The final article of a series of three by Paul Ellson, author of The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion.

Introduction

Although we are merely one tiny element in one star system amongst millions of stars that reside in just one galaxy amongst millions of galaxies, whether looking for signs of life out there in the cosmos or for the secrets of life around us, we quite naturally look from a human perspective. But why believe that our expectations, our methods of investigation, the ‘objective’ techniques, our limited senses and limited intelligence, are able to define what life is? The signs of life that we recognise may be too narrow in definition; we may be missing the real thing, right here. Conversely, it may even be that life on this planet, right down to the building blocks, is a local mutation so different from the real thing, the universal norm, that we can neither seek that norm nor know it. Nevertheless, driven by our innate curiosity, we advance our anthropocentric enquiries across the board.

Worldwide, many scientists are working towards a common goal: a ‘theory of everything’, in scientific parlance: a unified field theory. Einstein created that term. To date, he is the most successful scientific theorist. However, theory is theory and nothing more. Published in 1915, Einstein’s General Theory focussed upon gravity. In this theory, the geometrical properties of space-time are conceived as modified locally by the presence of a body with mass such as a star or a planet. It has been a mainstay of scientific thought and has given far-reaching predictions that are close to a wide range of experimental results and discoveries made since that time. However, it is important to note that in a number of cases the predictions are far from perfect.

Questioning theories

One would expect a successful theory of gravity to explain the laws that govern the movement of pendulums, but Einstein’s theory entirely fails to explain certain anomalies, particularly their behaviour during an eclipse of the sun. In 1954 French economist and engineer, Maurice Allais of the School of Mining in Paris, undertook a number of pendulum experiments. It has long been accepted that a free-swinging pendulum will always trace the same path. Under lab conditions it can be shown that the plane of this path will rotate slowly, this is due to the rotation of the planet. These results correlate with Einstein’s theory which gives an explanation of the geometry governing the situation. But Allais’ thorough research showed that the pendulum’s rotation rate varied during the course of the day and that during a partial eclipse of the sun on 30th June 1954, the pendulum behaved very differently. The plane of its swing began to rotate backwards. The timing of its behaviour showed that it had been affected by the eclipse. Something was going on in the relationship between the Sun, Moon and the Earth that was not explained by Einstein’s theory. Over the years, further experiments by Allais and a number of others have confirmed the anomaly.1

Allais, the 1998 Nobel prizewinner for economics, believes that the pendulum evidence points to the existence of the ether, cited as the prime element by natural philosophers through the ages. It certainly shows that General Theory, whilst giving a great boost to the advance of science, is flawed and that there is more to the workings of gravity than most scientists currently accept. There are further questions regarding General Theory, including frequent debates as to the constancy of the speed of light; a pivotal element. In fact, Dr Lijun Wang of the NEC research institute at Princeton University has shown that, under special conditions, pulses of light can be accelerated up to 300 times their norm of 186,000 miles per second.2 Beyond the lab, serious questions as to the consistency of the speed of light have been raised through observations of very distant objects, particularly a quasar – a distant star-like object – that seems to be some 10 billion light years away. I say, ‘seems to be’ because there is evidence that, in this case, either the electron charge3or the speed of light has changed. This is problematical because both are supposed to be constant. Professor Paul Davies of Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia believes that, of the two, the speed of light is more likely to have changed. “Its entirely possible that the speed of light would have got greater and greater as you go back (through time) towards the Big Bang and if so it could explain some of the great mysteries of cosmology.”4 Such questions over the constancy of the speed of light undermine the basis of much that science espouses.

As is better known, General Theory does not to fit with the behaviour of particles in the micro world of quantum physics. This fact, above all, brought home the realisation that if there is one guiding law for the universe, General Theory does not describe it. Consequent work by quantum physicists has led to the emergence of a number of unified field theories.

Currently the consensus amongst scientists is that the most likely candidate in the race for a successful unified field theory would be a ‘superstring theory’ or string theory for short. Actually there are a number of string theories, in common, they suggest that incredibly tiny, one-dimensional, vibrating strings, a billion, billion times smaller than a proton,5 are active at the basis of creation. A universe based upon vibrating strings lends itself well to musical analogy and has something in common with early theological teachings where ‘the music of the spheres’ was a frequent topic. The leading superstring theory, known as M theory has managed to unify a number of earlier string theories. It resolves problems that they encountered by theorising multi-dimensions in terms of membranes. Each dimension is likened to a universe in parallel to our own. There are eleven of these membrane-like dimensions. It is imagined that these eleven dimensions curl up into one vibrating string. In his book Parallel Worlds, physicist Michio Kaku posits that eleven membranes might curl up into one sphere-like dimension that collapses in on itself, leaving its equator as a vibrating closed string.6

Despite the persuasive fame of string theory, it should be noted that even on the purely mathematical level, twenty years of work by many brilliant minds has failed to give convincing mathematical proof of any string hypothesis. Einstein, who questioned much of early quantum theory, would smile; it was he who said, “As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”As regards the experimental level, no physical scientific equipment has been developed that could handle the ultra-minute elements theorised. Nor could it be developed, Nobel prize-winning physicist Sheldon Lee Glashow has pointed out that: “No experiment can ever be done at the distances that are being studied. The theory is permanently safe.”7 By the same token, the theory would forever rest on very questionable ground.

