Creating the New Earth Together

Archive for the ‘Space and time’ Category

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: In a Participatory Universe, A Watched Pot Doesn’t Boil

“Et les étoiles d’or, légions infinies,
A voix haute, à voix basse, avec mille harmonies”  (Victor Hugo)

   ♦ ◊ ♦  

Ecstasy,  by Victor Hugo

I was alone beside the sea, one starry night. With not a single wave or sail in sight.  Past the world’s limits stretched my eye, And the forests and the mountains, with nature Seemed united in questioning, in vast yet mumbled sound, the billows of the ocean, and the splendor of the sky.

And the infinite legions of golden stars, had voices loud and deep, and harmonies over a thousand bars.  They replied, tipping low their radiant crowns of fame And the blue waters, which none could govern or arrest, Replied, tipping low the foam upon their crest: ‘The Lord, our great Creator! His glory we proclaim!’

♦ ◊ ♦ 

AS AN ENGLISH LITERATURE STUDENT, I loved poetry that took me to the heavens. I wrote my first and only sonnet about “A myriad of worlds and worlds of heavenly dust, In splendor clad with awe-inspiring grace.”  We had to memorize this poem by Victor Hugo, in French, and all I can recall today is the caption under the picture above.  I found a translation of this first line of the second stanza on Google search. I just had to share this fond memory from seminary days. 

 There is nothing more demonstrative of the magnificent perfection of God’s Creation than the Universe of stars and galaxies. The only thing that surpasses it in wonder is the capacity we have to encompass a living image of it in our consciousness . . . and the miracle of eyesight that brings it all into our brains, where alone we can know it as being real. The Universe is specifically designed and balanced to support life and consciousness. 

The word Universe itself means to turn together as one.  The Universe is not many separate things.  It is one Creation whose sole purpose is to provide a morphic field and a material platform for Life to abound and bring forth its vast array of living forms—all of which spring forth from out of a microcosmic quantum world of energy waves and light frequencies that pop out transformed into the particles that make up the vast Cosmos and the macrocosmic world in which we live.  I stand in awe before the God of Creation, whose “Universe of stars is but a cloak to Thee,” to borrow a line from a friend’s powerful baritone solo “How shall we give Thee glory?”  How, indeed?

♦ ◊ ♦ 

Moving on in this series, we come to the eighth chapter of Robert Lanza and Bob Berman’s fascinating book BIOCENTRISM — How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.  Having read it many times over, I still ponder over the experiments that prove beyond any shadow of doubt that the physical world is observer-dependent for its existence.  Without the presence of consciousness and life, the Universe itself would not exist, for it is Life via Consciousness that creates the Universe and not the other way around, Darwinism notwithstanding.  This is the essence of Biocentrism.  I will share a few excerpts from this chapter for your pleasurable reading . . . and mental stretching.  (All underscores were added for emphasis)

THIS “PARTICIPATORY UNIVERSE” 

Quantum theory has unfortunately become a catch-all phrase for trying to prove various kinds of New Age nonsense. It’s unlikely that the authors of the many books making wacky claims of time travel or mind control, and who use quantum theory as “proof” have the slightest knowledge of physics or could explain even the rudiments of quantum theory. The popular 2004 film, What the Bleep Do We Know? is a good case in point. The movie starts out claiming quantum theory has revolutionized our thinking—which is true enough—but then, without explanation or elaboration, goes on to say that it proves people can travel into the past or “choose which reality you want.”

Quantum theory says no such thing. Quantum theory deals with probabilities, and the likely places particles may appear, and likely actions they will take. And while, as we shall see, bits of light and matter do indeed change behavior depending on whether they are being observed, and measured particles do indeed amazingly appear to influence the past behavior of other particles, this does not in any way mean that humans can travel into their past or influence their own history.

Given the widespread generic use of the term quantum theory, plus the paradigm-changing tenets of biocentrism, using quantum theory as evidence might raise eyebrows among the skeptical. For this reason, it’s important that readers have some genuine understanding of quantum theory’s actual experiments—and can grasp the real results rather than the preposterous claims so often associated with it. For those with a little patience, this chapter can provide a life-altering understanding of the latest version of one of the most famous and amazing experiments in the history of physics.

