Sepp Hasslberger: Physics Archives

Toward an Empirical Reality in Consciousness Studies

This article has first been published as an appendix to Dr R.N. Boyd's recent paper titled "BACK TO REALITY" which can be found here. Since the paper on Consciousness Studies addresses an important point that has stunted progress in physics for a long time, I am giving it its own space here, where it is easier to locate than just as a mere appendix to another article.

The subject of the paper is whether consciousness is purely brain-based or whether there is another, more effective way to view consciousness that explains phenomena better but is being ruthlessly suppressed by current "scientific consensus".

Quantum Consciousness - Image found here

Toward an Empirical Reality in Consciousness Studies

by
Dr. Adrian Klein, MDD, Israel.

The hereby presented few considerations are inspired by, and strongly supporting Dr. R.N.Boyd's vibrant appeal for restoring common sense into Scientific exploration and interpretation concerning experimental and experiential observations in empirical range, as an urgent request launched at the beginning of the 21st Century ("Empirical Science - Back to Reality!")

In his pilot paper, Dr. Boyd questions the very value of the complex argumentation scaffold currently serving dogmatic authorities in the Sciences, which axiomatically defend misleading conjectures and their totally counterintuitive consequences. Dr. Boyd casts an annihilating spot of light on the shaky physical fundaments identified as sets of underlying fictitious constructs which are ceaselessly multiplying in all the fields accessible (and "acceptable" !) for scientific investigation today.

We strongly believe that Consciousness Studies, as one of the most recent fields opened to scientific exploration, would enormously benefit if its current misleading methodology, based on the rotten premises of the aforementioned scaffold of fantasies, would be brought into alignment with empirically supported observations hitherto ignored, denied or intenionally misinterpreted, based on a rigid and biased exclusion of the empirical hard facts. What really and most urgently is required instead, is the exclusion of the various inadequate principles themselves, as held "valid" by current "scientific" methodology, which corrupt principles are continously contradicted by observations.

Continue reading "Toward an Empirical Reality in Consciousness Studies" »

Posted by Sepp at 1:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Continuous Creation, Einstein and the 'Expanding' Big-Bang Universe

Something is wrong with our view of the universe as propagated by physicists around the world. The contradictions are glaring and the sums don't add up. And yet - we are told that red-shifted light from the stars is evidence of a continuous expansion of the universe, an expansion that started with a primordial explosion or big bang, and that is still going on to this day.

Big Bang 'afterglow' or thermal anisotropy of the universe?

Robert Neil Boyd questions that 'received wisdom' in a recent article. He argues that observation is far superior to theory. Whenever an observed fact contradicts a theory, the latter has to give way. We need to re-think and find a better explanation that fits all of the observations.

Boyd also challenges Einstein's Relativity. He says it fails the test of Popper's Criteria for Reliability in the Sciences.

His conclusion: We need to return to reality, even in physics, and even at the expense of tearing down a holy of holies like Einstein's Relativity.

Empirical Science: Back to Reality!

Science is based on the principle of Cause and Effect. We observe an effect. (Something happens, or some event is observed.) What caused it? Then, on finding out, we want to know, "What caused that?", going from cause to cause, looking for the actual origination of things. This succession of asking the same question, at every point in the sequence, is a process which is apparently without end. (Though there may be some end-points reached eventually, in some regards.)

"What caused it?" is the primary and most fundamental question in science. What causes that observable event to happen? In fact, this question is primary to existence and to life experience. We are always asking questions in our lives, such as: Where did that come from? Why did that happen? What started it? Who started it? Why did they do that? What was the origination of that (event)?

These are all varieties of the same question: What caused it, actually? Because we know that until we find out what is the cause of some experience, the origination of it, we may be experiencing the same painful experience over and over again, until we learn to avoid the results of that cause, or cease performing that particular action. Or we may be missing the same pleasant experience, time after time, until we learn how to get it to happen again.

