The Thinking Universe: Energy Is Thought

By Dr. Thomas Stark

The universe is a vast thought, a cosmic process of thinking, a living organism seeking to know itself. It thinks about itself all the time, and what it wants to know is exactly what it is. The task of the universal thought is to become conscious of itself, to become entirely self-aware, to attain Absolute Knowledge of itself.

The secret of thought is that it is the purest and clearest energy of all - light energy. Your mind is an immaterial electromagnetic system outside space and time.

When all of us become "enlightened", the resultant state of the universe is the "God State" of perfect light, perfect reason, perfect knowledge, perfect understanding, perfect symmetry, perfect consciousness, and perfect bliss. God is in his heaven and all is right with the universe. This is the State that awaits us all, and which some humans - the enlightened ones - are actually bringing about right now. Don't you want to be one of the Illuminated Ones?

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Mar 7, 2018
• ISBN: 9780244673079

Book preview

The Thinking Universe

Energy Is Thought

Ontological Mathematics Series: Book Three

Dr. Thomas Stark

Copyright © Dr. Thomas Stark 2017

All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this book, or portions thereof in any form. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted, downloaded, decompiled, reverse engineered, or stored, in any form or introduced into any information storage and retrieval system, in any form or by any means, whether electronic or mechanical without the express written permission of the author, except in the case of a reviewer, who may quote brief passages embodied in critical articles or in a review.

The Ontological Mathematics Foundation

ISBN: 978-0-244-67307-9

Imprint: Lulu.com

Table of Contents

The Thinking Universe

Introduction

The Devil

Language World

The Universal Language

The Death of the Physical Universe

Julian Jaynes: The Consciousness Fallacy

Mathematical Consciousness

The Mystery of Consciousness

The Hidden Observer

Why People Don’t Listen to Reason

Three Kinds of Reincarnation

The Problem With Science

Weaponize Philosophy

Subjective Idealism Versus Objective Idealism

The End of History

The Objective Psyche

The Judging and Perceiving Attitudes

Babel

The Consciousness Fallacy

Cultural Brainwashing

The Message From the Grave?

Seeing the Future

Medusa

Madnight

Autistics Versus Schizophrenics

The Hypnosis Game

Pharaoh Akhenaten

Horus: The Magic Child

The Satan-Worshipping Pharaoh

The Motion Mystery

Newton, Space and God

The Science Fraud

Syntax Versus Semantics

Supernatural

The Autonomous Soul

Spooky

The Best Conversation in the World

The Cosmic Puzzle

The Skeptic Field

Conclusion

Introduction

Is the universe alive? The ancient sages thought so. They believed in the Anima Mundi, the World Soul, which animated the World Body (the Cosmos), just as the human mind animated the human body. In their view, matter was imbued with spirit.

When science dispensed with spirit, the world was no longer depicted as a living organism, but as a clockwork mechanism, a lifeless machine. Today, science presents reality not even as a machine but as a kind of cosmic casino where the odds are always being calculated. God is a gambler, they say. He does nothing but play dice.

If the universe is made of energy, the nature of the universe is entirely dependent on how energy is defined. Is energy spirit, or is it stuff? Science cannot state what energy is. Physicist Paul Davies wrote, Energy is a purely abstract quantity, introduced into physics as a useful model with which we can short-cut complex calculations. You cannot see or touch energy, yet the word is now so much part of daily conversation that people think of energy as a tangible entity with an existence of its own. In reality, energy is merely part of a set of mathematical relationships that connect together observations of mechanical processes in a simple way.

Energy’s definition is a radical problem for science. If it doesn’t know what energy is, it doesn’t know what energy isn’t. In particular, it doesn’t know that energy isn’t mental. It ideologically assumes it isn’t.

So, what might energy actually be? Is it the basis of mind, or the basis of matter, or the basis of both? This leads us to the classic problem of Cartesian dualism. Descartes said that the world is comprised of unextended mind and extended matter. Mind thinks, matter doesn’t.

Since no one could work out how to make mind and matter interact, the school of materialists decided to abolish mind as an independent entity, and make it something derived from matter. The opposite school, of idealists, abolished matter as an independent entity, and made it a construct of mind.

The correct ontological definition of energy would resolve this debate, but science cannot deliver this. As Davies says, science provides models, and no analysis is performed on the validity of these models, bar their required fit to a limited range of sensory data. If they prove useful, with effective predictive powers, that’s all that anyone cares about. The question of their truth-content is another matter entirely.

