A Lawyer Presents the Case for the Afterlife

A truncated Extract from:


Christian Passey: mental medium

In May 2000 an unexpected telephone call came from Cheltenham. A lady calling herself Christian Passey said she was a medium who had been instructed by a famous scientist to call and see me. She did not know who he was but she wanted to know if it would be in order for her to come to Bath and give me a reading. I was intrigued and of course was only too willing to agree.

She arrived on 14th May and began on her mission. I will copy out the transcript and then afterwards will deal with the extraordinary way the predictions communicated unfolded in the next few days. I will itemise her statements, numbering them as she did. They appear in italics. My comments follow in ordinary script.

1. She said: “You have a meeting coming up within a few weeks when you will be giving a lecture. This will be a bombshell to some people. You will be trying to change their perception and so must not expect the lecture to be a total success though it will not be a total failure. The trouble is that some people will not be sufficiently far-sighted as to be able to take it on board.”

I had a lecture planned scheduled to take place in two weeks. This was a summary of my ECM theory covered in detail in our companion volumes. This had provided the alternative to relativity briefly mentioned in Chapter 3. This was to be presented at the ‘Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution’, the BRLSI for short.

2. “However, a man whose name begins with Y (she could not grasp the whole name) will call you in about two days. He will be trying to help and can probably help you.”

A man called Steve Yabsley rang from the BBC in Bristol two days later saying he had been informed of my lecture and invited me along to give a plug for it on the radio.

3. “A superior from a past work situation will also help.”

This prediction did not come to pass for several weeks. Then Professor Wallace who had been head of the Department of Mechanical Engineering, where I had been a lecturer, rang inviting me to give a talk about my theory. (I cut out irrelevant interruptions from relatives).

6. “You will get many more ideas whilst out walking the dog.”

I get most of my ideas whilst walking the dog.

9. “You are a great seer. The book you are writing will make money.”

I am afraid this was at least partly a misfire: I never finished the book. However, the communicator was clearly aware I was writing one and it was entitled, "Inventions that Saved the World". The plot was set in the future at the year 2100, the fictitious writer being a historian describing the way various inventions developed that solved the problems of energy supply and global warming. I had worked out the details of the inventions in fine detail but a friend who read the script told me my characters did not live. So I decided that I was unable to write convincing science fiction.

12. “Your ideas in physics will not be accepted in your lifetime. However, they will take root after your death. You will have the satisfaction of observing this from the spirit world.”

It is certainly true that I have been unable so far to make a dent on communicating the solutions to physicists or cosmologists. So this looks a very probable outcome.

16. “There will be further connections with the University of Bath that are likely to be of help.”

Some help has been given but not enough as yet.
(Again communications from relatives )
I wished these relatives would not keep butting in. But now the scientist gets back in again.

19 “Your work is superb – wonderful 8 or 9 out of 10”

Very flattering: I liked that!

20. “Please make papers easier to read”.

21 “Also it is very important that you make much more
revision of past work.”

I will take notice of both points and will try to improve.

22. “You need to make a leap of intuition and will do so soon.”

Does this mean people living in a parallel universe put every invention we make into our heads? And now for the final shattering message:

23. “I was known as Isaac Newton during my time on Earth – Well done my boy. But I used to keep very careful notebooks and that is something you should also be doing!”

That ended the communication. It is true that I have not kept careful notebooks but I have a pile of papers full of the maths of over twenty years of effort made during my retirement. This reading gave me renewed determination to proceed. I still do not keep notebooks but instead I write this series that covers the entire study. It is my hope that this will satisfy my taskmaster. I would hate to transfer to his world only to experience the wrath of our most famous scientist.

The sequel

Next day I was taking our boxer dog Jason for his morning walk. At that time we were doing two long walks a day: one in the morning and the other in the afternoon. We went up a narrow road called ‘Dover’s Lane’ in our village that ended in a fence and style leading to a farmer’s field adjacent to nearby woods. However, on nearing the fence that Jason had to duck through, since he was too big for the style, I had a surprise.

Chicken wire was blocking the entire fence so that Jason would no longer have access. At least this was the view from about five metres distance. At about two metres the chicken wire vanished! So Jason had no problem after all.

Instead I had a problem: I thought I must be hallucinating and this was very troubling. Next day Yabsley rang from BBC Bristol and we fixed up for the broadcast I mentioned earlier.

Then the next day Jason and I travelled the Dover’s Lane route again. And there it was again: the chicken wire under the fence just as it had appeared two days previously!

That I could be really hallucinating was very troubling indeed. However, on we went and then there was a second surprise. This time the chicken wire failed to vanish: it was real and solid. We had to turn back. It now dawned on me that I had seen the wire before it existed.

Could my taskmaster have deliberately induced this hallucination? Could this be telling me I really was a seer? I dismissed the thought since I do not consider that I have this gift, but it did seem connected with Christian’s reading.

Soon the date for my lecture arrived and all was ready with overhead transparencies stacked for display. This you will remember was a summary of the new Exact Classical Mechanics that provided an alternative to Einstein’s theory of General Relativity. It was very gratifying to find I had a very large audience. All seats were taken and some had to stand at the back. This must have been a result of the broadcast.

All seemed to be going well for the first 40 minutes and I felt I was getting the message across. At least nobody was snoring!
But as I had been warned during the reading, I was not pleasing everybody. Suddenly without warning and without waiting for discussion time, a leading member of the institution, Victor Suchar, broke in and started with a prepared lecture of his own. In this he was attempting to discredit everything I had been saying.

This did not please my audience at all. People were hissing and some shouted for him to, “Shut up we have not come to listen to you”. One man got up and put on his coat preparing to leave. The whole atmosphere had suddenly become poisoned. But Suchar pressed on regardless completely indifferent to the turmoil he had aroused. Also the chairman did nothing to stop him. He went on for the whole of the remaining twenty minutes so totally wrecking my presentation. Yet his argument was totally invalid. He spent nearly the whole time describing an experiment planned for Earth orbit but not yet flown. He said this would invalidate my work when it was flown by proving one of the predictions of Einstein’s theory known as ‘frame dragging’.

This argument was flawed on two counts. Firstly the experiment had not been tried and so this prediction had not yet been verified. Secondly the ECM alternative can be shown to give the same predictions as Einstein’s ‘curved space-time’ so a positive outcome would support ECM theory equally well.

However, Suchar succeeded in his aim since he had ruined the lecture and prevented me completing what had been planned. It was all very annoying but it did show that people in the next world are able to see what is going on here with much greater clarity than we can.

One member, Keith Hudson, was so incensed by the incident that he wrote a letter of protest to the BRLSI.
This lecture was the only one that did not appear in the annual records and I wonder if Suchar had anything to do with its omission.


This communication highlights the problem of trying to rectify wrong aspects that have become entrenched in Cosmology and indeed the whole of physics.

Two things have gone badly wrong to throw the discipline onto a hopelessly wrong track. One is the total refusal to accept that any aspect of the so-called, ‘paranormal’ can have any validity: particularly the existence of any spiritual realm.

Yet the crazy thing is that they claim the existence of some four varieties of parallel universes all existing in the same space interpenetrating all others. Each of these contains an infinite number of universes but none can communicate with any others. So they are beyond experimental discovery and this puts them outside the realm of science by definition.

Yet they make every effort to discredit mediumship: the only way the existence of any parallel universe could be proven!

The other thing that has thrown them wrong is a lack of adequate understanding of classical mechanics resulting in dreadful logical errors that have thrown them hopelessly off track. This of course is the major part of my own discipline. If they would only listen to us instead of branding anyone like me a maverick perhaps some real, progress might be made.