Seeing Past The Edge*
An Original Work of Non-fiction
By: David G. Yurth
All Rights Reserved
Looking For Simple, Elegant Solutions
Chapter One A World of Mystery and Wonder 34
The Problem With Language
Finding the Edge
Language, Mathematics and Semantics
The Art of Seeing
The Place of Creation
Things We know But Do Not Understand
Creating a New Context
The Principles of Complementarity
A Journey of Discovery
Looking For Simple, Elegant Solutions
A World of Mystery and Wonder
The world we live in is a place of mystery and fascination. In the late 60’s, an obscure Austrian physicist named Fritjof Capra had a spontaneous experience which forever altered his view of himself as separate from the rest of the Universe. When the veil of Seeing was removed from his conscious apprehension of the world around him, he witnessed
“…cascades of energy coming down from outer space, in which particles were created and destroyed in rhythmic pulses; …”saw” the atoms of the elements and those of my body participating in this cosmic dance of energy; …felt its rhythm and “heard” its sound, and in that moment …knew that this was the dance of Shiva…”
As a result of this remarkable experience, he was able to intuit the inextricable connection between the material world and his own consciousness. He was able to integrate his insight into a model which synthesized the world of quantum physics with the mystical philosophies of the East. His book The Tao of Physics[i] still stands as the watershed event which propelled our generation into a whole new way of apprehending the world. Over the past 30 years, since the publication of his book, scientists have succeeded in verifying many of his predictions about the “mystical” relationships he described.
Since then, we have discovered a number of things which were inconceivable to Dr. Capra and his contemporaries at that time. Newspapers and magazines, public television, documentaries and news groups on the Internet describe the discovery of such things as complementarity,[ii] zero point energy, dark matter,[iii] Buckey balls,[iv] self-organizing criticality [autopoiesis] in complex systems,[v] the way coherent light exchanges information at the interference fringe,[vi] the creation of particles of mass with nothing but intersecting beams of light,[vii] the connections between consciousness and quantum physics,[viii] and the discovery of quarks and sub-quarks.[ix]
Other discoveries, such as Nicolas Gisin’s experimental demonstration of the phenomenon known as simultaneity (non-local effects at a distance)[x] and synchronicity, verified by the experiments of Alain Aspect[xi] and Nobel astrophysicist Dr. John Wheeler,[xii] suggest that the single, immutable constant upon which virtually all the sciences have agreed is no longer valid. The speed of light is not the upper limit to velocity.[xiii] Further, there is compelling reason to postulate the existence of a holographic field which has been shown to convey information non-locally at least 109 times faster than the speed of light.[xiv] If we can verify these notions, the basic assumptions which comprise the Standard Model will have to be reconsidered. It appears that many of our most commonly held notions about the Cosmos may be seriously flawed.
Consider: a group of Ukrainian scientists has developed a whole new mathematics to describe the world we live in, which is so different from the one we are accustomed to using that we can scarcely believe they were both developed by the same species on the same planet.[xv] Our confusion is compounded by discoveries recently made by scholars of antiquities who have unearthed ancient records which strongly suggest that we are merely rediscovering information which was already common knowledge to civilizations which preceded the ancient Sumerians, much of which appears to have been long since been forgotten.[xvi] What are we to do with this information? How do we reconcile what we think we know with what we believe, when it is clear that we cannot rely on the model of the physical universe which is now the accepted standard?
These avenues of discovery have led us to a moment in time when it is no longer possible to make sense of what we know without examining information in a whole new context. The work of Danish mathematician Dr. Per Bak and his colleagues at the Brookhaven National Laboratories provides a perfect example. In an effort to validate the predictions developed by a new mathematical model of complex open systems, Dr. Bak and his colleagues designed an experiment which has caused a furor in the scientific community. His experiment was simplicity itself – it simply asked the question,
“How high can we build a pile of sand, depositing one grain of sand at a time on top of another, before the whole pile collapses under its own mass?”
