Paranormal phenomena offer a glimpse of a mysterious "reality" that evades the straitjacket imposed by conventional science. If a realm beyond science exists then all of the promises made by religion about an afterlife, heaven, souls and God become possible. Without paranormal phenomena, it would be practically impossible to sustain any idea of existence beyond this mortal coil of ours.
The trouble with non-scientific phenomena is that they are notoriously unreliable. If they could be demonstrated on a systematic basis in laboratory conditions then no one would doubt the paranormal. Instead, we are presented with endless anecdotes about bizarre things happening, but they are usually "one-offs" and have little or no independent or reliable corroboration. Demonstrations of the paranormal cannot be done to order. Also, many charlatans prey on the vulnerable and add a layer of downright fraud and deception to the subject.
Many people are highly suggestible when it comes to the world of the paranormal, but, oddly enough, this suggestibility could itself be construed as an aspect of the paranormal. Why would so many people be so susceptible to suggestion if this served no useful function? Equally, why would so many people have such a strong religious sensibility if there were nothing real corresponding to their spiritual sense?
Why would evolution create in us this inclination towards illusion and self-deception? It would be an extraordinary situation for a scientific, godless universe devoid of paranormal phenomena to create a delusion in human minds that there is a God and that there are paranormal phenomena. How could such a delusion ever actually arise? What would its basis be? It would be on a par with saying that lifeless atoms can gather together in order to create the delusion that life exists…but that very "delusion" would itself be proof of life because only a living entity could be subject to mental delusions. Why would "godless" atoms create the impression that there's a God? Why would "scientific" atoms create the impression that there are phenomena beyond scientific comprehension? At the every least, we would have to conclude that godless, scientific, lifeless atoms have the most remarkable qualities that would, of their own account, have to be considered quasi-religious, hinting at the greatest of mysteries.
Consider these remarks by theoretical physicist David Bohm: "[The growth of a living plant] starts from a seed, but the seed contributes little or nothing to the actual material substance of the plant or to the energy needed to make it grow. This latter comes almost entirely from the soil, the water, the air and the sunlight. According to modern theories the seed contains information, in the form of DNA, and this information somehow 'directs' the environment to form a corresponding plant." Think of the even more remarkable way in which an egg and a sperm cell from a human mother and father combine to make a blueprint for creating a potential Leonardo da Vinci from the food and drink consumed by a mother during her pregnancy. If that is not a supreme miracle that far transcends scientific knowledge then what is? If that does not point to a realm of divine wonders then what does?
Is it possible to put the paranormal on any sort of credible quasi-scientific basis? Above all else, there would have to be an all-embracing conceptual model within which all paranormal phenomena could be explained. At the moment, a whole number of disparate suggestions and speculations are put forward, most of which have nothing in common with each other. Science, although incomplete, nevertheless accounts for an astonishingly wide spectrum of phenomena within its general framework. It is only when the limits of science are probed, as in the very smallest particles, or the very highest densities, or the very fastest speeds, or in dealing with zero and infinity, or at the interface between mind and matter, or between life and non-life, that the scientific model fails to provide a coherent interpretation of reality within its own parameters. All of these limiting cases of science point to a reality outwith the standard scientific model, but the numerous incompatible hypotheses of "paranormal science" do not help us to illuminate this other reality.
Conventional science fails because it only concerns itself with "dimensional" existence, and denies that there is a more fundamental domain underlying it: the dimensionless domain. This domain is denied by science even though all the hardest problems of science point to it. Science can make no further advances until it embraces dimensionless existence. It has explained dimensional reality to the fullest extent possible, but this has not been enough to account for all of reality. Science, if it is ever to achieve a Grand Unified Theory of everything, needs a new ingredient that takes it beyond its current limitations.
That said, a number of courageous scientists have tried to extend the current conceptual model of science, and their reputations have suffered accordingly. The most interesting thinker in this context was David Bohm who arrived at a scheme that is the closest any scientist has ever come to the r >= 0 paradigm. He couldn't quite take his ideas to their logical conclusion and see that they necessitated a dimensionless aspect of existence. Instead he arrived at a model based on what he called "undivided wholeness" in which phenomena have two potential states: "enfolded" and "unfolded". Bohm preferred the terms "implicate" and "explicate". The word "implicate" has a Latin root meaning to enfold or to fold inward.
Bohm said, "In terms of the implicate order one may say that everything is enfolded into everything. This contrasts with the explicate order now dominant in physics in which things are unfolded in the sense that each thing lies only in its own particular region of space (and time) and outside the regions belonging to other things."
