Connect with us

Discover

Dopamine & Serotonin: Is Depression Really The Result of a Chemical Imbalance?

Published

on

There are many uninformed individuals when it comes to knowing what’s happening within the modern day medical industry, and by no fault of their own. The world of medical science, unfortunately, has been plagued with scientific fraud and pharmaceutical company influence.

advertisement - learn more

The words ‘big pharma’ are far from a conspiracy theory, which is why so many physicians and doctors in influential positions are trying to let the world know.

For example, Dr Richard Horton, current editor-in-chief of The Lancet is one of them. He stated that half of all the published literature could be false.  Mark Mattson, the current Chief of the Laboratory of Neuroscience at the National Institute on Aging said that pharmaceutical companies can’t make money off of healthy people, which is why there is no funding for research and why there’s a lot of pressure for regular eating patterns forced upon us by the food industry.

Physician and longtime Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal, Dr Marcia Angell, told the world that “it’s simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”

Pharmaceutical fraud and industry influence is prominent. Some still refer to ‘big pharma’ as a conspiracy theory, but the small group of people and the corporations they hide behind have tremendous amounts of power.

“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”  – (source)(source) Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard Professor of Medicine and Former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal

advertisement - learn more

Chemical Imbalance or Not?

Is the chemical imbalance theory of depression really true, or is it just a tool used to push more drugs onto the market? After all, antidepressant drugs are the most commonly prescribed drugs in North America. Pharmaceutical companies are bringing in billions of dollars every single year from the sale of antidepressant drugs alone, and they also spend billions of dollars marketing and advertising their products.

Joseph Coyle, a neuroscientist from Harvard Medical School, sums it up best, writing that “chemical imbalance is sort of last-century thinking. It’s much more complicated than that.” And it’s true; depression is much more complicated than that, at least compared to the commonly accepted belief that depression results from a chemical imbalance in the brain. This idea was posed in the late 1950s and has since taken hold in everyone’s minds. It’s the general idea that a deficiency of select neurotransmitters exists (chemical messengers) at critical points, like synapses. One of these neurotransmitters, for example, is serotonin; others include norepinephrine and dopamine.

As Scientific American reports, “much of the general public seems to have accepted the chemical imbalance hypothesis uncritically,” and that “it is very likely that depression stems from influences other than neurotransmitter abnormalities.” (source)

Harvard Medical School put out a press release a few years ago stating that it’s “often said that depression results from a chemical imbalance, but that figure of speech doesn’t capture how complex the disease is.”  (source)

Of course, there are brain events and biochemical reactions occurring when someone feels depressed, as there are all the time, but no research has ever established that a particular brain state causes, or even correlates with, depression. . . . In all cases studies yield inconsistent results, and none have been shown to be specific to depression, let alone causal.

The fact that more than 50 years of intense research efforts have failed to identify depression in the brain may indicate that we simply lack the right technology, or it may suggest we have been barking up the wrong tree!

Dr. Joanna Moncrieff,  British Psychiatrist, Author (source)

The most commonly cited evidence to support the chemical imbalance theory is simply that some drugs have been shown to increase and decrease mood in human and animal models, and yes — many antidepressants increase the amounts of serotonin and other neurotransmitters at synapses, but what we fail to realize today is, just because mood can be artificially manipulated with drugs, does not mean the chemical imbalance theory is true. Just because these antidepressants do increase and decrease certain chemical levels in the brain does not prove the chemical imbalance theory of depression.

We simply can’t currently determine if a human being has a chemical imbalance (to whatever extent) or say what neurotransmitters are involved, which is why the chemical imbalance theory of depression remains a theory. It’s not like chemical levels in the brain can accurately be measured or ‘looked at,’ either.

Yet much of the general public still accepts the chemical imbalance theory. Indeed, a survey conducted in 2007 of 262 undergraduates at Cleveland State University found that more than 80 percent of the participants found it “likely” that chemical imbalances cause depression.

“At best, drug-induced affective disturbances can only be considered models for natural disorders, while it remains to be demonstrated that the behavioral changes produced by these drugs have any relation to naturally occurring biochemical abnormalities which might be associated with the illness.” (source)

Keep in mind, as Harvard Medical School points out, there are probably many chemicals involved, working both inside and outside of our nerve cells: “There are millions, even billions, of chemical reactions that make up the dynamic system that is responsible for your mood, perceptions, and how you experience life.”

