Skip to Content

First Night’s Reading

Early Research

From The Notebooks of Peter Seeker

It was in the early days of my studies when I became fascinated with the field of genetics. The study of life forms and their processes of reproduction totally captivated my mind. I was most interested in the structures that permitted the transfer of characteristics and capacity within species. It was during this period of my career when I worked closely with Dr. Frank Measure that I became quite absorbed in designing and building instruments to measure the functioning of all living things. Frank and I worked together closely for more than ten years. During our joint efforts, we shared in the discoveries of certain qualities of genes and chromosomes and other details related to the transfer of information in chromosomes within species. This was an exciting time in my life, as I enjoyed the constant interaction and exchange with Frank.

It was a great tragedy for science when Frank was suddenly killed in a boating accident during a summer vacation on a lake near his hometown. It came as such a shock. I discontinued my research for almost a year and spent most of my time dedicated to teaching. One day during an undergraduate class, I remembered the last project Frank and I were working on. We were trying to develop an instrument to measure the existence of an energy source responsible for the expression of genetic potential in outer characteristics. I suddenly realized how much I missed research. At the end of the semester, I gave up teaching and went back to my lab.

For the next year, I tried to refine the device Frank had developed. It worked, but it was not sensitive enough to measure the energy signal we suspected to find as part of the genetic process. After two years of slow and painful progress, I made a breakthrough. Suddenly with some minor change to an electronic sensor and a small refinement in computer programming the device began to register low levels of an energy signature, as we expected. At last, I had a tool to carry on our earlier research. After completing the device, I took time to visit Frank’s wife. I explained to her I was continuing Frank’s last project. I assured her when it was commercialized she would receive some royalties for Frank’s contributions. She smiled and we laughed because she knew neither Frank nor I were ever interested in commercializing our work. I was just fumbling, trying to touch the past and Frank. She understood and appreciated my feelings.

I returned to my earlier genetic studies and began to incorporate the new measuring device into my research. At first I started recording data, but I had little time to review the results. After a long holiday break, I returned to the lab and began to study the data. At first, I thought the sensors must have been malfunctioning, so I tested them. I confirmed they were working well within their parameters. Then I decided to redo a few experiments because there may have been mistakes in the way tests were set up and energy levels measured. After repeating all of the original experiments, the data showed the same results. I was speechless. I needed to speak to someone about the results and what they meant, but who would understand what Frank and I had been doing for the last few years? Would anyone be ready to accept the data and seriously consider their implications? For weeks I could think of no one to consult, so I decided I needed more tests and data. I felt it was too early to share the information. I decided to expand my research to include other species to see what type of results I would obtain. If the results were the same, I would have to find someone to review and critique my research to be sure it was accurate.

After more than three months of research and hundreds of experiments, the data was conclusive. In the seeds of each plant, there was a faint but persistent reading located at the base of the genetic structure of each species. The signal in each species was unique.There also seemed to be individual differences between plants within the same species, but in either case its function appeared to be the same. The signal triggered the activity and direction of genetic code in each plant. Where was this signal coming from? How did it act? So many questions rushed into my mind it made me dizzy. The signal was faint but it was there. For each species the signal had a distinct signature. The presence of a signal was universal; its uniqueness was in the message it carried.

Was this possible? Could the world as we know it be unfolding before our eyes based on a subconscious signal embedded in all living things? If this was true, what were the implications? I kept asking myself over and over where the signal was coming from and what information it contained. Who was sending the signal and what was their intention in sending it? These questions were earth-shaking, as I had suspected three months earlier when I first saw the data. What should I do? Should I go public? What would people think? How would I answer their questions? It occurred to me I should do a more exhaustive study on a wider range of living things. To date, I had studied just 25 species. I had intentionally avoided all higher species including man himself. I felt there was no choice but to repeat my experiments over a wider group. New tests must include representative life forms from all species to be sure this was not an isolated phenomenon.

