So you’re immortal?
Apparently
so.
You er…
don’t seem too happy about it.
No more than
you seem happy about being mortal.
?
Flip sides
of a coin.
Huh?
Mathematically,
one cannot be more than the other, or better.
Mathematically.
Yep.
But if
you’re immortal you get to live forever.
Yes.
Well surely
that has to be better?
You'd imagine
so, but you’re not being mathematical, are you?
How do you
mean?
I don’t
mean. There’s nothing average about what I’m saying. Either you’re able to
think mathematically or you’re not.
Well, apparently,
I’m not – as I personally think immortality vastly superior to death.
They why do
you imagine you were unwise enough to choose the latter.
Choose? It
was forced upon me. Rules of the game.
Yes, this is
the problem trying to conduct a rational conversation with a non-mathematical.
Try to consider the relationship between 1 and 0. Which would you rather be?
1 of course.
Which only
goes to show that there’s no point continuing this discussion.
But surely 1
is better.
Surely?
Yes –
because it’s infinitely more than 0, isn’t it. It’s something or someone. It’s
complete. It can be used with other “ones” to make a bigger whole, a greater
number. It is the building block of infinity.
Oh dear.
You don’t
agree?
Agree?
Well you can’t
deny that we start as one cell which then divides again and again – and sooner
or later we reach the present trillion plus state of affairs – which is another
“one”, is it not, one body, one mind.
You’re
absolutely right.
So that just
goes to show that one is better than zero – life is better than not being
alive.
Er…
You see – my
mathematics is infallible. Now we can move on to something more challenging.
Like where 1
would be if zero was somehow removed.
Huh?
Well, what
happens to one when zero is removed? Any idea?
Nothing
whatsoever. 1 is like a tree or a house. Zero is like an empty space. You can
have a tree or a house standing alone, surrounded by zero, or you can remove
that zero, so to speak, although, in fact, nothing is being removed – we’re
just introducing something in place of nought – and now your tree has another
one growing alongside it, your house has another in close proximity, or even
semi-detached – which is a bit like the cell division model.
So now you
have two trees or two houses, but you have done nothing to explain what happens
if you removed zero from the equation, or from the picture.
Not exactly,
and yet the number 1 is an equation nonetheless.
Huh? How?
Because 1 is
impossible and meaningless, mathematically, without its corresponding zero. You
can’t create something from nothing, can you, but you can separate the two for
a time by inserting yourself between them, for a lifespan. In this way you
create what appears to be a one sided equation, which naturally, you don’t consider
an equation at all. You merely assume that things are things, that 1 is 1,
irrespective of nought, and nothing I say will convince you otherwise.
I don’t see
why.
I know, and
I don’t see how you can see why, because to do so you’d have to realise that
mortality and immortality are no more different than one and nought.
Of course
they’re different.
Precisely –
for you to think otherwise would involve a completely different way of
perceiving things – a completely different way of seeing reality. It would
abrogate your contract with matter in general, provoking a constitutional
crisis or what scientists call a phase transition.
Perceiving
things? Constitutional crisis? Phase transition? I thought you said we were
being mathematical.
I did. We
are.
Then stick
to maths. The maths is really very simple. I can have one carrot without
needing a corresponding zero carrot to hold it in place.
Yes. That’s
how it seems – but can you have one carrot without the notion, or the
understanding, of zero?
I don’t see
why it’s such an important issue.
Yes, I know,
but if you look at the shape of these numbers you might begin to see.
The shape?
What’s that got to do with the price of cheese? The shape is purely
coincidental.
So you have
been led to believe – and yet I’d suggest that it is not.
You think
the shape is important?
I think you
can learn something by looking carefully at the shape of one and zero.
This is
ridiculous. I’ve been looking at these numbers all my life and all I can say is
that they’re easily distinguishable, like all the other numbers, and the
letters too. Were they not we’d have difficulties using them, so really this is
hardly surprising.
You see, no
matter how hard I try to introduce an alternative perspective, your mind
already has things nicely settled and understood – making it impossible to share
any insight with you.
Insight? You’re
not my guru Pi. I just like chatting with you, though God knows why.
Yes. But you
were asking me about immortality, and I was endeavouring to share why
immortality is really no different, no better than mortality.
I don’t see
how you’re going to succeed. It’s like telling me a limitless bank balance is no
better than an account with a single dollar in it.
Ah – but what
if immortality or infinity is closer to being zero than a huge number?
I don’t see
how it can be.
And there’s the
rub.
Yes?
