http://www.blackvault.com/

UNI QASSI1ftIEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION-OF THISP PAE (1(4n Date EnteredI),~-~: EDISRCIN

REPORT DOCUMENTATioN PAGE F *SCOMPLETING FORM,

1. REPORT NUMBER 2.GOVT.ACCESSIOWNO 3.RE ,pIEmNT*S CATAL0G;NUMBER

~1 ~ ERiOD-- VEREO

An Approach, to Understandintg Psychotronicsoi Technicalefllg,

/0 Thoma ~*earden

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIN NAME AND'ADDRES 10. PRORAM ELEMENT.-PROJ ECT. TASK

AREA 5&WORK-UNIT NUMBERS

System-Development Corporation

48;10.Bradford Blvd, n/a,HiintsvAllej Alabama 35805 /1

It. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME-AND ADDRESS.une,7.

n/a iit 81

14. -MONITOR ING AGENCY NAME &ADDRESS( IiU8;;t from ControliliOc)1.SCUIYCAS ofti eot

i~. ECL ASSIF1 CATIONIDOWNGRADIN9-

-16t. DISRIBUTION STATEMEN4T (of thiReot

Approved for public release.. istributiofl unlimited.

17. DISTRIBUTIONSTATEgMENT (of th1 abstratct entered In Block 20, jidifferent iro Rpr)

18SUPPLE;E NTARY NOTES

E T.E. Bearden 1976. RAeproduced by permission of the copyright holder.

19. KEY WORDS (Continue onl reverse aide fnessary kid, Identify by. block number) action, antigravity,t~rchetype,

* axioms of logic, blofields, biological system, *collective -unconscious, cqmplemen

*tarity, consciousness, conservation of energy, death, deBroglie waves, duality,,

Einstein's 'spherical model of the cosmos, formon, freeL energy -devices, Heiseniber

uncertainty'principle, Hieronymus device, holographic, reality,'iety of opposite',

20. ABSTRAC (Confitie on reverse 3ide'it necesr an dnryb lc ubr The term pyhoonc rer

7 td the interaction of mind, 5nd nmatter, and the tinion of physics ahd. metaphysics.

Thus a -new concept of reality must be evoked o explain psychotronj. s. The authol

* advances a fourth law of logic, the age-old identity-of opposites 'which has

baffled- logicians, philosophers, and. scientists for centuries. With the- author-'s

pE2RceIro approach.-to perception, ow1e-is enabled to domprehendl-how the identity

of opposites is accomplished, a-nd when it is accomplished. The fourth, law,

together with, the first three Aitlenlaws-of 1odt.fr mltIc

PP1, jA3 1473 EDITION DOI Nov 65 IS OBSOLETE UCASFIEUAI $5YfSCkAS4cAT ,q F. THIS. PAGE (117am Prier. &En treed)'

UnclassifiedSECURITY CLASSIIFICA.TIONl.0F THIS PAGE(IW#,,n,Dat. .nt..,ed)

Block 19 (Continued). inception-, infinity, intersecting frames, life, linkedbrains, Mach's principle, many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics,ma.s, iaterialization, metaphysics, mind, mind/body problem, Moray device,nothing, orthogonalframes,, orthorotation, particle, pOrception, perceptron,probability, psychic, psychotronics, psi, quantum, quark, quiton, relativity,reality, spacetime curvature, spirit, time, tobiscope, tulpa, two-slit experiment-unified field-theory, universe closure, Wave', wavicle, zero.

Block 20 (Continued)jinmetalogic 'ncompassing both physics and. metaphysics.

Everett's many-worlds interpretation -(MWI) of quantum mechanics then providesthe: theoretical, framework onto which four-law perdeption theory can b. fitted.The MWI is known to be consistent with the entire experimental basis of physics.Thus the new schema contains a correspondence prificiple: i .e., it-reduces toordinary physics of'a-single 4-space in th6 limit.

A.clister of an infinite number of orthogonal_ 3-dimensional spatial frames,all containing the same single fourth dimension or time axis, provides a frameworl-onto which minrd, matter, fields, being, life, and both physical and- metaphysical'phenomena can be fitted and precisely modelled. Thus metaphysics can-beprecisely modelled by, and related to, physics,- A theory of biofields is thenapparent from the model. A solution to the ofitolgical prblem is presented..

j Using the four-law perception approach, a fundamental particle becomes aclosure of the universe, in, the manner of Einstein's spherical model of the-cosmosThe simultaneous existence of both macroscopic and microscopic universes isdue to multiple closure of the same universe at differig-rtes-(diffdring by afactor of 1.042). The polarity of a charged particle is due to the direction ofclosure taken by the .fast-olbsure universe cusp. The world thus becomes asingle giant hologram, and reality becomes holographic rather than Cartesian.Mass is a tim6-differentiator,. and in its-differentiating,of L3 T Minkowskianspacetime,, the time dimensioh is lost. Thus physical detection systems do.notdetect time directlyi, and the time dimension cannot be "seen" by a massdetect1on (sensory) system. The mind Is- objectives, since mental phenomenaoccupy the time dimension, and the timedimension is accepted as objective inphysia qs-However, since-the-mind, does not share the spatiaL. imensions of theordinary 4-space, the mind itself Vs not perceived orobserved or detected, sincea mass perception system (the physical sensory apparatus) loses the time dimen-sion, the only obje tive dimension shared in common by -mind and matter priorto perception/detection/observation. Thus the act of physical sensory detection -

perception or observation itself - -- ,is responsible for:Descartes' sharp sep-aration of-mind and body.

-A mind becomes a. complete, 3-dimensional physical world, three or moreorthogonal spatial turns. (rotations) away from the ordinary 3-dimensional world,in-an n-dimensional cluster of orthogonal three-spaces with-a single fourth-(or time) axis. DeBrogiie waves and photons-are fitted into this model as reiiparticles in the appropriate space frames,and the nature of a quark is simplythat it is spatially unclosed,-- hence it is not detected as a particle (which mustbe spatially closed) in physical experiments. - From the model, constructs thatmodel life, death, a biological system, psi, consciousness, inception, telepathypsychokinesis, UFO's, God, and the collective unconscious can be taken.Materialization, dematerialization, and mind linkage also exist, as does aspecific mechanism for tulpas materialized and objectified thought forms.

unclassified

AMCLASSIFIED-SecufltITYCLASI ATIOII OF Tt4I AF(I''JS).t'In'd

lok20 (Continued). the IJFO phenomena, may be' explained as tulpaszwhichare-tunied'in from the hyperspatial'mindworlds of the human specieg..Ar 1ietypalforms are, most easily evoked, but are imprinted or-changed aiccor~ding-,to personal,social1, and cultural conditioning,. Several major UFO. "flaps-" -aLre shown to pre--cisely fit these criteria,. Since -in Everett' s-'MWI allJ p6ssibilities are -concretelyreal and exist, then-ahy kind -of thought reality at all may be orthorotat~id in'anfdemqerge in the-ordindry. laboratory spatial frame, and emerge as -concretely -realobjects,, entities, v~hiclds., devicesi etc. However, since a minid i-s normallyquite urstab!6, then. tulppas which are- materialized, are unstable and usually. goaway in a short pleriod ,of time.

--The two-slit experiment and the ieri6nymus -device-.are shown to inivolvethe fourth.law of logic,, as does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle., -A newdefinition of -fothinig is -advanced', -4.hich resolves the philo'sohical problemof..nothiftq.- Multiple presence and singular absence are identical- (i.,e.., theyare indi stinquighable), to,.a monocular perception/detection process.

. 6ynman's, criterion for a unified field -theory ~tat .'t~ist..exlain why0 42 occurs in both the ratio of-an.,elebtron's radius. to the-,Einstein -closed,

universe' s radius;, and the ratio of the electrical force and the gravitational forcebetween two electrons -- is -met by dual- universe clbsure- at rates dififeing- bya factor of '1042 The dual closure universe-modet-al4o i's consistent withSantilli's'probf that the classical assUffiptiori-that electrtc field -and gravitationalfield are differefit things is false, ana. thdt they are either totally 6r partially the

-s;ame thing. 'In, dual closure, an electrical, field-is, essentially a- gravitationalfield compressed 'by a factor of 1042, but in a s eparate cl osure, cusp -than- thegravitational field.

sHubbard'Vs mainifol& theory of physics also derives the four-law ihetalogic,.,land suibstantiates the, four-law perception- approach.,

/k<~

14,

................

sified

T,. BeardenSystem Development, Corporation4-810 Bradford BlvdHuntsville, Alabama 35805

August 1', i976

SMs. Alice HealyDefense Documentation Center-ATTN: :DDCTSR-ICameron StationAlexandrial, VA'22314

Dear Ms. Healy:

Enclosed are two ,papers which I would like to have placed in the DDOsystem,per our previous conversatiori,. Completed DD Form 1473's,,arealso enclosed. The,material is copyrighted by me,,,but naturally this letter constitutes authority for yOutO; put it in DDCI°

Yqr assistance is. deeply apprediatedj' These- two papers, represent somethingof absolutely fundamental importance, I believe,, and'their content should be availableto all, DOD users who are interested in parapsychology and .p6chotronics.

Sincerely,

I4

Thomas E. BeardenLTC, U.S. Army (Retired)Research Scientist

2 incl'"Writing the Observer back'Into the 'Equation" (d Copies)-"AnApproach to Understanding Psychotronics" ( copies)

'1

/ / 7" -+*N

ANAPPROACH'TO UNDERSTANDiNG 0'PSYdHOIROiN -8

Thomas B.Bearden

June6 1976,

O1976 T.E. ;Bbarden

'ABSTRACT

" \ n ..y.h~ '(riA) " o (ph-cical d" ); the term. s chotronics refdrs'to the interaction of mind and matter, and so -to a union, of physic ad metaphysics,.

advances a fourth law of logi the age-old "identity of opposites'" W1essa.!Parent :necqesiyj s..baff ed-legieia h -loophers,,-and 0scienti Sts-f{or- centures.- With'the author's erce appr6 ch to perception, One is at last enabed tO-6omprehend

how tho 6pposites is_acwtomplished,_qnd when it is acdomplishedi.together with the first three Ailstotlean laws .of logidfo-h a

complete, closed-metalogic encompassing both physics and metaphysics. Everett"srriany-worlds interpretation- (MWI) of quantum mechanics then provides theoretical-framework onto which fou--law perception theory- can be fitte e MWI is knd6wn t0be consistent with the ent ireexperimental- basis o Physics. Thus the new schemaContains a--cofrespondence principle: i.e., it reduces t6 ordinfy physics in the'limit,.just-as Einstein's relativistic physics reduces- to Newtonian physics in-the limit.>' cluster of an infiifte number of orthogonal, 3-dimensional spatial frames, all

containing 'the same single fourth dimension, or time axis,. provides a framework ontowhich mind, matter,. fieldsi being, life, and both physical-and metaphysical phenomena: Vcan be fitted andprecisely riodelled. Thus metaphysics can be precisely modelledby, and related to,, physics Of Wiri i h Lo 4

4S uthe four-law per ption approach, a fundamental, particle becomes -aclosure of the universe, in the anner of Einstein's spherical model of the cosmThe simultaneous existence .of b h macroscopic*is due -

to multiple closure of the same u verse at different rates (differing by a factor.of1042). The polarity of a charged rticle is due to the-direction of closure takenby the fast closure universe cusp, he wor4ob.comes asingle gianthologram-and reality becomes- holographic, r er than Cartesian. MM&ss i's-a time differentf;itor,and in its differentiating of L3 T Mi kowskian spacetfime, ithe time dimension, is lost.Thus physical detection systems not detect time directly, and the time dimension-cannot be "seen" by a mass det tion.(sensory) system. The mind is-objective, sincemental phenomena occupy or, s re the time dimension, and the time dimension isacceptedas objective In' phics. H6wever, the mind itself'is not perceived or

observed or detected, si a-rnss perception system (tfi --physical sensoryapparatus) loses the e dimension, the only objective dimension shared. in commonby mind and matteri6r to perception/detection/observation. 'Thus the act of

41 physical sens "e-tection -- perception itself -- is'responsible for Descartes'sharp'sewp ion ofxmind and body.

