THE NEXT STEP

THE NEXT STEP IN THE APPLICATION OF 

THE TDVP CONSCIOUSNESS-BASED PARADIGM

Based on the findings of Transcendental Physics, the mathematical processes of the Calculus of Distinctions and the philosophical framework of TDVP (the shift to a consciousness-based scientific paradigm), we know that reality has a definite logical structure, a major part of which is hidden because it is not available to our physical senses or extensions of them. Fortunately, it is revealed by the logical structure of pure mathematics.

TDVP explains that Primary Consciousness (PrC), the source of all stable, mathematically logical structure, is the underlying field of all reality. Everything is embedded in it. Entities that appear as particles in the three-space, one-unidirectional-time dimensional domain (3S-1t), are actually perturbations in the PrC field. They form and fit into the matrix of the PrC logical structure projected into 3s-1t. This means that quarks, protons, electrons, neutrons, radiation, molecules, organic life forms, planets, suns, and the cosmos, are inevitable, reflecting the logical structure of PrC.

Pure mathematics, as exemplified by the Calculus of Distinctions, reflects the logical structure of Primary Consciousness and all reality. The perturbations of the PrC field that we see as objects, are actually composed of 9-D energy vortices. This is revealed by the math and is verified by physical realities not explained by mainstream physical theory, such as quark mixing angles, fermion spin and triadic combinations of quarks and electrons, protons and neutrons.

The fact that a major part (it turns out more than 95%) of reality is hidden from the five senses associated with physical bodies, should not come as a surprise. Experimental science has shown us that the physical senses are reduction valves, allowing only that small portion of the radiation, vibration and dimensionality needed for survival, into the processing functions our brains. In our logically structured universe, the main purpose of physical organic life forms is to serve as vehicles for the development of consciousness. This development of individualized consciousness and the accompanying expansion of awareness is traditionally called spiritual growth, which leads to enlightenment.

OK! So, physical reality is a matrix of PrC field perturbances interacting with each other according to universal laws. Enlightenment, however, sounds to most people (including physical scientists) like an almost unattainable mystical state. What practical application does TDVP  have for you and me as personalized individualized consciousness in physical bodies? How does this knowledge enhance our lives or improve our chances to progress into more advanced states?

We are told by the saints and sages of all times and traditions that enlightenment can include an awareness of the interconnectedness of all things. So it is reasonable to expect that knowledge of the universal laws that govern the interactions of all things, will give us the ability to make crucial decisions that will result in starting on a path to true enlightenment and happiness. 

The knowledge that every particle of the hierarchical structure supporting the processes that make up our physical bodies, contains non-physical components (we’ve called them triadic rotational units of equivalence (TRUE) of gimmel) that convey the logical structure of Primary Consciousness, assures us that there is meaning and purpose in our existence. An awareness of the PrC field brings an awareness that all things, not just the organs and processes of physical bodies, are connected in a multi-dimensional way.

The next step is to develop a deep awareness of the reflection of Primary Consciousness conveyed by gimmel in every quark, proton, neutron, electron and atom, and every single molecule of our physical being. By deep concentration on the consciousness existing in and pervading all things and by aligning your individual consciousness with the laws and logic of Primary Consciousness, you can traverse an otherwise physically hidden path to maximum physical and mental health and eventually, spiritual perfection.

ERC 11/25/2018

ANSWERS TO THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS

THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS

With the answer to the question: “Where did everything come from?” and the TDVP inclusion of quantum field theory (QFT) mentioned in my last post, we have the basis for explaining virtually everything about the physical universe, and are now ready to answer the even more important questions: questions that relate to the rest of existence, beyond the approximately 4.9% of the cosmos that comprises the physical aspects of reality.

To summarize the last post, “where did everything come from?”: Everything has always been there/here in some form. There is no evidence to support the idea that everything arose from nothing, or is dissolving into nothing. There is no absolute beginning or end, only change that happens in conformance with a system of logic that we call the laws of nature. The idea of nothingness comes from the mistaken concept of the absence of something; but there is no evidence that the stuff of reality has ever been absent. In fact, the law of the conservation of the substance of reality (an extension of the law of the conservation of mass and energy) excludes that possibility. Therefore nothingness is an illusion, and, like space and time, has no existence of its own. There is not, never has been, and never can be a state of absolute nothingness. It is now clear that nothing does not exist.

We are now able to answer the more important questions of existence, including: What is consciousness? What is Life? Why and how does it arise? And what is the meaning of life and the purpose of existence? These are questions that are of utmost importance to us as human beings, but that cannot be answered from within the logic of physical theory. These questions are examples of logical questions that cannot be answered within the axiomatic system within which they have been formulated. The fact that such meaningful questions do exist was proved by mathematician Kurt Gödel in what is known as Gӧdel’s Incompleteness Theorems. Because of the quantization of the stuff of physical reality (mass and energy), the logical structure of the physical universe is finite, and a finite logical system can be investigated using an axiomatic basis and deductive reasoning. The cosmos, however, is far more extensive than the physical universe. The cosmos is actually infinite, as can be demonstrated by the mathematical process of dimensional extrapolation. [An n-dimensional domain can only be observed from an (n+1)-dimensional domain.]

The logical structure of the physical universe is embedded in the infinite cosmos, and the logic of integral number theory reflects and/or is reflected in the structure of the cosmos. Without further ado, I will present the answers to these most important questions, as revealed by the Calculus of Distinctions of the Triadic Dimensional Vortical Paradigm (TDVP).

What is Consciousness?

Consciousness is Primary. It contains within it the logical structure of the cosmos. It is infinite, and everything arises from it. Consciousness cannot, therefore, be unambiguously defined in terms of finite words or forms because such words and forms will always be contained within it.

What is Life?

Life is the manifestation of the logical structure of consciousness in the mass, energy and gimmel of the physical universe. Gimmel, the non-physical aspect of structure, is the organizing principle that allows matter and energy to reflect the logic of pure consciousness.