I will not attempt to detail the actual experiments, which include the famous “double-slit” experiment that altered forever the scientific view of light—and everything else.  I will simply relate the eye-opening results and discoveries of these experiments.  Basically, the many scientists who performed the varied and progressively complex experiments over three-quarters of a century all came to the same history-altering conclusions, which I will share in excerpts.  But first, it’s interesting how this all got started.

It all really started early in the twentieth century when physicists were still struggling with a very old question—whether light is made of particles called photons or whether instead they are waves of energy. Isaac Newton believed it was made of particles. But by the late nineteenth century, waves seemed more reasonable. In those early days, some physicists presciently and correctly thought that even solid objects might have a wave nature as well.

The final conclusion of the experiments is that light is both wave and particle.  Waves, like those produced by two pebbles tossed upon the calm surface of a pond at the same time, meet each other and produce places of higher and lower crests. Some waves reinforce each other or, if one’s crest meets another’s trough, they cancel out at that spot.  These were called “interference patterns” in the experiments. This was one way the wave function of light was determined.  The second way was how the beam of light passed through both slots in the barrier board, unlike particles that passed through one or the other slit but not both.

So this early-twentieth-century result of an interference pattern, which can only be caused by waves, showed physicists that light is a wave or at least acts that way when this experiment is performed. The fascinating thing is that when solid physical bodies like electrons were used, they got exactly the same result. Solid particles have a wave nature too! So, right from the get-go, the double-slit experiment yielded amazing information about the nature of reality. Solid objects have a wave nature!

Now, for a look at the graphic details of the experiments, you’ll have to obtain a copy of the book and read how the complex experiments were performed, as I myself am still having a challenge following the details and connecting all the dots—and the graphics are simply too many for a blog this size.  The “weirdness” of the observations and conclusions did indeed entertain me and stretch my mental capacity.  The wave-and-particle nature of light is fascinating enough.  

Unfortunately, or fortunately, this was just the appetizer. Few realized that true strangeness was only beginning. 

The first oddity happens when just one photon or electron is allowed to fly through the apparatus at a time. After enough have gone through and been individually detected, this same interference pattern emerges. But how can this be? With what is each of those electrons or photons interfering? How can we get an interference pattern when there’s only one indivisible object in there at a time?  Somehow, these individual photons add up to an interference pattern! 

There has never been a truly satisfactory answer for this. Wild ideas keep emerging. Could there be other electrons or photons next door” in a parallel universe, from another experimenter doing the same thing? Could their electrons be interfering with ours? That’s so far-fetched that few believe it. 

The usual interpretation of why we see an interference pattern is that photons or electrons have two choices when they encounter the double slit. They do not actually exist as real entities in real places until they are observed, and they aren’t observed until they hit the final detection barrier. So when they reach the slits, they exercise their probabilistic freedom of taking both choices. Even though actual electrons or photons are indivisible, and never split themselves under any conditions whatsoever, their existence as probability waves are another story. Thus, what go “through the slit” are not actual entities but just probabilities. The probability waves of the individual photons interfere with themselves!  When enough have gone through, we see the overall interference pattern as all probabilities congeal into actual entities making impacts and being observed—as waves.  

Sure it’s weird, but this, apparently, is how reality works. And this is just the very beginning of quantum weirdness. Quantum theory, as we mentioned in the last chapter, has a principle called complementarity, which says that we can observe objects to be one thing or another—or have one position or property or another—but never both. It depends on what one is looking for and what measuring equipment is used. . . .

It turns out that the mere act of measurement, of learning the path of each photon, destroyed the photon’s freedom to remain blurry and undefined and take both paths until it reached the barriers. Its “wave-function” must have collapsed at our measuring device, . . . as it instantly “chose” to become a particle and go through one slit or the other. Its wave nature was lost as soon as it lost its blurry probabilistic not-quite-real state. But why should the photon have chosen to collapse its wave-function? How did it know that we, the observer, could learn which slit it went through? . . . .  We’re back to quantum theory’s complementarity—that you can measure and learn just one of a pair of characteristics but never both at the same time. If you fully learn about one, you will know nothing about the other.

 QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT OF TWIN PARTICLES

Okay, let’s try something else.  In nature, as we saw in the last chapter, there are entangled particles or bits of light (or matter) that were born together and therefore share a wave-function according to quantum theory. They can fly apart—even across the width of the galaxy—and yet they still retain this connection, this knowledge of each other. If one is meddled with in any way so that it loses its “anything’s possible” nature and has to decide instantly to materialize with, say, a vertical polarization, its twin will then instantaneously materialize too, and with a horizontal polarity. If one becomes an electron with an up spin, the twin will too, but with a down spin. They’re eternally linked in a complementary way.

