Thus spake Zarathustra.. ( The God of Light )!!

As of the 17TH OF June, 2013 — 196005 people have read the prequel here, now feast your eyes on the sequel. This total number of hits was achieved in a mere 78 DAYS!

M&H

 

Beholding the work of the Creative Power…

It’s done..

 

HABEMUS     IDEAM     VERAM

 

We who live in the 21st century and are witness to the marvels of science quite often overlook the simple fact that the ancient sages whether  religiously inclined or more on the secular side, seem to be on the right track when they depicted numerous writings conveying their ideas and concepts involving the idea of everything.

 

MAYAN    MYTHOLOGY   AND     RELIGION.

 

      In accordance with statements made with Mayan elders during the late 20th century the possibility arises that the Mayan people moved north, crossing today’s USA, Canada; and having reached Alaska they reached the Bering Straight, and following the coastline down the continent, crossing today’s China and further on moving along the coast, south west, reaching India, continuing west to the Middle East and eventually reaching what is today’s “Europe”. Some of the tribes spread south-west from the Middle East and reached Egypt.

Unfortunately there is little paleontological evidence to support this claim of the contemporary Mayan elders.

Their prophesies speak of our need to recognise our spiritual energy focussed on the sacred sites of all religions. For example, The Sikh Golden Temple in Amritsa, the Temple Mount and Wailing Wall, the Ka’aba in Mecca, Stonehenge in Wiltshire, St Peter’s in Rome, Bodhgaya the place of Buddha’s Enlightenment (Mayan Prophecies, p.52)

Having passed the twenty- first of December 2012 it is obvious that the earth was not destructed. In hindsight one could comment that this idea was fabricated more in Hollywood, and popular media sensationalist tabloids, then being the prophesies of the Mayan elders eg: Papal Votan 900AD).

(ibid p.67)  “The prophesies are not of a terminal catastrophe, but of an evolving earth and of a spiritual evolution of the people who inhabit it.”

What was kept secret: “the prophets predicted a time when the ancient hidden knowledge would be recovered and given to the world by a future generation of elders and timekeepers.” (ibid p.43)

What was kept secret was first revealed in Chichen Itza by Hunbatz Men.

Ipso facto, the dawn on the December 12, 2012 would herald a new age with the rising of the first sun or new era that would cover the next 5,126 years, leaving behind” the Age of Belief”  and the coming and gradual attainment of the new era (sun) – henceforth known as The Age of Knowledge (ibid p.111)

This secret knowledge had been hidden by the Mayan elders for approx. 500 years. This secret knowledge is expressed with uncanny perspicuity by Gerald Benedict (ibid p.13) “If one word could sum up the Mayan concept it is the word “Energy”. A single, all pervading energy to support the entire observable universe, all natural phenomena and life; and equally explicit “ For the monotheistic biblical religions, this unified energy is known as God”. The Maya priests also carefully distinguished between the two theological concepts “Universal Soul” and “Individual Soul”. Soul, or sprit or energy, is energy endowed with intelligence, or where the spirit became flesh – in simple terms it is where humanity embodied by the archetype of Jesus Christ became endowed with the acquisition of intelligence.

As mentioned before the contemporary Mayan elder Hunbatz Men elucidated his thoughts on the coming of this new era of disclosure, leading us to enlightenment (ibid.118)

By initiation, humanity will recover an atavistic perception of the universe. The prophesy recalls us to the central Mayan precepts that everything is energy, and of our urgent need to be conscious of it as the driving principle of the Universe, and to experience it in it’s innumerable manifestations.

THE SANSKRIT CONTRIBUTIONS

 

Concepts extracted from the Vedas and Upanishads, of ancient India espousing concepts of Brahmanism and Sanskrit writings. To the best of our knowledge and in accordance with Prof. Ben-Ami Scharfstein and as elucidated from his Magnum Opus “ A Comparative History of World Philosophy” which juxtaposes the ancient thoughts of India with those of China, and with contributions as they emerged in Western Philosophy. It was the school of Uddalaka which flourished about eight hundred BC. We find some strong difference between these traditions.  The later European philosophical tradition all powerful, the Indian tradition opposes it and the Chinese tradition puts natural forces and Heaven in god’s place. The school of Uddalaka draws the following conclusion “that which is, that subtle essence is nothing other than this universe. That is the real that is the self, that is Atman that is you.” (P59-60)   Uddalaka further more contends that the whole varied world arises and continues to exist from the invisible existent that caused the existent being and demonstrated that the existence of salt is present everywhere even though it is imperceptible and has shown that disappearance of consciousness and shall return to the imperceptible Existent. A later Indian sage by the name of Ramanuja claims that the self, the Atman is completely indistinguishable from Brahma, so that to think of them separately is in no way different, as to be under the spell of illusion (denoted by the modern definition of “Maya”)

In Sanskrit (Brahma eva idam visvam, eva idam Brahma.)

