BELIEF AND REALITY, MEANING AND PURPOSE

THE MEANING AND PURPOSE OF EXISTENCE

©Edward R. Close  2019

Disclaimer: What I have to say in this article, especially about the role of gimmel in Reality, meaning and purpose, is my opinion and mine alone. I make no claim as to who else may or may not share my views.

BELIEF AND REALITY

Your life is determined by what you believe. And for most people now inhabiting physical bodies on this planet, what you believe depends upon the amount of Reality you have experienced directly yourself, plus that which you accept as real from what others have told you. But that which others tell you may be true, partially true, or it may not be true at all. So be careful what you accept as true, accept nothing blindly, put it to the test of Reality as you know it. To the extent that what you believe is identical with Reality, your life will be what it is meant to be. When what you believe becomes 100% identical with Reality, you will have reached the Great Goal of Conscious Existence. But this is a rare condition for inhabitants of this planet at this point in time. One only reaches that level of consciousness when the time is right, and the Mind is ready. The process of reaching the state wherein you are capable of realizing that goal is called spiritual evolution. Thus it is of utmost importance to look often, and deeply, into what you believe. Your happiness, your well-being and your future depend upon it.

THE DISCOVERY OF GIMMEL

Why do I bring gimmel up in this context? Because it is a direct link to a major part of the universe that is not available to the physical senses. The vast majority of Reality is not available to us through our physical senses because it is composed of non-physical gimmel. A major part of Reality is, in this sense, hidden. This is not a flaw in the way the universe is created, it is a necessary limitation on the physical vehicles of evolving souls. I discovered gimmel in 2012, while in the process of developing a system of quantum mathematics and applying it to quantal descriptions of the combinations of the elementary particles that form the atomic elements that make up the universe we experience. I realized immediately that this was the first step necessary in putting consciousness into the equations of science, something I had been seeking to do since the 1970s when I wrote The Book of Atma.

QUANTUM REALITY: MASS, ENERGY AND GIMMEL

Stable Reality is made up of quanta of mass, energy and gimmel. There would be no stable atomic structure without gimmel. The precise combinations of quanta of the three forms of Reality, mass, energy and gimmel, that make up the physical reality of quarks, protons, neutrons, and atoms, are calculable fairly easily using the quantum math we call the calculus of dimensional distinctions. The paradigm shift from the current mainstream materialistic paradigm to the Reality of mass. energy and consciousness, that we call the Triadic Dimensional Vortical Paradigm (TDVP), is derived directly from the data of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) using mathematics available to anyone conversant with high school algebra and geometry. The derivation of the new scientific paradigm, including consciousness in the equations, has been published in several venues available to anyone, including this blog site. It has been validated by explaining paradoxes and experimental observations and data that are not explainable in the current mainstream paradigm.

REALITY IS A UNIVERSE OF MEANING AND PURPOSE

With the discovery and validation of gimmel, and its role in the evolution of the physical universe, we now know that the evolving universe is not the result of random processes, it is the purposeful and meaningful evolution of physical organisms to act as vehicles through which individualized manifestations of Spirit can experience physical reality. Consciousness, as the manifestation and expression of Primary Consciousness (traditionally called Spirit) in the physical universe, is primary, with gimmel as its agent, organizing stable structures of matter and energy in the continuing formation of the universe for the purpose of the spiritual evolution of individuals from the bare awareness of self from other-than self, to Cosmic Consciousness. The fact that the percentage of non-physical gimmel in the elements that make up the universe known to our current science is identical to the percentage of so-called dark matter and dark energy detected by the Hubble Probe, is evidence that the universe, not just this planet, is structured by Primary Consciousness for the purpose of the development of living organisms capable of being controlled by individualized consciousness for the purpose of spiritual evolution. (Calculation of the volumetric ratio of gimmel to Hadronic matter and energy, showing its correspondence to Hubble Probe data has also been published by Neppe and Close.)

TIME, SPACE AND CONSCIOUSNESS

Just as mass, energy and gimmel are the triad of variables of substance, or content of Reality, time, space and conscious imagery are the triad of variables of extent, in which the substance is contained as stable manifestations of the logic of Primary Consciousness. They are created by the stable existence of mass, energy and gimmel, and have no existence of their own. Thus Consciousness is Primary and omnipresent, as the ocean must seem to the fish who dwell deep within it; gimmel is secondary, as the organizer, and matter and energy are tertiary. All of this is describable with the Calculus of Dimensional Distinctions as nine dimensional domains nested within the infinity of Primary Consciousness.

 ER Close, 5/4/2019

TRANSCENDENTAL SCIENCE: BIOPHYSICS

TRANSCENDENTAL BIOPHYSICS: LIFE, CONSCIOUSNESS AND NEW PHYSICS

INTRODUCTION:

How does the discovery of the third form (gimmel) affect our understanding of life, and more specifically, the area of scientific study called biophysics? Recall that there could be no stable physical forms without the existence of the third form of reality, not measurable as either mass or energy. (If you don’t remember how the application of the principles of relativity and quantum mechanics to normalized Large Hadron Collider data using the mass of the electron as the basic TRUE quantum unit with the application of Fermat’s Last Theorem revealed the third form, please review the series of posts under “Putting Consciousness into the Equations” and posts about Fermat’s Last Theorem, gimmel and TRUE unit analysis. These concepts and derivations have also been published elsewhere, in technical journals and in “Reality Begins with Consciousness”, available at www.BrainVoyage.com.) The way the discovery of the third form affects biophysics is most obvious in the replacement of much of the statistical and probability analyses currently assumed as the basis of biophysics with new mathematical processes involving gimmel in the processes of biological change such as mitosis and mutation. This of course affects how we must think of the evolution of species, since it removes the randomness assumed to exist in natural selection.

