Discovery of Psychometric Proof of God

June, 2011 Hyannis MA USA
From: George Hammond, M.S. Physics/Psychometry
To: PSY-REL-UK



The quest for the Structural Model of Personality has
been the cornerstone of Psychology ever since
Hippocrates said there was such a thing 2500 years ago.
Modern computerized psychometry very nearly succeeded
in this quest, specifically Cattell, Eysenck, Goldberg,
Costa & McCrae and others, but their failure to discover a
prima facie causal biological mechanism for such a miracle
has so far doomed the effort to failure.

It was therefore an alarming turn of events when an
errant physicist accidentally discovered, proved and published
the long sought for biological mechanism in 1994 only to discover
that interdisciplinary jealousy, personal ambition and
hi-level dereliction in academic Psychology would ignore
and suppress this pivotal discovery.

I am alerting PSY-REL-UK about this because all efforts
to engage the right wing academic research establishment in
the US and Europe has been rebuffed and it appears that the
Psychology establishment is fully prepared to suppress a
crucial physics-biology discovery even if it means denying
the world the delivery of the Structural Model which would
transform Psychology into a prestigious science with a real
Global influence!

The discovery of the Structural Model since it turns out
to be an axiomatic physics structure leads to much more
than just the theory of Personality. It leads directly to
an explanation of the structural model of social attitudes
(the Bicameral/2-Party system), the explanation of the
general theory of Psychology (the unconscious mind) and
ultimately to no less than the worlds first scientific proof
of God!

Clearly the Structural Model is now a political problem
and no longer a scientific problem. Its discovery is too
much of a status-quo-breaker for the conservative
establishment to accept and it is my hope that
pressure can be brought to bear on conservative academia,
particularly the APA that will precipitate at long last the
historic birth of the Structural Model of Psychology.

I won't waste time rebutting the usual suspicions
concerning such a claim. Let me simply state the facts and
allow PSY-REL-UK to be the judge:


1. I am a physicist (MS 1967) affiliated with the
Massachusetts Department of Mental Health and have been
researching Personality Psychometry for 30 years. I managed
to published my discovery of the biological origin of the
Structural Model of Personality in an obscure journal in
1994:

(original paper NIP, Elsevier Science Ltd.)
http://tinyurl.com/HAMMOND2 

(free online research-only facsimile copy of paper is
located at:)
http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond/cart.html



2. It was during this period that I first became
suspicious of the higher echelon in academic psychology
research. At the time Hans Jurgen Eysenck was the most
famous living psychologist. I first sent the paper to Hans
for publication in his journal, P.A.I.D. it being the most
conspicuous journal in the field. Much to my chagrin he
handed the paper over to unqualified reviewers. He rejected
the paper and in one of those recondite but telltale
incidents he didn't even sign the rejection letter but
simply put a checkmark on it. I caught up with Hans in
person a few years later in Montreal Canada. but let me
continue the chronology.

I also wrote to Professor Jeffrey Gray, Hans' closest
colleague in London, since my discovery not only confirmed
Eysenck's Big-3 (ENP), it also confirmed Gray's 2-Factor
"diagonal" theory. in fact it united the two. I was totally
floored then when I received a particularly nasty letter
from Jeffrey Gray suggesting that my theory was no doubt a
delusion of grandeur and that he wouldn't waste time
discussing it.

I was also in touch with Dr. Paul Barrett, Hans' research
chief, via his IDANET discussion list and several peculiar
remarks of his began to clue me that there was something
noticeably out of kilter in the Eysenckian school of
psychometry research.

Meanwhile, in the US the situation was hopeless and
continues so. Hans Eysenck was the only genius in the field
since the other genius, Raymond B. Cattell was over 90 and
retired in Hawaii. I did receive several scrawled letters
from Cattell who apparently lapped the envelope so many
times it practically disintegrated before it reached me. He
recognized my work immediately of course and even urged
Prof. Widiger a much younger man to contact me but all I
ever received from Widiger was a few well wishes on a
postcard. Even the APA finally turned on Cattell accusing
him of being a racist or some other such nonsense. I did
talk to Ray's wife in Hawaii but she said Ray was so deaf
there was no use putting him on the phone. His daughter,
Heather Cattell was very helpful then being director of IPAT
in Champaign Ill. and sent me copies of hard to find papers
from their archives.

