Dacia Iluministă

THIS IS ONE OF A SERIES OF BOOKS outlining the cosmology, philosophy, politics and religion of the ancient and controversial secret society known as the Illuminati, of which the Greek polymath Pythagoras was the first official Grand Master. The society exists to this day and the author is a senior member, working under the pseudonym of “Mike Hockney”. The Illuminati’s religion is the most highly developed expression of Gnosticism and is called Illumination (alternatively, Illuminism). Dedicated to the pursuit of enlightenment, it has many parallels with the Eastern religions of Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism. It rejects the Abrahamic religions of faith: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The Illuminati formally began as Pythagoras’s mystery school revolving around the secrets of mathematics. Pythagoras elevated mathematics to a religion and asserted that everything was fundamentally mathematical and could only be explained mathematically. To this day, Illumination is grounded entirely in mathematics. It is therefore the world’s only rational religion, and is entirely compatible with science. Indeed, science is but a subset of mathematics and hence of Illumination. Illuminism asserts that mathematics is not science’s tool; on the contrary, science is mathematics’ tool, a way of exploring what we call “ontological” mathematics, the mathematics of existence. Illuminism is knowledge-based and rejects all “holy” scriptures, prophets, revelations and faith. It is future-oriented, rational, philosophical, scientific, mathematical and dialectical. Welcome to the religion of light – Illumination.

We are not prophets, this is not a “holy” text and we are not going to condemn you to hell and persecute you if you disagree with us. On the other hand, this text and the rest of the books in the series (known as “the God Series”) constitute the most ambitious project in history. In this series, we explain the minutiae of existence in a manner never previously attempted. We have discovered the “big picture” of existence and the meaning of life. The final answer to the nature of existence is as astounding, unexpected and magnificent as you would expect it to be. When you first encounter the solution, you will be disbelieving, then you will think that it’s obvious that this is how it should be, then you will be filled with wonder. After, disbelief will seize you again. Yet when you have overcome the shock, you will understand that existence is as mathematically beautiful and perfect as it can possibly be, that it is the “best of all possible worlds” and that you yourself can look forward to the greatest experience of all – literally becoming God. We promise this to you because it’s a mathematical certainty. We will also tell you something that will at first seem preposterous but, when you have fully understood our message, will make perfect sense. It is that you have already been God. In fact, you have been God an infinite number of times before, and you will become God an infinite number of times in the future. The same idea is implicit in Hinduism and Jainism. Your immortal existence is all about the mathematics of divinity, which is based on two numbers, the most mysterious numbers of all – zero and infinity, the “God numbers”. The eternal journey of your soul is a cyclical exploration of these magical numbers, and each cycle always ends in the same way – with your attainment of divinity. What is the ultimate process of life, the ultimate celebration of life, the process that always ends in the possibility of new life? It is ORGASM. How many orgasms have you ever had? Did you ever reach a climax that made you sated, that was so mind-blowing that you did not desire another? Or are you always in search of the perfect but unattainable orgasm? And what would it mean anyway if you did achieve the perfect climax? Orgasm is something that no one can get enough of. Everyone wants a high, and they always want it, no matter how many times they’ve had it before. That’s what lifeis – the insatiable pursuit of the supreme high, the best high of all. Existence is perfectly configured to give you the perfect climax not just once but an infinite number of times. Your existential climax is your attainment of divinity. What could be better than the feeling of being God? You are all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful; you are perfect. Yet perfection is not a state that can be sustained any more than an orgasm can endure forever. It is of the nature of orgasm to cease, of life itself to cease in one form before beginning in another. Even the Gods are not immune to the law of life. Even the Gods die, but they perish of their own volition, knowing that they can plunge headlong once more into the exhilarating rapids of the irrepressible life current, the endless existential flow, the ceaseless ocean of cosmic orgasm. Life can never stop. Life can never reach a state of being that endures forever. No, life is instead all about becoming. Life is eternal becoming. It can never be. Life is movement, change, dynamism. All orgasms end because they must become something else. For there to be highs, there must be lows. For there to be the highest highs, there must be the lowest lows. All of life’s processes are dialectical, concerned with opposites and the resolution of contradictions. They all involve thesis, antithesis and synthesis, over and over again. Each dialectical cycle reaches its omega point – it’s absolute, perfect condition, its climactic endpoint – and that is a trigger for the dialectic to be reset and for everything to start again in a new dialectical cycle. We do not expect you to “believe” us. We reject faith and belief and we are interested only in reason and knowledge. What we are presenting in this series of books is the culmination of thousands of years of thinking by the Pythagorean Illuminati. Our religion – Illumination/Illuminism – is about the optimisation of the self, about turning each individual into God. That can be achieved solely through the acquisition of knowledge and the exercise of reason, ultimately all revolving around mathematics. The supreme dialectical barrier to becoming God is in fact faith. You can never realise your divine potential if you are a person of faith. You will always remain the slave of whatever it is in which you have faith. Faith is the abandonment of reason and knowledge in favour of some greatly cherished idea that offers you ultimate solace. It is an emotional crutch for emotional and rational cripples. Illuminism seeks nothing less than to unify once and for all religion, mathematics, science, psychology, politics, sociology and even the “paranormal” in one super synthesis, a true Grand Unified Theory of Everything. We aim to create the ultimate paradigm shift. Through this series of books, we intend to set humanity on a new and astounding path – going all the way to divinity. In the future, people will refer to the time before and after these books. They mark the dividing line between Old Humanity ruled by superstition, ignorance, faith, and vicious, greedy, selfish power elites and the New Humanity that walks beneath a vast, broad sky of reason, light, and knowledge and has neither masters nor slaves. We are at the launchpad. Will Mission Control send us to the furthest stars, or will it be a failure to launch – caused by the irrationality and instant gratification of Abrahamism and free-market junk capitalism? Bringing the light of reason to this world means dispelling the darkness of ignorance. The medieval thinker Roger Bacon wrote in Open Majus (Greater Work) that the triumph of ignorance had four primary sources: 1) Appeals to an unsuited authority. 