As Uddalaka instructs the concept of tat-tvam-asi to his son (which is usually translated as “that is you”) –he makes his son Shvetaketu understand.

However as Scharfstein points out this rather shows that Shvetaketu exists in the same manner as all other living organisms, that is by virtue of a subtle yet invisible essence. The author continues (pg.61) “The lesson is although existence is not perceived it is the subtle essence, the truth, the self, that is, this universe.

 

                        INDIAN PHILOSOPHY,  (BRAHMANISM)

 

With Indian philosophy began the metaphysical designation of the One, for the metaphysical world-ground, the world-soul, the Ultimate Reality. Ergo, the world conceived as reason, nous, or more personally and more anthropomorphically. The Sanskrit sages called it Atman a word of several meanings such as the self, the ego or the soul. The sages revered Atman as Immortal Light, as the Light of Lights. (Brih-ad-aranyakam). It can be seen or interpreted, as Anu meaning atom or point or conceived of monadically, ethereally, and conceived of as the hypothetical carrier of karma, as energy, as activity in its widest sense.

This various concepts of ancient Hinduism are echoed in the modern writings of the authors of Brain, Symbol and Experience (pg.304)

“The rousing of Kundalini is the one and only way to the attaining of divine wisdom, super-conscious perception, realisation of the spirit. The rousing may come in various ways…through love for god, through the mercy of perfected sages, or through the power of the analytical will of the philosopher. Wherever there has been any manifestation of what is ordinarily called supernatural power, or wisdom, there a little current of the Kundalini must have found its way in the Sushumna (central axis). “Vivekananda 1956…58, as quoted by  …McLaughlin, MacManus and d’Aquili. To end this section we quote the ancient aphorism nihil ex-nihilo…nothing comes from nothing.

But ere we leave the Sanskrit sages, we like to quote Prof. Haisch (The Purpose Guided Universe) “Our human nature has both a material side subject to physical laws, birth, death as well as a non-material immortal spirit or soul, which is actually the more essential side because it is made of the same stuff as the ultimate source, which is generally regarded as god.”

 

                                                JUDAISM

 

Clearly, Sanskrit writings suggest a clearly comprehensive reality and the individual human being. Judean Theology makes this revelation by far more explicit and shows that the ancient writers of the Talmudic-Midrash literatures explicitated with utmost perspicuity the following – the identification of God with the most “Holy Place” (Machon Kadosh). This marginal usage soon lapsed into oblivion and machon became the general designation of God, excluding any spacial limitation. The identification of God with space can also be found in the book of Mishnah. (Zohar1:14b, 263b, 207a)

From the Talmudic Midrash writings emerges a further identification, that of space and that of light. In Kabbalistic writings the Infinite Holy One whose light originally permeated the whole universe, withdrew His own Light and concentrated it above His own substance. This apotheosis of light became a fundamental characteristic of neo-Platonism and medieval mysticism. Even the natural philosophy of the Middle Ages still retained the notion of “light” as the most exalted entity in the universe. In the most probable assumption it was Plotinus the Roman philosopher (2nd century AD) who placed light into this paramount position, ergo, light became the means of perceiving and preserving universal order. Plotinus’ essential thoughts are recorded in his six books called the Enneads which suggest that all reality consists of a series of emanations from the One, the eternal source of all beings.

 

                      ANCIENT PERSIA (ZOROASTRIANISM)

This particular strand of ancient Persian religion was also known as Mazdaism derived form the concept of Ormuzd, or Ahura Mazda, (the god of light) –who was opposed by Ahriman the god of darkness. Humanity must make its careful selection between light and darkness, truth and falsehood, more of right than wrong and thereby obtain either immortal bliss or eternal agony.

All the previously mentioned religions in their own way conceived of a Supreme Being elucidating upon the latter in either obscure mystical or rather vague designations excluding Judaism.

CHINESE CONCEPTS BC; VIS-À-VIS THE WORLD..

