Reality Begins With Consciousness:

A paradigm shift that works

What happens when two creative and internationally renowned experts
Vernon M Neppe MD, PhD, FRSSAf, DFAPA, BN&NP, DSPE
Consciousness Researcher, Physician, Psychiatrist and
Neuroscientist, and Philosopher
who previously developed the model of Vortex N – Dimensionalism
and
Edward R. Close PhD, PE, SFSPE
Physicist, Mathematician and Cosmologist
who previously developed the model of Transcendental Physics

together spend fifty years developing their models and another three years combining their models?
The result might be the most truly remarkable new scientific model to understand reality,
consciousness, extra dimensions, life, order and infinity ever, and a model that is supported by
mathematics and results in a philosophical model which resembles ancient mystical thought.

Join us in this the Electronic Version of this Book in either PDF or EPub (your choice).

Brainvoyage.com (URL: www.brainvoyage.com)

2nd Edition (Revised) 2012.

This E-Book is being produced in a Soft Cover Bound Printed Format as two books
Reality Begins With Consciousness: Part 1: This paradigm shift works and
Reality Begins With Consciousness: Part 2: The science; the theory; the justification.
Reality Begins With Consciousness:
A paradigm shift that works

By Vernon M Neppe and Edward R Close

Brainvoyage.com (URL: www.brainvoyage.com)

4616 25th Avenue NE, #236, Seattle, WA 98105, USA
Cover-page:
Reality Begins with Consciousness: A paradigm shift that works
Authors: Vernon M. Neppe, MD, PhD and Ed R. Close, PhD
ISBN # 1-58412-009-6
ISBNv2013: 978-1-58412-009-4
Brainvoyage.com, Seattle, USA.
Library of Congress cataloguing in publication data #: pending
Copyright © Vernon M Neppe and Edward R Close and Brainvoyage.com
Second Edition (Deluxe Version) liv + 370 pages Deluxe (422 pages total)
Revised 2nd Edition (+379 pages)
(Standard edition li+370 pages = 421 pages; First edition xlviii+358 (408 pages total).
All rights reserved. This book is protected by copyright.
Except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews, no part
of this book may be used, reproduced or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher and the authors.

Electronic Book.
First Edition. Special inscribed limited first edition original Ebook (lauched
preliminarlily November 2011 but with 2012 publishing date; collector’s edition.)
Second Edition launched March 2012.
Deluxe: Unlocked. Inscribed. Standard: Locked. Not inscribed (not collector’s edition).
Second Edition Revised (Deluxe and Standard) September 2012.

PUBLISHER: Brainvoyage Press (URL: www.brainvoyage.com)

4616 25th Avenue NE, #236, Seattle, WA 98105, USA.

BOOK CITATIONS:
Neppe, V.M. and Close, E.R. Reality Begins With Consciousness: A paradigm shift that
works. Seattle, WA: Brainvoyage.com, Brainquest Press. 2012. 2nd Edition.
53 preceding (revised 2Ed 54) +350 body (and 2ed b 401 as size 14 font mainly) + 15
reference pages (400 modified to 429 in revised 2Ed Sept. 2012), 5 then 6 index pages
[e-book] = 423 (then 424 then 481 in 2Ed B.) pages (2Ed. Deluxe); 52 then 53
preceding (Standard 1st Ed) = 422 pages; 1st Ed: 49 preceding, 5 reference pages (400
references), 5 index pages =407 / 436 pages. More information at
www.realitybegins.com and www.brainvoyage.com and VernonNeppe.com
FRONT COVER: Photo by Vernon M. Neppe: Hawaiian Sunset
(Waikaloa, Big Island of Hawaii, November 2008)
FRONT COVER DESIGN: Maria Welbourn.
BACK COVER DESIGN: Maria Welbourn with Vernon Neppe.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b ii

 
 Reality Begins With Consciousness:
A paradigm shift that works
By Vernon M Neppe and Edward R Close
___________
Vernon M Neppe MD, PhD, FRSSAf, DFAPA, BN&NP, DSPE a

with

Edward R. Close PhD, PE, SFSPE (Equally)b

From the Exceptional Creative Achievement Organizationc and

the Pacific Neuropsychiatric Institute, Seattle, WAd e, f, g, h

Second Edition, March 2012 (revised 2b, September 2012).

a
Drs Close and Neppe have worked closely together since July 2009, and in detail since December 2009. Prior to that, they
had independently worked on a paradigm in dimensional biopsychophysics for a combined more than fifty years. Both
have prior public documents on this topic. These two eminent, highly creative, successful, experienced, motivated
pioneers, from different yet complementary scientific research backgrounds, had independently reached similar provisional
conclusions and have now integrated this information into a new, workable, scientific, all-encompassing paradigm of
reality.
b
Dr. Close and Dr. Neppe are equal first authors in this book and its companion. However, one of their names had to
appear first. Dr. Neppe appears first in Reality Begins with Consciousness and Dr. Close appears first in Space, Time and
Consciousness.
c
Vernon Neppe is Executive Director and Distinguished Professor, and Edward R. Close is a Distinguished Fellow of the
Exceptional Creative Achievement Organization (www.5eca.com).
d
Dr. Neppe is Director of the Pacific Neuropsychiatric Institute; Dr. Close is on Faculty (www.pni.org).
e
This Electronic Book is copyrighted. This should not be distributed to others, without the written permission of one of the
authors or the publisher. Each download constitutes one license for one computer or reading device.
f
The new terms in the keywords and in this paper are trademarked by the authors and the concepts were distributed
selectively by electronically notarized unmodifiable Zmail (Zsentry.com) to establish prior claim to these ideas.
g
We are hoping to receive peer feedback prior to publication on this e-book so as to make our preliminary model better.
Thank you for your participation. It is much appreciated.
h
www.pni.org and www.5eca.com; also www.brainvoyage.com (Dr. Neppe’s books).
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b iii

 
 REALITY BEGINS WITH CONSCIOUSNESS:COMMENTS
Prior to publication this book was circulated to readers, peer-reviewers and
referees in twenty-two countries. The great majority were established scientists, leaders
in the area of consciousness research or highly creative individuals. We’ve received
feedback from tens of peer scientists and creative readers during these past seven
months.

Initially, we intended having an Invited Foreword. But there were numerous

individuals we wanted to honor. Instead, we have selected comments from individuals
whom we greatly respect. We have been very gratified by the responses from many
individuals, and publish a small selection here. Given that our model is a metaparadigm
impacting all areas of science, we ensure here that we have comments representing all
pertinent disciplines, namely the Consciousness, Physical, Psychological and Life
Sciences, plus Mathematics. Additionally, our model has a philosophical model.
One challenge was to amplify the ideas and to convert the hundreds of complex
multidisciplinary ideas into a readable scientific book. We targeted the intelligent
scientific community and to creative thinkers. But we also sent this to a small number
of general readers, who were members of certain Internet groups and specifically
requested a copy. We were particularly gratified that even our motivated general
readers could appreciate Reality Begins with Consciousness. Yet, we were not
surprised, because we spent seven months trying to make our very complex and
specialized manuscript more comprehensible, so that interested individuals could
benefit at their level.
In effect, we simplified the book by applying several techniques including author
prefaces that gave a historical perspective, an initial glossary of key terms, a prioritizing
detailed table of contents, and summary perspectives at the outset. We then eased
readers into the book and ensured that some chapters were self-contained allowing
reading of specific interest areas. We added footers for more esoteric areas, and applied
ample headers to guide our readers. We explained important concepts more than once
but in different ways. And we also allowed readers to regard our book as equivalent to
College Course work and to study at their own pace.
We’re gratified that we’ve still been able to maintain all the key cogent and
relevant elements of our paradigm, and that we’ve been able to amplify information,
and clarify areas that initially appeared obscure.

We have divided the comments into two groups and these represent six countries:
• Prominent scientists. We ensure that all the sciences (psychological, physical,
life, and consciousness) and mathematics are represented, plus philosophy and
philosophy of science.
• Intelligent general readers. We again ensure a spectrum is represented.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b iv

 
 Comments of Prominent Scientists
Psychological Sciences
Vernon M. Neppe and Edward R. Close have written what is destined to become a classic in
the literature on shifting paradigms and worldviews. Drawing from a dozen different disciplines, they
have adroitly pointed out the limitations of the Western world's currently accepted model of reality,
have spelled out the unfortunate consequences of this model's hegemony, have proposed a paradigm
that is not only multidimensional but metadimensional, and have supported it with logic, mathematics,
research data, and common sense. The implications that this book has for the betterment of humanity
makes for worthwhile, illuminating and enlightening reading which is practical and transformative.
Stanley Krippner, PhD, San Francisco, CA, USA. Pioneer, Humanistic Psychology and
Consciousness; Saybrook University; extensively published Author and Scientist.

Neurosciences
What an astonishing and prodigious accomplishment! The way the authors communicate their
profound insights both from our usual "bottom-up" experience as well as from the "top-down" higher
realities facilitates engaging readers in this unique and groundbreaking scientific model: We're able
to swim longer in the vast subtle and not-so-subtle cosmic pond—and the references provide
handholds to keep us afloat. I kept flashing on a museum installation that would allow people to have
a "walking around in" experience of climbing through dimensional rifts (in music: ostinati) and
connect all around with vortical interactions. I guess this comes from years of my interpreting to
people the leaps in transformation I see continually emerging in Neurofeedback work: The Neppe-
Close paradigm now provides for a much more coherent way to understand reality. Once introduced,
the actualities of these unifying concepts begin to live. It is quite stunning to observe people speaking
from an "already having changed" perspective…a thrilling journey!
Alan Bachers, PhD, Northampton, MA, USA. Neuroscientist; Director, Neurofeedback Foundation.

Life Sciences
Scientific revolutions require both empirical evidence and related coherent explanatory
frameworks. The encyclopedic book "Reality Begins with Consciousness" leads in providing the
sought after broader scientific unification linking the neurosciences, consciousness, biological,
psychological and the physical sciences with math-based logical philosophy and spirituality. Drs
Neppe and Close provide a missing broad exploratory paradigm for new scientific ideas that can
continue to be researched for many years to come. Whether or not this multidisciplinary model is
ultimately viable, the cogent supportive data should encourage scientists to explore seriously the
underlying ideas; the models presented go further than other volumes.
John Poynton PhD, London, UK. Consciousness Researcher; Biologist; Past President, SPR. Author.

Philosophy of Science
Prof. Vernon Neppe and Dr. Edward Close have prepared a much-needed volume that aims to
integrate our scientific knowledge into a comprehensive natural-law paradigm. Their work leaves no
stone unturned in the quest to re-configure our understanding of science, including those more remote
or fringe areas of science such as parapsychology that only a few of our highly respected and honored
scientists are brave enough to endorse. This new book by Neppe and Close is a paradigm shift that
hails in, if not, beckons for, a kind of scientific overhaul and shift in thinking that Thomas Kuhn spoke
of in his major work "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
Lance Storm PhD, Adelaide, Australia. Consciousness researcher, Author, Journal Editor,
Psychologist, Parapsychologist and Philosopher of Science

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b v

 
Physical Science
This is the book of books. Close and Neppe have succeeded in articulating a unified theory that
explains everything known through human experience and observation, including, not only the data
obtained by the five senses, but also the data that comes through mind and feeling. Former scientific
thought has considered the material universe to be the total universe with consciousness to be the
result of matter. Neppe and Close have shown the reverse. Matter is inseparably linked with
consciousness. They have succeeded in the ultra-complex task of including everything we know
through the material laws of Classical Physics, Quantum Physics, and Relativity, with the non-
material observations gained through psychology, parapsychology, and spiritual vision, into a unified
metaparadigm with consciousness as the foundation of all creation, including the origin of creation,
itself. This is a book you will want to study, absorb, and return to again and again to experience the
thrill of understanding how the billions of bits of the universe all fit together as a unified whole, and
how we are a participatory part of everything. The authors’ many years of labor will be appreciated
for centuries to come.
David Stewart, PhD, Marble Hill, Missouri, USA. Geophysicist, Theologian, and Author

Consciousness Sciences:
I've just completed the perusal of your impressive work. I feel very excited to have sensed myself,
the enthusiasm of discovering so many overlapping fields in our views!
…A work that will change mankind's future.
…For the first time in mankind's history, its real nature is scientifically disclosed at the highest
charismatic academic level!
…Reading your masterpiece, …… be aware of my deepest reverence for your monumental work!
…A seismic shift in understanding the understanding process itself!
…The beginning of the ultimate disclosure about the nature of an all-encompassing reality.
…A monumental work forcing obsolete preconceptions to crumble.
…The 21st Century's revolutionary paradigm shift.
Dr. Adrian Klein, Israel. Dimensional Biopsychophysicist and Consciousness Researcher.
Expert on Theories of Everything, pioneer of the Subquantal Integration Approach;
Major analyst of TDVP and “Reality Begins With Consciousness”.

Philosophy
This authoritative work in consciousness studies will shape philosophical discourse about
mentality and mind. It is a serious and lucid exploration of a most complex topic, suitable for
philosophers and cognitive scientists who seek explanatory models that allow one to reach beyond
methodological boundaries while at the same time adhering to scholarly rigor. Recognizing
consciousness without boundaries and as formative action leads to unexpected conclusions outside
any normative space, while at the same time providing a profound value to the future of humankind.
Neppe and Close have masterfully demonstrated that hope is inside and outside Pandora's box.
Helmut Wautischer, PhD, San Rafael, USA. Philosopher, Consciousness Researcher and Author.
Sonoma State University.

Medical Sciences and Mathematical Physics

I’m still completing this, but your book is impressive. It seems astonishing that you could
combine deep scientific notions with mysticism. I never knew that such work was possible.
Dr. Frank Luger, International (Private) Research Professor, Retired Physician, Mathematical
Physicist, Poet, Author, Psychologist, and Chess Grandmaster.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b vi

 
Multidisciplinary Sciences
Most physical TOEs (theories of everything) fail because they don't explain where the TOE
comes from in the first place -- a creative act of consciousness. Most psychological TOEs fail because
they don't appreciate the very real physical context in which the psyche struggles to explain itself.
Reality Begins with Consciousness (RBC) avoids these mistakes by taking a TOE's promise of
"everything" seriously. This puts RBC in a radical multidisciplinary class by itself, and as a result,
understanding it is nontrivial. This should not be surprising, for unadorned Reality as-it-is is vast and
hyper-complex, and any TOE that hopes to model that Reality must be equally vast and complex. But
for readers who are up to the challenge and are able to stretch their minds in many directions,
tackling RBC is well worth it.
Dean Radin, PhD, Senior Scientist, Institute of Noetic Sciences, Petaluma CA.
Extensively published author, cognitive psychologist, electrical engineer, consciousness researcher.

Comments of General Readers

I couldn't put it down last night: Very few books grab my attention enough to force me
to stay up past my normal bedtime. And this is one of those books.
Russell Rebman, Fort Worth, TX, United States.

I've been reading your book a bit at a time, absorbing it… Quite the complex read, but
fascinating.
Ron Dinelle, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

I can say that if I can understand your information, it is likely that anyone reading it
can… I believe you have reached your goal to "dumb it down" to the level where those of us
who are both linguistically challenged and are not scientists can grasp and comprehend what
you are saying—I believe that the material is just that good…a fine work.
Rob Abbott, Port Orchard, WA, United States.

Wow. I feel like I am back in graduate school while reading through your work! What a
wonderful experience.
Karen Miller, Buffalo, NY, United States

Broad in scope, multidisciplinary in approach, this monumental work is more than food
for thought - it's a feast. If consciousness shapes reality, then you may well adjust your own
after reading this book.
James Hardenbergh, Seattle, WA, United States.

Without proper scientific evidence or reasoning, consciousness has, for years, been
treated as a secondary phenomenon that is somehow derived purely from materialistic origins.
There is actually no scientific proof that this is true. I am glad, therefore, that Vernon Neppe
and Edward Close have taken on this monumental task of addressing this unwarranted bias in
scientific thinking.
Kenneth Chan, Singapore, Singapore. ISPE member and Author.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b vii

 
 DEDICATION
"Every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life are based on the labors of other
men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure
as I have received and am still receiving." Albert Einstein

“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force. We must assume behind this
force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all
matter.” Max Planck

“The notion of existence is one of the primitive concepts with which we must begin as
given. It is the clearest concept we have.” Kurt Gödel 1

“The fear of infinity is a form of myopia that destroys the possibility of seeing the
actual infinite, even though it in its highest form has created and sustains us, and in its
secondary transfinite forms occurs all around us and even inhabits our minds.”
Georg Cantor

An Important Dedication, with great respect, appreciation, inspiration and awe:

To those great creative pioneers who have preceded us:
• Albert Einstein (1879 – 1955, Physicist), whose concepts of relative, relativity
and warping are so critically important.
• Max Planck (1858 –1947, Physicist) who introduced the idea of discreteness at
the smallest level.
• Georg Cantor (1845 –1918, Mathematician), who conceived of the relevance of
the infinite and of the correspondence of sets.
• Kurt Gödel (1906 –1978, Mathematician), who challenged us to realize that the
closed finite reality is insufficient.

You have all allowed us to extend our imaginations and our very finite and limited
thoughts to a new limited but slightly higher level.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b viii

 
Acknowledgments from Dr. Neppe and Dr. Close

We especially wish to thank our personal secretary and special assistant on this
project: Maria Welbourn.

We also gratefully thank Dr. Adrian Klein in Israel for his comprehensive evaluation of
our manuscripts. He gave us significant suggestions and was able to apply his special
expertise in this area of consciousness, dimensionality, space-time physics, and infinity,
to each and every chapter. His expert insights have been invaluable.

Over many years, we have discussed our ideas with several individuals who have given
us valuable feedback and insights. We particularly wish to thank (alphabetically):
Bernard Carr, Jacquelyn Close, Angell De La Sierra, Osher Doctorow, Ed Gerck,
Joyce Hawkes, Brian Josephson*, Eva Lobach, Richard Niejelski (web)*, John C.
Poynton, Dean Radin, Saul-Paul Sirag, John Smythies, David Stewart and Henry Swift.

We are also greatly appreciative to Dr. Neppe’s esteemed colleagues of many years on
the closed Internet scientific groups, PDL, SurvivalNet, SSE and Ultranet as well as
the1000.ning network. The insights of the members of these remarkable groups have
greatly impacted Dr. Neppe’s thinking.

We thank (again alphabetically) the following individuals for their suggestions relating
to the book. These were sometimes short—even a suggestion that provoked change, or
an opinion, or a peripheral insight that allowed one of us to contemplate—and
sometimes involved lengthier comments, suggestions or ideas. In these instances, the
feedback did not reflect on dissonance or consonance of their views with ours, but in
some way, they impacted on this book, sometimes indirectly:
Rob Abbott, Alan Bachers*, David Bolnick, Neil Boyd, Vladimir Brandin, Damien
Broderick*i, Kenneth Chan, Gary Cohen, Richard Dickison, Ron Dinelle, York Dobyns,
Peter Fenwick, Neil Grossman, Jim Hardenbergh, Jan E.F. Kaan, Charna Klein, Stan
Krippner, Vic Liebmann, Andrew Lowrey, Frank Luger, Robert McKnight, Miguel
Mendoza and the Endnote Bibilographic Tech Support team**, Karen Miller, Mel
Morse, Jonathan Neppe, Lis Neppe, Clifford Oliver, Serge Patlavskiy, Russell Rebman,
Stanislav Riha, Jason Schneier, Gerald Schroeder, Jim Seltzer, James Spottiswoode,
Stephan Schwartz, Lance Storm, Amos Szpiro, Stan Tenen*, Michael Tymn, Ted
Vollers*, Tyler Vega (web), Don Watson, Helmut Wautischer, Dennis A. Wright and
Harry Zeitlin.

i
* Second edition.; ** Second Revision edition B addition August 2012
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b ix

 
 The authors have specially inscribed this electronic
book for you.
To our special readership community.
We greatly appreciate the relevance of the suggestions we’ve received from colleagues
who carefully reviewed the earlier versions of this book. They allowed our model to be
better.
This is our opportunity to honor them, and also to thank our new readers.
We present this special gift to all our readers.
This is a limited inscription first edition of what may be the first inscribed electronic
book.j
We trust you will benefit from these ideas, and integrate them into your thinking.
Please enjoy the enlightenment and we hope you will feel uplifted.
May your quest for greater understanding of our complex world come to fruition.
Challenge, stimulation, and convergence of perspectives are relevant.
So is divergent opinion, thought and re-evaluation of the relationship of consciousness,
the infinite, multiple dimensions, life, order and a whole new model for reality.
This book may be that latent vehicle that facilitates your thoughts.
Presented with our very best wishes and most cordial of greetings.

j
We understand that a signed message is an original application for an electronic book and document. As a consequence,
this is protected by copyright ©, trademark ™ and patent pending (Brainvoyage.com) (∑µ: an electronic message to
readers in EBooks). The signatures are special but not our usual ones for security reasons.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b x

 
 Other Books By The Authors (* indicates www.brainvoyage.com
for orders)
Books by Dr. Vernon Neppe include:
• Neppe VM. The Psychology of Déjà Vu: Have I Been Here Before?
Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. 1983. *
• Neppe VM. Innovative Psychopharmacotherapy. New York: Raven Press.
1990. (Revision of first edition 1989)*
• Neppe VM. Cry the Beloved Mind: A Voyage of Hope. Seattle: Brainquest Press
DBA Brainvoyage.com (with Peanut Butter Publ. / Elton-Wolf Publishing) 1999
(also electronic version). *
• Neppe VM. Déjà Vu Revisited. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com. 2006. E-Book.*
• Neppe VM, (Ed.), Funkhouser, A. T. (Sub Ed): Déjà Vu: A Second Look. Seattle:
Brainvoyage.com. 2006. E-Book. *
• Neppe, VM. Déjà Vu: Glossary and Library. Brainvoyage.com, Seattle. 2006.*
• Neppe VM. How Attorneys Can Best Utilize Their Medical Expert Consultant:
A Medical Expert’s Perspective. Brainvoyage.com, Seattle. 2008. Second
edition.*
• Neppe VM Tomorrow the Earthquake: Cry the beloved hope.
Brainvoyage.com, Seattle. 2001.
• Neppe VM Quakes. Brainvoyage.com. 2002. Revisions 2003. 2004. 2005.*

All of these books or EBooks are available at www.brainvoyage.com.

Please watch the brainvoyage site for upcoming books on this topic.

Books by Dr. Edward Close include:

• Close, E.R. Infinite Continuity: A Theory Integrating Relativity and Quantum
Physics. Paradigm Press, Los Angeles, 1990 (Currently out of print.)
• Close, E.R. The Book of Atma. Libra Publishers, New York, 1977.
• Close, E.R. Transcendental Physics, iUniverse, Lincoln, NE, 2000.
• Close, E.R. Big Creek, History, Folklore and Trail Guide, Paradigm Press, 2003.
• Close, E.R. and Close, J.A. Nature’s Mold Rx, The Non-Toxic Solution to Toxic
Mold, EJC Publications, Jackson, MO, 2007.
• Close, E.R. and Close, J.A. Ancient Wisdom Modern Science, Sound Concepts,
American Fork, UT, 2010.

See www.tphysics.com

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xi

 
STAND BY FOR FORTHCOMING PUBLICATIONS ON THIS:

Books and publications on this topic that are anticipated or in press.

Companion to Reality Begins with Consciousness due mid 2013.
Close, ER, Neppe VM, Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad. Seattle:
Brainvoyage.com. 2013 In press.

Because of the large amount of information, stand by too for the third book in this series,
anticipated late 2013 or 2014 by Drs Neppe and Close or Dr Close and Dr Neppe
(provisional title).
Beyond Einstein: How Mathematics and Physics support the revolutionary Neppe-Close
model.

Hard copy printed books on this topic.

Two other hard copy books are anticipated in late 2012 or early 2013 because of the
requests for these books. These effectively divide this book Reality Begins with
Consciousness into two into
Reality Begins With Consciousness: Part 1: This Paradigm Shift Works.
Reality Begins With Consciousness: Part 2: From Science to Understanding.

Electronic series on tablet media:

Also to become available during late 2012 and 2013 are a series of electronic books
available for use on Kindle, I-Pad, Nook or other tablet media. These relate to 2012
publications by the two scientists Drs Close and Neppe, on this topic in the Dynamic
Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement. Again, this closely correlates with the book
Reality Begins With Consciousness.

Books for the General Reader.

The authors recognized the need to write scientific books for trained professionals for peer
review and to promote scientific advances could occur. Now that this has been achieved,
Drs Neppe and Close are pleased to announce that they are devoting 2013 to a series of
books for the General Reader. We want these to be comprehensible to the layperson yet
educate and fascinate.
All of these will be announced on one or more of the websites
www.brainvoyage.com,
www.realitybegins.com, and
www.VernonNeppe.com.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xii

 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRELIMINARY APPENDICES. i-xlix
• Coverpages i
• Title Page ii
• Comments on “Reality Begins with Consciousness” iv
o Comments of prominent scientists v
o Comments of general readers vii
• Dedication viii
• Acknowledgements ix
• The authors have specially inscribed this electronic book x
• Other books by the authors xi
• Table of contents xiiii
• Author’s Biography Vernon M. Neppe xxxv
• Author’s Biography Edward R. Close xxxvi
• Preface Vernon M Neppe xxxvii
• Preface Edward R Close xlii
• To you, the reader: Our grateful thanks xlv
• Perspective to the Second Edition xlvii
• Key Words li
• Brief glossary of key terms liii
• Choose your readership style lv

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xiii

 
 SECTION A: THE FUNDAMENTAL PERSPECTIVE.