What should energy be? What does energy need to be in order to explain reality? How many people give any a priori consideration to what characteristics energy must possess? What’s the point of discussing energy, energetic processes, and laws of energy if you have no idea what energy is, how it exists in the first place, and what purpose it serves?

Energy, in order to achieve a comprehensive explanation of reality, needs to possess some very particular properties. Energy is much stranger than anyone thinks. Energy must be a language, the language of existence itself. Everything is energy and all energy speaks the same language. How else could everything communicate with everything else, and always automatically know what to do in any situation?

What is this energy-language? Is it forever beyond our understanding? Or do we already know it, but just haven’t registered that fact yet?

The language of energy must be eternal since existence itself is eternal (existence can’t jump out of non-existence, hence it has always existed, which is what the law of the conservation of energy is all about: energy can be neither created nor destroyed … it is eternal). It needs to be an absolute language, infallible, perfect, immutable, ubiquitous, simple, and provide a perfectly stable universe under all transformations. Only one language qualifies as the eternal language of energy – mathematics, the bearer of the eternal truths of reason. There are no other candidates. Mathematics is energy, and energy is mathematics. You can understand neither mathematics nor energy unless you grasp that they are one and the same thing. Mathematics is not only the science of energy, but also the ontology, epistemology, physics, metaphysics, noumenon and phenomenon of energy.

Recall what Paul Davies wrote, Energy is a purely abstract quantity … energy is merely part of a set of mathematical relationships… Science regards not just energy but also mathematics as an unreal abstraction. If science is wrong about this, science is wrong about everything. If mathematics is real, and mathematics is energy, we have an entirely new, ontological means for defining and understanding science. Above all, we can dispense with science’s abstractions and treat science in entirely realistic terms, i.e. we can say that science is not a model of reality, but is reality itself … provided we equate science to mathematics, and use the full power of mathematics in science, and not just the aspects of mathematics that fit with the scientific dogmatism of materialism and empiricism.

The basic energy, the energy from which all other energy is derived, is light. Mathematics isn’t what you think it is. Mathematics is nothing like how people imagine it to be, nothing like how it is taught – with mind-numbing tedium – in math class. Mathematics is both light itself, and the language of light. Mathematics specifies everything that can be done with light. What can be done with light is in fact everything. Absolutely nothing happens, or can happen, that cannot ultimately be expressed in terms of light. Light is the grand unified, final theory of everything. The basic ontological formula for light is Euler’s Formula, the most powerful analytic formula in mathematics, and an ubiquitous formula in physics, which Richard Feynman described as our jewel and the most remarkable formula in mathematics. In fact, it’s the most remarkable formula, bar none. It’s the formula for existence itself, the base formula for light, the base formula for energy, the base formula for mind and life. It’s none other than the God Equation.

The fact that light is to be equated to the language of mathematics tells us something remarkable and decisive about its nature, and the nature of reality. To use a language is to be engaged in thought. To be a language is to be thought. Light is thought, and that means we live in a mental world and not a physical world, as science asserts.

Think about it. There are only two possibilities. Either reality is made of language, or reality isn’t made of language. If reality is made of language, everything can communicate with everything else via that self-same language. If reality is not made of language, it becomes a mystery how anything can communicate with anything else at all. What would be the basis of their communication?

Let’s pretend that reality is made of something called matter. How does one lump of mindless matter communicate with another lump of mindless matter? According to science, matter obeys scientific laws, derived from mathematics (for example, think of the law of gravity, or the laws of motion, or the laws of thermodynamics, or the laws of electromagnetism, and so on). These laws are considered eternal. But this poses a highly problematic and perplexing picture. Do these laws therefore exist independently of matter (e.g. does the law of gravity exist whether or not any matter exists to which the law of gravity could be applied)? They must do so in order to have initiated and controlled the Big Bang which gave rise to the material world of spacetime. Otherwise, the claim would be that matter, space, time, and their controlling laws, all summoned themselves into existence out of nothing at all, a claim more insane than anything proposed by any religion.

How can the laws of matter exist without matter, without space and without time? There was no matter, space and time before the Big Bang created them. So, where are these laws located? What are they made of? How can they exist at all? What is the reason for their existence? How can laws create matter, space and time in any case? Laws, according to science, are just unreal abstractions. Unreal abstractions can’t create anything. Matter can’t emerge from a law, from an abstraction. Nor can space, and nor can time. So where do they come from? And how can matter know what a law – an unreal abstraction – is? How can it obey it? How can it interact with it at all?