Bohm's explicate, unfolded order is exactly what we refer to as the r > 0 dimensional domain. His implicate, enfolded order is analogous to the r = 0 dimensionless domain, although Bohm failed to realize that "enfolding" is really a process that takes dimensions and compacts them so much that they leave dimensionality altogether and become dimensionless. Had he taken the extra step of making the implicate order dimensionless then he would have independently arrived at the r >= 0 paradigm. While r >= 0 is a precise formulation, Bohm's explicate and implicate order remains somewhat vague.
In his important book Wholeness and the Implicate Order, Bohm gives a couple of concrete physical illustrations of what he's driving at:
1) "Thus, in a television broadcast, the visual image is translated into a time order, which is 'carried' by the radio wave. Points that are near each other in the visual image are not necessarily 'near' in the order of the radio signal. Thus the radio wave carries the visual image in an implicate order. The function of the receiver is then to explicate this order, i.e., to 'unfold' it in the form of a new visual image."
2) "A more striking example of implicate order can be demonstrated in the laboratory, with a transparent container full of a very viscous fluid, such as treacle, and equipped with a mechanical rotator that can 'stir' the fluid very slowly but very thoroughly. If an insoluble droplet of ink is placed in the fluid and the stirring device set in motion, the ink drop is gradually transformed into a thread that extends over the whole fluid. The latter now appears to be distributed more or less at 'random' so that it is seen as some shade of grey. But if the mechanical stirring device is now stirred in the opposite direction, the transformation is reversed, and the droplet of dye suddenly appears, reconstituted." (Our Comment: So, when the drop was dispersed, it was implicated or enfolded in the treacle; when the stirring process was reversed, it was unfolded once more back to its original state. When the particles of the ink drop were enfolded, they supposedly retained knowledge of their original state despite being apparently randomly distributed. The trouble with this example is that the ink drop is insoluble and therefore would, in any case, tend to separate from the treacle given enough time, just as a spring would bounce back to its original state if we stretched it then let go. Bohm's example would be much more convincing if the drop were soluble, but this process would never happen in that case. Thus, Bohm is not really providing a general principle with this analogy. It's just a peculiarity of two physical systems that don't mix.) A more convincing example Bohm provides is that of the hologram. It's a feature of a holographic image that if any part of it is illuminated, the whole picture can be seen in the illuminated section. In other words, the whole is enfolded in every part: the totality is implicit in every fragment. As Bohm says, "A total order is contained, in some implicit sense, in each region of space and time." This is often referred to as the Holographic Paradigm. The r >= 0 paradigm says that the r = 0 dimensionless domain is implicit throughout the r > 0 dimensional domain i.e. the whole of space and time is permeated by a domain of spacelessness and timelessness.
The two paradigms are very similar but not identical. Bohm's position is that any region of space and time (the microcosm) reflects all of space and time (the macrocosm). Although it's a powerful idea, it is extremely difficult to conceive of how all of space and time could possibly be enfolded in every individual region of space and time. What would be the mechanism for this astounding universal enfolding of space and time within space and time?
Holography is three-dimensional photography by laser. A hologram records the pattern formed by two interfering sets of light waves, one being a reference wave and the other coming from the object being photographed. To maximize the technique, laser light must be used. How could "nature" or "God" achieve this on a cosmic scale to produce a holographic universe? It already implies the existence of several elements external to the universe: a reference beam, a beam splitter, a cosmic holographic plate, laser light, and an intelligent entity to organize the whole thing and take the picture.
It also implies that rather than living in the "real" universe, we live inside the hologram of the universe. Moreover, a hologram is static but we seem to live in a continually moving universe (although there are philosophers who would argue that movement is an illusion). Also, what would be the relationship between the noumenal universe - the universe as it is in itself - and the moving holographic representation of it that provides the universe of our experience? The laws of the two universes would be completely different because in the original, noumenal universe, the enfolding mechanism would be absent. The whole concept is actually incoherent. Unsurprisingly, it has never been developed in any serious way. Bohm himself started to add new layers. He said, "There is a second implicate order which organizes the primary order." He called this the super-implicate order, then others suggested that there might be even higher orders that exist in "other dimensions" that somehow beam or project frequencies into our universe.
Bohm said that the implicate order is "carried" by what he calls the "holomovement", which is "an unbroken and undivided totality." Bohm wrote, "More generally, all forms of the holomovement merge and are inseparable…Thus the holomovement is undefinable and immeasurable." This is getting increasingly close to a statement of mysticism.
The r >= 0 paradigm removes all of these problematic issues at a stroke while providing a similar conceptual model: an enfolded aspect of reality combined with an unfolded aspect. The r >= 0 paradigm succeeds because it introduces dimensionlessness into dimensionality.
