Note: the following four centered lines were copied from the printed book:
Preface
Introduction
PART ONE Modeling the Universe
1 Bell’s Theorem
The Philosophy of Particles2 The Computing-Element Reality Model
A Problem in Need of a Solution
Quantum Mechanics
Instantaneous Communication
Overview of the ModelPART TWO Bions and Solitons
Components of the Model
Program Details and Quantum Mechanics
Living Inside Virtual Reality
3 Biology and Bions
Cell Movement4 The Bionic Brain
Cell Division
Generation of Sex Cells
Development
Neurons5 Experience and Experimentation
The Cerebral Cortex
Mental Mechanisms
Psychic Phenomena6 Mind Travels
Obstacles to Observing Bions
Meditation
Effects of Om Meditation
The Kundalini Injury
Dreams7 Awareness and the Soliton
Lucid-Dream Projections
Bion-Body Projections
The SolitonPART THREE The Caretakers
Solitonic Projections
The Afterlife
8 Foundations of Organic Life
Gaia9 Evolution by Intelligent Design
Requirements for Self-Reproduction
Odds of a Self-Reproducing Organic Entity Forming Randomly
Evolution10 Caretaker Activity
Design by Random Changes
Design by Intelligence
The Caretakers
The UFOSummary and Discussion
Occupants
The Abduction Experience
Identity of the Occupants
Miracles at Fatima
Miracles and the Caretakers
Glossary
Select Bibliography
At the time of Isaac Newton’s invention of the calculus in the 17th century, the mechanical clock was the most sophisticated machine known. The simplicity of the clock allowed its movements to be completely described with mathematics. Newton not only described the clock’s movements with mathematics, but also the movements of the planets and other astronomical bodies. Because of the success of the Newtonian method, a mathematics-based model of reality resulted. However, in modern times, a much more sophisticated machine than the clock has appeared. This machine is the computer. A computer includes a clock, but has much more, including programmability. Because of its programmability, the actions of a computer are arbitrarily complex. Assuming a complicated program, the actions of a computer cannot be described in any useful way with mathematics.
To keep pace with this advance from the clock to the computer, we believe it is time for civilization to upgrade its thinking and adjust its model of reality accordingly. This book is an attempt to help smooth this transition from the old conception of reality—that allowed only mathematics to describe particles and their interactions—to a computer-based conception of reality. We believe such a shift in thinking is inevitable for civilization, in spite of the strong inertia of the old mathematics-only reality model. Just as there was a shift during the 17th century from the theological reality model to the mathematics-only reality model, so too there can be a shift starting in the 20th century from the mathematics-only reality model to a computer-based reality model.
A reality model is a means for understanding the universe as a whole. Based on the reality model one accepts, one can classify things as either possible or impossible. The current reality model of science is the mathematics-only reality model. This is a very restrictive reality model that rejects as impossible any particle whose interactions cannot be described with mathematical equations.
If one accepts the mathematics-only reality model, then there is no such thing as the afterlife which is widely believed to follow death, because, by that model, a person only exists as the composite form of the simple, mathematics-obeying common particles composing that person’s brain, and death is the permanent end of that composite form. For similar reasons, the mathematics-only reality model denies and declares impossible many other psychic phenomena.
We do not accept these limitations on reality that the mathematics-only reality model imposes. On the other hand, the older theological reality model is unscientific, because it ignores intermediate questions and jumps directly to an intelligent super being. For example, the question of the particle composition of the hypothesized super being is completely ignored. As part of being scientific, a reality model should be able to answer questions about the particles composing the objects of interest.
The approach taken in this book is to assume deepest reality is computerized. Instead of, in effect, mathematics controlling the universe’s particles, computers control these particles. We call this computer-based reality model the computing-element reality model. This model is presented in detail in chapter 2, after some groundwork from the science of physics is described in chapter 1.
With particles controlled by computers, particles can behave in complicated, intelligent ways. Thus, intelligent particles are provided by the computing-element reality model. And with intelligent particles, psychic phenomena such as the afterlife are easy to explain.
Of course, one can object to the existence of computers controlling the universe. Compared to the mathematics-only reality model—which conveniently ignores questions about the mechanism behind its mathematics—the computing-element reality model adds complexity to the structure of deepest reality. However, this greater complexity is called for by the scientific evidence presented in chapters 3, 4, and 8. Also, this greater complexity is called for by the testimonial evidence presented in chapters 5, 6, 7, and 10.
In this chapter we first discuss the idea of particles. We then present a brief history and description of quantum mechanics. Last, we describe several experiments that—besides confirming quantum mechanics—place constraints on any reality model of the universe.
The world is composed of particles. The visible objects that occupy the everyday world are aggregates of particles. This fact was known by the ancients, and probably by the earliest people: a consequence of seeing large objects break down into smaller ones.
The recognition of the particle composition of everyday objects is very old, but the definition of what a particle is has evolved. It is too late to ask the members of the earliest culture how they defined a particle, but there are records regarding the teachings of the Greek philosopher Democritus. Another Greek named Leucippus, who lived in the 5th century BC, is credited with the first atom theory. He taught his theory to Democritus who in turn popularized what became known as atomism. In Democritus’ atomism, the particles composing everyday objects exist by themselves independent of everything else, and these particles are not composed of other particles.
Particles that are not composed of other particles are called elementary particles. Philosophically, one must grant the existence of elementary particles at some level, to avoid an infinite regress. However, there is no philosophical necessity for the idea that particles exist by themselves independent of everything else. And the science of physics has found this idea of self-existing particles wrong.
In the early 20th century, a major effort was made by physicists to explain in detail the experimentally observed absorption and emission of electromagnetic radiation by individual atoms. Electromagnetic radiation includes light waves and radio waves. The elementary particle that transports the energy of electromagnetic radiation is called a photon.
The atoms of modern science are not the atoms of Democritus, because what today are called atoms are not elementary particles. Instead, atoms are defined as the different elements of the periodic table. The atoms of the periodic table are composite particles consisting of electrons, neutrons, and protons. The neutrons and protons of an atom reside at the atom’s center—in a clump known as the nucleus. Unlike the electron, which is an elementary particle, both protons and neutrons are composite particles, and the elementary particles composing them are called quarks.
The simplest atom is hydrogen. Hydrogen consists of a single proton and a single electron. Because of this simplicity, hydrogen was the logical starting point for theoretical explanation of experimentally observed electromagnetic effects. However, early efforts, using classical methods, were unsuccessful.
The solution to the problem came in 1925. Werner Heisenberg developed a new mathematical approach called matrix mechanics, and Erwin Schrödinger independently developed a wave function. Heisenberg’s approach presumed particles, and Schrödinger’s approach presumed waves. Both approaches worked equally well in precisely explaining the experimental data involving electromagnetic radiation.
The work done by Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and others at that time, is known as quantum mechanics. However, quantum mechanics actually began in 1900 when Max Planck proposed that electromagnetic radiation could only be emitted in discrete units of energy called quanta.
Briefly, the theory of quantum mechanics retains the quanta of Planck, and adds probability. The old idea of the continuous motion of particles—and the smooth transition of a particle state to a different state—is replaced by discontinuous motion and discontinuous state changes.
For the particles studied by physics, the state of a particle is the current value of each attribute of that particle. A few examples of particle attributes are position, velocity, and mass. For certain attributes, each possible value for that attribute has an associated probability: the probability that that particle’s state will change to that value for that attribute. The mathematics of quantum mechanics allows computation of these probabilities, thereby predicting certain state changes.
Quantum mechanics predicts experimental results that contradict Democritus’ notion that a particle is self-existing independent of everything else. For example, there is an experiment that shoots electrons toward two very narrow, closely spaced slits. Away from the electron source—on the other side of the partition containing the two slits—there is a detecting film or phosphor screen. The structure of this experiment is similar to the classic experiment done by Thomas Young in the early 1800s to show the interference of light. In that experiment, sunlight was passed through two closely spaced pinholes.
In the above electron experiment, by shooting many electrons at once toward the slits, one sees a definite interference pattern on the detector, because electrons have a wave nature similar to light. When shooting only one electron at a time, it is reasonable to expect each electron to pass through only one slit and impact somewhere on the detector in a narrow band behind that particular slit through which that electron had passed. No interference is expected, because there is no other electron to interfere with. However, the result of the experiment is the same: shooting many electrons at once, or only one electron at a time, the same interference pattern is observed. The standard quantum-mechanics explanation is that the single electron went through both slits at once and interfered with itself. The same experiment has been done with neutrons, and gives the same result. Such experiments show Democritus’ notion—that a particle is self-existing independent of everything else—is wrong, because, for the particles studied by physics, particle existence, knowable only through observation, is at least partly dependent on the structure of the observing system.
The theoretical framework of quantum mechanics was laid down in the 1920s, and received assorted challenges from critics soon afterward. One serious point of disagreement was a feature of quantum mechanics known as nonlocality. In a few words, nonlocality refers to instantaneous action-at-a-distance. Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, offered their objections to nonlocality in 1935. They suggested an experiment, since known as an EPR (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen) experiment. Their experiment would test the nonlocality feature of quantum mechanics, and—they thought—contradict and disprove it. However, the EPR experiment they suggested could not be done at the time, because it involved colliding two particles and making precise measurements that were beyond the available technology.
In 1964, John Bell presented what eventually became known as Bell’s theorem. This theorem, and the associated Bell inequalities, opened the door to practical EPR experiments. The new EPR experiment involved the simultaneous emission from an atomic source of two photons moving in opposite directions. The total spin of these two photons is zero. After the photon pair is emitted, the photon spins are measured some distance away from the emission source. The spin of a photon is one of its attributes and refers to the fact that photons behave as if they were spinning like tops. In the EPR experiments done—first by John Clauser in 1972, and then more thoroughly by Alain Aspect in 1982—the instantaneous action-at-a-distance that happened was that the spin of either photon, once measured and thereby fixed, instantly fixed what the other photon’s spin was.
The nonlocality feature of quantum mechanics was proved by these EPR experiments to the satisfaction of the physics community. Regarding these EPR experiments, some kind of instantaneous, faster-than-light communication is going on.
At this point we summarize the constraints quantum mechanics places on any reality model of the universe. First, self-existing particles—that have a reality independent of everything else—do not exist. Second, instantaneous communication occurs.
This chapter presents the computing-element reality model. The remainder of this book applies this model to those aspects of life that are ignored or denied by the current reality model, which is the mathematics-only reality model, dominant since the 17th century. In this chapter we first describe the computing-element reality model, and then consider how this model supports quantum mechanics. Last, we discuss the consequences of this model, and in particular distinguish between common particles and intelligent particles.
Just as a rigid computing machine has tremendous flexibility because it is programmable, so can the universe have tremendous flexibility by being a vast, space-filling, three-dimensional array of tiny, identical, computing elements. A computing element is a self-contained computer with its own memory. Each computing element is connected to other computing elements, and each computing element runs its own copy of the same large and complex program. Each elementary particle in the universe exists only as a block of information that is stored as data in the memory of a computing element. Thus, all particles are both manipulated as data and moved about as data by these computing elements. In consequence, the reality people experience is a computer-generated virtual reality.
Today, computers are commonplace, and the basics of programs and computers are widely known. The idea of a program is easily understood. Any sequence of intelligible instructions that orders the accomplishment of some predefined work is a program. The instructions can take any form, as long as they are understandable to whatever mind or machine will follow those instructions and do the actual work. The same program has as many different representations as there are different languages in which that program can be written. Assuming a nontrivial language, any machine that can read that language and follow any program written in that language, is a computer.
Given the hypothesized computing elements at the deepest level of the universe, we assume the following. Each computing element is structurally identical, and there is only one type of computing element. Each computing element runs the same program, and there is only one program; each computing element runs its own copy of this program. We call this program the computing-element program. Each computing element can communicate with any other computing element.
Regarding communication between computing elements, different communication topologies are possible. We assume communication between any two computing elements is instantaneous—in accordance with the nonlocality property of quantum mechanics described in chapter 1. Since apparent communication is instantaneous, the processing done by any computing element—at least when running the quantum-mechanics part of its program—is also instantaneous.[1]
Regarding the shape and spacing of the computing elements, the question of shape and spacing is unimportant. Whatever the answer about shape and spacing might be, there is no obvious impact on any other question of interest. From the standpoint of what is esthetically pleasing, one can imagine the computing elements as cubes packed together without intervening space.
Regarding the size of the computing elements, the required complexity of the computing-element program can be reduced by reducing the maximum number of elementary particles a computing element simultaneously stores and manipulates in its memory.[2] In this regard, the computing-element program is most simplified if that maximum number is one; and we assume this. Then, if one assumes, for example, that no two particles can be closer than 10−16 centimeters apart—and consequently each computing element is a cube 10−16 centimeters wide—then each cubic centimeter of space contains 1048 computing elements.[3]
Although instantaneous communication and processing by the computing elements may mean infinite speed and zero delay; instead, probably there is an actual communication delay and a processing delay. It is possible to compute lower bounds on computing-element communication speed and computing-element processing speed by making a few assumptions. For example, assume the diameter of the universe is thirty billion light years, which is roughly 1026 meters; and assume a message can be sent between two computing elements across this diameter in less than a trillionth of a second. With these assumptions, the computing-element communication speed is at least 1038 meters per second. For comparison, the speed of light in a vacuum is almost 3×108 meters per second.
Regarding processing speed, assume a computing element only needs to process 100 million program instructions to determine that it should transfer to a neighboring computing element an information block. In addition, assume this information block represents a particle moving at light speed, and the distance to be covered is 10−16 centimeters. With these assumptions, there are about 10−26 seconds for the transfer of the information block to take place, and this is all the time the computing element has to process the 100 million instructions, so the MIPS rating of each computing element is at least 1028 MIPS (millions of instructions per second). For comparison, this book was composed on an 8-MIPS personal computer.
footnotes
[1] A message is a block of information that is transmitted from one computing element to another. The communication topology describes how the computing elements are connected in terms of their ability to exchange messages. For example, a fully connected topology allows each computing element to directly exchange messages with any other computing element.
An alternative and more economical communication topology connects each computing element only to its nearest neighbors. In this scheme, a message destined for a more distant computing element has to be transmitted to a neighbor. In turn, that neighbor routes the message to one of its neighbors, and so on, until the message is received at its ultimate destination. In such a message-routing scheme, if the message’s routing is conditional on information held by each neighbor doing the routing, then it is not necessary that the sending computing element know exactly which computing element(s) should ultimately receive its message. An example of such conditional message routing appears in the next section, Program Details and Quantum Mechanics, where the collapse of the quantum-mechanics wave function is discussed.
[2] Throughout the remainder of this book, as a literary convenience, the word particle always denotes an elementary particle. An elementary particle is a particle that is not composed of other particles. In physics, prime examples of elementary particles are electrons, quarks, and photons.
[3] Very large numbers and very small numbers are given in scientific notation. The exponent is the number of terms in a product of tens. A negative exponent means the number one is divided by the product of tens. For example, 10−16 is equivalent to 1/10,000,000,000,000,000 which is 0.0000000000000001, and 3×108 is equivalent to 300,000,000.
Chapter 1 described some of the experimental evidence that self-existing particles—that have a reality independent of everything else—do not exist. And this same conclusion is a natural consequence of the computing-element reality model: particles, being data, cannot exist apart from the interconnected computing elements that both store and manipulate that data.
In the language of quantum mechanics—which applies to the common particles known to physics—a particle does not exist as a particle until an observer collapses its wave function. The wave function for a single particle can fill a relatively large volume of space—until the collapse of that wave function and the consequent “appearance” of that particle to the observing system. Quantum mechanics offers no precise definition of what an observer is, but the observer is always external to the particle, and different from it.
A particle in the computing-element reality model exists only as a block of information stored as data in the memory of a computing element. The particle’s state information—which includes at least the current values of the particle’s attributes—occupies part of the information block for that particle. We assume the information block has a field that identifies the particle type. For a computing element holding a particle, i.e., holding an information block that represents a particle, additional information is stored in the computing element’s memory as needed. For example, such additional information probably includes identifying the neighboring computing element from which that information block was received or copied.
Among the information-block fields for a particle, we assume a simple yes-no field to indicate whether a particle, or more specifically a particle’s status, is active or inactive. When this field is set to active, a computing element runs a different part of its program than when this field is set to inactive. A description of the basic cycle—from inactive to active to inactive—for a common particle known to physics, and the correspondence of this cycle to quantum mechanics, follows.
A computing element that holds an inactive particle could, as determined from running its program, copy the information block for that inactive particle to one or more neighboring computing elements. This copying corresponds to the spreading in space of the particle’s wave function.
A computing element that holds an inactive particle could decide, as determined from running its program, that the held particle’s status should be changed to active. That computing element could then send a message along the sequences of computing elements that copied that inactive particle.[4] The message tells those computing elements to erase their inactive copies of that particle, because the message-sending computing element is going to activate that particle at its location. This erasing corresponds to the wave function collapsing.
Once a computing element has changed a held particle from inactive status to active status, it becomes the sole holder of that particle. That computing element can then run that portion of its program that determines how that particle will interact with the surrounding information environment found in neighboring computing elements. This surrounding information environment can be determined by exchanging messages with those neighboring computing elements. Information of interest could include what active and inactive particles those neighboring computing elements are holding, along with relevant particle state information. The actual size of the neighborhood examined by a computing element depends on the type of particle it is holding and/or that particle’s state information. This step corresponds to the role of the observer. Once the computing element has finished this step, it changes the held particle’s status back to inactive, completing the cycle.
footnotes
[4] Sending a message along the sequences of computing elements that copied an inactive particle is easy. We assume each computing element that holds a copy of that inactive particle maintains what is known as a doubly linked list, so that the sequences can be traversed in either direction. Specifically, each computing element holding a copy of that inactive particle maintains a list of all computing elements that copied to it, and a list of all computing elements to which it copied.
We assume this method of a doubly linked list, because it efficiently uses the available resources when compared to other methods, such as broadcasting the message to all computing elements regardless of their involvement with the inactive particle. However, there are other issues regarding this change-to-active-status algorithm that we do not consider here, because reasons for selecting among the different design choices are less compelling. For example, there is the issue of arbitration logic when two or more computing elements both want to activate the same particle.
In effect, the computing-element reality model explains personally experienced reality as a computer-generated virtual reality. Similarly, modern computers are often used to generate a virtual reality for game players. However, there is an important difference between virtual reality generated by a modern computer, and the ongoing virtual reality generated by the computing elements. From a personal perspective, the virtual reality generated by the computing elements is reality itself; the two are identical. Put another way, one inhabits that virtual reality; it is one’s reality.
For the last few centuries, scientists have often remarked and puzzled about the fact that so much of the world can be described with mathematics. Physics texts are typically littered with equations that wrap up physical relationships in nice neat formulas. Why is there such a close relationship between mathematics and the workings of the world? This question is frequently asked. Given the computing-element reality model, the easy and likely answer is that many equations discovered by scientists are explicitly contained in the computing-element program. In other words, the computing-element program has instructions to do mathematical calculations, and parts of that program compute specific equations. Modern computers handle mathematical calculations with ease, so we assume the computing elements do at least as well.
We now consider what the computing-element reality model allows as possible within the universe. First, we note that the dominant reality model for the last few centuries has been the mathematics-only reality model. Because all the equations of physics describing particle interactions can be computed either exactly or approximately, everything allowed by the mathematics-only reality model is also allowed by the computing-element reality model.[5] Also, the mathematics-only reality model disallows particles whose interactions cannot be expressed or explained with equations. By moving to the computing-element reality model, this limitation of the mathematics-only reality model is avoided.
A computer when programmed can behave in ways that are considered intelligent. In computer science, the Turing Hypothesis states that all intelligence can be reduced to a single program written in a simple language, running on a simple computer. The universe contains at least one example of intelligence that is widely recognized, namely people. The computing-element reality model offers an easy explanation for this intelligence, because all intelligence in the universe can spring from the computing elements and their program.
At this point, we make the distinction between two classes of particles: common particles and intelligent particles. We classify all the particles of physics as common particles. Prime examples of common particles are electrons, photons, and quarks. In general, a common particle is a particle with relatively simple state information consisting only of attribute values. This simplicity of the state information allows the interactions between common particles to be expressed with mathematical equations. This satisfies the requirement of the mathematics-only reality model, so both models allow common particles.
Besides common particles, the computing-element reality model allows the existence of intelligent particles. In general, an intelligent particle is a particle whose state information is much more complex than the state information of a common particle. Specifically, besides current attribute values, the state information of an intelligent particle typically includes learned programs, described in chapter 4, and data used by these learned programs.