4A ,e'' mind becomes a complete 3-dimensional physical world, J ree or moreorthogonal spatial- turns (rotations) away from the ordinary 3-dimensio world Inan n-dimensionalcluster of orthogonal three-spaces with a single time axis eBrogliewaves~and photons are fitted into this model,,asreal particles in the te spaceframes, and' the nature of a quazf simp ,_ y unclosed -- hence it .isn- c i muste spatially closed) in physical experiments.

-I model, constructs that modellife; death, a biologicai system, psi,consciousness, inception, telepathy, tpsychkinesis, UFO's,, God, and the collectiveunconscious can be taken. Materialization, demat rializaticn, and mind linkage alsoexist, as does a tspecific mechanism for,.tulpas. '-(materia!zed' thought form. ,

The. UFO phenomena may be :explaifed as tulpas. Which are tuned in from thehyperspatial mindworlds of the human species. Archetjy4al forms are most easily --evoked-, but are imprinted or changed according , to personal, social, and culturalconditioning. Several major UFO 'flaps" ate shown tooprecisely fit these criteria.Since in Everett's MWI all possibilities are concretely real, and e xsti then any-kindof thought reality at all may be orthorotated.in and emerge in the 6rdinary laboratory

spatial frame, and emergeaas concretely real objects, entities, vehicles, ,devices,etc:. However, since a mind is normally quite unstable, then tulpas Which ,arematerialized are unstabe_and usually go away in a short peri6d of time.

.... - e-- Iit expetimefitand the Hieronymus device are shown to involvethe fourth- law of logic s oes the Heisenberg un ertainty principle-.1k newdefinitionof nothing. is advance. Mltiple-preseice and singular absence ar identical (i.e.,they are mdi _ able) to a minocular percePtiQn/deectio prcess .

ynman 's criterion-for a unified field theory ( f it mus'_-xblain-why 1042 '

occurs in both the ratio of an electron's radius t6the Einstein olqspd universe's radius,and the ratio of the 'electrical force and; the gravitational-Jr eween two electrons --

.is met by dual universe closure 'at rates differing b 'The dual -losure universemodelalso is consistent with Santillisa at the classical-assumption that,electric field'and gravitational lfieIldre'diff"eret things is false, and thatthey areeither totallyor partiallyvtheaie thing. -In duaii dlosure, an electtical field isessefitially-a gravi -ional field compressed by a factor of 1042, but-ina separte

.closure cu praan tihe gravitational, field. -14'iub bard's manifold theory-of physics also derives the four-law metalogic, and

substantiates the four-law perception approach.

ii-

UII

~TO.-7NDER8TAND, PSYCHOTRONICS (

N, VUGRAPH O(VNJ

the prefix pyco rfr to the -mind-.

'The, suffix "'tronilds" -refers, to ,ph-yiss pyi~l~d~

Thus the-concept of "psychotronic'd!'rdfers to a union, of phyksicandmetaphysics.

'to solve, the f~rmidable problem ,presented by supha uaiu

conceptx equires asutntQerypsntproblem in metaphysics , foundaionof logic, foundations of physics, and foundations o6f math&erti~cs.

AIt has bben said that fools-. rush-in where angels fear-to tread.,I

To, tackle the problem ,of psydhotronics ddmands an audacity-.to

go, where even fools fear to trdad'.

~SMt BASIC UNKNOWNS

VUGRAPHON,

-this slide lists .a few of the tingis which no one rleally understands.

Tsychotronics involves a, new uinderstandingr 6f'aUl tese concepts

Onei- must literally evoke a nrew concept of reality.

VUGRAPH, OFF:

SUGGESTED APPROACH (VUGRAPH ON (Vg#3)

In 12 years of intensive work on this question+ the: present authorhasevolved-a conceptual approadh, which is consistent with preseft #phy cs , butextends it, and one that appears to be capable of dealing with the ptblem.

A new cbncept of feality is involved, however, and severe demands'are made on the individual to Stretch his framework of domprehension.

The perceptron+.concept is ahabstraction which enables the-modelling 'fperception.itself -- either mental perception -or physical detection.

The fourth law of logi d involves the age-old-"identity of'oppositeS"'' whoseapparent recessity has baffled logicians, philosophers, and scientists for-centurie:.With-the perceptron concept, one is at last enabled to comprehend how the identityof opposites- is acco°mplished ,and when- it is accomplished.

E. g., this immediately solves the age0!d philosophical problem of change,once applied. The fourth laW also closes Jogiclint6 a- complete, closedd metalogicenCompassing, both physics and metaphysics.

Everett'S many-worlds interpretation'(MWI) of quantum mechanics then -Cprovides the theoretical framework onto which perception theory can be fitted.The MWII ,is known to be consistent with the entire experimental basis of physics,Thus the new schema contains a correspondence principle: i.e., it reduces toordinary physics in the limit, just as Einstein physics reduces, to Newtonianphysics in the limit.

-A cluster of an infinite number of orthogonali, 3-dimensional spatial framescontaining a, single common fourth dimension, or time axis, provides -a framework6onto which mind, matter,, fields, being, life, and both physical and metaphysicalphenomena can be fitted and precisely modelled.

Thus metaphysicscan be precisely modelled by -physics.

A theory of biofields is then apparent from the model.

VUGRAPH OFF

3.

A SUGGESTED ,APPROACH1 TO PSYCHOTRONICS

(vg#4)VIUGRAPH ON

From perception theory,, using :the perceptron coricept, the, author hassucceeded .inderiving a great deal of the present basis-of physics,,, as shownon this slide.

-Einsteint's postulates of relativity -have been. derived for the-special.relatiVity case , and-it alpears that the e quivalence prnciple, necessary-forgeneral relativity, alsbfollows. 'The derivation 6f the first two postulateshas been published-.

Newton'-s laws of motion -- relativistic form -- have beeriderived andpubh~shied

A solutioh to the ontological problem has been derived.

'in, addition, a new nature-of the photonfihas been, revealed. A photon issimply an ,ordinary 3-dimensiondl particle existing in a 3-spacethat is orthogonalto the laboratory 3-space frame. Thus the photonic particle has a 2-dimensionalintersection with the labratory-observer's spatial frame, and it appears as a waveor 2-dimensional entity to him, A stationary particle in the laboratory frame

cppears as a photon to the orthogonal- spatial frame.

This can readily be seen as a necessity if one restates Einstein's secondpostulate. The second ,postulate is usually, stated as "The-speed of light is thesame for every observer."

Restated, the postulate becomes "Every photon in an inertial frame .is movingat the speed of light, c , With respect to-every particle in-that inertial frame."

The corollary. then follows immediately: Every, particle in that inertial frameis also moving'at the speed of light, c , with respect to every ,photon in thatinertial frame.

In a single 3-space, this is incomprehensible; Taking two orthogonal3-spaces, it is perfectly comprehensible.

Ari:stotle's three laws of logic are incomplete, and' it is necessary'to,developa fourth law to close logic into a metalogic encompassing physics and"mnetaphysics.The fourth law has thecharacteristics shown o.n the viewgraph.

Wewill develop the fourth law shortly.

VUGRAPH OFF

4.

SUGGESTD,,.APPROACH- TO. PSYGHOTRONICS Of4(vg#4) "i i.

VTUGRAPH ON

From perception theory usingthe, percptron ,coficept, the-author has -succeeded in-deriving'a great deal of the present basis-of physics-,, as,shoWh-on this slide.

Einsteihn's postulates -of relativity have been.derived for the, special-,relativity case, and it appears that the, equivalence-principle, necessary for,general relativity,, also follows. 'The derivation of the.first two postulateshas been published. f

Newton's laws of motion -- relativistic form -- have been derived",a ndpubh shed.

A solution to the ontological problem has been derived.

In, addition,, a new- nature. of the photon has been, revealed. A, Photon: issimply an ordinary 3-dimensional particle existing in, a 3-space that is orthogonal ito the laboratory 3-space frame. Thus -the photonic particle hasa -2-dimensionalintersection with thelaboratory observer's, spatial frame, andit:appears as a waveor2-dimensional entity to-"him. Astationary particle in thelabqratory frame

appears as a photon.to the brthogonal- spatial frame. (This can readily be seen as a necessity if one restates Einstein's second A

postulate. The second postulate is usually stated as "The speedof light is the 4'same for every -observer."

Restated, the postulate becomes .Every 'photon in an inertial frame:is movingat the speed, of light, c,, With, respect to every particle in- that inertial frame."

The dorollary" then follows immediately: Every, particle inthat-i nertia l frame,is also moving at the. speedof light, c, with respect tO eVeryphotoniin thatinertial frame.

In a single 3-space,, this is incomprehensible. Taking two orthogonal.3-spaces, It is perfectly comprehensible.

Aristotle's three laws of logic are incomplete, and it is ,necessary ,to developa fourth law to close logi -into a metalogic.encompassing physics and- meta physics.The fourth law has the characteristics shown on the viewgraph.

We- will develop the fourth law shortly.

VUGRAPH -OFF -

4.

-A _SUGGESTED APPROACH TO PSYCHOTRONICs (CONT'D)

VUGRAH ON (Vg#5)

Everett'S ,many-worlds 'interpretation of quantum mechanics, with which-very few physicists are familar, in fact provides a4 needed- correction to theconventional interpretation of relativity, and it allows a theoretically -sound-basis to be constructed for psychotronics.

The conventional interpretation of relativity considers only a single-Observer at a time.

But if you can convince yourself of as simplea thing-as thatboth you andI exist simultaneously, regardless of how we move with respect to each other, thenI assure you that physics is startling]y differeit from what you studied in theordinary university physics 'book.

Everett, originally a student of the world-renowned physicist, Dr. John ,

Wheeler at Princeton-, for:his PhD thesis considered the Iproblem of- multiplesimiultaneous observers and worked out what this, did to physics. His highlyinnovative thesis&provided a totally new interpretation of quantum physics, andit defined a startling new kind of reality in which--all possibilities are physicalreal and, exist. This new physics ois indeed very strange, butit is totallyconsistent with the entire experimental basis of physics today.

The present author discovered that all his, perception theory -could be fittedprecisely onto Everett's many-worlds interpretation. On :that basis, a- theory orschema of biofields was derived which provides an approach toward a unifiedfield theory. In fact, it predicts that any kind'of field can be turned into anyother kind of field, merely by correct and precise time synchronization. It also'offers a physical and- exact model of mind and mental phenomena.