How and Why does Life arise?

The emergence of living organisms is as inevitable as the existence of quarks, protons, electrons, neutrons, and the atoms of the periodic table. Their forms are dictated by gimmel, just as the structures of elementary particles are. The different life forms reflect the range of logical possibilities existing in the structure of Primary Consciousness. The answer to why they arise lies in the nature of the logical structure of Primary consciousness.

What is the Meaning and Purpose of Life and Existence?

The meaning and purpose of the existence of finite organic life forms and individualized consciousness on this planet, and elsewhere, is the reproduction of Primary Consciousness. If you can think of Primary Consciousness beyond names and forms as God, then you are God in the making. Life and conscious experience are the processes by which this is accomplished.

ERC 11/23/2018

WHERE DID EVERYTHING COME FROM?

IN THE BEGINNING …

Where did everything come from? Was the universe as we know it engineered by a conscious intelligence to have purpose and meaning, or did it just happen by accident? Is this a question that can be answered within the scope of human intelligence? Many answers have been offered over thousands of years of human history by thinkers of all sorts: philosophers, theologians, scientists, and mystics. But, are any of the answers truly final and definitive? Or do they come with arguments convincing enough to compel you to live your life as if they were true? Apparently, many people have thought so, because over the history of life on this planet, bloody wars have been fought over some of the answers to this question, and many people have died defending their beliefs in what they considered to be the correct answer to this question.

If you have been reading my books, papers, and/or posts, you probably won’t be surprised to learn that I think there is a definitive answer to this question; and that I believe I have found it. Do I dare offer my answer for you and the rest of the world to consider? Why not? At my age and stage in life, it makes little difference whether anyone listens, agrees, disagrees, or simply ignores me. I am happy with my answer, and I find that that is enough for me. You are free to accept it, reject it, think about it, or ignore it. It’s completely up to you.

A Starting Point

I think we can agree that, without question, there is something real that actually exists, and you and I are part of it. Without this supposition of an existential reality containing at least you, me and the universe, we have nothing to talk about. So, given that there is something, how did this something come to be what it is now? That is the question, and there are three possible answers: 1) Something from nothing, 2) nothing from something, and 3) something from something else.

To believe that number 1 or 2 is the reality, you have to discount nearly all the evidence at hand. No one has ever seen something arising from nothing, or something disappearing into nothing. Even when it appears that way, a thorough investigation always reveals that one of the most basic laws of physics holds in every case: the law of the conservation of mass and energy. In all of the experiments ever conducted into the physical, chemical and biological processes of our universe, we see only change, never creation from nothing, nor total annihilation of anything. In even the most violent explosion, the sum total of all matter and energy before and after the explosion is always the same. In other words, the empirical evidence from our experience is for number 3, not 2 or 1. Something never arises from nothing, something never degrades to nothing and the something we have now came from something else, because it was different in the past, and, in our dynamic reality, it will be changed from what it is now into something else, but the sum total of mass and energy will remain the same.

Despite the evidence, historically, mainstream science and mainstream religion have both declared that 1, 2 or a combination of them is the true nature of reality. In the theory of a big-bang expanding universe, e.g., the equations of general relativity predict a mathematical singularity at the origin event and mathematical singularities in black holes, with the semi-stable world of our experience existing somewhere in between. The current scientific paradigm sees reality expanding from a mathematical singularity at the beginning of spacetime, with everything eventually falling into the singularities of black holes. This is a process of something from nothing (1) becoming nothing from something (2) unless you assume that the nothing is not really nothing, but some other form of the something we have now; but then, you have number 3, don’t you? In the current scientific paradigm, quantum field theory (QFT), with particles defined as quantized states of underlying fields which are more fundamental than the particles, is, in my opinion, closest to reality. But, QFT, using matrices with values subject to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle as perturbations of the underlying fields is more descriptive than it is explanatory.

In Catholic theology, creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing), is a doctrine invented by early Roman Catholic theologians after the original teachings of the pre-Christian Judeans, Jesus and the first Christian theologian, Origin, were subverted by the Emperor Justinian in his anathemas against Origin, in 553 AD. Justinian realized that the teachings of the Jewish Gnostics and the followers of Jesus constituted a serious threat to his power because in his interpretation of early Christian teachings, Origen had written:

"Each soul enters the world strengthened by the victories or weakened by the defects of its past lives. Its place in this world is determined by past virtues and shortcomings."

Such teachings were in direct conflict with what Justinian saw as his divine birthright as a Roman Emperor to rule the world, so he seized on this statement and related ideas in early Christian doctrine, as documented by Origen, that undermined the exclusivity of the Roman Emperors’ claim of divinity. If people were allowed to believe that by being virtuous, they could rise to the level of an Emperor, i.e., to the status of a god, or even sons and daughters of God, then the power of the Emperors would be seriously threatened. He decided that he must declare this idea to be heresy and take strong measures to stamp it out. The anathemas, an edict that he prepared for this purpose, read in part:

"Whosoever teaches the doctrine of a supposed pre-birth existence of the soul, and speaks of a monstrous restoration of this, is cursed. Such heretics will be executed, their writings burned, and their property will become the property of the Emperor."

This was, of course a powerful incentive for Christians priests and monks to remove any such references from the scriptures from which they taught. Without the teaching of the eternal nature of the soul, theologians were free to shape the doctrine of the church in a way that ensured that the masses had to depend upon the Church of the Holy Roman Empire for salvation. It was a way to control the masses, pure and simple, and perpetuate the power of the Holy Roman Empire. Most other major religions, with the exception of Islam, which, like Judaism and Christianity, is also of Abrahamic origin, are not encumbered by this illogical assumption of creatio ex nihilo.

OK, you may say, so what does it mean if number 3 is the real answer? In my opinion, it changes things very profoundly: With no absolute beginning or end, we must look at human history in a completely different way. No longer burdened by the misconception that everything was created out of nothing and that consciousness is something emerging from organic neurology evolving only a short time ago, we begin to see that our simplistic linear view of things was very misleading. The cyclic nature of things taught by the philosophies of the orient begins to make more sense.

