Creating the New Earth Together

Archive for the ‘Physics’ Category

Setting the Ordinance of Heaven in the Earth (Reposted)

As Above So Below

“Let Love Command. Let wonders form. Let heaven’s beauty shine.”

I WILL CONTINUE from where I left off in the previous post in this series on “BiocentrismHow Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.”  I am sharing excerpts from Dr. Robert Lanza and Bob Berman’s consciousness-expanding book by the same title and subtitle.  Dr. Lanza, a “genius” and “renegade thinker,” according to U.S. News & World Report, who likened him to Einstein, is one of the world’s most respected scientists; and Berman is lauded as one of the best-known astronomers in the world.  I’ll dive right into this post with these excerpts:

♦ ◊ ♦

ENTANGLED PARTICLES OR “TWINS”

Now, because quantum theory tells us that everything in nature has a particle nature and a wave nature, and that the object’s behavior exists only as probabilities, no small object actually assumes a particular place or motion until its wave-function collapses. What accomplishes this collapse? Messing with it in any way. Hitting it with a bit of light in order to “take its picture” would instantly do the job. But it became increasingly clear that any possible way the experimenter could take a look at the object would collapse the wave-function. At first, this look was assumed to be the need to, say, shoot a photon at an electron in order to measure where it is, and the realization that the resulting interaction between the two would naturally collapse the wave-function. In a sense, the experiment had been contaminated. But as more sophisticated experiments were devised, . . . it became obvious that mere knowledge in the experimenter’s mind is sufficient to cause the wave-function to collapse.

That was freaky, but it got worse. When entangled particles are created, the pair share a wave-function. When one member’s wave­function collapses, so will the other’s — even if they are separated by the width of the universe. This means that if one particle is observed to have an “up spin,” the other instantly goes from being a mere probability wave to an actual particle with the opposite spin. They are intimately linked, and in a way that acts as if there’s no space between them, and no time influencing their behavior.

Experiments from 1997 to 2007 have shown that this is indeed the case, as if tiny objects created together are endowed with a kind of ESP. If a particle is observed to make a random choice to go one way instead of another, its twin will always exhibit the same behavior (actually the complementary action) at the same moment—even if the pair are widely separated. . . .

 Although predicted by quantum mechanics, the results continue to astonish even the very physicists doing the experiments. It substantiates the startling theory that an entangled twin should instantly echo the action or state of the other, even if separated by any distance whatsoever, no matter how great . . . . [the momentous adjective here is instantly.]

In a paper published in Nature by a team of researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology led by Dr. David Wineland, entangled pairs of beryllium ions and a high-efficiency detector proved that, yes, each really does simultaneously echo the actions of its twin.

Few believe that some new, unknown force or interaction is being transmitted with zero travel time from one particle to its twin. Rather, Wineland told one of the authors, “There is some spooky action at a distance.” Of course, he knew that this is no explanation at all.

AS IN HEAVEN SO ON EARTH

THERE ARE PROFOUND IMPLICATIONS in this phenomenon of “entangled” or “twin” particles, one being that we are not on this earth alone.  We each have a twin in a parallel universe, only not of the hypothesized multiple “parallel universes.”  The parallel universe I’m referring to is a heavenly universe, which in reality is half of a duality rather than a parallel.  Heaven-and-Earth is a duality. That twin in the heavenly half is who I really am. The other twin here in this earthly half is my human capacity for incarnating on this planet.  It even bears a name, as my twin does.  My ancestral name is Palumbo, which in Italian means dove or messenger pigeon (the u was later closed to form an o).  I am a messenger, as we all are: messengers from Heaven to bring the Light of Love and Truth to Earth to create Life.  In our true identity, we are emissaries of Heaven’s Light.  We dwell in the heavenly realm of Light as angels and we each have our analogous twin in the earth.  

You may see where I am going with this analogous dichotomy of seeming contradictory characteristics, the one being of a spiritual nature and the other being of a physical nature.  They are rather more complementary than contradictory, a true duality: Human Being. The One manifests the other, and the other was manifested to reveal the qualities and virtues of the One.

Now the spiritual twin is by nature always attuned to the frequency of love, is love, and moves about in the invisible realm of Heaven in harmony with all other heavenly beings.  When the earthly physical twin is attuned to the same frequency of love, it mirrors perfectly the qualities and movements of its heavenly twin.  They behave as one, which they are. When two substances vibrate at the same frequency, by resonance they fuse together as one.

Continuing in this chapter:

THE INEFFABLE WORLD OF “QUANTUM WEIRDNESS”

Dubbed quantum weirdness, this wave-particle duality has befuddled scientists for decades. Some of the greatest physicists have described it as impossible to intuit, impossible to formulate into words, impossible to visualize, and as invalidating common sense and ordinary perception. Science has essentially conceded that quantum physics is incomprehensible outside of complex mathematics. How can quantum physics be so impervious to metaphor, visualization, and language?

Amazingly, if we accept a life-created reality at face value, it all becomes simple and straightforward to understand. The key question is “waves of what?” Back in 1926, German physicist Max Born demonstrated that quantum waves are waves of probability, not waves of material, as his colleague Schrodinger had theorized. They are statistical predictions. Thus, a wave of probability is nothing but a likely outcome. In fact, outside of that idea, the wave is not there! It’s intangible. As Nobel physicist John Wheeler once said, “No phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.”

Note that we are talking about discrete objects like photons or electrons, rather than collections of myriad objects, such as, say, a train. Obviously, we can get a schedule and arrive to pick up a friend at a station and be fairly confident that his train actually existed during our absence, even if we did not personally observe it. (One reason for this is that as the considered object gets bigger, its wavelength gets smaller. Once we get into the macroscopic realm, the waves are too close together to be noticed or measured. They are still there, however.)

With small discrete particles, however, if they are not being observed, they cannot be thought of as having any real existence –­ either duration or a position in space. Until the mind sets the scaffolding of an object in place, until it actually lays down the threads (somewhere in the haze of probabilities that represent the object’s range of possible values), it cannot be thought of as being either here or there. Thus, quantum waves merely define the potential location a particle can occupy. When a scientist observes a particle, it will be found within the statistical probability for that event to occur. That’s what the wave defines. A wave of probability isn’t an event or a phenomenon, it is a description of the likelihood of an event or phenomenon occurring. Nothing happens until the event is actually observed.

This chapter ends on a note of promise and optimism:

At present, the implications of these experiments are conveniently downplayed in the public mind because, until recently, quantum behavior was limited to the microscopic world. However, this has no basis in reason, and more importantly, it is starting to be challenged in laboratories around the world. New experiments carried out with huge molecules called buckyballs show that quantum reality extends into the macroscopic world we live in. In 2005, KHC03 crystals exhibited quantum entanglement ridges one-half inch high—visible signs of behavior nudging into everyday levels of discernment. In fact, an exciting new experiment has just been proposed (so-called scaled-up superposition) that would furnish the most powerful evidence to date that the biocentric view of the world is correct at the level of living organisms.

To which we would say — of course.

And so we add a third principle of Biocentrism: The behavior of subatomic particles—indeed all particles and objects—is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the presence of a conscious observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state of probability waves.

♦ ◊ ♦

SETTING THE DOMINION OF HEAVENLY ORDINANCES IN THE EARTH

I’m drawn back to those haunting questions in the 38th chapter of the Book of Job: “Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?” And the preceding one: “Can’t thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season, or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?” And the one before that: “Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?” These challenges all have something to do with the stars and constellations, the Zodiac and the Science of Mazzaroth, the feminine and the masculine energies, and with Arcturus the Great Red Giant and father of stars.  This question particularly piques my interest: “Who hath put wisdom in the inner parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?” 

All of these demands are preceded by the Lord’s answer to Job from out of the whirlwind:  “Gird up now they loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.  Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.” We’re supposed to know these things consciously and understand them in our hearts, where true understanding takes place.  We are created and equipped to participate in the manifestation of Creation from out of the “inner parts“—the parts that scientists have bumped up against and by which they’ve been stopped in their tracks and left gazing into the ineffable formulating theories about what they imagine is occurring there.

Yet, I dare ask, are they only theories?  Has the repentant mind of Man, exhausted from crawling on its belly “up and down and to and fro in the earth,” looked upward and ascended to the heights of Heaven?  Has it been invited into the “inner parts” of Creation; been restored to its ordained place in Heaven, humble and no longer behaving as Satan, the prince of darkness and destroyer of life, but now functioning as a bearer of the Light of Truth?  That is, after all, the literal meaning of the word “Lucifer:” Light Bearer. 

In the Beginning when Man’s mind was in Heaven, it was called Lucifer . . . and Morning Star, Day Star and Son of the Morning.  Morning, the beginning of a new day, is also the herald of a new creative cycle.  Light is needed at the dawn of new cycles to cast light on the way forward.  I think this is what has been occurring over the last several decades, evidenced by the rise of spiritual guides, mentors and teachers the world over—a rise in the Consciousness of Man to an opened window in Heaven out from which the Light of Truth shines into the human mind, including the minds of scientist and physicists who apparently have sufficient resonant substance in their hearts to perceive the spiritual implications in their research and experiments.  

Have we been drawn to the very threshold of Creation, the Gate leading to the Garden of Eden where the angel with a flaming sword that turns in every directions stands guarding the way to the Tree of Life?  Has the restoration of Man to his ordained state moved us thus far toward enlightenment since this cycle was initiated by the Lord of Love some 2000 years ago?  Are these the end times of a dark age and the dawning of the first days of a Golden Age of Light?  

How shall we view and receive these explorers of the Quantum World of atomic waves and particles, the stuff of creation, the “dark matter” of which the cosmos is made, the yet unformed waves of energy between the stars awaiting the Command of Love?  “Let there be light!”  And who are the ones chosen and designated to speak Love’s Command if not we who have incarnated for this very purpose?  Am I asking the right questions for our time in the sunlight?  Is it too much to ask that we leave the old world behind and enter the Garden of Heaven at hand.  A New World awaits as waves of limitless possibilities for our command.  Let us tarry no longer in bringing it forth into manifestation . . . t-o-g-e-t-h-e-r.  Until my next post,

Be love. Be loved

Anthony   (tpal70@gmail.com)

P.S. Desolate and covered with boils, yet Job did not curse God and die, as his three friends advised.  Rather he repented in dust and ashes . . . and he prayed for his three friend.  “So the Lord blessed the later end of Job more than the beginning , , , and gave Job twice as much as he had before.

Perhaps we could pray for those who seek to harm and kill us , , , even forgive them because they do not know what they are doing.

Credit: Graphic at top is by Rose Meeker

BIOCENTRISM: The Illusion of Segregation in a Unified Cosmos

IT IS SAID THAT FOOLS RUSH IN where angels fear to tread . . . and so it may well be.  The self-active mind foolishly speculates about reality.  The Christened mind walks gingerly but confidently upon this sacred ground with humility and intent to offer insight and blessing.  Emerson said it more poetically:

Here we find ourselves, suddenly, not in a critical speculation, but in a holy place, and should go very warily and reverently.  We stand before the secret of the world, there where Being passes into Appearance, and Unity into Variety.

We Heavenly Beings incarnate in these Human capacities and endeavor to integrate racially segregated variety back into a state of integrated wholeness and unity—albeit segregation in only a condition of consciousness.  All peoples of the planet make up One Human Race. This endeavor, therefore, is futile if exercised merely in the social order without addressing the issue of separateness in our consciousness, where we see the whole as separate parts.  For example, we think of our solar system as having a sun with planets orbiting it, each a separate entity; when in reality our solar system is one entity and functions as one whole undivided entity.  As the authors of BIOCENTRISM succinctly state it . . .

We “see” separations between objects only because we have been conditioned and trained, through language and convention, to draw boundaries. . . . We see only that for which we are looking.  

I recently returned to a book I had set aside some years ago—for reasons that have only now become apparent—entitled Race And The Cosmos, written by Afro-American author Barbara A. Holmes.  She writes:

I am suggesting that we view issues of race and liberation from the perspective of the cosmos . . . This is a reasonable choice, given that the universe is an integral aspect of any human endeavor, even when it is a taken-for-granted backdrop for our activities.  I am challenging all justice seekers to awaken to the vibrant and mysterious worlds of quantum physics and cosmology. . . .  All the narratives that frame reality have been unsettled by the Hubble telescope’s unblinking eye and strangely responsive but unseen quantum elements.  From cosmic and quantum realms we learn that we are connected to one another in unexpected ways.  Theoretical physics suggests that, even when separated, entities that have once been in contact will react to changes in the other.

I resonate with this author’s perspective.  How we view the Cosmos and our relationship to it and within it seems vital to our movement forward into a new way of living together in harmony on Earth.  In that context and rationale, Dr. Robert Lanza and Bob Berman’s BIOCENTRISM has afforded me expansive insight into where Barbara Holmes is coming from in her timely book. 