2) The undue influence of custom. 3) The opinions of the unlearned crowd. 4) Displays of wisdom that simply cover up ignorance. Bacon, nominally an orthodox Catholic (he was a Franciscan monk based in Oxford in England), was a freethinker, renowned for the stress he placed on science and experimentation. Above all, he celebrated mathematics as the sure foundation of the other sciences. Bacon, a man of universal learning, was accused by some of being an alchemist (he was rumoured to have invented gunpowder in his laboratory) and black magician. Known as Doctor Mirabilis (the doctor of miracles), he was suspected of witchcraft and heresy and ordered to go to Paris where he was placed under surveillance by command of St. Bonaventura, the head of the Franciscan Order. He was forbidden for a time from publishing his writings. Contemptuous of stupid people, Bacon was later jailed for fourteen years for condemning the general ignorance and prejudice of monks and priests, and died not long after his release. Had he been born in the present day, he certainly wouldn’t have been a Christian, and, in truth, he wasn’t even a Christian in his own day. He was a secret Illuminatus. The Illuminati, as advocates of dialectical progress, look to the past for inspiration, but not for higher truths. The knowledge of now should always be superior to the knowledge of then if humanity has not succumbed to some terrible setback such as the Judaeo-Christian Dark Ages or the rise of Islam. It’s absurd to think that our ancestors knew better than we do, or to think that old and decrepit customs are right. We should never be guided by beliefs simply because they are widely held and popular. The truth is not democratic. It’s not a popularity contest. In An Enemy of the People, Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen attacked the notion that the majority is ever on the side of the truth, announcing, on the contrary, that it’s the minority that’s always in the right. His anti-hero Dr Stockmann declared, “The most dangerous enemy of truth and freedom amongst us is the majority—yes, the damned Liberal majority—that is it!” Later, he fulminated, “I propose to raise a revolution against the lie that the majority has the monopoly of the truth. What sort of truths are they that the majority usually supports? They are truths that are of such advanced age that they are beginning to break up. And if a truth is as old as that, it is also in a fair way to become a lie, gentlemen. Yes, believe me or not, as you like; but truths are by no means as long-lived as Methuselah—as some folk imagine. A normally constituted truth lives, let us say, as a rule seventeen or eighteen, or at most twenty years—seldom longer. But truths as aged as that are always worn frightfully thin, and nevertheless it is only then that the majority recognises them and recommends them to the community as wholesome moral nourishment. There is no great nutritive value in that sort of fare, I can assure you; and, as a doctor, I ought to know. These ‘majority truths’ are like last year’s cured meat—like rancid, tainted ham; and they are the origin of the moral scurvy that is rampant in our communities.” Dr Stockmann talked of a special few “fighting for truths that are too newly-born into the world of consciousness to have any considerable number of people on their side as yet.” In fact, this is always the case with the truth. Each new truth is at first pronounced by a singleperson. That person is then faced with a struggle to persuade others. There was a time when everyone believed the earth was flat. That was “the truth”. One man realised the earth was a globe, and eventually managed to convince others. Then everyone believed that the earth was at the centre of the universe, until one man realised it was just a planet orbiting the sun. But for every truth of this type, there are scores of “truths” proclaimed by prophets and such like, and these don’t come accompanied by a shred of evidence, yet are often far more solidly believed than the most rigorously tested scientific theories. Nietzsche said, “There are no facts, only interpretations.” His position was that truth is always a matter of perspective, that there are simply no absolute truths. We construct truths that we find useful, or lazily accept truths others have told us and which we find convenient to follow. Nietzsche had an even more extreme formulation: “What, ultimately, are man’s truths? Merely his irrefutable errors.” Schopenhauer was equally damning of humanity’s strange attitude to truth. He declared, “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” Even “common sense” isn’t very sensible. Einstein said, “Common sense is the set of prejudices we have acquired by the age of eighteen.” It seems that truth and humans don’t mix well. Without a sensitive instrument for detecting truth, we are left at the prey of crazy fantasies. Many of our most sacrosanct beliefs are certainly false, and not far short of insane. The Abrahamic religions manifestly contain zero truth content. People will always be seduced by nonsense if it seems life enhancing or comforting in some way. The upshot is that without reliable truths we are condemned to be stupid. We are a race of dunces who refuse to wear our pointed caps. Perhaps the very last human being will dig his own grave and carve an inscription on the headstone he has prepared for himself. It might read, “Here lies the last of humanity, a species that never once came into contact with the truth. It existed for a million years and spent the whole time in a dream. Its only skill was in inventing fantasies about itself. In all the infinite vastness of time and space, it managed to convince itself that it was the most special creation of an all-powerful, all-knowing Creator that it called God.” Humanity was born stupid, has stayed stupid, and relies on stupidity to make “sense” of the world. The only certainty is that notbeing stupid would kill most people; they couldn’t endure the world of reason. Human stupidity is nowhere more obvious than in the Abrahamic religions, which fall foul of everything Bacon warned against. Abrahamists do nothing but appeal to fallacious authorities, whether they are the words of ancient prophets, or “holy books” claiming to be the infallible