Dacia Iluministă

Academia Iluministă (62)

The Profound Mystery of Time:

If time is grounded in imaginary space and there are three dimensions of imaginary space then doesn’t that mean that time is three dimensional rather than the single dimensional arrow of time that we experience? We can never travel backwards or sideways or up and down in time…we just go forward.

But is that true? Physicists say that superluminal particles would be perceived by us to go backwards in time, so, in theory at least, it’s possible for time to have a reverse direction. But Einstein’s equations of special relativity actually indicate that superluminal particles would experience “imaginary” time, but no scientist knows what that is. There’s actually a huge problem with defining what time is in scientific equations, and what its negative might be. Is “negative” time simply -t compared with it? But what about imaginary time and negative imaginary time: it and -it? Where do they fit in? And what if time is actually complex and has a real part and an imaginary part? What then? Science doesn’t have a clue about any of this. Time is always handled as an ill-defined “bodge”; it seems to work (more by accident than design), but there’s no firm theoretical foundation for it.

Why does it work at all? Time is regarded as a one-dimensional scalar quantity. It has a magnitude and, in our experience, it goes one way only – forward. But consider distance. A straight line between two points is a one-dimensional scalar. But if we have drawn a straight line in a 3D space then its two ends may have x, y and z coordinates such as (3, 4, 7) and (10, 2, 8) i.e. it is now actually a vector (a directional line) in 3D space and not just any old line. But, in real life, its magnitude may be all that really matters to us. If we have to walk ten kilometres over flat land from one place to another, it is the distance travelled that will matter to us. We won’t be aware of how the x, y and z coordinates constantly change as we move; the vector elements are almost irrelevant. Obviously, we need to be walking in the right direction to reach our desired destination, but once that is established, it is the magnitude that preoccupies us. Time is treated as a scalar but is actually a vector, exactly like distance. We just don’t notice its vector aspects.

In 6D(3r3i), it is possible to go forwards/backwards, left/right, up/down. Exactly the same is true of imaginary space, hence of time. In 6D(3r3i) space, positive and negative space, and imaginary and negative imaginary space, can all be defined. By the same token, positive and negative time, and imaginary and negative imaginary time can all be defined. A proper scientific theory of everything needs to be able to clearly distinguish between all of these different cases. Many scientific equations involve taking the square root, but a square root always has a positive and negative solution for both real and imaginary numbers. Often, science only accepts one solution as real: the positive root of a real number. Everything else is discarded as unreal. Yet Einstein’s special theory of relativity and the quantum mechanical treatment of “antimatter” show how wrong this approach is. The world is enormously more complex. It’s no wonder that scientists haven’t got a clue what dark matter and dark energy are since, on the whole, they have rejected all of the “unreal” solutions where these mysterious entities are unquestionably lurking. The cosmos is not ruled by real and imaginary numbers (the extreme cases), but by the numbers in-between: the complex numbers that have both a real and imaginary component. Science, again by accident more than design, has found equations that actually deal effectively with complex numbers, but scientists are unaware of why their equations actually work. After all, they have no idea what the core dimensionality of the cosmos is. According to relativists, the cosmos is a 4D spacetime continuum. According to M theorists, it is an 11D spacetime with 10 spatial dimensions (seven of which are “folded” into practically nothing, hence why we can’t see them!) and one of time. Is it any wonder quantum mechanics can’t be reconciled with the general theory of relativity (concerning gravity)? How can the two theories be blended if they can’t define something as basic as dimensionality? We have no doubt at all that if relativists and M-theorists both start using 6D(3r3i), many of the difficulties in merging the two theories will vanish.

Another point worth mentioning is what we mean by “going back in time”. If I truly travel back in time by, say, ten years then it means that I go back to who I was and where I was ten years ago, and everything that happened to me in the interim is erased. However, most people think that time travel means going back to the past but in their present condition and state of knowledge. The two situations are entirely different.

In the former case, time has truly been reversed. In the second case, it hasn’t been reversed at all because the time traveller’s consciousness is still GOING FORWARD in time.

Going forward in time actually means that INFORMATION always increases. To go back in time would imply the erasure of INFORMATION and that can never happen. This is why we experience time as always going forward even though it is actually three dimensional like space. It is INFORMATION FLOW that has only one direction in time. Our consciousness, hence our experience of time, is linked to this information flow, not to time itself. We can’t go back in time in terms of reversing time (erasing information). If we could experience the time of ten years ago, but with our present knowledge, then we would still be going forward in time in terms of information. Such is the mystery of time.

Time needs to be completely re-examined in philosophical, religious and scientific terms. The 6D(3r3i) paradigm provides the only mathematically, scientifically and philosophically coherent framework in which to define and analyze time.

It’s time for a scientific revaluation of all values!
__________

The Profound Mystery of Schrödinger’s Quantum Mechanical Wave Equation:

Schrodinger’s wave equation is one of the most important in physics. If you look it up, you will discover that it has the imaginary number right at its heart. What’s that there for? How does it make any sense in the “real” world (of real numbers)?

No physicist actually knows why it’s there. They simply know that it works. But we know the reason – it’s precisely because of 6D(3r3i) space. The imaginary dimensions are every bit as “real” and important as the real dimensions. Quantum mechanical particles need to be handled with 6D complex numbers (with real and imaginary parts). Schrodinger’s equation achieves this by incorporating the imaginary number along with real components, but Schrodinger, and every other scientist, has never been able to account for why the imaginary number is essential to quantum particles. We have now given the reason: 6D(3r3i) complete mathematics requires it.

All quantum “weirdness” stems from the fact that these tiny, almost massless particles are whizzing around in 6D(3r3i) space rather than 3D real space, and are fluttering in and out of the null zone that exists outside space and time (hence these particles can seem to be in two or more places at once). This is the “physical” model of what is actually taking place at the quantum level, a subject that has hitherto baffled all scientists, who have never been able to form any kind of picture of what is taking place. Once again, 6D(3r3i) provides the decisive breakthrough.

The famous Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox concerning instantaneous communication between correlated particles separated by enormous distances is explained with consummate ease: the particles are linked outside space and time via the null zone which links all points in the cosmos. Simple stuff! Yet it has defied the greatest scientific minds for decades.

M-theory will never work because scientists are groping their way forward without actually knowing what they’re doing and without having any logical conceptual framework in which to work. They are continually changing their ideas to suit the latest experimental data, rather than logically working out what NEEDS to be true. Over and over again, scientists manage to find good equations, but they never really know why they work, just that they do. That’s why there are so many rival interpretations of what quantum mechanics means in terms of reality. That debate should end thanks to the 6D(3r3i) space of complete mathematics.

******

The complete mathematical space 6D(3r3i) provides the framework for the Grand Unified Theory of Everything. Everything that can happen, happens within this space. One way of thinking about the cosmos is to consider a single point and its relationship with the infinite number of other points in the cosmos. The point we choose will be separated by a certain distance from each of these infinite other points. There are only three possible types of distance it can experience: a “real” separation, an “imaginary” separation” or a null (zero) separation. That’s it. Nothing else can happen. The same is true for every point in the cosmos. If we want the simplest possible way of thinking about the cosmos it is this: energy moves from point to point and as it does so it crosses a real distance, an imaginary distance or no distance at all. This staggeringly simple model describes everything that can ever happen in the cosmos from a scientific standpoint. All the complexity we see around us is simply the manifestation of what happens when energy, spread across an infinity of points, moves around from one point to another within that infinite matrix – the ultimate cosmic game of Musical Chairs except no chairs are ever removed and the music never stops.

The null zone – where distinct points are separated by no distance – is the key to the whole edifice. Here, and here alone, time and space do not exist. Dimensionality disappears. Movement occurs, and yet no distance is ever traversed. Everything here is interconnected, interpenetrating, flowing over and into each other endlessly. This is the extraordinary domain of the mind, the soul, the afterlife, God. It is the dazzling domain of light.

It is this null zone that underlies the Buddhist conception of nirvana – the underlying Oneness where everything is interconnected and where the individual is “extinguished”. He enters into union with Zero, with nullity, so to speak. And also with infinity since the null zone is as strongly associated with infinity as its twin zero. So, Buddhists must be congratulated. Nirvana is certainly an enlightened concept that expresses much of the essence of the null zone. Equally, the Hindu concept of Brahman, the universal soul, the eternal, infinite, immanent, transcendent reality and ground of all being can be equated with the null zone, so Hindus too must be congratulated. Nirvana and Brahman both lie beyond the “veil of illusion”, which we can equate with the r > 0 physical cosmos, the cosmos where distances between points are real or imaginary, but not zero. As for Taoism, the Tao is the ultimate creative principle of the universe in which all things are unified and connected: again, this is strikingly like the null zone.

Buddhism and Hinduism, if they dropped their allegiance to the idiotic concept of karma, would be truly enlightened, and close to the fundamental truth of existence. Taoism is arguably one step closer already to Illumination since it avoids karmic thinking.

Only Abrahamism, with its laughable idea of God being external to the universe rather than at the centre of it, is truly deluded and ignorant. Abrahamists – Jews, Christians and Muslims – could not be further from the truth. Their holy books are a philosophical, religious, scientific and mathematical joke. Their holy prophets are liars, madmen, idiots, clowns, frauds, fools, fakers, charlatans, warmongers, fanatics and deceivers. The Abrahamists are the forces of darkness, utterly estranged from the light.

