100% God Proof: Deriving God and the Law of Attraction

back

Preliminaries and Sources

This book should be read cover to cover. If you pick up a book on mathematics, surely you would need to understand the beginning before the end. It is in the nature of any derivation to build the end on the beginning. So it is with the book you are holding.

Often you will find words that are unusually capitalized. This capitalization is intentional and means to convey ADDitional MEanINg. Scripture quotations that do not make reference to a particular translation are either so generic that they apply to many versions or they were rewritten and adapted from a number of sources. The main reason for any divergence from scripture is to increase readability, or to choose words that can be more easily interpreted and understood.

For the derivations to remain understandable, it was necessary to refer to popular scientific concepts in common and everyday language and to repeat some material. An astute scientist may find it a worthwhile exercise to derive God in a more rigorous fashion and to compress the derivations. The information before you contains a number of explanations that are not strictly necessary, but were included to improve the reading experience and to make the proof more accessible to everyone.

Somewhere along the way, the Law of Attraction will be established as a lemma. A lemma is a proven proposition and a stepping stone to derive a larger result. Originally, the title of this book was going to be: Excuse me but ... if you believe in the Law of Attraction, you believe in God! My optimistic view is that soon all the disciples of the Law of Attraction will make room for God in their hearts.

This highest of laws has been explained and stated in various texts and by various authors, most notably the Apostles of the Bible. Many modern-day authors have also emerged to share their knowledge about the secret of this law. More often than not, God does not enter into the equation.

Although our investigations will lead us to new insights about the Law of Attraction, it is not necessary to have any familiarity with it. For the reader who is interested in gathering more information about the Law of Attraction, the writings of Charles F. Haanel are highly recommended. He is a noteworthy author whose works are in the public domain. Although he usually does not speak directly about God, he makes reference to the Universal Mind or the Universal Consciousness. In doing so, he does not exclude God from his considerations.

It is my sincere hope that the derivations contained within this writing will add to your understanding of God and the Law of Attraction. Depending on your background, you may on occasion find it hard to follow my train of thought. My advice to you is to take your time. The subject of God is without a doubt deserving of your attention and effort.

As an outcome to the derivations, practical and applicable knowledge will also be developed. Even if you encounter conceptual difficulties, the practical information can still be of value. To put it in different words, not knowing how all that electricity stuff works is not going to hold you back from turning on the light switch. And not knowing how to prove that (1 + 1 = 2) is not going to hold you back from believing it all the same.

After the God Proof is complete, the nature of God that is established through the approach is further explained. As your confidence in the derivations will grow, we will explore how they fit into select verses of the Bible and other spiritual and religious insights from around the globe. What was previously perceived as dogma will unravel itself as hidden knowledge.

All human endeavors have flaws and I do not make the claim of perfection. If you therefore find yourself in strong disagreement with anything that is written here, please do not let your disagreement escalate into offense. If you have reason to disagree, I hope that you will still be able to appreciate the attempt at enriching our understanding of God. To quote the classic Latin phrase: Ut Desint Vires, Tamen Est Laudanda Voluntas.¹

That being said, I am not trying to start or establish a new branch of religion. It is my hope to find a reader with an open mind and heart who dares to read on, even when things seem fuzzy or ridiculous at first. This is especially important for the moment when you encounter the phrase Quod Erat Demonstrandum.²

During the writing of this book, I ran into a well known disagreement between the theory of Quantum Mechanics and the special theory of Relativity. Special Relativity³ expresses issues with velocities above the speed of light. The claim of this theory, that there are no speeds greater than the speed of light, had never gotten a rise out of me. Now it bothered me to such a degree that I started reading Einstein's book on Relativity and whatever I could find about it online. Yes, I cannot take anything for granted either. I prefer proof and understanding over dogma. For that reason, I halted the writing of this book for about two months.

My background research showed that many had already disputed the special theory of Relativity and even proven it wrong through various examples of where it fails. While there is mathematical proof aplenty that Special Relativity is incorrect, I wasn't able to find a thorough conceptual refutation of the theory. However, working through Einstein's book entitled Relativity, I discovered a number of theoretical missteps.

Besides that, Special Relativity stands and falls with the Lorentz Transform, an ingenious, yet short piece of mathematics created by the late Nobel Laureate Hendrik Antoon Lorentz. Although it was entertaining to work through this mathematical piece of history, it also contains conceptual errors that can be made blatantly obvious.