When to theorise

Theory is an ancient word, one that F M Cornford interpreted as ‘passionate, sympathetic contemplation’.8 Coming from the Greek, theos: God. The word relates directly to the study of the divine. In my previous article, note was made regarding the use of contemplation in the quest for knowledge. Today, contemplation is viewed as a religious pursuit: subjective, and therefore seen as imprecise in its result. But past records tell us otherwise. Luminaries such as Pythagoras used contemplative techniques to extend the boundaries of knowledge. Using contemplation, the scientists of old would gain experience through both physical and mental experiment and, having done so, would then theorise upon what was beyond. In Sanskrit we have a clue to the root of theos in the word tiras meaning ‘beyond’. Certainly, string theorists are needing help from beyond: “We don’t know what we are talking about“, said Nobel laureate, David Gross, when summing up at the December 2005, Solvay Conference, ‘The Quantum Structure of Space and Time’, in Brussels. Gross, a former leading advocate of string theory, now believes that physicists are missing something absolutely fundamental in their search for a successful unified field theory.

There is nothing wrong with theorising, there has to be theory, but it needs to happen at the appropriate time: when all of the available information, both objective and subjective, have been pulled together and a final answer is still found wanting. String theorists talk in terms of parallel worlds and multi-dimensions but as yet they still approach these possibilities in three-dimensional, materialistic point of view. The one thing that we all have ready access to that is truly multi-dimensional is consciousness; mind-stuff. It sleeps, it dreams, it imagines, it conceives well beyond the three-dimensional. Do the theorists ask themselves, what is this that spurs us on our path of inquiry in the first place? What is it that enables us to conceive of these multi-dimensions? Nowhere in their theories is consciousness featured and yet it is fundamental – a word that through the Latin, fundare – to found, and mentis – the mind, indicates that the ancients taught that the basis of all is founded in the mind.

Scientists are seeking a theory of everything but how can their search come to fruition until every parameter has been investigated and taken into account? It is evident that none of the prevalent scientific works take consciousness and the role of the subjective seriously enough. Whilst a small number of scientists are tentatively venturing into the ‘consciousness problem’, they still attempt to explore it through objective measurement and continue to avoid the subjective element; the person taking the measurements, the observer; the human self – us! Their narrow, pseudo-objective, approach will prove impossible. Why jump to theory when not all of the experimental avenues have been taken? Where there is another source of information, a related but as yet un-investigated field, then surely, it should be investigated with great rigour prior to theorising. A greater understanding of the relation between science and religion will help enable this investigation to truly begin. Clues to the past closeness of that relationship are coming to light.

In the spring of 1985, NASA researcher Rick Briggs wrote an article in A.I., Artificial Intelligence magazine.9 He wrote about NASA’s twenty-year attempt to develop a truly scientific language as precise as mathematics, natural languages being too cumbersome and ambiguous to work with the clarity and efficiency required in the computer oriented world of artificial intelligence. Briggs explained that almost all languages deviated from the precision required – all except for one: NASA researchers had realised that “there was a language spoken among an ancient scientific community that has a deviation of zero.” Still in use, that language is Sanskrit, the world’s most ancient spiritual language is now recognised as a scientific language too.

Our scientists use mathematics extensively but do not have a spoken language to match. This leads to problems regarding the understanding and take up of science by the general public: the knowledge is restricted to the few who are well versed both in the mathematics and in the specially created terminology that goes with the subject. As a scientific language Sanskrit had the potential to transmit a deeper understanding of the workings of nature to a wider public,

