The First Unified Theory
The solution to Einstein's Quest
Theory - Article
The First Unified Theory
The first verified governing theory.
Unveils new levels of joy.
By Gunnar Arild Holth
Translated from Norwegian by Cindy Miller
Is it possible to come up with a new and more elegant scientific theory? In 1988 Physicist David Bohm advanced the eccentric proposal to assign “a spiritual principle” the role of cause and “matter” that of effect. The precondition for exploring this possibility is strict adherence to scientific conduct; to compile anomalies and paradoxes, formulate the “spiritual principle” as a set of characteristic assertions, and examine whether the subsequent new rules of logic solve existing problems. The result is a new reductionistic governing theory that explains all types of phenomena, complies with all known physical laws and – is confirmed by experiments. Remarkable consequences include: elementary particles of the atom become elementary ideas and elementary forces become the attraction toward joy.
Table of contents:
Theory - Article
The First Unified Theory
A contribution from a non-physicist
The atom is not the fundamental element of matter, but comprises the elements of a fundamental idea. The components registered are not material particles, but the concepts the fundamental idea is made of. The forces measured deep within the atom are not forces devoid of quality, but the attraction toward joy. The driving force in our reality is joy-maximation.
Background new theory
The statements above are culled from the new reductionistic governing theory we’ll cover in a moment. But first we must ask; why introduce a proposal for a Great Unifying Theory that's as crazy as this seems to be?
The answer is science’s requirement of rationality. It’s a theory’s superior ability to explain reality that gives it the right to dictate what is rational. (1) Today’s material paradigm has fundamental problems explaining all types of phenomena. We need a new governing theory crazy enough to solve the problems and dictate a new form of rationality.
Description vs. understanding
Albert Einstein is highly acclaimed as the originator of the Theory of Relativity and E = mc2 as well as for his contributions to Quantum Theory. “Yet”, writes physicist Brian Greene in an earlier version of his website The Elegant Universe, “many do not know that his greatest theory was never completed. (…) Einstein’s crowning work should have been a ‘unified field theory of matter’, an attempt ‘to read God’s thoughts’. Einstein was simply ahead of his time. More than half a century later, his dream of a unified theory has become the Holy Grail of modern physics.”
Physics’ contributions toward fulfilling Einstein’s Quest are impressive. Information about some parts of reality, particularly those found deep within the atom, has become extremely detailed. The search for a governing theory for understanding reality should have a greater chance of success than ever before. And yet - when viewed by a non-physicist who takes science’s own criterion for success literally – a very different impression emerges.
Reductionists sum up science’s aspirations and requirements for a Theory Of Everything / Grand Unified Theory thus: “If you understand everything about the ingredients,(…) you understand everything.” The phenomena slated to be the ingredients were physics’ elementary material particles and forces. They are very accurately described, but not a soul on the planet understands the first thing about these anomalies. For instance, science has described both gravity and the u-quark with painstaking accuracy, but doesn't understand the first thing about why separate bodies are attracted to one another or where the quarks’ properties come from. The same goes for all the other ingredients. They’re accurately described, but we don’t understand anything about them. If we take the reductionists at their word, we can sum up the situation quite simply: Since we understand nothing about the ingredients, we understand nothing.
Stephen W. Hawking has determined that science has abandoned the task of solving The Great Riddle. In A Brief History of Time he writes: “We find ourselves in a bewildering world. We want to make sense of what we see around us and to ask: What is the nature of the universe? What is our place in it, and where did it and we come from? Why is it the way it is?” But in practical terms, that’s not what science concentrates on finding out, says Hawking: “In effect, we have redefined the task of science to be the discovery of laws that will enable us to predict events (….). The question remains, however: How or why were the laws and the initial state of the universe chosen?” and “Up to now, most scientists have been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is to ask why.”
Hawking is saying science isn’t working on developing understanding. It’s working on developing descriptions. Solidly verified descriptions are excellent, per se. But solidly verified descriptions do not equate to the verification of understanding. As a result, the contribution from physics is different than many have thought. What many have believed is a solid solution to The Great Riddle is really nothing more than an extremely accurate description of It.
What makes science special as a method isn’t that it gathers information. Everyone does that. What makes it special is the obligation to verify all knowledge by examining whether the rules of logic characteristic for a hypothesis fit in explaining all types of phenomena. Today's ruling hypothesis consists of the assertion that reality is made from material elements. Therefore, the tools of logic we can build explanations with today are lifeless material elements, causes within time and space, blind physical laws, and coincidences.
After implementing these tools to explain the five main types of phenomena, the results look like this:
The verification results are negative. None of the five types of phenomenon can be explained using the tools in the material paradigm’s toolbox. The logic leads to complicated or incomprehensible explanations, the phenomena are totally bizarre. It seems the reductionists are right. When we don’t understand the ingredients, we understand nothing. Verification is supplanted by belief and hope. We end up with an edict that forces the logic upon the phenomena and raises the hypothesis’ status to that of theory even though it has never been verified with positive results.