It’s time for an end to all the mumbo jumbo, hocus pocus and mysticism. We have provided, as we promised we would, the framework in which all the issues of religion, philosophy, science and mathematics can be treated in a comprehensive, unified, integrated manner. Science and religion do not describe two separate universes, and “never the twain shall meet” (so to speak). Rather, there is only one universe. Science and religion come at the same problem from two different angles, but they are dealing with exactly the same problem, not completely separate ones. If religion does not or cannot specify the mathematical and scientific framework in which it is said to manifest itself then it’s not worth a cent. It’s literally nothing but madness and delusion into which human fantasy will flow unopposed, completely disconnected from reality and truth. That is the essence of the Abrahamic religions of faith. If your starting premises have no basis in fact then you can literally believe anything. None of it will make any contact with the truth.

Only the framework we have provided allows a proper consideration of religion. Only this framework links it indissolubly with science, philosophy and mathematics. Religion has nothing whatsoever to do with faith. Religion is a special type of science that operates fully within the scientific framework. We have shown that religion is the province of the null zone where time and space do not apply – where everything endures forever. The part of us that exists in the null zone cannot die; we have a guaranteed afterlife.

Descartes described the mind as being without “extension”. In the null zone, we have exactly that extensionless domain of mind. Panpsychism asserts that mind is everywhere. We have seen that every point in existence is indeed connected to the null zone, so mind is omni-present. Enlightened religions talk of everything being interconnected. We have demonstrated that this is true within the null zone. Enlightened religions say that we can enter into union with God. Again, the null zone provides this precise possibility. All psychic and paranormal phenomena are mediated through this “magic” zone of cosmic interconnectivity. We haven’t even begun to tap into the extraordinary powers that reside within this zone, the zone that can convert us into gods.

Have we not provided the entry point to all the mysteries of the cosmos? Have we not provided the Solomon Key?

Illumination is the only truly valid religion. It is the only religion based on science, mathematics, philosophy, logic, and reason. It is a religion of knowledge, not faith. The Eastern religions are pale imitations. The Abrahamic religions are preposterous. Atheism is the quasi-religious worship of scientific materialism. Agnosticism is for people who are paralysed by doubt, indecision and lack of knowledge. To access the truth, you don’t have to take any “leap of faith”. You simply have to think.

The adherents of Illumination are incredibly loyal. Why? Because they have at last found what they were always looking for – the one, true religion that avoided all the ridiculous bullshit of all the rest. It is not a “finished” religion. It’s a dialectical religion, always making itself more perfect, always embracing new knowledge and new insights. It is never out of date. It is not frozen in time like Abrahamism which gets less and less relevant with every passing day. All the followers of Illumination can contribute to its development. There are no prophets and no holy texts. Ideas are adopted according to their merit. Illuminism is all about meritocracy. The smartest, most meritorious make the biggest contributions.

Ten Grand Masters are singled out by the Illuminati because they are the ones who made the most meritorious contributions. One of them – Simon Magus – is accorded special status because he achieved gnosis before his death and become a man-God. His is the example that all Illuminists seek to emulate. But Simon Magus was not the intellectual driving force of Illuminism. That honour falls to the likes of Pythagoras, Heraclitus, Leibniz and Hegel. Nor was he the most revolutionary and political – that honour falls to Adam Weishaupt. The most creative and artistic was Goethe. The greatest showmen were Pythagoras and Empedocles.

Solomon, Pythagoras and Empedocles had almost the same extraordinary powers as Simon the Magician. Hypatia, the only woman in the list, was extraordinarily intelligent, beautiful, charismatic, dignified, and courageous. Her philosophical, mathematical and scientific knowledge were profound, and she sought to overcome the opposition of Christian fanatics with peace, love, logic and reason – only to be brutally and horrifically martyred by the diabolical, evil Christians.

******

We, the Illuminati have glimpsed the Mind of God. Now we want to become God. Our sign is the truth, and in that sign we shall surely conquer. Ours is the religion for the past, the present and the future. For then, now and forever. Ours is the religion dialectically perfecting itself. It is “complete” only when it attains its Omega Point…when every Illuminatus has become God.

******

The notorious medieval theological question – “How many angels can dance on the point of a needle?” – can actually be regarded as the precursor of modern discussions of quantum physics and Einstein’s special theory of relativity. Thomas Aquinas said that angels and human souls are without matter (incorporeal) i.e. they are rather like massless photons. He also said that angels, being pure spirits, are not, strictly speaking, in any place – they have no specific location, which again is like photons that exist in the null zone, which are everywhere at once. He declared that they are in the place, or places, where they exercise their activity, which is a rather clever definition that could equally be said of photons. An angel, according to Aquinas, does not pass from place to place. It could exercise its activity first in Italy and then in Germany in two instants (of angelic time), without travelling through the intervening space. This sounds like a quantum particle entering the null zone at one instant and exiting somewhere else completely different in the universe at the next quantum instant. Aquinas contends that many angels cannot be said to be in the same place at the same time for this would suggest that they could be producing the same effect at the same time. There can only be one angel in one place at one time. However quantum physics argues otherwise. Certain types of particles can indeed produce the same effect at the same time, leading to a massive intensification of an effect at a specific point. This is the case with laser technology, for example.

Nevertheless, Aquinas and other medieval thinkers engaged in a fascinating way with issues that are now frequently debated by top physicists, albeit using different terminology. But isn’t the idea that photons are none other than angels an inspiring one? When the noonday sun blazes down on us, are we being immersed in guardian angels coming from heaven to protect us?
__________

Putting It All Together:

Illuminism has no connection whatsoever with faith. We don’t expect anyone to “believe” a single word of what we have said. Our religion has no time for those who cling to Holy Scripture and the words of dead prophets. All faith-based religious statements are intrinsically absurd and quintessentially UNBELIEVABLE. That’s the supreme irony of the Abrahamic religions. They are all about belief, yet no one with a brain and power of rational thought could ever believe them.

We have presented Illuminism as a set of philosophical, religious, mathematical and scientific statements. Slowly but surely we have constructed the edifice that everyone can now see for themselves. We have quoted no holy books of Illuminism that you must accept without question; we have quoted no prophets of Illuminism whom you must believe utterly or suffer eternal hellfire.

Every statement we have made is capable of being analysed and challenged. If you think you can improve Illuminism, go for it! Illuminism is a dialectical religion; it is perfecting itself, just as the cosmos itself is. That is the fundamental nature of the dialectic.

The following are the essential points of Illuminism, the logical premises by which it stands or falls:

1) Q. What is the arche, the fundamental substance of existence?

A. It is “minded”, formless, striving, dimensionless energy – Pure Will. Since it is dimensionless, it does not experience the “mortal” dimensions of space and time, hence is immortal. It has always existed and it will always exist. It is existence itself. It can never not exist. It accords with the First law of Thermodynamics which declares that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It cannot be brought into existence and nor can it be removed from existence; it has simply always existed. But, crucially, it can be transformed. Its quality can be improved until it’s perfect.

2) Q. How does the formless arche attain form?

A. Through the only thing that can provide absolute order, organization, system, stability, pattern, logic – mathematics, the queen of the sciences, the sacred science. Nothing else exists that can accomplish what mathematics can. It is the ONLY candidate for providing cosmic form, law and organized behaviour.

3) Q. In that case, where does mathematics come from? How is the cosmos able to understand mathematics?

A. Mathematics is in fact the surest proof of cosmic mind and intelligence. It is absurd to propose as materialistic science does, that mindless matter is miraculously able to organize itself in a host of complex ways according to the “laws of physics”. No scientist has ever explained where the laws of physics come from and how they are possible. Why those laws and not others? Why any laws at all? Why not eternal randomness and chaos? Why should matter be subject to law at all? Why should matter have any connection with mathematics? In fact, the cosmos “learned” mathematics over many eons by nothing more sophisticated than trial and error, evolutionary natural selection and dialectical progression: the principles that have guided all existence since time immemorial. The cosmos in itself – dimensionless energy – continually “spilled” out of itself into dimensionality. It is the nature of Will never to be “contained”. It will always try to reach beyond itself. This was a haphazard process since dimensionality is mathematical and mathematics did not yet exist in any coherent way. Each time Will entered the domain of partial, incomplete dimensionality, it learned some new item of mathematical information. After countless “experiments”, the Will had learned to count and understand geometrical shapes. Not in any conscious sense – more like the ultimate autistic savant. Its grasp of mathematics was strictly intuitive.

Mathematics was the first language ever learned by the cosmos; it is thereby the fundamental language of existence. It is the basis of all order and thought, of logic and reason, of mind, of consciousness. It is the essential framework providing the categories of understanding. It is the sine qua non. Mathematics can be considered as the true version of the Platonic Forms: eternal, perfect, unchanging, existing in a permanent ideal state to which the whole cosmos has access. They were not given to the cosmos as perfect Forms; rather they dialectically evolved and when they reached their Omega Point they were subject to no further change; they had achieved perfection and completion. Plato’s domain of perfect Forms is the domain of mathematics and it is now hard-wired into the cosmos (we might say that this domain is stored in the core memory of the cosmic mind, the Read-Only memory, to use a computing term.) The Will learned through its endless experimentation that only “complete” mathematics is stable and provides a proper framework for organization and order: all of Plato’s mathematical Forms must be used, not an incomplete subset. And so came the miraculous moment when the r = 0 dimensionless cosmos of mind deliberately poured itself out into the r > 0 dimensional cosmos, according to a perfect intuitive understanding of complete mathematics as eternal Platonic Forms. Formlessness flowed through the domain of mathematical Forms and emerged in the myriad forms we observe in Nature. Plato’s mathematical Forms are the origins of the laws of physics that shape the world we observe around us. They dictated the creation of the material world. This supreme, defining event was none other than the Big Bang itself.