Word of God. The Torah, the Bible and the Koran are all claimed to be the supreme, eternal and unchallengeable revelation of the same God, even though they all say wildly different and contradictory things. Abrahamism’s primary task is to get believers to subscribe to the notion that badly written, bizarre and mutually contradictory books that contain no science, philosophy or mathematics are nevertheless the absolute truth. In other words, they have to make you believe that “revelation” trumps reason, and that, sometimes, new revelations (such as Islam) can trump old revelations (such as Judaism and Christianity), but usually they can’t (Muslims believe that nothing can now trump Islam). Consider the history of Abrahamism. Firstly, God revealed himself to Abraham (the first Jew) and later to Moses (the prophet who defined Judaism via the Torah). The Jews were God’s “Chosen People. Then came the Jewish prophet Yehoshua ben Yosef (aka Jesus Christ) with his New Testament. His followers called him Messiah and even God himself and claimed that they were now the Chosen People and that any Jew who remain wedded to the Torah alone was now damned to hell. To be saved, you had to accept the Torah and New Testament. Then along came the Arab prophet Mohammed who said that Jesus Christ was just a prophet and not God, that Abraham was actually the first Muslim rather than the first Jew, that God spoke in Arabic and the Koran was his final word to humanity. Mohammed named himself the “Seal of Prophets”, meaning that he was the last one and that any person claiming in the future to be a prophet was a false prophet working for Satan. Remember that the Jews, Christians and Muslims all claim to worship the same God who communicates infallibly via a sacred text and that anyone who rejects the sacred text will go to hell. The Jews think the Christians and Muslims believe in false sacred texts and are going to hell, the Christians believe that the Jews and Muslims haven’t recognised Jesus Christ as God hence are going to hell and the Muslims think that the Christians and Jews don’t recognise Mohammed and the Koran, hence are going to hell. So, what is the criterion to rely on if revelation trumps reason? Which revelation is right amongst all the different, contradictory revelations that claim to be infallible? You are allowed to use faith alone, and if you place your faith in the wrong “Word of God” then you will burn in hell forever. Apart from appealing to dubious “authority”, the Abrahamic religions also commit the sin of giving undue influence to customs. The Jews have six hundred and twenty rules and commandments to obey in order to remain Jewish. Muslims have to pray five times a day, including in the night. All three Abrahamic religions do nothing but stuff ancient customs down the believer’ throats. Customs define these religions. Abrahamism strongly qualifies as expressing the opinions of Bacon’s “unlearned crowd”. Modern-day Muslims are practically retarded. The Koran says that the earth is flat and that there are in fact seven flat earths piled on top of each other, beneath seven semi-domed heavens! The Jews are Creationists and claim that the earth was created out of nothing circa 4004 BCE. Christian Fundamentalists think that the Grand Canyon was created by the Flood and that humans and dinosaurs lived together – because the Bible says nothing about creatures living on earth millions of years before Adam and Eve. There are absolutely no facts or scientific theories to support these deranged claims (and indeed they contradict all known facts and evidence). They all rely on nothing but revelation, yet they are fanatically accepted by billions of people in preference to the factual findings of science. It’s disturbing that so many human beings should so eagerly embrace manifest nonsense. The reason they do is that Abrahamism makes the crudest assault on people. It promises them heaven for believing and hell for disbelieving. Science, on the other hand, offers nothing but the scientific facts and scientific theories that account for an enormous range of phenomena and which power the modern technological world. It also provides modern medicine that has given life to so many who would otherwise have died, showing that science has the true power over life and death. In every way, science is superior to Abrahamism, yet still the common herd remains faithful to Abrahamism and contemptuous of science. Abrahamism reveres prophets who claimed to be wise but who never once uttered a single philosophical, scientific or mathematical truth. Why are God’s prophets so hostile to philosophy, science and mathematics? Why is their God equally hostile, to the extent that all of his “divine revelations” are scientifically, philosophically and mathematically absurd? No wonder Martin Luther, the founder of Protestantism, described reason as “the Devil’s whore” and proclaimed that faith alone was all that mattered. Protestantism is pure irrationalism, an outright assault on reason. Voltaire remarked, “The truths of religion are never so well understood as by those who have lost the power of reasoning.” Reason and Abrahamism do not mix. The European Enlightenment that ushered in the modern world was in every way a rejection of Abrahamism. Sadly, the Enlightenment was a failure. The Enlightenment liberated smart human beings, but to this day the vast majority of people are Endarkened. They cling to the imaginary power of revelation. They remain in thrall to the strange band of men called prophets who claimed to have some uniquely special relationship with God and found legions of people fool enough to believe them. There has never been a prophet who was not severely mentally ill. Indeed, their insanity sanctified their words. Mad and outrageous claims have always been regarded as holy. The Oracle at Delphi was a mad priestess inhaling narcotic fumes and spewing out trippy pronouncements. That is the template for all prophets – crazy people who were proclaimed as vessels of God rather than being put in mental asylums. As Havelock Ellis observed, “The whole religious complexion of the modern world is due to the absence from Jerusalem of a lunatic asylum.” Nietzsche declared, “Whatever a theologian regards as true must be false: there you have almost a criterion of truth.” To state it bluntly, mainstream religion is “normalised” madness. It consists of insane claims that are deemed sane simply because large numbers of people hold them. Their popularity and emotional power, not their truth or rationality, is what matters. Humanity has proved that it’s capable of believing anything at all. It’s hard to imagine any claim that would be more preposterous than those already believed by billions of religious people. Virgins births, people coming back from the dead, God being an Arabic speaker, God ordering a father to murder his son, God ordering Jews not to mix wool and linen (!), God creating humanity and then exterminating all but eight of them in the Great Flood… the list of