The journey to find God begins in the strangest place – in the absolute conviction that there is no God. Religion, as atheists have always argued, might simply be the opium of the masses that stupefies them and causes them to believe in the most absurd and incredible things. All the talk of heaven, souls, an afterlife, a Supreme Being may be nothing but moonshine, a vast, elaborate fantasy into which billions of humans have subscribed for the simplest of reasons – it allows them to turn away from the horror of contemplating their own deaths, from acknowledging that their annihilation for all eternity is inevitable.
The Illuminati's antidote to despair, nihilism and existential dread is one you will never have explicitly encountered previously and yet the truth is that it is embedded in most of philosophy, many diverse religions and at the core of science. The finest minds of the human race have not been pursuing chimeras. They have glimpsed the "Mind of God" and they have all but completed the jigsaw. Only one piece is missing, yet it's not actually missing at all. Rather, it has been in front of us all along, but most have never "seen" it. Somehow it lies within humanity's blind spot. Only mystics and esotericists have hitherto recognized what has been staring us in the face all along.
Science, in particular, has gazed straight at this phenomenon that lies so plainly in front of us and seen nothing that makes the slightest bit of sense to the scientific mind even though scientists' very own equations are screaming at them to pay attention. Science has shaken its head in absolute incomprehension, refused to accept the final conclusions demanded by its own greatest theories, and turned away to futilely pursue areas in which the truth can never be found. Science wants to find the "GUT" – the Grand Unified Theory of everything that explains the whole of science, preferably in one short, simple equation. They are practically there already…if they did but have the higher wisdom to "see".
That, as it turns out, has always proved the most difficult task of all for humanity.
There is no God
If you glimpse only part of Illuminism, the conclusions you will draw are entirely different from those you will reach if you see the entire thing. Those of us who have steadily graduated through the various degrees have often been afflicted by "dialectical dizziness", followed by a sense of complete elation when we arrive at a desired synthesis. Each new level of the dialectic raises us up. We are presented with new theses, new antitheses and new syntheses, each more wondrous and enlightening than the last.
Because it is a dialectical religion, Illuminism is full of apparent contradictions, all of which are progressively resolved as Illuminists advance further along the path of knowledge. "Outsiders" would inevitably be baffled. Myths, misrepresentations, misinformation and disinformation are practically inevitable if bits and pieces of Illuminism, but not the "whole", slip into public awareness in an uncontrolled way. No secret society has become the subject of more ludicrous fantasies and baseless accusations than the Illuminati.
"The true is the whole," said Grand Master Hegel. We who have not yet reached the final mystery degrees of Illuminism know that we are still some way from the whole, but we can begin to see it coming into view. Our vision gets clearer every day. We see further than we did yesterday. The shape of absolute truth is forming in front of our weary eyes.
We ask you to carefully read our site then read the websites of the most vocal and hysterical critics of the Illuminati; people such as David Icke, Henry Makow, Jeff Rense etc. and judge for yourself who is presenting a serious, thoughtful, intellectually rigorous new vision of society and who is indulging in infantile boogyman stories to frighten you and make you part with your money. All of our material has been provided freely. We have furnished some one million words in total: an enormous and unprecedented body of work. Whom will you trust? - those who seek money from you or those who ask for not a penny? Which side do you think is motivated by the Profit Principle, and which by a desire to bring enlightenment? You would never catch the most prominent charlatans and conmen who rant on about the Illuminati ever providing their material for free. They are in business and their business is about spreading hysteria. Fear sells. Every day these people wake up and ponder how they can generate a terrifying headline that will have all the legions of fearful reaching for their wallets.
Criticising the Illuminati has become a lucrative industry for a few unscrupulous people. They can spin any old yarn and sell it to the gullible hordes that flock to hear their nonsense, the crazier the better. The more ridiculous the tale, the more the credulous suck it up. It's a weird form of entertainment - politics, science fiction, fantasy and horror rolled into one - and it has nothing to do with the truth. Reptilians, Nibiru, pan-dimensional, shape-shifting, invisible aliens, the hollow earth, stargates, chem-trails, plans to exterminate half the world's population and enslave the rest, sinister schemes to place microchips in everyone's heads and create a diabolical, tyrannical one world dictatorship with a single currency (not based on the dollar - horror of horrors!), and all of it somehow orchestrated by the evil shadow government run by the "Jewish" Illuminati. Wake up! It's all absolute garbage. It's quite literally mad. The Old World Order have nothing to fear from those who are permanently living in this fantasy land.
We are sick of having to read the outpourings of insane people telling us about their latest theory concerning pan-dimensional aliens emerging from the hollow earth in Nazi flying saucers searching for a stargate to Nibiru where the original race of Atlantis live. To those people who send us such junk, have you got any idea how deranged you sound? Do you imagine that anyone is ever going to take you seriously? Get real. Get with the program. Overthrowing the Old World Order is not a task for the demented. It is serious undertaking, requiring serious, intelligent, dedicated and determined people - not complete loony tunes. Makow, Icke and Rense are not insane, but they certainly understand how to squeeze the last penny from the insane. Shame on them. We challenge them to give away all of their material for free if they think they are in the business of saving the world from the "evil" Illuminati.
Recently, a self-proclaimed psychic asked us whether or not we were "disinformation agents" for "the aliens" and demanded that we clarify our position (if he's psychic why doesn't he already know?). We certainly did clarify the matter for him. We admitted that we are indeed working for "the aliens" (whoever they are!). So, now that we have confessed all, can the alien obsessives please go elsewhere and lavish their attention on some other more deserving site? Meanwhile we'll get on with serious business, such as softening up the earthlings for the Nibiru invasion fleet!
