THE MOBIUS PRINCIPLE
Let us make man
in our image, after our
God: Genesis 1:26
For those people who call themselves creationists, the Bible is the
word of God.
But which Bible is the authentic one?
There are countless versions of the books contained in both the Old
and New Testaments and the oldest versions have been carefully
dissected to reveal the different styles of authorship woven into
the fabric of the stories.
Two of the three main traditions - the
Yahwist and the Elohim (a word meaning gods in the plural) - talk of
a specific sequence of creation. This deals with the arrival of
plants, then good and evil, then animals and next women.
The third, priestly tradition has a sequence of creation that is
rather more in line with modern theories about evolution.
comes light followed by heaven, the Earth (land and then sea),
vegetation, then the Sun, Moon and stars. Next come birds and fishes
and finally man and women together.
An interesting fact is that the first two traditions use the Hebrew
yasar for the creative act of making man, which has a
simplistic or crude implication of being shaped, as a potter models
clay objects. Both also use the word demut for likeness,
which implies similarity or looking the same.
However, in the
Priestly tradition, (the version that has God talking to his wider
council about making man in their image), he uses a very different word.
case the word bara is used for the creation of m an and this
is a word that carries a more complex, creative value. Next we find
selem as the chosen word for the use of the creator's image,
which means something m ore like a precise duplicate.
Selem is a term directly related to the
Canaanite word for Venus that is associated with resurrection and
therefore rebirth of the individual.39
We find it strange that a supposedly singular God is talking
to others around him, even before humans have been created. He has
already made the Sun, Moon and Earth and supplied the oceans along
with plant and animal life - but to whom is he talking?
And why do they all, whoever 'they' are
(including God himself) apparently have heads with noses, ears and
eyes, bodies with arms and legs and presumably even genitalia?
Why is God, along with his undisclosed team, human in appearance?
It is not our place here to try and make sense of
myth, but we came to find the idea fascinating and surprisingly
plausible. The Bible has been edited, changed and added to by a
succession of people who wanted it to support whatever they deemed
to be true.
Early Christians even accused the Jews of having
incorrect versions of their own scriptures when they were found to
differ from the texts the early Christians had doctored. In terms of
Christianity, it seem s unlikely that a passage that involves God
talking to others before he created humanity would have survived,
had it not been for an important aspect of the new Christian faith.
This was the 'new' concept of the trinity where God is said to
comprise three separate entities including his living human mode
We are not attempting to claim that the Bible provides us with any
evidence for the authorship of the message we had discovered, but a
close look at the situation did lead us to a tantalizing thought.
Could the only known intelligent life force in the Universe be
responsible for the message? To be blunt: Could modern humans have
built the Moon?
There is obviously one very substantial issue of logic to address
here, which is obviously the time gap of 4.6 billion years between
the creation of the Moon and the present era. Clearly, if humanity
created the Moon, this would have to be explained. In reality, this
may not be the obstacle it appears to be, because leading
scientists are currently debating the possibility of travelling
backwards in time.
Virtually everyone speculating about time travel
is agreed that the associated mathematics indicates it should be
We will come to the problem of travelling in time shortly,
but for the moment let us put the issue of the time gap aside and
consider the reasons why the Moon's message might be from closer to
home than we ever dreamed could be possible.
The hypothesis we originally laid down was:
The Moon was engineered by an unknown
agency circa 4.6 billion years ago to act as an incubator to promote
intelligent life on Earth.
The unknown agency knew that humanoids would be the result of the
That unknown agency wanted the resulting
humanoids to know what had been done and they left a message
indicated by the dynamics of the Moon and its relationship with the
Firstly, it has to be acknowledged that there are no other possible
candidates that we know of anywhere in the Universe.
