SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT GOD IS AN EINSTEINIAN CURVATURE OF REALITY

[George Hammond]

SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT GOD
IS AN EINSTINIAN CURVATURE
OF SUBJECTIVE SPACETIME

June, 2011 Hyannis MA USA
From: George Hammond, M.S. Physics
To: RAD-PSY-NET
Attn. Professor Dennis Fox
Professor Isaac Prilleltensky


RAD-PSY-NET is dedicated to changing the status quo of
psychology and bring about a better world. I share that
objective.

The quest for the Structural Model of Personality has been
the cornerstone of Psychology ever since Hippocrates said
there was such a thing 2500 years ago. Modern computerized
psychometry very nearly succeeded in this quest,
specifically Cattell, Eysenck, Goldberg, Costa & McCrae and
others, but their failure to discover a causal biological
mechanism for such a miracle has so far doomed the effort to
failure.

It was therefore an alarming turn of events when an errant
physicistaccidentally discovered, proved and published the
long sought for biological mechanism in 1994 only to
discover that interdisciplinary jealousy, personal ambition
and hi-level dereliction in academic Psychology would ignore
and even actively suppressing this pivotal
discovery.

I am alerting RAD-PSY-NET about this because all efforts
to engage the right wing academic research establishment in
the US and Europe has been rebuffed and it appears that the
Psychology establishment is fully prepared to suppress a
crucial physics-biology discovery even if it means denying
the world the delivery of the Structural Model which would
transform Psychology into a prestigious science with a real
Global influence!

The discovery of the Structural Model since it turns out
to be an axiomatic physics structure leads to much more than
just the theory of Personality. It leads directly to an
explanation of the structural model of social attitudes (the
Bicameral/2-Party system), the explanation of the
general theory of Psychology (the unconscious mind) and
ultimately to no less than the worlds first scientific proof
of God!

Clearly the Structural Model is now a political problem
and no longer a scientific problem. Its discovery is too
much of a status-quo-breaker for the conservative
establishment to accept and it is my hope that
Critical-Psychology pressure can be brought to bear on
conservative academia, particularly the APA that will
precipitate at long last the historic birth of the
Structural Model of Psychology.

I won't waste time rebutting the usual suspicions
concerning such a claim. Let me simply state the facts and
allow RAD-PSY-NET to be the judge:


I am a physicist (MS 1967) affiliated with the
Massachusetts Department of Mental Health and have been
researching Personality Psychometry for 30 years. I managed
to published my discovery of the biological origin of the
Structural Model of Personality in a highly respected but
obscure journal in 1994:

(original paper NIP, Elsevier Science Ltd.)
http://tinyurl.com/HAMMOND2

(free online research-only facsimile copy of paper is
located at:)
http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond/cart.html



. It was during this period that I first became suspicious
of the higher echelon in academic psychology research. At
the time Hans Jurgen Eysenck was the most famous living
psychologist. I first sent the paper to Hans for publication
in his journal, P.A.I.D. it being the most conspicuous
journal in the field. Much to my chagrin he handed the paper
over to Unqualified reviewers. He rejected the paper and in
one of those recondite but telltale incidents he didn't even
sign the rejection letter but simply put a checkmark on it.
I caught up with Hans in person a few years later in
Montreal Canada. but let me continue the chronology.

I also wrote to Professor Jeffrey Gray, Hans' closest
colleague in London, since my discovery not only confirmed
Eysenck's Big-3 (ENP), it also confirmed Gray's 2-Factor
"diagonal" theory. in fact it united the two. I was totally
floored then when I received a particularly nasty letter
from Jeffrey Gray suggesting that my theory was no doubt a
delusion of grandeur and that he wouldn't waste time
discussing it.

I was also in touch with Dr. Paul Barrett, Hans' research
chief, via his IDANET discussion list and several peculiar
remarks of his began to clue me that there was something
noticeably out of kilter in the Eysenckian school of
psychometry research.

Meanwhile, in the US the situation was hopeless and
continues so. Hans Eysenck was the only genius in the field
since the other genius, Raymond B. Cattell was over 90 and
retired in Hawaii. I did receive several scrawled letters
from Cattell who apparently lapped the envelope so many
times it practically disintegrated before it reached me. He
recognized my work immediately of course and even urged
Prof. Widiger a much younger man to contact me but all I
ever received from Widiger was a few well wishes on a
postcard. Even the APA finally turned on Cattell accusing
him of being a racist or some other such nonsense. I did
talk to Ray's wife in Hawaii but she said Ray was so deaf
there was no use putting him on the phone. His daughter,
Heather Cattell was very helpful then being director of IPAT
in Champaign Ill. and sent me copies of hard to find papers
from their archives.