I want to establish the logical basis for this presentation of new concepts in biophysics without bringing in all the mathematical details here, by discussing the probabilistic and deterministic approaches to science, as they are used and misused in the current paradigm. I think I can best do this by relating some of my experiences and discussions with a couple of brilliant scientists when I was one of the seven charter members of the Department of Interior USGS Systems Analysis Group. Over a period of three years, I had many discussions about probabilistic vs deterministic analysis with Dr. Nicholas C. Matalas, Director of the Systems Group, as well as other members of the Group, and Dr. Benoit Mandelbrot, an IBM mathematician who worked with us on some environmental modeling projects. Dr. Matalas, received his PhD in probability theory from Harvard University, and Dr. Mandelbrot was the creator of fractals. As a research group, we found Dr. Mandelbrot’s fractal functions useful in the mathematical modeling of environmental systems.

Dr. Matalas, who preferred to be called Nick, and I became good friends and we both very much enjoyed discussing probabilism vs determinism. He took the position that reality is basically probabilistic, that the laws of physics are statistical in nature, and thus only approximate; while I argued that statistics and probability analyses are estimation tools appropriate for use when the exact mathematical nature of a relationship is unknown. Neither of us could ever totally convince the other. And I remember discussing fractals with Dr. Mandelbrot, a somewhat shy, but warm and friendly, large man of European origin. We agreed that the success of the use of fractal functions to model coastline morphology, cloud and storm-cell formations and other environmental features was probably due to the similarity of the iterative nature of fractals to the structure of cells, molecules, atoms, and quanta that made fractals and physical reality essentially holographic. Now, many years after those interesting discussions with Nick Matalas, Ben Mandelbrot and others, I now see how the inclusion of the third form of reality, and application of the calculus of distinctions clarifies the concepts of probability, determinism and fractals..

In this series of posts I will attempt to bring that clarity to the subject of biophysics. In general, Max Planck’s discovery of the quantum nature of the mass and energy of physical reality, and Albert Einstein’s discovery of the relativistic nature of space and time, combined with the discovery of gimmel and TRUE analysis, radically changes what is known and knowable about biophysics, life and consciousness. Starting with the utter simplicity of the distinction of an object of observation from everything else, we have the binary logic of Bayesian algebra and computer science. Then by including the consciousness of the observer, the logic becomes triadic, and the whole universe begins to be revealed in a completely new and exciting way.

G. Spencer Brown’s statements that “A universe comes into being when a space is severed or taken apart” and that “Although all forms, and thus all universes, are possible, and any particular form is mutable, it becomes evident that the laws relating such forms are the same in any universe” are replaced by: A living universe comes into being when space and content are divided and made distinct by the action of the conscious drawing of a distinction. This triadic relationship is articulated in the conveyance equations of the Triadic Dimensional distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP), expressing the laws governing all of reality, not just the 5% of the universe available to the physical senses.

In posts to come, I will describe the difference between the materialistic statistical randomness basis of current biophysics and the conscious symmetrical stability basis of the new biophysics of TDVP. This will allow us to see subjects like creation and evolution in a new light, and answer questions like ‘Why are elementary particles so small? (Or, conversely, why are conscious living organisms so large relative to the size of the electron?)  Why is more than 95% of reality hidden? And what is the purpose of intelligent life?

PARADIGM SHIFTS AND BIOPHYSICS

Relativity and Quantum Physics

Before I discuss how the TDVP shift with the discovery of the third form of reality affects our understanding of life and consciousness, let’s look at how the previous paradigm shifts of relativity and quantum physics have affected our understanding of biological organisms. Relativity has had, up to this point little, if any, direct affect. This is mainly because the direct study of living organisms is practically limited to life on this planet. The relativistic effects, for example, of linear time and space distortion only become relevant at the extremes of content and extent, (mass, energy and linear motion) in relation to the observer and the object of observation. So until we can observe the effects of space travel on living organisms moving across the universe at near light-speed velocities, the relativistic effects on biophysical processes like growth and aging are largely a matter of speculation.

However, the theory of relativity has more potential for enhancing our understanding of biology through its role in defining TRUE quantum units of equivalence than it has ever had before. The effects of quantization, on the other hand, are immediately relevant from the minimum distinction of content and extent (the TRUE unit), through the entire range of size and motion, most likely to the maximum distinction of extent and content, i.e. the entire universe. But let’s look now at how the effects of quantum physics manifests at the everyday scale of living organisms on the surface of planet Earth.

Biophysics. Life and the Experience of Consciousness

The goal of biophysicists is to explain the events that are observed to take place within the dimensional boundaries of a living organism in terms of a theoretical model consistent within a comprehensive scientific paradigm. The quite natural approach is to try to explain the events observed to be taking place in organic cellular structures by applying the currently known laws of physics and chemistry within the current scientific paradigm. This approach has only been partially successful so far. Biophysicists must of course take the position that just because they can’t explain everything, including especially the experience of consciousness, there is no reason to believe that they won’t be able to do so eventually. It is my position, however, that they will not succeed in explaining consciousness with this approach because it is unnecessarily limited: consciousness is not included in the equations they are using to describe the processes occurring within and around living organisms.

As we’ve seen in these more than 180 posts, putting consciousness into the equations involves applying the principles of relativity and quantum physics and developing the appropriate new mathematics, resulting in new discoveries that are producing a full-blown paradigm shift. But let’s back up a bit, and have a look at how we got there, by starting with seeing how quantum mechanics affects certain biological processes.

Due to the remarkable work of biologists and geneticists over the past 60 years, the physical structure of RNA, DNA, and living organisms in general, has been discovered in enough detail to reveal the fact that the classical laws of physics and chemistry are completely inadequate and incapable of explaining life and the experience of consciousness. In their zeal to make biology as simple as physics and chemistry, biophysicists have taken the metaphysical position, as did my friend and Director of the USGS Systems Analysis Group discussed in the last post, namely the position that reality is basically probabilistic in nature and that the laws of physics, are statistical in nature, and thus only yield approximations of the real picture. The discovery of the third form, however has produced a more detailed understanding that pushes the estimates of statistical analyses farther back to reveal more detail and remove some of the perceived ‘weirdness’ of quantum physics.