Cause and effect. This principle is used and applied by all Life and all forms of Consciousness, continuously. Knowing the cause of a thing or event is fundamental to existence. Nothing can live without applying this principle of cause and effect, at every opportunity. So learning about cause and effect is a natural condition, and is crucial to all Life. So, doing "science" (in terms of cause and effect) is a natural behavior.

The proverbial tale of Newton and the apple that bonked him on the head (it never happened, really) leading to Newton's discovery of the Law of Gravitational Attraction, is an example of how exploring and examining our experiences in order to find what is the origin of the given observable event, results in reliable understandings about how Reality actually works.

Given a known cause, we can observe that a known effect is always resulting from that same cause...

Read the rest of the article here

Continue reading "Continuous Creation, Einstein and the 'Expanding' Big-Bang Universe" »

Posted by Sepp at 5:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Particle Physics and the Planes of Existence

I read a fascinating article the other day in Infinite Energy magazine and would like to share it with you here.

Under the title A Heuristic Approach to the Particle Physics Implicit in Theosophical “Occult Chemistry”, William Patrick Bourne links the work of theosophist investigators Annie Besant and Charles W. Leadbeater to the mess that today is known as particle physics.

As you may know, Besant and Leadbeater investigated the world of particles with a particular approach, using the mind's inner eye to bring into focus the infinitely small.

ANU - the basic particle as described by Besant and Leadbeater

They had little to go by at the time, to compare their findings with the results of investigations by physicists who work with instrumentation, but their results were painstakingly recorded and they are available in a classic work: Occult Chemistry.

Image found on skybooksusa.com

Much has changed since the early part of the last century and physics has come up with a veritable particle zoo, but there are many inconsistencies and agreement on what is real and what are merely temporary products of the destruction of particles is still a far way off. So it is interesting to go back and see what was found before we started to build atom smashers to investigate subatomic particles and their components.

Bourne is an independent researcher who has published scientific papers in Chronology and Catastrophism Review, Leading Edge, and The Theoscientist. He is a generalist with particular interest in cosmology and particle physics. His synthesis of the occult knowledge of theosophical investigation with modern particle physics makes good sense.

The scale of particles postulated by Bourne brings us from the immaterial and ethereal all the way to visible, tangible matter. It would certainly constitute a worthwhile direction for further investigation ... to falsify or confirm, as the case may be.

Here is a PDF of Bourne's article as published in Infinite Energy.

A Heuristic Approach to the Particle Physics Implicit in Theosophical “Occult Chemistry”

Continue reading "Particle Physics and the Planes of Existence" »

Posted by Sepp at 5:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Dirac's Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy - Part III

This article is a continuation of an earlier post that contains parts I and II of Don Hotson's article titled "Dirac's Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy". You can find the earlier post by following this link.

In the meantime, Don Hotson has written part III of the article, and like the previous ones, it was published in Infinite Energy magazine.

To give you an idea of what the argument is, here's the introduction to part III of Don Hotson's article:

Introduction
The preceding two-part article published in Infinite Energy 44 and 45 (see web links to both documents in Bill Zebuhr's Introduction) was entirely predicated on the proposition that a true physics must be based on simplicity and causality. If Dirac's equation means what it says--that it describes everything that waves or every possible particle--it arguably provides the first basis, simplicity: the universe must be built of the four kinds of electron which are the roots of the equation.

We have shown at least plausible ways this might happen, ways that solve the glaring problems with conventional physics. Moreover, we have shown direct contact, causal solutions to the problems of the "electromagnetic field" and gravitation, in which we have shown that both represent physical, non-local structures, responses the Big BEC (Bose-Einstein condensate) must make to balance imbalances and maintain its own integrity.

There are a number of developments, unmentioned in Parts 1 and 2, which greatly strengthen the case presented there. First, the Nobelist Dr. Norman Ramsey convinced his colleagues that negative absolute temperatures made thermodynamic sense.1 Since it is the quantity of positive energy in a substance that gives it its positive energy temperature scale, it should be a perfectly obvious corollary that negative energy must be a prerequisite for negative absolute temperatures.

