Truth is an Endgame



Opus I 




Growth, Gravity and


The Gateway to the Gods




‘Tiz the trauma of birth–and of death–that we pay
To come into this life and the game we all play.
So-what if it’s all more a ploy than a plan?
For what better place to hide from ‘I AM’



It's the experience of being in time, once again, and to explore the sensations; to see the clarity of universe, once again, and to delight in its frictions, passions, pleasures and pains; it is to go from the soul to a self, once again and explore the vicissitudes of experience; it is all these things and more of course, that keep us coming back – again and again…


To this thing we call Universe, which seems to identify an entity that desires, or otherwise necessitates, awareness: self awareness (The odds against this being otherwise – i.e., a random or “accidental” universe – are enormous). This is curious, if not coincidental, because the whole of what we call nature seems to focus primarily on creating entities that perceive. Universe, “an expression of a reality other than itself”, wants to see itself, converse with itself, re-create itself, perhaps just to entertain itself, or even to enjoy itself!



So we all get cast in a joke we can’t see,
‘Cause the joke and the joker’s the same entity;
And if you need this truth to be subject to view,
You’re playing the joke, and the joke is on you.



Sense organs are filters that welcome the outside world. Each sense organ is, in essence, a transducer, transforming a portion of the world outside of itself. But the body itself is also a transducer and sense organ as it ‘feels’ the most dominant and relentless of all sensations from both inside and outside itself : the continuum of weight!


However, the process of vision has entirely beguiled us into believing in its wondrous creation; a 3-d panorama of clarity, color, particularity and permanence – none of which actually exists in the substantive world.


When light waves touch the eyes and are miraculously transformed into vision, it is done so fast and efficiently, that our subsequent experience is the envy of the gods (it’s why we keep coming back.). And the ‘touch’ itself is rarely registered in our consciousness (have you ever felt that someone was watching you?).


When audio waves touch the ears they are likewise magically transformed into sound and even music. In both instances, we usually forget, or don’t even consider, that we’ve been physically ‘touched’.


But vision, color and clarity along with sound and music, are not all that are merely effects of this process of transformation. According to the physicist Max Born, quanta, those tiny independent ‘bits’ of information/energy both constructing the universe and allowing us to see it, are the result of “the transformation of mechanical energy [waves] into radiation [particles].”1 And so an entire separate reality emerges! And we must – utterly, must – acknowledge the fact that we live amongst two separate causal and thus physical realities. For if we do, that wonderful gift called understanding awaits us!


The theme of this work is that the world of appearance is not a reflection of what is, but an effect of the visual process on the universal process. We cannot see how this process works (energy transformation), as it is occluded by why it exists (self-awareness, through energy transformation). And it is no coincidence that they are two extremes (micro and macro) of the same fundamental process.


Nor is it just a coincidence that the visual process and the quantum process – not to mention the digital process and even the photographic process – are one and the same. It is this, perhaps, that explains why we’ve become an observation oriented species, especially during the past half-century. Quantum mechanics and the digital media are so successful because they mimic the process of vision. Consequently, there is simply no end to how they can delight us.


But the probability exists that we have not been able to correctly distinguish between the principles of perception and the principles of what is perceived. Are they laws of nature, or principles of perception? Are they ‘out there’ or ‘in here’? One can hardly overstate the profundity of this question.


What is presented to the eye is something that is ultimately four dimensional and continuous, according to Einstein’s special theory of relativity. But what leaves the eye and registers on the brain are electro-chemical impulses; individual ‘bits’ of an on/off process called transduction. Somewhere between ‘out there’ and ‘in here’, funny-business happens: something changes to its opposite reality. And it now seems apparent that it does so, not in the ‘outside’ world, but right in the medium that observes/measures it.


The result: our three-dimensional, discontinuous reality, a relatively permanent effect of our process of vision as it acts on a dynamic, constantly changing world. Thus, by definition, what we see – our entire visual panorama – is a “virtual” reality (reality in effect, but not necessarily in fact). This would be compared to our actual reality, which is four-dimensional and continuous: “There is no more commonplace statement than that the world in which we live is a four-dimensional space-time continuum”2 (Einstein). It is observation, that is, the process itself, which collapses this continuum into three-dimensional particularity.


God has eyes of ev’ry size
In shapes and forms unheard;
Sensations all that come about
Contained within a word:


An eye that SEES through eyes that see
Like a window through infinity,
Reflecting back to you and me
Just tokens of philosophy.

