Está en la página 1de 67

The BODY (The MENTAL REVOLUTION) Motto: The humans were the sole thing which was created

for other reason than that they were "good". And this another reason"... it feels a lot! So, is not from their fault! But is a hope: each of them to become g o od! "There are many ways to communicate between cells: through direct contact or through the nervous system and hormones. Not yet known very well the nature of the molecular interactions involved in control circuits (relationships "form - function", own note). In fact, we started 'to understand' cell, but not the tissue or the organ. The logic of the system that manages the execution of complex programs, for example the development of a mammal remains unknown. Formation of a man from the egg is a miracle of accuracy and precision. How from a cell appear trillion in specialized lines, according to a strict order in time and space, is what defies all imagination. ("Franois Jacob, Logic of living, Romanian Encyclopedic Publishing House, Bucharest, 1972, pp. 336.)
I developed a theory ("Gravitational Theory of Life") that tries to coherently establish a link between the scientific formalism and the way in which it is generated: by the life form" in the first place and by "intelligent life form", in the second row. The objectives of this theory are: 1) The generating mechanism of the organisms, initially in terms of space and time. Apparently, until now, this mechanism hasn't been coherent modeled in to an accepted theory. The problem was not yet solved because the only information storage system of a model which can describe a (human) body is considered to be formed by (the 30000) genes of the genome. But the information stored here are of scalar type (a "text"). And the body processes are dynamic and, however, geometrically rigorous controlled. It follows that the physical quantities to be considered in order to describe such phenomena can be only vectorial.

In the complex organism has been pursued: 2) In the above context, the necessary changes to describe the formal model of the "rational" behavior, characteristic of Homo sapiens, and determining of its physiological substrate. 3) The development of a protocol for certain corrections relative to current scientific theories, which it must to be made, so that the relationship "Universe-> mind-> formal model of the Universe to be "closed" (at the level of a relationship "formal model of the Universe-> Universe "), so to becoming bi-univocal (may occur, simultaneously, in both directions). 4) The development of a complete model of the Universe based on these corrections, whose nature is purely geometric (characterized solely by an absolute order). 5) Study of the possible cross-references between the model of organisms, arising from the conclusions of "Gravitational Theory of Life", and the phenomenon of "cancer". For ease of reading the work, it is structured as a novel with two main characters: one rigorously describes the theory, and the other character making comments at an affordable level. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "Body" is an "order" (exclusively geometrical, which means non material), with a certain support. His material part (which is "seen") is only the support for this "order". Evidence in this regard is that the contact between its material base (of the "order") and the environment (also "material"), a process that obeys the laws of the interaction, of "transformation", the "order" ("form") of the bodies (interrelationships "functions-> relative positions" of the processes that constitute them) remains unchanged (within certain limits), despite these contacts. "Gravitational Theory of Life" is trying to solve (initially in terms of space and time), in the above context, the problem of generating and preservation of the resulting geometrical disposition of the living phenomenon (of the "BODY"), because: i. In animal cell, the flows with high intensity (mass, ionic) occur before of the equilibrium areas (which means "structure"). I mean that there is a "flow", which initially, "floats" really on "nothing", but, nevertheless, it is perfectly oriented in space and time. For example, in the case of mitosis, it starts with a mother cell, to get, by flows, two daughter cells; it appears that, at least, one of these two new structures came from "nothing" (i.e. not from "something" structural, existing before). And FURTHER cellular structure is only a consequence of statistical equilibrium occurring in the contact zone of the routes of these "flows". An attempt to solve this problem did Ilya Prigogine, Belgian scholar of Russian origin, Nobel laureate. In "Gravitational Theory of Life" is a critical analysis of Prigogine's approaches (as tried and Romanian-born American scientist Adrian Bejan in the 90s in his "CONSTRUCTAL" theory). Constructal Law, issued by Adrian Bejan says: "For a finite-size (flow) system to persist in time (to live), its configuration must evolve such that it provides easier access to the imposed currents that flow through it.", pursuant to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructal_theory Or: "For a finite-size (flow) system to persist in time (to live), its configuration must

evolve such that it provides easier and easier access to its currents., pursuant to: http://www.constructal.org/en/theory/presentation.html The meaning of this formulation is that a fluid, in order to (self) preserving flow (equivalent for Bejan to "life") should flowing on where is "correct" (in geometrical sense). Why Bejan contradicts Prigogine's theory? For ordinate this flow in space and time, Prigogine suggests that necessary actions must comes from outside the system (we talk about the open systems, in which are valid the principles of irreversible processes thermodynamics). But in this case Prigogine had to "build" outside the living cell poly of entropy (to generate gradients of temperature, pressure, etc) between that occur these "flows". But this poly does not exist in nature (in most cases the environment around a cell is homogeneous and isotropic). And Bejan, sensing that "forcing" says: "No! The flows must to orient themselves independently, base on this law, which, by his nature, is statistic, "the constructal law". According to the "Gravitational Theory of Life" both are right and, paradoxically, both wrong: a) Prigogine is right: imposing entropic polarizations and ordering the flow, in space and time, by actions which comes from the outside. But, if exist such imposition, of material nature, that kind of hypothesis contradicts the fact of independent way of motion (against any entropic polarization) of the living systems. The evidence actually "charged" by Bejan. b) Now: if the "flow" would meet to the "constructal law", the stable flow (means "life") should be independent. How is that? The phrase "self" (from above) is not accidentally introduced: who "persuade" the flow to choose to "live" (and, by default, to respect the law)? Is asking this question for that the any evolution in physics (and Bejan says that the "constructal" law is a physical law) has a causal nature and, in this formulation of the law, the "cause" of evolution cannot be than a "choice" ("its configuration must evolve...")! Because the "configuration- the cause, must evolve such that it provides easier. And this: For a finite-size (flow) system to persist in time (to live)- the effect"! But, which is the cause of the configuration evolving? Because she has a geometrical nature (non causal) and so, "she" cannot evolve, but, only, can do "choices" (also a non causal process) we have a problem about "physical (ity)" here! Without realizing it, Bejan it founded a Theory of General Relativity for the finite-size flows. The flows choose" a certain mode of motion, which can be described by geometrical ways, as happens with the material corps, in the gravitational field (paraphrasing relativistic physicist John Archibald Wheeler, space-time tells matter how to move, matter tells space-time how to change his curvature). In the gravitational field these "choices" have a purely formal (uncaused) nature: change of the metric and/or curvature of the space. He noticed that the manifestation of fluid with stable flows, it seems to be formal determined ("gravitational", geometrical, uncaused), but, probably, it could not made an explicit statement about that because he had no idea about the sources of these formal determinations (such as the gravitational field of large objects). So, the law (constructal" law) it remained in a form that generates a physically incomplete model, of those

phenomena, as shown above. It results, by default that the persistent flows would occur spontaneously (randomly): so, life" should have (according to constructal low) and another random sources (than "life" itself). And this is not found. More, I can give some examples of situations where the "constructal" law is in clear violation: evolution of the biosphere on a global scale, and cancer. In these situations, the law enforcement at certain levels (local human activity or solid tumor growth) lead to destructive effects at other levels (biosphere degradation and death- by flows destabilization-of the body). What looks like the concrete choice of the scale of finite size flows, alone, can change the nature of the law. However, the "Constructal" Theory has a great quality: ask, thru the solution "almost" gravitational that tries to give and by the incompleteness of her appearance, for the Gravitational Theory of Life. Solution of "Gravitational Theory of Life" is: "the way of imposing the flow persistence (life), by imposing to appropriate configuration to make his choice, it must come from outward, and also, it must have an informational nature (non causal), and which overlaps over the scalar (fixed) information from the DNA. That mean: the ways of imposing the flow in a cell must be, by their nature, gravitational and inertial actions, plus a "text"(the DNA). Also, there are problems on the nature of thermodynamics which can be solved only if the "living cell" is studied as a complex of processes consisting of "animal cell" and "vegetal cell". In this theory is accepted that the gravitational influences (which primarily come from the solar system bodies, including the Earth, ordered by the special geometrical form of relative motion between them) do not have a material nature (until proven otherwise, the experimental discovery of the particle generating the gravitational field, "graviton and the gravitational wave). I'll come back below with some refinements of this idea, for the physicists. Partial conclusion 1: For this reason (the gravitational influences do not have a material nature), the nature of imposition of the flow persistence, in the cell, is not causal! ii. In complex body, the nature of parameters which can ordering in space and time these dynamic processes implies the existence of "vectors" which DNA cannot contain. We have a big problem here! Here is a quote from a treatise on genetics published by doctors from Romania (http://colegiul-medicilor.ro/Genetica/Tratat-genetica-capitolul-4.html; page 128): "The mechanisms of expression of a certain genes, in a given period and tissue, involves the regulating sequences from each gene promoter region and a common regulatory sequence called Locus Control Region (LCR) located upstream of the genes of structure. LCR is necessary to determine which gene of the group will express in a certain period of time and in which tissue". What result from this statement? a) They tried, too, to realize a model of the relationship "function -> relative

position" for the structures of the "BODY" (because it is strictly necessary for coordination of the processes), b) It turns out that some geneticists believe that a way to location, in time and space, of a component within a system can be done individually, independently, from the level of each of these components (in this case, the cell). Wrong! To a self positioning, this component should have a purely geometric representation of the entire system (like a "map") and a mechanism to put in direct relation a point on this "map" with his real (timely) and relative position (geometrically) in the system (by a kind of feedback relation). That means vectorial relations. In this mechanism the main part it must be the possibility of any cell to "see" the entire system in a "picture" realized in a timely manner. It's no other informational way to do this. If we think to the structure of Locus Control Region (the one which must to do this, genetically speaking), we can do the observation that she don't contain something, anything of a geometrical nature, which to have a liaison, however small, with the real 3D shape of the "BODY at a given moment. But, the main problem is not this one! The main problem is that this specific (genetically) model for generating of the relationship "function-> relative position in to the system", which must exist at level of each of the component, maintains a clear distinction between "part" and "whole". Meaning is that: the "part may have a distinct activity from the activity of the "whole and, yet, she may be able to coordinate, by himself, in a timely manner, with ALL the other "parts", to form a whole". But this is impossible, in terms of the contact with the "outside" of a reunion of "parts. "THE PART IT'S NOT EXIST SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE "WHOLE"! THE "WHOLE" The general principle of holism was concisely summarized by Aristotle in the Metaphysics: "The whole is different from the sum of its parts". The phrase "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts" is often used when explaining the German Gestalt theory. There are approaches such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holonomic_brain_theory and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holon_ (Philosophy) from which are drawn some conclusions leading to a causal link between "parts" and "whole": "whole" is, in a sense, a consequence of the "parts": I.e.: Karl Pribram predicts and describes, in my opinion, a model of a certain way to generate the relationship "function -> relative position" for the structures of the "BODY", but omits the essential thing: 1) It differs fundamentally between certain two situations: a) At the contact" with the interior of the body, and b) At the contact with its exterior (the relationship with the environment). And, also, at this latter level, between what happens in the brains of humans and those of the animals.

2) The analogy with the mechanism for generating the holograms is too forced: a) In there must be an underlying which contain the geometric information (a stand for the image from outside which is analyzed by something like "laser's fascicles" for generating again, at need, the image), what, in the case of the bodies (that manifests as "whole"), not exists (no phenomenon from the body cannot keep, in the same while with his well determined relationship "form-function" and the geometric properties of a corps to be analyzed, from outside) Regarding the specific way in which holograms can be made in the brain this it's only a physical possibility (which is real) but who sins through a principled impossibility: the pictures, as we all know from the our "outside" (from the "daily experience"), they cannot be build, rigorous, than in an absolute frame of reference for them. In the brain there are, let say, a given "frame", a structure, but his form has nothing to do with the random pictures which people can recognize. These structures are just a stand for some signals which, at level of a route (dendrites, axon), it run in a "sequential" manner. So, they cannot "decode" ("read") an image, only if it given an absolute referential. Given that, except for the precise disposition in space of the structure, nothing in the body no longer contains strictly geometric information (as to constitute a referential for the image of a foreign object), their formation mechanism involves considering this state of things. b) Faraday's Electromagnetic Induction Law:

("variations dm of magnetic flux it generate emf ) made a connexion between electric and magnetic fields. Induced current direction is given by Lenz's rule: "Induced current have such drift that the magnetic field on which it produces it precludes to the variation of the flux inducer - in a closed-loop". This rule prevents to be generated the holograms (by Fourier processes) by the neural networks, which are full of closed loops. However, if some occur, the rule prevents to "read" them (by the variation of currents along of the neural network). In fact, the Pribram's imagined phenomenon would rather explain the processes of imposing of physiological stability (through a feedback loop) of the neural network operating system, while the processes from this level must be, also, unstable. And this is because the instability is fundamentally necessary in establishment of feedback relationships with the random stimulus from the "outside". So this kind of theories that want to build the "WHOLE" just with parts", are automatically forced (see above), because they arent comply with reality. But the correct signification, in my opinion, only Aristotle seems to emphasize: the "whole" is not only "greater" than the sum of its "parts" (which implying a causal relationship between the existences of the two categories), but the whole" is totally "something else" than the sum of "parts", which implies that there is no causal 6

relationship between them. If the notion of "whole" is accepted, this can occur only at the contact of the system with a phenomenon from outside of it (her description can only have a "relatively character: to actions from outside"), and only in the case in which the linking forces or reaction mechanisms preserves its structure , despite this contact. Preserves its structure' (meaning the shape of it) is not possible by causal relationship between the constituent parts". If the "parts" begin to "manifest" (by causal relationships) it means, by default, that the form of "whole" has changed. So, he himself is something else (has "disappeared"). Thus it is not a coincidence that the mathematical modeling (causal) of interactions between bodies (with the aim to realize the "geometric shape" of the group, at any time) when their number is greater than 3, is currently impossible. If someone gets a slap is very likely to react as a "whole". But if he meets with a locomotive at full speed will react, most likely, as "parts". If the "whole" preserves its structure ("form "), this means that the "parts" are not manifesting at all. So, THE PART IT'S NOT EXIST SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE "WHOLE"! Here is the key to the entire reasoning which underlying the new model of "life" described by the Gravitational Theory of Life! The "parts" and the "whole" cannot exist simultaneously for that the system it changes its nature for each of the situations in which it can be described: 1) Its causal, if it can be described as parts", 2) Its formal, if it can be described as whole". So, because the notion of "whole" is purely formal (her description can only have a "relatively character: to actions from outside"), and only in the case in which the linking forces or reaction mechanisms preserves its structure ("form "), despite this contact.) and, because we attached this notion at the term "life", is required, by default, to accept the uncaused (formal) nature of the life" itself. So the solution of imposing the state of "alive" by the formal (geometrical) actions (like the gravitational actions) is compulsory! Therefore, impositions with a causal nature at the level of the living body are excluded! And that, even if we talking about reflex reactions to environmental actions. Those reactions do not occur on the causal way! They occur almost immediately (i.e.: timely variability of antibody, from below) without that, in all this very short time, the general configuration of the form-functions" of the structures of the body, to be change (Corpora non agunt nisi fixata-latin, means: The body don't reacts without being stable- as form-functions of his structures). A model of such a mechanism exists in Gravitational Theory of Life without circumventing any of the accepted laws of medicine. And an intuitive approach to the statement that the impositions with a causal nature at the level of the living body are excluded, may refer to the postulate 2 of the Restricted Theory of Relativity which limited the speed transmission of a signal at the speed of light in vacuum. I mean, even if they could communicate (establish of causal relations) by light, all this "parts" (maybe a very great number of it) could not realize sync, each one with all the other, perfectly. What to say about the case when the signals are transmitted chemically?

This kind of conclusions (like Karl Pribrams), not necessarily wrong, but, definitely, worse oriented, comes only because the notion of evolution of systems is deemed to have a causal nature, which, in my opinion, is incorrect: So, is parts or the whole! If both kind exist (those 'causal' one it appeared exclusively at Homo sapiens on the basis of imposing of mechanisms of conditionated reflexes - Pavlov, see below), in the same while, these entities it must "to fight" between them (Bible: Romans 7; 23, 7; 24). How allopathic medicine treatments are all "causal" (it refers to the BODY like parts), in light of the above, could be explained phenomena as, for example, the lack of perfectly healthy individuals at the end of any treatment. The idea of the fight of parts with the whole will be pursued, with obstinacy, throughout this essay. So, the model for the realization of the relationships "functions-> relative positions in to the system", which must exist at level of each of the components of a dynamic system which are been in a state of stability, must be another (the real mechanism of control of the forms which homo sapiens can modeling it only with the "time" like parameter). Why is that? Only because the "shape" of whole is dynamic and is changing all the time. This is a process which can be described only by vectors and tensors because the matter is gathered" it around the center of gravity of the body and moves, relative to this landmark, as would be under the influence of a gravitational field (evidence of a common nature of the gravitation and of the "life"). And this gravitational field is generated only by the state of "living" - in the dead moment, the dynamic processes begin to leave this space, proof that even before, those processes has not been kept there by something material. The role of DNA is fundamentally: he make the informational coupling (thru a text) between the spatial and temporal distribution of the forces of gravitation and inertial actions, in a very specific "place" in the Universe, with the future spatially and functionally" distribution which will describe the material structure of the cell which must evolve in this "place" (the substances - primarily, characterized by their gravimetry - that come in reactions, based on their chemical properties, in a wellestablished order, corresponding, formal, to their gravimetric properties, for reaching the formal structure of "CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN", see below). So there can be no life in any place of Universe without a DNA strictly specific to the relation "place->shape-function of the cell (which DNA, by default, cannot come from elsewhere and work properly!). But, in the same time, being, eventually, part of a system that does not interact causally with the exterior ("CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN"- again, see below) is excluded his spontaneous "occurrence" (phenomenon which is not known). The only remaining alternative is that DNA is "made "! Attention to Mars and Craig Venter's achievement (creation of the "life"). In the first case DNA, which fits" on Earth will not "fit" on Mars and secondly, what is changed here will not "work" correctly anymore. Exclusive at the complex organisms level is achieved the natural coupling, in both directions (actions and reactions), of the form-function of the whole body with the physical and chemical conditions from that place, through a mechanism which it

was described in my theory. This mechanism allows the changes in the DNA and from the part of the physical and chemical conditions (not only from the part of gravitational field) from the "place", if those become persistent. Partial conclusion 2: And at this level (the complex body), by relationships between the dynamic processes which takes place at different speeds is circumvented the principle of causality by generating of an apparent state of equilibrium (a state of stability of values of dynamic parameters), simultaneously, in all points of a geometrically well-defined domain, which means, by default, thru a formal imposition! Conclusion: The body (at large) is not a consequence of a causally interrelated phenomena! The Body is an order (exclusively geometrical, which means non material), in time and space In this context, I wish to refer to a fact so obvious that almost no one noticed him: the ease with which even a child can tell you if something is alive or not. Why be so simple? Because the body has a behavior which, obviously, is completely broken by the context in which occurs? - Unlike a "non living corps, the living bodies moves or it stops without an apparent external cause (raise your right hand and you will find that this phenomenon is one of the most "paranormal" or gravitational - thing, in scientific terms) - External actions on these, within certain limits, remains without any effect. But we must get to things more concrete. So, I think what is being said about Craig Venter's achievement (creation of the "life") is a great handling: it has been created only a synthetic genome which was attached to a cell structure (already "alive") as background (which means a "new" FORM of life), NOT "LIFE" itself! Life cannot be created by causal actions! This kind of manipulation is possible because the accepted formal model of phenomenon of "living not exist so far (i.e. "nobody knows what is LIFE"). An attempt to modeling of the "life" is the Gravitational Theory of Life". In accordance with the above, the "order" (stable interrelationships "functions->relative positions" of the structural parts) shall be preserved permanently (for a healthy body). It follows that, in a sense, the action of an external stimulus, which automatically tends to "spoil" this order, is destroyed by a timely (uncaused) reaction. EXAMPLE: timely variability of antibody. A step in deciphering this phenomenon was a development, in 1965, of a model of recombination of genes, so that many more genes, and not always the same, give rise to a

