Articles

<< Return to Articles

Introduction

Quite a number of people have realised that quantum theory must link with evidence proving the continued existence of consciousness following death of the brain. The most recent contribution of this nature I have seen is the excellent article The Quantum Marriage, by Will Hand (1). He shows, for example, that quantum theorists were driven to accept that on the small scale of the atom, what we interpret as "reality" only occurs at the instant of observation. This is the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of a phenomenon called "wave-particle duality": an important feature of quantum theory. Quantum theorists found that, on these small scales, what had been regarded as minute objects, the electrons, photons and other components associated with atoms, seemed to exist as sets of interfering waves until observed. Only then did these waves "collapse" to become real particles. The extraordinary situation, which has prevailed for nearly a century is that, despite the clear acceptance of the role of consciousness in creating reality, all mainstream scientists still insist that consciousness vanishes on brain death. The obvious paradox, which is never mentioned, is that matter could not exist prior to any brain! The development of quantum theory has, therefore, already proved that some form of consciousness had to pre-exist the creation of matter. Yet scientists, across every discipline, go to immense trouble to discredit all evidence showing that consciousness can exist independently of matter.

Most enlightened people, like Hand, have had personal experience demonstrating to them that at least some so-called, "paranormal" experiences have to be real phenomena and cannot be explained away by delusion or fraud as most scientists and parapsychologists insist must be the case. Then some of the enlightened seek explanations from twentieth century physics. This is perfectly sensible and reasonable but is not the way my own contribution came into being. I started without any intention of considering survival or any other aspects of the paranormal. I had simply started to take an interest in physics as it stood. Then in 1984 I realised something was wrong with the logic associated with the "big bang" theory. This has it that all the energy and matter of the universe was created in a gigantic explosion taking only a split second. From then on the total substance of the universe, its energy plus matter, remained constant and, being pulled back by mutual gravity, the flying debris would decelerate ever afterwards.

Flaws in the logic had led directly to a huge false prediction called the "Cosmological Constant". This says that the universe is expanding at rates many billions of billions of times faster than astronomical observations could possibly allow and theorists, to this day, still look for a resolution to this problem. What is also extraordinary is that theorists simply ignore this huge false prediction and yet claim that the big bang theory is fully supported by all the observations they have made!
I realised that I ought to be able to create a flaw-free alternative theory capable of eliminating the difficulty, using the expertise of my own discipline. I soon found some other difficulties in need of resolution and so treated them all simultaneously as a single holistic problem. The solution, which began to appear in a few years, showed me that the paranormal and survival of consciousness must be real and true: an integral part of what I think of as an enlightened physics. Not until then did I embark on a search for evidence and did so by joining a circle for psychic development. This was run by two mediums, Victor and Barbara Iles. I soon had all the evidence I needed to support the theory. Then in 1988 I met Michael Roll who showed me the powerful published scientific literature of Crookes, Lodge and other scientists, showing me how this evidence, amounting to the total proof of survival, had all been suppressed and discredited by other scientists and parapsychologists who had perceived it all as a threat to existing paradigms.
Hence, to me, survival appeared as unexpected spin-off from an effort made to solve physical problems. It is therefore my opinion that this approach supplies a much greater credibility than one which merely attempts to fit existing quantum theory to survival fact, especially when the flaws in that theory are not eliminated.

Survival Physics in a Nutshell

The other main problem needing resolution was a theory of gravity compatible with quantum theory. Einstein's theory called "general relativity", a mathematically very accurate description of the way matter behaves on the large cosmic scale, is still accepted to be the best in existence. Unfortunately, as all physicists freely admit, it just does not match in with quantum theory. They have been trying for nearly 80 years to match these two so-called "pillars of twentieth century achievement" and success still evades them.

I will summarise my own final solution which gives mostly the same end equations as general relativity, eliminates the difficulty of the cosmological constant and then shows how an ultimate immortal consciousness must exist as part of an invisible background medium.

It seemed to me that the trouble with Einstein's theory was that the assumptions on which it was based made it incompatible with the existence of any background medium, such as the old aether. The latter was discredited about 1900 and is still regarded as non-existent, yet something like it is needed if quantum theory is to make sense. Therefore the assumptions of relativity needed modification. This is something theorists still will not accept since, in effect, this means the abandonment of relativity theory.

Newton's mechanics seemed the only alternative but is restricted to low speeds. Revision therefore seemed necessary to make it exact. I found that the mass of an object needed to be regarded as variable instead of remaining constant as Newton had assumed. A background medium had to exist and had to be more compressed the closer the approach to a massive object: the density of the aether had to be variable. This variable density, coupled with the variable mass, gave the same predictions as general relativity but offered the huge advantage of being fully quantum compatible.

