Thursday, October 20, 2011

Fate of democracies

In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinborough, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage." The Obituary follows:

Monday, September 05, 2011

Financial Distotion - A Ticking Time Bomb

Markets have lost their purpose

Anthony Hilton

14 Jun 2011

Twenty years ago, it used to be the case that only in the foreign exchange

market was the underlying business activity dwarfed by speculation -

meaning that the foreign currency needed for the buying and selling of

imports and exports was well under 10% of the global daily volume.

Today, similar conditions have an impact on all manner of markets which are

simply not structured to cope with such waves of speculation.

We are now in a position where flows of hot money drive prices, not the

fundamentals of supply and demand. And because other markets lack the scale

and resilience of forex, the results are less benign.

The belief that markets know best rests on a couple of important factors.

First, there have to be a lot of participants in the market so that no one

can influence more than 5% of either supply or demand, which in turn means

no group is in a position to use its buying clout or monopoly power to

influence price or supply.

Second, it is important that people are principals, either acting in their

own name or for a company which is either supplier or end user. When these

conditions exist, it is reasonable to assume that price signals from the

market are fairly accurate reflections of genuine supply and demand.

This begins to break down when buyers and sellers are in a position to use

other people's money - thereby acting as agents rather than principals.

It is often - though not always - the case that this coincides with their

being interested in speculating on price movements rather than the buying

or selling of the physical goods for some business purpose.

There are two reasons things have gone wrong in financial markets.

In recent times - since technology advanced enough to allow capital to be

moved in seconds into or out of any market in the world - the ebbs and

flows of speculative money have increased massively.

Capital is now mobilised on a global scale and directed anywhere in the

world at the touch of a button. It dwarfs the resources of the original

market participants.

At the same time, with a growing emphasis on trading profits and short-term

time horizons, money managers have embraced momentum - buying not on

fundamentals but simply because everyone else seems to be buying, or

selling because they all seem to be selling. They assume they will be able

to ride the price movement and then use instant-dealing technology to leap

off and take their profits just as the price is turning.

This has increased massively the amount of money swamping a market when it

is in fashion. It has also multiplied the power and influence of those who

are seen to have an edge in a market - the established traders or

investment banks - because where they lead others follow (or risk being

wiped out). The interaction of their expertise and third-party money gives

a few speculators disproportionate influence. These lead speculators now

have the power of the herd behind them. They have enough monopoly power to

distort prices.

Financial markets such as the oil market, the metals markets, the grain

markets or the sovereign debt market were created for actual users, not

speculators, but they are now so dominated by hot money that the sounds

from the original users are no longer audible. As a result, these markets

and their prices indicate what the speculative money believes at any one

time, and this is not necessarily what is happening in the real economy. It

also adds an overwhelmingly short-term perspective and huge layers of


We all pay a high price for this because the real economy is then forced to

adjust. In rich countries, oil consumption and economic activity get cut as

oil becomes too expensive. In poor countries, they have riots and

governments fall as food becomes too expensive.

In all countries, governments have to produce policies that put the whims

of the markets before the needs of their citizens - witness the way

policies across Europe are tailored to appease bondholders and debt


A letter to the Financial Times yesterday pointed out what are only the

most recent examples of how the financial market tail wags the dog.

In oil, pricing is based on two sources of supply: the North Sea's Brent

crude and West Texas intermediate. For years, the price difference between

them has remained between two and three dollars to reflect the oil quality

and its distance from market.

At present, however, the price gap is more than $17. Similarly, it has long

been a feature of metals markets that when stocks rise, the price falls.

But not since 2008. Today, stocks at the London Metal Exchange are high and

rising, but so are metal prices. In both these cases - as well as with

grain and foodstuffs - the new factor in recent years is that these markets

have become fashionable for financial speculators.

To sum up, we have financial institutions that have power without

responsibility. They are dedicated to using that power to make profits for

themselves. They now know they can drive markets in one direction or

another for most, if not all, of the time. The distorted signals these

markets then deliver hold governments and the world's citizens to ransom.