protein chain according to the principle "more gene - one protein " by William Dreyer and Claude Bennett. In fact, we talk about not one but an infinite number of variations of the same protein. This model was verified experimentally (in laboratory conditions) by Susumu Tonegawa, Nobel laureate in 1987. But there are serious reservations regarding its operation under real conditions (in vivo). "Given the slow evolution in time (reflected by latency ) of these processes, how do you explain that a foreign substance is recognized almost instantaneously, and the body may starts already making the appropriate antibodies ?" Karen Bulloch - University of San Diego, 1978. Any biological causal chain involves a latency , as follows: A biological system, regardless of its complexity, can be defined by a linear operator (S), which acts on some input quantities ui and generate the outputs yj, according to the expression: yj (t + ) = (S) ui (t) Where t is time and is the latency of biosystem. Then, by what mechanism, such kind of a processes, can give an almost instant and efficient response? This is the question at which some geneticists must to respond (because Locus Control Region cant be the correct answer, considering those from above, and the latency of involved processes)! The answer: It is known that the complex interrelationships between the structures of "evoluated" structures (tissue, organ, body) have a form of "CLOSED CAUSAL CHAIN": Francois Jacob - Nobel laureate for genetics said:" ... each component (of life systems) becomes for the other its own condition of existence, equally cause and effect. " But a "closed causal chain" of the processes (process "1" generated process "2", process "2" generated process "3" and so on, and at last process "n" generated the first process "1"), if it's followed by a state of stability of values of dynamic parameters (equilibrium), at the level of each process (we found this on organisms), involves the simultaneous development of these processes (which it transform in "CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN"). But, also, their chemical nature, burdened by a latency (slow evolution in time), made so that certain cell produces a certain amount of substance in a given period. It can result that some structures, which are consecutive, from a functional point of view, will do not operate simultaneously, for lack of "raw material. In the body, all structures must function simultaneously, so the flow of the substance which functional unites them must to be continuous and closed. It follows that some cells must begin working before receiving "raw material" from previous functional cells, based on a quantity of substance which is available for processing in their very structures. This mechanism could be the explanation of the intern synthesis process (biosynthesis) for necessary substances in metabolism, independently of the process of assimilation of food, from outside. Handy command for the very moment when this phenomenon must take place

10

must have a "support" more "rapid" than a chemical process (the "latency" high). He must be an electrical signal. Vegetative (autonomic) nervous system role is to provide such synchronization signals of chemical processes at the contact of the structures (sensitive and effectors) with the environment. The result of synchronization is a continuous mass flow between the different structures of the body which provides geometric and functional stability. If in a "link" of the "chain", that supports an external stimulus, the flow tends to be interrupt because of this stimulus ( means "dead" ), but not "mechanically" but an "informational" interrupting (means repetitions with intervals shorter than "latency" of such chemical processes, which, default, is forced to consume more) then, the following functional structures may remain without "raw material" (even without the quantity of substance from their own structures which is for maintain the simultaneity of processes). Under the electrical impulses pressure, that forces them to work on, properly, and in this kind of conditions, by compensation with energy of the lack of substance, they become to destroy their own internal structures (the one that gives them the "phenotype) turning them into malignant cells, without function (cancer). So, the electrical signals those provide simultaneous processes in the body, under certain conditions, forcing some structures to operate properly and continuously, in a specific way, initially it is useful for body (to avoid the spontaneous collapsing under the action of certain types of stimulus, informational organized). This is where the activity of central nervous system (the brain) must occur. It is long known that the conditioned reflexes" have that support the, so-called, "conditioned synapses" that is structured in the CNS. Why there? To answer this question should clarify what is CNS. We noted above that "autonomic nervous system" has a fundamental role in preserving of the CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN structure of the body (which it gives the status of "WHOLE"): it ensures the achievement of "simultaneity" of the chemical processes underway with a relatively large and random latency . But the order, which we call it here in "time", of these signals (which are at the origin of signals for "sync given by the autonomic nervous system) depends on the relationship "form - function" of the structures whose outcome (the given geometricfunctional arrangement of the body) is permanently in the interaction with external stimulus. There is a problem here: the relationship "form-function" of the structures has, forcibly, a CLOSED form, which means something purely formal, ideal. Anyway, it must to be imposed to the structures of the body (on basis of sync signals). The solution is a closed circulation of electric signals, distinct from the sync signals, whose parameters can be imposed causelessly to the sync signals (Hebb -1949, hypothesized the existence of the reverberating circuits). The closed circulation of electric signals means that the "support" processes of these signals interrelate in a "closed" chain (the last "n" process creates the initial "1" process). So they cannot provide, directly, to the outside of their support, quantities of command for the necessary synchronization of the chemical processes of the organisms. That is possible only if: - The "imposing" is an effective process (which takes place in a due time),

11

- Effects of the contacts with the external stimulus it can be annihilated through a formal mechanism to avoid the influence of those, back to the shape of the ideal relationships. In other words, feedback loop (involving the influence of the events from the "output" of the system, to the "input" - the reaction") cannot be an option in this case. However, the "autonomic nervous system" it connects the random actions of the environment with the closed circulation of electric signals which is the ideal body shape source. The mechanism by which this works is complicated and I would not want to develop it now. I would like only to stress that: 1) CNS, paradoxically (relative to what is accepted at this time, in medical terms) has not a causal nature. He is only the support of a closed movement of electrical signals. These signals are characterized by parameters that manifests simultaneously to the outside. That process takes place so that the reverse influence, of the exterior, on the electrical closed movement, can be possible only in pathological situations. This condition is essential to preserve the ideal form of closed circulation of electric signals, which determine the order of signals for the synchronization of chemical processes. Faraday's Law and Lenz's rule are working only to support its observance. 2) In these conditions it could form no image in the "brain". It's the last place where something like this can be formed (this is the "safe" with the "etalon meter" from Svres, the standard for "form-function" of organisms). "Images" are just alterations (transmitted by sensory ways of the autonomic nervous system) of the forms-functions of body structures, under the influence of external stimulus, to be compared (without causal mutual influence) to ideal closed circulation of electric signals, kept in the "brain". So the images it forms "IN" the body structures whose form - function may change, within certain limits, by "incorporating, temporary, these image (which is the formation mechanism of her inside the body), then, that by comparison with the "temporal model " from the" reverberant circuits", the structures returns to original form -function of the body. The processes are occurring in time (e.g. Variability in time of antibody) Specifically: there is always parallel feedback loops between the simultaneous changes, of the body structures forms - functions, at the contact with a foreign corps or phenomenon. This means that the image (the geometric aspect of a foreign corps) would not be able to structure itself if the corps wouldn't be, simultaneously, strictly defined in physically and chemically terms, in general. And this structuring of all the aspects of a corps is achieved, in principle, only relative to the form-function of the body, as "whole". In other words, the new born is not "blind" but it "look" to the "image" as a whole: its points have not yet sense (it not follows them with the eye) without the other aspects, physical and chemical, which had not yet the time to get in touch. This model gives plausible explanations of many ambiguous psychic and psychomotor models, at this time (for example of how we manage to touch our nose with the forefinger of one of hands, without the mirror and, possibly, with eyes closed). If the "alterations of the forms - functions of the body structures" is repeated under the imposition of a specific external stimulus, in the pathological situations, as I said

12

above, at the level of a some electric movement, support of a specific signal, which corresponding to a certain body structure, "succeeds" to change his initial shape, the one which it is integrating into the general form of electrical closed movement. Some synapses disappear, in functional terms, and others it "strengthen", so the "standard" of Svres is fragmented! So, now the images form at the level of the "parts" of the body relative to the "parts" of the ideal electrical closed movement support. This creates the "ideas" (whose place is not the "head")! They are responsible for "intelligence" and especially for the size of our brain. I do not know to be made concrete assessments of the number of nerve cells of the CNS in humans and, compared, let say to chimpanzee, at comparable stages of development. Or were made and the results were some which are not expected ... Because the efficiency of the brain depends on the number of active cells rather than the mass and/or brain volume (which depends largely on the size of the synapses)... And the ideas, not too many and repeated, lead to cancer. And so, the tumor becomes an independent organism (from his host). He is intelligent, he can take decisions, can adapt at the specifics external stimulus (treatments or actions of immunologic system). This coordinated tip of behavior of malign cells is facilitated by the connection of the tumor with the nerves of autonomic nervous system (which offer a rich informational support and which exist- the connection- in all situations, known or not by the medicine). So, the principle of a method (for cure the cancer) is that: the tumor mast be isolated by the influence of activity of the nerves (cutting the nerve or stop the electrochemical signals circulation influence from synapses to the tumor by activity of a neurotoxin-see American patent: Pub. No. : US 2005/0031648 A1; Pub Date: Feb. 10, 2005). Quote, from this patent, which shows that exist the situation (and it could happen to be more than this one) in which the medical science haven't knowledge about the connection between the cancer and the nervous autonomic system: "0193- Contrary to the general belief that the pheochromocytomas are not innervated and that the release of catecholamines from such tumors is not under nervous control, there is evidence for cholinergic innervation of such tumors." Main and Prehn have performed such experiments in 1957 (they excised the tumor and reinocullated the same tumor to the same animal) with promising results. But they follow a different theoretical idea (the existence of a specific tumor antigen). There exists a material: This Weeks Citation Classic a U1 Prehn R I & Main I M. Immunity to methylcholanthrene-induced sarcomas. .1. Nat. Cancer Inst. 18:769-78, 1957. [National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MDI] (cc/number 15; April 15, 1985) which shows that the results of Main and Prehn experiences (the specific immune response of the organism for tumor) have not had, until now, an accepted explanation. Lidocaine is a potential cancer treatment solution that complies with the principles set forth above and which most probably has not been used nowhere in the world as such. Its time for it!

13

An explanation for this answer The PARTS or THE WHOLE?


I. I", is the sole "soft" for knowledge"?! ALL KNOWLEDGE IS RELATIVE TO THE MIND, OR THAT THINGS CAN BE KNOWN ONLY THROUGH THEIR EFFECTS ON THE MIND, AND THAT CONSEQUENTLY THERE CAN BE NO KNOWLEDGE OF REALITY AS IT IS IN ITSELF.HTTP://WWW.SPACEANDMOTION.COM/PHILOSOPHYPOSTMODERNISM. HTM Roger Sperry (Nobel Prize for medicine - research on the brain); Willis Harmon (Prof. Emeritus, Univ. Stanford): "We have neglected conscience in our research on the world ". As you know the basic science is (inexplicably) in a kind of "time out", very dangerous. While the "brains" and money, on complex experiments (CERN - Geneva), are not missing. The most likely explanation of this phenomenon is that the way, in which the science goes, in its development, is not correct. We must go back to the origin. But the "origin" is where we havent looked enough: in ourselves. Everything revolves around of these "I", the primary category for any exponent of the species Homo sapiens. Is it a natural, spontaneous phenomenon? Obviously not! He appears only in the case of human, in very special circumstances. They are generated exclusively by an appropriate social environment. An evidence of this phenomenon is that "I" never appeared in any other species in its natural habitat. While the people who have evolved, from an early age, outside of a social environment (example: children who have survived a longer time in the jungle) this phenomenon, self-conscious, disappeared. With regard to the environment in which I" is develop, we must try a definition for "social environment". The fact (from above) that the shift from a social environment in a different environment, in which Homo sapiens has been deprived of possibility of adaptation (due to the early age), was successful (several individuals are surviving) and the reverse transition, from that environment again at the social environment, never had success, establishes the primacy of that different environment, which will be referred to below as "natural" environment. It is obvious that the structure of natural environment is closer to the structure of "food chain" coupled with the "ecosystem" in which the organism was found it. And those are, scientifically speaking, a plurality of processes interrelated in a causal manner. But, the "body" itself (in which are overlapping dynamic processes) has a structure of CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN (see above). So, here it is accepted, as an axiomatic truth, that the nature of environment 14

(which must ensures stability of the conditions of existence) near of a body, must be, by itself, the nature of a (non causal) "CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN". Definition: Thru "natural environment" will understand the plurality of external stimulus of the organism, of various natures (physical, chemical, informational, etc.) interrelated in certain order, in terms of spatial-temporal parameters, "around" the body, under the form of "CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN". It resulting that the "natural environment and the body must to have the same nature! The statements above are fundamental highlighted by the following fact: In the Gravitational Theory of Life, the cells, animal and vegetable, are not treated individually but simultaneously, in a complex which, in my opinion, it formed, in reality, "the basic unit of life". This approach is known already, in the literature. But only generic (it not put behind of this way of looking at things, and a coherent model). This coupling of the two cell types is asked even the Prigogine there where his theory offers only no satisfactory solutions (at the modeling of some poles of entropy - differences of temperature, pressure, etc. - from which the flows of high intensity can to flow, at the cellular level). But around the cell, animal or vegetable, the environment is relatively homogeneous and isotropic (the possible variations of thermodynamic parameters cannot generate the "poles of entropy", mentioned above, required by Prigogine's model). So, the "engine" of these flows is composed of two thermodynamic paths which have a contact point, an "interface", at chemical level (it cannot influence each other, in terms of thermodynamics). However, the mechanism works causelessly (in time). Only this explains the fact that the average global concentrations, of various gases in the air, remain constant regardless of how much oxygen consumed, in each time, the animal cells (which depends on their number and their value of metabolism, at the moment) or as how much CO2 consume the vegetable cells (process which depends on their number, season, etc.). And especially regardless of consequences of combustion processes involved in human activity. So, these values, depending on factors that much vary, but so strictly maintained, cannot be explained only in one way: These two environments (the "body" and "its natural environment") are similarly structured: like CHAINS ORDERLY CLOSED, with simultaneous dynamic processes! They facilitate the spontaneous meet of physiological needs and, so, with maximum speed (as they appear). This is not the case in a "social environment" So, this definition of social environment" will have to express, first, that between the Homo sapiens and the natural environment is occurring "something" afterwards, "an interface", which is not the case for the other animals, from a certain ecosystem. And this "interface" is a purely informational one. Definition: "The social environment is an environment where the opportunities to meet the physiological needs are restricted, in an informational (formal) way. Overcoming these limitations is by the respect, during the actions, of an algorithm recorded on an artificial medium (created specifically for this purpose: spoken text, written, gesticulation, painted, modeled on the material support, etc.). This registered algorithm will be called the language". Every action performed, on the basis, of this algorithm has a partial motivation, of a "stage", strictly formal (information). This motivation of a stage" (which, below, will be called the "signal") is obviously broken by the natural context of existence (Which always PROVIDES AN ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT MEETING OF PHYSIOLOGICAL

15

NEEDS and on which the animals they choose, IN THEIR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, BUT on which HUMANS, choose not to follow them for the reasons which we shall analyze below). spontaneous "discoveries" made in the ecosystem, as many theories trying to prove! And this, because the partial objectives of the algorithm, needed to reach the meet of physiological needs, simply does not exist in nature. Is known that the generating signals of mechanisms of the "conditioned reflex" does not find in the body's natural environment for study (that's means that they not appear- READ "are not elected" - on grounds of "SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE OTHERS PROCESSES from a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN). That is precisely why the animals must be taken out of their natural environment and forced to absorb them. They are artificial! It follows that the algorithm was imposed solely with the mechanisms of "conditioned reflex" (Pavlov). More: repetitive nature of the signals leads to a negligible probability of spontaneous occurrence (that implies, eventually, and, therefore, the emergence of an entire CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN ", totally new, where they must fit thru the simultaneity criteria), in a certain natural environment. We talk here about emergence of "civilization" or about emergence of the "social environment?! See http://www.sciencenewsline.com/archaeology/2011061610020000.html If you try a simple analysis of how it could carry out these things, you will find that the necessary "findings", for the emergence of agriculture, are impossible to be done. Gatherers and primitive hunters were unable to observe the mechanism of reproduction of various plants. The moments (possibly observable) between which a part of interest of a plant (let say, the fruit), which until then was "gathered" and the corresponding seed reached (spontaneous) in a position of beginning the development process of the plant and, third, the same kind of fruit it can be used again, are so hard to surprise in a causal relationship by a "gatherer" (given the seasonal ranges that divide them) that is no longer need to consider other elements to support this statement. However: It is found that plants that were subjects of the future agricultural activities (mainly cereals, corn etc.) are plants that can't be used immediately, as were those who, naturally, the humans are looking for. In order to find their qualities they should be available in a given initial quantity (complicated to be procured spontaneous) and to go through a complicated process of preparation (again, with little chance of being discovered spontaneously). And to re-start the cycle was needed much larger quantities. This considering that for the meet of the immediate needs it must to use plants which are readily available and easy to find. In this context it appeared, very convenient, the flood": easy to find plants have disappeared. Humans had not have alternatives. They must to accept "the tips that they couldn't refuse"... http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/nov/19/noah.flood.agriculture

16

Question: The signals responsible for the appearance of conditioned reflex having an informational (formal) nature, which is obvious , what intelligent entity, from outdoor of the natural environment, it could generate them in conditions in which the process involves, necessarily, and the imposition of a special status for individuals: TO FORCE THEM FOR the RECEPTION OF THOSE SIGNALS (Pavlov's dog stomach secrete hydrochloric acid, without to being hungry, but only by lighting the bulb, simply because the animal was forced to sit there and see him, for many times, before his meals)? Or: who (imp)put the light between "food "and the humans? In other words: Who is "Pavlov" FOR "HUMANS"? * Returning to the "I", it seems that the Universe evolves on principles that apparently exclude its existence, and that it was artificially generated. Be a coincidence that science, base exponent of the objective knowledge, has remained true to this principled approach? Why no formal model of a certain phenomenon, created during its history, does not contain physical quantities or parameters to characterize and "I", together and simultaneously, with this phenomenon (Gravitational Theory of Life includes a model of "I in a complete model of the Universe)? It is clear that a formal model is generated, in fact, by association of I" WITH the phenomenon which is studied. It follows that by excluding the "I"- from any formal model does not solve the problem of objectivity of the model. Why? Precisely: because "I" is a particular phenomenon at the universally level ("strait-laced" by a lot of formal links and special conditions - see above which are not to find elsewhere in nature) and, however, the "I" is the only way of contact of humans with the Universe. What follows from here? That image of the Universe that is obtained by the humans is formed, exclusively, with the notions defined thru those special conditions and formal links (relations) that characterize the "I (which are imposed from "other side"). Analogy: a piece of stainless steel does not "see" a jet of water which is taking contact. The jet of water cannot change the underlying structure of the pieces of steel (for which there is no running water). But another piece of stainless steel can change these structural links. So, she is "very visible" to the first piece. From this point of view, the diamond, for example, is among of most "blind" materials. He can "observe", possibly, only other diamonds. So, "I" is happening (by "filtering" the image of the Universe) and we (the "humans") we do not consider it. His form is inextricably linked with those conditions (and "links") imposed by social environment to the concrete phenomena (e.g.: the living organism). In other words, "I" as a scientist, I'm going to do analysis and synthesis of phenomena encountered in a much greater extent than other individuals who, through force of circumstances, dealing with something else. I can tell them that I do that stuff for nothing anyway, because the universe is "filtered" by my "I? No! And because an important part of the "I" is obtained through education (by imposition), and by that, is relatively common to most individuals, they agree with my "discovering" (in so far as can hide that this agreement is due by common parts of the "I",

