I have been asked to explain the essence of the cosmology I put together thirty years ago. I will try and provide an introduction to the essential concepts that make it so different from other attempts at a “theory of everything”. I refer to myself as a cosmologer rather than a cosmologist, since the latter title today has become the monopoly of astrophysicists whose interest is restricted to physical cosmology. My attempts to understand the theories of Talcott Parsons, the structural-functional sociologist started me off on cosmology construction, but this was limited to cultural, social and psychological theories. In 1971-4 at Melbourne University Union I taught my cosmological synthesis in the old Pathology Lecture Theatre which the Vice-Chancellor kindly made available for my personal use. I was assisted by Dr Derek Banks who provided valuable information about the physical aspects of cosmology.

The classical Four Temperaments were already at the back of my mind as they so closely resembled the ‘ideal types’ adopted by psychologists and sociologists when they categorised social and psychological phenomena. I was stunned when I discovered that the self-funding scientist Pavlov had dared to conclude his studies with a categorisation of the nervous systems of the dogs he had spent years conditioning, as Phlegmatic, Choleric, Melancholic and Sanguine. Magical thinking based on the oppositions between Inner and Outer and between Active and Passive or receptive, seemed to fit in well with my explanation of the ‘kinematics’ of the observable world “out there”.

A book that encouraged me was “The Sleepwalkers” by Koestler. As a magician-scientist, Kepler had struggled to link the motions of the moon and planets with the operation of divine love rather than the operation of purely mechanical forces. A universe where love has no part to play, and which is little more than a complex ballistic description structured by gravity, seems monstrous to me. I made the Marxist assumption that the ballistic work of Galileo and Newton had been adopted on account of its usefulness to the new military industrial rulers in Western Europe. However Relativity Theory in the macrocosm and Quantum Theory in the microcosm can be used to subvert and remodel the objective reductionist paradigm.

It was at this time that I came across “The Phenomenon of Man” by Teilhard de Chardin. His cosmology was both non-reductionist and evolutionary and was aiming towards a convergent unity. It provided an inspiring example, although, like Aquinas and Aristotle, he made his reality system at least partly dependant on a divine governor. I adopted his new concept of involving will, as a necessary connection to the orthodox concept of evolving form. Prigogine’s theory of non-equilibrium thermodynamics of self-dissipating systems appeared at this time and provided the vital missing link between evolving inorganic and organic phenomena.

The universe is shown as a self-actualising, self-organising system. Theories of the self-organising universe (Erich Jantsch and others) have now become acceptable. Before going into a description of the hierarchical feedback and control system, I must distinguish between (in principle) observable phenomena or extension, and (in principle) deducible noumena or intention, and their interaction as historical events in the hierarchy of probability or eventuality.

The most obvious difference between my “theory of everything” and those of other contemporary theorists is that it not presented as a fragmented series of explanations but is essentially a set of diagrams showing inter-connectedness. I have a great difficulty in communicating in prose. It may be that the very dislike I have for laying out thoughts in a sequential structure is the reason that I was able to synthesize, simplify and interrelate such a mass of diverse material into a single system. It was rather like assembling a jigsaw.

The Post Modern Cosmology is a synthesis of “meta narratives” of religion, science and magic, cast in a subjective, aesthetic form. It is a systems model of evolving phenomena and involving identity where each level transcends and includes the levels below.


Intention; the curious lack of identity and will in descriptions of the universe greatly puzzled me. These seemed to be located outside the cosmos, either in the form of a supernatural creator and more or less absent ruler, or as an observer. Pantheism is little more than nature-worship, and if everything is holy then the term is redundant. I assumed that the growth of materialism and atomism initiated by the Greek natural philosophers, who separated “Nature” from “Super-nature”, or the divine, had led to this objectification of the universe. I brought will or intention back into my cosmological theory by integrating it throughout the entire system as morphogenetic fields of identity, in other words, formal causes or predispositions operating at each level. Sheldrake, the heretical biologist has made similar assumptions.