demented and terrifying religious claims is endless. Isn’t it time reason was given a chance? So, what should the answer to everything look like? According to the Abrahamists, we already have the solution. For them, the whole explanation of existence lies in the Torah or Bible or Koran, depending on preference. For these people, the answer to everything is God and it’s not for us to ask God how he created the world, why he permitted evil and so forth. In other words, Abrahamists aren’t looking for a rational answer to the fundamental questions of existence. Instead, they are looking for an imaginary candidate to have such answers – and what imaginary candidate could be better than the all powerful, all knowing, all seeing Creator? Does any Abrahamist think to himself that he will ask God for his design plan, for how he accomplished creating something from nothing, or why he chose to have a universe large beyond our capacity to observe, full of galaxies, stars, planets, moons, comets, asteroids and interstellar dust? Will they ask him about why the speed of light is a constant, why the world of the atom is so weird, why he chose quantum mechanics, how to reconcile general relativity with quantum gravity, the significance of black holes, what a vacuum consists of, the significance of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle or Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem? If they are interested in such questions, why aren’t they thinking about them now? Since they’re not, they plainly don’t care what the answers are. They have no intellectual curiosity whatever. For these people, the meaning of life resides in an all-powerful Creator who must, by definition, know what he’s doing. His existence is all that matters to them, not the details of how he carried out Creation. To a thinking person, the mere existence of a divine being with all the answers is not enough. The answers themselves are what counts, and if “God” refuses to furnish them then the thinker is as dissatisfied as he was before. To a thinker, God’s existence is irrelevant unless God can and does provide an explanation of existence. To reiterate, for a thinker, the explanation of existence is what matters, and is actually more important than the existence of God. Is this not the profoundest of all ideas? For non-thinkers, the explanation of existence IS God, and no further explanations are sought. So, we see that humanity is divided into two groups – the religious non-thinkers who seek meaning solely in the existence of God and the thinkers who will never be content until they comprehend the mind of God. To wish to understand God’s mind is the same as wishing to be God, and that is the radical dividing line between the two types of human being. Believers are submissives who want to be dominated by an all powerful being. Thinkers are dominants who will never rest until they know every last detail of how the world works. A God who remained silent in the face of probing questions would never satisfy a thinker. A believer, on the other hand, would be on his knees or prostrate, eyes cast downwards, begging for God’s mercy. A believer would never dare to ask a question, and is not in any case interested in the answers. All heretics, atheists, agnostics, skeptics and Gnostics have been thinkers and dominants. They dared to ask the deadly questions that the believers were too afraid and credulous to ask. All believers throughout history have been non-thinking submissives. They believe BECAUSE they are non-thinking submissives. That’s what belief is – non-thinking submission to a higher power. In other words, religion has never been anything other than a tale of dominants and submissives. Dominants are incapable of simple beliefs and submissives are incapable of complex questions. Submissives are stupid and dominants are clever. It’s Hegel’s master-slave dialectic come to life with the submissives as the slaves and the dominants as the masters. No thinking person could read the Torah, Bible or Koran without finding them nauseating and an insult to his intelligence. They contain no answers to anything at all. All they contain is the formula for getting submissives to kneel and bow to an invisible power, represented by his powerful earthly representatives – the priest caste. This evil caste are dominants who prey on submissives. They exploit the weakness, superstition and credulity of the believers. The submissives are content to be dominated by the priest caste because being dominated is what they seek above all else. The Abrahamic “holy” books are all about submission and domination. The founding myth of Abrahamism is that God dominates Abraham to such an extent that Abraham is willing to murder his own innocent son for no other reason than to show how obedient he is to God’s will. To any sane person, it is unimaginable that a would-be child killer such as Abraham could be held in anything other than contempt. Abraham is a coward who would kill his own flesh and blood in his zeal to obey orders. He is no role model for humanity. He’s the opposite: the last person you would want to emulate is Abraham. Yet a submissive looking at exactly the same facts is irresistibly drawn to Abraham’s example. To kill for God – to obey to the extremest degree possible – is his ultimate dream. Abrahamism is incomprehensible to any thinking person, but of course thinking people aren’t its intended audience. Abrahamism is a work of psychological genius because it knows perfectly how to target submissives. It preys on their deepest fears, superstitions and irrational beliefs, and it gives them what they most crave: a supreme dominant, a perfect Torture God, to worship. Submissives can’t get enough of Abrahamism, the religion that debases, degrades and humiliates them. All of the physical postures required by Abrahamism are those of submission: on your knees, on your belly, eyes averted downwards, head bowed, hands with palms upward. No Abrahamist is permitted to stand up straight, to look up, to be human. Abrahamism is simply a sublimated sado-masochistic sexual ritual where the masochists revel in being tortured by their Lord and Master. Abrahamism proved so successful because it pandered to the craving of countless people to be slaves of a higher power that would reward them with paradise for obedience and punish them with eternal suffering for disobedience. Abrahamism is about submission and nothing else. Abraham is praised for showing unconditional obedience to God. Adam and Eve are condemned for disobedience. Moses was prevented from entering the “Holy Land” because of some trivial yet apparently unforgivable act of disobedience. Jesus Christ’s elaborate suicide is often spoken of as an act of perfect submission to God. As for Islam, it actually means Submission. Mohammed does nothing other than preach submission. Unthinking submissives are not looking for answers. This book would fill them with horror. Instead of allowing God to explain the world, this book explains God. Only