Although mostly the same end equations appeared, they had a different meaning and interpretation. For example, as most people know, a clock situated at a low level in a gravitational field runs slow due to Einstein's concept of "gravitational time dilation": time itself runs slower at a lower level. For the revised Newtonian time runs at the same rate everywhere but there is a gravitational mass increase with reduction of level and this reduces the frequency of vibration of the clock mechanism.

The same revised Newtonian then needed to be applied to study the background medium, assumed to operate on similar mechanics but in such a manner as to explain the peculiarities of quantum theory. In effect this mechanics was being assumed to apply both on large cosmological scales and at a sub-quantum level of reality. The hope was that the peculiarities at the quantum level would emerge as a natural consequence.

First the problem of the cosmological constant needed to be addressed. The only way the revised mechanics could provide a solution was by making a further revision. A mirror mechanics had to be added having all masses and energy values considered negative. Then the background medium, I now call the "i-ther", had to consist of a mixture of particles, some made of positive energy and with the remainder of a negative kind. Then both kinds could be created or destroyed in balance because the changes would cancel out. To understand what this entails it is easiest to think of the energy form known as mechanical work. An object is pushed a given distance and the work done is obtained by multiplying the pushing force by the distance it moves. If the object is free to move it will accelerate, so absorbing the work done and turning it into energy of motion: kinetic energy. (This also adds a "kinetic mass" causing a mass increase according to the revised Newtonian.)

If now the energy from which the object is made is considered negative then a backward facing force will cause it to accelerate. So negative mechanical work is converted to negative kinetic energy and there will be an associated increase of negative mass. There is nothing peculiar about such negative mass and energy. We could do all our mechanics on these assumptions and get all the same responses because the negative effects always come in pairs and cancel out.

The really new feature, however, is that now both kinds of energy, considered complementary to one another like the Yin and Yang of Eastern philosophies, are considered to co-exist. They have to form a mixture of fast moving "primaries" in constant collision with one another like the molecules of a gas. Collisions of primaries of the same energies were just like those of billiard balls. For evaluating responses of unlike kinds, however, it was necessary to extend the mechanics by introducing what I call, "Opposed Energy Dynamics". Just as in ordinary mechanics it is necessary to consider two conservation laws together: those of energy and momentum. Applied to opposite energies in collision, however, responses turned out to be very different from those between like kinds.

An astonishing mathematical discovery emerged. At each collision of opposites, the need to conserve momentum forced each primary to gain energy. They were breeding like opposite sexes! Each of the collision partners gained energy of its own kind in balanced amounts. It meant that pure creation could spontaneously arise from a void of nothingness! This meant the i-ther could spontaneously appear from nothing and grow at an ever accelerating and extremely rapid rate, both in volume and density. Fortunately at a critical density instability would arise allowing flow patterns on a minute scale to appear. Primaries would be pushed by the pure creation going on behind them so that they flowed in large numbers to common centres from all directions. The conditions for almost total mutual annihilation had appeared so that only a minute net creation could remain.

A solution to the cosmological constant had appeared naturally! The i-ther would be committed to a modest ever-accelerating growth and, after matter had appeared, the universe of matter would be carried along so that it too would expand in a similar way. This prediction was not finalised until 1992 but I thought no way would ever be found for checking this prediction. However, in 1998 astronomical observations of very distant supernovae, published by Schwartzchild (2), confirmed that indeed the universe was expanding at an accelerating rate: so lending fortuitous support to the theory. Cosmologists on the other hand were taken by surprise and are still trying to explain the effect in terms of dark energy with strange repulsive powers.

The centres of annihilation are most stable as filaments existing in bundles but on larger scales these bundles have random orientation. Switch-like Tee-junctions appear as filaments try to cross each other. Also the cell-like structures of breeding cylinders, with filaments of annihilation at their centres, act like tiny engines producing power. This power can only be expressed in the form of waves of switching action as one switch, in changing state, triggers the next. A fluid component of breeding primaries bathes the filaments and so forms an additional medium for wave propagation. A source for quantum waves seems to have appeared! In addition the filaments seem to have the potential for evolving a brain-like structure: a background neural net. Hence my speculation is that consciousness evolved at the level of i-ther long before matter appeared.