4) It is essential for the cosmos to externalise itself, to physicalize itself, to alienate itself, in order to dialectically overcome that alienation and reach self consciousness. The teleological purpose of the cosmos is precisely that: to attain self-consciousness, to actualise all of the latent powers, potential and possibilities of raw mind. No scientist has ever explained how mind originates in dead, mindless matter. The truth is that the arche is alive and minded and always has been. There is no dualism between life and death, between mind and non-mind, between consciousness and non-consciousness. Everything exists on a continuum of actualisation of life, mind and consciousness. Humans have more of it (more actualisation) than plants which have more of more of it than rocks which have more of it than interstellar dust. The cosmos is based on monism, not dualism. To be precise, it is a dialectical monism. All dualistic systems – those based on two radically different concepts such as mind/matter, death/life, consciousness/non-consciousness – all fail for exactly the same reason: two unlike substances cannot interact.

5) Mathematical dialectical monism based on complete mathematics provides the answer to Leibniz’s requirement that the best account of the world is the one that is “simplest in hypotheses and the richest in phenomena.” Complete mathematics achieves precisely this. Nothing else could accomplish this with the same simplicity, consistency, efficiency and elegance. In fact nothing else is even conceivable.

6) Complete mathematics also addresses Leibniz’s fundamental question of why there is something rather than nothing. “Nothing” – zero – is something. It is a mathematical number, one of the complete set; in fact it’s at the very origin of the complete set. Complete mathematics asserts that all numbers have equal “reality”, hence zero is as real, has as much existence, as any other number. Zero can be defined as 1/∞. So, already, we can see that it is something and not nothing. In fact, any finite number divided by infinity equals zero. Zero is the twin of infinity – the other side of the coin, the flip side, the inverse – and contains all numbers. The question why is there something rather than nothing is really an implicit acknowledgement of the stance of scientific materialism that dimensionless existence is impossible.

To an idealist who rejects materialism, the question should be reformulated as: is it possible for mind/thinking not to exist? Could there ever have been a time when there was no thought? If so, what caused the first thought and indeed what was the first thought? And if something caused the first thought then the precursor of thought must always have existed since how could thought or its essential precursor have sprung out of absolute nothingness? But if thought or its precursor has always existed then “something” has always existed. Pure nothingness is quite simply impossible. And when we understand the indissoluble relationship between nothing and infinity, we see why. Everything is implicit in nothing. Infinity can pour forth from nothing. “Nothing” is defined with regard to the finite divided by the infinite i.e. it is finite “something” divided by infinite “something”. It is not defined with regard to nothing. No definition of nothing can ever be formulated. It is an impossible state. It cannot exist. Pure nothingness is outside the scope of complete mathematics, hence cannot have “reality”. Scientists who talk of a “free lunch” universe assert that the overall energy of the universe is zero because the positive mass-energy of the cosmos is exactly balanced by the negative gravitational energy i.e. something came from nothing but only because something is always implicit in nothing, and because somethings can have opposite signs and cancel each other out, leaving zero on the one hand and an infinity of balanced energy on the other.

The cosmos at the “scientific” level may be considered as energy moving through a complete mathematical space where the distance between any two points can be zero, real (positive or negative) or imaginary (positive or negative). The zero zone, the “null” zone, is outside space and time. The imaginary zone is what relativity describes as “timelike”, and the real zone as “spacelike”. We exist in the timelike zone where no speed ever exceeds light speed. In the spacelike zone, no speed can ever fall below light speed. But note the fundamental asymmetry: subluminal speeds go from zero to the finite speed of light (as measured in space-time reference frames), while superluminal speeds go from the finite speed of light all the way to infinity. All symmetry-breaking phenomena deserve the most careful study because it is they that make the cosmos what it is and not just some eternal cancelling out of symmetrical properties where nothing significant would ever evolve. Asymmetry is essential to evolution and teleology.

******

One of our correspondents – “Zero One” – suggested that the cosmos is eight dimensional: “So, I think, in order for ‘time-space’ to be complete again, we give each one of our four dimensions both real and imaginary parts. Once time-space is completed this way, there is no way going at any speed, faster or slower than light would allow you to ‘break out’ of the space. The answer should be 4 complex dimensions, 3 spatial and 1 temporal. This could also be seen as 8 dimensions if we take the real and imaginary parts as separate dimensions. I hypothesize 8 dimensions, or actually 4 ‘pairs’ of dimensions, in the same way a complex number is a pair of real and imaginary. These 4 pairs are grouped into 3 space-like pairs, and 1 time-like pair, the time-one being not quite like the others, the timepair is ‘flipped’ in a sense. The reason why I proposed 8 is that with the 4Di model, once you attempt to pass ‘light speed’, make it to ‘the other side of the wall’, you break out of 4Di entirely. 8 does not have this problem. It’s ‘complete’ in a sense.”

“Zero One” has correctly seen that the error we committed was to include only one imaginary dimension in our 4Di model, rather than have an imaginary counterpart for each of the three real dimensions. So, congratulations to “Zero One” for perceiving the right way to extend our model. However, he has gone further than he needed to by including time and imaginary time as separate dimensions.

Einstein’s special theory of relativity demonstrates that time and space are different aspects of the same thing. That’s why it’s possible to fuse space and time together into four-dimensional Minkowski space-time. As we saw earlier, time is in fact derived from imaginary space. It’s not a primary dimension, but, rather, a derived, secondary dimension, entirely dependent on imaginary space for its existence. So, despite its importance, it is not one of the core dimensions of the cosmos, and nor is its pair (imaginary time). So-called space-time is, at root, space-imaginary space. The connection between space and time in 4D space-time results from the natural relationship between space and imaginary space. Space and imaginary space are the “same but different”, hence why they are able to interact so smoothly.

In Newtonian physics, space and time were treated as a dualism of two separate, absolute substances: space and time. So, how did they interact? In fact, they didn’t. In Illuminism, space and imaginary space are fused together as two complementary aspects of a mathematical space. There is no mystery at all about their close relationship and how they interact.

The combination of space and imaginary space creates a null zone where light resides. Light flows through this null zone. It can be said to do so at infinite speed since it is everywhere at once. This infinite speed of light in ITS frame of reference outside space and time must be interpreted as a FINITE speed in any space and time frame of reference since space and time automatically impose finitude – which is why a black hole singularity does not tear the cosmos to pieces despite being associated with zero and infinity. The singularity remains safely “contained” within finite space and time. Nothing at all is capable of tearing apart the fabric of space and time. If anything could, the cosmos would certainly self-destruct. That’s the whole point of complete mathematics: it contains everything and it is completely stable (in the cosmic sense) no matter what happens. The cosmos won’t blink out of existence because of the presence of zero and infinity in scientific equations.

The finite speed that light assumes is exactly the same in all spacetime frames of reference. Hence it is the invariant, “natural speed” of the cosmos. Since speed is defined as distance over time, we have found a means of introducing “time” into the 6D(3r3i) mathematical space. Distance divided by speed equals time, just as time multiplied by speed equals distance.

As soon as it is possible to define an invariant cosmic speed, time is conjured into existence. Time is the outcome of movement within a mathematical space. The arche is in eternal motion (otherwise it would be permanently static and nothing would ever happen). If there is motion, hence change, then there must be some kind of time. But time can be defined only if an invariant cosmic speed is defined first. Only via the null zone of 6D(3r3i) space where the motion of light never changes because it is everywhere at once (even though it is moving) can we derive a speed that will manifest in space-time as an invariant speed in any frame; it is thus an absolute, invariant frame of reference in all circumstances, the only one capable of performing this role.

In other words, a consistent interpretation of time is possible only because of 6D(3r3i) null space and the way that light moves in that zone. Without 6D(3r3i) mathematical space, time as we experience it could never exist. Time is a derivation of 6D(3r3i) mathematical space. It is secondary, not primary. It is not a true core dimension.

Since a real number axis and an imaginary number axis can be drawn in a plane to produce the set of so-called “complex” numbers, it occurred to Irish mathematician William Hamilton that perhaps he could define 3-dimensional complex numbers by simply adding another suitably oriented imaginary dimension. However, complex numbers with one real part and two imaginary parts proved resistant to a successful mathematical treatment. The addition of yet another imaginary dimension to create “hypercomplex” 4D complex numbers with one real part and three imaginary parts resolved the problems. These new numbers were called “quaternions”, meaning “a set of four” (its Greek equivalent is the tetraktys!)

A quaternion has one scalar component (w) and three vector components (ix +jy + kz): q = w + ix + jy + kz

The three components of the vector portion are imaginary numbers, just as “ib” is the imaginary number portion of a complex number (c = a + ib, where a is a real number). While complex numbers can be used to algebraically describe rotations in the two-dimensional complex plane, quaternions achieve the same thing for rotations in three-dimensional space defined by the three imaginary axes, i, j, and k.

However, quaternions and various other exotic numbers have thus far only ever found very specialized applications and have not proved the wonder numbers that Hamilton thought they would be. They are actually just a 4D(1r3i) subset of 6D(3r3i) numbers. The fundamental numbers of the cosmos are 6D(3r3i).

******

The sharp-eyed might object to our entire scheme on the basis of one glaring potential problem. How does Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem fit in? Doesn’t that kill off all schemes that have pretences to completeness? In fact, it is the Completeness Theorem (thesis) harnessed to the Incompleteness Theorem (antithesis) that creates the cosmic synthesis that forms the Grand Unified Theory of Everything. But that is for another day.

