Pure Conceptuality



Chapter 9: Everything is Soluble in Truth


Engaging Pure Conceptuality as elemental and foundational, we begin to realize that the idea of HARDWARE dissolves through conceptuality into SOFTWARE. This is Unification. This realizable unification frees us from having to think in terms of what comes “first.” There is no first or last or beginning or end in Universal terms. Only MIND can conjure up the comprehensive solutions and ultimately make real sense out of experience. Mind, used carefully, finds the inherent wholeness of the ALL. This “wholiness” is conceptually realizable, conceptually tangible and understandable. Following through the self-development of the conceptually tangible stopped time image, after-image geo-spacial realities, affords us a way of resolving contradictions and holding those contradictions in a unifying and rational  geo-spacial word image or universal language of form.


We can use the security and certainty of this conceptual matrix to investigate the high frequency “maya” or experiential immersion of life in time. For example: we hear on the radio that the radio station wants us to donate our used car, or truck or boat to the station. That might be an   advantage to us to save a repair bill while also providing a tow and even a possible tax deduction.  But why does a radio station want a car, truck or boat? The fact is that the material items have tied up energy that can be converted into radio.  The energy of the car is DISSOLVED into a conceptual medium we call money and radio is precipitated out of that medium.  So conceptually money is the Universal Solvent for these kinds of transactions and transformations. The conceptual utilization of money (facilitated by language) by self conscious intelligence provides a means to dissolve anything and precipitate it out as anything else! Even if money is the old fashioned kind, like a gold coin, it is still conceptually a Solvent. What makes that so is the perception of the exchange value of the gold, which really is simply the current accepted consensus STORY about gold.  It is even more clear today, that  money is conceptual as there is no attempt to connect it with any “standard” of value such as gold or silver. Billions of “dollars” of money come into existence or go out of existence daily as a result of markets going “up” or “down” or governments simply making notes of it coming into existence. Beyond that, Bit Coin virtual money is CLEARLY a perfect demonstration of the purely conceptual nature of money. So it is not the money that has any value itself, it is the story attached, the system to prove possession and practical utility which supports the idea of its value. The WORD money is a purely conceptual tool we accept as real and use as real every day and, in fact, is essential to our daily lives. The true functionality of money is its NATURE as a Universal Solvent. It SOLVES the problem of   transforming and transacting among differing energy systems. Car versus radio for instance. Money is a “thing” only by virtue of its nature in a story. No one would suggest that money would exist outside the context of the story of mankind. This should point us to the FACT that there are ELEMENTS in thinking and consciousness that point us to the way to study and observe a more inclusive truth about experience.


The originator of the concept of electronic cash is William Powell of Newark, Ohio. He patented a device at least 40 years ago which would securely  transfer electronic chits (as he called it) from one device to another directly by setting the transaction and then putting the “watches” into physical contact with each other. This was a direct transfer within the secure family of devices which time stamped each transaction. It is the synchronization of the devices in time which made the code unbreakable.  He had no funds to develop the project and anyone who could understand what he was talking about (Visa Card for example) wanted nothing to do with such a system with no central clearing house.  What he understood is that cash is in jeopardy and all financial transactions would eventually be recorded and tracked and some middle men in those transactions would have lots of power and privacy of transaction would be a thing of the past. Unfortunately, Will thought that  the money would have to be backed by “real assets” and he could find no major player partner as they either lacked vision or were actively opposed to the idea of electronic CASH in principle.