First of all, “racism” is an illusion.  We do not see racism because it is “out there.”  Racism only appears to be “out there” because we continue to see it “out there,” projected by our race-conditioned consciousness.  We will continue to have racism in human society for as long as we continue to look for racism in human society.  As soon a we stop looking for it, and consequently seeing it, racism will vanish.  As soon as we look to find diversity in our unity and learn to appreciate it, the illusion of racism will cease being a dividing factor in our consciousness, and therefore in our world—and I speak here to my own state of race-conditioned consciousness as well. People behaving in a segregated fashion does not negate the reality of oneness.  If we do not believe this, then it’s upon us to prove it out in our living.  Make the change in consciousness, and the way we see our world will change instantly—along with our world. 

The power of observation is real and transformative. “Behold I create a new heaven and a new earth for the old heaven and old earth are passed away . . . and the former things shall no longer be remembered.”  I have lived in hopes of seeing this day dawn—and so it has. 

With that foreword, I will complete my review of chapter 11, as well as this series.  Continuing from my previous post, the authors conclude this section of their insightful book taking a final look at the nature of space and coming to the conclusion that all things in the Universe are truly connected, in more ways than we’ve imagined.

♦ ◊ ♦

ABANDONING SPACE TO FIND INFINITY

Einstein’s relativity is fully compatible with a much more flexible definition of space. Several threads in physics indeed imply that a rethinking of space is necessary to move forward: the persistent ambiguity of the observer in Quantum Theory (QT), the nonzero vacuum energy implied by cosmological observations, and the breakdown of general relativity on small scales, to name a few. To this we may add the unsettling fact that space as perceived by biological consciousness remains a domain apart, and remains one of the most poorly understood natural phenomena.

To those who assume Einstein’s development of special relativity necessitates the reality of external, independent “space” (and likewise assume the reality of an absolute separability of objects, what quantum theory calls locality, and rest the concept of space on this basis) we must emphasize once again that to Einstein himself, space is simply what we can measure using the solid objects of our experience. . . . As science becomes more unified, it is to be hoped that we can explain consciousness as well as idealized physical situations, following the current threads of quantum mechanics that have made it clear that the observer’s decisions are closely linked to the evolution of physical systems.

Although consciousness may eventually be understood well enough to be described by a theory of its own, its scaffolding is clearly part of the physical logic of nature, that is, the fundamental grand unified field. It is both acted on by the field (in perceiving external entities, experiencing the effects of acceleration and gravity, etc.) and acts on the field (by realizing quantum mechanical systems, constructing a coordinate system to describe light-based relationships, etc.).

Meanwhile, theorists of all stripes struggle to resolve the contradictions between quantum theories and general relativity. While few physicists doubt that a unified theory is attainable, it is clear that our classical conception of space-time is part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Among other nuisances, in the modern view, objects and their fields have blurred together in what seems to be an eternal game of peek-a-boo. In the modern view according to quantum field theory, space has an energy content of its own and a structure that is very quantum mechanical in nature. Science is increasingly finding that the boundary between object and space is growing ever fuzzier.

SINCE SPACE IS ILLUSORY, WHERE IS THE UNIVERSE ?

Moreover, experiments in quantum entanglement since 1997 have called into question the very meaning of space and ongoing questions as to what these entangled-particle experiments mean. There are really only two choices. Either the first particle communicates its situation far faster than the speed of light, indeed, with infinite speed, and using a methodology that totally escapes even our most desperate guesses, or else there really is no separation between the pair at all, appearances to the contrary. They are in a real sense in contact, despite a universe of seemingly empty space standing between them. Thus, these experiments appear to add yet another layer to the scientific conclusion that space is illusory.

Cosmologists say that everything was in contact, and born together, at the Big Bang. So even employing conventional imagery, it may even make sense that everything is in some sense an entangled relative of every other, and in direct contact with everything else, despite the seeming emptiness between them.

What, then, is the true nature of this space? Empty? Seething with energy and therefore matter-equivalent? Real? Unreal? A uniquely active field? A field of Mind? Moreover, if one accepts that the external world occurs only in Mind, in consciousness, and that it’s the interior of one’s brain that’s cognized “out there” at this moment, then of course everything is connected with everything else.

A separate oddity is that during high-speed travel, especially near the speed of light, everything in the universe would seem to lie in the same place, unseparated and undifferentiated, directly ahead. This bizarre wrinkle comes from the effect of aberration. When we drive through a snowstorm, the flakes seem to come from in front of us, while the rear window hardly gets hit at all. The same thing happens with light. Our planet’s eighteen-miles-per-second motion around the sun causes stars to shift position by several seconds of arc from their actual locations. As we increase our velocity, this effect grows ever more dramatic until at just below light-speed, the entire contents of the cosmos appear to hover in a single blindingly bright ball, dead ahead. If one is looking out any other window, there appears nothing but a strange, absolute blackness.

The point here is that if some thing’s experiences alter radically depending on conditions, that thing is not fundamental. Light or electromagnetic energy are unvarying under all circumstances, as something that is intrinsic and innate to existence, to reality. By contrast, the fact that space can both seem to change its appearance through aberration, and actually shrink drastically at high speed, so that the entire universe is only a few steps from end to end, illustrates that it has no inherent, let alone external, structure. It is, rather, an experiential commodity that goes with the flow and mutates under varying circumstances.

The further relevance of all this to biocentrism is that if one removes space and time as actual entities rather than subjective, relative, and observer-created phenomena, it pulls the rug from under the notion that an external world exists within its own independent skeleton. Where is this external objective universe if it has neither time nor space?

We can, at this point, formulate seven principles:

First Principle of Biocentrism: What we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness. An “external” reality, if it existed, would — by definition — have to exist in space. But this is meaningless, because space and time are not absolute realities but rather tools of the human and animal mind.

Second Principle of Biocentrism: Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined. They are different sides of the same coin and cannot be divorced from one another.

Third Principle of Biocentrism: The behavior of subatomic particles — indeed all particles and objects — is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the presence of a conscious observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state of probability waves.

Fourth Principle of Biocentrism: Without consciousness, “matter” dwells in an undetermined state of probability. Any universe that could have preceded consciousness only existed in a probability state.

Fifth Principle of Biocentrism: The structure of the universe is explainable only through biocentrism. The universe is fine-tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around. The “universe” is simply the complete spatiotemporal logic of the self.

Sixth Principle of Biocentrism: Time does not have a real existence outside of animal-sense perception. It is the process by which we perceive changes in the universe.

Seventh Principle of Biocentrism: Space, like time, is not an object or a thing. Space is another form of our animal understanding and does not have an independent reality. We carry space and time around with us like turtles with shells. Thus, there is no absolute self-existing matrix in which physical events occur independent of life.

♦ ◊ ♦

In his youth, Einstein believed that he could build from the physical side of nature without the living side simply with mathematics and physics. In his later years he concluded that “there is no free will” as the life-created and life-centered Universe is what it is and will continue to unfold as it pleases in accordance with natural law, human ignorance, interference and manipulation notwithstanding. Our only freedom is to choose between life’s way and “the highway.” In our arrogance, we have chosen the highway, to the destruction of life’s sustainable and supportive natural world. What absolute insanity.

Does it not make more sense to simply let Life build a natural world and provide for us the life-sustaining fruits of Mother Nature’s cornucopia?  And for us to return to tending the Garden while co-creating a domicile that is compatible and in harmony with the natural world?  We may even stop dying from diseases . . . and stop waging wars!

These things inspire me to write about the cosmic context of our presence on this planet. We are connected to this larger context, and within it to one another, and to extraterrestrial beings, in ways we are only now beginning to become aware as we evolve from our narrow earthly consciousness to planetary consciousness, and further on to galactic, and ultimately, cosmic consciousness.  There are galactic beings who are very much aware of and concerned about what we do here with energy, particularly nuclear energy—and I believe they are protecting us from ourselves, along with the Earth. This planet was created as a sacred place for the creation of living forms and it will not be allowed to be destroyed by nuclear war, tyrannical aggression notwithstanding.  Let’s not bring nuclear war to our world by harboring fear.  Let love radiate without concern for results—and the truth of Love is Oneness.  Fear not. 

I will continue to explore the nature of consciousness in my next series.  Until then,

Be love.  Be loved.

Anthony

tpal70@gmail.com

Credits:  Graphic at the top is by Rose Meeker.

 

BIOCENTRISM: “All things are connected”

Our Earth navigating the solar winds

“This we know. All things are connected, like the blood which unites one family. All things are connected.” —Chief Seattle 

THE INFINITE WEB OF LIFE

The singular, seamless energetic fabric of the Universe, the web of life, has interwoven structures of “frozen light” whose atoms and molecules dance and gyrate to the lower octave tones in the multicolored rainbow of Life’s harmonic symphony. There are no silent or empty spaces between the notes.  All the lyrics and melodies are connected.  No tune plays alone.  There are no solos, no arias, no rests in the musical score of Life. Only one universal and unending symphonic chorus.  It’s the immeasurable “Music of the Spheres.”

That’s my take-away after reading chapter 11 of Robert Lanza’s insightful book BIOCENTRISM, “Space Out.” Following up on my last post,Time No More,” the illusion of space has always puzzled me—until one day,  back in the early 1970’s when I first began to work with “no-touch” energy healing in my Chiropractic office in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, when an elderly gentleman with whom I had been giving “attunements”—mainly because he loved the no-touch technique as opposed to the not-so-light touch spinal adjustments to his ageing bones—asked me point blank if I would help his little great-grandson who was scheduled for a kidney transplant from his mom at Ochsner’s Hospital in New Orleans.  When I explained to him that they wouldn’t allow a chiropractor to treat a patient in a medical facility, he exclaimed emphatically “NO! I MEAN FROM HERE!”  With no hesitation I replied “Oh, okaaaay!” with a bit of uncertainty.

You see, I had never done long-distance energy healing before.  Proceeding with his request, I asked the old man to lie on his side on my treatment table.  He gladly complied, after which I simply placed my hands over and above his kidney area and immediately began feeling an erratic ball of hot energy.  The child was obviously in the room with us held lovingly in his great-grandfather’s bosom some seventy miles away. 

Within less than a minute, the hot ball of erratic energy began dissipating, like air escaping from a balloon, and the “pattern” over the old man’s kidneys became calm and open as the stuck energy began to be freed up to flow once again to the child’s kidneys.  He urinated for the first time in several days that night and was taken off dialysis and transplant surgery schedule the next day. 

I met little Brett shortly after this and saw a sweet little boy full of spunk and sunshine.  The doctors at Ochsner’s had no explanation for what had happened and simply concluded that it was a miracle.  And it was a miracle—but the real miracle for me was the way in which the distance between New Orleans and Baton Rouge simply vanished into the here-and-now bringing that little boy into my treatment room where his great-grandfather labored in love for his healing . . . and it was the power of love, as well as two in agreement and his absolute faith, that wrought the healing.  This was my first “centurion event,” referencing the healing of the centurion’s servant by the Master Physician: “Just say the word and my servant shall be healed.”  Such faith I’ve rarely encountered. There is no space between people except as we perceive it to be so.  “Pluck a flower and disturb a star.”

Here’s how Dr. Lanza and Bob Berman understand the illusion of space:

♦ ◊ ♦    

For what is space if not for the observer?

HOW do our animal minds apprehend the world?

We’ve all been taught that time and space exist, and their apparent reality is reinforced every day of our lives-every time we go from here to there, every time we reach for something. Most of us live without thinking abstractly about space. Like time, it’s such an integral part of our lives that its examination is as unnatural as scrutinizing walking or breathing.

“Obviously space exists,” we might answer, “because we live in it. We move through it, drive through it, build in it. Miles, kilometers, cubic feet, linear meters—all are units we use to measure it.” Humans schedule meetings at places like Broadway and Eighty-second on the second floor of Barnes & Noble in the cafe. We speak in clear terms of spatial dimensions, often associated with times. It’s the “when, what, where” of daily life.

A theory of time and space as belonging strictly to animal-sense perception, as our source of comprehension and consciousness, is a new and perhaps abstract thing to grasp, and day-to-day experience has indicated nothing of this reality to us. Rather, life has seemingly taught that time and space are external—and perhaps eternal—realities. They appear to encompass and bind all experiences, and are fundamental rather than secondary to life. They seem to lie above and beyond human experience, the grid-work within which all adventures unfold.

As animals, we are organized and wired to use places and time to specify our experiences to ourselves and to others. History defines the past by placing people and events in time and space. Scientific theories such as the Big Bang, the deep time of geology, and evolution are steeped in their logic. Our physical experiences—of moving from point A to point B, of parallel parking, standing on the edge of a precipice—confirm the existence of space.

When we reach for a glass of water on the coffee table, our sense of space is usually impeccable. The glass almost never spills due to a miscalculated reach. To place ourselves as the creator of time and space, not as the subject of it, goes against common sense, life experience, and education. It takes a radical shift of perspective for any of us to intuit that space and time belong solely to animal-sense perception, because the implications are so startling.

Yet we all instinctively know that space and time are not things, the kind of objects that we can see, feel, taste, touch, or smell. There is a peculiar intangibility about them. We cannot pick them up and put them on a shelf, like shells or stones found at the shore. A physicist cannot bring back space or time to the laboratory in a vial, like an entomologist collects insects to be examined and classified. There is something oddly different about them. And that is because space and time are neither physical nor fundamentally real. They are conceptual, which means that space and time are of a uniquely subjective nature. They are modes of interpretation and understanding. They are part of the mental logic of the animal organism, the software that molds sensations into multidimensional objects.

