What's new by James (Jim) E Beichler
None
This experiment was originally entered into the recent BICS and IONS competitions for the best ev... more This experiment was originally entered into the recent BICS and IONS competitions for the best evidence for the afterlife (BICS) and verifying the existence of consciousness (IONS). It never even got past the first review of proposals. This experimental research is to test a theoretical model of how the brain stores and recalls common sensations as core memories in consciousness (four-dimensional higher consciousness) as well as
recognize sensed objects and things in our sensual environment and extrapolate that knowledge, via the single field theory, to develop a similar technology to sense the paranormal aspects of higher consciousness directly and electronically itself as well as the survival of consciousness. A beginning has already been made with Persinger’s ‘God Helmet’ (stimulation) and the fMRI experiments (detection) that have already demonstrated that the storage and recall of memories is magnetic vector potential in nature, which can only occur by utilizing and manipulating the four-dimensional magnetic vector A-field in which our higher consciousness exists as a mega-complexity pattern that corresponds quantum point-by-point with the three-dimensional body (matter/energy or ME-Field), mind (electric or E-field) and the conscious awareness of common consciousness (scalar magnetic or B-field) in the brain.
To be announced
For the past century it has been universally believed and taught in science that general relativi... more For the past century it has been universally believed and taught in science that general relativity and quantum mechanics were and remain mutually incompatible while quantum theory alone overthrew the older classical notions of physics, even including relativity theory. The quantum is believed by most to be more fundamental than relativity and continuity of space. That interpretation of or world is just BS (Bad Science). Under these circumstances, it is an accepted fact (not a natural truth) that any unification of the two major modern paradigms, general relativity, and the quantum, can and will only be based upon of overthrow relativity and our modern ideas of gravity by the quantum. Yet nothing in science could be further from the truth and our experiences of our true physical reality.
Einstein can even be blamed in part for these views because he got rid of the need for Newton’s concept of absolute time and space. In essence he prepared the way for the takeover of the quantum. Even toward the end of his famous Habilitationsschrift a half century earlier in 1854, where Riemann spoke of the physical possibilities of knowing and understanding the space his differential geometry explained, Bernhard Riemann stated that we could not really understand and know what space is until we conquered the smallest possible measure of space, the quanta.
The belief that Einstein rid physics of the concept of absolute space and time was then and is still thought, taught, and caressed with passion and enthusiasm as strict scientific dogma by all concerned, even though he only rendered them unnecessary to do modern post-revolutionary physics, i.e., his relativity theories and gravity. But that fact was nothing new. The non-usefulness of absolute space and time had been known since Newton’s time when all physical mechanics describing matter in motion took place in relativistic space and time without reference to Newton’s concept of absolute space. Absolute space and time were only had mathematical and philosophical importance.
Yet now, the unification of all the major physics paradigms demonstrates conclusively that quantum theory and the quantum world that it portrays is nothing more nor less than a new intuitive vision of a physical point-absolute space and time that has been derived mathematically because no such thing as a zero-point of nothing, a no-thing, an infinitely small nothingness, or such physical nonsense can exist in our physical space or time without the universe collapsing into it. Points, whether discrete or not, are just mathematical gimmicks used for conceptualization and the logical ordering of how we think.
So, the real problem for physics is ‘what is a point’ and if zero points of physical space are real then how can that reality be justified? Or is continuity our reality and the zero point just a mathematical artifact or calculational convenience? Even the original Greek Natural Philosophers argued over just this ‘point’ and never solved the point problem, so they never accepted the zero point as a valid number. For Newton, who was familiar with motion and matter in motion, this problem was translated into his spinning bucket experiment which he related to the orbit of Jupiter.