His attempts to develop a mathematical model to predict the precise moment at which the point of criticality is reached have opened a whole new window on our quest for understanding how Nature works.[xvii]
This deceptively simple project was designed to answer a much more important question. By determining the underlying dynamics which operate at the precise slope angle at which the sand pile begins to collapse [known as the point of criticality], Dr. Bak hypothesized that a model could be constructed to predict the behavior of other, more complex systems, particularly as their structural complexity approaches a condition where catastrophic annihilation and spontaneous creation coincide. He theorized that the model could perhaps be used to predict the location and magnitude of earthquakes, the weather, El Nino and other manifestations of complex systems which have thus far thwarted the best efforts of the finest minds in science.
Bak discovered, among other things, that all complex systems spontaneously organize themselves to a point of criticality. This is an underlying principle which appears to be common to all complex systems at all stages of development, at all scales, everywhere in the Universe. His discoveries are substantially altering the way we consider our role in the scheme of things. Punctuated equilibrium, power laws and logarithmic relationships, the role of fractal geometry and 1/ƒ noise thresholds constitute a family of new concepts which have to be included in our model and our vocabulary. And, unfortunately, he concluded that not only can we not apply the principles of self-organizing criticality to predicting earthquakes and such, we probably cannot predict the local magnitude or frequency of any occurrences in such complex systems at all.
It is curious to note in passing that the slope angle of Dr. Bak’s sand pile is precisely the same as the slope of the Great Pyramid of Giza.[xviii] Is that merely a coincidence? Or does this discovery suggest that the engineers who designed and built those ancient monuments may have understood the relationships which define the behaviors of self organizing systems and encrypted a carefully encoded message into the structure of their creation? If there is a message there, what does it mean?
It is time to take the next intuitive leap, to create a new context for re-examining newly discovered information which cannot be accommodated by the current model of quantum mechanics. It is now time to ask the questions which naturally arise from Dr. Capra’s seminal work:
“Is there a limit to what we can know? What are those limits? Where is the edge of knowing?”
The Problem With Language
The moment we begin to conceptualize about these issues, in the very instant we attempt to talk about them, we crash headlong into the first of many powerful dynamic mechanisms which limit our ability to see clearly – language. Without language, we are unable to communicate meaning in the form of abstract concepts. We call these notions “ideas.” Indeed, it is by engaging in the process of conceptualizing that we encounter at first hand one of the primary dynamics which operates in the background we refer to as “reality-as-it-is.” The very idea that the reality we see – the one we look at and measure every day – is only a small part of reality-as-it-is, is so novel that it has only been in the very recent past, since Maxwell formulated the electrodynamic quaternions, that scientists in the West have been willing to concede the possibility.
In the ancient traditions of the East, this notion has been thoroughly integrated into the fabric of language and culture for thousands of years.[xix] Indeed, in the modern era, it appears we have forgotten much of what has long been known by the sages.
It is language which governs the way we think.[xx] Language exerts a fundamentally limiting, restrictive influence on what we can know and how we can know and express it.[xxi] Without language, we have no other way to impute meaning to our experience or communicate our experience to others.[xxii] This paradox is mirrored in every aspect of creation. It is the essence of the phenomenon known as complementarity.
Finding The Edge
In the pages which follow, this point of departure is our baseline. This point of reference relies on the notion that there is, indeed, an Edge, a finite scale in the physical world beyond which we cannot travel with the intellect and physical observation alone. It is that place where bigger, more powerful telescopes and stronger, higher resolution microscopes cannot take us. It is in that place, where intellectual understanding meets intuition, in the realm of things which cannot be visualized, that we will find the answers we seek. This is the Edge of Knowing, the interference fringe, the point of criticality where order meets chaos, where creation meets catastrophe, where looking meets seeing, where mind meets matter. This is the place of creation, where the things we are discovering operate according to a set of rules we do not yet fully understand.