After more, and more complex, experiments with this quantum entanglement of twin particles, their conclusions were: 

It’s our knowledge alone with which the photons or electrons seem concerned. This alone influences their actions . . . .  Okay, this is bizarre. Yet these results happen every time, without fail. They’re telling us that an observer determines physical behavior of ‘external’ objects. . . .  It doesn’t matter how we set up the experiment. Our mind and its knowledge or lack of it is the only thing that determines how these bits of light or matter behave.

It forces us, too, to wonder about space and time. Can either be real if the twins act on information before it happens, and across distances instantaneously as if there is no separation between them? 

Again and again, observations have consistently confirmed the observer-dependent effects of quantum theory. In the past decade, physicists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology have carried out an experiment that, in the quantum world, is equivalent to demonstrating that a watched pot doesn’t boil. “It seems,” said Peter Coveney, a researcher there, “that the act of looking at an atom prevents it from changing.” (Theoretically, if a nuclear bomb were watched intently enough, it would not explode, that is, if you could keep checking its atoms every million trillionth of a second. This is yet another experiment that supports the theory that the structure of the physical world, and of small units of matter and energy in particular, are influenced by human observation.) . . . .  In the last couple of decades, quantum theorists have shown, in principle, that an atom cannot change its energy state as long as it is being continuously observed.

Of course, experiments were conducted to prove this principle true, which led to this conclusion: 

However, when the researchers kept checking the atoms every four milliseconds with a brief pulse of light from a laser, the atoms never made it to the higher energy state, despite the force driving them toward it. It would seem that the process of measurement gives the atoms “a little nudge,” forcing them back down to the lower energy state—in effect, resetting the system to zero. This behavior has no analog in the classical world of everyday sense awareness and is apparently a function of observation. . . .

. . . . Eugene Wigner, one of the twentieth century’s greatest physicists, stated that it is “not possible to formulate the laws of [physics] in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness [of the observer].” So when quantum theory implies that consciousness must exist, it tacitly shows that the content of the mind is the ultimate reality, and that only an act of observation can confer shape and form to reality—from a dandelion in a meadow to sun, wind, and rain.

And so, a 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.

♦ ◊ ♦

There are many implications in what I’ve just shared.  The one that comes up for me is based on the Creation story in Genesis that tells how we are each made in the image and likeness of our Creator, all sharing the same wave-function of Divine Being.  We may not share the same vibration as humans, but as beings we are each and all together vibrating at the same frequency of Love.  That makes us entangled partners in the quantum realm of Spirit, in the Heaven of this Earth.  We share an inseparable bond, and what I do impacts everyone else.  So, take care.  Until my next post,

Be love.  Be loved. 

Anthony

tpal70@gmail.com      

Biocentrism 2: “Where Is The Universe?” Part 1

   The Holy Place of Creation

FROM MY READERS:  Neil Salka writes:  Some heavy duty thoughts you are writing about. Thank you. Love getting your posts.  In the last one about biocentrism towards the end, you write: “one fully understands that there is no independent external universe outside of biological existence,…..” now that thought alone stirs up in my mind: are you stating that we are actually/essentially dead outside of ‘biological existence’?  Dead in consciousness therefore no ‘life’ as we understand it? If there is no biological existence, what or where is life and consciousness? and then instead of: what happened in the second after big bang? it might be better to ask: where did my consciousness (life) come from? so life/consciousness came FIRST and then the body/biological existence. . . . first the Heaven, then the earth. Is heaven simply consciousness?

Great questions, Neil, both of which stop scientists in their tracks . . . and great segue to this post. Let’s explore your questions.

For as far back as I can remember, I’ve had a vivid awareness of being an immortal spiritual being. This awareness emphasizes itself as I move my arms to reach out and my legs to walk — presently as I move my fingers across the keyboard typing out the thoughts emerging through my mind while composing this blog post. 