            With a sense of increased excitement as well as a growing dread of possible public response to such a discovery, I threw myself into a new round of testing. I was sure this would take another year. This provided me time to think and reflect on the significance of my finding as well as time to write a detailed report for my colleagues and the general scientific community. I added researchers to my staff. I increased the rigor of the testing procedures and documentation. I created multiple sources of measurement to make sure there were no false readings. The lab was very busy and everyone was excited, even though they did not know the real nature of my research and its implications.

After nine months of testing, the results confirmed my original findings. Right from a blade of grass to a human being there was an element that was energizing the path and direction of genetic formation and expression through a faint signal. A subconscious signal transmitted to a seed defined its future development along specific lines. Clearly genetic code played a role in the development of characteristics but this new element, which I called Real Idea, was determining the nature of life. The idea there was a Real Idea; a defining information signal that determined all things clearly expressed what I had discovered. Therefore, I adopted the new term as the name for the particular element. My preliminary research did not provide me with any idea as to where the signal was coming from, but it was clear it was a signal capable of releasing the potential of the genetic expression contained in the earliest form of all living substance. At this point, I coined another term to describe the dimension from which I thought the signal was coming from. I called it Status. I thought there must be a place in the universe where the knowledge of a particular form existed, which was expressing itself here. These terms would be acceptable to the scientific community as well as the general public, as it conveyed something of the action and nature of this element. Much work remained to confirm all of these assumptions. 

For three months, I compiled test results and prepared a thesis to explain the results I had uncovered. Throughout the year, I had seriously considered including other researchers in my project, but on second thought I decided to remain solely responsible for the results. I felt there might be a lot of controversy about these findings and I did not want to jeopardize the careers of close friends. It had taken me exactly a year to complete the tests and prepare my report. I sent out invitations to a conference at my university to all leading researchers and specialists in my field along with a summary paper on the research I had completed. 

The next day the phone started ringing. Calls were coming in from universities across the nation and from around the world. Scientists and researchers wanted more details and facts to substantiate such dramatic findings. I spent three days trying to calmly answer all of the calls. I assured them that all the scientific evidence they required would be presented at the conference scheduled to take place in three weeks. Everyone would have to wait. I assured colleagues I was sensitive to the nature of my findings and the questions they raised. In fact, this was the only reason why I had not gone public with my research. All of my efforts did little to keep the information out of the newspapers, which presented a wide range of misleading headlines that created a lot of unfounded criticism and fear. I remained patient and planned for the upcoming meeting.  

Finally the conference opened. Everyone was provided with the complete details of my research and the data collected from each experiment. For three days top scientific thinkers, politicians and religious leaders from around the world listened, questioned and challenged every detail. Many questions were raised and defended based on data and methodology. At the end of three days many remained skeptical, others called for verification and still others left in a state of amazement, as their whole conception of Existence had been turned on its head. Fortunately, I had anticipated most of their questions and had provided more than adequate information and data to support my findings. When it was all over and the crowds had gone home, I knew the world would never be the same. It took only six months for other researchers to duplicate my research. The results were conclusive. There was an element, the Real Idea, and for now it came from the dimension of Status. My research had not waited for these confirmations though they were welcome. I had already tried to move on to the next phase of my work, which involved developing tests and methods to determine the origin and true nature of the signal. This would prove to be a very complex and lengthy process that consumed the next 25 years of my life. Fortunately, the first phase of my research had opened the purse strings for additional research, so I faced no constraints in my work.

In less than a year, I had assembled a large research team spanning a variety of fields, which developed designs and protocols for a wide range of experiments. Three lines of enquiry emerged. The first focused on where the signal originated. The second was dedicated to discovering when the Real Idea actually became active in a life form. The third focused on developing technology and methods to respond to and communicate with whomever or whatever was its source. Progress was slow. After five years little had been accomplished. The origin of the signal still remained a mystery. The activation time and role of the Real Idea had been narrowed down but still nothing definitive had been determined. Finally, there had been little or no progress on responding to the signal, let alone communicating with the source. 

After five years of slow progress I found myself quite disheartened. One day, I received an invitation to a lecture from a colleague at the university. It was a general invitation sent to all faculty members. Normally, I did not even notice these invitations, but as I was a bit distracted from my work, I read it. The invitation came from the psychology department. The topic was “Psychic Connections - The World of Telepathy”. Somehow from the moment I read the card, I felt I must attend. It would be great to get out of the lab and mix with others. It had been a long time since I had taken a night to relax.  