The Illuminati have far more in common with atheists than they do with the followers of the Abrahamic faiths. Belief ought to be equated with ignorance, or even insanity. Is there any sane, rational limit to what can be believed? The followers of Abraham have demonstrated that no belief is too absurd. The more insane the belief, the more firmly people adhere to it. They see it as a "test". Only the purest, the most devout, the most godly, can believe the unbelievable. The harder it is to believe, the "holier" and more devoted and faithful you have to be to believe it. If you manage to believe the impossible, you will prove to God that you are the truest and purest of heart and he will personally summon you to sit at the foot of his celestial throne as one of his most special and beloved subjects.
God will reward your devotion, your unwavering faith, with the highest position in paradise. And hence we get "martyrs" - those who kill others, and themselves, to show God the strength of their faith, even unto death. These people think they are the holiest of the holy. In fact they are psychopaths who should be in mental asylums where they can do no harm to others. That's what "faith" does to people. The Inquisition, the Crusades, Jihad, Witch burnings, Slavery, Genocide, Persecution, rooting out all infidels, mass slaughter, child abuse, "martyrdom" operations…these are the blood-soaked, deranged legacy of blind, irrational faith that refuses to hear any contrary voice. The genius of faith is that it actually knows it's insane and yet it manages to turn that insanity into strength. It says, "Ah, if you have any doubt about these insane claims then you are not the Chosen of God. God only wants those who believe the unbelievable. Only they are good enough; only they have true faith. All the rest are the faint-hearted and the worthless. They are little more than infidels."
Yahweh demanded that Abraham kill his own son. That's what a psychopathic test of faith looks like. Abraham, to his eternal shame and infamy, agreed. For the Illuminati, the "test" would be the opposite. Only those who absolutely refused to comply with such an insane and monstrous demand would ever be deemed fit to join. If anyone ever deserved to be cast into hell it was the monster Abraham, the would-be child killer. Imagine revering a man who, in order to show his obedience to God, was willing to murder a child, and not just any child; his own flesh and blood, according to the Bible. And you wonder why we have so much violence in the world? It's no surprise that so many Catholic priests, the offspring of Abraham, are child molesters. It's in their Abrahamic DNA. They long to hurt and sacrifice children to their own desires, just as Abraham did. Where was Abraham's concern and love for his son? It mattered not a jot to him as long as he won the favour of the tyrant Yahweh. All parents who subscribe to the Abrahamic faiths thereby proclaim that their own children are dispensable, just as Isaac was to Abraham. No, there is no God in the Abrahamic world, just the Demiurge, the Prince of Darkness.
Imagine the story of Abraham and his son being told from the son's viewpoint: "My very own dad tied me up and was intending to murder me to curry favor with his God. I despise my father now. I will never love or trust him ever again. I despise his God, a monster if ever there was one." The son would have been traumatized for the rest of his life. This is a tale of the worst possible child abuse. The son's interests and rights, his actual life, are completely dismissed so that the father can show God how wondrous his faith is and how obedient he is. This is the most fundamental story of the Bible and it is hard to imagine anything more chilling and creepy. When have you heard any Christian, Jew or Muslim condemn and denounce the psychotic Abraham? Never. No wonder the People of the Book are so twisted and screwed up. They have no sense of right and wrong: just of obeying orders.
Science, Atheism and Gnosticism are the antidotes to faith. How much misery would the world have been spared if the fanatics of Abraham were intelligent enough to doubt their absurd beliefs?
"It is not doubt, it is certainty which makes men mad."
Faith, precisely because it has no rational basis, gives rise to irrational hysteria. Have you ever met an Abrahamist whom you did not secretly consider demented when you heard them ranting on about the nonsense they believe in?
Martin Luther said, "Reason is the Devil's greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil's appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom ... Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism... She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets."
Well, that certainly sums it up!
Martin Luther, the great champion of Protestantism, was yet another Abrahamic psychopath, one of the most disturbed men in history, and his dark and dismal religion is simply a dark and dismal reflection of the polluted contents of his unhinged mind. It is extraordinary that so many people have followed the path of this lunatic. The other great champion of Protestantism was John Calvin, another spectacular mental case. Unfortunately, America, the world's superpower, has more than enough followers of Luther, Calvin and the rest of their Protestant brotherhood. They hate the Illuminati because we represent everything to which they are opposed: knowledge and reason.
Everyone ought to begin life as an atheist or agnostic, free of religious brainwashing, and then they can find their own way to God.
Despite its complexity, Hegel's philosophy has proved incredibly influential. No one who has made a serious attempt to get to grips with it can doubt its astonishing power, breadth and the sheer scope and audacity of its ambitions. It sought nothing less than to describe everything in one vast, monumental synthesis embracing art, nature, religion and philosophy. It was a Grand Unified Theory of Everything. That objective has always been the endeavour of the Illuminati - to specify the complete nature of existence.
Unfortunately, the person who made most of Hegel's philosophy was the dialectical materialist Karl Marx who turned Hegel's idealistic, spiritual, religious philosophy on its head. He made it into a materialistic philosophy, and there was no place for God, and not much for common sense either. It is because the seeds of Marxism lie in Hegel's dialectical philosophy that the Illuminati have often been accused of being the founders of Communism.
Communism is a failed, impractical, unrealistic, anti-meritocratic ideology, but it has one thing in its favour: it provides a lacerating critique of capitalism and it's well worth studying for that reason alone. Not surprisingly, sales of books on Marxism soared during the Credit Crunch.
The Illuminati recognized that Hegel had failed to communicate the principles of Illuminism in an easily understandable form. They wanted to try again and the person they earmarked for the task was one of the greatest writers and communicators of all time - Nietzsche.