Researchers who claim there is evidence that some of the ancient stone structures scattered around the planet are much older than mainstream archeologists believe, may not be as wacky as they seem. When viewed through the lens of belief in answers 1 and/or 2, their claims can’t be right, but if you drop the irrational belief in a linear progression from nothing to something, and accept the evidence for the eternal existence of something, you have to take their evidence seriously, because civilization, just like everything else, undoubtedly progress in cycles. Our fixation that we are the epitome of the development of sentient species for all time, due to the illogical belief in answers 1 and 2, is as egocentric and as wrong as the idea widely believed a few hundred years ago that the earth was flat and the center of the universe.

I have found that the logical structure of the universe is reflected in the logical structure of pure mathematics, and vice versa. This finding, combined with recognition of the endless process of something from something else, means that physical reality is a quantized logical structure embedded in the infinitely continuous multi-dimensional field of consciousness, and the illusion of beginnings and ends is only meaningful in relation to the amount to which we are identified with finite physical bodies. Identification with the undifferentiated field of consciousness allows us to see time in the same way we see space: three dimensional. Once freed from the illusion of being limited to finite three-dimensional objects evolving in one, unidirectional dimension of time, and rising into the perception of 3-D time, we see that everything exists eternally, and only appears to evolve in cycles of finite duration.

So, the answer to the original question: “Where did everything come from?” is everything has always existed. There is no absolute beginning or end, only endless cycles of change. This answers a lot of otherwise unanswerable questions, including Leibniz’s question, the first question natural science should answer: “Why is there something rather than nothing?” There is something because there has always been something, and there will always be something. Nothingness is an illusion. The illusions of absolute beginnings or ends are perpetuated by certain traumatic changes, like the birth and death of the physical body. So, everything that is something came from something else that existed before the beginning of the process or processes that changed it into the something we have now, and the something we have now is already being transformed into the something else that will exist in the future. But awareness expanded into the 3-D time and 3-D consciousness predicted by pure mathematics, becomes awareness of the reality behind the illusions of 3 space- 1 time.

In the beginning of one cycle, we find the end of the previous cycle, but they are not the same. The new cycle is one of greater awareness than the previous one, because we have learned and expanded our awareness; and thus we rise in a progressive spiral from the finite into the Infinite.

ERC 11/16/2018

A SIMPLE ONLINE COURSE IN THE BASICS OF TDVP

A SIMPLE COURSE INTEGRATING THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH

One of the founders and first President of the Academy for the Advancement of Postmaterialist Science (AAPS), Dr. Gary Schwartz, has suggested that I prepare an online course designed to help people understand Transcendental physics and the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP), the shift to a consciousness-based science. The previous post, “TDVP MATHMATICS AND THE STRUCTURE OF REALITY”, together with this post, articulate the basis for such a course.

In the previous post, I discussed the difference between the Aristotelean and the Platonic approach. The Aristotelean approach (Aa) emphasizes the use of mathematics as a tool to solve problems, while the Platonic approach (Pa) looks deeper and sees mathematics as a reflection of the logical structure of reality. The Aa is primarily descriptive, while the Pa is primarily explanatory. So, contrary to the belief of scientists like professor Rowan-Robinson, quoted in the previous post, neither is wrong, both are needed, and they must be integrated in the search for truth.

Publishers tell authors writing for the general public to avoid equations. They say something like: “With every equation, you lose a thousand readers.” Most mathematicians, however, think in equations, and most physicists use equations to describe physical processes. Equations are the sentences of the language of mathematics and science; and every branch of science and engineering has developed its own language. To understand Transcendental Physics and TDVP, you must set aside such specialized languages and learn a new language, a language integrating physics and geometry, engineering and theory; thinking and doing. That language is a primary calculus that I call the Calculus of Distinctions (CoD). It includes procedures like Dimensional Extrapolation {moving from an n-dimensional domain to an (n+1)-dimensional domain}, quantum equivalence units, called Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence (TRUE) and Diophantine equations that I call Conveyance Equations, because they convey the logic of consciousness into physical structure. Are these intimidating terms for you? They won’t be if I’m able to develop a course comprised of clear, simple steps from the basics to the integrated language of TDVP.

Understanding the CoD is the first crucial step toward  understanding TDVP. Inspired by George Spencer Brown’s “Laws of Form”, I developed the calculus of distinctions in 1986, and published the basics in my second book, “Infinite Continuity” in 1990, and expanded on it in “Transcendental Physics” in 2000. Even now, more than 30 years after the first inspiration, only a few people, probably less than half a dozen, understand the importance of the calculus of distinctions, a system that integrates mathematics, science and consciousness.

I’m called a mathematician, physicist, logician and cosmologist because I’ve gone through the training and hazing of formal education: from high school math and science to college and university courses in applied and theoretical science and engineering, attaining degrees, and going on to post-graduate research. But in this integrated course, I must rise beyond, and go deeper than those specialized labels. I am no longer a physicist or an engineer, no longer an Aristotelean or Platonic thinker, a scientist or a lay-person, neither a materialist nor a spiritualist, I am an integrated human being. And the task I am setting for myself is nothing less than to explain in simple terms, the integration of the human search for truth, i.e., the integration of mathematics, science, philosophy, and spirituality.

THE BASICS

·      Physical reality is quantized. This simply means that the basic measures of physical reality, i.e., mass and energy, only occur in multiples of one very small unit, and that is the smallest quantum unit.

·      An exact equivalence exists between mass and energy. That means that mass and energy are simply two different forms of the same thing. This is expressed mathematically by the simple equation E = mc², where c, the speed of light, is defined as the distance travelled in a given unit of time, like miles per hour, or meters per second.