It is a vertical language enabling a well-structured exposition of the ancient law of ‘as above – so below.10This law does not mean that the micro and the macro and every level in between are exactly the same. It is more a guide to patterning. From the visual perspective, modern scientific confirmation of this comes through the application of microscopic and telescopic technologies that have enabled the investigation of fractals. A fractal is an entity created through diminishing subdivisions of a given shape. Often associated with geometric form and computer graphics, fractals present themselves all around us in the natural world. An oft-quoted example is the image of a rugged coastline pictured from above. Zooming in on a subdivision of that image we find a similar image; zooming in again to a yet more detailed scale, we find another similar image, and so on, right down to the tiniest grain in close focus. A more universal exposition was published in the book The Powers of Ten11 where consecutive images are shown subdividing by powers of ten. The baseline is the everyday human scale where a man is seen sleeping on a picnic blanket in a park in the city of Chicago. The picture shows an area of one square metre. From this point, at the rate of the power of ten, the images zoom in to the human body through the skin to the cellular level, on to the atomic level and further to the sub-atomic level; similarly a set of images zoom out from the human level, through to the planetary level, the solar level, the galactic level and further out into deep space, always looking back toward the park in Chicago, the sleeping man and his subatomic structure. At www.wordwizz.com/pwrsof10.htm I found these stills displayed, moving from the outermost to the innermost and accompanied by a commentary by Bruce Bryson. Whether galaxies, solar systems, suns, cells, electrons, or protons etc., the similarities in patterns of distribution are striking. We live in a fractal, as above – so below, universe. A moving image, zooming in from outer space to inner space, would show even more clearly, how nature moves in a patterned, rhythmic fashion from the spacious to the dense, back to the spacious and so on. Were the people of long ago who coined ‘as above – so below’, aware of this? It is recorded that Sanskrit was cognised by Seers and that Seers were also the writers of the Veda. We cannot dismiss the inference that they cognised these patterns through the art of contemplation for they were revered in scripture as experts in the art.

Throughout nature, the relationship between form and function is implicit. In the above paragraph we focussed on ‘as above – so below’, regarding visual form, but the Sanskrit language naturally used its vertical attributes to describe function too; the similarity of administrative patterning throughout the universe. In such a scientifically precise language, metaphor is a potent force. With this facility, one could gain an appreciation of the laws that guide life beyond the earthly senses. A striking example is the word bhurij. It has three levels of meaning, relating to the body of the universe, the human body and the objective world of humankind. The linking theme is ‘things that come together’. Reflecting the three levels, bhurij can be translated as, ‘heaven and earth’; ‘arms’, hands’; ‘scissors’ or ‘a carpenter’s vice’. 12

Throughout the language, the rules of metaphor are grounded in practical, worldly terms. The Vedic culture was largely agrarian where domesticated animals were put to work, therefore that spirited creature, the horse, is a symbol of power and spiritual strength. The Sanskrit word for ‘cow’. go´ or gau´s,is noteworthy, it also means ‘light’ or ‘ray of light’. Light, as the sustainer, the giver of life and energy, was reflected in their understanding of the role of the cow in their way of life. To this day, in the high Himalayas, human life is utterly dependent upon bovine herds. The vertical meaning rises through to the ultimate: in Hymns To The Mystic Fire,a translation of many Vedic texts, Sri Aurobindo explains that “The cows of the Veda were the herds of the sun . . . the rays of Truth and Light and Knowledge”.13

We know that, millennia ago, Sanskrit was in broad everyday use over a significant area of southern Asia. It is also the root language for all of our major western languages. These facts should prompt us to take a closer look at the work and methods of the scientists of old. Whilst taking in the subjective, their standards were comparable to scientific standards of today. New information was not simply accepted. Mentoring was a fundamental part of this tradition, and there was the ability to check one’s experiences against thousands of years of expertise leading to an accretion of knowledge in coherent fashion. This scientifically oriented tradition can be tracked from the early Vedas through to the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali14 where numerous subjective experiments and their results were logged in detail. Patanjali’s reputation has stood the test of time. This is because when the experiments are properly prepared for, the results are consistent. As noted previously, this preparation is at the heart of re-ligio. Recall that Pythagoras utilised contemplation as a scientific tool. In this he followed the ancient tradition where, utilising a stilled mind, simple questioning with an open sense of wonder brought results. A stilled mind helped ensure that interference by one’s personal expectations and agenda did not take place, the best conditions being where the researcher was not repressing their expectations but did not actually have any; this is one reason why the power of innocence and humility is promoted in scripture.

Re-ligio Research

Rare is the individual who, without straining, has great peace of mind. Therefore, a major goal of religious techniques such as meditation, japa (repetition) and certain prayers is to cultivate a stillness of mind wherein, unlike the stillness of deep sleep, one remains conscious. Only when meditation has done its work can true contemplation take place. Meditation stills the mind, contemplation uses the mind to wonder broadly, yet in a focused fashion, thereby inducing the knowledge of the part in relation to the whole.