On this basis, a framework can be provided for psychotronics which isconsistent with what we know of ordinary physics, but which does nOt containmany of the limitations of conventionalI physics;

VUGRAPH OFF

5'

A FUNDAMENTAL CORRECTION TO CLASSICAL LOGiCd

(vg#6)VUCPAPH ON

Let us now make a fundamental correction to Aistotle's three laws of logic.

First, one does not have a thought pet se; one has a "'perceivedthought,"There is a perception operatibh involved whenione 'thiniks.

There is no independent existence to :physical: phenomena either; there is aperception operation involved' when-one perceives or observes physical phenomena.

Further, it takes a finite piece of time fot the perception proces s to occur.So let us impose this ctiterion upon logic itself; i.e., so as to constitute "logicalperception" or the "logic of perception" or the "perception of logic." We beginwith Aistotle's third law of logic, A or not-A, the law of the excluded-middle.

We Willihskst that there is- n6 such thing as A per se, but that rather thereisa perceived A where A is the output of the perception process; Similarly, thereis no such thing as not-A, but rather there is a perceived not-A where not-A isthe output of the perception process.

We wil] use a little square box symbol as an abbreviation for the fact thatperception, has occurred, and, anything written inside the, boxrepresents the output

of:that perception operation. One can speak of the little -box either-as mentalperception and describe thought, or'one can speak of it as physical detection anddescribean instrumentation system :that does detection and measurement.

Also, since each little box requires a finite time to occur, one must carefullykeep up with the individual little pieces of time, the delta t's. -Sometimes one willget tired of writing little delta t's, and in that case 'one will just Write :the number ofeach one as a subscript and the delta t will be understood.

So applying this to Aristotle's third law, we have A perceived or outputted intime one, and not-A outputted in time 2. Note that to ascertain that A1 and not-A2actually differ requires a third operation, in time 3, that is assumed by the exclusiveor symbol.

Looked at in this Way, Aristotle's third law actually is the law of monocularity;i.e., it states that only one-thing at a time is perceived. Actually we had assumedthis when we assumed that perception was a finite process, so it is nice to find thatAristotle's third law justifies our assumption, once we understand the third law.

The exclusive or symbol assumes a third operation, in time three (not shown),whereby it is determined that perception output one and output two actually differ.But such an operation itself requir@ inultiocular perception -- i.e., the .collL -ing

of two outputs at once -- and that in itself is a violation of Aristotle's third law. Thelaw as Written contains its own cohtradiction, as indeed does each of the other two,laws when. one examines them meticulously. It can only be established as true byinvoking or involving an operation wherein it is not true.

4(

ATUNDAMEN.TAL CORRECTiONTO CLASSIGAL 3LOGIC U .

(continued),

So-now let-us write what-we, did-in time three toestablish-zthe third -law..

Wegathered up what had ,beenper-cepton ,output in time one -;-A1 -- andi

What'had been perception output in-time 6 -- A2 , which, just yet We, do notknowis different -from A or not - and shoved them both through the perceptin -process,gettifg only one output -- let us -call it B ,-- in time three. By the nature-6f B in timethree, we say that the outputs ii times o neand twodiffefror hot. In either.tlie-one rtimen w6,. there is-noirdicationb wihatsoever of difference-.orsameness.existing betweefnoutput-o'neand output two'..

Now note that,, in time three, if A and .fiot-A2 are precisely opposite - i.e.,

If one, operati6fialis simply the.negative obf theother--then B3 will-be, zero., If,A and- not-A2 are not-preci'gely opposites, then 1B3 wil have a finite value.

But-if;B3 is zero,, that:i§ the samneas saying that perceptiond6es.n6it occur.Hence perception6of difference. between A1 and not-A 2 does not occurAn time 3 .ifIA1 and'A2• are precise opposites.• (I

Sobhere we have arrived at the identity of opposites. If no perception occurs (.in, time three, then there i's no perception of difference between A1 and' not-A2 intime 'three.

And.this cofistitutes a fourth lawof logic: the law of :the boundry, -or theboundary Identity-of exact opposites. All that is necessary to identify opposites isto lose all perceptual distinction between- them. And that is accomplished"bymultiocular perception, of perceiving the presence~of both at once, hence theabsenceof either exclusively present. To a monocularprcess, multiple presence of pairedopposites is not perceivable;, hence no single one is perceived,, which means thatnothing is, perceived I

VUGRAPH OFF

7.

FOUR, ;LAWS1 OF L OGICAL ;-THOUGHT,

" . . .(vg#7)

VUGRAPH ON

The first three, laws of logic, after Aristotle, are shown on this vugraph,along:with the prqposed fourth law.

The first three 'lawsinvOlve perceptual output entities which are mohocularo.I e., one-at-a-time has been perceived.

The ,fourth law involves' perceptual output entities which are multiocular.I.e., two-at-a-time, have beenperceived.oroutputted.

If one would completely describe perception, it is not possiblRe todo0 so withmonocular laws only. For in that case, the multiocular dase-is not covered by a,logic ,thdtis .monocular ,only'.

Thefirst three laws, being, monocular, are incomplete, and a multiocularlaw is 'required if a Complete logic, is to be, formedl.

The fourth law, as writtenis, the required multiocular law, and 'it completesformal'logic.

We willalso see that the first three laws have been inappropriately -named'.

VUGRAPH -OFF

t

THE LOGICIAN'S'DREAM: A CLOSED METALOGIC.

(vg#8)VUGRAPH' ON

The new system of logic is shown here'.

The system is-closed.

All present paradoxes contradictions of one,or moreof the first threelaws -- are. resolved by the fourth lawj which coritains the negation of each ofthe first three laws.

Note also that the hidden time three operation -- which has actually, beenthe application of the fourth law all along, - is, implied by the cofinecting symbolin each of the firstthree laws. Identity or, non-identity between time one and time,two 0utputs can- only be eStabliShed in a time- three. operation. The fact thatA or not-A exclusively exists can only, be established by a separate operation whichestablishes that nothing else is there.

Since these laws refer to perceptual operations, one can, think of themoperationally, or vectorially.

To-ciose the vectorial system prescribed by the first three laws, the opposite(or negation of -each of the:three vectorial statements must be present. I.e., -this-follows simply from the definition of what constitutes a closed system.

Since the fourth law contains ,the negation of each of 'the first three laws,then the four law system is indeed closed, and the logician's dream of a closedmetalogic is realized. Further, anything which c6ntradicts any combination of thefirst three laws automatically is covered by the fourth law.

We thus should 0b able -to ,resolve all paradoxes.

VIUGRAPH OFF

II ' ~ 9.

A 'PHYS] SAL :EXAMPLE

(vg4#§)VUGRAPH ON

For a physical example:

Take the surface: of a cube in deep space. Call the cube, thiny, a Z3-D-concept. Call the empty space around the cube nonthing, meaninga 3-bD nohthingor absenc'bf thing.

If one is standing inside the cube and looks at the boundary surface of thecube, one cannot find a single piece of that boundary surfact that-does not belong.toatily to the cube. S6oone can very reasonably proclaim that by the first threelaws of logic each piece of the boundary belongs totally to the cube, to .i-,4

But if in a different operation one is 'standing outside the cube, one cannot )

find a single piece of that boundary surface that does, not belong entirely to the,space surrounding the -cube. So in thiscase, one can claim by the first three lawsof lgic that the boundary surface belongs totally to nonthing.

Then in a third operation- one can state that, bythe first law of logic, eachand every piece of the boundary surface is identical to itself, and of course-onehas just identified what.was thing with what was nonthing.

Specifically, what wa's thing in perception time one and what was nonthingin perception time two have been identified, by all,distinction, and separation'between'them being removed,/in time three.

Andall one has really donie is apply the fourth law of logic, the law of thej boundary.

Every single perceived thinghas a boundary, where it-both begins and endsits exclusive: presence in perception output. And at that boundary, the fourth lawapplies. Thusthe law is universal.

'The fourth law defines a boundary.,

VUGRAPH OFF

I" 0

=' 10.

THREE EXAMPLES 'OF. FOURTH.LAW

(vg#10)'VjGRAPH ON-

Here are three more examples that have -baffled mathematicians andlogicians.

All of these are simply boundary statements -- i.e., statements- involving:the fourth law of logic.

Since logicians used' only the first three laws, none of these statementsis acceptable or understandable. By the fourth law,, there is no problem withthese tatements.

The first merely refers to -the operational boundary between the operation,used to establish "truth" and the operation used to establish "falsity." There is Ianother class of operation where neither truth nor falsity exclusively applies.

E.g., take the proposition "It is raining or it is not raining."'

To state the proposition is 'to jimply that you yourself can see or ufnderstandboth conditions at once, but that you Will extract one or the other separately, (

The other two:examples have corfiparable meanings. (

VUGRAPH OFF

11.

At

NEW-DEFINITION ZOF ZERO (

(vg#l1) _\tUGRAPH ON'

To a m6nocular perception process, multiple presence constitutesabsence of "the exclusive presence of any-particular one. 4

Therefore such a multiple -presence is monocularly ,uhperceivable, and 4hence becomes a zero to a monocular detection process. I

This allows new definitions of zero, and"a solution tothe problem of nothing.

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to the briefer:

I.e., consider that a mbnocular detection process, asks the question, "Isthere a single exclusive thing present inmy input? " '

If the answer is yes, an output is generated and a perception occurs.

if the answer is no, no output is generated and perception does not occur.

Tl- ;nswer "No," occurs in two fashions: total absence, or presence oftwo or more simultaneously. For either of these cases, monocular perception givesno output, and' perception does ntoccur. I.e., the "absence Of perception" occurs.

Now note that the monocular perceptron cannot tell any difference in, the twoinput conditions. To it, there is no difference between- the two conditions.

The lack of difference atall constitutes identity. Thus to ainonocularperception process, condition oneAs identical to condition two.

That in fact derives 'the fourth law of logic. Total absence and total,presence are identical insofar as a monocular detection prodess is concerned.

12'.

SYNCHRON4ICI OF, 0CONCEPTS

VUGRAPli ON

licAs is. so often -the case, two -persons, appear to haiveb derived the new5

Bearden from perceptron theorV.

IHubbard from manifold theory.

WGAIIP

VUGRAPH ,ONj

Hubbard'&s profound' Work- fully-substanitiates the neowlogic and th&4new reality paradigm4. i

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to briefer:,1

Per private, correspondence with Dr. J. ubbard., Direttor, AssbciationIfor Distinguished Ameorican. Scientists, P.-O. Box 805 , Saratogak, CA 95070.

14,.

Two :-SLIT E:XPEkRIMENT' ((v9#i14

. , YU AVjGPH ON," ' """

This''experiment is fundamental to all f modern .physics.

Fey nman, 'Nobel prize winner in physicsj, .has stated that -,n6- physicfst-,ndetstand's this experiment. " ""

'The reason is that it cannot be monocularly comprehended. I .e,., 'the

firSt three laws,-of logic cannot explain it. ".Thefourth law. cA n and does,,

In -the experiment, electrons are emitted from a source .and tra-vel6 past~adoubly-sit wall region. on theirWay to a screen. The apparatus is shielded against

light. If one belieyes that the emitted eldctron is a little 3-d,, particle-, muchlikea little baseball,, then it should go-through one of -the slits and- not -the other., 'Itwould then -hit "the screen at-one of the. tWo 'spots indicated ias the expecteddistribution, With. a little scatter from those that chip the. edge of the:slit a bit. 1Electrons which do, not hit the holes but strike the Wall are absorbed.