After submitting my discovery of the Structural Model to
21 journals (simultaneously) and having every one of them
rejecting it, I ran into Professor Richard Kitchener editor
of New Ideas In Psychology who put the paper out for review.
Kitchener was a Philosophy professor and a no nonsense
person. In the first round one reviewer balked because the
theory didn't explain the Big-5 model. Kichener told me to
take another look at the problem and lo and behold the
theory stunningly confirmed the Big-5 as the sum of
Eysenck's 3 normals plus Gray's 2 diagonals: 3+2=5. This
triumph convinced the holdout reviewer and the paper was
unanimously published in 1994. Naturally, since New Ideas In
Psychology is a lo-impact journal nobody has ever read the
paper much less cited it, and the discovery of the
biological origin of the Structural Model remains to this
day languishing on library shelves.

In the meantime I struck up a correspondence with fellow
New Englander professor Peter F. Merenda chairman of the
psychology department at URI. He had been involved in the
discovery of the 4-Factor AVA model and was quite interested
that my theory explained the biological origin of his model
also (in fact the discovery explains the biological origin
of every known psychometric model).

Peter asked me if I wanted to be an invited speaker at the
XXVI International (IUPsyS) Congress of Psychology in
Montreal Canada on August 16, 1996. He said he had invited
Hans Eysenck to speak and he had accepted the invitation.
Naturally I was anxious to meet Hans so I accepted.

I seated myself next to Hans on the dais with about 200
present in the audience. I first noticed something odd when
I offered Hans a copy of my now published paper reporting
the discovery of the Structural Model. He rather coolly
replied "I've read it" and refused to take the paper. We
sat for an hour listening to several internationally known
Personality psychometrians. I finally got up and spoke for
30 minutes about my discovery and how it explained (i.e.
physically caused) all of the known Factor Models in
Personality Psychometry. I showed 20 carefully drawn
slides illustrating the elementary physics-biology of the
whole thing. I received a surprisingly energetic ovation but
sat down with the distinct feeling that no one other than
perhaps Hans had taken seriously a single word I said. Then
Hans then got up and spoke for 30 minutes. I didn't
pay much attention since he wasn't talking about psychometry
but apparently about the international situation in Bosnia.
I did hear him refer to me as "Dr. Hammond" which I
suspected was another of his famous backhanded compliments
since I know for a fact he was aware that I
don't have a PhD in anything.

Later I had a chance to talk to him privately on the
mezzanine balcony overlooking the great hall and tried to
ferret out his impression of my discovery, He actually told
me at one point "I don't see the significance of it" which
immediately struck me as disingenuous fakery since he had
spent the last 30 years searching for the biological origin
of the Structural Model commencing with his widely known
1967 book on the subject. and at that moment I suddenly
realized that he was actually personally envious of my
discovery. a discovery which he had failed to make in his
long quest for the biological origin of the Structural
Model! He had failed to realize that simple brain geometry
(primary brain cleavage) was the root cause of the
Structural Model of Personality, for instance Sperrian
Lateralization and the Bell-Magendie motor sensory cleavage.
And he was apparently annoyed that some no account physicist
had wandered into the field and accidentally discovered it,
and published it!

Don't get me wrong, I immediately liked Hans Eysenck the
minute I met him. He was a heroic figure, and close up even
more so. Yet, there was unmistakably an air of the
entrenched establishment about him that wasn’t going to
cooperate with a mere upstart, a physicist no less, making a
historic scientific discovery in Psychology which could
possibly expose him. I came away feeling like I had just met
perhaps the Kurt Waldheim of Psychology research and that
politically speaking I was no match for him.

Of course Hans Eysenck was 80 years old by the time I
reached him. In fact he died a couple of years later of a
brain tumor. But I still suspect that there must have been
something that he could have done to prevent this discovery
from simply turning in the wind since 1994 while the entire
field of Psychometry has sunk into moribund stagnation
without a hope of regaining its old momentum or its former
glory.

