Transcription
If you were to ask a group of people which academic discipline is the study of space, I'm willing to bet that the most common answer you'll receive is astronomy. It's our natural inclination. However, this isn't entirely true. Astronomy deals with the study of outer space, yes, but the actual study of space is geometry.
In my most recent video, the one that is directly before this one—and I'll have it on the screen—I tried to explain the way that our conscious perception operates. I stated that we exist inside of a bubble, the bubble of our own perception, and this bubble is some kind of psychic apparatus, or spiritual contraption, or mechanism. One of the commenters mentioned something called a Gromov boundary, and when I looked into it, there it was; I just couldn't believe it.
If you ask me to make a model of the way that this device operates so that anyone looking at it can intuitively understand the way that it works, this would be it. I probably couldn't do a better job myself. This is called a Poincaré disc, and it is a visual representation of two-dimensional hyperbolic geometry. I know that that is a mouthful, but the thing that I want to focus on, or the thing that you need to understand, is: as I mentioned, geometry is the study of space. But despite this, defining exactly what space is isn't as straightforward as you would think. The best thing that we can come up with is that it is some kind of domain where things are able to happen, or things are able to exist.
But there is a way that you can view this where it makes a lot more sense metaphysically. You see, when we normally think of space, we think of freedom, or potentiality, or something like that. But space is something closer to the opposite of that; space is the restriction of freedom; it is the restriction of potential. You could define space as a set of rules or conditions; it is an arena of potential relationships and connections, and we define the parameters of these relationships via dimensions. This is what dimension means. As a very quick and simple example, as you probably know, within 2D space there is no depth; there is no going forwards and backwards. Even though a 2D plane may extend forever, it is constricted by this rule, and if you want to break this rule, you have to add a new dimension; you would have to enter into a new kind of space. So you can clearly see that space is what determines the way that things are able to behave. If you are within a space, you would call this nature; this is what nature is; it is the rules of the game. This is why spaces are often referred to as universes.
And this Poincaré disc is the best visual representation that I've seen of our nature, or this situation that we find ourselves in, or this space that we occupy, or the rules of our game, etc., etc. If you want to call it consciousness, or intelligence, or the psyche, I'm well aware of, you know, the whole Jungian disposition with the mandala, and you're going to have to be patient with me in this video because this is the most complicated thing that I've tried to express on this channel without sounding completely insane. But I believe that this is some kind of thing, or some kind of object, or personality, or entity. And I know, I know, non-Euclidean two-dimensional hyperbolic space, I get it, negative curvature, all of that, but there is something missing from that explanation. It's almost as if you can't see the forest for the trees. It's kind of like the universe—the normal universe—is it a place, or is it a thing? Since the universe is an organized system, it fundamentally has to be a thing, because that's what things are; that's what "thingness" is; it is the emergent complexity that arises from something being organized. And I've talked about this concept in my previous videos, which I'll have on the screen, and I really do believe that I have sort of cracked the code on defining what a thing actually is. But I think that if you stop viewing this as the way that the universe is, and you instead view it as the way that we are, then what I'm saying will make a lot more sense to you.
One of the few claims from philosophy that science has had no choice but to accept is that we cannot know what the outside world is—what Kant called the noumenal realm. This is a metaphysical principle; it is a philosophical foundation that everyone just accepts as a given; everyone's given up on trying to prove it wrong. We cannot know what the outside reality is like; we can only trust our own interpretations of it. So we ultimately exist within the walls of our own understanding, and this object is what understanding looks like; this is what understanding is. And what I believe is that this is some kind of thing; it is some kind of apparatus; some kind of spiritual device. If you actually believe that reality is some kind of literal computer simulation, this would be the strange, far-out, psychedelic VR headset. But whatever it is, it is some kind of machine.
Now, am I saying that reality is some kind of machine? I have no idea. As a matter of fact, no one knows what reality actually is. But our perception—what you and I call consciousness or intelligence—it is some kind of machine. And I'm using this word "machine" as a metaphor; I'm not talking about a literal machine. This is why I keep using terms like "psychic apparatus." I guess you could express it as a hyper-complex network of infinite interconnectivity; everything is connected, because that's what intelligence is; it is connections and relationships. If something doesn't connect to something else, it is literally not intelligible; it's something that doesn't even pop up on your radar.
The way that this apparatus operates is, as I mentioned, it is some kind of highly intricate network of infinite interconnectivity, and it is this interconnectivity portion that is throwing everyone for a loop and causing confusion. It is literally what confusion is; this is the chaos portion of chaos theory. Chaos is what happens when the density of relationships and connections becomes too great to compute; you hit some kind of singularity, which is the same thing as infinite interconnectivity; they are like these weird mirrored, inverted versions of each other. And you actually see this represented in the Poincaré disc, with the singularity being in the center and infinite interconnectivity being represented in the circumference. And what these zones represent—if you want to call them zones—is the end of intelligence, or at the very least the end of the kind of intelligence that we possess. To simply put it, it is the inability to grasp, because that's what intelligence is; it is grasping and making connections. And if you pay attention to this situation, we appear to be stuck between a rock and a hard place; I couldn't think of a better way of putting it. This is why we know but don't know; this is why there are all of these paradoxes that we run into; this is why Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is true; this is why Gödel's incompleteness theorem is true, because we are surrounded by some kind of uncertainty, some kind of paradoxical confusion, because that's what logic does; it produces confusion. Confusion is quite literally a symptom of logic.