From being the servant of the world economy, the financial markets are

becoming its master.

This is not how the system was meant to work. This is not what a belief in

markets was meant to deliver. It is impossible to know how it will end but

it is surely unsustainable.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Higg's Bosun - what is it?

How Particles Acquire Mass

By Mary and Ian Butterworth, Imperial College London, and Doris and Vigdor Teplitz, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas, USA.
The Higgs boson is a hypothesised particle which, if it exists, would give the mechanism by which particles acquire mass.

Matter is made of molecules; molecules of atoms; atoms of a cloud of electrons about one-hundred-millionth of a centimetre and a nucleus about one-hundred-thousandth the size of the electron cloud. The nucleus is made of protons and neutrons. Each proton (or neutron) has about two thousand times the mass of an electron. We know a good deal about why the nucleus is so small. We do not know, however, how the particles get their masses. Why are the masses what they are? Why are the ratios of masses what they are? We can't be said to understand the constituents of matter if we don't have a satisfactory answer to this question.

Peter Higgs has a model in which particle masses arise in a beautiful, but complex, progression. He starts with a particle that has only mass, and no other characteristics, such as charge, that distinguish particles from empty space. We can call his particle H. H interacts with other particles; for example if H is near an electron, there is a force between the two. H is of a class of particles called "bosons". We first attempt a more precise, but non-mathematical statement of the point of the model; then we give explanatory pictures.

In the mathematics of quantum mechanics describing creation and annihilation of elementary particles, as observed at accelerators, particles at particular points arise from "fields" spread over space and time. Higgs found that parameters in the equations for the field associated with the particle H can be chosen in such a way that the lowest energy state of that field (empty space) is one with the field not zero. It is surprising that the field is not zero in empty space, but the result, not an obvious one, is: all particles that can interact with H gain mass from the interaction.

Thus mathematics links the existence of H to a contribution to the mass of all particles with which H interacts. A picture that corresponds to the mathematics is of the lowest energy state, "empty" space, having a crown of H particles with no energy of their own. Other particles get their masses by interacting with this collection of zero-energy H particles. The mass (or inertia or resistance to change in motion) of a particle comes from its being "grabbed at" by Higgs particles when we try and move it.

If particles no get their masses from interacting with the empty space Higgs field, then the Higgs particle must exist; but we can't be certain without finding the Higgs. We have other hints about the Higgs; for example, if it exists, it plays a role in "unifying" different forces. However, we believe that nature could contrive to get the results that would flow from the Higgs in other ways. In fact, proving the Higgs particle does not exist would be scientifically every bit as valuable as proving it does.

These questions, the mechanisms by which particles get their masses, and the relationship amongs different forces of nature, are major ones and so basic to having an understanding of the constituents of matter and the forces among them, that it is hard to see how we can make significant progress in our understanding of the stuff of which the earth is made without answering them.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

The broken society

Over the last ten years I have had many conversations with people about the parlous state of our country. Many were unable to comprehend how we came to sink so low on so many levels. All without exception blamed soft headed thinking at the highest and lowest levels of national and local government which has led to a rapid degredation of morality, parental control, discipline as well as alienation from the political process.

The majority of people in this country have known what is wrong with this country for years but have been unable to convey their fears and concerns to unlistening representatives, more concerned with the perks of political power than the interests of the country. Politicians of all parties have been only too willing to sell sound principles down the drain, if it means winning votes to either hold on to or gain power.

The constant drip drip effect of years of political expediency has led to a gradual weakening of the solid foundations that gave order, principle and stability to our society. We no longer value the cornerstone of any society, the family unit, as we used to do. The media has done its damndest to focus our attention on meaningless drivel, celebrity and youth culture, giving both a superficial gravitas they do not merit.

Instead, the wisdom of the elderly has been devalued to such an extent that the elderly are more or less seen as an inconvenience to be ignored, a class of people with no value and yet it was they who fought for the freedom of those that followed. We have broken our society or rather those that serve us have failed us lamentably and still they will not recognise it.