Along with time, space is the other human construct, as if every conceivable object is displayed within a vast container that has no walls. Unfortunately, the actual tangible perception of no-space is often confined to experiments that produce “changes of consciousness,” where the subject reports all separate objects to lose their reality as individual, separate items.

For the moment, confined to logic alone, we still should be able to see that the appearance of a myriad of separate objects existing within a matrix of space requires that each item first be learned and identified as separate, and the pattern imprinted on the mind.

“Name the colors, blind the eye” is an old Zen saying, illustrating that the intellect’s habitual ways of branding and labeling creates a terrible experiential loss by displacing the vibrant, living reality with a steady stream of labels. It is the same way with space, which is solely the conceptual mind’s way of clearing its throat, of pausing between identified symbols.

At any rate, the subjective truth of this is now supported by actual experiments (as we saw in the quantum theory chapters) that strongly suggest distance (space) has no reality whatsoever for entangled particles, no matter how great their apparent separation . . . .

. . . . Biocentrism, of course, shows that space is a projection from inside our minds, where experience begins. It is a tool of life, the form of outer sense that allows an organism to coordinate sensory information, and to make judgments regarding the quality and intensity of what is being perceived. Space is not a physical phenomenon per se—and should not be studied in the same way as chemicals and moving particles. We animal organisms use this form of perception to organize our sensations into outer experience. In biological terms, the interpretation of sensory input in the brain depends on the neural pathway it takes from the body. For instance, all information arriving on the optic nerve is interpreted as light, whereas the localization of a sensation to a particular part of the body depends on the particular pathway it takes to the central nervous system.

“Space,” said Einstein, refusing to let metaphysical thinking interfere with his equations, “is what we measure with a measuring rod.” But, once again, this definition should emphasize the we. For what is space if not for the observer? Space is not merely a container without walls. It is pertinent to ask what would be left if all objects and life were removed. Where would space be then? What would define its borders? It is inconceivable to think of anything existing in the physical world without any substance or end. It is metaphysical vacuity for science to ascribe independent reality to truly empty space.

Yet another way of appreciating the vacuity of space (yes: that’s a joke) is the modern finding that seeming emptiness seethes with almost unimaginable energy, which manifests as virtual particles of physical matter, jumping in and out of reality like trained fleas. The seemingly empty matrix upon which the storybook of reality is set is actually a living, animated “field,” a powerful entity that is anything but empty. Sometimes called Z-point energy, it starts to show itself when the all-pervasive kinetic energies around us have quieted to a stop at the temperature of absolute zero, at -459.67°F.  Z-point or vacuum energy has been experimentally confirmed since 1949 via the Casimir effect, which causes closely spaced metal plates to become powerfully pressed together by the waves of vacuum energy outside them. (The tiny space between the plates stifles the energy waves by leaving them insufficient “breathing room” to push back against the force.)

So we have multiple illusions and processes that routinely impart a false view of space. Shall we count the ways? (1) Empty space is not empty. (2) Distances between objects can and do mutate depending on a multitude of conditions, so that no bedrock distance exists anywhere, between anything and anything else. (3) Quantum theory casts serious doubt about whether even distant individual items are truly separated at all. (4) We “see” separations between objects only because we have been conditioned and trained, through language and convention, to draw boundaries. . . . 

There is no physical matter between the planets, not even “ether.”

. . . . The physical qualities that the physicists had bestowed upon space, of course, could not possibly be found. But that didn’t stop them from trying. The most famous attempt was the Michelson-Morley experiment, designed in 1887 to resolve any doubt about the existence of the “ether.” When Einstein was very young, scientists thought this ether pervaded and defined space. The ancient Greeks had detested the notion of nothingness: being excellent and obsessive logicians, they were fully aware of the contradiction built into the idea of being nothing. Being, the verb to be, patently contradicts nothing and putting the two together was like saying you were going to walk not walk. Even before the nineteenth century, scientists, too, believed that something had to exist between the planets, or else light would have no substance through which to fly. Although earlier attempts to demonstrate the presence of this supposed ether had proved unsuccessful, Albert Michelson argued that if the Earth was streaming through the ether, then a beam of light traveling through the medium in the same direction should reflect back faster than a similar beam of light at right angles to the direction of Earth’s flight.

With the help of Edward Morley, Michelson made the test, with the apparatus attached to a firm concrete platform floating atop a generous pool of liquid mercury. The multiple-mirror device could be readily rotated without introducing unwanted tilt. The results were incontrovertible: the light that traveled back and forth across the “ether stream” accomplished the journey in exactly the same time as light traveling the same distance up and down the “ether stream.” It seemed as if the Earth had stalled in its orbit round the Sun, as if to preserve Ptolemy’s natural Greek philosophy. But to renounce the whole Copernican theory was unthinkable. To assume that the ether was carried along with the Earth also made no sense at all and had already been ruled out by a number of experiments.

Of course, there was no ether; space has no physical properties.

THE VIBRATIONAL OR SPIRITUAL PLASMA OF LIFE 

Just as Chief Seattle pronounced the obvious, all things are connected in the web of life, like the blood which unites one family.  The creating Light of Love is one multi-vibrational Ray and each graduating frequency creates its own form of manifestation.  The higher frequencies create the rarer forms and the lower frequencies manifest coarser forms.  There is the plasma, the blood, that unites the one family of Life’s creations.  There is no empty space between creating things in the universe.  Heaven and Earth are one. The Triune Ray of Love creates the plasma of spiritual substance for transmitting the design and instructions for creating living forms.  Uranda called this plasma “pneumaplasm,” spirit-substance, as it is generated by the Spirit of God that connects all things in Oneness.  The very word “Universe” means to turn as one interconnected and functional whole.  And that’s how it is.

As the Chief says, what we do to the web of life we do to ourselves and impacts the Whole.  That’s why we feel in our gut the violence of war in the Ukraine . . . and we need to hold steady the frequency of love and compassion.  The finer frequencies of Love penetrate the coarser humanly generated frequencies of hate and fear and hold the power to dissipate and transform it.  All things are connected.  Abide in love. Radiate love without concern for results . . . and there will be results. ♦ 

Be love.  Be loved.

Anthony

tpal70@gmail.com

BIOCENTRISM: No Time to Lose

       The Atom by Live Science

“Time is a concept looking for a function.”

THE HUMAN MIND is a very beautiful capacity and extremely lucid when it’s rather thin substance is gathered together into a place of stillness and its lens-like essence focused on the moment, or the topic at hand, in humility and open-minded receptivity of what is coming now from Divine Intelligence for expression and implementation — as well as to what is coming from the heart where true understanding of the things of Spirit takes place.  A tranquil mind allows for clarity and a sharp focus of singular direction and purposeful action with unwavering resolve and determination toward truth. Under the dominion of Spirit, it channels pure genius.   

We have used our minds and  imaginations to create many imaginings that have no reality in fact. They are simply concepts, some of them old hand-me-downs and some we’ve created ourselves. Cases in point: time and space, both creations of the mind having no palpable existence, nor can they be measured.  How long, for instance, is the present moment ?  And how much space does it occupy? Time is a measurement of the clock, a convenient mechanism someone in the past invented for measuring forward movement — like the ball in a football game, in which time can be stopped or even moved backwards to accommodate the rules and events of the game.  Time is something we find very useful, and for which Spirit has limited use. if any, being present only in the Now. 

What is the distance between this moment and the next? Not even a millisecond — even though an Olympic medal has hung in the balance of a few hundredths of a second.  In reality, there is only this moment. The “next moment” doesn’t exist and never will.  There’s only now, and now is eternal. Even travelling at the speed of sound or light, we cannot escape the present moment.  We take time and space with us wherever we go and at whatever speed, because they only “exist” as concepts in our imagination and belong solely to us.

Dr. Robert Lanza and Bob Berman elucidate further on this subject in chapter ten of their fascinating book BIOCENTRISM, a work of genius outside the box of conventional “thinking”— if we may call it such.  Conventional thinking is more often than not a rehashing of yesterday’s mental constructs for managing our daily lives.  That’s the default way of letting the past determine and set the pace for the ongoing creation of life’s journey, which excludes any real and critical thinking.  True thinking is the flow of a stream of fresh and truthful ideas through the mind from Source within.  I invite you to gird up your leisure mind and focus your listening as you read the following excerpts from Dr. Lanza’s book with intent to increase your understanding about the universe and your functional existence in it.  But more than that, get into the author’s  mind and try to see what he sees as he writes and attempts to articulate the infinite with finite words and ideas.  Here we go.   (All underscores added for emphasis)

♦ ◊ ♦

“From wild weird clime that lieth, sublime, Out of Space-Out of Time”

–Edgar Allan Poe, “Dreamland” (1845) 

NO TIME TO LOSE

Because quantum theory increasingly casts doubts about the existence of time as we know it, let’s head straight into this surprisingly ancient scientific issue. As irrelevant as it might first appear, the presence or absence of time is an important factor in any fundamental look into the nature of the cosmos.

According to biocentrism, our sense of the forward motion of time is really only the result of an unreflective participation in a world of infinite activities and outcomes that only seems to result in a smooth, continuous path.

At each moment, we are at the edge of a paradox known as “The Arrow,” first described twenty-five-hundred years ago by the philosopher Zeno of Elea. Starting logically with the premise that nothing can be in two places at once, he reasoned that an arrow is only in one location during any given instant of its flight. But if it is in only one place, it must momentarily be at rest. The arrow must then be present somewhere, at some specific location, at every moment of its trajectory. Logically, then, motion per se is not what is really occurring. Rather, it is a series of separate events. This may be a first indication that the forward motion of time — of which the movement of the arrow is an embodiment — is not a feature of the external world but a projection of something within us, as we tie together things we are observing. By this reasoning, time is not an absolute reality but a feature of our minds.

Much absurd theorizing goes on in this part of the chapter about the scientific opinions on the subject of entropy, the diminishing of structure over time, which all boils down to this defining paragraph: 

Such endless unanswerables and seeming absurdities come to a blissful end, however, when time’s nature is seen for what it is — a biocentric fabrication, a biologic creation that is solely a practical operating aid in the mental circuitry of some living organisms, to help with specific functioning activities.

To understand this, consider for a moment that you are watching a film of an archery tournament, with Zeno’s arrow paradox in mind. An archer shoots and the arrow flies. The camera follows the arrow’s trajectory from the archer’s bow toward the target. Suddenly, the projector stops on a single frame of a stilled arrow. You stare at the image of an arrow in mid-flight, something you obviously could not do at a real tournament. The pause in the film enables you to know the position of the arrow with great accuracy — it’s just beyond the grandstand, twenty feet above the ground. But you have lost all information about its momentum. It is going nowhere; its velocity is zero. Its path, its trajectory, is no longer known. It is uncertain.

To measure the position precisely, at any given instant, is to lock in on one static frame, to put the movie on “pause” so to speak.

Conversely, as soon as you observe momentum, you can’t isolate a frame — because momentum is the summation of many frames. You can’t know one and the other with complete accuracy. Sharpness in one parameter induces blurriness in the other. There is uncertainty as you home in, whether on motion or position.

At first it was assumed that such uncertainty in quantum theory practice was due to some technological insufficiency on the part of the experimenter or his instruments, some lack of sophistication in the methodology. But it soon became apparent that the uncertainty is actually built into the fabric of reality. We see only that for which we are looking.

Of course, all of this makes perfect sense from a biocentric perspective: time is the inner form of animal sense that animates events — the still frames — of the spatial world. The mind animates the world like the motor and gears of a projector. Each weaves a series of still pictures — a series of spatial states — into an order, into the “current” of life. Motion is created in our minds by running “film cells” together. Remember that everything you perceive — even this page — is actively, repeatedly, being reconstructed inside your head. It’s happening to you right now. Your eyes cannot see through the wall of the cranium; all experience including visual experience is an organized whirl of information in your brain. If your mind could stop its “motor” for a moment, you’d get a freeze frame, just as the movie projector isolated the arrow in one position with no momentum. In fact, time can be defined as the inner summation of spatial states; the same thing measured with our scientific instruments is called momentum. Space can be defined as position, as locked in a single frame. Thus, movement through space is an oxymoron.

Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle has its root here: position (location in space) belongs to the outer world and momentum (which involves the temporal component that adds together still “film cells”) belongs to the inner world. By penetrating to the bottom of matter, scientists have reduced the universe to its most basic logic, and time is simply not a feature of the external spatial world. “Contemporary science,” said Heisenberg, “today more than at any previous time, has been forced by nature herself to pose again the old question of the possibility of comprehending reality by mental processes, and to answer it in a slightly different way.”

The metaphor of a strobe light might be helpful. Fast flashes of light isolate snapshots of rapidly moving things — like dancers in a disco. A dip, a split, a snap becomes a still pose. Motion is suspended. One still follows another still.  In quantum mechanics, “position” is like a strobe snapshot. Momentum is the life-created summation of many frames.

