal
of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1204: 1204; 21592169, 2012.
43. Neppe VM, Close ER: The necessity for infinity:
Section 3. IQ Nexus Journal 9:
1; 2429, 2017.
44. Neppe VM, Close ER: The fifteenth conundrum:
Applying the philosophical model of Unified Monism: Returning to general
principles. IQNexus Journal 7:
2; 7478, 2015.
45. Neppe VM, Close ER: Unified monism: linking
science with spirituality in a philosophical model. Section 9: In Integrating
spirituality into science: applying the NeppeClose Triadic Dimensional
Vortical Paradigm (TDVP). IQNexus
Journal 10: 2; 4851, 2018.
46. Neppe VM, Close ER: Wondrous gimmel: Section 8. In
Integrating spirituality into science: applying the NeppeClose Triadic
Dimensional Vortical Paradigm (TDVP). IQNexus Journal 10: 2; 4247 2018.
47. Close ER, Neppe VM: Summary and conclusion gimmel,
TRUE and the structure of reality (Part 20). IQNexus Journal 7: 4; 112114, 2015.
48. Neppe VM, Close ER: Relative and dynamic psi, and
gimmel: The nonlocal variants (Part 9). IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 7483, 2015.
49. Söding P: On the discovery of the gluon. European Physical Journal H 35: 1; 3–28,
2010.
50. GellMann M: Symmetries of baryons and mesons. Physical Review (Nuclear Physics) 125:
3; 1067–1084, 1962.
51. GellMann M: The
Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex. New York,
NY: Henry Holt and Co. 1995.
52. Close ER, Neppe VM: The problem of determining the
mass of the neutron: Section 7: In: Derivation and application of TRUE quantum
calculus for the analysis of quantized reality. 2018, In submission.
53. Close ER, Neppe VM: Applying hydrogen1 and
deuterium: The origin of mass: Section 8: In: Derivation and application of
TRUE quantum calculus for the analysis of quantized reality. 2018, In
submission.
54. Close ER, Neppe VM: Why TRUE units have to be
correct: the mass in the proton: reaffirming the truth of Triadic Rotational
Units of Equivalence. Chapter 6 IQ Nexus
Journal 8: 4 —V6.122; 7096, 2016.
55. Klein A: Toward
a new subquantum integration approach to sentient reality (unpublished),
in. 140. Israel. 2010
56. Stewart D: The
chemistry of essential oils made simple: God’s love manifest in molecules.
Marble Hill, MO: Care publications. 2005.
57. Stapp HP: Mindful
universe: Quantum mechanics and the participating observer. New York
SpringerVerlag. 2007.
58. Radin D: Consciousness and the doubleslit
interference pattern: Six experiments. Physics Essays 25: 2; 157– 171, 2012.
59. Neppe VM, Close ER: Relative nonlocality  key
features in consciousness research (seven part series). Journal of Consciousness Exploration and
Research 6: 2; 90139, 2015.
60. Neppe VM, Close ER: The concept of relative
nonlocality: Theoretical implications in consciousness research. Explore (NY): The Journal of Science and
Healing 11: 2; 102108, http://www.explorejournal.com/article/S15508307(14)00233X/pdf.
2015.
61. Neppe VM, Close ER: Integrating spirituality into
science: applying the NeppeClose Triadic Dimensional Vortical Paradigm (TDVP).
IQNexus Journal 10: 2; 7108,
2018.
62. Neppe VM. The dyadic, creative Interface with
Vernon Neppe (YouTube) On TDVP and the NeppeClose relationship. New Thinking
Allowed, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtMQdS8_Vck&t=2123s.
2018.
63. Neppe VM, Close ER: Perspective: dimensional
biopsychophysics: approaching dimensions, infinity, meaning, and understanding
spirituality and the laws of nature: Section 13. In Integrating spirituality
into science: applying the NeppeClose Triadic Dimensional Vortical Paradigm
(TDVP). IQNexus Journal 10: 2;
7177, 2018.
