Theory of Everything...
Relativity and Quantum Theory will forever remain incompatible and never lead to an understanding of the universe, simply because they are founded on incompatible premises - which both are not representative of physical reality.
Relativity Theory collapses time into space such that time can be seen as a kind of fourth spatial dimension due to the fact that simultaneity is relativized in relation to velocity and the fact that there is no privileged frame of reference. This means that within the theoretical framework of Relativity there can be no absolute sense in which an event can be said to have preceded or succeeded any other event. (The Twin Paradox often used to “explain” Relativity actually destroys it, because it only can stand if you violate the premise of Relativity: the symmetry and interchangeability of the Twin’s situations, you have to call one stationary, and by so doing Relativity collapses.)
Within Quantum Field Theory however this is not the case. A Quantum event has either occurred already or it has not and if a Quantum event has not yet occurred then that event exists within an indeterminate superposition in which the exact properties of the event have not been decided. In other words there is a very concrete sense of before and after within Quantum Field Theory which is not present within Relativity Theory. Within the former framework there is a very real distinction between what has and has not yet occurred, whereas in the latter all events are objectively speaking occurring at the same time. (The Cat paradox often used to “explain” the Quantum world, actually was formulated by Schrödinger as a scathing critique of Quantum Mechanics, because it violates one of the fundamental laws of logic, LNC, the law of non contradiction. Schrödinger’s Mechanics was “Wave Mechanics” NOT “Quantum Mechanics”)
The contradictions within these theories as well as between these two “fundamental theories” are substantial and far too serious to be simply ignored - a discrepancy of 10^120, i.e. "the most embarrassing problem in all of physics" and "the worst theoretical prediction in all of history"…… except ignoring is kind of exactly what happened. Lacking any clear resolution to these contradictions, physicists mostly just swept this problem under the carpet and carried on with business as usual.
Quantum Field Theorists continued doing Quantum Field Theory and would go on to begin the extremely expensive - as well as extremely lucrative - search for the various subatomic entities predicted by Quantum Theory.
Astrophysicists on the other hand largely ignored the lack of space-time curvature implied by Quantum Theory and proceeded to begin making immensely far-reaching inferences about the nature of the cosmos under the assumption that Einstein's Relativity Theory was actually correct, despite observations which tell us that Relativity is actually wrong.
It's usually at this point in the discussion when science apologists defer to the Feynman-esque "shut up and calculate" mentality: "perhaps the universe is just too bizarre for our stupid monkey brains to understand? Hey what do YOU know, you're not a physicist, you aren't authorised to have opinions about the sacred wisdom, right? we should simply trust the science, right? hey, maybe we just need a really Advanced AI to figure this all out for us." ....... Or just maybe the science simply was wrong!
The latter is exactly what Heisenberg told us and he did so in no uncertain terms when he wrote: “…that even major modifications of present physical theories would not transform them into the desired new theory, as quite different and novel ideas are required. Secondly, the impact of quantum theory and relativity theory on the minds of those scholars who helped found them during the first half of our century is conceivably such that they are imprisoned by these theories and thus cannot help but reason conformably, that is, in terms of traditional concepts; whereas the need is for a whole revolution of thought, which can only be carried through by nonconformists.... “ (Mercier 1971)
If we really want a “Theory of Everything” we have to start with an assumption that has “Everything” baked into it, an assumption of ONE-ness, from which “Everything” emanates, or which permeates “Everything”. This approach turns out to be the oldest theory of mankind and has been around for thousands of years, tracing back to ancient Egypt, China, India and Greece: the MONAD, the ONE is the root of all monadic philosophies throughout history, all the way up to the 20th century, when Kurt Gödel crushed the arrogance of mathematicians who claimed they could explain the whole universe using math.
Bertrand Russell had published the first volumes in his ambitious "Principia Mathematica" project to prove step-by-step that mathematics was a complete and absolute consistent system of knowledge.
At the same time Ludwig Wittgenstein was attempting to prove mathematics was based on a perfect system of logical arguments.
German mathematician David Hilbert was grounding math in fixed axioms that would produce a “unifying theory of everything”. He was so sure of his results that he announced at a math conference in Göttingen that for mathematicians there were no unsolvable problems and all of nature could be explained completely using math. At the end of his speech he shouted triumphantly: "Wir müssen wissen und wir werden wissen!" ....."we must know everything and we will know everything". He became famous for that passionate outburst which became the new credo of mathematicians everywhere - but sitting in the audience that day was Kurt Gödel who a year later would publish a proof that in a single stroke destroyed all the pompous assumptions of Hilbert, Russell, Wittgenstein and scores of other mathematicians around the world.
