A Better History Of Our World

2 downloads 0 Views 724KB Size Report
Mar 30, 2001 - If there were merely an indication or even proof that certain constantly recurring ...... 23 Quoted from Simon Singh, "Fermat's last Theorem ", see List of ...... last, in 1993, the English mathematician Andrew Wiles was able to.
Dr. med. Walter van Laack ____________________________________________

A Better History Of Our World Volume 1

The Universe

2

Author Dr. med. Walter van Laack Specialist for Orthopedics, Orthopedic Surgery, Physical Therapy, Sport Medicine, Chirotherapy, Chin. Acupuncture Cover "The Tree of Life – an Island in the Universe", designed by my son Martin Drawings The drawings in this book have all been designed by my two sons Alexander and Martin. Translation Translation copyright © by 2001 Anneliese Wolstenholme, Roetgen/Aachen. Again I thank her very much for her kind cooperation.

1. Edition in English published on March, 30, 2001

 2000 by van Laack GmbH, Aachen/Germany, Book Publishers All rights reserved. This book may not be translated, reproduced or transmitted in whole or in part in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording or by any information storage and retrieval system including the internet without the prior written permission of the author. Printed in Germany by

Books on Demand - Libri GmbH, Gutenbergring 53 , 22484 Norderstedt/Hamburg Softcover / Paperback

ISBN 3 – 8311 – 1490 - 0

3

Contents

Monologue

5

1. Why I wrote this Book 2. What makes me so sure? 3. Time and Again – Numbers 4. Two Special Yardsticks 5. The Three Muketeers 6. Prime Numbers 7. Everything falls into Place 8. Straight to the Point 9. Structure and Function 10. A truly Divine Analogy 11. From Being to Infinity 12. From Multiplicity to Unity 13. Continuity and Infinity 14. Final Remarks

6 12 18 23 30 41 46 56 70 75 88 83 87 89

Dialogue

97

Spirit and Matter Mathematics, Existence and Space In the Beginning was Space and Time like Matter and Spirit Nothing is really solid Space and Light Here we go again! Space is not curved Therefore Fremat is right Numbers are the Medium of Space

98 99 102 105 108 111 116 118 121 124

4

The dual Nature of Light The Speed of Light Tunnel Experiments Effects in Space What is the Opinion of the Great Religions? Was there a Big Bang or not? The Structure of the Atom Time, the Antipode of Space Electricity and Magnetism and a Combination of the four Elementary Forces Final Remarks

125 127 129 130 132 138 145 149 157 162

Epilogue

163

Glossary

171

References

180

Some Information

185

5

Monologue

"Number is the First Principle of the Universe" Pythagoras, 580-496 BC

"Mathematics is the Alphabet with whose Aid God wrote the Universe" Galileo Galilei, 1564-1642 AD

"Geometry already existed before the World was created. It is eternal as is God's Spirit" Johannes Kepler, 1571-1630 AD

6

1. Why I wrote this Book In early 1988 Bantam Press New York published a book written by the meanwhile famous British physicist Stephen W. Hawking entitled 'A Brief History of Time'. In his bestseller, Stephen W. Hawking, holder of the prestigious Lucasian Professorship of Mathematics at Cambridge, the same professorship that Isaac Newton once held, describes how he imagines our universe to have been created. Even 12 years after it was first published it is no exaggeration to claim that this book, which explains in layman's terms current thought about the creation and probable future of the universe, has had a decisive influence on the commonly accepted theories about the creation of the universe. I too devoured this book many years ago along with many others, and today its influence on my latest work on the subject, the first volume of which you are holding in your hands, is still perceivable. But now it should serve as the means to providing us with a completely new view of the world. Hawking views the world from only one and, therefore, a restricted, that is a purely natural scientific, perspective which, in my opinion, cannot be successful if we are searching for the entire truth. Only a short time ago I was fortunate enough to obtain the book "La Plus Belle Histoire du Monde" (The Most Beautiful History of the World) written by Dominique Simonnet, chief editor of the French magazine 'L'Express'. In it three scientists explain their views on 'The Creation of the Universe', 'The Creation of Life' and 'The Creation of Humans and the Human Spirit' in the form of interviews. The interviews support a certainly fascinating but rather materialistic view which leave me dissatisfied. In spite of all attempts to explain such fascinating phenomena as the existence of this huge universe, the essence of life or the emergence of consciousness, thoughts and emotions in the usual, purely materialistic manner, Madame Simonnet's interview partners can scarcely conceal their amazement about the many things in the cosmos – everywhere and at all times – which have clearly been

7

governed and are still being governed by recurring numbers defining narrow, very uniform limits. Finally, Madame Simonnet reminds us in her introduction that we are really "nothing but a ridiculously tiny spark in the universe". This is, in my opinion, an exaggeration which may even be described as utter nonsense. Both books mentioned above remind me of Godfrey Saxe's parable. He was an English writer who lived during the 19th century. In his parable he describes six blind men who try to visualize an elephant. They all feel the animal with their hands and are absolutely convinced that they know everything there is to know about its nature and appearance. However, they fail to notice that they each had perceived only a small part of the animal, in a similar way to that of a mathematician who perceives only mathematics or a chemist who perceives only chemistry, etc. as is often the case. The first blind man thought there was a wall in front of him. The second, who only touched the tusk, thought it was a spear. The third touched the trunk and thought it was a big snake and the fourth thought it was a tree because he touched a sturdy leg. The fifth touched the ear and thought it was a fan and the sixth only touched the tail and thought it was a rope. In the end they quarreled with one another as to which of them was right. We experience the same problem when considering the sciences separately: on the basis of numerous independent results we may arrive at differing independent interpretations which in themselves seem perfectly justified. However, when taking all results into consideration we are confronted with more doubts than certainty and the question arises whether a bolder and more comprehensive interpretation would not be better. Very much to the chagrin of our one time parish priest in Cologne, I was the offspring of a mixed Christian marriage, infinitely tolerant, and was brought up with no religious dominance whatsoever. I became active in our catholic parish as a server at an early age and later as head of youth groups and parish youth groups. During my student days I was a senior for several terms, i.e. the head of the active members of the catholic student

8

society. In spite of this religious background, I was a real skeptic as a young man and I had my doubts about religious ideas, especially about the Christian conceptions of death, but I was curious. However, a number of circumstances caused me to change my attitude and in the next chapter I will go further into details about this. After having spent a further 20 years reading intensively and studying all kinds of knowledge, especially that concerning this subject in an attempt to satisfy my burning desire to look beyond my own horizons, my father died unexpectedly in 1996 after unsuccessful heart surgery. A year later I started my first book in which I collected my previous thoughts about and experiences with death. But I really wanted more: deep down I wanted to prove somehow the accuracy of my conviction, which was then already firmly established in my mind, that the physical death of a human being does not mean the end of his personal existence. That this might in the end prove to be very naive did not prevent me from looking for evidence which proved my conviction. After only a short time I realized that it would be necessary to adopt a fundamentally different view of the world to the presently accepted one. For a long time, also, it had been a matter of course for me to assume that mathematics had a decisive role in this. In my search for a more plausible view of the world "fortune" helped me along as it has done so often in important situations in my life. At the beginning of 1998 I read Peter Plichta's book "God's Secret Formula ". I realized intuitively that his train of thought would save me a lot of work. Shortly after, I contacted Mr Plichta. We kept in touch and he also seemed very interested in this contact which was initiated in Cologne due to casual meetings during courses we participated in together and due to our common profession, but which later led to mutually very stimulating discussions. In May 1999 I published my first book: "Plädoyer für ein Leben nach dem Tod und eine etwas andere Sicht der Welt" (Arguments for Life after Death and a Better View of the World) – in December the same year I published my second book: " Key to Eternity".

9

In these two books I outline in detail a clearly alternative, but, in my opinion, absolutely conclusive and, above all, integrative, holistic view of the world based on scientifically sound reasoning. I formed my view of the world after looking closely at all the important religions, at philosophies from ancient to modern times, and through natural science, medicine and parapsychology. My present ideas are in line with the basic notions I gathered from a number of personal experiences which made clear to me that, in the final analysis, only something really simple and beautiful can be the truth. And finally these notions are the result of a logically consistent attempt to bring all indisputable, confirmed facts in the various fields of science under one common denominator. This is the only way which allows us to arrive at a final, coherent and conclusive, total concept, analogue to the story of the blind men and the elephant. In my previous two books I already attempted to suggest solutions for as yet unanswered questions and unsolved problems, including those concerning Plichta's space model, to find correlations with other fields of science and to decipher them. Following this - sadly, Mr Plichta let me know through his life companion, quite suddenly in January this year, of his intention to break off all contacts with me. It seems he did not approve of my starting to develop and publish my own ideas which went beyond his concept; he would much have preferred that I remained an avidly learning admirer of his mathematical model, which I never really was. I must admit that his intellectual approach seemed rather brilliant at first, but in part it seemed too complicated to understand and not always sufficiently coherent to be easily understood. Yet his books leave a string of related questions unanswered and a skeptic could easily use this to cast doubt on the whole concept. Therefore, I considered it my responsibility to find the missing answers to all open questions. Many of my readers could identify themselves with the explanations I gave in my last two books. But I also met with objective criticism because the scientific depth made reading sometimes difficult for some people. This was brought home to me especially by a crucial experience I made:

10

In March 2000 I was invited by pupils in their last year at the Kaiser-Karl-Gymnasium, a grammar school, for a discussion evening. During their lessons of religious instruction the pupils had read my book "Key to Eternity " and they had dissected and analyzed it in detail. In presentations and lectures several pupils had then made the attempt to explain my various thoughts to their fellow pupils to prepare them for the imminent discussion with me. It was a very exciting evening in the course of which I had to defend my theses against a large number of mainly young skeptics. Although I enjoyed the discussion, I had to realize that some of my theories had not been made sufficiently clear or had been insufficiently understood. Even the teacher admitted later that he had also found the book not always easy to understand. The following night, therefore, I had a rather restless sleep because it seemed important to me that my books should appeal to as many people as possible. Therefore, I made up my mind after that discussion and decided to write another book, especially since in the meantime I had found some simpler and augmenting approaches particularly explaining the mathematical basis of my alternative view of the world. My new book had to be as simple as possible, easy to read, and yet plausibly comprehensible – and simply a better history of our world. Of course, the key issues should be discussed in a scientifically sound manner. In the meantime, I had gathered experience and learned that not every reader is interested in the full spectrum of this subject matter. Basic mathematical principles especially are not everybody's cup of tea, although, in my opinion, they are indispensable for supporting the plausibility of the entire structure. Therefore I decided to publish my "Better History of our World" in three volumes: "The Universe", "Life" and "Death". In the first part of this first volume I discuss mainly some necessary aspects of important number-theoretical principles which are essential for the understanding of my view of the world. In the second part I discuss the consequences of an alternative view of our physical world, of the universe, in the form of a

11

dialogue with my two sons. I chose this form of representation in the hope of achieving a better understanding. My aim was to write three short and yet comprehensive books. Therefore, I had to select strictly and refrain from extensive representations of various scientific backgrounds. I recommend all interested readers, therefore, to refer to further specialized literature and to my two previous books. They can be used merely for reference. Each of the three volumes of this series includes its own complex glossary and bibliographical references for its own specific complex of themes. Many personalities and subjects mentioned in the books are listed and are explained there in more detail if necessary. Such references are indicated by italics. Finally, I hope you enjoy this first volume and also, of course, the next two volumes of this series and I hope you will find following my ideas an enriching experience. In doing so you should be able to look forward to your own personal future with justified optimism. Aachen, April 2000

Dr. med. Walter van Laack

12

2. What makes me so sure ?

In discussions I always attempt to define the positions early on. And this is what I want to do now. I believe that the reader should know what he is letting himself in for before he proceeds reading this book. Therefore, I will not leave readers in any doubt that, although my own profession is based on natural science, for most people my theories about the world are not easily comprehensible, especially not so for those with a natural scientific background, at least in our western civilization. At the same time I would like to point out again that about 25 years ago I also belonged to the skeptics. Today, however, I am absolutely convinced that the current theses and theories about the creation of the world, about evolution and the inevitability of death as being the definite end of our personality cannot be correct in this form. On the other hand this does not mean that, by writing this book, I propagate a kind of hermetic new age; that is best left to the esoteric gurus. No, I still think that most observations and results, especially those made over the last two centuries, have contributed a great deal to the currently accepted view of the world and are undoubtedly correct. However, the fact remains that they often lead to theses which are merely dubious interpretations even right from the start. For various reasons they are only too often disseminated by the media at an amazing speed as supposedly confirmed knowledge. It becomes easier to do this the more the observations match the spirit of the age and the desired social-political attitude. For example, it still seems opportune and relevant to our times to question the absolute uniqueness of the human individual and to relegate humans to the anonymity of an easily manipulated collective. I already mentioned another important reason in the previous chapter: In the old days, towards the end of the Middle Ages, during the times of Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, the title

13

"Doctor Universalis" existed for universal scholars, and people still seemed to have a good overview of the sciences as they were then known. Today most scientists are usually only involved with their own specific field of science and are becoming ever more specialized. Professor X is the specialist for the enzyme Y. He may even be awarded the Nobel prize because he decoded a new side-chain of this enzyme. Excuse me please if this sounds demeaning; I do not mean to belittle the achievement, but the fact remains that today most scientists no longer think and work on an interdisciplinary basis, with the result that the overview so desperately sought after was sometimes lost long ago. We are left on our own to try and piece together our world concept like a mosaic from an immense number of more or less correct details. In this way something of possibly essential importance in our search for the truth about our world is lost to us: the conviction that every utmost truth must, above all, possess a large measure of integration, simplicity and beauty. Many great scientists have underlined the necessity of especially the last two of the above mentioned points, usually towards the end of their working lives, e.g. Sir Arthur Eddington, Albert Einstein and Erwin Schrödinger. Some scientists do indeed embrace integration – but only within their own field of science. This becomes apparent yet again today when the world elite of physicists is avidly trying to work out an integrated formula for the hitherto postulated four elementary forces. I believe that these efforts will be unsuccessful because they do not take the form of an integrated search and they do make no effort to include the results and experiences of those sciences which supposedly cannot be classified as serious science. Included in these are, above all, the intuitive experiences of all the great religions, gathered over many thousands of years. The aversion of science to get really involved in such areas is not altogether accidental: for too long the Catholic Church especially suppressed the slowly emerging natural sciences over the last thousand years, ignored their confirmed results and often persecuted their proponents to death. The famous philosopher

14

Immanuel Kant was surely one of the first to reject serious discussion of religious opinions. Kant always refused to rely completely on the "sensually experienced" sciences alone; on the contrary, he continually propagated the involvement of our own spirit in order to classify results correctly. His appeals were later ignored only too often. It has to be said, and I say it right here, that we are condemned to overlook a wealth of old and new sources of experience and knowledge due to impossible ignorance. Only if we attempt to open ourselves to these sources, if we are prepared to draw on them and to combine them with the natural scientific sources presently favored, will we really achieve our set goal. I already made the attempt in my previous books. With these three volumes I want to continue the effort and to add important points. I also want to achieve a broader effect. My research has made me deeply religious. I do not mean this in an ecclesiastical sense, i.e. an institutionalized church of whatever denomination. I believe that the great legacy of human culture lies in a combination of all religions, and only to a small degree in each single one. One of the pillars of my faith is the strong conviction that there is a superior, transcendent and personifiable – but not in the human sense - intelligence on a level high above everything we know, giving us unconditional love and which we, therefore, call God1. I am as strongly convinced that our spirits and our personalities are not only absolutely unique but that they are also not merely the product or by-product of a physical brain after a sufficiently long evolution. They are, to use von Ditfurth's words, "from another world" - although he probably meant it in a slightly different sense. And as a direct 1

The male article is in this case just a long-established habit. I would like to point out here that the divine intelligence is not, nor can it be, either purely male or female in our sense of those words. Man and woman both belong to the symmetry and polarity necessary for the physical manifestation in this universe.

15

consequence I am also absolutely convinced that this immaterial part of us survives our physical death without losing its own personality and self-awareness; not through physical reincarnation, however, but due to the fact that it enters a new, completely different dimension of a spiritual yet real world which is as yet unknown to us. In my opinion these paradigms are irrefutable because I treat known scientific results in an integrative and comprehensive manner. However, I have to admit that I have been fortunate in the course of my life insofar as I have often been allowed to experience phenomena which are commonly described as "supernatural". These were due partly to certain situations in my life over the last few decades some of which no one would care to inflict on his fellow men. There have been several "borderline situations" in my life where death seemed imminent. In addition, I endured downright "surgical" incursions into my personal and family life. Some of these incredible events were directly connected with the deaths of friends and members of my family. But there were others which had nothing to do with that. They always absolutely surprised me and occasionally they just happened in situations when I really needed them. The famous psychoanalyst Carl Gustav Jung once coined the rather neutral expression synchronicity for paranormal experiences which seem to occur more often, for example, in connection with death. But many of the theories Jung formulated before 1944 hardly seem correct although his advocates in psychology still support them today. Jung himself once had a near-death experience due to a heart attack after which he stopped describing his experiences as socalled archetypes2 of a collective unconscious as his " advocates" still do in his name today. On the contrary, Jung changed his thinking about his experiences in this connection completely as he revealed in a letter to Ms B. dated 10.07.1944: "That which happens after our death is so 2

An inherited idea or mode of thought derived from the collective human and spiritual experiences and present in the unconscious of the individual.

16

inexpressibly amazing that our imagination and our senses are incapable of understanding it even to a small extent (…) Sooner or later the dead will become what we are. However, in this reality we know little or nothing about such a being, and what indeed will we still know about the earth after our death? The disintegration of our time-bound form in eternity is no loss of senses. On the contrary, the small finger will learn to recognize that it belongs to the hand." Jung adopted a completely different attitude after only one, albeit decisive, personal experience whereas I had several of varying intensity. I can only either ignore or suppress them all, or I can accept them as real. I decided to accept them and I gained a lot. I believe that I can provide a better view of the world with my theories. Nevertheless, I will be on my guard against regarding them as a new dogma down to the last detail. Some points will certainly need modification; but then other concepts must be just as comprehensive and integrative. I expect them, therefore, to adapt to my ideas and rather to complement them than to dismiss them completely. In the last instance they will be unable to change the prevailing key-note. This deep insight into my own credentials right at the beginning of my three-volumed book is intended especially to enthuse my more doubtful and skeptical readers, to motivate them and to get them involved with my views. It should also help to give our world a better profile in future. This could mean that people whose thoughts go in a similar direction will no longer be able to harm others and damage the environment quite so badly as is, sadly, quite common in our daily life. This by no means enables you or me to be or to become an angel on earth. We are all only human and our shortcomings abound. And as humans we are all allowed our little weaknesses. But each of us should make the attempt at insuring that all harm to others arising from such weaknesses are avoided. We must learn to be aware of the consequences our actions inflict on other people. Our individual

17

responsibility for our actions is of utmost importance. Each one of us has to take care not to harm his neighbor. It is especially one's own responsibility which is often played down today and then supported by more than questionable arguments. Each human being carries a large share of the responsibility for the world in which we are allowed to live. On the one hand society must ensure that each single human being recognizes and realizes his chance to lead a self-determined life. On the other hand society must also be vigilant in ensuring that no single individual harms the life and the personal integrity of his neighbor by abusing his responsibility. And "neighbor" always means in the first instance another human being and not various institutions irrespective of what they stand for. Unfortunately such institutions very often proclaim themselves as being the guardians of human neighborliness without really being any such thing. This could apply to a Church as well as to a government and its authorities. This is probably what is meant in the Bible when it talks about "the love of God, the love of ourselves and love towards our neighbor" and exactly in that order. It is exactly this love of God which backs up the above mentioned conviction that a human being is by no means a merely accidental or even superfluous individual in this world. On the contrary, each human is unique – and that since the beginning of the world and for all time! Therefore each of us must recognize his own opportunities but also his personal responsibility for himself and others and also, of course, for the world in which we live. Only if we do this do we create the right basis to enable us to help others and to serve them in the same altruistic way, i.e. in an unselfish manner. Only in this way will we be able to protect mankind and our beautiful Earth against the continual threat of self-induced destruction. Any lasting and successful association between two individuals is brought about by "love". The recognition of a "self" on the one hand and the "neighbor" on the other is of inestimable

18

importance and is at the same time the cause (causa) and the engine for "love" which leads via the neighbor to "God": to "God" who is described as the "omega point" or the "focus point" by Teilhard de Chardin. God as the beginning and the end, alpha and omega, highest conscious awareness, whilst being simultaneously universe and single personality. Individualization is, therefore, a necessary prerequisite for the "self-development" of a greater sense of community based on binding love to the neighbor in the community. This development requires a growing spirit (noogenesis). The creation of an individual spirit and its steady growth are, therefore, a generally applicable, i.e. universal, principle with a purposeful evolution towards God, a convergence of "all centers of consciousness in the world", which will then become "one with God". That will not happen by "identification" (whereby God becomes everything), but by the differentiating and unifying effect of "love" (God is in everybody). If viewed from this standpoint evolution has by no means come to an end. We are all God, so to speak, as Teilhard de Chardin said, --- God in emergence. And I can only agree wholeheartedly here.

3. Time and Again - Numbers It seems that people have been fascinated by numbers throughout time. Since time immemorial many people have believed that numbers and simple geometric forms exist in reality. They have often been assumed to be the real key to the understanding of our universe. For example, the Hebrew alphabet in which the Bible was written, only uses consonants which makes reading and understanding it very difficult; it also includes numbers and pictographic writing whereby each letter is related to a number and a picture. The

19

complete message of the written text results from the order, the quantity and the combination of such numbers. Therefore, mistakes and misunderstandings are frequent and they multiply should anyone attempt to decode or translate the text on its own. If we were to assume that numbers have no real meaning and are based purely on human imagination, then we are left, especially with regard to the Bible, with distorted texts. Unfortunately, this is very often the reason why they are discarded (all too) hastily as a collection of entertaining fairy tales at the very best. Yet we might assume that since time immemorial most people have been convinced that numbers or geometrical forms are not merely a human invention but that they possess their own important meaning in reality. In ancient Greece it was mainly the great natural scientists and philosophers, e.g. Pythagoras, Socrates and Plato, who proclaimed that numbers and forms were the gray eminence of the world and they attached certain regulating forces to them. Their theories were supported by the notion that arithmetical and geometrical interrelations are the internal orientation to everything in our world. At first Aristotle, who was probably the most famous of Plato's pupils and tutor to Alexander the Great, followed his great teacher's ideas. He conceived the theory of the 10 hypotheses or categories possessing a close relationship to the 10 numerical (really existing) ideas in the Hebrew culture or in the old Hebrew secret science, the Kabbala (10 holy Sephiroths). Later he distanced himself from this theory and in so doing became, therefore, the great figurehead for the prevailing spirit of our age. Most people today consider numbers and geometrical forms and their interrelationships, i.e. that which we call mathematics, to be a human invention. They are considered as mere tools, constructed by humans as thinking beings, which make the management of things in this world much easier. If we take a closer look at numbers and claim that they possess real meaning we are usually branded as a numerologist. During the 1930's the American Bell published a treatise on the subject and arrived at the conclusion that there is nothing real in

20

such number games. The qualifications of certain numbers such as those published by Endres and Schimmel in their book, according to which the number "3" is the "number of comprehensive synthesis", the number "4" is the "material ordinal number" and the number "5" is the "number of life", are usually doomed to ridicule. However, it is interesting to note that many of such number interpretations persist. Those of us who allow themselves to be influenced by these numbers are then called superstitious. Yet hardly anyone is completely free of such superstition. In Germany the number "13" is supposed to be a typically unlucky number. Often one of my patients turns down an appointment for surgery if I, a doctor with an operative surgery, suggest the 13th of a month. It is always better to be safe than sorry, and caution is better than regret. For a number researcher, the fear of the number "13" stands for the fundamental fear of the new era which it symbolizes. In his very interesting book about the real significance of numbers in our world, which he describes as indubitably verifiable, the author, Michael Stelzner, points out that the number "12" signifies absolute perfection and that, therefore, the number "13" is the commencement of something new and unknown. There are several examples of this in history and also in anecdotes which I can quote here: there were 12 Apostles, for example, whilst Jesus as the 13th departed from them. Or Odysseus who alone survived in the end and had to leave his 12 companions to their horrible fate. Another example of the significance of the number "13" as an unlucky number is given to us in the story of the pirate, Klaus Störtebeker, who was captured by the authorities of Hamburg in 1401 after a long and previously unsuccessful chase. He was beheaded on the market place in Hamburg. The story tells us that, when asked by the executioner for his last wish, he requested that all those members of his gang should go free whom he managed to pass whilst running headless. They were all lined up in front of him. After the executioner had done his job Störtebeker is said to

21

have managed to pass 12 of his men before he finally collapsed in front of the 13th who was then duly executed together with all the others remaining. In other countries we find other customs: in Italy, for example, the number "17" is unlucky and in China the numbers "3" and "4" stand for "death" and the "grave", whilst the number "9" is a holy number. It symbolizes the Highest. This concept can also be found in other theories: the number "3" symbolizes in many instances the smallest complete cycle. According to this theory, the number "9" as 3.3 forms a perfect cycle of smallest cycles and is their completion. The number following is the "10" which then represents "perfection on a higher level of being" (Stelzner). The Bible tells us about 9 generations before the Flood very nearly destroyed the entire world, and Noah made a new start in the 10th generation with his ark – and Jesus died on the cross during the 9th hour. The long wanderings of Odysseus lasted 9 years and Troy was conquered after 9 years of siege. Such examples are plentiful and they can also be listed for many other numbers to which mysticism, esoteric, numerology, religion and philosophy attach important meanings. In spite of their rejection by most serious scientific circles, I believe that such interpretations of numbers should be permissible. The Bible presupposes this when it says: "But you have set all things in order by measure and number and weight." (Wisdom of Solomon III, 11.20), and Aurelius Augustinus the Latin father of the church and teacher said that numbers were "forms of the wisdom of God present in the world itself which can be recognized by the human spirit" (according to H. Meyer, 1975). Two great world religions, Christianity and Hinduism, know the Trinity as a central principle which is represented in Christianity by God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost and in Hinduism by the highest God Brahman, Vishnu the Preserver and God of Love, and Shiva, the God of Destruction.

22

Three points define the smallest geometrical form, the "monoangle", i.e. the circle. And each tiny but finite point is actually an infinitesimally small circle which can again be defined by another 3 even smaller points. In theory this can be continued ad infinitum. In practice, however, we arrive at a very small finite size below which no stable existence is possible. With this perception we recognize an important aspect of our world: no matter how often we divide a finite point we will never reach the value of zero. In this book "zero" means "null" as the Latin meaning of the word, nulla figura, tells us. An infinite number of factors, i.e. the reciprocal value of integers, are limited by "1" for the whole, i.e. the starting point, and "0" for the nothing which is never reached. If there were merely an indication or even proof that certain constantly recurring numbers are of decisive significance time and again in this universe, then we might assume that a mathematical construction plan exists for our universe and we could try to reconstruct it. Then numbers themselves would really exist and that would mean that they are just as real as you and I. Then they would have been working for us constantly and everywhere in the background since the world began. The same could then be said about certain geometrical interrelationships which are closely connected with numbers. If we could demonstrate in simple, creative concepts, which in addition should be aesthetically beautiful, that very important numbers, number sequences and geometrical interrelationships occur in our universe and are engendered automatically, then we can make an attempt at rewriting the history of the entire world with the aid of mathematical analogies so that it is made more plausible and easier to understand. This is exactly the objective I have set for myself here. I am certainly neither the first nor the only one who thinks about these things and designs models. Some of these models are very remarkable in my opinion and will, therefore, be mentioned in my

23

representation whereby the names of their authors will, of course, be appropriately mentioned in the context. In some significant points my own theories go beyond all models known up till now, especially in regard to the simple clarity of their derivation, plausibility and construction. In this way, they offer a new basis for a really integrative picture of the world from a viewpoint which takes all significant fields of science into account.

4. Two Special Yardsticks Natural scientists always agree that we and all other life on earth are only possible due to the environmental conditions here being narrowly defined and extremely favorable. If these had been only slightly different we would never have had a chance of coming into existence. Indeed, our entire universe would be unthinkable were it not for these narrow limits. However, the majority of natural scientists do not infer from this that such important parameters could be the doing of some regulating "firm hand", however, that may be envisaged. More than ever it is assumed that, at least in the beginning, everything was pure coincidence. In the course of immeasurably long periods of time mutation as a factor of evolution came into play in which coincidence alone is the decisive factor. Further additives were selection, i.e. selection of the fittest in the daily fight for survival and later cooperation, at least between living creatures. However, the motto is still valid: were it not for these unbelievably fortunate chains of coincidences we would neither exist nor be able to think about it. It took nature billions of years to achieve this – which means there has evidently been enough time. So, it is thanks to the indescribable luck of our accidental existence that we are able today to ponder whether there is possibly more behind all this.

24

Many critics point out, however, that even such an immeasurably long period of time has, when viewed realistically, been far too short for accomplishing all this. But this does not hinder the majority of scientists from spreading their opinion so widely and so much in accordance with the social-political spirit of our age that there is hardly anyone who dares to believe anything different. Even those who had previously been strongly religious are in growing despair as it too often requires almost exceptional strength to hold on to their religious faith. Often they find themselves being looked upon as living in the past and ridiculed with pity. But are all these theories which are sold to us as confirmed knowledge actually true? I think not! My conviction has grown over the last few decades that some are not even worth the paper they are printed on (whereby I have no doubt that some natural scientists will say the same about my theories). But then I enjoy reminding them of the many lateral thinkers of earlier times. 150 years ago a fellow doctor, the Viennese gynecologist Ignaz Semmelweiss, was even consigned to a "funny farm" because of his convictions (which proved to be correct in the end): he had merely suggested to his colleagues and superiors that it was probably their own lack of hygiene which caused so many young mothers to die of childbed fever. In those days bacteria or other disease-causing micro-organisms were still unknown. Only four years later Robert Koch discovered the bacterium causing tuberculosis which heralded a complete new era in which Semmelweiss was rehabilitated posthumously. Unfortunately, such examples in history are plentiful so that I am only glad not to have lived during the time of the Spanish inquisition or to live today in one of the numerous countries in which intolerance prevails. In our universe two number sequences seem to be in especially great demand since they occur with penetrating frequency in several important positions.

25

Of course, being the first to establish a self-suggesting geometrical connection between them in my previous book – in my opinion a reasonable attempt – I was reproached for allegedly having made a personal construction based on a purely subjective choice of facts; and this edifice of ideas was, therefore, objectively, rather worthless, as nice as it may sound. In this book, therefore, I will take up that accusation and will demonstrate that it is without substance. On the contrary, we can observe that these two number sequences, as well as some other important numbers, manifest themselves inexorably after taking only a few steps from the tiniest of starting points. Only a few prevailing conditions are necessary, a fact which suggests of course that at some time or other a purposeful choice must have been made between several possibilities. The first two number sequences to which I am referring are 2-7-3 and 6-1-8. Over the last few years and decades a number of authors, e.g. Bindel, Plichta and Stelzner, have either made intensive attempts at identifying a number model for our cosmos or have studied numbers and their realistic significance for our world. In some of their doubtlessly very remarkable books the frequent appearance of these two number sequences is pointed out. However, not one of them has yet been able to ascertain and explain conclusively the interconnections in our world based on these number sequences. With regard to the number sequence 2-7-3, Stelzner talks of a "certain bias to squares" and assumes, as others do as well, that the number sequence 6-1-8 – the proportions of the golden section – is of special significance. However, I can find neither references nor even suggestions in any of these authors' books to the immediate connection between the creation and evolution of each form arising from its smallest origin – the finite point, and the inevitable appearance of these two number sequences. In my previous two books I already discussed these two sequences in detail.

