"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Remote viewing of the large-scale world does not change the objects under observation. As well as seeing them paranormally as they exist at the time, the remote viewer may sometimes see them as they were in the past or even as they will be in the future. The object itself, however, remains unaltered. In the subatomic world, however, the situation is very different because particles obey the Uncertainty Principle. The intervention of the observer in a physics laboratory disturbs what is being measured or detected, and this remains true for a remote viewer who focusses on atoms and subatomic particles. Ignorant of the quantum nature of the subatomic particles that they described with micro-psi (the modern name given by the author to the yogic siddhi called anima), the Theosophists Annie Besant & C.W. Leadbeater made the working assumption that they did not affect what they were examining, so that they believed that they paranormally "saw" atoms in their natural state. Everyone who later studied their work also assumed this and implicitly based their assessment of their claims upon the validity of the belief. The error led to the long-standing impossibility of reconciling their accounts with the discoveries of atomic and nuclear physics. This generated scepticism towards their clairvoyant observations in general, inducing some people to question even the honesty of other claims they had expressed in their Theosophical writings. Once, however, this assumption is discarded by recognising that even micro-psi is a form of observation that is subject to the laws of the quantum world, the scientific obstacles that for so long faced their book Occult Chemistry no longer exist. One needs to understand that this great, pioneering work is primarily not about chemistry and atoms. This is the mistake of thinking that is still made by those modern critics who either are unaware of the author's work or ignore it. Instead, it is about nuclear and particle physics, nucleons, quarks and subquark states of superstrings — topics which were totally unknown to science during the period 1895-1908 when Besant & Leadbeater carried out the bulk of their investigations. This makes irrelevant all speculations and arguments about what scientific information the two Theosophists could have known and used to fabricate their work. What scant knowledge about atoms was available to them still cannot even begin to account for the massive degree of correlation that the author has established between the encyclopaedic volume of observations published in Occult Chemistry and these modern fields of scientific research (see his four books). What is the point of sceptics making unprovable speculations about what contemporary scientific knowledge Besant & Leadbeater might have known and have used to create a scientific hoax if this can pertain to only one per cent of their observations, leaving the other ninety-nine per cent still unexplained?! Cherry-picking of the evidence to suit a pre-determined, negative conclusion is a favourite tactic used by debunkers of the paranormal to create the illusion that they have explained all aspects of some mystery that challenges science, when in reality all they ever manage to do is to account in a conventional way for the one small piece of the puzzle that they bothered to consider. Students of the subject should take heed of this whenever they read sceptical appraisals of Occult Chemistry, especially those which — because they have not studied the author's systematic analyses — make the naive, wrong assumption that the observations of Besant & Leadbeater refer to atoms, when the author's research proves conclusively that they actually refer to objects formed from pairs of atoms.
By means of detailed, self-consistent analysis of the "micro-psi atoms," or MPAs, of 48 elements, the author established beyond all reasonable doubt that up (u) and down (d) quarks are not fundamental particles, as currently assumed by most physicists. He showed that they are, instead, bound states of three subquark states of the E8×E8 heterotic superstring with the following compositions:
u = X-X-Y, d = X-Y-Y,
where X is a subquark with an electric charge of +5/9 and Y is a subquark with an electric charge of -4/9. It needs to be emphasized that this is not merely some ad hoc model of particle physics that has been used to interpret thousands of details about the constituents of MPAs; it is in fact not even a hypothesis but a deduction. The criterion of self-consistency is so powerful that it enables these compositions of up and down quarks to be inferred from the paranormal observations! As pointed out in the section Occult Chemistry, the "atom" of an element as described with micro-psi is not that known to chemists and physicists but an object akin to what nuclear physicists call "compound nuclei" that was formed from two atomic nuclei of an element prior to appearance of images in the altered state of consciousness of the person using this yogic siddhi. This invalidates all past criticisms and debunkings of the work of Besant & Leadbeater that implicitly assumed that they had described atoms, with the implication that their claim was false because their descriptions contradict scientific knowledge about atoms and atomic nuclei. The process of transformation of pairs of nuclei into MPAs went on "behind the scenes," so to speak, so that Besant & Leadbeater were oblivious of the radical, psychokinetic effect their consciousness (or, rather, their trained, mental will) had on the atoms they selected for study. This section will provide examples of some of the simplest MPAs and how well their compositions can be understood in terms of a