Nietzsche was not a member of the Illuminati but his philosophy was immensely admired by the Illuminati and intersected with Illuminism in numerous ways. It was often used as an example to Second Degree Illuminists of how to construct an inspiring way of life that did not have any reliance on any God.
The Illuminati never got the chance to recruit Nietzsche: he went insane just before the Illuminati planned to introduce themselves to him. He was not a famous person at the time - his radical philosophy had been mostly ignored, but the Illuminati had followed his career for years.
Nietzsche called for a "revaluation of all values." He considered that the foundations of the Judaeo-Christian West were collapsing. All the values based on that false, crumbling edifice were being exposed for the sham they were. Every institution derived from them had to be replaced.
Nothing has changed. More than ever we need to revalue all values. (Look at the Vatican: the centre of a worldwide empire of child abuse at the hands of the "shepherds of the flock". How much longer can this failed religion stagger on? Catholicism, and Christianity in general, has already died, and it just doesn't know it yet. It is a zombie religion, grimly dragging its undead carcass around.) This is precisely the project of the Illuminati: to establish a New World Order where all the decaying values of the past, all the failed institutions, all the corrupt ideologies, all the lies and greed and selfishness are abolished, where the zombies are finally put out of their misery.
We call for an end of the Abrahamic faiths, an end of consumerism and materialism, an end of capitalist democracy, an end of the privileged elites and dynastic families, an end of the all-pervasive Profit Principle. Get rid of it all. Place a new value on everything. Create new institutions. It's time for a new world dedicated to the maximisation of human potential. The People Principle is the one we need to enshrine - whereby the function of the state is to treat each and every person as a unique talent who needs to be nurtured and cultivated. No sexism, no racism, no discrimination, no privilege, no brainwashing, no rat race, no treating human beings as units of consumption, as objects rather than subjects. No more alienation. No more Old World Order. No more institutions of the past. The future is ours.
The biggest stumbling block to real change is psychological. Nietzsche was a major influence on Freud, but Freud would certainly have been a major influence on Nietzsche if Nietzsche had ever had the opportunity to read Freud's work, particularly his theories concerning ego defence mechanisms. Nietzsche thought that the old, failed systems would, ultimately, be slain at the hands of the truth; their own contradictions would undo them. What he didn't appreciate fully, even though it is implicit in many of his writings and even though he acknowledged the utility and power of "the lie", was that the truth is astonishingly weak in relation to human ego defence mechanisms.
People will use denial, projection, repression, displacement, transference, dissociation, narcissism, regression, suppression etc. to protect themselves from harsh truths. If their identity has become fused with a lie then there is virtually no truth on earth that can release them because to confront the truth would be to abandon their identity. And without an identity you are no longer human. You are nothing. It will never be truth that frees humanity, but methods of shaping new identities, liberated from the failed identities of old. We need to revalue all values and introduce new identities based on those new values. For many people, it is already too late to save them. They are permanently locked into identities that prevent them from ever acknowledging the truth.
Look at the Abrahamic faiths. Muslims now (and Christians in the past) are eager to massacre every infidel. All Muslims secretly want to kill you if you are not part of their faith. Your very existence threatens their identity. How can you not believe in Allah? How can you not accept Mohammed and the Koran? They are terrified that you know something they don't, that your disbelief might contaminate them. Therefore you have to die. Islam and Christianity have always wished to covert the whole world, and have always homicidally despised all those who refused to convert. Muslims and Christians are profoundly intolerant, frightening people. Their entire identity is based on it.
The Jews are a different case. Their identity is founded upon being the "Chosen People". To be chosen there must, logically, be others who are not chosen. Therefore Jews have no inclination to convert others. They want enemies because it is only in contrast with their enemies that they can maintain their identity as the Chosen of God. Historically, they have brought a terrible fate down upon themselves because they have always actively cultivated enmity. They have made themselves "alien" and revelled in that identity. Can you imagine the Jews ever acknowledging that they are not the Chosen People? They would not be Jews if they did, so they never will. Their identity is infinitely more important to them than the truth.
History, it must be said, was as unkind to Nietzsche as it was to Hegel. While Hegel's philosophy was twisted into Marxism, Nietzsche's was linked with fascism. It was many years before Nietzsche's philosophy was redeemed from that outrageous libel. The Illuminati have been slandered and libelled just as much. The internet is awash with the lies and propaganda of the Old World Order and the dumb puppets who unwittingly work for them.
But, as always, we ask you to judge for yourselves. Read what we say and read what our enemies say and then make up your own minds.
The Universe of Sufficient Reason
The most fundamental question of all is why anything should exist at all. The religiously minded assert that God has always existed and always will. They define him as all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful, all-present, all-perfect, all-good, all-forgiving, all-just, all-compassionate. He is the Prime Mover, the First Cause, the original link in the chain of existence. All explanations come back, finally, to God. So, the answer to every fundamental question is simply "God". If God wills it, it happens. But is that any kind of satisfactory explanation? The problem of the existence of evil is one that mainstream religion has never answered in any credible way. If God is everywhere, why is the world so imperfect, why do so many people not believe in God, why does he seem so remote, why is he incommunicado?
Atheists declare that "God" is no meaningful explanation of anything. After all, one could simply answer "God" to everything. Why is the sky blue? Because God made it that way. How did life originate? God created it. Why does anything happen? Because God wills it. This is the antithesis of scientific and philosophical enquiry. In all great periods in the development of the human mind, "God" has been ignored in order to create room for progress. In the contemporary world, Muslims invoke Allah to explain everything. Virtually every sentence uttered by a Muslim contains the phrase "insha'Allah" - "God willing". Islam is now a primitive, backward religion that has turned its back on science and philosophy and retreated into religious fanaticism.
