Out of body experiences [NDE’s], telekinesis and similar will soon be able to be reliably scientifically explained

I have always believed that this might be the case

I submit the PDF file below (derived from this website) in support of my position. The article implies that there is more to physics than is currently known. It also implies consciousness exists outside of our bodies. I suggest that it is our non-local implicit awareness that exists outside of our bodies and that our local consciousness exists inside of our bodies. I see our personal awareness as being intuitive and our consciousness as not being so. The experiment still needs to be more widely replicated. However, Morphogenic and Quantum Homotopic Field Theories seem to support this hypothesis.

Have trillions of dollars been misappropriated [thieved] from Australian national welfare fund?

If this has happened Australian pensioners would now be legally entitled to a pension of $1000 per week.

Source: Brian Hale, The Courier-Mail-January 11, 2017


“THE stigma of charity should be removed from the age pension. It should be an entitlement earned by the person’s personal contribution to the fund,” said a very famous Australian long ago.  Who? Former Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies. When? At the time the current pension scheme was introduced. Fund? What fund and what personal contribution?

You wouldn’t know about it listening to the major parties’ politicians or Senate crossbencher David Leyonhjelm who, echoing former Treasurer Joe Hockey, told the ABC he wants Australians to drop their sense of entitlement to the aged pension, which should only be paid to poor people, and receiving it should be “nothing to be proud of”.

Well, no David, most pensioners worked and spent a lifetime paying for their pensions. It’s not welfare and, when it was introduced, it was actually meant to be an entitlement. A 7.5 per cent tithe was taken from wages to put into a fund to pay their pensions. Just as workers now have superannuation collected.

What a good idea! Unfortunately (for pensioners) the Labor Party insisted the contributions shouldn’t be kept in individual accounts as in the UK and the US where retirees get the entitlement earned by their contributions. Instead, it all went into one big pot, the National Welfare Fund. And when the pot got really big, the politicians took it.

They won’t talk about the historical facts because these days politicians have developed a new “ending the age of entitlement” narrative while pushing the disingenuous line that younger workers are paying tax to support pensioners.  Menzies was opposition leader when then prime minister Ben Chifley announced a National Welfare Fund to pay for pensions, unemployment relief, child endowments, even health care with a 7.5 per cent tax increase.

Menzies insisted that the Compulsory Contribution (levy) should be kept completely separate; that it should be paid straight into a trust account and not mixed with the general revenue.  The levy and the National Welfare Fund began on January 1, 1946, and contributions were shown separately on workers’ personal tax assessments for 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949 and 1950, with the money paid straight into the special fund from which claims were paid out.

In 1950 the balance in the fund was almost £100 million or $200 million – in today’s money the equivalent of several trillion dollars.

But the pot was too big for the politicians to leave alone. Menzies, supported by the Australian Labor Party, amended the Acts governing the fund so the compulsory contributions levy was lumped in with people’s income tax and the whole lot paid straight into consolidated revenue.  But the compulsory 7.5 per cent “levy” was still collected and spent.

In 1977 Liberal PM Malcolm Fraser transferred the balance left in the welfare fund account (by then almost $500 million, or several trillion in today’s terms) to consolidated revenue. But still the 7.5 per cent was taken out of everyone’s pay packet every week.  Then in 1985 the Labor Government repealed Acts No. 39, 40 and 41 of 1945 (The National Welfare Fund Acts) and introduced income and asset testing, thus excluding millions of levy and taxpaying Australians from receiving the pension for which they had paid.

But still the 7.5 per cent levy continued to be collected (while hidden in general income tax revenue.) And to this day it still is collected.

There have been estimates that the trillions of dollars stolen from the fund and the money paid and similarly stolen (sorry, transferred) since 1985 would be enough to pay a non-means-tested pension to every retiree of far more than $500 a week.  If it had been invested, like the Future Fund, the pension might be $1000 a week. Small beer compared with the politicians’ pension deals but a huge leap for older Aussies, 420,000 of whom had their age pensions cancelled or reduced from January 1.

Ironically, they are the very pensioners who would have the highest pensions if their personal contribution to the “fund” was the yardstick as in the UK and the US.  They probably generally have been Coalition voters. But no more.

Spend time in the RSLs, bowling clubs, voluntary organisations and the like, where these people gather and it is clear they are Liberal-National voters no more.  In lieu of an Australian Trump, they see no alternative but One Nation.

The Coalition, supported by Labor and the Greens, has turned 180 degrees from Menzies’ view the age pension is “an entitlement earned by the person’s personal contribution to the fund” and portrays it as charity.  For many Australians this alone shows how far the parties they once supported have strayed from principle.

