Ultimate Reality: The New Paradigm of Life Eternal

By Béla Balogh

A bridge building engineer grown up with a strictly materialistic worldview started to question this worldview first when he met a man who had the ability to move objects by the power of his concentrated thoughts only. The result of his research was astonishing. 

If somebody told you your brain cannot generate thoughts, would you believe that?

If somebody told you that the theory of evolution goes against the laws of physics, and the whole scientific world and the media around this theory is telling you lies, would you believe that?

Would you believe your life did not begin with your birth?

Well, you don’t have to. It is quite enough if you understand it.

Even the possible conditions of the „afterlife” are known!  

You can easily replace all you have been made to believe with sure knowledge.

Dear reader! You might be at the threshold of your most astonishing adventure.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Fényrózsa bt.
• Release date: Feb 26, 2021
• ISBN: 9786150105086

Book preview

all.

PART ONE

Chapter 1

PRISONERS OF ILLUSION

When Kepler found his long-cherished belief did not agree with the most precise observation, he accepted the uncomfortable fact. He preferred the hard truth to his dearest illusions; this is the heart of science.

Carl Sagan (1934-1996)

The desire to explain where the Universe came from and why we are here is as old as humanity itself. Most modern individuals expend at least some energy wondering about the purpose of existence, the possibility of life after death, or the proposed existence of a central intelligence versus a world governed by the impersonal forces of thermodynamics and probability. In my view, we are not as far from knowing the answers to such questions as one might suppose, though we are often prevented from recognizing them when we see them, because we are unable to distinguish between reality, which exists independently of us, and illusion, which does not.

Illusion is a peculiar phenomenon, and the way human beings perceive their environment often stands in the way of deeper understanding. Information related to our day-to-day lives reaches us through our sense organs, producing an effect so strong, we accept it as reality without ever thinking to question the validity of our experiences or how the process works. Many illusions are shared by several or even many individuals at the same time, and so find their way into the collective worldview to define reality as understood by the larger community. As a result, the history of humankind is riddled with tragic, even amusing misunderstandings.

In fact, the majority of ideas once held as indisputable truth over the course of human thought and consciousness seem quite ridiculous when viewed from the modern perspective. One ancient legend, for instance, taught that the world was flat and was supported by four enormous elephants standing on the back of a giant turtle. This interpretation offered convenient explanations for any number of phenomena, including earthquakes, which were said to occur whenever one of the elephants shifted its weight.

img2.png

Indeed, it was only relatively recently that the first tentative theories of a spherical Earth were proposed. In 1492, Christopher Columbus set a course west in an attempt to reach India, landing eventually on an island not far from the American coast. Thinking he had actually succeeded in his endeavor, he called the natives he found there Indians. The misnomer stuck, and generations thereafter spoke of North American Indians and South American Indians, often forgetting that the real Indians lived somewhere else entirely. In spite of the error, history still remembers Columbus’s expedition as having transformed humanity’s perception of its larger environment. It is important to note, however, that the real change occurred not in the actual shape of the planet, which had always been round, but in the minds of those who assimilated the discovery, and its many implications, into their own perception of the universe.

Though with Columbus’s voyage one of humanity’s most enduring illusions had finally been cast aside, naturally, the next stood ready to take its place. For many long centuries, people had believed the Earth stood fixed at the center of the Universe, with all the bodies of the heavens orbiting about it. In fact, without the benefit of a modern primary school science class, it would have been difficult for an ordinary person some centuries ago to imagine otherwise. Men who questioned this premise might even find their lives in danger, as Galileo discovered when compelled to refute his beliefs before the infamous Inquisition. His predecessor, Giordano Bruno had fared worse. Though the Inquisition had found his conclusions contrary to the teachings of the church, Bruno held to his convictions to the end and was condemned to death at the stake. Drastic as such measures may have been, they did nothing at all to alter the facts: The Earth had orbited the sun long before Bruno and would continue to do so long after the wind had swept his ashes away. In the end, the rotation and revolution of heavenly bodies is not a matter of proof at all, but one of recognition. It is not reality that changes, not one world that is substituted for another, but a perception that undergoes transformation within the realm of human consciousness.

Since Galileo, humankind has, at some sacrifice, attained a significantly higher level of consciousness. People today no longer see the Earth as lying at the center of the Universe, and for that matter, have moved beyond even the heliocentric view. The orbits of the planets and paths of the stars have been calculated using Newtonian physics and the results assimilated into humanity’s collective consciousness. At the expense of a worldview founded on faith, materialism, constructed upon theorems that can be proved, has eventually prevailed.

