REALITY MATH, A FOLLOW UP

THE FOLLOW-UP TO ‘REALITY MATHEMATICS’ POSTED JULY 30, 2019

How does rational thought, including what we call science, develop? It develops by following and reflecting the logical structure of reality as more-or-less accurately perceived by sentient beings. The ability of sentient beings to perceive reality clearly rises and falls in a cyclic manner: The average mental virtue manifest in sentient beings increases gradually for 12,000 years to a peak, and then gradually decreases for 12,000 years, to a low point. Ascending and descending cycles of average mental virtue repeat over and over, with an even more gradual increase from one 24,000 year cycle to the next. See The Holy Science, by Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri.

Science develops during the ascending cycles, to the point that most sentient beings understand nearly everything at the peak, called the Satya Yuga (सत्य युग) in Sanskrit, and then deteriorates during the descending cycles, to the relative occlusion of knowledge for most, in the Kali Yuga (कलियुग).

What is the history of the development of science during the present ascending time-cycle pointing toward? In the current ascending cycle, the findings of Einstein, Planck, Kaluza, Klein, Nordstrom, Pauli, and a few others point toward understanding reality as a multi-dimensional field of existence, consisting of universal substance measured in three forms: mass, energy and consciousness, developing within the framework of nine dimensions, three of space, three of time, and three of consciousness.

The three dimensions of space are known to us as width, height and depth; the three dimensions of time are 1) the individual event timeline, comprised of the past, present and future, defined by conscious acts of the drawing of distinctions, 2) expansive time, defined by two or more non-congruent individual timelines, and 3) volumetric time, defined by two or more of the expansive planes of time, described as the two-dimensional time domains described above. The three dimensions of consciousness are: 1) finite individualized consciousness, 2) group consciousness, as in human, animal and plant consciousness, and 3) Primary Consciousness, the reality behind all forms. The nine-dimensional finite framework, within which objects exist and events happen, is encompassed by the trans-finite field of conscious substrate, embedded in the infinity of Primary Consciousness, the matrix from which all things arise. We don’t experience just three dimensions, as often claimed, but segments of five dimensions: segments of three dimensions of space, one dimension of time, and one dimension of consciousness.

The more aware we become of the substance and dimensions of space-time-consciousness, the more we understand reality, which appears to consist of quanta of matter, mind and consciousness, interacting in a nine-finite-dimensional field. At the peak of understanding, we realize that they are all one. Modeling reality as a consistent triad of distinct quantum forms of substance in nine finite dimensions, embedded in a trans-finite field, enables us to explain a number of things that have puzzled mainstream science for decades.

Mainstream science is stymied by certain phenomena because it is based on the limiting assumptions of materialism. Our new paradigm expands the axiomatic basis of  the logical structure of reality to produce a more comprehensive model that is more consistent with empirical data, and explains much more. Examples of things explained by the Neppe-Close model, the Triadic Dimensional Vortical paradigm (TDVP), include: the intrinsic ½ spin of fermions, the exact mass of the photon and neutron in atomic structures, the exact value of the quark mixing angle, called the Cabibbo angle, what gluons, bosons and other ephemeral “particles” really are, what dark mass and dark energy are, why and how so-called paranormal (psi) phenomena exist. Our nine-finite-dimensional model removes the so-called “weirdness” of quantum mechanics, integrates relativistic field theory and quantum field theory, and thus is a paradigm shift from materialistic science to post-materialistic science that really works.

SOME MAJOR MAINSTREAM IDEAS ARE FALSE

SOME MAINSTREAM IDEAS ARE SCIENCE FICTION, NOT SCIENCE

When I say some mainstream ideas are science fiction, by ‘science fiction’ I don’t mean a futuristic story created for entertainment, I mean something that is fictitious, i.e., actually false. A lot of things accepted and reported as science today are not real, and some things routinely rejected by mainstream science actually are true. If you don’t believe this could be the case, just look at the history of science. It is not uncommon for a hypothesis once accepted as fact because it was consistent with the mainstream view, to turn out to be untrue; and it is not uncommon for some things rejected because they were not consistent with the mainstream view, to be proved to be true. There are ample instances of both of both types of turnarounds, but I’ll mention only a couple of each that are of major significance.