Eventuality; I was not satisfied with the Judeo-Christian concept of time as a single linear dimension. Time in my cosmology is a probabilistic hierarchical ordering of events which form themselves into systems in order of complexity. Eventuality better represents the connection with the probability of an event occurring. It also emphasises that event probability is the way that intention and extension interface in the comprehensible systems that we actually experience as participants in the historic cosmic process.

Extension; the Greek notion of space as emptiness between material bodies can no longer be sustained, especially after Relativity Theory. Moreover what is observed must not be taken for what is really “out there” as the act of observation is an interaction between the observer, a human being and part of the universe, and the observed. This process takes place as an historical event in the culture system.

Kinematics: until 1978, Dr Banks and I were using the term mechanics to describe the manifestations in space, or extension, of causation or intention. This latter term carries with it assumptions of patterning, which is not realised until both intention and extension are integrated by ‘eventuation’ into a stable, historic culture system. The term kinematics better indicates the range of observable processes, which far exceeds those that can be identified by observers and located in a theoretical structure by inductive reasoning.

Systems; these are maintained by control and qualitative upgrading from the outer

kinematic phenomena and provide control and upgrading to the identity fields. Alteration of any identity field is shown by changes in the expression of that field which then affects the operation of the kinematic processes.

Convergence; Extension is treated as an evolving and converging system of location; from “Nowhere” (the Big bang) to “Here” (the hypothetical convergent central place).

Intention or being, expressing itself though various types of love, is treated as an involving and converging system of identity; from “Nothing” (The Big Bang) to “Me” (the hypothetical convergent centre of being).

Eventuality is treated as an evolving and converging historical system, from “Never “, or impossible (the Big Bang) to “Now” (the hypothetical inevitable convergent moment when the universe realises itself in person).



The “being” which is self actualising is the involved identity at the highest level. Since this a deduced dynamic which cannot itself be observed, I describe it as the Soul Dynamic Field of involving identity. It is through Agape, the highest form of love, that this is expressed. The observable aspects of these personality phenomena I have termed the Ego Kinematics of evolving Androgynes in Cosmological space, the total world view or meaning system.

Note that the involving identity is deduced to be a kind of magnetic field, whereas the expressed Ego Kinematics can be observed as they are manifested.

At the highest level I have placed the Personality System. This is a deliberate and unusual decision and I need to emphasise that it is rare that any personality evolves to this level. It can become so effective that it transcends the cultural system and at this point may, under certain conditions, create a new culture. I was lecturing in primitive revitalisation movements during the upheavals and social experiments of the 60s. As a result of cultural collapse or decline, an individual who had been through a period of successful self analysis and had reorganised his world view, might appear as a prophet and announce a new set of beliefs and new roles. If accepted by enough people and not eliminated by rival believers, this could form the basis of a new culture system. I was greatly influenced by the article “Revitalization Movements” in the American Anthropologist of 1956 by A.F.C.Wallace, a psychiatrist. He traces the pre-literate prophet’s personal transformation through the organic, psychological, social and cultural levels.

Apart from such phenomena, which are common in the pre-literate world, it was obvious to me that such figures as Moses, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad and Joseph Smith were successful or partly successful examples in the literate or semi-literate world. Muhammad’s life and teachings are fully recorded and he is an outstanding example of a realised personality of this type. Similarly, powerful personalities like the First Emperor, Napoleon, Lenin, and Mao, may degrade a culture yet produce strong foundations for a future society.

Ego Kinematics; religious sanctions, moral philosophy or psychological theories have accustomed us to regard the ego as a “bad thing” per se. Recently Dr John Carroll of La Trobe University in Melbourne has written intelligently on the balance between soul and ego. An examination of the level at which this highest “outered” self can be observed indicates that the ego, once free of cultural constraint ( the Freudian Super Ego) and cultural nourishing ( the Freudian Ego Ideal), can be truly free to be introverted, extroverted, passive or active etc. Nietzsche is one of the few thinkers who takes this point of view. Freud’s Id or life force is presumably the input from lower level systems. I also use the term androgyne to describe the fully realised personality, with male and female aspects in equilibrium. By androgyny I do not mean biological, psychological or social bisexuality, but the balance of animus and anima in the alchemical tradition, an ultimate state of freedom.

