Pure Conceptuality


Chapter 3: Of what use is time?


Paddling this canoe upstream is simple, just stroke by stroke, but it is not easy. If you are exhausted or disappointed by the trip so far, you can just float back downstream, but that would result in nothing fresh just by definition. This is a very specialized excursion with a specific objective. That objective is to simply show and explain, and experience the whole of existence and experience. We all belong in this knowing and there is a place for all of us upstream!


Remember, the point of this adventure is to discover a fresh way of seeing the landscape. In the beginning, we are being meticulous in establishing the validity of the system of navigation. The further correlations that we will see, which enhance our vision, could be described as fanciful if it were not for the groundwork we are doing in carefully developing and showing the accuracy of the map we are drawing. In the end it might be possible to just “believe” the veracity of the map and still make some connections and see some sights that are truly awesome in their simple beauty but Understanding is what we seek.


Now, back to the work and the adventure. Let's review, renew and refresh our position so far. We have been disciplined in building the experience of our journey in a very careful way. Our first challenge was to find a straight path. We eliminated all the noise of the world subtracting from consideration identified context in order to consider a simplicity without particular distractions. We knew we had to get from A to B in a straight path and we determined that we had to eliminate the context of the spinning, orbiting earth around sun while they orbit the galactic core. In doing this we essentially stopped time while holding our location A with the goal of imagining (traveling) in a straight path to location B. We had to acknowledge we could do that because we have a priori consciousness and self-awareness so the potential (en potentia) of the task is proven in the exercise of the task. We discovered that we could not go infinitely fast, so we considered traveling as light since light is something we know travels at less than infinitely fast and has a constant rate of c. We acknowledged that science has provided us with this tool chest and that it is now basic common knowledge. We are attempting to be meticulous in our navigation and charting, traveling our journey in the same spirit as a scientific investigation.


In imagining location A to be illuminated we started time in providing for motion and (vice-versa) motion starts time. We realized that the illumination was proceeding in all directions away from A at speed c which was creating a conceptual spherical wave front away from A in all directions. We stopped time, while maintaining the afterimage of the conceptual sphere. The periphery represents any number of B locations and any path to any B is straight. We could have tried to imagine location B to proceed toward it directly, but it is not possible to know the location or the distance before the rate and the time. So as pointed out earlier, according to d = rt, we use one unit of time multiplied by rate c with a value of one to get a distance of one. This gives us an array of B locations at the periphery any one of which is our straight line path. This straight path is essentially self-generated, we just isolate it. If it can exist it does exist and our job is simply to find it, which we have done.


Let’s study this a bit more. We notice that all paths to the periphery diverge. Once we have isolated one AB there can be no other. Any choice other than these locations is a different AB. A accommodates any number of ABs, but the periphery accommodates only the B we have isolated. All other apparent ABs must be in a different location very nearly parallel, but not quite. So in terms of the Universe in which we are traveling here, we have isolated the unit of measure! Once we have established location B, we cannot “undo” it. We cannot run time backwards. We can’t have a negative rate. Isn’t the self-evidence of that kind of exciting? Do not misunderstand this. This is the WHOLE of consideration of distance and the whole consideration of time.


Considering that location B is now isolated and definite, can we travel back to A? Wow, what a question. Within the thought experiments so far defined we should be able to do that. Let’s just illuminate B and travel to A at rate c. We have now established BA but this process results in a new spherical domain around B. Hmmm. This is something to examine. Which domain is our considered Universe? This is like having a beautiful waterfall in front of us and behind us. Which one do we look at? Well, A was already looking at B and B purposely traveled toward A. B may have seemed to be traveling inward toward A but in fact the trip from B to A was outward from B. Now we have two unit lengths residing as one and two cycles of unit time accommodating what appears to be the same unit length. This reinforces the idea that time cannot “run” in reverse.