For many years, most people, including some early scientists, believed the earth was flat. The idea that the earth could be something like a ball spinning in empty space was, to them, obvious nonsense. Then, when the earth was considered to be the center of the universe, the astronomer Claudius Ptolemy worked out a system of cycles and epicycles that appeared to adequately explain the erratic behavior of the known planets. Both of these scientific ideas proved to be false, because they were based on false assumptions.

The text from a physical geology course I took in the early 1960s identified the continental drift theory proposed by a meteorologist named Alfred Wegener in 1915, as pseudoscience, i.e., an idea that had been thoroughly discredited by geologists. But just a few years later, the same idea that mainstream geologists had called a ‘crack-pot’ theory, proved to be true, and was renamed plate tectonics. Even Einstein’s 1905 idea that the measurement of space and time in one inertial reference frame from another moving reference frame varies according to relative velocity was considered by most mainstream physicists to be “utter nonsense” until it was proved to be true by empirical data.

What’s the point? The point is that science is never complete. It moves forward on theories and testable hypotheses. and thus is never completely correct nor completely wrong. Science is always a work in progress. The problem is that when a mainstream scientist says something, the media presents it as if it is prima facie truth, even though it may be based on unproven concepts, and the public gets the impression that everything about science as we know it is solid fact. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many things believed by mainstream scientists right now will prove to be incorrect.

I will list just a few scientific theories in vogue today that are false. They are literally science fictions.

The Big-Bang Theory

The 13.8 billion-year finite age of the universe

The 4.5 billion-year age of the Earth

The current civilization is the most advanced ever to exist on this planet.

My reasons for declaring that these theories are in fact false, stem from the discovery that current conventional beliefs about the nature of matter, energy, space, and time are flawed. This is revealed by the application of the primary calculus, the Calculus of Distinctions, to mass, energy and spacetime at the quantum scale, and by empirical evidence from quantum mechanics. Dr. Vernon Neppe and I have written about this in detail in a number of publications, and I have posted a number of essays about it in this blog site, so I will only summarize some of the reasons here, and note that they are in agreement with the historical resolution of the EPR paradox by Bell’s inequality and meticulous experimental data that show that matter, energy, space, and time are not what we think they are.

All four of the mainstream ideas listed above are fatally flawed because they are based on the erroneous idea that space and time form a uniform, passive background within which everything happens. Once you realize, as Albert Einstein did, that space and time have no existence of their own, and that observation and measurement of space-time dimensions are not uniform throughout the universe, but vary depending on relative mass and motion, the four ideas above fall like a house of cards.

There is ample evidence that 1) the big bang never happened; 2) the universe has always existed and will always exist in some form; 3) the Earth is much older than 4.5 billion years; and 4) civilization as an expression of the mental virtue of consciousness, has far exceeded its current level many times in the past. This evidence is all around us in many forms, and has been presented in a number of publications by Neppe and Close. I will summarize some of the evidence in my next post.

WHY MAINSTREAM SCIENCE CONTINUES TO MISS THE POINT

THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE PHYSICAL AND THE SPIRITUAL

AND WHY MAINSTREAM SCIENCE CONTINUES TO MISS IT

Edward R. Close © December 17, 2016

On December 8, 2016, John Herschel Glenn, Jr. left this Earth for the last time. As a tribute to him, I want to start this post with a John Glenn ‘right stuff’ quote:

“It has been my observation that the happiest of people, the vibrant doers of the world, are almost always those who are using - who are putting into play, calling upon, depending upon - the greatest number of their God-given talents and capabilities”. – John Glenn, Pilot, Military Leader, Astronaut and US Senator

Are you using your God-given talents and capabilities to the best of your ability to be everything you can be? Every day you fail to do so, you are wasting your time on this Earth, reducing your chances to become what you could and should be.

Human beings have a curious inclination to want to be absolutely right - forever. Behind this desire is the deep need to know The Truth. But this desire is dangerously perverted when you decide that what you believe is right, and that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong, deluded and, even worse, evil. We have seen a lot of this during this election year, from both the extreme left and the extreme right of the political spectrum.

But, if one endeavors to avoid these extremes, there is another, much more subtle danger: the danger of believing that there is no absolute truth. This was epitomized by President Bill Clinton’s “It depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is!” In the world of this kind of thinking, truth is whatever you can make believe it is. This is very dangerous because it usually leads to self-destructive behavior. In fact, “Believe” may be the most dangerous word in the world. Most of the worst examples of man’s crimes against humanity are the result of acting on the basis of belief and socially institutionalized belief systems.

