One can think of the universe as all spirit, with matter being the
densest form; or one can think of the universe as all substance, with
spirit being its most rarified form.
The highly conditioned western mind will find it hard to conceive how multiplicity can come from unity and then return again; or how the size of an atom and the size of a galaxy can be interchangeable through four-dimensional motion. But both will come much easier when you begin to understand how limited our picture of the world really is; and that for millennia, how nature has been giving us an incomplete view of physical reality.
Universe can exist only dualistically through the tension between opposites. The frictional effects between the two forces of change (one syllable) and non-change (two syllables) create everything: heat, light, the collective of gravitation, both positive and negative electrical charges, thus mass-energy; plus the space and time containing (and being contained by) them. In other words, herein lay the field of play and the play itself: the duality of CAUSE AND (its multiplicity of) EFFECTS. What could be simpler?
Although he proclaimed science to be the most precious thing we have, Einstein still called it “primitive and childlike” when it is “measured against reality”1.
But ‘they’ didn’t want to hear Einstein, they wanted Bohr; they didn’t hear de Broglie and Schrödinger because they wanted to hear Born and Heisenberg; just as they didn’t want Spinoza, they wanted Descartes, they listened not to Heraclitus, but only heard Parmenides. In all cases, “The Plan” of finitism wins. It is no wonder that insanity rests at the foundation of the human condition.
The major difference between sanity and insanity is large numbers with the unspoken assumption that this majority is always right. They have to be right or they would be insane. If not, they will change reality (instead of questioning their thinking) till it is right (fact: historically, the majority opinion, based on the chimera of knowledge, has always been wrong; else, why would it always ‘improve’?).
Burroughs called this mode of thinking, “the right virus”2.
From The Journyl of the Soul to Self (and back again)
are, wherever you’ve been,
The Fifth Dimension
You’ll never understand the complexity of existence until you recognize and rediscover the ecstatic simplicity, identity and equality of pre and post existence, or repose.
How can we know the fifth dimension when the fourth dimension confounds us so much?
Actually, it seems that everything we want to say about the fifth dimension has already been erroneously applied to the fourth dimension. By skipping over true four-dimensionality and placing the fourth dimension in the ur-zone of exotic geometry, their descriptions are breathtakingly close to the repose of the fifth dimension (which is no dimension at all!).
In the midst of Replacing Newton’s space and time with Minkowski’s
frozen space-time, Gary Zukav tells us:
The special theory of relativity, however, says that it is preferable, and more useful, to think in terms of a static, non-moving picture of space and time… If we could view our reality in a four-dimensional way, we would see that everything that now seems to unfold before us with the passing of time, already exists in toto, painted, as it were, on the fabric of space. We would see all – the past, the present, and the future – with one glance…” (The Dancing Wu-Li Masters, pp 155-156)
P.D. Ouspensky said it best: “Let us imagine some object, say a book, outside of time and space. What will this last mean? Were we to take the book out of time and space it would mean that all books which have existed, exist now, and will exist, exist together, i.e., occupy one and the same place and exist simultaneously, forming as it were one book which includes within itself the properties, characteristics and peculiarities of all books possible in the world…
“What is “man” out of space and time? He is all humanity, man as the “species”—Homo Sapiens, but at the same time possessing the characteristics, peculiarities and individual earmarks of all separate men. This is you, and I, and Julius Caesar and the conspirators who killed him, and the newsboy I pass every day—all kings, all slaves, all saints, all sinners—all taken together, fused into one indivisible being of a man, like a great living tree in which are bark, wood, and dry twigs; green leaves, flowers and fruit. Is it possible to conceive of and understand such a being by our reason?” P.D. Ouspensky, Tertium Organum3
Again, they are describing our fifth dimension by giving examples of Minkowski’s altered, normalized and quite static, fourth dimension! What an amazing ‘majority rule’ irony.
Where Zukav says ‘preferable and more useful’, Wikipedia says it “is most conveniently formulated” while the Encyclopedia Britannica says ‘there is reason to believe’! No argument or proof whatsoever! It is this kind of rhetoric that Minkowski’s static spacetime rests upon.
“Return to Sender”: This is the fifth dimension that has been popularly merchandized as the fourth. But to get to the fifth and to be able to dance to the rhythm of all happening, you must first put your three dimensions in perpetual motion. This is true, non-normalized, Einsteinian four-dimensionality. And it is not finite.
The belief in finitism is a gift from the act of seeing and measuring the infinite while ignoring the process; it is also its own reason to be. But we have taken finitism much too seriously till it’s gone beyond the serious all the way to the critical. But!
Finitism is the heart and soul of’
The Great Cosmic Joke.
There’s nothing real about it.
What you see is only half the equation.
The ‘other’ half being how.
Now half of that is when, where, why, who.
And only half of that here now.
Which is also ‘now here’
Which is also ‘nowhere’.
When infinity shows up in the equations of physics, it should be celebrated, not mourned and defiled. Instead, we arbitrarily normalize and then ‘renormalize’ to chase it back down the well-spring of size.
The mind is so powerful that it can create an experience to support a belief, and then use the experience as proof of the belief, not realizing that the belief created the experience.1 (J. Krishnamurti)
* Modern mankind has yet to evolve to the point of sustaining a successful social system. He seems somehow unable to contain and control ego and/or self-love, so that when man becomes men (that is, when a person becomes people, a social entity) cooperation seems to yield to competition. He reverts to his basic animal nature. Instead of his social systems being the servant of its members, expressing their desires, it tends to become the master to be served, suppressing those same desires. This weakness is prevalent in government, religion and science, all of which, become ‘in business” and must surrender its original purpose in order to succeed.
1. From the front matter of Banesh Hoffmann’s Albert Einstein, Creator & Rebel
2. William S. Burroughs, from The Place of Dead Roads. ©1983, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, NY
3. See R. Jones, Physics as Metaphor,, pp 73