In Pursuit of the Absurd
For some time I have known that I should write a commentary on what I think I’m uncovering about Nostradamus, his works and its relevance to the world. I have refrained from doing so because in truth I don’t know and my thoughts are speculation. I do have a much clearer idea of what it isn’t and cannot be which are pertinent if we are to find the technique and mechanism involved. Over the 2010 end-of-year holiday period I have been asked to address this issue and this series will attempt to do that.
I cannot emphasise enough my awareness of the absurdity of my claims in respect to my findings in Nostradamus’ Prophecies. Yet this is no deterrent to my efforts for reasons which I will attempt to justify.
The absurd is a well appreciated phenomenon in science and it is one that serves us well when we attempt to understand Nostradamus. There is a principle called ‘reduction to absurdity’ that is often used in logical argument and its strengths and weaknesses are very applicable to my topic.
For instance it is logically absurd to claim Nostradamus saw visions of the future and wrote his work to be a warning to mankind in the 21st century. There is an obvious flaw since a warning is only of any benefit if by intervention the future can be changed which renders the Prophecy false.
There is also a deeper issue invovling the nature of time. If it is possible to change one event then we can change any and this would imply multiple futures. If it can be changed and it doesn’t include mutiple futures then Nostradamus’ Prophecies must again be false. To cover the period of 500 years since he wrote his work Nostradamus would have had to build in infinite versions of the future. Such a possibility is clearly absurd.
But the reduction to absurdity has its limits and these are highly significant in this unusual case of a man who claimed an ability not recognised by orthodoxy. I would like to approach this idea of limitations by using a tale loosely based on one in the classics.
It is possible to argue that if a son was to challenge his father to a race and gave his father a head start then he can never overtake his father. The classical argument goes like this. The son has to run the distance by which he’s behind his father but in that time his father has got ahead of him. The son now has to cover that distance but his father is once more ahead of him. The father will always be ahead of the son no matter how many times we do this process. Therefore at no time that we can see will the son be ahead of the father.
It is a perfectly logical argument and it really doesn’t have a flaw, what it does have however is a constraint that prevents progress to undertanding. The method of analysis takes shorter and shorter time periods that never get to the time where the son and father are at the same place.
What has this to do with understanding Nostradamus? I would argue a great deal since you cannot answer the question of whether Nostradamus was genuine or a fraud if you confine your view to the idea that the premises on which its based are improbable and illogical. But isn’t logic and probability the basis of science? No, logic and probability are aids to science and secondary to something else as shown by many examples in the history of science.
Two hundred years ago the principle of reduction to the absurd was turned against science in respect to arguments about the age of the universe. Those arguing for the Bible claimed the earth was formed a few millennia before Christ was born, while scientists claimed geology showed the earth was vastly older than this.
Those arguing for the shorter age used the Sun to prove the case based on its being a burning object. If the sun was a normal object burning by a normal process then, they argued, the sun must once have been vastly bigger, so vast in fact that it filled the space between the earth and the sun. Their argument was valid since what the scientist lacked was evidence that could prove otherwise ; and this didn’t come until the phenomenon of nuclear fusion was known to man. The principle of reduction to the absurd doesn’t necessarily resolve what is true. This isn’t the only weakness of the principle.
In the early 17th century a man stood on the Leaning Tower of Pisa with two objects destined to destroy the notion that the prime foundation of science is logic and probability. Uto that time it had been a cornerstone of belief about the nature of matter that a heavy object will fall faster than a lighter one. This was not questioned for it was reasonable and the Greek philosophers had raised the process of thought to be the pinnacle from which the world could be understood.
Galileo could never have challenged this by logic and reason alone; what he did was produce evidence that the world didn’t behave as predicted. In so doing he produced motivation to find out why it was so and from this quest came our understanding of gravity and relativity.
In this case as in many others the consequence of taking up what evidence shows to be true rather that what reason claims was profound and it is evidence that is the prime concern of science, not preconception, mindset or reason.
I consider the above as important for those who wish to know my goals. My work on Nostradamus prophecies achieves results that must be examined by the rules of evidence not by the seeming absurdity of what they show. I consider that if my work can stand the scrutiny of the evidence then it may offer much about the nature of time.
But like those who understood the import of the geological record in dating the existence of the earth, I am not in possession of the knowledge that tells me how. What I am capable of knowing is the status of the evidence and that will be the sub ject of what follows.
On the credibility of Michel de Nostredame’s writings.
