Connect with us


Why We Need To Expand Our Scientific Methods: Empiricism Old & New



Modern science some time ago became enamored of attempts to “be objective.” To be objective implies eliminating a personal point of view as much as possible from science. Science writing itself still reflects this trend today with awkward passive phrasing such as “it is shown” or “it was found,” rather than “I show” or “we show.”

advertisement - learn more

There is, of course, in any attempt to be objective a pretense of there not being a person making the statements at issue. But there is in fact always a person, a scientist, doing the science. In this manner, science is inherently and irrevocably subjective, not objective.

Erwin Schrödinger, one of the key architects of quantum mechanics in the early part of the 20th Century, labeled this approach in 1954 the “principle of objectivation” and expressed it clearly:

By [the principle of objectivation] I mean … a certain simplification which we adopt in order to master the infinitely intricate problem of nature. Without being aware of it and without being rigorously systematic about it, we exclude the subject of cognizance from the domain of nature that we endeavor to understand. We step with our own person back into the part of an onlooker who does not belong to the world, which by this very procedure becomes an objective world.

This practice, of “being objective,” is part of what I call in this column “old empiricism.” It’s a way of doing science that pretends there isn’t inherently a person doing the science. And in this manner, the simplicity that objectivation once afforded is now outweighed by the confusion that the pretense leads to.

tambookNow that science is firmly engaged in examining consciousness itself—a shift from even a couple of decades ago when it wasn’t considered very scientific to engage in such studies—it is time to drop the pretense and face the subjective realm head on. One of the key tasks of today’s science is how to resolve, scientifically, the classic mind/body problem. The mind/body problem is all about establishing the relationship between objective/external reality and subjective/internal reality.

advertisement - learn more

A good example of what I mean by old empiricism is Sean Carroll’s argument, in his 2010 book, From Eternity to Here, for entropy as the explanation for the observed arrow of time we see in the universe around us and in our daily lives. The arrow of time is considered a problem because many of our physical theories suggest that there is no inherent direction or arrow to time. So why do we remember the past and imagine the future?

Carroll explicitly leaves out any substantial discussion of the psychological flow of time or questions of consciousness or first-person empiricism in his book. He starts, rather, with the traditional “objectivist” viewpoint that has defined modern science for some time. He raises the question of the psychological passage of time as an issue in physics but then says that he’s not going to address it. But addressing the experienced passage of time is as much a physics question as anything else in physics, and is perhaps fundamental to the nature of reality and thus to physics. We can’t ignore this issue if we are to have a more complete physical understanding of the world.

My feeling is that modern science, while it has achieved tremendous gains in human knowledge, is in some ways running out of steam in our attempts to tackle the remaining “big questions,” and this is largely because of this historical commitment to “objectivation.” It’s time to expand our scientific methods to include the half of nature—subjectivity—that were explicitly left out of many areas of science in order to simplify our approach. It is time to correct that simplification by seeking a more complete account of nature that includes the subject. This expansion in our scientific perspective is what I call “new empiricism.”

“New Empiricism”

The new empiricism I’m suggesting relies on first-person experience as the primary form of empiricism, recognizing that all experimental evidence is ultimately first-person experience. Experiments using physical equipment are ultimately first-person experience because there is no data, no information, without a human apprehending such data. But simple experience independent of any physical equipment is also data available to science. All experience is data.

The second important point contained in the new empiricism I’m advocating here is the need to take primary experience more seriously than has been the case for the last couple of hundred years. Where our physical theories clash with primary level empiricism—the direct evidence of our senses—in most cases, the resolution should be to prefer the evidence of our senses over the experimental evidence.

Where exactly we decide the dispute in each potential conflict is a matter of debate. We can offer an example where the evidence of our senses is indeed misleading: judging whether the earth is flat or round. In everyday experience the earth does seem flat and yet we have no problem accepting that this is an illusion resulting from the scale of our planet compared to our human scale. When we pull back from the surface of our planet, we can see very clearly that the planet is a sphere. It didn’t even require that we get in an airplane or a spaceship to accept that the earth is round. Rather, theories and evidence gathered from various experiments convinced most people that the earth was round long before the era of mechanized flight. For example, Aristotle deduced that the Earth was round by observing that ships on the horizon disappeared hull first, then mast and sails.

