Pure Conceptuality


Chapter 2: What has existence?


OK, rest and reflection are over for now. You made it through Chapter 1. Remember, we are writing this already having the knowing and realizations we are attempting to communicate. So from our perspective, these thoughts are rational and understandable. From your perspective so far it is just so many words. All we can say is that the rewards will be great if you just persist. You can't expect to feel familiar with what is “new” or different. To be honest, it is nearly impossible to truly change our seeming secure and “common sense” way of experiencing self-awareness. We are highly, if not totally invested in it. There must be an effort at unlearning as well an honest willingness to engage the spirit of the venture. To passively and even openly ride along will result in seeing only what we have always seen. How could we expect anything else? When two people read a book they read two different books. Each reader creates and fills in the imagery, voice, color and detail. In fiction this ability to enter as if “real” into the nature and spirit of a story is called suspension of disbelief. We must go beyond that wonderful experience in this journey. We are going to look at the landscape as it truly is. If that were easy, none of this preparation would be necessary nor would the trip matter. TRUTH is more strange than and more beautiful than the FICTION we ERRONEOUSLY PERCEIVE as common sense reality. If we cannot look with new eyes we cannot see unexpected beauty. What is perceived as ordinary is changed by the context of “the greats” up to this moment but until there is full integration of consciousness and a leap it remains consensus reality and ordinary.


Science is great for examining and exploring into some aspects of the nature of things taken in isolation from the whole of reality. A simple atom “looks” like our conceptual sphere. In some ways it too is conceptual. No one can tell you what it actually is other than describing it and its behaviors apparent from a very distant place. That distant place is right here. In a relative way of seeing, our self-aware consciousness is galactic distances away from any atom. When we touch a table we perceive it as a solid thing. We honestly know that in some reality it is mostly “open space.” The electron is relatively as far away from the nucleus as the earth is from the sun. The deeper (higher resolution) science looks the less there “really” is.


We can agree that, what we perceive as matter, is made up of the finite number of elementary geometries of the periodic table which interact with each other in predictable ways to describe much of what is around us locally. We have done a great job of reverse engineering all this stuff that is and in so doing feel quite confident in our understanding of what makes what. On closer examination that understanding is really describing and labeling and then turning around and running that reverse engineered sequence forward predictably. That is actually awesome and has resulted in a canoe of plastic which works great! We will take it, but it does not really explain how the wholeness of everything is conceived and fits together universally. For example, why does this table seem like it is solid and here?


So let’s examine this scientific mental image of the elementary building block of what is. It looks a lot like our conceptual sphere. Science describes it as a nucleus with an electron zipping around in all possible paths at a given distance from the nucleus. The explanation of the spherical model is that the electron is in some way everywhere at once and exists in any given instance when and where it is measured. The conceptuality of that is quite beautiful! Actually this conception might help us imagine the nature of our so far described conceptual sphere.


There has been a lot of prior description of what comes into existence or is evidenced in considering our conceptually created sphere. Even though we are advised to examine in a new light, it is very difficult not to imagine the conceptual periphery which separates inside from outside as some kind of membrane or film. Even if that periphery is conceptually in spinning motion, it exists only as general potential location for any and all specific out of time locations a distance away from A. A way to help think of this by analogy is to think of an inflated balloon. That membrane that separates the inside from the outside in our ordinary way of seeing is obviously a continuous impermeable (solid) barrier keeping the compressed air in. Well, science is certain that the membrane is made up of atoms which are mostly open space. Even though air consists of relatively free tiny atoms they cannot pass through the more tightly “woven” net of atoms that is the balloon. So, relative size does matter, but nevertheless the balloon is an open network of geometries. So our conceptual sphere is a kind of combination of thinking of the periphery as a net of locations at some resolution and the electron shell as the electron is everywhere until it is defined (measured) at some location. There is no continuous anything anywhere except perhaps in our imaginations.


Wow, that was some upstream paddling! Let’s just get back to some simple thinking about our sphere and that AB path remembering that it is an idea and that it is the conceptual tracing of a specific distance (length) between location A and location B. The technical name for this conceptual tracing is a vector. We are going to use our conscious license to imagine it, but really it has no existence beyond an idea so far. But we are going to deal with it as a “baton” of length one while also remembering that we have already determined we have plenty of ABs available in potential. There are any number of them available between A and the periphery. Using conscious license we are going to do some experiments with our conceptual “batons.” We will operate autonomously within the space created by the sphere, so at least we are operating in defined space with a defined conceptual artifact. We will free one AB baton from the periphery and the center and just bring it into the space in some random position. Every position is valid as we know we have a full array of potential locations available and we have fixed the length between, so any A and B are possible anywhere in the sphere. We are mixing states in that we are moving this “baton” around in stopped time and that is a contradiction, so just realize that. When we look back from another perspective this contradiction will resolve itself.