Having studied the anatomy and physiology of the physical body, I am aware of the complex chemical, neurological, muscular, circulatory and skeletal systems involved in moving the various parts of my anatomy.  They work quite smoothly and cooperatively together with instantaneous precision in finding the right keys to type a word, a sentence, a complete thought.  That being so, I know that my brain does not decide nor originate my body’s movements.  It is clearly used in the process, along with all the other anatomical parts — and there are habitual patterns of movement developed simply by repetitive practice, such as in piano playing and typing.  But the brain is not the author nor originator of my movements.  The author and creator of my body’s movements is the immortal being that I AM incarnate in this earthen form — and, believe it or not, this has been proven scientifically.  Read on. 

In the following excerpt from Dr. Robert Lanza’s¹ book BIOCENTRISM,² he delves into the illusion of separate internal and external realities, which brings us to a consideration of the second principle of biocentrism — which I will let the author explain and develop in his own words.

♦ ◊ ♦

The Second Principle of Biocentrism: Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined.  They are different sides of the same coin and cannot be separated.”

First . . . simple logic must be used to answer a most basic question: where is the universe located?  It is here that we will need to deviate from conventional thinking and shared assumptions, some of which are inherent in language itself.

All of us are taught since earliest childhood that the universe can be fundamentally divided into two entities: ourselves, and that which is outside of us. This seems logical and apparent.  What is “me” is commonly defined by what I can control.  I can move my fingers, but I cannot wiggle your toes.  This dichotomy, then, is based largely on manipulation. The dividing line between self and non-self is generally taken to be the skin, strongly implying that I am this body and nothing else.

Of course when a chunk of the body has vanished, as some unfortunate amputees have experienced, one still feels oneself to be just as “present” and “here” as before, and not subjectively diminished in the least. This logic could be carried forth easily enough until one arrives at solely the brain itself perceiving itself as “me”—because if a human head could be maintained with an artificial heart and the rest, it too would reply “Here!” if its name were shouted at roll call. 

Now, this is a rather simplified, as well as divisive, description of “me” versus “you” and everything “out there” not enveloped within my skin.  We know, or at lease believe, that all is one and that there is no energetic separation between the multifaceted and diverse forms and entities in the Universe—and there is only apparent separation between the outer borders of physical forms in the Universe.  The question this doctor raises in his book is “Where is the Universe?” Where does it exist as far as we are concerned and aware?  According to the principles of Biocentrism, the Universe exists solely in the back of our cognitive brains, projected there by our eyes via the complex workings of the visual cortex.  

WHERE ARE THE SENSATIONS OF LIFE?

We can start with everything visual that is currently being perceived all around us — this book you are holding, for example. Language and custom say that it all lies outside us in the external world. Yet we’ve already seen that nothing can be perceived that is not already interacting with our consciousness, which is why biocentric axiom number one is that nature or the so-called external world must be correlative with consciousness. One doesn’t exist without the other. What this means is that when we do not look at the Moon the Moon effectively vanishes-which, subjectively, is obvious enough. If we still think of the Moon and believe that it’s out there orbiting the Earth, or accept that other people are probably watching it, all such thoughts are still mental constructs. The bottom-line issue here is if no consciousness existed at all, in what sense would the Moon persist, and in what form?

So what is it that we see when we observe nature? The answer in terms of image-location and neural mechanics is actually more straightforward than almost any other aspect of biocentrism. Because the images of the trees, grass, the book you’re holding, and everything else that’s perceived is real and not imaginary, it must be physically happening in some location. Human physiology texts answer this without ambiguity. Although the eye and retina gather photons that deliver their payloads of bits of the electromagnetic force, these are channeled through heavy-duty cables straight back until the actual perception of images themselves physically occurs in the back of the brain, augmented by other nearby locations, in special sections that are as vast and labyrinthine as the hallways of the Milky Way, and contain as many neurons as there are stars in the galaxy. This, according to human physiology texts, is where the actual colors, shapes, and movement “happen.” This is where they are perceived or cognized.

If you consciously try to access that luminous, energy-filled, visual part of the brain, you might at first be frustrated; you might tap the back of your skull and feel a particularly vacuous sense of nothingness. But that’s because it was an unnecessary exercise: you’re already accessing the visual portion of the brain with every glance you take. Look now, at anything. Custom has told us that what we see is “out there,” outside ourselves, and such a viewpoint is fine and necessary in terms of language and utility, as in “Please pass the butter that’s over there.” But make no mistake: the visual image of that butter, that is, the butter itself, actually exists only inside your brain. That is its location. It is the only place visual images are perceived and cognized.