What does this have to do with the failure of mainstream science to acknowledge the connection between physical and spiritual reality? Mainstream science is not really science, it is almost completely dominated by a very simplistic belief system. That simplistic belief system is material reductionism: the belief that everything can be reduced to matter and energy interacting in time and space.

Mainstream science has become just another form of the same kind of blind-faith belief system that early science fought so hard against. Early scientists like Giordano Bruno, who was burnt at the stake for heresy, Galileo, who died under house arrest for daring to claim that the Earth revolves around the Sun, and many others, persecuted and ostracized for announcing discoveries that contradicted church doctrine, attest to the cruelty of institutionalized belief systems.

Today, any scientist who dares look outside the box for answers to questions raised by real data exposing contradictions in the current materialistic belief system is shunned and ostracized by mainstream science. Just the mention of certain words, considered to be taboo by the priesthood of mainstream science, in an otherwise valid research paper, guarantees that it will not be published. And the increasing number of clues that materialism is wrong, constantly arising from relativistic and quantum data are ignored by those perpetuating the mainstream dogma. The mainstream belief system masquerading as science routinely and systematically shuts down any voice daring to challenge it.

Even worse, the indoctrination of young students by self-proclaimed atheist instructors has produced an increasingly in-bred educational community of closed-minded people claiming to be scientists. Evidence of this perversion and indoctrination is widespread and even increasing, paralleling the widespread and increasing number of empirical clues from experimental data that materialism is wrong. For example, we hear statements like: “Of course, as a scientist, I’m an atheist.” And “We know that dark matter and dark energy are some form of matter and energy, we just don’t know what that form is.”

Statements from the giants of science concerning the spiritual nature of reality and to the effect that there is an Infinite Intelligence behind the reality we experience, are ignored and excluded from today’s text books. I’ve quoted a few of them in earlier posts, but here are some quotes from Newton, Planck and Einstein making my point:

Newton:

“He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.” 

Planck:

“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 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 Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.”

Einstein:

“The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity.”

I choose not to waste my time here by pointing out the fallacies of thinking in the statements made by many mainstream atheistic ‘scientists’ who believe that our existence is the result of a series of random events with no purpose or meaning. It is likely that most of the members of the mainstream materialistic priesthood, just like the inquisitors of the medieval church, actually believe that they are right, and don’t realize that they have bought into a belief system based on unsupported, and now unsupportable a priori assumptions. They don’t even appear to realize that they are constantly misrepresenting and distorting Planck’s quantum physics and Einstein’s relativity by talking about massless and dimensionless particles and warping of space-time, in spite of clear statements by Planck and Einstein that there is no matter, space and time independent of mass and energy, and no knowledge of it without consciousness.

In spite of man’s proclivity to screw up, the truth will eventually win out, and I intend to do everything I can to bring that about.

THE FLAT EARTH HYPOTHESIS: SEEING IS BELIEVING!,

THE FLAT EARTH HYPOTHESIS: SEEING IS BELIEVING!

Thanks to a Facebook friend, I am going to take this opportunity to make what I think are some very important points about seeing, believing, and the scientific paradigm of the mainstream establishment. People all too often don’t question the prevailing scientific paradigm, because, after all, it brought us television, computers, smart phones, etc., etc., …and mainstream scientists have spent virtually their entire adult lives studying science, so surely, they must know what they’re doing, right? Wrong! They are just as fallible as anyone, and because of academic specialization, they tend to have tunnel vision and are often not very open minded.

This Facebook friend deserves credit for bringing up the flat-earth hypothesis is spite of the ridicule he’s sure to get from people who think they know the Earth is round.  He deserves even more credit for having an inquiring mind, and not just accepting what the scientific establishment says, but wanting to see the truth for himself. It is very easy to just laugh at him and say, surely no one in this day and age really believes that the Earth is flat!  That’s been disproved ages ago! The Earth is just one of the planets orbiting the Sun. Hasn’t he seen Star Trek, or Star Wars?  Of course Star Trek, Star Wars, and other science fiction movies that show the Earth like a ball suspended in space, were not actually shot from outer space, those images are just special effects. And NASA could certainly produce such films and pass them off as real if they actually have not gone to the Moon, or sent an unmanned probe to Mars.