Regarding the movement of an intelligent particle through space, we assume this movement is a straightforward copying of the particle’s information block from one computing element to a neighboring computing element, and then erasing the original. Specifically, we assume this copying is done without producing the multiple inactive copies that are produced for the common particles of physics, as was described in the previous section.
As explained, the state information of an intelligent particle is much more complex than the state information of a common particle. Similarly, the observer role of an intelligent particle is much more complex than the observer role of a common particle. We assume the rules within the computing-element program that govern the interaction between an intelligent particle and common particles, or between an intelligent particle and other intelligent particles, are very complex—including the self-programming capability described in chapter 4. In general, because of this complexity, and the potential complexity of the learned programs, expressing with mathematical equations the interactions involving intelligent particles is impossible. This explains why intelligent particles are absent from the mathematics-only reality model.
footnotes
[5] Equations that cannot be computed are useless to physics, because they cannot be validated. For physics, validation requires computed numbers that can be compared with measurements made by experiment.
From the science of biology, there is evidence for the existence of intelligent particles. We name the intelligent particle that is associated with biology, a bion, and we assume there is one bion associated with each cell.[6] This chapter presents some of the evidence that each cell is inhabited and controlled by a bion: First, we consider the ability of single-cell organisms to follow a chemical concentration gradient. We then consider cell division, followed by an examination of the steps by which sex cells are made. Last, we briefly look at development.
footnotes
[6] The word bion rhymes with the word ion, and is a word we made up by truncating the word biology and then suffixing on to denote a particle. Similarly, the word soliton, which we introduce in chapter 7, is a word we made up by truncating the word solitary and suffixing on.
The ability to move either toward or away from an increasing chemical concentration is a coordinated activity many single-cell organisms can do. Single-cell animals and bacteria typically have some mechanical means of movement. Some bacteria use long, external, whip-like filaments called flagella. Flagella are rotated by a molecular motor to cause propulsion through water. The larger single-cell animals may use flagella similar to bacteria, or they may have rows of short filaments called cilia which work like oars, or they may move about as amebas do. Amebas move by extruding themselves in the direction they want to go.
The Escherichia coli bacterium has a standard pattern of movement when searching for food. This bacterium moves in a straight line for a while, then it stops and turns a bit, and then continues moving in a straight line again. This pattern of movement is followed until the presence of food is detected. The bacterium can detect molecules in the water that indicate the presence of food. When the bacterium moves in a straight line, it continues longer in that direction if the concentration of these molecules is increasing. Conversely, if the concentration is decreasing, it stops its movement sooner and changes direction. Eventually, this strategy gets the bacterium to a nearby food source.
Amebas that live in soil feed on bacteria. One might not think bacteria leave signs of their presence in the surrounding water, but they do. This happens because bacteria make small molecules such as cyclic AMP and folic acid. There is always some leakage of these molecules into the surrounding water through the cell membrane. Amebas can move in the direction of increasing concentration of these molecules, and thereby find nearby bacteria. Amebas can also react to the concentration of molecules that identify the presence of other amebas. The amebas themselves leave telltale molecules in the water, and amebas move in a direction of decreasing concentration of these molecules, away from each other.
The ability of a cell to follow a chemical concentration gradient is hard to explain using chemistry alone. The easy part is the actual detection of a molecule. A cell can have receptors on its outer membrane that react when contacted by specific molecules. The other easy part is the means of cell movement. Either flagella, or cilia, or self-extrusion is used. However, the hard part is to explain the control mechanism that lies between the receptors and the means of movement.
In the ameba, one might suggest that wherever a receptor on the cell surface is stimulated by the molecule to be detected, then there is an extrusion of the ameba at that point. This kind of mechanism is a simple reflexive one. However, this reflex mechanism is not reliable. Surrounding the cell at any time could be many molecules to be detected. This would cause the cell to move in many different directions at once. And this reflex mechanism is further complicated by the need to move in the opposite direction from other amebas. This would mean that a stimulated receptor at one end of the cell would have to trigger an extrusion of the cell at the opposite end.
A much more reliable mechanism to follow a chemical concentration gradient is one that takes measurements of the concentration over time. For example, during each time interval of some predetermined fixed length, such as during each second, the moving cell could count how many molecules were detected by its receptors. If the count is decreasing over time, then the cell is probably moving away from the source. Conversely, if the count is increasing over time, then the cell is probably moving toward the source. Using this information, the cell can change its direction of movement as needed.
Unlike the reflex mechanism, there is no doubt that this count-over-time mechanism would work. However, this count-over-time mechanism requires a clock and a memory, and a means of comparing the counts stored in memory. This sounds like a computer. But such a computer is extremely difficult to design as a chemical mechanism, and no one has done it. On the other hand, the bion, an intelligent particle, can provide these services. The memory of a bion is part of that particle’s state information.
All cells reproduce by dividing. One cell becomes two. When a cell divides, it divides roughly in half. The division of water and proteins between the dividing cell halves does not have to be exactly even. Instead, a roughly even distribution of the cellular material is acceptable. However, there is one important exception: the cell’s DNA. Among other things, a cell’s DNA is a direct code for all the proteins the cell can make. If the cell is part of a multicellular organism, then the cell’s DNA also contains a development plan for the complete organism. The DNA of a cell is like a single massive book. This book cannot be torn in half and roughly distributed between the two dividing cell halves. Instead, each new cell needs its own complete copy. Therefore, before a cell can divide, it must duplicate all its DNA, and each of the two new cells must receive a complete copy of the original DNA.
All multicellular organisms are made out of eucaryotic cells. Eucaryotic cells are characterized by having a well-defined cellular nucleus that contains all the cell’s DNA. Division for eucaryotic cells has three main steps. In the first step, all the DNA is duplicated and the chromosomes condense into clearly distinct and separate groupings of DNA. For a particular type of cell, such as a human cell, there are a fixed and unchanging number of condensed chromosomes formed. Ordinary human cells always form forty-six condensed chromosomes before dividing.
During the normal life of a cell, the chromosomes in the nucleus are sufficiently decondensed so that they are not easily seen as being separate from each other. During cell division, each condensed chromosome that forms, hereafter simply referred to as a chromosome, consists of two equal-length strands that are joined. The place where the two strands are joined is called a centromere. Each chromosome strand consists mostly of a long DNA molecule wrapped helically around specialized proteins called histones. For each chromosome, each of the two strands is a duplicate of the other, coming from the preceding duplication of DNA. For a human cell, there are a total of ninety-two strands comprising forty-six chromosomes. The forty-six chromosomes comprise two copies of all the information coded in the cell’s DNA. One copy will go to one half of the dividing cell, and the other copy will go to the other half.
The second step of cell division is the actual distribution of the chromosomal DNA between the two halves of the cell. The membrane of the nucleus disintegrates, and simultaneously a spindle forms. The spindle is composed of microtubules, which are long thin rods made of chained proteins. The spindle can have several thousand of these microtubules. Many of the microtubules extend from one half of the cell to the chromosomes, and a roughly equal number of microtubules extends from the opposite half of the cell to the chromosomes. Each chromosome’s centromere becomes attached to microtubules from both halves of the cell.
When the spindle is complete, and all the centromeres are attached to microtubules, the chromosomes are then aligned together. The alignment places all the centromeres in a plane oriented at a right angle to the spindle. Now, the chromosomes are at their maximum contraction. All the DNA is tightly bound so that none will break off during the actual separation of each chromosome. The separation itself is caused by a shortening of the microtubules. In addition, in some cases the separation is caused by the two bundles of microtubules moving away from each other. The centromere, which held together the two strands of each chromosome, is pulled apart into two pieces. One piece of the centromere, attached to one chromosome strand, is pulled into one half of the cell. Simultaneously, the other centromere piece, attached to the other chromosome strand, is pulled into the opposite half of the cell. Thus, the DNA is equally divided between the two halves of the dividing cell.
The third step of cell division involves the construction of new membranes. Once the divided DNA has reached the two respective cell halves, a normal-looking nucleus forms in each cell half: at least some of the spindle’s microtubules first disintegrate, a new nuclear membrane assembles around the DNA, and the chromosomes become decondensed within the new nucleus. Once the two new nuclei are established, a new cell membrane is built in the middle of the cell, dividing the cell in two. Depending on the type of cell, the new cell membrane may be a shared membrane. Or the new cell membrane may be two separate cell membranes with each membrane facing the other. Once the membranes are completed, and the two new cells are truly divided, the remains of the spindle disintegrate.
Regarding the question of bion involvement with cell division, we discuss this at the end of the next section.
The dividing of eucaryotic cells is impressive in its precision and complexity. However, there is a special kind of cell division used to make the sex cells of most higher organisms, including people. This special division process is more complex than ordinary cell division. For organisms that use this process, each ordinary nonsex cell has half its total DNA from the organism’s mother and the other half from the organism’s father. Thus, within the cell are two collections of DNA. One collection originated from the mother, and the other collection originated from the father. Instead of this DNA from the two origins being mixed, the separateness of the two collections is maintained within the cell. When the condensed chromosomes form during ordinary cell division, half the chromosomes contain all the DNA that was passed by the mother, and the other half contain all the DNA that was passed by the father. In any particular chromosome, all the DNA came either from the mother or from the father.
Regarding genetic inheritance, particulate inheritance requires that each inheritable characteristic be represented by an even number of genes.[7] Genes are specific sections of an organism’s DNA. For any given characteristic, half the genes come from the mother and the other half come from the father. For example, if the mother’s DNA contribution has a gene for making hemoglobin, then there is a gene to make hemoglobin in the father’s DNA contribution. The actual detail of the two hemoglobin genes may differ, but for every gene in the mother’s contribution, there is a corresponding gene in the father’s contribution. Thus, the DNA from the mother is always a rough copy of the DNA from the father, and vice versa. The only difference is in the detail of individual genes.
Sex cells are made four-at-a-time from an original cell.[8] The original cell divides once, and then the two newly formed cells each divide, producing the final four sex cells. The first step for the original cell is a single duplication of all its DNA. Then, ultimately, this DNA is evenly distributed among each resultant sex cell, giving each sex cell only half the DNA possessed by an ordinary nondividing cell. Then, when the male sex cell combines with the female sex cell, the then-fertilized egg has the normal amount of DNA for a nondividing cell.
The whole purpose of sexual reproduction is to provide a controlled variability of an organism’s characteristics. Differences between individuals of the same species give natural selection something to work with—allowing, within the limits of the variability, an optimization of that species to its environment.[9] To help accomplish this variability, there is a mixed selection in the sex cell of the DNA that came from the two parents. However, the DNA that goes into a particular sex cell cannot be a random selection from all the available DNA. Instead, the DNA in the sex cell must be complete, in the sense that each characteristic of the organism is specified, and the number of genes used to specify each characteristic is only half the number of genes present for that characteristic in ordinary nondividing cells. Also, the order of the genes on the DNA must remain the same as it was originally—conforming to the DNA format for that species.
The mixing of DNA that satisfies the above constraints is partially accomplished by randomly choosing from the four strands of each functionally equivalent pair of chromosomes. Recall that a condensed chromosome consists of two identical strands joined by a centromere. For each chromosome that originated from the mother, there is a corresponding chromosome, with the same genes, that originated from the father. These two chromosomes together are a functionally equivalent pair. One chromosome from each pair is split between two sex cells. And the other chromosome from that pair is split between the other two sex cells. In addition to this mixing method, it would improve the overall variability if at least some corresponding sequences of genes on different chromosomes are exchanged with each other. This exchange method is, in fact, used. Thus, a random exchanging of corresponding sequences of genes, along with a random choosing of a chromosome strand from each chromosome pair, provides good overall variability, and preserves the DNA format for that species.
Following are the details of how the sex cells get their DNA. The original cell, as already stated, duplicates all its DNA. The same number of condensed chromosomes are formed as during ordinary cell division. However, these chromosomes are much longer and thinner than chromosomes formed during ordinary cell division. These chromosomes are stretched out so as to make the exchanging of sequences of genes easier.
Once these condensed but stretched-out chromosomes are formed, each chromosome, in effect, seeks out the other functionally equivalent chromosome and lines up with it, so that corresponding sequences of genes are directly across from each other. Then, on average, for each functionally equivalent pair of chromosomes, several random exchanges of corresponding sequences of genes take place.
After the exchanging is done, the next step has the paired chromosomes move away somewhat from each other. However, they remain connected in one or more places. Also, the chromosomes themselves undergo contraction and lose their stretched-out, long-and-thin appearance. As the chromosomes contract, the nuclear membrane disintegrates and a spindle forms. Each connected pair of contracted chromosomes lines up so that one centromere is closer to one end of the spindle, and the other centromere is closer to the opposite end of the spindle. The microtubules from each end of the spindle attach to those centromeres that are closer to that end. The two chromosomes of each connected pair are then pulled apart, moving into opposite halves of the cell. It is random which chromosome of each functionally equivalent pair goes to which cell half. Thus, each cell half gets one chromosome from each pair of what was originally mother and father chromosomes, but which have since undergone random exchanges of corresponding sequences of genes.
After the chromosomes have been divided into the two cell halves, there is a delay, the duration of which depends on the particular species. During the delay—which may or may not involve the forming of nuclei and the construction of a dividing cell membrane—the chromosomes remain unchanged. After the delay, the final step begins. New spindles form—either in each cell half if there was no cell membrane constructed during the delay; or in each of the two new cells, if a cell membrane was constructed—and the final step divides each chromosome at its centromere. The chromosomes line up, the microtubules attach to the centromeres, and the two strands of each chromosome are pulled apart in opposite directions. Four new nuclear membranes form. The chromosomes become decondensed within each new nucleus. The in-between cell membranes form, and the spindles disintegrate. There are now four sex cells, and each contains a well-varied blend of that organism’s genetic inheritance which originated from its two parents.
As one can see, cell division is a complex and highly coordinated activity consisting of a sequence of well-defined steps. Can cell division itself be exclusively a chemical phenomenon? Or would it be reasonable to believe bions are involved? Cells are highly organized, but there is still considerable random movement of molecules, and regions of more or less disorganized molecules. Also, the organized internal parts of a cell are suspended in a watery gel.[10] In general, no one has been able to construct, either by designing on paper or by building in practice, any computer-like control mechanisms made, as cells are, from groups of organized molecules suspended in a watery gel. Also, the molecular structure of cells is already known in great, although incomplete, detail, and computer-like control mechanisms composed of molecules have not been observed. Instead, the only major computer component observed is DNA, which in effect is read-only memory. Whereas read-only memory is optional, a computer requires an instruction processor, which is a centralized machine that can do each action corresponding to each program instruction stored in memory. This required computer component has not been observed in cells. Given these difficulties for the chemical explanation, we conclude that, for any cell, a bion controls the cell-division process.
footnotes
[7] The exception to this rule and the exception to the rules that follow are genes and chromosomes that are sex-specific, such as the X and Y chromosomes in people. We avoid further mention of this complicating factor.
[8] In female sex cells, four cells are made from an original cell, but only one of these four cells is a viable egg, having most of the original cell’s cytoplasm. The other three cells are not viable eggs and they disintegrate. We avoid further mention of this complicating factor.
[9] Natural selection is also known as survival of the fittest. The idea is that differences between individuals translate into differences in their ability to survive and reproduce. If a species has a pool of variable characteristics, then those characteristics that make individuals of that species less likely to survive and reproduce, tend to disappear from that species. Conversely, those characteristics that make individuals of that species more likely to survive and reproduce, tend to become common in that species.
A species is characterized by the ability of its members to interbreed. It may appear that if one had a perfect design for a particular species, then that species would have no need for sexual reproduction. However, the environment could change and thereby invalidate parts of any fixed design. In contrast, the mechanism of sexual reproduction allows a species to change as its environment changes.
[10] The sequence of well-defined steps and substeps for cell division is a program. For running such a moderately complex program, the great advantage of computerization over noncomputer solutions, in terms of resource requirements, is discussed in the next chapter, chapter 4.
Every multicellular organism begins as a single cell. How a single cell can develop into a starfish, tuna, honeybee, frog, dog, or person, is obviously a big question. Much research and experimentation have been done on the problems of development. In particular, there has been much focus on early development, because the transition from a single cell to a baby is a much more radical step than the transition from a baby to an adult, or from an adult to an aged adult.
In spite of much research on early development, there is no real explanation of how it happens, except for general statements of what must be happening. For example, it is known that some sort of communication must be taking place between neighboring cells, and molecules are typically guessed as the information carrier, but the mechanism is unknown. In general, it is not hard to state what must be happening. However, the mathematics-only reality model allows only a chemical explanation for multicellular development, and, given this restriction, there has been little progress. There is a great mass of data, but no explanation of the development mechanism.
Alternatively, by upgrading one’s reality model from the old mathematics-only reality model to a new model that includes the mathematics of the old model and adds computers, one has available for explanatory needs, intelligent particles. With the availability of the intelligent particle we call a bion, multicellular development is easily explained as a cooperative effort between bions. To achieve development, the cooperating bions read and follow the master development plan recorded in the organism’s DNA. The likely architects of this DNA are the Caretakers who are the subject of chapters 9 and 10.
This chapter presents evidence that bions give the brain its intelligence. First, we review the basics of neurons, and describe the cerebral cortex. We then consider arguments for bion involvement with the brain, including arguments for the computerization of the mind. Last, we discuss the location of memories, and describe self-programming by intelligent particles.
Every mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, fish, and insect, has a brain. The brain is at the root of a tree of sensory and motor nerves with branches throughout the body. The building block of any nervous system, including the brain, is the nerve cell. Nerve cells are called neurons. All animal life shows the same basic design for neurons. For example, a neuron from the brain of a person uses the same method for signal transmission as a neuron from a jellyfish.
Neurons come in many shapes and sizes. The typical neuron has a cell body, and an axon along which a signal can be transmitted. An axon has a cylindrical shape and resembles an electrical wire in both shape and purpose. Axon length in people varies from less than a millimeter to more than a meter in length.
A signal is transmitted from one end of the axon to the other end as a chemical wave involving the movement of sodium ions across the axon membrane. During the wave, the sodium ions move from outside the axon to inside the axon. Within the neuron is a chemical pump that is always working to transport sodium ions to the outside of the cell. A neuron waiting to transmit a signal sits at a threshold state. The sodium-ion imbalance that exists across the axon membrane waits for a trigger to set the wave in motion. Neurons with a clearly defined axon can transmit a signal in only one direction.
The speed of signal transmission through an axon is very slow when compared to electrons moving through an electrical wire. Depending on the axon, a signal may move at a speed anywhere from ½ to 120 meters per second. The fastest transmission speeds are obtained by axons that have a myelin sheath: a fatty covering. The long sensory and motor nerves that connect the brain through the spinal cord to different parts of the body are examples of myelinated neurons. In comparison to the top speed of 120 meters per second, an electrical current in a wire can move more than a million times faster. Besides speed, another consideration is how quickly a neuron can transmit a new signal. At best, a neuron can transmit roughly one thousand signals per second. One may call this the switching speed. In comparison, the fastest electrical circuits can switch more than a million times faster.
One important way neurons differ from each other is by the neurotransmitters they make and respond to. In terms of signal transmission, neurotransmitters are the link that connects one neuron to another. The sodium-ion wave is not directly transferred from one neuron to the next. Instead, the sodium-ion wave travels along the axon and spreads into the terminal branches which end with synapses. There, the synapses release some of the neurotransmitter made by that neuron. The released neurotransmitter quickly reaches the neuron(s) whose dendrites adjoin those synapses, provoking a response to that released neurotransmitter. There are three different responses. First, a neuron could be stimulated to start its own sodium-ion wave. Second, a neuron could be inhibited from starting its own sodium-ion wave. Third, a neuron could have no response.
In the human brain, there are many different neurotransmitters. Certain functionally different parts of the brain use different neurotransmitters. This allows certain drugs to selectively affect the mind. For example, a drug imitating a neurotransmitter can stimulate signal activity in the brain part that uses that neurotransmitter as a stimulant, thereby increasing the relative “loudness” of that brain part in the ensemble of the mind. Conversely, if the imitated neurotransmitter has an inhibiting effect, the relative “loudness” is decreased.
