The essence of a partnership is 1+1. The question is: What is the result? In a constructive partnership, 1+1 is more than 2 – the whole is greater than the sum of its parts; both partners benefit. If 1+1 is less than 2, the partnership is destructive – the partners wear each other down, or one takes advantage of the other. In the following, I’ll show you how to have a fulfilling, constructive partnership – or any other team.

In nature, partnerships are rare – except among birds. This raises the question: Is a partnership even natural for us? In the first article of this trilogy on partnership, “Where Does the Desire for a Partner Come From?”, I give four reasons the answer is ‘yes.’ There, I also explain why romantic love is merely a social program, and why even true love is not a sufficient foundation for a partnership. In the second article, “How to Choose a Partner Wisely,” I explore the process of choosing a partner. Once you’ve made your choice, the actual work begins. That’s what this article is about.

Another word for partnership is team. Two people make the smallest possible team. The purpose of a team is to achieve more together than any individual team member could on their own. Examples include sports teams, orchestras, research teams, rescue teams, etc.

A team’s success is based on cooperation. Selfishness can disrupt or even destroy a team. In my article “To Survive as a Species, We MUST Work Together,” I reflect on the importance of cooperation for the future of humanity. A partnership is a great opportunity to practice exactly that.

The criteria for a successful partnership between two people apply to virtually every team. In fact, it’s actually easier for us to reflect on these criteria by looking at a different kind of team – because it’s easier to analyze something from the outside than from the inside. We’ll choose a soccer team. You can learn a lot about team spirit by watching a soccer game. A few minutes are enough. The focus isn’t on the game itself, but on how eleven people come together as a whole and deliver a team performance.

The following ten criteria describe a good soccer team:

1. Everyone must want to be part of the team… the team as it is now. Everyone should get along with everyone else. If two players have a conflict, it can impair the team’s performance.

2. Team consciousness: Besides their natural self-consciousness, every player needs a we- or team-consciousness. They must not act solely for their own benefit; they must act for the good of the team – and in case of conflict, the team comes first. Think about this in terms of a flock of birds: What happens to the flock if one bird acts selfishly?

3. Task allocation: As part of the team, every player has tasks to fulfill. There are individual tasks, such as “You guard the goal,” group tasks, such as “The two of you neutralize the opposing forward,” and a task for the entire team. The latter is so important that it deserves to be an own item on this list:

4. Team goal or vision: A shared vision, such as “We’re going to win the championship,” gives the team a goal, and everyone knows the direction in which they’re moving together.

5. Team love: All players care for the team as they care for themselves. If someone fails to fulfill their role, for whatever reason, another player steps in to cover for them. For example, if the goalkeeper has strayed too far from the goal, another player will temporarily defend the goal if necessary – even though it’s not their job. The motto is: “One for all, all for one.”

6. Trust: Everyone must be able to trust that everyone is acting in the best interest of the team and giving their best.

7. Time for reflection with honest communication: To succeed and grow as a team, players must reflect regularly. For example, during halftime, the course of the first half is discussed: “What went well? What didn’t go well? …” Everyone must be able to express their perspective without fear of repercussions. There is no room for personal sensitivities here, because it’s about the team – not individual players. This requires respectful, appreciative, and neutral communication as well as genuine, unbiased listening.

8. Willingness to compromise: If – outside of the agreed-upon assignment of tasks – there are two irreconcilable suggestions, such as how to improve the game in the second half, a compromise must be reached.

9. Equality: No one on the team is more important than the others.

10. Discipline: It doesn’t take much to form a team, but it takes a lot to remain a team and grow as a team. The guidelines above help with this – and it takes discipline to stick to them.

Think about these criteria for a soccer team. Discuss them with your partner, and then apply them together to your partnership. Make adjustments where your situation requires it.

One important adjustment regards both of your life’s purposes. Fulfilling your purpose is every person’s calling and deepest desire. A relationship doesn’t change that; it’s meant to support both partners in fulfilling their purposes. Discuss how your purposes can be reconciled with your relationship – assuming you both know them. Otherwise, discuss how you can support each other in finding your purposes. For more on this topic, see my article “The Five Pillars of One’s Life’s Purpose.”

A soccer team has it both harder and easier than two people in a partnership. It’s harder because 11 players have to function as a team. It’s easier because they have a coach to guide them. When a relationship is in crisis, a temporary “coach” can help – for example, a relationship counselor.

There will be conflicts. Therefore, you should agree in advance on a mediation process that either of you can initiate at any time. Discipline (Criterion 10) requires that the other person accept this – even if it’s sometimes difficult. A first step in the process could be to say something constructive to each other, such as, “I love you. Our partnership is important to me. We’ll find a solution.” Initiating the process forces both of you to take a step back and view the conflict from the outside. That often leads to a solution.

A partnership isn’t something that just happens on its own. It’s a project that requires planning and maintenance. The number one maintenance rule of a partnership – or any team – is communication! I’ve also written a guide on this topic; see: “Five Criteria for Good Communication.”

Further:

Article “Where Does the Desire for a Partner Come From?”

Article “How to Choose a Partner Wisely”

Article “To Survive as a Species, We MUST Work Together”

Article “The Five Pillars of One’s Life’s Purpose”

Article “Five Criteria for Good Communication”

Share

Leave a comment

Share Bernhard explores

A partnership project has three phases: (1) desire and finding a candidate (or vice versa); (2) choosing; (3) nurturing. Each of these steps is the subject of an article in this trilogy on partnership. In this second part, I’ll explain how to choose wisely.

Starting a partnership can be one of the most significant and far-reaching steps of your life. After all, it has consequences. Perhaps you’ll have children… who will accompany you for a lifetime. Perhaps you’ll build shared values, such as a business. A separation can be complicated and tedious – sometimes expensive; or traumatic for children.

A relationship is a risk. And yet many people long for a partner. In the first article of this trilogy, “Where Does the Desire for a Partner Come From?”, I explained why this desire is natural and what social, health-related, and energetic rewards a relationship has in store for us.

If you are looking for a partner, you should first figure out exactly what you want. Do you want a genuine, constructive partnership to shape your future life together… or do you want a partnership that’s less “all-encompassing” and therefore, in fact, “just” a relationship? I ask because, over the decades, I’ve seen many relationships, but alarmingly few genuine partnerships. This is probably because most people struggle to let their “I” dissolve into a “WE” – and that’s exactly what a genuine partnership requires. But since the “WE” is humanity’s only chance for survival – as I explain in my article “To Survive as a Species, We MUST Work Together” – we should start practicing; and the best place to begin is with the smallest “WE”: a partnership.

A vivid metaphor for a genuine, constructive partnership is the image of two people connected by a rope, climbing a mountain together. At first, one remains in a secure position while the other climbs upward. Once the climber has gained height, he secures himself in the new position, and the two switch roles. They get to the summit together by taking turns securing and climbing. Here we see both the key prerequisite and the benefit of a partnership: You have to trust each other… and as a pair, you can reach many goals faster, more easily, and more safely than you can on your own.

Relationships are less binding than partnerships; they are less “WE” and more “I+I.” Often they are barters, such as, “We keep each other company so that neither of us is alone.” Or they are more or less destructive power games that arise from social conditioning. This can still be useful, however – for example, to recognize these patterns and free oneself from them. If that succeeds, the relationship may have run its course.

There are two paths to a relationship. Both lead to where you may have to choose: Will you start a partnership with this person – or not?

The first path begins with the desire for a partner… and the resulting search. You hope to find someone you’re attracted to – and who feels the same about you. If that happens, a relationship can develop.

The second path begins with no intention. Suddenly, you feel attracted to someone; and because the feeling is mutual, you spend time together. A relationship can develop.

If one of you then wants to turn the relationship into a partnership, you must make a choice.

Choosing is a matter of the mind. Even if a choice is based on intuition, it is still the mind that chooses to follow that intuition. However, it is anything but easy to distinguish intuition from social programming: Do you want something because you’ve learned to want it… or because your intuition tells you? I explain intuition in my article: “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense.”

Intuition or not; social conditioning or not. There are good reasons you should definitely involve your mind in choosing a partner. One reason is that love, no matter how deep and genuine it is, isn’t a sufficient foundation for a partnership – and romantic infatuation certainly isn’t. And even “the animal within you,” which expresses itself through instinct and drive, is only a guide for the moment.

Intuition is now. Instinct is now. Emotion is now. Social programs represent the past. With your mind, you can shape the future. With it, you can plan; make choices. And since a relationship should have a future, your mind should have a say in planning and nurturing it.

Many decisions in life are less far-reaching than choosing a partner: such as buying a car, buying a condo, or starting a business. In these cases, you clarify in advance what you want and what you can contribute; for a business, you’ll make a business plan. A relationship is like a business. You should therefore proceed with at least as much care.

Let’s say you have a potential partner.

Step 1: Make a list of what you expect from a partner. Start with the four reasons why the desire for a partner is natural. We discussed them in the first article of this trilogy:

1. Trust

2. Companionship

3. Intimacy

4. Sex

Add to the list everything else you expect from a partner.

Step 2: Now comes the challenging part: The top four points are truthful. Some of what you’ve added may have resulted from social conditioning – that is, you’ve learned to expect this or that. But these expectations aren’t truthful. If you recognize this – and that takes a lot of self-honesty – you should mark them… perhaps by putting them in parentheses.

Step 3: Make a list of what you can offer your partner. Start again with the four truthful items. Is there anything that you recognize as social conditioning?

Step 4: Ask your potential partner to create the same two lists.

Step 5: Compare and discuss your lists.

If your potential partner is willing to go through steps 4 and 5, that’s a good sign. A partnership isn’t a done deal; it takes work; it requires ongoing reflection; it requires honest, respectful, and appreciative communication, as well as genuine, unbiased listening. It therefore makes sense and is helpful to clarify all of this in advance… rather than demanding it only after the first conflicts arise.

In the third part of this trilogy, “How a Partnership Can Succeed,” I discuss what else is needed for a partnership to thrive. There, I outline ten criteria for this.

Further:

Article “Where Does the Desire for a Partner Come From?”

Article “To Survive as a Species, We MUST Work Together”

Article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense”

Article “How a Partnership Can Succeed”

Leave a comment

Share

Share Bernhard explores

A life partner is someone with whom you shape your life together. A partner extends the “I” into “WE.” This is just as momentous in a person’s life as the transition from single-celled to multicellular life was on this planet. This article is the first in a trilogy. It focuses on the desire for a partner, which is the beginning of a journey toward a partnership. In the second article, we’ll look at choosing a partner – and in the third, I’ll show how a relationship can succeed.

We usually associate a relationship with romantic love. However, this idea did not become widespread until the second half of the 19th century. It is an idealized form of love that was glorified in novels. Before that, a partnership was a union of convenience.

World literature, pulp fiction, TV, movie theaters, and radio stations are full of romantic love. The more we read, watch, and hear about it, the more we long to experience it ourselves. That is social conditioning – not the truth.

If you feel attracted to someone, there could be three reasons:

1. You meet your cosmic partner (soulmate, twin flame).

2. You meet someone who matches your social programming.

3. You meet someone who appeals to “the animal within you.”

It’s not always easy to figure out which of these applies. It could also be two or even all three at the same time. The first reason points toward a constructive, lasting partnership. The second points toward a temporary relationship for the purpose of helping each other getting free from programs. The third reason has nothing to do with partnership. It’s about instinct and desire – and those exist only in the present moment.

What is the cosmos? It is the order in the universe that guides everything and everyone toward fulfilling their life’s purpose. I see it as a kind of spiritual gravity that nothing and no one can escape. Whatever you need to fulfill your life’s purpose will enter your life through cosmic guidance… which may include a cosmic partner. More in my articles “Dancing with the Cosmos… Do We Have Free Will?” and “God or Cosmos – Part 1: What Moves the Universe?”

A cosmic partnership primarily serves the following purpose:

• You strengthen and support each other to an extent that would otherwise be unattainable, so that you can fulfill your respective life purposes better than you could on your own – or with a different partner.

In addition, a cosmic partnership can also serve the following purpose:

• You also share a common life mission – for example, a joint project that serves the greater good.

A cosmic partnership may be open-ended or limited in duration. Once the cosmic tasks toward each other – and, if applicable, toward the community – have been fulfilled, the cosmos may separate you just as elegantly as it brought you together.

Let’s say you’re attracted to someone. But how does the other person feel about you? Look at nature: males court, females choose. As a man, you show your interest, and as a woman, you respond to it – or you don’t. This also applies to same-sex relationships, since there is an “energetic” man and an “energetic” woman. Individual personality traits and social conditioning can modify this. For example, there are women who are “hunters” – and therefore court a man.

Attraction can give rise to love. But what exactly is love – beyond romantic conditioning? The word love has the linguistic root *leubh-, which means “to care for, to look after.” Self-love cares for oneself. A mother’s love looks after her children. The mutual love between two people cares for both themselves and the other. See also my article, “What Is Love – and Why Do We Need It?”.

But even true love alone is not enough for a partnership.

About 90% of birds and 5% of mammals form partnerships. Great apes are not among them. We cannot therefore conclude from nature that a partnership is natural for us. But we are more than just nature. We have a tool with which we constantly create and thus can transcend nature: the mind. I explain this tool in my article, “That Is the Difference Between Humans and Animals.”

In nature, everything is truthful; therefore, there is only trust. We humans can act untruthfully; we can lie – and we do. That’s why we cannot trust one another.

Yet trust is natural. When a child is born, it trusts its mother; its father; siblings; grandparents; and later, teachers. But unfortunately, abuse occurs among people… and so we “fall from paradise”: mistrust arises.

Later on, we long to find someone we can trust unconditionally – just as we once trusted our mother; only differently: reciprocally and in combination with other needs. There are three additional reasons why the desire for a partner is natural for us:

1. We long for companionship because it provides a sense of security; being alone triggers the release of stress hormones that can harm our health.

2. We long for intimacy with someone we trust because it triggers the release of hormones that promote health.

3. We long for sex because it allows us to increase our energy with the help of our partner.

In a herd, the animals look out for one another. That’s natural herd love. Being part of a herd means protection. If you’re alone, you must watch out for danger yourself; you must take care of everything on your own. You’re constantly in fight-or-flight mode, which is why your body releases stress hormones. In the long run, this is not only harmful to your health but also fuels aggression. See my article, “Why Is There So Much Aggression?”.

However, a group only provides security if you can trust all its members. But since building trust is a challenge for us humans, we initially look for the smallest possible group of two people: a partnership.

Intimacy requires the utmost trust, because in it we completely open ourselves up to someone else. This is risky, but it also offers a reward: physical contact with someone we trust triggers the release of oxytocin, the cuddle hormone, which reduces stress, lowers blood pressure, promotes healing, and otherwise supports our health. During intimacy with a stranger – eg during a ‘one-night stand’ – the body remains tense, which inhibits hormone production.

Sex is the most intense form of intimacy. What sex is depends on how you define it – and there are cultural differences. I’m referring to sex when intimacy involves the sexual organs.

These are powerful energy centers. The vagina has a negative polarity, while the penis is positive. When the two are connected, energy flows. Other energy centers include the chest – in both women and men – the mouth, and the hands. When you connect positive with negative and negative with positive – such as with kissing during intercourse – an energy cycle is created that you can sense and direct. This can lead to experiences far more intense than those of typical “athletic” sex. When two partners consciously circulate sexual energy between themselves, they become a powerhouse, through which they can boost their energies.

So there are four reasons our desire for a partner is natural:

1. Trust

2. Companionship

3. Intimacy

4. Sex

Love is the icing on the cake of a partnership.

A life partnership is about shaping the future together. Even though our animal nature operates only in the present moment and therefore has nothing to do with partnership, it still plays a role in choosing a partner: no matter how perfect a candidate may be, if you “can’t stand the smell of them,” a partnership isn’t possible. We’ll discuss this in the second article of this trilogy: “How Do You Choose a Partner?”

When two people enter into a relationship, an adventure begins. It doesn’t just happen on its own; a relationship takes work to make it work. In the third article, “How to Make a Partnership Work,” I’ll outline ten criteria that must be met for a constructive partnership. They apply also to other partnerships and teams.

Further:

Article “Dancing with the Cosmos… Do We Have Free Will?”

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 1: What Moves the Universe?”

Article “What Is Love – and Why Do We Need It?”

Article “That Is the Difference Between Humans and Animals”

Article “Why Is There So Much Aggression?”

Article “How Do You Choose a Partner?”

Article, “How to Make a Relationship Work”

Leave a comment

Share

Share Bernhard explores

In this part of the series “God or Cosmos,” we take another look at chance, because according to the findings of quantum physics, it may well exist at the smallest scale. In the following, I analyze what this means for events on a larger scale and why chance is actually necessary at the quantum level for consciousness to influence matter – as in the placebo effect, for example.