Anyone can legitimately ask how God himself came into existence and acquired those sublime qualities of his. What was the cause of God? If he had no cause then how can that be? How can anything exist outside the chain of causal necessity? What did God do in the infinite time before he created the world? What does God want from us? Why doesn't he make it clear what he expects us to do? Isn't he cruel and heartless to create a place - hell - where finite beings will receive an infinite sentence out of all possible proportion to any crime committed by any mortal. How can this be just? How can a Supreme Being of love, forgiveness, justice and compassion create hell?
There are innumerable contradictions and mysteries that leave no thinking person satisfied.
No process of understanding the universe can begin from the starting point of "God" because God himself, rather than the universe, then becomes the Supreme Mystery that must be explained in order to explain his creation. If God is the answer to all the questions of the universe then what is the answer to God? We are no further forward. We have simply pushed the explanation back one stage, achieved nothing and answered nothing. We have created the illusion of an answer, but no actual answer.
So God, for the time being, must be ignored.
Returning to the original question, why does anything exist at all? It is not because of God but for another reason. The English writer T.H. White said in The Once and Future King (about King Arthur): "Anything not forbidden is compulsory."
Nothingness, the absence of everything, a state of no content where events never take place, is the logical "zero-point energy" of the universe. It is the simplest state conceivable. It requires nothing. No effort has to be exerted to create it. It is the lowest energy state possible because it contains no energy. The energy level is eternally zero. Nothing can be more stable than nothingness because nothing ever happens to destabilise it. There is nothing to which anything ever could happen. The "path of least resistance" begins and ends here. If such a state were logically possible then it would certainly happen since it is the simplest possible system, requiring no effort, no things, nothing at all.
The great Illuminist Leibniz introduced the Principle of Sufficient Reason:
"...we can find no true or existent fact, no true assertion, without there being a sufficient reason why it is thus and not otherwise..."
There is a prima facie sufficient reason why there should be nothing rather than something - nothing could ever be simpler, more stable and require less work than nothingness. And if there is perfect nothingness then there can never be "something" because how could something emerge from nothingness? There is nothing there from which to emerge.
So there is only one reason why existence is not eternal nothingness and infinite void - this state is forbidden. It is quite simply impossible. If it were possible then it would certainly exist and there would be no universe as we know it.
It is not God who makes it impossible. It is the properties of nothingness itself. Immanuel Kant asserted in his critique of the ontological "proof" of the existence of God that existence is not a predicate i.e. it is not a property that things can either possess or lack. For someone to say that unicorns exist, he must be able to point to an example in the real world of a unicorn. If he can't then he's talking nonsense. Merely saying that something exists does not give it the property of existence in the real world. You must demonstrate its existence. A good explanation of Kant's subtle argument can be found here.
So, how could the statement "nothing exists" ever be demonstrated? It is impossible by definition because we exist, the world exists, the universe exists. There is no correspondence between the concept of nothingness and the real world. It is a purely hypothetical concept. Atheists would argue that exactly the same is true of God: can anyone point to God and prove that he is any more real than a unicorn? But some people might contend that these are all just word games, so let's try to think more deeply about nothingness. Would it have dimensions e.g. length, breadth and height? In other words, could an imaginary being travel backwards and forwards in nothingness? If so, nothingness is not nothingness: at the very least it has physical dimensions. It is an enormous physical space - empty, certainly - but a space nevertheless with the basic properties of space, which are not those of absolute nothingness (which would have no properties at all). Theoretically, we could divide "dimensional nothingness" into an infinite number of tiny cubic cells, each a unit long in terms of breadth, height and length (in whatever scale of measurement we choose).
If that type of dimensional nothingness doesn't work then what about nothingness without physical dimensions (i.e. such that an imaginary being couldn't travel through it)?
Now we arrive at the central teaching of Illumination, the one idea from which everything else - the whole of existence - flows. It is extremely abstract initially, but soon we will make it much more concrete: with reference to the most mysterious objects in the universe - black holes.
In its most abstract form, Illumination states that just as "dimensional nothingness" can be broken down into hypothetical basic units, so can "dimensionless nothingness". In this case, the basic units are mental rather than physical, and the imaginary being could indeed travel through this nothingness, but mentally rather than physically.
No matter how you examine the issue, you can never define any state of absolute nothingness. It is an impossible state. The concept is incoherent.
Conversely, we can easily demonstrate the existence of "something" by simply pointing to anything in the world. And even if we adopt absolute skepticism and doubt the genuine existence of everything we see around us, we are still left with Descartes' famous dictum that what we cannot doubt is that thinking is taking place: "I think therefore I am." Thought, at least, exists, and that is the central irrefutable fact of existence that no one can possibly challenge.
The answer to the question, "Why is there something rather than nothing?" is that the state of nothingness is impossible. It is not even definable.
What the universe unquestionably contains, and has always contained, is the prerequisites for thoughts, for thinking. Even if a trillion trillion years ago there wasn't a single living thing in existence in the universe, what that primordial universe certainly contained was the potential to make intelligent thinking an actuality at some point in the future.
Descartes famously divided the universe into two incompatible substances - matter (res extensa: extended substance, having dimensions and capable of being divided); and mind (res cogitans: thinking substance, having no dimensions and therefore incapable of being physically divided). This dualistic description of reality has, in one way or another, dominated human thinking ever since. The insurmountable problem it presents is how matter and mind can interact if they are entirely separate substances. For that reason, science has denied the existence of the mental universe and become entirely materialistic, contending that "mind" is some mysterious by-product of the physical world. But no scientist has ever come close to explaining how consciousness arises from atoms.
