Introduction

O#o van Nieuwenhuijze, MSc, MD (c)
Independent Research Scientist

13 June 2008 01:04:01

Today i woke up with the idea that i should write “the g.o.d. equation”.
I discovered this equation in, say, 1974; sitting behind my desk.
The equation was simple and compact; and explains all that exists.
It also explains how things come into existence, based on the generating of dimensions; g.o.d..

Let me first point out what g.o.d. is not.

It has definitely been a great advantage that my parents - having been Overdosed on religion in their youth - spared me the burden of church indoctrination. My parents were also clever enough to give me the homeopathic minimal dose of the cultural religious bias, by sending me to Sunday School, for few enough Sundays.

As i grew up in the Western Civilisation- which is not that civilised yet - i grew up in a pell mell of different types of Christianity; the one church that by itself already caused more deaths than Hitler and Nero combined. As a friend says "they burned Europe’s best women, and never  apologised for what they did".

No, as you can see i was not impressed by 'my' cultural context; and in reading the sullen book that church abide by just did not help. To me it was the verbose equivalent of a medieval sewer; an indiscriminate mixture of clarity and fifth. It took till Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber to get in touch with the quality of personal human psychology, as the basis of the biblical myth. (Or, if you prefer, the mythical bible. As a secret police agent, a professional document manipulator, once wrote; 'i can see the paw prints of my colleagues all over the bible'.)

It is not surprising that that book (in Greek: Biblos) has been manipulated and falsified. Because connected to the religion is the church; a parasitical entity with a main interest in money. Without shunning a variety of means of extortion. When they really overdid it, and started to sell salvation in exchange for money (how did you think the building of the Vatican was financed?) and Luther stepped in that a cure could set in. As a result we now live in the fortunate time of decline of the totalitarian rule by a variety of popes.

Sorry, my rant is not finished. Because the decay of the totalitarian rule of the church is not the end of the mentality, or mind set, by which it functions. At present, i reduce that development to a quite simple model, of human (d)evolution, in and around Europe. Because it condenses my living experience with/in that culture i describe it her in a box.

At present the European 'culture' is ruled by a belief in Science. Scientists have thereby taken over the role of the popes to determine what is Real. The popes were satisfied to say only what was True. They therein had taken on the roles of the ceasars to determine what is Just. Who again perpetrated the role of the Greek senates who decreed what was Proper.
Many people forget that the Greeks were a society of slaves. The 'Democracy' involved only the 5% of free men; this did not account for the women. Greek slaves were the teachers of the Romans, who made slavery into a national export product. The christian church institutionalised this into a multinational firm. And now science is trying to present the same concept as applicable to the universe as a whole.

What started as a belief of ownership of individuals, expanded - through the ceasars - into ownership of a nation, then - through the popes - to ownership of the world. Science now tries to turn that into ownership of the universe; and playing master-god over everything in it. While disowning - as did all those 'leaders' before them - their responsibility for their actions. World pollution. World genocides. Grand scale theft. And enslaving others. (In going back from science to the Roman church, the Roman legions, to the 'free' Greeks.)

So, this is the cultural inheritance that i live with, grew up with. And i don't like it. I see how science now aims for totalitarian rule over Spirit, just as the Roman church wanted to have totalitarian control over the Soul, the Roman legions wanted the same over the Mind; and the slave-holding Greeks did the same over Body.
Body, Mind, Soul and Spirit are to me four integral aspects of our being. All are equally important. All are the response-ability only of each individual person.

Perhaps you can now sense the irony that today i woke up with the notion that i should' write a book entitled "The G.O.D. Equation".

This notion is the result of years of work. Independent from established institutions, because they are very limiting on freedom of thought. It helped, for my realisations, that i once, a long time ago, had an inner conversation; with Yesha and with Lucifer. Both really helped to get a better understanding of Religion; and the crippling role of the churches, those crutches.