Of course, authorities LIKE to know what is going on in financial transactions and the paper we know of as cash is doomed and very few have a clue of the monumental change that is.  Third parties will get a piece of every transaction and every transaction will be recorded forever. What Will did not see at the time was how important the “freedom aspect” actual was.  It was so important it can now be seen as the basis of Bit Coin, for example.  It turns out you don't even need to back up the cash, you merely have to provide a secure system for transfer while creating another story of its worth. In Will's case, if you lost your watch you lost your money. His answer to that was, “if you lose your wallet, you lose your money.”  If you have cash in a mattress it could go when the house burns down.  With Bit Coin apparently users are willing to risk the loss for the SERVICE.  The average person might feel that the only use for free transaction would be a criminal intent for illegal transactions or to hide money to evade taxes. That makes some sense, but what if you want to live in a free society as was imagined by the Founders? They knew that Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely. So if you flip the role of criminal and government it becomes clearly critical to maintain a private system of transaction. We're just sayin! If we live in a system of conscious understanding which by its nature is caught in the past, how can we expect leaders and government to be anything but corrupted in some sense of the word? If we can't think, even honest good intent is rendered potentially harmful (unresolving) and unhealthy. Stress is a personal sensing of the unresolved.


We have words such as transaction., exchange and trade that describe, define and label the interactions and transformations just referenced. But these words do not suggest the wholeness of what is going on here.  Even in bartering the mind must assess, dissolve and resolve the relative “values” of things ex-CHANGED. This dissolving and resolving is conceptually MONEY. So money is not a thing that can be counted, added, subtracted. It is purely utilitarian conceptually and to think of it as chits is to miss the point of what  it is. It is the CONCEPTUAL SOLVENT used to transfer or transform tied up energies. So all self conscious beings have MONEY by their very nature. The old adage “time is money” is not as complete a thought.  Money is the conceptual solvent built in to the system-order of consciousness itself. We are all walking around with all the money we will ever be able to use or ever need. We have an “unlimited supply.” Our strengths, talents, skills, knowledge, training and expertise manifest or precipitate out of that manageable supply as some product to be exchanged and transferred from self to other. Some people are better than others at manifesting and setting up or recognizing conditions to precipitate stuff out of their supply. The potential is Universal. When money itself is mistaken as the “precipitate,” the whole system becomes “corrupted” by privilege and special interest. The existence in the Order of the conceptual SOLVENCY is the essence that results in GOVERNMENT. In principle government need not be corrupt. It is as simple as understanding the hearts and minds of the Founders and the Constitution but it is not easy. The personal imperfections of people do not necessarily invalidate the universality of their principles and ideals.


When we stand back and consider the world as a wholeness, we are using language in self consciousness to imagine and consider. There are over four thousand languages in use in the world. All of these languages can be translated one into the other due to the fact that they have structures, utility and themes in common. These structures, utilities and themes are contained within the symbol systems of language but are also universal in consciousness in the ways we are studying here in Pure Conceptuality.  Against the background of all this diversity of social language, the fact that we all use one system of time and one system of number should pose a contemplation by contrast.  There are two systems of measure of length, weight and temperature and three systems of speed.  These systems are based on ten and twelve. Even though it seems irrational, it has not been possible to move a large technically advanced and highly educated populace of the world off of the system of twelve when the system of ten seems so much more functional and rational. There is something inherently comfortable and essential in the use of twelve and there is no consideration or suggestion to change the universal time system to a system of ten. So this global view and consideration of the above should point us back to the themes and essences we are uncovering as PRIMARY in consciousness and in the geo-spacial “material” world.  These universalities and insistences are indicators, hints or clues as to where we must look for resolution. An openness of mind with careful investigation and consideration is its own teacher where simplification, integration and whole understanding are the goal. Further, it is interesting to consider the Music, including Beat, as Universal Language.  A little meditation on this Signpost should help the reader open to the awareness that there is another inherent and natural language of meter, harmony and frequency which resolves the integration of everything rationally, inclusively and with wholeness.