One of the greatest unsolved mysteries in physics is the formation and evolution of material syst... more One of the greatest unsolved mysteries in physics is the formation and evolution of material systems. Nearly everyone in the physics community would say that this is a long-solved problem, but they do not even notice that the formation and evolution of material systems, both animate and inanimate, are in direct violation of the laws of thermodynamics, which is also completely accepted 'as is' by the physics and scientific communities. Under these circumstances, two new theories of galactic and universal evolution have recently been proposed. But a better place for such a physics theory of physical evolution would be in a new and more comprehensive balanced thermodynamics so it could counter the physical principle of entropy in those physical instances that it does not matter. After all, entropy is, in fact, a form of anti-or deevolution. When a living or animate body dies, it becomes inanimate matter and entropy takes over in the body as the living processes and interactions cease. Unfortunately, the laws or principles of thermodynamics as they now stand are grossly incomplete and needfully wrong, but no one seems to have seen this error. The simplest error in them is that they refer to closed systems, which is commonly accepted, but there is no such thing as a closed system in the universe unless it is the universe itself, as a unitary continuous whole. So additional laws or rules are needed to fill this theoretical gap: Primarily Prigogine's Principle and chaos theory with the emergence of complexities. Nor does thermodynamics take into direct consideration the natural forces that rule physics and all physical interactions. However, thermodynamics can be extended to take these into account and thus develop a complete and comprehensive view of the physical universe. Doing so carries surprises in it with the development of physical evolution, both animate and inanimate, as a common property of the physical universe, and more.
You cannot unify QT and GR until you identify the role of points (not within points as the non-Ri... more You cannot unify QT and GR until you identify the role of points (not within points as the non-Riemannian geometries tried to do, nor as Klein’s ambiguous 1-D quantum-point extension of Kaluza 5-D GR as do subsequent superstring and brane theories) within a surface described by Riemannian geometry, even though tensors are placed at points for calculational purposes in Riemannian 4-D space-time. The tensors used in GR only refer to an infinitesimally close approach to the 3-D zero point, not the actual value at, in or through the zero point. Therefore, the tensor calculus used by Einstein and others is both incomplete and theoretically mis-leading, at least until it considers other geometrical possibilities at, in and through the point it represents.
SSE conference Presentation, 2023
The field of consciousness studies is filled with useless weeds that are preventing sturdy stock ... more The field of consciousness studies is filled with useless weeds that are preventing sturdy stock and proper theories from emerging and growing. The problem is twofold: An inability to properly define consciousness in a manner that succumbs to scientific theoretical research and an inability to develop a theoretical physics model of how the brain gives rise to the emergence of conscious awareness. These problems go beyond the normal problems inherent in physics, such as those between reductionism (quantum) and generalization (relativity) but are related after their own manner to this and other dualisms in nature. By taking a wholly new approach founded upon the single field unification of physics, which has already been used to define and model life (the biofield), mind and consciousness within the context of a truly unified field theory, a model of how the brain works from sensation input to memory storage and recall, to building and storing complex memories, all the way through and up to the formation of self-concepts and worldviews, as well as the whole-brain resonance necessary for simple cognition, and beyond to whole-body coherence representing the manifestation of higher consciousness. Within this context, wholly new areas of physics are opened to science, including what ends life, death and what happens thereafter.
Two years ago, Robert Bigelow and the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS) announce... more Two years ago, Robert Bigelow and the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS) announced an essay competition for the best evidence of the afterlife, i.e., the survival of consciousness past bodily death. The original purpose of the competition was to bring attention to the latest research on the question of the survival of consciousness after death and advertise its supposed scientific 'proof' (sic). The purpose of the BICS essay awards is to raise the public awareness for the Survival of Human Consciousness topic and to stimulate research. The goal of the essay contest is to award contestants for writing papers that summarize the best evidence available for the survival of human consciousness after permanent bodily death. (From the BICS webpage) Of the 204 'experts' that were allowed to enter the competition, 29 actually won cash awards and their essays will be published in special editions for libraries all over the world.