Spatial units are stagnant and there is no “stuff” between the units or frames. The weaving together of these frames occurs in the mind. San Francisco photographer Eadweard Muybridge may have been the first to have unconsciously imitated this process. Just before the advent of movies, Muybridge successfully captured motion on film. In the late 1870s, he placed twenty-four still cameras on a racetrack. As a horse galloped, it broke a series of strings, tripping the shutters of each successive camera. The horse’s gait was analyzed frame by frame as a series. The illusion of motion was the summation of the still frames.

Two and a half thousand’ years later, Zeno’s arrow paradox finally makes sense. The Eleatic School of philosophy, which Zeno brilliantly defended, was right. So was Werner Heisenberg when he said, “A path comes into existence only when you observe it.” There is neither time nor motion without life. Reality is not “there” with definite properties waiting to be discovered but actually comes into being depending upon the actions of the observer. . . .

On time and space travel, consider this:

. . . . Those that assume time to be an actual state of existence logically muse that time travel should be valid as well — and some have misused quantum theory to make this case. Very few theoreticians take seriously the possibility of time travel or of other temporal dimensions existing in parallel with ours. Aside from the violations of known physical law, there’s this little detail: if time travel were ever possible, so that people could journey into the past, then -­– where are they? We’ve never been faced with tales of unexplained people arriving from the future. . . .

[Only in movies like “Deja Vu” where Denzel Washington’s character travels via sophisticated technology four days back in time to save a woman who was about to be blown up, along with a lot of people, in a homespun terrorist attack.] 

. . . . We feel as if we live on the edge of time. That’s a psychologically comfortable place, really, because it means we are still among the living. On the edge of time, tomorrow hasn’t happened. Our future has not been played out. Most of our descendants haven’t yet been born. Everything to come is a big mystery, a vast void. Life stretches ahead of us. We’re out in front, strapped to the engine of the Time Train, which relentlessly travels forward into an unknown future. Everything behind us, so to speak, is the dining car, business class, the caboose, and miles of track we can’t retrace. Everything before this moment in time is part of the history of the universe. The vast majority of our ancestors, about whom we haven’t the foggiest idea, are dead and gone. Everything prior to this moment is the past, gone forever. But this subjective feeling of living on the forward edge of time is a persistent illusion, a trick of our attempts to create an intelligible organizational pattern for nature in which one calendar day follows upon another, that spring precedes summer, and that years pass. Time in a biocentric universe is not sequential — however much our habitual perceptions dictate that it is.

If time is truly flowing forward into the future, is it not extraordinary that we are here, alive, for a split instant, on the edge of all time? Imagine all the days and hours that have passed since the beginning of time. Now, stack time, like chairs, on top of each other, and seat yourself on the very top, or, if you prefer speed, strap yourself once again to the front of the Time Train.

Science has no real explanation for why we’re alive now, existing on the edge of time. According to the current physiocentric worldview, it’s just an accident, a one-in-a-gazillion chance that we are alive.

The persistent human perception of time almost certainly stems from the chronic act of thinking, the one-word-at-a-time thought process by which ideas and events are visualized and anticipated. In rare moments of clarity and mental emptiness, or when danger or novel experience forces a one-pointed focus upon one’s consciousness, time vanishes, replaced by an ineffably enjoyable feeling of freedom, or the Singular focus of escaping an immediate peril. Time is never cognized normally in such thought-less experiences: “I saw the whole accident unfolding in slow motion.”

In sum, from a biocentric point of view, time does not exist in the universe independent of life that notices it, and really doesn’t truly exist within the context of life either. But let’s return to Barbara’s point: growing children, aging, and feeling most poignantly that time exists when our loved ones die constitute the human perceptions of the passage and existence of time. Our babies turn into adults. We age. They age. We all grow old together. That to us is time. It belongs with us.

This brings us to the sixth principle:

Sixth Principle of Biocentrism: Time does not have a real existence outside of animal-sense perception. It is the process by which we perceive changes in the universe.

  We really can’t “lose any time” or “waste any time” then, can we.  I’ll continue with this series in my next post.  Until then,

Be love.  Be loved.   

Anthony

tpal70@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

A “Goldilocks’ Universe” Part 2 . . . . Created With Light

 

Apocalypse of light

“All things are one.”  —Heraclitus (540-480 BC)

THE SECOND HALF of the ninth chapter of BIOCENTRISM — How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe, authored by globally respected scientist Robert Lanza, MD and renown astronomer Bob Berman, delves into the perspective of a likely pre-existent universe in an indeterminate state of formless, vibrationless wave of potential, possibility and probability — and the necessity, therefore, for a universe that accommodates and supports both life and consciousness . . . simply because of the need for an observer to collapse its wave-function and bring the universe out into particle-form reality. 

This perspective was dubbed “the Anthropic Principle,” a term that emerged in the 1960’s from papers written by Princeton physicist Robert Dicke and elaborated upon by Brandon Carter in 1974. The alternative is a billiard ball model that, by mere happenstance, produced a Michael Angelo and a Amadeus Mozart.  Based simply on such unlikely outcomes, intelligent design wins out over Darwin’s preposterous random selection, as well as religion’s inconceivable creation out of nothing scenarios.  

Starting from where I left off in the previous post . . . .

Carter explained that what we can expect to observe “must be restricted by the conditions necessary for our presence as observers.” Put another way, if gravity was a hair stronger or the Big Bang a sliver weaker, and therefore the universe’s lifespan significantly shorter, we couldn’t be here to think about it. Because we’re here, the universe has to be the way it is and therefore isn’t unlikely at all. Case closed.

By this reasoning, there’s no need for cosmological gratitude. Our seemingly fortuitous, suspiciously specific locale, temperature range, chemical and physical milieus are just what’s needed to produce life. If we’re here, then this is what we must find around us.

Such reasoning is now known as the “weak” version of the Anthropic Principle or WAP. The “strong” version, one that skirts the edges of philosophy even more closely but clearly supports biocentrism, says that the universe must have those properties that allow life to develop within it because it was obviously “designed” with the goal of generating and sustaining observers. But without biocentrism, the strong anthropic principle has no mechanism for explaining why the universe must have life-sustaining properties.

Going even further, the late physicist John Wheeler (1911-2008), who coined the term “black hole,” advocated what is now called the Participatory Anthropic Principle (PAP): observers are required to bring the universe into existence. Wheeler’s theory says that any pre-life Earth would have existed in an indeterminate state, like Schrodinger’s cat. Once an observer exists, the aspects of the universe under observation become forced to resolve into one state, a state that includes a seemingly pre-life Earth. This means that a pre-life universe can only exist retroactively after the fact of consciousness. (Because time is an illusion of consciousness, as we shall see shortly, this whole talk of before and after isn’t strictly correct but provides a way of visualizing things.)

If the universe is in a non-determined state until forced to resolve by an observer, and this non-determined state included the determination of the various fundamental constants [elements such as oxygen, carbon, hydrogen and helium, etc.], then the resolution would necessarily fall in such a way that allows for an observer, and therefore the constants would have to resolve in such a way as to allow life. Biocentrism therefore supports and builds upon John Wheeler’s conclusions about where quantum theory leads, and provides a solution to the anthropic problem that is unique and more reasonable than any alternative. . . .

. . . .  To be honest and present all views, however, it should be noted that some critics wonder whether the Weak Anthropic Principle is no more than a piece of circular reasoning or a facile way of squirming out of explaining the enormous peculiarities of the physical universe. Philosopher John Leslie, in his 1989 book Universes, says, “A man in front of a firing squad of one hundred riflemen is going to be pretty surprised if every bullet misses him. Sure he could say to himself, ‘Of course they all missed; that makes perfect sense, otherwise I wouldn’t be here to wonder why they all missed.’ But anyone in his or her right mind is going to want to know how such an unlikely event occurred.”

But biocentrism provides the explanation for why all the shots missed. If the universe is created by life, then no universe that didn’t allow for life could possibly exist.  This fits very neatly into quantum theory and John Wheeler’s participatory universe in which observers are required to bring the universe into existence. Because, if indeed there ever was such a time, the universe was in an undetermined probability state before the presence of observers (some probabilities — or most — not allowing for life), when observation began and the universe collapsed into a real state, it inevitably collapsed into a state that allowed for the observation that collapsed it. With biocentrism, the mystery of the Goldilocks universe goes away, and the critical role of life and consciousness in shaping the universe becomes clear.

So you either have an astonishingly improbable coincidence revolving around the indisputable fact that the cosmos could have any properties but happens to have exactly the right ones for life or else you have exactly what must be seen if indeed the cosmos is biocentric. Either way, the notion of a random billiard-ball cosmos that could have had any forces that boast any range of values, but instead has the weirdly specific ones needed for life, looks impossible enough to seem downright silly.

And if any of this seems too preposterous, just consider the alternative, which is what contemporary science asks us to believe: that the entire universe, exquisitely tailored for our existence, popped into existence out of absolute nothingness. Who in their right mind would accept such a thing?

Has anyone offered any credible suggestion for how, some 14 billion years ago, we suddenly got a hundred trillion times more than a trillion trillion trillion tons of matter from — zilch? Has anyone explained how dumb carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen molecules could have, by combining accidentally, become sentient — aware! — and then utilized this sentience to acquire a taste for hot dogs and the blues?

How any possible natural random process could mix those molecules in a blender for a few billion years so that out would pop woodpeckers and George Clooney? Can anyone conceive of any edges to the cosmos? Infinity? Or how particles still spring out of nothingness? Or conceive of any of the many supposed extra dimensions that must exist everywhere in order for the cosmos to consist fundamentally of interlocking strings and loops? Or explain how ordinary elements can ever rearrange themselves so that they continue to acquire self-awareness and a loathing for macaroni salad? Or, again, how everyone of dozens of forces and constants are precisely fine-tuned for the existence of life?

Is it not obvious that science only pretends to explain the cosmos on its fundamental level?

By reminding us of its great successes at figuring out interim processes and the mechanics of things, and fashioning marvelous new devices out of raw materials, science gets away with patently ridiculous “explanations” for the nature of the cosmos as a whole. If only it hadn’t given us HDTV and the George Foreman grill, it wouldn’t have held our attention and respect long enough to pull the old three-card Monte when it comes to these largest issues.

Unless one awards points for familiarity and repetition, a consciousness-based universe scarcely seems far-fetched when compared with the alternatives.

We can now add another principle:

Fifth Principle of Biocentrism: The very structure of the universe is explainable only through biocentrism. The universe is fine-tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around. The universe is simply the complete spatio-temporal logic of the self.

♦◊♦

SEEING THE UNIVERSE INTO BEING

This entire consideration around the theme of a life-centered and participatory universe takes me back to a line in the Creation Story as recorded in the Book of Genesis of the Old Testament Bible: “And God saw the light, that it was good.”  If one were so inclined, as I am, one may consider the possibility that this quantum phenomenon of wave-to-particle transformation has been operative since the Beginning.  The phrase “And God saw” is repeated several times in the Genesis  Creation story.  

Is this perhaps the key to how Elohim, the conclave of God Beings who ventured forth into the deep dark void of space to create a “Home among the stars,” created the world “out of nothing”– or no thing — but rather from out of the “void”– or perhaps the “darkness” that was “upon the face of the deep?”  Perhaps even a Quantum Source-Field of the unformed essences of all possibilities and probabilities?  Kind of makes one think twice and critically about what we were taught in our religious upbringing.  

For instance, what was the length of a “day” in Genesis?  According to scholarly biblical time-lines I’ve come across, a cosmic day in Genesis is 25,872 earth years.  This brings the total six days of Creation to 155,232 earth years — then God rested from His work for another cosmic day of 25,872 years.  It’s been surmised that we are living today in the last years — perhaps decades — of the 13th Day of Creation, some 336,336 years since the creation of light on Day One. 

[For my numerology friends, this resolves out to a 6 (3+3+6+3+3+6 = 24 = 6), the number for bringing forth or coming forth — perhaps the coming forth of angelic beings on Earth in an apocalypse of Light, a truly privileged historic time to be living on Earth.]

It all boils down to this one Eternal Moment, doesn’t it?  For, since time is just an idea in our minds, an aid for measuring forward movement through space, another illusionary concept, and the “past” exists only as coded memory engrams in our collective unconscious mind, everything that has happened since Man’s creation on the Sixth Day is happening NOW in human consciousness.  The planet has simply been turning on its axis giving us countless days and nights since the eternal NOW dawned in Eden.  In this light, let’s revisit the story in Genesis. 

ALL OF CREATION FLOWS OUT FROM LIGHT

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And God said Let there be light. And God saw the light that it was good.” 

What was the origin of the light?  The simplistic answer is “Well, God made it.” But how?  My conjecture is that a super nova exploded spewing electromagnetic energy along with star debris out into the cosmos, the raw material for creating solar systems and planets. “And God saw the light that it was good.” Another word for “good” is “complete.” Each day of creation came to a point of completion before the next creative cycle was initiated.  Then God separated the light from darkness, day from night. That completed the first day’s work. The operative word here is “saw,” indicating observation by the Creator Beings. 