·      In observing, describing and measuring physical reality, there are two types of variables: variables of extent: width, length and depth, and variables of content: mass and energy. All other measurables are combinations of these.

·      To describe quantum reality in its simplest form, all units of measurement of the variable of observation and measurement must be normalized directly to the quantum equivalence unit of mass and energy. This is done very simply by naturalizing the speed of light to unity; i.e., by defining the speed of light as one, so that c = one unit of distance divided by one unit of time. In other words, c = 1/1 = 1. In this system of units, with c = 1, from which c² = 1, the equation E = mc² becomes E = m, signifying a one-to-one relationship between mass and energy.

·      Along with the two types of physical variables of content and extent, there is a third type of variables, the variables of consciousness. They are the variables of intent, resulting in impetus and impact on physical reality, leading to meaningful structure and purpose.

·      There are no “separate realities”. Quantum reality and macro-reality are one and the same, and that reality includes both physical objects and conscious beings. Therefore, a comprehensive science must include both consciousness and physical objects, and the way in which they relate to each other.

·      Consciousness, i.e., conscious reality, is a reality that is as important as, if not more important than physical reality. Without it, there is no you or me.

·      The reality we experience, in all of its complexity, begins with the simple drawing of a distinction. This is why we (Neppe and Close) called our first book together “Reality Begins with Consciousness”. All the various forms of reality arise from the drawing of distinctions.

·      The first and most important distinction is the distinction of self from other.

·      Secondary distinctions are formed in the “other”. They are formed, or are recognized as pre-existing by conscious entities.

·      All of natural atomic structure (called hadronic matter by contemporary science) is made up of electrons, protons and neutrons. But protons and neutrons are made up of up-quarks and down quarks. So the three basic building blocks of stable atomic structure, capable of forming molecules, hadronic matter and sustaining life, are electrons, up-quarks and down-quarks.

·      The basic quantum equivalence unit is derived from the physical characteristics of the electron, the elementary entity with the smallest mass among the three basic building blocks.

·      All of the basic units of measurement of mass, energy, space, and time can be naturalized to the quantum equivalence unit, which, because of the spinning of elementary particles, and the inclusion of consciousness, is called the Triadic Rotational Unit of Equivalence (TRUE), the true quantum equivalence unit. See derivations in Parts 8 - 13 of the IQNexus article referenced in the previous post. (Putting Consciousness into the Equations of Science: The Third Form of Reality (Gimmel) and “TRUE” Units (Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence) of Quantum Measurement, the IQNexus Journal, 2015 Vol. 7, No. 4.

·      This basic quantum equivalence unit (TRUE) is the basic distinction of the calculus of dimensional distinctions (CoDD), a subset of the primary logic of the CoD.

·      All measurements are integer multiples of this unit, and all equations describing the combination of elementary entities including electrons, quarks, protons and neutrons will be Diophantine equations, i.e., equations with integer (whole numbers: 1, 2, 3, …) solutions. This allows us to use mathematical theorems (independently proved relationships) like the Pythagorean Theorem and Fermat’s Last Theorem, to answer questions like why quarks combine in threes and why fermions have one-half integral spin.

An understanding of these basic concepts should enable anyone to follow the logical development of TDVP, including putting consciousness into the equations of science, and the solutions and explanations of many problems that cannot be adequately addressed in the paradigm of current mainstream science.

TDVP MATHEMATICS AND THE STRUCTURE OF REALITY

THE ROLE OF MATHEMATICS IN INVESTIGATING THE NATURE OF REALITY

Mathematical Platonism:

Some scientists, when thinking about the nature of reality, make a distinction between the Platonic ⁴⁰ and Aristotelian worldviews ⁴¹ : The Platonic view, a revision of which we ascribe to, is that the universe is the physical manifestation of a partly hidden, deeply mathematical reality; while the Aristotelian view is that mathematics is simply an invention of the human mind, developed as a tool used to process direct observations and measurements of the material universe. Michael Rowan-Robinson, Professor of Astrophysics at Imperial College, London, has articulately expressed his belief in the Aristotelian view in his well-written presentation of current observational cosmology, “The Nine Numbers of the Cosmos” ^42. :

[The] “Platonic view, that the universe is a manifestation of some kind of ideal, mathematical form, is very fashionable today. Some of its proponents are so astounded by this insight that they are driven to a mystical interpretation. This deep mathematical structure is God, or the mind of God, or is evidence for a creator. But, why isn’t this insight, that the universe is deeply mathematical, sufficient in itself? The additional mystical interpretation doesn’t seem to add anything. There is, anyway, an alternative to this Platonic view, namely that we should think of mathematics as simply an invention of the human mind, which we use as a tool to model our limited perceptions of the universe… This Aristotelian view, which I share, sees the universe as something we try to characterize, measure, describe.”

Mathematical Platonism ⁴³ incorporates three theses: The existence, abstractness and independence of mathematical objects. This means that had there not been any intelligent agents, or had their language, thought, or practices been different, there would still have been mathematical objects. Platonism must be distinguished from the view of Plato in history. ‘Platonism’ is simply inspired by Plato's famous theory of abstract and eternal Forms and Platonism is quite independent of its original historical inspiration. ⁴³. But the Mathematical Platonism we describe is broader than the purely metaphysical ‘Platonism’ because we attempt in our models to incorporate mathematics directly into science recognizing that we can not only apply it empirically but use the equations of consciousness as part of the model.

Platonism implies that reality extends far beyond the physical world and includes objects which aren't part of the causal and spatiotemporal order studied by the physical sciences. Mathematical Platonism argues beyond naturalistic theories of knowledge. If philosophical analysis revealed mathematics to have some strange and surprising consequences, it would be unattractive simply to reject mathematics. With respect, the mathematics we present below are far beyond naturalistic mathematics, and extends to empirical particle physics and postulates beyond that. Therefore, Mathematical Platonism is very powerful as presented below.

