Pure Conceptuality


Chapter 8: Is believing Useful?




Now let’s look back at our trip so far.  We have actually come a long way just plodding along stroke by stroke.  Just attempting to get anywhere in a straight trajectory from A to B put us on a light path which has precipitated a kind of a chart of our journey. The trip has become more than just the path as we have discovered messages in the medium as we have seen the self development of THEMES as well as the self development of a universal symbol system.  At the simplest and most obvious level we have uncovered the thought dynamics or conceptual framework out of which derive our symbols of the universal language of low frequency numbers. We see that the “stick numbers” 1,2,3,and 4 make some dramatic points.  Look at it this way.  The number 1 is one angle, two ABs and ONE POINT. The number 2 is two angles, three ABs and TWO POINTS.  The number 3 is three angles, four ABs and THREE POINTS.  The number 4, as we see it, jumps off the page as a complete triangle with its “dangler” AB which scribes out the FOURTH POINT.  We can also notice that if we allow our natural tendency to complete these angles we will see 1 as one triangle, 2 as two triangles, three as three triangles and 4 as the four triangles of the Tet.


It should be apparent that all of this realization has occurred in very low frequency but in a very rational way. It is obvious that our perceptions of the first four numbers match perfectly the symbols we use to represent them. The symbols clearly function as pictographs. At this point a very interesting question arises. Did the “ancients” or the “extraterrestrials” know all of this and set up this symbol system for us to discover? Another way we could wonder is - who invented this symbol system and was that history just lost?  We could say that there is no history of the Arabic Numerals coming into being this way so all of this is reverse-engineering of just what already is.  Hmmm - that sounds familiar.  What is “wrong” with that!  The way we have described these symbols is ACCURATE  in itself so the question of where it came from in the 'normal' sense is moot. We KNOW these perceptions came from a careful analysis of what is. This demonstrates the inductive logic theory which self resolves in the language of structure at its lowest frequency.  Problem solved without having to speculate on something that CANNOT be known; no extraterrestrials, no mysterious Egyptian mathematician priests, no Persian traders etc, etc. It comes down to- WHICH STORY DO YOU PREFER? It would seem that the ACCURACY of a unique case of inductive reasoning based in a theory we can see, touch and realize would be high on the list!  


The essential message of fourness and the Tet as context and content should bring us to a fresh way to look at “old” messages. We have noticed the many essential fours in the high frequency story and we have included self consciousness in our consideration of Universe, as to consider Universe without it would  be to leave out the most OBVIOUS part, the very part we are using to consider Universe at all!  When we allow consciousness and self-consciousness into consideration we bring with it all our languages, stories, histories and memories.


As it turns out the Alchemists four “elements,” earth, air, fire and water start to look pretty accurate in their inclusiveness. In the ultra high frequency reality these classifications work quite nicely to integrate everything including you.  You are the carbon EARTH, generating heat by combustion (FIRE) with each breath (AIR) supported by most of your weight being WATER.  In a scientific sense the three states of matter- solid, liquid, gas and the chemical reaction - oxidation - are intimate to us.


Every day we are confronted by the HORISCOPE somewhere if we are involved in any way with the consensus story of humanity unfolding daily as social communicating beings. Somehow this or a similar system of organization of the ultra high frequency rises to the surface in every language in every part of the world.  The system derives from the four elements- (earth sign, air sign, fire sign, and water sign). the 12 signs and ten planets.  The idea of personality is grouped into the 12 “pure” types. These types are influenced by the ten “character-themes” of ten planets all based on the position of the planets when you were born.  Many, many people, even intelligent people, embrace the “truth” they anecdotally and intuitively feel of this system. Of course, to an astronomer, a sociologist, a physicist  or an engineer, there is no truth or real basis to astrology.  The question remains, why does astrology have such appeal and an apparent functionality in the consensus story reality?  That very question is the MESSAGE. It should point us back to the low frequency understanding of the ORDER in nature-consciousness. The answer resides as the message in the question.  There is something anecdotally appealing about the apparent “functionality” of the system of order in “astrological science.” The essence has a correctness even though the “effectiveness” is purely anecdotal. The effectiveness has nothing to do with the “science” OR astronomical proposition of the position and “influence” of celestial bodies at any particular moment as they “really were.” That is the Red Herring. Stinkin’ Thinkin.’ The “effectiveness” resides in simply organizing and/or recognizing order.