We are really going to stretch now and for entertainment we imagine a majorette in our defined space twirling our baton which has a red light on one end and a green light on the other. She is talented and in the dark those spiraling red and green tracings of spirals are stretching and swirling from our perspective and she’s really putting on a show, throwing the baton up and catching it. We see that light as beautiful ellipses of red and green and it is quite rational and we don’t question our perception of the beauty and spectacle. Now suddenly the continuous lights on the baton ends are switched to super strobe mode with the lights now only brightly and momentarily flashing. The beautiful and predictable spiraling light is gone and we see only random flashing of stopped light in various positions within the domain of the sphere. If we could see accurately we would just see two lights as they flashed and no movement. In our way of perceiving we are accustomed to seeing afterimages, but in this true world there are only two lights at any time even though the same twirling is going on. Now if we carry out that thought we will realize that the strobe lighting isolates locations in any given moment. The continuous lights trace a curved path through all of the potential locations and give an apparently rational and predictable tracing. So the question becomes, is that a truly continuous curved path or is that path so highly segmented it seems curved? That is something to ponder and enough entertainment for now. Perhaps we will resolve that. But at least we know the length of the baton and the distance between the strobe lights and the continuous light remained the same distance we have defined as 1.


So let’s try another thought experiment we move the AB baton out of the center and away from the periphery into defined static space. Let’s “grab” another baton from our conceptual inventory and connect it to the end of the first baton and now grab another and connect it to the loose end of baton 2. Now we have three hinged batons with two unrestrained ends. It’s pretty difficult to describe exactly what this configuration is. We know the length of each baton is constant, but how can we describe the locations of the batons other than they are connected to each other end to end? We could really dig into our conceptual license and even try to use the tool of measuring degrees, but we find that we can’t, as we have no way of making the three batons “flat” in relation to each other. Without that, the angular measurement would have no meaning. In fact it is conceptually impossible to describe the position of the three batons with open ends. It is also conceptually impossible to describe the positions of the batons if we add another baton between the two open ends, Now we could simply use our conscious license to define them to be in such a relationship as to be flat and simply measure the angles and have a defined location of the batons relative to each other. But that would be our old way of thinking and quite honestly it doesn’t work because there is a simpler way to see that does work and is exclusive, destroying the other way of thinking.


The true way of seeing this is obvious and incredibly enlightening and exciting. It’s a meteor shower lighting up the night sky. You have never seen this or thought of it before and it takes seeing to believe so we leave the world of words and proceed to the wonder of tactility, models and YouTube! See you there. Watch Conceptuality1 on YouTube.


OK, There is not much point in moving on if you have not seen the video. These videos are the illustrative snapshots in our journey like illustrations in a book. Remember that we are being careful to go stroke by stroke in a very conscious way, making sure we work with full awareness within what has been defined so far. It is pretty clear how we created and defined the space in which we were conceptually modeling. We stopped time to establish limits and relative size. The AB batons (vectors) available in principle were manipulated freely within the defined space and that was possible because there was plenty of “room” (space defined and created) in which to move them around. We established that there were plenty of ABs available in the potential inventory defined. We noted that we were technically violating the idea of stopped time in taking the liberty to move the batons around so freely. This liberty was taken as a shortcut in our journey, like a channel to bypass a big curve in the river. This is just one way and the easiest way to move forward. There are whirlpools we skipped by doing this for the purpose of expedience. Don’t despair, this allows us to look back at the whirlpools later from another perspective and not get consumed or confused by them. We “cheated” but you will forgive it.

In many ways our common sense perception of time is flawed. In the sense of experience, time deceives us. In the relativity of the dimension we inhabit light travels at c (186,000 miles per second). The fact of motion and measuring implies conceptually stopping things to measure them. If they are not conceptually stopped to establish some relativity there are no numbers to use to describe relationships of speed, time and distance. We could have just let our conceptual sphere keep expanding and defined AB to be length 1, but in doing that we have taken up a conceptual position. Time then stops as a result of taking the position of defining length. If it didn’t the AB would just continue getting “longer.” So longer really means time running longer. The rate is fixed at the constant c by universe itself. That is not a relative rate as unlike sound, light does not get to you quicker if you are moving toward it, or slower if you are moving away from its source. That should be a red flag that something wonderful is going on here.