This complements our symmetry arguments, and the fact that both the energy equation and Dirac's equation have negative as well as positive roots.

Dr. Benni Reznik of Tel Aviv University has demonstrated that the "vacuum" as a whole violates Bell's inequalities, and so acts like a BEC. (Bell's inequalities, and the now voluminous proofs thereof, show that two particles or photons, created in the same event, remain "entangled" with each other, sharing the same wave function, no matter how far apart they may move. Thus an action on one instantaneously causes a complimentary change in the other.)

Dr. Reznik demonstrates that two unentangled probes, inserted into the "vacuum" at random distances, rapidly become phase-entangled. This is behavior one would expect from a BEC, not a "vacuum," and can hardly be understood except in terms of a universal BEC. Since the Dirac papers insist that the "vacuum" is a universal BEC, this represents an immense verification of its thesis.

This is only one of a number of demonstrations, recent and ancient, that entanglement and superluminal effects are real and fundamental factors. For instance, it has been known since Laplace that gravitation must act much faster than light, or the earth/sun system would form a "couple" and the earth would spiral off into space. That gravitation acts almost instantaneously has been shown by studies of contact binary stars, which show that it must act many orders of magnitude faster than light. Astronomer Dr. Tom Van Flandern has shown that General Relativity, though it gives lip service to the "light speed limit," simply goes on to assume instantaneous "changes in the curvature of space" in its equations, and so is non-local.

Further, it has been known for decades that electromagnetism acts faster than light, according to a whole series of experimental results starting with the Sherwin-Rawcliffe experiment and continuing with those of the Graneaus and Pappas. These experiments all show that changes in the electromagnetic field must propagate much faster than light, apparently instantaneously, so that a moving charge has no "left-behind potential hill." Thus changes in electromagnetic potential must propagate apparently instantaneously over any distance.

A BEC has been shown by laboratory experiments to be all one thing, so that an action on one end of a BEC causes an instantaneous reaction at the other end. Therefore a universal BEC is the only plausible explanation for these burgeoning superluminal effects.

But we require a further, in-depth look at causality... (continue reading here)

Continue reading "Dirac's Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy - Part III" »

Posted by Sepp at 10:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Turning Sand into fuel - Silicon oil as an energy carrier

Dr Peter Plichta studied chemistry, physics and nuclear chemistry in Cologne, Germany. He obtained his doctorate in chemistry in 1970, and in the years following he did much research, on the subject of silanes. Similar to hydrocarbons, silanes are hydrosilicons, molecules that incorporate atoms of both silicon and hydrogen.

Plichta also studied law, and in the 1980s he studied and researched logics, numbers theory and mathematics. As a result, he published several books outlining a new theory on prime numbers in German. In this article however, I will only discuss his proposal to use silanes as a highly energetic fuel.

Silicon is more abundant than carbon. It oxidizes or combines with oxygen into silicon dioxide, which forms crystals present in rocks like quartz, basalt and granite. Silicon dioxide is especially prevalent in sand which fills deserts and sea shores. We process silicon dioxide into glass and purify the silicon for use in electronics. Both of those processes require much external energy input.

Before the 1970s, silanes were considered unsuitable for use as fuels, because they instantaneously self-combust at room temperature. Not satisfied to leave it at that however, Plichta went to work and succeeded in producing longer-chained silanes that appeared as clear, oily liquids and were stable at room temperature. He argues that these higher (long-chain) silanes could be used as an abundant fuel as an alternative to both hydrocarbons and pure hydrogen.

Unlike hydrocarbons, silanes use both the nitrogen and the oxygen in air for combustion. While the hydrogen component of silanes reacts with oxygen, the silicon oxidizes in a highly energetic reaction with nitrogen. So the burning of silanes produces much higher temperatures and frees more energy than the burning of hydrocarbon fuels. The silane reaction leaves no toxic residues.

Much of the information in this article comes from a recent description of Plichta's discoveries and his proposed silane fuel cycle written by Norbert Knobloch and published in the German magazine raum&zeit.