Table of Contents
The Great Conceptualization
Author’s Note: This article discusses the great conceptualization as it applies to ponderable (non-charged) bodies of which you are as a typical observer. This article does not deal with how the great conceptualization applies to electrical (charged) bodies.
Definition: The great conceptualization is the post-modern description of space and time as entities imbued with the aspects of form and dimension.
For millennia man has made judgements and has derived conclusions about the nature of the universe based on his physical perception or observation of natural phenomena and especially of motion.
But in this new era, man is beginning to make judgements and derived conclusions about the nature of the universe based on his metaphysical perception or observation of natural phenomena and especially of motion.
Since man conceived of space and time, he has only thought of them as entities or constructs with only physical essence. To him, space is just space and time is just time both without form but exhibiting the aspect of dimension. This ordinary view of space and time constitutes the conceptualization.
Definition: The conceptualization is the description of space and time as entities imbued with only the aspect of dimension.
Now, in post-modern physics, space is no longer just space and time is no longer just time. Space and time now have two forms each and this transcendent view of space and time constitutes the great conceptualization. In post-modern physics, we have abandoned our everyday understanding of space and time.
This in turn means that we must abandon our everyday perception of motion, or at least understand how they are modified by the great conceptualization. Our everyday perception of motion is based on the conceptualization in which space and time have only one form and are ascribed only physical relevance.
But the new transcendent perception of motion is based on the great conceptualization in which space and time have two forms and are ascribed metaphysical relevance. The two forms of space and time are uniform space and time and accelerated space and time.
In some of my articles, I justify the existence of two forms of space and time by relating them to the two non-mechanical waves in the universe. While this is applicable, I only make this proposition because of your unfamiliarity as of now with the new scientific tradition.
But when you come to understand the new physics, you will realize that the aspect or concept of the forms of space and time exist in its own right and as an independent cause just like the aspect or the concept of the dimensions of space and time.
In this higher perception, you would have come to embrace form and dimension as the two aspects of reality, that exist regardless of and independent of any other manifestation. Space and time as the framework of reality exhibit these two prime aspects and not only the aspect of dimension as afore thought.
It is this new balanced view of reality that is changing how we perceive motion and the extensive universe. This is very important, because in due time it is going to have a practical and ramifying effect on how we see the universe.
So, together, both form and dimension will evolve into everyday concepts as this new era marches on, and no longer will dimension be the sole concept employed in our discussion of reality and of space and time as it has been in other previous eras.
The conceptualization embodies only the aspect of dimension, but the great conceptualization embodies both the aspect of form and the aspect of dimension. In fact, man has since been describing reality based on only a part of it which is dimension leaving the other half which is form.
This can no longer continue. Now, when we look at bodies and motion we take cognizance of how the aspect of form applies to them. The great conceptualization leads us on this new way of perceiving reality.
Concerning how we perceive motion, I have talked about it in the article below, but I want us to still discuss it in further detail in this article. So, how does the great conceptualization forces us to perceive motion?
When we observe bodies move according to the conceptualization, we observe that they are either moving in a straight line or deviating from a straight line, that is moving in a curved path.
This observation based on how bodies maintain or deviate from linearity is physical, and as I have said, it is based on the conceptualization which regards only the aspect of dimension and how it applies to space and time.
In this context, space and time are physical and even though one can say that they have only one form, one must realize that the aspect of form is alien to the conceptualization. Now, in this physical observation, one also knows that when bodies move they either sense inertia or they don’t.
So, what is the connection between motion and inertia? How does the physical observation of the motion of bodies which either maintains a linear path or not related to the fact that they either sense inertia or not?
This relationship between linearity and inertia has been captured by Newton’s first law of motion which is the law of inertia and which states that bodies maintain their linear path when in uniform motion unless they are impressed by external forces.
Since Newton’s laws are based on the conceptualization and they are our basic guide when we make physical observations, we come to the conclusion that there is a relationship between linearity and inertia.
We now think that the preservation of linearity during uniform motion is related or responsible for the non-sensation of inertia, while the non-preservation of linearity during accelerated motion is related to the sensation of inertia.