We the people know what has gone wrong and we know how to fix it but are prevented from doing so by those who legislate, not in the interests of the country but the pursuit of their own political agenda and the ultimate reward of power. If there is a vote in it, they will do it, regardless of the long term effects.

Poor foundations can only make for an unstable building.

It must stop. We must re-build the foundations and construct a sustainable society in which we can all play a part and take pride. That is the task for which we elect leaders. That is the challenge before them.

Tuesday, August 09, 2011

Complex protoplasm.

Most complex mass of protoplasm on Earth or maybe in our galaxy! Make of it what you will.

Friday, July 22, 2011

Oldest mass of water ever detected in Universe

Astronomers have discovered the largest and oldest mass of water ever detected in the universe — a gigantic, 12-billion-year-old cloud harboring 140 trillion times more water than all of Earth's oceans combined.

The cloud of water vapor surrounds a supermassive black hole called a quasar located 12 billion light-years from Earth. The discovery shows that water has been prevalent in the universe for nearly its entire existence, researchers said.

"Because the light we are seeing left this quasar more than 12 billion years ago, we are seeing water that was present only some 1.6 billion years after the beginning of the universe," said study co-author Alberto Bolatto, of the University of Maryland, in a statement. "This discovery pushes the detection of water one billion years closer to the Big Bang than any previous find."

Tuesday, July 05, 2011


 If there is no #God, life and death are meaningless as they are without purpose or consequence. The how and the why are worthless pursuits.

It is impossible to accept this synopsis because to do so would mean that everything (the universe and all that it is) is for nothing. To believe that it evolved by mere chance, came from nothing, means nothing and is of no consequence, is too stretch logic to breaking point.

Everything that happens everywhere, whether it be the birth and destruction of stars or galaxies, or the way we and all living things live and die has purpose and meaning. To suggest then that the Cosmos from which life evolved is not imbued with the same meaning and purpose that is demonstrated in everything we see is to admit that logic itself is meaningless.

That makes even less sense than believing in God. If science is based on logic then science has nowhere to go since the Universe itself is apparently without logic.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

A Pittance

Nothing worth a pittance will ever come from a philosophy, of spin, half truths and outright deceit

Political hypocricy

 Political hypocricy and double standards will never engender anything but a loss of respect for its practitioners

Monday, May 02, 2011

Fundamental truth

One cannot find fulfillment in superficiality nor enlightenment without struggle.

Sunday, May 01, 2011

Future in the past

The future is written by what has gone before and can only be changed by what we do in the present.

Friday, April 29, 2011

Common interest is self interest

Obama et al when will you understand that national interest is only assured if the common interest is served first? This must be a self evident truth to anyone who cares to give it some thought?

Friday, April 15, 2011

Labour Party take note!

Will the Labour Party in general and Mr Ed Balls in particular please note today's further reduction in Ireland's credit rating. House prices in Ireland are down 50-70%. Jobs are at a premium and migration is at it's highest for 30 years. That is why cuts to public services are obligatory unless we wish to follow suit.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Matter is spirit

 Matter is spirit moving slowly enough to be seen - Teilhard de Chardin


Tuesday, April 12, 2011

That's the nature of things!

When things are going right, they can only go wrong and visa versa. That's the nature of life.

Friday, April 01, 2011

Mankind's Self Deception

The real stupidity of humankind has been its failure to understand that by tacitly condoning that which we know to be wrong for whatever reason, we simply end up perpetuating and complicating matters to the point that the undoing becomes impossibly difficult. Until we understand, that we can never build a civilised world founded on self interest, deception, greed and hypocrisy, our future will continue to hang by a thread.

Thursday, March 31, 2011

What or who is God?

If there is a God would he/she/it be the supreme energy that controls every living cell? Is this perhaps how cells developed different functions, some cells developed into skeletons, others into eyes, limbs, leaves, trees and so on. Could these cells have developed in such a structured way by chance, haphazardly or  randomly to produce the extremely complex world we live in?