26

For better understanding, I would like to mention some important interconnections here again: The famous Italian mathematician Fibonacci of Pisa, for example, identified the sequence 6-1-8 as the result of a simple intellectual experiment concerning the continual reproduction of rabbits. In mathematics this is the result of a division in extreme and mean ratio whence it has acquired the name "golden section" (GS). This means that a straight line is divided into two sections whereby the smaller dimension (minor) is to the greater dimension (major) as the greater is to the whole. This may be continued indefinitely yet the ratio of the dimensions remain constant at 1,618:1 or, inversely, at 0,618:1. This means that the greater dimension is 61,8% of the total dimension. The following graph by my son Martin explains it clearly:

Line A

B

Line B

C

Line C

D

Line D

C D E

(e.g. 10) (6.18) (3.82) (2.36)

In Nature we find exactly this ratio so frequently that it seems almost obvious that nature always aligns itself to the golden section. The structure of petals and pine cones both follow this rule and when a sunflower has, for example, 89 petals, 55 (= 61,8 %) will be turned in one direction and 34 in the other. If we measure the spirals of a snail-shell we will notice that the distances between them follow the same ratio as do the spiral arms of a galaxy and when we look at the distances between the sun and the nine planets (Titius-Bode-Law) and analyze their revolution periods we will recognize the same again. When a man

27

stretches his arms, each length of arm compared to the width of his shoulders will also show the ratio of the golden section. Consider the three phalanxes of your fingers and the metacarpal bone as the fourth part, then each two neighboring phalanxes are as major and minor, i.e. they also demonstrate the golden section. And even in music, the theory of harmony indicates that there must be an optimal interval between notes which is slightly wider than the perfect quint and is thence exactly 61,8 % of an octave. The famous astronomer Johannes Kepler talked in this context of a "divine division" which leads us to the "purest" or "most perfect" quint. This mathematical rule clearly finds exact counterparts elsewhere in nature. One obviously "optimal number" seems to be the number sequence 2-7-3 as I already attempted to prove in my first book by a simple calculation: for example, the absolute zero temperature is found at -2730C whereas the freezing point of water – surely the most important and, according to latest discoveries also seemingly the most ubiquitous and abundant material in the universe – is found at 00C. However, water being the essential basis for life and also being so abundant in the universe, it is clear that the establishment of these temperature scales by Kelvin (K) and Celsius (C) was certainly not arbitrary. Plichta indicated this already, and he explains further that for him this is clear evidence that our universe is decimally coded. The discovery of such a fundamental connection would otherwise not have been possible. Our number system came from India. The English mathematician and physicist John Barrow calls it the "most successful intellectual novelty which has ever been introduced on our planet". I would like to mention other examples here which strengthen the fundamental significance of the number sequence 2-7-3: According to Gay-Lussac's well-known law of physics all materials in our cosmos contract by exactly 1/273 of their volume (under constant pressure) if the temperature is lowered by 1 degree and

28

they also expand by 1/273 of their volume if the temperature is raised by 1 degree. The radius of the moon is exactly 0.273 times the radius of the earth and the rate of acceleration of the moon on its orbit around the earth is 0.273 cm/s2. A sidereal month, i.e. a real lunar month, is 27.3 days as is also the synodical rotation of the sun. Scientists today agree that our moon is a twin planet of the earth and that it had to adopt this order of magnitude to enable it to stabilize our earth in the solar system in a favorable and lasting manner. The gravitational acceleration on the sun is 273 m/s2. The earth revolves around the sun in one year or exactly 365.25 days (a year according to the Gregorian calendar, introduced in 1582 has 365 days and every leap year 366 days). The reciprocal value of this number is the decimal sequence 2-7-3. At university, students of medicine learn that a human pregnancy lasts an average of 273 days which is 10 lunar months; the length of pregnancy, therefore, equals the reciprocal value of the number of days in a year. Our air is, as we all know, a mixture of various gases. Yet only small changes in the ratio of its composition would probably have tragic consequences for our survival. With an optimal quota of 21% oxygen and 77% nitrogen, the ratio of oxygen to nitrogen is 0,273 or 27,3%. Finally, some information on the so-called background radiation (BGR), an extremely uniform thermal radiation which is found everywhere in the cosmos and to which I will refer again later: for physicists it is at present the most important piece of circumstantial evidence that the universe resulted from a big bang which occurred approximately 15 billion years ago. According to the commonly accepted theory, the BGR is the result of the cooling down of the universe over this very long period. The exact calculation of its temperature up to two decimal places is exactly 2.73 K...! Of course, the values actually measured usually vary slightly around such number sequences. But, as I already mentioned, in

29

most cases the slightest variation of certain physical constellations would probably have prevented not only the creation of our earth and life on earth but perhaps also the creation of the entire universe. Therefore, it can hardly be a mistake to assume that exactly the two number sequences 6-1-8 and 2-7-3 are optimal for the universe and important processes follow them repeatedly. If we look back on the historical course of events we will see the following picture: starting with the human race as the temporary pinnacle of spiritual evolution at least on earth. For our existence an optimal combination of the mixture of gases in the atmosphere is of utmost importance. To generate the atmosphere the sun is necessary, as is a stable orbital system of the two planets Earth – Moon at exactly defined distances from one another. The sun is a fixed star in a universe with a constant temperature, that of the background radiation. All these characteristic stages are closely connected with the number 273. In my previous book, this recognition initiated my statement which I thought was well founded - that the most important developments in our universe always "strive" to realize this optimal number sequence and that the world only seems "satisfied" when these values are finally realized. Now I would like to go one step further: I claim that these two number sequences are simply the natural result of propagation and growth of the simplest geometrical form, the finite point. I will explain this statement in detail in Chapter 8. We can logically conclude, therefore, that the structure of the entire world is based on a simple mathematical order. This order must exist in reality and must have existed at all times. Numbers themselves are immaterial and their existence must be regarded as being absolutely independent of any state of energy. The principle of the conservation of energy, based as it is on the proven physical laws, does not seem valid where numbers influence the world and organize themselves into structures and processes ipso facto, i.e. by the very nature of the case. Numbers and forms almost force matter into certain courses and circumstances. The frenzied but as yet unsuccessful search for

30

various particles, which are supposed to have so much influence on matter, e.g. the search for gravitons which influence gravitation and gluons which are supposed to hold the nucleus together, becomes superfluous. I will discuss these aspects – especially the physical consequences of my theories and those of my spiritual companions – in detail later in a dialogue with my two sons. In this connection I would point out that, as you may also read in my books about "Life" and "Death", numbers and forms are only one aspect of a spiritual world of a higher order. If I have already succeeded in describing the realistic spiritual existence of numbers and forms, it will not be too difficult even for a deep-rooted skeptic to accept the existence of further spiritual qualities later on.

5. The Three Musketeers Who does not know the thrilling novel "The Three Musketeers" by Alexandre Dumas, the French author? United they fight for law and order. We may notice a certain resemblance with regard to the order in our universe: Here, too, are three numbers which, as "musketeers", seem to bring order to our universe. They are the numbers 10, 24 and 81. If we consider first, whether or to what degree they are of significance due to their content or historically, we will notice that all chemical elements in our universe, i.e. all constituents of physical matter in the world, exist either as pure elements or in the form of up to a maximum of 10 small variations, known as isotopes. The number 10 characterizes the decimal system which is used successfully throughout the world and nobody is really searching for something more efficient. Because it employs a "zero", it

31

facilitates a denominational number system which is easy to handle making arithmetical operations like additions and subtractions simple. It is seemingly derived from counting on one's fingers but is not regarded as something real or even universal. But it poses the question as to whether the number of our fingers and toes with 10 each, arranged in 2x5, is not in itself a hint as to the reality of the decimal system in our world3. Firstly, we must at least admit that we can only imagine physical matter coming into existence by the expansion of an original unity into an opposing (polar) and symmetrical duality. This duality is the proverbial other side of the coin and can be established always and everywhere in the world. The concept of 10 fingers and toes in a mirror image of 2x5, therefore, seems immediately plausible and obvious. The sum of the numbers 1 to 10 is the number 55. This number also consists of 2 times number 5 whose sum is again 10. If we consider the frequency with which the number sequence 273 appears at important points in our world and during its evolution, then any interrelation would have to be artificially created were the world not based on an actually existing decimal system and were not the decimal system the favored number system. The English mathematician Barrow, who certainly had no intention of mystifying the world of numbers, established prosaically in his beautiful book "Pi in the Sky" that the number 10 is simply optimal: if the number were smaller the number system would not be efficient enough and if the number were too large a myriad of single digits and numerals would be needed. The decimal system is also very simple due to its "pleasing symmetry". It is very interesting to note that, when comparing the various number systems which were used over the last few thousand years in twenty of the most important civilizations - from the ancient Egyptians till modern times – we will find that three quarters of them used the decimal system. In three of the civilizations 20 was 3

This is valid for the genetic concept of all creatures on earth and in view of the assumed universality also for all possible creatures in our universe.

32

used as the basis for their number systems, in two civilizations it was 60. It is amazing, of course, that in this way they were based on a multiple of the number 10. None of the civilizations worked with an "asymmetrical" number, although from the mathematical point of view any basic number would do. Our computers today, however, work with a binary code using 2 as a basis. Already the Babylonians, as well as the Mayas and the Chinese used denominational number systems in which the position of each digit defined its value. That corresponds with our number system which originated in India and was passed via the Arabian countries4 to our western civilization. The Hebrew alphabet, in which the original Christian Bible was written, starts with the letter "Alef" (ℵ). It consists of the letter Jota mirrored on a diagonal axis. Each Hebrew letter is related to a number and a symbol. The Jota corresponds to the number 10 and to the symbol of a hand with 5 fingers. The letter Alef is related to the number 1 and to the symbol of a bull. Since the Hebrew language consists only of consonants, the letter (A)l(e)f cannot really be pronounced which is why this first letter in the Hebrew alphabet is called the unpronounceable. This kind of analysis entices us to play the whole range of numerological and religious symbols. The First (God) is unpronounceable (indescribable as it is meant in the biblical commandment). It symbolizes strength, the power to act, the symbol of the bull. It includes all the symmetry and polarity which becomes evident in subsequent actions, i.e. in the manifestation of the idea in our world. Each of these symmetrical and polar manifestations contain the number 10 as the criterion of (complete) perfection on a (system-) level. Via this level the next one can be perceived. The 10 corresponds with unity again but on the next higher level since it is a merely transported and, therefore, heightened 1. The two hands ("the Jota in the Alef") simultaneously manifest the universal duality, expressed here in 2x5 fingers, which is continued internally. 4

We can still see this today in that Arabs write numbers from left to right but letters from right to left.

33

The basic order in our world is thus already included in the original, or divine, unity. Strikingly, all this is expressed by one single Hebrew letter. I do not intend to go into further details here about the historical, mystical or religious references concerning the peculiarities of the number 10. I have already made some comments on this in Chapter 3. I would just like to emphasize again at this point that the number 10 always symbolizes a typical new start on a new and simultaneously higher level, or in a completely different dimension. The parallels to the decimal system are obvious. If we are prepared to recognize at least a grain of truth in mystical and religious primeval experiences – which I think is legitimate – then we can certainly understand this as a clear indication that the decimal system is the favored number system embodied in reality in our world. This presupposes, of course, that numbers themselves are embodied in reality in our world, i.e. that they exist in reality. There are abundant further indications for this. And now the analysis of the number 24 will lead us exactly into the same direction: An important group of numbers are the so-called prime numbers. They seem to perform important controlling functions, always under the assumption, that is, that numbers have a real existence. In the next chapter we will discuss them in more detail. Apart from the prime numbers 2 and 3, which probably have a special status due to certain circumstances, all prime numbers follow the formula 6n±1 in which "n" designates all integers, i.e. beginning at 1 through 2, 3, 4, … to infinity. If we begin with n=1 then 6n is 6. The two numbers before and after this number, according to the formula, are 5 and 7 which are prime numbers. They are also called prime number twins. If n=2 then 6n=12, the prime number twins are 11 and 13, with n=3 the prime number twins are 17 and 19. So we obtain 3 successive prime number twins. The picture changes for the first time with n=4. Before the number 24 we find the real prime number 23 but the number after 24 is not a real prime number. 25 is the first prime number square, i.e. 52, which means that the number 24

34

characterizes the first break, it being connected again with the 4th ordinal number (since the break occurs at n=4). Now back to some general details: as already mentioned the alphabets of two important historic civilizations, i.e. the new Hebrew and the Greek alphabet, each possesses 24 letters. Other alphabets, like ours, for example, have more than one letter for similar or even the same sounds5. The writing in ancient Egypt also consists of 24 single-layered hieroglyphs. Stelzner wrote in his book that in mythology the number 24 always appears "when something single merges into something great". In the New Testament of the Christian Bible we find the Book of Revelations of St. John. In the chapter describing the apocalypse St. John wrote about his prophetic vision of 24 thrones arranged in a circle with 24 elders sitting on them who will sit in final judgement over the world. Every year on the 24th of December we celebrate Christmas Eve, the day when the light, personified by Jesus, the Son of God, came into the world and started a new era. And, of course, I would like to remind you again that our day has a cycle of 24 hours, which has been recognized in all civilizations since the time of the Babylonians but is still considered to be a mere human invention. Pythagoras was probably the first to recognize that all pure (consonant) musical intervals together form integral relationships. All this leads us to the assumption that humans too are "organized" according to integers; how else can we explain our ability to pick out immediately a dissonant chord, i.e. a chord not based on a whole-number relationship, as wrong or disharmonious and unsatisfying? If we sought to describe all musical intervals, i.e. octaves, quints and quarts, which are all in principle natural intervals of an octave, in continuous integers then we could only do so in a rhythm of 24.

5

For example v and f and c and z in the German alphabet are pronounced in the same way so that we are really left with only 24 different sounds.

35

The biblical example of the revelation of St. John with its 24 thrones demonstrates as well the special arrangement of the 24 in the form of a circle or cyclically. Let us suppose that the religious-mystical contains a grain of truth, as in the adage "in dubio pro reo"6, and let us assume that the number 24 may possess a real significance in our world. Then we are bound to conclude that in principle the number 24 arranges everything in the form of a circle. This apparent cyclicity of the number 24 in our world can be supported by a physical observation: if with a high-speed camera we photograph a drop of water or milk falling on to the surface of the liquid we will notice that always, without exception 24 small droplets splash out in the form of a circle. My son Martin drew the sketch shown below. Stelzner, who also referred to this example, wrote: "we can approach this phenomenon with physical and mathematical theories as often and as exactly as we wish: the 24 and their context remain".

Figure 1 (by Martin): When a drop of water or milk falls on to the surface of the liquid, always exactly 24 small droplets splash out. This example shows the cyclical interconnection between the partial and the entirity in our world.

We already know that the 10 as well as the 24 have a common mathematical background based on the four first numbers (ordinal numbers):

6

Latin: in doubt for the defendant

36

As is: So also is:

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10. 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 = 24.

The first four ordinal numbers lead us to the first two "musketeers", one by addition and one by multiplication. But what about the number 81 and what is its special significance in this world? Here is the mathematical answer: It is:

12

.

34 = 81.

Here also the first four ordinal numbers are combined by introduction of the next higher type of arithmetical operation just as we did when we introduced the 24. If we work with powers alone then we arrive at the starting number 1 again, because 1 2 . 3 . 4 = 1. it is: In Chapter 8 I will explain further how a perfect multiple, represented by the number 4, can be generated from an initial single, represented by the number 1. This then becomes a new single, albeit in a higher dimension, which is now recognizable. Of course, this "expansion" bypasses the numbers 2 and 3. All this seems very trivial at first. But, although it might sound so unbelievably simple, these four numbers nevertheless contain the central mathematical idea of the entire universe. With the aid of all three possible (positive) arithmetical operations, i.e. addition, multiplication and powers (the three opposite negative operations result inevitably following the laws of symmetry and polarity) the numbers 10, 24 and 81 – as well as the way back to the unity 1 – can be calculated from the first four ordinal numbers. For Pythagoreans the number 10 was the most perfect number of all. It is the characteristic and eponymous number of our decimal

37

system which is, in my opinion, the favored number system on which mathematics is based in our world. The number 24 seems to be the characteristic number for all natural and cyclical processes in the universe. Now some more comments about the number 81 which can also be naturally calculated from the first four ordinal numbers by the next higher type of arithmetical operation. At school we were taught – carelessly – that there are 83 elements in our universe which are stable and natural. Plichta was the first to point out that actually there are only 81 natural and stable elements. Two in this series, the elements technicum (no. 43) and promethium (no. 61) are unstable and can only be produced artificially. Of the remaining 81 elements the smallest element,

hydrogen, with the atomic number 1 takes an outstanding position: it is the most abundant and most important element in the entire universe. All other elements are based on it. It is almost the star of a series of elements in which each element has exactly one proton7 more than the preceding one. All elements in the world are arranged neatly in a harmonic order, and it is certainly no mere accident that this corresponds to the order of our ordinal numbers, i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4 …. If we accept that the decimal system is the favored and real numerical system embodied in our world then we may also divide the number 1 in a different denominational position, e.g. the 100, by 81. This produces the result 1,234567(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)....(∞)8, which means that the reciprocal value of 81 shows all ordinal numbers up to infinity. This also means that our numbers are an inversion of the real embodied, natural maximum expansion of all matter. Here again the number 1 holds a prominent position. We should take a look now at biology and the roots of all organic life, the genotype, i.e. the genetic code. It is often and, in my opinion, too hastily and disparagingly, described as "degenerate". 7 8

A proton is a positively charged particle of the atomic nucleus. This arithmetical operation for representing the periodical fraction with infinite positions along all ordinal numbers (also beyond the number 10) is simple but shall not be explained in detail here. For further reference I recommend to have a look in a book of mathematics.

38

The genetic code means that three of four possible biochemical bases, the "letters of the genetic alphabet", are always arranged in groups of three, known as triplets, each of which encodes one amino acid. There are 20 of these amino acids, which are the components of proteins. Encoded by these base triplets, the various amino acids can be combined at random to form long molecule chains, i.e. the proteins. Proteins are the basic building blocks for all forms of life and also for the necessary builders and their tools working within, i.e. the enzymes. If, then, four different bases, arranged in groups of three, are responsible for the linking of 20 possible amino acids together to form long protein molecules, then we discover that there are 43 = 64 possible combinations for the encoding of amino acids. It follows that several of these base triplets must be responsible for one and the same amino acid. Biologists consider this to be an extravagance of nature and describe the genetic code, therefore, as degenerate. But this is by no means the case! On the contrary, this code is extremely "cunning" in that – and I already explained this in my previous books – it effectively eliminates the risk of accidental changes, i.e. mutations, which in most cases cause more damage then benefit. I will explain this in detail in the second volume "Life". At this point I highlight the most important perception: up to now, nobody has recognized that, although the calculation 43 = 64 is arithmetically correct, it is by no means important for the number of possible encodings. The wrong premiss was chosen. A thorough analysis of the possible base combinations enabled me to prove for the first time that the number of possible triplets is of no importance whatsoever. Of sole importance is the position of the bases within the triplet which decides the type of amino acid to be encoded. Finally, there is always only one single base position which decides the combination of proteins.

39

In this way exactly 84 possible base positions can be demonstrated. Three triplets are known as nonsense-triplets and are also defined by three base positions. They are unable to transport one single amino acid. Indeed, when they appear all further protein production is terminated. In the end this leaves 81 (=34) effective base positions by which proteins can be constructed. Among the chemical elements hydrogen takes a prominent position since it is the starting point for all further elements. The genetic code also has one triplet, defined by one single base position, which sets off the whole range of protein production. It is known as the start codon. A more detailed explanation of this most important and original realization can be found in the second volume of this series, as already mentioned. To our amazement it seems that everything from chemistry and biology to the elements and the genotype is defined by one and the same number, 81, in the form of 80 + 1. And the number 81 derives from the numbers 1 to 4. The question now arises, of course, as to the meaning of the factor 12 or why I chose the first four ordinal numbers to calculate the number 81, whereas a calculation with only 34 may seem quite sufficient. But it is absolutely essential to incorporate the concept of 12 which points in the right direction! Only at first sight does it seem superfluous to multiply it by 34. However, in contrast to the calculations of the numbers 10 and 24, two different arithmetical operations become necessary if we are to include the arithmetical operation 12. And here we have yet another important key – subtly hidden – for enabling us to understand our world: The numbers 10 and 24, in exactly this order, describe the purely spiritual and immaterial basis of our universe: The number 10 defines the numerical system to which all things relate. All numerical systems are in principle equal in worth but one is favored. It is the first and lowest step for all decisions, it is the basis on which the numbers are to work and control.

40

Mathematically the smallest musketeer can also be derived from the simplest arithmetical operation, the addition. When it has been clarified just how mathematics is to work in our world, then it must be decided on the next level how the world is to expand. This involves the question of the space in which our physical universe will later exist. A decision must be made at this point as to how everything should be arranged in number and form and how it should all expand. The most obvious form is the circle which is defined and controlled by the number 24. It results from the next higher arithmetical operation, the multiplication of the first four integers. This arithmetical operation is also still homogenous since the result is still something immaterial: the purely spiritual information for order and expansion of all processes and events. But the third number, the 81, is the first having anything to do with matter. It defines the maximum quantitative expansion, i.e. the number and distribution of the most important goods within the already expanded space. Now, at this point, something of utmost importance happens: although 81 can also be derived from the first four numbers, now, for the first time, it is reached by two different arithmetical operations. The number 34, which itself results in 81, stands for the maximum expansion of all purely physical matter! But, in consequence, the factor 12 is now a sign that all matter is in actual fact a combination of two completely different parts, one of which can be and is easily overlooked since it possesses nothing physical. The 12 proves in a purely mathematical way that every kind of matter simultaneously possesses something that "adheres" to it, which seems to be invisible but nevertheless belongs to it imperatively: it is the pure information "to be" – or, in other words, the information of its own existence! Every kind of matter informs us of its existence by way of the "being" which is inseparably connected with it. This idea is unambiguously induced by mathematics. However, this

41

information of existence is something purely spiritual and immaterial. Mathematics provides the proof that there is a subtle dualism between the spiritual information of all existence and its physical part. And since the omission of the arithmetical operation 12 is perfectly possible from the mathematical point of view when calculating the number 81, it proves that the connection between spirit and matter is not bound to obey the thermo-dynamic conservation laws! I will explain this in further detail in Chapter 10 with the "divine analogy". Here I would just like to state that all kinds of matter in this world actually possess a non-physical and a physical existence simultaneously. This explains why any expansion, any formation and any construction of physical existence inevitably possesses a spiritual quality at the same time. Therefore, all matter has an eternal nature since it is not of physical quality alone but also of spiritual quality.

6. Prime Numbers Prime numbers are numbers which can only be divided by 1 or by themselves. The prime number sequence starts with the number 1, passing the numbers 2 to 3, thence to 5 and 7, further on to 11, and then to 13 and so on. In the last chapter I explained the term "prime number twins". They always occur just before and just after a number which can be divided by 6. The number 24 (4.6=24), however, is the first number where this rule does not apply. The previous number is 23, a prime number but the next higher number is 25 which is not a prime number but a compound number. In this case it is a prime number square 5.5 (=52). The higher we go in this sequence of numbers divisible by 6, the less numbers we will find with prime number twins with relation

42

to the adjacent numbers. Hadamard proved that in mathematics this decrease of prime numbers can be defined by an important constant, Euler's constant "e". All non-twinned numbers are either squares or products of lower prime numbers. The product of two different prime numbers is, however, nothing special since all natural numbers can be calculated in this way. If the divisibility by 6 is viewed mathematically, the aforementioned general law prevails and applies at least from the prime number twins 5 and 7 onward for all further prime numbers: a number may be a prime number if it is the number before or after a multiple of 6, i.e. 6n±1, for n=all natural (whole) numbers, 1, 2, 3,…! At first sight this seems to be incorrect for all numbers at the beginning of the prime number sequence, i.e. for all numbers below 5, since 2 and 3 are also prime numbers. However, Plichta already pointed out that the numbers 2 and 3 can be considered as the starting numbers of two independent infinite number sequences: the number 2 is the first of all even numbers and the number 3 is the starting number of all numbers divisible by 3. The number 1 could be considered as being the first of all prime numbers and we might disregard the numbers 2 and 3 in the sequence of prime numbers. In this way it is possible to distribute all numbers to three "equally long", infinite number sequences starting with the numbers 1, 2 and 3. The prime numbers would all follow the formula 6n±1. We could even say, all prime numbers can be defined by this formula, but not all numbers which we can define by this formula are simultaneously prime numbers; we have already seen that the higher the number "n" the less real prime numbers there are. What is behind all this? It seems that our universe is closely connected with prime numbers since they are extremely useful as keys: nearly all secret services use prime numbers for encoding their secret messages. The assumption that prime numbers are the keys to our universe is also supported by the number 24 which seems to control the cyclical course of universal processes and

43

events. Imagine a 24-hour clock. The 24 is right at the top where we usually see the 12 on a normal clock face. On such a clock all prime numbers can be directly detected on 8 rays. These rays form the well-known, traditional image of the Maltese cross (see Figure 2)! The 1 remains in its normal place in the first cycle. When a second cycle of 24 is placed over the first shell of 24 numbers the first number of the new circle would be 25 or 52. In a third cycle the same place is taken by 49 or 72. We realize that over this exposed first place a ray is growing, pointing outward, on which the squares or products of all prime numbers are found, starting with 12, 52, 72 etc., all obeying the formula "6n±1". Among the shells of two adjacent prime number twins we find some with single prime numbers whose growing number gives us the sequence of all even numbers. And between two shells with the squares or products of prime number twins – e.g. between 52 and 72 or 232 and 252 - there is a growing number of other shells with single prime numbers. They give the sequence of all ordinal numbers, starting with two times zero. Plichta coined the term prime ray for it. Now it becomes obvious why it seems sensible to write the 1 on the inner shell of this ray as 12. The following illustration explains this in detail: Figure 2 (by Martin): In a circle defined by the number 24 all prime numbers can be seen along the 8 rays in this drawing. Optically, they form a Maltese or St. John's cross. The question certainly arises as to whether this form of cross, which is frequently used, or even any form of cross in general has not been based on intuitive knowledge of the basics of our world?

44

Figure 3 (by Martin): Due to the concentric arrangement of the shells over the number 24 we see at 1 o'clock a ray pointing outward on which mainly the squares or products of all imaginable prime numbers can be found, starting with 12, 52, 72 etc., all obeying the formula "6n±1". Between the shells of two adjacent prime number twins we find some shells with single prime numbers, whose growing number gives us the sequence of all even numbers. And between two shells with the squares or products of prime number twins – e.g. between 52 and 72 or 232 and 252 there is a growing number of other shells with single prime numbers. They give the sequence of all ordinal numbers, starting with two times zero. Plichta coined the term "prime ray" for it. Now it makes sense to write the 1 on the inner shell of this ray as 12. I put a question mark in the center of the circle since the origin of all things still has to be discussed.

It was Plichta who established the connection between this shell model and the space of our universe, although his line of thought was from a different direction entirely. He called his model the "Prime Number Cross". Its result conforms with my theory which, I believe, is much simpler and, in addition, purely evolutive and number-theory orientated. Once again, there are two different ways of arriving at the same result which should support the correctness of this theory. I will come back to this again later. Something else is rather remarkable too: When we look at the circle with the prime ray pointing outward in Figure 3 we notice that it is identical with a symbol which has always been used for "power" – or perhaps better translated, according to Lao Tzu's (Tao Te Ching) Chinese philosophy, for "sense" or the "invisible spiritual laws in our world" (=Tao)9- in astronomy for "Mars" and

9

My translation or interpretation of Lao Tzu's idea behind the word "Tao" is surely permissable and apt. This is also shown in the following of excerpt of one of his poems: "The content of the great LIFE (Te) follwos the SENSE (Tao). The SENSE (Tao) causes the things, so chaotic, so dark...".

45

in biology for the same reason for "Male":

This could also be considered to be an intuitive perception of such connotations over thousands of years. The necessary polar and symmetrical counterpart, the "Female", according to Lao Tzu's (Tao Te Ching) "Life" (=Te) or the astronomical symbol for "Venus" is the following:

Since the "male principle" from time immemorial stands for the "extrovert", something "pointing outward", especially in Chinese philosophy, symbolized here with the arrow, the cross underneath the circle (for "internal") must be the symbol for "Female", for something "pointing inward". It could also be interpreted as the "internal" system of coordinates for a new perception of space. Many mathematicians consider the prime numbers to be the most important numbers of all. They are, as Barrow wrote, the "atoms of numbers" since with them all numbers can in general be expressed, provided, of course, that the numbers 2 and 3 are included. However, numbers possess their own reality in this world, as I hope I have already made clear. They exist just as you and I do. It seems more than probable to me that they encode the entire physical world. This would also mean, however, that if we search for reasons for the definite influence on certain spatial structures or effects in our universe, then we must search among the prime numbers for the key. Others before me have already come to this conclusion, but it is still not accepted by scientists. I hope this will change after my attempt in this book to explain the really simple mathematical interconnections on which everything in based in the same simple manner and, in addition, for the first time as completely and as conclusively as only possible.

46

7. Everything falls into Place In the previous chapters I described various parallels which seem to exist between some numbers and some clearly optimal conditions in our universe. Apart from the number sequences 2-7-3 and 6-1-8, the first four ordinal numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4 as well as the figures 10, 24 and 81/10, which can be derived from them, have a fundamentally important function. Are there any other connections between them which could be of interest and lend support to my total concept? In my first book I identified a connection between the sequence 2-7-3 and spatial expansion and structure. It is also the measure for the maximum expansion of all physical matter in this world. As Plichta pointed out there are only 81 stable and natural elements in the entire universe. And I was able to prove for the first time11 that our genotype, the genetic code of all creatures on earth, contains exactly 81 different code positions which clearly define the elements of all proteins (amino acids) necessary for the generation of life. We may surely assume that this is the same everywhere in the entire universe. In addition there are a few complementary aspects, e.g. the maximum number of 10 isotopes per element (isotopy). As I already mentioned in my first book, the components of all genotypes, i.e. the nucleotides, also follow this rule of 10. If we were also to take my concept of a "Universal Law of Triple Unity" into consideration, which I also mentioned in that book, or merely the fact that each finite point requires three pieces of information to enable a clear definition to be made then the following formula results: (81+10).3 = 273. In this way a universal optimum manifests itself and can plausibly be brought into congruence with number-theory reflections. 10

Remember that the inverse value of 81 (= 1/81) produces all ordinal numbers from 0,1,2,3,4… to infinity. 11 See Part 1, Chapter 1.5, Part 2, Chapter "Life" and the Appendix of my book "Key to Eternity".

47

In the train of thought concerning the multiplication of circles and growth which follows in the next chapter I will attempt to explain this in more detail and to show that now the important quantities which are already known can be derived mathematically after only a few steps. In our world the sequence 6-1-8 proves to be the optimal number of any division. It is found in the theory of harmony as well as in botany, zoology, astronomy or in us humans. It represents the "golden section" of a division in extreme and mean ratio and, after only a few steps of my intellectual game in Chapter 8, it is also the inevitable result. Now the following is true: If the number 273 is subtracted from the number 618 the result is the number sequence 3-4-5 which is also important as we know since it is a combination of the first three Pythagorean numbers, i.e. the first three integers which in increasing order, i.e. in the their chronological order, fulfil the condition of a rectangular triangle which is: a2 + b2 = c2. The number 3 is the ordinal number for the three-dimensional finite corporeality of the physical universe. The number 4 on the other hand is the ordinal number of a four-dimensional infinity, as I will explain later. Here some more numerology: Any cross (4 points) creates a center point at its point of intersection and thereby a central fifth point. This may be one of the reasons why the number 5 is called the divine number and the number of love in many religions and myths since love is a connecting factor as is the fifth point, the center point of the intersection. The number 5 is also considered to be the number of all living things: many flowers have 5 petals, or a multiple thereof, e.g. the rose. Even humans are an example of this five-fold structure with their pairs of upper and lower limbs (symmetrical and polar four) but with only one head (asymmetrical and non-polar) which is simultaneously the highest center.

48

Throughout time regular pentagons, so-called pentagrams, and five-pointed stars have been a favored symbol for secret societies and philosophical and religious circles or orders. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and acupuncture are classic examples of the important doctrine of the 5 elements which has existed for thousands of years: if these elements are connected in the direction of mutual "generation" to a pentagram, another pentagram can be drawn inside it when the mutually "controlling" or "despising" elements are connected with one another. One reason for the mystification of pentagrams and pentagons may be that they possess a divine-mystical geometry, just as Johannes Kepler was able to show. Within every pentagram we can draw an infinite number of ever decreasing pentagrams which alternate with ever decreasing five-pointed stars towards their highest non-polar center (see Figure 4). All these theoretically infinitely alternating forms are the result of a division in extreme and mean ratio (see number sequence 6-1-8). Figure 4: Diagram of alternating pentagrams and five-pointed stars. It can in theory (intellectually and numerically!) be continued into infinity and will always strive for a mutual center (S). It results from a division in extreme and mean ratio.

That is enough mysticism for the moment. As I already mentioned, the numbers 3, 4 and 5 have for thousands of years been the well-known and certainly most sensible basis for dividing our time into seconds and minutes12. Yet, most scientists still consider this to be merely a convention from the dim and distant past. based on numerology, possessing no causal connections at all with universal events. 12

60 minutes = 3.4.5; 3600 seconds = 32 . 42 . 52 (see Chapter 1).

49

Moreover, each of these three numbers belongs to one of the three infinite number sequences into which all numbers can be classified. The number 345 is also the sum of 273 and 72, whereas 72 is also 3.24. Numbers run on into infinity. I have already shown that the expansion of numbers must occur in circular, i.e. cyclical rhythms of 24. Assuming this theory to be true, we notice immediately that the number 24 takes on a special significance. The measure for the expansion of circles consisting of 24 numbers each is, as Plichta established, the number 3 in which the (maximum) "speed of light" also seems exactly defined (3.10n, e.g. 3.105 km/s, see Dialogue)! We can identify, therefore, three important number sequences which clearly have a decisive influence on our universe and which also complement each other according to the famous Pythagorean law. It is true that: a2 + b2 = c2 or, here: 273 + 345 = 618 since we may consider these number sequences also as being the planes of three squares which surround a rectangular triangle. The three numbers 3, 4 and 5, which together represent one plane are simultaneously the three smallest integers which themselves, as side lengths, fulfil the geometry of a rectangular triangle and are, therefore, known as Pythagorean numbers. The area of the enclosed triangle is 153. If we take a closer look at this number sequence out of sheer curiosity from a numerological perspective we notice that it contains the "1", the symbol for an omnipresent and omnificent power in the world or, expressed in Christian religious terminology, for the spirit. The "5" in the middle is a number symbol for the very principle of life, but also for God and love. The last number in this sequence is the number "3", the quintessential dimensional unit for all three-dimensional objects in the universe. It only asks for a little more fantasy to recognize in this centrally positioned number sequence 1-5-3 a connection, for example, to the Christian Trinity with the highest central figure of God the Father, with the Holy Ghost on one side

50

and, symbolized by Jesus Christ, physical humans on the other side. From a more scientific point of view, the number 153 represents again the physical expansion of matter (81) and the expansion of space (3) in a concentric number space with circles in a rhythm of 24. The total of different things is mathematically their sum. Therefore: 153 = 81 + (3 . 24) /13. These three number sequences control optimal conditions in our world and that without placing overdue emphasis on religious and numerological aspects. The Pythagorean theorem interconnects them geometrically, in the same way as Einstein's famous equation interconnects arithmetically the universal increase of mass with the sequence of all ordinal numbers. By squaring the equation E=m.c2 we obtain: c = 34.(10x) ⇒ E2/m2 = 34 = 81. And the fraction 1/81 results in all ordinal numbers. In this representation a new triangular plane is formed whose value 153 again includes space and quantities. The four values, 153, 273, 345 and 618, can be derived completely from the already mentioned four numbers each of which is also an important key number in our universe and that is the number 3 as well as those of the "three Musketeers" 10, 24 and 81. On the strength of these relations I went in principle already one step further in the previous chapter. We have to assume that the decimal system, as well as the cyclical order of 24, form the basis of all processes and events in this world, as is shown, for example, by the expansion of space over all ordinal numbers and the expansion of matter (through the 81), and that they are really embodied in our universe especially because they can be described with the help of the first four ordinal numbers as their sum, their product or a combination of their product and power, as follows: 1+2+3+4=10, 13

or 1.2.3.4=24,

or 12 . 34 = 81.

The brackets are really superfluous since mathematically multiplication and division have priority over addition and subtraction.