Aspiration; the final evolutionary stage of Ego Kinematics when, through inspiration, the Ego raises itself above others, is likened to shamanic flying up the cosmic axis or apotheosis through levitation or ascension into heaven. This ultimate form of self-expression is found in all cultures except purely secular societies (where the soul is not regarded as a meaningful term and ascension takes the form of a spaceship going outwards). Dreams of flying, which are a universal human phenomenon, may be the operation of associated innate release mechanisms. Thus “Me”, the most involved identity, attempts to reach “Here”, the central place or Heaven, at the historical time “Now”. The actual possibility or impossibility of such transcendence is a “leap of faith” beyond the brief of this or any other cosmological theory.

The ego tension between the extremes of the feminine identity, or anima, and masculine identity, or animus, and the tension between introversion and introversion, is the subject of much study by traditional magician-scientists up to the theories of Jung, whose terminology I have partly adopted. Meaning systems may evolve through these ego kinematics. The double dialectical interaction produces four ego complexes.


Feeling….   Introverted/Anima

PHLEGMATIC Ego Complex. The ego concerns itself with and depends upon others.

Expression.. Extroverted/Animus

CHOLERIC Ego Complex. The ego expresses itself to others


MELANCHOLIC Ego Complex. The ego senses itself in others

Imagination.. Introverted/Animus

SANGUINE Ego Complex. The ego raises itself above others.

There is considerable literature on the four temperaments or humours in the magical tradition. Theories of self-actualisation in current psychology are also helpful in describing these forms of ego-complexes. The impact of influential personalities on meaning systems is the subject of major historical studies. These are of course “ideal types” adopted for heuristic reasons.


The sociologist Max Weber has made important theoretical contributions to the ways that ideas, as expressed in symbols, result in the evolution of values in institutions. He was careful to avoid the reductionism to purely economic interests which he considered to be the weakness of Marxist theory. Both “ideal and material interests” have to be considered when attempting to explain an historical paradigm shift when a culture evolves into a radically different form, such as the shift from religious feudalism to materialistic industrialism.

Institutions, the basic family structure, together with religious, legal, intellectual, economic and political institutions etc., have to deal continuously with structural and functional necessities to resolve or repress symbolic tension. The “strain to consistency” is the term used by Talcott Parsons whose work is invaluable in this field of study. The resistance to changes in scientific world view or ‘paradigm shifts’ has been well described by Norman Kuhn. The dialectics involved are the tension between functional and structural necessities and that between subjective interests at one extreme and objective interests at the other.

I have made partial use of Parsons’ theoretical formulations in finding terms for the institutional value clusters that accumulate around the interactions of the pair of dialectics that operate at all levels in the cosmos. I hope the rather unusual terminology does not confuse the reader. Study of structural-functional sociology should clarify the reasons for choosing the terms. For sociology to become less vague and ideologically unbalanced, clear and unambiguous terminology showing the relationships between the different parts of the whole is needed. I have not come across any better attempt to link these processes in a systematic way. My own attempt is certainly clumsy and inadequately formulated. I must leave it to others to correct and refine my efforts.

Subjective v Objective; Evolving epistemological phenomena, or world-views, must obviously provide sufficient symbolic support for the inner significance of the various institutions which make them up or they will lose trust and meaning and dissolve in chaos. At the same time, if they fail to relate adequately to their outer environment and to others they will be destroyed. This dialectic may swing from one extreme to the other in times of crisis.

Structural v Functional. Evolving epistemological phenomena must also provide symbolic support to maintain the structures of the institutions. This involves the creation and maintenance of absolute values. In order to function with necessary flexibility however at the same time there must be relativistic symbolic processes to reform these absolutes should the need arise. Again the dialectical process may swing suddenly from one pole to the other in times of crisis. Value Orientation Theory in cultural anthropology summarises the overall process.