Chapter 1: Overview perspective: 1

1. Priorities
2. The ten point brief summary of TDVP
3. Paradigms, Metaparadigms and Theories of Everything and TDVP
4. The four-sentence axiomatic metaparadigm summary
5. One point (heavy) summary of the TDVP model
6. And the easy one sentence axiom

Chapter 2: The hundred point perspective of TDVP: 10

The limitations of our current paradigm for reality: #1-12
Requirements of a TOE and paradigm shift: #13–24
TDVP as a new paradigm: #25-39
Key terminology in TDVP: #40-50
Applications, uses and understanding TDVP: #51-58
Concepts addressed by TDVP: #59-81
How TDVP differs from all other TOEs: # 82-89
Our Current Perception of TDVP: #90-99
Summary: #100
__________________________________________

SECTION B: THE LIMITS OF WHAT EXISTS

Chapter 3: The Dilemma: 34

The Standard Model
Limitations of the Standard Model
Current status of science
The historical approach to science
Why our model is different
The Metaparadigm

Chapter 4: What The Standard Model Lacks. Some Questions to Resolve: 41

Let us imagine
Entanglement
Psi
Lower dimensional incompleteness and higher dimensional extrapolation
Life
Evolution
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xiv

 
Scientific Subatomic Model

Chapter 5: Falsifiability of Current Science: 48

Popperian Falsifiability
Beyond Popper
Scientific Model of Feasibility and Falsifiability: LFAF Model
Feasibility: What it does not mean

Chapter 6: The Need for a New Paradigm: 54

Requirements
Linguistic Needs
LFAF and Consciousness
A perspective approach to developing a metaparadigm
o The metaparadigmatic approach
o Proofs
o Methodology and assessing significance
o Heuristic scientific approach
o Paradigms, axioms and eventually metaparadigms
Our new paradigm: an integrative approach
o Unlearning what we have learnt
o Beyond reductionism
o Percepts and concepts are not actual reality
o Calculus of distinctions
o Re-uniting space, time and consciousness
____________________________________________________

SECTION C: KEYS TO A NEW PARADIGM FOR REALITY

Chapter 7: Our Fundamental Model: 60

Towards a logic for the metaparadigm of TDVP
1. Historical background to TDVP
2. The necessity for the infinite
3. Ordropy
4. Ordropy and the infinite
5. Ordropy and life
6. Infinity and interfacing with the finite
7. STC Tethering
8. Infinite continuity and finite quantal discreteness
9. Top-down tethering
10. Quanta and discrete meaning
11. Non-locality in the finite; metacist in the infinite
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xv

 
Table 1: New terminology applied to essence
12. Infinite space and time
13. Philosophy
14. Postulates and relativity
15. Essentials
16. Extensions
17. The proposed model
Dimensional elements in the TDVP model
Triadic CST (or SCT) and indivension

Chapter 8: Reality and Subjectivity: 69

Monist or pluralist?
Unified monism and tethering
Reality and individual-units
Finite bottoms-up tethering
Transfinite top-down tethering
Tethering and vortical indivension
Actual reality is relative, experiential common reality
The misnomer of “actual”
Commonality and interactions
The inanimate and the fallen tree in the empty forest
Unified monism revisited
Relative reality
Conscious reality closed and open
The gesher and dynamic freedom of choice: Real meaning in our lives
The “higher” dimensions and essence
Top-down and Bottoms-up

Chapter 9: The C-, S- and T- Substrates: 75

Substrates
Dimensions
o Dimensions as we know them
o Dimensions mathematically
o Euclidean dimensions and non-Euclidean space
o Dimensionometry
o Metric
o Parangular
o Cartesian co-ordinate
o Ordinal, interval and ratio
o Dimensionality notation
o Building dimensions
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xvi

 
 o Hierarchy of infinite dimensions and of infinities
Metadimensionality
o Dimensions, substrates, and nesting
o Dimensions of content and extent revisited in practice
o Dimensional variation and indivension
o Vortices in metadimensionality
Domains and subdomains
o Distinctions
Three elements
o Variables
o Dimensions and distinctions
o Close’s Calculus Distinctions (C of D)
o Distinctions in physics
o Distinctions and the Origin Event

Chapter 10: Consciousness and the New Paradigm: 85

Consciousness
Table 2a: Subdivisions of C-substrate
o C-substrate and consciousness
o Terminology in consciousness
o Neurology
o Psychology
o Consciousness research
o Physics of consciousness
o Philosophy
o Paradigmatic Consciousness
Table 2b: Neppe’s Proposed ASC Terminology Classification
o Specialist terminology for Consciousness
o Nervous system: Neurological consciousness: N-consciousness
o Psychology and social sciences: E-consciousness
o Consciousness sciences: C-consciousness
o Quantum consciousness: Q-consciousness
o Mystical consciousness: M-consciousness
o Paradigmatic sciences
o Paradigmatic consciousness
o Density in C-substrate
C-substrate
o Neurological Consciousness: N-Consciousness
o E-Consciousness
o Metaconsciousness
o Meaningfulness (or meaningful apprehension and influence)
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xvii

 
Chapter 11: Metadimensions and the C-substrate: 96
C-substrate perspective
o Infinite expression
o Finite expression
o Triadic elements
o Metaconsciousness and metadimensionality
The CST Model (C-, S-, T- substrates)
o Justification of the C-substrate
o Higher dimensional consciousness
ASCs: Altered states of consciousness
Higher finite dimensions
Infinite STC
o Conscious distinctions

Chapter 12: Infinity and the finite: The mathematics and the logic: 101
Substrates, Dimensions and Infinity
Table 3: The infinite versus the finite
TDVP, mathematics and consciousness
Ordropy and thermodynamics
What kind of infinity?
o Infinity of infinities in mysticism
Mathematics, infinity and TOEs
Infinity
o Countable infinity versus continuous infinity
Rules of the finite and infinite
o The infinite and the laws of nature
o Supernatural
o Coincidence and meaningful coincidence
o Psi
o Metadimensionality, psi, and vortices
o Laws of nature and “miracles”
o Infinite intent
o Free-will
Infinity from the top-down
o The top-down approach
o Discrete and continuous
Metaphenomena in the infinite and survival
o Terminology
o Communication
Mathematics
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xviii

 
 o Proofs
o Relativity of zero and infinity
o Dimensional zero
o Singularity
o Pythagorean elements in space
o Applying radians instead
o Multidimensional scaling representations
Dimensional representation
o Multidimensional scaling representations
o Applying more than 3 dimensions
o Space and time
o Time as a necessary extra dimension
o More spatial dimensions
o Creative thought and the Euclidean dichotomy
o Euclidean limitations of 3D of time
o The outside in or top-down approach again
Unification of the C-substrate model by dimensions

Chapter 13: Life, Ordropy, Essence and the Infinite: 116

Infinite continuity
o Infinite Essence
o Finite Essence
o The boundless ocean and the land
Life
o Life and consciousness
o Metalife, polife and the infinite, and physical life
o Extent, content and essence
o Animate ordropy
Ordropy and entropy, animate and inanimate
o Ordropy and entropy
o Entropy basis
o Animate essence and artificial intelligence
o Infinite essence
o Content and process
Projecting concepts of essence
o Essence, Primary Receptor and the concept of a deity
o Quantal uncertainty and the theological model
o Chaos theory

Chapter 14: The infinite-finite boundary: 123

Permeable bidirectional filter
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xix

 
The extreme: The infinity of the infinities
Gesher and bridges
o The metaphorical link
o Which infinity is the Gesher to?
o Gesher and dimensions
o Gesher and different consciousness elements
o Gesher and the brain
The boundary and communication
Continuity and discrete: Metareality and nonlocal reality
Infinity, holograms and the brain
Interpreting data
Boundary and the brain

SECTION D: THE KEY ELEMENTS TO TDVP

Chapter 15: Theoretical Models: 130

The Philosophy of Science model: A New But Necessary Synthesis
LFAF
Our usual reality
The contribution of the psychological approach and metadimensionality
Clinically relevant approaches and when statistics are less meaningful: Applying the
medical model
o Double blind statistics versus clinically meaningful non-blind evaluations
o The medical evaluation paradigm
o Correlations in medicine move to causality
o The Neppe bidirectional (multidirectional) approaches in Medicine and
Phenomenology
The Gould Magisterial approach
Applications of the statistical, common reality, medical and psychological models to
TOEs
o The application of information to TOEs
TDVP: The criteria of scientific correctness and the problem of intersubjectivity
Gödel’s theorem: the finite and the infinite in TDVP

Chapter 16: The Key Axioms: 140

Finite related axioms
1. Axiom of finite unification
2. Axiom of triadic inseparability
3. Axiom of CST tethering
4. Axiom of discrete quantal expression
5. Axiom of vortical ubiquity
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xx

 
 6. Axiom of nervous system endpoint
7. Axiom of subjectivity
Infinite axioms
8. Axiom of infinite origin
9. Axiom of holism in space-time infinity
10. Axiom of living infinite reality
11. Axiom of ordropic reality
12. Axiom of metaconscious infinity
13. Axiom of information
14. Axiom of pervasive, essential infinity
Linked finite-infinite axioms
15. Axiom of communication relative infinity
16. Axiom of fluctuating dimensional-distinctions
17. Axiom of continuous infinity linked with discrete finity
18. Axiom of artificiality
19. Axiom of boundaries
20. Axiom of metaconscious dimensional-distinctions
21. Axiom of relativity
22. Axiom of tethered origin (ATO)
The four sentence axiomatic metaparadigm summary

Chapter 17: Definitions: Reality, dimensions and distinctions: 148

Definition I: Reality
o Perceptual reality
o Conceptual reality
o Common (or actualized) reality
Definition II: Dimensions
o Dimensionometry
o Metric
o Cartesian Co-ordinate
Definition III: Distinction
1. Three elements (abbreviated DFC)
2. Elements of distinction
3. Variables of distinction
4. Mass
5. Energy
o Reality distinctions
o Dimensions can be conceptualized as distinctions
o Distinctions in physics
o Distinctions and the Origin Event

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxi

 
Chapter 18: Specialized Conceptual Definitions: 153

Definition IV: The Primary Receptor

Definition V: Existence
Definition VI: Consciousness
o Metaconsciousness
o Meaningfulness
o Consciousness
Definition VII: Ordropy
Definition VIII: Life
Definition IX: Variables
Definition X: Qubit
Definition XI: Chronit
Definition XII: Conscit
Definition XIII: Qualit
Definition XIV: Vortex
Definition XV: Relative non-locality
Definition XVI: Substrate
o Space
o Time
o S-substrate
o T-substrate
Definition XVII: C-substrate
Definition XVIII: Domains
o Subdomain
Definition XIX: Realm
Definition XX: Dimensionometry
Definition XXI: Prime-essence
Definition XXII: CST metric
Definition XXIII: Manifold
Definition XXIV: Triads
Definition XXV: Group
1. Axiom
2. Postulate
3. Theorem
4. Corollary
5. Lemma
6. Principle
7. Paradigm
Definition group XXVI: Indivension cluster
1. Indivension
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxii

 
2. Relative actualization
3. Tethering
4. Relative tethering
5. Individual-unit
6. Dimensional fabric
7. Ethicospirituobiopsychofamiliosociocultural systems
8. State specific
9. Trait dependent
10. Altered states of consciousness (ASC)

SECTION E: THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF TDVP

Chapter 19: Rationale for the Dimensions Beyond 3S-1t: 163

Historical Base for the Existence of Dimensions Beyond 3S-1t
o Minkowski
o Einstein
o Newton
o Where is the involvement of consciousness?
o Dimensional Extrapolation
Statistical Basis or Justifying a Paradigmatic Shift
o Special Relativity
o Quantum Physics
o Consciousness Research

Chapter 20: Consciousness in the Brain: 167

The need for proper controls
Information versus consciousness and the brain
Meaning in C-substrate
Is psi always on call?
Recognizing psi: The difficulties
Ego-boundary distortions and psychopathologies
Future research on the and special skills
Brain epiphenomena
Current limited explanations for consciousness
Sorting out confounders
Solutions?

Chapter 21: Towards the New Paradigm: LFAF and TDVP Model: 172
TDVP Motivation
TDVP and TOE
TDVP: What is it?
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxiii

 
Chapter 22: Statistical Basis of Consciousness Research: 175
Perspective
A perspective to such overwhelming data and to meta-analysis
The nine six sigma protocols in parapsychology
Psi
Consciousness research and psi
Important principles in psi and consciousness: A primer
o Decline effect
o Attitudes matter
o Replication difficulty
o Repeatability
o Rare events
o Large sample sizes needed
o Frequentist statistics
o Leakage
o Blind protocols
o Meta-analyses
o File drawers
Psi in the general population

Chapter 23: Six Sigma Statistical Data in Consciousness Research: 181

Six sigma research: Nine types
Ganzfeld
Global consciousness project (GCP)
Remote viewing
Random number generators (RNGs)
Presentiment
BEM protocol
Less usual six sigma protocols
o Staring protocols
o Survival after bodily death
o Precognition and six sigma data
o Statistical combinations and independence

Chapter 24: Applying TDVP to the Data on Psi: 192

Perspective on the consciousness statistical protocols
Bayesian Statistics
Speculative application to a consciousness-dimensionality model, specifically TDVP
A model of psi applying TDVP
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxiv

 
A new model of psi: applying specifically vortical indivension interfaces of TDVP
o Connectedness
o Rarity
o Psi conducive and repulsive phenomena
o Improbability of the superpsi hypothesis
o Learnt skills
o Decline effect
o Apprehension and influence
o Psychoneurological influences

Chapter 25: Psi and Entanglement: 202

Psi and its role
o Entanglement
o Psi and rarity
o Entanglement and psi: Are they the same?
o Rarity of psi and language
o What about psi below awareness?
o Psi in everyday life
o Psi beyond 3S-1t
o Psi and vortical indivension
Entanglement and quantum correlations
o A complex re-think about nonlocality and psi
o Bell, Copenhagen and beyond
o What allows entanglement?
o The role of precognition
o The role of time
o Revisiting nonlocality
o Is entanglement “observable”?
o Sifting through the entangled complexity
o Filters, signals and psi
o Leggett or Einstein?

Chapter 26: Time and Free-will: 210

Time multidimensionality
Linear time
Absence of choice
Estimation of the future
Time seriality and infinite regress
Dunne and multidimensionality
o Infinite regress in the TDVP context
Free-will implies three finite time dimensions
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxv

 
Clock reality and ordinal time
Time and consciousness and STC
Time, Minkowski, quaternions and imaginary numbers
Are there other motivations for three-dimensional time?
o Physics
o Consciousness
o Psi
o Archetypes of actual time?
o Thought experiment
o Relativity
o Origins
o Logic
Time density
Parallel dimensions and universes and the use of parangular
What if we could appreciate 3T and therefore, 3S-3T?

Chapter 27: The Mathematics of Time and Consciousness: 219

Mathematics is needed for paradigm shifts
Quaternions historically
Multidimensionality and quaternions
S and T-substrates and mathematics of quaternions
Dimensional Extrapolation and the STC substrate
The Relativity of dimensional scales
Quaternions- the STC mathematical link
STC and NC re-translated into mathematics
C-substrate, STC and quaternions: the link
Quaternions and C-substrate
Consciousness and complex numbers
3S-1t or 3S-1t-1c as our basic physical experience
Support for 3 dimensions of time and extensions: Some complex speculations
Conceiving of Euclidean reality in 3S-1t
________________________________________
SECTION F: THE THEORY BEHIND TDVP

Chapter 28: Axioms that are Closely Related: 227

The subparadigmatic axioms
1. Postulate axiom of STC dimensions
2. Axiom of STC Domains
3. Axiom of Relative Zero
4. Axiom of Potential Life
5. Axiom of Physical Life
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxvi

 
6. Axiom of interfacing of extent and content
Subsidiary, but closely related axioms: Linked infinite/finite
7. Axiom of simultaneous existence
8. Axiom of unified existence
9. Axiom of holistic existence
Relevant but somewhat speculative are the seven axioms of infinite-finite boundary
communications
10. Axiom of distinction existence
11. Axiom of distinctions
12. Axiom of permeability
13. Axiom of protection
14. Axiom of communication ease
15. Axiom of communication complexity
16. Axiom of top-down communication
Infinite
17. Axiom of metaconsciousness qualities
Finite
18. Axiom of individual-units
19. Axiom of metaconscious state and trait
20. Axiom of physical reduction valves
21. Axiom of abstracted C-substrate dimensionality
22. Axiom of three dimensional manifestation
23. Axiom of forces and dimensional increase
24. Axiom of holistic continuity, corollary to the axiom of origin
25. Axiom of mathematical dimensional reality
26. Axiom of fundamental three dimensional space
27. Axiom of fundamental multidimensional time
28. Axiom of consciousness

Chapter 29: Quantum Entanglement: A Brief Perspective: 234

What is it?
Violating Bell’s inequality
The entanglement paradox
STC inseparability and entanglement
o Relative inseparability
o Resolution of the dimensional fluctuation dilemma and vortical and 3-D
model
o Differing Metadimensionality: Hyperspace and strings versus TDVP

Chapter 30: Indivension: A Necessary New Concept: 239

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxvii

 
Counting dimensions
o How many dimensions are appropriate using the TDVP model?
o But what do we regard as a dimension in the C-substrate?
o There are not a static number of dimensions
Entanglement and TDVP
o Vortices and spin, indivension and tethering
o Spin
o Indivension and vortices
o Charge, dimensions and forces
o Energies and forces
o Warping of dimensions

Chapter 31: Individuals and Society: A Unification of Different Consciousness

Mechanisms: 245
States of consciousness and dimensionality
o Altered states of consciousness and higher dimensions of consciousness
o A mechanism for acquisition of psi
Revisiting Tethering: Closed or open? Finite or infinite?
o Why tethering may be important in metadimensional consciousness
o Different amounts of tethering
o Different dimensions of tethering
o Relative tethering
o The finite is not always closed; the infinite is not always open
o Individual-units and systems theory
Perception as individual-units: The role of the social sciences
o The individual and the individual-unit
o Application in extended social science systems theory
o Psychofamiliosociocultural model: idiosyncratic percepts or concepts
o The “multifaceted” multiple systems approach to metadimensionality
o The common “multifaceted” systems approach to individual units
o Indivension, Vortices, and Systems Theory
o Indivension revisited in an individual unit systems context
o Vortical metadimensional realities
o The metalevel of individual-unit vortical indivension
o Top-down versus bottoms-up revisited
o Unified systems theory and compound words
o Multidimensional”, multifaceted common individual-unit reality
o States and traits and the individual-unit
o Calculus of distinctions applied
o Materialism or Metadimensionality? Two models
o The key importance of tethering for dimensions, C-substrate, and survival
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxviii

 
Chapter 32: Fluctuating Dimensions: 253
Fluctuations
Vortical indivension
Consciousness transfer
Meaning and random fluctuations
State
Accessing the metaconsciousness
Metaconsciousness and fluctuations
Traits
Quality and quantity
No man is an island entire of itself
The brain and 3S-1t

Chapter 33: The Brain, Physiology and its “Consciousness”: 256

Brain interaction
The Bergsonian filter
Windows into metaconsciousness
The temporal lobe
Unconscious bodily metaconsciousness?
Differentiating the brain consciousness or unconsciousness from metaconsciousness
Consciousness and information
___________________
SECTION G: THE MODELS BEHIND TDVP

Chapter 34: Calculus of Distinctions: 261

1. The axioms of finite-infinite interaction
2. Self versus not-self
Table 4: Distinctions and Dimensions
3. Density
4. Distinctions of intent
5. Calculus of distinctions and set theory

Chapter 35: Theorems: 267

1. The theorem of (extra) dimensional extrapolation
2. Theorem of lower dimensional discontinuity (or incompleteness)
3. Theorem of discontinuity
4. Theorem of N-dimensional manifold
5. Theorem (Principle) of tridimensional warping of reality
o Bending
o Warping
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxix

 
 o Distortion
6. The theorem of parallel N-1 realities and further N-D realities
7. Principle of vortices being the ubiquitous universal shape
o Circle
o Pi
8. Lemma of dimensional falsification impossibility
9. Lemma of lower dimensional indeterminate feasibility assessment
10. Lemma of open ordropic systems
11. Pythagorean theorem (PT) extension to 3 dimensions and applicability beyond
12. The theorem of metadimensionality: non-integers, imaginary or complex numbers
13. Theorem of pervasive multi-level tridimensional distinctions

Chapter 36: Postulates and Principles: 273

1. The postulate of three fold quark combinations
2. Principle of dimensionometric explanation of forces acting at a distance
3. Principle of Non-Euclidean dimensional representation approximated through
4. Euclidean substrates (space, time, C-substrate)
5. Principle of Non-Euclidean space-time continua
6. Corollary of Pythagoras’ theorem being only true for Euclidean spaces
7. Postulate of Indivension Tethering
8. The Postulate of TOEs requiring infinite reality
9. Rare Event Theory Postulate
10. Rare Events are Linked to Interfacing Vortices, Vectors, Scalars, and Tensors
Postulate
11. Postulate of at least 9 dimensions
12. Postulate of dimensional representation is based on the fundamental forces of nature
13. Corollary of Dimensional Warping
14. Corollary of double warping distortions
15. Corollary of Euclidean/ Non-Euclidean experience
16. Postulate of Non-Euclidian spaces or domains are conceptual and not actual
17. Postulate of perceived different dimensionalities
18. Postulate of worlds with additional dimensions
19. Postulate of C-substrate warping additional dimensions
20. Corollary of Postulate of C-substrate warping higher dimensions
21. Postulate of initial symmetry then asymmetry
22. Postulate of distinction singularity
23. Postulate of the first distinctions
24. Postulate of infinite qualits in 3S-1t
25. Principle of infinite coexistence
26. Principle of different experience
27. The Principle of Relative Dimensionality
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxx

 
28. Postulate of perceptual consciousness and warping

Chapter 37: Major Mathematical and Logical Adaptations: 280

Mathematical models used in TDVP
The key mathematical models
o Pythagorean theorem
o Close’s calculus of distinctions with dimensions of extent, content and
intent applied to STC, dissimilarities and across dimensions
o Fermat’s last theorem with 3-d or greater space
The next level of mathematical applications
o Doctorow’s Rare Event Theory
o Einsteinian general relativity
o Minkowski space
o Theorem of dimensional extrapolation and lemma of dimensional
incompleteness
o Gödel’s incompleteness theorem in finite closed reality
o Cantor’s set theory
o Spencer Brown’s laws of form
o Cantor’s infinite of the infinite
o Euclidean applications in 3-D space or below
o Non-Euclidean and Gaussian mathematics
o Extension of Popperian falsifiability (LFAF)
Further mathematical applications
o Alfred Evert’s mathematical vortices.
o Penrose’s spinors
o Riemann N-Dimensional manifolds
o Euclidean Newtonian versus non-Euclidean
o Gauss and Riemann’s multidimensional manifold
o Bell’s inequality theorem
o Real numbers (space), imaginary numbers (time) and complex numbers
(C-substrate)
Major Physicist Mathematical Applications
__________________

SECTION H: THE METAPARADIGM

Chapter 38: Philosophical Basis of TDVP: 282

Monism and dualism: a short perspective
Unified monism as part of the TDVP model: The philosophical basis of TDVP
Clarifying monism and dualism in its modern context

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxi

 
Chapter 39: The Philosophical Perspective of Meaning and Consciousness: 289
Primary consciousness
o Cosmological argument
o The critiques of the cosmological argument
o Teleological argument
o Ontological argument
A new explanation; Our Proposed Infinity Model of the Axiom of Origin.
The TDVP Position
TDVP and these models
The strong anthropic principle, fundamental constants, ordropy and TDVP
o Revisiting the Anthropic Principle
o Does TDVP support the fundamental constants?
o Physical life pre-requisites
Ordropy, Expanding Universe and the Big Bang
o Pyramids of complexity and yet stability
o Higher Organization Entropy
o Which one is the epiphenomenon?
o A terminological aside on consciousness concepts
Philosophy and Meaning
o Degrees of meaning
o More than just “panpsychism”
o Consciousness not information at the finite beginning
Philosophy, purpose and the infinite
o Our infinite reality choices
o Our own idiosyncratic reality? The ultimate speculation
o Approaching solipsism through the infinite
o Individual traces in infinite reality
o Rejecting solipsism
o Rejecting Panpsychism
o Meaning and purpose

Chapter 40: Perspective: Distinguishing TDVP Versus Other TOEs: 307

Chapter 41. Tabulation of Relevant Theories of Everything: 310

Criteria for consciousness or dimensional TOEs or related models
o Historical perspective
o Methodology and selection criteria
o Applying universal constructs
o Specific criteria; The example of the triadic element
o Universality of certain results
o Applying Table 5
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxii

 
 o The most complete TOE by a landslide
o Using a level playing field
o Understanding the data
o Requirements of a real TOE and metaparadigm
o Does it work?
The uniqueness of TDVP
Table 5. Comparison of Paradigms for Reality. General (/16); Specific (/11); Special
(/12) (Total /39).
1. Legend
2. Specific: Almost unique to TDVP
3. Special criteria based on feedback
4. Models

Chapter 42: The Earlier Close and Neppe Theories of Everything: 323
Current Close and Neppe (Neppe and Close): Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP)
Neppe: Vortex N-Dimensional Paradigm (VNDP)
Close: Transcendental Physics

Chapter 43: Contributions of Previous TOEs or Related Models: 327

Sheldrake’s Formative Causation
Carr: Transcendental Field Theory
TDVP: A metalevel higher than Field Theories
Smythies: Theory Of Material Dualism
Klein and Boyd: Subquantum Integration Approach
Evert and his Typology of Aether-Motion-Pattern
String theory and dimensionalities
Table: 6: Perspectives of String Theories
Hawking: Many-worlds Interpretation and dimensionalities
Langan: Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe (CTMU)
Laszlo The Akashic Field TOE
Lanza and Biocentrism
Laszlo and Lanza on evolution and reality
Campbell: “Big TOE”
Goswami: Quantum Activism
Wilber: TOE Kosmos
Sirag: Consciousness and Hyperspace.
Kabbalic mystical model and Vedic tradition
Applying the highest dimensions and the mysticism to the C-substrate
De La Sierra: Neurophilosophy of Consciousness
Whiteman: Philosophy of Space and Time
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxiii

 
Gould: Nonoverlapping Magisteria (NOMA)
Watson: Theory of Enformed Systems (TES)
Hoffman: Conscious Realism and Multi-user Interface theory
Leibniz: Topological space, totalities and monads
Bohm: Implicate and explicate order (IOE)

Chapter 44: TDVP: A Unified Paradigm Shift: 358

The paradigm shift
Revisiting a key area: Consciousness
The process of indivension; the content of fluctuating vortices
The unified basis
The ultimate unification

Chapter 45: How TDVP Explains the Previously Unexplained: Answers: 363
o Entanglement
o Psi
o Lower dimensional incompleteness
o Evolution
o Life
o The Standard Physics Quantum Mechanics Model has limitations.
The subatomic particles and the current paradigm. Can they now be explained?
Speculations
Wave Particle Duality or Wave Particle Meaning? Other areas to test.
o Preliminary approaches to testing the TDVP hypothesis
Already existing pertinent data
Practical Separation of the Levels of Hypotheses.
Mathematicologic approach to hypothesis testing for TDVP

Chapter 46: Is TDVP Truly a Metaparadigm? 372

References: 380
Index: 397

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxiv

 
 BIOGRAPHICAL DATA ON THE EQUAL FIRST AUTHORS:

Vernon M Neppe MD, PhD, FRSSAf, DFAPA, BN&NP.

