OVERWHELMING EXPERIMENTAL evidence for survival of bodily death,
amounting to total proof, already exists. This has been generated by both mental
and physical mediumship, as concisely described by Victor Zammit(1) in his book,
"A Lawyer Argues for the Afterlife". He draws his information from a
wide range of literature and this is only one of thousands of books written on
the subject. For example, James Webster(2), a member of the inner magic circle
and one time stage magician, is a more recent author who would be most difficult
to deceive by trickery. He includes his own personal experiences to supplement
reports from famous scientists such as Sir William Crookes, Sir Oliver Lodge and
John Logie Baird. What ought to provide a real clincher, however, is the
evidence given by a team, including scientists and Webster, in the "Scole
Report" published by the Society for Psychical Research(3) in 1999. This is
surely proof that mediumship, inclusive of physical effects impossible to
replicate by us, can be genuine.
Unfortunately mainline physicists all refuse to recognise the
validity of such observations. They are clearly attempting to protect their
paradigm that life, based only on matter we can explore by our instruments, is
all that exists. To them consciousness is generated by the interaction of
neurones in the brain and nothing else so that when the brain dies everything
blacks out. This is clearly in total contradiction to the evidence supplied by
mediumship and so something needs to be done to resolve the issues raised. It
must be obvious to all that theoretical physics is the main stumbling block: it
is unable, at the present time, to accommodate spiritual aspects within its
framework. Until it can do so most scientists will continue to avoid looking at
all this accumulated evidence: indeed they will continue to discredit and debunk
this evidence whenever circumstances force them into confrontation.
All Theories Must Match Experiments
No theory can, by itself, prove anything: the proof comes from
experiment and observation. Theories make sense of the experiments and show how
apparently unrelated phenomena are aspects of the same thing. Good theories
provide unification. For example, magnetism and electricity were separate fields
when science was in its infancy. As understanding grew it was found that
magnetic effects could be produced by electric currents and a moving magnet
could cause a current to flow in a loop of wire. Now we speak of
electromagnetism as a single force: one of the four forces of nature.
Theoretical physicists hope ultimately to join these by a unified field theory
arising from a single "superforce". Science, however, cannot progress
by theory alone: it requires a synthesis of theory and experiment. When
observation runs ahead of theory to provide anomalies which seem inexplicable,
then as history has shown by repeating itself over and over, the anomalies are
avoided, ignored or discredited in order to maintain the status quo: to avoid
the need to injure existing intellectual vested interests. This, however,
underlines the importance of making advances in theoretical physics. Until it
can permit paranormal phenomena to exist, by unifying them as part of its
framework, no amount of further evidence for survival will make the slightest
difference: it will be simply ignored like all the rest.
This is where a new approach comes in and, it is hoped, will
provide the key needed to switch existing paradigms. This could then permit
acceptance of the evidence.
The Invention of the Big-Bang
My study began in 1984 after looking into the basic principles
of the "Big-Bang" theory of Cosmology Physics. This had a huge
explosive creation produced from an "intrinsic negative pressure of the
vacuum". It breaks the rules of common-sense logic for any negative
pressure to produce an explosion: such effects can only cause implosions!
Further study showed up an alarming number of flaws in the basic logic. This
logic is still accepted as if the theory was sound, even though it makes false
predictions such as the "Cosmoligical constant" - a force pushing the
galaxies apart which is 50 orders of magnitude greater than astronomical
observations can allow! It arises because the theoreticians can find no way of
turning off the Big-Bang they have invented.
Could the whole thing be completely wrong I asked myself. At the
time I was a sceptic like most other scientists and had no intention of
supporting the idea of survival. However, this appeared automatically as a
spin-off within the solution.
Relativity Incompatible with Quantum Theory
Further study showed that attractive forces, like gravitation or
the strong nuclear force, were being modelled using assumptions which violated a
basic law of physics called the "conservation of momentum", which
meant that a complementary form of substance had to exist at a sub-quantum level
whose responses to applied forces had to be opposite those of matter. This
complementary substance had to exist as primary particles made of negative
energy. They complemented "primaries" made of positive energy, the
whole existing as a balanced mixture. Unfortunately such a background medium was
incompatible with the idea of "curved spacetime": the basis of
Einstein's theory of general relativity. However, an incompatibility also
existed between Einstein's relativity theories and quantum theory. The former
relates generally to motions of matter on the large cosmic scale whilst quantum
theory deals with the small scale: mostly motions of the components of atoms.
(This incompatibility was admitted later by Professor Stephen Hawking in his
popularisation, "A Brief History of Time").