God exists by
faith and not as a result of evidence, and aliens m ay or may not
exist. It is entirely possible that we are totally alone, either in
our part of space or in the whole of the Universe. In any case, who
would have m ore to gain from a life-producing planet than the very
intelligent creature that has most benefited from its existence,
The question of how the UCA (Unknown Creative Agency) could have known that the intelligent
species on Earth would evolve with ten fingers and therefore adopt
base-ten arithmetic, at a time when the Moon was exactly where it is
today, is answered instantly if humanity is the agency we are
The mystery simply dissolves if we are that unknown
Another difficult issue to explain has been how the UCA could
possibly have used Megalithic and metric units as part of the
message. Once again, this scenario resolves the problem. Indeed, it
adds to the message because it makes it very clear that the UCA 'has
to be' humans from our future, travelling back in time to
manufacture the Moon.
The motive for the message becomes obvious and absolutely necessary.
If humans do not become alerted to the need to manufacture the Moon
as an incubator for life - we would not be here.
However, there is the problem we can't avoid. Humanity might be
described as having been reasonably technologically advanced for
around 100 years. The Moon came into being some 4,600,000,000,000
years ago. We have to admit that this does represent a bit of a
The answer can only be
Time is perceived as flowing like a river from the past into the
future and we are all riding the wave in one direction.
But what if
it were possible to head back upstream? Not necessarily for humans
themselves, though that cannot be ruled out, but for pre-programmed super-machines; equipment so sophisticated that it could engineer
After all, most spacecraft today are
unmanned units that carry out all kinds of experiments, take
photographs and even analyze samples of alien rock. It would not
therefore be hard to imagine a project team from our relatively near
future designing and deploying 'chronobots'40 to construct key
elements of the past.
But is time travel a dream or a possible reality?
For most people such thoughts cause headaches. The question that
anyone will reasonably focus upon is: If humans went back in time to
build the Moon so that there would be humans - where did humans com
It seems like an impossible loop - but is it stranger than the
age-old conundrum about the chicken and the egg? Logically, it is
necessary to have a chicken to lay an egg, yet one needs an egg for
that chicken to have sprung from.
A creationist would have no
problem as their God manufactured the first chicken with an ability
to lay eggs. The evolutionists would be a little sneakier and say
that a creature that was not quite a chicken laid an egg that
produced a mutation that was the first proper chicken. So, the egg
It really is not worth losing sleep about such problems, as the only
way to deal with any paradox is to simply accept it.
Today, we are programmed with a need for neat, predictable
Newtonian- style logic. Simple cause and effect - so that if 'A'
happens 'B' will result. People everywhere seem willing to accept
the idea that we were either created by God, or that we exist due to
a mega-series of flabbergastingly beneficial accidents.
these two possibilities again and then ask yourself if it is any
more farfetched or unreasonable to suggest that, as a species, we
went back to create our own life-giving planet system and ultimately
(For some reason, to the religiously-minded, the
insurmountable question of 'Who made God?' can be safely ignored,
as can the ridiculous improbability of an infinitely flowing stream
of beneficial serendipity to non- believers).
Humans throughout history have generally had a psychological need
for a higher authority, whether it be a supreme deity or the laws of
physics. Thankfully, that is not necessarily the whole story at all.
The debate about time travel goes on amongst the experts as it has
done for m any decades. Generally speaking, philosophers don't care
for the idea, for a whole host of logical or illogical reasons,
though some of them are coming round in the face of the latest
evidence. Meanwhile physicists are becoming increasingly certain
that time travel is possible, and they have the mathematics to back
up what is far from being a simple hunch.
Whilst the idea of travelling into the past is so counterintuitive
for most people that they just cannot get their heads around it, a
physics heavyweight and a philosophy heavyweight from Oxford
University have another view.
They once teamed up to confront the
apparent paradox that seems to forbid the highly fluid present
penetrating the apparently frozen structure of the past.
Deutsch and Michael Lockwood have the problem in context; saying
about the quantum physics of time travel:
'Common sense may rule out
such excursions - but the laws of physics do not.' 41
Most people have a real problem with the idea of time travel, and
the so- called 'grandfather paradox' encapsulates why the idea
appears to assault common sense so strongly.