dominant thinkers – authentic truth seekers – will grasp what we are saying. Our work will be meaningless to submissives. It doesn’t “press their buttons”. The question of what constitutes the “answer” to life, the universe and everything is a fascinating one. What will satisfy a thinking person? How will they know they’ve found what they’ve always been seeking? We know what submissives want – some proof that “God” exists. God is their perfect answer. There’s another group of people who think that some sort of proof of God has been physically coded into the universe – as signs and patterns – and if only they could decipher the “God Code”, they would uncover the proof of God’s existence. They measure distances between planets in search of some supernatural regularity, and they seek elaborate star patterns, and they measure the time between stellar events and so forth in their pursuit of some tell-tale sign of God’s brand on the cosmos, just as SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) look for some regular signal that must indicate the presence of an intelligence. A sub-group of these people is convinced that the Giza Plateau is where the answers to the proof of God’s existence are to be found. They speak of a “Hall of Records” and “The Book of Knowledge.” The pyramid itself is supposed to embody the number π. Rumour has it that an ancient time capsule is hidden at Giza that has infinitely more significance than the treasures of Tutankhamen. The “Hall of Records” in which the time capsule resides supposedly has secret chambers filled with technological wonders of an Atlantis-like civilization, much older than the Egyptian one, and enormously more advanced. The time capsule will allegedly reveal the true origins of humanity and the meaning of our existence. It was the American “seer” Edgar Cayce who predicted the discovery of an Atlantean “Hall of Records”, a library containing papyrus scrolls that add up to a Book of Knowledge of all things, located between the Sphinx and the river Nile with a connecting entrance under the right, front paw of the Sphinx. Others say that the Hall is directly beneath the Great Sphinx of Giza. We received a message from “DB” saying, “It now appears, at least to me, that all the things written about Giza and the Pyramids are true and it’s a record of mankind and the harbinger and holder of all the knowledge of mankind. It is for lack of a better word, the Hall of Records and thus indirectly, my personal Holy Grail. Elizabeth Newton feels that Giza is the control point of a closing of a Time Loop that will culminate in 2012. I am starting to agree with her or that the Giza Plateau seems to be at the very least the control point OF MY REALITY! In a bizarre twist on reality, I am starting to think I BUILT IT!!! I built it you might say? How so? Well it seems to be revealing itself to me way beyond what most individuals have been able to find and thus it is almost as if I am awakening to its secrets ALONE. My understanding of this plateau seems to be increasing and each day, no in fact each hour, no make that each minute brings a new revelation and a new discovery. So, I begin to think that it is indeed a gift from the future but also from the past as we go through our time loops together, or at least I am doing so. I begin to feel that The Giza Plateau, no in fact all the 3rd and 4th Dynasty Pyramids are a legacy from MYSELF, a memento of sorts to try to help me understand I have been this way before. I am now on the verge of totally translating this ancient ‘Book of Knowledge’ and becoming convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that The Giza Plateau AND The Great Pyramid are this ‘Book of Knowledge’ AND are the fabled and once lost ‘Hall of Records’. Here are my assertions: a) There is a God b) He left his calling card in The Solar System c) Early man knew this d) Early man “talked to god” There is no longer any doubt of an earlier civilization. There is no longer any doubt that Giza represents the Solar System OR that the Solar System represents Giza. Was I this god who did all of this? Do I really want the answer to that? Was The Earth the primal mound? Did it all originate from Giza? Did all the universe originate from the Giza Plateau? So maybe some of the early ones were correct. Maybe the Earth IS the centre of it all.” ***** Well, to what extent do such tales help with the “ultimate answer”? Imagine that the Hall of Records was indeed discovered. What would the papyrus scrolls tell us (assuming they were written in a decipherable language)? Wouldn’t they add just another layer of myths and legends? In what way would they provide us with the knowledge of the secrets of existence itself? These “archaeological seekers” have become so gripped by their pursuit of the Hall of Records and Book of Knowledge that they have failed to ask themselves exactly what they are expecting from their discoveries. They think that the discoveries themselves will somehow be sufficient. To make the discovery is somehow to obtain the answer. But let’s say that the Hall of Records contained a set of extremely abstract mathematical equations and declared that these constituted the Grand Unified Theory of Everything. Would any of the searchers – not a mathematician amongst them – be satisfied? If they couldn’t understand the equations then they would be as far as ever from the final answer. If an archaeologist discovered some ancient version of M-theory in the Hall of Records, would that be the answer? Why should the fact that something was discovered at the Giza Plateau make it any more important than the work of some Russian mathematical genius working on his own in a flat in Moscow in the present day? Even if DB was convinced of God’s existence, even if it was somehow encoded in the stars or the pyramids, DB would still have to ask himself, “And now what? What does God expect of me? What do I have to do? How am I supposed to live my life? Have I really got all the answers I need?” In a sense, proof of God’s existence changes nothing, especially if it’s not linked to knowledge of what God seeks from humanity. And the mere fact of his existence is not of course the “answer” anyway. Only the cosmic design plan itself is the answer – the Platonic blueprint used by the Demiurge. For Plato, the “Creator” was secondary to absolute knowledge itself – the eternal, perfect Forms. Proving the existence of the Platonic Demiurge wouldn’t help you one iota if you were wholly ignorant of the Platonic Forms. What Plato did was truly fascinating. He separated absolute knowledge from “God” and made it freestanding. God, like any other being, had to understand the Forms, and he had no power to change the Forms. God was as subject to the laws of absolute knowledge as anyone else. To know TRUTH is to know the Forms, NOT to know “God”. This is the position of all thinkers. For believers, on the other hand, the truth is to know God, and the Forms are neither here nor there. The Jewish philosopher Philo was the person