Creating the New Earth Together

Archive for the ‘Subatomic particles’ Category

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.



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. 


“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. 



BIOCENTRISM: A “Goldilocks’s Universe”

“Wherever the life is [the world] bursts into appearance around it.”     Ralph Waldo Emerson

♦ ◊ ♦

NOWHERE IS IT MORE OBVIOUS than here on planet Earth where we live, breathe oxygen and enjoy the beauty of Mother Nature’s array of colorful creations that we live in a perfectly balanced universe.  Any closer to the sun, our Star in the heavens, the heat would be unbearable. Any farther away, life forms would freeze and cease growing and multiplying, including our physical forms for incarnating here—which in themselves are miracles of Life’s creations. 

    Our Home among the stars

♦ ◊ ♦

“The universe is fine-tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe”

We come to chapter nine of Dr. Robert Lanza and Bob Berman’s enlightening book BIOCENTRISM — How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.  This is my favorite chapter of the entire book as it’s full of details about the universe and about our world as seen through the beautiful and clear lens of the authors’ minds — like where the oxygen we breathe comes from, and all the carbon that goes into building just about everything; and how the atom maintains its integrity and coherent unity. 

The title of this chapter is “GOLDILOCKS’S UNIVERSE.”  As you may recall the fairytale, Goldilocks came upon a cottage home belonging to a family of three bears, who were away at the time.  There on the table were three bowls of porridge, the first of which was too hot, the second too cold, and the third was just right. 

So is it where our home among the stars is set in the Cosmos: it’s just right for life to flourish and for Man to live and steward creation.  I invite you to come with me on a survey of the microcosmic ingredients of the macrocosmic world and renew your appreciation of the finer and unseen details of our world’s makeup, and that of the Universe where our world lives, that make it just right for life and consciousness. In fact, it has to be just right for life and consciousness for this “Participatory Universe” to exist at all. 

♦ ◊ ♦

The world appears to be designed for life, not just at the microscopic scale of the atom, but at the level of the universe itself. Scientists have discovered that the universe has a long list of traits that make it appear as if everything it contains — from atoms to stars — was tailor-made just for us. Many are calling this revelation the “Goldilocks Principle,” because the cosmos is not “too this” or “too that,” but rather “just right” for life. Others are invoking the principle of “Intelligent Design,” because they believe it’s no accident the cosmos is so ideally suited for us, although the latter label is a Pandora’s box that opens up all manner of arguments for the Bible, and other topics that are irrelevant here, or worse. By any name, the discovery is causing a huge commotion within the astrophysics community and beyond.

In fact, we are currently in the midst of a great debate in the United States about some of these observations. Most of us probably followed the recent trials over whether intelligent design can be taught as an alternative to evolution in public school biology classes.  Proponents claim Darwin’s theory of evolution is exactly that — a theory — and cannot fully explain the origin of all life, which naturally it never claims to do. Indeed, they believe the universe itself is the product of an intelligent force, which most people would simply call God. On the other side are the vast majority of scientists, who believe that natural selection may have a few gaps, but for all intents and purposes is a scientific fact. They and other critics charge that intelligent design is a transparent repackaging of the biblical view of creation and thus violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

It would be nice if the debate changed from the contentious one about exchanging evolution for religion, and switched to the more productive tack of asking whether science can explain why the universe appears to be built for life. Of course, the fact that the cosmos seems exactly balanced and designed for life is just an inescapable scientific observation—not an explanation for why.

At the moment, there are only three explanations for this mystery. One is to say, “God did that,” which explains nothing even if it is true. The second is to invoke the Anthropic Principle’s reasoning, several versions of which strongly support biocentrism, which we shall now examine. The third option is biocentrism pure and simple, nothing else needed. No matter which logic one adopts, one has to come to terms with the fact that we are living in a very peculiar cosmos. 

By the late sixties, it had become clear that if the Big Bang had been just one part in a million more powerful, the cosmos would have blown outward too fast to allow stars and worlds to form. Result: no us. Even more coincidentally, the universe’s four forces and all of its constants are just perfectly set up for atomic interactions, the existence of atoms and elements, planets, liquid water, and life. Tweak any of them and you never existed.

