Man is not at home in the universe, despite all the efforts of
philosophers and metaphysicians to provide a soothing syrup. Thought is
still a narcotic. The deepest question is why. And it is a forbidden
one. The very asking is in the nature of cosmic sabotage. And the
penalty is the affliction of Job.
(Henry Miller, Tropic of
What I'll be introducing on the following pages is the result of a
series of songs I wrote beginning in 1985.
These songs were the product of at least two identifiable sources. The
first was a growing feeling of suspicion I'd been harboring since
It held no image and thus no simple means to communicate it.
But as seen in retrospect, it had something to do with the state
of recognition: hardly anything
really surprised me.
The second source of these songs was combined in a study I'd been doing
since the early 70s, after my wife had a serious confrontation with
mental illness. The effects of
that event and an eventual decision to retire from the music industry,
created a desire to return to school.
I was suspicious and fascinated by the concept of truth.
And, being a chronic wonderer, I was naturally drawn to
philosophy, the field that studied truth.
Especially since it embraced so many of the other intellectual
high roads. And since
philosophy is no longer considered a viable career, I knew I would not
be surrounded by narrow goal-seeking influences, which is something I
vowed to stay away from for awhile.
One day in class, the professor of philosophy introduced a thought
experiment dreamed up by the nineteenth century mathematician, Henri
Poincare. He asked if,
during the night, while we were asleep, the whole universe and
everything in it were to double in size, would we notice it when we woke
up? In other words, if all
the atoms, space, forces, energy waves, measuring devices and
our bodies – literally, our entire perceptual field, including
ourselves – were to double in size, could we upon awakening imagine any
experience that would allow us to know it?
Poincare's answer and the class's eventual consensus was no, since all
frames of reference enlarged simultaneously; i.e., doubled compared to
The experiment, of course, was meant to be an innocuous dialectic
puzzle designed to stimulate thought and create discussion.
And it certainly succeeded.
But I sat transfixed, dumbfounded and totally mute.
I had just read about this idea in Martin Gardner's book on
Einstein and relativity. But this time it really grabbed me. It reminded me of something, but I just couldn't
it was; something that made me suspicious of the standard conclusion.
After walking out of that philosophy class, I began to ponder the
different implications of “Poincare's riddle”.
The whole idea, impossible as it then seemed, completely ignited
my imagination. It points
out the possibility of size relativity. And when you consider the action it would take for all matter and
space to double in size, then it leads to another idea of a hidden
dimension; a mode of relative motion that would be utterly undetectable.
Perhaps, I fancied, there is more to our reality than what passes
through our eyes.
After many years as a musician, and many more as an audio engineer and
producer, I was acutely aware of latent dimensional qualities involved
in sound. There was much more to
music than what was captured by the ear.
I was certain. And somehow
there may be an important relationship between the mechanics of
perception, the whole mystery of cognizance and the existence of hidden
That night, as I sat at my desk thinking about these things, I
absent-mindedly picked up my guitar. Sometimes
I like to plunk away while in deep thought. But as I lifted it, the electric pick-up or transducer came
unglued. I retrieved it,
looked at it, and an idea suddenly began to blossom.
A transducer changes energy from one form to another. In this case, mechanical vibrations are transformed into electrical
impulses. Perhaps the most gross
type of transducer would be a steam engine, which changes thermal energy
into mechanical energy. And the
ultimate transducers are the eyes and the ears which, like my guitar
pick-up, change mechanical energy (light and sound waves) into
Now in the case of the steam engine, an enormous amount of energy is
forever lost in the process. This
lost thermal energy (dissipated heat) is called entropy.
And I began to wonder:
could some similar entropic loss occur during the act of seeing and
Could there be some connection here that nobody seems to have yet
As I soon found out, this perceptual transformation, like so much else
in the microscopic world, is not even remotely understood by science.
Like gravity, it just happens. All we can do is observe, measure effects and be content to just
wonder about the causes.
That same week, I discovered an astounding little book on logic and
Laws of Form, by G. Spencer-Brown. The revues were so
enticing I gobbled it up. Browns new calculus was like a new form of
logic, but with four classes of answers like in algebra. This includes
the “imaginary” ( i ) option. Glancing through it I found
this passage which froze me in my tracks because of the coincidence:
“In any attempt to see itself as an object, it [the world] must make
itself distinct from and therefore false to itself.
A few days later I ran across a small paperback at the college
bookstore. It was a hastily published book from one of the many
counter-culture sources in San Francisco. It contained a new interpretation of Einstein's theory of
general relativity which cited the cause of gravity while exposing the
fourth dimension. I said
earlier that hardly anything ever surprised me.
This astounded me because of the coincidental relationship (not
to mention the bold proclamations).
This passage – as written – sums up the basic premise:
This statement intends
that the entire material/spatial universe is expanding/accelerating –
electrons, neutrons, protons, and the space between/separating
them... The entire physical universe and all spaces and material
within it is a proportionately accelerating field. This acceleration
is responsible for the phenomenon termed gravity. (sic, New
Gravity, by Ken Robertson ben Abraham)
Poincare's Riddle was
coming to life! The idea, of course, was preposterous; pure Alice in Wonderland, the most bizarre clap-trap I'd
ever heard of. But the timely
coincidence was simply too much to overlook. First of all, it fit in with the idea I was toying with about the
loss of measurable dimensions during perception. This is the kind of unimaginable behavior one might expect from an
unperceivable quality. Everything
in the seer's field of vision expands proportionally, including the
Secondly, it gives a new answer to Poincare's riddle.