who made the fateful choice of moving the Forms into the Mind of God, and thus fatally confused the person with the Forms. The Platonic distinction should have been preserved at all costs. Each of us is a seeker of the Forms, not a seeker of “God”. The Forms are the final answer – absolute knowledge – not God. And the Forms are, finally, pure mathematics. We have always asserted that the Abrahamists worship the Devil. How does anyone know that “God” is what he is claimed to be? The God of Abraham certainly never acted like a moral being, so how can he be God? Even if “God” behaved in a Godlike way for a time (and what exactly is a Godlike way anyway?), how would you know that his behaviour wouldn’t change in the future? As soon as you place the Forms within a personality, you have made absolute knowledge and standards subject to all of the foibles of living beings, hence no longer absolute and no longer infallible. As we have said, the absolute, objective truth never resides in a person but in a system – a Platonic system of immutable, perfect, unarguable, absolute, eternal truths. That’s why Plato was extremely clear about placing the Truth with a capital T in a domain of eternal perfection rather than in a person of allegedly eternal perfection (God). He simply couldn’t imagine a perfect, eternal Creator. The logical difficulties are insurmountable. If God is perfect then his Creation must be perfect. It really is that simple. In Plato’s system, there is a perfect domain, but this world is a flawed copy of it, and that’s why it’s imperfect. The perfect world is immaterial while this world is material and it’s material itself that causes imperfection and degradation. Plato’s system is logical. Any system relying on a Creator is not. When Philo took the disastrous decision to put Plato’s perfect Forms in the Mind of God, he paved the way for the Christian synthesis of Platonism (paganism) and Judaism, which went on capture the imagination of the world. (Christianity can also be thought of as St Paul’s hybrid of Mithraism and Jewish Messianism.) It cannot be stressed enough that eternal perfection does not reside in people but in existential laws – those of mathematics. A person can evolve towards perfection, but that means that they are not presently perfect hence are not eternally perfect. Only the laws of mathematics are eternally perfect. Nothing can ever change them. No person can change them. They can be neither created nor destroyed, nor transformed. They are immortal and imperishable. They are flawless and will always be flawless. The laws of mathematics never change under any circumstances. Insofar as anything called “being” (unchangingness) exists, it’s the laws of mathematics. Where Heraclitus said, “There is nothing permanent except change”, the modern Illuminati would say, “The laws of mathematics are permanent (pure being), and govern the endless process of change (becoming). There is nothing permanent except the laws of mathematics, and the laws of mathematics give rise to permanent change.” Why should the ultimate answer of existence be anything that any ordinary human being can grasp? Why shouldn’t it be extremely complex mathematics, philosophy or science that is far beyond the ability of all but a few geniuses to comprehend? If science’s M-theory were indeed proclaimed as the final answer, how many people would be able to understand it, given that it’s the most complex theory in human history, reconciling two ultra complex theories (general relativity and quantum mechanics) that are already far beyond non-scientists’ abilities. Why should the ultimate answer be “democratic”? Why should it be accessible to all? Why should it be simple and straightforward? Isn’t it, of necessity, the most complex thing of all, even more complex than God himself since it actually explains God? Well, you can judge for yourself because we are going to reveal in this series of books the answers to life, the universe and everything. Douglas Adams’ famous answer of “42” isn’t, as it turns out, so ridiculous. It’s one part of the answer because the answer is all about numbers and mathematics. Our claims to knowing ultimate truth may sound ridiculously far-fetched, even comical. Have not endless charlatans peddled their wares over the centuries and lured the unwary and gullible into their malevolent webs of deceit and exploitation? What makes us different from them? Why should you take us seriously? Well, as we stated at the outset, we are not prophets proclaiming these books to be the sacred word of God. We don’t ask you to believe a single thing we say. In fact, we insist that you don’t since we have contempt for the world of faith and belief. We don’t threaten you with hellfire if you disagree with us, though we do offer paradise if you follow our long, intellectual road. Above all, what makes us different is that we have understood the true ontological basis of reality – i.e. the truth of existence – and it does not involve faith, mysticism, mumbo jumbo, obscurantism, mystery, magic or woo woo. The universe has in some sense played the ultimate joke on the human race – and is that not somehow supremely appropriate? – because it has hidden the secrets of existence in the most terrifying, difficult, intimidating, off-putting, emotionally unappealing and indeed place imaginable, the place where almost all of humanity fears to tread or lacks the wherewithal to tread. If you wanted to hide the Holy Grail, where would you put it so that it was right in front of everyone’s faces – hidden in plain sight – but no one could detect it other than those with the “eyes to see”? The answer was given over 2,500 years by one of the greatest figures in human history – the ancient Greek philosopher and mathematician, Pythagoras. He was the first person to use the term “philosopher” and the first true deductive and systematic mathematician. Showman, mystic, magician, wonder worker and formal founder of a secret society of adepts that has come to be known as the Illuminati – “the enlightened ones” – Pythagoras made perhaps the most enigmatic and mysterious declaration there has ever been: the universe is made of numbers! The modern Illuminati make an almost identical statement: the universe is mathematical. Existence is mathematical; reality is mathematical; knowledge is mathematical; information is mathematical, the mind is mathematical; consciousness is mathematical; life is mathematical; God is mathematical, the soul is mathematical; the afterlife is mathematical; religion is mathematical; psychology is mathematical; science is mathematical; the paranormal is mathematical. Even art, emotion and irrationality are mathematical. The universe is intelligible, organised and unified because there is not any part of it that is not completely and utterly mathematical. All phenomena are just manifestations of mathematics. There is nothing other than mathematics. You, the reader, are nothing but mathematics, as is this book, the words, the ideas, the concepts. Wherever