As a writer, I was tempted to refute Special Relativity on conceptual grounds and started taking notes right there and then. Eventually, I found experimental evidence that the theory is incorrect and stopped short, realizing that the book before you is of much greater importance. It is a step forward and constructive, not backward and into the past. Maybe after 100% God Proof there will be a another book in the making. In the meantime, I can assure you that the writing before you is not in conflict with any up-to-date theories in the field of physics. In short, the tenets of Quantum Mechanics hold firm over Special Relativity.

Without further ado, let us derive God.

The power may be lacking, but the will should be praised all the same.

back

Latin for: Which had to be demonstrated.

back

Please do not make the mistake of confusing Special Relativity with General Relativity. General Relativity is still widely accepted.

back

Chapter 1

The Axioms

Our axioms are simple observations that scientists have made in the field of physics. Let's say you have two apples in front of you. You see both apples, their existence is not in question. You add: (1 + 1 = 2). The apples are the observation. If you look away and look at them again, there they are. It's a repeatable observation. Nothing is hidden. You could take Apple and make it into your counting axiom. But then there are pears, peas, mangos, oranges and so forth. So you don't make Apple into the axiom.

Instead, you propose an idea: Natural Number! Mathematicians have done so and have postulated the existence of natural numbers. For us, Natural Number is the axiom, not Apple. With natural numbers you can count everything. Pears, peas, mangos, oranges or apples. But if our world was concerned with apples alone, the existence of natural numbers would not have been postulated. The counting axiom would have been called Apple instead.

The point is: Any repeatable observation is so basic that it cannot be denied by our intellect or disproven by logic. It can be an axiom. Let us choose our axioms wisely.

Axiom 1

Our universe exhibits a wave-particle duality, and every particle or mass can be described by a wave function or as a wave, a matter-wave.

This axiom is one of the central tenets of Quantum Mechanics and an often discussed topic of modern-day science. At its heart, the statement conveys that all observable phenomena can be described by waves.

The following illustration shows two apples:

On the left, the apple looks solid. Our eyes see it that way. But physics tells us that what we see is only an interpretation of reality. With different eyes, maybe we would see the apple as it is shown on the right: standing waves, so dense that they offer resistance to touch.

Axiom 2

Waves are characterized by their wavelength, their amplitude and their frequency:

If you can sit on a beach or swim in the ocean, you can understand what the wavelength, amplitude and frequency of a wave are. First a small wave comes in. It's not so strong and not very high. That means it's amplitude is small. Amplitude is just a fancy word for the height or the strength of a wave. A strong wave has a large amplitude.

When a large ocean wave crashes into you, you will feel it. Think of it this way, a large ocean wave will amplify the way you feel.

When you swim at the beach and the waves are high, you have to pay attention to the next wave coming in. So you look for the next peak, the next crest. You can count the waves. From one peak to the next, that's one wave. With the next crest, the next wave starts. So how long is the wave? From crest to crest, that is its wavelength.

Everyone can understand waves, they are fun. And they don't just exist in the ocean. They are everywhere. Particle physics deals with the smallest imaginable matter. Everything can be described by waves.

Take a minute at the beach. How many waves can you count in one minute? Sometimes the water moves slowly, at other times more quickly. When it moves fast, you count more waves. The crests appear more frequently.

Maybe you count 60 waves the first time. 60 waves per minute, that's the frequency. The next time you count when the water moves faster. 75 waves per minute, that's a higher frequency. When things get small and microscopic these principles do not change.

Waves can be made visible:

A spinning wheel makes waves. Color a dot on the perimeter of a coin. Put the coin on a table and roll it on its edge. As the coin is moving through space, the dot is tracing wave after wave.

An oscilloscope is a device that allows the observation of electrical waveforms and it makes them visible in a two-dimensional plot.

A wave that is strong and has a high amplitude is easily found. For weaker waves, equipment may be needed to detect them. Whenever we are talking about the frequency, wavelength, strength or amplitude of a wave, we are using Axiom 2.

Axiom 3

Waves interact. Two waves end up being one wave after interaction.

When matching waves interact, the result is a stronger wave with a higher amplitude. When non-matching waves interact, they can cancel each other out. The frequency and wave description of a wave can change through interactions.

The following picture shows how two waves that are in-phase and similar interact with each other. The resulting wave's amplitude is the sum of the amplitudes of the interacting waves:

The next picture also shows two waves that are similar. However, they do not match up and are out-of-phase. The result is that they cancel each other out:

Another picture of two waves interacting: A big wave interacts with a small wave. The wave description of the resulting wave incorporates both waves:

Go to a park and find a swing. The motion of a swing is like a wave. Trace the swing in the air, it's part of a semicircle. Think of the bottom as the crest of the wave. To make yourself swing higher and faster you have to move rhythmically. You have to match the wave of the swing with the muscular contractions that ripple through your body.