But is this really true? Is there any relationship between linearity and inertia? The answer is NO. There is no relationship between linearity and inertia, the apparent relationship between them seem to only exist in the physical perception of motion and the physical perception of motion does not agree with the truth.
So, what is then related to inertia? What is related to inertia is orthogonality. The preservation or non-preservation of orthogonality is what is related and genuinely responsible for our non-sensation or sensation of inertia respectively.
The conceptualization teaches us to observe motion and to judge the accompanying experiences of it based only on linear space, but the great conceptualization teaches us to observe motion and to judge the accompanying experiences of it based on orthogonal forms of space and time.
This orthogonal description of space and time is best described by and due to the aspect of forms. Form is an aspect of reality which enables the two forms of space to co-exist in the same spatial plane and which enables the two forms of time to co-exist in the same temporal plane.
Form is really not concerned about preserving orthogonality, but in the case in which a form of time is orthogonal to a form of space, then there become experiential consequences.
So, according to the great conceptualization, uniform time is orthogonal to uniform space, and accelerated time is orthogonal to accelerated space. These corresponding orthogonalities are responsible for the non-sensation of inertia for uniform motion and accelerated motion respectively.
Orthogonality and Uniform Motion
The sensation and non-sensation of inertia are not in any way related to linearity. The diagram below shows you explicitly how we observe uniform motion based on the conceptualization and the great conceptualization.
I think that there can be variants of this diagrammatic depiction but the underlying interpretation should be the same. In diagram A for uniform motion, according to physical observation and the conceptualization, the body is moving in a straight line where θ = 0º indicating that there is no deviation from linearity.
Also, you will notice that for physical observation, there is no explicit relationship with or concern for physical time. This relationship becomes explicit only when the physical observer wants to model the dynamics of motion of the body. This limitation is due to the fact that physical time is not the true time of the universe.
There seems to be no reference to time. This whole physical observation based on linearity is concerned with just space unimbued with the aspect of form. And in the case of uniform motion, no inertia is sensed, and this wrongly supposes that linearity and this non-sensation are connected.
However, in section B for uniform motion according to metaphysical perception and the great conceptualization, we realize that the body is moving in uniform space dx and as such is moving in a space imbued with the aspect of form.
It doesn’t end there, uniform time dt is also shown attached and orthogonal to uniform space dx where θ = 90º. This orthogonality between uniform space dx and uniform time dt is responsible for the non-sensation of inertia. I really hope you can understand what I am showing you about the universe.
This orthogonal relationship between uniform space dx and uniform time dt which is responsible for the non-sensation of inertia for the body causes even its derived linear path to underlyingly be a function of uniform space and uniform time (dx, dt).
Thus, while the physical perception of uniform motion is based on spatial linearity, the metaphysical perception of uniform motion is based on spatial-temporal orthogonality. You must understand how orthogonality is the cornerstone of motion in the universe.
In physical observation, only space is recognized while time is left out and this leads to linearity, but in metaphysical observation, both forms of space and time are inseparable and this leads to orthogonality. In simple terms, the physical observer observes only space but the metaphysical observer observes space and time.
This new description of uniform motion importantly reveals to you how the law of inertia is founded on orthogonality and not on linearity. This is aptly called the absolute principle of inertia founded on orthogonality, and it is different from the relative, Newtonian principle of inertia founded on linearity.
Also, the distinction arises because the absolute principle of inertia is founded on the great conceptualization, while the relative, Newtonian principle of inertia is founded on the conceptualization. Please, take note of these post-modern insights.
Non-orthogonality and Unnatural Acceleration
Now, the figure below shows when the body moves in accelerated motion, according to physical perception shown in A which does not take the aspect of form into account, the body deviates from its linear path where θ > 0º, and if the accelerated motion is unnatural, then the body would sense inertia.
There are things I will point out about this soon which will further reveal the confusion and limitations in the conceptualization. Now, when the body moves in accelerated motion, according to metaphysical perception it is simply moving in accelerated space.