Watching David Attenborough's fascinating programs on life on Earth and Brian Cox in the Wonders of the Universe, they give no rational or scientific explanation for the way in which cells developed into complex and complementary structures, each enhancing and enabling life to thrive and survive. This developmental process is simply assumed to have taken place given the visible end results but no indication is given as to how this occurred. The why is clear, the creation of a living viable and sustainable eco-system, but the how is far from clear. It is unscientific to simply say that organisms "developed" skeletol frames, limbs, eyes, lungs, etc. without understanding how. As we can see all around us this process could not have been random, i.e. without purpose. You cannot concoct a chicken curry without the right ingredients and you cannot concoct intelligent life without intelligence. Or if you can where is the proof?

Is the answer that each cell required a catalyst, an instruction, and/or an intelligence to meatmorphose in a certain way as part of a pre-determined grandiose creational scheme? Where is the proof to the contrary? I have yet to see it.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Intervention in Libya but not Rwanda?

While we talk of Libya let me remind you that Clinton/Blair et al allowed the genocide of 800,000 Tutsi's in Rwanda to go unchallenged. How many thousands have died or been tortured at the hands of Robert Mugabe and how many more in Congo/Zaire. Where was the UN then and why is Libya a special case now? What is the difference between Libyans and those other poor souls who were left to their fate?

More to the point perhaps is where was/is Africa's compassion for its own brothers and sisters then and why do they continue to stand idly by while Mugabe terrorises his own people? Never let me hear them call the West hypocrites whilst they continue to tolerate atrocities in their own front yard?

Friday, March 18, 2011

Obama’s transformation from confrontor to accommadator

There is nothing new in Obama’s transformation from confrontor to accomadator. Every previous American and Western government were, to their shame and ours accomadators of tyranny.

What is sad is that Obama was the first to understand the longer term importance of confronting bad governace. Taking the bull by the horn sooner rather than later would avoid the inevitability of being tossed and trampled by the bull as it grew fatter and more arrogant with time. Ignore a problem short term and you make it worse long term.

Quite apart from anything else it is the roll of leadership to take humanity to a higher place. To do nothing is to be an accomplice and to condone immoral and murderous regimes. This never has been nor ever can be in anyone’s self interest, other than the dictators themeselves.

In Obama the World saw hope and the possibility of change and therein lies the sadness. So little has as yet changed. However to believe that anyone else would have understood the problem, let alone do anything about it, is self delusion.

Obama was and still is the only World leader who has come close to understanding the need for a new politics which is not based on the beligerent use of raw power and self interest at the expense of the common interest. He understands that self interest can only be served when and if it is aligned to the common interest.

As someone who lived and worked in Africa for many years I know what harm has been caused by sustaining the fetid status quo in the name of so called self interest.

I hope Obama will not lose sight of the fundamental wisdom that gave hope to so many.

UN authorises action against Gaddafi

Is it too late? What action will now belatedly be taken? One must assume that end game is now the overthrow of Gaddafi but can this be achieved without a protracted ground war? A whole new can of worms has just opened up.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Libya and Western hypocracy

When all the handwringing and self righteous rhetoric by western powers over recent events in Libya is quelled by Gaddafi's crushing of the pro-democratic movement in his country, which powers will throw off the yoke of principle and continue trading with this tyrant?

We shall be watching.


As a result of miltary action taken by a number of countries in accordance with a UN resolution authorising a "no fly zone" amongst other things, it now looks as though Gaddafi will go one way or another. His position is now untenable. No one could now deal with Gaddafi were he somehow to remain in power. That would be beyond ridiculous and the mother of all hypocracies!

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Smiling in adversity

If you are interested in helping give these kids an education, please contact me. These kids are amongst 13 being looked after by an 80 year old grandmother. They have nothing and have all lost their parents. We are trying as a family to contribute towards their education but we are unable to help them all.

An education is their way out of poverty and the World should be doing much more to fund education in the poorer countries as a means of tackling long term poverty and dependency. We need to get our priorities right and spend less on war and more on peace. Thank you for reading this.

UFO or clever special effects?