******

Finally, returning to Pythagoras’s Law of Harmony, we discover that he has been triumphantly vindicated by quantum physics, some two and half thousand years after his death. The domain of quantum physics is very different from the world of our everyday experience because it is based on discontinuous, grainy, discrete changes.

Imagine that you were driving a new car and that in order to increase your speed from 10 kilometres per hour to 20 kilometres per hour, you put your foot on the accelerator in the usual way. To your amazement, nothing happened for a second or two and your speedometer still stubbornly showed 10. Then, an instant later, it showed 20, without ever having gone through any of the intermediate speeds. Each time you wanted to increase your speed, you could do it only via 10 km per hr increments, and you always had to wait a second or two until the car had enough capacity to make the “jump”. This is how the quantum world functions – through quantum leaps from one state to another, bypassing any of the intermediate states. (But in the quantum world, jumps are instantaneous; they either happen or they don’t – they don’t “build up” to it.)

In other words, in the quantum world, we return to Pythagoras’s beautiful domain of rational numbers, of correct notes, of harmonies. Anything irrational – all the notes of discordance – is excluded, just as Pythagoras would have wished. Why is this? Because of the wave-particle duality of quantum particles. Particles seem to travel as waves and arrive as particles. Waves are of course based on undulations, on peaks and troughs.

When two similar waves come together then if they are in phase with each other the peaks and troughs will be reinforced. But if they are out of phase and the peaks from one wave meet the troughs of another, they will cancel out. Thus only harmonic notes are permitted, and everything else – all the intermediate forms – will be erased. (One might even suggest that the lack of intermediate forms in the fossil record that is used to criticise Darwinian evolutionary theory – i.e. why can’t we see a smooth gradation of fossils clearly showing us how one species morphs into another through genetic mutation? – is also a consequence of harmony: only certain notes are allowed.)

So, if you put your ear to the microscopic world of the invisible and strain ever so slightly, you may start to hear something truly beautiful and inspiring, that lifts your mind and soul to the heavens: Pythagoras’s transcendent Music of the Spheres. The music composed by God!

******

We have given you Solomon’s key to the secrets of the cosmos. Use it wisely. Use it well. Use it to become all that you have it in you to be. Maximise your potential. Be great. Be divine… become God!

The End

******

The Armageddon Conspiracy: The Plot To Kill God
__________

http://www.amazon.com/Illuminatis-Dimensional-Universe-Illuminati-Series-ebook/dp/B00519T3EO
__________

8/8

Academia Iluministă (61)

Academia Iluministă (60)

The Mind Mystery:

The key to God, religion, souls, the afterlife, mind is contained in the cosmic equation r >= 0. What this equation says is that although there is a single continuum of existence, it can be regarded as the interaction of two separate domains: one in space and time (r > 0) and one outside space and time (r = 0). We previously showed how light in its own frame of reference is outside space and time, yet is perceived by us as being in space and time. This dichotomy and paradox is the essence of existence.

Any mind perceiving the cosmos from the perspective of space and time can’t help but impose space and time on everything, including those things such as light that are not actually in space and time. Things that exist in space and time have a beginning and an end. They are mortal. They die. Humans die. The part of the human mind shaped by space and time dies. These are the facts of space and time. These are the facts of a life lived within space and time.

Yet part of the cosmos is not in space and time. It is immortal. It cannot die. It is not subject to the laws of space and time. It does not partake of those laws. Instead, it partakes of the radically different laws of an existence outside space and time. It has a fundamentally different perspective of the cosmos.

What does the universe look like from outside space and time? If everything is interconnected because there is no physical distance between any two things, how does that work? If no time ever passes, how can anything ever change? Isn’t everything just eternally frozen? Isn’t the universe outside space and time incomprehensible?

Certainly, we cannot hope to describe it in the familiar terms of space and time since these do no apply. Still, it is useful to have some kind of image in our minds.

The r = 0 cosmos is hard-wired to the r > 0 cosmos. The r = 0 domain is not in space and time, but is indissolubly linked to something that is (the r > 0 domain). So, the r = 0 DOES experience space and time, albeit at second hand. In particular, it experiences it informationally (mentally). Consider a time-lapse film. You film traffic going over a bridge for a 24-hr period. You then speed up the film and compress the 24 hours into, say, 24 minutes. The speeded up film looks both familiar and very different. The compressed film is operating according to different rules of space and time compared with the original film. Now speed up the film to infinity. What happens? If something is travelling infinitely fast, it does not experience the passage of time. It gets anywhere in no time. Everything is instantaneous. The time-lapse film ends as soon as it begins. All of the information it contained is processed instantly.

And now we get to the heart of it. An observer in the r = 0 domain perceives the r > 0 domain as running at infinite speed. Everything that happens is instantly reflected in r = 0. No time passes and yet information accumulates infinitely rapidly, in complete contradiction of the notion that nothing can change in a timeless environment. This is the ultimate time-lapse film. If you could view the r > 0 domain from the r = 0 domain you would experience all the events of the universe flashing past you at infinite speed, and yet not a single moment would ever elapse.

You wouldn’t experience “physical” time – the time of the r > 0 domain that can be measured with a clock, but you WOULD experience another type of time – psychological/mental time. In times of extreme danger, people report that time seems to almost stop. Each second passes much more slowly. This is not physically true of course, but it is mentally, and, in the pure mental realm of r = 0, this would be the only type of time that would be experienced: mental time.

The mind would be able to cope with distance in similar fashion. It would have a mental ability to differentiate all of the spatial events taking place in r > 0 even though it did not itself experience physical space.

So, in the r = 0 domain, physical space and time, measured by physical rulers and clocks, are replaced by a mental experience of space and space and time, measured by mental rulers and clocks. The statement that something is outside space and time is something of a misnomer. The precise meaning is that it is not subject to physical space and time.

The r >= 0 universe is a cosmic two-way feedback process. The informational content of the r > 0 domain (all the events happening everywhere) is fed into the r = 0 domain, which mentally processes the information and responds to it, which is then instantly reflected in the r > 0 domain, as scientifically demonstrated by the famous EPR paradox where quantum particles that are “entangled” are able to coordinate their behaviour instantaneously.

Some people claim that a domain outside space and time must already have experienced all future events. Such things have been said about God: he knows the future because he is outside time. This is utterly absurd. The future hasn’t happened yet. No one can know that which has not yet happened. They might be able to predict it, but they certainly can’t “know” it. We have now presented the proper philosophical, scientific and religious framework in which this matter should be contemplated: the union of two domains, one outside space and time, and one inside. The domain that is outside space and time is continuously and instantaneously updated by what’s going on in the r > 0 domain, but it never has access to any events that have not yet happened in the r > 0 domain. This is a simple impossibility. No one can ever know the future and all talk of precognition, seeing the future, travelling into the future and back again etc is pure fantasy. It can never happen. We can certainly influence the future and make certain events more likely to happen, but we cannot “know” the future. God cannot know it. No one can. People can have strong intuitions about the future, but that’s as far as it goes.

Two philosophical traditions have dominated Western intellectual thought: materialism and idealism. Materialism is the position championed by modern science. In this view, mind emerges from matter, and can have no existence independently of matter. This is the exclusive r > 0 universe. According to science and materialism, two numbers are excluded from physical reality: zero and infinity. Science says that a strictly dimensionless (zero-dimension) entity is impossible since in the material universe all things are dimensional by definition. Science also says that if the equations of physics produce infinite results at certain points then physics has “broken down” at these points and something must be wrong with the underlying theory.

One divided by zero equals infinity.
One divided by infinity equals zero.

Infinity is the “flip side” of zero. Zero and infinity are inextricably linked. If you exclude one, you exclude both. In short, the assertion of science is that the r = 0 universe does not and cannot exist. Yet no scientist queries the properties of light which, according to Einstein’s sacrosanct special theory of relativity, is massless, travels in “null” space and does not experience space and time i.e. is dimensionless. No scientist has ever realized that science has already proved materialism to be untenable. Dimensionless existence is the essence of light, which is the beating heart of relativity theory.

Idealism is the view that only mind exists. What we perceive as the external world is actually a mental construct. “Material” objects are mental rather than physical. This is the r = 0 universe. In this view, zero and infinity define reality. There are no solid, dimensional objects i.e. there is no matter. The assertion of idealism is that the r > 0 universe does not exist i.e. reality consists of an infinite number of dimensionless (zero-dimensional) entities; all other numbers are mental rather physical – the term “four dogs” would refer to four mental dogs rather than four physical, dimensional, material dogs. Many of the greatest philosophers have supported this position.

Illumination is the synthesis of materialism and idealism: r >= 0. Mind and matter co-exist. All numbers from zero to infinity are part of reality. No numbers are excluded mentally or physically. Nature has no preference for some numbers over others. It doesn’t discriminate.

Materialism and idealism are both subsets of reality, based on a fallacious view that Nature, for some unexplained reason, gives some numbers a greater “reality” than others. (In materialism, zero and infinity have no “reality”; in idealism only zero and infinity have “reality”.) Illumination is based on mathematical completeness. In the language of Gnosticism, this concept as known as the “pleroma”: the universe of “fullness”. Both materialism and idealism are examples of what Gnosticism calls “hysterema”: the universe of “deficiency”. Illumination, by incorporating all possible numbers, cannot be made any bigger. It lacks nothing. Materialism and idealism are both in the position of having to explain why they are deficient; why materialism excludes the dimensionless and why idealism excludes the dimensional. Neither ideology has ever successfully accomplished this.