Innocently we gaze at a starry night and are awestruck with wonder as we experience the majesty of a clear sky starry night. We can imagine any human in any time having a similar experience and reaction. In wondering we attempt to put the majesty into some kind of order. In this con-sideration we impose images over apparent locations in the dome of the sky surrounding us. We see and name Pisces, Gemini, Aires etc in an attempt at organization. We see constellations of stars which give us outlines of these forms only to discover that the stars have no planar relationship as experienced but are dimensionally separated forward and back by light years as science would have it. Our “template” becomes anecdotal and historical and factually irrational and irrelevant. The con-templation was faulty. The template was not universal. Here we seek and find the Universal Template.  


Frankly, it comes down to the story each person engages as “real.”  We see that the Tet as symbol carries enough information in number and relationship to be the essence of the word STORY (mother, father , son, daughter, who, what, when, where, how, why and the wholeness and SINGULARITY of UNITY as rationally considerable in the Tet. LOVE.

Self conscious life is a cascade of intertwining overlapping stories. Everything is simply story.  Ponder that.  Science, art, philosophy, religion, astronomy, cosmology, numerology, astrology are all stories. Story and nothing else is truly the essence of self conscious being.  So when we buy into the seemingly rational story of the scientific development of medicine, for example, we encounter the screaming signpost of PLACEBO. Science verifies placebo “effect,” labels it and passes right by.


Let’s consider this carefully.  Placebo effect WAS explained as an imagined cure for an imagined illness relating to a particular individual. In other words, the person was a bit flaky and mentally “cured” an illness he never had in the first place! Well, SURPRISE! It turns out that Placebo is a very “real” effect and  a consideration in the cure of what science knows as real and particular diseases.  Scientific studies have consistently shown  a strong effect,  accounting for at least 20% of the efficacy of medication.  Some patients are cured of actually diagnosed diseases by placebo alone.  Science does not argue the truth of this. These are stories that don’t seem to fit the scientific expectation.  Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.”  Imagining that some scientifically benign “agent” is a medicine IS powerful “medicine!” Knowledge is mostly simply description and belief. IMAGE-ination is a tool more useful and insightful in clear thinking. We have been IMAGE-ining on this whole trip into pure conceptuality. The images, inter-relationships and connections are real and self informing. Imagining a pill (sugar) as a medication IS a medication.  Or we could say that we believe that the sugar pill is medication. It is easy to carelessly conflate imagination with belief. A highly intelligent scientific mind could not say, “Belief is more important than knowledge.” We are not looking to Believe anything here, we are imagining the  Nature of the Order of   the ALL.  Placebo effect is not alien to a system of perception and thought which acknowledges the ESSENTIAL NATURE of STORY itself as the “stuff” of self-consciousness.  


Here we enter into the idea and the fact of the phenomenon of SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF.  The whole “magic” of life is in the exercise of this experiential tool. When you experience a novel or a movie or listen to a great story teller, the reward is in “forgetting” that the novel, movie or story is a fabrication of sorts.  When we simply examine a book and its pages, paragraphs, sentences, words and letters, we do not experience the story and the images and feeling a story evokes.  We must engage language and allow ourselves to suspend DISBELIEF and enter into the “other world.” This natural ability is counter-intuitive to a rational scientific mind. We know that the movie is not  REAL, but we  don’t constantly remind ourselves that this is a set, with actors, a script, a camera etc. or we literally could not experience the movie; same with the book. A child easily engages the story at bedtime as REAL. We adults keep a SEPARATION going all the time, but the line of demarcation is not really clear at all. So not to consider the WHOLENESS of this fact-truth in an overall view of reality is to miss the point! The scientific effectiveness of placebo and the anecdotal effectiveness of astrology (for example)  are rationalized in realizing that these phenomenon are another example of Imagination and Suspension of DISBELIEF - not Belief or Scientific Rational “proven” (highly described) “truth.”