If you illuminate only a small portion of the total hologram then, although you obtain the whole image, it is a less bright, less intense, less vivid, lower resolution and somewhat less realistic image. If you imagine looking through a window at a garden, you could compare that to a full holographic image. If you then blacked out the entire window bar one small square, you would still be able to see the full garden scene through the small square if you adjusted your eye position, but your view wouldn't be nearly as good as before. Your ability to see around objects in the foreground would become progressively limited as the square was made smaller and smaller.
Nevertheless, with a hologram, the whole contains all of the parts, and all of the parts also contain the whole: parts and whole are interdependent and interlinked. This is a radically different version of reality from the standard mechanistic scientific model in which all parts are independent.
Experiments have been performed on rats whereby they were trained to perform a number of tasks such as finding their way through a maze without any errors. Sections of their brains were then removed in at attempt to isolate where the memories concerning the learned tasks were stored. No matter what sections of the brain were removed (apart form those required for basic survival), the memories remained intact - so where was the information kept? Neuroscientist Karl Pribram has argued on the basis of such evidence that specific memories are not encoded in specific sites in the brain but are instead distributed throughout the brain, in agreement with the holographic paradigm.
Another concept that is reminiscent of the hologram is the fractal:
Fractals are said to be "self-similar": any subsystem of a fractal system reflects the whole system. Fractals appear similar at all levels of magnification and have been described as "a way of seeing infinity." As with holograms, the whole contains all the parts, and all of the parts reflect the nature of the whole: the whole and the parts are again inextricably linked. Fractals are found throughout nature.
With holograms and fractals, the whole can be considered as being "enfolded" in the parts. With the r >= 0 paradigm, the r > 0 domain is the unfolded, explicate reality and r = 0 is the enfolded, implicate reality. The enfolded reality is present throughout the unfolded reality: the whole is reflected in every part. The universe is both local and non-local. Non-locality and the implicate order are essentially the same thing. If the whole is enfolded in every part then two parts that are superficially infinitely far apart and unable to communicate in any finite time are nevertheless able to exchange information instantaneously via non-locality.
Another example of the implicate order is a circle, which can be shown to be equivalent to a straight line with a "point at infinity":
The two points of infinity that exist at either end of an infinitely extended straight line become a single point of infinity in a circle: two infinities have been enfolded into one. Any circle can therefore be thought of as a representation of an infinite line: it is a compressed, enfolded, finite version of infinity.
So, to reiterate, a straight line with a point at infinity is the same as a circle i.e. a circle is its enfolded form, and we can make the circle as small as we like until it reaches its limit: a dimensionless point. By the same token, a flat plane with a point at infinity is equivalent to a sphere. A Riemann Sphere is an example:
If, for simplicity, we reduce the 3-D universe to 2-D, the Riemann sphere provides us with an excellent means of visualizing the relationship between the unfolded order (the plane) and the enfolded order (the sphere). The two orders are completely mapped to each other via a single "infinity point" (projection point). The enfolded order sits on top of the unfolded order. We can imagine shrinking the enfolded sphere until it reaches its limit - the ultimate enfolded state - a dimensionless point (r = 0). Then we are left with the r >= 0 paradigm: the whole of physical reality mapped to a single dimensionless point (r = 0) that constitutes the mental aspect of existence.
Just as in the case of the circle where the point at infinity bridges the two "ends" of an infinitely straight line, the point at infinity on a sphere ties together the north, south, east and west infinities of an infinitely extended plane. As usual, zero and infinity are the poles around which all of existence revolves. The r >= 0 paradigm is the only one that embraces zero and infinity.
The Riemann sphere can be thought of as a visual representation of an enfolded reality sitting on top of an unfolded reality, dimensionless on top of dimensional, of a mind sitting on top of matter, and fully linked to it. Descartes was never able to give a persuasive answer as to how the mind and matter aspects of existence could interact. The r >= 0 paradigm completely resolves this problem: they are indissolubly linked. Mind pervades matter.
Reality can be understood only in relation to both unfolded and enfolded states, dimensional and dimensionless. If just one state is studied, whatever knowledge we derive is necessarily simplified, approximate and incomplete. That is the stage we have reached with science. It has provided us with a great deal of knowledge about the unfolded state, but it cannot come to grips with the enfolded order and, more often than not, dismisses it out of hand as if it didn't exist.
The phenomena of the paranormal world are all manifestations of the mysterious enfolded order which science has been unable to understand or define. Quantum mechanics, because it deals with entities that are barely distinguishable from dimensionless points (the essence of the enfolded order) has encountered the implicate order head on, and while quantum mechanics has proved immensely successful, the finest minds of science have been incapable of saying what it tells us about reality. Their inability is caused by their blind refusal to accept an enfolded order, especially one that results in a dimensionless aspect of existence.