Based on peer-reviewed publications, presentations, international honors and
medicolegal consultations, Prof. Vernon Neppe has achieved an international reputation
in numerous and diverse disciplines. These include:
• Five fundamental but related medical specialties, namely Neuropsychiatry,
Behavioral Neurology, Psychopharmacology, Forensic Psychiatry and
Neuropsychiatry, and Psychiatry: In all these specialties, he has been listed under the
peer reviewed “America’s Top Doctors”—and he is one of the few to be listed in all
eleven (in press) issues of this peer-reviewed book and, is apparently, the only
physician ever listed in five different subspecialties.
• Consciousness Research, Phenomenology, Epileptology and Neuroscience, in which
his contributions have been pioneering and prodigious; and he is also
• an internationally in demand Professional Speaker, Author and Playwright.
Dr. Neppe has pioneered numerous pharmacological areas. These include adjunctive
anticonvulsants in psychiatry (these contributions alone have impacted the lives of
millions of people), and a successful treatment for the previously incurable tardive
dyskinesia. He has described four new medical conditions, invented about a hundred
new terms, suggested three major new classifications, developed more than thirty
evaluations, tests and historical screens in neuropsychiatry and consciousness,
pioneered several new theoretical concepts in his disciplines, and developed the literary
genre of sciction.2 He also pioneered the links of brain function and subjective
experience, developed Phenomenology in the Neuroscience and Consciousness
contexts and is the world authority on déjà vu phenomena. The author of eight plus
books, including Cry the Beloved Mind 2, and two plays (www.brainvoyage.com), he
has overall more than 400 publications on every continent. He led the 1st USA and
International Delegation in Neuropsychiatry and Psychopharmacology, has lectured in
twelve countries, chaired international symposia, and worked internationally with the
media. He was the first USA based MD to be elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of
SA, is a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, recipient of the
rare Marius Valkhoff prize, one of the rare “Diplomates” of the International Society
for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE) (www.thethousand.com), is the only Distinguished
Professor of the Exceptional Creative Achievement Organization and Executive
Director (5eca.com), a WISE Distinguished Scientific Advisor and Director of their
Human Performance Enhancement Division. He mainly trained in his native South
Africa (then did a Fellowship at Cornell University, New York). He then founded the
first Division of Neuropsychiatry in a USA Psychiatry Dept (Univ. of Washington in
Seattle), and then a model institute (Pacific Neuropsychiatric Institute), which he
directs (www.pni.org). He is also (Adj. Full) Prof., Dept. of Neurology and Psychiatry,
St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO. TDVP@pni.org.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxv

 
Edward R. Close PhD, PE, SFSPE

Edward R. Close is a Physicist, Mathematician, Cosmologist, Environmental Engineer

and Planner, and international consultant. He was a charter member of the U.S.G.S.
Systems Analysis Group where he developed state-of-the-art mathematical optimization
programs, hierarchical modeling techniques and fractal geometry models of coastal
geomorphology, storm cell development and other environmental modeling
applications.

Pursuing an active research program in environmental remediation, he has made a

series of breakthrough discoveries in using non-toxic compounds in mold research that
have benefited millions. He is a charter member of the internationally known Integrated
Health-Care Professionals Council. He has authored numerous technical papers and
five books, including the groundbreaking “Transcendental Physics, Integrating the
Search for Truth”. He developed the mathematical “calculus of distinctions”, which is
very relevant in the current book. He described a brief (several pages), but never refuted
first published proof for the famous Fermat’s Last Theorem 3, which will appear in the
companion volume to this book, Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad.
He has also developed several new theorems of consciousness, and contributed
important engineering applications.

Dr. Close is Principal Engineer and Director of Research and Development at EJC
Advantage, LLC. He is currently Science Editor of Telicom (the journal of the
International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE) in which he is a Senior Research
Fellow (www.thethousand.com), and also a Distinguished Fellow of the Exceptional
Creative Achievement Organization (5eca.com).

Both Dr. Neppe and Dr. Close can be regarded as pioneers of the new interdisciplinary
science of Dimensional Biopsychophysics, in which dimensionometry, consciousness
and the interface of the biological, psychological and physical are integrated together,
as in their remarkably innovative model of the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm.
eclose@ejcenterprises.com

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxvi

 
AUTHOR’S PREFACE (Dr. Vernon M. Neppe)

“The more I learn the less I learn I know.” Vernon M Neppe, circa 1967k

Since my childhood, I had contemplated the contradictions in our current scientific

model— a model that I, nevertheless, realized worked very well in possibly 99.99% of
cases. Yet I had wondered why these possibly 0.01% of apparent aberrations occurred.

Over two decades, I gradually concluded that a new model could explain some of
these problems: If an imaginary observer existed outside the “box” of our current
reality, his relative position imagining the situation would be different. He would be
able to observe far more of our current reality looking from the outside and then
examining inward. This would imply that the number of dimensions could repetitively
increase because the observer could look at that new reality from the outside, and this
could continue ad infinitum. Effectively, I began to use this outside-in approach to
examine ostensibly anomalous information. I applied it to many disciplines, and it
seemed workable, too, across the sciences I examined.
I became convinced that this experience was relative to one’s location. I penned
notes about this, studied the existing data, and gradually by the mid-1980s, after many
years of contemplation, had refined this to whether there was some kind of essence. I
wondered about the essential core in our existence, whether it was always expressed in
space and time in other dimensions, and whether we could be living in an N-
dimensional reality, as part of a broader infinite existence. I realized we were only
perceiving a tiny fraction in our conventional three spatial dimensions and one moment
in time—our present experiential reality.
In addition, I realized there needed to be a content and that the fundamental spatial
elements could be expressed not in the rectilinear box noted by the observer, but in
increasingly complex curved movements. I was struck by the ubiquity in all of nature of
these vortical shapes. I wondered whether these three-dimensional spatial rotating
objects—vortices—could be playing a role that was completely fundamental even in
this multidimensional world that I was contemplating. I opposed myself: My rational
mind argued that even contemplation of vortices was too ridiculous a concept to
embrace. Yet the more I looked, the more this idea became feasible: Vortices and
curved objects were ubiquitous in nature and they fitted the theoretical need I had
conceptualized. Somehow, there had to be a content by which any kind of individual,
society, or even humankind in general, or any group or any other level of individuals, or
even other sentient beings, could interact. This was a function of social interaction and
reflected a consistent combined reality. Vortices could fit this role because they were
dynamically changing in state reflecting movements from moment to moment, and yet

k
This phrase has re-awakened over the years. As far as is known, it originates as indicated and was recorded at that time,
though not officially published. It was chosen here because it is Dr. Neppe’s motto.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxvii

 
they also reflected a consistent trait over time where others would be objectifying in a
relative sense their realities with others. Vortices could be interacting and interfacing
and there could theoretically be “zillions” l of such combinations taking place with
much of reality being silent as they would not be expressing themselves in
consciousness.
Moreover, there was no need for these dynamic forms to be full-blown classical
vortices. Any moving curvature element would fulfill that role and provide a content for
this interacting process (which many years later in our model we called “indivension”).
Certainly, curved movement was easier to conceive of than rectangular ones because
they were more natural and would not be as restricted to Euclidean space.
And so, in my initial model, first, there was N-dimensionality, with this outside-in
derivation from an essence and an observational consciousness, and there was also an
inside-outside approach. Then there was the role of an (infinite) essence and an N-
dimensional reality. But, then even to contemplate vortices— quite ridiculous surely?
Yet, the idea persisted.

I gradually put this together into a model I called the concept vortex pluralism5. I
presented this as an invited lecture to a sub-branch of the American Philosophical
Association m, and I was surprised at the response. Instead of ridicule—after all I was
not a philosopher and what did I know anyway?—it met with a standing ovation. I felt
at the time that given N-dimensionality, this was pluralistic, not monistic or dualistic,
and so I described my model as “pluralism”. It was going to be published in a book,
but the editor justifiably objected to the lack of references. And that was true: It was my
own idea that had spontaneously taken hold, and at that point, there were, strangely, no
formal references yet. I revised this paper and placed it onto the Internet. And I added
hundreds of references, discovering in retrospect, that, indeed, there was a theoretical
justification for what I was positing. Later and more appropriately, I called the model
“vortex N-dimensionalism” because I realized this model was not based on plural
realities just N-dimensions, and that this reflected one unified reality.6; 7

I realized, too, that despite the fundamental laws of thermodynamics n, living beings
also exhibited order not disorder, and was puzzled why life came about. So, already at
that point, I was puzzling over the finite and the infinite, N-dimensionality, vortices,
multidimensional space-time, observer consciousness outside our usual space-time, life,

l
The term “zillions” is used here to communicate an extraordinarily large quantity. It is of the same order of magnitude as
another term, now well known for a different reason, namely “googol”. A googol is technically 10100. An even larger term
is when googol becomes exponential, namely “googolplex” which is 10googol ! 4
m
Paper in this area originally presented on 6 April 1996 to a subgroup at the American Philosophical Association: The
Society For The Anthropology Of Consciousness at the Westin Hotel, Seattle at a symposium entitled "Tribal
epistemology and philosophy of consciousness". This has become a more recognized theory since then.
m
It was German scientist Rudolf Clausius who is generally credited as the first to articulate the 2nd law in his “on the
mechanical theory of heat” published in 1850.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b
xxxviii

 
the role of order and the variable directional approach (outside-in and also inside out—
later on we referred to this as the top-down and bottom-up approach). I produced a two-
part document of some eighty pages, and circulated it to a few colleagues. I was
stimulated to action when an anonymous colleague overseas justifiably critiqued my
then life’s work: “But how can he test this? And where is the proof?” I understood this
criticism, and agreed with it, because I knew he was correct: And it was this extreme
prod that provoked my need to work with a mathematician and a physicist and re-look
at this paradigm.

Through the International Society for Philosophical Inquiry, I met Dr. Edward Close
who had written the book Transcendental Physics.8 This book had many similar
fundamental ideas to vortex N-dimensionalism. We made an interesting team: I as a
consciousness researcher, neuroscientist and psychiatrist, who could play the role of
ignorant creative thinker in physics and mathematics, and on the other hand, Dr. Close
as a physicist and a mathematician, par excellence, who could, similarly, bounce off
creative ideas in the biological, consciousness and social sciences.
I spent the next year immersed in complex physics and advanced mathematics
because I realized I would need to apply sufficient skills to use logic and think
creatively in these disciplines.

We were ready, and both of us recognized this was our song we needed to sing. It
was a project that we were driven to complete: It was our gift, however, small and
possibly even misguided, to humankind. The result are these books: Reality begins with
Consciousness: A Paradigm Shift that Works 9 and the companion book, Space, Time
and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad 10.
Having spent months allowing colleagues around the world to critique over twenty
major revisions of this model, we’ve become increasingly persuaded that our model is
fundamentally truer than any other that currently exists: Often models die after six
months of scientific, mathematical and creative critiques. Yet, we’ve been able to
answer challenges, and though the fundamental metaparadigm remains, the emphasis
on certain areas, such as infinity, order, life, meaning, time, consciousness, tethering,
vortices and dimensionality has been amplified—and concepts and definitions have
been clarified. Every query has been seriously addressed, appropriately answered, and,
we believe, adequately encompassed within our model.

We are grateful that the clarifications required made the model stronger and allowed
it to grow, both in being more coherent, as well as more detailed, in its essentials. We
are encouraged, too, by the support for the underlying hypotheses and the fundamental
metaparadigm and the acclaim by responding scientists: This continued growth of a
model would be expected for any consistent and feasible paradigmatic shift.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xxxix

 
 Has our model succeeded? For a paradigm to work, the underlying axioms should
feasibly, without contradiction or demonstrable falsification, explain empirical data and
be supported through mathematicologic approaches. Our model, now called the Triadic
Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm model (TDVP), does just that in certain
contexts, and, of course, is applicable across many scientific disciplines (physics, life,
consciousness and psychological sciences) and mathematically is logically justified.
Yet, how dare we postulate a paradigm shift that cuts into the sheer fabric of current
reductionistic materialism? And moreover, how dare we involve multidimensionality,
consciousness, infinity, life and order? It’s like suggesting the flat world is round,
surely?
We have to agree, at this point, with expert reviewers who believe that TDVP will
endure and will become critically important for a long, long time to come. Yet Dr.
Close and I both still anticipate the initial resistance, anger, denial, and even ridicule.
This may not be surprising because TDVP literally shatters many prevailing ideas
about the very nature of reality, and it furthermore, has both the mathematics and the
empiricism to demonstrate its viability, with hypotheses that are not yet tested. Our
TDVP model has emphasized the cardinal role of consciousness and the need for a
specific kind of higher dimensionality. And it has addressed infinity, order and life, and
restructuring of time as necessities. Based on empirical data, potential proofs of our
metaparadigm, mathematical justifications, and qualitative tabulations, we have
justified it as the most complete, and also the most extensive practical paradigm ever
posited.

Our first book, Reality Begins with Consciousness, is written to be more easily read.
It is still formidable, but those not reading all of it will obtain the fundamentals, without
the data and amplifications, at the start. This book on TDVP begins with a 10-point
summary of the basics of the TDVP model, then the key single statement, then jumps to
100 core points. It then deals with fundamentals and gradually builds up, in some detail,
to why the key metaparadigm fits. It progresses as if one were doing a university course
in the area, with basics, and then with increasing complexity of some areas.
The second companion book, Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad,
relates to amplifications, specialized models and speculation. Here are the challenges,
speculations and proposals for future research. This book incorporates some remarkable
ideas, and is more complex than the first book. It’s almost like one is then studying a
further advanced course. But in both books, our frequent headers and subheaders allow
greater readability and the opportunity to skip certain areas, or to come back to them
later.
We look at it simply as delivering two ostensibly cutting edge books. This is the
first, and I postulate that both will impact the ideas of all of our readers. Those
embroiled in reductionistic materialism may be challenged to modify their views
because they appear unjustifiable in the light of the empirical data presented, and our
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xl

 
ideas demonstrate the contradictions to our standard, current physical paradigm.
We hope that this book will fulfill the initial reviewers’ impressions that Reality
Begins with Consciousness will have long-lasting major impacts on the physical,
biological, consciousness, psychological and mathematical sciences. Certainly, the
concept of an enduring model of reality that provides a workable paradigm shift across
all the scientific disciplines, and has mathematical theorems and proofs, is very
important. Add to this, a paradigm that provides a new philosophical perspective and
yet still is consonant with philosophy including mysticism and its potential enduring
relevance is enhanced. Whether it fulfills this promise remains to be seen. But, we, the
authors, interpret this as far the most important life’s contribution of our lives.

Vernon M Neppe MD, PhD, FRS(SAf), DFAPA, BN&NP, FFPsych, MMed, DPsM, DSPE.
Seattle, WA, USA. (November 2011)

Post-script: 2nd Edition addition to Dr Neppe’s Preface

An important caution, however, needs to be emphasized: Clearly, there is a great

deal more to be done. We have only a tiny knowledge base of what exists. Complex
aspects of physics are disputed. How much more so are the biological, consciousness
and psychological findings where our “proofs” are limited? In these scientific
disciplines, we can only apply conclusions using, at best, tenuous inductive reasoning
based on experimental data. This is often an order of magnitude below those same
controversial but very complex “proofs” in physics.

We can certainly argue that the data we cite is not contradicted because it has not
been falsified. Furthermore, that the data appears to occur and be feasible in the
collective experience of our society. But we recognize that feasibility has its own
limitations.

Our application of the TDVP model as a metaparadigm is ambitious and often

based on the feasibility of fundamental aspects, yet it only provides principles and
process for examination of the content, namely the data. And based on the comparative
metrics of Table 5, it may provide this extremely effectively. However, that does not
mean that this is truly how reality works: This book may at best provide a good start to
explain our model which we perceive as feasible and to stimulate ideas, research and
thinking for others.

VMN (March 2012)

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xli

 
AUTHOR’S PREFACE (Dr. Edward R. Close)

“Real scientists should have no need to defend their territory, because real science has
no boundaries.” Edward R. Close (p104) 8

Albert Einstein saw that the forces of electricity and magnetism could be unified with a
few elegant equations, revealing the beauty, as he said, of some of “God’s thoughts”. 11
He also reasoned that, if two of the fundamental forces of the universe could be unified,
he should be able to discover the mathematical laws integrating all of them. He
believed the universe to be ordered and logical, and that the laws governing it could be
discovered and understood. A metaparadigm would reveal the elegant harmony of the
universe.

Einstein and many brilliant scientists since have tried to find this “Holy Grail” of
science and failed. Why should we think that we have? We have done something that
has not been done before: We have identified the missing elements of the current
paradigm, and we have found a way to rectify the glaring omission of any mathematical
representation of consciousness in the equations of the standard model. We have
reunited science with human experience by formally describing the conscious act of the
drawing of distinctions with a mathematical tool I call the calculus of distinctions. This
simple act of including consciousness in the equations leads to a whole new
understanding of time, space and consciousness.

What motivated us to seek an ever more comprehensive scientific paradigm? In my

case, I believe the answer lies in the brain I was born with and the nature of my early
environment. I believe the same may be true for Dr. Neppe.

The small town where I was born lay in a narrow valley in the St. Francois Mountains
of Southeast Missouri. The largest high-grade iron ore and lead mines in the country lay
to the north, a steep conical knob of porphyritic rhyolite, that had been mined for iron,
stood on the east side of the valley, batholiths of granitic and basaltic rock blocked the
flow of surface drainage to the south to form pools and waterfalls that were called
“shut-ins”. To the west lay several American Indian mounds along a small stream, and
in the middle of the valley, the earthen works of the Civil War Union Fort Davidson
and the building where Ulysses S. Grant received his commission as General, were
located. Emigrants came from all over Europe in the eighteen hundreds to work in the
mines. My great grandfather was one of them. In this setting, it seemed natural that by
the age of ten I was interested in geology, archeology and languages. I collected civil
war bullets, stone-age artifacts, and was learning two “foreign” languages.

By the age of thirteen, I had active interests in science, mathematics, history,

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xlii

 
archeology, geology, and linguistics. I found it fascinating that, given observable facts,
one could, with nothing more than one’s own mind, discover new facts about things
both seen and unseen. At that early age, I knew I wanted to be a scientist. At the age of
fourteen, I discovered Einstein’s relativity, and I knew I wanted to be a physicist. In my
naïveté, I thought physics was the answer to everything. I see this same naïveté in most
mainstream physicists today. Physics was my first love. There was, however, a
problem. This problem wasn’t to surface until several years later when I was a physics
and math major in college, but it was there from the beginning. The problem was, in a
word, experience. I had experienced things that did not fit within the materialistic
framework of mainstream physics.

From a very early age, I experienced things that seemed to be extensions of the five
senses. These experiences could not easily be explained within the limits of known
physical and biological science. Basically, some of my experiences did not easily fit
within a materialistic paradigm. These experiences happened occasionally,
unexpectedly and with no apparent cause. There were, however, some locations and
circumstances that seemed conducive to them. They seemed to happen most often when
I lay in bed just before sleep, or when I was alone in a natural setting. Opportunities to
be alone in nature were frequent, as I was an only child, and our back yard bordered on
the untouched wilderness of the St. Francois Mountains. I also remember having these
experiences in the classroom in the fourth or fifth grade. Were they simply states of
heightened auditory, visual, tactile or other awareness? The only person I confided in
was my father. He allayed my concerns by saying that they were signs of “growing”,
and that he had had similar experiences as a child. They were nothing to worry about.
Accepting them as normal, I began to analyze and even enjoy them.

These experiences impacted my thinking leading me to realize that some aspect of my

consciousness might occasionally, under certain circumstances, be operating in ways
that did not correspond with the pervasive everyday perception of reality. If this were
true, the simple materialistic paradigm I was being taught in science classes could not
explain it.

Because of my personal experiences, and some controlled experiments I participated in

during my second and third years as a physics major in college, I also began to study
everything that came out of the areas of consciousness research. I realized that concepts
outside currently accepted physical science were required. I also realized that if
consciousness existed somehow outside the physical body, it could explain some of the
rare-event phenomena called psi phenomena, but that this would require a completely
new theory of space, time, and consciousness.

Was it purely a coincidence that Dr. Neppe and I met? We had both joined ISPE in
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xliii

 
hopes of connecting with kindred souls with similar intellectual interests. As we began
to share our thoughts, we realized that they fitted together like the pieces of a jigsaw
puzzle. And coincidences began to happen. Soon after we began our collaboration, we
advised each other of prior commitments involving travel that would ostensibly
interrupt our regular communications. Vernon would be traveling to South Africa, I to
Egypt. I was participating in the production of a documentary film, and a travel agent
employed by the company producing the film had arranged my itinerary. Vernon’s
itinerary was also set. When we compared flight schedules and layovers, we found that
we would both be in Amsterdam on the same day! Without any pre-planning, we were
able to spend several hours together discussing some of the basic concepts of our
theories. These discussions were recorded and became part of the archives and
manuscripts leading to this book. It could have been a coincidence, but the theme of
this book emphasizing consciousness as it does, at least allows for other possibilities.

Other synchronous events followed. Both of us lead very busy professional lives, with
client-driven schedules, deadlines and multiple commitments. In spite of this, we would
often call each other at opportune times and find that we had been thinking along the
same lines. We would wake up in the middle of the night with epiphanies that were
nearly identical, or that would fit together in complementary ways. The frequency of
such synchronous experiences led us to suspect a hyper-dimensional connection of
some sort. As we developed our new paradigm, the possibility and reality of such a link
became more and more apparent. When consciousness is seen to operate in more than
four dimensions, synchronicity becomes the rule rather than the exception.

These experiences, while personal and anecdotal from a scientific point of view,
convince me that science in general, and physics in particular, needs to be expanded to
transcend the materialistic box in which it has confined itself. This conviction led to the
concepts presented in my 1997 book “Transcendental Physics“ and eventually to this
book in collaboration with Dr. Vernon Neppe.

We are confident that our Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm shift will
usher in a new consciousness-based comprehensive science with a tremendously
expanded scope, a scope including the spectrum of human physical, mental and
spiritual experience. This book and associated articles and papers form the basis of a
scientific paradigm shift unlike any in the history of the search for truth and
understanding.

Edward R. Close, PhD, PE, SRFSPE

Jackson, Missouri, USA. (November, 2011).