It is fascinating to see, when i look back, that i must have always been religious. In a deeper sense than i could know at that time. Just to give you an impression of my perspective: i found myself saying - when asked about my 'religion' - "i am member of all religions; and none of its churches'. I still find that that describes it quite well.

And so now i woke up to the realisation that i should put some of this down in a book. "The G.O.D. Equation". For the simple reason that i now know the equation that underlies all religions. And that, with that equation in mind, all religions can be understood. And known to all be the same: futile attempts to describe how this universe functions. And how we are all part of the equation.

As for that equation itself: i still remember when i first saw it. It was written down on paper, on my desk, where i was working. Suddenly i saw how one side of the equation described the other, on the other side of the equality sign. If the one side described the other, while at the same time the other describing the one; then what was my involvement? I realised that i was not needed. The equation described itself...

Now i know that what had been written was a bi-dual transformation. Each side of the equation was an operator, a functor. Thus its own 'active agent'. I don't even remember what that equation was - it probably still lies somewhere in my notes of that time. I know it does not matter; the same essence can be found in any equation. A = A is a pretty petty example. How can A equal A, unless A is A. In other words: If A=A, a priori because A is itself, thus, A; what then is the aim of the gain to write it into an equation? Now i know: our consciousness matters; it is all about our own involvement. And that is the key to this book: we matter. Our involvement, makes all of the difference. We are not slaves of reality, our culture, our state, or others. We are Creators. What we do matters, not just for (y)ourselves, but also for others, all others, and reality as a whole. That is the essence of the G.O.D. Equations. Equating is about interfacing, making distinctions: making a difference. That is what our being is about. That is what religions try to show - but can't -, and what churches try to take away- but can't -. What you are makes all the difference. By what you do, you turn reality, life, our culture or your experience, into Heaven or Hell. By anything, everything you do. B whatever you think, feel, want, are. The G.O.D. equation show that it all matters.

That makes the G.O.D. equation so funny: it can show what can not be seen. How we are one with the universe. How the universe existed before it had form. How churches raped religion, and on and on.
The G.O.D. equation is its own solution, and no more than just that.
A Witness, an explicit expression, of what already, always, was.
Of what we, already, always have been. And of what we, already, always have known; without knowing.

The G.O.D. equation as i saw if on my desk was part of a quest. At that time i was a student of science, in a "good" school of Engineering. At that time i realised that all different departments were all dealing with the same. Differential Equations. Like so many bakeries, all using the same dough, each dished op a merely different form of the same. Stick bread, croissant, loaf, buns. Mechanical-, electrical-, mathematical-, physical-: just as many brands of engineering as there were applications for Differential Equations. Yet all had the same flow: none could deal with Newness {Foresythe}. All had the Engineers playing god: tweaking the settings of the differential equations, but thereby forgetting all about newness. That was when i realised - but did not know yet - that Science is simply a system for Angst Reduction, at the scale of the social collective. And that Science had done so by declaring reality 'dead’. And the scientist is sole master. It is a kind of necrophilia; a tyrannical control over dead matter, with an irresponsibility that exceeds that of colonisation by Roman churches, deportations by the  Roman legions and violation of personal being by the Greeks. Science has become more than a state church; it has become a cultural cult. Yet at heart all scientists still aspire to know, not what is, but what they are. The G.O.D. Equation helps make this clear.

In this book, chapter by chapter, the essence of this equation unfolds. How in looking at mathematics, i needed to be able define where axioms come from. And needed to define a Generator of Dimensions only later did i see how that abbreviated to g.o.d.. Only later yet again did i wonder if this g.o.d. is the same as others called god (and yes it is). Later, when looking at the nature of dynamic transformations the same puzzle emerged, and resolved. At that time i needed something that could initiate change: a Generator, Operator, Destructor. Again i then saw the same acronym. Again i questioned, saw answered, that what was described was what others call 'god'. And now i know: god is not human, not even like a human. G.O.D. is an equation, but no normal equation. It is an equation, like any other. But at the same time the equation of all equations, and equators. It describes us, and how we equate. How we interface. How we are connected to everything around us. Which makes us creators. Not creatures, but creators.