you look, wherever you go, whatever you do, you are engaged in mathematics – and yet that’s the LAST thing you imagine to be true. So, our task is the most radically ambitious ever undertaken – to reveal to you the mathematical nature of everything without boring you to tears with lots of incomprehensible mathematical formulae (though, one day, no mathematical formula will ever bore you). Like the ancient Alexandrian mathematician Euclid whose book of geometrical axioms ruled supreme for millennia, we will provide the mathematical axioms that underlie everything. We will be using philosophy as much as mathematics since philosophy is the best way of interpreting mathematical concepts in relatively precise yet non-mathematical language. We will also employ some scientific concepts, although we will often be engaged in showing that the foundations of science do not rest on solid ground – because they are insufficiently mathematical and philosophical. Science, despite all of its success, is the junior partner of mathematics and philosophy. Mathematics is not known as the queen of the sciences for nothing, and philosophy has always been far more aligned to answering the big questions of existence than science. Science is still mute when it comes to addressing the whys of existence. It does “how” quite well, but that’s never enough. Before we begin in earnest, we must draw a few mathematical distinctions so that there is no ambiguity about what we are setting out to prove. Mathematics is often regarded as an abstraction, a wonderful tool of the mind that just happens to prove remarkably useful in science. Most scientists are “instrumentalists” meaning that they use mathematics as a tool to get the right answers and don’t spend too much time pondering why mathematics should correspond so astoundingly accurately with scientific reality. Some philosophers have proposed that we simply “construct” a reality based on science and mathematics that has no necessary connection with “real reality”. This is reminiscent of Kant’s philosophy of a mind-created phenomenal reality that is somehow based on an underlying and completely unknowable noumenal reality. In this view of mathematics as a construct, science and mathematics are partners in a kind of gigantic fraud and illusion and actively conceal the true nature of things. We use them to invent “reality”. Our position is that there is no fraud. Mathematics so accurately describes our world because the world IS mathematical and can’t be otherwise. Try to imagine the alternative: a “true reality” that has absolutely no connection with mathematics. How could an “invented” mathematical description of reality possibly coincide with such a non-mathematical reality? That would imply some correspondence between the two that was even more baffling than Cartesian mind-matter dualism. Two radically different substances such as mind and matter cannot interact unless there is a hidden unity between them. How can mathematics and non-mathematics share any possible commonality? How could they possibly map to each other and correspond to each other? Moreover, if mathematics has nothing to do with reality and is not embedded in reality, how did the mind manage to construct something as staggeringly complex as mathematics? What are the mental origins of mathematics? Mathematics would become as much a mystery as existence itself. However, if we are all inherently mathematical objects in a mathematical universe, there is no mystery whatever. Distinguished mathematical physicist Roger Penrose placed so much significance on mathematics that he proposed that there are three kinds of reality: physical, mental and mathematical, all connected in an unknown and deeply puzzling way. Such a proposition is even worse that Cartesian dualism. Now we have three apparently separate “substances” with which to deal and to make them communicate with each other and work in perfect harmony. What we will show is that there is only one reality – that of mathematics – and mind and matter are its two expressions. Consider again the concept of a non-mathematical universe. How would it be organised and ordered in the absence of mathematics? What non-mathematical rules would it obey? Is it possible to have any non-mathematical set of rules complex enough to organise a universe? Indeed, are any rules possible at all in the absence of mathematics? How could stars and atoms, quantum mechanics and relativity theory make any sense non-mathematically? Order and organisation are inherently mathematical. Logic is simply a branch of mathematics (although the mathematical philosophers Russell and Whitehead bravely tried but failed to prove that pure mathematics is only a branch of logic). It is impossible to order or organise anything without mathematics and logic. Language and grammar only make sense because of logical syntax and are themselves just expressions of mathematics. Let’s just emphasize this point. Without mathematics, there can be no cosmos, no ordered universe obeying regular patterns and which is organised in particular ways as in planets, stars and galaxies, atoms and molecules. What is the periodic table upon which chemistry is based if not a set of mathematical relations? It tells us the number of protons, neutrons and electrons an atom of each element has. It tells how the electrons are ordered around the nucleus of each element. It tells us how chemical reactivity is determined by how stable the outer electron orbits are. All of this is underpinned by quantum mechanics, an enormously mathematical theory. If you removed mathematics from reality, you would not only remove our ability to understand the universe, you would actually abolish reality since it is impossible for a non-mathematical universe to exist. There was one extremely simple way for Kant to reconcile the “knowable” phenomenal universe and the “unknowable” noumenal universe and that was to make them both mathematical. Then the whole universe could be known mathematically. In this context, we shall introduce the mathematical concept of the TRANSFORM. A transform converts a function from one mathematical domain (such as space or time) to another (such as frequency) with no loss of information (to be more precise, there is always a loss but it is so small as to be negligible and can be dismissed in situations we ordinarily encounter). Transforms form the basis of signal processing and underpin all modern technologies based on images and sounds. Wikipedia says, “Signal processing is an area of systems engineering, electrical engineering and applied mathematics that deals with operations on or analysis of signals, in either discrete or continuous time. Signals of interest can include sound, images, time-varying measurement values and sensor data, for example biological data such as electrocardiograms, control system signals, telecommunication transmission signals, and many others. Signals are analogue or digital electrical representations of time-varying or spatial-varying physical quantities.” Wikipedia lists the four main applications as: 1) Audio signal processing – for electrical signals representing sound, such as speech or music. 