The authors provide a chart listing 32 “constants” and their modern values from the CODATA 1998 recommended by the National Institute of Standards and Technology of the United States, along with their mostly Greek symbols — interesting but not necessary for inclusion here.  Most of the elements I’ve never heard of, such as Bohr Magneton, Boltzmann’s Constant, Deuteron Mass, Fine Structure Constant, and Hartree Energy.  The more familiar ones are Atomic Mass Unit, Electric Constant, Faraday Constant, Magnetic Constant, Planck Constant (Length, Mass and Time), and Proton Mass.  I had no idea that the Universe was made up of so many “constants”—and that scientists had discovered, isolated and gave them values, names and symbols.  All this to show how intricately balanced and stable the atomic fabric of the universe is. 


Such life-friendly values of physics are built into the universe like the cotton and linen fibers woven into our currency. The gravitational constant is perhaps the most famous, but the fine structure constant is just as critical for life. Called alpha, if it were just 1.1 times or more of its present value, fusion would no longer occur in stars. The fine-structure constant gets so much scrutiny because the Big Bang created almost pure hydrogen and helium and almost nothing else. Life needs oxygen and carbon (water alone requires oxygen) but this by itself is not so great a problem because oxygen is created in the cores of stars as an eventual product in nuclear fusion.

Carbon is another story.  So where did the carbon in our bodies come from? The answer was found a half-century ago, and, of course, involves those factories where all elements heavier than hydrogen and helium are manufactured — in the centers of suns. When heavier stars later explode into supernovae, this material is released into their environments, where they are taken up, along with nebulous clouds of interstellar hydrogen, into the stuff that composes the next generation of stars and planets. When this happens in a newly formed generation of stars, these further enrich themselves with an even higher percentage of heavier elements, or metals, and the more massive of these eventually explode. The process repeats. In our own neck of the cosmic woods, our sun is a third-generation star, and its surrounding planets, including all materials comprising the living organisms on Earth, are composed of this nicely enriched, third-generation, complex-material inventory. 

For carbon in particular, the key to its existence lies in an odd quirk within the nuclear fusion process itself, the reactions that make the Sun and stars shine. Now, the most common nuclear reaction happens when two extremely fast-moving atomic nuclei or protons collide and fuse to form a heavier element that is usually helium, but can be even heavier, especially as the star ages. Carbon should not be capable of being manufactured by this process because all the intermediate steps from helium to carbon involve highly unstable nuclei. The only way for its creation would be for three helium nuclei to collide at the same time. But the likelihood of three helium nuclei colliding at the identical microsecond, even in the frenzied interiors of stars, are minuscule. It was Fred Hoyle — not of the card rules fame, but the one who championed the steady state theory of an eternal universe until that grand idea’s sad demise in the 1960s — who correctly figured out that something unusual and amazing must be at play in the interior of stars that could vastly increase the odds of this rare three-way collision, and give the universe the abundant carbon found in every living creature. The trick here was a kind of “resonance,” where disparate effects can come together to form something unexpected, the way the wind resonated with the structure of the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge more than six decades ago, causing it to sway violently and collapse. Bingo: turns out, carbon has a resonant state at just the correct energy to let stars create it in significant quantities. The carbon resonance, in turn, directly depends on the value of the strong force, which is what glues together everything in each atomic nucleus out to the farthest villages of space-time.

The strong force is still somewhat mysterious, yet is critical to the universe we know. Its influence only extends within the confines of an atom. Indeed, its strength falls off so quickly it’s already anemic at the edges of large atoms. This is why giant atoms such as uranium are so unstable. The outermost protons and neutrons in their nuclei lie at the fringes of the clump, where the strong force retains only a fragile hold, so occasionally one does overcome the otherwise iron-like grip of the strong force and falls off, changing the atom into something else.