We would be able to perceive the universe doubling in
size. For how else could it
double in size except through expansion?
This would produce an outward acceleration of our planet's
surface. And since acceleration and gravity are identical experiences, we
would feel a corresponding increase in weight. It would be like riding a continuously accelerating elevator.
Though the idea was becoming more ludicrous by the page, I finally
realized why this idea grabbed me. It
focused on that nagging, recurring suspicion I'd been having since
childhood: this is similar to
an idea I thought of when I was seven or eight years old!
I even remember being scoffed at for suggesting it. But
at the time it seemed like the only explanation; an explanation soon
suppressed by the acquisition of knowledge.
Then another thought occurred to me. This
same deja-vu feeling happened during a psychedelic experience,
years back, when I thought I could feel, see and hear every atom around
me moving and transforming; as if things were growing.
Small wonder this idea appealed to me. It
had been embedded and reinforced in my mind since childhood.
However, once the initial appeal had passed, it dissolved into
implausible non-sense. How could
a sane person even consider it? For how could objects maintain any structure or enduring form? And
if it were true, then why wasn't it discovered by now?
But the main reason for rejecting it was the
inadequate explanation of orbital or universal gravitation, the force
that keeps the moon and our many satellites in precise, predictable
orbits. Material expansion
doesn't explain the tides either. All
relevant behavior must be taken into account with any new idea,
especially one concerning gravity, the most apparent and dominant of the
forces and a subject reflected on by some of the most brilliant minds
And there were other considerations also. Like
the space it would take to contain such an expansion. In
very short order, the solar system would expand to the size of the
galaxy. And a constantly
accelerating surface expansion would eventually surpass light speed, a
major transgression of our laws of physics.
But in spite of its shortcomings, I thought I'd do a paper on this
subject simply because of its thought provoking character. In
a writing class, I tried to persuade the instructor into letting me do a
large essay on the theory in lieu of a series of smaller papers the rest
of the class would be doing. To
my delight, he was fascinated by the subject and readily acquiesced.
In no time at all I realized what a Pandora's Box I was opening, as it
covered most of physics and astronomy.
Then I realized that all of science, religion and philosophy
would be drastically effected should this idea be true. So
I limited myself to exposition and overview at the expense of critical
analysis. And while it was
academically successful, it in no way appeased my suspicions concerning
its ultimate disposition. This
was primarily because of the large amount of conflicting and at times
astounding information I accumulated.
For every question answered, two more would pop up. Every
mystery weighed led to another beyond itself. And
the deeper I dug, the more mysterious, suspenseful and enlightening it
became. Such is the disease
of curiosity and the art of wondering.
Thus began a passionate journey of discovery bordering on the mystical. The
circumstances were too compelling as the coincidences were too
coincidental. I determined to
settle once and for all the true status of this bizarre idea. Everything
considered was examined through an expanded point of view then
contrasted with conventional wisdom. For
over 20 years I tried to refute this idea, but in every instance, I only
confirmed it. As if by magic, all
of my previous objections were being transformed into vindications.
The process of atomic growth is a reality we must confront. As
impossible as it may appear, and as psychologically unacceptable as it
may surely be, the evidence speaks for itself.
In fact, as the evidence accumulates and one sees the relevance
of this concept, it becomes obvious – almost to an amusing degree – that
reality couldn't exist any other way.
But you should not try to apply this process to the reality you now
have. You must apply your reality to the process. For your reality is
what it is only because of it. Form follows function. It is, always has
been and always will be the primary, universal process. If atomic
elements didn't grow, we'd never feel any weight. We would never be able
to see anything because electromagnetic effects from the friction
involved, couldn't exist. And, if truth be known, nothing at all could
But if the only thing to be said consisted of convincing a few readers
of another fantastic idea about the structural dynamics of our universe,
I wouldn't have undertaken such a task.
Or, in the spirit of Lao Tzu, the desire to communicate a truth seems
to be inversely proportional to its understanding.
But there are many more reasons
to speak than the one not to speak, so speak I will. The
logical inferences, deductions and corollaries that follow are
staggering. The implications of
this universal “mechanism” affect (if not infect) all of science,
religion and our global, political/social, infrastructure to their
foundations. And in light of our current
3-d catastrophe, any marginal impact here can only be seen as an
“improvement of the understanding”.
So it is the intention of this work to present a tangible model of our
universe by extending the dimensions of our imagination; or as Einstein
put it, “by means of a mental image to which, with some practice, we
shall soon grow accustomed”.
The correspondence of this image to our physical world leads to a
cosmology of profoundly different proportions than what “official
culture” has led us to believe. It
came about through the labors of many and can be verified by every
measure of truth available, including (especially) experience. And
its consistency is telling, as is the score of perennial mysteries that
The model given here can free one from the “chains of reverie” which
have long imprisoned us all in three dimensional thought and expression. Once realized, it allows one to operate empirically in the startling
world of the fourth dimension which evolves from and converges to the
fifth, the link (transducer) between all worlds, and the essence of