We might think that entering the “spirit” of a book, movie or story is not suspension of disbelief, but rather a willing engagement with the spirit of the thing.  This is another point of view which begs the question - what is the difference? Remembering that we are attempting to always reference back to the essential structural conceptual symbol-word models which we have seen develop, we stretched to see the correlation of the structural Tet with the universal HEART SYMBOL.  We saw how the shorthand way we write the Arabic Numerals similarly hides in plain sight the Tet “residing” in the Heart Symbol.  This gives us love as a word meaning of the symbol Tet. Of course, not forgetting that the rational mind word for Tet is ONE or UN ITY.  So we have introduced here the essential and basic duality of self consciousness, heart and mind, knowing and feeling, rational and metaphysical or spiritual.  So to prefer to think of suspension of disbelief  as engagement with is simply a head forward point of view, while preferring suspension of disbelief is a heart forward perspective.  The head forward position REQUIRES suspension of disbelief while the heart forward position REQUIRES engagement. The result is the common ground of entering the spirit of the artful enterprise regardless of the persuasion of the individual experiencer.  Here we arrive back at the integrative nature of the Tet as a conceptual tool, artifact, word and symbol for complex but BASIC and ESSENTIAL essences of Self Consciousness while also serving perfectly well to EXPLAIN and act as the CONCEPTUAL  LIMIT CASE - TURN AROUND  model for MATERIAL SPACIAL REALITY.  


So can we write off all of this as coincidence? That would be handy if coincidence had some real meat on its bones.  Under close examination, coincidence as an explanation of ANYTHING simply evaporates.  Coincidence is a word-idea which is just a description of an experience which has NO EXPLANATION!  In other words a careless acceptance of coincidence as more than just a word must reside in a system of simple BELIEF based in experience and accepted without thought, just as the sun appears to rise and set.  Literally seeing and experiencing the sun as setting and rising is not valid in the light of what is now obvious, and so EXPIRES the acceptance of coincidence as a valid tool of explanation.  Hopefully, this is as refreshing as an unexpected cool breeze on a hot day or putting on 3D glasses at the theatre. Coincidence becomes the “signpost” for the TRUTH of the integrative wholeness of being experienced daily in the story of each of our self conscious lives.  In this light coincidence takes on the character of a functional PROOF that things are not as they seem! Even more amazing is that coincidence only exists and can only be shared in the context of story. So any theory that RELIES on coincidence as a MATERIAL rational basis for OUTCOMES must be flawed. Coincidence can  only be the RESULT (reflection) of the perfect integrative nature of Universe and not a CAUSE.


Just to labor this a bit more, we can take the stand that there is nothing that can not be understood. This does not mean that we cannot have mystery. A book is not a mystery.  It is a thing that can be understood as to what it is. It has existence as a series of pages of symbols scribed on paper which transmit thoughts, ideas and themes by the sequential    nature of arrangement of letter-word-sentence and agreed and learned universality of the communicated ideas and themes. However the story in the book, through its author,can create and communicate a mystery which is neither the book nor the author.  It is something set up in the mind of the receiver. You cannot just look at a book and see the mystery, but you can UNDERSTAND what the book is. The way science would take up the mystery of a book is to examine the nature of its pages and ink and continue to beat that horse to death back to the Big Bang and finally there hit a wall of mystery with no chance of perceiving the mystery within the WORD of the book.


Let’s take a break here.  This has been strenuous.  It is hard work to honestly and accurately examine our own consciousness and habits of thinking.  The point of this journey is to openly look and that is difficult.  We are very invested in the way we see and think.  Really, that is fine as this conceptual way of seeing is not to undermine our beliefs or points of view but more to reveal the essential structure or nature that infuses consciousness itself.  No matter what we know at a purely conceptual level, we remain exactly who we are. Honestly, on  a daily basis we see and experience the sun RISING and SETTING even though we know that is a misperception. All the rest of daily experience is much like that.  Our natural tendency to “brush over” the truth is actually part of the gift of self consciousness.  When we travel in our canoe, we don’t have to think about every aspect of it or even understand displacement of water for the canoe to support us and work as a tool.  The lack of detailed UNDERSTANDING does not preclude the simple use. This is somewhat like the phenomenon of “suspension of disbelief” in that WE KNOW BETTER but we choose our particular way of experiencing.  It is just nice to KNOW we are doing this!  