Based upon a profound grasp of psycho-physiological processes, various re-ligio systems were developed. Techniques used in the process of ‘binding back’ are still to be found in the religions of today. Usually, the initial focus is the body and its relation to the mind; the localised consciousness. Here pure diet and detailed exercises are often prescribed to help balance bodily energies thus avoiding illness. If the body is ill, it is likely to be an obstacle to contemplation.

Some religions use a great number of symbols and images in order to inculcate psychological growth and balance. There is more imagery in pantheistic systems. This is not to say that a pantheistic religion is not focused upon one God. The varied imagery is used to balance inner resources and the images usually relate to the worldly experience of the participant so that a meaning can be grasped through an understanding of natural relationships. In India, the half human, half elephant god, Ganesha represents patience, persistence, inner strength and wisdom. It is held to be the remover of all obstacles especially of obstacles in the way of spiritual progress. The idea is that, step by step through identifying with Ganesha, the devotee develops their latent qualities of patience, persistence etc. thus balancing a flighty or quick tempered nature. Pantheons may use humanlike forms and creature-like forms but they have high attributes. They enable the aspirant to move from the earthly toward the divine, progressively being taken from a knowledge of the material world to a knowledge of the subtle and cosmological worlds. This is possible on a consistent basis through a simultaneous regime of physiological and mental purification. Guidance from a more experienced practitioner is also part of the package.

Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras are still in use and continue to deliver consistent and verifiable results to the well-prepared and earnest enquirer. Patanjali’s works are seen as ‘mumbo-jumbo’ by the sceptical, and mystical by believers. But there is no need for continued scepticism or blind belief in mysteries that can actually be unravelled. As the word infers, experiment gives experience, not simply intellectual understanding. With real experience comes a more complete understanding. As a result, knowledge replaces belief and its bedfellow, theory. Here lies the potential to unite religion and science and also philosophy.

It is time that science understood why re-ligio is closely associated with ritual. Any experiment needs to be repeatable and, in the repeating, to gain consistent results. This is the usefulness of ritual; prescribed format; standardised approach, the fixed rules for experimentation. The English words right and ritual come from the Sanskrit rita meaning right, proper, worshipped, respected, enlightened and luminous. And, a main key is the quality of the equipment used. For re-ligio research, the main equipment is the human being. It must be cleared of impurities, hence the rigorous systems of care and cleansing of both mind and body, found in yogic practices. This is reflected in modern scientific research, where with the right equipment and the correct approach, consistent results can be obtained.

Science is a methodology that aims at precision. It aspires to clarity through thoroughness and with this approach it aims to discover even the ultimate truth. But precision should not mean narrowness of mindset and dismissal of other means of knowledge acquisition. The perceived limits of the human mind must be transcended. Subjective research will reveal the secret of science’s greatest challenge, consciousness. What will follow are the gifts that transcendent states can bring including the fullest union with the heart of religion and philosophy.

Paul Ellson.

_________________________________

The above text is based upon extracts from The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion.

Paul Ellson is a natural philosopher. The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion is available via his website www.paulellson.com and from other outlets.

Notes and References

Notes and References

1. Shadow Over Gravity, by Govert Schilling, New Scientist magazine 27^th Nov 2004.
2. The Sunday Times, June 4^th 2000.
3. Electrons are negatively charged elementary particles occurring in all atoms. The electron charge at 1.6 x 10^-19C is held to be a constant.
4. BBC News Online, 8^th August 2002.
5. A proton is an elementary particle of positive charge and unit atomic mass, the atom of the lightest isotope of hydrogen without its electron.
6. Michio Kaku, Parallel Worlds, p198. Pub. Penguin, Allen Lane, London 2005.
7. The Theory of Everything: Einstein’s Dream, C4TV, 2^nd November 2003.
8. Frances McDonald Cornford From Religion to Philosophy: A Study in the Origins of Western Speculation pub., Princeton University Press 1991.
9. Rick Briggs, Knowledge Representation in Sanskrit and Artificial Intelligence. AI Volume 6(1); Spring 1985, 32-39.
10. Perhaps the best known reference to this law is found on The Emerald Tablet. This tablet, thought to be of Egyptian origin, is accepted as the source of Hermetic Philosophy and Alchemy and has been known to scholars and philosophers since the 10^th century.
11. The Powers of Ten by Philip Morrison and Phylis Morrison. Pub., W H Freeman & Co. (revised edition) September 1994.
12. A Sanskrit – English Dictionary, Ed. Sir Monier Monier-Williams, 1^st edition, OUP 1899. p 425. Note: All Sanskrit definitions are taken from this source.
13. Hymns To The Mystic Fire, Trans. Sri Aurobindo, p11. Aurobindo Ashram Trust, 6^th impression 1998.
14. bce, dates unclear.

The first of three articles by natural philosopher, Paul Ellson, author of The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion.