In doing so, we have that the two forms of time uniform time dt and accelerated time Δt come into play, but uniform time dt is not orthogonal to accelerated space Δx, whereas accelerated time Δt is orthogonal to accelerated space Δx. This presents us with two conditions and I will like to discuss the first condition.
In the case when the body is placed in accelerated motion by an action which is not gravity, it senses inertia, however, this sensation occurs because of the non-orthogonality of accelerated space and uniform time and it is not related to (the deviation from) linearity as physical perception would lead you to think.
As shown in figure B above, the body deviates from orthogonality as accelerated space Δx and uniform time dt are not orthogonal to each other, where θ > 90º, and this results in the sensation of inertia.
Also, its derived linear path underlyingly becomes a function of accelerated space and uniform time shown as (Δx, dt). What I want you to see is how the aspects of form and dimension together determine our experiences of motion.
We should no longer ignore or underplay the crucial role the aspect of form plays in our experience of motion, and this is the relevance of the great conceptualization. The great conceptualization teaches us to employ the aspect of form and dimension when observing motion and the universe.
This particular section on the deviation of a ponderable body from orthogonality shows you what the deviation from linearity in the physical universe translates as in the metaphysical universe.
The physical observer and the metaphysical observer cannot agree on their perceptions of motion whether uniform or accelerated motion. During uniform motion, the physical observer observes that the ponderable body maintains linearity, but the metaphysical observer observes that the ponderable body maintains orthogonality.
And when the ponderable body accelerates, the physical observer observes that the ponderable deviates from linearity, but the metaphysical observer observes that the ponderable body deviates from orthogonality.
The physical observer does not even know how this adherence and non-adherence to linearity could possibly produce the non-sensation and sensation of inertia, but the metaphysical observer knows that the adherence and non-adherence to orthogonality produces the non-sensation and sensation of inertia respectively.
And the metaphysical observer is more concerned about the underlying causes or principles that determine our experiences of motion, but this cannot be the concern of the physical observer upholding linearity.
Metaphysical observation is just another term for experiential observation, and physical observation cannot inform us about how we experience the universe. There truly exist two kinds of perception of the universe, one based on the conceptualization and the other based on the great conceptualization.
The second perception of reality based on the great conceptualization does not only apply during observation, it also applies to the new way we now see light, gravity, matter, energy, and in fact everything. The great conceptualization presents us with a sweeping new way of perceiving the universe.
Orthogonality and Natural Acceleration Due to Gravity
True perception is metaphysical. Now, to explain the other condition due to the two forms of time and accelerated space. When you experience accelerated motion due to gravity, you realize that you don’t sense inertia. Why does this happen?
The experience of accelerated motion due to gravity is similar to the experience of uniform motion, even though according to physical observation a ponderable body deviates from linearity during accelerated motion due to gravity and adhere to linearity during uniform motion.
This apparent contradiction is showing to us the limit of physical observation and of physics itself. When you probe this apparent contradiction using the great conceptualization it varnishes, for you will realize that the experience of accelerated motion due to gravity is similar to the experience of uniform motion because for both cases orthogonality is preserved even though, apparently, linearity is not preserved.
When the body accelerates due to gravity as shown in B below, it doesn’t sense inertia because of the orthogonal relationship between accelerated space Δx and accelerated time Δt where θ = 90º. And it derived linear path underlyingly becomes a function of accelerated space and accelerated time shown as (Δx, Δt).
So, Just like uniform motion, where uniform space and uniform time are orthogonal, we have the same case when ponderable bodies accelerate due to gravity. You can refer back to uniform motion above in order to see and understand this similarity.
Furthermore, I want you to understand that these two possible experiences of accelerated motion are inherent in all accelerated motion whether natural or unnatural accelerated motion. But ponderable bodies experience either of them depending on whether they are in natural motion or not.
These two conditions of accelerated motion can be compared to the basic concepts of dominant and recessive genes. Remember that both kinds of genes can be present in a human, but the dominant genes are the evident and active genes while the recessive genes are the non-evident and non-active genes, and it can be vice versa.