Recently, even areas of the sciences that have enjoyed stability for much of written history have come under renewed scrutiny. The axioms of Euclid, for example, had formed the basis for all geometric speculation for over two thousand years following their initial postulation in the 4th century B.C.E. For centuries no one even suspected any other viable geometry could exist. The first to test this assumption was Hungarian mathematician Janos Bolyai, who explored movement over a curved surface or within a distorted space, where the shortest distance between two points is not a straight line, as it is in Euclidean space.

img3.png

Bolyai was followed by the genius Albert Einstein, who pointed out that humanity’s view of time and space had been flawed to begin with. Prior to Einstein, time had been seen as absolute and immutable. While many people actually experience the opposite in their everyday lives, still, the thought that time might be fluid and variable proved difficult for most modern, rational individuals to accept. Einstein’s theory of special relativity aroused much suspicion among scientists of the time and continues to frustrate most people today. (Interestingly enough, Einstein received the Nobel prize several years later not for relativity, his most famous theory, but for another unrelated discovery.) Einstein succeeded in proving special relativity both mathematically and experimentally, a feat that remains one of the most drastic interventions in the way human beings think about their universe up to the present time. However, his observations did not stop there. Einstein also noticed that no individual sees the world from the same perspective as another, meaning that no two individuals ever see exactly the same thing. Thus, reality itself must also be different for different people. If one considers that light rays reflected from an object travels along different paths in reaching observers standing at two separate distances away, it cannot even be said that reality for two observers is identical in terms of time. The observer standing closest to the object will see the object before the one standing farther away. Though the difference is actually minimal, its existence forces the conclusion that no two people can ever see exactly the same thing from the same point of view.

img4.png

Scientific discoveries such as these have done much to propel the development of the human mind, allowing humans first to conquer the skies and then to venture out into space. At the same time, increasingly precise instruments have advanced the causes of both biology and medicine by opening the way for the examination of things as small as the living cell and giving humans a glimpse into the structure of matter. And while such discoveries have relentlessly transformed the way people look at their world, it would seem they have actually begun to relate to each other differently, as well. One rarely hears the argument anymore that violence might be a suitable or appropriate means of resolving international conflict, and though the world is not yet completely rid of the spectre of war, attempts to resolve international conflict through peaceful means occur with noticeably increasing frequency.

Of course, this is all just the beginning. The idea that humanity might live in peace and harmony with nature is still just a dream, and the road to realizing that dream is very long, indeed. Nor have we succeeded in answering the long-standing questions of where the Universe came from and why life exists within it. The failings of evolutionary theory with respect to the laws of physics and especially with respect to the findings of quantum physics have not yet been made clear, while the workings of the human mind remain a mystery. A certain portion of cosmic radiation has still not been accounted for, and perhaps most interestingly of all, the solid materialist worldview is continuously perturbed by unexplained phenomena, generally lumped together under the dubious collective term paranormal.

Each time humanity recognizes a shared illusion, it comes that much closer to understanding reality. Paradoxically, each time such an illusion has been shattered, the majority of those who shared it believe the new worldview to be the final one. And yet, as this book will show, humanity still nurses a number of common illusions, convictions regarding the concepts of time and space, evolution, gravitation, the human mind, matter, and even the soul and spirit, that continue to bar the way to deeper understanding.

Physics is the foundation of all sciences, but since Einstein concluded that E=mc² the findings of quantum physics have been largely ignored by biology and medicine, because they don’t fit in the matter-based world of Newtonian physics on which biology is based.

Quantum physics tells us the following about the nature of the universe:

Energy and matter are one and the same - it is impossible to consider them as independent elements.

The universe is one, indivisible dynamic whole in which energy and matter are deeply entangled. The atom has no physical structure. Matter can be defined both as a solid and an immaterial force field. Every material structure (including human beings) radiates its own unique energy signature.

Yet doctors are trained to disregard the effectiveness of alternative treatments that are based on the idea that energy fields are the key to influencing physiology and health, such as acupuncture, chiropractic massage therapy, and prayer. Conventional research has completely ignored the role of energy in health and disease.

(The Biology of Belief By Bruce H. Lipton, PH.D)

Chapter 2

IS MATTER REALLY MATTER?

Most human beings perceive the world around them based on information gathered through their sense organs. The process by which this is done is fundamentally linked to the properties of substances, what scientists call matter. This means of perception has always offered such a firm basis for consensus that few have bothered to question its validity or to doubt the nature of matter as currently conceived. On closer examination, however, we find there is more to a complete understanding of the concept than is traditionally revealed by our perceptions alone.

