Holomorphic Engineering

Updated Feb 27, 2021

Introduction

The holomorphic process is a process approach to understanding the mind-body system in terms of sound engineering principles. It is an idea that grew out of a profound personal experience of higher state of consciousness that woke me up to the realization that our current perspectives on reality are fragmented, static and in need of a more dynamic approach. As a Nuclear Engineer/ Medical Physicist (Ph.D.) with a dual B.S. in Physics and Electrical Engineering and an M.S. in Physics, I am a seeker of truth and feel the need to express what I have come to understand: that it is about the process (journey), as well as the destination (an infinite series of static states).

There are a lot of people who see truth in both science and religion, but when they enter college-level education, truth-seekers might have to choose one path or the other. Once they choose, they learn the language and the rules and may become indoctrinated – effectively captured by one and turn away from the other. They may have to turn away from the other because the two subjects don’t seem to be compatible. But then, as Einstein once said, “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” That sounds like he meant that science and religion are compatible, yet he went on to explain how they are not compatible but complementary in their purpose: in other words, science helps us understand the physical structure of the universe, while religion deals with human values, morals, and meanings.[1]

Complementary subjects are like two sides to the same coin. They both have to exist in order to make them whole, but like the faces of a coin, they have to “face in opposite directions” or else the whole will be warped and distorted. And that distortion is often apparent when scientists (the ones who have reached tenure or retired and are ready to reveal their strong desire to understand spirituality) try to talk about how they have come to interpret religious scripture. The same distortion often happens when people, who have spent a lifetime using the language of religion, try to use scientific vocabulary, like quantum, vibrations and energy. People of faith (at least those in the older generation) generally don’t like to hear scientific explanations and scientists don’t like religious accounts of reality. Both sides have sacred symbols and messing with those symbols can be insulting (blasphemous). So it’s no surprise that science professors will tell their students to avoid those “quacks” who have “gone off the deep end” and religious leaders (professors of faith) tell their students to avoid those “heathens” who have “lost their faith”.

Like a lot of students, I disobeyed the physics professor who advised me to ignore the quacks (he was referring specifically to Fred Alan Wolf) and there are a whole lot of other people, even in the older generation, who have done the same. And these days, there is a growing number of people who have found a healthy balance in science and spirituality without getting snagged in the trappings of either. As a result, a great deal of progress has been made in finding scientific expressions of spirituality as well as spiritual expressions in ancient mystery teachings and religious metaphors that provide amazing interpretations of modern discoveries. Some say that they are trying to build a bridge between science and religion. But there is a problem with this “bridge” metaphor because it can only be “grounded” at one end. Science is objective and “human values, morals and meanings” are not objective enough to provide a firm foundation. If you try to cross that “bridge” there comes a point when still you have to take a leap of faith.

So if we really need a metaphor, and I think we do, perhaps a drone would make a better model for this and future generations. A proper metaphor for something that allows us to rise above our differences has to separate from the “ground”, project upward, in order to transcend the differences between the complementary sides, and provide a higher perspective of both. From that perspective, it becomes obvious upon reflection that science and religion (complementary yet partial expressions of truth) are two different aspects of the same thing. And that is when they morph into a unified tidbit of the whole truth.

A New Branch of Engineering

Regardless of how you get there, once you wake up and see the truth about your spiritual nature, you realize its tremendous importance. It is extremely humbling because you see things from a whole new perspective – in retrospect – and wonder how you could have been so blind. The smarter and more objective you are, especially as a scientist, the greater the epiphany you experience. Dr. Temperance Brennan in the series “Bones” is a good example of a very smart person who is so objective that she doesn’t “get it”. If you’ve watched the program you may wonder how someone who is so incredibly smart can be so blind to the realities of life. Life is a dynamic process that requires a good bit of subjectivity. Objectivity definitely has its place, but once a perspective is objectified, it is static. Paradigms become crystalized and have to be shattered, but then once you “get it” you realize that static and dynamic are complementary perspectives. From the perspective of “IT”, the big it that you get when you “get it”, you recognize that both perspectives have their own biases. You understand that all forms of expression are necessarily biased because bias, which creates polarity, is an inherent part of the process. So rather than destroying the “testaments” or demolishing the metaphors, like “bridge”, enlightened people are coming up with better, more modern metaphors like holograms and computer systems.

In a 2009 edition of The Guardian, Michio Kaku said, “What we usually consider are impossible are simply engineering problems … there’s no law of physics preventing them.” Mankind has needed engineers for milenia to design and build objective things like bridges, but now we need a breed of engineers who can work as well with the subjective side of reality. Whether mainstream (objective) scientists and engineers like it or not, mankind is entering a new era of awakening and needs them more than ever before to get serious about truth of reality, and to help transform “bridges” into “drones”. Science departments need to stop treating spirituality as taboo or “woowoo” because there is enough evidence in, for example, mind-body medical research to prove that the mind, “soul” and “spirit” are as real as the body and provides the key to health, happiness, joy, prosperity and our eventual transformation into “higher beings”. We all need to get serious about it because there are also a lot of un-awakened, dishonest people trying to swindle those who are waking up dazed and confused – looking for honest professions for guidance. Professional psychologists have led the way on the subjective side, but we also need honest professionals to create a scholarly curriculum and respectable vocation for those who want to engineer the transformation using well-established engineering principles. Holomorphic Engineering is proposed here, perhaps as a sub-branch of biomedical engineering. There is already a group at Harvard Medical School conducting research in mind-body medicine and that group is part of biomedical engineering department.