The idea is that if a
young m an was able to travel back from the present time to, say,
1950, he might kill, or cause his grandfather to be killed before
his own father was born. If this were to happen, it would mean that
he could not exist and therefore could not have killed his
grandfather. The problem just goes around in apparently impossible
The only solution appears, at first view, to be to consider
all such journeys as utterly impossible - if for no other reason
than to save us from terminal confusion!
However, Deutsch and Lockwood are not so easily fazed and they
remain unconvinced about the need to protect our sensibilities from
issues of reality just because laypeople tend to
become confused. In an article published in Scientific American they
discuss another apparent time paradox that deals with the
possibility that even knowledge does not seem to require a
They refer to the grandfather-killing scenario as being an
'inconsistency paradox' and then they discuss another type of
apparent time-traveler violation of logic that they call a
This is an apparent violation of the principle
that knowledge can only come into existence as a result of
problem-solving processes, such as biological evolution or human
thought. In the example, they talk about a hypothetical art critic
who goes back in time to visit a famous artist from the previous
century who, the critic realizes, is only producing very mediocre
The time traveler shows the painter a book containing
reproductions of his later and greater works, which he then proceeds
to carefully copy in every detail with oil paints onto canvas.
This means that the reproductions in the
book exist because they are copied from the paintings and the
paintings exist because they were copied from the reproductions.
So, where did the inspiration come from?
'This kind of puzzling paradox,' say Deutsch and Lockwood, 'once
caused physicists to invoke a chronology principle that, by fiat
alone, ruled out travel into the past.'
But they believe that
travelling into the past does not violate any principle of physics,
however much it seem s counterintuitive to the average person.
Furthermore, the Oxford duo state that quantum - mechanical effects
actually facilitate time travel rather than prevent it, as some
scientists once argued.
They explain the basics of the concept of time by pointing to
Einstein's special and general
theories of relativity where three-dimensional space is combined
with time to form four- dimensional space-time. Within this,
everyone's life forms a kind of four-dimensional 'worm' in
space-time, with the tip of the worm's tail corresponding to their
birth and the top of the head to the person's death.
The line along
which the 'worm' lies is called the person's (or object's) 'world-line'
and each moment of time is a cross section of that world-line.
Einstein's general theory of relativity predicts that massive
bodies, such as stars and black holes, distort space-time and bend
world-lines. This is believed to be the origin of gravity - and, for
example, the Earth's world-line spirals around that of the Sun, which
in turn spirals around that of the centre of our galaxy.
Lockwood propose that if space- time becomes really distorted by
gravity some world-lines would become closed loops where they would
continue to conform to all the familiar properties of space and time
in their own locality, yet they would become corridors to the past.
'If we tried to follow such a Closed Time-like Curve (or
exactly, all the way around,
we would bump into our former selves and get pushed aside.
following part of a CTC, we could return to the past
and participate in events there. We could shake hands with our
younger selves or, if the loop were large enough, visit our
ancestors. To do this, we should either have to harness naturally
occurring CTCs or create CTCs by distorting and tearing the fabric
So a time machine, rather than being a special kind
of vehicle, would provide a route to the past, along which an
ordinary vehicle, such as a spacecraft, could travel.'42
So, world-class physicists like Professor Deutsch can conceive of
giant spacecraft voyaging backwards in time.
Perhaps such craft
could be filled with chronobots that could even self- replicate to
take on a task that might take hundreds of thousands, or even
millions, of years. Building an object the size of the Moon with
pre-programmed orbital requirements is unlikely to be a quick
exercise. But time would literally be on their side.
There are various ideas about how these time-travel enabling CTCs
might be formed.
Godel found a solution to Einstein's equations that describes CTCs
within a rotating Universe and they also appear in solutions of
Einstein's equations describing rotating black holes.
