Just an update to the list of recommended reading from the Illuminati’s “God Series”.
(February 11, 2013)
The Omega Point
(March 26, 2013) I am just about through “The Noosphere” and have found it the best reading yet of the entire series. It is so good that you might even be able to start with it, and then go back and read the others, if you haven’t already read some of the work. I haven’t started “The Omega Point” yet, but am certainly chomping at the bit now that I’ve just seen it come out yesterday! Just look at the “book description”:
What is history’s biggest lie? It’s that there’s one “God”, that he Created the universe out of nothing and made Adam from the dirt of the Garden of Eden, with Eve then being generated from one of Adam’s ribs! Nothing has done more damage to the human psyche than monotheism – the doctrine of an all-powerful “Spy God” who watches what everyone does (the divine peeping Tom) and sentences to perpetual pain in his cosmic torture chamber of hell anyone who doesn’t slavishly worship and obey him . In fact, the universe is a mathematical “God factory” and creates infinite Gods over eons of time, via the optimization of the cosmic equation (the universal wavefunction), which is entirely mathematical. The universe, via dialectical ontological mathematics, is converging on the perfect answer to everything. This condition is known as the Absolute or the Omega Point. The universe travels, mathematically, from Alpha to Omega, from perfect potential to perfect actualization. Even now, on this Earth, people are transforming into Gods. The ancient and controversial secret society known as the Illuminati has, for thousands of years, waged a war against Abrahamic monotheism and promoted the doctrine of “becoming God”. No matter who you are, you can attain divinity if you get off your knees and stop mindlessly and slavishly worshiping a non-existent “Creator”. Mathematics is the Philosopher’s Stone that can transmute base metal (ordinary humans) into gold (Gods). You too can attain your own divine Omega Point, and complete your cosmic journey – across countless reincarnations – from alpha to omega. Are you ready to become an Omega Human?
How can anyone not just be totally converted at the instant of simply reading that synopsis!? Of course, there’s lots of reasons why and the Illuminati explain the reasons clearly, and based on the best understanding of human personality types. Don’t you want to know the reasons too? Look, if you can read the entire set of work, understand it all, and intuitively “get it”, you will automatically be among the top few thousand intellectual geniuses on the planet. You will be in the 6-nine’s percentile of rational intelligences – the 99.9999’th percentile. Try it out, see if you can do it! I guarantee you will experience something develop inside yourself as you work through it – some of it, most of it even perhaps, will be challenging. Prove that you have a mind, and take this challenge on. – I am writing an article which I will publish here which will explain how the ontological Euler Equation derives all of the features of special relativity in an objective, back-ground dependent, non-relativistically subjective, 6-dimensional space-time framework, and why and how the Michelson-Morley experiment produced the results it did. Of course this is all developed in their God Blunder and in Noosphere, but I’ll try to give a little more detail and demonstrate some more of the particulars, and explain more of it. You’ll see it when its done. 🙂 Infinitely zero!
WSM is the way to go – surely.
“matter and fields are just two different ways that space vibrates”
If space is the monadic plenum, which it is, then certainly everything that exists is a manifestation of “space vibrations”, in that definition, with of course the ontological Euler Equation being the basis of the vibration waves. It would of course be more accurate to speak of space-time, rather than just space. Does the paper at the link refer in any place to Euler’s Equation?
This image at the beginning of the article:
sure looks a lot like Euler’s Equation!
Thanks for the link Martin – will read it today.
Scanning through the article Martin linked to… – this fellow would benefit greatly if he studied Illuminism…it would help sort out his thoughts.
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/philosophy-academic-letter.htm That WSM website is fascinating to a person like myself with no proper math training. Is there a way to include Euler’s equation, follow this gentleman’s methods using qq* = (a + i b + j c + k d)(a – i b – j c – k d) = a²+b²+c²+d² and derive the Dirac equation etc? I know you said you were working on a post about deriving the 6-d spacetime framework and curious if this is related or not, and it is Illuminism’s claim that all mathematics can be derived from the Euler formula, so it would be interesting to see in practice. I know The Omega Point explains wave mathematics more in depth. I am just beginning to study Leibniz’s infinitesimal calculus and it is my intention to learn Fourier mathematics when I can begin to understand it. Working in music and digital audio synthesis has given me an intuitive grasp of the ideas but now I am interested in understanding the numbers behind it.
Thanks Joe! .. I have purchased my Kindle versions of these texts and I am excited to read them (haven’t had the time yet, but perhaps this weekend).