Does God Play Dice With the Universe?

The TDVP revelation through TRUE unit analysis of more of the biophysical details providing the symmetry and stability needed for the existence conscious organic life, has vindicated Einstein’s famous statement “Der Herr Gott würfelt nicht!” (The Lord God does not play dice! [with the universe]). But, you may say, what about Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle? Doesn’t that imply that God, or Nature, if you prefer, does play dice? In my opinion, it does not. The uncertainty principle, which Heisenberg derived from a statistical analysis of the probability of precisely measuring both location and angular momentum of a particle at the same time, has come to be regarded by most mainstream physicists as a fundamental feature of the particle/wave nature of elementary quanta. But the value of the product of probabilities in the inequality expressing the uncertainty principle is a function of h, the Planck constant, and thus it is related to the size of the quantum entity involved. So, rather than a gambling-type uncertainty, it actually limits the precision with which the parameters of can be known, by applying conventional mathematics within a finite range, and thus provides a window within which the quantum may be found. But now, with the influence of the appropriate number of TRUE units of gimmel, the precise parameters for a given particle are not random; they can be precisely determined using the calculus of distinctions and the solution of the appropriate Diophantine (integer) conveyance equation. The mathematical logic supporting this statement is beyond the scope of this post, but the precise determination of the mix of TRUE units of mass/energy and gimmel has been calculated for the elementary particles and has been published elsewhere. See references at the end of this post.

The Legitimate Use of Statistical Analyses

Statistical analyses of biophysical processes occurring in living organic entities reveal striking and very significant differences between the atomic and molecular structures supporting life, and the atomic and molecular structures of the inanimate matter usually studied by particle physicists. Most notable is the ability of living organisms to create negative entropy. They are able to avoid the devastating effects of the second law of thermodynamics, which mandates the inevitable decay of material structures toward maximum entropy, a state of dissolution, ending in the absolute equilibrium of the mass and energy that was associated with the structures with the mass and energy of the physical surroundings. In the case of inanimate matter, this is simply a natural process observed in every finite closed physical system. In the case of living organisms, however, in plain English, the road to maximum entropy spells death.

We know that complex organisms like human beings are motivated by the sophisticated qualia of conscious awareness, not the least of which are pain and fear, to avoid death and destruction by whatever means available, but what is it about living organisms that even at the cellular level, propels them to avoid entropic decay? Is consciousness present in some form, even in one-celled organisms? If so, where does it originate? Could consciousness be present even farther down the scale of measurement, into molecules, atoms and elementary Particles?

TRUE Unit Analysis

As mentioned above, TRUE unit analysis is very effective in determining the mix of mass/energy and gimmel in elementary particles, and bears out, with mathematical precision, the conclusion reached through statistical analysis that the molecular structure of living matter is very different from non-living matter, even if the same atomic elements are present. If gimmel is the carrier of the logic, meaning and purpose of consciousness, as it seems to be, TRUE unit analysis is a potentially powerful tool for use in exploring and understanding life and consciousness. I will argue that gimmel is either a form of consciousness, or a finite extension of multi-dimensional consciousness in four-dimensional space-time. I believe this is true because there is no other candidate extant for gimmel, and because it explains the improbable existence of conscious entities in a universe that appears to be very precisely designed for them.

Additional Questions

Why are particulate entities like atoms, electrons, protons, neutrons and quarks so astonishingly small, related to the size of the cells and organs of conscious beings? If consciousness is present in some form, in physical reality at every level, and every scale of measurement, is it even present in inanimate matter? This line of thought leads into even deeper questions of symmetry and stability, of mind and matter, creation and evolution, conscious and subconscious processes, conscious choice, free will and determinism, etc., but before we go that far, let’s look at the implications of the findings of quantum physics on biophysics within the current scientific paradigm, and see how quantum considerations has affected our understanding of biological processes.

Biophysicists working within the current materialistic paradigm realize that, not only are the laws of physics as we now know them, too simplistic to explain the biological processes of living organisms, let alone consciousness, but the laws of natural selection for survival as proposed by Darwin also fail. Darwin attempted to explain the emergence of different species over time by a step-by step development of complex organisms, including humans from single-celled organisms. In fact, the idea of continuous evolution from one species to another over a long period of time, as postulated by Darwin is now known to be incorrect.

The first clue is found in attempts at selective breeding: In a statistically-significant sized sample of individual organisms of a specific species we find a range of a certain physical characteristic, for example, say length, and if we breed pairs that both have the maximum length in the range, Darwin would have expected a sample of their offspring to have heights skewed toward the longer end of the range, but such is not the case. Experiments have shown consistently that the offspring of pairs selected this way have the same range of a given characteristic as all of the individuals in the original sample of parent individuals. Geneticists have found that existence of different species is not due to incremental changes over time that are passed on to progeny, but rather they are due to changes that happen suddenly, i.e. discontinuously, like a quantum leap. The resulting mutational change is actually due to quantum jumps in the structure of the gene molecule common to the original species. These jumps are called mutations, and are assumed by most biologists to occur randomly, caused by cosmic radiation, or some other, currently unknown, influence. If the characteristic manifested by this quantum jump in the gene is conducive to survival, then it is more likely to continue to be passed on in the genome of the species than it would be if it wasn’t conducive, or even detrimental to survival.

For the purposes of this discussion, what we have learned from the biophysical study of genetics is that so-called evolutionary changes are often discontinuous and probably reflect the patterns of the quantum nature of elementary particles, even if the mass and energy of the change are large-number aggregates of quantum particles; and a large number of physical characteristics are encoded in the simple cellular structures of even the simplest of biological structures, the egg and sperm. So we can conclude that quantum physics facts impact biophysics in major ways, that physical characteristics are duplicated faithfully over many generations unless there are ‘outside’ forces, and that the vast difference in size between atoms and living organisms is what allows the encoding of hundreds, perhaps even thousands of physical characteristics in the genomes of living organisms.

