of the Society for Psychical Research
SPR claims to have no corporate policy. I write to you, since I
believe you to be one of the more open minded members of the SPR, to
prove to you that this claim is false. The corporate policy of the
SPR is to support a paradigm of established physics: that mind is
mere brain function. The problem of introducing a balancing view is
summarised in this open letter. A return to the encouragement of
cross-fertilisation between disciplines is proposed for its
solution. Your comments would be greatly appreciated.
very obvious, for example, that James Randi and his CSICOP
organisation have support from key members of the SPR, so that a
transatlantic alliance exists designed to project only the
materialist stance. However, these people are really just puppets.
Destroying their act would not win the intellectual war. This is
because people in the back room pulling the strings would put up
replacements very quickly. To win this war we need to eliminate the
root cause of the conflict.
evidence leads us to suspect certain established physicists,
cosmology physicists in particular, are the major string pullers.
For example, Perrot-Warwick grants have been awarded from Trinity
College, Cambridge to support Susan Blackmore and Richard Wiseman
for paranormal research. These associates of Randi also seem
controlled to find "rational explanations" which do not
conflict with the current "mind is pure brain function"
paradigm of establishment physics. Since the Lucasian chair held by
Professor Hawking is at Trinity College, the likelihood of a
connection cannot be ruled out. Such parapsychology can hardly be
claimed as unbiased research aimed at finding the truth. There is
also a religious dimension. In Hawking's Brief History of Time it is
stated that he and his group went to the Vatican to give lectures
about physics. The Pope then defined his territory and left the rest
to them -as if the real reason for his invitation had been to
establish demarcation lines. It is also clear from other information
that some physicists and theologians are colluding to block the
truth. Though poles apart they have common ground: both know they
will lose out if paranormal and spiritual realities are proven to be
may seem strange for a religious organisation. However, the Catholic
religion was cobbled together at the Council of Nicaea in 325 of the
Christian era by priests under duress, The motivation was political
and in consequence most of the belief system they produced has no
factual basis. In particular by officially making Jesus into Christ
the God they had to make everybody else "rest in peace" in
the ground awaiting Judgement Day, when all will be resurrected by
reconstitution of their old earth bodies.
is in direct conflict with an overwhelming bulk of evidence, which
shows that our immortal minds transfer to another system of matter
invisible and untouchable to us (since it operates on a different
quantum wavelength). I think this is the main reason the Church has
tried to suppress the truth about the real nature of spirituality
for so many centuries. So this must be why they are backing the
physicists despite the total conflict of view, which exists between
the two organisations.
it is the physicists nowadays who have the greatest influence. Until
alternative theories can become accepted, which support survival and
yet demonstrate that there is no real threat to basic scientific
principles, all the available evidence will continue to be
discredited and rejected, Theorists have been trying for about 70
years to construct their "Theory of Everything". Professor
Brian Josephson FRS (physics Nobel Laureate of Cambridge) said in a
lecture reported in this quarter's SMN journal that, "The
theory of everything has collapsed". So theorists admit to
failure. They have failed because they have simply been looking at
the problem the wrong way. Worse is a discovery I made in 1991 when
I gave a lecture on quantum gravity to the "Cambridge
University Students Physics Society" (Stephen Hawking's
students). They enthused about the solution I presented. One said,
'We can really understand this: it makes sense". I asked about
their standard courses and the response was universal, "None of
it makes sense. The mathematics comes at us so thick and fast we
have no time to really understand what it all means!” This
response suggests physics students are not being taught to
understand basic principles. Then some will become professors to
transmit the same fog to the next generation. This must be why they
are all stuck and anybody like me, from an allied discipline of
applied science, sees immediately the dreadful logical errors
appearing in peer reviewed scientific publications. These must be
caused by lack of basic understanding.
is where I come in because I have been able to offer solutions to
some of the major problems in cosmology which confront them. I do
not make myself out to be some kind of walking genius because of
this: I have been taught a different perspective with an adequate
depth of understanding.
spotted basic flaws in the "Big Bang" theory in 1984 -
which in any case makes the hopelessly false prediction that remote
galaxies are accelerating away from us at rates many billions of
times greater than is possible. Finding a solution to this led me to
tackle the big one -a paradox free theory of quantum gravity able to
match all the achievements of relativity theory. Physicists admit
relativity (the theory for the large scale of the universe and with
speeds up to that of light) is incompatible with quantum theory
(concerning the small scale workings of the atom) yet they have been
attempting the impossible for over 70 years in trying to match them
up. It is not surprising that they have all failed! In fact
relativity theory presents the main block to the extension of
physics for incorporation of paranormal and spiritual realities.