According to Thomas Kuhn (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions), this situation is the norm prior to a paradigm shift. Normal-science bases its work on the idea science knows what the world is. The scientific community is therefore less interested in unexplainable phenomena and verification. In fact, according to Paul Feyerabend (Against Method), the situation is probably even more serious. “…we must become clear about the nature of the total phenomenon: appearance plus statement. There are not two acts – one, noticing a phenomenon, the other experiencing it with the help of the appropriate statement – but only one, (...) describing a familiar situation is, for the speaker, an event in which statement and phenomenon are firmly glued together.” And this in no way reflects negatively on normal-science. On the contrary; continued support of prevailing hypotheses during periods of fundamental problems is crucial in establishing the paradigm’s true potential.
But if the problems persist, it’s time to take these unexplainable phenomena seriously and use them as the foundation for what Kuhn calls revolutionary-science.
The task, in other words, is to look for a hypothesis that can be verified with positive results. We’re looking for something that breaches the rules of logic that today define what is rational (reason). Or, as Niels Bohr once told his colleague Wolfgang Pauli: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.”
Traditionally, efforts to solve the Great Riddle have followed two different strategies. One has dominated science up to now, and is referred to here as the matter-based strategy. The other has dominated religion and mysticism. For the sake of clarity, I call it the idea-based strategy. In the 1980’s physicist David Bohm suggested applying scientific methods to the idea-based strategy. The reason for this rather drastic proposal was the accumulation of anomalies /unexplainable phenomena. Normal-science had had ample time and resources to solve the problems, but hadn't succeeded. In his view, the time had come for revolutionary-science. And he put forth a specific proposal.
The Institute of Physics’ student association at the University of Oslo, invited Norwegian author Erik Dammann to open a discussion on this topic on May 3, 1988. There he introduced Bohm’s entreaty saying: “Indeed, one can say everything I’ve talked about points toward an inversion of the relationship between spirit and matter as it has been understood in science: While spirit has traditionally been discussed as being a result of material processes in the individual brain, now being discussed is a universal spiritual principle that is both unlimited and superior to material processes. According to David Bohm, it then becomes natural to imagine mankind’s spirit as having sprung out of, or as an expression of, one such spiritual principle. – ‘Let us take these ideas seriously’, says Bohm: ‘Let us explore it!’”
The search for a crazy theory
OK. Let’s look for a new theory the way Bohm proposes we should. I’ve formulated his “universal spiritual principle” as “an entity of infinite Consciousness and Intelligence”. I’ve also given it the status of Single Principle in anticipation of it embodying everything necessary to fulfill the requirement of being the cause for all effects. Here it is:
An entity of infinite CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE is THE CORE of REALITY. IT has always existed (2), will always exist, and is the cause for all effects.
Utilizing a similar starting point, religions’ efforts in explaining reality have produced good explanations for the following types of phenomena: intricate design (the first living cell, species, ecological systems, etc.), ordinary idea-based phenomena (consciousness, intelligence, ideas, feelings, etc.), and extraordinary idea-based phenomena (telepathy, synchronicity, healing, miracles, and so on). But when it comes to the specific riddles physics has described with impressive accuracy, they’ve fallen brutally short. If science is to employ this strategy, it must be discovered whether the new starting point has logical consequences that can help solve these problems.
(For the time being, take note of this: The assumption about THE CORE gives us a cause for the existence of the universe. This was one of the things the old theory’s logic couldn’t give us. To be better, a new had to have a logic that could.)
Having first said A, it’s simple enough to get to B: With CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE as the starting point, master ideas are formed. These master ideas are realized automatically and create reality. (They are realized automatically and create reality because they are reality. Reality is not material, it is the realization of an idea.)
Instead of this formulation, I will be using the extended version below. The reason needn’t be covered here
Consequence 1- Basic Function (Extended version.)
With CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE as the starting point, master ideas comprised of two parts are formed. The first part describes Intended Creation. The second describes the possibilities for its realization. As the master idea describes reality, so becomes the universe.
The principle underlying this assertion is that the ideas formed by THE CORE OF REALITY are realized automatically and are the cause of all effects. The ideas about the fundamentals are called master ideas. But here we must stop for a moment. When it comes to ideas, all of us have a lot of experience. As far as we can tell from those experiences, ideas are incapable of creating anything tangible. Before we can continue, we must be able to understand the assertion in a way that doesn’t conflict with our everyday experiences. Suppose then, there are two types of ideas.
The one type of idea describes everything necessary to define a reality. Now suppose, because it’s the only type of idea which describes a universe, it’s also the only type that can be Causes, i.e. it’s the only type able to realize itself and create a universe. A master idea, then, is the type of idea that describes and creates a universe.
The other type of idea describes what we need to know to navigate the reality the master idea has defined and created. It could be ideas that convey something of the dangers in this reality, of the possibilities it holds, how to attain one’s goals, what’s logical and what’s not, what’s enjoyable and what’s not, and so on. These ideas do not create a reality; they are just law-abiding effects of our master idea. We can call this type of idea spin-off ideas.