As proponents of the Triadic Rotational Vortical Distinction Paradigm (TDVP), Drs. Vernon Neppe and Edward Close differ markedly from Rowan-Robinson. TDVP aligns to some extent with the Platonic worldview, except that is applied not only philosophically, but mainly based on empirical inductive and deductive reasoning and applying feasibility as a method of the Philosophy of Science. ^{41; 44} We are not therefore ‘astounded’ that the universe is deeply mathematical, - we expected it. And we are not ‘driven’ to ‘mystical interpretation’; we see it as natural, satisfying, and more to the point, explanatory. It explains many things that the materialistic Aristotelian worldview cannot. It is the materialistic Aristotelians who are astounded, and see speculation concerning a conscious substrate as ‘mystical’. The insight is ‘sufficient in itself’, only if we choose not to look any farther. It doesn’t seem to add anything only if you are content to ignore the clues in relativity and quantum physics that cry out for explanation. It doesn’t seem to occur to materialistic scientists steeped in Cartesian dualism that if there were not some kind of (Platonic, if you must) deeper reality, their mathematical descriptions would not work. The challenge to science is to explore the deeper reality. Reality is ‘mystical’ only if you don’t seek to understand it.

Mathematics is not just an abstract human artifact. Far from it, the deep logic of mathematics is invariant because it actually reflects the true underlying logical, intelligent structure of reality. The basic axioms and theorems of mathematics remain unchanged when dimensional transformations are applied. Thus the logic of mathematics is a prime example of invariance.

The only thing that is an artifact of the human mind is the notation developed to convey the mathematic and dimensional logic underlying reality. While it seems that we may invent whatever mathematical procedures we wish, the same invariant mathematical laws would be discovered by any sentient being. They would then be expressed in whatever symbolic language might be applicable.

All mathematical reasoning and description is based on the conscious drawing of distinctions, starting with the distinction of self from other, which then allows the drawing of three types of distinctions in the “other”: distinctions of extent, content and impetus, which are measurable, contain meaning and purpose, and impact on other objects. This reflects the very basic form of mathematical logic which Close developed and we’ve now amplified, the Calculus of Distinctions ¹⁰. It is combined with Euclidean and hyper-dimensional geometry, requires a nine-dimensional reality containing the basic “stuff” of the universe, and provides the framework for describing the elementary particles that appear to be the building blocks of the physical universe. This is the logical extension of very important work started by Hermann Minkowski, Albert Einstein, Georg Cantor, Theodor Kaluza, Oskar Klein, and others, who made significant progress explaining physical phenomena in the framework of multidimensional geometry ^{36; 8.}

The third form

Based on the natural structure of number theory and mathematical invariants relating to dimensional domains, we developed TDVP as a paradigm that describes reality as consisting of the substances of mass and energy interacting within nine finite dimensions embedded within infinite domains containing a potentially infinite number of finite logical patterns. Based on clues from relativity and quantum physics, these domains contain the logical organizing structure that guides the evolution of a stable universe. We hypothesize that the infinite substrate may constitute consciousness itself with space and embedded within it, and mass energy also being contained within this infinite consciousness container (which we call “gimmel”) ¹².

The brilliant physicist Wolfgang Pauli worked on developing five- and six-dimensional models until 1953, but didn’t publish his findings because he was bothered by the appearance of what he called “…rather unphysical shadow particles.”⁵ Since Pauli’s , science has discovered that just over 95% of the substance of reality consists of some sort of “shadow stuff”, presently called “dark energy” and “dark matter” ^45-48and, not directly detectable through the physical senses or extensions of them. ¹²

The mathematics and dimensionometry of TDVP indicate that a third form of the “stuff” of reality is actually necessary in the sub-atomic structure of reality for there to be any stable elements in the physical universe; i.e. in order for there to be something rather than nothing.

The logic of TDVP also suggests that this third form of substance may be imbued with the qualities we associate with consciousness. It is interesting to note that late in his life, Pauli, who was regarded as the most brilliant mind of his day by many physicists, including no less brilliant minds than Albert Einstein and Max Born, dreamt of “unifying matter and spirit within the world of physics.”⁵

The untestable models of contemporary physics

In mainstream physical science, some progress is being made in multi-dimensional concepts with the acceptance of time as a fourth dimension, and the concept of multiple “curled-up” space-like” and “time-like” dimensions of various string theories, which, unfortunately, remain untestable ^{19-22; 49}. Progress in developing testable multidimensional models with consciousness components has been hindered by the acceptance in the academic community of Materialistic Monism which excludes consciousness from the paradigm of physical science and has promoted an increasingly materialistic trend in scientific thinking in recent years. Also, formal education has become institutionalized and has prevented most mainstream physicists from looking outside the box of materialism for the link between consciousness and the physical universe, i.e. between the dimensionometric domains of mind and matter. In the established scientific disciplines, students who ask about the ‘higher intelligence’ spoken of by former scientists like Newton, Planck and Einstein, are often ridiculed by egotistic professors, and told that such ‘mystical’ concepts have no place in science.

TDVP and its pertinence

Guided by the mathematical structure of number theory, Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry, particle physics data, and new mathematical tools created for the purpose of including the direct interaction of conscious entities with objective reality at the quantum level, we have developed TDVP, a model of reality that includes spinning elementary distinctions existing in nine finite dimensions embedded in a conscious substrate that contains all of the logical patterns, reflected and/or potentially reflected in the structure of the physical universe. Within the theoretical framework of TDVP, we are able to explain a number of phenomena that have remained inexplicable in the standard model of particle physics for decades, including the stability of the triadic combination of quarks ^1, the intrinsic spin ²⁸ of Fermions ^{24; 50}, the Cabibbo mixing angle ²⁶, and the step-by-step development of the structures of the Elements of the Periodic Table ¹.