Other illusions of our normal experience include the feeling that the sun orbits the earth, when it is more accurate to say that the earth orbits the sun. Another obvious illusion of our senses is our brain’s ability to fill in the blind spot in each of our eyes with the surrounding image, a phenomenon that arises from the evolutionary accident that our optical nerve goes through our retina rather than attaching to the back of the retina as in some other species. The filled-in field of our vision is entirely fabricated by the brain to match the area near the blind spot. But as we can see from the classic spot on a piece of paper experiment, this trick of our brain can be misleading.

There are a ton of illusions like this that have become apparent to modern science. It is no surprise, then, that the scientific pendulum may have swung too far toward the view that even fundamental aspects of our existence, like the passage of time, may in fact be an illusion. I’ll discuss this particular “illusion” more below.

“Old Empiricism”

Old empiricism takes the implications of mathematical theories further than empirical facts should allow. For example, the various physical theories that take time to be symmetrical (as space is symmetrical) should be re-considered with great scrutiny in the light of the direct evidence of our senses and of our experiments that time seems to pass in one direction only, and that the subjective passage of time is real.

Other than the reality of our own consciousness, there seems to be nothing else that we can know more firmly than the fact of the experienced flow of time, from moment to moment to moment.

Another good example of what I am calling here “old empiricism” comes from Huw Price’s 1996 book, Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time:

This book is about the need to think about time’s puzzles from a new viewpoint, a viewpoint outside time. One of my main themes is that physicists and philosophers tend to think about time from too close up. We ourselves are creatures in time, and this is reflected in many ordinary ways of thinking and talking about the world. This makes it very difficult to think about time in an objective way, because it is always difficult to tell whether what we think we see is just a product of our vantage point.

Price’s viewpoint is perhaps an extreme point of view because he is calling explicitly for a non-empirical point of view. He realizes that everything that we know and experience is, of course, within time, and yet he calls for science to ignore this obvious and direct empirical basis for science in creating a physics that is truly a “view from no-when,” to use Price’s phrase.

Price seems to get it exactly backwards in terms of his understanding of the relationship between the world and physical laws. He states: “[W]hat is puzzling is why the physical world should be asymmetric in time at all, given that the underlying physical laws seem to be very largely symmetric.”

It should be an uncontroversial point that physical “laws” are entirely human creations, derived specifically from empirical facts and deduction, not the other way around. So it shouldn’t be at all puzzling that the physical world shows temporal asymmetry because if our physical laws are symmetric and the world is asymmetric then the physical laws are wrong or at least incomplete. The fact that someone of Price’s stature can make such statements without seeing this problem illustrates the degree to which modern science and philosophy have strayed from empiricism and common sense.

A good thought experiment for assessing whether our common sense view of a particular phenomenon is illusory in some manner is to zoom in and out on the phenomenon, literally or figuratively, just as we do in assessing whether or not the Earth is actually flat or round.

When we zoom in and out with respect to the passage of time we can see that no matter how much we zoom in or out on any particular phenomenon there is always the passing of time. The phenomena observed are always changing in some manner no matter how close up we look at, say, cellular processes, or subatomic particles; similarly, no matter how far we zoom out, at far-away galaxy clusters, for example, we still see change and thus the passing of time. So it seems that empirically we have no evidence whatsoever to support the notion that the passage of time is illusory.

Price and his co-thinkers are left arguing based on indirect evidence alone as follows: that our mathematical theories that explain much of the physical phenomena we see suggest in some manner that the passage of time isn’t real because the time term (usually denoted simply “t”) can be reversed with no fundamental impact to the equations. But the direct evidence that shows the passage of time is real surely should outweigh the indirect evidence that suggests the opposite. Rather than take our mathematical theories as indirect evidence of the illusory nature of time, perhaps we should adjust our theories!

Time For A Change?

Luckily, Einstein, Price, Carroll and the many other physicists and philosophers who see time as illusory, face the opposing viewpoint from an increasing number of other scholars who see a strong need to re-establish the reality of the passage of time. Lee Smolin, a physicists with the Perimeter Institute in Canada, and Tim Maudlin, a philosopher with a strong background in physics, have both argued in recent years that conventional physics’ rendering of time as somehow illusory is a major mis-step. Smolin has made his case in two recent books, Time Reborn and, with Roberto Mangabeira Unger, The Singular Universe and the Reality of Time. Tim Maudlin has argued his case in his book, The Metaphysics Within Physics, in the chapter called “On the passing of time.”