Language, Math and Semantics
The Edge of knowing lies beyond the reach of language, even [sometimes, especially] mathematics. Although mathematicians will argue to the death against such heresies, just as there is no such thing as a simple, non-dynamic language,[xxiii] neither is there is such a thing as a pure or privileged language.[xxiv] Like every other kind of form of symbolic expression developed by man, mathematics is as susceptible to the nuances of semantics, ambiguity, and complementarity as any other means of human expression. This is true because in its most sophisticated forms, mathematics is simply another means for expressing intuition. The notion that a consistent, universal one-to-one relationship exists between the symbols used in mathematical expressions and the reality of the physical world has long since been invalidated.
The mathematical language in current use in the West is derived directly from the notion that all life emerges from matter -– in the conventional scientific community, this is taken as a dictum. But what if all matter emerges from a background reality which is pure consciousness? What use is the language of mathematics then? What if the process of creation is driven by non-local forces which are non-linear in nature? This is problematical because we have not yet created a non-linear mathematical expression which describes such things.
It is because of the kind of precision made possible by mathematics that we now know that the more precisely we are able to measure and predict any aspect of the material world, the less relevant that information is. This leads us to the heart of the problem – it is not possible to describe quantum phenomena adequately using only the language of mathematics. This leads us to the place where Jung first ventured – the realm of archetypal forms and symbols, where fundamental shapes, forms and tones carry the information which drives the creative processes of the Cosmos. This is the place of metaphysics, semantic language and information theory.
The Art of Seeing
The Edge is that place where non-material science [the art of “seeing”] meets material physics [the science of “looking”]. In our world, within our culture, within the confines of our limited ability to conceptualize, there is precious little distinction made between looking and seeing. However, after the realm shifting work of Alain Aspect, John Wheeler and Nicolas Gisin, we can now be certain that apprehending something with the senses and explaining it with the intellect has little or nothing to do with “seeing” the true nature of things, understanding what they mean or comprehending how they work. The I Ching describes this conundrum when it says,
We can know the ineffable, but when we attempt to explain it, all understanding is sacrificed.[xxv]
What can we do when the biggest telescope and the most powerful microscope we can imagine will no longer allow us to examine the dynamic forces which drive the Cosmos? How can we “see” past the Edge? It is because we have encountered the outer limits of “looking” that we are compelled to have the conversation about “seeing” – about knowing in the intuitive sense rather than simply apprehending things in terms of measurement. What we are beginning to suspect is that there is an underlying reality from which everything is constantly emerging, unfolding, adapting and organizing, which cannot be apprehended with the tools we are accustomed to using.
The Place of Creation
Where do we find the spawning grounds of creation? How do we come to know them, understand what they do and how they work, explain the forces which drive them, and conceptualize them in ways which can be understood and unambiguously communicated to others? Fortunately, we do not have to look very far to find a suitable entry point. Fritjof Capra made a giant leap when he intuited that there are distinct commonalities in both the mystical traditions of Eastern religious philosophies and the world described by quantum physics. Since he wrote The Tao of Physics,[xxvi] our collective curiosity has produced a wealth of information to which he did not have access and could scarcely have imagined. We follow Dr. Capra’s footsteps to the Edge of creation by synthesizing this new information into a paradigm.
Things We Know But Do Not Understand
Decades ago, Marcel Vogel[xxvii] and Sir Jagadis Chandra Bose[xxviii] produced a body of impeccably documented pioneering work which graphically demonstrates how thin is the line which separates living from non-living matter. Alain Aspect[xxix] and John Wheeler[xxx] both proved that a more powerful microscope or bigger telescope will only take us to the Edge of Knowing, into a world where the conscious choices of the observer and the means of observation cannot be separated from the act of observation. Today, there can be no doubt that we are connected to both electrons and photons by the dynamics of consciousness. This is no longer debatable. But what those bonds are and how they work, however, are issues we clearly [at least in a scientific sense] have not understood at all.
