The E:P:N Prototype, Part I:

Are you an electron soul or one of the

human nucleons—a proton or neutron soul?

 

 

 

1.  At the soul-level, have I evolved (over many lifetimes) or was I created for this life?

 

 

 


2.  Are humans basically good or bad?

 

 

 


3.  Are we driven by higher or baser instinct?

 

 

 


4. Our conscience: Is it innate or does it need to be programmed?

 

 

 


5. Heaven: Is it here and now, or is it something to be entered after death?

 

 

 

 

 


BASIC ASSUMPTIONS:

 

1.     That whatever our current belief, the original God was and still is a pool of life-giving energy at rest.

2.     That Life, as we know it, is that same energy in the process of making things out of itself, which results in unique electric states and vortexes (atoms) with the simplest of them, hydrogen, estimated to represent 75 percent of all that we can measure.

3.     That a Class M planet, such as earth, absolutely needs more than just hydrogen to foster and sustain sentient life. The second most abundant element in the cosmos (comprising 23 percent of all that we can measure) is helium, which consists of not only twice as many electrons and protons but has also an equal number of isotopes called neutrons. That same form of trinity structure God/Nature has role modeled for every one of the 90+ atoms we have on earth other than hydrogen.

4.     Sentient souls are similar to an atom’s three constituents (electrons, protons, and neutrons) in that some (electrons) prefer to live by structure and dictates and the rest (protons and neutrons) prefer to either impose or maintain such structures.

5.     Last, the E:P:N theorem holds that all three types of souls go through four stages of growth: Each starts as a neophyte and has, therefore, a quasi worthless stage, which is soon followed by the competitive productive stage and then the creative productive stage. Each concludes with a supportive productive stage before it restarts or switches to a different state.

These five assumptions should be acceptable to both creationists and evolutionists. Even the above definition for Life should be acceptable to all camps, including those that support the various yin-yang concepts. What might be difficult to accept is the premise of soul-level differences at the human level of sentient life, starting with the question of whether we actually have a soul. If we “have” one, are we all alike or are we different in origin? And is it possible that sentient life forms actually “are” souls that, like perennial plants, come back after each seasonal death? The E:P:N theorem takes the liberty of saying that at least two-thirds of all souls are such perennials whether they know it or not. Jesus’ resurrection, I am convinced, is meant to symbolize that very truth. The E:P:N theorem aligns this annual/perennial dichotomy to the eternal life doctrines of the science-based branches of the major religions. One supporting Christian Scripture (on soul-level differences) reads:

The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. (I Corinthians 15:46-48)

Caveat: Though the E:P:N theorem and prototype propose that we learn from atoms, neither suggests that dualities are inferior or that they need to be replaced. It suggests only that a human hydrogen’s volatility be kept in check and that its voice on international issues be kept in a non-voting capacity to avoid reverting to the laws that governed, and still govern, the chaos of the cosmos and primitive jungles.

Class M planets need laws in place that address the needs of complex social structures that have to live side-by-side with simple ones. In Chemistry, we learn that many compounds need hydrogen (H) to facilitate its creation. Two well-know ones are H2SO4 (sulfuric acid) and H2O (water). Therefore, we need such groups of two (H-groups) in every classroom. Some things, in fact, are performed more efficiently in teams of two. However, groups of just two learn very little about how to get along with those who are not like them. Classrooms, according to the E:P:N theorem, need to expose youngsters daily or at least weekly to the practice of collaborating with like-minded peers as well as cooperating with members on their team with whom they have little, if anything, in common.

To accomplish this dual exposure, seating arrangements are pre-set and contracted for by the students for varying periods of time. The e-book at EPNLABS.com explains these arrangements in detail.

 

OUTPOST MANIFESTO 2007

This E:P:N manifesto aims to preserve all representations of thought that do not threaten the survival of others. In practical terms, the theorem supports the whole spectrum of unions, ranging from simple Mom and Pop operations and dictatorships to complex groups and conglomerates as long as no group attempts to dictate to more than one-third of the total number of people. Points 1 and 2 are the only two requirements for maintaining residency at this outpost. The subsequent points address issues that have been asked to date. All peaceful manifestos may be suggested for inclusion. An updated manifesto will be posted here by the 10th of January of every earth year.

1.     All residents (age six or older) agree to take on the role and responsibility of either (a) making things, (b) selling them, or (c) making sure things get done. Adults may switch roles yearly for three consecutive years and then again at five-year intervals for the duration of their lives. Youngsters may switch every semester for as long as it takes them to settle on a role they wish to pursue as a career. An integral part of settling on a specific role (for all) is the required choosing of a productivity preference, i.e., a resolve to be either (a) competitive, (b) creative, or (c) supportive. Teaching methods, tests, and incentives are then tailored to these three E:P:N roles. (Waiting lists are maintained in all three categories to facilitate the switching from one role to another.

2.     Being comprised of diverse peoples, the outpost’s major problem, of course, is the language problem. Like on earth, English has been accepted as the language of choice for Ph.D.-level dissertations, interstellar aviation, business, and Western-style entertainment. In this spirit, English is used in all schools but is not taught as a foreign language. It simply is used for teaching the subjects stated above. For political purposes, however, the official language shall be Esperanto, the only known fair and unambiguous vehicle for negotiating disputes and contracting cross-cultural agreements. All Political Science courses, therefore, shall be taught in a bilingual fashion using both English and Esperanto. There will be no language classes per se since both languages can now be taught expertly over the Internet through interactive courses and tests, online tutors, and moderated language forums.

3.     All courts and juries are structured on the basis of equally balanced E:P:N ratios. However, human electrons have the right to request an additional electron-favoring judge or jury member to avoid conflicts of interest between the human nucleons (protons and neutrons) and members of the hierarchy.

4.     Court reporting shall be done in both English and Esperanto. During disputes, however, only the Esperanto version shall be considered the official record to increase intercultural fairness and reduce ambiguities.