Stephen Hawking, perhaps the most pre-eminent physicist of our time, also provides some support for the “time is real” camp. Hawking states:

In the standard positivist approach to the philosophy of science, physical theories live rent free in a Platonic heaven of ideal mathematical models. That is, a model can be arbitrarily detailed and can contain an arbitrary amount of information without affecting the universes they describe. But we are not angels, who view the universe from the outside. Instead, we and our models are both part of the universe we are describing.

These are not easy topics to get one’s head around, but I highlight the issues surrounding the nature of time because the bottomline here is pretty clear: everything we see, experience and measure shows the passage of time. Once today’s physics gets its head around that empirical reality we can start to really make headway on other thorny issues like the nature of consciousness and the mind/body problem.

Free David Wilcock Screening: Disclosure & The Fall of the Cabal

We interviewed David about what is happening within the cabal and disclosure. He shared some incredible insight that is insanely relevant to today.

So far, the response to this interview has been off the charts as people are calling it the most concise update of what's happening in our world today.

Watch the interview here.
advertisement - learn more


MIT’s Wearable Headpiece Can Hear The Words You ‘Say’ In Your Mind



In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A new tech out of MIT uses electrodes to pick up the movements and frequencies from your voice through bone-conduction. It's being coined a 'mind reading' device.

  • Reflect On:

    Is it important we consider the implications of using so much technology that has the potential to rob us of our privacy before we jump on the bandwagon?

While the concept of subvocalization may sound like something straight out of a science fiction movie, like many things nowadays, it is becoming a part of our reality. Subvocalization is the practice of quietly saying things in your head while we read, the majority of us do this even if we don’t realize it. Recently, MIT researchers have begun to use this process as a way to interact with mobile devices and computers. Essentially, they have developed a device that you wear on your face that effectively measures the neuromuscular signals that are triggered whenever you subvocalize something in your head.

So, if you’re wondering what the point of this gadget is, when we already have voice technology like Hey Siri and OK Google — well, you’re not alone.

This MIT system includes electrodes that pick up the movements when you verbalize internally as well as bone-conduction headphones, which use the vibrations that are sent to the bones of your inner ear without obstructing your ear canal. These signals are then sent to a computer that is able to use neural networks to distinguish the words. This system has been used so far to navigate a Roku, and for reporting your opponent’ movies in a game of chess in order to get the best counter moves all in complete silence.

“The motivation for this was to build an IA device — an intelligence-augmentation device, our idea was: Could we have a computing platform that’s more internal, that melds human and machine in some ways and that feels like an internal extension of our own cognition?” says Arnav Kapur, a graduate student at the MIT Media Lab in a statement.

So far the device has a rather limited vocabulary of about 20 words, and while it is clever, researchers say that it is still limited. It has a 92 percent accuracy with the 20 words, although they expect it to scale up and get more sophisticated over time.

“We’re in the middle of collecting data, and the results look nice,” Kapur says. “I think we’ll achieve full conversation some day.”

advertisement - learn more

What Are The Implications?

Imagine being able to control your television, send text messages, ask for directions all without uttering a word? This could soon be a reality. The kicker? If this became a device that we could use instead of using a speech device, could the words that we are thinking inside our heads be sent and stored to someone who might be listening?  To me, this device seems a little too close for comfort and is resembling yet another concept from George Orwell’s classic, ‘1984,’ the thought police, who have the ability to read your mind and make arrests if anyone is even thinking about stepping out of line.

Before jumping on the tech bandwagon it is very important to understand the potential implications of having these devices literally, too close for comfort. It is really not that difficult to say voice commands to control your phone or send texts, but many feel that even that software could be capable of recording your every word whether you are commanding it to or not. Another example of this is a story we covered a few years ago about how Samsung Smart TV’s were admittedly recording your conversations, this is yet another similar concept from ‘1984,’ the telescreens that would record everything going on inside the homes of the citizens.

With that being said, it is important to know that we do not need to fear this technology, but yes, we absolutely need to be aware of the implications no matter how cool, sleek or convenient it may appear to you.

Free David Wilcock Screening: Disclosure & The Fall of the Cabal

We interviewed David about what is happening within the cabal and disclosure. He shared some incredible insight that is insanely relevant to today.

So far, the response to this interview has been off the charts as people are calling it the most concise update of what's happening in our world today.

Watch the interview here.
Continue Reading


Geckos Are Able To Heal & Regenerate Parts Of Their Brain, Which May Mean We Can Too



In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The human brain has more in common with lizards than it does with amphibians. The discovery that geckos can regenerate parts of their brains leaves some scientists thinking that maybe humans can too.