The following statement by Albert Einstein in connection with quantum physics is legendary:

“God does not play dice.”
(Albert Einstein)

Einstein was cosmically religious. He was convinced that everything obeys an order – the cosmos. For him, God and the cosmos were one and the same. I explained why I also see it this way in the second part: “God or Cosmos—Part 2: What’s the Difference?”

Einstein was repelled by the idea that something could happen purely by chance. Yet chance seems to play a significant role in the realm of the universe’s smallest building blocks.

In quantum mechanics – the foundation of quantum physics – an elementary particle is described by a so-called wave function. This is an abstract mathematical construct… essentially something like a thought, an idea, or a knowing.

Interpretations of quantum mechanics describe how the abstract wave function and the concrete particle are related. There are several interpretations – and as yet no way to determine which one is correct… correct in the sense that it describes reality. Physics cannot say anything about reality itself. Measurement is the basis of physics. Physicists measure, look for patterns in the data, and then formulate these as laws. Physics can make statements about what it can measure – not about the underlying reality.

The most popular interpretation of quantum mechanics is the Copenhagen interpretation. It was developed by the three Nobel laureates Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, and Max Born, and interprets the wave function as a probability wave.

What is that? Every object in the universe has physical properties such as size, position, and velocity. According to the Copenhagen interpretation, an elementary particle has no physical properties; it is merely the abstract potential for physical properties. The probability wave specifies the probabilities with which the particle has certain properties. When I measure a particle, the measured property becomes concrete – such as its position. This is denoted as the probability wave collapsing because of the measurement: probability becomes certainty.

You can visualize a probability wave using a die held in your closed fist. The die has six possible outcomes: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. In your fist, it is a potential – a probability wave, so to speak. When you roll the die, the potential becomes a concrete event. The roll is a measurement that causes a collapse.

The Copenhagen interpretation is revolutionary because it contradicts common sense. Before a particle is measured, it is an abstract potential… a probability cloud; you can think of it like the flickering light you saw during beaming the TV series Star Trek. When the particle is measured, it becomes concrete. Einstein couldn’t bring himself to believe this either:

“There is no logic that could prevent the moon from existing simply because no one is looking at it.”
(Albert Einstein)

What is a measurement? When I look at or touch an object, I am measuring it. Every interaction is a measurement. The moon doesn’t need anyone to look at it in order to exist. It comprises subatomic particles that constantly interact with one another – and thereby keep each other concrete. Einstein probably didn’t mean the above statement literally. It was likely an exaggerated way of expressing what made him uncomfortable.

There are also interpretations of quantum mechanics that do not rely on chance. However, they are based on assumptions that are, shall we say, “far-fetched.” One of these interpretations is the Many-Worlds Theory. It states that at every moment, every possibility that exists anywhere in the universe leads to a splitting of the universe into parallel universes. Therefore, at this very moment, there are countless universes in which all possibilities of the past have come to pass… and countless new ones are added every moment; for example, a universe in which you have read this article, and one in which you have not.

The Many-Worlds Theory replaces the abstract potential of countless possibilities with countless concrete parallel worlds. To me, one abstract potential seems more plausible than countless parallel universes.

We do not know whether the Copenhagen interpretation is correct – nor can we know. It remains a matter of belief. For me, the following arguments support it:

1. It is beautiful and simple.

2. From it, one can derive simple explanations for, for example, the placebo effect.

3. It ties in seamlessly with my non-physical theory of the mind.

4. It has the most followers.

Is chance back on the table as the ultimate root-cause after all? If it exists at the tiniest scale, how does that fit with the laws of nature, such as the law of free fall? Couldn’t a rock then purely by chance fall upward once?

The surprising answer is: “Yes, it could… but.” The “but” refers to the fact that it would take unimaginably long periods of time for this to happen purely by chance. And then the question is whether someone is watching at exactly that moment…

Put simply, for a stone to fall upward, most of the elementary particles it is made of would have to move upward simultaneously – purely by chance – for long enough. This does not happen within a reasonable amount of time. The reason for this is that randomness at the smallest scale is a special kind of randomness. As a result, on a large scale, everything follows the laws of nature, even if on a small scale, chance reigns.

Imagine the die in your fist again. All six possible outcomes are equally likely: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 all occur with a probability of one-sixth. This type of probability is called uniform.

Now imagine a die that shows a 6 five times and a 1 once. Now the probability of rolling a 6 is higher than the probability of rolling a 1. The result is still random, but this probability is not uniform. We call this die a loaded die.

Now imagine a large die that is made of many small, loaded dice. We roll the small dice – and the result of most of the small dice becomes the result of the large die. So, for example, if the large die comprises five small dice and I roll the numbers 1, 6, 6, 1, 6 with the five small dice, then the result for the large die is 6.

The following table shows the probabilities of the large die showing a 6 or a 1, depending on the number of small dice it comprises:

The more small dice the large die is made of, the less random the outcome becomes: after all, the large die practically always shows a 6. With only 650 small dice, the chance that the large die will show a 1 is as small as the chance of winning a lottery in which you choose, from among all the atoms in the universe, the one that is the winning ticket.

The same is true in the quantum world. The properties of an elementary particle are not equally likely. As a result, microscopic randomness is lost at the macroscopic level – and the laws of nature emerge. An object the size of a pinhead comprises about 10²³ – one hundred thousand quintillion – elementary particles. Its behavior results from the behavior of these particles. We have seen that even 100 small dice inside a large die cause randomness to practically vanish. It is therefore clear that this is all the more true for one hundred thousand quintillion elementary particles. This explains how incredibly unlikely it is for a stone to fall upward… even though it is – theoretically – possible.

It is precisely this possibility that serves as the door through which the mental/spiritual can influence the physical. Although this door is open only a tiny crack, it is open nonetheless.

There is an experiment that suggests that human consciousness can influence random processes: the ‘Global Consciousness Project,’ which was launched in 1998 by psychologist Roger Nelson at the renowned Princeton University. He installed 70 computers around the world that continuously generate random numbers. While they do so, tests are conducted continuously to verify whether the numbers meet all the criteria of random numbers; and they do – usually.

This project aims to test the following hypothesis: When a piece of news moves numerous people around the world simultaneously, it could, metaphorically speaking, create a “wave of consciousness” that affects random number generators. And indeed, this has been observed. The death of Princess Diana, for example, led to an anomaly in the random numbers, as did the attacks on September 11, 2001. The news moved countless people at the same time – and in both cases, this appears to have generated a presumed “wave of consciousness,” which caused a disruption in the random number generators.

How can that be? Can this theory be justified? Yes, it can. A computer’s behavior results from the behavior of its components – and ultimately from the behavior of the elementary particles of which it is composed. Where the laws of physics apply, consciousness – knowing – cannot have any effect; that would contradict the laws of physics. But at the subatomic level, it is not the laws of physics that govern, but those of quantum mechanics. According to the Copenhagen Interpretation, an elementary particle is a probability wave. It is abstract and, therefore, made of the same “fabric” as knowing and consciousness. I describe this fabric and its properties in my article, “There Is More Than Just the Universe.” One can, therefore, describe a particle like this: an elementary particle is the knowing of the probability with which it possesses certain properties. You could also say: the particle is its own know-how. At the level of the fabric of knowing, there is no separateness… just as drops of water in the ocean are not separate from one another and therefore, in principle, all influence one another. Probability waves and knowing – elementary particles and consciousness – are interconnected in this realm, which is why knowing can influence the collapse of the probability wave. If the “wind of knowing” is strong enough to shift the collapse of enough particles in the same way, this can have a large-scale effect, and we observe an anomaly. A storm of knowing indeed could cause a rock to fall upward. Such a phenomenon is called telekinesis.

The placebo effect could also be explained this way. In the Global Consciousness Project, the small gusts of knowing from countless people combine into a storm of knowing that leads to an anomaly in the random numbers. In the placebo effect, a single person generates a storm of knowing by maintaining a state of mind – that is, a knowing – “intensely and long enough.” On a macroscopic level, this storm causes unusual cellular behavior, which we observe, for example, as a miraculous healing.

This is a theory – and theories are neither right nor wrong; they are simply more or less useful. This theory ties in well with the Copenhagen Interpretation and provides coherent explanations for many phenomena for which there has been no explanation so far. In that respect, this theory is useful.

There are other phenomena that cannot be explained by physics but by the above theory. I describe one such phenomenon that I witnessed in the fourth part, “God or Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators” – and I also present X-ray images as evidence there.

Finally, in the fifth part, I offer an answer to the question: Where is the universe heading? (“God or Cosmos – Part 5: Quo Vadis, Universe?”)

Acknowledgments: I am grateful to Michael Petz for calculating the probabilities in the thought experiment “A Large Cube Comprises Many Small Cubes.”

Further:

Article “God or the Cosmos—Part 2: What’s the Difference?”

Article “There Is More Than Just the Universe”

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators”

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 5: Quo Vadis, Universe?”

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 1: What Moves the Universe?”

Share

Leave a comment

In the first part of the article series “God or Cosmos,” we analyzed the two explanatory models ‘gods’ and ‘laws.’ We ruled out the possibility that something happens purely by chance. In this part, we will examine both models once again and see that they are much more closely related than they might initially appear; and we will clarify the term ‘religion.’

This text builds on the first part of this series: “God or Cosmos – Part 1: What Moves the Universe?”

Gods and laws are not mutually exclusive. It is possible that there are both laws and gods. Perhaps gods, if they exist, do not want to take care of everything personally. Perhaps they leave routine tasks – such as free fall – to the laws of nature.

Exploring causes means asking “Why?” Every answer raises new questions. That is why a truly curious person never stops asking. If, however, they do stop, they must accept as a given whatever they have not yet an answer for. They must believe in an unknown cause, for which there are three candidates: gods, laws, and chance.

In physics, there is an interesting example of this: quantum entanglement. This term describes a phenomenon in which two particles – such as two electrons – “know” about each other without physical transfer of information. Quantum entanglement contradicts the laws of classical physics.

Countless experiments confirmed entanglement – for photons, electrons, molecules, and even tiny diamonds. It is a fact. Albert Einstein called it “spooky action at a distance.” What is behind it? Is it ghosts or gods? Are there laws that cause entanglement? We can rule out chance because the phenomenon occurs as reliably as free fall. So only two explanations remain:

1. A “god of entanglement” causes this phenomenon. He connects particles beyond space and time – ie, outside the physical universe. This god creates the “spookiness” that Einstein saw in this phenomenon

2. There is a law. However, since it contradicts the laws of classical physics, it must lie outside the framework of classical physics.

There have been various attempts to explain quantum entanglement. These include, for example, the assumption of “hidden variables” or a “superdeterminism” that might have originated in the Big Bang; or questioning how real the world truly is and whether physicists are free to make choices in their experiments. Accordingly, there are several interpretations of quantum mechanics – and which explanation one follows is a matter of belief. A quote from the American Nobel laureate Richard Feynman sums up the situation:

“If you think you understand quantum mechanics, then you don’t understand quantum mechanics.” (Richard Feynman)

But we do want to understand… and so we’re taking a different approach: we’re looking outside of physics for a law that explains quantum entanglement in a way that makes sense. To do this, we must allow for the possibility that there is something outside the universe:

This image aligns with well-known philosophical, spiritual, and religious models, although different terms are often used:

Using this image, we can also visualize a combination of laws and gods: Gods exist in spirit. They can intervene in the universe and bypass the laws of physics.

In the first article, we already examined such an extension by adding the non-physical realm of knowing to the physical universe. Knowing is a non-physical phenomenon. Your thoughts and feelings are part of your knowing; they have neither length, nor weight, nor any other physical property. Your body is part of the physical universe; your knowing “happens” in the non-physical realm of knowing. I describe these two worlds and their properties in my article “There Is More Than Just the Universe” and in my book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It.” In this book and in my article “Why and How Everything Is Interconnected,” I explain why everything is connected with everything else through the non-physical level.

Scientific models and theories are neither right nor wrong; they are simply more or less useful for explaining phenomena. For example, Einstein’s theory of relativity is more useful than classical physics because it can explain phenomena that occur at speeds close to the speed of light. The model of two worlds is more useful than the materialistic-physical worldview because, besides everything that can be explained physically, it also allows us to explain phenomena that are outside the realm of physics – such as quantum entanglement and the placebo effect.

1. Quantum entanglement arises because two particles are connected to one another on the non-physical level of knowing: they know about each other.

2. A person’s mindset is a form of knowing; if someone knows “intensely enough,” this knowing can influence the physical realm just as a god could. More on this in the fourth part of this series, “God or Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators.”

On the non-physical level, one cannot measure; one can only know. Measurement is the foundation and essence of physics. Physics can only make statements about what can be measured. Hence, measurement determines the limits of physics. Thus, we can also describe the above dichotomy as follows: the measurable and the unmeasurable.

Many scientists ignore the existence of the unmeasurable. Research into such phenomena is often disparagingly labeled as pseudoscientific. In fact, however, this term is a sign of the arrogance of those who use it. Limiting science to physical phenomena contradicts the term itself, since it derives from the Latin word scire, which means ‘to know’ and denotes a non-physical phenomenon.

There is no reasonable basis for assuming that everything is measurable. Observe yourself. Your thoughts and feelings cannot be measured; they can only be known. Perhaps you might object that they can be visualized in brain scans and thus made somewhat measurable. But that is a misinterpretation. Such scans only show the more or less vague traces that thoughts and feelings leave in the brain. I explain this view in my article “Thoughts Are Not Products of the Brain” and in my book on consciousness.

Explanatory models that refer to one or more gods are usually called religions. The word religion comes from the Latin word religare, which means ‘to reconnect.’ A religious person assumes that the course of events is not purely random, but has causes… and is ultimately connected to a root-cause. A root-cause can be gods or laws. Therefore, the conviction that everything arises from laws is, in the literal sense of the word, also religious.

Albert Einstein distinguished – in this sense – three types of religions:

1. Primitive religion of fear,

2. Moral religion,

3. Cosmic religion.

Most primitive religions have polytheistic models. Most moral religions have a monotheistic model. See “God or Cosmos – Part 1: What Moves the Universe?” A cosmic religiosity can arise when someone keeps asking “Why?” and, in doing so, delves deeper and deeper into cause-and-effect relationships. Together, these relationships form an order that underlies the universe: the cosmos. A cosmically religious person believes that there is an order in everything. This kind of religiosity is individual. It cannot be taught. It arises from passionate curiosity. Einstein was cosmically religious.

“I am not particularly gifted. I am just passionately curious.”
(Albert Einstein)

There is no difference between God and the cosmos in the outcome. Both “rule” or “govern” the universe – one might say. God is beyond the universe, but can influence it. The cosmos, the order, encompasses both worlds.

One could argue that the difference is that God is a being, whereas the cosmos is not. But that is just cosmetic. Psychologically, the idea of a god who is a being offers many people an advantage over a cosmos that is not a being. A god, who is a being, is usually attributed with human-like qualities, such as love, anger, compassion, etc. So people try to win God over; and then they ask Him to direct things the way they wish.

At first glance, this seems impossible with the cosmos. One cannot win the cosmos’ favor. One cannot persuade it to steer things one way or another, because everything happens in accordance with physical and non-physical laws. However, we see in the placebo effect that something very similar to praying to a god can have a physical effect. When praying, one believes in a god; with the mindset underlying a placebo effect, one believes in, for example, a healer, a healing method, or in oneself.

A “spiritual/mental intervention” can also come from someone else – such as a “spiritual healer.” I witnessed such a phenomenon. I describe it, supported by X-ray images, in the fourth part of this series: “God or Cosmos—Part 4: Humans Are Creators.”

Some gods are said to be capable of love. Is that different from the cosmos? To find out, we need to clarify what love is. I do that in my article “What Is Love – and Why Do We Need It?” In short: To love means ‘to care.’ And that is exactly what the cosmos “does.” In the first part of this series, I characterized it as follows:

Those who fulfill their life’s purpose experience the highest possible fulfillment. Therefore, the cosmos constantly guides us toward the highest fulfillment… ie toward bliss. In this sense, the cosmos “takes care” of us, and it is appropriate to say, “the cosmos loves us”. So on this point as well, there is no difference between a God and the cosmos.

The difference between God and the cosmos lies, on the one hand, in the “packaging,” and on the other, in the observer: A person who never stops asking questions is cosmically religious; a person who eventually stops asking comes to believe in a god at that point… or in an unknown law that ultimately corresponds to a god, because it could simply be an attribute of that god.

In the first part of this series of articles, we ruled out chance as the root cause of the course of events. However, according to the findings of quantum physics, chance might exist at the smallest scale – that is, according to the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Why things are nevertheless not random on a large scale, and why chance is actually necessary at the smallest scale in order to enable a mental/spiritual influence on the physical universe, I will explain in the next part of this series, “God or the Cosmos – Part 3: Does Chance Exist After All?”