If the strong force and gravity are so amazingly tweaked, we can’t ignore the electromagnetic force that holds sway in the electrical and magnetic connections found in all atoms. Discussing it, the great theoretical physicist Richard Feynman said in his book The Strange Theory of Light and Matter (Princeton University Press, 1985): “It has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it. Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to π or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It’s one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man. You might say the ‘hand of God’ wrote that number, and ‘we don’t know how He pushed his pencil.’ We know what kind of a dance to do experimentally to measure this number very accurately, but we don’t know what kind of dance to do on the computer to make this number come out, without putting it in secretly!”

It amounts to 1/137 when the units are filled in, and what it signifies is a constant of electromagnetism, another of the four fundamental forces, that helps facilitate the existence of atoms and allows the entire visible universe to exist. Any small change in its value and none of us are here. 

Such factual oddities powerfully influence modern cosmological thinking. After all, mustn’t cosmologists’ theories plausibly explain why we live in such a highly unlikely reality?

“Not at all,” said Princeton physicist Robert Dicke in papers written in the sixties and elaborated upon by Brandon Carter in 1974. This perspective was dubbed “the Anthropic Principle.” 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.

♦ ◊ ♦


This “strong force” and electromagnetic gravitational pull at the nucleic core of the atom alludes to the invisible power and control of the Life Force, the Creative Power that holds the Universe together.  This Life — which has eluded scientists, who live to hopefully understand it in their day — is a subtle but irresistibly attractive magnetic Force.  Call it Spirit, or God, or the Supreme Being — by any name we may give to this all-powerful Creating Force, Life wastes nothing as it assembles and dissembles forms.  That which holds together at the core of the atom partakes of creation at that level and ascends to the next level for higher and greater creative purpose to fulfill.  What doesn’t or can’t adhere to the magnetic force at the nucleus falls away to take part in the Creating Process at a lower level. Nothing is lost or destroyed, only the structured state changes form in the ongoing processes of transformation, transmutation and ascension.  All things return to their Origin in the One. I will complete this episode in my next post.  Until then,

Be love. Be loved. 



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)


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.


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. 


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:

♦ ◊ ♦


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.


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:


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.

♦ ◊ ♦


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   (

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.


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.


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.


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.”


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.


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.


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.  


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





























A Nuclear Community, Part 2

   The Atom by Live Science

WE LIVE IN A NUCLEAR COMMUNITY of stars, galaxies and solar systems, all macro expansions of the micro atomic universe with its positively charged central hub and negatively charged cloud of orbiting electrons. Everything in the Universe orbits around a positive nucleus of some kind, a reflection of an inviolate heavenly design of angelic hosts orbiting around the Supreme Creator and Ruler of the Creating Universe—along with a myriad of focused configurations of LORDS and lesser Lords of lords.  

The Atomic World of Controlled Power

The atom is a micro model of right relationships in true community.  In it is manifest the working dynamic of the One Law, simply stated by Lloyd A. Meeker (Uranda) (1907-1954) as “Positive action, Negative reaction or response.” Walter Russell called it “The Law of One” (which I will focus on in my next post).  As I consider these two nomenclatures, I see how compliance with the One Law would bring about Oneness in the human family in “one nation under God.” 


Consider what we now know about the structure and dynamic operation of this fundamental building block of Creation.  At the nucleus of the atom dwell one or more positively charged Protons and one or more neutral stabilizing particles called Neutrons.  Orbiting around this central hub of focused power are a number of Electrons carrying a negative charge.  Looming behind this atomic portal lies a reservoir of awesome power held in check by the integrity and stability of the tiny atom.  Let’s have a look at the smallest thing in the universe. The following excerpt is from Live Science website.

ATOMS are the basic units of matter and the defining structure of elements.  The term “atom” comes from the Greek word for indivisible, because it was once thought that atoms were the smallest things in the universe and could not be divided.  We now know that atoms are made up of smaller particles: protons, neutrons and electrons – which are composed of even smaller particles, such as quarks.

THE NECLEUS was discovered in 1911 by Ernest Rutherford, a physicist from New Zealand. In 1920, Rutherford proposed the name proton for the positively charged particle of the atom. He also theorized that there was a neutral particle within the nucleus, which James Chadwick, a British physicist and student of Rutherford’s, was able to confirm in 1932.