The arrogant politicians think they can hypocritically and sanctimoniously speak condescendingly of older Australians.  They are in for a shock.

Brian Hale is a former business editor ofThe Courier-Mail and The Australian

What are cosmological particles in physics?

If you have not heard much about physics particles before, the quotation below may help

As you read this document I especially draw your attention to the last paragraph of this quote, which reads:


“And of course, we’re still left asking: If particles come from fields, are those fields themselves fundamental, or is there deeper physics involved? Until such time as theory comes up with something better, the particle description of matter and forces is something we can count on.”

I suggest that this last paragraph supports both sub fractal and geometric concepts relating to my Awareness model. Furthermore the quotation also supports my ideas relating to the implicit/explicit nature of reality.  This includes our 3D universe. I think it is easiest and best to describe reality as being informational because it is very difficult to scientifically define anyway.

If you are interested in the mysterious relationship between the implicit (n0n-local) and explicit (local) influences and effects relating to wider reality I suggest that you take the time to peruse my blog “The relationship between Gnosis and science”.

You should also keep in mind that the Standard model of physics does not say what causes particles to have the properties that they do!

Full article quote:

What are particles

“Is he a dot or is he a speck? When he’s underwater, does he get wet? Or does the water get him instead? Nobody knows.” —They Might Be Giants, “Particle Man”

We learn in school that matter is made of atoms and that atoms are made of smaller ingredients: protons, neutrons and electrons. Protons and neutrons are made of quarks, but electrons aren’t. As far as we can tell, quarks and electrons are fundamental particles, not built out of anything smaller.

It’s one thing to say everything is made of particles, but what is a particle? And what does it mean to say a particle is “fundamental”? What are particles made of, if they aren’t built out of smaller units?

“In the broadest sense, ‘particles’ are physical things that we can count,” says Greg Gbur, a science writer and physicist at the University of North Carolina in Charlotte. You can’t have half a quark or one-third of an electron. And all particles of a given type are precisely identical to each other: they don’t come in various colors or have little license plates that distinguish them. Any two electrons will produce the same result in a detector, and that’s what makes them fundamental: They don’t come in a variety pack.

It’s not just matter: light is also made of particles called photons. Most of the time, individual photons aren’t noticeable, but astronauts report seeing flashes of light even with their eyes closed, caused by a single gamma ray photon moving through the fluid inside the eyeball. Its interactions with particles inside creates blue-light photons known as Cherenkov light—enough to trigger the retina, which can “see” a single photon (though a lot more are needed to make an image of anything).

Particle fields forever

That’s not the whole story, though: We may be able to count particles, but they can be created or destroyed, and even change type in some circumstances. During a type of nuclear reaction known as beta decay, a nucleus spits out an electron and a fundamental particle called an antineutrino while a neutron inside the nucleus changes into a proton. If an electron meets a positron at low velocities, they annihilate, leaving only gamma rays; at high velocities, the collision creates a whole slew of new particles.

Everyone has heard of Einstein’s famed E=mc2. Part of what that means is that making a particle requires energy proportional to its mass. Neutrinos, which are very low mass, are easy to make; electrons have a higher threshold, while heavy Higgs bosons need a huge amount of energy. Photons are easiest of all to make, because they don’t have mass or electric charge, so there’s no energy threshold to overcome.

But it takes more than energy to make new particles. You can create photons by accelerating electrons through a magnetic field, but you can’t make neutrinos or more electrons that way. The key is how those particles interact using the three fundamental quantum forces of nature: electromagnetism, the weak force and the strong force. However, those forces are also described using particles in quantum theory: electromagnetism is carried by photons, the weak force is governed by the W and Z bosons, and the strong force involves the gluons.

All of these things are described together by an idea called “quantum field theory.”

“Field theory encompasses quantum mechanics, and quantum mechanics encompasses the rest of physics,” says Anthony Zee, a physicist at the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics and the University of California, Santa Barbara. Zee, who has written several books on quantum field theory both for scientists and nonscientists, admits, “If you press a physicist to say what a field is, they’ll say a field is whatever a field does.”

Despite the vagueness of the concept, fields describe everything. Two electrons approach each other and they stir up the electromagnetic field, creating photons like ripples in a pond. Those photons then push the electrons apart.
What waves?

Waves are the best metaphor to understand particles and fields. Electrons, in addition to being particles, are simultaneously waves in the “electron field.” Quarks are waves in the “quark field” (and since there are six types of quark, there are six quark fields), and so forth. Photons are like water ripples: they can be big or small, violent or barely noticeable. The fields describing matter particles are more like waves on a guitar string. If you don’t pluck the string hard enough, you don’t get any sound at all: You need the threshold energy corresponding to an electron mass to make one. Enough energy, though, and you get the first harmonic, which is a clear note (for the string) or an electron (for the field).