Remember time does speed up and slow down relative to the local speed of the “clock” measuring it. Even further, if you were sitting with that clock time. your actual aging would occur at that rate not at the rate of someone sitting by a remote clock. Time is specific to each of the relativity relationships. It is or travels at constant c. That is so fast, it seems irrelevant but every day the sun actually “sets” 9 minutes before we experience it as “setting.” No matter how hard you try, you cannot actually see the sun set. You are only imagining it. If you carry that thought out, there is a lag in everything you experience as there is some delay for any perception of any thing to occur. So what we experience to be NOW is always, in fact, actually in the past. So where is the present? We should realize this PRESENT we have just discovered only exists in seeming experience or in the conceptual imagination. If we unwrap this present, we get the present of conceptuality. Use it freely it is yours!


So back to our sphere. We have only one conceptual control and that is to stop time, period. The only way to experience NOW is through conceptuality which only exists within consciousness. Consciousness and conceptuality and our conceptual sphere is the only “place” in the Universe we can know and experience the present. Our journey is getting a bit more exciting isn’t it? By defining everything and moving very deliberately with our eyes wide open we are seeing things in a different way. We have our batons of defined length in defined space to play with in the conceptual present because time is stopped.


Now let’s play with these ideas a bit more. We defined AB to be length 1. What else could it be? It lengthened at rate c for a time. If d=rt, the rate was c and the time was one amount of time so the length is c times 1. We have not “broken” it into segments in any way, so it looks like one thing. So for now we don’t have any conceptual way to know the speed of light relative to anything. We have brought that “knowledge” from non-conceptual reality. So that’s another way we are “cheating.” but at least we are aware of it. So there is nothing keeping us from defining the speed c to be one rate per one time which gives us one distance. Kind of like, 60 miles per hour takes us 60 miles in 60 minutes.


Two ABs in Straight Path in Conceptual Sphere
Two ABs in Straight Path
in Conceptual Sphere
Now things get very strange indeed. Just to be honest, let’s look at our created sphere with mind wide open. We don’t want to paddle past anything without truly looking as that is the point of this trip. What if we see the point A as exploding into light but instead of looking at it from the point of view of just point A, we look at the whole thing happening. Haven’t we really been doing that anyway? If there is a potential for any and all possible ABs there are at least two ABs that span the whole sphere in a straight path in the same amount of time as one AB reaches the periphery — location B. So there is a conceptual straight path distance that is twice as long which happened in the same amount of time as half the distance. That is twice the speed of light! Hmmmm. That seems or even looks like one length that happened in one time, so why don’t we use that as our conceptual baton of length one? Well, for one reason, if we did, we would not have the space to move the baton around in defined created space as we have already so freely done to discover the Truth explained in the creation of the sphere and the video showing the minimum conceptual structured artifact (symbol-word). All we could do is rotate it around with A returning into play as the only location around which all the potential paths of length 1 could move or rotate. We will see later that we can build something of significance in this case, but for now we will look at this whole situation as our introduction of the concept of frequency.


If we are at any location at the periphery and looking at A, light comes toward us from A, but also is going away from us at the “back side” of A. So if we are standing at B, time has already stopped, so the straight path through the center A to the opposite periphery is still two ABs. The total time is the same but there are 2 iterations, two cases or 2 frequencies of AB. If you are standing at B enough time has already passed so that the straight path to B can exist on the other side of A. Again there are two instances or two iterations and that is frequency 2 of AB. That resolves it but it does hurt the head a bit, conceptually. There is still the longer path across the defined universe that happened in the same time. This may be the proof that mind is not limited by the speed of light or anything, but it at least dramatizes the importance of point of view and the importance of the idea of inward, outward and frequency. Or science might call this INFLATION as they needed a word to rationalize “phenomenon” implied in complex mathematical exploration. Or we may have established an invalid use of conscious license in that we cannot be at any point B at the periphery of a space that does not exist yet. We are always located at the center of time. If we are at B, we had to be there at the same time A exploded and we exploded simultaneously and our sphere of universal relativity could only reach the center of the sphere A in time c so B can’t consider what is outside the sphere of influence of B. So the double distance does not exist from B. We will get into this later from another point of view that should resolve these seeming enigmas or open questions. Science would start speaking of Multiple Universes here! We consider the term multiple universe to be self-evidently OXYMORONIC.


Keeping all these considerations in mind let’s get back to the more simple conclusions we have actually demonstrated and shown as self-evident without a lot of complexity. This is the basic map we are developing without all the detail, color and myriad manifestations of experience. It is important to remember we are mapping the nature of the journey with the objective of seeing a whole new landscape in general to ultimately elucidate the specific. What you were shown in the video Conceptuality1 is self-evident truth which proceeded from an honest look at self resolving and eternal conceptual realities of the nature of things.