Some may imagine that there are two worlds, one “out there” and a separate one being cognized inside the skull. But the “two worlds” model is a myth. Nothing is perceived except the perceptions themselves, and nothing exists outside of consciousness. Only one visual reality is extant, and there it is. Right there.

The “outside world” is, therefore, located within the brain or mind. Of course, this is so astounding for many people, even if it is obvious to those who study the brain, that it becomes possible to over-think the issue and come up with attempted refutations. “Yeah, but what about someone born blind?” “And what about touch; if things aren’t out there, how can we feel them?”

In the previous chapter, the author describes the tactile perception of a “solid” external world.

What about if you touch something? Isn’t it solid? Push on the trunk of the fallen tree and you feel pressure. But this too is a sensa­tion strictly inside your brain and only “projected” to your fingers, whose existence also lies within the mind. Moreover, that sensation of pressure is caused not by any contact with a solid, but by the fact that every atom has negatively charged electrons in its outer shells.  As we all know, charges of the same type repel each other, so the bark’s electrons repel yours, and you feel this electrical repulsive force stopping your fingers from penetrating any further. Nothing solid ever meets any other solids when you push on a tree. The atoms in your fingers are each as empty as a vacant football stadium in which a single fly sits on the fifty-yard line. If we needed solids to stop us (rather than energy fields), our fingers could easily penetrate the tree as if we were swiping at fog.

None of that changes the reality: touch, too, occurs only within consciousness or the mind. Every aspect of that butter, its existence on every level, is not outside of one’s being. The real mind-twister to all this, and the reason some are loath to accept what should be patently obvious, is that its implications destroy the entire house-of-­cards worldview that we have embraced all our lives. If that is consciousness, or mind, right in front of us, then consciousness extends indefinitely to all that is cognized — calling into question the nature and reality of something we will devote an entire chapter to: space. If that before us is consciousness, it can change the area of scientific focus from the nature of a cold, inert, external universe to issues such as how your consciousness relates to mine and to that of the animals. But we’ll put aside, for the moment, questions of the unity of consciousness. Let it suffice to say that any overarching unity of consciousness is not just difficult or impossible to prove but is fundamentally incompatible with dualistic languages — which adds an additional burden of making it difficult to grasp with logic alone. 

Why? Language was created to work exclusively through symbolism and to divide nature into parts and actions. The word water is not actual water, and the word it corresponds to nothing at all in the phrase “It is raining.” Even if well acquainted with the limitations and vagaries of language, we must be especially on guard against dismissing biocentrism (or any way of cognizing the universe as a whole) too quickly if it doesn’t at first glance seem compatible with customary verbal constructions; we will discuss this at much greater length in a later chapter. The challenge here, alas, is to peer not just behind habitual ways of thinking, but to go beyond some of the tools of the thinking process itself, to grasp the universe in a way that is at the same time simpler and more demanding than that to which we are accustomed. Absolutely everything in the symbolic realm, for example, has come into existence at one point in time, and will eventually die — even mountains. Yet consciousness, like aspects of quantum theory involving entangled particles, may exist outside of time altogether.   (To be concluded in my next post)

♦ ◊ ♦

THE IMAGINAL REALM OF CREATION

There’s a biblical passage that says “The thoughts and imagining of men’s hearts are only evil continually.” They don’t have to continue being evil.  I am here, along with a host of other incarnate angels, to change that, so that the world and the people in the world can be safe and made new in our consciousness.  

Consciousness can be seen as the “Imaginal Realm,” the Holy Place where creation and re-creation take place, and out of which creation emerges into the realm of visible, material form.  It is also the realm in which visions and visitations from heavenly beings take place.  Here in this vibratory garden the true design of form is seeded by Life from above and within the Heavenly Kingdom of heavens — the garden of consciousness being the heaven out of which the kingdoms of this world emerge.  It is also a vibrational workshop, so-to-speak, for re-creation and for making all things new again.  The image of our world being projected from “outside” into our consciousness is herein made available for our co-creative work of re-creation in the heaven.  “Behold, I create and make all things new!” is our intention and command as co-creators with the Creator and with one another.  Consciousness is, in that sense, an aspect of who we are.  I am consciousness and I create my world.  Collectively, We are Consciousness and We create our world together as one body of Man, male and female, made in the image and likeness of God. To participate with the Creator at this level requires that we relinquish our false temporary identity as creatures and rise up to take on our true and immortal identity as creator Beings.  I will continue along this vein of consideration in future posts of this series.  As always, I welcome your participation by sharing your thoughts.  Until my next post, 

Be love. Be loved. 

