

About Life Book I:

Understanding Existence

Newton Fortuin

Copyright © Newton Fortuin 2006

Published at Smashwords

Blog: http://newtonfortuin.blogspot.com/

Last updated: 28 December 2014

A Heavenly Gift

The endless night sky,  
A window with a glimpse to a wonder beyond mortal sense or reason,  
The Universe –  
An expanse so vast,  
It transcends the bounds of the most vivid imagination.

For me,  
A traveller in this space,  
It seems all imposing.  
Physically,  
A mere quintessence of dust against infinity.

Yet,  
Is this infinite vastness as omnipotent as the night vision suggests,  
Or merely mortars afloat in a sea of darkened emptiness?  
Is this world some coincidence?  
Some nebulous manifestation having evolved into an ordered system.

Or is it a masterpiece,  
An assemblage of mass and energy in passionate harmony,  
Created with care by the hands of a loving master?

If so,  
Then who is this genius and how has She acquired this divine craft  
applied to such precision?

Perhaps these answers would defy our very existence  
And  
Best kept under eternal darkness.

Be it as it may,  
One thought is like a dawn ray of sun over an infinite horizon.  
All heaven's motions can have but one purpose,  
That of conceiving life,  
Organic intelligent life,  
Life as we know it on earth.

For without it,  
This world is doomed to an endlessly passive existence,  
The debris of some meaningless cosmic explosion.

Though,  
With life  
The entire Universe gains life.  
It gains colour, form and meaning.

Most certainly,  
Only the living can herald its wonders abound  
By traversing it with their infinite imagination.

So next,  
When you gaze at that infinite sky,  
Stand tall, reach out,  
And accept your very own gift of life with grace and dignity.

But remember,  
Only you can make it truly yours

by giving it purpose and meaning.

Newton Fortuin, 1993
Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

About the Framework for Existence

Developing a Model for Existence

The Good News

Some Clarification

A Word of Caution

UNCOVERING THE MYSTERY

Against the Odds

Thought Provoking Experiments

The Heart of the Matter

What Monkeys Know

THE SILLY THEORY

Mental Preparation

Light as a Wave

The Luminiferous Ether

Light as a Particle

The Spooky Experiment

Making a Rational Breakthrough

FRAMING REALITY

Crossing the Chasm

Ordinary Relativity

Time and the Special Theory of Relativity

The Twins Paradox

The Exclusion Principle

The Imaginary Zone

Modelling Existence

BEYOND SPACE AND TIME

Gravity and the General Theory of Relativity

The Event Horizon

Matter and Energy

Identifying the Threads

Finding the Imaginary Realm

Untying the Knot

UNFOLDING EXISTENCE

A sneak Peek at God's Cards

How to Build a Universe

The Final Draft

The Magic Trick of Life

God's Original Plan

SPLITTING HAIRS

Chemical Manifestation

The Origins of Instinct

Genes hold the Key

Opposite Identical Twins

The Unmanifest Identity

The Answer in an Egg Shell

BEYOND MERE CHANCE

The Future is Nigh

The Dilemma of Knowing what will happen Next

Ordered Chaos

The Butterfly Effect

The Dance of Life

The Virtual Reality Program of Life

The Infinite Loop

CONCLUSION

FINAL NOTE

Introduction

"Nothing seems of more importance, towards erecting a firm system of sound and real knowledge, which may be proof against the assaults of scepticism, than to lay the beginning in a distinct explication of what is meant by thing, reality, existence: for in vain shall we dispute concerning the real existence of things, or pretend to any knowledge thereof, so long as we have not fixed the meaning of those words." – George Berkeley

About the Framework for Existence

I know that, in attempting a manuscript of this nature, I have set myself a near impossible task. Yet in my view, wanting to know the philosophical and scientific basis of how it is possible that we exist at all, and why, is the most important endeavour one can ever embark upon in one's lifetime.

To serve as an introduction to this work that we may put this quest into some perspective, I have quoted below from the conclusion of Stephen Hawking's famous work, A Brief History in Time, first published in 1988.

...

Einstein once asked the question: 'How much choice did God have in constructing the universe?'

Even if there is only one possible unified theory, it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?

The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe.

Why does the universe go to all that trouble of existing? Is the unified theory so compelling that it brings about its own existence? Or does it need a creator, and, if so, does he have any other effect on the universe? And who created him?

Up to now, most scientists have been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is to ask the question why. On the other hand, the people whose business it is to ask why, the philosophers, have not been able to keep up with the advance of scientific theories.

In the eighteenth century, philosophers considered the whole of human knowledge, including science, to be their field and discussed questions such as: did the universe have a beginning?

However in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, science became too technical and mathematical for the philosophers, and everyone else except a few specialists.

Philosophers reduced the scope of their enquiries so much that Wittgenstein, the most famous philosopher of the 20th century, said 'The sole remaining task for philosophy is the analysis of language.'

What a comedown from the great tradition of philosophy from Aristotle to Kant!

However, if we do discover a complete theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few scientists. Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist.

If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we would know the mind of God." i

Developing a Model for Existence

The model that will be described in this work is logically formulated similar to that of a computer network model. For ease of understanding a computer network is logically divided into seven conceptual layers though they are in fact inseparable.

This allows for a standard way of viewing the workings of the network and is universally known as the OSI (Open Systems Interconnection – depicted in Figure 1) model.

Figure 1 – The OSI Network Model

The OSI Model divides network communication in progressive levels from its basic physical transmission devices to how the end user eventually interacts with it through the user interface (usually a printer, mouse and keyboard).

For the purposes of developing a similar model to understand existence one can logically reduce the entire seven layered model into a three layered model as depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2 – OSI Model as Three-Layered Sandwich

Here the actual data exchange takes place in the middle three layers while the user only experiences the outer application layer by interacting with the software applications specifically designed to facilitate his user specific tasks. Therefore when two users communicate with each other as on the Internet, they are oblivious of the complicated technical interactions which are involved in all the other layers.

And it is my suspicion that this is exactly how it is in our reality framework as well. Though:

Unlike formulating a model of something we are the creator of, framing existence is like the cyber-fellow in a computer game wondering why he is being kicked whenever the kickboxing software is turned on. And since no other option is apparent, feels compelled to kick back whenever it can.

At this point it is important to stop and think a little about what was described in the block above. In fact the fellow in the kickboxing game experiences a cause-and-effect reality as he relates to his particular cyber-world.

This is just as we do when viewing reality from an existential perspective. What must be grasped is that we are literally forced to experience our own reality through our five senses in exactly such a manner. Largely oblivious to the deeper levels of reality that defines who we are and what we are experiencing.

The Good News

The good news is that we are getting closer to understanding these deeper layers since science has now moved to the next frontier, from only exploring the rational ordered universe, to the transition zone of the Quantum Element.

Recent scientific experiments in quantum physics have shed enormous light on how this world might function and have confirmed beliefs by early quantum physicists that light is not the fastest moving particle. That information at the quantum level passes instantaneously, and thus is infinitely faster. And that virtual chaos exists at the level of the atom. The latter indicating that existence is not sure what it must be in this region. That is whether it must be a particle or whether it must be a wave.

That light is the fastest moving entity was considered immutable by Einstein. That chaos exists in the quantum domain and that photons can communicate telepathically, he countered with the following quote.

It seems hard to sneak a look at God's cards. But that He plays dice and uses 'telepathic' methods – is something that I cannot believe for a single moment.

That quantum particles can communicate telepathically was however verified by an experiment in 1997 in Geneva Switzerland. Irrespective of this quote, hardly anyone else has done more to advance the understanding of the world around us. And his revolutionary insights into the nature of time and space also will form the basis of this work. ii

Some Clarification

On the Framework

The first all-important clarification to bear in mind about this work is that it presents a logical or conceptual – not technical – interpretation of the world as we ordinarily relate to it. It should therefore not be equated to how physicists may describe its intricate external nature. This being significantly more involved than this work attempts to do.

Let me emphasise this that it be born in mind as the work continues.

This is not a technical explanation. Rather, it looks at the philosophic implications of a diverse set of scientific findings to interpret a meaningful approach to aid relating to these often incomprehensible findings. This often requires we resist thinking in terms of the model described in technical terms.

In any event physicists are yet still only attempting to decipher the mathematics of what appears only to be the infinitesimal surface layer of reality. And if the current methodology is to be followed, we cannot even begin to infer any deeper meaning that could necessarily be attached to these discoveries.

On the Reality of Materiality

While the proposed model may seem to propose an illusory model of sorts that appears to suggest the physical unreality of materiality, it nonetheless from the onset must be appreciated that this is merely an intellectual (or philosophic) attempt to conceptually understand the underlying dynamics behind it.

And very importantly: while the information provided may suggest otherworldly dynamics, we have to realise that our world is as we smell, hear, touch, taste, see, and even more importantly, as we may generally feel it to be. That is, not only as we may perceive it through our five externally focused senses.

This tangible appreciation of the nature of our world is paramount as we ordinarily relate towards our sensory environment. For when we defined that something is tangible or physical or material, it indeed was given such a reference based on how our senses had experienced it. That is irrespective of whether we now may have insights into the nature of the finest scale of existence that suggests at that particular level it may be otherwise.

To this end we have to intellectually appreciate that this level of reality is not perceptively real to us. Therefore the terminology of our world at large should also not be applicable to it, though we may be forced to use it to describe its very mysterious reality.

A Word of Caution

Admittedly, while many scientists are doing truly pioneering work, many scientists are engaging experiments on the power of mind simply to promote a New Age doctrine which I do not personally agree with. However, whatever their motivation may be, their science is looked at for what it is without any attachment to the specific philosophy being propagated. The dangers of these views are discussed in another book titled Scourge I: The Demise of Critical Thinking in the Age of "The Secret".

While these scientists may have been motivated to prove their particular worldview and thus embarked on their particular scientific direction, it is important to realise that their science, if done in accordance with strict scientific principles, can definitely inform a deeper understanding of reality. Albeit that it at times requires a radical mindshift or that the existing understanding of reality would need some tweaking.

What is imperative though is that the philosophy that may have motivated the endeavour and which supposedly had been proven, not be a stumbling block to viewing the findings. Indeed the underlying philosophy should be completely disregarded, and that any philosophic understanding that emerges from it be based on the full database of knowledge, facts and experience we do have at our disposal.
Chapter One

Uncovering the Mystery

"Many and strange are the universes that drift like bubbles in the foam upon the River of Time." – Arthur C. Cark from The Wall of Darkness.

Against the Odds

A few weeks before writing the poem A Heavenly Gift I read a book titled Cosmic Coincidences by the UK based science writer John Gribbin and Cambridge University Professor Martin Rees. In it they explained the many anomalies that eventually led to our existence as intelligent beings living on earth. These facts astounded me leaving me even more confounded than I was before.

In the book the authors methodically described that the anthropic universe (a universe tailor made for life) we're living in is a damn near impossibility, being the result of many unlikely coincidences. iii

The Stable Universe

One of these coincidences is that the exact rate at which the universe is expanding is precisely the rate required for a stable universe to exist and galaxies to be 'cooked' into stars. That is opposed to the 'stuff' of the universe aimlessly and formlessly hurtling away at fantastic speeds. Or on the other hand, had the Big Bang explosion not sent its particles off with enough force they would not have been able to have travelled the required distance, therefore to be sucked back into the infinitely dense mass it originated from.

Consequently the rate at which the universe is expanding is an absolute imperative for a cosmos capable of conceiving life as we know it on earth.

In fact the probability of this exact rate of expansion just spontaneously occurring as determined by scientists is one in ten to the power sixty (one followed by sixty zeros).

To put the above probability another way, it is more likely that George Bush will in the next sixty seconds while I'm writing this work, rock-up at my home in Cape Town South Africa asking me to go fly fishing, than that sort of odds ever occurring.

But the reality is, it most definitely did!!!

The Missing Stuff

To add a further twist to this, scientists cannot as yet account for why it is so – that the universe expands at the rate it does – because it apparently does not consist of sufficient matter (or stuff) to hold it all together to begin with.

To understand this one must be aware that the 'glue' holding the universe together, is gravity. And that gravity is exerted relative to the mass of the object being attracted. In plain English, the larger objects are, the greater their attraction to one another. While the further they move apart, the weaker the attraction between them becomes. Thus if we were to move far enough away from the earth, its gravity would lose its grip on us, and we would be set adrift aimlessly in the heavens.

This understanding is derived primarily from the classic Newtonian model of physics as universal attraction is currently understood. And that our universe appears for the most part to be empty space with only miniscule specs of stuff floating around in it, completely defying this undisputed law of nature. In fact more than ninety percent of the required material content theoretically needed to hold the universe together cannot be accounted for.

Therefore contrary to this law: the 'known' universe does not have enough material to prevent it from formlessly hurtling to outer space.

This is as understood from Newtonian as well as other conceptual scientific frameworks.

In other words:

Our stable planetary system appears to defy the most basic law of physics.

Hence a scientific vacuum exists, or to use an unscientific term – a basic universal mystery is apparent – that to a large extent supports the perceived implausibility of existence far beyond the odds given.

The Elixir of Life

Though, even greater odds are at play to eventually have a planet that has all the myriad of conditions exactly right that life could even stand a chance to begin with.

Now having somehow overcome the overwhelming odds of having a benign hospitable universe that had led to an incredibly hospitable planet such as our earth, a phenomenal string of other intricate interdependent impossibilities led to the eventual formation of life. For instance the random formation of a single collagen protein molecule is impossible without the prior existence of life and some form of intelligence in the first place. The calculated odds against its spontaneous formation being 1 in 10 to the power 260.

To appreciate its magnitude, 10 to the power 260 is more than all the atoms in the entire universe. To perceive it you must first contemplate how minutely small an atom is and how magnificently large the universe is.

As we commonly understand it, proteins cannot exist without living organisms to make them in the first place. Yet formation of protein molecules is an absolute requirement for living organisms, let alone the evolving of complex intelligent beings as ourselves capable of perceiving, conceptualizing and rationalizing to the remarkable extent to which we obviously can.

Nonetheless, a number of rationalizations are made as to how it might have occurred, but certainly are confined to mere speculation. And unless an experimental situation is established in which atoms somehow randomly combine to form proteins, it will remain mere speculation. iv

Reconciling the Impossibility

Only three improbabilities were cited above while there are infinitely many more responsible for the formation of the universe as it is. And particularly that the conditions in it are perfect for the formation of intelligent life.

For instance protein cells can only occur once a stable universe exists, but there are a myriad of coincidences that must occur in between: such as a planet that is not too hot or too cold, with the right gravity in the vicinity of a stable star such as our sun that has enough fuel to burn as long as it is necessary for it to provide a sustainable environment for life to evolve to high levels of complexity. In fact it needs to burn for a few billion years at a consistent intensity not to destroy the earth's delicate ecosystem that would allow protein based organism to evolve to greater complexity.

Since most of these coincidences are co-dependent on each other they should be multiplied by one another to determine the final odds that eventfully had led to intelligent Homo-sapiens.

One of the accepted scientific arguments used to explain these unlikely events is that our universe just so happen to be one of an infinite number of randomly and spontaneously formed one's that are floating like bubbles on the river of time. And that we, by virtue of being alive, are viewing the apparent marvel of existence from the vantage of one of these which per chance got all the myriad of factors exactly right.

The implication being. That the perceived coincidence is not such a great miracle after all, as one out of an infinite array of possibilities implies the improbable will eventually have its chance of occurring anyway.

While not necessarily looking at the plausibility behind such arguments, it is interesting though that science gives credence to such convenient speculation while demanding scientific exactness for others. Hence a double standard appears to exist that allows for fantastic otherworldly premises, but dismisses what should be regarded as a reasonable postulation. It is to accept that an underlying intelligence is responsible for creation. In this way to remove the destructive mindset that diminishes the marvel of existence to a mere statistical aberration.

And by this I am not disputing the infinite universe argument. But in giving this view there is an all-knowing arrogance, while on the other hand we do not as yet know some of the most basic mechanics behind our own being. It therefore appears that we may be speculating on infinite worlds beyond our physical experience, merely to avoid what well may be the most reasonable and ultimately most fascinating conclusion.

It is that:

Our existence is not merely a statistical anomaly,

but rather appears to be the product of pure Divine Intelligent Creation.

And that:

Our existence as rational intelligent perceptive beings,

is an active extension of that very Intelligence.

What this "Intelligence" may be, and how it may interact in our daily lives, is a discussion for another edition.

Thought Provoking Experiments

We know from our daily interactions with the world around us that the brain can affect physical reality through our conscious actions by virtue of our bodies being the conveyors of our intentions. But it is also asserted that thought – such as visualization, strong intentions, as well as prayer – may on its own affect material events. And based on well documented though often disputed science, this is exactly what some much esteemed scientists are suggesting.

For instance in a research study published in a very reputable journal Social Indicators Research, a group of over 4,000 transcendental meditation practitioners from 81 countries assembled in Washington DC to affect one of the largest social experiments ever. They collectively meditated in the city for an 8 week period, and while doing so the comparative crime statistics had shown that between June 7 and July 30 1993, a drop in crime of 23% had resulted. This supposedly due to the calming effect of the meditation.

This phenomenon is now referred to as the Maharishi Effect and it had been calculated that the odds against this eventuality spontaneously occurring is less than 2 in 1 billion, with rigorous statistical analysis ruling out an extensive list of alternative explanations (also refer to The Enlightenment Effect in Scourge I: The Demise of Critical Thinking in the Age of "The Secret").

While that is astounding on its own, the meditation however did not affect physical reality itself, just the minds of those predisposed to certain behaviour. Even more convincing is that quantum experiments conducted have had differing outcomes where it appears that the intention of the scientist was the determinant. This therefore suggesting that the particular expectation the scientist had before the experiment must have contributed to the particular end result.

This understanding suggesting that the brain connects at an intelligent quantum level that may allow the unfolding of events based on our intentions.

This currently is a real sticky point in science as conventional scientists are resisting the notion that nature is more deterministic than they previously had supposed. This is because implies that something else, including our thoughts, can determine the movements of previously considered random unintelligent physical entities as well.

Though these results seems to suggest that the experimental observer can influence the outcome of events at a quantum level, it is apparent that these experiments only affected reality on the most singular level.

What about trillions of atoms of seemingly unrelated physical entities acting in unison to orchestrate the requirements of a particular thought as is required with physically manifesting our prayers?

The extent to which thoughts on its own do manifest reality is debatable, but merely to have a thought to lift your hand or my fingers to move in a coordinated manner as I'm typing this work without thinking of my fingers at all, is a remarkable manifestation of intention on its own. Indeed, trillions of atoms indeed did respond to my request. Though this seems far less remarkable because neurons had been the physical conveyers of that message. Thus it simply appears to be nothing more than a chemo-physical manifestation triggered by my neurons.

However to this end Dr. William A. Tiller (a particle physicist and Professor Emeritus at Stanford University) has devised empiric experiments that have proven exactly this. In a consistently repeatable experiment four experienced meditators were tasked to imprint specific intentions in an electrical device – for instance, either an intention to raise or lower the pH of water – after which the device was wrapped in aluminium foil, and shipped to a laboratory 2000 miles away.

And the result: after the device was unwrapped, plugged into an electrical outlet and switched on leaving the device in the vicinity of a jar of water; after a period of 2-3 months the pH in the water was affected accordingly, with pH level changes exceeding 1 occurring.

For those who may not know this, pH is a scale for measuring the acidity or alkalinity of a fluid and can have values between 1 and 12; this depending on the relative acidity or alkalinity of a liquid with water having a neutral value. Thus a change of more than 1 is a change of around 20% either way, a very large change which would account for any other normal variations.