2) Speech signal processing – for processing and interpreting spoken words. 3) Image processing – in digital cameras, computers, and various imaging systems. Image processing is any form of signal processing for which the input is an image, such as a photograph or video frame; the output of image processing may be either an image or, a set of characteristics or parameters related to the image. Most image-processing techniques involve treating the image as a two-dimensional signal and applying standard signal-processing techniques to it. Image processing usually refers to digital image processing, but optical and analogue image processing also are possible. 4) Video processing – for interpreting moving pictures. Video processing is a particular case of signal processing, which often employs video filters and where the input and output signals are video files or video streams. Video processing techniques are used in television sets, VCRs, DVDs, video codecs, video players, video scalers and other devices. “In Digital Signal Processing, engineers usually study digital signals in one of the following domains: time domain (one-dimensional signals), spatial domain (multidimensional signals), frequency domain, autocorrelation domain, and wavelet domains. They choose the domain in which to process a signal by making an informed guess (or by trying different possibilities) as to which domain best represents the essential characteristics of the signal. A sequence of samples from a measuring device produces a time or spatial domain representation, whereas a discrete Fourier transform produces the frequency domain information, that is the frequency spectrum. … Signals are converted from time or space domain to the frequency domain usually through the Fourier transform. The Fourier transform converts the signal information to a magnitude and phase component of each frequency. Often the Fourier transform is converted to the power spectrum, which is the magnitude of each frequency component squared. The most common purpose for analysis of signals in the frequency domain is analysis of signal properties. The engineer can study the spectrum to determine which frequencies are present in the input signal and which are missing. In addition to frequency information, phase information is often needed. This can be obtained from the Fourier transform. With some applications, how the phase varies with frequency can be a significant consideration.” – Wikipedia ***** The world is presented to us mostly as visual and auditory phenomena. This is the province of signal processing based, above all, on the Fourier Transform. Visual and auditory signals that we experience in space and time can be represented in an entirely different domain called the frequency domain. The frequency domain, a domain that exists outside space and time, is none other than the domain of mind. ALL signals, all sensory information, all information gathered via smell, taste or touch as well as sight and hearing is in fact convertible into a frequency domain representation i.e. the whole sensory domain that links us to the physical world of science is in fact just a transform of the frequency domain of mind. The mathematical transform – in particular the Fourier Transform – is what links mind and matter. The material world of time and space is one side of the transform and the mental world of frequencies outside space and time is the other side of the transform, and each domain can be translated into the other. That is the solution to the brain-mind conundrum. The brain is, in a manner of speaking, just the mind represented as a material object in space and time gathering space-time information. The mind is, correspondingly, just the brain transformed into the frequency domain. Our subjective experience of mind is located in the timeless and spaceless frequency domain, which is why we don’t experience our thoughts in space and time and we have no sense of our mind ageing even if we see our bodies ageing. A fifty-year-old will often say that in terms of his mind he still feels like a twenty-year-old. The mind does not “age” directly but only via the physical deterioration of the brain to which it is harnessed, and until the brain has reached a very unhealthy state, the mind effectively remains the same one you had when you first became an adult, no matter how long ago that was. A healthy 100-year-old might well think that his current mind is identical to his mind of eight decades earlier, though his physical body might be almost unrecognisable to the one he had all those years ago. Is it not truly extraordinary how, year after year, our minds stay the same while our bodies do not. The key point about a transform is that the respective domains in which the information is held are both equally real. Neither is privileged over the other. One isn’t “real” and the other a construct. Both are as real as each other. Two apparently different domains are reflecting a single reality in two radically different but completely convertible ways. Does that not sound suggestive of a baffling dualism with which we are all familiar: mind and matter? Are mind and matter simply the two sides of a mathematical transform, and fully interconvertible? Matter is a representation in space and time: mind is the equivalent representation outside space and time. The Fourier transform provides a basic explanation of the human condition and in particular the otherwise baffling mind-body interaction. At a stroke, mind-matter dualism is resolved. And can we not apply exactly the same principle to Kant’s famous division of reality into phenomenon and noumenon? Far from being unknowable, the noumenal universe is simply the other side of a mathematical transform. All of the information encoded in the phenomenal universe is fully available in the noumenal universe and vice versa, just as in the world of signal processing all of the information in the time domain is equally available in the frequency domain. Before the advent of Fourier mathematics, the time and frequency domains would have seemed like two separate domains with nothing in common. In fact, they are the same domain presented in two different but equivalent ways. Kant, had he been aware of transforms, might well have concluded that the noumenal universe is not unknowable in principle but is merely provisionally unknowable until we have identified the relevant transform that link phenomenon and noumenon. Thanks to the transform, we can obtain total information about another apparently mysterious and unknowable domain from the information readily accessible to us in a domain with which we are entirely familiar and comfortable. The material world with which scientists are so comfortable is actually a transform of an independent mental domain (the existence of which scientists completely deny), and vice versa.