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xliv

 
 To you, the reader: with our grateful thanks

The initial version of our paradigm shift, a holistic model that permeates
scientific, mathematical and philosophical disciplines o, was extremely complex to the
extent that readers commented there were very few who would be able to understand it.
Indeed that was so: It was multidisciplinary and required a high level of knowledge, a
conceptualization background, and training in specialized aspects of the physical,
psychological, biological, and consciousness sciences, in philosophy and logic, plus a
specialized background in mathematics: There were few who could fully appreciate all
these disciplines. We have assiduously made hundreds of revisions over the past several
months. The result is Reality Begins With Consciousness. This book attempts to make
these complex areas more coherent.
Ideas that have inherent merit should stand the test of time. But they must be
comprehensible and sound. Sometimes such models are so esoteric they are difficult to
interpret unambiguously. It's fascinating that when we examine broad "Theories of
Everything", we find Kabbalic and Vedic Mysticism have survived centuries or even
millennia, yet are so complex that interpretations are ambiguous. We also find
remarkable, but conceptually limited older models that focus on one specific area, such
as consciousness.12, 13 By contrast, in our model, we have strived for clarity and lack of
ambiguity. We differentiate more speculative information from our key axioms.
The scope of our challenge has been enormous. But we hope it will stimulate
long-term further developments and research. Drs. Edward R. Close and Vernon Neppe
attempt the broadest of paradigms, not a single area of focus 9; 10. We attempt to develop
something never before done: an all-encompassing paradigm that is feasible yet not
falsified in all the major scientific disciplines, namely, the physical, life, psychological
and consciousness sciences. Additionally, we ensure that there is a mathematicological
basis to justify this overriding paradigm, plus a philosophical mystical basis, as well.
Our fundamental metaparadigm has tens of eventually or potentially testable ideas
applying a novel approach to the philosophy of sciencep, and indirectly suggests about
six hundred different concepts, ideas, postulates or hypotheses. It uses both the
empirical, often inductive data of scientific method plus the deductive bases of
mathematics.
We’ve received feedback from tens of peer scientists and creative readers during
these past seven months. We are gratified that we have still been able to coherently
maintain the key elements of our paradigm, which remains cogent and relevant. But one
challenge was to amplify the ideas and to convert the hundreds of complex
multidisciplinary ideas into two readable scientific books. We did this by applying
several techniques: We have provided:
• an immediate glossary of key terms (which many may want to print for

o
Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP)
p
This is called “lower dimensional feasibility, absent falsification” (LFAF). We also apply Popperian falsifiability.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xlv

 
 reference),
• a comprehensive table of contents allowing a sense of prioritizing the concepts,
• initial summary perspectives allowing readers to understand the broader picture,
• numerous chapters that can be read independently of the rest of the book,
• comprehensive, but pertinent references, and
• an index at the end.

On the other hand, there may be those of you who do not want to be given the key
information at the start, and who would prefer a gradual transition. If so please begin at
“Section B: The Limits of What Exists” with Chapter 3, but we recommend you still
use the key glossary of terms at the beginning.
This book could not have succeeded without the specialists who provided important
peer-reviewed feedback within their areas of expertise, and alerted us to other areas that
were pertinent. We have therefore, particularly endeavored to ensure that those who
specialize in particular disciplines, such as psychology, physics, mathematics, or
philosophy can be stimulated in their disciplines, and yet, those specialists can use their
specialty as a jumping point for the challenge of the multidisciplinary emphasis. We are
gratified, too, that those with particular interests across disciplines, in areas such as
“time” or “order” can appreciate specific chapters. Clearly, too, this book focuses on
Consciousness Research. Those in that very broad scientific discipline may be able to
conceive of the enormous leap to understand the need for change, and the nature of an
all-encompassing paradigm.
And so, this book is for scientists, philosophers, creative thinkers and
mathematicians who want to understand reality, consciousness and the world, and for
those who seek a single broader base to appreciate their cosmos and themselves. We
have deliberately initially produced an electronic book because we knew that based on
the feedback we would receive, there would be further revisions leading to further
editions. We also know that this book is particularly suited to reading on computers or
electronic readers because searching is so much easier. However, once this EBook has
been revised a few times, and there is a justified demand, we may produce a hard copy
of the book: We realize it is that important.
What about those who do not fit the description above? Have we catered for non-
scientists and those who want some easier reading on this topic? We’ve been surprised
at the General Reader comments we’ve listed. Some are indeed mastering this book,
even as it stands! However, within the next year, it’s our hope to produce a (hard copy)
book written for the layperson in the sciction style 14 initiated by Dr. Neppe 2; 15. This
way we hope to fascinate and educate and use dialog (“conversagraphs”) communicated
at the layperson level16. This will allow much broader readership of what to us are
fundamental ideas.

Vernon M Neppe and Edward R Close.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xlvi

 
 PERSPECTIVE TO THE SECOND EDITION

This second edition of Reality Begins with Consciousness: A Paradigm Shift that
Works (RBC 2Ed) was fully anticipated. We realized we would have significant
feedback from readers and also from colleagues such that we had predicted three
editions to this book during the first year. With a 2012 publishing date, the 1st Edition
became available in November 2011. By late December 2011, we had made relatively
small but profound additions based on feedback and decided on a 2nd Edition.
The initial motivation for RBC 2nd Ed was our need to particularly clarify two
terms:
1. We realized that scientists do not have a consistent understanding of the term,
“Theory of Everything” (TOE). We recognized the ambiguity and far prefer the terms
“paradigm” and “metaparadigm”. We have allocated a section in Chapter 1, Paradigms,
Metaparadigms and Theories of Everything and TDVP. This way we ensure that our use of
the “TOE” term is understood not as an all-embracing knowledge—not requiring
omniscience, but instead reflecting a comprehensive process to understand reality—
principles that can be applied to currently soluble and insoluble problems.
2. We discovered that even though Dr Close developed the term “extropy”, and used it in two
of his previous books8; 17, it appears to have been used differently by others. Consequently, we
introduced the term “Ordropy” to avoid ambiguity. Therefore, “extropy” of the first edition is
“ordropy” in the second.
However, like a never-ending exploration, this book remains a work in progress.
With these changes have come numerous very important and stimulating revisions.
These have continued through to March 2012. Importantly, the metaparadigm on which
the book is based has been unaffected, and the 1st edition text is largely unchanged
though certain concepts are clarified and amplified. Most pertinently, we clarified the
different levels of the unit that is broader “consciousness” into its components parts:
• Neurological Consciousness (N-C) in the brain.
• Psychological Consciousness (or “Ego-consciousness”).
• Transfinite consciousness (T-C) in the finite and transfinite domains.
• Metaconsciousness (M-C) in the boundless infinite domains.
• Quantal Consciousness (Q-C).
We also amplified slightly certain specific areas that we regarded as incomplete:
• We differentiated the different levels of essence.
• We demonstrated the consistency of the different dimensions of actualization,
transfinite, the infinite, and the highest infinity of infinities.
We then made some highly relevant additions to RBC 2Ed.
• We clarified two new terms “Metalife” and “Metaorder” in the Infinite.
• We introduced two brief but exciting new metaphors, namely, the concepts of
Life Track in the Infinite, and of land-masses in a boundless infinite ocean. The
concept of Life Track is particularly exciting as it allows understanding of how
we interface with others and have a broader freedom of choice.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xlvii

 
We added in Chapter 45, a brief but critically important section on testing the
hypotheses pertinent to the TDVP model.
“TDVP is a model in evolution: We do not have answers for everything. We’re not
even close. There are key elements that may not be soluble at any point in the future.
The vast limitations of proof in biology and psychological sciences will not change.
They are based on inductive reason an order of magnitude less certain than the physical
sciences, which already are embedded in controversy. Much more needs to be done,
and even then we can never approach omniscience. The biological sciences and even
more the psychological databases are simply too tenuous to draw many conclusions,
even in areas that have been studied for decades. Inductive empirical proofs are simply
at a different level from the physical sciences, and even physics relies on inductive
empiricism. We can never achieve complete proof by even proving falsifiable scientific
data, because the inductive elements limit proof and we ultimately rely on less certainty
than interpretations. Moreover, in TDVP, certain models are even more esoteric and
less subject to proof: How do we show that “life” always exists, as opposed to times
when there is no life /no existence? We can make conceptual jumps and posit new
secondary ideas such as infinity and this leads to tertiary hypotheses such as infinite
life. And even despite enormous progress in applying TDVP to the mathematicological
models, we have not yet, and likely will never prove each and every secondary and
tertiary component of TDVP.”

We ensured that other pertinent comparisons with TDVP, including scoring, were
made.
• The recent Amit Goswami model, has become well known; and
• A detailed special section on David Bohm’s Implicate and Explicate Order.
We also amplified, clarified, compared with TDVP and re-scored (as necessary):
• The My Big TOE model of Tom Campbell.
• Bernard Carr’s Transcendental Field Theory and other Field Theories.
Consequently, we updated the scoring of the Table (Table 5) comparing the 24 different
“TOEs” (and this now includes the current physicalistic paradigm).
• We, also, minimally clarified Tables 1 and 3 and added Table 2a.

We’ve continued to recognize the enormous challenge of this ground-breaking book.

Related follow-up books, already planned, written or being rewritten, or in press are:
• Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad: This is our companion
book. It includes the mathematics, logic and physics and stimulates further ideas.
It clarifies many complex areas alluded to in Reality Begins with Consciousness.
• Because of the size of this second book, a third book Beyond Einstein is
anticipated for 2013 or 2014.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xlviii

 
 • Due to common requests, we are producing two Soft Cover Bound Versions of
Reality Begins with Consciousness. The sheer volume requires two books and
this is based on the Revised Second Edition.
• General Reader / Layperson books: We’re writing several books to simplify these
concepts. These are targeted specifically for the layperson. There are so many
exciting aspects of our model that we wanted to ensure that the General Readers
would be able to share our voyage.

We hope to produce these General Reader books in the classical dialogic sciction
style genre delineated and developed by one of the authors, Dr Vernon Neppe
(originally in his book Cry the Beloved Mind: A Voyage of Hope2 and then in his play
Quakes15). Sciction communication has proven useful applying the dialogic,
conversational style to “education through fascination”. 14, 16
Sciction engages the reader throughout, allowing complex concepts to be applied
using simple dialog, as if speaking to different individuals with varying knowledge
levels.
Sciction sometimes requires an unusual paragraphing style “conversagraphs”. 14, 16
Although in our current Reality Begins with Consciousness, sciction is not used,
conversagraphs are applied, when convenient, to communicate information about areas
that did not fully require new paragraphs, yet needed differentiation from the previous
one. 16 Similarly, we have used different styles under certain circumstances—new lines,
spaces, indents and different levels of header (as well as taking page demands into
account!)—an example is this very paragraph (see how “Although” begins a new line).

We reiterate some useful reading comments on approaching our book.

• If you want to study principles, first begin with Chapters 1 and 2. But do not
expect explanations in these sections. Please treat these chapters simply as
summaries so you can obtain a perspective of some complex topics.
• If you prefer the excitement of exploration, begin with Chapter 3 and use the first
2 Chapters as reference material.
• In both instances, please refer to the Glossary Key at the end of the appendix (p.
lvi).
• Also the key glossary may facilitate what is necessarily a new or idiosyncratic
language (page lvi-lviii).

A special appeal to all readers: At this time, this E-book, has been funded by the
authors. Please do not pirate issues—records of legitimate purchases exist. Instead,
please encourage others to purchase, read and study, just as they would a College Study
course— this E-book, with respect, involves several university courses of study.

To facilitate this, for a minor added cost, we’ve introduced an alternative “Deluxe
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b xlix

 
Second Edition” of this E-book. This is open source so you can make “sticky notes” in
the PDF amplifications or corrections (with suitable Operating Systems and software—
sorry, no guarantees can be made though). This Deluxe Version also still contains the
original possibly unique, “collector’s” autographed inscribed page (the Standard locked
Second Edition does not.). If you’re using purely the E-Pub version (as with your
Kindle, Nook or IPad or other E-Reader) (and don’t want the inscriptions) this may be
unnecessary.q

For those who are curious, after the Second Edition was published in March 2012, we
made some minor revisions (Revised Second Edition)in September 2012. We
minimally updated Tables 4 and 5, added slightly to the Philosophy Section, clarified
our overview one line descriptions in Chapters 1, 2 and 46 and particularly amplified
the key statements in Chapter 46, as well as remediating typographical errors and
adding slightly to our bibliography plus updating the current scientific content. This
version is now the downloadable version you will obtain on purchasing either the
Deluxe or Standard Second Editions.

Thank you for your attention and we hope you benefit from these updates.
Please enjoy, learn, debate and contemplate!
Vernon M Neppe and Edward R Close.

q
Those who have purchased the First Edition may, for a limited period, be able to obtain the second edition of Reality
Begins with Consciousness at a considerable reduction. Please refer to www.brainvoyage.com
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b l

 
KEY WORDS: A SELECTION.

3S-1t, 3S-3T, 3S-3T-NC, Actual, Affect, Aharonov, Altered states of consciousness,

Anatomicophysiological, Anatomy, Anthropology, Appearance, Apprehension, Akashic field,
Anthropic, ASC, Aspect, Astronomy, Astrophysical, Asymmetry, Atomic Vortex theory, Atoms,
Awareness, Axiom, Axiom of existence, Axiom of life, Axiom of origin, Axiom of original tethering,
Axiom of physical reduction valves, Axiom of physical life, Axiom of reality, Axioms, Bell, Bell’s
theorem, Bem, Bending, Bidirectional, Big bang, Biology, Black hole, Bohm, Bohr, Bottom-up,
Boundary, Brain dynamics, Bridge, Brown, C-substrate, Calculus, Calculus of distinctions, Campbell,
Cantor, Carlson, Carr, Cartesian co-ordinate, Causality, Cause and effect, CAV, CEV, Chaos, Charge,
Chemistry, Chronits, Close, calculus of distinctions, Closed, C-substrate, Cognition, Cognition-affect-
volition, Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe, Collins, Common reality, Complex numbers,
Common reality, Conceptual, Conceptual reality, Confounder, Consciousness, Conscit, Content,
Continuous, Copenhagen Interpretation, Core questions, Corollary, Correlation, Cosmological,
Countable, Creative, CST, CTMU, CTT unification, Dawkins, De La Sierra, Déjà vu, Delayed choice
experiments, Deniers, Dennett, Density, Dimension, Dimensional Extrapolation, Dimensional fabrics,
Dimensional falsification impossibility, Dimensionometry, Discrete, Distinction, Distortion, Domain,
Double-slit, Dualism, Dunne, Ego-boundaries, EHE, Einstein, Electrochemical, Electromagnetism,
Electrons, Elementary, Elements, Emergent, Empirical, Energy, Enformy, Entanglement, Entropy,
Epiphenomena, Epistemological, EPR, Essence, Ethicospirituobiopsychofamiliosociocultural systems,
Euclidean, Event-horizon, Evert, Evolution, Exceptional Human Experience, Existence, Expanding
universe, Ethicospirituomysticobiopsychofamiliogroupsociocultural, Extent, Extradimensional
extrapolation, Extropy, Falsifiability, Feasibility, Fermat, Fermat’s last theorem, Field, Filter, Finite,
Finity, FLT, Fluctuating, Force, Formulae, Fractal, Fractal geometry, Fractional dimensions,
Fractionated dimensions, Free-will, Fundamental, Fundamental constants, Fundamental forces,
Fundamental ideas, Funnel, Future, Gauss, Ganzfeld. General Relativity, Genetics, Geneva, Gesher,
Global consciousness project, GCP, GIFECSS, Gisin, God, Gödel, Goswami, Gould, Gravitation,
Guided, Guiding, Guth, Hameroff, Hamilton, Hausdorf, Hawking, Heisenberg, Helices, Heuristic,
Hierarchy of infinities, Hilbert, Hitbonnenut, Hoffman, Holistic, Hologram, Hyperspace, Imaginary
numbers, Implicate, Incompleteness theorem, Indivension, Inequality, Individual-unit, Infinite,
Influence, Information, Integrated, Intent, Interactions, Inverse square, Jigsaw, Kabbalic, Kinetrons,
Klein, Langan, Lanza, Laszlo, Laws of nature, Leibniz, Lemma, Leptons, LFAF, Life, Life sciences,
Limitations, Logic, Lower dimensional discontinuity, Macrophysical, Magisteria, Mandelbrot,
Manifold, Mass-energy, Materialist, Mathematical models, Mathematics, Mathematicologic, Meaning,
Meaningful information, Meaningful influence, Meaningful knowledge, Meaningful perturbation,
Meaningful reality, Median column geometry, Medicine, Meta-analyses, Metacist,
Metaconsciousness, Metadimensional, Metadimensional reality, Meta-information, Metalife,
Metaorder (Meta-order), Metaparadigm, Metareality, Metaspace, Metatime, Meteorology, Metric,
Minkowski, Minkowski space, Model, Monism, Monistic, Morphogenetic fields, Movement, Multi-
dimensional, Multidimensional scaling, Multidimensional time-space, Muons, Mystical, Mysticism,
Mysticospirituotheological, Natural law, Nature, Nature of reality, N-Dimensional manifolds, N-1
dimensions, N-distinctions, Negative entropy, Neppe, Neppe’s Vortex N-Dimensional paradigm,
Neurological consciousness, Neurophilosophy of consciousness, Neuroscience, Non-Euclidean, Non-
locality, NOMA, Nucleons, Nucleus, Numinosity, Object, Objective, Ockham, Ontological, Open,
Ordinal, Ordropic reality, Ordropy, Origin Event, Ovoid, Packets, Panexperientialism,
Panprotoexperientialism, Panpsychism, Paradigm, Paradigm shift, Paradoxes, Parallel, Parangular,
Parapsychology, Particle, Past, Penrose, Perceptual, Perceptual reality, Pharmacology, Phenomenal
consciousness, Philosophy, Physical life, Physicalist, Physics, Physiology, Physiobiopsychological,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b li

 
Pico, Planck, Polife, Popper, Postulate, Precognition, Present, Pribram, Primary consciousness,
Primary receptor, Prime essence, Prime radiation, Principle, Protons, Provable, Pseudoskeptics, Psi,
Psitron, Psychology, Psychoneurological, Pythagoras, Pythagorean theorem, Qualit, Quantum
consciousness Quanta, Quantum field theory, Quantum Hall effect, Quantum mechanics,
Quantomacroastronomophysicochemicalethicospirituobiphysiopsychofamiliosociocultural, Quantum
physics, Quantum reality, Quaternion, Qubit, Radian, Radical, Radin, Random Event Generators,
Random number generator, RNG, Rare event, Real numbers, Reality, REG, Relative, Relative
actualization, Relative dimensionality, Relative tethering, Relativity, Relative Non-Euclidean,
Relative non-locality, Relative infinity, Relative zero, Riemann, RNG, Roth, Russel, Russell, S-
substrate, Samadhi, Scalar, Schrödinger, Schroeder, Science, Scientific model, Self, Set theory, Sheep-
goat, Shefa, Shefam, Sheldrake, Sieve, Sigma, Sirag, Smythies, Social sciences, Space, Space-time,
Speculative critical, Special Relativity, Spinors, Standard paradigm, Staring, State, State specific,
Statistical, String theory, Strong forces, Strong anthropic, Subatomic, Substrate, Subquantum,
Subjective, Subject, Subreality, Substrate, Subtypes, Systems Theory, T-substrate, Survival, Tegmark,
Teleological interpretation, TDVP. Tensor, TES, Tethering, Tethered Origin, TOE, Theorem,
Theorem of dimensionometry, Theorem of extra-dimensional extrapolation, Theorem of lower
dimensional incompleteness (discontinuity), Theorem of lower dimensional indeterminate feasibility,
Theorem of parallel N-1 dimensions, Theorem of tridimensional distinctions, Theorem of
tridimensional warping of reality axiom, Theorem of vortices, Theoretical strengths, Theory, Theory
of Everything, Theory of relativity, Thought, Time, Top-down, Topology, Trait, Transcendental
physics, Transdimensional vortices, Triad, Triadic, Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm, Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity, Trimath, Tridimensional
warping, TTOOURS, Twistors, Tzimzum, Ubiquitous, Ubiquity, Ultimate, Understanding,
Unification, Unified Monism, Variables, Vector, Vedic, Volition, Volition. Life, Vedic, Vortex,
Vortex N-dimesnionalism, Vortical, Vortices, Warping, Watson, Wave, Weak anthropic, Weak
forces, Wheeler, Whiteman, Wilbur, Wisdom.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b lii

 
BRIEF GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS.
The following terms are used in special ways in our model, and defined briefly at this point to assist
our readers. These terms are discussed in more detail through this book.
3S-1t: Our conventional scientific reality—3 dimensions of space and 1 moment in time.
Conceptual: The never complete interpretation of the perceptual combined with the logic inductive
and deductive reasoning processes.
Consciousness: A broad, general term describing both infinite conscious meaningful information and
finite awareness and responsiveness ranging from the discrete finite physical meaning at inanimate
levels and extending to transfinite continuous interactions, and modulated in sentient beings in the
brain.
Continuous: Spatial, temporal or conscious extension, infinitely divisible, non-discrete, without breaks
or gaps.
C-substrate: Combined total consciousness, linking the finite and transfinite with infinite.
Dimension: A continuous distinction that can be measured in units of extent. These interact together
forming different domains with specific properties.
Euclidean dimensions can be characterized in degrees of freedom.
Distinction: Any finite object, event, image or thought distinguishable from its surrounds.
Discrete: Finite, discontinuous, countable set of values; not continuous.
Essence: Fundamental infinite nature including infinite space, time, consciousness, information, order
and life. Qualities of the infinite incorporate metaspace, metatime, and metaconsciousness, plus
ordropy and potential life.
Extrapolation: A mathematical term for the logical extension of a known parameter or parameters
facilitating the process of moving to higher dimensions.
Extropy: Our previously used term replaced by “ordropy” (“order” opposing “entropy”).
Finite: Limited extent in space, time or consciousness: discrete, discontinuous subreality.
Fluctuating dimensions: Relative dynamic changes in dimensional perspective including rate or
magnitude of change. These are within, across and between dimensions, and may be state related (at
that moment in time) or trait related (more consistent over time).
Indivension: The process involving fluctuating STC—mainly C-substrate domains of “zillions” (Nn)
of individual-units. These portray unique or common transdimensional (often transfinite) relative
experiential realities. Indivension occurs through the interaction of vortical distinctions (New term
derivation: Individual-units; dimensions).
Individual-unit: Distinct conscious biological unit or group including individual, family, social,
cultural and ethnic units.
Infinite: Limitless, unbounded, continuous, without end subreality; interfaces with finite.
LFAF: Lower-Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification; the basis for including logically feasible
concepts in hypotheses that may not be falsifiable in 3S-1t. This is closely related to feasibility and is
applicable at all dimensional levels.
Metaparadigm: Broadest paradigm impacting all sciences, mathematics and philosophy.
Origin Event: The initial origin in finite reality of events at the beginning, corresponding with the
origins of space, time and consciousness, and possibly mass and energy.
(Some use terms, like Event Horizon. These may be linked with singularity and expanding universe
or the Big Bang, but these are controversial concepts, and we are using the term Origin Event non-
prejudicially here.10)
Ordropy: The existence of spatial, temporal or other meaningful multidimensional order and patterns,
in finite and infinite subrealities, including, but not limited to, negative entropy: “Negative entropy“ is
only one component. (A new term: previously “extropy”).
Paradigm: A model of reality constituting a specific worldview underlying the theories and
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b liii

 
methodology of a particular scientific subject.
Paradigm Shift: A paradigm that transforms thinking in a discipline.
Perceptual: In physics, it is what we obtain from the senses and instruments extending the senses. It is
considered as empirical evidence though in reality it is affected by the observer state and their
relationship to the whole substrate. It is thought of as objective physical reality with measurable data
and interpreted as reality but limited by the axiom of physical limitations. This is easily
misunderstood, partial and incomplete element because of its necessary limitations of the senses and
instruments measuring it.
Psi: extrasensory perception (ESP) + psychokinesis (PK); psychic /paranormal/anomalous.
Reality: The infinite and finite subrealities making an indivisible holistic unit. In sentient beings, that
which is subjective, perceived or experienced; common reality may be verified independently by a
majority of conscious observers.
Six sigma data: Statistically, six or more standard deviations beyond the mean (1 in >109)
STC: Space, time and “consciousness”; specifically, S, T and C-substrates (S,T and C).
Space: Volumetric extent including the dimensions of height, depth, and width (reflecting three
variables of extent with an interval metric) within which physical reality manifests.
Substrate: The source of all distinctions of extent and content: There is a space substrate, a time
substrate and a special kind of substrate of “consciousness” (C-substrate).
Tethering: In TDVP, all of STC are fundamentally inseparably linked together at one or more sources.
S, T or C may also be separate, but remain linked, like a balloon on a string, by being tethered to that
source origin. “Tethering” is also a generic combination term for these two components: a
fundamental inseparable existence of the STC parts at the origin, and the separation with profound
linkage of any tethered aspect of the STC components.
Time: Duration of finite moments perceived together as past, present and future and an infinitely
continuous substrate. In finite reality, this encompasses proposed 4th, 5th and 6th dimensions of extent
encompassing all lower-dimensional realities and events and necessarily moving through space and
consciousness.
TDVP: Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (model of the metaparadigm).
TTOOURS: “Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity” (description of the
metaparadigm).
Triad: An inseparable trio such as space, time and consciousness (STC) (adjective: triadic).
Vortex: A dynamic moving curvilinear manifold multi-dimensional distinction of any open or closed
form, including spherical, ovoid, helical or spiral forms (adjective: vortical).
Warping: The distortion of Euclidean dimensional realities by opposing forces.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b liv

 
Choose your readership style.

