reading

The author Klaus-Dieter Sedlacek, born in 1948, studied mathematics and computer science. He completed his studies in 1975 with a diploma in mathematics. After a few years of professional experience, he founded his own company, which dealt with the development of application software. This he led for more than twenty-five years. As a mathematician, he is predestined to uncover and logically explain complex interrelationships in our world. Besides non-fiction books he also writes exciting novels.

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über www.dnb.de abrufbar.

Cover composition: Sedlacek; basic image: Wolfgang Beyer, GNU license (see appendix).

Preface

This book is neither about faith nor esotericism, but about evidence. Credible, scientific evidence, packed in a form that is understandable and comprehensible to anyone interested. The form of presentation is a frame story in which the fictional Professor Allman holds a course for his colleagues. Little by little, Professor Allman develops a robust scientific theory.

It is unusual for a scientific work to be structured like a non-fiction book and use a framework story. But this work also has an unusual content that concerns us all. It should not and must not gather dust in the libraries of the professional world, but is pressing for access to a broad public. Probably for the first time, it is possible to prove that consciousness exists outside the brain. This has hardly foreseeable consequences for our world view. Some of these consequences are presented.

The framework plot and the names of the course participants are fictitious, but the content put up for discussion is real. The unexplained phenomena presented here, which can be explained, have usually been known to experts for decades. However, because the phenomena have so far resisted any deeper explanation, scientists have not been able to present them to a wider audience in an understandable way. Science accepted them as inexplicable, dealt with them and got used to them until they seemed quite ordinary and natural. The larger connection behind the phenomena remained hidden.

Since I began to deal with it in my student days, the phenomena have not left me in peace. Again and again I thought that there must be an explanation for this. Unfortunately, during my professional life as a mathematician and computer scientist I did not have the time to look for a solution. Only now in my retirement did I get these.

To benefit from a deeper understanding of the content, it should not simply be consumed. Rather, it is necessary to think about the evidence in order to understand it. At this point I would like to quote a sentence by Immanuel Kant, who is one of the most important philosophers of modern times: „Habe Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen!“ (Berlinische Monatsschrift, 1784,2, S. 481–494). The reward for the effort is an incredible, and for many people even gratifying, insight, of which I do not want to reveal too much at this point. I believe and hope that I have succeeded in explaining the phenomena and presenting the larger context in such a way that school knowledge is sufficient to grasp the fantastic and yet real consequences for the world and for you personally.

Credibility of statements about reality

"What is reality? - What is the essence of spirit and matter? - Does man have free will? - What is the meaning of life? - Will our individual consciousness survive personal death - these are just a few of the issues we will be addressing in the coming days!

With his strong, deep voice, Professor Allman opens the well-attended course with the title: "On the immortality of consciousness - a new metaphysical world view".

Previously, the well-known physicist from Quantum City welcomed his interested colleagues from all departments.

The sun floods through the large windows of the secluded seminar room in the outpost of the AlbertEinstein University. The course building sits alone on top of a dune with a view over the vastness of the Atlantic Ocean and is often used when a small group of highly qualified specialists wants to enter new scientific territory and combine the wonders of naturalscience into one overall view. But the group that found its way to the seclusion, a good 150 km from Quantum City, this Monday, is by no means small. Despite the limitation to a maximum of 25 participants, another ten colleagues of the extravagant physics professor came from disciplines not specifically addressed. These are colleagues who did not want to miss the interesting topic under any circumstances. Professor Allman did not have the heart to reject her and so the classroom is packed.

The series of courses will last the whole week. Those who do not want to drive home on the evening of a seminar day can stay overnight in the affiliated hotel and combine the acquisition of knowledge with a few hours of holiday feeling.

The 43-year-old and 1.80 m tall Professor Allman strokes with his left hand over his full beard, which is only a few millimetres long, and looks around expectantly to see if there is already a reaction to his first sets. He looks likeable with his rounded face and the lively, friendly eyes flashing through his glasses. His brown checkered jacket and a blue silk scarf give him the extravagant look of an artist rather than a dry naturalscientist.

Courses for scientists of equal rank are characterized by a high degree of interactivity between the moderator and the course participants. So the first interposed question is not missing. Dr. Helena Anaximenes, a highly qualified mathematician from the front row, despite her red hair, smiling mischievously throws in: "Professor Allman, aren't you poaching your subject from the philosophers? What does this topic have to do with your department of physics?"

Professor Allman smiles: "Certainly, philosophers claim metaphysics as their sole field of study. Nevertheless, modern physics cannot do without what allegedly belongs to metaphysics. - Do you know what the goal of metaphysics is?"

Dr. Albert Maupertius, the philosopher among the participants, who is greying in honour, feels addressed: "It is about knowledge of the basic structure and principles of reality! - But that is actually my area of expertise, colleague, not yours."