In the next post, we will see how the existence of gimmel, the third form of the ‘stuff’ of reality, sheds new light on the puzzle of how and why stable conscious and intelligent life exists in a universe that appears to be composed of random arrangements of the elementary quanta of quarks, electrons, protons and neutrons in a violently expanding physical universe.   

References: 

In the archives of this blog

1. The Simple Math of TRUE Units, the True Unit, the Conveyance Equation and the Third   Form of Reality – Posted Feb, 1, 2016

2. Putting Consciousness into the Equations of Science, a series of posts: Part 1 through Part 20:

            Putting Consciousness into the Equations of Science, Part 1: The Third Form of Reality            (Gimmel) and the “TRUE” Units (Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence) of Quantum     

            Followed by subsequent posts, to Part 20, Summary and Conclusions – Posted Jan. 5, 2016

3. Also see TRUE Units and the Natural Elements of the Periodic Table – Posted March 11,       2015.

In peer-reviewed and published references

1. Neppe, VM, Close ER: Reality Begins with Consciousness (Fifth Edition), BrainVoyage.com, Seattle, WA, 2014

2. Close ER, Neppe VM: The thirteenth conundrum: introducing an important concept, TRUE units – Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 60-71, 2015

3. Close ER, Neppe VM: Fifteen mysteries of 9 dimensions: on Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence and new directions, Part III. Neuroquantology 13: 4; 2015.

4. 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; 13-50, 2014

5. Close ER, Neppe VM: The eighth conundrum: angular momentum and intrinsic electron spin. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 44-45, 2015.

6. Neppe VM, Close ER: The third conundrum: How the core dimensional calculations in the Neppe-Close Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) contributes to a workable model of reality. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 24-30, 2015.

7. Close ER, Neppe VM: The ninth conundrum: two different solutions to electron rotation IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 46-49, 2015.

8. Close ER, Neppe VM: The twelfth conundrum: The thought experiment replication of 9 dimensional spin. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 57-59, 2015.

Related publications:

1. Close ER: Appendix B: 1965 Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, in The Book of Atma. Edited by. New York: Libra Publishers. pp. 93-99 1977.

2. Close ER, Neppe VM: Translating fifteen mysteries of the universe: Nine dimensional mathematical models of finite reality, Part II. Neuroquantology 13: 3; 348-360, 2015.

3. Close ER, Neppe VM: Specific challenges involving the Close and Neppe research: The fourth conundrum: applying the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) constructs in our dimensional calculations. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 31-33, 2015.

4. Neppe VM, Close ER: The concept of relative non-locality: Theoretical implications in consciousness research. Explore (NY): The Journal of Science and Healing 11: 2; 102-108, http://www.explorejournal.com/article/S1550-8307(14)00233-X/pdf 2015.

5. Close ER, Neppe VM: The eleventh conundrum: The double Bell normal curve and its applications to electron cloud distribution IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 51-56, 2015.

6. Close ER: Infinite continuity: a theory integrating relativity and quantum physics. Los Angeles: Paradigm Press, 1990.

7. Close ER: Transcendental Physics. Lincoln: I-Universe, 2000.

8. Brandin V, Close ER: The calculus of dimensional distinctions: Elements of mathematical theory of intellect. Moscow: 2003.

Relevant references by other authors

1. Morgart E: The theory of everything has nine dimensions: The sparkling diamond and the quanta jewel turn quantum physics and the nine-pronged world of consciousness— on its ear. USA Today Magazine: 1 (January); 66-68, 2014.

2. Brown GS: Laws of form. New York: Julian Press, 1977.

3. Tegmark M: Our mathematical universe: My quest for the ultimate nature of reality. New York: Knopf, 2014.

BIOPHYSICS, LIFE AND CONSCIOUSNESS

BIOPHYSICS

How does the discovery of the third form (gimmel) affect our understanding of life, and more specifically, the area of scientific study called biophysics? Recall that there could be no stable physical forms without the existence of the third form of reality, not measurable as either mass or energy. (If you don’t remember how the application of the principles of relativity and quantum mechanics to normalized Large Hadron Collider data using the mass of the electron as the basic TRUE quantum unit with the application of Fermat’s Last Theorem revealed the third form, please review the series of posts under “Putting Consciousness into the Equations” and posts about Fermat’s Last Theorem, gimmel and TRUE unit analysis. These concepts and derivations have also been published elsewhere, in technical journals and in “Reality Begins with Consciousness”, available at www.BrainVoyage.com.) The way the discovery of the third form affects biophysics is most obvious in the replacement of much of the statistical and probability analyses currently assumed as the basis of biophysics with new mathematical processes involving gimmel in the processes of biological change such as mitosis and mutation. This of course affects how we must think of the evolution of species, since it removes the randomness assumed to exist in natural selection.

I want to establish the logical basis for this presentation of new concepts in biophysics without bringing in the mathematical details here, by discussing the probabilistic and deterministic approaches to science, as they are used and misused in the current paradigm. I think I can best do this by relating some of my experiences and discussions with other scientists when I was one of the seven charter members of the Department of Interior USGS Systems Analysis Group. Over a period of three years, I had many discussions about probabilistic vs deterministic analysis with Dr. Nicholas C. Matalas, Director of the Systems Group, as well as other members of the Group, and Dr. Benoit Mandelbrot, an IBM mathematician who worked with us on some environmental modeling projects. Dr. Matalas, received his PhD in probability theory from Harvard University, and Dr. Mandelbrot was the creator of fractals. We found fractal functions useful in the mathematical modeling of environmental systems.

Dr. Matalas, who preferred to be called Nick, and I became good friends and we both very much enjoyed discussing probabilism vs determinism. He took the position that reality is basically probabilistic, that the laws of physics are statistical in nature, and thus only approximate; while I argued that statistics and probability analyses are estimation tools appropriate for use when the exact mathematical nature of a relationship is unknown. Neither of us could ever totally convince the other. 