But there are
many practical problems including the evidence that naturally
occurring black holes are not spinning fast enough. Maybe a
technique will one day be found to increase their rotation rate
until safe CTCs appear.
The physicist John A Wheeler from Princeton University has famously
suggested shortcuts through space-time that he calls 'wormholes',
and other scientists have shown how two ends of a worm hole could be
moved, so as to form a CTC.
Professor Deutsch has become a champion of the many-Universes
theory, first put forward by Hugh Everett III in 1957, where
everything that can happen does happen.
For this reason, the
supposed paradoxes of time travel simply do not exist. In the
scenario where the m an kills his grandfather, he does not exist in
the one single Universe where the murder is committed, but he does
in the ones where he fails to assassinate his forebear.
Deutsch and Lockwood conclude that there is no scientific objection
to time travel, saying in
'The idea that time travel paradoxes could be resolved by "parallel
Universes" has been anticipated in science fiction
and by some philosophers. What we have presented here is not so much a new resolution as a new way of arriving at it, by deducing it
from existing physical theory...
These calculations definitively
dispose of the inconsistency paradoxes, which
turn out to be merely artifacts of an obsolete, classical
They appear to be suggesting a loop in time that has a twist in it
so that contact is made with a
near identical parallel existence, through which the time traveler
can arrive at a time and place that always has them present.
Their thought-provoking article concludes with the authors pointing
out that science says time travel is theoretically possible.
result, the onus is on those who wish to argue otherwise to prove
'We conclude that if time travel is
impossible, then the reason has yet to be discovered. We may or may
not one day locate or create navigable CT Cs.
But if anything like the many-Universes picture is true - and in
cosmology and the quantum theory of computation no viable
alternative is known - then all the
objections to time travel depend on false models of physical
So it is incumbent on anyone who still
wants to reject the idea of time travel to come up with some new
scientific or philosophical argument.'
And many experts agree.
Physicist, Matt Visser of Victoria
University of Wellington, has compiled a short list of the time
travel opportunities that have turned up since Einstein showed us
how to warp space-time. He has said that Einstein's general theory
of relativity not only allows time machines to exist, it is
'completely infested with them '.
Others fear the concept of time travel, even though they have not
been able to demonstrate that it cannot be done.
'I think most of
us would like to get rid of time machines if we possibly could,'
says Amanda Peet of the University of Toronto. 'They offend our
The only argument that has been made against time travel comes
from the famous Cambridge physicist, Stephen Hawking, in the form of his 'chronology protection
This suggestion boils down to the notion that the
Universe might have a built-in time cop, so whenever anyone is on
the verge of constructing a working time machine the time cop turns
up and shuts the operation down before it has a chance to damage the
However, there are no time cops evident in the laws of
physics, so, at the moment, the chronology protection conjecture is simply wishful thinking.
As far as our scenario is concerned, humans exist because, at some
future point, we will return to the time when our planet was a young
lump of unstratified matter and then we shall make the Moon.
Once complete, our Moon worked its magic and life began, evolving
eventually into an intelligent, ten-fingered species that uses
Megalithic and metric units. The message had to be built into the
very nature of the structure or else we would miss the cue
to understand what we need to do.
But how can we do it and when will we do it?
Ronald Mallett, a Professor of Theoretical Physics at Connecticut
University, already believes he has found a way to create a CTC or
time machine using light. He has identified that a circulating beam
of light, slowed right down to a snail's pace, may well be the key
to the door of time travel because, although light has no m ass it
does bend space.
The realization that time, as well as space, might
be twisted by circulating light beams caused Mallett to team up with
other scientists at Connecticut University in 2001, with the
intention of building a prototype, saying,
'With this device time
travel may become a practical possibility.'
Mallett decided that if he added a second light beam, circulating in
the opposite direction to the first, it would increase the intensity
of the light enough to cause space and time to swap roles.
the circulating light beam, time runs round and round, and, what to
an outsider appears to be time becomes like an ordinary dimension of
space. A person walking along in the right direction could actually
be walking backwards in time - as measured outside the circle. So
after walking for a while, you could leave the circle and meet
yourself before you have entered it.