51

If, for the fun of it, we were to describe the four important, geometrically interconnected numbers exclusively with the help of the first four ordinal numbers14, then we would need the positive arithmetical operations which are addition (+), multiplication (.) and to exponentiate (power). We can see that in these four numbers alone all basic arithmetical operations are embodied in our world since from the three positive arithmetical operations automatically the three opposite negative operations, i.e. subtraction (-), division (:), evolution (√) can be derived. The sum and the product of the first four ordinal numbers, these being 10 and 24, and also the combination of product and power of these four numbers, this being the number 81, define the three prevailing conditions for our universe. We can assume, therefore, that this is valid also for the exponential function itself. But this is trivial, since the result of 1 power 2 power 3 power 4 (=12•3•4) remains 1. /15 And the number "1" is the most awe-inspiring of them all. It is the real key number to the entire world. Another possibly important aspect is the following: Numbers which are often represented in reality, e.g. 273 and 618, are described here not as integers but always as decimal numbers with an infinite number of decimal positions. The same applies to the arithmetically calculated results 153 and 345. They are all transcendental numbers16.

14

It is also true that: 153 = 81+72 = 34 + 3.24 = 34 + 3(1.2.3.4) = 34 + 1.2.32.4; 273 = (81+10).3 = (34+10).3 = (34+1+2+3+4).3; 345 = 273 + 72 = (81+10).3 + 3.24 = (34+10).3 + 3(1.2.3.4) = (34+1+2+3+4).3 + 1.2.32.4; 618 = 273 + 345 = (34+1+2+3+4).3 + (34+1+2+3+4).3 + 1.2.32.4; 15 The natural order must of course be observed. 16 Since they cannot be described by an algebraic equation with a rational coefficient.

52

Since I am attempting here to consolidate mathematics, all the natural sciences as well as philosophy and religion, it must be allowed to evaluate this aspect again from the numerological point of view also: due to the inherent infinite number of decimal positions all these numbers are an inseparable part of the infinity of our world. Figure 5 (by Alexander): "The Geometry of the Universe" (schematic): Important key numbers of natural science, principles of the creation and expansion of mass, spatial structure and the expansion of space; all ordinal numbers, the decimal system, the dimensions of space, transcendence of numbers, circle constant pi, squares as perfect examples for all quadrangles, the rectangular triangle as perfect example for all triangles, the circle with all its forms as the basis of all geometric constructions – all things are brought together here.

We can construct a circle around the rectangular triangle shown in the illustration which has the same area as the internal circle of the largest outer square, i.e. it is the internal circle of the square on the hypotenuse. The area of a square divided by the area of its internal circle is always 1,273. Only with exactly these dimensional relationships does this number sequence equal the area of the square on the shortest side of the triangle exactly. The area of this circle is in itself also interesting, of course: it is also a transcendental value and without decimal places it amounts to 485. It follows that 485 – 345 = 140. We have already seen how the number 345 is arrived at with the aid of universally important numbers.

53

140 The number closes another gap in that 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 140 = 1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 . In my previous books17, I suggested why it is that the electrons of all elements are to be found on a maximum of 7 shells. The maximum number of electron pairs supportable by each shell is equal to the square of the relevant ordinal number (i.e. 12 pairs on the first shell, 22 pairs on the second shell, etc.). Up to now, I have derived the maximum limit of 72 solely from the prime number cross of 24 shells since this "metronome" shows three prime number squares in a row (12, 52 and 72). Then there is a break for two circles until the square of the next prime number appears. This is a caesura which could be interpreted as being an independent code again. Now, however, we can see that the very geometrical linkages of the most important universal numbers are directly encoding this limit, so that the derivation with the aid of the prime number ray of the order of 24 concentric shells is no longer necessary. As the above illustration shows, all important arithmetical and geometrical bases of the universe can be depicted in one simple diagram. That all this should be governed by pure coincidence seems to me quite ludicrous especially as in the long run it loses its effect as can be proved mathematically. On the contrary, the mathematical foundations of our very existence are laid down here in a simple and convincing way. The relationships described in this paragraph have been described only by me in my previous books. However, I am convinced that many of the relations and links must have been known, at least in principle, to some of the great ancient philosophers, to Phythagoras especially and probably also to Plato. However, they were unable to recognize the higher meaning behind these specific number sequences since this has only been correctly classified by the researches of modern natural science.

17

See list of references.

54

It seems likely that countless pupils and teachers over many generations have learned and taught the important geometrical fundamentals of our physical world without ever having realized its real significance. The very idea is downright fantastic. And another important remark at the end of this chapter: all numbers and number sequences which obviously possess important key positions in our world and control the construction and expansion of all things are without exception twodimensional. In other words: even if we consider just the two-dimensionality everything already seems to be explainable. But in our experience there exists space too, in which we all live in a (seemingly closed) three-dimensionality. We believe this because we ourselves possess three-dimensional bodies. But this discrepancy allows only one sensible conclusion: our universe is not of the same three-dimensionality as we assume. In reality it is four-dimensional which is also logical, since a closed three-dimensionality necessitates a higher four-dimensionality to enclose it. In addition, four-dimensional space must be closely connected with the two-dimensionality since the complete plan for it is laid down there! Four-dimensional space can only be plausibly considered as two two-dimensionalities merging into each other at right angles. Whilst the three-dimensional space known to us consists of an "xyz-Geometry" (3 axes) with a measuring unit in the third power (e.g. meter m3), four-dimensional space has a "x2y2-geometry" which is naturally derived from the two planes merging into each other at right angles. Its measuring unit is then raised to the fourth power. And this space is infinite since it is defined by the sequence of all ordinal numbers only, and is controlled and arranged in a circular order by the rhythm of 24. It is, therefore, exclusively a number space. This sounds terribly abstract at first but this space is as real as the numbers themselves. And we should already have gathered some understanding for

55

these relationships. After all, they cross our path everywhere in our world as intimate friends controlling all processes in the background. Numbers write the all deciding rules in the background of our world. They seem to be exactly what Lao Tzu already meant with his Tao but which he was unable to describe in this fashion. However, he was a very wise man and seems to have recognized these connections intuitively 2½ thousand years ago as the following poem no. XXV shows: "There is one thing that is invariably complete. Before Heaven and Earth were, it is already there: so still, so lonely. Alone it stands and does not change. It turns in a circle and does not endanger itself. One may call it 'the Mother of the World'. I do not know its name. I call it TAO18. Painfully giving it a name I call it 'great'. Great: that means 'always in motion'. 'Always in motion means 'far away'. 'Far away' means 'returning'. Thus TAO is great, Heaven is great, Earth is great and Man too is great. There are in space four Great Ones, and Man is one of them. Man conforms to Earth. Earth conforms to Heaven. Heaven conforms to TAO. TAO conforms to itself." I think that this poem is absolutely magnificent in this connection. Plichta was the first to postulate such a space for our universe, although from a completely different intellectual approach. The derivation I described, however, is based solely on the logical construction of numbers and simple geometry and it seems much easier to understand and is thereby plausible and credible. In the end we arrive inexorably at the same result. I go one step further: I even believe that I could derive this model from any finite matter, i.e. from physical matter, as a compelling development with only very few sensible premisses in a quite different but consequential and conclusive way. This will be the subject of the next chapter. It takes us back to all these important numbers and number relationships but is based on very simple 18

In 1910 Richard Wilhelm translated it into German and used the word "Sinn" which could be translated into English as the "intrinsic meaning", also "the way, the direction". He wrote that it must mean "work without action" – just as Lao Tzu describes it himself.

56

geometrical considerations and the exclusive results of plain and simple logic.

8. Straight to the point All these interconnections, which show themselves repeatedly between certain number combinations and especially important real cornerstones in our world, may be derived solely from the first four ordinal numbers. Skeptics feel the need to point out time and again that this is valid only for the numbers chosen by myself – a purely subjective choice – but not for so many others which are possibly just as significant. They accuse me of omitting number sequences which do not fit into my concept so neatly. Therefore, they say, my theories are comprehensible only in the context defined by myself. Some mathematicians accept proof only if it is acquired exclusively by mathematical means. One of the most famous of them, the mathematician Goedel, strictly dismissed such demands. On the contrary, he admitted that no final proof could possibly be obtained within the same system. The comparison of observations between different systems would be necessary. Basically, therefore, there can be no objections to the comparisons I make myself. Nevertheless, I also need to show that the numbers and number sequences I use here are not based solely on my personal choice. I propose this simple intellectual game, therefore: Imagine for a moment you are the creator. This is by no means meant blasphemously. There are a number of computer games available these days in which your children do exactly this every day, although in a slightly different way. In addition, there are sometimes similar, very systematic experiments which are considered highly topical science.

57

Geometry will help me with my intellectual experiments. Have no fear, very simple constructions will be perfectly adequate here. Everything follows the very old, very wise motto: "Simplex sigillum veri (est)" (Simplicity is the hallmark of truth). Let me start with the introduction of one of the very smallest, physical, i.e. finite, existences, the simple point. We may draw a point as small as we like, but as a finite point it will always be a circle even if its internal area is tiny. A "real" point in the best sense of the word does not exist in finiteness. It would be real, since I consider numbers and spirit as being real, but not finite! For a better differentiation we should, therefore, describe it as a pure "point" information. Our smallest circle, the finite point is a "mono-angle". Strictly speaking it is already two-dimensional in its nature, even if this does not seem obvious immediately because we tend to describe points or lines made of points for simplicity's sake as being one-dimensional (single-axle would be a better expression). The finite point, the "smallest" circle, is the simplest imaginable two-dimensional figure. Since it possesses an inside it must also have an outside. No matter how small its inside is, it can still be structured smaller, theoretically, i.e. intellectually or spiritually, even infinitely smaller. If we wish to "create" something larger out of this "smallest" yet finite circle, we have in principle two possibilities. On the one hand our circle may grow, i.e. increase in size. On the other hand it may multiply, i.e. increase in number. Let us assume that the circle starts multiplying, then it will generate new, enclosed forms, i.e. "polygonal" forms, as soon as possible, and further dimensions are opened up. The possibility of achieving an ever higher perfection within the shortest time and sudden improvements in quality seems to exist. At first, a new circle is generated and has a common line with the first one. Then it is possible to develop a second dimension from this line at right angles to the first one. For this, at least three circles are necessary. With four circles we obtain a new perfect,

58

geometrical form, the square, which is two-dimensional and externally inducted by its multiplicity. It is generated by the lines joining the center points of the four circles and it is perfect since it encloses the original circle. Starting from one single, very small but finite circle, i.e. from a unity, we generate the square, the first object in multiplicity, which fully encloses it. It is now at the latest that we no longer need to submit to the restraints of the flat one-dimensional plane, we can start to open up the third dimension, the three-dimensional space, which is the natural environment for us humans. With the aid of a fifth circle we generate the square-based pyramid, the tetrahedon, exactly the same form as the ancient Egyptians built as burial chambers for their God-kings. This manner of accessing space is, in my opinion, an obvious and logical conclusion since it corresponds with our own natural imagination of space as being something three-dimensional. But I believe that an alternative point of view would be more correct. We will arrive at this if we approach the matter in an objective and strictly logical manner. The external induction of two-dimensionality, i.e. the plane, is achieved at the earliest through the generation of the third circle by way of it standing optimally at right angles to the starting line of the first two circles. An elevation above the plane, and that means an expansion into space, should, therefore, also grow at right angles to the original geometry, since only this would be clearly defined by its preceding circle. This originating geometry, however, is a plane and no longer a line. The induction of space must naturally be made by a second plane standing at right angles to the first. Space is induced by x2y2geometry as already mentioned in the previous chapter. And its measuring unit is four-dimensional.

59

The following illustrations by my son Alexander should clarify this: 1) The start: The "mono-angle", the ("smallest", real) finite circle (K1). It is clearly defined by three (also real, but spiritual information-) points. The circle is the smallest imaginable twodimensional form whose internal dimensions can theoretically (or purely numerically) be structured (divided) infinitely. Its center point is M1. Its radius is a (randomly chosen) unit, e.g. simply 1 (standard circle).

2) The first expansion:

When the center points of the circles and the points of intersection of circle K1 and K11 are connected equilateral triangles (GD) are generated. They are also perfect geometrical forms, and they give internal structure to the circles. Equilateral triangles are produced inevitably and they divide the enclosed space internally. This division can theoretically (spiritually) be continued into infinity thereby creating an infinite number of ever decreasing triangles in dimensions of between zero and 1. This is, of course, purely hypothetical since there cannot be an infinite number of finite things. On the other hand the division of the number sequence on which this is based can be continued into infinity since numbers are always immaterial and spiritual.

60

3) The first duplication: The third circle, being only the second independent one (K2) in one line, i.e. it is still a "onedimensional" (or better: of single-axis) form, starts the creation of another completely new, polar and symmetrical existence. For this new circle (point) prolongs the line "r" since it stands practically in to the first circle, i.e. it is its mirror image. After the appearance of this first new and independent existence, we can start to induct a new dimension which stands optimally at right angles to the center point M2. This line intersects the new circle K2 and facilitates the generation of a new closed form in the space between the center point of the first circle (M1), the center point of this second independent circle (M2) and the intersection point of the vertical on M2. A rectangular triangle is generated, the very first of its kind.

4) The Golden Section:

The intersection point of the (longer) part of the hypotenuse starting at M1 with the circle K2 establishes a new radius for the larger circle (GK1). When reproduced, a controlled growth can begin within the clearly defined predetermined dimensions, of course. This larger circle (GK1) intersects the straight line between the two center points M1 and M2 in the ratio of the Golden Section (GS). After only a few stages of development from unity to multiplicity the important number sequence 6-1-8 is automatically generated. A further reproduction of the larger circles is achieved in the same manner and according to the same controlling laws.

61

5) The second dimension, the equilateral triangle, circle 3: In opening up into the second dimension in multiplicity after the creation of another (auxiliary) circle (K21) and a third (independent) circle (K3) vertical to the starting line, the center points of the independent circles, when connected, i.e. M1, M2 and M3, form an isosceles triangle (GSD). All perfect forms of triangles have now been generated.

6) The perfect, "expanded" multiplicity: the square: In the second dimension of multiplicity the first real perfection is achieved by the isosceles triangle being mirrored over its hypotenuse. Thus a square is generated by developing circle K4. It is the first and next largest, perfect unity in the multiplicity and corresponds with the circle. It has been clearly defined by the four circles and is thus the result of the reproduction from a single-angled to a multiple-angled form.

62

7. Between multiplicity and unity: 2-7-3: The square is the first perfect form of multiplicity which encloses and contains the original circle, i.e. the unity. The ration of the area of the square to that of the original circle is the same as 1,273 to 1. Stelzner rightly describes the number 273 as a "measure of the imprisonment in the square".

After only a few stages, which started with the "smallest" circle as the starting position of the unity, and which led us towards the square as the first unit of complete perfection in the multiplicity, we have been able to prove that the two number sequences 618 and 273 are obviously important for our world. However, if these numbers occur so frequently in our universe and if they do represent significant pre-conditions, as they seem to do, then we have here an irrefutable indication that the physical evolution of all matter in this world could not have been started by a sudden explosion, a big bang, which - as most people believe - has already been proved. On the contrary, it seems to have been set into motion by the creation of single finite points, according to a "construction plan", strictly defined by numbers or geometric guidelines. In the square, two-dimensionality has achieved lasting and comprehensive perfection. An equilateral triangle could be developed originally as an internal structuring order of the inside with the aid of the first auxiliary circle (K12). Into each circle we can draw exactly 6 such equilateral triangles, the side lengths of which is given by the circle radius. When connected with each other they form a regular hexagon the circumference of which is 6 times the length of the circle radius.

63

For the time being this is the last rational polygon in the series: The heptagon is the first with irrational angles and cannot, therefore, be exactly defined. This is surely an explanation for the number 7 being of sometimes questionable, but often of transcendent and important significance in all religions and myths. The spontaneous appearance of the circle and the internal hexagon enables us to define the ratio between their areas and circumferences. The area ratio of circle to hexagon is 1.209 whilst the ratio of circle to circumference is 1.047. Expressed in meters this corresponds to the last millimeter exactly with the height and width of passages in Egyptian pyramids, whereby 1.047 is equal to 2 Ellen, the old Egyptian yardstick. The achievement of two-dimensional perfection in the multiplicity with the aid of the square, enables us to develop the third dimension known to us. My example with the proliferation of circles will lead us, when expanded, to the third dimension, i.e. that which we humans consider to be space, the "spatial pentagon", the tetrahedon with a square base such as those of typical Egyptian pyramids. The cross section of these produces a double triangle, i.e. two rectangular triangles, symmetrical and polar to one another, with side lengths in the Pythagorean ratio 3:4:5. The selection of such measures for passages in pyramids permits us to draw only one sensible conclusion: the ancient Egyptians knew far more about the origin of our universe than we might expect and even more than we know today. Clearly, they tried to pass on their knowledge to their descendants by manifesting it in pyramids which were built for kings whom they worshipped as gods. We, too, are their descendants. But we obviously are unable to understand their messages – probably because we tend to grossly underestimate the knowledge, the experience and the wisdom of ancient civilizations. Sometimes we too behave like adolescents who believe that their parents are still living in yesterday's world, as Mark Twain once wrote in an amusing story. But there must be a plausible reason as to why the advanced

64

civilization of ancient Egypt with its highly developed scientific knowledge chose to bury their kings in pyramids. This could be the answer. In spite of all this, and the assumption that the ancient Egyptians discovered universal space as being something three-dimensional with the aid of the square pyramid, I do not believe that it reflects the path which creation really took. I have already pointed this out. The logical and, therefore, unambiguous consequence of creation must be twodimensionality which is completed in the first instance by the square, i.e. this plane as a whole must be erected into the vertical by mirroring it, whereby space is created. This produces two interlocking planes which are defined exclusively by numbers. Numbers, however, run on into infinity once they are "released". Therefore, any one of these real but purely spiritual, i.e. numerically produced, planes can also be imagined to run into infinity. Two interlocking planes display, as already mentioned, an "x2y2geometry", the measuring unit of which is four-dimensional (e.g. a meter to the power of 4). Two planes which are controlled purely numerically and are, therefore, infinite, result in a fourdimensional infinite space which is – by definition – flat, i.e. it is not curved. The four-dimensionality of an open and infinite space is thus the reversal of the three-dimensionality of finite and enclosed space.

65

8) The order of 24 for every perfect flat plane of multiplicity: The square now being the most perfect form in this newly developed outward twodimensionality in multiplicity is defined by four circles. Each circle when internally structured, automatically creates 6 equilateral triangles by constructing the radius of the circle six times. With the new multiplicity 24 such triangles are thereby produced. This seems to me to be the geometrically verifiable reason for the cyclical 24-rhythm which is characteristic for any outwardly expanding order. This also seems to be the reason for our time unit which was invented by the Babylonians and is still valid and very useful today.

The square resulting from the first four independent circles also points to the order of 24, inherent in the physical world. The order of really existing numbers is, therefore, not linear but cyclic. The recognition of this order of 24 for a four-dimensional and infinite expansion of our world, which is outwardly open and controlled by really existing numbers, has already been, as I already mentioned, the basis of Plichta's spatial concept, although this was based on a completely different intellectual approach. However, I believe that my train of thought and my models, represented here in a detailed and expanded form, are comprehensive, logically coherent, plausible and consequential and, above all, simple in respect to their deduction, explanation and construction of the complete theoretic number basis of our universe. Other authors also arrive at the same conclusion, e.g. Bindel, Plichta of course, Steiner and Stelzner. I am convinced that we are in

66

principle very near the truth with our theories. Therefore, I say it again: all (many) roads lead to Rome. The square is the first perfect form of the new multiplicity within the two-dimensionality outwardly emerging and is the true counterpart to the original unity, the first circle, and it demands, of course, access to the next higher level. Humans, who are only able to perceive three-dimensional space, must deduce that the next circle – the fifth - causes this qualitative jump, in the same way as does the apex of a pyramid with a square base. Yet, as already mentioned, up to now and for strictly logical reasons, we only have circles and not spheres, so that gaining entry into the third dimension from a two-dimensional level is not possible without further information. Therefore, it is merely consequential to mirror the already existing plane by means of an axis into the vertical which is possible to do without further information. Thus we have two interlocking planes and, since they are number controlled, they strive towards infinity. In this way the above mentioned infinite space emerges from a two-dimensional geometry. It now contains the third dimension, i.e. space as we conceive it and, therefore, it facilitates closed three-dimensional bodies to be generated. This reminds me of the technique in producing an artificial hip-joint in orthopedic surgery. Many people have an artificial hip-joint implanted when they get older and it enables them to walk again after their own natural hip-joint has worn out. Some years ago the idea was borne to adjust these artificial joints to the individual anatomical conditions. At the beginning special X-ray photographs known as twodimensional computer tomographies were taken of the hip joint of two vertically intersecting planes. Such images are, of course, finite. From these pictures the computer creates a threedimensional positive image of the hip-joint. Thus the threedimensional form of the hip is also based on a "fourdimensional", though finite, medium. Based on this data it is then possible to cut an artificial joint from a block of, for example, titanium, by means of a computer controlled lathe.

67

We are involved here with an intersecting two-dimensional geometry, though finite, on the basis of which the inherent threedimensionality subsequently emerges. Our universe, on the other hand, is based on an intersecting two-dimensional geometry which is controlled by infinite numbers and is, therefore, also infinite. Its measuring unit is raised to the fourth power. That makes it infinitely open and thus "truly" four-dimensional. Since four-dimensional space is infinite there can be no higher dimension. Infinite space cannot be enclosed by anything in contrast to a three-dimensional closed space. Our physical universe seems to obey certain strictly defined and mathematically encoded conditions. The number 3 proves to be the ordering axiom for an internal structuring force, i.e. inside of an enclosed and thus finite threedimensional space. In this finiteness, we can in theory differentiate infinitely with the aid of (real) numbers. Nevertheless, and we have known this at least since Leibniz, Euler or Gauss, an infinite sequence of links does not result in an infinite but in a finite total. All quantities of finite matter are always finite. In the year 2000 a huge world exhibition, known as the Expo 2000, took place in Hanover. I drove passed a billboard advertising this event. I could read in huge letters that my home town Aachen, had installed its own home page in the internet, the address of which contained the term "Expo2000". In a flash I saw a simple way of explaining this theory. In Germany there are so many people called Schmidt, Meier or Schulze, or slight variations thereof. Now just imagine, each of them wants to have his own internet site. Anybody may have one. They could even invent an infinite number of different addresses for their own website. They would only need to add a number to their name. And, in order to shorten the name, they could express the numbers in powers. The number of imaginable possibilities is infinite. But in the end the (physically) realized number of internet sites would be a finite quantity. There is simply no infinite number of finite quantities.

68

The number 4 is obviously the decisive order unit for outward expansion. On the basis of real existing numbers the 4 is infinitely possible up to infinity itself and it is unlimited since it creates its own space. This space is, therefore, the number space, i.e. something abstract we can hardly imagine. Nevertheless, it is real because the numbers themselves, which define it, really do exist19. As a fourdimensional number space it is expanding infinitely. In my intellectual game the origin of all evolution is a single finite point, a "smallest" circle. Therefore, we may say that each single one of these finite points may also lead to precisely the same evolution and will indeed probably do so. Even one single finite point creates an infinitely expanding space. Many such points, therefore, are as unable to expand infinity as we are unable to travel faster than light. Einstein proved this, although light has a finite velocity of expansion. Of interest here is, of course, the indication that the velocity of light20 has the factor 3 (300,000 km/s). It is of little consequence that precise measurements show a very slight deviation with 299,792.458 km/s. This is another indication that there is no place in the world where the mathematical and geometrical guidelines are exactly adhered to – I will come back to this later. It is also an indication that all physical manifestations are ultimately imperfect projections of the perfect immaterial laws on which they are based. My intellectual game makes clear that, at the beginning of the world, there could hardly have been an uncontrolled explosion. An explosion would certainly not have facilitated evolution to 19

Here another of Lao Tzu's poems: "TAO generates the One. The One generates the Two. The Two generates the Three. The Three generates all things. All things have darkness at their back and strive towards the light and the flowing power gives them harmony ". 20 Later I will explain that the term of light "velocity" seems not to be correct. It implies something "active". However, in accordance with the imagination of a number-encoded infinite expansion of space it is rather something "passive", it means that the light follows the expansion of space.

69

take certain logical steps which I have explained here in a facetious manner, but which are in fact geometrically controlled. The original circle in our game is the result of an intellectual creation. And if we wished to generate an entire cosmos with it, we would continue to release such new circles or finite points into the world. I estimate that it was in exactly this fashion that our physical universe was created: as a spiritually induced creation of single real finite points which, as shown above, follow a simple kind of mathematics. Once created they build up their own spatial and temporal infiniteness at "a leisurely pace". For us, such a creation has had no defined beginning and has not yet come anywhere near to an end. All created matter possesses the information of its existence and continues, therefore, into infinity (eternity). Let us assume that the "divine brainwave" and every smallest information unit in this world is equal to the value 1 as is done in the world of computers today with the aid of the number 1. Let us further assume that in our physical world this smallest information unit "1" is at the same time equivalent to the smallest physical information carrier, the light quantum or photon. In doing so we have already recognized the intersection between the spiritual, transcendental background and all things physical in our world. Now, I already mentioned at the beginning of this chapter that each real finite point, i.e. each "smallest" circle can be exactly defined by 3 other points. Since the finite point, or rather the circle, chosen by us is supposed to be the smallest possible, the other 3 points defining it must consist of mere information or, expressed as physical matter, massless quanta. With these quanta the smallest physical particles are generated in a continual creation process and their cross sections correspond to our original circles. They merge to form larger objects and ever more complex units of matter are slowly built up. Exactly this, the creation of matter from practically pure energy, mistakenly always called "creation

70

from nothing"21, was successfully proven by a number of experiments with the Stanford particle accelerator in California, USA. To do this a beam of light from a 1 trillion watt laser was directed on to an area of a billionth of a square centimeter for a period of a trillionth of a second. This laser beam was brought to collide with an electron beam of the particle accelerator. As a result of this cataclysmic impact "nuclear particles" were generated in a kind of chain reaction.

9. Structure and Function Basically, humans and animals have two metabolisms: one for construction and one for operation. In simple words: the first is responsible for building up body matter and maintaining it. It makes children grow and in periodical intervals it replaces all body cells right up to advanced age. The construction materials are proteins. The metabolism responsible for operation supplies the energy which is necessary to keep the complex engine "body" in constant movement. Expressed simply, we could say that the first one is responsible for the structure and the second for the function. Let us go back to my intellectual game in the previous chapter: here, too, we can distinguish between structure and function. By means of a square, a finite point, our "smallest" circle, strives to achieve its first completely perfect form in a two-dimensional external multiplicity. 21

Oriental wisdom is often quoted in an attempt to prove by means of an incorrectly interpreted comparison: "nothing" as the translation of "notbeing" is, according to Lao Tzu, by no means really nothing but more the intangible, invisible counterpart to the physical existence. He calls the latter, therefore, "being" and the former "not-being".

71

Each original circle is exactly defined by 3 other points which, however, cannot be finite points themselves. They are pure information points, spiritual points or simply information about positions. They are, of course, just as real. And as such they are the construction components of this finite initial circle. The information as to where it belongs adheres to each component, for example it belongs to circle 1, the initial circle. In the same way, a symmetrical second circle, generated by mirroring, is also clearly defined by three non-finite, i.e. immaterial, spiritual points, which carry the information of belonging to the second circle. For one circle we have 3 details giving information about its position, if we consider 2 circles together as a new "unit" then we have 9 already. In addition, we can define the single information points or information details about its position for "circle 1" with P11, P12 and P13 and for the second circle with P21, P22 and P23. If we wished to define all imaginable positions of informal construction components for both circles, we would arrive at nine: P11/P21, P11/P22, P11/P23, P12/P21, P12/P22, P12/P23, P13/P21, P13/P22, P13/P23! For three circles they would amount to 27. The number of possible positions is a function of the basis 3 – since there are 3 basic informal components for each circle – and the exponent gives the number of the circles involved. The number of components needed for the clear definition of our circles, i.e. the structure, becomes – mathematically speaking – the basic number. It is a constant 3. The function results from the number of participating circles and is the exponent. We obtain a function 3n, where "n" is the number of circles. Repeated in a simpler way again, it follows: exponents give the control command for the base numbers which follow them – as the following illustration by Martin may clarify:

72

Figure 6: The helmsman sits on top, just as the exponent does on the base number. This comparison is meant to remind us of the famous painting of St. Christopher who carried his helmsman, the child Jesus, on his shoulders through the water. Maybe this Christian picture is also a symbol for the exponent and the base number?

In my intellectual game about circle-growth and proliferation, the first closed system resulted automatically in the number sequences 2-7-3 and 6-1-8 as well as the number 24 which are all so important for our universe. Now we realize that the next significant number, the number 81, is the measuring unit for the maximum number of all basic physical construction components, i.e. the chemical elements and the encoding positions of genotypes. It is 34 = 81 and with the fourth circle, which completes the square, there are exactly 34 possible positional coordinates for the informal construction components of the circle. One small closed intellectual model is sufficient and we obtain all we need for our cosmos: Four finite points, our "smallest" circles which, in spite of their own limits, elucidate the possibility of a theoretically infinite internal structure or division, soon form a first new completeness with the square. It is the all-embracing completeness in the twodimensional outward multiplicity. On their way to completeness they already divulge to us all important geometrical forms as well as the significant arithmetical

73

key numbers of the entire universe which we humans perceive to be three-dimensional. If we add these four first numbers we arrive at the Pythagorean's most perfect number , the 10, as already explained. We use the number 10 every day because the decimal system is used all over the world. It seems that we discovered this system to be especially useful since nature seems to have already decided for it long ago. Certainly, any other calculation system is basically possible – but the decision seems to have been made on a different level. And, since my game with its four points and the square reflects the internal order of symmetry and polarity inherent in everything, we usually find the 10 arrayed in 2 packs of five, as is the case, for example, with us humans and our 2 times 5 fingers and toes, etc. Of course, we are all shaped by evolution and in this example too – we are all able to register quantities up to 5 very easily. But quantities exceeding that amount must be counted. Try it out for yourself with the following illustration:

Figure 7 (by Martin): Seven sections with varying numbers of objects. We can immediately register numbers up to 5 without having to count.

We have now obtained our number families practically completely from a mere "creation game". Using the first four ordinal numbers, the zero for nothing, the 10, the 24, the 81 and the number sequences 273 and 618, we can start to write a more accurate history of our world.

74

I would like to mention yet again that this entire number family, as well as all important geometrical forms, is based completely on two-dimensionality. Three-dimensional space, as we humans usually perceive it, does not play a role here. The reason for this I have already mentioned. Our three-dimensional space is first generated from a fourdimensionality on which it is based in reality and which is really an (infinite) two-plane geometry. From these simple interrelationships we can draw some more important information: The number 1 at the beginning symbolizes something new, the start of the development of our infinite points. The number 5 now describes something new again, namely the first point in a completely new dimensionality, since it is placed perpendicularly above our square and becomes the apex of our pyramid. It is, above all, a symbol for human characteristics since humans arrive at the 5 by opening up the three-dimensional space which they perceive as such. If we take another look at the circle we recognize that, in theory, the differentiation of the inside into equilateral triangles starting with 6 could be continued into infinity and that this is performed automatically. It would be impossible to generate a seventh triangle rationally, i.e. with clear-cut angles. In this way the 7, too, offers something completely new. It is the key to transcendence. The numbers 5 and 7 are, just like the 1 and, with certain restrictions the 2 and the 3, classical prime numbers (see Chapter 6). "Prime" is a synonym for "first", the new. And prime numbers seem to have a very important function. The numbers 5 and 7 are the first prime number twins we came across which arrange themselves around the number 6 or a multiple thereof.

75

10. A truly Divine Analogy "There are countless definitions of God. But I worship God only as the truth." Mahatma Gandhi, the great Indian politician, said this and it gives evidence of his deep religiousness. In this chapter I will make an attempt at showing the divine origin of our world in a small but accurate analogy. The simplest and best way to do this is to introduce mathematics again, especially since you must by now have recognized its fundamental significance. Let us take a closer look at the value "1" because, mathematically, it symbolizes the first (whole-numbered) reality. The 1 stands for the standard circle and thus for the first finite point. Following geometrical rules from this starting point we can construct its growth and proliferation by which the significant numbers of our universe are generated. But we have to ask ourselves: where did the 1 originate? How was it created? Of course, as a number, it must also have had some kind of spiritual basis just as the smallest finite point (circle) is geometrically defined by three real but non-finite information points. This gives us an analogy for the creation of our world, which may appear rather abstract at first but which is, in my opinion, the truth. I will fill this statement later with "practical life" in the "Dialogue". This idea is in accordance with the significant doctrines of all religions, myths and ancient philosophies! Mathematicians may take the square root of 12 and arrive at the result 1. Since the value of 12 equals simply 1, and the square root of 1 is also –1, it follows: (-1)2 = +1 and (+1)2 = 12 = 1 or 12 = (-1)4. If we can take the square root of +1 then, logically, it must also be possible to take the square root of -1. Everybody knows, however,

76

that there is no mathematically educible number which when multiplied by itself, i.e. when squared, results in –1. The "real", i.e. "our" mathematics reaches its limits here, limits which logic does not know. During the 16th century the Italian mathematician Rafaello Bombelli introduced the so-called imaginary number "i" to take account of this. It represents the number which inevitably must exist in reality, but which we humans with the means at our disposal obviously cannot describe in our system of "numbers". Therefore, it is described as imaginary, but – it has to be emphasized again – there is no doubt at all that it must exist. We can only describe it as a picture or, as it is done, as a letter. The very necessity of introducing the imaginary number "i" to mathematics – here reduced to a system of numbers – proves to us in quite a different way the existence and the influence of a completely different and yet just as real dimensionality. It follows: i2 = -1 and (-1)2 = +1 and (+1)2 = 12 = 1 = (-1)4 If we apply this relationship to my theories we can assume that every kind of physical existence, e.g. the geometrically depictable finite point, the "smallest" circle, can only be generated from something which surely exists but which we cannot describe or express any further with finite circles or points, i.e. within this same system. This demonstrates that we humans can neither explain with the system properties known to us, nor perceive with our senses the cause and the beginning of our own existence or that of the universe which we inhabit! Yet, if we accept the comparison mathematics offers us then it follows that no first finite reality, whatever its properties are, can be generated from nothing – which is mathematically symbolized in our western civilization by the zero thanks to Leonardo Fibonacci of Pisa.