I have held the belief for several years that I have found the key to decoding Nostradamus’ work and I have stated so on many recent occasions. However at no point have I claimed I had proof that Nostradamus was a prophet nor have I ever claimed he wasn’t. The two things are separate aspects in the sense that while both may be true, Nostradamus’ prophetic ability or inability is independent of his work being coded.
However his ability to prophesy is tied into the existence of code since it goes to the critical element of Nostradamus ’ credibility. In a similar vein it is possible Nostradamus could see into the future but not be a prophet and this too is linked to his credibility.
Nostradamus’ credibility is critical because he is the only authority that knew what his aims were; an inevitable consequence of a secret process. It is absurd for anyone to claim that they have unravelled his work by ignoring what he claims. It is an extreme folly to suggest his obscure writing was a quirk of personality or a shield against the unenlightened.
Excuses for the author’s inadequate presentation destroy the vision needed to understand his work. Where there are words of no known meaning, seemingly meaningless verse, misspelt names and other distortions it is too easy to claim a personality quirk or a fear of the inquisition these these are just excuses devoid of reason.
Excuses place the writings outside the testing of the evidence, evading the scrutiny that reason must undergo. It is when we accept the writing holds a code that we can see why it has such an awkward appearance. It is testing that generates evidence not conjecture and so I use the lettering of the prophecies with the minimum of alteration. I can go further and say I am deeply reliant on the words of Nostradamus as my source and my guide, not the interpretations generated by others that remove the original lettering or discard verses they consider mystic or too obscure.
Any work, whether it be coded or not, tends to have its key tenets set out early in the presentation while the conclusions tend to give summaries, overviews and projections. It is for this reason that I pay particular attention to Nostradamus’ commentaries in the beginnings of the prefaces to his work. Some from the beginning of the first Preface of 1555 which seem pertinent are given below.
And in the Henry Epistle of 1558 there is much of the same with the following being a worthy sample:
As for myself I would never claim such a title [as a prophet], never, please God. I readily admit that all proceeds from God and render Him thanks, honor and immortal praise. I have mixed therewith no divination coming from fate. All from God and nature and for the most part accompanied by the movements along the celestial course. It is much like seeing in a burning mirror, with clouded vision, the great events, sad, phenomenal and calamitous events that will approach those of the principal cultures.
Compare the message in the first two verses to that above and we see the same patterns emerge.
These passages tell us much about Nostradamus technique and show his credibility as I will attempt to show in the next article.
The remarkable modernity of Nostradamus
Michel de Nostredame seems to have been very precise in his choice of words and it benefits the analysis if we heed his choice rather than impose new words more suited to any preconceptions of Nostradamus. By reading his description in his prophecies we can see the following claims are made by Nostradamus;
I am not a prophet and would never claim to be.
Read the above carefully and judge whether they accurately reflect what Nostradamus said. I suggest you do this because it is important in the realisation of how credible Nostradamus is. The credibility comes from the fact that the above very precisely details experiences that you and I have every day. For insyance:
We can know by our own experiences that such things are possible and the surprising thing is how closely Nostradamus describes a technology similar to our own.
We tend to take for granted things that in reality are quite bizarre: quite marvellous.
The images we see and hear on a TV, radio, mobile phone or computer come without a sensible connection to their source. All around you and passing through you are the couriers of these images. They are everywhere but can you see, touch, hear, taste or smell them? Can you sense them at all, these divine angels of the modern day? No, you need a means built out of rock.
Your life centres around rocks that both speak and display images but you discount it as ordinary, not biblical, not even very special but in truth what we experience as everyday is what in olden days were considered miracles. And these angels of the modern day are exactly of the type Nostradamus describes; they are like rays from the sun since the waves that carry light and heat are also electromagnetic waves.
It would be foolish to then use his Prophecies jumto conclusions about the sophistication and origin of Nostradamus' technology. The best guide is Nostradamus own admission he is a mortal and therefore not from space or any other exotic source. He also clearly states it is vision and sound that he experiences so he is no time-traveller with physical access to future technology.
The only claim he makes is to the skills of his ancestors. In the beginning of the preface of 1555 he states he left his work in writing because time would wear and erode that which he wanted to share with his infant son. These are as close we come to knowing what the device was that he used.
We are so used to the sophistication of our modern devices that we can easily overlook that very simple materials can achieve much the same result. During the second World War, allied soldiers imprisoned in German camps carefully touched a rusty wire to a piece of crystal and successfully heard these awesome words “This is London..”
It is also presumptuous to assume that Nostradamus’ means is a form of electromagnetic wave in the range that we know and use. Just as understanding the burning rate of the sun needed knowledge of nuclear fusion our understanding of Nostradamus' means may need to await greater insights into the links between time and space.