There is ample proof that the cerebrum’s thin, gray, covering layer, called the cortex, is the major site for human intelligence. Beneath this cortex is the bulk of the cerebrum. This is the white matter, so called because of its white appearance, caused by the presence of fatty sheaths protecting nerve-cell fibers—much like insulation on an electrical wire. The white matter is primarily a space through which an abundance of nerve pathways, called tracts, pass. Hundreds of millions of neurons are bundled into different tracts, just as wires are sometimes bundled into larger cables. Tracts are often composed of long axons that stretch the entire length covered by the tract.
As an example of a tract, consider the optic nerve which leaves the back of the eye as a bundle of roughly a million axons. The supporting cell bodies of these axons are buried back in the retina of the eye. The optic tract passes into the base of a thalamus, which is primarily a relay station for incoming sensory signals. There, a new set of neurons—one outgoing neuron for each incoming neuron—comprises a second optic tract called the optic radiation. This optic radiation connects from the base of the thalamus to a wide area of cerebral cortex in the lower back of the brain.
There are three main categories of white-matter tracts, corresponding to which parts of the brain the tracts are connecting. Projection tracts connect areas of cortex with the brainstem and the thalami. Association tracts connect on the same cerebral hemisphere one area of cortex with a different area of cortex. Commissural tracts connect on opposite cerebral hemispheres one area of cortex with a different area of cortex. Altogether, there are many thousands of different tracts. It seems all tracts in the white matter have either their origin, destination, or both, in the cortex.
The detailed structure of the cortex shows general uniformity across its surface. In any square millimeter of cortex, there are roughly 100,000 neurons. This gives a total count of roughly fifteen billion neurons for the entire human cortex. To contain this many neurons in the cortex, the typical cortex neuron is very small and does not have a long axon. Many neurons whose cell bodies are in the cortex do have long axons, but these axons pass into the white matter as fibers in tracts. Although fairly uniform across its surface, the cortex is not uniform through its thickness. Instead, there are six distinct layers when seen under a microscope. The main difference between the layers is the shape and density of the neurons in each layer.
There is only very limited sideways communication through the cortex. When a signal enters the cortex through an axon, the signal is largely confined to an imaginary column of no more than a millimeter across. Different areas of widely spaced cortex do communicate with each other, but by means of tracts passing through the white matter.
The primary motor cortex is an example of cortex. This cortex area is in the shape of a strip that wraps over the middle of the cerebrum. As the name suggests, the primary motor cortex plays a major part in voluntary movement. This cortex area is a map of the body, and the map was determined by neurologists touching electrodes to different points on the cortex surface and observing which muscles contracted. This map represents the parts of the body in the order they occur on the body. In other words, any two adjacent parts of the body are motor-controlled by adjacent areas of primary motor cortex. However, the map does not draw a good picture of the body, because the body parts that are under fine control get more cortex. The hand, for example, gets about as much cortex area as the whole leg and foot. This is similar to the primary visual cortex, in which more cortex is devoted to the center-of-view than to peripheral vision.
There are many tracts carrying signals into the primary motor cortex, including tracts coming from other cortex areas, sensory tracts from the thalami, and tracts through the thalami that originated in other parts of the brain. The incoming tracts are spread across the motor cortex strip, and the axons of those tracts terminate in cortex layers one, two, three, and four. For example, sensory-signal axons terminate primarily in layer four. Similarly, the optic-radiation axons terminate primarily in layer four of the primary visual cortex.
Regarding the outgoing signals of the primary motor cortex, there are the giant Betz cells. Betz cells are big neurons with thick, myelinated axons which pass down through the brainstem into the spinal cord. Muscles are activated from signals passed through these Betz cells. The Betz cells originate in layer five of the primary motor cortex. Besides the Betz cells, there are smaller outgoing axons that originate in layers five and six. These outgoing axons, in tracts, connect to other areas of cortex, and elsewhere.
Besides the primary motor cortex and the primary visual cortex, there are many other areas of cortex for which definite functions are known. This knowledge of the functional areas of the cortex did not come from studying the actual structure of the cortex, but instead from two other methods: by electrically stimulating different points on the cortex and observing the results, and by observing individuals who have specific cortex damage.
The study of cortex damage has been the best source of knowledge about the functional areas of the cortex. Localized cortex damage typically comes from head wounds, strokes, and tumors. The basic picture that emerges from studies of cortex damage is that mental processing is divided into many different functional parts, and these parts exist at different areas of cortex.
Clustered around the primary visual cortex, and associated with it, are other cortex areas known as association cortex. In general, association cortex borders each primary cortex area. The primary area receives the sense-signals first, and from the primary area the same sense-signals are transmitted through tracts to the association areas.
Each association area attacks a specific part of the total problem. Thus, an association area is a specialist. For example, for the primary visual cortex there is a specific association area for the recognition of faces. If this area is destroyed, the person suffering this loss can still see and recognize other objects, but cannot recognize a face.
Some other examples of cortex functional areas are Wernicke’s area, Broca’s area, and the prefrontal area. When Wernicke’s area is destroyed, there is a general loss of language comprehension. The person suffering this loss can no longer make any sense of what is read or heard, and any attempt to speak produces gibberish. Broca’s area is an association area of the primary motor cortex. When Broca’s area is destroyed, the person suffering this loss can no longer speak, producing only noises. The prefrontal area is beneath the forehead. When this area is destroyed, there is a general loss of foresight, concentration, and the ability to form and carry out plans of action.
There is a great deal of wiring in the human brain done by the neurons. But what is missing from the preceding description of brain structure is any hint of what the mental mechanisms are, by which human intelligence is accomplished. However, despite this lack of structural evidence, and regardless of how the computers are composed, human intelligence is most likely accomplished by computers—for the following three reasons.
If one tries to avoid computers by assuming all mental processes are hardwired—a term we use to represent any noncomputer solution—then several problems arise. First, the existence of human memory implies computers, because memory is a major component of any computer. In contrast, hardwired control mechanisms typically work without memory. Second, people have learning ability—even single-cell animals show learning ability—which implies the flexibility of computers using data saved in memory to guide future actions. In contrast, hardwired control mechanisms are almost by definition incapable of learning, because learning implies restructuring the hardwired, i.e., fixed, design. Third, beyond a very low level of problem complexity, a hardwired solution has tremendous hardware redundancy when compared to a functionally equivalent computers-and-programs solution. The redundancy happens because a hardwired mechanism duplicates at each occurrence of an algorithmic instruction the relevant hardware needed to execute that instruction. In effect, a hardwired solution trades the low-cost redundancy of stored program instructions for the high-cost redundancy of hardware. Thus, total resource requirements are much greater if mental processes are hardwired instead of computerized.
Human intelligence can be decomposed into functional parts, which in turn can be decomposed into programs using various algorithms. In general, for the purpose of guiding a computer, each algorithm must exist in a form where each elementary action of the algorithm corresponds with an elementary action of the computer. The elementary actions of a computer are known collectively as the instruction set of that computer.
Regarding the composition of the computers responsible for human intelligence, if one tries to hypothesize a chemical computer made of organic molecules suspended in a watery gel, an immediate difficulty is how to make this computer’s instruction set powerful enough to do the actions of the many different algorithms used by mental processes. For example, how does a program add two numbers by catalyzing some reaction with a protein? If one tries to assume that instead of an instruction set similar in power to those found in modern computers, the instruction set of an organic computer is much less powerful—that a refolding of some protein, for example, is an instruction—then one has merely transferred the complexity of the instruction set to the algorithms. Then, instead of, for example, a single add-two-numbers instruction, an algorithm needs some large number of less-powerful instructions to accomplish the same thing.
For those who apply the mathematics-only reality model and confine themselves to a chemical explanation of mental processes, there has been little progress. As with the control mechanisms for cell movement, cell division, and multicellular development, all considered in chapter 3, there is the same problem: no one knows how to build computer-like control mechanisms satisfying cellular conditions. And the required computer component, an instruction processor, has not been observed in cells.
Alternatively, the computing-element reality model offers intelligent particles. Chapter 3 has already presented evidence that each cell is occupied and controlled by an intelligent particle which we call a bion. Each neuron in the brain is a cell, and would therefore be occupied by a bion. To explain the intelligence of one’s mind, it is only necessary to assume that bions in the brain perform mental functions in addition to ordinary cell functions. Brain bions are in a perfect position to read, remember, and process, the sodium-ion signals moving along their neurons from sensory sources. Brain bions are also perfectly positioned to start sodium-ion signals that transmit to motor neurons, activating muscles and causing movement.
Regarding memory, the whole question of memory has been frustrating for those who have sought its presence in physical substance. People have a rich variety of memories, including memories of sights, sounds, and factual data. During much of the 20th century, there was a determined search for memory in physical substance—by many different researchers. However, these researchers were unable to localize memory in any physical substance.
An issue related to memory is the frequently heard claim that neural networks are the mechanism responsible for human intelligence—in spite of their usefulness being limited to pattern recognition. However, regardless of usefulness, without a neural-network algorithm and input-data preprocessing—requiring memory and computational ability—neural networks do nothing. Thus, before invoking physical neural networks to explain any part of human intelligence, memory and computational ability must first exist as part of the physical substance of the brain—which does not appear to be the case.
For at least the last decade, the most common explanation of memory is that it is stored, in effect, by relative differences between individual synapses. Although this explanation has the advantage of not requiring any memory molecules—which have not been found—the explanation is incomplete, because even if true there must still be a mechanism that records and retrieves memories from this speculative storage medium. Thus, how does a sequence of single-bit signals along an axon—interpreting, for example, the sodium-ion wave moving along an axon and into the synapses as a 1, and its absence as a 0—become meaningfully encoded into the synapses at the end of that axon? If memory is encoded into the synapses, then why is the encoded memory not recalled every time the associated axon transmits a signal? How do differences between a neuron’s synapses become a meaningful sequence of single-bit signals along neurons whose dendrites adjoin those synapses? Where is the mechanism for all this? Thus, this explanation, which lacks supporting evidence, pushes the problem elsewhere, making it worse in the process because synapses are specialized for neurotransmitter release, not memory storage.
Alternatively, given bions, the location of memories is among the state information of the bions that occupy the neurons of the brain. In other words, each memory exists as part of the state information of one or more bions.
Regarding the residence of the programs of the mind, we assume the computing-element program provides various learning algorithms—such as learning by trial and error, learning by analogy, and learning by copying—that allow intelligent particles to program themselves. Specifically, each program of the mind—such as the program to recognize a face—exists as part of the state information of those bions occupying that part of the brain that is the site for that program’s operation.
For reasons of efficiency, we assume the overall learning mechanism provided by the computing-element program includes a very high-level language in which learned programs are written. Then, to run a learned program, the computing-element program interprets each high-level statement of that learned program by executing the computing-element program’s own corresponding low-level functions.
Regarding the type of learning used by the brain bions to construct the various programs of the mind, at least some of the learning may be copying from other minds, and/or reading general specifications found in the DNA. The “reading” of DNA is a learned program. Once a learned program is established, such as the DNA-reading program, other bions can copy the program from those bions that already have it.
Regarding learned programs within moving particles, absolute motion through space is the norm for particles. We assume that as an intelligent particle moves through space, each successive computing element that receives that intelligent particle continues running that intelligent particle’s learned program(s) from the point left off by the previous computing element.
We also assume that each intelligent particle has a small mass—i.e., its mass attribute has a positive value—making that intelligent particle subject to both gravity and inertia. This assumption frees each intelligent particle from the computational burden of having to constantly run a learned program that would maintain that intelligent particle’s position relative to common particles.
During what we call a bion-body out-of-body experience, bions can be observed as a group of particles that fills the body. This observation corroborates the conclusion reached in chapters 3 and 4 that cells are occupied by bions. In this chapter we first consider how the computing-element reality model allows commonly reported psychic phenomena. We then discuss obstacles to observing bions. Last, we consider in detail an ancient meditation method which promotes out-of-body experiences, including bion-body projections, and we describe the meditation-caused injury known as kundalini.
Unlike the mathematics-only reality model, the computing-element reality model is tolerant of human experience, because much more is possible in a universe with intelligent particles. For example, whenever an object is within the accessible information environment of the bions of a mind—which is all of the surrounding information environment whose content can be directly examined by a learned-program perceive statement which we assume the computing-element program offers—that object can be directly perceived by those bions—ESP. The actual selection and processing of the perception depend on the learned programs of that mind.[11]
In contrast to the computing-element reality model, the mathematics-only reality model cannot accommodate ESP. With only common particles to work with, ESP cannot be explained, and the mathematics-only reality model states that ESP does not exist.
Besides ESP, there are many reported experiences that are denied by the mathematics-only reality model. However, these experiences can be explained by the computing-element reality model. For example, commonly reported psychic phenomena such as the afterlife, materialization, psychokinesis, out-of-body experiences, and communication with the dead, are all allowed by the computing-element reality model. Brief explanations follow.
An afterlife is possible because the bions occupying the body and brain are elementary particles. In general, the breakdown of a structure leaves intact the elementary particles that compose that structure. Since human memories are stored as particle state information, they, too, can survive the destruction of the body.
Materialization is possible, assuming the computing-element program offers learned-program statements that allow a learned program to generate into neighboring computing elements new information blocks that represent common particles. Alternatively, what appears to be materialization may sometimes be instead the becoming visible of a common-particle object that was previously invisible. The subject of invisibility is discussed in chapter 10.
Psychokinesis is possible because bions can interact with common particles.[12] Specifically, we assume there is a learned-program translate statement for translating particles to adjoining computing elements, discussed in chapter 10.
Out-of-body experiences are possible, assuming at least some of the bions in the brain can neglect their cell-care duties for at least a short time without causing unacceptable sickness in the body.
Communication with the dead is possible because both an afterlife and ESP are possible. Regarding the communication channel for transferring data between intelligent particles, we assume the computing-element program offers learned-program send and receive statements that allow a learned program to send and receive data. This type of communication must always be consensual between the sender and receiver, because reception by the receiver is dependent on the receiver using the necessary receive statement to receive the data. Then, even if data is received, it can be discarded, filtered, or processed, depending on the learned programs on the receiving side.[13] Using send and receive statements, data is transferred as a message, or as a stream of messages in the case of telepathic voice communication, from the computing element containing the sending intelligent particle to the computing element(s) containing the receiving intelligent particle(s).
footnotes
[11] ESP is an acronym for extrasensory perception. Broadly, ESP is perception by psychic means. Most often, ESP refers to the ability to feel what other people are thinking or doing. An example of ESP is the commonly reported experience of feeling when one is being stared at by a stranger. Upon turning around and looking, the feeling is confirmed.
Remote viewing is one consequence of ESP. The parapsychology literature has many examples of subjects “seeing” objects thousands of kilometers distant. Thus, we assume the accessible information environment of a bion is a sphere with a radius of at least several thousand kilometers.
Precognition is another consequence of ESP. For example, when a person feels the telephone about to ring, bions in the mind of the caller probably perceived the mind of the person being called and then communicated notice of the call in advance. As another example, when a person anticipates an accident such as a train wreck caused by equipment failure, the information probably originated in the mind of a mechanic or similar person who works with the relevant equipment, and who unconsciously used ESP to detect the relevant flaws, and then unconsciously estimated the time of failure. That person then unconsciously used ESP to perceive the other minds to whom that person then communicated the danger. Eventually, as the warning is unconsciously passed along, one or more persons may consequently avoid the danger.
Synchronicity or coincidence is another consequence of ESP. Because the mind’s bions can “see” unobstructed by intervening objects within a much larger volume of space than the physical senses, and communicate with other minds, arrangement by the mind’s bions of meaningful coincidence is easy.
One reason ESP and other psychic phenomena are normally restricted in use, and not brought to awareness, is the fair-play rule discussed in chapter 6.
[12] Psychokinesis is the ability to move objects by psychic means. For example, the poltergeist phenomenon, which has been linked to children and adolescents who were experiencing emotional upset at the time, is characterized by psychokinetic activity. Psychokinesis, as commonly understood, is rare. However, bions are engaged in constant psychokinetic activity as they care for their cells.
[13] We have an anecdote that illustrates the consensual nature of communication between intelligent particles. We once went to a psychic fair offering readings by professional psychics. Interested in a personal demonstration of ESP, we selected one of the available psychics. To avoid helping her during the reading, we did not ask questions, give personal information, comment on her reading’s accuracy, or even look at her. Nevertheless, the reading she gave was a personally convincing demonstration of direct communication between minds, where the received communications were brought to awareness in the mind of the psychic.
The point of this anecdote is that after the reading was over she remarked that we were very easy to read, and that sometimes she gets very little or nothing from the person being read. The explanation follows. During a reading, bions in the psychic’s mind are sending questions to bions in the mind of the person being read. If that person’s mind refuses to read or answer any questions, or is unable to, then that psychic draws a blank, and is forced to rely on secondary means such as interpreting Tarot cards and/or making guesses based on whatever clues are available. Thus, a skeptic who wants “proof” that a psychic is fake can get “proof” by unconsciously refusing to answer truthfully any question sent by the psychic’s mind.
Psychic readings, when genuine, offer one a means to consciously learn about hidden plans and expectations in one’s own mind, circumventing the normal, restricted, and heavily filtered paths to awareness. Channeling, when the source is not merely the channel’s own mind, is a closely related talent which many psychics have. When a psychic channels communications from another mind, such as from the mind of a dead person, the same consensual communication between intelligent particles is taking place.
Experimentation is an important part of the scientific method. Because bions are particles, one might expect to observe bions directly with some kind of instrument. However, observing an intelligent particle with an instrument made of common particles is difficult in practice. This is because an intelligent particle is selective about how it interacts with common particles.[14] For example, if an intelligent particle chooses to ignore a physics instrument such as an accelerator, then that accelerator will not detect that particle.[15] At present, organic cells seem to be the only common-particle instruments that intelligent particles respond to in repeatable fashion.
Being partly composed of intelligent particles, it is possible for a person to be his or her own instrument to observe bions. However, because of the fragility of the physical body and its overriding needs, most people cannot directly observe bions without some kind of assistance, such as by meditation.
footnotes
[14] Of course, the computing-element program decides all particle interactions—either directly in the case of common particles, or indirectly through learned programs in the case of intelligent particles—and all particles are blocks of information manipulated by the computing elements that run the computing-element program. However, as a literary convenience, intelligent particles will sometimes be spoken of as having their own volition. This avoids excessive repetition of the details of the computing-element reality model.
[15] In computational terms, ignoring other particles and not interacting with them is always easiest, because interaction requires computation whereas noninteraction requires none. Thus, for example, bions passing through a wall is computationally easier for those bions than being repelled by that wall. And bions remaining invisible to ordinary sight is computationally easier for those bions than reflecting and/or absorbing light and being seen through the eye.
The ancient books of Hinduism are collectively known as the Vedas. It is not known with any certainty when the Vedas were written, but typical estimates have the oldest books written three thousand years ago. Regarding the origin of Hinduism, it can be argued that Hinduism developed and prospered because it had a specific and powerful means for an individual to directly experience psychic phenomena.
Among the Vedas are the Upanishads, a collection of ancient writings which embody the philosophy of Hinduism. The Upanishads speak clearly about the means to experience psychic phenomena. It is an amazingly simple method: briefly, mentally repeat over and over the sound Om. The sound Om rhymes with the words Rome and home. The o sound is short, and the m sound is typically drawn out. Robert Hume, in his book The Thirteen Principal Upanishads, translates from the original Sanskrit:
The word which all the Vedas rehearse,
And which all austerities proclaim,
Desiring which men live the life of religious studentship—
That word to thee I briefly declare.
That is Om!
That syllable, truly, indeed, is Brahma!
That syllable indeed is the supreme!
Knowing that syllable, truly, indeed,
Whatever one desires is his!
That is the best support.
That is the supreme support.
Knowing that support,
One becomes happy in the Brahma-world.[16]
This verse is from the Katha Upanishad. In this verse one sees the praises heaped upon Om. There is also a promise of desires fulfilled and happiness attained. The word Brahma is a technical term which occurs frequently in the Upanishads and often refers to the experiences one can have as a result of using Om.
Taking as a bow the great weapon of the Upanishad,
One should put upon it an arrow sharpened by meditation.
Stretching it with a thought directed to the essence of That,
Penetrate that Imperishable as the mark, my friend.
The mystic syllable Om is the bow. The arrow is the soul.
Brahma is said to be the mark.
By the undistracted man is It to be penetrated.
One should come to be in It, as the arrow [in the mark].[17]
This verse is from the Mundaka Upanishad. The syllable Om is identified as the bow in the fifth line, and in the first line the bow is called the great weapon. By this bow-and-arrow analogy, the power of Om is expressed. A straightforward interpretation of this verse is that the use of Om can launch the awareness into an out-of-body experience.