That is, the G.O.D. Equation offers a sense of perspective. It shows the same as all religions always tried to describe; it also explains why they fail. (Because in essence this can nor be described; it describes what we are. That is something you can only be.) It also shows the difference between religion and church. All that is not described by the G.O.D. Equation, is not dealing with the universe as a whole, but with churches: a limitation of it. This helps understand why church rule contributed to this culture and planet to be in the sick state she is in. (Material wealth, out of rape; together with spiritual poverty, and atrophy of the soul.

I find it intriguing, that i - with my church-free background - now woke up to the idea of describing the G.O.D. Equation, and my experience with it. Which will show in which sense, and to which extent, science has taken over the role of a church; yet how it can also be a religion. (In spite of what the Roman popes and legions did wrong and intensely so; at some level they also meant well. Ehm, the same holds for this book: i mean well, even if at times it perhaps looks less than kind...)

The god equation

The word universe defines all that exists as one integral dynamic system: uni (one) and verse (song).

This is a much more valid approach than that currently used in science, which regards the cosmos as a large collection of objects; regarding it from an objective perspective (only). As a result, a bias is introduced, by which the relationships, their interdependence, and especially their origination are lost from view. This is the basis of a fundamental blind spot in science: whatever exists can be described, but not understood, as it is and remains impossible to ascertain how it came to be and from whence it came. In short: the model of classical science is, literally, unfounded. In other words, the universe as a whole has become locked into a black box.

This can be found in the formulations of the inverse also: it is considered to be a space, which means that it takes up space, but how is it bounded? It is not: the model that is used excludes its own self definition, thus the defining bounding limits are not described, thus not realised.

Relativity and probability theory were designed to remedy this situation: relativity addresses the fact that conceptually any space needs to be bounded (otherwise it is illogical in its core definition); probability addresses the aspect that any boundary has more than one side. Thus other states (spaces) are to be considered.
However this does not yet resolve the issue: knowing that there is a boundary, as seen from the inside, make space relative, thus relativistic. Knowing that the boundary has more than one side makes space, reality, multiple by essence, thus a multiverse which contradicts the notion of a universe.
The basic issue is thus that of Closure: and this is where religion described the universe as a mystery. Like science, it came to conclude that space is contained within a Black Box. Which we thus are inside of.

It means that all we know is invalid, because we do not know what defines the reality that we live in. Because it has no boundary, thus no definition. Field theory proposes a solution: it regards what is outside of the boundary. This is based  on a property of any boundary: it is a separator, but also a connector. By realising this, it is possible to understand the boundary as a field. This means that a boundary and a Field are essentially the same; and can be inverted. This means that crossing the boundary changes the perspective, not only from a boundary to a field but also from a Closed to and Open System. (This links the objective reality and subjective realisation).

The Open System is commonly known as god (generator operator destructor). This is not the definition as used by churches (which are political systems for mass manipulation) but that of religions (which are applied and experiential philosophies for realising the integral connectedness between the closed and open system).

The god concept, that of generator operator destructor, implies a fourth concept: that of dimensional emergence: creation. The differences between generation, operation and destruction lie in their dimensional transitions.
Generation adds a dimensionality or dimension (transmutation), operation permutes them in stable arrangement, and destruction operates dimensional compression.
Underlying this, thus, is the existence of dimensional transitions. This precedes the dimensional emergence (existence and immergence) thus is not defined within our dimensional perception.

At this level, dimension is an axiom.
In order to understand the universe we need to understand the origin of dimensions, which can be found in logic.
Logic is a general form of information. Although it may appear, to some, surprising that there is a possibility to consider the universe without form of manifestation, this is only seemingly so.
Our existence is a boundary itself, we interface reality and realisation, matter and information, which means that we incorporate all transitions of phase. This includes the aspects of phase (de)dimensionalisation, i.e. material transmutation, which is required for the relating of the open and closed system.
This means that we are the interface (“the way”), thus we are at the same time manifest and immaterial, meta-real, by operating by the fundamental logic of phase integration.