Having this knowing is an element of a further understanding.   As we paddle along, we are gathering experience and acquiring skills.  It is necessary to stay in the spirit of the investigation of conceptuality and not get distracted from the focus and promise of the trip. We must hold in mind the essentials we have seen unfold. Nothing so far unveiled is complicated nor does any of it require belief to hold it together.  We have taken message and theme from the low frequency and correlated with message and theme in the ultra complex high frequency experiential reality.  In so doing we have found common ground and resolution for some apparent enigmas.   The simple truths we have discovered in conceptuality run through the entirety of the of the ultra high frequency system as underlying (contained) and unifying themes.  This understanding does not “steal the magic” from self conscious intelligent being but rather enhances the beauty of the WHOLE perception.  We can inhabit the wholeness of Being from a homogenized context where everything can be integrated in a fresh perspective. Generally we live as spectators of a magician's act. He gives us a unique, delightful and unexplainable experience through the use of practiced skillful distraction and deception. In the case of the magician, if we learn the trick, we forfeit the amazement.  In Pure conceptuality as all is revealed and understood the AWE just increases.


We must confront the fact that we are the instrument of observation using our minds to explore the totality of what we see, hear, taste, smell, touch, think and feel.  It should be clear by now that we are attempting to keep it simple by returning to our careful system of examination and exploration of what seems to be external by keeping our focus on what can be known and shown in our free conceptual space.  The correlations we make with high frequency themes are propositions to support and explore the idea that the dynamic understanding of the essential and simple objective elements of thought and realization we have seen develop rationally operate throughout subjective and objective experience.


In a technical sense, general experience “lies” to us.  We think the sky is up and the earth is down. We think and feel that we can stand still. We think that time is linear and inviolate in that it “ticks by” additively one “second” at a time. Most of what we experience has  a kind of “falseness” when examined in terms of what is actually known about “matter” and “space.” We have met the challenge of that fact by embracing conceptuality and imagination as the tools to be carefully and deliberately used to integrate the truth with what we experience rather than just ignoring what we know in favor of what feels comfortable and seems to be common sense.  The problem in analyzing accurately resides in the fact that common sense becomes common ignorance even in the most intelligent minds. Artistic minds are free to sidestep this problem while scientific and rational minds are submerged in the problem of what is known versus what is experienced.  Scientists sidestep this problem by attempting to communicate in the language of mathematics which becomes its “own world.”  


Universe is not divided.  If we know nothing else, we know Universe is somehow a WHOLENESS. In order to find that wholeness, we must reconsider, refresh and renew our minds and ways of thought in such a manner that we find  common ground in art, philosophy, spirituality and “hard science.”  We must let the fog clear to see the CONCEPTUAL BRIDGE that already exists and simply must be used. In the case of this bridge we must UNDERSTAND it in order to use it. It is different from other tools that we can use without understanding them like, for example, this computer on which these words are tapped out.  In order to use this conceptual bridge we must remain open and at least temporarily let go of common sense and Belief in favor of an honest exploration.


Wisdom is not the integration of life experience and knowledge, but rather the conquering of ignorance. Ignorance is the blind and inconsiderate acceptance of anything without a serious and competent openness to question with insistence on a wholeness of understanding.  When we suspend disbelief we are not Ignoring the fact that a novel, for example, is not “real.” It is ignorant to say that a novel is not real.


So now we go back to our original conceptual sphere. Using our ultra high frequency a priori consciousness we imagined a location of one event - to “travel” from A to B. We eliminated all “noise” so that we could keep it simple. We imagined that Location A emanated as light for one unit of time which could be any “amount” of time. We accepted that our thought experiment started time and that when we arrived at B, we could stop time. Actually, simply stopping time establishes Location B.  We stipulated that the ONLY “place” time can be stopped is in conceptuality. For the sake of the thought experiment we accepted from science that light is both wave and particle and that it travels at constant speed.  Putting all of this together, we confirmed in the most general sense in pure conceptuality that one rate times one time is one distance (length) and we came up with our unitary AB.  This should be clear. If it is not simply go back and review the whole trip.