Oh that is excellent that you work in that type of music work. A “EQ” (equalizer), for example, is all about modifying the intensity of the frequency components in certain frequency ranges, of course. That is, you can enhance the bass (low frequency), etc etc. So, you work on the frequency components themselves in the frequency domain, and you hear the effects of that in the space-time domain. Of course many audio synthesis systems let you look at both the waveform and the frequency spectrum – the frequency spectrum one is of course the Fourier Transform of the spacetime waveform, and it is the frequency spectrum you modulate in order to produce changes in the waveform (and hence how it sounds). I’m sure you know all this but just explaining it for others…and you probably know a lot more than I do anyway!
I didn’t care much for the WSM site after I read it – whatever he’s intuiting, and it legitimately might be something neat, needs to be filtered and sorted out with a knowledge of Illuminism.
I’ll keep you in mind as I write about the Euler Equation and relativity. Running a little busy here but if you have any more comments or questions, I promise I’ll get to them.
Oh, Ubster, yes, the equation “qq* = (a + i b + j c + k d)(a – i b – j c – k d) = a²+b²+c²+d²” does present the same idea as when applied to the Euler Euqation, that relativity is derived.
If you have e(i*θ) = cos(θ) + i*sin(θ), then the magnitude of this is the equation multiplied by its complex congugate, i.e. the modulus of the equation, so that:
|e(i*θ)|2 = [cos(θ) + i*sin(θ)]*[cos(θ) – i*sin(θ)]
|e(i*θ)|2 = cos2(θ) + sin2(θ)
Then, since for any theta (θ), cos2(θ) + sin2(θ) = 1, we simply have
|e(i*θ)|2 = 1 = cos2(θ) + sin2(θ)
Then, you look at the plot of the Euler equation as a space-time complex plane as they’ve done in their books, and you relate cos(theta) and sin(theta) to physical parameters, and then relativity pops out. This is done with the understanding that the constant magnitude of the vector represents constant motion on the complex plane. You can also do something a little different with it and get the Minkowski space-time metric. Then, you need to figure out why Michelson-Morley and related experiments produce the results which they do and how it relates to this framework…but don’t worry I’ll do that in my article.
Some may enjoy “The Essence Of Reality” found at –
Ive read How to Become God, Ground Hog Day, Noosphere and a few others. I thought I was the only one to have agreed with pretty much everything contained within. I get the impression it has been authored by chaps in their mid 20s as the language is rather relaxed and care free. No one around me seems to see the logic – the authors need to tone down their arrogance and rudeness concentrating on what they do best; being articulate. Life affirming, depressing and revealing all in one. It is a long journey and somewhat lonely one thus far.
Well, there are a few of us out there. Join the Illuminati Pub on Facebook and when you’re ready, volunteer for the Movement. Regards.
I have read the books by the Pythagorean Gnostics through “The God Equation”; and, the idea that their ontological mathematics is an analog for relativity in any way is simply, albeit unwittingly it seems, parroting the narrative for materialist science.
Relativity is the greatest achievment of the shit-bag anti-intellectual elites, and has been their greatest tool of intellectual suppression.
Relativity is antithetical to the notion of continuity at zero and infinity, which is to say, its very intent is to deny the exclusivity of fields and particles ( matter and mind if you like ). Einstein and Minkowski willfully ignored quadrature in assigining versor operators to the “light/second”, thereby deriving an erroneous mathematical paradigm ( Gaussian coordinate system ), forever robbing the metrical dimesions of time and space of independance, and marrying them to a misapplied and overstated luminal velocity.
Although, I very much enjoy reading the climate material and rational presentation of the information pertaining to the “God Series” on this site, we must do something about the mathematical views espoused, as they are completely irrational. I assume this is a civil arena for debate, and I look forward to your response.
All the Best,
Well it seems to me that your middle paragraph summarizing the problem of relativity is very much in-line with the Pythagorean perspective: “robbing the metrical dimensions of time and space of independence, and marrying them to a misapplied and overstated luminal velocity” is precisely what I’ve read in only slightly modified sentences in the books, I do believe. The Eulerian approach to relativity fixes that mistake, does it not? Space-time becomes independent again, an objective plenum. Unless you mean you want to make space and time independent of each other? For that I would not know how or why to proceed, and I prefer the Eulerian approach to space-time as it is, given the logic, and the observational applicability. Am I missing something?
Just found this page, loving the blogs, keep it up!
Im just wondering if anyone is doing anything practical anywhere that is based on this work? The latest book ‘hyperhumanity’ acknowledges the downfall of them using such a purely logical way of getting their message across and the need for a new dialectical solution between illuminism and abrahamism (rationality and mythos). I think a different way of exploring this information, such as in a video game, would work well.
Just found your blog, great reads!