You may think that an engineer is a scientist, but a “pure scientist” is someone who is mostly interested in discovering new laws. Engineers are a subset of scientists they are more interested in creating new things, including ideas, that are based on and obey the laws, but they build new perspectives. They are not afraid of shattering paradigms and breaking the old laws. They are smart enough to learn the language and understand the laws and relationships, but they are very practical and don’t get hung up on the details. They respect “pure science”, defined as “a basic knowledge for the discovery of unknown laws based on well controlled experiments and deductions from demonstrated facts or truths.”[2] And they often take part in discovering new laws by designing and engineering those controlled experiments.

So most scientists have to either act like an engineer or collaborate with engineers at some point in their career. Therefore, there is mutual respect between scientists and engineers. And unlike pure scientists, a lot of engineers will admit to being religious, or at least spiritual. So there is also mutual respect between engineers and religious people.

Discussion

Question: Why is a separate profession needed?

Answer: because the indoctrination process creates separation. Most religions that I am aware of, teach that we are all “one” and that it is our sacred duty to help each other. And they teach you how to help others – by helping them “see the light”, which means to see the truth in their expression and then subscribe to their way of thinking, i.e. their religion. But since “their religion” is different and therefore separate from other beliefs, including other religions, the result is not unity but rather an increase in the size of their fragment of reality. 

The same could be said about scientism (a belief system, in contrast to science as a method). Although scientists may not use the same word, they also believe that it is their sacred duty to help other scientists find truth. But they do it by looking in the opposite direction (compared to religion). Rather than looking toward, accepting and basking in the light of truth, they face “the darkness” and require each other to prove that any new hypotheses can be clearly distinguished from the dark “null hypothesis”.

Thomas Strawser is an engineer who got his master’s degree in psychology and discovered that the principles that he had learned in engineering to understand concepts like force and energy also helped him understand his own spiritual energy. It helped him so much in his personal and professional life that he wrote a book entitled Spiritual Engineering. (Strawser 2014) However, he was writing to a general audience, so there is no math in his book and therefore no real engineering. The point of his book was to “introduce techniques that harmonize spirituality, science and psychology to access the awesome spiritual power residing within each person.” And the reason it is important is that it demonstrates how the concept of spirituality actually does resonate with logical, scientific, and reasonable “systems thinking”. Spirituality is not woowoo; it’s real, but the study of it needs a new name: Holomorphic Engineering.

Having spent a lot of time in both physics and engineering departments, I have found that engineers are not afraid of being wrong. In fact they do their best to build working models so that if they are wrong, the models will tell them: they won’t work. Physicists tend to be much more imaginative with their theories, and a little more defensive. When it’s impossible to build experiments to test a theory, they have learned to defend their models with extremely complex mathematical “proofs”. But some of their theories about cosmology and reality have severely damaged the reputation of science, as Jim Baggott explained in his book, Farewell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search for Scientific Truth. We’ve all heard the old saying, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.”

Someone once said that the search for truth is too important to be left to physicists. The same can be said about leaving it to religious leaders. And some religious leaders agree. There is an article in the International Journal of Engineering Education entitled How Is the Spirituality of Engineering Taught or Conveyed?[3] written by two campus chaplains at Delft University of Technology in The Netherland describing how “they discovered a hidden but strong spirituality among engineers, which, once expressed, helped their students to understand their own motivation to become an engineer.” After spending some time in the engineering department and listening to the students, they wrote their conclusions and stated that “engineers are living and working according to a widely shared belief system, making visible, in their products, the profound conviction that they are committed to defending the sacredness life.” They discussed some of the issues that we face in society and said

Engineering is a profession containing many powerful and inspirational traditions that may serve us today. This means that, for engineers too, the days of comfortable autonomy are over and done with. Engineers can no longer hide in the realms of science and focus solely on the development of new technologies. As mediators between science and the world they live in, engineers have the task of finding ways to sustain and develop life in a balanced and adequate way by controlling and explaining the complicated processes in nature and human existence.

Do we really need a separate profession? Maybe not. In the final sentence of the paper they said, “we do not need a new type of engineer – we need an open and communicative engineer who is able to share with us, face-to-face, his or her ancient inspiration and commitment.” So even if we don’t create a new branch, perhaps holomorphic engineering should be a course in the undergraduate curriculum for all branches of engineering.

Engineers learn the static laws but then use them to create dynamic “engines”. They invent new models that make it easier to get the important work done. Arthur M. Young was an engineer, known as the inventor of the first helicopter, and he presented a workable process model for understanding the evolution of consciousness in his book, The Reflexive Universe. The inventor of the holographic technique was Dennis Gabor, an electrical engineer, and the model of the universe as a hologram makes it easier to understand everything from quantum particles to consciousness.