On the other hand the sages of China (eg: Confucius, Meng Tzu, Lao Tzu, et al) From the sixth century onward preferred the designation “heaven” to that of any supreme being or creative power of the universe. They were content with creating an ideology that served to generate a fabric to hold society together. In that sense it can be considered a religion (Lt…religio..To bind together…)

In the second century BC it was the Chinese sage Tung Chung Shu who introduced to the Chinese secularised religion the concept of I –Yuan.

The one prime which is a supreme being is the one and is identical with the origin (genesis). Tung explicates furthermore… The prime is the root of the myriad of things in which there is also the origin of humanity. I-Yuan marked the beginning of the material principle “chi”, as energy. An additional concept that is closely related is.. “Yuan-chi” – depicted as the primal fluid or prime force, the product of the cosmos, it’s pure and light portion formed space, its impure and heavy force is symbolised by Earth. The latter served as the designation of what we now refer to as matter or most up- to- date as solidified energy.

The Chinese philosophers, are far as we know, and have any records of, started their religious undertakings about the same time as the ancient Greeks. The first one on record is therefore Confucius. Confucius lived in a time of great upheavals; he is described as a skilful teacher whose primary concern was to present a teaching that was able to bind his contemporaries together under one common belief. His successors Meng Tzu and later on Lao Tze followed a similar line of thought. Therefore in the simple context their undertaking was a religious one, (Lt. religio “to bind together). The first references to a universal “higher order” principle appear to have emerged in the fourth century BC. The principle referred to, is of course Chi –whose meanings are thus, “The moving power”; the subtle beginning of motion; the great Agenda from which all things came and to which all things return. Seemingly differentiated is the concept of Ch’i which can be seen as “force, spirit, the vital fluid or even breath”. It was only much later 1,032 -1,086 that the philosopher Cheng Ming-Tao considered all that has physical form to be identical with the vital force. It was also regarded as the principle of novelty in creation, deriving its origin from Li (reason). However, the neo-Confucians in particular, Chi Hisn (1130-1200), whose argument goes that reason has no control over any novelty of the creation. However, Ch’I vis-à-vis, while conceptually different, can never be separate. Without Ch’I reason would have nothing to be embodied in. This was further elaborated upon by Hung Shung Shu in the latter part of the century. His argument was that the One was the source of all things. The One or the prime was behind the creation of a myriad of things inclusive of the creation of humanity. Reflecting upon it, it may be argued that the Chinese thinkers understood the principle of creation with or without a reference to a Supreme Being.

 

 

 

 

GREEK PHILOSOPHY; INCLUDING THE CONCEPT OF LOGOS.

 

The first thing that children in any generation acquire can be described as logos. The word resonates with the biblical use that marked the first words in many biblical writings. In the beginning was “the word” and the word was with god..

The rendition of the word from logos is just one of a plethora of possible translations, such as language, speech, the learning of, the study of, the knowing about and many more. According to linguistic researchers it is the most prolific word in ancient Greek, with some linguists arguing that there are as many as seventy meanings from this single word.

In accordance with concepts developed by Ben Ami Scharfstein, the Greeks were not the first to espouse atomism, at least three hundred years before the Greeks Democritus, Leukippus and others generated the idea that atoms moving in the void accounted for the origin and existence of the universe, there were Indian schools debating this issue according to available evidence. Then in Greece, Hesiod was the first to convey the concept of space. Hesiod called it chaos, which is another ancient concept presenting a multiplicity of meanings….The formless, the confused, the completely disorderly or absolutely lawless, also seen as empty or void. This may have influenced writers in the second century AD – e.g. Origen, Eusebius of Caesarea, Philo of Alexandria, et al) to argue that “God created the world ex-nihilo,( “out of nothing”) A better translation would have been “no-thing”, as light is still considered massless, therefore not a thing.

Aristotle, revered for almost two millennia, as the “Fountainhead of all knowledge” understands Hesiod’s chaos as the empty place supposed to be required before anything could be used to occupy it. (Perhaps this fallacious idea influenced Isaac Newton, who as we shall see later on, considered space to be empty)

Under the influence of the Pythagorean School, space was turned into pneuma-aperon; sometimes the term Kenon, the void, is also used and was juxtaposed to matter and the atom. It is the author’s considered surmise that the ancients meant the photon rather than the modern idea of the atom, as proclaimed by Sir Ernest Rutherford, the father of the atom.

About the same time as the Pythagoreans examined and found the substratum of the manifold processes of nature in a single world principle, or cosmic stuff, which they identified with the “Infinite”. They prescribed to the Infinite the attributes of imperishability, inexhaustibility and eternity.

