Novelist. Author of APSARAS and tales from the beautiful Saigh Valley. First person to quantify spiritual values.

Total Pageviews

Monday 30 May 2016

Brexit4. Cameron's campaign

For a man that was once considered a eurosceptic it has not gone unnoticed how hard David Cameron has been prosecuting the 'Remain' case. Indeed, in his endeavour to win at all costs he has formed alliances with former enemies including those he had accused in the House of Commons of colluding with groups harmful to the security of the Nation.  He has corralled the Civil Service, all the financial agencies, businesses, trade unions etc sympathetic to the 'Remain' argument, ignoring any opposition or negative comments even from those people he called his friends.
This fervour has led me to question why, when surely there is only one issue: should the UK recover its undiluted sovereignty or stay in the EU. Put in these simplistic terms, Cameron, shouldn't need to push for the win- at- all- costs strategy, scaring the voters with threats of Armageddon, plagues, financial meltdown etc. So what is it that has got the PM so worked up? It's almost as if Cameron has been given an ultimatum; win the referendum or die.
Well, maybe not that harsh but something like that. He negotiated with the EU elite and got nowhere, coming back with meaningless promises but was there something else. I don't suppose that the EU constitution has a 'treachery' clause like almost every single nation has, usually backed up with the death penalty, but what else might the smarmy bastards have lined up for him. Should the UK vote to leave have they threatened us with 'Judas' status, accusing us of being a Nation of betrayers. Have they spelt out the penalties for leaving the EU? It's not easy to see how they can harm the UK in the event of a 'leave' win but might they appeal to the US and China to have the UK kicked out of the Security Council or the G7. Will they try and marginalise our influence in the world, perhaps rewrite history? I wouldn't put it past them but maybe it's simpler than that. Maybe they have some intelligence on Cameron himself-or his family but whatever the reason, he surely can't believe that when its all over, everything will return to normal. His campaigning modus operandi has put paid to that.

Thursday 26 May 2016


On the day that The Office of National Statistics announced that immigrants to the UK totalled a third of a million, the Labour Party together called 'Leave' campaigners' claim that immigration levels were unmanageable as being 'alarmist'.
They would, wouldn't they. Despite not being able to explain where all these people live, how they might get school places for the children or appointments to see a doctor they all agree that immigration is a good thing. But surely not in these numbers unless you need these folk to vote for you in the next General Election. Let's face it they need all the votes they can get and this seems their best bet in the Corbynista era. Even better, the immigrants can be housed in solid Tory constituencies but I can't see the good people of Witney accepting too many.
Even Corbyn, formerly a Brexit supporter has changed his tune having recognised that the best hope for the Labour Party is to have a socialist EU. He can then rejoice with unbridled glee as the French trades unions riot on the streets of Paris and the air traffic controllers cause chaos for travellers.
This dream of a socialist ideal in Europe can take comfort in what has happened in Venezuela where the Country, with enormous oil reserves, is on the brink of total failure due to the Socialist governance of Chavez and his successor.

Prison problems

It seems that mobile phones are illegally getting into prisons and used, amongst, I am sure, other things, to record violence amongst the inmates.
Stop visitors. Totally.

Radicalisation of Muslims. (How is it possible that one can own to being Muslim and committing a crime?)
Answer. Stop freedom to associate. Imprisonment should mean just that- in a cell. This would also reduce to zero, violence against prison officers.

But that would be against their Human Rights.
Answer. They should have thought of that before they committed a crime against society. Suspend all Human Rights.

Wednesday 25 May 2016

Spirit, soul, body. A critique of Watchman Nee.