Spin-off ideas are no problem to explain. They fit in nicely with our everyday experiences.
The master idea actually poses no problem, either. It’s common knowledge that the physical reality we inhabit resembles our mental images of it. With the old theory, the explanation for the resemblance is that the physical world has made these images look the way they do. With the new hypothesis, the explanation is that the mental images made the physical world become the way it has become. At present, we don’t know whether our reality is idea-based or not. But even at this early stage, we can see this proposal of a new understanding harmonizes well with our everyday experiences.
(Notice how an ancient paradox disappears: Behind the limits of everything we can see in the universe, there must be something more, and behind this “more”, there must be something more still, … . In short, the universe can’t be limited in its dimensions. And an idea simply outlines a condition, a principle. Principles have no dimensional limits.)
Now. One important characteristic of reality is that it doesn’t change from moment to moment. In this way, the universe as we know it is highly stable. Having put forth the assertion this stable universe is created from a master idea, we must also assume this idea must be one with a specific content. Which begs the question, what sort of content? What would the infinite CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE come up with to make a MASTER IDEA out of?
Because CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE automatically becomes a participant in the reality IT creates, IT will choose the most enjoyable and fulfilling ideas to create reality from. This brings us from B to C:
Consequence 2 – Governing Force
With CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE as the starting point for the formation of ideas, the attraction toward joy becomes the governing force and joy-maximation the steering principle for creation.
(Notice that forces are now explained; another central phenomenon the old theory couldn’t explain and that, to be a better theory, the new had to be able to explain better.)
Creating joy is something we know a whole lot about. To reach this end, we usually try to arrange our surroundings so it’s enjoyable for us to live in them. We see ourselves as kids and try to organize the world into an enjoyable playground. If we take a look at the world around us, it seems CONSCIOUSNESS & INTELLIGENCE maximizes joy by going creatively amok. IT acts as though all individuals share consciousness and are therefore capable of sharing the joy experienced by every other individual – IT maximizes joy by making joy-guaranteed KIDS and PLAYGROUNDS in myriads of forms.
If THE CORE not only creates the world from ideas, but from a MASTER IDEA that’s maximally joyful, then reality should be ultimately JOYFUL with no effort on our part. Experience tells us this isn’t the case. Very little can be done here without trials and tribulations, and the most salient feature of joy is its habitual scarcity. On this point, science is brutally explicit: Phenomena are everything. Theories are nothing. This leaves only two possibilities. Either this draft of an idea-based theory of reality has already proven itself wrong, or there’s something missing in its toolbox.
We’ve come to one of the biggest surprises of an idea-based reality: Master ideas create in their image. (Consistent with the master idea’s content.) We don’t usually think about it, but activity is the application of a specific idea. Activity - the application of the idea the goal is out of reach. Whereas applying the idea to wait and receive (a goal) – is practicing the idea the goal will be given us.
We were at C and can move on to D:
Consequence 3 – New Logic.
Only applied master ideas create reality. (Theoretical ideas, or master ideas which are not put into practice, create no reality.)
An idea-based reality is deaf and blind to theories or unapplied master ideas. It reacts only to ideas we use. And it doesn’t matter whether or not we know we have and are practicing a master idea. When we don’t understand the idea-based logic, we choose an active attitude with the intention of getting a hold of what we desire, hence we practice an idea where happiness is not here, but there – thus launching a reality where everything we desire is spread out, a scattered universe – a physical universe with time and space:
But when we do understand the new logic and choose a fundamental receptive attitude in acknowledgement of what we desire is given us, we’re practicing the only idea where joy is here – and launch a reality where what we desire is gathered together, a unified universe:
(Notice how science has described an event they’ve dubbed the Big Bang; an event that created our universe spread out in time and space. But it hasn’t been able to explain why it took place. With the logic of the idea-based understanding, we’ve just found a solution to this central aspect of The Great Riddle.)
The master idea we practice is a boomerang. It comes back and hits us with a reality. With the fundamental receptive attitude, we create an ultimate and sublime REALITY with no divisions or separation. With the complementary attitude, active, we create a limited Reality spread throughout time and space.
The key to both creation and joy is understanding. And here the word understanding doesn’t refer solely to the theoretical acceptance of certain relationships. In this arena, we’re talking about applied understanding; understanding that’s concretized when we act in accordance with these relationships. Since joy is the ultimate goal, we can formulate the relationship thus: In an idea-based reality with the applied understanding of idea-based logic, the result is the realization of joy in its full format. Without the applied understanding of idea-based logic, the result is the realization of joy in a vastly reduced format.
When the world seems less magical and enjoyable than we might wish, it could be because there’s so little applied understanding of the master idea’s part 2, the ability to realize Intended Creation. In addition there is the master idea’s part 1, Intended Creation. This provides us with additional opportunities to create realities that are even less joyful. The less we understand about the joyful Intended Creation, the less joyful and fulfilling the master idea we practice becomes. And for every further reduction in the level of understanding in our private version of master idea, we unleash a private version of the shared reality that is equally reduced in joy.
