Speaking of Dimensions—Part I

Independent of the theorizing of mainstream physicists as well as earlier philosophers and mystics, Noetitek™, the proprietary system developed by PluribusOne™, informed us many years ago that Reality has a total of eleven dimensions, nine of which are the material Space-Time-Mind dimensions of each universe within Omniverse, and two of which are the dimensions of Nothing and All that stand in equal opposition to each other. This multidimensionality has been discussed in various earlier posts, beginning with: “One Atom, Nine Dimensions!” (October, 2009), and including the most recent: “Multidimensional Mind” (May, 2015).

Multidimensionality beyond three or four dimensions has been known to esoteric philosopher-mystics for many millennia, articulated in a number of ways. Science, however, has been slow to grasp or share the truth of this despite Sir Isaac Newton having been a student of the Jewish Kabbalah and its Tree of Life, composed of ten sephirot (spheres)—eleven including Da’at. Perhaps Newton sensed some imperfection in kabbalistic conceptualizing. The Noetitek™ system is science-based and not in complete agreement with the Kabbalah; most fundamentally, we disagree with Isaac Luria’s tzim-tzum (contraction) explanation for the Creation of Omniverse, an assertion that overshadows all subsequent kabbalah-centered theorizing. See “The Structure of Nothingness” (April, 2015) and earlier related posts.

The three dimensions of Space: height, breadth, and depth are obvious and familiar to the operative-in-full-physicality human senses. These dimensions have always been acknowledged as givens by science. However, the fourth dimension was not conceptualized until after 1750 (Joseph-Louis Lagrange), and it remains controversial. Some physicists see it as a dimension of Space while others, in recent years, are beginning to see it as separate from the physical/spatial dimensions. However, even those physicists who see it correctly as Time, and also recognize its separateness from spatial dimensions, lack understanding of what that means and have not yet found that Time, like Space, has three dimensions.

Like science, exoteric religion has also been slow to realize, or advertise, the fullness of multidimensionality. In the Old Testament we see Solomon’s Temple described in three dimensions, although it serves as a metaphor for the nine-dimensionality of Omniverse too, as discussed in “Solomon’s Imperfect Temple—Part II” (August, 2013). By contrast, we note St. Paul’s direct mention of four dimensions in the New Testament: Ephesians 3:18, where he refers to “…width and length and depth and height…” And, in writings published circa 1140 by St. Bernard de Clairvaux, Bernard defined God as being length, width, height, and depth—four dimensional again, at least from the human perspective. Width, depth, and height are sufficient to describe the three dimensions of Space. Is mention of “length” by St. Paul and St. Bernard an inadvertent redundancy?

Our interpretation of St. Paul’s and St. Bernard’s unthinkable redundancy is that “length” was included as an inherent measure of Space rather than as an additional dimension of Space. The length of each of the three dimensions of an object can be measured, and measurement implies movement and periodicity, which are attributes/effects of Time. These spiritual thinkers must have deduced or intuited Time as a fourth and separate type of dimensionality, what some physicists call the fourth dimension of space-time. If Paul was subtly revealing knowledge of higher dimensionality to those who could hear, Bernard went further by openly discussing those same four dimensions in terms of the nature of God while not overlooking the paradoxical higher truth of the One—“…there are different words, many paths, but they signify One.”

PluribusOne™ Consulting continues to share information about multidimensionality, and especially “higher” dimensions, because our Noetitek™-guided insights are not only unique but valid, reliable—integrous—and because the subject is not simple. Three-dimensionality alone can sometimes be confusing, even to science writers. We saw an illustration recently that presented figures representing the spatial dimensions, and they were labeled incorrectly. A line does not have two dimensions. A point, symbolized by a dot, has no dimension. A line of dots is one-dimensional. A square, for example, composed of four such lines, is two-dimensional. A cube, sphere, or pyramid has three dimensions. A tesseract, or hypercube, is an example of a representation of a four-dimensional figure.

Our nine-dimensional sphere design, announced in the February, 2009 post: “Nine-Dimensional Sphere™ Discovered,” is a master symbol, a metaphor, designed to: (1) serve as a teaching tool, (2) catalyze an awareness of multidimensionality, and (3) stimulate a feel for the higher dimensions as present within the self. See Image File #40, accessible from the home-page.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s