As the material form of fire when latent in its source
Is not perceived—and yet there is no evanishment of its subtle form—
But may be caught again by means of the drill in its source,
So, verily, both are in the body by the use of Om.
By making one’s own body the lower friction-stick
And the syllable Om the upper friction-stick,
By practicing the friction of meditation,
One may see the God who is hidden, as it were.[18]
This verse is from the Svetasvatara Upanishad. It uses an outdated analogy, as did the previous verse. Before matches and lighters, people started fires by such means as rapidly spinning a stick of wood called a drill, the pointed end of which is surrounded by kindling and pressed against a stationary block—the heat from the friction then ignites the kindling. The beginning of the verse is scientifically inaccurate; it is saying fire exists in wood in some subtle form. This is not true, but excusable because the Upanishads are prescientific writings.
The meaning of this verse starts with the fourth line. The first three lines make the claim that fire has both a visible form and a subtle, hidden form. The remaining lines make the claim that there is something similarly hidden in the body. Normally this something is hidden, as the writer of the verse supposed fire is hidden in the stick. But by using Om, one can draw out this hidden something and make it known to one’s own awareness. Referring to the computing-element reality model, this hidden something is the population of bions inhabiting the cells of the body.
Whereas one thus joins breath and the syllable Om
And all the manifold world—
Or perhaps they are joined!—
Therefore it has been declared to be Yoga.[19]
This verse from the Maitri Upanishad gives a definition of yoga as involving the use of Om. However, since Hinduism’s founding, there have been many innovators on the Om meditation method. The yoga practices of today are testimony to this. For many meditators the syllable is not used. Or if it is used, it is used in combination with other sounds.
footnotes
[16] Hume, Robert. The Thirteen Principal Upanishads, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, London, 1934. pp. 348–349.
[17] Ibid., p. 372. The bracketed note on the last line is by the translator, Robert Hume.
[18] Ibid., p. 396. The word subtile on the second line is an obsolete synonym of the word subtle.
[19] Ibid., p. 439.
The early Hindus had somehow learned about Om, probably from the Caretakers who are the subject of chapters 9 and 10. By repeating Om many times, they obtained the impressive results indicated in the Upanishads.
If one wants to meditate using Om, and risk the injury described in the next section, the typical procedure seems to be the following: lie down comfortably on a bed—preferably at night before sleeping. The room should be quiet. Then, close the eyes and mentally repeat the sound Om, over and over at whatever seems like a normal pace. Do not say the sound aloud. Avoid stray thoughts and try not to feel the body. Although movement should be avoided, move if it will correct any physical discomfort. During the meditation, the attention has to settle somewhere, so a good place to focus the attention is the center of the forehead.
There is no guarantee that the use of Om will produce results. The results of Om meditation have a high threshold. A single sounding of Om is useless. Instead, it must be repeated many times. Many hours of using Om, spread over many days, may be necessary before there are any results. If it turns out that individual responsiveness to Om is genetically determined or influenced, then at least some people may be immune to it.
The following are some effects that may be experienced because of Om meditation. One effect is that the use of Om enhances the clarity and frequency of dream remembrance upon waking from sleep. Another effect is that during sleep there is lucid dreaming. A lucid dream is where one is conscious within what appears to be a surrounding dream world, and in this dream world one can freely move about. As is discussed in the next chapter, lucid dreams are out-of-body experiences.
Another effect of Om meditation is that during sleep there is an onset of consciousness and a direct perception of a nonphysical body. Often this bion body, which is a body composed solely of bions, is either coming out of, or reentering, the physical body. This tangible, nonphysical body—which is capable of motion and movement independent of the physical body—convinces those people who experience it that they are truly exterior to the physical body.
Another effect of Om meditation is that something is felt in the body during the Om meditation. This may be a vibration, or a loss of sensation in the limbs, or a shrinking feeling.
Of the four effects mentioned, the first occurs upon awakening, and the next two occur during sleep. If one is going to have unusual perceptions, the best time for them is when one is asleep. When asleep, the body has the lowest need for the services of the mind. If part of the mind were to wander off and leave the body alone, then hopefully the body would not miss it. However, regardless of whether one is asleep or not, the primary limitation on any out-of-body experience, and the primary limitation on its duration, is the extent to which the bions involved can neglect their cell-care duties.
Although Om meditation has the potential to promote unusual perceptions, it also has the potential to cause a very painful injury. Om meditation, and meditation in general, can—after long use—cause the devastating injury known as kundalini. This injury, which appears to be nonphysical, happens during the actual meditation, and not during sleep. Briefly, the cause of the injury is too much meditation. Specifically, we assume excessive meditation can cause a neuron-inhabiting bion in the lower spine to self-program, causing an alteration or corruption in one of its learned programs, and the ultimate consequence of this reprogramming is the burning pain of the kundalini injury.
The details of the kundalini injury are as follows. At some point during meditation, without any warning, there is a strong sensation at the spine in the lower back, near the end of the spine. There is then a sensation of something pushing up the spine from the point of the original sensation. How far this sensation moves up the spine is variable. Also, it depends on what the person does. He or she should immediately get up, move around, and forswear future meditation. Doing so can stop the copying of the learned-program corruption, if that is what the felt movement up the spine is: a side effect of the corruption-originating bion copying to neighboring neuron-inhabiting bions, and those neighbors copying to their neighbors, and so on up the spine.
The onset of the pain is variable, but seems to follow the kundalini injury quickly—within a day or two. Typically, the pain of the kundalini injury is a burning sensation across the back—or at least a burning sensation along the lower spine—and the pain may also cover other parts of the body such as the head. The pain is sometimes intense. It may come and go during a period of months or years and eventually fade away, or it may burn incessantly for years without relief.
The common reaction by the sufferer to the kundalini injury is bewilderment. Continued meditation seems to aggravate the kundalini injury, so the typical sufferer develops a strong aversion for meditation.
The Indian, Gopi Krishna, suffered the kundalini injury in December 1937, at the age of thirty-four. He had a habit of meditating for about three hours every morning, and he did this for seventeen years. Apparently, he did not practice Om meditation. Instead, he just concentrated on a spot centered on his forehead. In his case, the sensation rose all the way up his spine and into his head. The pain he suffered lasted several decades.
The Indian, Krishnamurti, who had been groomed as the World Teacher of the Theosophical Society, suffered the kundalini injury in August 1922, at the age of twenty-seven. He had been meditating. His suffering lasted several years and the pain would come and go. In one of his letters of 1925, Krishnamurti wrote, “I suppose it will stop some day but at present it is rather awful. I can’t do any work etc. It goes on all day & all night now.”[20] Such are the hazards of meditation.
footnotes
[20] Lutyens, Mary. Krishnamurti: The Years of Awakening. Avon Books, New York, 1983. p. 216.
In this chapter we consider two kinds of out-of-body experiences, namely lucid-dream out-of-body experiences and bion-body out-of-body experiences. First, the difference between internal dreams and external dreams is considered, followed by a consideration of two classics of the esoteric literature. The first classic is the book Astral Projection, by Oliver Fox, which reports Fox’s history of lucid-dream out-of-body experiences. We use his book as a source book on lucid dreams. The second classic is the book The Projection of the Astral Body, by Sylvan Muldoon and Hereward Carrington, which reports Sylvan Muldoon’s history of bion-body out-of-body experiences. We use their book as a source book on the bion body.
Dreams need no introduction, because dreaming is an experience most people have. However, there has long been the question as to the location of dreams. Some past cultures believed in a separate dream world which exists around the dreamer. Then, when a person dreams, the mind of that person is moving about in this dream world. We call this kind of dream an external dream. The alternative is that dreams are spatially confined to the dreamer’s head, which we call an internal dream.
The mathematics-only reality model cannot explain external dreams, and according to that model, all dreams are internal. In contrast, the computing-element reality model allows both kinds of dreams.
Assuming an internal dream, the imagery and sounds of that dream are generated by some of the brain bions without using substantial sensory input. That the mind can generate high-quality images and sounds without sensory input is a certainty. First, most people can imagine or recall low-quality images and sounds while awake. Second, hallucinogens, such as LSD and DMT, can provoke a torrent of high-quality images while the person is awake. Thus, the mind is fully capable of internal dreaming.
We assume internal dreaming is the rule, and external dreaming is the exception. However, if the mind uses ESP and/or receives communications from other minds, then a given internal dream can incorporate direct perceptions of external objects and/or communicated information from other minds. Thus, even an internal dream can have an external component.
Assuming an external dream, the imagery and sounds of the dream are generated using substantial sensory input—by some of those brain bions that have collectively left the body for a short time. However, the common particles normally observed during an external dream are different from the common particles observed when one is awake. In other words, the common particles observed during an external dream are a different class of common particles than the electrons, quarks, photons, and other elementary particles of physics. For convenience, we call the common particles of physics, p-common particles. And we call the common particles that are observed during an external dream, d-common particles. These d-common particles do not interact with p-common particles.
Those brain bions that have collectively left the body for a short time, we call a mind-piece. The word piece is used, because at least some brain bions are necessarily left behind with the body.[21] The sensory input for an external dream comes from the interaction of the roving mind-piece with its surroundings. These surroundings typically include other minds and/or mind-pieces, and d-common particles.
Conceivably, all the experiences of an external dream, more commonly called a lucid dream, could be simulated by a learned program. However, simulation is not the most economical explanation, because learned-program complexity is minimized if the apparent experiences in an external environment, such as those described in the next section, are, in fact, occurring in an external environment.
footnotes
[21] The various molecules of a cell are more or less stable. Thus, we assume that without its bion, a cell, typically, soon reaches a stable state where chemical reactions cease and the structure of the cell just before that bion’s departure remains mostly unchanged—succumbing only slowly to environmental stresses from outside the cell. This quasi-stability means that a bion can leave its cell for at least a short time, and, upon return, find its cell in much the same state as when it left it.
However, because there is so much interdependency in the human body, subpar performance by cells whose bions are absent—depending on how many bions are absent, for how long, and from which cells—could have a cascading effect that ultimately causes sickness, or possibly even death. To avoid these dangers, we assume the bions are collectively careful about staying with the physical body, and that, for the typical person who has out-of-body experiences, they maintain comfortable safety margins for those experiences.
Regarding out-of-body experiences, many good accounts have been written in Europe and the United States. Many people have had isolated out-of-body experiences, and some of these experiences have been collected and published by researchers. However, there are also books written by individuals who have had many out-of-body experiences, and have done so spontaneously without the aid of meditation, drugs, or other means. They are called projectionists, because they are self-aware while projected away from their bodies, and they remember their experiences long enough to record them.
In 1920, the personal account of Hugh Calloway, who used the pseudonym Oliver Fox, was published in a British journal. About two decades later, Fox, as we shall call him, wrote the book Astral Projection, which recounted his experiences more fully. Fox was a lucid dreamer.
Fox had his first lucid dream at the age of sixteen in 1902. He dreamed he was standing outside his home. In the dream, the nearby ocean was visible along with trees and nearby buildings; and Fox walked toward his home and looked down at the stone-covered walkway. Although similar, the walkway in the dream was not identical in appearance to the real-life walkway that it imitated. During the dream, Fox noticed this difference and wondered about it. The explanation that he was dreaming occurred to him, and at that point he became self-aware. His dream ended shortly afterward.
After his first lucid dream, lucid dreaming became a frequent occurrence for Fox. He would be asleep and dreaming, and at some point he would become conscious in the dream. Fox noted two interesting things about his lucid dreams. First, he could move about within the dream—such as by gliding across an apparent surface. Second, the substance that formed the objects in the dream could be molded by thought.
Fox’s lucid dreams were typically short, and he did his best to prolong them. But he would feel a pain in his dream-head, and this pain signaled the need to return to his body. As this initially weak pain grew, he then experienced a dual perception consisting of his dream sensations and his body’s sensations. A sort of tug-of-war resulted, with the body winning.
Unlike Fox, most lucid dreamers never report having a choice, since at some point the lucid dream just ends without any warning, and the dreamer awakes. In Fox’s case, we assume the perceptions he felt of his physical body were communicated from bions still in his brain to bions in his mind-piece, using the learned-program send and receive statements. Similarly, the communication can go in the other direction, as demonstrated by sleep-lab experiments where the physical body can show various movements and other responses that correlate with events in the lucid dream.[22]
Fox had wondered what would happen if he resisted the warning-pain signal and delayed the return to his body. He decided to experiment. About a year after his first lucid dream, he became self-aware in another of his walk-around-the-town dreams. He felt the warning pain and ignored it. The dual perception occurred and he successfully willed to retain the dream perception. Next, the growing pain in his dream-head peaked and then disappeared. At that point Fox was free to continue his dream.
As Fox’s lucid dream continued, he soon wanted to awake, but nothing happened; his lucid dream continued. Fox then became fearful and tried to concentrate on returning to his body. Suddenly, he was back in his body, but found himself paralyzed. His bodily senses were working, but he was unable to make any movements. Fortunately, this condition did not last long, and he was soon able to move again. However, immediately afterward he was queasy, and he felt sick for three days. This experience deterred him for a while, but a few weeks later he again ignored the warning-pain during a lucid dream, and the same pattern resulted. He says the sickness was less, and the memory of the dream was lost. After this second experience, Fox no longer fought against the signal to return.
Fox remarks that years later he learned that if he had only relaxed and fallen asleep when he was paralyzed in his body, then the subsequent sickness would have been avoided. If the mind-piece is away from the brain for too long, then some time is probably needed for that mind-piece to restore to par performance those brain neurons that it normally inhabits. Hurrying this restoration process, possibly ending it prematurely, may explain the sickness Fox experienced.
During his teens and twenties, Fox continued having lucid dreams, and he noticed a pattern. Often his lucid dreams never reached the warning-pain stage, because he would do something that would cut the dream short and cause him to awake. Fox gives some examples of what he means: After ordering a meal in a restaurant and then eating it, trying to taste the food he was eating caused him to awake. While watching a play in a theater, a growing interest in the play would cause him to awake. If Fox encountered an attractive woman, he could converse with her, but when he thought of an embrace or such, he would awake. To prolong a lucid dream, Fox suggested the following projectionist’s motto: “I may look, but I must not get too interested—let alone touch!”[23]
A typical end to a lucid dream is when the person tries to react to the dream in some personal way. This ending happens because the mind-piece of a lucid dreamer is not the complete mind available to that person when awake. When the lucid dreamer tries to think or act in a way that requires involvement of the missing mind part, the two mind parts are automatically rejoined to fulfill the functional request. The two mind parts are the mind-piece and the remainder of the mind left behind with the brain. A rejoining, of course, means a return to the body where at least some of the bions in the other mind part remain by necessity.
Sight and hearing are the two senses of the lucid dreamer that work as well in the lucid dream as they do in the body. The typical lucid dreamer sees clearly in color, and can hear and talk by means of telepathic communication, although conversation during a lucid dream is typically infrequent. In contrast to sight and hearing, the other senses are noticeably absent. The lucid dreamer has no sense of taste, touch, or smell. And any attempt to use these senses during a lucid dream causes an automatic rejoining of the split mind. Also, apparently absent from the mind-piece is the ability to understand writing. Fox remarks that he always had trouble reading whatever writing he encountered. He could see the writing, and he knew it was writing, but he could not read it, except occasionally and with difficulty. According to Fox, other people told him they had this same inability to read lucid-dream writing.
Instead of being an idle spectator watching the world go by, the lucid dreamer is frequently in motion. He or she may be moving slowly by walking or floating, or moving more quickly by flying. However, the most spectacular motion for the lucid dreamer is a sudden acceleration to a great speed. At first the lucid dreamer may be at a relative standstill, or flying, when the sudden acceleration begins. As the acceleration quickly builds, the sight goes black and there may be a loss of consciousness. The next thing the lucid dreamer is aware of is a change in the location of the dream. Apparently, the sudden acceleration happens when a large distance has to be traveled.
The esoteric literature has many lucid-dream stories in which transcontinental and transoceanic distances are quickly traveled by the lucid dreamer. Thus, there is reason to believe that the projected mind-piece can quickly accelerate to a speed of roughly several hundred kilometers per second. In general, for any movement of the mind-piece, the motive power of the mind-piece is the learned-program translate statement, used by the intelligent particles composing that mind-piece.
Although the motion of the lucid dreamer is an impressive clue that there is an external dream world, additional evidence comes from encounters with people known to the lucid dreamer. These dream encounters are sometimes independently confirmed when the awakened dreamer later talks with the people in question. For example, Fox tells the following story. He was discussing dreams with two friends. The three of them then agreed to meet together that night in their dreams. Fox remembered meeting only one friend in a dream that night. The next day the three friends compared experiences. The friend whom Fox met in the dream also recalled meeting Fox. Both Fox and this friend agreed they never saw the third friend who claimed to have no memory of his dreams that night.
The experience that most convinced Fox that there is an external dream world involved a girlfriend of his when he was nineteen, in the summer of 1905. Fox had talked about his lucid-dream experiences with the young woman, and her attitude was that such things are wicked. Fox tried to overcome her objections by claiming she was ignorant and he could teach her. However, her reaction was that she already knew about such things and could appear in his room at night if she wanted to. He doubted her claim, and she became determined to prove it. That night, Fox had what he calls a False Awakening—where he becomes self-aware very close to his body, having both his lucid-dream vision and lucid-dream hearing. While he was in this condition, his girlfriend made a sudden, dazzling appearance in his bedroom. She appeared fully formed, wearing a nightdress. She said nothing, but looked about the room. After a while, Fox tried to speak to her, but she disappeared and Fox awoke.
The following day, Fox met with his girlfriend to compare experiences. She greeted him enthusiastically with the news of her success. Without having been in his room before, she successfully described both its appearance and contents. The description was sufficiently detailed, convincing Fox of the reality of her visit. Fox remarks that his girlfriend said his eyes were open during the visit.
In describing his projections, Fox often shows an apparent confusion between dream-world objects and physical objects. For example, he seems to think his girlfriend saw his physical bedroom, and that is why he makes the remark about her saying that she saw his eyes open during the visit. He is quite sure his physical eyes were closed. He finally concludes she probably saw the open eyes of his dream appearance.
It seems to be a rule that the things seen during a lucid dream are objects composed of d-common particles. When Fox’s girlfriend visited his room that night, she was having a lucid dream; and she saw a d-common replica of his room which occupied the same space.
In a lucid dream, d-common objects often duplicate the shape and coloring of physical objects. For example, the appearances of other people seen during a lucid dream are typically imitations of the physical appearances of those people. When Fox’s girlfriend made her appearance that night, probably the only thing in that room that was her was the mind-piece. Presumably, her mind-piece occupied a smaller volume of space than the volume of her brain. If Fox had seen only the real her that was present, he probably would have seen a small, oddly shaped object which he would never have recognized as his girlfriend.
A valid question is what causes d-common particles to assume shapes and colorings that imitate physical objects? We assume that what shaped, colored, and clothed Fox’s girlfriend during her visit was the girlfriend’s mind-piece. Specifically, the bions—of the girlfriend’s mind-piece that was present in the room—constructed out of d-common particles the appearance that Fox saw. The observed replica room was probably part of a larger replica house or building. We assume these replicas are constructed by the bions of those people who are associated with the physical structures in question. The replica of Fox’s room was probably done by Fox himself, unconsciously.
Fox mentions the existence in the external dream world of an entire city—an imitation London which he visited and explored. By analogy with Fox’s replica room which shared the same space as his physical room, we assume this imitation London which Fox visited shared the same space as the physical London. Besides imitation buildings that looked familiar, there were also buildings and monuments that Fox knew had no equivalent in the real city of London. Fox says it was his experience that his repeated trips to the same dream-world town or city showed the same buildings and monuments—including those that had no counterpart in the real town or city.
Once made, a d-common object seems to remain in the same location and retain its form—until intelligent particles move, change, or destroy it. Although the actual manipulation of d-common particles is normally done unconsciously, sometimes a lucid dreamer consciously orders a change in some nearby d-common object and sees the change happen.
In spite of often similar appearance and location, there is no linkage between d-common objects and p-common objects. For example, an experiment often reported by lucid dreamers is that they successfully move some d-common object that they think corresponds to a familiar physical object. However, once they are awake and check the physical object, they always find it unmoved.