We use a slightly different terminology for Descartes' proposal about the nature of reality. What he calls extended substance, we call "dimensional substance", and what he calls thinking substance, we call "dimensionless substance". We then invoke Leibniz's Principle of Sufficient Reason. Is there any sufficient reason why dimensional substance should be privileged over dimensionless substance? i.e. is there some obvious reason why it is legitimate for scientists and materialists to dispose of the possibility of dimensionless substance? On the face of it, the only thing we can be sure of is thinking, which most people regard as non-materialistic. Conversely, is there some obvious reason why idealist thinkers should dispose of dimensional substance and deny the existence of the material world? On the face of it, everyone takes the existence of the material world for granted. It seems utterly undeniable.
We are left with a hopeless standoff. How do we proceed? This is where dialectical logic plays a decisive role. The dialectical approach treats the dimensional substance as the thesis and the dimensionless substance as the antithesis then combines them into a higher synthesis.
Thesis - dimensional substance
Antithesis - dimensionless substance
Synthesis - dimensional/dimensionless substance i.e. we replace Descartes' two separate, incompatible substances with a single substance that has two dialectical aspects: dimensional and dimensionless. This is technically called dialectical monism. Descartes' problem of how to make two different substances interact is thus overcome because now there is only one substance, but with two aspects: physical and mental, dimensional and dimensionless, which perpetually interact dialectically.
Science, hitherto, has been the study of a single aspect of existence: the dimensional, physical, material aspect. The other aspect - the dimensionless, mental, immaterial aspect has remained the exclusive arena of religion and metaphysics.
The divide between science and religion arises from each side looking at only one aspect of existence, and ignoring the other. Illuminism is about reconciling the two.
The Illuminati refer to the mental aspect of existence as the Psychocosmos and the physical aspect as the Hylocosmos. It must be emphasized that there are not two separate universes - just one universe with two radically different aspects. Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, famous for his concept of the noosphere, talked about two types of energy. One type is called "tangential" and is equivalent to the energy of the physical universe as studied by scientists. Teilhard de Chardin refers to this as the energy of the "without of things". The other is called "radial" and is equivalent to spiritual or psychic energy. This is the energy of the "within of things".
The Illuminati draw a similar distinction. Physical energy is the energy of the dimensional aspect of existence (the "outer" aspect) while Psychic energy is the energy of the dimensionless aspect of existence (the "inner" aspect). Because there is only one fundamental substance, one fundamental energy, physical and psychic energies are different aspects of the same thing. When energy acquires dimensions it is physical and when it loses dimensions it is psychic. The universe has an inner aspect - a "within" (which is dimensionless), and an outer aspect - a "without" (which is dimensional). Science ignores the within because it is not amenable to conventional scientific study, although its effects manifest themselves everywhere in science, and especially in psychology.
The dimensional aspect of existence is associated with the dimensions of space and time. The dimensionless aspect, since it has no dimensions, is outside of space and time. This is the key aspect to existence: an aspect outside of space and time perpetually interacting dialectically with an aspect inside space and time. All of the weird and wonderful phenomena of the universe are the products of this ultimate dichotomy.
Does this sound crazy? Then consider the evidence provided by black holes.
The R = 0 Universe
Their hypothetical existence was first predicted in Einstein's famous theory of General Relativity, but Einstein himself believed it was impossible for them to become real objects in the universe. The reason for that is that they exhibit a feature that physics cannot cope with or comprehend.
Einstein's equations contain a term that involves dividing the mass of the black hole by the distance "r" from the black hole. The question is what happens when r=0? Division by zero gives a result of infinity. To physicists, it is impossible for infinity to appear in the real world, so they consider r = 0 to be the point at which physics breaks down. At r = 0, the centre of a black hole, gravity is infinite and time itself stops: all of the mass of the black hole is contained within an infinitely small point where the concept of space no longer makes any sense. The point takes up precisely no space at all. Since this point is outside space and time, it is dimensionless. The physical universe collapses into an ineffable twilight state at this point.
This apparently impossible object of infinite density and infinite gravity is known as the singularity. No predictions can be made about it, or about what might emerge from it. At the singularity, physicists' understanding of nature fails completely. Therefore, they believe that there is a fatal flaw in the formulation of Einstein's theory of general relativity, despite its immense success.
The one thing no physicist has ever contemplated is this: there is no flaw whatsoever. The reason why physics seems to disintegrate at r = 0 is for the extremely simple reason that r = 0 is not in the physical universe. It is in the mental universe, the universe of mind, as we have described in the previous section.
Physicists, so blindly and irrationally wedded to materialism, have never taken their own equations to their logical conclusion. What their equations actually point to at the limit of r = 0 is a different aspect of existence - mental rather [than] physical, dimensionless rather than dimensional, outside of space and time. Rather than face up to that, physicists would prefer to futilely search for a new theory. But they have nowhere else to go. They will always run up against exactly the same problem: that the universe of dimensions, of space and time, coexists with another universe of no dimensions, outside space and time. Reality can never be comprehended if either aspect is ignored.
As already mentioned, to talk of "two universes" is convenient but technically incorrect. The true nature of existence is that it has two aspects coexisting in a single continuum. The r = 0 (dimensionless, mental) universe and the r > 0 (dimensional, physical) universe are both part of a single universe r >= 0 (r greater than or equal to zero).
If you want an equation for everything, you could choose r >= 0 because that encapsulates the true dual nature of reality; physical and mental.
There is a black hole at the centre of every galaxy. At the centre of ours is one that is four million times more massive than our sun. Such black holes are called supermassive. They are essential for galaxy formation, and hence for life itself.
Black holes shape the evolution of the universe. They are everywhere in the universe, millions upon millions of them, and in every place where they occur Einstein's equations catastrophically break down (as far as physicists are concerned).
Black holes are real objects in outer space that lie beyond current scientific understanding. A new theory beyond Einstein is required. It already exists - it is that of the Illuminati. It is that of the r = 0 universe, the "within" of things, the inner aspect, the dimensionless reality that science chooses to ignore even though their equations point directly to it.