No "scientific" progress can be made regarding the paranormal until scientists accept a new conceptual, holistic paradigm completely different from their current reductive, mechanical view of the universe as an enormous machine with independent parts. Instead, it is an organic, flowing, dynamic Whole reflecting two very different states: unfolded and enfolded, r > 0 and r = 0. The mystery of existence is contained within this dichotomy.
So, straight lines (1-D), planes (2-D) and cubes (3-D) with an infinity point can all be considered the same as enfolded forms (circles, spheres and hyperspheres). What then is the "truth"? If the circle is the equivalent of a straight line with a point at infinity then, whenever we encounter a circle, we could just as easily conceive of it in terms of its infinitely extended linear form. There is no sufficient reason to privilege one interpretation over the other. But extraordinary consequences can flow from looking anew at things we have taken for granted for so long. If we conceive of time, for example, as linear and as extending infinitely far back, and that will also extend infinitely far forward, we soon become overwhelmed by the concept of infinity, particularly the notion that an infinite amount of time has already preceded this moment. As Nietzsche pointed out, if infinite linear time led to any sort of final state we would certainly already have reached that state because an infinite amount of time has already elapsed. He was an advocate of "eternal recurrence" - circular time in which all events, including our lives, are repeated an infinite number of times. If "unfolded" time is linear then "enfolded" time is circular, so is Nietzsche at least partially correct? If we keep increasing the "folding" of time, eventually we reach a state in which a single instant is repeated an infinite number of times i.e. time has stopped: it cannot move on to the next instant because it is in an infinite loop and has no way of halting. Once more, we have arrived at a so-called "strange loop". This is what we said in an earlier article that mentioned strange loops:
In his famous book Gödel, Escher and Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid, Douglas R. Hofstadter talks about Strange Loops which he defines as follows: "The 'Strange Loop' phenomenon occurs whenever, by moving upwards (or downwards) through the levels of some hierarchical system, we unexpectedly find ourselves right back where we started." He says, "Implicit in the concept of Strange Loops is infinity since what is a loop but a way of representing an endless process in a finite way?"
Hofstadter is absolutely right that a loop shows that infinity is built into the apparently finite. Science, as ever, rejects such a conception because it dogmatically rejects the presence of infinity in the world since it doesn't know how to handle it. Strange loops are intrinsic to the unfolded/enfolded "hierarchy".
So, what is time? Is it linear, circular, or frozen in an eternal loop of no duration? If you analyze time you will discover that there is no stranger concept. It is impossible to define it in any simple and satisfying way. Time has seemingly different characteristics in relation to the unfolded order, enfolded order and infinitely enfolded order. Not only that, there is "psychological" time - our perception of time differs according to circumstances. It races past when we are excited, drags when we are bored and almost slows to a stop in times of extreme crisis when we are faced with life and death choices.
In his book A New Model of the Universe, mathematician and mystic P. D. Ouspensky talks about three time dimensions, matching the three dimensions of space, but his system soon becomes highly unwieldy.
In fact, our everyday lives already encapsulate a synthesis of linear and cyclical time. Although every day is different, it is also, by and large, very similar to the one before and the one to come. We live in a framework of 24-hr cycles, weekly cycles, weekend cycles, monthly cycles, annual cycles. The planets travel round the sun cyclically. The tides are cyclical. We have internal biological cycles. Even the tissues that form our physical bodies are regenerating cyclically. Quite simply, we are immersed in cyclical, enfolded time, but our overriding sense of time is nevertheless linear. The extraordinary film Groundhog Day emphasizes cyclical time to an extreme degree, but even then the protagonist still manages to sustain a sense of linear time. Each new day is not quite identical to the one before, even though the starting position is always identical.
In our article The Divine Suicide, we have already hinted that there is a fundamental cyclical element to time. The universe/nature/God undergoes periodic regeneration/reincarnation/recycling and a new phase of existence begins. The new phase is never identical to the one before - there is no eternal recurrence - but nor does it go on forever linearly: we have an eternal compromise between linear and cyclical time.