  • Reflect On:

    Perhaps it is possible for the human brain, when healthy, to regenerate damaged or diseased cells? We are a step closer to finding this out.

Lizards have a unique ability to regenerate their tails and spinal chords, and recently, researchers from the University of Guelph discovered that geckos can actually regenerate parts of their brain as well. Because of the connection between lizard brains and human brains (reptilian brain), this could be good news for us too. It could be the beginning of a new realm of research for treatment methods of injuries and degeneration from the human brain.

The study was published last month in the journal Scientific Reports. Because of the knowledge of the geckos’ ability to regenerate parts of their body, it led the researchers to see what was going on in gecko brains. They injected leopard geckos with a chemical label that allowed them to detect within the DNA any newly formed cells, which allowed them to examine new cells as they showed up in the geckos’ brains.

The Results?

The researchers found even more cells than what they had anticipated — including a type of stem cell that regularly turned into brain cells in the geckos’ medial cortex. This is the part of the brain that has the same function as the hippocampus in humans. This was the very first discovery for scientists finding out that stem cells were involved in the formation of new neurons in the leopard gecko’s brain.

“The brain is a complex organ and there are so few good treatments for brain injury, so this is a very exciting area of research,” said Prof. Matthew Vickaryous in the Department of Biomedical Sciences at the Ontario Veterinary College (OVC).

“The findings indicate that gecko brains are constantly renewing brain cells, something that humans are notoriously bad at doing,” he said.

If you didn’t already know, lizards are more closely related to humans than amphibians or fish, which are typically studied in research involving regeneration. This groundbreaking study could actually change the way that the human brain is studied, more so that previous studies involving regeneration.

advertisement - learn more

“Most regeneration research has looked at zebrafish or salamanders. Our work uses lizards, which are more closely related to mammals than either fish or amphibians,” said Rebecca McDonald, a master’s student who led the study.

“The findings indicate that gecko brains are constantly renewing brain cells, something that humans are notoriously bad at doing,” said Matthew Vickaryous, McDonald’s co-author on the study, in the news release. “The next step in this area of research is to determine why some species, like geckos, can replace brain cells while other species, like humans, cannot.”


While human brains may not be the best at regenerating brain cells (although fasting has been shown to do this), there has been a great deal of research over the past decade or so into the study of neuroplasticity. This is the brain’s ability to form new neural connections throughout one’s life. Neuroplasticity allows the neurons (specifically, nerve cells) in the brain to compensate for injury and disease and adjust their activities in response to new situations or to changes in their environment.

This is the opposite of the saying, you can’t teach an old dog new tricks. To just assume that the brain is how it is and can only learn new information up to a certain age is incorrect, and luckily we are seeing a lot of science that is proving this.

Perhaps combined with the research of gecko brains, scientists will be able to determine how to trigger this type of regeneration. It has the potential to help heal degenerative diseases and those who have suffered brain injuries or brain damage.

Free David Wilcock Screening: Disclosure & The Fall of the Cabal

We interviewed David about what is happening within the cabal and disclosure. He shared some incredible insight that is insanely relevant to today.

So far, the response to this interview has been off the charts as people are calling it the most concise update of what's happening in our world today.

Watch the interview here.
Continue Reading


New Physics Theory Questions The Big Bang: How Did Our Universe Really Begin?



Popular writer and scholar Graham Hancock once said that we’re like a species with amnesia, and it’s true, the origins of the human race, and the universe is supposedly unknown to us. But it’s human nature to question things, and as a result, we’ve developed a few theories that despite being pushed as fact within the mainstream educational realm, they’re not scientifically sound in several ways and actually appear to be very weak. The theory of evolution is one great example, and the big bang is another.

The big bang theory suggests that everything in existence results from one event that sparked the creation of physical matter and that everything in our entire universe, and in existence as we know it, was part of a single, infinitely dense point, also known as the “singularity.”  Scientists estimate that it occurred approximately 13 billions of years ago, which created ‘cosmic inflation’ milliseconds afterwards.

The theory has come under a tremendous amount of scrutiny over the years, almost to the point where it should be deemed false, or at the very least, admit that our universe, other universes and also dimensions, have resulted from something far greater and perhaps more complex than our ‘intelligent’ explanation.

There are numerous examples that span scientific literature for several years. For example, the cover story of the April 2011 edition of Scientific American included the article, “Quantum Gaps in Big Bang Theory: Why Our Best Explanation of How the Universe Evolved Must Be Fixed – or Replaced.”

As Jim Mars points out, in his, “Our Occulted History.”