Now, before I leave this issue let me point out that I
have informed every authority in the field of psychometry
about this discovery, including the Heymans Institute in
Groningen Holland. Although my discovery proves that 2nd
order Factor structure in Personality is a CUBE, it turns
out I am not the first one to suspect this. Gerard Heymans
guessed it in 1930 and became so famous for doing so he
founded the Heymans Institute which is now a world leader in
psychometric Personality research. Louis Thurstone also
surmised it when he made up his famous Factor Analytic "Box
Problem". It turns out that the Structural Model of
Personality is PRECISELY a "Thurstone's Box" at the 2nd
order in Personality psychometry! I wrote an elegant
synopsis of this discovery in a 2 page letter and emailed it
to a dozen of the world's top psychometric authorities at
the Heymans Institute including the director professor
J.M.F. Ten Berge. Anyone desiring a succinct and
comprehensive explanation of this discovery should read this
2 page letter which is fully illustrated. A copy was posted
to IDANET (also a JISCMAIL.AC.UK email list; Paul Barrett
moderator) and a copy is currently posted on my page on
Academia.edu at:

http://tinyurl.com/2b86k7e

I emphasize that only high school physics and undergraduate
psychometry is necessary to fully comprehend the stunning
historic discovery described in this 2 page letter. Needless
to say the Heymans institute has reacted exactly like Hans
Eysenck. apparently the conservative wing of psychometric
research is not about to allow a physicist to upset the
apple cart with a fundamental discovery, even if it means
selling the entire field of academic psychology research
down the river. Finally, it is to be noted that the APA, of
which I am not a member and which wouldn't even consider
publishing a paper written by me, knows absolutely nothing
of this discovery despite the fact that it was made by an
American scientist and dozens of APA members are already
aware of it!


Okay, So much for the discovery of the biological origin
of the Structural Model. However it turns out that that
discovery was only the tip of the iceberg! The year after
the conference in Montreal with Eysenck, I made yet another
historic discovery in Factor Analytic Psychometry. This one
even more unbelievable than the first!

As anyone familiar with psychometric Factor Analysis (SPSS
for instance) knows, when you factor a large correlation
matrix and rotate it to Simple Structure you wind up with
another correlation matrix of about half the size. That
matrix can again be factored and rotated and so on. In fact,
it only stops when you get down to one Factor and can't go
any further. People have idly wondered for years where
Personality Factor Analysis might end, and what the meaning
of that final Factor might be! My discovery answered that
question, and the answer turns out to be a
miraculous shock! The last Factor turns out to be "God" no
less, the God of the Bible. The discovery of the Structural
Model leads immediately to the world's first and only,
scientific proof of God!

Now, why wasn't this discovered before I came along? Well,
it very nearly was. Raymond B. Cattell almost got to the 4th
Order which is where Psychometry stops. My theory shows that
because the 2nd order structure is theoretically a cube,
that there are therefore exactly 13-2nd Order Factors
corresponding to the 13 symmetry axes of a common cube. Ray
had meanwhile experimentally resolved somewhere between 12
and 14 Factors in the normal Personality domain. Without a
theoretical explanation he couldn't be exactly sure how many
Factors there were. Ray then Factored the 12x12 2nd Order
matrix to the 3rd Order and extracted "4 or 5" 3rd -Order
Factors. Three of the Factors I immediately recognized as
Eysenck's ENP which I expected since the 3rd Order Factors
should simply collapse onto the 2nd Orders since ENP are
nearly orthogonal at the 2nd Order as Eysenck had proved.
The existence of a 4th factor perplexed me until I realized
Cattell had included not only Personality but Intelligence
also in his data. I then realized that Psychology turns out
to be not only a 3-dimensional space (as Hans argued for 20
years) because of 3-dimensional brain cleavage, it actually
turns out to be 4-dimensional
(space-time) space because Intelligence is time related
(mental speed). This new theoretical discovery immediately
shaved Rays "4 or 5" 3rd Orders down to exactly 4.

Ray never bothered to factor his 3rd orders to the 4th
Order, but he left us an intriguing message at the end of
his 1975 paper*, he said:

"The correlation among the tertiaries, though less
invariant than among the secondaries, are reasonable stable
and are set out for those who, with reinforcements, may wish
to proceed to the fourth order."
(R. B. Cattell ibid 1975. pg. 139-140)

*Reference:
Cattell 1975, Third order personality structure in Q-data:
Evidence from 11 experiments. J. of Multivariate
Experimental Personality and Clinical Psychology 1(3)
118-149

Ray didn't live to get to the 4th Order and discover God,
but I did. Armed now with a theoretical proof of the exact
number of 2nd and 3rd Order factors which was unavailable to
Ray, I was able to redact his experimental 3rd Order matrix
and Factor it to the 4th Order. Dr. Paul Barrett, then still
working for Eysenck at the U. London was kind enough
to run the matrix through SPSS for me, and Dr. David Routh
who read about it on IDANET ran an independent check also.
Naturally only ONE Factor emerged at the 4th Order (a 4x4
matrix can only determine 1 higher order Factor according to
Thurstone's Rule). I had finally found out where all of
Psychology (i.e. Personality plus Intelligence) ends. It
ends in a single eigenvector Factor at the 4th Order!

