Reciprocal System #93-Beyond Space and Time SSS [Thomas Newsome]

Transcript

all right hello everyone welcome to my channel I'm Thomas and I do uh mostly educational material on this channel um and today is 93rd video on the reciprocal system of theory which is a Theory of Everything derived by Dewey B Larson back in the 20th century and uh he died back in 1990 we're taking a closer close look at his final book that actually came out posthumously in 1995 called beyond space and time this book was his attempt to explain metaphysics um philosophy psychology religion and uh it was a departure from his earlier books which were all on hard Sciences such as chemistry and astronomy and physics and um the basic logic behind Larson's system is that um he believed that the Universe was not made out of matter it was not made out of energy but it was made out of motion motion a universe of motion and motion is the relationship between space and time space and time are basically they came together in motion there was no space or time except it as they formed in motion so any type of uh relationship between space and time was motion all physical phenomena basically could be described strictly in terms of motion in terms of space and time space and time both were multi-dimensional three or more dimensions and they both flowed or progressed so uh you know speed is space over time uh turns out that energy is time over space matter is time to the third power over space to the third power pressure is time over space to the fourth power impulses time to the second power over space capacitance is spaced to the third power over time and so on and so forth all and that that works as a great check because you can go over the classical uh you know physics and look at all the equations and substitute the space time um you know components of them and you can uh figure out whether their equations make sense or not now um so space and time are reciprocals of each other they are both multi-dimensional they both flow or progress and they are both quantized meaning that there is a minimum unit of time and a minimum unit of space one unit of space in one unit of time space over time is speed uh one unit of space over one unit of time is the speed of light uh the speed of light is the neutral point or the midpoint or the null point or the origin of the universe of motion whereas in Einstein's Universe the speed of light was the maximum speed for Larson the speed of light is just the boundary between two separate universes one of which is going faster than the speed of light the other is the one that we're familiar with moving slower than the speed of light because that sector one or the material sector and sector two or the cosmic sector is the half that's moving faster than the speed of light sector one grows by aggregation chemical bonding and so on uh up until its most complex level which is DNA containing several billion atoms per molecule and at that point becomes eligible to be taken control of by a sector 2 entity this is a difficult explanation but it has to do with what Larson calls the inter-regional ratio and [Music] it's basically how much you lose in the translation Crossing from Once one sector of the universe to another um and it basically takes uh 2.1 billion atoms um in the material sector to balance out one atom in the cosmic sector and so uh when a material and Cosmic sector unit link up like that um Larson calls that the life unit and the life unit also then develops or evolves over time and up until its most complex level which Larson calls the intelligent human being and that intelligent human being then becomes eligible to be controlled overall by a uh metaphysical unit or a unit from what Larson calls sector three other people might have called it God or Spirit or the numinous um and uh that is beyond space and time or independent of space and time or maybe we were pointing at it earlier when we were talking about the origin uh that light the speed of light is the origin and uh anyway that sector 3 unit is um motivated motivates us it communicates with us and through intuition um revelation [Music] um insight ESP these are all Communications from sector three the answers that we get from sector three are correct our ability to translate them is correctly is limited uh but those Communications are targeted toward an ethical life or a good a life of good behavior whereas the sector 2 control the life uh part of it is uh directed towards survival so at some at some times survival and ethics are in conflict and that's where the human being has to make the choice between the two um it's only a choice between two there is no middle ground you either choose good or evil uh evil in this case being uh the animal uh life survival impulse sometimes they do work together as well so you know life isn't all bad but there are some points where it has to take a back seat to the ethical Behavior okay now we are uh in chapter 23 of uh Larson's book beyond space and time which is all on metaphysics it's all on about sector three and uh this chapter is called religion re-examined and uh he's talking about how you know human beings have gotten intuitions about about things over the years and many of them have been put into uh biblical or other uh ancient texts uh and but that there is also a need to uh winnow out the kind of the sector three components of language from the sector two components of religion um from the sector two components of religion which are kind of like the ritual and the uh you know the superficial aspects of religion and uh we will let Larson take over right here um toward the beginning but uh beginning middle of the chapter the creation issue is one of the major bones of contention in the American religious scene at the moment the battle is centered on the question of biological evolution the contention of the creation forces being that evolution is incompatible with the religious account of the creation of the Earth the logic of this position is rather difficult to grasp just why the creation of an evolutionary Universe in which biological evolution was one of the things created should be objectionable to those who Champion the idea of creation is puzzling to a neutral Observer it is even more difficult to understand when we examine the biblical account of creation on which the objections to Evolution are purported to be based and we find as we did in chapter 10 that it portrays the creation as sequential and therefore by implication evolutionary some of the confusion obviously results from reading things into the creation account that are not actually there uh and now he's quoting Titus saying according to this creation view all living species were created at one time in place and Larson says but this is not the way the story is written it describes the creation as a sequence of events taking place over a period of time and with one minor exception puts them all including the pre-evolutionary events in the proper order there is it is true considerable controversy as to how long a period of time is implied by the wording of the creation story uh the meaning of the language used in an account such as this written long ago under circumstances much different from those that now exist cannot be understood unless the general level of knowledge and the manner of expression of thought prevailing at that time and place are taken into consideration present-day science finds that millions of years were required for each of the major evolutionary stages and billions of years for the events that preceded the origin of life on Earth the early Hebrews were not prepared to think in terms of long intervals of this nature even if the revelations contained all of the information and it was therefore the revelations really being sector 3 Communications Larson it was therefore necessary for the