We appreciate our readers. We offer you a choice.

There are three ways to read this book: To read the summary of the broader theories
and then begin; or to go full throttle into reading it directly and then there are those who
want to jump into certain chapters of significant interest to them.

All these methods have their proponents.

And in every instance, this book can be regarded as an interactive learning experience.
We keep revising it — a great advantage of an electronic book!

Please choose how you will most benefit from reading this book:
• Chapters 1 and 2 summarize and create a perspective listing the key features.
• Many of you may prefer to begin at Chapter 3 and experience the excitement of
this book, using Chapters 1 and 2, and also the Key Glossary and Keywords
above, as a reference system.
• And some of you may want to approach this book by going to specific chapters
depending on your interests.

Whichever way you choose, we hope you not only enjoy this book but are inspired to
study more and interchange in this difficult and controversial area.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b lv

 
 SECTION A: THE FUNDAMENTAL
PERSPECTIVE
CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW PERSPECTIVE 18, r

“Every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life are based on the labors of
other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same
measure as I have received and am still receiving.”
Albert Einstein

Priorities
Reality Begins with Consciousness presents a sweeping new paradigm shift that we
know will be greeted by a wide range of reactions. A few will embrace it, many will be
stunned by it, and those with vested interest in a materialistic worldview will react with
hostility. A new theory incorporating elements that lie outside the scope of the existing
scientific paradigm will always meet with resistance: And this is as it should be. All of
the major advancements, which Thomas Kuhn19 called “scientific revolutions” or
“paradigm shifts”, like those brought about by Copernicus and Kepler, Newton and
Leibniz, Einstein and Bohr, challenged long-held assumptions and were met with great
resistance. But a new theory should never be rejected out of dogged adherence to belief
in pre-existing fixed assumptions. If the new assumptions are correct, or even just
more correct than the old, they will eventually win over open-minded scientists and
thinkers.

Every scientific theory is based on a priori assumptions, and since they are a priori, by
definition, no matter how correct they appear to be, there is always the chance that they
may be wrong. This certainly applies to the tacit assumption of modern science that
everything can be explained in terms of matter and energy interacting in time and
space as we now understand them, and that consciousness is an epiphenomenon of
material complexity. This new paradigm challenges this belief. But we are not just
replacing one belief system with another, we present cogent arguments based on
empirical evidence from relativity and quantum mechanics, and we provide new
mathematical and logical frameworks to support the new paradigm.

r
In every chapter, we cite a reference on which it is based. This is derived from a series of peer-reviewed articles over the
year published / in press in the DIJECA (Dynamic International Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement) in 2012.
The articles in both books, Reality Begins with Consciousness and Space, Time and Consciousness are featured in this
special series of 12 journals for 2012. DIJECA is the first dynamic journal, which archives previous versions, but allows
upgrades of specific articles to ensure they are current. Each article contains an abstract, too.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 1

 
What we are asking you to do, dear reader, is keep an open mind until you have seen
the whole picture. It will involve learning a number of new concepts and new
terminology. If you will do this, we believe you will see the unfolding of a
comprehensive new paradigm that will expand science to encompass aspects of reality
heretofore excluded from the scientific search for truth.

In this book, Reality Begins with Consciousness, we present to you some remarkable
ideas supported scientifically and mathematically. We realize it may be valuable for
the reader to, at least, encounter our major points of emphasis now, then to read our
overall paradigmatic statement, and then to devour a broader one hundred points about
our model and then begin. We only then develop our detailed theme. We believe this
will assist more in comprehending our ideas than disclosing these summaries only
many chapters later, because at any point you can return to these summaries. These
initial statements in Chapters 1 and 2, at this point can be perceived as equivalent to
abstracts that are non-referenced. But we have endeavored to support every component
of this model with appropriate sources spread through the body of this book. Please
refer to the glossary above for terms that you may not recognize.

The Ten Point Brief Summary of TDVP

a. In this book, Reality Begins with Consciousness, we propose a model that appears
to be the first comprehensive paradigm that can be explained consistently in
science, mathematics and philosophy.

b. The proposed model in this book is called the Triadic Dimensional-Distinction

Vortical Paradigm model (TDVP). In its full descriptive name, it is called The
Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) — The N-
Dimensionometric, CST Substrate, Entropic-ordropic, Infinite-finite
Mathematicologic, LFAF Model: An integrated space, time and “consciousness”
substrate reflecting origin event, warping-N-Dimensional extrapolation, extent-
content-intent distinctional-C-substrate indivension, open-closed, holistic-
unified, biopsychophysical reality.

c. TDVP is based on a single metaparadigm: For clarity, we divide this metaparadigm

of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity (abbreviated
TTOOURS) into four statements:
i. Finite and infinite: Reality involves a unified wholeness of the continuous
infinite with the infinite pervading the discrete finite experience at every
dimensional level.
ii. Living and essence elements: The continuous, infinite reality reflects all of time
and space in totality simultaneously (and therefore, on a finite level appears
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 2

 
 “nonlocal”) and exists as a reality essence (a metareality) involving a pervasive
consciousness (information expressed through meaning as metaconsciousness)
and order (ordropy) with “metalife” (all encompassing life in the infinite:
potential physical life —“polife”—which then manifests as physical life in the
finite when linked with the correct current physiology).
iii. Tethering and individual-units: The discrete, finite, natural law based cosmic
reality component is fundamentally inseparably tethered from its origin as a
triad of space—time—broader “consciousness” (S, T and C-substrates—STC).
The tighter triadic STC tethering may become more loosely separated and
manifest across, between and within multiple fluctuating dimensions and appear
only slightly linked together depending on one’s relative position. This tethering
allows a merging of individual-unit realities and yet retains a profound potential
communication with all the tethered STC components. Individual-units may
reflect individual humans or any other individual sentient beings. Importantly,
individual units can also reflect groups, or families, or societies or cultures or
ethnic groups or any other living population. They may also reflect any
inanimate (not living) components of the finite S, T or C substrates.
iv. 3S-1t limitations: Our experience of the commonly interpreted physical reality (3S-
1t) is profoundly limited by subjective perception, conception and common
experiential reality. In humans, the endpoint expression of such a finite-infinite
interface is the brain, and the brain can filter, integrate or manifest meaning
through neurological consciousness (N-consciousness). N-consciousness (N-C)
can be clear, or in various states of altered or impaired consciousness. There is a
technicality here, implying that because of the “consciousness” element, at
minimum, any sentient being is dealing with 3S-1t-1C because there is a
dimension of conscious meaning that is fundamentally linked with S and T. And
if we describe 1C, then it is technically more consistent to describe N-C as there
is no restriction in our experience to 1 dimension of consciousness and
therefore, it is 3S-1t-NC even in our regular human experience. This
neurological consciousness through the brain becomes the final common
pathway for Ego Consciousness as well as the broader Transfinite
Consciousness, which may include qualities like love, honor, courage or even
negatives such as hatred).
v. Relative, top-down, bottoms-up: The finite-infinite reality is always relative. It is
relative to any subjective realities experienced by any level of individual-units.
And at the broadest level, it can be conceptualized from the “top-down”, in
terms of transfinite higher dimensions influencing dimensions below.
Alternatively, it can be also be experienced “bottom-up” beginning at the
information and meaning we have in the few pieces of our 3S-1t jigsaw puzzle,
and trying to conceptualize or distinguish dimensions of time and consciousness
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 3

 
 that are difficult to perceive or conceptualize. The bottoms-up approach is much
more limiting and difficult to think out of the box than the top-down approach,
which also pervades the infinite subreality.

4. TDVP applies ten interwoven fundamental components to a proposed overriding

metaparadigm that facilitate explanations of many of the mysteries of our reality:
• C-substrate (as an infinite metaconsciousness from metainformation possibly linked
with finite quantal “conscits” with meaning translated into reality by neurological
consciousness (N-C) in 3S-1t.
• metadimensionality (including space and time, extended dimensions beyond our
conventionally perceived 3S-1t, plus interactions with the infinite).
• infinity (with its mathematical, logical and philosophical implications. The infinite
subreality bridges the finite subreality to produce the reality of the laws of nature.
• infinite potential for life: This manifests in the finite subreality as physical life
provided adequate biology could support that physical life. When that physiological
support is no longer possible, physical life terminates as physical death, but that
infinite potential life still exists.
• Life has related implications for ordropy (order across many dimensions and going
beyond negative entropy) (“ord” for order, and the “d” for dimensions).
• Inseparable finite tethering of space-time and C-substrate (STC) is a core idea in the
TDVP model: The tight inseparable STC base or source separates, like a
metaphorical balloon tied by a string to a pole, into tethered S, T and C components
but still remains linked with its original base or bases. This allows communications
with the STC via the tethering.
• The tethered elements involve a communication process across, between and within
dimensions, called indivension (individual units interacting with dimensions).
• Indivension reflects the process by which a fundamental level content namely,
vortices can produce sources of information, time or space. These manifest at
interfaces to allow meaningful information (specific “metaconsciousness”) in 3S-1t.
Vortices reflect any 3 dimensional moving, fluctuating, curved or rotational content
within, across and between dimensions: They are ubiquitous in our 3S-1t domain.
The interfaces across vortices can be facilitated by vector, scalar or tensor elements.
• Each individual-unit interfaces with zillionssof other vortical individual-units
producing a complex web, and a finite origin of all information.
• The beginning in finite subreality is the Origin Event (the beginning of existence,
e.g., around the big bang or other event), and tethering occurs from there. In the
infinite subreality, there is no beginning or end.

s
The term “zillions” is used here to communicate an extraordinarily large quantity. It is of the same order of magnitude as
another term, now well known for a different reason, namely “googol”. A googol is technically 10100. An even larger term
is when googol becomes exponential, namely “googolplex” which is 10googol ! 4
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 4

 
 Based on this model not being contradicted, these features appear necessary. No
other TOE apparently applies even more than three of these principles as necessary
building blocks. TDVP extends these components to develop an extended explanatory
model for all the sciences (physical, life, consciousness and social) from the finite
subatomic to the conventional macroreality to the astronomic realities applying quanta,
or (more correctly) “qualits” (which include consciousness elements even in the
inanimate, plus all the subatomic elements in quantum physics and may be
subquantal), as basic finite discrete reality units with the interlinking continuum of the
infinite.

2. We apply a new philosophy of science model for evaluating science, in addition to

Popperian falsifiability, which is very useful in many 3S-1t macroreality physical
events, we utilize the idea of feasibility. Reality in 3S-1t is sometimes expressed
scientifically as empirical pieces of a complex jigsaw puzzle in our common physical
reality experience of three spatial dimensions at one point of time (3S-1t or technically,
3S-1t-NC). This means we don’t have the full metadimensional (higher dimensional)
picture and we must assess what is feasible, yet has not been falisified. This model is
called Lower Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification (LFAF). The TDVP model
logically allows for feasible applications in all the sciences and non-contradiction in
mathematicologic evaluations. This LFAF technique is combined with the recognized
scientific analyses of falsifiability as part of the methodology of literature review,
hypotheses, methods, results, analysis, discussions, provisional conclusions (including
statistical, clinical significance and observational non-statistically needed analyses)
and then amplifying by modifying the hypotheses until a paradigm and ultimately a
metaparadigm is developed.

3. Mathematics and logic are applied to these fundamental principles to further

validate the empirical findings and hypotheses.
a. The TDVP model generates over 600 new ideas, some speculative, that logically
follow from its fundamental axiom. These are covered in our book, Reality Begins with
Consciousness: A Paradigm Shift that Works, 9 and particularly so in the (to be
published) associated companion book involving more speculations and models,
Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad. 10
b. Amongst these ideas, the TDVP model provides for rare communications across a
fluctuating number of dimensions. However, potential information, knowledge and
meaning may exist without expression, just as we have available more than we see,
hear, taste or smell at any moment, and only a tiny spectrum of these abilities are
available for humans. This differentiates what is potentially available from what is
used at any point.
c. The implications of TDVP lead to “unified monism”, a new philosophical model.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 5

 
 These fundamental axioms constitute the TDVP metaparadigm of the finite, the
infinite and the relation between the two. This TDVP metaparadigm is conceptually a
unit that may be more easily comprehensible only after appreciating the specifically
defined terminology, such as metaparadigm, metareality, consciousness, potential,
tethering, triad, Origin Event, separate, fluctuating, vortices, subjective, relative,
individual-units, ordropy, 3S-1t, experiential, and subreality.
Again, please refer to the brief glossary in the front initial appendix: Later on
these areas are explained in greater detail and we suggest this metaparadigm be
revisited throughout the exploration of this book. The concepts here are complex, but
the object here is to obtain an overview. Do not be concerned if this is not easily
comprehensible to you. The concepts will be explained gradually: This is why the
book does not end here!
Nevertheless, we provide the metaparadigm now because it will allow the reader to
conceptualize more the directions and approaches we are going to use. You should, at
minimum, appreciate at this point that:
• We are dealing with space, time and “consciousness” as a single entity
(tethered together: The tethered triad of “STC”.
• This single component of tethering like a balloon on a string then branches out
and moves across, within and between dimensions. These tethered elements still
have a profound link because of the source STC components. (This introduces
the idea of interactions across multiple dimensions).
• This allows communications of information and consciousness between
individuals, groups, societies, ethnicities and culture. (This means we need a
way to communicate—we call this process “indivension” relating to how
“individual-units” —individuals or units like society —move across
dimensions).
• There are different levels of development and this can fluctuate even in
individuals or individual-units. (These fluctuations occur within a context—
three-dimensional moving rounded shapes called vortices. The indivension is
the mechanism).
• In addition to this finite reality, we are dealing with an infinity that interfaces
with the finite. (The infinite and the finite subrealities of reality impact upon
each other.)
• Infinity reflects continuous and unending (open) subreality. The finite involves
the discrete, closed subreality that we experience on a day-to-day basis.
• In the finite reality, everything exists from the beginning even the potential
towards life. (This refers to an Origin Event)
• Life reflects significant order at many levels (ordropy) and has infinite origins.
• With this ordered reality is intermixed disorder (entropy) at the physical finite
level.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 6

 
 • The TDVP model can be applied to all the sciences, from the smallest to the
largest, and from the physical to the biological to the psychological to the
consciousness sciences. (It has an application across all the sciences hence it is
a metaparadigm).
• Furthermore, our model has mathematical justifications with axioms, theorems
and proofs. (Distinctions are one kind of mathematics particularly important in
consciousness theory as is the justification for the infinite).
• The TDVP model can be applied both as a broader workable new paradigm,
plus as a philosophical model.

Paradigms, Metaparadigms and Theories of Everything in TDVP.

As it can be applied to all the major areas of scientific endeavor, we describe
TDVP as a “metaparadigm” because of its overriding higher-level basis. This
paradigmatic model is not intended to solve all current unexplained mysteries in
physics or any other endeavor relating to content. But, we have yet to find an area of
principles of reality that cannot be expressed within this global paradigmatic shift.
There are, of course, millions of, thus far, insoluble questions and unknowns in the
world, but we’re attempting broad models that are not being refuted, not to provide
omniscience! TDVP is a practical, so-called “Theory of Everything” (TOE): We
intently dislike the term “TOE”, but because it’s been commonly and persistently used,
we need to apply it, at times, to compare TDVP with other proposed “TOE” models.
TOE is an unfortunate term because it may be interpreted ambiguously. In its most
appropriate sense, “TOE” implies a universal feasibility model applicable at every
level of endeavor. But in its misinterpreted, inappropriate meaning, TOE is mistakenly
regarded as representing theories of all-embracing knowledge. No model, except a
proposed Divinity, is all-embracing in answering everything. We use the terms “TOE”
and “paradigm” not to explain bizarre neutrino behaviors, mixing angles amongst
quarks, every detailed change in evolution, the exact DNA sequence, or specific
chemistry: Whereas these are all legitimate areas to clarify, they reflect content
questions, not paradigms. Paradigms are not just theoretical, they are practical but
predominantly examine process not content, broader pictures and principles, not
specifics. But by virtue of the process, they could assist with appreciation of the
content and the specifics—that would be the secondary application.
Ironically, in TDVP, we initiate a very broad scientifically empirical, inferential
model based on specific testable or hypothetical content data, but that is directed
towards the process of testing the model. The “process” reflects the “procedure” for
evaluating data. As an example, we may be able to understand the process that in an
asymmetric multidimensional, moving, curved (vortical) reality spin occurs. So we can
from that understand that quarks may have a specific “mixing” spin structure, but we
may not be able to predict the exact Cabibbo angle (content) though postulating that
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 7

 
there should be an angle. Additionally, if possible, deductive mathematics and logic
provide demonstrable support. Moreover, existing current solid empirical data can
frequently be incorporated into the model by applying the principles of the "philosophy
of science"; and even esoteric abstractions of process still have content applications.
To give a perspective of our TDVP model, we list three descriptions: The first, the
four point model, gives a good though complex perspective of what the paradigm
reflects. The second is a “for fun” very complex single sentence that contains all the
key features of TDVP. But even with its limited comprehensibility, it is still meant to
portray how all the very interwoven parts can be put through as a whole. The third is
literally one short sentence and is a good one line summary. (Though even there the
historical footnote on Minkowski gives a perspective on the extreme relevance for
today of that one liner!). And now the 4-point TDVP axiomatic summary of this
TTOOURS metaparadigm. In chapter 16, we discuss the 22 key axioms and then
summarize it with 4 statements. These four statements are listed here to give an added
perspective to this metaparadigm.

The Four Sentence Axiomatic Metaparadigm Summary

1. Reality involves a unified wholeness of the infinite and finite with the infinite
pervading the finite experience of content and extent, ordropy and entropy, in the
Space Time and “Consciousness” Substrates.
2. The essence infinite reality component is without extent because it exists or
potentially exists in all space, time and consciousness, and information content.
Infinity involves the potential towards order (ordropy). Discrete elements of the
infinite are manifested in the finite. Consequently, in finite terms, infinity is
conceptualized as nonlocal (beyond space and time) but in infinite terms it involves a
metareality of all existing metatime and metaspace, existing as a pervasive
metaconsciousness and potential living, ordered subreality. Metacist is an acronym for
metaconsciousness, meta-information, metaspace and metatime.
3. The Finite reality component is fundamentally inseparably tethered from its origin
as a triad of space—time— broader descriptive “consciousness” (S, T and C-
substrates), which manifests across, between and within multiple fluctuating
dimensions.
4. This finite-infinite reality is relative to all dimensional-distinction factors, and
experienced subjectively (by individual-units).

The One Point (Heavy) Summary of the TDVP Model

And now the “heavy” description of TDVP. This is presented simply for its
unification, not for its limited comprehensibility. It certainly is a deliberately
contrived, single statement summary of TDVP. But it is listed here to show how TDVP
involves several closely related concepts linked into one complex metaparadigmatic
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 8

 
statement, in turn based on the twenty-two underlying and interwoven component
axioms though there is also a primary axiom. We express this in the next chapter as our
summary statement under #100. By that stage it should make only a little more sense.
We then later express each individually, yet we link them here because of the essential
unity of the metaparadigm—the overarching statement reflects a major shift in
conventional thinking about our usual physical reality, and describes not just a shift in
thinking in one scientific endeavor, but in many disciplines. So though the one
sentence portrays the model’s unity it does not portray how comprehensible it will
become. Please don’t be discouraged if this sounds a little like gibberish—it should at
this point! Later in the book, it should make more sense when each component is
analyzed and synthesized. So this one sentence paragraph is read to reflect the unit, not
for comprehensibility.
Reality can be expressed within the laws of nature of the physical, psychological,
biological and consciousness sciences with mathematical elaborations, and involves a
unified holistic reality with interweaving infinite and finite subrealities: the infinite is a
continuous essence metareality (i.e., an all encompassing consciousness/information,
space and time, with potential order and potential physical life); the infinite pervades
a discrete finite, cosmic subreality manifesting as a fundamental triad (originating
from the Origin Event) of S, T and C-substrates (space, time and broader descriptive
“consciousness”) which is inseparably tethered together—tightly, loosely or slightly,
and which separates into multiple interwoven, fluctuating 3-dimensional vortices
within, between and across dimensions, but only perceived to a limited degree, via our
restrictive and responsive 3S-1t experiential, entropic physical subreality interpreted
by our living physiological ordropy and conceptualized subjectively (relatively by
individual-units).
We have called this “The metaparadigm of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin
Unified Relative Subjectivity” (TTOOURS) and it is based on our model of the Triadic
Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP).

And the easy one sentence axiom

We now follow this with the single primary axiom we referred to, and include the
historic Minkowski linked footer.
All of space-time-"consciousness" have always been inseparably tethered together—
tightly, loosely or slightly.t

t
At one point time, “time” was regarded as separate from “space”, but Hermann Minkowski argued in 1908 that they
were not: space-time could not be separated. Just as time is not a subset of space but a separate and different kind of
dimension though inextricably linked, we argue that Space and Time are not subsets of “Consciousness”, nor vice versa;
yet they are not (dualistically)separated. All three exist in extent, necessarily together as a unit: There are likely multiple
“dimensions” of “consciousness”, definitely at least 3 of space, and likely 3 of time—and all need careful definition.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 9

 
CHAPTER 2: THE HUNDRED POINT PERSPECTIVE OF TDVP20; 21
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them
see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation
grows up that is familiar with it.”
Max Planck

The order of the 100 points below are logical.

We’ve emboldened 30 ideas to allow further perspectives for first time readers.
This way effectively there is another section: 30 key ideas followed by the other 70. But
the 30 are more appropriately ordered by scattering through the 100 total.

The Limitations of our Current Paradigm for Reality

1. A paradigm refers to a specific worldview underlying the theories and
methodology of a particular scientific subject.
2. Our standard paradigm for reality involves our usual current day-to-day world
experience with the physical conventional reality domain of three dimensions
of space and one point of time—3S-1t. The standard paradigm has
applications for almost all our everyday earthly human realities, and works in
almost every instance.
But a new model is needed other than our standard paradigm because there are rare
areas in which the standard paradigm is incomplete and, indeed, falsified, for
example:
a. contrary quantum experimental evidence (the double-slit and delayed
choice experiments);
b. the contradictions of the standard model of subatomic physics
particularly in the context of relativity and data that varies greatly from
predictions;
c. the nine different six sigma meta-analyses in consciousness research.
d. the internal inconsistency in physics across quantal, macro- and
astronomical levels;
e. the applications of special and general relativity theory have facilitated
new approaches to the previous Newtonian physical understanding of

We propose that all three—Space Time and "Consciousness" (STC) —necessarily form a triad in everything, from the
tiniest subatomic components to the astrophysical, from the inanimate to the sentient, from the finite to the infinite. It
starts at the finite origin of events and possibly an existing infinite where “origin” may be a contradiction. And, even
going beyond Minkowski’s powerful empirical approach in physics, our model cogently evidentially argues data across
the sciences, and mathematically demonstrates why this STC triad works and is better than any other model previously
proposed. We may be wrong, but, we argue that it is more soundly motivated than any other because it fits all disciplines
of science, is supported mathematically, and has a philosophical (and, it turns out, even an ancient mystical) basis.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 10

 
 the world but reduced new challenges.
f. Whether evolution can be applied to the standard paradigm cannot be
demonstrated because it is not falsifiable, yet there is debate as to its
feasibility: it is unanswered;
g. The unanswered question of how life comes about.
3. We argue that this standard paradigm cannot explain why there is complex
structure and complex conscious organisms in the universe or a universe at all.
This physicalist, materialist paradigm fails. In it, consciousness is nothing more
than an emergent feature or epiphenomenal expression of the physical world,
and disputably neuroscience itself cannot adequately explain consciousness in
terms of the physical brain alone.
4. Because of these failures, there is a need for a radical new paradigm of reality
which will address the complex controversies that are not explained using our
standard model.
5. A paradigm shift refers to a fundamental change in approach or modification of
our current underlying assumptions.
6. This book describes the authors’ motivated “Theory of Everything“ (TOE) and
their recognition of a global paradigm shift that includes consciousness and
interfaces every known area of scientific endeavor.
7. Because there are areas with evidence and even proof in science that cannot be
replicated, we need to consider adding to this approach in special
circumstances.
8. The special circumstances in which the classical approach of Karl Popper in the
Philosophy of Science 22 requiring falsifiability cannot be applied include
evolution, cosmology, new models (for example, Einsteinian General Relativity
took some years), dimensions beyond 3S-1t, models of indeterminacy, psi,
entanglement and alleged survival after bodily death.
9. Because falsifiability is usually limited to only 3S-1t, we propose a new model
approach to the philosophy of science. This recognizes that some elements
cannot be falsified at this time in 3S-1t., yet there may be ample feasibility
evidence in 3S-1t.
10. We propose the model of LFAF: Lower dimensional feasibility (usually 3S-1t),
absent falsification. This is equivalent to using a jigsaw puzzle in 3S-1t and
filling in the pieces that fit, but not allowing any contradiction where a piece of
that jigsaw does not fit, implying it is falsified or misinformation or contradicted
by empirical evidence.
11. By demonstrating the limitations of Popperian demands for the falsifiability of
science in metadimensional realities (i.e., beyond 3S-1t), we apply this LFAF
(lower dimensional feasibility—absent falsification /falsified) approach where
logically indicated.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 11

 
 12. Because data at the higher dimensional levels cannot be completely represented
in 3S-1t, they present like single puzzle pieces in a whole, multidimensional (i.e.,
>3S-1t) puzzle. They are only there in part and conclusions may be feasible yet
not falsifiable or falsified in the traditional sense as they cannot be directly or
completed represented in 3S-1t.