Nostradamus' credibility is not under threat by his descriptions but enhanced because we do know that as time has passed skills once thought impossible have come into being.
Special boundaries applicable to those who claim to see the future.
The principle of reduction to absurdity is extremely useful in addressing possible combinations of facts. For instance I would argue that if Nostradamus was able to see the future then his mindset wouldn’t be that of a 16th century person since the mindset is a product of experience and interaction with others.
If we were then to try to interpret Nostradamus’ Prophecies by assuming things that would limit a 16th century author we must also assume he couldn’t see the future. It would be preposterous that the future could be seen but that the knowledge from it couldn’t be used or absorbed.
In the case of a future-seer mistakes of ignorance would be minimal and things like astrology would be known as being of little practical use. The evolution of ideas and the discovery of ancient materials would be available to the future-seer, thereby shattering the foundations of the 16th Century Church. The idea of Jesus as immortal would have to go, as would the concepts of his return and an imminent end-of-days. The many other fallacies of religion imposed by the church leaders would also be known. At the very best the religiosity of Nostradamus would be as a Gnostic.
If a person believes Nostradamus is a prophet or could see the future then it is folly to try and prove that his purpose involved ancient religious ends.
It is also true for investigators of Nostradamus’ prophetic abilities as well as those who are convinced Nostradamus’ Prophecies apply to our times. For example no researcher should assume that Nostradamus’ writing, his knowledge or his language has to be based in the 16th century because such a stance is bad science. It is bad because by this assumption the researcher automatically assumes the future has had no impact on the seer with the inevitable result that what could serve as proof is excluded from the start.
I am a researcher into Nostradamus’ prophetic ability and at this point of time I neither believe nor disbelieve he had any but I do believe that there is evidence in Nostradamus’ works that shows he saw into the future.
I have already shown in the previous section statements by Nostradamus that back my position and it is his words that surely are the most telling. These should set the ground rules for any testing of his work and they lead to some quite unusual boundaries for any investigation.
>It is quite true Sire , that my natural instinct has been given to me by my ancestors, who did not believe in predicting, and that this natural instinct has been adjusted and integrated with long calculations. Epistle 1558
I do not wish to assume for myself a title so sublime for the present. For he who is now called a prophet was once called a seer. Strictly speaking my son, a prophet is one who sees things remote from the natural knowledge of men. And it can happen that the prophet, by means of the perfect light of the prophecy appearing before him, thinks he sees things divine as well as human, but this cannot be for the effects of future prediction extend far. . Preface 1555
We should also take careful note of Nostradamus references to astrology for they show he disdained that art. His frequent mention to stars is nearly always linked to the term astronomy and to calculations.
There is a great difference between the two terms today although it wasn’t always so. An astrologer sees the stars position and alignments as shaping the fortunes of an individual man at a particular time while an astronomer sees the stars position and alignments as applying to time alone.
There is no doub t that there are influences of the planets on both living and non-living things but they don’t support astrology as a credible source of knowledge. For instance we know the cycles of animals are somewhat attuned to the phases of the moon as are the tides. But these few cases are established from credible evidence and their rules apply to all, not a randomly selected few.
Nostradamus couldn’t have held astrology as important to his writing if he could see into the future for he would know its true worthlessness. He might foresee Earthly disaster, strikes by comets and asteroids but they are results he had seen, not signs by which he could forecast what might happen.
There is a great difference between seeing an event and noticing the stars at that time and prophesying an event when you have only seen the stars.
And there is a reason why Nostradamus would have looked for the distant stars when he saw an event and it is that they provide the only calendar that is universal. The date in any calendar system can be calculated precisely if you understand planetary and star movement and it will always be the same point no matter what the system. Nostradamus art was that of astronomy./p>
Although he complied with the fashion of the time by giving a few horoscopes he did so reluctantly and his work in this area was reputedly very lacking in an understanding of that art.
Through his own words we can conclude Nostradamus was not an astrologer which is the only stance that is consistent with his being able to see the future. If we were able to prove his words untrue about his disdain of astrology we would know he had no insight into the future, the two things are incompatible.
I caution you especially against the vanity of the more than execrable magic condemned of yore by the Holy Scriptures and by the Canons of the Church. However judicial astrology (positioning of the stars) is excepted… Preface 1555
Any assumption that Nostradamus’s works are reliant on 16th Century knowledge is likewise an immediate refutation of the idea he could see into the future. For instance if we assume his work takes anything sub stantial from the hermetic tradition then our methodology is flawed.