In a second cosmic day the firmament of Heaven was created, separating the “waters above the Heaven from the waters below the Heaven.”  Water is the womb of living forms and the first of the Four Forces.  Our world was conceived in and brought forth out of water.

During a third cosmic day, the seas were created by the waters under the Heaven gathering into one place . . . and the dry land of Earth “appeared”— from out of the waters under the Heaven. The Heaven came before the Earth. That’s the Divine Order of Creation.

The Earth appeared — dropped down out of its pre-form wave state in the Heaven and into its particle state of physical form. And God “saw” the Earth that it was good, complete, and out of the Earth appeared grass and seed-bearing herbs and trees, and all living things, including the physical body of Man.  

All of the above emerged from its invisible pre-form wave state as God saw, observed, the light and all else that was created from light.  And that action of seeing collapsed the wave function of light and activated the particle function of light, therein making available the positively charged atoms and negative life essences by which our world was created.  Makes perfect sense to me. 

Any thoughts?  Until my next post — on the convenient illusion of space and time, 

Be love. Be loved. 

Anthony 

tpal70@gmail.com

  

BIOCENTRICITY: Setting the Ordinances of Heaven in the Earth

As Above So Below

“Let Love Command. Let wonders form. Let heaven’s beauty shine.”

I WILL CONTINUE from where I left off in the previous post in this series on “BiocentrismHow Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.”  I am sharing excerpts from Dr. Robert Lanza and Bob Berman’s consciousness-expanding book by the same title and subtitle.  Dr. Lanza, a “genius” and “renegade thinker,” according to U.S. News & World Report, who likened him to Einstein, is one of the world’s most respected scientists; and Berman is lauded as one of the best-known astronomers in the world.  I’ll dive right into this post with these excerpts:

♦ ◊ ♦

ENTANGLED PARTICLES OR “TWINS”

Now, because quantum theory tells us that everything in nature has a particle nature and a wave nature, and that the object’s behavior exists only as probabilities, no small object actually assumes a particular place or motion until its wave-function collapses. What accomplishes this collapse? Messing with it in any way. Hitting it with a bit of light in order to “take its picture” would instantly do the job. But it became increasingly clear that any possible way the experimenter could take a look at the object would collapse the wave-function. At first, this look was assumed to be the need to, say, shoot a photon at an electron in order to measure where it is, and the realization that the resulting interaction between the two would naturally collapse the wave-function. In a sense, the experiment had been contaminated. But as more sophisticated experiments were devised, . . . it became obvious that mere knowledge in the experimenter’s mind is sufficient to cause the wave-function to collapse.

That was freaky, but it got worse. When entangled particles are created, the pair share a wave-function. When one member’s wave­function collapses, so will the other’s — even if they are separated by the width of the universe. This means that if one particle is observed to have an “up spin,” the other instantly goes from being a mere probability wave to an actual particle with the opposite spin. They are intimately linked, and in a way that acts as if there’s no space between them, and no time influencing their behavior.

Experiments from 1997 to 2007 have shown that this is indeed the case, as if tiny objects created together are endowed with a kind of ESP. If a particle is observed to make a random choice to go one way instead of another, its twin will always exhibit the same behavior (actually the complementary action) at the same moment—even if the pair are widely separated. . . .

 Although predicted by quantum mechanics, the results continue to astonish even the very physicists doing the experiments. It substantiates the startling theory that an entangled twin should instantly echo the action or state of the other, even if separated by any distance whatsoever, no matter how great . . . . [the momentous adjective here is instantly.]

In a paper published in Nature by a team of researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology led by Dr. David Wineland, entangled pairs of beryllium ions and a high-efficiency detector proved that, yes, each really does simultaneously echo the actions of its twin.

Few believe that some new, unknown force or interaction is being transmitted with zero travel time from one particle to its twin. Rather, Wineland told one of the authors, “There is some spooky action at a distance.” Of course, he knew that this is no explanation at all.

AS IN HEAVEN SO ON EARTH

THERE ARE PROFOUND IMPLICATIONS in this phenomenon of “entangled” or “twin” particles, one being that we are not on this earth alone.  We each have a twin in a parallel universe, only not of the hypothesized multiple “parallel universes.”  The parallel universe I’m referring to is a heavenly universe, which in reality is half of a duality rather than a parallel.  Heaven-and-Earth is a duality. That twin in the heavenly half is who I really am. The other twin here in this earthly half is my human capacity for incarnating on this planet.  It even bears a name, as my twin does.  My ancestral name is Palumbo, which in Italian means dove or messenger pigeon (the u was later closed to form an o).  I am a messenger, as we all are: messengers from Heaven to bring the Light of Love and Truth to Earth to create Life.  In our true identity, we are emissaries of Heaven’s Light.  We dwell in the heavenly realm of Light as angels and we each have our analogous twin in the earth.  

You may see where I am going with this analogous dichotomy of seeming contradictory characteristics, the one being of a spiritual nature and the other being of a physical nature.  They are rather more complementary than contradictory, a true duality: Human Being. The One manifests the other, and the other was manifested to reveal the qualities and virtues of the One.

Now the spiritual twin is by nature always attuned to the frequency of love, is love, and moves about in the invisible realm of Heaven in harmony with all other heavenly beings.  When the earthly physical twin is attuned to the same frequency of love, it mirrors perfectly the qualities and movements of its heavenly twin.  They behave as one, which they are. When two substances vibrate at the same frequency, by resonance they fuse together as one.

Continuing in this chapter:

THE INEFFABLE WORLD OF “QUANTUM WEIRDNESS”

Dubbed quantum weirdness, this wave-particle duality has befuddled scientists for decades. Some of the greatest physicists have described it as impossible to intuit, impossible to formulate into words, impossible to visualize, and as invalidating common sense and ordinary perception. Science has essentially conceded that quantum physics is incomprehensible outside of complex mathematics. How can quantum physics be so impervious to metaphor, visualization, and language?

Amazingly, if we accept a life-created reality at face value, it all becomes simple and straightforward to understand. The key question is “waves of what?” Back in 1926, German physicist Max Born demonstrated that quantum waves are waves of probability, not waves of material, as his colleague Schrodinger had theorized. They are statistical predictions. Thus, a wave of probability is nothing but a likely outcome. In fact, outside of that idea, the wave is not there! It’s intangible. As Nobel physicist John Wheeler once said, “No phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.”

Note that we are talking about discrete objects like photons or electrons, rather than collections of myriad objects, such as, say, a train. Obviously, we can get a schedule and arrive to pick up a friend at a station and be fairly confident that his train actually existed during our absence, even if we did not personally observe it. (One reason for this is that as the considered object gets bigger, its wavelength gets smaller. Once we get into the macroscopic realm, the waves are too close together to be noticed or measured. They are still there, however.)

With small discrete particles, however, if they are not being observed, they cannot be thought of as having any real existence –­ either duration or a position in space. Until the mind sets the scaffolding of an object in place, until it actually lays down the threads (somewhere in the haze of probabilities that represent the object’s range of possible values), it cannot be thought of as being either here or there. Thus, quantum waves merely define the potential location a particle can occupy. When a scientist observes a particle, it will be found within the statistical probability for that event to occur. That’s what the wave defines. A wave of probability isn’t an event or a phenomenon, it is a description of the likelihood of an event or phenomenon occurring. Nothing happens until the event is actually observed.

This chapter ends on a note of promise and optimism:

At present, the implications of these experiments are conveniently downplayed in the public mind because, until recently, quantum behavior was limited to the microscopic world. However, this has no basis in reason, and more importantly, it is starting to be challenged in laboratories around the world. New experiments carried out with huge molecules called buckyballs show that quantum reality extends into the macroscopic world we live in. In 2005, KHC03 crystals exhibited quantum entanglement ridges one-half inch high—visible signs of behavior nudging into everyday levels of discernment. In fact, an exciting new experiment has just been proposed (so-called scaled-up superposition) that would furnish the most powerful evidence to date that the biocentric view of the world is correct at the level of living organisms.

To which we would say — of course.

And so we add a third principle of Biocentrism: The behavior of subatomic particles—indeed all particles and objects—is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the presence of a conscious observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state of probability waves.

♦ ◊ ♦

SETTING THE DOMINION OF HEAVENLY ORDINANCES IN THE EARTH

I’m drawn back to those haunting questions in the 38th chapter of the Book of Job: “Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?” And the preceding one: “Can’t thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season, or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?” And the one before that: “Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?” These challenges all have something to do with the stars and constellations, the Zodiac and the Science of Mazzaroth, the feminine and the masculine energies, and with Arcturus the Great Red Giant and father of stars.  This question particularly piques my interest: “Who hath put wisdom in the inner parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?” 

All of these demands are preceded by the Lord’s answer to Job from out of the whirlwind:  “Gird up now they loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.  Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.” We’re supposed to know these things consciously and understand them in our hearts, where true understanding takes place.  We are created and equipped to participate in the manifestation of Creation from out of the “inner parts“—the parts that scientists have bumped up against and by which they’ve been stopped in their tracks and left gazing into the ineffable formulating theories about what they imagine is occurring there.

Yet, I dare ask, are they only theories?  Has the repentant mind of Man, exhausted from crawling on its belly “up and down and to and fro in the earth,” looked upward and ascended to the heights of Heaven?  Has it been invited into the “inner parts” of Creation; been restored to its ordained place in Heaven, humble and no longer behaving as Satan, the prince of darkness and destroyer of life, but now functioning as a bearer of the Light of Truth?  That is, after all, the literal meaning of the word “Lucifer:” Light Bearer. 

In the Beginning when Man’s mind was in Heaven, it was called Lucifer . . . and Morning Star, Day Star and Son of the Morning.  Morning, the beginning of a new day, is also the herald of a new creative cycle.  Light is needed at the dawn of new cycles to cast light on the way forward.  I think this is what has been occurring over the last several decades, evidenced by the rise of spiritual guides, mentors and teachers the world over—a rise in the Consciousness of Man to an opened window in Heaven out from which the Light of Truth shines into the human mind, including the minds of scientist and physicists who apparently have sufficient resonant substance in their hearts to perceive the spiritual implications in their research and experiments.  

Have we been drawn to the very threshold of Creation, the Gate leading to the Garden of Eden where the angel with a flaming sword that turns in every directions stands guarding the way to the Tree of Life?  Has the restoration of Man to his ordained state moved us thus far toward enlightenment since this cycle was initiated by the Lord of Love some 2000 years ago?  Are these the end times of a dark age and the dawning of the first days of a Golden Age of Light?  

How shall we view and receive these explorers of the Quantum World of atomic waves and particles, the stuff of creation, the “dark matter” of which the cosmos is made, the yet unformed waves of energy between the stars awaiting the Command of Love?  “Let there be light!”  And who are the ones chosen and designated to speak Love’s Command if not we who have incarnated for this very purpose?  Am I asking the right questions for our time in the sunlight?  Is it too much to ask that we leave the old world behind and enter the Garden of Heaven at hand.  A New World awaits as waves of limitless possibilities for our command.  Let us tarry no longer in bringing it forth into manifestation . . . t-o-g-e-t-h-e-r.  Until my next post,

Be love. Be loved

Anthony   (tpal70@gmail.com)

P.S. Desolate and covered with boils, yet Job did not curse God and die, as his three friends advised.  Rather he repented in dust and ashes . . . and he prayed for his three friend.  “So the Lord blessed the later end of Job more than the beginning , , , and gave Job twice as much as he had before. “Perhaps we could pray for those who seek to harm and kill us , , , even forgive them because they do not know what they are doing.

Credit: Graphic at top is by Rose Meeker

Biocentrism: Behold, I Create . . . Something from Nothing

“It’s an unpleasant thing to bring people into the basic laws of physics.” —Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg

GOD DID INDEED CREATE the Universe out of nothing.  In fact, we’re creating our worlds out of nothing all the time, that is according to quantum physics theory and biocentrism.  Atoms, the invisible, intangible and essential energetic building blocks of the visible, tangible, material world of creation are not “things.”  They are nothings from which all things are made.  It is, therefore, accurate to say that God created the Universe out of nothing.  What God did do, according to the Genesis story of Creation, was speak a command “Let there be light” and the Universe proceeded to unfold out of light. 

The Universe was created by light.  A more scientific way of describing creation would be “The Universe materialized when light shined into the darkness of the quantum world of all possibilities, collapsing the wave function of probabilities and, Voila! Electrons, protons, neutrons and photons materialized into particles, and what was before “without form and void” became the Earth and the fullness thereof, the world and all that exists in the world, including Man—Darwinism notwithstanding.  The Universe was created by Life and not the other way around.  This is biocentrism.  Mind-stretching truth and reality. 

So, let’s go down this path of biocentrism further and explore the magical world of quantum physics, what I would refer to as the Heaven God created before creating the Earth.  The Heaven of immaterial preform essences always comes before the creation of the material world of form. It’s just the way the Law of Creation works, and there’s no shortcut around it. We cannot create a heavenly world here on earth without the heaven God creates for us to keep and work out of. That’s what brought us down to this vale of tearful existence to begin with. The earth emerges out of the heaven, not the other way around. We can’t squeeze a heavenly experience out of an earthly mind-made world. Consider the Natural world of blue-green forests and snow capped mountains; of paradise islands and jungles of the wild virtually untouched by the human species.  All of it a heaven on earth.  But let’s leave the material world and explore the vibrational world of atoms and subatomic particles, the stuff out of which the material world is made.