To reiterate, the experiment was consistently repeatable (by Dr. Tiller's team as well as by other scientists at other institutions) and conclusively proves the overall principle that at some level our clear intentions can to some extent alter the physical make-up of the world around us. This notwithstanding the now incredible fact that a specific thought can literally be recorded and then be transported to another location thousands of miles away.

With regard to the integrity of the test results, the attitude I prefer to have on whether the experiments should be trusted is simple. Firstly, the results proves an age old universally contended observation. But more importantly, Dr. Tiller would be the biggest fool to have risked his career to make such wild assertions without the necessary up, and did he just one day wake up and decide to become a scientific fraudster.

So unless one is dogmatically cynical, one must conclude that:

We can affect material reality through our brain,

and that this now can be accepted as scientific fact.

Over and above this conclusion one must realise that the only way the experiment could have been affected is if the individual water molecules on their own somehow collectively possessed the 'intelligence' necessary to understand the message in the device to manifest the intended response without any detail for them to know how to do so.

Thus they must have implicitly known what "Ph up" or "Ph down" meant. How on earth can this possibly be?

This must be so as water does not consist of a neural network such as that found in advanced living organisms that can respond to a particular external impulse. And not only does dead water molecules appear to understand our intentions, but they seem to possess the organising capacity to affect the incredibly complicated transformations required to rearrange its molecular structure in order to achieve the required chemical and structural configuration as per the initial intention.

To appreciate the magnitude of this revelation, one must realise that every individual molecule had to respond uniquely based on the overall intention. As a result it requires the most incredible spatial organising capacity. Yet as we ordinarily look at them, they appear to exist as autonomous entities from one another.

To put this into perspective, if a dog is given the instruction to sit in English, no matter how intelligent it might be, it would never respond appropriately if it had only been exposed to Chinese. For that matter the same would apply to a highly intelligent human as well.

Thus it can only be concluded that a universal language of thought must exist that extends beyond our own intelligent being, but seems to exist in every aspect of all material creation as well.

And furthermore, every smallest aspect of the atom in the entire universe thus must speak the same universal language to which they are individually able to respond to in such an incredibly coordinated manner.

How can one begin to explain this apparent collective co-existence based on our current cause-and-effect model of the universe?

The fact is that we can't.

This is because the cause-and-effect understanding of the world mentally confines us to experience the first layer of reality as depicted in our network model. Hence we are only observing the surface of a much deeper reality.

What this evidence incontrovertibly points to is that the entire universe is intelligent, down to the workings of the tiniest aspect of the atom. And that our mind is much more powerful than we may previously have thought, appearing to be an intrinsic aspect of a much larger Collective Whole. v, vi

The Heart of the Matter

While informing a friend at the University of Cape Town Medical School about my manuscript his faculty at the time was in some consternation about an article a colleague had brought to their attention the day before.

It was titled Electrophysiological Evidence of Intuition (McCraty et al, 2004) based on a study done at the HeartMath Research Centre in Boulder Creek California. This journal article providing what appears to be conclusive evidence that we have access to intuitive processes, and fascinatingly, that the heart appears to play the primary role in processing this extrasensory information.

Ironically the primary problem for the esteemed scientists was not the validity of the science as the methodology was beyond refuting, but rather the particular finding. The problem was that it was confirming dynamics that scientist until now had not been very comfortable with while additionally proving that a metaphysical reality now cannot be avoided.

Briefly, the methodology of the experiment was based on exposing a group of 26 males and females to emotionally arousing stimuli (such as explicit pictures of accidents and sex) or emotionally calming stimuli (neutral backgrounds). In this experiment it was 30 calming and 15 arousing pictures. Participants were then strapped to a number of sensors that included an Electro-encephalogram (EEG) to measure brain activity and Electrocardiogram (ECG) to measure heart response. The participants were then showed the images in a controlled environment.

However the key was to detect whether any pre-stimulus was discernible.

A pre-stimulus is some physiologically measurable response that indicates that the body had in advance perceived what the stimulus would be.

And the results were conclusive in that:

Both the heart and the brain correctly intuited the stimulus in all individuals based on measuring the associated response before the respective stimulus was actually shown.

Specifically, the heart pre-stimulus was received on average 4.5 seconds before the images were actually shown, while the brain only responded 3.5 seconds before. What is also amazing is that the same sensors detected the exact same response when the respective image was eventually shown. Thus the pre-stimulus perceived by intuitive pathways was the same as that perceived by the eyes.

Besides the fact that future events were correctly perceived before it actually happened, the most amazing conclusion is that the heart seems to have been the primary entity responsible for processing this type of information.

The researchers also made assertions that were based on recent research, that: "the heart's intrinsic nervous system not only makes adjustments to the heart's rhythmic activity on a beat-to-beat basis, but can even override inputs from the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems".

It further concludes that: "intuitive perception involves the body's connection to a field of information beyond normal conscious awareness".

One of the primary scepticism with regard to the heart's possible greater involvement in the higher dynamics of our physiology has always been its physical structure and its apparent specificity of purpose—that it is a pump without the cellular and neurological content for such complicated a task as interpreting the future.

Be that as it may, the experimental results do suggest that much of our being (if not all) resides in a dimension beyond our physical body.

The researchers responsible for the study are in the process of preparing a paper on how this dynamic can be explained. In the research document they have indicated that: "the interaction between the body and the ambient field of energy surrounding it operates as a holographic-like information processing system that informs the body about 'future' events."

While these scientists are looking at this matter technically, the aim of this work however is to use these amazing revelations to interpret its philosophic significance and how it relates to our daily interactions.

And one of the most important of these questions from this discovery being, whether we now should rather let our heart lead our head? vii

What Monkeys Know

In a 30 year study of the behaviour of a group of monkeys known as the Macaca Fascata found only on a small group of Japanese islands, it is reported that between 1952 and 1958 a fascinating phenomenon had occurred. This at least is according to Ken Keyes Junior in the book The Hundredth Monkey where he relates apparent anecdotal evidence of events that had transpired based on the observations of the scientists and helpers that was involved with the study.

In essence what the story suggests is how a quantum-leap of collective monkey consciousness had occurred when the entire known population of the monkeys acquired an innovative potato washing ability. That is six years after it was first observed being performed by a particular monkey called Imo. Before that all monkeys of this genus ate unwashed sandy potatoes.

The story describes how, after a certain threshold of monkeys (hypothetically this is ascribed the number 100) on Imo's island acquired the potato washing behaviour by learning it from one another, the behaviour somehow seemed to have leap-frogged over to the adjacent islands where all the Macaca Fascata started washing their potatoes as well.

Though according to the actual scientific reports, it appears that the behaviour was only propagated through normal learning among the young of the particular group on Imo's island. On the other hand the older animals generally remained resistant to acquiring the behaviour for the remainder of their natural life.

After many years it was observed that certain monkeys on other islands with a similar personality predisposition as Imo had also acquired the behaviour. Thus no quantum leap of consciousness had occurred. Nevertheless it is apparent that particular monkeys that were not exposed to the behaviour had somehow been more prone to initially acquiring the behaviour than others.

Based on the above story The Hundredth Monkey Phenomenon was postulated by botanist Lyall Watson who suggests that much of our social behaviour is similarly informed by some underlying morphogenetic field that has an effect on our individual human behaviour as well. This in fact has spawned some new age views that one day our world will similarly wake up to a new dawn of love and brotherhood of mankind where all sentient life will live in peace and harmony with one another. This supposedly will ensue as a result of increased mediation as described before, which too will eventually affect such a quantum leap of human consciousness.

While the principle assertion of the 100th Monkey Phenomenon in my view is not a realistic one, based on the discussion to follow the concept of some shared morphogenic field is nevertheless plausible. It also may be suggestive of some sort of logical mechanism which allows species to intelligently evolve. That is, that some or other collective mindspace exists which gets updated with newer and newer information to better equip species for their survival. This suggesting that evolution may not be a purely random mechanical phenomenon, although it may appear to be random in its outworking.

And to unfold this argument, we have to start off with an understanding of the intrinsic nature of space and time. For as you will soon discover, it is not quite as it appears. viii
Chapter Two

The Silly Theory

"It is often stated that of all the theories proposed in this century, the silliest is quantum theory. In fact, some say that the only thing that quantum theory has going for it is that it is unquestionably correct." – Michio Kaku

Mental Preparation

When reading this section on Quantum Mechanics be forewarned that the science behind it is so obscure that even the most talented minds of our time are stilling grappling with the philosophical issues it raises. So, don't be too hard on yourself if you have some trouble comprehending it.

While they mainly have been grappling over exactly what is happening, the great quantum debate has also been about its philosophical implications. But moreover, what this understanding means on our daily lives.

The main problem is that, because the results are so incredibly baffling when viewed from our perceptual perspective as they appear to defy the basic laws of physics, it also is completely counter rational and counter intuitive as well.

Despite the importance of scientific scepticism on such matters, what is required to make sense of what is to follow is that one refrains from attempting to make too much rational sense of the information provided (at least not yet). Simply accept these as hard scientific fact.

The reason for this requirement is that, unless one has developed a paradoxical view on reality, one will attempt to interpret the information from one's sensory perspective alone. This would be counterproductive to your understanding as the information that follows does not reflect the surface layer of reality we are overwhelmingly exposed to. As with our Network Sandwich, our sensory perception can be compared to the experience of the end user interacting with the computer, and who is oblivious to the workings in the deeper layers. For them to make sense of these layers, they would require a very in depth understanding of the technical workings of the physical network. This would then be equivalent to the understanding a quantum scientist has.

When relating it to our network model, this would be the same as not knowing that there are silicone chips, hard discs, software, cables, networks, satellites and technicians behind the scenes driving this communication, and that one is for the very first time presented with this information. However, that it is so in our computer model is not such a great mystery, since we designed and manufactured this technology ourselves, and hence we already have the blueprint to explain it to ourselves. But this is not the case with our understanding of the makings of the quantum world.

Thus, for now, merely read this section without delving too deeply into aspects which will seem strange. This can be done by avoiding questions such as "how can this possibly be?" Instead simply unconditionally accepting that reality at this level is this way; and whenever you are so confounded, rather to say "Wow, that's amazing!", and leave it at that. At least until you have completed your first read.

In doing so, you will allow the answer to reveal itself as the work progresses.

And while one may yet be sceptical about the findings, as mentioned before, everything covered in this section is absolute scientific fact, and has been so for a very long time, albeit that they are truly very strange scientific fact.

Light as a Wave

The central mystery in physics ever since the days of Newton is the unanswered questions about the intrinsic nature of light.

Despite all the confusion and debate over the centuries, one thing about it has always been incontestable:

That light is propagated as a wave, or at least it exhibits the qualities of a wave.

This is easily inferred as experiments that apply to any other medium through which waves are propagated – such as water or sound – applies to light as well. Thus light can similarly be reflected, refracted and interfered-with in the same way as one can with any other wave that passes through a medium—such as water or air.

That there was an ether of sorts through which light was propagated in, was absolutely accepted until a century or so ago, before cutting edge science revealed some incredible inconsistencies about light's nature. These peculiarities were so unusual that the debate over the actual nature of light became the centre stage for one of the greatest scientific controversies ever.

The cardinal problem with the notion that light is propagated (or transported) as a wave, and one that scientists to this day are grappling with, is that:

If light is a wave, then through what medium is its energy travelling through?

To understand this problem, one must appreciate that light from the sun reaches us through what for all intents and purposes is a physical vacuum as all that exists between the earth's outer atmosphere and the Sun is absolutely empty space. And in this space not even traces of air molecules (or molecules of any kind) can be found. Hence nothing that can be considered as remotely physical or tangible exists in this space that would allow light to be transmitted as energy alone.

Though as an absolute rule of physics:

The propagation of energy waves of any kind requires a substance or medium of some sort to travel through.

So for instance an ocean wave originates from some physical disturbance of water, usually the wind in the polar regions; the energy that results from that disturbance then passing as a sinusoidal (wave) motion. This is physically seen as a wave on the surface of the water which reaches the mainland where it eventually breaks down as it crashes into sold ground. Thus the energy of the initial disturbance is finally dissipated on the shore.

However:

No net transportation of water molecules resulted to achieve the transfer of energy.

Sound waves are similar in that no sound can be transported from one object to another if there is no air between them—in this case the air is the physical medium transferring the sound energy.

This is unlike the way wind is propagated:

Wind literally being the movement of air molecules pushing against each other propagating themselves collectively in a particular direction.

This is also as water flows in a river where water molecules are physically transported by pushing and pulling one another along the course of the river trench.

Thus the crucial question we have to ask at this point is:

How does light reach us on earth through the physical vacuum of space if it indeed is a wave?

The Luminiferous Ether

The question the above begs is this: is the apparent emptiness around us really empty?

And if it is not, then what is the 'substance' it consist of?

To account for this mystery of what supposedly exists in this apparently "empty space" the 17th century French philosopher Rene Descartes and English scientist Isaac Newton postulated that an invisible imaginary medium or substance they called the Luminiferous Ether must exist in order to account for, in particular, the propagation of light. Except for the fact that it may logically account for the movement of light, based on the demand of science for physical proof, it consequently could not be proven to exist as it merely was a logical device in the absence of any other explanation.

Nevertheless Descartes and Newton insisted that this mysterious substance must surround us or else it would be impossible for any light from the greater universe to reach us at all.

The notion that there is such an invisible intangible Ether (or non-material 'substance') however has now been discarded after an experiment done in the late 19th century by the American scientists Morley and Michelson. In this experiment they discovered that the speed of light was a physically absolute – that the speed of light remains constant relative to that of any observer.

What this implies is that:

If an observer is measuring the speed of light, whether he is travelling in the direction of a light beam or in the opposite direction; the speed of light will remain absolutely unchanged irrespective.

This is as opposed to any physical phenomena. To understand this one must realise that we can travel at the same speed as an ocean wave (as a surfer does) and therefore would have zero relative speed to it.

Though if you were to travel at the same speed in the opposite direction to the wave, then the wave would be travelling at double your speed away from you.

This is also so for sound travelling as illustrated in Figure 3 where its usual speed in air is 344km/hr.

Figure 3 – Cumulative effect of the speed of sound

In the depiction the cumulative speed of the oncoming sound experienced by the driver must include: that of the ambulance travelling towards him (this however does not impact the equation); the sound coming of the ambulance siren also travelling towards him (344m/s); the driver's speed travelling towards the ambulance (30m/s). This adds up to 374 m/s.

Though in the case of light we know that it travels at 300,000,000 metres per second. However, should we be travelling towards the sun at let's say 200,000,000 metres per second, the speed of light will still be approaching us at the very same speed as before, that is at  metres per second. Thus it will not be reaching us at the logical speed we would have supposed which is the speed of light added to our own speed, that is:

300,000,000m/s+ 200,000,000m/s = 500,000,000m/s.

This is scenario is illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4 – Unchanging speed of light

Logically speaking, the fact that light can never travel towards us at a speed other than 300,000,000 metres per second literally requires the traveller conform its nature to it, as light seemingly is not prepared to change itself in order to conform to the Newtonian interpretation of reality.

The frightening conclusion of this is that:

Light in essence requires the traveler to change his physical makeup to conform to its unchangeable nature.

For now, don't try too hard to get your head around this. Rather accept that this is the intrinsic nature of the universe in which light appears to be making all the rules of the physical universe.

It is interesting that the concept of the Luminiferous Ether was discarded primarily because of this new insight. This was done because the apparent unchangeable nature of light somehow implied that Newton's laws do not apply consistently in the universe, and that physics required a completely new interpretation.

And furthermore, that light's seemingly different nature somehow negated the requirement for a medium for light's wave propagation. However, by discarding of the notion of a Luminiferous Ether, scientists also discarded the only plausible basis which could explain how light possibly could reach us through the apparent emptiness of our physical universe.

Light as a Particle

A further development in the on-going scientific and philosophic saga around light, is that in 1924 Swiss physicist Louis de Broglie postulated that light must have a dual nature which he referred to as its wave-particle nature. This postulation now is considered a scientific fact and also forms the basis of Quantum Physics and its subsequent 'messiness'.

What de Broglie suggests is:

That light behaves somewhat like a particle, somewhat like a wave.

Does this part particle aspect now imply that it can travel from one place to another as any material object such as a cannonball could, propelled by its own kinetic energy?

The first real problem is that:

Light has no mass and thus has no momentum to carry through the journey.

Though, in very real terms a significant overriding mystery is apparent in this postulation.

What does the above duel nature of light really mean? And, because light now has such a particle-like nature, can it now get away with not needing a medium for propagation as is implied?

Despite all the theory around it, when one looks at it closely, light truly is nothing but an absolute wave that manifests itself as if it is a particle. This is because it gets formed in wave packets or quanta which flicker in and out of existence. In other words it is formed as small grouped locations of vibrational energy that in a sense can be viewed as little virtual particles, though this is where its similarity with physical particles ends.

This understanding is illustrated in Figure 5.

Figure 5 – Light as a wave

Though despite their part particle designation, they are in fact really waves (or wavacles or packets of vibrational energy). Or as it is referred to in physics, they are Quanta of light energy or Photons that appear as tiny particles that flash in and out of existence.

To get a sense of light's apparent particle nature, these light photons moving through space and time can also be viewed as in Figure 6.

Figure 6 – Logical Depiction of a moving light photon

Thus, despite its apparent particleness, light essentially is a wave showing particle-like characteristics. And thus logically speaking, must still require a medium of some sort or other for it to move through apparently physically empty space.

The Spooky Experiment

By far the greatest mystery of light is revealed by one of the most basic of all scientific experiments known as Young's Double Split Experiment.

The object of the experiment is to view the interference patterns of waves of similar phase. Usually the result is exaggerated wave patterns as the wave peaks and troughs interferes with each other. This is as illustrated in Figure 7.

Figure 7 – Young's Double-slit wave experiment

These interference patterns can be seen in any medium in which waves are propagated. This includes light waves. However in a variation of the above experiment where a single light quantum (in other words, a single light particle, and thus an indivisible physical entity) is projected onto the double slit, one of the single-most significant scientific results is observed.

The photon (or light quantum) appears to have subdivided itself in order to pass through both slits, simultaneously.

This depicted in Figure 8.

Figure 8 – Young's Single Photon with wave detection only

However, should two detectors that tests for the particle nature of light be placed behind both of these slits, something fascinating occurs.

Instead of detecting the presence of a photon on each detector as one would've expected given the wave based experiment, only one photon can be detected.

And furthermore, that the wave pattern along the partner slit also completely disappears, with no interference pattern being perceived either.

This is as depicted in Figure 9.

Figure 9 – Young's Single Photon with wave and particle detection

The logical conundrum presented by this scenario, at least when viewed from a cause-and-effect perspective, is that it suggests that light must have some or other form of intelligence.

In other words:

The result suggests that a choice had to have been be made in advance about which slit it wanted to enter through.

What can be concluded from this experiment is that an experimental setup that only tests for the wave nature of light literally allows the respective photon to be all its potential possibilities. At that stage light literally is a possibility wave that can choose to manifest in infinitely many ways. In fact that singular quantum can be in all places it possibly is logically allowed to be, all at once.

However, the moment the objective requirement of the experimental setup requires it to reveal its particle nature, it literally is forced to "make up its mind" as to exactly which one of the two slits it must manifest as a physical entity in.

While this in itself is mind boggling, the central mystery is, at least as we ordinarily look at it, that:

The wave must have entered both slits simultaneously and therefore reached the particle sensor at the same time.