But just as we shouldn’t assume a reliance on outmoded practice we must test for things from the future. It would be a disproof that he could see into the future if there were no evidence of this type embedded in his work.
I believe his description of his process can be seen as an account of a technology we would recognise today. The fact that such an interpretation can be given doesn’t prove anything; what it does is remove an argument for disproof. That is also true of the anagrams found in Nostradamus’ work.
The individual appearance of a modern term however complex doesn’t prove anything by itself but if the works of a claimant to the art of seeing-the-future had no such words we would immediately know he was a fraud. We must expect that if Nostradamus could see into the future he would have the capacity to shape language and image to that of modern times.
And importantly those who would seek to refute evidence showing the works contain modern data, arguing that Nostradamus couldn’t know it, are missing the point. It is improper to dismiss evidence, that if the hypothesis were true must necessarily be there. And it is the absence of which, not its presence, that would offer a fair basis for dismissing the hypothesis.
But we cannot presume that the finding of words makes Nostradamus a prophet, nor that being able to see into the future makes what is seen true; there are many hurdles before the seeing of something in the future can be accepted as a reflection of something that will happen.
The method and medium by which the information is attained are critical to the value of the information gained. Nostradamus’ work must stand the modern tests we would apply to all means of communication, we must know how credible is its source and we need to classify its content correctly as a factual occurrence, myth or fiction to know its worth. The ability of the communicator to make such distinctions on our behalf is crucial and these issues are amongst those things I will address in my next sections.
The missing universal Yang.
If we are to test whether Nostradamus could have seen the future we may need to postulate a concept that even today is unproven. In stating this it is important to note modern understanding of the universe and its origin is not written in stone. In fact there are more acknowledged questions today than at any time in the past where the scientists are prepared to say We have no evidence at all about this event; we only know that there must be new laws and new concepts to explain anomalies we have found.
The Higgs Boson falls into this category. This boson is a hypothetical concept that could explain anomalies in the properties of the fundamental parts of mass and energy. It is not known to exist but tests around the World are aimed at finding it. [In 2013 scientists claim to have found evidence of its existence].
The postulates scientist make are necessary because every framework has its own logical properties and these can be explored even while the frame is unproven. For example electricity was in practical use long before the electron, the carrier of charge, was identified.
In order to present the missing concept for this section I wrote a paragraph two days ago [in 2011] to show the basic elements needed in order to make seeing into the future possible. I was also going to write a paragraph on how this manifests itself in the writings, thought and inspirations of humans. The paragraph is given below:
Let us assume that from the beginning the universe comprises two parts, one of which manifests itself as mass and energy diffused throughout the flow of time and the other comprises all-time from the universes existence to its destruction. Electromagnetic waves unite the mass-energy model and similarly there may be a wave that unites the time mass-energy model in which instances of time convert to a minutely small mass-energy. Together the sum of these, the Yin and Yang of creation and existence , should be a constant.
The first of these instances, the Yin, is the way we currently see the universe, the second a mode which cosmologists may well be forced to utilise to explain the mystery of dark matter. The second mode would imply that although its wave has minute mass-energy the total sum throughout time is finite and massive. From the perspective of beings like us that evolve within the first mode this second mode would appear invisible since it covers all time, a dimension we cannot interpret. But what we would perceive at any instance of time would be the sum of its mass throughout existence; it then appears as an invisible finite mass-energy similar to that inexplicable phenomenon which present-day science calls dark-matter… Allan Webber 3rd Jan 20111 (See my 2016+ papers on cosmology for how these ideas have developed)
In the previous sections of this paper I showed how Nostradamus’ writings embraced concepts, unknown in his day, but recognisable by us of the 21st Century. The following section for example is interpretable by us in terms of electromagnetic waves and their influence on matter and energy.
… the prophetic heat and power approaches us like the rays of the sun, which cast their influences on bodies both elementary and non-elementary. Preface 1555
In making the point that we should expect to find things in Nostradamus that were ahead of his time I should have also said and ahead of ours.
To any 16th Century reader of his work there would be no meaning to Nostradamus’ remarks and they would therefore be dismissed as part of a mystical rant. It is the same in our time when we read his work and I was struck when I wrote the above paragraph how it changed my perception of some parts in Nostradamus writing that seem nonsensical even today. The following passage for example is a strong parallel to the ideas in my own paragraph.
Buoyed by this unexpected parallelism I am now prepared to expand upon the conclusions that arise from such a concept and what they would mean for the art of seeing the future.
The metaphysics of the Yang
Let us assume for the sake of practical illustration that Nostradamus’ medium was one with which we are familiar, a device for translating electromagnetic signals into images and sound.