“The cause of mental disorders such as depression remains unknown. However, the idea that neurotransmitter imbalances cause depression is vigorously promoted by pharmaceutical companies and the psychiatric profession at large.” (source)

Again, theories like the low serotonin one came into existence because scientists were able to observe the effects of drugs on the brain. It was a hypothesis that attempted to explain how drugs could be fixing something, yet whether or not depressed people actually had lower serotonin levels actually remains to be proven. You can read more about the science here.

“The serotonin theory is simply not a scientific statement. It’s a botched theory – a hypothesis that was proven incorrect.” – Dr. Joseph Mercola (source)

Not only is there no solid scientific proof to back up the chemical imbalance theory, many depressed people are not even helped by taking antidepressants like SSRIs. For example, a review done by the University of California in 2009 found that one third of people treated with antidepressants do not improve, and a significant portion of these people remain depressed. As Scientific American observes, “if antidepressants correct a chemical imbalance that underlies depression, all or most depressed people should get better after taking them.”

Depression has one focus, brain chemistry, even though it is a multifaceted issue involving many concerns and many chemicals. Focusing on this one chemical imbalance theory, and then dishing out drugs that actually alter brain chemistry, is shortsighted and dangerous.

“In spite of the enormous amount of money and time that has been spent on the quest to confirm the chemical imbalance theory, direct proof has never materialized.”  (source)

The irony of this situation is hopefully not lost on everyone. The only imbalances we know for sure to exist in the brains of ‘mentally ill’ people are the ones inflicted on them by psychiatric drugs. We are making a false claim that they have biochemical imbalances and then actually giving them biochemical imbalances based on that claim.

Antidepressants are supposed to work by fixing a chemical imbalance, specifically, a lack of serotonin in the brain. Indeed, their supposed effectiveness is the primary evidence for the chemical imbalance theory. But analyses of the published data and the unpublished data that were hidden by drug companies reveals that most (if not all) of the benefits are due to the placebo effect. Some antidepressants increase serotonin levels, some decrease it, and some have no effect at all on serotonin. Nevertheless, they all show the same therapeutic benefit. Even the small statistical difference between antidepressants and placebos may be an enhanced placebo effect, due to the fact that most patients and doctors in clinical trials successfully break blind. The serotonin theory is as close as any theory in the history of science to having been proved wrong. Instead of curing depression, popular antidepressants may induce a biological vulnerability making people more likely to become depressed in the future.

Related Article: 10 Ways To Increase Dopamine Levels In The Brain 

Irving Kirsch offered the above information in a publication obtained from the US National Library of Medicine. He is the Associate Director of the Program in Placebo Studies and a Lecturer in Medicine at Harvard Medical School. He is also Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the Universities of Hull and Plymouth in the United Kingdom, and a few others in the United States.  Needless to say, he’s done a lot of research, and his revelations above should be read by anybody taking, or considering taking, antidepressant drugs.

Investments in the pharmacological and pharmaceutical business.

The Effectiveness of Anti-Depressant Drugs Compared To Placebo

In a 2002 study conducted by Kirsch and his team of researchers, published in The American Psychological Association’s Prevention & Treatment, it was discovered that 80 percent of the effect of antidepressants, as measured in clinical trials, could be attributed to the placebo effect. The difference between the response of the drugs and the response of the placebo was less than two points on average on a clinical scale that goes from fifty to sixty points. This is a very small difference, and is, according Kirsch, clinically meaningless:

I assumed that antidepressants were effective. As a psychotherapist, I sometimes referred my severely depressed clients for prescriptions of antidepressant drugs. Sometimes the condition of my clients improved when they began taking antidepressants; sometimes it did not. When it did, I assumed it was the effect of the drug that was making them better. Given my long standing interest in the placebo effect, I should have known better, but back then I did not.

Analyzing the data we had found, we were not surprised to find a substantial placebo effect on depression. What surprised us was how small the drug effect was. Seventy-five percent of the improvement in the drug group also occurred when people were give dummy pills with no active ingredient in them.  (source)

To learn more about the placebo effect and access more studies about it, you can refer to this article we published on it a couple of years ago.