The commentator and Chinese theologian, Watchman Nee, argues that man is composed of three parts, body, soul and spirit, quoting from Genesis and 1 Thessalonians 5.23 as his prime authority for doing so. In his exegesis, he claims that when God created man from dust (clay) the unliving body was animated by the divine breath, the Spirit, to give rise to the living soul.
The idea of a three part human is not new; Augustine had a notion based on the Holy Trinity, God, the Father, God, the Son and God, the Holy Spirit. What the Watchman doesn't show is that this analysis can apply to almost any God, (not only Christian,) or, more importantly, NONE.
For those who think that man is made up of flesh and bone alone, this tripartite version may seem abstract; so has it any basis in truth?
Readers of my booklet, 'Spiritual Man: An Introduction to Negative Dimensions' or viewers of my youtube talks on The Davies Hypothesis (see above) will know that a natural and universal law covers almost every aspect of life, a law described by my trinitarian equation. This equation is best demonstrated by its application to time where the three aspects, 'real' time, 'unreal' time and 'imaginary' time are shown to correspond to the present, the past and the future. In other words, what seems to be illusionary, can be explained by this novel approach. Using the same arguments for mankind we might show that the 'perceived' constitution of a living being, B can be described thus:

B =  ± √ [b² + (-b)² + (ib)²]    where i = √ -1,  'b' real man (flesh & blood), '-b' 'unreal' man and 'ib' is 'imaginary' man

Solving, we have perceived man, B = ± b

In other words, we can perceive the 'real' (+b) and 'unreal' (-b) man but not 'imaginary' man. I suggest, therefore that we can equate 'imaginary' man with the 'Spirit' of the Watchman. Its essence is simply unknowable which correlates with most peoples experience. But what of the other two, the parts we can perceive? The Watchman describes the body (my 'real' man) as being that which exists in the world of matter (Plato's phenomenen) or flesh and blood. I relate it to the body's senses, sight, hearing etc which allow it to identify its place in the world. So we are able to correlate the Watchman's notion of body and Spirit with our own concept. But what of the 'soul' and my 'unreal' man. The Watchman argues that the body, given life by the Spirit, becomes a living soul, having free will and its own identity. I believe this exactly matches the idea that the human soul he describes is indistinguishable from the character, inherited from the past, passed on in the genes from generation to generation, giving, along with nurturing, a person's unique identity.

'But,' I hear you say. 'You've made that equation up!' Not quite; you see the coefficients of the terms within the parenthesis are +1, -1 and +i, three of the four fourth roots of unity, those that introduce uncertainty into the world. See my book for more analysis.

Looking again at the equation we can see that B becomes zero if either the body (real) or soul (unreal) is missing. In other words there is no human existence without both elements present. If the Spirit, the 'imaginary' component is missing, the concept of human life becomes nonsensical. At death, both the body and soul die and B is defined solely by the 'imaginary' component of life 'ib', the Spirit. The Watchman explains that the Spirit, after the creation process, can only influence the body through the medium of the soul which has free will, including the inclination to sin. If he is right, then clearly after death, without the soul to manipulate, the Spirit must become inoperative. In other words, after death all sense of a human being ceases to exist.

So what is wrong with the Watchman's argument? The Watchman doesn't seem able to explain why an omnipotent God should create an entity that is capable of acting contrary to His will.
Whereas the Watchman attempts to demonstrate the existence of God, I believe I have shown here, through my Hypothesis, is that every human being has an inherent capacity for spirituality, including the ability to divine Gods. You do not need to know Jesus to have within you, a stream of 'living water'.

Monday 23 May 2016

Working against the grain

New dietary advice suggests that the obese should eat more unprocessed food including fat, contrary to the mainstream view that good health requires calorie controlled eating habits. The authors of the report have come up against a wall of opposition from the established position who claim these ideas are confusing and dangerous especially for those suffering from diabetes.
Sticking ones head above the parapet has always been fraught with danger as entrenched positions are challenged. Protagonists  are urged to ignore setbacks and try, try again despite understandable disappointments and 'battle' fatigue. As an author I have suffered such 'war' weariness as my titles are ignored when books much worse are published by out-of-touch publishing houses but this is nothing compared with the fight to have my hypothesis heard by the scientific community. It is not hard to see why; my work suggests that the basis of most of science for the last hundred years, the 'Big Bang' is simply wrong. Careers have been forged and reputations built on the basis of this theory and therefore to suggest it is wrong throws the whole shabang into a paroxysm of outrage. But the truth will out. Nothing is more certain that to give up leads to failure and therefore I urge everyone who has an open and inquiring mind to challenge orthodoxy and read my theory by clicking on the link to the Davies Hypothesis, above.