Recent developments in the science of photonics have taken us one step closer to the Edge. Scientists have developed devices which are capable of emitting and detecting quarter wavelengths of light which have been successfully used to turn other beams of light on and off, without the interposition of an intermediary physical material.[xxxi] More recently, a team of British scientists demonstrated that two beams of circularly polarized light can be used actually move minute particles, when the beams are slowly rotated around each other.[xxxii] This work demonstrates that it is in the interference fringe, the area where wave forms of light interfere with each other, that some of the mysteries of creation may be understood. The things made possible by these insights into the semantic properties of light are quite revealing.
At the Santa Fe Institute, Nobel laureates from dozens of different disciplines are discovering that the forces which drive the behavior of atoms at the interference fringe are precisely the same forces which drive all other aspects of creation, including especially the behaviors of open, complex systems.[xxxiii] And while we cannot “see” the inner workings of physical materials at the quantum level, we can observe the dynamics and laws which govern such things by witnessing the fascinating emergence of the Internet. At the societal level, this is clearly one of those phenomena which demonstrates what happens in that place of pure creation, where order meets chaos, where undifferentiated fields of information take on polarity, at the interference fringe.
If we are to truly see beyond the Edge, we must somehow identify and understand the rules which operate in the realm of non-material physics. We find ourselves in that avenue of inquiry and experience referred to derisively as pseudo-science by scientists and embraced as manna by philosophers, known as Metaphysics. The cultural, societal, religious and linguistic conceits which prevent us from examining these considerations in a careful, systematic, organized manner are ponderous. Few in the scientific community who value their hard-won academic credentials have been willing to spend any significant amount of time or money in this sort of research. The risk of censure, ostracism and professional ridicule are so daunting that only the most fearless or foolish dare tread this ground.
Fortunately, there have been some intrepid heroes who have defied the pressure to conform – Marcel Vogel [the genius behind the creation of IBM whose work on liquid crystals is still not completely understood], Sir Jagadis Chandra Bose [whose impeccable, voluminous work described the connection between human consciousness and plants,][xxxiv] Nikola Tesla [whose discoveries regarding the etheric transmission of electric power have become the stuff of myth and legend],[xxxv] and others whose work could, if the context of the discussion could be expanded to allow it, considerably alter the paradigm which defines the way we which we apprehend the world around us.[xxxvi]
In addition, we have the extraordinary work of Charles W. Leadbeater[xxxvii] and Annie Besant[xxxviii] to examine. Under the direction of the legendary J. Krishnamurti, they relied entirely on their carefully honed ability to delve deeply into consciousness to discover the secrets at the heart of the atom. Dr. Stephen Phillips’ work chronicles how these two researchers identified the sub-atomic particle named the “quark” as early as 1927.[xxxix]
Without the aid of either physical measuring or observational devices, in the days before quantum mechanics was even a cogent idea, when Cartan and Einstein had no notion of the nature and importance of spinors in the sub-atomic realm, Leadbeater and Besant created a journal which spanned more than 30 years of impeccably documented psychic research into the sub-atomic structure and behaviors of matter. Some 60 years later, Dr. Murray Gell-Mann was awarded a Nobel Prize for his “discovery” of what was then believed to be the primary, indivisible material component of the Universe, which was also called the quark. Has anyone of our generation ever heard of Leadbeater and Besant?
A whole new avenue of inquiry has been opened up in the past few years which examines what Menas Kafatos and Robert Nadeau refer to as “reality-as-it-is”, that place from which all creation emerges. This new science is referred to as “Complexity.” Its point of departure is marked by the outer limits of chaos theory, string theory, super symmetry, autopoiesis [self-organizing principles], emergence, adaptation and the effect of positive feedback loops on systems, fractal geometry and the role of holographic memory functions in human intelligence. This new synthesis of information is being derived from a wide variety of long-accepted scientific disciplines. Its contributors are mostly Nobel Prize winners.
It is an honest attempt by the finest minds on the planet to discover the simple, elegant underlying sets of rules which drive the processes of creation. If the underlying dynamics which govern self-organizing criticality and the phenomena associated with the transfer of information in the interference fringe can be defined, we will have taken a giant leap toward understanding not only how we have come to be, but where we came from and how we got here. While this does not answer the question “Why are we here?” it does provide a new context within which the question can at least be asked without the risk of professional suicide.