The NUCLEUS is held together by a strong force, one of the four basic forces of nature. This force between the protons and the neutrons overcomes the repulsive electrical force that would otherwise push the protons apart, according to the rules of electricity. 

PROTONS are positively charged particles found within atomic nuclei. . . .  Protons are about 99.86% as massive as neutrons.

The number of protons in an atom is unique to each element.  For example, carbon atoms have six protons, hydrogen atoms have one and oxygen atoms have eight. The number of protons in an atom is referred to as the atomic number of that element. The number of protons also determines the chemical behavior of the element. Elements are arranged in the Periodic Table of Elements in order of increasing atomic number.

Three quarks make up each proton — two “up” quarks (each with a two-thirds positive charge) and one “down” quark (with a one-third negative charge) — and they are held together by other subatomic particles called gluons, which are massless.

THE NEUTRON: a subatomic particle of about the same mass as a proton but without an electric charge, are present in all atomic nuclei except those of ordinary hydrogen.

Neutrons bind with protons and one another in the nucleus via the nuclear force, effectively moderating the repulsive forces between the protons and stabilizing the nucleus.

PURPOSE: The extra attraction from the neutrons keeps the protons’ electrical charge from tearing an atomic nucleus apart. So the reason for the neutrons is to allow more than one proton to coexist in an atomic nucleus.

[Consider this design and functional dynamic at work in a “nuclear community” comprised of people in consensus groups focused and facilitated by spirit-oriented leadership with the larger community orbiting around this hub and offering loving support in an atmosphere of accord and agreement, with input from all members of the community.]

THREE PARTS: A neutron contains two down quarks with charge –1/3 e and one up quark with charge +2/3 e. Like protons, the quarks of the neutron are held together by the strong force, mediated by gluons. The nuclear force results from secondary effects of the more fundamental strong force.

ELECTRONS are tiny compared to protons and neutrons, over 1,800 times smaller than either a proton or a neutron. Electrons are about 0.054% as massive as neutrons.  Originally known as “corpuscles,” electrons have a negative charge and are electrically attracted to the positively charged protons. Electrons surround the atomic nucleus in pathways called orbitals, an idea that was put forth by Erwin Schrödinger, an Austrian physicist, in the 1920s. Today, this model is known as the quantum model or the electron cloud model. The inner orbitals surrounding the atom are spherical but the outer orbitals are much more complicated.  (Live Science) 

 Then there’s the “God Particle” that, simply stated, gives mass to energy vortices:

In 2012, scientists confirmed the detection of the long-sought Higgs boson, also known by its nickname the “God particle,” at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the most powerful particle accelerator on the planet. This particle helps give mass to all elementary particles that have mass, such as electrons and protons…., which allows them to bind together and form things, like stars and planets and Donald Trump’s hair. More broadly, countless Higgs boson particles make up an invisible force throughout the universe called a Higgs field. (Chicago Tribune News, July 10, 2012) 

More current yet, there’s the “Dark Bason” that scientists cannot quite isolate and observe but strongly suspect exists somewhere in the cosmic soup of dark matter:

“Two experiments hunting for a whisper of a particle that prevents whole galaxies from flying apart recently published some contradictory results.  One came up empty handed, while the other gives us every reason to keep on searching.

Dark basons are dark matter candidates based on force-carrying particles that don’t really pack much force.

Unlike the basons we’re more familiar with, such as the photons that bind molecules and the gluons that hold atomic nuclei together, an exchange of dark basons would barely affect their immediate surroundings.

If they existed, on the other hand, their collective energy could be responsible for making up dark matter – the missing mass that provides the extra gravity needed to keep our Universe of stars in their familiar formations.

Unfortunately, the presence of such basons would be about as detectable as a murmur in a storm.  For the physicist, however, a murmur might be enough to still be noticeable given the right kind of experiment.