Introduction

I sometimes call myself a natural philosopher, an unusual title for the present day, but I have my reasons. Having spent 35 years in research both broad and deep, I felt prompted to share it with the world. However, I realised that this world requires labels; hooks to hang knowledge on: scientist; theologian etc. Nowadays, knowledge gathering tends to be specialised, the participants usually educated and certified to work in a particular channel and to approach the work in a specified manner. Objectivity is advocated. This presents great problems where the study of consciousness is concerned and, it is the study of consciousness that holds the key to so many scientific conundrums.
My work embraces and also transcends all of the modern labels and so I sought a more suitable title. Prior to the industrial age, those who had the time and money were educated in natural philosophy, usually by monks or clergy. In addition to religious instruction, this curriculum featured mathematics, geometry, astronomy and music. Its basic function was to give a firmer grasp of the underlying nature of life and to provide intellectual and intuitive tools with which to further one’s own work. It became apparent to me that, throughout the ages, natural philosophers were those involved in the broadest, deepest and least fettered research. I am therefore happy to use the title natural philosopher. The role of a modern day natural philosopher is to work outside ‘the box’. Therefore it is fortuitous that natural philosophy has not been institutionalised in some academic package.
As a result of findings from my own research of 35 years, I am sure that science, philosophy and religion can, and will, work together, harmoniously, in the not too distant future. To see how this can occur one needs to strip down each of the three approaches and rebuild as one integral edifice. This is what my book The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion undertakes. In the process, it questions many assumptions; a key one being that consciousness somehow evolves. The theory of evolution is based around functionality – something evolves because it has practical value. This demands a relative quality for that which evolves, for something can only evolve due to its relation with something else – in the broad scheme, its environment. But, my own research indicates that consciousness does not have a relative quality. Lack of serious research into subjective states has resulted in misunderstandings regarding what consciousness is and here help is to be found within ancient scriptures that can be interpreted in the light of subjective consciousness research. As my book explains, scientific research, i.e., repeatable experiments with measurable data, can be undertaken in this more subjective field. Through this research, we find that consciousness itself is the absolute, silent, witness. Other attributes of mind, such as the intellect, have relative functions, but there is some confusion over this.
Our language is ill equipped for explaining experiences beyond the material. We have terms such as being and soul which are vague in definition, and in the more often used consciousness, ego, intelligence, intellect, and mind we have a number of closely related words that, even in worldly matters, tend to be used in imprecise fashion. This is due to imprecise knowledge. In an attempt to avoid confusion, I define these terms in the following way:

Consciousness: Pure, universal, intelligence; non-relative, pure awareness; beingness.
Soul: Consciousness as the non-relative witness of the relative through a vehicle of expression.
Ego: The sense of self or being; the appreciator of relative experience. How the expression recognises its identity as an expression of the universal: When it ceases to identify with the universal and identifies with the relative, it becomes small self. In natural philosophy, the individual’s ideal relationship to pure, universal, consciousness and the relative is to remain in the universal, witnessing, whilst engaged in the relative i.e. be in the universal whilst witnessing (Soul) and appreciating (Ego), the relative.
Intelligence: Directs the relative being through intellect, the discriminating faculty that directs the flow of thoughts in the mind.