However, it turns out that the energy needed to twist time into a
loop is enormous, and when Mallett reviewed his progress he realized
that the effect of circulating light depends on its velocity: the
slower the light, the stronger the distortion in space-time.
By strange good fortune, Lene Hau, a physicist at Harvard
University, has slowed light from the usual 300,000km per second to
just a few metres per second, and almost frozen its progress
Mallett was ecstatic saying,
'The slow light opens up a
domain we just haven't had before. All you need is to have the light
circulate in one of these media.'
Maybe current scientists will crack the problem of time travel but
it seems logical to expect the necessary instructions to be
contained in the deeper layer of the Moon's message.
seems likely that black holes m ay be at the root of the technology
The black holes of deep space are the gravitational remains of dead
stars. They are super- dense, bottomless pits in both space and time
that are capable of
sucking in almost infinite amounts of material, including light.
Everything a black hole swallows gets compressed into an
unimaginably tiny central region called a 'singularity' in which the
atoms are crushed into an unmoving whole. If the Earth were to
become as dense as a black hole, it would be smaller than a golf
ball. (And they say you can't compress water!)
There seems to be no way to get any information about what is
happening inside a black
hole, as even light is trapped inside. However, Cambridge physicist
Stephen Hawking proposed a way in which black holes do radiate matter and slowly dissipate until they eventually disappear in a
final mega-burst of radiation.
Amazingly, scientists are becoming increasingly confident that they
will be able to create black holes on demand using the new
atom-smashers due to come on line in 2007.
It is believed that the
Large Hadron Collider (LHC) being built astride the Franco-Swiss
border west of Geneva by the European Centre for Nuclear Research
(CERN) will be able to create black holes at the rate of one per
The LHC is an accelerator which will bombard protons and
antiprotons together, with such a force that the collision will
create temperatures and energy densities not seen since the first
trillionth of a second after the big bang. This should be enough to
pop off numerous tiny black holes, with masses of just a few hundred
protons. Black holes of this size will evaporate almost instantly,
their existence detectable only by dying bursts of Hawking
This work is at an early stage but it m ay well prove to be the
beginnings of a platform that could drive the search for the
technology to enable time travel.
If humans from our future did travel to the distant past to create
the incubator that would produce our own species, it does make
complete sense of the message left to us. We have to imagine that
our ability to complete such an awesome task must be hundreds or
even thousands of years ahead of our current level of capabilities.
However, what if the instructions of how to proceed were contained
inside the message itself? If this was the case, the development
time might be cut to a minimum.
Maybe a question we should be asking ourselves is why the message
was so carefully timed to reveal itself at this particular time.
Could it be that we have so far only seen what is little m ore than
a 'waving flag' to alert us to a
greater message that tells us exactly what must be done in order to
fulfill our own destiny?
Maybe the central pattern revealed by the
mutual orbits of the Earth and its Moon and, quite separately, by
the relative sizes of 366.3 x 27.3 = 10,000 is the most
fundamental key of all.
At this stage there are two entirely separate questions that need to
To what are we to apply the
If humans created the Moon as an incubator for life, where did the
seeds for germination come from?
The answer to both final elements of this ultimate riddle may well
rest in the same place: DNA.
The secrets of the Genome
The Human Genome Project, completed in 2003, was a thirteen-year mission to unravel the secrets of the minute data store that carries
all the information needed to make a hum an being, what we call
The key goals of the project were to:
Identify all the genes in
human DNA, of which there
are believed to be approximately 20,000-25,000
Determine the sequences of the three billion chemical base pairs
that make up human DNA
Professor Paul Davies has published an
idea that strikes a real chord with the findings laid out in this
He does not criticize the people from SETI for constantly
sweeping the skies with radio telescopes, in the hope of stumbling
across a signal from deep space, but he is realistic about the
chances of success.
