|
Tim,
That is, other than identifying axions as the medium of non-local consciousnes, his characterization of the human mind (not the brain which supports a distinct visible consciousness) as being layers of Cooper-pairs of unlike charges may be his most important contribution.
[It is something that science is quite unlikely to come up with. Of course, science makes progress to begin with on the basis of inspiration, an indirect form of revelation, whereas Father Jerome's is direct. So perhaps the mind would be modeled as Cooper=pairs anyway]
I believe that those charges are not electrical but rather a new charge that cumulatively is our imagination and our awareness. Others in the field have called it the charge of consciousness.
So Father Jerome's contribution is to point out that this new charge C can be plus or minus, and that the plus or minus is reflected in good and evil, but without saying that it is a new charge.
The mind, then being layers of dipole like coupling of a plus and a minus C charge (the electrical charge is usually called Q), is therefore a weak consciousness, and is reflected in our imagination being weak. At least mine is very weak.
Then something like Remote Viewing, which is mind-based, yields fuzzy images; whereas OBE (out of body experience) which happens in the purely plus C axion condensate that surrounds us, yields images that are just as sharp as the visible brain consciousness. Lucid dreams are of this type.
This is good news for as when I contemplated life after death, I formerly was of the impression that the imagery there would be fuzzy. I felt this way even though OBE was a sharp consciousness, or I should say a strong consciousness. Since I had not had an OBE myself, it was possible that OBEs were the property of people with highly developed consciousnesses, unlike mine.
However, with Father Jerome's contribution explaining how the consciousness of the mind can be weak, and after death consciousness can be strong, my vision of life afer death has improved considerably, pun intended.
The other scientists I have been in contact with are very put off by Father Jerome's site as being much too farfetched and even repulsive as in all that talk about Lucifer. I was also at first. For example, his talk about Einstein seemed unfounded, he said that temperatures could go below zero. And he implied that axions can have electrical charge. I have communicted all this and more to him via email.
After I pointed out the below absolute zero statement, about three times in various emails to him, he finally realized what I was saying and totally agreed. He has since removed that statement. He does seem to have difficulty hearing what others say.
Since he did not actually say electrical charge, we can interpret it as a new charge. But he has not said that either. So for me to become aware of his contributions, I had to get over the sometimes trivial (sometimes drastic) errors, and reinterpret his remarks in new and usually softer language. Then I was able to appreciate the clues to how consciousness works from his rhetoric.
My approach to scripture is the same. I do not take it literally but rather as clues or metaphors of cosmology and even reality. In fact I rather see the writings of science as modern day scripture. Ancient scripture incorporated history, cosmology, the science of the day, morality and government. Modern science does the same except that the disciplines are now separate and specialized.
Enough preaching.
Cheers,
yanniru |
