Microvita Research e.V.


Questions & Answers                              

B.: Why read this book?

M.: Microvita Research has been an ongoing process worldwide for more than 30 years. Several books and dozens of articles have been published, and hundreds of seminars were conducted. Nevertheless, the new book is a milestone in this endeavor: It signifies the turning point from a narrative to an analytical and constructive approach. It mostly refrains from proclaiming anything, rather it describes within a mathematical model, how Microvita (ultimate particles of consciousness) could function at the very basic level of existence. Thereby the possibilities of our discipline are explored in a new way, opening the door to the foundation of a new science of reality. By reading the book, you will be empowered to participate in this promising adventure.

B.: What does it bring about in everyday life?

M.: In many cases, conception comes before perception, or "you can only see what you believe." As a consequence, it makes a difference in everyday life, whether you believe that everything is made out of atoms, or whether you believe in God, angels and devils. And it makes a big difference for a religious person, whether his or her conceptions are aligned or twisted with science. Einstein said “Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind. So if a religious person neglects science, he or she is highly susceptible to become a ‘blind follower.

In contrast, the book provides a concise and testable model, which integrates atoms and elementary particles, as well as God (Purushottama), angels (Devayoniis) and devils (Praetayoniis). All you still need is a pen and a sheet of paper, or more conveniently, an Excel worksheet. Once youve understood the system, its even needless to calculate; instead, you can guess the results, knowing how the physical and the spiritual are interrelated to each other: concise and testable. It becomes a mental tool in everyday life.

For religious people, this tool possibly removes fuzziness and obscurity; and for materialists it allows an acceptance of the spiritual.

B.: Is this new model inventing a totally new ontology and epistemology about microvita?

M.: Its not totally new. Before, the topic of Microvita was mostly communicated within the framework of P.R. Sarkars own terminology. People were basically repeating what he had said - therefore, the logic was circulating among some of his explanatory patterns, like Gunas, Tattvas, Brahmacakra, 4-Chambered Universe etc.; the discourse was neither scientific nor philosophical, rather like a political or legal presentation. The excuse for doing so was that we had no alternative, as we didnt have experimental data. The idea was that, would we be able to present experimental proofs, we could show that P.R. Sarkar was right in saying what he said: A notorious approach, which was finally ridiculed.

Additionally, we also had approaches that linked Microvita Research with ‘New Science. In this way, however, the problem of having no reasonable base was only shifted from leaning onto the authority of P.R. Sarkar, to leaning onto some statements of the ‘New Science. Their arguments were too speculative, as also too much driven by a desire to prove what was actually ‘known in advance.

So, ten to twelve years ago, the challenge was to find ones own reasonable base for any talk about Microvita.

For me, the reasonable base was found in logic, mathematics and quantum physics: In my view, the topic of Microvita must stand on these feet, or it doesnt stand at all. Neither authorities, nor experimental data can replace it. Rather, experiments are the outflows of theoretical concepts: in experimentation, its even more true that you can see only what you assume. However, if the facts dont meet your expectations, you are compelled to learn. That is because the experimental setting has to be readily comprehensible, so that you dont have an easy escape if the results disappoint your beliefs. But then you have to produce a new assumption, and the experiment has to be designed accordingly, and finally the data will either match or dissent from your hypothesis.

In contrast, daily life is mostly so complex that it can be impossible to draw a conclusion out of a mismatch between conception and perception. Consequently, with learning becoming a hazard, mental life is prone to slow down. This is particularly true for religious systems of belief, and therefore religion without science is bound to become blind.

Just have a look at this stela:


It shows an authority, no doubt. But moreover, it reminds of an equation: my point is that this equation starts with the number i. Yes, its not a letter, its a number, the square root of -1, which is, in my interpretation, the missing link to a reasonable concept of microvita!

The i means that the wave equation Ψ (psi) must be complex, which means that it must have imaginary components (an imaginary number multiplied by an imaginary number gives a real number, in the most simple case, i x i = -1, so H Ψ equals E Ψ = i hbar delta Ψ / delta t only because Ψ has got imaginary components).

And the crucial question has been, since 1925/26: What does the imaginary part of the wave equation actually mean; because it introduces something unreal into real physics, isnt it?

The standard answer has been: dont ask for the meaning, just use it - and use it in the way, as it was agreed upon in Copenhagen 1927, by applying the Born rule, which tells us that a probability is equal to the amplitude-squared (really the amplitude times its own complex conjugate, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_rule)

This means that you make a square of an imaginary term, and what you get is real - so dont worry about that you had a short excursion into the unreal ; )

Here we can introduce P.R. Sarkar. On May 19th, 1989, he said: Microvita are the initial stage of matter. Although they are matter they are very, very subtle. All of a sudden microvita are transmuted into matter and matter is transmuted into microvita. For investigating the initial stage of matter, research is not possible in physical laboratories, but it is possible in the human mind and the human soul. Microvitum is closer to the realm of ideas than matter.

Then what is the silver lining of demarcation between matter and idea? Of that silver lining, the outside is matter and the other side, the inner side, is idea. That is, this silver lining is made of the initial stage of matter and the cruder stage of idea. If you consider that the atom is the constituent of matter, likewise idea is the constituent of microvita.

Two days later: Microvita are a happy blending of matter and idea. There is a silver lining made of the initial stage of matter and the final stage of microvita. Or, in other words, between the final stage of microvita and the initial stage of matter there exists a silver lining.

My conclusion is ideas reside in imaginary space-time (-it, ix, iy, iz), matter resides in real space-time (-t, x, y, z), and microvita are the inhabitants of that silver lining, between the imaginary and the real realm.

So the imaginary component of the wave equation refers to specific ideas which can become real, and the probability of becoming real is calculated from its amplitude times its own complex conjugate, which is nothing but a matrix calculation!

Here we are.

It had been objected to that nature wont perform matrix calculations at the subatomic level. However, Werner Heisenberg had his epiphany during a holiday on the island of Helgoland, without any reference to matrix calculations. Only when coming back to Göttingen, and presenting his findings to his headmaster, he (Max Born) remembered lectures about matrix calculations that he had heard during his studies as a young man in Breslau. Using this formalism, Heisenbergs equations could be written down most elegantly - which means that nature is doing something at the subatomic level, and we can describe or model it with matrix calculations.

B.: Wow! This approach would make so much sense to all. Think about innovation, creativity etc. Especially, when you approach it in a more scientific way and get out of the spiritual discourse, which could scare the public away. Natural science, religion, philosophy and art are so much connected when you look at it in that light.

B.: So, here we have an equation for creativity - innovation - social change etc. - wow - we will be rich - just kidding :-) but couldnt this be a ground breaking formula?

B.: I already think about how I can adopt this thinking to match my teaching at school - going from the physical world into the imaginary - and making math into something much more mysterious, where one can reconnect ones imagination and not just do multiplication, addition, subtraction and division like "business as usual."

B.: But can we risk ending up putting Microvitum under an imagined rational control in our attempt to explain and finally exploit it?

M.: Yes, its the general problem with rationality: the more we understand, the more we can abuse. And, of course, it refers to the Sorcerer's Apprentice.