Fox remarks how the memories of his lucid-dream projections were fleeting. To counter this, he would often write down an account of his projection as soon as he was awake. In his book, Fox wonders why such memories are not more permanent. Of course, for most people the memory of ordinary dreams is very fleeting, too. Occasionally a projection or dream makes an impression on long-term memory, but that is the exception, not the rule. It seems the learned programs that manage the mind’s memory, when deciding long-term retention, assign a comparatively low priority to both dreams and lucid dreams.
footnotes
[22] LaBerge, Stephen. Lucid Dreaming. Ballantine Books, New York, 1987. pp. 82–95.
[23] Fox, Oliver. Astral Projection. Citadel Press, Secaucus, 1980. p. 44.
Overall, Fox was primarily a lucid dreamer. His bion-body projections, in which the mind-piece is incorporated in a bion body, seem to have been very infrequent. In general, the projected bion body can vary in its mass and substantialness—depending on how many bions are withdrawn from the physical body. It seems Fox never had a bion-body projection in which his bion body felt substantial. During his bion-body projections, Fox was unable to directly sense physical objects. Instead, when Fox was projected in his bion body, it always seems to have been a flimsy bion body, and his senses were lucid-dream senses.
Sylvan Muldoon was born in America in 1903, and spent his life in the Midwest. In November 1927, he sent a letter to Hereward Carrington, a well-known writer on paranormal subjects. Muldoon had read one of Carrington’s books. He wanted to let Carrington know that he, Muldoon, knew a lot more about the projection of what we call the bion body, than did the sources Carrington had used in his book. Carrington was so impressed by Muldoon’s letter that he wrote Muldoon back and invited him to write a book which he, Carrington, would edit and write an introduction for. The result was The Projection of the Astral Body, published in London in 1929.
Overall, lucid dreams are more common than bion-body projections. But Muldoon had only bion-body projections. And his projected bion body was much more substantial than in the case of Fox and similar projectionists, who often have lucid dreams and only occasionally have bion-body projections. In its main elements, Muldoon’s account is consistent with the many other accounts in the esoteric literature of bion-body projections. The main elements of agreement are a complete and unchanging bion body that comes out of the physical body and then later reenters it; an inability to contact or affect physical objects; and the relatively short duration of the projection experience, sometimes punctuated by brief returns to the physical body. Where Muldoon’s account differs from the standard account, each of these differences is attributable to either the greater density of his projected bion body, or the details of the learned program that we assume regulated his projections. Overall, we find Muldoon’s account highly credible, and we consider it valuable, because it is relevant to the afterlife experience which is described in the next chapter.
Muldoon was only twelve when he had his first projection experience. His mother had taken him to a camp of gathered spiritualists in Iowa, because she was interested in spiritualism. Muldoon slept in a nearby house that night with other people from the camp. He had been asleep for several hours when he awoke slowly. At first he did not know where he was and everything was dark. Eventually, he realized he was lying down on his bed, but he could not move. Muldoon soon felt his whole body vibrating and felt a pulsing pressure in the back of his head. Also, he had the sensation of floating.
Muldoon soon regained his sight and hearing. He then realized he was floating about a meter above the bed. This was his bion body floating, although he did not yet realize it. Muldoon still could not move. He continued to float upward. When his bion body was about two meters above the bed, his bion body was moved upright and placed onto the floor, standing. Muldoon estimates he was frozen in this standing position for about two minutes, after which the bion body became relaxed and Muldoon could consciously control it.
The first thing Muldoon did was turn around and look at the bed. He saw his physical body lying on it. He also saw what he calls a cable, extending out from between the eyes of his physical body on the bed. The cable ran to the back of his bion-body head, which is where he continued to feel some pressure. Muldoon was about two meters from his physical body. His bion body, being very light, was not firmly held down by gravity, and it tended to sway back and forth in spite of his efforts to stabilize it.
Not surprisingly, Muldoon was both bewildered and upset. He thought he had died, so he resolved to let the other people in the house know what had happened to him. He walked to the door of the room intending to open it. But he walked right through it. Muldoon then went from one room to another and tried to wake the people in those rooms, but was unable to. His hands passed through the people he tried to grab and shake. Muldoon remarks that in spite of this inability to make contact with physical objects, he could still see and hear them clearly. Muldoon says that at one point during his movements in the house he both saw and heard a car passing by the house. Muldoon also says he heard a clock strike two. Upon looking at the hands of the clock, he verified that it was two o’clock.
Muldoon gave up trying to wake the other people in the house. He then wandered around in the house for about fifteen minutes. At the end of this time he noticed that the cable in the back of his head was resisting his movements. The resistance increased, and Muldoon soon found himself being pulled backward toward his physical body, which was still lying on its bed. He lost conscious control of his bion body which was automatically repositioned, as before, above his physical body. The bion body then lowered down, began vibrating again, and reentered the physical body. Upon reentry, Muldoon felt a sharp pain. The projection was over. Muldoon concludes his story by saying, “I was physically alive again, filled with awe, as amazed as fearful, and I had been conscious throughout the entire occurrence.”[24]
Over the years that followed, Muldoon says he had several more projections similar to the first one in which he was conscious from the very beginning of the projection until its very end. In addition, Muldoon says he had several hundred other projections where he was conscious for only part of the time during the projection. Typically, he would become conscious after the bion body had moved into a standing position a short distance from the physical body. As far as he could tell, the order of events established by his first experience was always maintained. His situation, in terms of his sight, hearing, bion body, and cable connection, was the same from one experience to the next.
The cable that connects the bion body with the physical body is more commonly called a cord, and has been noticed by other bion-body projectionists. What is this cord and what does it connect to? The cord is composed of bions. Back at the physical body the cord is connected to the bions that are still with the physical body. In a sense, the cord does not exist as a separate structure. Instead, there are two body-shaped masses of bions which are connected by still more bions in the shape of a cord. Bions can collectively assume any shape, such as the shape of a cord, by individually using the learned-program translate statement to make changes in position relative to each other. Similarly, by using the translate statement synchronously to move together, bions can maintain the appearance of being connected.
During a bion-body projection, it often happens that the bion body briefly returns to the physical body at regular intervals. During each brief return, a kind of pumping sensation is sometimes felt. First, the bion body quickly reenters the physical body. Then, during the brief period of a few seconds when the bion body is with the physical body, the projectionist may feel the whole bion body pumping. Muldoon and other projectionists have interpreted these brief returns as a recharging and reenergizing of the projected body. This is the fuel-is-low and batteries-are-run-down kind of explanation.
Actually, the reason for the brief return of the bion body to the physical body is the need of at least some of the bions in the bion body to get back to their cells. The reported pumping sensation is probably caused by bions both leaving and joining the bion body—synchronously, in droves. During the brief return, those bions whose time is up can leave the bion body and reassociate with their cells. Simultaneously, among the bions currently associated with their cells, some may leave and join the bion body. In other words, an exchange of used for unused bions takes place. If during a return there are not enough available unused bions to replace the used ones, the whole projection experience probably ends at that point.
The consistent shape of the bion body suggests its origin. The bion body is always a match of the physical body in terms of its general outline. No projectionist ever reports an incomplete bion body or—aside from ordinary movement such as the bending of limbs—a bion body that alters or transforms its shape.[25] This is different from what is possible during a lucid dream. The apparent body of a lucid-dream projectionist is constructed on the spot out of d-common particles which have no connection to the projectionist’s physical body. Thus, lucid-dream projectionists sometimes report having no body—or an incomplete body, or a nonhuman body. Also, they sometimes report seeing someone else undergo a transformation of their apparent human form. However, such variability is never reported for the bion body. Instead, it seems the projected bions retain the same relative positions they have in the physical body. This relative-positions retention probably makes it easier for each projected bion to return to the same cell it left.
The typical bion-body projectionist finds himself or herself in a flimsy bion body. These projectionists make no connection between physical health and bion-body projections—unless to claim good health promotes projections. Muldoon, of course, was not the typical bion-body projectionist. When compared to others, his bion body was consistently dense, and his projections were sometimes long lasting, such as the roughly twenty-minute duration of his first projection. It is interesting that Muldoon takes a very decisive position on the relationship between physical health and projection ability: he claims sickness promotes projection, and health has the opposite effect. His basis for this claim was his personal experience: Muldoon was often sick. According to Carrington, Muldoon wrote his book from his sickbed.
Muldoon’s identification of sickness with projection ability may be accurate in his case. Muldoon’s opinion was that sickness comes first, and then the projections follow. However, Muldoon’s projections kept many bions away from their cells, and sometimes for comparatively long periods. Therefore, it seems more reasonable to suppose the projections came first—followed by the sickness.
Regarding the vibration of the bion body, the bion body is known to vibrate at times. The esoteric literature of the 20th century has an erroneous, standard explanation for this vibration of the bion body, beginning with the premise that there are different invisible planes of existence. The phrase planes of existence is a figure of speech used in esoteric literature to suggest separateness. According to the erroneous explanation, these planes operate at different frequencies, and the vibration rate of the bion body can match these different frequencies. Thus, according to this explanation, the vibration rate of the bion body determines which of these invisible planes becomes visible and accessible to the projectionist.
There are three reasons why this erroneous explanation came about. First, bion-body projectionists report that when they feel the vibrations increasing in frequency, separation of the bion body from the physical body will happen. Conversely, when they feel the vibrations decreasing in frequency, reassociation of the bion body with the physical body is likely. Thus, it was argued that there is a correlation between low vibration frequency, and the physical plane of existence. Second, projectionists often report experiences that are very different from each other. It was argued that this suggests different planes of existence. For example, lucid dreams are happening on one plane, and bion-body projections are happening on a different plane. Third, vibrations are easily described with mathematics. Thus, a vibrational model of reality appealed to those who were influenced by the mathematics-only reality model.
The correlation of decreasing frequency with physical reassociation, and increasing frequency with physical disassociation, suggests that when the bion body is separated from the physical body and the projectionist does not feel any vibration, then the bion body is nevertheless vibrating, but at a frequency too high to be felt or otherwise noticed. Probably this vibration of the bion body is a consequence of the process that keeps the bion body together when it is away from the physical body. However, regardless of the specific cause, the vibrations have nothing to do with tuning in alternate realities—as though the bion body were a radio-tuner or television-tuner switching stations and channels, instead of being what it really is: a population of cooperating intelligent particles.
After the onset of the vibrations, Muldoon felt himself floating. As he was floating upward, his senses of hearing and sight became active. That Muldoon could see and hear physical objects is unusual. Most bion-body projectionists see and hear physical objects either poorly or not at all. Instead, they see either darkness or d-common objects. Also, they can see their own bion body—typically as a darkness-enveloped, grainy, gray-looking, wispy body—when they look at it. To try to understand what Muldoon’s senses were like, we quote him:
When the sense of hearing first begins to manifest, the sounds seem far away. When the eyes first begin to see, everything seems blurred and whitish. Just as the sounds become more distinct, so does the sense of sight become clearer and clearer.[26]
As is often the case, everything at first seemed blurred about me, as though the room were filled with steam, or white clouds, half transparent; as though one were looking through an imperfect windowpane, seeing blurry objects through it. This condition is but temporary, however—lasting, as a rule, about a minute in practically all conscious projections.[27]
Once you are exteriorized, and your sense of sight working, the room, which was dark to your physical eyes, is no longer dark—for you are using your astral eyes, and there is a ‘foggish’ light everywhere, such as you see in your dreams, a diffused light we might call it, a light which seems none too bright, and yet is not too dim, apparently sifting right through the objects of the material world.[28]
The primary difference between Muldoon and most other bion-body projectionists was the high density of his bion body. There were many more bions in Muldoon’s projected bion body than most bion-body projectionists have in theirs. Since bions constantly interact with the p-common particles of one’s cells, we assume some of the bions in Muldoon’s projected bion body were collectively sensing p-common particles. By sensing photons and the atoms and molecules of the air, data is available that can be processed into sight and sound perceptions of physical objects. Apparently, the greater density of Muldoon’s bion body meant there were more bions available that could do the sensing and processing needed.
Although Muldoon’s sight perceptions could have been constructed from ESP of the nearby physical objects, without having to sense photons, there is a complexity cost. Specifically, to get results and accuracy comparable to algorithms using photon data, the processing algorithms using ESP data would have to be much more complex, because of such complications as having to determine visible surfaces, perspectives, and, most difficult, colorings and/or grayness. Thus, we assume photon sensing. Specifically, Muldoon’s ability to see physical objects in an otherwise dark room suggests an extremely sensitive light sensor and/or a sensor that measures more of the electromagnetic spectrum than just the visible-light portion.
The cord that Muldoon noticed during his first projection was a common feature of his later projections. He often studied this cord when he was projected. At least some bion-body projectionists never notice any cord connecting between their bion body and their physical body. However, perhaps every bion-body projection has some sort of cord connection, whether noticed or not.
For Muldoon, out to a somewhat variable distance of a few meters from his physical body, his cord remained thick. As long as the cord appeared thick, his bion body was strongly influenced by his physical body. Within this range, Muldoon felt happenings to his physical body reproduced in his bion body. For example, once a pet dog jumped on the bed and snuggled against Muldoon’s physical body—while he was projected within range. He felt this dog as though it were pressing against his bion body. Besides feeling his physical body’s sensations, Muldoon could also control its breathing when within range.
Either these communications between the projected Muldoon and his physical body were being directly communicated from brain bions to mind-piece bions, and vice versa, in the same manner as during a lucid dream—in which case cord thickness and communication ability correlated only because the learned program regulating Muldoon’s projections made them correlate. Or, less likely, these communications followed an indirect path along the cord, conditional upon the cord’s thickness.
As Muldoon moved further away from his physical body, the cord became very thin, like a thread. Muldoon claims the cord kept its threadlike thinness out to whatever distance he moved to—even to a distance of many kilometers. Perhaps the cord is like a life line, guaranteeing that the bion body can get back to its cells. However, there is no evidence for any kind of cord during a lucid-dream projection. A possible explanation for this difference is that the mind-piece has the learned programs for ESP needed to locate the physical body and then guide the return to it, whereas the bions in the bion body do not.
One might wonder if there is a limit on how far away a bion body can move from the physical body, because of the trailing cord. Although there are many stories of lucid-dream projectionists moving thousands of kilometers away from their physical bodies, there is no good evidence that a bion-body projectionist has ever moved such a distance. Thus, it is probably safe to say that the range of the bion-body projectionist is substantially less than the range of the lucid-dream projectionist.
During Muldoon’s first projection, he tried to make contact with the other people in the house. He saw their physical bodies lying in bed, but his bion-body hands passed right through them. There seems to be a fair-play rule involved here. Broadly, the fair-play rule covers all the restrictions imposed on bions for the sake of organic life. For example, a consciously controlled bion body can contact other bion bodies, but it cannot contact the bions within physical bodies, and it cannot contact physical objects. However, because d-common particles have no part in organic life, bion manipulation of these particles, as was indicated in the previous section, is apparently unrestricted.
Regarding the form in which the fair-play rule exists in a bion’s state information, we assume either the fair-play rule exists as one or more learned programs and/or learned-program parts and/or learned-program data, possibly centralized—and perhaps using certain learned-program statements specifically provided by the computing-element program to help a cooperating population of intelligent particles to maintain a stable virtual reality; or the fair-play rule exists as intelligent-particle attribute values, where each of these attribute values is interpreted by the computing-element program as defining a globally applicable limitation, or restriction, on each use or attempted use by the intelligent particle of a specific learned-program statement, such as the translate statement; or the fair-play rule exists as a mixture of the first two possibilities.
Muldoon remarks how frustrated he was that he could never make contact with physical objects. In the many projections he had, his bion body never made contact with a physical object while he was conscious. However, there were a few instances where Muldoon knew his bion body had made contact with a physical object while he was unconscious.
On the night of February 26, 1928, Muldoon had a serious stomach sickness which caused him great pain. At close to midnight he was overcome with pain and called out to his mother for help. She was asleep in an upstairs bedroom and did not hear him. Muldoon struggled out of bed, still calling, and he fainted from the pain and effort. He regained consciousness, only to struggle and faint again. The next time he regained consciousness, he was projected in his bion body. His bion body was moving without conscious control up the stairs, through a wall, and into the room where his mother and small brother were sleeping. Muldoon saw both of them sound asleep on the bed. Then, Muldoon lost consciousness for a brief period. Upon regaining consciousness, Muldoon saw his mother and small brother excitedly talking about being rolled out of bed by an uplifted mattress. After witnessing this scene, Muldoon’s bion body was drawn back and reentered his physical body. Back in his physical body, Muldoon called to his mother again. This time she heard him and came downstairs. Ignoring that he was lying on the floor, she excitedly told him how spirits had lifted the mattress several times. And she was, of course, frightened by it.
That the bion body is restricted from physical contact—and from contact with other bions in a physical body—is obviously for the common good. It seems the only contact allowed is what may be called fair contact. The only fair contact for a projected bion body is contact with other projected bion bodies, or contact with bion bodies that have no physical-body association. Because they are meeting on equal terms, the two bion bodies can make contact with each other. Most bion-body projectionists eventually have encounters with other bion bodies. Struggles and fights are often reported. These encounters can be both frightening and painful. Muldoon gives one example of this kind of encounter.
In 1923, Muldoon listened to a conversation between his mother and another woman who lived in town. This other woman described what an awful man her husband, who had just died, had been. Because of the stories the woman told, Muldoon became angered against this man. That night, Muldoon had a projection. Upon turning to look at his physical body, Muldoon was shocked to see the bion body of the dead man talked about earlier in the day. Muldoon describes this man as having a savage look and being determined for revenge, and he quickly attacked the projected Muldoon. There was a fight, and Muldoon was getting the worst of it—as well as being cursed at. However, the fight soon ended when Muldoon was drawn back into his physical body. Once he reentered his physical body, Muldoon no longer felt or heard the attack of his enemy. Muldoon remarks how his attacker clung to him and continued his attack while Muldoon was being slowly drawn back toward his physical body. However, the attacker was completely powerless to prevent Muldoon’s reentry.
In this chapter we have considered in detail both lucid-dream projections and bion-body projections. A third kind of projection is covered in the next chapter, chapter 7. The likely architects of the fair-play rule are the Caretakers who are the subject of chapters 9 and 10.
footnotes
[24] Muldoon, Sylvan, and Hereward Carrington. The Projection of the Astral Body. Samuel Weiser, New York, 1980. p. 53.
[25] In medical literature there is the related subject of phantom limbs. Amputees typically experience sensations in their missing limbs, such as position sensations and pain sensations. Also, phantom limbs seem to play a role in the use of artificial limbs.
The phenomenon of phantom limbs answers the question of what happens to the bions occupying a body part if that body part is removed. At least some of those bions remain in their old position with the remainder of the body. In the event the removed body part is reattached, those bions can reoccupy it at that time. Overall, phantom limbs demonstrate the tenacity of the bions to stay together for the good of the physical body.
[26] Ibid., p. 233.
[27] Ibid., p. 255.
[28] Ibid., p. 204.
An age-old mystery is one’s own awareness. Under the computing-element reality model, awareness is associated with an intelligent particle. We name this intelligent particle, with which one’s own awareness is associated, a soliton. In this chapter we describe the soliton, and then describe a type of projection that evidentially supports the existence of the soliton. Last, we describe the afterlife.
The soliton is an intelligent particle that has an associated awareness. Each person has a single soliton which is the location of the separate, solitary awareness that each person experiences. Unlike bions, which interact with both intelligent particles and common particles, we assume the soliton interacts only with intelligent particles. In particular, we assume the soliton interacts only with bions.
The computing-element program, in effect, can make a soliton the ruler over a cooperating population of bions. Each adult person has a cooperating population of roughly ten trillion bions—assuming one bion per cell. The bions of the brain that collectively form the mind are like a government—where the governed is the body. This government reports to and receives orders from the soliton ruler. The role of the soliton ruler is to be the final decision maker—to set goals for the government and approve its results.
Although the soliton ruler is intelligent, so are the bions that form the subject population. The intellectual work of one’s mind is done by bions. For example, the bions of the brain store memories. Also, they provide all processing of sensory input, including all recognition work such as recognizing a face. In addition, they provide all language operations such as parsing and constructing sentences, and they provide all motor control. Moreover, they provide all problem-solving and creative services—and so on. The total amount of intellectual product generated by the bions of the brain is much greater than the amount of intellectual product that is brought to the attention of the soliton ruler.[29]
Regarding the reports received by the soliton ruler from brain bions, there is a filtering process that takes place. The soliton ruler can express preferences about what specific reports it wants to see. Also, the bions can decide on their own what reports are important and demand the attention of the soliton ruler. Some general examples of reports are image reports, sound reports, and thought reports. The conscious act of seeing involves a continuous stream of image reports sent to the soliton ruler. The conscious act of hearing involves a continuous stream of sound reports sent to the soliton ruler. The conscious act of thinking involves a continuous stream of thought reports sent to the soliton ruler.