Immediately we know that this is possible and we know how clear and convincing are the stories we perceive when we look at small parts of the spectrum utilised by man to create images and sound.
We also should know that throughout the universe there are continuous electromagnetic emissions and every one of those emissions will continue moving throughout time until it reaches the ends of the universe.
In passing it is worth commenting on how awesome is this eternal, invisible and omnipresent essence and it has totally unexpected properties only uncovered in the last few centuries. I emphasise this awesome nature because when we have a device to read these signals we tend to take for granted what emerges, reducing it to everyday ho-hum-ness. When we watch TV or receive input over the internet we don’t see it as celestial guidance and nor should we, it is as earthly as its creators, our fellow men. And it is as valuable and fallible as those men intended.
Nostradamus’ writings imply his device locks into another signal that involves time itself, a medium which is not seen as commonplace today. His description of the nature of this device implies it requires deethought and a surface, such as water in a brass tripod, against which the mind might cast its images. If such a device can be used the credibility of the material that emerges from it is sub ject to the same weaknesses as electromagnetic signals which don’t inevitably signal truth by the fact of their being part of such an awesome media.
It is manifested chiefly by two means, which are contained in the understanding of the inspired one who prophesies One comes by infusion, clearing the supernatural light for the person who predicts by astronomy, making it possible to predict through inspired revelation. The other is a fixed participation of the divine eternity. By means of it the Prophet comes to judge what has been given him by his divine spirit, through God the creator and his natural intuition.
So that what is predicted, and is true, has an ethereal origin. This light and the thin flame are altogether efficacious and are of heavenly origin no less than natural light… Preface 1555
It is clear from the above that Nostradamus rates his source as impeccable but recognises it passes through the human mind.
Nostradamus takes what he sees and writes it into verse but it only becomes prophecy when he gives it a date calculated from the stars associated with the event. This too he claims to have incorporated into his prophetic verses.
I have commented on how we perceive things that once would have been considered magic as mundane when they become commonplace. However underlying these phenomena there is usually an even deeper mystery to cause us awe. This should be kept in mind as I proceed for I want to give a context to the concept of my proposed Yang.
When we turn on a TV the electromagnetic waves don’t choose what we will watch, the waves just exist with bizarre properties of being invisible and a mixture of an infinite array of signals.
It is us that turn on the TV and select the part of the spectrum which is of interest. As we do this the electrical dimensions of the rocks (silicon chips) contained in the TV change to the point where they resonate with the selected part of the spectrum and are amplified by these same rocks. They are delivered to other rocks and liquids that glow and vibrate thereby making images and sounds. The TV has no choice as to what it does nor does its components.
In nature resonance is what changes randomness into pattern and man has learnt to exploit many of these. When you blow across a bottle there will be emitted a musical sound if you have the art of finding the right speed to blow. The shape of the bottle is critical to this pattern and determines what speed is needed but it doesn’t choose whether it sounds the note or not.
This is the critical element to all things in the universe, the loopholes to randomness whereby physical attributes are arranged into patterns. And it is harmony and resonance that form the essence of the YANG;, that primordial set of rules that govern all things; the beautiful maths of awesome equations.
The Yang is true for all time and without it there is no existence. The Yang does not choose to set the rules, the rules are what it is and matched with the Yin, mass and time evolve into the universe as we know it. The Yang is the timeless patterning inherent in the universe causing even that which seems random to be patterned. Fractals illustrate the Yang’s extent as does the evolution of the planets and of life.
The Yang defines what happens when randomness meets structure and there is no choice whether it is to happen or it is not, if the conditions are right the Yang creates according to its immutable nature.
The lack of choice doesn’t limit variety but there is only one timeless record by which time proceeds, that of the Yang. It is the Yang that can make possible the seeing of the future. When its omnipresent essence is in tune with certain structures in certain conditions it always responds as would an electromagnetic wave. In this sense there is no freewill for the timeless one, the Yang, since it is a single record of all history; what was, what is and what will be; the product of the responses evoked into being by its laws.
I believe that Nostradamus claims that he was in touch with the essence of all time, the timeless patterns, are worthy of testing against my concept of the Yang.
And the evidence from Nostradamus’ own words gives us further clues as to what to test since he refers to its impact on the higher functions of his brain. The results of patterning I find in his work suggest it may also be in all written works, in all creative activity including music. My hypothesis would imply that we will find less randomness, more order than reason would suggest, in all expressions of human thought and that these may well be a form of fractal pattern of the mind.
END of PAPER