Mind:
The localised consciousness of a being; the whole of its general mental space.
The majority view of natural philosophers is that consciousness constitutes the fundamental basis of existence, it being present even before creation began. One of the clearest explanations comes from the Yoga Vasistha.1
Jiva (the Soul) is the vehicle of consciousness, ego sense is the vehicle of Jiva, intelligence is the vehicle of egos and mind it is the vehicle of intelligence, prana is the vehicle of mind, the senses are the vehicle of prana, the body is the vehicle of the senses, and motion is the vehicle of the body.
In Vasistha, the order runs opposite to that of science where the material body comes first, with the senses, ego and consciousness evolving from the material. Indeed, most scientists will tell you that consciousness is distributed too unevenly and is too ’special’ to be a fundamental property, but they are looking at data from a fixed, human, standpoint, limiting the remit, limiting their vision to ‘life like us’. The tendency is to relate consciousness to intelligence, as we know it and use it. This is unsatisfactory; those who are considered to be the most intelligent are doing the choosing (Intellect: from L ‘inter’, between and ‘legere’, to choose), in that the more intellectual amongst us actually come up with the definitions, many of which are based upon the intellectually biased work of modern science. It is possible that, at least subconsciously, there are tendencies to choose definitions which place humankind in general, and the choosing scientists/academics in particular, at the top of the intelligence range. But what if it were the same, pure intelligence expressing itself in different ways throughout the entirety of creation – some ways recognisable and others, to date, unrecognisable? Could a head lice be aware that its provider of regular meals – the human head – facilitates an intelligence which can express itself to a vastly greater extent than any blood sucking pediculus capitus? Even if it were proven that head lice were intelligent we should say that the systems were too different in size and in complexity to allow such an awareness.
If consciousness is non-relative – and my book The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion cites much research that, taken together, supports this – it would accord with the scriptural term omnipresent, and the scientific term non-local. In its rebuilding aspect The Beautiful Union looks at many links between science and religion. One of these is non-locality and this is what this, the first in a series of three articles, will focus upon using text from the book.
Non-locality and entanglement
There are many areas where scientists and natural philosophers are in almost complete agreement, where just a change in the terminology may suffice. But the dispute over consciousness is where the natural philosophers and modern scientists are at their most distant. If, at least as a possibility, the idea of an underlying, pure, non-local, consciousness is accepted, the reason for natural philosophy’s terminology becomes clearer. The terminology of the early natural philosophers is largely based upon hierarchical, vertical, systems rich in the potential for analogy and for linking the microcosm and the macrocosm through the same term (These systems hark back at least 5,000 years). However, new terminologies are arising in the world of science that natural philosophers can easily relate too. Non-locality is one such term.
Non-locality is an effect demonstrated in the realm of quantum mechanics. The concept of non-locality is based upon evidence that, in quantum physics, particles can be influenced instantly from a great distance. Many experiments have shown correlations in the behaviour of widely separated particles. The concept of non-locality does not, in itself, explain how these correlations might occur. However, scientists find some explanation in quantum entanglement, a phenomena which was discovered by Erwin Schrodinger.3 Examining the mathematical descriptions of two particles that had collided, he realised that from the collision onwards, the original properties of each did not remain discrete. All of the information now lay in their joint properties. He showed that if the quantum state of one were to be affected, the other would also be affected no matter how distant it was. Later, Thomas Durt of the Free University of Brussels, used equations that Schrodinger had considered, to show that almost all quantum interactions produce entanglement.4 Further to this, mathematician Benni Reznik of the University of Tel-Aviv, Israel, has demonstrated mathematically that all of ‘empty space’ is filled with entangled pairs of particles.5 Pairs of entangled quantum particles are now created routinely by scientists for use in such pursuits as cryptography. Incidentally, quantum entanglement is not confined to pairs, in 1999, John Rarity and Paul Tapster of the UK Defence Evaluation and Research Agency entangled three photons6 and in 2004 a Chinese-led team entangled five photons.7 This work continues apace.
For decades the entanglement effect remained confined to the microscopic realm of quantum particles but in 2001 a team of scientists at Imperial College, London, led by Vlatko Vedral, predicted that the effects of entanglement would be found on macroscopic levels. Sure enough, in 2003, Sayantani Ghosh of the University of Chicago reported quantum entanglement effects that could be measured on a macro scale.8The magnetic orientation of holmium atoms9 in salt was analysed. These atoms behave like magnets and naturally adjust their orientation in response to one-another’s magnetic field, however, their alignments can be modified by introducing an external magnetic field. The degree of adjustment to this new field is called ‘magnetic susceptibility’. The University of Chicago team analysed how much this susceptibility changed subject to temperature. At very low temperatures they reported more coherent alignment than would have been predicted at normal quantum energy levels. They cited quantum entanglement as the explanation.
Having predicted this event, Vlatko Vedral said, “What would really be interesting would be to find a material that exhibits the effects of entanglement at higher temperatures”.10 Look no further than the mirror: Humankind. Many people have read of Cleve Backster’s research involving humans and plants. His book The Secret Life of Plants was a bestseller in the 1970s.11 Subsequent to this, in the 1980s, Backster, by now heading his own research foundation in San Diego, California, demonstrated another related wonder: single cells can respond to thoughts and feelings. One of the processes that he had developed was to take white blood cells (oral leukocytes) from the mouth of a volunteer. Whereas the volunteer might return home – perhaps a distance of some miles – to watch the television, the cells were put into a test tube that stayed in the lab with EEG monitoring equipment attached. Whilst the volunteer watched TV, the lab also tuned into the TV programme. There were cameras focused on the TV screen, on the face of the volunteer at home, and on the chart which was driven by the monitoring equipment in the lab. Together with a date and time display all of these elements were recorded onto video using split screen technology. Details of the equipment and the procedure are given in the book The Secret Life of Your Cells12 Backster’s extensive research showed that when the volunteer’s thoughts and feelings were stimulated by what they saw and heard, these stimulations were also recorded on their cells – ‘entanglement’, even though the cells were ‘non-local’, often miles away.13
For decades, psychologists and parapsychologists had been observing similar occurrences between individuals during psi research. Amazingly, their researches are all but ignored by scientists working in very closely related areas. After over 100 years of psi research, in 1992 renown neuroscientists Francis Crick and Christof Koch wrote, “For many years after [William] James penned The Principles of Psychology (1890) …. most cognitive scientists ignored consciousness, as did almost all neuroscientists. The problem was felt to be either purely “philosophical” or too elusive to study experimentally. . . In our opinion, such timidity is ridiculous.”14 [Author’s parenthesis] Thankfully, timidity is on the wane. Professor Brian Josephson, a Nobel laureate of the University of Cambridge, links non-locality to telepathy – the ability of individuals to communicate without using the five senses.15