Physicists dream of combining these two astonishingly successful theories into one grand unified theory that describes everything from the smallest scale to the largest, from the slowest speeds to the fastest. At the moment, each theory is incomplete as a full description of reality, but a combination might offer completeness.
The two theories meet head-on at one place: black holes. A black hole is a macroscopic entity associated with enormous amounts of mass and gravity, yet the singularity at the centre of the black hole is exactly of the hyper-microscopic scale of the quantum world.
To fully account for what goes on in inside a black hole at the mysterious singularity, quantum mechanics is essential.
When it comes to the quantum world, these are the types of statement that are typically made:
a) The act of observing changes what you see.
b) It is impossible to exactly specify where something is; you can only state where it is likely to be.
c) Anything that is possible, no matter how improbable, happens all the time and gives rise to measurable phenomena. A good example is the phenomenon of quantum tunnelling whereby if you place a particle in a box and lock the box, there is a tiny but finite chance that you will subsequently find the particle outside the box i.e. it has apparently tunnelled its way through a solid object. In the case of the particles being electrons, you can find electrical phenomena occurring in seemingly impossible places.
d) Particles can literally be in many different places at the same time.
Our whole common sense view of the world vanishes at the quantum level. All of our most treasured notions of how things behave change beyond recognition.
Quantum mechanics is routinely described as the best idea in physics. It has furnished the most successful predictions ever made by any theory. Everything is ultimately composed of quantum particles, and quantum mechanics comes closer than anything else to describing the true nature of reality. But it doesn't incorporate gravity, the universal force that holds everything together. Without gravity, the sun would explode and the earth would disintegrate. Gravity is the universal binding force. It is caused, according to General Relativity, by the bending of space and time by massive objects. The effect of gravity on quantum-scale particles is usually negligible, but when it comes to black holes we are dealing with quantum-scale particles (singularities) and the most enormous gravitational effects conceivable. The singularity that exists at the centre of a black hole is both infinitesimally small and astronomically massive. Hence black holes are the key to understanding the universe, for combining general relativity and quantum mechanics.
Physicists now want to extend quantum mechanics by introducing gravitational effects. This new theory is referred to as "quantum gravity". In effect, it is a quantum version of Einstein's general relativity. The problem is that the two theories have proved incompatible. They simply don't talk to each other. Whereas black holes generate an infinity caused by division by zero, in quantum gravity an infinity of infinities is generated i.e. the problem becomes infinitely worse.
The only entity comparable to black holes is the singularity that gave birth to the Big Bang itself. Here, too, scientific understanding collapses.
The Big Bang is conceived of as a dimensionless point in nothingness from which the whole of the observable physical, dimensional universe of time and space miraculously emerged some 14 billion years ago. To get an idea of how much matter has emerged from "nothing" consider that the sun is a million times more massive than the earth. Our galaxy has a million million stars like our sun. The observable universe has a million million galaxies like ours. All of this material, together with vast numbers of black holes and "dark matter" all, supposedly, came from absolutely nothing. All of it spewed out of the primordial singularity, a dimensionless point that gave birth to the biggest explosion of all time. It was the event, so we are told, that created space and time themselves, and some physicists contend that it is absurd to speculate about space and time before then because they did not exist.
So we are all the progeny of the mother of all singularities. We all came out of a dimensionless point. We are the children of nothingness, the products of nothing. Or so says science.
If science can solve the mysteries of the black hole by understanding the complete nature of a singularity then it should also be able to answer the question of how the universe began and where we all came from. And perhaps the other "big" question can be answered - what was there before the universe existed?
There are two numbers that have proved an insurmountable problem to science, two numbers that provide the limits of existence: zero and infinity. Infinity is a number without limit, while zero is an anti-number that doesn't count anything (for example we can point to three apples, but not to zero apples). Zero and infinity are two of the most obscure topics in mathematics and, because of their mysterious nature, both arrived on the scene much later than ordinary numbers such as 1, 2, 3, 4 etc. It wasn't until Georg Cantor's work of the late nineteenth century that infinity became a respectable subject of study. Moreover, zero is simply the inverse of infinity, and vice versa: 1 divided by infinity = 0, and 1 divided by zero = infinity. Science will never be complete until it is able to fully incorporate zero and infinity.
Science is the theory that only Descartes' "extended" substance exists i.e. things must have dimensions before they can be "real". Illumination is the doctrine that "things" without dimensions are as real as those with dimensions. To express it mathematically, r = 0 is as real as r > 0. Science has no legitimate basis for excluding r = 0, and, indeed, r = 0 appears right at the heart of science, right at the centre of the Genesis Singularity, the Big Bang itself. Science says the Big Bang arose out of nothingness (an impossible and non-existent state) while Illumination teaches that the physical universe of dimensions (r > 0) emerged not from "nowhere and nothing" but from the mental, dimensionless universe (r = 0). Something did not come from nothing but from a different aspect of something: matter from mind, dimensions from non-dimensions. Equally, dimensional matter can be transformed into dimensionless mind, and this is the process that take place at a black hole singularity where r = 0. Which paradigm is the more logical and consistent? Which does not require something to spontaneously arise from nothing?
Scientists have never asked themselves the most basic question of all: why should dimensional entities (r > 0) be privileged over non-dimensional entities (r = 0)? What is the sufficient reason for existence to exclude dimensionless entities and be wholly based on dimensional entities? There is no such reason. It is blind, irrational prejudice that causes scientists to ignore the r = 0 universe. They suffer from "group think".