“In the article, Paul J. Steinhardt, director of Princeton University’s Center for Theoretical Science, pointed out that astrophysicists have left a number of problems with the theory unresolved, stating that “the case against the Big Bang theory challenges the logical foundations of the theory. Does the theory really work as advertised? Are the predictions made in the early 1980’s still the predictions of the inflationary model as we understand it today? There is an argument to be made that the answer to both questions is no.”

advertisement - learn more

Numerous discoveries have come to light when it comes to examining the nature of our reality, and we now know, through quantum physics, that consciousness has a direct relationship with what we regard as physical material matter. We also have evidence which suggests that consciousness might not be a product of our brain, and can exist without the physical body. On the other hand, we have no evidence that shows consciousness is a direct byproduct of the brain.

Research in quantum physics and parapsychology has also seen quantum phenomenon occur at classical physical scales, which is also very interesting. One example in itself would be how consciousness can influence physical material reality, but also real world, documented examples of people with special abilities who are about to influence matter with their mind.

This also brings up huge questions with regards to consciousness, does it come before matter, or after matter? Is consciousness required for the creation of matter, and, if it is, what does that say about the big bang theory? The fact that the origins of our universe might have a non-physical, non-material origin, which is being shown by science, is simply hard for many to accept.

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.” – Max Planck, the originator of quantum theory (source)

It’s not only the connection between quantum physics and our physical material world but what we once thought was nothing, is actually something.

No point is more central than this, that space is not empty, it is the seat of the most violent physics – John Wheeler

The fact of the matter is, space is not empty, and it’s full of energy. What we once thought was nothing, is not, and this is no longer trivial in the world of physics. How much energy? According to Nassim Haramein, “there’s a lot of it and we can actually calculate how much energy there is in that space and that reality might actually come out of it. Everything we see is actually emerging from that space.

Now we know that there is the possibility that matter is formed from this void, from this ’empty space,’ it’s one of many examples where ancient knowledge is coming together with modern-day science. We see this with quantum physics, neuroscience, Buddhism and other sects of ancient eastern philosophy.

Idham thadhakshare parame vyoman

This is from ancient Vedic scripture, and it means “the aakaash is not destructible, it is the primordial absolute substratum that creates cosmic matter and hence it is:

The Aakash is not destructible, it is the primordial absolute substratum that creates cosmic matter and hence it is:

Parame vyoman

“The aakaash is the eternally existent, superfluid reality, for which creation and destruction are inapplicable.”

This “aakaash” has been written about since the beginning of time, which again, is super interesting given the fact that in this day in age, we can actually detect it!

We’ll get to that later…

Mainstream science and education, or those who create it, continue to hide this from our textbooks, in the same way, they don’t teach students about Nikola Tesla…

All perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, or tenuity beyond conception, filling all space, the akasha or luminiferous ether, which is acted upon by the life-giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never-ending cycles all things and phenomena – Nikola Tesla, Man’s Greatest Achievement, 1907.

This is one of my favourite examples from antiquity, although there are several:

And they allowed Apollonius to ask questions; and he asked them of what they thought the cosmos was composed; but they replied; “Of elements.” “Are there then four?” he asked. “Not four,” said Larchas,  “but five.” “And how can there be a fifth,” said Apollonius, “alongside of water and air and earth and fire?” “There is the ether,” replied the other, “which we must regard as the stuff of which gods are made; for just as all mortal creatures inhale the wire, so do immortal and divine natures inhale the ether.” “Am I,” said Appollonius, “to regard the universe as a living creature?” “Yes,” said the other. – The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Philostratus, 220AD (source)

Related CE Article: How Vedic Philosophy Influenced Nikola Tesla’s Idea of “Free Energy.” 

The most recent discovery in this field comes from the late Paramahamsa Tewari, the former Project Director of the Kaiga Atomic Power Project, and retired Executive Nuclear Director, Nuclear Power Corporation, in the Department of Atomic Energy in India.  He recently published a paper in Physics Essays titled  “structural relation between the Vacuum Space and The Electron. You can access the full study here.

The study discusses how this non-material superfluid, also discussed by the ancients, is the makeup of space, also known as the vacuum. It’s incompressible, non-material, massless and not perceivable to the human senses, and it can pose a steady flow varying from zero to light velocity.