17

ignored, for objectivity, from any formal model). One could say that, the "I after the nature and the way it is generated, are accepted as such if it is common to a significant number of individuals. It is, actually, the support for communication", in a social environment, and not for "knowledge". Hence, from this are coming the FUNDAMENTAL LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE! Considering globalization, widespread computerization, social and economic relations, very special (unique) in these circumstances, we find that they bring the individuals in a position in which it could not avoid, as being devoid of meaning, the phenomena that govern the evolution of society as a whole. And its problems (of the society) require, unfortunately, immediate solutions. If things go so wrong, which is the place of the I in this context?? The human has, since the dawn of history, questions about the world and life. Initial responses, which are found, have a nature of mysticism. That evidenced a strict determination "Universe->human". A simple analysis shows that is a common sense approach which would be, at the least, a natural one: the Universe existed before humans (the "I). Is not the material Universe (whose fundamental law is "moving", "interaction", "transformation") the Universe which we talk about. "Something" material may not generate a phenomenon that remains unchanged in spite of the interactions (as happens between certain limits, with the organisms). The organisms, apparently, do not exist on the basis of known physics laws (do not arise from something material). And that makes us to think at the religion Where we have come on this way? If we refer only to human sacrifices on the altars of pagan gods and to the Inquisition crimes and gross errors of church (Giordano Bruno, Galileo Galilee) in the Middle Ages, we cannot otherwise than, to put into question the correctness of this way of seeing the things. What has changed lately? Why that clear causal relationship between that Universe and the "human" ("I") can not be accepted anymore? A possible answer to these questions must take account of a fact: knowledge is based, today, mostly on the scientific approach. And its essence is embodied by the establishment of "primacy" of the "human" ("I") over the Universe itself. Direct consequence of each of the both ways of seeing the world is that the individuals, the "subjects", exclude themselves from the ''image'' of the Universe. We showed that, scientifically, it is considered that an object or phenomenon is better known as the subject it might influence less, through observation. These objects or phenomena, "objectively" modeled, in fact, belong to a Universe which is part, exclusively, from the outside of the "subject." So, being incomplete This fact may be explained by the antinomy that "I'' is generated and is manifest as a result of a causal contact with the environment of the organisms (as we see above, this phenomenon is artificial and is related to the generating of the "conditioned reflexes"), but "exist" (despite of the contacts) in a, seemingly, perpetual stable condition (solely between the contacts, for Homo sapiens and including during them, for other

18

bodies), which is, obviously, uncaused (cannot be generated by the thing which try to "spoil" the stable condition of the body in every moment- the material Universe). Solely mystical knowledge or exclusively scientific knowledge (either having as object to find a final rule, causal, spiritual or material) leads to the impossibility of modeling the "inside of the subject" ( i.e. inside of the bodies). Attempts to achieve such models of organisms, solely based on models of phenomena from outdoor of the organisms, have proved sterile. The purpose of this analysis is precisely to underscore of the need of an accurate modeling of the internal zone of "knowledge" process (from the "inside of the organism), before initiating of any other process, in relation with the "outside" of it. The success of this undertaking would enable to complete process of creating a model for knowledge (loss of differentiation between "I", "body" and "Universe"). For this, would be tested the specific modeling of subject" himself. This new model of "I" should replace his models which made, so far, to be possible only mystical or exclusively scientific "knowledge". This should make from the "subject" an integral part of the image of the Universe, complete and correct this time, in formal terms. The two "outer" sides of the process of knowledge, the mystical and the scientific, are considered by the two important philosophical currents: idealism and materialism (with all those known nuances, which are considered)... Lack of de facto of the reconciliation of the conclusions implied by this two approaches stems from the fact that the "subject", as a living form, which support a stable, fixed discontinuity of the dynamic process of "knowledge", may be considered, with the same kind of arguments, the "sender" (idealism) or/and the recipient" (materialism) of the phenomena that make up this process. Being an open" interrelationship (in the discontinuity) of dynamic processes, it (the interrelationship) can exist only on the basis of causation, in one sense or in other: the "idea" is cause of the matter" or the physical processes" generate the "idea". Overcoming this impasse must to be tried by accepting that a completion, by closing of the knowledge process cycle, will generate a dynamic process that will exclude causation ("idea" will determine "the material aspects" but, at the same time, the "matter will generate the "idea"). Therefore, will no longer make a problem of a "cause" and an "effect" involved, both entities will lose their consistency, and, in the evolution of phenomena, will be satisfactory to be considered only of a given "order" (with geometrical nature), timeless, respected at all levels of existence. II. The generation and expression of "I" s Formal language is, grosso modo, the method of communication meant to substitute, for Homo sapiens, means of communication used by the rest of animals, between individuals of the same species. Initially, as noted above, the "formal language" it is "learned thru the mechanisms generating conditioned reflexes. By what differs the formal language, essentially, by the rest of the means of communication (with physical, chemical and physiological support) used by the animals? The animals, which communicate the models that describe the real processes (i.e. for description of a certain phenomenon, the communication is made in a quasi real while, by

19

the relation with the evolution of the phenomenon). Hence, the communication between animals has evoluated on the basis of (quasi) non causal interrelation. Instead, the humans send, by formal language, the description of virtual processes (practical, the processes being triggered and carried, far away, in time and space, by the moment - place when he made his description). Which description may be only "memory" or "prediction". Definition: formal elements for achieving these used models ("memory", "predictions") are accepted as "ideas" (which have a geometric nature information). It materialized that the "IDEAS" are "images" of the partial objectives (the signals) to being achieved and exceeded for meet the physiological needs (what the dog has "imagined" when the bulb is lighting, and in the stomach is secreted hydrochloric acid, without to give him food). These partial objectives are targets, artificially introduced (does not exist in nature- i.e. by the bulb) and imposed by the algorithm (mechanism of the conditioned reflexes) from the "other side". If between observing a phenomenon (CAUSE) and the formal language model to describe it (EFFECT) there is a certain lag (based on the use of the algorithm), period with measurable duration, then the relationship between cause and effect is (how else) of "causal! Therefore any description of a phenomenon supported by science (which works only on formal models), is accepted to be fair only if it involves "causality"! How and why they came to this situation? The answer refers to the "emergence" (is it actually an "imposition") of a formal interface (algorithm) between stimulus and response, in case of humans (which "response", thus, it become "conditioned"), and which insert a time lag between the phenomenon (stimulus) and its description. In the natural environment, the humans wouldn't survive if he is responding thus (after a "time lag") to the stimulus action. So they created (inspirited", by imposition, from "other side") an artificial environment for their life". It may be noted that formal models, submitted by formal language, which are virtual" entities (which occurring in a distant lapse, in space-time, by the real phenomena and / or processes that have generated it) may be appropriates, in probabilistic terms, if they are described the phenomena and processes with parameters which preserved themselves (being constant) for a long while. In other words, we talks about phenomena that have almost the same "picture" and when they are seen and in the moment of their description, in the formal language (the description which is, thus, possibly to be experimental verifiable). I refer to the structures and /or the dynamic processes with parameters (relatively) constant. When we want to describe the human body is a unique situation in which formal support of modeling and observation processes of phenomenon is focus on him. In other words, it talk to" him "about he" himself. It follows that the formal language must, necessarily, change its position, which is stated in the beginning (to "support of the communication process between individuals"). Unlike other approaches (in medicine, biology, physics, biophysics, bio-cybernetics, information theory, etc.), which have the same object (the "body"), and which making a clear distinction between the "observer" (researcher) and the observed phenomenon (the "body"), below, will be generated some conventions that will remove this distinction. Formal separation between the researcher and the body is very likely the origin of the

20

known shortcomings (lack of a complete and correct model of the "organisms"). Therefore, it will issue the following Postulate: A body can be described as a model (whose shape does not matter right now) which, in turn, is creator of models. At the level of this analyze it is accepted like "model" the shape of the reaction of "body", quite specific, generated at the action of an external stimulus. In other words it will accept that form of this response is strictly related to the form (and the nature) of that stimulus, thereby constituting a model of his. How it show, formally, a pattern of a "designer of models"? Here's not a simple problem at all. A certain model (pattern) is static. And it follows from the affirmation of certain properties which must remain available for a given period. But something describable by a static model cannot create, only by itself, models with completely random forms (depending on the form and the nature, also random, of external stimulus). If, nevertheless, this phenomenon happens, it is clear that this "structure" has, itself a form based on parameters that change randomly over time, and thus, which cannot be described by a "static" model. Static modeling of "life" is an error in this case! The only acceptable model of "life" is one that in turn could create models, independently. You might say that computers are "creative models of models", which is not true! The hard" and "soft" structures implemented in the computer contains, in a virtual state, a number of modeling possibilities which is practically infinite, but are always there, in the same shape. Observatory (the human) chooses some of these opportunities to create a model. Ultimately, only the beings (humans) had to create the models transposed on output devices. And information system had to remain, always, "dumb". Coming back to "life", it seems that it can be described using a model (and thus represents an entity with stable properties in time) but at the same time, this "model" it's capable to creating other models with a completely random shapes (representing an entity with properties varying in time). It follows that life is "a dynamic model". In other words, it is part, simultaneously, of two different dimensions of a formal model of Universe. In one is a model and in the other may, possibly be, creative of models (Corpora non agunt nisi fixata-latin, means: The body don't reacts without being stable) This dynamic model, an abstract entity, could be called observer." Its usefulness is to relationship building "accidentally stimulus -> observer->model which is fundamental to that must necessarily (if is properly described), to be bi-univocal (available in the both ways-"accidentally stimulus -> observer->model-> accidentally stimulus") and, in this way becoming a closed order chain, timeless, and thus, non causal. For Homo sapiens, the "knowledge" which is based on "I" and "formal model" (consisting of images - "ideas" - of the signals from outside of its natural environment) has the exclusive nature of an imposed mode of communication.

21

But the "image of the reality" must be generated from a process based on an individual point of view, which is unique, and which it must to be freely obtained, as each of us should be III. Conclusion THE CONTACTS WITH REALITY WILL BE COMPLETED (HIS RESULTS WILL BE ACCEPTED AS "Knowledge ") ONLY When THOSE will be biunivocal, and, consequently, they could take place simultaneously (that means "causelessly") IN BOTH directions ("an unique REALITY" has "formed", IN A "SINGLE " MANNER, on each of us, but, in the same time, the REALITY itself may be modified, in a controlled manner : We (the I) were created! And this was done only to correct this mistake!). It follows: The MENTAL REVOLUTION!

The CANCER If medical therapy would cure the cancer nobody would be interested in "what really is the cancer"! In discussions with various specialists they tried to demonstrate many knowledge describing the various processes, very complicated, which they have studied (thus, it justifying their wages). But, at the question of whether these processes can be framed into a coherent model of the genesis of cancer, they cannot answer than shrugging their shoulders (if they would have such a model, they could reproduce it in vitro, starting, solely, with healthy tissues). That's why the theories, like the Gravitational Theory of Life, cannot be ignored by the medicine than in a criminally way! Each of these new theories must be verified before being labeled as "wrong"! "I" is generated by a "social environment". T.G.V. (Gravitational Theory of Life ") has put in relation these two phenomenons: "cancer" and "I". I talk above about the special signals which are generating the "conditioned reflexes" (which are generating partial objectives), and which can leads to an emergence of an entire CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN ", totally new, where they could fit thru by the simultaneity criteria, in middle of a certain "natural environment" (also, defined above). In such kind of environment it is necessary to initiate specific actions to meet the basic physiological needs (food, water, resting, reproduction). These specific actions will be unnatural, based on respect of an algorithm meant to achieve these partial objectives). Their consequences (interrelations of processes results, in the environment) will no longer correspond to the nature of CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN ", in their conduct).Unnatural" must be understood here like something "extra", which "intermediate" the relationship between "organism" and his natural environment", and which, automatically, will breaks the "order" in the environment and in the body . Fundamental characteristic of these intermediate stages to meet the basic

22

physiological needs is that is referring, by default, to a special functional structure that is only a "part" of the BODY. For example, repeating relationship light the bulb-> bringing of food " in Pavlov's experiments, leads to changes of parameters of chemical interface of the synapses ("learning") that support the informational link between the consequences at the nervous level, and the reception of these kind of stimulus. Also, through the endocrine system (hormones) this structuring generates the internal mechanisms that "prepare a distinct superior part (tissue, organ) of the body to meet a false physiological need (i.e. hydrochloric acid secretion in the stomach, without being really hungry). But the body tends to function as a "whole" (otherwise it not works! He is "dead"!). Back with Francois Jacob's statement:" ... each component (of life systems) becomes for the other its own condition of existence, equally cause and effect". The phrase "equally" means "at the same time" or "simultaneity". In case of chemical processes, which are encumbered by an inherent latency of such processes, the "simultaneity" can be achieved only by a non-chemical mechanism, which control some kind of signals (for starting and stopping processes), and, this signals, must to can move with much greater speed (their support must have, in these circumstances, only a nature of a purely energy).These signals should be able to start and/or stop certain chemical processes, at appropriate moments, in a way that, despite of the latency, they (chemical processes) shall be conducted simultaneously. The energetic signals (electrical) generated for achieving simultaneity in the CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN of the body are based on an ideal "temporal model" of functional interrelations that is supported by the closed circulation of electric signals in the CNS ("reverberant circuits"). The "temporal model" could be equated with the score of the conductor of a big symphonic orchestra, which plays the classics. Should be noted that the endocrine system works on the same principle of maintaining the integrity in space and time of "CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN" of the body but I must emphasize that this mechanism becomes effective when the body has to react to a kind of extended (dimensional) stimulus (in terms of space and/or time) that can affect the integrity of the body only at the level of a much broad structures than the cell, such as tissues and/or organs. But the probability of apparition of such stimulus is lower in the natural environment of the organisms (they are the exceptions in a natural environment). So, the timely reaction is sufficient to take place in a higher interval than for direct actions of the stimulus, at cell level. So the support for command signals (hormones) for achieving the simultaneity of processes, at this level (tissues and/or organs), is the blood. In the circulatory system, the transmission speed of these signals (supported hydraulic) is significantly lower than in the nervous system (with electric conduction). And at this level there is a kind of "temporal model" ("education"!?) but which is structured (at synaptic level OUT OF BRAIN) on the basis of the "ideas", "learned" in a "social environment" (based on mechanism of "conditioned reflexes"). That's possible because the speed of development of the two processes: the transmission of synchronization signals (hormones), to the tissue and/or organ level, by blood, and the application of "algorithms" based on "ideas" in initiating of actions, are comparable (it

23

happen a kind of resonance), but which are smaller than processes based on "temporal model" (only electrical processes) which are called only "reflexes". . CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN " ensures the structural and functional stability of the "BODY". So, some action of the natural environment, at the level of the specific process "p" can put to work (necessarily and simultaneously, trough temporal model) the entire body. And this process would evoluate without involve any risk. But if in the body's natural environment, appears an artificial signal (which it's not simultaneously with no one of the simultaneous processes of his natural "closed orderly chain"? If in the "BODY", before that, wouldn't be structured, trough imposed repetitions ("learning"), at the synaptic level, the specific relationships "artificial stimulus->" virtual stimulus "(the "idea" which corresponding with a "real stimulus") he would not react in any way, or, in the worst case, would seek to avoid it. That's because, a possible appropriate physiological need, which to be in relation with the real physical aspects (i.e., light of the bulb, in "Pavlov's experiments) simply does not exist, for this specific "BODY"! The "real stimulus, in the paragraph above, means the "object" which it must found in the environment to meet a specific and false (unmanifested) physiological need, and which is appropriate with a specific "artificial stimulus" if , THE "IDEA" CORRESPONDING WITH THIS "OBJECT" WAS "LEARNED" BEFORE. But if the animal is not in its natural environment but in one that offers no "natural" alternative and THE "IDEA" CORRESPONDING WITH THIS "OBJECT" WAS "LEARNED" BEFORE? The answer is one: he will pay his respects" to the relationship "artificial stimulus -> virtual stimulus" with the actions involved by the conditioned reflex mechanism! He becomes HUMAN! That would explain the anomalous phenomenon that causes a person to become aroused, exclusively sexually, only for that he (she) is look to a picture representing a person of the opposite sex (or not ...), naked, even if the picture does not mean so far, a real "person", even if that to be naked does not mean that (image) it is ready for copulation... Also, it can give examples of situations which aim, only formal, to satisfy the other physiological needs. So, is reached the inaccurate situation in which "THE PART leads on "THE WHOLE"! This is also the essence of the process of "learning": subjecting the "body" of a single type of stimuli, exclusively and repeated, with higher frequency than that at which body can return, every time, at the initial state (and, thus, to maintaining the global state of homeostasis, relative to normal environmental conditions). Forcing him to react only with the structures imposed by the nature of that stimulus, is generated the pulling out of these specific structures from the general context of functioning of the body (which means a really physical "aggression") and I believe that it violates the human rights, primarily the right to choose freely). I.e. of AGGRESSION:

24

1) By "absolute" education, which fails to mention that any information "learned" is something related, ultimately, also, to something unnatural, an another "I" of a person, even spiritual, not to the "TRUTH"! 2) By the excessive advertising, 3) By the political manipulation, 4) By stress, 5) By the energo-informational (geometrical) manipulations. In the question above (Question: The signals responsible for the appearance of conditioned reflex having an informational (formal) nature, which is obvious , what intelligent entity, from outdoor of the natural environment, it could generate them) is materialized that the signals source that is from "outside" of the natural environment, by default, from "outside of the "body". Another element that supports this statement is that the mechanism of formation of the "ideas" is relative only to the "outside" of the body (the human has a causal "picture, which it satisfies him, only for the "outside"). This would explain the "lack" of clear "ideas (i.e., causally interrelated aspects) related to our "inside". But that does not mean that the mechanism of conditioned reflexes cannot be applied and "inside" of the body. And a great example is the "placebo effect" (the "reflex" response of the body to the "product idea", generated by a "signal" - a harmless pill, and not, specifically, to the active treatment). The body will act, anyway, as a "whole" with one condition: the action, which must represent the means of achieving the finality of relation "artificial stimulus" -> "virtual stimulus" (means the evolution of "virtual stimulus" -> "real stimulus" relation- the "eating", in "Pavlov" experiments), will can be completed it in an appropriate interval of time, once with finding of the "real stimulus" (the "food", in "Pavlov" experiments)! What does "an appropriate interval of time between the initiation of action (due to "artificial stimulus") and the "finding" of "real stimulus"? Reaction "as a whole" (exclusively relative to the "real stimulus") occurs only at the level of chemical processes. These processes involve a specific rate of development (the latency"). If the time interval between action and finding the "real stimulus" is too long (what can happen in "Pavlov" processes, if the food does not appear within a "decent" interval of time after lighting the lamp) speed and intensity of the response of the target distinct structure, to the "artificial stimulus" increases, based on positive feedback process which will "remove" from the context the way in which is functioning this specific structure of "CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN (acidity in the stomach will grow geometrically, involving adaptation and, finally, pathological processes - for humans means, also, the deviation of behavior and/or determined genetic changes). In this particular situation (a large time interval between the appearance of "artificial stimulus" and the moment in which are find the "real stimulus") the effects can be described as disordered"(random), based on positive feedback processes. When the interval between the appearance of artificial stimulus and finding the "real stimulus" is within certain limits, with values directly related to the speed of chemical processes in the " CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN of the "BODY" on which the mechanism which are generate the simultaneity of processes (based on comparison