In the latest book ‘Hyperhumanity’ they acknowledged the problem of having such complicated consepts of illuminism being misunderstood by the masses and in the book ‘How To Become a Hero’ they call on people to start doing their own thing to spread the message. What is needed in my eyes is a dialectical solution of the knowledge presented in a mythos way, similar to the Mike Hockney books, but maybe more obvious with the concepts…
my idea is a video game with a Heroes Journey narrative, encompassing all the archetypes and symbols of the journey, their relation to the human psyche and goals for bridging gaps through dialectical solutions, using a integral, dialectal psychological model such as Spiral Dynamics. It would look at lots of similar themes as the god series of books and characterise the extremes as living examples with a game mechanic of exploring and recognising them.
Anyone have more ideas??
P.s. looking for programmers and artists
Yes that does seem to be the question Squidgers…how to turn the work into action. Some people are working on the Meritocracy Party: http://meritocracyparty.org/
One other thing that could be done is to expose the intellectual fraud of academic science such as to force a revolution in it.
That sounds excellent Alex, brilliant! There are a bunch of people at the Illuminati Pub you might be able to work with: https://www.facebook.com/groups/291584434321560/
The philosophy at this point seems to revolve around individuals who can make things happen with little (i.e. no) outside assistance. I have my own ideas I’m working on and I can’t expect anyone else to help finish them for me, so I need to create a system that people can plug in to and be told what to do to achieve such and such a goal, etc., kind of like the story in The Last Bling King by Hockney.
I’ve sent a request on the facebook page, waiting for an admin to accept.
I’ve been trying to talk to a ‘brainwashed’ scientist, engineer type about the possibility that science could be flawed and sent him plenty of links to this blog, videos to the illuminism idealism maths and the AC site etc, but to no avail. Anything that logically disputes one of his beliefs is ignored and anything that he can pick up on to turn the conversation, (including me not having a degree in maths!) is used to avert the discussion back to he is right and I am wrong….
even started trying to suggest that he look into the philosophy of maths to get across the idea that his knowledge is not the be all and end all of knowledge, but I don’t think he understood. How do you make a scientist interested in philosophy, especially one who is heavily invested in semantics and tries to pull apart all philosophy as nonsense?
I fear that people so fiercely identify with ideas that to be considered wrong is to have failed in some way. They can be worse than the extremest religious types!
Yes, Alex, scientists are totally deluded at this point, and they are indeed as faithful as any fundamentalist religious type. The dangerous part for them is that they believe so strongly otherwise. A physicist makes his or her living with mathematics, exploring the mathematical behaviour of reality, but ask them if mathematics is important and they will scoff and ridicule. Science has absolutely no foundational basis if you remove mathematics from it, but scientists seem to prefer the faith that reality has no foundational basis!
I’ll send a message to the admin to look for your request. Maybe try again tomorrow.
“What is history’s biggest lie? It’s that there’s one “God”, that he Created the universe out of nothing and made Adam from the dirt of the Garden of Eden, with Eve then being generated from one of Adam’s ribs! Nothing has done more damage to the human psyche than monotheism – the doctrine of an all-powerful “Spy God” who watches what everyone does (the divine peeping Tom) and sentences to perpetual pain in his cosmic torture chamber of hell anyone who doesn’t slavishly worship and obey him . In fact, the universe is a mathematical “God factory” and creates infinite Gods over eons of time, via the optimization of the cosmic equation (the universal wavefunction), which is entirely mathematical. The universe, via dialectical ontological mathematics, is converging on the perfect answer to everything. This condition is known as the Absolute or the Omega Point. The universe travels, mathematically, from Alpha to Omega, from perfect potential to perfect actualization. Even now, on this Earth, people are transforming into Gods. The ancient and controversial secret society known as the Illuminati has, for thousands of years, waged a war against Abrahamic monotheism and promoted the doctrine of “becoming God”. No matter who you are, you can attain divinity if you get off your knees and stop mindlessly and slavishly worshiping a non-existent “Creator”. Mathematics is the Philosopher’s Stone that can transmute base metal (ordinary humans) into gold (Gods). You too can attain your own divine Omega Point, and complete your cosmic journey – across countless reincarnations – from alpha to omega. Are you ready to become an Omega Human?”
— Well, if that isn’t atheist tripe, I don’t know what is. I thought Lawrence Krauss tried to make the argument of “something from nothing” and it seems these fools are trying to do the same.
Plus, the Illuminati is not thousands of years old. It’s only a hundred years old. And how come they only attack Abrahamic religions and not polytheism? Why not Hinduism or Paganism? Oh, that’s right. It’s because they don’t have a single “God”.
Right, a perfect answer to everything. Do tell how nothing becomes something.
