10 Comments

  1. Brilliant,exciting,inspiring and liberating!

    Stunning work…invaluable in fact,Thankyou Sir.

    On “Boundary”(not to be confused as ‘within\without’ existence,as you shown “no such thing”)

    A few great thinkers have used the term “Boundary substance”,more recent great thinkers(ontological mathematician’s) termed it “Mental boundary conditions”.
    https://climateofsophistry.com/2015/11/05/mental-boundary-conditions/

    It could also be termed Monadic calculus,’The ring’s of conscious evolution’ perhaps.

    thanks again

    P.B.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Very happy to see a new post from you!

    It took me a couple of days to get through this one and it is one that I will no doubt revisit many times in the future to make sure I absorb it all.

    All I can say is I wish this to go viral….truly a labor of love putting this post together so succinctly.

    The gold nuggets of knowledge you have buried in this post really help flush out and enhance the ideas put forward by Hockney, Weishaupt and Faulk.

    Look forward to more!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. One of the best articles I have read so far. A brilliant collation of ideas demonstrating your profound understanding. They asked us to create works better than theirs, this one certainly rivals, if not exceeds. Bravo!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Wow, thank you so much for the inspirational message Scott, I truly appreciate it, and thank you also for reading. Your comment gives me even more motivation to get to writing 🙂

      Like

  4. Thank you for targeting a concept such as the plenum. There is so much in the God Series that for someone overturning 70 years of directionless meandering (conventional religions, materialist science, agnosticism, atheism, new ageism – to paraphrase Zorba: “The full catastrophe!”) it is easy to lose sight of some key fundamentals. Your blogs are much appreciated for elaborating on essentials. I always remembered good teachers as those who would say “Let me put this another way”, “Let’s summarize what we have just learned”, “I’ll just run through this again”. This is essentially what you are doing for me (and hopefully others) and it is much appreciated.
    I have spent some time digesting this blog and it has certainly deepened my understanding of the plenum principle and what it implies.
    Great post! Again, thanks and keep up the good work of educating.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thank you so much Richard, I always appreciate your feedback. I greatly enjoy studying Pythagoreanism. Writing about it on this blog allows me to share what I’m learning with others, and it allows me to introduce brand new people to Pythagoreanism. Writing these blog posts also helps me out a lot with the process of strengthening and sharpening my own understanding of Pythagoreanism/Ontological Mathematics. It’s a win, win, win situation 🙂

      I’m never quite sure if I’m making a concept more confusing or less confusing when I repeat what I’ve said about it multiple times, using slightly different words each time. The Mike Hockney team writes expertly in this way (I get stronger and sharper with my knowledge of Pythagoreanism daily thanks to their preeminent work) and I try to model my articles on theirs as much as I can. When I used to teach Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and Mixed Martial Arts, I would teach in a way very similar to this. I found that by showing students techniques from many different angles, postitions, and situations, it helped the students to learn quicker and more efficiently. I try to write these articles in a similar manner to the Mike Hockney team and to how I used to teach self defense. I’m glad that I was able to pull it off in this post.

      Thank you again for the comment Richard, talk to you soon 🙂

      Like

  5. A very great article! I really liked it! Let me please add a litle to it.

    These mathematical coordinates, are NOT some sort of illusion! They truly are real, external, and objective. As soon as you have to distinct points seperated by a certain distance, there’s a REAL external, objective distance between them.

    The “Key” to these different abd unique coordinates, lies in the “infinitesimal” gap. The Big Bang is nothing more than the conversion of Bosonic minds into Fermionic minds. What this actually means is that they go from “overlapping” eachother.. to “touching!” Eachother. Bosons can sit right on top of eachother, while fermions can not. However, fermions CAN still be touching! Like two human beings standing side to side, with their shoulders still “touching”. They are still connected to eachother, rather than disconnected. When you have all the points next to eachother on the number line, forming a continuum/plenum for instance, what is the gap between point 1 and point 3? It’s an INFINITESIMAL gap! What is that gap? Point 2! On the other hand.. what is the gap between point 1 and point 2??? It’s a ZERO gap! An INFINITELY Small gap! And yet, they are still seperated and unique. Precisely because they can “touch” but not “overlap”.

    So contrary to what usually gets tossed around.. They really DO move! It’s not just some mathematical illusion. But they really DO move, but only by an INFINITESIMAL amount!

    Without this infinitesimal gap.. Extension would never be possible! Hence, “Dimensionality” would never be possible.

    And here’s somethint you’d probably like too that i’ve written a while back on my account.

    I want to clear up a few potential misconceptions and set things straight so that we don’t have anyone confused.

    During the God Series they mention the term “Singularity” several times to refer to different things.. which can be quite hard to follow at times if you’re not familiar with it. But i have figured it all out and can explain it. They use the term “Singularity” to refer to 3 things so far..

    1. The mental domain itself. (Though infinite in extent) it is only a point IN COMPARISON to the material world.
    (Because it’s dimensionless/nothing)

    2. The bosonic monadic singularity. (Point at the CENTER of the infinite space of the mental domain) composed of infinite other points/monads.

    3. All of existence. (Both the material world AND the mental world) so it is a point IN a point IN a point! How can that be!? It’s because they use it to refer to different things. Without mentioning the fact that it is only a singularity IN RELATION to something else..

    Now.. to get back to example 3.^
    Why would “all of existence” be a point..?
    Well it’s precisely a point IN RELATION to a “HYPOTHETICAL” solid world. A “true physical world” which obviously doesn’t exist! Because everything is ultimately mental! So all of existence is just a point because it isn’t “Physical” at all or “Solid” there’s no such thing. Anything is made by minds and their thoughts. Souls and their contents. No “Matter” exists on it’s own. That’s impossible. Everything is ultimately an “idea” generated by minds.

    Imagine at the CENTER of the infinite mental space a single point composed of infinite other single points. This 1 point becomes MANY, creating an infinite material world by nothing more than themselves. They are actually THE BOUNDARIES/The Holders of the material world, (but precisely because of that, they are still ofcourse OUTSIDE space and time) where they serve as the boundaries/walls of the material world. while the energy contents/unconscious thoughts inside the monads leave the monads and creates everything else INSIDE the material world. So everything and the whole material world takes place INSIDE the mental domain!

    A Single Point/Super Singularity at the CENTER of the infinite space of the mental domain. Becomes a whole infinite universe that keeps expanding and expanding ALL INSIDE this INFINITE mental domain! And then finally when the Big Crunch is achieved, it contracts back to a single point again from which everything else came. (A bosonic singularity)

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you so much for reading Fred, and thank you for another amazing comment, it truly adds to the article!

      Ontological mathematics is fascinating to me and I can’t get enough of thinking about it. It looks like you’re in the same boat as me 🙂

      I’m still working on building my knowledge of mathematics so that I can better understand The God Series and better share that understanding with others. This is my goal. I want to help bring ontological mathematics into the public consciousness so that we can finally begin creating a more reasonable world where human beings can actualize their full potential.

      On a side note, I’m just beginning my studies in Differential Calculus on Khan Academy and have recently been studying limits and instantaneous rate of change. This is still very new knowledge for me but I am excited because it is helping me understand more and more about the God Series/Ontological Mathematics.

      Anyway, I’m rambling now. Thanks again for reading and writing excellent comments Fred!

      P.S.

      Do you have a blog or website where you write? I would love to read any of your work 🙂

      Like

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