The immediate question of course, is what was the
biological cause of this Final Factor? What was it?

The answer is actually quite easy to discover. In fact by
that time I already knew the answer even before I confirmed
it. The Factor was obviously "GOD". yes the good old
fashioned anthropomorphic invisible God of the Bible. I had
actually discovered the World's first scientific proof of
God!

The actual biological cause of the single 4th Order
Factors is easy to identify, it turns out to be caused by
the Human Growth Curve Deficit (GCD). About 100 years ago
the field of Auxology discovered that there is a SeculaTrend
in human growth. Evidence of the Secular Trend is
commonplace. Modern soldiers cannot even fit into a medieval
suit of armor for instance. School children in the US have
gained 3.5 inches in height since 1900. The Flynn Effect
shows world IQ increasing as much as 3 points per decade,
due to brain growth caused by the rising standard of
living, mainly nutrition. Moreover, studies of Third World
malnutrition growth stunting show IQ losses of up to 50% due
to growth stunting. In fact, the data shows that the entire
human race, on average, is as much as 20% short of its full
height and weight. An interesting Time Magazine
cover story on the Secular Trend can be seen at:

http://economics.sbs.ohio-state.edu/rsteckel/Articles/time6.htm

If 20% of your body is missing, then 20% of your brain is
missing. it is simply ungrown. It is not totally ungrown
however, it still functions but in a partially conscious
manner. This is the origin of Freud's famous Unconscious
Mind" and it turns out to be the biological cause of the
top, last, final, single Factor in all of Psychology. Bear
in mind that this eigenvector can be measured now to three
significant figure accuracy in modern Psychometry!

Now what does all of this mean. well for that you have to
know some Physics. A correlation matrix in Psychology is
referred to as "oblique". However, physicists refer to such
matrices as "curved". In Physics the 4x4 space-time metric
of XYZt is an oblique matrix and the physicists say that
space-time is "curved" because of this, and that gravity is
the physical cause of this curvature. What my discovery
shows is that the intercorrelation matrix of ENPg in
psychometry is likewise curved, and that it is the GCD that
is causing it. Now, space-time, that is XYZt is simply what
the physicists call "reality" or "objective reality". But my
discovery shows that ENPg in psychometry is also curved and
the "curvature" is caused by the brain growth deficit, or
"God" to use common parlance. What this means is that the
brain growth deficit causes a curvature of "subjective
reality", and this curvature of reality in Psychology is
called "God". Basically, the brain growth deficit causes the
world to appear bigger and faster than it actually is just
as gravity makes objective space-time appear bigger and
faster than it actually is as discovered by Einstein. While
the gravitational effect of objective reality is very
miniscule, the effect of the brain growth deficit on
subjective reality is very large. and this large and
noticeable effect in Psychology has been recognized for
thousands of years and is referred to as "God". Notice now
that not only has the existence of God actually been proven,
but that God can actually be measured to 3 significant
figures by modern psychometry.

Needless to say the technological applications of this
discovery will be enormous. This curvature of subjective
reality will ultimately be able to be simulated on virtual
reality computers and the next age of psychiatric treatment
may well be computerized virtual reality therapy where you
will effect a personality change by "seeing" what your new
reality will look like. After all, seeing is believing and
may prove more effective than neuroleptic drugs or
psychoanalysis ever were!

By the way I published this discovery of a scientific
proof of God in 2003, again in an obscure journal and a copy
of the paper may be seen here:

http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond/Hammond5s1.html

Well, I will try to wrap this up by mentioning that I don't
expect Critical Psychology to take up the cause of advancing
a scientific proof of God, but they should know that that's
where the Structural Model leads to. And we can be sure that
there are large sectors of society who are vitally
interested in the politics of such a development. Israel,
the Vatican, the Islamic countries of the Middle East or
even the Kansas City Board of Education, among other places
come to mind.

But in the meantime, it is clear that the conservative
academic Psychology establishment is now standing in the way
of a major, indeed historic, Psychology discovery. The
delivery of the Structural Model of Personality has been
central to Psychology from the beginning, and I think the
Critical-Psychology wing should know that there is foul play
of a very serious and injurious nature to the success of
Psychology growing like a cancer in academic Psychology.

I invite anyone interested to respond on the RAD-PSY-NET
discussion list, or contact me at [Log in to unmask].

George Hammond, M.S. Physics
Massachusetts Department of Mental Health
========================================
GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
Primary site
http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond
Mirror site
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=======================================