He points out that it is inconceivable that
aliens would beam signals at our planet continuously for untold eons, merely in the hope that one day intelligent beings might
evolve and decide to turn a radio telescope in their direction. And
if the aliens only transmit messages sporadically, the chances of
us tuning in at just the right time are infinitesimal.
However, he does not write off the idea of contact:
'But what if the
truth isn't out there at
all? What if it lies somewhere else? Now may be the time to try a
radically different approach.'43
Davies uses the idea we have
already reported of a 'set-and-forget' technique of
communication, whereby the information content of the message m ay
have to survive for
hundreds of millions of years. He acknowledges that a conventional
artifact placed on the Earth's surface would be almost certainly
overlooked, even if it did somehow survive.
He then suggests that an
altogether better solution would be:
'a legion of small, cheap, self-repairing and self- replicating machines that can keep editing
and copying information and perpetuate themselves over immense
durations in the face of unforeseen environmental hazards.'
This sounds like pure science
fiction but he continues by saying:
'Fortunately, such machines
already exist. They are called living cells.'
What a brilliantly simple idea.
We have already established that
large sections of the scientific community are openly saying that
DNA absolutely could not have spontaneously arrived - it must have
As Paul Davies confirms, the cells in our bodies, and anything else
that lives for that matter, contain messages set out billions of
He also says that the idea that aliens have deliberately
hidden messages inside DNA has been 'swirling around' for a few
years, and has been championed in recent times by the Apollo
astronaut Rusty Schweickart.
But, says Davies, on the face of it,
there is a serious problem.
Living cells are not completely immune to change, and mutations
introduce random errors that become stored as information, and,
over a long enough time span, they would turn the original message
into 'molecular gobbledygook'.
Davies then reminds us that there is
so-called 'junk' DNA: sections of the genome that seem to serve no
useful purpose. These areas could be loaded with messages without
affecting the performance of the cells and some parts of that junk
DNA are in highly conserved regions that are therefore relatively
safe from degradation.
When a team of genomic researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory in
California presented their own findings in June 2004, the audience
gasped in unison.
Those listening, simply could not believe what
they were hearing from Edward Rubin and team who were reporting that
they had deleted huge sections of the genome of m ice without it
making any discernable difference to the animals.
The result was
truly amazing because the deleted sequences included what is known
as 'conserved regions', which were previously assumed to have been
protected because they contained vital information about functions.
To find out the function of some of these highly conserved
non-protein- coding regions in
mammals, Rubin's team deleted two huge regions of DNA from mice,
containing nearly 1,000 highly conserved sequences shared between
humans and mice. One of the removed chunks was
1.6 million DNA-bases long and the other was over 800,000 bases
long - which should have
caused the mice to have serious problems.
All DNA can acquire random mutations, but if a mutation occurs in a
region that has a key function, the individual will die before they
are able to reproduce and therefore the damage to the information
will be removed from the species.
This protection mechanism means
that the most vital sequences of DNA remain virtually unchanged -
even between species. So by
comparing the genomes of mice and men, geneticists had hoped to pick
out those with the most important functions by studying the
The geneticists were utterly perplexed because the regions they
removed made no difference to the mice in question, so there seemed
to be no reason why these non-coding sequences, apparently
functionless parts of the DNA, should be protected from change.
should they matter? It is like having the world's finest encrypted
security system built into your waste bin.
Any burglar who observed that your rubbish had so much apparently
unnecessary protection would immediately suspect that you were
hiding something of great value in an unexpected place. And that is
the thought that occurred to Paul Davies. He believes there could be
a message from extra terrestrials in what has been referred to as
We suspect he might be right about the message but not about the
messages in living cells has the virtue that DNA is being sequenced
anyway. All it needs is a computer to search for suspicious-looking
Long strings of the same nucleotides are an obvious
Peculiar numerical sequences like prime
numbers would be a clincher and patterns that stand out even
when partially degraded by mutational noise would make the most
sense, if a
sequence of junk DNA bases were displayed as an array of pixels on a
screen (with the color depending on the base: blue for A, green for
G, and so on...)'