Yes, for you
understand infinity or immortality as a much, much bigger version of your one –
a version so vast it seems to go on forever.
That sounds
fairly sensible. How else would you describe immortality?
I think you
can guess.
No – you can’t
mean zero?
Why not?
Because zero
means no life, no carrot, no tree, no house, not anything. That’s the opposite
of infinity, the opposite of immortality.
So it seems,
until you see the spinning wheel in the numeral, until you embrace infinity existentially.
Existentially?
How can I do that?
Well, you
need to embrace it with more than your mind. If you only use your mind then it’s
merely theoretical or abstract. If, on the other hand, you embrace it
existentially – then you can start to know
what your mind can’t possibly understand.
Know what my
mind can’t understand. I don’t see what you mean.
Of course.
You’re
contradicting yourself.
Am I?
Yes. You
only really know something if you’re able to understand it.
Do you?
Yes. It
should be obvious.
Do you really
know you’re alive?
Yes.
Do you
understand this?
I
Can you
really explain how or why you’re alive, or what it means to be alive?
Not exactly.
But you know
you’re alive. You know you are you – and not me, or not a computer-generated
mind.
I think so.
Think so?
You’re not sure?
I know, I
know – just, I don’t really understand.
Well, there
you go. There’s direct knowledge, direct knowing – and then there’s
understanding – but our understanding might change regularly when new
information comes to light.
Isn’t the
same true of knowledge?
Yes, if you
use the word that way – but I’m using it specifically in terms of knowing –
which is more an experience, an awareness – it’s something fundamental.
Oh.
Precisely –
Oh.
What do you
mean “precisely”? What’s precise about me saying Oh?
Because the
Oh – like the Om or the zero is not merely coincidence. It’s the number of
knowing, the number of not-finite thing or things, not-finite span or period of
time.
You mean my “Oh”
is equivalent to zero?
Yes. That is
correct.
But… this is
so strange.
Yes, I know.
And you
actually said it’s a number.
Correct.
You called
it “the number of knowing”
And “the
number of not-finite thing or things”
Isn’t that
the same as saying “the number of nothing”?
It might be,
or, it might not. It depends how you understand, or, apprehend these words. I
was fairly careful to avoid saying “nothing”, because our rational mind – the mind
responsible for processing and understanding, immediately discounts and ignores
anything described as “nothing”, in the same way it discounts or ignores any
thing described as zero.
With good
reason. For what’s there to gain in considering a zero thing.
Or a zero
point.
Or a zero
point?
Well, I
rather thought you might have figured it out by now.
Er… I’m a
bit slow when it comes to zeros.
Evidently.
But I can give you a clue.
Ok, fire
ahead.
You embrace
it, existentially.
I think you
already said that a minute ago – and it failed to ring any bells.
Because
thinking it achieves nothing.
But how can
I embrace something like zero or infinity – if I can’t think it mentally. It’s
a tautology.
So it might
seem, yet if what I’m saying is true, then there’s an interesting implication
that you might want to consider.
The
implication that existence is both.
Oh well done
– that was sharp of you.
You mean to
say that existence is both zero and one? But if that’s the case, how come I can’t
think zeros?
Fascinating,
isn’t it.
I’m not sure
I’d go that far.
Fascinating
to see the limitations of the rational mind.
Er…
It’s like a
computer which uses ones and zeros in its basic processing – yet can only
consider ones or things within the operating system.
Look – I don’t
have a problem considering zeros, Ok, I just have a problem considering them as
you want me to. I don’t see how they can equate.
Which is
precisely why I advised you to consider them existentially.
But how does
one do that? We are thinking minds, not thinking bodies.
Ah… what
makes you so sure?
Well I for
one tend not to have conversations with my feet or toes.
Me neither,
and yet as long as you rely exclusively on the rational mind to do the thinking
for you, you’ll be trapped in an essentially two-dimensional reality.
Oh – it’s
two dimensional is it now?
Apparently
so, as long as you’re thinking things without reference to zero or nought.
This is just
absurd. We’re getting nowhere. I see no way how I can possibly understand your
illogicality.
Don’t you
mean irrationality?
Yes, I
suppose I do, but it doesn’t alter the fact that I can’t understand it.
Naturally,
unless you’re willing to bite the bullet and consider the nature of things.
The nature
of things? Now you’re making this sound like a philosophy class.
Oh dear – I hope
not.
As I
understand it – you’re of the opinion that things are both positive and not. Is
that right?
Yes – both positive
and nought.
So not and
nought are synonyms?
More or
less.