Any scientist who dared to suggest that the r = 0 dimensionless aspect of existence was as real as the r > 0 dimensional aspect would be ridiculed by his peers. This is the terrible danger of institutionalized thinking. It breeds fear; it prevents the most radical ideas from being contemplated, unless such ideas conform to the ruling paradigm.
Yet no scientist can provide any legitimate scientific or philosophical reason why dimensionless existence is not every bit as real as dimensional existence and, indeed, the Big Bang singularity itself is a dimensionless entity, as is the singularity at the centre of any black hole. Why don't scientists face the facts provided by their own most cherished theories?
Dimensionless entities can, do and must exist.
"Regarding the God of Becoming: How does this process avoid appearing like a perpetual motion machine (and violating the laws of physics)? In other words, what is fuelling this grand evolutionary process? The universe can't just be evolving on its own without an outside energy source (unless it was 'wound up' with potential energy and is now unwinding - e.g. an involution/evolution process). But that would simply beg the question of how the universe was initially wound up (i.e. involuted) since that would take energy as well. And, as you know, it's cheating to say that energy comes from empty space because even quantum physics, while allowing for energy to appear from a vacuum, still has to repay this energy back soon thereafter - there is no free lunch!
The universe IS a perpetual motion machine. No laws of physics are violated by such a concept. If the universe weren't a perpetual motion machine, it would already have stopped i.e. reached thermal death where nothing of use happens, or it would be manifestly heading in that direction (there is no indication that it is). Such a notion is in fact completely incompatible with quantum theory. The whole point of quantum theory is that the "vacuum" is a ceaseless quantum foam, supposedly capable of generating events such as the Big Bang. It is therefore nonsensical to say that the universe could ever reach a state where useful energy is unavailable. A perpetual motion machine is impossible in terms of our existing laws of thermodynamics, but it could be argued that thermodynamics is as much in need of being made fully consistent with quantum theory as general relativity theory is, in order to establish a true Grand Unified Theory.
Most science theories are incomplete. You should not view them as inviolable. No one thought that Newton would be disproved, but he was, yet 99 times out of 100 we still use Newtonian calculations because they work. Why would you expect the laws of thermodynamics to be any less susceptible to challenge than Newton's highly successful and seemingly impregnable laws? Success is not proof of absolute truth.
"Entropy" - the basis of why perpetual machines seem impossible - is an extremely complex concept, which is nowhere near being fully explained by science.
"The universe can't just be evolving on its own without an outside energy source (unless it was "wound up" with potential energy and is now unwinding - e.g. an involution/evolution process)."
There can be no energy source external to the universe (and if there were you would have to account for what that entity's energy source was, and so on to the point of absurdity). If the universe is everything (which it is) how can there be something external to it? Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (and quantum tunnelling which logically arises from it) amounts to a mechanism, within conventional physics, for continually recycling useful energy and defying entropy.
"But that would simply beg the question of how the universe was initially wound up (i.e. involuted) since that would take energy as well. And, as you know, it's cheating to say the energy comes from empty space because even quantum physics, while allowing for energy to appear from a vacuum, still has to repay this energy back soon thereafter - there is no free lunch!"
Alan Guth, the man who created inflationary theory said, "In the context of inflationary cosmology, it is fair to say that the universe is the ultimate free lunch."
Energy can be "borrowed" as long as it is paid back, as you say, but the concept of "negative energy" cancelling out positive energy could indeed mean that such a thing as a free lunch is possible i.e. overall energy equals zero but a universe nevertheless exists. "Nothing" is a very complex subject. The overall electric charge of the universe is zero, but that doesn't mean that electrical charges don't exist. Matter and anti-matter pairs are continually created and destroyed. Also, it is possible to invoke the concept of time reversal at the level of "Planck time". Anti-matter can be viewed as matter with negative energy going back in time and cancelling matter with positive energy going forward in time.
You say, "And, as you know, it's cheating to say the energy comes from empty space because even quantum physics, while allowing for energy to appear from a vacuum, still has to repay this energy back soon thereafter - there is no free lunch!"
In that case, do you reject the idea that the Big Bang universe arises from a quantum fluctuation? In fact, most physicists say that we live in a zero-energy universe with gravitational energy being defined as negative and exactly balancing the Einsteinian mass-energy of the universe. So, if the energy of the universe is zero, what energy has to be repaid?
It's all in the mathematics and the physics.
Science is very far from providing a coherent account of the nature of the universe. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that science explains everything and is infallible. Most scientists are instrumentalists - they are interested in the practical uses of science - but many will admit they have no idea what science says about the fundamental nature of the universe.
Consider the concept of the multiverse - very popular with many scientists. Every time a quantum "decision" is required, the universe splits to accommodate each possible outcome. Would you like to explain where the energy for all of these parallel universes comes from? Would you like to explain what physical space all of these parallel universes fit into? Would you like to explain how parallel universes interfere with each other in order to produce the interference patterns observed in twin-slit experiments?
Science has a long way to go to explain the major questions about the nature of the universe. You need to learn to cast a more skeptical eye over the claims of science.
In fact, because of the existence of the r = 0 universe, Heat Death is impossible. Energy in the universe can be perpetually recycled (without any energy lost to heat) from physical (dimensional) energy to psychic (dimensionless) energy and back again. Dimensional energy and dimensionless energy are simply two aspects of the same thing. This dialectical process can never stop. The universe will always be moving forward - evolving - and will always have infinite useful energy available.
Consider the Big Bang singularity. As we described in the "Creation Myth" of the Illuminati in an earlier article, it is fully consistent with all available scientific knowledge to assert that the universe was once in a state of absolute dimensionless (mental) energy. There was no dimensional (physical) energy whatsoever. The whole of dimensional existence spewed out of a dimensionless singularity: no Big Bang scientist could dispute this. This "fact" by itself reveals that no matter what entropic state the dimensional universe reached, it would always be possible for a singularity to spew out new dimensional energy in a form that could do useful work. Black holes reveal the opposite process: dimensional energy being converted into dimensionless energy at the black hole singularity. So, Q.E.D. - the universe is indeed a perpetual motion machine.