We realized that AB only “exists” in any sense in pure conceptuality. Even to “see” it is “cheating” with our imaginations as it only has one dimension - length.  If we really want to bend our minds and challenge our preconceptions, we could consider that this “length” could just as well be called time. It might even make more sense in imagination to think of it as time rather than a length. We have no habitual visual model for time.  Regardless, it remains that any “amount” of time gives a distance of one at a constant rate of one. So we see here that time is in some sense “unitary” and that its rate as expressed in light speed is the KNOWN CONSTANT in Universe as no one would argue. In this light, time itself becomes worthy of re-consideration. What is it?  In our experience here, it allows one unit of distance in one (any) amount of time.  So time, itself is a unitary wholeness which can only be sensed as linear if it is “broken” into segments or in high frequency, sensed as experience integrated with other happenings such as the “rising” and “setting” of the sun. Without association, time is not measurable.


In daily life, the sensing of time is very unreliable.  We have a dream for “five minutes” in which we may experience days. We get busy and “lose track of time.”  We notice that when we travel out from home, the return trip ALWAYS seems shorter.  When we were children it was “forever” between Christmas’s or birthdays. These are universal truths that are experienced but not considered in any real way. As we get older - days, weeks, months and years become shorter. Time speeds up.  There are certainly some illusions in operation here.  Is it in the way we UNDERSTAND time or in the way we experience time? We should be able to figure that out.


Einstein tells us that time “speeds up” or “slows down” relative to two observers traveling at different speeds.   An astronaut traveling in space at a high rate of speed will age slower than his twin brother on earth.  It is experimentally proven that this is true.  The constant frame of reference is SPEED OF LIGHT not TIME.  This is very difficult to accept as true, so we just say, “weird” and move on. It does not seem to affect us so we ignore it.  Except every time we use our gps we are depending on the fact that time slows down as relative speed increases.  So the whole idea or sense of time as we generally understand it and experience it, is not reliable at all, so the basic tenant of our relationship to reality is based in misperception.  This begs the question, “What is reality?”


We can go back to our conceptual sphere to try to think abut this. In the conceptual model “A” is us attempting to get to B in a straight path.  So, as soon as A radiates as light and we imagine ourselves to be moving, we are no longer at A. We can’t even look back at A as we are traveling at light speed so nothing can get to us to sense from                                                                                                        ‘back there.” As soon as we realize that, we become B and the Idea of A back there is an after image in our minds ( a story). As B we can convince ourselves that we can travel back to A and it will just take the amount of time on our clock to go back. But in fact, conceptually we have gone nowhere.  We have just invented LOCAL TIME and CONSENSUS REALITY.  This IS mind bending but it does help us realize that all we experience is in the PAST. The stars, the sun, the moon and the cat across the room are not experienced in the present moment as there is no present moment for us. It starts to make a lot more sense to “look” at things in stopped time conceptually as we have done on this journey.  By this means we can see the truth of the nature of things underlying the wildly transformative experience in LOCAL TIME. There is an underlying rationality to all motion (energy) which is based naturally in triangulation. “Chaos” is filtered out by the rationality of Universal Intelligence (realizable order).  In essence, self consciousness “creates” the Universe as we know it.  It is ALL story, STORED ethereally in self consciousness. One might say, the Universe is the WORD.


There should be some dawning sense of what we are alluding to with an increasing awareness of the scope of the meaning and utility of the idea of WORD as we have connected to the essential structural models. These models and the dynamics of their development are in themselves, message.  If we were given a video game by a friend who was an enthusiast of that game, we would not really be receiving the gift intended if we did not have a game console to play it and if we did not engage the actual playing of the game while suspending disbelief in entering the spirit of the game.  Unless we did all of this, we could not SHARE the knowing, understanding and spirit of the game. Therefore we cannot receive the intended gift without opening our minds and hearts to it and putting effort into imagining, engaging and learning it.  Similarly, Pure Conceptuality must be engaged and practiced, while also challenging in the self “ignor-ance” and “common sense” ways we see the world and reality itself. In other words this, too, requires a suspension of disbelief of the unfamiliar ideas presented here while also suspending the natural BELIEF we have in the way we habitually experience reality. In principle and in fact this is VERY DIFFICULT.  