single hypothesis, namely, that MPAs contain all the quarks that originated in two (usually) similar nuclei of the element in question. Such is the level of correlation that emerges from this analysis of the first 20 elements in the chemical periodic table (the author's book ESP of Quarks and Superstrings contains analysis of 48 elements) that it cannot be plausibly dismissed as due to coincidence. Such an option requires accepting the miraculous possibility of a series of agreements that is so large that the probability of its occurrence by chance would be infinitesimally small. It does not require the formal application of a statistical test in order to realize this qualitative consistency, although tests of the level of quantitative agreement yield highly significant results. All one needs is common sense in assessing what could and what could not be the result of chance. Unfortunately, in their desperation to debunk Occult Chemistry because it discredits the presuppositions of what materialistic science deems possible (something which they feel obliged to defend at all costs), some sceptics have displayed a singular lack of common sense. Moreover, unable to explain why Besant & Leadbeater should have bothered to go to enormous lengths of complexity to describe atoms in a way that they knew contradicted some basic notions of atomic theory (hardly the action of fraudsters!), these critics resort to the tired tactic of making ad hominem attacks, exaggerating the seriousness of the defects of character that they believe they see in the two Theosophists in order to induce doubt about the validity of their work. For example, what they want you to accept is that their uncovering some hitherto unknown fact about Leadbeater, such as that he fibbed about his date of birth for some reason, is sufficient to discredit everything he claimed about his clairvoyant abilities, including his paranormal observation of atoms! It does no such thing, of course. His claims have to be assessed objectively and scientifically on their own merits. Sceptics are fond of quoting American astronomer Carl Sagan's declaration that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Well, in the case of Occult Chemistry we have such evidence when this body of work is properly understood. In fact, we have volumes of it. Humans have a tendency to avoid making the effort to evaluate the truth of complex issues by relying on their instant impressions of them. Debunkers like to exploit this laziness by presenting people with a simplistic, irrelevant or illegitimate reason to doubt some paranormal claim. It is as though they expect you to dismiss as worthless the pioneering work of some Nobel Prize winner in physics or medicine merely because they discovered that the distinguished researcher had been fined once by a law court for parking his car in the wrong place! Such is the level of ludicrous, desperate argument so often employed by debunkers in their smear tactics against people who claimed to possess paranormal abilities that they cannot expose as false. Never let it be forgotten that ad hominem arguments are always the last resort of someone who has lost the argument.....
Annie Besant & Charles W. Leadbeater.
The account of every element recorded in Occult Chemistry includes diagrams depicting the break-up of the constituents of its MPA. According to their assistant, C. Jinarajadasa (see here), this task of disintegrating groups of UPAs and studying the various configurations of the lines of force binding them together was Besant's main contribution, whereas Leadbeater concentrated upon examining how particles were arranged inside MPAs and determining their configurations, numbers and how many UPAs they comprised. Their disintegration diagrams provide crucial information for testing the theory that the subquarks released from two atomic nuclei regrouped themselves into an MPA prior to its observation by the two Theosophists. In fact, Besant's work proved far more valuable in this task than Leadbeater's because the huge volume of details that she amassed enables far more testing correlations to be made between her observations and the author's theoretical interpretion of MPAs.
The following labelling is employed here for interpreting what was described in Occult Chemistry:
= X subquark
= Y subquark
= X or Y subquark. This also depicts either: 1. several free UPAs released from different particles and which include both X and Y subquarks, 2. UPAs that should not have been observed, according to the theory, or 3. UPAs that belong to particles which are predicted to have been misobserved, e.g., a group of UPAs described as being "negative" instead of "positive," as predicted by the analysis of the MPA containing them.
Below is displayed the key interpretations of the two types of hydrogen triplets and the three types of duads of UPAs recorded in disintegration diagrams. The reader is recommended to memorize them, as the analyses presented here refer to them frequently.
According to the recent results of a research group led by Cornell physics professor G. Peter Lepage (Physical Review Letters (Vol. 104:13), the mass of the up quark has been calculated with an uncertainty of a few percent to be about 2 MeV (about four times the mass of an electron), whilst the mass of the down quark is about 4.8 MeV. For more details, see PhysOrg.com.
Reference will be made to so-called "mirror states." This is a subquark version of a well-known concept in nuclear physics, namely, that two atomic nuclei are said to be mirror nuclei when the number of protons in one nucleus is equal to the number of neutrons in the other nucleus. Two bound states A & B of (m+n) subquarks are mirror states if
A = mX-nY,
B = nX-mY.