As an intelligent particle, the soliton can store its own data—such as preferences, which are probably in the form of learned programs—as part of its state information. For a person, the state information of the soliton ruler is one component of personality. The cooperating population of brain bions that collectively form the mind is the other component of personality. This bionic component of personality can be directly shaped by genetics—assuming there are genes that specify personality traits. However, the solitonic component of personality cannot be directly shaped by genetics, because the soliton cannot interact with common particles, and genes are composed of common particles.
footnotes
[29] It is well known from psychology that the activities of the unconscious mind are not always brought to awareness. For example, one is never aware of the algorithmic steps taken by one’s own mind to solve problems. An example of a problem is to understand the meaning of a sentence. As the problem is solved, the algorithmic steps are hidden from awareness. One becomes aware of only the finished product.
The existence of a solitary particle of awareness, the soliton, is evidentially supported by a rare projection experience. During an otherwise ordinary out-of-body experience, the projected population of bions stops sending sensory reports to the accompanying soliton ruler. In other words, the awareness is cut off from all sensory input. At the same time, the soliton remains active.[30] We call this a solitonic projection.
A solitonic projection can happen to someone without a prior history of out-of-body experiences, but this seems to be very rare. More likely, a solitonic projection can happen to experienced lucid-dream projectionists and bion-body projectionists. Regarding meditation, Om, described in chapter 5, has the potential to elicit a solitonic projection.
The comparative rarity of solitonic projections is indicated by a reading of the principal Upanishads. There seems to be confusion when most of these Upanishads talk about the awareness—called the soul in the verses that follow. However, the Katha Upanishad appears knowledgeable on the subject:
Know thou the soul as riding in a chariot,
The body as the chariot.
Know thou the intellect as the chariot-driver,
And the mind as the reins.[31]
This verse from the Katha Upanishad portrays awareness as separate from the mind, just as the soliton is separate from the bions.
Though He is hidden in all things,
That Soul shines not forth.
But he is seen by subtle seers
With superior, subtle intellect.[32]
A certain wise man, while seeking immortality,
Introspectively beheld the Soul face to face.[33]
These two verses from the Katha Upanishad are probably talking about a solitonic projection.
The starting point of a solitonic projection is either a lucid-dream projection or a bion-body projection. Once all sensory reports cease, the following is experienced. One finds oneself existing as a completely bodiless and mostly mindless awareness—residing at the center of a sphere. All sensory inputs are gone. But it is typically still possible to think to oneself, in which case thought reports are still occurring. Also, one cannot report a solitonic projection unless it is remembered. Therefore, we assume any reportable solitonic projection always involves some interaction, albeit minimal, between the projected bion population and the accompanying soliton ruler.
The perception of a surrounding spherical shell—around the point-like awareness—appears to be a common feature of a solitonic projection. Probably, this apparent shell is the limit of the soliton’s direct perception when it is in the solitonic-projection state. More broadly, given the solitonic-projection data, we assume the apparent shell is only a few centimeters in diameter, and, similarly, we assume the accessible information environment for a soliton is only a few centimeters in diameter. This contrasts sharply with bions which, based on ESP data, seem to have an accessible information environment at least several thousand kilometers in diameter.
Solitonic projections are typically short in duration—lasting less than a minute, or perhaps only a few seconds. Given a lucid-dream projection, the solitonic projection typically begins during the sudden acceleration that occurs for long-distance travel. In contrast, a solitonic projection that occurs during a bion-body projection, typically begins when the bion body is stationary.
Based on scanty reports of solitonic projections scattered in the esoteric literature, the awareness is separate from the mind. Besides the separateness of the awareness, the point-like quality of the awareness—as experienced during a solitonic projection—is compatible with the awareness being associated with a single particle.
footnotes
[30] By active we mean that the soliton is still communicating in various ways with the accompanying bions. During a solitonic projection, the soliton is active and the person is conscious. However, in general usage, active and inactive are not necessarily synonymous with conscious and unconscious, respectively. For example, during ordinary dreaming a person is typically unconscious but the soliton is active: receiving pseudo-sensory dream reports.
Probably there is a changeable stimulation threshold. To be conscious, the soliton must be stimulated beyond the current threshold by received reports from bions. In this case, ordinary dreaming is typically insufficiently stimulating. However, during normal awakening, or when forcibly awakened, one often becomes conscious while a dream is still ongoing. Once awake, and prompted by recollection of that part of the dream that occurred while conscious, one may be able to recall other parts of the dream—even though one was not conscious during those parts—because the mind still stored that dream in memory.
[31] Hume, op. cit., p. 351.
[32] Hume, op. cit., p. 352.
[33] Hume, op. cit., p. 353.
The computing-element reality model allows an afterlife, as was discussed in chapter 5. A brief outline of the stages of the afterlife follows. Upon death, although not necessarily all at once, the entire population of bions abandons the physical body. Of course, the fleeing population takes its soliton ruler with it. In other words, the soliton accompanies the bion population that abandons the p-common, physical body.
Thus, the first stage of afterlife is roughly equivalent to the bion-body projection experiences of Sylvan Muldoon, described in chapter 6.[34] However, the afterlife bion body is even more dense than the bion body Sylvan Muldoon had, because all bions are included. By analogy with Muldoon, this greater density of the bion body means the newly dead can see and hear physical objects. However, the fair-play rule prevents them from disturbing anything.
Upon death, most of the bions have lost the purpose they had when they occupied the physical body. Without cells to manage and care for, most of the bions in the afterlife bion body are severely underutilized. The only exception to this would be the former bions of the brain that collectively form those parts of the mind that are not body focused. These former bions of the brain still have their soliton ruler to serve and interact with. However, the loss of purpose for the other bions is probably the reason the bion-body stage of afterlife typically has a short duration.
The average duration of the bion-body stage is uncertain, but it seems to be a few weeks or months. Perhaps this duration shortens with physical age. In other words, the older one is when one dies, the shorter the bion-body stage. There is some evidence for this inverse relationship. There is also evidence that a violent or sudden death tends to prolong the bion-body stage.
It is just as well the bion-body stage typically has a short duration, because the bion body can cause feelings of pain. Also, there is the possibility of the bion body being attacked by other bion bodies—such as when the projected Sylvan Muldoon was attacked by a recently deceased neighbor. However, we assume fights during the bion-body stage can be avoided, just as they can be avoided during ordinary life.
One way or another, one is soon freed from the bion body. We assume the bion body eventually breaks up and its bions wander off more or less independently, finding suitable reemployment elsewhere.[35] Upon separation from the bion body, a person is not as complete as he or she once was. What remains with the soliton ruler are those bions that collectively form those parts of the mind that are not body focused.
After the bion-body stage, the next stage of afterlife is roughly equivalent to the lucid-dream projection experiences of Oliver Fox, described in chapter 6. It seems this lucid-dream stage of afterlife can continue unbroken for many years, even centuries. In general, there is no pain or distress during the lucid-dream stage. Instead, one leads a benign and possibly enjoyable existence. However, at some point the lucid-dream stage ends. Then, both the soliton ruler and the remaining bions wander off more or less independently and find suitable reemployment elsewhere.
Regarding the mind’s longevity, the total memory storage in each computing element is finite. Thus, there is a limit on how many memories and other data a mind can retain. The management of the available state-information memory of each bion depends on the learned programs of that bion. However, as available memory becomes filled, storing new memories and other data requires replacing old data. Thus, an old mind either forgets its past or its present. Also, the finite amount of memory for each computing element may be the primary reason the human mind has so many bions. The more bions, the more room there is to store memories and other data.
footnotes
[34] This first stage of afterlife should not be confused with the many published accounts of NDEs (near-death experiences). By definition, during an NDE the person has not yet died, so many or most of the bions are still with their cells in the physical body—which is not the case once death has occurred.
[35] The typical ghost story has sounds and/or apparitions. However, the boring, repetitious behavior of the typical ghost suggests the absence of the soliton ruler. Thus, a ghostly manifestation that occurs long after a person’s death, is probably caused by that person’s still-intact bion body acting on its own without guidance from the departed soliton ruler.
This chapter examines the credibility of the explanation that organic life is the product of chance. First, we describe the Gaia Hypothesis, and consider the current atmosphere and its maintenance. We then discuss the theoretical requirements for a self-reproducing machine, describe the molecular structure of bacteria, and compute the odds that the first self-reproducing organic entity developed by chance. Last, we discuss the reaction to such odds by scientists.
The oldest known organic life is bacteria. The fossil record shows that they first appeared at least 3½ billion years ago. Since then, organic life has radically altered the atmosphere. For example, the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere probably started with the first appearance of bacteria; and all the oxygen in the atmosphere originated from photosynthesis, an organic process.
The assertion that organic life actively maintains the atmosphere to suit its own needs is known as the Gaia Hypothesis. The Gaia Hypothesis was developed by atmospherics scientist James Lovelock. While working as a NASA consultant during the 1960s, Lovelock noticed that Venus and Mars—the two nearest planets whose orbits bracket the Earth—both have atmospheres that are mostly carbon dioxide. As a means to explain the comparatively anomalous Earth atmosphere, Lovelock formulated the Gaia Hypothesis.[36]
The current atmosphere of the Earth is not self-sustaining. It is not an equilibrium atmosphere that would persist if organic life on the Earth were removed. Instead, the atmosphere is mostly a product of life, and is actively maintained in its present condition by life. The composition of the atmosphere by volume is roughly 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1% argon, and 0.03% carbon dioxide. Other gases are present, but in smaller amounts. As Lovelock states in his book Gaia, if life on Earth were eliminated, the oxygen would slowly leave the atmosphere by such routes as reacting with the nitrogen. After a million years or so, the Earth would have its equilibrium atmosphere. The argon would remain, and there would be more carbon dioxide. But the oxygen would be gone, along with much of the nitrogen.[37] However, instead of moving to this equilibrium state, the atmosphere is maintained in disequilibrium by the coordinated activities of the biosphere.
One of the more interesting examples of control over the atmosphere by organic life is the production of ammonia. The presence of ammonia in the atmosphere counteracts the acids produced by the oxidation of nitrogen and sulfur. Lovelock estimated that without ammonia production by the biosphere, rainwater would be as acid as vinegar.[38] Instead, there is just enough ammonia produced to counteract the acids and keep the rainwater close to neutral. Besides ammonia production, there are many other Gaian processes.[39]
The mathematics-only reality model would have one believe that the entire history of organic life—including the transformation of the early atmosphere to the current atmosphere, and the active ongoing maintenance of the current atmosphere in a state of disequilibrium—was accomplished in its entirety by common particles jostled about by random events.
Intelligent processes are too complicated to be explained by mathematical equations. Therefore, the mathematics-only reality model denies there is any intelligence at the deepest level of the universe. By a process of elimination, the mathematics-only reality model has only common particles and random events with which to explain all the many innovations during the history of organic life.
footnotes
[36] Margulis, Lynn, and Gregory Hinkle. “The Biota and Gaia: 150 Years of Support for Environmental Sciences.” In Scientists on Gaia, Stephen Schneider and Penelope Boston, eds. MIT press, Cambridge, 1993.
[37] Lovelock, James. Gaia. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1982. pp. 44–46.
[38] Ibid., pp. 68, 77.
[39] Shearer, Walter. “A Selection of Biogenic Influences Relevant to the Gaia Hypothesis.” In Scientists on Gaia, op. cit.
At present, the simplest organic life is a virus. However, to reproduce, a virus is a parasite requiring a host cell. In the beginning of organic life there were no host cells, so the first organic life was not a virus, because a fundamental requirement of the first organic life is an ability to reproduce itself. Otherwise, it would quickly disappear without leaving a trace of its existence. Today, the bacterium is the simplest organic life that can reproduce itself without the need to parasitize other cells.
Any self-reproducing machine in the physical universe must meet certain theoretical requirements. A self-reproducing machine must have a wall to protect and hold together its contents. Behind this wall, the self-reproducing machine needs a power plant to run its machinery; among which is machinery to bring in raw materials from outside the wall. Also, machinery is needed to transform the raw materials into the components needed to build a copy of the self-reproducing machine. Then, machinery is needed to assemble the components. All this transport, transformation, and assembly machinery, require some sort of guidance mechanism. For example, there must be some coordinated assembly of the manufactured components into the new copy of the self-reproducing machine. Thus, the guidance mechanism cannot be too trivial, because its complexity must include a construction plan for the entire self-reproducing machine.
The requirements of a wall, power plant, transport machinery, transformation machinery, assembly machinery, and a guidance mechanism—all working together to cause self-reproduction—are not easily met. Consider the fact that there are no human-made self-reproducing machines. The bacterium is only simple when compared to larger organic life forms. When examined as a self-reproducing machine, the bacterium is extremely complex.
Each molecule of DNA is a long molecule composed of chemical units called bases. These bases are strung together like links on a chain. There are four bases, so there are four choices for each link. The sequence of bases in an organism’s DNA is very important, because this sequence codes the structure of proteins, among other things. A bacterium typically has many strands of DNA containing altogether hundreds of thousands or millions of bases.
Besides DNA, the most prominent class of organic molecules is protein. The proteins are the machinery and power plant of a cell. A protein is a long folded molecule. Just as DNA is composed of a sequence of smaller building blocks, so is protein. However, whereas the building blocks of DNA are four different bases, the building blocks of protein are twenty different amino acids. Although a protein has more choices per link, a protein rarely exceeds several thousand links in length. A bacterium has several thousand different proteins. The average length of these different proteins is somewhere in the hundreds of links.
The wall of a bacterium is a membrane made of chained sugars. Behind the wall are the DNA, proteins, and other molecules—including many water molecules. About two-thirds of a bacterium’s mass is water.
With this brief look at a bacterium, which is the simplest self-reproducing organic entity known, one can make some meaningful calculations as to the odds of a self-reproducing organic entity forming randomly. First, imagine a rich soup consisting of the four different bases and twenty different amino acids, and whatever other raw materials a self-reproducing organic entity might need.
The odds against getting an exactly specified DNA chain of 100,000 links are roughly 4100,000 to one, or roughly 1060,200 to one during a single trial of allowing a DNA strand to form randomly to a length of 100,000 links. The odds against getting an exactly specified set of one thousand proteins, of one hundred links each, are very roughly 20100,000 to one, or roughly 10127,200 to one during a single trial of allowing a thousand proteins to each form randomly to a length of one hundred links.
Of course, there are many more DNA sequences than only a single DNA sequence that would adequately code for a self-reproducing organic entity. So, one can be generous and assume that only a short DNA strand of 10,000 links is needed. In addition, assume that at any link, two of the four different bases are acceptable as that link. With these assumptions, the odds against getting a DNA chain that meets these generous criteria are only roughly 210,000 to one, or roughly 103,010 to one during a single trial of allowing a DNA strand to form randomly to a length of 10,000 links. We will use this smaller number. We do not need the higher numbers of 1060,200 and 10127,200. And we do not need to consider the fact that a DNA strand by itself, even in a rich soup of raw materials, does not make a self-reproducing organic entity. To see this, review the list of theoretical requirements for a self-reproducing machine given in the previous section.
To put the low number of 103,010 in perspective—103,010 is the number 1 with 3,010 zeros after it—one need only compare it with a few cosmic numbers. Physicists estimate there are only about 1090 particles in the universe. If instead, there were ten times the number of particles, that would only make the number 1091. The age of the universe is only about 1016 seconds.
Assume an experiment in which the atoms of the universe make 1080 flasks of soup. In addition, for each flask assume a million trials per second for the entire age of the universe. These assumptions give one about 10102 chances to get a DNA chain that meets whatever criteria one sets. The criteria for the short DNA chain—10,000 links, and, at each link, two of the four bases are acceptable as that link—need roughly 103,010 trials before they have an even chance of being satisfied. Having 10102 trials can get one just about any exact DNA sequence of fewer than 170 links. However, no one believes there theoretically exists a DNA chain of less than 170 bases that could support a self-reproducing organic entity. Such a tiny DNA chain could only code, for example, a small protein of roughly fifty-five links.
Comparing 10102 (which overestimates the available trials for random creation) with 103,010 (which probably underestimates the DNA complexity required by a self-reproducing organic entity, especially when compared to the DNA requirements of a bacterium) gives an effective zero of likelihood. Specifically, the odds of the experiment succeeding are roughly 102,908 to one, against. In other words, there is absolutely no chance that a self-reproducing organic entity was created by randomness, even when allowing tremendous resources and time.
Compounding this problem, scientific opinion of early Earth conditions holds that the soup never existed, at least not in any large amounts. For example, hydrogen cyanide is needed for synthesis of amino acids and DNA nucleotides, but a plausible mechanism for massive production of hydrogen cyanide in the early atmosphere is lacking.[40] Overall, the prospects look exceedingly dim for there having been an abundant soup on the early Earth. One may also add that in spite of the impossible odds and lack of soup, the first bacteria did not waste much time making their appearance once the surface of the Earth was sufficiently cool.
Confronted with the hopeless odds, lack of soup, and the quick appearance of bacteria, scientists have reacted in different ways. Many have simply denied there is a problem. They use a backwards reasoning based on a leap of faith in the mathematics-only reality model. They say that because there is life, and life can only have a cause rooted in the mathematics-only reality model, then there must have been a soup and the odds were beaten. Because life exists now, these other things must have happened. The obvious flaw in their reasoning is that they are not questioning the completeness of their reality model.
Richard Dawkins, in his book The Blind Watchmaker, admits that the origin of organic life presents a difficulty: “But cumulative selection cannot work unless there is some minimal machinery of replication and replicator power, and the only machinery of replication that we know seems too complicated to have come into existence by means of anything less than many generations of cumulative selection! Some people see this as a fundamental flaw in the whole theory of the blind watchmaker.”[41] Dawkins immediately answers this difficulty by setting up the theological reality model as his straw man, declaring it “a transparently feeble argument.”[42] Thus, Dawkins presents an either-or choice: either the mathematics-only reality model or the already obsolete and discredited theological reality model. However, the computing-element reality model is a third choice.
To improve the odds for the creation of organic life by randomness, some scientists have embraced an extraterrestrial origin for organic life. However, the odds are still hopeless even when the whole universe is thrown in, as was shown.
footnotes
[40] Kasting, James. “Earth’s Early Atmosphere.” Science, Vol. 259, pp. 920–926, 1993. p. 922.
[41] Dawkins, Richard. The Blind Watchmaker. W.W. Norton and Co., New York, 1987. p. 141.
[42] Ibid.
In this chapter we consider the explanation offered by the computing-element reality model that the first bacterium and other organic milestones arose from intelligent direction. First, there is a brief explanation of evolution, followed by a discussion of randomness as a designer versus intelligence as a designer. We conclude that intelligence designed organic life. Last, we consider and describe the intelligent beings that designed organic life, which we name Caretakers.
Biological evolution states that new organic life forms are derived from older organic life forms. Often this derivation involves an increase in complexity, but this is not a requirement of evolution. The idea of evolution is very old. A theory of evolution, such as Darwin’s theory, offers an explanation of the mechanism of evolution.
In more general terms, evolution is a process by which something new is created by modifying something old. This kind of evolution is so common throughout human activity that one takes it for granted. Almost every modern product is at least partly derived from knowledge that was previously developed and used to produce one or more preexisting products. For example, if a group of engineers is asked to design a new car, they do not throw out everything known about cars and reinvent the wheel.
Charles Darwin’s book, On the Origin of Species, was first published in 1859. Darwinism is a theory of how biological evolution has happened. The theory states that during the production of a child organism, random events can cause random changes in that child organism’s characteristics. Then, if those new characteristics are a net benefit to that organism, that organism is more likely to survive and reproduce, passing on those new characteristics to its children.
Darwin’s theory has two parts. The first part identifies the designer of organic life as randomness. The second part, called natural selection, is the means by which good designs are preserved and bad designs are eliminated. Natural selection is accomplished by the environment in which the organism must live.
As was discussed in chapter 8, randomness is the only designer the mathematics-only reality model allows. Thus, Darwinism applies the mathematics-only reality model to the question of how organic life has come about.
Actually, for sexually reproducing organisms, randomness does play an important role in fine-tuning a species to its environment. As was described in chapter 3, the production of sex cells has certain steps, where the genetic inheritance from both parents is randomly mixed to form the genetic inheritance carried by each sex cell.
