OUR UNDISCOVERED UNIVERSE BY TER= ENCE WITT

BOOK REVIEW= BY MELVIN L MORSE MD FAAP

SPIRITUALSC= IENTIFIC.COM

Just whe= n you thought you were starting to understand quantum physics, here comes Terence Witt with Our Undiscovered Universe in which he challenges virtually= all the accepted assumptions underlying our current perception of reality. Terence Witt’s Universe is infinite, timeless (no beginning and no end), with no Big Bang, no accelera= ting galaxies away from the center, and no sub-sub atomic particles such as quarks. Instead, he postulate= s that the Universe consists of nothing! This is why he calls his theory “Null Physics”. But not just empty space, not that= kind of nothing. Terence Witt’s view of the Universe is that is consists entirely of curved space, gravity, and energy forming a complex balance of matter and anti-matter, energy and dark energy, all adding up to nothing at all.

I love this sort of book as it forces scientists to re-examine their most cherished assumptions. As a physician-consciousness resea= rcher, I have used the quantum non-local reality physical reality model as the best fit to understand our current scientific concepts of consciousness. However, Witt’s book forces = all of us to re-examine everything that we believe to be real. I am not qualified to do the math = needed to critically evaluate his book, but my best guess is that ultimately he wi= ll be proven wrong. He is so thoughtful and thought provoking, however, that the book is well worth it f= or the hours of discussion it has provoked between me, my wife, and friends.

It is clear, well organized and simply written. It is often funny. You don’t need to be a mathematician to understand his basic concepts. He presents a broad comprehensive = theory of reality which incorporates subatomic reality, ordinary reality, and the latest understandings of astronomy and cosmology. He has great lines such as describ= ing modern physicists as being so astonished by their experimental findings that they have become “infused with a hysterical mysticism”.

He does a great job of summarizing the basic principle= s of quantum physics in one of the best and succinct presentations I have read f= or the non-physicist. He accurat= ely points out the many flaws in the current scientific model and he nicely outlines the mainstream understanding of the difficulties in creating a coherent unified theory of reality given the constraints of the current paradigm. Let’s face it, there is plenty of room w= ithin modern theoretical physics for Witt’s Null Physics, given that many no longer feel the Big Bang is a viable theory and mainstream physicists state= the Universe is made mostly of “dark energy” and “dark matter” and that we have no idea what they are.

His critics are legion, yet mainly consist of anonymou= s chat room “experts” and graduate level physicists who have not read = his book. The substance of their criticism consists mainly of repetitively chanting “crack pot, crack pot” over and over again. Sort of a Lord of Flies meets the Internet gone really really bad. As Harold Bloom points out in The Luci= fer Principle, “the most insubstantial things we call ideas . .can lead to the basest cruelties.” I have rev= iewed the websites of Witt’s critics and understand their concerns. These primarily young men are in t= he process of establishing themselves within their fields. It takes a sense of confidence and maturity to read Witt’s book which most people are going to completely disagree with. By challenging= our basic beliefs, Witt forces a healthy re-examination of the fundamental assu= mptions of modern physics and a greater understanding of whatever model of reality = we ultimately end up with.

I have written peer reviewed articles with theoretical physicists, and I showed the book to them.= They hemmed and hawed, and muttered ridiculous, and yet ended with a healthy respect for what Witt is trying to accomplish. One internationally recognized theoretical physicist told me that “he is totally wrong, really doesn’t get it at all. However, if he is right, he is on the right track, I would work on h= is math, some of it needs complete revisions, but for a first effort, not bad,= not bad at all.” It is telling that he declined me to allow his name to be used, given the controversy the book has created. Scientific American has recently d= ecided to refuse Witt’s advertisements for his book, a sad commentary of the power of the current Scientific Fundamentalist movement (see side bar). No one wants to offend them or the= y too will have to suffer an Internet onslaught of chanting science drones.

As a scientist who challenged the medical model of con= sciousness by documenting the near death experiences of children, I will always have a soft spot for intelligent outsiders who dare to take on the scientific stat= us quo. My theories of conscious= ness are now well accepted enough that they have been replicated by other scientists, and published in the American Medical Association Medical Journals, the Lancet, and the New England Journal of Medicine. The United Nations recently launched a multi-medical center study of near death experiences, yet 25 years ago I was also dismissed as a crackpot.

Ultimately, I am not sure if Mr. Witt’s theories= will stand the test of time. It is not my field, and stranger things have happen= ed in the history of science. However, I do know I learned a lot from reading = his book, and it stimulated me to rethink my own theories of reality.