Friday, February 11, 2011


Beware you politicians! You are about to learn that you cannot impose your will on the people forever without their consent. We are millions. You are but a few thousand and a few thousand too many at that!
November 2009

Crystal clear

A sense of tranquility
Poerty in motion

Glorious cascade of Wisteria

Sometimes words alone cannot describe the beauty of nature!

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Whatever happened to the BBC?

What happened to journalism? Thirty or forty years ago journalists reported events. Today they offer opinions about events. They stamp their own views on the consciousness of  viewers and listeners. They opine. They seek the extreme edges of events, be they floods, earthquakes or some gruesome murder to sensationalise their so called reporting and better draw focus to their own over-inflated egos.

News programs today are packed with negativity. They present a one sided view of the world which is utterly depressing and totally false. A sop to cheeriness is added in an item about pandas or some other cuddly story in the last item of news. This is supposed to make us all feel better before we trudge off to bed, those of us that is, that are still watching.

We have no idea what casualties have been inflicted on the enemy in Afghanistan. We are never told but we know the names of every single one of our soldiers killed in action. Why? Did the media highlight the deaths of every soldier killed in WW1, WW2,  or the Korean War. Of course not, that would have taken all day to read out. So why are the relatively few deaths of today's fighting men given such prominence? What is the purpose of it?  If you listen to the news, it would appear that only our soldiers are dying. Our allies for all we know, have suffered few if any casualties. As for the enemy who knows? We certainly do not but the question is why not? Do the powers that be think we are idiots that we must only be told only what they want us to know, that we cannot be told the facts or that we should not be given the opportunity to make up our own minds? Who can trust an authority that tries so hard to maipulate the news and by inference our minds?

This is not news broadcasting. This is mind manipulation, media brainwashing and government propaganda. It's abysmal. It's depressing. It's unbalanced and therefore presents a false image of the world we live in. I for one have switched off.

I do not trust the integrity or the motives of those whose job it is to inform us. I do not want opinions. I want news and I want both sides of it not one. I want to hear what is new in the world of science, technology, art and what positive initiatives are being taken by communities and people in our country and elsewhere to make the world a better place. I want to hear about all the good that is going on in the world as well as the bad. I am sick to my back teeth of the garbage that is being fed to us by the television and paper media and so are most people. We are all gradually switching off.

I could go on about the endless dreary repeats that our licence fees paid for donkey's years ago. What are they using licence payers money for now? So mind numbingly dull are many of the programs, I now prefer to watch old black and white films! I hate to think how many times these have been repeated but they are at least better than the rubbish showing on other channels. They at least have a bit of drama in their storylines. I could go on about reality shows and the general dumbing down of the BBC and other networks but I'm sure you have got the drift, so I wont bother. I simply ask who will save us from these donkeys?

Monday, January 03, 2011

Quantum Survival

Herewith Dr. R.D. Pearson's theory on Quantum Survival.
It is most definitely worth reading. I will say no more but welcome related comments.

A major paradigm, accepted across all established scientific disciplines, states that mind and consciousness result from brain function alone. This means that mind must vanish at the instant of brain death, a conclusion totally at variance with the evidence. This evidence has been building for over a century and is now so firm as to effectively constitute totally convincing proof of survival. Roll (9) and Zammit (12) cover this aspect exhaustively.

The reason scientists in general go to great pains to discredit this evidence is because it conflicts with all theories physicists have so far developed. Until a major paradigm-shift in physics has occurred there can be no hope of any change of attitude. Hence it is of paramount importance that the flaws in existing physics are resolved so that it becomes extended to incorporate survival and other controversial phenomena.

This article shows how a successful search made to solve three difficulties in physics resulted in providing just such an extension. The resulting “Survival Physics” shows that, as a natural consequence of the mathematical logic, at least the sub-conscious mind is the true reality at the base of all that exists. Although the brain must die its exact copy lives on to be connected with another parallel universe. Built the same way as our own, these seem just as real as ours when the mind is in register.

This is not the only attempt at producing a theory of survival. The states of others, presented at an SPR conference on 24 April 2004, seem less advanced.