Journal for Spiritual and Consciousness Studiesdn , 2021
The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting,... more The best evidence presently available for the afterlife has already been tried and found wanting, although there is a great deal of good and various levels of even better evidence when NDEs, reincarnation, new standards for verifying mediumship, death bed visions and other phenomena related to dying and the afterlife are considered. But none of these rises to the level of 'best evidence' for 'proving' the reality of the afterlife. The truth is that there is no falsifiable evidence that can distinguish between the afterlife and other paranormal phenomena, i.e., there are always alternative super-psi or general psi explanations for the data, stories and evidence gathered by parapsychologists and experienced by individuals. The afterlife hypothesis is neither falsifiable nor verifiable given the absolute best 'so-called evidence' available today. Only a valid theory could offer scientific verifiability and also distinguish whether the evidence gathered so far supports the afterlife concept or super-psi. So, with no valid theory of the afterlife available, either an independent acceptable theory based on specific phenomena or better yet as part of a greater comprehensive theory of physical reality, there is nothing on which to base a truly rigorous experiment that could verify the afterlife to the satisfaction of both the scientific and nonscientific communities. Some form of valid acceptable theory is necessary and long overdue to explain and verify the various paranormal phenomena as well as hone the scientific search for survival of consciousness and the afterlife. We must assume that at least consciousness survives as either part or the whole of any possible afterlife. All of the common paranormal examples that deal with the afterlife are in some way simply different data points that should be used to follow the scientific method and lead to some common physical concept that we identify as the afterlife, so the hypothesis can be tested and verified. Not one of these examples is based on anything other than experiences/observations for which no comprehensive scientific model has ever been developed and/or studied in enough detail to even attempt to verify even the minimum level survival of consciousness in some manner. Only one theoretical unification model in modern physics, the single (operational) field theory or SOFT, is comprehensive enough to model life, mind, and consciousness and their evolution in enough specific detail to even talk logically about survival of consciousness. Be this as it may, the only possible 'best evidence' would then be the direct experience of higher consciousness, as in NDEs and enlightenment, which are very personal experiences, but even then, it could only be used as evidence, the best evidence, when it can be analyzed and understood as a physical phenomenon within the context of SOFT, an equivalent or better theoretical model.
Toward a Science of Consciousness Conference, 2020
The first and most important problem with developing a theoretical model of consciousness is defi... more The first and most important problem with developing a theoretical model of consciousness is defining consciousness, but everyone mistakenly tries to define consciousness with respect to the individual, or 'self', when in fact consciousness can only be defined within the context of our whole physical reality relative to a person's visions of 'self'. Some thinkers and scholars even try to dismiss the physical nature of consciousness, but consciousness can only and must be physical, at some level, because it clearly interacts with the physical world through mind, brain and living material beings. Since consciousness cannot, by its very nature, be material, that leaves only the possibility that consciousness must and can only be a field effect such as an extremely complex multi-leveled field structure. This leaves only two possibilities: The electromagnetic and the gravito-gravnetic fields. Gravity is too weak so it can be eliminated, which leaves only electromagnetism. Now, of the two parts of this stronger field, magnetism rules over and can direct the flow of electricity, which dominates the body and brain, and magnetism can build extremely complex multi-leveled field domain structures. So consciousness must be magnetic in nature, with the normal scalar magnetic B-field domain structure equating to our lower level mundane consciousness and the corresponding magnetic vector potential A-field representing our higher consciousness that connects us to (is continuous with) the wholeness and oneness of the universe at the quantum level of our reality. This physical model of consciousness is fully and comprehensively compatible with a completely unified single field theory that unifies all of classical physics (Newtonian theory, Maxwellian electromagnetism, evolution theory and thermodynamics), the various popular models of the quantum theory and all of relativity theory. We can now consider consciousness to be wholly and completely explained, at least within the context of our present knowledge of physical reality and the universe, within a physical unification theory that is both falsifiable and yields specific predictions, some of which have already been confirmed.
