The Meaning of ‘One’ and ‘Oneness’

Global-OnenessWe often come across references to ‘One’, ‘The One’, ‘Oneness’, and so on when we start to explore the possibilities of the universe and how humanity is connected. Although many of us can understand the concept of ‘Oneness’, there may also be rational explanations based on current science.

We know that everything is made up of billions of little things that come together to form objects we see in the world around us. The fundamental thing in everything is the atom.

Nothing in our world is solid – fact. An object or material may appear to be solid, but this is relative to how sensitive our senses are. If we had super-microscopic vision we would be able to see the spaces in solid objects. To be able to see the spaces, science has developed special instruments to be able to look at materials at such a microscopic level.

If a large object were truly solid it would be so heavy that it may fall through the earth! Scientists know this through measuring density around black holes in space. For example, if your average mobile phone were as dense as the material around a black hole, in earth’s gravitational field it would weigh the equivalent of approximately ten tons!

So we live in a world where things appear solid, but are not really solid – it is an illusion. They are relatively solid.

If there is a wooden table, and we interact with it, then we feel it as being a solid object – we cannot pass through it without altering the structure of it. And yet the table is not really a solid object at all.

atom11All of the billions of things (atoms) that make the table are packed together in a specific way to make the construct of the table. Each little thing knows what it has to do to keep the material together.

There is space between each thing that scientists have yet to discover the construct of. There are theories, but they only go as far as the limitation of current scientific knowledge and is an on-going quest.


infinityAnother interesting and relevant thing to consider is the theory of infinity. Perhaps when we think of infinity we think of big things, like outer space. But infinity goes both ways. There is infinite outer space, AND infinite inner space. So if the concept of infinite inner and infinite outer space were applied to us and our perceived world, we know we are not the biggest thing, and we know we are not the smallest thing.

Infinity can be a difficult concept to think about when we are used to thinking in terms of limits. But it is real and exists.

bodyenergyNow let’s take a look at something else – our bodies. Our bodies are made up of different parts that all join together and work as a unit. Each part knows how it fits in to the rest. Each part is made up of billions of things that know what to do to enable the body as a whole to function.

All of us also have other creatures living in and on our bodies, and each of them is made up of smaller things. Perhaps to some creatures our body is a planet or universe, the same way as we perceive ourselves to be part of a universe. Perhaps our universe is a very small part of a bigger thing that we cannot perceive because of the limits on our knowledge and perceptions.

We have very briefly touched on a few things that establish that there seems to be a lot of space in our world that science cannot account for, and we are part of much bigger things and are made from much smaller things.

49624-1Science is still fairly primitive. It wasn’t so long ago that people worshiped the sun as a God, and then science discovered that there was the universe. So in time perhaps science will come up with answers, because there are many, many more questions than answers, and all we can do is ponder as speculate – much like our ancestors have done.

At our current level of scientific knowledge, we know there are many things that we cannot detect with our natural senses, but which we know to exist within our world.

An interesting fact is that humans can only detect visible light without the help of other devices in a very narrow spectrum (400–790 THz at most), yet there are other species on the planet that detect light outside of our range (infrared and ultraviolet for example). Our visible light spectrum is a very small part of currently known frequency ranges (from extremely low frequency waves to gamma rays).

If you sit in a room and look at a wall, you see the wall, but you don’t see what is filling the space between you and the wall. There are all kinds of things in that space that you cannot see, feel, hear, or smell.

electromagnetic-spectrumTake radio waves. You cannot see them, you cannot touch them, you cannot hear them, and you cannot smell them using your natural senses. If you want to listen to your favourite radio station, you have to use a special device – a receiver – that changes the invisible and inaudible frequencies into a form you can sense. It is the same for all kinds of things in our world and in the spaces we perceived.

Examples of things that remain invisible to some or all of our natural senses are Wi-Fi, TV broadcasts, mobile phone communications, electro-magnetic fields, and so on. You cannot see cold or heat. You can sense them with other senses, and you may be able to see things affected by them, but you cannot see them. These are just a few examples of things we know exist in the space we move around in.

There are many other energies that science knows to exist, but they have yet to find ways of interacting with and measuring them to find out what they do – what function they perform. The spectrum of energies we can currently interact with using our natural senses is very small, and our devices and instruments are only able to measure a limited spectrum of energies at the current time. We know that all energies have a reason – that they interact in some way with each other. We know that everything is energy and energy is everything.

You may be wondering what all of this information has to do with the concept on ‘Oneness’ and the meaning of ‘One’.

The information so far is a very basic demonstration of how energies in this world interact with each other. It shows that there are energies that we know of, and energies that we know to exist but can’t yet measure, so logically there must be other energies we have yet to discover. It shows how limited our knowledge of the universe really is. Although it has progressed in leaps and bounds, those leaps and bounds as we perceive them are really very, very tiny baby steps in terms of the greater universe.

It wasn’t too long ago when someone would have been branded as being in league with ‘The Devil’ if they had dared to express an opinion that wasn’t ‘proven’ by the science (beliefs) of the time. It was even less time ago that the concept of a personal, wireless communication device was purely in the realms of science fiction and TV shows such as Star Trek. Now the use if such a device (aka mobile phone etc) is commonplace.

And let’s not forget that scientific theory is often proven to be wrong, even though it was taken as unquestionable and ‘the law’ at the time. Today, scientists studying black holes in space have discovered that the ‘laws’ and current theories of physics cannot be applied in areas of their study – they don’t make sense anymore.