Wednesday 18 May 2016

Brexit3. The great betrayal

Today, as HM The Queen opens Parliament amidst the usual pomp and ceremony that characterise the British tradition; a circumstance that goes back for centuries but part of a culture that will be alien for an ever increasing number of immigrants to the Country. It will mean nothing to those who came, not to contribute to the well-being of the British people but to forge a better way of life for themselves than that which they could expect in their own Countries.
Sadly, they won't abandon those beliefs and practices that contributed to their own Country's problems but will bring them to the UK either in a misplaced respect for their (elderly) family or in a bizarre demonstration of idiocy.
The trouble is that millions of these people, no doubt with their own agenda, will have a vote in the EU referendum, possibly opting to defy the wishes of the indigenous Anglo-Saxon, non-Muslim  population who want to retain the UK's undiluted sovereignty.
These newly arrived immigrants should not have a vote in the EU referendum  but it is clear that Cameron is counting on them to betray the Country they've joined and the populace who only have the interests of the UK at heart.
In 2011, in a wider debate, (
I mentioned that I thought it wrong that first generation immigrants (Possibly as high as 40 MPs) should be barred from holding public office because their families hadn't lived in the Country long enough to qualify as being 'British'. Who are they to presume to arrive in the Country and pontificate on those matters of interest to families who have lived in these 'sceptred isles' for untold generations or as long as the traditions described above have been observed?

Tuesday 17 May 2016

An epileptic sees God

Doctors in Israel have had the opportunity to observe the electrical discharges of a patient immediately before he had a vision of God. Dr Shahar Arzy and Dr Roey Schurr of the Hadassah Hebrew University were reportedly treating a 46-year-old man for temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), carrying out a battery of tests including an online electro encephalogram (EEG) which measured his brain activity.
In the run up to the tests the patient, a Jewish man who had reportedly never been especially religious, had stopped taking anticonvulsant medication for seizures.

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The man, who had had his head wired up for epilepsy, shouted out the Hebrew name for God, ripped the wires off and went walkabouts telling everybody that he had seen the Lord and trying to recruit followers.
They observed what appeared to be a 'spike' of activity in the pre-frontal cortex, a region of the brain thought to be connected with personality and decision making; what psychanalysts identify as 'executive function'. Experimental data indicate a role for the prefrontal cortex in mediating normal sleep physiology, dreaming and sleep-deprivation phenomena.
It is worth noting that the pre-frontal cortex in humans has evolved dramatically compared with other animals in the last million years. The human brain size has tripled but the pre-frontal cortex has grown by six times. It clearly is important in
defining what makes the modern human being and how we differ from other creatures including the apes.

In my theory, 'The Davies Hypothesis', here, I identify the working of the brain with three dimensions of time which relate to the 'past', the 'present' and the 'future'. It is my contention that the presence of all three dimensions gives rise to the level three consciousness recognised by academics today. I had previously thought that the seat of brain working in the abstract was the 'pineal' gland but it looks as if the pre-frontal cortex also exhibits evidence of working in 'imaginary' time, the term introduced by Steven Hawking in his book, a Brief History of Time. I explain in the 'Davies Hypothesis' and my book, 'Spiritual Man: An Introduction to Negative Dimensions' (  ) how 'imaginary' time plays a role in dreaming, an often subliminal  way in which the brain promotes future development including the perception of the divine.

As I quote, in my book, the nineteenth century philosopher, Ludwig Feuerbach, said that humans will have to come to realise that instead of God creating man, man, in fact, created God. This unfortunate man is clearly delusional. The question is: are too the other believers?