So, if we are going to stick with our original conceptual sphere, as containing all possibilities, what have we gained? We have discovered an inherent duality in seeing the AB-BA and that at least two cycles of unit time can be realized as within the original conceptual sphere which is now represented by AB-BA. Also, we have modeled the idea of convergence and a relative inward trajectory. Up to now we only had divergence and outward trajectory. This is really exciting as we can still hold all these ideas in our heads and within our conceptual sphere. We have amplified our perception and description of our self-generating modeled conception of thought forms precipitating and self-defining out of the intelligence (en potentia, a priori) of the self-organizing truth underlying all manifestation. Wow, that was a whirlpool!


It is easy to see now that any trajectory from the periphery of our conceptual sphere can be imagined to travel inward toward A, thus giving us a rational model for convergence. In essence we have accommodated the functionality of a “mirror” at the limits of our conceptual sphere. We have explained how any B has a defined path toward A without violating any of the conceptual considerations we utilized and learned from experience as we have proceeded on our journey. We see how our universe has at least two iterations of time thus eliminating the problem we earlier pondered about accommodating the apparent linear expansion at twice the speed of light. We already suggested two cycles of time and this view helps us see that from another perspective. We have seen that time can have a considerable and modelable cyclic nature. The very rational, beautiful and simple explanation of the “reflecting” of BA back to Center (A) is dramatic. Every location in the periphery must have the same potential, so all of the energy of the illumination of B locations moves toward or is “returned” to A. We look at this as only a beautiful and interesting idea. This is a beautiful sunrise in our adventure.


We are going to take a little side trip over the hill and through the woods just to examine the journey from another angle. For now this is just for the purposes of diversion or maybe you could call it exploration. It is self-evident that we have just one obvious allotment of time and that allotment is always 100%. In terms of our unique existence, we have one lifetime in which to live our story. If we exist a week, that is 100% of our time or if we live to be 90 it is still 100%. Actually as each moment approaches and passes, THAT is our hundred percent. We have just lived 100% of our lives! This is true for each individual and within that unitary context of time we experience and manifest our unique story. We can imagine egoistic afterlifes or successive incarnations and we can even be exposed to anecdotal stories from the conscious minds individually making a strong case for having lived another life. This exemplifies the unlimited potential for particular experience. But underlying all of this potential is an armature that we are examining with the clear intention to keep it simple as we go along to avoid getting lost.


A life suggests a beginning and ending of time, With our conceptual sphere we have taken control of time in the ways that have been made clear as we have gone along. It seems worth considering at this point, if we are in time, as proven by our very conscious existence, what would being outside of time look like? A case could be made that, like the left and right glove, one implying the other, that being suggests nonbeing. Unlike the glove, we cannot have a model for the state of nonbeing. We might say that is self-evident when considered fully. A way to consider nonbeing or nontime is to accept it as foundational yet nonexperienceable except as an idea which, in principle, must be true, yet is functionally irrelevant to our further consideration.


We have had no problem stopping time conceptually in our model for the purpose of allowing a fresh examination. The sensing of time as continuous must be an experience and not a fact. We might conclude that time must be intermittent but at a resolution, frequency or cycle which becomes irrelevant to our experience except in principle. This is a way of addressing the problem of truly finding the present moment as a conscious being. We seem to be able to experience the present moment, but honestly we cannot nail it down as our sensory nature makes it technically impossible to consciously experience the present moment ever. We cannot measure it. We MUST always be a bit behind it. That frustration to resolve may not be so difficult to imagine if one imagines the problem of trying to divide (for example) a line in half and then halve that half length and the next “forever.” It is more difficult to imagine a “moment” of nonbeing or stopped time as a moment in some measure of time in fact and in theory. So the moment disappears as somewhat analogous to the right disappearing into the left. Stopped time is the continuous thing operating as the conceptual compliment for non-continuous experience. Don’t worry. We have already proven to ourselves that we exist. Self-awareness exists and must always exist en potentia and a priori, right? Universe is not gobbled up by non-existence. This moment is the self-evident proof of that. We might say that is, was, will always be applies to the ALL.


OK. Let’s get back on the river and continue the adventure. The water gets more clear as we move upstream, It is amazing really. We are moving toward the headwaters which are sourced by a beautiful spring. Let’s keep paddling. These are charted waters. Let’s look at the chart as it is self-developing.