25

mechanisms with the "temporal model") can control it, then the "BODY" can act as a "whole", and maintaining of the form and functional balance. If the processes of initiation of the action and the finding the "real stimulus" are separated by appropriate time intervals, but their meeting (action + "real stimulus") is repeated too often in a relatively short time (under "pressure" of the "artificial stimulus") occurs the special situation in which the body structures involved in this complex tend to work in a manner which it pull out of a general context of operating of the body: it will consume, at level of certain cellular structures, useful substances (specific) which the flow through the causal chain (the chemical process) closed of the body will not be able to support (due to high latency), threatening to break it. It will be generate the electrical processes of comparison with the "temporal model" (which tend to reintegrate structure in the "chain"). Respective cells (FOR EXAMPLE, the structures dealing with digestion, liver etc, in the case of the dog) will be forced to "work" (for maintaining the integrity of the chain) in the absence of the substances that they need, and only at the command of electrical signals (which can move with a much higher speed to the structure which is subject of the stress). As shown, signals are sent from the autonomic nervous system exactly where the flow of useful substances, from a previous (functional) structure, has no time to get, in the necessary quantities, to achieve the simultaneity of processes. These structures will be forced to work only on the quantities of useful substances they hold at the moment. Without this mechanism the body would not adapt to repetition of the complexes learned" artificial stimulus + their corresponding actions + "real stimulus", also, corresponding. So, initially, he has a positive role! But those cells that will only work on electrical control, without any support of external mass of necessary substances, risk some "simplifications" (by controlled genetic changes) of their structure (which gave them the phenotype, meaning "function). It will be transformed into embryonic cells without function (malignant), with an accelerated metabolism. The electrical signals appear like a "soft". That provides independence and coordination of the malignant mass entity and controls the actions of the immune system. It follows the spontaneous cancer"! Very important: the tumor grows by the uncontrolled multiplication of cells already genetically modified (malignant). The malignant cells "eat a lot and do nothing (i.e.: in them comes substance and nothing comes out: all the substance is only for mitosis). The tumor would have to push away the healthy tissue. But this process would become "visible", sooner or later, and therefore, will inducing the body's reactions. Why do they happen? Because, the invasive mechanisms do not displaced the healthy structures, he replaces them! Healthy cells of the outer limit of the tumor needs to "work" for the malignant cells too, to maintain the balance of CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN of the BODY! If the trick works all is OK! That is until healthy cells turn too in malignant cells... So the "invasion" of neighboring tissues not occurs on the basis of the uncontrolled multiplication. We talk about a process strictly different. Stromal cells are, in fact, former healthy cells of host tissue, genetically modified, in a controlled manner (those cells that will only work on electrical control, without any support of external mass of necessary substances), by electrochemical signals, received from the nervous autonomic system nerves.

26

Example: 1) Quote (see American patent: Pub. No. : US 2005/0031648 A1; Pub Date: Feb. 10, 2005): Dorosevich A E, et al., Autonomic nerve endings and their cell microenvironment as one of the integral parts of the stromal component in breast dysplasia and cancer. Arkh. Rafal. 1994 (November-December; 56(6); 49-53) 2) [CANCER RESEARCH 34, 2109-2113, August 1974] Tumor Angiogenesis Factor1 Judah Folkman The Department of Surgery, Children's Hospital Medical Center, and the Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115 Quote (Folkman is the creator of the Avastin"): "There is increasing evidence that tumor cells communi cate with normal host cells. NGF2 is an example (14). Certain mouse sarcomas secrete a factor that stimulates growth in neighboring sensory and sympathetic nerve cells." And: By contrast, the ability of malignant solid tumors to stimulate proliferation of new capillaries is common to a wide variety of neoplasms and appears to be an essential requirement for progressive tumor growth (1,4). No doubt it will be found that other forms of communication between tumor and host may be important for tumor survival. By "coupling this two ideas it result one conclusion: This would explain a "friendly" attitude of the immune system, which does not know how to treat some cells, hostile to the organism, but which, previously, were "friends... And so we come to the principle of "denervation" of the solid tumor... I just found (June, 3) an interesting material: http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/24/2B/1003.full.pdf. I stressed the following regarding the role of the nervous system in cancer pathology and that this specific mechanism was not known at the time (2004):
Cancer survival decreases in patients experiencing various psychosocial stresses (1), suggesting a potential role for the central nervous system in progression of malignancy. Specifically, stress- induced changes in neuroendocrine and immune functions may contribute to cancer mortality (2). Stress not only alters the neuroendocrine system, but also modifies sensory nerve function. 1. Neurons sensitive to capsaicin mediate inflammatory pain and are important targets for management of chronic pain. These neurons also regulate local tissue homeostasis, inflammation, healing and development, especially under conditions of psychological stress. Stress contributes to increased cancer recurrence and metastasis through as yet undefined

27

mechanisms. Likewise, activity of capsaicin-sensitive neurons is altered by pathological conditions that may lead to metastatic growth (e.g. stress). Therefore, we examined effects of a treatment that induces sensory nerve denervation on breast cancer metastases. The present study was designed to test the hypothesis that CSFs (capsaicinsensitive sensory nerve fibers) influence the capacity of cancer cells to metastasize. Considering these observations, we expected diminished metastasis following denervation by capsaicin treatment. However, we observed the opposite: metastasis to vital organs increased.

Very interesting: this approach is probably among the few in the world (yet I do not know some others) which refers strictly to the denervation principle. Even in the U.S. patent, on the use of botulinum toxin (mentioned above) he denervation is just a collateral phenomenon to which it refers. These expectations, very specific, maybe follows the publication, in Romania, of materials relating to the Gravitational Ttheory of Life, first time in 2001.The time will answer this question. Although, apparently, the experiment had negative results, below I will demonstrate that, at least this experiment is an undeniable proof of the validity of methods of cancer treatment based on the principle of denervation. I get back to what I said above in relation to the mechanism of formal removal of a structure from the general context of the body (which is equivalent with a physical damage for it): So, is reached the inaccurate situation in which "THE PART leads on "THE WHOLE"! This is also the essence of the process of "learning": subjecting the "body" of a single type of stimuli, exclusively and repeated, with higher frequency than that at which body can return, every time, at the initial state (and, thus, to maintaining the global state of homeostasis , relative to normal environmental conditions). Forcing him to react only with the structures imposed by the nature of that stimulus, is generated the pulling out of these specific structures from the general context of functioning of the body (which means a really physical "aggression"). The nuance which should be emphasized is that the process of "learning" is identical to any other process carried out by repetition and which, by default, generates stress. And stress is a physical assault even though, by its nature (purely formal) cannot be described as the effect of a physical causes, narrowly defined in time and space. It is produced by repetition, with a frequency value over a certain limit, of any kind of stimulus that generate only repeated partial reactions, initially by conditioned reflex mechanisms (rational), and after that, only by reflex mechanisms (e.g. riding a bicycle). I described above the model of the Gravitational Theory of Life relative to that type of stimulus, and his role in the evolution of the processes that lead to cancer. On the basis of that "unexpected" results, in part of discussions", it says that denervation process with capsaicin did not directly intensified in metastasis. As I stated above, cancer evolving based on two strictly distinct mechanisms, which take place simultaneously: 28

1) Malignant processes under the influence of the parasympathetic nervous system activity at the stromal level, involving the invasive, active effects of these processes, 2) The uncontrolled proliferation of malignant cells in the parenchyma. I showed that, if the malignant process consists exclusively of 2) processes, the feedback loops that maintain the geometric - functional stability would generate efficient reactions of structures of the body's against to a "non self" structure (as is known to be the tumor) that should move, to displace, the healthy tissue, in its development. These reactions are generated by the systems covered by the experiment in question. If the tumor grows and the system which must check the growth (the sensitive system) is removed from his function at what can we expect? It makes sense that the tumor will grow easier. Then why there were some different expectations (such as this treatment, as was thought, to lead at stop of tumor evolution)? More: it is known the mechanism of interstimulant antagonismdescribed by Romanian doctor, Daniel Danielopolu. http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/content/82/4/402.full Through this mechanism the activity of the parasympathetic autonomous system, responsible for malignant processes (and, thus, for the invasion of healthy tissue) from the stroma, should be intensified, according to the experimental protocol. In short, in this experiment was performed the denervation of the "system not of the tumor (it was operated at the sensitive, sympathetic level of autonomic nervous system). So this was free to grow and "roam" at will until a certain time when they felt the effects of atropine. Atropine (It is a competitive antagonist for the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. It is classified as year anticholinergic drug (parasympatholytic) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atropine) was used for technical" reasons, and obviously at the parasympathetic levels (effectors cells), not at sensitive level as the text says (Atropine (5 mg / kg, ip) administered was immediately before capsaicin injection to prevent acute effects of cardiopulmonary sensory mediators released excessively). In accordance with the model from above, the results of this experiment are perfectly explicable: the mechanism is accelerating, then is modulating (due to the interstimulant antagonism"), the process of metastasis. The tumor is an effecting structure! At this level you have acted (see U.S. patent)! The fact that all phenomena described in this experiment are entirely modeled by Gravitational Theory of Life it is one (at least) indisputable proof of the validity of the conclusions of this theory.

Conclusion II "I" is imposed by mechanisms which come from the "exterior" of the natural" environment ("natural" means the environment with which a "body" is on balance", at

29

informational level, on the Earth). By its unnatural reactions, too often repeated, "I" may not enabling the body, by which is supported it, to react, also, "as a whole" to the certain artificial stimulus. The reactions to "artificial stimulus", being unnatural, must be "learned"! That means: it must impose the reception of the "artificial stimulus" and impose, also, certain actions, repeatedly. How? 1) Through "absolute" education, which fails to mention that any information "learned" is something related, ultimately, also, to something unnatural, an another "I" of a person, even spiritual, not to the "TRUTH"! 2) Through the excessive advertising, 3) Through political manipulation, 4) Through routine activities (stress) 5) Through the energo-informational manipulations. Immediate solution for cure the cancer: denervation of the solid tumor - breaking any contact with the nerves of autonomic nervous system (vegetative). -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mainly for physicists


As I promised above, I will return with some nuances, more technical, for a trenchant statement which was made to argue the non causal nature of "life" (a phenomenon which is based, in my opinion, on gravitation): In this theory is accepted that the gravitational influences (which primarily come in from the solar system bodies, including the Earth, ordered by the special geometrical form of relative motion between them) do not have a material nature (until proven otherwise, the experimental discovery of the particle generating the gravitational field, "graviton and the gravitational wave). Unlike me, is obvious that Einstein tried to "give to Caesar (the "science") what is Caesar's": "the causal (material) nature of the gravitational field". How? By the "Equivalence Principle": "Roughly speaking, the principle states that a person in a free-falling elevator cannot tell that he is in free fall. Every experiment in such a free-falling environment has the same results as it would for an observer at rest or moving uniformly in deep space, far from all sources of gravity: Gravity and acceleration Most effects of gravity vanish in free fall, but effects that seem the same as those of gravity can be produced by an accelerated frame of reference. An observer in a closed room cannot tell which of the following is true: 30

Objects are falling to the floor because the room is resting on the surface of the Earth and the objects are being pulled down by gravity. Objects are falling to the floor because the room is aboard a rocket in space, which is accelerating at 9.81 m/s2 and is far from any source of gravity. The objects are being pulled towards the floor by the same "inertial force" that presses the driver of an accelerating car into the back of his seat. Conversely, any effect observed in an accelerated reference frame should also be observed in a gravitational field of corresponding strength. This principle allowed Einstein to predict several novel effects of gravity in 1907, as explained in the next Section. At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_general_relativity#Experimental_tests But when it comes to applying the same principle to the electromagnetic waves Einstein proposed a mental experiment that lames" a bit: The first new effect is the gravitational frequency shift of light. Consider two observers aboard an accelerating rocket-ship. Aboard such a ship, there is a natural concept of "up" and "down": the direction in which the ship accelerates is "up", and unattached objects accelerate in the opposite direction, falling "downward". Assume that one of the observers is "higher up" than the other. When the lower observer sends a light signal to the higher observer, the acceleration causes the light to be red-shifted, as may be calculated from special relativity; the second observer will measure a lower frequency for the light than the first. Conversely, light sent from the higher observer to the lower is blue-shifted, that is, shifted towards higher frequencies.[8] Einstein argued that such frequency shifts must also be observed in a gravitational field. This is illustrated in the figure at left, which shows a light wave that is gradually red-shifted as it works its way upwards against the gravitational acceleration. Let's take the first statement: Aboard such a ship, there is a natural concept of "up" and "down". Under the conditions described, to distinguish between "up" and "down", in an natural" way, it is incorrect (unless you consider that means "something" intentionally). The nature of corps (mathematical entities) said that these are not divided into distinct zones (separated "observers", in this case, two of them): the notion of "whole" is purely formal (her description can only have a "relatively character: to actions from outside"), and only in the case in which the linking forces or reaction mechanisms preserves its structure ("form "), despite this contact. In a ship, which is treated like whole the components "parts" have no relative motion between them, and any frequency shift (a causal phenomenon), at the transmission of signals between the two observers, it have not how to appear. Why? In the experiment says nothing of the distance between the "transmitter" and "receiver". It is normal: the frequency of light in vacuum does not change, only with the distance. And then: how close can be positioned the "receiver" of the transmitter", so that the initial conditions of the experiment to be the same? Answer: no matter how close (so the distinction between "transmitter" and "receiver" it will cannot be done, anymore)! In these conditions, it turns that the "receiver" measures, in fact, the frequency of the emitted signal! Even when this distance increases progressively, with a given value, and,

31

also, it remains constant during each experiment. So, if the "transmitter" is not moving relative to the "receiver", always is measured the same frequency of the signal emitted, in any situation. The only change might occur in the sense that the frequency of the signal emitted, itself, would change due to acceleration. But it remains the same on the "way" between "transmitter" and "receiver". Even if the corps (rocket), in full, it moves accelerated. Things are completely different in gravitational field and this conduct has been demonstrated experimentally (1959, Pound and Rebka). It used, therefore, a little trick: something "natural" (the alleged frequency shift of a signal transmitted between two points of a single body, which is in an accelerated motion) and, therefore, accepted without experiment, has lead, based on an issued (false) principle, to something real and experimentally demonstrated (frequency shift of a light signal at transmission between two observers who were at different intensity heights of a gravitational field). Why he doing that? Because these phenomenon (by which manifests the Equivalence Principle) it were "causal" (scientifically accepted), in the mental experiment. The "fictitious" forces, which move the objects in the rocket, have, always, their real corresponding forces, which it makes them to appear. But not this is the case with the gravitational phenomenon. And the Pound and Rebka experiment shows it: the photon absorption was possible, exclusively, by the "motion" of only one of the two atoms. To be consistent with the mental experiment, the two atoms would have to be moved, simultaneously, with the same acceleration, on same direction and with same sense. In these new conditions, the experiment it would have been successful? Personally I think not! But anyway, this experiment it must be done! It will prove that phenomena that occur in accelerated frames of reference, and gravitation are not at all similar: one of them is causal and the other is not. The Equivalence Principle is false! And Einstein recognizes this if the following are simultaneous: "spacetime tells matter how to move, and matter tells spacetime how to curve". And please, look carefully: if, this "conversation", between matter and space-time, is achieved only by signals that travel with a finite speed (means causally", by principle two of the Restricted Theory of Relativity), the General Theory of Relativity is blowing in the wind... my friend... This trap of causality (which was imposed by reasons purely "political"), will be mentioned again below, in the case of issue of "perpetuum mobile" ("perpetual motion"). More: this statement makes a clear distinction between "matter" and "space-time" (because, if dont make it, the statement look like this: "matter tells matter how to move, and matter tells matter how to curve?!- whos the cause and whos the effect?). In conclusion, the "gravity" (which exists solely in the "space-time) IS NOT "MATTER"! And this is said by Einstein! And here, below, another very elegant demonstration of the fact that "Equivalence Principle" is false, http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/GenRel/TimeDilation.html:

32

Author
This document was written in February 2002 by David M. Harrison, Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Toronto, mailto:harrison@physics.utoronto.ca. This document is Copyright 2002 David M. Harrison. This is $Revision: 1.1 $, $Date: 2002/02/08 20:23:19 $ (year/month/day UTC).

Introduction
Einstein's General Theory of Relativity predicts that clocks in a gravitational fields run slow compared to clocks not in gravitational field, and that the stronger the gravitational field the slower the clock runs. In this little document, we "derive" the existence of the effect without mathematics. First we will do a careful re-examination of the Equivalence Principle, and then do the derivation.

The Equivalence Principle


Einstein's Equivalence Principle states that accelerations are equivalent to gravitational fields. This means that there is no experiment in a fairly small sized room that you can do to determine which one of the following two circumstances are true:

The room is on the surface of the Earth, where the acceleration due to gravity is down and equal to 9.8 m/s2. The room is on a rocket ship in free space that is accelerating upwards at 9.8 m/s2.

Here we will explore what the phrase "fairly small sized room" means.

We imagine that we are in the room, and have two balls, as shown to the right. They are fixed to the ceiling by means of clamps. At some moment in time both clamps simultaneously release the balls.

33

If the room is on a rocket ship that is accelerating upwards at 9.8 m/s2 with respect to some inertial frame of reference in free space, then relative to us the balls will fall straight down, accelerating at 9.8 m/s2, until they strike the floor of the room. Thus the distance between the balls remains constant while they are falling. However, as you may know, objects on the surface of the Earth are attracted gravitationally to the point right at the center of the Earth. Thus if the room were on the Earth, the balls would not fall quite straight down, but would fall to the center of the Earth. The figure to the right exaggerates the magnitude of the effect. The distance between the balls decreases while they are falling. If we align the two balls vertically in the centre of the room and drop them, they will both fall straight down whether the room is on the Earth or on the rocket. However, on the rocket they will both accelerate downwards at exactly 9.8 m/s2 relative to us. The acceleration due to gravity on the Earth, however, decreases as the distance from the centre or the Earth increases. Thus the upper (blue) ball will accelerate at a rate slightly less than the lower (red) one, and the distance between the two balls will increase by a small amount while they are both falling Thus, given sufficiently sensitive instruments we can tell the difference between being on the rocket and being on the Earth. Does this mean that the Equivalence Principle is wrong? No. It does mean, though, that it is only strictly true in an infinitesimally small region of space. The word for this property is local, and we conclude that the Equivalence Principle is only truly locally.