Therefore, even though the particle was physically detected in the one, the wave aspect of that quantum must at least have entered the other slit at that moment for the detector to know the difference (that an experiment requiring particle detection was present). But this had not occurred as not even the wave aspect was perceived in that slit at all.

The problem with this is that, it is only possible if:

The light quanta had known in advance what hole it wanted to enter through before it had left its source of emission.

Making a Rational Breakthrough

Far more advanced experiments using the double split approach had been set up, some acting as a virtual obstacle courses to outfox the quanta of light.

However what these experiments consistently reveal is that light acts as if it can read the mind of those who had set up the experimental protocol to begin with. Notwithstanding how it may appear, what these experiments are increasingly suggesting is that it is not the light quanta outfoxing the experiment, but rather that it may be the scientists who are conducting the experiment who are in fact influencing the outcome of the experimental results.

In other words:

The photons only appear to be as intelligent as those conducting the experiments.

As mentioned before, one's tendency to want to rationalise the above would interfere with one's understanding. It is natural to want to find explanations of such inexplicable phenomena based on one's rational understanding of how we ordinarily interpret the workings of the rational ordered universe as we perceive it through our senses.

The only way to make any headway on this one, however, is to detach from the weirdness of the experiment and to rationally appreciate that we are attempting to define the workings of a completely different world whose intricacies have very little in common with the workings or our sensory world. It also does not operate on the same distinctive set of rules as our rational ordered universe does.

As difficult as it may be for a rational thinking person to accept this, the rational breakthrough required here in order to make any headway, is to accept that the underlying workings of the deeper aspects of our physical world, is far spookier than we may have supposed.

Clarifying Note

It is important to consider the idea of the Luminiferous Ether in relation to the recently discovered Higgs Boson, otherwise known as the "God Particle".

The background to this discovery is that the Higgs Boson (or particle) was a mathematical theory postulated by Peter Higgs and some other scientists in the mid-sixties. The theory suggested that matter does not inherently have mass. However they gain mass when they pass through a field—the Higgs field—that exists throughout the universe.

They proposed that a theoretical particle, the Higgs Boson, act as a carrier in a particular parcel of matter affecting the others. In the process creating the parcel's mass. Other particles such as singular photons can pass right through unaffected unless the Higgs particle is present.

On the 14th of March 2013 this particle was created and detected at the particle accelerator at CERN. On this discovery the theory had moved a quantum leap to becoming scientific fact.

The reference to "God particle" stems from the fact that the universe could conceivably not have existed without it. This is because gravity can in conceptually be viewed as the glue that holds it together. Thus that without this mysterious particle the universe would literally have expanded into infinity at the moment of its inception.

Many theorists and thinkers have postulated that this field is indeed Newton's Ether. The Higgs Field notably is not responsible for the propagation of light, however, but specifically that of effecting gravity.

What to me is intriguing is that Newton in his wildest imaginings, that is given the limited knowledge of the nature of reality at the time, could not have imagined that mass would indeed need a field or any medium other than its intrinsic nature, to exist. But moreover, that light, apparently, does not.
Chapter Three

Framing Reality

Crossing the Chasm

This section will blow your mind!

And despite what you may otherwise tell yourself,

has nothing to do with the supposed complicated mathematics.

That it is complicated, despite your legitimate protestations,

is simply an illusion.

In this section I will be using a very well-known but completely counterintuitive concept – Einstein's Theory of Relativity – to interpret the fundamental nature of reality.

Why this is such a daunting task is primarily because it is mathematical. Yet because it is mathematical is absolutely empiric, and hence is one can make very reliable assertions about reality.

The problem is that it results in a paradoxical interpretation about the nature of our perceptive world.

Because of its contradictory implications, the following section is by far the most difficult to grasp. And if not at least conceptually understood, could potentially present a barrier to understanding much of what will follow. However whether one understands a particular concept or not while reading through the work, it nevertheless is important to continue regardless, not allowing one to get too bogged down with the technicality of any particular section. In this regard it is also best one ignores the footnotes which contain much of the mathematical corroboration, at least until a later read.

It also is important to further appreciate that the sections are not necessarily technically difficult. This is because they are based on two relatively simple mathematical equations. The mental obstacle being that they are truly weird, even absurd, but understanding what they imply having profound implications on our interpretation of reality.

Ordinary Relativity

"It must certainly be allowed, that nature has kept us at a great distance from all her secrets, and has afforded us only the knowledge of a few superficial qualities of objects; while she conceals from us those powers and principles on which the influence of those objects entirely depends..." – David Hume

Simply put the reason why it is virtually impossible to comprehend this information, is because we overwhelmingly experience our respective realities through our five senses.

And the fundamental conceptual problem we have to contend with is that we tend to view time as inextricably linked to a mechanical measuring device, our clocks.

In investigating the technical nature of time one can begin to perceive that time is not as definite as it generally is thought to be. In fact, it is relative. But to understand what this means in terms of Einstein's assertions is not an easy proposition.

Now, where can we possibly begin?

I suppose, by shattering one of our most fundamental perceptual understandings is as good a start as any. It is that time and space does or does not exist depending on how dense you are; and how fast you consequently are able to move.

And by dense I'm not referring to the rate at which your neurons can fire. But I'll leave the technical discussion for later.

When asked to explain his Theory of Relativity to a lay radio audience, it is believed that Einstein gave the following response:

"No two people experience time in the same way at any particular point in time. When I'm talking to a beautiful young lady, time literally flies. But should I be sitting on a hot stove plate, time literally stands still."

It is almost as if some internal observer within us perceives time differently depending on what he or she experiences at that moment. And indeed, should there be no understanding of clocks and measurement, with only an understanding of relative time – only thinking in terms of longer and shorter, or the same time – then time literally would have a less fixed and more random perceptual meaning than we currently have.

Based on this relative understanding of time, when one might have had a busy productive day or have had a boring or frustrating day, one's perception of time would be different as we are perceiving time relatively. Thus on having a bad day one might remark, "Hasn't that been an awfully long day", not in a metaphorical sense, but literally, just as one might remark about the weather being awful. And who's to argue that it wasn't longer if you don't know any 'better'.

However, since we're living in a rational world and we want a sense of conformity and are happiest when others have the same perceptions as we do, I would suppose the arguments that must have resulted over who is actually right when two people disagreed on how long or short a particular day might have been, made it unbearable living in a world not having uniformity on this delicate matter.

The problem with perceiving of relative time in terms of Einstein's assertions is therefore that we've incorporated the paradigm of a mechanical clock into our rational frame of reference. This literary requiring we shatter the clock paradigm before we can truly perceive of relativity. In other words, it is our conditioning—in a way we've been brainwashed into believing in the rational concept of time.

But since it is a truly useful invention in a rationally ordered world allowing us to constructively organise around, I truly doubt whether we will be able to discard of it any time soon.

Though, despite our awareness of the concept of mechanical time, our true identities nonetheless do not perceive of time as fixed in any way, and hence most of us find it incredibly difficult being on time without carrying a watch around.

Time and the Special Theory of Relativity

"... experience only teaches us, how one event constantly follows another; without instructing us in the secret connexion, which binds them together, and renders them inseparable. – David Hume

That time is relative is encapsulated by Time-dilation. This is a proven scientific principle and the basis of the Special Theory of Relativity that suggest that that moving clocks run slow. It primarily asserts that:

Time becomes infinite relative to a static observer for any object approaching the speed of light.

Consider the depiction in Figure 10. It shows a static observer O in a stationary frame of reference (standing on earth); and an observer O' travelling a spaceship.

Figure 10 – Relative Frames of Reference

Based on the speed at which the spaceship is travelling, the following equation applies:

 ix

where v is the velocity at which the spaceship is travelling and c is the speed of light.

The important point to grasp from the above equations is that, depending on the relative speed of the traveller he will experience a correspondingly slower passage of time to that experienced by the stationary observer.

Thus the faster the speed the slower the passage of time, until at speed of light absolutely no time passes at all. Yet we know that light does indeed travel at that very speed since after all, it is light.

________________________

For ease of understanding, the above equation can be rewritten as:

  where   .

Then x  1 for a traveler travelling at normal speeds; and x = 0 for a traveler at the speed of light.

When we enter zero at the bottom of the modified equation, the equation fails as it goes into infinity. Thus the equation does not apply from our rational perspective for any value greater than or equal to the speed of light.

Time-dilation together with Space-contraction (that objects contract with increased speed) are in fact the basis of Einstein's marvellous revelation not E= mc2. While this in itself is an awesome discovery, this equation specifically has to do with the nature of our material world and not directly with the greater concept of relativity.

The Twins Paradox

"The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." – Albert Einstein

Based on the report back I get, the above section is exactly where the wheels completely unravel and one is likely to begin to lose the plot and to blame one's state of confusion on the 'complicated' mathematics. For this reason it is advised that one takes a long mental pause before continuing.

Notwithstanding your potential state of abyss at this point it simply must be accepted that the mathematics is not complicated. In fact it is best ignored except that one realises that it is an absolute scientific fact that time in our universe is governed by this specific equation.

What the equation essentially asserts is that time is not definite, but that it can be experienced on a continuum ranging from absolutely no time at all, to how we are experiencing it right now as mortal beings, as apparently very definite time.

To explain the theory further I will give a mind blowing example of how these dynamics theoretically can take affect:

Imagine twins at their twentieth birthday. One of them setting off on a journey on an enormously powerful spaceship.

Based on the theory there would be a specific speed at which this twin could travel, where only one year might pass form him; while for his brother, the observer back on earth, his normal fifty years would elapse while waiting for him to return.

Of course when the travelling twin returns one year later on his 21st birthday he would have to find a brand new generation to party with (perhaps his brother's grandchildren). On the other hand his brother would be celebrating his 70th birthday, perhaps relaxing on his faithful recliner too frail to engage in any significant activity.

In fact the exact speed the brother is required to travel at is 0.99979998 that of the speed of light.

This is referred to as the Twins Paradox. The real problem with the above is not that relativity is not absolutely so, but rather that it is almost impossible to conceptualise as we therefore would have to discard what we experience as very real as perceived through our senses.

It is nevertheless important to appreciate that Time-dilation has been adequately proven in particle accelerators such as the one at CERN in Switzerland where subatomic particles that has a particular lifespan were tested. Some of these particles decay in only a few second, and when accelerated to particular speeds their lifespan was increased in accordance with the formula.

In another experiment where two incredibly accurate atomic clocks – one mounted on a fast-moving aeroplane (the traveller) and another remaining on the ground (the observer) – were used, the similar results were obtained. By entering the speed at which the plane travelled and the relative times of the two clocks into the Time Dilation equation, the exact time delay expected by the formula, also resulted.

Yet there are aspects of ourselves as will be discussed later, that experiences its particular reality from beyond our conventional understanding of space and time. This for instance can be directly inferred from our Intuition Experiment mentioned before.

To make any headway at all in this section, you simply have to let go of the notion that time is fixed despite your experience of it as such. Rather to on an intellectual level accept that it is relative and that at the speed of light it does not exist at all.

Thus for now, accept that the way you experience time in this very moment, merely is as it is on the surface of reality. And that within deeper levels of reality this does not necessarily apply. In a sense our view of the world is as in the seven layered network model, where we are experiencing the world only through the Application Layer. And because of this orientation, are largely oblivious to the deeper aspects below the surface.

The Exclusion Principle

Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept 'empty space' loses its meaning. – Albert Einstein

In 1925 the Austrian Physicist Wolfgang Pauli – one of the pioneers of Quantum Physics – postulated a much disputed concept called  Pauli's Exclusion Principle.

One of its primary assertions is that two electron pairs must have equal but opposite spin, and that they would maintain this characteristic irrespective of the physical distance between them.

The implication being that the message that a spin had been affected in the one electron would instantaneously be transferred to the partner, irrespective of the physical distance between them. This implies that they could be at the opposite ends of the universe, and if anything happened to the spin of the one, it would instantaneously be communicated to the other—despite finding itself a near infinite distance away.

The scientific problem with this assertion is that the only way this is possible is if a telepathic relationship of sorts exists between them.

This Einstein viewed as ludicrous as he was confident that nothing in the entire universe could move faster than the speed of light. And he had good reason to believe this. For if it was the case, the material basis of our known universe as asserted by classical physics, would be in question. And one of the most important being that it would question the very nature of time itself.

But even more importantly.

If the information passed between two points instantaneously as the theory suggests, by implication the space that we experience around us as real theoretically speaking does not exist at all.

Yet in 1997 a University of Geneva research team under the leadership of Nicolas Gisin separated photon pairs using fibre optic cables. And at a distance of about 7 miles apart two analysers' at either end were placed to detect whether any disturbance on the one photon would affect its partner on the other end.

The physical setup of the experiment is shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11 – University of Geneva Setup

And the resultant finding: that the inconceivable seventy two year old postulation by Pauli was proven to be correct.

One must appreciate that the above result applies equally to protons, electrons, as well as any other subatomic particle, and thus by implication Pauli's Principle and electron spin as well.

What must be realised is that the seven mile distance from the perspective of a photon equates to distances of many universes that has to be travelled from the perspective of something the size of a billiard ball compared to the scale of the electron. But it appears from the photons perspective that the physical space between them is of no consequence to affecting their predefined behaviour.

This is the single most important finding in the history of all of science. Yet its dramatic implication is mostly being ignored by a great many mainstream scientists.

Despite the sceptical arguments regarding these experiments, after almost a century of studying the nature of quantum reality, it by now must be accepted that at the quantum level, these are the intrinsic dynamics involved. And particularly that these 'particles' seem to function beyond our usual spatial sensibilities as interpreted from a cause-and-effect perspective.

In any event, while some scientists still cannot get their heads around the experimental results, others are already finding ways to use this understanding to develop new technologies—specifically quantum computing.

Irrespective of how we may want to explain the inherent nature of these subatomic particles for it to make logical sense from our conventional understanding of space and time, what we nevertheless must accept is that:

The two primary experimental apparatus – a disturbing device at the one end, and a measuring device at the other – were independent physical entities located seven miles apart.

Thus the quantum experiment was observed to have a tangible effect within physical reality.

To put the experimental results into perspective, it must be understood that we view any communication between two entities as in Figure 12.

Figure 12 – The Physical Universe

However, from the perspective of the electron it is as if time, space, the formulation, the transmission and translation happened all at once.

These respective separate processes are an absolute requirement within our cause-and-effect universe. But from the electrons perspective apparently are inseparable, where the electrons (or 'objects'), the intermediary processes, as well as the final action, appear to be one and the same thing. And thing is indeed a regrettable word, as it in fact is more of an idea than anything tangible that can in any way be perceived of as a thing.

This is depicted in Figure 13.

Figure 13 – The Logical Universe

What we can draw from these depictions is that all definitions of everything, perceived or otherwise, appears to exist as an interconnected dynamic within this circular space. Except that in reality, the depicted space is merely a logical representation and does not exist in any physically perceivable space at all.

I admit that this view would be difficult to integrate from within our cause-and-effect perspective of reality, but remember, this is merely a conceptual model which is used as a tool to interpret reality from our overwhelmingly sensory perspective—as with our network layer, we tend to perceive reality from our user-interface perspective only. How this model may all fit together that it may cease to be abstract scientific concepts, but rather that it may inform our everyday reality, will be unfolded in the following manuscripts, but for now we have to still work at unearthing the nature of basic reality on the very hard and seemingly impenetrable existential surface layer. x, xi

The Imaginary Zone

Everything real may be imaginary.

And what is imaginary behaves as if it is real.

For anything travelling at greater than the speed of light the Time-Dilation equation cannot hold as the equation goes into what is referred to in mathematics as the imaginary plane.

This is because the square route of a negative number cannot be conventionally calculated. And even if we could, how to conceptualize what this might mean is open for interpretation and would not be applicable to our understanding of the nature of the physical universe.

However, this is exactly what happened in the above experiment: photons not only passed information between each other at faster than the speed of light, but rather, they did it instantaneously, in other words, at an infinitely ( ) fast speed.

By inputting this into our Time-dilation equation we find that our equation goes into the range of imaginary numbers (this is explained in the footnote). By this all that we reasonably can infer is that our usual understanding of time as perceived based on the laws of physics cannot apply as it together with space does not have the same interpretive meaning beyond the speed of light. This is because the square route of a negative infinite number would imply that time is derived from both negative as well as positive infinity.

My view is that this reality as perceived in the experiment has nothing to do with Time-dilation or any other equation that governs our physical world. It rather appears as if the laws of physics are specific constructs applicable only to our three-dimensional sensory world, and without which our material reality well and truly cannot exist at all.

This bizarre photon behaviour therefore does provide prima facie evidence that existence beyond our own time and spatial dimensions do exist. It suggests that reality on that side of the equation functions as an active underlying information template from which our material existence is derived from. This smallest spec of evidence thus also suggesting that reality on a much larger scale – such as the particular Time-dilation equation itself – is coordinated on a level that that we cannot readily observe when examining this information from 3-dimensional sensory perspective alone.

_____________________________

By inputting this into our Time-dilation equation, the following result is obtained:

A square route of a number determines the value by which it was squared by to get it. For instance, the square route of 4 is 2 or -2 that is 22 or -22 equals 4. However, the square route of any number less than zero is impossible to determine as, let's say -4 can only be derived at if 2 was multiplied by -2, but never by two numbers of equal size and sign i.e. a number that could be squared as indicated before. Thus the term imaginary number.

When this results one way of viewing it is to say that the value is approaching zero from either the negative or positive side from our frame of reference.

( /c) means infinite speed divided by the speed of light which once again is infinite, as an infinitely large number divided by any real number, no matter how large but not considered infinite, is still infinite.

The equation  2 =   is so since an infinite number is so large that squaring it makes it even larger than it was before, thus even more infinite. While in the equation 1 –   = -  we are in fact attempting to add 1 to negative infinity, that is -  \+ 1 = - , which ultimately has no effect on the equation.

Modelling Existence

"All we see or seem is but a dream within a dream." – Edgar Allen Poe

Despite the fact that we cannot truly interpret what these equations are telling us about reality from a rational perspective, let us nevertheless use the evidence we have as a basis upon which to expand our understanding of what reality might be like beyond our sensory world.

By altering the Time-dilation formula to determine a relation between the velocity travelled and the relative time between the two frames of reference, the graph in Figure 14 was derived at.

Figure 14 – Time Dilation Beyond the Speed of Light

This depiction can be viewed as a three-layered reality sandwich as the one given for our network model. Using this graph reality can be framed as in Figure 15.

Figure 15 – Three Layered Reality Sandwich

As in our network model this simply is a logical construct as these layers do not exist apart from each other.

While the technical understanding at this point may yet confound you, how this understanding may begin to inform your personal world view is all-important, and ultimately, only for you to decide upon.

_________________________

By altering the Time-dilation formula to determine a relation between the velocity travelled, and the relative time between the two frames of reference, the following equation was formulated:

 .

All that must be grasped from the above equation is that it essentially the Time-dilation equation adapted to plot the graph shown in and illustrates the three distinct levels of reality as it was discussed in this section.

Chapter Four

Beyond Space and Time

Gravity and the General Theory of Relativity

"What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space." – Erwin Schrödinger

If you've grasped all that, congratulations is in order as you've now graduated to the ranks of only an elite few.

All that really only explains aspects of the easier to grasp Theory of Special Relativity. Einstein's further contemplations into the nature of time and space led to an even more bizarre theory, General Relativity. It literally adding another curve-ball altogether: that gravity sucks!

Though that's been common knowledge for quite some time now. But also that time is inextricably bound to space—well, that is not so new either, but very few people can actually grasp its implications.