There may or may not be a massive conspiracy and cover-up going on; maybe we’ll get to that later, but first, let’s consider my FB friend’s position: He has taken the position that seeing is believing and has stated that the Earth looks flat from 100,000 feet up. Furthermore, he contends that the fact that no curvature can be seen in the horizon from that altitude proves that the Earth is actually flat because, he believes that if the surface of the Earth were curved as scientists say it is, you would be able see that curvature from 100,000 feet. But, is that true? The Flat-Earth people apparently believe it is, and it sounds right. But, if we’re going to reason this out, we can’t just accept it as true because it sounds right, we need to think of it as a hypothesis and actually prove it either true or false.

Seeing is Believing

The belief that, if the surface of the Earth is curved, then we should be able to see that curvature from 100,000 feet up is based on the idea that light always travels in a straight line, at a constant speed. It turns out that this is not always true. It is usually true in everyday circumstances, like looking across the room or down the street, but looking at the horizon which is a great distance from you, from 100,000 feet (18.9 miles) up, is different. There are several physical phenomena that cause light to slow down and follow a curved path and significantly affect what we see when looking at the horizon from 100,000 feet up. These phenomena are either too minor to be noticed over short distances, or non-existent in our normal environment. The most relevant one in this case is refraction.

Refraction is what makes a straight straw in a glass of water look bent. It happens because light moves more slowly in a dense medium. In our case, the atmosphere of the Earth is like the water in the glass, except the atmosphere is most dense at the surface of the Earth and thins out to nothing at about 327,360 feet. So, light coming to the eye of an observer at 100,000 feet from the horizon is curved as it passes through the atmosphere, making the horizon look even farther away than it really is. This makes the horizon look flat until you get high enough that, looking straight down, the Earth will look round regardless of which model is correct.

Why is this so? Imagine you are standing on a huge ball, a few miles in diameter. Depending on the actual size of the ball relative to your height, if you are tall enough, you will be able to see the curve of the ball. Now, suppose you are instead, standing at the center of a flat, circular disc shape, like the Flat-Earth model shown on the various Flat Earth Societies’ websites, with it horizontal diameter the same as the diameter of the ball. Because the surface of the disc is flat, you will have to be taller to see the curve of the edge of the disc than you had to be to see the curvature of the ball, but if you are tall enough, or you stand on something to gain enough altitude, you will see the curved edge, just like you did on the ball.

The fact that at a certain height above the surface, the Earth will look round regardless of which model is correct, means that to use this approach to prove which model is actually correct we will have to calculate the heights at which we can see the curved edge for both models and then go to those heights to see which one is real. But, different from standing on the ball or disc, to accurately determine those heights above the surface of the Earth, we will also have to calculate the proper adjustment for the curvature effect from the light passing through the Earth’s atmosphere for each observation, since the density of the atmosphere varies with height. As I mentioned above, the atmosphere thins out to nothing at about 327,360 feet. This has been determined two ways: both mathematically by calculating the effect of gravity on the gasses of the atmosphere, and by direct sampling with measuring devices called sondes, attached to balloons. Calculating the respective heights for observing the edge of the disc or the curvature of the sphere, and flying high enough to check them out would be a fun experiment and would give us an absolute proof positive answer. But before we try to get funds to do it, there are other less labor-intensive ways to approach the problem of determining which model is correct.

Perhaps the easiest one is the sunrise experiment I proposed in an earlier FB post. It doesn’t require funding or high-flying observations, just cooperation from a couple of friends or acquaintances. Just have someone in New York City and someone in Denver call you on the same day at dawn at their respective locations. If the Earth’s surface is flat, the calls will be virtually simultaneous because there are no mountains high enough between Denver and New York to block the line of sight. If the Earth surface is curved, the call from Denver will come in after the call from New York, because the sun will be hidden behind the curvature of the Earth until it reaches the height necessary for it to be seen in Denver. If the Earth is nearly spherical, the calls will be about 2 hours apart.