The task of defining matter has presented a serious problem not only for history’s philosophers, but for modern researchers, as well. In ancient times matter was thought to consist of tiny, indivisible building blocks, of which the entire material world was constructed. The word atom comes from the Greek and means precisely indivisible, though today we are all too aware that the integrity of the atom can no longer be taken for granted. Twentieth-century science has dedicated much of its energy to divining the exact composition of matter and to separating it into its constituent parts. First the existence of an atomic nucleus, a central core for the atom, with electrons orbiting about it, was postulated. Later, the nucleus itself was discovered to consist of subatomic particles called protons and neutrons. As the process of investigation continued, these subatomic particles were further broken down into even smaller components called mesons and baryons, which themselves have proved to be composed of exceedingly minuscule particles, now called quarks. In fact, a consideration of progress in this matter to date might lead one to believe science could carry on subdividing particles into smaller ones ad infinitum, but research into what happens when it actually does has led to some rather startling conclusions:

Constituent particles of matter are no longer regarded as solid, indestructible particles. Particles without mass such as photons show characteristics of matter, whereas counterparts of particles, for example positrons and electrons can entirely be converted into energy of radiation. Such elementary particles as quarks could not be observed directly, and it is likely that they will never be set apart and examined as isolated phenomena. (Tor Ragnar Gerholm: Swedish National Encyclopaedia, 1997)

Physicists had to give up looking for basic elements of matter when they found so many basic particles that they could hardly be called basic. Physicists have found matter very shaky in their experiments for the past few decades and have seen at subatomic level that matter does not exist in particular places but shows a tendency to exist. According to the book Hands of Light by Barbara Ann Brennan, a physicist and former worker of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

The idea that matter does not exist in a definite place, but displays only a tendency for existence, that is, that particles of matter cannot be pointed out for certain or pinned down for examination, clearly challenges the intuition. If correct, then a physicist may expect to divine the nature of matter by dividing it into smaller and smaller particles with as much success as the biologist who pursues life with the scalpel: in both cases, the object of examination has, in essence, slipped through the fingers of the examiner by the very nature of the process employed.

Before any analysis of matter becomes too focused on the behavior of particles, however, it must also consider the recent discovery that matter, like light, displays a peculiar dual nature, sometimes behaving like a particle and sometimes like a wave, depending on the conditions to which it is subjected.

They succeeded in proving as early as in 1925 that an electron ray can behave as a wave because there is interference when an electron ray collides with a crystal. This made it possible to measure the wavelength of an electron. The result agreed exactly with what Louis de Broglie had calculated in advance. So electrons could not be determined as a small bullet or as a material object in general. In the world that surrounds us, it is straightforward that an object, for example a football never behaves as a wave. Photons, electrons and atoms, which are ‘non-objects’ appear as something that is only sometimes an object, that is to say something that can only sometimes be determined on the basis of its position, shape and mass. Then it also happens that photon rays (beams of light), electron rays or even atom rays behave as waves. An electron is no wave, and neither is it a particle. It is an electron. (Svante Svensson, Molekylerna genomskådas, Liber Publishers, 1983)

In this paradox, we face one of the most disputed mysteries of physics, the question of whether our environment consists primarily of particles that sometimes exhibit the properties of waves, or of waves that occasionally behave as if they were particles. While modern physics currently favors the position that it is both, everyday experience would still lead us to believe that the objects we encounter in this universe are indeed tangible, that they do, in fact, have substance, and that they hence have little to do with waves. On the other hand, scientific experience has often shown that everyday perceptions of the truth can sometimes lead an investigation down the wrong path.

Approaching the essence of the matter from a less obvious perspective, consider instead what would happen if matter were assumed to be a wave, an experiment for which both the mathematical and physical means are available. Einstein’s theory of special relativity produced the famous equation E=mc², where E is energy, m is mass, and c represents the speed of light in a vacuum. Since the speed of light in a vacuum is presumed constant, this formula describes the precise relationship between mass and energy, allowing us to calculate just how much energy a particle of given mass represents. Thus, particles, which we tend to perceive as substance or matter, can also be construed as minute packets of energy. Moreover, as Max Planck discovered in 1900, their associated energy values can be expressed equally well in terms of frequency, with higher energies corresponding to higher frequencies.

Thus, we find that various subatomic particles can, in fact, be said to correspond to various types and frequencies of waves.

We have seen that what we perceive as matter can be convincingly described as a wave; however, physicists who have probed the issue emphasize that in the case of matter, calculations point not to the type of wave that progresses through a medium in a particular direction, but to what is called a standing wave. In contrast to its name, however, a standing wave should in no way be imagined as a static phenomenon. Secondary school physics teachers often illustrate standing waves using a rubber band of several meters’ length, secured at one end to a stationary object, such as a wall or desk (see Figure 1). A student standing at „B and gripping the free end of the rubber band produces a steady series of waves that travel along the band to the fixed end at „A, where they are reflected. As they return along the band toward „B", these waves encounter the original stream of waves proceeding in the opposite direction, resulting in an interference pattern composed of both. Results vary, but at certain frequencies, the pattern can be shown to take on a regular form.

