Archive for January, 2017

The Structure of Nothingness II

January 15, 2017

In response to exciting, new, and validating information, this is a follow-on to our April, 2015 post: The Structure of Nothingness. It is our practice to add brief updates to posts by appending comments. However, comments are not automatically distributed to blog subscribers; if you did not know that, you might want to check back on favorite articles by using the search feature or the “Quick List of Posts” utility. In any case, a recent confirmatory finding and the insights it subsequently triggered warrants separate publication on the topic of the structure of Nothingness. The original article had focused on the big “How?” question: How is it possible for the All of Creation to emerge from out of Nothing? The following will expand on our answer to that while supplying mathematical proof of its correctness.

On page three of the late mathematician George Spencer-Brown’s book: Laws of Form: The New Edition of This Classic with the First-Ever Proof of Riemann’s Hypothesis, he shared a powerful thought experiment:

1. Draw a distinction.
2. Call it the first distinction.
3. Call the space in which it is drawn the space severed or cloven by the distinction.
4. Call the parts of the space shaped by the severance or cleft the sides of the distinction or, alternatively, the spaces, states, or contents distinguished by the distinction.
5. Let any mark, token, or sign be taken in any way with or with regards to the distinction as a signal.
6. Call the use of any signal its intent.

In the original post, The Structure of Nothingness, we asked readers to imagine a white circle inscribed on a white background, like an invisible halo. The white background, extending endlessly in every possible direction, represents Nothingness and the circle represents what Spencer-Brown, in the above item one, called “a distinction” and further, in item two, called “the first distinction.” Our “Nothingness” is that which Spencer-Brown, in item three, called “the space severed or cloven by the distinction,” and such Nothingness is indescribable —even the word Nothingness is nonexistent within the non-realm of eternal Nothingness (referred to as Dimension Zero in NoetiTaoism™). The circle is fully correspondent with the concept of Word, as in the biblical book of John: “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God…,” which is revealing with respect to the advanced metaphysical knowledge of the Apostles, and it is supportive of NoetiTaoism™ and of Contrarian Christianity.

Then, in the above item four, Spencer-Brown said: “Call the parts of the space shaped by the severance or cleft the sides of the distinction or, alternatively, the spaces, states, or contents distinguished by the distinction.” In other words, now that there is this circle, this distinction, we can perceive and describe in words all that is inside the circle and outside the circle. In NoetiTaoism™, that which is outside the circle is the eternal Nothingness, and that which is inside the circle is the infinite All-ness of endless Omniverse, which many people, including scientists, refer to simply as “space”—undifferentiated physical space—whereas, more accurately, it is a realm composed of dimensions of Mind and Time and Space. The structure of Omniverse, as we have been informed by way of Noetitek™, has nine uniquely-purposed dimensions of which three are dimensions of Mind/Consciousness, three are dimensions of Time, and three are dimensions strictly of Space (height, breadth, and depth).

Note that Spencer-Brown’s “severance,” our white circle, has created two distinct white “spaces” such that: where there had been no thing nameable, suddenly there are three nameable parts to that which is still Nothing because the parts were created purely by imagining a white circle on a white background; all three parts and all contents are, therefore, imaginary—nothing plus nothing plus nothing equals nothing and, therefore, Omniverse is an illusory realm, Einstein’s “persistent illusion.” The imagined circle is topologically/analogically consistent with the concept of “event horizon,” and because that which is inside the circle is opposite to that which is outside the circle, the first perception is also, simultaneously, an apparent (magical) manifestation: a black dot, a distinctive, definable, describable separateness that initiates/introduces the concept of Dyad—masculine versus feminine and all things dyadic that extend topologically from out of that. So, the circle, the dot, Omniverse, is understandable as being the Primal Feminine, the archetypal crucible and Holy Grail. (For more on the Holy Grail see, for example, our June, 2012 post: “Analysis: ‘The Da Vinci Code’.”)

Spencer-Brown, in the above item five, further stated: “Let any mark, token, or sign be taken in any way with or with regards to the distinction as a signal.” In other words, the white circle has symbolic value—it signifies something—and each of the other two parts of Nothing also, accordingly, have symbolic value conveying meaning expressible through use of marks and tokens—identifiers. The word “signals” is interpretable in Noetitek™ terms as: having congruence with “principles” as “forces” that are borne forth by analogous, metaphorical, and archetypal correspondences within the master language that we call the Language of Nature. Such source-signals—carriers of primal meaning—include numerical signs/designs used for expressing the language of mathematics, which language enables the use of numbers in conducting Rosetta-Stone-like evaluations of the products of other representations of these primal signals (e.g., the color spectrum) via what amounts to: a natural analogical calculus. More importantly, harnessing the source-signals enables one to perform purposeful acts of Creation, to operate the machinery of transformation.

Finally, in item six, Spencer-Brown said: “Call the use of any signal its intent.” The intent of our white circle as signal—however it may be represented by marks or tokens—initially arose from SEA’s urge to solve the problem of confinement/stagnation. By analogy, within Omniverse the same signal is useful in making any desired change, shifting to any alternative zone of experiencing. Given the triune nature of Nothingness and the triply triune nature of Omniverse, the intent of Source Energy Awareness (SEA) was decodable/deducible with Noetitek™ by observing its expressions through form, phenomena, and creature-based experience: Action → Reaction → Reconciliation, concepts further reflected in the Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis components of the Grand Omniversal Dialectic (GOD), and by having the ears to hear the biblical/mythological pronouncement to: Go forth and multiply (and never look, or try to come, back). NoetiTaoism™ recognizes, based on Noetitek™, that SEA’s primal intent is best expressed as: Freedom through Liberation. This is the purpose for Creation and carries the meaning of Life. The first human word known to have conveyed this “liberation imperative” was amargi (translated from the Sumerian), which is visually and phonetically resonant with: “a mare” (sea) or “a Mary,” and it also means: return to Mother. Mary is derived from Maria and is connected to the sea. The ultimate Mother is the alchemical ocean of Omniverse.