It is the contention here that the stopped time, low frequency geo-spacial image integrity communicates the inherent integrity of all systems at any considerable frequency and in that sense is the Conceptual Universal Solvent (Truth- Word) and inherent essence of all experience both the seeming material and the seeming intellectual. (re-consider here our discussion of money or cash as Solvent.) We do not become intelligent, intelligence becomes us. “Matter” exists as a sensory perception of self consciousness.  This seems outrageous, but all other INTEGRATIVE  possibilities have been shown to be self-excluded. We have shown that there is no present moment in which matter, as we think of it, can exist. In this measured and defined world we can only experience what is slightly past. Self-consciousness imagines the future. The only way we can experience the PRESENT is to imagine it in conceptual stopped time. The REVELATION inherent in IMAGE-ining the Conceptual Present is the Universal Solvent for all experience and rational understanding of “being and things.” The sense of existence in a material reality is all afterimage in stopped time.  The “rule ” that “governs” the afterimage IS the primordial afterimage which self-reveals simply through the honest observation of the inherent order which presents itself upon the opening of true vision, which is one's own capacity for understanding. The Order is the a priori and en potentia in and out of time. It is eternal, ever EXISTANT and ultimately realizable. The Order and the Wholeness is the Nature of Universe.


Self conscious being is of this wholeness and senses, experiences or intuits this “wholiness” and comes up with a story which contains an idea expressed in a WORD description and some kind of definition,   and “explanation” which sounds good, becomes legend and is taken as an authoritative story which is learned and taken as a Truth. Not unlike “money” as elucidated above, the Nature of consciousness sets up a condition for this intuited wholeness to be “hijacked”  by authority. The story is “good” from some perspective, but breaks down or is suspect from some other perspective. At this time a pseudo-rational perspective and means of investigation has developed which claims to invite, accept and withstand criticism while increasing in integrity of “truth” and knowing. Of course, we are referring to Science or more accurately “popular science.” Before the scientific era,(in the story) humans in daily life generally accepted as Obvious, some kind of concept of God.  That satisfied the inherent and intuitive sense of an underlying wholeness and order. This universal characteristic of self conscious being is inherent and understandable in terms of the ONLY POSSSIBLE way “reality” can be sensible. This common generally undefined sensibility was easily hijacked, before science and resulted in a myriad of religious “myths and legends”(stories) which communicate differently to any particular individual. It is not necessary to describe the RESULT to date of all that. So now enter scientific rationality and a new perspective which MUST dismiss “god” as irrelevant for the purposes of investigation.  The resulting productivity and seeming clarity of this system of investigation sweeps the “inherently satisfying” sense of God out of the relevant and respectable arena of consideration. Scientific thinking with its current limitations CANNOT integrate with the sense of WHOLENESS inherent in self consciousness. Simply put, this is because science sees consciousness as a RESULT of time rather than TIME being a result of self consciousness.  It is DIFFICULT  to see this, but,quite honestly, it is OBVIOUS once an individual mind “gets” it.  Nothing is lost at all in this common sense realization.


We know positively that Consciousness and Self-Consciousness exist in The Universe. So obviously, consciousness is a part of and has some place in consideration of what is. The question becomes what part and what place? Besides the fact that Universe cannot be contemplated at all without consciousness, what can we know or how can we think about consciousness? Is consciousness an important aspect of Universe or some minor accident, possibly unique, on a small, insignificant planet in a vast universe? Does the significance simply depend on point of view? Is consciousness confined to the tiny “blue dot” as viewed from the Voyager Spacecraft as it leaves our Solar System or does consciousness extend to the limits of the Solar System as we look to the earth? It seems that the “lifeless” voyager somehow gives US a perspective which consciousness can embrace. If a material spacecraft tool can expand consciousness, what are the limits of consciousness? The spacecraft becomes an element of consciousness. So then how is a rock slung from a sling any different? It, too, expands our consciousness. Is it possible that everything is an interaction with consciousness and we   have a special place in that interaction? We are not necessarily the only experiencers of consciousness. As a matter of fact it would seem quite unlikely thinking in a scientific sense that in “ the vastness of

Universe” we would be the only location for consciousness. Assuming we are not the only “place” in Universe with consciousness, consciousness would have to be the rule and not the exception and thus Universal and Primary. If consciousness can be perceived as the Rule, the “location” of consciousness in some sense of time and space becomes irrelevant. Certainly there seems to be some kind of intelligence operating in the formation of a crystal or the DNA and RNA “instructing” the construction of biologicals. What then is the instructor? Certainly animals “display” to us, consciousness, so where is the “beginning” and where is the “place” of the idea of consciousness? Is any thing, anywhere and anywhen that seems to react exhibiting or involved in consciousness of some kind? Is it time,itself, which “allows” for any animation and transformation.  