QUANTUM PHYSICS 

I will probably get in over my head here, not being a physicist nor a scientists.  I am but a curious visitor to this mysterious realm of quarks and nanoparticles that somehow defy the laws of modern day Newtonian physics and the law of gravity as well; that ignore Einstein’s edict that the speed of light is constant at 186,282.4 miles per second, and that events in one place cannot influence events in another place simultaneously.  Yet we seek to move electronic data at that speed and faster. 

We live in an information age where the new competitive enterprise is the movement of information and data faster than anybody else in the field of computer science, an industry that has commandeered the ways in which we communicate—indeed, the very way we live and “move people to the food and the food to people,” as portrayed so graphically in Godfrey Reggio’s 1982 epic documentary film Koyaanisqatsi, a Native American term that means a life out of balance needing a new beginning. 

Presently we’ve developed 5G technology that is driving global growth and enabling industrial commerce, moving data across the globe using broad band low-frequency waves that are capable of moving large quantities of information faster than the speed of light.  Unfortunately, these low-frequency wave-lengths of energy are close enough to the low-frequency wave-lengths of radio communication that the airline industry here is the US is concerned about the scrambling effect 5G towers near airports will have on airplane instrumentation telling the pilot how close he is to the ground.  5G also messes with the vibratory frequencies of our bodies and our mental capacities, potentially, if not actually, scrambling our cellular light-signaling information delivery and hormonal communication systems. 

This morning I read a report from Dr. Robert Malone, one of the developers of the mRNA COVID vaccine who immediately warned against using it without first testing it for adverse reactions, telling how “human augmentation” is being developed to meld humans with machines for future industrial development and warfare advancement.  We know not, nor do we seem to care, how our modern technology is impacting the delicate fabric of organic life on the planet, ours and that of the other kingdoms of the Natural World.  We are out of control. Koyaanisqatsi !

My purpose in bringing all this modern technology into this consideration is to demonstrate how we are attempting to move about on the material plane of existence as fast and as effortlessly as atoms and their constituents move about on the other side of the veil separating and connecting the physical plane from and with the spiritual, or vibrational, plane in this multi-dimensional world where we live and have our being.  We also seem to be bent on building an electronic Tower of Babel powered by “Artificial Intelligence” that promises to make life on earth more efficient, enjoyable and even effortless.  It reminds me of the movie WALL-E depicting life in a space station where the earthlings salvaged from a devastated Earth are served up all of their needs and conveniences without getting up our of their comfortable recliners.  We’re not quite there . . . yet.  Movies such as this cast their ominous shadows on our tomorrows.  A more current movie on Netflix is “Don’t Look Up”—rather than casting a shadow is itself an allegorical shadow depicting present human hypnotic behavior—scary for sure. Onward now to this series’ third installment and the third principle of biocentrism: 

♦ ◊ ♦.”

Third Principle of Biocentrism: The behavior of subatomic particles—indeed all particles and objects—is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the presence of a conscious observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state of probability waves.

WHEN TOMORROW COMES BEFORE YESTERDAY

Nobel physicist Richard Feynman admonished us saying “I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics. Do not keep saying to yourself, if you can possibly avoid it, “But how can it be like that?” because you will go “down the drain” into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped.”

Quantum mechanics describes the tiny world of the atom and its constituents, and their behavior, with stunning if probabilistic accuracy. It is used to design and build much of the technology that drives modern society, such as lasers and advanced computers. But quantum mechanics in many ways threatens not only our essential and absolute notions of space and time but all Newtonian-type conceptions of order and secure prediction.

It is worthwhile to consider here the old maxim of Sherlock Holmes, that “when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” In this chapter, we will sift through the evidence of quantum theory as deliberately as Holmes might without being thrown off the trail by the prejudices of three hundred years of science. The reason scientists go “down the drain into a blind alley,” is that they refuse to accept the immediate and obvious implications of the experiments. Biocentrism is the only humanly comprehensible explanation for how the world can be like that, and we are unlikely to shed any tears when we leave the conventional ways of thinking. As Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg put it, “It’s an unpleasant thing to bring people into the basic laws of physics.”

In order to account for why space and time are relative to the observer, Einstein assigned tortuous mathematical properties to the changing warpages of space-time, an invisible, intangible entity that cannot be seen or touched. Although this was indeed successful in showing how objects move, especially in extreme conditions of strong gravity or fast motion, it resulted in many people assuming that space-time is an actual entity, like cheddar cheese, rather than a mathematical figment that serves the specific purpose of letting us calculate motion. Space-time, of course, was hardly the first time that mathematical tools have been confused with tangible reality: the square root of minus one and the symbol for infinity are just two of the many mathematically indispensable entities that exist only conceptually—neither has an analog in the physical universe.

This dichotomy between conceptual and physical reality continued with a vengeance with the advent of quantum mechanics. Despite the central role of the observer in this theory—extending it from space and time to the very properties of matter itself—some scientists still dismiss the observer as an inconvenience, a non-entity.

In the quantum world, even Einstein’s updated version of Newton’s clock—the solar system as predictable if complex timekeeper fails to work. The very concept that independent events can happen in separate non-linked locations—a cherished notion often called locality—fails to hold at the atomic level and below, and there’s increasing evidence it extends fully into the macroscopic as well. In Einstein’s theory, events in space-time can be measured in relation to each other, but quantum mechanics calls greater attention to the nature of measurement itself, one that threatens the very bedrock of objectivity.

When studying subatomic particles, the observer appears to alter and determine what is perceived. The presence and methodology of the experimenter is hopelessly entangled with whatever he is attempting to observe and what results he gets. An electron turns out to be both a particle and a wave, but how and, more importantly, where such a particle will be located remains dependent upon the very act of observation [and intention].

This was new indeed. Pre-quantum physicists, reasonably assuming an external, objective universe, expected to be able to determine the trajectory and position of individual particles with certainty—the way we do with planets. They assumed the behavior of particles would be completely predictable if everything was known at the outset—that there was no limit to the accuracy with which they could measure the physical properties of an object of any size, given adequate technology.

In addition to quantum uncertainty, another aspect of modern physics also strikes at the core of Einstein’s concept of discrete entities and space-time. Einstein held that the speed of light is constant and that events in one place cannot influence events in another place simultaneously. In the relativity theories, the speed of light has to be taken into account for information to travel from one particle to another. This has been demonstrated to be true for nearly a century, even when it comes to gravity spreading its influence. In a vacuum, 186,282.4 miles per second was the law. However, recent experiments have shown that this is not the case with every kind of information propagation.

Perhaps the true weirdness started in 1935 when physicists Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen dealt with the strange quantum curiosity of particle entanglement, in a paper so famous that the phenomenon is still often called an “EPR correlation.” The trio dismissed quantum theory’s prediction that a particle can somehow “know” what another one that is thoroughly separated in space is doing, and attributed any observations along such lines to some as-yet-unidentified local contamination rather than to what Einstein derisively called “spooky action at a distance.”

This was a great one-liner, right up there with the small handful of sayings the great physicist had popularized, such as “God does not play dice.” It was yet another jab at quantum theory, this time at its growing insistence that some things only existed as probabilities, not as actual objects in real locations. This phrase, “spooky action at a distance,” was repeated in physics classrooms for decades. It helped keep the true weirdnesses of quantum theory buried below the public consciousness. Given that experimental apparatuses were still relatively crude, who dared to say that Einstein was wrong?

But Einstein was wrong. In 1964, Irish physicist John Bell proposed an experiment that could show if separate particles can influence each other instantaneously over great distances. First, it is necessary to create two bits of matter or light that share the same wave-function (recalling that even solid particles have an energy-­wave nature). With light, this is easily done by sending light into a special kind of crystal; two photons of light then emerge, each with half the energy (twice the wavelength) of the one that went in, so there is no violation of the conservation of energy. The same amount of total power goes out as went in.

Now, because quantum theory tells us that everything in nature has a particle nature and a wave nature, and that the object’s behavior exists only as probabilities, no small object actually assumes a particular place or motion until its wave-function collapses. What accomplishes this collapse? Messing with it in any way. Hitting it with a bit of light in order to “take its picture” would instantly do the job. But it became increasingly clear that any possible way the experimenter could take a look at the object would collapse the wave-function. At first, this look was assumed to be the need to, say, shoot a photon at an electron in order to measure where it is, and the realization that the resulting interaction between the two would naturally collapse the wave-function. In a sense, the experiment had been contaminated. But as more sophisticated experiments were devised, . . . it became obvious that mere knowledge in the experimenter’s mind is sufficient to cause the wave-function to collapse.¹  (Underscores added)

I find this most stimulating.  Just to know that our conscious presence in the Field of Life itself is as creators to creation just by thinking and feeling with intention is quickening as well as sobering.  We are the creators of our world, whether we are conscious participants or sleep walking through life.  We create.  That’s our essential nature.  And we are responsible for our creations.  As true stewards of our creations we stay with them from the beginning to the end of their useful existence.  Then we assist them in passing away.  We never abandon our creations.   

I will continue this series in my next post.  Until then,

Be love.  Be loved.

Anthony

tpal70@gmail.com

¹CREDIT:  BIOCENTRISM—How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe, by Robert Lanza, MD with astronomer Bob Berman.

Biocentrism: Behold! And Everything Matters!

“The only things we perceive are our perceptions.” —George Berkeley

OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE UNVERSE and with our world is one of creator with creation—not merely in a mechanical or physical sense, as in building houses, roads and cities. I’m thinking in terms of the dynamics of quantum physics, the realm of preform where everything in held in “wave form” until it materializes into “particle form” in the simple action of being observed by a conscious being. 

Do Christmas and New Years exist outside of human consciousness?  For that matter, does anything exist outside of human consciousness? According to Biocentrism, there is an existential relationship between life, consciousness and physical reality. The world of “solid” form springs into visible existence the moment it is observed. A tree falling in the forest makes no sound without someone present who has the capacity to perceive the perturbed air molecules and interpret them as sound.  A candle’s flame of hot gas has no color or glow unless a functional pair of eyes are present to observe it and call it candlelight.   

This is the fascinating field of Biocentrism as explored and elucidated by Robert Lanza, MD with the assistance of Bob Berman.  From the introduction of their book BIOICENTRISM—How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe:

This book proposes a new perspective: that our current theories of the physical world don’t work, and can never be made to work, until they account for life and consciousness. This book proposes that, rather than a belated and minor outcome after billions of years of lifeless physical processes, life and consciousness are absolutely fundamental to our understanding of the universe. We call this new perspective biocentrism.

I will do my best to represent their tenacious explorations and resultant findings in a series of blog posts.  I hope you will enjoy this series and benefit by the work of these two critical thinkers.  There are seven “Principles of Biocentrism.”  I will take them one by one with each post. 

The First Principle of Biocentrism: “What we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness.”

Our science to date has failed to recognize those special properties of life that make it fundamental to material reality. This view of the world in which life and consciousness are the bottom line in understanding the larger Universe—biocentrism—revolves around the way a subjective experience, which we call consciousness, relates to a physical process. . . .

Some of the thrill that came with the announcement that the human genome had been mapped or the idea that we are close to understanding the first second of time after the Big Bang rests in our innate human desire for completeness and totality.

But most of these comprehensive theories fail to take into account one crucial factor: we are creating them. It is the biological creature that fashions the stories, that makes the observations, and that gives names to things. And therein lies the great expanse of our oversight, that science has not confronted the one thing that is at once most familiar and most mysterious: conscious awareness. As Emerson wrote in “Experience,” an essay that confronted the facile positivism of his age: “We have learned that we do not see directly, but mediately, and that we have no means of correcting these colored and distorting lenses which we are, or of computing the amount of their errors. Perhaps these subject-lenses have a creative power; perhaps there are no objects.”

CREATED BY LIFE FOR LIFE’S PURPOSES

The word biocentric simply means life-centered, which characterizes the creative design and purpose of the Universe and all its vast and multifaceted structure and content, both animate and inanimate.  In simple terms, the Universe is created by invisible Life to express Life through visible, material form.  In quantum terms, the Universe is created by Light as a dynamic mechanism for moving creating energy out of invisible, intangible wave-form and into visible, tangible particle-form.  Where we come into this dynamic equation is as a means on the ground floor of the Father’s House of Many Mansions for bearing the Light of Truth and bringing it to bear at the threshold of creativity where the invisible, intangible and inaudible become visible, tangible and audible.  In a word, we ground Consciousness for the Creator in the Heaven to create on the Earth—which was created as a womb for beauty to be born, to borrow a line from a hymn I shared in my Christmas Day message.

