QUESTIONS OFTEN ASKED AND MY ANSWERS
The questions listed
below and answered in this post have been asked of me personally by numerous people
over the past 8 to 10 years. It is more efficient to answer them all here so
that when I’m asked the same questions again and over again, I can refer the
asker to this post. The questions I’m addressing here are not mathematical or
technical in nature. They are more general questions related more to the
historical and personal perspectives related to TDVP as a scientific paradigm
shift than the actual theory itself. Dr. Neppe has also received these
questions or slight variations of them. I’m quite sure that his answers are
very similar to mine, because our thinking is so similar and parallel that it’s
almost ‘spooky’ sometimes. But these are my
answers. I take full responsibility for them.
The Questions
Here are the ten questions
I hear most often:
1. Most scientific breakthroughs
are made by people in their early twenties. How is it that you and Dr. Neppe are
coming out with these ideas so much later in life?
In fact, both Dr. Neppe
and I were recognized leaders in our fields early in life. Personally, I developed
some of the basic ideas of Transcendental Physics before I was twenty, and I developed
much of the math before I was thirty.
2. Why aren’t you associated
with a major university?
Both Dr. Neppe and I have
been associated with major universities, but personally, I left academia
because of the departmental politics, and we both were interested in areas that
are considered to be outside the proper disciplines of science by major
universities.
3. If your theory is, as you
claim, “the science of the future” why haven’t mainstream scientists discovered
it?
Partly because of the interdisciplinary
nature of a comprehensive paradigm, and tendency of academic professionals to
specialize, and partly because of the taboo of mixing so-called ‘hard’ science with
metaphysical considerations.
4. Why aren’t you going
through ‘normal’ peer-reviewed mainstream channels to get your ideas out?
It is interesting how
often people assume that, since our work is unusual, it hasn’t been peer
reviewed. Actually, we are going through normal channels, to the extent we can.
We’ve had papers and articles developing many of the new concepts peer-reviewed
and published in professional journals.
5. What makes you think your
ideas are better than those of mainstream scientists?
For the most part, between
paradigm shifts, mainstream scientists focus on working on details of the
accepted paradigm to expand it and develop practical applications that attract
funding.
6. Are you claiming to be
smarter than most scientists, as smart even as Hawking and Einstein?
This question is usually
posed by someone who thinks it is going to be a game stopper. This question really means, and sometimes is even
stated something like: “Who do you think you are to compare yourself with great
scientists, do you really think you are as smart as them?”
Well, yes I do. And I’m not
saying this to brag and elevate myself, I’m just stating it as a matter of
fact. My documented IQ is higher than that of either Hawking or Einstein, and I
believe that Dr. Neppe’s IQ is as high as mine, or higher. I’ll give a little
more detail here for those who might be interested in IQ, but you can skip it
if you want.
I didn’t know my IQ for
most of my life and didn’t care. My score on the Graduate Record Exam was more
than high enough to get me into MENSA and grad school in any university in the
country, in spite of the fact that I took a nap during the eight-hour test, and
chose to take the specific area part in a different field than the field in
which I was getting a degree.
Stephen Hawking’s IQ is
known to be 154, and Albert Einstein’s IQ has been estimated by experts as 160.
I was told that my earliest IQ score (as a junior in high school) put me
somewhere beyond the top of the reliability of the test the used, which was
160. Estimating my IQ from the GRE and the Army IQ test (AGCT), I estimate it
was in the range of 180 to 200, and I was told that my score on a certain high-IQ
society test taken in 2008 put my IQ at or above 182. Because of the relative
rarity of a score at this level (a score of 182 with standard deviation of 15
is 1 in 43,508,721, or at the 99.9999977016
percentile of the general population) the confidence interval
is more than 18 points. Claiming an exact IQ number like 197 is problematic and
inaccurate, but there are a few people out there claiming IQ’s of 200 and
above. Statistically, an IQ of 195 with SD of 15 would be 1 in 8,299,126,114, but there are only about 7,300,000,000
people on the planet. The point is that all someone like me can claim is
an IQ above 180, and there are only a handful on the planet..
I know that many people who
join high IQ societies do so just to inflate their own egos, and some of them like
to perform mental tricks to impress people. I did a little of this when I was a
sophomore in college, but quickly realized that such behavior was a waste of
time, or worse. A high IQ is not worth much if you don’t choose to do something
worthwhile with it.
7. You say there has been no
real paradigm shift in physics, or even science in general since about 1935
with the acceptance of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Are you just
ignoring all the progress that has been made in biology, particle physics and
cosmology in the last 80 years?
No, those advances are
all within the paradigm of relativity and quantum physics, not new scientific
paradigms. TDVP incorporates them and more.
8. What makes you think that
your “theory of everything” is better than all the other theories out there?
First of all, ‘theory of
everything’ (TOE) is a misnomer. When mainstream physicists speak of a TOE, like
string theories, M-brane theory, etc., they are talking about a theory uniting
the known physical forces of the universe. TDVP is more nearly a TOE than those
because it includes existing phenomena like psi phenomena and other rare-event
phenomena not included in materialism-based TOEs. Sometimes, people refer to
Einstein as trying to find a TOE.
To my knowledge, Einstein never spoke of a
TOE as such. He was looking for a unified field theory that would eliminate the
contradictions and paradoxes existing between relativity and quantum mechanics.
We made an objective comparison of all
the purported TOEs we could find, in our book “Reality Begins with
Consciousness’, with objective criteria including statistically legitimate
non-physical phenomena, and none of them measured up to TDVP.
9. If, as you say, your
theory incorporates science and spirituality, why aren’t all philosophers and
theologians thrilled with it?
It is a matter of
intellectual ‘turf’. Most theologians see us as scientists invading their
territory. Philosophers who, like mainstream scientists are materialists, dualists,
or even atheists, reject anything outside the box of materialism.
10. Why are you using social
media to get your ideas out?
We exist in a new information world
today where the new ideas of a real scientific paradigm shift can impact the
general populace much more quickly than in the past. I believe that the general
public are much more intelligent than the mainstream educated elite of the scientific
establishment would like to think.