Honestly, Science has no answers to any of these questions. When in fact these questions did not even exist before science. Let’s think about this in terms of our conceptual models. Conceptually, we reduced Universe to the most basic characteristic, the quality of movement. Then we simplified even more and took the case of the simplest and most primary case for motion, a conceptual straight line trip from A to B. In doing this we soon found ourselves confronted with the ideas of speed, time and distance.  We RESOLVED many things but we did not confront consciousness in the investigation. Where is consciousness in its simplest conception?


Let's review. Location A  radiates in all directions as light. Our problem of getting from A to B in a straight path is resolved at the periphery of the expanding sphere by stopping the expansion and taking any location in that periphery as B.  Then the trajectory between A and B is the solution and straight path we were seeking. Once we have B it is easier to imagine B as radiating as at least B “came from somewhere.” How did location A  locate? Well if we can imagine B radiating it has one path directly back to A which establishes the position of A. We could call this Circular Logic but let's think about it some more. If we accept that A happened before B, and B radiates one path back to A we have established a two way path one iteration of time to B and one iteration of time from B to A. Since speed is constant c,  A and B are co-existent in concept. There is another way of looking at it.  We could say that all potential of all location “lights up” and radiates at the same moment. Then any two locations A and B would have the two way pathway  between them representing the same two iterations of time. The time from A to B and the time from B to A. So no matter how you look at it, the theme precipitates that there is an a priori relationship between A and B. A generates B and B generates A simultaneously so RELATIONSHIP is a Primary Theme in Universe. We showed earlier that as soon as A is radiating it becomes B and B cannot “look back” at  A as B is traveling at light speed. As soon as we realize that, B is not not moving at all. It is as static at light speed as it is when conceptually stopped. The only thing that gives either A or B their particular locations or existence is their  RELATIONSHIP.  This is how relationship alters our perception of time. This relationship requires a kind of “awareness” of each other represented by the two way time interval between them. This “time path” could also be gravity or conceptual attraction. This implies the necessity for the idea of afterimage and relationship. Can we have afterimage without consciousness? Without afterimage we could not experience anything as whole and “stable.” So consciousness seems to be simply a combination of afterimage and relationship in the presence of time. So consciousness is the ethereal bridge which facilitates relationship and so, for all practical purposes, might be called RELATIONSHIP.  Relationship implies connection, and in this simple case the connection is a time interval and a kind of “tethering” which implies what might be called a gravitational restraint. Remember, all of this is conceptual and abstract while still offering a framework in which to get a sense of how things are at the most stripped down level. Consideration of these essential relationships reveal themes in a very simplified and direct way.  We are not suggesting that these ideas are an explanation of “how the Universe started.”  Frankly, we contend that questions perceived and pursued in time is simplistic, erroneous and irrelevant in relation to what is already KNOWN.  Remember that we are imagining in purely conceptual space restrained only by the careful ordering and examination of our conceptual self generating models.  We suggest that this is the self evident way of integrating all experience into one rational field. Remember, we are not moving from the simple to the complex we are simply unraveling to get to the essence.


We contend that this simple way of analysis and referencing helps avoid pitfalls in thinking and provides an alternate way of looking at conundrums which actually resolves the thought.  Rationally and reasonably measuring and observing that the Universe is expanding and that the rate of expansion is increasing is only “TRUE” if we don't consider the MORE BASIC TRUTH of the “elasticity” of time itself. It is only consciousness that can understand, misunderstand and experience any story. TIME IS A CONSTRUCT IN SELF CONSCIOUS MIND AND HAS NO EXISTENCE OUTSIDE OF THAT CONSTRUCT – PERIOD. That does not mean that we can't  study and examine time seriously and realistically! We are doing that here.