Science has done an excellent job of explaining the r > 0 cosmos, but now it cannot go any further to produce a Grand Unified Theory of Everything until it confronts the two critical remaining pieces of the jigsaw: zero and infinity. While science blindly asserts that these numbers are impossible in Nature, it is doomed to failure. Nature accounts for all possibilities. It does not exclude anything. This MUST be the basis of any theory of everything. Clearly, if science has ruled out zero and infinity, it is a limited theory, hence not a theory of everything. Bizarrely, not a single scientist has ever comprehended that any theory of everything must specifically address everything. The r >= 0 paradigm does address everything; r > 0 and r = 0, separately, do not. r >= 0 is the only paradigm devised by the human mind that imposes no limits. It is the only viable, the only possible, Grand Unified Theory. It is the summit of human thought, the limit. Nothing can exist beyond it, not even in principle. Once zero and infinity have been accommodated, the story is over. Finis. r >= 0 is the answer to “life, the universe and everything.”

Imagine that you are the owner of a sophisticated radio-controlled helicopter. There’s a little silver pilot sitting in the cockpit. You start remotely flying the helicopter and you’ve never had so much fun. But then you think – this COULD be better. Specifically, it could be better if your consciousness was somehow transferred into the little pilot guy. For you, if the helicopter crashes, it’s too bad. You’ll need to get a new one. If your little pilot crashes, he’s “dead”. The stakes are so much higher for him, hence the excitement is so much greater. Your hobby is transformed into a life and death struggle if you can switch your consciousness into the pilot’s head.

So, imagine that your “soul” in the r = 0 domain is controlling a physical body, a human being, in the r > 0 domain. Well, it’s quite a lot of fun having this remote-controlled “android” doing things at your behest. But the creature is disposable. You’re not feeling what it’s going through. Everything is taking place at a distance. You are experiencing second-level, second-hand emotions. Your mind needs to be inside that human being if your life is to become meaningful.

What is a human brain? What’s the point of it? If minds exist independently of matter, who needs a physical brain? The answer could not be simpler. The brain, with its countless brain cells and connections, is the means by which consciousness in the r = 0 domain gets transferred into the r > 0 domain. That’s the amount of processing power a mind needs if it’s to change its perceptions from that of something outside space and time to something inside space and time. It needs to be able to process, via the physical senses, all of the signals coming from its environment. It needs to understand spatial and temporal pleasure and pain. It needs to feel emotion.

The mind is never anywhere other than in the r = 0 domain, but a physical brain allows a mind to have the experience of being in space and time. Consciousness is transferred from one place to another, like the helicopter owner transferring his consciousness to the toy pilot. Our space-time consciousness is, strictly speaking, an illusion since our mind is never actually in space and time. Yet it’s a very convincing illusion!

But the situation is rather more complicated than we are suggesting, and the architecture of the internet helps us to get the full picture. Human beings actually have “multi-minds” that work seamlessly together to give the illusion of a single consciousness.

Experiments conducted on “split brain” patients, where the corpus callosum joining the two hemispheres of the brain is severed, have demonstrated unequivocally that the left and right brains are different in capabilities, intelligence, creativity, and emotions i.e. they are “different people”, different minds. Many of the peculiarities of human behaviour stem from the fact that more than one mind is involved in our decisions. Right-handed people, the vast majority of the human race, are dominated by the mind associated with their left brain. This is what they regard as their consciousness, their ego, their sense of self. The dominant left hemisphere is where our language abilities reside. Therefore if consciousness and language go together, it is inevitable that the left brain will seem to be the seat of consciousness. The constant monologue that goes through our heads all the time is the product of our language skills, hence is a left brain phenomenon. The mind in the right hemisphere is effectively silent and some researchers have called it the seat of the unconscious. The language skills of the right brain are not non-existent, but they are distinctly primitive. They are like caveman grunts and basic commands. So, of our two minds, one constantly speaks to us while the other grunts. Naturally, we identify with the language-based mind, so that becomes our consciousness, but it’s not the “whole” of us. Again, we see that we are the victims of a kind of delusion. Is it possible that the delusion has even more layers? Do we have a ladder of minds, for example, that we might use to climb up to the level of none other than God himself?

Let’s return to the computer analogy. A standalone personal computer is like our brain-based mind(s). Our left-brain consciousness is like the active application on the computer, while our right brain consciousness is like all the background tasks being performed by the computer and all of the various rules, protocols and code for running the computer. Sometimes there’s a conflict and our computer suffers a blue-screen crash (like a human nervous breakdown). The computer needs to be rebooted (we might have to be helped by a psychotherapist to get our life back on track; to be “rebooted”).

The computer’s RAM memory is like our short-term memory. The hard drive is where our long-term memories are stored. Over time, some sectors can become corrupted and we can’t access them any more (equivalent to losing some of our memories – with Alzheimer’s Disease, all access is lost).

Now we add in the internet. How does this change the picture? The internet protocols and a modem allow us to link to an enormous number of other computers. We can download material onto our hard drive from internet servers, and we can do the opposite and upload material onto internet servers. The internet is like the interconnected r = 0 domain. Let’s say that our right brain is the “modem” for connecting us to the r = 0 domain, and knows all of the relevant protocols. The r = 0 domain can pass messages to us via the right brain, and we can upload material to the r = 0 domain via the right brain. Let’s say that there is a specific “soul” in the r = 0 domain that is like an internet server dedicated exclusively to us. Let’s say that this exclusive server/soul is tightly linked to certain others servers/souls – those of the members of our family. And let’s say that it can make strong new connections with other servers/souls – our friends and lovers.

So, our left brain consciousness is equated with our standalone computer. Our right brain is too (it works in tandem with the left brain), but it can also be equated with a link to the internet i.e. with a direct link to other computers (the equivalent of other consciousnesses). If we say that the internet, based on linked computers, is like a Mass Mind, based on linked minds, then we can create a new model of mind and its connections. Our right brain is linked to the Mass Mind via a node in the r = 0 domain: our “soul”. The soul can download messages to the right brain mind, and the right brain can upload messages to the soul, but this all happens unconsciously because our consciousness resides in the left brain which does not explicitly participate in this link.

Our soul is closely linked to the souls of the other people in our lives, particularly in the case of identical twins where their souls might be so closely linked that they practically overlap, hence the ability of identical twins to virtually read each other’s mind. We can use soul “hyperlinks” to hook up with any other soul in the Mass Mind. This is the basis of “remote” psychic connections with those with whom we are not related.

If we associate the whole of the Mass Mind with none other than God’s Mind then all of us are linked to the Mind of God, meaning that part of our soul is in direct contact with the Godhead, albeit at an unconscious level. (Consider God as the original node of the Mass Mind – the first computer on the internet, in our analogy – that defines all the communications protocols. God is the Controller of The Matrix, in a manner of speaking, the Supreme Architect.)

If we can climb the ladder of mind and raise our soul to this highest possible level – our Highest Self – then we have achieved our divine mission – to become God. We have entered into mental union with God. We are experiencing his thoughts and he ours. We have attained our personal Omega Point. And when all of us have attained this same level then we have become a Community of Gods and the cosmos has reached its Omega Point of maximum actualisation of cosmic potential.

Is it not a wondrous prospect? Is it not glorious? Is it not divine? Yet, in truth, although we have talked about multi-minds (about a left-brain mind, a right-brain mind, about a linked r = 0 domain soul and an r = 0 Highest Self), they are all really the same mind, located in r = 0, but compartmentalized to allow us to function in two domains, r = 0 and r > 0, and to ultimately raise ourselves to our highest possible level.

When we die, our left-brain consciousness perishes – there’s no avoiding that – but at the moment of death it is in a sense uploaded via the right-brain link to our soul in the r = 0 domain. And if we have not achieved gnosis/ enlightenment/ the achievement of our Highest Self, then the process will begin again (reincarnation) and our soul (or rather one aspect of it) will be downloaded into a new brain and will assume a new consciousness in the r > 0 domain.

The characteristic descriptions of near-death experiences: entering a long tunnel and seeing a bright light at the end, and feeling the presence of the dear departed who went before you to the Great Beyond – these would be entirely compatible with the type of set-up we have outlined.

Borrowing and modifying Hindu terminology we can construct the following scheme:

Jiva: left-brain consciousness; the ego that perceives itself as existing in r > 0. The “active” consciousness of our everyday experience.

Jiva-atman: right brain consciousness. It is connected to both the r > 0 left brain consciousness and also to the r = 0 domain.

Atman: the r = 0 Soul/Higher Self/Divine Spark that can communicate with us via the jiva-atman connection. This might be referred to as our “real”, immortal Self.

Param-atman: the r = 0 perfected Soul/Highest Self. This is what we aspire to. This is when we have literally “become God”.

Brahman: the union of all Param-atmans – the transcendent Godhead, the union of all the Gods in a single entity that is yet greater than the collection. Nirvana for Buddhists. The Gestalt (the whole is greater than the sum of its parts). The cosmic Omega Point.

But all of this is just an analogy, a pictorial framework in which to consider the issues. There is no actual “uploading” and “downloading” since the mind never leaves the r = 0 domain. It’s AS IF this type of process takes places, but in fact what’s really taking place is a sequence of coordinated alterations and shifts in the consciousness of an immortal mind in the r = 0 domain as it proceeds on its dialectical journey to the ultimate destination.