After submitting my discovery of the Structural Model to
21 journals (simultaneously) and having every one of them
rejecting it, I ran into Professor Richard Kitchener editor
of New Ideas In Psychology who put the paper out for review.
Kitchener was a Philosophy professor and a no nonsense
person. In the first round one reviewer balked because the
theory didn't explain the Big-5 model. Kichener told me to
take another look at the problem and lo and behold the
theory stunningly confirmed the Big-5 as the sum of
Eysenck's 3 normals plus Gray's 2 diagonals: 3+2=5. This
triumph convinced the holdout reviewer and the paper was
unanimously published in 1994. Naturally, since New Ideas
In Psychology is a lo-impact journal nobody has ever read
the paper much less cited it, and the discovery of the
biological origin of the Structural Model remains to this
day languishing on library shelves.

In the meantime I struck up a correspondence with fellow
New Englander professor Peter F. Merenda chairman of the
psychology department at URI. He had been involved in the
discovery of the 4-Factor AVA model and was quite interested
that my theory explained the biological origin of his model
also (in fact the discovery explains the biological origin
of every known psychometric model).

Peter asked me if I wanted to be an invited speaker at
the XXVI International (IUPsyS) Congress of Psychology in
Montreal Canada on August 16, 1996. He said he had invited
Hans Eysenck to speak and he had accepted the invitation.
Naturally I was anxious to meet Hans so I accepted.

I seated myself next to Hans on the dais with about 200
present in the audience. I first noticed something odd when
I offered Hans a copy of my now published paper reporting
the discovery of the Structural Model. He rather coolly
replied "I've read it" and refused to take the paper. We
sat for an hour listening to several internationally known
Personality psychometrians. I finally got up and spoke for
30 minutes about my discovery and how it explained (i.e.
physically caused) all of the known Factor Models in
Personality Psychometry. I showed 20 carefully drawn
slides illustrating the elementary physics-biology of the
whole thing. I received a surprisingly energetic ovation
but sat down with the distinct feeling that no one other
than perhaps Hans had taken seriously a single word I said.
Then Hans then got up and spoke for 30 minutes. I didn't
pay much attention since he wasn't talking about psychometry
but apparently about the international situation in Bosnia.
I did hear him refer to me as "Dr. Hammond" which I
suspected was another of his famous backhanded
compliments since I know for a fact he was aware that I
don't have a PhD in anything.

Later I had a chance to talk to him privately on the
mezzanine balcony overlooking the great hall and tried to
ferret out his impression of my discovery, He actually told
me at one point "I don't see the significance of it" which
immediately struck me as disingenuous fakery since he had
spent the last 30 years searching for the biological origin
of the Structural Model commencing with his widely known
1967 book on the subject. and at that moment I suddenly
realized that he was actually personally envious of my
discovery. a discovery which he had failed to make in his
long quest for the biological origin of the Structural
Model! He had failed to realize that simple brain geometry
(primary brain cleavage) was the root cause of the
Structural Model of Personality, for instance Sperrian
Lateralization and the Bell-Magendie motor sensory cleavage.
And he was apparently annoyed that some no account physicist
had wandered into the field and accidentally discovered it,
and published it!

Don't get me wrong, I immediately liked Hans Eysenck the
minute I met him. He was a heroic figure, and close up even
more so. Yet, there was unmistakably an air of the
entrenched establishment about him that wasn’t going to
cooperate with a mere upstart, a physicist no less, making a
historic scientific discovery in Psychology which could
possibly expose him. I came away feeling like I had just
met perhaps the Kurt Waldheim of Psychology research and
that politically speaking I was no match for him.

Of course Hans Eysenck was 80 years old by the time I
reached him. In fact he died a couple of years later of a
brain tumor. But I still suspect that there must have been
something that he could have done to prevent this
discovery from simply turning in the wind since 1994 while
the entire field of Psychometry has sunk into moribund
stagnation without a hope of regaining its old momentum or
its former glory.