The two studies – one led by researchers from the Massachusetts institute of Technology (MIT), the other by Aarhus University in Denmark – looked for subtle differences in the positioning of an electron in an isotope as it jumped between energy levels.  If it swayed, this could be a telltale sign of a dark bason’s nudge.   (Source:


As science has concluded, atoms are not things. They are “vortices of energy” that have no material dimensions. In practical terms, they are not objects that can be placed under a microscope and examined, much less manipulated.  They cannot be divided into their component parts without destroying their cohesive energetic structure and coherent functionality.  As noted above, the word “Atom” literally means indivisible–although not totally invisible. 

Our bodies are made up of these vortices of energy.  They are nuclear communities—as are all “material” structures.  In fact, there are no material structures.  The universe of creating matter is one cosmic nuclear community made up of vortices of energy vibrating at a wide range of frequencies, the lower ranges becoming visible, as well as tangible to our low-range physical senses.  

Now, just take a moment or two to let that sink in.  


Let’s turn our attention away from the anatomy and functionality of the atom and give thought to the “force” that holds it together, as mentioned in some of the definitions and descriptions above.  What is this force that attracts neutrons and protons toward one other?  It is described as “electromagnetism.” I would describe it as the positive phase of the One Law; the radiation of Love originating from the other side of the atomic portal.  This radiation engenders response and attraction leading to union, which in turn results in the creation of a unified “cloud” or field of radiant energy that holds electrons in an orbital pattern of both response and repulsion. In other words, they are both drawn toward and repelled from the nucleus at the same time, a dynamic found at work between all atoms of and throughout the Creating Universe—including in our relationship with God and with one another.  That “force” is the Force of Love, the Fire of fusion that holds the Universe together.  

While the irresistible force of Love draws us in toward union, the radiance of our own divine being incarnate in a flesh body keeps us in a creative proximity in relationship to the all-consuming fire of Love—as well as from one another.  Only in spirit can we know union with God and with one another—that is until we ascend physically to a higher level in the transmutation and transfiguration of our outer forms. At that point, our sense of separation from God and from one another will cease to exist and we will know that union we only believed was possible before and had but a limited experience of.

I will continue this meditation in my next post.  Do feel free to share this post with your friends — and to share any of your thoughts and comments. Until my next post,

Be Love. Be Loved.



“The Secret of Light” page 2

Well, are we ready for another dose of Walter Russel from The Secret of Light ? Here is the second half of chapter twelve in which Russell challenges current scientific thinking about the nature of light, presenting a new paradigm in which light does not travel at 186,400 miles per second. In his physics, light does not travel at all, not even from the sun! Hmm. If you liked the previous post — which you really need to read first if you’re just tuning into this series — you will really like this one — especially after two or three readings!  Enjoy!


There is much confusion concerning the many kinds of particles of matter such as electrons, protons, photons, neutrons and others. These many particles are sup­posedly different because of the belief that some are negatively charged, some are positively charged and some are so equally charged that one supposedly neu­tralizes the other.

There is no such condition in nature as negative charge, nor are there negatively charged particles. Charge and discharge are opposite conditions, as filling and emptying, or compressing and expanding are oppo­site conditions.

Compressing bodies are charging into higher potential conditions. Conversely, expanding bodies are discharg­ing into lower potential conditions. To describe an elec­tron as a negatively charged body is equivalent to saying that it is an expanding-contracting body. 

Contracting and expanding bodies move in opposite directions. Contracting bodies move radially inward toward mass centers, and expanding bodies move radially outward toward space which surrounds masses. In this two-way universe, light which is inwardly directed toward gravity charges mass and discharges space. When directed toward space it charges space and dis­charges mass. All direction of force in Nature is spiral.

The charging condition is positive. It multiplies speed of motion into density of substance. The principle of multiplication of motion because of decrease of volume is the cause of the acceleration of gravity. The discharg­ing condition is negative. It divides speed of motion into tenuity of substance. The principle of the division of motion because of expansion of volume, is the cause of the deceleration of radiation. 

One can better comprehend this principle by knowing that what we call substance is purely motion. Motion simulates substance by its variation of pressures, its speed and its gyroscopic relation to its wave axis.