Scientists of the highest level postulating a BIG BANG don't seem to have any trouble with the “on-off” nature of Universe nor the relative nature of time in principle as Einstein “proved” in scientific language.. They postulate a  moment of ON coming out of OFF. This conception REQUIRES the OFF and the OFF is never integrated in any way other than the NOTHINGNESS BACKGROUND for the ON. The implication is turning off time is turning off Universe. Those who refuse to imagine that, resort to ideas like parallel Universes or Multiverses bumping in to one another initiating a big bang like event that is misinterpreted as a beginning. So where does this leave the beginning? The subsequent physical unfolding of the Universe in linear time is a mathematical exploration. To deal with time as linear in relationship to an understanding of Universe might be a fun challenge, but such an endeavor has NO POSSIBILITY of  finding a comprehensive resolution. How can we KNOW this? If you don't know it yet, reread everything so far presented in Pure Conceptuality and CONSIDER it carefully.


All of that being said, we now move on in the further investigation of the geo-spacial integrity and what what it TELLS us. Remember, inTELLigence is the Order inFORMing us through the WORD of Universal Language. We are going to dis-COVER an amazing landscape, always present, and always available to be seen.  So as promised, we go back to our conceptual modeling to continue to learn the language of the Universe.  

Much of what is discovered in our exploration is a primordial self manifesting mathematics which might seem fanciful to “real mathematicians.”  We can't apologize for what we don't know, but we can hope that any honest discipline of the modern world is willing to at least be open to constructive criticism. We don't feel it appropriate to re-experience the Inquisition by the new High Priests. Can't we all just get along and allow for mutual, inclusive, holistic, intelligent and accurate investigation to arrive at a conclusive and simple integration of the Whole? Even, once seen, the Truth can only operate individually as a Theory, but it is a theory which stands in its own light and allows the Wholeness of Reality and Experience to be rationally understood by reducing complexity rather than increasing it. This is the means for opening rational conversation between what seem to be mutually exclusive world views.


As promised earlier we are going to advance from our primordial FOURNESS into a consideration of FIVE. In being consistent with our process, we simply imagine a fifth location outside any face of the unit edge Tet  and realize the three vectors or paths to this new location. If we use our built in “3D Compass” we find the only location equidistant from the three intersections of the face of the Tet. Of course this produces, conceptually, a second complete identical Tet, face bonded to the original Tet. We can call this whole structure the DUO TET but it is also a Hexahedron as it has six faces. Frankly, this is the Prime Hexahedron as the cube by itself is not a structure as we have explained. But for conformity's sake we will reference this structure as the DuoTet. Honestly, we neglected to point out this essential Primordial self organizing structure purposely in our consideration of  the self organizing geo-spacial integrities. Simply put, it is the afterimage of the “insideouting” of the Tet we referenced several times. Beyond that there are four possibilities for the insideouting. Any of the four “points” of the Tet can be pushed through the opposite face.  If you can imagine that structure, (see conceptuality9a video) it is a Tet with four Tets face bonded to it and it is a four pointed star which we will call the TetraStar. There is an essential duality to all of our conception from the A to B – B to A   duality, the right and left of the Triangle and the insideouting of the Tet which is conceptually the right and left of the Tet just as the insideouting of the Glove.


By simply adding one location to our ongoing thought experiment, we have produced double volume, while adding only three vectors. We can easily see that three vectors of the bonded face of this structure are serving dual duty to substantiate two Tets.  This is another way of seeing the Duality Potential of the conceptual triangle. In this DuoTet structure we have nine relationships among five location intersections. BUT – being consistent with our method, we must notice we have two “open” locations which introduces a “new” dimension. That is the dimension (potential time interval) between these unresolved  locations. They “need” a vector.  By the Pythagorean Theorem we can show that Dimension is a factor of the Second Power Root (square root) of 6. In fact, if the frequency of the DuoTet is one, the Dimension expressed is the square root of six divided by three. This may seem complicated but essentially we are still in a very low number set as the square root of 3 times the square root of 2 is the square root of 6.  These Dimensions are factored in already in our study.  This would have been difficult to see if we had introduced the DuoTet earlier..Further, we notice here that the second power root (square root) of eight divided by the second power root of three is is exactly the same Dimension. What we see and have been taught as numbers are converted to symbols of roots to distinguish Dimension from Frequency.