Anyways, this group really sounds like a bunch of kooks trying to sound smart. They know nothing about the Illuminati, which only came into public view in the late 18th century. Before then, there is no record of them, so the idea that they were fighting monotheism is entirely fantasy.
How’d these reincarnations come about? Plus, the idea that monotheism has destroyed the human mind seems to ignore, yet again, other religions such as polytheism. I guess sacred cows don’t count, do they?
If man is unexceptional, why are they pushing divinity? Isn’t that attaining the idea of the Superman?
I have never seen so much ignorance of history. The Illuminati didn’t exist until the 18th century. Plus, this is M-theory, isn’t it? The idea that infinite universes exist, and that infinite Gods exist, too? If they say God(s) don’t exist, why aren’t they attacking polytheism?
And…here we have a grand argument from ignorance. Gotta love the New Atheist types. What they can’t attack in logic they attack in sniveling tripe.
Second, this author is an unabashed racist who likes to indulge in conspiracy theories. From noosphere:
“Who have hitherto ruled and oppressed our world (the
Wall Streeters, the privileged WASP elite and the Abrahamists)? Imagine the
Soul Sphere merging, finally, with the “God Sphere” and establishing a Society
of the Divine. Is that not the ultimate destiny of higher humanity?”
For a so-called mathematician, who claims to have the answer to everything, he doesn’t understand that IQ exists, race exists, and that the WASPS don’t oppress the world when they stop and lend a helping hand to the unfortunate.
This is the best we can get out of the New Atheists: a complete denial of human reality and going to the march of the Superman.
“How can anyone not just be totally converted at the instant of simply reading that synopsis!?” – I, for one, am not converted, because this is the token New Atheist tripe: there is no God but us; God is just a myth and Christianity is evil.
Postma, you may be good at math but you are wholly ignorant of religion, and so are these folks. They can’t even answer their own questions of how you can get something out of nothing, but merely skirt around it.
Postma, you’ve been hacked. Hockney is not a rationalist. Here’s a gem:
“The Rise of Women
One way to bring about an immediate change in the tone of the world and the way it operates is for those who have hitherto ruled the world – men – to be replaced in the top positions of power by those who been oppressed by men – women. Human history would have been entirely different under women. Isn’t the rational thing to do to give women the opportunity to run the world? One thing’s for sure – they can’t fuck it up worse than the men.
That’s unfair to men, because they’d be replaced. That is not equality. There is no evidence of matriarchies; on the contrary, female run households, such as those in the black community, are rife with crime and abuse. Plus, women on average how lower IQ than men – about four or five points – and are not interested in the hard sciences. Feminism encourages women to pursue things that are not fit for them. The march for equality has proven to be a backwards motto; this is not progress at all.
“The Invisible Men
In the world of the privileged, all unprivileged people are invisible. The rich stare right through you as though you aren’t there. Isn’t it time you made yourself visible?
Get your Priorities Right
If women spent as much time on making themselves intelligent as they do on making themselves pretty, they’d be geniuses. If they spent as much money on books as on make-up, they’d be the best-read people in history.
If men and women devoted as much time and effort to their professional lives as they do to their social lives and their facebook pages, they’d be millionaires.
It’s easy to see what makes someone tick – you simply watch how they spend their free time. What you see is this – endless people doing fuck all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
You read books by this guy? He clearly hates women. Plus, intelligence is mostly genetic. Women are the moderators: on the IQ scale, the are in the middle, while men can be the brightest, or the dumbest on the scale. Plus, Norway is one of the biggest book-readers in the world, yet all of their Nobel winners have been men. Oppression? I don’t think so.
This guy isn’t a genius. He’s a liberal pointing fingers. He doesn’t have the answers; he’s ignoring them. And he writes like a 16-year-old. America and most of Europe have programs that cater to minorities and women. Yet women make up less percentages in the sciences than they did in the ’30’s, while minorities lower standards.
Have an example from Islam, which isn’t a religion but a cult:
“What Did Muhammed Say About Rape?
Muhammad Would Never Approve of Rape
It is against Islam to rape Muslim women, but Muhammad actually encouraged the rape of others captured in battle. This hadith provides the context for the Qur’anic verse (4:24):
The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) “And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)
Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn’t Muhammad, but “Allah the Exalted” who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands – which is all the more reason not to think of Islam as being the same as other religion.
Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle. This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves. (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?)
There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women – yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed. In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their new slaves for later resale by getting them pregnant. Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:
“O Allah’s Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?” The Prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.” (Bukhari 34:432)
As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.”
No, man. Christianity is BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD.
Shooter, wow man that was hilarious! You did write that as humor on purpose, right? 🙂 lol