The fourth part, “God or Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators,” explores our role as creative beings.

Finally, the question arises: Where is the universe headed? I offer an answer in the fifth part: “God or Cosmos – Part 5: Quo Vadis, Universe?”

Further:

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 1: What Moves the Universe?”

Article “There Is More Than Just the Universe”

Book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It”

Article “Why and How Everything Is Interconnected”

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators” (forthcoming)

Article “Thoughts Are Not Products of the Brain”

Article “What Is Love – and Why Do We Need It?”

Article “God or the Cosmos – Part 3: Does Chance Exist After All?” (forthcoming)

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 5: Quo Vadis, Universe?” (forthcoming)

Share

Leave a comment

Why do things happen the way they do? Can we influence the course of events? In the following, I’ll get to the bottom of this.

Imagine a village on the edge of a jungle. A tiger comes into the village and kills a child. This has never happened before. What must the villagers do to prevent this from happening again? They must first understand why the tiger did this. There are basically two possibilities:

1. Its behavior has a cause.

2. Its behavior has no cause; ie it is purely random.

The latter is extremely unlikely. If the tiger’s behavior were random, the same would likely be true also for other life forms. Yet the magnificence of nature can hardly be the result of random behavior. If you toss a handful of coins onto the floor, the result is disorder – not order. The probability that the coins will then lie on the floor in a beautiful pattern is practically zero.

However, quantum physicists have discovered phenomena at the subatomic level that may be purely random. In the third part of this series of articles, I will discuss this and explain how it fits with the fact that the behavior of large objects is not random: “God or Cosmos – Part 3: Is There Chance After All?”

So let’s assume the tiger’s behavior has a cause. There are three possible causes:

1. It is a being, and its behavior is an expression of its free will.

2. There is a being that controls the tiger, and the tiger’s behavior is an expression of that being’s free will.

3. The tiger’s behavior arises from the laws of nature; ie it follows a certain order.

If either of the first two explanations is correct, the villagers may have angered the being – and the child’s death was a punishment. In that case, they should find out what caused the being’s wrath. They should ask for forgiveness and avoid such behavior in the future.

If the third explanation is correct, the villagers should investigate the laws that the tiger follows. Perhaps human behavior was not the cause of the incident; maybe the tiger could not find enough food because of a drought and, therefore, ventured outside the jungle in search of food.

Whether the tiger is a being with free will or is controlled by a being with free will makes no difference in the outcome. Therefore, we can combine these two explanations into one. This leaves two explanations: being and laws.

First Explanation: Being

Either things are beings, or there are beings that control them. Beings act of their own free will. To influence the course of events, one must win the favor of these beings and ask them to guide things appropriately. To ask a being for something is to pray, for this word has the root *prek-, which means ‘to ask.’ The beings invoked are called gods, for this word has the root *ghau-, meaning ‘to call upon.’ A god is a being that one calls upon; eg with a prayer.

There are many variations of this explanation. One can recognize them in a tradition or culture, eg by references to the “spirit of an animal” or “the sun as a manifestation of a god.” Well-known examples include the ancient Greek and Roman gods.

If an explanatory model includes many gods, the knowledge about them and how to invoke them is complex. Therefore, members of the community are chosen to take care of this. Often these are the elders, which is why they are called priests. This word has the Greek root presbys, which means ‘old.’ People turn to the priests with their requests, and the priests then turn to the gods. Communication with the gods may involve prayers, dances, songs, and offerings such as stones, plants, animals, or dolls. In addition, the priests instruct the people on what behavior is pleasing to the gods; this may include body painting, self-mutilation, and rules regarding clothing. In god models, fear is often a factor – specifically, fear of “wrong” behavior; ultimately, this is a fear of the gods.

Within such an explanatory model, priests bear a great responsibility for the well-being of society and thus wield great power. They are regarded as representatives of the gods and are sometimes treated as if they were gods themselves.

A god model becomes simpler when gods are grouped together. For example, all animals could be ruled by one god – the god of the animal kingdom. The ultimate simplification is the reduction of all gods to one god. The complex power structure of many gods turns into the omnipotence of one god; everything in the universe happens according to his will.

A one-god model is easier to understand. Everyone can learn what pleases the god and what does not – and can pray to him directly. Priests then perform tasks such as conducting god-pleasing ceremonies for special occasions.

If a community has different god models, this can lead to conflicts. People of different faiths may clash over what behavior is god-pleasing and how to handle a situation. Religious wars are sad evidence.

Second Explanation: Laws

Everything follows laws that determine what happens, or what to do, when, and how. These laws describe the relationships between causes and effects. To influence the course of events, one must know the laws; then one can try to create the conditions necessary for a desired outcome.

Water, for example, follows the laws of physics. If you know that frozen water takes up more space than the same amount of liquid water, you can use this knowledge to split stones.

Recognizing and describing laws – that is, cause-and-effect relationships – is an intellectual challenge. It requires meticulous observation as well as structured, logical thinking. We can see just how challenging this can be from the very simple example of free fall. Aristotle already investigated this phenomenon; yet it took about 2,000 years before Galileo Galilei correctly formulated the law of falling objects.

Over thousands of years of scientific observation of nature, vast collections of natural laws were compiled, along with insights into how these laws could be used to influence the course of events. This gave rise to arts such as home-building, toolmaking, agriculture, healing, astrology, and alchemy. As the materialistic worldview took hold, sciences such as physics, chemistry, metallurgy, biology, and medicine emerged.

Parallel to this, people developed the thinking technology required for this research. It is a mental tool independent of the observed phenomena: mathematics. See my article “What Is Mathematics? A Long-Overdue Clarification.”

Although the laws of physics are simple compared to the laws of life, we are still working to understand them. Essentially, the theory of relativity and quantum theory describe the current state of knowledge… and there are still unanswered questions.

The laws governing the behavior of living organisms are far more complex – and our understanding of them is still in its infancy. But as long as we cling to a materialistic worldview, according to which only the physical universe exists, there can be no genuine progress. Meticulous observation of nature shows that the behavior of living beings is not determined solely by the laws of physics and chemistry, the genetic code, and sensorimotor programs; a being’s life history also plays a role, as does a phenomenon called intuition. An impressive example of the latter happened during the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, which claimed the lives of many people but hardly any animals. See my article “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – But Almost No Animals.” In areas that were later flooded, the animals intuitively knew before the water arrived that they should move to safe areas – and they did so. See also my article, “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense.”

Life forms act based on their knowing. Therefore, we must first understand what knowing is. Observe yourself: Your knowing has neither length nor weight, nor does it have any other physical property. It is not a physical phenomenon, but one that “happens” outside the universe; some call this realm spirit. I describe a strictly logically derived model for this meta-material level in my article “There Is More Than Just the Universe” and in my book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It.”

Traditional science ignores the meta-material level and therefore often struggles to provide explanations. Scientists try to provide physical explanations for phenomena such as the behavior of animals observed during the tsunami; but they never delve deeply enough to provide genuine explanations. Often, however, such phenomena are simply ignored … because for many, “what must not be cannot be.”

If we include the meta-material level, all phenomena that were previously difficult or impossible to explain have simple explanations. This is reminiscent of the transition from the geocentric to the heliocentric worldview. Viewed from Earth, the planetary orbits are complicated; for example, Venus makes five loops during two orbits. Viewed from the Sun, the planetary orbits are simple: they are ellipses.

When we adopt a meta-material perspective, we can view the physical universe “from the outside” and recognize it as embedded within the meta-material realm. Then we see that, besides physical laws, there are also meta-physical laws. If we examine these systematically, we see an order underlying all.

This order is comparable to the order within your body. Your body lives and thrives because nearly all of your 35 trillion cells follow its order. The universe comprises everything within it… stars, planets, you, me, etc. All of this – including you and me – are the “cells” of the universe. Just like your body, the universe is also based on an order. This is called the cosmos because kosmos is the Greek word for order. The laws of physics are part of the cosmos. We can imagine the cosmos as an invisible rubber membrane that connects all – the physical and the metaphysical; matter and knowing. Intuition is the connection to this cosmic membrane.

Each of your cells has a purpose as part of the body and has specialized in it; that is why there are liver cells, blood cells, skin cells, etc. The order of your body guides each cell to fulfill its purpose. Likewise, everything in the universe has a purpose – every stone, every plant, every animal, every human being. Everything has a life purpose.

This guidance includes encounters, opportunities, doors that open, doors that close, and so on, but also accidents and illnesses. Everything happens in order to lead us to our life’s purpose. (I explore this further in the fourth part of this series: “God or the Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators.”)

Everything non-human on this planet follows this guidance and thus fulfills its life’s purpose: a stone fulfills its purpose of being a stone; an oak tree fulfills its purpose of being an oak tree; etc. We humans have the freedom not to follow this guidance. This freedom makes us creative beings – creators. Some of our creations are constructive, others are destructive. It is because of this freedom that 230,000 people died in the tsunami. Since biologically we are animals, these people, too, had felt the urge to leave in time – such as the idea of taking a trip inland. Yet thoughts and social conditioning are much louder than the quiet, subtle voice of intuition, which is why we often overlook or misinterpret cosmic guidance.

Doing what you were meant to do is deeply fulfilling; some call this bliss. This is, in a sense, the reward for fulfilling your life’s purpose. In my article “The Five Pillars of One’s Life’s Purpose,” I explore this concept in greater detail and describe what can help you discover your purpose.

God or the cosmos need not be an either/or choice. These two explanations are closer to each other than they may seem at first. I analyze this in the second part of this series: “God or Cosmos – Part 2: What’s the Difference?”

In the first part of this series of articles, we ruled out chance as the root cause of the course of events. However, according to the findings of quantum physics, chance might exist at the smallest scale – that is, according to the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Why things are nevertheless not random on a large scale, and why chance is actually necessary at the smallest scale in order to enable a mental/spiritual influence on the physical universe, I will explain in the third part of this series, “God or the Cosmos – Part 3: Is There Chance After All?”

In the fourth part, “God or Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators,” I explain the role we play as creative beings and why, despite our free will, we cannot break free from the universal order.

Finally, the question arises: Where is the universe headed? I offer an answer in the fifth part: “God or Cosmos – Part 5: Quo Vadis, Universe?”

Further:

Article “What Is Mathematics? A Long-Overdue Clarification”

Article “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – But Almost No Animals”

Article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense”

Article “There Is More Than Just the Universe”

Book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It”

Article “The Five Pillars of One’s Life’s Purpose”

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 2: What’s the Difference?”

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 3: Is There Chance After All?” (forthcoming)

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 4: Humans Are Creators” (forthcoming)

Article “God or Cosmos – Part 45 Quo Vadis, Universe?” (forthcoming)

Share

Leave a comment

The image most people have of mathematics was usually shaped in school. This image is almost always wrong because the school subject of mathematics does not reflect what mathematics actually is. I am a mathematician, and I will shed some light on the matter below.

There are people who are very good at mental arithmetic. Some can multiply large numbers in their minds faster than it takes someone else to type them into a calculator. That’s impressive, but it has nothing to do with mathematics. A mental arithmetic artist is not a mathematician!

“Nothing reveals a lack of mathematical education more strikingly than excessive precision in numerical calculations.”
(Wilhelm Weber – physicist)

Mathematics is not the art of calculation – on the contrary:

Calculation is the application of a method; an algorithm; a formula. It requires neither intelligence nor creativity. Calculation requires

• Memory (to remember the formula or method) as well as

• Accuracy and perseverance (to apply the formula or method).

In fact, many mathematicians are poor at mental arithmetic. We are – in a way – lazy. We want to reach a goal with minimal effort and spare ourselves the work of calculating. Suppose you need to determine the number of seats in a room. You could count the seats, for example: 1, 2, …, 96. A mathematical approach is to examine the arrangement of the seats in search of a usable pattern. Suppose the seats are arranged in a rectangle: each row has the same number of seats. This pattern is useful because it allows to determine the number of seats by multiplying the number of seats per row by the number of rows. With 8 seats per row and 12 rows, that’s 8 times 12, which gives 96. That’s less work than counting the seats from 1 to 96.

In the 18th century, at an elementary school in Braunschweig, Germany, a teacher had the children add up the numbers from 1 to 100. They were to write the result on their slates and put them on the teacher’s desk. After just a few minutes, the nine-year-old pupil Carl Friedrich brought his slate forward.

Toward the end of the class, the other children’s slates followed. Most of the answers were wrong. The bottom one had the correct answer: 5050. The astonished teacher asked the boy how he had arrived at the answer so quickly. He replied, “The first and last numbers added give 1+100=101; adding the second and the second-to-last numbers, 2+99, also gives 101; likewise the third and the third-to-last numbers; and so on. Every pair formed in this way adds up to 101. The last pair is 50+51=101. There are 50 pairs, so the result is 50 times 101, which gives 5050.” All other children had calculated by adding 99 times. Carl Friedrich took a mathematical approach and reduced the problem to one multiplication.

The teacher saw the boy’s talent and supported him. Carl Friedrich Gauss became one of the greatest mathematicians in history. The formula he discovered, (n+1) times (n/2), is called Gauss’s summation formula. This also shows how important a teacher can be for a person’s life path. Being a teacher is a very responsible task. I reflect on this in my article, “What Casanova Has to Do With the School System.”

The two examples illustrate a central aspect of mathematical activity: patterns. Therefore, the following also applies:

We mathematicians look for patterns – because they might help us answer a question, as was the case with the young Gauss, or simply so we can “play” with them.

A popular mathematical playground is the so-called natural numbers. These are the infinitely many numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, …. Out of curiosity, we ask, for example: “Which numbers can be written as products of smaller numbers—except for the number 1?” The number 4 can be written as 2 × 2; 6 as 2 × 3; 8 as 2 × 4 or also as 2 × 2 × 2. This is not possible for 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. So there are two types of numbers: those that can be factored and those that cannot. We call the latter prime numbers. Then we continue by asking questions like, “Is there a largest prime number?”

Even the ancient Greeks were interested in prime numbers, and so over the course of more tan 2,000 years, many of their properties have been discovered. Some findings influenced other areas of mathematics, such as algebra. Today, prime numbers play an important role in cryptography, ie the encryption of messages.

Patterns play a central role in many intelligence tests. That would be fine, but these tests are often used destructively. I explain how this happens in my article, “Many Intelligence Tests Are Not Only Nonsensical, But Downright Criminal.”

Numbers are abstract. While we can use them to count concrete objects, such as seats, that is not what mathematical play is about. We are simply curious about the properties of numbers and other abstract objects, the patterns they contain, and how patterns are related.

There are also patterns in reality; for example, an arrangement of seats, or the falling of objects. At first glance, the latter is a simple pattern: if I drop something, it falls downward. If we examine the falling process more closely, we realize: if something falls from a greater height, the impact upon landing is greater. This impact depends on speed – and it turns out that a falling object gets faster and faster.

The behavioral pattern of falling objects has already occupied thinkers of antiquity, such as Aristotle. At the beginning of the 17th century, Galileo Galilei was the first to describe free fall mathematically and correctly using a formula. At the end of the 17th century, Isaac Newton went a step further and formulated the law of gravity, which describes not only free fall but also the motion of the planets.

The law of gravity states: Two bodies attract each other; the force depends on the masses of the two bodies and their distance from one another. In fact, the falling stone also attracts the Earth, and the Earth moves toward the stone; however, because of its much greater mass, the Earth is vastly superior to the stone. Its movement toward the stone is so minimal that it cannot be measured.

It was a mathematical masterpiece of Newton to recognize the law of gravity as a common pattern in free fall and the motions of the planets.

We are dealing with two types of patterns:

1. patterns of abstract objects, such as numbers;

2. patterns of concrete objects, such as seats or falling objects.

This corresponds to the two major branches of mathematics: pure mathematics and applied mathematics.

Pure mathematics is a playing in which we invent the games ourselves. Metaphorically speaking, we choose a game board, game pieces, and rules, and then we start playing; as we do, for example, with prime numbers. Such a game has no purpose other than play itself.

„Play is the highest form of research.“
(Albert Einstein)

Mathematical play requires creativity and structured, logical thinking. Thinking is humanity’s superpower. I describe it in my article “That Is the Difference Between Humans and Animals.” Brain teasers train thinking. Games like tangram train thinking. The supreme discipline for training thinking is mathematics. Hence, it is also true that:

Whether a mathematical game has anything to do with reality is of no interest to the pure mathematician. The American physicist and Nobel laureate Richard Feynman put it this way:

“In fact, the glory of mathematics is that we do not have to say what we are talking about. The glory is that the laws, the arguments, and the logic are independent of what ‘it’ is.”
(Richard Feynman)

Applied mathematics is about reality and solving real-world problems.