Creating A New Context
This avenue of inquiry holds the keys to unraveling some of the most intriguing mysteries of the Cosmos. The phenomenon of the interference fringe, the place where it is difficult [if not altogether impossible] to observe and measure things with physical devices, is also the realm within which the forces which drive the engine of creation and consciousness operate. And it is in the examination of these phenomena where I believe we will find the most fascinating clues to the way the world in and around us really works. We do not yet have a cogent, universally accepted paradigm which makes it possible in our culture to consider the mathematical physics of Nobel Laureate Murray Gell-Mann and the techniques of quantum healing espoused by Deepak Chopra, with equal grace.
This is true in spite of the fact that Murray Gell-Mann’s brand of mathematics and quantum physics strongly implied that science would never discover an atomic particle smaller than a quark. The world still venerates him in spite of the fact that in 1996 scientists operating the linear accelerator at FermiLabs near Chicago, Illinois, not only discovered the sub-quark, but captured a record of its dash-space-dash-space tracing on a photographic emulsion plate, as it shifted into and out of “reality” before mysteriously disappearing.[xl]
Why does the community we live in not venerate the discoveries and investigative techniques of Dr’s Chopra and Gell-Mann with equal measure? Is Dr. Gell-Mann’s description of the quark any more valid than the description provided by Charles W. Leadbeater and Annie Besant, whose psychic viewing techniques provided an impeccably documented view of the quantum world of the quark in 1927? Who ever heard of these people and their work? Is the knowing acquired by these means any less valid or important than information which can be measured by physicists or predicted by mathematicians? I leave it to you decide.
In our society, we vest certitude in a very narrow spectrum of carefully controlled kinds of information to the exclusion of other, less socially acceptable varieties. If the truth were known, I believe we would find [as Capra predicted] that the disciplined practice of metaphysics can be relied on to produce information which is less speculative and imprecise than many of the conventions of science which condemn it. Truly, we cannot have a complete understanding of the Cosmos without employing both kinds of knowing because they are complementary to each other.
The Principles of Complementarity
How do we resolve this apparent impasse? By demonstrating that the generalized principles of complementarity operate with equal facility in the construction of all human realities. We are forced to bridge the gulf which separates hard science from metaphysics by acknowledging that consciousness cannot be divorced from the methods of examination employed by conventional science. The realization that everything which operates in and around us is inextricably interwoven provides us with a way of understanding the Universe in a context which is devoid of conceptual conflict.[xli]
Complementarity is a term coined by physicists which has to do with an attribute of information which cannot be visualized in common experience. It embraces the idea that a sub-atomic component [like an electron or a photon] can manifest multiple qualities [electrons can be detected as particles with measurable mass and as energy quanta with waveform characteristics] simultaneously. Electrons have been shown to exhibit either one or the other of those attributes individually, when called upon by the conscious choice of an observer to do so. We have Alain Aspect to thank for proving in 1982 what Dr. Capra intuited in 1967[xlii]. He proved with physical science what the mystics have always said, that we are connected to all we observe by the very fact of our consciousness.
In a similar experiment, Nobel Laureate Dr. John Wheeler proved Rupert Sheldrake’s profound intuition that we are equally connected to the stars by the simple act of gazing at them.[xliii] How our conscious choices effect the process of creation, in both a material and non-material sense, is one of the primary points of focus for this book. And this is the real crux of the matter.
It is in the context of this discussion that we are able to take a whole new look at reality-as-it-is. In the context of this paradigm, we can make a convincing case that the current scientific viewpoint about creation may be seriously flawed. It is at the Edge where we will discover whether life emerged from matter [as science currently declares] or matter is emerging from consciousness in every moment.