Professor Allman presses a few keys on a computer keyboard and, with the help of a 3D beamer, projects the sentence glaringly brightly into the middle of the classroom. At the same time, the window panes become discoloured and darken like the lenses of sunglasses in order to dampen the sunlight. The second statement of his colleague, which is similar to a reprimand, he does not take into account.

"Moreover, the Greek philosopher Plato said that metaphysics is what comes after physics," adds Dr. Krates, the bearded assistant to Dr. Maupertius.

"That is also correct!" comments Professor Allman. "Classical metaphysics deals with questions such as 'why does anything exist at all' or 'what constitutes reality as such'. These are the questions we will also be dealing with. In this week of the course we want to deal with topics that are beyond the classical nature ofscience, but nevertheless have a meaning for scientific research.

The mathematician Dr. Anaximenes persistently objects: "Nevertheless, I would like to recall what the philosopher Kant said and what I am also familiar with as a mathematician. He believed that any attempt to formulate theories about reality that lie behind the things of experience is doomed to failure.

"Kant was right in his environment at the time," noted Professor Allman, looking first at Dr. Anaximenes firmly and then at the round. "Whether his statement is still valid today, I cannot at this point give a credible answer."

Faces that have been entered look back. If all objections to the course are to be correct in the first place, why are they sitting here?

"But," Professor Allman continues. "I don't think you came to this course You are keenly interested in the basic questions of your being. They want answers and not just any answers, but plausible answers. Answers that will satisfy you. Answers beyond religion, pseudoscience and esotericism. Answers on a scientific level. Short, credible answers based on the scientific method."

The grey-haired Dr. Maupertius replies: "That's exactly how it is, colleague! It is not philosophical expertise that interests me, because that is part of my profession, but credible answers to the fundamental questions of our being. I think I also speak for the rest of the audience when I say that the term metaphysics in the seminar announcement by a physicist confused us very much.

"Then let me briefly anticipate the outcome of my subsequent remarks: Without metaphysics there are no theories and no scientific method. In addition, I want to show you a way to find credible answers to the basic questions of being."

"That seems to me to be a contradiction, Professor Allman. For many people what their religious leaders tell them is already credible. Logic and empirical evidence do not count for these people, because they do not dare to think for themselves, but take over everything that is put before them. Other people are satisfied with esoteric descriptions. For them, what sounds comforting is already credible. For professional reasons alone, I belong neither to the first nor the second group of people. Precisely because I am a spiritualscientist, I want my critical mind to be satisfied. For this I need empirical evidence for the statements about the basic questions of being, i.e. something philosophy is not able to deliver. So I'm curious how you intend to solve the problem of credibility."

"I'm sure this course will satisfy you, Dr Maupertius. - Now to the topic: At the times when we humans still went hunting with bow and arrow, the knowledge of physics was limited to everyday life. The knowledge of why something worked originated from magical thinking at best. For everything there was some god or spirit that made the world go round. A theoretical basis was missing. Today, however, knowledge and understanding of the world is much more comprehensive. When we marvel at the breathtaking technical progress since the time of our fur-clad ancestors, and especially the progress of the last three centuries, we must remember that we owe it almost entirely to the 'scientific method', i.e. experiment, observation, logical thinking, hypothesising and refuting. What I have just summarized in a few terms belongs to what we call scientific theory."

"I am well aware that you are all very well versed in the meaning of scientific theories. Nevertheless, let me discuss some basic questions on the basis of the following slide."

The glaringly bright beamer throws the film onto a smoky transparent curtain in the middle of the room. The curtain consists of a newly developed material. The image projected onto it makes the participants believe that it is floating freely in space.

Seven criteria that must be met for it to be a scientific theory. It must be...

... a reality can be described logically without contradiction, including the preconditions of this reality
... this reality must be explained logically and, if necessary, further conclusions must be derived (=hypotheses)
... an unnecessarily complicated explanation can be avoided, even if it is easier (Ockham's razor!)
The hypotheses must in principle be falsifiable (=check for falseness)
... empirically decide whether the reality matches the hypotheses (falsify or verify)
Derivations of such predictions must be made which have practical significance
It must be possible to decide empirically whether the predictions are correct (falsify or verify)

Professor Allman looks around: "Can anyone give me an example of a scientific theory?"

"Yes, me!" said Johanna Balthasar, a strictly dressed woman in a grey dress and from the back row. The sign in front of your seat identifies you as a member of the theological faculty. "The world was created in six days by our Creator!"

"What makes you think this could be a scientific theory?" Professor Allman frowned.

"Because it is the absolute truth, after all, everything was written down literally as it comes from the Creator!"

"All right, let's check, using the seven criteria that make up a scientific theory, whether your statement is really, in fact, a scientific theory. Let's start with the first criterion. Is the young lady's statement the logically consistent description of a reality?"