The same concepts can be applied to the experience of the two conditions of accelerated motion. When ponderable bodies are in natural motion, the effects of orthogonality becomes dominant in that they do not sense inertia while the effects of non-orthogonality become recessive.
But when ponderable bodies are in unnatural accelerated motion, the effects of non-orthogonality become dominant in that they sense inertia while the effects of orthogonality become recessive. Orthogonality and non-orthogonality are responsible for the non-sensation and sensation of inertia respectively.
Both experiences are inherent in all accelerated motions of ponderable bodies, and this why Absolute Relativity shows you how ponderable bodies carry two distinct absolute quantities.
Thus, in my elucidation of the metaphysical observation of accelerated motion, I was simply making a switch between orthogonality and non-orthogonality depending on whether the ponderable body is experiencing natural accelerated motion or unnatural accelerated motion.
The Great Conceptualization: Further Discussion
Surprisingly, the similarity of uniform motion and gravitational acceleration which is based on orthogonality shows us the true connection between uniform motion and gravitational acceleration that Albert Einstein sought to show us in general relativity.
Einstein general relativity based on the conceptualization established a subtle form of physical connection between uniform motion and gravitational acceleration based on linearity.
But post-modern physics which is based on the great conceptualization establishes a metaphysical connection between uniform motion and gravitational acceleration based on orthogonality.
The relationship between uniform motion and gravitational acceleration as established by post-modern physics is a lot simpler and basic than that established by general relativity. You can read more about this in the article below on the distinctions between gravi-electrodynamics and general relativity.
Physical perception of motion based on the conceptualization cannot reveal these things, only metaphysical perception based on the great conceptualization can. The adherence or non-adherence of orthogonality and not linearity is responsible for how we experience motion.
In post-modern physics, you are translated from the physical world dependent on linearity to the metaphysical dependent on orthogonality. You will realize in post-modern physics how rich reality is at its base.
So, just this simple explanation of the relationship between orthogonality and the two forms of space and time are responsible for our experience of motion. No need for superfluities and abstract interpretations based on some derived mechanics.
I cannot overemphasize this, orthogonality is fundamental to the operation of the universe. It is, in fact, the first absolute principle of the cosmos. All our experiences of the universe are determined by orthogonality. This is why I sometimes tell you that we live in a Pythagorean universe.
You have always thought that space and time are just what they are based on the conceptualization which does not attach form to them but only dimension, but now I teach you that space and time have two forms alongside their aspect of dimension based on the great conceptualization.
I have written this article to explicitly tell you how the great conceptualization changes your perception of the universe. You have before now observed the universe according to the conceptualization.
In post-modern physics, you are shown a new transcendent observation of the universe based on the great conceptualization. To you now, what I have informed you about this transcendent metaphysical perception may not be realistic, but it would soon be.
Man’s ascension has begun. The great conceptualization will be the common basis for our perception of reality. This will be further accelerated by the advent of post-modern technologies, that will follow from this new knowledge. All these I have foreseen.
The metaphysical nature of the universe is real. And in post-modern physics, metaphysics is elevated above physics, the truth is elevated above the apparent, and orthogonality is elevated above linearity. This is the way of the new science.
The great conceptualization captures the true nature of space and time necessary for the understanding of the metaphysical nature of the universe. We have for so long been attempting erroneously to probe the metaphysical nature of reality deploying the conceptualization. This is a gross mismatch, to say the least.
Only by the great conceptualization can we understand the metaphysical nature of the universe. The great conceptualization presents us with a new way of perceiving reality and it is the grandest idea that has ever come to man since the last 6000 years!
The great conceptualization now tells you: look at orthogonality when you observe or experience uniform motion, look at orthogonality whenever you observe or experience accelerated motion. Change your paradigm, abandon the physical and embrace the metaphysical, reality is richer than you think.
When I speak of the metaphysical, I speak of the kind of science that investigates and acknowledges the quantitative and the qualitative aspects of reality. It is easy to see how form is the qualitative aspect of reality while dimension is the quantitative aspect of reality.