The 'expected Pattern is notat all what one gets.

Instead', the actual pattern is. essentially the same as what one Would get'if each ,electron Were a wavefront, and that Wavefront passed through both, slitsat-orie. However, each electron still strikes ,the screen in only one point; thedistributionof'these points, fits the actual distribution pattern shown.

And that blew their minds in- physics. They , didnt believeit,at first, so theyset up a, photon gun and hit each ,and every electron with a photon as -it left theemitter source and started over toward the two-slit region. 'That is, 'they determinedprecisely when a little 'electron was on theway,, and the fact that'it was like a, littlebaseball and in just.one place,. And this,:time the electron ohlywent through a single.slit, and it gave the expected pattern .after all. And'when the experiment was repeatedand only a fraction of the electrons were hit with photons, then a. mixture of thetwo patterns emerged.

It is simpleto mathematically describe the 'results, but noone hasunderstoodwhy things 'happenedas they did in this experiment.

The principle of complementarity evades the 'issue. That principle is 'simply,a monocular statement that deals Withone aspect of the problem at a time -- i.:ewith the determined,, exclusive, monocular.p only. It~does not apply to the preseinor to the future.

If one'thinks in terms of the present, then the third law of logic is Violated andCthe fourth law applies. The two states -- 2-D, wave and 3;-D corpuscular - bothexist simuicAneously in the present,, but nonexclusively. That requires two simiultaneousstates, and that automatically means .that determination or ,Prception hs not0o .

TWO-SLIT-EXPERiMIENT (.

(continued)

Thus in physics tens]that becomes probabilistic andundetermined, -and thatis.automatically a WaVe._. coacept., I.e..j. waves.are' not stuck:in one place and:determinedor localized, sothey exist in the present and not the :past.

On theother-hand, when a selection or determina'tion iS made..on the electron,that is adifferentiating or separating,,perception operation, hence itis in the, past.'And that is, aut matically a -3-D corpuscle concept +.-a localizing or fixihg concept.So When the electron has not been separated into single state butremains indUal-state, it can-act as' a wave. In that case it easily passes through- both slitsat once. But when it has been forced intoa selection or separatingperception, thatmakes it single-state, and in that case it:passes through only one-slit.or the other.When the electron strikes the-screen', regardless of whether it is dual-state orsingie-state,, the screen forces a selection upon it, and so the electrondbecomes ,single-state and thus hits in only one spot on thb screen at once.

And that is the explanation-of the two-slit experiment, that no one understands.JThe reason it has not been understood- is that the ansWer wasnot present in the firstthree laws of logic. It requirest the addition of the fourth law :to complete theexplanation of the experiment. (

And photons 'do the same-thing, as indee d do all neutrons, .prti0ns, and otherfundamental particles.

So. things, nothings if you will, can. be-processed in ,the two-states -identified-as-one-so-none-bserved state. They can-be amplified, recorded,,put on tape, etc.

,The two-slit experimental apparatus is a real gadget, and it works. It isa device,. So one can build devices that process entities Whichare intwo nnexclusive-states-at-bnce. To our monocular detection gadgets andmonocular theory, such entities are unobserved and hence are zero. They are purevacuum. Put space. Pure nothing. But very real indeed, and -they do physicallyexist, but multiocUlarly ratfher than monocularly.

VUGRAPH OVF.

16.

TPSYCHOTRONIC-DEVICE:., SPACE, (gUITON)AMPLFIIR

It is now possible to- speak Of a "'piece of nothing, #' that we will call aguiton, . ,A quiton will be defined as "the -smallest piece of nothings,, 'that still does, n6i&(oocularly,appear as, a, perceived thing.,"

Collection of a sufficient number ofquitons results in breaching a :threshold,so that a thift results.

el., olecting al of one type of thing -- quitons -- reaches the boundary- -j

where it turns fitoits ,own oopposite, by- the fourth law of logiC. .

Thus in any situation-involving a, particulari'zed n6thing, collecting enoughpieces oftthat nothing eventually exhausts the nothingi set-and reaches its boundary,,whereupon it is a thig.

That is really little 'different from collecting all nondimensional poifnts in a

particular sequence and 'finding you now have a one-diniensi6nal line: segment, orcollecting all th6 pieces of spacetimewarp in a 'particular region and discovering'thatyou, have now a mass.

A device can easily be constructed to process dual-natured- 6r binocular .

entities (quitons), which are monocularly zeroes, while excluding monocularentities. Thus one can builda space amplifier or quiton amplifier or vacuum amplifier.

The vugraph shows a schemefor doing that. Two single-state excludersin series feed or input to an ordinary single-state amplifier or processor -in a shieldedcontainer. The output is fed into a device which -will rotate the dual-state entityor field so that an ordinary- field can result. I.e., one side or the other of thedual-state output will be exclusively presented in 3-space.

VURAP OFF

Note, to, briefer

Consider "nothing" in the multiocular sense; i.e., as multiplepresence.

Collecting all the multiple present things intoone reaches the boundary.But one thing is perceivable by monocular perception. Therefore the one-thing

just collected now can be outputted by perception, and it is.That -is how the unperceivable turns into the perceivable when one reaches the

boundary.

17. .:

-PSYCHOTRONIC DEVICE: SPACE (QUITON) AMPLIFIER

(Yg$15)VUGRAPH ON

It is now possible tospeak ofta "piece- of nothing," that we will call aquiton- -A quiton Will be defined as "the smallest piece of nothiig, that still- does-'not monIobulafly appear as a perceived thing.,"

Collection ofi a sufficient number of quitons results in breaching a threshold-,so that a -thingq, results.

I e., collecting all-of bne type of thing -- quitons -- reaches the boundarywhere it turns into its own opposite, by ,the- fourth law of-logic.

ThUs in any situation involvirig a particularized nothing, collecting enoughpieces of that nothing eventually exhausts thenothing set 6nd ' reaches its boundary ,

whereupon it is-a thing.

That is really little different from collecting all nondimensional' points in a

particular sequence and finding you nr ow have a One-dimensional line segment, orcollecting all the pieces of spacetime- warp in a particular region-and discoveringthat you-,have now a mass.

A device can easily be constructed to process dual-natured or binocular (enttities (quitons), which are monocularly Zeroes, while excluding monocularentities. Thus One can build a space-amplifier or quiton amplifier or vacuum amplifier.

The vugraph shows a scheme for doingthat. Two single-state excludersin series feed or input to an ordinary single-state amplifier or processor in a shieldedcontainer. The output is fed-into a device which will rotate the dual-state entityor fieldso that an ordifiary field can result. I.e., one side or the other of thedual-state output will be exclusively presented in 3-space.

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to briefer

Consider "nothing" in themultiocular sense; i.e., as multiple presence.Collecting all the multiple present things into one reaches the boundary.But one thing is perceivable by monocular •perception. Therefore the one-thing

just-collected now* can be outputted by perception, and it is.That -is how the unperceivable turns into the perceivable when one reaches the

boundary.

17. [

Now, if one believes he cannot sense th e anenergy fields, then he can'.t.One can turn the entire anenergy detection system in-, his body off with'hisunconscious mind. The negative psi effect is a Weli -documented effect inparapsychology. There-are goats~as wellas sheep., ;Some persons do worseon psi tests than chance would possibly allow. They-are the goats. They- exhibitthe negative psi effect,, for unconsciously they-want to §how you that psi doe:snot Work, so badly that they use psi effects to do-worsethan is possible by chance.

At any rate, the human sensory system can get a tingle,.from the anefiergy -field,generated by the flat c0il of wire in the Hieronymus machliie's output. What type oftingleone gets depends upon one's own type of body sensory tuning. It madyfeel asif the fingers on the plastic plate are in. thick syrup. Or as if the plastic plate were Ivibrating,. Or it may feel greasy in a peculiar way. 'And the negative person doesnot -get~a tingle at all.

The Hieronymus ,machine 'has been built, by many persons, and it works forthose'whoare not negative. It processes entities ,that existin the-dual-statej, orthatobey the fourth law of logic. And one can do Some almost magical'things-

with -thesedual-state nonthings, these, nothings, -if one,ets "his mind- to it.A; all of you reariZe,;that is what psychotronids isalla bout.

VUGRAPH OFF

19.1 I 1[' . . . i I "1 IN* I" "' ' L'i~ li ! 'l .... :' I~ "'i "' m l "l '°i 'i:' "{ i:'' ...

PROBABILITY:., THROW OF ADIE

(vg# 1.7)VUTGRAPHE',ON

The fourth law of logic is absolutely indispensable in physics. One usesit every-day and'does not realize it.

E.g., fin probability. One doesn't have.much.physics left without probability.,

But what/after all is probability? The lfbundations of mathematics fell6ws havenever succeeded in answering-that question to their satisfaction. If you read thedefinitions presently advanced, you will find they essentially say, "'Probability; isprobability, every fool knows that ."

Let us usea very simple example to get at the answer to that queston.Let us use the face of a die' turned uP. 'How can I model that, before the die is'thrown?it Now one can only think by operationalism. To operate and output somethingis to automatically putit in the past. Its happened, iO s gone, the moment you doit. To. perceive an object is to. put it in the past. To determine it is to put it in' the.past. To observe it is to put'it in the past. There is no observed, perceived,detected, mpasured, or determined present. That is, there is no separated,exclusive, determined present such as is specified by the first three laws of logic -4ithe fourth law is the present, by the way -- but in observational physics which deals.with determined, observed past phenomena, there exists no present. The ftiturehas not yet been observed, so it also is the -unobserved'. Only the 'past' therefore isthe observed. How then can one ever .hope to. model the-unobserved present or theunobserved future?

If I look at this little problem-I'm disciissing -- the future 6bserved die withone face up -- that is in the past. When I see it, it i's in the past. When I think it,

it is in the past. So if all I can observe, think, or perceive is- the die in the past,how can I ever model it in the future?

It's very simple!

If I drive any problem set to its absolute boundary limit, it turns into itsp owli opposite by the fourth law of logic, by the law of the boundary. So how do I

do that With this problem of the die?

The problem set is specified by the condition "the perceived die with oneface up"; that is..the -most recent past. NOW' simply find.&ll the most immediatepasts you can get to meet the condition specified, and gather themJall up ogether,and they then must turn into and comprise precisely the&opposite, the most'imiebdiatefuture. In this problem set, I can'constructand collect six such pasts, each (consisting of the perceived die with-one face up. So by the fourth law of logic.,

J' those six-"faces up" collected together as an ensemble represent the future andin'faict are identical to the future. The "present,' which -is simply'the boundary.. ... ... .2.0.

PROBABILITY: THROW OF A- DiE

(continued)

betwee-n the -most inumediate past and the most immediate-future, was specifiedby-applying; the fourth.law Of logic in the first ,place: identity of m6st immediatepast and most immediate future, being binocular, is unperceived, butit'is ,thepresent nonetheless. So that is what probability is -- an application of the-fourth law, of logic, so 'the most immediate future can be rep-esented interniisof the most immediate past -- and physicists andhathematiciafns have been doingthat ever since they have .been-doing physics and mathematics.,

Without the fourth law of logic, there exists n6-rigorous logical basi'sforpr6bability!V

So the fourth-law is a very useful law indeed. W.e have just failed to,realiZe that-we have 'been applying it all, along.,

vuGRAPH OFF

21/ 21

i2 .-.21.