That gravity sucks we experience since we are bound to earth by it—that is unless one is catapulted at a phenomenal velocity that will propel us beyond the earth's gravitational attraction. According to General Relativity though gravity is the result of what is referred to as curved space-time. It meaning that mass somehow is capable of bending space as well as time around it. This is described by Stephen Hawking in the text below.

The mass of the sun curves space-time in such a way that, although the earth follows a straight path in four-dimensional space-time, it appears to us to move along a circular orbit in three-dimensional space.

Therefore we experience reality as we do as we do not perceptively experience time as an extra dimension, only the three dimensions of space which we appear to be moving through.

While this theory requires a lengthy discussion on its own, one of the consequences is that gravity not only sucks any object with mass, but that it literally sucks time and light as well. This is as in the case of black holes that literally can suck all time and space in its vicinity into itself. A black hole being an unimaginably small and dense mass with a weight far exceeding the Sun's, and thus also having commensurate 'sucking' power. In fact its gravitational effects are so powerful that light cannot escape from it, hence the reference to blackness.

One of the physical implications of General Relativity is that clocks run slower near massive objects as their relative time also is sucked in. This effect of gravity on time was once again experimentally verified using very accurate nuclear clocks. In an experiment done in 1962, two such clocks were used, one mounted on the ground and the other on top of a tall water tower. The clock on the ground ran slower in exact agreement with the formula suggested by general relativity. It should be noted that gravity had no effect on the clock's mechanism at all, but that the actual time from the perspective of the clocks was affected. Thus we all do not experience an exact 24 hour day, for depending on our elevation our relative time may be a miniscule fraction of a microsecond different.

If anything what once again can conclude from this discussion is this.

What we observe is limited to our perceptual human experience thereof; and our particular frame of reference in 3-dimensional space; that we are perceptually limited to experience the cause-and-effect view of reality.

In other words, our ability only to perceive the world around us through our five senses limits us to perceive it as 3-dimensional as opposed to its actual 4-dimensional state.

Scientists however assert that many more dimensions exist and often use it to explain other inexplicable phenomena. One of them being the previous anomaly of how it is possible that the universe is expanding at the exact rate required for life while not containing enough matter for it to be possible. In this regard, String Theory postulates between ten to twenty six dimensions to explain how the universe is held together through a theoretical process called compactification. Imagine conceptually getting your head around that, while it certainly is a tough enough task for us mere mortals to get our heads around three, let alone four.

After much debate these theorists have now settled for eleven dimensions with the general acceptance of a concept called Super Gravity. From this a new theory emerged called Membrane-theory or M-theory. It postulates multiple universes or parallel universes. This understanding allows scientist to tie together the many mathematical inconsistencies that have baffled them over the past decades. This bringing them very close to their quest to find the Holy Grail of science, the illusive Theory of Everything that Einstein had until his dying day been searching.

M-theory currently appears to be the flavour of the month among physicists and science watchers alike. It asserts that all existence is interconnected in the proposed 11th dimension. This dimension in fact being some or other membranous dimension that exists in between and around everything in the entire universe as well as all other universes beyond our own.

Thus in theory, everything everywhere according to M-theory is interconnected with everything else.

If anything can be concluded from the theory, it is that the universe itself is Intelligent and Alive. This is because existence within this membranous dimension seems to be interactive, constantly updating itself from every conceivable point of itself. That is wherever existence of any kind is to be found—whether in this universe or any other.

Whether one is a proponent of this theory or any other view on the nature of the universe, for the purposes of this discussion we simply have to appreciate the following. That while Relativity – the special as well as the general theory – is counter-intuitive and cannot readily be conceptualized because of our 3-dimensional sensory limitations, though perceptually weird, is proven scientific fact.

The Event Horizon

"Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another." – Leibniz

The Event Horizon is the point where an object reaches the speed of light and can also be viewed as the dividing line between the imaginary and physical realms. Here time is literally frozen in what is referred to as a time singularity where events are immobilized in a virtual time-warp.

To relate to this aspect of reality one first has to have some understanding of a concept called Space-contraction, is the partner equation to Time-dilation. It basically asserts that a moving object contracts in size relative to a stationary observer the faster it moves. That is till it literally does not physically exist at all from the observer's perspective once it reaches the speed of light.
This is as depicted in Figure 16.

Figure 16 – Reaching the Event Horizon

The Event Horizon therefore is not a place that can be physically reached as it literally does not exist in any particular region of space that we can physically go to. The only requirement – though physically impossible to do with our bodies – is that one reaches the speed of light, irrespective of where in space you might be.

And should you be able to exceed the speed of light, once you reach the Event Horizon, you'd be shattered into nothingness as nothing material can possibly exist on the other side of reality. Not even light. Thus the Event Horizon exists in any conceivable location where we can perceive of the existence of light as only it travels at the required speed.

By implication it therefore exists in every molecule, in all material objects, as well as in free-flowing liquid light. Thus in a manner of speaking it is the 3D projector screen of reality. It therefore exists wherever we perceive of anything tangible or where we may observe free-flowing light.

Consequently and very importantly. The Event Horizon exists even within our own bodies. Not merely because of our physicality, but since we are a source of energy, as we are not mere cold rock, but are alive, and thus our whole physical being is filled with active intelligent light energy. Though not only emanating from our materiality, but literally from being an intelligent energy source capable of actively forming our world.

Thus we as living beings are active manipulators of light and not merely ordinary passive light.

Ultimately though, as we discussed before, from the perspective of the unbounded realm not even our perceptive space and time exists at all—just the images, sounds and feelings, the light flashes so to say, processed by the brain that eventually is perceived by our mind.

To reiterate the physical implications, if you could jump on the back of a light photon and hitch a ride from the sun to the earth at its speed, the 8 or so minutes it would take for an observer to witness your journey back to earth would not have passed for you while travelling on the photon at all. At that speed not a fraction of a microsecond would have elapsed, even if you embarked on a journey taking billions of years as witnessed by a stationary observer.

And if you do not want to take my word for it, perhaps you'd rather accept the writings of the famous science writer, Dr. John Gribbin.

... as Einstein explained with his special theory of relativity, signals that travel at the speed of light take no time at all to complete any journey – in effect, for light signals every point in the Universe is next door to every other point in the Universe. Whether the signals are travelling backwards or forwards in time doesn't matter, since they take zero time (in their own frame of reference), and +0 is the same as -0 – and all the quantum probability waves do travel at the speed of light.

And therefore we can conclude that:

Any reality that can possibly be perceived from the perspective of a travelling light particle exists in a time and spatial singularity—in other words, in timelessness as well as spacelessness.

Thus it appears that:

The speed of light forms the dividing line between what can be perceived of as real (occurring in time and space) and that perceived of as imaginary (occurring in a dimension beyond our rational reasoning power).

And thus, though we may not be aware of it, aspects of who we are as human beings – or any life-form for that matter – also exist simultaneously on the other side of the dividing line (hereafter referred to as the Event Horizon) while experiencing existence as a perceptual being on earth. xii, xiii

__________________________

The Space-contraction equation is:  where x is the physical distance travelled. To reassert the point I will model this scenario using the simplified Time Dilation equation where  t equals a billion years and v equals c:

Or the actual equation:

If the above equation still is difficult to absorb, simply accept that at the speed of light, as an absolute empiric fact, time cannot exist.

Matter and Energy

"What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just appearances..." – Erwin Schrodinger

The Imaginary Realm is unbounded. This is as opposed to four-dimensional space-time – the three spatial dimensions and the one time dimension – which is the material world we perceive through our five senses. In our world time literally creates the illusion that things are not happening all at once.

Our materiality as we do perceive of it however does bind us to experience space-time and the four-dimensional plane as very real, and from which we can only escape from in our dreams, through our imagination, and eventually, when we physically die.

However, not even our bodies are truly material. In fact it is made up of light, even while mortal. This is as asserted by Einstein's most famous equation,  E = Mc2— where E is every physical object's full potential atomic energy, M is its mass and c is the speed of light.

To perceive the implication of this equation you must realise that your full potential atomic energy can blow up an entire city the size of Seattle. This also explains the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by two rather small atomic bombs.

In A Short History of Nearly Everything Bill Bryson observes that you contain the explosive capacity of about 30 very large hydrogen bombs within your own atomic makeup. It should be appreciated that normal bombs react chemically, not atomically, when they explode. Thus conventional explosives with our physical mass would only be capable of blowing up an area the size of a small apartment.

The above equation literally implies that energy and matter are interchangeable and that the energy that you are made of is related to your entire mass multiplied by the square of the speed of light. Thus ultimately you are made of the building blocks of the material world, light.

Yes, you are indeed an aspect of light that is confined to a particular material configuration, and if you were able to see the world fast enough, you would not perceive yourself as physical at all. Rather as light, flashing in and out of existence in the smallest fraction of a microsecond. This is just as the images on a movie screen also flashes in and out of existence, though this is imperceptible to our visual senses.

You should also realize that when you look at yourself in the mirror you are only looking at 0.0001% of who you really are. And even that is not made of any tangible stuff at all. In fact an atom consists of a nucleus surrounded by an orbiting electron an immense distance away. Thus an atom is made up primarily of empty space. Therefore not even our physical bodies are really made of anything physical. At least not in the way one would ordinarily perceive of it through our sensory organs.

Ultimately, the only thing in all existence which in terms of our rational understanding of quantum reality can vaguely be considered as being tangible, is light. That is both on the Imaginary as well as the rational side. And no matter where you find it in the material world, exists only on the Event Horizon—the 3 dimensional movie screen of life.

And what is on the unbounded side is nothing that can be considered in anyway physically tangible. This is because only pure unmanifest Spirit existence can ever reside there. It literally can be regarded as God's home. And what happens on the other side of the screen is merely the reflection of God's creativity, Gods intentions so to say, which we perceive as materially real.

Thus all existence in this universe appears literally to be a projection from the physically non-existent Imaginary Realm, onto the Event Horizon, onto the perceived material domain.

To put it all together:

It is as if there is a puppet master controlling hand puppets, and our individual human existences are the shadows projected on a screen.

The screen being the Event Horizon. The puppet master is the phenomenon commonly referred to as God. And the individual puppets our Spirit identities.

But only to perceive your human existence as the shadow reflected on a screen is to sell yourself short by a long, long way. For you are a projection of God's creativity, and your essence, your Spirit, therefore appears to be an intrinsic part of God after all.

Thus, ultimately:

Our perceived physical being is a projection off the movie screen of the show of life playing on the virtual reality screen of the Event Horizon.

If we can begin to grasp this, then what we have to ask ourselves is: Is what we see and feel really real, or is it just an illusion? xiv, xv

Identifying the Threads

"The quantum is that embarrassing little piece of thread that always hangs from the sweater of space-time. Pull it and the whole thing unravels." – Fred Alan Wolfe

So, what are the implications of this model on how we must perceive our reality?

How to relate to the three frames of reference is an impossible task. Nonetheless let me continue using words designed for our understanding of the rational physical world in a way that it may aid us in interpreting what these dimensions might be like.

In this regard one is tempted to describe the model from our current frame of reference derived from a rational perspective by saying that the three realities exists simultaneously and within the same space. But space and time have different perceptual meanings depending on which reality you are consciously operating from.

This has always been where the sceptics and the more mystical diverted. The sceptical viewing the world from the physical dimension where all is separate. Mystics on the other hand already perceiving the interconnectedness of the universe on the other side of reality.

From the perspective of the three realms, one realm can be described as being unbounded and most certainly not tangible, where everything is possible. In the other, all time is trapped in a time singularity, while everything existing in its environs is fuzzy and erratic. And in the other, almost everything behaves in a fluid and predictable way, and all outcomes are governed by very definite laws that are intrinsically associated with the logical construct of time and space.

The latter is the way things operate in the physical world in general. But since we have life – that conceivably only could have emanated from the unbounded realm – we have free choice. Hence our predictability is not so apparent in our behaviour and the actions we may choose.

On the other hand, if you decide to go to the North-pole for a winter holiday for instance, once you start your journey, the process happens sequentially in a very predictable and fluid way. That is one molecule at a time, and you would have to face the prospect of the weather in late December.

This is unlike the way you might go about things in your imagination as you would be operating from the imaginary side. For then you can fly there on a broomstick if that is what you prefer. And it certainly does not need to take any time at all. And when you get there, it does not need to be a cold unpleasant place, even though the landscape may be covered with white fluffy snow.

But trying to locate and perceive of how these realities all might exist together is a nasty preoccupation we have in our rational world where everything has to be definitively organized and structured within space and time. For indeed, in this world exposed to by our conscious being, time and materiality is perceived to be very real. And the consequences of the actions we are to choose most certainly can have serious implications. Thus irrespective of how we may argue this understanding, our actions certainly must take cognisance of how it affects us from this rationally ordered end.

However, from the perspective of the imaginary world absolutely everything makes perfect sense, no matter how bizarre or extraordinary. Or for that matter, irrational. And God, being the prime mover of this world, certainly would not be overly concerned with whether we write His name in capitals or refer to Her as a Him. But alas, I have to progress bearing in mind the sensibilities and sensitivities of the rational intent on only perceiving of things from this side of the reality divide.

Nevertheless we must appreciate is this.

What we see in our dreams and our imaginations is not just a perception of what the Unbounded Realm might be like, we are literally there when we perceive of it. We are then operating from its frame of reference. When we dream or have amazing insights, we have literally crossed into this world on the other side of the Event Horizon. And thus we can and do live interchangeably on either side, whether we are conscious of this fact or not.

Finding the Imaginary Realm

To find a world beyond your greatest imaginings, be still, and look within.

Despite the mathematical equations and the technical nature of the previous section, can you accept based on the overall argument that your being potentially is informed from three separate logical realms of existence, one of which is beyond time and space itself; and yet, that it informs every moment of your material existence?

If your answer is yes, whether it was intellectually understood or whether you simply have a sense that this is how reality may be based on your personal experience, by all means continue reading.

However, if your answer is no you unfortunately have to go back to the beginning of the previous section on relativity to once again mull over the content. But remember, the answer will not be found by looking at it too technically.

Rather it will only come once you fully accept that this is what science has revealed through centuries of meticulous endeavour and therefore that there is no point in arguing it away because you don't like what the findings are suggesting or that it may contradict what your five senses may be telling you.

In fact intellectualising about it is exactly the aspect that diminishes one's understanding in this regard.

However whatever your current state of confoundment may be, to help you concretize the two realms for yourself, it would be useful to do the exercise below.

Firstly, look at your hand. See its colour, lines, deformities, whether your nails are well manicured or not. Now close your eyes and stroke your face with it. Feel the texture of your skin and the sensation of your hand on your face—whether it is hard and rough, or whether it is soft and silky.

You have just experienced the material realm through your sensory organs where your eyes and skin provided information of your immediate material surroundings which was processed within your brain. This is what we overwhelmingly experience as being real because our senses are so compelling.

Now close your eyes and visualise any person you may have had a close relationship with such as a dearly departed or a lover for instance.

Pause and stay with this image for a few moments before continuing.

Did you have to think about what this person looked like? Where do you think was the detail you observed stored?

While you first may have used your brain to interpret the request and then to decide on who it was that you wanted to see, you did not need to think about the details of the image you had visualised at all. Either it came by itself or it did not. It therefore seemed to have spontaneously orchestrated itself, the details being completely obscure to you.

The important realisation to make in this regard is that the entire process of visualising the final picture did not occur within the brain itself. The brain merely coordinated the initial request which started off with reading this text, to translating it, to finally comprehending the instruction. But how the visual imagery came to be was completely orchestrated on the imaginary side of the reality divide.

So for instance when you have a vivid daydream, the entire visual feast was a complete manifestation of the imagination. And thus it truly was not an orchestration of the rational organiser of our lives, our brain—it at that very time being in its most tranquil neurologically inactive state.

What you now have to internalise is this.

When you were daydreaming, you have interacted within a completely non-physical world.

Thus despite your doubts, if you did get this, then you've got it! It is that our being simultaneously resides in a physical timebound, as well as a non-physical timeless dimension. If so you can spare yourself the agony of having to go back and work through this very spooky section all over again.

Untying the Knot

"There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of by mere mortal men" – William Shakespeare

If this chapter was too much to absorb, the most important aspect that must be grasped is the following.

Depending on your frame of reference, time literally might not exist. While in another frame of reference it can be boundless and infinite. And that in our current frame of reference, as humans moving in 4-dimensional space-time, has a particular intrinsic configuration that allows the events of our lives to unfold in an orderly – or synchronous – manner. That is instead of all at the same time or in reverse or randomly.

While the latter is not such an important requirement in the imaginary, unmaterial world of the Spirit, it is an absolute imperative for material existence. This is as light manifested as matter is forced to behave in an orderly and predictable manner by the laws that govern physical reality.

Furthermore what we see in our dreams and our imaginations is not just a perception of what the Imaginary Realm might be like. We are literally there when we perceive it. But it does not feel real because indeed, it is imaginary. This is because we have a tendency to want to validate and categorise things from the rational end. But if we could perceive our world purely from that end, it would not matter at all.

In fact when we dream or have amazing insights, our consciousness has literally crossed into this world on the other side of the Event Horizon. And thus we can and do live interchangeably on either side.

The paradigm shift we now must make is that the deeper imagination is not something that exists within the brain, but exists in a dimension of its very own, beyond the physical confines of the brain.

This I know for sure. But the important question is: are you beginning to perceive it as real as well, or is it still just, imaginary?

Chapter Five

Unfolding Existence

A sneak Peek at God's Cards

"The chess-board is the world, the pieces are the phenomena of the universe, the rules of the game are what we call the laws of Nature. The player on the other side is hidden from us." –

Thomas Henry Huxley

While it is taken for granted that the universe and life in general simply is as it is, the fundamental question in this regard to ask is: How did this all get to be so incredibly sophisticated?

As far as living creatures are concerned, evolutionist would argue that it all happened by chance through natural-selection, where only the fittest survive. In this way it is argued that better and better equipped genes are randomly passed on to the next generation based on their respective abilities to adapt. It implying we somehow randomly evolved to our current level of human complexity.

While I don't discount that we evolved, or that survival of the fittest may in fact be one of the primary mechanisms at play in how we got here, I nevertheless strongly disagree that it was a purely animalistic mechanistic and random process.

This once again is merely the cause-and-effect surface of what appears to be a far more complicated phenomenon. And to start my argument one must first understand what a feedback-loop is.

A simple feedback loop would be the feedback experienced through a microphone, or when one is live on a radio station talking on a telephone. The sound from the speakerphone feeds back to the microphone, gets amplified and in turn is fed back to be amplified even more by the speakerphone. So it continues until it either becomes unbearable, or the amplifier, speaker or microphone breaks down.

In a more complex scenario such as in a computer simulation program we also have feedback loops. In simulators a number of factors can influence a particular event, such as a money market simulation for instance. Using such packages a specific required outcome can be simulated by using random number generators. While fixing a particular outcome, a random number generator runs through all the possible variables until the optimal solution is found. This often requiring billions of repeated instructions being performed until an optimal solution is derived at.

But what does this have to do with evolution and how life ended up being as complex as it apparently is?

In the book, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Steven Covey suggests that one Begins with the End in Mind. It means that one must strive to live today with a clear vision of what one's life is to have represented.

If we are capable of this, isn't it conceivable that God –who or whatever She may be – might work on a similar notion?

The problem with life as a human being though is that we live in time and space and our future vision might often change in the course of living. Thus through experience we gain new information and insights, and so we tend to change our end goals as we go along. But perhaps this is so for God as well, particularly since She apparently does not reside in a world where the rules are fixed; and where the beginning as well as the end can be clearly perceived.