A mathematical "transform" can convert a function from one domain (such as the time domain) to another (such as the frequency domain) without suffering any loss of information. An "inverse" transform takes you back to where you started. One of the most famous transforms is the Fourier transform. It converts a function from the time (or space) domain to the frequency domain. It allows any signal no matter how complicated to be broken down into a sum of simple sine waves. Every sound has a unique Fourier spectrum and, via, the inverse Fourier transform, every spectrum can be converted back into a sound. This raises the question of which domain is more real: the time/space domain or the frequency domain. The original signal and its Fourier transform are equivalent representations of the same entity. Neither is privileged over the other. There is no sufficient reason to suppose one to be superior to the other. The same information is simply expressed in two different ways: it's a "signal" in the time/space domain and a "spectrum" in the frequency domain.
Rather than seeing a world of space and time we could just as easily tune into an astounding shifting matrix of frequencies. We would perceive ourselves and everything in the world as frequency distributions endlessly flowing in and out of each other in a never-ending cosmic dance. We might perceive them in the most astounding and vivid colours. We would be inside a frequency kaleidoscope where we found ourselves able to interpret the subtlest, intricate and complex frequency patterns. Our perceptions would focus on dominant frequency patterns; we would perceive these as the "things" of the world; as other beings and objects. Living beings and plants might seem to glow in comparison with mere objects.
The fact that we don't perceive the world like this is because evolution by natural selection has chosen one mode of Fourier transform over its inverse. In the earliest days of the human race, perhaps there were those who operated in the frequency domain rather than the space and time domain, but they failed to prosper and died out.
Because quantum particles are associated with wave behaviour, Fourier mathematics is integral to quantum mechanics. It's a feature of Fourier transforms that, to be entirely accurate, they need to be analysed over an infinite time (once again we see the critical role played by the concept of infinity).Since this is impossible then all transforms will reflect a degree of uncertainty, normally negligible and undetectable in the everyday world. It transpires that a particle's momentum is the Fourier transform of its position and any attempt to increase the certainty in the measurement of one quantity automatically leads to less certainty in the measurement of the other. In the extremely improbable case that a particle's position is known with complete certainty, its momentum (its Fourier transform) is completely uncertain and so the particle could end up anywhere the next instant. This is the famous Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle which states that we cannot simultaneously know a particle's position and momentum with complete precision. This principle is critical to quantum mechanics and shows how deeply embedded in reality Fourier transforms are. If a particle's momentum were a 100% accurate Fourier transform of its position then there would be no quantum effects at all. It is precisely because of uncertainty that the quantum world is as strange as it is. This fundamental strangeness has its ultimate roots in the interaction of the dimensional and dimensionless aspects of existence: particles on the quantum scale can actually disappear from dimensional existence into dimensionless existence, then re-emerge. Science has never been able to offer a plausible account of where this intrinsic uncertainty originates.
In The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley wrote, "'Each person is at each moment capable of remembering all that has happened to him and of perceiving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe. The function of the brain and nervous system is to protect us from being overwhelmed and confused by this mass of largely useless and irrelevant knowledge, by shutting out most of what we should otherwise perceive or remember at any moment, and leaving only that very small and special selection which is likely to be practically useful.' According to such a theory, each one of us is potentially Mind at Large. But in so far as we are animals, our business is at all costs to survive. To make biological survival possible, Mind at Large has to be funnelled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet…Most people, most of the time, know only what comes through the reducing valve and is consecrated as genuinely real by the local language. Certain persons, however, seem to be born with a kind of by-pass that circumvents the reducing valve."
Most of us are locked into a single mode of perceiving reality, and science encourages this blinkered approach: it has the effect of tightening the "reducing valve". Science, for all of its tremendous successes, has had a deadly effect on human spirituality. It has given us an incomplete view of reality that has shut us off from our higher selves. We have become shadows of what we ought to be.
The universe is so much richer and wondrous than science would have us think. And the most remarkable feature of all is the enfolded, dimensionless domain: the inside of experience rather than the outside, the mental rather than the material, the spiritual rather than the physical, the domain beyond space and time.
It's the r = 0 dimensionless domain that animates the universe, that is its breathing, living heart, soul and mind. All paranormal phenomena are related to the r = 0 domain. The spiritual component of humanity resides there too. But the most remarkable feature of the r = 0 domain is that it is a cosmic mind that has been evolving for eons. It is the mind of Abraxas, the True God, and each and every one of us is part of the divine Mind. We all contain the divine spark, just as ancient Gnosticism always taught.
Each of us stands in relation to the whole of the r = 0 domain as a fragment of a fractal does to the whole fractal, as a small region of a hologram does to the whole hologram. We are part of the whole, and the whole is part of us. We are enfolded in God, and he in us.
Four factors hold humanity back from achieving an astounding increase in mental capacities and knowledge:
1) Science, the ruling intellectual paradigm, denies the existence of the r = 0 domain. The greater the success of science, the less people feel competent to challenge it. Leading scientists have come to resemble the high priests of ancient cults. They utter prophetic remarks in the form of bewildering mathematical equations. The people, in awe, bow down before these gods of the mind.
