Gavin Rowland


A simpler version of the book, right here!

Mind Beyond Matter can be a difficult book to get through. Here you will find the theory in as simple terms as possible. I will spend a minimum of time on the physics, moving on as quickly as possible to consciousness and psychology. If you really don’t want to read any physics, you can skip forward to Chapter 6.

To be ultra-succinct, this theory says that your mind, and your emotions, are fuelled by two types of head-space. One head-space is constructive and the other destructive. This nonmaterial stuff is unrecognised by science because it cannot be detected with material instruments. I will demonstrate the ways in which this model is not only supported by science, but also offers solutions to the majority of unanswered “big questions”.

Chapter 1 – A different kind of space.

There is this stuff called dark energy which has now been part of our standard model of the universe for the past 20 years. It’s not matter because it behaves differently, anti-gravity. It can’t been seen directly, only by inference. It is the first nonmaterial substance identified in the universe, and it appears to be everywhere. That means it is also in you and me.

The universe has been expanding continually since the Big Bang. Because of the dark energy, this expansion is accelerating. Currently the biggest controversy in cosmology (the study of the universe) is the discrepancy between the early measure of the universe’s expansion rate and later measures. There are quite a few news clippings about this on my Facebook page. In Chapter 1 I referred to it as the late takeoff problem.

The trouble is, the data were supposed to match the green line, marked DE1 in the above diagram. This is the behaviour of dark energy. But the data are a fit to the purple line, which I have labelled DE1+2. What I predict is that there is a second dark energy, the red line, which trends towards zero. Add the two dark energies and you get the net effect. This is what is kicking up the results of the early measures of the Hubble constant (universe’s expansion rate).

Cosmologists haven’t hit upon my explanation. They are doing the usual thing science does and are looking for material explanations – material particles, radiation and such that might have slowed the expansion in its early stages. And ever more scrutiny of the data in case they might have made a mistake. The problem is they can’t find any new matter to explain the problem and the data is continuing to fit the purple curve and not the green one.

Oh and one last thing. I proposed that DE1 and DE2 separate at the Big Bang via a process known as inflation (another unexplained feature of our standard understanding of cosmology). This is also illustrated on the diagram.

Chapter 2 – Something from nothing.

So we have two nonmaterial energies, one of which wants to contract towards zero and the other which wants to keep expanding towards infinity. Now rather than just talking about space, let’s be more correct and talk about spacetime. Einstein taught us that we live in a 4 dimensional spacetime – one dimension of time and three of space. Relativity experiments show us this. So dark energy 1 is in fact building or expanding spacetime and dark energy 2 is shrinking or contracting it.

The funny thing is, when we look back at matter, it has the same two properties. If we put a bunch of energy, in the form of a hot gas, in a zero gravity environment, it will go on expanding indefinitely, seeking a state known as thermodynamic equilibrium, where it achieves maximal expansion. If there is no boundary, this will go on to infinity. And gravity is like DE2 – it will shrink spacetime to ever smaller dimensions, moving forever towards what is known as a spacetime singularity.

Gravity and this positive energy of matter (call it kinetic energy if you like) are bound together as one, in matter. That’s the opposite to the two dark energies, which according to this theory, want to separate via inflation. This leads to the following diagram. DE1 is called increaser space and DE2 is called decreaser space.

Or if you take it back a step it becomes even simpler –

Now cosmologists have made very precise measurements of the geometry of the universe, and these measurements indicate that the top and bottom arrows balance out (and hence the universe is exactly ‘flat’). So the net energy sum of the top and bottom arrows may well be zero. If the other two arrows on this diagram, the separating and uniting forces, also balance out to zero, then this could be a universe born from nothingness.

There is a certain appeal in this, as it is a universe that doesn’t necessarily require a creator as it can make its own spacetime and matter as it goes, and its also a universe that doesn’t necessarily require a preexisting universe. It also fits well with the absolute vastness of the universe. As far as we know the universe goes on forever, and the only way I can think of to create something infinite would be to create it out of nothingness, as there is no limit to the amount of nothingness one could have. Indeed if nothingness were to have some kind of boundary or limit, it would be something rather than nothing.

Of course this kind of stuff can’t be proven beyond argument in the way a lot of science-minded people like. So when you propose this kind of stuff you tend to get a lot of argument. That’s just human nature.

Chapter 3 – ‘What’ is a dimension?

In this chapter I argued that in a self-creating universe there should also be mechanism for making the ‘what’ of existence, as existence is ‘what, where and when’, not just a place and time with no subject. I argued that there is a fundamental dimension of ‘whatness’ that has gone unrecognised because it doesn’t conform to what science expects a dimension to look like. That’s because ‘whatness’ isn’t really a measurable quantity. To fit into my theory it should be able to expand towards infinity on one side and contract towards zero on the other. It should be possible to add it to the top and bottom of the diagrams above.

Let us take one example of the subject matter of the universe – a human. There are many layers of complexity here – organs and structure of the human body, cells, molecules, atoms and subatomic particles. All this is built on a set of universal laws and constants that are seemingly finely tuned to allow for the development of such complexity. I argue that these laws and constants are all (with the exception of gravity) signs of this complexity dimension, the results of which, in today’s world, are truly impressive. I also argue that DE1, or increaser space, is probably the ultimate designer of these laws and constants, as it would possess the ability to be conscious. But more of this later.

So without dragging you overly into the detail of the argument, it appears as if complexity as a whole can be added into the cross-shaped diagram of Chapter 2, so that we get the whole of reality into a form that could fit on the back of a postage stamp:

Note – this is a very brief version of Chapter 3. If you would like something a little more, but not the whole chapter, then try my answer on Quora to ‘Can we explain the fine-tuned universe without religion or parallel universes?’

Chapter 4 – Nonlocality

This is a taboo subject of physics.