The more deeply you think about the scheme on which the whole of science relies, the more incoherent and baffling it becomes. Here’s the fundamental problem. Matter exists in space and time. The laws of matter are not material and do not exist in space and time. This is a bizarre dualism that science has never explained any better than Descartes explained his dualism of mind and matter. On the face of it, matter and the laws of matter have zero in common, just as Cartesian matter and Cartesian mind have zero in common, so why should we accept that they both exist, and interact with each other (which they must do in order for science to be true)?

The Cartesian dualist philosophy gave rise to the opposing monist schools of materialism and idealism. Why hasn’t exactly the same happened with scientific dualism? One school should have emerged that denied the existence of scientific laws, and another school should have emerged that denied the existence of scientific matter. Either way, science would become absurd.

If scientists were remotely philosophically literate, they would understand that all they did when they got rid of unextended, immaterial Cartesian mind was replace it with unextended, immaterial laws. To put it another way, science got rid of minds, but then replaced them with laws that can only be construed as mental, not physical. Scientific laws are not made of matter, don’t exist in space and time, do not degrade, and are immutable, eternal, perfect, absolute, infallible. They therefore have the same sorts of characteristics as the soul, or even God! In fact, they have the exact characteristics of the Forms that define Plato’s philosophy.

Science, despite all of its preposterous anti-philosophical bluster, is just a bad version of Cartesian dualism, or a bad version of Platonist philosophy. Science didn’t get rid of mind at all. It simply recast it as laws. If the laws of science aren’t physical entities in the physical universe, they are therefore mental!

It’s impossible to banish mind. It will appear one way or another. Materialism is a wholly bankrupt and fallacious ideology, riven with internal contradictions and incoherence. Scientific materialism is unquestionably false.

The only way round the problem of the dualism of laws and what they control is to remove the separation between them. The laws thus become the actual existents. To picture what is going on, take mathematical waves as an example. The laws of waves are encoded in the waves. The waves are the expression, the manifestation, the actualization, of the laws. You can’t get the laws of waves without the waves, or the waves without the laws of waves. They are inseparable. All waves speak exactly the same language … the mathematical language of waves. If everything in the universe is made of mathematical waves then the laws of everything are encoded in everything, hence everything always knows how to communicate with everything else in any situation. We no longer have any baffling dualism. We don’t have some mysterious, undefinable matter, and nor do we have equally mysterious, abstract laws floating around in the ether, which somehow miraculously operate on matter and control it.

You cannot separate matter and the laws of matter. The laws of matter must be built into matter, but this changes the entire way in which matter is conceived. Have you ever heard any scientist claiming that every particle of matter literally contains all of the laws of science? Where, in an electron, for example, is the law of gravity, and the laws of quantum mechanics? Yet any mathematical wave inherently contains all of the mathematical laws of waves. The wave is the exact expression of those laws. There is no dualism. There is no mystery. Everything is perfectly defined.

Aristotle tried to combine laws and matter in his hylomorphic theory of substance, which he defined as a compound of matter and internal form that defined the substance. Modern science hated Aristotle. It removed all internal forms and replaced them with external forms, which it then called scientific laws. Mathematical waves allow Aristotle’s conception to be restored. Now we have the form of the wave as its syntax, and the content (matter) of the wave as its semantic expression, i.e. what it ontologically expresses, how it is experienced. The wave is both an information carrier and the information carried. The syntax (form) is the information carrier, and the semantics (matter) is the information carried.

Everything with a syntax and semantics is a language. So, the revolutionary idea is to define substance not in terms of a compound of form and matter, but, instead, as a compound of syntax and semantics. When this is done, substance becomes language, and language, critically, is mental, not physical. The foundational substance is mental substance, not physical substance. Materialism is false.

Anything that is a language is ipso facto mental, not physical. Only minds can use language. How would mindless stuff (matter) know what language is, and be able to use it? The use of language immediately and automatically implies intelligence, and purpose. The intelligence involved will be unconscious, the default mode of mental activity. (Consciousness has to evolve from the unconscious.)

A universe made of language is a mental universe. A universe of energy is a universe of mind. Idealism is true. A universe not made of language is physical. In such a universe, materialism would be true. A universe made of language is directed by the logic of the language. Rationalism is true. A universe not made of language is sensory. Empiricism is true. A universe made of language is necessarily a mathematical universe. A universe not made of language would be a scientific universe. Yet a scientific universe has to use mathematical laws, so why not just go straight to a mathematical universe? Who needs the intermediary of science? Science is redundant.