A visiting Indian scientist who was experimenting with a new technology to increase the telepathic capacities of subjects made the presentation. It was fascinating. He described his experiments and technology for three hours. After the lecture, I introduced myself and spoke with him about his ideas and their relation to my work. I asked if he could visit my lab the following day to discuss some of the ideas I had after hearing his presentation. The speaker agreed to stop by late the following afternoon. I returned home in an excited mood. My mind was full of ideas about how to use this technology in my research to communicate with the signal we had identified. I had trouble sleeping that night as I sensed the possibility of a dramatic breakthrough. 

Four o’clock the following afternoon, Professor Leela, the speaker from the previous night, arrived at my office. I had spent the whole day preparing my thoughts for our meeting and was delighted to see him. After a few minutes of formal introductions and a cook’s tour of the lab, I led Professor Leela into my conference room, where we sat until early the next morning discussing ideas on how to apply his technology to my research. Leela was a patient and quiet man who listened carefully to my ideas. Once in a while, he made an insightful comment that opened up additional possibilities. Early the next morning, we left the lab to get some early morning breakfast. The night had passed in a few moments.  

Over the next six months, I worked and corresponded with Leela. We shared information and data. Slowly I had understood the essence of his approach and started reconfiguring his technology to meet my needs of communicating with the signal from the dimension Status. During this period, Leela and I enjoyed many hours together in the lab, over dinner or even on long walks around the campus. During these discussions, he spoke to me about his discoveries. He told me about the ancient traditions of his country and the findings of the ancient Rishis. I listened with great interest, hoping to glean some insight into realms I did not understand. Leela was not an assertive man. Rather he engaged me in an active dialogue. At times, I thought he and I were playing a game together. It reminded me of the days when I had worked so closely with Frank. He was centered, relaxed and self-assured. One night over dinner he told me of the Legend of Brahman and said the signal I had discovered, the Real Idea, was a communication from a Self-Existent Being from which all had come and to which all would return. I was not a spiritual or even a religious man, but I liked Leela a great deal. It had been many years since I had had a collaborator with whom I could share my ideas and emotions.

A few months later when I was writing a paper on my research, I decided in honor of my new friend and his good will towards my work to name the source of the signal after the great legend of the ancient Rishis. From this point onwards I referred to the source as Brahman and from that time the term stuck.

After three months of intense work with Leela, who had been on a visiting professor program at the university, I relocated two of my research teams. I had decided to shift my entire focus to the idea of communicating with the signal. I felt if I could accomplish this within my lifetime, it would answer all of my questions. My team was limited to a few dedicated professionals who shared my zeal for unraveling the mysteries of Brahman. Everyone else returned to their universities to carry on some other aspects of the research in specialized labs dedicated to specific disciplines. I immersed myself in my work. I rarely went out or involved myself with the university and its activities. Two years later, I published some additional findings to maintain my funding. On the release of any new report, there was always a lot of excitement about what I might say about Brahman, but there was little to report during the first decade. Yet I persisted in my effort to establish communication with Brahman.

Second Day of Class

Legend class was not until first period in the afternoon. I had a free period in the morning, so I re-read the pages to see if there was anything I had missed. At 12:50 pm, lunch period ended and I went to Legend class. Mr. Vidya was already in the room waiting for us like yesterday. He waited till everyone had taken their seat. He began with a question as he had done the day before. “How would you describe Seeker from the early days of his career?” he asked

Judy French, who had answered yesterday, spoke immediately without even waiting to be called upon. “It was very interesting to me,” she said, “to learn about this period of his life. Yesterday, I said he seemed to be more like a religious person than a scientist. When I read this period of his life, I found that element missing altogether. He seemed to be a good person, a good friend and colleague, but religion was completely missing. He appeared to be preoccupied only with science and proving results or, I should say, defending himself, rather than with its real meaning.” Mr. Vidya paused for a moment and replied, “In many of the biographies written about Seeker, they described him just as you have. He was a young scientist caught up in his work who was more concerned with methods, procedures and measurement, as compared to his later years.” Mr. Vidya glanced around the class to see if someone else had a comment.