64. Neppe VM, Close ER: On Nonlocality III:
Dimensional Biopsychophysics. Journal
of Consciousness Exploration and Research 6: 2; 103111, 2015.
65. Palmer WF: Cabibbo angle and rotation projection.
Phys. Rev., D 8: 4; 11561159,
1973.
66. Reifler F, Morris R: Prediction of the Cabibbo
angle in the vector model for electroweak interactions. J. Math. Phys. 26: 8; 20592066, 1985.
67. Close FE, Lipkin HJ: Puzzles in Cabibbosuppressed
charm decays. Physics Letters B
551: 34; 337342, 2003.
68. Close ER, Neppe VM: The eleventh conundrum: The
double Bell normal curve and its applications to electron cloud distribution IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 5156, 2015.
69. Neppe VM, Close ER: The sixteenth conundrum: The
general immediate implications of a nine dimensional reality IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 7980, 2015.
70. Close ER, Neppe VM: Translating fifteen mysteries
of the universe: Nine dimensional mathematical models of finite reality, Part
II. Neuroquantology 13: 3;
348360, 2015.
71. Close ER, Neppe VM: Mathematical and theoretical
physics feasibility demonstration of the finite nine dimensional vortical model
in fermions. Dynamic International
Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1301: 1301; 155, 2013.
72. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Cabibbo mixing angle (CMA)
derivation: Is our mathematical derivation of the Cabibbo spin mixing angle
(CSMA) equivalent? IQNexus Journal
7: 4; 120128, 2015.
73. Close ER, Neppe VM: The seventh conundrum: the
mathematical derivation of the Cabibbo mixing angle in fermions. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 4143, 2015.
74. Close ER, Neppe VM: The sixth conundrum:
theoretical knowledge on deriving the Cabibbo angle. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 3940, 2015.
75. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Cabibbo mixing angle and
other particle physics paradoxes solved by applying the TDVP multidimensional
spin model. IQNexus Journal
14: 1; 1350, 2014
76. Close ER, Neppe VM: The thirteenth conundrum:
introducing an important new concept, TRUE units—Triadic Rotational Units of
Equivalence. IQNexus Journal
7: 2; 6071, 2015.
77. Anonymous. Planck mission full results confirm
canonical cosmology model. Dark matter, dark energy, dark gravity, https://darkmatterdarkenergy.com/2015/03/07/planckmissionfullresultsconfirmcanonicalcosmologymodel/.
2015.
78. Neppe VM, Close ER: A data analysis preliminarily
validates the new hypothesis that the atom 'contains' dark matter and dark
energy: Dark matter correlates with gimmel in the atomic nucleus and dark
energy with gimmel in electrons. IQ
Nexus Journal 8: 3; 8096, 2016.
79. Neppe VM, Close ER: The groundbreaking paradigm
shift: Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (“TDVP”): A series of
dialogues. Telicom 29: 14 52177,
2017.
80. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Triadic Dimensional
Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) is valid and appropriate: The roles of neutrons and
protons, particle emergence including decay and vortical spin  A response. Telicom 30: 3; 95105, 2018.
81. Close ER: Can a quantum physics description of
brain dynamics explain consciousness? Telicom 22: 1; 3644, 2009.
82. Close ER, Neppe VM: Dimensions, consciousness and
infinity. Dynamic International
Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1203: 1203; 2129 2139, 2012.
83. Dossey L: The millennium of consciousness:
reflections on the one mind. Explore
(NY) 9: 2; 6774, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23452706.
2013.
84. Nelson RD: Coherent consciousness and reduced
randomness: correlations on september 11, 2001. Journal of Scientific Exploration 16: 4; 549570, 2002.
85. Neppe VM: Phenomenological consciousness research:
ensuring homogeneous data collection for present and future research on
possible psi phenomena by detailing subjective descriptions, using the
multiaxial a to z SEATTLE classification. Neuroquantology 9: 1; 84105, 2011.