Requirements of a TOE AND Paradigm Shift

13. To be true, the key components of any TOE must allow feasible modifications
from the current conceptual, mathematical and scientific models without
contradicting fundamental knowledge (other than materialist reductionism).
They must be feasible fitting pieces of the 3S-1t jigsaw puzzle without being
falsified.
14. Any all-encompassing TOE must conform to all known laws of nature. Such a TOE
must also seamlessly reconcile with the major theoretical models and authoritative
sources of all the natural sciences.
15. Scientific areas that must be actively evaluated include not only the
• physical sciences including physics, chemistry, meteorology, and astronomy;
• the biological sciences including anatomy, biology, genetics, physiology,
pharmacology, the life sciences and medicine;
• the social sciences, including anthropology, psychology and sociology; and
• the consciousness sciences including dimensional biopsychophysics,
phenomenology, parapsychology and quantum consciousness.
16. A complete TOE should also be specifically compatible with the three major
disciplines examining concepts outside our 3S-1t conventional reality: Hyperspace,
Consciousness research and Philosophy, except those concepts that can be falsified
by new logic and/or evidence.
17. Moreover, we posit that such a TOE should be compatible at all levels of
cosmology, from the tiniest subatomic packets to the macrophysical usual realities
to the astrophysical.
18. The TOE should also be compatible with the known forces including all energies.
19. We posit that a TOE should be able to explain events in all of time. This includes
evolution.
20. A TOE must not only be empirically appropriate, but explainable within the
confines of Philosophy including mysticism and spirituality.
21. A TOE should preferably have a demonstrable solid logical and mathematical base.
22. We regard the principles of LFAF and falsifiability as key to motivating any
scientific models including TOEs.
23. Our premise is that the laws of nature should be universally applicable to to all
finite cosmic reality. This includes scientific endeavors. We do not have data on
infinite subreality but propose this is also part of the broadest laws of nature. The
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 12

 
 infinite bridges with the finite subreality and the data that is expressed is discrete
and finite.
24. We posit that a TOE should not imply anything supernatural or miraculous. What
may be perceived as miraculous in 3S-1t, may not be anomalous in other higher
dimensions but nevertheless, its occurrence at that moment in that place under that
circumstance may be meaningful, possibly reflecting the finite-infinite interface.

TDVP as a New Paradigm

25. We present our multidisciplinary Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP) model. TDVP can be applied without contradiction to all those
disciplines (physical, biological, social and consciousness sciences) under an all-
encompassing TOE, and allows these disciplines to manifest consistent elements of
the same unified world-view.
26. TDVP demonstrates the essential and maintained holistic-unified triadic nature of
space, time and "a broader consciousness" (STC). This biopsychophysical reality
applies to everything from the subatomic to the astrophysical.
27. TDVP reflects origins from the very beginning of the cosmos. It involves aspects
of STC inseparability. But it also involves aspects of space, time and C-substrate
that are tethered. Therefore, tethered dimensional independence of STC
dimensions are key elements, leading to dimensions of Space, Time, and
Consciousness that theoretically function separately. Nevertheless, the
inseparable STC component is an essential functional component of the tethered
S, T and C dimensions. This is because the tethered linkage to the source allows
the linking of space and time events and information—including meaningful
information as consciousness— across STC. Tethering allows the
communication network to work for Reality.
28. TDVP is controversial because of its implications. Nevertheless, the mathematics
and the empirical data strongly support the necessity for this fundamental
paradigm.
29. The TDVP model may appear presumptive given the failed attempts of the past
century to achieve a TOE, but TDVP applies five key, fundamental differences:
• “consciousness” in its broadest meaning: an obvious, but previously mainly
ignored, phenomenon;
• finite discrete multiple dimensions: linked with this “broader consciousness”
• broader continuous infinity: this application is added to consciousness and
dimensions;
• order: the awareness of certain situation tending towards order as well as
others towards disorder is critical to support the TDVP paradigm;
• closely related to Order (which we call “ordropy”) is “life”.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 13

 
No other TOE has applied all these elements.
30. A sixth unique and apparently necessary need is fundamental tethering of Space-
time and C-substrate: This implies, too, areas of (at least theoretical) independent
separation of content (possibly interfacing vortices) and process (involving various
levels of identity “individual-units” [of individuals, groups, families, societies,
cultures, ethnicities and any other subgroups] that intersect and interface creating
billions of complex vortices across dimensions.

31. The TDVP model incorporates the mathematical proofs and empirical data
supporting the relativity of several important areas, namely:
• Relative dimensionality
• Relative zero
• Relative infinity
• Relative vortices (“fluctuating indivension”)
• Relative non-locality
• Relative distinctions.
• Relative warping of reality.
Essentially, all these features may be necessary to ensure a compatible all-
encompassing paradigm No previous TOE has applied all these elements.
32. By integrating “consciousness” into space-time, we are able to construct a TOE
that utilizes and can be applied to every major scientific, philosophical and
consciousness discipline, namely, the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP).
33. TDVP impacts on every major scientific philosophical and consciousness
discipline. It is a comprehensive multi-dimensional paradigm integrating physical
and life sciences with consciousness, applying ontological, epistemological,
empirical, heuristic laws of nature.
34. TDVP reflects an entropic-ordropic, N-Dimensionometric CST substrate
(“consciousness”-space-time) model supported by mathematical formulae,
dimensional-distinction logic, and empirical physical, consciousness, psychological
and life-sciences data, with the finite pervaded by the infinite.
35. Essentially space, time and “consciousness” are fundamentally tethered
inseparably from the event-horizon (e.g., the first appearance of matter at the end
of the rapid expansion period of the big bang).
36. The fundamental and permanent tethering likely implies a unification of what, in
our conventional reality of 3S-1t, we experience as past, present and future. This
means that our concept of time is relative.
37. This also implies that there may be something outside of time as we experience it in
3S-1t. That concept could reflect continuous infinite realities or discrete
multidimensional time in the finite or both.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 14

 
38. With the presence of tethering and a fundamental “consciousness” as well as
space and time, the likelihood of a requisite order to reality becomes a theoretical
possibility and there is empirical data (e.g., life and its origins) to support that.
39. This means that there may be another system besides the closed finite concept of
physical “disorder” that we call “entropy”. This is more than “negative entropy”
as it is multidimensional. We call this active system “ordropy”.

Key Terminology in TDVP

40. The term “consciousness”: “Consciousness” has been misunderstood,

misinterpreted and variably used in different disciplines. It is narrower than “C-
substrate” as that has several unifying elements. C-substrate refers to the broadest
consciousness. There are several components to consciousness which we
differentiate namely:
a. Neurological Consciousness relating to brain functioning (N-consciousness or
N-C implying neurological consciousness or C-substrate) as the final common
endpoint and integrator of all awareness and responsiveness in sentient beings:
N-C is exemplified by brain function and perceives, filters, integrates and
responds to all the major incoming information in the brain—autonomic,
automatic, physiological and psychological as well as any postulated external
subreality. N-C ranges from coma to at least minimal awareness and/ or
responsiveness to the clear distinction of self from everything else, in living
organisms.
b. Psychological Consciousness or ego-consciousness (E-consciousness: E-C)
including all psychosocial mechanisms such as conditioning and
psychodynamics. Subgroups include preconscious-, subconscious-, unconscious-
and collective- E-consciousness.
c. Quantum consciousness: Physics and consciousness or Quantum
Consciousness, Q-consciousness (Q-C.)
d. Higher consciousness: (H-C) This is divided into an overlap of
metaconsciousness in the infinite or M-consciousness, abbreviated (M-C) and
Transfinite Consciousness (T-C).
e. Paradigmatic sciences: This is P-consciousness (P-C). This broader
consciousness includes meaningful information and unifies all other areas of
consciousness:
• the consciousness sciences particularly in our TDVP discussion. This includes
• any kind of subjective experience, afferent or efferent, including psi and
exceptional human experiences.
• the biological and life sciences including neurological
anatomicophysiologicopathological elements,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 15

 
 • the psychological sciences across the systems spectrum of individual
psychological, family, group and social, cultural, anthropological and ethnic,
and mysticospirituotheological components; and the
• physical sciences including all the laws governing the subatomic, macrophysical
and cosmo- or astrophysical.
• The altered states of consciousness, e.g., 10 different kinds.
• Infinite (I-consciousness) and finite consciousness (F-consciousness) may be
artificial divisions with H-C and its M-C, T-C divisions.
41. C-substrate: C-substrate refers to the broadest possible interpretation of
“consciousness”, and is closely linked with Paradigmatic consciousness as this
integrates the sciences and philosophy. C-substrate recognizes the finite and the
infinite summarized as follows:
Metaconsciousness (or M-C for this infinite consciousness) implying extended infinite
consciousness. Some have used terms such as “collective consciousness”, “the
unconscious” (not in the Freudian but extended sense), and “information repository”.
These may be similar, but are not identical because they are often described within the
finite sentient being context. Whereas finite “conscits” of C-substrate may be
perceived or conceived of by humans or other sentient beings after being expressed,
filtered and likely distorted or amplified, through the nervous system,
metaconsciousness is fundamentally an infinite concept reflecting an infinite essence
repository. It is almost certain that other life-forms besides humans could tap into it, in
which case metaconscious finite expression may be different. Metaconsciousness refers
to an infinite continuous repository of infinite meaning extent derived from a infinite
repository of information content (metainformation). In a broader sense, Transfinite
Consciousness can be expressed as discrete meaning that can occur, theoretically, at
any dimensional level. At higher dimensions it may express itself with qualities such as
honesty, love, hate, modesty, satisfaction, wisdom, understanding. It may also express
itself across individual-units, reflecting Higher Consciousness at levels such as the
individual, group, family, society, culture or, ethnic identity.
a. Meaning (or F-C for discrete Finite Consciousness of the C-substrate) involves
both apprehension and influence implying at minimum very basic meaning at
the most primitive level of reality even in subatomic particles or quanta or
subquantally, all the way through to the macrophysical and then cosmological
astrophysical level. This involves both the inanimate and the animate. At the
animate level, this meaning may be so complex, it closely resembles all the
information plus meaning acquired through the metaconscious, but at 3S-1t or
3S-1t-1C levels, it ultimately requires neurological expression and may be
modified by the nervous system of the sentient being.
b. Therefore, C-substrate means the broadest possible interpretation of
“consciousness” but in sentient beings F-C and I-C is expressed within N-C and
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 16

 
 admixed with N-C, E-C and C-C. It is also postulated to include Q-C, which
exists in any kind of finite subreality. M-C is conceptually different as it reflects
philosophical interpretations so may not be incorporated, per se, into C-
substrate.

42. The special use of “Vortices”: A major mechanism facilitating radical changes to
the perception of the nature of reality is the predominant structural form of nature,
namely, 3-D vortical movement.
a. The term vortex is used broadly implying symmetrical or asymmetrical
movement involving ovoid, circular, spherical, arc, helical, elongated or
twisting shapes.
b. Vortices interact and impact across and within dimensions and domains.
c. Vortices are naturally occurring, and demonstrably fundamentally ubiquitous
across many areas of empirical scientific endeavor, and are now
mathematically demonstrable across dimensions.
d. Vortices can be applied as one model to explain any field theory. Therefore, any
field theory model explanation can be used for vortices. Vortices are empirically
derived from nature, and mathematically justified by extension of Fermat’s Last
Theorem, Pythagorean interaction, and extending a modeling of General
Relativity with warping beyond four dimensions.
e. Vortices link with other vortices or with scalars, vectors or tensors, allowing
transfer of space, time and consciousness information across dimensions.
Billions of interactions of variably shaped ovoid or curved movements (vortices
in their broadest meaning) reflect reality experience at both 3S-1t and other
domains in an N-D universe.
f. Vortices impact, impinge, repel, permeate and intrude through and within N-Ds.
This makes for societies, cultures, ethnicities, families, groups, individuals and
subatomic through cosmological stuctures.
g. Effectively, the vortical interfaces allow for C-M to transfer across all
dimensional and systems levels, and it also allows for a vast quantity of
potential untapped vortical data to be utlized as and when necessary.

43. The role of Distinctions:

• Distinctions are used in the context of Close’s Calculus of Distinctions,
which derive from Brown’s Laws of form.
• Distinctions differentiate two qualities via consciousness or form.
• Unlike set theory, which examines linear binary similarities, distinctions
examine differences across many dimenstions—they can utlize a
multidimensional approach.
• To qualify as a dimension, we apply Close’s Calculus of Distinctions.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 17

 
 Dimensions necessarily involve variables of extent (such as depth or linear
time or one kind of consciousness) not of content (such as mass or energy,
which can be characterized by their density, defined as amount of content
per volumetric unit of extent).
• Distinctions differentiate the perceptual, conceptual and experiential.
The concept of Dimensions:
• Dimensionality is the study of different dimensions (measurable using
variables of extent) including the metadimensional (going beyond 3S-1t).
• Separation of dimensions are artificial as they interact together forming
different domains with specific properties.
• Dimensions involve combinations of any of the three fundamental
substrates of S (space), T (time) and C (broader consciousness).
• Euclidean dimensions can be measured using finite numerical units and
are characterized in terms of degrees of freedom.

44. The term “triadic”: Triadic refers to the fundamental components of space, time
and C-substrate being inseparably tethered together. It does not mean that there
are only three Dimensions but the application of triadic perspectives allows
conceptual jumps of triadic kind: For example, vortices are three dimensional;
there are three aspects of reality (perceptual, conceptual and common
experiential); and the possibility of three dimensions of time with consciousness
is relevant. This basic triadic nature of reality appears to be reflected often in
logic, mathematics, linguistics, and philosophy.

45. Metrics: Dimensions can be measured metrically. In space and time such
measures use fixed differences such as interval-ratio elements; in consciousness,
measures are ordinal, applying comparisons (e.g., nil, mild, moderate, severed).
The mathematical representation beyond 3S-1t often goes beyond simple
Euclidean geometry, and we have called this “dimensionometry”. However, the
non-Euclidean dimension, n, can generally be closely represented by the
Euclidean approximations (sometimes in n-1).

46. Metadimensionality: In TDVP, we regard the presence of metadimensionality (>5

dimensions) as strongly supported by logic, mathematics, dimensional
extrapolation, and empirical evidence. Metadimensionality is required because our
current 3S-1t is insufficient even with 3S-1t-1C. Indeed, C-substrate is particularly
complex dimensionally with a large number of finite dimensions likely.

47. Individual-Unit: We introduce the (concept of the) “individual-unit” reflecting

interactions at individual, family, social, cultural and any other systems
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 18

 
 impacting the broader ethicospirituobiopsychofamiliosociocultural approach.
Individual-units may reflect single humans; they could reflect any individual
sentient beings, or groups, or families, or societies or cultures or ethnic groups or
any other living population, plus any components of finite S, T or C substrates.

48. Indivension, a necessary new term in the absence of other term expressing the
concept.
• Indivension portrays the fluctuating dimensions and domains in the individual-
unit or a combination of individual-units experiencing a common reality—a
quantomacroasronomophysicochemical-
ethicospirituobiophysiopsychofamiliosociocultural systems translation of
common or individual experience at higher dimensional levels.
• Indivension allows for transitory or fluctuating experiential realities and
emphasizes that individual-units may not be experiencing static numbers of
dimensions or domains but they are circumstance dependent. Whereas
indivension is the “process”, the “content“ by which indivension works is
through Transdimensional Vortices.
• Indivension allows for a merging of individual-unit realities. Effectively, this
allows for and produces common experiences, knowledge, information and
interactions across various systems units (individual, group, social, cultural,
ethnic, spiritual or any other identity)
• The fluctuations are within, across and between dimensions, and may be state
related (at that moment in time) or trait related (more consistent over time).
• The interfacing meeting points may be vortical, vectorial, scalar or tensor and
allow for information retrieval, apprehension, awareness, perturbation or
influence.
• Indivension provides for rare communications across a fluctuating number of
dimensions.
• However, potential information, knowledge and meaning may exist without
expression, just as we have available more than we see, hear, taste or smell at
any moment, and only a tiny spectrum of these abilities are available for
humans. This differentiates what is potentially available from what is used at
any point.

49. Tethering: "Tethered" in the TDVP has two components:

o a fundamental inseparable existence and linkage of the three component
substrates at the origins or sources of their inseparability, namely, space-
time and “consciousness”.
o relative perceptual separation of these parts, namely, any aspect of the
STC components, that are not perceived as tethered in 3S-1t-1c.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 19

 
In TDVP, "tethered" refers to an inseparable linkage of the parts—space, time and C-
substrates—at some or multiple points. Useful metaphors would be the umbilicus
linking the fetus to the mother yet the fetus being independent too; the ship being
moored and the moorage being the tethered part; staples holding down a series of
papers; the roots of the STC tree being common but the branches being separate; the
balloons being held in hand by strings but potentially interfacing with each other.

This tethering leads also to very fluid vortical three dimensional separations of the
various levels of individual-units by indivension, whereby interfacing and interacting,
and movement across, between and within dimensions occur. Tethering is fundamental
and inseparable occurring from the event-horizon (e.g., the big bang). This allows for
the unified wholeness of cosmic reality. (This is reflected in the Axiom of Tethered
Origin [ATO] as part of the broader TTOOURS in the Metaparadigm of Triadic
Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity).

50. Reality is unified with infinite and finite subrealities. It is convenient to use the
term “essence” for the components of the infinite relating to time that is enduring
and ever present (i.e., past-present-future exist simultaneously as proposed in three
dimensional time), space that is all pervasive, C-substrate which encompasses the
continuous metaconscious extent and metainformation intent, ordropy and metalife
(potential life). This essence pervades the discrete finite directly and at every
dimensional level including 3S-1t (or more correctly as consciousness is always
present, 3S-1t-1C or NC).

Applications, Uses and Understanding TDVP

51. Amongst the important mathematical demonstrations are new applications of:
• the Pythagorean theorem, showing that the three dimensional Euclidean
substrate is common to space, time and consciousness;
• All dimensionometric representations (not only Pythagorean), e.g., radians, can
be used to show the same three dimensional limitation;
• Fermat’s last theorem, demonstrating the fundamental asymmetries in
metadimensionality and the ubiquity of the vortex;
• Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, applied to finite complete arithmetical
functions and therefore, TOEs, which necessarily reflect Theories of Everything,
would require infinity to go beyond the finite completeness (of peano
arithmetic).
• Bell’s theorem and inequality being refuted demonstrating the Copenhagen
interpretation of physics or equivalents;
• later Leggett’s inequalities showed the same findings;
• the application of real, imaginary and complex numbers in metadimensional
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 20

 
 reality arguing for real numbers in space, Minkowski space time dimensions of
imaginary numbers and C-substrate dimensions involving complex numbers,
which therefore, can interface with S and T substrates;
• the use of quaternions as potentially representing dimensions of the conscious
substrate.
• both Euclidean and non-Euclidean mathematics demonstrating the relative
perceptual reality of curved non-Euclidean space;
• extra dimensionality going beyond Minkowski space and Cantor’s set theory;
• applying Close’s calculus of distinctions, particularly with regard to the C-
substrate (the broadest consciousness) as well as distinctions of extent, content
and intent, plus interval and ordinal metric measures.
• the calculus of distinctions involves a modification of classical Newtonian and
Leibniz motion of motion calculus to a calculus of conscious forms and
indications;
• a potential use of Multidimensional Scaling applying Mean and Median Column
Geometry can be applied to represent multiple higher dimensions into two
dimensional graphs, e.g., as with the Neppe déjà vu work.
The mathematics supports the feasibility of a number of the hypotheses in the TDVP
model.

52. The TDVP model includes 22 fundamental axioms that create a unified
metaparadigm based on the infinite, the finite and the relation between the two.
• There are finite axioms of unification, triadic inseparability, CST tethering,
discrete quantal expression, vortical ubiquity, nervous system endpoint and
subjectivity.
• The infinite axioms are axiom of infinite origin, of holism in space-time
infinity, of living infinite reality, of ordropic reality, of metaconscious
infinity, of information, of pervasive, and essential infinity.
• Linked finite-infinite axioms are of communicating relative infinity,
fluctuating dimensional distinctions, continuous infinity linked with discrete
finity, of artificiality, of boundaries, of metaconscious dimensional
distinctions, and of relativity.

53. These axioms can be divided for clarity into four sentences creating a
metaparadigm.
• Reality involves a unified wholeness of the infinite and finite with the
infinite pervading the finite experience.
• The cosmic infinite reality component involves order (ordropy), is in finite
terms nonlocal (beyond space and time) but in infinite terms metareality of
all existing metatime and metaspace, exists as a pervasive
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 21

 
 metaconsciousness and potential living, ordered subreality
• The Finite reality component is fundamentally inseparably tethered from
its origin as a triad of space—time— broader descriptive “consciousness”
(S, T and C-substrates), which manifests across, between and within
multiple fluctuating dimensions.
• This finite-infinite, entropic-ordropic reality is relative to all dimensional-
distinction factors, and experienced subjectively (by individual-units)
(Metaparadigm of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative
Subjectivity [ TTOOURS]).

54. Dozens of other axiomatic implications exist summarized by:

• STC dimensions and domains,
• relative zero and relative infinity,
• entropy-ordropy dynamics,
• potential life and physical life,
• interfacing extent and content,
• distinction existence, distinctions,
• measurement: metric (extent) and density(content),
• permeability, protection, communication ease,
• communication complexity,
• top-down communication,
• metaconscious qualities,
• metaconscious state and trait,
• individual units,
• physical reduction valves,
• positive and negative C-substrate dimesionality,
• three dimensional manifestation,
• forces and dimensional increase,
• holistic continuity and corrolary to axiom of origin,
• mathematical dimensional reality,
• fundamental three dimensional Euclidean space,
• fumdamental multidimenional time mathematically,
• consciousness (infinite metaconsciousness; finite meaning and
transcendence; through N-C).

55. In dimensionality, we apply the theorems of:

• extra-dimensional extrapolation,
• lower dimensional discontinuity (incompleteness) / N-Dimensional
manifolds,
• parallel N-1 realities and further N-D realities,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 22

 
 • tridimensional warping of reality

56. The TDVP model theoretically provides explanations for:

• In biology, the feasibility of “ordropy”. The concept of ordropy is
simplistically a negative entropy but broader than that reflected in a finite
multidimensional order.
• In the life sciences, the potential for life arises around the big bang event
horizon (see Definition section) in the C-substrate. Physical life becomes
actualized into reality when the correct genetic and anatomicophysiological
markers evolve to sustain such existence.
• In the psychological sciences, the model provides a dimensional and
vortical perspective for the “unconscious”, dreams, altered states, and any
level of group interactions.

57. Additonally, other subsidiary axioms exist:

• unified, holistic simultaneous existence
• CST unification and ubiquity,
• extended physics of tridimensional warping of reality, and
• rare event modeling and
• “entanglement”, as well as
• the unification of the inverse square forces from the subatomic to the
macrophysical to the astrophysical and has postulated components (namely,
qubits, chronits and conscits [including psitrons, kinetrons?] as part of the
qualits [quantal discreteness of space, time, and consciousness]).

58. We apply various theoretical ideas of:

• Physicists such as Einstein, Planck, Bohr, Schrödinger, Aspect, Heisenberg,
Wheeler, Cantor, and Penrose.
• Mathematicians such as Cantor, Gödel, Close, Pythagoras, Hamilton, Euclid,
Fermat, Doctorow
• In our lengthier documentation we include, too, Bohr, Bohm, Hilbert, Pico,
Sirag, Bell, Leggett
• We discuss relevant theories like Atomic Vortex, Conventional Quantum
Physics, EPR, Copenhagen Interpretation, Holographic, Mass-energy and
Morphogenetic Fields, Rare-event theory, String theory, and Tensor and
distinction calculus.

