Chapter 9. Your World, Or Mine?

In the last chapter we derived the proton as the resultant of the interaction of two Union

particles of identical mass and a third particle, a weird kind of "quark." I think it should

not be called a quark. Instead maybe we should call it a sQuark. Since we also have

derived the mass of the proton in terms of the simple relation between the (e) force and

the speed of light, we can now define the mass of the Qp (proton sQuark) by substituting

that value and solving for Qp.

* (e / c)(P Ao / %) = (Qp)(e^2 Ao / As P eo G).

* Qp = P^2 eo G As / c e % = 4.817x10^-10 kg^-1.

Before we go deeper into exploring subatomic particles, let's step back again and look at

physics as a discipline.

There are several levels we can work from. At the "deepest" level there is no such thing

as physics. Harry Palmer wiped out physics as we know it with a single sentence.

Starting from his proposition that belief and experience are perfectly mapped, he took

another step that opened up the field of applied consciousness. He said,

"I call my philosophy Creativism because it is not discovered truth, it is created truth.

Most philosophies are derived from some fundamental experience or understanding of

the universe -- not Creativism; it is created by awareness at source."

(Living Deliberately, Ch. 14, "Creativism and Reality", p. 99. Quote from a 1988

lecture by Palmer.) You can download that book free from the www.AvatarEPC.com

web site.

The first sentence of that quote dissolves not only all past philosophies (and a priori

religions), it dissolves physics and all of the sciences as well -- not as belief systems, but

as claimants to Ultimate Truth. Read Palmer's statement carefully. Creativism is not

discovered truth. It is CREATED truth. Palmer created out of source awareness a set of

tools for exploring awareness. Not only Palmer, but also you, and I, and anyone can

create anything we like. You have a choice. You can use Palmer's tools if you like.

Or you can create your own tools. You can create your own universe. And of course it

will have its own laws of physics, which will be whatever you decide, as long as they are

reasonably consistent. Otherwise your universe may not hold together very well.

This brings us back around to Einstein. He built his great system of general relativity on

the basis of two fundamental assertions: the equivalence principle, and his great

assumption that the core laws of the universe are isotropic for all observers. We have

shown that the equivalence principle is really only a special case in the limit of the

infinitesimal -- hardly the basis for a universal theory. Einstein got his equivalence match

turned around backwards. The notion of isotropy also becomes extremely suspect in the

light of quantum mechanics and observer physics. Once we become aware of the

belief/experience paradox and Palmer's fundamental principle of Creativism -- that it is

9 * Your World, Or Mine? * 2

possible to CREATE truth, not just discover it -- the whole ballgame shifts, and we must

revise Einstein's "special case" assumption about isotropic laws to make it more general.

There is really no reason why isotropism should hold. I don't think Einstein had

anything more than his personal intuitive preference to back it up. And he did have

wonderful intuition most of the time and a flair for prediction. However, in the light of

Palmer's new and more general propositions, we realize that the core laws of a universe

are only isotropic for that subset of observer-participants who BELIEVE they are

isotropic. Furthermore, any given set of "isotropic" laws is only isotropic for the group

that believes in them. Such a group and their shared set of core beliefs constitute a

shared universe of experience. I say "core beliefs and laws", because a system may

include metabeliefs that permit participants to hold differing sub-beliefs while holding

the same core beliefs.