James McClain said, “Seeker could have been in our class. He would have been one of us, a good friend. He was a hard worker with focus and determination. He seemed quite ordinary in most ways, except for his attention to detail, scientific method and a fear that his peers would reject his work. I felt interested to learn more about him, after I understood he was a regular person like the rest of us.”

Mr. Vidya listened and replied, “If any of you are interested in reading more about Seeker’s life, there are a number of books in the library that will provide you with more details of his early life. In most of the books, authors have struggled to find something special about Peter Seeker. In all of my reading there appears to be only one thing that stands out in my mind about Seeker’s early life, which is worth noting. Seeker had an uncle who was very close to him. Peter spent summers with his uncle traveling around the world. His uncle had a great influence on Peter in a very formative period of his life. He took Peter to many places with different customs, values, thinking and behavior. At the end of each trip, his uncle made sure Peter learned one lesson. Do not judge life, people, and objects by their appearances. He told Peter he must learn to look behind the surface and to think for himself. He must be rational and objective. ‘You should strive not to be one of the crowd, which is swayed by appearances,’ his uncle would write in letter after letter. ‘You must learn to think for yourself.’ It appears Peter listened and followed his uncle’s advice throughout his life.”

Mr. Vidya asked if there were any other comments about Seeker. Jane Hessen struggled to frame her question. “Well,” she said, “Uh! Uh! I am not sure I understood the importance of Peter’s discovery. I sense from the way he acted with test after test that he felt insecure or even threatened by others. I do not understand the reason for his behavior. Yesterday, you said he had made an earth-shattering discovery. I guess I do not know enough about history to understand why his discovery got everyone so defensive.” Mr. Vidya was very happy with Jane’s comments. “Miss Hessen, thank you very much for your candor and openness,” he said. “I am sure there are others in the class who felt the same way but hesitated to ask for an explanation. I appreciate your courage.” Jane smiled and blushed a bit at his comment, though she was happy she had not made a fool of herself.

Mr. Vidya asked the class, “Can anyone answer Jane’s question?” Martha Benson, one of the most serious girls in our class responded. “I believe Seeker’s signal was a great challenge to many established points of view in society. Science said for a thousand years our universe was created 15 billion years ago after the big bang and since that time evolution was the result of the chance interaction between force and matter within the universe. Science challenged and refuted any idea of God or Spirit for more than a thousand years. Since religious people couldn’t prove that God existed with facts and evidence, he did not exist. Seeker’s experiments provided the first strand of evidence to challenge the assumptions of science. His research suggested there might be something more to life than force and matter. His signal provided initial evidence there might be an inherent knowledge in life instead of just a cosmic accident that produced life, as we know it. This was revolutionary. Seeker knew his work would cause a lot of heated debate.”

Mr. Vidya was pleased with Martha’s answer. He asked the class if anyone had any questions about what Martha had said. No one replied. “Seeker was a turning point in the relationship between science and religious beliefs,” Mr. Vidya said. “For centuries, a priestly class had used knowledge to enslave people and dominate the world. The history of early civilization in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and elsewhere was full of accounts where religious authorities used superstitions to influence and control the public. Science arose in reaction to long years of religious domination and superstition. Science no longer accepted these superstitious ideas. Science said, we will believe in what we can see, what we can prove, and what is real. For thousands of years, the battle between religious and scientific thinking has gone on over what is real and what is the truth. Seeker’s findings offered possible confirmation for a number of religious ideas, which millions had taken on faith without evidence. His findings seriously challenged science, which had become intolerant of other forms of knowledge outside of the scientific method. Seeker’s discovery was earth-shaking for both sides of society, men of faith and men of science.”

Mr. Vidya again asked the class if they had any other observations to share about Seeker and his early career.

I replied, “I know your family came from India many years ago, and I was wondering if you could explain something to me about Peter’s choice of the word Brahman. I looked up the word ‘rishi’, which Professor Leela used, and understand they were ancient saints or holy men in India. Leela told him the ancient rishis had known and described Brahman in spiritual terms long ago. Their explanations were not written in scientific language, but the idea they described was quite close to Seeker’s. My question is how did these men, who lived thousands of years before Seeker, gain this knowledge and why did the world miss it for thousands of years?”