86. Neppe VM, Close ER: The different faces of
psychology and the perspective of “Consciousness”: Part 2. IQNexus Journal 15: 2; 1719, 2014.
87. Neppe VM, Close ER: EPIC consciousness: A
pertinent new unification of an important concept. Journal of Psychology and Clinical Psychiatry 1: 00036: 6; 114,
2014.
88. Close ER, Neppe VM: Understanding TDVP through
dimensions: chapter 5. IQ Nexus
Journal 8: 4 —V6.122; 6169, 2016.
89. Halpern P: The
great beyond: higher dimensions, parallel universes and the extraordinary
search for a theory of everything. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
2005.
90. Neppe VM, Close ER: Toward a method of proof for
added dimensions (Part 8). IQNexus
Journal 7: 3; 6873, 2015.
91. Neppe VM, Close ER: Dimensions and dilemmas (Part
13A). IQNexus Journal 7: 3;
115117, 2015.
92. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality, 9 dimensions, and
TDVP, Section 1. IQ Nexus Journal
9: 1; 816, 2017.
93. Pico RM: Consciousness
in four dimensions: biological relativity and the origins of thought. New
York: McGraw. 2002.
94. Close ER, Neppe VM: The mathematics and logic of
infinity Dynamic International Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1204: 1204; 2140 2158, 2012.
95. Close ER, Neppe VM: The role of mathematics in
investigating the nature of reality (Part 4). IQNexus Journal 7: 4; 2226, 2015.
96. Close ER, Neppe VM: Defining the basic units of
quantum mathematics for a quantum calculus: Section 3: In: Derivation and
application of TRUE quantum calculus for the analysis of quantized reality.
2018, In submission.
97. Stewart I: The
mathematics of life. NY: Basic Books. 2011.
98. Wang H: From
mathematics to philosophy. London Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1974.
99. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Calculus of Distinctions:
A workable mathematicologic model across dimensions and consciousness. Dynamic International Journal of Exceptional
Creative Achievement 1210: 1210; 2387 2397, 2012.
100. Close ER, Neppe VM: Further implications:
quantized reality and applying Close’s Calculus of Distinctions versus the
Calculus of Newton(Part 19). IQNexus
Journal 7: 4; 110111, 2015.
101. Close ER, Neppe VM: Understanding the calculus of
distinctions and its role in TDVP: chapter 8 IQ Nexus Journal 8: 4 — V6.122; 107114, 2016.
102. Close ER, Neppe VM: Application of TRUE analysis
to the elements of the periodic table: Section 9: In: Derivation and
application of TRUE quantum calculus for the analysis of quantized reality.
2018, In submission.
103. Neppe VM: The
Psychology of Déjà Vu: Have I been Here Before? Johannesburg: Witwatersrand
University Press. 1983.
104. Neppe VM, Close ER: Integrating psychology into
the TDVP model. IQNexus Journal
15: 2; 738, 2014.
105. Neppe VM, Close ER: The most logical psychology:
The “horizontal” approach” to Transpersonal and Humanistic Psychology in the
TDVP context: Part 3. IQNexus
Journal 15: 2; 2024, 2014.
106. Neppe VM, Close ER: The most logical psychology:
The “vertical” approach” to the transcendental and Transpersonal Psychology in
the TDVP context: Part 4. IQNexus
Journal 15: 2; 2538, 2014.
107. Bokulich A, Jaeger G: Philosophy of quantum information and entanglement, in. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 2010.http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511676550
108. Griffin DR: Parapsychology and philosophy: A
Whiteheadian postmodern perspective. Journal
of the American Society for Psychical Research 87: 3; 217288, 1993.
109. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reevaluating our assessments
of science: The approach to discovery, applying LFAF to the philosophy of
science IQNexus Journal 8: 1; 2031,
2016.