Science creates a dualism: stuff plus mathematical laws, i.e. non-mathematics plus mathematics. This is untenable. Mathematics cannot communicate with non-mathematics. You must have one or the other. The only option that produces a rational universe is a mathematical universe. The entities that convey the laws of mathematics are themselves mathematical.

Light is the entity that is both mathematical and conveys the laws of mathematics. This idea is nothing new. The great medieval scholar Robert Grosseteste provided a grand unified theory of light as the carrier of mathematics. Wikipedia says, Grosseteste concluded … that mathematics was the highest of all sciences, and the basis for all others, since every natural science ultimately depended on mathematics. He supported this conclusion by looking at light, which he believed to be the ‘first form’ of all things, the source of all generation and motion … Hence, since light could be reduced to lines and points, and thus fully explained in the realm of mathematics, mathematics was the highest order of the sciences.

James J. McEvoy wrote, Grosseteste’s intuition led him to the conviction that mathematics, far from being an abstraction from aspects of the physically real, is the very internal texture of the natural world, presiding over its coming to be and controlling its functioning… For the first time, it would appear, in the history of Christian belief, God is addressed as a mathematician whose ideas for creation are mathematical operations realizable in matter and form.

Tanner, Bower, McLeish, and Gaspar wrote, "Grosseteste’s treatise on light (De luce)... reflects a significant influence of Aristotle’s scientific thinking. ... Its model of the expanding universe stimulated speculation as to whether Georges Lemaître in 1927... was aware of Grosseteste’s thinking when he introduced the modern ‘Big Bang’ model... Grosseteste develops the consequences of his metaphysics of light towards a physics of light... This connection between the perfect heavens and the imperfect earth is an astonishing intellectual feat, rooted in the premise that there exists a fundamental unity..."

Grosseteste himself wrote, "All causes of natural effects have to be given through lines, angles and figures, for otherwise it is impossible for the reason why (propter quid) to be known in them." In other words, you cannot have the reasons for things without mathematics.

The quality of scientific thinking has radically deteriorated since Grosseteste’s day. The connection between light and mathematics has been lost, thanks to materialism and atheism.

In the end, there is nothing but light. Pythagoras said, All things are numbers; number rules all. He could equivalently have said, All things are light; light rules all.

No one ever said, Let there be light. Light is eternal and necessary. It is the fiber and fabric of existence. It is the quintessence of the thinking universe … the universe of light energy. Light has a mathematical property of being breakable (via phase relations), and this leads to what is religiously known as the fallen world of matter. In Hegelian terms, the material world is the world of alienated mind. The task of mind, of light, is to restore itself to perfect light, and the thinking trajectory of the universe is exactly reflective of broken light unbreaking itself and returning to its optimal nature.

To become enlightened means to understand what light actually is, and light is actually mathematics. To become enlightened means to understand that light is thought, and thought has a precise objective – to become perfect. This pursuit of perfection is the meaning of life. People alienated from the potential for perfection contained within themselves have projected their notion of perfection onto an external being (God), or a cosmic consciousness, or a perfect state (nirvana), or whatever else religious types have thought up.

It is precisely because light is mathematics that the universe has an answer. It is precisely because light is thought that we can think about the nature of reality and understand existence, that we can ontologically and epistemologically be rendered perfect, and thus think perfectly.

To understand light fully is to fully understand reality.

When will you see the light?

Have we been understood? ... light = energy = thought = mathematics = the information carrier and the information carried, syntax and semantics, form and content, signifier and signified, map and territory. Mathematics quite simply is the language of existence, and you cannot understand existence unless you understand its language.

What is the primary obstacle to understanding reality? … manmade language, human feelings, the human senses, human mystical intuitions. In other words, the biggest obstacle to Truth is the human condition itself, which is why humanity has had such an almighty struggle with the Truth and invented so many false truths, in which it has then placed absolute and fanatical belief, contrary to all reason.

If you want the Truth, you must transcend your humanity, not indulge it. What is the subject most alien to human beings, most abstract, most difficult? It’s mathematics. That, therefore, is exactly where you must go for the Truth.

All manmade languages deal with words. Nature’s language deals with numbers. That’s where the catastrophic gulf exists between humanity’s delusions of truth and actual Truth. How can you understand a numerical universe with words rather than numbers? It’s impossible.