77

We can then establish that the zero as a "value" for nothing possess two symmetrical integral real existences, one on each side, i.e. -1 and +1. Mathematics not only illustrates the geometrical development of points and circles, as I described above in my intellectual game, but it also provides us with another beautiful analogy for the creation of our entire world. Later on this will also apply to all further evolutionary developments. Everything in the world began as a creation from an entity which we cannot further describe or even imagine. It is this entity which is known as "God" in all religions. The mathematical "i" can in this comparison be considered as being the smallest unit of God – a gross oversimplification, of course. It is from the "i", and not from zero or nothing, that two real, separate yet symmetrical and polar "dimensionalities" or "levels" are generated. One of them is our physical world: this is the later one and can be described in its manifestation as the squares of positive integers starting with 12 . The other reality, which is the earlier and the physically invisible world, must then be on a symmetrical and polar, i.e. purely spiritual, level. Just as in this analogy -1 is polar and symmetrical to +1 and is without doubt absolutely real, the spiritual and physical worlds are two realities which are polar and symmetrical to one another and which together result in one united entire world. They are both as real as you and I are, externally at least, purely physical beings. Perhaps we should say that the spiritual part of the one world is a kind of "parallel universe", although this term is usually reserved for science fiction. The spiritual part of this one world is simultaneously the starting point for the generation of the physical part of the world, i.e. for our universe. The spirit supplies the ideas and thus the spiritual basis for any physical existence generated later. This is the world of physical information or the world of "informal existence". It can be best compared to an extremely wide and monstrous internet without hardware. It is practically "God's Internet".

78

In contrast to Plato's theories and those of his many spiritual disciples up to the present day, it does not, in my opinion, provide us with anything approaching all the ideas for everything which is already finished in this world. "God's Internet" is more or less empty at the beginning except for some basic and rather simple rules. It represents, therefore, only a potential which must be discovered and differentiated, i.e. it must be filled in22. As the French mathematician and astronomer Laplace was able to show about 200 years ago, our world would have had no chance whatsoever of creatively producing anything new, i.e. of emergence, if there had already been ready-made models for everything. This process of "producing new forms and systems from already existing things", and of it being the one single motor driving each and every development in the world, as postulated by the Austrian philosopher Karl Popper about twenty years ago, is certainly a quite decisive characteristic of our world. However, my position really lies somewhere between Plato and Popper, since I believe that any emergence must follow certain pre-conditions which it takes by the hand, so to speak. I must admit that I do not believe in the sudden accidental appearance of some rather amazing physical laws of nature whereby everything else is left to take care of itself in a purely physical world for ever after. I rather believe in the constant interaction between a spiritual reality and a physical reality which is usually the only one we are able to perceive and accept. Both realities are, however, two sides of the same coin which subtly but constantly influence one another, as do the Chinese Yin and Yang. The spiritual reality is the one which influences the physical part of this world initially with the aid of certain universally valid principles of order. One of these principles is especially important: the principle of simple numbers 22

Here I would like to refer to Lao Tzu's "Tao Te Ching". He talks there of a more profound secret than the secret, the "Wu Gi", in which all differences are still inseparate and indiscriminate and which is usually represented by a simple circle. It is, so to speak, the mere possibility of being, in a way it is the chaos.

79

and geometrical forms. Over extremely long periods of time, however, this spiritual background may also change and become more perfect due to feedback from the now slowly developing physical world. Precisely this is the aim of the world and is in some respects characterized by what the French anthropologist and philosopher Teilhard de Chardin described as the Omega Point (see Chapter 2). It seems possible to draw on simple mathematical relationships in constructing an explanatory model for the making of worldly comparisons. This is so because we can see that such a model inevitably produces certain numbers which inherently impose themselves on us at especially significant points in our physical world, the only one which we can perceive as real. Therefore, we can be even more precise: From the real but for us imaginary "i", being the smallest comparable unit of "divine transcendence", emerges the divine idea of a world. Divine thoughts or, in the words of the Bible, "God's Word", correspond to i2, which is the same as -1, the analogy for the spirit. It follows that the manifestation of this idea as a spiritual world is (-1)2. It can also be considered as a kind of written document of the idea for a physical world. The mathematical quantity (-1)2 is simultaneously +1, which already indicates the smallest physical information of being and the twodimensional written document for our physical world. Its square (+1)2 describes the smallest physical being in its now spatial, fourdimensional expansion. Since we usually write (+1)2 = 12 as just 1 it is especially easy not to notice that it is also (-1)4. Therefore, in the analogy I chose, we tend to overlook the actual spiritual background and the spiritual origin of all physical existence. In every smallest physical existence, i.e. in every randomly chosen finite point, the (spiritual) information of its existence is inherent. I already deduced this theory (see Chapter 7) from the necessity of describing the number 81, this being the measuring unit for physical expansion, not simply as 34 but, consequentially, as 12 . 34.

80

An atom is, therefore, not just a mere physical, finite, small point in our cosmos, but simultaneously also a supplier of the information that this atom exists! And a human being, who is constructed of "zillions" of these atoms in an extreme complexity, is thereby also an immense physical field of information which is his absolutely perfect informal mirror image. Since this mirror image is already inherent in a human being, it remains intact if its physical environment collapses. Each existence in this universe, be it animate or inanimate, is – according to my analogy – a coin with two sides which are symmetrical and polar to each other. Each existence displays the side of its physical identity and the immaterial information of its being. It is now up to us to answer the question as to the consequences which result for our picture of the world and for such important matters as infinity, eternity or immortality. The great German philosopher and naturalist Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz wrote 300 years ago: "Imaginary numbers are a fine and wonderful refuge for the divine spirit, almost an amphibia between to be and not to be."23

11. From Being to Infinity If something has been created as smallest unit, as finite point, the information of its existence remains infinitely, i.e. eternally, unspoiled, since it has been determined by the numbers which are the framework of information. They are the really existing numbers which inseparably adhere to all finite, i.e. three-dimensionally existing, closed bodies – their immaterial side so to speak – which express that they all possess an infinite but limited inward structure, whilst at the same time 23

Quoted from Simon Singh, "Fermat's last Theorem ", see List of References.

81

possessing an equally infinite but now unlimited outward expansion, and these they possess forever. The smallest finite starting point, which is always a circle, is itself defined by 3 non-finite points of pure information, so that the smallest finite unit itself emerges from a multiplicity, albeit a nonfinite one. This may also be symbolized by the biblical and Hindu trinity, i.e. the trinity of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost or Brahman, Vishnu and Shiva. It also corresponds with biblical tradition in that "i", which we are unable to explain more precisely, becomes an analogy for the "smallest part of God". One of the ten commandments dictates: "Thou shalt not make unto thee any image of God". Of course, this does not mean that humans are not allowed to do it but that they are simply unable to do it. In the "1", being the smallest unit of information and thereby being automatically adherent to all matter and carrying the immaterial information of its being, its existence, we find a further indication of the fundamental truth of many other biblical wisdom, such as, for example, the following: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made"24. We have learned long ago that all physical construction components in our world tend to form ever larger, more complicated complexes over the course of extremely long periods of time. Our solar system, our life-giving earth and, of course, all of its creatures exemplify this. Whilst the smallest physical construction components themselves are often practically indestructible this does not apply to the physical complexes resulting from them. In contrast, the total information adherent to all these complexes is immaterial and, therefore, indestructible. It will continue to exist even if the originally associated physical 24

The Bible, New Testament, St. John, 01.01.-01.03.

82

environment with its highly structured composition should no longer do so. My attempt at an explanation adds plausibility to the thesis of the English scholar Julian Barbour. In his opinion, there exists a universe without time. What we understand by the term "time" was for him pure illusion. For him all imaginable worlds, therefore, exist simultaneously. Temporal events are frozen as mundane pictures in so-called time capsules. Thus every movement and all of the past becomes a perfect illusion. According to my theories, all entities that have ever existed and acted will indeed continue to exist side by side in an immense data network for ever and ever in eternity. In practice this means that everything that ever existed is accessible at any time and that we may enter any situation at any time. However, it is not possible to exert any influence retrospectively on historical events. It remains impossible to violate causality. All events of all times remain complete in their dynamic. In the Dialogue that follows I will pick up this idea again and go into further detail. There are two other important consequences stemming from my intellectual game about growth and reproduction of a finite point, i.e. the unit of a smallest circle in multiplicity. On the one hand I have been able to show that an internal order is established , i.e. that every finite geometrical quantity, even if extremely small, is structured internally. This structuring may be continued in theory – in our imagination or spiritually even into infinity – but will never reach zero! If we write this down in numbers, then the standard circle is comparable with a limited distance between zero and 1. This distance can be divided into as many parts as we wish, i.e. expressed mathematically, by the reciprocals of all ordinal numbers from 1 to infinity (1/2, 1/3, 1/4, ..., 1/∞). This produces an unlimited quantity of numbers within a limited numerical distance. Growth and reproduction may be described mathematically by the infinite quantity of all ordinal numbers or, in spatial terms, in

83

the form of an interlocking, infinite two-plane geometry by the squares of all ordinal numbers, i.e. 1,2,3,4,...,∞ and 12,22,32,42...∞. In contrast to the inward number sequence, which is limited by zero and 1, or by the small area of the finite point (the "smallest" circle), the outward number sequence, once started, continues without limit into infinity. It is neither temporally nor spatially limited since no numerical limit exists. Here we find an important indication of the infinite and eternal universe which can be produced compellingly and automatically solely by the creation of finite points. Reproduction and growth orient themselves to the aforementioned infinite sequence of numbers or the squares thereof. Inward bound, this sequence is infinite but limited, outward bound, it is infinite and unlimited. Of course, -1 is, in the same way as +1, the starting point for two infinite number sequences, one of which is infinite but limited and the other infinite and unlimited.

12. From Multiplicity to Unity I have already demonstrated how, due to a clear universal conformity to natural laws, multiplicity is generated from unity. However, this is only half the story, since unity is itself generated from multiplicity. It becomes thereby a unity on a higher level due to a quality jump which makes the new unity into something completely new. We could already recognize this from my intellectual game in Chapter 10. In the same way as the original circle may be divided in an immaterial and spiritual manner, i.e. mathematically, into an infinite quantity of parts, so we can say that, regarded from a higher level, it is composed of a countless number of single parts.

84

Everything, every structure or form, every development and every temporal process inevitably possesses two sides which are symmetrical and polar to each other and between which there is an intersection. It is all one unit and accordingly it has the value 1, as I pointed out in my analogy of the two infinite number sequences. Within a limited space every physical unit possesses an inside which, theoretically or mathematically (spiritually), can be divided into an infinite number of parts. The outside extends for an infinite and unlimited distance. In analogy to this, from the standpoint of every single such unit, every temporal process possesses a limited prior existence with, theoretically or spiritually, an infinite number of possibilities and an infinite and unlimited future, i.e. eternity. It has always been difficult for us humans to grasp the meaning of the term infinity. This is because we are only used to contemplate matters from a purely physical point of view. For us there simply cannot be such a thing as an infinite amount of physical matter. All amounts of physical matter must be limited! I have already pointed this out; the total amount of a theoretically infinite number of ingredients makes for a finite quantity in the end. If we add the reciprocals of all ordinal numbers, which correspond to the ingredients, and which define the limiting value of these ever decreasing values striving toward infinity, the sum will still be finite. Infinity remains an abstract expression for us. However, it possesses a reality which may be experienced within a spiritual dimension. In our physical world we may handle it since it is after all part of our everyday life. When placing ourselves between two large mirrors they will reflect our image an infinite number of times. Nevertheless, we can only recognize ourselves a finite number of times. The process of unity emerging from multiplicity and its symmetrical continuation by the development of a new multiplicity is a process which happens only once in each system

85

because the new multiplicity is infinite and unlimited. Therefore, a new unity can only emerge if the original system of infinite and unlimited development in multiplicity is not disrupted. This means, however, that each further unity must include the untouched multiplicity upon which it is based. An end of this process of a unity striving to multiplicity and the change to another new unity striving to multiplicity would demand a limitation which is no longer possible in this process. Although a world-immanent and eternal cycle of processes is thus the main characteristic within every system, and although even the total system may be subject to cyclical processes, every process in itself must remain inviolate. We must understand this basic theory if we are to find logical answers to such fundamental questions as personal survival of physical death, or the probability of a physical rebirth or reincarnation. I will discuss this in detail in volume three of this series entitled "Death". It was the Russian-Belgian bio-chemist, Ilya Prigogine, who discovered the spontaneous generation of new and higher system levels or planes for which he was awarded the Nobel prize. He called it the phenomenon of "dissipative structures". According to this, an increase in the supply of energy can suddenly cause large amounts of organic compounds to be reorganized from an originally chaotic state to an ordered one within which they act coherently as a new unity. If the supply of energy ceases, they return to their previous chaotic state. Regarded from a higher level, a new, coordinated unity is generated from an uncoordinated multiplicity. If we apply this discovery to a temporal process whilst incorporating the basic principle of the two symmetrical and polar infinite number sequences, the following results: From a theoretically, i.e. spiritually, infinite potential of possible subordinate structures which later form one unity, a new higher unity emerges "over the course of a limited period of time". From the standpoint of this new unity all steps which led to it can be

86

described and compared with the inverse values (fractions) of all integers between 1 and infinity. Considered as a finite, i.e. physical, mass they will attain their highest value shortly before they become a new unity.

Figure 8 (by Martin): Each unity possesses a spatially limited and theoretically, i.e. spiritually, infinite potential of internal structures, or has been generated within a limited period of time from a potentially unlimited multiplicity.

Once this new unity has been attained, a potentially unlimited and thereby eternal development commences analogue to the potentially infinite increase of information and space (1, or 12). If we take a closer look we find this principle demonstrated repeatedly in our world.

Figure 9 (by Martin): From a multiplicity on a lower level a new unity develops on a higher level which results in yet another new multiplicity. This process is potentially infinite and is also unlimited.

87

Please note that in the interest of a better understanding I chose a linear representation here. In reality processes in our world are cyclical (e.g. the seasons). Therefore, it would be reasonable to assume that it is a cyclical process which is omnipresent in the world from which a multiplicity develops first into a limited unity and from there into an infinite and simultaneously unlimited multiplicity.

13. Continuity and Infinity I believe that continuity and infinity belong together inseparably and that in combination they are the reciprocals of interruption, i.e. discontinuity, and finiteness. In our physical world there is no real continuity. If broken down even further, everything finite existing in our universe consists of smallest particles – atoms, atomic nuclei and quanta. Everything is divisible into the tiniest of pieces. A wave, which seems to be something coherent and thereby continual, is, in my opinion, a mere illusion in this physical world; the same applies to time. Without doubt, time and also life must be continual things, or else we would die and re-emerge within infinitely short moments of time. But their continuity is derived from a spiritual level – it is not a product of the physical universe which we perceive by our senses. We have only developed a sense of time due to the fact that we belong naturally to both levels in this world, the spiritual and the physical. This also applies for people who ignore or even fight the other side, the spiritual side, of our existence. How then is this internal connection, which we can also notice in our physical world, brought about? Why do we believe in the existence of a continuous, coherent wave?

88

It is the continuity of numbers which gives us this impression and thus the illusion of a coherence in the physical world. The physical universe and everything within it, is in fact structured exclusively by the continuity of infinite numbers within something infinitely large and the reciprocals thereof within something finitely small. Thus the real and infinite, immaterial spiritual number space emerging around each finite point increases with the squares of all ordinal numbers. This is due to the two-plane geometry (x2y2-geometry); if projected onto only one plane, (xy-geometry), only the infinite sequence of all simple ordinal numbers is important. In contrast to this, all effects controlled by numbers alone become weaker in space, for example, the intensity of light and gravitational forces decrease in a four-dimensional infinite space due to its two-plane geometry (x2y2-geometry) by the squares of the reciprocals of all ordinal numbers (in accordance with 1/r2) known since Newton as the "inverse square law". This means also that any effect into infinite space is inevitably of finite character. Although it remains infinite and eternally detectable (decreasing in magnitude all the time) because it is coded by infinite numbers, its total quantity (with light is meant the total intensity) is in the end finite in size as is the sum of all fractions from 1 to infinity. If we place a light between two mirrors opposite to each other the intensity of the light will never grow to infinity although the number of reflections is infinite! The German physician, Wilhelm Olbers of Bremen, once claimed that our universe must be finite which was accepted as proven fact until the 20th century. He claimed that in an infinite universe an infinite number of stars would make the sky at night infinitely light. But this theory was based on a wrong premiss. Since infinite quantities do not exist the number of stars cannot be infinite – not even when the universe itself is infinite!

89

14. Final Remarks Permit me at this point to make some remarks summing up the above and anticipating what lies in store for us, before I start to discuss in detail, by means of a dialogue, the practical consequences which these theories will have for our universe. In my opinion they demand a new and alternative view of our world. About 1.5 to 2 million years ago humans appeared on Earth25. It seems probable that these people had a concept of their own death right from the start. It also seems that humans have always believed in "something after death". We can also assume that the faith in one God or more is a generally accepted and a natural basic concept. In my previous books I even posed the question as to whether this is not in fact the one real, common spiritual characteristic and quality of humanity. I believe that this basic existential faith is a kind of collective fundamental knowledge, a primeval intuition inherent in humans. These basic points have remained the same over thousands of years and have been unimpeded by geographical or cultural borders. The key elements revolve around the following 3 assumptions: 1) The assumption that an immaterial soul or an immaterial spirit represents our real self and is to be considered as existing independently of our body. 2) The assumption that a higher level of immaterial being, or a transcendental God, exists. 3) The assumption that all immaterial things in our world may possibly exist eternally, as do soul and spirit, and will survive physical death, even if some philosophers (e.g. Aristoteles, Popper) would not consider this as being a continued personal existence. 25

Or, as recent investigations show, humans may have appeared already about 6 million years ago.

90

Modern natural science has completely dispensed with the idea of a possible immaterial dimension of existence – at least it seems to have done so and this is what we are being seriously told in all areas of life. Even the concept of a God fulfils scarcely more than a stopgap function which should be invalidated as soon as possible. From a universal point of view, many people consider humans as being at least the temporary culmination of the evolution of life on earth whilst being quite as insignificant as a single person within the community of a human collective. The existence of these misconceptions – and with certainty I would dismiss them as such – is a major reason for the rightly much lamented deterioration in real values and the increasing brutalization and decadence within our "enlightened" society. Of course, these problems are not unique to our time, indeed, many other civilizations before us failed for this reason. But, in contrast to all previous societies and for the first time in the history of man, we have today attained a high technological level which, unfortunately, enables us to wipe out completely everything that surrounds us and which we love and cherish – either by pure negligence or even willfully. We humans are standing on the brink of an abyss, a fact which we should have recognized long ago. Only we ourselves can – as indeed we must – prevent our fall into ignominy. There is no shortage of supposedly good advice offered by various dubious political ideologies and religious fundamentalism. But do they really offer a solution? No, they do not. First of all, they do not accept the inviolate freedom of every single human individual. They all lack the necessary tolerance towards the immeasurably wide and beautiful individual variety characterizing humans especially. Furthermore, they disregard the tenet that every human being is fully responsible to himself and to his neighbors for his deeds. In the last instance, political as well as religious doctrines must all fail most pathetically. A glance at world history proves that this has already happened repeatedly.

91

Religion may be necessary but, as the Latin word "religare" expresses, it should be under a very peaceful, conscientious and considerate attention to the real central messages. It should not be dogmatically embellished by anachronistic and superfluous ballast imposed by self-appointed institutions ad libidum disregarding new additional and well-qualified sources of knowledge. Since, on the other hand, modern science - unfortunately – also fundamentally opposes a religious and probably wiser perception of our world it is unable to facilitate a peaceful coexistence between the human race and the environment. The hearts of today's natural scientists seem to lie elsewhere in regard to this matter and their interpretations lack every serious effort to take the divine transcendence, which most people feel intuitively, into consideration. I would just quote from the Talmud: "The best preacher is the heart, the best teacher is time, the best book is the world, the best friend is God." We must ask ourselves whether the theories of existence to which natural scientists currently subscribe are really acceptable. If this be so, we could, in principle, discard all religious ideas and the whole structure of a world of intuitive conviction established over aeons of generations would be untenable (to which many people today would unfortunately heave a sigh of relief). It is exactly here that I want to take an unambiguous stand with my books. In doing so my most important allies are natural numbers and simple geometrical forms. Some numbers, among them the often mentioned number sequences 2-7-3 and 6-1-8, and also the numbers 10, 24 and 81, are found repeatedly and they obviously control very important processes in our world. Many things in our environment resemble simple geometrical forms, e.g. circles, hexagons, or other regular polygons. Thousands of years ago already philosophers assumed that our world is based on a mathematical order. Although these ideas have persisted into modern times, renowned natural scientists

92

have not taken them seriously into consideration. Not without a certain degree of amazement, however, do we have to recognize repeatedly that a number of unchangeable natural laws do exist. The astrophysicist, Reeves, emphasized26 that these laws possess "properties" which are "still more amazing" and he continues: "Their algebraic forms and their numerical values seem especially well tailored." However, unfortunately, even he does not arrive at the conclusion that such laws really do exist, or that numbers and geometrical forms really do exist and that they control our world. If we take a close look at the actually realized forms in our world we notice that they are never really perfect. They always seem to strive to match their geometrical or numerical models, but they never attain their standards. We have to ask ourselves where their "knowledge" of perfection comes from, what gives them their geometrical shape if it is not an inherent information or a perfect model. The author Peter Höeg writes in his book "Miss Smilla's Feeling for Snow: "Geometry. Deep inside we have a geometry. My teachers at university used to ask repeatedly what the reality of geometrical terms was? Where is, they asked, a perfect circle, a real symmetry, an absolute parallelism if we cannot construct it in this imperfect world? I gave no reply because they would not have understood the self-evidence of the answer and its incalculable consequences. Geometry is an innate phenomenon in our consciousness. The outside world will never produce a perfect snow crystal. Yet the glittering and immaculate knowledge of perfect ice is embodied in our consciousness." I will attempt to go to work on this contradiction in further detail – the contradiction between abstract precision and continuity on the one hand and a less perfect but actually realized manifestation on the other.

26

From D. Simonnet: "La Plus Belle Histoire du Monde" (The most beautiful History of the World), see List of References.

93

It really does seem that physical manifestations do orient themselves to abstract models and move within their narrow limits. All natural scientists do at least agree that the structure of all natural constants in our cosmos are quite delicately balanced. Even the slightest fluctuations would have prevented all life. Yet again the two number sequences 2-7-3 and 6-1-8 show this especially clearly. Although this does not always receive the acclaim to which it is due. In 1992 the satellite COBE, short for Cosmic Microwave Background Explorer, was able to measure the background radiation (BGR) of 2,73 K impinging us from all directions. It is absolutely constant practically everywhere in the cosmos. It was established that there are only extremely slight fluctuations27. Nevertheless, we can still find incorrect information about this phenomenon even in reference books28. The possibility of a transcendental significance in this exact value does not seem to have been recognized. If we go back to my intellectual game in which we induce "smallest" circles to grow and reproduce, and instruct them to strive to new dimensions and even more complex perfection in the shortest possible time, we find that all the important numbers, e.g. the 10, 24, 81 and the sequences 273 and 618, appear after only a few evolutionary steps. This must exclude that they are voluntarily chosen by myself. On the contrary, it is a clear indication that evolution always follows the same rules be it on a large or a small scale, abstract or physical. The perception of these abstract numerical guidelines in our world has always been slightly imperfect. The actually emerging values fluctuate slightly around the given numerical and geometrical values (in the same way as the actual value for the so27

With the COBE satellite it was possible to measure temperature fluctuations (ripples) of about a thirty millionth fraction of one degree. Notwithstanding the basic value of 2.73 K this is still considered to be a further proof for the Big Bang theory. 28 e.g. 2,716 K in D. Simonnet, "La Plus Belle Histoire du Monde" (The most beautiful History of the World), see List of References.

94

called speed of light fluctuates around the factor 3). Therefore, the basic rules must be transcendental and cannot just be the result of a fixation – which must mean that they are not the inevitable result of a new physical existence as materialists usually claim. These can only be spiritual ideas which previously must have existed in reality for a long period of time already. I would like to quote Lao Tzu again29 with the following poem: "The great TAO is overflowing; it can be to the left and to the right. All things owe their existence to it and it does not refuse itself to them. When the work is done it does not call it its possession. It clothes and nourishes all things and does not play at being their master. Inasmuch as it is forever not clamoring one may call it small. Inasmuch as all things depend on it without knowing it as its master one may call it great." Every bit as real but the result of a purely spiritual definition controlled by numbers is the infinite expansion, which must be simultaneously limited on the inside and infinite on the outside. Then my analogy about the generation of all existence is correct: it is not from nothing that all things originate but always from something inexplicable, something we call God. Finally, it follows that the world always starts with something imperfect and then consequently strives to a higher (system) level and to perfection which becomes recognizable only at the moment of completion. This seems to comply with the generally accepted scientific idea of an evolution which always follows a regular course from something "simple" to something more "complex" as Lukrez assumed 2000 years ago. A good example from the field of physics is the subatomic particles, known as quarks, which merge to real nuclear particles, protons and neutrons. These 29

Here it should be allowed to remark that Lao Tzu's "Tao Te Ching" is not a religion and has nothing to do with the religion of Taoism today. Nor is it a book giving regulations for manners and moral. It is merely a metaphysical philosophy which Lao Tzu gained by intuition.

95

consequently merge to form atoms and from there to molecules and later to more complex molecule chains, etc. Today, we tend to overlook that a new system level, as I understand it, has already been attained with the finished atom. Even if the atom, for example, strives to combine with others to form new and more complicated complexes, in the moment of attaining its perfection it is destined to become practically indestructible: the information of existence inherent in the atom, symbolized by the number 1 or 12 of its physical spatial perfection, will remain in existence infinitely and without limit. The attainment of a completely new system level means changing paradigms which is not really accepted by modern science. From exactly this point onwards there are no further limits for the new system with regard to the spiritual or immaterial information about its physical existence, its "being" or, in respect to spiritual properties, concerning its path to further perfection. This applies on a small scale (e.g. single atoms) and on larger scales (e.g. the further existence of a human personality). These basic principles seem somewhat abstract at first sight but I discussed them in detail in the previous 13 chapters, the Monologue. In the Dialogue, which now follows, and in the next two volumes of this series, I will attempt to show their significance in our world as simply as possible and to give supportive arguments. This should be possible for all aspects, of course; for if spiritual construction plans such as numbers and geometrical forms can be explained in such a way that they appear very plausible, this is, in my opinion, as close to a proper proof for the existence of an immaterial and yet real spiritual world as makes no difference. In the process, other "spiritual regulations", which strictly order the "how" and the "why" of every development in our world and provide its basic rules, become more plausible, too: spiritual construction plans for the evolution of all life and of the spirit within living beings. And finally, it allows us to give answers to the questions as to whether our death is the end of our personality and also as to the basic principles of a possible "thereafter".

96

97

Dialogue

The universe is an idea of God. Friedrich von Schiller, 1759 - 1805 AD

A truth can only have an effect if the recipient is ready for it. The truth itself is not the reason for people still being so full of ignorance. Christian Morgenstern, 1871 - 1914 AD

There is no way out of eternity. Rainer Maria Rilke, 1875 - 1926 AD

98

Although the following conversation with my two sons, Alexander and Martin, is fictitious it could indeed have taken place in exactly this or a similar manner. We have already spent a lot of time together discussing "God and our universe". Based on the previous chapters, we will first discuss the ideological consequences for the lifeless universe with which a better history of our world could probably be best described. Spirit and Matter 'Hey, Dad, I have read the first part of your book', Alexander starts our conversation, 'do you really think you can explain our world in a better way? With so little mathematics?' 'Not quite, son. Your doubts are justified. But I am sure that the physical side, which for us seems to be the objective side of the entire world, can be well described in this way. The other, the spiritual side, which seems to be a more subjective side of the world, is more difficult to grasp, but I am sure that it also follows certain basic principles which are objectifiable even for us from this side. I would like to give you some concrete suppositions.' 'Let us stay with the physical side first,' he interrupts me; 'what we learn at school sounds completely different – and we have never heard anything about an allegedly spiritual side of this world. At least it does not seem to exist for natural scientists and that means it doesn't exist for us in class either. Something spiritual seems to be a mere side effect of the physical world – more like a byproduct!' 'Unfortunately, it is like that. But I am convinced that this view is no longer tenable. You will see later, especially in Volume 2, when we discuss the human properties or patterns of behavior, that the old dichotomy, which means the method by which the reason for everything is apportioned to two different causes, for example, inheritance and environmental influences, only provokes unnecessary quarrels because it does not get us any further. It doesn't work because a third aspect is plainly overlooked, and that is the aspect of a "spiritual interaction". And this is done solely

99

because the existence of an immaterial spirit, independent of the physical body, is flatly denied by most people.' Mathematics, Existence and Space 'Well,' he insists again, 'let us stay with the subject of "matter". How, in your opinion, does mathematics, as you describe it in your monologue, explain our universe? Could you repeat that in such a way that everybody is able to understand it? And by the way – what gave you this idea in the first place?' 'I already told you: It is a conspicuous fact that at extremely significant places and in important processes in our world the same certain numbers and number sequences keep turning up. This alone gives us grounds to suppose that there must be a system behind everything. If we take a closer look, for example, at the number sequences 6-1-8 and 2-7-3 or at the numbers 10, 24 and 81 we can establish that they may be derived through just a few, simple mathematical operations. And it seems that everything in nature, and even in the entire world, is built and ordered according to these numbers. About 800 years ago the Italian Leonardo Fibonacci of Pisa reflected over the propagation of rabbits. He considered what would happen if a pair of rabbits produced one baby rabbit every month. Every new generation of rabbits would reach sexual maturity after 2 months and would also start to produce baby rabbits. If we look at the number sequence generated by this we can see that the number of new baby rabbits each month is equal to the sum of the young rabbits from the previous two months. If the number of baby rabbits born in two successive months are divided by each other, then, after only a few months, the number after the decimal point is always 618. Up to now this number is merely the result of a purely intellectual game. But, as I already mentioned in the first part of this book, the Monologue, we find this number, also known as the "Golden Section", everywhere in nature.'

100

'That may be', Alexander answers, 'but these are not the only numbers. If we open any book of physics or astronomy at random and look for numbers and number relations which also describe important processes in our world we would surely find lots of them and not just the ones you chose. Do you not just pick some special numbers because they fit so neatly into your concept? Could it be that you are building a house around your view of the world by using these numbers?' 'My dear son, you are not the first to assume that. Others have already made exactly the same accusation. But it is not correct. Just think back to my intellectual model of the growth and reproduction of circles in Chapter 8. At the moment we are talking about the purely physical part of the world, since only this is usually considered to be objective and real. The smallest possible existence is a finite point. No matter how small we imagine it to be it is still a circle and it is already twodimensional. We will disregard for the moment the third dimension known to us as the higher dimension of space. Let us start with this "smallest", finite starting "point", the circle. We have already recognized here that this circle and thus any physical existence is in general something "two-fold". Right from the start physical existence means "polarity" and "symmetry". Each circle already contains the right angle as the optimal polar and symmetrical expansion into the second dimension. The number 2 is, therefore, the first characteristic of all matter. Duality, two sides of the coin, is exactly that which is omnipresent everywhere in the world as it is known to us. But let us go back to the finite point, the "smallest" circle, the smallest imaginable existence. The circle is mono-angled and, therefore, in spite of its inherent duality, still a unity. It is the smallest finite perfection. Imagine this circle is reproducing itself, which means that it doubles and doubles again. In this way we obtain a new perfect form which encloses this unity and represents a new unity in multiplicity: a square, a regular quadrangular. The square, too, is a symmetrical and simultaneously polar form. Humans assume now that three-

101

dimensional space, which is only known to them, must be the next direct step, especially since the next circle, the fifth, would be sufficient to achieve it. Thus we arrive at the square-based pyramid as the ancient Egyptians already found out before us which is the reason why we look in amazement at their pyramids and consider them Wonders of the World. They consist of 5 corner points with 5 sides and 8 edges. Space is, therefore, according to human understanding, opened up by the number 5. The number 5 is unpaired and stands above the dual physical polarity which is described by 2.2. However, all the important numbers I identified in our universe already emerge after the first few steps towards the generation of a square. This is still pure two-dimensionality. Three-dimensional space as we know it, and which we consider to be the obvious next step of development, does not provide a new important number and is, therefore, logically inconsequential.' 'But there is something I don't understand,' Martin interjects now, after having listened carefully. 'Why do you say that humans are the ones who assume they have to introduce space with the fifth circle? Isn't that our space? And who apart from us humans should have an opinion anyway?' 'No, this three-dimensional space of which I am speaking here is only the space we all know because it is supposed to be a closed body. We humans automatically assume that this is the only space existing. That is why for us it seems, after the square, to be the logical next step towards the pyramid in my intellectual game. However, I believe that reality is different. As already said, all the especially important numbers and number sequences in our universe were already created in the two-dimensional square, i.e. in a two-dimensional development of the unity "circle" towards multiplicity and a new unity "square". If we now talk about threedimensionality we can only know of it from closed bodies. We assume, therefore, that our universe is also three-dimensionally finite. Logic, however, should tell us that every three-dimensional closed body, e.g. a sphere or a human being, requires the existence of something four-dimensional. I already discussed this in detail

102

in the first part of this book. All important numbers already appear in the two-dimensionality, the plane. A new dimension, however, in a consequential continuation of my intellectual game, should only be imagined as a further reflection according to the laws of symmetry and polarity. Then it would only be logical to mirror the whole, already existing plane on an axis. In this way we obtain two planes which penetrate one another vertically. If each of these planes is based on the infinite sequences of all ordinal numbers starting at 1 and running into infinity, then we arrive at a space which shows an infinite twoplane geometry. If we appoint a measuring unit to each of the 4 axes of these two planes then we have established a fourdimensional space which then encloses our three-dimensional closed body as demanded.' In the Beginning was… 'Papa', Martin changes the subject slightly, 'then there was no Big Bang at the beginning of our world?' 'Nobody can answer the question concerning the beginning of our world – or whether there ever was a beginning. However, you are surely right with your assumption: in my opinion there never was such a thing as a Big Bang which scientists will have us believe and which they already claim to be almost proven knowledge!' 'But, what was there then?', Martin persists. 'I call it a spiritual field, or, so to speak, "God's ideas", if we prefer a religious formulation or, as I wrote in my previous books, the pluripotent spiritual field, the PSF. It is the origin of everything and our physical world was created out of it or with it. However, I would like to quote the Bible again, "and God spoke". Really this means the following: in the eternity of a pluripotent spiritual field, previously open to all sides and at first completely without content, i.e. undifferentiated, something suddenly starts moving. Something like a "spiritual movement" materializes, possibly a kind of pendant to an "electrical charge", and which, if expressed in religious terms, we could call "the breath of God".