He then asks what the message could contain and notes that one
segment of DNA, chopped out
by Rubin and his team, contained more than a million base pairs -
enough, he says,
'for a decent- sized novel or a potted history of
the rise and fall of an alien civilization.'
And this would be from just one part of the junk DNA.
As we digested Davies' suggestion about number sequences making a
screen we were immediately reminded of how the numbers that we
have identified as the lead key of the message produce 10,000 - or
if the decimal point is removed from the values we get the
3663 x 273 =
As close to a million as makes no difference.
These are the PIN numbers of the Earth and Moon doubly
cross-referenced by their orbital periods and relative masses.
Without the decimal point, they describe a screen (possibly a
computer monitor) that has a million pixels with sides of 3663 and
One of the 'high security' sections of apparently empty genome
removed by Rubin's team
had just over a million elements. It would be more than interesting
to apply the 3663 x 273 matrix
to this data.
What will it tell us?
It m ay well give us vital information about building equipment
that moves matter backwards in time and it will tell us where to
start the process of planning to build a Moon!
It is likely that it
will also instruct us where to look for further information.
If we are correct, we are all carrying this 'treasure map' in our
hearts, our brains and even our hair. But so too is every living
creature on God's Earth.
'Let us make man in our image, after
our likeness,' said God.
Could it really be true that a team of humans will control the
creation of our world and seed it with DNA so that humans will
evolve in our own image?
Will a future president of the United
States of America, or perhaps a Director General of
Nations sanction the launch of a mission to create these mammoth,
but necessary, changes to the past, whilst quoting the words from
verse 26 of the first chapter of the Book of Genesis?
This is not a blasphemous thought.
Some Christians and indeed people
of other religions might find this idea offensive because it appears
to suggest that we humans are God. But this is not the case. It
merely suggests that we acted and will act on creative information
that was originated somewhere else by some elemental force that
transcends all Universes - all parallel realities.
The awe and mystery of existence
remains intact and for those that want to call that essence 'God',
He remains unchallenged.
However, the account we describe here does sit well with the
scriptures of the great religions. Genesis is remarkably accurate
and, as it turns out, the creationists m ay not be entirely wrong
about a grand design in which humans were existent from the start.
They will have to adjust their dating assumptions, which do not come
from the Bible anyway. And they will have to accept that evolution
was just a mechanism within the grand design.
The Hindu perception of the way the Universe works also remains
intact, and the only
adjustment they might adopt would be to accept that the cycle of
rebirth has twisted into reverse as well as going forwards. We doubt
the intellectuals within Buddhism will have a problem with this.
We see this process of self-conception as something akin to a Mobius
strip, named after
Ferdinand Mobius, the nineteenth-century German mathematician and
a pioneer in the field of topology. Along with his contemporaries,
Riemann, Lobachevsky and Bolyai, Mobius created a non-Euclidean
revolution in geometry.
The simple construct that is a
Mobius strip can be made with a strip
of paper by joining the
ends with a 180° twist.
It then only has one surface and one edge
that goes around forever. Without the half- twist it would have been
impossible to move from one side to the other without crossing an
edge - but suddenly the barrier does not exist. If one travelled in
a straight line on a Mobius surface one would return to the starting
The world's most famous graphic artist Maurits Cornelis
Escher (1898-1972) was fascinated by the imagery of the Mobius
We see an analogy with humankind who evolved from DNA, seeded on
Earth some 3.5 billion years ago by ourselves, just a little in our
When we reach the point of being able to travel back in time
we will have completed a circuit of the single-sided loop and then
move off into a new trajectory.
Once the idea of time travel is accepted as a scientific
possibility, there is no problem with the idea that humans in the
future engineered both DNA and the life-nurturing Earth-Moon system
billions of years ago.