Anaxagoras who followed them presented arguments for the transmutation of matter and its indestructibility. What we witness here is the beginning of the law of conservation of mass, which, as we shall see much later was only proven to be falsifiable in the last decade of the 2oth century. Aristotle in the fourth century is well known for his four causes. Of primary importance here is the Ontological cause. The Ontological cause (Gk…ontos…the beginning, being seen as “the uncaused first cause…) reverberates well with the modern law of conservation of energy.

 

The law of conservation of energy formulated during the 19th century by inter alia, Julius Mayer, Herman von Helmholtz, Clausius, and specifically, James Joule in 1847. The work done by Lomonosov a hundred years earlier was unfortunately unknown outside Russia. Now recognised that it was formulated in 1748. (p. 293 J.Gribbin…Science a History) and it became known as the Law of Conservation of Mass-Energy. In its modern formulation it tells us unequivocally that energy is uncreated and indestructible in its totality….more of that later…

 

Continuing with the Greek philosophers we look at the contributions made by Anaxagoras, Plato and Aristotle.

 

Anaxagoras, who was previously mentioned, experimented and observed. He assembled facts and data from his research into patterns, involving generally accepted axioms and procedures of deduction generating a principle of causality. These findings gave Anaxagoras a basis to argue for the transmutation of matter and thereby for its indestructability.

This suggested to Anaxagoras a still somewhat vague concept of the “conservation of matter, “– which in his view presented itself as an infinite variety and continuous change; a universal process, never beginning, never ending. However, only rather limited processes of decomposition where observed by this early Greek philosopher/scientist; it lead him to believe, that an infinite conglomeration of “seeds” (nous) existed, therefore enabling Anaxagoras to engender a more accurate theory of the cosmos, in which “mind” or “reason” became the source of all order (cosmos) in the universe.

Ergo, it seems reasonable to argue that it was Anaxagoras who first introduced a teleological principle into the explanation of the natural world. As he conceived it there was harmony displayed throughout the universe. Ionian philosophy and cosmology was primarily an undertaking to decide what this primitive element of all things is.

These ideas were later analysed by Plato who in his Timaeus develops his substrative concepts vis-à-vis those arguments. Depriving matter of its inherent activity and lodging the power of movement in forms, ideas and spiritualised supreme beings. Plato, with these ideas degraded matter until it was seen as passive, inert, and “dead”

Matter, thus conceived became a lower form of existence, owing its motion and any activity to external influences, designated “form”, “idea” , “soul” or God. The Supreme Being was conceived as “idea” tou, agathou—“the Highest Good”.

His theory of forms bifurcates the world into an upper and lower echelon. The upper or higher is seen as metalogoi,and refers to the discursive arguments of mathematics and the dialectic. Therefore, in Plato’s conception they yield to us a securely grounded apprehension of reality and truth. The lower order is constituted by phenomena, (things, objects that can be seen and measured). As such, conceived by our senses it is conceptualised as that which is always becoming (genesis). The multi-facetedness of these (last) words raised a plethora of controversial thoughts, as to whether Plato did imply that the universe had a beginning in time.

In Plato’s own words; considered to be highly metaphorical

    “ …. The symbol of the father is transferred to Being which serves as the model for becoming, as if the Forms themselves could be credited with the power to beget Becoming in the womb of space.”

This symbolism clearly should not be taken literally, for the forms possess no generating power. There needs to be a concurrently existing soul to cause motion. Which ever way this moving cause maybe presented, the conclusion that presents itself is, that the visible world, (objects, phenomena) is an image of the eternal. Ipso facto, this constitutes the main doctrine of Platonism.

It implies that there can be no exact or self-consistent science of nature. Plato had simply transformed physics into geometry.

His pupil, Aristotle developed his ideas and formulated his theories primarily in his “Categoria” and his “Physik”. In the former he raises the argument whether quantity was continuous or discontinuous.

 

Space, for Aristotle belongs to the category of quantity and is, per se continuous. Conceiving of space as the aggregate of all places (topos), whereas place is part of the kind of space whose limits coincide with the limits of the body which occupy it.

Aristotle finds Platonic and Democritic notions of space in conflict with his own ideas and since the concept of an empty space has no place in his theory of space, he simply develops a theory of positions in space, thereby excluding the notion of total space.