The only problem is that scientists have been unable to penetrate the final mysteries of existence. The best scientific minds have tried and failed. They themselves have slowly started to comprehend that there is a disastrous conceptual difficulty at the core of science. They have no idea what it is and they are groping blindly for it. Yet it could not be simpler: it's the concept that any dimensional entity can be "shrunk" down to a dimensionless point. Scientists admit that they have no idea how to work out what happens at the smallest possible scales of dimensionality, but they still refuse to accept that dimensions can disappear entirely. As we have demonstrated in previous articles, the central mysteries of general relativity and quantum mechanics are explained with complete ease by the addition of a dimensionless domain to a dimensional domain.
Physicist John Bell objected to the philosophical position commonly adopted by many scientists that what is unobservable does not exist. Given that virtually everything on the atomic scale and below is unobservable in any direct way, as are concepts such as the Multiverse consisting of infinite parallel worlds, it's a paradoxical stance for scientists to hold and it unquestionably prejudices them against the possibility of dimensionless existence which, by definition, is not observable in any conventional sense. Yet how could dimensionless existence be any more conceptually outrageous than a Multiverse and other currently popular exotic scientific speculations?
2) The evolving universe involves the ever-growing power of the cosmic mind (the r = 0 domain) over the cosmic body (the r > 0 domain). When the mind has full control of the body, and knows it, then the universe has become God. At that point, God completely controls the destiny of the universe and everything within it. This definition of Abraxas, the True God, provides the means for understanding how we ourselves can become God.
Aldous Huxley said that we could all potentially be "Mind at Large" i.e. have the ability to perceive "everything that is happening everywhere in the universe." This is just a different way of referring to the r = 0 domain. Huxley said that the "reducing valve of the brain and the nervous system" produces a "measly trickle" of consciousness. This is the essence of the issue. The more we can expand our consciousness beyond this mere trickle, the more we enter into union with the mind of God, of which we are all part. If we could fully open our minds i.e. become Minds at Large then we ourselves would have full access to the r = 0 domain, to the Mind of God.
Illuminism teaches that the consciousness and the unconscious of the human mind added together make up the equivalent of the Mind at Large. Each human mind contains the Mind of God but the vast majority of that divine mind is locked within the unconscious. In previous articles, we have talked about venturing into your unconscious, resolving the conflicts you find there, and getting in touch with your "Higher Self". This is the same as saying that as you expand your consciousness into your unconscious, as you illuminate the unconscious domain more and more, you are in effect embracing more and more of God's mind. Ultimately, your Higher Self is none other than God himself, and when you truly make contact with your Higher Self, you have literally become God, as we have always insisted was the culmination of human existence.
The r = 0 domain is the key to life and to the project of becoming God. Any intelligence that can "tune in" to the r = 0 domain ever more effectively starts to become ever more like God. Becoming God is the beautiful destiny that awaits all of those who pursue and achieve gnosis. Gnosis is the moment of divine epiphany when the mental barriers between our limited consciousness and the unlimited consciousness of God suddenly dissolve and at last we are Mind at Large, sharing God's thoughts. We have entered into union with the divine mind, and we are thinking the thoughts of God.
Is that not the highest conceivable achievement for a human being, literally to become God? Is not everything else pathetic in comparison? Those greedy people who spend their lives amassing multi-billion dollar fortunes, they have turned themselves into gods on earth, but missed out on the infinitely greater prize of becoming God himself. They have understood nothing of the true meaning of life. They are blind fools who have wasted their lives. Truly, they can be called the damned.
The r = 0 domain is the "enfolded" aspect of existence, the "inside" of things that contains the meaning of life. The r > 0 domain is the unfolded aspect of existence, the outside of things, the cold, sterile, lifeless scientific aspect. The enfolded domain is omnipresent within the unfolded domain. This has the effect of putting the Mind of God inside everything. Every part of the universe contains the whole of the Mind of God, and the whole of the Mind of God contains every part of the universe. That is the final answer to the riddle of existence. All of humanity's greatest and noblest aspirations reside in this single incredible Truth. There is nothing mystical, bizarre or impossible about becoming God. It is the essential nature of the universe to allow this magical evolution to take place. It is how the universe is designed. It is guaranteed by the core logic of existence.