In May 2004, psychologist Dr. Stefan Schmidt and a team from the University of Freiburg, Germany, published the results of more than 1000 experiments where two people were put into two different rooms. In these experiments one of the volunteers could see the other over a close circuit TV system. The volunteer in view had electrodes attached to the skin and and when this person was being stared at by the other participant, a meter repeatedly registered a prickling in the skin. Other experiments demonstrated that the starer could make the other volunteer feel either relaxed or uncomfortable. Again this was confirmed by monitoring equipment. The study, ‘Distant Intentionality And The Feeling of Being Stared At’, was published in the May 2004 issue of the British Journal of Psychology.16
Not all of the convincing research has been undertaken by psychologists and parapsychologists, important work has been undertaken by Princeton University’s PEAR (Princeton Engineering Anomolies Research) Group and published in The Journal of Scientific Exploration (1997).17 Over two decades of research comprising thousands of experiments, millions of trials and hundreds of operators, the PEAR Group has identified anomalies in human/machine interactions “that can only be attributed to the influence of the consciousness of the human operator”.18
Led by Robert Jahn, the Princeton team have developed a number of different acoustical, electronic, fluid, mechanical and optical devices that, without human involvement, produce random outputs. In the experiments, operators attempt to influence the machines by pre-stated intention only. This is called micro-PK (Psycho-kinesis) research. No physical means are employed yet the results show increases in information content that are only attributable to the operator’s influence.
“The observed effects are usually quite small, of the order of a few parts in ten thousand on average, but they are statistically repeatable and compound to highly significant deviations from chance expectations.
“These anomalies can be demonstrated with the operators located up to thousands of miles from the laboratory, exerting their efforts hours before or after the actual operation of the devices.” 19
In a reflection of the concepts of non-locality and entanglement in the quantum world, these results clearly indicate the influence of consciousness over great distances in the world of human beings. In the quotation I have underlined a further remarkable result that promotes the concept of entanglement over time. This phenomena is also to be found on the quantum scale.
In February 2004, a team led by Caslav Brukner at Imperial College, London, published evidence that moments of time can be entangled.20 They demonstrated time-entanglement between successive actions. The report gave an example where there were successive measurements of a photon’s polarisation: Measure it once for a result and measure it again later, for a second result. It was found that “the very act of measuring a second time can affect how it was polarised earlier on.”21
Parapsychology
Many parapsychology experiments have shown that phenomena such as telepathy and psycho-kinesis etc., are distance independent and can transcend both space and time. Much of this research has been published by either the British or American Societies for Psychical Research in their journals. However, the word ‘psychical’ still reveals timidity in many scientists. Also, because of its subjective element, some scientists do not accept parapsychology or even psychology as sciences at all. The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion investigates the reasons for this state of affairs and asserts that pseudo-objectivity is responsible. Perhaps scientific evidence of quantum entanglement may help lead to parapsychology gaining the respect it deserves. When one reviews research from both the quantum and parapsychology fields, the mutual support is obvious, leading one to consider the concept of a universal consciousness.
In an experiment on precognitive clairvoyance, parapsychologist G R Schmeidler 22tested 75 subjects who each made 150 calls on targets which would later be selected by computer. The subjects were not told that later, only 50 of their targets and related calls would be shown to them (‘subject sees’ condition), another 50 would be seen by the experimenter and 50 would not be seen at all, remaining unprinted from the computer. Furthermore, during the session, the experimenter had no idea which calls would end up in which category. After categorisation, when the scores within the three categories were correlated there was a distinct pattern between the first two categories, “. . there was a marked tendency for subjects who scored high on one of [these] conditions to score low on the other condition”45 Schmeidler further observed that “this correlation implied that the subjects had been responding to the difference that did not yet exist but would be produced by the letters I was about to write [to subjects, enclosing lists of their targets and responses in the “subject sees” condition]”.23
The evidence showed that a decision taken after the calls were made actually affected the calls themselves. This was also true in experiments run by Feather and Brier (1968); I quote the complex scenario as explained by Rhea A White:
“The subjects were told that the experimenter would check half their runs (to be determined randomly) while someone else (known to the experimenter but not to the subjects) would check the other half. Subjects were also requested to specify those runs they felt the known experimenter would later check. In two pilots with Feather as the known checker and Brier as the unknown checker, the subjects obtained a differential effect, but only on those runs checked by Feather. When they thought she would check the runs and she actually did, they scored above chance, whereas when they thought the other person would check the scores but Feather actually did, they scored below chance. For the two pilots combined the difference was significant (P < .03, two-tailed). In a confirmatory experiment Brier was the known checker whereas Feather was the unknown checker. The differential effect again occurred on the runs checked by Brier, but not on those checked by Feather (P < .02. one-tailed). Since the checker or experimenter effect noted in these data was apparently not due simply to the subjects’ conscious expectations of who would check the runs but was based on who actually did check them, the effect had to be psi-mediated, in this case by precognition.”24 What is inferred here is a scientifically measurable, seeming pre-existing, relationship between, even, distant peoples and events. I am not suggesting that quantum entanglement and the results of these parapsychology experiments are exactly the same phenomena but I am suggesting that they are both reflections of the same phenomena: a non-local awareness due to the existence of non-local, i.e., omnipresent, consciousness. The above text features extracts from The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion. In the next article I shall use further extracts from the book to look at cognitionin relation to non-local consciousness. Paul Ellson. _________________________________