103

But I want to underline here expressly that "God" does not mean the often painted "old man" of religious art. We should not even imagine a man or a woman. It is somebody and yet simultaneously something we cannot begin to describe! The Bible tells us, therefore, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any image of God". We simply cannot do it. And the Navajo-Indians, for example, describe God in this way: "It is said that we do not have a highest God, because he is without name. That is not so. The highest being has no name because it is unrecognizable…"30. Well – this "breath of God" is the necessary background to our cosmos; it manifests itself in movement. It is from this movement that we gain strength, as I will explain later. The next background is "God's Word", i.e. "information". Here we find again the principles of "structure" (information) and "function" (movement) as mathematics has already shown us. And these will determine the entire concept of the physical world and its forces. Such information, since it is simultaneous finite and infinite, does not consist of fully developed physical points. It is by no means physical in the sense we know, like an atom, for example. No, it is, above all, numbers. It is apparent that whole, natural numbers or ordinal numbers, as we call them, exist in reality. They really do exist! They are just as real as you and I! And three times the number or the information "1" definitely determines the finite, i.e. "physical" point, the often mentioned "smallest" circle. From the physical point of view the smallest information unit of all existence in our world is the quantum. You know that Isaac Newton and later Albert Einstein proved that the radiation in our cosmos consists of smallest points or "particles" – known to us as electromagnetic radiation (EMR). These particles, however, have no mass whatsoever. They are, therefore, nothing physical, nothing three-dimensional. They are rather some kind of "material nothingness" and yet they are something. They are pure information of measurable quality, i.e. 30

Gormann, Navajo Vision: Spiritual Legacy; from M. Otto, see List of References.

104

we are able to detect them with our senses. They are pure radiation points or quite simply points. Measuring them does not mean we can be sure that we have really "seen" them. Here the term "measuring" only means that we can detect their existence. This is important as I want to make clear that we will never be certain that we are measuring exactly that quantum which we intended to measure. We always measure just one quantum or, better still, the information of its existence. You also know that there is a small band of visible light within the broad spectrum of electromagnetic radiation which we humans can perceive directly because we can "see" it. The various radiations differ only in their frequencies. Frequency simply means the rate of repetition at which such quanta, i.e. smallest information "particles", are hurled into deep space. To simplify things I shall speak of "light" when I mean any kind of EMR.' 'So – in the beginning, quanta were generated or photons, if you talk about the quanta of light', Alexander summarizes. 'They are the smallest particles of matter?' 'Yes, but don't go too fast. Before we go on you should realize yet again that, although we speak of particles in connection with quanta and photons, the expression is really extremely exaggerated. They are only pure information units but they are cut up into pieces, i.e. quantized. They are in principle of dual nature, since on the one hand they are finite in their nature as quanta, whilst on the other they are not yet three-dimensional bodies. And as such they form a kind of intersection between matter and spirit. In my 'divine analogy' they correspond mathematically with the number '1' which is on the one hand (-1)2, but on the other not yet 12, remember?' 'That means light is simultaneously part of the spiritual and the physical nature of the world?', Martin interjects. 'That is what I believe, yes! This idea may even explain the phenomena perceived by people who go through a near-death experience. They usually report of having been in a world of blazing light.

105

By the way, we can quote the Bible here again. It says: "In the beginning was the Light" and somewhere else: "In the beginning was the Word". So, quanta, or, in this case, photons as the quanta of light, are the smallest information units. And they also have a dual nature. I believe that this is really the true dual nature of light as quantum physics actually demands but which it describes in the wrong way. But more of this later. The quanta or photons are the A and Ω /31 or the beginning and the end of all matter. As I showed in my little mathematical comparison, the initial (worldly) spirit or, as I call it, the PSF, which is practically identical with "God's Word" in the Bible, now creates the smallest information unit of matter, the +1, the symbol for a quantum. Quanta repeatedly colliding with one another generate (increasingly) "solid" matter in the same way as the 12 is generated in mathematics by squaring +1. I want to remind you of the experiments at Stanford University in California I mentioned earlier, in which particles of atoms were generated in a particle accelerator by making quanta collide with one another.' 'That means that ultimately matter was created by spirit.' Martin is obviously impressed. 'That is right, my dear son, exactly right. As in my mathematical comparison, 12 is the final result when we square (-1) twice or raise it to the power of 4; matter is created by pure spirit in the same way.' Space and Time like Matter and Spirit 'Therefore you suppose that there was a spiritual field before our universe existed?' Martin inquires. 'Yes – but not just before. It still exists, of course, and it permeates everything – the entire universe! But a purely spiritual field in principle does not need space. Remember how it is when you are asleep. You dream of so many things and sometimes you 31

Omega, the last letter of the Greek alphabet.

106

may even make big journeys. But everything is just happening "in" (or better: with the aid of…, see Volume 2) your brain without your actually being in "real" rooms. The world of our dreams is a nice example to demonstrate that, from a purely spiritual point of view, physical space is not necessary. Your dream will, however, take a certain period of "real" time, although the period of time elapsing in your dream may differ from that. Yet, the time in your dream still seems to be real and to have continuity in exactly the same way as does time during the day when you are awake. This is very important because it shows that continuity, which we regard as a matter of course when we speak of time, is primarily something spiritual. We find no such real continuity anywhere in our physical world. We can also imagine numbers infinitely without needing a "real" space for them. Now we notice that certain numbers and number sequences appear regularly at all important points of our universe. We can also recognize that even in a simple development, extending from the creation of a smallest finite existence to the next perfect multiplicity by propagation and growth, they start appearing again automatically even after we have taken only a few steps. This goes to show that numbers and number sequences must really exist. Therefore, they are, and they ensure that these processes take place as they should do and in no other way. For it is true what the Pythagoreans always assumed and on which they based their philosophy and their association two and a half thousand years ago. After all, Pythagoras was the first to examine numbers and their interrelations systematically. He already recognized that numbers exist independently of the physical world and that they are not influenced by the many imperfections of sensory perceptions. But if numbers really do exist, and if they themselves really are something spiritual, something immaterial, then there must be more and other spiritualities as well – and that means there must be a spirit utterly independent of any kind of matter! In addition, similar to numbers, that spirit does not primarily need "real"

107

three-dimensionality, as we experience it in our physical world, because, in contrast to the physical world, it is able to exist without "real" space. But this spirit is characterized by continuity in the same way as numbers. When we learn to recognize the difference between spirit and matter it will be easier for us to give explanations for experiences we gather in our world and which are based directly or indirectly on scientific experiments. We have already made a start when we have learned to relate these terms to the two different levels of existence in this world. Then we will recognize that continuity, time and numbers are part of the spiritual side of the world, whilst discontinuity, e.g. separate light "particles", three-dimensionality and quantity belong to the physical side of the same world. And as illustrated by my mathematical analogy, matter is engendered by the spirit. But, and I will come back to this later in the next books of this series, this essential physical state serves the purpose of generating more spirit, albeit spirit in an incomparable more highly differentiated form.' 'Why is that? Isn't this physical level superfluous when in the end spirit is regenerated?' 'No, Martin, what I meant to say in my last sentence is: the spirit "newly" generated with the aid of the physical state is now a spirit which is "further developed"! In the physical world it was able to gather innumerable experiences and specifically those it was unable to experience in a purely spiritual world. It is only in the physical world that the spirit is able to perceive threedimensionality and discontinuity. These experiences are necessary for the process of enabling the spirit to recognize itself as being simultaneously both an individual existence and also a part of the entirety and for its further development when later on it reverts to a spiritual reality. We could imagine this in the same way as we could imagine single droplets in an ocean. This might sound a bit complicated, but I will explain it in detail later in Volumes 2 and 3.' 'All right, Dad, let's go back again to three-dimensionality. If I understand you correctly you believe that space as we know and

108

perceive it, is generated by the creation of matter from spirit?' Alexander jumps in again. 'That's right. First of all, we should especially emphasize the expression "creation" again. All matter is in the beginning principally a small creation. And this is no brutal, explosive event such as a Big Bang. It is rather a continuous and possibly never ending process. Presumably creation is still taking place today unnoticed by us. In this way, constantly and without any Big Bang, new atoms are being created – at first hydrogen atoms because these are the most simple construction components of our physical world. And now, let us discuss space…' 'Hold on,' Alexander interrupts, 'come back to that later – but first you must help me again: I don't seem to be able to understand this thing with the matter and the spirit; I just can't imagine that solid things like wood, stone or iron, even if we only consider their smallest particles, the atoms, can possibly be generated from spirit which is something immaterial.' Nothing is really solid 'Well, we delude ourselves immensely regarding the firmness of matter. We only think that everything is so solid because we ourselves are also made of the same material and according to the same plan. We are as well adjusted to wood, stone and iron as a key is to its lock. This is the only reason why for us these things appear to be really solid. However, when regarded purely objectively it is all an illusion since nothing supposedly solid is really solid. Let's take, for example, the smallest atom, the hydrogen atom. In the final analysis, all other larger atoms are based upon it. Today specialized analytical and photographic techniques enable us to photograph single atoms and we see them as we would expect them to be: closed spheres. But they are not really like that at all. Every atom possesses an atomic nucleus just as the hydrogen atom does. The hydrogen atom possesses only one single positively charged nuclear particle, known as the proton. This

109

nucleus is orbited by one paltry, tiny single electron with a negative charge. I will come back to the significance of the electrical charge later. If we imagine the atomic nucleus to be as big as a cherry, i.e. approximately 1cm in diameter32, then it is orbited by an electron the size of a pinhead at a distance, that is a spherical radius, of about 1 kilometer. In between there is nothing but empty void, absolutely nothing. You can't really call that solid, can you?' 'But why does it appear to us as if it were solid?' Martin interrupts. 'Well, here is another comparison: think of the wheel of your bicycle but with only one spoke. When your bicycle stands still you are able to look through the wheel. The one spoke does not impair your sight. But if you turn the wheel really fast you can no longer see through it because the fast running spoke seems to be practically everywhere at the same time. The speed is too fast for our eyes and our brain to be able to detect single details and follow the movement of the spoke. Now, the wheel looks more like a disc. By the same token we perceive a film to be something continuous. In reality we all know, and especially do those of the older generation who grew up during the era of the 8mm/16mm cine film, that a film consists of single pictures which flash past our eyes at speed. So now, think of the electron and imagine that after each incredibly fast orbit (A) around the atomic nucleus, the next orbit shows a slight alteration of direction, for example by the width of its own tiny diameter. This gives us practically two orbits at the same time because the electron orbits the atomic nucleus at an incredible speed approaching the speed of light (A). Due to the lateral deviation of each successive orbit we must consider a second velocity perpendicular to the first (Ω). But this second velocity is, of course, much less since it is the sum of all lateral deviations. This idea was developed, by the way, nearly 100 years ago by one of the physicists within Albert Einsteins' circle, 32

The atomic nucleus of the hydrogen atom (= H) in reality has a diameter of approx. a ten trillionth of a centimeter (10-13 cm). The entire atom has a size of approx. a one hundred millionth of a centimeter (10-8 cm).

110

as Ahrheit-Volle wrote in his book. But it did not gain general acceptance. Look at the diagram I asked you to draw. I can show you very well what I mean:

Figure 10 (by Martin): Alpha (A) and Omega (Ω) movement. Explanation in the text.

The second velocity is still sufficiently fast to simulate a closed sphere for all modern measuring devices. This explanatory concept enables other questions concerning the structure of the atomic nucleus to be answered even though many people today believe this to be superfluous since all problems seem to have been solved already. I will come back to this later when we discuss the structure of atoms, all right?' 'Terrific,' Martin says, 'then our entire solid world is just an illusion!' 'But if nothing is really solid', Alexander interrupts his brother, 'then it becomes much easier to understand that the tiny bit of really "solid matter" which remains in the last instance – that is something the size of a cherry or a pinhead compared to the size of an atom with a diameter of two kilometers – can only have been generated from a spiritual medium which possesses no form of physical substance.' He continues: 'And in the case of a very large atom such as that of lead, the fact that the cherry is slightly larger and that there are a few more pinheads does not change much! A slightly larger nothing is still a nothing!' 'Well said, son, and so it is! Matter, and that means the entire physical world, is from this purely materialistic point of view indeed very nearly nothing! But for us as the offspring of matter and consisting of it the world still appears so solid and massive!'

111

Space and Light 'Right,' Martin agrees, 'that sounds plausible. But now you should come back to the issue of the space of our universe. How is all that generated by matter?' 'Well, physicists today also believe that the entire cosmic space is of physical origin. Nevertheless, our concepts differ tremendously. More precisely, they believe that the Big Bang generated radiation, let's use the simple term "light", which escaped. This light then formed space. Today it is accepted that light travels at a constant speed of approximately 300,000 km per second. Einstein ordained this with his relativity theory. Light travels into space at this speed thereby expanding it together with all its solid components such as galaxies, stars and planets generated over the course of time; they all follow this expansion in more or less retarded motion. The universe is expanding and it is assumed that this expansion is still continuing to the present day – it is even believed to be accelerating. Insofar my conviction that space is created by matter is nothing new in principle.' 'And what do you think?' Alexander asks curiously. 'To explain that I have to go back again to my intellectual model concerning the proliferation and growth of finite points, the "smallest" circles, and dig a bit deeper. This "smallest" circle, a finite unity, is itself already the product of a multiplicity, but a spiritual one. Each of these circles can be determined exactly by three points. But if the circle is to be the smallest finite, i.e. physical, reality, then the points themselves can, of course, no longer be physical. We may imagine the points, which determine our smallest finite point (circle), to be mere points of information or, from a physical point of view, quanta or photons. They contain the information "to be". We could depict the quantum as the number '1', the quantity for the smallest "being". The number 81, which controls, for example, the numerical expansion of chemical elements or code positions in the genotype and which belongs to the key numbers of our universe, enabled

112

me to demonstrate that this number, as indeed all other important numbers also, arises from the first four ordinal numbers. Through this number the true dual nature of all physical existence is revealed (Chapter 5). The information of existence is inherent in everything that exists, even in the number itself! Every bit of real matter in our universe, irrespective of how small it may be, possesses the information of being – just as our finite point, the "smallest" circle, does. The proliferation of finite circles continues along the sequence of all ordinal numbers. The development of the square as perfection on a higher level indicates that these numbers are ordered in a rhythm of 24. Even if it is true that the purely physical expansion is always only finite, the real number information adherent to each finite point expands infinitely. The basic information of being is thus projected along the sequence of all ordinal numbers into infinity. As already mentioned, all important numbers and number sequences of our universe can already be found in a plane, that means in a two-dimensionality. The logic of my intellectual game in Chapter 8 demands that each quality jump, including the development of a further dimension beyond two-dimensionality, can only be achieved by mirroring the two-dimensional plane over the perpendicular. This results in two planes, i.e. a double twodimensionality. You both know from your lessons in mathematics that a plane is defined by two axes, known as x and y axes. If we are confronted with two planes which penetrate each other vertically then the geometry will change from an "xy-geometry" to an "x2y2-geometry". And in the same way as a plane is expressed in square meters (m2), for example, the measuring unit for the two-plane geometry is raised to the fourth power. Since each of these planes is coded by numbers and since the numbers continue "into infinity" this space, too, must be infinite. Herewith we have a real spatial four-dimensionality. Any three-dimensional entity known to us is practically generated by a kind of "dimensional backward step" within this fourdimensional, infinite open space.

113

If each finite point does indeed have two sides and it does in fact reveal its existence with the aid of infinite ordinal numbers then this would mean the following: around each finite point a numerically encoded double two-plane space is generated, the planes of which are perpendicular to one another and which occupies a four-dimensional, infinite space. Every threedimensional and, therefore, finite body, however small it may be, creates its own infinite space. If space should be infinite, however, it cannot possibly be enclosed by another higher dimensionality, as, for logical reasons, we could expect to be the case for a closed three-dimensional body. Our universe is, therefore, not a somehow enclosed, three-dimensional space whose limits are marked by light. It is rather a four-dimensional, infinite and, therefore, open number space, and that means it is something spiritual and immaterial. But that does not make it any less real! The numbers controlling its expansion are ordered in a rhythm of 24, i.e. it consists of concentric shells, which we might imagine as resembling spherical shells, each containing 24 numbers. This order applies to all planes. The actual space, however, is generated by an interpenetrating two-plane geometry, i.e. an "x2y2-geometry". For such space, therefore, it is the squares of all ordinal numbers which are important. In this way the real number space around each finite point in our universe resembles a kind of climbingframe of numbers by which the information of its existence is transported into infinity. In the same way any effect that is hurled into space must remain subject to this order of numbers. Later I will explain this in detail with respect to light and gravitation, i.e. for the forces attracting masses, e.g. planets. Any expansion of physical mass, e.g. the expansion of electrons orbiting an atomic nucleus, is, of course, also subject to this square number frame. Since there is an extremely large, but not infinite, number of bodies in our universe, we have in principle not simply one single space but in reality as many as there are three-dimensional objects. Each of these number spaces is in itself already infinite. An infinity is, of course, something absolute. That

114

means, there is nothing more than infinity. Therefore, "all these infinite spaces" can be combined to form one infinite space. There are some nice examples of this idea like Hilbert's hotel, for example: This hotel has an infinite number of rooms (which contradicts, of course, the reality of the always finite number of things). One evening a guest arrives and he is told that all the rooms are occupied. But the receptionist reconsiders and assures the new guest that he will find him a free room. He then asks all guests to move into the next higher room number. The guest in room no. 1 moves to room no. 2, the one in room no. 2 to room no. 3, etc. Each guest now has a new room and room no. 1 is free for the new guest. The next evening catastrophe draws close: an unexpected bus drives up which is infinitely big and has an infinite number of guests on board. But the receptionist is not irritated: he asks all the guests in his hotel to move to that room whose number is twice the number of their present room. The guest in room no. 1 moves to room no. 2, the one in room no. 2 to room no. 4, the one in room no. 3 to room no. 6, etc. In this way only the rooms with even numbers are occupied and all rooms with odd numbers are suddenly free. Each of the infinite new arrivals gets a room and the catastrophe is avoided. Although it is impossible that an infinite number of real quantities exists, the number space being generated around each finite point becomes on the other hand infinitely large. In the final instance, however, there is only one infinite space. This is difficult for us all to understand at first because it seems so abstract. However, I think I have explained sufficiently by now that numbers really do exist. This is in accordance with the convictions of very many famous scientists and philosophers throughout the ages, even if unfortunately not with those of modern times. Numbers are, therefore, the medium of our universe. So we have a medium after all and we can stop crediting light erroneously of being its own medium. But before I come back to this subject I want to say something more about the structure of the shell-like number space forming around each finite point. The structure is already shown in my

115

often-quoted intellectual model of the circle proliferation: The first real perfection in a finite multiplicity is the square enclosing the unity, the original circle. Its four corner points are the four circles of this new multiplicity. Each of these circles can be divided optimally into 6 isosceles triangles. The hexagon formed by these 6 triangles is the biggest and last rational form which is closest to that of the circle. The next higher figure, the heptagon, generates irrational angles. In simple words, each circle offers us the natural divider 6. The hexagon represents the optimal packaging unit in our universe which is why we find it so frequently in nature. Just think of honeycombs or of aromatic compounds in chemistry, those all important cyclical hydrocarbons. If we divide the four corner circles of our square into six isosceles triangles each, we obtain 24 such triangles. This I explained in Chapter 8. This dictates that the model's concentric shells of infinite number space emerging around each finite point, should have 24 numbers each. They are layered like onion skins, and there are always 24 of them layered over the previous 24 and so forth into infinity. With such simplistic thinking we arrive at a model which was possibly already known by our ancient forefathers. It was perhaps for this reason that the Babylonians divided time into a 24rhythm. It is important to think and reflect – or, as the wise Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said very aptly more than two and a half thousand years ago: "Without going outdoors one knows the world. Without looking out of the window one sees the TAO of Heaven. The further out one goes the lesser one's knowledge becomes." 33!' 33

As all of Lao Tzu's verses this is quoted from "Tao Te Ching", see List of References. It was translated into German by Richard Wilhelm in 1910 and then into English by H.G. Ostwald. Wilhelm translates Lao Tzu's "TAO", which from his point of view describes the inexpressible and indescribable, with the German word "SINN", which includes the meaning of way, direction, sense. The concurrence between the German word "Sinn" and "Tao" is very comprehensive. Wilhelm points out that, above all, Tao must have meant a spiritual background which controls all physical existence.

116

Here we go again! 'Pheeeeeeew, that is a bit much all at once,' Alexander responds, 'Let me repeat some of it briefly: our physical world was created by the spirit – or is based on a set of spiritual principles, however we care to define them. The spirit is also present in the finite point, the smallest circle, i.e. the smallest imaginable physical reality since it defines it and supplies it with important information about its further development.' 'Just a moment, son,' I interrupt him. 'I have not mentioned yet that it passes on other important information about a further development process – apart from the number information, that is – but it is true: The physicist Fritz Albert Popp was able to prove that living beings "radiate" and possess a so-called biophoton field which seems to encode messages. And more than 70 years ago, the famous physicist Erwin Schrödinger already demonstrated that it is not only the energy content of photons as the smallest components of light which was important but especially the information they carry and the order they implement.' 'All right,' Alexander replies, 'let's go on: The smallest spiritual information unit on which the 'smallest circle' is based has the value '1'. Since it is a physical, a finite, existence, it generates around itself a spiritual framework of numbers. The actual space is induced when two plane geometries interlock vertically. Since such planes consist of sequential numbers, it is the squares of all ordinal numbers which now become the influential power if considered spatially, i.e. as a "two-plane geometry". Since numbers continue into infinity, the number space, too, becomes infinitely large. The result is an infinite four-dimensional open number space. A simple but really existing number framework forms the actual space around every circle and thus simultaneously around every smallest finite three-dimensional existence, i.e. around every closed body. In this way every finite existence creates its own infinite space. Our cosmos became already infinite and eternal at the very moment when the first circle, the first physical point, was created. But there cannot exist anything more beyond infinity. This means that finally there is

117

always only one infinite real number space. And that is our universe. Each new circle emits the information "I am here" via the framework of numbers surrounding it. And this remains infinitely and eternally. The infinite number space expands in steps of 24 over concentric shells constructed like onion skins. Does the information of each finite existence, however small it may be, remain infinitely and eternally, even if these bodies no longer exist, i.e. if their physical manifestation has perished? Does the information of an atom, for example, remain when the atom no longer exists?' 'Excellent, that is exactly what I meant, my dear son. And that explains why everything, and I do mean everything, that has ever really existed and will ever really exist will go on living as complex information for ever and ever in eternity; every stone as well as every living thing. However, – and I will discuss this in detail in Volumes 2 and 3 of this series – as long as neither a stone nor any kind of low existence is aware of its real and physical existence then none of them will ever become aware of their eternally continued existence. To do that the development of a higher conscience and self-awareness is essential. Something, which has developed over billions of years, throughout both, the evolution of life itself and also the evolution of appropriate biological receivers and transmitters now realized in humans. But more to that later.' 'With receivers and transmitters you mean our brains, Dad?', Martin persists. 'Yes, that is exactly what I mean – and the brain must possess a highly developed hardware of adequate complexity, otherwise the communication on a spiritual level would be rather restricted – which is often not or not fully recognized.' 'That really sounds like a kind of cosmic spiritual internet,' Martin adds. 'Splendid, of course you are right – and I used this comparison in my previous books. But that is not what we should be discussing now. We will talk about that in Volume 2.' 'All right,' he relents, 'then proceed as you intended.'

118

Space is not curved 'Yes, I would like to bring this line of thought to a conclusion,' I am almost apologetic, 'and then we will come back to open questions. Alexander just gave us an excellent summary: Each finite point, such as an atom, forms around itself an infinite number space which is ordered in concentric shells by the number 24. This formation arose automatically from my intellectual game about the growth and proliferation of a smallest finite starting circle to the first perfect multiplicity, the square. And in the same way as on paper, these shells expand through all the whole numbers in the form of a "two-dimensional single plane" into infinity whilst through space they expand along the squares of all ordinal numbers in a "four-dimensional dihedral" manner into infinity. A few years ago the chemist, physicist and mathematician Peter Plichta, who lives in Düsseldorf, Germany, developed a congruent theory of space. However, his intellectual approach is different to mine, and I believe it is far more complicated and not as logical and convincingly coherent and complete. The concept of two intersecting planes stretching out into infinity seems to show conclusively that universal space cannot be curved but is in fact flat, or Euclidean – to use the eponymous expression going back to the famous Greek mathematician and head of the library in Alexandria, Euclid.34 Since Albert Einstein, however, there seems to be no physicist who does not believe that space is curved. The perceptions which seem to confirm this theory are undoubtedly correct, but they could also be interpreted in a different way if we were to assume that the number space is the really existing medium on which our universe is based.' 'How is that?' Martin asks.

34

The very latest international experiments, called "Boomerang" and "Matima", do indeed seem to support my theory that the universe is not curved!

119

'Well, it has been established that light which passes the sun at a great distance is deflected very slightly. It was assumed, therefore, that space must be curved due to the sun's force of attraction. Light, it seemed, follows the curvature. But my opinion is that light is a kind of effect. Although light moves within the number space which emerges around the source of light it does not generate it and whilst "radiating" into space it is weakened. As with all effects this occurs along number sequences. Light is weakened, as is the force of attraction, known as gravity, according to the inverse squares of all ordinal numbers. This means that they both obey Isaac Newton's inverse square law. Light becomes weaker as the distance increases. If it enters the sphere of influence of a large mass such as that of the sun, then it becomes stronger again, just as the force of gravity increases according to the squares of the reciprocals! Viewed from a great distance, for example, such as that between the Earth and the Sun, the light only appears to be nearer and, therefore, we think space is curved, since according to accepted theories, light defines the limits of space.' 'But then Einstein must be wrong,' Alexander interrupts, 'don't you feel you are rather arrogant when you talk like that?' 'I don't think so –although I am no physicist. Einstein did indeed recognize that four-dimensionality does play an important role. But he did not visualize space itself as being four-dimensional. Therefore, he constructed a model combining spatial threedimensionality with time. For Einstein time was the fourth dimension. This makes sense insofar as time is one-dimensional, although probably only from our physical point of view: we talk about a time-arrow pointing from the past into the future. But I will come back to that later. According to this theory, therefore, space must be curved. But in this Einstein was mistaken, I am quite sure of that. Yet the world considers his theorems to be irrefutable, not least out of great respect for him. There is no doubt that he really did start a revolution in physical science. Quantum physics was also a revolutionary concept. But neither are as revolutionary as has

120

been supposed up to now. It is interesting to note that Einstein detested quantum physics which was based on Max Planck's theories. In this context he made the famous remark "God does not play dice". But there are more aspects concerning the space model we discussed here. Due to the rhythm of 24 by which the "onion skins" are ordered, the first shell starts with 12 when viewed from a four-dimensional spatial aspect. The second shell starts with the number 25 which equals 52. The third shell starts with 49, which is 72. If we continue with this progression we obtain the prime number ray, as Plichta called it, a ray of numbers containing solely prime numbers, their squares or their products. Since it is the "starting ray" of the infinite number space we could also compare it to the conductor who gives the rhythm. This is of great importance for some further considerations concerning our universe.' 'If we have to produce a three-dimensional drawing during our geometry lesson,' Alexander muses, 'we use the three axes x, y and z for the three dimensions of known space. The measuring unit is then, for example, cm3, which means centimeter raised to the power of 3. But you tell us that our universe is a space with an exponent of 4!? What are the axes then?' 'Since there are two planes intersecting one another it has the form of "x2y2". We could say, therefore, that we perceive the third spatial dimension only because it is practically 'cut out' of an infinite fourth spatial dimension. Remember my example of the artificial hip joint in Chapter 8. The "program" on which our universe seems to be based is written practically in a twodimensionality – in the same way as we develop a program on paper or on a computer screen. The emergence of a second plane perpendicular to the first is, therefore, compelling. The right angle is already contained in this plane as polarity and it is through this that the second plane is encoded. Duality and polarity are two firmly established components of the entire physical world. This means that they have always existed, even before the first humans, who brought with them the ability to think about such theories,

121

ever existed. Furthermore, all the important basic information, the very "cornerstones" of our universe, can be deduced from the purely two-dimensional proliferation of "smallest" circles to their new physical perfection, the square, alone. And finally, all numbers, which we may consider as real, continue into infinity once they have been generated. Three-dimensional space as we know it is based, therefore, on a program made for two infinite, perpendicularly intersecting planes. Therefore Fermat is right Maybe here lies hidden the secret of Fermat's "Last Theorem". Fermat was a very famous French amateur mathematician who lived during the 17th century. Actually he was a judge and he was a typical loner. All his life he enjoyed poking fun at all his mathematical colleagues every time he found some new mathematical theorem or other. He always claimed that he was able to prove them but he very rarely did and when he did, his proof was incomplete. He loved to keep his colleagues guessing by dropping discrete hints. Before we come to his famous "Last Theorem", recall to mind the Pythagorean theorem, which I already discussed in detail in the first part of this book. In my opinion this theorem is of utmost importance if we want to understand our physical world. It says: a2+b2=c2, i.e. in a rightangled triangle the area of the square on the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the areas of the squares on the other two sides. And the first three integers fulfilling these conditions are the numbers 3, 4 and 5, which are known, therefore, as the Pythagorean numbers. Pythagoras was able to prove that there is an infinite number of integers which fulfil this equation. It was Fermat's idea to investigate how many numbers would fulfil the equation if the exponent were increased at random, e.g. to a3+b3=c3. Figuratively speaking, this would no longer involve squares but cubes. His question became therefore: are there two whole numbers the cubes of which add up to the volume of the cube of a third whole number?

122

He posed this same question, of course, for all kinds of higher exponents, so that the equation could be generalized: is there an integral solution for the equation an + bn = cn , if "n" is higher than 2? Fermat established in the end that no single whole number higher than 2 would fulfil this equation. But there are infinitely many which are very close to the required result, as the example in the next illustration shows. Of course, he made it known to all his colleagues again that he was also able to prove all this but, alas, he did not reveal his proof. Until a few years ago nobody has been able to prove his theory. Over a period of three hundred years the mathematicians of this world racked their brains in vain. At long last, in 1993, the English mathematician Andrew Wiles was able to produce a mathematical proof for Fermat's famous theorem. The derivation is written down on more than one hundred printed pages, as the scientific journalist Simon Singh explains in his excellent book.'

Figure 11 (by Martin): The example of cubes with side lengths of 6 and 8 is typical: There are no two cubes the added volumes of which result in the volume of a matching third. For the equation of Fermat's great theorem (a3+b3=c3, or generalized with an exponent higher than 2) there is no integral solution.

'And what has all this to do with the infinite four-dimensional space of two intersecting planes?' Martin asks somewhat uncomprehendingly.

123

'I will explain it to you,' I respond quickly, 'doesn't it seem absolutely amazing that for the exponent 2 an infinite amount of integral solutions exist but for all higher exponents there are none at all but many 'close' solutions! That reminds me again of "Miss Smilla's Feeling for Snow" by Peter Höeg, the book from which I already quoted in Chapter 14. Nature repeatedly confronts us with manifestations which clearly remind us that they are based on an optimal program which actually never fully materializes. On the other hand it reminds me of another mathematician, Leopold Kronecker, who lived in the 19th century. He once said "the natural numbers were made by God; everything else was made by humans!" And this Mr Kronecker assumed that the entire field of mathematics may be traced back to integers. --- That's all very well, but what does all that have to do with 'two-dimensional' infinite space? Well, if the program for our physical world is indeed twodimensional and thereby subject to the law of symmetry and polarity, by which a four-dimensional infinite space is generated from a plane by the reflection over a right angle, then there is only one possible solution for Fermat's equation. Only the exponent 2 (or those below, i.e. 0 or 1, but this is a triviality) fits into the twodimensional program on which our world is based. That means that nothing can exist that extends beyond the Pythagorean theorem since a three-dimensional space as we know it is only part of the four-dimensionality (as the result of a double-twodimensionality) due to the development of all physical things. As I already described in detail in the first part of this book, the Monologue, every closed three-dimensional body already demands the existence of this fourth dimension of space. Although I never read the mathematical proof of Fermat's theorem by Wiles and would probably not even understand it if I did – but here I provide a logical explanation which is also pragmatic and plausible and supports my ideas about the most important regions of our world.'