A Journey of Discovery
In the final analysis, while I do not pretend to provide answers for any of the fundamental Cosmic questions, I am convinced that the very nature of our inquiry can serve to provide a broader scope within which all such questions can be framed and examined. After all, as any competent alchemist will tell you, the answer to every question is implicit in the form of the question itself. If all we do here is succeed in reframing the way we formulate our inquiries, we cannot help but succeed in arriving at new and ever more fascinating insights, somewhere beyond the Edge…
Endnotes, Comments, References, Hyperlinks & Suggested Reading
[i] Capra, F. The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism, Third Edition, Updated, Shambala Press, Boston (1991) ISBN:0-87773-594-8.
[ii] Stapp, H. “The Copenhagen Interpretation,” American Journal of Physics 40 1098 (1972).
[iii] The search for Dark Matter is being conducted with three different varieties of technologies: (1) microlensing, (2) neutrino detection and (3) WIMP detection. References to research can be found on the Web at lyoinfo.in2p3.fr/manoir/web_eng.html.
[iv] Buckey Balls are referred to as Carbon 60. They represent the first commercially viable products arising out of the new science of atomic engineering. For a full explanation of Buckey Balls and the techniques, technologies and markets which are related to them, check the Web at www.ill.fr/dif/3D-crystals/.
[v] Bak, Per, How Nature Works, Springer-Verlag (New York @ Copernicus) 1996.
[vi] United States Patent Number 5,093,802, March 3, 1992. “Optical Computing Method Using Interference Fringe Component Regions.”
[vii] Tatterson K.G., “Boom! From Light Comes Matter. Photonics Spectra, November 1997, page 31. The experimental results have been replicated thus far at Stanford University, the University of Rochester at Rochester, New York; Princeton University in Princeton, New Jersey, and the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.
[viii] Kafatos, M., Nadeau, R., The Conscious Universe, by,(1990) Springer-Verlag New York, Inc . See also Alred Korzybsky, Science and Sanity: an Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics (1995) 5th Edition, Institute of General Semantics. See also J. Campbell, Grammatical Man: Information, Entropy, Language and Life, Simon & Schuster, New York (1982).
[ix] Gell-Mann, M., The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex. Reprint edition (October 1995), W.H. Freeman & Co. ISBN 07 16727250; see also, “Inclusive Jet Cross Section in pbar p Collisions at sqrt s = 1.8TeV,” F. Abe et al., The CDF Collaboration, FERMILAB-PUB-96/020-E. Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett. January 24, 1996 — Abstract, Paper; see also, FERMILAB MEDIA ADVISORY 2/7/96, CDF Results Raise Questions on Quark Structure. An article to appear in the February 9 issue of Science describes results contained in a paper submitted to Physical Review Letters by the 450-member Collider Detector at Fermilab collaboration. The CDF paper reports results that appear to be at odds with predictions based on the current theory of the fundamental structure of matter. The paper, submitted January 21, reports the collaboration’s measurement of the probability that the fundamental constituents of matter will be deflected, or will “scatter,” when very high energy protons collide with antiprotons, according to CDF spokesmen William Carithers and Giorgio Bellettini.
[x] Poole, R., “Score One (More) For the Spooks,” Discover, January 1998 page 53. Dr. Gisin and his team borrowed fiber optic phone lines running from Geneva to two nearby villages. In Geneva, they shone photons into a potassium-niobate crystal, which split each photon into a pair of less energetic photons, traveling in opposite directions – one north toward Bellevue and the other southwest to Bernex. At these two destinations, nearly seven miles apart, each photon was fed into a detector. When the attributes of one positron were altered at the point of detection by an electro-magnetic field, the other positron instantaneously adjusted its characteristics to accommodate it. This experiment, which has been successfully repeated thousands of times, proves beyond question two important things: First, we live in a quantum realm, where common sense cannot be relied on to interpret data and, second, that there is an interpenetrating field which conveys information at least 109 times faster than the speed of light everywhere in the known Universe.
[xi] Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, Gerard Roger, “Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time-varying Analyzers,”. Physical Review Letters 49 1804 (1982).