R >= 0, the ultimate Equation of Existence, is nothing other than a program for allowing us to become God. It stands in absolute contrast to the Bible, the Torah and Koran. Which do you think is correct? - the most magnificently simple and beautiful equation conceivable, or the bizarre writings of ancient bearded "prophets" whose words are riddled with errors, madness, violence, fanaticism, demands for blind faith, and the most violent threats against those who choose to disagree? The Equation is the expression of the Mind of God; the "holy" books are the expression of the Mind of the Demiurge. Nothing could be more self-evident.
3) The Abrahamic faiths, the ruling religions of the world, deny that we are part of God and he part of us. They seek to alienate us from God, to make us his worthless slaves, fit only to throw ourselves down on our faces in front of him and beg for mercy. Look at Islam - a religion of people on their knees, heads bowed, averting their eyes, the women invisible and completely dehumanised in their burqas, unfit to be seen in public. Their alienation from the True God could not be starker. How could anyone believe that God wants us on our knees? It's an affront to God.
Look at the Jews - bobbing backwards and forwards in front of the Wailing Wall, in their drab black suits and black hats, with their bizarre hair and beards that they imagine glorify God in some incomprehensible way. These people are an affront to God.
And the Christians - the Hallelujah, Happy Clappy gang, the faith healers and TV evangelists, the Catholic hierarchy in all their silk finery, the Protestant preachers damning the world to hell and banging on endlessly about a Jewish carpenter called Yehoshua ben Yosef. What an assortments of misfits and nutters. All of them are an affront to God.
The Eastern religions, and the Western traditions of Hermeticism, Gnosticism, and, above all, Illuminism, are the beacon of hope. They have all understood that gnosis, moksha, nirvana and enlightenment are the same thing - the wondrous epiphany when a person realizes that he is one with God, that he can enter into full union with God.
The purpose of the Abrahamic faiths is to prevent enlightenment. These faiths are the absolute enemies of knowledge. They promote faith as a means of preventing human beings from ever realizing their divine potential.
Ask yourself a very simple question. Is the pursuit of enlightenment through knowledge healthier or unhealthier than blind and fanatical faith in the words of ancient prophets, all of whom preached entirely different versions of the so-called infallible Word of God? God has no need to preach to us because he is already inside us, if we would but listen.
Is it better for humans to see themselves as potentially divine or as grovelling, unworthy sinners crying out for God's mercy? Which type of human is more easily controlled by the OWO - those who are on their knees like slaves, or those who stand on their two feet like gods? Make no mistake, the posture you adopt says everything about you. Those who are on their knees, in abject submission, are slaves. They are a disgrace to the human race.
There is no more urgent need than that every human being should receive the gospel of Abraxas - the true good news - that we are part of God and he part of us. We are a community of gods in the making, a society of the divine.
Anyone who says differently is evil, a liar and is trying to hold us back from our divine destiny. The religions of faith are an abomination. They are the work of the Devil. They seek to alienate us from our divine selves, to reduce us to debased slaves. These religions must be swept aside before humanity can step forward into the bright sun of illumination.
Never let anyone tell you that you are bad, a sinner, weak, unworthy, wretched and depraved, in need of Jesus or Moses or Mohammed. You need no one except yourself. You need no faith. It's knowledge that will deliver you. Never let anyone threaten you with hellfire for disagreeing with them. Never let anyone bully you and intimidate you. Never let them put you down, relegate you to second-class citizen, make you a slave.
Humanity can be great and fulfil its mission only when every human sees God in every other human. You would never dream of treating God badly, would you, so nor would you treat your neighbour badly if you saw the God within them.
We are all becoming God…if we desire it…if we reject the false prophets…if we reject faith…if we get off our knees.
4) The Global Elite have no interest whatever in ordinary people becoming divine. In fact, nothing could represent a more serious challenge to their kingdom of earthly power. To stay as the kings of the world, they require the rest of us to stay as their subjects, serfs and slaves. In a community of equal gods, there is no Elite.
The Elite seek to ensnare us in trivia, in materialism and consumerism. They wish us to be permanently distracted. They give us endless injections of Hollywood junk, TV soap operas, romcoms, shopping, sport, celebrities, "reality TV" (the precise opposite of reality). They make it all "hyperreal" - more real than real. We become transfixed with the images they bombard us with. We want to become those impossible things. We are miserable when we fail. Our lives become nothing but a history of failure. We are losers, suckers, victims. Why? Because we have bought into an illusion supplied to us, like the most toxic drug on earth, by the Elite, who make immense profits from our misery. Why do we go along with it? Why don't we wake up?
Imagine a society that does not want to turn you into a shopper and worker drone where your purpose is purely to keep your nose clean, cause no trouble and help to make more and more money for the Elite. The Elite DESPISE us. If they didn't, they wouldn't treat us as they do.