Theoretical physics has so far been unable to resolve three major difficulties. In consequence greater and greater sophistication in concepts and mathematical formalism has resulted, yet no solutions are yet within sight. Could it be that theorists are all leading each other into a blind alley so that a totally different approach is required? This article shows that when a return is made to the logic of common sense, in which only fairly elementary maths is required, a solution to all three problems appears simultaneously.

One problem concerns the big bang theory that purports to explain the creation of the universe from nothing. It is clearly flawed since it makes a major false prediction known as the “Cosmological Constant” (CC). Theorists are unable to switch off their creative explosion. To show how serious this is I quote the Nobel laureate, Steven Weinberg, (11) who wrote in “Reviews of Modern Physics” January 1989 that this “represents a veritable crisis for physics”. Even today the situation remains unchanged after the 25 years of its existence. In 1987 this author realised his own expertise was potentially able to solve the difficulty. Unfortunately the second difficulty known as “wave-particle-duality” needed simultaneous resolution.

When matter is repeatedly divided the atom is eventually reached. Then further division shows this to constitute sub-atomic particles. Quantum theory is the study of the mechanics operating at this sub-microscopic level of reality. In the 1920’s it was discovered that at this level nothing moved as it does at the visible level. In fact motion seemed governed by a plan formed by interfering waves. If two pebbles are thrown into a pond simultaneously waves spread out in rings and the rings cross into each other creating a patch of rough water.

This is the interference pattern characteristic of waves. At the quantum level, particles only appear where the wave amplitudes add up; none are seen where they cancel out. The conceptual difficulties are best illustrated by reading a book by David Deutsch (2) called, “The Fabric of Reality” (Penguin 1998). He says the only possible interpretation requires the universe to split in two every time one of these particles has a choice of two ways to go.

It involves an almost infinite set of universes existing in the same place each multiplying at an almost infinite rate! This is needed if consciousness is kept out of the solution. One of the original ideas from the 20’s, however, is called the “Copenhagen Interpretation”. This says that a particle only exists when an observer “collapses the wave function”. So this interpretation had already accepted consciousness to be involved in the creation of matter.

To me this meant that the quantum level had an unreal quality and had to be contrived by consciousness. There had to be a true reality at a deeper level having a structure able to evolve a conscious intelligence. It could not, therefore, operate on the wave mechanics of the quantum level but needed to exist to make those waves. It was more likely to operate on the classical mechanics found satisfactory for explaining how stars and planets moved: “Classical Mechanics”.
This introduced the third difficulty for which no resolution has emerged for over 70 years. Einstein’s theory called “General Relativity” (GR) is accepted as the best since it has survived almost every experimental check. Unfortunately it is incompatible with quantum theory.

It was also impossible to apply it to solve the problem of the cosmological constant owing to the assumption that only motion relative to the observer existed. Now as objects are speeded up they gain energy of motion called “kinetic energy”. In relativity its value differs from one observer to another if the observers also see each other in motion. Consequently kinetic energy, according to GR, has to be regarded as illusory. To solve the problem of the CC kinetic energy had to be real. Consequently a new mechanics had to be derived. I had to be, not only compatible with quantum theory, but also had to match all the experimental checks that had elevated the status of GR to one of the two major achievements of 20’th century physics.

To provide a satisfactory alternative to GR seemed to present a formidable obstacle since this had to be derived first. However, by applying the mechanical engineers logic of common sense a satisfactory new “Exact Classical Mechanics” (ECM) soon emerged. It matched all the data just as well as did relativity theory but had the advantage of starting out quantum compatible. It was first published in Russia in 1991 (5) but can be found on the “Campaign for Philosophical Freedom” website of Michael Roll, (1) very professionally organised by Paul Read.

ECM theory had all motion referred to the local background medium, to be called the “i-ther”. So now kinetic energy could be regarded as real. To enable a paradox free theory of creation from the zero energy state of nothingness to appear it was also necessary to extend the theory to yield an, “Opposed Energy Dynamics”.