Your contractions are waves that add to the motion of the swing. When they are properly adjusted to the oscillations, you go fast and strong. The result of in-phase or partially in-phase interactions is a stronger wave. As the amplitude gets higher, you swing higher. The speed changes too and you accelerate. Because the contractions are slightly out of phase and timed correctly, the frequency of the swing changes.

When you want to get off, the timing needs to be changed and you use your body to counteract the motion of the swing. The waves of your contractions become dissimilar to the oscillations. Interactions of dissimilar waves remove or cancel out energy.

Sometimes waves interact that are not very similar at all. The result is still a new single waveform. It looks different, maybe more random, but it is only a single wave.

In short, wave interactions have effects on the amplitude, frequency and wavelength of the resulting wave. With respect to their interactions, small waves (e.g. light waves or sound waves) interact in the same way as large waves do (e.g. waves in the ocean).

Physicists have experiments, similar to being on a swing, that demonstrate interactions of small waves and the resulting changes in frequency. For example, sound waves can be converted into light waves. This change can either be observed through what is called sonoluminescence or through the use of piezoelectric speakers (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 2009).

Axiom 4

Waves advance and travel through space or they exist as standing waves.

An ocean wave travels a distance through space and can advance to the shore. In contrast, solid objects like an apple are standing waveforms. In the particle description of matter, a solid appears to be mainly empty space. Under the microscope there is a dot, an atom. Then there is a long empty space. More empty space, more ... more ... more ... another dot, another atom!

Because of the way we interact with matter, we want to think of it as particles, i.e. as solid. The moment we do, we have to accept what the microscope is telling us.

Why doesn’t our hand simply pass through the apple when we try to touch it? It should, if one thinks of the apple as occasional particles and mainly empty space.

But the hand does not pass through the apple. The space between atoms can’t be so empty after all! Luckily, the atoms that make up the apple can be thought of as many waveforms standing in space. They are connected to each other and are filling the space. Now it is possible to understand why our hand doesn't pass through the apple. Thinking of matter as standing waves seems closer to reality than looking at it as small tiny dots with much empty space between them.

Naturally, standing waves interact with other waves. For example, sunlight shines off a mirror. When it does, we know that there is a mirror standing in space and that light travels to and from the mirror. The light reveals the existence of the mirror, but what we process with our senses is not the mirror. We see the light that interacted with the mirror and contains an image of the mirror. Yet, the image of the mirror is not the mirror itself, just as the image of an object in the mirror is not the object itself.

Axiom 5

Matter-waveforms can quantum tunnel. The location of a particle or matter-waveform is expressed by a probability function.

Quantum Mechanics does not recognize the speed of light as a limitation. This leads to the acceptance of an observable phenomenon: quantum tunneling through zero time space.

Imagine a matter-waveform, a tiny one, just one. You observe it in a lab and under a special kind of microscope. Watch it, watch it, ...! Poof, it disappeared. It sort of dematerialized. Where did it go?

The truth is, it could have gone anywhere, anywhere at all. The moon maybe or into another galaxy. In zero time, instantaneously! How likely is this occurrence? Not likely, but possible. At any moment a matter-waveform could simply disappear through a quantum tunnel:

As babies we learned a thing called object permanence. Mom or dad played peekaboo with us. They looked at us and we saw their face. They hid their face, where did it go? Peekaboo, and it's back! What fun to know that things don't disappear on us. No wonder that babies like the game. But as adults, we can accept that matter-waves can travel to just about anywhere and in no time at all. As long as it is not our wallet or the house keys, we can be fine.

How often do matter-waves quantum tunnel? All the time! They are in a constant state of flux. This flux is expressed through a probability equation. It is a quantum tunnel flux.¹

Why doesn't everything disappear then? What creates object permanence? Think of it this way: Most of the time matter-waves enter a quantum tunnel, go through the tunnel, and reappear exactly where they were before. That is, the quantum tunnel loops back onto itself.

Besides that, objects like a house key - that consist of millions or billions of atomic matter-waveforms - can afford to lose a few atoms disappearing through a quantum tunnel.

Their disappearance is not noticed and does not disrupt the experience of object permanence. The probability of all the atoms that make up a larger object to quantum tunnel to an already improbable location is not impossible, but astronomically low.

If a matter-wave tunnels elsewhere, it doesn't have to be lost in a far off place either. It can ride the next tunnel right back to its most probable location: back to the object permanent location. That's probability for you, that's the quantum tunnel flux. It creates the satisfying experience of object permanence and it makes for a stable universe.