But if that
were so – we should be able to un-thing things. We should be able to make them
disappear.
Have you
ever tried?
Not really.
It seems like a waste of time when they’re so evidently real.
Well, on the
other side of the river of thoughts you call “mind” there are things which
haven’t yet been mined.
Uh?
Your mind is
a kind of processor which mines things – making them real and tangible here in
3D reality.
Oh God. This
is too much to bear. No – it – is – not!
In other words,
your mind dips into the waters of infinity and extracts things which it’s able
to recognise, which it’s able to discern and perceive, because they correspond
with its current awareness of what matters. In doing so it correlates them with
your own positive mortality.
Uh?
It’s a
correlation. It’s like saying – if I am mortal and living in a finite reality,
then let these things be proof of this, let them matter correspondingly. And
amazingly, they’re happy to oblige.
You mean that
things just jump out of infinity in order to please me?
Yes, in a
manner of speaking, that’s a fair description of what actually happens. Things
oblige because they get to ride on your coattails – they get to experience a
moment of reality that you’re creating – they get to merge with the mind or
body that you are finiting.
Oh dear. That
makes no sense at all. How can you say they “merge” with the mind or body I’m
finiting? My car doesn’t merge with me. Nor my house. Nor the book I’m reading.
I just hold them or use them and then let them go. Besides, they’re still there,
whether I hold them or not.
Yes, yes, I
know – but we’re speaking mathematically, remember, and on the other side of
that river are corresponding things unmined – or no-things.
Oh.
So for every
house, car, or book, there’s a zero which is actually heavier or emptier than
it would have been, had you not extracted by mining the house, car or book from
infinity.
How can
something be heavier or emptier than zero? That’s ridiculous.
I know, and
yet that’s how I have to describe it – it’s a bit tricky putting this into
words – as you can see.
Heavier or
emptier than zero would be minus one, minus two, minus three.
Correct –
except that minus is a mined concept. Minus is no different from plus on the
other side of the river, in infinity. That why I refer to it as zero.
Oh. So it’s
a zero which, from our perspective is the minus x equivalent of any thing we
have here.
Yes.
And what
does that give us.
It should
give us nought – if the two are combined.
But how can
they be – if they’re on opposite sides of the river?
Well, that’s
a good question.
Is there an
answer?
Oh yes,
there’s always an answer, if you’re ready to know it.
Ah – there’s
your tricksy “know” again.
Yes.
So to know
it I have to experience it, existentially.
Yes.
But why?
Because your
very existence is part of the equation, is it not?
Huh?
You’re not
just body and mind, are you. You’re a kind of blockchain ledger – to use the
latest concept – a record of everything you’ve thought, said and done. A
living, breathing, constantly updating experience library – just like the blockchain. So you have to factor yourself into the equation, and only when you do
that do you get the entire picture – only then do you access zero.
Oh.
It sounds
kind of impossible, I know, but the key is wanting it, daring it, being willing
to feel it and experience it. In short, you need to intend it purposely.
And that’s
all it takes?
All? That is
all there is, in fact.
Huh?
Once you
intend to experience things in their entirety, your zero and one come into easy
proximity, conjunction, or alignment. At that point 0=1, it is i am
Oh
At that
point you simply know what is, regardless.
…
At that
point you no longer need to focus on things, for you’re no longer standing on
the edge of the river sifting the sand of time for nuggets of gold, mining
matter from the waters of infinity
…
At that
point you are one with all – and zero is the wheel, the circle, the toroidal
field, without beginning or end – the infinity that is, no less, immortality
when expressed bodily, if you so desire.
So that’s
where you are?
That’s where
we all are, in a sense.
Except most
of us are mortal – stuffing our mind’s pockets with things.
Up to a
point – but in actual fact we are artists and engineers of the blockchain
human-experience work in progress, which is crunching numbers and testing the relationship
between 0 and 1 in every conceivable way, shape and form, just in case we can
find an anomaly, just in case we can find life hidden somewhere in the
seemingly random code.
Life?
Yes. Didn’t
you realise?
?
We’re
searching for life, for the entire universe is a single organism, a single
process that can and does generate life, in spite of immortality, in spite of
matter and things and nought.
Then what is
life?
What do you
imagine it to be?
I don’t
know.
That’s a
good start. Now ask it – the great all that is which you are part of – the mass
of things – the quantum stream – the universe – what is life
What is
life?
Good
What is
life?
Good
What is
life?
Here it
comes
It is i am
Excellent
Coherence
Indeed
0=1
Absolutely
Oh
Mmm