ECM theory yields Einstein’s famous equation E=mc2 by a totally different method but without reference to relativity in any way. This equation shows that matter is made out of energy. So energy is the ultimate building substance of the universe of matter. Since matter had to emerge as a construct of the i-ther, this ultimate level of reality had also be made from the same stuff.

For energy to appear from nothing it had to exist in two opposite and complementary kinds: positive and negative. We assume we are made of only positive energy defined by Newton’s laws. He said that when an object was caused to accelerate it had to be pushed by a “force of action” pointing in the same direction as the motion produced.

An object made of negative energy would move in a direction opposite this force. Although difficult to accept at first introduction, this actually involves no conceptual difficulties. If two objects both made of negative energy are imagined to collide, both have their responses reversed and so the effects cancel. Consequently if all matter were negative it would behave in exactly the same way as that we observe. Indeed it is impossible to say which dominates for our matter.

For creation to occur both kinds need to exist as a balanced mixture of minute real particles to be called “primaries”. These are the only true particles that really can exist. Then it is also possible for the positive and negative primaries to cancel each other to zero, so enabling an existing mixture to annihilate itself to become nothingness. So what would actually happen during the collision of opposites? They would certainly all be in vigorous motion, like the molecules of a gas, eternally colliding and bouncing off one another.

Opposed energy dynamics gave the answer. Another law of mechanics called the “conservation of momentum” had also to be satisfied. The momentum of an object is defined as its mass multiplied by its velocity. The sum of the momentums of all objects colliding has to be the same after the collision as it was before, as measured in any specified direction.

Instead of annihilating this condition forced both colliding primaries to gain energy of their own kind in balanced amounts. They were breeding like opposite sexes! A detailed computational study taking collision probabilities into account showed that the average energy gain would be 0.091 of incident kinetic energy if the average speed were 99% of the speed of light. The proportion rose to 0.199 as speed fell to 10% of light speed. Of course the incident kinetic energy rises rapidly as speed increases.

In consequence the i-ther would form a rapidly growing ball but its density would also increase until an unstable condition was reached. And this solved the problem of the CC!

The entire flow field now broke up into minute cells divided by watershed-like boundaries, possibly forming a regular pattern like a honeycomb. Inside each cell, flows converged to a central point and here conditions, again governed by the need to conserve momentum, favoured mutual annihilation. In the outer annulii of each cell a gas-like fluid existed forming a breeding blanket and nearly all this creation was cancelled out at the central focal points.

A minute net creation remained causing a slow growth, over aeons of time, to the vast size of the universe we see today -except for one thing: matter did not yet exist. The i-ther is only the source of matter. However, when matter eventually appeared it would go with the flow. And the flow predicted was one of accelerating expansion. Every part would be moving away from every other with both speeds and accelerations proportional to separating distance. This was predicted in 1992 and in 1998, as reported by Schwarzchild, B (10), astronomers discovered that, contrary to their expectations, the expansion was indeed accelerating. So Survival Physics has made an important prediction later confirmed by observation.

There could be almost spherical centres of annihilation (hubs) or long filamentous shapes (links) all of finite diameter and consisting of primaries in the act of mutual destruction. Hubs and links, however, would themselves form permanent structures. Many links could couple to a single hub as one of an infinite variety of geometries that could form by chance.

This structure formed a source of power that could only manifest as waves: so explaining why the quantum level has to operate on wave mechanics. The waves need intelligent organisation, however, but arrangements of hubs and links could be imagined that looked very like the artificial neural networks that scientists, such as Hinton(3) have shown to have memory and learning capability. The speculative part of the emerging theory had to assume that in the fullness of time a neural network would evolve and that further evolution would lead to the emergence of the conscious intelligence needed for wave organisation.

This meant that at least the sub-conscious mind had to exist as an i-theric structure. It would need to contrive matter by the clever organisation of real quantum waves. A sub atomic particle would be formed by the repeated focusing of waves at points chosen at random but confined to regions of constructive wave interference patterns. In this way a satisfying interpretation for the enigma of wave-particle-duality emerged.