Concepts by the early Atomists; that had been rejected by Aristotle were revived, however, by Carus Lucretius (98-54 BC) who left us a didactic poem called in Latin “De Natura Rerum”, which reaffirms the philosophy of Epicureanism. In this exposition of Lucretius, space becomes an infinite container of bodies as he presents it (De Natura Rerum 1, 420)

 

All nature as it actually exists is based upon two things, of bodies and the void in which these bodies have their location, and in which they move. The atomism of Democritus had been adopted by Epicurus; yet, the latter modified the harsh determinism of Democritus by permitting chance to cause an exiguum clinamen in the fall of atoms, that is, a deviation from the straight motion through space (conveying a pioneering idea of what came through Newtown,be known as the force of gravity)

Lucretius further argues “if space was infinite, then in the lapse of time since eternity all matter would have sunk to the bottom of space and nothing would no longer exist” ( ibid, 1. 987)

In the Second Century AD several ideas emerged. First, the ptolemaic system confirmed and further complexified the already cumbersome conceptions vis-à-vis the universe according to Aristotle. Secondly, the Roman philosopher Plotinus made his contributions to the creation of the world, more of that shortly. Last but not least, the founding Fathers of the Catholic Church prepared a collection of writings that they named the Apocrypha. It became the exegesis of what was soon to be known as the Bible.

From historical evidence it was Plotinus (270 -275AD) who placed “light” into a paramount position. Thus, light became the means to preserving universal order. The essence of Plotinus’ thought, as recorded in his six books (Enneads) is, that all reality consists of a series of emanations from the One, the eternal source of all being. The first, necessary emanation is nous (mind or intelligence), the second that of psyche (soul). At the periphery of the universe is found matter. Man, as a bifurcation of nature partakes in both. Humanity must transcend the multiple things of the realm of mind and strive to achieve that communion with the One which constitutes their ultimate good. Even the more scientifically created  Naturphilosophy of the Middle Ages still retained the notion of Light as the most exalted entity in the universe. Before we discuss the contributions made by St Augustine to early Christian beliefs, we conclude this part of our dissertation with a quote by Ben-Ami Scharfstein…. “A soul determined by logos (a rational forming power, by a rational form added to the soul) if the answer is yes, it follows that the humans’ ability to perceive is not as such, but in the human logos and because this logos is no more than the expression of a transcendent form found in the divine spirit, the possibility of sensation thus pre-exist in the divine spirit.” (Plotinus 5.5)

St Augustine of Hippo born 354 AD, known primarily for his great work “City of God” and several other books that notably and heavily influence the Catholic Church and subsequently induced what historians referred to as the Dark Ages, during the next thousand years the only philosophical and intellectual progress was achieved about 850 AD by Arab philosophers. Coming into contact with Greek civilization and philosophy and under his Eastern influence a further mystical trend was produced similar to Neo-Platonism, where the already existing “metaphysics of life” noticeable in the religious conception of the Koran also assisted to assimilate Platonic ideas. There was also a keen interest in science and medicine that contributed to the dissemination of Aristotelian philosophy.

Arab philosophers who made great use of Aristotelian writings, where among others, Al Kindi, Al Farabi, Ibn Sina (Avecenna).

 

One can conclude that in the East, theology remained the dominant force but incorporated in its own teachings more than a modicum of philosophies which it otherwise condemned. The pre-Renaissance period was marked by a change in Catholic thinking by the ideas of St Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century, primarily owing to his highly influential publication “Summa Theologica”. The Neo-Platonism of St Augustine was superseded and modified by Aristotalianism. Another thinker of that era was the scientist Grosseteste who conceived of light (lux) as a primary corporeal form and principle of motion and declared the creation of the world in space as the self-dissemination of light. It is this insight which gives this Thirteenth Century thinker an aura of modernity.

In the early seventeenth century at the beginning of the Enlightenment Era a cluster of thinkers emerged. Clearly the best known of all, is Sir Isaac Newton whose opponent emerged to be G.W. Leibniz, and as history conveys in the last few decades several other thinkers, amongst whom was David Hume, Robert Hooke who was a practical scientist, John Flamsteed and Christopher Wren. As new evidence emerges, those were people who influenced Sir Isaac Newton and corresponded with him, or had numerous discussions at the Royal Society which contributed to Newton’s ideas and concepts. Newton delayed publication for nineteen years, before he finally brought them to the attention of the public by presenting the Principia Mathematica.

Leibniz, in his Discourse on Metaphysics (1686) said “God is the sun and the light of souls, the Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. “ ( Lumen illuminans omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum)

Leibniz presents this beautiful aphorism in the philosophical writings by G.H.R Parkinson, 1973.