is because it is incompatible with the very existence of the "aether"
or any other real background medium, such as the "quantum
vacuum" essential to quantum physics. But some such medium must
exist and forms the spiritual base, according to the solution, which
comes up from my own work. Theorists say that a good theory must
accurately match experiment and make new predictions by which it
might be falsified/verified. They avoid saying that absence of
contradiction is also essential. The reason for this omission is
obvious: its acceptance would demolish the current paradigm!
major issue of interest to you is that my solution led on to, at
least, a skeleton theory of everything showing how the universe is
spiritually based. Yet even the way this base is constructed (from
two opposite kinds of complementary forms of energy) can be
synthesised by mathematical analysis. It shows that things like
psychokinesis, telepathy, mediumship, OBE's and survival of bodily
death can be all explained as a part of physics: as real effects.
They cannot be "explained away" as Blackmore, Wiseman and
Randi have been commissioned to attempt.
SPR seems to have been manipulated by physicists for years, its aims
subverted in attempts to prove these effects the result of fraud,
coincidence or delusion. In 1996 I attended the SPR annual
conference and, to my surprise, found it had been organised by a
cosmology physicist, Dr Bernard Carr. The recent SMN journal shows
he favours the "Anthropic Principle" to explain the fine
tuning of the universe. This is pure establishment physics which
denies the existence of anything paranormal or spiritual. So why is
such a man called in to organise an SPR conference?
previously sent in an article summarising my theory of everything,
showing how a spiritual base could work physically. This should have
been just the thing needed by the SPR since it lacks the physical
theory required to properly explain its published observations. It
had first been rejected by Dr Beloff on grounds that they had nobody
who could assess it. So I said Professor Archie Roy, their president
of the previous year, being an astrophysicist, would be perfectly
capable. His rejection letter, months later, gave the reason that
its assessment would take him too long and that frankly he had other
things to do. The pamphlet referenced below is almost identical with
that paper and formed the basis of an article Consciousness as a
Sub-Quantum Phenomenon published in 1997 in the scientific journal,
Frontier Perspectives after full peer review by a physicist. This
suggests the approach is sound!
tragedy is that some people make out their wills to the S P R, to
promote research: to discover if there is any substance in the
paranormal and the survival hypothesis. They do not know that their
money is likely to be subverted to only promote the case against
1996 SPR conference I had asked Dr. Bernard Carr (now Professor of
mathematics and astronomy at Queen Mary and Westfield College,
London University) why it was that all my submissions were rejected
despite the fact that no assessor had been able to find any flaw in
the logic. He answered, "You are well known in Cosmology
circles: as a Maverick! No journal is ever going to publish any of
your work." He was telling me they had all been told to reject
anything I sent. I also have a letter from Dr Maddox, then editor of
the prestigious journal, "Nature", saying it was an
editorial decision that they would never publish any of my articles
even though they might be perfectly sound.
also been invited on TV to balance Blackmore or Wiseman and give
scientific support for survival on at least 12 occasions, only to be
dumped at the last minute. On ringing in to find out why, the answer
has always been the same. "We would love to have you on",
the presenters always said, "but orders have come from above
that you are not to be permitted under any circumstances". This
implies the media are also under the thumb of the established
physicists. This is all to give you some idea of the strength of the
forces ranged against any advancement of physics which could
embarrass top people.
also becoming very clear that many professional electrical and
mechanical engineers are becoming aware of the sad situation, which
has evolved though nobody is to blame. It has resulted from such
increasing sophistication of mathematics at the cutting edge of
physics that simple solutions are just missed. The solution is to
allow these applied sciences to contribute and bring back the
required whiff of commonsense.
Please note that the ISS does not necessarily endorse the views
above. They are merely presented for the reader to consider.
Ronald D: Consciousness as a Sub-Quantum Phenomenon.
Frontier Perspectives, Spring/Summer 1997 Vol. 6, No, 2. pp 70 -
78 (Temple University, Ritter Hall, 003-OOPA 19122 USA)
Ronald D: Key to Consciousness: Quantum Gravitation. A
pamphlet on which the above peer-reviewed publication was based.
Available from author £2.00 inc.p&p