Psi Con: Aspects of Consciousness, 2019
Any physical or realistic scientific theory of consciousness requires four different fundamental ... more Any physical or realistic scientific theory of consciousness requires four different fundamental elements: (1) Unification of physics; (2) A new theory of physical evolution; (3) Precise physical definitions of life, mind and consciousness; and, (4) A complete physics of the brain. When these four are finished, a complete and comprehensive model of physical reality emerges which is not only amenable to consciousness but requires consciousness to evolve. Consciousness is therefore a fundamental part of all living organisms and beings as well as the universe at large that extends beyond the three-dimensions of normal experiential space but becomes higher consciousness as the four-dimensional extension of our being into an embedding hyperspace. The existence of this fourth dimension of space is necessary to give a complete explanation of the simple principles of three-dimensional matter and ‘matter in motion’ on which the present science of physics is ultimately based. Without the fourth dimension of space, our universe could not exist as we experience it.
Journal of Spiritual and Consciousness Studies, 2019
According to commonly accepted theories of history and the history of science in particular, a re... more According to commonly accepted theories of history and the history of science in particular, a revolutionary period of progress is presaged or preceded by crises. In the case of physics and the Second Scientific Revolution (1900), these crises were a failure to detect the luminiferous aether and the problem of blackbody radiation. But these crises were defined by the winners of the Second Scientific Revolution −primarily the quantum scientists−to propagate their own claims to having overthrown the Newtonian paradigm and replace it with their own quantum paradigm. However, within this context, the cultural movement known as 'modern spiritualism; and the reciprocal movement in science to study psychic phenomena, are considered historical aberrations and therefore unscientific. Yet these are all what I call 'phallacies in fysics' because they are wrong when the historical record is studied more closely.
To Be published, 2019
One of the great unanswered questions in the history and philosophy of science is why science aro... more One of the great unanswered questions in the history and philosophy of science is why science arose in the West and not in the East. The Axial age, from 700 to 300 BCE, saw a Zeroth Scientific Revolution in the West, from Thales to Aristotle, Archimedes, and Euclid. Almost simultaneously, Lao Tzu and Confucius appeared in China and the era of a Hundred Philosophies began, ending only when the Imperial Age began, while Siddhartha Gautama and Mahavira began changes in India that only ended when the Veda declined with the rise of Buddhism and the Ashokan Empire conquered India and surrounding areas, spreading Buddhism farther and wider than previous beliefs had ever gone. These changes during the Axial Age established the fundamental differences in worldview that we still witness and live by today in the East and West. Yet many scholars point to early technological developments in China such as gunpowder and rockets and wonder how China failed to capitalize on these and other developments to establish a theoretical basis for science, as did western culture, while major advances in mathematics and other scholarly pursuits occurred in India, raising the same questions. But in these historical speculations, and they are no more than idle and prejudicial speculations, there is at least an inaccurate presumption if not a dangerous assumption that Eastern philosophies are somehow unscientific, a view which mistakenly places Eastern ideas and ideals in an inferior position relative to Western science. Neither the statement that Eastern cultures did not formulate sciences nor the implications of this statement can be regarded as complete or even partially accurate. That inaccuracy has now become evident with Western science since modern physics has evolved to the point where concepts such as wholeness, subjectivity, and consciousness that are more common to Eastern science have now become fashionable in the West and have raised concerns about new advances in science itself. The new single (operational) field theory, or SOFT, offers Western and Eastern sciences a chance to combine their characteristic ideals reductionism and wholism, seemingly opposite fundamental approaches to science, into a new and far more comprehensive physics of reality for the first time in human history.