The kinematic process of the two dialectics at all levels of the cosmos leads to the clustering of phenomena into four complexes.

Evaluative Subjective/Structural,

ARBITRATION Symbol Complex. Explanation and understanding of values concerning justice, what is fair or unfair, are paramount. Values in legal/religious/ideological institutions. Strongly emphasised in traditional societies.

Cognitive Objective/Structural,

IMPLEMENTATION Symbol Complex. Where explanation and understanding of how to control the environment are pre-eminent and concerns magical and scientific institutional values. Emphasised strongly in industrial societies.

Cathectic Objective/Functional,

CONCORDINATION Symbol Complex. Where explanation and understanding of consensus values in the culture, or what is acceptable or unacceptable, are paramount. Values in institutions engineering consent through symbolic interaction such as education, news media, communal ritual gatherings etc. Strongest in consumer societies. Like Parsons I use the term Cathectic, derived from Aristotle.

Ecstatic (Intuitive) Subjective/Structural,

LEGITIMATION Symbol Complex. Where explanation and understanding of ultimate reality and purpose is associated with values in religious, philosophical or ideological institutions. Unlike other symbol complexes, these values are transcendent to the whole culture.

Ecstatic or ‘standing outside’ is similar to Jungian theory of intuition and is also associated with imagination. Emphasised strongly in hunter-gatherer societies.


This is upgraded through understanding of the values evolving from the symbol kinematics. The control of the lower level social system is through discouragement of role actions that threaten the equilibrium of the social system and there is upgrading from the social system into the ideo-dynamic field through the encouragement of those role actions that benefit the system. This identity field is modified though explanations.

Eros. The Ideo-dynamic field expresses itself into Symbol Kinematics though Eros. This form of love transcends and includes parental love or storge. Eros is associated with the psychological, social and cultural interaction between male and female which has a great deal to do with the formation of culture. See N.O.Brown, “Life against Death” and “Love’s Body”, for my meaning here. Even amongst the animals, the proto-cultural, symbolic phenomena which are associated with courtship display, and which may not be particularly adaptive to survival, cannot be reduced to the purely social level for explanation.


At the social level the double dialectic which drives the Action Kinematics associated with evolving roles in families, is the opposition between dominance roles and submissive roles, often age-based, and between male roles and female roles. I adopt the word Action here from Parsons’ core theory of social action; the expression of roles through action is the essence of social reality. As at other levels, the resolution or repression of tension is essential to avoid devolution.


Affective Dominant/Female,

MATERNAL Action Role Complex. Performing and responding in these interactive mother/offspring roles is essential for the socialising of mammalian offspring with their extended infancy. Human infants are particularly dependent. Roles are not fixed biologically, as in the social insects, and males may perform female roles and vice versa.

Instrumental Submissive/Male,

SURVIVAL Action Role Complex. Performing and responding here is necessary for dealing with threats in the environment, as well as developing male independence from dominant parents. Hunting parties in pre-agricultural societies, warrior cohorts in agricultural societies and sports teams and supporters in industrial societies help resolve these role tensions.

Collective Submissive/Female,

COURTSHIP Action Role Complex. Performing and responding in these roles is essential for mate selection where males perform and females respond. The fact that human females are always on heat and are capable of sexual orgasm, indicates that their bonding with males is more significant than that of other female animals. Initially the females’ response is decisive, later the males play an important part in maintaining the bond and must avoid regression to mother/offspring roles. This is a common pathological phenomenon amongst human beings. Non-sexual bonding between human beings, winning friendships and forming social groups is also part of this role complex.

Individualistic Dominant/Male,

REGULATION Action Role Complex. Performing and responding to the ordering of the society by authority figures generally. Preservation of order, initiation rites, connection with the sacred etc. Represented by elders and shamans in hunter-gatherers, warlords and priests in agriculturalists, capitalists and scientists in industrialists, and managers and advertising psychologists in post-industrial societies. I am again indebted to Parsons for the action alternatives of affective v instrumental and collectivistic v individualistic which are associated with the obvious social necessities of nourishment, mating, protection and government.