(Joy, the Rime)


Infinity enters the third dimension


(They’ll never freely give it back, you know. It would destroy they’re hold on you and your precious imagination. And since it’s the ultimate freedom, it’s also the ultimate taboo. Because you just may remember some things about purpose, process and above all, origins – like who you are, what, when, where, how, and that most forbidden of questions, why? But we are held in check by our desire for security, stability, normality and permanence. And to these ends, it seems, we willingly make the ultimate sacrifice.)


We are four dimensional creatures in a four dimensional universe acting-out this finite, three dimensional drama for the benefit of modern man, “the measurer”. Consequently, there is an entire dimension of reality out there that is being excluded from our powers of reasoning!


The ‘acting-out’ (purpose, the mental aspect) is perhaps why we’re here, but the action (process, the physical aspect) is how it all comes about. And it never ceases to amaze me how the understanding of one can lead to the understanding of the other, as it does, ultimately, in all aspects of dualism; yet we never seem to grasp this.


…the error of dualism forms the root of intellection and is therefore next to impossible to uproot by intellection (Catch 22: If I have a fly in my eye, how can I see that I have a fly in my eye?).3


The refusal of scientists to interpret a very interpretable Nobel winning experiment (i.e., one that “yields its own result”) or to deal with the separate realities it brings about, and the continued denial of the geometry of true four-dimensionality, is no different than when the high priests refused  to look through Galileo’s telescope. And to justify this refusal and ultimate denial, these scientists created a whole new fictional brand of physics with its now famous laws of ignorance and defeat – “The New Physics”. Ironically, it is this refusal that has allowed the physicists to nearly perfect the art of measurement to an accuracy that seems almost uncanny!


But this interface is with the dark side of matter, the shadow of reality we call three-dimensional finitude (what William Blake called “the land of shadows”, a nature created not by a benevolent God, but by an evil demiurge). And although this is the world of color and clarity we enjoy so much, we are nevertheless “blinded by the light” side of matter by the process of vision itself, which must condition this light for our viewing pleasure.


Because if the experiments are interpreted at face value; and if the evolution of the Schrödinger wave-function – the “centerpiece” of quantum mechanics – is followed rigorously without all its added fictions, the results are shattering, at least to the physicist who covets this science of measurement. For the perpetual flux that existed in our prehistory (under the sobriquet “infinite matter”, from the Milesians, “the first philosophical school of Greece”), and popularized by Heraclitus, returns with a vengeance.

The Tao of Change, or Logos


The opposite of a great truth is also a great truth.(mystical truism)


Our truth for all seasons has a name; a name with one syllable, unequivocal in meaning: and that truth is simply change: every thing, every where and every when, constantly changes. And this process of perpetual change is so logically compelling that it changes into its opposite, non-change, and thus produces two separate physical – and thus palpable – realities: the Actual (four dimensional, and continuous wave-world), and Virtual (three dimensional and discontinuous particle-world). In other words, it’s the four dimensional universe of change that the three dimensional universe of permanence emerges from through the process of perception.

Perhaps this is why the reputations of so many theorists, in Richard Feynman’s words, have gone “down the drain”. They mingle in one universe and try to interpret it in another.


According to their state-of-the-art theories, the matter of universe can be inferred to exist, at least with any continuity or endurance (which they deny can even happen), only at the expense of letting it “spread-out”, grow, “get fatter” (Parker) or expand over time; to give it “spaces of more than three dimensions” (Born).  In other words, the unseen reality of the quantum world, if we allow it to exist, actually grows!  Until, that is, it is observed or measured; and then “a miracle occurs” (J. von Newmann)


The physicists have been quietly* dealing with this spread-out behavior in matter for over 80 years (i.e., the “measurement problem”, or “Reality Crisis”). It caused a psychological drama in all of science that has never been properly dealt with to this day, despite the pleas of some of its participants:


It would seem that we must indeed come to terms with this picture of a particle which can be spread out over large regions of space…Even when localized as a position state [i.e., a measurement], a particle begins to spread at the next moment.(Roger Penrose)


Think about the startling profundity of this – after all, it does come from one of the giants in mathematical physics: unobserved material particles, the same particles that create the entire physical realm, “spread-out”! And it must do so in perfect proportion, what they call “absolute perfection of dimension”.