Gödel showed that mathematics is a partial and forever incomplete system that will never be able to discover all the truths in the universe. For mathematicians this was like calling the queen of the sciences a wh*re. His proof shows that any axiomatic logical system such as arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete because there will always be statements that are true but not provable within any formal theory.
Protests against Gödel's ideas came from around the world, there were reports of mathematicians committing suicide when they read this proof and untold scores of math students dropped out or changed her majors. Cambridge mathematician Alan Turing invented a machine that used only yes or no decision to eliminate the gray areas in Gödel's proof and sort out exactly what problems could be processed mathematically. Turing's machine became the very first electronic computer, but it did nothing to soothe mathematicians souls, for it was soon proven that any algorithmic machine or computer is also inconsistent and incomplete.
Bertrand Russell abandoned his “Principia” project, Wittgenstein first mercilessly attacked Gödel but later admitted that math was essentially a game and that “no mathematical statements were true in any real sense.” David Hilbert retired and worked to find applications where his theories could be applied. His famous credo died with him and is now engraved on his gravestone.
In his final years Gödel was working on a corollary to his theorem which expanded on the fact "that the ultimate complete truth about our universe can only be found outside the circle of our universe" (which means in Metaphysics). He believed it could be proven that there was One Mind behind all the various appearances and activities of the world and that this One Mind exists independently of its individual properties projected into the world. He also stated that Mind is not just not localised in the brains of people but exists everywhere at once.
This is when thousands of years of monadic philosophy comes full circle, giving us all we need to start over and create a modern “Theory of Everything” - under the condition that we accept that it will not be a theory embedded in necessarily incomplete Physics but a theory embedded in complete Metaphysics.
We need to allow ourselves to learn from Akhenaten (14th century BCE), who proclaimed Aten the single source of light and mind in the universe and the "Giver of all Life". The androgynous Aten exists beyond duality in a state of unchanging Oneness. Unlike other gods the Aten has no human traits or weaknesses, it has no attributes, no spacial extension nor temporal duration, it simply exists in the “monistic light of pure awareness” and by that existence causes all else to exist.
We should learn from the Dao de Ching that the Monad, the Aten, the Dao, should NOT be worshiped but rather sensed in the feeling of being alive, as the “field of awareness underlying the natural Order of things.” (David Bohm’s “Implicit Order”)
Practically no philosopher of consequence throughout history missed or ignored the Monadic Principle of the universe:
Hermes Trismegistus described the Monad as an intelligent sphere whose “center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere”, (incommensurability of counter space)
Valentinus described the Monad “as the source of the Pleroma, the spiritual cornucopia of infinite fullness from which the universe sprung forth.”, (all encompassing potential of ultimate rest)
Plotinus described the Monad “as an indivisible whole without attributes that can't be any existing thing and is beyond human ability to conceive of it.”
Iamblicus maintains that the ineffable Monad is “outside time and space but is the source of sole eternal reason, the Logos that creates the universe.” He described the Monad as “the realm of Original Thought, while the Dyad is the domain of objects and the Results of Thought.”
al-Kindi, al-Farabi e.a. equated the Monad with Aristotle's idea of the First Cause. They taught that the First Cause is in a state of Eternal Self-Contemplation which creates a reflection in a new level or emanation of intellect.
ibn-Sina known as Avicenna believed the Monad was a logically necessary entity that cannot not exist at the head of creation. In Ibn Sina's model the infinite Mind of the Monad interacts with the human brain to create intellect and self-awareness in individuals.
ibn-Arabi taught that all things belong to just one entity, the Monad. "We are through it" he wrote "but it is not through us". We remain with our own root which is in non-existence, yet even things which don't exist are part of the Monad. (all encompassing potentiality)
Gerhard Dorn, Belgian philosopher, physician and Alchemist, a student of Paracelsus, writes that the “Unus Mundus” is an underlying monadic reality from which everything emerges and to which everything returns. (Magnetism, springing from Inertia through loss of Inertia (radiative force) returns as Dielctricity, (gravitative loss of force) back to Inertia.