“Unpublished Data That That Were Hidden By Drug Companies”

The idea that scientific literature has firmly established the benefits of antidepressants has lost all credibility, thanks in large part to Kirsch and his team. They used the Freedom of Information Act to request that the Food and Drug  Administration (FDA) send data that pharmaceutical companies had sent to it for the process of obtaining approval for multiple antidepressants, which accounted for the bulk of antidepressant prescriptions at the time.  As a result, the researchers were able to obtain data on both published and unpublished trials:

 This turned out to be very important. Almost half of the clinical trials sponsored by the drug companies have not been published (Melander, Ahlqvist-Rastad, Meijer, & Beermann, 2003Turner, Matthews, Linardatos, Tell, & Rosenthal, 2008). The results of the unpublished trials were known only to the drug companies and the FDA, and most of them failed to find a significant benefit of drug over placebo. . . .  [T]he data in the FDA files were the basis upon which the medications were approved. In that sense they have a privileged status. If there is anything wrong with those trials, the medications should not have been approved in the first place. (source)

All in all, the data sent to the researchers by the FDA showed that only 43% of the trials showed a statistically significant  benefit of drug over placebo. The remaining 57% were failed or negative trials.

Many other studies have also demonstrated just how ineffective antidepressants are, as well as how often that fact is obscured by pharmaceutical companies. What’s worse, studies have since determined that anti-depressants can cause real harm to those who take them, and this information is often withheld, too. For example, a study published in The British Medical Journal by researchers at the Nordic Cochrane Center in Copenhagen revealed that pharmaceutical companies were not disclosing all information regarding the results of their drug trials. Researchers looked at documents from 70 different double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) and found that the full extent of serious harm in clinical study reports went unreported. These are the reports sent to major health authorities like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Tamang Sharma, a PhD student at Cochrane and Lead Author of the study, noted that they “found that a lot of the appendices were often only available upon request to the authorities, and the authorities had never requested them,” revealing that she was “actually kind of scared about how bad the actual situation would be if [they] had the complete data.”

Joanna Moncrieff, a psychiatrist and researcher at University College London, elaborates:

[This study] confirms that the full degree of harm of antidepressants is not reported. They are not reported in the published literature, we know that – and it appears that they are not properly reported in clinical study reports that go to the regulators and from the basis of decisions about licensing.

It’s also important to note the pharmaceutical drug aspect into this equation. For (one small out of many) example(s), American psychologist Lisa Cosgrove and others investigated Financial Ties between the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders (DSM) panel members and the pharmaceutical industry. They found that, of the 170 DSM panel members 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on ‘mood disorders’ and ‘schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders’ had financial ties to drug companies. The connections are especially strong in those diagnostic areas where drugs are the first line of treatment for mental disorders. In the next edition of the manual, it’s the same thing. (source)(source)

“The DSM appears to be more a political document than a scientific one. Each diagnostic criteria in the DSM is not based on medical science. No blood tests exist for the disorders in the DSM. It relies on judgments from practitioners who rely on the manual.” (11) – Lisa Cosgrove, PhD, Professor of Counseling and School Psychology at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.

The very vocabulary of psychiatry is now defined at all levels by the pharmaceutical industry,” Dr. Irwin Savodnik, an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California at Los Angeles (source)

Conclusion & What You Can Try If You’re Not Interested In Drug

Don’t get me wrong, depression is a very real, and a big problem. It’s just the methods commonly used to treat it is what should be called into question.

We’ve written countless amounts of articles on depression, many of which provide alternative method of treatment you can use to help you out. You can read some of them that are listed below:

How Depression Affects Brain Structure & What You Can Do To Change It Back

15 Natural Plant Materials For Treating Depression

5 Things You Can Do To Overcome Depression Using Your Mind

6 Tips To Help You Overcome Anxiety & Depression Without Using Drugs

10 Ways To Increase Dopamine Levels In The Brain

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
advertisement - learn more

Discover

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

Published

on

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

Discover

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

Published

on

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.”

Neuroplasticity

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

Discover

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

Published

on

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 Phys.org:

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

Video

EL

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!