In many of my really early videos, I used to say that things are only confusing, things are only complicated if you try and understand them. As soon as the attempt to understand disappears, so does confusion. And I'm not making any sort of judgment call or saying how things should or shouldn't be; I'm just telling you the way that it is. And when logic leaves the room, magic is able to take center stage, because logic and magic are antithetical to each other; they cannot coexist. Logic is the attempt to explain; it is explanation itself. And what magic is is the unexplainable; it is pure potentiality, where anything is possible. This is what infinite interconnectivity looks like—to have everything that could possibly be possible mushed together into this one thing. This is what the strange attractor is. I talked about this in my previous video on chaos theory—that there are these strange attractors, and what these strange attractors do is manifest all possible possibilities around them, and we call these fractals. And what we clearly see represented in the Poincaré disc is logic penetrating magic; it is the attempt to explain the unexplainable.
But if we stick with this machine metaphor, you could say that this apparatus is some kind of liquid machine. I'm not quite sure how to express it, but it is ultimately made up of these cogs, and we call these cogs different dimensions, and these cogs are all turning at these different rates and ratios. And I guess this is ultimately sounding very similar to how people claim that there are these different planes that operate at these different frequency levels, and I guess I'm ultimately doomed to become one of those frequency types of people. But at the end of the day, it's all just metaphor. The way that this all actually works just appears to escape language. If you want to keep the frequency metaphor and say that you are resonating or tuning into different frequencies, or if you want to keep it a bit more mechanistic and say that it's synchronicity—there is some kind of way information is able to travel back and forth between these places in these weird, exotic spaces—or it's kind of like Kabbalah, how there are these nodes that are all interconnected to each other—whichever way serves you the best so that you can understand it. Consciousness appears to be some kind of system or machine that is comprised of these interdimensional cogs. And I've tried to explain this all kinds of different ways on this channel, but it always just comes off as sounding a bit cuckoo and out there. You could say that they are different domains with different perspectives, or different domains that are able to make different types of connections and relationships. You could say that they are different domains where they make sense in a different kind of way—you know, kind of how we see within geometry in these weird spaces, or within physics—you know, quantum physics is famous for its counterintuitive nature.
One of the things that I always found to be interesting about representations of the psychedelic experience is just how geometric that they are. And one of the things that you also see reported in tandem with this odd geometry is alien intelligences. And what's probably happening is entry into some kind of strange geometric space. I don't know, but it's some kind of exotic space where things make sense in a different kind of way; that's what alien intelligence is—things making sense in a different way. Like Carl Jung with his whole sticktick on dream analysis—that dreams make sense, but in a way that you have to read in between the lines, or how the unconscious sort of speaks in these riddles. And I know that this all sounds pretty strange and odd, but I guess for you to conceptualize it, you can look at this example: arithmomania is a type of OCD; it is probably the most notorious form of OCD; it is the famous counting OCD. Whenever you see OCD depicted in media, it is probably this form of it. Now, the furthest back we've been able to trace this condition is around the 1400s, and within the context of the scale of human evolution, this is extremely recent; this is like yesterday. But I'm willing to bet that this condition, or something similar to it, is way older than that; it probably impacted people who had no idea how to count, back when counting and literacy was essentially non-existent. It's similar to the same way that deaf people can still have schizophrenia and hear voices, or have an internal dialogue or monologue, even though they've never heard sound before. I'm willing to bet that this condition impacted people who didn't know how to count. And for people who have this condition today, where counting is just considered the basics of life, it's not like they see numbers everywhere; their entire perspective is just dominated by the significance of numerical values. It's almost as if their lives had been invaded by numbers. For someone who doesn't know how to count, with the same condition, what they probably experience is odd coincidences, or what Jung would call synchronicity; it would just be this overwhelming sensation of synchronicity. And when you look at the way that Jung describes what archetypes are, it's similar to what I've been stating the entire time on this channel—that there are factors from some other dimension or some other plane that are pressing onto this one; he just calls this different dimension the unconscious. You could express it as us seeing the shadows cast by higher-dimensional objects; you could say that there are factors from some other plane that are pressing onto this one; you could say that information from some other dimension is materializing through us. When I use all of these analogies, I'm trying to express the same thing. And for Jung, for example, these higher-dimensional objects are what he calls archetypes, and then they manifest through the human being as complexes. The Jungian take on this is that complexes are quite literally patterns of behavior that are caused by information from some other dimension spilling over into this one. Which brings me back to this arithmomania complex—that it isn't simply about numbers; it is about the significance of numbers, or to simply put it, it is about significance. That's what synchronicity is; it is the realization that you are inside of some kind of meaning machine; all of these gears are turning in order to turn out meaning from this—this sea of magic. But the catch is that meaning isn't what you think that it is; meaning is something that I can only describe as being transcendent; meaning is some kind of strange phenomenon that occurs when information is processed, or connections are made, or patterns are seen or beheld. But since we are dealing with infinite interconnectivity, this means that the connections are quite literally endless; the patterns are endless; the information is endless; all information is present in all places at all times—kind of how there's this idea that reality is a single quantum object. This is why you're able to see the nebula imprinted on the wings of the butterfly, and for you to look at the metamorphosis from caterpillar to butterfly and infer that something similar is happening to you, even though it makes no rational sense; it is completely irrational. However, this concept resonates with every human being to the point that if it doesn't resonate with someone, we sort of look at them as sort of being non-human; there's something off about them, perhaps something a tad bit dark, because irrationality is a form of logic; it's just a logic that makes sense in a different kind of way; you are making a different kind of connection, one that has a different dimension to it; it is a language, and all languages are systems of significance that we use to better understand reality. Arithmomania is significance applied to numbers, but have you ever given any thought to what numbers are? Numbers are just significance applied to something else.