Anthony

tpal70@gmail.com

You may enjoy reading articles relative to health and wholeness on my HealthLight Newsletter blog: LiftingTones.com

REFERENCES:

¹ROBERT LANZA, MD, is one of the most respected scientists in the world—A U.S. News & World Report cover story called him a “genius” and a “renegade thinker,” and likened him to Einstein. Currently chief scientific officer at Advanced Cell Technology and an adjunct professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Lanza has hundreds of publications and inventions and more than two dozen scientific books to his credit, including Principles if Tissue Engineering, recognized as the definitive reference in the field.  BOB BERMAN is one of the best-known astronomers in the world. He is Astronomy magazine’s “Strange Universe” columnist as well as the former astronomy columnist for Discover and it responsible for the astronomy section of The Old Farmer’s Almanac.

²BIOCENTRSM, How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.  In recent years quantum theory has forced a sea of change in Western natural philosophy, casting doubt on traditional physical explanations of the universe’s genesis and structure. Biocentrism completes this shift in worldview as it takes on one of the key tenets of Western thinking: that all life ultimately reduces to physics. In its place it offers the revolutionary view that biology is primary — that life creates the universe, not the other way around.

Apocalypse of Light 2013: Russell’s Two-Way Universe . . . page 4, ENERGY AND MATTER

ALL MATTER IS SIMULATED LIGHT  — Walter Russell

Walter Russell

Walter Russell

Continuing our review of Walter Russell’s challenge of scientific concepts and beliefs from his book A New Concept of the Universe, here are three more scientific misconceptions he rectified and clarified in his writings.

(I can’t say that I grasp his concepts and ideas with my mind; only that I am finding it quite pleasurable to let his stream of thought flow through my mind . . . but only if I don’t stop to try and grasp it. There is another Mind at work within me, perhaps meshing with my own human mind — much like two wheels interlocking, with the larger wheel turning the smaller — which fully understands what Russell is saying and writing.  My desire is for my readers to share in that same exquisite pleasure reading these articles and excerpts.)

MISCONCEPTION OF ENERGY

3. Failure to recognize that this universal body of moving matter has been created by some power outside of itself has led science to conclude that the energy which created matter is within itself.  Even more erroneous is the conclusion that energy is a condition of matter, such as heat.

This fallacy has led to the conclusion that Creation will disappear when heat energy “runs down.” The first and second laws of thermodynamics are built upon the obviously wrong conclusion. The universe will never “run down.” It is as eternal as God is eternal.

Throughout his writings, Russell describes the universe as “matter in motion.”  It’s all “simulated light” — in other words, energy. That God created the universe is as much a truth as poetry is created by a poet and a symphony is written by a music composer.  The poet’s poem is not the poet nor is the symphony the composer.  Creation is a product of God’s Mind, a manifestation of his “IDEA for Creation.” Just as the qualities of a poem and a symphony, or any other product, “have been extended to that product by their creator to manifest qualities, attributes and energies that are alone in the creator of that product,” so are the qualities, attributes and energies of the universe extended to it by the Creator. 

Nor is the IDEA which matter manifests within matter. IDEA is never created. Idea is a Mind quality. Idea never leaves the omniscient Light of Mind. Idea is but simulated by matter-in-motion.

IDEA never leaves its invisible state to become visible matter. Bodies which manifest IDEA are made in the image of their creator’s imaginings. 

Every creation, whether of God or man, is an extension of its creator. It is projected from him by a force which is within its creator and not in the projected product. 

All the knowledge, energy and method of creating any product are properties of Mind alone. There is no knowledge, energy, life, truth, intelligence, substance or thought in the motion which matter is.

MISCONCEPTION OF MATTER

4. Electric Matter is but a mirror which reflects qualities outside itself to simulate those qualities within itself.

Matter cannot move itself.  It is moved solely at the command and desire of the Mind of its creator.  