author of The Genesis account to use some expression to which an indefinite indicated and indefinite period of time he chose a word which has been translated as day obviously he did not mean an earth day even though the words morning and evening are employed in elaborating the account there was no Earth during the first days of the creation story it follows that the author could not have used the word day in the sense of the period of the Earth's rotation on its axis the sense in which the creationists are interpreting it he must have used it in a different sense his use of the terms morning and evening in describing the events of the days before there was any morning or evening in the specific sense shows definitely that the language was intended to be interpreted broadly rather than specifically The Logical conclusion is that he used these terms in the general significance that has been attached to them throughout recorded history Even in our day has indicated in the following definitions taken from standard dictionary morning the first or early part of anything evening any later period of time of decline as in the evening of this life of his life day a period of time age or era as in days of old this present work has not uncovered enough evidence to determine as a matter of scientific fact whether the universe was brought into being by an Act of Creation we find the biblical account of the origin of the earth and of biological life to be an authentic Revelation insofar as it is an account of what happened is concerned subject to the limitations of the recipient's knowledge of physical phenomena and processes but the investigation has thus far located nothing that would either verify or disprove any religious assertion as to the cause of what happened similarly we have confirmed the existence of metaphysical agencies but we have not determined whether one or more of these agencies created the universe or even whether such a thing as creation is possible as matters now stand therefore both the reciprocal system and the conventional science are silent on the creation issue anyone who feels that he should arrive at a definite conclusion on the subject will have to determine whether he can accept on faith some one of the many pronouncements as to the origins origin of the universe that have been made by various religious bodies creation is by no means the only controversial metaphysical question on which this first scientific Expedition into the region beyond space and time fails to shed much light while this investigation has definitely established the most important fact the reality of metaphysical existence it has not produced much information as to the nature and characteristics of the existences other than ethical a subject on which the religions have a great deal to say and say it in a great many different cut and contradictory ways however the verification of the basic religious doctrines that has been accomplished is a big step forward there are also some broad general principles underlying both science and religion that can now be regarded as firmly based as it is now clear that the almost Universal acceptance of these principles is evidence that they have been received by a process of intuitive insight and their validity can be tested by application of the criteria that have been developed for judging the products of insight and revelation all this definitely confirms Hawking's assertion that it's uh that religions basis is more substantial and less vulnerable than the the fabric of speculative ideas in which it seems to consist the question now arises as to whether a scientist can logically identify himself with any particular organized religion with a specific set of those speculative ideas without doing violence to his scientific Reliance upon the processes of reason or whether his reconciliation with religion is confined to agreement on generalities here some detailed consideration will be necessary it is evident to begin with that a scientist as a scientist cannot accept all of the official doctrines of any of the organized religions many thoughtful individuals have in fact concluded that the unacceptable portions constitute so large a proportion of the whole that these organized religion religious bodies must be rejected summarily such as personal Percival Bridgeman who once asserted that acceptance of any of the traditional or conventional religions seems to many incompatible with plain decent intellectual honesty another Paul uh Dirac takes a similar stand if we are honest and scientists have to be we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions with no basis in reality and Arthur Kessler says much the same by saying uh to the inquiring intellect the established churches become venerable anachronisms though still capable of giving sporadic uplift to a diminishing number of individuals at the price of splitting his mind into incompatible halves our analysis indicates however that these extreme views are not justified it is true that the analysis does show that a very large part of the information purported to be received through Revelation Insight or equivalent means is erroneous in whole or in part and religious beliefs based on such information are spurious fully prepared recipients of intersector communications are extremely rare and even though the message itself may be complete and correct the interpretation that it is given by the recipient may be completely wrong it is also true that the greater part of the doctrine of any of the religions of today consists of additions to or interpretations of the original Revelations and there is considerable doubt as to whether The Originators of this additional material were qualified to perceive and to understand the full effect of the additions on the revealed information for centuries men had been indoctrinated in the complex system of myths built on what had originally been a simple religion but had uh this is a quote I'm sorry this is a quote from Vanna VAR bush for centuries men had been indoctrinated in a complex system of myths built on what had originally been a simple religion but had been embroidered Through The Years by tradition and the human tendency to elaborate and ornament um and now he's citing the Theologian EA Bert uh every great religion when it spreads widely becomes corrupted and it is necessary to distinguish between the insights of the Pioneers who founded it and the popular superstitions which arise through mingling their teachings with persistent primitive Notions or through interpreting their basic ideas as so as to satisfy childish demands on the part of their followers so back to Larson in this connection it is significant that many probably most of the highly controversial religious tenets belong to this category of additions and interpretations rather than being part of the original Doctrine some of the most controversial of all are assertions about the founder of the religion rather than about his teachings and these are especially likely to become highly emotional issues the particular Target of ecclesiastical vindictiveness has always been the heretic the individual who differs with the original Doctrine in no more than a few of these very controversial points perhaps only one and a minor one at that the Infidel or atheist is attacked verbally or where circumstances permit physically but not with the same fervor that characterizes the assault upon the heretic meanwhile the items included in this category of controversial additions and interpretations are being revised even in the most inflexible and immovable religious organizations the heresies for which men are imprisoned or executed in one era often become perfectly respectable beliefs a few centuries later okay we'll leave it there I'll take over with Larson here starting tomorrow thanks for tuning in have a great day