There’s reason to assume, both from the theory and from experiments where the practiced level of understanding has been consciously manipulated, that this declining level of understanding leads to equally deteriorated levels of joy. That this has been a downtrend from the original and best limited level of joy available in our physical version of the universe. And – that what we call “a normal life” appears to be among the lowest of these levels. There’s also reason to assume that, when we’re confined to this physical reality, more lasting improvements in our level of joy are upwardly restricted to the best limited level of joy available in the physical version of the universe.
With this we have a rough draft of a new crazy theory. It seems to agree well with our everyday experiences. The question is whether it’s “crazy enough” to explain all five types of phenomena. Particularly those found in the depths of physics. The time has come for its verification. That is, to see whether the tools of logic in the new hypothesis’ toolbox can be used to explain the different types of phenomena.
This time around, the tools we can use to construct explanations are living consciousness and intelligence, idea-based causes, the attraction toward joy, and intended purpose.
Verification I and II:
Elementary phenomena / other peculiarities of physics
Since this is all new, we’ll start with the basics. All around us, the reality we see and take measure of has two distinct characteristics. The one encompasses the creatures and formations regarded as typical and easily perceptible. The other, the atoms from which all this is constructed. The creatures and formations fit well as expressions of Intended Creation. The atoms fit well as the limited possibilities for realization.
Here we must add something that's decisive in science but unknown to most laymen. No experiment in physics has ever actually confirmed that the atom is material in the sense of “thing”, as in “physical substance”. What experiments have shown us is that the atom is a collection of small stable entities regulated by a set of forces.
The idea-based understanding asserts that forces exist solely in connection with ideas. According to Governing Force, there is only one fundamental force; namely the attraction toward joy. The more joy an idea facilitates, the greater the force of attraction.
These concepts are clearly significant for constructing idea-based explanations about the relationship between ideas and forces. It’s tempting to turn them into a tool better suited for eliciting details:
The idea-based explanatory model
Every idea that increases or diminishes joy is accompanied by a force. The force’s strength is identical to the amount of joy and its direction is determined by whether joy is increased or decreased.
Getting back to the matter at hand; the peculiarities of the atom. Atoms are the second part of the master idea. This gives us:
The particles in the atom are the ideas involved in defining the limited possibilities for realization.
The forces in the atom are the attraction toward the joy evoked by the ideas in the atom.
Under the material paradigm, the particles and forces have been accurately described. But we’ve never understood them. We couldn’t answer questions about why they’re here and why they have the properties and peculiarities they have. They’ve been regarded as phenomena with no rational origins; miracles, in other words. With an idea-based paradigm, we can understand them and answer these kinds of questions.
One of the atom’s many peculiar characteristic traits is the pairs of equally strong forces and counter-forces in action between the particles. The various particles are attracted to one another, but they don’t collide – they’re all held at a certain distance from one another by equally strong counter-forces. The tools of logic in the material understanding can provide no answers for this strange phenomenon – these forces simply pop up out of nowhere, further examples of miracles. With idea-based thinking, these phenomena have a rational explanation.
Atoms aren’t collections of separate particles that have been strewn in every direction by the Big Bang, to later find one another by pure coincidence and then become stable groupings thanks to miraculously convenient forces and counter-forces. They are the second part of the limited Reality’s master idea, a collection of elementary ideas which together form a meaningful statement.
The atom’s balanced pairs of force/counter-force: The atom is a statement comprised of elementary ideas that together define a fixed coherent content and is therefore accompanied by forces in static balance.
A simple example of a statement: Here is a big piece of candy, but du can’t have it. In this statement it’s plain enough to see the idea that sparks the attraction toward joy and the idea that hinders the possibility of attaining that joy. The same goes for the balance between them and the result of that balance – you won’t be getting this piece of candy.
A more complex, but more correct explanation of the specific statement within the atom can look like this: 1) The limited Reality is formed from the ultimate REALITY and both realities are present at the same time. 2) When the ideas that provide the possibility for joy and the ideas that rescind that possibility are present at the same time, the forces toward and away from joy will be present simultaneously and thus form a static balance.
According to physics, all the particles and forces we find in the physical universe were present when the Big Bang occurred. With an idea-based understanding, this means all the ideas that were present when the limited Reality was formed from the sublime REALITY are also present in our universe today. Including the ideas that define unlimited realization.
Let’s take a quick look at one atom, and for simplicity’s sake, the 2H-atom (the hydrogen isotope deuterium) Figure 3. Outermost, the electron (E) in its sphere, within this, the nuclear core with neutron and proton and their quarks, the elementary ideas that occur as two opposing and intriguingly complementary types; the up-quark (U) and the down-quark (D).