The powers of ‘attraction and repulsion’ which science mistakenly attributes to matter are electrical effects performing their one and only function of dividing an equilibrium into two opposing conditions, which extend equally from a dividing equator. The magnetic Light controls the balance of these two opposing conditions which interchange two ways in their endeavor to void their opposing conditions, but the stresses and strains which seem to make matter attract and repel matter are electrical effects.

Electric effects of motion can be insulated from each other — but the magnetic Light of the Creator, which causes those effects, cannot be insulated from matter by matter.

All matter is electric. Electricity conditions all matter under the measured control of the ONE MAGNETIC LIGHT which forever balances the TWO electrically-divided, conditioned lights of matter and space.

Divided matter strains to find balance in the zero of equilibrium from which it was divided.  The senses of man are mightily deceived by the illusions of appearance which cause him to conclude otherwise.

In a word, matter is light, as Russell explains in The Secret of Light:

All dense cold matter, such as iron, stone, wood, and all growing or decaying things, are light. We do not think of them as light but all are waves of motion, and all waves of motion are light.

Light is all there is in the spiritual universe of knowing, and simulation of that Light in opposite extensions is all there is in the electric wave universe of sensing. The simulation of Light in matter is not Light. There is no Light in matter.

Russell differentiates between the invisible and visible worlds of light: 

Perhaps the confusion which attends this idea would be lessened if we classify concerning the spiritual universe, such as life, intelligence, truth, power, knowledge and balance as being the ONE LIGHT of KNOWING, and everything concerning matter and motion as being the TWO SIMULATED LIGHTS of thinking. Thinking expresses knowing in matter but matter does not think, nor does it know.

Thinking also expresses life, truth, idea, power and balance by recording the ideas of those qualities in the two lights of matter in motion, but matter does not live, nor is it truth, balance or idea, even though it simulates those spiritual qualities.

Man’s confusion concerning this differentiation lies in his long assumption of the reality of matter. His assumption that his body is his Self, that his knowledge is in his brain, and that he lives and dies because his body integrates and disintegrates, has been so fundamental a part of his thinking that it is difficult for him to reverse his thinking to the fact that matter is but motion and has no reality beyond simulating reality. 

This was not as common a realization in 1947 when Russell first wrote down these ideas as they are today in an age of spiritual awakening and transformation of consciousness.  I resonate with what he says here in concluding his thoughts on our perception of energy and matter as being more about feeling than visual or sensory:

The light which we think we see is but motion. We do not see light. We feel the wave vibrations set up by the motion which simulates light, but the motion of electric waves which simulate light is not that which it simulates.

ON GRAVITY

 Russell challenges Isaac Newton’s law of gravity as being invalid and only half the story.

Newton’s apple was not attracted to the ground by gravitation. The high potential condition of that solid apple sought a similar high potential condition. That is to say it “fell” toward the earth to fulfill Nature’s law of like seeking like. Had Newton sat with the apple for a week or two  he would have seen that same apple “rise” unto the heavens as a low potential gas seeking a like low potential to balance its electrically-divided state. The “rising” of the decaying, expanding apple again fulfills Nature’s law of like seeking like.

All polarized bodies add to their densities and potentials. The apple which fell to the ground was a polarized body. All polarized bodies must reverse their polarities and depolarize. They then lose their densities and potentials. The depolarized apple returned to the zero of its beginnings. 

The Newton law is in this respect invalid because it accounts for but one half of the apple’s growth-decay cycle. This is a two-way universe of opposed effects of motion — not a one-way universe. 

MISCONCEPTION OF SUBSTANCE IN MATTER

5. Sense of observation has led to the erroneous conclusion that there are 92 different substances in matter. 

This universe is substanceless. It consists of motion only. Motion simulates substance by the control of its opposing wave pressures of motion which deceive the senses into seeing substance where motion alone is. The senses do not reach beyond the illusion of motion, nor do those who believe that they can gain knowledge of the secrets of this vast make-believe universe even faintly comprehend the unreality of this mirage of polarized lighty-in-motion which they so firmly believe is real.

Motion is two-way, for all motion is caused by the division of an equilibrium, and its extension in two opposite directions to create the two opposite conditions of pressures necessary to make motion imperative. 

One of these two conditions of electric motion thrusts inward toward a center to create a centripetal vortice to simulate gravity. On the other side of the dividing equator, the other condition thrusts outward from a center to create a centrifugal vortice to simulate vacuity.