TDVP is a paradigm shift that explains why there is something rather than nothing. And, it expands the “Standard Model” of physics ^{3; 51} to include a new theoretical basis for the biological, psychological and life sciences, as well as for little-understood and rare phenomena like remote viewing, out-of-body experiences (OBEs) and other so-called paranormal or psi phenomena. ^{52 9} It even provides for a better understanding of spiritual experiences that have been occasionally documented to impinge upon physical reality under certain conditions.

Not surprisingly, TDVP also requires a significant expansion of our understanding of mathematics in general. In 1986, Close realized that George Spencer Brown’s Calculus of Indications, presented in “Laws of Form” ⁵³, re-uniting for the first time, imaginary numbers with symbolic logic, and thus re-aligning the algebras of logic with mathematics, was the first step toward integrating number theory, geometry and mathematical physics into a comprehensive logical framework capable of describing and explaining physical, chemical, biological, neurological, psychological, and even spiritual phenomena.

We adapted Brown’s Laws of Form, creating the Calculus of Dimensional Distinctions (CoDD), a comprehensive mathematics dealing with the functions of consciousness, and applied it to some long-standing cosmological puzzles. Some of the results were published in “Infinite Continuity, a Theory Unifying Relativity and Quantum Physics” ³⁵ in 1990, and in “Transcendental Physics, Integrating the search for Truth” ³⁶. By introducing appropriate additional notational structure, the Calculus of Distinctions was refined to become the Calculus of Dimensional Distinctions (CoDD) in 2003 ³⁸. From 2008 to the present, we amplified this mathematical tool, recognizing it as the logical basis integrating all mathematics and applications to physical and spiritual reality has been systematically applied to develop the mathematical basis of TDVP. ¹⁰

References

1. Close ER, Neppe VM: The thirteenth conundrum: introducing an important new concept, TRUE units—Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 60-71,  2015.

2. Neppe VM, Close ER: Explaining psi phenomena through TDVP principles: References (Part 15). IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 140-153,  2015.

3. Close ER, Neppe VM: Translating fifteen mysteries of the universe by applying a nine dimensional spinning model of finite reality: A perspective, the standard model and TDVP. Part 1. Neuroquantology 13: 2; 205-217,  2015.

4. Neppe VM, Close ER: A Proposed Theory of Everything that works: How the Neppe-Close Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) model provides a metaparadigm by applying nine-dimensional finite spin space, time and consciousness substrates and the transfinite embedded in the infinite producing a unified reality. IQNexus Journal 16: 3; 1-54,  2014.

5. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP): The nine-dimensional finite spin metaparadigm embedded in the infinite  Dynamic International Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1401: 1401; 4001-4041,  2014.

6. Neppe VM, Close ER: TDVP: a paradigm shift that works —how the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm challenges conventional scientific thinking and explains reality. Telicom 27: 1; 24-42,  2014.

7. Close ER, Neppe VM: Fifteen mysteries of 9 dimensions: on Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence and new directions,  Part III. Neuroquantology 13: 4; ,  2015.

8. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality begins with consciousness: a paradigm shift that works (5th Edition) Fifth Edition. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com, 2014.

9. Neppe VM, Close ER: How some conundrums of reality can be solved by applying a finite 9-D spinning mode1. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 7-88,  2015.

10. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Calculus of Distinctions: A workable mathematicologic model across dimensions and consciousness. Dynamic International Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1210: 1210; 2387 -2397,  2012.

11. Close ER, Neppe VM: Speculations on the “god matrix”: The third form of reality (gimmel) and the refutation of materialism. WISE Journal 4: 4; 3-21,  2015.

12. Neppe VM, Close ER: The fourteenth conundrum: Applying the proportions of Gimmel to Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence compared to the proportions of Dark Matter plus Dark Energy: Speculations in cosmology. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 72-73,  2015.

13. Close ER, Neppe VM: The fifth conundrum: applying mathematical dimensional extrapolation non-specifically in our dimensional calculations to demonstrate multidimensionality. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 34-38,  2015.

14. Anonymous). Pythagorean theorem. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem. 2011.

15. Kleiner I: From Fermat to Wiles: Fermat's last theorem becomes a theorem. Elem. Math 55: 19-37,  2000.

16. Aczel A: Fermat's last theorem: unlocking the secret of an ancient mathematical problem. New York: Four Walls Eight WIndows, 1996.

17. Close ER: Appendix B: 1965 Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, in The Book of Atma. Edited by. New York: Libra Publishers.  pp. 93-99 1977.

18. Morgart E: The theory of everything has nine dimensions:  The sparkling diamond and the quanta jewel turn quantum physics and the nine-pronged world of consciousness— on its ear. USA Today Magazine: 1 (January); 66-68,  2014.

19. Brax P). The supermoduli space of Matrix String Theory. 2011, from http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/411941/files/9912103.pdf. 2011.

20. Kiritsis E: String theory in a nutshell. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007.

21. Schwarz P). The official string theory website: Basics. from http://www.superstringtheory.com/basics/index.html and http://www.superstringtheory.com/forum. 2003

22. Figueroa-O'Farrill JM). String theory in a nutshell. from http://www.strings.ph.qmw.ac.uk/WhatIs/Nutshell.html. 2003.

23. Duff MJ: The theory formerly known as strings, Scientific American. February, 1998.

24. Close ER, Neppe VM: The seventh conundrum: the mathematical derivation of the Cabibbo mixing angle in fermions. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 41-43,  2015.

25. Close ER, Neppe VM: The sixth conundrum: theoretical knowledge on deriving the Cabibbo angle. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 39-40,  2015.

26. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Cabibbo mixing angle and other particle physics paradoxes solved by applying the TDVP multidimensional spin model. IQNexus Journal 14: 1; 13-50,  2014

27. Neppe VM, Close ER: Translating some conundrums of the universe by applying a 9 dimensional spinning model of finite reality: References. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 84-88,  2015.

28. Close ER, Neppe VM: The eighth conundrum: angular momentum and intrinsic electron spin. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 44-45,  2015.

29. Close ER, Neppe VM: The tenth conundrum: weak universality based on the 9D findings. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 50,  2015.

30. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality begins with consciousness: a paradigm shift that works (6th Edition) Sixth Edition. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com, 2016 (In Press).

31. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality begins with consciousness: a paradigm shift that works (Second Edition) 1 Edition. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com, 2012.

32. Neppe VM, Close ER: The third conundrum: How the core dimensional calculations in the Neppe-Close Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) contributes to a workable model of reality. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 24-30,  2015.

33. Von Neumann J: Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics 1 Edition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1932.

34. Anonymous: May 13, 2011). Gluon. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon. 2011.

35. Close ER: Infinite continuity: a theory integrating relativity and quantum physics. Los Angeles: Paradigm Press, 1990.

36. Close ER: Transcendental Physics. Lincoln: I-Universe, 2000.

37. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality begins with consciousness: a paradigm shift that works (First Edition) 1 Edition. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com, 2012.

38. Brandin V, Close ER: The calculus of dimensional distinctions: Elements of mathematical theory of intellect.  Moscow: 2003.

39. Neppe VM, Close ER: EPIC consciousness: A pertinent new unification of an important concept. Journal of Psychology and Clinical Psychiatry 1: 00036: 6; 1-14,  2014.

40. Smythies JR: The walls of Plato’s cave. Aldershot: Avebury Press, 1994.

41. Neppe VM, Close ER: Interpreting science through feasibility and replicability: Extending the scientific method by applying “Lower Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification” (LFAF). WISE Journal 4: 3; 3-37,  2015.

42. Rowan-Robinson M: The nine numbers of the cosmos. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999.

43. Editors: Platonism in the philosophy of mathematics, in Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy  http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/platonism-mathematics/. Stanford, California.2013.

44. Neppe VM, Close ER: The second conundrum: Falsifiability is insufficient; we need to apply feasibility as well Lower Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification (LFAF) as a scientific method IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 21-23,  2015.

45. Collaborators P: Planck Publications: Planck 2015 Results European Space Agency. Astro-ph CO  Febr,  2015 (submitted).

46. Cowen R, Castelvecchi D: European probe shoots down dark-matter claims. Nature Physics Doi:10.1038/nature.2014.16462,  2014.

47. Collaborators P: Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters. Astro-ph.CO arXiv:1303.5076,  2013.

48. Collaborators P: Planck 2013 results. I. Overview of products and scientific results. Astro-ph.CO ArXiv:1303.5062,  2013.

49. Zimmerman Jones A). Hawking and Hertog: String Theory can explain dark energy. June 20, 2006, from http://physics.about.com/b/2006/06/20/hawking-hertog-string-theory-can-explain-dark-energy.htm. 2006.

50. Close ER, Neppe VM: Mathematical and theoretical physics feasibility demonstration of the finite nine dimensional vortical model in fermions. Dynamic International Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1301: 1301; 1-55,  2013.

51. Neppe VM, Close ER: Limitations of the standard model of physics. Dynamic International Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1201: 1201; 2001-2010,  2012.

52. Neppe VM, Close ER: Explaining psi phenomena by applying TDVP principles: A preliminary analysis  IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 7-129,  2015.

53. Brown GS: Laws of form. New York: Julian Press, 1977.

54. Einstein A). Collected quotes from Albert Einstein. from http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshire/EinsteinQuotes.html. 2015.

55. Planck M: Max Planck:  Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers. New York: Harper 1949.

56. Anonymous). On truth and reality: The wave structure of matter (WSM) in space: Physics. from http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Physics.htm. 2015.

57. Calaprice AE: The expanded quotable Einstein. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000.

58. Anonymous). On truth and reality: The wave structure of matter (WSM) in space:  Albert Einstein: God, religion and theology: Explaining Einstein's understanding of God as the universe / reality. from http://spaceandmotion.com/albert-einstein-god-religion-theology.htm. 2015.

59. Bell JS: On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics 1: 195-200,  1964.

60. Stapp HP: Quantum physics and the physicist’s view of nature: philosophical implications of Bell’s Theorem, in The world view of contemporary physics. Edited by Kitchener RE. Albany, NY SUNY Press.   1988.

61. Tittel W, Brendel J, Zbinden H, et al.: Violation of Bell's inequalities by photons more than 10 km apart. Physical Review Letters 81: 3563-3566,  1998.

62. Acin A, Chen JL, Gisin N, et al.: Coincidence bell inequality for three three-dimensional systems. Phys. Rev. Lett 92: 92; 250404-250408,  2004.

63. Aspect A, Grangier P, Roger G: Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedanken experiment: a new violation of Bell's inequalities. Physical Review Letters 49: 2; 91-94,  1982.

64. Marcikic I, De Riedmatten H, Tittel W, et al.: Distribution of time-bin entangled qubits over 50 km of optical fiber. Physical Review Letters 93: 18; 180503-180507,  2004.

65. Neppe VM: Vortex N-dimensionalism: a philosophical–scientific paradigm and alternative to mind-body theories.  Seattle, WA, USA: 2003.

66. Hoffman D: Conscious realism and the mind-body problem. Mind and Matter 6: 1; 87-121,  2008.

67. Neppe VM, Close ER: The fifteenth conundrum: Applying the philosophical model of Unified Monism: Returning to general principles. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 74-78,  2015.

68. Tegmark M: Our mathematical universe: My quest for the ultimate nature of reality. New York: Knopf, 2014.

69. Close ER, Neppe VM: Translating fifteen mysteries of the universe: Nine dimensional mathematical models of finite reality, Part II. Neuroquantology 13: 3; 348-360,  2015.

70. Close ER, Neppe VM: The ninth conundrum: two different solutions to electron rotation IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 46-49,  2015.

71. Lightman A: The accidental universe: The world you thought you knew. New York: Pantheon, 2014.

72. Bohr N: Atomic physics and human knowledge. Woodbridge: Ox Bow Press, 1987

73. Grünbaum A: The degeneration of Popper's theory of demarcation, in Collected Works, Vol. 1. Edited by Kupka  T. New York Oxford University Press.  pp. 43–61 2013 (from 1989).