Johanna Balthasar's right-hand neighbour, a tall young man whose name plate identifies him as Dr Benedict of Aniane, briefly takes a look at his neighbour and then replies: "In honour of the theological faculty, I would like to say that we too are committed to scientific thinking. As far as it concerns unprovable contents of faith, we do not want to lump our religion together with naturescience! As far as I know, the creation myth in Genesis 1,1 - 2,4a differs from the text in Genesis 2,4b - 25, which follows immediately after it: whereas in the first text the whole world is created first, and man does not follow until the sixth day, in the second text the individual acts of creation follow in a different order. Here the earth is dry at first, a barren steppe. Man is then created as an individual, then the plants and animals of the garden, so that man is not alone. So if one takes the text as a whole, I do not think that it is a logically consistent description of a reality. Already the first criterion of what constitutes a scientific theory is not fulfilled!"

"Not only that," exclaims Dr. Anaximenes, the mathematician from the front row, who apparently also has theological knowledge. "The first creation myth, according to which the universe is filled with water and the sky is a solid watershed, obviously contradicts demonstrable facts. After all, our spaceships do not float in water, but pass through the vacuum prevailing in space. Criterion five is not met. The hypothesis that the universe is filled with water does not fit reality."

"Very well analyzed," rejoiced Professor Allman. "If there is only the description of a reality that is perhaps not even logically consistent, then it is religion, pseudo-science or esotericism. This is not meant in a judgmental way, Dr. Benedikt von Aniane, but only as a classification. - But now I really want to hear from you the example of a scientific theory!"

The tall Dr. Aniane answers: "If six sheep graze in a pasture and seven are added, then there are thirteen sheep in the pasture.

His neighbor Johanna Balthasar blushes in annoyance: "This is supposed to be better than what I said before?

With the words: "All serious contributions to the discussion are allowed! We don't want any prohibitions on thinking and no suppression of opinions", Professor Allman ends the laughter. "Both participants of the theological faculty are definitely serious contributions. - Dr. Aniane, will you please substantiate your statement?"

"Criterion 1: The thirteen sheep in the pasture are the description of a reality. One of the premises of this description of reality is that sheep exist and graze on the pasture and are not just imagination. Criterion 2: The hypothesis is that arithmetic can be used to add up the number of animals and thus arrive at a result. Criterion 3: There are no unnecessarily complicating explanations. For example, I don't need gods to reach the number thirteen. That means Occam's razor is done enough. Criterion 4: The hypothesis that simple arithmetic can be used to determine the number of sheep is verifiable. Criterion 5: I saw a sheep pasture behind the dunes, so we can decide empirically whether reality fits the theory. Let's test the theory for ourselves and go outside!" With those last words, Dr. Aniane stands up.

"Thank you, Dr. Aniane, please sit down. We don't have to go outside. Life experience speaks for itself," Professor Allman interjects. "But please proceed with your statement of reasons."

"Criterion Six: I can make predictions from the hypothesis. One of these predictions is: If there are thirteen sheep in the pasture and three come into the fold, then there must still be ten sheep in the pasture. Criterion 7: The predictions can also be empirically tested. As the shepherd in the pasture assured me before the start of the course, the predictions about the number of sheep have always come true!

Those present are briefly amazed, then they begin to knock enthusiastically on their benches.

"A physicist could not have expressed it better, Dr. Aniane!" praised Professor Allman as the knocking died down. "With this you have actually given the example of a physical theory and given a clean foundation. And you showed me more. In metaphysics one asks in the most general way what exists. The three great physicists Einstein, Podelski, Rosen, on the other hand, have given physics and thus also metaphysics a concrete criterion to decide when an element of physical reality exists. Sloppily speaking, they said that if the predictions have a probability of one, that is, if they are certain to come true, then there is an element of physical reality that corresponds to the predictions. To express the result metaphysically: Sheep exist! - We first had an example of a statement about reality that satisfies only criterion 'one' of a scientific theory, and now we have an example that covers all seven criteria and thus reaches the highest level of credibility. Is there anything in between?"

Dr. August Dessoir, a corpulent parapsychologist wearing nickel glasses, says: "I am thinking ofscientific theories that have the potential to become accepted scientific theories, but where important things are still missing, such as the empirical decision of the hypotheses. The criteria 'one' to 'four' of scientific theories would then be fulfilled, but the criterion 'five' is lacking.

"Dr. Dessoir, are you thinking of your own field, parapsychology?" Professor Allman asks.

Dessoir adjusts his glasses: "I first studied geology before I became a parapsychologist. Therefore, I would like to take Wegener's continental drifthypothesis as an example, which for a long time was regarded as pure speculation and finally, after its confirmation, was accepted by geology, i.e. by a recognized science".

"Thank you, Dr. Dessoir. Since not everyone knows Wegener's theories, I would like to start by playing a short film from the digital archive."

Table of contents

Preface

Credibility of statements about reality