The fact is that we (as human beings) are only a part of something else. We know what some of that something else is with our limited measuring tools and knowledge. It may be that we are part of something very specific.

NDE-eeA very good example is the concept of near-death experience (NDE).

Near Death Experiences have been dismissed by the scientific community as a product of the brain’s neurological process of shutting down and starting up. This is a VERY dismissive explanation that does not take into account ALL of the information available. Basically, those in science who dismissed NDEs were very selective in the information they used to come to their conclusion.

If it were the case that many who experience NDEs ONLY had a very brief experience, or ONLY had the experience as their brain was stopping or starting, then the explanations of those scientists could have validity. However, there is more evidence (and we are referring to documented and very accurate scientific evidence) that something else takes place.

In one example of someone experiencing a NDE, they were able to very accurately recollect events that happened during the time they ‘died’ on the operating table. The time span of their ‘death’ was in excess of 60 minutes. During the time when all brain activity has stopped and they were clinically dead, there were complications in the surgery which meant that the theatre staff had to adapt to the situation – which was recorded and documented. The person who was having the NDE was able to accurately recollect conversations about the complication, even though they had no prior knowledge of how the complication would be handled, or any subsequent knowledge of exactly what happened in the operating theatre.

In addition, they were able to describe an instrument used during their surgery that they had not seen, and could not have seen at the time because their eyes were taped shut. What makes their statement even more valid, is that the instrument in question was used by the surgeon as a last minute substitute for the usual instrument he used. When the person who experienced the NDE recollected their experience to an experienced surgeon, the surgeon didn’t understand what the instrument was, or why the usual instrument would be substituted, so he requested a list of instruments his colleague had used during the surgery.

When the list arrived, there was one instrument that the surgeon didn’t recognise, so he contacted the manufacturer for details. To his surprise, the instrument was a highly specialised instrument, with a very distinctive design – a design that the person who had experienced the NDE has described as being like a stainless steel electric toothbrush.

There was no way that the person who experienced the NDE could have had any knowledge that the substitute instrument would be used during their surgery.  There is no way that they would have had knowledge about the instrument after their surgery. Unless specifically trained, they would not have recognised the instrument as something that would have been used during their surgery.

So when we put together that the person was clinically dead and all brain functions had stopped so there could not possibly be a way for the person to perceive anything through their senses, and they would not have been able to retain memory in the brain – that the person was able to accurately recollect conversations over a 60 minute period that were later verified – that the person was able to describe a surgical instrument that was used in an unusual way in an unusual situation – and they had no knowledge of surgical procedures and no access to records before recollecting their experience to another surgeon – the only possible conclusion is that those who dismiss NDEs as invalid experiences are just not looking at things that challenge the limits of their knowledge. It also shows that the energy around and within us is much more complex that we currently know about.

For more information look up Pam Reynolds.

That is one example. There have been many others.

One of the most recent is a neuroscientist who lay in a very deep coma for seven days. His experiences are very similar to those of people who have experienced NDEs. For more information on his experiences, look up Eben Alexander. It makes interesting reading.

When a supposed doctor of psychology (Dr Susan Blackmore – someone who likes to make a name for herself) was asked about NDEs in the BBC documentary ‘The Day I Died’, she passed off the experiences as a phenomenon of the brain shutting down and starting up. When she was asked about people who had be clinically dead for some time and had a very firm recollection of what happened during that time, her explanation was that it was their imagination ‘filling in the gaps’. Interestingly, she had no explanation at all for someone experiencing a NDE being able to recollect in detail events that took place while they were supposedly dead.

It is scientists and so-called professionals like her, who have a very narrow view that is set within their own rules and limits that probably maintains science in the dark ages.

quantum-consciousnessFortunately, there are some scientists who take NDEs seriously and as a valid part of human consciousness. There are scientists who have properly investigated NDEs and have come up with some interesting results.

Two of the most notable researchers are Dr Peter Fenwick and Professor Stuart Hameroff. They could be considered pioneers in the study of what consciousness is. Basically, there are microtubules in the brain that contain sub-atomic particles that form what we can consider to be the construct of our spirit, soul, and consciousness. Using quantum consciousness theory it is highly likely that these subatomic particles interact with other sub-atomic particles which are independent of our body machine/computer. It is almost like a computer backup system. So if something changes in the microtubules it will also have an effect on the independent particles – duplication. The ‘duplicates’ can exist independently of the constraints of time or other influences.

The two scientist’s theory is that the duplicate of the particles contained in our brain can exist in another space in the universe. So if the physical body ‘dies’ then these duplicate particles will remain in ‘space’. It is highly probable that they join with other particles and could constitute what we consider to be one consciousness.

An interesting programme in which Stuart Hameroff explains the concept is ‘Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman’, season 2, episode 1, ‘Life After Death’.

When we take all of the information we have looked at, the conclusion can only be that science is only just venturing into areas that can explain why we as humans can ‘sense’ things that may not be in the normal known range of our perception.

It may explain why some people are able to ‘connect’ with other energies, and why the deep feelings we have about consciousness and connection with other humans has been known, but explained in mystical ways.

The concept of ‘Oneness’ is a very real one. We are all part of the universe. More importantly, we have a distinct connection with each other that is eternal and which is not influenced by time.

One thought on “The Meaning of ‘One’ and ‘Oneness’

Leave a Reply


You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Google+ photo


Connecting to %s