Creating the New Earth Together

Posts tagged ‘Science’

Transmutation Demystified, Part 2: Rectifying Misconceptions

“Great art is simple. My universe is great art, for it is simple. Great art is balanced. My universe is consummate art, for it is balanced simplicity.” Walter Russell, THE DIVINE ILIAD

* * * * *

TRANSMUTATION IS NO MYSTERY — any more than the digestion of food is a mystery. Transmutation of the earth itself, though presently limited, is an ongoing process of ascension . . . one in which we human beings could well play a more conscious stewarding role. Let me elucidate.

There are some 14 inorganic minerals and 72 trace minerals or more being chelated (literally clawed apart from their covalent bonds) and lifted up through the roots of your garden vegetable plants, transformed and transmuted into organic vegetables that are easily consumed, digested, ingested and absorbed into your body . . . transmuted again into flesh and bone . . . and not one of these steps can be circumvented. Inorganic minerals cannot be transmuted into living flesh without passing through the chelation process of the vegetable kingdom where they are dissembled and rearranged for use in animal organisms, such as our bodies. They are the building blocks of the body temple and facilitators of its chemical processes and nutrient utilization.

But that’s not the final destination for these elemental building blocks, nor their last transmutation to undergo. They have yet a higher purpose to serve and a sacred role to play in this Whole Holy World.

Creation comes from God through Man and returns to God through Man. How this occurs and unfolds is the magic of transmutation, which is no longer a mystery, as “The mystery of God is finished on earth.” (Rev 10:7)

Let me share with you the rest of this amazing story, a story that demystifies not only transmutation, but a story that demystifies as well the “mystery” of God and of our relationship to our Creator. This will be a fascinating series . . . albeit a bumpy ride for a structured mindset.

Before we get into the story, let’s take a few posts to rectify some longstanding misconceptions in the scientific community, which will establish a foundation for our consideration of transmutation. For this I will rely on my science mentor, Walter Russell, and his illumined consort and beloved companion, Lao Russell. (Click on his name above to visit my previous post about him).

We are at the beginning of a glorious New Age of knowledge and awareness of our oneness with all life. May we bring into being in this twentieth century the Life Triumphant for all peoples everywhere and thus fulfill our sole purpose on earth—which is to discover our divinity and live it” LAO RUSSELL

Misconceptions Rectified

1. The cardinal error of science lies in shutting the Creator out of His Creation.

“This one basic error topples the whole structure, for out of it all of the other misconceptions of light, matter, energy, electricity, magnetism and atomic structure have grown.

If science knew what LIGHT actually IS, instead of the waves and corpuscles of incandescent suns which science now thinks it is, a new civilization would arise from that one fact alone.

“Light is not waves which travel at 186,000 miles per second, which science says it is,— nor does light travel at all.

“The light of incandescent suns is but an effect of one of the two equally-opposed electric pressure conditions which interweave this universe into visible solids and liquids surrounded by invisible gases of space.

“These two opposite electric conditions which form the basis of the constitution of matter are the compressed condition of gravity pressure and the expanded condition of radiation pressure. These two electric conditions are the equal-and-opposite pressures which make motion imperative and without which motion is impossible.”

This is essential to our understanding of transmutation, as we’ll see later.


“The positive electric condition compresses large volumes of light-waves into small volumes by winding them up centripetally into spiral vortices by thrusting inward from without. That is what gravitation is.

“The negative electric condition expands small volumes of light-waves into larger volumes by unwinding them centrifugally into voiding equators where matter disappears. This is what radiation is. Radiation thrusts outwardly from within to depolarize matter and void motion.

“The light of suns and the dark of space are but two opposite conditions of the same thing. They interchange constantly. Each becomes the other sequentially.

Science excluded God in its considerations because of the supposition that God could not be proven to exist by laboratory methods.

“This decision is unfortunate for God IS provable by laboratory methods. The locatable motionless Light which man mistakenly calls magnetism is the invisible, but familiar, Light which God IS — and with it He controls His universe — as we shall see.” —Walter Russess, A New Concept Of The Universe

* * * * *

The disappearance of matter is precisely when the final process of transmutation of flesh to a higher order of Light takes place, as we shall see . . . and it need not all fall back into the soil which gave it rise.