Now, before I leave this issue let me point out that I
have informed every authority in the field of psychometry
about this discovery, including the Heymans Institute in
Groningen Holland. Although my discovery proves that 2nd
order Factor structure in Personality is a CUBE, it turns
out I am not the first one to suspect this. Gerard Heymans
guessed it in 1930 and became so famous for doing so he
founded the Heymans Institute which is now a world leader in
psychometric Personality research. Louis Thurstone also
surmised it when he made up his famous Factor Analytic "Box 
Problem". It turns out that the Structural Model of
Personality is PRECISELY a "Thurstone's Box" at the 2nd
order in Personality psychometry! I wrote an elegant
synopsis of this discovery in a 2 page letter and emailed it
to a dozen of the world's top psychometric authorities at
the Heymans Institute including the director professor
J.M.F. Ten Berge. Anyone desiring a succinct and
comprehensive explanation of this discovery should read this
2 page letter which is fully illustrated. A copy was posted
to IDANET (also a JISCMAIL.AC.UK email list; Paul Barrett
moderator) and a copy is currently posted on my page on
Academia.edu at:

http://tinyurl.com/2b86k7e

I emphasize that only high school physics and undergraduate
psychometry is necessary to fully comprehend the stunning
historic discovery described in this 2 page letter. Needless
to say the Heymans institute has reacted exactly like Hans
Eysenck. apparently the conservative wing of psychometric
research is not about to allow a physicist to upset the
apple cart with a fundamental discovery, even if it means
selling the entire field of academic psychology research
down the river. Finally, it is to be noted that the APA,
of which I am not a member and which wouldn't even consider
publishing a paper written by me, knows absolutely nothing
of this discovery despite the fact that it was made by an
American scientist and dozens of APA members are already
aware of it!


So much for the discovery of the biological origin
of the Structural Model. However it turns out that that
discovery was only the tip of the iceberg! The year after
the conference in Montreal with Eysenck, I made yet another
historic discovery in Factor Analytic Psychometry. This one
even more unbelievable than the first!

As anyone familiar with psychometric Factor Analysis
(SPSS for instance) knows, when you factor a large
correlation matrix and rotate it to Simple Structure you
wind up with another correlation matrix of about half the
size. That matrix can again be factored and rotated and so
on. In fact, it only stops when you get down to one Factor
and can't go any further. People have idly wondered for
years where Personality Factor Analysis might end, and what
the meaning of that final Factor might be! My discovery
answered that question, and the answer turns out to be an
utter shock! The last Factor turns out to be "God" no less,
the God of the Bible. The discovery of the Structural Model
leads immediately to the world's first and only, scientific
proof of God!

Now, why wasn't this discovered before I came along?
Well, it very nearly was. Raymond B. Cattell almost got to
the 4th Order which is where Psychometry stops. My theory
shows that because the 2nd order structure is theoretically
a cube, that there are therefore exactly 13-2nd Order
Factors corresponding to the 13 symmetry axes of a common
cube. Ray had meanwhile experimentally resolved somewhere
between 12 and 14 Factors in the normal Personality domain.
Without a theoretical explanation he couldn't be exactly
sure how many Factors there were. Ray then Factored the
12x12 2nd Order matrix to the 3rd Order and extracted "4 or
5" 3rd -Order Factors. Three of the Factors I immediately
recognized as Eysenck's ENP which I expected since the 3rd
Order Factors should simply collapse onto the 2nd Orders
since ENP are nearly orthogonal at the 2nd Order as Eysenck
had proved. The existence of a 4th factor perplexed me
until I realized Cattell had included not only Personality
but Intelligence also in his data. I then realized that
Psychology turns out to be not only a 3-dimensional space
(as Hans argued for 20 years) because of 3-dimensional brain
cleavage, it actually turns out to be 4-dimensional
(space-time) space because Intelligence is time related
(mental speed). This new theoretical discovery immediately
shaved Rays "4 or 5" 3rd Orders down to exactly 4.

Ray never bothered to factor his 3rd orders to the 4th
Order, but he left us an intriguing message at the end of
his 1975 paper*, he said:

"The correlation among the tertiaries, though
less invariant than among the secondaries, are reasonable
stable and are set out for those who, with reinforcements,
may wish to proceed to the fourth order."
(R. B. Cattell 1975)

Ref:
Cattell 1975, Third order personality structure in Q-data:
Evidence from 11 experiments. J. of Multivariate
Experimental Personality and Clinical Psychology 1(3)
118-149

Ray didn't live to get to the 4th Order and discover God,
but I did. Armed now with a theoretical proof of the exact
number of 2nd and 3rd Order factors which was unavailable to
Ray, I was able to redact his experimental 3rd Order matrix
and Factor it to the 4th Order. Dr. Paul Barrett, then
still working for Eysenck at the U. London was kind enough
to run the matrix through SPSS for me, and Dr. David Routh
who read about it on IDANET ran an independent check also.
Naturally only ONE Factor emerged at the 4th Order (a 4x4
matrix can only determine 1 higher order Factor according to
Thurstone's Rule). I had finally found out where all of
Psychology (i.e. Personality plus Intelligence) ends. It
ends in a single eigenvector Factor at the 4th Order!