And I remember discussing fractals with Dr. Mandelbrot, a somewhat shy, but warm and friendly, large man of European origin. We agreed that the success of the use of fractal functions to model coastline morphology, cloud and storm-cell formations and other environmental features was probably due to the similarity of the iterative nature of fractals to the structure of cells, molecules, atoms, and quanta that made fractals and physical reality essentially holographic. Now, many years after those interesting discussions with Nick Matalas, Ben Mandelbrot and others, I now see how the inclusion of the third form of reality, and application of the calculus of distinctions clarifies those concepts.

In this series of posts I will attempt to bring that clarity to the subject of biophysics. In general, Max Planck’s discovery of the quantum nature of the mass and energy of physical reality, and Albert Einstein’s discovery of the relativistic nature of space and time, combined with the discovery of gimmel and TRUE analysis, radically changes what is known and knowable about biophysics, life and consciousness. Starting with the utter simplicity of the distinction of an object of observation from everything else, we have the binary logic of Bayesian algebra and computer science. Then by including the consciousness of the observer, the logic becomes triadic, and the whole universe begins to be revealed in a completely new and exciting way.

G. Spencer Brown’s statements that “A universe comes into being when a space is severed or taken apart” and that “Although all forms, and thus all universes, are possible, and any particular form is mutable, it becomes evident that the laws relating such forms are the same in any universe” are replaced by: A living universe comes into being when space and content are made distinct by the action of the conscious drawing of a distinction, and this triadic relationship is articulated in the conveyance equations of the Triadic Dimensional distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP), expressing the laws governing all of reality, not just the 5% of the universe available to the physical senses.

In posts to come, I will describe the difference between the materialistic statistical randomness basis of current biophysics and the conscious symmetrical stability basis of the new biophysics of TDVP. This will allow us to see subjects like creation and evolution in a new light, and answer questions like ‘Why are elementary particles so small? (Or, conversely, why are conscious living organisms so large?)  Why is more than 95% of reality hidden? And what is the purpose of intelligent life? Stay tuned!

WHICH CAME FIRST, CONSCIOUSNESS OR THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE?

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE?

This may seem to be just another form of the question raised by ancient philosophers: “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” Every complex living organism on Earth today, including every human being, began as a fertilized egg, and that egg was fertilized in a similarly complex living organism. Religious thinkers reason that since eggs must be protected by the living organisms that produce them in order for a species to survive, God must have created living organisms first, not just a bunch of eggs. Evolutionary scientists like Charles Darwin on the other hand, looking at biological and geological evidence, noted that things have not always been the same as they are today, and that the fossil record suggests that living organisms evolved incrementally from one-celled organisms to the extremely complex organisms that exist today through the mechanism of the ‘survival of the fittest’ over a long period of time. They reason that the first spark of life may have been an accident in a randomly evolving physical universe. At first glance, this seems to eliminate the need for any pre-existing form of intelligence acting as a creator or guide toward meaningful evolution. But theologians counter that there are serious problems with this view, with no explanation of why and how physical organisms are self-conscious, and there are missing links in the fossil record.

So an emotional argument began and still rages on, fueled by the egos of scientists who believe everything can be explained in terms of the random interaction of matter and energy, and followers of the religions of the world who believe in the existence of an intelligence behind physical reality. I will argue that both sides are partly right and partly wrong, and that he truth lies somewhere in the middle. Both sides argue that they have the truth, but history reveals that neither side has had the whole truth, since our knowledge of the nature of reality has been incomplete at any point in the past, and we now know that it will always be incomplete. We know this because all theories of reality are logical systems developed on the basis of incomplete knowledge with belief-based assumptions. We know now that this will always be the case, because of the proof of the incompleteness theorems by mathematician Kurt Gӧdel, who proved that no system of logic can ever be complete.

As I said, the question “Which came first, consciousness or the physical universe?” may sound like just another form of the question: “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” But it is not. It is a much deeper question, with much more profound implications. I will elaborate on this below.

When Dr. Neppe and I published our first book together: “Reality Begins with Consciousness” in 2012, a number of well-known scientists praised it with comments like:

“Vernon M. Neppe and Edward R. Close have written what is destined to become a classic in the literature on shifting paradigms and worldviews[EC1] .”

And:

 “This is the book of books. Close and Neppe have succeeded in articulating a unified theory that explains everything known through human experience and observation, including, not only the data obtained by the five senses, but also the data that comes through mind and feeling. Former scientific thought has considered the material universe to be the total universe with consciousness to be the result of matter. Neppe and Close have shown the reverse. Matter is inseparably linked with consciousness. They have succeeded in the ultra-complex task of including everything we know through the material laws of Classical Physics, Quantum Physics, and Relativity, with the non-material observations gained through psychology, parapsychology, and spiritual vision, into a unified metaparadigm with consciousness as the foundation of all creation, including the origin of creation, itself. This is a book you will want to study, absorb, and return to again and again to experience the thrill of understanding how the billions of bits of the universe all fit together as a unified whole, and how we are a participatory part of everything. The authors' many years of labor will be appreciated for centuries to come.” 

Some scientists however, dismissed our work as “nonsense”. The following statement, a composite of such comments, summarizes their views: “The physical universe existed for billions of years before anything like conscious life forms emerged. Modern science has shown without a doubt that the physical universe began as an explosion of hot dense matter, without consciousness. So how can anyone say reality began with consciousness?”

This opinion reflects three unscientific, but common beliefs held by many scientists and laypersons. They are not usually stated explicitly by those who believe them, but they are the beliefs that:

1.  Consciousness does not, and cannot, exist outside of living organisms.

2.  The universe was devoid of consciousness for billions of years and is largely devoid of consciousness now, except for the life on Earth and possibly on a few other planets somewhere else in the universe.