However, we are keeping it simple and presenting an elemental structural model to be an objective frame of reference and we have stretched to show that this frame also operates subjectively.  Like the word being, our words interchange as subject, verb and object. Think of a juggler starting with just two balls, becoming familiar and then progressing to three. After practice he finally progresses to four balls. What was impossible for him before is now easy.  He eventually shows us how easy it is by riding a unicycle while juggling the four balls!  The idea of juggling four balls is pretty simple but it just is not easy at first.  All we have done here in concept so far is present four balls and the idea of juggling them in an orderly way to engage and become a “juggler” and learn a new skill.  That skill is in being conversant with truth which permeates, infuses and rationalizes being any who, any what, any when, any where, any how and any why. There is a WHOLENESS which is conceptually realizable.  


If we were advanced mathematicians, we would be holding many axioms, formulas and theorems in our heads. We may have “proven” or developed some of the elements of thought ourselves, but we would still be operating in a very complex and stratified area of expertise in a very formalized and established language.  What is presented in Pure Conceptuality is a simple and self evident method of navigation of being and existence.  If feeling lost or fragmented, we simply go back through the developments to get to HERE with a sense of wonder at the developments so far and an openness to further study of the comprehensive nature of this form of investigation developing a system of navigation and comprehension of the Universal Language.


We  will return to our models and add the “fifth ball,” but before we do, we are going to stretch credulity a bit in examining an even more extended understanding and interaction with WORD. We have made the case for our self generating geometries being WORD in that they express by their very form the ideas and themes. We concluded that there is no “history” in the normal way of thinking, to support these very clear explanations and self evident connections and representations, We neatly eliminated “COINCIDENCE” entirely as an EXPLANATION of anything. We relied on the self evidence  as described and experienced in the purely conceptual thought experiment and resulting thought forms which we concluded operate as WORDS. We saw develop the symbol structures of one, two, three and four. But also we still  have all of the information of the  thought experiment that got us to the simplicity of seeing the number symbols as simple and obvious pictographs. We concluded that the self evidence of the conclusion OUTWEIGHED the non-existence of a “historical verification.”  This is a huge transgression of the “normal” way of thinking.  This implies that history is not necessarily the absolute authority that it is commonly understood to be.


If we think carefully about history, we realize that there are many histories for almost anything.  There are varying opinions that are sorted out by researching experts piled higher and deeper and at some point some authority is accepted to be the “final word” and the “truth” is finally revealed.  It is easy to see that these “truths” are temporary and any consideration of experience proves that this method of arriving at truth is not reliable at all.  Why is this not more honestly examined, seen and admitted?  All it really is is STORY.  It is a FACT and the TRUTH that it is story, but the content of the story cannot be accepted as anything more than relatively authoritative, not true.


IT IS OUR CONTENTION HERE THAT WHAT HAS DEVELOPED IN THIS INVESTIGATION IS TRUTH. It is not based on anecdote or opinion or prior authority. The truths revealed so far are self evident in the context of the method of investigation.

Let's consider an analogy to try to differentiate between a truth and a fact. A jig saw puzzle has unique and differentiated pieces that can only fit together in one way, Each piece has a an orientation and position within a frame of reference. The picture into which the puzzle resolves, contains the clues as to the orientation and position of the pieces. The rationality of the image in terms of pattern, color, graphic texture and familiar image provide an approach to resolving the puzzle. Normally pieces with a linear edge can be assumed to be part of the frame edge of the puzzle. To set up the whole frame is a good strategy to begin in the resolution of the “picture.”A puzzle designer could add a good deal of complexity by putting linear edged pieces into the interior of the puzzle. There could be successive embracing “frames” within the puzzle to provide the integrity of the thing. Each piece of the puzzle can be seen as a fact. It has one position and orientation, The concepts presented here about the puzzle are the TRUTH. The facts do not elucidate the truth, the Truth allows the facts to be put into order.


We have attempted in this presentation of ideas to transform and expand our perception of the nature of WORD. We saw that the self-developing primary architectures are in themselves word and, of course idea associated directly out of the stopped time conceptual architecture after image. We made a strong case for the words one, two three, four and UNITY. In doing this we realized that there is no “historical verification” for our conclusions, but that the self-evidence of the conclusions, eliminating coincidence, forced us to consider in a new light and accept a new perspective. We are going to “drag” that perspective into a larger consideration and study of WORD.