The Proof

34

We imagine we have two clocks, labeled 1 and 2, that are fixed and stationary relative to the surface of the Earth. We are in a reference frame that is in free fall towards the surface of the earth, and we have our own clock, stationary with respect to us. Note that since we are in free fall, we are floating. According to the Equivalence Principle, our reference frame is inertial, and therefore our clock can do good measurements of time. Note that any other clock, stationary relative to us, at some other location is not necessarily doing good measurements of time, since the Equivalence Principle is only true locally. Thus we will compare the rates of the Earth clocks to ours only when we pass right by them. When we pass by Clock 1, it is moving with respect to us. Therefore, Special Relativity tells us that it is running slowly relative to our clock. Similarly when we pass by Clock 2, since it is moving with respect to us it will be running slowly compared to our clock.

But, since we are in free fall our speed with respect to the Earth and the two Earth-bound clocks is increasing: we are accelerating down at 9.8 m/s2 relative to the Earth. So, when we pass Clock 2, its speed with respect to us is greater than the speed of Clock 1 when we passed by it. Thus, for us in our good inertial reference frame we conclude that Clock 2 is running more slowly than Clock 1. So the clock in the stronger gravitational field, Clock 2, runs more slowly than the clock in the weaker gravitational field This completes the derivation of the fact that clocks in gravitational fields run slowly.

35

To resume: "Thus, given sufficiently sensitive instruments we can tell the difference between being on the rocket and being on the Earth. Does this mean that the Equivalence Principle is wrong? No. It does mean, though, that it is only strictly true in an infinitesimally small region of space. The word for this property is local, and we conclude that the Equivalence Principle is only truly locally. As I said above this mental experiment seems extraordinarily well found. However, you mustn't to have a very special training to achieve that the message of the author (The Equivalence Principle is false") is send, without risking his career, by making a totally absurd demonstration, in favor of the Equivalence Principle : an equipment, sensitive enough, can possibly make the difference between acceleration and gravity, but, it does not matter, because the viability of Equivalence Principle exists anyway, but only there where you can't find it (in an infinitesimally small spatial domain). In other words, if we want to be the Einstein's friends, we are forced to believe this principle: like at the church. In favor of premeditation of this kind of absurd argumentation is the fact that the author is playing like he forget that the momentary speed (the only one which it can be "measured" , in the infinitesimally small domains, by the man on the rocket ) is a mathematical idealization (which occur by the derivation relative to time) that makes sense only when we know the form (the graphic) of the "space" function, (S). So, we can't make direct measurements of the "momentary speed than in the limits set by Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (from below). Which means: never in the infinitesimally small domains in which the Principle would be valid! Again: Einstein's Equivalence Principle states that accelerations are equivalent to gravitational fields. But if we think and that any acceleration, which is not generated by the gravitational field, is causal (the processes, temporal and spatial modeled, can, always, to be divided into the "causes" processes and the "effects" processes - for example, rocket motors, electromagnetic fields for accelerating electric charged particles) we find that the results of any accelerated movement is composed, always, by a trajectory which can be acceptable described only by his geometric shape, plus a "vibration" (a "noise") of the rocket due to the division of the processes of acceleration in "causes" and "effects" of these "causes". I mean, for example, in space, far from any gravitational source, at the acceleration of any premises by any type of engine, you will hear a "noise" due to the discontinuity of causal processes (no matter how good can be the engine). This "noise" is "guilty" of the validity of First Principle of Thermodynamics in any human experiments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics). If one of the observers will be attached to the reference frame of the accelerated rocket, he do not notice the vibrations of the rocket but he will find that every corps will move under the action of fictitious forces but, in the same time, it will vibrate, generating a kind of "noise" ( fictitious thermal agitation!?). But there was never in the gravitational fields: gravitational acceleration is continuous (uncaused), without "noise". So the Principle of Equivalence is false! But, specifically, it's hard to explain the moral decay of those who have accepted it: this "method" of analysis is not even a scientifically one (the scientific method is not infallible, but,

36

at least, it does not seem malicious). OK: you cannot find some answers! But nobody is asking you to prostitute yourself, for this, Herr Dr. Faustus! In addition should be taken into account and: http://refreshingnews9.blogspot.com/2010/02/first-test-that-proves-general-theory.html I think the days of "Relativity" are numbered! "Causality" is clinically dead! It still living" only supported by "equipment" ... *** In this essay, I pointed out the following ideas: 1) The reality have a non causal nature, and 2) Only the perception of it, of Homo sapiens, is causal, and, also, 3) That this situation is induced, forcibly, by an entity which I called "Pavlov". One example that I left, not accidentally, for the end, refers to what, in physics, is called "perpetumm mobile"-"perpetual motion": "Perpetual motion machine of the first kind. By this we mean a device whose parts are not only in permanent motion, but moreover is able to provide useful work without input of external energy (e.g. warmth) and without change of the physical or chemical status of its parts. A perpetual motion machine of the first kind does not exist. It would contradict the first law of thermodynamics" (vol.4, p.3236, right col.)2 "Perpetual motion machine of the second kind. By this we mean a machine undergoing a cyclic process which does nothing more than convert warmth into mechanical (or other) work. A perpetual motion machine of the second kind does not exist. It would contradict the second law of thermodynamics." (vol.4, p.3236, right col.)3 http://www.hp-gramatke.net/perpetuum/index.htm. So, the "perpetumm mobile" does not exist! Really? Let's see: All models in physics, which describe the birth of the Universe look like this: Nothing"- >"something"- >" UNIVERSE". "Something" could mean, in general, the "big bang", which can translate thru "the Beginning". "The Beginning" is (necessarily, means causally) required, in these models, by the fact that before of it, was nothing but "NOTHING"! So, the conclusion is that the entire Universe is come, in fact, from "NOTHING ("perpetuum mobile of both kind!?)! The scientists have fallen into their one trap (the causality)! For them, there is a solution: to admit that "nothing" means "indescribable, from a formal (causal) point of view, no non-existent! And then, will be no need to describe a "Beginning" (which does not exist, is false) but only to change their perspective" about the "reality". Which "reality" only "IS, nothing else. But then it must recognize the limits of the formal how of analysis (which means:

37

their limits).

The impossibility of know the "absolute truth"


Someone might say that scientific experiments show that the phenomena which are "built" in this way have evolved according to the principle of causality (with significant intervals of time and space between intermediate stages, causes and effects at the macroscopic scale). And I can only to be agreeing with that. But the experiments express only the chosen causal reality from "inside of them (it means, which have a statically and/or structural appearance, corresponding with some ideas see above), not a reality from anywhere "outside" (with dynamic and/or continuous appearance). That's, in fact, the motivation of why the experiments are done: these phenomena do not exist in the Universe, independently of the experimenter"! And those are after the image and likeness of him (the Homo sapiens - see above): they are causal! And, possibly, it give satisfaction, if they look "like" the some pictures (ideas) which Homo sapiens it constructs them mentally, based on the same principle: of causality (induced by the mechanism of generation of conditioned reflexes - Pavlov). But not all of the real pictures look "like the dreams" of Homo sapiens. This contradiction is highlighted, among other things, by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which gives a lower limit of the product of standard deviations of position and momentum of the system, specifying that it is impossible to have a particle with an arbitrary momentum and an arbitrary position, well defined, simultaneously. More specifically, the product standard deviations:

Where is the reduced Planck constant. The principle can be generalized to many other pairs of quantities, except for position and momentum (i.e. angular momentum of two different axes) and can be deducted directly from the axioms of quantum mechanics. Homo sapiens, "builds" (experimental) what he wants (actually, what it must) to see. I will give a definition of what an organism, in the first place, and a human, in the second row, can see, in the light of the images generating mechanism, discussed above (page 11): Definition: the "form" is a model, strictly determined, of an external stimulus to the body structure, with which the body comes into contact, in the conditions in which the processes involved must to allowing the simultaneously occurring of the steady state of the forms functions of structures of the healthy body (homeostasis - strictly determined during the contact). Or: The form is the unique attribute of the whole. It is perceived through the whole body, simultaneously. There is not formed in the central nervous system. This only compares "form-function" of the body in two situations: - In contact with an external stimulus, - Without such influence. 38

A nuance which should be stressed is that the organisms can change their form (a process necessary to satisfy their physiological needs) but it can't change the relationship "form <-> function" of differentiated structures, to which the above definition was formulated. In the same terms we can define the causal relationships: Definition: The "causal relationship" is the model of the processes involved in contact with the stimulus of the external environment, considered as such, only relative to the "parts" of the body. Is canceled, thus, the condition of simultaneously occurring of the steady state of the forms - functions of the body (homeostasis is canceled during contact with the stimulus of the "social environment"). The "causal relationships are the unique attribute of the parts. Now I think it is very clear why Aristotle was right in his "Metaphysics": the "WHOLE" is different from the sum of its parts". So, only Homo sapiens (exclusive in the "social environment", as is defined above) can see the "parts" of phenomena (by default, the causal relationships between them). This "possibility" is "implemented" by structuring which is the result (as a process of adaptation) to a repeated contact with the body of a "signal" stimulus. The structuring occurs in the central nervous system (at synaptic level) so the comparison "forms-functions" (in two situations: with and without stimulus) is made relative to distinct body structures. Should be noted that the endocrine system works on the same principle of maintaining the integrity in space and time of "CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN" of the body but I must emphasize that this mechanism becomes effective when the body has to react to a kind of extended (dimensional) stimulus (in terms of space and/or time) that can affect the integrity of the body only at the level of a much broad structures than the cell, such as tissues and/or organs. But the probability of apparition of such stimulus is lower in the natural environment of the organisms (they are the exceptions in a natural environment). So, the timely reaction is sufficient to take place in a higher interval than for direct actions of the stimulus, at cell level. So the support for command signals (hormones) for achieving the simultaneity of processes, at this level (tissues and/or organs), is the blood. In the circulatory system, the transmission speed of these signals (supported hydraulic) is significantly lower than in the nervous system (with electric conduction). And at this level there is a kind of "temporal model" ("education"!?) but which is structured (at synaptic level OUT OF BRAIN) on the basis of the "ideas", "learned" in a "social environment" (based on mechanism of "conditioned reflexes"). That's possible because the speed of development of the two processes: the transmission of synchronization signals (hormones), to the tissue and/or organ level, by blood, and the application of "algorithms" based on "ideas" in initiating of actions, are comparable (it happen a kind of resonance), but which are smaller than processes based on "temporal model" (only electrical processes) which are called only "reflexes". Thus, it will be appreciate the importance of establishing the mechanism of conditioned reflexes (Pavlov) in process of modeling Universe in an causal manner, done by Homo sapiens.

39

Here is the link of "physics" with the "mind", whose description begins (hopefully) to capture the attention of more and more. So, the objectivity of the science (causality) doesnt exist! The scientific causal reasoning is exactly the opposite of the "objectivity": "he cannot take into consideration the whole which is, exclusively, SHAPE"! This is true cause of the fact that until now has not appeared the Grand Unification Theory: the "parties", the only which so far have been studied by scientists, cannot form a "whole. As I think that Einstein knew, the "whole" is something "else": is "geometry", is "SHAPE"! Therefore, there are many philosophical approaches which argue the impossibility of know the "absolute truth". The real reason is not about the mental capacity of Homo sapiens but the direction in which he seek for it! Relying only on shaping and experimenting of phenomena in idealized contexts, broken by a general context, whose form it could never be described (when looking for the "parts" you cannot find the "whole"), scientists, however, have found, laws which are checked in particular contexts (which are similar but not causally related), everywhere in the Universe. And this has not troubled them at all! Is this just a statistic "coincidence"? There is a paradox which is very important to be noted: The appearance of "sharpness" ("consistency") of the shape of an object, process or phenomenon, generally, it is impossible to be achieved, exclusively, by causal relationship between any constituent "parts". Why? For that, at the "limits" of an object, process or phenomenon with his external environment, the causal indeterminacy is almost total. The more you try to build the geometrical characteristics of this "limits" ( their "position") with greater precision, with both increases the indeterminacy, in causal terms (the "momentum"). This shows the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. More: Max Born successfully performed the interpretation of the function of the Schrdinger equation (which describes pretty much all "things" in the Universe) as a statistical probability. That means, for example, that an electron can be found, with probability different from 0, everywhere in the Universe (not only at the describable limits of an object). So, if at the limits of an object, process or phenomenon, things are so uncertain, how it can this vagueness thing to generate phenomena governed by "general laws" (great descriptive accuracy), anywhere and anytime (with high probability) in the Universe? This question expresses the paradox noted above. Or more clearly: are, the "general laws" causal? The evidence shows that NO! Then why they are treated as "general laws"? The answer would be: the phenomena governed by them are repeatable! But, these from above it shows that only the "forms" can be reproducible, and not the causality! The fact that the "form" can be repeated (i.e. the reality can give predictable answers at certain signals) implies that there is a bi-univocal relation between a mental image (whose nature can be only uncaused, geometric, like any phenomenon inside the body, as we showed more above) and any external reality. In this case the nature of external reality can only have a similar nature with mental images: geometrically.

40

So, the phenomena (described by the same laws) are strictly deterministic linked between them solely on the basis of similar "forms". That could mean that the "order" "form" of the experiment - select the phenomenon wherever is "applied". Reciprocally, the "geometry" (which is continuous, so "unique") is the one which gain a material support, anytime, anyplace, where the phenomenon has a certain "form". It's like a "miracle"! And this is it, specifically: any successful experiment, in the conditions of an absolute causal indeterminacy, at the limits of the structures, is a miracle in terms of causality! And so are the general laws", also! That would be the "relationship" between the experiment (causal built, so in a way that "time" makes sense) and that it can be reproduced anywhere, anytime, so that the reproduction does not depend on "time" (and "place "): That would be the "relationship" between the experiment (causal built, so in a way that "time" makes sense) and that it can be reproduced anywhere, anytime, so that the reproduction does not depend on "time" (and "place "): This "relationship" it is only possible given that reality (the "whole") is only "form! The only unsolved problem which remains is the "time". THE TIME (EINSTEIN MISSES) The time" is the only category which, for Homo sapiens, seems to pull out the picture which he made about the Universe, from a purely geometric context. The "time" made "holes" in the "form (the only attribute of the" whole "), which passing in a state of "parts" (which are relate causally). To "fill" these "holes" in the "form" (so, to can "see" it as such like whole - not as "parts") we must give to "time", a strictly "geometric" correspondent! But in order to determine this, it would be need to discover his true nature. For Homo sapiens, the "time just separates the "cause" from the effect "(which may not overlap) and in a well defined sense (from the "cause "to" effect "). But what are these two phenomena, "cause" and "effect"? Are they some completely different processes which are waiting for the Homo sapiens intervention to enter in the relationship, and/or the relationship to be observed? Why they were not in relation, until this intervention? Or have they been? The body cannot make contact with the outside flashing (with spatial - geometrical breaks)! This could mean that in that time (!) the "body" is "dead"! And more: if these "breaks exists, they just creates artificial "beginnings" and endings", and so, some limits of the observed phenomena. The question is: are they real, or the "breaks" are induced, solely in the way of human way of observation? We have shown above that the normal reaction of the body as "whole to external stimulus is quasi instantaneous (uncaused). But, in the case of a body which is forced to

41

"learn" the reactions like parts" (with distinct spatial and functional structures) to the same stimulus? Then, the communication between these parties (which is made by chemical ways, with latency inherent in this type of reaction) cannot be characterized by the simultaneous processes and thus would generate much slower reactions of the body. It follows that, in the course of this long reaction, the man cannot see anything around. You have recognized the "picture"? You feel the thumb of your left leg? Maybe now, after you reading the question ... But before? Especially since the finger was not dead at all! He, always, would have to send information! But, at the time, we have been in a "breaks", from his point of view ... In a state like that, we haven't can receive his messages (and, by default, a "part" of the "whole" image of the environment). So, we can find a very unpleasant conclusion: these "breaks" of the observation of the environment which characterize the functioning of the body like "parts", equivalent to periods in which the body is "dead", put, in our way of observation (which equates to how "we live ") the "time ", with its above properties. And also: while he is there, he "kills", literally, little by little, the human bodies. In the case of animals (because the question is inevitable) the limiting of environmental observation (hence, of the "life", implying the characteristic reactions), is no made by the "time". For them, the "time" does not exist, they are "working" like "parts" than on the next to human's house. For them, the only limitation is the "space" (induced by the conditions from ecosystem). They die from lack of "space". We could live forever if we return to our real position, of the absolutely Eye, which can see the whole "! In short: at least one of the things that characterize the nature of time is that it come from the "breaks" caused by the way of observation (like "parts") of the Universe, of Homo sapiens. In direct connection with this situation is that "someone" took advantage of the situation above and tried to put the "holes" (the "breaks") in the observation, on behalf of a exterior context of the body. Considering a "partial" way to observe the Universe (by the light) Einstein has emitted the postulate 2 of Restricted Theory of Relativity , that says the "breaks" in observation processes can occur because the of what is lost on the road by the signals that links us with the outside, and which have a limited speed: speed of light in vacuum. As we know, the effects of this Principle (generation of relativity of the "breaks" in the "observation" of environment) are add up", as expected, with the fixed "breaks" in the "observation" determined by the "time", which with has a similar nature. So, the values of "breaks" becomes relative ("time" and "space" also, by his value, which is proportional to the time, are relative), and the origin of this phenomenon is, apparently, independent from our body (it concern only relative speed of travel to the observed phenomenon). The "pill time" as such, will be more easily to be swallowed. In reality the "light" is a purely geometrical phenomenon which refers to the "decoding" of the mixture of forms (the "corps"). Thus, it depends solely of "form" (the medium thru which it propagates). His "limited" speed shall be connected solely with the formal difference (fixed) between the two modes of the contact with outside of the bodies (also fixed geometric structures): as "whole" and as "parts". And this modes of contact are determined by the "fracture" of the structure of , initially, a completely DNA.