img5.pngimg6.png

Standing waves possess several important characteristic properties. We may note, for example, that with a standing wave, all parts of the medium vibrate simultaneously, not sequentially as with a progressive wave. In addition, amplitude in a standing wave is distributed such that certain points in the pattern, called nodes, are virtually at rest, while others, called anti-nodes, vibrate consistently at maximum amplitude. Standing waves of this variety also occur in organ pipes, where they consist of fluctuations in the flow of air within the pipe, and along the strings of musical instruments (violin, guitar), in which case the string itself provides the medium for vibration.

img7.jpg

Irrespectively of the length of the string, only whole number of loops can be generated. (a - fundamental mode. b - first overtone. c - second overtone)

img8.png

In Figures 3 a, b, and c, the waves shown display perfect symmetry with respect to the center of the membrane, whereas in d, e, and f, symmetry occurs only with respect to one of its diameters. Thus, standing waves may be characterized not only by their frequency, but also by the type of symmetry they exhibit.

Returning to the subject of matter, both the atomic nucleus and the electrons that revolve about it have been shown in certain experiments to possess properties characteristic of waves.

img9.png

In this illustration, the electron appears as a standing wave, much like the standing wave occurring along the string of a violin shown in Figure 3. As appealing as this analogy may be, however, observe that in the case of the violin or organ pipe, the sound the instrument makes will stop the moment we cease to move the bow or produce an inflow of air. In other words, a standing wave only stands as long as we continue to feed it with energy. Thus, if we hope to describe a particle of matter such as an electron or proton as a standing wave, then we must also address the issue of what maintains it. The actual question here is, is it more probable that the electron engages in ‘perpetual motion’ in contradiction to the laws of physics, or must we rather assume that electrons, too, need a constant supply of energy in order to sustain the frequency and symmetry of their vibration? To fully grasp the difficulties involved in completing the above analysis, however, one need only examine figure 3 and 4. The simple, two-dimensional theoretical model for the electron shown in Figure 4 may conveniently resemble diagrams of the electron from secondary school physics texts, but it unfortunately ignores the reality of three dimensions, a circumstance that tends to complicate matters even further. Figure 5. illustrates what the same standing wave might look like from two different perspectives, the first from the side and the second from the top.

img10.png

In such cases, the standing wave associated with a given particle does not even form a single, unbroken pattern and thus defies description as an orbit in the classical sense. One approach used in the past by certain physicists to impose meaning upon such three-dimensional standing wave patterns was to interpret the electron as a particle, which could be found with greatest probability in areas of the pattern exhibiting the largest amplitude. However, this view has since gone out of fashion.

Standing waves are characterized by both their frequency and symmetry. By varying these two properties, any number of interesting standing wave patterns may be produced. When, in the middle of the last century, Erwin Schrödinger applied his celebrated wave equation to the simple hydrogen atom with its single electron, he discovered a whole series of standing waves possessing a broad variety of forms, several of which are presented below:

img11.png

Despite his success in depicting standing wave patterns for this particular type of atom, Schrödinger never claimed to know precisely what it was that orbited within them, if anything at all.

img12.pngimg13.png

Schrödinger examined the standing wave patterns produced by a single particle residing within a simple atom. Entire atoms containing larger numbers of particles, however, require that we consider the composite formed by many component waves. The stable Sodium atom, for example, contains 11 protons and 12 neutrons in its nucleus, totaling 23 various types and frequencies of standing wave. If we also include the atom’s 11 electrons, then the sodium atom as a whole may be described as a single energy packet composed of 11+12+11=34 different standing waves patterns. Atoms themselves often bond together to form molecules, which in turn comprise the living and non-living matter that make up our universe. Thus, everything we call matter, every stone, flower, automobile, or human being, represents its own unique composite of multiple compounded standing wave patterns.

Although the characterization of matter in this fashion runs counter to most of what humans sense about their world, indications are that there is really no such thing as a particle of matter, but only standing waves that exhibit the properties of matter. In order to discuss the place of matter as a wave in the universe, however, we must first determine what frequencies matter represents, and where these frequencies lie along the electromagnetic spectrum, a task easily accomplished using what physicists call spectrum analysis.

Lightening an atom means allowing for certain photons, - whose energy is determined by their frequency, that is wavelength - to interact with the atom. If this energy corresponds to the difference between the different levels of energy of the electron, a phenomenon based on resonance occurs. The electron absorbs the energy of the photon, and simply changes its waveform... And the reverse happens when an electron generated to a higher level of energy emits a photon and returns to the lower level of energy. (Svante Svensson: Molekylerna genomskådas, Liber Publishers, Stockholm 1983)

From the wavelength of an absorbed or emitted photon, we can determine with accuracy the frequency of the standing waves that form atoms. If we apply the method to a broad range of types of matter (contained in Fig. 7. The