Try to think of your own model of what takes place. Look around the world for possible analogies. Maybe you will look to Nature and consider ant colonies, beehives and flocks of birds – “swarm” intelligences. Maybe you will look at a human political movement such as Communism, or the “market” of capitalism, or a metaphysical concept such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s General Will, or a psychological concept such as Freud’s Id/Ego/Superego model of the psyche or Jung’s Collective Unconscious, or a religious organisation such as the Catholic Church or one of the Protestant sects. Do such things reveal truths about our minds and souls, about how they relate to and interact with each other?

And never forget… As above so below. As inside, so outside.
__________

6/8

Academia Iluministă (59)

Light Hole versus Black Hole:

A black hole, in conventional scientific terms, is where an enormous amount of mass is accumulated at a single dimensionless point – a singularity – giving rise to infinite density. Time stops. All distances are reduced to zero.

The realm of light – the arena for photons and all other particles travelling at light speed – is where time stops and distances are zero i.e. it has the same characteristics as a black hole singularity, the one glaring difference being that the realm of light – the Light Hole, so to speak – has no mass. (But, of course, we should always bear in mind that Einstein’s most famous equation, E = mc2, makes mass and energy different forms of the same thing, related by the square of light speed.)

In other words, the Light Hole is the massless equivalent of a black hole. The Light Hole is the defining speed limit of the universe. Black holes are the mass limit of the universe. If particles accelerated to light speed acquire infinite mass (i.e. ALL of the mass created by the Big Bang) then by accelerating the cosmos to light speed, we would be combining the Light Hole and the Genesis Singularity in one entity. Isn’t it remarkable that the physical universe always returns to itself? If you push it too far in any direction, you invariably come back to a dimensionless domain outside space and time, associated with zero and infinity. The physical dimensional universe – the finite – is hardwired to the dimensionless mental universe – the infinite. The wiring is provided by light.

The term “black hole” is one that has validity only from the perspective of observers not travelling at light speed, but, to something that is travelling at light speed, there’s no such thing as a black hole. Moreover, the expression “travelling at light speed” is meaningless from the point of view of any particle travelling at light speed because it’s not actually travelling anywhere (since it’s not in space and time, and all distances are zero).

When the finite and the infinite come together, paradox is inevitable. Alfred Weber, discussing Hegel’s approach to the infinite and the finite, said:

“The contradiction found in the idea of being is resolved in the notion of becoming. Being becomes i.e. determines itself, limits itself, defines itself. But determinate or finite being continues ad infinitum; the finite is infinite; nothing compels thought to assign limits to it. Here we have a new contradiction, which is resolved in the notion of individuality (being-for-self, Fürsichsein). The individual is the unity of the finite and the infinite. To consider these two terms as excluding each other is to forget that the infinite, excluded by the finite, would be limited by the finite, or would be finite itself. If the infinite begins where the finite ends, and if the finite begins where the infinite ends, so that the infinite is beyond the finite, or the finite on this side of the infinite, it would not really be the infinite. The infinite is the essence of the finite, and the finite is the manifestation of the infinite, the infinite existing. Infinity determines itself, limits itself, sets boundaries to itself; in a word, it becomes the finite by the very fact that it gives itself existence. Existence is possible only under certain conditions, in certain modes, or within certain limits. Existence is self limitation. Existence is finite being. Finite being, the individual, the atom, is infinity existing in a certain manner, limited infinity: quality becomes quantity.”

There are a couple of key phrases here: 1) “The individual is the unity of the finite and the infinite.” That’s a perfect description of the union of a mortal body and an immortal soul. 2) “Infinity determines itself, limits itself, sets boundaries to itself; in a word, it becomes the finite by the very fact that it gives itself existence.” This is the appropriate response to the scientists who think that infinities are some threat to the fabric of the cosmos, that infinity represents a potentially fatal puncture of the finite. In fact, it is the nature of the infinite to set boundaries to itself and become finite. A circle is a perfect symbol of infinity represented in a finite form. Infinity is never a threat to the finite. Indeed it is the origin of the finite. There is no such thing as uncontrolled infinity. When an equation of physics produces an infinite result, it is a sign that something fascinating is happening: that the interface of r > 0 and r = 0 has been reached. It is no cause for the horror that afflicts physicists when they see infinity rearing its head. The final challenge facing mathematicians and physicists is to produce a technique for seamlessly integrating infinity with the finite rather than treating infinity as some sort of disastrous discontinuity. Everything between, and including, minus infinity to plus infinity is part of a smooth continuum. We never reach the “end of the world” and fall off the edge.

Some people ask the question: Why isn’t the speed of light infinite? As we have seen, it can be interpreted as infinite in its own frame of reference. It appears as finite in our frame of reference for exactly the reason just stated: infinity limits itself. Space and time are finite dimensions. Therefore anything perceived from the perspective of these dimensions will appear finite. If we wore green goggles, we would see everything as green. Similarly, if we wear spacetime goggles, everything appears in terms of space and time, of finite quantities. It cannot be emphasized enough that infinity filtered through finite dimensions must appear as finite.

The electromagnetic wave equation that describes light is time dependent. If light speed was infinite, it would have no time dependence since it would be everywhere at once. Hence the equation would fall apart, and the whole universe would be permanently blindingly bright. Light, as we understand it, would not exist. Space and time allow the infinite to be tamed, to provide scope for the type of lives we lead. Space and time are finite filters through which everything, including the infinite, is forced to appear finitely. The infinite speed of light is converted into the constant finite speed with which we are familiar.

Our universe is an extraordinary arena in which, just as Hegel contends, the infinite is able to become finite, to become individual and self-limiting. But via black holes and the Light Hole, the finite returns to the infinite. Individuation is extinguished in black holes – one thing cannot be distinguished from another. The same is true in the dimensionless realm of photons in their own frame of reference. In some sense, all photons are the same. Leibniz said that the universe is based on an infinite number of dimensionless mental entities called monads. Just like photons, they are in some sense all the same since they are not differentiated in space or time. We could just as easily treat infinite separate monads as one Monad. Thus infinity becomes finite and indeed singular. The many and the one are intimately and inextricably related.

We could almost talk of a single Photon, the light of the entire cosmos concentrated in one single super light particle. If the Monad is the Mind of God then the Photon is his Divine Light with which he illuminates existence.

Gnostic enlightenment is all about entering into union with the Monad via the cosmic light. Is there any more glorious image? Is it not infinitely more inspiring than the “vision” of the Abrahamic slave religions, where humanity is forever on its knees, with its eyes cast downwards through fear, worshipping a dim light far, far away, with which it will never come into communion.
__________

4Di – Space is not 3D:

The key to reality is the imaginary number, i. Imaginary numbers based on i are usually contrasted with so-called real numbers, which are the familiar numbers of the 3D world. (Numbers that contain both real and imaginary parts are known as “complex” numbers.)

How many dimensions of space are there? Three? That’s what common sense says. Wrong. There are four. Why? Because mathematics says so, and mathematics always takes priority over common sense. Here’s why there are four dimensions of space rather than three:

1) What is 1 x 1 (i.e. 1 “squared”)? Answer = 1.
2) What is -1 x -1 (i.e. -1 squared)? Answer = 1.

Notice anything odd? Squaring 1 or -1 gives the same answer. In fact, squaring any negative number always gives a positive number. So, although there is a set of positive numbers and a matching set of negative numbers, there is no such matching set when it comes to the squares of positive and negative numbers. The squares are always positive, whether or not they are derived from positive or negative numbers. But why should the universe exclude a matching set of negative square numbers? This contravenes the Pythagorean principle of mathematical completeness.

All sorts of things that could be accomplished via negative square numbers are impossible in a universe in which only positive square numbers are possible. Why should negative square numbers be prohibited? Is there any fundamental mathematical reason for it, or is just a consequence of limited mathematical knowledge? If -1 is OK, what’s wrong with -1 as a squared number? Symmetry demands that there should be a way of addressing this problem. There must be a set of negative squares forming the mirror image of the set of positive squares.

Mathematicians themselves were painfully slow to grasp what had to be done. Even when they stumbled upon the answer, it took them centuries to properly comprehend and develop it. They too were victims of the prejudices of common sense. They couldn’t see anything physical that negative squares would apply to, so they largely ignored them.

The key to the problem of negative squares was i, the imaginary number. This is defined as the square root of -1. When i is squared the result is -1 i.e. i2 = -1. From i we can generate all of the negative squares e.g. 5i squared = -25; 10i squared = -100. Mathematical symmetry is restored at a stroke. Mathematics is “complete” once more.

But many mathematicians found the imaginary number bizarre and repulsive. One mathematician described it as, “void of meaning, or rather self-contradictory and absurd.” Another said it was “uninterpretable”, and another “an untrustworthy intruder.” Another called it “fictitious.” Such people thought it had no practical applications and was just some odd mathematical irrelevance. In fact, it is arguably the most important number of all, holding the key to breaking through the barriers of “common sense” that block our path to the truth.

In 1831, the brilliant German mathematician Gauss wrote of imaginary numbers: “If this subject has hitherto been considered from the wrong viewpoint and thus enveloped in mystery and surrounded by darkness, it is largely an unsuitable terminology which should be blamed. Had +1, -1 and the square root of -1, instead of being called positive, negative and imaginary (or worse still impossible) unity, been given the names, say, of direct, inverse and lateral unity, there would hardly have been any scope for such obscurity.”

You will never understand reality unless you appreciate the very real significance of the imaginary number. It is the crucial antidote to common sense. One might even call it the God Number since, as we shall see, it is the imaginary number that creates the scope for God, souls, heaven and an afterlife.