I differ from other sociologists and psychologists by postulating an involving Mytho-dynamic field of identity. There is a suggestion of this in both Freud and Jung. Role actions are motivated by unconscious or semi-conscious intentions (narratives) deriving from myths of relating to others. Unlike psychiatrists and other sociologists I chose not to reduce this field down to a psychodynamic field. My training as a sociologist has accustomed me to follow Durkheim’s principle that social phenomena cannot be understood by regarding them as no more than a summation of psychological phenomena. In view of the originality of this concept and its importance in this cosmology I will go into further detail.

Most obvious of the relationships between myth and social phenomena is Freud’s so-called Oedipus complex. This should really be called the Jocasta Complex as Oedipus himself is not motivated to kill his father or marry his mother. Killing an old man in a quarrel and accepting a marriage proposal from a wealthy and powerful older woman are much less conscious choices than Jocasta’s actions, which she carries out in the full knowledge of the prophecy. Incest taboos are the responsibility of parents, not their offspring.

Freud’s Electra complex seems another odd choice. The original Greek myth concerns Orestes rather than his sister. Orestes is commanded by the Gods to kill his mother who has killed her husband and married a younger man and who has banished Orestes and cut off her Electra from the succession. Orestes’ action in killing his mother is not an act of passion but a loathsome duty and he suffers the consequences for years afterwards. Finally all role tension is resolved. This is the only Greek family myth where this is the case. Freud assumes that Electra drives Orestes to the deed because she was in love with her father and hates her mother, a totally different scenario. As Brown points out, myths change in time. This throws light on why Aeschylus chose to write his theatrical masterpiece the Oresteia at a time when values were shifting away from feudalism to mercantilism. The myth undergoes great changes of emphasis over the century following. Euripides’ Electra is closer to Freud’s interpretation.

I emphasise this aspect of mythodynamics because it is of fundamental importance to the functioning of role complexes in human societies. In hunter-gatherer societies great attention is paid to initiation rituals to separate young boys from their attachment to their mothers. Another very important myth is the Fall of Man, found in most agricultural societies in various forms. This is an account of the disaster that befalls when the archetypal man disobeys his archetypal male master, choosing to obey a female sexual partner instead. His subsequent blaming of the woman for his own failure shows that he is reverting to infantile irresponsibility. The accounts found in myths of interaction of parent and child and man and woman have proved invaluable to psychotherapists.

Mythotherapy and Logotherapy

The control and feedback links from the ideo-dynamic field though the symbol kinematics to the mytho-dynamic field show that, once unconscious myths have been revealed and explained, they can be brought under conscious control with important consequences for resolving role tension. This is also the assumption behind psychiatric theory. The psychologist Frankl has pioneered the use of the concept of logotherapy in which adequately functioning meaning systems are seen as essential for psychological and social well-being.,

Storge. The Mytho-dynamic field is expressed into the phenomenal world through Storge, a Greek word specifically used for parental love. See “The Four Loves” by C.S.Lewis.



No one active in the field of psychotherapy can function without the hypothetical construct of psycho-dynamics. This must not be confused with observable neuro-physiological phenomena in the brain. Animal behaviour can be studied and theories derived from this are often referred to as ethology; hence the term Ethosystem. I have combined the two fields to show the links between the neural kinematics, the animal ecosystem, the psycho-dynamic field, and thetransmutation system of the biosphere, from which the higher levels evolve. The concept of Innate Release Mechanisms (IRMs) is used throughout.

Pavlov’s classical conditioning theory distinguishes between the poles of non-equilibration (excitation) and equilibration (inhibition) and between weak (conditionable) and strong (non-conditionable). These correspond with the levels above and below. They can also be seen as corresponding to Freud’s evolving psychological complexes and I have adopted three of his four descriptive categories. Since his “latency” term is essentially meaningless I have used the term neural to describe the phase after genital. Freud has referred to ideas as libidinal complexes. Behaviour evolves in species.