Moving waves of oppositely-conditioned matter simulate substance, but there is no substance to the motion which simulates IDEA in matter. 

To make his point even more graphic, albeit more unbelievable to the orthodox mind, he draws this unlikely picture of a cobweb cutting through  steel:

If a cobweb could move fast enough, it would simulate a solid steel disc — and it could cut through steel. If such a thing could happen it would not be the “substance” of the cobweb which cut through the steel — it would be the motion which cut it.

Fast-moving short waves simulate solids, which slow-moving long waves simulate the gases of space which surround solids. Waves of motion are substanceless, however. They merely simulate substance. 

Russell brings it all Home to design, control and purpose in these final paragraphs:

Motion itself is controlled by the Mind of the Creator Who uses it to express His desire for simulating IDEA of Mind by giving it a formed body. There is no other purpose for motion. 

Desire in the Light of Mind for creative expression is the only energy in this universe. All motion is Mind motivated. All motion records Mind thoughts in matter. 

All matter is but pressure-conditioned motion. Varying pressure conditions yield varying states of motion. Varying states of motion are what science misinterprets as the elements of matter.

Varying pressures in a wave are tonal. In each octave wave there are four pairs of tones, each of which has the same relative position in its octave color spectrum as it has in its octaves of chemical elements. Waves are, therefore, electric pressure-conditioned octaves of tones.

It’s all music and art . . . the “Music of the Spheres.” The Creator is the Great Artist and Musician . . . and, I would add, Magician. And we are made in His image and likeness? Sometimes I see it, but mostly don’t. We have a lot of evolving to go through before we can say in truth “Man is God-in-action on Earth.” We are only designed that way.  Revelation of that design is only minimal.  Full apocalypse of the Light Man is created to manifest is a work in progress.  I only know it in my own experience . . . and I do know that I Am the Light of my world. My blogging is an expression of my desire to share the light that I Am with my world. Isn’t that the reason any one of us does anything?  

We will continue to explore Walter Russell’s “Two-Way Universe” and the mystery of Light the Creator in my next post. Until then, 

Be Love. Be loved.

Tony 12.11.07Anthony Palombo

Visit and read my HealthLight Newsletter online at my LiftingTones.com blog for more inspiring and informative articles on the spiritual essences of health and wellness, more about perspective and how to think about your health than what.

 

100 countries visiting my blogs:

ALBANIA, ARGENTINA, AUSTRALIA, AUSTRIA, BAHAMAS, BAHRAIN, BANGLADESH, BARBADOS, BELARUS, BELGIUM, BOLIVIA, BOSNIA, BRAZIL, BRUNEI DARUSSALAM, BULGARIA, CAMEROON, CANADA, CHILI, COLOMBIA, COSTA RICA, CROATIA, CYPRUS, CZECH REPUBLIC, DENMARK,  ECUADOR, EGYPT, FINLAND, FRANCE, GEORGIA, GERMANY, GHANA, GREECE, GUATEMALA, GUYANA, HONG KONG, HUNGARY, ICELAND, INDIA, INDONESIA, IRAQ, IRELAND, ISRAEL, ITALY, JAMAICA, JAPAN, JERSEY (island), JORDAN, KENYA, KUWAIT LEBANON, LATVIA, LITHUANIA, MALAYSIA, MALTA, MEXICO, MOLDOVA, MONTENEGRO, MYANMAR, NEPAL, NETHERLANDS, NEW ZEALAND, NORWAY, OMAN, PAKISTAN, PANAMA, PERU, PHILLIPPINES, POLAND, PORTUGAL, PUERTO RICO, REUNION (Island), ROMANIA, RUSSIAN FEDERATION, SAUDI ARABIA, SERBIA, SPAIN, SINGAPORE, SLOVAKIA, SLOVENIA, SOLOMON ISLANDS, SOUTH AFRICA, SRI LANKA, SUDAN, SYRIAN ARABIA, REPUBLIC OF (SOUTH) KOREA, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, TAGO (West Africa), TAIWAN, TANSANIA (UNITED REP. OF TZ), THAILAND, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO, TURKEY, UKRAINE, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, UNITED KINGDOM, USA, VENEZUELA, VIET NAM, YEMEN, ZIMBABWE (South Africa)

Welcome YEMEN!  Welcome Negara Brunei Darussalam “Abode of peace.”

 

Tag Cloud