If x, y and z are the normal Cartesian coordinate axes (perpendicular to each other) of the three-dimensional space of common sense with which we are all familiar (left and right, backwards and forwards, up and down) then the “imaginary” axis for imaginary numbers is perpendicular to these three in a four dimensional space (that we can’t visualize, of course, since our senses are stuck in 3D).

It is precisely because we can’t picture 4D-space that “common sense” is so shocked by it and tries to resist it. It seems intrinsically wrong. Yet it is fundamental and essential to a true understanding of the universe, as will become clear.

The starting point is the famous theorem of Pythagoras which states that in any right-angled triangle, the square of the hypotenuse (the side opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides. In the famous “3, 4, 5” triangle, 32 + 42 = 52. So, the length of the hypotenuse = square root (side1 squared + side2 squared)

If two points (x1, y1) and (x2, y2) are placed on a 2D plane then we can calculate the distance between them by using Pythagoras’ theorem: distance = square root ((x2-x1)2 + (y2-y1)2). This is the general technique for calculating the distance between any two points. The same technique can be extended to two points in any dimensional space. In 4D (including the “imaginary” axis), each point is specified by four points: (x1, y1, z1, w1) and (x2, y2, z2, w2).

Using mathematical terminology, we write ds2 = dx2 + dy2 + dz2 + dw2 where “d” is shorthand for the distance or difference between the respective coordinates (e.g. dx = x2 – x1). However, because the values of “w” lie on the imaginary axis, this means that every value is multiplied by i, the imaginary number. If w1 = 2i and w2 = 8i then dw = 8i – 2i = 6i and dw2 = 6i2 = -36.

This ability of i to generate negative square numbers is one of the most important results conceivable. It is of such crucial significance because it means that in a 4D space, with one axis being imaginary, negative square numbers, which can be used in calculating distances between any two points, now become part of the mix. (In the traditional 3D universe, this is impossible – there are no negative squares involved in any distance calculations.)

To reflect that we have moved from 3D space to 4D space with an imaginary axis, we will henceforth use the designation “4Di”. Here are the astonishing consequences of reality being based on 4Di rather than 3D:

1) If the negative number produced by dw2 exactly balances the three positive numbers provided by dx2 + dy2 + dz2 then the overall result (ds2) will equal 0 i.e. it is possible, in 4Di space, for the distance between two different points (the square root of ds2) to be ZERO! In 3D space, the only way to get the distance between two points to be zero is for the two points to be the same. In 4Di space, thanks to the imaginary axis, two points that may be very far apart if we compare their respective x, y, z and w coordinates, can actually be separated by no distance at all. Hence, at a non common-sense level, the two points are actually the same despite being distinct, since no distance separates them. In quantum mechanics, we encounter the bizarre idea that a particle can be in two places at once. Here, we encounter the equally bizarre idea that two particles can be at the same place at once (in the sense of being at two distinct points but separated by no distance).

2) And if dw2 is larger (as a negative number) than the three positive numbers provided by dx2 + dy2 + dz2 then it means that the overall result ds2 will be less than 0 i.e. it is possible for the squared distance between two distinct points to be negative. (This means that the distance, the square root, will be imaginary.) In other words, in 4Di space, it is possible to get squared distances greater than zero (as in ordinary 3D space), less than zero and exactly equal to zero. Or, in terms of distance, to get real, imaginary and zero distances. In the 3D world of our everyday experience, this is impossible since the distance between two distinct points is always real. We can take a ruler and physically measure the distance in 3D space. But no “common sense” ruler will help us to measure an imaginary length or no length at all. Yet it turns out that imaginary and zero distances dictate our world.

3) If, to emphasize the different character of w compared with x, y and z, we write iw instead of w then d(iw)2 = -dw2. Hence our original equation of ds2 = dx2 + dy2 + dz2 + dw2 can be rewritten as ds2 = dx2 + dy2 + dz2 + d(iw)2 which, in turn, becomes ds2 = dx2 + dy2 + dz2 – dw2. So, the critical function of the imaginary axis is to introduce a negative sign into the calculation of distances, thus counteracting the normal positive signs. The squares of the three real spatial axes x, y and z have the same positive sign, while the square of the imaginary axis w is preceded by a negative sign. Our lives are dominated by the fact that one “square” axis in 4Di space has a different sign from the others. Our minds separate out the three positive axes and call them 3D “real” space.

To characterize the universe as a 4Di space rather than a 3D space is revolutionary. We now begin to see the glimmerings of something utterly profound: our ability to experience “reality” is severely restricted. If it is the case that our senses have evolved to be attuned to a 3D physical space but we actually inhabit a 4Di space then our senses will constantly deceive us since they are lacking awareness of an entire dimension. Hence much of our inability to grasp reality would stem from this problem. “Common sense” i.e. placing our trust in the direct evidence provided by our senses is our worst enemy because our senses are cut adrift from one of the four dimensions in which we live.

It’s hard to believe that we could successfully ignore an entire dimension without disastrous effects. In fact, we don’t. The effects of the “missing” dimension based on the imaginary spatial axis manifest themselves to us in an entirely different way from those associated with the traditional three spatial axes. We experience these effects as the basis of TIME.

Einstein himself, and everyone who followed him, failed to understand this astonishing truth: time has its origins in imaginary space. Time is not a primary dimension, but secondary, being based on distance. Or rather on imaginary distance.

A light particle, a photon, has no mass. What governs its path and speed? Will it follow an “imaginary”, “real” or “zero” distance path through 4Di space? In fact, it takes the simplest, shortest path of least resistance between two points. What is that path? It is the most obvious, least complicated option, the path of least resistance: the “zero” path i.e. where there is no distance between any points on this path.

The zero path traced out by a moving, massless particle through 4Di space has a unique significance: it is the limiting speed of the universe. No particle travelling along an imaginary path can ever exceed the speed of a particle following the zero path (i.e. the zero path speed is the speed limit for particles on imaginary paths) and no particle travelling along a real path can ever travel at less than that zero path speed. The zero path speed is the universal speed limit for any particle following any other path; it is the lowest speed attainable for any real path particle and the highest speed attainable for any imaginary path particle. We know this special speed by another name. It is the speed of light.

This unique speed is invariant. No matter what frame of reference is used, the speed of light always has the same value. Every observer, no matter what speed they are moving at, will always obtain the same value for the speed of light. Even someone travelling at 99.999% of the speed of light will, if they switch on a torch, find the light beam racing away from them at the speed of light, exactly as would happen if they were standing still. We can now understand why this should be so: light is following a unique, invariant zero path. (Note that we are referring to the speed of light in a vacuum; light travels more slowly through other media such as water.)

Einstein famously wondered what would happen if he were travelling at the speed of light while holding a mirror in front of himself. Since both he and the mirror would be travelling at the speed of light, how could the light from his face catch up with the mirror in order to be reflected back? Wouldn’t his reflection disappear? The answer he arrived at with the special theory of relativity was that a) he could never attain light speed and b) he would always see his reflection.

That the speed of light is constant in all frames of reference is one of the truly momentous facts of existence. Just consider how truly weird it is. If a man at the front of a train that is travelling at 100 kilometres per hour throws a rock out of the window at 50 kilometres an hour in the same direction as the travelling train, then a stationary observer will measure the rock as travelling away from him at 150 kilometres per hour i.e. the sum of the speed of the train and the speed of the rock. Likewise, common sense says that if a man travelling at 0.9 light speed switches on a torch and the light beam shoots away at light speed, then a stationary observer should measure the light beam as travelling at 1.9 times the speed of light, but common sense is completely wrong. Light, no matter who observes it in whatever context, is always measured to have exactly the same value in a vacuum. An observer standing still and an observer travelling at near light speed will both obtain exactly the same result for the speed of light. How can it be that relative motion between the stationary and moving observer makes no difference at all to how they measure the speed of light?

Imagine that the speed of light is 100 km per hour, and a man on a train travelling at 90 km per hour switches on a torch. We would expect a stationary observer to see the light beam travelling at 90 + 100 = 190 km per hour, but in fact the observer would see it travelling at 100 km per hour. How is this possible? Speed is distance over time. After one hour, the man on the train has travelled 90 km, and, relative to him, the light beam has travelled a further 100 km. So, he measures the speed of light to be 100 km divided by 1 hr = 100 km per hour. Relative to a stationary observer, the light beam has seemingly travelled 190 km in the hour so its value should be 190 km per hour, but it’s still in fact 100 km per hour. As Einstein realized, the only credible way for this to be true for both the stationary and moving observers is for distance and time to change in some proportionate way as our speed alters so that it will still seem as if the light beam has travelled only 100 km in an hour.

For distance and time to alter as speed alters means that they are not primary, absolute properties of existence; they are dependent on how objects move. The ramifications are astounding. The idea that anything has definite, measurable dimensions in any absolute sense is rendered meaningless. An object viewed by a stationary observer will have different dimensions depending on the object’s speed relative to that of light. So, what are its “true” dimensions? Can it be said to have any? Because we never move at speeds significant in relation to light speed we never notice any strange changes in the dimensions of objects as they move relative to us, but we would if the speed of light were similar to the speeds we move at. If light speed were 1000 km per hour, we would notice weird effects all the time. We would no longer have a vocabulary based on solid, unchanging objects with fixed dimensions.

When a particle moves in “Zero space”, it does not experience time and it has no mass. What about particles moving through “imaginary” space? That’s when they do experience time and they have a positive mass. What about particles moving through “real” space? That’s when they experience “imaginary time” and have “imaginary mass”. In the language of relativity theory, the zone we live in is called “timelike” and only subluminal speeds are possible, while the zone associated with real space is called “spacelike” and only superluminal speeds are possible.