3.  Consciousness is created by the evolution of matter. At some level of complexity, matter becomes conscious.

These statements may sound like very convincing rebuttals of the idea that consciousness existed prior to physical reality, but they are simply statements of belief, not statements of fact. It is often stated that belief has no place in the scientific method. This is not true. Belief is the basis of what are called a priori assumptions in logic. If beliefs can be stated as positive assumptions, and rendered as valid scientific hypotheses, they can be proved or disproved by direct observation and/or mathematical logic, and emotional arguments about whose beliefs are correct can be avoided.

The correct scientific approach, whether you believe these statements to be true or not, is to state them as hypotheses to be proved or disproved, and then look for real evidence and irrefutable logic proving or disproving them.

As hypotheses, these statements are problematic for the following reasons:

1.  Science currently lacks a clear definition of what consciousness, the only thing we experience directly, is, but these statements assume that there is no form of consciousness other than the awareness of self and other than self, as it exists in living organisms. Consciousness is equated with biological life, even though there is no clear evidence proving this.

2.  The second statement does not qualify as a scientific hypothesis, because it can be neither proved nor disproved. It is impossible to directly observe a world without consciousness.

3.  There are serious problems with the third statement as a scientific hypothesis: The laws of physics discovered so far, do not favor the accidental growth of complexity; they actually suggest just the opposite: Newton’s laws of motion, and the laws of thermodynamics are formal statements of the observed fact that physical systems when left alone, with no energy added, consistently break down and decay toward a state of maximum entropy (the complete lack of organization or structure). So the apparent emergence of consciousness as material structures become more complex, is more likely to be the manifestation of an underlying logical substrate.

The problem with belief, however heart-felt, whether it is the belief that the universe is a meaningful creation, or the belief that the universe is an accident that has resulted in the evolution of living organisms by survival of the fittest, is that neither belief system explains consciousness. If our self- awareness is a finite reflection of a pervasive higher form of consciousness, we must be able to prove it through direct observation and mathematical logic, otherwise, it is just unsubstantiated theory. If consciousness is produced by a certain level of physical complexity, we must explain why less-complex unconscious material structures would be able to want to survive, and how particulate matter could overcome the entropy of a violent explosion.

So in this discussion, we will not state beliefs as if they were fact. We will take the proper rational approach and consider the following scientific hypotheses, stated as questions leading to positive statements to be proved or disproved:

1.  Can or does consciousness exist in some form outside of living organisms?

2.  Has consciousness existed in some form from the beginning of the physical universe?

3.  Are the complex living organisms we see in nature manifestations of a pervasive form of consciousness?

Stating these questions as positive hypotheses, we have:

1.  Consciousness can and does exist outside of living organisms.

2.  A pervasive form of consciousness has existed from the beginning of the physical universe.

3.  Living organisms are physical manifestations of this pervasive consciousness.

Notice that the materialistic beliefs currently expressed by many if not most mainstream scientists are simply negatives forms of these positive hypotheses.

In subsequent posts, I will present the evidence for and against the three scientific hypotheses stated above, and show how valid conclusions are reached. The next post will discuss the pros and cons for hypothesis #1: Consciousness can and does exist outside of living organisms.

---

 [EC1]

Creation vs Evolution: a Debate Arising from a Deep Misunderstanding

cREATION OR EVOLUTION?

Richard Dawkins, high-profile self-proclaimed atheist is on national TV today making declarative statements like "Evolution is a fact with thousands of proven examples, implying that there was and is no 'Creator'." Mr. Dawkins is either an idiot, or he is being deliberately misleading. Yes things, including biological life, evolve over time, but this in no way eliminates the fact that there has to be an intelligent creative force. In fact, without an intelligent creative force there could be no physical universe. This is true for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the second law of thermodynamics. It is understandable that many may think that the debate over the existence of God vs a universe evolving from the random combination of matter and energy after a big-bang explosion, but this is a misguided debate arising from a profound misunderstanding on the part of the participants on both sides. While there is ample evidence that things evolve, there is also ample evidence of an infinite form of consciousness behind it all. So we need to avoid the extremists' rantings on both sides, and examine the evidence without prejudice. 

The Illusion of Material Reality

Clues from relativity and quantum physics suggest that the time-honored idea that matter, energy, space, and time exist separately is incorrect.  It appears that the macro forms of matter, space and time we perceive through our physical senses are subtle illusions; although, as Einstein said about time², they are “very persistent” illusions. TDVP is built upon, and an extension of, the monumental works of a number of intellectual giants like Pythagoras, Fermat, Leibniz, Poincare, Cantor, and Minkowski; but most especially, it is built upon on the deep insights of Max Planck and Albert Einstein.

Max Planck said: "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear-headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as the 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. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter."¹⁴

And, Albert Einstein said: “Space-time is not necessarily something to which one can ascribe a separate existence.”¹⁵ And “I want to know the thoughts of God, everything else is just details”¹⁶

These statements, from two of the most brilliant scientists who spent their entire lives studying physical reality, reveal the important conclusion that the common perceptions of matter, energy, space, and time, conveyed to our brains by the physical senses, are subtle illusions! And both of them conclude that the reality behind these subtle illusions is a conscious, intelligent Mind!

It has long been known that the appearance of solid matter is an illusion, in the sense that there appears to be far more empty space than substance in an atom. But now we learn that the matter of sub-atomic particles and the “empty” space around them are also illusory. This is, however, consistent with quantum physics experiments that bear out the conclusion resulting from the resolution of the EPR paradox¹⁶ with the empirical demonstration of John Bell’s inequality¹⁷ by experimental physicist Alain Aspect¹⁸ and many others that the particles and/or waves of the objective physical reality perceived through our senses cannot be said to exist as localized objects until they impact irreversibly on a series of receptors constituting a distinct observation or measurement by a conscious entity.