What we have been calling physical science is the science that only investigates and acknowledges the quantitative aspect of reality. This is why the aspect of dimension is the only known aspect of reality in physical science.
It is in this post-modern era that we are beginning to realize the fundamental and equally relevant aspect of form. The great conceptualization consummates both aspects of reality, unlike the conceptualization which is solely based on the aspect of dimension.
The great conceptualization further shows you how the mathematical foundation of post-modern physics is different from that of other eras of physics. The aspect of form alters and enriches our pursuit for the mathematical understanding of the universe.
I don’t really know categorically the influence the great conceptualization will have on mathematics as a pure discipline, but I am concerned about how it will influence our experience of reality, and I am of the opinion that form is of more concerned to the metaphysician than the mathematician.
I do not in any way imply that the metaphysician does not apply mathematics, he does, but he is open to the experience of the new kind of practical mathematics, unlike the mathematician and even the physicist that only applies theoretical, pen on paper kind of mathematics.
The physicist sees mathematics as a tool with which he models reality and he cannot tell why reality seems to conform to mathematical rules, but the metaphysician sees mathematics as reality and not as a tool to model reality. He realizes that his experiences of motion are mathematical objects with real existence.
The aspect of form makes mathematics more tangible and purposeful than it had been in other eras. It infuses quality into numbers which would have otherwise possess only quantity.
In my book on FORMS, you will be further enlightened about the new experience of the motion and the vast cosmos that will emerge from the great conceptualization. If you notice, you will see that I am placing much emphasis on the aspect of form.
This is because you are already familiar with the aspect of dimension, and whichever way I apply it you are already familiar with the tradition. However, form is a newly introduced aspect.
A close observation of the application and depiction of the great conceptualization, show that the aspect of dimension is recognized and applied, however, it seems to be more of a mathematical, directional essence.
Form, on the other hand, is more of a non-mathematical, definitive, essence. Both form and dimension are inseparable and in this way they give us a new perception of reality. The great conceptualization reveals to us how all bodies and all experiences are birthed from the orthogonality principle.
What we call the Pythagoras theorem, and which is the most famous and widely known mathematical equation in the world, is the true mathematical equation of the cosmos. This simple form of orthogonality is the foundation upon which reality stands.
The conceptualization cannot reveal and uphold this great truth. You become illumined about this great truth when you comprehend the great conceptualization. So, whenever you I apply the Pythagorean principle, I want you to know that I do it on the foundation of the great conceptualization and not the conceptualization.
You must take note of how the new understanding and representation of space and time based on the great conceptualization of post-modern physics differ from those of other eras. It is in this new understanding of space and time which incorporates both aspects of form and dimension that the extensive application of the Pythagorean law is valid.
It becomes invalid if you attempt to extend the application of the orthogonality principle to the physical universe based on the conceptualization. The orthogonality principle or the Pythagorean law as explicated in post-modern physics only applies in the metaphysical universe.
It is from this metaphysical plane that our physical and apparent observations of the cosmos emerge. The metaphysical universe is the universe of reality and truth, and every other plane of existence and thought are shadows.
The space and time of the new physics are based on the great conceptualization and not the space and time of other eras of physics based on the conceptualization. The new physics balances every aspect of the universe.
What is this article all about? What have I been trying to show you in this article about the universe? This article presents you with two options when it comes to the observation of the universe.
Before now, you may have always thought that physical observation is all there is, but I now show you that there is also another perception of reality according to metaphysical observation.
According to physical observation, we employ our ordinary understanding of space and time based on the conceptualization to observe motion, and as such, we physically observe motion manifesting as either the preservation or non-preservation of linearity.
But according to metaphysical observation, we employ the transcendent understanding of space and time based on the great conceptualization to observe motion, and as such, we metaphysically observe motion manifesting as either the preservation or non-preservation of orthogonality.
The key to the new perception of reality is to translate from a linearity based mode of perception to an orthogonality based mode of perception, from the conceptualization to the great conceptualization.
The choice is yours.
– M. V. Echa