Before dealing with Newton and his subversive misconceptions which came to dominate Western thought, philosophically, sociologically and above all else scientifically for the next three centuries and further, we may discuss Descartes and Leibniz.

While producing some rather obscure nomenclature it appears in hindsight that the German Leibniz and the French philosopher Descartes where on a fundamental level closer to discovering how nature worked than Newton. Why Descartes can be helped for the ill-conceived concept; usually referred to as Dualism, by bifurcating the world into matter and mind, body and mind, spirit and corporeality, he may have done so, to avoid persecution by the church. Having bifurcated nature with his philosophical ideas it became the task of Newton to elaborate on the matter-side of things. Hampered by the misconception it became a fatal flaw in Newton’s edifice of thought, having no evidence to the contrary, the substrative principle of Newton’s materialism became what is commonly known as “The Law of Conservation of Mass”. As Newton misconceived space as being empty, he had a philosophical conundrum that offered no escape.

 

For if mass (defining matter) is conserved and space is considered to be empty then where does the universe have its origin, including all the stars, the planets, including the atom itself. Newton was not unaware of this conundrum and in order to protect his career from any charge of heresy he wrote in his second publication “Opticks” in 1704 “It seems probable to me that in the beginning God created the atoms and He made them in such a manner as best conduced to the way He created them…He made them hard, impenetrable, massy….” and so on and so forth..

The thought experiment that clearly emerges is as follows “If atoms are uncreated and indestructible (matter is conserved) then the world and its contents have no beginning. By postulating then “God” is merely to prevent a charge of heresy. As we shall see much later, the irony of all this is that Newton actually made a totally correct statement. Its correctness emerged only in the 1990s. It was primarily through the efforts and persistence of those scientists who persisted in the tenets and concepts of Quantum Field Theory, but more of that later… The first one who found inconsistencies, if not some real problems with Newton’s edifice of thought was the sage of Koenigsberg, the great philosopher and mathematician Immanuel Kant.

Already in his mid-fifties, Kant contemplated the conflicting philosophical theories that had arisen during the proceeding centuries. In his magnum opus “The Critique of Pure Reason”, as well as in his “Metaphysics”, he systematically attacked Idealism, Empiricism and Cartesian Rationalism. Kant, in philosophical circles an imposing figure, presented in the “Critique” his arguments for the infinity of space and the eternity of time over several pages and being a profound philosopher then proceeded to argue for the opposite, these sections are referred to as the Antinomies. In 1781 with the publication of the “Critique”, there was simply no possibility for even one of the sharpest minds of humanity to reach a decisive conclusion. The world of learning and man of erudition had to wait until well into the twentieth century to find an empirical solution to this vexatious problem.

Furthermore– on Immanuel Kant, and without spending undue time on the intricacies of his thought and his seriously convoluted phraseology. , in essence removed the concept of a “Universal Consciousness” – from a theological exegesis, by showing the limits of human reason. As Heinrich Heine, the German poet laconically commented… “How great was the crime of Robespierre, he killed the king. How much greater the crime of Immanuel Kant – he killed “god”.”

Of course, Kant did not kill “God”, clearly a misinterpreted idea. However, the church had equalised “Universal Reason” (or consciousness) with God, as the origin of all individual (human) reason.  A forgivable mistake that could be rectified because in 1781 neither biochemistry nor neurophenomenology existed, therefore, any understanding that consciousness is derived from energy would have been impossible.

As Prof. Peter Atkins puts it with marvellous succinctness… Life is a controlled unwinding of energy. Phosphorus in the form of adenosine-tri-phosphate (A.T.P) turns out to be a perfect vector for the subtle deployment of energy and it is common to all living cells. (The Periodic Kingdom, Uni. of California), 1998 p.27.

Before leaving the world of materialism created by Newton and undoubtedly even more so by the post-Newtonians, I wish to present a bon-mot that evokes in its whole gamut the spirit of a bygone era.

Simon-Pierre Laplace, having presented the new fangled ideas of Newtonian physics to the Emperor Napoleon who found himself in a discombobulated state of mind asked Laplace “Where in this new scheme of things, Monsieur, is there room for our Almighty Creator?” Laplace with the utmost confidence retorted “Regrettably, Sire, there is no room for such a superfluous entity.”

In hindsight, of course the post-Newtonians had no conceivable reason to doubt the seemingly concrete reality of the Law of Conservation of Mass, and that’s how things stood until the brilliant Scottish physicist and mathematician James Clerk Maxwell came onto the scene, who in the opinion of this humble writer took science, specifically physics back into the right direction, for it was Maxwell’s Equations on Electro-Magnetism that exerted a major influence upon the ideas of the young Einstein.