We have our conceptual sphere model still accommodating all of the artifacts of our thoughts and descriptions. There is the periphery (wave front) which can be seen to accommodate any location when time is stopped. We have located B there and found it to be possible to move from B to A as described so carefully and thus establishing a dual nature to our AB vector, baton or trajectory. We developed two iterations of unitary time. Up to now we intervened by taking license manually grabbing ABs out of our conceptual inventory resulting in the construction of the Tet in a very logical manner. Now there is another way to see this. We can allow the Tet to self-construct by simply removing all that is not Tet. We have all of the concepts to allow this now.


The Tet Inherent in The Conceptual Sphere
The Tet Inherent in
The Conceptual Sphere
We know that we have any number of ABs diverging out of A which is the center but we have selected just one eliminating, in that consideration, all others. Now lets consider two additional B locations in the periphery that are equidistant from each other and the original B. Can you see that this establishes a triangle at the periphery with the trajectories, AB batons, existing within our defined sphere? Actually these locations were defined specifically with the thought experiment of illuminating B to travel (still forward) to A. The locations for those two new Bs equidistant and at the periphery of the original conceptual sphere are scribed out as if by a 3D (spherical) compass! So there is a trajectory connecting the locations at the corners of that triangle at the periphery to A at the center. We can illuminate the two new B's as that is consistent with our method in illuminating A in the first place. Now there will be vectors BA which travel the same path back to A. You don't have to see that right now but it is important to know as it is part of the beauty of the understanding of the self-manifesting and organization of the artifacts we are observing and considering. We do not have to grab and move anything. We just eliminate from all the possibilities of what is not a Tet and we end up with the Tet already existent. The only difference so far is that three corners (locations of intersection) of the Tet are pushed out against the sphere boundary while the fourth location remains at A where all of our considerations “began.”


We are going to go just a bit further in analyzing dynamic possibilities which can be contained within the limits we have so far established. Let’s imagine (now that we have our self-manifested Tet) that all of the locations at the corners are illuminated simultaneously. Imagine all of the wave fronts moving spherically away from each corner while their peripheries expand toward each other and stop at the locations along the six ABs of the Tet where they all met. These locations bisect the ABs. We also have spheres of consideration around all the corner locations of the Tet. More than half the three spheres generated at the periphery are in principle outside our original sphere of consideration. We can choose to include those domains in the original sphere by allowing the expanding wave front to push the whole Tet into the center of our original sphere or we can just leave the Tet where it is and disregard what is in principle, outside. We have conceptual leverage to “expand” the sphere to include the new domains at any and all of the potential B locations. This would make the whole field of consideration two units of length (frequencies) from the new periphery to A. Either way, the ABs are bisected and this is the critical fact.


This is hard work, so lets relax and watch another video of these developments demonstrated by models which should help us realize our achievements so far resulting in visual artifacts which are comprehensible. By the way, these artifacts are tactile and tangible in every way, meaning you could be blind and yet still see by feeling and manipulating the models and experience the full beauty of this trip. Think about that. Through the application of this method of visualizing conceptual universal structuring we have rationally “backed in” to a primordial modeling for the ideas of simultaneity and synchronicity. In conversation these words are similar in effect to the word “heliotropism” explaining nothing at all. Simultaneity, as presented here in considering the conceptual self-generation of geometries illuminates the understanding of eternal as inside and outside of time. Generally we have a wrong-headed relationship with time.


Now to Video Illustration Conceptuality3. In that video, if you try hard to follow the descriptions, you will notice that FOUR spheres are described as three spheres on a couple of occasions. A 2 frequency Tet is defined by four spheres. This should be no big deal as your eyes don’t lie, just look. The “mistakes” of the presenter emphasize by contrast the self-evident truth of the language of the forms and what is attempting to be shown or seen directly.


If you are truly interested in this journey you MUST watch the Video Illustrations as they come up. The clear and simple truth resides in the self-evidence of the forms, ideas and dynamics not the words of the presenter.