New Types of Experiments
Eyes closed, looking for the universe
“ The historian of science may be tempted to claim that when paradigms change, the world itself changes with them. Led by this new understanding of the world, scientists adopt new instruments and look in new places. Even more important, during revolutions, scientists see new and different things when looking with familiar instruments in places they have looked before. It is rather as if the professional community had been suddenly transported to another planet where familiar objects are seen in a different light and are joined by unfamiliar ones as well. ”
Philosopher of Science, Thomas Kuhn
The subject as measuring instrument
A new theory always represents a new form of logic and will therefore always constitute a break with established reason. It’s a theory’s form of logic that determines which types of experiments are significant. We now have a new theory, The First Unified Theory. It is this theory’s logic that will designate important and relevant experiments.
In the old material theory, there’s no reason to expect happiness in any way, shape or form other than known magnitudes.
The new theory asserts the strong forces in the depths of physics are joy in very large magnitudes. Moreover, that the purpose of creation is to experience a maximally joyful life. Both scientifically and personally, it is of the utmost importance to set up experiments able to confirm the existence of such outlandish magnitudes of joy. Experiments 1 and 2 confirm their existence and are therefore very important contributions to the verification of the new theory. And even more interestingly – they offer the prospect of joy in hitherto unknown quantities in our personal lives.
Quantitative properties of subatomic entities (fundamental ideas)
can be studied by manipulating them in an accelerator.
(Picture: AchimWeidner)
Qualities of subatomic entities (fundamental ideas)
can be studied by manipulating them in consciousness.
In the material paradigm, consciousness and ideas are regarded as mere effects of material causes. It’s not surprising then that experiments involving the manipulation of consciousness and ideas haven’t been interesting in science’s search for the solution to the Great Riddle. With an idea-based understanding, consciousness and ideas become causes and material phenomena effects. This changes the situation entirely. Experiments involving the manipulation of consciousness and applied ideas become of paramount importance to the solution of the Great Riddle.
As individuals with consciousness and intelligence,
we are part of the ultimate CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE that created the universe.
In principle, we can study CAUSE from the inside.
We can study the very nature of intelligence and consciousness, we can study the thoughts, intentions and feelings that underlie creation, and we can study the thoughts and feelings that result from creation.
The ideas that arise during this type of experiment become part of the result. The specific wording doesn’t have to depict reality correctly; it will always be influenced by the ideas and culture characteristic of the person carrying out the experiments. But the experiment is in itself a short-term practice of a master idea with a far higher understanding than the one we practice on a daily basis; the result is an experience of the exotic reality such an exquisite master idea creates.
The goal of all research is to understand reality better. With this type of experiment, the goal of increased understanding gains relevance in both size and scope. The CONSCIOUSNESS and INTELLIGENCE that created reality/the universe with joy maximization as its goal has full understanding and fully acknowledges the ultimate JOYFUL result. As we continually strive to gain this level of understanding, more and more of reality will be understood. At the same time, we will experience more and more of the joy.
What about objectivity?
Lending weight and significance to the ideas and feelings we experience is unusual in science. At first glance, doing so may seem to violate the long established requirement that science must be objective. But referring to objectivity has never stopped theories from being based on subjective assumptions. Nor has it ever prevented science from keeping a theory artificially alive with subjective preconceptions.
A theory is a collection of assumptions, and assumptions are inherently subjective. A material theory of reality, for example, consists of a set of assumptions that the world is made up of inanimate parts. The material theory may be right or it may be wrong. But, it is a collection of assumptions the origins of which are one hundred percent subjective. We can forget the question of objectivity in this case and stick to the question that matters: “What makes science special?”
The only thing that has contributed to the solidity of science over the centuries is the requirement that a theory must be able to explain reality. If the idea-based theory candidate leads to a significantly better ability to explain reality than its competitors, it doesn’t matter that the idea content and feelings experienced are subjective. It is then objectively a more solid theory.