Nurturing Inhibited/Weak CNS.

ORAL Nerve Complex. Feeding and security IRMs. Succouring/dependency. Resolving nervous tension associated with fear of starvation or abandonment.

Fighting  Excitated/Strong CNS.

ANAL Nerve Complex. Attack/defence IRMs. Resolving nervous tension associated with aggression against threats.

Copulating Excitated/Weak CNS.

GENITAL Nerve Complex. Mating IRMs. Exhibiting/reacting. Resolving nervous tension associated with sexual relationships

Dreaming Inhibited/Strong CNS.

NEURAL Nerve Complex. Reality testing IRMs. Resolving nervous tension associated with cognitive mapping.

Note. Since “hard” science is reductionist, due to its location in history as a cultural phenomenon, I have here restricted my explanation to the inter-relationships at the upper system levels. I would like to point out that similar hypothetical forces, which manifest the intention at various levels at these levels, are adopted by physicists. Dr Banks and I have used some of these terms. Beginning with Leukos (the Em Force) and rising up through Mesos (the Strong Force) and Kinos (chemical bonding) that manifest the lower levels of physical and sub-physical reality. Bios(the id or old ‘life force’) is hypothesised to realise the intention of the biodynamic morphogenetic field.


Much academic reasoning derives from the practices of the religious commentators who preceded them. Footnotes, quotations from authoritative texts, chapter and verse, lead one progressively to a series of explanations and answers to questions of how and why. “Showing the working” in mathematics is the supreme example. My own approach to learning differs from this. I immerse myself in books and articles of an extremely heterogeneous kind with no expectation that doing this will lead to a successful outcome in terms of intellectual reputation. However the particular circumstances at the University of New South Wales in the late 1960s and the unusually tolerant and playful period of psychological, social and cultural experimentation taking place in Europe, North America and Australasia at that time led to my philosophy of fun. As a recently trained psychologist and sociologist with a career of sponsoring and organising cultural activities from a university base, I was able to carry out social experiments that would not normally be tolerated I also think that my largely directed wanderings as a back-packer for much of the 1950s played a part in detaching me from conventional ideas.

I will simply list some of the books of the hundreds that I fed into my brain that I think were most influential in producing a kind of implosion of ideas from 1971 to 1973. In this respect I am more like a prophet than a natural philosopher or theologian. I list some books which I hope will throw more light on my “inspired creation”. Some I came across later but which support or partly support my theories.

Basic; Bricks to Babel by Arthur Koestler; Science and the Modern World, by A.N.Whitehead; The Phenomenon of Man, by Teihard de Chardin; The Rebirth of Nature, by Rupert Sheldrake; The Self-organising Universe, by Erich Jantsch; A Brief History of Everything, by Ken Wilbur.

Culture and Symbol Systems; The Social Construction of Reality by Peter Berger and

Thomas Luckman, The Social Theories of Talcott Parsons edited by Max Black, The Gutenberg Galaxy by Marshall McLuhan, The Technological Society by Jacques Ellul.

Psychiatry, Psychology and Neurophysiology; Life Against Death, by Norman O Brown;

The Birth and Death of Meaning, by Ernest Becker; Psychological Types, by Carl Jung, King Solomon’s Ring, by Conrad Lorenz; Galen’s Prophecy, by Jerome Kagan.

Physical Cosmology; Order out of Chaos by Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers.



“Reality is what the Boss says it is”. Most of human civilisation has been based on an Agricultural economy. The key values are Fertility, Patriarchy and Immortality. Woman’s duty was to have as many children as possible and men’s duty was acquire, defend, and farm, fertile land. The ultimate reward for obedience to authority was usually some form of promised immortality after death. In most cases Patriarchs, as heads of extended families, passed land on to offspring bearing their name. Supernatural beings, most of whom who acted like parents, were worshipped as immortal beings. Priests control the means of communication by the monopoly of writing provided by their protectors the war lords.