SOLUTION TO ONTOLOGICAL PROBLEM -

VUGRAPH- ON (gl8

The ontological problem can also be solved as shown on this chart.I

VUGRAPH OFF

22..

THE PERCEPTRON APPROACH (

(vg#19) 4

VUGRAPH ON

This slide shows the basic perceptron approach.

It gives a new definition of a fundamental particle.

It is also an application of the fourth law of logic.

Since it contains all four laws, the concept is capable of modelling everythingwhich can be perceptually thought.

By the fourth law, since it can model everything which can 1e perceived,it can also model everything which cannot be perceived as well.

Thus the concept enables one to model everything, perceived or unperceived.

(PAUSE WHILE VUGRAPH IS READ)

VUGRAPH OFF

23.

EINSTEIN"S SPHERICAL MODEL OF THE COSMOS

(vg#2O0)

VUGRAPH ON

Einstein's spherical model of the cosmos is a primary example ofa holographic universe.

In such a closed spacetime, each point inside thE universe .is alsoat the extreme end of the universe in any direction. [

Thus the entire "physical universe" is totally outside any of itsinternal points, and totally inside each internal point as well, in this model.

That is an application of the fourth law of logic. The total internalis identical to the total external.

The adjective "total" merely moves one to the common boundary betweenthe operational concepts of "internal" and "extcrnal." At that boundary, thereis no operational distinction between one and the other.

VUGRAPH OFF (

Note to briefer:

The universe ciosure is not limited to just one occurrence or onerate of closure. In fact the universe can then proceed to close again withinthe same local 3-space. E.g., a gradual macroscopic closure due to gravityfield (or causing it!) constitutes the "external universe," and a secondextremely sharp microscopic closure due to electric field (or causing it!)

constitutes "electric charge." The two together constitute a fundamental chargedparticle of mass. The polarity of charge is determined merely by which of two

directions the second closure was made in. Considering an electron as sucha dually closed entity, it is readily seen that the closure ratios are all that isbeing referred to by Feynman's condition. In this model, the same parameter betweengravitational force and electrical force will obvio.sly exist as is between the

radius of the electron and the radius of the closed macroscopic universe, only ininverse fashion. This meets Feynman's condition. The model is also consistentwith Santilli's proof that the electric field and the gravitational field are either thesame thing or partially the same thing. In our model, an electric field is in fact

a highly compressed gravitational field. Proper time synchronization shculd allowfantastic antigravity effects to be realized, and thus electrogravitics has a basisin this model. -

24.

BASIS FOR A UNIF1ED FIELD THEORY: SOLUTION TO FEYNMAN'S PROBLEM

(vg#2 1)VUGRAPH ON

Feynman pointed out that unified field theory must explain theappearance of the same parameter 1042 in the respective force ratios andradiuses of the electron and the macroscopic universe.

The dual closure hypothesis does this.

It also is consistent with Santilli's proof.

VU ...RAP. OFF

Note to briefer:

The implications of such a model are potent. A totally newinterpretation of electromagnetic fields is conceivable. Electrogravitics,Kozyrev's time oscillations, T. Townsend Brown's rock transducers, andCurtis's oceanic electrical fields are some fruitful aspects for analysisand exploitation.

25.

REALITY IS HOLOGRAPHIC

(vg#22)

V(JGRAPH ON

From every nook and cranny it is shouted out that reality isholographic rather than a Cartesian cube,

VUGRAPH OFF

26.

MASS IS A TIME-DIFFERENTIATOR

(vg#2 3)

VUGRAPH ON

The most fundamental aspect of the concept of mass is that it occupiesspace -- i.e., that it is three-dimensional.

Mass thus is a time differentiation of Minkowskian spacetime L3 T.

Applying the fourth law of logic, a thing does that which it is, and isthat which it does.

Thus mass is a time-differentiator.

VUGRAPH OFF

41

'A;'

1 .A

27.

Ii _-

MIND IS OBJECTIVE

(vg#24)

VUGRAPH ON

But in time differentiating, mass loses the time dimension.

Therefore one cannot see "time" with a mass perceiver, but cansee L3 (spatial extension).

Therefore one also cannot perceive mind, because the plate (time)on which it was sitting is lost in the perception process.

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to briefer:

Thus Descartes was both right and wrong. He was right in that mindis not present in physical detection output, but wrong in believing mind andphysical phenomena were therefore totally separate. E.g., time does notexist except with respect to between one L3 perception and another, if L3 (is all that is outputted. I.e., "physical" time is totally relative, totallymental, and exists only in memory. Mind is thus present in L3 T 4-dimensional

physical phenomena and is discretized along with time discreteness in theHeisenberg uncertainty relation A E .4 t h/21Yt.

In fact, one can even take the extreme view that time is mind, with

some justification. Because to establish a delta t, a "former" L3 must beestablished and compared to a more recent L3 . The only place the former L 3

can rigorously be found is in memory. An event, once occurred, is in the pastand is forever "gone" to the observer. Only in his memory can it be said toexist. But then so is the observation also of the "most recent L3 . " Thusrigorouslylobserved phenomena may be said to exist only in memory, and there is

only a past, never a present. Thus a full 4-D mind is inseparable from perceived

physical phenomena, and mind is quantized along with quantum change in the$"physical world."

2(

BIOFIELD CONCEPTS

(vg#25)VUGRAPH ON

To understand the hyperframe approach to fields, one mustunderstand dimensionality of intersections in n-dimensional space.

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to briefer:

Hubbard's manifold theory also derives these principles shown on theslide, -

I :

(142

2

29. .2

i-i

MASS,,FORCE, AFT) 3-3) ROTATION

VU GRAPH ON (vg#2 6)

It is well known that a moVing mass can be considered as existing in a3-D space which is bent away from the line of motion of the mass as seen inthe laboratory frame.

As the velocity of the object approaches C, the angle of bending approaches900 .

From the bottom left fig-re it can be seen that a force in the laboratoryframe, applied to the moving mass along its direction of motion in thelaboratory frame, only affects the mass ivi the mass's bent frame with a 4

projected portion. ,;

To the laboratory observer, the mass's resistance to the disturbingforce applied seems to have increased;thus to him the inertial mass of theobject seems to have increased. I.e., if it's harder to push, its resistanceto pushing must have increased.

But in the bent frame, the object's mass has not increased.

The bent frame effect is why the mass of an object increases to oneobserver but not to the other.

* When the bent frame can be rotated a full 900, no force applied by thelaboratory observer can accelerate it further, because the applied forcehas zero resultant in the bent frame where the mass actually is. Thus themass (resistance to pushing) appears infinite to the laboratory observer, vwhile to the bent observer it is still exactly the same as iL always was. '

However, the mass's intersection in the lab frame is now 2-dimensional.Since only 3-d objects can have mass, the object is "massless" to thelaboratory observer,

So here we have a paradox; Zero mass is identical to infinite mass.

This is perfectly in copsonance with the fourth law of logic.

The absence of any single finite mass actually permits two indistinguishablesolutions: The absence of any 3-d mass at all, and the presence of more thanany finite mass at all, The two opposites are identical on the boundarycase*.

Thus a photon has zero mass because it is a two-dimensional object andP only 3-dimensional objects have mass. A photon also has infinite mass

because it cannot be accelerated along its direction of travel.)A'

jl Further, a photon is a perfectly ordinary 3-D particle existing in a3-space that is one orthogonal turn away from the laboratory 3-space.

VU GRAPH OFF (

30.

k; __ __

PI - BENDING OF 3-D FRAMES

(vg#2 7)VUGRAPH ON

Two consecutive orthogonal bends can be accomplished insuch a manner that spatial closure back upon the starting point isaccomplished.

If a 2-D wave is travelling through such a dimensional closure andcloses back exactly in phase, it can travel forever in such a closed-in space.That closure, called a formon, constitutes a stable particle.

It also represents two c velocities multiplied together to give c 2 .A particle mass, which from its mass content refers to this closure of2-D into a 3rd dimension, thus contains a c 2 term. When the particle isseparatea into its constituent 2-D photon waves, the c 2 term is recovered.

That is why E m 0c 2 constants of proportionality disregarded.

VUGRAPH OFF (k

Note to briefer:

If a 2-D wave in a double orthogonal bend closure closes on itselfslightly out of phase, that constitutes a formal , a form that is unstable, i.e.,an unstable particle.

If the closure is greatly out of phase, the formal is so unstable that itconstitutes a resonance in particle physics.

31]

31.

QUARKS

(vg#2 8)VUGRAPH ON

It is proposed that a quark is an unclosed two orthogonal bends, asshown in the left figure.

Three quarks, however, can make a complete universe closure, as shownin the right figure. And that is a fundamental particle.

Thus single quarks do not independently appear as particles in experimentsbecause they are neither particles nor waves in the classical sense.

Their indirect effects, however, should be detectable in a properlydesigned experiment.

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to briefer:

Thus quarks have not been independently detected to date because theexperiments have been designed to detect particles or waves.

Under the proper conditions, a quark as postulated herein should be able toseemingly annihilate a photon in the proper type of collision.

__ 32.

EVERETT"S MANY-WORLDS INTERPRETATION OF QUANTUM MECHANICS

(vg#29)

VUGRAPH ON

Both mind and matter -- metaphysics and physics -- can be preciselymodelled in Everett's many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Specifically, if one selects an infinite number of orthogonal 3-spaces(L 3 's ) which all share the same 4th dimension in their 4-spaces, thenbeing, mind, matter, life, and psi are all modellable in a precise and exactfashion by physics.

VUGRAP OFF

Z..

,{ - 4

33. 1

_ - - ii

SPACET[ME CURVATURE IS TRICY

(vg#30)VUGRAPH ON

But bent spaces give strange results.

A thing in one frame can be something quite different in anotherframe.

just as the mass of a moving object does not increase withrespect to its own inertial frame.

What a thing is, is relative to the perceiver and his perceiving frame.Entirely. It can even be nothing in a great many frames.

Now do you see how "nothing" can contain "everything?"

VUGRAPH OFF

(

!I;

34

CLUSTERED ORTHOGONAL WORLDS

(vg#3l1)

VUGRAPH ON

A sample of this is shown here.

A inental object is quite physical in its own bioframe.

VIJGRAPH OFF

35.1

BIOFIELDS: TIME-CLUSTERED ORTHOFRAMES

(vg#32)VUGRAPH ON

On this slide is a convenient list of how objects appear in differentframes.

This schema, selected from Everett's MWI, allows modelling oflife, death, mind, matter, and psi. It also allows one type of "field" tobe orthorotated and turned into another kind.

Such orthorotation demands correct time synchronization, ratherthan brute force energy application. In fact, orthorotation is energy- 11conservative for a single orthogonal turn.

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to briefer:

E.g., photon emission and photon absorption are orthorotbionalprocesses, 3-D to 2-D and vice versa respectively. These processes -.

are energy-conservative, but require precise time synchronization, hence 4

precise energy synchronization.

36.

'i

'I;

LIFE AND DEATH

(vg#33)

VUGRAPH ON

Here, e.g., is shown the schema for life and death.

Note that all possibilities -- everything that happened or could havehappened, and everything that will happen or could ever happen, are realand exist concretely. The same is true for all thoughts and thought worlds,and all possible thoughts and possible thought worlds.