Sunday 15 May 2016


Much as I distrust the EU and its undemocratic and wasteful governance, I reluctantly feel that the UK will eventually be part of the Nation of Europe. It's worth remembering that, once, some time ago, the Country was actually joined to the mainland by a land bridge that became submerged after the last ice age.
Why do I think this? Because I believe that the Rule of Two will prevail as it must as a law of nature. To have an overview of this Rule please see my 2009 blog here

We can see the process in action, already as 28 separate countries of Europe join to form the single market as a forerunner of the new political entity. Interestingly, these countries do not include the biggest by land mass, Russia, thereby ensuring that the Rule of Two holds in continental Europe. In order to incorporate Russia into our political sphere it is necessary to identify a wider sphere of influence, always bearing in mind that the world can NEVER unite as one unless a cosmic threat materialises to provide a new two-part system.
To incorporate Russia into Europe, therefore, we must see Europe as one of fewer global groups, where the land of the Tsars sees its best interests in a wider group. It is happening already, elsewhere, with the formation of Asian  and American trading groups.
Is there an alternative scenario for the UK? The end result must be the same but a different route may be possible. Rather than ally itself with those European Countries who were defeated in WW2, the UK could form a trading pact with the other winner, Russia. Combined the two Countries could, in the relatively short term, forge a potent group, able to take on the challenges of the 21st century before being forced to join a larger European group in the next.

As this polarisation continues, the world will eventually split into East & West and the final act will be complete. How safe will this situation be? I don't know but, thank goodness, I shan't be around to find out.

Thursday 12 May 2016


Expats in Spain are fretting over the referendum on June 23rd about the UK's membership of the EU. Frequently one hears that there isn't enough information on which to make a decision when the consequences, either way, could jeopardise an entire way of life.
As I see it, and I believe, this was highlighted by Gove last weekend, there can be NO confusion over what is on offer. Nobody can see the future therefore it is futile to want more information that, at best, is a guess. The only question is: should the UK be sovereign, liable for its own affairs or should it be governed by an unelected elite whose accounts haven't been approved by accountants for over twenty years?
I suggest that the population of the UK should not be voting selfishly in their own interests but rather, in the interests of the Nation and, in those terms, surely there is only one way to go.

Yesterday, Boris Johnson, was as good as being branded a liar by a TV presenter over a slogan on the side of his 'battle' bus which stated that the UK gave £351m a week to the EU to spend as they liked. The presenter argued that subsidies given back by the EU reduces this figure to a mere £150m, thereby misleading the populace. Johnson countered by arguing that the subsidies were at the whim and disposal of the EU, liable to change or cancellation at any moment and it was therefore more honest to quote the gross figure. He might have added that if and when asked how much he earned, the presenter might truthfully give his NET income after deductions for tax and NI etc but is more likely to give his gross salary as that is fixed whilst the deductions are variable.

It is strange, is it not, that following World War II, the victors, the UK, now want to kow tow to those who were defeated: Germany, Italy, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Greece (These last conquered by the Germans). In other words, why should the UK, the winners, wish to ally themselves with a bunch of losers?

Monday 9 May 2016

Black Holes and determinism

A recent report suggested that Professor Hawking's idea that Black Holes first swallow matter and information and then 'evaporate' to nothing, might be correct. The experimenters cooled and 'churned' helium to just above absolute zero, in which state any sound within the gas cannot escape, mimicking the Black Holes capacity to hold light. They found that there was a small 'leakage' of sound that corresponded well with Hawking's equations for Black Holes.
The problem, if indeed it is a problem, is that the loss of information seems to be contrary to the philosophical concept of 'determinism'. If information is lost, then so too is history and the idea that cause and effect is the motivation for everything that ever happens. I hope I've got this right.
According to THE DAVIES HYPOTHESIS) all the information captured by a Black Hole is not lost but reprocessed and passed to our 'sister' universe as 'unreal' and 'imaginary' matter, energy or radiation. This process resolves a natural imbalance that occurs as the universe expands and grows. Since the universe expands forever, there is a continual need for Black Holes and for this reason, the DAVIES HYPOTHESIS does not support the view that Black Holes completely disappear.