Killing me SOFT-ly, part three

A little more about James E. Beichler and his single (operational) field theory, or SOFT ...

If you click here (PDF), you can read a paper Beichler published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration (Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 523-542, 2007) titled "Three Logical Proofs: The Five-Dimensional Reality of Space-Time." The paper is rather technical and I don't claim to have followed all of it, but to those with a background in physics or mathematics, it should make interesting reading.

Beichler notes that scientists generally agree that the universe is expanding, but what sort of space is it expanding into? He argues that it is expanding into a fourth spatial dimension.

If the concept of extrinsic curvature and a higher embedding spatial dimension does not represent our true reality, simple relativity will be violated in the case of the expanding universe and other astronomical observations....

In the ... three-dimensional spatially extended universe, all of the galaxies rotate and recede from each other at all possible angles or orientations in three-dimensional space. Yet you cannot have a mathematical property true for one configuration of spatial dimensions (two dimensions embedded in three-dimensional space) that is not true for another configuration (three dimensions embedded in a four-dimensional space). Such an inconsistency would destroy the validity of the mathematical model....

So, there is a logical necessity that the orientation of all of the galaxies in the expanding universe be relative to a single point or center of curvature of the universe. The natural rotations of galaxies in the universe are all relative to the same point, and the planes of galactic rotation are all tangential to the three-dimensional surface that is our space, which is perpendicular to the real extrinsic radii drawn between them and the center of a physically real curvature of our universe in a fourth spatial dimension....

The only way to derive a direction perpendicular to all three dimensions of space simultaneously would be to adopt the geometry of a real four-dimensional embedding space. That fourth dimension or direction is orthogonal to the normal three dimensions of space. So the observed three-dimensional orientation of astronomical bodies directly requires the reality of a fourth spatial dimension. In effect, our three-dimensional universe is expanding into a fourth dimension of space.

Another of his arguments is that "magnetism implies a fourth dimension." He cites the work of 19th century mathematician William Kingdom Clifford:

Clifford claimed that what we sense as matter is nothing more than three-dimensional space curved in a fourth dimension and what we conceive as matter in motion is no more than variations in that curvature.... For having stated this, Clifford's geometrical model of space is normally regarded as a precursor to Einstein's model of space-time curvature in the general theory of relativity....

Clifford attempted first to explain magnetic induction ... with his four-dimensional geometry....

Clifford expressed the opinion that all energies are either potential or kinetic, but he also believed that kinetic energies in three-dimensional space would become potential energies in his four-dimensional spatial framework. In other words, forces in three-dimensional space would reduce to constant variations in position along paths in a four-dimensional curved space, an idea that was made current in general relativity. However, the modern concept only deals with gravity as modeled by modern relativity theory while Clifford meant to apply the concept to all forces in his model.

Beichler believes that Clifford's approach could yield a unified field theory - the elusive "theory of everything" - and that Clifford was on the track of such a theory at the time of his death from tuberculosis at the age of 34.

If Beichler is right in saying that both theory and observation support the existence of a fourth spatial dimension that is continuous with our space-time universe, then the implications drawn by SOFT for consciousness, psi, and life after death may not be as far-fetched as they might sound.

Comments

[MarkL]

No, the expansion of the universe in the fourth dimension is what we call time. The Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation relating mass and time when velocity is close to that of light seem to confirm that. Of course, I could be missing something.

[Barbara]

I thought Einstein said that SpaceTime merges into TimeSpace.

[william]

timespace, spacetime, equations velocities, mass, time, etc.

I spent a lot of time on research into theoretical quantum physics and philosophy. Not sure either gave me much as far as knowledge about life after death, meaning of life or purpose of life.

Philosophy lots of profound questions few if any answers.

Physics lots of unanswered questions and funny stuff going on at a micro level that frazzles the mind of the greatest of scientists.

Oh the discoveries yet to be realized by the human mind.

We see what percent of reality? Like 6 per cent?

I suspect some day someone will figure out that the theory of everything equation equals one. Now this is not a putdown of physics or philosophy just a couple of comments about William’s involvement with both.

[Paul Welsh]

Don't refer to yourself in the third person William it makes you sound like Victor Zammit.

[sonic]

Physics doesn't need to be logical, it needs to match with experiment.
There are an infinite number of truths that are true if and only if they cannot be proved true.
We don't need a new dimension for consciousness, we just have to recognize existence.

[Andrew Davidson]

I think any reference to Victor Zammit should be blocked out on this blog, but thats just cause I hate him quite a lot. lol

Anyway most of things Beichler talks about go wooooooooosh right over my head but thats cause I am not smart when it comes to Physics.

[mmfiore]

We are a group that is challenging the current paradigm in physics which is Quantum Mechanics and String Theory. There is a new Theory of Everything Breakthrough. It eexposes the flaws in both Quantum Theory and String Theory. Please Help us set the physics community back on the right course and prove that Einstein was right! Visit our site The Theory of Super Relativity: http://www.superrelativity.org

[Pete]

"So tragically, the tremendous work done in the effort to prove the existence of the ether by Fitzgerald and Lorentz and Maxwell was *by enlarge* ignored."

Mr Fiore, you need to change that to "by and large" (Page 14 of The Undiscovered Error.

[Michael Prescott]

Mr Fiore, you need to change that to "by and large" (Page 14 of The Undiscovered Error).

Well, it looks like at least one error has not gone undiscovered!

:)

[william]

“Don't refer to yourself in the third person William it makes you sound like Victor Zammit.”

Victor zammit is providing his special contribution to society. It may not be to some peoples taste but every soul is part of the whole therefore every soul contributes to the whole. I am actually on his mailing list and find some of his articles interesting and informative. This is easy to state but difficult to do yes even for William but try to look past the personality and find the underlying reality in that soul expressing itself. Sorry about the third person thing again but my idea of humor or rebel take your pick.

“I think any reference to Victor Zammit should be blocked out on this blog, but thats just cause I hate him quite a lot. Lol”

He does seem to arouse emotions in some people. He apparently has sit in on many materializations and it appears hard for him to have people question his integrity. Materializations are very difficult for people to accept. I met a person once that witnessed a materialization and still could not accept it. I think we have one person that blogs on here that has witnessed materializations.

“We don't need a new dimension for consciousness, we just have to recognize existence.”

Or is it awareness we need to recognize as the ultimate reality?

[The Major]

I have similar sentiments, William. Zammit may not be perfect, but then who is? He's done a good job of bringing evidence for the afterlife to people's attention.

[The Major]

Or should that be 'The Major has similar sentiments, William'?

[william]

"Or should that be 'The Major has similar sentiments, William'?"

my original third person statement was meant to be humor. I have been told many times my humor is very dry.

unless I am mistaken I think victor zammit no longer refers to himself in the the third person.

I have found once we get caught up in any system of beliefs we tend to protect those beliefs at all costs.

Some people will even fly thru tall buildings to protect their cherished beliefs and yell god is great while they are doing it.