WE ARE THE LIGHT OF OUR WORLD 

My wife and I love to sit on the East bank of our beautiful lake and watch the sun set in the Western horizon, often glorified by clouds lighted and brilliantly colored by the rays of the sun.  On one occasion we observed how the sunlight, reflected off the surface of the waters, made a direct and separate path of light to each of us—not a single path of light, but two.  Then we remarked how each person on the boardwalk that evening had their own individual path of light from the setting sun.  This is also true for rainbows.  There are as many rainbows in a single sighting as there are human beings looking at what we might think is just one rainbow.  No two people see the same rainbow.  We each have our own.  Notice how the rainbow created in the spray of a lawn sprinkler moves with your movements.  It’s yours and nobody else’s. 

This gives me pause for deep consideration and meditation.  What does it mean?  What is this phenomenon telling me?  That I center a world?  That, like in the movie It’s A Wonderful Life, without me the world that I center would not exist, as though I had never been born—like with George Bailey’s wish his guardian angel Clarence granted him to show him how much his life meant and mattered to everyone in his world.  It’s a tear-jerker of a story for me every year, such a softy that I am.  Of course Clarence steals the show.  What really gets my eyes watering is the final scene where all the people in George’s world of care and service come to his rescue with so much love, generosity and robust appreciation.  That gets to me whenever and wherever I see it demonstrated. 

My life matters.  Now there’s an interesting and dynamic word.  Matters can have two meanings: counts as something and materializes.  My life counts a great deal to many, and it materializes as I live it.  It unfolds out of my consciousness moment by moment, day by day, year by year.  My living on Earth leaves a trail of forms, as well as relationships and friends, that came into manifestation and formed simply by reason of my presence and creativity in it.  I am responsible for a world that no one but I created—of course with the help of many other important people whom I’ve met in my journey—and that implies a shared consciousness, and a collective consciousness involving as many as draw near in creating a world in which to live together in community.  It’s a sobering thought when I stop to consider the implications, an obvious one being that I am not alone in this world.  We are one family of Man living on a relatively small planet adrift in a galaxy of heavenly bodies speeding through space and time.

Space and time?  What are space and time?  Do they really exist?  How do I know there is a vast cosmos “out there” set in motion by a “Big Bang” that allegedly occurred billions of years ago?  Years?  What is time?  How can the infinite be measured by the finite?  The ineffable by the effable?  Where does all this exist except in our own imagination, our own consciousness—two more interesting and dynamic words:  imagination is the ability of the mind to make images, and consciousness is a capacity with which to know.  They’re verbs, not nouns.  The Universe isn’t a “thing.” The Universe is a dynamic living organism, the nature of which scientists have only been able to speculate:

George Berkeley, for whom the campus and town were named, came to a similar conclusion: “The only things we perceive,” he would say, “are our perceptions.”

A biologist is at first glance perhaps an unlikely source for a new theory of the universe. But at a time when biologists believe they have discovered the “universal cell” in the form of embryonic stem cells, and some cosmologists predict that a unifying theory of the universe may be discovered in the next two decades, it is perhaps inevitable that a biologist finally seeks to unify existing theories of the “physical world” with those of the “living world.” What other discipline can approach it? In that regard, biology should really be the first and last study of science. It is our own nature that is unlocked by the humanly created natural sciences used to understand the universe.  (underscore added)

A deep problem lurks, too: we have failed to protect science against speculative theories that have so entered mainstream thinking that they now masquerade as fact. The “ether” of the nineteenth century; the “space-time” of Einstein; the “string theory” of the new millennium with new dimensions blowing up in different realms, and not only strings but “bubbles” shimmering down the byways of the universe are examples of this speculation. Indeed, unseen dimensions (up to one hundred in some theories) are now envisioned everywhere, some curled up like soda-straws at every point in space.

CONSCIOUSNESS AND LIFE

This brings us back to the quantum field out of which all forms emerge.  Consciousness and life, the very foundational realities that underlie the biological and chemical worlds scientists search and research, yet know nothing about but live to hopefully know what they are and how they tick before their time runs out.  Time: an illusionary convenience we invented to organize and schedule our calendars of events.  Space: an imaginary finite way of attempting to measure the infinitely eternal HERE an NOW.  

THEORIES ABOUND IN THE SCIENTIFIC MIND

Today’s preoccupation with unprovable physical “theories of everything” is a sacrilege to science itself, a strange detour from the purpose of the scientific method, whose bible has always decreed that we must question everything relentlessly and not worship what Bacon called “The Idols of the Mind.” Modern physics has become like Swift’s Kingdom of Laputa, flying precariously on an island above the Earth and indifferent to the world beneath. When science tries to resolve a theory’s conflicts by adding and subtracting dimensions to the universe like houses on a Monopoly board, dimensions unknown to our senses and for which not a shred of observational or experimental evidence exists, we need to take a time-out and examine our dogmas. And when ideas are thrown around with no physical backing and no hope of experimental confirmation one may wonder whether this can still be called science at all. “If you’re not observing,” says a relativity expert, Professor Tarun Biswas of the State University of New York, “there’s no point in coming up with theories.”

Absent the act of seeing, thinking, hearing—in short, awareness in its myriad aspects—what have we got?  We can believe and aver that there’s a universe out there even if all living creatures were nonexistent, but this idea is merely a thought and a thought requires a thinking organism. Without any organism, what if anything is really there?

For the moment, therefore, we’ll accept on a provisional level that what we’d clearly and unambiguously recognize as existence must begin with life and perception. Indeed, what could existence mean, absent consciousness of any kind?

. . . . This “Is it really there?” issue is ancient, and of course predates biocentrism, which makes no pretense about being the first to take a stance about it. Biocentrism, however, explains why one view and not the other must be correct. The converse is equally true: once one fully understands that there is no independent external universe outside of biological existence, the rest more or less falls into place.

We live, largely unaware, at the hub of creativity in a world that spins around us having materialized out of our collective consciousness.  This is one responsibility from which we cannot escape or run away from to some distant planet or moon.

We do not just have a consciousness.  We are consciousness itself, the capacity to know—in the biblical sense of that word as when Adam knew Eve and begot Cain and Able.  We are given the privilege and responsibility to engage in intercourse between Heaven and Earth to beget life forms that reflect the harmony and beauty of Heaven inherent in the many dimensions and frequencies of Light.  Through our eyes and consciousness the Creator can see and enjoy Creation—perhaps even bring it out of wave-form into particle-form where it can be seen and enjoyed. 

My friend in Loveland, Colorado, Jerry Kvasnicka, expressed this privilege with passion in a response to one of my blog articles:   

We are surely the lucky ones, to be incarnate in this body of flesh and able to sample all of sights, smells, sounds, tastes and other physical sensations combined with the thoughts, feelings and the ineffable essences that well up from the deepest recesses of the soul, all of which may visit us daily as we walk from place to place on this sacred Earth.   

I welcome any comments and thoughts you may wish to share.  Until my next post in this series, I wish for you a very Happy New Year and a healthy 2022.

Be love.  Be loved

Anthony 

tpal70@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Status

Masculine-Feminine Energy, part III: A Balancing Act

Masculine and Feminine forces balance one another in the “Creating Universe” of Walter Russell.  In this third post of the current series, he expands his consideration of electricity and magnetism to include the balancing act performed by the masculine and feminine forces.  I shall excerpt this chapter in its entirety, along with graphics, from his 1927 signature work THE UNIVERSAL ONE.

(Note: you can open the graphics in a new tab by right clicking on the image for a drop down window and a bit larger image. Also, all underscores are mine.)  

CHAPTER IV

POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ELECTRICITY

Again it must be repeated that in this universe of motion-in-equilibrium all energy equalizes itself in two equal and opposite swings of the cosmic pendulum, no matter where in the cycle those opposites of motion appear.

The cosmic pendulum swings forever between positive and negative electricity, eternally transferring its constant of energy from one dimension to another, but never changing that constant.

The opposing energies of the two swings, added together, make one equalized unit of the universal reproductive constant.

More than this, these opposing swings are simultaneously equalized at corresponding points in each of the ten octaves.

Electric action and its magnetic resisting reactive flow are simultaneous and in equilibrium at all times.

Positive electricity is an endothermic, contractive force which is actively absorbing a comparatively large quantity of generative light units of heat which raises its potential, and is expelling a smaller number of them, devitalized into magnetic radio-active emanations, thus slightly lowering its potential.

Negative electricity is an exothermic, expansive force which is reactively absorbing a small quantity of generative light units of heat which slightly raises its potential, and is expelling a greater number of them, devitalized into magnetic radio-active emanations, thus lowering its potential.

In the term “negative electricity,” the word “electricity” is used in the generic sense, as the inclusive word “man” is used to represent both sexes.

Electro-positive systems are preponderantly charging systems, while electro-negative systems are preponderantly discharging systems.

Charging systems are in the positive half of the octave, the tones of which are generatively dominant. These systems are forcing magnetism out, and because of this they grow more compact. They therefore grow smaller, tone by tone to the fourth tone of the octave. Their atomic volume lessens and their density increases as magnetism is squeezed out, just as a sponge lessens in volume and increases in density as water is squeezed out.

Now must it be clearly understood that magnetism, expelled by electricity from within a charging system, did not enter that system as magnetism or as negative electricity. It entered as positive electricity and became devitalized into negative electricity by nucleal absorption of its positive charge. It was then expelled from the higher inner pressure to the lower outer pressure of the system.

Discharging systems are in the negative half of the octave, the generative tones of which are weakened. Weakening genero-activity results in weakening radio-activity which causes the systems to grow less compact. They, therefore, grow larger, tone by tone, from the fourth to the master tone. Their volume increases and their density decreases as magnetism is allowed to return, just as a sponge increases in volume and decreases in density as water is allowed to return.

By a study of the charts, pages 17, 83 (See chart), it will be seen that when magnetism returns to negative systems it does not return as negative electricity. It impacts against the inertial plane between itself and the system, is regenerated and reconverted into negative electricity after it has made its centripetal journey to the apex of its spiral orbit with ever increasing pressure, and started on its centrifugal run with lowering pressure back to the inertial plane.

Charging systems are simultaneously discharging but their positive charges become increasingly preponderant and dominant until the consequent increase of potential changes the dimensions of the system. They then appear to be another substance.


Discharging systems are simultaneously charging, and their negative discharges become decreasingly dominant until the consequent lowering of potential changes their dimensions. When they have readjusted their various dimensions, they in their turn appear to be another substance.

Charging systems are preponderantly generative, male systems, while discharging systems are preponderantly radiative, female systems. Charging systems are exactly balanced by discharging systems.

For example, exercise discharges energy. It is thus a female activity. At the same time it triggers an increase in muscle mass, a male activity of contracting energy, which in turn radiates discharged energy, a female activity — and the cycle is ongoing, one force giving itself to and empowering the other.  My young son used to say “Let’s go for a walk to get some energy” — and he was right-on.  While we expend energy exercising we increase the potential of our core energy. One can also think of this as the “Breath of Life,” which is twofold in its function and activity: inhaling and exhaling.  But it’s one breath.

TEN OCTAVES OF SEVEN TONES 

All systems are divided into seven tones of energy.

One charging tone, and its exact mate in a discharging tone, balances as one unit constant of energy.

There are four exactly equal unit constants of energy in each octave.

An octave is one universal reproductive constant. Ten octaves constitute one cycle.

Tone 1+ is a charging system exactly balanced in all its periodicities by tone 1−.

Likewise tone 2+ is balanced by tone 2−, and tone 3+ by 3−. Tone 4± is a double tone which is neither positive nor negative. It is bi-sexual.

These seven tones of four unit constants make up the total universal constant of energy which is omnipresent throughout the entirety of this universe of Mind.

Consider, for an example of positive charge attracting positive charge, the sun of our solar system.

It is the nucleal center of this system, the point of maximum positive charge. It is therefore the high potential point of the system.

Consider this planet. It is a doubly charged mass, which means that it is both positive and negative.

Its preponderance of positive charge is always toward the nucleal center, which means that it is always toward the light.

Its preponderance of negative discharge is always away from the nucleal center, which means that it is always away from the light.

The positive charge of this planet is therefore preponderant in that portion which is in daylight and the negative discharge is preponderant in that portion which is night.

The daylight portion of the planet is generative and endothermic, which means active, contractive and heat absorbing.

The daylight portion is that in which the potential is increasing, where flowers open their petals and relive, where life is regenerative and wide awake.

The dark portion of the planet is radiative and exothermic, which means inactive, expansive and heat expelling.

The dark portion is that in which the potential is lowering, where flowers close their petals and become dormant, where life is devitalized and fast asleep.

Well, not all of life is dormant at night, as one reader pointed out in a recent comment. There are flowers that open at night only. The Moonflower comes to mind, as well as Four O’Clocks, the Evening Primrose and Casablanca Lily.  One may well explore as to whether nighttime bloomers are female plants and daytime bloomers male. All flowers are Mother Nature’s creations using Father Sun’s energy. Unlike in man’s world, there is no competition in the Natural World of the Creating Universe. There is only cooperation and co-creation.

Russell explains how the light rays and heat of the sun do not travel to the planets directly but pass trough a very dark and cold space on their way to the surface of our earth, for example. In other words, we do not feel the heat of the sun directly. This is fascinatingly rectifying of common belief and orthodox thinking.  

Just so with all of the other planets.

