Reading The Cosmic Icon- What ‘The Principle’ Is Pointing Toward

Commentary by: Rick DeLano
President: Stellar Motion Pictures
Producer/Writer: The Principle

Whether the universe, as measured by the incredibly powerful instruments and operational procedures of “precision cosmology”, accords with the basic assumption of our scientific worldview- the Copernican cosmological principle- is now established.

“The cosmological principle is not in the sky” is no longer merely an argument of a years-ahead-of-its-time science documentary.

It is the title of an exhaustive study published on the Cornell University scientific preprint site last month.

It may take a few more years, or even a few more decades, for the message to  begin to permeate through to the proverbial man in the street, because there is a lot of money, a lot of power, and a lot of influence involved.

There is a worldview involved.

But the Copernican cosmological principle is not found in the sky.

In other words, even the bare photons-impacting-collectors and x-y-and-z axis “hard science” of precision cosmology is now telling us that our present, Big Bang picture of the universe and our place in it is not only wrong- that ought to have become abundantly apparent once 96% of the mass and energy of the universe was added in by hand out of thin air to make the equations come out right- in important aspects, it is the ancient, geocentric cosmology which provides us a more truthful icon of the cosmos, and this remarkable turnabout is suggested even through the scientific operations and instruments of a bare “physical” cosmology.

The implications of this are so profound that they point beyond even physical cosmology itself; more exactly, they point above it.

Recall the remarkable exchange between George Ellis and Bernard Carr near the end of “The Principle”, where it is suggested that the incredible fine tunings required for intelligent life to exist in the universe leave us ultimately faced with two possible explanations, a “multiverse” or a Fine Tuner, a Creator.

Lately, things have started to go very badly for the multiverse, or the “multimess”, as one of inflation theory’s originators, Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University, re-names it in a remarkable Scientific American article covered by us here.

That article has sparked a marvelously long-overdue, good-old-fashioned dust up in cosmology circles- airing it out in public with as amusing a kerfuffle as the scientific Olympians have provided us mere mortals in quite a long time.

Since the release of “The Principle” in fact.

You can read about the latest developments here, but the sign of the times that carries the most import is that more and more theorists are willing to publicly challenge even the most important and basic assumptions of standard cosmology, and they are ready to do so on the basis of the integrity of the scientific method itself.

Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm shift is approaching. Theories which have yielded the standard cosmology “physical universe” (with the exception of quantum physics, which, as anyone who has read Wolfgang Smith’s “The Quantum Enigma” will know, is the key exception) have arrived at last at dead ends, with ad-hoc ex-post-facto patch ups galore and the “multimess” providing the Big Red Flag that something has gone amiss.

Speaking of Wolfgang Smith- and it has been my pleasure to have been speaking with him an immensely enjoyable good deal of late- the matter of the Kuhnian paradigm shift is considered by him in his remarkable “Science and Myth“:

There remains the question of evidential basis, of verification. It is to be noted, first of all, that in the absence of controlled experiment, verification in the full scientific sense is ruled out in advance: the best one can hope for is that signals from outer space, when interpreted according to terrestrial physics, do not conflict with the theory. It happens, however, that they do, which is to say that it has been necessary to introduce a number of ad hoc hypotheses: i.e., assumptions formulated specifically for the purpose of squaring the theory with conflicting observational findings. What is more, the process of adding extra assumptions in response to adverse data appears to be ongoing; as Brent Tully (known for his discovery of supergalaxies) observed: ‘It’s disturbing that there is a new theory every time there is a new observation.’ To which one might add that Tully has every right to be disturbed: for such a modus operandi in effect eliminates empirical verification as a criterion of truth. Under such auspices it becomes hard to ascertain whether there exists so much as a shred of real evidence in support of the theory.

The story we tell ourselves about the universe and our place in it is about to change, and whenever a cosmology is changed, a civilization is changed.

It is, in the end, not the “hard data” of cosmology that most concern us.

It is the myth constructed to reify those data into a worldview- universes pop out of nothing, reducing ultimately to aggregations of fundamental quantum particles and fields, eternally inflating infinite multiverses (about which, ironically, physics in the end can tell us not a single true thing)- this is what concerns us primarily.

It is remarkable how so many have of us have been intrigued and even, seemingly, fulfilled by the science fiction universe of standard cosmology. But it is becoming abundantly clear now that the prodigious feat of building a universe out of quantum fluctuations is not going to yield a cosmos, an ordered universe.

The dead ends have been reached, and science is, as if by nature, returning to its business of experimental test and, yes,  falsification of even its most cherished assumptions (the very first and most cherished of which is that the quantitative aspects of reality are, in fact, all the reality there is).

The great project to reduce the world to what can be measured and operated upon by the instruments and procedures of physical science is reaching its end, and in reaching its end finds itself confronted by the ancient wisdom of humanity, which wisdom modernity continues to be perfectly persuaded has been banished forever to a pre-scientific age of myth and superstition.

As it turns out, not so much.

Having read the cosmic icon in its barest, physical sense, and seen, as in “The Principle“, the signs of a coming transformation of our cosmology- of our worldview- we can progress beyond what is actually the least important aspect of the cosmic icon: what the remarkable mathematician/physicist/philosopher Wolfgang Smith has called “the debateover the outer husk“.

We begin to turn to what are, for us, the actually vital aspects of what Smith terms an integral cosmology, one which reconnects us to the transcendent realities that lie beyond and above the photons and the collectors and the graphs and the charts, far beyond the most rigorous scientific studies.