Although sexual reproduction uses randomness—as part of the total sexual reproduction process—that does not mean the process itself was produced by randomness. There is no logical connection between the two assertions. For example, in computer science there are many different optimization problems whose solutions are most efficiently approximated by randomly trying different possibilities and keeping only those tries that improve the quality of the solution. This is a standard technique. However, because a computer program uses randomness to find a solution, that does not mean the program was itself produced by randomness. Quite the contrary, the programs of computer science were produced by intelligent designers—namely computer scientists and programmers.
The computing-element reality model allows randomness as a designer. However, the computing-element reality model also allows intelligence as a designer. So, the computing-element reality model offers a choice between randomness and intelligence. Given the analysis in chapter 8 about the inadequacy of randomness as the designer of organic life, the correct choice is obvious. Intelligence is the designer of organic life. The question then becomes, where does this intelligence—that designed organic life—reside?
Regarding the residence of the intelligence that designed organic life, there are two possibilities. The first possibility is that the computing-element program itself explicitly programs the details of organic life. For example, the computing-element program could include the details of the DNA, proteins, and other molecules, in the first bacterium. The second possibility shifts the burden of designing organic life onto intelligent particles.
Humanity is a prolific designer of a broad range of complex objects—such as all the factories, and all the products these factories produce. It is easy to demolish, on rational grounds, the suggestion that the objects humanity has designed, or will design, are explicitly programmed in the computing-element program. Similarly, it is easy to demolish, on rational grounds, the suggestion that the computing-element program explicitly programs organic designs.
Briefly, the basic argument is that it is redundant, unnecessarily complex, and inelegant, for a system to provide both a general-purpose design mechanism and a detailed set of plans for objects that alternatively could be designed by that general-purpose design mechanism. This general-purpose design mechanism is one or more populations of cooperating intelligent particles—such as the large bion population with soliton ruler that is found in each person. We conclude, therefore, that organic life was designed by the general-purpose design mechanism. This means organic life was designed by one or more populations of cooperating intelligent particles.
Having identified cooperating intelligent particles as the direct cause of organic life, several questions arise. First, how many populations of cooperating intelligent particles are involved in this design work? Humanity’s design work often involves hundreds or thousands of individuals working together in teams. By analogy with human experience, we assume there are many separate populations of cooperating intelligent particles involved in designing organic life. For convenience, we refer to these populations as the Caretakers.
A second question involves the particle composition of these Caretakers. Because the general-purpose design mechanism does not include common particles, we assume the Caretakers are composed only of intelligent particles. Thus, the Caretakers do not have common-particle bodies.
With regard to intelligent particles, we assume each Caretaker follows the basic pattern found in people: a single intelligent awareness particle ruling a large, cooperating population of intelligent unaware particles. This basic pattern is probably also found in the larger and more intelligent animals—such as dogs, elephants, dolphins, and chimpanzees.
Although we assume the Caretakers conform to the basic pattern found in people, we do not assume each Caretaker is necessarily composed of a soliton and bions—although this is a possibility. The computing-element reality model allows more than a single type of particle in each particle class. Thus, besides the soliton there may be other awareness particles with properties somewhat different from the soliton’s properties. Similarly, besides the bion there may be other intelligent unaware particles with properties somewhat different from the bion’s properties. However, if the Caretakers individually are composed of a soliton and bions, then they differ from people primarily in terms of their learned programs. Otherwise, they differ from people primarily in terms of particle type.
This chapter surveys what is known about UFOs by describing the UFO, the UFO occupants, and the abduction of people by UFO occupants. After the survey, we evaluate the evidence, concluding that the UFO occupants are the Caretakers responsible for the design of organic life, described in chapter 9. Last, we consider Caretaker involvement with miracles.
Starting with the flood of American UFO reports that occurred in 1947, the U.S. Air Force established an official investigation in September 1947, which existed under different names until December 1969, when it was closed. For most of its life the investigation was lightly staffed and had a policy of debunking and dismissing each one of the thousands of UFO reports that accumulated in its files. An astronomy professor, J. Allen Hynek, was a consultant to the investigation from 1952 to 1966. However, he quit in disgust after being subjected to public ridicule for his infamous “swamp gas” explanation of the March 21, 1966, UFO sighting on the Hillsdale College campus in Michigan.[43] On the night of March 21, a civil-defense director, a college dean, and eighty-seven students witnessed the wild maneuvers of a car-sized, football-shaped UFO. Keith Thompson, in his book Angels and Aliens, summarizes: “The curtain came down on this four-hour performance when the mysterious object maneuvered over a swamp near the Hillsdale College campus.”[44]
Although initially disbelieving, Hynek underwent a conversion during the 1960s as he was overcome by the weight of evidential UFO reports.[45] He had personally investigated many of these reports by interviewing UFO witnesses as part of his role with the Air Force as a UFO debunker. In a 1975 conference paper quoted by Leonard Stringfield in his book Situation Red, Hynek summarized as follows:
If you object, I ask you to explain—quantitatively, not qualitatively—the reported phenomena of materialization and dematerialization, of shape changes, of the noiseless hovering in the earth’s gravitational field, accelerations that—for an appreciable mass—require energy sources far beyond present capabilities—even theoretical capabilities—the well-known and often reported E-M effects, the psychic effects on percipients, including purported telepathic communications, the preferential occurrence of UFO experiences to the “repeaters”—those who are reported to have so many more UFO sightings that it outrages the noble art of statistics.[46]
The statement about materialization and dematerialization refers to reports where the UFO becomes visible or invisible while being stationary. The statement about shape changes refers to reports where a UFO undergoes a major change in its apparent shape—such as when two smaller UFOs join to form a single larger UFO. The statement about E-M effects refers to electromagnetic effects, such as the bright lights and light beams that often emanate from UFOs. Also, there is the effect that UFOs can have on electrical machinery. For example, a UFO in proximity to a car typically stops the car’s engine.
UFO sightings are not evenly distributed over time. Instead, the sightings tend to clump together in what are called waves. During a UFO wave, the number of reported sightings is much higher than normal. Waves are typically confined geographically. For example, France experienced a large wave in 1954 which included landings and observed occupants. Sweden and Finland experienced a wave beginning in 1946 and lasting till 1948. In that wave, the UFOs were cigar-shaped objects which were termed at the time ghost rockets. More recent was the wave in Belgium that began in November 1989 and lasted through March 1990. The American waves include those of 1897, 1947, 1952, 1957, 1966, and 1973.
UFO sightings—not confined to modern times—extend far back in history. The total number of available UFO reports from early times is not large, but there are several mitigating factors, including the smaller number of potential observers, low literacy rates, the general unavailability and expense of paper, and poor communications in general. Computer scientist Jacques Vallee, in his book Anatomy of a Phenomenon, summarizes some earlier sightings:
Their attention, for example, should be directed to the ship that was seen speeding across the sky, at night, in Scotland in A.D. 60. In 763, while King Domnall Mac Murchada attended the fair at Teltown, in Meath County, ships were also seen in the air. In 916, in Hungary, spherical objects shining like stars, bright and polished, were reported going to and fro in the sky. Somewhere at sea, on July 29 or 30 of the year 966, a luminous vertical cylinder was seen.... In Japan, on August 23, 1015, two objects were seen giving birth to small luminous spheres. At Cairo in August 1027, numerous noisy objects were reported. A large silvery disk is said to have come close to the ground in Japan on August 12, 1133.[47]
Over time, the volume of UFO reports increased with the growing human population and the frequent improvements in communications. In consequence, the total number of UFO reports from the 20th century dwarfs the number of reports available from earlier times.
There is no standard size, shape, or coloring, of UFOs. Reported sizes, as measured along the widest dimension, have ranged from less than a meter to more than a thousand meters. However, most reported UFOs whose size was observed from the ground at close range, were roughly between a small car and a large truck in size. The shapes of UFOs vary greatly. In modern times, most UFOs have resembled spheres, cones, cylinders, saucers, boomerangs, or triangles with rounded angles. Sometimes the observed UFO has a distinct dome, and sometimes the UFO has what appear to be windows or portholes. In general, roundness seems to be the only constant for the current crop of UFO shapes.
When viewed as solid objects, UFOs often have a shiny metallic finish, although dark colors are also sometimes reported. When viewed as lights, or as flashing lights on a UFO body, typical colors seem to be white and red, with other colors, such as yellow, blue, and green, reported less frequently.
The observed shape of a UFO is at least sometimes deliberately adjusted to meet the needs of human tolerance and expectation. For example, in earlier times, some UFOs actually appeared as boats or ships in the sky. Jacques Vallee, in his book Dimensions, describes how sometimes the “ship” would throw out an anchor, as reportedly happened in Ireland about the year 1211:
There happened in the borough of Cloera, one Sunday, while the people were at Mass, a marvel. In this town is a church dedicated to St. Kinarus. It befell that an anchor was dropped from the sky, with a rope attached to it, and one of the flukes caught in the arch above the church door. The people rushed out of the church and saw in the sky a ship with men on board, floating before the anchor cable, and they saw a man leap overboard and jump down to the anchor as if to release it. He looked as if he were swimming in water. The folk rushed up and tried to seize him: but the Bishop forbade the people to hold the man, for it might kill him, he said. The man was freed, and hurried up to the ship, where the crew cut the rope and the ship sailed out of sight.[48]
A more recent example of an anchor incident occurred during the American wave of 1897. Then, the observed UFOs had the appearance of cigar-shaped dirigibles, which moved about slowly; the occupants, when observed at close range, typically appeared as ordinary Americans speaking English. The specific anchor incident involved a farmer near Sioux City, Iowa, who was hooked by an anchor from one of these “dirigibles” and dragged a little way along the ground.[49]
During the 1897 wave, the “dirigibles” were seen over a number of cities in the West and Midwest, including Chicago. Newspaper stories written at the time comprise much of the available source documentation about that wave. The first human-made dirigible was constructed in France in 1852, and was powered by a steam engine. In more recent times, UFOs that looked like helicopters have been reported. For example, Keith Thompson describes a witness who in September 1980, saw what he thought was a helicopter. However, “soon the craft had become a silver, ball-shaped object dangling a long ‘fluttering’ appendage from its side. Eventually the object shot straight up until it disappeared.”[50]
footnotes
[43] Thompson, Keith. Angels and Aliens. Addison-Wesley, New York, 1991. pp. 80–84.
[44] Ibid., p. 81.
[45] Ibid., pp. 80, 83–84, 117.
[46] Stringfield, Leonard. Situation Red: The UFO Siege. Fawcett Crest Books, New York, 1977. p. 44.
[47] Vallee, Jacques. Anatomy of a Phenomenon. Ace Books, New York, 1965. p. 21.
[48] Vallee, Jacques. Dimensions. Ballantine Books, New York, 1988. p. 42.
[49] Ibid., p. 38.
[50] Thompson, op. cit., p. 131.
UFO occupants come in different humanoid shapes and sizes. It seems the appearance of the occupant is as plastic as the appearance of the UFO. Depending on the circumstances of the observation, a UFO occupant may appear as a normal-size person, a dwarfish person, a humanoid monster, or a small alien. Apparently, the only appearance constant is that the occupant follows more or less the basic humanoid shape: two legs, two arms, a head, and bilateral symmetry.
The UFO occupant is often small, ranging from roughly 1 to 1.5 meters in height. One advantage of this small size is that for whoever sees them, that person’s fright is reduced. Typically, the person assumes he or she is stronger than the small occupant. In the case of occupants that look human, the person is even more at ease.
UFO occupants assume normal human form when they want to be mistaken as human, such as during some abductions, where a person is abducted. Apart from abductions, there seems to be a standard ruse that a single occupant, masquerading as a human, likes to play on the selected observer. The ruse is to approach the person and ask for help of some kind—such as requesting food or water. This ruse has three advantages. First, it gives the occupant a believable excuse for approaching the person. Second, it puts the person at ease with the occupant, because the occupant is claiming weakness and the need for help. Third, it prolongs the time the occupant has with the person, because the person is soon busy getting the food or water. For example, Jenny Randles, in her book Alien Abductions, recounts an incident on the Drakensteen mountain in South Africa during the spring of 1951. A British engineer was driving his car up the mountain late at night when he encountered a strange man who said he needed water:
Collecting water in an oil can, the engineer drove the mysterious stranger back to the pick-up point. Here he now saw a disc-shaped craft hidden in the shadows of the mountain. He was invited inside and shown a table or bed, on which lay one of the entities. He had supposedly been burnt—hence the need for water. For the man’s kindness, the aliens allowed their benefactor to ask questions. Naturally he wanted to know how their UFO worked, but the reply was not helpful: ‘We nullify gravity by way of a fluid magnet,’ they explained. So where did they come from? They looked at the sky, pointed and said melodramatically, ‘From there!’[51]
UFO occupants assume dwarfish human form under two conditions. First, occupants assume this form when they are engaged in activities on the ground that may cause them to be inadvertently observed by people who come along by chance. There are many reports, both old and recent, of people coming across this kind of occupant while it is busy collecting rocks, soil, or plants. There may be several occupants so engaged at once, and there always seems to be a UFO parked nearby. When surprised by a person, the standard scenario is that the occupants quickly take whatever they are carrying at the moment, return to their UFO, and leave the area. Depending on the actions and proximity of the person when his or her presence is detected, one of the observed occupants may aim a short wand at that person, rendering that person unable to move until some minutes after the occupants and their UFO have departed. For example:
On December 19, [1954] Jose Parra, an eighteen-year-old jockey from Valencia [Venezuela], who was doing some night-training, during the early hours, suddenly saw six little men pulling boulders from the side of the highway and loading them aboard a disc-shaped craft which was hovering less than nine feet from the ground. Parra started to run away, but one of the little creatures pointed a small device at him, which gave off a violet-colored light and prevented Parra from moving. [52]
The second condition under which UFO occupants assume dwarfish human form is obsolete in modern times. In premodern times, when UFO occupants wanted to abduct a person, they typically appeared to the abductee as dwarfish people. These occupants would then play a ruse on the abductee. They invited the abductee to come with them to provide help of some kind, or to participate in their celebrations. Some such excuse would be made to help win the abductee’s initial cooperation in his or her own abduction. The people at the time believed these occupants to be members of an advanced human race that lived on mountains, in caves, or on islands; in places not inhabited by ordinary people. This deception became obsolete when it became unbelievable, because of improved communications and improved land surveys. However, the deception was used in Europe until as late as the 19th century when the practice died out completely. Jacques Vallee, in Dimensions, quotes Walter Evans-Wentz, who wrote a thesis on Celtic traditions in Brittany, and a book in 1909 titled The Fairy-Faith in Celtic Countries:
The general belief in the interior of Brittany is that the fees once existed, but that they disappeared as their country was changed by modern conditions. In the region of the Mene and of Erce (Ille-et-Vilaine) it is said that for more than a century there have been no fees and on the sea coast where it is firmly believed that the fees used to inhabit certain grottos in the cliffs, the opinion is that they disappeared at the beginning of the last century. The oldest Bretons say that their parents or grandparents often spoke about having seen fees, but very rarely do they say that they themselves have seen fees. M. Paul Sebillot found only two who had. One was an old needlewoman of Saint-Cast, who had such fear of fees that if she was on her way to do some sewing in the country and it was night she always took a long circuitous route to avoid passing near a field known as the Couvent des Fees. The other was Marie Chehu, a woman 88 years old.[53]
Although UFO occupants have been seen collecting rocks, soil, and plants, in recent times almost no one has reported seeing them collecting farm animals. However, UFOs have been sighted in farm areas where shortly afterward the carcasses of biopsied farm animals, typically cattle, have been found. In particular, there was the recent wave of so-called cattle mutilations that took place in America during the 1970s:
There is no doubt that in the mid to late 1970s, something of an epidemic of animal mutilations in states including Minnesota, South Dakota, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, Idaho, Wyoming, and Texas took place. By May 1974, more than 100 cattle had been found dead and gruesomely mutilated in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska alone. In case after case, ranchers and farmers reported that an unknown person had killed the animals, and removed with surgical precision body parts including sex organs, tongues, ears, eyes, or anuses. “I’ve yet to see a coyote who can chew a straight edge,” said the organizer of a patrol to protect the animals. The killers were elusive, leaving no footprints or other evidence of their presence. Often the mutilations were committed in what should have been plain sight or within hearing distance—close proximity to a farmhouse, for instance—but no sights or sounds were reported.[54]
UFO involvement with animal collection is not confined to modern America. Jacques Vallee, in his book Messengers of Deception, describes an incident that occurred in the Natal midlands of Africa during the 1960s as two men walked down a hill:
They saw “an eerie reddish glow” on the farm runway, about 200 yards from them. The flock of sheep in the runway paddock were all standing in two one-third circles on opposite sides of the glow, looking toward it. “From our elevated position,” wrote Anton Fitzgerald in the aviation magazine Wings over Africa, “the sheep reminded me of iron filings on a piece of paper around a magnet.” The pinkish glow started rising vertically without a sound. Fitzgerald inspected the area, and noticed that one old sheep was missing. He was reminded of the Zulu legend of “the Red Sun that rises straight up into the sky after devouring some of the tribe’s cattle.” The Cherokee Indians have a similar legend of the Sun that rises straight up.[55]
UFO occupants assume monstrous form comparatively rarely. Perhaps there are times when the UFO occupants want to deliberately frighten the observer. Alternatively, by appearing monstrous, a UFO occupant communicates the idea that it is radically different from people—thus discouraging in advance certain lines of questioning and types of behavior. A possible, legendary example is Oannes: a large fish—with feet at its tail, and a human voice—that walked out of the Persian Gulf and taught civilization to the early Babylonians.[56]
footnotes
[51] Randles, Jenny. Alien Abductions. Inner Light Publications, New Brunswick, 1988. p. 153.
[52] Vallee, Anatomy of a Phenomenon, p. 201.
[53] Vallee, Dimensions, pp. 70–71.
[54] Thompson, op. cit., p. 129.
[55] Vallee, Jacques. Messengers of Deception. And/Or Press, Berkeley, 1979. p. 165.
[56] Story, Ronald. Guardians of the Universe?. St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1980. pp. 104–109. Ronald Story quotes the Greek sources for this legend.
In recent times, and especially in America, UFO occupants assume the small alien form when they are abducting people, examining them, performing procedures on them, and returning them. Also, around the world, many abductions are reported to be conducted by UFO occupants that look like people.
Detailed reports of the abduction experience typically come from abductees who undergo hypnosis to learn the truth of what has happened to them. It seems to be standard practice that the UFO occupants do something to the abductee that prevents conscious recall of the abduction experience. This forced forgetfulness is not new, because “the mind of a person coming out of Fairy-Land is usually blank as to what has been seen and done there.”[57]
When UFO occupants abduct someone, they are faced with a dilemma. On the one hand, the abductee must be conscious during any psychological testing. In addition, a conscious abductee can do certain tasks, such as undressing. Also, a conscious abductee can warn the UFO occupants if he or she is being inadvertently hurt by them. On the other hand, conscious recall by the abductee distracts that person from his or her normal life, and causes social ostracism if the abduction experiences are told to other people. For this dilemma, forced forgetfulness is probably the best possible solution.
Historian David Jacobs, in his book Secret Life, states that he “had more than 325 hypnosis sessions with more than sixty abductees.”[58] We summarize Jacobs’ description of the UFO occupants involved in abductions: The aliens do not wear clothes, although sometimes the coloring of clothing appears to be “painted” on their bodies. The aliens lack any visible sign of a circulatory system. In other words, there is no sign of veins on their bodies. The alien skin is completely smooth, and there is no sign of surface or color irregularities. For example, there are no hairs, bumps, or wrinkles. There is no noticeable aging of the aliens. There are no signs of bones or muscles in the alien body. In other words, there is no visible sign of subsurface supporting structures. The two alien eyes—on a disproportionately large head—are very large, solid black [presumably because of photon absorption], fixed without visible movement, and have no eyelids. The alien mouth is a slit which never seems to move or open. The alien neck has a narrow tube shape. Also, their arms and legs have a narrow tube shape. In spite of such apparently flimsy structure, motor control by the aliens is excellent. They move about and manipulate tools with speed and precision. Regarding bodily needs, Jacobs remarks, “they do not appear to breathe or to ingest food and water.”[59]
We now summarize the basics of the abduction experience in which the physical body is abducted. These basics are described by David Jacobs in Secret Life. There are other books by different authors that say essentially the same thing, although not necessarily in as much detail.