More generally, an aggregate of m X subquarks and n Y subquarks is the mirror state of an aggregate of n X subquarks and m Y subquarks. They differ merely in the replacement of X subquarks by Y subquarks and vice versa. A mirror state of a particle P is written in the text as P′. In diagrams, it is written with a tilde above the letter(s) representing the particle (this is, usually, the chemical symbol of the element in whose MPA the particle was first noticed). It should be noted that no assumption is made about the differences between X and Y subquarks. In particular, although protons and neutrons are the two isospin states of the nucleon with third component of isospin T3 = ±½, the application of the concept of mirror states to bound states of subquarks does not necessarily imply that X and Y subquarks constitute another isospin doublet. The analysis does not need to assume this about the two types of subquarks, and it will not do so. In fact, the explanation of MPAs presented here needs to make no assumptions other than the basic hypothesis that they are formed from two atomic nuclei of an element prior to their becoming visible to micro-psi vision.
Throughout their descriptions of bound states of UPAs, Besant & Leadbeater referred to the "positivity" and "negativity" of particles and depicted the difference schematically by drawing diagrams of them with their UPAs pointing, respectively, either outwards from the centre of the group or inwards towards it. As they distinguished between positive hydrogen triplets, which analysis deduces are positively charged up quarks, and negative hydrogen triplets, which are inferred to be negatively charged down quarks, it is plausible to believe that their micro-psi faculty enabled them in some way that they never discussed to detect the electrical polarity of subatomic particles. The hydrogen MPA depicts one of the two positive hydrogen triplets in the lower hydrogen triangle as composed of two (+) UPAs and one (−) UPA and the other one as comprising one (+) UPA and two (−) UPAs. They are both up quarks with T3 = +½. This means that the (+) and (−) UPAs cannot be members of an ispin doublet, because ½ = ½ + ½ − ½. There is no evidence that Besant & Leadbeater determined the net positivity of a group of UPAs by subtracting the number of its negative UPAs from its number of positive UPAs and seeing whether the result was a positive or a negative number. Clearly, this could not have been the case for the hydrogen triplets in the hydrogen MPA, and so it is reasonable to assume that it was also not true for the more complex bound states of quarks and subquarks, particularly so given the tedious task of identifying which of the UPAs were positive in type and which were negative. The electric charge Q carried by a bound state A is Q = (5m−4n)/9; for its mirror state B, it is Q′ = (5n−4m)/9. Hence, Q>0 if 5m>4n and Q′<0 if 5n<4m. A and B will have opposite polarity if m>1.25n. This is true for up and down quarks, for which m = 2 and n = 1. Analyses of many groups of UPAs displayed in disintegration diagrams demonstrate that their negative versions do, indeed, have predicted electric polarities that are of opposite sign to the polarities of their positive versions. Moreover, the predicted polarities of what were called "positive groups" are, indeed, positive. This is truly remarkable, for it indicates that the remote-viewing faculty of Besant & Leadbeater was sensitive to the electric polarities of subatomic particles that came under their micro-psi observation. There is no alternative explanation for the chance-defying degree of correlation revealed by analysis of dozens of MPAs between the predicted electric polarities of hundreds of groups of UPAs and the positivity and negativity assigned to them by the two Theosophists. Nor is there any conventional explanation for the consistency between the predicted compositions of the same group in various elements in terms of X and Y subquarks. Chance — the last refuge of the sceptic — is absurdly improbable, given the huge set of data assembled in their book Occult Chemistry.
The following pages of this section will analyze the recorded MPAs of all the elements in the Periodic Table up to calcium. The gold MPA is added at the end because of its especially remarkable consistency with theory, facts of nuclear physics and the quark model of the nucleon. The hydrogen MPA is not discussed here because it is analyzed in the section Occult Chemistry. However, the MPA of deuterium — the heavy, stable isotope of hydrogen — will be analyzed in detail. The author's book ESP of Quarks and Superstrings analyzes the MPAs of 48 elements, showing similar levels of consistency even for MPAs that contain thousands of UPAs. It hardly needs to be pointed out (except, perhaps, to diehard debunkers of the paranormal) that it is not remotely plausible that such detailed agreement can be due to chance. Instead, it constitutes the most amazing evidence ever assembled of the existence of a form of extra-sensory perception known to yogis for thousands of years — one which Besant & Leadbeater used to describe the subatomic world in a way that matches what high-energy physicists would discover with their particle accelerators many decades later.