What is a problem? A problem exists when we want something based on something given. For example: Given a lecture hall; we want the number of seats. Or: Given a tower and a stone; we want the speed at which the stone hits the ground when dropped from the top of the tower. The wanted is called a solution to the problem.

The term problem is also used in pure mathematics, eg: Given the numbers from 1 to 100; we want their sum. Or: Given a natural number; we want its factorization into prime numbers.

In applied mathematics, one proceeds as follows when solving a real-world problem: First, the real-world situation is modeled, ie described by a mathematical model or framework. For example, the motion of a falling stone could be described by a table that shows the remaining height above the ground at one-second intervals. The numbers would be obtained through observation.

The mathematical model simplifies the real-world situation. It describes only those properties that appear relevant to the solution. For example, the color of the stone is not modeled because experience shows it does not affect the fall.

Thus, in the first step, a real-world problem P is transformed into a mathematical model problem P_M. In the second step, one attempts to solve the model problem P_M using the tools of pure mathematics. If a model solution S_M is found, one applies it to the real world in a third step … hoping to have found a solution S to the real problem. Whether this is the case must be verified experimentally.

The success of this method depends on two factors:

1. the quality of the translation of the real-world problem into a mathematical problem; and

2. the availability and quality of the tools of pure mathematics.

For the latter, one can draw on a wealth of resources. Over thousands of years, mathematicians have developed countless mathematical tools. Many arose playfully out of curiosity and only later proved useful.

One of the best-known mathematical tools is the Pythagorean theorem (“a squared plus b squared equals c squared”). It is useful because it helps construct a right angle. This theorem is much older than its namesake, who lived around 570–510 BC. The oldest known source for this theorem is the ancient Egyptian “Rhind Papyrus,” which dates back to 1,550 BC. This mathematical tool is already over 3,500 years old.

Applied mathematics has also often inspired pure mathematics. If you can’t find a suitable tool to solve a real-world problem, you can try to develop one… or you may have to create an entirely new mathematical game.

Today’s basic mathematical research is tomorrow’s technological progress because mathematics continuously produces new tools.

But even the best mathematical tools are useless if the translation of the real-world problem P into a model problem P_M is inadequate. This translation is not part of mathematics.

In mathematics, there is certainty. There, one can prove things; for example, that there are infinitely many prime numbers. Being able to prove this is remarkable because such a proof cannot be derived through calculation alone. The universe contains only finite resources and finite time; it is impossible to examine an infinite number of cases. Making the infinite manageable within the finite is one of the greatest achievements of pure mathematics.

“Insofar as mathematical propositions refer to reality, they are not certain; and insofar as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”
(Albert Einstein)

Outside of mathematics, there are no proofs and there is no certainty. All other sciences are speculative. Statements like “Trust science” are utter nonsense. Scientific progress comes from questioning scientific findings. Doubt is the driving force behind science.

“If you thought science was certain – well, that’s a mistake on your part.”
(Richard Feynman)

If the mathematical solution S_M is applied to reality and it turns out that S does not solve the real problem, this must be due to the translation of the problem P into the model problem P_M. Then one must repeat the three-step process above … with a better translation.

Mathematics is everywhere. Today, more than ever. Virtually every technological progress is made possible by mathematical tools. The theory of relativity and quantum physics, for example, are two mathematical models that lie at the heart of our current understanding of physics and chemistry. Consequently, all resulting technology is based on mathematics. This includes not only space travel and lasers but also everyday technologies like GPS.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is also a form of applied mathematics. AI emerged from computer science, and computer science emerged from mathematics. The father of the computer is the English mathematician Charles Babbage. In the 19th century, he built the first working model of a calculating machine.

In my article “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Artificial Intelligence,” I analyze AI systems and their significance for humanity. In my article “Why AI Systems Are NOT Intelligent,” I describe how they work and what mathematics is at their core.

However, life comprises more than just intellect and technology. There are important aspects of our existence that are beyond the reach of thought. That is why we need non-thinking just as much as we need thinking. One of the great contemporary mathematicians, Bruno Buchberger, reflects on this in his highly recommended German language book “Wissenschaft und Meditation – Auf dem Weg zur bewussten Naturgesellschaft“ (“Science and Meditation – Toward a Conscious Society in Harmony with Nature”).

*

Further readings:

Article “What Casanova Has to Do With the School System”

Article “Many Intelligence Tests Are Not Only Nonsensical, But Downright Criminal”

Article “That Is the Difference Between Humans and Animals”

Article “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Artificial Intelligence”

Article “Why AI Systems Are NOT Intelligent”

Book „Bruno Buchberger: Wissenschaft und Meditation – Auf dem Weg zur bewussten Naturgesellschaft“ (“Science and Meditation – Toward a Conscious Society in Harmony with Nature”)

Share

Leave a comment

The ‘I’ seems so obvious ... and yet it is so mysterious. In the following, I will describe what it is.

„The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms.“
(Socrates)

I couldn’t find a reasonable definition of the ‘I’ on the internet. Many are about the use of the (lowercase) letter ‘i’ for the imaginary unit, ie the square root of minus 1. Others describe the linguistic use of the uppercase letter I as a subjective singular pronoun of the first person.

The ‘I’ has to do with consciousness. Therefore, we must clarify consciousness first.

Consciousness denotes a knowing, since the term includes the Latin word scire, meaning ‘to know’. An old English word for ‘know’ is witan, which has the root *weid- that means ‘to see.’ Thus, knowing is what someone sees – physically or mentally. Your current knowing comprises

• Feelings or perceptions,

• Thoughts,

• Familiarities or memories, and

• Intuitions.

You can find detailed descriptions of these four ingredients in my article, “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense.” I explain the connection between knowledge and truth in the article, “Knowledge Is Not the Same as Truth.”

Knowing is now – and it is permanently changing. You experience a flow of knowing, comparable to a film in which every frame contains the above ingredients. The collection of all you have ever known is your life’s story – you could also call it your knowing history, life story, life film, or life book. You can willfully remember what you knew in the past – for example, last night. You can look back on your life story and therefore know that you have a life story. That makes a meaningful and linguistically accurate definition of consciousness.

You can find a graphical illustration of the definition of consciousness in my article “Consciousness Is Not the Same as Awareness” and in my book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It.”

Your life story makes you who you are. Therefore, a meaningful definition of the ‘I’ is:

Knowing, memory, life story, consciousness, and the ‘I’ are mental/spiritual phenomena: mental/spiritual in the sense that they are not physical. To understand this, we must define the term mind/spirit. For this, we divide what is into two “kingdoms”:

• the kingdom of separateness, which is nothing other than the physical universe, and

• the kingdom of non-separateness, which is colloquially referred to as spirit and, philosophically, as mind.

Colloquially, the term mind denotes the tool that thinks, since the word’s root *men- means ‘to think’. Philosophically, This term is used in the more general sense of spirit.

Mind/spirit is the opposite of the physical universe and therefore has no physical properties. It is not energy because energy is a physical phenomenon. Knowing is a mental/spiritual phenomenon: it has neither length nor weight, neither temperature nor any other physical property. You can find out more about these two kingdoms in my article, “There Is More Than Just the Universe.”

Your knowing includes feelings and perceptions – and thus information about your body. Your body is the constant in your life’s story. You are knowing that appears anchored in the physical universe through a body.

Since sight and hearing are the dominant outer senses, you perceive the world from a perspective located ‘behind your eyes’ and ‘between your ears.’ Therefore, your consciousness and your ‘I’ seem to be in your head. But this is an illusion created by anatomical circumstances. What if your eyes were on your kneecaps? Then you would assume your ‘I’ and your consciousness in your knees.

Since spirit has no physical properties, it has no locality; that is, it is not in any place. Therefore, consciousness and the ‘I’ are also not in any place; neither in the brain, nor in the knee, nor in any other part of the body. This is part of the mystery of the ‘I’.

Your life story grows from moment to moment; every moment, a new knowing is added. Therefore, your ‘I’ is permanently changing. The ‘I’ of your youth differs from your ‘I’ today. You are different today... and yet the same. This is also part of the mystery of the ‘I’.

The ‘I’ is initially just the identification with your life story. But as you grew up, you learned to call the body that is the constant in your life story, “my body.” That’s how you learned the concept of ‘ownership.’ You learned that MINE and YOURS are separate . You learned you are separate from everything else. The ‘I’ became your most fundamental experience of separateness.

But this is an illusion – albeit a very persistent one. MINE and YOURS are different... but being different doesn’t mean being separate. A healthy hand, for example, has five fingers. They differ from each other, but they are not separate from each other.

My ‘I’ and your ‘I’ are different because our life stories are different. But they are not separate from each other because they are mental/spiritual phenomena, and there is no separateness in mind/spirit… yet another mystery.

Imagine mind/spirit as a hand; then everything and everyone is a finger of that hand. Everything and everyone is interconnected in the kingdom of non-separateness, ie on the “mental/spiritual level.” The body is a mask through which we end up in the illusion of the kingdom of separateness. You can find out more about this illusion in my articl,e “Why and How the Universe Is an Illusion.”

Separateness is just a program; it is a knowing that is an illusion. We can overcome it by choosing to know that we are interconnected with all. In this way, we can develop “we-consciousness.” Many indigenous peoples cultivate such a mindset.

Finally, a long-overdue clarification: ego is the Latin word for ‘I’ – which is why there is no linguistic difference between ‘I’ and ego. One can semantically create a difference by using two different definitions. However, one must then also provide these two definitions.

Further:

Article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense”

Article “Knowledge Is Not the Same as Truth”

Article “Consciousness Is Not the Same as Awareness”

Book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It”

Article “There Is More Than Just the Universe”

Article “Why and How the Universe Is an Illusion”

Share

Leave a comment

Is what you do your life’s purpose? A test is the question “Would you do what you do if you weren’t paid for it?”. Austrian actor Roland Düringer posed this question in one of his shows. Two out of 500 people came forward. In the following, I will explore the concept of a life’s purpose and show how you can find your own.

The life’s purpose is also denoted a calling because “something” calls you to fulfill it.

„If it is your calling, it will keep calling you.”
(unknown)

If you follow your calling, you will experience the highest possible fulfillment; some call it bliss. Otherwise, you will experience a longing that keeps you searching. Many people then end up in substitute satisfactions such as food, possessions, sex, information, or drugs.

To understand where the life’s purpose comes from and what it means, let’s first look at your body. It comprises 35 trillion cells, each of which has a task – its life’s purpose. This purpose has a general and a special part. The cell’s general purpose is survival – because that’s the general purpose of every cell. You can recognize its specific purpose by its place in the body. If it is part of the liver, its special purpose is to be a liver cell. Etc.

This applies to everything and everyone. Everything and everyone is part of the universe and a purpose that has a general and a special part. For example, the special purpose of a lion is to be a lion. Lions are important for the balance of the biosphere – as is every species. Without lions, gazelles would become rampant.

Behind this is an order that connects all things and directs them; such as all cells of your body; all birds in a flock; all life forms in a biosphere; all things in the universe. This universal order is denoted cosmos, because kosmos is the Greek word for order. The laws of physics are a tiny part of it. The cosmos urges everything and everyone to fulfill their purpose. I explain the universal order in my forthcoming article, “God and Cosmos.”

All living beings are connected to this order through their intuition. Cells, plants, and animals follow their intuition and, therefore, fulfill their purpose ... unless they were programmed by humans. If someone catches a lion and trains it, the lion will no longer function according to its life’s purpose. For example, it would naturally and intuitively flee from fire. As a circus lion, it might jump through a hoop of flames every evening.

I describe the connection of a life form to the cosmos in my article “Intuition is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense.”

We are the only known life form on this planet that can choose not to function and not to follow our life’s purpose. We can spontaneously act differently because we have a mind with which we can create behavior. I describe this tool in my article, “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals.”

Because we can create, we can transcend nature. Nature represents the know-how of survival that evolved over billions of years and thus is tried and tested. In a fraction of this time, we have created an artificial un-nature comprising countless unnatural materials, tools, habitats, and ways of life – without knowing which of these will prove successful in the long run. I say this without judgment: a creation can be useful or harmful, nature-friendly or nature-hostile, constructive or destructive. We have also manipulated nature and are doing so with increasingly aggressive methods, such as genetic manipulation. We are pushing back nature more and more. This is dangerous because nature is the foundation of our existence.

We not only program other life forms but also ourselves. Over thousands of years, social programming has created a man-made idea of what a human is, what potential a human has, and how we should live. There are cultural, religious, regional, and other variations. See my article, “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical.”

Through social programming, we have become increasingly disconnected from the cosmos. A striking example is the 2004 tsunami in the Indian Ocean, which claimed the lives of many people, while almost all animals in danger intuitively fled in time. I analyze this event in my article, “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – but Almost No Animals.”

Your life’s purpose also comprises a general and a specific part. You can grasp your general purpose intellectually: it’s mental growth. It happens through experience, insight, understanding, and creative expression. See my article, “How to Find Your Purpose in Life.”

You cannot intellectually grasp your specific life purpose. Intuition is the only way. But the more unnaturally you live, the weaker your intuition and the less chance you have of finding your specific purpose. There are three measures you can take to strengthen your intuition:

1. In nature, everything follows intuition. In un-nature, everything follows human programs that can block intuition. Reduce the un-nature in your life and strengthen nature. Spend time in untouched nature; without a cell phone; preferably alone. Observe plants and animals; sit by a body of water and watch the waves. Live as naturally as possible: exercise, preferably in nature; eat natural or near-natural foods and avoid industrially processed foods.

2. Following your intuition means being in the flow. To be in the flow, you must surrender. You can train this through sports such as surfing and dancing. When surfing, you surrender to the waves; when dancing, you surrender to the music.

3. Intuition is your cosmic connection to everything and everyone. You are part of several communities, such as family, circle of friends, neighborhood, etc. The cosmos directs every community, just as a conductor directs an orchestra or a coach directs a team. A community needs team players, not egoists. A strong ego-consciousness blocks intuition; a we-consciousness supports it. Cultivate a we-consciousness for every community you belong. This goes beyond human communities; you are also part of nature, because despite the un-nature in your life, nature is still the basis of your existence: every cell of you is nature. Team sports are an excellent training opportunity for a we-consciousness.

You can also increase your chances of finding your special purpose in life by taking two further measures:

4. When you consciously live out your general life purpose, ie mental growth, you align yourself with your life’s purpose. This makes it easier to discover your specific life’s purpose.

5. Free yourself from social programs because they block your intuition. You can achieve this through self-exploration. You observe yourself and explore where your actions and thoughts come from. The goal is to find these programs and make them ineffective. I describe the method in my article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps” and in my book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box.”

We created un-nature, but we did not leave the universal order – because that’s impossible. The cosmos holds everything together; nothing and no one can escape it. The universal order also applies in un-nature. Everyone has a purpose within the framework of what is; even in un-nature, whereby this purpose has something to do with “back to truthfulness.” The cosmos dances with you – it is up to you whether you dance along. See my article “Dancing With the Cosmos … Do We Have Free Will?”

Further reading:

Article “God and Cosmos” (forthcoming)

Article “Intuition is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense”

Article “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals”

Article “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical”

Article “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – but Almost No Animals”

Article “How to Find Your Purpose in Life”

Article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps”

Book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box”

Article “Dancing With the Cosmos … Do We Have Free Will?”

Leave a comment

Share

If you meet someone, it would be helpful to know something about the person. Shaking hands can help. I’ll explain below what you can read from a handshake and how.

In the body, all tissues and organs are interconnected physicochemically and electromagnetically. Body and mind are also inseparably linked, as I explain in my articles “Why and How Thoughts Affect Matter,” “Why and How Everything is Interconnected,” “There is More Than Just the Universe” and “Why and How the Universe is an Illusion.”

Therefore, potentially everything shows up everywhere. Some parts of the body reflect body and mind particularly well. These include hands, feet, face, and eyes. That’s why there are arts such as foot reflexology, hand-, face-, and iris-diagnosis.

40 years ago, I met a psychologist who was a master of hand diagnosis and I learned this art from him. Reading a handshake is one aspect of this. At the end of the article, I explain why hand reading is a serious diagnostic science.

When you read someone’s handshake, you must “take yourself out of the equation.” For example, if you grab a hand firmly, you can’t say much about how firmly the other person is grabbing your hand. Therefore, learning to read a handshake begins with observing yourself shaking hands ... in order to calibrate yourself The better you manage being neutral when shaking hands, the more accurately you can read a person.

Pay attention to the following signals:

How does the hand come towards you? Brisk? Energetic? Hesitant? ... You can apply this to the person one-to-one.

How does the person grab your hand? Is their hand up, forcing your hand down? Is their hand down so that your hand is up? Or are your hands side by side?

An upper hand shows dominance and activity; a lower hand shows submission and passivity. If the hands are side by side, this is an encounter at eye level. With this signal, it is key that you offer your hand neutrally and observe what the other person does with it.