Later mercantile-industrial civilisations developed and culminated in the present Global Industrial Civilisation. The Judeo-Christian unquestioning belief that strict obedience God’s Will would lead to population expansion and world domination by the faithful, became secularised into unquestioning belief in never ending economic growth. Man’s relationship to the means of reproduction became “man’s relationship to the means of production“.

Key values became Material, Utilitarian and Mechanical. Utilitarian materialism took varying forms of government from individualistic (Capitalism) to egalitarian reductionism (Socialism). Peasants who paid tithes or taxes to land lords were transformed into wage-earners who bought consumer commodities. Mobile nuclear families replaced settled extended families as a consequence of rapid urbanisation and required mobility of labour. Uncontrolled industrialisation led to a need for compulsory secular education for both sexes, the stated aims for which were to increase individual earnings. Academic scientists control the means of communication through the monopoly of printing technology by their sponsors the businessmen.

Mass media of information, financed by advertising, soon developed alongside mass education Their main purpose was to create and guide consumerism amongst the new urbanised wage earners. A new form of post-industrial civilisation began to emerge, best summed up as “man’s relationship to the means of consumption”. The landowning elite, who had monopolised the status hierarchy in Agricultural economies, had been largely replaced by the bankers and business men of the Industrial economies. Now in the Age of Consumption a new status hierarchy was being created by the mass media, the Celebrity culture based on highly visible consumer life styles. Propagandists, advertisers and spin doctors control the means of communication through the monopolies of their sponsors in the mass media.

Utilitarianism and belief that human beings are essentially egalitarian machines led to extreme forms of feminism which are contributing to the rapid weakening of the nuclear family. Psychological stress is resulting in apathetic acceptance or religious or secular fundamentalism aimed at destroying the present world order. Moreover uncontrollable economic development is also leading to catastrophic destruction of the environment. It is time for a truly radical reappraisal of the values and cosmological beliefs of our contemporary ruling elites. I hope that my “revaluation of all values” and exemplary personal life style of the past forty-five years will help to get things back in balance before they get any worse. A wake-up call or koan is needed to show how little our intellectual elites are aware of the fragility of their world view. The following simple thought experiment should do the trick. If it succeeds wizards will control the means of communication through the World Wide Web!


Physical reality will always be what the elite, who control the truth and meaning systems, say it is. Any alternative system will meet with blank incomprehension, hostility, or silence, if not outright persecution. The inside-out model of the physical universe is an example of a change of the current frame of reference which beautifully demonstrates that symbolic reality includes and transcends physical reality. This model is obtained by making a conformal inversion of the coordinates of the traditional Heliocentric model.

As a demonstration of how my cosmology works as descriptive system I can put it like this.”I am inspired to choose this new frame of reference and express it egotistically as my soul-dynamic intention is impelling my personality to negate the present human meaning system”. The latter is an inconsistent mixture of out-dated religious and secular-scientific values and urgently needs integrating and upgrading. The experiment draws attention to my cosmological meaning system as a whole.

Altering the shape of the physical universe means altering the present frame of reference. This is not an absolute but has been adopted for its “usefulness” by those who control symbolic meaning and communication through mass education and mass media. Frames of reference, such as always showing the Earth with the North Pole at the top, are a matter of choice based on the ideal and material interests (or ideo-dynamics) of the elite who control the means of communication and are based on emotional needs as well as rational choices.

There is, as far as I am aware, no evidence based on observation that can demonstrate the Geoperipheral model to be any more or less “true” than the one “believed in” by physicists. The Heliocentric system which derived from the need for accurate ballistic predictions has given great advantages for industrial cultures whose rulers require the best weapon technologies. The inside-out Geoperipheral model is not suitable for ballistic calculations but has enormous religious, psychological, therapeutic and aesthetic advantages. The new model, details of which are on my web site, could be chosen as a result of voting on the Internet. Unlike the printing press, which requires capital to own and control, the Internet has great potential to by-pass the reality controllers who will of course try to preserve the paradigm which gives them meaning, social status and economic benefits.