Maxwell, adding“boost-symmetry” to Faraday’s earlier formulations, the burgeoning Scientist reflected upon Faraday’s considerations that magnetic fields changing over time created electric fields. With a flash of insight, Maxwell reasoned that this could be a process ad infinitum. These reflections led Maxwell to discover the source of light within the universe and had opened the door for Albert Einstein.

 

When Einstein set to work as a third class patent officer in his office in Bern, Switzerland he had everything going for him. Without the usual parochial limitations, which surround scientists in academia; Einstein was free to let his thoughts wander. Besides Maxwell’s equations, Einstein had a whole smorgasbord of new concepts and insights that had accumulated during the last decades of the nineteenth century.

 

There was the discovery of the electron by J.J Thompson in 1897 which already raised grave doubts that the atom was hard, impenetrable, or any of the other adjectives that Newton had used to describe it. Heinrich Hertz had discovered radio-waves while others had found further extensions to the light spectrum such as infra-red, ultra-violet and had related them to the concept of black-body radiation. Then there was the discovery of Max Planck that “atoms emit discrete quanta of energy. Historians of science attribute this statement of Planck as the birth of “Quantum Physics”.

Einstein, sitting comfortably in his patent office reflected upon these new and clearly revolutionary ideas. He realised that the problem was not, that there was no relativistic theory; on the contrary he was confronted with two stridently relativistic theories. The first one was Newton’s venerated relativistic Theory of Classical Mechanics, the other, Maxwell’s relativistic Theory of Electromagnetism.

After much, what historians describe as pain, headache and stomach cramps which the young Einstein suffered, when he realised that the most venerated theory of Newton came out the losing end. Einstein formulated his first paper, whose caption was what can be without any exaggeration can be called the sixty four million dollar question…

“Does the inertia of a body depend on its energy content?”

With that, for the fist time humanity and its thinking processes had arrived at the truth. Einstein’s original formulation became:

M=L/V2

This formulation according to historians remained in Einstein’s use for at least four years. As he published his five papers in 1905, usually referred to, as his “Annus Mirabilis”, it became   m=E/c2. Several writers emphasise that nowhere in his 1905 papers appears the world famous E=mc2. It is this original formula that can be, without proviso referred to as “the Formula of the Creation”. Why can we confidently call it the “Formula of the Creation”?, because as we shall see in the final part of this dissertation, Quantum Field Theory some ninety years later presents experimental evidence that mass has its origin in pure energy (light).

 

 

To arrive at a clear understanding, of Energy, scientists like Faraday, Maxwell and specifically Einstein; it became a quintessential requisite, without them no truly modern physics could have transpired.

Einstein’s genius,  having derived this formula (M=L/v2) via mathematics, using pen and paper would have had to wait  more than seventy years to be experimentally and therefore within the paradigm of strict science, to be verified  and to be acceptable to the Nobel Prize Committee.

Planck and Einstein had opened the gate for Quantum Physics. A new generation arrived on the scene about the time when Einstein put pen to paper (e.g. Schrödinger, Heisenberg, Dirac, DeBroglie and Niels Bohr, Wolfgang Pauli, et al) produced what was in their heyday referred to as “Quantum Mechanics.”

As for Einstein himself, the shadow of Newton lingered on, and he argued at times vehemently against the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg. With the completion and inclusion of Q.E.D through the work of Richard Feynman, Julian Schwinger and Tomonaga, the stage was set to tear from nature its final secret. This was achieved through the wonderful efforts of Frank Wilczek, David Gross and David Politzer establishing the rigid structure that became known as Quantumchromodynamics (Q.C.D).

Contemporary physicists are now looking towards a Unified Field Theory which has as its ingredients, Relativity, QED and QCT and of course QFT. Conspicuously missing from this list is Newtonian Mechanics. It worked in practice for three hundred years and still works for engineers and other still existing die-hard-in-the wool Newtonians; they, like Laplace, continued to believe that the cherished law of conservation of mass is still valid.

Unfortunately for those aficionados of “Troglodyte Physics” the L.E.P. at CERN proved conclusively in its nine years of running that mass can be converted to pure energy, as formulated by Einstein a century earlier. By emulating the conditions of open space, approx. two degree above Absolute Zero Kelvin its energy congealed into mass. Astonished physicists noticed that the output exceeded the input by several ten thousand times; WOW! What happened to the conservation of mass? Well, it was a wonderful tenet that looked good for several centuries, indeed, for a  looooong time.