How firmly does the person grab your hand? The spectrum ranges from strong, the “bone breaker,” to weak, the “dead fish”. A firm grip is a sign of dominance and activity, perhaps even aggression. The “dead fish” is what the name implies: the person is passive and doesn’t want to reveal anything about themselves; they may be stingy, wait-and-see, or uninterested.

Does the other person lock your hand, the “vice”? This can be done by the other person placing their thumb firmly on the back of your hand from above, while their four fingers hold the edge of your hand in place from below (left image); or the other person additionally clasps your hand with both hands (middle picture); or the other person forces your wrist into a bend (right picture).

These gestures reduce your ability to move your hand; the other person controls the handshake – and thus you – or at least wants to. The “vice” is a gesture of dominance, activity, or aggression; however, it can also mean that the other person clings to you, eg because they need you or think they need you.

The shaking of the hands can be powerful or powerless, energetic or hesitant, subdued or exuberant. You also interpret this one-to-one.

As you shake hands, you feel the other hand. Is it muscular, fleshy, thin, lean? Soft or hard? Elastic or stiff? Moist or dry? Warm or cold?

• A firm, muscular hand is courageous, persevering, serious.

• A fleshy hand is content, comfortable.

• A thin, lean hand is hungry, thirsty, flexible.

• A soft hand is impressionable, influenceable, sensitive, vulnerable, yielding, adaptable; possibly capricious, dreamy, epicurean.

• A hard hand is unimpressionable, un-influenceable, strict, unyielding, determined, controlled, persevering, practical; emotional expressions may be inhibited.

• An elastic hand is adaptable, yielding.

• A stiff hand is rigid, unyielding.

• A dry hand is strict, dismissive, energetic.

• A moist hand is friendly, receptive, sensitive, nervous, excited, shy.

• A warm hand gives warmth and affection.

• A cold hand needs warmth and affection.

When is a hand soft? When is it hard? When is it stiff, when elastic? These are relative characteristics that you need experience to assess. To gain experience, you need to feel as many hands as possible.

Once you have identified the signals, you must combine their meanings. Signals can strengthen or weaken each other. For example, an upper hand, which shows dominance and activity, can be given as a dead fish, which says the opposite. You must take all signals into account – and the context.

Finally, there is the question of why someone is sending a signal. Let’s assume that the handshake contains several dominance signals. Is the person actually dominant, or just pretending to be? The dominance could be a mask, eg to hide a weakness or a feeling of inferiority. If you fear something or someone, you may want to dominate it or them in order to be in control. A self-confident and strong person does not need to dominate you.

Hand reading has a reputation as a fairground attraction where the future is predicted. This happens, but it is not truthful. Hand diagnosis is a science that is researched at universities.

A serious hand diagnostician will not predict the future; because you can’t. The simple reason is that hands are constantly changing. As a proof, here are two prints of a woman’s left palm – taken 20 months apart:

Hands show a person in the present. They show “what someone is made of,” what the person is like now, and they show the potential. If a person changes, physically or mentally, their hands change.

Further reading:

Article “Why and How Thoughts Affect Matter”

Article “Why and How Everything is Interconnected”

Article “There is More Than Just the Universe”

Article “Why and How the Universe is an Illusion”

Leave a comment

Share

In the following, I will analyze which criteria must be met for communication to be good and constructive.

The word communication comes from the Latin word communicare, which means ‘to make common.’ Communication is the key to togetherness ... and this is essential for the survival of humanity, as I explain in my article, “To Survive as a Species, we MUST Work Together.”

Imagine standing in front of a tree and looking at it. From your position, you see some of the tree, some you don't. For example, you see the side of the trunk facing you, but not the opposite side. You have a perspective on the tree. If you change your position, you see the tree differently; you see something that you didn’t see from your first position. If you walk around the tree to look at it from more and more places, you will get closer to the truth of it, but you will only ever have a perspective. There are parts of the tree that you can‘t see, such as the roots, which clearly belong to the truth of the tree.

Optical illusions demonstrate how deceptive perspectives can be. In my article, “Who Can You Trust?”, I show in a brief video clip how little you can trust your own eyes.

You see the world as you have learned to see it. This applies to health, religion, politics, you name it. You have a perspective, a worldview, which was shaped by your parents, your schools, and the media you consumed. Most people consider their worldview to be the truth – and this is not only a problem in any communication, it can lead to fanaticism and war. In my article, “For Many, Vegetarianism is a Religion,” I talk about my experience with it.

Believing that your perspective is the truth is arrogant. Good communication requires modesty. You have a perspective – and other people may have different perspectives, which are just as worthy of consideration. I analyze the relativity of perspectives in my article, “Knowledge is Not the Same as Truth.”

Communication is useful when it inspires. Ideally, all communication partners should be able to say afterwards: “It's good we had this conversation.”

Inspiration can happen when someone questions your perspective. Genuine curiosity not only allows for this, but actually encourages it. The word curiosity comes from the Latin word curiositatem, which means ‘desire of knowledge.’ Curiosity longs for the new. For this, you must let go of the old. A truly curious person gives up their perspective, at least temporarily, in order to consider a new perspective, at least temporarily. They can then compare and weigh things up ... and then either return to their old perspective, adopt the new one, or combine the two. Remember, the more perspectives you have on something, the closer your overall perspective may get to the truth, which is what it’s all about. You can find out more about curiosity in my book, “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans.”

“I have no special talent; I am just passionately curious.”
(Albert Einstein)

Another prerequisite for good communication is listening. Listening is more than just hearing. Hearing is what your ears do: they translate sound waves into electromagnetic impulses, which the nervous system sends to the brain. In communication, listening is the willingness to understand the other person. When you under-stand someone, you stand in their place – metaphorically; then you have their perspective.

But unfortunately, very few people really listen. Many use the time someone else is speaking to think about what they will say next. Or, even worse, many conversations are simply a battle for speaking time. On social media, not listening shows as people commenting on posts they have not read in full; they only react to the headline or part of the text. This is nothing more than a waste of time and energy because a constructive exchange is not possible in this way.

Understanding begins with words. The Greek philosopher Socrates put it like this:

“The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms.”
(Socrates)

When you use a term, you ought to say or write what exactly you mean by it. Only then will the other person have a chance of understanding you – and that’s what it’s all about! If someone uses a term without explaining it, ask: “What exactly do you mean by ...?”

I illustrate the importance of linguistic precision in my articles, “Feelings are Not the Same as Emotions” and “Consciousness is Not the Same as Awareness.”

As already mentioned, contradiction can be useful. But as the saying goes: “The sound makes the music.” Praising someone is easy. Contradicting can be challenging. Contradictions should be

• clearly communicated,

• well justified, and

• related to the content, not the person.

My rule is: tough on the issue, gentle with people. Being tough on the subject is important so that the criticism is not watered down. Being gentle with people is important so that they will consider the criticism as the basis for a constructive conversation.

In summary, good and constructive communication follows these criteria:

• Modesty

• Curiosity

• Listening

• Definitions

• Tough on the topic, gentle with people.

There is a simple exercise you can do to improve your communication skills: watch others communicate. Pay attention to which of the five criteria they adhere to. This will sensitize you to these criteria – and your communication will automatically improve.

Further reading:

Article “To Survive as a Species, we MUST Work Together”

Article “Who Can You Trust?”

Article “For Many, Vegetarianism is a Religion”

Article “Knowledge is Not the Same as Truth”

Book “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans”

Article “Feelings are Not the Same as Emotions”

Article “Consciousness is Not the Same as Awareness”

Share

Leave a comment

Yes, we do have free will. It comes with the tool that distinguishes us from all other known life forms on this planet: the mind. But possessing something differs from using it. Therefore, the more exciting question is: do we use our free will? In the following, I will explain why we have free will and why most people hardly ever use it.

What does it mean to will or desire something? The word ‘will’ has the root *wel-, which means ‘to choose.’ To will is to choose a fictitious mental image with the intention of it becoming real. For example, you can will to raise your right arm. To do this, you choose the corresponding mental image and intention. If there is no physical or mental impairment, the arm goes up immediately. I explain why it does in my article, “Why and How Thoughts Affect Matter.”

You can also imagine raising your right arm without the intention of doing so. This could be called “mind movie.” This also influences your body, just not immediately.

But even with intention, not every mental image becomes real immediately. If you want to slow down your heartbeat, for example, this is possible if you hold the image and the intention long enough. Here, your intention combines with the automatic processes in your body. It may, therefore, take longer to manifest – or it may only happen partly. This is the placebo effect.

Often you need more than just perseverance in choosing an image and intention. If you want to be a concert pianist, for example, you also must do something, such as practicing; and it helps if it is your life’s purpose. More on that later.

Free will, thinking, and creativity are closely related. I analyze thinking in my article, “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals.”

However, people only use their free will rarely. This is because we have become social robots. This is because children copy their environment, primarily their parents. Over 99% of the time, people do, think, and will what they have learned to do, think, and will. I describe this in my article, “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical.”

People use their free will less than one percent of the time. For most people, it’s only 0.01% or even less. These numbers may shock you. Around 2300 years ago, the Greek philosopher Aristotle saw that people are largely controlled by programs – he called them habits:

„95% of everything you do is the result of habit.“
(Aristotele)

Even the ancient Greeks lived 95% as robots – at a time without TV, radio, internet, etc. Because of these media, it is 99 to 99.99% or even more today.

Why do we have free will? There are two answers: a technical one and a philosophical one. The technical answer is complex and goes beyond the scope of this article. For this, see my Theory of Mind, which is described in my book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It.”

Philosophically, this question has an answer if we recognize the universe as a great whole in which everything and everyone has its purpose – just as every cell in your body has its purpose. This is because of an order – in the universe as well as in your body. The order of your body is encoded in your genes, among other things. The order of the universe is called cosmos; kosmos is the Greek word for order.

The Earth is around 4.6 billion years old. Humans have been around for an estimated 300,000 years. To put this into perspective, let’s imagine the age of the Earth as a 24-hour day. In this image, we have been around for 6 seconds. Before we appeared, an increasingly complex biosphere evolved over several billion years. Cells, plants, and animals are cosmic bio-robots – in the sense that they cannot help but follow their behavioral programs and cosmic guidance.

It is not easy to see that behavior is very complex. This is because of their intuitive connection to the cosmos. Their behavior not only depends on their sensory perceptible environment, but potentially on the entire universe. An impressive example is the 2004 tsunami. See my articles “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense” and “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – but Almost No Animals.”

Our appearance on this planet caused an evolutionary step that has taken off in the last 300 years. In the 24-hour picture, that’s 0.006 seconds. In this time, we created countless things that have not evolved in billions of years and would never evolve naturally, such as plastic, cell phones, and airplanes. This shows that we are fundamentally different from cells, plants, and animals.

In the billions of years before us, there have already been evolutionary steps. The first was the emergence of life. Then there was a smaller step from unicellular to multicellular life. Humans are the step from robotic to creative life. That was a reasonable next step, because only then could non-natural things be created.

On the one hand, we have free will, even if we rarely use it. On the other hand, like everything in the universe, we have a purpose as part of the whole, and the cosmos constantly pushes us to fulfill this purpose. How does that fit together?

Cells, plants, and animals always follow cosmic guidance and, therefore, fulfill their purposes. An oak tree fulfills its purpose by being an oak tree. A cheetah fulfills its purpose by being a cheetah. Through our free will, we can choose to fulfill or not to fulfill our purpose. This does not mean that we can escape the universal order; nothing and no one can. Within the universal order, everything has consequences – like a balance scale: if you put something in one pan, the other goes up.

If you fulfill your purpose, you experience maximum fulfillment; some call it bliss. If you don’t fulfill your purpose, you experience a longing for fulfillment. As part of social programming, we learn to try to satisfy this longing with substitute methods, such as food, sex, or drugs. But this is in vain. In addition, unpleasant life situations can arise, such as diseases and accidents. These are nothing other than cosmic guidance. Therefore, in such situations, you should ask: “What is this trying to tell me?”

The cosmos permanently guides you; whether you realize it or not; whether you comply or resist. I call surrendering to cosmic guidance “dancing with the cosmos.” Let’s look at the role free will plays in this.

(1) Since people live like robots over 99% of the time, hardly anyone fulfills their purpose. You can use your free will to question your life and thus may recognize your robotic existence.

(2) Once you have seen this, you can use your free will to free yourself from your programs.

(3) The path of becoming free from your programs comprises observing yourself and exploring where your behavior and thoughts come from. You must use your free will every day to keep doing this. I describe the method of self-exploration in my article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps” and in my book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box.”

(4) The more programs you have freed yourself from, the more clearly you will see your purpose in life. You can then use your free will to live it.

(5) If you do, you have landed on your life path. You must also use your free will every day to stay on it.

(6) You can also exercise your free will in your life path. You can choose how you follow cosmic guidance and live your purpose: listlessly – or with enthusiasm. Imagine a dance couple as a metaphor: one leads, the other follows. The cosmos leads you, and you are supposed to follow. Watch dance couples: Ballroom dancing, Argentine tango, salsa, .... then you'll know what I mean: the person being led can passively let themselves be dragged around the dance floor ... or actively contribute to the creation of a work of dance art. That’s a matter of free will.

Let's summarize: Your life’s purpose is predetermined – because you are part of the whole and have a purpose. With your free will, you can choose to find your purpose; then you can choose to fulfill your purpose; and finally, you can choose how you fulfill it.

Further reading:

Article “Why and How Thoughts Affect Matter”

Article “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals”

Article “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical”

Book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It”

Article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense”

Article “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – but Almost No Animals”

Article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps”

Book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box”

See also:

Article “Why and How You Have Much More Influence on Your Body Than You Think”

Article “Why and How Your Body Helps You to Free Yourself from Your Programs”

Leave a comment

Share

Everything in nature is truthful. Humans have become untruthful and, as a result, fell into slavery. How did this happen? The following thought experiment provides an answer.

Imagine two early humans feeding on fruit, nuts, and meat. They become partners in order to work together. Early human X is stronger, so he goes hunting. Early human Y collects fruit and nuts. In the evening they meet to share and eat. Y brings food every evening because he always finds fruit and nuts. X does not bring food every evening because sometimes the hunt is unsuccessful. The partnership benefits both. If X has hunting luck, Y gets meat without having to hunt. If X has no hunting luck, he still gets food.

One day, X has an idea. Instead of hunting, he treats himself to a day off. Because this is against the partnership agreement, Y must not know. In the evening, X says that he has had no luck hunting. With this, he invented the lie and the abuse; he abuses Y's trust. Because the lie worked, X uses it more often. But one day, while looking for food, Y comes across X lying around lazily. The first partnership dispute in the history of humankind ensues. Trust is gone, mistrust is born. I explain why we can lie in my article, “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals.”

X and Y share a territory. A territory is an area that offers everything for survival, such as space, water, and food. In nature, animals or groups of animals use territories that are just big enough for them to survive in.

One day, X has an idea that is even more beneficial to him than the lie. He declares himself the owner of the shared territory and presents Y with a fait accompli: Y has to provide food for both of them from now on – or leave the territory. As X is stronger, Y has to comply. He could leave the territory and find his own ... but there are no more free territories, because the stronger early humans have done the same everywhere. Y only has the choice of who he has to collect food for from now on.

By declaring himself the owner of the territory, X has also become the owner of the resources it contains. He now has more space, water, and food than he needs. By gathering food for both of them, Y buys food and a right of residence from X; he pays with his labor.

Since early human Y needs space, water, and food, he now depends on X – or another landowner; he has become a slave. Along with land ownership, X also invented resource ownership and slavery. From now on there are owners and slaves, rulers and subjects.

Early human X can now laze around as he pleases. He just has to watch Y so that he works and doesn’t rebel.

When the slaves reproduce, their numbers increase. This is both beneficial and dangerous. The more slaves someone has, the more surplus they can generate for him. But slaves could band together and rise against the owner. The following measures shall prevent this:
1) Cooperation between owners
2) Guards
3) Prices
4) Distractions
5) Manipulation of natural needs.

Let’s look at these measures.

1) Cooperation between owners

The owners coordinate so that the conditions for the slaves are similar everywhere. This prevents slaves from moving to more attractive territories.

2) Guards

The owners select slaves who are strong or skilled in using weapons. They pay them with food and privileges in return for their monitoring the other slaves.

3) Prices

The slaves work to survive. The more expensive life is, the more they must work. The more they work, the less time they have to think about their situation or even organize for an uprising. Hence, the owners make life as expensive as possible.

4) Distractions

Another word for distraction is entertainment. Its purpose is to keep someone busy so that they don’t do something else – such as think about their situation. In ancient Rome, the rulers realized this as ‘bread and games.’ Cheap or free grain and free events distracted people.