The positive charge moves around them as they revolve, ever keeping as near as possible to their positive nucleus, the sun.

It is a well known fact that high potential discharges into lower potential.

Consider the radiative rays of the sun as negative light units expelled by positive contraction, which forces them to seek lower pressures and lower potential.

It might be argued that these negative rays are attracted by the positive charge of the daylight portion of the planet.

Consider the law of pressures as stated elsewhere which says that between any two masses is a line or plane of equalized pressures.

As the light units which constitute the rays circle spirally and centrifugally around the sun in their search for lower pressures exactly as this mass of light units which is our planet circles around the sun, they continue to expand and become increasingly negative the farther they recede from the sun.

It must be interpolated right here that “light rays” do not proceed directly from the sun to a planet in straight lines. They follow the orbital lines of lowering pressures exactly as does this planet.

All direction is curved and every curve is a part of an orbit.

When the light units which we familiarly term “light rays,” reach the inertial plane of equalized pressures between the mass of the sun and the mass of this planet, their expanded masses impact against it and continue beyond it in an ever increasing state of solidity.

These expanded, negative particles which have reproduced themselves in transit then become positively charged as they impact with, and plunge gravitatively through the pressures which increasingly rise as they near the mass of this planet.

Eventually they impact against the planet as positive charge attracted toward another positive charge. The potential of each is increased by this impact and the heat generated by magnetic resistance to the impact is absorbed as accumulated energy until it becomes devitalized and is released by the turn of the planet away from the light.

For another example, consider the familiar lightning flash which we know as “forked lightning.” Lightning is a highly generative, positive charge seeking its own pressure and potential.

The maximum positively charged high potential and high pressure of this planet is that part which is nearest its center.

Lightning and all the forks of lightning are gravitative. They always seek the planet. Never do they proceed in the opposite direction toward negative discharge except in rare instances where a minor charge leaps upward toward a cloud of higher positive charge, or higher potential.

This latter effect is exactly analogous to that of an iron nail leaping upward toward a magnet.

Lightning seeking its own potential and an apple falling to the ground are effects of exactly the same cause. Gravitation is the cause of each.

Each is taking a “short cut across lots,” through intervening pressures, to find its equal pressure.

Later it will be seen that the cause of rotation and revolution, together with all of their respective variations and periodicities, can only be solved through the understanding that positive charge attracts positive charge, and negative discharge repels both positive charge and negative discharge.

Well, there you have it – or maybe you don’t and have to read it a couple of times, as I had to. In my next post, I will attempt to apply all this newfound knowledge to our experience and handling of our masculine-feminine creating energy.  This will admittedly be a challenge — and I do have a dawning sensing as to how I will proceed in such a delicate thinking process, especially in the wake of a recent in-depth and insightful conversation my wife and I had with one of our sons and his wife during their richly nourishing visit from Ashland, Oregon, this week — a couple who, for me, exemplify the grounding of masculine-feminine energy in the dance they do together in their shared creative field. We shall see how this unfolds in my final post of this series. Until then, 

Be love. Be Loved.

Anthony 

Masculine-Feminine Energy, Part II: Opposing Forces

It is not the negative “charge” of the female which is attracted to the positive charge of the male, but rather the positive charge of each attracts the other.” (Walter Russell)

In his comprehensive work and captivating book THE UNIVERSAL ONE, Walter Russell lays out a scientific foundation for understanding how the “Creating Universe” works energetically. In sharing excerpts from his book, my hopes and intentions are to offer insight into the way we see and experience out sexuality. We incorrectly identify with our male and female genders, saying “I am a man” or “I am a woman.” However, these are not our identities. On the physical plane of life, the words “male” and “female” identify the gender of our human capacities. But we are not our human capacities. We are Human Beings inhabiting these earthen forms, endowed with mental, emotional and spiritual capacities for the expression of our creativity.  

Russell says we are “creating” human beings, and the energy that empowers our creativity is twofold in nature: masculine and feminine.  However, it is One energy, not two different forces. It is the energy of the Universal One — what Russell calls “Mind” (with a capital “M”) throughout his book, and what we have come to call “God.” This energy moves in two different and opposing directions: inward and outward, toward and away from the apex of a spiraling vortex of creating energy.  On the spiritual level, the words “masculine” and “feminine” identify the nature of our singular creating energy. Note that I use the singular “energy” with a hyphen between the words masculine and feminine to call attention to this reality of singleness. 

In this post, I share Walter Russell’s explanation of the opposing manner in which this singular energy moves and interacts within itself as it creates and dismantles form through a creative process. I find this explanation, and all of Russell’s thought processes and concepts, both fascinating and rectifying. I hope you do as well. (Tip: if you don’t understand what he’s saying, just keep moving as he’ll say it another way the next few lines.) So, with no further ado, I give you the genius himself, Walter Russell. 

TWO APPARENTLY OPPOSITE FORCES

Walter Russell

It must be remembered that electricity is the attractive force and that magnetism is the repellant force. The attractive force attracts only attractive force, which is itself.

Electricity attracts electricity. Electricity does not attract the repellant force.  Neither does electricity repel the repellant force.

On the other hand, magnetism, which is the repellant force, does nothing but perform its function of repelling. It does not attract itself. A repellant force cannot be an attractive force, nor can the attractive force be a repellant force.

Each can but fill its own office; one attracts, and thus gathers light units together into an appearance of solids of matter. The other repels, and thus pries light units apart into the dissolution of solids of matter, into gases and vapors.

Magnetism is that force within the universal Mind substance which tends to preserve the Oneness of universal uniformity.

Magnetism desires a formless and dimensionless universe, just as electricity desires a universe of form and dimension.

Magnetism prevents the apparent separation, or division, of divine Mind into parts as electricity attempts this apparent separation.

All the force of electricity is exerted in the attempt to create the illusions of form and dimension.

All the force of magnetism is exerted in the attempt to destroy all illusion, all form and all dimension.

Neither force completely fulfils its desire, for each partially thwarts the other.

The energy of magnetism is the elastic energy of expansion, a straining energy ever pushing toward the inertial line of equalized pressures which lies between any two masses, white the energy of electricity is ever pulling toward the pulsing heart, the gravitational nucleus of every mass.

ELASTICITY

One of the outstanding characteristics of motion is elasticity which also appears to be an attribute of the One substance.

Elasticity is due to opposition.

Elasticity is that force developed in the One substance of Mind as a reaction to the action of electricity.

It is this quality of elasticity which gives magnetism its rebounding force.

This elastic, magnetic reaction which is forever and eternally pressing against electric action, is that force which surely restores all opposed motion to inertial equilibrium.

Imagine electricity as a compressed spring, with magnetism eternally ready to take advantage of any let-up in the contractive force which is holding it in compression, no matter how slight a relaxation that may be.

If one could imagine such a thing as an absolutely complete and sudden withdrawal of all electric contractive energy, the instantaneous response from this elastic counter pressure would cause a cosmic explosion which would instantly destroy all appearance of form. The universe would then be one of equalized pressures, and opposed motion would be at an end.

This sudden expansion is exactly what occurs when man combines two or more elements which desire to get away from each other because they are tonally too far removed from each other to be possible mates. The elasticity of magnetism takes advantage of the sudden letup in the process of generation and rebounds so swiftly that it instantly tears apart form which otherwise might take a million years to disintegrate.

It is this force of elasticity in magnetism that is constant in its resistance to any appearance of integration into any form whatsoever.

ELECTROMAGNETIC OPPOSITION

Magnetism is radiative and repellant, as electricity is gravitative and attractive. Magnetism repels, electricity attracts.

That which electricity integrates through gravitation, magnetism disintegrates through radiation.

Magnetism is the brake upon the wheels of electricity resisting its generation of higher potential and registering that resistance in heat.

Electricity is the accelerator which speeds magnetic radiation, the expansion of which is registered in cold.

Electricity and magnetism are actually opposing forces which leap away from each other in exactly opposite directions.

Forces which depart one from the other do not attract each other.

Opposing forces oppose each other.

To say that positive charge and negative discharge attract each other is to say that electricity and magnetism attract each other.

This would be equivalent to saying that centripetal force attracts centrifugal force, or that generation attracts degeneration, or that a charging body attracts a discharging one.

One might as appropriately say that life attracts death.

Electricity and magnetism are opposites, and opposites move in opposite directions.

One is accustomed to thinking that male, which is preponderantly positive, attracts female which is preponderantly negative.

It is not the negative “charge” of the female which is attracted to the positive charge of the male, but rather the positive charge of each attracts the other.

In youth, when the attraction of opposite sexes is at its maximum, the positive charge of each sex is at its maximum.

In age the negative discharge increases, the disintegrating magnetic force dominates, the positive charge decreases, and as a result the attraction of each sex for its opposite decreases until it disappears and repulsion takes its place.

The apparent attraction of each action to its reaction is due to the desire of the active force within each for accumulation, and the consequent continuance of the evolving idea of itself through that accumulation.

When action is preponderant as positive charge, form of idea evolves. When reaction is dominant as negative discharge, form devolves. The record of the idea of both action and reaction is registered in inertia.

The chemist, when breaking up compounds, is accustomed to seeing a negative element seek the positive pole, and a positive element seek the negative pole.

He would know better how to interpret this if he would think of his elements in terms of sex, and also consider the process of regeneration of negative discharge by impact against the inertial plane between a discharging and a charging mass.

When the positive charges of negative reactions are attracted to positive poles, centrifugally dominant force is conquered by centripetally dominant force. The negative reaction then becomes a positive action. The equalization causes reproduction. The union of an action with its reaction is always followed by the reproduction of separate actions and reactions. These reproduced actions and reactions are rebounds of the union.

Magnetism opposes electricity in its desire to transform this universe into one solid, motionless, non-elastic ball of positive electricity. Electricity opposes magnetism in its desire to transform the universe into one of equalized pressures where opposites disappear into dimensionless non-opposition, Positive electricity is preponderantly electric. Positive charge attracts positive charge.

Negative electricity is dominantly magnetic. Negative discharge repels both negative and positive charge, for both are electric and magnetism repels electricity.

Again must it be written down that electricity and magnetism are not opposites, nor are they two forces. There are no opposites of anything in this universe of the One Thing.

Mind is the One substance. Thinking Mind is the One force.

If Mind were not a thinking substance the universe would be without force. It would be without life. It would indeed be a dead universe.

Thinking is a positive action. To every action there is an equal reaction which is the opposite or negative matrix, of that action.

The minus charge of the reactive negative matrix is equal to the plus charge of the active positive form of idea.

The positive form of an idea is stored in inertia as a negative matrix of that form.

There is but One active force of thinking Mind and that is the father force. Man calls it electricity.

Electricity appears as the first action of the process of thinking and disappears, like temperature, in motion-in-inertia.

Electricity therefore has no existence. It belongs to motion, and not to substance.

It is desire which causes the One substance to appear to change in state as it performs its function of recording form of idea.

Opposites are born of attempted division of unity or Oneness.

The very first action which attempts division of unity develops the reactionary apparent opposite reaction which opposes that attempted division.

The father force, acting upon the desire of Mind to create, finds that as Mind is the only substance, idea and its form must be developed out of that One substance of Mind.

The father force which is the image making faculty of Mind, proceeds to create idea and then to fashion the form of that idea out of the One substance.

The opposing magnetic force is then born to prevent the fashioning of the substance of Mind into form. For a time it vainly opposes such formation, but eventually it succeeds.

Electricity and magnetism are the two major dimensions of the universal constant of Mind.

Therefore the beginning of creation is the beginning of an attempted separation of the One substance by the One force of the substance.

The very attempt to divide the One substance gives the appearance of, but does not make, two substances.

It only develops two equal and opposing states of motion which man calls “forces.” It but creates two illusions.

Part of the energy used in the attempted division into two is given to each, and the sum total of this energy is the exact amount of the energy of the One.

Electricity and magnetism are attributes of motion only and as separate entities they are but illusions of the substance of matter.

Form, or solidity of matter, is an electromagnetic record of states of motion. Therefore solidity of matter is but an illusion which is measurable by electro- magnetic dimensions which, in themselves, are but illusions.

Out of the father force then, is born the mother force, which man calls magnetism. The symbolism of the creation of Eve out of Adam is basically sound.

The father force creates all idea and gives it the appearance of form; but that idea cannot be perpetually held as idea in the appearance of form, nor can it be reproduced without the union of the father with the mother force from which the father force has parted and with which it makes an equilibrium of unity.

Both idea and the form of idea return to motion-in-inertia as memory and remain there for a time as formless idea.

A union of the father force with the mother force brings it back again into the form of idea, for the united energies of these apparent opposites make the total required by the One.

Just so with positive electricity and negative electricity. They are not two forces. They are but two aspects of One force attempting to separate, each by its own opposite method, thus becoming two forces.

They never succeed in so doing. Each is charged with the other, permeated more or less in accord with its periodicity.

I love the dynamic creative tension he describes between these two opposing aspects of the One force.  I hope I am making us think outside the traditional box of scientific knowledge.  In my next post we’ll see how these two opposing forces balance one another. Until then,

Be love. Be loved.

Anthony

 

Tag Cloud