John Dee writes his “Monas Hyroglyphica”
Giordano Bruno his “De Monade Numero et Figura”
G.W. Leibniz his “Monadology” where he established a logical connection between atoms of consciousness and physical reality.
E.Kant writes his "Monadologia Physica" where he argues that Monads are the ultimate principles of all bodies and states, that “understanding them can unite Metaphysics and Mathematics.”
Bertrand Russell , expanded on Kant's ideas in a new viewpoint now known as “Russelian Monism” in which a single source or set of properties underlies both consciousness and the physical universe. Russell wanted to create a new physics by focusing on precisely what classical physicists were trained to ignore: the underlying cause or source of physical reality.
Erwin Schroedinger, believed the apparent multiplicity of Minds in the world is an illusion and there is only One Mind, a singularity in Consciousness that expresses itself in a myriad of ways.
"The total number of Minds in the universe is One" he said and “Consciousness is a singularity phasing within all beings.”
Bernard Haisch, a renowned german-born American astrophysicist claims modern science and traditional spiritual Traditions are describing the same fundamental single reality.
Philip Goff, professor at Durham University whose research focuses on “Philosophy of Mind and Consciousness” argues that theories in which Consciousness arises from physical processes or materialism and theories in which Consciousness is separate from the body or dualism both face insurmountable difficulties. Instead He suggests a form of “pan psychism”, the view that Consciousness is an intrinsic part of the universe.
Hedda Hassel Mørch believes the physical sciences revealed the structure but not the true nature of the physical world. Her research focuses on “Neutral Monism” which is an umbrella term for a popular class of theories that reject the dichotomy of mind and matter and suggest that the fundamental nature of reality is neither mental nor physical in other words it's something neutral.
Isaac Newton got so very close, but couldn’t or wouldn't follow through with a logical interpretation of observation: he correctly defined “force and motion” as “loss of inertia” [F=ma] - but couldn't bring himself to see free fall as “return to inertia” via “loss of force”. He fell for the simplest logical trap imaginable, and that was because he was a mathematician at heart, not a philosopher holding up logic as highest arbiter of thought: he practically said: “cats are furry animals, therefore all furry animals are cats” which we all immediately recognise as a potentially false conclusion.(There is only one world where this conclusion is true, a world of cats, but this is not our world). Yet for 400 years we have repeated this error when we say: Force is mass times acceleration, therefore all acceleration is force per unit mass. …….. Wrong, free fall is the opposite of force, it is the “loss of force” returning an object back to Inertia. Had Newton followed the path of logic and closed the circle……
……. we would have a Theory of Everything by now - simply by understanding what gravity really is.
But we need not despair, we already have a rough draft of a “Theory of Everything” in Walter Russell’s grand opus about the “Monad of Light” titled “The Universal One”
When you find the word “God” there, let yourself not be put off, as you obviously have not been put off by Newton's use of the term “Lord God Pantocrator”, but try to understand the difference: The Monad has no property, no demands nor preferences, it is not a cult object, and doesn’t need nor want to be worshipped. It is pure awareness from which “Everything” springs forth. That this concept has predictive and thus scientific power is shown in Russel’s “harmonic octaves of the elements”, where he predicted, a.a. things the complementary element to gold, which was found 20 years later right where it was predicted and named Promethium.
This system also showed that Hydrogen is actually an Alkali Metal……
……something that just hours ago appeared on a physics channel:
It’s time to learn from 2000 years of Monadic Philosophy and cast it in a already well prepared modern frame of a “Theory of Everything” because the misguided constructs of the “Standard model of Cosmology” as well as the “Standard Model of Particle Physics” are crumbling, upheld only by evermore absurd injections of money as well as ever more crazy ideas.
Revealed At Last... Must watch!
Free Energy Magnetic Generator and synthesizes many other technologies imbued with Nikola Tesla's technological identity
✔ Nikola Tesla’s method of magnifying electric power by neutralizing the magnetic counter-forces in an electric generator
Generates Energy-On-Demand: 👉 Free Energy Will Change Our World Forever
✔ Combination of induction motor and alternator
✔ Combine generators with induction motors - self-powered generators with rotary motion
✔ Various methods of generating high power immobile generators
✔ Or maybe called Overunity for the system. Mother Nature doesn't care about people calling or naming phenomena. Overunity/Free Energy, Zero Point Energy (ZPE) are just a few different words
Related: NATURAL ALCHEMY - Biological transmutation
A famous and high-quality book about Tartaria that cannot be missed:
