The Final Truth

A Theory of Practice

The Thirteen Intentions of Creation

Theories play an important role in our lives by helping us make sense of the world. When we develop a theory, we are not primarily concerned with practical results as we are with the possibility of finding answers that can increase our knowledge of the universe. In fact, if scientific theories were elaborated only with immediate and practical results in mind, then a lot of them would not even exist today. Any knowledge acquired is priceless, but to apply knowledge in practice is just a matter of paying the right price.

Problems have to be completely understood before we can come up with efficient solutions. It is therefore normal for theoretical research to be carried out for a long time until concrete results can appear. Still, no theory is beyond practical application and should only be contemplated as a work of art. The problem is that to make a theory yield practical results requires as much work as elaborating the theory itself. A classical example regarding this dilemma lies in the stereotype of the mad university professor that daydreams about fantastic theories and yet fails to produce concrete results from his research. Well, suppose that the university's upper management decides to cut off research funds for unyielding projects, but if only they had waited a few more days, the professor could have accomplished a major breakthrough. As you can see by this example, eagerness for results and results only can work against the possibility of a great discovery.

There is a strong relationship between the possible applications of a theory and how valuable and effective that theory is. If a theory can be proven to be consistent with observations after rigorous testing and experimentation, it becomes a valuable tool for predicting master phenomena. The relevance and specificity of those predictions will determine how potentially useful the theory is. Such view / approach is known as instrumentalism. In this highly pragmatic view, theories are considered mere instruments that we can use to gain control over the processes of reality; nevermind if they also satisfy philosophical aspirations of achieving the highest truth. For the pragmatist, truth already has a name: pragma, which means "to do, act and perform."

Any scientist with a philosophical mind knows that although each new theory is better and may last longer than the last, the only thing that never fails inside him is the primal instinct to find the truth. The search for the absolute truth has always been the motivation behind philosophical inquiry. Some of the greatest ancient philosophers had this ambition in abundance, and that is mainly why they are set apart from less-known thinkers. Eventually, however, the active search for truth had to give place to the advent of the pragmatic view. The pragmatist is only concerned with the difference that a theory will make in his world; that is, it makes no sense for him to look for a truth that is independent of his reality. To put it simply, the pragmatist considers that that which is valid and true is that which is real (factual) or has the possibility of becoming real through action in the physical world. (Note: the physical world is also the practical world.)

What happened next is that the pragmatic conception together with religious dogmatism played a strong role in discouraging people from seeking the truth by themselves. It turned out that pragmatism was not only an ideological movement defended by a few philosophers, but an entirely new way of thinking that grew to affect social philosophy as well. Also, pragmatism has helped in many ways to establish grounds for materialism. The result is that the truth has become something that people like to take for granted, since it is handed down to them by institutions. People are no longer supposed to look beyond the "facts" of life for answers, because the truth for them is that which is laid upon their eyes: physical reality -- they are entitled to take action upon it or shut up.

What pragmatists seem to ignore is that there is a reflexive relationship as well as a two-way communication between theory and practice. Theoretical knowledge can contribute to the efficiency of practical action, whereas practical action can bring to our awareness facts that complement and refine our knowledge. While practice already includes the act of elaborating a theory, a theory can change our outlook on reality and thus even determine what we consider practical. Therefore, theories should not be eternally submissive to practice, because sometimes the inverse must also happen.

Unfortunately, the supposition that theory and practice are essential to each other seems to be more true in theory than in practice, because that is not what has seeped into the public consciousness: the common view is that theory and practice are separate entities that do not go along with each other. While theoretical behavior relies on careful planning and attention to principles and details, practical behavior has been associated with action without thinking, action which focus solely on "getting things done" at all costs. In other words, people tend to reject thinking as too impractical and time-consuming even when a lack of it may very well prove disastrous.¹

________________________
¹ Take Note of Something Different, "Session 24," http://www.take-note.com/session24.htm (accessed April 23, 2008; site now discontinued).

Practice (praxis) usually refers to a situation in which taking action is the only real challenge and the only real purpose. An action can be said to be practical to the extent that it dispenses with the need for lengthy theoretical considerations, because the only motivation for it is the very necessity for deliberate and spontaneous action, such as when there is a need for immediate results.

But there is a great deal of relativity and confusion when it comes to the notion of practice, because any kind of behavior can be aimed at obtaining practical results. Therefore, we must make an important distinction: a practical approach to life does not mean that any kind of activity is valid. Instead, we need a set of principles that will help us decide which activities are best for us. A first step in this direction is to understand that there is no such thing as a complete state of inactivity in the universe. Physics, for example, predicts that all atoms are in a state of constant energetic motion / fluctuation even when temperature drops infinitely toward reaching absolute zero.¹ Therefore, we must consider that some degree of activity is always present even when there is appearance of rest or inaction.

Without activity there is no circulation of energy, and so there is not a circuit, a closed system in which energy is contained. Without a containment system there can be no energy present at all, because energy is not an entity in and of itself -- there is no such thing as formless energy. We know that energy (work) is required to bring things into reality, but there is much more to it: we will learn in this book how energy is an universal variable that brings everything into reality. Consequently, without energy it would be no longer possible for a physical reality to exist, which means that existence would become insubstantial and probably very boring.

It is important that we establish a common denominator for reality as this term is quite relative. In other words, we need to be talking about a reality that everyone can agree and identify with. We may start from the principle that reality is better defined as the baseline for those sensations that feel more intense than others and thus hook our perception better. Well, it is obvious that the only type of reality that feels sufficiently intense for most people is the physical reality, which everyone shares to a certain degree. Therefore, physical reality is the perfect candidate to be the common denominator for the term reality.

Now, because there is no true state of inactivity that can characterize a complete lack of action, people prefer to accept the values of culture and society when it comes to deciding what activities and courses of action are valid (useful) or not. Therefore, behind the "do something" provocation that people commonly throw at each other, there is always a hint of "do as I do" or "do what is considered valid by our society." The only possible common-sense exception to this rule is that it really does not make sense to possess a valuable instrument such as the human body and never actually use it. Anyway, whether it is in accordance to cultural values or ingrained common sense, practical action is just action seen as useful.

Despite it being neglected by most people, there is an important aspect of life that requires us to figure things out before we get ourselves involved with them. Practice must be based on theory as much as theory must be realized in practice. But because of the external pressure and judgement imposed by society on the individual, people often walk into situations just for the sake of displaying action. This can be very dangerous, of course, because no course of action is free of risks. To jump into a situation without a proper understanding and assessment of risks is tantamount to enter a war zone unarmed: remarkable, but stupid. Doing just for the sake of doing and not understanding why it is necessary to perform an action is what characterizes an ingenuous practical approach.

Practice may have degenerated into those activities composing one's social duty or role, but it is still a central aspect of life. In fact, practice focus on what is essential to human life: survival. By mastering practice, the art of survival, we can master reality. That is why it is necessary that we develop a theory of practice, which is a theory on which we can base our life practice. Any theory that is not of practice is still not realized in what we do and how we live, and so it is still removed from our reality and will ultimately fail to provide us with real answers.

A theory of practice is in many ways a theory of Reality, the ultimate reality, and not a theory based on what we believe or expect reality to be. A theory of practice is really the unification of theory and practice in a wider frame of reference that provides us with an understanding of the nature of reality. In addition, a theory of Reality is no ordinary theory if we expect it to always work: Reality is ruthless and never fails to work regardless whether people like It or not, and so should a theory about It. For this reason, a theory of practice must for a change provide us with some final answers if it has any business explaining Reality to us.

________________________
¹ According to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, atomic motion (energy) is still expected to exist even when temperature approaches the hypothetical absolute zero infinitely.

Like the mortals who develop them, theories cannot enjoy an infinite life. Many times theories are inaccurate and incomplete. Scientists can only hope to learn as much from a theory for as long as possible, because it is just a matter of time until circumstances change and a theory's ability to predict and support new discoveries starts to fail. In other words, all theories lose their value (applicability) sooner or later. But let us be a little more reasonable here: it is not only a matter of failure vs. success. Some theories can be more persistent than others, and not all of them need to be rewritten from scratch every time that something goes wrong. The bottom line is that we can never be sure about the continued success of a theory without actually testing it for an eternity.

Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. (Stephen Hawking)

If we can never prove a theory to be the ultimate one, then looking for one that escapes this rule must be an act of faith. Of course, faith in the context of scientific inquiry is irrelevant, but the degree of confidence that people have in a theory plays an important role in determining its success. As the confidence in a theory grows, the theory grows as well, because more people are willing to support it. The problem with confidence, or any other positive attitude for that matter, is that nothing can replace the scientific prospect of certainty of knowledge. The mistake begins when science is no longer seen as a tool for the quest of knowledge and truth, but instead the tool itself is believed and promoted to be the final truth. This approach is known as scientificism and could not be more non-scientific considering that we cannot be sure that the scientific method is ideal if we do not subject the method itself to a scientific study. But for that, a more profound (i.e., meta-scientific) approach is needed, but also one that is resolute in providing us with certainty in an objective, hence scientific way.

The fact that theories eventually fail is considered one of the greatest strengths of science, because there is no other way for scientists to achieve reliable conclusions without it. In other words, science as an institution sees its own limitations as the factor that promotes its constant development. However, scientific development is not cumulative.¹ Instead, we see a succession of revolutions (i.e., paradigm shifts) where newer scientific models replace older models almost completely. Every time that a new paradigm arises, the scientific establishment has no other choice than to disregard a good part of its work and restructure its disciplines. Real and continuous progress can only be found in the natural evolution of the collective consciousness of a civilization, which is the actual process that generates new paradigms that force science to readapt itself.

But let us assume that there is continuous progress behind science after all. With this in mind, we can ask ourselves the following: how long until there is enough improvement / progress? Do scientists even know exactly where they are going? That is, we cannot afford having no clear destiny in sight while certain problems continue to plague our civilization. It is not prudent to stay in a slow path of evolution when there is a real possibility of getting the process over with at once. Instead of asking the same questions over and over again, we should start asking ourselves about the reason why we keep making questions.

We can, however, resolve this uncertain fate on a personal level by finally achieving closure in our minds that does not rely on faith that the scientific establishment is in a path of steady progress. The individual must take back his power and have the confidence that he can discover the Truth for himself. For that we need a theory that does not have limitations, a theory that is not susceptible to failure. It is indeed counterintuitive to even conceive such theory as being scientific (testable), and it is probably not even a good idea to call it a theory. Therefore, consider that we are not talking about any theory; we are talking about a final theory. The list below shows the requirements of a final theory should it ever arise.

• Must be applicable to any scenario / situation.
• Must be intuitive and self-evident. Able to hold our confidence indefinitely.
• Must predict and explain every possibility, every aspect of Reality.

Theories and models are not to be confused with reality; instead, they are built on top of reality. For this reason, all theories born from the physical sciences are too superficial to give us deeper understanding of reality. That is, we either know how things work on the most fundamental level or we hold tight to an elaborate hunch that we consider sufficiently accurate. Well, in the same manner that scientific theories tend to fail, a gap in our understanding eventually becomes our downfall. That is why a theory to be final must provide us with such an accurate understanding that almost no difference (gap) between theory / model and practice / reality remains. Any gap in the application of a final theory must be too insignificant to ever force us to abandon the theory completely.

Realistically speaking, it is practically impossible for a theory to predict and explain everything directly, but a final theory could at least offer us a starting point for such herculean task; it could offer us the essentials so that discovering the rest becomes only a matter of derivation. In other words, a final theory is not the end of all knowledge and desire to learn, but instead it is the final excitement needed for the acquisition of all remaining knowledge. There is no reason to live in confusion and doubt. Why not learn the basics first and then have fun experimenting with our fundamental knowledge for the rest of eternity? It is certainly possible to enjoy a continued learning process just as much as the fact that we have already learned the essential.

Many scientists discuss the possibility of a Theory of Everything (T.O.E.) in physics for all the physical sciences. Such theory, however, could never be "of everything" if it does not explain those phenomenons that touch the individual personally and directly, mainly the phenomenon of consciousness, which invariably involves a whole set of philosophical considerations. One thing is to study reality, that which is observable; another is to study the nature of reality. Therefore, the individual needs more than just a theory of everything in the physical sense, a theory that attempts to describe what already exists and what already works. Instead, the individual needs to understand why things exist at all and why the universe works as it does; he needs an understanding of everything, including an understanding of himself. This is the main reason why a final theory is not really a theory, but more of a learning device that imparts fundamental knowledge.

Therefore, whether a final theory explains everything or not is not even the most important requirement. Above all, a final theory should put an end to the most bugging philosophical, scientific and theological questions so that there would be little or nothing left in our minds besides a raw desire for action based on our understanding of the workings of Reality. In other words, with a final theory there would be no more doubts preventing us from assuming a fully powered practical approach to solve our problems. Instead of continuing to learn by mistakes, we are able to skip the possibility of error completely and go directly after that which is guaranteed to work. Instead of contemplating or ignoring the Truth, we can finally put It into practice.

The single most important goal that anyone can have is to achieve a permanent state of peace of mind. And crucial for the maintenance of peace of mind is the degree of certainty that one has about the universe. Taking this into consideration, we can conclude that a final theory is simply a theory that can provide us with the highest degree of certainty. In this manner, a final theory serves as the ultimate scientific theory, the ultimate religion and also the ultimate philosophy -- it is only a matter of how much it can be developed toward each one of these three directions.

Anyway, it is true that theoretical knowledge will never replace direct experience of the Truth, and so even a final theory is still an interpretation, not an awareness. That is because it is in the actual experience that certainty of knowledge lies. A person needs to internalize the experience of what is true and not just contemplate the Truth from an external perspective. Therefore, the task of attaining the ultimate truth becomes eternal in practice, but we can still strive toward reaching a virtual and theoretical end to our knowledge. We will see in the next section how something like this is possible when we work diligently toward simplifying our knowledge.

It is important that we stay focused on finding common knowledge between sciences as opposed to perpetuating paradigms that seek to further compartmentalize knowledge. The key for greater knowledge of the universe lies in the practice of knowledge synthesis. Such practice is the mark of a dynamic learning process, which is much better than clinging to a static and opinionated view of the universe. If one is not undoing one's assumptions about the universe every day, then one is not learning anything. In fact, the only assumption that seems to hold true is that any assumption is dangerous and will backfire sooner or later.

Scientists know that laws that apply only to a limited range of phenomena are but minor expressions of fundamental laws that apply to the whole universe. Furthermore, when researchers are sorting information about a certain field of knowledge, they invariably notice a small number of root concepts, perhaps only one, from which all other concepts stem from. In Biology, for example, there are hierarchical models describing the various levels by which life is structured, such as those involving life forms and their evolution from common ancestors. In short, what these examples have in common is that they reveal a hierarchy of concepts intrinsic to how the universe is organized.

In face of the universal principle of hierarchy, what any field of knowledge tries to do is integrate information around a point of reference. In this context, a point of reference is a central piece of knowledge that justifies the existence of all secondary (peripheral) pieces around it. That is, if you achieve this point of reference in your knowledge, achieving the rest becomes a matter of derivation. Only a very small subset of all knowledge is actually useful, while the rest only becomes useful when supported directly or indirectly by this subset. Many times we fail to understand certain aspects of the world because we lack a point of reference acting as the support for our knowledge.

Let us make an analogy: Consider a tiny circle surrounded by several scattered fragments of bigger circles. The tiny circle represents our point of reference. Also, consider that there are many paths leading to the tiny circle, but none of them is free of the clutter caused by the fragments.

The fragments represent fragmented information and distorted knowledge, while the tiny circle represents complete information and perfect knowledge, although the latter is in a relatively small quantity. We can try to put all fragments back together to form perfect circles again, but such task is clearly out of hand: it is the same as trying to use a box of scrap metal parts to build a spaceship. Alternatively, we can just force our way through the fragments and reach directly for the tiny circle. Once in the center, we can project and expand the tiny circle outwards so that it will serve as a mold or support for the reconstruction of the bigger circles.

Does this analogy mean that we should ignore all first-hand information and instead go directly after the most occult and fundamental knowledge? Not necessarily, but if we do not give priority to address the core of the problem first, then most information will remain peripheral and meaningless. Information needs context in order to make sense, and a context by definition carries a hierarchy of concepts; therefore, if we can grasp the root of the hierarchy, then all information inserted in the context will fall into perspective. Therefore, the quantity of information that we hold is not the most important variable, because it may amount to a whole lot of superficial knowledge that does not lead to any useful conclusion (i.e., philosophical truths) about life, the universe and reality. Quality of knowledge is more important than quantity. To acquire knowledge based only on quantity is to have many pieces that do not fit together. Someone may not have all the pieces, but at least they already have the most important (valuable) ones.

We cannot be certain about the quality of what we know if there is not an absolute concept at the center of our knowledge. Therefore, we need a point of reference; we need one or more concepts that are absolute and thus will act as the final standard for our reasoning. We cannot achieve unified knowledge without absolutes. Absolutes simply are: there is no real reason for their existence. We do not question the authority of an absolute; we just accept it. Questioning an absolute signals denial (non-acceptance) of our part, although we are not forbidden from trying to understand how exactly an absolute is what it is: absolute. The theme of absolute concepts is going to be very important in this book. We will eventually define some of them, but they are mostly open to the reader's personal interpretation.

We discussed how a final theory may be something possible for us to achieve. In this section we will merely exercise one way of achieving it. There are many ways to do it, perhaps one for every individual. However, only one theory may rise in the end, because a final theory must have no contestants if it deserves to be called final. For this reason, in no way should we settle down to the complacent belief that "all truth is relative" and give up our attempt at designing a final theory. In fact, it is essential that a final theory be developed with the dream (utopia) in mind that everyone can understand and agree with the same set of core principles inserted in an unified model of Creation. The Truth should be made accessible and comprehensive to everyone.

The first step consists of us addressing the logical part of the problem. The mother of all problems is the existential problem: Why do we exist? Why is there something instead of nothing? Well, the most rational conclusion that we can reach is that we cannot disprove the existence of something beyond our perception. Even if our own existence does not mean anything to us, there must exist something greater, a higher power, and yet we are not aware of it. In the case of nihilism, for example, even those who glorify nonexistence are still giving credit to something that lies beyond their perception, which is one of existence by the way. Nihilism is arguing then, paradoxically, that nonexistence is the higher concept of existence lying beyond our perception. Anyway, the idea is that, irrespective of one's beliefs, faith in some kind of higher power is always present.

No complex logic is necessary for us to reach the conclusion that everything that exists or will ever exist is part of a great whole. It does not matter, because everything that can be imagined, or not imagined, is part of this Whole. There is only the Whole. Even if there was something outside of or detached from everything that we know, we could still rise our perspective to assimilate that object and thus restore the sense of wholeness. Therefore, we can accept as inalienable truth that, for an infinite succession of greater perspectives, the Whole is continuously reaffirmed as a recursive totality, an overall existence that engulfs / encompasses everything. To this overall existence we also give the name of Creation (All That Is). Everything is part of the whole of Creation.

Although Creation is all-inclusive, we still cannot say for sure that Creation is everything. At the same time that Creation already includes everything, It is also a much greater concept, going beyond all categories of definition. An absolute concept such as Creation is always more and beyond. So far we have already seen examples of absolute concepts: the Whole, Reality, etc. What the Whole and other absolute concepts have in common is that there is never an objective limit for what they really are, and thus no amount of explanation can convey what it means for them to be absolute. That is why even the act of giving Creation a name is ridiculous: whatever Creation really is, is beyond the name Creation. In reality, we are talking about a certain Absolute that transcends all denominations.

The Tao [absolute] that can be named, expressed or defined is not the eternal Tao [the Absolute]. Even the finest name is insufficient to define It. (Tao Te Ching,¹)

No one is really sure about how to define the Absolute properly, but we know due to an overwhelming intuitive force that the Absolute is infinite, perfect and eternal. Organized religions tap into this latent knowledge present in everyone and try to spin it along a certain line of interpretations. What religion does not realize is that any ideas about the unlimited will still be unbelievably limited. Generally, what is left for a person after all belief systems have been demistified is acceptance of the transcendental nature of the Absolute. Surprisingly enough, it is through this act of acceptance that better interpretation of the Absolute may come. Most often, people cannot understand the Absolute simply because they are trapped in their current understanding (i.e., belief system). Thus the only way for them to receive new information is by opening their minds to the possibility that they are failing to understand something or perhaps everything.

All I know is that I know nothing. -- -- -- -- -- -- (Socrates)

The natural urge to understand the Absolute is present in everyone, but it is initially dealt with in a very primitive way. On the following paragraphs we will see examples of how primitive conceptions of the Absolute arise and then turn out as dead ends. The idea is that the majority of people expects to find their point of reference in the form of a principle that lies above all the others, and so they falsely believe that they can forget about everything else in favor of that principle. They never try to determine a fixed set of principles, because they desire just one that can act as a magic bullet. Thus they go from one principle to another, one "answer" to another, one philosophy to another, one extreme to another. They find a principle that they consider fascinating until they forget about it only to stumble upon another. They end learning the hard way: all their once favorite principles failed to maintain their status as such, because it would be a great shame to the Absolute if It had to be restricted to a single interpretation.

As they look further for the Truth, people become fascinated with certain philosophies up to the point that they forget or ignore anything discordant with their views. But philosophy is not the least bit concerned with finding answers that can put an end to the search for truth: an attitude consistent with reality, because in practice there is a continuous supply of new questions arising that force people to adopt new paradigms. Human beings are naive by nature, and so it is easy for them to consider every new paradigm as definitive. It is a process that repeats itself for a long time until the person starts wondering if the final truth is of a complex nature beyond a single answer. This is a major breakthrough, because suddenly the person becomes much aware of the necessity of getting to know as many points of view as possible without favoring one too much over the others.

However, a new kind of conclusion tends to arise when the person reaches an intellectual dead end after many failed attempts at trying to comprehend the Absolute. They are usually very relativistic and extremist conclusions based on the theory that the universe is infinitely complex and that there is as many universal principles as people can come up with. The problem with such conclusions is that they are the product of a fascination with infinity. It is not far-fetched to think that there is an infinite number of ways to view the universe, one for each individual, but to take this at face value defeats our purpose of trying to find principles that are true (absolute) regardless of what anyone thinks. We would never become acquainted with an infinite number of principles, and thus we would never fully move from theory to practice.

There is nothing wrong with the concept of infinity. The problem begins when people choose to worship infinity as a fixed ideal, a limit. Infinity cannot be taken as a limit because it is already defined as being greater than any limit. Once you believe that you have reached infinity, you become disappointed, because infinity by definition cannot be reached. Infinity only gives the illusion that it can be sought as an ideal, because in reality there is nothing to be sought. Consequently, to be infatuated with infinity alone is dangerous and can put someone inside a path with no real destination in sight. For instance, if someone worships infinity as a symbol of power and grandiosity and thus seeks these ideals obsessively, they will be temporarily unable to achieve fulfillment (happiness) due to this extremist and unbalanced behavior.

The Greeks saw the idea of infinity as being absurd and chaotic. Indeed, infinity is often employed as a supplementary word for human uncertainty and/or ignorance about certain quantities in the universe. There is, for example, an exact amount of particles in the universe just as there must be a certain amount of distance, a certain shape and size, and a certain amount of mass for everything. There are finite values associated to everything, even to abstract concepts. There is enough evidence for us to believe in a finite model of the universe; otherwise, we are left with irrational ideas based on the prerogative of infinity, ideas that in reality provide us with no answers at all.

As people continue with their search for the Truth, they eventually come to the next clue: the Absolute seems to have no specific form, color, name, sound, etc, and so this could be the reason why all attempts to define It are in vain. It seems that the Absolute is always far beyond anything that we can say about It; but hey, perhaps it is our own fixation with trying to define It that is preventing us from understanding It -- perhaps there is nothing to be defined! With this in mind, people will usually jump to the conclusion that the Absolute is completely void of definition, and so they start to believe that the Absolute is tantamount to nothingness. This is still not the final answer, but it is true enough to enlighten people in a direction that explains why the Absolute seems to be beyond any rational definition: what does not exist is also what is incomprehensible.

Zero, a placeholder (symbol) for nothingness, is different from other numbers to the extent that it cannot be canceled as when we subtract a number from itself, because zero is already its own additive inverse: 0 = 0. Also, zero is always present before and after operands and signals in an equation, as well as before and after decimal places in a number (e.g., 001.000 = 01.0 = 1). All of this makes of zero an omnipresent abstract concept in mathematics, a concept that accurately reflects the absoluteness of the Absolute.

Zero could very well be the answer that we are looking for if it was not for a major flaw: by pointing a finger to zero and isolating it as a concept, we are still creating a duality composed of zero and its absence: non-zero. For instance, if we name an unknown object as "greel," then we automatically create an opposite to greel made of whatever is not greel to the extent that it is outside / beyond greel. Therefore, the presence of non-zero makes of zero an unworthy symbol for the Absolute; after all, there can be no opposite for something that is supposed to be all-inclusive: the Whole joined with Its negation still constitutes a Whole.

Nonetheless, if our chosen principle really was nothingness / zero, then in reality we would not have a principle at all. Unlike in the real world where there is no such a thing as a perfect nothing (e.g., perfect vacuum in space), the word nothing in the strict sense should mean absolute nonexistence. Thus an ideology based on nothingness should also acknowledge that no universal principle can exist. That is, in one hand proponents of nihilism are following a principle, while in the other they believe that no such principle can exist. In such a contradictory approach lies the proof of how zero is unusable as a concept that can be sustained ideologically, and thus we come to know another dead end resulting from people's fascination with extremes.

Common sense naively defines nothing as the "absence of thing." Absence, however, is still a state, while nothingness is not supposed to be a state, nor a state that is not a state, nor a state that is not a state that is not a state, and so on ad infinitum. The fact that the word nothing exists is proof that we cannot address a "no-thing" if we do not treat it as "some-thing." In other words, there is no way to talk about nothing without us falling in contradiction, and to be in contradiction with oneself is the mark of an incomplete understanding of Creation. This leads us to conclude that thinking or talking about nothing is completely irrelevant and a distraction from more important (useful) issues.

Apart from being conceptual numbers, infinity and zero are also abstract concepts that ultimately equate to each other, because when exclusively sought as ideals they both lead nowhere. In many ways, going nowhere is the same as never leaving the place. People will be deceiving themselves by walking in circles exactly how a dog chases its own tail; they will always be looking for something, but never being able to find it. To seek infinity is a task that never comes to fruition, and to seek zero is an absurd, because zero is simply not "there" to be approached or avoided: once you believe that you have reached absolute zero, you become disappointed, because nothing is still something. The only difference between infinity and zero is that those who seek infinity are not even aware that they are walking in circles; they are also going after zero, because infinity is a masked zero.

It is obvious why infinity and zero have failed to give us satisfactory answers about the Absolute: they are irrational concepts, and that which cannot be understood rationally cannot be properly defined. Therefore, we still cannot say anything about the Absolute except that It is not represented only by zero, infinity or any other singular and extreme notion for that matter. As we hinted before, people enjoy jumping from principle to principle while ignoring the possibility that a finite number of universal principles, including zero and infinity, could be complementing each other to embody the Absolute. In other words, a finite number of principles could be the balance between a null and an infinite number. Indeed, this is the best possible guess that we can have about the Absolute: It is infinite, but It also presents Itself finitely. Therefore, to design a final theory we must find the infinite in the finite -- we must explore the finite aspect of the Absolute.

________________________
¹ Adapted from translations by Western scholars who interpreted the Tao Te Ching, a classical Chinese work reportedly written by Taoist sage Lao Tzu. The second sentence is credited to Stan Rosenthal's translation, http://www.vl-site.org/taoism/ttcstan3.html (accessed Dec 8, 2009).

The Model of Creation is an abstract and conceptual model that illustrates the main aspects of Creation. One can imagine the Model of Creation as being an abstract model photographed as if the photographer were enjoying a panoramical view of Creation. Such possibility, however, is purely hypothetical, because nothing can exist outside of Creation according to the definition given in Section 1.5: Creation is a recursive totality that includes all possible realities, and so there is no "outside" that is not already a part of It.

There are four main elements in the Model of Creation: the Origin, the Line, the End, and the Result. They are shown in the diagram below.

Origin

The Origin is the point of reference for everything within the Model. It is symbolized by a circular infinity, which represents the unification of zero and infinity into a singularity. It is in the Origin that the essence / core / source / spirit of all Creation resides, an essence that is sometimes personified as an omnipotent being called the Creator. If we interpret the Origin as a place, then it becomes a true, divine and perfect manifestation of Creation, sometimes called as Heaven, Spiritual World or Paradise. It is important to understand that Creation is not only the Origin but also all Model elements taken as a whole. The difference here is that we are focusing on the core aspect of Creation while ignoring the "fringes" of Creation that lie outside of the Origin and stretch the boundaries of the Artificial Creation (a.k.a. Universal Matrix, Nature, Virtual Reality) to a maximum limit (Result).

Line

The Line represents the distance between the Origin and the End. It can also represent a process that expands the boundaries of the Artificial Creation as one walks away from the Origin. Being absolute, Creation cannot be rejected or denied, and thus attempting to do so is akin to feed an illusion. In fact, denying the Origin can only lead one to the Result at most.

End

The End is the farthest point from the Origin. It represents the goal of those willing to go as far from the Origin as possible in search for oblivion, unconsciousness. The problem, of course, is that a state in which Creation is seemingly no more is still a state pertaining to Creation. Therefore, searching for oblivion may very well be a futile endeavor, but it still plays a purpose in leading one to the Result at most.

Infinity and zero are the conceptual extremes behind any conflict in the universe. The End can coincide with either one of them: a person can choose either zero or infinity as an ideal to follow, but not both at the same time. It is a duality of choice that is in direct opposition to the unified (non-dual) nature of the Origin.

Result

The Result represents a theoretical limit for the process of the Line. Theoretical because the process does not necessarily stop at this point; instead, real progress ends and an illusion of progress begins, which means that from the Result onward we can only hope to walk in circles as long as we are still looking for the End. Alternatively, the Result can be interpreted as the surface of a mirror that delimits the passage from a real half to an illusory (dream-like) one.

X

The numeric variable X corresponds to how far the boundaries of the universe of the Artificial Creation can reach. According to the research presented in this book, the official value of X is 13.

When we said that Creation is not only the Origin but also all other elements in the Model, we were alluding to the paradoxical nature of absolute concepts such as Creation. An absolute concept does not have to be just one thing in particular; on the contrary, it can be everything and nothing at the same time. As nothing, Creation is the Origin, and as everything, Creation is the entire diagram shown in the Model. More specifically, the distance between the Origin and the Result can be taken as a blown-up (exploded) version of the Origin, whereas the Origin is a condensed (imploded) version of that same distance.

Figure 2.2 - Instances of the Model of Creation

Each instance (copy) of the Model is like a snapshot of Creation. An entire snapshot is actually the Origin element inside another instance. Therefore, from a dynamic perspective we may imagine that, when the process of the Line reaches the Result, a new instance of the Model begins with the process rewired back to the beginning at the Origin. This of course ties with the cyclical nature of Existence as we will see in Chapter 3. Notice that the term instance is appropriate because the Model of Creation is a basic template that never changes.

In several myths of Creation, the notion of a supreme intelligence behind all creation is strongly related to the idea of an omnipotent being responsible for the creation of the universe. This notion is prevalent among many cultures and societies, and for a very good reason: any person as the individual they are cannot help but project the notion / perspective of individuality in everything, and thus they have to personify Creation as an individual being in order to understand It better. The result of an absolute concept such as Creation that becomes individualized and hence personified is an absolute being that may be given the name of Creator. (Note: there is a reflection between how beings can imagine a creator god and what beings are themselves in their own spiritual nature. This will be further discussed in Chapter 4.)

Creation, Creator, the Whole and Consciousness are all absolute concepts due to their transcendental qualities. Because an absolute concept is always referring to an incontestable authority, two or more of them can only be different titles for the same Thing (Absolute). It is simply not worth it to give the Absolute only one title, because each absolute concept embodies a different aspect of the Absolute that could easily go unnoticed if left unmentioned. There is nothing wrong with us using different terms to try to build a complete picture of the Absolute; we only need to remember that the Absolute is not limited to have a single identity or to have an identity at all. (Note: capitalization is a way to ensure that we are talking about an absolute concept instead of the ordinary meaning of the respective word / term.)

Existence = Universe = Whole = Creator = Creation = Reality = ..

Absolute concepts refer to infinity and so they cannot be defined through limited means of communication. Of course, their meanings can always be approximated with words and symbols, but the moment we bring in a description of an absolute concept, we define it, and the moment we define it we frame it in limitation and we deceive its true essence. The idea prevalent among those who are addicted to symbolic representations of the Absolute is that there is hidden / occult meaning behind their symbols that only a selected few can comprehend. Not only this creates many ills associated with elitism, but it is also a misleading approach to the Absolute: whatever the Absolute is, may even transcend the meaning of meaning. Certainly, the Absolute does not need to have a fixed meaning, and even if It does, this meaning does not need to be one that is hidden. The very meaning of the word meaning implies that nothing is quite what it is, but rather is representative of something else. In this sense, any attempt to convey meaning to the Absolute will always remain as an open question.

As a personified absolute concept, the Creator represents someone that is manifest and immanifest at the same time. As manifest He embodies All That Is (Creation), and as immanifest He is beyond anything that can be imagined. While the Creator is the essence and the spirit of Creation, Creation is the entirety of existence; Creation entails everything. Therefore, it may not be a good idea to depict or conceive the Creator as an individual, because He is everywhere (omnipresent) yet nowhere in particular; He is everybody yet nobody in particular. At the least, the Creator is an abstract entity that does not need or want any kind of special devotion from people. In fact, worshiping the Creator may be an insult, as when someone passes judgment on the appearance of a person while ignoring who the person really is beyond the body.

God is a common denomination for the Creator seen as an anthropomorphic deity. All kinds of attributes are traditionally ascribed to God by many cultures, but ultimately these are nothing more than petty attempts at molding the Creator to fit a certain image. It only creates mass confusion, and where there is mass confusion there is opportunity for a few to reign over many. Fortunately, the Creator does not indulge in such customs and categories; He is far more like an abstract entity representing universal and eternal consciousness than He is an individual being with definite (human) form. The Creator is beyond form, but He is also the eternal aspect of the form, the eternal force that holds ideas together in manifested form. Everything exists as ideas in the mind of the Creator.

Anyway, people are free to have limited ideas about the Creator. A major problem, however, is that at the instant that they identify the Creator with a god, the potential for the existence of an opposite, an anti-god, is automatically created. Naturally, we may argue that a creator can be complemented by an anti-creator, but then we must ask ourselves about who created the anti-creator, because by definition an anti-creator cannot create, only destroy. Therefore, eventually we have to stop the causal reasoning and acknowledge the existence of a self-creating creator, that is, a creator that creates and/or recreates himself continually along with everything else. A self-creating creator is the same thing as an absolute creator, who is also responsible for the creation of any opposites and/or counterparts he may have.

Another reason why Creator is a better denomination than God is because it puts extra emphasis on the act of creating and the role of creator, both of which are fundamental notions in our rational minds: if something exists, it must have been created by some kind of intelligence. To think of a Creator also helps to take religious bias out of the way when we are discussing God. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with us using the term god as long as we are strictly referring to the Creator. The name by which we refer to the Creator is not all important as long as we have the understanding that we are talking about a personified aspect of the Absolute, which is boundless and cannot even be properly defined with the utilization of a single name.

The idea of antithesis concerning the Creator / God is not exclusively related to mythical personages such as Satan and Lucifer. Everything is potentially the inverse of the Creator, because Creation is nothing more than a mirror image of the Creator. The many aspects of Creation are the many symbols for the Creator. Symbols are like features of the Creator's image in the mirror, which is an inverted (reflected) image by definition. If the inverted image is worshiped as sacred instead of that which is casting the image, then much power is given to forces that oppose the Creator. Because symbols are finite, static and fixed representations, then whenever people take a symbolic approach to the Creator, they are paying attention to something that is the exact opposite of what He represents: an infinite, dynamic and transcendental power.

The mythical story of Lucifer, the angel that rebelled against God, is a good example of a creature that opposes its creator. The story has its origins in ancient mystical literature, but it was incorporated by monotheistic belief systems, mainly Christianity. Basically, the story says that Lucifer was the wisest, the most beautiful and the most powerful angel in heaven. Lucifer eventually reasoned about his apparent superiority only to acquire the desire to become as great as God, his Father, and to be reverenced as such. From that point on, Lucifer's prideful and selfish aspirations turned him away from God and led him to be cast out of heaven for disobedience, hence the famous archetype of the fallen angel.

The story of Lucifer is practically the same plot found in Creation myths in which a primordial consciousness forgets about itself through self-contemplation. Suppose that an infinite consciousness (i.e., Consciousness with capital C), initially unified within itself, decides to imagine itself to be able to explore (know) itself better. As a consequence, Consciousness gets momentarily caught in Its own imagination; It falls asleep while a dream takes over Its mind; it is the enchantment brought about by Its bright image of light. This event alone is responsible for an entire imaginary universe, an artificial design that Consciousness believes to be real but ultimately is not. It is also believed that a disaster occurs at the moment of self-contemplation, because Consciousness gets disconnected from Its infinite mind resulting in dissociation and amnesia. The more Consciousness falls inside Its dream, the more fragmentation It suffers.

Lucifer represents the greatest error (sin) ever committed by Consciousness when in possession of free will. It is the primordial error that results in the first light of Creation, and that is why Lucifer is sometimes called the Angel of Light or the Morning Star. Whether Lucifer's act is evil / sinful is not important because the Creator is ultimately in charge of everything, including even that which sounds erroneous. That which falls like Lucifer falls for the highest good of All. The Creator is like a highly talented painter that is always attempting new moves with his painting brush to purposely create mistakes that turn out as beautiful in the end. In other words, failure is a primitive but necessary step for the advent of Creation, as schematized below.

divine perfection -> failure -> creation of the universe

While Creation is the answer for "what is the Absolute?," the Creator is certainly the answer for "who is the Absolute?." That is, the Creator is the personification of everything that exists taken as a whole; He is Existence personified. This means that there is no beginning or end that applies to the Creator or His Creation. They both exist in the absolute present (i.e., the Now). However, people often assume time is linear and absolute; they assume that there was a time "before" the universe. Well, in reality there was never a divine act of creation at some point in time, because time itself also comes from this act. To propose a time before the universe is therefore just as absurd as proposing a time before time, and so there is no logical basis for us to prove or disprove that the universe began or that it will end. What we can do is observe the current / present universe and from this make projections backward or forward in time, which is after all relative to our perception.

The common scientific view is that the universe started with the event known as the Big-Bang.¹ When it comes to the Big Bang theory, we have to come in terms with the idea of a singularity. The confusion lies in that it is not only energy that is infinitely condensed in the event of a singularity, but also time itself. Therefore, one might say that the Big-Bang occurred an eternity ago as much as one can say that it occurred "billions of years" ago. But you do not learn much from making these statements. This point in time known as the singularity might as well be any point in time, or no point in time at all, because whenever we are talking about a singularity, we are dealing with paradoxes. Also associated to a singularity is the idea of an event horizon, a boundary beyond which all possible events occur simultaneously even if these occurrences are contradictory to each other. In this case, it is true that the universe never really began because it has always existed "inside" the singularity, but it is also true that the same singularity lies in the past and in the future of the universe.

Cosmos is the name given to the universe taken as a coherent whole. And what is an universe? An universe is Creation materialized, made into a system. The term universe refers to all the matter and energy that exist. Unlike Creation, an universe must have a definite beginning and a foreseeable end; it is momentaneous like a photograph of Creation, while Creation Itself is eternal; It is not confined to physical worlds and physical theories. Considering that the universe is the first and the last system subject to measurement, then anything before its beginning must be beyond any possibility of measurement. Therefore, if nothing can be detected before an universe, the only explanation for a first cause is that something literally came out of nothing! Is this a cop-out explanation? Maybe, but we will see that it is in the usage of the word nothing that we find out about the existential paradox that underlies all philosophical indagations.

Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there is no way one could measure what happened at them. (Stephen Hawking,²)

Considering that everything in the universe is energy in one state or another, let us suppose that everything before the universe was also energy, but in a pure state. There was no space or time. There were no attributes, qualities or activities; there was only chaos. There was absolutely nothing, but nothing as something, as in a paradox. Instead of a mere is/is-not, exist/not-exist alternative, it was like an inconceivable state of existence unified with nonexistence. And it was precisely some form of division / separation applied to that "nothing-as-something" that resulted in the creation of the universe. The point becomes a line, adimensionality becomes dimensionality, stillness becomes vibration, and nothing finally becomes something. This is the basic creation myth. As for the primordial division, it can be interpreted as a spontaneous desire to create that the Creator had, that is, a desire for self-expression.

Since before time and space were, the Tao [the Absolute] is. It is beyond "is" and "is not". (Tao Te Ching,³)

Myths of Creation are romantics ways to explain a simple yet divine act of creation. The Creator creates by simply imagining Himself into being. But with this imagination comes an illusion of separation, a certain distance between Creator and created. After all, for the Creator to see His image on the mirror means that a line of division must be introduced: the mirror surface. The drawing of a line on a blank canvas automatically creates two sides. Furthermore, we can imagine this mirror shattering into many pieces, with every broken piece still containing a reflection of the Creator in full and within the boundaries of its unique shape and size.

Rationality dictates that whatever exists must have a cause for its existence. Consequently, such rationale can lead us to a succession of questions trying to determine a never-ending chain of causality. This is what happens when we keep trying to justify phenomenon after phenomenon while failing to see that the only phenomenon that remains unchallenged and uncaused is that of Existence. In other words, Existence is the primordial and absolute cause, the cause that is its own cause. There is no further cause or purpose behind Existence. Any chain of cause and effect begins and ends with absolute concepts, all of which refer to some form of self-existent energy, that is, an energy whose existence does not depend upon anything.

Throughout the ages many philosophers have questioned the meaning of Existence. For example, one of philosophy's most perplexing questions is "why there is something instead of nothing?." To ask this question is to imply that there is a purpose to Existence that has nothing to do with Existence Itself. Whoever is asking this question is forgetting that Existence is already the highest purpose; that is, the purpose of Existence is Existence Itself. One can either accept Existence without flinching or one will keep trying to find "higher purpose" for who knows how long. Another point often missed has to do with Existence's paradoxical nature: both nonexistence (nothing) and existence (something) are two sides of the same Existence. Therefore, we can offer the following rebuttal to the previous question: if nothing, by definition, is lack of existence, then how could it exist? Because all that exists is Existence, in one state or another. Nonexistence is still a valid existential state, just as nothing is still something.

The Artificial Creation (A.C.) is a virtual world that is analogous to a featureless image of the Creator like a silhouette or shadow. By definition, a shadow is a distorted image of the true shape of the object casting it, and it does not reflect the features (qualities) of that object. The Divine Creation, in contrast, is a genuine and flawless depiction of the Creator because it reflects His attributes, His characteristics, and most importantly, His intentions of how Creation should be. Both the divine and artificial versions of Creation are images of the Creator; they are imaginations produced by an infinite consciousness. The only fundamental difference between the two is that one is genuine (real) and the other is false (virtual).

For example, if we consider the Artificial and Divine Creations as being like photographs of Creation, then the A.C. is the negative photographic film while the Divine Creation is the positive film. This is why these two versions of Creation are not absolute concepts themselves, because when we are considering a static (photographic) representation of Creation, we are invariably discarding Its dynamic and transcendental quality of absolute concept.

In a virtual reality, everything is programmed and hence not actually real in the sense of a reality that feels natural. But then, how is it possible that the obvious physical surroundings composing one's reality are not real? Well, reality is a very subjective term. What is real for a person may very well be illusory for another, because reality is simply the baseline of that which feels more intense, hence more realistic, for someone. There is always a degree of illusion in any reality as well as a degree of realism in any illusion. Fundamentally, reality and illusion are equivalent concepts because the former implies in that which is manifested, which is always the outer appearance and never the spirit of who is casting (creating) the image. It is true then that all images / looks can be deceiving, because nothing can embody (reflect) the spirit of Creation perfectly.

Therefore, the reality of the Divine Creation is one replete with aspects (forms) that most approximate the perfection of the Creator, while the reality of the Artificial Creation follows the exact opposite direction. The Divine Creation is a clear and honest manifestation of the Creator, but still deceptive (illusory) to a very small degree. This is why Maya, a concept in Hinduism meaning "world of illusion," is a name sometimes attributed to Creation. The only thing that can be considered absolutely real is the spirit, because all substance lies in the spirit even though the spirit is formless and insubstantial by definition. Such is the paradoxical nature of that which lies behind the veil of illusion: in the case of Creation, the spirit is the Creator Himself.

Both versions of Creation can be interpreted from a technical perspective as well as from a philosophical one. Philosophically, it is much like Plato's Allegory of the Cave:⁴ there is a world of ideal forms and a world of shadows. The prisoners of the cave are inclined to believe that the shadows are the only reality, as opposed to the true reality outside the cave. But it is only in the ideal forms that knowledge about the essence of various things can be found. The shadows are mere instances of the ideal forms and often carry distortions that cannot be trusted. Plato also discusses the existence of filters obstructing the soul's ability to perceive ideal forms. In principle, the Divine Creation is a spiritual world of unending beauty, because everywhere you look there are imageries of infinity. But put on a perceptual filter and you begin to see limitation instead, which cuts infinity short and brings beauty to a superficial level of mere appearance (shadows), and thus the possibility of ugliness arises.

The Artificial and Divine Creations are primarily different mental locations and lastly different physical locations, in which case we may rightfully consider the existence of different locations / realities throughout the Universe that must pertain to one (Divine) or another (Artificial). Such distinction, however, is only visible when we still have filters occluding our perception of Reality. In the absence of filters, we no longer see the two versions of Creation as being distinct; we no longer take specific scenarios as being Heaven or Hell. Instead, the ideal is to train our "spiritual eye" to see the singular pulse of Creation in all of its glory. The ideal is to realize how Creation is a divine artwork in which the ugly and the artificial is also beautiful and natural.

The A.C. is an universe ruled by time and space, hence dimensionality. It is not limited, however, by the values that time and space can assume as the individual variables they are. This means that the A.C. has not a spatial or temporal boundary, since time or space can vary from zero to infinity. The only limitation of the A.C. is the lack of creative power to be able to keep up with an infinite amount of time or space, and so eventually the same spatio-temporal configuration has to repeat over and over again like a broken music record. The A.C. is subject to stagnation, to limitation and repetition, and that is why it is artificial. But in the case of the Divine Creation, not only there are no limits in time and space but also no limits in creativity. After all, the Divine Creation is a direct manifestation of Creation in Its absolute form.

In the Model of Creation shown in the image below, the arrow represents how the Line keeps advancing toward the End while bypassing the Result, which is the maximum theoretical limit for any single direction of advancement. This means that, with respect to the A.C., something can grow toward infinity or shrink toward zero, but such illusory extremes are never truly achieved. The Result is the only extreme that can be achieved, although that only happens in the realm of theory, because in practice the Line never stops for anything: time and space are forever recycling within the A.C. and forever renewing within the Divine Creation. It is just that when the Result is achieved, the doors of perception become open to infinite realities and possibilities; it is not that all realities have been already traversed and all possibilities have been already explored. It is just that the riddle of Existence has been solved. As an example, consider the Result as being a final conclusion (theory) achieved after much study, experience and intuition, whereas life, evolution, or whatever may be our interpretation of the process of the Line must go on advancing toward either infinity or zero -- you choose.

Let us assume a perspective from inside the A.C. The primary consequence is that the Model of Creation suffers an inversion of principles: the End and the Origin exchange places. This exchange, however, has nothing to do with a mere horizontal flip of the Model, because what really transpires is that the extremely dualistic nature of the End takes over and becomes the fundamental characteristic of the universe. We can no longer see the Origin directly. Instead, we see the End in every direction we look; we see either zero or infinity as a conceptual limit. Everything revolves around these two opposite extremes, with the Result occupying the exact middle point and thus being easily overlooked during our quest for extremes. The Divine Creation, which lies at the Origin, vanishes from sight to become like a distant and illusory oasis that is theoretically reachable only through behavior rooted on zero or infinity.

The right side of Figure 2.# is more complex: Let us represent Creation as a dashed circle and then "invert" this circle to produce the star pattern shown in the figure, which then represents how Creation looks like from the inside. Of course, there is no such thing as an inverted circle unless we take the idea of infinite discontinuity into consideration: There are four curves, one for each quadrant, forming the star-like graph of the inverted circle. This graph has four infinite discontinuities, which means that each pair of adjacent curves have to meet at infinity. Therefore, we can never be sure whether we are looking at a single figure or at four disconnected curves. If that shape is a seamless figure, then we are still looking at a full circle, but an "inverted" one.

As we can see in the inverted Model of Creation, zero is in the place originally occupied by the singularity of the Origin. A singularity is what the Origin really is, and thus the main reason why the Origin disappears from the Model once an inversion occurs is because all characteristics of the Divine Creation seem to vanish, that is, they are no longer perceived directly or they are no longer perceived at all; they become invisible and fleeting to ordinary perception and thus they tend to be ignored ideologically. In other words, the main consequence for a perspective inside the A.C. is that it lacks signs of the Divine Creation -- it can be an horrific view. Fortunately, the A.C. is not only finite and temporary, but also fundamentally flawed / imperfect, which is the reason why the Divine Creation cannot be shunned completely. That is, something of a divine nature always has to bleed in through the crack of the A.C., which can also function as a hatch for anyone willing to escape to a Model instance that is less artificial and more divine. (Refer to Figure 2.2).

Zero and infinity are the conceptual extremes of the universe, and an universe by definition is the largest system we can think of, that is, the one that includes all the others. The universe of the A.C. is populated with extreme forces that lead one to approach zero or to approach infinity, never both simultaneously. It is an universe torn between two opposite forces exerted by two magnetic poles: one at infinity and the other nowhere to be found. And the only way for these two abstract forces to coexist without doing it simultaneously is through continuous alternation (i.e, each one has its turn). Alternation is the basis of vibration, which means that the A.C. must be completely based on polarity, since for something to vibrate it has to have two poles between which to oscillate.

________________________
¹ The Big Bang is a cosmological theory and also a popular idea / scenario regarding the origin of the universe in the past when it existed as a point of infinite density known as the singularity. Following this state, the universe expanded inside a conceptual (mathematical) space to become what it is today. As a scientific theory, the Big Bang is born from cosmological analysis that lead scientists to believe that the universe, hence cosmological time, must have a beginning at some point in absolute time. Now, at the same time that scientists agree that time should not have a meaning independent of the universe, the concept of absolute time is fundamental to scientific determinism. Proponents of the Big Bang theory who like to interpret it as fact are not always aware of this paradox regarding time.
² Stephen W. Hawking, "The Beginning of Time," Public Lectures, http://www.hawking.org.uk/index.php/lectures/62 (accessed July 24, 2010).
³ From Stephen Mitchell's translation of the Tao Te Ching.
⁴ The Allegory of the Cave, also commonly known as Myth of the Cave, is an allegory used by the Greek philosopher Plato in his work The Republic. According to Plato, we are supposed to imagine prisoners chained deep inside a cave. The prisoners have been there all their lives with their necks chained so that they are always facing a blank wall. They watch shadows on the wall produced by things and people moving past the mouth of the cave, and they listen to echoes of distant sounds. This parable tries to illustrate that the shadows are mere reflections of a true reality outside the cave, but the prisoners are inclined to take the shadows as constituting reality instead. Plato then explains how the philosopher is like a prisoner who is freed from the cave and comes to understand that the shadows on the wall are not constitutive of reality at all, as he can perceive the true form of reality rather than the mere shadows seen by the prisoners.

Suppose that every conceivable thing, not mattering if concrete, abstract or imaginary, is derived / created from a very basic and fundamental knowledge that we can interpret as being constituted of a few intentions of cosmic creation. Suppose that this knowledge is about everything, not just about a few things, and once we are in contact with it we can learn about the nature of reality and consciousness, the physical and spiritual laws of the Universe, and the great paradox of Existence.

To be in possession of the right kind of knowledge means that you can become a cosmic genius in a very short amount of time. Does this sound like megalomania? Not quite when you understand that everyone is omniscient at the core of what they are spiritually, but most have not come to mind what they already know intuitively on a cosmic level; they have not brought this knowledge to their conscious awareness by relating it to words and concepts. Well, this is a gap that the Thirteen Intentions of Creation come to fill with excellence.

Crudely speaking, the Thirteen Intentions are Creation. They already constitute the simplest and most rational way for us to look at Creation. They can be interpreted as energies, principles, meanings, archetypes, levels (steps), tones, commands or laws -- you name it. But, for a better understanding, imagine some kind of universal consciousness, a creator god if you will, who has a finite number of intentions regarding how his creation should work / operate / behave. Every creation has a corresponding creator, which means that the will (intentions) of the creator can be found even in the smallest details of his creation. This is precisely the case when it comes to the Thirteen Intentions, the Creator and Creation as we know It. We will see many examples in this and further chapters of how the nature of reality is intuitively defined / programmed through these Intentions.

The premise of this book is to offer a logical explanation for why the Thirteen Intentions are central to everything. We should always remember, however, that it is not possible to completely justify the existence of something that is already the cause of everything. There is no real reason / explanation for something that is already self-explanatory, although we can still attempt to study the obvious; we can still come up with all sorts of pseudo-reasons to help us understand the obvious. The Truth should be simple, but unfortunately It often seems complex for the untrained, chaotic mind. Thus an entire theory based on the Thirteen Intentions becomes necessary. Fortunately, we can rest assured that there is nothing "better" than these Intentions in terms of a theoretical knowledge of Creation. Better than theory, only direct experience, only strict practice.

The Thirteen Intentions are initially abstract energies and thus cannot be put into words easily. However, much like a psychic can use words to describe invisible energies sensed by him, we can find concrete meanings that most approximate how each Intention feels like. Of course, there is no real logic behind such process of interpretation because any logical analysis can only come after the Intentions have been translated from a sensational domain to a purely objective one. The interpretation brought forward by this book is a list of directives of Creation carefully chosen for each Intention. All that we need for an unified theory of Creation is right here on this list. No grand unified theory of everything is worth its name if it does not recognize the existence of these directives on an abstract level.

1. Unification, Origination, Simplification, Principiation, Singularization, Individualization, Prioritization, Adoration, Representation, Idealization, Declaration, Motivation
2. Polarization, Differentiation, Linearization, Mensuration, Rationalization, Isolation, Delineation, Limitation, Identification, Separation, Externalization, Classification
3. Activation, Animation, Manifestation, Realization, Electrization, Stimulation, Circulation, Creation, Automation, Imagination
4. Formation, Formalization, Solidification, Foundation, Stabilization, Structuration, Materialization, Objectification, Concretization
5. Potentiation, Infuriation, Energization, Excitation, Acceleration, Irradiation, Exploration, Experimentation, Corporation, Movimentation
6. Compensation, Accommodation, Equilibration, Variation, Oscillation, Alternation, Equalization, Fluctuation
7. Harmonization, Syntonization, Reverberation, Sensation, Vibration, Intonation, Inspiration, Situation, Orientation, Association, Organization
8. Maximization, Magnification, Amplification, Accumulation, Augmentation, Verticalization, Exaggeration, Extrapolation, Multiplication
9. Spiritualization, Nullification, Annihilation, Cancellation, Certification, Confirmation, Internalization, Specification, Meditation, Anticipation, Liberation
10. Integration, Assimilation, Adaptation, Particularization, Divination, Instantiation, Concentration, Densification, Intensification, Totalization, Optimization
11. Approximation, Regulation, Moderation, Adequation, Preparation, Destination, Qualification, Graduation
12. Finalization, Termination, Crystalization, Personification, Cooperation, Communication, Dedication, Sacrification, Universalization, Dissemination, Solicitation, Conscientization
13. Acceptation, Perpetuation, Salvation, Immortalization, Preservation, Propagation, Continuation, Transformation, Transmutation, Regeneration, Purification, Renovation

Besides directives, each Intention is also associated to certain qualities, concepts and techniques. To see a complete description of each Intention go to Appendix 1. You might as well use Appendix 1 as a reference for the remainder of this book.

The Thirteen Intentions can also be seen as an universal decree formed by thirteen principles or ideas. This possibility comes from the fact that there is no other set of principles more fundamental to the universe. They can also be taken as laws or commandments, but the fact is that not all of them work or behave as laws, although some of them are directly associated to certain spiritual laws well-known by spirituality practitioners. In most cases, however, it is better to think about them strictly as Intentions of Creation.

What really makes the Thirteen Intentions special as principles haivng universal validity, is that they can be applied onto themselves. Each Intention can clarify aspects about each other and/or the whole set. This means that all the knowledge about the Thirteen intentions is found in the Thirteen Intentions themselves! In the remainder of this document, we will be making references to Intentions when they prove something about themselves using the IC #n (Intention of Creation) where n is a number.

We have already seen in 1.5 - Principles how zero and infinity cannot give us a proper (definitive) answer with respect to the universal truth, and so we decided that maybe the number of universal principles is a finite one. Indeed, discovering the Thirteen Intentions is just a matter of finding principle by principle until there is a number of them that finally covers everything. If the number of Intentions was any higher than 13, it would not be possible for us to settle at this number and not suffer with a feeling of incompleteness. In fact, that is exactly what happens when we are aware of less than 13 Intentions.

To discover an Intention is to understand its meaning with respect to all of Creation. Fortunately, one Intention leads to the discovery of another very easily. When we have already found out about a few Intentions, it does not take long until we become aware of all of the first 12 Intentions. The only exception to this chain reaction of discoveries is Intention #13, because this Intention can only be found by pure intuition, that is, one of those "a-ha!" moments.

Anyway, as it is the case in any field of research, a researcher eventually reaches a point that if he simply knows the truth then he no longer has to believe in it. The truth is that there is not a real cause for the fact that 13 is the right quantity, because it is something that becomes self-explanatory after we learn about the sheer amount of evidence pointing to this exact number of steps for the cosmology of Creation. The Thirteen Intentions are the end of all knowledge, and this notion only gets reinforced as we learn more about them. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that supports number 13 as being the right one, and amassing this evidence is one of the main goals of this book. We will see in Chapter 3 how the Thirteen Intentions literally implement reality in all of its details.

Should you just believe that there are 13 Intentions of Creation? Of course not, because first you have to prove this to yourself. Believing is not knowing. You must be rooted in a state of knowing, not based entirely upon beliefs, most of which are false. People believe that they have to believe and in the process they forget about the importance of having genuine knowledge, of having certainty. A belief is a form of self-deception -- you either know or you don't, so why fool yourself? If you have to believe in something then you have already been defeated in your quest for knowledge, but do not worry: there is nothing better than beginning this quest with the certainty that all that you know is that you do not know anything.

All Intentions are only different aspects extracted from the great singularity that is Creation. Of course, Intention #13 coincides with the singularity manifest, and so it is more than only an aspect. Anyway, to help us visualize the cause for the name Intention, we can imagine each Intention as a vortex. When something is caught inside a vortex, it is dragged toward the core, which lies at the innermost extreme of the vortex. As something gets nearer to the core, tension tends to infinity. Now, from the word innermost we have the prefix in, and so we get intension by joining in with tension. Sure, an intension is not the same as an intention, but the two words share the same etymological root. While intention may refer to a mental state, a state of intension is specifically one of internal tension, and for all matters, internal is the same as mental. Indeed, each Intention of Creation functions as a psychoactive frequency, a mode of consciousness, that causes a certain degree of tension on those assuming (mentalizing) that particular intention.

None in reality. Each Intention has unique properties that are essential to the whole set. All Intentions are unique (IC #1) and equally (IC #6) important. However, according to the directive Representation (IC #1) there must be one Intention that represents all the others: a leader. A leader is not necessarily better than all the others, but is simply ellected because of his skills to be the spokesperson and to represent the group. A leader is usually an authority that is occupying the highest (IC #8) place. Well, if we need just one Intention to represent all the others, and one that occupies the highest place, then that can only be Intention #13.

Intention #13 is the representative (IC #1) of all Intentions, but since Representation and Unification are both directives of Intention #1, then another way to see it is that Intention #13 equates to the unification of the first 12 Intentions. In other words, Intention #13 not only has an independent meaning but also single-handedly represents the entirety of the first 12 Intentions. Therefore, when we need to address something about all Intentions taken as one, we can very well do this by using Intention #13 alone.

The Thirteen Intentions can be interpreted as simple command statements from a low-level programming language used to write the program that renders Creation as a virtual reality (VR). We have already seen that the Artificial Creation (A.C.) is pretty much like a VR when compared to the Divine Creation. But before we explore this idea any further, we need to first define what a program is. In computer science, a program is a set of instructions in sequence for the computer to execute. In essence, a program is a function from input states to output states, which means that specific output data will be produced from given input data. The output of a computer program is predictable by definition. Furthermore, all program instructions must be coded in the machine language native to the target computer that is going to execute them, and irrespective of the methods of codification, all machine language is simply binary code.

Of course that the program of Creation is not really a computer program, but a consciousness program. The output of this program is the A.C., which is the sum of all virtual realities. A VR is an artificial (false) reality contrasting with a natural (true) reality. By definition, VRs cannot have an independent existence from a natural reality; after all, they are created inside one. For instance, VRs that are based on real-world technology are all created with computers and rely on them for data storage and processing. A technological VR does not differ from a real one except for what creates it: the A.C. is a product of consciousness instead of technology. That is, Consciousness is a metaphysical supercomputer that runs the program of Creation, which in turn outputs the A.C. and all physical reality contained therein. The Creator must be then the master programmer, that is, the one who implements the Program.

The A.C. is programmed and hence machine-like; like any machine it cannot function without an external power source. To unplug consciousness from the A.C. is equivalent to unplug the power cord from a machine. Without the infusion of spiritual energy that consciousness provides, the A.C. would vanish forever, although it could still exist for a few more cycles powered only by residual energy. The bottom line is that the A.C. only exists through the consciousness of each being that is willing to participate in one or more scenarios / realities of the virtual world. Therefore, in a sense each being is helping to create the realities of the A.C. Each being is a co-creator, an aspect of the Creator.

In the same manner that a VR has an underlying programming, the A.C. is completely programmatic in all of its 12 levels. (See Figure 2.#.) The programming is not always obvious to those immersed in the computer simulation, and they should remain forever ignorant if it was not for a miracle that prompts them to recognize the artificial aspects, the anomalies, of their reality. What miracle would that be? Well, it is Consciousness that creates the reality / world of the A.C. and thus holds the last card when it comes to maintaining it or discarding it. Since individual consciousness is linked to universal consciousness, conscious individuals already have access to the power needed to evolve beyond, to transcend, any kind of reality. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the miraculous power of Intention #13.

In other words, a being endowed with consciousness has unbounded potential as it can access (channel) the power of Intention #13 at will. This is because consciousness (IC #12) as the ordinary concept is directly linked to the absolute concept of identical name, which corresponds to Intention #13. Therefore, the individual who embodies Consciousness already has all the power within himself to override programming and thus transcend the virtual world in order to access realities that better reflect his true identity as an incarnation of the Creator living inside His own Creation. For example, these realities will not be of programming and limitation like the ones of the A.C., but instead they will be of infinite creative potential like the ones of the Divine Creation.

Now, at the same time that Consciousness is running the program of Creation, It is also being programmed by it up to a certain point. In this context, the Intentions are instructions to control (program) Consciousness while at the level of individuation (i.e., the individual being). Thus, during the course of the Program, Consciousness has to follow a few rules that It created in the first place. This happens because self-regulation is the only way that Consciousness has to force Itself to evolve. It is important to understand that it does not matter how much comfortable anyone can be with their spiritual progress, because from the perspective of Intention #13 there is never enough progress. There is only eternal revolution, which can be interpreted as being evolution on top of evolution. At the exact moment that one believes they have reached the "end" of their evolution, an entirely new horizon of being and possibility opens.

Let us write a pseudocode for the program of Creation. We already know that each Intention is a computational step in the Program, and so all we have to do is analyze the directives of each Intention and figure out what functions they perform over Consciousness. For that we can make use of specific keywords. See the table below.

We basically have a subroutine composed of 12 steps / commands. Is there a 13th? Certainly, but it lies in another scope of execution, yet we can consider it as coming right after the execution of the subroutine. Which name is given to the 13th command will depend on how we interpret the 12th, because the latter can cause termination of the Program and/or of the subroutine. If the Program stops, then we must assume that its main body (routine) is the subroutine already; that is, the subroutine is the Program. This means that the subroutine is executed only once before the Program ends. However, the Program may be started again, in which case the 13th command is appropriately named RESTART. Now, if only the subroutine stops, then we must assume that the Program runs forever (IC #13) and causes the infinite reiteration (loop) of the set of 12 instructions. In this case, the main routine of the Program contains only the command CONTINUE (IC #13), which causes the subroutine to be called (started) repeatedly.

Every time that the Program's subroutine gets executed, the instruction set based on the 12 Intentions is the same. In other words, the implementation of the Program does not change; what changes is the input data given to the subroutine, which is really the subprogram of Creation. Consciousness Itself is the variable passed as an input parameter to the subprogram. The input data is used in calculations until an output value is produced (returned) at the end of the execution: it is Consciousness again, but this time in a much higher state / level, relatively speaking.

What can be said about the 13th command is that it represents how Consciousness is always seeking to break monotony and learn something new. This is known as the quest of the Spirit (IC #13), and it is the same moving force that breaks a cycle, stops a program, only to start (IC #1) a new one. The next step in evolution for Consciousness is always to start anew, not necessarily "again." Intention #13 is about renovation, not repetition. It is only within the scope of the program of Creation, and hence of the Artificial Creation by equivalence, that repetition of patterns tends to be a reality.

As you can see, to equate Creation with a computer simulation may seem counterintuitive at first, but it is an approach that provides tremendous psychological and spiritual insights. In this vein, the program of Creation is the solution to the problem of how Consciousness can move beyond Itself while still remaining as Itself. The program of Creation is the actual implementation of a miraculous (IC #13) process that allows One to move beyond the impossible. The Program must be followed, but at the same time it must be transcended.

As explained in Section 2.1, the A.C. is all about polarity, and where there is polarity there is the antagonism of two poles, and so there is potential for challenges and competition -- a game scenario. Indeed, the A.C. is very much like a game for those experiencing it first hand. Games are feedback control systems where players perform actions to get desired outcomes in an attempt to compete with other players. Playing games is important for the acquisition of intense experiences, but often players will be so caught up in winning against others that they forget the fact that no game has a clear, eternal winner except for the game creator, the programmer. The programmer exists beyond all rules and parameters that have been established according to the programmed logic of his game. In the case of Creation seen as a VR game, we already know that the role of the programmer belongs to the Creator, and to Consciousness too, although Creator is more accurate in this context.

Once inside the virtual world of a game, new players get the impression that they are participating in an exciting adventure as they see all sorts of scenarios randomly appearing before them. However, the programmer knows that the output generated by his program is not random at all, but instead it happens according to carefully chosen instructions. The programmer is completely aware of how his program works just as a game designer knows all possible outcomes of his game. Therefore, it is just natural that a player devoid of the same kind of technical knowledge will be in awe of the apparent ingeniousness and complexity of the game for a while. For the programmer, however, all is very deterministic and simple.

Let us call the program of Creation, now equated to a game, as the Game. Everybody wants to play this Game because, frankly, it is the only game in town: there is no better option to speed up spiritual evolution. Players of the Game are self-conscious units; they are beings that represent a systemic anomaly within the Game due to their non-deterministic / spontaneous behavior based on free will (IC #13). It is by design that their free-will conflicts with the deterministic nature of the artificial world they are participating in. The core theme of the Game is free will vs. determinism -- this is the ultimate challenge for any being accepting the role of the player, since it is something that touches very deeply on someone and thus forces their evolution on a spiritual level.

Of course that in the end it is not really a matter of conflict when it comes to playing the Game, because it is the players themselves who designed the Game and agreed to play it for the purpose of acquiring intense bits of experience. See, all players (beings) by definition share the consciousness phenomenon; that is, all players are individual expressions of an universal consciousness that is willing (IC #13) to play the Game. Whether players are conscious of this fact or not, there is never an unwanted challenge given to them. One simply cannot exist inside the Game if one is not willing to play it at some level. But what about winning? Well, the Game exists to be won on a personal level only: as one comes to understand all of what has been said here and much more, a process of transcendence (IC #13) takes place that will ultimately allow the player to exit (IC #12) the Game.

The Game is fun while it lasts, but it must be seen to its ending. This happens precisely when all players, all strands of consciousness, all inputs of creativity, have left the Game. As a player progresses into the many levels / stages of the Game, he comes to understand the game mechanics better. During his journey he collects little clues embedded in the fabric of the virtual reality that reveal how unnatural, fixed and repetitive the A.C. is. What was once fun can become boring, because the player is beginning to see repeating patterns -- time to look for a new game. The goal of the Game is evolution of consciousness up to a certain threshold, and this is true on an individual basis and on a collective basis. With achievement of this goal, the Game can be declared to be over, although technically it is only an instance of the Game that ends. Finally, nothing can stop Consciousness from wanting to start a new game that will present an entirely new set of experiences.

The concept of number is born when we seek to divide the energy continuum of the universe for purposes of rationalization. Breaking the continuum in parts makes it easier for us to reason about the universe. We attribute symbols to different aspects of the continuum to enumerate them and reinforce the notion that one aspect is completely separate from the other. Still, any separation is nothing more than illusion caused by limited (IC #2) perception of the universe. Perception is characterized by a process of discretization that breaks the continuum in parts, and this happens on a sensorial level as well as a cognitive one. The continuum, of course, remains undifferentiated: there are no parts that are not also the whole. Every part is just the whole "dressed" differently; every part is an aspect of the whole. Ultimately, there is only the Whole (IC #13), which means that all parts are reflections of Infinity (IC #13).

If we imagine the universal continuum as a line of infinite extension that includes an infinite number of smaller lines (segments), then a number is what symbolizes the size difference between one segment and the other. But we are dealing with a continuum, an ultimately indivisible extent, and so it does not matter how many times we divide it into smaller pieces because we can never determine the exact (precise) extension of a line segment. All numbers on this line must be then discrete approximations for the creation of an abstract metric for the nature of reality, because all in all there are no real divisions on that line; there are no exact extensions in that line. If we do not know where one line segment ends and the other begins, then we might as well consider all segments as being the same infinite line: For example, if we do not know where 2 ends and 3 begins, then 2 and 3 might as well be the same number (i.e., 2 = 3), and if we do not know where 3 ends and 4 begins, then 2 might as well be 4. We can do this until we equate 2 with 8676.78 if we wish, but ultimately all numbers are infinite because all segments equate to the infinite line. In other words, there is only one indivisible line with infinite extension -- anything else is an illusion.

In general, people only associate quantitative meaning to numbers. Scientifically speaking, there should be nothing special about numbers themselves, because they are mere abstract concepts used to evaluate reality. But what is reality after all? First of all, in the real (concrete) world there is no place for abstract entities, and so numbers are not actually real; they are only real in the sense that they are encountered as quantities in the realm of experience. But there is a deeper reality surrounding numbers: Consider that the real world is one of sensations before it is anything else. We do not see an object; we feel an object. We do not count a number; we feel a number. Feelings are the basis of awareness / perception. Therefore, the key to understand how numbers can be meaningful beyond their ordinary quantitative meaning lies in the study of how numbers as archetypes can evoke certain feelings in us. That is, we can identify ourselves with numbers on many levels such as personal, emotional, spiritual, intellectual and mental.

Numbers reveal a deep significance that is independent from how symbolic they can be only as the numerals they are. For example, the Greek philosopher Plato postulated a higher dimension of existence, a perfect world populated with ideal forms (i.e., spiritual objects) that exist independently from the realm of sensible experience where only their shadows can be appreciated. Well, in the same way that in mathematics everything can be translated into numbers, everything in Nature can be reduced to essential qualities, also known as archetypes. Unlike Platonic forms, an archetype takes an outer / shadow form and it still presents itself as an inner / ideal form, and so an archetype is a paradox that can actually exist in the real world. Numbers illustrate this concept beautifully, because they are both logical / mathematical objects as well as spiritual objects. Numbers are archetypal in the strictest sense, expressing the infinite in the finite: we have seen previously how numbers are individual ways to express Infinity, and yet they appear as finite discontinuities.

You begin to see numbers as having special significance when you begin to see the deep connections that they have to the natural world. Reality (IC #13) has the need to manifest Itself (emerge) out of an energy continuum, of infinite dimension, and we have seen in Figure 2.2 that the first pattern that emerges is the abstract metric of numbers. (Note: one possible etymological definition for archetype is "original pattern.") Numbers are "the extension and energy of the spermatic reasons contained in the monad [the One - IC #13]."¹ That is, if the Universal Mind (Consciousness) reasons about Iself, then It is automatically breaking Itself down, numerically, in order to experience Itself objectively. Therefore, one option is to take numbers literally, and the other is to take them symbolically as descriptions of ideas (i.e., lines of thought) that the Universal Mind has about Itself. In the latter, each idea corresponds to a number, and so numbers function as the Universal language / code describing and encoding every aspect of Creation, every Conscious experience.

Ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras and his followers believed numbers to be the language of the universe, specially the natural (counting) numbers: {1,2,3,4,...}. The Pythagoreans' motto was "All is Number." Indeed, the natural numbers in sequence are literally describing the structural order embedded in the universal continuum; therefore, numbers reflect and echo the nature of reality. That is why mathematics, the science of numbers, is an exemplar science that shows us the rationality present in the order of the universe. Mathematics greatly expands the number language by adding many new symbols and ways to organize and relate numbers to each other. Mathematics also defines other categories of number (e.g., rational, irrational, real, complex) that are less intuitive, less natural. Still, all mathematics is constructed around the logical theory of natural numbers and its basic arithmetic operations.

Numerology is the field that studies the occult and qualitative meaning of numbers. While mathematics sees numbers only as effective means to an end, numerology sees numbers as an end unto themselves -- numbers are everything except meaningless. Numerology is actually a spiritual science that rescues the philosophy of numbers, and for that reason it serves as a link between philosophy and science, since numbers are the language of science. We learn through numerology that many ancient cultures understood the spiritual power and the cosmic significance of numbers and based important aspects of their culture on them. They had a deep affinity for numbers in themselves,² and all of this when they knew little or nothing about the myriad of ways that numbers can be manipulated through mathematics. In short, history shows us that numbers are just as useful for solving philosophical problems as they are for solving mathematical problems. The Pythagoreans, for example, evolved their philosophy from the science of numbers.

[Under construction]

The whole idea of numerological analysis is finding the numerological meaning of integral numbers (integers). In the case of the decimal system, which uses the digits 0 to 9, the set of basic meanings are those of the single-digit numbers 1 to 9 excluding zero whose meaning is simply "lack of meaning." But If a number has more than one digit, its meaning is seen as a composition, combination of the meanings of numbers 1 to 9. Thus, When we want to find the composite meaning of a number, we must first break the number down and analyse each digit separately, as for example: 13 = 1 + 3 ; 6782 = 6 + 7 + 8 + 2.

Numerically speaking, zero is officialy introduced with Intention #10, but, as you can see, it comes attached to number 1. This is because the meaning of zero is that of a paradox (IC #10). Although zero is considered an ideal from the perspective of Intention #9, it eventually reveals itself as being a paradox, an absurd. It is possible to go as close to zero as possible in reality, but zero taken as a limit is an absurd idea, and also the reason why Intention #9 leads to #10. Zero is always a relative concept, and only absolute concepts can operate as Intentions of Creation. At most, zero is an integral part of the paradoxical Intention #10, which represents a dynamic whole that merges opposite extremes.

Naturally, the meanings of numbers 1 to 13 come directly from their respective Intentions of Creation, and so we do not need to focus on these numbers for now since we already know what each Intention means. Our goal lies in numbers 14 up to infinity that do not have Intentions associated to them. their meanings come from different combinations of the first nine Intentions, forming composite meanings. See the examples below.

14 -> 1 + 4 -> an ideal (IC #1) structure (IC #4)                               
27 -> 2 + 7 -> a limited (IC #2) vibration (IC #7)                              
31 -> 3 + 1 -> a manifested (IC #3) singularity (#1)                            
465 -> 4 + 6 + 5 -> a variating (IC #6) potential (IC #5) object (IC #4)        
564 -> 5 + 6 + 4 -> an equilibrated (IC #6) material (IC #4) energy (IC #5)     

But the most important practice in Numerology is to reduce numbers with more than one digit to the sum of its digits and continue until a single-digit number is reached. This process of simplification is also known as pythagoerean math or numerological arithmetic, and it is an attempt to find the root/elementary/basic (IC #1) meaning behind the composite meaning of a number.

10 -> 1   20 -> 2   30 -> 3   40 -> 4   
11 -> 2   21 -> 3   31 -> 4   41 -> 5   
12 -> 3   22 -> 4   32 -> 5   42 -> 6   
13 -> 4   23 -> 5   33 -> 6   43 -> 7   
14 -> 5   24 -> 6   34 -> 7   44 -> 8   
15 -> 6   25 -> 7   35 -> 8   45 -> 9   
16 -> 7   26 -> 8   36 -> 9   46 -> 1   
17 -> 8   27 -> 9   37 -> 1   47 -> 2   
18 -> 9   28 -> 1   38 -> 2   48 -> 3   
19 -> 1   29 -> 2   39 -> 3   49 -> 4   

The purpose for this process is simply a matter of convenience if one wants to get down to what the composite meaning of a number adds up to (results) in simple terms. It's like reaching a conclusion, a summation for what is the outcome of the combination of two or more number meanings. From one side it is an unified meaning that sums up pretty well, on the other hand it wastes important details only found on the composite meaning. Therefore, In any way it does subsitute the composite meaning. A few examples are included below.

14 -> 1 + 4 = 5 -> an ideal (IC #1) structure (IC #4) results in robustness                                    
27 -> 2 + 7 = 9 -> challenging (IC #2) vibrations (IC #7) are certainly found in meditation (IC #9)            
31 -> 3 + 1 = 4 -> a manifested (IC #3) individual (#1) thing is obviously an object (IC #4)                   
465 -> 4 + 6 + 5 = 15 -> 6 -> a variating (IC #6) potential (IC #5) object (IC #4) leads to equilibrium (IC #6)

There is nothing magical about this process alone because it even depends on which numeral system is adopted. If we were using the hexadecimal system, which uses sixteen symbols, we would have fifteen symbols corresponding to fifteen basic meanings, and all multi-digit hexadecimal numbers could have their composite meanings reduced to one of these fifteen basic meanings. Of course, all numerological meanings are ultimately borrowed from the Thirteen Intentions, and fifteen basic meanings would extrapolate the number of meanings that are really basic and fundamental with respect to Creation. we would be mistakenly attribtuing a fundamental status to the nomerological meaning of the fourteenth and fifteen symbols of the hexadecimal system.

Numbers with repeating digits introduce the notion of multiplication (IC #8) in our analysis. at first there is only one single-digit meaning contained in the number, but multiplied one, two or more times. Multiplifiation is the same as amplifying/reinforcing the single-digit meaning of that number by an arrbitrary number of times, but this reinforcement itself has meaning, because it happens through another number. against through or by in the same way when we say (one number by another).

44 -> 4 x 2 = 8 -> an object (IC #4) reinforced by separation (IC #2)                  
666 -> 6 x 3 = 18 = 1 + 8 = 9 -> equilibrium (IC #6) reinforced by manifestation (IC #3)

More examples, but this time with no repeating digits:

3 x 4 = 12 -> reality (IC #3) happening through form (IC #4) equals consciousness (IC #12)

For numbers containing the digit zero, we do not have a combination of intentions anymore, but just one intention at a higher order (IC #8). a highe rorder means the same energy is at a higher level, being more intense and more powerful. the more zeros you add, the higher it is. Because Intensification is a directive of Intention #10, then any Intention or combination of Intentions can be multiplied (IC #8) by Intention #10, that reuslts in the same energy at a higher level at which it is felt more intensily . See the following examples:

30 = 3 x 10 -> manifestation (IC #3) at a higher order                                    
350 = 35 x 10 -> (3 + 5) x 10 -> electric (IC #3) energy (IC #5) at a higher order        
50000 = 5 x 10^3 -> an explosion (IC #5) whose power is at the order of ten thousand units

FInally, For numbers 10, 11, 12 and 13, and their corresponding Intentions of Creation, we can still analyse them numerogilically, yet there is no need because we already know their meaning as Intentions of Creation. Their meanings as Intentions of Creation andas numbers are two separate things, but they stil coincide with each other, as shown below.

________________________
¹ Manly P. Hall, The Secret Teachings of All Ages, p. 70, http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/sta/index.htm.
² John D. Barrow, Between Inner Space and Outer Space: Essays on Science, Art, and Philosophy (NY: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 102.

We are not going to talk about love as if it was a mere feeling or emotion; on the contrary, we are going to ascribe a cosmic (universal) significance to it in the same way that we did with the Thirteen Intentions of Creation: Love is the primary, the highest and the most powerful energy in the universe. Love is the substance of everything that is, the foundation of all existence. It is incredibly difficult to convey the true meaning of love to another person because love transcends any form of representation. In fact, it is only through personal experiences that a true knowledge of love can be attained.

There is very little room for a rational interpretation of love in the universal sense, that is, love for all things in the universe. Shortly after coming into existence, a being is still immature and thus comes to experience love as an irrational urge / feeling. As the time passes, the being starts building a bridge from rationality to irrationality. Knowledge is what anyone gets after sufficient time being a rational person. All beings can feel love, and they are always in love with something, but not always are they mature (powerful) enough to be able to control the energy of love so that they can be in a state of love permanently. Again, love is the most powerful energy, which means that controlling it is the biggest intellectual and physical challenge for any being.

The word love in its ordinary usage is so loaded with assumptions that it is almost impossible to define it in a way that does not contradict the true meaning / nature of love. As many spiritual teachings like to put it, love is very close to the idea of an unconditional and transcendental force, meaning that it does not care about limits, boundaries or conditions. Anyway, because of the great confusion surrounding the meaning of love, let us consider Love (IC #13) instead, with capital L, which should coincide with the definition given on the first paragraph: love as an infinite energy.

infinite (IC #8) energy (IC #5) -> 8 + 5 = 13 -> IC #13 -> Love ; Will

Many sources have referred to Love as the basic law of Creation, the only law we have. A famous phrase was coined by occultist Aleister Crowley: "Love is the law, love under Will." Technically, the last part of this statement is wrong considering that Will and Love share the same level of importance, although some consider that Crowley only wanted to emphasize that those two absolute concepts are aligned with each other. Indeed, any law expects a degree of commitment and discipline requiring that one's will is aligned with it. In the case of Love, no restrictions are cast upon anyone's will, and this alone acts as the whole of the Law, but for one to actually be in a state of true will (i.e., Will) great discipline and training is necessary. Therefore, in the end Love turns out as being the most restrictive law of all, but also the most liberating if understood correctly.

Love, human of the Earth, is the first and last law of all being, therefore of life, altogether. Without Love no creation may form, and without Love no transformation may be completed. Love is required for all changes of life, for being and not-being, for light and darkness, for the coming and the passing away, for life and death, for everything in everything, and for everything in the existence altogether. (Law of Love,¹)

As a law, the general alias for Love is Law of Allowance, which in turn is said to manifest / express the Will of the Creator (a.k.a. Will of the Universe, Divine Will). Love determines just one rule: allow and accept (IC #13) everything dearly and unconditionally. This may sound contradictory for a law, but the Law of Allowance does dictate something: free will must be maintained at all costs. Above all, free will is the right of being, the right of choosing to be, and this means that Love protects all existence by ensuring that everything can exist (be) and continue (IC #13) to exist unimpeded. Also, by even allowing negative expressions of Itself to exist, such as hate or fear, Love maximizes the possibilities for the exercise of free will.

Love = Law of Allowance = Law of Creation

If you had to follow just one law, that would be Love, but the paradox is that Love is the only law that does not require obedience, although we can also say that Love's only requirement is that we should remain free to obey It or reject It. Each one is permitted to experience Love as they understand It, even if the experience is one of denial. This means that in one way or another we are always obeying Love -- there is not really a choice in the matter. Of course, perhaps an individual refuses to choose whether he wants to obey Love or not, but he is still making the choice of not having to make a choice. In fact, there is no such thing as an existence without choices.

Choices can be made consciously or unconsciously. When choices are made unconsciously, people play the victim role as consequences arise and they pretend not to know where they came from. On the other hand, it is through the conscious affirmation of our choices that we exercise our free will, and that is how we abide by Love, whereas our freedom dissipates when we remain oblivious to our choices. Still, even an unconscious choice is abiding by Love, at least indirectly, because at some point in our existence we made the conscious choice of not having to assume responsibility for our choices anymore. Therefore, Love is the only law that everyone can be happy with, because there are no obligations except accepting responsibility for our own choices.

In the song "All is Full of Love" by singer Björk, the concept that Love is an omnipresent energy is well illustrated with the passage "All is full of love, you just ain't receiving." In other words, the problem was never really about the search for Love; instead, it is about a simple decision to embrace Love right now and ever. It is a matter of letting Love flow inside us naturally, without resistance. Also, still considering Love as an omnipresent energy, we may conclude that the Law of Allowance is already implemented everywhere in the universe; it is therefore useless to dispute It or run away from It.

It should be clear by now that it is not really possible to reject Love, as Love is responsible for the very miracle of existence. Love is already implemented and realized with full force in all forms of existence. This fact turns the idea of following and/or applying Love into a pointless task, because everyone is already doing this in one way or another -- everyone is a part of Creation (i.e., overall existence). On the other hand, acknowledging that everything is full of Love and so there is no need for us to ever worry about anything is also something pointless, because we are merely stating the obvious and using it as an excuse to drop our responsibility.

Love does not require any kind of special devotion, and It does not expect us to do anything in Its name or that we act in a certain way all the time. Love only expect us to surrender ourselves to our true will. The fact that Intention #12 is right under Intention #13 in the sequence of Intentions means that any kind of consciousness (IC #12) is already close to inherit all of the Will of the Creator, which is Love. The only missing part between Intention #12 and #13 is the unique account that comes with individuality (IC #1). In other words, all beings share the will of the Creator, because each one of them has an unique way to express Love. Consequently, to follow your Will really means to express Love in your way.

12 + 1 = 13 -> consciousness (IC #12) individuated (IC #1) is the same as a being (IC #13),
who has its own will (IC #13) based on Love (IC #13)                                       

As implied by the Law of Allowance, one of the most efficient ways to express Love is to simply allow things to happen and allow them to change. However, it is important that we comprehend that allowance does not always mean inaction, because our passiveness can also tamper with the free flow of things. For example: In a river stream full of fish, you decide to set free a fish that got stuck. This may be considered Love in action, but it would not be Love if you tried to impede the fish from going with the flow or if you remained passive while there was a clear need for intervention.

Allowance involves a subtle transformation of consciousness from denial (fear) to acceptance (Love). An entire reality of pain and suffering can disappear when one is able to accept it, because corrective actions can be taken far more efficiently once fear is gone. First you have to accept a situation, and then you do whatever is necessary to correct (change) it. Unfortunately, it is more common that people stay in denial about problematic situations, and sometimes they even work to remain in this state .

Before one can practive Love efficiently, they must learn discernment based on the Law of Allowance. Sometimes our assistance is truly needed; soemtimes it is not, and thus it is our duty to allow things to happen. There is great wisdom in being able to honor the way things are. In fact, Love is really like an affirmation, a declaration made by the Creator Himself with full force: "So be it!". Additionaly, beliefs that are limting our choices may also be liminting our abiity to practice Love. As an exmaple, there is the idea that Love is only about "good" deeds. But Love is not devoid of force, strength or even violence. The gentleness of Love may also be the gentleness of strength. Sometimes love can even account for its "negation" if the final objective is honorable and pure, that is, an even greater expression of Love.

Love is a paradoxical concept for the simple fact that It is a law that does not work as one. A law that is already fully operational and cannot be violated is no more no less than just the way things are. Therefore, when we state the importance of Love as for example with the phrase "Infinite love is the only truth. Everything else is illusion" (David Icke), we are not crazy or deluded, but we may be putting too much emphasis on the obvious. An ingenuous approach toward Love serves no purpose in the real / practical world. We cannot forget that a true understanding of Love can only come with personal experience, and an experience by definition is something that happens through a series of real and often problematic situations. This means that our reality and experiences are all-important, because they work as a jumping platform that propels us toward a greater knowledge of Love.

In sum, there is no reason for us to forget about all our problems just because "love will prevail." Yes, It will, but only at the very end of our journey back to the Source. (See the Model of Creation in Section 2.1.) Creation is wholly sustained by Love, and it is in Its core that infinite, perfect and genuine love resides. Everyone is already spiritually present at the Source, but not everyone has achieved a state of mind in which this truth is realized. There is always more work (evolution) to do, and that is why it is important that we avoid falling into extremes of denial of Love or denial of reality. We must understand that absolute concepts such as Love are not removed from reality, no matter how grim that reality is.

Intention #13 is the most powerful energy of Creation, or, to be more exact, the divine energy that we call Love. However, from within the Artificial Creation (A.C.) Love is actually spread out, fragmented, and must be rediscovered through a series of experiences that form a line of evolution for the individual. In fact, evolution is the name of the process of Creation, a process that justifies the existence of the physical universe, which is the A.C. Figuratively speaking, if there was no evolution there would be no need for the A.C. and the Thirteen Intentions, and Creation would remain as an immanifest singularity without levels of energy forming an evolutionary ladder.

Each one of the Thirteen Intentions is a different way to express Love, with Intention #13 being the one that brings Love forward in Its full glory. Such genuine love is sometimes referred to as "unconditional" love. The problem with such denomination is that unconditional still sounds as a condition within the context of the Law of Allowance. Love in action is comprehension, understanding, cognition, knowledge, ability, mastering, respect, logic and certainty, and all based on wisdom, which in no circumstance means a complete lack of conditions. That is why there is no such thing as unconditional love inside the A.C.; there is only a learning process toward reaching Love with capital L, and any accomplishments during this process are at most approximations of what Love really is. Love as the universal law cannot be directly applied in practice because it involves a level of self-awareness and self-responsibility that has nothing to do with us doing some thing or another in particular, but that also depends on every single action of our part.

Is it justified to kill for Love? Certainly not when we are wise and always looking for a better solution, but in reality there is no answer to this question because Love is above the category that elicited it. This question itself carries a fundamental mistake: trying to answer it is giving in to the possibility that Love can fail. But Love is absolute and cannot be violated. A feeling of Love provides us with wisdom beyond words that will decide the best course of action we should take. however, this does not mean that we cannot devise a code of conduct compatible with this feeling.

Therefore, it is only when we break Love down into rules and directives that we can begin to understand It from a more rational and scientific viewpoint, and thus we find effective ways to follow and apply It in our lives. That is where the Thirteen Intentions of Creation come in. With the Thirteen Intntions it is possible for us to plan in advance, take decisions and translate our understanding of Love into rational thoughts. Then we will be able to make decisions according to the best possible principles, the Will of the Creator. This is mainly what Chapter 4 is all about: to show how the Intentions can be applied in practice.

To exemplify, suppose that we could see Creation as a spherical jewel floating alone in the void. With the creation of the universe, or from a perspective located inside the A.C., it can be said that this jewel has been shattered into numerous pieces. The jewel still exists as a fragmented whole, but it is no longer in a pristine condition. In any case, the jewel seen as a single object is the Divine Creation, whereas the Artificial Creation corresponds to how the jewel looks like as a bunch of fragments from the outside or a bunch of facets from the inside -- both scenarios are valid.

The most important thing in life is to experience, which in turn means to learn more about Love. To learn more about Love is an eternal task in reality, one that is made discrete in the form of cycles (lives). This means that the act of living is the purpose of life itself, because any life cycle is a modal unit of experience. Life is supposed to be lived according to your Will. The goal is to keep living, to evolve, and to let others do the same. There is no such thing as a restrictive plan for life, because that would go against free will, which is an incorruptible right according to the Law of Allowance. However, discipline is always good to ensure that you are living in the best possible way, and thus you are making the right choices. Discipline yourself by making your own rules according to your Will and the directives of Creation, because then you can amplify your life's experience and thus serve as an example to others.

Fear is basically a feeling of spiritual disconnection. Fear emanates from the shadowy part of the Self that is temporarily separated from the Divine. Fear arises when one gazes into nothingness, the void that once was occupied by a spirit. The vibration of fear takes over when one cannot find their essence / spirit anymore. Fear is the greatest barrier to personal growth, a barrier that can prevent us from acquiring self-awareness and rediscovering our spiritual nature / identity. Fear can easily spiral out of control and transform into despair as one gazes deeper into the abyss of the soul. However, not all is lost, because according to German philosopher Goethe, "Tiefer, tiefer, irgendwo in der Tiefe gibt es ein Licht." (Translation: "Deeper, deeper, somewhere in the depth there is a light.")

If we are supposed to come up with an opposite for Love, then that opposite is fear, not hate. Hate is actually the opposite of Love's lesser / ordinary version: love with small l. We have already exposed unconditional love as being a fallacious and extremist version of Love, and such judgment applies the same for other ordinary notions of love because they all tend to be extreme and imbalanced. Ordinary love is extremist like hate, and so the two are pretty much sides of the same coin. On the other hand, Love reigns supreme over all sides as if they were one, and a force against Love does not really exist except as an extremely distorted form / aspect of Love Itself. Although it is true that everything in the universe is a matter of love vs. fear, you can see that this conception is only valid when we are talking about ordinary love, because there is no opposition at all when fear is in reality Love playing an inverse role of Itself. This means that an opposition between fear and Love is nothing more than an illusion propagated by fear itself.

It would be a great shame for Love if It had to do battle with a counterfeit opposition. True love comes from a much higher plane than the unconditional version that requires its adherents to turn the other cheek in masochistic style. The Big L may also turn the other cheek, but not because It is incapable to react: being Love an infinite power, all fights are already decided in Its favor. What Love represents at the level of Intention #13 is already an eternal victory, while the battles and competitions involving the polarity aspects of Love are just for fun, just for laughs, since playfulness is one of the main aspects of Love. Think about it: if you do not care about losing or winning, then what good is a game to you?

Fear is considered the primary instinct of survival (self-preservation) in dangerous situations. But here we are more interested in the energy of fear and its fundamental nature, not in physiological and psychological effects caused by fear. We are talking about fear in the spiritual sense, because fear is like a barrier causing one to be disconnected from the Spirit. Fear is the principle by which consciousness is persuaded to continue to maintain that barrier, which is needed for the preservation of the being inside the game of Creation. In Section 2.2 we had a glimpse of the actual source code of the universe as the program (game) of Creation and we saw how consciousness becomes individuated when it first enters this game. Well, fear makes sure that the player (being) has a chance of surviving all stages of the game. Fear prevents the player from giving up too soon and will leave him with no choice other than progressing into the game.

When you avoid something out of fear, it's only because that thing still exerts influence over you, and you may just right into it without knowing. just fall back to it in the drop of a hat. fear is a great attractor, and we always attract that which we fear. A negative attitude based on fear draws a negative experience that will feed that fear of yours. fear has to be overcome / mastered first through acceptance of it, and then by confronting it. just sitting and acknolwdgeing the fear is not enough. One must transform the fear into higher levels of understanding, and the highest level is Love. The key is to experience and subsequently to learn to control and direct the fear energy, transforms his fear into fury, caution, courage... the fear energy is which is Love on the mirror, , so reaching out for Love automatically means letting go of fear. translates to a unfocused, uncontrolled love. not put into action or movement. lack of control of one's energy.

To put it simply, fear is ignorance, unawareness and, deep inside, denial of Love, because there is always a choice at the level of the subconscious mind. We have already made the connection between fear and denial when we were discussing Love in the beginning of this section. Fear is always associated with denial of some integral aspect of Creation, and most importantly, everything that Intention #13 represents. Intention #13 can represent many things, but one of Its most important aspects on a personal level is change. Change always involves some loss by the introduction of the new and the removal of the old. False expectations instead of acceptance of whatever may come is what characterizes a fearful approach to the new (IC #13). When the new is falsely imagined beforehand rather than being accepted for what it is, it is turned into an unknown, and all fear is generated by unknowns. In addition, fear involves an ignorant perspective of denial, which means that the fearful entity does not even understand the reason for its feelings of repulsion.

... all our worries and wars are based upon change. We fear that something will happen, or we fear that it won't; so we fight to prevent change or to speed up the process. But whatever we do, change is 100 percent guaranteed. The only question is its rate. Slow change we interpret as evolution, fast as revolution. Changes are the epitome of Unknowns -- the greatest of fear generators. (Monroe 2)

Whereas Love is latent in the first few Intentions of Creation, fear is potent, and can be pictured as being a natural force pushing away from Intention #13. Considering that this force must go through Intentions #3 and #2 in order to reach Intention #1, we can resume the focus, the culmination of fear as being an existence (IC #3) that is removed (IC #2) from Love in the most absolute (IC #1) manner. But how absurd does this sound when we already know that Love is absolute? Surprisingly, not so absurd considering that absolute (IC #1) existence (IC #3) -> 1 + 3 -> 13 -> IC #13, which means that fear still guides one to Intention #13 after all. Indeed, what is shown in Figure 2.# is a perspective from within the illusory reality of the Artificial Creation. It only appears that fear opposes Love, because in reality fear is a force of attraction toward Love without the conscious participation of the individual.

Intention #13 is is a singularity (IC #1) manifested (IC #3) meaning that It is self-sufficient, It is whole unto itself, and does not need the other Intentions, including Intention #2. Now if fear is denial of love, it is also denial of what Intention #13 represent, and so fear justifies the existence of polarity which means two poles and not just a singularity. Fear in adition is a potent (IC #5): it pushes the poles fara way from each other as possible, that is, extrapolate (IC #8). it wants the two poles to be completely (IC #10) separate. biut it can at most make an approximation (IC #11). ANyway, see Note how we have mentioned ICs #5, #8, #10 ansd #11 come into the picture just because of the process of polarization which is directly related to fear. We could also derived the other itnentions. but the fact is the firts 12 intentiosn only have their existence justified because of thsi process of division that we call fear.inshort this processa alone involves all 12 intentions.

Let us see some examples of how fear is simultaneously repulsion from Intention #13 and attraction to Intention #1. Fear of death, for example, is supported by the belief that there is only one (IC #1) life that must be preserved as sacred; however, according to Intention #13, there is continued existence as long as there is will (IC #13) to exist, not mattering how many lives happen during the process. There is also fear of life when one is afraid of not living according to external (IC #2) conventions (Representation - IC #1) that require conformity to social standards. Fear can make people choose to conform instead of expressing their individuality. Interestingly enough, according to numerological arithmetic we have individuality (IC #1) expressed (IC #3) -> 1 + 3 -> 13 -> IC #13, and so fear of non-conforming goes against Intention #13 as well.

Now, if fear is a force that pushes away from Love, we may ask ourselves: away from Love toward what? Well, the answer is nothing, because the very premise of the question is an absurd. Indeed, fear is love of nothing; it is still Love, but without control by the hands of the individual. For example, the Divine Creation disappearing in the inverted Model of Creation means that the Source can no longer be found. The Source contains an infinite amount of love, and the fact that all this love is suddenly gone creates a feeling of disconnection that leaves the being completely lost. At Its essence, Source is Love and as such Love is the only real (authentic) energy in the universe; all else is just illusion associated with the game of separation, which is fear, that defines the physical universe. Fear is the shadow of illusory disconnection from the Source, which is everyone's original home. Fearful beings are attracted to nothing because it is a placeholder for where their Home was. Fear manifests as denial of reality in favor of nothing because instead of looking forward to go back, the being is looking back to where it came from.

Still according to Figure 2.#, consider that fear is a magnetic pole at Intention #1 whose force of attraction, or sphere of influence, is stronger at Intention #2 (separation), #3 (illusion) and #4 (physicality). Therefore, we can say that fear is rooted in the illusory perception of separation that pervades the physical universe. Anyway, and perhaps fortunately, fear is gradually released as there is attunement to higher Intentions of Creation. As the individual suffers a spiritual (IC #9) transformation, focus shifts from fear to Love as an ignorant (fearful) approach to Love is replaced with a conscious one. Thus fear is the foreshadowing of such transformation. Indeed, it is always a surprise for those who held a negative connotation about fear to see that their greatest fears were essential to their spiritual awakening. From a victim of fear they have become masters of Love. They were on the right path all the time -- they just did not know it.

In spite of fear being an illusion considered by many as the cause of negative experiences, fear is vital for an evolutionary existence. In Figure 2.# we can see that without a force of repulsion that creates separation there would be no distance or difference between Intention #1 and #13. This 12-fold distance is the conceptual length of an evolutionary process for consciousness as it traverses the universe. In short, fear sets forth and justifies an entire context of evolution and spiritual progression. Fear is only fear as long as there is lack of spirituality, a phase in which the individual is unknowingly seeking Love while guided by its own fear. That is, the individual requires the experience of fear until it is ready to experience Love.

Fear is the original disassociative distraction of the spirit of Creation. The Spirit, or Consciousness forgets about Itself, but it is a wilful act so that it can remember about its nature anew. In other words, it is a like the mythical Luciferian rebellion, a denial of Love, so that Love can be rediscovered, because rediscovering Love is the only way to learn more about It. To deny Love is still just an experience, but perhaps not the most pleasurable one, reason why it cannot be sustained forever. however multiple attempts can be are done continually, efefctively creating a continuous process. in intention #13 acceptance and eternity are related; therefore, there is no such as "eternal denial". there is only eternal accepatnce and temporary denial. denial _is_ the temporary process, while greater and greater acceptance is a continuous, eternal process.

To say that there is a state where one becomes fearless is an exxageration. Some degree of fear is always present. However, when we are able to accept our fear, we can control / master it. Courage is mastery of fear. Denial of fear is the only obstacle to its transcendence. The only thing we have to deny is denial itself, The only thing to fear is fear itself, and that is how fear eventually cancels itself out. A fearless / courageous person is more afraid of not facing their fear than what they fear. Also, if ic 3 representes infintie power (5 + 8 = 13), and fear is denial of what ic13represents, then our deepest fear as beings (IC #13) is that we are powerful beyond measure, and that we can overcome all of our fears.

To conclude, know that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with fear. When Consciousness enters the game of Creation and becomes individualized, it is only natural that a feeling of loneliness sets in on the being. But it is these emotions based on fear that will lead the being back to its original home where true love can be found. In other words, without a number of fear-based lessons there is no way for the being to finally be able to see (remember) the bright (loving) side of existence. One must never forget the fact that Love rules over everything. Fear is only the illusion that there is something wrong with Creation, or that life in the universe is unsafe. There is nothing to fear but fear itself, and this implies that ultimately there is nothing to fear.

Love in action should lead to unity, coexistence, comprehension and cooperation; therefore, when we are talking about love set against hate, we are talking about love with small l. Between love and hate, the first is when Love is approached by an immature spirit, while the second is when Love is approached by a rebellious spirit. There is passion in both sides: love is a positive passion and hate is a negative passion. Also, in both cases there is non-acceptance of what Love represents, and this means that there is a dose of fear on both sides. The idea here is really one of polarity (IC #2): love and hate are opposite forces, and a force by definition is exerted by a pole. There is no real difference between love and hate, because each aspect / polarity has the other in its heart. (Example: the immature is rebellious at heart and vice-versa.) Therefore, any vocabulary used to describe love can also be applied to hate, and vice-versa, because the only thing that we can be sure is that both sides possess a low degree of connection to Love's energies.

The idea behind opposition is polarity. A pole by definition implies in the existence of another pole. With respect to any pair of opposites in the universe, one pole is always attracting to the direction of Love, which is the right / good direction after all. (How could it be that the best side is not the side of infinite balance, wisdom and freedom?). But we can also extrapolate and claim that Love is wrong / evil, and indeed It is in a paradoxical sense: fear is the hallmark of Love's severity and toughness. There is darkness in Love in the same manner that a loving person is not immune from casting a shadow. Think of a father that wants to teach his son how to grow stronger, but he must do that indirectly by lending minimal assistance so to not spoil the child. The fact is that Love can be defined in a recursive fashion exactly as we did with the Whole (IC #13). Love is the output of a continuous process of atonement for any pair of opposites that eventually arises. The pair is neutralized and made back into one. Therefore, Love always wins by transcending dualism, but It still leaves room for an eventual challenge.

Love inside the context of polarity gives rise to two extremes: one of light and one of darkness. Light and Dark are more fitting names for the polarities because they clearly indicate that we are working with a contrast of ideas. What is not obvious is that both Dark and Light share the same power source: the Source (IC #13). In fact, it is denial (fear) of the absoluteness of the Source that results in some seeing It as an emission of white light or black light, because in reality the Source emits both types of light at the same time that it emits no type in particular. The closest denomination of color / energy to what we are describing here is golden light, which corresponds to the perfect energetic balance of Love. (Note: it may appear that we are being more figurative than literal here, but when positive and negative energies are seen for what they are, they can only assume one appearance or another according to the binary and extremist nature of the universe. We will learn more about these aspects of color in Chapter 3.)

Symbolically speaking, the main difference between the respective sources for Light and Dark is that one emits a very bright light and the other emits a deep darkness. Therefore, whether it is due to obfuscation by too much light or due to lack of visibility within the darkness, followers of both factions are continually tripping and falling on their way to the Source. All paths lead to the Source and all of them are fundamentally rocky (challenging - IC #2), because the universe is after all an illusion based on polarity. Being polarity the main characteristic of Intention #2, then it also implies in the presence of challenges. Anyway, instead of exclusively focusing on the light at the end of the road, a balanced perspective based on Love gives as much importance to the journey as well to the goal, and in fact it sees no difference: the journey (evolution - IC #11) becomes the goal (end - IC #12), which in turn becomes an eternal beginning for the sake of experience (i.e., eternal (IC #13) beginning (IC #1) -> 13 + 1 = 14 -> 1 + 4 = 5 -> IC #5 -> experience).

The polarities operate under the principle of fear, and use it as their main weapon. Fear is a force that pushes for total separation between poles. Both polarities want to be the "monopole" that concentrates all the power for itself, but of course that this is impossible as long as there are two competing for hegemony. Dark and Light are perceived as different depending on your perspective, but the truth is that they are identical (IC #6). An individual can have both Dark- and Light-based traits and alternate between them. What does not change is that both sides display fear-based purposes: a darksider's approach is more direct and so it is willing to do anything to cause fear that will feed its source; a lightsider's approach is more indirect and so it expects everyone to eventually worship (fear) the "superior" source of Light. The fact is that both sides desire everyone to feed their respective power sources with fear energy. These sources are always represented by something external: gods, masters, symbols or even oneself when there is a self-serving and self-centered attitude, because it is also polarization when an individual worships self from an external perspective.

If the polarities are identical sides of the same coin, then anything that is said about one side must be inversely proportional and applicable to the other. However, we can also draw many parallels and similarities between Dark and Light. As an example, consider that darksiders have no higher purpose other than just to deny Love in the most explicit manner. They simply like to cause fear on others, specially because they need this fear to feed their energy source: the Dark. On the other hand, lightsiders seek unconditional acceptance of Love, but a lack of understanding prevents this acceptance to occur in practice. Lightsiders fail to fully accept Love because their unwillingness to accept the rightful existence of Dark violates the Law of Allowance. Lightsiders hold an extremist (imbalanced) idealization of Love in such high regard that they end becoming fearful of what Love truly represents: perfect balance. They end worshiping and adoring a distant representation of Love. Therefore, we may also consider that lightsiders depend on fear, since they expect everyone to worship (feed) their energy source: the Light, which they mistakenly equate to Love.

The polarities do not have an existence independent from each other. After all, they are polarities, and polarity corresponds to Intention #2, whereas the notion of existence is only introduced later with Intention #3. But it is by Intention #6 that we can begin to understand how the polarities come into existence as a whole: they are equal halves that form a dynamic balancing act, a spinning yin-yang kind of thing. In other words, it is not only a matter of us recognizing how the polarities coexist in the big picture; we must also take into account a dynamic relationship in which the polarities feed on their mutual desire to confront each other, because they would both starve and die if those feeding channels were removed.

Fear, a force of extreme polarization, is an illusion. Attraction toward what Love represents is the only valid and real force in Creation. It is only when there is denial of Love that an inversely proportional force seems to exist, and so the complex interplay of forces characterizing the universe begins. Denial of Love corresponds to when we assume an inverted perspective of Creation, which means that the standard sequence of Intentions becomes inverted as well, with Intention #1 replacing Intention #13. In the inverted "mode" of Creation, we have a force of unification (IC #1) based on separation (IC #2) instead of a force of universalization (IC #12) based on approximation (IC #11). Fear is attraction (unification) based on repulsion, or attraction toward finite difference, while Love is attraction (approximation) that seeks to cross boundaries and eliminate differences, or attraction toward infinite sameness -- like attracts like.

The polarities subscribe to the quest for total separation that characterizes fear, but they are still affected by an universal force of attraction based on Approximation (IC #11). By analogy, this force is the inverse of a repulsive force based on Separation (IC #2). The latter pushes for oneness as Intention #1, while the former pushes for Oneness as Intention #13. There is repulsion and attraction happening simultaneously over the polarities, much like in a love-hate relationship. In other words, the two forces respectively based on Intention #2 and #11 end up equilibrating each other to create the spinning motion of a binary system.

Polarity is a fundamental aspect of Creation. The game of Creation requires both polarities to be active both on a macroscopic and microcospic scale. No matter how much one has raised their consciousness above duality, for an external judge they will always fall into one side (Dark) or the other (Light). Of course that somewhere in the course of eternity one may achieve 100% control over both the Light and Dark aspects of their being. The only one who already occupies this position of absolute balance is the Creator, who is after all a personification of Love.

Polarities exist in all levels of Creation, but they are active only in some. As will be further explained in Chapter 3, polarities are active only up to the sixth density. In the seventh density there is only positive orientation toward Love, and then comes the next higher octave. (Note: a negative orientation in this case is one that is still focusing on Intention #2 [polarity] or lower instead of Intention #13 [newfound unity].) In the sixth density, the positive entity is already facing the right side, but the negative entity has an additional step to take: a 180 degree turn to face the positive side. It is however a simple reorientation that the entity has to make considering that one who reaches the top of the mountain but ends in the shadowy side only needs to take a small step into the sunny side.

When someone needs to learn and evolve, it does not matter if this is done though a positive (Light) or negative (Dark) path. What is important is that one becomes aware of where one is ultimately going. A darksider will learn a lot in his path of darkness, but eventually such path reveals itself as being wrong under the true light of Love, not under the false light of the Lightside. There is always time, however, to change the road that one is on. Similarly, a lightsider roams erratically in his path because he is being blinded by the Light, and this too eventually turns into a mistake as the lightsider is unable to complete his course. There is really no Darkside or Lightside; there is only evolution toward greater wisdom acquired through experience. Wisdom does not have a polarity.

The good thing about polarity is that it appears to be a very simple game: Light is the inverse of Dark, and the absence of one means the presence of the other. However, polarity games do not look so simple when we rise above the chess board, because then we can see the many possibilities for moves and strategies. Being equal (IC #6) halves, one polarity can imitate the other easily. Dark in particular is better known for its ability to imitate Light in a very shameless and deceiving manner. As an example, consider that whenever we are talking about the top of a pyramidal hierarchy, we are already implying extreme polarization (e.g., top vs. bottom). Because Dark is the polarity between the two that tends to be more explicit (extreme), then we can say that every "master of light" who expects or demands worship is a darksider in disguise.

Another aspect of the chess game of polarity is how both Light and Dark think that they deserve the throne. Both factions consider themselves as "illuminated" and the other as being "in the dark." This is interesting, because it shows how the polarities are nothing more than sides of a coin that is constantly flipping. In the end it is only a matter of perspective. The truth, as we already know, is that one side cannot exist without the other. Without Light there is no Dark and vice-versa. They have to both exist to exist.

Dark and Light cannot be beaten in their own game because the very purpose of the game is that players adopt the "win or lose" mentality. A polarity game exists as long as there are hopes that the game will end once the forces of Light overcome the forces of Dark, or vice-versa. But Dark cannot exist without Light. The game only ends when both factions self-destruct, because one faction cannot destroy the other without destroying itself in the process. Were Dark to destroy Light, it would self-destruct into nothingness (IC #9). Nonetheless, a polarity game can be won on a personal level when you remove yourself from it without guilt or remorse. One should not attempt to destroy polarity; one should transcend it by evolving past desires for action against another. According to the cosmic law of balance (IC #6), for each person that leaves a polarity game that will remove one pawn of Dark and one pawn of Light. In fact, it can be said that Dark and Light already exist in perfect (IC #12) balance according to a perspective based on Love.

The polarities are not completely unaware that they cooperate with each other on behalf of Love. They may pretend that they want each other dead / destroyed, or that they need to stay far away from each other, but deep inside they know that they need each other as in a love-hate relationship. This in turn provides an interplay of forces that is fundamental to keep the game of Creation running. As one side taunts, attacks or avoids the other, it gives the other purpose and motivation to react. Action and reaction. What would be the purpose of a lightsider if not to fight off the "dark forces"? And what would be the purpose of a darksider if not to corrupt the Light that the lightsiders consider and love so much?

Love can be seen as Light or Dark. While Light feeds Dark and vice-versa, an incarnation of true love lies above the battle field, laughing, observing, learning and participating indirectly through all sides as well as by a side of its own. It is certainly insuffienct to say that Love is a neutral side, because although it assumes the role of a neutral side, it is also more than just a side, and carries a richer proposal other than just neutrality or indifference. Love is the only extreme that unifies, equilibrates and integrates all other extremes in perfect harmony and balance. Love is the true Light that remains occult (dark) until one is able to find It.

________________________
¹ "Billy" Eduard Albert Meier, Gesetz der Liebe [The Law of Love] (Augsburg, DEU: Printing Service, 1995).

In Chapter 2 we saw how the Thirteen Intentions of Creation can be interpreted as distinct steps in a sequence; however, a purely sequential approach hides the fact that they are actually discretizations of a continuous process. Seeing the Intentions as individual entities is convenient for an initial study, but we eventually realize that it is not possible to completely separate the meanings of one Intention from those of the next.¹

But what kind of process do the Intentions define? We ought to find an answer if we try to define what a process is according to the Intentions themselves. In first place, Intention #2 (linearization) is the one that better depicts what a process is, because all processes entail a linear abstraction (sequence) of events. Second, a process is understood insofar as we can see into its development, because then we can analyze it from beginning to end, and we are able to see it coming full-circle before our eyes. This leads us to the following:

process (IC #2) as a whole (IC #10) -> 2 + 10 = 12 -> IC #12

Can we imagine a process described by the Intentions ordered in sequence? Yes, and while we are at it let us name this process as Process. As noted before, a process that can be seen in its entirety is necessarily a finite (IC #12) process. Thus we can assume that the Process must begin and end with some Intention of Creation, and since we know that Intention #1 represents beginning and Intention #12 represents end, then the Process can only be contained in the interval from Intention #1 to #12. In short, the Process is actually a 12-Intention process. Intention #13 is the only Intention that escapes and transcends this Process.

Every process produces a result once it ends, an output, and the 12-Intention process is no exception: we already know that it ends with Intention #12. But what does that mean? What is the output? Well, by numerological arithmetic we have the following: 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 so that the actual result of Intention #12 is Intention #3, which in turn brings the directive Circulation and the idea of a cycle to our attention. In short, the result when the 12-Intention process finishes can only be the completion of a cycle, which is equivalent to the idea of a circle. Another way of coming to this conclusion is shown below.

IC #12 -> unified (IC #1) linearization (IC #2) -> a line that is unified -> circle ; cycle

The Cycle of Life is the name given to the cyclical process formed by the first twelve Intentions of Creation. It is far from being an ordinary cycle; instead, it is the blueprint, the fundamental standard cycle of Creation that determines the pattern behind all cycles. Many people think that only biological life (i.e., living systems) follows natural cycles, but we cannot forget that there is energetic activity (IC #3) in all things in the universe regardless of their size or origin. By the very nature of reality, any kind of energetic activity is describing pulse waves, which are nothing more than cycles. That is, from a micro or macro perspective, everything in the universe operates according to cycles.

As a process, the Cycle of Life is actually non-linear because of its cyclical nature. But of course that any cyclical process is still subject to a linear interpretation by the very definition of process. In other words, the Cycle of Life is both linear and non-linear as a process: we can picture it sideways and see the progress from beginning to end, or we can picture it from the front and see a juxtaposition of spirals forming an outermost circle as shown in Figure 3.3. The outermost circle alone can represent the entire process and/or the result of the process. This is interesting, because by Intention #3 the idea of a circle is linked to the directive Manifestation. But manifestation of what? Of something, anything. The product of the Cycle of Life is the manifest (physical) universe itself, which is frequently called as "reality." That is why the Cycle of Life is so important for us to understand the nature of reality.

Cycle of Life -> 12-Intention process -> 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 -> reality (IC #3)

We can expect to find the pattern of the Cycle of Life in whatever direction we look, especially when we are analyzing some aspect that is more fundamental with respect to how Creation is implemented through the Thirteen Intentions. More specifically, any aspect in Creation can be characterized by the first twelve Intentions organized sequentially to describe a finite process that results in a cycle. This is what is behind the nature of reality.

We can correlate Figure 3.4 with the idea of a fractal. The word fractal comes from the Latin fractus meaning "fracture." Above all, a fractal exhibits self-similarity, which is the tendency for an overall geometric pattern to be repeated across all levels of magnification. Therefore, no matter how much we zoom in a fractal, we still get the same shape / pattern approximately. That is how the Cycle of Life alone can provide us with all the knowledge necessary for a comprehension of the organization of the universe. If you understand that there are only 12 types of building blocks, you understand it all.

By Intention #3 we have the directives Manifestation and Circulation, the latter of which gives birth to the idea of a cycle. Consider also the notion of duration (length) from Intention #2. Now, considering that Intention #2 evolves into #3 by the sequence of Intentions, we can say that when a duration of any sort becomes manifest, it can only describe a cycle; it can only function as a cycle. This means that all things including abstract concepts have a lifespan (duration) in the form of a cycle.

Consequently, every phenomenon in Nature is cyclical. Planetary, galactic, cosmic and even universal cycles are like ordinary biological (life) cycles yet operating at a greater scale of energy. There are macroscopic as well as microscopic cycles. There are always cycles within cycles. Cycles of different magnitudes work together to form a giant cosmic wheel. Each cycle possesses its own internal "clock" that ultimately synchronizes with cycles above and below it. At the end of a cycle there is always a new cycle beginning at a higher order / level of energy and consciousness -- it never ends. Going from one cycle to the next is like an ascension for consciousness.

Intention #13 is the one responsible for the transition between cycles. The resulting process is a cyclical evolution forming a spiral that never comes to an end. A spiral is formed as one cycle connects to another in a continuous fashion. It is not a coincidence that Intention #13 is the last Intention of Creation, because it plays the most important role as an ending that guarantees a continuous supply of new beginnings. Intention #13 is eternity itself. In fact, if we consider the word end as meaning purpose, we can say that the end of all Creation is continued evolution and nothing more.

With the eternal power of Intention #13, the Cycle of Life can transform from a finite and sequential process to a continuous and recursive process. The perpetuation of this process is acomplished through the recylication of every ending (IC #12) in the Cycle of Life into something new (IC #13): a new beginning. By Intention #13 we no longer have a process per se, but more of a flow, a greater process by which everything flows. The Cycle of Life being a finite process serves as a building block for an infintie process in which there is continuous rennovation of this cycle.

The only way for a finite process to last forever is through a greater process that causes it to repeat. Indeed, Intention #13 makes sure that there is continuous renovation of the Cycle of Life. However, how much different every new cycle appears to be is relative: a copy is always a new copy not mattering if it looks identical to the mold. A cycle can be excitingly new for some and incredibly boring (repetitive) for others. The bottom line is that all cycles are somewhat new (IC #13), because at least in some detail they will differ, but as instances / copies of the Cycle of Life they still follow the same receipt.

So we know that the cycle of life is the fundamental pattern behind all cycles, and that it has 12 events correpsonding tot he Intentions of Creation. Of course that, for example, the life cycle of a rock is very dull: all that we can say for sure is that it has a beginning and an end, which amounts to only two events in place of where there should be twelve. The reason for this discrepancy is because the Cycle of Life is a life cycle seen from a multidimensional perspective. Even the simplest of the things can become more complex when seen from a higher-dimensional perspective. See the following example:

Psychological time is a frame of perception that extends from birth to death based on how the individual experiences life. Imagine if we could take a picture of someone's life so that the entire set of experiences could be archived in a file in some kind of holographic database for the purpose of an universal record keeping.² There would probably see a strong resemblance to the Cycle of Life in the resultant energetic patterns of oscillation in the life of the individual, even though every life cycle has an unique signature.

Therefore, the Cycle of Life is the template for a file that encases all 3D experiences in the life of a person plus one more dimensional experience considered temporal by us: the fourth dimension. for every dimension on top of another, the dimensions below are folded as an infinitesimal unit that can be lined up for spatial measurement of the new dimension. we use 2D units (eg, inches, milimeters, etc.) to measure 3d objects and we use 3D units, as our minds depend on a sucession of 3D scenarios to measure the duration of events. try it yourself, chamber of sensorial deprivation where time would go? and you will lose track of time.

The fifth dimension can be visualized as a temporal plane containing all possible timelines and probable lifetimes. We know that a plane is composed of an infinite number of lines, and so eahc line is an infinitesimal unit. if we imagine each line as being a timeline with an arbitrary length, then each timeline would be an instance of the Cycle of Life, a fourth dimensional line wrapped to a life experience. therefore, the Cycle of Life serves as an unit of measurement for the fifth dimension.

from a 3d perpective we measure the duration of events using a linear interpretation of time as an absolute variable, but in the fifth dimension we measure duration according to cyclical an interpretation of time that has a multitude of instances of the cycle of life entire timelines and lifetimes, as the hours, minustes and seconds of regular time. therefore, the cycle of life is a process that encapsulates time and space, and not the other way around.

it is worth rememebring that the cycle fo life, as part of the thirteen intentions of creation, isn't restricted to anything . it is an abstract pattern and cab be applied even to the fifh the sixth and any finite or infinite number of dimensions. it is just that inside the context of cyclical time, the cycle of life really does indeed spans only four dimensions. in the context of other an abstract qualities from even higher dimensions than the fifth, the cycle fo life would still apply but probably with much less relevance, as even the concept of life would not even apply to such dimensions.

In the same manner that the invisible energies of the Thirteen Intentions can be interpreted as directives, imagining a graphical representation for the Cycle of Life is only a matter of giving form to the Thirteen Intentions. It may seem like a difficult task, but we have already been given a hint: the Cycle of Life is a cycle.

Cycles and waves have a lot in common, especially because wave patterns originate from cyclical processes. Ocean waves, for example, are formed due to orbital, seasonal (weather) and tectonic cycles. In wave theory, the conclusion of one period of a wave is said to be one cycle that has ended, while frequency is the number of cycles per an arbitrary unit of time.

Change (IC #13) in terms of space and time is always associated with Oscillation (IC #6), since where there is no disturbance there is no change. An important distinction in physics is that scientists model oscillations mathematically and call the results as waves instead of the actual phenomena that may or may not be explicitly observed as waves. Therefore, in most cases when we use the term wave, we are actually talking about a graphical representation known as a waveform. A waveform is generally a x-y graph of a varying quantity over time and it is used to represent energy signals.

When looking at a waveform, we can appreciate the two main properties of a wave: wavelength and amplitude. Amplitude is the maximum positive vertical displacement corresponding to the magnitude of oscillation, while wavelength is the distance between two sequential peaks. They are graphically defined as:

The basic, pure building blocks of all waves is the sine wave, also known as the sinusoidal wave. Sine waves are "well-behaved", periodic waves with definite frequency and wavelength and thus are more appropiate for consistent study of waves. the most complex wave shape is still a simple sum of sine waves of different wavelengths. This shape of waveform is often encountered in natural phenomena, while complex and chaotic (non-pure?) shapes tend to correspoind in artificial phenomena.

When we look at a waveform we are seeing a static drawing, but if we try to follow the curve visually as a flow, we can even sense a momentum in certain regions. To put it in another way, there is a thrust in a horizontal or vertical direction in certain segments of the curve. Sometimes the curve wants to explode horizontally, other times vertically, and sometimes the force is even in both directions. These two tendencies can be said to correspond to more or less wavelength or amplitude.

Horizontal Tendency (DH) -> lower amplitude, higher wavelength
Vertical Tendency (DV) -> higher amplitude, lower wavelength

If waves are models originated from cyclical processes, then we should be able to build a waveform for the Cycle of Life. We can take the first twelve Intentions and evaluate their meanings in terms of wavelength, amplitude, horizontal and vertical tendency, and then try to draw them as the peaks and valleys of a wave. We should also take into consideration that some Intentions are very extreme and translate as null amplitude and/or wavelength, or have tendencies toward infinite amplitude or wavelength.

IC #	DH:DV		Language
1	0:0		beginning; singular event; singularity; point
2	+:0		line; length; extension
3	+:+		expression; manifestation; visibility
4	+:+		closed shape; form; object
5	∞:+		potency; horsepower; acceleration; horizontal thrust
6	∞:+		settle down; accommodate; rest
7	+:∞		align; orient
8	0:∞		more; higher; infinity; vertical thrust
9	+:∞		less; zero; nothing
10	0:0		concentrated; dense; particle; instant; singular event; singularity; point
11	∞:0		not enough; seek last frontier; incompletion
12	0:0		ending; singular event; singularity; point
DH: horizontal tendency ; DV: vertical tendency ; +: at least some

The graph above is far from being a plot based on real data; it is more like a product of intuition than of data analysis. What we really did was determine the visual chracteristic of each step (Intention) of the "flow" of Creation while trying to represent it as a wave. We start from the assumption that a standard wave is supposed to go up and down, up and down, but here we have addiitonal possibilities to consider: horizontal or vertical tendency. Also, beginnig with Intention #9 we get into heavy abstraction. Since the transition between each Intention is supposed to be smooth, We try to linearize the abstraction, as for example: The graph "collapses" at Intention #10: Fir we went to infinity (IC #8) then to zero (IC #9), and if the graph ended at Intention #9, it would stay at zero; however, Intention #10 is a limit point case where both zero and infininty are present at once.

For other Intentions the graph would have discontinuities If we were to do complete justice to their meaning. Intention #8, for example, has the characteristic of a vertical (90 degrees) line going upward toward infinity. In the graph, however, this would introduce a vertical disconinuity. Also, Intention #8's line is slanted and not vertical because wenever we have the idea of process we must take duration into consideration, and this means a disllocation along the horziontal axis. The same case applies for Intention #11: it is a process happening inside a singularity, hence Intention #11 not being represented as a a singular event.

Looking at the graph of the Cycle of Life, we can see that not all Intentions have a significant extension. Some are depicted as mere dots that could very well represent instantaneous events, such as a beginning (IC #1), an atonement (IC #10) and an ending (IC #12). The Intentions that have extension and duration are the phases of the Cycle of Life. A phase is any point of the graph that demarcates one stage or portion of the cycle's duration.

The phases correspond to those intentions that have the quality of length (IC #2) present in them. The phases correspond to those portions of the graph displaying horizontal and/or vertical tendencies, that is, processes of approximation (IC #11) that take some time. Numerollogicla math, 1 + 1 = 2 which means that tendency (IC #11) will necessarily imply in length or duration (IC #2).

A stage is bla bla bla.. We are accostumed to think of a life cycle as having just a few stages, but in the Cycle of Life we have nine. It has to do with the fact that the Cycle of Life spans four dimensions: three main events represent the cycle alone, but when we add four dimensions to three evetns three events are seen through four dimensions, 3 x 4 = 12, see below.

In the graph of the Cycle of Life you might have noticed that the axes have no meaning associated to them, much less units of measurement, but this does not mean that they have nothing to do with spatio-temporal concepts. There is no problem in trying to associate a few quantities to the axes and see how it plays out. After all, the Cycle of Life is an universal pattern valid to all phenomena that can be quantified (measured).

Because the Y-axis tends to infinity at Intention #8, there is not a definite amplitude that applies to the whole waveform of the Cycle of Life. An amplitude must be a finite maximum vertical displacement. However, if we isolate certain intervals of the waveform as if they were standing alone, then the concept of amplitude can apply to these intervals individually. Still, the wave will have maximum vertical displacement at some points, namely amplitude, but these maximums will not be related to anything in particular. Indeed, amplitude is just another name for a literal quantity, i.e., quantity that is not of something physical.

To quantify is to measure, and so a literal quantity (amplitude) is just a measurement that is not of something in particular (e.g., length, time), but also can be of anything. This means that there is an amplitude for everything that exists, and every thing is completely characterized by its amplitude. In this respect, amplitude and the idea of pure energy are directly related with each other. People frequently talk about energy as if it was an absolute measurement not restricted to a form in particular, but this does not mean that they believe that energy exists in this state. The fact is that everybody knows that energy is an absolute variable with respect to life, and this is the reason why the term can be applied in all kinds of imaginative ways without sounding unrealistic.

For most practical uses, the terms energy and amplitude are interchangeable. Most waveforms treat amplitude as the amount of energy (power) that is being transferred by the wave. Therefore, there is no doubt that energy is an appropriate choice for the Y-axis of the Cycle of Life.

Thus for a more practical application of the Cycle of Life, we can make the vertical axis denote energy and the horizontal axis denote time, because all processes have duration. The Cycle of Life then becomes very clear if applied to ordinary living systems that are born, experience highs and lows of energy, and die.

Until now we are discussing only two variables that are explicit. the other two (DH and DV) are implicit and have been already discussed. that makes it four variables. remember that we said before that tmainly because the Cycle of Life has four dimensions. each spatial dimension is obviously associated to an intention, as we will see in 3.2 - Dimensions, but in the graph each dimensions is turned into a variable, which means that each dimension has a certain quality that cna be measured.

Let us imagine that the space sorrounding the curve as being the spatial representation of Zero, a void, that serves as abstratc propagation medium for the intentional flow of creation. According to Intention #2, the principle of duality can be found in every conceptualization, and thus even in zero. Indeed, the idea of absolute nothingness, or zero, zero can be seen as real or imaginary. the first case when it is absolute, as the real lack of something, and the other as a symbol representing the imagination of nothingness that can only be approximated in reality.

zero (real) -> zero in the strict sense         
zero (imaginary) -> as close to zero as possible

Curiosly, In mathematics we find that zero also has two distinct representations: one grouped with the positive numbers and gripued with the negatives known as negative zero. with this in mind, the graph can also be considered as having a positive and negative quadrant. one for real zero, and other for imaginary zero. the positive quadrant deals with everything real, and the negative with everything imaginary.

but we can reach the same conclusion through the ICs themselves. both quadrants span the vertical axis (energy) which corresponds to ic 5. 5 can be formed by two numbers either by 1+ 4 or 2 + 3. 3 is on the upper quadrant, while 4 on the lower, therefore:

(+) quadrant -> real (IC #3) ; individual / subjective (IC #1)     
(-) quadrant -> imaginary (IC #?? ???) ; material / objective (IC #4)   

knowing that the upper quadrant representes real, and the lower, helps wiht the interpretation of the graph of nthe Cycle of Life. it also helps with udnerstanding why some intentions are below and others on top, or crossing like ic #8. the intentions that have imaginary aspects are #4 and #7 and lower half (beginning) of #8. and the real are #3, #5, #6, the upper half of #8 and #9. other intentions are free from this categorization.

________________________
¹ Due to this fact, there's a good chance that the list of Intentions presented in this book is not 100% accurate. please refer to the (proceed to website for up-to-date list)
² the akashic records are....

There is more than one possible interpretation for what a dimension is. In the strict geometric sense, a dimension is one of the three standard spatial dimensions: width, height and depth. However, due to a fundamental connection between dimension and frequency range, we can extrapolate the former's meaning to refer to parallel universes, planes of existence and even levels of consciousness. (In the last case individual perception is attuned to a certain frequency range interpreted by the physical senses as an N-dimensional world.)

Regardless of denomination, whenever we are talking about a dimension we are implying the measurement of some property or quality. There is no such thing as a dimension that does not embody some kind of measurement, since the very word dimension comes from the Latin "measured out." Modern physics presupposes that extra dimensions exist at incredibly small scales. In other words, dimensions beyond the fourth are infinitesimally condensed, almost reaching a singularity, but they still have some measurable magnitude -- it just lies beyond what humans and their instruments can detect.

A phase in the Cycle of Life is the same thing as a dimension, because the phases correspond to those Intentions that admit dimensionality (length). Associating one dimension to each phase gives a total of nine dimensions. However, there is nothing impeding that the entire extension formed by all the phases can be considered a dimension as well: the 10th dimension.

A dimension is not necessarily physical and so it does not need to have a perceptible size. Therefore, from a physical perspective some dimensions are very much abstract and conceptual. In the Cycle of Life, you can see that the first and ninth phases do not possess an appreciable amount of energy, yet phase by definition implies in duration, and a duration must always be in relation to some form of energy variation. Therefore, there must still exist a speck of energy in the ninth dimension, for example. The idea is that this energy is of a finer quality; it is an extremely thin and subtle form of energy that lies in-between the smallest units of matter. As an example, we can conceive the 10th dimension as being an ether, which is a conceptual / theoretical substance that embodies space itself by permeating everything.

Note that we are associating dimensions to Intentions and not Intentions to dimensions because the Intentions of Creation are always the root of any association. But once the root association has been done, we can proceed and associate Intentions to dimensions in order to complement our understanding of the numerological meaning of each dimension. For example: Intentions after #9 are completely abstract, paradoxical and meaningless with respect to spatial concepts such as length and dimension. This means that the number of dimensions that are truly spatial is nine. Therefore, although Intention #9 has a direct correspondence with the eighth dimension, we can establish an indirect but nonetheless true connection between Intention #9, the last Intention that has something to do with spatiality (length), and the ninth dimension, the last spatial dimension.

Basically, there are two types of dimension: spatial and temporal. As depicted in Figure 3.#, the first nine dimensions have spatial characteristics. The 10th dimension, however, is non-spatial because it does not occupy a space of its own in the graph, yet it does have extension borrowed from the first nine dimensions. Therefore, the 10th dimension is paradoxical like Intention #10: it is non-spatial yet it has extension. Well, the problem lies in our denomination: in the context of a non-spatial dimension, we are talking about duration (time), not extension (space). Indeed, as we will discuss it later, a number of spatial dimensions can be taken as one, as a continuum, and the result is a temporal dimension.

Another difference between the 10th dimension and the spatial dimensions is that they are associated to phases in the Cycle of Life, while the 10th is not. However, nothing stops the 10th dimension from having an indirect (numeric) association with Intention #10. Furthermore, there are two additional "levels" beyond the 10th dimension that are not dimensions per se, because they deal with null or infinite space-time; however, as we did with the 10th dimension, we can still find dimensionality in their lack of dimensionality. The 11th level is adimensional because it is completely void of space and time, and the 12th is transdimensional because it transcends all dimensionality. In spite of their characteristics, we can still refer to these levels by the name of dimension if we consider them as dimensions of consciousness.

A dimension by itself is nothing more than an idea, but if we consider a bunch of them simultaneously and orthogonal to each other, the result is the property known as space. More specifically, a minimum of three dimensions is required to give birth to the general notion of space, because space is primarily characterized by the existence of material (3D) objects. In other words, the notion of space is only relevant when there is spatial relationship resulting from the presence of at least one object.

A purely spatial perception tends to interpret space as if it was a three-dimensional "hole", but the fact is that without observable three-dimensional mass, space loses any sign of dimensionality and is therefore meaningless as such. Space acquires relevance only when there are material objects, just as the notion of distance only makes sense when there is a relation of position (coordinates) between points. In sum, the three-dimensional (spatial) perception that characterizes space is imparted by material objects.

Space is a fundamental property of physics, and as such it inspires many definitions and few convincing answers. Many have struggled to come to terms with the meaning of space before, but it turns out that space cannot be understood outside of its role as an essential part of the perception process. In fact, space does not need a definition because the term is already intuitively defined.

The classical view of space is that of an ultimate reality where objects and physical phenomena take place. Simple and effective, this view shares its roots with Newton's deterministic physics that introduced the notion of absolute space, that is, space whose existence is independent of physical phenomena. Although Newton's view acknowledges that motion and rest are relative notions, it still has the necessity to define space as being a property that is above observers and their frames of reference, and so space itself becomes the authority that decides whether there is motion and/or acceleration happening at all.

A possible criticism of spatial absolutism is that it is irrelevant that we try to imagine space as something "out there" when there is nothing about space making of it a real thing with its own independent meaning and existence. Space does not possess a reality of its own, and more importantly, it does not exist "outside" time and perception. Instead, perception is always changing with time, and this change manifests itself as physical phenomena along with the property known as space. In this section we will not discuss the details about how this manifestation takes place, but consider the following according to the Intentions of Creation:

consciousness (IC #12) -> 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 -> reality (IC #3)

According to the Thirteen Intentions of Creation, the concept of space along with the concepts of time, movement and life can all be found in Intention #5. This means that the very process of being alive, and the resulting perception thereof, is what makes time and space a reality. Therefore, it is always better that we understand how these concepts are not separate from each other and how they are all relative to perception. Alternatively, we can go even further and study these concepts under the light of consciousness, which is the essence of perception. Consciousness is the only true authority with respect to what takes place in the physical world.

Perception can be roughly defined as "the mental apprehension of a certain number of things." This means that perception is always restricted to those things that it can perceive, and it is unable to grasp anything beyond itself. For this reason, if someone's perception is restricted to space only, they will simply not be able to understand how time and space are relative to perception, because the relativity becomes clear only when the two concepts are perceived as one. Since space does not exist without time, one can very well conclude that a perception that sees only space is trapped in monocularity. Space is just one side of the spatio-temporal "coin."

The main consequence of the belief in absolute space is the notion of empty space. In this view, space is supposed to exist "out there" even when there is absolutely nothing. However, deep analysis of the nature of reality can show us that the idea of an empty space is not so much obvious as one would think, and in fact, if we extrapolate our results from this analysis, we can even conclude that this belief is just as meaningless as the belief in a space that exists independently from our perception.

A particular example showing how absurd is the notion of empty space arises from the problem of the boundary. In this case, a boundary is the middle between two extremes that does not constitute a third extreme, but instead unifies the two extremes into a paradox. The problem is that boundaries are always ignored by a monocular perception, which sees only one thing at a time but never both at once unseparated. A monocular perception cannot distinguish between total absence and multiple, unseparated presence, and the result is that it fails to recognize states where one thing does not exclude the other.

In the example illustrated above, a multiocular perception should be able to see that presence and absence of thing are states that are simultaneously present at the boundary, which in turn, at least momentaneously, equates object with empty space. Of course that such conclusion does not make a lot of sense, because real-life objects are not the same as emptyness; however, if we discard the word emptyness and consider space as being as much as a thing as the things contained in it, we will simply have thing = thing at the boundary.

But what does it mean that space is a "thing"? It means that in the end there is only one thing going on between creatures and space: a continuous perception process attached to time. That is, if we add the time dimension to a spatial perception, the material objects and the spaces between them will be perceived as the features of a four-dimensional continuum, because absence of thing in three-dimensional space still constitutes presence in four dimensions. In short, empty space can be considered a four-dimensional "thing", which is also an event if we consider the fourth dimension as time.

With respect to Figure 3.#, one can still argue that an array of atoms constitute the definitive barrier between empty space and object. This surely sounds like a comforting answer, but the actual nature of reality according to the Intentions of Creation is based on continuous (IC #13) interaction (IC #12) between an infinite (IC #8) number of elements everywhere (IC #10). This means that a reductionist analysis can be performed endlessly and still never be able to find an absolute line of separation between elements; instead, two elements always have some kind of connection accomplished through even smaller elements. (Note: everything has a threshold, and size is no exception: things can only get as small as the concept of size remains applicable, because anything beyond starts fading into abstraction [IC #9] and finally into a paradox [e.g., infinitely small = infinitely big].)

By 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 we have that Intention #3 (reality) is the fruit of interconnectedness (IC #12). But how can we corroborate this hypothesis? Well, it is not easy to demonstrate how fundamental qualities of Creation such as continuity and interconnectedness have their place in a macroscopic world where things definitely appear to be disconnected. In the case of physical reality, for example, there are those who prefer to discard everything as an illusion, but it seems that being an illusion does not make of a reality something less real to a perception conditioned by it. That is why it is important to understand that there is no such thing as a fixed absolute reality valid for everyone, except if we restrict the meaning of everyone to a group of individuals having the same experiences and thus living the same reality.

Physical reality was generally seen as something absolute to all levels of perception until experiments in modern physics overthrew this concept. Because of this, many people jumped to the other extreme and concluded that "reality is an illusion." Well, for most people reality will always be sufficiently concrete, a "persistent illusion" as Albert Einstein said, but experiments have shown that it can also be probabilistic and undetermined when perception crosses a certain threshold. That is, determinism and indeterminism are not mutually exclusive, although indeterminism has the advantage of being more essential to the nature of reality.

Quantum physics was the new science that came to explain the anomalous behavior of subatomic particles. It also introduced a new view of the configuration of microscopic space that turned the classical deterministic / Newtonian approach into something quite inappropriate for this level. Instead of the classical idea of particles bumping into each other, detecting and analyzing elementary particles at the quantum scale requires a statistical approach applied to wave theory. In fact, the classical notion of space barely holds at atomic and subatomic levels, because wave concepts in physics are nonobjective, and most importantly, non-spatial.

Although the wave model is abstract, wave functions can mathematically describe all kinds of real, continuous-effect phenomena in Nature. What quantum mechanics did was to extend the wave model to describe the state of a particle according to the Heisenberg principle.¹ The wave function was then treated as if it determines a distribution or set of probabilities. This distribution can be worked out accurately, but not the actual location of a particle. Instead, the position of a particle is described by the probability corresponding to the Y-values of the waveform. For example, a particular Y-value defining a sharp peak means that we have a greater chance of locating the particle at a point in space associated to that value.

These interesting concepts brought by quantum physics mean that subatomic particles hardly behave as corpuscles; instead, they are spread out as clouds or propensities corresponding to the probabilities of where they might be found. There are no well-defined boundaries marking where one particle begins and another ends, nor there is certainty about the momentum or position of a particle.² The more precise one measurement is, the more diffuse the other becomes. But the indeterminism is not there to mislead; instead, it is evidence that better understanding about the nature of space comes with seeing it more like an ocean of energy about which we need to make approximations (IC #11) to surface what we want to see.³

As discussed in Section 3.1, amplitude has a relation with energy in the sense that it refers to any amount of pure energy. In a probability wave, the amplitude is actually a probability amplitude, and it extends itself from one side to another. Therefore, a probability wave can be said to describe a smooth distribution of energy where certain regions have greater concentration than others. The dense regions are particles with well-defined positions and ill-defined momentums (momenta); the less dense regions are particles with ill-defined positions and well-defined momentums. In both cases, the particles are infinitely dispersed either because they vibrate wildly in a sense that they are at multiple places at the same time, or because they are not in a definite place due to their erratic movement. With this in mind, we can make the following analogy regarding the nature of space:

For any interval of spatial dimensions that begins with the first dimension, the dimension that comes right after the last in the interval is the one that goes through and enfolds all the previous dimensions, with the result being a continuum. This is equivalent to how each Intention of Creation includes and extends the ones before it.

Continuum simply means that there is continuity instead of discontinuity, or that there is continuity behind apparent discontinuity. But a more interesting implication in the presence of a continuum is that you can never really say that a part is not a manifestation of the whole. It only takes a few changes in perception for someone to see that what once appeared as an isolated part is actually connected to another part, and then another and another in a never-ending assemblage. In fact, one can classify as many parts as desired, but ultimately there is no end to the succession of aspects in Creation that can be categorized as parts.

Any interval of spatial dimensions is a continuum. By its own definition, a continuum does not admit the presence of separation; instead, it always presents itself as a whole. There are only different ways for us to see a continuum in its entirety, ways that bring to our attention different aspects of the same thing. Therefore, an observer is necessarily seeing a single object (continuum) wherever he looks. The idea of parts only arises with the idea of multiplicity, which is in fact an illusion: an observer that sees multiple parts / objects is actually looking at a single crystalline object from different angles that bring to his attention different facets of that same object.

In reality, a continuum is experienced by an observer as a world full of objects that keep appearing everywhere he looks. Every observed object is merely an aspect of the continuum as well as the continuum already manifested in full. In other words, everything that is observed is a valid representation of the continuum in its entirety, and there is not an object or part that can be considered the ultimate manifestation of the continuum. This is a valid analogy because it is based on the holographic principle that the whole is in every part. At least conceptually, the physical universe is a hologram, an example being the striking similarities between the atomic model and the galactic model.

Furthermore, the act of seeing an object necessarily implies in the presence of a surrounding space, a higher dimension that includes both object and observer. It is a matter of logic: Delineation (IC #2) leads to the automatic creation of two sides: one current and one beyond. That is, at the very instant that we determine an interval of dimensions, we automatically create a higher dimension beyond that interval. Such logic may give us the impression that the number of dimensions is infinite, but as we saw in this section's introduction, there are two more transcendental levels beyond the 10 standard dimensions. These levels transform the possibility of an infinite number of dimensions into an infinite fractal recursion applied to the same base number of dimensions, just as the Cycle of Life is the same basic process renewed for all eternity thanks to Intention #13.

For example, with respect to 3D space, 2D objects (images) and the 2D spaces between them are nothing more than features of a 3D continuum, which in our analogy is a 3D sphere floating inside a 4D space. In the same manner, 3D objects and the 3D spaces between them are nothing more than the features of a 4D continuum, which is a 4D sphere floating inside a 5D space. As you can see, this analogy can be applied to any pair of consecutive spatial dimensions, and that is with the notions of object and space still holding as true, but perhaps changed into more abstract concepts.

A second example: An observer inside three-dimensional space sees several images (i.e., 2D objects) forming what he may deem as material (3D) objects; however the images only seem as 3D objects because the observer acquired a sense of depth in his perception as a collateral effect of being partially immersed in the higher dimension. This analogy can be applied to even higher dimensions as well, with the notion of space and depth still holding as true. The dimension that includes the observer always exert some effect in his perception that gives a sense of depth to wathever he is looking at.

A higher dimension has a particular space or zone of its own (e.g., the ninth dimension is the interval [8.0,9.0]), but at the same time this interval has an equivalence with the interval composed by all the lower dimensions. Therefore, whenever we are talking about the nth dimension, for example, we will not only be reffering to that dimension's particular zone, but also to the interval [0.0,n-1] which is equivalent to [n-1,n]. The equivalence is with respect to energy and vibration in a way that the higher dimension alone makes up for the entire combined vibrational level of the lower dimensions. We will see more about vibration in 3.5 - Densities.

Relatively speaking, a higher dimension is always experienced as a temporal dimension (time) by creatures living inside the corresponding spatial continuum. This dimension directly above the creatures plays the role of time as long as it stays removed from their perception: a priori, time is a non-observable dimension. For example, by the equivalence between dimensions shown in Figure 3.#, the fourth dimension would be the embodiment of all dimensions directly perceived by the 3D creatures as well as an extra dimension that controls their lives. In other words, the fourth dimension is everywhere around the creatures as well as nowhere to be found. Now, for creatures standing somewhere inside the interval [2.0,3.0], they would have a partial 3D experience because they are not fully outside the third dimension in order to have a full 3D experience.

The consequence of being stuck inside a spatial dimension is that time seems like an omnipresent force. The resident creatures have no choice other than to take time as an unidirectional force that controls everything, and as an absolute variable that controls the system they are in. But consciousness is what ultimately determines reality, not time. All that it takes for a being to cross over from one dimension to the next is a shift in perception, and that is exactly what follows after someone experiences a great expansion of consciousness. This process is known as a dimensional shift.

In a dimensional shift, time and space exchange places. What was once perceived as space-time, or just space, becomes time-space, or hyperspace, and walking a distance in the new time-space environment will be like time-traveling in the previous space-time environment. With that said, time and space are like mirror images of one another, and as two sides of the same coin, they are not really separate from each other. However, from the inside of a continuum, space and time are perceived as separate entities because, as we have already seen, there is always a higher dimension that a being's awareness cannot reach and go beyond. If the being could only rise his consciousness to an extra-dimensional level, he would see time and space as undifferentiated.

Most often, A paranormal experience is needed for a person to begin to understand how time and space are opposite aspects of the same phenomenom, and also to demistify the godlike status of time. But it is still possible to formulate about this possibility: Einstein, for example, postulated about the relativity of space and time, but what he really did was rising his intellect to a level where he was able to visualize the three-dimensional continuum. This means that intellectualty-wise he was inside the fourth dimension, at least intelectually. Nonetheless he could not explain the nature of time, as this would require his intellect to be at the same level or above the fourth dimension. By beign physically present inside the fourth dimension, the inexorable nature of time would begin to break, and one would be able to manipulate it.

Motion, as we all know, is always in relation to a frame of reference: an object inside a train will obviously appear to be at rest for a passenger inside the train, but not for a fixed observer at the station. In other words, the motion of a body is only as valid as it can be validated by an observer watching the body change position according to his unique perspective. There is not an absolute frame of reference where a determined (measured) motion is always valid for all observers. What is not obvious for most people is that the same relativity applies to time, because time is really only a function of the perceived motion (change) of things inside the visual range of an observer.

motion and acceleration requires energy or force. energization and acceleration are essentially the same in physical terms, and Both are directives of Intention #5. the more energized the observer is, or the more energized the system that acts as his referential is, the closer to lightspeed he will be, and all the relative movement of things around him will seem increasingly slower. realized that the idea of movement, as well as the idea of time, were totally relative to the observer, which is also the same case for space.

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

________________________
¹ heisenberg uncer. principle.
² Momentum is defined as the product of the mass and velocity of an object. An alternative way to interpret it is as quantity of movement. It differs from velocity in that it is a vectorial quantity, and, because it involves mass, its total value in a closed system never changes.
³ Establishing probabilities is a way to approximate what cannot be determined for sure. We should not underestimate its usefulness in ???: probability in quantum mechanics can offer the same degree of predictability found in classical mechanics.

In Chapter 1 we defined Creation as an absolute concept, and we equated it to an overall existence. But in the same manner that Creation with capital C is not the same as creation, the act of creating, Existence with capital E is not the same as existence, some form of reality among others. Therefore, it is imperative that we redefine these concepts as follows:

creation -> the act of creating -> Intention #3                                                 
existence -> some form (IC #4) of reality (IC #3) is what consciousness (IC #12) is all about ->
             3 x 4 = 12 -> Intention #12                                                        

Existence / Creation ->                                                                         
      all (IC #10) realities (IC #3) -> 10 + 3 = 13 -> Intention #13                            
      a singular / absolute / overall (IC #1) existence (IC #12) -> 1 + 12 = 13 -> Intention #13

Whether we call It Existence or Creation, we are still talking about the Absolute mentioned in Chapter 1.

Seeing Existence as absolute yields an interesting implication: it makes of it a paradox. In Section 1.5 we saw how wholeness can be recursively defined on top of its own negation. In other words, an absolute concept is paradoxical by nature because it incorporates and includes even that which opposes it, that is, even its own "shadow." In the case of Existence, this definition means that both the essence of what is and what is not (nonexistence) will be a part of it, as contradictory as this may sound.

Another way to reach this same conclusion about Existence is as follows: Existence is beyond definition, and indeed, this is the case if we consider it as an absolute concept. However, if someone does not agree with this, they can still go and try to define Existence, but this will require the consideration of an opposite: nonexistence. It is not possible to define (IC #2) something properly if the definition is not done through an opposite (IC #2), that is, something that provides a contrast for reference. Anyway, nonexistence cannot be considered a valid counterpart for Existence due to the latter's absolute status.

Existence is directly linked with and has its basis in consciousness. When what was previously unknown to our consciousness becomes known, it is the same as if the thing had been brought into existence for us. According to this logic, if we ever come to experience nonexistence, it will become a valid mode of existence for us, because we will be conscious of it. Nevertheless, if nonexistence does not allow for consciousness, then nonexistence cannot exist, because no one can ever be conscious of it in order to prove its existence. In any case, nonexistence is just another mode of existence, or it does not exist, leaving only Existence as the triumphant absolute concept.

Now, if nonexistence is out of the game, then there is no way left to define Existence. From a rational standpoint, this means that it may not be possible for us to believe that Existence is true if we cannot even define it. But as Descartes said, "I think therefore I exist": if we are here discussing and thinking about Existence, then we are proof to ourselves that Existence must be true. The result of these two conflicting views over Existence is a paradox. In other words, Existence is better understood and defined by its own paradoxical nature.

Existence is essentially paradoxical in nature, but as it can be and often is perceived linearly, so is it possible to not be enlightened about it. ¹

It is worth noticing that one of the limitations of rational (linear) thinking is that it sees paradoxes as problems that must be resolved. But sometimes a paradox is the answer, not the problem. Paradoxes in Nature appear to be contradictions, but they actually express a non-dual truth: the coexistence of opposites. Holistic thinking, for example, accepts paradoxes as they are because it knows that the actual nature of the thing being analyzed is all-inclusive and cannot be divided without loss of information. Rational thinking, in contrast, needs to be able to separate and classify (IC #2) things completely before accepting them as true. It is not a surprise that rationality fails miserably in face of the paradoxical (IC #10) nature of Existence, because there is no room for a rational interpretation anyway: Existence is all possible realities (IC #3) happening at once (instant - IC #10).

In Section 1 we saw the transcendental nature of Existence how can be better understood through a recursive definition for the Whole. A whole is the objective notion of a totality. and the Whole with capital W is an objective equivalent for Existence. Note the word objective: it has to do with visualizing an object as, for example, a circle whose circumference is nowhere and center is everywhere. In everywhere we look ,there is existence, even in the smallest speck of reality, but still we can never find its bounradies circumference.

Fortunately there is already a conceptualization of Existence and its paradoxical nature: a singularity. In physics, a singularity is defined as a point in spacetime at which gravitational forces are extreme, and at which physical quantities become infinite and space and time become infinitely distorted / warped. In astronomy and astrophysics, a singularity is expected to be what lies at the core of a black hole. In any case, physics cannot study singularities directly because they are a phenomenom where physical laws and equations "break down".

The idea of a "living" paradox, a manifested singularity is a very good representation for Existence. Zero and infinity are the two fundamental extremes that represent the essence of polarity, the two poles that delimit rational thought. A singularity finally promotoes the identity of these two extremes, because a singularity is a nothing (zero) that is also everything (infinity). Instead of the monocular perspective that there can only be zero, or infnity at any one time, we can now actually see both at once unseparated, forming a singular whole. Even more, we can give it a formal definition in the form of a conceptual equation:

0 + infinity = 1

According to numerological arithmetic, another way to define Existence is as follows: singular (IC #1) unvierse -> 1 + 12 = 13 -> Intention #13, and so Existence (IC #13) is the Universe with capital U, i.e., the universe taken as one. Of course, the word universe already implies a single instance, and that is why we saw in 3.2 - Dimensions that the term Multiverse fits under the context of Intention #13 (Existence) better.

Additionaly, consider that by numerological arithmetic. reality (IC #3) is the output (result) of the universe (IC #12) since 1 + 2 = 3 -> reality (IC #3). This means that an equation that is valid to and symbolizes Existence is also valid to the Universe. Now, if realities are the outputs of universes, then Reality is the output of the Universe (Existence), and so the equation in schemtics can very well be called an universal equation that is valid to Reality, some kind of collective dream that all beings share.

Although symbolizing Existence and being valid to all realities, the universal equation has little value except as a philosophical truth/consideration that everything is one, and one is everything. In order to make it more useful, we will have to transform it into a real mathematical equation so that it can accuraterly describe what touches us more directly: our own ordinary reality, not the universal Reality. That is, we need to find a way to work this equation mathematically until we able to see how the truth contained in it also reflects in the fleeting aspects that compose our reality.

We can transform the universal equation into a real mathematical equation, more especifically a single-variational equation, if we make the following distinction: Since this equation is conceptual, the presence of zero and infinity is also purely conceptual, which means that both concepts are present as imaginary ideals. However, for a realistic version of this equation, zero and infinity would have to give place to approximations to their respective ideals, because they don't exist in Nature. In real-world vocabulary this means that zero becomes a fixed limit, and infinity becomes an unbounded limit.

Consider that a + b = 1 is the prototype of a realistic incarnation of the equation in Schematics 3.#. Also, consider that a→0 and b→∞, where symbol → reads as "tends to." One thing that a and b have in common is that they both converge to a limit, and although they do this in opposite directions, a convergence (IC #11) by definition is a process that only ends (IC #12) at infinity. Therefore, consider x such that

    and     . (3.1)

For simplicity purposes, a and b can both be expressed in function of x: a = ± x^-1 and b = x. As a result, there will be two versions of the prototype equation:

x^-1 + x = 1(3.2)

and

-x^-1 + x = 1.(3.3)

Equation 3.2 has no solutions among the positive and negative numbers, but it is possible to find what is known as complex solutions using imaginary numbers. Imaginary numbers are born from the symbolic manipulation of "impossible" magnitudes. These magnitudes differ from real numbers to the extent that they are metaphysical, that is, they are not restricted to the physical notion of linear extension (length) that defines real numbers. In short, these numbers are essentially meaningless, but this does not stop them from having applications in many fields of science.

We shall focus only on solving Equation 3.3 because we seek the meaning that the universal equation holds with respect to physical reality, hence the title of this section "???", this meaning of course can only be found in the real solutions of Eq. 3.3, while the complex (non-real) solutions of eq 1 are for now completely useless to our purpose.

If we multiply both sides of Equation 3.3 by x, we obtain the quadratic equation x² - x - 1 = 0. We can now attempt to solve this equation with the quadratic formula;² hence,

x = (1 ± √5) ⁄ 2 ⇒ .(3.4)

As displayed above, there are two possible solutions for Equation 3.3. Curiously, but not coincidentally, the first value for x is the value of Phi, a well-known mathematical constant whose name is borrowed from the Greek letter Φ. Also known as the golden number, Phi is the first one of three universal constants directly related with the Thirteen Intentions of Creation. We will see how this relationship takes place, but for now we shall focus only on Phi and its amazing properties.

Welcome to the wonderful world of Phi. This little constant has amazed mathematicians and philosophers throughout the ages mainly because of its unique properties. Some have called it a mystical number, while others have called it magical, but apart from mysticism, it is a fact that many natural phenomena exhibit some relation to Phi. There are Phi geometries in DNA, in galaxies, in organic structures, in musical sounds, in arts and even in systems linked to the dynamics of human consciousness (e.g., financial markets). In fact, the degree that Phi occurs in Nature seems to be only limited to the degree of creativity that a person can have when studying the geometries present in the aforementioned scenarios.

1.6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576 2862135448 6227052604 6281890244
  9707207204 1893911374 8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766 7263544333
  8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788 0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269
  5486262963 1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364 8644492410 4432077134
  4947049565 8467885098 7433944221 2544877066 4780915884 6074998871 2400765217 0575179788
  3416625624 9407589069 7040002812 1042762177 1117778053 1531714101 1704666599 1466979873
  1761356006 7087480710 1317952368 9427521948 4353056783 0022878569 9782977834 7845878228
  9110976250 0302696156 1700250464 3382437764 8610283831 2683303724 2926752631 1653392473
  1671112115 8818638513 3162038400 5222165791 2866752946 5490681131 7159934323 5973494985
  0904094762 1322298101 7261070596 1164562990 9816290555 2085247903 5240602017 2799747175
  3427775927 7862561943 2082750513 1218156285 5122248093 9471234145 1702237358 0577278616
  0086883829 5230459264 7878017889 9219902707 7690389532 1968198615 1437803149 9741106926
  0886742962 2675756052 3172777520 ..                                                    

The fact that we were able to derive Phi from the universal equation is not a mere coincidence: When we transforfmed the universal equation from a conceptual form to a variational form, and thus an algebraic equation, Phi and its conjugate were the values that solved the equation and reaffirmed / maintained the original meaningunity of opposites. Therefore, if Phi solves the universal equation that is supposed applies to all aspects of reality even when they are opposites to each other, it must acts as an universal constant behind the fabric of reality.

The ratio derived from Phi is known as the golden mean (a.k.a. golden ratio, divine proportion), and it can be expressed as the ratios 1:φ or 1:φ^-1. Tthe golden mean offers the perfect balance (IC #6) between excess and deficiency in the universe. This means that if we want to do something stand out in relation to another, with the golden mean we can do this in a way so that the opposites complement each other perfectly and so they maintain a bond or an unity that is aesthetically beautiful. In the end, it is the whole that will stand out, and the opposites will be equal in the sense that they are undifferentiated from the whole picture.

Most sources say that the golden mean is present in Nature, but it is more appropriate to say that Nature is based on the golden mean. Examples could be given to fill several books, but it is more important that we understand how this is possible. An even more counterintuitive implication born from the fact that Phi is an universal constant is to say that artificial structures are also based on golden mean. This is also true, but only meaningful and obvious from a multidimensional perspective.

Artificial structures are those created by intelligent beings for complex and unnatural purposes. Thereforem, the objects will reflect their complex purposes and not natural patterns. As we add more dimensions to our analysis, eventually all complexity fades back into the natural patterns of creation. We saw an example of this in section when we the cycle of life was shown to apply even to the life of a rock, yet from a fourth dimensional perspective, except we are talking about the inverse here: complexity becomes simplicity in the fourth dimension. the reason for this is because secion crossing from one idmension to another implies a shift (IC #9), meaning that everything is inverted.

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

________________________
¹ Transcix. "What is enlightenment?" Online posting. 14 Oct. 2006. 23 April 2007 < http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message302358/pg1 >.
² the quadratic formula is used to solve quadratic equations of the type ax^2+bx+c=0,

In this chapter we will learn ways that the knowledge imparted by the Thirteen Intentions of Creation can be applied in practice. It is nonetheless critical that you understand that the Thirteen Intentions are nothing more than a set of tools at your disposal. The Thirteen Intentions should be to you as a number of ways to express and realize your Will (IC #13). Notice how your Will is at the same level as all the Intentions taken as one: Intention #13. Therefore, your Will and the Thirteen Intentions taken as one are the same thing: your Will is composed of 13 Intentions. The key is to live by the law of your Will, which is the same as the Will of the Creator: Love. In this chapter we will present a practical definition for Love that will also serve as a definition for what everyone really wants deep inside.

The first impulse displayed by most people is anxiety associated to the fact that they want to follow and obey the Thirteen Intentions as soon as possible. They want to put themselves under what the Thirteen Intentions represent. The problem is that when they blindly follow the Thirteen Intentions, they are actually following their own Will disguised as a belief system. It is needless to say that this approach will be just another attempt by person to escape self-responsibility. As noted in Chapter 2, all beliefs are self-deception. First and most importantly is that you get to know and understand what the Thirteen Intentions are and then you can proceed to apply them in your life effectively. Belief in the Thirteen Intentions is far from being the same as understanding them.

However, even the idea that the Thirteen Intentions can somehow be applied in practice is questionable. The Thirteen Intentions are the programming behind Reality and so everything / everyone already follows them in one way or another. It is irrelevant that we try to apply reality on top of reality because we already do it all the time! You can only really choose to become aware of the underlying plan / programming of Creation or not, and if you do become aware then your existence and evolution will be much more hassle-free. Again, it all falls down to achieving peace of mind. Everybody wants to be at peace with themselves. Everybody wants to be happy. With greater awareness of the nature of reality, you are able to recognize patterns better, and it is from the recognition of patterns that peace of mind can come.

Anyway, the Thirteen Intentions can be used to manipulate reality at the conscious level to the extent that they allow you to concentrate all of your energy only on a few (13) things that really matter. By concentrating on a certain Intention you are already concentrating on what is of most significance to the reality you are in. However, you cannot expect the Intentions to make decisions for you. You cannot expect the Intentions to do the work for you while you remain with your arms crossed. Do you want to be a programmer or a program? The challenge is to become the programmer and stop being programmed by Reality / Creation. As long as your free will does not dictate the rules by which you live, you are being controlled by external (alien) forces. Your free will should be above the programmatic nature of reality. Your free will should be the true nature of your reality.

The most practical result that everyone is really trying to achieve is relief from practical results. Consequently, much more important that obtaining practical results is that we strive to obtain more consciousness, which will ultimately determine whether we have peace of mind or not. Nothing short of an infinite level of consciousness is sufficient for a perfect application of the Truth. Your only compromise at all times must be with Infinity, because anything less is a contradiction, a fraud. Relatively speaking, no amount of action we take is ever sufficient when we lack consciousness, because everything that we do is a fuck-up that could be made a million times better.

The search for the Truth is a matter of personal development; it is an internal (spiritual - IC #9) journey as we strive to increase our energy and expand our consciousness. Energy and consciousness are names for the same universal variable whose only purpose is to increase its value perpetually. This variable describes the only kind of power that can only grow and never decrease: spiritual power. However, many people believe that there are shortcuts in life that can provide them with more power than what they actually deserve -- a great trap. And so people keep stumbling in circles while looking for nonexistent shortcuts in life. The truth is that there are no shortcuts, and thus we should learn the art of "escaping forward"; that is, we should always advance instead of retreating. Therefore, in a spiritual sense there is no way out in our evolution except when we go straight up to the obstacle and we bang head against it until it breaks.

"The Truth lies within" -- truer words have never been spoken. This means that a practical application of the universal and fundamental knowledge presented in this book will really only depend on how much you can realize the truth that the Thirteen Intentions are not "out there," but within yourself. They are Creational intentions after all, and only living beings can have intent. That is why knowledge of the Thirteen Intentions can make you more proficient in bending yourself as in the spoon metaphor of the movie Matrix, The (1999). The full dialogue between two characters of the movie, Neo and the Spoon Child, is shown below.

[Neo tries to bend a spoon only using his mind.]

Spoon Child: Do not try to bend the spoon, that is impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth.

Neo: What truth?

Spoon Child: There is no spoon.

Neo: There is no spoon?

Spoon Child: Then you will see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

Bending yourself means changing (IC #13) yourself on a deep and personal level. Such task is nonetheless something akin to a miracle because it requires a consciousness change willed. Waiting for circumstances outside of your control to provoke permanent changes in your life is the biggest self-deception. You have to stop wanting and waiting for abstract forces of Nature to magically change your life for you. All that you will get with such an indirect and passive approach is the illusion of change. Stop wanting it and be it. You have to develop a mindset that increases your sense of self-responsibility up to infinity and leaves no other option in your mind besides the immediate need for you to be that change that you want to see in yourself. Change on a personal level must be done at all times, never "later." This is very difficult to achieve and requires that you find your true identity as a spiritual and godlike entity that has complete control over its destiny. (More on this topic later in this chapter.)

Therefore, in order to find the Truth you got to really be wanting to know who you are on a spiritual level. It does not matter how many beliefs you subscribe to, because none of it matters if you do not know how it all relates to you. It all comes down to you. That is why all knowledge is ultimately self-knowledge, and knowledge of the Thirteen Intentions, being the most powerful there is, can help you achieve a greater level of self-knowledge. But you have to regard this knowledge as a tool, nothing more. A tool is by definition an inanimate object that cannot do all the work by itself. The big difference with respect to the Thirteen Intentions is that they represent a tool that is alive (IC #5) and thus can almost do all the work for you, but you still have to put the final nail to impede the construction from falling apart. In other words, you can find the lot of all knowledge, you can find the Truth, but it may still fall through without you.

By getting to know yourself better you are expanding your sphere of consciousness, and at each rest stop during this process you can see by looking at your old self that you have successfully climbed another ledge. (Note: self-knowledge.). The effect is progressive as the individual evolves in consciousness and in his ability to create from intent. (Note: Thirteen Intentions.) The more expanded the awareness, the more powerful the intent, the more successful and automatic the creation and the more realized the consciousness. (Note: It is not a surprise that by 12 + 3 -> consciousness results in realizairton, automation and creation, etc.) therefore, the degree of power you have matters when you use the tool (intent) that which will invebitably be one of the any one Thirteen Intentions, or all of them at once if your will is aligned with Intention #13.

According to Intention #1, there is always a purpose behind something; there is always a meaning, a cause. There is, for example, a purpose for life and a purpose for evolution, and they differ from one another, though the latter includes and overrides the former. We may not be aware of the final purpose / meaning of Existence (Life), but there is a purpose in the sense that there is a straight and objective answer that applies to everyone regardless of individual beliefs, and this answer, if understood in the right context, is more enlightening than relativistic answers such as "the meaning is the meaning you give it." Notice how this absolute (nonrelative) statement cannot be objectively true, as it is implying that relativity is an absolute. Because relativity (chaos - IC #10) is not an absolute in Creation, and specially because there is always a higher order (IC #7) behind / beyond the perceived chaos, then anyone who parades relativistic beliefs is simply ignorant of the final truth that we learn from the Absolute (IC #13).

In Section 2.1 we learned that absolute concepts such as Existence are self-causing, which means that they are their own purpose. The purpose of the Absolute is the Absolute, period. That is already the highest purpose that anyone can have in mind. But the problem is that we need to further elaborate on the nature of this higher purpose until we can achieve a proper level of technical knowledge that will allow us to apply it in our lives. For now, consider that this purpose is spiritual and coincides with what Intention #13 is all about: Love. We will better characterize and define this purpose later in this chapter.

Most people do not have a higher purpose in life; but of course, not everyone is looking for one. Sometimes their purpose is to just experience the basic / standard things that life has to offer and not necessarily do something "great." To justify this lack of a well-defined purpose, most people subscribe to the "enjoy life" philosophy, which is in tune with the highest purpose of Existence after all. (See the figure below.) The problem is that a philosophy that considers life (IC #5) itself as the purpose of life is still not the highest purpose that we can have in mind. The highest purpose is spiritual and lies at Intention #13, and so it is bigger / greater than life (IC #5); it is a purpose that remains valid for all eternity, and so, in theory, it should span many lives.

Life is neither sacred nor insignificant; it just is. From a spiritual perspective, life is just an enriching experience that is not necessarily the first or the last. Belief in life after death is not even a requirement for us to be able to see everything as part of a bigger context, a plan of Creation, as described by the Thirteen Intentions. Still, most people will only look for answers inside the context of life, because their focus is restricted to life, and so they are unable to find higher purpose that could provide them with everlasting fulfillment. Nonetheless, if people are aware of a significant purpose in their lives, they at least have a chance to extrapolate such purpose in order to achieve great things. On the other hand, when people are not aware of any significant purpose, they simply limit themselves to experience life without any sort of extrapolation; therefore, it can be argued that to experience life on a basic level is their purpose after all.

But the biggest problem is not being ignorant of the purpose of life, but assuming that a certain course in life must be followed in detriment of all others. This in itself is an assumption that controls people's minds and limits their amount of energy and motivation. For example, when an individual is part of a society, there is often stress and anxiety associated to the fact that he must honor a lifelong societal contract, and yet he is not aware of having signed anything. Therefore, the individual keeps pushing himself to have the motivation to "do something" and "become someone" for the sake of society, but the truth is that he will not have enough motivation to excel as long as he feels obligated as a slave does. The moral of this story is that one should not honor agreements in which they did not consciously participate. Many people are brainwashed by society in this aspect, although in the end it is the individual himself who allows his mind to be controlled.

A greater motivation that comes from the inside can only arise when there is freedom, which is above all a state of mind. It is very difficult for the individual to achieve responsible freedom of self-determination, hence the reason why so many people choose to remain trapped in situations where responsibilities are automatically assigned to them by outside authorities. Funnily enough, it is only when the individual stops thinking that he ought to have motivation to do only certain things that he begins to have motivation to do everything. That is, when one strives for nothing too much in particular, they automatically acquire the energy (motivation) to strive for everything at once. For this reason, there is truth in the statement "the purpose is to not have a purpose." The purpose of Existence is indeed along these lines, as it tends to be quite paradoxical (IC #10): it is a purpose unassuaged of purpose, a purpose that is not really a purpose.

The spiritual and gentle nature of the purpose of Existence leads us to understand that a forceful way of living is the same as not living. There should be no limitations in life, only infinite possibilities. To have a spiritual purpose is to have a free mind, a mind that acknowledges infinite possibilities. Any purpose that brings limitations to our minds, and consequently to our lives, is not the highest purpose. Lesser purposes flood our minds with expectancies for results. Most often, people will live their lives going after all sorts of results, most of which lie in a distant and uncertain future. For them, the very fact that they are alive is not enough, for they must also display to others some sort of closure to their lives. The problem is that, once all results have been achieved, people sink right back into questioning the meaning of life. Well, by Intention #13 they should know that it is the very continuation (IC #13) of life that matters, and so no result is necessary except that they learn to live (be) in the present -- this is what it means to live life to the fullest.

IC #13 -> 13 = 3 + 10 -> be (exist - IC #3) in the present (IC #10)

Finding your true purpose in life also means finding your true will and then see how it translates to the tasks of everyday life. One's true will is the same as one's true purpose in life as well as the purpose of Existence. Some tasks may temporarily align with such purpose, but after a while they become counterproductive. They may help or hinder the main purpose. But to be bonded by the spiritual purpose of Existence means that you sees life as an experience that enriches your spirit and you understand that you don't really have to do anything in order to live; you do not need to "get a life" because you already have one. Any other commitment, any other responsibility should be an extra that you are willing to take, according to your Will.

in , the purpose of Existence only expects you to go along with the free flow of your living. no purpose at all besides living. You have to be being free from desire. As such, it is the pinnacle of freedom, but also the strictest bond possible, because there is serious commitement and responsibility in being free, much more than people are willing to have. With great freedom comes great responsibility. One does not have any responsibility at all except that which one decides to have for oneself, and unadultered freedom is already the ultimate responsibility that anyone can have. The price of freedom is eternal self-vigilance against falling in limitation, and infinite self-responsibility. This will become increasingly obviosu as we central is neecssity cultiave one's analyze in later sections the n otions of power and energy. The probvlem of cultivating ond's energy more and more becomes central then..

The universe is made of one substance: energy. Everything in the universe is energy assuming one form or another. But what is energy after all? Mainstream science defines it as the "capacity to do work," "usable power," etc. Well, all of these definitions are somewhat circular considering that by Intention #5 the concepts of power, force and work are all interchangeable with energy. The fact is that energy is something beyond definition because it corresponds directly to an universal principle, an Intention of Creation. Energy is already what provides the definition for several concepts with respect to life and the universe. For this reason, it is suitable for a fundamental analysis that we treat energy as the absolute variable of the universe.

Vibration and consciousness are alternative names for the absolute variable of the universe. These two concepts along with energy are all intrinsically related and in fact they are the same abstract property under different names. The concept of energy is a better denomination for most practical (IC #5) purposes because it is closer to physical world concepts. Therefore, to see energy as a continuous variable serves a more practical purpose than in the case of vibration or consciousness. Energy by itself is an abstract property and as such its existence is questionable -- we cannot really prove it -- but still everything that exists is an effect produced by energy in the same way that consciousness (IC #12) is constantly giving birth to reality (IC #3): 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3.

What the absolute variable of the universe really is, is the concept of a completely pure (IC #13) form of energy which underlies all physical reality. Pure energy is an abstract entity / concept and as such it cannot be detected by scientific means, but inside the physical world this energy assumes many forms that can be detected and measured. The five qualities of energy shown in Table 4.# are nothing more than degrees of energetic purity. They are simply different states of the same substance, a divine essence, which is actually the substance of the Void (IC #13). In other words, the Void also has a nature and substance of Its own from which all matter and energy is derived. The Void is hardly "nothing" considering that It is already the source of everything. There is absolutely no energy as well as infinite energy in the Void.

IC #13 -> Void ; Source -> pure (IC #13) energy

		Energy	IC
		mass	#5
		heat	#6
		sound	#7
		scalar	#8
		vacuum (zero-point)	#9

Let us take one of the qualities and see it in detail: vacuum energy. This quality of energy, also known as zero-point energy, is the lowest possible energy for a system, except that it is also virtually infinite energy considering that it is present at all points in space. Therefore, vacuum energy is the most abundant form of energy despite the fact that it is extremely subtle and fluid and thus cannot be easily harnessed. This makes of vacuum energy the highest quality of energy, the one that is closest to the idea of a completely pure form of energy found in the Void. In fact, vacuum energy is spiritual energy emanation directly from the Source.

To remain dependent only on a particular energy source can block you off from higher quality sources, which are more abundant and allow those who access them to be more in touch with their spirituality. the highest faculties of self, higher levels of being and consciousness, are there waiting to be discovered by those who get in touch with these finer energies of Creation. For example, One may be healthy physically but not healthy spiritually. if their focus is solely on cultivating mass instead of vibrastioanl energy. In this way, one may be neglecting one's spiritual evolution, which greatly depends on how fast vibration is rising. The funny thing about finer energies is that they are pretty much the same as no energy at all, and this means that being in touch with these energies is practically the same as becoming self-sufficient. It is not necessary to say that for a being to become its only and own source of energy is something extremely difficult, until there it has to depend on outside and intermediary sources.

In this chapter, we are interested in solving the problem of how someone can accumulate (IC #8) and control their energy. This is fundamental to anyone's evolution, because there is always a need for more energy in order to solve problems that keep arising. It is well known that a problem cannot be solved on the level on which it was created. For example, if you want to solve a problem at level x, you need to be at level x+1 or greater. You cannot perform at a high level without enough energy. Also, you always need more energy to achieve control (power) over your current level of energy. Power begets more power, and that is why there is never enough energy -- there is always a need for more.

The good news is that the energy of any system already tends to increase under optimal (natural) conditions. This is by natural law, more specifically due to Intentions #8, #11 and #13. However, constant (IC #13) growth only takes place in the realm of vibration (IC #7). The reason why it is only energy as vibration that can rise to infinity is simple: Intention #8 following immediately after Intention #7 can only mean that the principle of accumulation (IC #8) applies to vibration and not to the standard concept of energy as defined by Intention #5. Intention #5 merely defines the concept of physical (IC #4) energy, which is really energy as mass, and thus it is restricted to physical boundaries. Now, vibrational energy is non-local and so it is not restricted to the boundaries of a system, although it can be temporarily associated to one. On the other hand, physical energy cannot be increased indefinitely without the risk that the system's limits are exceeded and the system gets destroyed in the process. For this reason, physical energy requires constant maintenance to remain in an optimal level that is neither too high nor too low.

absolute (IC #1) variable (IC #6) -> 1 + 6 = 7 -> IC #7 -> vibration ; frequency

As seen in 3.5 - Densities, every system has a base level of vibration that we can call as its frequency. A system only exists to the extent that it incorporates a specific frequency: change (e.g., increase) the base frequency and we are no longer talking about the same system. However, sometimes a change of frequency is not only because we have changed the focus of our analysis, but also because the system we were analyzing is now dead: A system is nothing more than a certain amount of energy, which means that the tendency for energy to keep increasing on a metaphysical (vibrational) level eventually exhausts the system by also triggering the physical (systemic) energy to blow out of proportion. As a result, the system suffers great instability until its subsequent death, because it only existed to the extent that its energy remained stable (i.e., within a characteristic frequency range).

As we can see by Table 4.#, vibration corresponds to one of the qualities of energy: sound, and if mass (i.e., physical energy) and sound are states of the same substance, then physical energy can also be interpreted in terms of vibration. It is therefore acceptable to say that a system suffered a process that "lowered" its vibration. Technically, however, a system variable measuring vibration can only be fixed or rising. Whether there has been an increase or a decrease in a system's physical energy, that still constitutes a fixation or an increase in its vibrational energy. The reason for this is because vibration by itself cannot suffer an oscillation considering that it already is oscillation assuming a definite frequency value. Accordingly, when analyzing a system in isolation we notice oscillations in its energy, but beyond that system we discover that the disturbances are the result of an evolutionary process involving another system that includes the latter as a subsystem. Therefore, we find out that the vibrational energy of a system is always rising by an indirect association with the energy of a greater system.

Let us analyze the graph of Figure 4.#: The y-axis contains the values that the absolute variable of the universe takes as energy of a purely vibrational nature rises steadily across systems even when physical energy oscillates locally (i.e., within a system). The x-axis measures the scale (wavelength) difference between cycles (waves), but it can also represent time. The diagonal line is depicting the energetic growth process associated to the absolute variable, and we can consider it as a third axis which would be the z-axis if the graph was three-dimensional. Now, what is important is that the process of the diagonal line is unrelated to time, and so, even if we consider the x-axis as representing time, that still does not mean that the diagonal line is the graph of the function y = x. We can see this in the graph by the fact that the third axis is not mapped to the x-axis, only to the y-axis. The third axis is really a vector that includes the y-axis as a vertical (scalar) component and the x-axis as a horizontal component that adds the much-needed factor of time to our linear analysis. It is only appropriate to say that vibrational energy is increasing over time when there is an increase in physical energy coinciding with an increase in vibration, because apart from that we are talking about a process that is happening on an axis / time / dimension of its own.

Notice by Figure 4.# that there is an aspect of energy that never dies, it just changes form (system - IC #4). From system to system, energy achieves immortality. In physics, this concept is known as the first law of thermodynamics, which states that energy can never be destroyed or created. A system can be said to be continually producing energy (work), but in reality it is borrowing energy from a higher-frequency energy source corresponding to a greater system. The Universe is the greatest system; it is both the ultimate energy source as well as the ultimate isolated macroscopic system. In systems theory, however, an universe is merely the environment of a system. The environment not only provides all the energy that the system needs, but it also reabsorbs all the energy contained in the system after it has died. That is, the system simply disintegrates back into the environment after reaching its maximum level of entropy.¹

Now we are going to see a more realistic depiction of the evolution of a system on a purely energetic level. A system is supposed to remain stable during its life, but eventually a need for post-systemic evolution arises: the system needs to evolve beyond itself. Such metaphysical need eventually triggers the system's energy to rise to such a high level relative to normal levels that the result is pretty much a state of infinite energy, hence a singularity. All systems end with a singularity (death), which means that everything that the system ever was (i.e., energy) is compressed into one instant. Therefore, notice how the wave of a system collapses into a singularity according to the steps shown in Figure 4.#, which is actually an adaptation of the exponential growth shown in Figure 4.#. As the rate of growth (vibration) tends to infinity, the wave collapses as more energy is being compressed into the present instead of remaining evenly distributed along a horizontal axis of time.

In essence, there is a law of evolution (IC #11) responsible for continuous and spontaneous energetic growth on all levels of Creation. There is always progress being made, even when we cannot detect it. What makes this evolution hard to define is the fact that it goes into into higher degrees of everything and nothing in particular: power, order, complexity, chaos, vibration, spirituality, consciousness, etc. Of course that in the end we are talking about energy of a purely scalar nature, that is, energy characterized by magnitude [IC #8] only. All you have to do is imagine a vertical (IC #8) line extending from zero to infinity -- this is the true (spiritual) nature of evolution. This vertical line is an uinfailing process of evolution always happening in the background, but we have the option to bring it to the foreground and thus start living our lives by it.

________________________
¹ In physics, entropy is the measure of the disorder (chaos) of any system. According to the second law of thermodynamics, the entropy of any isolated system can only increase over time. In the case of open systems, entropy can decrease locally and temporarily due to external agency, but the tendency for it to increase overall persists if we consider the entire life cycle of the system. That is, if we keep expanding our analysis over time and space, it becomes increasingly obvious that there is always a positive net change in entropy for the universe. For this reason, entropy is sometimes considered an universal principle of which the second law is a mere expression.

[Under construction]

According to Intention #13, any individual (IC #1) existence (IC #3) is nothing more than a reflection / incarnation of the Triad, which is nothing more nor less than the three-fold nature of Existence. This means that every existent / created thing is not monadic or dyadic, but triadic in its fundamental nature, otherwise it simply cannot exist. Now, let us recall that every created thing has a certain base signature frequency, which can be any real number. The difference now is that we are talking about core frequencies of Creation that are not necessarily the same as base frequencies. There is a limited number of core creative (IC #3) energies behind everything that exists. Therefore, the fundamental frequency responsible for the existence of something must be a three-digit number. Anything greater or lower than three digits is not a real root frequency of the universe.

Nicole Oresme was a medieval scholar who made a series of translations of the works of Aristotle. In one of his books, he quotes the following from De vetula:¹

Said Aristotle, prince of philosophers and never-failing friend of truth: All things are three; The three-fold number is present in all things whatsoever... Nor did we ourselves discover this number, but rather natures teaches it to us. ²

The frequencies we will work with here are actually numbers describing the meaning of natural creative forces. According to Intention #3, creative has to do with three, hence three digits. But root creative frequencies can only be formed from the digits 1 to 9, because as we saw in Section 2.3, 0 is omitted from numerological analysis. As a consequence, the frequencies 380 Hz and 308 Hz, for example, are both equivalent to 38 Hz, a two-digit frequency, which means that none of these frequencies are root creative frequencies.

The fact that only nine digits matter in our analysis is also related to how our main concern is to understand Love (IC #13) from a practical perspective: What most people like to call as the "real world" is really the physical universe. The real world is a world where only action matters, and so it is also the "practical" world. In 3.2 - Dimensions, we saw how the physical universe extends from Intention #1 to #9 in the Cycle of Life. That is, the real world consists of nine main aspects of Creation.

There are 729 (9³) combinations of three digits (1-9). In other words, there are only 729 base frequencies or energies of creation / manifestation. EVen more interesting, we can call these 729 numbers as spiritual frequencies if we play a little with number 729. (See below.)Spiritual frequency is pretty muc hthe same as a certain value attributed to the concept of pure energy that we saw before. Pure energy by definition is already infintie, but still it may assume any one of these values as we will explain shrotly . frequencies represent a channel, a bridge, because they are spiritual frequencies manifesting themselves as a finite physicla reality.

9^3 = 9 x 9 x 9 -> the spirit (IC #9) empowering itself to create reality (IC #3)
9^3 = 729 -> vibration (IC #7) finite (IC #2) of the spirit (IC #9)              
9^3 = 729 <=> 297 -> a number (IC #2) of spiritual (IC #9) frequencies (IC #7)   

It should not be a coincidence that the sum total of all numbers in the 27×27 square above can be reduced to 9: 111 + 112 + ... + 998 + 999 = 404595 -> 4 + 4 + 5 + 9 + 5 = 27 -> 2 + 7 = 9. In other words, these 729 types of energies (vibrations) emanating from the Spirit are what supports the real world; together they form a spiritual foundation upon which the physical universe is built. This is a notion that only gets reinforced the more we look into number 729. For example, one characteristic of 729 is that it is the largest three-digit cubic number; therefore, if we consider that cube -> 4 corners -> IC #4 -> system ; physical ; foundation, we can conclude that 729 symbolizes the physical universe, the cosmos, which by definition is the largest system ("cube") possible.

In Chapter 2, we saw how numbers 3, 6, and 9 hold a special function in the creation of the universe, which is why they can be considered more fundamental than the other single-digit numbers. And then we saw how, beyond 6 and 9, the most fundamental number to the nature of reality is 3. Three is the first number that comes into existence and the only number that will ever really exist. To illustrate that, think of a bidimensional plane as a void: the first 2D geometric shape, the first thing, that can come out of this void is a triangle. (Note: a geometric shape is by definition a closed figure.) Since a triangle possess three endpoints and three angles, the greater triangle in Figure 4.# symbolizes number 3 itself and also a triad formed by 3, 6 and 9. Numebr 3 is the entire triangle but also appears as one of the endpoints.

3-9-6 triangle -> Trinity -> "God" (singularity - IC #1) as three (IC #3) persons -> IC #13

In Chapter 2, we touched on the subject of how Love is already everything and so we cannot easily figure out a consistent course of action based on It. Also, what many like to call as "infinite" or "unconditional" love is actually love in a perfect and immanifest state that at first does not serve any practical purpose in the real (manifest) world. Therefore, we need to make Love into something more well-defined, more rational, so that we can put It to good use. One thing is knowing the Truth, another is applying It efficiently. The problem is that Love is already Infinity (IC #13), and thus we cannot associate a value to It unless we commit the biggest crime ever: we have to limit the unlimited. Some will abominate such a crazy idea, because we have to downgrade what Love represents; we have to break Love apart. But, as soon as we are done with the breakage, we have the opportunity to capture the first and most fundamental fragment that better reflects the whole of what Love is/was.

Ideally, and according to the conditions we have set sorrouding the importance of practice, a value for Love will be one of the 729 spiritual frequencies. Only one of them is the right one. Well, our focus here is noto n iNtnetion #13 alone, but exclusively on the first nine intentions expressed as the 729 spiritual frequencies. Therefore, because The 3-9-6 triangle represent Intention #13, which in turn is Love, any permutations of the number set {3,6,9} result in frequencies that are the most fundamental to the nature of reality, but not not the most fundamental to our purpise, because each one of them is stll reflecting Love wholly and directly. but no, we don't need a faithfu lrepresnetation ofLove, we need a fractured one. We cna discard all of them , none of them serves our purpose, which is practical, and requires us to break Love. translates to break the 3-9-6 triangle, at least once, which in turn means that we must derive another set of frequencies, hopefulyl more "practical", from that triangle.

Permutations: 369, 396, 639, 693, 936, 963

396 -> manifest (IC #3) spiritual (IC #9) equilibrium (IC #6)
636 -> 6 + 3 + 6 = 9 + 6 -> inner (IC #9) learning (IC #6)   

Because the 3-9-6 triangle is archetypal to the nature of reality, each one of its characteristics carries the notion that something can only exist as three, and that existence has its basis on the principle of duality, hence Intention #2. For example, numbers 3, 6 and 9 are set apart from each other by two (IC #2) elements when we consider their positions in the sequence {1,2,3,...,9}. (Note: the same applies to 9 and 3 as in numerology the 1-9 sequence is cyclic.³) In the same manner, the 3-9-6 triangle is formed by three lines (IC #2) connecting three points (i.e., numbers 3, 6 and 9). Now, being a representation of the Triad, the 3-9-6 triangle is the only triangle that exists, which means that any other triangle made from a triplet of numbers must be a reflection of it. Therefore, the only option we have is to arrange 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8 in two sets of three numbers each, namely {1,4,7} and {2,5,8}.

We now have a total of three sets corresponding to three triangles. There are 6 permutations of each set giving a total of 18 spiritual creative frequencies. Naturally, each frequency reduces to 3, 6, or 9, and taking them apart digit by digit shows how all of them are composed of numbers set apart from each other by two elements. These are only frequencies in the entire group of 729 that exhibit this property. Anyway, we must still find out which one of the two triangles derived from the 3-9-6 triangle is the most fundamental, the most faithful reflection.

3 = 12 = 1 + 7 + 4 <- 174 | 471 -> 4 + 7 + 1 = 12 = 3
6 = 15 = 2 + 8 + 5 <- 285 | 582 -> 5 + 8 + 2 = 15 = 6
9 = 18 = 3 + 9 + 6 <- 396 | 693 -> 6 + 9 + 3 = 18 = 9
3 = 12 = 4 + 1 + 7 <- 417 | 714 -> 7 + 1 + 4 = 12 = 3
6 = 15 = 5 + 2 + 8 <- 528 | 825 -> 8 + 2 + 5 = 15 = 6
9 = 18 = 6 + 3 + 9 <- 639 | 936 -> 9 + 3 + 6 = 18 = 9
3 = 12 = 7 + 4 + 1 <- 741 | 147 -> 1 + 4 + 7 = 12 = 3
6 = 15 = 8 + 5 + 2 <- 852 | 258 -> 2 + 5 + 8 = 15 = 6
9 = 18 = 9 + 6 + 3 <- 963 | 369 -> 3 + 6 + 9 = 18 = 9

Notice that right before any one of these frequencies are reduced to 3, 6 or 9, they are reduced to 12, 15 or 18. This is the hint we need in order to conclude that the 2-8-5 triangle is more fundamental than the 1-7-4 triangle, although it should have been obvious all along if we consider that (1) 3 x 2 = 6 -> a tri- (IC #3) angle subjected to division (IC #2) and that (2) all permutations (frequencies) of the set {2,5,8} reduce to 6. Asd you can see, the first triangle generated from 3-9-6 is the 2-8-5 in the same manner that 6 is the first number generated from 3.

{3,6,9} -> {2,5,8} -> {1,4,7}

1st fracture:

3 = 1 + 2 -> origin (IC #1) of number 2
6 = 1 + 5 -> origin (IC #1) of number 5
9 = 1 + 8 -> origin (IC #1) of number 8

2nd fracture:

2 = 1 + 1 -> origin (IC #1) of number 1
5 = 1 + 4 -> origin (IC #1) of number 4
8 = 1 + 7 -> origin (IC #1) of number 7

We are now free to discard all frequencies of the sets {3,6,9} and {1,4,7} since they are not the most fundamental to our purpose here. Only the frequencies 258 Hz, 285 Hz, 528 Hz, 582 Hz, 825 Hz and 852Hz matter. only ONE of these six frequencies is the most fundamental to our purpose, and thus we have to find yet anpother criteria that may point us to this direction. apparently, there is no more criteria left except for the one of that of symmetry: the position of the digits in the numbers / frequencies. From now on, It is pretty much a matter of preference we are delaing with now, because all of those frequencies are somewhat equivalent, but we must proceed if want to find out what is the most important frequency.

We already know that 3 is the most fudnamental, the most central, number to Creation. It does not matter that there is not number 3 in {2,5,8}, since, Between 5 and 8, number 2 is the one that mostly approximates 3. That is, according to the directive Approximation (IC #11) we can ellect frequencies 528 and 825 as the most iumportant. Now, the same logic can be aplied further: we also know that 6 is the first number generated from 3 as long as we are not breaking 3 down. between 5 and 8, 5 is mostly approximates 6. hence hence 5 comes before 8 in terms of fundsamentality. we get 528 is, officialy, the first created frequency. because 825 is mirror of 528, as soon as you have 528 hz, you pretty much have 825 as well. because it only depends on our perpective.