124

Numbers are the Medium of Space 'Good, I seem to be understanding some of it slowly,' Alexander says, 'but let's proceed to the "numbers" as the medium of space. You just said that we have at last a medium again in the form of a number space and that light, therefore, no longer needs to represent its own medium. What do you mean by that?' 'You know what happens when a stone falls into water. It causes waves which spread outward just like the concentric circles of the number space. When you talk or shout your vocal cords cause the air to start vibrating. These vibrations produce the sound. I will not go into all the details here. It is only important here to establish that in both cases a medium or the surrounding environment, in one case water in the other air, is set vibrating. If a beam of light is emitted into the universe it vibrates in itself according to current opinion, since we know that there is definitely no (physical) medium whatsoever in the cosmos as Michelson and Morley established with their experiments during the 19th century. In earlier times people talked of the ether and of a near-vacuum such as we really seem to find in the cosmos which was for many people a rather frightening thought. In this context Aristotle talked about a "Horror vacui", the horror of a vacuum, well over two thousand years ago. Although there are still some very few particles per cubic meter in space, it is without any doubt a near-vacuum. Then the question arose as to how light was transported through the cosmos. After all, Isaac Newton, Max Planck and Albert Einstein had clearly recognized that light also was of an interrupted or discontinuous nature. They talked of light possessing the character of particles which, however, easily leads to the misconception that quanta and photons are real threedimensional bodies. Others, however, believed that light had the character of waves. The famous Danish physicist Niels Bohr was in fact rather amused about Einstein, who assumed that light consisted of particles and dismissed the wave theory completely. Nils Bohr stated that Einstein's telegram would never have reached him if light rays were not simultaneously also waves. Two

125

significant physical experiments, the "dual split experiment" and the "aspect experiment" to "Bell's theorem", both of which I discussed in detail in my first book, seemed to provide the proof at long last that light possesses the properties of both particles and waves simultaneously. These experiments are considered to be milestones in the development of a new direction in physics which deals with the uncertainties supposedly inherent in smallest sub-atomic structures: quantum physics had been born. Within these tiniest subatomic structures the laws of physics seem to be different, which means that here things can be both particle and wave simultaneously. Even for competent scientists some of these theories are not always easy to understand. But they seem to have accepted that with this theory they are on the right track. And when we are confronted with something which is difficult to understand it does not mean that it must be wrong. Nevertheless, I cannot accept that these concepts are correct in their currently assumed form. The dual Nature of Light From a materialistic point of view, light, or any other kind of electromagnetic radiation, is at best composed of particles, which, however, would be a gross exaggeration of the facts. The wavelike property attributed to light is in any case an illusion – this is due to the fact that our universe is not empty; it possesses a "medium". But have no fear. By this we do not mean a physical medium, a kind of ether or anything like that. Our space is infinite and is filled, as we now know, with numbers. The cosmos possesses a spiritual, and, for us, therefore, abstract medium. And that is in fact the only real continuum. This means that light itself no longer needs to be wavelike but has found its own medium: numbers. I also believe that light is the physical interface to this continuous spiritual world – yet light itself is discontinuous. You may imagine a beam of light as being a bombardment by a great number of single photons. They are massless, however, which means, they

126

are not real particles. They are not three-dimensional as real particles would be. No, expressed in mathematical terms they are "ones". This means they have a "hybrid character" so that we really can talk about light as having a dual nature. However, it does not mean duality in the sense of being both wave and particle. Photons in their role as interface between the spiritual and the physical world must represent aspects of both sides of the coin. And that is exactly what gives them their dual nature. From our primarily materialistic point of view, a photon, as a real interface, can be seen and measured by everybody: we recognize that it belongs to the physical world because it is discontinuous. It is this that gives the photon its particle-character. On the other hand a photon is pure information and thus the number "1" itself. As a number it is part of its own infinite world of numbers and, therefore, demonstrates the continuity of the spiritual side. This is what gives it its wavelike character. However, a real wave is of "physical" continuity which is completely missing here. From a purely materialistic point of view a photon remains a "particle" even if it is a number. Its interconnection with others is purely spiritual, immaterial or number-controlled. The various electromagnetic radiations differ insofar as they impart their information bits at various speed rates. We then talk about their "frequency" which is expressed in Hertz named after the physicist Heinrich Hertz. This information of light is transmitted into infinity through the square number frame of space. Since we are all constructed according to the same plan and our measuring instruments cannot function in any other way we believe, therefore, that light is also a wave. However, we humans seem to be able to recognize the reality of a number space by means of our spirit if it is not side-tracked too seriously by the unceasing flood of information inundating us every day. A good example for this are the autistic twins John and Michael described by the New York neuro-phsychiatrist Oliver Sacks. I will come back to them in the second volume. Locked into the very

127

confined space of their inner world they seemed to be able to perceive the prime number sequence of the universal number space and to be able to read it. With almost effortless ease they were able to name at least 9-digit and probably even up to 20-digit prime number twins in sequence, something a computer of the 1960's – which was when this experiment took place – was hardly able to do or at least not without tremendous expenditure in time and energy.' The Speed of Light 'What then gives light its speed?' Martin interrupts. 'My dear son, light does not possess any speed of its own!' I reply enigmatically. 'But Papa, excuse me, please, but that is utter nonsense! Everybody knows that light is extremely fast and that, according to Einstein, there is nothing faster than light, nothing at least outside of science fiction stories', Martin is rather indignant. 'Slow down, let me finish first. I did not want to doubt that photons, the smallest particles of light, or the quanta of all other electromagnetic radiation, travel through space at high speed. This was established and measured more than once long ago. Therefore, it is a proven fact. But – it is not their own speed at which they travel! Let us imagine a radiating atom, a radioactive uranium atom, for example, in respect to which I mean the following: This atom is one of our renowned finite points. Therefore, this atom generates its own number space which continues along the squares of all ordinal numbers, i.e. from 12 to infinity (here, we need no exponent of 2 since infinity is something absolute) and is arranged in concentric shells in a rhythm of 24. This number space does not come into existence instantaneously but rather emerges at a tremendous speed. Nevertheless, it needs "time"! And here Plichta comes into his own again: If we add up the numbers of each shell of our number space the sum for the first shell will be 300, which we can also write as 1.3.102. The numbers of the next shell add up to 900 or

128

3.3.102. Thereafter the sums are 1500 or 5.3.102 and 2100 or 7.3.102, etc. We can recognize that the basic value 300 (or 3.102) also expands into infinity over the sequence of the odd integers, i.e. 1,3,5,7, etc. which we now call, therefore, extension numbers. If we add up the first 10 extension numbers the result is 100 (1.102) again, the sum of the next 10 is then 3.102, the sum of the next is 5.102 , etc.! Thus another and this time even higher order of extension numbers is generated which always encompasses all odd numbers, etc. – in the same way as it happened with the number sequences of each preceding lower level. This means that the number sequence generated around each finite point expands by a multiple of 3.102, such as 3.102.102.102..., etc. For this reason, Plichta called the number 3 the space expansion constant of the really existing number space. It is an interesting fact that again the number 3 seems to be of special significance. Please remember that the number 3 was already the decisive factor for the first finite existence, the "smallest" circle, since this was defined by exactly 3 points of information. And keep in mind that the real number space expands at a speed which is encoded by the number 3. Let's look again at the value which we use to define the velocity of light: Here again we have a factor 3 raised to the power of ten. Light, a shower of discontinuous packets of information points, is not travelling into the infinite cosmos at an active velocity of 300.000 km/s. Rather, light with its massless "particles" adopts the speed of the number encoded space in a purely passive manner by means of the constant of spatial expansion which is the number 3. Everything that possesses any degree of mass, however small this may be, is much more inert in the end and simply cannot follow quite as fast. Light and all other radiations are merely the fastest. Therefore, it is irrefutable that light can indeed be slowed down. I have already described such experiments. Light can, however, never travel faster than the expansion of space.'

129

Tunnel Experiments 'But, Dad,' Alexander interrupts, 'I just sent you an article I found in the "Times Newspaper Ltd." by e-mail. It states that, according to some experiments, it might be possible that light does indeed travel through the cosmos at a higher speed than the well-known 300.000 kilometers per second.' 'Yes, thank you very much, I have read the article. By the way, it was the Cologne physicist Günter Nimtz who was the first to claim to have made such observations at the Institutes of Physics of Cologne University, where I undertook some much simpler experiments for my thesis some twenty years ago. And now the physicist Lijun Wang of the NEC research center in Princeton, USA, is said to have arrived at the same conclusion. I think that the results of these so-called tunnel experiments, which seem to prove that light travels faster than previously assumed, are based on an illusion due to the misinterpretation of light and space. Since space expands, according to my theory, as a mathematical number space independently of light and since light only follows this expansion passively, its maximum speed is limited. But light can indeed be slowed down by environments which are denser than the cosmic near-vacuum. However, this has no influence on space whatsoever. (Number-) spaces are generated around finite points. Together they combine to form one infinite space, our universe. We must differentiate between the one infinite universal space and the countless single spaces around each finite point. This might explain how the different number spaces of various bodies can overlap each other. Light has without doubt a dual nature, as I already mentioned, - but by that is not meant its being particle and wave. Rather is meant that whilst a photon is always a massless particle without body properties it is at the same time the smallest information unit of existence. It is the mathematical equivalent of the number "1". This side of the coin called "photon", i.e. information, is also transmitted over the really existing number spaces. If two number spaces overlap one another at the same extension number than it is indeed imaginable that the "1", i.e. the information of the

130

photon, could be transferred to another, possibly larger or differently positioned number space. In this case it will be possible to detect immediately the information of the existence, i.e. the "being", of the photon on the entire shell of both number spaces. Whether it is observed as a "pattern of particles" or as an "interference pattern" depends on the measuring devices we are using (see also the dual split experiment I described in my first book). On the other hand, the converse side of this information, the "glowing", massless point, is slowed down by the medium through which it travels – in Wang's experiments this was a chamber containing special cesium gas – and, therefore, makes contact with the "waiting" measuring device later. I believe that here again we are experiencing an illusion similar to the phenomenon of the curvature of space which is due to the real nature of gravitation and its being controlled purely by numbers. We have already talked about this. In addition, we seem to have a problem since within the pure "dual nature" of quanta our measuring methods cannot distinguish between "information contents" and "point of light".' Effects in Space 'Let's go back to the radioactive uranium atom: its number space is the really existing framework by means of which its "radiation", i.e. the emitted quanta – its smallest information units – are transported into infinity. In mathematical terms this means that the value "1" is multiplied by the square of every single ordinal number of the number space surrounding this uranium atomic nucleus, all the way to infinity.' 'That's all very well, Dad,' Martin interrupts, 'but then the light of my desk lamp must also illuminate the entire universe when I switch it on. With all the light generated so abundantly on earth alone the universe should be a pretty bright place by now. But vast regions of the universe are in fact still rather dark, aren't they?'

131

'In principle you are right, son,' and I am delighted in his astuteness, 'but the following is also true: the information "1" of a quantum's "dual nature" indeed remains the same eternally everywhere in the universe. However, the strength or intensity of light is a physical effect and is, therefore, part of the other side of the same coin. And all effects decrease with the increasing distance from the source. This means that they get weaker the further they travel away from the atomic nucleus into open and infinite space. You know this already: take your torch, for example, and direct its beam to the sky at night. You can hardly assume that anyone on the moon would notice it! Isaac Newton, the genial English physicist, established a law for this effect which he discovered through his study of gravitation. We all know that a rather rough landing awaits us after falling from a tree. Newton once observed apples falling from a tree. The law he established is a natural law. It states that the force of gravity diminishes with the square of the distance from an attracting mass and similarly increases with the decreasing distance. It is called the inversesquare law of distance. It adheres to the constant factor 1/n2, where "n" is the distance from the attracting mass. We notice again that this is the reciprocal of the squared expansion of space passing through all ordinal numbers starting from a finite point and expanding outwards. We can assume, therefore, that any kind of mass expanding outwards will always follow the squares of all integers, whereas any kind of effect imparted by the body will decrease reciprocally to it! In the same way as gravitation decreases in proportion to the reciprocal of the squares of all ordinal numbers, the intensity of light will decrease whilst its pure information remains untouched. For a better understanding we could compare it to a hologram whereby even small sections contain the complete information. Although the intensity of light, or its luminous intensity, decreases it never vanishes altogether. But with the growing distance it becomes so minute that after a short time it becomes barely noticeable. But, as I said, it never disappears completely, not even

132

after having traveled millions of billions of light years for ever and ever. Therefore, we can say as a general rule: every physical existence that was ever generated in this universe, i.e. every threedimensional, finite body, also contains immaterial, i.e. spiritual, information of always identical complexity similar to light and its photons. That includes also humans who, with their billions upon billions of combined atoms, radiate corresponding amounts of complex information which not only portrays the entirity of each human existence but represents also an absolutely identically functioning, immaterial mirror image. We can even go further and say that this is the real being of a human. This exact copy in the form of an immaterial body of information could be similar to the astral body we hear about from esoterics or spiritualists.' 'That is unbelievable,' Alexander throws in, 'then there is some truth in the Akasha-Chronicle. During our holidays in the Far East, if I remember correctly, we heard that this chronicle is a kind of eternal world memory in which everything remains stored.' What are the Standpoints of the Great Religions ? 'Of course, and that is again an appropriate indication that we cannot simply dismiss the religious and mystical experiences of our forefathers as being wrong to the core. And it is an arrogant error of our acclaimed knowledgeable society today that, with a pitying smile, we consider them to be nothing more than entertaining fairy tales. If you are interested I could give you some more quotations from the Bible, as representative of the Western religious civilization, and from Hinduism and Buddhism or Chinese philosophy as representative of that of the East. In St. John's Gospel (01.04.-01.05) we can read: "That was made – in Him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." Here it is made clear that all that was generated from the Word (which was there in the beginning!) already contains all the information necessary for everything be it matter or life. It follows from this

133

that life is already a part of the spiritual field upon which everything is based. It is a spiritual principle since it was "in Him", i.e. in that which was created. This spiritual principle is the "light" of humans and as such it is their immediate source of information. In addition there is also the light which has the effect of "illuminating" a room. This indicates clearly the real dual nature of light as an interface between the spiritual and the physical world. And the spiritual principle of the coin "light" is just as real as its physical, illuminating side since it also "shineth" in the "darkness". Therefore, both are "not comprehended" by the darkness. This means that light is eternal and indestructible. The Gospel continues (01.09-01.10): "(The Word) was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world and the world was made by him and the world knew him not." It is interesting to note that in this passage the Word, i.e. the information, as the spiritual basis of all things, is equated with God as a person! The term "Word" is used to denote a thing as well as a person. At the same time it is also established that this spiritual field of information was "in the world" whilst it was simultaneously creating it. And that the world "knew him not" is an opportune reference to the well-known fact that humans have always been skeptics. There is another interesting aspect: In contrast to the later apocalyptic description of eschatological events (Exodus) the biblical story of the Creation (Genesis) does not describe such dramatic events. Therefore, the creation seems to have been something peaceful. There is no indication of a Big Bang in the Bible.' 'Fine, but I want to hear more about the Big Bang,' Alexander interrupts. 'After all, modern scientists will not have just invented this theory out of thin air. And from time to time we can hear and see some new information in television programs which seem to confirm this theory in spite of all your plausible propounding to

134

the contrary. There must be some clear evidence that such dramatic events really did happen in the beginning?' 'Certainly, there are indeed various indications but no real proof that the events took place. And I will come back to that in a second. I just want to give you one or two more examples from eastern religions before we digress. May I?' 'Well, okay, but don't take too long, I am far more interested in the natural scientific aspects,' he answers. 'I think religions are also very exciting, but I will make it short. In Hinduism Brahman is the highest divine principle and it stands for the absolute eternal being, undivided, complete in itself and unchangeable. Brahman stands above any kind of activity, movement or inactivity and is beyond good and evil. In it rests a latent vitality like that of a seed which can start to germinate at any time. When its vitality does emerge it generates the physical universe, the Maja. In general we only can perceive this with our inadequate senses. When Brahman is radiating Maja the heat is as hot as fire. The Maja, the physical universe, is cyclic. One cycle, according to Hinduism, lasts 4.32 billion years. Afterwards Maja returns into Brahman's heart. The physical world is reduced to rubble or is destroyed by water. Thereafter a new cycle starts.' 'Ah well,' Alexander jumps in, 'there you have it. Everything you just said supports even more the general theory of a Big Bang and an ensuing collapse of the universe at some time in future – exactly as most modern physicists and astronomers believe today. And are there not plenty references to a collapse of the universe in the Christian account of the apocalypse?' 'Not really,' I contradict him. 'I will explain it to you. There are some details worth taking into consideration: the number sequence 4-3-2 must certainly be interpreted as a symbol which reveals the mathematical structure strictly ordering the world. Here we find these three numbers by means of which the original unity progresses to a new perfection in multiplicity. Brahman is in principle identical with the Christian God or with Allah in Islam. Being "beyond good and evil, or standing above activity and inactivity", etc. means that God, Brahman or Allah

135

are external to the entire world and thus also outside the real existing spiritual world which encompasses emotions in their entirety as well as all immaterial values in general. In this way the highest being stands in transcendence to the entire world, which is also what I believe myself. Brahman emanates life energy which in turn generates Maja, i.e. the physical world. Perhaps we should define the meaning of the two words "life" and "energy" before we continue. To me, life seems to be an important spiritual principle which we shall discuss in detail in the next volume of this series. According to my "divine analogy" in Chapter 10 of the "Monologue" it is the spiritual principle which emerges first. From this starting point the entire physical world is generated. Energy can surely be represented, in my opinion, by the two different construction plans on which the world is based. The first of these being the mathematical construction plan, which we have discussed here in detail, and the other being the one representing all life in the world (Volume 2). Together they are not only responsible for the physical development of the entire universe but also, later on, for the spiritual realization of the diversity of life in this physical environment (see Volume 2). The "Maja delusion" is the physical world, as I see it: a typical illustration for this is that there is no such thing as "solid" matter. And, therefore, the physical world must be a delusion insofar as it distorts our view of the important background of our world, namely the spiritual world. The physical basis for the not-so-solid physical world is in the last instance pure energy. And the characteristics of energy are information and movement. Information is constructive, i.e. it structures the matter; movement is dynamic, i.e. function, becoming evident in effects emanating from the structure of matter. The terms "structure" and "function" we already encountered in Chapter 9. I always think of Martin's beautiful drawing depicting St. Christopher with the child Jesus on his shoulders. This dualism also explains electricity and magnetism. Spirit and energy (movement) shape structure and function. These are two different qualities in which

136

the spirit conditions the energy. Between them both interactions are possible in which the spirit will, of course, always represent the higher order. The physical world is cyclical and will end sooner or later in finite time. This profundity taken from Hinduism conforms rather exactly with my ideas according to which any physical, i.e. threedimensional, corporeality must end sooner or later35. The time span of 4.32 billion years is, as already mentioned, not to be interpreted as the world's complete real life-time from beginning to end. Of course, only physical, i.e. finite bodies, can have an end. Infinite space, however, is a number space, and, therefore, something spiritual, and the spiritual world cannot end. Superficially, it does seem that the Hindu concept of a Maja cycle lasting 4.32 billion years tends to support the modern scientific theory of a dramatic Big Bang followed by an expansion of the universe which later collapses, thereby concentrating all matter in one small point which possibly explodes again in a new Big Bang. But if the number sequence 4-3-2 is to be explained symbolically, then the concept of a cycle must also be of symbolic character. This must mean that all matter has a beginning and an end as a matter of course and that the end of one kind of matter is the beginning of another. But it does not necessarily mean that all matter emerged together and simultaneously and will disappear again in the same way. Even the Hindu concept does not tell us that there will always be only one Big Bang at a time, but rather that many small "Big Bangs" have been, and still are, happening all the time. In this the Hindu concept in no way contradicts my opinion that matter is being created constantly all the time in an infinite space. In contrast to the creating God in Christianity, who created matter from the Word and not, as often misinterpreted, from 35

I want to point out here once again that the three-dimensional corporeality has nothing in common with the infinite number space emerging around it. Space itself is real in itself, it is infinite and exists infinitely. All physical (finite) bodies, which have generated it, disappear, however, after a finite period of time.

137

nothing, Brahman, the God of Hinduism, created the universe from himself or at least from already eternally existing matter, since no existing matter can ever disappear without trace. But even here I see no serious contradiction since "the Word was with God and God was the Word"36. God's Word arose from himself. All matter was created by this "Word" and is, therefore, unlike the Word itself, not eternal but temporal and thus destructible.' 'Dad, you promised to keep it short!' Martin admonishes me. 'Yes, I know, but I've nearly finished. Just one comment on Buddhism or Chinese philosophy, all right?' Without waiting for a reply I go on: 'In Chinese philosophy there are two especially prominent basic forces: Yin and Yang. Their world-famous symbol is two interlocking flames in white and black. Each flame bears a spot in the color of the other in its center symbolizing the mutual influence. Intuitively, the wise people of ancient China – first and foremost Lao Tzu – recognized that two mutually influencing forces, aligned symmetrically and polar to one another, have the world in their power. They came to the conclusion that all existence in this world follows this principle. For the ancient Chinese these were the two levels of being in this world. One necessitates the other and everything else was created in due course according to the laws of symmetry and polarity. Mathematics can also help us here in upholding this perception and proving it to be absolutely correct. If we succeed in establishing numbers and mathematical relationships as the real existing basis of our world, then Yin and Yang, a concept formed from an intuition stretching back – amazingly – thousands of years, also become the principle reinforced by mathematics upon which the world is based.'

36

Bible, New Testament, St. John's Gospel 01.01.-01.03

138

Was there a Big Bang or not? 'That's enough now. Tell us something about the scientific proof for the Big Bang which the physicists keep telling us about,' Alexander repeats. 'All right, although the physicists themselves never really talk about a proof. They know very well, at least most of them do, that the concept of a Big Bang is still only a theory in spite of all the supporting indications. It is usually the media which present this hypothesis as safe theory or even as proven fact. But let's look now at some aspects of the arguments in favor of the Big Bang. One of them is the so-called nebulae recession. In 1924 Edwin Hubble, after whom the famous space telescope is named, proved that the universe is absolutely teeming with billions upon billions of stars and galaxies. Originally they were called nebulae, and, upon discovering that some of these nebulae radiated more red light than others, it was assumed that they were further away and flying apart. Moreover, there was a conviction that our universe had to be finite, an idea which was based on the paradox established by the German physician Wilhelm Olbers. He stated that the universe could not possibly be infinite because if it were there would also be an infinite number of stars which would illuminate the night sky and make it as bright as day. We might be able to imagine numbers without end – but numbers are spiritual and they do not possess a finite three-dimensionality. I will try and clarify this with an example. Imagine the distance of one meter. This distance can be divided into smaller and smaller parts, theoretically an infinite number of times. But in practice there must be a point after which the person doing this can no longer proceed. But then, what we call theories are just as real if they are established by the spirit. The theory then becomes practice on a realistic spiritual level. Hilbert's Hotel only has an infinite number of rooms because it is an intellectual game. Were these thoughts to become physical reality there would only be a finite number of rooms. Therefore, Achilles was theoretically never ever able to overtake the tortoise

139

which had been given a slight start in Zenon von Elea's parable. Each time Achilles seemed to catch up with it, the tortoise had moved a bit further. Of course, we know that Achilles in practice, in our real world, could easily overtake the tortoise after only a short distance – just as we can overtake the car in front of us if we only go fast enough. In other words, there is a difference between physical and spiritual practice. And all finite quantities, in this specific example the number of stars, must be finite and can never be infinite. Therefore, Olbers cannot have been right with his paradox and, therefore, we can no longer use it as an argument against the theory that the universe is infinite. But, and this is as true today as it was then, the universe has always been considered as something finite and as so neatly comparable to a big, threedimensional balloon. Einstein knew from his famous equation E=m.c2, or, in its relativistic form E2=m2.c4, that we have to do here with a fourdimensionality since c4 describes the quadrupled velocity and the velocity itself is measured in meters per second. Both units, meter as well as second, exist in the fourth power. It seems that Einstein himself could not envisage a four-dimensional space and, therefore, he assumed that four-dimensionality must really be three-dimensional space plus one-dimensional time. The latter is, as I already mentioned, absolutely plausible since we know of the irreversible direction of time pointing from the past into the future. This is in line with the second major law of thermodynamics which states that the degree of disorder, known as positive entropy, increases with time. For example: if a glass drops to the floor and breaks into a thousand pieces we have a fair degree of disorder. It will be quite impossible to restore the glass to its original state without applying some kind of new energy to it, in the case of this example, for instance, somebody must take the time to glue all the bits back together again and repair it with great effort. The basic process is irreversible. We talk today, therefore, of a space-time continuum. However, I have already demonstrated that, for purely logical reasons, space demands its own four-dimensionality; in the same way as a two-

140

dimensional piece of paper only makes sense in a threedimensional environment, i.e. in a finite space, the threedimensional finite space demands a four-dimensional environment.' 'All right, but then it would go on and on,' Martin interrupts, 'because your four-dimensional space would demand a fivedimensional environment, and so on.' 'No, that's exactly the point. The four-dimensional space which I am talking about here, this four-dimensional number space, is now infinite and therefore a higher level of dimensionality is no longer possible. It is similar with light. Einstein was absolutely correct when he said that the speed of light is constant and cannot be exceeded. If you are in a fast car, therefore, driving at, let's say, 150 miles per hour down the highway and you shoot with a laser gun forwards from the car, like James Bond does in the movies, then the laser light will travel no faster than the laser light shot from a stationary gun. It is similar with the four-dimensional number space, which we might imagine as an "x2y2-space " with two interlocking planes. Above the center point of its finite starting point it is infinitely open on all sides and cannot, therefore, be exceeded.' 'Very well then, I understand that. But continue with your arguments against those who believe in the Big Bang,' Martin concludes my slight digression. 'Well, prior to all this, the theory of a three-dimensional and finite universe had already existed. After discovering the so-called nebulae recession we obtained the impression that space was expanding because it was established that many nebulae, i.e. galaxies, showed a "redshift"….' 'What do you mean by that?' Alexander mutters, interrupting me. 'Well, it is like this: scientists were able to determine that the color of light emitted by faraway stars and galaxies was very red. And red in this context means that it has a low frequency. The Doppler-effect, named after the Austrian physicist Christian Doppler, had been known since the 19th Century. For example, if you hear the siren of an approaching ambulance, the sound waves

141

are pressed together because they all fly towards you. Pressed together means that the frequency of the sound waves increases and the tone becomes higher. After the ambulance has passed by and drives away from you, the distance between the sound waves increases, there are less and less hitting you until you stop hearing them. The frequency decreases and you hear the sound at a lower pitch. Light waves behave in a similar way. If a source of light moves away from us the measured light frequency decreases. Less frequency means red light.' 'Oh, I see,' Alexander is obviously satisfied, 'then the redshift of galaxies means they are moving further and further away from us – and that would prove that the universe is expanding.' 'Exactly, that is what people believe, anyway. And because they are all moving away from us – in the same way as do colored marks on the surface of a balloon which is blown up further and further – this is assumed to be the proof that millions of billions of years ago everything was drawn together in one single point. That's when the Big Bang is supposed to have happened.' 'Yes, but this argument is difficult to refute,' Alexander smiles somewhat cynically. 'You are a great old skeptic, don't you believe it! Let me first give you some more aspects which the Big Bang supporters often conveniently disregard: Firstly, a Big Bang poses the problem of having to explain where it could have come from. Was it an immeasurably small and yet finite point? This would be a gross contradiction of all the accepted, physical fundamental conservation laws. It would mean that these laws could not have been in force at the time of the Big Bang. As just one example: all matter would have been eradicated by anti-matter. I do not want to go into detail here because this would take us beyond the scope of this book. If, on the other hand, the origin of the Big Bang were an infinite and small point, a so-called unity, then this would render any discussion of the Big Bang completely impossible for all materialists due to the fact that natural science rests on the premiss that there can only be a material-based truth.

142

Let's go back to the redshift. In the meantime some problems have appeared. If we follow this theory through, the cosmos should be expanding faster and faster and some far-away galaxies should move away from us with almost the speed of light. But that is absolutely impossible. Because that would also mean that, viewed from a distant star, the earth was moving away from that star at the speed of light. Nobody has ever asked this question. Since scientists are aware of all these problems they are always ready to change the basis of calculation, in this case the Hubble Constant, which is a supposedly constant measure for the expansion speed of galaxies. For galaxies at differing distances from us – however that may be understood – the Hubble Constant is assumed to vary; just so that everything fits again! In addition, galaxies and other faraway objects known as quasars have been discovered which show grossly varying redshifts although they should really be quite close to one another. None of this fits into the concept. I would remind you of the amazing measurements registered by the COBE–satellite. They underline that the background radiation (BGR) at 2.73K is practically the same everywhere in our universe. It is isotropic which means not only that it has the same strength everywhere but that it is "distributed evenly and without any one-sided preference". The actual variations are extremely small, as already mentioned in Chapter 4. It would only be fair and equitable by today's standards to expect the advocates of the Big Bang theory to prove their case and in some way to invalidate these contradictions. But this they have not done, nor can they. Instead they modify the rules to make their theories fit actual observations. Now I would like to show you that there is indeed another explanation for the redshift and that is the growing age of the luminous objects and of the light, even the possibility of the latter is still dismissed by physicists.' 'You mean to say,' Martin asks, 'that distant galaxies are old and decrepit and for that reason show a redshift?'

143

'Exactly!' we know that when stars grow old they often give off a red light just before they die. We could also say their reactor is no longer functioning properly and less and less light is radiated which inevitably decreases the frequency of photons. This would adequately explain why nearly equally-distant celestial bodies, which in addition appear to be interconnected, may show different redshifts. After all, their velocities can't be all that different if they are interconnected. But if one of them is distinctly older than the other, then their differing redshifts are understandable.' 'I agree,' Martin says, '…' 'But, there is another argument,' I continue, without letting him get another word in. 'For that I have to refer to the number space again. This is a fixed idea of mine to which I already referred in my first book. In this number space with its order of 24, the first ray, the prime number ray, is the metronome. Now, you already know that light possesses three characteristics: velocity, frequency and intensity. The latter is an effect which light has in its spatial environment and which, like gravitation, decreases along the inverse values of the squares of all ordinal numbers without ever vanishing completely. The velocity of light, I also believe, is the consequence of light passively following the spatial expansion. This is determined by the last ray of each shell, i.e. the ray that follows the numbers 24, 48, 72, etc. That leaves only the frequency. And since the two other parameters are already controlled by the all regulating number space, then we have all reason to assume that this applies also to the frequency of light. In short, the most important rays in the infinite number space are the last of each shell and the first, i.e. the prime number ray. The last has already been appointed, that leaves the first one, the prime number ray. On that ray all prime number squares are directly readable. Now, the higher the numbers become the less prime number squares there are, but really large gaps only occur between large numbers.

144

Therefore, I postulate that the frequency of light is controlled by the prime number ray and that, for this reason, the single photons are not transported into space by means of all numbers of the number space, i.e. via each shell, but only through those with prime number squares. This would mean that the light frequency decreases automatically in the inverse ratio as the numbers grow bigger, i.e. with the increasing expansion of space, and the redshift could be explained alone by these two values, the "age" of a celestial body and its "distance".' 'I like that idea,' Alexander says, 'now it's up to the astronomers to prove it.' 'Yes,' I muse, 'but then they ought to read this book and for many of them that is not so simple. There is so much material being written and published today that much of it is simply not read. Furthermore, if you support some completely new ideas, hardly anybody takes you seriously.' 'That's no reason to become depressive,' he soothes me, 'you usually have enough faith in your success.' 'I still believe in it,' I say dismissing his doubts, 'but it usually takes rather a long time to get a hearing with such revolutionary ideas.' 'But what about all those concepts about new structures such as the strings and gluons, etc.?' Alexander asks. 'I think you can forget those – they don't exist. They haven't been discovered yet either which, of course, is of no consequence. But I am convinced that gluons, which are supposed to be particles of glue binding small, closely adjacent particles together, do not actually exist, neither do strings which are supposed to have a long-distance effect. They are simply no longer necessary because the numbers of the infinite number space determine the force of attraction. It's as simple as that. They are the strings of our universe.'

145

The Structure of the Atom 'Could you tell us more about atoms? It seems that numbers must also define exactly where the electrons orbiting the atomic nucleus must be?' Alexander is very adamant in changing the subject. 'Very well, they not only define where the electrons must be in principle but also the maximum number of electrons that may be found at certain locations! Furthermore, they render the search for ever more particles within the atomic nucleus rather superfluous since these particles provide no further explanation of the issue as a whole. Each atom is one small finite point around which an infinite, four-dimensional number space is formed by way of the squares of all ordinal numbers. Each atom possesses electrons, i.e. negatively charged particles, which orbit the positively charged nucleus. I believe that the opposing charges are due to opposing rotational movements. I will refer to this again later. As the law of symmetry dictates, electrons have a natural tendency to form pairs. They have a contra-rotating spin which conforms with the law of polarity. This spin is a momentum which causes opposing selfrotations. An atom with a single electron, such as the hydrogen atom (hydrogen possesses only one electron), is therefore relatively responsive because the one electron strives to form a pair with another electron. All electrons and electron pairs orbit the nucleus in concentric shells. Ernest Rutherford and Niels Bohr discovered this 100 years ago and based on their discovery they developed their well-known atom models. These ordained that on the first shell there is only space for 1 electron pair, on the next shell for 4, on the third we have a maximum of 9, on the fourth a maximum of 16, etc. After a maximum of 7 shells each atom is fully equipped but the outer shells are usually not fully loaded with the possible maximum number of electrons. Such an eccentric load would probably be unsustainable. Should we ever be able to produce artificial elements fully equipped with the maximum number of electrons they would surely disintegrate again after an extremely short period of time just as those recently produced have done.

146

If we take a closer look at the possible maximum number of electron pairs we notice that the numbers 1, 4, 9, 16 could also be expressed as 12, 22, 32 and 42. The maximum load on the shells follows the squares of the first few ordinal numbers in a purely mathematical manner. I assume that here too the maximum load is encoded by the prime number ray. We know that the seventh shell is the last one and that there are no more shells for electrons after that. If we take a look at the prime number ray, this being the first ray of a possible four-dimensional real number space outward bound, we will find on its first concentric shell the 12 (i.e. 1), on the second the 52 (i.e. 25) and on the third shell the 72 (i.e. 49). They are all squares of prime numbers. On the next two shells there are just simple prime numbers and only thereafter another prime number square (112). This gap could possibly be regarded as the code for the number of electron shells. As I described it in Chapter 7 the Pythagorean triangles also bring us to the number 140 by simply subtracting two planes from each other; the number 140 is also the sum of 12+22+32+42+52+62+72. This could also be a code.' 'If a concentric, four-dimensional number space is generated around each finite point, such as an atomic nucleus, for example, which thereby controls the expansion of all effects and masses in space, then the real existence of such a number shell itself establishes where an electron pair must be situated, namely on this shell,' Alexander draws the correct conclusion. 'That's exactly how it must be,' I am delighted by his astuteness, 'however, we know nothing about the exact position of the shells. Nor do we know why such an electron does not constantly lose energy while orbiting the nucleus. Nevertheless, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle or principle of indeterminism herewith becomes superfluous.' 'What does that mean?' Martin asks eagerly. 'Well, Heisenberg sought an explanation for the fact that electrons, according to Rutherford, were so well-behaved by remaining on their orbit around the nucleus without ever falling into it as might be expected since they ought to lose energy while orbiting the

147

nucleus, as I just pointed out. He established his theory of uncertainty or indeterminism according to which electrons no longer fly on fixed orbits around the nucleus but rather fog-like, and indeterminately, in clouds. Accordingly it is impossible to ascertain both the position and the momentum of electrons with accuracy. It was made possible to establish this theory because in the meantime the French physicist de Broglie believed he could finally prove that light did possess a dual nature and that it indeed consisted of particles and waves simultaneously. Earlier on I also suggested that light has a dual nature. Not as "real" waves and particles, however, but just as "particles" each with two different sides, like the two sides of one coin, one side being the smallest reality in the physical world, i.e. a massless, not really finite spot of light, and the other being simultaneously the pure information of its existence, equaling the value "1". If we assume that there is indeed a spiritual but realistic number space emerging in a shelllike 24-rhythm along the squares of all ordinal numbers around each finite point, then it becomes clear that their positions are allocated to electrons by numbers. It is this number space which compels electrons to maintain their orbits and which is responsible, at least partly, for the fact that no energy is lost when electrons are orbiting the atomic nucleus. Energy need only be introduced when such an electron changes from one shell to another. I already devoted some further explanation to this at the beginning of our dialogue, and Figure 10 illustrates the point. Thus the notion of fixed orbits can be retained. In addition, we can now explain why it is that even one single electron, as in the hydrogen atom, gives the impression of being a completely closed sphere: every finite point, which also includes the electron, also possesses – in addition to its finite mass – the spiritual information of "being", i.e. the "1" which, in its turn, is a massless light quantum, a photon. On its own spherical shell it is to be found everywhere at the same time (i.e. pan-local, but not nonlocal as Heisenberg assumed), since this "1" is multiplied by the square of that shell on which the electron is located. That is why those of us doing research on our world by using similarly

148

functioning instruments and devices, obtain the optical picture of a completely closed sphere. In short, the cyclical, mathematical, i.e. spiritual, yet real number space around each finite point is the sole determinant for the expansion of an atom, the maximum number of electrons it carries, as well as its spherical form which we perceive with our senses. The number space of the atom in itself proves its existence. Since it expands infinitely and thus exists eternally, each atom remains in existence for ever. It leaves its trace in an eternal world memory which objectively never fades away into the past. On the contrary it will always remain in the present, albeit without correlating to the actual current state of affairs. This all sounds rather complicated at first, but is in fact quite simple. In principle it is the same, grossly simplified, of course, as watching the video film of your last holidays. The moment you watch it, the past becomes the present again for you, but it is after all just a video film, and it may even be that one or the other of the persons in the film, regrettable, has died in the meantime. In the eternal world memory, however, everything continues in its full complexity and its three-dimensionality, i.e. just as in real life, although it belongs to the past. It is, therefore, absolutely impossible to change history retrospectively. The law of causality remains unimpaired. We could not, as is sometimes claimed, travel back in time to, perhaps, kill our wicked grandfather, because in doing so we would erase our own life at the same time, or more precisely we would not have been born in the first place and could not, therefore, kill our grandfather anyway, etc.! What holds true for every single atom is also true without exception for every arbitrary combination of atoms no matter how complex this may be. Since everything in this physical world is made of atoms, everything remains in existence eternally and continually in all its complexity as a trace in the memory.