Concepts Addressed by TDVP

59. Various principles and lemmas exist:
• ubiquitous vortical shape
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 23

 
 • dimensional falsification impossibility
• lower diemsional indeterminate feasibility assesment
• open ordropic systems likely involving he infinte
• Pathagorean theorem extension to 3D and beyond
• Metadimensionality requiring real numbers, imaginary and complex numbers
• Pervasive multilevel tridemensional distinctions
• Postulate of 3 fold quark combinations
• Dimensiomentric waping of forces acting at a distance
• Non-Euclidean dimensional representation approximated through Euclidean
substrates (space, time, C-substrate)
• Principle of Non-Euclidean space-time 4D continua are actual, not only
perceptual and conceptual
• Corollary of Pythagoras’s theorem being only true for Euclidean spaces
• Postulate of Indivension Tethering
• The Postulate of TOEs requiring infinite reality
• Rare Event Theory Postulate
• Postulate that Rare Events Are Linked to Interfacing Vortices, Vectors, Scalars
and Tensors
• Postulate of at least 9 dimensions
• Postulate of dimensional representation is based on the fundamental forces of
nature
• Corollary of Dimensional Warping
• Corollary of double warping distortions
• Corollary of Euclidean / Non-Euclidean perceptual experience
• Postulate of Non-Euclidean spaces or domains are conceptual and not actual
• Postulate of transfinite dimensions
• Postulate of perceived different dimensionalities
• Postulate of worlds with additional dimensions
• Postulate of C-substrate warping additional dimensions
• Corollary of Postulate of C-substrate warping higher dimensions
• Postulate of initial symmetry then asymmetry
• Postulate of distinction singularity
• Postulate of the first distinctions
• Postulate of infinite qualits in 3S-1t.
• The Principle of Infinite Coexistence.
• Principle of different experience
• Postulate of perceptual consciousness and warping

60. Our model addresses core questions including:

• the nature of reality and existence,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 24

 
 • the link of human consciousness to reality,
• why consciousness does not arise solely from the complexity of brain dynamics,
• the relevance of physical structures, meaning, ordropy, entropy, manifestations
in the organizing activities of “consciousness”, neurological brain limitations
• the links of consciousness with and without physical realities.

61. TDVP demonstrates how a single unified, monistic type, paradigm can encompass
the findings of current knowledge by applying TDVP as a viable, radical, profound,
new paradigmatic shift.

62. Our model incorporates some key features. It logically suggests some hypotheses
that may or may not be true, or which have not yet been tested.

63. The key elements of TDVP relate to STC tethering, dimensional extrapolation,
metadimensionality, distinctions, and vortices.

64. The next suggestive level reflected in our subtitle suggests

• the possibilities of N-Dimensionality, as well as
• ordropy (as opposed to just the entropic tendency) suggesting and order in
living organisms
• applications of mathematics and logic to the model
• the fundamental triadic role of CST (“consciousness”, space and time)

65. At the next level of speculation, we tentatively suggest models of how to extrapolate
dimensions, the roles of infinity within this metadimensional concept, and how
reality can be unified by applying dimensionality and infinity.

66. Whereas we attempt to apply mathematical and physical data, and to utilize
theorems, while supporting the feasibility of the broader model, it does not prove
that exact model. This is why we have separated the primary aspects of our
hypothesis from secondary elements.

67. We have used a paradigmatic shift and the major jump in ideas that flow from it
might ultimately take several hundred scientific papers to evaluate parts of this
data, but these will still be sources for debate.

68. Importantly, the refutation of any single concept does not refute the model, only
that single concept. Even refutation becomes a building block to re-assess the
status, a mid-course correction, and part of the heuristic structure of a related or
modified model.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 25

 
69. Dimensionality, fields, consciousness, and the fundamental forces of the universe
link directly into the Principle of Dimensional Extrapolation, the Theorem of
Asymmetry, and the Triadic and Holistic Nature of Reality.

70. The interval metric derived in dimensions is particularly valid in the space and time
substrates and fundamentally with the ordinal distinctions of the C-Substrate. All
three of these substrates are closely related to each other and to the proof of the
chain of mathematical theorems and demonstrations that support the STC
paradigm shift.

71. One way in which dimensions are conceptualized is the application of Close’s
calculus of distinctions. Dimensions necessarily require variables of extent.

72. Dimensions can be measured metrically ordinally in time and space, and ordinally
in C-substrate applying extent variables.

73. TDVP impacts several speculative critical and fundamental ideas: Three
dimensions of time, N-Dimensions of consciousness, cause-effect, cognition-
affect-volition, ego-boundaries, free-will, hyperspace, meaningful information,
knowledge and awareness, understanding, wisdom and thought and their
influence across and interactions with subtypes of affect and volition: life,
mystical awareness, special higher qualities such as love, and causality.
“Metaconsciousness”, subject-object paradoxes, multidimensional time-space
and numinosity, are all introduced. Relative non-locality, relative zero, relative
time, relative infinity and even relative non- Euclidean mathematical
dimensionometry facilitate the interface with our current physical universe. An
ultimate end-point is the infinite interacting with the finite even prior to the
Origin Event with a Primary Receptor. We show how warping of dimensions
occurs, producing an open-closed, holistic-unified, finite-infinite universally
applicable biopsychophysical reality. Ultimately, at minimum there is a 3S-3T-3C
reality (implying 3 dimensions each of space, time and C-substrate) but there may
be more dimensions and almost certainly it is 3S-3T-NC (implying N dimensions
of C-substrate [broader consciousness]).

74. From a metaparadigm of the fundamental tethering of space, time and C-

substrates from the Origin Event, TDVP generates about 600 different ideas.
TDVP generates approaching six hundred concepts, practical applications and
implications. This includes about, twenty-two fundamental axioms, and more than
thirty more, fifty theorems, postulates and principles and over sixty conceptual
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 26

 
 definitions. This also includes some speculative hypotheses. Because of its general
feasibility, practical applications, and supporting empirical evidence, all of TDVP
cannot be refuted by refutation of any specific axiom or theorem, postulate or idea.

75. We briefly address philosophy and mysticism though we prefer to concentrate on

scientific and mathematical detail and concepts. Nevertheless, the theoretical
strengths and limitations of the models of Collins, Roth, Russel and Schroeder
versus Dawkins and Dennett, although examined carefully, are not addressed in
these books, per se.

76. Because the TDVP model is versatile, involving a process of fluctuating

dimensions with indivensions, and a content mechanism with vortices, specific
hypotheses or tests that have been proposed to support several other TOEs will
not refute the TDVP model, but they, generally, will provide added supporting
feasibility data. This great flexibility involving process-content across dimensions
allows for the applicability of the model across numerous different disciplines and
across many concepts.

77. The specific content components of other current postulated “theories of

everything” models are not contradicted by the TDVP paradigm. These include the
TOEs of Klein and Boyd, Laszlo, Evert and Sheldrake, Bohm, Carr and Smythies in
regard to mechanism of communicating consciousness. TDVP is also compatible
dimensionally with certain physicalistic, non-consciousness hyperspace paradigms
including String Theory and that of Hawking,
78. TDVP fits into these TOEs because of the ubiquity of the vortical and indivension
structures being able to be applied to many different dimensional or consciousness
substrates such as a proposed subquantum reality, akashic fields, to emptiness,
subquantum infinitesimals and ether, morphogenetic fields or any other kind of
communication or interpersonal field. TDVP also encompasses and extends beyond
the mathematics of string theory and other TOEs involving mathematical physics
because of the use of Close’s calculus of distinctions, which is logically prior to
conventional mathematical tools. Therefore, any postulated models to demonstrate
these models also can be used to show that TDVP is feasible but may still remain
compatible with the specific TOE on which the proposed hypothesis test is based.

79. On the other hand, a specific refutation of one of these TOEs based on detail (e.g.,
that subquantum fields are unfeasible, or that formative causation does not work)
does not refute TDVP because of the versatility of being a higher level model on
which these models would then become dependent but not vice versa.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 27

 
 80. The speculative but important idea of all fundamental forces warping reality as a
mechanism to extrapolate dimensions, following on an Einsteinian general
relativity modification is raised.
Even more so, the greater speculation of C-substrate particularly
metadimensionality reflecting extra dimensions based on Transfinite Consciousness
forces is posited.

How TDVP Differs from All Other TOEs

81. One basis of our models is taking into account how other models fit in and how they
can ultimately improve our model. This is why we compare, so we can make our
model better or see its limitations. When the essential characteristics of TDVP
and all relevant comparable TOEs are listed, there is no current TOE that fits all
these criteria other than TDVP. The conventional current Standard Physicalistic
Reductionist Materialistic Model of Physics scored 13/39 (7+5+1=13/39), 14th of
the 24.

82. Critical is the comparison of key features such as:

• models of “consciousness”. This is not unique for a TOE. Models such as
those of Klein, Evert, Laszlo, Campbell, Smythies and Carr recognize the pre-
eminence of consciousness, however, they do not incorporate consciousness
the way we do.
a. In TDVP, Consciousness has several unified components and so
deliberately called “C-substrate“ to ensure this concept is understood as the
conceptualization may be unique.
b. C-substrate at the neurological level (N-C) has several components: It can
be expressed in CEV: Cognition, Emotion, Volition.
c. Paradigmatically, it can be expressed as possible Higher Consciousness
component qualities such as love, honor, courage, wisdom, and
understanding. These are all distinctions of extent implying separate
dimensions but also can be applied in the content context.

83. Other than C-substrate, other features are relevant. An N-Dimensional base.
Such a base includes hyperspace, e.g., Sirag’s model and various string theories
including M-theory and Hawking’s model. (This requirement eliminates those
models that are still based on the 3S-1t standard physical paradigmatic model that
explains most daily experience but does not explain the contradictory data).

84. In this comparison of other TOEs with our TDVP model we are including previous
models by the authors (Neppe and Close).
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 28

 
 • The unification of STC substrates. The only other TOE amongst the current
ones is that of Laszlo. But this is not necessarily an inseparable whole.
• The initial elements from the Origin Event or equivalent. This is
comprehensible mystically, e.g., Kabbalah and possibly Vedic philosophy and
also with Laszlo, Lanza and Watson.
• The unification of past, present and future. This is comprehensible mystically,
e.g., Kabbalah and also with Laszlo.
• The integration of biology including ordropy and life. The interpretation of
how life actually begins is a unique part of the model and involves an
explanation for life. A similar concept is implied in Watson’s enformy.
• Conceptual linguistic elements with order are used in Langan, and Watson et
al, as well our TDVP model.
• Multidimensional time has been proposed by several scientists but has only
been variably integrated into their models. Amongst them are (alphabetically)
Broad, Carr, Close, Dunne (with time seriality), possibly Hawking, Neppe
(with cause and effect) and Whiteman (who developed this concept into a key
part of his model).
• The concepts of pervasive processes is frequent in the TOE model. This
includes not only TDVP with vortical indivension, but Sheldrake’s
morphogenetic fields, Carr’s TFT, Laszlo’s akashic fields, and also seen in
String theory, Hawking, Langan, Watson and Smythies.
• The only model that recognizes movement across fluctuating dimensions is
TDVP (and preceding that Neppe’s Vortex N-dimensionalism).
• The tethering and vortical separations allowing communications between,
across and within dimensions is unique to TDVP.
• Indivension relating to individual-units and communication both at a state
and trait level. This integrates the social sciences and allows for a fluctuating
number of dimensions. This is unique to TDVP.
• The role of the infinite, and its interaction with the finite, which very few
paradigms incorporate. Kabbalic and Vedic mysticism recognizes this.
• The Space Substrate is at least three dimensional and represented
mathematically as real numbers. The Time Substrate is posited as
multidimensional and applies the imaginary numbers (as per Minkowski
space). Because C-substrate is tethered with time and space, the interface is
likely to be represented mathematically as complex numbers (the sum of real
and imaginary numbers).

85. We tabulate and compare the major similar models, namely, those of Bohm,
Campbell. Carr, Goswami, Gould, Hoffman, Kabballic mysticism, Laszlo, Lanza,
Langan, Evert, Hawking, Klein and Boyd, Sheldrake, Sirag, Smythies, String
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 29

 
 theorists, Vedic tradition, Watson, Wilber, and the previous models of Neppe and
Close. We also comment on De La Sierra and Leibniz.

86. Qualitative comparisons of TOEs: TDVP was directly compared with 19 other
TOEs, which involve consciousness, dimensions, order or infinity.

87. Scoring: 39 characteristics were carefully chosen based on relevance and different
broad screening parameters. The first 16 were more universal, general
characteristics; the next 11 was developed from feedback on our TDVP model and
had either specific but common relevance to TOEs or some specificity. The next 12
reflected specifically TDVP criteria, often unique to the model or derivations from
the earlier Neppe or Close models and again, in part, derived from feedback.

88. Results: TDVP as expected scores a maximum. In fact, at this point, the only TOE
it competes against is making itself better. However, it is somewhat tautological
because the criteria we have deemed important may not be the criteria that others
deem important. Nevertheless, the criteria derivation were sent to the developers (or
with Kabbalah and Vedic mysticism, the representatives) of all available authors
(13/21).
Remarkably TDVP scores a full (16+11+12) or 39/39. This would be required for a
real TOE because it cannot afford exceptions. The older models on which some TDVP
concepts were based easily come in second and third scoring highly at Neppe’s Vortex
N-Dimensionalism (15+7+5) or 27/39, and Close’s Transcendental Physics (13+9+1)
or 23/39. However, both of these models leave out key features making the
combination TDVP profoundly more powerful.
Several remarkable TOEs follow, which contain outstanding original ideas, namely:
• Klein and Boyd (13+6+0) or 19/39, are the highest scoring of the TOEs not
derived from Neppe and Close.
• The long-enduring mystical Kabbalic mysticism (12+5+2) or 19/39 scores next,
reflecting a relevance of models that can persist for millennia. (Vedic Mysticism
has great similarities and scores 11+4+0 or 15/39. It might score slightly higher
but needs esoteric clarifications and is not “triadic” like TDVP and Kabbala).
• Bohm’s well-known Implicate and Explicate Order model also scores 19/39
(11+6+2). It has superficial similarities to TDVP within the triads, unification,
vortical equivalents and mathematicophysics. Bohm’s model is very different
with enfolding and deeper orders and it lacks STC tethering and
multidimensionality.
• Watson’s TES (11+5+1) or 17/39, and is remarkably different as a model
• Campbell’s Big TOE (12+5+0) also at 17/39, is extensive and thought
provoking
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 30

 
 • Rupert Sheldrake’s Morphogenetic Fields (11+5+0) or 16/39, and remains a
classic in important thinking.
• Carr’s remarkable Transcendental Field Model (10+3+3) is a major contribution
at 16/39 with some special similarities to TDVP in many parts.
• Lanza’s Biocentrism (9+5) or 14/39, is an excellent model. So is Smythies’ s
one (11+1+2) so 14/39 who extends beyond the brain to the multidimensional.
• Langan (7+5) is at 12/39. Goswami (10+0+1) and Wilbur (10+1+0) reflecting
possibly the most well-known layperson models are at 11//39.
• Not far behind and also exciting models are those of Hoffman, Laszlo, and
Sirag (9/39 even without being a TOE). These all have great qualities.

89. These results strongly motivate for the powerful breadth of TDVP as a TOE and the
inclusion of consciousness with dimensions and infinity plus the mathematical
demonstrations with the feasible, non-falsified empirical data, raises it to the level
of a paradigm shift. These qualitative results are even more dramatic when looked
at quantitatively.
• There are fifty different mathematical theorems in TDVP, yet this is the only
TOE that utilizes any (other than Carr with theorems en passant.).
• There are some fifty new definitions and concepts and yet this was not even
qualitatively measured. Other TOEs have, at most, a few new concepts.
• TDVP is unique in the context of tethering and yet allowing independence of
S, T and C substrates.
• TDVP is unique in the context of fluctuating dimensions.
• TDVP involves infinity not only as beyond dimensions but as an intimate
integrating component of every dimension.
• TDVP incorporates unique, new mathematical and dimensionometric
concepts and tools.
TDVP allows for appreciation of a new philosophical model called “unified monism”.

Our Current Perception of TDVP

90. TDVP may be the first feasible paradigmatic unification of philosophy, science,
and consciousness. TDVP is a universally applicable paradigm that should
deepen our understanding of reality allowing science to enter a new world of
expanded possibilities demonstrating the ubiquitousness of a “consciousness”
inclusive paradigm across all major scientific disciplines.

91. We perceive TDVP as a critically important beginning evoking further

research and demonstrating a viable mathematical and scientific theoretical
framework with demonstrated feasibility through application to various fields
of science, from quantum physics to the life sciences to consciousness
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 31

 
 research.

92. There are always deniers and pseudoskeptics who will ignore facts. However,
TDVP should impact every serious scientist and thinker in every human
endeavor who wants to understand the nature of reality and the meaning of
human experience and existence.

93. Confirmation of these research hypotheses should open the door to a flood of
meaningful new research and discoveries in almost every field of science. This is
because the laws of nature should be universally applicable to to all scientific
endeavors. This is so also because it provides new, more comprehensive
theoretical frameworks, conceptual and mathematical tools, and a vastly
expanded domain for scientific investigation and even may require revision of
concepts in Theoretical Physics.

94. Of these ideas, the core concepts of TDVP are solidly based empirically or
mathematically. Additionally, there are lesser speculative ideas for further
research or theorizing.

95. TDVP may become a major contribution to the physical, biological,

psychological and consciousness sciences, as well as to mathematics,
philosophy, the philosophy of science and the scientific linking of mysticism
and spirituality. TDVP pioneers the new discipline of "dimensional
biopsychophysics".

96. The TDVP model has emphasized the fundamental role of consciousness, higher
dimensions, infinity, order, the potential for life, multidimensional time, finite
relative nonlocality and infinite metatime/space/consciousness, tethering with
vortical indivension and individual-units, and finite origins.

97. TDVP also emphasizes the unified holistic reality of the finite and the infinite,
the link between the two and the application of finite reality from the subatomic
to the macrophysical to the cosmic astrophysical. It explains how different rare
communications may be only one of billions of unused finite components
reflecting a tiny fragment of potentialities.

98. TDVP can be explained philosophically by a new model called “unified

monism”. Despite the term, “monism” this is not reductionistic instead reflecting
the holistic, unified, integrated reality of the infinite subreality pervading the
finite subrealities.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 32

 
 99. Based on qualitative tabulations appears to be the most complete model of
consciousness and dimensionality that exists, a true paradigm shift, and a theory
of everything in which applying LFAF, it has not been refuted and is a
significant advance in both the theory and practice of the understanding of
reality. There will be significant advances beyond this but the TDVP model
provides a basis for future research.

Summary
100. The unified metaparadigmatic statement is the overriding higher level basis for
the TDVP model and reflecting reality.
• Reality can be expressed within the laws of nature.
• Examining reality includes the physical, psychological, biological and
consciousness sciences with mathematical elaborations.
• It involves a unified holistic reality with interweaving infinite and finite
subrealities.
• The infinite is a continuous essence metareality. This means that it incorporates
an all encompassing consciousness/information, space and time, with potential
order and potential physical life.
• The infinite pervades a discrete finite, cosmic subreality.
• This finite reality manifests as a fundamentally inseparably tethered triad which
has always existed (originating from the Origin Event).
• The tethering is always together—tightly, loosely or slightly, providing
a communication network.
• This STC triad has three substrates —S, T and C-substrates (space,
time and broader descriptive “consciousness”).
• Although STC is tethered, components are variably in space, time and
consciousness manifesting as dynamic multidimensional finite realities
(and always interfacing and pervading the infinite).
• Movements occur across, between and within these dimensions which
separate into zillions of multiple interwoven, fluctuating 3-dimensional
individual-unit vortices.
• Reality is only perceived to a limited degree, via our restrictive and responsive
3S-1t experiential, entropic physical subreality. They are interpreted by our
living physiological ordropy and conceptualized subjectively and relative to
our own individual-units)
This description is the metaparadigm of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified
Relative Subjectivity [TTOOURS]. The single sentence in Chapter 1 reflecting its
unifying elements, has now been subdivided to give a more comprehensive, but still
complex perspective of the TDVP paradigm.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 33

 
 SECTION B: THE LIMITS OF WHAT EXIST
CHAPTER 3: THE DILEMMA

“Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the
prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming
such opinions.”
Albert Einstein

“The views of space, time and consciousness which we wish to lay before you have
sprung from the soil of experimental physics and the toil of consciousness research
and the developments of mathematical theory, and therein lies their strength. They are
radical. Henceforth space by itself and time by itself and consciousness by itself are
doomed to fade away into mere shadows and only a kind of tethered union of the three
will preserve an independent identity.” 23 u

Modified from Hermann Minkowski, 1908 to include our new paradigm.

Minkowski’s famous quotation reflects the major paradigm shift of that time. He
described a fourth dimension of time and realized the great unification of time and
space. It certainly was revolutionary. But is this still the solution for a paradigmatic
shift? We do not believe so and have added “Consciousness“ resulting in a triadic
tethered union.

In this book, we go well beyond Minkowski. We approach concepts such as

consciousness and multiple dimensions. We use models such as the calculus of
distinctions and vortices. We apply a model of geometry for multiple dimensions and
emphasize the triad of three, inseparably substrates of Space, Time and an Extended
Consciousness. We apply mathematics, logic and a new philosophical model. We
realize the need to unify the infinite and the finite, to recognize the roles of order and
disorder, of the animate life and the potential for life, and of the origins of existence.
We explore the possible deeper links to these ideas and we recognize that all of this is
ultimately involving ourselves in our current reality.

We present to you our rather complex sounding title:

uu
This quotation is adapted from Hermann Minkowski, in his famous Cologne public lecture: 80th Assembly of German
Natural Scientists and Physicians. 21 Sept 1908 “The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung
from the soil of experimental physics and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself and time
by itself are doomed to fade away into mere shadows and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent
identity.”
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 34

 
 The Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP).
This incorporates the key features of a new Theory Of Everything, which appears to
work. But we need further clarifications and add essential details to these key
elements, namely:
The N-Dimensionometric CST Substrate Mathematicologic LFAF Model.
We then go further describing further key principles to this paradigm:
An integrated space, time and “consciousness” substrate reflecting holistic-unified,
finite-infinite entropic-ordropic, animate-inanimate, event-horizon.
Furthermore, our model provides ideas for conceptual mechanisms:
Warping-N-Dimensional extrapolation, extent-content-intent distinctional-C-substrate
indivension, open-closed.
And we look at all of this in the context of our current human experience in
biopsychophysical reality.

Let’s begin at the beginning, understanding first why there are limitations in our
current standard scientific thinking, recognizing the need for a new way to examine
these.

The Standard Model

Despite our current prevailing reductionistic materialist paradigm allowing
explanations of almost all areas of our experience, certain areas of scientific endeavor
are still contradicted and conflicting theories do not explain everything. The current
paradigm of physical science, is comprised of three major parts: Relativity, classical
physics (primarily Newton’s laws) and quantum physics. Relativity has proved to be
very successful on the astronomical scale, dealing with extremes of mass and relative
velocity. Newton’s laws of motion are still very useful and successful in the mid-range
scale, dealing with events in the range of distances, matter and motion detected by
human senses on this planet. Quantum physics, on the other hand, is very successful in
dealing with phenomena on the sub-atomic or quantum scale. However, these three
theoretical approaches to understanding reality are not entirely consistent. Everything
is made up of quanta, yet different mathematical laws seem to apply on the three
different scales of measurement, and physicists’ efforts to develop a single consistent
theory to deal with all reality (sometimes referred to as a theory of everything) have
been largely unsuccessful. The reason for this lack of success is the fact that they have
not included everything in the basic assumptions underlying their models. There is no
place in the equations of the standard model for consciousness.

Limitations of the Standard Model

• There is no place for consciousness in the equations
• Consciousness is perceived as internally inconsistent across quantum mechanics,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 35

 
 macrophysics and astronomical levels of reality, yet there are no solutions to
important quantum and consciousness paradoxes.
• The standard model cannot explain why there is complex structure and complex
conscious organisms in the universe
• In fact, the standard model cannot explain why there is a universe at all. The
universe appears to have originated in an explosion. The idea that all the
complexity observed in the current universe is the result of accidental
arrangements of materials flying away from that explosion is simply untenable:
The accidental beginnings of any complex pattern of matter and energy would
quickly be destroyed and dissipate in a violently exploding universe because the
second law of thermodynamics acts continuously in any finite system, and the
expanding universe is a finite system at any given point in the process of
expansion. Explosions do not create complexity. Explosions do exactly the
opposite, they destroy pattern and structure; they are the epitome of entropic
activity. Someone has said that believing that the universe is an accident is like
believing that a tornado could pass through a junkyard and assemble a Boeing
747 en route. Actually, it’s much worse than that. It’s more like piling all of the
junk in the world on top of a hydrogen bomb and expecting the flying debris to
accidentally form an Airbus 380 (the world’s largest commercial aircraft) along
with a full load of passengers and their luggage, and a crew with the knowledge
needed to fly it.

Current status of science: In our conventional 3 S-1t (3 dimensions of space, 1 point

in time reality) domain (our current perceived scientific reality or the Standard Model),
time is assumed to be linear with each moment of time going only forward, and we
experience three dimensions of space in our physical reality. This is the core of the
current materialist, physicalist paradigm and it can explain almost everything in
common experience. Whereas our standard physical conventional reality domain of
three dimensions of space and one point of time—the present (3S-1t) has applications
in most current experience, it is incomplete and, indeed, falsified by contrary quantum
experimental evidence (the double-slit and delayed choice experiments), and the nine
different six sigma meta-analyses in consciousness research. It is also internally
inconsistent in physics across quantal, macro- and astronomical levels.
It also cannot explain certain quantum and relativistic observations.
Science cannot explain the rare empirical exceptions.
Nor can our standard paradigm explain why there is complex structure and complex
conscious organisms in the universe or a universe at all.
We can choose either to ignore these or to confront why they are contradicted.