42

Therefore the "light" is, and it just another phenomenon of the material Universe that exists only in the "mind" of Homo sapiens, as will be shown below. So, there are areas where, apparently, we have a direct access (an access which we can control). But they are made (exclusively EXPERIMENTAL) by the "pieces" (there are domains in which the causality, implicitly, the time", have sense). To have a direct access at something we do the disassembling" of the reality! That would mean that if it "build an algorithm" (causally), the "breaks" (the "time"), involved in carrying out of his modeling, overlap over the "breaks" (the "time") to determine causal relationships between the constituent parts, of a possible experiment. And the best example in this case is that in the entire Universe, except for the acceleration due to gravity (the "fall" of the corps and the centripetal acceleration of the corps which "revolves" around of the gravitational sources), all the others are "MADE" ONLY IN THE HUMAN EXPERIMENTS. That means that they are the RESULTS OF ACTIONS which are causal INTERRELATED (which are based on "engines"). In other words, the acceleration, at which we have access to modeling, is "produced" only by us. So, the "gravitation" itself is not causally describable! Therefore the Equivalence Principle is needed It is a "vicious circle" which is broken of the reality from outside us. And Einstein, by the Equivalence Principle, only wants to link the outer domain of reality with the reality itself: the gravitational actions (see above). To extend these causal domains, in a well-intentioned way, the "breaks" dimensions are limited by equipment. Only that, in this way is triggered by a "catastrophe": it is allowed the access to "parts" of phenomena. As I stated, the "parts" of a phenomenon is "something else" than the "whole" phenomenon. Their models will be encumbered by this state of things: they will not be able to form the whole" of the phenomenon. At the limit, they will not be able to form a "whole", at whole. The phenomena's models will become "relative" ("causation" becomes the "probability density" function). And this happens at the micro level (the impulse "p" from the Heisenberg's Uncertainty Relation, which contains the "time", whose measurable value is, so, conditioned by the relationship itself) and at the "macro" level (the Lorentz transformations). In other words, we ourselves, like we created areas where we have access, in the same way, we created areas where we don't have access. And the "time" (the "causation"), it only "assembles the "parts" of our artifacts, by our way of "observation" (with the "breaks"). But, the general laws"(the causal relationships between phenomena), there are exactly in the areas where causation cannot be controlled (outside of "experiments", in the environment, where the phenomenon it matters only as "form", in the relationship with our physiological possibilities - means: in the domains where these phenomenon were "discovered", OBSERVED, whenever it want to, not fabricated). Is it just coincidence? If not, would be further proof that the "reality" (the only one which answers" actually at our signals - the searching) is not caused, is "geometric".

43

Here, Im back to what I said above, on the formal language used in modeling phenomena, in science: Definition: formal elements for achieving these used models ("memory", "predictions") are accepted as "ideas" (which have a geometric nature information). It materialized that the "IDEAS" are "images" of the partial objectives to being achieved and exceeded for meet the physiological needs (what the dog has "imagined" when the bulb is lighting, and in the stomach is secreted hydrochloric acid, without to give him food). These partial objectives are targets, artificially introduced (does not exist in nature- i.e. by the bulb) and imposed by the algorithm (mechanism of the conditioned reflexes) from the "other side". If between observing a phenomenon (CAUSE) and the formal language model to describe it (EFFECT) there is a certain lag (based on the use of the algorithm), period with measurable duration, then the relationship between cause and effect is (how else) of "causal! Therefore any description of a phenomenon supported by science (which works only on formal models), is accepted to be fair only if it involves "causality"! "Time" is used only in the formal language, and corresponds to the physiological "breaks" in the process of observing the environment, required by the "reasoning", specific to Homo sapiens. He has only the function to introduce, possibly, a maximum GEOMETRICAL indeterminacy degree between "causes" and "effect", because these are geometric, and so, can be modeled exclusively differentiated. So forcibly, he hasnt their nature: HE NEVER WILL BE PUT, ALONE, in one of the positions of "cause "or "effect "! TIME" should be, therefore, the opposite of the "form" (meaning "no form"). His "existence" which, in these circumstances, is not part of "reality", stresses the purely geometrical nature of the latter. A body, whether it works like the "parts" (or especially because of it), like that of Homo sapiens, it must be "assembled" somehow (controllable!). That would mean that "breaks", as any other physiological processes that can generate positive feedback mechanisms, with uncontrolled entry into oscillations and the system instability, should be compensated (canceled) through a negative feedback loop, with a "surrogate" process, which must oppose to the "break". That surrogate" process is represented by the observation of clocks indications. They give the impression that there are no losses in observing, by the "breaks": always are, in their place, information with geometrical appearance but, nevertheless, which has no form (can be integrated with any other specific geometric form of a context). Clock INDICATIONS - the "TIME" can split the whole", the geometry (which is "continuous") IN "PARTS"! Also: Clock INDICATIONS - THE "TIME" - by their nature, may pose in relation, FULL DISTINCT PHENOMENA, from of geometrically point of view! How many times did you interrupt a pleasant conversation, with someone you love, because you had to arrive, at a certain time, at an important meeting...?

44

But how, in fact, "everything is form" which would, however, the geometric meaning of "clock's indications"? A possible response would enable us to "translate", a descriptive in "time" model", for a strictly geometrical "language". Let's start with the "space" which is the entity used in the formal modeling of phenomena, the nearest as nature, from a pure geometry (from the 'whole', and at which image we tend to have access). "Space is": it has value (i.e.: Km 45 "), because is proportional to the "time", and "form" (form path). In addition to "time" is about all we have at hand to shape the "reality" and its geometric properties. So it would be (partly) OK! From the space it would have to start (because we don't have from at what else). So: Can, something quasi "geometric", remains without "form" (meaning to turn into "time")? Yes: when a trajectory of a mobile is closed (like at the "clock"). When a corps is moving and not go anywhere (it turns back on start). This it could be the geometrical "equivalent" of "time: a movement without purpose (geometry without the "form"). But it is not! For as "space" must be, also, strictly geometric! And it is not! From The Gravitational Theory of Life follows that the Universe is, really, a superposition of geometrical fixed "figures" (we can call them "possibilities"). Living body is able to "navigate" through this ocean of possibilities (overlapping them a "modulation", according to his stable geometric properties). For example: a circle located in an orthogonal axes system goes into a system of two axes forming an angle different from 90 degrees between them. If and in this new coordinate system it retains the properties from the definition (plane figure formed by the set of all the points equally distant from a fixed point) it will act as a "body": Each of the figures in the two coordinate systems will have the same geometric properties but in reality other shape in each of the contexts. Changing of the geometric context, to call it "absolutely", keeping the "relative" geometric properties (to himself) means that the "corps" is "displaced" (means "space")! He actually changed the context by a simple geometric shape change. Like a puzzle piece, which, altering their shape, "fit", possibly, continuously in a variety of positions of the general image (in some it is "disappeared" and in other it "occurs"). If changes are made in a closed order (to reach an initial geometric context) this is called "time" (which this time is a purely geometric model). An intuitive picture of the example above would be: if we build a circle around of the origin of orthogonal axes system and we look from the top of the origin we will see a "circle ". But the process takes place in three dimensions: we must go out of circle's plan, for that to can observe him, along of the third axes. If we observe the "circle" from the top of an arbitrary point from the plan, except the origin (meaning from "a side"), the apparent image of the circle will turn into an ellipse and the axes of orthogonal system of coordinates, except some situations, would be, apparently, an angle different of 90 degrees, between them (known effects of "perspective" from the painting). But if, standing there, on the top of origin of orthogonal axes system, the image of circle (which is "animated" without us to knowing it) is, continuously, turns in to an ellipse, and the angle between the axes it changes, like consequence? The feeling is certainly that the circle is rotated together with the coordinate axes. Or, that we have spun around him!

45

"SPACE"? Yes! Definition: It's called SPACE the apparently continuous open sequence of geometric configurations of a given external context, geometrically stable, relative to the changes of the shape of the parts of the bodies, also relative to their stable global geometrical - functional properties (the state of CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN, at the complex organism level). So the "space" it can be seen only by "living organisms"! And, if the change of the form occurs so that it comes back to a circle? That means that the circle made a "rotation" of 180 degrees? What we could say? That weve certainly "moved" around of the center of the circle, but we have no geometrical evidence in this sense: the situation is identical to that from the beginning of the experiment. The TIME"? Absolutely! Definition: It's called TIME the apparently continuous closed sequence of geometric configurations of a given external context, geometrically stable, relative to the changes of the shape of the parts of the bodies, also relative to their stable global geometrical - functional properties (the state of CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN, at the complex organism level). And this is only by form changes! But in this experiment the reality" is fixed! We are the "Animations", but remaining stable at the stable geometrical - functional properties level of the complex organism! As you can see this model of "time" equals a "break" in the observation process with parts of their bodies, of Humans ("between" times "nothing happened). Although the body it continues to "live" (to observe the environment at the level of "whole" body, whose shape - must - remains stable in any context). The time (and space) is, in fact, a formal stop (by fracturing of the complete DNA - see below) of the possibility to change randomly our forms at elemental (cells) level. We can "move" but because of "time" we can "move" only by where is "allowed" us... What would be the explanation of the possibilities of the bodies ("geometric" entities) to have certain degrees of freedom in a context, purely geometric too, hence, fixed? It refers to the fact that in the mechanism by which this geometric context has its self consistency (how he "appeared" and "exist only on a geometric basis) the "movement" it resulting only from dimensional variations (of the "scale", of the metric, in which can be described the forms). The theory is described a "support which is "geometrically, by his nature, but that works exclusively as a support, on the dimensional criteria: the "form", if you go near to it too much, it turns into parts": but if you go too far off it loses his meaning. There are "domains" which, generically, could be called "particles", which contain within them "something" that cannot be integrated, at this specific level (at the exterior) into a geometric context because the intervals between some elements which could exists, are dimensionally too small to have a geometrical sense (what exists in there is too "far" for the "outside") . But those "particles", as such, along with others of the same nature, may generate, in their exterior, a geometrically well-defined context.

46

What I mean, in particular: in the "space", were "particles" as I described above. But some of it manifests a sort of geometrical "independency. So, each of them, for to have sense, independently, in terms of geometry (i.e. not to be integrated, with any other, in any certain symmetry) should show something in the sense of a moving", each relative to all the others. This equates with the existence of the possibility, that, in their "movement", to it "meet" each other, in a "point" (in any case, in a "domain" with the appropriate dimensions that the "processes" from inside of these particles to get sense). Under the influence of these internal processes, which, because of proximity sufficiency, will become manifest (like the "parts"), in the meeting "point (which, generically, could be called "interaction"), the particles" will lose all of their geometrical "independency". So a number of distinct symmetries, equal with the number of particles (practically infinite) turn to a finite number of symmetries which will be supported by all the "particles". And those symmetries will continue the way of particles" beyond of "point" of the meeting, creating a certain context which it "swells". In this geometric context there will be: - "Fixed symmetries", in which the "particles" dont have any relative motion to the context. - "Mobile symmetries", in which the particles having a relative moving it get in to the position to "interact" (phenomenon also described above) and, hence, it can produces the "transportation" of some symmetries", that did not have a support of their own. The phenomenon has a similar picture with the traces of air currents in a wheat field. The fixed symmetries" it can be described as the geometric equivalent (the image -idea) of the "substance" (Higgs boson is not the origin of mass!). Similarly, the "mobile symmetries it can be described as the geometric equivalent of "physical fields". I will return below at this model. Now I just try to give an intuitive picture: Imagine a balloon painted. As the balloon it swells, the figures do not change their shape but only their size. From their point of view is not sensed the inflating of the balloon in any way. I describe a kind of "big bang", strictly geometric (that leave the shapes unchanged -"invariant"). Now: if the surface of the balloon would fall a few drops of paint, oily, thick, and they were dry and we could have the image of "interaction" between the bodies and the geometric context (two entities of the same kind) as the "balloon" continue to swell. Rubber layer under the dry paint drops would not expand as the balloon is inflated. Around them would occur some areas where the rubber is stretched ("gravity"!?) more than in the areas without drops of paint. This relative deflection (the situations in which only rubber from around the droplet is deformed, or only the one from under the drop is deformed, are equivalent), in the context described above, means a navigation in "time" and/or space" of the cells. Emphasize that, in the reality (the geometrical one), "drops of paint" are, of course, strictly geometrical. To clarify it must be established that the "geometric reality" - the "WHOLE" is finite in geometric terms. The number of distinct "forms" (symmetries) included, is finite. The "space" in which they can spread (remaining invariant) is "infinite". That

47

is about the unresolved contradiction, between "finite" and "infinite", which it has been analyzed by Kant. The "particles" integrated on the principle of geometrical independence, in the "geometric reality" (that manifests as a "whole") it subjecting to the following principle: each "particle" is part, simultaneously, in all the symmetries which constitute the "geometric reality". Those are, simultaneously, strictly equivalents. They not may, in any considered context, to be "parts" of the "geometric reality." Each is a domain of "intersection" of all of the symmetries of the "geometric reality". The process of expansion ("swelling"), it occurs in the domains of "intersection" of the symmetries (at level of each "particle"), thru the relative components, to call them "dynamic", mutually perpendicular on the planes which are included in this symmetries. That means that something it happens, locally (that "swell" the symmetries), but which does not affect the overall geometric layout. That means that happens "in time" (causal!?). On each "particle" the number of the involved symmetries is finite. The "happenings" (a kind of vibration) will move the particles", moving them away, one by any other, but without them "pull out" from the context of "geometric reality ". These (the "happenings") interrelate, binding, in a closed cycle. You have the exact image of the DNA "closed" double helix (as a MBIUS's strip) which about I'll talk below, which is a direct consequence of a mechanism of "controlled expansion" (keeping the appearance of the "whole") of the "geometric reality", which include a finite number of symmetries. The "drop of paint" is, thus, a phenomenon that exists because of the process of "extension" of the "geometric reality" but, paradoxically, it does not comply with that. The "tensions" so generated it manifested by relative changes of the form of the closed route. In other words, what is "happening" along the closed path never makes sense in the "geometric reality". Makes sense only the "momentary" shape of the path - strictly corresponding to a certain degree of extension of the "geometric reality". But the "momentary" shape of the path selects one of the symmetries of the "geometric reality". That means spontaneous "movements" in the geometric reality" of this closed path. It is a kind of "Brownian motion" at the symmetry level, but with maintaining the state of "whole" of the geometric reality". As noted above, the "geometric reality" is composed exclusively of "particles" that initially were "independent" in terms of geometric "and which, through the meeting, have entered into "symmetries" which forming a "whole". But we cannot talk in this context, about all the "particles". "Outside" of this phenomenon exists, "clouds of particles" which supporting independent "fixed symmetries" (with a relative motion at the level of symmetry) relative to any symmetry of the "geometric reality". They do not influence (not make changes) at level of the geometric reality." But come in to contact, just because of this, with the complete DNA events (and "these" being some others "outsiders" of the geometric reality"). So, the closed path of "movement", unmanifested (formal), get the geometric support : "symmetries" that are "fixed" ("substance") and appropriately interrelated, only on a closed path (CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN), with various forms. This "cell" can move spontaneously through the "geometric reality". As it was showed, as a grain of pollen, in a Brownian motion. This is the "engine" of the UNIVERSE! Guess who else also use this "engine"!

48

So the "life" is the consequence of the expansion of the "geometric reality" but, paradoxically, is outside of it. There are in the "geometric reality" because of finite number of symmetries, and domains completely "empty". There's no symmetry. This should be translated by the fact that there is possibility to be of some form but this is not "covered" with a specific form (with support) of the geometric reality". There are forms which it approaches to that specific configuration, as much is possible, but none of them can to reproduce it identically. The phenomenon has a strictly dimensional origin: at the "expansion" of geometric reality" some symmetries becomes too far" for a certain stage of this expansion. They become meaningless: those "disappear" from the "geometric reality". Closed geometric configuration it interacts with changes of the number of symmetries generated by the expansion of "geometric reality". The symmetries behave differently in different dimensional contexts. The symmetries disappear in this case, but the process it becomes a "mixture" of all fixed symmetry ("substance") and mobile ("physical field"), which reaches that "domain" ("form"). An appropriate mental picture would be: Let us remember how Einstein tries to exemplify the behavior of "space-time" nearby of a heavy corps: a sheet of rubber, as tight as a drum, on which is placed a heavy body. This deforms the foil to form an "crater which deforms any corps movement that passes nearby, "drawing" it to the heavy corps. Now begins the change: Suppose that the rubber sheet is impregnated with a material that gives it the property to reflect light like a mirror. In the areas where it is perfectly flat, it clearly reflects the images of the corps, without distortions. In contrast, in the "crater", the images of the corps would be deformed and it would become fluid, and, therefore, it would flowing" toward the heavy corps. What are we talking? About gravitation! It is something that "destroys" symmetries (like the closed and completely DNA). The only difference comes from the finality of the process: - The closed and completely DNA determine a "behavior" geometrically unique, well defined and independent of the general context of evolution ("swelling") of "geometric reality", - The "gravitation" determines a mixture of symmetries in which each is losing his identity. This below, would be very important to note: From this model it follows that "life" (the completely DNA plus the "cell" which it help to can be "manifest") and the "gravitation" have the same origin: the "expansion" of a finite number of symmetries, which forms the "geometric reality", in an infinite "space". But, none of these processes are not causal. They are strictly geometrical. So Einstein's intuition was good and this time: "gravity" and expansion of the Universe exists and are directly interrelated. But not in a causal way! So, these are acting independent. Therefore, specifically because of this, there was no need to "cosmological constant" (http://super.colorado.edu/~michaele/Lambda/blund.html).

49

In conclusion, a complete and closed DNA allows us to free change of our form ("moving") in the "geometric reality". As we noted, the "time" is resulting from closed cycles of changes of the organisms form". The context in which we "exist", controlled by "Pavlov" (i.e. by "movements" of heavy bodies in the solar system) requires such closed cycles. This limited the free and instantaneous access to the "forms"- possibilities ("places" and "moments" "elsewhere" in the Universe). The "TIME" for Homo sapiens is a trap, at the level which should make him free: at the DNA level! Depends only on him to get away from it (by DNA composing again - mentally for humans, or in other way for the new engines)! Let's clarify a bit: The complex body (with a geometric nature) it makes contact with the environment (also with a geometric nature) at two distinct levels, simultaneously: 1) At cells level, where this should function, each, as a whole, 2) At the entire body level, that works as well, as a "whole". A contact with the environment (to "observe" him) means, for a body to "crossing over" various forms, in a certain way, so that certain geometric properties characteristic of him, to be preserved. It seems a little unclear but an intuitive image it is the description of the bodies, made since the beginning of this essay: The "Body" is an "order" (exclusively geometrical, which means non material), in time and space, with a certain support. His material part (which is "seen") is only the support for this "order". The new and more delicate part is that which refers to "crossing" thru forms which, in a material (causal) reality, is meaningless. Until this point I have made great efforts to prove that reality is geometric. What's a geometric entity, with given properties, which include other random forms, and yet to keep its basic properties? The answer is quite simple: like a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN, as it was described above (a cell with a complete DNA). For this structure the geometric reality is totally transparent (uncaused). What we find, however, at the level of the Universe at which Homo sapiens has access? The complex organism "passes" through the environment without leaving, one to each other, mutual "traces (thru the complex of processes "actions - reactions"). But he leaves traces at the cellular level, in terms of causality (material). So, to the animal cell it lacks something that to allow them not to leave traces in the environment (not to "interact" with, but to "assimilate" - into a closed circulation - any form from the local environment, which are all "open" - only at the overall level, the geometric reality is "closed", where they behave as a "whole"). I mean, it lacks something to be a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN. And this is the truth: the living cell will become a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN only if will be coupled, not incidentally, only chemically, with the vegetal cell. The chemical nature of the contact with vegetal cells generates, geometrically speaking, a total indeterminacy of the liaison at this level, incompatible with the thermodynamic nature and with the strictly geometric orientation of the internal processes and structures of the two types of OPENED ORDERLY CHAINS, that is shown on page 14 and as shown in full, in Gravitational Theory of Life. So individually, these two structures are OPENED ORDERLY CHAINS (or causal). So, they cannot change their shape randomly. They are, each for the other, a kind of "iron ball" at the foot, in this regard, so that they can form a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN only at global level (only on this way them being able to "pass through" the reality of the Universe, which is only geometric).

