Since the dawn of the 21st century, this technology has come to govern every sphere. . .dictates our decisions in our homes and offices, in our cities and countrysides, and in our social, civic, personal, and professional lives.
Water is a dipole antenna and conveyor of consciousness. . .the manifest twin of the unmanifest aether, reflecting the One into Mind.
Roman, Republican or Early Imperial, Relief of a seated poet (Menander) with masks of New Comedy, 1st century B.C. – early 1st century A.D., Princeton University Art Museum
Safetyism is founded on the concept of someone else knowing what’s best for you; you are freed from having to determine your own choices, freed from weighing up logic and proportion before you take action; you just need to follow rules set out in front of you.
The following investigation is a product of the ongoing scientific inquiry ‘whence human suffering?‘, the same encountering a critical need to call into serious question the long-standing pi (π) “approximation” methodology (ie. of exhaustion) first employed by Archimedes (late, c. 287 – c. 212 BCE), and then by mathematicians and scientists ever since. To begin, the author draws attention to an important inquiry: ‘ does π ever naturally emerge as a product of a square? ‘ If so, it must be measureably so such to negate any/all need/inclining for “approximation” methodology(s) employing the use of multiple straight-edged polygons. Now consider the quadratic: x² – x – 1 = 0 and find it to have positive solution x = (1+√5)/2 which, as the reader may recognize, is the so-called golden ratio (hence: Φ). By expressing Φ in/on a base of 2π (thus generally applicable to rotational motion): Φ = (π+π√5)/2π = 1.618… and then squaring: Φ² = (3π+π√5)/2π = 2.618… we find a numerator difference (being a matter) of a discrete 2π: Φ² – Φ = 2π/2π …
The comet impact scenario circa 10,800 BC makes perfect sense according to all the scientific evidence we have. And it doesn’t just make scientific sense, we can now understand the basis for most of the world’s religions. So in the end it is a triumph for science—finally we can explain religion with its cycles of destruction and re-birth and its prominent ophiolatry.
In a book I wrote some years ago—A Secret History of Consciousness—a reader can find this statement: “We can characterize the advance of science as the sole arbiter of truth by seeing in it the gradual expulsion of human consciousness from its object of study.” What I’d like to do here is to explore what I mean by this, to see where the “reality” behind this dictum has led the human mind and to look at a possible alternative to the methodology that such a view argues is unavoidable.