The Secret History Of The World And How To Get Out Alive - Webs
The Secret History Of The World And How To Get Out Alive - Webs
The Secret History Of The World And How To Get Out Alive - Webs
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
xxiv<br />
<strong>The</strong> <strong>Secret</strong> <strong>History</strong> of the <strong>World</strong><br />
But, isn’t that the point? That we search for that tiny clue that there IS a reality<br />
beyond that which the materialist scientific view accepts as measurable?<br />
Just as certain mechanical aids can augment the perception of certain ranges of<br />
light such as infra-red, ultra-violet, x-rays, and radio waves, so might our so-called<br />
psychic perceptions be similarly augmented. This was my theory at the beginning<br />
of the Cassiopaean Experiment, though I never thought it would evolve into a<br />
dialogue with “myself in the future”.<br />
<strong>The</strong> brain is an instrument devised to focus reality in mathematical constructs --<br />
interpreting waveforms as material objects. What I had in mind from the beginning<br />
was a process of not only being able to perceive those ranges of energies that are<br />
normally beyond the range of three dimensional perception, but to be able to do so<br />
in a repeatable way with practical applications. By developing such a process, the<br />
implication is that we can not only perceive the effects of myriads of waveforms,<br />
but also, depending upon the amplitudes and energies, predict the outcomes of<br />
certain motions, even, perhaps, in very precise terms.<br />
<strong>Of</strong> course, it seems that the descriptions of the greater reality beyond three<br />
dimensional space and time must be, in an essential way, difficult to describe<br />
except metaphorically. So, I think we can assume that the finite nature of our<br />
minds is self-limiting in a certain sense. It seems that all the instruments we can<br />
create and build are probably incapable of penetrating into such realms because of<br />
the simple fact that they are three-dimensional. <strong>The</strong> only material way we may be<br />
able to go beyond our reality is through mathematics, which seems to transcend<br />
time and space.<br />
<strong>The</strong>re is, indeed, a lot of research in physics that sounds provocatively like<br />
ancient mystical teachings, yet the possibility is that the true nature of the reality<br />
behind our world is beyond quantum mechanics and theory.<br />
Ark: As Wheeler so succinctly points it out:<br />
We have every right to assume that the universe is filled with more uncertainty than<br />
certainty. What we know about the universe - indeed, what is knowable - is based<br />
on a few iron gateposts of observation plastered over by papier-mâché molded from<br />
our theories.<br />
Popper makes these important observations:<br />
“... all explanatory science is incompleteable; for to be complete it would have to<br />
give an explanatory account of itself. An even stronger result is implicit in Gödel’s<br />
famous theorem of the incompletability of formalized arithmetic (though to use<br />
Gödel’s theorem and other mathematical incompleteness theorems in this context is<br />
to use heavy armament against a comparatively weak position). Since all physical<br />
science uses arithmetic (and since for a reductionist only science formulated in<br />
physical symbols has any reality), Gödel’s incompleteness theorem renders all<br />
physical science incomplete. For the nonreductionist, who does not believe in the<br />
reducibility of all science to physically formulated science, science is incomplete<br />
anyway.”<br />
“Not only is philosophical reductionism a mistake, but the belief that the method of<br />
reduction can achieve complete reduction is, it seems, mistaken too. We live in a<br />
world of emergent evolution; of problems whose solutions, if they are solved, beget<br />
new and deeper problems. Thus we live in a universe of emergent novelty; of