In the idea-based way of thinking, the 2H-atom is like a sentence comprised of two phrases; the neutron and the proton. Each of these phrases is again comprised of a triplet of elementary concepts, the quarks. Earlier, we discovered which concepts define the possibilities for realization. There are only two of them, too; the receptive attitude and the active attitude. These, too, are complementary. It’s tempting to interpret this as straightforward as it seems. The up-quark (U) is the concept of an active (A) attitude and the down-quark (D) is the concept of a receptive (R) attitude.
These interpretations of the quarks can be confirmed by experiments. (See Experiment 2 under heading Experiments.)
Phrases of this type, the neutrons and protons found freely in nature, share a striking characteristic. Each of them contains one of each of the complementary ideas (R) and (A) and in addition, one more of one or the other. What kind of grammatical acrobatics are we witness to?
The principle for the construction of concepts.
Every concept used is dependent upon its opposite (complimentary concept) for its definition and therefore occurs together with its complementary concept.
While customarily we simply say a receptive (R) attitude, according to the principle above, we’re actually saying: “Of the two complementary concepts of the attitudes receptive (R) and active (A), I’m now referring specifically to the receptive (R)”. In other words, R and A to define the concepts + one more of one or the other to show which of the concepts is now in use – a triplet. RAR or RAA. The neutron with its DUU triplet (RAA) represents the ideas that define unlimited realization. The proton with its DUD triplet (RAR) represents the ideas which define limited realization.
Because all the ideas that existed when the limited Reality was formed from the sublime REALITY continue to exist in our universe, we can take things one step further. “The limited Master Idea is formed from the sublime MASTER IDEA by adding a supplement.” The sublime MASTER IDEA, MISBL (SBL for sublime) is comprised of Intended Creation plus the ideas which unleash unlimited realization (the idea of a receptive attitude; RAR). The limited Master Idea, MILIM (LIM for limited) also contains this. But the original RAR (now the neutron) in the second half of the Master Idea has acquired the supplement RAA (now the proton), the active attitude. The result is a very limited possibility for realization.
It’s reasonable to assume the supplement came about through the application of the idea of an active attitude without understanding how this kind of decision brings very undesirable consequences in an idea-based reality: - Big Bang and limited Reality where the desired goal is placed outside immediate reach. In other words, the supplement was added in a situation much like todays.
Below is a sketch of the relationship between the sublime MASTER IDEA (MISBL) and the limited Master Idea (MILIM). I’ve arranged it so we see the system with the supplement as well as where the atom comes in. (In the figure, RAA is also included in Intended Creation. The reason for this will be covered later.)
Now for the electron. Start with the entire atom, and for simplicity’s sake, take the 2H –atom (a variant of Hydrogen, the smallest element).
The 2H-atom is a name given to a small group of elementary ideas (and their accompanying forces) that together define limited realization (of Intended Creation).
The contribution from each atom is the one tiny packet of possibilities for the limited realization of Intended Creation that can be combined with a second and a third and so on to a vast number of atoms. The vehicle for each tiny package of possibilities is – the electron. At the same time, the electron differs from the core particles in that it is non-local. That is, it isn’t to be found at any one particular point, but is spread around the core. With that, we can surmise what the electron represents.
The electron: In idea-based thinking, the electron represents the consequences of the elementary ideas in the atom (in the form of the ability to bind with other atoms and thereby realize Intended Creation).
As stated earlier, the nuclear forces, both strong and weak, accompany the particles/ideas in the atom. Now it’s possible to be more specific about them as well. The forces originate from concepts which, combined, formulate ideas of consequence for the realization of Intended Creation and with that, the possibilities for joy. Even in the atom, where the possibility for sublime JOY is very limited, the attraction toward sublime JOY is present.
The strong nuclear force appears where concepts are combined, constituting ideas which advance or inhibit the possibility of sublime CREATION (sublime JOY).
Therefore, because they define the possibilities for sublime CREATION, and with this sublime JOY, the strong nuclear force appears only in connection with neutron and proton, specifically the quarks that express the ideas of the attitudes active (A) and receptive (R) – the attitudes that decide the realization of joy.
Weak nuclear forces appear where concepts are combined to become ideas which advance or inhibit the possibility for limited Creation.
Therefore, because they define the possibilities for limited Creation and with that, limited Joy, the weak nuclear forces appear throughout the atom in its entirety and are expressed via the electron’s affinity for other atoms; the ability to combine several atoms and thereby contribute to the limited realization of Intended Creation.
We’re now ready to expand this from the 2H-atom to the whole range of elements. According to physics, the elementary particles are brought together in the constellations we recognize (neutrons, protons, atoms, and the series of 90+ elements) due to the accompanying forces. In idea-based thinking where forces are the attraction toward joy, this means the elementary ideas form the constellations we recognize because these are necessary steps on the road to realizing joy. – The whole array of elements, including their isotopes, has been amassed because this provides so many more opportunities to realize limited Creation.
Now we can apply the idea-based understanding to explain other central concepts from physics.
Mass: Mass is the ability to realize Intended Creation that’s not in use.
Energy: Energy is the ability to realize Intended Creation that is in use.