This paper presents a formulation of Absolute principles for vacuum-space that enable revealing the process of creation of a stable electron and its known properties of mass and charge. Fundamental questions on the electron’s charge and mass are derived from first principles from the vacuum vortex of the electron’s structure. Also, generation of electrostatic, electromagnetic, and gravitational fields are shown to arise from the vacuum vortex structure of the electron. The electron and positron have been pinpointed to be the fundamental particles of matter.

So basically, the matter is created within these pockets of “empty space” which exists from space.

What’s even more shocking is that Tewari has developed an electrical generator that proves the theory, and it’s over-unity (free energy). A prototype of the machine was built and tested by Kirloskar Electric, a manufacturer of electrical generators in India. There, it exhibited 165 % efficiency (over-unity).

Below is a picture with, from right, Paramahamsa Tewari, Executive Director Nuclear Power Corporation, Ret., Murlidhar Rao, Technical Director, Karnataka Power Corporation, Ret., Chief Engineer, electrical engineer, a mechanical engineer. From Left, Vice President of Kirloskar Rotating Machines Group, General Manager Hubli facility.


Below is a Discussion of test results during the filming of AUS DEM NICHTS (Out of the Void), with the device in the Kirloskar facility.

The information listed above is a tidbit of information on why the Big Bang theory isn’t really a sufficient explanation for the creation of matter. This ‘void’ seems to be, and we actually have the ancient knowledge and theoretical physics by real-life experimental demonstrations, like the machine above. These are concepts that are being published in physics journals all over the world.

One study even suggests that the universe has no beginning, which again, correlates to the information above, stating that this ether or ‘Akash’ do not fit in the same category of creation or destruction, meaning that creation and destruction are inapplicable to the Akash, which is definitely hard to wrap your head around.

The theory also suggested as Tewari has for years, that there are no singularities or dark matter, and that the universe is filled with a “quantum fluid,” which is itself filled with gravitons,  According to

The scientists propose that this fluid might be composed of gravitons—hypothetical massless particles that mediate the force of gravity. If they exist, gravitons are thought to play a key role in a theory of quantum gravity.

“A century from now, it will be well-known that: the vacuum of space which fills the universe is itself the real substratum of the universe; vacuum in a circulating state becomes matter; the electron is the fundamental particle of matter and is a vortex of vacuum with a vacuum-less void at the center and it is dynamically stable; the speed of light relative to vacuum is the maximum speed that nature has provided and is an inherent property of the vacuum; vacuum is a subtle fluid unknown in material media; vacuum is mass-less, continuous, non viscous, and incompressible and is responsible for all the properties of matter; and that vacuum has always existed and will exist forever….Then, scientists, engineers and philosophers will bend their heads in shame knowing that modern science ignored the vacuum in our chase to discover reality for more than a century.” – Tewari

If all this IS, then how can the big bang theory hold true? Perhaps there is a lot we are missing…

Huge Implications

“Ether has got to be, once again, established, then there will be the meaningful understanding of physics, meaningful understanding of metaphysics, and meaningful understanding of spiritual processes” – Tewari (source)

Just like anything else, this information has indeed been suppressed, in various forms, but it’s slowly creeping into the mainstream, and the acknowledgment of these machines, and this science in general, which goes way beyond just energy generating devices…

As you can see above, science is now confirming the spiritual realms…

According to Sir James Jeans: “the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter… we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.”…The Universe is immaterial — mental and spiritual/”  Richard Conn Henry, Professor in Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hopkins University (source)

Once the world accepts this, and if it does, it means a complete paradigm shift with regards to the perception of reality. This has happened multiple times, our laws of science were made to be broken, Einstein’s paper on special relativity is one example, the Earth not being flat anymore, is another…

Non-material science, in general, has huge implications, we are at the beginning of the next scientific revolution.

Today, this work is breaking long-held science beliefs that have now turned into dogma, but what we think we know is always changing. Take Lord Kelvin, for example, who stated in 1900 that there is nothing new to be discovered in physics and that all which remains is more and more precise measurement. This assertion was shattered only five years later when Einstein published his paper on special relativity.

Related CE Article: Distinguished Scientists Gathers To Emphasize, Matter is Not The Only Reality

Free David Wilcock Screening: Disclosure & The Fall of the Cabal

We interviewed David about what is happening within the cabal and disclosure. He shared some incredible insight that is insanely relevant to today.

So far, the response to this interview has been off the charts as people are calling it the most concise update of what's happening in our world today.

Watch the interview here.
Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more



Watch: Exclusive Uncut Interview With David Wilcock'Disclosure & The Fall Of The Cabal'

Enter your name and email below to watch the interview.

You have Successfully Subscribed!