528 <=> 852 -> 8 + 5 + 2 = 13 + 2 -> Love's (IC #13) value (IC #2) 
528 <=> 285 -> 2 + 8 + 5 = 2 + 13 -> measured (IC #2) Love (IC #13)

Love is the primary vibration / frequency of the universe, and now we know with mathematical accuracy the value of this frequency. Who would have thought that there is a well-defined value for Love? It could not be different, as Love is not about enigmas designed to screw with our minds. Love is about clearness, openness and honesty. Love does not hide from us; we hide from It. Experiencing Love is a matter of "tuning in" to the right channel, to the right spiritual creative frequency. We can access the power of Intention #13, the power of Love, when we spiritually and consciously attune ourselves to 528 Hz. Thoughts and behavior will reflect this attunement (IC #7), and so we are able to Love others and ourselves properly. However, as we will see, there is an increasing need to make sure that we do not commit further deviations from this Love channel.

If Love is supposed to be the ultimate power, then why not is Its frequency infinite? Well, it is in a certain sense considering that there are no exact values (measurements) in real life, only approximations (IC #11). For this reason, 528 Hz can only function as a borderline value, a limit: as we strive to achieve Loving perfection, there is a convergence toward 528.000…. This may pose a problem though, because the closer we are to 528, the greater the effort required for additional steps that can get us even closer. Thus there is a progressive need for more fine-tuning until we have settled on exact 528 Hz. Nonetheless, satisfying results may be achieved from time to time: let us say, 528.000001 and 527.999999, but the truth is that any degree of precision ceases to be enough sooner or later. Therefore, it may be that someone has cultivated their energy up to infinity and still they have not achieved a pure state of Love. How much Love is enough? The truth is that It is never (IC #13) enough.

Keep in mind that 528 Hz is Love in a fallen (broken) state; it is Love as It is/was cast as the first (IC #1) light (IC #3) of Creation. "Let there be light" really means to let Love be made into something concrete (IC #4), which fundamentally involves the creation of the polar aspects of Love that characterize the physical universe: Light and Dark. This breaking down of Love for the creation of an universe can be deduced from how number 13 reduces to 4: 13 -> 1 + 3 = 4, which means that it is only natural that Creation (IC #13) turns into something physical (IC #4), always. In Chapter 2 we saw how the Artificial Creation is all about polarity, and consequently there is fear, which greatly reinforces the search for Love. But this search is really a rediscovery, and that is why any separation from the Spirit (IC #13) can only be an illusion. Of course, nothing impedes this illusion from being a strong, convincing and persistent one that requires beings to continuously strive to rediscover true love within themselves. Without striving (life - IC #5) there is no evolution and no being, and so there is no purpose for Existence.

528 = 132 x 4 -> (13 + 2) x 4 -> Unity (IC #13) divided (IC #2) through solidification (IC #4)

It is interesting to notice that in classic Hebrew biblical texts we find out that the gematria of "the breaking forth of light" is 528.⁴ This expression is a metaphor for the first act of Creation, the dawn of Creation. The Creator propels Love, the true Light, by shooting It through the Void, the true Darkness. Naturally, the Void and Love are the same Absolute, and so to divide the Void with a ray of light is equivalent to break Love. In a sense, to break Love is to destroy It, but we already know that, after all, this is a constructive action that results in greater appreciation, experience and knowledge of Love. The Creator is Love, and thus it is only by breaking Himself apart that He can Love (know) Himself better. Such act is the ultimate sacrifice (IC #12) in the name of Love. As we will see in the next section, the Creator has to literally die in order to live through His creatures.

People are not wrong in their assumption that, at the end of the day, life is the only reality that matters. In fact, we find out that without life there is no purpose (IC #1) for Creation, because the very first act of Creation, to which we have assigned 528 Hz, is geared toward the origination (IC #1) of life (IC #5): 528 -> 5 + 2 + 8 = 15. Therefore, the beginning of the universe / reality is inextricably attached to the beginning of life. This makes sense when we consider that there can be no reality / existence if there is not a living being aware of it. Everything in Creation can only logically begin with the miracle of life and the resulting perception thereof. To say otherwise is to believe that a dead and artificial version of Creation can exist independently from the Divine Creation, which is full of life. We know by Chapter 2 that the Artificial Creation cannot exist without the Divine Creation in the same way that a shadow cannot exist without something casting it.

The fact that life is so important to Creation reflects how the numerical archetype 528 is central to a successful application of the Thirteen Intentions. In previous chapters we had to delve into abstract theories to understand the much greater spiritual reality of Creation (i.e., "the big picture") before we could find the right key to decipher the mystery of practice (life). Now we have such key: 528. Now we have an object of study that unlocks the possibility of us finally being able to unify theory with practice to produce a theory of practice. Our theory is based on the Thirteen Intentions, hence Intention #13, and 528 Hz is the Creative frequency that incorporates and objectifies what Intention #13 represents from a real-world perspective.

There is only one (i.e., the One) who has achieved balance between all aspects of its being, and that is the Creator. But within Creation everything is a product of the corruption of spiritual and perfect balance. We can therefore pose the following question: how can the individual become balanced while living in an imbalanced world? Again, the key is 528: 528 -> 5 + 2 + 8 = 15 -> 1 + 5 = 6. 528 is the key that unlocks the power of Love in our lives. To be in possession of the knowledge imparted by 528 is to be in possession of the key that unlocks spiritual balance (IC #6) within Creation, and thus the individual can slowly achieve perfection in all aspects of his life as he slowly achieves a conscious experience (IC #5) of Love. In other words, the individual literally becomes the Creator within His own Creation.

Love is the balance of all. The power of Love is in itself an extreme that does not subscribe to any other (known) extreme but at the same time involves all extremes all the time. That is why the keyword balance taken in a Loving context is very important, because in no way does it mean that we should forsake a material reality for a strictly spiritual one. On the contrary, we must achieve balance between material and spiritual so that we can create an even more powerful reality (life) for ourselves through the unification of these two aspects. The goal is to embrace (love) reality in the most powerful way, whatever that reality may be. Thus we may also consider 528 as a bridge between material and spiritual realms, a bridge of Love.

We are now going to interpret 528 and its cyclic permutations according to the numerology of the Thirteen Intentions. Notice that "quantity (IC #2) of infinite (IC #8) energy (IC #5)" is quite a contradictory statement: how can infinity be a quantity when infinity by definition is beyond any quantity? Well, this is actually a confirmation of what we discussed previously about the need of the Unlimited (Love) to become limited. Certainly, to quantify Love, which is infinite energy, is to create a paradox, an error in the logical sense, and yet this is absolutely required for the advent / genesis of Creation.

528 -> life (IC #5) line (IC #2) to infinity (IC #8)                  
528 -> potential (IC #5) dimension (IC #2) of extrapolation (IC #8)   
528 -> product (IC #5) of polar (IC #2) extremes (IC #8)              

528 <=> 285 -> quantity (IC #2) of infinite (IC #8) energy (IC #5)    
528 <=> 285 -> linear (IC #2) cumulative (IC #8) power (IC #5)        
528 <=> 285 -> diversity (IC #2) of extreme (IC #8) forces (IC #5)    

528 <=> 852 -> great (IC #8) opportunity (IC #5) for challenge (IC #2)
528 <=> 852 -> maximum (IC #8) energy (IC #5) differentiation (IC #2) 
528 <=> 852 -> augmented (IC #8) experience (IC #5) of duality (IC #2)

We find important clues regarding the meaning of life when we interpret 528 numerologically. For example, since 528 reflects Love, the Will of the Creator, we find out that this Will is primarily set on the act of living, but living in the greatest (IC #8) possible (IC #5) way (line - IC #2). The Creator wants to see life in its full (infinite) extension / expression. In a sense, the Creator is saying, "Hey, take this life / opportunity and push it forward into infinity. Make the most of it! Live without limits." And to make sure this notion is followed through, He peppers life with challenges (IC #2) in order to make it more (IC #8) intense and thus provide more opportunities (IC #5) for learning on a spiritual level, because this is what enables the Creator to know Himself (Love) better. The moral of the story is that life is a learning ground for the spirit, and thus it is imperative that we learn how to maximize (IC #8) this learning process.

Notice that 528 can mean a horizontal (IC #5) line (IC #2) to infinity (IC #8) and a horizonal (IC #5) line (IC #2) elevated (IC #8). Both interpretations are valid and show how 528 is a combination of horizontal and vertical to form a diagonal line that represents the elevation of the line of life to a higher plane, a spiritual plane. As we saw in Figure 4.#, the "final frontier" of the real world, hence life, has everything to do with spirituality (IC #9). However, we cannot forget that, in the case of 528, digit 5 is preceding 8, and so the right way to interpter this number is to imagine that first we have a horizontal process, and then this process suffers verticalization resulting in a diagonal process. We have already studied such concepts in 4.2 - Energetics when we ascribed a diagonal line to energetic growth according to the absolute variable of the universe, and then we learned that this process has a horizontal and vertical component. 528 is both the process in full as well as just an horizonal component.

To live life to the fullest is the epitome of the enjoy-life philosophy, but with the added respnsibility of manifesting such joy through a lot (IC #8) of work (IC #5). (Note: 8 + 5 = 13 -> Love (IC #13).) "ENjoy life" by itself is a cop out because it doe snot specificy how we go about doing this nor the amount of effort required for the manifestation of joy. Happiness should never be taken for granted. To be happy, one must work, and thus culttivate (grow - IC #8) their power (IC #5). (Note: this will be made clear when we come to study 825, the mirror of 528.) most people, however, like to jump from one extreme to another, and so at first they will agrre that over indulgence in joy is not a good idea, but they attributresee 528 to over indulgence in suffering. this is simply not true. 528 is not about "work first, fun later"; it is about the achievement of infinite pleasure through infinite work. That is, the best results come when we unify work with pleasure so that there is no difference in practice: you have fun while working and vice versa, and so productivity (IC #5) grows (IC #8) at the same time that pleasure (IC #7) grows (IC #8). Life is not one big party, nor is it one big drama -- again, balance is necessary.

528 -> work (IC #5) quantity (IC #2) up to infinity (IC #8)  
528 -> 5 + 2 + 8 = 7 + 8 -> pleasure (IC #7) infinite (IC #8)

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

________________________
¹ De vetula is a long thirteenth-century poem written in Latin. It purports to be the autobiography of the classical Latin poet Ovid.
² Nicole Oresme, Le livre du ciel et du monde, ed. Albert D. Menut and Alexander J. Denomy (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1968).
³ A cyclic sequence is a sequence in which the first and the last elements are considered adjacent.
⁴ Gematria is an ancient numerological system as well as an occult science in which the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are assigned numerical values so that entire words and sentences extracted from Hebrew scriptures can be converted into numbers that unlock occult meanings and correlations. This kind of numerology was also used with the Greek alphabet. Author Bonnie Gaunt in her book Beginnings: The Sacred Design (Kempton, IL: Adventures Unlimited Press, 2000) analyzes the gematria of the Hebrew and Greek biblical texts in order to find clues of an intelligent (sacred) design for Creation. Gaunt exposes that the gematric value of the Hebrew word for the expression "the breaking forth of light" is 528, which she rightfully calls as the "first act of creation."

final (IC #12) truth (IC #1) -> 12 + 1 = 13 -> IC #13

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

Consciousness generally refers to a living being's awareness of several things about itself, its own existence, and the world around it, including but not restricted to sensations, perceptions, emotions and thoughts. Psychology and other sciences of mind also consider consciousness as being the quality or state of being aware. These common-sense definitions, however, are vague (circular), because awareness and consciousness are practically the same thing: awareness is a subproduct of consciousness. Therefore, let us stay away from orthodox and circular definitions and instead try to build a more natural approach to an explanation of consciousness.

To be conscious involves a lot of things. As conscious beings ourselves, we are trapped inside the consciousness phenomenon. Our intellect and perception are subject to consciousness, and not the other way around. This means that we cannot simply expect to fully define consciousness if we are not totally "above" and beyond it to see the entire process unfolding before our "eyes." Because of this, many people feel that consciousness has no place in the objective world of science, although a lot of "unobservables" in Nature can be and have been the targets of scientific investigations before. There are no boundaries for scientific inquiry, but the nature of consciousness seems to be just as unlimited.

Sorry. Content beyond this point will only be available in the version of this book for sale.

By the analysis done in Chapter 2 on the polarities of Love, we should now be able to see that the good/evil duality is an illusion. This means that whether something can be classified as good or evil is relative to individual perception. Or is it? Well, at the same time that perception plays an important role in determining the orientation of something, Love is the absolute good after all, and fear can be considered an expression of absolute evil. With this in mind, we can say that an act is intrinsically evil if it is implemented with the sole intent of causing fear, whereas an act is intrinsically good if it is implemented with the sole intent of cultivating Love. But let us not forget that Love is the only Absolute, and as such It can be seen as a benevolent or malevolent force if one chooses to accept It or deny (fear) It, respectively. We have already discussed how Love is beyond superficial categorizations and so It can assume any role (mask) without losing Its integrity; therefore, the Absolute is both potentially good and potentially evil.

Sorry. Content beyond this point will only be available in the version of this book for sale.

Suffering arises from feelings that are stronger than the individual's capacity to assimilate them. Suffering is intense and obscure, and with causes that are unknown or ignored (denied) by the individual. Aspects of one's existence that cannot be understood nor accepted eventually become too intense to be ignored. It is only natural that suffering arises according to the sequence of Intentions of Creation: sensations (IC #7) grow (IC #8) internally (IC #9) until they become very intense (IC #10) to produce a personal singularity, an existential paradox (IC #10).

Sorry. Content beyond this point will only be available in the version of this book for sale.

• Intention #1 is the principle / beginning of everything: A count can only truly begin with one. Without one, the other numbers cannot exist. The singular precedes the plural.
• Intention #1 only cares about oneness; it does not allow awareness of anything else.
• Intention #1 is the origin of the individual (the I). The individual has the penalty of being disconnected from the totality (IC #10) of things, but deep inside he is already a whole unto himself because of his unique characteristics.
• Intention #1 is the simplest Intention of Creation. Everything that is simple and unified is already ideal. There is no purpose in making things more complex if we can keep them simple. In fact, everything that looks complicated has a very simple foundation that has been overshadowed.
• Intention #1 simplifies and facilitates our understanding: there is only one main cause behind an effect not mattering how many different factors are involved. If you are able to find the main / absolute variable of a system, you are able to control that system entirely only through that variable.
• Intention #1, being the leftmost Intention in the sequence, can be considered the inverse of Intention #13. This means that everything that goes against the Thirteen Intentions, which are represented by Intention #13 alone, is focusing on and being attracted to Intention #1. The most common outcome of this inversion is monocularity: to see only one thing at a time and become fascinated with it, and then find another and fall in fascination again while forgetting about the last one. Monocularity automatically implies in Intention #2 because it requires an external (IC #2) representation as the object of fascination.
• Intention #1 represents individualized nonexistence, nothing as something, zero as one. Since existence only comes with Intention #3, what we have here does not exist: it is It is not really nothing, but also not really something; it is a "nothing-as-something." What intention #1 repreentes by does not exist by itself. This only becomes clearat intention 3 becaue then we can visualize a line (IC #2) dividing the nothingness and thus producing something. because you cannot get csomeinto without creating (IC #3) a constrast (IC #2). and that is whe we have actually something with Intention #4.

• Intention #2 is the duality principle by which nonexistence can be brought into existence (IC #3). Intention #2 breaks the monotony and loneliness of Intention #1 by introducing diversity: now there are two instead of one. Without duality nothing can exist because we need one to validate the existence of the other.
• Intention #2 can represent a line and Intention #1 can represent a point. When the singularity of Intention #1 is "broken" there is separation and division, and this can be thought as representing the manifestation of a line. Therefore, we can say that Intention #2 comes into play exactly when a point turns into a line. A point is precisely nothing, nothing as something. If you do not take a point and do not somehow turn it into a line, which is definitely something, then you are left with eternal nothingness. However, with Intention #2 there is no form of existence (IC #3) or manifestation yet, because a line is by all means invisible and intangible as just an abstract idea.
• Intention #2 is responsible for the dual nature of reality (IC #3). Duality is necessary for something to actually exist and/or to be created (IC #3). For example: the creation of a painting begins with the first significant line drawn on a blank canvas, a line that automatically creates two sides.
• Intention #2 allows for unity (IC #1) after all, but always in detriment of another unity, another one: there can be only one or the other. Intention #2 cannot perceive different aspects as one, but only the antagonizing differences / contrasts between them. Therefore, Intention #2 fails to consider higher non-dual states such as continuity (IC #13), interconnectedness (IC #12) and wholeness (IC #10), and it will see division / dichotomy instead.
• Intention #2 introduces the notion of dimensionality with the first dimension.

• Intention #3 is the power of manifestation, the spark that is necessary for the actual materialization (IC #4) of something. Things at the level of this Intention do not exist except as imagination, as thought forms. A world with concrete forms only arises with Intention #4. We can imagine Intention #3 as the occult (invisible) light that brings everything into existence by making it all visible. But the creative energy itself is formless, invisible.
• Intention #3 is not Reality, the equivalent of Creation; instead, Intention #3 is the principle that realizes things by bringing them into Reality.
• Intention #3 introduces the idea of electric charge and electric current (circulation). This is how something is first brought into reality: as an electrical signal. If with Intention #2 we had two poles, with Intention #3 there is a third pole that closes a circuit. An electric current can only exist if there is a closed circuit.
• Intention #3 represents an additional geometric dimension: width or height depending on the orientation. Therefore, Intention #3 is when a line becomes a plane: the imaginary expression of nothing into something. However, since a geometric plane is infinitely thin due to lack of depth, it still cannot be perceived by an observer. That is where Intention #4 fits in to give texture to this imaginary plane.

• Intention #4 finally gives concrete form and texture to Reality; it is an actual manifestation of Reality, and not just the ability to manifest / create as in the case of Intention #3. In other words, there is now visibility in the material sense, and not just in the imaginary (IC #3) sense. Reality is no longer just an imagination, but It also becomes visible from a third-person perspective. We now really have things as physical objects right in front of observers. However, all of this is still in the figurative sense, as in a dream, because the real world can only begin when there is energy, life and perception (IC #5).
• Intention #4 is when an idea (IC #1) is finally made into reality (IC #3) as something concrete. Intention #4 is not Reality, the absolute concept, but it equates to what Reality is all about in the end: a system or model that is manifested before our eyes.
• Intention #4 represents the standard (physical) notion of reality. Things are only real without a shadow of doubt when they appear to have form, depth (i.e., three dimensions) and solidity.
• Intention #4 builds upon dualism (IC #2) by introducing the notion of observer and observed (object). Considering that 2 x 2 = 4 -> IC #4, we now have duality happening through duality, or duality over duality. This means that in addition to the distinction between two sides (IC #2) now there is also the distinction between observer and observed.

• Intention #5 introduces a new dimension: time, which in turn implies in the possibility of motion (movement perception). Intention #4 could at most provide us with the idea of a dead (i.e., static, motionless) three-dimensional world.
• Intention #5 is life in the broader sense. Although not all objects are living, all of them are alive in the sense that they are energized. All objects in the universe are potentially in motion; all objects have potential energy.
• Intention #5 introduces perception, which can only be sensorial after all. Basically, what a life form does is explore the physical environment around it by making use of its senses. In this context, the humanoid form with its five main appendages (head, arms and legs) and five senses is the most efficient.
• Intention #5 being aligned with Intention #1 on the golden spiral represents therefore a new beginning / principiation, but this time a more potent one like an explosion. That is the actual beginning of life and the universe, ...since Intention #5 is when any kind of force begins.

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

• Intention #9 represents a vortex, an imploding force that sucks things into the spiritual world. As all things fall into this vortex they are stripped down to their core essence. One has to go through the needle's eye, the center of the vortex, in order reach the spiritual world of ic #10 and beyond.
• Intention #9 is a complete inversion of principles because every principle before it in the sequence of Intentions is the inverse of some principle after it. A few examples: variation (IC #6) is the inverse of constancy (IC #13), separation (IC #2) is the inverse of approximation (IC #11), and organization (IC #7) is the inverse of chaos (IC #10). Intention #9 itself is quite the inverse of what Intention #8 represents, being the former based on zero and the latter on infinity. For this reason, Intention #9 shifts the focus from Intention #1 to Intention #13, and this is very important from a spiritual perspective, because Intention #13 is the true spirit of Creation.
• Intention #9 has extremist qualities like Intention #8, but the ideal here is zero, not infinity. There is now a specific concern with spiritual power, not any kind of power. Therefore, Intention #9 marks the beginning of a spiritual journey toward perfection. The spiritual path is a narrow path that requires the practitioner to have great discipline by cultivating his internal energy and developing his awareness.
• Intention #9 is not "less is more" because that is still "more of less," which corresponds to Intention #8 instead. According to the philosophy of Taoism, in the pursuit of Tao (IC #10) every day something is dropped. In this way, the search for less indeed happens through Intention #9, but while one is at it there is absolutely no concern with dropping more; instead, there is only concern with attaining no concern at all. The fact is that there is not really a less; there is only more or lack of concern with obtaining more, which automatically leads to less in a spiritual sense. In other words, less things are not really less, because one can be free of material possessions and still carry a huge psychological burden, as for example when people believe that they need to attain more spiritual qualities all the time.
• Intention #9, or spirituality, is often considered unpractical by materialists, and indeed it appears as so if we consider that it follows the Middle Way, the path of less effort. However, spirituality is actually the ultimate practical approach: the less effort, the more power. #9 is actually the pursuit for the ultimate power through which challenges can be overcome with no effort at all. It is a path that is generally taken only after the spiritualist has already gone through the "power trip" and seen it for what it is: an obsession with nothing, because it is in nothing that true power lies. The spiritualist learns to at least be honest in his approach: he assumes an active instance, a direct approach of going toward zero, instead of the passive approach that goes after zero masked as infinity. All the time in itnention 8 the pursuer was trying tor each something by wallking away from it.
• Intention #9 reminds us of the inconvenient fact that the only thing certain in the future of anything is complete destruction. Everything collapses sooner or later, and often sooner than we expect if we consider that the directive Antecipation is also part of Intention #9. For this reason, Intention #9 teaches us about detachment from things. The spiritualist learns that material wealth does not enrich the spirit: the more you have, the more you can lose, and so in reality you never really had anything. There is no real gain and loss. Nothing is ever lost or gained, because the sum always end up being zero.

• With Intention #10, non-duality is achieved. The duality of Intention #2 is completely anihilated, although in reality it is transformed into something else: totality. All things are made into an entirety, a whole. Note that we do not say that all things "form a whole," because in the context of Intention #10 only the whole matters: if there is one thing against another, one thing all by itself, or several things, all of these scenarios are made into a whole. The holistic paradigm seeks to attain a vision of the whole even when looking at an individual part. Therefore, the whole in the context of . assumes a very special role, reason why we cannot simply define it by the sum (IC #7) of its parts; instead, the whole represents more than the sum of its parts, and is more significant than a simple acknolwedgedment that multiple sides coexist.
• Intention #10 is not the same as opposites being unified. Opposites are opposites. The idea that "two becomes one" disrespects the sequence of Intentions because Intention #1 cannot possibly follow after Intention #2. What really happens is that opposites cease to be opposites when Intention #6 enters the picture; they become equal parts instead. Separation (IC #2) is still present in Intention #6, though a common ground, an equilibrium, has been found between parts. It is in Intention #10 that all separation vanishes due to a perspective that sees everything combined to form a particle, and everything merged to create a whole. (Note: although differences between parts also vanish with Intention #10, they do not cease to exist.) The bottom line is that in Intention #6 we see how opposites are equal as parts, while in Intention #10 we see how parts are not really separate insofar as they integrate a whole, and thus they have even more in common than what Intention #6 was able to convey. Therefore, a true identity of opposites is found in totality, not in unity (IC #1) or equality (IC #6), although wholeness refers to a singular (unified) state in the visual sense.
• Intention #10 is all about the big picture, but in addition the picture is also more impressive (intense) than just a picture of all the parts standing next to each other, because that would mean that separation would still be apparent and ic #10 represents complete non-duality.
• Intention #10 represents an entire world in a particle, an universe in a nutshell. A world may contain several different things that are separate from each other, but from the perspective of Intention #10 we see only a particle. Therefore, every single thing that may be inside that world looks like a particle to us,after all a particle is all that we can see. That is why in Intentino #10's context we have diversity in unity at the same instant that we have unity in diversity. We never have only diversity in unity, or only unity in diversity, because in the first case there is bias toward Intention #2, while in the second case the bias is toward Intention #1. We also have totality in unity at the same instant that we have unity in totality. We never have only unity in totality (e.g., "one world"), but totality in unity is acceptable alone. This is because totality depends both on unity and diversity, while unity is independent. When we write unity in totality, we might as well write unity alone and the idea remains, while totlaity in unity if we take unity from it, we miss the idea thatthere is totality in a single unit, and not ordinary totality.
• Intention #10 does not mean we stick parts together with bubblegum and call the result a whole; instead, we merge parts to form an optimal blend that represents the best of all parts. Consider the following: Two substances, one black and one white, are absorbed through a funnel representing the vortex of Intention #9. The resulting substance that spurts from the funnel is a paste with no distinguishable features but that also cannot be considered homogeneous. The paste is not gray, or black with white spots, but an "impossible" color that is completely black and white at the same time. In short, Intention #10 is when a paradox comes to life.

[Under construction]

[Under construction]

• Intention #13 is the final ontological truth; it is the nature of being. Everything comes down to Intention #13, because not only is this Intention everything, but everything is this Intention. That is, for something to be something it has to individually (IC #1) exist (IC #3), hence 1 + 3 -> 13 -> IC #13. Therefore, everything is a singularity (IC #1) manifested (IC #3), and since there can be only one singularity (i.e., the singularity, which is Creation), then every part (thing) is already an expression of the whole of Creation -- there is no difference. The Whole / Oneness can express Itself in a myriad of ways.
• Intention #13 is the synthesis of all the Intentions. Not only Intention #13 has an independent meaning but also single-handedly represents the first 12 Intentions. Metaphorically speaking, Intention #13 is the conductor of a magical orchestra composed of 12 different instruments, all of which are important to the symphony of Creation.
• Intention #13 is the power of transcendence, the power of going beyond and forming bridges even between those things that we think to be completely unrelated to each other. Everything that is manifest or unmanifest, existent or nonexistent, known or unknown, alive or dead, material or spiritual, physical or metaphysical, finite or infinite, singular or plural, concrete or abstract, practical or theoretical, is One according to Intention #13. The true Oneness is Intention #13, because this Oneness is not restricted to exist only as a single (IC #1) thing or being, but instead It already exists as everything and beyond.
• Intention #13 reminds us that everything flows in the end. There is not really anything to worry about. Energy, which is also consciousness, is always "moving" from one state to another and so it can never really "die" (stagnate). There is only a continuous transformation of the same prime matter, the same Oneness.

1. Capra, Fritjof. O Ponto de Mutação [The Turning Point]. 20th ed. São Paulo: Cultrix, 1997.
2. Maturana, Humberto R. & Francisco J. Varela. A Árvore do Conhecimento [The Tree of Knowledge]. 5th ed. São Paulo: Palas Athena, 2005.
3. Trusted, Jennifer. Physics and Metaphysics: Theories of Space and Time. Paperback ed. London: Routledge, 1994.
4. Hawking, Stephen. A Brief History of Time.
5. Bearden, Thomas E. Excalibur Briefing
6. ciencia com consciencia - edgar morin
7. Tao of Physics - fritjof capra
8. Predrag Vranicki. ?On the problem of practice,? Praxis, 1965,1, pp. 41-48.
9. An Overview of the Mayan Calendar http://www.mayanmajix.com/art024p.html Ian Xel Lungold
10. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) publ. University of Chicago Press, 1962 by Thomas Kuhn,
11. ultimate journey robert monroe

Copyright © 2008-2010 Conspiracy Knowledge Base

You are free to reproduce parts of this work as long as you give credit to the author. When copying parts of this work, make sure to always include a notice identifying the original title and author. You may also distribute this work as a whole as long as you do not add or remove anything from the original content. You may not mutilate the content, or leave off contact, copyright and authorship information. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.