We may as well emphasize here that the Dimensions we are watching self organize are discrete and Universal.  They are Whole Dimensions in that there is a conceptual exactness of their “amplitude” as evidenced by their self-resolution in the geometry.  They are not numbers in the way we are taught to think. They have NAMES and a FUNCTIONAL CHARACTER  as evidenced by their geometric existence. Number is FREQUENCY and is simply an expression of Relativity. Number and Dimension are DISTINCT.  If we think in a linear sense of time, these realizations rest on the development of mathematics and science “to date.” We are either engaged in the search for truth or we are not.  


So, if we are mindful of what we have just experienced we will notice a doubling of volume with an addition of one location. We have seen the dual nature of the Tet gaining a dissimilar Dimension and polarity, while seeing the synchronous duality of of the vectors in the equator of the DuoTet.  We have five-ness, nine-ness and, with our new Dimension, ten-nes. We are in rational order of AB to Triangle (right and left) to Tet, to DuoTet to Octahedron- One Dimension, to three Dimensions.  In the case of AB, the Dimension is square root of one; in the case of the triangle the Dimensions are square root of one and square root of three and the square root of four (which is the square root of two times the square root of 2); in the case of the Tet the Dimensions are the square root of one, the square root of two and the square root of three (as still existent in the triangle faces);in the case of the DuoTet, we have the square root of one, the square root of two and the square root of three; Octahedron, we have the square root of one, the square root of two and the square root of three (in the apogee of the triangular face.) Additionally in this progression we have all of the ideas, realizations, themes and transformations so far elucidated and held in the mind while only dealing with three Dimensions.  One of these realizations previously demonstrated is the transformation of the Octahedron back into the three face bonded tetrahedra, which are conceptually apparent in the DuoTet and TetraStar. So, in this simple rational progression, we have the conceptual dynamics presented for the firm and understandable relationship between the tetrahelix and the crystalline (oct-tet) field or the integration of the “organic” and “inorganic.”


Now we must review again at a most basic level.  We are engaging here in the purely conceptual development of at least the relative truth in terms of the careful way we see how the “self development” of of prime geometries communicate in Word  Language in nouns, verbs, adjectives and themes Universally and Generally. The only “place” where there is an absolute exactness of form, resolution and solution is in the engagement with Pure Conceptuality.  A true and exact and “real” triangle or Tet can only exist in pure conceptuality which is in the Universe. We cannot think outside of Universe, so we are free to examine honestly, holistically being careful to be entirely inclusive ultimately.  If it cannot be seen and understood, for example, that the second power root of two (square root of two) is an exact and resolved Dimension, the reader must suspend disbelief and just see the fact conceptually. The beautiful mathematical language we are taught traditionally and engage honestly, productively and creatively does not examine itself in Prime and General terms to understand its Nature and the Nature of Language in General. The perspective we engage here is the method for that examination and generalization. Until we understand that there is a Universal Language, self evident and self revealing in the very nature of Consciousness and “Matter” we are trapped in an impossible conundrum if our goal is to understand the nature of things. We must understand how Language IS matter, theme and story. The beauty is that it is not too complicated, is realizable, is resolvable, and is Universal.  


Are you beginning to see the elegance of the simplicity?


There are four videos on youtube for this chapter- conceptuality9a, conceptuality9b, conceptuality9c, and conceptuality9d. In video 9c the we show the transformation from the icosahedron through the vector equillibrium (cube octahedron) to the octahedron and finally to the Tet. The presenter said “icosahedron”  but of course that is mis-spoken and we hope YOU saw the Tet! It is interesting to consider that the 24 vectors of that quadrupled Tet plus the six vectors we removed originally amount to another Tet. That's FIVE Tet vectors in the Icosahedron. That number five again.