The abduction experience begins when several small aliens appear to the abductee. The aliens typically choose a time for the abduction when the possibility of detection is minimized—such as late at night or when the person is alone. If the abductee is in a bedroom, for example, the aliens either pass through a wall or float through a window. At some point the abductee is aware of the presence of these aliens. Fear is the normal human reaction, so at least one alien quickly moves alongside the abductee, who is calmed by this alien. If there is someone near the abductee, such as a mate, that person remains unconscious—asleep—for the duration of the abduction.
The next step is that one or more of the aliens grab hold of the abductee. The entire party then floats upward and out of the abduction site. If the abduction site is a room, standard procedure is for the party to pass through a window to leave that room. The aliens do not bother opening the window. Instead, the aliens, including the abductee, pass through the closed window. The flight of the party through the air, up to the UFO that is typically close by, is never witnessed by passersby. Thus, Jacobs concludes that the entire party is invisible to outside observers during the transit to and from the UFO.
As the UFO is approached by the party, the size of the UFO—as estimated by abductees—is somewhere between ten meters and one hundred meters in diameter. Depending on the size of the craft, the abductee may enter directly into the examination room; or, if the UFO is very large, the abductee enters first into a waiting room.
Once the abductee is in the craft, the next step is the undressing of the abductee—assuming the abductee was wearing something at the time of the abduction. If the craft is very large, the abductee is soon brought to the examination room in which there are typically many examination tables. At least some of these tables may already be occupied by other people who are undergoing the examination process.
Throughout the abduction experience, all communication from the aliens is by telepathy. Typically, they say to the abductee only words of assurance that everything is all right, that the abductee will not be harmed, and so on. When the aliens are asked questions about their motivation for the abduction, the typical reply is that it has to be done, followed by the usual assurances. In general, the aliens do not volunteer information, and, as a rule, they evade direct questions.
The abductee is placed on an empty examination table, and a very thorough physical exam—by human standards—is conducted by several aliens working together. At the end of the physical exam, a tiny object may be implanted in the abductee. This implant is typically placed in the head, up the nose. According to Jacobs, “someone might expel a tiny metallic ball from their nasal passage, although this has not happened to the abductees I have worked with.... In the cases where they have been recovered, analyses have so far been inconclusive about their origin.... To date, no operations have been performed to remove the suspicious masses because the risks and problems inherent in surgery outweigh recovery considerations, or the object mysteriously disappears.”[60] The standard comment abduction researchers make about this implant is that it is analogous to the way people tag animals.
Once the physical exam is over, a specialist alien—noticeably taller than the other aliens—may become involved with the abductee to conduct an advanced physical procedure—using hand-held tools. When working on women, this specialist does egg and fetus removal, and, presumably, other things—such as fertilized egg implants. Sometimes, a woman abductee learns—soon after her abduction and much to her surprise—that she is pregnant. Then, within the next few months, the fetus is removed during a follow-up abduction. Besides collecting eggs and fetuses, the aliens also collect sperm, but sperm collection is a comparatively easy task which does not require the specialist.
Psychological exams—which are sometimes given after the physical exam—are also done by a specialist. Some of these tests involve emotional response. For example, a woman abductee might be placed in a comfortable-looking room. Shortly afterward, a man whom the woman knows and is attracted to, suddenly enters the room. While this is happening, the specialist remains close to the woman and “stares” at her, watching her response. Later, the woman learns that the man is actually an alien that had assumed that man’s appearance.
One of the strangest psychological tests—perhaps testing maternal instincts—involves a nursery, or, alternatively, a kind of orphanage. The abductee, typically a woman, is brought into a room that looks like a nursery. This nursery is filled with small, sickly, abnormal babies, typically in transparent boxes. The woman may be told one of these babies is hers. She may be given one of the babies to hold, along with encouragement about how good the baby is. While this nursery charade is going on, the woman’s reactions are closely watched by the specialist. A variation on this nursery is the orphanage, where the woman is presented with a frail child that looks like a cross between an alien and a human. As with the baby, the woman is encouraged to hold the child and give it affection.
The reported appearance of these babies and children probably serves several purposes. First, the sickly or frail appearance, coupled with the crowded nursery or orphanage setting, gives the appearance of alien neglect, which gives the abductee a reason to believe that the baby or child needs affection which it is not getting from the aliens. Second, the semi-alien appearance is human enough for the abductee to identify with, but alien enough so that the abductee avoids the stressful belief that the aliens are, in effect, stealing human babies and children.
Once the scheduled agenda for the abductee is completed, it is time for the abductee to leave the UFO. If not already there, the abductee is taken to his or her clothing. Then, the abductee is encouraged to dress, and helped if necessary. The abductee is then escorted out of the UFO, and returned to the place from which he or she was originally taken. Once returned, the abduction experience is over—having lasted, usually, “from one to three hours.”[61]
The typical abductee is abducted first in infancy or childhood, and then abducted at least several more times over the remaining course of his or her life. This pattern has the obvious advantage of allowing a long-term study of the individual, beginning with an early stage of development. Also, another advantage of repeated abductions is that the repetition habituates the individual to the abduction routine, making the results of psychological testing more reliable and less corrupted by the surrounding abduction experience.
footnotes
[57] Vallee, Jacques. Passport to Magonia. Henry Regnery Company, Chicago, 1969. p. 87. Jacques Vallee is quoting Walter Evans-Wentz.
[58] Jacobs, David. Secret Life. Simon and Schuster, New York, 1992. p. 24.
[59] Ibid., p. 228.
[60] Ibid., p. 240.
[61] Ibid., p. 50.
We now consider how well the survey data support the idea that the UFO occupants are the Caretakers described in chapter 9.
In contrast to people, the UFO occupants—like the Caretakers—are, it seems, composed solely of intelligent particles. Thus, without the burden of common particles, the UFO occupants are free to pass through walls, as during an abduction, and to shape-shift and assume the many different appearances found in the survey data. This shape-shifting ability includes the ability to form the appearance of clothing, although on certain occasions p-common clothing may be worn.
The ability of the abductee to pass through solid objects, such as a closed window, is probably due to a masking of p-common particles by the bions that fill the abductee’s body.[62] Normally, one’s bions never do such masking, because of the fair-play rule discussed in chapter 6. However, we assume the Caretakers, having imposed the fair-play rule in the first place, can, in effect, order a population of bions to temporarily waive the fair-play rule and mask the particles in question. This masking would also account for the apparent invisibility of the abductee during the transit to and from the UFO.[63]
The ability of a UFO occupant to become solid to p-common particles, such as when collecting rocks and soil, is a consequence of the intelligent particles composing that occupant deciding that they will interact with p-common particles. Specifically, the learned-program translate statement can be applied to p-common particles. For example, if a learned program only applies the translate statement to move p-common particles that are next to the outermost intelligent particles of the occupant, then the direct contact that people experience with their own p-common bodies can be closely simulated. Even Newton’s law—for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction—can be simulated, allowing an occupant to use the resulting feedback to moderate the force that the translate statement applies against p-common objects. Thus, not surprisingly, there are many reports of UFO occupants being knocked over by various p-common impacts—such as a person falling on them, or bullets hitting them—after which they get up unharmed and continue whatever they were doing.
That UFOs are described in old historical records is consistent with the UFO occupants being the Caretakers, because the history of the Caretakers extends back at least to the beginning of organic life 3½ billion years ago. The collecting of rocks and soil by UFO occupants may not appear, at first glance, a Caretaker function. However, such collecting can be a Caretaker function, because various biosphere-related chemicals, bacteria, and sometimes other organisms, are found on rocks and in soil.
The biopsies done on lower animals—such as the cattle that had parts of their anatomy removed—are consistent with the UFO occupants being the Caretakers. A likely reason for such sampling of animal parts is to monitor the animals’ well-being as a species and/or to monitor the results of changes or improvements made to that species. Fortunately, the UFO occupants do not fatally biopsy people. Because people are conscious, and much closer to the UFO occupants in mental terms than the lower animals are, better treatment is to be expected. In general, as the abduction data show, the UFO occupants go out of their way to minimize the trauma of the abduction experience.
The abduction experience—with its focus on human fitness and reproduction—is consistent with the UFO occupants being the Caretakers. The human species is a relative newcomer to the family of organic life. Because of this newness, and the mental complexity of people, the attention humanity receives from the UFO occupants is understandable. In conclusion, if one assumes the UFO occupants are the Caretakers, then all the survey data make sense.
Regarding the composition of the flying machines used by the Caretakers, likely possibilities are: either intelligent unaware particles, probably bions, but with learned programs completely different from those found in bions inhabiting organic cells; or, more likely given the observational data, a mixture of intelligent unaware particles and common particles, specifically bions and p-common particles—with the p-common particles normally fully masked (i.e., completely invisible, see footnote 62+; abductees inside a masked UFO remain masked themselves), less often partially masked (e.g., only unmasking emitted photons, making the machine visible to sight, but insubstantial to the atmosphere, etc.), and least often completely unmasked. In any case, the motive power of the flying machine is the learned-program translate statement, used by the intelligent particles.
Regarding the currently common belief that these Caretakers are extraterrestrials, this place-of-origin question is irrelevant, because the Caretakers have been on Earth for at least 3½ billion years. As the data strongly indicate, the Caretakers routinely conceal what they are; presumably whenever the observer cannot understand the truth, because of an inadequate knowledge and/or reality model. Whereas they used to claim they lived on mountains or islands; now, in humanity’s space age, they claim to live on other worlds. Specifically, earlier in this century, until the 1960s, the Caretakers routinely claimed to be from Venus or Mars. However, as humanity’s scientific knowledge progressed, and organic life on Venus and Mars became unbelievable, they switched their claimed origin to other star systems.
Probably the Caretakers can and do travel within the solar system. However, travel to other stars is another matter. Even if they can do it, it would be a time-consuming trip at sublight speed.[64] And in another star system, the learned programs of whatever intelligent-particle beings are there, are probably at least somewhat different, limiting personal interaction with them. Thus, star systems are probably fairly isolated from each other, even at the level of the Caretakers.
footnotes
[62] Specifically, the p-common particles of the abductee’s body and clothing are masked from interacting with any p-common particles that have not been similarly masked. The computing-element reality model allows such masking, assuming the computing-element program offers learned-program statements that allow a learned program to mask common particles.
In algorithmic terms, masking can be accomplished by assuming there is a certain p-common particle attribute, and each p-common particle in the visible universe has the default value for this attribute, and the computing-element program only interacts p-common particles that have the same value for this attribute. Then, changing the value of this attribute to a nondefault value, the associated p-common particle, in effect, disappears from the visible universe.
[63] In effect, all nonmasked photons striking the abductee pass through the abductee without interacting with the abductee’s p-common particles. However, a complicating factor is that during transit the abductee can apparently see nonmasked physical objects. A possible explanation is that all nonmasked visible-light photons entering the abductee’s eye lens are masked using the same value (referring to the previous footnote) used to mask the abductee’s p-common particles, thereby making those photons visible to that abductee.
During transit, selective masking is also, presumably, done for air molecules, allowing the abductee to breathe and experience normal atmospheric pressure. Specifically, this can be done by masking each air molecule just before impact with the abductee’s masked body, and then unmasking that air molecule just after impact. Any air molecule absorbed by the abductee’s body remains masked, and any air molecule desorbed by the abductee’s body is unmasked.
[64] Does the computing-element program allow the Caretakers to instantaneously jump to other star systems? Specifically, does the computing-element program offer learned-program statements that allow a group of intelligent particles to instantaneously translate itself to arbitrarily different spatial coordinates?
First, although the accessible information environment of a bion is a very large sphere centered on that particle, there is no reason to believe this sphere’s radius is on the order of interstellar distances. Specifically, the computational burden of examining an accessible information environment is proportional to the sphere’s volume. For example, compared to the computational burden of examining the information environment of a sphere with a radius of 100,000 kilometers, the computational burden for a sphere with a radius of four light years, which is the distance to the nearest star, is about 1025 times greater.
Without strong evidence—and there is none—one should not assume intelligent particles can directly perceive objects across interstellar distances. Yet, without direct perception, an intelligent particle cannot provide a meaningful destination coordinate or address that a translate statement, or a send or receive statement for communication purposes, requires. Of course, this does not rule out a series of short jumps made within the limits of direct perception. However, there are other difficulties. Specifically, the existence of a translate statement for arbitrary spatial translation within the accessible information environment would be inherently dangerous to the stability of any population of cooperating intelligent particles. Each intelligent particle is autonomous, running its own learned programs, so there is no guarantee that a cooperating population of intelligent particles would always use such a translate statement in perfect synchrony. Thus, intelligent particles could easily separate from each other beyond the limits of their direct perception, quickly becoming lost to each other. Given these considerations, we conclude that the computing-element program does not offer such a translate statement. Instead, we assume a safe translate statement, which only allows sublight-speed movement to an adjoining computing element for each particle, whether intelligent or common, that is translated by a given use of that statement.
Regarding UFOs and religion, many UFO researchers have suggested that UFO occupants have played a major role in the formation and maintenance of at least some historical religions. The evidence for this claim includes the widely cited miracle at Fatima, Portugal, which occurred on October 13, 1917; witnessed by roughly 70,000 people. This large number of witnesses was the direct result of a methodical sequence of ever greater miracles, occurring at the same location, which was a pasture named Cova da Iria, 2½ kilometers from the village of Fatima. The sequence of events had the following dates and approximate attendance: May 13 attended by three; June 13 attended by fifty; July 13 attended by 4,500; August 13 attended by 18,000; September 13 attended by 30,000; October 13 attended by 70,000.[65]
On May 13, three children, who worked as shepherds, met and conversed with, we assume, a Caretaker, which appeared as a woman floating on top of a tree. The woman wore radiant, beautiful clothing. The children believed she was the Virgin Mary. Among other things, she told them to return to the same spot each month on the 13th day. On October 13, 1917, at the Cova da Iria site, at the appointed time of noon, there appeared a giant, radiant, UFO, which had a flat, disc shape. This UFO maneuvered about for roughly ten minutes, changing colors, spinning, and sometimes dropping closer to the ground, which frightened the audience greatly.
footnotes
[65] Vallee, Dimensions, p. 177.
The Caretakers are the designers of the highly constrained virtual reality in which humanity lives. The bions in one’s body and mind are constrained by the fair-play rule to limit the use of their power over p-common particles, because the game of organic life cannot be played unless everyone follows the rules established by the Caretakers.
Although people cannot bend the fair-play rule, the Caretakers can, such as when they perform miraculous cures and healings at religious shrines like Lourdes, France. We assume that in the typical case, the Caretakers cure or heal a person by, in effect, ordering that person’s bions to temporarily waive the fair-play rule and effect the cure or healing by manipulating p-common particles as needed. This temporary waiving of the fair-play rule can also account for those miracles where people become impervious to normally destructive agents, such as fire and steel. Of course, some cures and healings may be more difficult to achieve than others, and may require more intervention by the Caretakers.
Regarding people with lasting miraculous powers, we assume such a person has received from the Caretakers a modified fair-play rule, and, if needed, one or more learned programs for the specific powers in question. Or, alternatively, the miracles apparently done by such a person may actually be done by a nearby Caretaker that monitors the situation but remains invisible.
A likely example of Caretaker involvement is provided by the great escape artist Harry Houdini, who died in 1926 at the age of fifty-two. Houdini routinely did escape feats that have not been duplicated since, in spite of improved technology. According to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, a friend and contemporary of Houdini:
He told me that a voice which was independent of his own reason or judgment told him what to do and how to do it. So long as he obeyed the voice he was assured of safety. “It all comes as easy as stepping off a log,” said he to me, “but I have to wait for the voice. You stand there before a jump, swallowing the yellow stuff that every man has in him. Then at last you hear the voice and you jump. Once I jumped on my own and I nearly broke my neck.” This was the nearest admission that I ever had from him that I was right in thinking that there was a psychic element which was essential to every one of his feats.[66]
Why do the Caretakers perform miracles? Miracles are a window revealing the possibilities of an unconstrained virtual reality. Thus, miracles lessen the burden of the highly constrained and sometimes oppressive virtual reality which the Caretakers have created.
footnotes
[66] Doyle, Sir Arthur Conan. The Edge of the Unknown. Barnes & Noble Books, New York, 1992. p. 12.
Of course, not every independent mental voice a person might hear is from a Caretaker. Other possible sources include other human minds, or the dead; or a functional piece of the person’s own mind which has not integrated properly—either caused or accompanied by a neurotransmitter imbalance. This functional-piece possibility is the explanation for those suffering from schizophrenia, in which the voices are independent but “low,” having an extremely limited mental range.
Broadly, we have proceeded along the following lines. First, the current reality model of science was put in its concrete terms: exclusive dependence on mathematics. We did this because the model is so ingrained in Western Civilization that it is not explicitly taught as a model. Instead, for example, in academia the model appears as cliches, such as, “if you can’t say it quantitatively, it isn’t worth saying.” And academic journals enforce this viewpoint by favoring those papers having greater mathematical content.
In physics, mathematical treatment is de rigueur. This is appropriate and proper for a science that focuses exclusively on p-common particles, but useless for describing and understanding intelligent particles. Intelligent particles are in the domain of computer science, not physics.
After making explicit this current reality model of science, the computer alternative was presented and described in detail. Once both models were clearly laid out, the remainder of this book frequently compared and contrasted them. As is widely known and often complained about, the current reality model of science, which dates from the 17th century, is very restrictive about what it can deal with. For those who read widely, the plaintive cry to “look at all the data” is a cliché. It is true the current reality model ignores whole areas of data and dismisses them with handwaving. However, such dismissal is done by necessity. The answer is not to force-feed a model with data it cannot digest, but instead to replace that model with a more robust model that can feed on all the data. That replacement model, of course, is the computing-element reality model. As was made clear in chapter 2, this new model swallows the old model whole, losing nothing in the process.
With both models described, we then looked at how well the new model fits the data ignored by the old model. First, various data from biology were considered and accommodated by the new model. Then, various data from religious and esoteric sources were considered and also accommodated by the new model.
Overall, the computing-element reality model puts in concrete terms what many people already suspect: that there is an underlying connectedness in the universe. In this model, this connectedness exists between individual computing elements that communicate with each other at instantaneous speed. These computing elements, working through intelligent particles, are, the computer inside you, connecting you to the universe and to your environment.
This glossary defines two different reality models, namely the mathematics-only reality model and the computing-element reality model. For the computing-element reality model, elementary particles exist as blocks of information, and are either common particles or intelligent particles. For common particles, there are at least two classes: p-common particles and d-common particles. For intelligent particles, there are at least two types: bions and solitons.
An intelligent particle associated with biology. Each cell is inhabited and controlled by a bion. Bions interact with both intelligent particles and common particles. Each adult person has a cooperating population of roughly ten trillion bions—assuming one bion per cell. The bions of the brain collectively form the mind, and the mind is guided by a soliton.
A particle that has relatively simple state information consisting only of attribute values. This simplicity allows the interactions between common particles to be expressed with mathematical equations. Prime examples of common particles are electrons, photons, and quarks.
The computing-element reality model states that the universe’s particles are controlled by computers. Specifically, the computing-element reality model states that the universe is a vast, space-filling, three-dimensional array of tiny, identical, computing elements. A computing element is a self-contained computer with its own memory. Each computing element is connected to other computing elements, and each computing element runs its own copy of the same large and complex program—called the computing-element program. Each elementary particle in the universe exists only as a block of information stored as data in the memory of a computing element. Thus, all particles are both manipulated as data and moved about as data by these computing elements. In consequence, the reality people experience is a computer-generated virtual reality.
The common particles observed during a lucid-dream out-of-body experience. These d-common particles do not interact with p-common particles.
A particle whose complex state information typically includes learned programs, and data used by these learned programs. In general, because of this complexity, it is not possible to express with mathematical equations the interactions involving intelligent particles.
The mathematics-only reality model is the current reality model of science. This is a very restrictive reality model that rejects as impossible any particle whose interactions cannot be described with mathematical equations. Because physics equations can be computed, everything allowed by the mathematics-only reality model is also allowed by the computing-element reality model.
The common particles of physics. Specifically, the electrons, quarks, photons, and other elementary particles of physics.
An intelligent particle that has an associated awareness. Each person has a single soliton which is the location of the separate, solitary awareness that each person experiences. The soliton in each person interacts with the bions of the brain that collectively form the mind.
END OF BOOK