“In 415 AD, Hypatia, one of the last great scientists and Pagan philosophers of Alexandria, was seized by a mob of Christians who removed her flesh with scallop shells and burnt her remains. The mob’s leader, Bishop Cyril, was later canonized St Cyril. Alexandria’s great library was finally destroyed as so much Pagan superstition and this wealth of knowledge was scattered to the four winds. The Christian Roman Emperor Theodosius closed Pagan temples across the empire and began the previously unknown phenomena of book-burning. For the West, the fifth century ushered in the thousand-year period appropriately known as the Dark Ages.”
‘The Light - the Mind of God - existed before the chaotic waters of potentiality. The Mind of God’s calming Word is the Son of God - the idea of beautiful order; the harmony of all things with all things. The Primal Mind is the parent of the Word, just as in your own experience, your human mind gives birth to speech.’
‘I saw in thought limitless power within the Light, to form an infinite yet ordered world. I saw in the darkness of the deep, chaotic waters without form, permeated with a subtle intelligent breath of divine power. Atum’s Word fell on the fertile waters making them pregnant with all forms. Ordered by the harmony of the Word, the four elements came into being.’
‘You have perceived the boundless primal idea, which is before the beginning. By Atum’s will, the elements of nature were born as reflections of this primal thought in the waters of potentiality. These are the primary things, the prior things, the first principles of all in the universe. Atum’s Word is the creative idea - the supreme limitless power which nurtures and provides for all the things that through it are created.’
Death then, according to the Influence Idea, is a transition, the time when we abandon our failing bodies. For us, that moment is when the play (or the puppet show) ends and we leave the stage. What then?
While developing his theories, Feynmann pointed out a strange fact. According to the maths, there is no difference between an electron moving forward in time and a positron (an anti-matter electron) moving backwards in time. They are one and the same thing. Matter and anti-matter aren’t intrinsically different, they’re just the same matter going in opposite time directions.
This fact puts the diagram into a new light. Normally, we read the diagram as an electron and a positron colliding, which causes the creation of a photon which then turns into a quark anti-quark pair. But this is just our viewpoint. According to the maths, nothing actually follows anything else and nothing causes anything else. It is simply a pattern that obeys certain rules. If the viewer moves from left to right, with a belief in cause and effect, the pattern appears to be an electron and positron colliding and producing a photon etc, but there is no reason to do this. You could just as easily view it as an electron going forward in time, then changing direction by producing a photon and going back in time as a result. It’s just as valid as the normal viewpoint.
It would therefore seem that the whole idea and perception of time passing is something we do, not something out there in reality. It’s tempting to say that we're only talking about the weird world of subatomic events and that's got little to do with the real world of mountains and lakes and stars, but this would be wrong. The macro-world that we see around us every day is the subatomic world, just seen from a different viewpoint.
To help get a clearer idea on what’s going on with the whole idea of time passing, let's think a bit more about Feynmann diagrams. A Feynmann diagram usually shows a particular subatomic event. But, logically, you could draw a Feynmann diagram for all subatomic events. If your drawing surface was big enough, you could draw a Feynmann diagram for every subatomic reaction in the Universe, following them back all the way back to the Big Bang and all the way forward to the End of Time.
As the red dot ticks around the clock face, the back of the brain begins activity, then the front of the brain. Only after that does the subject think they've 'decided' to press the switch.
Libet's experiments were extremely challenging to the belief that we have free will. It seemed, according to his experiments, that people's belief they were deciding to do things was a fallacy. In fact, people don't decide to do things at all. Instead, they simply get the feeling from their brain that they are making a decision during a decision-making process, a process that has already been well underway seconds before they think they've decided to act. People, according to Libet's experiment, aren't really in control of their brains at all.
Some commentators have used Libet's experiment to state that we don't have free will. They say that Libet's experiments prove that our brains decide everything and our conscious minds are simply powerless epiphenomena, observing what goes on without really having a say. We might sometimes get the feeling we're deciding things, but really we aren't. We're just bystanders. This idea fits with the philosophy of Hard Determinism, in which there is no free will and everything happens like a giant programme, or like a roll of film, beyond any conscious control.
Fortunately, the Influence Idea rescues us from this bleak outcome. According to the Influence Idea, our minds influence our brains, they don't absolutely control them. Our mind and brain relationship is like someone piloting a sailboat. The weather and waves push the craft around and the pilot cannot stop prevent that happening, but he or she can guide the craft in the right direction. We do have free will but can only influence our brains to a degree, and that degree may vary significantly from one person to another.
Brains are astonishing organs. In many ways, they are a pinnacle of evolutionary development, the organising of an incredible number of cells for the purpose of higher thought. But what about creatures with smaller brains? Can we see evidence in their behaviour that the Influence Idea is correct? Let's have a look at animals…
The idea that plants make use of quantum physics to harvest light more efficiently has received a boost. Plants gather packets of light called photons, shuttling them deep into their cells where their energy is converted with extraordinary efficiency. A report in Science journal adds weight to the idea that an effect called a "coherence" helps determine the most efficient path for the photons. Experts have called the work "a nice proof" of some contentious ideas.
For example, making and breaking of chemical bonds, absorbance of frequency specific radiation (e.g. in photosynthesis and vision), conversion of chemical energy into mechanical motion (e.g. ATP cleavage) and single electron transfer through biological polymers (e.g. in DNA or proteins) are all quantum effects. Regarding the efficient functioning of biological systems, the relevant question to ask is how can a biological system with billions of semi-autonomous components function effectively and coherently? Why providing a complete explanation remains a major challenge, quantum coherence is a plausible mechanism responsible for the efficiency and co-ordination exhibited by biological systems.
Sections of DNA or RNA from disease causing bacterium, or viruses, produce electromagnetic radiation. When these sections of genetic code are mixed with water, the water forms nanoscale structures that will themselves produce detectable electromagnetic radiation if diluted/shaken to a sufficient level.
According to a materialistic view of the body, this shouldn't be possible. Organisms - plants and animals - have been honed by evolution for millions of years to survive and reproduce. There should be no way that an animal of any kind should be able to kill itself simply through a misguided belief, without inflicting any physical harm on itself. As can be seen from the report above, this clearly isn't the case, but if the body can only function if it has the positive mental intent of the mind occupying it, then such a scenario becomes perfectly believable.
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.