We must be clear, however, that this does not validate subjective solipsist theories like that of Bishop Berkley¹⁹ as one might think; rather, it reveals a deeper, multi-dimensional reality, only partially revealed by the physical senses. It suggests that reality is like a fathomless, dynamic ocean that we can’t see except for the white caps. The difference is that the particles and waves, analogous to the white caps, only appear in response to our conscious interaction with the ocean of the deeper reality.

As noted above, Albert Einstein is quoted as saying: “Ich will Gottes Gedanken zu wissen, alles anderes ist nur Einselheit.” (I want to know God’s thoughts, the rest is just detail.) And he also said “Rafinert ist der Herr Gott, aber Bohaft ist er nicht!” (The Lord God is clever, but he is not malicious.) Taken together, these two statements reveal that Einstein’s science was rooted in a deeply spiritual understanding of reality. It appears that he believed that the universe, as a manifestation of God’s thoughts, is very complex, but understandable. Agreeing with Einstein, TDVP seeks to reveal that all things are, in fact connected to, and part of that deeper ocean of reality, only momentarily appearing to be separated from it. This apparent separation, perpetuated by the conscious drawing the distinction of ‘self’ from ‘other’ and the drawing of distinctions in self and other, allows us to interact with and draw distinctions in the ‘other’. TDVP posits that, although ostensibly separate in the 3S-1t world of our physical perceptions, we are never truly separated from the whole of reality, but remain connected at deeply embedded multi-dimensional levels.

There are some in the current mainstream of science who do see the universe as deeply mathematical, but even those scientists seem to shy away from including consciousness in their equations. An example is the Swedish physicist Max Tegmark. In his brilliant book “Our Mathematical Universe” he concludes that the ultimate nature of reality is mathematical structure. In reaching this conclusion, however, he strips mathematical description of any intent or purpose. He says “A mathematical structure is an abstract set of entities with relations between them. The entities have no ‘baggage’: they have no properties whatsoever except these relations.” ^{ref p. 231} In other words, he still does what most mainstream materialistic scientists do: he throws the baby out with the bath water. It is critically important to separate science from fantasy and wishful thinking, but consciousness is an extremely important part of reality and should not be excluded from the equations of science just because it complicates the picture.

From the broader viewpoint of TDVP, it is not surprising that mainstream science, focused, as it is, on the limiting philosophy of reductionist materialism, has lost touch its metaphysical roots, and thus cannot explain how it is that a large part of reality is not available to us for direct observation, but makes its existence known only indirectly through quantum phenomena like non-locality and quantum entanglement, as well as the near light-speed vortical spin of fermions and the effects of so-called dark matter and dark energy in the rotation of spiral galaxies²⁰.

TDVP also answers the real need to explain why we sometimes catch glimpses of a broader reality in rare extra-corporeal (out-of-body) experiences and other documented psi phenomena. The current mainstream scientific paradigm cannot explain so-called anomalous phenomena and the “missing” portions of reality because there is no place in its formulation for phenomena that may involve more than matter and energy interacting in three-dimensions of space and one dimension of time. TDVP, on the other hand, reveals a multi-dimensional reality and the need to recognize a third form of reality, not measurable as mass or energy, in the equations of science. As we shall see, TDVP provides a theoretical basis for a much deeper understanding of reality, as well as providing the appropriate tools for exploring it.

DO WE LIVE IN AN ACCIDENTAL UNIVERSE OF RANDOM COINCIDENCES?

Dividing the world of our experiences into the internal or subjective and the external, assumed to be completely independent of any form of consciousness, i.e. leaving consciousness out of the equations, as the current scientific paradigm does, alienates consciousness from the ‘real’ world of the physical universe and leads to an endless chain of unresolvable paradoxes. The prevalence of this attitude among scientists is expressed very well by MIT physicist - become science writer Alan Lightman in his recent book “The Accidental Universe”. In talking about the apparent ‘fine-tuning’ of the physical universe (if any one of a number of parameters were only a tiny bit different, there would be no chance for life as we know it), he says “Intelligent Design is an answer to fine-tuning that does not appeal to most scientists.” 

When confronted with the observer-related non-locality of Bohr’s solution to the EPR paradox, most scientists prefer the multiverse theory, devised to preserve Cartesian duality and keep consciousness out of the picture of ‘scientific objectivity’. In the multiverse theory, there are many, many parallel universes. Just how many there are is unknown and unknowable, because your consciousness only exists in this one, and unfortunately you cannot experience any of the other universes. Thus, just like the spate of string theories, there is no hope of proving or disproving such a theory. Even though these scientists pride themselves in being ‘hard-nosed’ objective scientists (read: materialists), it doesn’t seem to bother them that string theory and the multiverse theory cannot be tested. At best, they can only be internally consistent; and thus they do not even qualify as scientific hypotheses. By retreating into safely unprovable theories, they continue to throw the baby out with the bath water. TDVP, on the other hand, by including consciousness as an objective reality, is producing testable results and explaining observations that the current materialistic paradigm cannot explain. Several of these are listed in the previous section. In a new paper, I take the time to explain exactly how we put consciousness into the equations as part of objective reality, and show how doing so explains many things inexplicable in the current materialistic paradigm.

Unifying Quantum Physics and Relativity

The full unification of quantum physics and relativity is brought about in TDVP by applying the tools of CoDD and Dimensional Extrapolation²¹ to the mathematical expressions of three well-established features of reality, recognized in the current scientific paradigm: 1.) quantization of mass and energy as two forms of the same essential substance of reality; 2.) introduction of time as a fourth dimension, and 3.) the limitation of the velocity of rotational acceleration to light speed, c. In this process, the need for a more basic unit of quantization is identified, and when it is defined, the reason there is something rather than nothing becomes clear.