Nevertheless, our world cannot function well with a schizophrenic God as our lives would be backtracked whenever a new insight is discovered. And thus, as Einstein correctly observed, God certainly cannot play dice with Her Creation. The rules do not change as we go along. And our universe most definitely is stable and predictable, having had a clearly defined beginning, and most likely also as clearly a defined end.

Before continuing, until further defined, for now God will be personified. And before proceeding along that vein it is important to appreciate that this God is not meant to be a literal humanoid of sorts, but rather, a dynamic that I will attempt to interpret as this work continues. xvi

How to Build a Universe

"The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference." – Charles Darwin

So this in my humble opinion is how I think the universe was created.

Since God resides in an unbounded world time then literally was at Her disposal. And a predictable time was one of the primary ingredients She envisioned, melding it with three imaginary dimensions of space. And the ability God has that we too have, though in a far more limited capacity, is to see the end as clearly as the beginning; as well as every point in between.

This is not impossible for us to perceive, for in our own earth-made simulator we did the exact thing. We perceived the program and once we contemplated all the variables looking at the required outcomes, we meticulously crafted a logical design that takes cognisance of all the steps in between, before finally proceeding to encode the final program. After its completion, the program would consistently deliver any conceivable result that fits within its domain.

Thus similarly the physical laws of nature were perceived and the variables put in at the beginning by conceiving the end through infinite-correlation where the required end is always perceived of at the beginning. Consistently making all the necessary corrections as the program goes along.

The Final Draft

That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy. – Jonathan Swift

It is important to bear in mind that, when we try and get our heads around how such processes may work from our infinitesimally narrow perspectives, the unfolding of a universe must be child's play for God. Don't forget, She is the primary manifestation of the world of infinity. And that our tendency to try to analyse exactly how difficult a logical feat it must have been to calculate all the potential scenarios to eventually formulate as complex a model as the universe with literally gazillions upon gazillions of atoms that somehow needs to have order as we understand it, is wasted time.

It is only impossible if you are bounded by a finite world as we apparently are, being forced to proceed within logically ordered time, where from this narrow perspective the future that will be as an absolute rule, always is unknown.

Though I have to some extent used infinite-correlation whilst writing this book. To be quite honest, I didn't really understand these concepts that well when I started off writing. But in the course of a few weeks I received various flashes of random inspiration that were not confined to a particular topic. And it was effortless as it didn't come from me thinking about it as one ordinarily understands it at all. Though, I must have unconsciously started this endeavour many years before in attempting to make sense of the bigger picture for myself. Then one day the puzzle literally started filling itself in. And as it unfolded I found a theory emerging that started connecting all the missing links until it became a coherent work.

But since I'm devising an idea, although manifesting as words, I'm fortunate in this fantastic information age we're living in that I'm able to use a computer instead of a typewriter. By this being afforded the opportunity to be random. And therefore presumably to truly use God's preferred methods.

However, the building of a rational universe cannot be afforded such a luxury. It has to be built one logical time-frame at a 'time'. This is as God literally could not roll back time to change and fix a problem once the process started. And even though She could if she wanted to, would irreparably destroy the confidence we would have in our world as our lives would be constantly backtracked to make the desired correction.

Thus irrespective of whether God may get a new insight into the art of universe building, it has to be a far more structured endeavour. And then could only use the new information on the next updated version of the universe which is yet to come.

Thus my writing this manuscript can be seen as a metaphor describing our perceived rational world that has to be typed on a continuous page, one letter at a time. This though is indeed as opposed to how things can be done in God's world. For there, like with the word processor, the words can be shuffled around and revised, until eventually, the ultimate assimilation of thought is derived at. Thus there may have existed infinitely many draft universes without any existence of life in which God had conceived Her master plan to build a rational world in which She could consciously form herself in.

The conceptual design therefore must have already been done on Gods personal word-processor, and the pages simply needed to be printed for final publication. And as we all can bear testimony to, it ended up being a phenomenal best-seller!

The Magic Trick of Life

"If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning." – C. S. Lewis

Understanding how the cosmos came to be is the easy part as its nature is absolutely predictable. But formulating the beginnings of life is far trickier for randomness, complexity and interrelatedness had to be factored in.

And we still have to overcome the 'little' impossible obstacle of a single protein molecule somehow assembling itself, given the odds stacked against it not to do so. In fact it would require a much longer time period than the entire lifespan of the universe to randomly organize a single protein molecule in the way it had, without some kind of intelligent intervention.

But then again, a single-protein-molecule doth not a single-celled-organism maketh—let alone humankind maketh.

Nonetheless, having accomplished this impossible feat, quite a few of these rare marvels then had to be formed at more or less the same time. Then happen to huddle themselves into a micro-metre of space to remotely stand a chance of forming this first living creature. And as I understand these blighters, they don't last too long either unless they are alive to begin with. I wonder how long they hung around together like that before they got struck by the first lightning strike that sparked them into being.

Now, having overcome that insurmountable hurdle, then, Voila!!!

But unfortunately without absolutely any great fanfare at the time, the first living organism arrived on the scene after receiving a nasty shocking bolt of lightning to kick-start its bits. And once accomplished, now being faced with the awkward predicament of having to keep all its newly enlivened spontaneously moving parts together in a rather flimsy permeable outer membrane. And considering its newly acquired need for self-maintenance, it at some very basic level should have been able to say to itself: "Oh dear! My covering membrane is feeling a bit thin and delicate today! Before my inner bits start seeping out, I better find a limestone molecule or two to rectify the problem. Let me think about this for a while. Hmm, I wonder where I found last week's morsels. Those were rather tasty I thought."

In other words it had to have an appetite of sorts to start off with, and be somewhat discerning about it, and really want to make this effort to begin with.

Imagine this fellow had come to life with the attitude: "What's the big deal about being alive anyway. These primal sees are too damn acidy, and I'm not in the mood to run around looking for obscure tasteless minerals to stay alive. What's in it for me anyway?" This is just as the dolphin at the aquarium probably would be thinking when it is required to do its flips. But since it gets a nice tasty morsel at the end, doesn't mind flipping as many times as the fellow with the fish wants it to.

Thus, on all accounts, this first creature must have had a real positive attitude despite all the incredible obstacles, while not having the apparent sense of finding the experience in any way rewarding. And it could not have been instinct? Or could it?

Perhaps it existed, right from the very the start, very high on Mazlow's Hierarchy of needs. And therefore must've been the first self-actualized life-form ever, with an incredible sense of purpose. That it hung in there is testimony to this moment. For it together with all existence would've shrunk away back into unaliveness, very soon after it was first conceived.

What a waste of effort that would have been, wouldn't it. Let alone me not being able to write my thoughts about it as I happen to be here because of that rather intelligent, perceptive and tenacious sack of life, as he certainly could not have derived great joy out of the experience.

Hats off to you fellow! Since, after all, you are my greatest and most precious ancestor

God's Original Plan

There is danger inherent in the teaching of man's 'nothingness'—the theory that man is nothing but the result of biological, psychological and sociological conditions, or the product of heredity and environment... that man is the victim of outer influences which deny that he is free. – Viktor E. Frankl

Does that not sound a little improbable to you too?

That life somehow just popped into existence, going on its merry way from there. And consequently, we're sitting here speculating on how dead solid matter found a way to start perceiving of the need to jump into animated intelligent existence.

As you can appreciate from the above, one must conclude that the beginning of life was the real feat of Creation. And certainly could not have happened without some intelligent, or let's call it for what it is, divine intervention. But I know that undoubtedly was the original intention of the Creator in the first place.

I'm sure She had in mind: an upright biped with incredible dexterity; two arms having incredible mobility; a large cranium to allow for 'reasonable' intelligence; hands that can do almost anything, but particularly to write, type and to do great cooking and eating with; not to mention eyes that can see in full colour and ears capable of appreciating both Mozart and the Rolling Stones; of course a good selection of pleasure drugs to make the whole endeavour less of a drag and at times downright magnificent; and not to mention good looks and a great personality to boot.

All Her workings to this end therefore could immediately have been factored in right from the start. That these required ingredients should find their way to each other as part of the overall calculations in the program driving the creation of the universe. But what a monumental schlep that would've been. All that painstaking calculations, even for God, as I'm sure even She has better things to do with infinitely unbounded time.

Once again, conceptualising on this from a rational scientific paradigm might not be convincing. On the other hand, it really should not be a problem for God to start off the creative process in any way she chooses. After all, what would have been the point of creating a stone cold universe? Merely to serve as a giant party trick for idle spirits not knowing what to do with infinitely unbounded time, I would suppose.

Though, isn't the proof right in front of us? That we are here as witnesses to the fact; or do we value ourselves that little as to think we were merely an accident of nature, and not the product of heavenly intervention.

And hence it ought not to be an incredible mind leap to conceive that God, while putting the workings of the universe in autopilot once it was dealt with, began to personally engage the issue of life, since living was to be an engagement She was to have a vested interest in—Her life literally being at stake.

Then again, She had a couple of billion years to play with before the earth was ready for life anyway and hence to orchestrate this eventuality. And since it really was only a matter of the minutest scale of existence anyway, only a few hundred million years or so should have sufficed to do the initial deed.

It is conceivable that not only a blueprint for cell formation to form single living entities as ourselves exists, but that the entire blueprint for sentient existence has already been laid out; with every possible configuration of life having already been conceived. This again can be envisioned by thinking in terms of our simulation model and infinite correlation.

Thus our DNA can be viewed as the specific combination code for unlocking our unique individual configuration responsible for unfolding our own very specific life formula that has already been postulated as part of a grand plan in the master program charged with the unfolding of life. And if this was indeed the method, then life's ultimate creation has already been conceived. And in my view, will be very much like us, but better. Not necessarily physically or mentally, but certainly in its ability to connect to all of life and all existence in a way that we might currently not be capable of at this stage in our evolution.

If anything, I hope you are somehow reasonably convinced that without an initial Creative Intelligence in this scenario, creation could not possibly make any sense. And since I'm not doing a doctoral thesis on this issue, this is where I'll rest my case on this rather precarious aspect of existence. For after all, the rest has been history, so to say.

And by wanting to go back so far for a rational explanation on what triggered the first blob of plasma into existence – and which can only be scientifically revealed by travelling back to the exact event in time and then still not know what the real trigger might have been anyway – is conceivably beyond reason, and thus somewhat irrational to begin with.

I nonetheless am not in the least advocating not researching this issue. And if it gives you such a thrill to be the first human to experimentally orchestrate a primal soup that would conceive of life, by all means continue to do so.

And should you be successful, except for the glory of achieving a near godly endeavour, what have you really proved?

It is that with all the technical wizardry that might have been at your disposal, it certainly only would assert what we ought to already have known.

It is that life, as you would've demonstrated with your success, could not have been conceived without an intelligent kick-start after all.
Chapter Six

Splitting Hairs

Chemical Manifestation

"I think science has enjoyed extraordinary success because it has such a limited and narrow realm in which to focus its efforts. Namely, the physical universe." – Ken Jenkins

A question bound to be asked is, if it indeed is the case that an underlying genetic blueprint for unfolding life exists, how can one explain genetic malformation?

Sceptics usually use these anomalies to argue away the evidence that there is any deeper intelligence behind life. The argument usually going along these lines: "If there is such a kind and benevolent god, then why does he allow the many cruel realties of our earthly existence?"

This argument unfortunately being based on the notion that, if there is such a benevolent father god, then why is he forsaking his subjects by allowing the brutalities of the world. By using simple deductive logic, it is then argued that he cannot exist as he therefore is not perfect at all. Or if he does, then he is just not caring at all and therefore not deserving of our worship.

What we must realise though is that the God as defined in this work does not have the same sensibilities about the issues of individual life and death as we apparently do. In fact what is apparent is that the panoply of life and death merely is the way things are. And as a consequence, that our individual life may have relatively little consequence in the bigger scheme of things.

On the other hand, on a level that is impossible for us to fully comprehend, our individual lives' are of absolute consequence within this greater scheme than we ordinarily would suppose—as contradictory as this may seem.

The above paradox aside, for the most part genetic malformations tend to be the exception rather than the rule. This is just as cell formation usually succeeds in its objective of forming a complete living being with relatively little exceptions, despite numerous opportunities for it to go wrong.

Once again, these are incredibly complex issues of our existence, much of which we as yet – if ever – can begin to rationally explain. But as a start we have to appreciate that the genetic code by its very nature cannot be a purely chemo-physical phenomenon. What it appears to be, is a very specialised and specific instruction set for unfolding an incredibly unique combination of physical and behavioural characteristics that are to be a new and exclusive life form.

In any event, genetics cannot be compared to conventional chemistry. Here we know for sure that a specific combination of chemical compounds will result in a specific chemical reaction which will form a particular compound or substance. Notwithstanding this, it is still the predominant scientific view that the unfolding of complex life somehow is similarly chemical.

Thus it is assumed that the material components of a cell can of their own accord know when, where and how they have to logically organise, to the extent that they can unfold in billions of unique ways to eventually become a complex living being.

It is my contention that the dynamics of sentient existence is organised on a far deeper level than is apparent within its material contents. Bearing in mind dynamics we cannot as yet fully comprehend, in the process of its unfolding, the most favourable result usually is assured.

The Origins of Instinct

"What distinguishes humans from other creatures is ... our relative lack of instincts or preformed, preset inherited patterns of behaviour, which give other creatures a much more fixed nature than we have." – M. Scott Peck

Now, what about animal instinct? Where does this inexplicable though very real intelligence reside?

A clear example of this is illustrated by an infant antelope. The moment after birth, still wet with embryonic fluid, shakes itself off, proceeding to walk around exploring its world with still limp unexercised limbs. Though, from the very start all four legs already unconsciously knowing the dynamics of controlling itself in a coordinated manner in space and time. Bearing in mind all its billions of associated cells will follow this command in synchronous order, allowing the creature to move in any direction, at any required speed, wherever its soon agile limbs would take it.

And if you think that is a magnificent feet for a newly-born. Imagine what the challenge might be with a fellow having a few hundred of them such as a millipede? A creature with hardly any brain to speak of.

Cat behaviour does convincingly suggest that unconscious group learning indeed must occur on a much deeper cognitive level. More often than not domestic cats are removed from their litters before any such learnt behaviour could have been acquired. Yet cats almost consistently will bury their faeces in the sand. This certainly could not have been genetically passed in the DNA code itself. Rather, the cat gene seems to act as a key of sorts that unlocks behavioural characteristics derived from some underlying cat identity that informed the behaviour instinctively. Irrespective of how it might have evolved or have been acquired, this now is a common aspect that informs the behaviour of all domestic cats.

What must be grasped is that the cat suspended a natural response to rather respond to a seemingly unnatural hygiene compulsion. Then on getting to the location, to further resist just-doing-it by first digging a hole, upon which it neatly closes up its mess.

These complex behaviour patterns are similarly observed in birds that have complex nest-building abilities such as swallows. These abilities were certainly not learnt in the course of their lives. This therefore is unlike the requirement for humans, where we have to systematically observe and internalise how a complex task must be done. But rather that they simply are able to do it merely because they are swallows. I suppose learning on the trot was not an option for these creatures as they would have been scorpion meat if one was a millipede for instance, or on some other predators menu for dinner at their birth, if it was not so.

Therefore these responses seem to be programmed in the instinctive behaviour-set of the cat – or the swallow. And not learnt through cognitive exposure to the respective activity.

Genes hold the Key

"DNA was the first three-dimensional Xerox machine." – Kenneth Boulding

Hence the argument that a few dozen genes hold the information necessary for unfolding physical and behavioural complexity in such creatures is not a practical postulation. For besides having to account for the specific code responsible for unfolding the physical being, it has to build in complex behaviour patterns as well. This therefore accounting for how the various interdependent cells have to function on an incredibly mind-boggling logistical level, without having the benefit of a prior rehearsal.

Thus one must conclude that the genes are not in itself responsible for the actual physical and behavioural unfolding of the creature. It should instead be viewed as a code that unlocks the instruction set that is already accounted for on a deeper plane—specifically for antelopes, or cats, or millipedes, or finches, or bees, or humans, or whatever other unfolding is required.

It is also interesting that according to the Human Genome Project, 90% of the human genome is shared by other mammals as well. Thus the particular anatomical variations together with the respective behaviour patterns must therefore be accounted for in the remaining fraction of the DNA code.

This is an absolute mathematical impossibility. Therefore the gene itself cannot be responsible for both the unfolding of the physical creature, together with the intricate behaviour patterns which consequently must be neurologically defined in advance.

That genetics is a purely chemo-mechanical manifestation is furthermore limited on a very basic logical level. This is because one can compare the unfolding of any creature based on its respective combination of Adenine, Guanine, Thymine and Cytosine (the logical building blocks of the DNA strand) with a person being shown the letters C, O and W, but that person never having heard of a cow before. Therefore they would be unable to make a meaningful association with the word cow as they had no prior experience with the nature of the beast to thereby base an understanding on. Thus whether to see it as holy, or as a regular source for fresh milk, or whether it will make a good trade-off for magic beans, or not.

When postulating the dynamics involved we have to consciously appreciate that the genetic code is merely a four letter alphabet that is responsible for infinitely more meaning than the one we associate with verbal communication. It being responsible for far more complex coherent multi-dimensional meaning. That is the meaning behind the unfolding of life in three spatial dimensions, one time dimension, and infinitely many more behavioural dimensions—such as that of our personalities, intellects, instincts, emotions, and then of course, our spiritual dimensions of being as well.

The implication of the above discussion is this:

That the AGTC combination code behind genetics would be meaningless without the information template that defines its unfolding in space and time to begin with.

This is just as the intentions of the meditators in Dr Tiller's experiment would also have been meaningless, having no tangible effect, if they simply thought 'PH up' or 'PH down' without understanding what it meant. And incredulously. The apparently unintelligent water molecules also by implication also having to have such an understanding as well.

Thus the intention in the mind of the meditator had to conform to the definition in the unbounded for it to manifest in materiality. And when it did, it happened spontaneously, without any regard for the details at play.

This is where the observation in Japan on the Macaca Fascata monkeys also provides a significant clue. It was observed that like-minded monkeys – that is monkeys with similar personality characteristics as the initial monkey that had started washing its sweat potatoes – had also eventually incorporated the initial learnt behaviour without any physical contact with any other monkey that had already been washing sweat potatoes. It can therefore be inferred that these monkeys shared a behavioural aspect that was genetically linked. And that once updated with the new information, informed the new behaviour set of all subsequent monkeys that shared the same behavioural genetic code. xviii

Opposite Identical Twins

How is opposite gender identities possible in identical twins?

Yet at this point the ardently sceptical might still argue: is it not the hormonal stimulus within the mother bearing the child that is responsible for controlling the genetic unfolding? And if so, then the process must be chemical.

I suppose that's a fair call, for the mother's body and hormonal cycles do dramatically change during pregnancy and does influence foetal development.

The question then must be: is it the mother who is controlling the hormonal cycle, or is it the foetus itself?

To give some credence to the former view, a very real medical phenomenon exists that to some extent suggests it may be so. It is referred to as Gender Identity Disorder (GID). But what is very interesting is that it does not appear to be genetic as the condition could be found in only one of two identical twins. Thus one twin may be very happy with their sexual identity while the other would be totally dissatisfied with the physiological gender they were born with.

Scientists argue that this results when a portion of the brain does not develop normally during pregnancy in the respective sibling. The 'disordered' brain it is said, results from not receiving the usual hormonal stimulus that allows a particular portion of the brain associated with gender identity to develop normally, hence the dysfunction. This portion is referred to as the Stria-terminalis or BSTC and has differing sizes in the opposite sexes. Those who have GID therefore having the same sized BSTC as that found in the opposite sex. Thus a physical 'male' with GID will have a female brain and therefore is mentally female; the opposite being true for a female with the 'condition'.