110. Neppe VM, Close ER: Resolving the scientific
approach by amplifying the Philosophy of Science: Part 3 IQNexus Journal 8: 1; 2531, 2016.
111. Whiteman JHM: Philosophy
of space and time and the inner constitution of nature: a phenomenological
study. London: George Allen and Unwin. 1967.
112. Neppe VM. Kabbalah, science, and spirituality
with Vernon Neppe (YouTube). New Thinking Allowed, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtMQdS8_Vck&t=2123s.
2018.
113. Neppe VM: Genius and exceptional intelligence.
IQNexus Journal 6: 4; 766, 2014.
114. Neppe VM: The concept of genius and prodigies
(Section 3). IQNexus Journal
6: 4; 2433, 2014.
115. Neppe VM: The unsung “new factors”
differentiating genius and prodigies (Section 6). IQNexus Journal 6: 4; 5466, 2014.
116. Neppe VM: The creativity quotient and the
hypothesized c factor: the property of
creativity (Section 5) IQNexus Journal 6: 4; 4853, 2014.
117. Close ER, Neppe VM: The proton: Section 6: In:
Derivation and application of TRUE quantum calculus for the analysis of
quantized reality. 2018, In submission.
118. Bohr H, Nielsen HB: Hadron production from a
boiling quark soup: quark model predicting particle ratios in hadronic
collisions. Nuclear Physics B
128: 2; 275, 1977.
119. Dossey L: Creativity: on intelligence, insight,
and the cosmic soup. Altern Ther
Health Med 6: 1; 1217, 108117, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10631815.
2000.
120. Close ER, Neppe VM: Introductory perspective to
the God matrix. Part 2. World
Institute for Scientific Exploration (WISE) Journal 4: 4; 512, 2015.
121. Koberlein B. Measurements of neutron decay
disagree, and we don't know why. Forbes Magazine, https://www.forbes.com/sites/briankoberlein/2016/04/16/measurementsofneutrondecaydisagreeandwedontknowwhy/#4cfcd1b285bb.
2016.
122. Miernik K, Rykaczewski KP, Gross CJ, et al.:
Large betadelayed one and two neutron emission rates in the decay of 86Ga. Phys Rev Lett 111: 13; 132502, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24116772.
2013.
123. Lorusso G, Nishimura S, Xu ZY, et al.: BetaDecay
halflives of 110 neutronrich nuclei across the N=82 shell gap: Implications
for the mechanism and universality of the astrophysical r process. Phys Rev Lett 114: 19; 192501, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26024165.
2015.
124. Bales MJ, Alarcon R, Bass CD, et al.: Precision
Measurement of the Radiative beta Decay of the Free Neutron. Phys Rev Lett 116: 24; 242501, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27367385.
2016.
125. Neppe VM, Close ER: Redefining science: Applying
Lower Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification (LFAF): Section 1. In
Integrating spirituality into science: applying the NeppeClose Triadic
Dimensional Vortical Paradigm (TDVP). IQNexus Journal 10: 2; 913, 2018.
126. Neppe VM. Feasibility and falsification in
science: On LFAF (YouTube). New Thinking Allowed, https://youtu.be/w3elui7unrA.
2018.
127. Neppe VM, Close ER: Interpreting science through
feasibility and replicability: Extending the scientific method by applying
“Lower Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification” (LFAF). World Institute for Scientific Exploration
(WISE) Journal 4: 3; 337, 2015.
128. Neppe VM. Science and pseudoscience. Retrieved 6
August 2018, Email to Surendra Pokharna 2018.
129. Wheeler JA: accessed August 2018. Brainyquotes of
John Wheeler. https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/john_archibald_wheeler.
130. Close ER: Transcendental
Physics. Lincoln: IUniverse. 2000.
131. Neppe VM, Close ER: Explaining psi phenomena by
applying TDVP principles: A preliminary analysis IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 7129, 2015.