It is this property that is the basis for a concept that is fundamental to our existence, and the understanding of the universe as a whole: total system inversion. The open and closed systems are not separate, but interspersed with each other by a dynamic of ongoing inversion. (For this reason the cosmos has been compared to an egg, which is one of the forms associated with a vortex, which can also be represented by a toroid. See also the graphic work of Dan Winter.

This is where religion integrates with science: we are a closed system and open system, at the same time.
This can be experienced in our body (see Freedom of Choice, Incarnate Conscious choice), which itself is a concrete example of the principles of (de/re)dimensionalisation. (Dimensional changes denote the changing of internal degrees of freedom of a system in a logical manner).
Again: in order to explain or understand the integral nature of the universe as a whole, we need to include the non-dimensional state. This is the phase space, which has a null dimension, and is based only on logic.
This logic is thought to be immaterial or abstract, in fact it is the information on which the unfoldment of the universe is based, thus it is seen in the manifestation of the universe as a whole. Every manifestation of an expression of it; this is where mysticism calls the universe a manifestation (expression, reflection, form) of god.

There are many formulations of this. Researchers have sought and found descriptions, for the various levels of manifestation.

• Peter Rowlands: a mathematical system based on operations on the number zero, and the necessity to maintain integral balance (return to zero) at all levels of realisation (mathematical formulation).
• John Conway: a number development based on a diffraction around number zero: the boundary of manifestation.
• Richard Amoroso: a fundamental notion of phase space and the way the formulation integrates mind and body; it applies equally to what we perceive and to what we are.
• Uri Fidelman has pointed out that the formulations in physics and mathematics are reflections of the way our brain functions. It points to a direct link between the objective reality and the subjective realisation.

There are many others who have developed such studies; in both religion and science. Both formulations complement each other.
The approach of religion deals with the open system, and defines it at the level of subjective realisation.
The model of science explores it in terms of closed Systems, and describes it at the level of objective consensus.
The first is internal, and interact with our own thinking (the kingdom within), the second is external, and interacts via our symbols (the tradition of books).
Both are equally valid, and incomplete.
However, when both are seen to be same, the perspective both offers helps straddle the interface, and bring out what happens at the interface itself: the principle of dimensional transition, where the closed and open systems interact and invert (Total System Inversion, DeDimensionalisation).

The Organisation level has been well studied: it is known as the science of material systems. These are linear, invariant, and mostly considered inert. This equates equations to 1 (one). This is a system of description that ignores, sometimes denies, the system emergence and immergence. It is a closed system, and example of it is classical physics. Many political, social and mental constructs are (still) based on this.

The Destruction level has partly entered into the consideration, in e.g. the study of analysis and nuclear fission. Classically this is known as the age of Kali, the exploration of destruction. Metaphorically it is seen in all equations that equate to zero.

The Generating level is only tentatively addressed; of which cosmology and embryology are examples. The budding neurology and consciousness studies are leading up to this, with the realisation of the source of emergent ideas, and the understanding that the actions in the body emerge from processes that are not taking place at the physical level, but between and within it.

Cosmology is the easiest example to see how physics and metaphysics relate: matter is composed of molecules composed of atoms, which emerge out of coherence of phase. Phase space is immaterial; this is known as the subatomic field, which is the same as the space of he universe as a whole. This consideration leads to understand that the whole universe is a coherent (conscious) system of manifestation, in unfoldment. From a cosmologic perspective this can be seem as an inversion in phase space, which leads to a wave front of a gradient of coherence of phase (commonly known as energy). This leads to reflections and reverberation, leading to wave interference and wave fields (commonly known as time). Which again can lead to reverberant wave field, with interference patterns of coherent (standing) waves (commonly known as space).

Rather than writing a book i have now decided to present the findings on a web site; this web site. Because this gives the - very theoretical - g.o.d. equation a very practical application: the quality of the life that we can be living, by our realisation of our participation in creation.

“We are not creatures, but creators”.