The Unmanifest Identity

"Man is not fully conditioned or determined but rather determines himself... man is ultimately self-determining—he does not simply exist but always decides what his existence will be, what he will become in the next moment." – Viktor E. Frankl

The interesting aspect to determine is: if one were to change the makeup of this portion of the brain of such an adult to what it is 'supposed' to be, whether the respective sexual identity would also change?

I seriously doubt that. For, while the physical brain may or may not have been responsible for forming such a sexual preference in early childhood, the essential identity that was eventually formed in the deeper layers, does appear to reside beyond the physical functioning of the brain. Thus it is my view that the 'condition' cannot as such, be 'cured'. This is because the foundation for the deeper sexual definition has already been laid within the deeper identity.

We nevertheless should resist arguing that someone who may be different to the supposed norm because of genetic or other variations therefore is defective.

One should rather have the attitude that says: whatever the reason for the difference, life had in so doing created even more richness in its diversity, as imperfect as it may appear.

If anything, what GID in identical twins proves is merely that our essential identity is unmanifest at birth. Therefore, that what is to become of us is largely informed by an intricate web of circumstances which includes our very particular brain our genetic code had provided us with.

However, what many invariably do is to lose sight of the bigger picture by latching on to such small detail, without giving credence to a plethora of others.

To illustrate the point, by using such arguments some neurologist suggest that criminal behaviour is somehow associated with our brain function as well. Specifically indicating that those who are criminally inclined lack prefrontal lobe activity, hence the inability to control their impulses.

On the other hand, it is ignored that the majority of individuals who may have the same brain dynamics do not behave criminally, and may be considered merely spontaneous or creative. While interestingly it was found that pathological lying usually occurs in remarkably intelligent individuals. Their lying when they were young usually getting them what they may have wanted at the time, but becoming a habit primarily because they have become so good at it, or having been enabled in it by their parents inaction. It has also been found that addicts have a much higher average IQ than the rest of the population—perhaps their disease developing to the extent it had because they could justify their behaviour to themselves, or develop successful strategies to avoid it being detected by others.

Incredulously by engaging arguments of this nature, concluding that we are purely products of our neurology, discarding that there is an existence beyond the brain which has to develop the will – the deeper sense of self within – to overcome our compulsions, our neuroses and our circumstances.

This after all is how we grow in strength and stature by rising above mere physical circumstance. However, if it is the view that who we essentially are is supposedly confined to the amorphous physical mass of our brain, we likely would also disregard this fundamental truth. And sadly therefore, to completely ignore what humanity ought to be about.

The Answer in an Egg Shell

"My brain is only a receiver, In the Universe there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength, inspiration. I have not penetrated into the secrets of this core, but I know that it exists."– Nikola Tesla

To put the entire issue of life, genetics, God, Universal Intelligence, Consciousness, the brain and mind, time and space, and all else, into a healthy perspective, picture an unbroken chicken egg. Now imagine breaking the shell and gently pouring its contents into a small bowl.

What do you see?

I'm sure you are mentally observing more or less what I am seeing too. That is a bright yellow yolk the colour and shape of the sun, surrounded by transparent jellylike albumen.

Yet that nebulous mass of primal protein holds all that is necessary to unfold a perfect intelligent life. With complex eyes, ears and nervous system; viscous red blood; toes, beak, liver, heart, brain, veins, cloaca, feathers; and whatever else you will associate with a tiny little chick. And of course, that it knows how to be a chick from the very moment it cracked open its shell. From the day it was born scratching around in the dirt for tiny morsels it deemed edible, yet also somehow knowing what to avoid.

All this being accomplished within three weeks. On its own, from a tiny singular fertilised cell containing a message it unambiguously obeyed, to so become a very particular type of non-flying bird.

And the mother most certainly did have a significant hand in its unfolding. For if she were to have loitered a lot the chick might not be the best chicken or cockerel it one day could've been. This is just as GID may be a direct result of the chemical makeup of the pregnant mother when she may have been depressed.

But that is mere detail that should not dismiss the wonder inherent in an act that indeed is so commonplace it is taken completely for granted!

The significant point to grasp from this to aid understanding our greater existence that one may put the smallest details into their proper perspective, is this. That the tiny single embryonic cell that started it all off, is so immensely intelligent that it functions on a level that is beyond our own logical comprehension.

In fact, it is capable of manifesting something beyond anything we can even nearly consciously conceive. And in manifesting, logically orchestrating billions of individual entities of life, somehow becoming a coherently interconnected being. Doing so apparently on its very own, and on an exceedingly tight schedule.

But let me rather rest my case just here, as by now I'm sure you must be convinced that it is improbable that stone cold matter, just one day on its very own, suddenly found a way to become animated existence. Then proceeding on its merry way from there.

The simple extrapolation that sceptics now have to make from this is to realise.

That the same organizing power that is responsible for unfolding the nebulous contents of the egg to one day become a chick,

is also responsible for unfolding all of life on a much grander scale,

and the universe in its entirety.

Clarifying Note

Since 1922 research has showed evidence that biological systems emit weak but permanent photons. In 1972 a group of German physicists at the University Marburg started serious investigations into this phenomenon. Their primary hypothesis was that biophoton emissions has to be assigned to a coherent photon field within the living system responsible for intra- and intercellular communication and regulation of biological functions such as biochemical activities, cell growth and differentiation.

It has since been shown that that biophoton emission can be traced back to DNA as the most likely candidate for working as the (main) source. Further research has shown that each emission from a particular living organism is unique.

It is my contention that this light emission is what is directly responsible for the formation and function of the cell, and that the DNA is the source that connects to a field responsible for the greater function of the organism. In other words, the evidence suggests that the greater intelligence of the cell is located within the Conversion Zone.

A further study conducted by Gariaev et al in Moscow and Canada suggests that there exists An Electromagnetically mediated "language" for communication between DNA and the cells.

The study suggests that:

1. That the evolution of biosystems has created genetic "texts", similar to natural context dependent texts in human languages, shaping the text of these speech-like patterns.

2. That the chromosome apparatus acts simultaneously both as a source and receiver of these genetic texts, respectively decoding and encoding them.

3. And that the chromosome continuum of multicellular organisms is analogous to a static-dynamical multiplex time-space holographic grating, which comprises the space-time of an organism in a convoluted form.That is to say, the DNA action, theory predicts and which experiment confirms,

3.1 is that of a "gene-sign" laser and its solitonic electro-acoustic fields, such that the gene-biocomputer "reads and understands" these texts in a manner similar to human thinking, but at its own genomic level of "reasoning". It asserts that natural human texts (irrespectively of the language used), and genetic "texts" have similar mathematical-linguistic and entropic-statistic characteristics, where these concern the fractality of the distribution of the character frequency density in the natural and genetic texts, and where in case of genetic "texts", the characters are identified with the nucleotides, and

3.2 that DNA molecules, conceived as a gene-sign continuum of any biosystem, are able to form holographic pre-images of biostructures and of the organism as a whole as a registry of dynamical "wave copies" or "matrixes", succeeding each other. This continuum is the measuring, calibrating field for constructing its biosystem.

The researchers specifically make reference to the chromosome quantum non locality as a phenomenon of the genetic information which is seen as being particularly important in multicellular organisms applying on various levels.

The 1st level is that of the organism as a whole. Here nonlocality is reflected in the capacity for regeneration, such that any part of the body recreates the whole organism, as, for example, in case of the worm Planaria. That is to say, any local limiting of the genetic information to any part of a biosystem is totally absent. The same concerns the vegetative reproduction of plants.

The 2nd level is the cellular level. Here it is possible to grow a whole organism out of a single cell. However with highly evolved animal biosystems, this will be a complex matter.

The 3rd level is the cellular-nuclear level. The enucleation of somatic and sexual cells and the subsequent introduction into them of other nuclei does not impede the development of a normal organism. Cloning of this kind has already been carried out on higher biosystems, for example, sheep.

The 4th level is the molecular level: here, the ribosome would read mRNA not only on the separate codons, but also on the whole and in consideration of context.

The 5th level is the chromosome-holographic: at this level, a gene has a holographic memory, which is typically distributed, associative, and nonlocal, where the holograms "are read" by electromagnetic or acoustic fields. These carry the gene-wave information out beyond the limits of the chromosome structure. Thus, at this and subsequent levels, the nonlocality takes on its dualistic material-wave nature, as may also be true for the holographic memory of the cerebral cortex.

The 6th level concerns the genome's quantum nonlocality. Up to the 6th level, the nonlocality of bio-information is realized within the space of an organism. The 6th level has, however, a special nature; not only because it is realized at a quantum level, but also because it works both throughout the space of a biosystem and in a biosystems own time frame. The billions of an organism's cells therefore "know" about each other instantaneously, allowing the cell set is to regulate and coordinate its metabolism and its own functions. Thus, nonlocality can be postulated to be the key factor explaining the astonishing evolutionary achievement of multicellular biosystems. This factor says that bioinformatic events, can be instantaneously coordinated, taking place "here and there simultaneously", and that in such situations the concept of "cause and effect" loses any sense. This is of a great importance! The intercellular diffusion of signal substances and of the nervous processes is far too inertial for this purpose. Even if it is conceded that intercellular transmissions take place electro-magnetically at light speeds, this would still be insufficient to explain how highly evolved, highly complex biosystems work in real time. The apparatus of quantum nonlocality and holography is in the authors' view indispensable to a proper explanation of such real time working. The 6th level therefore says that the genes can act as quantum objects, and that it is the phenomenon of quantum non-locality/teleportation, that ensures the organism's super coherency, information super redundancy, super knowledge, cohesion and, as a totality or whole, the organism's integrity (viability).

Essentially what we can infer from the above is that evolution and the mechanics of cell formation as well as genetics, can largely be explained by extrapolating an understanding derived from quantum physics, and particularly the discoveries at the University of Geneva discussed in The Exclusion Principle. xix
Chapter Seven

Beyond Mere Chance

The Future is Nigh

"All things are in the act of change; thou thyself in ceaseless transformation and partial decay, and the universe with thee." – Marcus Aurelius Antonius

It is mathematically understood based on our Time-dilation model that an awareness of future outcomes of events should be possible. While this might not be such a problem with the deterministic unfolding of the physical universe, it is a real dilemma for perceptual living beings as ourselves.

However, that the future does inform our every moment has been incontestably proven by experiments as the Intuition Experiment done at HeartMath. While in the experiment only limited short-term information was received, it is conceivable that more personal information pertinent to the individual could be accounted for well in advance. The ability to do this most likely depending on our respective cognitive capacity; with those particularly gifted such as psychics seemingly having access to future information of themselves as well as others well into the future.

The question this begs to ask is: what about the notion that we have free will, and that we are the masters of our own destiny?

This indeed becomes a logical conundrum, for from the postulated framework the future on some level has already happened. And therefore, our lives then must be based on some or other predetermination that we therefore by implication have no control over as our future has already happened.

To get our heads around this, we must first accept that the basic rules of the material world are clearly defined by the laws of physics. And thus – irrespective of what the deeper dynamics governing our lives suggest – we have to accept that:

Time is unidirectional as perceived in space-time;

that it perceptually unfolds towards the future;

and once an event has passed, it is in the past.

Notwithstanding this, from the perspective of the unbounded the future has already happened despite what we are yet to decide in any given moment. Albeit that there are infinitely many futures that come to play at that moment.

Our dilemma is that we tend to implant our perceptual frame of reference to conceptualise this deeper unbounded reality. To reassert a previous point:

Because of our sensory relationship to our world, we are perceptually limited to understanding anything in terms of a beginning of something with its eventual demise.

This after all is the nature of the material world. That everything, such as the universe, life or a teacup, has a beginning with an eventual demise. We cannot escape thinking otherwise as the stimuli we are continually subjected to overwhelmingly suggests this is so.

Despite having just intimated this, let me nonetheless interpret this future dilemma in a way that it might be comprehensible from our sensory perspective.

Assume you get an intuition of an event in your future. You then have an option of using that information to affect a change. And if you do so, in a real sense you have altered the course of the future destiny of all creation. For then the Butterfly Effect (discussed later) consequently would ensure that the entire future, not just of your own life but that of the entire universe, is fundamentally different to what it would've been without you enacting on that information.

Thus at that very point, the unbounded also updates all of its own future eventualities as another future had now been realised based on your chosen intervention: it being your choice to act differently in that moment. Therefore in this way the entire unbounded is in constant flux when viewed from our own frame of reference. All its futures constantly being updated by every moment of every life in existence in this and all other universes.

Perhaps one should view our entire existence as a blank page. If you were to cut a design on it, the possibilities before cutting it is limitless, but confined to the page and the methods of creating on it. Cutting would then be a metaphor for your own life, hence your body moving through space and time is like a scissors creating a very specific reality. And once you have decided on a design, you could begin cutting. But once you've made an incision, the page up to that point, is cut, and you cannot go back.

And as with cutting on a page, in real life there are no second chances. You cannot go back as your past has already been decided upon.

You could however change your mind about the direction you are yet to take by deciding on another design. Then the future possibilities yet again are limitless. But now also having to account for what you have already cut. The parts of the page that have not been cut upon are all the future possibilities open to you from that point on. That is if you so choose to enact upon them.

Another way to view the same dynamic would be to consider a completely blank CD. An uncut CD has the potential to record every tune that has ever been conceived, as well as every potential tune that is yet to be. But once that CD is cut with a particular tune, it is cut. With the remaining portion still having that same potentiality, bearing in mind it already contains the music of its past. In other words, all past decisions of what music were to have been included is already on the disc, never to be erased.

These are examples of the proverbial blank slate on which we all can create our individual future realities. Similarly, our human existence is like a four-dimensional page, or an uncut CD, or blank slate on which we as free-willed beings are tasked to create on the universal canvass of our life. It already containing the full potential of our own life, as well as that of all future generations.

Though paradoxically, it appears that while there may be infinitely many individual paths to choose from, some or other creative controlling force appears to have overall control—that is irrespective of the decisions we are to make in any moment. Thus, notwithstanding the perceived randomness and chaos at play, it is my guess that the universe is heading in the general direction it had always intended to.

And will reach its desired destination irrespective of the infinitely many choices available to us in each of our lives. And irrespective of how much desperate anxious energy we may be wasting to control all the variables to achieve any particular end.

The Dilemma of Knowing what will happen Next

This moment is yours to create, and the future is your canvass.

Which future will you choose for yourself?

Now, let us consider the dilemma of receiving a clear message of our own future and its impact on our individual lives. I will be using a ceteris paribus (all other things being equal) type argument as in economics, where it is assumed that you are the only person at the time receiving future information.

Suppose that a psychic had a vision of a future event in which you were involved. Let's say she visualised you being in a terrible motor vehicle accident that you were responsible for. Furthermore, that as a result of this a dear friend of yours died, and you in turn were seriously injured, perhaps blinded. Should she not inform you of this event, you would go on your merry way, and then that fateful day will eventually arrive with the crash resulting as had been observed.

This is because, without any interference, at a deeper level of reality the future has already happened. That is irrespective of the infinitely many choices you are yet to make, at this level you have already made them. This is because at this deeper level of reality, our futures are happening all at once, as inconceivable as this may logically sound.

However, should the psychic inform you of this future scenario, very interesting dynamics most likely will result.

Depending on how seriously you take the message, you might go into a deep depression because of the guilt and anxiety that results from pre-empting every eventuality. This will particularly result because of your new induced preoccupation with wanting to avoid your impending doom. And with all the associated pressure this now brings to your life, you may decide to commit suicide rather than be responsible for taking your friend's life.

However since this is your future we're pre-empting, we are forced to correlate back to the exact moment the reading had taken place. From the physics perspective the first event now would become erased, and she now would see that you will commit suicide instead.

She then passes on the newly perceived information to you. And since this is the information you would've received instead, you might be so bemused that it even was envisioned. Particularly since your life at that time was perfect, and could never even contemplate such an eventuality. And so, on some reflection of what state of mind one must be in to take such a drastic measure, you decided to call a friend for lunch to tell her about this ridiculous psychic. So to end up taking a completely different course that day.

Now of course our poor psychic would see a completely different scenario before having told you this.

In this way the future is obliged to wind itself back to where the vision was initially seen. The important point once again to bear in mind is that all of this is entirely in your future. And of course one of the requirements for how life now is logically playing itself out being that she is definitely to intervene in your life by telling you this to begin with. Therefore being obliged to inform you irrespective of what the future outcome would otherwise be as the decision to meddle in your future affairs had already been made.

In this way, both of you together with all of sentient existence is stuck within this infinite loop that will only pass once a congruent future that will relate to your then state of mind somehow surfaces.

So the unmanifest future plays itself out until finally, she gives you a message that balances out all the scenarios, being one you can live with and perhaps even wanted to hear all your life. Let us suppose it is that you will leave your current employ that you had been at for the past twenty odd years. Sell off all your fixed assets and start a very successful country guest-house in an idyllic setting. This being something you had been contemplating all your adult life, but never had the courage to do.

The future in this way infinitely loops back creating limitless possibilities in every moment. And while all the above did not take place in physical reality, it certainly did in the unmanifest world of the mind. Nevertheless, psychic abilities might to some extent be a malfunction of our mind, very often being associated with schizophrenia where future visions can unwelcomely intrude into the sufferer's current sense of reality. Though in some African cultures, those who have this supposed disposition – that is schizophrenia – are revered for having a very special gift.

Be this as it may, it appears as if normal intuition is cognitively regulated to give us only the necessary information required to affect a more desired course for our lives. This can be equated to standing on a lookout post to see into the distance that we may find our bearings, and so to take a more optimal course to reach our desired destination.

Thus the moral of this convoluted entanglement is:

While the unbounded world is infinite and can infinitely correlate the end,

we as free thinking human beings can define every moment.

We can also correlate information that emanate from intuitive impulses from our future to create the optimal course for our lives today.

Therefore to create any desired future,

as the future is literally for us to define in this very moment.

And while our future has boundless possibilities,

it nevertheless appears that the information to live our best life is always close at hand.

That is,

if we have the courage to respond to its call.

Ordered Chaos

"All the evidence shows that God was actually quite a gambler, and the universe is a great casino, where dice are thrown, and roulette wheels spin on every occasion." – Stephen Hawking

What an underlying program of sorts governing existence does exist can be inferred from findings derived at by a new branch of science called Chaos Theory. It asserts that all perceived randomness have an underlying predictability, even our seemingly spontaneous human actions.

While I won't go into the theory in detail, Chaos Theory generally asserts that:

While life and creation on the whole appears to be chaotic, it does however have unique intrinsic patterns of unfolding that, in theory, can be mathematically modelled.

Thus there is inherent order even within apparent chaos. What has already been observed is that:

- molecules tend to combine and form structures that are patterned;

\- the orbits of the planets seem to have more significance than just simply orbiting in arbitrary formations in space and appear to have a deeper interrelatedness;

- life tends to move in space and time in an ordered fashion and thus events manifest partially by design as is the case with cell formation, but even on a larger scale as with our individual human interactions as well—this is referred to as synchronicity;

- names and dates of events are calculable with the result in some way being meaningful;

- inspirational writing have a chronological linkage to other apparently disconnected events such as the bible codes that has statistically been accepted as scientifically verified (although contested by others), but mathematicians have asserted that other great books such as Moby Dick have equivalent interpretive value—these interpretive connections is statistically calculated to be significantly beyond mere chance;

- and that the list of such meaningful coincidences are virtually endless.