Why do we give power to those who have contempt for us, who see us as nothing but vast numbers of meaningless ants? The power in this world does not reside where it should - with the people - but with a tiny Elite that, astoundingly, has succeeded in making us dance to their deranged tune. How did they pull off the biggest con of all time? Why did we let them?
Isn't it time we changed the music? Listen to this song by Pho' and Catshez.
Retail Therapy - Pho' ft. Catfish Ink (Produced by AnnoDomini)
It's time for us to snap out of the spell the Elite have cast us over us. There is nothing great or remarkable about them. They do not deserve gargantuan and unprecedented rewards for their efforts. No one on earth can work to full capacity for more than about eight hours a day. So why are some people paid a handful of dollars for a day's work while others are paid a literal fortune? A billionaire makes 20 million dollars a week - for a forty-hour week. This is a million times more than the people working themselves to exhaustion and death in sweatshops to make clothes for Nike and the like.
In other words, we value one person's time as a million times more valuable than another person's. And if we're being honest about it, we're really saying that the rich man is a million times more valuable than the poor man, a million times superior to him. Is that healthy capitalism, or is it stark, staring insanity, an absolute insult to any concept of human equality? How could anyone possibly merit being paid $20 million for forty hours work? There is no rational basis for it. That $20 million becomes the private income of a private individual. The Elite have managed to persuade us that it is good for society - good for every one of us - for them to be paid $20 million a week while the rest of us get a pittance. Only the brainwashed and the dumb would ever think that their interests are served by more and more money pouring into the pockets of the Elite.
So why do we vote for people who relentlessly transfer our money into a few private bank accounts? Society profits not one jot from this process. Cancer isn't cured, children aren't educated, the elderly don't receive better pensions. All that happens is that a tiny group of people who call themselves the Elite get to set themselves up as kings of the world, enjoying all possible luxuries at our expense. Isn't it time we toppled these idols? They are the false gods that religion has always warned us against. Let's not shy away from the truth: the excessively rich are pure evil. They have no redeeming qualities at all.
Aldous Huxley, writing about the effects of mescaline, said, "Visual impressions are greatly intensified…Interest in space is diminished and interest in time falls almost to zero…[Mescaline] impairs the efficiency of the cerebral reducing valve. When the brain runs out of sugar, the undernourished ego grows weak, can't be bothered to undertake the necessary chores, and loses all interest in those spatial and temporal relationships which mean so much to an organism bent on getting on in the world. As Mind at Large seeps past the no longer watertight valve, all kinds of biologically useless things start to happen. In some cases there may be extra-sensory perceptions. Other persons discover a world of visionary beauty. To others again is revealed the glory, the infinite value and meaningfulness of naked existence, of the given, unconceptualized event. In the final stage of egolessness there is an 'obscure knowledge' that All is in all - that All is actually each. This is as near, I take it, as a finite mind can ever come to 'perceiving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe.'"
Perhaps we should compel the Elite to take daily doses of mescaline!
What Huxley describes is approximately what happens on the journey to becoming God. You do not need mescaline to achieve these effects. Eastern religion is full of drug-free techniques for "expanding the mind", for loosening the effects of the reducing valve. Imagine a whole world engaged in the process of expanding the mind rather than shopping and watching golf.
We need a society based on the People Principle not the Profit Principle. The purpose of government should be to enrich the People, not to enrich the Elite.
"LW" told us about a pertinent dream:
"I rarely remember my dreams but this one was disturbing and seemed very real. I dreamt that my husband and I were in a movie theater watching a film. Now, I have noticed that when we do see a movie, I am laughing or otherwise reacting about something in the movie that most people just don't see, and the rest of the theater will be silent. So we're sitting watching a movie and, sure enough, I'm reacting and no one else is and I'm annoyed and puzzled about this. The next thing I'm aware of is that everyone is sleeping, I awake from the sleep, it's still dark and there's a mechanical sound like the entire theater is moving and I get the sense that it's moving upward. I am panicky, and stand up to try to wake everyone, but they're sound asleep. I'm yelling and waving my arms, but no one responds. Finally the lights go on, the mechanical sound stops and everything seems to be back to 'normal'. No one seems to have any inkling of what has happened, they're just milling around. End of dream.
I have known for a long time, as you have, that most people have turned into zombies. You can't talk to them about anything meaningful; they look at you like you have two heads. I think the dream was underscoring that fact and my frustration with it. Anyhow, thanks for raging against the machine."
How true. Why are there so many zombies? Why have we allowed the Elite to do this to us?
Our next article will be delving into the world of paranormal phenomena using the r >= 0 paradigm, the synthesis of enfolded and unfolded existence.