I enjoy consuming content on the philosophy of mathematics, and I was watching someone a while ago who pretty much asked, "Is math lore? Is it just a long, extended lore?" Because to this very day, no one has been able to give a satisfying answer as to why numbers are somehow able to explain reality in the first place. It isn't written anywhere that it should be this way. But the secret is that numbers and mathematical processes don't explain reality; that's absolutely ridiculous. Heck, the world's most advanced supercomputer today couldn't even calculate the trajectory of a single leaf falling from an oak tree. Think about that; it's just too chaotic; it will just spit out a range of possibilities. Math is just a language; it's a system of significance. If you're hungry, I can use plain English to tell you that there's an apple sitting on the desk right behind me; I can use math to show you that same thing, and I guarantee you, if I blindfolded you and I just had a guitar, simply by me strumming the guitar, I could guide you to where that apple is. That's why music is called the universal language. Now, is the apple that's sitting on my desk actually an apple? Who knows? It's impossible to know. The only thing that we can know is knowledge itself, and this is what that looks like. And we see within all of these languages an endless amount of patterns; you find this in every system of significance; it could be math, speech, art; you find meanings within meanings—these endless amount of patterns, buried treasures, hidden mysteries, untold secrets. Some of these patterns are powerful enough to be very destructive, and others appear to be strictly benevolent in nature. There is some kind of factor that is allowing us to interface with the unknowable, and we call this factor knowledge. And the entire point of this video has been me stressing that knowledge isn't what you think that it is; it isn't just some word; knowledge is some kind of thing, some kind of spirit, entity, deity, place; I'm not quite sure how to express it, but it is language; it is where all languages come from; it is description itself. Is it Christ? Is it Yahweh? The Demiurge? Is it a good thing or a bad thing? Is it demonic? Is it angelic? I have no idea. Whatever this thing is, it is patterns—an endless amount of them. And what I think is occurring with this whole process is some kind of search for the perfect pattern, which is why I always emphasize this idea of being a friend of the pattern. The New Age perspective on this would probably be something like being aligned with the universe; a more academic take on it, I guess, would be the Jungian psychoid. For those of you who don't know, the psychoid is sort of like this psychic bubble, this psychic aura that surrounds you that delineates your inner world from the outer world, and it is the perimeter of this bubble where synchronicity occurs. And as the circumference of this bubble increases, so does synchronicity; you are sort of becoming more in tune with the universe, or being in harmony with it, and the natural result of it is everything becomes more significant; everything becomes more meaningful. To be a true friend of the pattern would be something like you being in rhythm with reality, for your will and the cosmic will to somehow align and become one. But it doesn't just mean going with the flow; for the theosophists, this is you finding and fulfilling your purpose in life; for Jung, it is the realization of the self; for the Christians, it is being like Christ, who is the actual embodiment of the cosmic will in man; being in harmony; for the Buddhists, it is becoming a Bodhisattva. There's a reason why this motif continues to pop up all throughout history; it's because it's humanity's medicine; it has to be taken, or else bad things happen, and we appear to be set on bad things happening. So I invite those of you who have ears to hear; I invite you all to become friends of the pattern. But I'm going to end things here. Please do all of the YouTube stuff—you know, like and comment and all of that—but most importantly, if you know someone who would probably be receptive to this message, please share this video. I am very interested in starting some kind of group, because as I mentioned, I stumbled across this Poincaré disc in the comment section; I just happened to read the comment, and I see that there's just so many things that I don't know; there's too much for one person to know. We live in this information age; no one person can crack the quote-unquote "secrets of the universe." So if you are interested in these kinds of topics—you know, if you are some kind of university student, or or are an adept in mathematics, or an autodidact, or you are into astrology, astronomy, anything like that—we can all meet on my local platform where we can sort of post and share ideas and bounce them off of each other. So consider that, and until next time, y'all have a blessed day.