[xii] John Archibald Wheeler & Wojciech Hubert Zurek, Quantum Theory and Measurement ed. Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press (1983).
[xiii] G. Nimtz, Superluminal Signal Velocity, Annalen der Physik 7, 618 (1998); see also G. Nimtz, W. Heitmann, Superluminal Photonic Tunneling and Quantum Electronics, Progress in Quantum Electronics, vol. 21, 81 (1997); see also, A. Enders, G. Nimtz, “Photonic Tunneling Experiments,” Physics Review, B 47, 9605 (1993) regular paper; see also, A. Enders, G. Nimtz, On Superluminal barrier Transversal, Journal of Physics (France),vol. 2, at pp. 1693 (1992); see also, G. Nimtz, A. Enders, H. Spieker, Photonic Tunneling Experiments: Superluminal Tunneling, Trani Workshop, 24-30 September 1992, Waves and Particles in Light and Matter. A.v.d. Merwe and A. Garuccio (eds.), Plenum Press, NY (1994). See also, B. Ramsay, H.Fox, Superluminal Velocity of Gravity Waves, Journal of New Energy, vol 3, no. 2/3, Proceedings of the INE Symposium on New Energy, August 14-15, 1998. ISSN 1086-8259.
[xiv] A. Akimov etal, “Heuristic Discussion of the Problem of Finding Long Range Interactions, EGS-Concepts,” Journal of New Energy News, Winter 1997, Vol.2, No. 3-4, pages 59-80, including 177 studies, references and suggested readings; see also, M. Talbot, The Holographic Universe, HarperCollins, NY (1991). ISBN: 0-06-092258-3.
[xv] D. Yurth, The Anthropos Files (unpublished report of the sciences, materials, technologies developed at the Institute For Problems of Materials Sciences, Kiev, L’vov, Chernovitsky, Republic of Ukraine, from 1951-1991); see also, Anastasovski, P.K, Benson, T.M., Quantum Mass Theory Compatible With Quantum Field Theory, Nova Science Publishers, Inc. (1995) ISBN: 1.56072-157-X.
[xvi] Z. Sitchin, Genesis Revisited: Is Modern Science Catching Up With Ancient Knowledge? Avon Books, NY (1990) ISBN: 0-380-76159-9; see also, Z. Sitchin, The Earth Chronicles: Book I [The 12th Planet], Book II [The Stairway to Heaven], Book III [The Wars of Gods and Men], Book IV [The Lost Realms], Book V [When Time Began], Avon Books, NY.
[xvii] Bak, Per, How Nature Works, Springer-Verlag (New York @ Copernicus) 1996.
[xviii] P. Lemesurier, The Great Pyramid Decoded, Element Books, Ltd. Great Britain (1977); see also, P. Tompkins, Secrets of the Great Pyramid (with an appendix by Livio Catullo Stecchini), Harper & Row, Publishers, NY (1971) ISBN: 06-014327-4; see also, G. Hancock, Fingerprints of the Gods: The Evidence of Earth’s Lost Civilization, Crown Trade Paperbacks, NY (1995) ISBN: 0-517-88729-0.
[xix] Krishnamurti, J. The Awakening of Intelligence, Harper San Francisco (1973).
[xx] Campbell, J. Grammatical Man: Information, Entropy, Language and Life, Simon & Schuster, New York (1982).
[xxi] Korzybsky, A. Science and Sanity: an Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics (1995) 5th Edition, Institute of General Semantics.
[xxii] Martin, R. Out of Silence: A Journey Into Language, Henry Holt & Co., NY (1994) ISBN: 0-8050-1998-7.
[xxiv] The Conscious Universe, loc. cit.
[xxv] Wilhelm, R. The I Ching or Book of Changes, Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press (1967).
[xxvi] Capra, F. The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism, Third Edition, Updated, Shambala Press, Boston (1991) ISBN:0-87773-594-8.
[xxvii] Vogel, M., Pringsheim, P. Luminescence of Liquids and Solids and Its Practical Applications, Interscience Publications, NY (1943).