Einstein recognized that mass and energy are interchangeable forms of the physical substance of the universe, and discovered that their mathematical equivalence is expressed by the equation E=mc². In TDVP, accepting the relativistic relationship of mass and energy at the quantum level, we proceed, based on Planck’s discovery, to describe quantized mass and energy as the content of quantized dimensional distinctions of extent. This allows us to apply the CoDD to quantum phenomena as quantum distinctions and describe reality at the quantum level as integer multiples of minimal equivalence units. This replaces the assumption of conventional mathematical physics that mass and energy can exist as dimensionless points analogous to mathematical singularities.

The assumption of dimensionless physical objects works for most calculations in practical applications because our units of measurement are so extremely large, compared to the actual size of elementary quanta, that the quanta appear to be existing as mathematical singularities, i.e. dimensionless points. (The electron mass, e.g., is about 1x10^-30 kg, with a radius of about 3x10^-15 meter.) Point masses and point charges, etc. are simply convenient fictions for macro-scale calculations. The calculus of Leibniz and Newton works beautifully for this convenient fiction because it incorporates the fiction mathematically by assuming that the numerical value of a function describing the volume of a physical feature of reality, like a photon or an electron, can become a specific discrete finite entity as the value of a real variable, like the measure of distance or time approaches zero asymptotically (i.e. infinitely closely). This is a mathematical description of a non-quantized reality. But we exist in a quantized reality.

Planck discovered that the reality we exist in is actually a quantized reality. This means that there is a “bottom” to physical reality; it is not infinitely divisible, and thus the calculus of Newton and Leibniz does not apply at the quantum level. This is one reason scientists applying Newtonian calculus to quantum mechanics declare that quantum reality is ‘weird’. The appropriate mathematical description of physical reality at the quantum level is provided by the calculus of distinctions with the relationships between the measureable minimum finite distinctions of elementary particles defined by integral solutions of the appropriate Diophantine equations. The mathematics of quanta is the mathematics of integers.

In TDVP we find that, for quantized phenomena, existing in a multi-dimensional domain consisting of space and time, embedded in one or more additional dimensional domains, the fiction of dimensionless objects, a convenient mathematical expedient when we did not know that physical phenomena are quantized, is no longer appropriate. We can proceed with a new form of mathematical analysis, the calculus of dimensional distinctions (CoDD), and treat all phenomena as finite, non-zero distinctions. Replacing the dimensionless points of conventional mathematical physics with distinctions of finite unitary volume, we can equate these unitary volumes of the elementary particles of the physical universe with integers. We can then relate the integers of quantum reality to the integers of number theory and explore the deep relationship between mathematics and reality.

In TDVP, we have also developed the procedure of Dimensional Extrapolation using dimensional invariants to move beyond three dimensions of space and one of time. Within the multi-dimensional domains defined in this way, mass and energy are measures of distinctions of content. If there are other dimensions beyond the three of space and one of time that are available to our physical senses, how are they different, and do they contain additional distinctions of content? If so, how is such content different from mass and energy? We know that mass and energy are two forms of the same thing. If there are other forms, what is the basic “stuff” that makes up the universe? Is it necessarily a combination of mass and energy, - or something else? For the sake of parsimony, let’s begin by assuming that the substance of reality, whatever it is, is multi-dimensional and uniform at the quantum level, and that mass and energy are the most easily measurable forms of it in the 3S-1t domain. This allows us to relate the unitary measure of inertial mass and its energy equivalent to a unitary volume, and provides a multi-dimensional framework to explore the possibility that the “stuff” of reality may exist in more than two forms.

Since 1989, I have been determined to find a better way to explain putting the Primary Reality of Consciousness into the equations of science. In 1996 I published the book “Transcendental Physics”, an effort to make the 1989 work more accessible. It reached a few more people, but still only a relative handful of scientists and others interested in the merging of science and spirituality.  One who shared my vision, and has been my research partner for the past six years, is the world-renowned neuroscientist, Dr. Vernon Neppe, MD, PhD. Together Dr. Neppe and I have developed a comprehensive framework, a paradigm for the science of the future. We call it the Triadic Rotational Dimensional Distinction Paradigm (TDVP). It was first published as “Reality Begins with Consciousness” in 2011, and has been reviewed by more than 200 scientists and philosophers worldwide. We have also published a number of technical papers; and recently, I’ve found a way to explain the revelations of the Calculus of Distinctions of 1989, 1996 and 2011, in a more accessible way. This paper does that, and in the process, I believe, it does much more.

The exists empirical evidence that provides the answer to two important questions: 1.) Why is there something rather than nothing? And, 2.), what is missing from the current scientific paradigm? The answer to both questions can be summed up in one word: Consciousness. Without consciousness there could be no physical universe; and yet, there is no place in the current paradigm for consciousness. The clues that consciousness is the answer to the first question are plain in both relativity and quantum physics, but most mainstream scientists, steeped in reductionist materialism, are blind to those clues, and their belief – it is not even a valid scientific hypothesis – that the universe could exist without some primary form of the consciousness manifest in sentient life, is stubbornly maintained and the clues are ignored.

Many of the key scientists of the past were deeply spiritual. But the materialistic belief system widely taught in our educational institutions today brings otherwise rational people to scoff at, and ridicule, any mention of any form of intelligence superior to their own. This egotistical position of mainstream scientists is justified in their minds by the successes of materialistic science. But those successes lie almost entirely in the realm of explaining superficial physical mechanisms. Deeper and ultimately much more important questions about the meaning and purpose of manifest physical reality, life and conscious awareness, are beyond their reach. Those questions, of paramount importance to humanity, are within reach of meaningful analysis when consciousness is included in the equations of science. The purpose of a new paper by Close and Neppe is to show how this is done.

The bottom line is that, 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. The argument between creationists and evolutionists will be seen for what it iss: a profound misunderstanding. In TDVP, we show how consciousness is describable in the equations of quantum physics and relativity, and a few of the explanatory revelations produced as a result. And, believe me, this is only the tip of the iceberg! 

Note: the references indicated in this article will be provided in the paper on TRUE units, currently in press.