Let's consider the word universe – UNI  VERSE. In the language we are using here we can agree this word  says: ONE WORD. It is the contention here that this correlation is profound. We have proven conceptually an a priori limit case unitary “turn around” condition in the stopped time after image of the  unitary conceptual Tet. This IS the ONE WORD which is the”beginning” and end point for the conceptual, consciously realizable NATURE of Universe. We have “backed in” to this realization together by careful, yet simple conceptual analysis. One might think it seems fanciful, yet it is too OBVIOUS to be overlooked and it cannot honestly be dismissed by coincidence. We have dealt with all of that. We have SHOWN that conceptual self division of Tet manifests the oct-tet complimentary field-matrix while also demonstrating that UNITY is sufficient to conceptually “contain” an infinity of increasing frequency by division where division becomes multiplication. We will show through stopped-time models as we progress an even more elegant and comprehensive way of seeing and realizing Universe as being unbounded and limitless while being conceptually contained as a conceptual SINGULARITY.


The universal order speaks to us directly through our conscious inTELLigence. All we must do is allow it.  That is not easy.  We are steeped in a “common sense” view that the World and Universe are somehow separate and independent of the observer. Even though it is obvious that the conscious observer is the reason for and the recipient of gains from study there is no stipulation in contemporary study and science that consciousness is purposely disconnected from the nature of the physical world.  This division itself makes impossible any hope of a synthesis OR conclusion about the nature of Universe and Being.  In Pure Conceptuality we CLEARLY STIPULATE that we remove the complexity of the objective world while embracing  a view toward UNCOVERING the simple essence of self consciousness ( the metaphysical) in direct correlation to the physical world. We place self consciousness in the center of the investigation rather than ignoring it.  This study is an immersion in the method as described and developed so far.


In our study, we try not to overlook any clues as to what is going on.  We have not been shy in showing a self correlation of words in the English language with with IDEAS or THEMES claimed to be self expressing in the self generating geometric modeling. Example the sentence – UNI-VERSE in-FORMS inTELLigence of SOLVE-ent. OR, universally- the word symbol, Tet (and its transformations and message) tell the solution of understanding Universal Language.  These apparent congruences of English words with these deeper messages or meanings and “obvious” correlations with geometric forms begs criticism.  We plead GUILTY here!  We have no idea if these correlations are apparent in the many thousands of other languages. We would assume – probably not. Further, English is a new and minor written language. So we must point out and accept that these correlations here must be taken as anecdotal.  Anecdotes may line up to direct the mind to new considerations, which should not be ignored out of hand but anecdote IS anecdote.


Since a PARTICULAR MIND in imagining and making connections, must somehow see and be impressed by these correlations, is a signpost in itself. What can we make of it? We can see that these congruences seem to “work” for us here, but the particular occurrence in this language points to an apparent flaw in examining honestly and dispassionately. We have ruled out “coincidence” as a valid thought altogether.  Of course, the thesis does not rest on this “fanciful etymology in the English Language, as we do insist that the symbol -message correlation with the Arabic Numeral discourse is universally valid and that is not limited by language but IS universal language. The self-evidence is valid as “proof'” by correlation.


So, for the moment, we will take these English Language symmetries as colorful and begging investigation. One area of investigation is a generalization in mind dynamics involving the description of paranoia (delusions of grandeur) where the experiencer finds all things to be perfectly correlated in total relation to SELF. One who is experiencing the world in such a way “knows” the truth of his/her experience or there would not be a name for this phenomenon and mental state. Some of the paranoid rationale may have some consensus support while ALL of it must be an overall mistaken engagement with consensus reality. It is  up to the individual to tease out the “compromise” to be accepted as or to become sane and healthy. Perhaps we are confronted with that selective choice here.  In this correlation we have a window into the nature of consciousness even in the way it “erroneously” engages the underlying truth of structure mistaking it for content in the phenomenon of paranoia. So even the puzzling phenomenon of paranoia can be seen as a signpost rather than a puzzle.


Further, we might argue that we (all of us) are to some extent a product of the story of “our time” and its major consensus influences. We have argued in our thesis here that our “general knowledge base” influences what we are equipped to “think with” as compared to other time frames in the Consensus Story. In fact, so far, the English Language does have a strong position in the forefront of scientific and technical investigative and integrative thought – a kind of universality at least.