There were stadiums and theaters for chariot races, gladiator fights, and animal fights. The Colosseum was the largest amphitheater ever built in the world. It offered space for around 50,000 people. The largest stadium was the Circus Maximus, which could hold 250,000 people. That’s almost twice as many as the largest sports stadium in the world today, which has 132,000 seats ... the cricket stadium in Ahmedabad, India. With 70,000 seats, the Allianz Arena in Munich is currently only the 80th largest stadium in the world.

Chariot races and gladiator fights turned into sporting events in countless disciplines, including mental disciplines such as chess. Gladiators became athletes. The reach of the events was increased to gigantic numbers through TV broadcasts. For example, 1.5 billion people viewed the final of the 2022 soccer World Cup in Qatar.

5) Manipulation of natural needs

Everyone has natural physical and mental needs. The physical needs relate to the resources discussed already. The mental needs are mental growth and the fulfillment of one’s purpose in life. If these needs remain unfulfilled, people remain chronically needy, which weakens them. I analyze our needs in my article, “You Have Four Kinds of Needs”.

The owners have space, water, and food in abundance and thus control the fulfillment of the slaves’ natural physical needs. In addition, these needs are manipulated to further weaken them.

Food provides you with what your body needs. If a healthy foodstuff is made bad, you may consume less of it or not consume it at all. This can lead to an under-supply of vital substances. Industrially processed foods confuse the digestive system: the metabolism gets confused, which also weakens the person. For example, years of eating a vegetarian diet weakened me massively. I talk about this in my article, “I Was a Vegetarian for 36 Years – Then This Happened.”

Cuddling, ie close physical contact between familiar people, produces oxytocin. This hormone is very healthy; it lowers blood pressure, alleviates anxiety, and reduces stress. By making touch, nudity, intimacy, sex, and pleasure taboo or even demonizing them, people are being cut off from an important power source.

When I was 20 years old, I had the following experience: I spent a month in Nigeria to put a software I had developed into operation and train the locals. One day, I saw two men walking down a street, holding hands. I asked if the two were homosexual. The answer was: “No; people touch each other because it feels good.”

Growth is the principle of life. For us humans, it is primarily about mental growth. For this, you “only” need to be like a child and explore the world with curiosity. But unfortunately, growing up, we learned to try satisfying our natural mental hunger through substitute channels, such as food, possessions, sex, entertainment, and drugs. But none of these can satisfy a mental hunger, which is why people remain chronically mentally hungry. So they will use substitute channels repeatedly, which can lead to addictions such as food addiction, shopping addiction, sex addiction, internet addiction, or drug addiction. See also my book “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans.”

The intuition would lead a person to their life’s purpose. But since people are busy earning money, they have no or too little time to find their calling and follow it; or they are so distracted that they don’t hear their inner voice.

Over time, it becomes easier and easier for the owners to maintain the system. The descendants of slaves are born into slavery and, therefore, do not even know what it is like to be free. As a result, they hardly ever question their situation or even want to change it.

The above considerations explain what is happening today. Some measures are implemented or organized subtly, so they are not easily recognized. For example, if someone “owns” a house with some land, they have not yet become an owner in the sense of a ruler. Apart from the fact that property is often encumbered with loans for decades – and therefore usually actually belongs to the banks, people today depend on the rulers in countless other ways. Modern slavery is cleverly disguised.

People are also programmed to believe that they are free. They are inculcated with an illusionary concept of freedom, namely: “I am free if I can do what I want.” This power-based concept of freedom is not only illusionary, it inevitably leads to a global power pyramid. I explain the why and how in my article “There is Only One True Freedom.” Another measure of enslavement is our monetary system: positive interest rates permanently shift values from poor to rich and, therefore, force the masses to work more and more in order to survive. See my articles “Bartering = Deceiving” and “Positive Interest Rates Make Us Poorer.”

Land ownership is the root of global enslavement. The power-based concept of freedom and today’s monetary system reinforce the effect. I explain how we can become truthful again in my article, “This is How We Become a Truthful Society.”

Further reading:

Article “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals”

Article “You Have Four Kinds of Needs”

Article “I Was a Vegetarian for 36 Years – Then This Happened”

Book “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans”

Article “There is Only One True Freedom”

Articles “Bartering = Deceiving”

Article “Positive Interest Rates Make Us Poorer”

Article “This is How We Become a Truthful Society”

Leave a comment

Share

Knowledge is often confused with truth – and science is mistakenly considered the guardian of truth. In the following, I will shed light on the confusion surrounding these and related terms.

An old English word for ‘know’ is witan, which has the root *weid-, meaning ‘to see.’ The German word for ‘know,’ wissen, has the same root. To know means to see – physically with the senses or mentally. Therefore, knowledge is a perspective. This word has the Latin root specere, which means ‘to look at.’

A perspective, and thus knowledge, is neither right nor wrong. If you look at a city from a helicopter, you see it differently than if you look at it from a neighboring hill; and if you walk through the city, you see it differently again. A perspective is neither good nor bad; it is just more or less useful. From a neighboring hill you can see which is the tallest building, but not the shortest route from the train station to the church; for that you need the bird’s-eye view from a helicopter – which a city map also provides. And if you want to know what color the church entrance gate is, you must stand in front of it.

Imagine one of your neighbors. You know something about him because you’ve spoken to him a few times. Maybe you’ve heard a thing or two about him from others. Altogether, you have a perspective of him. This perspective can be more or less close to the truth.

Optical illusions teach us we cannot even rely on what we see with our eyes. In the following picture, you probably see a white square. But there isn’t one. There are just four black three-quarter disks. More on this example in my article “Who Can You Trust?”.

„Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact.
Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.“
(Marcus Aurelius)

Everyone has only perspectives. What someone says is their perspective. A book contains the author’s perspective. In a newspaper, you can read the perspectives of the journalists or the editor. Teachers at schools and universities teach perspectives. Your doctor has a perspective of you ... which is why it makes sense to get a second opinion or perspective if necessary.

The word truth has the root *deru-, which means ‘be firm, solid, steadfast.’ The German word for truth, Wahrheit, has the root *wer-, which means ‘trust.’ The truth is solid; you can trust it; it is what it is.

What is the truth about homelessness? No matter how many homeless people you have seen, or even know personally; no matter how much you have read about homelessness, you only have a perspective of it. You can know the truth about it only if you have been or are homeless. Truth is being.

The misconception of the word knowledge also exists because science has the same social status today as religion did hundreds of years ago. Back then, the church was regarded as the guardian of truth ... although logically, it also only has perspectives. The word believe expresses its connection to truth: it means ‘holding something to be true,’ which differs from ‘being true.’

Today, science is regarded as an authority. The word science comes from the Latin word scientia, which means ‘knowledge.’ Therefore, science is about perspectives. The famous US physicist and Nobel Prize winner Richard Feynman put it like this:

„If you thought before that science is certain – well, that is just an error on your part.“
(Richard Feynman)

Religion and science are similar. Both search for the truth. But both have only perspectives. The explanatory models of religion are based on one or more deities who guide the lives of people. Each god has certain characteristics from which their guidance arises; for example, with a punishing god, an illness can be a punishment for disobedient behavior. The explanatory models of science are limited to causalities within the physical world. The emergence of many diseases, for example, is explained by pathogens. In religion, you must believe in the god or gods. In science, you must believe in the explanatory model. So in the end, science is also about belief.

Unlike religion, science is dynamic in its search for truth – or at least it should be. While most religions dogmatically refer to a book, for example, science is constantly refining or changing its models by researching ever deeper into causes. In physics, it was long believed that atoms are the building blocks of matter; then it was atomic building blocks such as electrons; then came quarks; today string theory is en vogue. In medicine, the theory of microbes as the cause of diseases is not the last word in wisdom. It cannot explain why microbes make one person ill and not another. The French doctor Claude Bernard formulated the following counter-thesis:

„The microbe is nothing; the terrain is everything!“
(Claude Bernard)

In contrast to microbes, the terrain is much more difficult to measure and control. It depends on many factors, such as diet, exercise, breathing, stress, sleep, and mindset.

Scientific perspectives are called theories. The word theory comes from the Greek word theoria, which means ‘a looking at’ and, therefore, means the same as the word perspective.

As in religion, there are also competing perspectives or theories in science. One person says this, the other says that – such as microbes or terrain as the cause of disease. Academia, like all other human communities, is also governed by personal sensitivities, vanity, ambition, striving for power, and so on. This influences which theories prevail.

Albert Einstein is an example. He did not get a job at any university after his studies. He had a reputation for questioning established results and conducting unorthodox research. As a result, no professor wanted him at their institute. But the rejection did not impress Einstein. For years, he carried out his research privately, putting up with many hardships. It was only after the publication of his Special Theory of Relativity and several other articles that he got an academic position. Today, he is considered one of the greatest scientific geniuses in history; his theory of relativity is not only the basis of modern space travel; it has become an integral part of modern life; every GPS system uses it.

Everyone only has perspectives – private, professional, religious, political, etc. But unfortunately, most people consider their perspectives to be truths. And so people often fight because of different perspectives ... instead of simply exchanging them out of curiosity. Different perspectives can even lead to wars. The Crusades of the 12th and 13th centuries are an example. Among other things, they were waged for religious reasons ... that’s how fundamentalist the Roman Catholic Church was back then. Today, we are once again experiencing religious fundamentalism.

People would do well to take the Greek philosopher Socrates as a role model, because the few perspectives that a person accumulates in their life are as good as nothing in relation to the universe and its history:

„I know that I know nothing.“
(Socrates)

Further reading:

Article “Who Can You Trust?”

See also:

Article “Opinions are Made, Not Measured”

Leave a comment

Share

You have physical and mental needs. Physical needs can be divided into

1. physiological needs for air, water, food, sunlight, and warmth, and

2. sensory-motor needs such as for sensory stimuli and movement.

The former serve to keep your cells and tissues healthy, while the latter serve to keep your sensory organs and musculoskeletal system healthy. You also have two types of mental needs:

1. the general mental need for mental growth and

2. the individual mental need to fulfill your life’s purpose.

In the following, I will look at these needs in detail and explain how they can be met.

We experience a need as hunger and appetite. Hunger arises from emptiness. Breathe out and then don’t breathe in for a few seconds. You experience the emptiness in your lungs is a hunger; the longer the emptiness lasts, the hungrier you become. Hunger is accompanied by an appetite. This word comes from the Latin appetere, meaning ‘to long for.’ When your lungs are hungry, you have an appetite for breathing air. When your cells and tissues are hungry for water, nutrients, or minerals, you have an appetite for water or food that provides what is missing. You also have an appetite for knowing, understanding, and creating. An appetite also generates the search for your life’s purpose.

Hunger seeks fulfillment. Appetite gives it a direction. It shows what you should fill the void with. However, for most people, neither natural hunger nor natural appetite function properly – neither physically nor mentally. The reason is that through social programming we learn needs that override our natural needs.

In nature, animals eat when they are hungry, they stop eating when they are no longer hungry, and they eat what they have an appetite for. A cow eats grass – not meat. A lion eats meat – not grass. Our natural physiological hunger and appetite are buried very early on. I will discuss an example below. In addition, industrially processed foods can disrupt metabolism, hunger, and appetite, which can lead to addictions, such as to sugar.

It’s similar with sensorimotor needs. Animals are hungry for sensory stimuli and movement. They observe their surroundings with all their senses and roam around. Children are the same; they look, listen, touch, taste, etc and they are constantly moving. They do this until they have learned to sit still, stare at a screen, a teacher, or a book, and watch and listen. The other senses are then increasingly neglected. Children also learn to move under supervision in gym class – instead of spontaneously following their appetite for movement.

Children satisfy their general mental hunger and appetite by exploring the world. This includes play.

“Play is the highest form of research.”
(Albert Einstein)

Unfortunately, most adults do not take children’s play seriously enough. Imagine a child who is absorbed in its play. A parent calls it to lunch. The child says that it is not hungry. But it must obey; it must stop its play and eat. The playing child is mentally hungry. Its mental appetite has chosen a game. Play was its mental food. But the child is forced to interrupt its play. It is forced to eat something even though it is not physically hungry. The child learns trying to satisfy its mental hunger with physical food. But that cannot succeed. Over time, this program becomes stronger and stronger, and the child turns from an active explorer into a passive consumer. Instead of curiously exploring the world, it pseudo-curiously explores the fridge or pantry. Food has become a substitute channel for its mental hunger. Other substitute channels we learn when growing up include possessions, sex, information, travel, and drugs. See my book “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans.”

Finally, there is also the individual mental hunger and appetite that leads us to our life’s purpose.

Everything in the universe has a purpose as part of the whole. The purpose of a bee is to be a bee. It fulfills a task as part of the biosphere. The purpose of an oak tree is to be an oak tree. Etc. In cells, plants, and animals, their purpose is genetically inherent. A cheetah, for example, has no choice but to be a runner. A human can be a farmer, an engineer, a doctor, a teacher, a musician, a writer, a philosopher, and so on. How do you find your life’s purpose among all these possibilities? Good examples of how this can happen are Albert Einstein, Pablo Picasso, and Nikola Tesla.

Pablo’s first word was “piz,” the short form of the Spanish word for pencil. His father was an art teacher; he recognized his son's talent early on and encouraged it. This set the course for Picasso’s career.

When Einstein was four or five years old, his father gave him a compass. Albert wanted to know why the needle behaved the way it did. He enjoyed exploring such questions – and became a physicist. Einstein developed the special theory of relativity by thinking about magnetism.

Young Tesla had a cat. When he was four or five years old, he noticed sparks were jumping from the cat’s fur to his fingers when he stroked it. He asked his father for an explanation. The father didn’t know, but suspected a connection with the lightning during a thunderstorm. Nikola asked himself: “Is nature nothing more than a big cat?” He became an electrical engineer and genius inventor – and lightning was his trademark.

There was ‘cosmic guidance’ at work. The cosmos is the order in the universe. It drives everything and everyone to fulfill their purpose as part of the whole. The cosmos is like the conductor of an orchestra. Through the cosmos, everything comes into your life that you need to fulfill your life’s purpose, such as people and circumstances. Intuition is your connection to the cosmos. I explain this in my article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense.” Intuition works perfectly in animals, plants, and cells; it also works in young children – until they lose their access because of social programming. Parents play a decisive role in this – either as supporters or preventers.

Another word for life’s purpose is vocation … from Latin vocatio, meaning ‘a calling.’ A calling is the mental appetite for fulfilling your life’s purpose. But very few people are following their calling; most have a job that earns them money. I describe how we have collectively learned to work for money instead of following our calling in my article “Bartering = Deceiving.”

There is another aspect to this topic that I will not go into here: if a hunger remains unfulfilled, aggression arises. I explain the connections and consequences in my article “Why Is There So Much Aggression?”.

It is about recognizing our natural or true needs so that we can fulfill them; so that we lead a fulfilled life. To do this, you must free yourself from your learned needs. I describe how to do this in my article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps” and in my book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box.”

Further reading:

Book “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans”

Article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense”

Article “Bartering = Deceiving”

Article “Why Is There So Much Aggression?”

Article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps”

Book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box”

Leave a comment

Share

In the following, I analyze how and why food can become a matter of belief – rather than simply being the fulfillment of a biological need.

Recently, I published an article about my experience with vegetarianism. It’s about how my body had become a wreck after 36 years of a vegetarian and in the end almost vegan diet, how I then started eating meat again, and how my body healed as a result. See my article “I Was a Vegetarian for 36 Years – Then This Happened.”

This article provoked many reactions. Most of them were from people who had a similar experience. But there were also attacks on me ... which is completely nonsensical, because a personal experience is inviolable.

„The own experience has the advantage of total certainty.“
(Arthur Schopenhauer)

I realized that vegetarianism is a religion for many people. Some are so fundamentalist that they even demand that everyone should eat a vegetarian or vegan diet. Conversely, I never met a meat eater who demands that everyone should eat meat.

Why does someone eat what they eat? This question is part of a bigger question: Why does someone do and think what they do and think? The search for an answer is self-exploration. It’s about finding out which actions and thoughts are natural and which come from programs.

Why does someone eat a vegetarian or vegan diet? Here are four common answers:

1. Because I grew up that way.

2. Because someone recommended it (a doctor, a nutritionist, a friend, …).

3. Because I read about it in a book.

4. Because of animal welfare.

In these cases, vegetarianism has nothing to do with the body’s natural needs, but is a matter of belief – and thus a religion. Anyone who gives Reason 4 wants to be good and thus puts the welfare of animals above their own welfare.

Some argue with the abomination of animal factories. These should of course be rejected. Firstly, the animals are kept in unnatural conditions, which is cruel. Secondly, the products coming from these factories are not only of inferior quality, but often even harmful. Unnatural animal husbandry affects products such as milk, eggs, and meat.