149

Time, the Antipode of Space 'Fine, then we find ourselves right in the middle of the question of "time". You wanted to tell us something about that, too,' Alexander summarizes. 'Yes, but that will be the end for today,' I try to bring this discussion slowly to its conclusion. 'About time, too. I still have to go to school tomorrow and I ought to go to bed,' Martin adds. 'I think we ought to look at this phenomenon alternately from two sides: from our point of view, which means mainly from the standpoint of the physical universe itself, space seems to be threedimensional and time one-dimensional, pointing in one direction, i.e. from the past into the future in a kind of one-way street. Einstein based his space-time-continuum on this. We already talked about that. But in reality, universal space seems to be fourdimensional. And this also applies to time even though at first sight it does not give us that impression. Let's now view time from the other side, from the spiritual world. Now, everything seems to be exactly vice versa. All past events still exist in the spiritual world, and they exist simultaneously side by side; yet we still have no access to it whatsoever. Time here is just as multidimensional as is space in our physical world. But space in the spiritual world seems to be one-dimensional and pointing in one direction just as time is for us. From this spiritual point of view, temporal processes, which "for us" seem to occur at different times, are actually taking place simultaneously; they just occur in different places of the spiritual (time-) "space", in the same way as "for us", different processes can occur at the same time but in different places within universal space. We find ourselves in a kind of eternally stopped time corridor wherein each of these merging (time-) "spaces" can be visited at any time, although the visitor can only watch events passively, since he himself lives in one of the "current" spaces which are separated from the others. There he can meet with anyone he wishes and may proceed with his guest into the "future" which, temporally speaking, really is something

150

happening "simultaneously", but which opens or even represents a new part of space. The same applies for everybody in this spiritual world, irrespective of the time he lived in. This comparison is, of course, not quite congruent since there can be no perfect comparison between the continuity of real temporal processes on the one hand and thoughts, which remain in physical categories, on the other. Think, for example, of "our" spaces. Our ("real") space, as we know it, is also in the first instance spiritual since it is generated by numbers. But thereafter it is "filled" with matter and "illuminated" by light. Thus it becomes the central dimensionality of our physical world and of our level of cognition. Time, on the other hand, always remains a purely spiritual expansion. In the physical world it can only be simulated. In the same way, our space is probably somehow just as simulated in the spiritual world. This presupposes that the quality "space" has already been experienced before! Time really is something which always possesses continuity and which has no real counterpart in the physical world. It obtains its continuity, its flow37, solely through the thoughts of a subjective spirit. In our physical world there is no such thing as objective, absolute time. It is always relative, i.e. it depends on gravity and velocity. But even then it requires commonly accepted agreements between "subjective spirits", i.e. between us thinking beings, which means it requires our existence. And only then time becomes a (seemingly real) physical quantity but will always remain dependent on the above mentioned forces and, therefore, flexible due to its being a simulation in the physical world. This relativity, even in objective time measurement, has been known since Einstein. The stronger the gravitation, the slower time "passes".

37

Panta rhei, Greek: everything flows. This wisdom came from Heraclitus, the Greek philosopher (approx. 544-483 BC).

151

We can measure this with the tremendous number of single beats (oscillation=frequency) of the cesium atom38. It can easily be imagined. We all know the television adverts for batteries where a large number of soft toys, little rabbits, play on a drum in front of them. When the batteries grow weaker the drumming gets slower and slower. It just becomes more difficult for them! It would be the same if they had to play the drums against an increased resistance, such as, for example, a higher force of gravity. Then, too, it would become more difficult for them and they would have to slow down! When the force of gravity is increased, therefore, the clocks slow down as well. Imagine on the other hand you are flying very fast, at half the speed of light perhaps. Einstein thought deeply about this and developed his intellectual experiment with the light clocks (Figure 12). Light, travelling at maximum speed in a back and forth motion inside a huge vacuum tube, must travel a further distance if the tube itself moves through space. Since the maximum speed of light is constant, however, the only logical consequence can be that time itself must have changed, or more exactly, that time has been extended. Einstein talked about a dilatation of time. Figure 12 (by Martin): Illustration of time dilatation. Light moves from 0 to A' and back again in a vacuum tube. At the same time the tube moves from 0 to A. Therefore, the light has to cover a further distance. If the speed of light remains constant, time must be dilated.

38

Since 1967, the basic unit of time is one second defined as the length of time taken by 9.192.631.770 periods of electro-magnetic radiation generated when the two hyper-fine structures of the cesium isotope 133Cs alter between their normal energy levels (cesium clock).

152

This must mean that there is nothing really continual in the entire physical world. In the last instance everything can be explained by the interaction of single particles and, in the case of light, even by the interaction of photons (commonly known as quanta) with their "1"-information. When talking about time we mean a continuity which does not exist in our physical world. We may compare this to a movie film which consists of millions of single pictures which appear to us as being one continuous film due to our perceiving the sequence of pictures as something continuous. The only real continuity in our physical universe is generated solely by the sequence of ordinal numbers in number spaces. They are immaterial since numbers are spiritual. And their sequence going from 1 to infinity gives the impression of their possessing continuity. They are the spiritual expansion of matter. But matter itself is the result of something spiritual (see Chapter 10). Spirit and matter are obviously interdependent, just as the famous and age-old principles, Yin and Yang, of ancient Chinese philosophy suggest for everything in the world. The sequence of single events, always discontinuous in reality, is made to appear continuous merely by the number frame of space. Depending on their level of awareness, only living beings are able to perceive time as something really continuous. And we humans are not only receptive due to our consciousness and our ability to think – both of which are again based on spiritual principles – but we alone are also able to comprehend all this and to think about it in a conscious and abstract manner. Without life and its thinking beings, time and continuity would make no sense! The mere fact that we humans are able to develop a perception of time in our physical world without any kind of physical correlate, certainly indicates strongly the independent existence of a spiritual level in which time is of the same fundamental significance as is space in the physical world. And it is this spiritual background which, much later, ensures that – over and above the numbers – further spiritual contents are manifested in our physical world

153

thereby enabling their own development to continue. These contents are life and spirit. The generation of the former is still an utter enigma. It is still an inexplicable phenomenon. Having experienced the various steps of life, it leads in the end to a selfaware spirit (see Volume 2). Time is both spiritual and subjective at the same time. Objective measures are based on our treaties, i.e. the conventions of "thinking and evaluating spirits". This corresponds with our everyday experience. Without such objective agreements the personal perception of time is purely subjective and it varies according to age, emotional situation and many other things.' 'You are as young or as old as you feel,' Martin seems to be a bit tired. 'Yes, son, we have differentiating terms in science as well, for example, we talk about a biological age, a psychological period of time or a psychological age. It you are looking forward to something, e.g. the next holiday, or Christmas presents, time seems to be so slow because you just can't wait. But your holiday or the Christmas period seem to fly past. When asleep, we often dream of situations taking a long period of time whereas, objectively, only a few seconds elapse or – at the very most – some minutes. Our subjective perception of time is prolonged. Therefore, the argument of the Austrian philosopher Karl Popper against an "eternal life" after physical death is not convincing: for him, the prospect of such a life seemed unbearable – and possibly, also unbearably boring – and for this reason he could not imagine it. He expressed his apprehensions in a book which he wrote in cooperation with that famous and, in my opinion, most brilliant of brain researchers, the Australian John Eccles. Eccles, however, had in one respect a completely different opinion, and was just as convinced of a life after death as I am myself. In my opinion, time is purely spiritual since in the entire physical universe there is no correlate for (continuous) time, as I already mentioned. Time is ultimately also subjective, and from this it follows, of course, that

154

any "eternity after death" must also be and ought to be judged from a purely subjective point of view. This can have nothing to do with any "objective" measures we may be able to take with the aid of the physical environment available to us as physical inhabitants of this earth. Space, as we have seen, is composed of two opposing aspects: on the one hand we have the three-dimensional finite corporeality, and on the other an infinite four-dimensionality emerging around each point. In the same way, time also encompasses finiteness which is inevitably inherent in all three-dimensional (finite) bodies, together with temporal infinity, known as eternity, which is appropriately adjusted to four-dimensionality. In this way, space and time each possess two opposing, polar aspects, those of finiteness and infinity. This is the basis for the general and omnipresent symmetry known to you. Two sides of one and the same coin accrue inevitably to every part of this world. Therefore, the notion that everything carries the spiritual information of its being, in addition to that of its physical existence, becomes very plausible. And this has nothing to do with the smallest souls or the monads ascribed to every being by the greatest philosophers of modern times, such as Gottfried Leibniz and Baruch de Spinoza, for example. However, the way should be left open for reconciliation with their theories. Everything in our world has two sides, one of which is symmetry; but every symmetry embraces polarity at the same time. These are always correlations between two opposing mirror images which nonetheless are inseparable and perfectly complementary to one another. Space and time are interconnected in the same way as are the two sides of the same coin. Nevertheless, space itself emerges from spirit with its very own dimension "time". And being itself generated from spirit it generates a new coin in its turn with again two sides which are mirror images of each other, one of them

155

being finiteness, the other infinity. Both are as polar to one another as are physical space and spiritual time. Thus time does not just fill the gap for a fourth dimension in a space-time-continuum as Einstein believed, and as has been generally claimed after him. My feeling is that this was an inappropriate human concept conceived at a time and age when it was fashionable (as it sadly still is) to consider materialistic aspects alone as being true.' 'But,' Alexander interrupts, 'it is indisputable that a time arrow exists which points from the past into the future irrespective of the relativity of time. You wrote that yourself with reference to the second law of thermodynamics. Does not time, then, really resemble a one-dimensional line with a clear direction?' 'Yes and no, son, I already went into all that. But let's look again at time from two alternative points of view. First we view it through our normal physical spectacles, through which space appears to be three-dimensional and time seems, as you just said, to be one-dimensional and directed. Remember when, some years ago, you stood on the top of the Table Mountain in Cape Town with your grandfather. Your grandfather sadly died in the meantime. Two years later, we went back and we remembered him, we talked about him and the past became present in our minds. In our physical world you were at the same place, i.e. at the same place in space. Although you were able to change place at random, time traveled in only one direction. Your grandfather was not there this time. What is passed is passed. But look upon time from a spiritual dimension: space then becomes what time is for us now. It appears as a spiritual line. In a single dimension such as this, everything takes place side by side. Past, present and future form simultaneously existing worlds in which the future can be considered as a new room which is constantly disclosed afresh. Here we can relive all past events, but we cannot interfere; for in the same way as we could before visit the same place containing past events, but had to accept a temporal restriction on reliving the event, we can now effortlessly visit past times but experience a spatial restriction.

156

However, I am convinced that space is infinitely open and fourdimensional. It follows that time must also be infinite, i.e. eternal. Infinite space and eternal time will always possess and remember continually and eternally the information of all events in their original as well as in their constantly changing full complexity. Everything is existing in reality and is also eternally preserved in its dynamic. Everything which is able to act will retain its capability to do so eternally. Nevertheless, it is impossible to violate causality. I already explained why that is. Although all times exist side by side and can each be "visited" in the spiritual world, the room will always be a different one. In the first scene of his opera "Parsifal", the famous composer Richard Wagner describes such a phenomenon of close temporal proximity of events in the spiritual world: the young hero, Parsifal, is taken to the castle of the Holy Grail by the old Gurnemanz. Parsifal is to take part in the holy act. The stage set is moving past the traveler who seems to walk but really remains stationary. Parsifal is rather amazed about this and says to Gurnemanz: "I am hardly walking but yet I seem to have gone so far." And Gurnemanz replies: "You see, son, time becomes space here." One of the big problems of our time is that we still have not yet freed ourselves from our materialistic viewpoint and, therefore, we are unable (or no longer able) to recognize the nuances. Only if we learn to turn away from materialism will we find the long overdue key to a better world! This is at the same time the only key to a future world with a chance of survival!'

157

Electricity and Magnetism and a Combination of the four Elementary Forces 'Amen,' Martin says. He seems to be very tired but he pulls himself together: 'Papa, you wanted to tell us something about electricity.' 'Very well then, but I'll make it short. Electricity and magnetism are two phenomena which modern science can only describe; they have never yet been explained exactly. I believe they are also two sides of one coin and belong inseparably together. Of course, both phenomena must be explainable by my theories. I will try to do this as follows: electricity, as we all know, comes about due to the existence of two polar charges which we quite arbitrarily label (+) and (-) and call electrical poles. We all know that poles with the same charge repel mutually, whilst those with opposing charges attract mutually. Between the two poles, forces are effective which almost "cry out" for an explanation by way of the number space. The 19th century British physicist and chemist, Michael Faraday, discovered that every (complete) charge is always an integral multiple of the smallest charge, the so-called elementary charge. This leads us to the logical conclusion that the total charge is proportional to the number of charged particles. Every electrically charged body exerts a force. Since Faraday we talk about a field without really knowing more about it. We also talk about an electromagnetic force; this form of magnetism is based on an electric charge. It is a well-known fact that the intensity of the attracting or repelling (electromagnetic) force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the total charge. In the first instance this can be derived from the above-mentioned rule because the more charge carriers there are the bigger the total charge will be and the greater will be the force exerted between the opposite poles, of course. It will also depend on the distance between the poles.

158

But, secondly, it follows that if the distance between the bodies increases, or more precisely, if the distance between the centers of the charges is increased, then the force will always decrease by the squares of the reciprocals of ordinal numbers. If the distance between the poles is decreased the force grows by the squares of all integers. You will notice immediately that this is Isaac Newton's inversesquare law all over again which also applies, for example, to the force of gravity or the distribution of light in space. The squares of all ordinal numbers also control the effects of electromagnetic forces. Solely responsible for all this is the real existing number space around each finite body. Now we still have to explain what it is that causes the different charges. We already know that, with its very own number space, any finite existence, i.e. any three-dimensional body, exerts gravity. If many finite bodies are densely packed then the force of attraction is correspondingly stronger. According to Faraday practically the same rule applies to electromagnetic forces which, however, are far stronger than those of gravity. This means, however, that the structure of finite bodies, or their "naked" existence, alone cannot explain electromagnetic force. Therefore, I believe that, apart from the structure, function (by which we mean here rotation) also plays an important part. Any finite body, small or large, can rotate around its own axis whereby the same direction of rotation denotes the same elementary charge. If two bodies rotating in the same direction and thus possessing the same charge approach one another they will repel one another in the same way as one rotating cogwheel does not harmonize with another next to it rotating in the same direction. Within every atom there are tiny electrons rotating around their own axes whilst also orbiting the nucleus. The far bigger protons only rotate around their own axis but in the opposite direction to the electrons. The neutrons do not seem to rotate at all. Thus different elementary charges are generated which usually compensate each other in the same atom. To the outside, therefore, the atom appears to be neutral, i.e. uncharged, if it

159

carries exactly the same number of electrons as protons, i.e. an equal number of particles each rotating in opposite directions. Only when one electron is removed – by friction, for example – does the atom become electrically charged. The name "electron", by the way, is Greek and means "amber". The ancient Greeks already noticed that a piece of amber develops an ability of attracting other bodies, such as hairs or feathers, after having been rubbed against fur. An electrically charged atom which has one electron too few or one too many (an ion) always strives to discharge, i.e. to become neutral. For this reason, electrons move from places with an excess of electrons (negative pole) to places with a shortage of electrons (positive pole). We say that an electric current is flowing. We are observing here the incredibly fast transport of particles and information from one atom to the next. The number spaces of the atoms involved are thereby continually frequented again and again and are probably strengthened due to the constant "renewal". So as if several atoms were closely packed together, this brings about a noticeable increase in the force of "gravity". We call this electromagnetism. It has the same effect but is much stronger. Gravitation, the "simple" gravitation that is, is the "basic force", generated and controlled by the real number space, and is the result of the "naked" existence of any finite structure. The electrical charge is an expression of its movement and thus the external sign of its function. Electromagnetism is the direct consequence of this function which concentrates "simple" gravitation to an electromagnetic force in a similar way as a lens focuses light. All these forces are controlled solely by the numbers of the real number space.' 'What about the natural magnetism of, for example, iron?! Alexander asks, now visibly exhausted. 'That is also a magnetic force, but not an electromagnetic force, isn't it?' 'Yes and no! The word "magnetism", by the way, is derived from the place where chunks of certain iron ore, which attracted other

160

metals, are supposed to have been found. The name of the place is Magnesia, today called Manisia, in Asia Minor, north east of the Turkish town Izmir. Certain metals such as iron (Fe) or Copper (Cu), for example, always possess two apparently "loosely connected" outer electrons. Expressed in simple terms we could say that these electrons move easily between such atoms even when the metals themselves are still in a solid state. There is a natural transfer of particles which is why metals are especially good conductors of electricity. On the one hand these "loose" outer electrons prevent the creation of a firm connection between two such metal atoms to form a molecule whilst on the other they support the formation of a dense mesh structure in which the atoms come to lie in close proximity to each other. I suppose that it is due to this spatial proximity that the two outer electrons orbit two adjacent atoms in the figure of eight whereby their orbits run in opposite directions (see Figure 13). In this way stable pairs are formed which possess two poles of equal intensity but with different charges. We call them dipoles. Since they are the smallest units between which an exchange of electrons takes place they are known as molecular magnets. If they are distributed randomly, their magnetic effects are compensated. But if they are well ordered in one direction then the whole object becomes magnetic. We then have the typical magnet with stable north and south poles. This means that in natural magnets we also find a "flow of electrons". The two poles of the dipole form two number spaces which overlap in the middle and, therefore, mutually compensate their effects there, whereas towards the poles, of course, their effects are strengthened again. They control the extension and the direction of the magnetic force. As already mentioned, magnetism and gravity are very similar, since magnetism has the same effect as gravity, whereas gravity is solely the result of a structure, i.e. of any "naked" finite existence, which generates an infinite cyclical number space. Such a number space controls the behavior of other masses and effects.

161

Magnetism is based upon that. It is also the result of the function, i.e. of movement, which such a structure can exert. Magnetism is much stronger than gravity because here the effect is seemingly focussed due to the movement of the particles which constantly renew the number spaces. Of course, in order and extension all these effects obey the numbers. Structure and function together determine what kind of force is generated. The numbers determine how this force takes effect.

Figure 13 (by Martin): Model of magnetic dipoles generated by the "flow of electrons" between two iron atoms (Fe) with "loosely connected " outer electrons. If the dipoles are aligned in one direction a magnet is created. (N= north pole; S= south pole). Further explanations in the text.

Finally, all four of the known elementary forces can be understood and explained by adopting the terms "structure" and "function" and by using the infinite cyclical number frame around each finite point. "Structure" always means here the finite existence itself and "function" is usually the movement of this being, sometimes its order.

162

Final Remarks

As long as scientists can offer no explanations for so many inexplicable but not easily ignorable phenomena experienced by so many people in their daily lives – and as long as they seek to deny people their own will and believe that even human awareness, thoughts and emotions are just trivial, materialistic, concomitant circumstances – scientists have no right, in my opinion, to expect a greater acceptance than that due to completely new ideas which at least try to integrate completely all these things. Scientists fail to accept things existing in this world, or they dismiss them vehemently, apparently because they do not fit into their view of the world and therefore cannot be. It is their perception of the world, therefore, which must be wrong and not, as is always assumed, the well-founded authenticity of many immaterial things or phenomena,' I conclude – and Alexander nods in agreement. 'Some other time we will discuss the uniqueness of life and of the human spirit,' and Alexander agrees again. Martin went to sleep on my arms some time ago.

163

Epilogue

The Truth is the Essence of Being. Thomas of Aquinus, 1225 - 1274 AD

The truth, dear friend, which we all need and which makes us humans happy, was covered only slightly, not buried deeply, by the wise hand, intending it for us. Christian Fürchtegott Gellert, 1715 - 1769 AD

In our times, the truth is so much darkened and the lie is so wide-spread that we cannot recognize the truth if we do not love it. Blaise Pascal, 1623 - 1662 AD

164

Did our universe originate from a Big Bang that happened about 12-15 billion years ago? If so, from what was it generated? Was it an infinitesimally small but finite point? If so it must be permitted to ask as to what went before and in what kind of environment did it exist? Both must have existed. Was it an infinity, or a unity? Here science introduces something which is usually strictly dismissed, something which is nonphysical. Let us assume that there was a Big Bang. This must have meant that all the laws of physics, known to us up till now and that would include all the laws of nature, were not in force for several hundred thousand years. Today we know of distant celestial bodies which must have already existed at a time when our universe had not yet been created – or at least was possibly on the very verge of its emergence. At that point in time these celestial bodies already existed and were complete! They were discovered only after it had become possible to investigate the limits of the cosmos directly with telescopes from space. Is it not fair to assume that in a few years time we will have discovered even more distant galaxies thereby proving our present time scale since the supposed Big Bang to be utterly incorrect ? Why is our universe isotropic? Why do we find masses and massless gaps ordered like a huge system of honey combs and in absolute regularity and harmony? Why is it that we can detect the same weak radiation of heat, a micro-wave background radiation (BGR) – at a temperature of 2.73 K it is slightly above the absolute zero point of –273°C – everywhere in the cosmos?. Why do we keep finding mutually dependent, regular and integral number relations be it in the field of gravitation, electricity or magnetism? Why does the structure of atoms always follow exactly the same number rules? Why do atomic particles possess moments of momentum which also correspond to integral relationships?

165

Scientists attempt to explain all this usually by employing very complicated reasoning and models. They invent "glues", which they call "gluons", to explain the force of attraction between nucleic particles. They invent "gravitons" which are supposed to cause gravitation in a similar way. They look for "strings", immensely long, highly energetic, massless "mooring cables" which are supposed to hold the celestial bodies over large distances forcing them into this practically unbelievable regularity. But as yet not one of these "particles" or "elastic bands" has actually ever been found. Let us take for granted that there was a Big Bang and it was followed by a steady expansion of the universe and let us further assume that the redshift of light is an argument in favor of this theory. This would mean that all very distant celestial bodies would by now already be diverging at a rate approaching the speed of light. Only by introducing mathematical tricks, i.e. the assumption that the Hubble Constant alters, is this impossibility averted. And it is indeed an impossibility because matter moving at the speed of light would have infinite mass and be infinitely small39. And why does nobody mention that, if all these assumptions are correct, our earth, observed from a distant celestial body, would have to travel at an impossible speed? Why do we keep finding the same numbers and number sequences in all important positions in our universe so that the impression is almost forced upon us that they must have something to do with this incredibly pedantic order? I admit that many numbers only fit if they are read in one specific mathematical system. But does that contradict the idea that the world itself could be functioning according to this system. Could it not rather be the case that we humans chose the decimal system from a great number of other possible systems precisely because it just seemed sensible due to the prevailing situation in our near and distant environment? 39

Due to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction, see Glossary.

166

When we generally accept that, for creatures like ourselves, equipped with 10 fingers and 10 toes, neatly packed in 2.5, a number system like the decimal system is more agreeable and has been since time immemorial and rightly so, why can we not accept that already "somebody else" did the same before us and that it just proves to be a wise decision when we adopt it ourselves? To none of my queries, and this is only a very small selection of possible doubts and criticisms, has modern science been able to provide a really satisfying answer. There is nothing wrong with that in itself – but then scientists should not gerrymander the models and theories as if they were already proven facts. However, this is exactly what is happening today; otherwise it would be impossible to meet with such a lack of understanding if the notion that the real existence of immaterial things, such as an existence after death, the existence of supernatural phenomena or even a divine dimension, is indeed imaginable. Yet everything that does not fit into the accepted pattern based on known but questionable models, is either ignored or dismissed as fiction born of human fantasy and is, at best, ridiculed. The beliefs of humans who inhabited the earth thousands of years ago – completely irrespective of their temporal or geographical position on earth and regardless whether they ever had contact with one another – are increasingly branded as pious legends of out-of-touch and anachronistic nut-cases: I am referring, of course, to the countless religions with their almost identical central concepts of a divine dimension, the existence of an independent non-physical, spiritual world and of a further existence after death as a still self-aware individual. Psychologists and psychoanalysts everywhere are avidly trying to explain these phenomena, often with doubtful explanations and in doing so they disregard the fact that hardly any of the arguments they like to quote are based on proven knowledge, but posses in most cases still the character of mere models. Here is an example which might explain my case: Peter Moosleitner, the former publisher of the widely acclaimed German magazine "P.M. Wissenschaftsmagazin" who has a self-

167

confessed penchant for Freud's ideas, explains the source of human faith in life after death in the following way: 40 All human fear can be traced back to that of the male of the species losing his penis or of being castrated. "In the moment that penis and human being and person are perceived to be equal, the original fear changes into a fear of death." It is then that the humans really have a problem, and that is "… having to live with death in sight. Humans solve this problem by denying death. By allowing only the body to die but not the soul." And further: "… in death they do not permit the soul to die, rather they imagine that at the moment of death the soul leaves the body and lives on. (…). Humans start to bury their dead. This enables the development of their culture to progress in leaps and bounds. The graves of relatives make people settle in one place because they want to look after it…." And as "someone who has been working in the field of depth psychology for decades," he tries to explain why humans believe in God by telling us: "Believers should feel safe and secure in the biblical world (my remark: this should also be taken as a synonym for any other religious perception) – at least safer than in the stark, sober reality. They should think: if anything happens to us then it does not happen "just like that", but it happens because we brought it on ourselves. In other words: someone who believes in God has a kind of insurance policy. Nothing and nobody can cause me harm just like that; if harm comes my way, I myself am the reason for it, for the punishing God merely reacts to my own behavior. This means that I can feel safe and I may sleep in peace. For I only have to follow God's laws, and then I am safe." It is even worse, in my opinion, when theologians, those that is who scientifically study religions and especially if also they happen to be priests, contradict the basic concepts of their faith from pure opportunism. For me, these people are surfing along, whilst succumbing to usually uncritical modern scientific theses, and an 40

From: "Die unsterbliche Seele der Menschheit", see List of References.

168

irrational current of defeatism, i.e. a dispirited pessimism. Many faithful people cannot counter the claim in a discussion and feel grossly insecure because they are neither qualified nor do they have the necessary intellectual ability to do so. I would like to quote the following part of a conversation: The catholic priest, psychoanalyst and former lecturer of theological science, Eugen Drewermann, who was forbidden to preach or teach by the Archbishop in Paderborn, Germany, in the 90's of the last century, now seems to belong more to the skeptics of this own teachings41 when he says: "Our desires and yearnings are also a product of evolution. And inside every human there is a need for security, for personal love in the face of death. To the same extent that such love is realized in humanity, nature has the audacity to bring about that which had not yet been seen on this planet, the outer contradiction to itself." (my underlining). The subtle connotations of such a statement only become obvious probably when he points out in the same conversation that "the evolution of life on earth from its chemical, primeval beginnings can quite reasonably be understood to have started on its own. (…). Humans, too, are part of this system (it means the system "of the continuous eating and being eaten") (…) They belong to one species of many, their strength is the brain power arising from a selective and self-controlled process of evolution and they are integrated into its laws of survival." These concepts, similar to those concerning the development of the universe, are not sustainable in this form. I will come back to this in detail in Volume 2 of this series. At this point I would like to come back to a bet made by Blaise Pascal. I already described it in detail in both my first two books. This bet, which was open especially to skeptical natural scientists, who usually consider themselves as the personification of logic 41

"What is creation? The one God who is, is not "; a report about a conversation by Peter Rosien about and with Eugen Drewermann. From "Publik-Forum", no. 9 (2000)

169

itself, demands for this very logical reason that natural scientists should adopt a considerably more optimistic view of the world and of their own personal futures; for it is only this attitude that will be crowned with success and which will be in the last instance solely responsible for acquiring a better quality of life. With this series of books, therefore, I attempt to suggest an alternative and yet well-founded view of our world. Unfortunately religious traditions usually have accumulated much superfluous nonsense over the thousands of years for whatever reasons. Far too often this unnecessarily conceals the true core of religion. In the same way, religions have too often neglected the necessity of giving serious thought to scientific knowledge in a critical yet constructive manner; in many cases due to the fear, which is in my opinion absolutely unnecessary, of losing their right to exist. But their blockade is increasingly taking its toll now and causes apostacy. I am profoundly convinced that only a mutual cooperation between all scientists who work on existential theories will give us a chance of attaining true cognition. My book is, therefore, to be viewed as a history of our world which combines scientific, philosophic and religious models. From a scientific point of view a consequential attempt has to be made to separate true results from interpretations. At the same time it must be allowed to include such knowledge which previously was not found to be suitable. I hope this will lead to a well-founded alternative explanatory model which might even open up an unexpectedly large scope of understanding for the various phenomena we encounter every day and which, unfortunately, are too often derogatively disregarded or dismissed. Our universe was probably created and constructed in a completely different way than most scientists today claim although they want to make us believe that theirs is certified knowledge. "Life", "spirit", "consciousness" and "emotions" – but above all "death" – are, in my opinion, utterly misinterpreted almost everywhere.

170

For these reasons, I will attempt in the next two volumes, Volume 2 "Life" and Volume 3 "Death", to shed more light upon the darkness in the same manner as I adopted here and with my very own personal conviction.

171

Glossary Akasha-Chronicle, Sanskrit: akasha = space, ether; describes a kind of world memory in which everything that ever existed is supposed to be recorded. Albertus Magnus (Albert the Great), originally Graf Albrecht von Bollstädt (approx. *1193 - †15.11.1280 in Cologne). Dominican, bishop, theologist, philosopher and naturalist. Alexander the Great (*356 - †13.06.323 BC), King of Macedonia (336-323 BC), world conquerer by his own grace, ”King of Asia”. Archetype, Greek: arche = beginning, origin, and typos = pattern, form, good example. Aristarchus of Samos (*c. 320 BC - †c. 250 BC) Greek astronomer. Proposed that while the sun and the fixed stars are motionless, the earth moves around the sun on the circumference of a circle. Aristotle (*384 - †322 BC). His father was the personal physician of King Amyntas of Macedonia. Astral, Greek: aster = star; relating to the stars; coming from the stars. Describes a kind of supersensible substance every physical human body is supposed to possess. Astronomy = the science concerning celestial bodies and the cosmos. Atom Greek: atomos = indivisible, uncut. It denotes the smallest physical particles of →elements which still demonstrate the properties of the element concerned. They cannot be divided chemically. Augustinus, Aurelius (*13.11.354 - †28.08.430 AD), was a Latin church father and scholar. Autism a pathological, extreme inability to take up contact with reality. Babylonian Astronomy: goes back to the 3rd millenium AD. Reached its peak about 500-600 AD, ended during the last century before Christ. The astronomical data were so exact that variations to the data established by most modern devices today are usually extremely small and are probably due to conditions actually having varied in the meantime! Background radiation (BGR): This is a cosmic radiation of micro-waves emanating almost uniformly from all directions. Variations detected by the satellite → COBE are extremely small at only about a thirty-millionth degree. Bar: 1 bar corresponds to 100.000 Pascal. 1 Pascal (Pa) = pressure of 1 N / 1 m2. Bohr, Niels (*07.10.1885 - †18.11.1962); Danish physicist; became known through his atom model which applied quantum theoretical principles to → Rutherford's shell model. Developed his complementary principle in 1927 which states that light and all other EMR consists simultaneously of particles and waves. de Broglie, Louis-Victor, Duc (*15.08.1892 - †19.03.1987); French physicist; was awarded the Nobel prize in 1929. Buddha, (*543 BC - †483 BC); originally Siddharta Gautama, Sanskrit: = the enlightenend. Founder of Buddhism. Buys-Ballot, Christoph Heinrich (*10.10.1817 - †03.02.1890); Dutch meteorologist. Causal, Latin: causa = the cause, the reason. Cavendish, Henry (*10.10.1731 - †24.02.1810). English chemist and physicist. He discovered the chemical element hydrogen in 1776. Celsius, Anders (*27.11.1701 - †25.04.1744), Swedish astronomer.

