I saw a comment the other day to someone else’s Independent Field blog, to the effect that what LRH describes as the fate of certain thetans dumped here by “aliens” simply wasn’t possible because the spacecraft doing it couldn’t get past NORAD’s radar. Whether you agree with or believe what LRH said about it or not, the statement reeked of ignorance. We have current aircraft in our arsenal which show up like “steel marbles” on defensive radars. If we can do that, why would anyone imagine that a more technologically advanced space-faring race couldn’t do us one better, by absorbing electromagnetic radiation at radar frequencies (thus making them radar-invisible)? Statements like this person made are patently silly.
It reminds me of how many Scientologists are disciples of what’s considered “modern” physics on this planet. LRH had quite a lot to say about physics over the course of three decades of lectures, most of it invalidative. Of course, there is no dogma in Scientology about this. You’re free to believe LRH or not. Our spiritual technology works whether Einstein was right or not.
But it leads me to want to comment on some of what is considered “true” in modern physics.
Consider space travel as understood on this planet. According to Einstein, the speed of light is a limiting factor of velocity in this universe. That is, according to Einstein, it simply isn’t possible to go faster than the speed of light. The mathematics of Einstein’s physics is such that if you approached the speed of light, your mass would approach infinity and the length of your spaceship would approach zero. The nearest star is 4.3 light years away. Meaning that, at best speed, it would take more than 4.3 years to get there. Of course, that’s at best speed. What we’re capable of achieving, with the best (untested) technologies we can imagine, puts that journey at something on the order of thousands of years to get to the nearest star. Imagine the planning and expense necessary to carry out that kind of journey. It would probably consume the entire productivity of all the nations of Earth for decades to execute such a mission.
We can imagine that our space buddies are better at this, and know of a way to do it a lot faster. Let’s say they could get from here to there (or vice versa) in just over five years. Of course, if you’re familiar with modern physics, you realize they’d have to spend a significant portion of the journey either accelerating or decelerating, and not too quickly, because otherwise it would crush their bodies. Hmm. Could be a big problem.
Of course, we know that our space buddies are visiting us all the time. There are almost daily reports of spacecraft and their inhabitants who visit the vicinity of this planet, looking remarkably similar to each other. In fact, the descriptions of their craft, their crafts’ capabilities, and the “aliens” themselves are so similar that it’s virtually impossible to ignore or discount all of them. There are simply too many similar or identical reports for them to be entirely fictional. So if we want to remain disciples of Einstein, we have to admit that there are quite a few of these folks, and they’ve all taken at least five years to get here. But here’s the really weird thing: If you decided to take a five-year journey to that blue planet around the nearest star, wouldn’t you do something like build a hotel at your destination, so you could relax and explore once you got here? How come our space buddies don’t do that? How come they’re not stopping in at the nearest Ramada Inn and ordering room service? After five years on the same old smelly spaceship, I’d do anything to get out of there and stretch my legs for a while.
Oh, you say, it’s not like that. They’re using “wormholes” to get here in an instant! Really? You do realize that wormholes are postulated purely out of the mathematics of modern physics, right? You realize no one has ever seen one or is likely ever to, let alone actually demonstrate or use one for anything. This is another example of common ignorance of what passes for physics on this planet. Talk to an actual physicist some time about this. It would require the power of a black hole to generate a wormhole. And you don’t want to be anywhere near a black hole, trust me. And there aren’t any near Earth or our nearest stellar neighbor, so far as astronomers have been able to discern. Moreover, even if you could generate a wormhole large enough for your spacecraft to pass through (you couldn’t), you could not predict or control where the other end of it went. You could, theoretically, end up on the other side of the galaxy today, and in Andromeda galaxy tomorrow. And the very act of attempting to shove something through a wormhole would instantly collapse it. I’m not telling you anything not known to every modern physicist. Wormholes and such are a theoretical extension of the mathematics of “modern” physics. Nice for science fiction, I suppose, but useless in reality.
Let’s consider another denizen of modern physics, so-called “dark matter“. Physicists have convinced themselves that this universe was born from a point source of energy which exploded about 13 billion (billion with a “b”, not trillion with a “t”) years ago (the “Big Bang” theory). Ultimately, it unevenly condensed into planets, galaxies and yielded our present universe. Physicists postulated this because of the observed “red-shift” of stellar spectra, assuming it must come from the “fact” that all the distant objects of the universe are moving away from each other. They’re still arguing about what will be the ultimate fate of this universe. But they seem to have agreed that the movement of distant objects in the universe doesn’t make sense. The universe should be flying apart a lot faster than it is. Gravity, the force which causes mass to attract other mass, just isn’t adequate to be keeping all this expansion in check. Thus, they’ve invented this stuff that would be able to keep the universe together the way we see it. It’s called “dark matter”. And apparently the universe is made mostly (90+%) of this stuff. Naturally, no one has seen any. Nor sensed it. Nor detected it. But its gravitational attraction is the only thing which could explain the behavior of the movement of distant celestial objects. Conveniently, it appears that it also doesn’t obscure our ability to detect distant objects, despite the fact that it supposedly makes up 90% of the universe.