If you try this, you will find that the time between the calls will actually be about 2 hours, give or take a few minutes depending on exactly where your friends are located in the Denver and New York areas. I can say this with confidence because I have been in both Denver and New York City a number of times, and I have friends in both areas. It is always necessary to allow that same amount of time difference if you are in one area and want to connect by telephone or skype at a specific time with someone in the other area. If the Earth were flat, the sun would be seen to rise at the same time in Denver and New York, but would reach the zenith (straight overhead) about 2 hours apart in in the two locations, Denver 2 hours behind New York. So the diurnal time difference would vary during the day, making synchronizing watches for a given time to schedule a phone call between the two locations very difficult. Obviously this is not the case. Conclusion: the surface of the Earth is effectively the surface of a sphere.

WHAT DO WE KNOW, AND HOW DO WE KNOW IT?

EXPANDING THE LIMITS OF SCIENCE

One of the most influential philosophers of the past 200 years, Ludwig Wittgenstein said: “Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent.” This bit of wisdom reflects the fact that we are verbal beings. If we know something, we must be able to describe it verbally. If we cannot, then we don’t really don’t know it, or if we do, it doesn’t matter, because we can’t pass that knowledge on in verbal or written form to anyone else. And as my High School counselor told me when she saw that my score was at the upper limit of the range of the standard IQ test: “You may become the greatest scientist ever, but if you can’t communicate what you know, it’s worthless!”

The greatest myth of modern science is the self-serving exaggeration that we know a lot about the nature of reality. Mainstream scientists would have you believe that we know just about all there is to know. The famous modern physicist Stephen Hawking announced in his book “a Brief History of Time” published in 1998, that we would have the “Theory of Everything” Einstein dreamed of by the year 2000. Of course that didn’t happen. The fact is that, even if it had happened, Hawking’s imagined ‘Theory of Everything’ the theory dreamed of by every theoretical physicist, would not be an actual theory of everything, because it would not include consciousness.

The fact is, current mainstream science has only scratched the surface of reality. There is far more of reality that modern science knows nothing about than anything even imagined in Hawking’s ‘theory of everything’.  You can’t have a theory of everything if you doggedly exclude a major part of Reality from your theory. For many years I have insisted that the dream of a theory of everything is never going to be realized until we find a way to put consciousness into the equations of science. In this world of human experience, we will never truly understand the Nature of Reality until our searches for scientific and spiritual knowledge are merged into one serious, combined effort. Once this happens on a global scale, humanity will experience an explosion of new knowledge and understanding far beyond anything experienced so far in the current era of recorded history. That time is here. With the discovery of the third form of the substance of reality (see the posts on TRUE units and gimmel) we can now begin to investigate all of the reality experienced by human beings, not just the tip of the iceberg addressed by current mainstream science.

Modern science has ignored the elephant in the room for more than forty years. In the early 1970s, Vera Rubin, a brilliant woman astronomer, found clear evidence for what is now called “dark matter’. It turns out that almost 95% of the universe is neither mass nor energy as we know it, it is made up of something mainstream science knows nothing about. In 2012, Dr. Neppe and I discovered that there is a third form of the substance of reality that is neither mass nor energy, existing in the heart of every atom.

Many brilliant people, considered to be ignorant, ordinary lay-persons by mainstream science, have known intuitively for a long time that the spiritual part of reality is far greater and more important than the part that can be weighed and measured. Many have even experienced it directly, but their experiences are considered to be fantasy and/or hallucination by mainstream science. That is about to change, because we now know, and can prove, that the physical universe is truly only the tip of the iceberg of the Magnificent Reality we experience. Explore the posts below and archived on this site to see that proof.

TDVP vs MAINSTREAM SCIENCE

With the discovery of TRUE units, TDVP puts consciousness into the equations of the laws of nature and solves hard physics problems that have puzzled physicists for more than 50 years. TDVP also answers questions about real psychic and spiritual phenomena, and gives meaning and purpose to physical existence. Yet, many mainstream thinkers, scientists, philosophers, priests and ministers are hesitant to look at TDVP.
Here are three questions for anyone interested in this issue:
1. What do YOU think should be included in a 'theory of everything'?
2. Why do you think most mainstream scientists are NOT welcoming TDVP with open arms?
3. Why do you think most mainstream philosophers of religion are also NOT welcoming TDVP with open arms?
Please give some serious thought to these questions. Your answers may help us find ways to get more general acceptance for TDVP, the science of the future.