The totality is simply all-being -- or call il God if you wish. ]Yes, Virginia, all possibilities and all formats of single 3-D reality

exist. IDemons, UFO's, fairies, Sasquatches, spirits, gods, realities,

conceptions, speculations -- each is real in its own )main. Our own"physical reality" is simply a single format -- but o! course it happens to ]be the one to which we find ourselves attached. Therefore "'physical reality"has a certain type of fundamental reality which is not normally shared by theother formats, unless a piece of one of them is orthorotated into our own (world.

Reality cannot be comprehended in terms of a single format.

Instead one must look at the format of all formats, which is formatlessby definition.

The void is devoid of void, and that is very full indeed.

Everett's many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics containsthe structure for the format-oi-all-formats.

It contains the structure for life and death as well, if we understandhow to look, and if we understand that all orthogonal worlds crosstalk.

VUGRAPH OFF

Note to briefer:

In fact what we call our own "physical reality" can be shown to be nothing (but the sum total of all the crosstalk from all the other worlds that passes throughthis particular differential zone w t

37.

(MAVERICK WORLDS

(vg#34)

VUGRAPH ON

Even the strangest conceptions and most fantastic possibilities havetheir own assigned realm of concrete reality.

These weirdos are referred to as maverick worlds.

One example is shown here, where the effect (i.e., the effect in thelaboraLofy franle) always precedes the cause (i.e., the cause in thelaboratory frame). This world would appear to run backwards to us.

By proper coherent tuning, an object in one of these orthoframes canbe orthorotated into our own frame and objectified -- and that is what theTibetian monks called a tulpa -- an objective materialization of a thoughtform. The tulpa will hardly ever be closed entirely in phase, however,and so it will almost always be unstable. UFO's, angels, imps, etc goaway. But the appearance of one of these can be entirely objective andperfectly objective traces can be left, such as photographs, broken limbs,scorched asphalt, indentations, depressions in grassy fields, etc.Any thought object can be so orthorotated, and objectified. Beings,religious figures, angels, fairies, imps, UFO's, monsters, etc can allresult.

VUGRAPH OFF

38

(

38.

ANGELS, IMPS. AND UFO TULPAS

(vg#35)VUGRAPH ON

When tulpas emerge, they emerge as cultural modulations of archetypalforms.

I.e., an infinite number of reality channels exist. The totalinstrumentation characteristics, both genetic, psychological, andphysiological, of the observer or observers who tune in the channeldetermine the noise content and the actual channel selected.

VUGRAPH OFF

z v:: 39.9

EXAMPLES OF UFO WAVES S

(vg#3 6)

VUGRAPH ON

Here are some examples of major UFO waves which show the imprintof stress upon the collective unconscious and the noise and tuning ofthe groups unconsciously tuning in the phenomena.

The psychological interpretation of the tulpa materialization isthus quite significant and revealing.

VUGRAPH OFF

(

i

° I '

40. i

SUGGESTED APPROACH: SUMMARY $' (vg#37)VUGRAPH ONg3

In summary, we have suggested an approach which can lead to theunderstanding of psychotronics. Further, it captures both the mind and thematerial universe within the same model. It is the only model proposed to datewhich does this.

Using the perceptron approach, the fourth law of logic, and Everett'smany-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, a theory of biofields can beconstructed to unit' field theory and provide a framework for some of the strangeeffects of psychotronics.

All of these parts are required, if one is to explain psychotronics.

Literally, one has to create a totally new physics paradigm -- one whichcontains the old physics, and yet contains the mind, life, hyperspaces, and a Igreat deal more. "i

Only in terms of such a new paradigm can psychotronics be comprehended.

As best I can, I have tried to put together the schema for that new paradigm,and that is what I have presented to you today. V

Thank you for your kind attention.

VUGRAPH OFF

4'

41.

Vixgraph 1

CI) CD rn_

CD rD C) D~

p~ ---, 4M

CDC) CD QI M*P1 --A

CD 1P CD CD

CD m

C/) CD

C-) CDCD - rr

m CD

P1 CD

C11o

C) P"ell

42.H(IAt

( Vu ra-ph #2

G) C) C) -V U

m C) cc -

-- q.=2() Cm' C:) --- r ~ - -

r/) '-n m- m t-4 C

C-,CD

cn C

-. AT

6 ~~Vugraph N3 -- 4

i-r C/) Mrr

C) :I IC/(l) CD

-4- C)- -

C) C-,ri7)0- C I-

m C) c,i-ri)CD0

-n -

=t

i-r

-n CD

m mC-1)

C-C)

'A--

Vugraph #4

C)Ii

70 C C) -1 C-) '- - l l) i - rn

r- rn mn C)- r Co CD~~~'m--

F-Cl) Co ~ H C:) rn H iC

CD CD CD C/) C/) C) _xj c ~ c C D CC)rf mn r -n :Z

- ~- Co Con - r C D c n l)Co--a -< cj C/') m'F_ $-4 m _n 70 CD m

__ ~ ~CD M :::o r- *-1 c )_n< _n-H i G) M C) cl) C) _ D M~~F / T

Co ) ) C_) C) <- C: 14-

C) '- >< f-) CD C) Cl C) -

___ CD--H -H -i tJ -cC) m r--

S C _ C:) M: CD =2 Mn-CD~ C) > ) C/) C

-D -- i -

m C/) )'CC)-I- 1 1 C CD Cr - n C C)

-n -r- CD -1_

:;Fi CoC C)*-Im n -n o C /) C o

C ) C HC D -:; -<n

C) Fr -C

C) C) C) P-4:73. :C)

-0 M:CoM- C/') :::

45.'

4-

( Vugraph #5_

tdJ

CD =:C/~)-a C-) C) C-) n 31 C- C= -:;a~ CD CD - FCD CD

-~C l o-n r- CD C/) CD CD P1

S C/) MCo P C/o Vo C/" C/) F- -i

M1 ---- Co) -= PC/, Pm m M m _0 CoI

=n Coz -n

-- :) C/) :z ) m70 C)

1 -n ::oC)

CD :r CD m CD D>< CD -- i

rn -<~ i-m m ____ CD

m- Mz : o .- 4 '--4

CD CD c l

r ~- r CD m : C) C__)

CP1 J> >- CD C

F- W CD :1 =-u C> CD

C o CoC

-< CD CD - -_K-c) - n c-" m

_1> C) PDCD-HF ~CD

-1--FCD -- W-4-co- -l C P C

Co~ >46.

Vugraph #6-

01

R H~

0 3. z

wo < t <

C) 0 0

or III t.i0 CoO

0O c0o17H 0

Co- -

0 co0z~l 0-j r

(I-, C:t 0- 0r

00

0 0r 0

C.4 U 120 M

00 0 0o

00-0-4 C.o 1-

P- 3-o

0 0Co '-

00

tlj

47.

V ugr a h #7

m- CDG-

C/)

---- m m P1

M. - -n -n- o D c C -- P1 CDR

r- r cH :;o

-n m >- ~I

-H -n

m CF-F--

< C ri- H -1 :2- CD C> CD C) F

-Co t= -H -n -nm -n

C/) CC) m D(0TCo Co-CD :a FR-= Co :; -n

m C): -n C CDP 1

~ )CD :Zl t= CI Li

M< -tH

FM CD CoF- C)

F--n

-< r- Co CD Co1 CD

-0 C

C -4 M )F--moC CA) >P

:9 CD

-- 0

P1 - Co * Co C

C C)

-n4

48n

m4

-a- ~ ~ C ::o ---.- -

Vu8rp1 #

t -n -nrn CD -

-T-

=C-7CCD

C-H

m z -,n >

C/') C/) CD kA U)70H I

mC-) _n _

CDC -

rn CD CD CD CD o-n -I -n -n 0 -0D

<<C CD --K4 .I

CD CD C) r m l

-0 -n n ~ ~ 0 rnm CD zz 71

m - r

CD m<-

CD-~C -n - CD)

r.-- M1-

CD

-n-CCD :;

f--i

49,.

Vugraph #

00

t71

0

ttrjj

ti 1. 7:7012

~ugraph #10

rir. -

- ~ r i C/)

~~ CD -

-~l -4

C/-)P1arn- i-Il

- CD C=) CD

CD wD Cf

d~~: --- nC)

CD- mI CD

i-n If

- -j CD P

M0 -',CD

r- i--n

CD _ C/Cl) CD C

ri-frC)

-,f.- --

I

Vugraph 1

CC

''I I'A

+ -+

++

-n

C)C.J. CD

P1 ,52.

Vugraph #12

CC

t~-n-n toWl C) - CD W

-04

Ull- ;-:i m-- C~Mx Cm M1 M C/3 . -ii

C/1) -H _0 C/ -H =r- c/, -n Cl) CD w1 P C)

CD, CD - CD ) :r> -n -0 CDmC) m_

=-- -< CO 70 C- CD mc-CD CD C)- m - - CD rn ;o rn

_/' m r- _0 -Iain r2 -j ri- Cl En r-1J

Cl) C) '- C/l) V>C)

C-) CD -- es>:: ~:r > I C) - C)

-< -n r- -n t~ P1 CD C) -Hi P1 n to C/)- -l -n r- =CD P1 C-) _

- r- -< -- m .' :;o C/3 C).t= - CD CD C) t ~ -H

t ~~~~/ CD~C) C)P -_C *11 C/ CD) Cl0 C-'

C/') 1 Cl) C/') :; Pi P1 :> C/) C-)

m T1 Dm M) rP P

D> C) r- CD) - m :P1 P19 7D::E C)i m P1 CDP

C) C) P1 CD -n -n*Tm Cl) -T P1m4C)P

C) CD CD :r 2 ~

-< CD :E C) p-4- :;Io _ :a: =P1Cl) --- I P1n:r C)

- :>=> C -fl -nl -Hi

C) -H C/1) 1 P C) CA) lC/')0

r- C) C) CD P1 P1 P1

m P1W C) GO C= P1 -< P1 CD P1 P

Cn /" -n wClb--4 1 Cl) =

C/) :;z P1 P1 P1 --H- c ) -a C) > Z 3 C) --

-n P1 P1 C) ~clC) = 4 -I := :7 %

;a C/)CD - mP P1 :P1 -H r CD P1

C1) C) PR: m1-

:r) CD) -D

P1 CD :; Cl)1)

P1 CDC)

cl) :> -nfl-:CD wl C- m

-aC/) C) C-)C/) -m

C/) C/

=1 CDC1(-H 21_; -H

53. .

vugraph #13-

-n :o m - mC)C/) 7 on P

-n m n iw=P-r- = = ~--C/) - f

I x f--4 %. rri -n CD :>_- 7 CD ~ -

rni =; o 70 C/P1 -1 "> C:)

C)1 C/) m1 CZ)

70- C/)

- 3C/) C) m - = /

-< -< *--4 -H- P1

m/P C m 7, C)

C/) -7

1 m D> C) CM rn ~C-) : Cl C/)= ml mPP -n 1

-< C-) C) C: :m

- C/) > -- q C/) C~- .-H *--4 % mr

mnm rCD '-

-- _ m C/3

CD-I a-'C -

q ~C C-H CD CD CD

-(~~ ~ ~r CD l I [T T l-C:) -nVC) m -- oC

C) C/) -n- r

-H C) CD -I m)C < C

m Cr - C D ' D

-P1 CD C)

-0 m l

Co CD- -0

P1 C 1- -) -)

)C/ ) C/)0-4 -i = -

C) C') C/)'-6-4

C-)> -4 C/

Cl)&-H ~ ClC:-P1 '-=

54.De' l

mm- MI

mm

t=

C55

Vugraph #15

-cp co

C / C ) C o

rn =rr

'-4 Co- C)

C/ C *-4r

C:i C: cn

C-C)

C-)C ) CD-~.~-

CD- -n -~C

P1 ~ ) ~ C 'C)

CD> C -)P

C) r- C) :

C/) M C- C)m nt

C / ) C) P 1

C/C)

C> r ->1-<

C/) C ) C

C-- M0 _zrnLnorC/C)

C) C) Co

P1 CD ---- I4

CD~-4 t -< .-- I -4

Co/CD C

P1 CD Co)

C) n: C)

P1 C) C>

56,.