However, what we will focus on is, that the next location of a matter-waveform is tied to a probability equation. For that reason, a matter-waveform is kind of everywhere and spread out through the entire universe. This leads to a very important conclusion. Because of the constant quantum tunnel flux, all matter-waveforms that are contained in our universe are simultaneously present in all known space.

The following image is a crude depiction of the quantum tunnel flux of a tiny matter-wave. Only a few tunnels are shown. A picture of the entire flux would show myriads of tunnels, overlapping each other and leading to every thinkable location in the universe.

Described as such for the first time in this writing and coined to avoid confusion with the often imagination-overused and movie-popular term quantum flux.

back

Chapter 2

Conclusions derived from the Axioms

The Axioms and conclusions will be used in different places throughout this book.

Conclusion 1

Human beings use their sense organs to interact with the world. The sense organs are physical, they are made of matter. By Axiom 1 the matter of our physical organs is also a matter-waveform, i.e. a wave. That means all of our sense interactions are interactions of waves. Sight uses light waves. Hearing uses sound waves. Touch, taste and smell are standing waves of matter interacting with other standing waves. Thoughts are associated with brain waves like beta, alpha, theta or delta waves.

Conclusion 2

Our observations are waves that interact with other waves. By Axiom 3 the interaction between two waves results in the creation of one new wave, not two. The new wave describes an entirely new state of reality. By Axiom 2, this new reality waveform has a fresh amplitude, frequency and wavelength description.

In short, the new wave, i.e. our new reality and that which is or will be, is altered by our own observations. In turn, observation or how we interpret what we perceive is dependent on our intentions. As a consequence, what we intend to observe in part defines our new reality. This conclusion is of the utmost importance. In the next few chapters we will explore just how powerful intentions can be.

Conclusion 3

Matter-waveforms that can be observed by us have a sufficiently large amplitude in relation to their frequency and wavelength to be noticed.

What we call manifest or manifested (from manus: hand & fest: firm), i.e. the palpable, is consisting of waveforms that are standing in space. They are sufficiently strong and frequent to offer resistance to touch. Similarly, interactions with waveforms that move or propagate through space, e.g. ocean waves, requires them to have an amplitude large enough to be perceivable.

Conclusion 4

There has to be a threshold at which a waveform that has built up over time just needs to interact with one more waveform, so that the resultant wave breaks into the state of perceptibility or even solidity. Then the waveform can be observed through our senses or detected by technological measuring equipment that acts as an extension to our senses.

Conclusion 5

By Axiom 5, all waves contained within our universe are simultaneously present in all known space. Because waves interact to produce one resultant waveform, the entire universe can at any given moment be described by an extremely complex, singular waveform. Different parts of the same complex waveform can, like appendages, interact with each other.

Viewed from the limited vantage point of a small observer that is immersed in an enormously sized, single waveform, these wave appendages can appear as localized waves in their own right. It is the appendages then that quantum tunnel. They disappear into the single universe waveform in one location and squeeze out to emerge elsewhere.

Can you picture our entire universe being one huge matter-waveform or being described as one complex wave? If you are having trouble with this thought, consider that the information of an entire movie is routinely digitized into a sequence of 0s and 1s. The 0s and 1s are written onto a DVD, Blue-Ray or other media.

Now imagine the following: Take a random point in the universe. Let's say a point in front of your eyes. Fixate this point and freeze the universe so that no time elapses. It's like pressing the pause button on your DVD player. Draw a three dimensional coordinate system (X, Y and Z) and make the point in front of your eyes the origin. Going left and right is X. Going up and down is Y. And going forward and backward is Z. Now your mind's eye can travel anywhere in the universe, to any point that is (X,Y, Z).

Every point in the coordinate system can be digitized, just like the pixel points of the frozen TV picture are digitized. The state at every (X,Y,Z) is describable through a sequence of 0s and 1s. If the particle description of matter is used and not waveforms, most of what needs recording is empty space. It's mainly a zero description and easy to encode.

Now we can take the complete set of 0s and 1s that describe our vast universe and we can mentally construct a single waveform that expresses them. 0s are a bump below the midline, 1s are a bump above. Bump up, bump down, bump down, bump down is 1,0,0,0. A huge and complex waveform can describe our entire universe! But it's not the same as the universe, it's a description of the universe through a binary language.

Nonetheless, the entire known universe can be encoded in this way. Because it can be coded into a single waveform, it also is a single waveform. You may say that this conclusion doesn't necessarily follow, but it does. Why?

Because if things can be encoded together, they cannot ever be truly separate from each other, i.e. they can be connected. This is true, even if the encoding function is the only way to connect what is being examined.

After all is said and done, a wave or a waveform is defined the moment one can draw connections. It therefore has to be concluded that