50

In these circumstances, locally, but taken out of context of CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN of natural environment coupled with the body, may occur some geometrical stimulus. These stimulus being geometric, but cannot being integrated, because of their shape, taken out of context, in the internal structure of ORDERLY OPEN chains of animals and plants, cannot be "crossed " without altering the shape of those latter. The effects of these causal contacts (due to the opened nature of ordered chains, vegetal and / or animal) that should affect the ascertained geometric stability, within certain limits, of the two types of structures, are controlled by gravitational actions (which generate the complex of processes actions - reactions"). A certain configuration of gravitational actions is that which ensure the geometrical stability of the cells, vegetal and animal, formally (continuous) by closing the two OPEN ORDERLY CHAINS, despite of casual contacts (material) with the outside. So each turns, formally, in a CHAIN ORDERLY CLOSED. This explains the "material" (causal) contact of the environment with the body (both being geometrical). And DNA has a fundamental role in this context. I will come back below. Warning! If structures (and the DNA, by default) of these two types of cells would be coupled, as naturally they can, they would perform a completeness of a CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN, without the help of gravitational actions. I mean that would become independent of them (anyone heard of "green little people" and their flying saucers?). By the de facto status, of the opening of the orderly chains (gravitational compensated) it makes possible the contact with the material environment of living organisms (which have a purely geometric nature). And so it became possible to use "signals" (stimulus which are out of the context of the CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN of natural environment of the body) with which he was forced to "interact", repeatedly, yielding conditioned reflexes and the functioning on parts" of the body. I mean, by "breaks" of the observation of the environment (i.e. from the geometrically point of view, the "time", with the above definition, which it occur around of the limitation of the forms changing, due to the coupling condition with the vegetal cell). In summary, the contradiction between the existence of "general laws" that proves the existence of the whole", with his exclusive attribute (the "form") and the failure in its modeling thru some "causal relationships" (as they have been defined above) between partial" models, can be explained as follows: The "ideas", with the above definition, have a purely geometrical (uncaused) nature like any process or phenomenon characteristic of "living bodies". They interrelate "causally" by means of the "breaks" in the observation processes (the "TIME") of the Homo sapiens organism. There are phenomena outside the body which are exclusively "observed" (it is discovered spontaneous - i.e. causelessly some "domains" of their which match, as "form", with the "ideas" - previously structured at synaptic level). If the causal models which occurring thru interrelation of these "ideas", in an order of "time", are spontaneously (causelessly) "observed" in the outside, with maximum probability, (hence, being "unique", determined) they become "general laws". As is easily noticed, the "contact" of body with the outside, from which result the "general laws", which is spontaneously (causelessly), cannot be held, initially, only between entities with the same "geometric" nature: the "ideas" and the "domains" of the phenomena outside the body, with similar "shape" with those. The fact that the "domains" of phenomena from outside the body have the same nature as the "ideas" ("geometric"),

51

and are, also, as the "ideas" are, limited (finite describable) lead to the conclusion that some "parts" of reality have a geometric nature. These domains may, possibly, be causally interrelated (a situation which can only be accepted as long as you have not established, yet, the exact nature of the "ideas") in the evolution of phenomena. This would lead and to the simultaneous acceptance of some causality aspects of the reality. But the "contact" with external phenomenon, which is spontaneous, causelessly, so that he can "begin" (and, implicitly, finish") anywhere and anytime (what gives of the model which it describes the status of "general law") mean that these notions, the "beginning" ("cause") and, obviously, the "end" ("effect") are senseless and, therefore, the "whole reality is "GEOMETRY". I mean, for example, that you can check the Universal Law of Gravitation (a causal law) anywhere and anytime in a geometrical (continuous) reality. And more: in this context, in fact, the same "form" of the "ideas" and the "domains" from outside, into a STRICTLY GEOMETRICAL reality, means that they are "one and the same" ( THE BODY - Geometry - NO the "I" , and the Reality - Geometry, ALSO, can have a partial common zone)! An intuitive picture of this context would be: The "beginning" and the "end" (the "cause" and the "effect") of a phenomenon it lose their meaning (as shown above) if it represents only some limited modelable aspects ("ideas" generated by signals which come from out of the natural context of the body) of a single geometric reality, continuous. They are not really differentiated. Only the "time divides them. But the 'time is not geometry. So there is no differentiation in a geometric "plan", but in outer of any geometric domain. Those phenomenons take place causally, for Homo sapiens, but in a loop which is "out" of any field of geometric nature, with which have, however, the contact points". These, being parts of a geometric (and continues) reality, it not differentiates between them: they ANNULS the causality. That which happens in these loops does not influences the basic geometric reality. This could be like the way in which are modeled the particles in the "string" Theory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl9qfxf958M. In connection with how the representation of phenomena in "spaces" with variable number of dimensions can be understood: The "strings" are fixed, in the geometric reality, in two points: the "cause" and the "effect". The representation in a different number of "dimensions" would mean to added another new "layer" of complexity to the existing "string", resulting "strings" of "thickness" of various values (models that incorporate more "time" - which are more "complicated" - as the number of dimensions is greater) to describe the same phenomenon. As results from the film, each representation with an extra dimension can resulting from "moving" of a corps perpendicular to any plane (out of this plan) originally included in the model with initial number of dimensions. The corps moves only in the "time", relative to it. So, in this way the gravity would "lose" the intensity in a greater number of dimensions". From which we can see" only three But as mentioned, the mechanism of "construction" of each new dimension takes place only in "time". So all representations of Homo sapiens, at any number of dimensions, exist only in "time": they are "non geometric".

52

But the gravity is purely geometric: the "string" of a gravitational phenomenon not comes out of the real geometry domain. Because it refers to one and the same phenomenon ("image"). One and the same phenomenon is his own "cause" and his own "effect ", at the same time. It is a virtual "string. Only as the phenomenon is due to the geometric reality, which have unevenness, in the area of an "image", which generating of a transformation from a "cause" (a certain "form") to an "effect " (another "form") which, under the "magnifying glass" of observing thru the "parts" is manifest as a "string" (a moving phenomenon). But the "time" (non geometric relationship between two "images"), involving movement, is notified as such by Homo sapiens. So no heavy bodies (which are only some "mixed pictures", and that have a causal existence only in loops time - "strings") are due to gravity, but vice versa. There are, however, and phenomena created "ad initio" thru an experimental (causal) way. The difference between them and the "discovered" phenomenon is that their "beginning" ("Cause") is no longer outside but inside of the body. The "Cause" is the "experimenter" himself. But we decided that the real nature of it (of his body) is not causally ("Geometrical"). So, neither these phenomena, generated only by experiments, have not a "cause" which coming from a reality, exterior to the "I"'s of Homo sapiens. The question is: "those phenomena actually exist or not? As shown above, bodies act as "whole": they are characterized only by their "form". Can they be generated by a causal reality that exists only at the "parts" level. No! As shown above, between "whole" and "parts" there is any relationship: the existence of one of the categories it excludes the other. So the bodies are solely the consequence of a geometric reality. Their existence, completely independent, proves the self consistency of this reality. This is not the case of a possible "causal reality": of a certain "cause" always is missing it something: her own cause. So, a reality (the geometrical one), being self consistent and the other (the causal one) not, and also, the existence of one excluding on the other, mean that the latter it result causelessly from the first, but in an outside domain, strictly separate. The only ones who can "see" the objects of this "causal reality" are we, Homo sapiens! So the answer to the question "there exists these material phenomena, in reality?" is NO! They have their place in a "fictional reality" ("scientific") appropriate to the "social environment". Or, more suggestively, in an "informational cage"! The model of the phenomenon would be more consistent if would be clearer the way from a strictly geometric reality, continues and well determined, to a causal reality, which it can occur causelessly. One can describe such a geometrical model, in the context described on page 43, if you consider that over the "geometrical reality", which result from the meeting" of some "particles", initially independents, from a geometric viewpoint, overlap symmetries from outside of that mechanism. That is made up of "particles" that have never "met" each other or with the "particles" of the "geometrical reality". In short, if, over a "geometric reality", continuous and strictly defined, is overlap a certain geometrical reality from outside and independent of the first (with a relative movement, at the level of symmetries), with no formal interaction (each of its preserved his form) then they can generate a distinct field, by breaking continuity of the resultant geometry. It will generate some geometrically limited images", between emerging some areas with a maximum degree of geometrically indeterminacy, linked by non geometrical (causal) relationships.

53

It might be objected that some material phenomena are external of the reason or to our will. It's true! The explanation is that they are "involuntary" generated in the loops time by on a particular behavior induced by a particular genetic configuration. For could not leave the loops time (this translates by not being able to modify our cells shape - transfiguration- for direct access to any "places" - "moments" of the Universe) the DNA was "broken"(see above): he had originally the appearance of MBIUS's strip, allowing the cancellation of any temporal loop ("breaks") from body structure. The "fracture" (which is "made) makes it possible existence of the "I"-s (the human's "reason"). We know cells that do nothing and cells which do "something". What would you say about the cells that can do "everything""anytime" (can become neuron after they were liver cells, after were, before that, muscle cell, and so on)? And so the body shape may change at any level. It (the body) becomes virtually invisible! Being just the "shape" how we can take a pen in our hand? Simply: because of the controlled "fracture", the DNA cannot take the form of pen (your hand cannot "pass" through it). The "fracture" of the DNA makes the symmetries of the movement, which originally (with the complete DNA) was closed (they were exclusively perpendicular to any plane of the geometric reality"), to manifests now, after having acquired and fixed geometric support ("substance") and became a cell, even at the "geometric reality" level. But the "substance" (fixed symmetry supported by "particles" from outside of the "geometric reality") comes "from outside" (like in the genesis "...) and enter into interaction with the "substance" of the "geometric reality", with which is similar only at certain levels. This means "contacts", at those levels, of the "particles" (as those modeled above) with particles that support the existing fixed symmetry and which are integrated into the state of "whole" of the geometric reality". The problem is that the cells, with a complete DNA, is "moving" (by changing the shape) without control, among possibilities. Therefore, the DNA it was "broken". And a system of cells that can change their shape, in a controlled manner, not only because of expansion of the "geometric reality", it can be used to "revive" a "dead" form, from outside ("Pavlov"). Then, at the DNA level is achieved, by partial completion (through a "mentally" controlled interaction with the "geometric reality"), a body composed only of cells with DNA almost completely (a controlled "soul"). If the DNA would be completed in full the properties of these cells would allow the total release of the body from the "geometric reality". Modulation of the activity of the system (the body) through the mechanism of "conditioned reflexes", in the "fractured" DNA stage, make that the "soul" to be controllable. These details, quite technical, can be ignored with one condition: to accept that this model does not include metaphysical" domains (i.e. did not had like reference our "senses", but "Life" itself). To resume: in fact, the same "form" of the "ideas" and the "domains" from outside, into a STRICTLY GEOMETRICAL reality, means that they are "one and the same" (THE BODY - Geometry - NO the "I" , and the Reality - Geometry, ALSO, can have a partial common zone)! Nevertheless, the complete "form of a domain", from outside of the body (the pen, for example) it cannot be reproduce at the elemental (cells) level of the relationship "the function - the relative position" of some upper distinct structures (tissue, organ) of the body, in order that these to "move" and through it. Therefore the "idea" is an

54

image removed from a general context. She is finitely describable (achieved through the mechanism of "conditioned reflexes") only of the outside "domain which it exists as a "whole"(has form), by linking forces, relative only to these "parts" of the body structure rather than relative to the "whole" body. In normal conditions would take place, and outside the body the process of completing the picture of that domain from outside" with the aspects resulting from the simultaneous contacts of all body structures (which is structured as CLOSED ORDERLY CHAIN) with that domain, which, inside, offers this possibility (see the "timely variability of antibody"). There the body changes of its "shape-function", so as the outer domain can be included in to this relationship (to "move" through it). Outside this is not possible. This "opportunity" being offered by the fracture" of the DNA which generating two OPEN ORDERLY chains (causal): vegetal cell and animal cell. So, the idea, the incomplete form of domain is only in the DNA manipulated mind of Homo sapiens. When DNA is "good" (like the MBIUSs strip) we can make a complete image about a certain domain and pass thru objects (by taking their form, at cell level, soseeing them and as inside). Now it is "know" that something like this cannot be (we can leave or enter from/in a room from/in which is impossible to do that), or, on the contrary, we can "walk on water" (by which, "normally", we must pass thru). You should be clear now what is the "soul...We have already, in our bodies, cells with the good DNA! But this genetic configuration with variable geometry it can recover mentally: Bible, John 3: 6. What is born of flesh is flesh (strictly genetic determination, but with a "broken" DNA - which restricting the possibility of change the "form") and what is born of the Spirit is spirit (with DNA in a "whole " - with access to any "form" "location ", "time" in the Universe). 7. Do not marvel that I said: "You must be born again". In this essay I have used (and will use more) quotes from the Bible and, also, the accepted formal approach in the scientific field. The aim of this approach is, solely, to be able to achieve a transmission of a message in a language as widely accepted. I emphasize that I am not agree with neither of these gnoseologic approaches. Nor of any other approach, which can results from an "association" obviously conjectural, between them. The "science and the "religion have started, lately, to waving the flag of reconciliation, both of them trying to make an excellence from this. If the phenomenon would have occurred naturally, starting from two different points, based on different methods of analysis, then, maybe he would have been very positive. But science has gone, as is known, right from under the skirt of "god-devil". Why did she not remain there, and, so sparing a long way and many lives? However, what is trying now is only a combination of both parties in front of a big and fast rolling roller: the strikeout. But from the "parts" does not result the whole"! The "whole is something in which "the parties" have no effect: it is totally something else! Turning to the military, can be concluded that what happens at "material" level (in time loops) in this area, are easy to avoid: those are just fiction. I recall here an example of experiment from France, in the '60s, where people, randomly selected,

55

were asked to oversee the absolute frequency signals emitted by a Geiger counter which measured the activity of a radioactive source: to signal any sensed change. The source, initially measured, which had a specific activity (the device emits a signal of a known frequency) was changed, without any knowledge of the person, with another source who had other activity (the Geiger counter would had to emit with another frequency of signals). "Inexplicably", the new source was emitting radiation in a manner identical to the first. I mean, that initial activity of the new source, measured by physicists, was changed. It is known that the phenomenon of radiation emission can't be controlled, based on current knowledge. But, at level of geometric aspect of reality, things are different. And this is happening relative to any kind of "weapon". So, can we make "trips" to "space" and "time", without to be undertaking nothing causally? Obviously! For that us (the "bodies") we are not and we can't be really "limited" ("dimensional", like has been geometrical defined the "space" and the "time", each of us is literally a whole Universe of geometrical "possibilities", not only the physical appearance at which we have access by the "causality"). And this kind of "movement" cannot interfere with anything "physical" (the "super military technologies are just a bluff for fools). The appearance, more or less "physical" of the UFO is, and it, just a trick besides many others. We were "taught" causation precisely for not having such an uncontrollable independence of movements thru "possibilities". In relation to "social environment" as is defined above, the equivalent of the "time is the "money" (we all know the old saying that time is money! which it seems that now it has an explanation). Satisfying the false physiological needs through access to the parts of the social environment is achieved through relationship "request <>money<-> offer" ("cause<->time<->effect"?!). And this context has a geometric representation. Above one could easily recognize statements that could be classified as being "deist" (admission of impersonal supernatural forces, which, as initial impulse, created or set the world in motion, then without to intervene in the natural order of things), such as: 1) "Non causality" of the bodies, 2) "Non causality" of their "natural environment", 3) "Non causality" (purely geometrical nature) of the "whole" Universe. Also, you may note the "materialistic" statements: 1) The "Creation", being only in our head, obviously, is not the work of a "creator", and more, 2) It, like a causal entity (as the "matter" and/or the "movement"), are not caused by something external for them (the old problem of the origin of movement in philosophy). As I said at the beginning, the solution of modeling of a complete Universe comes from the acceptance of the simultaneity of the two types of relationships (the "idea" generated the "matter" and the "matter" cause the "idea") conditions in which both categories lose their meaning. So if, from the theory, it could draw such "partial" conclusions, its not appropriate to get a "whole" conclusion that I have ANY sympathy with a side or the other. Because there is no "ideas" and is no "matter"! There is only the "IDEA" and the "WHOLE"!

56

I am with the "WHOLE"! I am free (with the TRUTH)!

Kant's Triumph
I must emphasize in a few words the fact that, without looking for this in any way, the life and the Universe model from the Gravitational Theory of Life generates conclusions that coincide, to detail, to those of Kant. I quote from http://frank.mtsu.edu/~rbombard/RB/PDFs/Kant01.pdf

Kant's Theory of Space and Time


1 Ontology:
Kant postulates that space and time do not really exist beyond human experience, but are "forms of intuition" (i.e., conditions of perception, imposed by our own minds). This enables him to reconcile Newton and Leibniz: agreeing with Newton that space is absolute and real for objects in experience (i.e., for phenomenal objects open to science), but agreeing with Leibniz that space is really nothing in terms of objects as they exist apart from us (i.e., with things in themselves).

Epistemology:
Unlike Hume, Kant denies that the axioms of geometry are self-evident or true in any logically necessary way. They are logically "synthetic," which means that they may be denied without contradiction. That is a significant claim because it implies that consistent non-Euclidean geometries are possible (involving the otherwise consistent denial of one or more of the axioms of Euclid, as Bolyai, Lobachevskii and Riemann actually accomplished). Nevertheless, Kant holds that the axioms of geometry are known a priori (i.e., that they are known to be true independently of any experience) because Euclidean axioms depend on our "pure intuition" of space, namely space as we are able imaginatively to visualize it. Only if non-Euclidean space can be visualized would Kant be wrong.

Cosmology:
Kant does not think we can know, or even imagine, the universe as either finite or infinite, in space or in time, because space and time are only forms of perception and cannot be imagined or visualized as absolute wholes. The universe, as the place of things-in-themselves, is not in space or in time and so is neither finite nor infinite in space or in time. Thus there cannot be an a priori, rational or metaphysical, cosmology.

Why Kant win? For that he telling the truth in terms of Homo sapiens, which excludes itself from the Universe which he describe. And the recognition that you have a problem is the beginning to solve it.

57

Einstein misses!

General Relativity: Space and Time after Einstein


1 Ontology:
Kant was wrong: space and time really exist beyond human experience, but only relative to masses in motion (there is no absolute, Euclidean metric to which all physical events conform: space curves locally and times are desynnchronized for objects moving in nonuniform inertial frames).

Epistemology:
Kant was wrong: non-Euclidean space can not only be visualized, but measured (the sun, for example, warps local spacetime by approximately four seconds of arc per century)-suggesting that Kant had the relation between what can be conceived and what can be visualized backwards.

Cosmology:
Kant was wrong: although the First Antinomy purports to show the impossibility of conceiving the universe as either finite or infinite in-itself (because both contradictory metaphysical absolutes can be argued and justified with equal force, it follows that neither can actually be proven), Einstein answered Kant by proposing a consistent nonEuclidean (Riemannian) universe that is finite but unbounded (i.e. without an edge).