The Beautiful Union of science, philosophy and religion is available via Paul Ellson’s website www.paulellson.com and other outlets.
Notes and references
1. Some sources date the Yoga Vasistha to the 10th century CE, others, much earlier.
2. From the Yoga Vasistha, trans. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, in Timeless Wisdom: the book of all religions. Pub. Vyakti Vikas Kendra, Bangalore, 2003.
3. Erwin Schrodinger 1887–1961; a Nobel prizewinner for his work on wave mechanics, he is also famed for the Schrodinger’s Cat hypothesis.
4. Physical Review (Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics), November 2002, Volume 66, Issue 5, Bohm’s interpretation and maximally entangled states by Thomas Durt and Yves Pierseaux.
5. The Weirdest Link, by Michael Brooks, New Scientist Vol. 181 issue 2440 27th March 2004 p36
6. Ibid.
7. On 24th August 2004, Technology Research News reported that scientists from the University of Science and Technology of China, the University of Innsbruck, Austria, and the University of Heidelburg, Germany, had worked together to succeed in this task.
8. Nature, Vol 425 p48 16th October 2003.
9. Holmium (Atomic No.67) occurs in rare earth materials such as gadonilite and is used for control rods in nuclear reactors because it readily absorbs neutrons.
10. The weirdest link, ibid.
11. The Secret Life of Plants by Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird, pub. Harper and Row Publishers, New York 1973; and Avon Books, New York, 1974.
12.The Secret Life of Your Cells by Robert B Stone PhD. pp74-76. Published by Whitford Press, Altglen, PA, USA, 1989.
13. Ibid.
14. ‘The Problem of Consciousness’, Scientific American, September, 1992.
15. Physics on the brain / A report on a strange interdisciplinary discussion, by Susan Blackmore. New Scientist vol 129 issue 1750 – 05 January 1991.
16. Distant intentionality and the feeling of being stared at: Two meta-analyses. Stefan Schmidt; Rainer Schneider; Jessica Utts; Harald Walach. British Journal of Psychology, vol. 95 Part 2 May 2004.
17. “Correlations of Random Binary Sequences with Pre-Stated Operator Intention: A Review of a 12-Year Program.” R.G. Jahn, B.J. Dunne, R.D. Nelson, Y.H. Dobyns, and G.J. Bradish. Princeton Engineering Anomolies Research (PEAR). School of Engineering and Applied Science, Princeton University.The Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol11, No.3, pp 345-367, 1997.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid.
20. Quantum Entanglement in Time, Caslav Brukner, Samuel Taylor, Sancho Cheung, and Vlatko Vedral of The Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, London. February 18th 2004. [www.arXiv:quant-ph/0402127v1]
21. Ibid.
22. Schmeidler, G. R. An experiment on precognitive clairvoyance. Part 1. The main results. Journal of Parapsychology, 1964, 28, 1-14.
23. Schmeidler, G. R. An experiment on precognitive clairvoyance. Part 11. The reliability of the scores. Journal of Parapsychology, 1964, 28, 15-27. pp 19-20.
24. The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research. Volume 70, number 2, April 1976: The Influence of Persons Other Than the Experimenter on the Subject’s scores in Psi Experiments by Rhea A White.