That existence apparently seeks order at all levels – though it may appear completely random and spontaneous to us – is a frightening thought that once again seems to fly straight against our conventional notion of free choice.

To illustrate this apparent pre-determination, chaos theorists have mathematically modelled a roulette wheel. By this, based on the formula inherent in the wheel, the odds of winning can be increased by around 5% while using the information provided by the program to choose the best options to play. I.e. if the probability of winning is 30%, the odds of winning can be increased up 32% based on following the calculations.

It is important to note that such programs do not take into account the individual machine's inherent biases. Rather the intrinsic nature of the roulette wheel itself is considered. Thus it has the same odds for beating every other similar machine.

Before I continue it is important that this sinks in. Ordinarily, scientist would say: "Sure we can model a roulette wheel. But first of all we need to know the point the wheel begins spinning. The time it starts spinning. The initial force applied to start the wheel off and the friction coefficient of the wheel. The specific weight and circumference of the ball thrown. As well as factors pertaining to the playing of the game such as the exact moment the ball was thrown in relation to the spin having started. The particular velocity at which it was thrown at. Then we most certainly can determine where it will likely land."

This is the conventional cause-and-effect understanding of the nature of the universe and reflects a mechanistic view of how objects interact in nature.

But this is not what chaos theorists have determined. Rather if you were to play roulette for the day, that a certain formula or pattern of what number is likely to result next as the game is played can be modelled. And thus, if you were to know what this pattern is, you are likely to increase the odds of winning on the wheel as you would then have an idea of what likely would happen next.

Thus the rate at which the wheel has been spun; the force of the throw which includes your brain and nervous system as well as the muscle cells involved; and all other seemingly random variables; have already been factored in the overall formula that governs the wheel. This includes your personal choices such as when you are to throw and exactly how hard. As well as the speed the wheel is to be spun at that particular moment. In other words, all the factors that were to impact the playing of the game, including oneself, has already been factored well in advance into some universal mathematical formula that governs roulette wheels.

Before continuing, there is no point arguing what I had just said for this once again is Scientific Fact.

The Butterfly Effect

"To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven." – Ecclesiastes 3:1

And so, all our life experiences seemingly have been factored into the giant program of all creation, and therefore are similarly deterministic.

Though, the obstacle to determining what the outcome will be in far more complicated scenarios, such as accurately modelling a money market in this way, is due to a phenomenon called The Butterfly Effect: This is a symbolic concept that describes the inherent complexity and interrelatedness of objects interacting in the material world.

It asserts that a single butterfly wing flapping in South East Asia, could be the final necessary determinant for a hurricane that will eventually strike in Kansas.

This indicates the interdependency of creation. Hence it is a significant obstacle preventing us from mathematically modelling anything even as relatively simple and manmade as the money market. That is at least on this side of the Event Horizon, since such a level of infinite correlation is not an option for us as our being appears to be limited to the confines of spacetime.

On the other hand, our intuition does provide us with such an infinite capacity and many do employ it to compute what future reality will result—even in the rational world of the money market. Then again, there's the subtle issue of how our thoughts and intentions do affect outcomes anyway and how in this regard, we can be the conscious masters that creates any future destiny we choose.

The important conclusion we can make from Chaos Theory is that the roulette wheel appears to have a life of its own, irrespective of our independent actions to control it. In a way the process of the roulette wheel's unfolding is not unlike that of cell formation.

We can therefore conclude that there also appears to be a roulette wheel soul of sorts manifesting roulette wheel unfolding too. As absurd as this may sound.xx

The Dance of Life

"We are members of a vast cosmic orchestra in which each living instrument is essential to the complimentary and harmonious playing of the whole." – J. Allen Boone

On an experiential level, once you have quietened the chaos in your mind, you can begin to perceive that the universe seeks order at almost every conceivable level. Then it will be apparent that the events around you have greater significance.

You will note that similar events will coincide. You may become aware that a string of similar accidents have occurred in your city that has heightened the collective awareness of the citizens to the chaos and disorder on their roads, subtly indicating that action must be taken. You may coincidentally meet up with the exact persons at a crucial time for a business venture to succeed. Or events simply seem to manifest having no apparent significance at all. Except perhaps to indicate to you that you are part of an ordered universe, and that your needs are cared for, despite the human chaos all around you.

It is also an incredible coincidence that the world famous British Theoretical Physicist, Stephen Hawking, one of the greatest thinkers of our age, was born exactly 300 years to the day after Galileo, one of the greatest thinkers of all time. Furthermore, Sir Isaac Newton was born in the exact year in which Galileo died. It is almost as if the father of modern science had directly passed on the flame of scientific enlightenment to his protégé in the next life. And of course, Hawking therefore born exactly 300 years after Newton, whose prestigious post he eventually was to fill at Cambridge University. Perhaps in this regard there is a mathematically determinable thread running between all such great thinkers—and for that matter, all great artists, great Dalai Lamas or great refrigeration technicians as well.

And what about the string of unusual weather and other natural phenomena observed in 2011? Are they all just mere coincidences?

The following arbitrary example of a recently publicised event involving a lady collapsing in a Toronto theatre who was revived through mouth-to-mouth resuscitation by the Hollywood actor Matthew McConaughey, illustrates how on some or other level, all our lives are ordered—albeit chaotically.

I suppose there is nothing strange about being revived by a Hollywood actor, except in this case it may be every gals dream come true. And this is exactly why the event was in the news. But more importantly – at least in the context of this discussion – on her fiftieth birthday the lady in question's husband arranged that her rescuer give her a surprise call. As it turned out, the actor's mom's birthday was on the same day as well.

While seemingly coincidental, and indeed apparently arbitrary, one must realise that such perfect timing is intrinsic in the nature of all things. Whether it is obvious – or meaningful – to us or not. And therefore that it is extraordinarily common to the extent that it appears to be the general nature of our interaction with our surroundings. Thus seemingly unrelated events somehow have an underlying timebound connection that is ascribed the technical term Synchronicity.

This is a phenomenon coined by the psychoanalyst Carl Gustav Jung, who indicates that the concept does not question, or compete with, the notion of causality. Instead, it maintains that just as events may be grouped by cause, they may also be grouped by their meaning. Since meaning is a complex mental construction, subject to conscious and subconscious influence, not every correlation in the grouping of events by meaning needs to have an explanation in terms of cause and effect (Source Wikipedia).

To understand the general phenomenon, as a rule we have to appreciate that our mind's thrive on ordered patterns of some sort or another. Our sense of wellbeing is affected if the physical space around us is unstructured. And indeed our health and vitality can be improved when we create environments that follow ordered patterns. Sounds synchronously ordered referred to as music can give us extraordinary joy. While unstructured sound, that is noise of any nature or intensity, is enormously disruptive and in the long run can cause disease and breakdown.

So most of our joy in life is mysteriously associated with any activity (such as dancing, music or tai chi); or material manifestation (such as artwork, patterns in nature, or the design of a car or jewellery) that has a specifically defined pattern or structure. And thus, although we might not be consciously aware of it, all of our human interactions probably occur as is metaphorically described as "the dance of life".

You may still say that all of these are just arbitrary. Or that it just so happens to be that it is so—that they are merely inconsequential coincidences.

If this is your point of departure it is fair that the saying "once a cynic, always a cynic" certainly holds true for you. In doing so to deny that this is the implicit nature of the world by ignoring the overwhelming evidence. The downfall with having such a worldview though, is that in one's scepticism one becomes completely blind to life's interconnected thread. And so, when such an afflicted individual stops to observe such momentary wonder, to in that moment say "wow, what an amazing coincidence that was!"; they then in the very moment would turn around and say, "Well, while from a mathematical perspective the odds of it occurring may be great, this amazing coincidence just so happens to have happened to me! Big deal!" And move on, unaffected by that instant of divine grace that had the potential to change their life forever.

What they have inadvertently done by this attitude in that wondrous moment, is to have broken the thread of the divine mystery of their own life. And they most likely have done so every single time they had that 'rational' change-about whenever such a miracle potentially could have affected their life differently.

However, had they instead stopped and looked back at every such 'coincidence' they observed incalculably many times before with a sense of incredulity, a different picture would've emerged. They then would realise – mathematically that is – that the single chance occurrence is diminished by the magnitude of every single such extraordinary event that may have been perceived as mere arbitrary coincidences.

And because of the awe at the impossibility of it all, to have concluded that they are part of a wondrous dance that moves in tune with the rhythm of life. But since the moment was not seized, but rather to feel compelled to manipulate every direction they are to take that their partner on the other side of creation has no part in. This is not dancing in any way at all; it is controlling. For the best way to truly dance is in one's ability to let go, and to begin to flow to the rhythm of life. Being completely unaware of who may be leading the way. You or something far more significant than your singular isolated being.

But also to know that in dancing, despite having to let go, you do have a hand in the direction you are to take, and the turns you are to make. Finding that you and your partner are somehow heading in the same direction.

And while letting go, enjoying the sheer marvellous miracle in something as seemingly obscure as a dance.

The Virtual Reality Program of Life

"Everything we do in life ... is it not just a game?" – Gururaj Ananda Yogi

What are the implications for us earthly beings of a universe seeking order of some kind as we go about our normal earthly business?

Well, it is that we indeed are living in a virtual reality program of sorts where the events of our lives are not completely random. This is not difficult to perceive. While engaging a man-made computer game you have absolute freedom of choice and can engage any action you want. Those actions however being limited to the rules and confines of the particular program domain, with every action having a particular consequence in relation to the rules as defined in the software that runs it.

Though, should you choose to disobey the rules by playing randomly and recklessly, you most likely will miss the clues on the way and won't fare very well at all. But with focused attention and practice, you indeed could learn these rules and become its master and play to win. Every time.

And as with the game, in life there are many different avenues at your disposal to get the same result. But since games are simply considered a pastime, the outcome can be regarded as being of little consequence.

Though, what if the stakes are as high as in a game of Russian-roulette? You then better know the formula for the consequences most definitely could be dire.

And thus in our understanding of existence, knowledge of the rules is an absolute necessity if we do want to succeed. To randomly engage the game, with limited insights and false and outdated information, is not wise.

As the French philosopher Voltaire remarked: "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand he or she alone must decide to play the cards in order to win the game."

Hence this simple advice on living this life.

Know the rules of life, and engage it with every ounce of energy at your disposal. It's after all what you're made of while passing through this lifetime.

That is, you're made of information and light energy.

But just in case you are not yet convinced that life does have interwoven levels of intelligence – that you still believe that our existence is limited merely to the dynamics of our surface reality – let me tell you about Millie, and how she got herself tied up into a dreadful knot.

The Infinite Loop

"Since evolution became fashionable, the glorification of Man has taken a new form." – Bertrand Russell

The bizarre reality of the time we are living in is how vociferously we increasingly are arguing against the underlying interrelatedness and complexity of life. Even to the extent where every effort is made to prove that it is not so based on the most arbitrary and often irrelevantly detailed arguments.

This attitude is aptly captured in the anecdote of the tortoise (or was it the snail or the hare) that was jealous of the fantastic dancing millipede.

The story tells of the tortoise who every Sunday jealously watched the millipede, Millie, give her spectacular dancing performances to standing ovations at the jungle fair.

To get his revenge, the tortoise asked Millie which leg she started her fantastic dance routine with. And in thinking about it, he got Millie's poor limited conscious head in such a tizz as it was an intellectual puzzle she could not possibly begin to answer. In the process she was never able to get herself out of this logical entanglement. This resulting in her not ever being able to dance again as she is still attempting to work it out to this very day.

Cruel fellow, this tortoise, wasn't he! Or whoever he may have been, and even if he indeed was real. In any event, at least as the story goes, he got his revenge.

Strange though is it not, that with all our intelligence, or perhaps because of our perceived intelligence, we seem to do the very same thing unwittingly to ourselves.

Conclusion

"When we have seen Reality, there is not a grain of dust which has not a sublime meaning."– Vanderleeuw

That all existence emanates from some or other Unbounded Imaginary Realm – God's world so to say – as expounded in this work, most likely would not be accepted as scientific fact based on the current paradigm prevalent in science.

It nevertheless must be asserted as an immutable law of existence that cannot be contested by anyone with even the slightest ability to observe the miracle at play within their own mind—not least of which that the mind is capable of providing colour and meaning to the grey fog of the non-existent materiality that supposedly surrounds us.

That an Imaginary Realm can never be proven in conventional scientific terms is because we are perceptually limited to rationally explore our world as we appear to consciously reside on the material end of the reality divide referred to as the Event Horizon—and after all, this world is 'imaginary'. Thus, just as we are forced to perceive of time in a very fixed way through our own invention that helps to order our lives rationally – the mechanical clock – so we do not perceive of relativity. And as unreal as relativity may seem, it is an absolute scientific fact, so there is no point arguing around what it suggests about our apparent timebound natures.

Yet we do not need to look too far to know of this imaginary world, for when our brains are relaxed and not focused on materiality – particularly in our dreams – we then experience it, but cannot perceive it as real as it just is so extra-ordinary. And it certainly is alive, vibrant and beautiful, and filled with endless possibilities, being the very reason for all that is most wondrous about our existence. There, time and space is malleable and the laws that govern materiality do not exist and we are truly free to be.

And that there are perhaps infinitely many different worlds like ours or perhaps unlike ours, popping into and out of existence like the bubbles floating down the gently flowing river of time or non-time, existing in the nonexistent flash of an imaginary second, is only for the imagination to conceive of. Not only is it highly conceivable but more than likely, as that world is unbounded, limited by neither time nor space, existing for the pure enjoyment of God. Thus it appears as if life after all is indeed but a dream.

While that on its own is a mind shattering revelation, on the other hand, our material world does not consist of any materiality as one would ordinarily perceive of it anyway. Matter consists of photons of light, and this light itself seems to have an identity crisis. It's not sure whether it must behave like a particle or a wave.

In any event, it exists on the Event Horizon, in the time singularity between the Rational and Imaginary Realms, and this perhaps explains its haphazard and uncertain nature.

In fact:

Our entire universe is like a giant lit up Christmas tree

– or perhaps a hologram of sorts – of flashing light,

existing between materiality and unmateriality

– between the rational and the imaginary –

sparking up on the instruction of a program residing in the region between our godly and human selves,

the Conversion Zone of the mind.

Playing on the Event Horizon,

the non-existent movie screen of life,

formulated by a master Creator

—the master of all existence we know as God.

And for the most part we perceive the program as static and unchangeable. But, unlike the cyber-fellow who is permanently stuck in the kick-boxing game over which he has absolutely no control, and whose only option therefore is to kick back when he is being kicked at as the program that defines him dictates, we have far more power to control the events of our lives.

For,

while we are indeed part of the program that defines our reality,

the programmer is in fact part of us.

And thus can begin to reprogram our own lives,

Fully aware

that we are not a prisoner locked up in the rigid confines of materiality.

And since our time on this side of the reality divide is short, a literal flash, we might just as well take control, and play this game with the full awareness that we have the power to shape the world around us, if that is our choice.

Therefore it is indeed possible to have a peek at God's cards

as Einstein against his own conscious reckoning

certainly must have done.

And that now we as human-kind,

for the first time in our history,

truly have a clear understanding of how to consciously peak behind the veil of the great mystery that for so long have confounded us,

and to begin to perceive of its true nature.
Final Note

Having provided the general argument, particularly with regard to synchronicity, my intention wasn't to offer an oversimplified interpretation of reality or make overtly esoteric claims. This is because there are many imperatives that must be considered before we make any otherworldly conclusions. And indeed, that many events—if not the far greater majority—are just mere coincidences.

Notwithstanding this there appears to be an underlying inexplicable "order" – even at times destructively so -- to the otherwise apparently random surface of reality. It simply is that the chaos that is apparent around us seems to form around a somewhat less chaotic core. Perhaps, metaphorically speaking, as it is within the eye of a storm.

Examples of this apparent "order" include a number of natural disasters including:  four disastrous earthquakes — in Haiti, Japan, Chile and New Zealand — in just about one year (2011/2012); the worst or ever recorded natural events in history occurring in a period of five years (2010 – 2014) such as the Japan Earthquake, tsunami, and Typhoon Haiyan the worst ever heat wave in Australia, the  coldest recorded temperatures in Antarctica by about 10º; the worst drought in the US for almost a century; amongst a plethora of others.

And what about The London Olympics taking place in near perfect weather in the  wettest English summer for a century. And  hurricane Isaac eerily following the exact path on the day of the 7th anniversary of hurricane Katrina.

And then there's the Summer of Death, where in the summer of 2009 an inordinate number of celebrities including Michael Jackson as well as a number of famous individuals including Ted Kennedy died in less than five months. These deaths include George Tiller (May 31), David Carradine (June 3), Michael Roof (June 9), Ed McMahon (June 23), Farrah Fawcett (June 25), Michael Jackson (June 25), Gale Storm (June 27), Billy Mays (June 28), Fred Travalena (June 28), Harve Presnell (June 30), Alexis Argüello (July 1), Karl Malden (July 1), Steve McNair (July 4), Oscar G. Mayer, Jr. (July 6), Robert S. McNamara (July 6), Arturo Gatti (July 11), Dallas McKennon (July 14), Walter Cronkite (July 17), Frank McCourt (July 19), Gidget (July 21), Vernon Forrest (July 25), Corazon Aquino (August 1), John Hughes (August 6), Eunice Kennedy Shriver (August 11), Les Paul (August 13), Bob Novak (August 18), Ted Kennedy (August 25), Adam Goldstein "DJ AM" (August 28), Wayne Tippit (August 28), Carl Reindel (September 4), Eric Davidson (September 9), Gertrude Baines (September 11), Patrick Swayze (September 14), Mary Travers (September 16), Irving Kristol (September 18), Lucy Vodden (September 22) and William Safire (September 27).

Though it cannot compare to 2009, 2014 is noteworthy for the death of a number of  iconic and high-profile actors as well. These include Philip Seymour Hoffman (February 2), Shirley Temple (February 10), Mickey Rooney (April 6), Bob Hoskins (April 29), Ruby Dee (June 11), James Garner (July 19), Robin Williams (August 11), Lauren Bacall (August 12), Sir Richard Attenborough (August 24) and Joan Rivers (September 4), amongst other lesser known actors. And since this list was compiled in October 2014, the death of Paul Walker (November 30, 2013) can be included in the list as it occurred in under 10 months. In this period it equates to more than 1 significantly famous actor a month, a significant statistical outlying cluster given that this is a very select group—more so than the 2009 group of generally famous people. In fact a number of months since I compiled the list no famous acting deaths were observed.

The month of December 2015 / January 2016 similarly is noted for an  unprecedented number of musician deaths, including Glenn Frey, Natalie Cole and David Bowie. This indeed continued throughout the first half of 2016 with the other notable passing being that of Prince. If nothing else, it is apparent that even the ending of lives which for all intents and purposes are dependent on a unique set of individual circumstances, are clustered in time based on some or other distinguishable commonality.

While these events are indeed random events, or that they are man-made such as the economic crisis and climate change, at some level their coincidence appears to be somewhat beyond our usual cause-and-effect understanding of them. While these certainly are coincidental, are they really just that? Just mere statistical anomalies.

By this I'm NOT suggesting that "there are no such thing as accidents" as is the new age view prescribes. Rather, that in the case of a small number of such randomly occurring events there also appears to be perfect timing at play. Note that while there are a reasonably small number of such timeous occurrences, the clustering of those that indeed have some or other meaningful link such as earthquakes or death of famous stars are such that they are statistically improbable given normal random causality.