Mr. Vidya sat on the edge of his desk and paused for a moment. He said, “I see you have done some serious thinking about these pages. I am glad you understand Seeker’s knowledge was not new. It had existed for thousands of years not only in my homeland, but also in many traditions around the world. Take a minute and think about those ancient societies more than five thousand years ago. How would they have been able to discover this knowledge? There were no labs. They had no electricity, testing equipment or many of the things that Seeker needed to make his discovery. Most of the people in those ancient cultures were farmers. How could people find the same answer Seeker found four thousand years later in his lab when they had none of these gadgets to help them? I am not going to answer this question today, because I hope by the end of the class after you have read more of Seeker’s notes, one of you may be able to answer the question. If no one finds the answer, I will answer your question next Wednesday.”

There were just a few minutes left before our next class. Mr. Vidya asked the class to read the next section in the notes by tomorrow. Before he let us leave, he said he had an announcement to make. “In two weeks, there will be a full day special exhibit at the university on Seeker’s work. There will be speakers, exhibits and even demonstrations of Seeker’s original device. I am organizing a trip for students who wish to attend. If you are interested in attending, you will need to get your parents’ approval. Take a form as you leave the room and get your parents to sign it. These forms must be returned by this Friday.” On my way out, I took a form. Very few students had taken one. I was going for sure. I was sure my mother would let me attend.

I was home by 4:30 pm. I found my mother having a cup of coffee in the kitchen. I got a soda from the fridge and sat with her at the breakfast table. I told her about the earth science quiz and the other important things from school. She asked me if I had a lot of homework. I told her I had come home early as I had a lot of homework again tonight. I also had to read the next section in Seeker’s notebook, which would take some time to read and think about before class. She did not ask me about class, though I knew she was keen to know. She really wanted me to discover Peter Seeker for myself. 

By 8:30 pm I finished all of my homework. I started reading Seeker’s Notebooks. I found the story fascinating. Seeker was changing. Slowly his work was progressing and he was changing as a result of his discovery, the signal. I had a hard time understanding what he was talking about when he described seeing levels in his mind. What were these levels? Did I have them? Was it possible for people to have levels in their mind and not be aware of them? I had never had any experiences like he was describing. He was talking about seeing light in his mind and also silence. What did he mean? Was he really seeing light or was it an imagination? Could it be real?  

As I read about his efforts to find the source of the signal, I sensed the excitement he must have felt as he got closer and closer to making contact with Brahman. He was not afraid of the experiences he was having through the device. All explorers must take risks. I was amazed as I read how he was able to remain calm throughout all of these experiments. I wondered what he was talking about, as I read some pages. What did he mean when he spoke of the border in his mind? What did he mean when he said he finally reached Brahman by going beyond his mind? How can you go beyond your mind? I thought my mind was in my brain. How can you go outside of your brain?

I did not understand this section as well as I had the first. All of the information about experiments, testing and measurement was clear. We were doing experiments in class, so I knew what that was like. When he talked about the changes taking place in him and the experiences he was having, it seemed strange, though I felt good when I read about it. Seeker was definitely interesting. I read this section twice and even made some notes for class. I did not want to forget any of the ideas and questions that were flooding my mind. Around 10:00 pm my mother knocked on the door. She came in to see what I was doing. I was sitting reading Seeker. She said it was late and I’d better get some rest. Before she left, I asked her if she or dad would have any objection to my going to the Seeker Exhibition at the university next Saturday. I showed her the form. She said she would talk it over with my dad, but as far as she was concerned, it was fine.

I woke up earlier than usual the next morning and was surprised at how wide-awake I felt. As I walked to school I made it a point to meet Martha. I asked her if she had read the next section of Seeker’s notes. She said she had read the whole book already. I told her I really enjoyed this section. I asked her if she was going to the exhibit. She said she was. I told her I was also planning to go. She smiled. We were both glad to be going. 


book | by Dr. Radut