Fully Compatible With Quantum Theory
The new approach, detailed in this author's book(4), showed that
the basis of his own discipline, Newtonian physics, was also not being used in
an exact way. The "inertial mass" of any object needed to include the
equivalent of its energy of motion, "kinetic energy". Then it turned
out that a sub-quantum level of reality had to exist to produce forces on matter
and that this had to behave as a compressible fluid. Like air, it was most
compressed the closer it was to a massive object like a planet or a sun. These
two effects, when quantified by mathematics, paralleled all the predictions that
were previously thought to be unique achievements of both special and general
relativity: the theories that made Einstein so famous. Indeed almost every end
equation that could be checked experimentally was identical to that derived from
special or general relativity. The big difference, however, was that the new
approach was not only fully compatible with quantum theory, it enhanced that
A Paradox-free Alternative to the Big-Bang
Quantum theory as it stands is based on abstract "quantum
waves" which double as sub-atomic particles. There is nothing in the theory
that even attempts to say how these waves arise or even suggests what they are
made from. These defects are now rectified as a consequence of a self-organising
structure appearing at the sub-quantum level of reality (whose very existence is
denied by relativity theory). It arises as a consequence of this level being a
composite of the two complementary energies mentioned earlier and having the
form of primary particles. It is shown that, in order to satisfy two basic
conservation laws of physics, those of energy and momentum, that these particles
actually breed by collision: so creating a paradox-free alternative to the
Big-Bang as the primary creative force. The problem of the cosmological constant
is resolved by its replacement with an ever-accelerating expansion caused by a
net creation existing everywhere at all times. This fits in nicely with a recent
observation made in 1998 and which still puzzles cosmologists: the expansion of
the universe is accelerating instead of slowing down as they supposed.
Survival as a Fundamental Part of Physics
The mechanics of the process is shown, in the author's second
publication(5), to result in a structure with similarities to the neural network
of our brains. This arose in space, right to the very edges of the universe,
together with its own built in power supply everywhere. The mathematics threw up
a structure of interconnected switches which would naturally generate waves in a
similar way to those traversing our brains. The structure is of immensely finer
scale than our brains of matter but, more speculatively, it appears to have the
same potential to develop both a machine-like intelligence and ultimately a
primary consciousness. All it could do, however, is to control its waves. It
seems reasonable to equate these with the quantum waves that are then used
deliberately to create matter. Focused waves produce density spikes and these
would behave like particles to us: so providing a unique explanation of the
enigma called "wave particle duality". This is a basic feature of
quantum theory but now providing a solution to a puzzle not previously resolved.
If true a "supermind of space" could create a whole
set of matter-systems all co-existing in the same space but tuned to different
quantum-wave frequencies. Then fragments of the supermind structure, the
"sub-minds", could only tune into one matter-system at a time.
Consequently the only reality apparent at any one time would be the one to which
a sub-mind is temporarily tuned. When that matter-system became outworn, this
sub-mind, being part of the structured sub-quantum fluid, would simply tune into
one of the remaining matter-systems and continue to survive. On this basis our
brains could well be mere interfacing mechanisms needed to enable the real minds
to pilot the body. No justification can exist any longer in postulating that, of
necessity, consciousness vanishes on brain death.
At least a mix of firm mathematical prediction and the
speculation based upon it shows, in this way, that the link between survival and
theoretical physics cannot be dismissed as impossible. Further detail is given
in the peer-reviewed publication by this author(6), which also shows how the
same waves produce the long range density gradients on which the new
"quantum-wave theory of gravity" depends. Hence a further indication
that this approach could be the one which is correct, is that now gravitation
becomes integrated with the other forces of nature: something that the
established approach has so far failed to achieve.
Now, however, nearly all aspects of the paranormal, inclusive of
survival, are seen as potentially real effects. Theoreticians are therefore no
longer justified in their attempt to explain these away. Nor can they be
justified any longer in resorting to any other kind of subterfuge for their
discreditment. Instead a way is provided for physics to be revitalised and
reformed to accept survival as a fact which in no way conflicts with its basic
It is worth noting, at this stage, that this new,
"enlightened theoretical physics" is not equivalent to
"dualism". The dualist idea is God outside of spacetime who organises
matter. Physicists balk at accepting something outside the scope of their
discipline. The new solution advanced, however, arises from physics itself and
is inseparable from physics.
Now, as soon as this theory can become published and criticised
the better. All criticism is welcome except for the destructive kind. The kind
which simply ignores the logic presented and, to quote one typical example of a
phrase used by an assessor for its dismissal, "relativity has withstood the
test of time". This is simply not true when its admitted incompatibility
with quantum theory is considered. I do not think anybody will find any basic
flaw in the logic or any inconsistency with experimental observation. Then, if I
am correct, this theory could become scientifically acceptable. If this happens,
or anybody else produces an equivalent theory, then the accumulated evidence of
survival will become accepted as a fundamental part of physics. No longer will
the controversy survive, and the conflict between creationists and evolutionists
will come to an end. The universe was deliberately created by the supermind of
space so that biological systems could evolve.
Zammit, Dr. Victor:
"A Lawyer Argues
for the Afterlife"
2. Webster, James:
3. Keen, M., Ellison, A., & Fontana,
Prof. D. : "The Scole Report".
Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research Vol. 58, Part 220.
November 1999. SPR, 49 Marloes Road, London W8 6LA
Pearson, R.D "Intelligence Behind
The Universe" ISBN 0 947823 21 2
£10 post paid in the U.K.
Add £3 overseas.
From Michael Roll, 28 Westerleigh Road, Downend, Bristol BS16 6AH, England
Pearson, R.D. "Origin of Mind".
ISBN 0 9517558 1 3.
£3 post paid in U.K. Add £1.50p overseas. From Michael Roll.
International cheques required for non-U.K. customers please, since bank
charges otherwise exceed the value of the purchase.
Ref. 4 & 5 are written for the intelligent non-scientist but each has a
mathematical supplement which should be understandable to anyone with school
'Consciousness as a
Peer-refereed and published in the journal 'Frontier Perspectives': Temple
University, Philadelphia, USA.
Vol. 6 No. 2 Spring/Summer, 1997. ISSN: 1062-4767