Many vegetarians refuse to accept logical arguments. When pointing out that there are also species-appropriate animal husbandry practices and stress-free slaughter methods, many resort to the argument that we should not kill animals for food after all. This is a religious reason that has no logical basis. In nature, animals are constantly killed for food. Or should we forbid lions to kill and eat gazelles?

For thousands of years, meat has been an essential source of nutrition for humans. 40 years ago, vegetarian food was still the exception in restaurants. I was traveling a lot and had difficulty eating out. Today, vegetarianism is “in” and vegetarian dishes can be found on almost every menu. This is a result of social programming. I see one reason for this in the so-called Disneyfication of animals. This term refers to the fact that Disney films portray animals as human-like. This programs people to attribute greater closeness to animals than is actually the case. I describe the difference between animals and us in my article “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals.”

I was a vegetarian for 36 years. For me, it was reason number 3: books and training courses made me believe that a vegetarian diet was right. Although I am a scientist, I fell into the usual trap: I only studied sources that supported my perspective, ie I only looked for confirmation of my thesis. It would have been logical to devote the same meticulous attention also to the anti-thesis. Then, I could have evaluated and chosen sensibly.

I was firmly convinced that vegetarianism was the right diet for everyone. I had distilled a handful of convincing arguments and disseminated them in lectures, seminars, and a book. With my doctorate in mathematics, I gave my arguments a scientific flair. I wasn’t just a religious vegetarian; I was a fundamentalist who tried to persuade people to go vegetarian.

At home, I was a radical fundamentalist. I demanded that my wife and son also follow a vegetarian diet. My wife could have resisted ... but she didn’t; I was too convincing, and she was too loyal. She occasionally ate meat at her mother’s house. My son grew up on a vegetarian diet. He had no choice.

Today, I deeply regret all that.

„You can't argue with religious people; you can't change their minds even if you prove them wrong.“
(M F Moonzajer)

After many years of self-exploration, I had become adept at questioning my actions and thoughts, exploring their roots, and seeing the connections between body and mind. But my vegetarian fundamentalism was so strong that I never questioned my eating habits. My body deteriorated visibly over the years ... but it didn’t occur to me to link this to my diet.

„Because what must not be cannot be.“
(Christian Morgenstern)

After 36 years on a vegetarian diet, my physical deterioration had progressed so much that I finally woke up and, for the first time, tentatively asked myself whether there was something wrong with my diet. As soon as I had asked this question, I “incidentally” stumbled across a video by Dr Berg. The rest of the story is in my article “I Was a Vegetarian for 36 Years – Then This Happened.”

Unfortunately, it took a physical crash to “crack” my vegetarian fundamentalism. I still remember my first ketogenic breakfast: four eggs, smoked duck breast, an avocado, lots of butter – and no bread. It tasted unbelievably good. I felt like I had never eaten anything so delicious before. Every cell in my body seemed grateful.

An animal eats when it is hungry; it stops eating when it is no longer hungry; and it eats what it has an appetite for. You too have an instinct, which manifests as hunger and appetite that tell you what is right for you, when, and in what quantity. But most people can’t hear the gentle voice of their instinct because their programs are so much louder. People eat what they have learned to eat. And all too often, they eat in order to distract themselves or or because they are out of balance and seek satisfaction. Sweets play a central role in this. In my book “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans,” I describe why and how these programs develop as we grow up.

Which diet is right for you? Finding an answer is simple, but not easy. The path to finding an answer begins with accepting that programs create over 99% of your actions and thoughts – including your food choices. To unleash your instinct – and thus your natural hunger and appetite – you must become a master of your programs. I describe a method in my article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps” and in my book “Being Free – Get out of the Box.”

Further reading:

Article “I Was a Vegetarian for 36 Years – Then This Happened”

Article “This is the Difference Between Humans and Animals”

Book “Curiosity – The Mental Hunger of Humans”

Article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps”

Book “Being Free – Get out of the Box”

Leave a comment

Share

I was a committed vegetarian for 36 years – the last ten of which I was almost a vegan. I firmly believed that this was the right diet for me ... until my body taught me otherwise. The following is the story of my eating habits.

As a child, I grew up with the usual home cooking, ie with meat, fish, dairy and cereal products, as well as vegetables and fruit. I became a vegetarian when I was 25 years old. It happened like this: I suffered from a chronic sore throat. None of the five doctors I consulted over the course of five months could help. Finally, a homeopath gave me a remedy, and I ate only salads for five weeks. That brought me healing. The scientist in me wanted to know: Why? So I read books on nutrition and became convinced that a wholefood vegetarian diet was good for me.

Initially, I felt comfortable with it... even though I was excessively thin. At a height of 5 feet 8 (177 cm), I weighed only 121 pounds (55 kg) ... although I had weighed 132 pounds (60 kg) when I was 18 and was still eating meat. When I ate a lot, I put on two to four pounds (one to two kilograms), but as soon as I returned to normal-sized portions, my weight went back to 121 pounds (55 kg). I also had little physical strength.

I remained thin and physically weak for 25 years, but otherwise felt well. I was so convinced of this style of eating that I trained as a nutritionist, wrote a book, and gave lectures and seminars.

From 2011 onwards, symptoms of physical decline gradually became apparent. It started with a slipped disc, from which I only recovered slowly. In 2017, I had a hernia. There were complications during the operation, and I had to have an emergency operation three days later. Again, it took me months to recover. In 2019, my left knee started hurting; at times, I could hardly walk. This was soon followed by pain in my right shoulder. Physiotherapy was unsuccessful for both knee and shoulder. To make matters worse, I also had chronic pain in my mouth. My gums were inflamed, and one tooth or another kept hurting. I went to the dentist every few weeks, who fortunately was my friend ... otherwise he would probably have thrown me out. He patiently checked every time ... and every time the diagnosis was: “The tooth is fine.”

What was wrong with me? I was supposedly eating healthily and was also physically very active ... that is, as far as my condition allowed. I also took naturopathic remedies. But nothing helped. I was only 60 years old and felt like a wreck.

At the beginning of 2022, I experienced acute digestive problems: severe flatulence and very loose stools several times a day. I had learned that white rice heals the gut ... but days of only eating rice didn’t help, nor did taking probiotics. I became more and more desperate.

Then I stumbled across a YouTube video by Dr Eric Berg. In it he talked about pain in the right shoulder and why it can be a symptom of a fatty liver. I knew that drinking too much alcohol could cause a fatty liver... but I hardly drank alcohol.

Dr Berg explained how consuming fructose can cause non-alcoholic fatty liver. Household sugar contains 50% fructose; and it is abundant in many types of fruit and in many supposedly healthy sweeteners such as agave syrup. Fruit juices are also rich in fructose. The liver is the only organ that can process fructose and is therefore quickly overwhelmed. This can lead to a fatty liver. The liver swells and displaces the surrounding tissue, which continues up into the muscles of the right shoulder; the result is right-sided shoulder pain that cannot be relieved by physiotherapy. I found my situation 100% reflected in Dr Berg’s description.

I appreciate how Dr Berg communicates his findings and experiences and backs up many of his statements with scientific studies. So I watched more of his videos. These shook my worldview of nutrition to its core – and provided explanations for all the symptoms I was suffering from. Dr Berg explains why a ketogenic diet is the best form of nutrition and how it optimally supports the body’s self-healing processes.

In my desperate situation, I was ready to give up my 36-year-old perspective and give a new one a chance. Firstly, I had nothing to lose. Secondly, Dr Berg’s explanations were logical. And thirdly, it was an interesting self-experiment.

„One's own experience has the advantage of complete certainty.“
(Arthur Schopenhauer)

The term ‘ketogenic’ means that the body obtains energy from fat – instead of from carbohydrates. The basic formula for the ketogenic diet is: very low carbohydrates, moderate protein, high animal fat. This is almost the opposite of how I had been eating for the last 36 years. Carbohydrate-rich foods such as cereals and legumes had been the basis of my diet. From now on, I cut them out completely: no more rice, bread, pasta, beans and lentils, and no carbohydrate-rich vegetables such as potatoes. I also avoided sugar and seed oils, such as sunflower oil, canola oil, and safflower oil. Only olive oil and avocado oil remained on my menu.

I switched to a ketogenic diet from one day to the next. After just two days, my digestion was back to normal. I had no more bloating and normal bowel movements. I was impressed.

Grains, nuts, and seed oils are rich in omega-6 fatty acids, which promote inflammation. As I had been eating mainly these for decades, it was no wonder my body was chronically inflamed. Inflamed and therefore weakened tissue had contributed to both the slipped disc and the hernia – and had delayed the healing process. After a few weeks on a ketogenic diet, all the inflammation had subsided. My liver also recovered as the shoulder pain decreased and eventually disappeared completely.

I am not offering a description of the ketogenic diet here or making any recommendations. I am sharing my personal experience and thoughts. If you are interested in this form of nutrition, you can find information on the Internet, get competent advice, or perform your own experiments. In my opinion, Dr Berg’s YouTube channel is a good place to start.

I eat red meat (beef, lamb, game), liver, fish (salmon, sardines, mackerel), eggs, beef kidney fat, butter, ghee, cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, cabbage), asparagus, avocados, and sauerkraut. I occasionally eat berries, mushrooms, green salads, olive and avocado oil, and raw milk cheese and yoghurt, preferably from sheep’s milk. I use a generous amount of salt, pepper, and apple cider vinegar as seasonings.

I pay meticulous attention to top quality. Organic production alone is not enough for me. Some of the legal guidelines for something to be labeled ‘organic’ are ridiculous. Organic food should not be produced according to legal guidelines, but according to what is natural. For example, grain is not natural food for cattle, nor for fish. Wild fish, wild cattle, wild sheep, etc do not eat grain. But in organic farming, cattle, fish, and other animals are usually fed grain. Since grains are rich in pro-inflammatory omega-6 fatty acids, the meat from these animals not only loses some of its health benefits, but can even become a burden on our health. I have therefore sought out farmers who feed their animals almost exclusively on grass. And I eat only wild-caught fish.

As a scientist, I always question everything, including myself. So after six months on a ketogenic diet, I did an experiment. I ate a portion of basmati rice with my meat and vegetable dish. A few hours later, I had stomach pains, and the next day I had diarrhea.

In my experience, a vegetarian diet made me ill, and an animal-based diet made me well again. Dr Berg and many others have had similar experiences. So, is this true for all people? Below, I share two of my thoughts on this.

Firstly. Vegetarian animals, such as cattle, sheep, and horses, eat most of the day. They must because their food is low in nutrients. Carnivores, such as lions, eat only occasionally. This suffices because their food is rich in nutrients.

Carbohydrate-rich foods such as cereals and legumes are rich in nutrients, although not as rich and high in quality as animal foods. But they are not an appropriate food for us or most animals. A carbohydrate-rich diet puts a strain on our bodies. For example, it overstresses the pancreas. It must release excessive amounts of insulin to regulate blood sugar levels, which are thrown out of balance by carbohydrate-rich foods. Snacking between meals exacerbates the situation. Over time, this leads to insulin resistance, which can develop into pre-diabetes, which can become diabetes. Grains can also inflame the gut; gluten intolerance and inflammatory gut diseases are evidence.

If we eat animal foods with a high fat content, we can easily manage with one or two meals a day. We don’t need snacks in between, and the pancreas has much less work to do.

Secondly. Many people in India and China eat vegetarian diets. When we see pictures of them, we notice that many are spindly and have hardly any teeth in old age. This reflects my experience after 36 years vegetarianism: this diet weakens us on right down to the teeth, which are an indicator of vitality. Much of this only becomes visible with advanced age.

Naturally, hunger and appetite would tell us what to eat and when – and how much. But programs that generate over 99% of our actions and thoughts control us. We do and think what we have learned to do and think. We eat what we have learned to eat. We believe what we have learned to believe. That’s how I came to be a vegetarian. I have been programmed through books, articles, and training courses. In addition, like-minded people reinforce each other ... ie each other’s programs. Therefore, finding the truth is anything but easy. See my articles “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical” and “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps.” Another challenge is that many industrially processed foods create addictions; such as the addiction to sugar.

Life is lived forward and understood backwards. Today I know - from experience:

1. Books are not sources of truth. A book reflects the author’s perspective. When we read and do training courses, we gather information, perspectives, and programs. With own experiments and experiences, we gather knowledge.

2. A vegetarian diet is malnutrition. It can take decades for the effects to become noticeable.

3. A carbohydrate-rich diet promotes inflammation.

4. A high-fat, animal-based diet strengthens and heals.

Further:

Dr Eric Berg’s YouTube channel

Article “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical”

Article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps”

Leave a comment

Share

Our society is sick ... because it is untruthful. Something untruthful cannot survive. In order to have a future, we must see this and then change. In the following, I will show how this can succeed.

„Imagine a community in which everyone does what truly fulfills them. One person is a farmer because he finds fulfillment working in the barn and in the fields. Another is a car mechanic, because he finds fulfillment in repairing cars. And so on. The farmer harvests more than he and his family can eat, so he gives the surplus to the community. If someone has problems with their car, they take it to the mechanic, who enjoys repairing it. Everyone gives and takes according to their talents and possibilities; everyone gives their best; everyone has a fulfilled life; everyone is in the flow – and the community thrives. It’s like nature.“
(from “Bartering = Deceiving“ by Bernhard Kutzler)

A truthful community comprises truthful people. Truthful people act truthfully and fulfill their purposes as part of the whole. As a result, they experience bliss, which is why they don’t need payment for what they do. They act out of joy in what they do. That’s why there is no bartering in such a community.

A born artist finds their highest fulfillment in creating works of art. A born researcher finds their highest fulfillment in exploring the world. But not everyone can fulfill their life’s purpose alone. A born teacher, for example, needs people to teach.

In nature, there are many communities: males and females with offspring, herds, biotopes; etc. Humans also belong to several, sometimes intertwined communities: a partnership, a family, friendships, a club, a village, a country, all of humanity; and we too are part of this planet’s biosphere.

All natural communities are truthful. Most human communities are untruthful. A human community can be untruthful for two reasons:

1. The members don’t fit together.

2. The members fit together but act untruthfully.

Knowingly acting untruthfully is lying; unknowingly acting untruthfully arises from programs. Since people are controlled by programs over 99%, they mostly act untruthfully. I discuss the programs that control us in my article “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical.”

How can we become a truthful society? For an answer, we must understand how we can recognize a truthful community. I see four criteria:

1. Truthfulness: everyone acts truthfully;

2. Purpose in life: everyone fulfills their purpose in life;

3. Caring: people support each other;

4. No bartering – and, therefore, no money.

Truthfulness is the basis; everything else arises from it. But since truthfulness cannot be seen from the outside, we need the other three criteria.

Our society “functions” mainly through bartering. This alone shows how untruthful it is. In my article “Bartering = Deceiving,” I describe how bartering came about and has become increasingly untruthful.

The transformation to a truthful society cannot be ordered “from above.” If, for example, money were abolished, wages would no longer be paid and people would no longer have to pay for goods and services. That would cause the existing system to collapse within days. The Austrian actor Roland Düringer once asked his audience: “Who would work what they work even if they weren’t paid for it?” Of the 600 people present, two came forward. If money were abolished, over 99% of people would stop working in their current jobs. Soon, there would be hardly any products and services available anymore.

Caring within a community is natural. In a herd of animals, for example, the strong support the weak, ie the children, the old, and the sick. In a human herd based on bartering, many of the weak perish because they cannot afford the help of the strong. Socialism orders care “from above.” But because of the untruthfulness of the people, it doesn’t work. Many interpret this as a reward for being weak, which is why many weak people become lazy; they no longer exert themselves. And some strong people turn lazy because they don’t see why they should support lazy people. Socialism promotes laziness.

Laziness does not occur in nature. In nature, even the weakest constantly exert themselves in order to become stronger. If the weak gain the upper hand in a herd, the entire herd perishes; this is natural selection. Since the weak inevitably get the upper hand in a socialist system, every socialist community perishes eventually. History provides the proof of this.

The seed of a truthful society is you.

„If you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change.”
(Michael Jackson in ‚Man in the Mirror‘)

The transformation of society starts with your becoming truthful. It helps if you free yourself from your programs, because they generate over 99% of your actions and thinking – and most of it is untruthful. I explain how you can free yourself in my article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps.”

This does not mean that you should stop selling or exchanging your products or services. That’s not possible in the existing system because you have to cover your living costs. Nor does it mean that you should become a Samaritan or a Mother Teresa and help everyone. It’s about growing your seed of truthfulness. You do this by welcoming other people in.

Start with people who are close to you and with whom you don’t barter; these are probably your partner, your parents, your children, and perhaps very close friends. However, there are also hidden barters; in a partnership, for example, love could be traded for financial security; or sex for social status; or two people are together only because neither of them wants to be alone. Such barters are not wrong; they are untruthful – and if you want to be truthful, you must recognize and stop them.