We exist because the right circumstances were
present for life to develop - and so why does it matter whether a super-entity (God), extraterrestrials or humans arranged it to be so?
Why should it be wrong to arrange for our own arrival?
Each of them is extremely unlikely, but nothing like as unlikely as
the notion of random chance - the endless mega-string of beneficial
The idea of the Mobius principle is that it is a loop that twists
back in time and returns
forward again. Imagine a situation whereby an artifact (say
monolith) was manufactured in the year 2010 and was taken back in
time by four billion years in 2011, where it was buried in a
location of long-term stability on the Moon.
The artifact could be
recovered from the Moon before it was manufactured and the atomic matter from which it was made would exist in two places at the same
time, until it was transported back to the early Moon.
This seems impossible. But just about everything about quantum
physics sounds implausible. Quantum physics tells us that everything
from light to matter is made up of tiny, indivisible packets
called quanta that do not work as we norm ally see the world.
Niels Bohr, one of the pioneers of the subject said:
'Anyone who can
contemplate quantum mechanics without getting dizzy hasn't properly
One of the features of this branch of science is the recognition
that particles (or wave functions) briefly
exist in several
different places simultaneously.
The monolith that had two
concurrent realities would be a quantum effect on a worldly scale
instead of at a sub atomic level.
Once the 2010 artifact goes back in time, the duality will be
resolved and the world will continue as normal. Equally, we could
consider all of the time, from the building of the Moon through to
the point of time travel, as a Mobius loop where we end up back
where we started.
Thereafter we break out of the loop and move
forward in the normal way.
Time and again
We have speculated that chronobots were sent back to engineer the
Moon and they must have returned again nearly a billion years later
to seed the ploughed Earth with DNA, to begin the process of
evolution that would result in the arrival of humans.
But it appears that there must have been other interventions at
specific times in the past to bring about certain events.
We have always agreed with archaeologists who say that the existence
Yard is inconsistent with the technology otherwise known to have
been present amongst the people of western Europe over five
millennia ago. But we heartily disagreed with them when
most chose to ignore Professor Thom's findings rather than attempt
to reconcile them.
Such people are obstacles to knowledge.
When we discovered that the Megalithic system extended to the
Moon, our credulity was stretched to the limit but our curiosity
carried us forward to try and make sense of that which looked impossible to reconcile. When we found that the metric system had been
in place almost perfectly, four-and-a-half thousand years before a
team of French scientists reinvented it, we were amazed.
discovered that metric units were perfect
integers for the most crucial aspects of the Moon as well as the
We have noted that through
ancient history different civilizations have recorded that people
with super powers arrived from nowhere to teach humanity about the
sciences. Then we noted how all the parallel developments that
occurred around the world in unconnected locations happened at the
We have to conclude that people will travel back to points in
history, such as the era around
3100 BC, when several civilizations, from South America to North
Africa to Asia to
Europe, were suddenly emerging and building similar structures. It
seems probable that the Megalithic structures that have lunar
alignments, and use the unit that describes the dimensions of the
Moon, were deliberately designed and left to point the way forward.
We do not yet know whether the detailed message is indeed inside the
protected sections of DNA, but wherever it is, the initial message
was only recognized because of all those Megalithic structures
extending their weathered and ancient stone fingers into the night
The fact that the imperial pound and the pint are mathematically
derivable from the Megalithic Yard was puzzling and when we found
that the same Stone-Age unit describes metric spheres we were
dumbfounded. How could such surprising consequences com e about so
accurately by chance alone?
It now seems that the past has been modeled by the future. A
strange Mobian twist for reality.
Of course this all sounds so improbable that some people will refuse
to believe it. They will reject the fact that everything we have put
forward is real and testable and the elements of unavoidable
speculation are scientifically sound.
But many creationists will
still shout that black is white and many so-called scientists will
return to their deeply flawed paradigms as though they were real.
But when the message is actually found, what then?
Back to Contents