74. Tegmark M: Parallel universes. Scientific American: 30-41,  2003.

75. Close ER, Neppe VM: Specific challenges involving the Close and Neppe research: The fourth conundrum: applying the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) constructs in our dimensional calculations. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 31-33,  2015.

76. Close ER, Neppe VM: The twelfth conundrum: The thought experiment replication of 9 dimensional spin. IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 57-59,  2015.

77. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality Begins with Consciousness: Survival and Life itself —Is There A How? Proceedings of 2013 Conference Academy for Spiritual and Consciousness Studies.: 1-17, 2013.

78. Wheeler JA: Information, physics, quantum: The search for links, in Complexity, Entropy and the Physics of Information. Edited by Zurek W. Reading: Addison-Wesley.  pp. 3–28 1990.

79. De Bianchi MS: Quantum measurements are physical processes. Comment on “Consciousness and thedouble-slit interference pattern: Six experiments",  By Dean Radin et al. [Physics Essays 25, 2 (2012)]. http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.0804,  2012, submitted.

80. Radin D: Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments. Physics Essays 25: 2; 157– 171,  2012.

81. Wheeler JA: At home in the universe. Woodbury, NY: American Institute of Physics, 1994.

82. Stachel J: Einstein's miraculous year: five papers that changed the face of physics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.

83. Einstein A: Explanation of the photoelectric effect with use of the quantum hypothesis of Planck: Concerning a heuristic point of view toward the emission and transformation of light. Annalen der Physik 17: 132-148, http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol2-trans/100  1905.

84. McElhinney MW, Taylor SR, Stevenson DJ: Limits to the expansion of earth, moon, mars, and mercury and to changes in the gravitational constant. Nature 271: 316-321,  1978.

85. Eddington A: The expanding universe: astronomy's 'great debate', 1900-1931. Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 1933.

86. Close ER: The earth is expanding. Telicom 24: 1; 20-29,  2011.

87. Liddle AR, Lyth DH: Cosmological inflation and large-scale structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

88. Einstein A: Relativity, the special and the general theory—a clear explanation that anyone can understand. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 2001.

89. Einstein A: Relativity, the special and the general theory 15 Edition. New York: Crown Publishers, 1952.

90. Einstein A: Creative thought, New York Times, March 19, 1940, 1940.

91. Einstein A: Physics and Reality. http://www.kostic.niu.edu/: Monograph, 1936.

92. Rauscher EA, Targ R: The speed of thought: Investigation of a complex space-time metric to describe psychic phenomena. Journal of Scientific Exploration 15: 3; 331-354, http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/abstracts/v15n3a2.html  2001.

93. Neppe VM, Close ER: Relative non-locality - key features in consciousness research (seven part series). Journal of Consciousness Exploration and Research 6: 2; 90-139,  2015.

94. Neppe VM, Close ER: The concept of relative non-locality: Theoretical implications in consciousness research. Explore (NY): The Journal of Science and Healing 11: 2; 102-108, http://www.explorejournal.com/article/S1550-8307(14)00233-X/pdf  2015.

95. Close ER, Neppe VM: The eleventh conundrum: The double Bell normal curve and its applications to electron cloud distribution IQNexus Journal 7: 2; 51-56,  2015.

96. Longuet-Higgins MS, Miller JCP: Uniform polyhedra. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences (The Royal Society) 246: 916; 401–450,  1954.

97. Anonymous). Copernicium: the essentials. from http://www.webelements.com/copernicium/. 2015.

98. Remoissenet M: Waves called solitons: Concepts and experiments. New York: Springer, 1999.

99. Euler L: Euler, L.  . Novi. Comm. Acad. Petrop. 6, ad annos 1756-1757: 181,  1761.

100. Anonymous). Copenhagen interpretation.   Retrieved 7/3/2011, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation. 2011.

101. Darling D: Cosmic abundance of elements, in Encyclopedia of science. (http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/E/elcosmic.html).2015.

102. Stewart D: The chemistry of essential oils made simple: God’s love  manifest in molecules. Marble Hill, MO: Care publications, 2005.

103. Jue T: Quantum Mechanic Basic to Biophysical Methods:  Fundamental Concepts in Biophysics.  . Berlin: Springer, 2009.

104. Kumar R, Anand SC: Dictionary of physical chemistry. Richmond, TX: anmol, 2002.

105. Schrödinger E: Probability relations between separated systems. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 32: 3; 446-452,  1936.

106. Schrödinger E: Discussion of probability relations between separated systems. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 31: 4; 555-563,  1935.

107. Heisenberg W: Physics and beyond: encounters and conversations. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.

108. Horowitz LG: The book of 528: Prosperity key of love (live). Sandpoint, ID: Tetrahedron, 2011.

109. Lenntech: Silicon (Si) and water: Silicon and water: reaction mechanisms, environmental impact and health effects, in Encyclopedia of science. (http://www.lenntech.com/periodic/water/silicon/silicon-and-water.htm).2015.

110. Darling D: Silicon-based life, in Encyclopedia of science. (http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/E/elcosmic.html).2015.

111. National Earth Science Teachers Association: Windows to the universe: The elements of life   http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/geology/life_elements.html,2015.

112. Wolfram research: Abundance in the Universe of the elements: Mathematica’s element data function periodictable.com/Properties/A/UniverseAbundance.html,2015.

113. Einstein A: Fundamental ideas and methods of the Theory of Relativity, presented in their development  Papers 7: 31,  1920

114. Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 47: 10; 777-780,  1935.

115. Rauscher E: Multidimensional properties of consciousness and some laws of reality. PSI Research 2: 53-66,  1983.

116. Neppe VM, Close ER: Multidimensional time and 3S-3T-3C (Part 13-J). IQNexus Journal 7: 3; 136-138,  2015.