Particles are variously conditioned as to pressure but there are no different kinds of particles. All are light waves wound up into particles which are doubly charged. Their position at anyone point in their wave causes them to have the electric condition appropriate for that point.  

Light particles are forever moving in their octave waves. All are either heading toward their cathode or their anode, which means toward vacuity or gravity. They are all moving either inward or outward, spirally.


All light particles are either expressing the mother-light principle or the father-light principle. For example, if a particle is on the amplitude of the wave, it would be a true sphere, and as a true sphere it would be neither positive nor negative. It might then appropriately be called a neutron. A particle which is spirally heading inward toward the apex of a vortex in the process of becoming a sphere might appropriately be called a proton, because of its expressing the father-light principle.

Again,if it is moving spirally outward, it could appro­priately be called an electron because it would then be discharging in excess of its charge or expanding in excess of its contraction. 

Light rays, for example, leaving the sun, are discharg­ing the sun. They are also discharging themselves because they are expanding into greater volume. They are also lowering their own potential by multiplying their volume. They reverse their polarity when radially converging upon the earth. They are then charging the earth and themselves by contracting into smaller volume and are simultaneously multiplying their own potential by thus contracting.


In an electric current there is a constant interchange between anode and cathode or positive and negative poles. A light particle expands as it leaves the anode in an outward radial direction and contracts as it radially approaches the anode.’ This light particle has been the same light particle at all times in all parts of its journey.

Its variation of charge and discharge, its direction of motion and the condition of wave pressure in which it finds itself at any time are the sole reasons for its chang­ing from one condition to another. The light particles are all the same light particles, all being different only in pressure condition. 

This is also true of the elements of matter. Whether they be iron, carbon, silicon, bismuth or radium, all are composed of the same kind of light particles. They all seem to have different qualities and attributes, but those qualities and attributes are likewise given to them purely by the positions they occupy in their waves.


A particle of light which belongs to an atomic system of sodium has in it all of the entire range of the ele­ments, besides all of every other creating thing in the universe. It acts to carry out the purposefulness of the idea of sodium simply because it is in the pressure con­dition of sodium, and is a part of the unfolding pattern of the seed of inert gas of the octave from which it has unfolded. 

If that same particle unfolded from the seed of the oak, it would be part of the wood fiber of its trunk, or leaf, or of the chlorophyll which colored its leaves, but it would be the same kind of particle while fulfilling the purpose of cellulose as while fulfilling the purpose of sodium.

All matter in this universe is but differently conditioned motion simulating light, and all differences in condition are pressure differences. 


The speed with which light presumably travels is186,400 miles per second. The distance between stars is so great that the speed of light is computed as light years, for the distance computed by lesser units of time would yield figures so great that they would be meaningless.

Light only seems to travel. It is but one more of the countless illusions caused by wave motion. Waves of the ocean seem to traverse the ocean but they only appear to do so, for waves are pistons in the universal engines, and pistons operate up and down. Wave pistons of light, or of the ocean, operate radially and spirally inward and outward, toward and away from gravity.

Waves of light do not travel. They reproduce each other from wave field to wave field of space. The planes of zero curvature which bound all wave fields act as mirrors to reflect light from one field into another. This sets up an appearance of light as travelling, which is pure illusion.

The sunlight we feel upon our bodies is not actual light from the sun. What actually is happening is that the sun is reproducing its own condition on the earth by extending the reproductions out through cold space into ever enlarging wave fields until those reproductions begin to converge again toward our center of gravity into ever smaller wave fields. The heat we feel and the light we see are dependent entirely upon the ability of the wave fields to reproduce the light and heat, and that ability is conditioned upon the amount of moisture in the atmosphere.

If there were no moisture in the atmosphere, our bodies would carbonize from the heat thus reproduced. One cannot consistently think of that heat as direct rays of the sun, for that same sunlight was intensely cold during its reproduced journey through the immensely expanded wave fields of space between the sun and earth.

The light and heat which appear to come from the star or sun have never left the star or sun. That which man sees as light and feels as heat are the reproduced counterparts of the light and heat which are its cause.