It is toward such an integral cosmology that “The Principle” points, and  toward which the luminous writings of Wolfgang Smith will take us further along the way:

“The heavens, I contend, will declare ‘the glory of God’ or the supreme futility of existence: here there can be no middle ground…(i)t is surely no accident that the rise of astrophysics has been accompanied by the advent of post-modernist nihilism in its philosophic as well as cultural manifestations. The drift into nihilism corresponds precisely to the loss of substance implicit in the physicist’s world view: culture and cosmology, it turns out, are intimately linked. In fact, as the cosmology flattens, so invariably does the culture.”— Wolfgang Smith, “Ancient Wisdom and Modern Misconceptions- A Critique of Contemporary Scientism” Angelico Press 2015

The cosmos transcends the domain of physics, and can not be reduced to it.

The disintegrating dream of a “theory of everything” might not be quite yet at the nightmare stage for the theorists, but it is not that far off, either.

The notion of an integral cosmos read as an icon, as a sign, as an “up”, furnishes the key by which we return from an “infinite and expanding universe”, from a “multiverse eternally generated by eternal inflation” concerning which we can never know a single true thing.

We return at last to the real world.

Buy/Stream The Principle Full Documentary Support The Principle


8 Responses

  1. William Galliher says:

    Pretty much as I’ve been saying for about 15 years.
    So much for all that dark Matter! Wonder if one who is really good at physics can predict the mass of a super massive black hole, by observing the approximate number of stars circling around it.
    While the jwst won’t reveal the secrets of the cosmos, it will still add information and insight, Wether or not we are capable of correct interpretation is all together a different matter.

  2. James Phillips, JD says:

    Thanks so much for bringing the cogent thoughts of the incredible Wolfgang Smith to the forefront of the above discussion. Perhaps, it would be apropos to quote here in part from this scientific giant as regards to what he had to say about Dr. Robert Sungenis and his (with an assist from Dr. Robert Bennett) monumental work, Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right: “Though I am not usually at a loss for words, I find it hard to express my admiration for this masterpiece, which has no peer and constitutes without doubt the definitive work on the subject of geocentrism……You are to be congratulated not only on your erudition and command of an incredibly vast subject matter, but also on the logical clarity of your presentation and lucidity of style. At your hands this subject of virtually unimaginable complexity becomes “almost” simple, and certainly understandable (up to a point) to nonspecialists.”

  3. Congratulations, Mr. Rick DeLano, for this wonderful article!
    People should be conected with the real world. Absolute Reality is aJesus Christ, who is one and the only God with Father and Holy Ghost.
    For people to return to the real world is necessary, that they turn or return first to Jesus Christ through His Catholic Church.
    If they do not do this, they will wander in their fantasy worlds,, because they are not conected with Reality!

    All the best from

    Fr. Vidko Podržaj

  4. Katherine Bachman says:

    I am only one person, but because I was ill all the time with asthma and couldn’t breathe and didn’t know when I would die, from the time I was little I searched for God because I was so afraid, I didn’t know which day would be my last………so I had to know one way or another IF THERE WAS MORE TO LIFE THAN THE LAST ‘GOOD TIME’ I HAD, BECAUSE, I always had to face reality by myself afterwards. So I spent my life searching for God as I grew up and older. And since I was born into a faithfilled family and was taught by the nuns and priests of our town I was able to persist in my quest. When I was in my twenties and teaching , my mom got sick and I had to take care of her. She had Alzheimer’s Disease. That was when I first began experiencing episodes that went beyond the laws of physics. And I have been having these different experiences ever since. In fact I am just beginning to write my book about it. Many of the incidents were prophetic and I learned what they meant in the long run of life, but some seem to be still in play. Sometimes it was something that saved my life, other times it was a vision of what could help the world situation and people if it played out. But all the incidents were beyond the laws of physics, so I now know that there is a God. In the Bible it says, “Keep my commandments and my covenant and I will manifest Myself to you! And I did (I attend mass daily and receive holy communion (the manna of the new covenant) and He did. So I believe what you people are saying, with God all things are possible! God bless you in all your endeavors. Kathy

  5. Fred Salvatti says:

    Thank you for your great work in exposing the truth about reality.

    Has anyone written articles or books detailing point-by-point where the theory-of-relativity is wrong based on the wrong assumptions about the speed of light and the fact that the universe is geocentric?

    Based on what your documentaries have shown, what is the correct way to look at time, space, matter and gravity? Are there places where the theory-of-relativity is correct, or is it all wrong?

    Thank you.

    • Rick Delano says:

      Thanks, Fred!

      The questions you ask are not simple.

      I will, however, try and give a (far too) simple answer.

      First off, geocentrism is perfectly compatible with General Relativity insofar as the equations are concerned- it is the *postulate* that absolute motion does not exist that both assures the compatibility of geo (or any other)-centrism with the equations of General Relativity, and provides the basis for experimental tests of that *postulate*.

      According to Dr. Robert Bennett, experimental evidence sufficient to refute both the Special and General Theories is already in hand, and if you search “Robert Bennett vixra” you will find a paper he has written about these experiments.

      As to the correct way to look at space, time, matter and gravity- that is exactly the subject of our next film, now in production, “The End of Quantum Reality”.

      It features Dr. Wolfgang Smith, whose work is extensively referenced in the article we are commenting on.

      All the best!

Leave a Reply