132. Close ER, Neppe VM: Unifying quantum physics and
relativity (Part 8). IQNexus
Journal 7: 4; 3640, 2015.
133. Georgia State University. Big bang
nucleosynthesis. In Hyperphysics http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu,
at http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/Astro/bbnuc.html.
2005.
134. Schroeder GL: Genesis
and the big bang. New York: Harper Collins. 1990.
135. Neppe VM. Questions and comments: Unexplained
conundrums and paradoxes solved through TDVP. Retrieved 18 July 2018, Email to
Surendra Pokharna 2018.
136. Popper K: A
world of propensities London: Thoemmes. 1990.
137. Neppe VM, Close ER: The statistical proof of psi.
Dynamic International Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207: 1207; 22772290, 2012.
138. Neppe VM: Six sigma protocols, survival /
superpsi and metaanalysis.Accessed Jan 9 Accessed. 2011.
139. Neppe VM: Double blind studies in Medicine:
perfection or imperfection? Telicom
20: 6 (Nov. Dec); 1323., 2007.
140. Neppe VM: Ethics and informed consent for
doubleblind studies on the acute psychotic. Medical Psychiatric Correspondence: A Peer Reviewed Journal. Model Copy
1: 1; 4445, 1990.
141. Neppe VM, Close ER: What is Science? A
perspective on the revolutions of change. IQNexus Journal 8: 1; 719, 2016.
142. Kuhn T: The
structure of scientific revolutions 1st Edition. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago
Press. 1962.
143. Neppe VM, Close ER: Revisiting Thomas Kuhn: An
extended structure for Scientific Revolutions: Part 2 IQNexus Journal 8: 1; 1119, 2016.
144. Close ER, Neppe VM: The twelfth conundrum: The
thought experiment replication of 9 dimensional spin. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 5759, 2015.
145. Close ER, Neppe VM: The eighth conundrum: angular
momentum and intrinsic electron spin. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 4445, 2015.
146. Close ER, Neppe VM: The ninedimensional finite
spin model (Part 14). IQNexus
Journal 7: 4; 70, 2015.
147. Close ER, Neppe VM: Jumping beyond the current
reality (Part 3). IQNexus Journal
7: 4; 1921, 2015.
148. Close ER, Neppe VM: A new paradigm describing the
nature of reality and what it implies for the future of science: Preface (Part
2). IQNexus Journal 7: 4;
1618, 2015.
149. Neppe VM, Close ER: Section 3: Integrating the
mechanisms of psi. IQNexus Journal
7: 3; 98138, 2015.
150. Close ER, Neppe VM: The origin of mass: Section
5: In: Derivation and application of TRUE quantum calculus for the analysis of
quantized reality. 2018, In submission.
151. Neppe VM, Close ER: Statistical demonstrations of
psi. (Part 2). IQNexus Journal
7: 3; 1832, 2015.
152. Neppe VM, Close ER: Theoretical bases to analyze
psi (Part 3). IQNexus Journal
7: 3; 3342, 2015.
153. Bauer H: Misleading notions about science and
their consequences. WISE journal
4: 2; 3036, 2015.
154. Bauer H: Dogmatism
in science and medicine: How dominant theories monopolize research and stifle
the search for truth. New York: McFarland. 2012.
155. Editor: Neppe, V.M. Close, E.R. The Whiting
Memorial Award. Telicom 29:
14 1114, 2017.
156. Editor on Neppe VM, Close ER: Special Press Release: Dr Vernon Neppe and
Dr Edward Close win prestigious ISPE international prize: The Whiting Memorial
Award for 2016. 2016.
157. Schrödinger E: What is life?: With mind and matter and autobiographical sketches.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992.
The history of western science shows us that a truth outside the boundaries of the established paradigm, however valid, is initially almost universally ignored, and condemned as unscientific nonsense. 1z01027 dumps
ReplyDelete