Vugraph 416

(I p~3rn ()-ir CD

M Cat:

-H M

C/))

Ii~rr -t *

C- -i-

SC- C/C:)I

-jjC _n7;0 70F

C,

Ar~h1! JIM

C):

r nm>

I- C___

Vugra ph 4

COD CD

-n C-)m rrr

-:P C=jj

-71n C)C-) r4 -

>4 Cn~ -n 1~

:;o -- C- 4) 1 " -4 :

C-) cClCDi

-nn

C,, C rrU)) V4

CD)

C)

_ rn i -

CD

C:)'

C:1 C,)

Ti r

rcl

rrli

-J

rrri

CD86-

er q Vugraph 118

rn =E:

>r m1 rl -

rm m ~ ><- t

t o mE > <~t I - - CT )tU) C/) F -n:> : S K

r~~~jt r n ; C

:z .~ i ~m CD ~C ~ -C' rn C/

~ ~ n >j r n n -- M -c

m ')~ C/) C)r m * = #C) o r-

rnl = -o Jm o -4 - - r - m7D. ri 'C)

n (/0--- ~- (=)m C/) -, r -0

-o t-3 C/) rr m C-)>< arn (/ 'l -. O wi- m a C

M- N C/) C) C) mrn C' ri-

70 :i> C)

eli m- -i -

=) I - -4m-HCD C)z

rn-n-~ :z C)

Hi ~ ~ C/) ~-S.-)

N(3 rn rCD CD

crn

CD :1 -n

C) CDCD

c~ci rn

CD)

m 4

m C:)

M'

i59.

vuqraph 4i19

a~4 ca CD ~- ~ t

= C) = m m=r m t= :o ::- n m -- ;;o

-< 70 t= C:) 0-

rn--In Cz'= --:; :z p- i- o Co .f

m -4 C:) -r -T- C,) m m1

c-C/ m ~ Co--)~Cocm C/) m mri-a C) C:) .4

- o 7'p-0- -0E -- 4 -0<> C/ m C/) t" C)M C/) C

m~ m~ 70 C/) m m ;:o ~m C -7C-- r>m C- o- -- Xm -- I m C) -- i :: m r- C- to

C) -0 0-o :o - -,a - CD mo c H C) C) --- m CD -- I-1-

r- mn m C-):I --q C-) m qC) C) :o C/)' r. - C:) n m -' M---) M: m - -< M*

t1 ~ ::zo m Jc> . -j Hm -ai -I.1->< C- C) C) t=

;- -a -0 -- 1 -n- mC-) ) - =-nc:) -ai

m ;:o M m a: m :m --A C) c- mC--~ ) C> --- CD ; < C1

<C) = ~m -o-I - o -Imm -n r) - CO C) C C/)- C/)

a-- C) m -- -r- m-a m =~ wo - -< C C) -

C-) C) -< r-m M - C/) C-) rn

710 -0i :1 :F in' <mn m -- 1I - m -1_~~0

CD m) 2: C) C-) m D-- L ---- --ci m --- ;: C-) -- II

_ m Co- C c m m -i C)C./)o C) Co -m mm - C) C) ---:7 70

-C) -C:) -- IC/) C)0' i I

Co-1~ m C)n) --- t= m -- I

mn 0 -A-Im -T -4 -r-;; -- i m :;_; :)>

C:) p-- fmC= C-) -- m CC) C (n cn Vo :Io- 4 M -C C) 70 - C

C-) m ;:o M C) :r--i m C o

Co C/ G-1<I

C/ m: -4 o~-~j C;t

- m f- _ n

a- C/))a= Cm :a:m m m=e

C) C) r- D- Dr

m m m m= m t

m CD m I.,"C) Co) - C-) -I ~XC1

c m = Cm -Im mc rrm :;

m m Co-i ( C)

C) C) C.41 C) m-n m m

m m CCoC) C/)-

m m - -

m m

60:

.........

( Vugra ph A20 1

-n F

CD C) m - -

7K >Cl ..,r- CD

:r> rrC/) l

m CD -i M) -w ~ i-r /I :-1 1

-n-

C/1 _n C-) VnCr -- - -H

C) =Z: -4 c C-) =Cm~~ ~ C n < P1

D CD4 CD-

C- m/ C)l C

ml )-- m-r A Aa.. >C/I >< -

C) C/A

C/) Cf. C/) '- 1C) F" ri C;) NJ

C-) to C)-1 --- ~ ~ C)J

i-r C/) f )w-ri F- crC) C:

C-) .1> C) C) MC)C- CD M 1 :I:-- C: ClC= 7z i-r :2_ = -] = <

C/ / C) P-H C1 Cl)C- -

><r C/) r- D-- Ca- C)b---4 >CD -) -a

-H C) FH'4)-~- CCmr l C:) M c) M :1>

m P1 C/ M-i-C

SC:) i-r

F- Cl)

C) '-40-4

CDC:) C/)

61.

1t14

>- ~ -~ -n ,- .c0 . z<~ -- ' o txm mz i - rn -nmm'- m C) :

C-) t= Z: CD- -m C m --1 - --- 1D _- C.

-':o -n =_ r

;;a C) mC m T1

mcn C-- ) C/) ~ 7 D - m -H1

C-C, m -- :

CD~C cn -:7Dr C-i m:r m "

3- M - m -n c- -< U2G m

C--- ri-i C,,: C) --. :E: J>r >c- ::0 D> rnC)C: m >

c&n~= c ~ -C) -n mD- ~ .r ,

-~~ -C ' - CD t:a --- ICl

-D: M Ml r ) ~ r - :; -a m r0& c m CD > m Dn

C) [m ~r

> -- i rii m-m~ C:) C/) C-)

m0 :> C- ;:o _- ri- rn-r ii m 0 M - m 3- -

r, m >< C- CD -nrr -14mC-

m CDMC PU CD C/) C

:[> C) :1> C

:3: 3 -- CD CZ: C-)D CD)C =Crn-n -< :1 7C) z~)

1 .m C)

C)~~~ m r- C)- -~i ~ -cC) m:I> n r-r- CC-n C: C) w) - ) l

D C - C ) C- m -::ai c m

5D p C) C-) r- ) Cr

c- ) c' mm-1 Z m C:) -n = - c) to C:)

_0I C:) :;o C) C CDEn CD

C- rC) C-) ;; -

,:n C -n C- C

q m m- -:x - CD

-C: C)C/

- m '- D C)CD

:", m -) c,0 -I Dm MI

C) -Cn ) m C :) =: mr CEn _

Sm m m C:z M' -: 3- Z)-

ci 3 -< i-i 1 C) ~ C ,

- :) m 3n -Cm-

r, m = ~ = m

3- C Ci )_ i3m7 M: tl cC/m

-cn C) CD C:) 3-

-i ~rri. - C)C) tC) ,-o m =1 -

C-) C- -I

-0 P-C4 CD (n3-) C-) C-) C' CC

3-;: r- C)C/: -4

:ci GrCi-i -3- C:n -nm .- : -o) C

In M 3- C)C:) m m

4-4 - :z C

m 62.

( Vagraph #22

CD LD O CD ~ kA1- .. - -

* - * - M -- 0

r- M m= CD C-) C-)1m/ rP0 U) -C .r- n)ca>) C:) t=:)P1 '-

M) C)) 7 - l)

- - D> - - --- D>- -

CD C< C: ::I M4 -- _

to P1 P1 - C) I

r- 'a F 7 ;

:3: P11-=

C/) J> C) -H: 1cn 1J 1 - ) < - P

-) -0 1 > j: -n P

P1 ~ ;m o n <m <-Co~~~a CoC> )-D-

-n t f F t

C -m C/) C)

t= tvC:) t~j C

-nmi -n --o P

C: C:C) C1 -

C) C C) z n

(~~~- -H- 1 1

C/) C/) :) :[)- r:ir -i P1)

Co Co) *C)> - C

:[--H :9 _

-n m : C ) C

C) > C-) 1> U) Co)c~ -1C)

--i C:)-C)C- P1

r r 1

C/,)

-C/)

C") CD)

b--4

63.

-Vugraph 423

4W OD m cD

M C) /fm:; ::: C m

mm cri i-r

m' -r - ---

w) -- i :a m r:a: Fn P CO - C')

m/ m CD'1-H ~ nC) :)

- i-n ) C

:m1 m C:~) C)- =-C ,

m i-fZl7 C_z m m C') M-

-n > ] m -

-H: C/) m70 CD =C

m m 7 /'-' C) m~ -- M b--4

-- ) CD 7:0 _D t

m -n' -' r-r70 -Ti ml t=P1-

4- P '- CDi -H:=C-H D J 7 CD b--

r- m -n

i-fl 4 -H :-i '.

7

P1n --

-1 kAf mM -C-

M -4 --

-n w m7o-n C/)

c- -n-n

mm

64.

Cf -Vugraph #24

-< n. - m N):Z:; . z -- - -- - -> :o C "

C/ - CU--H ) C) r -:;o CD Co) M -j -- L m -<) C/

C- DMC ) ::) CD = =1 D:>C/' C-) *--- M :mm C) Amr -n, - = coi -Hi -- q - C :) m

:1> -< -- C/ C/)- -0 C/) C-) C-)mC) M)> TJ &-- -- E -4 Fi- C: C)

--c- C *-H D> C> C') MI-I :Cm D . CD :aJP F- :, m -

>: - :2 - j) m' rri * C/) :z ~ =2:FrMr = - C.= -- C) r

C)m C/ I- -aF -4 (MC CDm = .

-n, > m> y, I iz--

~C:f)e F ( _ -H:- -7'a CD --- CD C< 7z4- (Am -0 w -- --I -z C--) C: -> D v C- Ml ' --- i 1-- Fri2E-" 1 P >CD Mz M CD C ( m_ - ) (C ~t-- C) -- I 7K rE i P1m

CD Cri m1 o~( -s - ( nC-- tO-<) CP1 -2 rr Ir

C)C D -0 C m ---

*C /)l r-P >e, C: CDDPP--- -n t '- ~ PvCDC m-C mP m4^

wAm m - >C

>c ArCD) CD CD D:>~me

~C/ CDM:ri ' ) .