172

Chromosome, Greek: chroma = color, and soma =body; rodlike or bow-like structure within the cell nucleus of plants, animals and humans carrying the genes. Consists of DNA or RNA. COBE-Satellite: = Cosmic Background Explorer, orbiting the earth since 1989. Coincidence, Latin: cum = with and incidere = to fall into something, to happen. It means the simulataneous occurrence or existence of things or events. Complementary, Latin: complere = to fill; means: together making up a whole. Computed tomography (CT), a computer-controlled X-ray examination in layers. Consonant, Latin con = together and sonare = to sound: in music it means to sound good together. Contrasted with dissonant. Copernicus, Nicolaus (*19.02.1473 - †24.05.1543 ); Polish physician, jurist and astronomer; he took over from →Aristarchus of Samos the heliocentric concept of the planetary system according to which the planets move around the eccentric sun on the circumference of circles. Cosmos: Greek: kosmos = world order, the ordered and harmonious universe; it denotes our universe, the "smallest", the microcosmos, the world below the threshold of visibility as well as the "largest", the macrocosmos, the universe with its planets, stars and galaxies. Cosmology is the science that deals with the character of the universe as a cosmos. Defeatism, French: défaire = destroy, beat; being resigned to defeat without any attempt to prevent or forestall it. Democritus (*460 - †371 BC), Greek philosopher and naturalist. Descriptive: Latin: describere = to describe, to characterize, to write down; means: to describe verbally. Deoxyribonucleic acid- and ribonucleic acid (DNA and RNA); found in cell nuclei and associated with the transmission of genetic informations. They always possess 3 components: one molecule of phosophoric acid, one molecule of deoxyribose, a pentose (five-carbon) sugar and one organic base. 4 bases exist: adenine, cytosine, guanine and thymine. In RNA thymine is replaced by uracil. DNA and RNA are encoded by the bases. They are spatially structured giant molecules. Carriers of the genes, necessary for the generation of living organisms. Discontinuous, opposite of continuous. Marked by breaks or gaps. Dissipative structures: theory developed by → Ilya Prigogine, according to which an input of energy causes large numbers of organic molecules to change suddenly from a chaotic state into an order in which they behave cooperatively as a unit. If the energy supply is interrupted, however, they disintegrate again and fall back into their chaotic state. Dogmatism: Greek: dogma = principle; unyielding belief in authoritative doctrines; uncritical acceptance of rigid beliefs and principles. Doppler, Christian (*29.11.1803 - †17.03.1853); Austrian mathematician and physicist. Dumas, Alexandre ('Dumas père') (*24.07.1802 - †05.12.1870); French novelist and playwright, e.g. "The Three Musketeers", "The Count of Monte Christo". Eckermann, Johann Peter (*21.09.1792 - †03.12.1854); German author; published "Conversations with Goethe" between 1837 and 1848. Eccles, John C.(*27.01.1903 - †02.05.1997), Australian philosopher and physician; brain researcher; was awarded the Nobel prize in 1963 for his work on the transmission of nervous impulses across synapses in the brain. Eddington, Sir Arthur Stanley (*28.12.1882 - †22.11.1944); English mathematician and astrophysicist.

173

Einstein, Albert (*14.03.1879 - †18.04.1955); German physicist, Nobel prize winner; discovered the relativity between time and space. Electrons: Their existence as elementary particles with a rest mass of 0,9109389 . 10-27 g was proved by the English physicist →Joseph J. Thomson (*18.12.1856 - †30.08.1940) in 1897. Elements are pure matter which cannot be decomposed further into simpler substances by chemical processes. Elementary forces, currently four types are known: strong nuclear force welds the atomic nuclei together. The weak nuclear force governs the particle level, the neutrinos. Electromagnetic force keeps the atoms together, gravitational force effects the attraction between distant masses. Elementary charge, the smallest possible charge. All other charges are integral multiples of such an elementary charge (according to → Faraday). Emergence: Latin: emergere = issuing forth, to rise from; to come into being through evolution from one level to a new, usually higher level. Empiricism: Latin: empirice, = former school of medical practice founded on experience; in general: science emphasizing experience. Entity, Latin: ens, entis = the thing, the being; existing being. Enzyme: Greek en = in, and zymos = leaven; proteins, very complex multi-chained macro-molecules essential to life by acting as catalysts inducing, promoting or accelerating chemical reactions and metabolic processes. Epistemology = the study of the method and grounds of knowledge, especially with reference to its limits and validity. Esoterics: Greek: esoteros = within, inner; a kind of mysterious and secret doctrine or science taught to the initiated only. Today it is rather used as a collective term for all not scientifically approved theories, including supernatural phenomena. Euclid (about 300 BC), Greek mathematician. Wrote a textbook including the entire known mathematics of his time. The classical geometry of the three-dimensional space is named after him Euclidean geometry). Euler, Leonhard (*15.04.1707 - †18.09.1783); Swiss mathematician and physicist. Discovered the transcendental number called Euler’s constant. It is e=2,718…. Faraday, Michael (*22.09.1791 - †25.08.1867); English physicist. Fermat, Pierre de (*17.08.1601 - †12.01.1665); French judge and mathematician. Became famous mainly for "Fermat's last theorem" stating that equations of the form an + bn = cn , where a, b, c, and n are all integers have no solutions if n>2. Fibonacci, Leonardo von Pisa (c. *1180 - † c. 1250 ); Italian mathematician. Wrote the ”Liber abaci” in 1202 which was the first systematic introduction into the Indian calculation with numbers. Author of geometrical and number theoretical works. Freud, Sigmund (*06.05.1856 - †23.09.1939); Austrian neurologist and psychiatrist; founder of psychoanalysis. Fulda, Ludwig (*15.07.1862 - †30.03.1939); German novelist. Galilei, Galileo (*15.02.1564 - †08.01.1642 ); Italian astronomer, mathematician and physicist. Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand, called: Mahatma = great soul (*02.10.1869 - †30.01.1948); Indian politician, played a significant role in India's movement for independence. Gay-Lussac, Louis Joseph (*06.12.1778 - †09.05.1850); French physicist and chemist. Gay-Lussac’s law. Gellert, Christian Fürchtegott (*04.07.1715 - †13.12.1769); German poet and novelist.

174

Gene denotes the smallest unit determining and transmitting hereditary characteristics. One gene may consist of several → nucleotides which are thus responsible for the generations of one or more proteins which in turn determine one characteristic. Geometry = part of mathematics which deals with two-dimensional planes and three-dimensional bodies. Gluon, hypothetical quantum which is supposed to act like a glue inducing the powerful interaction between nucleonic particles keeping the particles together. Goethe, Johann Wolfgang (*28.08.1749 - †22.03.1832); German writer, philosopher and naturalist; was knighted in 1782 and was thereafter known as ”von Goethe”. Graviton, hypothetical quantum which is supposed to induce gravitation. Hadamard, Jacques Salomon (*08.12.1865 - †17.10.1963); French mathematician. He and, independently, Poussin proved the prime number theorem in 1896 stating that the number of prime numbers decreases according to the formula ex / x. Hawking, Stephen (*08.01.1942); British physicist and cosmologist. Holder of the famous Lucasian Professorship of Mathematics at Cambridge since 1997, the same professorship that → Isaac Newton once held. Heisenberg, Werner Karl (*05.12.1901 - †01.02.1976); German physicist; was awarded the Nobel prize for physics in 1932 for his discovery of the indeterminacy and uncertainty principle. Heraclitus (c. *544 - †483 BC); Greek philosopher. Hertz, Heinrich (*22.02.1857 - †01.01.1894); German physicist. The unit of frequency known as hertz Hz is named after him. Hilbert, David (*23.01.1862 - †14.02.1943); German mathematician. Hölderlin, Johann Christian Friedrich (*20.03.1770 - †07.06.1843); German theologist and poet. Holography = Greek: “written entirely in one hand”. Holography is a method of producing three-dimensional images called holograms by means of laser light. The object photographed is reproduced as a three-dimensional picture by using a photographic technique with multiple exposures to laser light. Hoyle, Sir Fred (*24.06.1915), British astrophysicist and cosmologist, also author of science-fiction novels. Hubble, Edwin Powell (*20.11.1889 - †28.09.1953). The space telescope launched by the USA in April 1990 to explore space while orbiting the earth is named after him. Hubble discovered that distant nebulae in space are really galaxies. The socalled redshift gave him the idea that the universe was expanding and that the expansion followed the formula: v=H d, in which v is the velocity of recession, H is the Hubble constant multiplied by d, the distance. The greater the distance between the galaxies the faster they are supposed to move apart. Huygens, Christiaan (*14.04.1629 - †08.06.1695); Dutch mathematician and physicist. Ideology, Greek: idea = appearance, form; logos = word, discourse; legein = to say, to talk, to explain. It means the manner or the content of the thinking characteristic of an individual, a group or a culture, medical, legal, political or other. Imaginary number “i”: Negative numbers are mere mirror images of positive numbers. This means that it should also be possible to extract the square root of negative numbers. However, there is no number which, multiplied by itself, results in a negative number again. Therefore, it is denoted by “i”. It follows: √(-4)=2i. Immanent, Latin: immanere = to inhabit, to remain in place, present participle: remaining or operating in the subject considered. Also: indwelling within the universe itself. The opposite of → transcendent.

175

Inertness, inertia, Latin: inertis = idle, lazy. It denotes chemically inactive or unreactive substances. Interpretation, Latin: interpretari = to act as the expounder, to explain, to elucidate. Irrational number: A number that can be expressed to any degree of desired accuracy but not as an exact fraction, the fraction is infinite yet not periodical. An irrational number is calculated from a → rational number, e.g. √2. Islam means "surrender to God". Islam and muslim are in fact synonyms. Isotropy = Greek: isos = equal and tropos = direction: equally distributed in all directions without preference. Jesus, in Christian faith the Son of God. According to latest research he was born either in 4 BC or in 7 BC. Jung, Carl Gustav (*26.07.1875 - †06.06.1961); Swiss psychiatrist and psychotherapist, pupil of → Freud. Kant, Immanuel (*22.04.1724 - †12.02.1804); German mathematician and philosopher. Taught logic as a professor at the University of Königsberg, then East Prussia, Germany, now Russia. Kelvin: Decimal (!) temperature unit, Abbr.: ”K”; named after the British physicist Sir William → Thomson, Baron Kelvin of Largs. Kepler, Johannes (*27.12.1571 - †15.11.1630); German theologist, mathematician and astronomer. He established the three laws of planetary motion, known as Kepler's laws. Koch, Robert (*11.12.1843 - †27.05.1910); German physician and bacteriologist. Kronecker, Leopold (*07.12.1823 - †29.12.1891); Polish-German mathematician. His main mathematical work was almost entirely in the field of higher algebra and number theory. Kübler-Ross, Elisabeth (*08.07.1926); Swiss physician and psychiatrist; research into near-death experiences. Lao Tzu (*604 BC according to Chinese tradition; it is certain that he lived at the end of the 7th century BC). Chinese philosopher. He held official rank as archivist at the imperial court in Loyang (today known as the province Honan). He wrote a book about "sense" (probably better translated as "invisible spiritual laws of the world) and "life" with contains 5000 Chinese characters (→ Tao Te Ching). Laplace, Pierre Simon de L. (*28.03.1749 - †05.03.1827); French mathematician and astronomer. LASER = “light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation”. The technical laser emits a very strong and intensive light which is highly focussed. It is coherent and has a defined frequency. Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (*01.07.1646 - †14.11.1716); German philosopher and naturalist. Logic, a science that deals with the canons and criteria of validity in thought and demonstration and that comprises the principles of definition, the science of correct reasoning. Light, or better, so-called white light, can be dispersed into colors by a prism. Spectral color means light of a defined wave length. Lucretius, Titus Lucretius Carus (* c. 97 BC - †55 BC) Roman poet. He wrote e.g. the epic poem "On the nature of things" (De rerum natura). It is an exposition on the origin of the world in which he attempts to liberate mankind from the anguish and misery caused by superstitious terror of death and various divinities. Lunar month: Latin: luna = the moon. The period of time elapsing between two equal phases of the moon.

176

Maya = illusion-creating power. According to Hindu religion, the physical universe of Maya itself does not really exist, but is just a pale reflection of reality. Materialism (monistic): Everything is based on matter; only this one kind of matter exists and it is the one common universal fundamental principle; spirit and consciousness are mere properties or products of matter. The same as materialistic monism. Michelson, Albert Abraham (*19.12.1852 - †09.05.1931); American marine officer and physicist. Monad: Greek: monados = unit; monos = sole, lone, single. According to → Leibniz the smallest spiritual, indivisible entity of the universe inherent in everything. Monod, Jacques (*09.02.1910 - †31.05.1976); French physiologist. Nobel prize for medicine in 1965. Morgenstern, Christian (*06.05.1871 - †31.03.1914); German poet. Morley, Edward Williams (*1838 - †1923); American chemist, became world famous as physicist. Morphologic, Greek: morphos = form; it means relating to form, also Latin: anatomic. Mutation: Latin: mutare = to change; a sudden random change in the genetic material of a cell. Mysteriousness: Greek: myein = to initiate into religious rites. It means a "secret", a mystery, a basic form of a direct intercourse with God or another transcendental existence in an elevated religious feeling. Nature philosophy, a philosophy which undertakes to explain phenomena by natural causes and by experiences made in natural science. Neutron, an electrically neutral particle consisting of one positively charged proton and one small negatively charged electron which are welded together. Neutrons are part of the atomic nucleus. Newton, Isaac (*4.01.1643 - †31.03.1727). English physicist; professor at Cambridge university, holder of the Lucasian Chair. The unit ”1 newton” is named after him, it is the unit of force, being the force required to give a mass of one kilogram an acceleration of 1 m/s. Nucleotide, Latin: nukleus = kernel. Organic compound of high molecular weight. Carrier of genetic information in the nucleus. Part of the DNA and RNA. It is composed of one effective base, one sugar molecule (pentose) and one molecule of phosphoric acid. Null, Latin: nulla figura = having no character or the value of → zero. OBE, Out of body experience. Olbers, Wilhelm (*11.10.1758 - †02.03.1840), German physician and astronomer. Pascal, Blaise (*19.06.1623 - †19.08.1662); French philosopher and mathematician. In his ”Logic of Reason”, reason is portrayed as being inadequate. The final questions can only be solved in a personally satisfying manner by faithfully experienced religious revelations ("Logic of the Heart"). Penzias, Arno A. (*26.04.1933) ; German-American astrophysicist; discovered, together with his co-worker, the American physicist → Robert W. Wilson, the cosmic microwave background radiation. The discovery was made accidentally whilst they were searching for interferences in satellite radio communications. They were awarded the Nobel prize for physics in 1978. Philosophy, Greek: philos = friend, sophia = wisdom. Philosophy of religion, a comparison between religions and other philosophical theories and disciplines. Physics, the study of the laws concerned with lifeless matter.

177

Pi, symbol π. The ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter. It is a transcendental number. Planck, Max Karl Ernst Ludwig (*23.04.1858 - †04.10.1947); German physicist. He established the theory that energy is not emitted continuously but in "smallest portions”, so-called quanta. Plato, ( ca. *427 - †347 BC); pupil of Socrates, Greek philosopher and thinker. Plotin(os), (205-270 AD); Greek philosopher. Founder of the School of Philosophy in Rome. Pluripotent, Latin: plures = more, having or being more than one, potere or posse = to be able, powerful, mighty, strongly influential: to be affective in more than one way. Popp, Fritz Albert, German physicist. Established certain proof for biological matter, e.g. cells, e.g. DNA, being light encoded. Popper, Sir Karl Raimund (*28.07.1902 - †17.091994); Austrian philosopher and psychologist. Prigogine, Ilya (*25.01.1917); Belgian physicist and chemist, born in Russia. Developed the theory of → dissipative structures. Was awarded the Nobel prize for chemistry in 1997. Ptolemaeus, Claudius (*c.100 - †170 AD), lived in Alexandria; Greek geographer, mathematician and astronomer. His theory was based on the assumption that the earth was the center of the universe in which the sun, the moon and the planets moved around the earth in so-called epicycles. Pythagoras, (*c.580 - †c.496 BC), Greek philosopher and mathematician. The Pythagoreans recognized that √2 in the diagonal calculation of a square does not result in a number in the usual sense. Pythagoras' theorem: In a right-angled triangle the area of the square on the hypotenuse (the longest side) is equal to the sum of the areas of the squares drawn on the other two sides. Integers fulfilling this condition are known as Pythagorean numbers. 3 ,4 and 5, and their squares 9 + 16 = 25, therefore, are the first Pythagorean numbers. Rational numbers, Latin: ratio = the reason. In mathematics these are positive integers (= natural numbers) and negative integers, zero and any number that can be expressed as the ratio of two integers resulting in a finite or an infinite but periodical decimal fraction. Religion, Latin: religio = considerate, conscientious observance; Latin: religens = god-fearing, possibly going back to Latin: religere = to obey considerately. The Latin syllable "re" means "again" and the word ligere means to obey, to note; or perhaps connected with Latin: religare = to bind, to lead back, to tie back; or with relegere = to read again. The faith in one or more transcendental powers and the cult, the worship. Rilke, Rainer (or René) Maria (*04.12.1875 - †29.12.1926); Czech poet. Quantum, originally the "action quantum" introduced by → Max Planck. Today it usually denotes the minimum amount by which a minimum or quantized physical quantity of energy or angular momentum, for example, can change. The difference in energy between two conditions is often determined by one particle which is added or taken away. It is then called a quantum. The smallest quantum of light or of electromagnetic radiation is a photon. Quasars, a contraction of "quasistellar objects" (QSO), or quasistellar radio sources (QSS). They are star-like objects; possibly collapsed galaxies. Rezessive, opposite of → dominant. Rimpoche, (also called Guru R.), lived during the 8th century AD.

178

Rutherford, Ernest, first baron Rutherford of Nelson (*30.08.1871 - †19.10.1937); New Zealand physicist and chemist. Studied radioactive disintegration; established the atom model (shell model). Sacks, Oliver (*1933); British physician, neurologist and neuropsychologist, professor of clinical neurology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. Schiller, Johann Christoph Friedrich von (*10.11.1759 - †09.05.1805); German poet. Schrödinger, Erwin (*12.08.1887 - †04.01.1961); Austrian physicist; established mathematical descriptions for quantum mechanics. It was for this work that he was awarded the Nobel prize for physics in 1933. Semmelweiss, Ignaz Philipp (*01.07.1818 - †13.08.1865); Austrian gynecologist. Sidereal month, the mean time of the moon's revolution in its orbit from a star back to the same star. The sidereal moon month is 27,3 days of mean solar days. Singularity, physically an infinite point where the usually valid laws of physics do not apply. Socrates (*469 - †399 BC) Greek philosopher, who was put on trial on a charge of impiety and corruption of the youth and was sentenced to death by drinking a cup of hemlock (a poisonous fungus). Spin, the intrinsic angular momentum of elementary particles. According to quantum theory this is quantized and is restricted to multiples of h/2π, where h is the Planck constant. Because of their spin, particles also have their own intrinsic magnetic moments. Spinoza, Baruch de (*24.11.1632 - †21.02.1677), Dutch mathematician and philosopher. Steiner, Rudolf (*27.02.1861 - †30.03.1925); Croatian-German writer and thinker, founder of anthroposophy (1912), the theory of scientific research in the spiritual world. Strindberg, Johann August (*22.01.1849 - †14.12.1912); Swedish poet. Stringent, Latin: stringere = to draw together, to bind tightly. It means something with a convincing force of reasoning or argument. Strings, postulated by cosmologists submicroscopic (below 10-27m), massless, onedimensional "rubber-band like" objects equipped with tremendous energy crisscrossing the universe like threads after the assumed Big Bang and serving as a kind of primeval nucleus for the generation of galaxies. Synchronicity, a term coined by → Carl Gustav Jung in cooperation with the physicist → Wolfgang Pauli. It denotes the sensible coincidence of an objective physical process with an internal psychological event. Synodic period, the mean time taken by any rotating object in the solar system to move between successive returns to the same position, relative to the sun as seen from the earth. Talmud, Hebrew: "to learn, the instruction", the authoritative body of Jewish law and tradition developed during the 3rd and 6th century AD. Tao Te Ching, is the book (=Ching) of the "sense" (=Tao, or better translated with "the invisible spiritual rules of the world") and "live" (=Te). It was written by → Lao Tzu. Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre (*01.05.1881 - †10.04.1955); French anthropologist and philosopher, geologist, paleontologist. Particle zoo, a term used today for the plethora of unstable or merely hypothetical tiniest particles which scientists feel they must assign to atomic nuclei or just to forces or effects in general.

179

Teleology, the philosophical study of evidences of design in nature, the doctrine of final causes, the view that everything is expedient and purposeful. Was introduced by the German philosopher Christian Wolff (*1679 - †1754) in 1728. Thomas of Aquinus (*1225 - †07.03.1274); German Dominican, theologist and church scholar; was canonized by the Catholic Church. Thomson, Sir Joseph John (*18.12.1856 - †30.08.1940); proved the existence of → electrons as mass particles. Thomson, Sir William (*26.061824 - †17.12.1907); raised to the British peerage as Baron → Kelvin of Largs in 1892! He carried out fundamental research into thermodynamics, helping to develop the law of the conservation of energy . Titius-Bode law, describes the distances between the planets and the sun. It contains the constant factor 2n. (distance of planets = d = 0,4 + 0,3 . 2n). Transcendent, Latin: transcendere = going beyond, exceeding the usual limits: super natural; to go beyond the limits of the normal sensory perception and lying outside these limits. Contrasted with immanent (within the world). Transcendental numbers cannot be expressed by an algebraic equation with a rational coefficient, e.g. Euler’s number or π. Twain, Mark (*30.11.1835 - †21.04.1910); his real name was Samuel Langhorne Clemens; American novelist. Wagner, Richard (*22.05.1813 - †13.02.1883); German composer. Water, (chemical formula H2O) consists to 99,85% of the pure molecule H2O with only 1 proton. A "water mixture", however, contains in addition 0,15% of other isotopes deuterium (1 proton + 1 neutron) and tritium (1 proton + 2 neutrons). Watson, James Dewey (*26.04.1928); American biologist, biochemist. Wiles, Andrew (* 1953 in Cambridge); British mathematician Wilson, Robert W. (*08.06.1936); American physicist; discovered background radiation by accident together with the German-American physicist → Arno A. Penzias in 1965. Zenon of Elea (about 460 BC); Greek philosopher, quoted by Aristotle. Zero, Arabic: sifr = cipher, no quantity or number, nought, nil, → null.

180

181

References Ahrheit-Volle, W., "Das ewige Leben im Jenseits – die naturwissenschaftliche Lösung aller Menschheitsrätsel", Lindner (1995) Asimov, I., J. Asimov, „Kosmos und Materie --- Wissenschaft an der Schwelle zum dritten Jahrtausend“, Knaur (1995) Barbour, J., "The End of Time", Oxford Univ. Press (2000) Barrow, J.D., J. Silk, „The Left Hand of Creation“, Basic Books, NY (1986) Barrow, J.D., "Pi in the Sky", Oxford Univ. Press (1992) Bell, J.S., „Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics“, Cambridge Univ. Press (1987) Bindel, E., "Die Zahlengrundlagen der Musik im Wandel der Zeiten", Freies Geistesleben (1985) Bischof, M., „Biophotonen - Das Licht in unseren Zellen“, Zweitausendeins (1995) Breuer, R., „Immer Ärger mit dem Urknall“, rororo (1996) Briggs, J., F.D. Peat, „Turbulent Mirror. An Illustrated Guide to Chaos Theory and the Science of Wholeness“, Harper & Ross, NY (1989) Brüderlin, R., "Akustik für Musiker", bosse (1983) Capra, F., „The Turning Point“, USA (1987) Capra, F., „Uncommon Wisdom. Conversations with Remarkable People“, USA (1987) Cerminaria, G., „Many Mansions“, W. Sloane Ass., New York (1950) Clément, C., "Theos Reise – Roman über die Religionen der Welt", Hanser (1998) Davidson, J., „Natural Creation & the Formative Mind“, Element Books Ltd., UK (1991) Davies, P., „God and the New Physics“, J.M. Dent & Sons, London (1986) Davies, P., „About Time. Einstein's Unfinished Revolution“, Simon & Schuster, New York (1995) Descartes, R., „Philosophische Schriften - in einem Band“, Meiner (1996) Diederichs, E., „Laotse - Tao te king - Das Buch vom Sinn und Leben“, Diederichs (1972) Ditfurth, H. von, „Wir sind nicht nur von dieser Welt“, dtv (1985) Ditfurth, H. von, „Unbegreifliche Realität“, Lingen (1987) Ditfurth, H. von, „Innenansichten eines Artgenossen“, Claassen (1989) Ditfurth, H. von, „Kinder des Weltalls“, Weltbild (1990) Ditfurth, H. von, „Der Geist fiel nicht vom Himmel“, Weltbild (1990)

182

Dürr, H.-P., W. Ch. Zimmerli, „Geist und Natur --- Über den Widerspruch zwischen naturwissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis und philosophischer Welterfahrung“, Scherz (1991) Eady, B., „Embraced by the Light“, Gold Leaf Press, CA/USA (1994) Eccles, J.C., D.N. Robinson, "The Wonder of Being Human. Our Brain and Our Mind", The Free Press, New York (1984) Eccles, J. C., „Creation of the Self“, Routledge, London, New York (1989) Eccles, J.C., „Gehirn und Seele. Erkenntnisse der Neurophysiologie“, Piper (1991) Eccles, J. C., „How the Self controls its Brain“, Springer (1994) Eddington, A., „Wissenschaft und Mystizismus“, aus: „Das Weltbild der Physik und ein Versuch seiner philosophischen Deutung“, F. Vieweg & Sohn (1935) Einstein, A., L. Infeld, „Die Evolution der Physik“, Weltbild (1991) Endres, C.M., A. Schimmel, „Das Mysterium der Zahl - Zahlensymbolik im Kulturvergleich“, Diederichs (1995) Ewald, G., „Die Physik und das Jenseits --- Spurensuche zwischen Philosophie und Naturwissenschaft“, Pattloch (1998) Genz, H., „Die Entdeckung des Nichts - Leere und Fülle im Universum“, Hanser (1994) Gribbin, J., „Jenseits der Zeit ---- Experimente mit der vierten Dimension“, Bettendorf (1994) Gribbin, J., „In the Beginning. After COBE and before the Big Bang", Little, Brown and Company, Boston (1993) Gribbin, J., M. Rees, „Cosmic Coincidences. Dark Matter, Mankind, and Anthropic Cosmology“, Bantam Books, New York (1989) Gribbin, J., "Schrödinger's Kitten and the Search for Reality", Weidenfeld & Nicholson, London (1995) Halpern, P., „Wurmlöcher im Kosmos - Modelle für Reisen durch Zeit und Raum“, List (1994) Hawking, St.W., "A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes", Bantam Books, New York (1988) Hawking, St.W., "Is the End in Sight for Theoretical Physics? – An Inaugural Lecture", Press Syndicate of the Univ. of Cambridge, UK (1980) Heilige Schrift (The Holy Bible): Die Heilige Schrift des Alten und Neuen Bundes, Herder (1965) Heilige Schrift (The Holy Bible): die vierundzwanzig Bücher der Heiligen Schrift, übersetzt von L. Zunz, Goldschmidt (1995) Herbig, J., „Im Anfang war das Wort“, Hanser (1985) Hermann, U., „Knaurs etymologisches Lexikon“, Droemer Knaur (1983) Hermann, U., et al., „Das deutsche Wörterbuch“, Knaur (1985) Herneck, F., „Einstein und sein Weltbild“, Buchverlag Der Morgen (1976)

183

Höeg, P., "Fräulein Smillas Gespür für Schnee", Hanser (1996) Hoffmann, B., „Relativity and Its Roots“, Scient. Amer. Books, NY (1983) Hooper, J., D. Teresi, „The three pound universe“, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York (1986) Jung, C.G., „Briefe, Erster Band 1906-1945“, Walter (1972) Jung, C.G., A. Jaffé, „Erinnerungen, Träume, Gedanken von C.G. Jung“, Walter (1976) Kahan, G., „Einsteins Relativitätstheorie --- zum leichten Verständnis für jedermann“, Dumont (1987) Kaku, M., „Hyperspace. A Scientific Odyssey Through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, And The Tenth Dimension", Oxford Univ. Press, N.Y. (1995) Klivington, K.A., "The Science of Mind", MIT Press, Cambridge (1989) Krisciunas, K., B. Yenne, „Atlas des Universums“, Lechner (1992) Küng, H., „Ewiges Leben?“, Piper (1982) Laack, W. van, "Plädoyer für ein Leben nach dem Tod und eine etwas andere Sicht der Welt", van Laack GmbH Buchverlag, Aachen (1999), (LIBRI-Books on Demand, Hamburg, ISBN 3-89811-818-5) Laack, W. van, "Key to Eternity", Aachen (2000), ISBN 3-8311-0344-5 (Book-on-Demand, c/o Libri, Hamburg-Norderstedt/Germany) Löw, R., „Die neuen Gottesbeweise“, Pattloch (1994) Margenau, H., „The Miracle of Existence“, Ox Bow, Woodbridge (1984) Moewes, J., „Für 12 Mark 80 durch das Universum --- über Zeit, Raum und Liebe“, Zweitausendeins (1996) Moosleitner, G.P., "Die unsterbliche Seele der Menschheit", Libri (2000) Otto. M., "Worte wie Spuren – Weisheit der Indianer", Herder (1985) Paulos, J.A., „Beyond Numeracy“, A.A. Knopf, New York (1991) Platon, Sämtliche Werke, Bd. 3: Phaidon, Politeia. Deutsch von F. Schleiermacher. Rowohlts Klassiker d. Literatur und der Wissenschaft Nr.27 Plichta, P., „Das Primzahlkreuz - Bd. 1: Im Labyrinth des Endlichen“, Bd. 2, "Das Unendliche" Quadropol (1991), Bd. 3, "Die 4 Pole der Ewigkeit", Quadropol (1998) Plichta, P., „Gods secret formula“, Langen-Müller (1997) Popper, K.R., J.C. Eccles, „The Self and Its Brain – An Argument for Interactionism", Springer (1977) Popper, K.R., „Objektive Erkenntnis --- ein evolutionärer Entwurf“, Hoffmann und Campe (1993) Popper, K.R., „Alles Leben ist Problemlösen --- Über Erkenntnis, Geschichte und Politik“, Piper (1994) Prigogine, I., Vom Sein zum Werden“, Piper (1982)

184

Prigogine, I., I. Stengers, „Dialog mit der Natur. Neue Wege naturwissenschaftlichen Denkens“, Piper (1993) Prigogine, I., I. Stengers, „Das Paradox der Zeit --- Zeit, Chaos und Quanten“, Piper (1993) Reeves, H., J. de Rosnay, Y. Coppens, D. Simonnet, "Die schönste Geschichte der Welt", Bastei-Lübbe (1998) Reitz, M., „Leben jenseits der Lichtjahre --- Die Wissenschaften auf der Suche nach außerirdischen Intelligenzen“, Insel (1998) Ricken, F., „Lexikon der Erkenntnistheorie und Metaphysik“, Beck (1984) Riordan, M., "The Shadows of Creation. Dark Matter and the Structure of the Universe", W.H. Freeman & Co., New York (1991) Roederer, J.G., "Physikalische und psychoakustische Grundlagen der Musik", Springer (1977) Ruelle, D., „Zufall und Chaos“, Springer (1993) Ross, D., „The work of Aristotle; Select fragments. “, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1952) Ruelle, D., "Chance and Chaos", Princeton Univ. Press, New Jersey (1991) Sacks, O., "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat", Summit Books/ Simon & Schuster, New York (1985) Sagan, C., A. Druyan, „Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors“, Random House, New York (1992) Schröder, G.L., „Schöpfung und Urknall“, Bertelsmann (1990) Singh, S., "Fermat's Last Theorem. The Story of a Riddle that Confounded The World's Greatest Minds for 358 Years", Fourth Estate, London (1997) Steffen, P., "Eine Geometrie der Zeit", Stema-Verlag (1999), BoD LIBRI, Hamburg Stelzner, M., "Die Weltformel der Unsterblichkeit", Verlag für außergewöhnliche Perspektiven (1996) Tarassow, L., „Wie der Zufall will?“, Spektrum (1998) Teilhard de Chardin, P., „Der Mensch im Kosmos“, C.H. Beck (1981) Time-Life-Bücher, „Fernöstliche Weisheiten“, Time-Life (1991) Tipler, F.J., „The Physics of Immortality“, Doubleday, New York (1994) Toynbee, A., "Mankind and Mother Earth – A Narrative History of the World", Oxford Univ. Press, UK (1976) Trefil, J., "The Dark Side of the Universe", C. Scribner's Sons, NY (1988) Wapnick, K., „A Course in Miracles“, Roscoe, N.Y. (1983) Weinberg, St., „The First Three Minutes. A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe“, Basic Books Publ., New York (1977) White, M., J. Gribbin, „Stephen Hawking – A Life in Science“, Viking, London (1992) Wilber, K., „Das holographische Weltbild“, Scherz (1986) Wolf, F.A., „The Body Quantum“, Universe Seminars Inc. (1986)

185

Dr. med. Walter van Laack 1. Naturphilosophische Bücher in Deutsch:

Plädoyer für ein Leben nach dem Tod und eine etwas andere Sicht der Welt ISBN 3-9805239-2-6, Erste Auflage (1999), 448 S., Festeinband (HC), 28,50 € und als Taschenbuch (SC), 17,80 €

ISBN 3-89811-818-5; Zweite, überarbeitete Auflage (2000), 448 S., SC, 22,90 €

Der Schlüssel zur Ewigkeit ISBN 3-9805239-4-2, Erste Auflage (1999/2000), Festeinband, 24,80 €, ISBN 3-9805239-5-0, als Taschenbuch (SC), 15,80 € ISBN 3-89811-819-3, Zweite, überarbeitete Auflage (2000), 288 S., SC, 17,80 €

Eine bessere Geschichte unserer Welt Band 1, "Das Universum"

ISBN 3-8311-0345-3, Taschenbuch (SC), 196 S. (2000), 15,80 €

Band 2, "Das Leben" ISBN 3-8311-2114-1, Taschenbuch (SC), 248 S., (2001), 17,80 €

Band 3, "Der Tod" ISBN 3-8311-3581-9, Taschenbuch (SC), 276 S., (2002), 19,80 €

186

2. Naturphilosophische Bücher in Englisch:

Key to Eternity ISBN 3-8311-0344-5, Softcover (SC), 256 p. (2000), 17,80 €

A Better History of Our World Vol. 1, "The Universe"

ISBN 3-8311-1490-0, Softcover (SC), 188 p. (2001), 15,80 €

Vol. 2, "Life" ISBN 3-8311-2597-X, Softcover (SC), 236 p. (2002), 17,80 €

Vol. 3, "Death" Softcover (SC), 19,80 €, available in 2003, no ISBN yet

Die Bücher im Internet: www.van-Laack.de www.Leseproben-im-Internet.de