Science – as a compromise between words and numbers, as a compromise between stuff (matter) and mathematical laws – has been more successful than any religion or philosophy, none of which uses math. But we still haven’t reached the Truth. To get to the Truth we have to stop compromising. We have to stop believing in manmade words, manmade philosophies, and turn to pure mathematics, which is where we exercise pure reason and logic and leave behind human feelings, mysticism, and the senses.

What is light? Light, ultimately, is precisely ordered numerical sequences. Light is the ontological expression of numbers. A number is a syntactical element, but every syntactical element is necessarily accompanied by a semantic element, and this semantic element is what we experience when we encounter numerical syntax. We do not experience numbers as numbers; we experience numbers as the semantic information they ontologically carry, which is to say that we experience numbers as colors, shapes, smells, tastes, touch, sounds, feelings, i.e. things that do not seem like numbers in any way. It is precisely this dual-aspect of numbers that makes it so hard for humans to understand reality. Numbers are noumena, while the experiences ontologically carried by numbers are phenomena. The phenomenal universe is much more interesting than the noumenal universe, which is just endless number sequences (ultimately expressed as waves and their combinations), so evolution has attuned us to phenomena – which do not seem mathematical at all – and hidden numerical noumena from us.

Humanity has speculated endlessly about what lies beyond our phenomenal experiences. Is it God, cosmic consciousness, nonduality, matter-in-itself, things-in-themselves? Is it unknowable? Is it an eternal mystery? In fact, it’s the last thing an ordinary human would ever conceive. What lies beyond is a world of numbers expressed through the syntax of light waves. We live in a mathematically encoded universe, and that’s why the universe has an answer. Only equations can be solved. Only a reality made of one master equation – the God Equation – can have a definitive answer. The God Equation is Euler’s Formula.

=====

More Light! – last words of Goethe

A Trivial Matter

The philosopher Bishop Berkeley denied the existence of matter. What actually existed, he said, is the thought of matter. Science confuses the idea of matter with actual stuff (i.e. scientific matter), independent of our minds and thoughts.

Berkeley wasn’t quite right, but he was more right than scientists. Matter isn’t a thought in our individual minds. Matter is a thought in the Collective Mind (the collection of all monads), and, like everything else, is made of basis thoughts – sinusoids.

When Berkeley said to be is to be perceived (meaning that as soon as we cease to perceive something, it no longer exists), he was right in relation to private dream content. In your dreams, as soon as you cease to think about something, it’s gone. The material objects that exist in our dreams – which is to say the objects in our dreams that we take to be material things – vanish as soon as our thoughts move on to something else. They have no persistence as objects. Their construction and their perception are one and the same, i.e. as soon as we construct them, we perceive them, and as soon as we construct a new thing, we perceive the new thing (and the previous thing ceases to exist).

Berkeley, however, applied this same thinking to the objective world itself. Without the addition of a further element to his system, he would have regarded reality as one long dream, with all material things being nothing but ephemeral thoughts.

To support the existence of an objective world that did not vanish when we switched our attention elsewhere, Berkeley asserted that the objective world existed permanently in the mind of God. Since God could perceive all things all the time, there was no point at which they would vanish (if he turned his thoughts to something else). So, Berkeley grounded persistence and objectivity in the infinite power of God’s mind. He had no need for the hypothesis of matter.

Imagine if every night we returned to exactly the same dreamworld. This would imply that some other mind had constructed it and was continuously contemplating it and keeping it going. In fact, our own unconscious creates our dreamworld, and continuously changes it as its unconscious thoughts switch to new things. Our conscious mind experiences what our unconscious mind has built.

In Berkeley’s philosophy, we all exist inside God’s mind and interact with the world – the thought of the world, to be more exact – created by God. So, for Berkeley, reality comprises nothing but minds and thoughts. There is nothing else, and definitely no such thing as scientific matter, which is a redundant concept in idealist philosophy.

Berkeley’s system falls apart if God is removed. All that then remains is a multitude of individual, independent, subjective dreams with no objective connection to each other. However, we can easily replace God with a different all-powerful mind, namely the Collective Mind, the collection of all monadic minds. Moreover, we can straightforwardly explain why material objects persist. They are made of basis thoughts – sinusoids – supplied by all monads. While these sinusoids interact, they produce enduring objects. This is very different from the case with our dreams. In our dreams, we bring sinusoids together to form what serves the function of matter, but as soon as our thoughts turn to other things, these matter configurations disappear. They have been replaced by whatever new thoughts we are thinking.

In the objective world, this process does not happen. Because sinusoids are supplied by all monads, and all of these sinusoids are now part of an objective mathematical