I welcome any thoughts you may wish to share. Next weekend I will post the second misconception of science relating to “electro-magnetism.” Walter Russell proposes and demonstrates how and why there is no such force in Nature. Until then,

Be love. Be loved


BIOCENTRISM: No Time to Lose

       The Atom by Live Science

“Time is a concept looking for a function.”

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

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

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

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

♦ ◊ ♦

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

–Edgar Allan Poe, “Dreamland” (1845) 


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On time and space travel, consider this:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This brings us to the sixth principle:

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

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

Be love.  Be loved.   






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: 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





























Apocalypse of Light 2013: Russell’s Two-Way Universe, page 2

Walter Russell

Walter Russell

Challenging Scientific “Empirical Knowledge”

An apocalypse of the Light of Universal Intelligence has undoubtedly occurred in and through the life of Walter Russell.  There’s just no other explanation for what this man brought to light in a lifetime packed with discoveries and accomplishments. 

Since beginning this series of posts on his book A New Concept of the Universes, I started reading three more books by and about this autor, one by his beloved wife Lao entitled GOD WILL WORK WITH YOU BUT NOT FOR YOU, and another small but highly condensed biography by Glenn Clark entitled THE MAN WHO TAPPED THE SECRETS OF THE UNIVERSE.  The third book, which I’m eager to dive into, is Russell’s THE SECRET OF LIGHT. So, I am broadening my scope of awareness of the amazing life and accomplishments of this modern day mystic and great thinker and his equally inspired and intuitive life-partner Lao. 

Lao Russell

Lao Russell

The first two books came highly touted by a friend and blog-follower in Loveland, Colorado, who actually heard Lao Russell speak at a Homecoming gathering at Palmer College of Chiropractic in Davenport, Iowa back in 1965. Her father-in-law, the late Dr. Jerry England of noted fame in Louisiana for his victorious battle in the Supreme Court against the medical monopoly in health care known as “The England Case,” and his wife Olive, were both close friends with the Lao and visited her after Russell’s death.  

Dr. England and I came up together during those early days of legislative campaigning for licensure of our profession as a separate and distinct healing art in Louisiana, which ended victoriously in 1974 when the chiropractic licensing bill was finally passed—Louisiana being the last state to license its chiropractors.  To show how adamant orthodox medical thinkers were at the time toward new thought and methodology that threatened their monopoly (and their pocketbooks), even with the passage of our bill, the medical opposition sent the sheriff to arrest Dr. England at his home in Lake Charles, Louisiana, for “practicing medicine without a license.”  Dr. England got wind of the Sheriff’s arrest order and escaped out the back door. He and his wife were forced to leave the state and went to Alabama to practice and live out their days.  Shortly after that, the England Case was won in the U.S. Supreme Court.  With his quality of leadership, it was little wonder Dr. England and his wife were drawn to find a close friendship with Lao Russell and with her husband through his writings.  Greatness attracts greatness.

All this to say that Walter Russell was a contemporary genius who lived and taught in our day and at a time when much was being discovered and revealed in the light of inspired revolutionary thinking.  Chiropractic and osteopathy were being born and developed as natural healing arts by Daniel D. Palmer and his son “BJ” Palmer up in Davenport, Iowa, and Dr. H.T. Still respectively.  They approached health from the standpoint of finding and correcting the cause of dis-ease as opposed to the medical approach of treating the effects.  Radiant energy healing, variously called “attunement,” was also emerging both here and abroad in Japan.  So, there was much coming online of an apocalyptic nature revealing newly-conceived concepts that challenged the orthodox and threatened the status quo of scientific so-called “empirical knowledge,” marking the early dawning of a Golden Age and a timely, if not divinely ordered and ordained, transformation and upgrade of human consciousness. 

In A New Concept of the Universe, Walter Russell presents his case for what he called a “Two-Way Universe,” which challenged the scientific concepts of his day.  Basically, Russell’s universe is pure energy that flows from Source at the center of each and every cosmic particle on a “giving and regiving” basis — as opposed to the “big bang” theory as the source of all energy propelling the movement of heavenly bodies through the cosmos. In his universe, life does not give and take.  It rather gives and re-gives.