In the shift from a material-based to an idea-based paradigm, we see a new world emerge. Where before we saw a lifeless and meaningless world, we now see life and purpose. Where before we had accurate descriptions of phenomena, we now have understanding. And the decisive factor for being on solid scientific ground, - where before we had miracles or paradoxes and phenomena we accepted without demanding rational causes, we now have explanation and rationality.
With the two concepts that comprise the main focus in physics in place (mass and energy), gravitational force comes knocking; the solidly described, but miraculous attraction between separate bodies.
Gravitational force / Gravity: Since all entities of limited possibilities for realization (atoms) have mass, and the prerequisite for joy-maximation in limited Creation lies in being able to combine several of these entities, all entities containing mass are accompanied by a force which attracts other entities with mass.
And idea-based explanations of three other oddities in physics should be included. The first is the conversion from mass to energy and vice versa, something once thought impossible in a material world, but which we’ve been forced to accept without rational explanation.
E = mc2: In idea-based understanding, mass and energy share the same basis. “Mass is the ability to realize Intended Creation that's not in use.” “Energy is the ability to realize Intended Creation that is in use.” With the same basis, the conversion of mass to energy and energy to mass becomes easily explainable.
Quants are a central property of what we call matter. Today, no one knows why energy is exchanged exclusively in the form of standard-sized packets (quants), but we’ve learned to accept it. With the new idea-based understanding, we can explain it.
Quantum theory: “Energy is the ability to realize Intended Creation that is in use.” In limited Creation, quantification will be a characteristic trait of all energy because the ability to realize Intended Creation is available only in limited quantities, “quantum”.
Now for relativity, the characteristic trait of reality wherein all laws of physics are perfectly obeyed regardless of frame of reference. The phenomenon called relativity is confirmed by science, but the consequences are paradoxical. If, for example, a horizontally positioned flagpole is travelling fast enough, it will fit inside a stationery mail box. (3) And if one teenage twin was sent out in a rocket travelling fast enough, upon returning to Earth he’d still be a teenager while his twin was an old-age pensioner. Relativity is law-abiding, but impossible to understand and difficult to accept with material logic. With the idea-based logic it becomes understandable and natural.
The Theory of Relativity: In limited Creation, matter, time, space and the laws of physics are not absolutes, but properties defined by the master idea. Every individual and each entity of consciousness and intelligence becomes the center of its own idea-based reality. Matter, time, space, and all laws of physics are thus portrayed anew for each individual or entity. We end up with countless versions of the shared universe where all laws are perfectly effectuated.
The above is important in many contexts, among others Experiment 1, which in praxis is a brief alteration of a private version of the shared reality. Matter, time, and space are pliable circumstances. The master idea being practiced dictates the version of reality they help shape.
Matter, time and space: The greater part of matter (mass) is the ability to realize Intended Creation that’s not in use - time and space are the ability that's still available, dispersed.
The purely technical consequence is that we live in a universe where a great deal of Intended Creation is locked away in mass and what isn’t locked up is separated in time and space. The emotional consequence consists of a life marked by greatly reduced joy and the burden of having to help scrape together the vital necessities spread throughout time and space.
Yet another consequence: The forces involved in the realization of Intended Creation are the attraction toward joy. Physics’ measuring instruments are unable to register them. They are evidenced only via the resulting creation.
I chose to include this last consequence because it explains why we’ve become stranded in the material understanding of reality. The “sensor” in every kind of physical measuring instrument is comprised of the instrument’s atoms. What is registered and measured are the changes wrought upon these atoms by the atoms being measured. The limited Reality is constructed from a Master Idea comprised of two parts: 1) Intended Creation and 2) the ability to realize Intended Creation. The atom is the second part, the ability to realize Intended Creation. This of course means the objective measuring instruments can’t register or measure any of Intended Creation or anything whatsoever of the sublime REALITY. They can only measure the second part of the Master Idea which has resulted in the limited Reality. Even there they can make only quantitative measurements; they’re incapable of registering anything about qualities in the form of idea content or joy. In other words, these physical measuring instruments are doomed to overlook consciousness, intelligence, ideas, joy, purpose, and causes. In short, the measuring instruments are doomed to overlook most of reality and almost everything we find significant in our lives.
Verification III: Intricate design
The attempts to explain intricate design with material logic have one thing in common; explanations have had to be based on coincidences. The more complicated the design, the more the explanation has had to defy statistic improbability. With idea-based logic this sort of thing is unnecessary.
The first living cell, species, ecosystems: The “machinery” of living organisms, their physical and physiological design, provides a chance to place important details in the new hypothesis. With idea-based logic, the formation of the first living cell, the development of species and all types of creatures is a natural consequence of Intended Creation. Here in the limited Reality this comes about by assembling the limited ability to realize Intended Creation (atoms) one at a time. The steering is intelligent and joy-maximizing. Communication and coordination take place unhindered in the infinite CONSCIOUSNESS. The result is the physical design of the cell, the specific species and its niche, and the ecosystem of species and niches.