The immediate question of course, is what was the
biological cause of this Final Factor? What was it?

The answer is actually quite easy to discover. In fact
by that time I already knew the answer even before I
confirmed it. The Factor was obviously "GOD". yes the good
old fashioned anthropomorphic invisible God of the Bible. I
had actually discovered the World's first scientific proof
of God!

The actual biological cause of the single 4th Order
Factors is easy to identify, it turns out to be caused by
the Human Growth Curve Deficit (GCD). About 100 years ago
the field of Auxology discovered that there is a Secular Trend
in human growth. Evidence of the Secular Trend is
commonplace. Modern soldiers cannot even fit into a
medieval suit of armor for instance. School children in the
US have gained 3.5 inches in height since 1900. The Flynn
Effect shows world IQ increasing as much as 10 points per
decade, due to brain growth caused by the rising standard of
living, mainly nutrition. Moreover, studies of Third World
malnutrition growth stunting show IQ losses of up to 50%
due to growth stunting. In fact, the data shows that the
entire human race, on average, is as much as 20% short of
its full height and weight. An interesting Time Magazine
cover story on the Secular Trend can be seen at:


http://economics.sbs.ohio-state.edu/rsteckel/Articles/time6.htm

If 20% of your body is missing, then 20% of your brain is
missing. it is simply ungrown. It is not totally ungrown
however, it still functions but in a partially conscious
manner. This is the origin of Freud's famous "Unconscious
Mind" and it turns out to be the biological cause of the
top, last, final, single Factor in all of Psychology. Bear
in mind that this eigenvector can be measured now to three
significant figure accuracy in modern Psychometry!

Now what does all of this mean. well for that you have to
know some Physics. A correlation matrix in Psychology is
referred to as "oblique". However, physicists refer to such
matrices as "curved". In Physics the 4x4 space-time metric
of XYZt is an oblique matrix and the physicists say that
space-time is "curved" because of this, and that gravity is
the physical cause of this curvature. What my discovery
shows is that the intercorrelation matrix of ENPg in
psychometry is likewise curved, and that it is the GCD that
is causing it. Now, space-time, that is XYZt is simply what
the physicists call "reality" or "objective reality". But
my discovery shows that ENPg in psychometry is also curved
and the "curvature" is caused by the brain growth deficit.
or "God" to use common parlance. What this means is that
the brain growth deficit causes a curvature of "subjective
reality", and this curvature of reality in Psychology is
called "God". Basically, the brain growth deficit causes
the world to appear bigger and faster than it actually is
just as gravity makes objective space-time appear bigger and
faster than it actually is as discovered by Einstein. While
the gravitational effect of objective reality is very
miniscule, the effect of the brain growth deficit on
subjective reality is very large. and this large and
noticeable effect in Psychology has been recognized for
thousands of years and is referred to as "God". Notice now
that not only has the existence of God actually been proven,
but that God can actually be measured to 3 significant
figures by modern psychometry.

Needless to say the technological applications of this
discovery will be enormous. This curvature of subjective
reality will ultimately be able to be simulated on virtual
reality computers and the next age of psychiatric treatment
may well be computerized virtual reality therapy where you
will effect a personality change by "seeing" what your new
reality will look like. After all, seeing is believing and
may prove more effective than neuroleptic drugs or
psychoanalysis ever were!

By the way I published this discovery of a scientific
proof of God in 2003, again In an obscure journal and a copy
of the paper may be seen here:

http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond/Hammond5s1.html

Well, I will try to wrap this up by mentioning that I
don't expect Psychology to take up the cause of
advancing a scientific proof of God but they should know
that that's where the Structural Model leads to. And we can
be sure that there are large sectors of society who are
vitally interested in the politics of such a development.
Israel, the Vatican, the Islamic countries of the Middle
East or even the Kansas City Board of Education, among other
places come to mind. 

But in the meantime, it is clear that academic Psychology
is now standing in the way of a major, indeed historic,
Psychology discovery. The delivery of the Structural Model
of Personality has been central to Psychology from the
beginning, and I think PSY-REL-UK should know that there
is dereliction of a very serious and injurious nature to the
success of Psychology growing like a cancer in academia.

I invite anyone interested to respond on the PSY-REL-UK
discussion list, or contact me at [log in to unmask]


George Hammond, M.S. Physics
Massachusetts Department of Mental Health