At some point this consciousness developed a creative urge and built an interpenetrating system of universes of matter as a means of providing meaningful habitats for minds. Each mind would be a fragment of the i-theric consciousness, separated from the rest by information filter-barriers.
The only tools available for building such matter-systems were the quantum waves. Hence a perfect reason for the strange wave-particle nature of matter seemed to have appeared. To make what we infer to be a sub-atomic particle, waves had to be focused. At any focal point a transient spike of density in the i-ther would be generated to represent that particle and it would behave as such in collision with others built the same way. Then to make say, an electron, such focusing would need to be repeated very rapidly with places chosen by the i-ther using its own kind of computational mathematics. Any "particle" would really be a train of repeated creations joined end to end in time but not in position. The train of positions would be so chosen as to make it appear as if controlled be an electromagnetic force. Similar positioning would make the nuclei of atoms seem controlled by a strong nuclear force. Hence the forces, seeming so real to us, now appear as abstract mathematical constructs. Matter cannot be as real as it appears: true reality lies in the invisible, in the real energies at the level of i-ther.

This model, worked out in detail, provided a new and paradox free interpretation for both wave-particle duality and non-locality.

As each wave passed the focal point, to make a sub-atomic particle, it then started to spread out again travelling ultimately to infinite distance. As it went it caused increase in the collision of primaries and so stimulated excess creation. This mechanism was studied in detail and found to provide a satisfactory explanation for the variable density needed to create a satisfactory theory of gravity. The "quantum-wave theory of gravity" had appeared and seems every bit as good in predictive power as general relativity.

Conclusion

From a start made to solve a difficulty in the big bang theory, consciousness has been shown to have the potential of being immortal. If the brain is conscious as well, it cannot be the primary one. The latter must still remain after the brain has died.

It is my hope that, since survival can be shown an essential and integral part of physics, that the efforts still being made to discredit all evidence of survival will soon come to an end. This theory has achieved publication in Russian conference proceedings (3 & 4) of 1991 and 1993, and in the peer-reviewed journal "Frontier Perspectives" (5) in 1997. Two books by Pearson (6 & 7) provide further detail. Furthermore the theory was supported by Dr Peter Wadhams, Professor of Ocean Physics at Cambridge University, on the Jeff Rense Radio Show (8) in 2001. At least he said that a theory of this kind had to apply. Other details can be found on the websites of Michael Roll (9) and Tom Jones (10).

REFERENCES
1 Hand, Will: The Quantum Marriage: The Seeker Vol.2 No.4 Spring 2003
2 Schwarzchild, B.: Very distant Supernova Suggest that the Cosmic Expansion is Speeding Up: Physics Today, Vol.51(6) pp.17-19
3 Pearson, Ronald D.: Alternative to Relativity including Quantum Gravitation: Second International Conference on Problems in Space and Time: St. Petersburg, Petrovskaja Academy of Sciences & Arts [Sept.1991]: pp 278-292
Chairman Local Organising Committee:Dr. Michael Varin: Pulkovskoye Road 65-9-1
St. Petersburg 196140, Russia. FAX: (7) (812) 291-81-35
Phone:Alexandre Alekseev: office:(7) (812) 291-36-73, Home:(7) (812) 173-55-69 E-Mail: consym@saman.spb.su
4 Pearson, Ronald D.: Quantum Gravitation and the Structured Ether
Sir Isaac Newton Conference. St. Petersburg [March 1993] pp 39-55 (Address as Ref.3)
5 Pearson, R. D.: Consciousness as a Sun-Quantum Phenomenon
Frontier Perpectives, Spring/Summer 1997, Vol.6,No.2 pp70-78 (also see ref. 10)
6 Pearson, Ronald D,: Intelligence Behind the Universe!: [Dec.1990]
370 pages (520 grams) A popularisation plus Technical Appendix Available from:
Michael Roll: 28 Westerleigh Rd., Downend, Bristol. BS16 6AH:
Tel:0177 9561960 (or see ref.9 website)
7 Pearson, Ronald D.: Origin of Mind [Dec.1992]: -A popularisation plus
Technical Appendix
72 pages: (110 grams) direct from Michael Roll (see ref.6 or 9).
8 Jeff Rense Radio Show: www.rense.com (Date 3 Nov. 2001 in America)
9 Roll, Michael: The Scientific Proof of Survival After Death. See www.cfpf.org.uk
E-mail: mike@mroll.freeserve.co.uk (To order refs 6 or 7 )
10 Jones, Tom. M.: www.survivalafterdeath.org (gives ref. 5 in full)
11 Keen, Montague: Ellison, Arthur: Fontana, David (of the Society for Psychical Research UK): The Scole Report: (gives recent valuable evidence)
Proc.Soc. of Psychical Research Vol.58, Part 220 (1999)

<< Return to Articles