Their saving grace is what quantum theory calls “the collapse of the wave function.” Also called a vector reduction, this great quantum “miracle” is designed to bring the observed particle back down to size, to “normalize” the whole affair so that we don’t go spreading ourselves around the universe ad-infinitum.


All this started when the spreading fractional density, in Erwin Schrödinger's Nobel winning wave-function state, was confirmed by the spreading particles, in G.P. Thomson's Nobel winning experimental state. And the resulting agreement and mutual confirmation brought into being a whole new brand of physics, plus a profound sense of incredulity. Because this was all happening right after Einstein’s four dimensional world was passing every test of truth thrown its way And when the dust settled… you’re just not going to believe what they got away with.


In this century the professional philosophers have let the physicists get away with murder.  It is a safe bet that no other group of scientists could have passed off and gained acceptance for such an extraordinary principle as complementarity, nor succeeded in elevating indeterminacy [uncertainty] to a universal law.67 (Newman)


What is so important about this is that all the nonsense of the popular interpretation of quantum theory is passed along to its ugly stepchildren, the science fictions of the big bang and black hole theories. Now these ideas may exist in a similar way in some virtual form, but certainly without the preposterous explosion from nothing and the ‘cooking up’ and infinite compaction of matter. Science simply doesn’t understand the process of matter (mater mother!) and thus universal process itself. Or, they may well know it but since it doesn’t fit into the plan it becomes a normalized affair so it will fit all the published literature.

The ‘Philosopher’s Key’


... in that distance... between the seer and the thing seen, in that division the whole conflict of man exists.7 J. Krishnamurti

The Philosopher’s Key, an important ingredient of our universe’s one absolute principle, is hidden in that threshold (“in that distance”) between the processes of seeing and being seen – two variations of the universal process.

The ‘key’, also called, the ‘hidden variable’, may be non-computational: size and duration are inversely proportional and in a perpetual state of change (How can you compute an invisible magnitude that’s constantly changing?). Its corollary, what could be called the ‘Heraclitian principle’, states that: if the eye that sees changes like what it sees, then how can it see the change? Or in the spirit of Kafka, who might have said it thusly: If you make size a variable instead of a constant…”the world will freely offer itself to be unmasked. It has no choice. It will dance in ecstasy at your feet”

The persistence of memory, along with a misguided, blind faith in the results of the ‘act’ of observation – with little or no regard to the process itself – keeps us from recognizing this truth. Plus it is imperative in science (not to mention officialdom) that size and duration are permanent, fixed and predictable entities, especially in physics, the science of measurement (This is just one of the many un-provable grand assumptions of science).

How do we reconcile the spreading of the electron’s wave packet all over town with the picture of a localized particle? The answer is that we must include the act [but not the process itself!] of observation in our reckoning .8 (Goswami)

Think of it this way. Photography, an imitation of our visual apparatus, works by freezing a moment in three-dimensional space and time. And the result costs us the third dimension of depth in order to function. Every photograph, film or video tape ever made reflects this ‘normal’ reduction of dimension. Yet, just like weight, we simply take it for granted without being able to really explain it. We ignore it.

In the same way, and because it’s the same process of transduction, the process of seeing works by freezing “slices” of a four-dimensional continuum in space-time. And it likewise costs us a dimension in order to function. This collapse of dimensionality has been noted in physics but is woefully misinterpreted as a collapse in the quanta itself – a logical and empirical impossibility. This is the result of not being able to distinguish what we see from how we see it.

We must say that our measurement reduces the electron wave to the particle state.

Talking about a quantum object without talking about how we observe it is ambiguous because the two are inseparable. (ibid)

In reality, there is only the continuum, the complex weight of the universe. We are four-dimensional creatures in a four-dimensional universe and the only way to see or be seen is through three dimensionality. But also, ‘in reality’, it is near impossible to be constantly walking around thinking that things aren’t the way they appear. Three dimensionality is a pragmatic necessity. Hence the requirement of understanding the nature of our separate realities (one for the soul and one for the self).


In RealityA strange realitySomething seems to be missing in it.9


We perceive a world in three finite dimensions displaying itself with glorious color and clarity and a host of other observed qualities. But we also sense a world beneath these appearances: the substance of universe, the process maintaining it. We feel the weight of the world as it acts upon us! But subsequent theory has led us into revering the perceptions of the former while ignoring the sensations of the latter. Indeed, gravity and its seemingly eternal mystery is the sacred cow of science.