From the book “Collider” we receive the prophetic words of Paul Halpern “Soon Geneva could witness another revolution, this time in humanities’ comprehension of the fundamental nature of the cosmos”

Nearly forty years ago Fritjof Capra in the “Tao of Physics” (page 202) has the following commentary: “In the collision processes of high energy physics, mass is no longer conserved.”  Dr. Capra continues to explain (p. 203) “These dynamic patterns or “energy bundles” form the stable nuclear, atomic and molecular structures which build up matter and give it its microscopic aspect, thus making us believe that it is made of some material substance. Cosmologist Joseph Silk (The Big Bang) adds to the above, (p. 107) by describing the earliest moment of creation… Enormous energies were achieved at this early moment and resulted in the creation of matter out of almost nothing, that is, out of energy.”

Also “Space is the primary reality of which matter is a secondary manifestation”.  Sean Carroll, 2012 (The Particle at the End of the Universe p.43)

“Mass is constructed entirely from the energy of interactions involving naturally mass-less elementary particles.”

Professor Wilczek stipulates electrons, quarks, gluons and photons as the fundamental building blocks of matter. Again the champion of Q.F.D (page 166) states “the strong interactions’ main role is to build protons and neutrons out of quarks and gluons.”

Furthermore; Nobel Laureate Wilczek has this to say…. (Fantastic Realities, 2006)

(p.58) … “thus mass has been principally created from energy…”

And on the same page “thus mass has been physically created from energy…”

Explicating furthermore, (p.74) “This bundling of energy makes the protons mass…” 

And last not least makes the point (p.79) … “Pure energy of moving quarks and gluons accounts for most of the mass of ordinary matter”…

Prolific writer John Gribbin adds to this… (The Matter Myth p.43)   “A particle such as an electron can be viewed as a lump of concentrated energy.  Adding further to our understanding; In the Beginning there was energy and the energy created particles and anti-particles. All this confirms the ancient aphorism “Nihil ex nihilo”.  Indeed, “Nothing comes from nothing”. Frank Wilczek hammers the nail further in, via his opening paragraph in “The Lightness of Being”, 2008 –“The mass of ordinary matter is the embodied energy of more basic building blocks, themselves lacking mass”

Turning our attention back just one hundred years, it becomes clear that Einstein’s original formula where he wrote lichtquanta or simply “L” – which by 1926 was renamed “photons” by Gilbert Lewis. For whatever reason the word light quanta and the “L” disappeared from Einstein’s original formula and was replaced by “E” for energy, we shall never know! However, lightquanta became energy. The connections are blatantly obvious. It is lightquanta (as the purest form of energy) that is the origin of all things, indeed the Universe itself including all its stars …..And us!

The universe, the stars, the planets and approx., forty million species that populate planet earth from the amoeba to human beings had their origin in light. What are unique to human beings are the logos (language). Again, this insight from biology and DNA supports bible contentions. In the beginning was the word and the word was with God. The most modern interpretation, the author of this article happily contends not without a modicum of glee, is that the first eight words in the Bible are essentially correct and proven. Traditionally presented as… “In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth…”

Recognising that science could constitute the Future Religion, those eight words can be formulated as: “At and After the Big Bang, Energy created Space and Matter” As an unknown poet put it more than a century ago…

“Man can become divine, for the fire that dwells within him

             Is a minuscule spark of the divine fire irradiating the universe?”

The authors of this dissertation wish to express their gratitude to all the great men of erudition who helped to shape and formulate our “Weltanschaung”.

Advertisements

About Helmut Cerncic

An intensive perusal of books relating to more than six fields of learning eg: philosophy, physics, cosmology, ancient theology and neurophenomenology all in the name of ars artis gratis; not as a means to an end but as an end in itself,
Video | This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Thus spake Zarathustra.. ( The God of Light )!!

  1. Nina Goldman-Klein says:

    Amazing work guys in fact a masterpiece that succinctly examines “god” through the ages and arrives at a feasible scientific conclusion. LOVED IT! Can anyone smell a book deal in the air? I can!

    Great stuff!

    • Thanks Nina for a most encouraging comment. Yes a small book could be considered by us. The material involved hardly lends itself to further augmentation– as it would become unnecessarily repetitive. This is a labour of love rather than a commercial undertaking. As indicated it is ars gratia artis. (art for art’s sake).

Share your thoughts...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s