The rate of vibration in a wave field depends upon its volume. Vibration in a wave field means the pulse of interchange between its compressed core and the space surrounding that core. A slow vibration in a large wave field would cool one’s body, or even freeze it, while fast pulsing interchange in extremely small wave fields could burn one’s body. 


A lens which multiplies light and heat toward a focal point which sets paper on fire merely compresses larger wave fields into smaller ones. The rate of vibration increases for the same reason that the planets nearest the sun move much faster in their small orbits than those which are far away from the sun. Kepler’s law covering the speeds of planets will apply to rates of vibration in wave fields as appropriately as with the vements in the solar system.

Stay tuned for more of Walter Russell and The Secret of Light.


Read my HealthLight Newsletter online at


Apocalypse of Light 2013, Part 3: The Age of Transmutation, Page 2: New Power For Science

Eagle Nebula Pillars of Creation

Eagle Nebula Pillars of Creation

Hydrogen can be harvested from the air we breathe.  How? I’ll let Walter Russell answer that question. 


Man’s transformation by science will take much time, but it can begin NOW. A beginning is a reversal of direction. To reverse the direction of the downward plunge is to begin to climb into the heights.

The first step for science is to insulate its countries from attack by other countries and thus save the lifeblood of its nations and return destroying armies to useful pursuits. As very little time is needed to bring this about after the principles involved are thoroughly understood, the threat and fear of war should pass from the mind of man forever. Even if war should start before this had been accomplished, it could not go far before it could be remedied.

The second step should be to give the world a new and inexhaustible fuel. Free hydrogen is the logical supply because free hydrogen is the basis of the four space octaves. The entire population of ten planets like ours could not lessen its total because Nature balances the withdrawals of gases with replacements continuously. Nature’s replacements for withdrawals of solids consumes the amount of time taken to grow them.

Nature may take a million years to grow forests into coal. Coal is multiplied nitrogen, for nitrogen is a gas of carbon. Nitrogen can be transmuted continuously from the atmosphere in unlimited quantities forever.The atmosphere is composed of nitrogen and oxygen. Oxygen is carbon twice removed, just as nitrogen is carbon once removed. Likewise hydrogen is carbon one octave lower, but not removed tonally. Gyroscopically, carbon and hydrogen are the same, for their planes of structure are identical.

Hydrogen could, therefore, be transmuted from the atmosphere in unlimited quantities by merely changing the gyroscopic plane of nitrogen to the 90-degree angle of wave amplitude upon which hydrogen rotates.

It would simplify scientific thinking if science would view the universe of “matter” and “space” as gravity which accumulates generoactive predominance into hydrogen in the first three-and-a-half invisible octaves of matter that man today thinks of as space.

The visible universe begins at the middle of the fourth octave and continues to carbon—its generoactive maximum—where fourth and fifth octaves meet at wave amplitude.

From there on, radioactivity begins its depolarizing process but the “bodies of the octaves grow bigger” and keep within the visible range while dying, just as a tree, or man grows bigger of body during declining years.

If, therefore, science would form the habit of thinking of  matter and space in terms of the carbon octaves and the hydrogen octaves it would simplify their work oftransmutation mightily

Science should also form the mental picture of the visible carbon octaves as but a pea-sized volume of solid
matter suspended in the center of a great auditorium of rare gaseous matter millions of times greater in volume. Then realize that the very small globule of many solid elements of the carbon octaves are wound up from that vast volume of the hydrogen octaves of space.

Matter thus wound up is sequentially unwound into gases of the hydrogen space octaves, and its action-reactions are recorded in the inert gases which born each octave.

Thus matter gyroscopically emerges from space and is “swallowed up” by gyroscopic unwindings into the “space” which borned it, as has been rightly conceived.

“Space” is not empty – nor is it an “ether.” The space which surrounds every particle of matter in every wave field is the negative half of the wave field. The solid nucleus is the positive half. Both halves are equal in potential but vastly unequal in volume.

The next step in habit-forming thinking is to think of matter as being the accumulation of the same thing—wave motion—rolled up in time layers like a snowball—the final layer being called carbon but all being different conditions and pressures of the same thing.