Physicist Paul Davies says, "[Heisenberg's uncertainty principle] states, roughly speaking, that all physical quantities are intrinsically a bit uncertain and can undergo rapid spontaneous fluctuations. For example, energy can suddenly appear from nowhere in empty space so long as it fades away again quickly. By briefly "borrowing" energy out of the blue, a subatomic particle can, for example, leap out of a trap - a process that underlies the phenomenon of alpha radioactivity. The Heisenberg principle is a rule for payback on the energy loan: the shorter the loan, the more the energy on offer."
Look at the statements: 1) "…energy can suddenly appear from nowhere in empty space so long as it fades away again quickly." And 2) "By briefly 'borrowing' energy out of the blue…"
Does this sound like science or mumbo jumbo and hocus pocus? In our version of reality, we would say, 1) "…dimensionless energy can be transformed into dimensional energy and back again, and that process can occur over brief durations on a hyper-microscopic scale or over much longer time scales on a macroscopic scale (as in the case of Big Bang and black hole singularities); there is no question of anything appearing from nowhere in empty space." And 2) "Processes requiring dimensional energy are able to tap into an infinite reservoir of dimensionless energy on a hyper-microscopic scale and use if for a brief duration; there is no question of anything being miraculously borrowed out of the blue…"
Which version do you think sounds more plausible, more like real science?
Heisenberg's famous uncertainty relations are a mathematical description of the interaction between the r > 0 universe (within space and time) and the r = 0 universe (outside space and time). They have nothing to do with particles and energy popping into existence "out of the blue" (whatever that means), "out of thin air", "out of the future", "out of the past", "out of nothing" or anything else that scientists fancifully say to explain phenomena for which they have no viable conceptual model. There is nothing "spooky" going on. There is just dimensional and dimensionless energy existing in an existential continuum.
In mathematics, a perfect point is zero-dimensional (i.e. dimensionless). It has no height, width or length), a straight line has one dimension (length), a square has two dimensions (length and breadth), and a cube has three dimensions (length, breadth and height). Our world comprises objects that are spatially extended in three dimensions, and that has led scientists to conclude that the whole of reality is dimensional. They have forgotten where it all begins: the point with no dimensions.
The point is at the origin of all things. All dimensional objects can, finally, be reduced to a dimensionless point. This is a fundamental tenet of Illuminism.
Consider an extraordinary mathematical object called a Riemann sphere:
In similar fashion, a 3D-space can be mapped to a so-called hypersphere (a 4D sphere), again with a projection point: the 3D-space's point at infinity.
The point of this is to demonstrate that the whole of 3D-space, from zero to infinity in any direction, can be mapped to a single point - the projection point, the 3D-space's point at infinity. This is the Genesis Point, the point of ultimate origin. The whole of the dimensional universe located in space and time is accessible from a dimensionless point outside of space and time.
Any point that is not in space and time cannot be said to be located anywhere since that would give it a defined position in space, which would be a contradiction. Therefore, a point outside of space and time is in a sense everywhere and nowhere.
As the Illuminist Empedocles said, "God is a circle whose centre is everywhere, and its circumference nowhere."
Imagine the Genesis Point as a portal. Anything that emerged from it could literally appear anywhere in dimensional space since every point in dimensional space is mapped to it.
The Genesis Point, this extraordinary point outside space and time, is the province of God.
Our next article will delve into the subject much more deeply, with reference to quantum mechanics, general relativity, religion and philosophy. We appreciate that this is highly complex material. Hopefully, if you don't "get it" all, you will nevertheless get enough to let you see the big picture, if not all the detail.
Our purpose at this stage is to demonstrate that if the r > 0 dimensional universe of conventional science - the arena of space and time - were the true and exclusive nature of reality then atheism would be the only possible response since there is no scope at all within that universe for an immortal soul, a heaven or a God.
These things are possible for one reason only: the r = 0 universe, which is not located in space and time.
There is no spooky "other dimension" where God and souls reside, as the Abrahamists would have you believe. There is only the r >= 0 universe, divided into two aspects in a single continuum: mental/ dimensionless (r = 0) and physical/ dimensional (r > 0). There is nothing else.
This is the Illuminati's "cosmology". You will not find any other religion that provides such a precise, scientifically compatible cosmology. We say that any religion that does not provide a detailed cosmology is false and based on nothing but moonshine. You will never hear the Pope, the Chief Rabbi, or any imam describing their cosmology: they have nothing to offer other than the absurd assertion that God created the world out of nothing in six days and rested on the seventh (because he was tired, poor "man"). Faith in nonsense and wishful thinking will save no one. Only knowledge works.
Science = knowledge of the dimensional (r > 0) universe.
Gnosticism = knowledge of the dimensionless (r = 0) universe.
Gnosis = absolute knowledge of the r >= 0 universe.
Join the path towards the light! Step into the light of Illumination: an ancient religion that continually dialectically renews itself.
A new religion for a New World Order.
Continued here: The Celestial Human
From Ronde Tafel Beleid @ http://rondetafelbeleid.nl/illumination
For more information about Illuminism see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/illuminism
Please Help This Unique Independent Site Survive
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Just press the button -
Xtra Images by R. Ayana @ http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8473/8134667398_5ba57d4a9a_h.jpg
For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @ New Illuminati or click on any label/tag at the bottom of the page @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati
New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed
The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com
The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)
This site is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a small but heartfelt donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…
Live long and prosper!
From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com