So to make it clear, we are not resting the authority or authenticity of the thesis here on the colorful allusions in the English Language.


However, these observed correlations, symmetries or congruences in language do beg some consideration.  In relation to the examples shown here, it would seem that the correlations might come from having an expectation or assumption (belief) and the mind seeks connections to surround and support the expectation. Further we argue that there is a primacy of rational structural relationship in and which is consciousness. Language finds that order and functions generally in the same manner in any tongue. Poetry itself might be an analogy.


But beyond words into themes, dynamics in the consideration of cause and effect and the search for “facts” might lead one into another area of investigation. Take, for example, an event like the World Trade Center attack.  There is a consensus story and there are many other possible stories which are quite plausible yet antagonistic and mutually exclusive as to the “truth” of what happened on 9/11. All of the stories are “conspiracy theories.” Pick any one and there is a conspiracy in it from some perspective.  Frankly, one can choose any one and be powerfully verified in authenticity of the reverse engineered “cause and effect” scenarios and relationships depending on the set and assumptions (belief) of the perceiver.  There are many different scenarios for any event which are quite powerful and convincing if one allows oneself to suspend disbelief in the engagement with the different scenarios. We can even have truth commissions who claim to investigate in the most dispassionate and technical manner who come up with varying conclusions or a conclusion which does not seem to satisfy.  It is shocking to realize, but  to find “truth” in this method is not possible. The best one might do to arrive at a consensus truth would be to propose all the theories and “vote” to find the most popular one! Then AUTHORITY could claim the truth of one.  Honestly, this is what we live with every day all of our lives and never really think about it.

The fact of what is happening here is an unraveling from the present into the past and an invention or reinvention of the cause and effect. All the “witnesses” and all the players can be credited, discredited and shifted around in an infinite number of possible arrays. Motivations and intentions can be imagined and plugged in to some assumption, expectation or belief. So if we really want to tear this down to bare bones all we end up with is  the truth of RELATIONSHIP not cause and effect.


Let's look in to the mathematical  language. In the language of FORM-ulas. mathematicians find beauty, not unlike poetry immersed in the language. Certainly there are themes, ideas, natures and profound cause and effect RELATIONSHIPS engaged, described and developed ad infinitum. It shocks the sensibilities, but there is only the truth of RELATIONSHIP in this endeavor and no definitive cause and effect universal resolution of anything.  Cause and effect is only obvious in the context of time being experienced in a way that belies what it actually is! It is fine, necessary and useful to engage this experience of LOCAL TIME in engineering and classic physics. It is crippling to drag this misinformed perspective into the present age without proper perspective.


We do not intend to disparage the beauty of the mathematical language or it's “discoveries” and expressions. Simply stated, the nature and assumptions of the language of mathematics engages in an exploration based  in the premise that time as sensed is, in fact, linear and definite. A layman can now know that this is not the case – thanks to Einstein. The seeming definite nature of time is LOCAL and not Universal. Science chooses to remove the metaphysical from consideration in its rationalization

and exploration. While doing this, mathematicians discover the “metaphysical” in unexplainable phenomenon like intuited formulas being “discovered” by mind out of context before the possibility of their “practical” application.


In Pure Conceptuality we contend that the common sense experiencing of the obvious nature of time is the elephant in the room.  The blind man feels an elephant's trunk and determines that he is feeling a snake. For us the joke in this is that we understand his deception as we see the truth of the elephant. That satisfies us. But the real truth is that the truth of ALL is contained in the trunk separate from the elephant.


Mathematics says that the internal dimension from point to point in a  unit edged octahedron is the square root of two and that dimension is irresolvable and is irrational and goes on irresolvable forever in time and never concludes. It is easy to see that this is not true and that the dimension is static and quite resolved. We accept that mathematics is “resolved” within its context but argue that this resolution is technically misinformed as the square root of two is a quite static and resolved conceptual entity. The simpler perception is a universal truth while the mathematical expression is a relative truth.  


If we must think in a story sense, the tools used to examine in the manner of Pure Conceptuality were not available before Einstein. We can now re-examine the totality of the system from a different and obvious perspective. We choose to leave in metaphysics and take out motion in time. Watch the conceptuality8 video on YouTube now.