Keywords: Consciousness, unification, East, West, hyperspace, the fourth dimension, three-dimensional space, Chi, Ki, Prana, higher consciousness, modern physics, point and extension, dualisms, function and form
This paper is nothing short of a positive and complete verification of the unification of current... more This paper is nothing short of a positive and complete verification of the unification of current physics paradigms of single field theory (SOFT) in light of recently published observational data in astronomy. An article by Sabine Hossenfelder and Stacey S. McGaugh, titled " Is Dark Matter Real?', has just appeared in the August 2018 issue of Scientific American. Every physicist, astronomer, astrophysicist and cosmologist as well as everyone interested in science needs to read this article because it portends one of the greatest scientific advances in several hundred years, the complete unification of physics and science in general. Due to new observational evidence in astronomy, they have concluded that " Astrophysicists have piled up observations that are difficult to explain with Dark Matter. It is time to consider that there may be more to gravity than Einstein taught us. " But they have understated the case. In effect, the new observational data found by McGaugh and an international group of astronomers clearly shows that specifically designated dark matter particles do not exist, so the supposed Dark Matter halos around spiral galaxies do not exist and the rotational speed discrepancies in galaxy orbiting stars and star systems that go unaccounted for by normal gravity are, in fact, due to a secondary effect of normal matter within the galaxy. This finding not only challenges the present theories of gravity (Newtonian and Einsteinian), which it demonstrates are incomplete, it also blows some big logical holes in the fundamentality of the quantum theory, the Standard Model of point-particles and quantum field theories in general that seem to rule the world of modern theoretical physics. Given other recent confirmations of Einstein's general relativity, found mostly in the detection of gravitational waves that Einstein predicted a century ago, relativity theory seems on the ascendancy and quantum theory is falling behind. The time for a unified field theory that combines the best of both paradigms is at hand. 
Uploads
What's new by James (Jim) E Beichler
recognize sensed objects and things in our sensual environment and extrapolate that knowledge, via the single field theory, to develop a similar technology to sense the paranormal aspects of higher consciousness directly and electronically itself as well as the survival of consciousness. A beginning has already been made with Persinger’s ‘God Helmet’ (stimulation) and the fMRI experiments (detection) that have already demonstrated that the storage and recall of memories is magnetic vector potential in nature, which can only occur by utilizing and manipulating the four-dimensional magnetic vector A-field in which our higher consciousness exists as a mega-complexity pattern that corresponds quantum point-by-point with the three-dimensional body (matter/energy or ME-Field), mind (electric or E-field) and the conscious awareness of common consciousness (scalar magnetic or B-field) in the brain.
Einstein can even be blamed in part for these views because he got rid of the need for Newton’s concept of absolute time and space. In essence he prepared the way for the takeover of the quantum. Even toward the end of his famous Habilitationsschrift a half century earlier in 1854, where Riemann spoke of the physical possibilities of knowing and understanding the space his differential geometry explained, Bernhard Riemann stated that we could not really understand and know what space is until we conquered the smallest possible measure of space, the quanta.
The belief that Einstein rid physics of the concept of absolute space and time was then and is still thought, taught, and caressed with passion and enthusiasm as strict scientific dogma by all concerned, even though he only rendered them unnecessary to do modern post-revolutionary physics, i.e., his relativity theories and gravity. But that fact was nothing new. The non-usefulness of absolute space and time had been known since Newton’s time when all physical mechanics describing matter in motion took place in relativistic space and time without reference to Newton’s concept of absolute space. Absolute space and time were only had mathematical and philosophical importance.
Yet now, the unification of all the major physics paradigms demonstrates conclusively that quantum theory and the quantum world that it portrays is nothing more nor less than a new intuitive vision of a physical point-absolute space and time that has been derived mathematically because no such thing as a zero-point of nothing, a no-thing, an infinitely small nothingness, or such physical nonsense can exist in our physical space or time without the universe collapsing into it. Points, whether discrete or not, are just mathematical gimmicks used for conceptualization and the logical ordering of how we think.
So, the real problem for physics is ‘what is a point’ and if zero points of physical space are real then how can that reality be justified? Or is continuity our reality and the zero point just a mathematical artifact or calculational convenience? Even the original Greek Natural Philosophers argued over just this ‘point’ and never solved the point problem, so they never accepted the zero point as a valid number. For Newton, who was familiar with motion and matter in motion, this problem was translated into his spinning bucket experiment which he related to the orbit of Jupiter.
Keywords: Consciousness, unification, East, West, hyperspace, the fourth dimension, three-dimensional space, Chi, Ki, Prana, higher consciousness, modern physics, point and extension, dualisms, function and form