The Sacredness of All That Is
(c) Robert Neil Boyd

[From a comment on list]: There is no divinity.

[R. N. Boyd]:

Everything is Sacred. The fact that one is not Cognizant of It, does not abrogate the Fact of It. (Because you have never seen a kangaroo with your own two eyes, it does not mean that kangaroos do not exist. One cannot categorically deny the existence of kangaroos, in the face of large bodies of evidence which support the existence of kangaroos. Such an approach [out-of-hand denial of kangaroos] seems to me to be one which leads to delusions regarding the facts, any facts, when such facts are denied by the denial of the reports of other, first-hand witnesses.) Such a delusional approach to life fundamentally results from various personal biases and prejudices, which have been imposed by ones' own preferences, societal prejudices, and BELIEFS. Thus what you are actually saying [when you claim there is no divinity] is that you don't believe there is Divinity, as you have no first-hand experience of such, according to your prejudices. You can believe, or disbelieve [which is the same thing] whatever you want. Beliefs of any sort are TRAPS. Skepticisms are not only traps, they are disasters!

The fact is, that one may have a BELIEF that there is no divinity. Here, skepticism will lead one astray. Get the empirical facts, based on empirical explorations of such questions as, "Is there a God?" I asked this question. And to obtain the answer empirically, I threw out any and all beliefs, and any and all skepticisms, and any and all prejudices, then spent the next 10 years seeking empirical evidences and performing various experiments. You see, I could not allow any predispositions of any sort to distort the data in my purely scientific, empirical studies of these important matters. That meant disposing of any and all religions and any and all philosophies. Not an easy task, given that the culture we are in is filled with vast numbers of beliefs and skepticisms and prejudices. In fact, we are trained from childhood to skepticism! Which serves no one except the dominator personalities which appear to control large segments of the present and pitiable global condition.

Such a pity! You are missing a great deal of Beauty and Wonder due to your prejudices in these regards.

In fact, the quantum potential is part of this set of equations which point directly at the understandings which I have stated. Additionally, the multidimensional aspects of the topological physics, strongly support my statements regarding the fact of the existence of Divinity in all things. The facts of non-locality and transtemporal events, also support these views in terms of the physics. The experimental results of Vladimir Poponin at Lebedev University in Moscow and at the Heart Math Institute in Arizona, strongly support the understanding that everything, even the physical vacuum, is possessed of the property of memory. The experimental evidence that the vacuum has memory is important, because it implies some manner of Consciousness resides in the vacuum. (Memory implies consciousness.)

In addition, the Fermi-Popov-Ulam lattice view of the physical vacuum, which is simply the Hamiltonian of an N-dimensional system of loosely coupled non-linear oscillators, strongly suggests that the Consciousness may be viewed as a soliton-like formation in the FPU lattice. (See: The DNA Phantom Effect)

In further support of this view, Karl Pribram, a world renowned neurophysiologist, has presented large bodies of experimental evidences, that the memory of a human being, and thus also the Consciousness, reside in a holographic system of E/M energetics which are not contiguous with the physical brain. Combining the FPU lattice view with the results of Pribram, strongly show that the Consciousness itself, is non-physical in the material sense, but strongly real and factual in the purely energetic sense.

See: "The Holographic Universe" by Talbot.
Also see: The Physics of Consciousness

Regarding your statement that there is no such thing as "heaven" or "hell", there are conditions of life on this planet which might well be described by both these labels. It all depends on your intentions and your personal approach to life, which of these conditions you will experience. As to an "afterlife", afterlife is an absolute fact. But, what are the conditions when one's body ceases to function are most often conjectural. There are a large number of reports of the transition process. There are a large number of reports of the conditions after the transition. If you are an empiricist, as I am, such reports amount to hearsay. However, the fact is that you are not your body.

You are not your mind. "You" are a coherent holographic energy pattern which occupies a multidimensional frame and there is a difference in the experience of time, when ones' physical form has ceased, as well. This view is easily comprehended in view of the experimental work I have referenced above. I first derived these same perspectives empirically, through the senses and sensitivities, well before any of these other researches were completed. Fact is, I am able to communicate with both my parents much more easily and deeply, since they've gone to "the other side", and don't have physical limitations on their perceptions anymore. I have developed the ability to communicate with the "departed", at will. Not so hard, once you get the knack of it. It's getting the knack that is the hard part, because there are no guidelines on how to accomplish this with the intellect. That is because the intellect is not involved very much at all with this process. It is primarily a sensitivity to emotional energetics that engenders such experiences to occur.

[Comment on list]: "You know as well as I that these are inventions of humankind to explain the unexplainable at a time when science was in its infancy and the damn lies kept on going over the last 4000 years because the general mass is ignorant and unwilling to accept the universe as a real thing instead of a conjectured thing."

[R. N. Boyd]:

This is intellectual nonsense that has nothing to do with the apprehendable facts. One needs reliance on the senses, the experiencable facts. What you have stated above is purely conjectural, based on the results of the past 17 years of my empirical researches. Just because you want something to be so, or not to be so, does not make it that way. The facts are the facts, regardless of your opinions, beliefs, or skepticisms. I wonder how long has it been since you looked in the sky and noticed the sun, and the stars, and the moon, and the clouds, and the birds, and the insects which are there? I wish a beautiful world for you. Simply using your senses will greatly improve your condition, and the use of the senses is of primacy. The intellect cannot obtain the correct answers when data is excluded from the calculations, or data is distorted or in any way altered from its pure condition. I say that the sensory data is the pure data, and that sensory data should be relied on first, before the intellectual prejudices have any chance to distort the facts which are available by way of the senses.

If one does not categorically deny the possibility, and explores in these directions, one will discover that there are evidences in the literature which experimentally support my statements in these regards. The difficulty, again, is typically due to people's educated skepticisms and their belief structures. It's easy to go along with the crowd. But, it's much easier to make progress if you don't! David Bohm one said that the way to make progress in the physics is to discard as many assumptions as possible.

There may be radiation shorter in frequency and higher in energy than cosmic rays or the Planckian constant. And we're way ahead of the mainstream sciences, just because of this understanding, as insignificant as it may seem at first glimpse. But the bottom line is, the current theory of matter is very limiting and lacking and I totally agree that personalities, tenure and egos have gotten in the way of progress in this regard. Let us not fall prey to their self-serving narrow-minded interests. We have nothing to lose, while they, on the other hand, have everything to lose. I can understand their attitudes in these regards, but the results of their attitudes are not forgivable, in my view.