Male and female, ♂ and ♀: In biology we find the fascinating design of two particularly elegant masterpieces; male and female. What she and he can accomplish together has always been of more than slight interest to us. And it becomes no less interesting when viewed from an idea-based perspective. The idea-based model of the atom presented earlier can now be depicted as in Figure 5 below.
The complementary characteristics of the masculine (♂) and the feminine (♀) bear a striking resemblance to the attitudes active and receptive. Male and female, when united in sexual reproduction, have the ability to realize copies of themselves. And when this union takes place it releases a lot of joy, as is characteristic when we practice creation in accordance with idea-based logic.
It clearly makes no difference whether ♂ and ♀ turn up together in the atom, in Intended Creation, or on a pier. The possibility of joy is literally in the air. The attraction’s present no matter where they pop up. With that, it appears the qualities of the atomic forces can be read from the sexual attraction we experience in our world of flesh and blood. The forces in the atom are the same type of attraction as the attraction we experience toward sexual joy.
From there it’s relatively easy to explain the unrivaled status of sexual joy: Intended Creation, when experienced through the act of receiving is in every way superior to the experience of Intended Creation experienced through activity (that of gathering or producing). The level of joy is much greater. (This is confirmed by Experiment 2)
Take another look at figure 4. As mentioned, RAA, now ♀♂♂, is included in Intended Creation. It’s the attraction between ♀ and ♂ which leads us to surmise the idea active, ♂, is involved in Intended Creation. It’s the master idea’s parts I and II together which creates ultimate JOY and is the basis for mutual attraction. And an active attitude, ♂, is the prerequisite for enabling the selection of maximally joyful ideas to be used in Intended Creation from among the potentially endless plethora of ideas.
Verification IV: Ordinary idea-based phenomena
The attempts to explain spirit/life or idea-based phenomena as being bi-products of matter and material processes have one thing in common; the explanations must be based on lifeless material components. The question then becomes: At what point does life arise from lifeless components? Is it when two lifeless components are put together? Is it when one million lifeless components are put together? 100 billion components? Whatever number we multiply by zero, the end result is still zero. The logic in the material explanation for spirit/life is nonexistent and has been replaced with belief. With idea-based logic, these things are easier to explain.
The spirit / matter paradox: Matter, in the context meaning physical thing, does not exist. Everything is formed from ideas. The entire universe – the atom and everything comprised of atoms – is a product of the mind. The old paradox is solved.
Consciousness, intelligence, ideas, feelings, memory: In the new hypothesis, the formation of consciousness, intelligence, ideas and feelings no longer have the rabbit-out-of-the-hat origin they did with the material understanding. Of these phenomena, the first two, consciousness and intelligence, are the fundamental tools in the idea-based toolbox and the rest are what one can expect to construct with these tools.
Sensory perception and the formation of ideas: As we know, science has found the “sensor” in our sensory organs to be the same in principle as the sensor in any highly responsive physical measuring instrument. I.e. it’s the sensory organs’ physical construction which guarantees they’re able to register only the limited possibilities for realization and none of Intended Creation. In addition, we know the signals from sensory organs to the brain are transported exclusively in the form of only one kind of electric impulse. That is to say, all the signals the brain receives about the world are utterly identical and in every way meaningless. Sooner or later these signals must be assigned meaning. With the new hypothesis, we can explain how this takes place. Out there we have the world. Here in our consciousness we have the image of it (the master idea with Intended Creation and its definition of the ability to realize Intended Creation). Where our senses show us contours and formations without meaning, we assign meaning based on what we’ve understood from the image itself. Not as a spontaneous translation, but as a process of recollection. The ideas we try to recall aren’t culled from the brain locally, but are imported from THE CORE via direct contact. From THE CORE, communication always flows out in the format of the sublime MASTER IDEA. We receive in the format which corresponds to our level of understanding.
The contents of spin-off ideas: The relationship between master idea and spin-off ideas is law-abiding. All ideas and feelings, every form of reasoning and logic we develop, whether related to religion, science, social context or our personal lives, are true reflections of the master idea we practice.
Take note of this law-abiding regularity, it's key in the set-ups for the experiments.
Verification V: Extraordinary idea-based phenomena
Common for attempts at explaining unusual idea-based phenomena using material logic is that they have to be explained away. There is no logic, no tools in the material toolbox that can explain these kinds of phenomenon. Everything from mind reading to near-death experiences or experiences of extreme Joy must be regarded as non-existent or irrelevant. With idea-based logic it becomes easier.
ESP – communication independent of time and space: The basis for reality is THE CORE OF REALITY. When reality is “one-minded” in this manner, it doesn’t much matter whether individuals are separated by time and space.
Support and Synchronicity: Support is the inherent provision of our needs, including joy and fulfillment. Synchronicity is the coordination of events necessary for the implementation of this support. Together they make up what we can call Inherent Support, reality’s innate sustention of all creatures. When we practice a bad master idea, Inherent Support decreases. When we practice a better master idea, nature showers us with what we need, things fall in place and are made available to us seemingly as if by magic.