******

In a typical textbook treatment of Einstein’s special theory of relativity, you will encounter the equation: ds2 = dx2 + dy2 + dz2 -c2dt2 where c is the speed of light. How does this compare with the equation we have used of ds2 = dx2 + dy2 + dz2 -dw2? The equations are identical except for -dw2 (based on the imaginary axis) and -c2dt2. The square root of -c2dt2 is icdt since (icdt)2 = i2 x c2 x dt2. In other words, the imaginary axis is at the heart of -c2dt2, just as it is at the heart of -dw2. In fact, the only difference between -c2dt2 and -dw2 is the constant c2.

The imaginary axis that we have labelled “w” uses units of distance i.e. spatial units. The speed of light, c, has units of distance divided by units of time (since speed = distance divided by time). Hence the time axis, t, multiplied by c has units of distance since (distance/time) x time = distance because the time units cancel out. Thus the term cdt has space rather than time units and is now on a par with dx, dy and dz, which are also measured in distance units. So, dw is directly proportional to cdt since both are measured in distance units and c is a constant.

To state it explicitly, the time axis (t) and the imaginary axis (w) are directly related, via c the speed of light, the “natural speed” of the cosmos. We have thus demonstrated the astonishing fact that time is intimately related to imaginary space, the two being linked by the invariant speed of light. The mathematics of 4Di space are IDENTICAL to the mathematics of what the German mathematician Minkowski called 4D spacetime, where space and time are fused together, with time leading to squared distance expressions that have the opposite sign to the squared expressions of the conventional spatial axes of x, y and z. One of the central enigmas of existence can, in some sense, be attributed to this difference of a negative sign being matched against three positive signs, leading to real, imaginary and null zones instead of just real zones.

All of this stems from mathematical completeness, from the imaginary number i. Without it, all distances are real. With it, distances can be real, imaginary or zero. So, by ensuring that all of mathematics is used rather than a subset, we get the possibility of far more diverse phenomena. The Zero zone – the so-called infinitely narrow “luxon wall” – stands between the real and “imaginary” universes i.e. between the spacelike and timelike zones of existence. We have shown that time is born of imaginary space. Without imaginary space there would be no such thing as time. 4Di space is the basic entity, not 4D spacetime.

Isaac Newton believed in absolute space and absolute time. He envisaged space as an infinitely large 3D container, with time being measured by a cosmic clock that ticked at the same rate everywhere in the universe. This is the common sense view of space and time, and it works very well in our everyday environment. For Newton, space and time existed independently of any objects i.e. if you removed everything from the universe, space would continue to exist and time would continue to tick by.

Leibniz, with his “relational” view of time and space, opposed Newton. According to the relational view, space and time would not exist if there were no objects. Time and space describe relations between objects, and without objects then there are no relations to describe.

Einsteinian physics replaced Newton’s absolute space and time (each existing independently of the other) with a 4D spacetime where space and time are inextricably fused together. Einstein’s system is Leibnizian since space and time are dependent on the contents of the universe and how those contents move with respect to each other.

The Einsteinian/Leibnizian view only becomes obvious when objects are travelling at near lightspeed, hence why science remained resolutely Newtonian for so long.

However, the Einsteinian view of 4D spacetime is itself not the full story and ought to be replaced by the more fundamental 4Di space involving three real spatial axes and one imaginary spatial axis. Time comes into existence only because of 4Di space i.e. time is not a fundamental property of the universe but rather a secondary characteristic derived from the imaginary component of space. If space were not a 4Di domain then time as we know it would simply not exist.

Time results from how 3D objects move through 4Di space. Its nature changes depending on what path an object takes through space. Time does not “tell” an object how to move; rather, a moving object tells time how to tick, or indeed not to tick at all in the case of particles such as photons.

Moving objects are the fundamental reality of the dimensional universe, and “space” (4Di) defines the mathematical set of relations that all moving objects obey, thus giving rise to the laws of physics. Space does not exist as an independent, absolute physical entity; it is a mathematical construct that is given the appearance of reality by how objects move with respect to each other. Time is not an independent, absolute physical entity either, which is why time has always been so hard to define. People have been baffled by time because they have always attempted to make it a primary property of the cosmos. Once time is understood as a function of the mathematics of space and, in particular, of imaginary space then everything becomes clear. Even apparently stationary objects (in relation to space) are still moving – through time.

To reiterate, precisely as Leibniz first asserted, time and space do not exist in an absolute sense. Only moving objects exist. The dimensional universe, as we experience it, is the arena of physical objects in motion in space and/or time. There’s nothing more to it.

What is crucial to understand is that the frame of reference of any massless entity is outwith space and time. Everything that happens in the cosmos is instantly reflected in this unique reference frame. All possible information about the physical universe is instantaneously captured in the light domain.

When we describe the physical universe in terms of 4Di rather than 3D, at a stroke we get to the heart of the difference between common sense and reality. Common sense says that only 3D exists, but 3D is mathematically incomplete because zero and imaginary distances between two distinct points are prohibited. Physically, this seems to make sense, but mathematically it’s absurd. Why should zero and imaginary distances be excluded because of a mathematical feature that all negative numbers raised to an even power are positive? If another mathematical feature – imaginary numbers – can resolve this and allow a negative number to be generated when any such imaginary number is raised to an even power, why should nature ignore this complete version of mathematics in favour of a truncated version? Nature doesn’t. Nature is mathematical. Nature obeys the laws of complete, not incomplete, mathematics. It includes ALL numbers, not a subset of numbers. Numbers such as zero, infinity and the imaginary number are as “real” as 1, 2 and 3. They cannot be ignored or excluded or treated as less real or indeed as unreal.

Anything not forbidden is compulsory. Imaginary numbers are not forbidden, hence are compulsory. They are embedded in nature, but our common sense chooses to interpret them as non-spatial: as time, in fact. So, the profound mystery of why space and time exist is now explained by the underlying mathematical truth that there are two different types of numbers: real and imaginary. Real numbers underlie our conventional understanding of space; imaginary numbers underpin time. But, fundamentally, we are dealing with a single entity: all the numbers of mathematics, the complete set, none ignored or excluded. Nature operates according to Complete Mathematics. If it can exist mathematically then it will exist in reality. Anything not forbidden mathematically is compulsory.

Look at all of the things that fall into place when 4Di replaces 3D:

1) Instead of distances between two points always being real (as in 3D), it becomes possible to also have zero and imaginary distances. Three types of “reality” – three choices – become possible where only one was possible in 3D.

2) It transpires that Einstein’s famous special theory of relativity is based precisely on this division of reality into three distinct aspects. However, Einstein talked of a 4D spacetime rather than 4Di space. 4D spacetime and 4Di space obey exactly the same mathematical rules and framework. We choose to emphasise 4Di because it shows that the basic reality is spatial rather than spatial plus temporal. Time is derived from imaginary space; it is a secondary feature, not a primary one. Time could not exist if there were no imaginary space. Imaginary space, because it leads to zero and imaginary distances rather than just real distances, provides the crucial factor that makes life as we know it possible.

3) To reiterate, there are three zones of spatial reality: zero, imaginary and real. In the zero zone – “Null Space” – all distances and times are by definition zero. Everything is interconnected. Everything is One. This is the centre of the cosmic mystery, the transcendent realm that mystics have intuitively grasped. Since each point in our familiar 3D space can be matched up with an imaginary coordinate that can ensure that any two points in 4Di space are separated by zero distance then in Null Space all things are inextricably brought together in a single cosmic unity. This is the most profound mystery of all, and it is brought about by mathematical completeness. It cannot be stressed enough that in 4Di space, but not in 3D space, there is a null zone in which all things are connected. Our world of everyday common sense is locked into the illusion of 3D “reality” and, in this incomplete representation of existence, the differences between things are emphasized rather than their unity: individuation is stressed over communion. The great religion of Hinduism has always stressed that, under the power of Maya, human life is essentially illusory, and Buddhism makes the same claim that our reality is an illusion. But the illusion is one of incompleteness rather than false reality. To the extent that we experience 3D rather than 4Di, our view of reality is distorted, but it’s not fake or make-believe. It’s inaccurate, not wrong. It is lacking complete information. The world is absolutely real, but the 3D representation of it omits a critical component. The Absolute Truth lies in 4Di. Reason can lead us there, but not our common sense which leads us astray, and certainly not faith, which is useless.

4) The real and imaginary zones are like mirror images of each other, with the Null zone providing the mirror, the infinitely narrow luxon wall.

5) The Null zone is an extraordinary place where particles have no mass or size; where everything is interconnected and no time passes. It is the realm of the inverse twins, zero and infinity. The most extraordinary fact of existence is that zero and infinity can exist at the heart of 4Di spatial reality. Physicists are horrified and baffled by the Null zone. They don’t comprehend that it is the most critical feature of science and mathematics, and indeed of life itself. It is where the answer to every mystery ultimately lies.

******

So, have we provided the answer to mathematical completeness? Does 4Di accommodate all possible numbers? Is the cosmos four dimensional (three real space dimensions and one imaginary space dimension)?

No, we have committed an error. Although 4Di has the right “shape” – which is why Einstein’s special theory of relativity works – it is not actually complete. Can you see what we have done wrong? Use your intuition. What number seems right for the total number of dimensions required for mathematical completeness? How many dimensions does the cosmos need?

Are you beginning to see the light?
__________

5/8

Academia Iluministă (58)