

Total Pageviews

Sunday, 28 December 2014

Astrology; truth or fiction?

The majority of astrologists believe a person's personality can be linked to astronomical events at their time of birth. They also use astronomical data to make predictions about the future by means of horoscopes.
We are all familiar with horoscopes finding them in many papaers and magazines; most of us will look for our 'sign' out of idle curiosity, possibly impressed that the popular characteristics assigned to a particular star sign is often correct. For example I am a 'Pisces' and do identify myself with the typical trait of being a dreamer. Other traits are:  Compassionate,  Adaptable,  Accepting,  Devoted,  Imaginative or possibly,  with a less positive point of view:  Oversensitive,  Indecisive,  Self-pitying,  Lazy,  Escapist.

Scientists today consider astrology to be a pseudoscience with claims unproven yet over many millenia and in many differing cultures  these beliefs have persisted. How is it possible that all people born in a specific time frame bear the same characteristics? I may have the answer.
Readers of this blog and my book ( see;  here  ) will know that I suggest that whilst an embryo grows a brain it uploads data from both its parent's DNA using the 'unreal' dimension of time. This contains information, besides that concerning a child's ability to survive and grow into adulthood,  other data containing a record of all  antecedents. In fact, I also believe that although traits such as eye and hair colour may be assumed from near relatives, the character of a person may come from either parent from many generations ago. I have previously imagined that the process was at random but what if nature only chooses the character of an ancestor born at the same time in the lunar calender, say. This alone would produce the trend we observe, but rather than the date of birth being the important factor, I might suggest that it is the day of conception that is the most relevant, possibly ironing out some of the inconsistencies we doubtless observe.
A problem with this scenario is that posed by non identical twins with different characters. I have suggested that their characters may have come from different ancestors but surely according to the idea above both these antecedents would be born under the same star sign. Of course, it is possible to have the same star sign but appear different according to whether the traits are 'positive' or 'negative' as can be seen in the Piscean list above.

According to this hypothesis it is possible for the time of birth (or better conception) to influence a person's character as observed astrologically over the history of mankind and perhaps science should stop being so blinkered in its approach to what it refers to as the 'pseudosciences'. Sometimes the empirical approach is not always right because often it is what you don't see in experiments that are just as important as what you do.

Tuesday, 23 December 2014

The Pope is critical of the Curia

In a blog I posted in October, I suggested that the Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches may be preparing the way for a fundamental shift in their positions regarding belief. see; here

Now we learn that that Pope Francis has openly criticised the Curia of sinful behaviour, vanity before duty, cupidity before spiritual devotion, self aggrandisement before humility; that sort of thing. I can't help feeling that there is a sense of something happening here with global implications and the Pope is laying out the groundwork. The Archbishop of Canterbury I feel sure will be complicit in what is about to happen; not immediately perhaps but in time for the 1700 year anniversary of the Council of Nicaea in 2025.
Who can tell, but knowing how the Vatican works should warn the Pontiff to watch his back. His position as 'Vicar of Christ' will not protect him from a vengeful Curia.

Saturday, 20 December 2014

Family 'black sheep'.





Friday, 19 December 2014

Housing costs and the Rule of Two

In my rule of two, see,, I state that in any social system, nature is mimicked to the extent that any aggregation will reduce  by coalescence but can never number less than two. I wonder if we can apply this rule to home ownership.
Imagine the ideal in a village or town where each house is occupied by the owner. now imagine that as houses fall vacant they are bought by owners of another house. Fuelled by 'buy to let' mortgages, more of the properties sold are bought by existing owners forcing the remaining residents to rent. Gradually over many years these multiple property owners grow like the Church and the Oxbridge Universities leaving fewer and fewer single owner occupiers. you can see where this is going: left long enough unattended the number of owner occupiers will dwindle as controlling, greedy landlords dictate the supply, forcing up costs to unbearable levels. It is another example of how the current 'Capitalist' model which has served well since the industrial revolution, is failing in the 21st Century and the cost of housing in the UK is a manifestation of this failure.
This is only a theory but something needs to be done about the cost of UK housing. Prices must come down to ensure housing is affordable to all. What about limiting banks to give 50% maximum mortgages and putting mandatory rental income at, say, 1990 levels? Greedy landlords will sell as they put their money into schemes, offering a better return, bringing the price of houses down.