Miracles: It would seem readily apparent miracles are the result of shorter or longer intervals of practicing a level of understanding as high as or higher than the one which unleashed the limited Reality (our universe in time and space) and the laws which apply there. Miracles become glimpses of a world where matter and physical laws are no longer unyielding limitations, but pliable circumstances dictated by an entity that lavishes support and joy in quantities that correspond to the level of understanding being practiced.
Death, near-death experiences: Our personal core of consciousness and intelligence is anchored in the CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE of the eternal CORE OF REALITY. We live forever, nothing can be done about it. To die is to live on.
Different levels of joy: To explain the very different levels of joy described in the experiments and elsewhere, the starting point is that we live in a joy-maximizing reality. The sublime REALITY with full INHERENT SUPPORT and ONENESS with all things is available always. However, it’s the level of understanding we practice that determines how much of IT we experience. When understanding diminishes, the level of the joy experienced will also diminish. If understanding of both Intended Creation and idea-based logic is lost, there’s very little joy to be had because we will have then lost nearly all INHERENT SUPPORT and barely, if ever, experience ONENESS. And it isn’t merely the experience itself that changes. Our private version of the shared reality will withdraw a great deal of its built-in support. And vice-versa; as understanding increases, so too will joy and all the rest. (Confirmed by Experiments 1 and 2)
Verification through experiments
New paradigms lead to new types of experiments. The experiments already referred to in this article are short-term manipulations of the master idea. Both result in brief flashes of great expanses of joy and confirm central points in the new hypothesis. Among these are the ultimately joyful Creative Intention and the existence of the elementary ideas in the atom. The results of the experiments are posted under the heading Experiments along with instructions to enable anyone who wishes to perform them to do so themselves.
This then, is the whole crazy hypothesis. And in the same manner as we’ve seen employed in the examples above, we can now review the questions which, according to Hawking, science has given up trying to answer. We can answer why separate bodies attract each other, why there are particles in the atom, why there are forces between these particles, why all energy is released in regulated packages, that is to say “quants”, and so on. We can also see what forces are and what particles are. And with the same understanding that solves these small riddles (types I and II), we can also solve the classic paradox of “spirit and matter”. Matter, defined as physical thing doesn’t exist. Everything physical is stable ideas created by spirit. Phenomena in the categories intricate design (III), ordinary idea-based phenomena (IV), and extraordinary idea-based phenomena (V) are all easily explained. With this, we have the first hypothesis which explains all types of phenomena (I-V) based on one and the same principle. Science’s yardstick for verification is simple enough: The more of reality it is possible to explain using the logic characteristic of a hypothesis, the more certain is the hypothesis.
Consequently, this outline of a new reductionistic governing theory is not only crazy. It looks like it’s crazy enough. It looks like we have The First Unified Theory (4).
Figure 6 below illustrates the new theory’s explanatory capabilities.
The First Unified Theory explains all main types of phenomena. (Groups I, II, III, IV and V)
1) Rationality, often called common sense or logic, is not constant. It is inextricably tied to the yardstick science uses to discern solid hypotheses from less solid: The hypothesis that can explain more of reality’s phenomenon with its characteristic logic is the more solid. When an older, established theory proves to be less solid than a new hypothesis, it is science’s duty to abandon the old and adopt the new. In doing so, it abandons the logic/rationality characteristic for the old and adopts the logic/rationality characteristic for the new. As was the case when the old geocentric planetary theory (with the Earth as the center of the universe) was abandoned for the new heliocentric theory (where the sun is the center for the planets’ movements and the Earth rotates on its own axis). At that time, the starting point for the two hypotheses with their dissimilar logic/rationality was the two different interpretations of the phenomenon of planetary movement; “Heavenly bodies travel in such a manner that the movements, when seen from the Earth, have the appearance of near circular orbits.” This time, the starting point is two different interpretations of the phenomenon called the atom; “A collection of small stable entities regulated by a set of forces.”
2) Whether the origin of everything is matter or spirit, we probably have to accept it is eternal. The alternative would be that everything has arisen from nothing. This doesn’t seem scientifically acceptable.
3) Imagine there are two doors in this mailbox, one on each end, and that these doors can be opened and closed by remote control. The reason the thought experiment is set up this way is so we can open the doors to let the hurtling flagpole in the mailbox and then, for the tiniest fraction of a second, close both doors (before, for the mailbox’s sake, reopening them). During this tiniest of moments we will have captured the entire flagpole inside the mailbox.
4) In the old paradigm, all the elementary material phenomena are like miracles in that they are phenomena with no explainable causes. In the new paradigm, none of the elementary material phenomena are miracles. Instead, we have a new miracle: The entity of CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE. Yet the situation is improved. The concept of “matter” is altogether a theoretical construction. Throughout history, there are no experiences (including experiments) that can confirm that matter, meaning “physical thing”, exists. The existence of CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE, on the other hand, can be confirmed by our everyday experiences. When in addition, the new theory based on this entity solves The Great Riddle, it is solidly verified.