[xxviii] Gutpa, M.,Jagadis Chandra Bose, A Biography,, Chaupatty, Bombay; Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan (1964); see also, Acharya Jagadis Chandra Bose, (Transactions of the Bose Research Institute, Calcutta), Calcutta (1958); see also, D. M. Bose, J.C. Bose’s Plant Physiological Investigation Relating to Modern Biological Knowledge, Transactions of the Bose Research Institute, Calcutta (1947-48); see also, J.C. Bose, Izbrannye Proizvedeniya po Razdrazhimosti Rastenii, I.I. Gunar (editor), 2 volumes, Moscow: Isdatel’stvo Nauka (1964); see also, P. Tompkins/C. Bird, The Secret Life of Plants, Avon Books 19901 (1973).
[xxix] I recommend selected reading into the works of Alain Aspect and his team at the University of Paris.See A. Aspect, P. Grangier, G. Roger, Physical Review Letters, 1981, 47, p. 460 etal.
[xxx] Wheeler, J.A. Einstein’s Vision, Springer-Verlag, 1968, page 112. See also A. Dolgov, Yu. Zel’dovdich, M. Sazhin, Cosmology of the Early Universe, MGU Publ., Moscow 1988, page 200 (in Russian). See also M. Lavrent’ev et al, On Remote Action of Stars on Resistor, Doklady AN SSSR, 1990, vol 314, no 2, page 352 (in Russian). See also A. Pugach, A. Akimov, “Astronomical Observations by N. Kozyrev’s Methodology: Preliminary Results,” in the press (in Russian).
[xxxi] See Endnote #6.
[xxxii] McCarthy, Kieren. “Boffins Make Real-Life Tractor Beam.” The Reigister 12 May 2001, found at www.theregister.co.uk/content/2/18604.html
[xxxiii] Mitchell Waldrop, Complexity: The Emerging Science At The Edge of Order and Chaos (1992) Simon & Schuster, New York.
[xxxiv] J.C. Bose, “Live Movements in Plants,” Transactions of the Bose Research Institute, vols. 1-6. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1918-1931; see also, C. Muses, A.M. Young, (editors), Consciousness and Reality: The Human Pivot, Outerbridge and Lazard, Inc., NY (1972).
[xxxv] I. Hunt, W.W. Draper, Lightning in His Hand: The Life Story of Nikola Tesla. Sage Books, Denver (1964).
[xxxvi] H. Collins, T. Pinch, The Golem: what everyone should know about science, Cambridge University Press (1993) ISBN: 0-521-35601-6.
[xxxvii] C.W. Leadbeater, The Monad, Adyar, Madras, India: Theosophical Pub. House (1947).
[xxxviii] S.M. Phillips, Extra-Sensory Perception of Quarks, The Theosophical Publishing House, Wheaton, Illinois, USA 1980. ISBN 0-8356-0227-3.
[xxxix] Phillips ibid.
[xl] “Inclusive Jet Cross Section in pbar p Collisions at sqrt s = 1.8TeV,” F. Abe et al., The CDF Collaboration, FERMILAB-PUB-96/020-E. Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett. January 24, 1996 — Abstract, Paper.
[xli]Perhaps the most compelling work of this kind was written by Dr. Ken Hashimoto, Chief of Research and Development at Fuji Electronics Industries. His book, Introduction to ESP, now in its 60th printing, established the basis under which plants have become regularly used as truth detectors in the Japanese criminal court system. His second book, Mysteries of the 4th Dimensional World, now in its 80th printing, provides a voluminous catalog of carefully documented, often publicly repeated experimental results, which clearly demonstrate that nothing in this physical world operates without being effected at a fundamental level by human consciousness. Dr. Hashimoto’s books were printed in Japan in Japanese and are currently out of print. However, copies can be acquired by contacting www.iuniverse.com/. Additional information can be obtained from the Library of Congress, either by direct correspondence or online.
[xlii] Aspect, ibid.
[xliii] Wheeler, ibid.