Tuesday, 16 December 2014

I had a visit

I had some Jehovah Witnesses round the other day. One lady asked if I believed in a personal God? I told them to repent and stop peddling their myths and superstitions amongst the vulnerable public. The lady went off promising to send someone cleverer than her the next time, clearly feeling incapable of discussing the Paradox of Epicure, the flood story narrated in the Epic of Gilgamesh or indeed the the Gnostic gospels. Not surprising really as JWs are not encouraged to read anything that does not appear, and is therefore endorsed, in the 'Watchtower'. Her feeling of inadequacy might be addressed by her superiors in the way that God encouraged Jeremiah when he protested that he couldn't spread the gospel because he had no words to use. God touched his lips and told him to fear not as the words would be there when he opened his mouth unlike the case with our poor Witness.

Two days later a hundred children are slaughtered in a school in Pakistan by Taliban jihadists. What links the two? Faith with not an iota of common sense. It's no good trying to persuade the 'Witnesses' that there is more to life than blind faith and to look for truth elsewhere and the same applies to Islamic fundamentalists who believe only what their Imams teach them from a strict interpretation of the Qu'ran.
The Witnesses preach the imminent end of the world with Armageddon as we entered the 'last Days' in 1914. The Taliban and their allies want any early fulfilment to this prophesy with a policy of women and children first. I despair of the Abrahamic religions.

Friday, 12 December 2014

Quantum paradox solved?

One of the paradoxes of the quantum theory is the question of how paired particles communicate at speeds greater then the speed of light. The argument goes something like this: if two electrons are simultaneously generated from an interaction it is always found that they spin in opposite directions, even if they are huge distances apart. How can it be that the second electron knows which way to spin to fulfill this observation?

The secret is to adopt my theory of Negative Dimensions. Perceived spin, ɸ, is determined by three dimensions, the real spin, ɸ, the 'unreal' spin, -ɸ, and the imaginary spin, iɸ where 'i' is the square root of minus one.
The perceived spin can be related to the three spin dimensions by the equation:
ɸ = ±√[ɸ² + (-ɸ)² + (iɸ)²]

From which we arrive at:   ɸ = ± ɸ

In other words, at the point of generation of the two electrons, they automatically assume the two options for spin, plus or minus. Naturally.

Thursday, 11 December 2014

Very timely

The Daily Mail has published a report by scientists suggesting that the Big Bang created two universes, the second of which goes backwards in time.

The radical theory was proposed by Dr Julian Barbour of College Farm in the UK, Dr Tim Koslowski of the University of New Brunswick in Canada and Dr Flavio Mercati of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, also in Canada.
Their research attempts to answer questions that remain about the ‘arrow of time’ - which is the concept that time is ‘symmetric’ and everything moves forwards.
They say that at the time of the Big Bang not one but two universes formed – both moving equally in each direction through time, but opposite to each other.

Read the full article Here

Read more: 

How interesting, coming as I publish my own ideas on time on this blog. They argue that on creation two universes are created, compared with my view that our one universe has two parts. They also introduce the notion of backward time in partial agreement with my notion of three temporal dimensions related to the present, past and future.

It is interesting that scientists are slowly edging towards my ideas on Negative Dimensions as put forwarded in my booklet, available for download from Kindle or Kobo;

Tuesday, 9 December 2014

Time for another look at time


Hebrews 11.1. 

In his bestselling book, 'A Brief History of Time', the cosmologist Professor Stephen Hawking suggested that there may be two dimensions of time, the one we know and a second which he identified as 'imaginary'. He needed to do this in an attempt to avoid the problems posed by singularities in his theories and also to sidestep the question of 'What happened before the Big Bang?'
The problem was that according to conventional theory, time and space were created with the ‘Big Bang’ and to ask about time before that was futile. However, scientists are now thinking the impossible and looking at new theories to explain the creation and workings of our universe. So am I.
In my booklet, ‘Spiritual Man: An Introduction to Negative Dimensions’, I have proposed such a new theory and hopefully demonstrate how some of the mysteries of the world might be explained. In particular I demonstrate that each of our recognised three spatial dimensions and one of time are, in reality, composed of two additional dimensions, the ‘unreal’ and the ‘imaginary’, the latter as used by Hawking. I show that although in our normal perception of the universe these extra dimensions cancel each other out, they, nevertheless, play a part in life. But what about proof? Is there any evidence for these additional dimensions? I believe that time holds the key.
The three aspects of time have been recognised before. Augustine of Hippo tried to equate them to the Holy Trinity whilst Thomas Aquinas named them and associated them with men, angels and God. It is easy to divide time into three parts, we are constantly aware of them, the present time, (the here and now), the future and the past and I depict them as follows: the present, I refer to as the ‘real’ time, ‘t’: the future by ‘imaginary’ time, ‘it’ where ‘i’ is the square root of minus one and the past as ‘unreal’ time, ‘-t’.
The following, in italics, can be skipped by those who don’t wish to consider the maths.
The three aspects of time can be represented graphically as we do the three spatial dimensions, each acting mutually perpendicularly to each other. Using Cartesian coordinates and exercising Pythagoras theory one can calculate a perceived value of time, ‘T’, as follows:

T= ±√[t² + (-t)² + (it)²]
Solving this we see that:
T= ± t

Neglecting, for the moment, the negative value, this is a statement that the time we experience is in fact the same as the ‘real’ time. And so it should, because although we know about the future and the past we cannot directly experience either, in the same way that we cannot sense the other, ‘unreal’ and ‘imaginary’, dimensions of space. This fact is the crux of my argument that the time we experience is inextricably bound up with historic (‘unreal’) and future (imaginary’) time and although they ordinarily cancel each other out they, nevertheless, play a part in our lives.
If we accept that the future effortlessly morphs into the present and immediately passes on to be the past, we risk the certainty that the present, existing as it would seem to be between a positive value and a negative could equate with zero. That is the present will have no value. However, if we believe, as I do, that the future and the past exist in different dimensions, the problem does not arise.
It is also my contention that ‘unreal’ time is responsible for the brain’s ability to memorise and that ‘imaginary’ time allows humans to solve problems, appreciate art, love and affect the other ineffable traits of the human condition. This is no harder to acknowledge than that the future and the past exist.
Can we infer other properties of time with this new understanding? According to the ‘Big Bang’ theory of creation, ALL of space-time is created at the beginning. This immediately tells us that time according to this model is finite; there IS an end. This fits in well with the religious faith in an ‘end of time’ scenario; the Day of Judgement.
However, in my theory, there is no end of time; the universe simply grows and coalesces with others, expanding into infinite and eternal nothingness, what I refer to as the ‘Pleroma’.
What about time travel? At the point of creation, the universe has no past, therefore ‘unreal’ time, ‘-t’, can be set at zero. The above equation then gives us: T = 0. In otherwise the universe’s clock is set ticking at its inception. On earth the clock has reached nearly fourteen billion years but at the rim where space-time is being created the clock is set at zero. Therefore to travel back in time, to a more primitive period one must travel towards the rim and inversely one must travel back to see the future.
It is easier to imagine one can travel back in time by visiting our sister universe where ‘-t’ time plays a role. Remember the equation above where T = ± t. However it must also be recalled that the ‘unreal’ time act perpendicularly, not linearly, with the time, ‘t’, we experience and measure.

How do the additional dimensions of time affect us on earth? I contend that their influence can be seen in the workings of the brain. The ‘unreal’ time component allows us to recall, whilst the ‘imaginary’ time component allows us to contemplate the future. Consider the example I give in my book concerning the antelope and the lion:
The antelope spots a lion in ‘real’ time, ‘t’ the here and now. ‘Unreal’ time, (-t) recalls (from the past) that lions are dangerous and ‘imaginary’ time, ‘it’, speculates on the future and a course of action; flight or fight. All the processes work in parallel and are extremely quick offering the antelope a better hope for survival. The human brain works the same but offers more options. The example, however, demonstrates the intimate connection between the three modes of time and the extra dimensions I suggest.

For more information on how the dimensions of time impact on our lives please download my book, ‘SPIRITUAL MAN: AN INTRODUCTION TO NEGATIVE DIMENSIONS’ from Kindle or Kobo.

Friday, 5 December 2014

Imperial College: seat of learning or church of Mammon

A cancer research professor has taken his own life under pressure from his top university, Imperial College, to find more funding or face the sack.
Read more: 

Yesterday a spokesman for Imperial College London disputed Prof Grimm's claim he had been threatened with the sack, and said the matter had been at an informal stage, adding: 'His line manager met with him on a number of occasions to see how the College could help him to develop more competitive grant applications.

Here we have it; Professor Grimm had a 'line manager' and the threats of dismissal were 'informal'. It's all we need to know about the state of further science today. It's no more than a grubby business, more concerned with money and making money than pushing ing back the boundaries of knowledge. Did Newton, Faraday or Einstein face such questions? I very much doubt it, not least because it is next to impossible to be objective about science when obliged to produce results, often in a limited time-scale. Real science is not about that and one can't help but feel that this seat of learning  has sold its soul with Fleming spinning in his grave