The real mental hurdle to overcome is to avoid thinking in terms of these apparently coinciding events consequently having to somehow be ordained by a higher power of any kind. That there is some or other immaculate a designer unfolding their occurrence behind the scenes. The view one should simply have is that, while these events were purely random from a purely causal perspective, it was impacted by the culmination of a myriad of factors which includes genetics, nutrition, negligence, or other relevant causative factor. But moreover that their clustering cannot on their own be viewed purely from the superficial surface layer perspective (given our model) of cause-and-effect.

It is not determinism in the conventional sense as there definitely is randomness at work, even within the very small cluster of apparently coincidental events. The rule of thumb that appears to be at work is that, if a significant event has a high probability of occurring, it has a reasonable (not high) probability of occurring at a time and place that will highlight its significance even more.

To give an example of how this dynamic may work, consider Hurricane Sandy and the Sandyhook massacre. If pure cause-and-effect was at play the odds of these two events occurring is almost completely unlikely, let alone that they share the same name. That is considering that they occurred a few weeks from each other and in the same general location in a region would not ordinarily experience hurricanes while having the lowest incidence of gun violence in the US.

While one may insist that the name is merely a coincidence, one cannot also infer that there is a direct causal link between these events as they definitely are completely mutually exclusive in nature. Thus we cannot in any way infer that the shooter Adam Lanza committed the massacre to coincide with the occurrence of the hurricane by some deeper ordained plan or that he deliberately targeted a school with Sandy in its name. Rather one must hold the view that the circumstance that led Adam Lanza to massacre 26 people at Sandyhook is completely independent from Hurricane Sandy. In fact his actions are largely a product of his disturbed mentality. But moreover, the severity of his actions most likely being as a consequence of his mother keeping an arsenal of deadly weapons and being a survivalist, without in all likelihood the event would never have occurred.

However, considering the previous discussion of patterns and meaningful coincidences, the naming of the hurricane may indeed have a deeper linkage. To start off with those who named the hurricane definitely had thought they had done it independently of any other event other that considering names already used. Notwithstanding how they had applied their minds they indeed had inadvertently named it to coincide with a future unconnected equally significant event which was yet to occur in the very near future in their immediate vicinity.

Thus, while an alternate causative understanding is yet to be provided, one can infer that their "meaning" on a greater human level may somehow be key to the naming, timing and location. In the case of the two Sandy's, these events had alerted the US—if they indeed choose to heed the underlying meaning in the apparent "message"—to two of its most pressing contemporary issues: Climate Change and Gun Control.

A similar argument can be made for the downing of a Malaysian Airlines plane only four months from the mysterious disappearance of another Malaysian plane. It is reported to have been shot down, but that combatants happen to have chosen a Malaysian Airlines plane considering the number of other airlines flying over the region indeed was a horrific coincidence.

A further coincidence is that it occurred on the same day as the TWA 800 crash off the New York coast. And more ominously that two other major commercial aircraft disasters occurred within the same week with a cumulative death toll of 462—next to 911, the worst week in civil aviation. And yet, another incredible incidence to make it even more ominous, is the downing of AirAsia on the 28th of December 2014. This contributing to three major airline crashes in a single year by an operator based in Kuala Limper—these being the only three catastrophic crashes by any operator worldwide that year.

One can derive meaning from these incidences in many ways. The two most common are the implications on the war in Ukraine and the other obvious one being the impact it will have on civil aviation.

That there are definite deeper linkages to these incidences other than what we may personally impute on them, is mere speculation on my part. I.e. that there indeed are causal linkages cannot be asserted as absolute defendable fact. Nevertheless as the Malaysian Airlines incident shows, there appears to be many layered coincidences at play which goes beyond what one can reasonably impute as being mere chance. This individual occurrence in particular certainly strongly hints to a deeper dynamic that may be play. As statistical odds go, at least in terms of scientific provability, this one event goes beyond what would ordinarily be considered as mere chance.

That there indeed is underlying interrelatedness, even just theoretically, can nevertheless be derived at from our understanding of the intrinsic nature of time and space as provided in the framework discussed. In other words, it can be explained based on our understanding of physics.

At this point it is important not to get too carried away and to lose perspective. For instance to now conclude that the mundane events of our lives are continually governed by such linkages. Or that our life had somehow been previously ordained. This is not what this section is about as the evidence suggests that there only appears to be a relatively small interrelated causality beyond these obvious patterns.

Therefore the view that "there are no such thing is coincidences" is definitely a mistaken one. It should rather be significantly modified to "there are some islands of meaningful convergences in a vast ocean of random coincidences". The trick is to discern the true gems in the chaotic muck and mire that often is the reality of our lives.

Circumstances in the individual lives of those on flight MH 17 could as readily resulted in them not being on that flight and that they indeed were incredibly unlucky to have been on the respective planes. That is because our ordinary lives are most certainly governed by our personal choices and the hand of chance. It is because, as with roulette wheel spin, events are still largely indeterminable and chaotic. The relatively small determinability simply suggesting that dynamics other than mere randomness is also at play in the inner workings of the greater universe.

This level of conformity and convergence nevertheless appearing to be sufficient, and in all likelihood a necessary factor, to evolve an ordered anthropic universe to develop highly complex intelligent beings as ourselves.

In other words: it appears to be a deeper aspect of our reality operating beyond our sensual experience of time and space that we are yet to understand, appearing to routinely aid our greater human evolution.

That a Malaysian plane was to have been downed of all the planes flying over Ukraine that nevertheless day appears to have been inevitable given the extraordinary event that precipitated four months previously. If the first one was for argument sake an Air France jet that disappeared, the one that was to be downed too had to be an Air France jet, in order to enhance its significance. For without the extraordinary coincidence none of what I wrote above would have been particularly remarkable.

The immediate tendency by many when confronted with this type of information is that they would question why Malaysian planes were specifically "targeted" or "chosen". Then to question what Malaysians may have done to deserve such a horrible fate?

Quite frankly I don't know. But as I mentioned before, whatever is at play appears to be impersonal i.e. that it is not a "choice" based on feelings and thought patterns as you or I would ordinarily engage in.

It may well be that, because of the growth of air travel in the region, there may have been circumstances developing which were conducive to major airplane crashes in the future. Should the resulting incidents have been sufficiently dispersed, many more crashes could've resulted in a protracted period of time. But because of these apparent "coincidences", global attention had been focused to indeed prevent significant loss of life in the future. And indeed worldwide.

It therefore is not necessarily universal dynamics, or God, that had caused these crashes, but that "The Universe", God, or whatever mechanism may have been at play, had limited our failures by synchronizing our manmade tragedies in a way that brings attention to our human inadequacies and failures. So aiding in forcing us to take the appropriate early action to limit future tragedies.

The onus consequently is on every Malaysian to ponder what meaning this triple tragedy may have for them now that fate has clearly dealt such a devastating blow. For such an intensely religious nation these events most certainly would be personalised as they surely must believe that God had delivered his wrath on them, and that they indeed must have somehow brought this circumstance upon themselves.

I know this would be a very unpalatable philosophy for many. For instance one can legitimately ask why this dynamic "allowed" the killing of so many in the holocaust. This is a legitimate question which I would not even remotely be able to answer other than to say that this dynamic has absolutely nothing to do with our individual free will. It is also is in no way related to any form of determinism. The events of world war two were manmade — just as climate change or the economic crash or American gun culture — is. There well may have been myriad of fortuitous incidences and circumstances that led to the eventual prevailing of good over evil. This is as it appears to have been for millennia where evil never prevails indefinitely.

Another tendency is to make wild philosophic deductions about how such a phenomenon therefore must impact our lives. One particular example is that the theory is used to provide a scientific basis for Astrology. This may or may not be so. And while Chaos Theory does assert that all events and all phenomena on some level are interrelated by virtue of their interaction with one another. That is including the motion of the heavens by virtue of the gravitational and other forces they exhibit. We nevertheless cannot additionally infer as scientific fact that the planets therefore influence our human interactions merely by their particular orbits in space.

For now one simply must accept that at some level beyond our normal cognition, chaos has a significant measure of orderliness. What may be responsible for the general outworking of that apparent underlying order, will be revealed as the argument presented in this work unfold.

_____________

I'm writing this on the 9th of November 2016, the day Danold Trump was announced President of the United States, the man who wants to build a gigantic wall between The US and Mexico. The greatest irony is that it is very day, 27 years ago, which marked the falling of the Berlin Wall.

And to add another ironic twist, this day – 11/9 – is numerologically related to single most tragic day in American history, the downing of the twin towers on 9/11. Not that the two events can be compared other than this evident coincidence, or that the Trump presidency may be equally devastating. Nevertheless, given the gravity of these two disparate events and their impact on American society and that this note is about such events, it is noteworthy merely because of this very glaring and bizarre coincidence.

_____________

Adding to the previous note on Musicians dying in January 2016,  2016 became notable year of deaths of musicians, but  world icons such as Muhammad Ali, Fidel Castro, Harry Potter icon Alan Rickman and Star Wars icon Carrie Fisher as well.

The list of musician deaths includes David Bowie, The Eagle's Glen Frey, Black's Colin Vearncombe, Maurice white of Earth Wind and Fire, Prince, Leonard Cohen and George Michael. George Michael's death is particularly noteworthy in the context of meaningful coincidences since he is associated with one of the best known Christmas songs, Last Christmas, while he died prematurely on Christmas day.

_____________

This note may not be particularly meaningful, but given the general tenor of this section, is wholly appropriate. It is an article from ABC News titled  Buzz Aldrin treated by Dr David Bowie in remarkable coincidence.

Buzz Aldrin, the second person to walk on the Moon, is being cared for by Dr David Bowie in a New Zealand hospital after being evacuated from the South Pole.

In a remarkable coincidence, Mr Aldrin's doctor shares the name of the late British singer whose greatest hits included songs such as Starman and others about space travel, which could easily have been penned for the great American astronaut.

The strange circumstance certainly tickled Mr Aldrin's manager, Christina Korp, who posted a photo on Twitter of Mr Aldrin and Dr Bowie together in a Christchurch hospital.

"Thank heaven @TheRealBuzz's doctor is David Bowie," Ms Korp said on Twitter.

"You can't make this stuff up."

Bowie, the singer and actor, released his smash hit Space Oddity about a fictional astronaut who loses communication with ground control in 1969, just days before Neil Armstrong and Mr Aldrin became the first humans to set foot on the Moon.

Their moonwalk, part of the Apollo 11 lunar landing, was watched by a then-record television audience of 600 million people worldwide.

Bowie, who also adopted the alter ego of Ziggy Stardust, followed the success of Space Oddity with the release of Starman in 1972.

Mr Aldrin, 86, was evacuated from the South Pole on the weekend after falling ill and was flown to Christchurch on New Zealand's South Island, where he remains in quarantine.

He has been advised by doctors to remain until fluid in his lungs clears.

Bowie, who won the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award in 2006, died earlier this year.

_____________

The Chicago Cubs winning the 2016 World Series and the number 108 is another example of the occurrence of improbable coincidences. For more read  108: The Chicago Cubs' magic number.

_____________

On November 9, 2016, Danold Trump was announced President of the United States, the man who wants to build a gigantic wall between The US and Mexico. The greatest irony is that it is the very day, 27 years ago, which marked the fall of the Berlin Wall.

And to add another ironic twist, this day – 11/9 – is numerologically related to single most tragic day in American history, the downing of the twin towers on 9/11. Not that the two events can be compared other than this evident coincidence, or that the Trump presidency may be equally devastating given his rhetoric.

Let's hope that the saying, the only thing we learn from history, is that we do not learned, does not hold true given the ominous warning signs.

_____________

One can also make an argument that there is an interrelation between Donald Trump's Climate Change denialism and the removal of the US from the Paris climate accord with unprecedented Category 4 hurricanes in three weeks.

They are Hurricane Harvey (producing the greatest amount of continuous rain on the US mainland in 1000 years), Hurricane Irma (the most Powerful Hurricane ever experienced) and Hurricane Maria (the strongest Hurricane to hit the US Territory of Puerto Rico).

This is juxtaposed to a previous record period of the absence of any major hurricanes hitting the US for the entire duration of the Obama presidency. A major Hurricane being a Category 3 or higher. Hurricane Sandy for instance making landfall as a Category 1; all others being either a Category 1 or Tropical Storm. In fact he is distinguished as the  Longest-Serving President With No Major Hurricane Strike according to data published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Again, the key is the timing of Hurricanes and Trumps withdrawal from the Paris accord, all within weeks from each other. Perhaps what's different in this case compared to other coincidental events is the unprecedented fury and clarity to the issue in question (i.e. Climate Change) with which nature appears to have reacted to Trump. Coincidently Obama being the president having done the most of any other president to address the issue and indeed was instrumental to the global acceptance of the accord.

By the above it's important not to view the coincidence of these apparently synchronistic dynamics as God's or nature's wrath against Trump for his utterances. An example of this type of thinking is that some conservatives have suggested that  Hurricane Harvey was a punishment for Houston having elected an openly gay mayor. This however being glaringly negated by the spate of subsequent weather phenomena.

It's my assessment of the sheer scale of these events in an extraordinary limited period; that simply in having the view that Global Warming is a hoax, inadvertently chose a calamitous time to do so. Thus as the most powerful representative of the US, Trump just so happen to withdrew from the Paris Climate Accord at a catastrophic period when the worst possible storms resulting from abnormally warm oceans were to befall the United States.

It is important to appreciate that these events would've happened regardless of his utterances. But to reiterate, that the timing of his actions is the key that enhances their significance, and therefore the interrelatedness and meaning. It consequently also emphasizes the truth that the climate is changing and the fallacy of his view.

On the other hand, if Global Warning was definitely a hoax, the events would likely not have occurred as the material conditions would thus not have existed for it to occur on the scale and ferocity it did.

Finally for those attempting to equate Harvey to an ex gay mayor: Trump's removing the US from the Paris Accord, the very specific weather phenomena that followed and Climate Change, are meaningfully interrelated; a hurricane and someone's sexual orientation, clearly are not.

_____________

What can I, or do I need to, say about 2020?

Only, perhaps, that the year that everyone in their new year's wishes and contemplations was about 2020 vision, had manifestly become realized to reveal that we are a wounded world.

Oh, and it happens to coincide with the most ill-equipped US administration in history, having dismantled almost every safeguard necessary protect the country against a major pandemic. This resulted in a perfect storm of mismanagement, social division, and a highly undetectable virus that is incredibly confounding to scientists with its symptom formation.

It's as if Murphy's Law is playing out on steroids.

In this case the coincidence is poignant: the greatest plague in the last 100 years, the greatest economic downturn since 1929, the greatest civil unrest since 1968. All in a single year.

Ultimately, for a society that had lost its moral compass to such an extent to find in themselves to elect a man with such obvious lack of character as Trump as their leader, this profound lesson should be clear: that it is always ignorance that summons the vengeance of fate.

2020 has literally shaken our foundations, and a new – hopefully much improved – world of our choosing, potentially lies beyond the COVID-19 horizon.

i From A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking, published by Bantam Press. Used by Permission of The Random House Group Ltd.

ii Einstein's quote was derived from A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson, Transworld Publishers, 2003.

iii Anthropic meaning a universe capable of conceiving life.

iv Proteins are referred to as the Elixir of Life – usually the Elixir of Eternal Life – as those first proteins that somehow had formed themselves from its raw constituents, and then had somehow become animated existence, are responsible for the fact the life has survived to this very day. And then to have developed to the amazing complexity as is apparent in humans.

v Principal scientist is Dr John Hagelin a theoretical physicist. Journal article, "Effects of Group Practice of the Transcendental Meditation Program on Preventing Violent Crime in Washington, DC" published in Social Indicators Research. Also find articles on the Washington Prayer Experiment in the web page of the Institute of Science, Technology and Public Policy: main article with same name as journal article; and A Rebuttal to "Voodoo Science" by Maxwell Rainforth, Ph.D.

vi Dr. William A. Tiller, author of Science and Human Transformation, Conscious Acts of Creation and Some Science Adventures with Real Magic. Also see the articles: How the Power of Intention Alters Matter by Celeste Adams in an interview with Dr. William A. Tiller; and Exploring the Effects of Human Intention and Thought Energy, by Dr. William A. Tiller.

vii Journal article, Electrophysiological Evidence of Intuition, published in 2004 in the Journal of Alternative and Complimentary Medicine. The study was done by Dr Rollin McRaty, Mike Atkinson and Dr Raymond Trevor Bradly.

These experiments have been successfully repeated since 1997 with consistent results since the first experimental findings by Radin et al.

Journal article by Dean Radin is  Unconscious perception of future emotions: An experiment in presentiment.

viii Details of what actually happened in the Japanese Monkey experiment can be found in the Japan Monkey Centre reports in Primates, vol. 2, vol. 5 and vol. 6.

ix  is for delta or change.  t is the Observer's change in time; while  t' is the traveller's change in time.

x Graphic from article by Gisin et al titled Experimental Demonstration of Quantum Correlation over more than 10 km.

xi The photon experiment is titled Experimental Demonstration of Quantum Correlation over more than 10 km.

This experiment by Aspect et al and Gisin et al is commonly referred to as Quantum Entanglement. It centred primarily on creating a test scenario which could violate the famous Bell's Inequality which argues for local realism. It is important to note that subsequent experiments have done so beyond a distance of 30km and that the only limit proving that it is possible beyond that appears to be the limitations on the equipment available. But it nevertheless can be assumed that this quantum non-locality exists at any conceivable distance including the span of the universe.

Though there have been many attempts at proving the fundamental principles of quantum physics – primarily non-locality at the quantum level which the above experiment also proved – the first conclusive test of this nature was done in 1982 by a University of Paris research team under the leadership of physicist Alain Aspect. Though its implications on the nature of our world were nevertheless largely ignored or disputed.

xii Before continuing I want to reiterate that based on the theory, the spaceship has literally contracted, not the perception that it has contracted. Thus it is not becoming visually smaller as an object moving away from oneself such an aircraft would, visually contracting until you cannot see it anymore while all along it still is the same size as it had started, it physically contracts as it is in another from of reference.

The only problem is that if you were to actually measure the spaceship, you would have to be in its frame of reference, and so the measuring stick would also similarly contract, and so would measure the exact same distance as if the ship was stationary.

But once again, don't try too hard get your head around it. Rather simply accept that this is proven scientific fact, and that this is the bizarre nature of our world which we largely take for granted.

xiii John Gribbin is one of the UK's most respected science writers and has completed titles with Stephen Hawking and Martin Rees.

xiv State of the art experiments, specifically at the University of Paris-North, are showing that even molecules exhibit wave characteristics and therefore are not truly particles in the purest sense.

xv The sceptically scientific minded may not feel comfortable with any notion of God at all, though at this point it must be realized that this merely is a convenient personification, and that a clearer definition of God will be given in the section, The Alpha and the Omega, in a later instalment.

xvi Thomas Henry Huxley (refer to quote) was an advocate of Darwin's natural selection theory.

xvii It is suggested that the first life were not single celled but existed as a prima nucleic slush of sorts. Genetics however does suggest that we all evolved from a single creature, which is then is the single-celled organism described in this section.

xviii A, G, T and C are the components of DNA, and respectively are Adenine, Guanine, Thiamine, and Cytosine. They constituents are various combinations of sugars and mineral salts.

xix From The DNA-wave Biocomputer by Gariev et al.

xx Money markets are usually modeled statistically using random number generators. Modeling a money market with Chaos Theory however requires that one uses an intrinsic formula that governs the money market that can preempt the future in a more deterministic way than is possible in statistical simulations.