Next time you dig up a handful of “dark matter” while making fence post holes in your back yard, make sure you call your nearest physicist hotline. They’ll want take a look at it before you toss it in the trash can.
Here’s another one. You thought that the three spatial dimensions of this universe were pretty much perpendicular to each other. You silly human. Evidently you weren’t aware that gravity actually “warps” space. This one’s kinda hard to explain. Gravity isn’t actually a “force” like magnetism. Instead, that attraction of matter to matter is the result of the masses involved mutually warping the fabric of space, so masses just naturally fall into each other. As an example, let’s say we draw a straight line between our planet and the Moon. That’s the way we would typically think of the fabric of space. Lots of straight lines which represent the dimensions of our universe, and across which massive bodies simply attract each other. Except that modern physics says, “No”. Instead, in the vicinity of the Moon, that line you drew curves down to the surface of the Moon. So if you were to throw a ball bearing at the Moon, it would fall into the Moon, because the Moon actually curves your straight line. Like I said, instead of the Moon simply attracting your ball bearing because of its mass, it curves the space into a track that causes the ball bearing to roll down toward the Moon. No, I’m not making this stuff up.
“Quantum physics” is another modern physics curve ball created by physicists when they couldn’t explain what they observed at the sub-atomic level using the physics they presumed to be true at the level we normally observe things (a 72 degree room Fahrenheit room at sea level). It’s an exceptionally complex framework of theoretical ideas which yield even more wild (and silly) ideas about the nature of existence. Quantum physics is where physics intersects with philosophy and psychology. It could be considered the most theoretical branch of modern physics. (And the hardest to actually grasp.) Of course, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the way thetans actually think or act. There are axioms, factors and logics which govern such things.
Some of the foregoing was made up after LRH died. Much of it was postulated by physicists before Ron died, and in the course of his lectures and writings, he commented on the silliness and absurdity of it. A great deal of modern, Einsteinian physics stems from the mathematics which was used in physics subsequent to Einstein’s Special and General Theories of Relativity. It was (and is) assumed that the behavior of the universe would obey mathematical rules, even when those rules approached zero, infinity, and imaginary numbers (the square roots of negative numbers). If a physics equation ultimately ended up with an “imaginary” result, physicists would, instead of throwing out their original hypotheses, try to work out how the physical universe obeying imaginary numbers would look. And proceeded from there.
As I said, there is no dogma in Scientology about this. But I would venture that LRH’s evaluations of modern physics are probably more reliable than what passes for “truth” in physics today. A great many of the ideas and roots of modern physics (starting with the theories of relativity) are certainly counter-intuitive, if not downright false. Einstein was a bright guy, but in many respects, he was dead wrong. And much of what has followed since can be attributed to otherwise bright physicists following down his blind alleys.
Here’s something to think about. There is something called the “gravitational constant”, normally represented by the capital letter G in physics equations. It was originally posited by Sir Isaac Newton, but not actually measured until some decades after his death. It represents the degree of attraction between two objects which have mass. Its original measurement was done under what could be considered “normal” conditions (a normal room, normal pressure, normal temperature, etc.). It has been assumed for almost 200 years that this “constant” was constant under all conditions, including at the galactic and the sub-atomic levels. As a result, other forces and types of matter have been postulated to explain phenomena at the excessively large and exceptionally microscopic level, where mass attraction obviously exists but doesn’t conform to the gravitational constant. But what if the gravitational constant isn’t constant at all levels? What if it varies, depending on whether you’re talking about your office, or the galaxies in a cluster, or the particles involved in subatomic interactions? What would happen to modern physics if this were found to be the case? How many physics texts would have to be rewritten, and theories re-thought? How many red-faced physicists would there be? Here’s something even more important: how long would physicists, wedded to their accepted theories, argue about the validity of alternative values for the gravitational constant? How long would it take them to accept the new “truth”? Before you answer that, study the history of scientists’ behavior in the face of threats to scientific “orthodoxy”.
Believe what you like. But beware of scientific “orthodoxy”. It’s not the same thing as scientific “truth”.