The important thing about a holographic film is that it can be broken down into small pieces and each piece will still contain all of the information necessary to recreate the original image. So each piece contains information in packets, like tidbits of truth. It is easy to apply this model to words as being larger tidbits, and words can get so twisted that they can hide the truth. In fact, the “twists” can act like “snags” that can drag you down into the abyss if you are not firmly anchored in truth. “Truth” is the key word here. And if the word “truth” can be defined as the information content of energy, i.e. the actual information “fringes” that in-form or morph undifferentiated energy into quantum particles, then the first law of holomorphic engineering is that Truth can neither be created nor destroyed, but only changed in form. The first “Truth” (upper case) in that sentence refers to the implicit form of undifferentiated energy that just is (in the implicate order) and the second “truth” (lower case) refers to tidbits of information-modulated energy that form physical reality.

So Einstein’s quote can be reworded to say: “Science without truth is lame, religion without truth is blind”. As long as the search is centered on Truth, religion provides the vision (not blind) and science provides the basis for engineering (not lame). By centering both subjects on the principle of truth, they can both be objective about their common purpose – to find Truth. And that is why science needs engineering, to give it legs.

With legs we can step off of the scientific foundation of truth and move toward eternal Truth without getting snagged on the symbols, measurements, deities, etc. that appear to be static constants – eternal and unchanging. They are important to understand, but they are just the starting point in the process of transformation. The subject of “Statics and Dynamics” is a course taught in engineering school, and we are taught that nothing is truly static. But understanding statics is a prerequisite for understanding dynamics. Engineering is a vocation that focuses not so much on things as they are, but on what things do and how they can be understood and used as part of a process. In other words, rather than focusing on the “end” in “a means to an end”, engineering focuses on the “means”. To an engineer, it’s not so much a search for truth as a search for meaning. Rather than serving an objective purpose (or endpoint), engineering principles serve a function, a process that can be used to serve everyone that has a purpose.

Conclusion

My hope is that by posting my perspective and expressions of the holomorphic process on my website (and eventually in a book), other engineers will take what I have to offer and apply the simple mathematical functions to social sciences. And then to advise religious, scientific and political leaders, to help in the decision-making process. An immediate application is to express what’s going on in society, explain why we need temporary separation (like we are currently experiencing in America) and how we can respond to the separation in alignment with the “upward” flow of the process. Alignment with the “upward flow” means that the process will work in our favor if we reflect on the truth by rising us up above our differences. From there, we will see the unity and continue evolving rather than being caught in the “downward currents” that have repeatedly driven societies to destroy each other. 

The holomorphic process is a simple model – a template that applies at every level of reality, from the most fundamental quantum level to atoms, molecules, chemical compounds and polymers. It uses terms from basic physics and nuclear engineering to explain how the increase in entropy of the universe is reversed in closed systems (i.e. mass) and it accounts for the turn, where polymers are able to flex and resonate. When they do, they begin to store energy and the information content of that stored energy begins to act like feedback in a control system (well understood in electrical and control systems engineering). With the proper feedback the self-sustaining harmonic oscillators (holographically stored tidbits of truth) act as a computer program that projects physical reality (as demonstrated in computer engineering). Every living organism then expresses self-control like an avatar in the program with a “player” in a different dimension. And every event in the life of the avatar is fed back in a toroidal feedback loop (an excellent model of the unified field theory). This process feeds the “player”, which grows into an ethereal being who is destined to wake up, being born out of a single human being (a reference to a virgin birth).

I’ve explained in my book, Holomorphosis and the Hologenetic Universe how the same process applies to individuals in their day-to-day lives. Steps in the process start out as motions or actions (separate, project, reflect, reunify) at the first level, and transform into units of motion (separation, projection, reflection, reunification). Then the units develop into personalities (as shadow, anima, persona, self: archetypes per psychologist Carl Jung) that experience the process as feelings or emotions (awakening, high, challenge and unwinding). These moods are also reflected in society as eras as evident in historical records of cyclic events and societal attitudes (as explained in The Fourth Turning, by Strauss and Howe). But since we don’t understand the holomorphic process, societies react to challenges by using force and turn challenges into crises. The result is to twist the process so that rather than (awakening, high, challenge and unwinding), we get (Crisis, high, awakening and unraveling). 

Previous generations have intuited these patterns and have tried to engineer institutions like churches and education systems (such as the Kabbalah) that use “sacred patterns” as guides. Why are these patterns so important? What do they mean? And how can we use them to design and engineer systems that will improve the human condition? These are challenges for engineers. Once we conquer these challenges, the holomorphic process (awakening, high, challenge and unwinding) predicts that we can unwind, rest and relax. Our reward will be a new awakening to a world in harmony.

Works Cited

Strawser, Thomas. Spiritual Engineering: The Harmony of God and Science. Tate Publishing & Enterprises, LLC, 2014.


[1] https://newrepublic.com/article/115821/einsteins-famous-quote-science-religion-didnt-mean-taught

[2] https://www.biologyonline.com/dictionary/pure-science

[3] https://www.ijee.ie/articles/Vol20-3/IJEE2512.pdf