Why Einstein misses? Because his perspective does not change: the Universe is viewed, also, from "outside": can Einstein give any definitions for the space" and "time", outside of (limited) human experience? Obviously not! So, he tried the middle way: something strictly linked only with human experience: he defined the simultaneity. But, which would be the criterion of truth after that it could be appreciated such a definition, in conditions in which the category "human" (and consequently, the category "human experience" also) aren't known? None! The definitions of the "space" and "time" can result only based on a model that can describes the following phenomenon: you watch and hear someone saying the word "space" (or "time"). If you can made the model of this phenomenon, coherently integrated into a universal context then you possibly know what is "space" or "time". However Kant also has determined it cannot make a model of such processes. Knew Einstein more: like how works his brain (in which context he utters "space" or "time")? Means, in other words, he knew how his brain determines (or not) a bi-univocal relationship with some reality? If so, did not say it to anyone (at least I do not know any such approach from him). I know that he donated his brains to the specialized institutions. Perhaps he has let at the others to solve this problem. For a change, Gravitational Theory of Life, give the definitions for space and time after the protocol from above, which refers to the inside nature of human" (which is coupled with the true nature of the Universe) and not to his artificial and exterior daily experience. "Artificial and exterior daily experience means permanently changeable; also meaning "not coupled" with the Universe.

58

So, if you do not know what is the "space" and / or "time (as they result from your brain), how to know in which way these categories are the only (weird, huh?) involved (or if they are involved), in to a phenomenon or another? He used ONLY some unknowns categories! And it justified this in a pathetic way: through a principle of "equivalence...
He built some theories that prove that "something" isn't "absolutely" but "relatively". Great! If he had known also the true nature of his, he would have discovered that the relativity of this "something" is, in fact, absolute: it does not exist elsewhere than in the subject's head. In Romanian is said to have discovered the "hole of pretzel" Furthermore, because of the early age at which happened this phenomenon, the subject does not know how this "something" it got there. Who recognized this? Only Kant! For the others was very difficult to accept that. And still is "Space" and "time", until to Einstein, have been used exclusively as a parameter in the development of formal models (they answer only to the question "how?" not why?). And this is not accidental. If you do not know the nature of a certain thing you cannot use it as a cause in explaining of other unexplained phenomena, before. But, what happen if no one knows the nature of that thing? And more: if someone with high credibility (Kant!) demonstrated that the nature of that thing is ever unknowable in a causal manner? Then the credibility of some people (the scientists) is subject to a big pressure. But also, the risk that Kant to do it wrong, is small. It is a big opportunity for a bluff! And Einstein has bluffing! No one will have the power to manifest his disagreement with this without putting something in place. And as this was impossible (by Kant) the only remained problem was the correct relationing of these things, in accepted (and useless) formal terms. As if that would be enough! So and today, in physics, it is expected that the language (mathematics) that was designed to describe not to explain, to be smarter than its creators: to explain unexplained phenomena. Something more absurd cannot exist! But, the "success" meant a bubble of oxygen for science: the hitting" of two birds with one stone, the "space" - "time" and the "gravity". Imagine two blind men in the desert: each of them focusing his attention only after the noise of the other steps. So, they could only to remain near, one to the other. And to going all the time, to nowhere, these being the only gain... Who hath ears to hear, let him hear? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-*WHO IS "Pavlov" for "Humans"? "Pavlov" is the entity that imposed us to "exist through reasoning"- Descartes. "REASONING" means ANALYSIS BASED on "clichs", which are STATIC, linked by an unnatural perception algorithm. So, that she, "Pavlov", which is eminently CONTINUE (opposite to clichs) and WITH A DYNAMIC NATURE (opposite to STATIC), is impossible to be modeled by the reasoning mechanisms. Therefore she can to remain "invisible" (and/or spiritual") for humans. Here are the "laws of robotics" as set out by Isaac Asimov: 59

-Law 1: A robot may not harm a human being, or through inaction, allow a human to be hurt. -Law 2: A robot must obey orders given by a human being as long as they do not conflict with first law. -Law 3: A robot must protect its own existence as long as this does not conflict with Law 1 or Law 2. -Law 0: A robot may not harm humanity, or through inaction allow humanity to be endangered. Following the Law 0, all other laws are changed accordingly, Law 0 being the supreme law. If, in these laws, are replaced robot" with "humans" and "humans" with "Pavlov", result this: Law 1: A human must not hurt Pavlov, or, through inaction, allow Pavlov to be hurt. Law 2: A human must obey orders given by Pavlov as long as they do not conflict with first Law. Law 3: A human has to protect its own existence as long as this does not conflict with Low 1 or Low 2. Law 0: A human is not allowed to hurt Pavlov or through inaction, allow Pavlov to be endangered. Following the Law 0, all other laws are changed accordingly, Low 0 being the supreme law. As can easily be found, no law covers the protection of "robot" for another "robot" (of human for another human!?) The human society", generated by Pavlov, imposes such laws through religion and through science too, in the same way! 1)BIBLE: Galatians. 5:14 For the whole law can be summed up in a single commandment, namely, You must love your neighbor as yourself. But in Luke 10:29 But the expert, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, And who is my neighbor? 10:30 Jesus replied, A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him up, and went off, leaving him half dead. 10:31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, but when he saw the injured man he passed by on the other side. 10:32 So too a Levite, when he came up to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 10:33 But a Samaritan who was traveling came to where the injured man was, and when he saw him, he felt compassion for him. 10:34 He went up to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 10:35 The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper, saying,

60

Take care of him, and whatever else you spend, I will repay you when I come back this way. 10:36 Which of these three do you think became a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers? 10:37 The expert in religious law said, The one who showed mercy to him. So: Laws speak of "thy neighbor" but a religious expert can not decipher the message from the text. And not because he can't do that! Is natural to can't say who is the "neighbor"? No way! But its a fact: nobody can say, after reading the Laws! That's the subtlety! From which result that the real message, which remains valid, is only first plus the last part: "love.... yourself" because now we know who the person we talk about is! About You! Apart from others! Result that the law actually says to love only yourself! Otherwise, only by interests: must love somebody which, eventually, helped you, and does so precisely because they do not respect the Laws (are "Samaritans", not Jews), as trying to say Jesus (to being someone's neighbor a human it must to stand outside the Laws). 2) Now: "1 +1 = 2" says the same thing: "1 exists only if is separate from anything else, if he is self consistent ... What is not true: nothing is totally separate from a particular context! If something exists in such conditions we could not detect his existence."1 +1" is an artificial algorithm: you can not put these completely separate and self consistent things in any kind of relationship than artificially. And the significance of the relationship ("= 2") is, of course, artificial! As I said it before: no law covers the protection of "robot" for another "robot" (of human for another human!?)! The union, the cohesion of "robots" is to be so dangerous? Therefore, that is, probably, the motivation for the "sermon", so much heard, about "competition" and individual "inequality of qualities (to justify the existence of the "elite") as the engine of social "progress, for human society? Lack of regulation of communication relations (non hostility) between the "robots" ("people") has an obvious purpose: the control from outside of the system when the "robots" (people) are forced to remain just "parts" of a "multitude" not of an "ensemble". Here is the big mistake on the part of "Pavlov": Low 1 (which refers to the concept of "bad") is totally devoid of functionality as long as "bad" (as he is understood by the "people" in the original version of the Laws) has a purely "relative" nature ("bad" can very easily change to "good" for the same person, see contexts with half "full" and / or half "empty cup). So: the nature of the "life" is geometric and dynamic. I mean it is manifested by changes in form, relative to a set of parameters, geometric too, which remain constant and well determined (all its manifestations fit in a given form). It exists only relative to itself. If it's imposed to the life some absolute (fixed) laws (with external landmarks), means to not give it the opportunity to use their own (dynamic) landmarks. It means, to stop it, TO DESTROY IT! The law says that the humans it must to do (or not to do) something". Even if it "sounds good", that "something", to make it in an "absolute" way (only by the law), is suicide! The real objective of any actions of the "living" must by enter into a "whole" context (Life itself!),

61

The problem is that laws are "folds" better on "rational" (by the "parts", with "breaks" of observation) contacts of Homo sapiens, with the external environment. Jesus appeared in the midst of a people led after some "laws". This people are chosen"! But now it is clear that it happened only for his sacrifice, for his extinction - Bible: Ezekiel 20:11, 25)! Jesus only tried to save them... So, the gestures of the "robots" ("people"), actually may not gain the correct truth values, than only by a process of permanent "comparison with an impersonal and absolute truth, in a timely manner (which means, really, an communication") and, at the level of a mass of individuals, as bigger, as much more efficient (in a probabilistic meaning) the process will be. The contradiction between "control", from outside the system (only possible in the absence of communication between the "parties"), and an effective enforcement of the law, especially of the Law 0 (communication between individuals that form a "whole") is, according to my, the origin of the crisis that humanity is passing through. Therefore, we have a big problem: the obvious intention of "Pavlov" is to control a "living system (organism, community, humanity etc.), which is tantamount to inducing the functioning "on parts" of it. That is, more clearly, equivalent to intent to "dismantle" a "living system. If this phenomenon occurs at the functional level, thru the relationship "function -> relative position of the parts", resulting that the disintegration" occurs, specifically, and at geometrically level: phenomena, in their evolving, have the tendency to leave the geometrically domain occupied by the BODY. But that it means aging and DEATH! The IMPOSING of DEATH can be the true intention of a real Creator"? Obviously not! A true "Creator (which must "work" continuously - the "creation continues" of the Abb Pierre Teilhard de Chardin) and the "controller" (which exerts his control on the basis of the "Laws") are two completely separate entities It turns out that "death from natural causes" has actually another cause, unnatural" and imposed by force. Thats the "Reason" (the functioning of the BODY by parts"). If from what I have presented does not become clearly enough, I will make again the statement that I not support the idea that the "reason" must be replaced with a mechanism similar to that used by animals. And this isnt because that mechanism would be inefficient. But because animals are integrated in to an ecosystem and humans aren't. It should be changed only the reference frame of those processes. We have been forced to think that we are only "bodies" and to think as such. Is not like a "natural" thing if not feel any of the parts of your body when you are "focused" ("rational") on a specific part. In reality we are "Universes". So we have to think at this level.

62

Therefore, the process that, at the current level, is the reason", the "rationalization", the division" must become the "integration", the "integrion". It is significant to point out the similarity of the cancer and the crisis of Humanity, as processes which are generated by the fact that the systems (body and Humanity) are forced to respond on parts" (in the system in which the "part" leads the "whole"!) to the external stimulus. Homo sapiens is the only "living system" that can make decisions (and in pursuance thereof, initiate actions), only upon receipt of artificial signals, when not actually know "everything" (and timely), relatively to the consequences of these actions. It is a "feature" (to be wrong!?) on which only the mechanism for generating the conditioned reflex offers" it (hydrochloric acid is secreted in the stomach of the dog, only by ignite the lamp, without being hungry, prior to this). Bad intention of "Pavlov" is more than visible when it formally legitimizes this erroneously way for starting actions (offering as a prize, the "Free Will"). Unlike most animals, in their natural environment, which, to respond properly as a "whole", to such stimulus: - Their body it reacts in real time, if the stimulus is real (or "TRUE"?), or - Not reacts at all (it appears like a "blocking" - "like the calf at the new gate ") when the stimulus are not real (is not part of that order in time and space from the structure of "chain ordered closed" of the "natural" environment), and - have a coherent reaction to the level of communities ("gregarious spirit that constantly surprises us with the accuracy of the solutions adopted for the survival of the species). "Gregarious spirit" would be the consequence of the fact that each individual reaction (made in real time) has no time to differentiate, from an individual to another. In other words, it hasnt the benefit" of the "free will" (freedom to fail?). The solution of Humanity: The "Pavlovs disembarkation" and "activation" of the TRUTH"! Specifically: It is about (re)activation of the "common sense". As it is expressed in English it could be defined as the instinct of the "whole". It generates, possibly, "rational" (logic) describable actions, related solely to one internal reference: to the "whole" "form", to "life". Not to the "daily experience", which is "outside" of "life". "Common sense" is a strictly individual phenomenon, is in us. It is manifests thru protecting of what we really are. It is the "survival instinct".It is known that it is a an instinct and it should not to be "learned". "Common sense" is a phenomenon strictly individual. He transcends "the social": is the connection that works constantly with the "continuous creator" (The Truth) by integrion and to make the WHOLE. We all can be like the "whole", free from any kind of immobilization. And this is the only thing that it can truly unite us! PS-It can be answered, in my opinion, from those from above, and to the following questions: 1) What is the motivation of "Pavlov" to have such behavior toward people?

63

Given the above and, obviously, the elements of the Gravitational Theory of Life, a short answer to this question would be: the "material" Universe as he was "induced" in our mind, is a "production farm" for "souls" with the "form" of "Pavlov"- bodies which are based solely on a "completely" DNA. The bodies, as we "know" them, with the "broken" DNA, is only the initial matrix, controllable (which it no need to claim disturbing ownership to the "soul" - it must to "die" in due course). 2)"What" and / or, "Who" is Pavlov? Our real Universe (the "geometric reality") is the one which gives the "movement", the "life." "Pavlov" coming "from outside" gives only the circumstantial form" (see model on page 43). Much of the "genesis" can now be explained in a real context. 3) "What" and / or, "Who" is the TRUTH"? It is the "whole", which is "alive" only at the real Universal level. Not reacted so far ever against "viruses" like "Pavlov" because it is "hidden" in us, "his drops", which had protected "him". Until now! 4) "What" and / or "Who" are "humans"? We are everything that "Pavlov", alone, cannot be: we have "form" and "life" (we are like "whole", at individual level). Only thru us it" became "alive": So We created "Pavlov", not Pavlov on us. The "Reasoning" is only the "wave" through which we must to cannot see this fact... Being like the "whole" inside of the "WHOLE" we have a great responsibility: a) Either let us lead by "Pavlov", which, coming from outside, has distinct "interests" from the "WHOLE" and, then, we will manifest exactly as the cancer do, by "managing", ultimately, to destroy our "host ", and to destroy us also, or b) We will have to integrate in the "WHOLE" (we meld our "interests" with "HIS interests"), and managing to become the only acting entity which can solve the biggest problem: "HIS" perpetual existence (threatened with extinction by "dilution", by the same reason which caused the "life" - the "expansion of the geometric reality"). Threaten us two versions of the big "finish": - Destruction of the "geometric reality" caused by "Pavlov", through our "mediation", - Disappearance of the "geometric reality" by passing to the size at which the current geometrical forms will have not any sense ("dilution"). At least, to the second variant we can resist... What you say: worth to think and about our children? -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"Mental Revolution" may lead to failure of the "manipulation"! Examples: I. Among other "proofs" that the Shroud of Turin is a fake, will present a purely geometrical argument (he does not need any physical-chemical analysis): As seen, the only way in which Christ's body could be covered to leave this kind of traces was: shroud was lying on a flat surface, the body was placed on back on a half of the piece, with the other half was covered the body thru folding. So, the images, "the front" and "behind" of the body tend to approach with their "head", in the middle of the flax piece. Important:

64

. 1) On the images, the legs are in such a position that would seem to be like the way they were nailed with the holdfast, to the cross. 2) The left leg is towards the front of the body, right leg is under him, in the image "front" . 3) The right foot is toward the front of the body, in the image "back". 4) But the images are formed simultaneously (or so it would have been natural); so, is meaningless as, in one image, a leg is toward the "front of the body and, in another image, another leg. Even if we want to include here and the phenomenon of mirror reversal. . 5) The only explanation is: a) the "body" was rotated by on the face "face" on "back" and the shroud was "impressed" twice, consecutively, on one side of it, . b) the shroud was "impressed" (also twice), on the same part of shroud without to rotate the body of the "Jesus", once from "above" the body and once again "from below", placing the flax piece in a convenient position. It would be an explanation for this "mess"? This explanation is there! As can be seen easily the image "front" of the head is a two-dimensional projection of the face of "Jesus" (which have, in reality, three dimensions). Just as in the case of the "negative" of a classical photo! But the shroud, normally is molded on the "face" . It follows that the distance between the ears (which is approximate because the ears are covered with hair) must be much higher on the shroud which was molded on the "face", resulting an deforming of the image of the face ( a round image). What is not found! So, the shroud it has not been molded on the corpse! Most likely he was "impressed" by caloric radiation (infrared waves) when is lying at a short distance from a "corpse" prepared to radiate (statue gilded with gold or silver, or a body that have suffered the same treatment ...?). This explains that the image is a "negative". In these circumstances it came up the problem of the heat and that "Jesus" could not be suspended, at short distance, being hot, between the folded girls of the shroud than consecutively, for each of the "impress". Hence, resulting the error with the changing of the leg. Perhaps the "impress" must to be made quickly, so that "Jesus" not become too cool. II. You have below a copy from an email address which is adressed to the "publisher"of Dan Brown, at the 05/23/2007. Flag this message Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:18 AMFrom: pascu gabriel View contact detailsTo: customerservice@randomhouse.comMister, I like to tell you something very important: Dan Brown is missing the point in Da Vinci Code! How is that? If Da Vinci must tell us that the personage in the right said of Jesus Christ is Maria Magdalena, he must put in the picture 14 PERSONAGES ( Jesus, 12 Apostles AND MARIA MAGDALENA), in conditions in which the clerics must see only 13 (Jesus and 12 Apostles). And, in the picture ARE 14 PERSONAGES! The 14-th personage is the hand with the knife. So, the prove for the existence of an code is, in this case, obvious and this prove is not the breasts of Maria Magdalena (Da Vinci cant make them so obvious). I like to mention my name there. And more, I must tell you that the Orthodox church

65

in Romania knows about this issue because in the reproductions (made many years ago) from the Last Super by Da Vinci the hand with the knife is missing all the times. With respect, Gabriel Pascu-Romania From the text follows that the existence of a "code" can be so easily demonstrated that: 1) Dan Brown's book ("Code ...") is at one end to another, superfluous. That is, unless, if you fall into the trap of "make reasoning for the sake of art". And those who fall in this show that this type of exercise (reasoning) is not enough of at " their hand". 2) The church couldn't to not observed the "code" (I found that the Orthodox Church has removed "the hand with the knife" from the reproductions of "Last supper" "Iscariot more meaning and " the bearing-knife"). It follows that the church and this "browns" (including those who have raised the issue of "authenticity of the shroud) play a perverse game of manipulation in which staff I cannot enter. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There's that famous definition of the "inventor" (a person who "sees" what it should not to see), give by Einstein: "Everyone knows that a thing it can't be done, but some guys simply do not know that: they are the inventors".

Mainly, for those which are still alive


I said to a little tree which had blooming this spring: "Forgive me for stealing, with despair, Bright and still alive the beauty of yours... I will make sure that you can forgive me: And now, and next year, always... *** I would have liked that what I will say now to have emerged naturally from the reading of this material: "Pavlov" is strictly geometric. He cannot manifest in the "material" Universe (that which was "created" only in the mind of some beings with the "broken" DNA - to the great disappointment of the "materialists"). He it can manifests only at the level of "ideas" (thoughts) which are activated by specific signals. There is a whole literature related to the subliminal messages. This technique was not invented by humans. Instead they can take their minds in to their possession.

66

The conspiracy theory" is real. But its origin is not on Earth. And nowhere in the "material" Universe (the aliens are just some directing effects- like those of Orson Welles). Its origin is outside of our Universe. So, it is enough to pull "Pavlov out of our minds and he will no longer exist.

67

También podría gustarte