Mind you, this was at least half a century before awareness of an energetic universe became vogue in scientific thought. Today it’s rather common thought that all of matter is simply energy vibrating at different frequencies.  I think this shows how new thought usually comes through one or two individuals who are attuned to Universal Consciousness — perhaps who even incarnated with this sole purpose and mission to fulfill.  If it’s truth, it inevitably find its way into the collective consciousness to change the way we view reality and do things.  That’s one way evolution occurs. We’ll look at Russel’s perspective of a two-way universe in greater depth later in this series.  But first let me set the stage for our consideration of Russell’s cosmogony, which arises out of his “knowledge” of Universal Intelligence born of inspiration rather than book studies.

Walter Russel writes in the opening chapter of his book,

Once in a while, in long century periods, some vast new knowledge comes to the slowly unfolding race of man through cosmically-inspired geniuses, or men of super-vision, who have an awareness of the reality which lies beyond this universe of illusion.  

This new knowledge is of such a revolutionary nature in its time of coming that whole systems of thought, even unto entire cosmogonies, are rendered obsolete.

When each cosmic messenger gives such a new inspired knowledge to the world, the whole human race rises one step higher on that long ladder of unfolding which reaches from the jungle of man’s beginnings unto the high heavens of ultimate complete Cosmic Consciousness and awareness of unity with God.

Thus it is that man has ever been transformed by the “renewing of his mind” with new knowledge given to him since his early beginnings, through the Mahabharata and Bhagavad-Gita of early Brahmic days, through such ancient mystics as Laotze, Confucius, Zoraster, Buddha, Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Epictetus, Euclid, Mohammed, Moses, Isaiah, and Jesus, whose cosmic knowledge utterly transformed the practice of human relations of their day.

Let me be clear in distinguishing between “empirical knowledge” and “cosmic knowledge.” What Walter Russell “knew” came not from books. He left school at the age of 9 never to return. What he “knew” he knew from experiencing Universal Cosmic Consciousness.  In other words, God.  He goes on to write:

Then dawned a new day of the gathering of so-called “empirical knowledge,” which is gained through the senses by research and observation of effects of matter-in-motion rather than through the Consciousness of inspired Mind in meditation, which is the way that mystics and geniuses acquire their knowledge. 

Since the days of Galileo this undependable method of gaining knowledge through the senses has served to multiply man’s reasoning powers by teaching him HOW to do marvelous things with electricity and elements of matter, but not one great savant of science can tell the WHY — or the CAUSE — of his familiar effects.

If asked what electricity, light, magnetism, matter or energy is, he frankly  answers: “I do not know.”

If science actually does not know the WHY — or WHAT — or CAUSE — of these essentials, it necessarily follows that it is, admittedly, without knowledge.

It is merely informed — but information gathered through the senses is not knowledge. The senses sense only EFFECTS.  Knowledge is confined to the CAUSE of EFFECTS.

The senses are limited to but a small range of perception of the EFFECTS which they sense, and even that small range is saturated with the deceptions and distortions created by the illusion of motion. 

He then emphatically states his rationale and conclusive appraisal of scientific thinking:

It is impossible for the senses to penetrate any EFFECT to ascertain its CAUSE for the cause of illusion is not within effect. For this reason the entire mass of so-called empirical knowledge which science has gained by reasoning through the senses is invalid.

With that said to establish the setting and climate into which Russell brought his “new knowledge” and challenging concepts, I will close this post in order to work on my next post in which I will present some of the conclusions which form the basis of scientific theories — which Russell calls “unnatural theories” — and how and why Russell called them invalid.  One is these “erroneous” scientific beliefs is that light travels at 186,000 miles per second. Russell says that light doesn’t travel at all.  Intriguing, isn’t it?  We’ll learn more about that new concept in a couple of weeks.  Until then,

Be love.  Be loved.

Tony's picture 2 from PeggyAnthony

Read my Health-Light Newsletter at for its informative and inspiring articles on the holistic perspective of health and wellness. The current post is the final installation of the series “Seven Glands for Seven Spirits.” 



Tag Cloud