As a result of all this quantum thinking, it’s often unhelpful to think of particles as being like tiny balls.

“Photons [and matter particles] travel freely through space as a wave,” says Gbur, even though they can be counted as though they were balls.

The metaphor isn’t perfect: The fields for electrons, electromagnetism and everything else fill all of space-time, rather than being like a one-dimensional string or two-dimensional pond surface. As Zee says, “What is waving when an electromagnetic wave goes through space? Nothing is waving! There doesn’t need to be water like with a water wave.”

And of course, we’re still left asking: If particles come from fields, are those fields themselves fundamental, or is there deeper physics involved? Until such time as theory comes up with something better, the particle description of matter and forces is something we can count on.”

The hyperlink for this quotation is here.

My opinion about imaginary mass

This article relates to the origins of the SMUT particle that is talked about in different blogs.

I wrote this short paper in early 2013. In those times I nominated the SMUT particle as being related to the Chameleon [CP] particle which was then renamed the All Seasons particle. Whilst I may not write an article of this type in a similar fashion today, however, I do feel it provides an interesting insight as to how my mind was working at that time. I have also posted because in my opinion it contains interesting and valuable information within it that my readers may care to speculate about as well. It seems likely that I had secondary material on standby in order to string my argument together in the manner that I did. Because the SMUT particle plays a very important role in establishing the validity of the Awareness model of physics that I created I urge you to take the time to read what I consider to be the most relevant SMUT particle blog.

My original work relating to imaginative mass


“I referred to the contents of the tachyon field as being Browning dispersed coordinated framework of its own that in turn is embraced in my instantaneous fourth dimension. Dispersed Brownian means in clumps of diverse particles that are more adjacent to gravitational fields. I have referred to this imaginative mass as being phenomena that is in as imaginative state, a state observed by an imaginary now-observer from either a state within or external to an additional fifth dimension (not space time except from a two dimensional perspective). As I suggested earlier my CP particle (chameleon) has imaginary mass, energy and velocity. I have already shared the energy and velocity components. My debate proceeds along the following lines. I build an argument that generally points to the fact that although tachyon fields are important for movement and behavior of individual strings of mass (possibilities), tachyon particles themselves are stand alone particles with each one having both properties of the CP particle. This is thought (individual particle energy and driver as well as mass that is derivative of the fourth dimensional field of most possibilities (not including thought itself that remains as a standard item). I argue whilst tachyons have a space ether (foam type) speed ordinary particles have a more restricted dimensional momentum less than the speed of light. In other words they remain mere strings of information with the capacity to link up with another string altogether to become a full blown sub atomic particle.

I have referred to the tachyons in my fourth dimension as having both imaginary particle and field properties at the same time (because of imaginary mass). I argue because my CP particle has both imaginary and real mass and velocity (we know both thought and awareness are both space time real) it seems to make sense to meld the imaginative tachyon particle (with all possibility mass entwined therein) to the CP particle so as to become a single unit whilst the transfer occurs (through inter dimensional black holes I refer to as being tornado tunnels) into a space time format. At this point both are in imaginary supposition with dual properties of dissimilar mass possibilities. When in tandem they both proportionately expand as their combined speed moves from being instantaneous to just below the speed of light and grow mass accordingly. At the near speed of light the enormous (infinitesimal) energy behind the process creates the conditions where (in a combined state of temporary state superstition) they explode and once again become separated. The tachyon particle (with its own virtual mass but retains imaginary velocity and energy), surrounded by its own tachyon field then becomes like a driver to do something such as a cosmic embryo of all future observable phenomena and in itself promotes the conditions for the fore runner of the Higgs particles that in turn converts the already existing imaginative tachyon mass into broad space time matter, devoid of driver energy (dark matter). In the meantime the CP particle has in its own right moved from being imaginary to virtual. This means both driver and mass (most possibilities) start here and revert to becoming a unit of realness (something we can all identify with), with all of its own QM properties. These properties can then be embraced within the (changed) tachyon Higgs particle to become its indeterminable driver and eventually the essential conditions for the creation of atoms and molecules that in turn eventually evolve into the space time conditions we refer to as reality. I acknowledge these few words do not do justice to the enormity of this area of my beliefs and associated scientific challenges arising there from. I close this section by restating if the unmeasurable energy of my fourth dimension (through the medium of thought) was bought to bare at a single focus point like a giant black hole, the unlimited energy needed to convert faster than light (instantaneous) speed tachyons into space time (observable) reality is readily available to complete the task of creating the suitable conditions for not only one Big Bang but infinitesimal numbers of big bangs throughout infinitesimal (absolute) time.”