In principle we can try to imagine non-being. But in that very imagining we establish that being is. If being is, it is possible, so being exists in the potential and the potential is proven (manifest) in our self-awareness. We cannot get out of this cycle of truth which is self-evident. There is no way to back out of it or proceed outside of it without ignoring the truth of it. If we ignore the most obvious truth of our existence, and fail to re-integrate it at some point with what we discover, what chance do we have to arrive at any understanding of the nature of things? So, on a grand scale, we can dismiss the ideas of the beginning or the ending of anything except as a function of conceptual time which we can start or stop as we please. The only reason to deal with conceptual time is to isolate the problem we have in thinking based in what seems self-evident as opposed to what actually is self-evident at the most elementary scale of thinking without all the noise.


Now here is the shocker! Time is arbitrary and non considerable except in retrospect. If time can be seen as anything, it is length and the implied tension as in the relationship in AB. Time is and can only be considered as unitary. Its true length is always 1. No matter how long you live, you live 100% of your life, whether it is one hour, one day or one lifetime. The whole of anything is always 1. This becomes a very important consideration in understanding the nature of the whole and how a fresh understanding of the nature of time resolves seeming mysteries.


We have taken some liberty in building up our conceptual considerations so far. Solutions to problems are generally solved by reduction. You can think of the child’s game of pick up sticks. You have a pile of sticks and start removing them one by one from the pile without disturbing the other sticks until you have unraveled the pile. The difference with our pile of sticks is that we can’t unravel the triangle we conceived and demonstrated in the conceptualuity1 video. That triangle exists in principle and in potential with all the truth it “speaks” anywhere and anywhen. It is the conceptual framework of all rational existence and the potential and manifestation of self-awareness itself. This is literal and metaphorical. This symbol, word, pictogram, conception is the universal implication of the concept of UNITY. It exists universally as an expression of a potential wholeness to validate itself as the conceptual basis of the armature of reality as experienced in self-aware consciousness. The triangle takes the implied manifest components of the conceptual sphere and rationalizes that into a wholly conceptually manageable artifact. Curious, thoughtful, consideration of that conceptual artifact implies messages while at the same time being the very medium of that message. In this sense the triangle is a multi-function and universal pictogram word or communication tool which is message and transmits message about itself by being itself. The ABs function similarly. These essential geometries are universal language and the lowest common denominators so far described, while being the essence of the nature of the complexity (consciousness) which uncovers their objective and subjective meaning or message.


As beautiful as the triangle is, it fails in isolation to imply the space in which we have so freely operated with the ABs. It has established three locations which establish the primary truly considerable real flatness in principle. On these locations or “corners” let's continue our construction by connecting an AB baton to each corner. Remember we have plenty available. It’s easy to imagine this triangle with three batons kind of dangling where they may off the corners of the triangle. Now let’s gather the loose ends of the three danglers and bring them together at their loose ends and connect them. Wow! Now we have something. We have a real thing, finally. This is the minimum (most simple) conceptual entity that can exist anywhen in universe which includes the primal natures of universe while residing outside of time. You might initially think that a sphere is more simple, but as we have experienced, we had to really stretch the conceptual license to even imagine it. Even as we have described it, the sphere has an unresolved containment boundary.


By contrast this object we have allowed to form in our minds has a very defined and definite containment capacity. Geometers call this object a tetrahedron, which means four sided “solid.” We will call it Tet. It is not a pyramid. Tet has a triangular “base” and three triangular sides. Any side can be the base. Of course the aspect of solidness it possesses is the “magic” rigidity of the structural integrity described in the conceptuality1 video. It is in no way solid, nor is anything really solid. Atoms of which all things are structured are mostly open space with conceptual push-pull forces which operate in straight paths (vectors) so perceived solidity is a function of structural integrity based in triangulation in concept and in fact. Remember how the triangle became fixed and rigid as we connected the ends of the three ABs? Well, here are six ABs resulting in four triangles working together to enclose and define a space, domain or volume. So the Tet now expresses the natures of containment, inside-ness and outside-ness, convex and concave and definable location within the so far created space plus the natures of the triangle and the messages implied by it and its ABs revealed up to now.


Just to emphasize what we are trying to demonstrate here, let’s consider a cube constructed by similar means as the Tet. We take 12ABs and string them together in such a way as to end up with the six square faces of the cube. Good Luck. Try it with straws. A cube so conceived cannot stand — EVER. Apparent cubes and squares only exist by means of a resolvable inherent triangulated structural armature. Any square, cube or rectangle you experience exists only by virtue of the triangle in principle and in fact.


OK, it’s time to watch for the Conceptuality2 video illustration on YouTube.


Please understand that we are not claiming that universe is “constructing” literally as we are showing with the models. There is no “maker” tying these conceptual artifacts up into the geometric order. The point so far is to introduce you to the elemental and primary nature of these STRUCTURED images and architectures in principle. As we become more adept in experiencing conceptuality as real, we will see more clearly how these architectures just ARE, infused as EVERYTHING in ANYWHEN.