Be a role model and an inspiration. Be unconditionally honest and support the others in your “nucleus;” help them become stronger; help them grow ... and watch what happens. Are these people also unconditionally honest with you? Do they also support you? Are they also helping you to become stronger? It’s not about you getting back immediately or equally. As soon as you pay attention to this, you end up in the mindset of untruthful bartering again. If your truthfulness is rnot eciprocated, stop involving these people; at least for now.

Supporting each other without bartering is the essence of true love. This goes far beyond romantic love. It is the basis of all truthful cooperation. I discuss this in my articles “What is Love – and Why Do We Need It?” and “To Survive as a Species, We MUST Work Together.”

Your third contribution to the transformation of humanity is a ‘we’ mindset. Be aware of being part of communities and contributing to their thriving. This applies to your partnership and friendships and all other communities to which you belong. This includes nature, because you are part of this planet’s biosphere.

This contribution is just as important as the other two, because mindsets are “contagious.” I provide the reasoning in my article “Why and How Thoughts Affect Matter.”

You transform humanity by making three contributions:

1. Truthfulness

2. Extending your truthfulness

3. ‘We’ Mindset

The more people do this, the faster we will become a truthful society. Even if the seeds of truthfulness are small at first, they will grow ... just as a few small fires can set an entire forest on fire. Truthfulness always triumphs over untruthfulness.

„Lies run sprints - but the truth runs marathons.“
(Michael Jackson)

How could a truthful community of, say, 1 million people look like? Aldous Huxley provides an answer in his novel “Island.” There he describes the life of the people on the fictional island of Pala. Very inspiring!

Further reading:

Article “Bartering = Deceiving”

Article “Why the Question ‘What Am I?’ is Important and Magical”

Article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps”

Article “What is Love – and Why Do We Need It?”

Article “To Survive as a Species, We MUST Work Together”

Article “Why and How Thoughts Affect Matter”

Aldous Huxley “Island”

Also:

Book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box”

Share

Leave a comment

Thoughts have an effect in the physical universe. Therefore, it matters what you think. Below, I explain why and how thoughts influence matter.

Raise your right arm. How did you do it? Maybe you believe you commanded your muscles. But you didn’t. Unless you are an expert in human anatomy, you don’t even know which muscles are involved in this movement. So how could you have commanded them? You knew you were lifting your right arm – and it went up. Your knowing was your only contribution. Your body did the rest.

Maybe you believe that your brain commanded your muscles. Your body comprises about 35 trillion cells. Every behavior arises from the perfectly coordinated cooperation of these 35 trillion cells. You can visualize this number as follows: we are about eight billion people on this planet. On 4,500 planets like Earth, there would be 35 trillion people. How could so many people work together as perfectly as your cells permanently do? Your arm went up as soon as you had the thought. The very idea that the brain directs 35 trillion cells to execute a thought is absurd.

Also, who knew he raises his right arm? You are not your brain. And your brain is not the source of your thoughts, as I explain in my article “Thoughts Are Not Products of the Brain.”

So why did your right arm go up? The answer is: your cells know what you know and collectively execute your knowing. To understand this answer, you need a new perspective of yourself.

Imagine a school of fish. The school behaves as a single organism because each fish behaves in the “interest” of the school. Traditional science cannot explain this. The answer cannot be found on the physical level. You find it on the non-physical level that is ignored by traditional science. Some call this world spirit or mind. I explain and describe the non-physical world in my article “There Is More Than Just the Universe.”

In the physical world, things are separate from each other, such as the individual fish in a school of fish. In the non-physical world, is interconnected; that is why I call this world EL as an abbreviation for ‘Entanglement at Large.’ More about this in my article “Everything Is Connected to Everything Else.”

EL is the fabric knowing is made of; besides thoughts, this also includes feelings, perceptions, programs, and intuitions. Your body is in the physical world; your knowing – and thus your consciousness – is in the non-physical world EL.

The individual fish in a school of fish are interconnected in EL; they form a “swarm knowing” and have a “swarm awareness” in EL. Swarm behavior arises from this. This applies to all groups, such as herds and colonies. If you have a pet or a plant, you can observe this. You and your animals or plants are a group and interconnected in EL. Your animals or plants know what you know; they know your feelings and your thoughts and react to them; that is empathy. You also know what they know. But most of the time, your thoughts and programs distort or block your empathy.

I once did an experiment with a cactus that usually produces a single flower once a year. I chose the thought that it grows a flower – and held that thought for some time; and the cactus grew a flower within two weeks. As this could have been coincidence, I repeated the experiment: I knew it growing another flower; and indeed, over the next two weeks, it grew even two more flowers: “do you finally believe it?”

Back to you. Your body is a swarm of 35 trillion cells. These cells behave collectively as your body. This includes collectively performing your knowing – such as lifting an arm.

You could argue that your cells are physically connected and that many behaviors come from programs encoded in the genes and nervous system. This is true and explains the automatic part of your behavior, such as metabolism and heartbeat. Behaviors such as raising an arm or speaking do not arise in this way.

A fish also is a swarm of cells, and part of its behavior comes from the programs in its genes and nervous system, ie it arises in the physical world. Its behavior as a member of the school of fish arises in the non-physical world EL.

Why does the school of fish behave the way it does? It belongs to a biotope that is also home to many other living creatures. This biotope is a group in which everyone fulfills their purpose as part of the whole. This includes countless predator-prey relationships.

In the non-physical world EL, there is an order to all things. This order is aptly named cosmos, because kosmos is the Greek word for order. The cosmos “ensures,” one could say, that everything in the universe functions and thrives together; for example, that

• cells find food even though they have no sensory organs;

• plants develop protective mechanisms when new predators appear;

• animals find a new territory when the old one no longer provides for the livelihood;

• migratory birds fly to warmer regions to spend the winter.

The cosmos urges everything in the universe to fulfill its purpose as part of the whole – a small whole, such as a living being or swarm, as well as a large whole, such as a biotope or the planet Earth. Intuition is the connection of a living being to the cosmos. More in my article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense.”

Everything intuitively knows what it needs to know in order to fulfill its purpose as part of the whole. An impressive example was the 2004 tsunami in the Indian Ocean. Animals that would have been affected moved to higher ground in good time.

We are also connected to the cosmos. Why didn’t people flee?

We have a tool that sets us apart from animals: the mind. An animal follows its intuition unconditionally – unless it is prevented from doing so. Humans can choose not to follow their intuition, and often do because programs and thinking can block intuition. This can cost lives, as I explain in my article “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – but Almost No Animals”. But even without intuition, people could have saved themselves: seeing that the animals were leaving the riverbanks would have been reason enough to follow them.

If you raise your right arm, you have changed the course of events. When a dog reacts to its owner’s thoughts, the owner has changed the course of events. The so-called butterfly effect comes into play here: minor changes can bring about big changes in the long term. You may have heard that the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil can trigger a tornado in Texas ...

Thinking is the root of all creation. It is a person’s true power – but hardly anyone is aware of it.

It is easiest to recognize the power of your thoughts in your body. Your body follows some thoughts immediately, such as raising an arm or speaking. Some thoughts it follows slowly, such as changing your heartbeat. This takes longer because the thought combines with the automatic control of the heartbeat. Therefore, you must hold this thought longer and more intensely for it to have a material effect.

You also influence healing processes. If an animal gets injured, it heals according to the bio-physical laws; and it will intuitively behave in a way that supports the healing process; it may rest or feed on certain herbs. If you injure yourself in the same way, your wound could heal in the same way, and you would also intuitively know what supports the healing. However, your thoughts also have an influence. Optimistic thoughts, such as believing in the benefits of a therapy, accelerate the healing process up to the point of a miraculous healing. Pessimistic thoughts, such as doubt, slow it down to the point of incurability. These phenomena are known as the placebo and nocebo effects.

By thinking, you create. Since you are almost always thinking when you are awake, you are almost always creating – on a small and large scale; both for yourself and for everything else. You cannot not create! Therefore, everyone has a responsibility – whether they are aware of it or not. Everyone has responsibility for everything ... simply because everyone is connected to everything else. It is therefore useful to get into the habit of having a mindset of connectedness with everything. That alone changes your thinking and therefore your behavior.

But there is a catch: over 99% of your thinking comes from programs; over 99% of what you think is what you have learned to think. Schools and the media play a central role in this. Therefore, over 99% of the time, you create what you have learned to create.

When you free yourself from your programs, you can become a master of your thinking – and thus a more responsible creator. I explain how to do this in my article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps” and in my book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box.”

Finally, three exercises:

Exercise 1: Imagine your body as a swarm of 35 trillion cells that you control with your knowing. What does this mean in concrete life situations?

Exercise 2: Analyze examples of placebo and nocebo effects that you have experienced yourself or observed in others.

Exercise 3: Analyze examples of social interactions where you or the other person knew more than what was physically communicated.

Further reading:

Article “Thoughts Are Not Products of the Brain”

Article “There Is More Than Just the Universe”

Article “Everything Is Connected to Everything Else”

Article “Intuition Is Much More Than Just a Sixth Sense”

Article “Why 230,000 People Died in the Tsunami – but Almost No Animals”

Article “How to Become What You Truly Are in 7 Steps”

Book “Being Free – Get Out of the Box”

-

Book “Consciousness – Its Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It”

Leave a comment

Share

While some people say that everything is interconnected, classical physics does not confirm this. However, there are phenomena that suggest an interconnectedness beyond physics. In the following, I’m getting to the bottom of this and offer a perspective from which you see that indeed everything is interconnected ... and also how.

The traditional scientific worldview reflects our usual experience of separateness. For example, we must approach or grasp something in order to connect with it. The outer world comprises space, matter, and energy. We are part of it with our bodies.

But who perceives the outer world and how? That happens in our inner world; some call it consciousness. This world comprises our perceptions, feelings, thoughts, memories, and intuitions.

We share the outer world with people, animals, plants, stones, etc, but they are all spatially separate from us. In our inner world, we seem alone. We can only assume that other people have an inner world, too.

The inner world is more important than the outer world, because we need it in order to know about the outer world. Sometimes we feel the need to share our inner world with someone; for example, when we love. Loving happens in the inner world, but relates to someone or something in the outer world. When we love someone, we usually want them to know that we love them and how we love them. But we can only communicate in the outer world – through texts, images, sound, or touch. But no matter how hard we try, every attempt to express our inner world with the means of the outer world is only a shadow of what is actually inside us. This is a first hint that the inner world is larger than the outer world.

Although we seem alone in our inner world, when we love, we feel connected to the beloved ... no matter how far away it is in the outer world. It may also happen that we know something about the object of our love that, according to traditional science, we cannot know. And even strangers sometimes know something about us that they cannot know according to science. So we may not be alone in the inner world after all ...

We know a lot about the outer world through the natural sciences, especially physics. We know very little about the inner world. Psychology ventures into this world ... but with very modest success.

We can summarize the inner world experience, ie perceptions, feelings, thoughts, memories, and intuitions, under the term knowing. Knowing is a state of our inner world; knowing has no physical properties; it has no length, no weight, it doesn’t move; it is not measurable and therefore cannot be explored physically. The inner world of knowing is, therefore, fundamentally different from the outer world – and so the question arises: what “fabric” is knowing and thus the inner world made of?

Knowing is information. However, it is a different type of information than information in the outer world. In the outer world, information has a form – such as text, sound, or image. This formed information is local and bounded ... because every form has boundaries.

Knowing is boundless; it permeates your entire inner world; you cannot separate it from any other knowing. Therefore, you cannot delete it. You cannot un-think a thought or un-feel a feeling. I describe the fabric of the inner world in my article “There Is More Than Just the Universe.”

Since formless information is boundless, all is interconnected in the world of formless information. Quantum physicists found an inexplicable phenomenon of connectedness and called it ‘entanglement.’ I therefore call the world of formless information EL; this is an acronym formed from the letters E and L; it is the abbreviation for 'entanglement at large,' which is the characteristic property of this “fabric.”

Animals, plants, and cells also have an inner world; they too know; they too have perceptions, feelings, familiarities, and intuitions. I describe the difference between them and us in my article “This Is the Difference Between Humans and Animals.” And according to the widely accepted interpretation of quantum mechanics, the elementary building blocks of matter are abstract; that means that they are formless information. According to this, the world of formless information is the basis of the physical world.

The physical world, in which things are separate from each other, is made from the world in which all is interconnected. This seems paradoxical, but can be interpreted as: “In the outer world, things appear separate, even though they are not.” In this sense, the outer world is an illusion, because something is an illusion when it is not what it appears to be. In my article “Why and How the Universe Is an Illusion,” I explain why EL, the world of formless information, is the only reality and why the universe is made of it.

In the following, I suggest a metaphor that illustrates how EL creates the universe.

EL has no space and no form. But since we are used to thinking spatially and in forms, EL is unimaginable for us. In order to visualize the unimaginable, we give EL a form “on loan” that depicts its most important properties.

Imagine EL as a data cloud in the form of an infinitely long and infinitely fast fiber optic cable, where all the (formless) information can be retrieved instantly at any time. Being connected to this cable means that all you know is automatically uploaded, and you can also download all information.

Now imagine a knitting machine knitting a scarf from this cable. It is a vertical knitting machine; you are looking from above and therefore only see the last row of the scarf. Every moment, a new row extends the scarf.

• The cable is EL.

• The last row is the present universe.

• The scarf below the last row is the history of the universe.

Everything is made of EL; ie everything comprises formless information: the universe, ie space, matter, and energy, and the history of the universe; the latter is called the Akashic Records in some traditions.

Everything in the universe is made of cable ... and therefore everything is interconnected. The cable – and thus the scarf – contains all that someone or something in the universe once knew or knows now. All is available anywhere in the universe at any time. The French philosopher Henry Bergson talked about this:

„Each person is at each moment capable of remembering all that has ever happened to him and of perceiving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe. The function of the brain and nervous system is to protect us from being overwhelmed and confused by this mass of largely useless and irrelevant knowledge, by shutting out most of what we should otherwise perceive or remember at any moment, and leaving only that very small and special selection which is likely to be practically useful.“
(Henry Bergson, quoted by Aldous Huxley in ‘Doors of Perception’)

This doesn’t just apply to us humans. Everything is connected to EL: also animals, plants, cells, water, stones, molecules, atoms, and atomic particles. Potentially, everything in the universe knows all; practically, it knows what it needs to know in order to fulfill its purpose as part of the whole.

References to EL as the source of all are not only part of ancient traditions such as Hermeticism and Advaita Vedanta, but can also be found in modern entertainment products. In the movie ‘Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets,’ for example, there is the following scene: Valerian asks the computer to analyze a memory that had previously reached him in a flash. The computer replies: "Someone is sending you these images. They could come from the present or the past – and from anywhere in the universe." Also, the ‘Matrix’ film trilogy and in the movie ‘Lucy’ use this insight.

This “knitting theory” expands the traditional scientific world model by adding EL as another world, and describing the universe’s emergence from EL metaphorically. To understand the transition from EL to the physical universe, one needs quantum physics considerations. They are simple enough, so I will describe them in a future article.

A theory is a perspective. The word ‘theory’ is of Greek origin, the word ‘perspective’ is of Latin origin. A theory or perspective is neither right nor wrong; it is only more or less useful, such as for explaining phenomena. Does the knitting theory provide better explanations than the physical perspective?

For outer world phenomena, it provides the same explanations – with one exception. For inner world phenomena, the knitting theory provides explanations for all known phenomena, whereas there are no explanations in the physical perspective. This is because the physical worldview ignores the inner world. Therefore, the knitting theory is more useful.

The one exception in the outer world is the following phenomenon, which was first observed in electrons.

The physical perspective includes the insight that nothing can move faster than the speed of light. Therefore, information cannot be transmitted any faster. However, quantum physicists observed an instantaneous exchange of information. Although this contradicts the laws of physics, they cannot help but accept the measurement results and thus the phenomenon. It’s called quantum entanglement and has already been confirmed experimentally with photons, neutrinos, electrons, molecules, and even small diamonds.

There is no explanation of this phenomenon from the traditional scientific perspective. Albert Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance.” The knitting theory provides a simple explanation: objects know about each other; they are “knitted from EL” and are therefore interconnected “beyond” the physical universe.

In traditional science, only the smallest things are entangled. In knitting theory, everything is entangled – the small and the large. Therefore, I have called this world EL - ‘entanglement at large.’

For a meticulous derivation of the “inner world fabric” EL, see my book “Consciousness – It’s Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It.”

Further reading:

Article “Consciousness Is Not the Same as Awareness”

Article “There Is More Than Just the Universe”

Article “This Is the Difference Between Humans and Animals”

Article “Why and How the Universe Is an Illusion”

Book “Consciousness – It’s Nature, Purpose, and How to Use It”

Also:

Article “Thoughts are Not Products of the Brain”

Leave a comment

Share