A particle, such as an electron, would no longer be regarded as a single object travelling along the curved paths caused by the action of electric and magnetic forces. Instead electrons would be sequences of wave focusing events joined end to end in time but not in position. These positions would be chosen mathematically so that, as observed by scientists, electrons would only now appear to be acted upon by a real force of electromagnetism. The other three forces of nature could be similarly interpreted. Hence our universe now appears as a semi-virtual reality. It is built from real energies but these are intelligently organised.

Each i-theric mind would have to be separated from the universal sub-conscious by some form of information filter-barrier programmed into the i-ther, so that it could interact with other minds in meaningful ways. This could explain why at least one matter system had to be organised to provide a temporary housing in which such interaction could occur.

Then on the demise of that housing another based on different laws of physics was provided so that development of individual minds could continue. The i-ther could build several interpenetrating universes all occupying the same space but tuned to different quantum wave frequencies. Then the i-theric mind could tune into just one at a time. If the brain has its own consciousness then a copy is carried in the i-ther.

In this way a theory emerged, that had survival as its core feature. It had appeared from the simultaneous solution of the three major difficulties of physics. With this model the entire spectrum of the so-called “paranormal” can be given an explanation as potentially real effects including mediumshiop, telepathy, psychokinesis, healing, apports, OOB’s, NDE’s and prediction.

Most can be found on the Campaign for Philosophical Freedom website: Gives an article published by “Frontier Perspectives” Spring Summer 1997 Pearson: Consciousness as a Sub-Quantum Phenomenon gives maths of An Exact Classical Mechanics
This covers many other aspects mostly concerning the evidence for survival.
Deutsch, David: The Fabric of Reality : Penguin Books 1998

Hinton, Geoffrey E.: How Neural Networks Learn from Experience Scientific American special Issue “Mind and Brain” September 1992

Keen, Montague: Ellison, Arthur: Fontana, David (of the Society for Psychical Research UK): The Scole Report (More valuable evidence)

Pearson, Ronald D.: Alternative to Relativity including Quantum Gravitation: Second International Conference on Problems in Space and Time: St. Petersburg, (Sept. 1991) pp 278-292.

Pearson, Ronald D.: "Quantum Gravitation and the Structured Ether"Sir Isaac Newton Conference. St. Petersburg (March 1993) pp 39-55 Petrovskaja Academy of Sciences & Arts Chairman. Local Organising Committee: Dr. Michael Varin: Pulkovskoye Road 65-9-1 St. Petersburg 196140, Russia. FAX: (7) (812) 291-81-35. Phone: Alexandre Alekseev: office:(7) (812) 291-36-73, Home:(7) (812) 173-55-69 E-Mail:
Pearson, Ronald D.: Origin of Mind [Dec.1992]: -A popularisation plus Technical Appendix (Maths of Opposed Energy Dynamics) 72 pages: (110 grams) direct from Michael Roll.
Pearson, R. D.: Consciousness as a Sub-Quantum Phenomenon Frontier Perpectives, Spring/ Summer 1997, Vol.6,No.2 pp70-78 (See 1) website

Roll, Michael: A Rational Scientific Explanation for So-Called Psychic Phenomena: The Paranormal Review October 2004 pp 21-23 Proc.Soc. of Psychical Research Vol.58, Part 220 (1999)

Schwarzchild, B.: Very distant Supernova Suggest that the Cosmic Expansion is Speeding Up: Physics Today, Vol.51(6) pp.17-19

Weinberg, Stephen: The Cosmological Constant Problem Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol.61 (1) Jan 1989

We are grateful to Victor Zammit for giving us the permission to take all this information from his website:
April 2005

Wrld To reach our homepage
click here please.
You are visiting our website:

Saturday, January 01, 2011

Survival Physics

This is Ronald Pearson (Survival Physics). His eye opening theory should be read by everyone who is interested in Quantum Physics and what happens to us after death. You make up up your own minds. It makes a whole lot of sense to me and answers many of the questions that even the greatest minds have failed to address or explain satisfactorily. (See Above article)