Add to this thought that the universe consists of wave fields within wave fields—stellar, solar and atomic in measure—but of a like “substance” and of a like structural formation. Nature has no separate method or process of creating systems. The heavens clearly evidence the unwinding of mass by the way of rings and systems, but the senses do not so clearly record the winding of mass as a basis for systems.

During this whole process, each succeeding element becomes another phase of the same thing throughout the whole journey. The change of attribute is due solely to thdifferent relations of pressures and that is determined by polar relations.

Nature does not transmute one element into another. She merely makes her progressive change of elements by a continual readjustment of her gyroscope.

Elements are tonal. One wire of a piano can become a whole octave by changing its pressure relations sufficiently to either multiply or divide its vibration frequencies. Everyone is familiar with the fact that placing a book on top of an organ pipe lifts its tone just one octave higher.

Such effects are not transmutation. They are merely changed dimensions of states of motion. All of the notes which the organist plays are but one tone multiplied or divided in rhythmic pressure relations

That is the way the chemist of tomorrow should think of the elements, and not think of them as different chemical substances with different attributes. Chemistry should be based upon the idea of gyroscopically changing the north-southeastwest polarities of one tone to increase or decrease its time frequencies. The piano tuner uses an instrument to wind up his pressures from lower to higher tones. The chemist should use the electric current and solenoids as his tuning instrument.

The very thought structure of tomorrow’s chemist should very radically change in many other respects too
numerous to describe. One of these is to eliminate from his thinking the idea of one thing becoming another. That is not Nature’s way

In Nature, one tone ceases to be and another becomes. In other words, one formula for a patterned wave vibration ceases when another measured vibration begins. We must also carry this thought farther by not thinking of cessations, beginnings and endings. We must think of them as awakened continuities which we can “put to sleep” when we have no further need of them, or “awaken” when we have need of them.

The electric current of the universe is ready to motivate any tone as we desire to awaken it, just as the electric current of the organ is ready to awaken any tone when the organist desires to awaken it.

We should not think of sodium and chlorine as having become sodium chloride—or that sound has become silence—for each of them is and always will be. We should think of each of them as another note played on the universal organ. We change its tuning pattern if we want new isotopes which Nature has not yet given us—or we unite two unbalanced halves to secure stability—or produce explosives by multiplying unbalance.

That is Nature’s way. Carbon unwinds to nitrogen because of the predominant power of east-west negative polarity. Likewise, nitrogen unwinds to oxygen. That does not mean that carbon has ceased to be, or that it has become nitrogen and oxygen. It means that carbon still is but it has changed its pressure dimensions, just as John Jones is the same John Jones that he was ten years ago.

Nature demonstrates this fact by “transmuting” nitrogen and oxygen back again into carbon. Every root of all vegetable growth rewinds both of them upward again into carbon. Likewise, the bodies of all animals rewind oxygen and nitrogen into the proteins of their flesh, bones, horns and hair.

The roots acquire the complex formula for rewinding into violets, pine, oak or apple trees—or man or bird—from the inert gases of their octaves which have recorded the unfolding of many ideas of Nature in the seed of these ideas.

As nature unfolds from the seed to record its patterns in moving body forms, it simultaneously refolds into its seed in order that the refolding can be repeated in like patterns.*

And we will continue this trend of thought next post.  Isn’t this great reading! Are you learning anything you didn’t already know?  I am.  Until we meet again,

Be love. Be loved.

Tony Pics for SA BookAnthony

Read my HealthLight Newsletter online at  I’ve posted an excellent video by the Heart Math Institute on the intuitive intelligence of the heart.  You’ll love it.

References: Russell, Walter — A NEW CONCEPT of the UNIVERSE

I welcome a newcomer to my blog from the DOMINICAN REPUBLIC! There are now 103 countries who have visited my blogs. Welcome visitor in Ethiopia!  And Cote d’lvoire! And Bermuda! That makes 105!


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


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.)


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.


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.


 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. 


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 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:


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


Tag Cloud