> -)CD __>: 1CO -to P1 m(At=( C

~ P65,

Vugraph 425

-0 CD

rrrn

m - m rn m )C/) -

t - r1 m 0/

C/) HCD C/) C/ m,1 r rnt

CD r r-H CD rn

rn'

M)- CD ) n

- 0 C) I -n

C- n CD n - n P1cD-- n

P1 CO r- C-)-

t = ) P 1i C /) :; a C )

m CD :: M C/ m)-

M) I-f C:) ~ rn-M0

C/) -H H VC)

m t= rn

: Co=E - C)C) tj C) C)-

m m0 mrn m~C

CD P1 -1mcn)

C) ~ C/)

M

-Hm

- rn

C/) P1

66.

(a Vugraph #26

mA

r1-Ti

-n

-)

m -i

> n 0-

0 -- n

C:)

>Hcnm

zn q

C~Cil

(A 1M

(67.(6A'

Vugraph tj27

-nI

rrl

0

0 W-4

C-))

CD,

rnn

-n F. -n

CD rnCA)

C-)

544

68.,

Vugraph #28

tz

01

~~cz,

N,

I 9K

vugraph42

I -n-i> --A -n

rn -<

-n) -n C

-~ C) rrn -

C) 70

70C) : C /) 7z. -<

p1-C) rn

-7 0 p -44

-n C)t

G) U)-

C1-1 CD r ~:Y l 5:CC:= C> C/1 ) C

C) to rn 'n -' 1CCD) C)i :; -z U)CD -0 V)

C-) >< ~ - '- -

-o) 7 0 p1 -c = rC) 22 C) _ -l

p1 -- 1 -- 1~

m ~ ) ~Up1 p n -n r - 4 r

-c -!:

C) C1LO -n

-n C)U) C: p1 ;vC ) C)

-< ) < C) C)

U) C)) C)i -n) p

C)~p C

- ~C) )Cp1 U) -

-4 .n C). U)p1-

-~r Mp ~-U)F- <1 =-- -- -

C) czC) C)

(C; 5; p1

C:C)

CD -- )

U)n CD

n U)CD -4CD CD

C= I -- 4 -l UD

p- 71 -<>

C ) -- 4

-- n

-C-CD rn

C/o) C=70.

4 -Vugraph #30

Co p)

-0I

m m

Fri C--)

(~-Emm

Co '--.4

-71>

Vugraph #31 I

-H-

N) -r

P--4 $-- ~ 4 -4 :--4 - -:

Co C/" C-o Co) CDCo

'-4 -0 -CD- '-t-4 :0 MC

Mo -D Co- CoCD o

( CD Fr (-) -qC) >'- m 'J

Fw r- N) ComCD t= -a ComCo~

C) =r CD ~;r-n CD~ w) -i-) )i -I Co;:

-n cD :r> -0 =r -- H 70 C

11 ri = ) - - 0 M oPC) H C Co--A- CD ' - 1 --' --- _

-m CD D> mg r CD Fri --qH)

CD Fr CD r- Co -' CL

t---4 r- I.- t

ri -0 (D- - '- C -* riC

Co * j-j< -<i M.

C/ Fr C/o =)Fi rr- t j

CD), -10

m Co

N , 72.

Vugraph #32

c C-) CD ---4 CD( m1P C) CD -Ia'a~ 0 *4 m )

CD CD CD ~ -

--4 -4 -< .- 4 "

:-r.

-4 -'4 rr -<_

0-4 P--4 m,_

i-fli-rl

C-r) CAI C-)

-. 0-4 -n-P-

C) CD

.H -rl H"

CDC

CDz A i-

-4 -4

CC)

mt=

* CO -n to --

m : m i-m1-o z0-4 C) t= -0I7 CD

C4, , -

,,-, 00 - , C) -)Co-r"T r'C;, )

C 0" C1 if -I --- T

-n =

I i

:1> 1

C) CD

0~ 0 P-I -- C~Z1M

73.I-~ ,1Lk

,,ucraph 43 : ,

CCA)

C/)

-6 -n

- rr

er'i

-C1

v-4

CD -n

C) -<,

-ri CD

C)D

-o-

Vuq ap'h 413

C/C/)

t-H T1 -ll > CD

m 72:ztoI rnFri ><m t=

;o :;o~ C/ C/') -I D-m - m c,- ri-1

zn i fl) --- M~~ M ) Go~ oDr. - i >< m M n ;;1

flu) C/) -4 =n CDC) C-) *Mn :;a -n C>

M -n

E:c/ n CD CD M~ C-)<(J

fc= ~-Hn Mn CJ r cm c Hm r

CD~ -- CD ' I

rn- ) H l)

C:l)

v <T

~~ cDC-) i-&-4 ~ m )

-H r) C75.

I -?-

AkAM

-< :2-- o -n -

CD CDP1 V

C/' m C/, = -~ -< vCD C - m : j M M fl~

mCD VC/) Co-1 -

m : m :r C/) m> - CD) -r- :r

><J m - < :m CD r- -- i -Co D M MD

m~ -> C)-]M:F) --H _ r :] 0 7

CDn c CD C -

-nt / -I) C m 4 -HmCD-1 C, mC CC-

C m 710 m ' M CD -)4

= m m M- - C -) u m C

i m M Mh

7 6 .d

Vugraph 036m LO ( C) D CD) m

C)r Cl)D n

-n C-) C-) U 2 =E: ::

M.~f C/') LO7 --

L Oi :Cz) ml 7~* - i1 z C -

CZ) r DC V m C

7) P- -4 CDCD CD -n P'-4

CD l -4 C)( ~ *

C/) m

(C0 Cl)

C/))

C/)

t --0 t --- C D0 C -CC ) ' oC -) C) LO (.Lo LOL.D -- CD - Q)L

a CD) --0

m'-C CY) U- rj-.-.- --.

mI rI :1> -c:D -n / : C/ -r-7-

3>> C)i C.')m

C) CD -<C) -

MD M mmCj"- m/ C/)C' ~e

-, (2:1 C:)

-n i-i- -n -n

C.:.. I-Zi C:) CIO :;aC)

C/)C)

CDC-H

C .)/C i i If ) [i C- - C)I-0"i C--) /)

C:) C rt C) m C) -11 C) 0' -HIri

:r---3> --r> r- I-r > -o :3 C)

z C) -'a C) ) C) -a) C) _0 C) -0---l ;;n C0 ) C- ) CD

M~C rC) cC/1 ~C) rn _C/) ICI

Vugraph #37

P1C-) -<tr-

- ~ C/ CD

I IT] C

Co:

mmt= -

CD

C:) C-)

CD=

-M-m _

CCI

CD

m _

I- C")CD C"

-I

CD -

C=)

m

CD

-1t1

REFERENCES

1. Bearden, Thomas E., Quiton/Perceptron Physics: A Theory of Existence,Perceotion. and Physical Phenomena, Defense Documentation Center (DDC)System (U.L 763210), March 1973.

2. Bearden, Thomas E., Field, Formon, Superspace, and Inceptive Cyborq: AParaphysical Theory of Noncausal Phenomena, DDC, (AD/A-005-579i8G!); 1974.

3. Bearden, Thomas E., A Conceptual Derivation of Einstein's Postulates ofSpecial Relativity , DDC, 8 October 1975.

4. Bearden, Thomas E. , Restatement of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Princinle Forthe Condition of Superposition , DDC, 8 October 1975.

5. Bearden, Thomas E., A Postulated Mechanism That Leads to Materializationand Dematerialization of Matter and to Antigravity, DDC, 8 October 1975.

6. Bearden, Thomas E., The Boundary Identity of Exact Opposites: A SimpleSolution to the Age-Old Philosophical Problem of Change, DDC, 8 October 1975.

7. Bearden, Thomas E., The Fourth Lay; of Logic, 1976 (privately published).

8. Bearden, Thomas E., The Holography of Being , (in publication, private).

9. Bearden, Thomas E., "The One Human Problem, Its Solution, and Its Relationto UFO Phenomena," Pursuit, Journal of the Society for the Investigation of the IUnexplained, January 1976.

10. Bearden, Thomas E., "Writing the Observer Back Into the Equation," addressgiven to Princeton Center for Alternative Futures, Princeton, N.J., March 5, 1976.

11. Hubbard, J., private communication.

12. The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics,- A FundamentalExposition by Hugh Everett, III, with papers by ].A. Wheeler, B.S. DeWitt,L.N. Cooper and D. Van Vechten, and N. Graham; eds. Bryce S. Dewitt andNeill Graham, Princeton Series in Physics, Princeton University Press,Princeton, N.J., 1973.

13. Charles W. Misner, Kip S. Thorne, and John Archibald Whieeler, Gravitation,W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, CA, 1973.

14. B. B. Kazhinskiy, Biolo"6ical Radio Communications, Izdatel'stvo AkademiiNauk Ukrainskey SSR, Kiev, 1962; translation available through the DefenseDocumentation Center, AD 415676.

15. S.K. Lisitsyn, "New,7Approach to the Analysis of Electroencephalograms,"in Problems of Bionics (Selected Articles), pp. 16-25, DDC, AD 730045.

6 16. Svmposium on Unidentified Flying Objects, Hearings before House Committee onScience and Astronautics, July 29, 1968.

17. Jacques Vallee, Passport to Maconia, Regnery, 1970.

18. Richard Garvin, The Crystal Skull, Pocket Book Edition, March, 1974.

19. Yakov P. Terletskii, Paradoxes in the Theory of Relativity, Plenum, 1968.

20. Milic Capek, The Philosophical Impact of Contemporarv Physics , D. VanNostrand, 1961.

21. David Bohm, The Special Theory of Relativity, W.A. Benjamin, 1965, j22. Edwin F. Taylor and John Archibald Wheeler, Spacetime Physics, W.H.

Freeman and Company, 1966.

23. David Michael Jacobs, The UFO Controversy In America, Foreword byJ. AllenHynek, Indiana University Press, 1975.

24. Brad Steiger, Mysteries of Time and Space, special archeological research byRon Calais, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Copyright 1974 by Brad Steiger.

25. Robert Bruce Lindsay and Henry Margenau, Foundations of Physics, Dover, 1957.

26. R.M. Santilli,"Partons and Gravitation: Some Puzzling Questions," Annals of APhysics , Vol. 83, No. 1, March 1974, pp. 108-157. --1

27. P.A.M. Dirac, "Development of the Physicist's Conception of Nature,"Symposium on the Development of the Physicist's Conception of Nature ed.by Jagdish Merha, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Boston, 1973, pp. 12-14.

28. Hector Hawton, Philosophy For Pleasure, Fawcett World Library, fifth printing,June 1970, pp. 21-24. 4.

29. A. Einstein, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies," Ann. Physik. 17, 891,1905.

4 30. Robert Eisberg and Robert Resnick, Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, SolidsNuclei, and Particles, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1974, pp. 63-68, 146-15:}

31. Evert W. Bech, The Foundations of Mathematics, Harper Torchbooks, The ScienceLibrary, Harper & Row, New York, NY, 1966, pp. 481-518.

212. Donald R. Barr and Peter W. Zehna, Probability , Brooks/Cole Publishing Company,Belmont, CA, 1971, pp. 16-17.

33. N.A. Kozyrov, "Possibility of Experimental Study of the Properties of Time,"

Pulkovo, O vozmozhnosti eksiperimontal 'noqo issledovaniva svovstv vremeni,Russian, September 1967, pp. 1-49, JPRS 45238, 2 May 1968.

80.

. . ...... "Ililir [ I II ! -ll0"