But the theme of this work is that our sixth sensation of weight is not an eternal mystery at all. It’s the greatest clue we’ve ever been given! For the continuum of weight allows us to “feel”, and thus experience, what happens between those particular slices of space-time that we are allowed to see with the eyes.


So it’s all about the world and its desire and ability to see itself, while suffering the process. The sufferance, shared alike by all sentient creatures, is because it cannot see itself unless it transforms itself. Infinity cannot be seen. The Infinite must be changed into a finite state (as waves change into particles) in order to see itself – both as seer and as the seen. And it is we with our ‘big brains’ who surely suffer the most.


Why Perpetual Change?


At the present day the scientific universe is more mysterious than it has ever been before in the history of thought. Although our knowledge of natural processes is greater that it has ever been, this knowledge is, in a way, less satisfactory, for in every direction we are faced by ambiguities and contradictions.10 (Sullivan)


Things, as we are aware of them through our organs of touch, taste, sight, and hearing, are all in constant flux and therefore our sense organs cannot give us knowledge. (Heraclitus)


If things didn’t constantly change, we could never see them. If there were no perpetual change, there would be no resistance, no friction, thus no heat, thus no light, no electrical charges and no weight; there would be nothing at all. And since we appear at the heart of all this change, why can’t we see it?


The great cosmic joke is based on the fact that it costs us a dimension of reality just to be able to see reality. It’s the vain struggle to remain permanent and unchanged in a world of perpetual change; and to think that observation and measurement would lead us to this secure state via the grand assumption that we are the universal standard of size and time (or even that there is such a standard).


But the theme of this work is that there is no universal standard of size or time. That there is such a standard is merely an assumption; a grand assumption with a long history to be sure. But it is unproven and even lacks provability. Whereas the opposite can be proven by every test of truth there is, including experience and even measurement, but excluding observation. This is significant since it cuts into the very heart of science; especially physics, the science of measurement and motion.


Our folly is the misguided attempt to limit the unlimited; to measure locally and then give stellar meaning to what is fundamentally immeasurable; to refuse to understand that our universe only appears finite in order (and in such a way as to be able) to see itself; and that the great three-dimensional illusion we perceive is because we perceive.


No theory this. In the language of the ancients, this is the logos (anti-theory!) in its most intimate and original form. It’s about a truth that’s been suppressed and supplanted with ‘modern’, three dimensional theories of ignorance and impossibility; theories that – once stripped away – return us full circle to the first cosmology; the one we shed almost three millennia ago. The problem however, lies in the fact that in the course of our journey, we’ve become insane, hypnotized and fully conditioned to see the world in a manner almost opposite to the way it actually is. Our task, then, is surely a grand awakening.


Science today is in the awkward position of a young woman who has inadvertently become pregnant and wonders how long she can continue to keep her job.

                                                             Alan McGlashan, Gravity and Levity


Perhaps the most important theme of this work is that science, indeed, all philosophy and religion, is ultimately self-referential. And no matter how helpful or pragmatic they have become, they are ultimately meaningless. For once you’ve sifted through the disinformation spewed out by the static quo (“official culture”) and agonized over all the prejudices of religious and scientific dogma – the “two sides of a counterfeit coin”; and  once you’ve traveled the high roads of philosophy and the physics of hard, objective, ‘out there’ reality, you finally realize (if all goes well) that what really matters is the psychological aspect: you realize your own world view is just an artifact; a ‘primitive and childlike’ metaphor or group of metaphors for some constantly changing, relentless – if not downright ruthless – self devouring entity. Then, finally, you begin to realize just what or – gasp! – who in fact, this entity might really be.



* You won’t find a lot of literature that comes right out says this. However, as you’ll soon see, it does exist, although sometimes one must look beyond the camouflage of specialized languages..


Notes: (also see Bibliography or Notes and Quotes)
1. Quoted in Weaver’s The World of Physics, Vol. 1
2. Quoted in Lincoln Barrett’s, The universe of Dr. Einstein 
3. Ken Wilber, The Structure of Consciousness)
4. I’ve read versions of this by T. de Chardin, H. Hesse and N. Bohr 
5. Roger Penrose, The Emperor’s New Mind
6. James R. Newman, Scientific American, January, 1958.

7. J. Krishnamurti Talks in Europe
8. Amit Goswami, The Self Aware Universe
9. Erwin Schrödinger, What is Life? 
10. J.W.N. Sullivan, The Limitations of Science