The historical approach to science

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 36

 
The historical approach of science, philosophy, and religion has been primarily
fragmentary and reductionistic. Individual groups of scientists, philosophers and
theologians tend to wall themselves off from each other, and the rest of humanity, both
conceptually and institutionally. Even the abundance of information on the Internet has
not changed this very much. Science is divided into many fields and disciplines, each
with their own logical structure and technical language, largely cryptic and
indecipherable by the average layperson, and even by many scientists in other fields.
Philosophy is divided into ontology, the study of the nature of things, and
epistemology, the study of knowledge and knowing, with endless further subdivisions
of these two broad disciplines. Various intellectual and cultural groups of theologians
argue for the existence of greater realities circumscribed by dogmas based on divine
revelation. None of these groups of thinkers has an exclusive lock on truth, and none
are devoid of it, but what the world needs now is a new comprehensive integrating
paradigm that will unite the search for truth.

The desire to know and understand, whether manifested as science, philosophy,

religion, or in some other form, is essentially the same innate desire for direct contact
with, and direct knowledge of ultimate reality. Over the past few hundred years, and
notably so over the past few decades, thinkers in the various fields have amassed an
impressive amount of data and knowledge concerning the nature of the reality we
experience. Possibly, we should all be working toward the same goal: a comprehensive
understanding of reality. There are, however, conflicts between and within some of the
bodies of knowledge, indicating the need for an integration of the various fields into
one body of knowledge. This would constitute a reversal of the reductionist approach
and would require the development of a comprehensive paradigm capable of
encompassing the true knowledge of all fields and resolving the conflicts between
them.

Why our model is different

With respect to the conventional wisdom, we argue that because of these failures there
is a need for a radical new paradigm of reality which will address the complex
controversies that are not explained using our standard model. This motivates the need
for this new paradigmatic approach to integrate several different scientific disciplines
and to postulate a new and comprehensive model, producing a paradigm shift. But that
is not easy and has never before been achieved.

Previous models have often ignored the fundamental role of an extended

consciousness. Even in those Theories of Everything (TOEs) that recognize
consciousness, few include multiple extra dimensions, and only in this model we’re
proposing, Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Paradigm (TDVP) are infinity, order and
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 37

 
life fundamentally incorporated. In our TDVP model, the unification of space and time
is insufficient, and we postulate that space-time and a broader extended
“consciousness” (STC) are fundamentally inseparably linked at their sources, then
tethered separately—tightly, loosely or negligibly—to these finite origins, such that the
fundamental connection still exists. Our TDVP model allows for the interfacing within,
across and between multiple dimensions of finite subreality (by a process called
“indivension” and a content of “vortices”). This finite reality bridges an all-pervasive
infinite subreality essence of all-embracing time, space, and extended consciousness
(meaningful information) as well as ordropy (multidimensional order) and potential
life.
It may be that our current reality is not best portrayed as 3S-1t but must include one or
even N dimensions of consciousness, as this is so basic to any sentient being. But for
practical description here, we will use 3S-1t not 3S-1t-NC.

The Theory of Everything: Modern science has not yet produced a consistent,
comprehensive theory of everything (TOE). Essentially what is required is a logically
consistent, generally recognized, ontological basis for integrating scientific knowledge
into an all-encompassing comprehensive natural law paradigm.
The syntax of the language used to express scientific epistemology, namely,
mathematics, does not include any meaningful representation of consciousness, which
we believe is an important part of “everything”.

The term “theory of everything” in the purely physics context, is certainly a misnomer,
if not an outright oxymoron. When physicists speak of a theory of everything (TOE)
they mean a theory that encompasses, in a logically consistent manner, the known
fundamental forces of the physical universe. The question of whether such a theory, if
attainable, is truly a theory of everything is certainly a legitimate philosophical
question, and perhaps even a valid scientific one because:
• The “four fundamental forces of nature” as listed in the standard physics
textbook: gravity, electromagnetism, the strong and weak subatomic forces, may
not be all the forces in the universe v.
• Consciousness has been systematically excluded from the standard model.

In our currently popular materialistic understanding of reality, the observer is

represented as a dimensionless point (because it greatly simplifies the analysis and this
is regarded as outside world scientific objectivity), yet the observer may, in reality, be

v
Some scientists, though using terms like electromagnetism still, would at another level separate out electricity and
magnetism because they are sometimes orthogonal—effectively when the (electrical) force moves forward, the field [like
the magnetic filings} moves at right angles [right hand rule]. Separately, there is good data for a direct opposing force of
the expanding universe working at the same astronomic level as gravitation.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 38

 
more complex than that. Subjectivity is defined as that which goes on in the mind of
the observer, and has created a conceptual dichotomy separating science from direct
human experience. To the materialist, consciousness is nothing more than an emergent
feature (an epiphenomenon) of the physical world, and disputably neuroscience itself
cannot adequately explain consciousness by the physical brain alone. this physicalist,
materialist paradigm fails. Because of this failure, there is a need for a radical new
paradigm of reality. This book is the authors’ motivated “Theory of Everything“
(TOE). This interfaces every known area of scientific endeavor. We maintain that a
TOE model should incorporate the mathematical and empirical relevance of
dimensions, zero and infinity, vortices and distinctions. Essentially, the paradigm we
propose works; the others did not.

We propose that a comprehensive TOE must also seamlessly reconcile with the major
theoretical models and authoritative sources of all the natural sciences. Our premise is
that the laws of nature should be universally applicable to to all scientific endeavors.

The scientific areas that must be actively evaluated must include:

• the physical sciences (these include physics, chemistry, meteorology, and
astronomy; the biological sciences (these include anatomy, biology, genetics,
physiology, pharmacology, the life sciences and medicine).
• the social sciences (these include anthropology, psychology and sociology) and
• the consciousness sciences (these include dimensional biopsychophysics,
phenomenology, parapsychology and quantum consciousness).
To qualify as a complete TOE, it must cover “everything”. The TOE should be
specifically compatible with the three major disciplines examining concepts outside
our 3S-1t conventional reality: Hyperspace, Consciousness research and Philosophy.
Moreover, we posit that such a TOE should be compatible at all levels of cosmology,
from the tiniest subatomic packets to the macrophysical usual realities to the
astrophysical.
Additionally, the TOE should also be compatible with the known forces including
conventionally recognized energies.
It could be argued that a TOE should be able to explain events in all of time, including
the major event postulated to have been over billions of years in our conventional
linear time, namely, evolution.
We argue that a TOE must not only be empirically appropriate, but explainable within
the confines of philosophy, including mysticism and spirituality.
We posit that a TOE should have preferably have a demonstrable solid mathematical
base in its key areas.
We posit that a TOE should not imply anything supernatural or miraculous. However,
what may be perceived as anomalous in 3S-1t may not be anomalous in other higher
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 39

 
dimensions.
We believe that a new philosophy of science model may be required to explain
information developed beyond our conventional standard experience of 3S-1t. This
means applying new feasibility principles as well as ensuring that the presented data
are not falsified as a key to motivating any scientific models including TOEs.

The TOE may require a paradigm shift to achieve this. This means a fundamental
change in approach or modification of our current assumptions 19.
We motivate our own “Theory of Everything“ (TOE) and recognize the need for this
global paradigm shift that interfaces every known area of scientific endeavor.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 40

 
CHAPTER 4: WHAT THE STANDARD MODEL LACKS. SOME QUESTIONS
TO RESOLVE 24

“Imagination is more important than knowledge.”

Albert Einstein

Let Us Imagine
In Einstein’s classic paper in 1905 on the Special Theory Of Relativity, he imagined
the electrodynamic interaction between a moving magnet compared with a stationary
conductor, and then reversed the situation to illustrate his theoretical assumption of no
preferred reference frame.
He did the same in his later classic paper on the General Theory of Relativity:
Ultimately, this involved using the example of the observed departure of the orbit of
the planet Mercury compared with that predicted by Newtonian physics. 25; 26 These
were examples of his famous thought experiments.

Similarly, we have presented thought experiments pointing out the limitations of the
usual standard paradigmatic physicalist conventional materialist model relating to 3
dimensions of space and one point in time (3S-1t) that we humans experience on earth
on a day-to-day basis at this time.

• Let us imagine a model where space, time, and consciousness (STC) all exist.
• Moreover, let us imagine in a model, that the dimensions of STC are tethered
together at a specific point or volume as inseparable units; and that this tethering
can be partially released, altering this inseparability with each component
protruding separately, although there is always the tethering in at least one point.
• Let us imagine a model where time is such that we cannot use our linear
reasoning directly relating cause and effect, yet free-will still exists.
• Let us imagine a model where time is not just one moment in time.
• Let us imagine a model with extra dimensions that will explain the existence of
information, meaning or events in space and time.
• Let us imagine a model where there are always one or more dimensions in
addition to the dimensions of perception so that one could see the completeness
of the data but only from a higher dimension.
• If one had such a model, what evidence would be useful to demonstrate it?

We briefly mention such ideas, and these are amplified below because we have such a
model. We choose five broad examples.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 41

 
Entanglement
• Let us imagine a model of “quantum entanglement” where there is some kind of
link of ostensibly separated evidence, energy packets, particles, photons or
packets of information in time and space implying a non-locality at the 3S-1t
level.
• If, moreover, that entanglement had a statistical probability, which was
demonstrable but not necessarily overwhelmingly high. It would imply a
probabilistic state, which could not be predicted accurately relating to information
transfer that at 3S-1t one could not accurately definitely predictably show in any
specific, individual case.
• If one was able to define and apply a mechanism that could explain why this
entanglement would occur, involving a broader definition of consciousness, a
meaningful intentionality or apprehension of reality, this would be strong evidence
for some kind of tethering.

Psi
• Let us imagine a model where one was able to demonstrate that so-called psi
phenomena existed, it would be very difficult to explain within our common
physicalist framework of 3S-1t.
• In fact, it would be extremely challenging to explain unless one utilized the STC
substrates as the framework for an explanatory model.
• If one were able to demonstrate retrotime, or precognition, or presentiment even
seconds before an event, this would also not be explainable in terms of the
current physicalist definition of dimensionality, but it could be explainable in
terms of extra time perception, which might be describable in terms of extra
dimensions.
• If one were able to show that there were variants in terms of cause and effect,
this would require some kind of extra time dimension.
• If one were able to show that there was some kind of survival of consciousness
after bodily death, or even an overwhelming superpsi relationship that could not
be explained in terms of known psi concepts, this could imply extra
dimensionality because of the limitations of 3S-1t as a reality base for post-
mortem survival.

Lower Dimensional Incompleteness and Higher Dimensional Extrapolation

• Let us imagine demonstrating that there is discontinuity of information and of
space-time when information is projected onto lower dimensions, then demonstrable
continuity of the same information at a higher dimensional level would imply extra
dimensions.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 42

 
• Let us imagine data showing links of events that have not occurred, but then being
more easily learned once that event of data has been achieved. (At the risk of
diminishing the fun of not giving answers at this stage, this could be explained, for
example, by applying Sheldrake’s formative causation 27, but at a higher dimensional
level by another model, such as, to be seen, vortical indivension. Therefore, some of
these “imaginings” can be non-specific and have alternative explanations).
• Let us imagine data showing that there are different states of “consciousness” with
different realities in an individual this may provide evidence for fluctuating
dimensions.

Life
How does life begin?
At what point does physical life begin? Varied explanations are the moment of
conception, of birth, of particular development of the fetus. Could this be entirely
different from the actual time that life becomes a potential?
Can one explain life purely on the basis of genes and DNA/RNA combined with
appropriate physiology? Is that just a how based on physical limitations? Does that just
reflect physical life?
Does such an explanation allow for consciousness?
Is there a threshold point for life?
What information contradicts there always being a potential for physical life always
existing and the correct physical apparatus, genes and physiological functioning
allowing physical life to actualize?

Evolution
1.) Let us imagine demonstrating that evolution exists. (There is cogent data, of
course, that it does.) However, given that even Darwin pointed out the
difficulties of evolution occurring purely by chance, let us imagine that at some
point before or during the process such an evolution has had some kind of
meaningful assistance or guidance and this could be cogently demonstrated. We
are not addressing the feasibility of current evolutionary theory, either by
confirmation or denial. We are here examining its possible integration into our
specific TOE.
2.) Could that contribute to the feasibility of a complex mechanism involving a
proposed STC tethering derived from linkage at the Origin Event?
3.) Could that contribute to the feasibility of a unification of different kinds of
multidimensional time, space, and consciousness? This last one would be a
distant imagining because it would require numerous points not yet in evidence.
4.) Could it be that if evolution is occurring over time, what one ought to be looking
at is the predetermined facets of guidance that created the possibility of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 43

 
 evolution?
5.) Could it be that once this mold was created it could free-wheel and evolution
would run without help?

Scientific Subatomic Model

Let us imagine that some of the fundamental questions that one can ask are about the
limitations of quantum physics. Some of the limitations of the current scientific
subatomic model are well-known and many particle physicists believe that it is an
incomplete description of nature. Indeed, it is not a complete theory of fundamental
interactions. It falls short of being a complete theory of fundamental interactions28-30
because it does not incorporate certain fundamental physical findings. 31, 32, 33, 34
It is inconsistent, inter alia, with:
•the physics of general relativity, such as gravitation and dark energy, quantum field
theories of gravity generally break down before reaching the Planck scale. 35 This
contradiction has been a major problem.
•the emerging "standard model of cosmology requires modification” 36, w particularly
the observed amount of cold dark matter (CDM), which is associated with far too large
contributions to dark energy52; viable dark matter particles would not correspond with
the expectations of and the required properties deduced from observational cosmology:
Consequently, this model does not fit within a reliable theory for the very early
universe.
•correctly accounting for neutrino oscillations (and their non-zero masses). The
specifics of neutrino mass are still unclear and may require an additional 7 or
8 arbitrary constants;
•puzzles such as the strong CP problemx—why quantum chromodynamics55 (QCD)
does not seem to break the CP-symmetry)y;
• it has unnatural properties like the hierarchy problem 56 The Higgs mechanism gives
rise to the hierarchy problem if any new physics (such as quantum gravity) is
present at high energy scales. In order for the weak scale to be much smaller than
the Planck scale57, severe fine tuning of Standard Model parameters is required;
• the observed predominance of matter over antimatter (matter58/antimatter59 , 60);
• the isotropy61 and homogeneity62 of the visible universe over large distances requires
a mechanism like cosmic inflation63. This should constitute an extension of the
w
We have chosen to cite only selected pages on physics from Wikipedia: These are brief, factual, non-controversial,
scientifically based and without opinion. We do this to allow the reader easier access, but we caution that the pages may
change at any time, and are limited, non-trusted sources. We, therefore, restrict our citations to physics related areas only,
but even then one should be aware of the controversies surrounding them. Instead, we recommend some of the several
physics books consulted in Reality Begins with Consciousness. 8; 17; 31; 32; 39-51
x
A hierarchy problem occurs when the fundamental parameters (couplings 53 or masses) of some Lagrangian 54 are vastly
different (usually larger) than the parameters measured by experiment.
y
CP is the product of two symmetries 37: C for charge conjugation, which transforms a particle into its antiparticle38, and
P for parity, which creates the mirror image of a physical system.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 44

 
 Standard Model, but likely occurs.56, 64, 65
The inflationary hypothesis was originally proposed in 1980 by American physicist,
Alan Guth, who named it "inflation". 66-69 Cosmological inflation is the theorized
extremely rapid exponential expansion of the early universe by a factor of at least 1078
in volume, and comprises the first part of the electroweak epoch following the grand
unification epoch.67 Without rapid expansion before and up until the so-called event
horizon, the earth would still be a ball of molten rock with no life as we know it.68 The
inflationary hypothesis though we believe very well motivated, is still controversial
amongst some, however. This is so as there is contradictory physical evidence in the
literature, and an ostensibly continuous creation/ de-creation process observed in the
mesocosmic range: this could make the Inflationary Hypothesis untenable.68, 69 Other
data are esoteric but well motivated. For example, data suggesting possible deep
subquantal origination of physical laws. Contradiction of inflation is even more
evident below the Planck limit (to the Kolmogorov range and beyond), where these
subquantum laws ostensibly apply.70; 71

Several Grand Unified Theories (GUTs) have been proposed to unify

electromagnetism and the weak and strong forces. Grand unification would imply the
existence of an electronuclear force; it is expected to set in at energies of the order of
1016 GeV, far greater than could be reached by any possible Earth-based particle
accelerator. Although the simplest GUTs have been experimentally ruled out, the
general idea, especially when linked with supersymmetry, remains a favorite candidate
in the theoretical physics community. 37

It is emphasized that the Standard Model of Quantum Mechanics agrees with almost
all the experimental tests conducted to date. 65, 72 These areas of controversy are the
exception rather than the rule.
This model is applied to other fields besides particle physics (like astrophysics73,
cosmology, nuclear physics 74, quantum field theory 75, spontaneous symmetry
breaking76 and non-perturbative behavior). Simulators help search for new physics and
build more exotic models77 incorporating hypothetical particles78, extra dimensions79,
supersymmetry37 and to try to explain experimental results at variance with the
standard model. 32, 33
The standard model is theoretically self-consistent. 32, 33

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 45

 
Nevertheless, one of the fundamental questions that one can ask is about the
limitations of quantum physics. The limitations of the current scientific subatomic
model are well-known and many particle physicists believe that it is an incomplete
description of nature. Indeed, this standard paradigmatic model is not regarded as a
complete theory of fundamental interactions. It falls short of being a complete theory
of fundamental interactions 28-30 because it does not incorporate certain fundamental
physical findings. 31, 32, 33, 34
Effectively, composite particles, account for the hundreds of other species of particles
discovered since the 1960s. but a more fundamental theory may await discovery.

This subatomic model is theoretically self-consistent but has not only the difficulties
above, but it excludes consciousness. Certainly, we feel that any discrete model should
include Consciousness. We believe that until “consciousness”, “meaning” or C-
substrate is inserted, this model will remain incomplete. The TDVP model fills these
needs. This is why we are prepared to postulate composites such as qualits, which
contain composites of chronits, qubits and conscits. These would also have particle-
wave components and the conscits may have psitrons and kinetrons. Of course, this is
all speculation. Could it be that our accepted wave-particle duality is incomplete and
that we should describe an inseparable wave-particle-meaning? We postulate that this
is so: The physicalist notion of particle-wave duality is incomplete because while
quantum theory does consider the connection of content (particle or wave) with 3S-1t,
it does not include the relationship of this content to the C-substrate. The third content
component of any matter-energy object is consciousness.

A Physical Theory of Everything should unify all the fundamental interactions of

nature: gravitation, strong interaction, weak interaction, and electromagnetism plus
expansion of the cosmos reflecting a complete theory of fundamental interactions. The
basis of the subatomic quantum mechanical model is the interface area of wave particle
duality. 80
We posit that this concept may be insufficient given the overall limitations in related
quantum mechanics.

These questions need answering. Some cannot be answered at this time. But there is
data for some of them: The information on these form the basis for the feasibility of
our model and we answer some of these questions in this article. To a large degree,
demonstration of each of these may increase incrementally the certainty of the
veridicality of our full model.
We could simplistically answer that our TDVP model satisfactorily answers all the
questions above by using the one simple principle of STC tethering from the
beginning—in other words, Space, Time, and an Extended Consciousness concept, are
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 46

 
tethered from the beginning of existence (the “Origin Event”). From this tethering,
entanglement is easily explained; so is psi as points or vortices meeting; so is evolution
based on the early involvement of a broader consciousness; and so is the necessity for
extra dimensions and understanding the incompleteness of our currently standard
experience of 3S-1t.
We could be close to an accurate answer but in reality the level of veridical
confirmation of all hypotheses and proposals can always be improved and to be able to
understand the evidence we need apply a new model of feasibility.

Whether evolution can be applied to the standard paradigm cannot be demonstrated

because it is not falsifiable, yet there is debate as to its feasibility: it is unanswered.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 47

 
CHAPTER 5: FALSIFIABILITY OF CURRENT SCIENCE 81

“Falsehood has an infinity of combinations, but truth has only one mode of being.”
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778, Philosopher)

Popperian Falsifiability
Karl Popper’s need for falsification was initially inspired by the stark contrast between
Einstein's models, which involved difficult but later testable predictions with the
untestable psychoanalytic ideas of Freud and Adler. 22; 82

From this, Popper developed the idea of falsifiability—a key principle in the modern
methodology of science. Falsifiability reflects a concept and not a scientific theory or
statement of fact. It describes a methodology on how science must progress by learning
from its mistakes. By this means, what is falsified eliminates what was not meant to
be.

Popper applied his ideas from the past and heavily incorporated the history of science
into his work. Popper is one of the rare philosophers whose ideas have been highly
influential among scientists because falsifiability became the defining characteristic of
a scientific theory. 82

Does our current 3S-1t domain fit this prevailing model of falsifiability? To clarify, the
current 3S-1t paradigm refers to the current conventional laws of the materialistic
paradigm. 3S-1t reflects the three dimensions of space in a spectrum metric of volume,
and one point in time reflecting this moment—hence the lower case. We use the term
“domain” here to refer to a dimensional perspective of thought: The most current
portrayal of our current purely physicalistic reality is the 3S-1t domain.

On the one hand, 3S-1t materialism currently embraces the accepted scientific method
of Popperian falsifiability as the major method. But when we apply this well-accepted
principle of Karl Popper’s about the validity of our current materialistic 3S-1t
paradigm, ironically, the current conventional laws are falsified, for example, based on
the several “let us imagine” questions where we have pointed out the limitations. 24
These exemplify contradictions that simply should not exist.

These contradictions have been reflected in several areas of scientific endeavor in

mainstream physics, e.g., the Einstein-Bohr debate of the 1930s and the Einstein-
Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox. 83, 84
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 48

 
These scientific debates and their historic resolution profoundly change our
understanding of the nature of reality in fundamental and surprising ways, reflected in
Bell’s theorem 85, the validation of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum
mechanics 86, the Aspect experiment 87, and the Wheeler delayed-choice interpretations
49; 88
. Effectively, validation of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics
tells us that elementary particles and wave packets are not determined until they impact
on a receptor 8. Combining what relativity and quantum physics tell us about the real
nature of time, space, matter, energy, and consciousness, we find that the simplistic
big-bang evolutionary theory is incomplete and incorrect on many levels: space and
time are not independent measures of extent, but interacting dimensions of the
dynamic space-time continuum. We motivate below that time is not linear and one-
directional, and the present is not one single moment in the forward movement of time.
Matter and energy are not independent measures of content, but different forms of the
same universal substance. Our model posits that “consciousness” is part of that same
universal “essence” that constitutes reality.

The purest Popperian scientific method involves trial and error, conjectures and
refutations. 22 New hypotheses are then subjected to very rigid, careful testing in an
attempt to falsify them. If they are not falsified, and instead replicated, they are
regarded as “proven.” But, theoretically, such inductive techniques cannot be rationally
justified: This is so because even hundreds of repeated observations cannot guarantee
that a rule inferred from such repeated observations is always true. This implies that all
our scientific theories and laws are only conjectures— tentative hypotheses. 22
Nevertheless, we still apply falsifiability as a theoretical method. How scientific
reflects the degree to which something is testable. 89 However, this does not necessarily
imply only falsifiability necessarily and allows an opening for what we call the LFAF
model. 81 Of the great scientists, Einstein and Hawkins utilized the Popperian method,
as did John Eccles and Peter Medawar, but Newton, Galileo, and Copernicus, inter
alia, did not. 89

Moreover, there is some debate as to Popper’s success amongst peers.

Kuhn 19 and Feyerabend 90; 91 and also Collins 92 argued how major scientific
breakthroughs would not have been made if the discoverers had adhered to the rule of
falsification or, any prevailing prescriptive philosophy of science and Laudan
emphasized how he did not solve the demarcation problem 93. To these philosophers of
science, Popper appeared uninterested in falsifying his own assumption, and did he not
look for instances that proved him wrong. He seemed to pick examples that did not
threaten his views. To them, Popper smuggled inductive method back into science and
yet empirical method has been a basic technique for centuries, so this is not true. But
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 49

 
on the other hand, maybe they did not refute Popper instead they just did not
understand his simple ideas. 82 Nevertheless, this background is relevant to our model,
because of our proposed concept of feasibility and empiricism.

Beyond Popper
Popper knew that testing and falsification are not always practical 22; 82: Replication
must be appropriate in methodology including data collection and have adequate
controls to avoid leakage.89 But that does not imply that theories cannot or should not
be subjected to testing and hence possible falsification, or that it is impossible to falsify
some theories. However, some would regard theories that are not currently falsifiable
as better regarded metaphysics or ideology, not science. But that, in our opinion, defies
logic.

How does one prove something that one can see and photograph and videotape at the
same time? For example, the hypothesis that an apple under certain defined controlled
circumstances on earth will always fall from the tree onto the ground. How many times
do we need to demonstrate that to argue it is self-evident? Or is it feasible to
demonstrate correlations of two events? Alternatively, what about psychological data
or medical data involving ordinal measuring instruments where an individual scores
high enough for us to regard them as depressed and then responds appropriately to
antidepressants. Yet, we cannot falsify that a specific individual who does not exhibit
one of these criteria is not depressed. Effectively, there is a difference between what is
clinically relevant and statistically significant. Classical Popperian falsifiability does
not account for the hypothetical and sometimes obvious. If the full moon and the sun
cannot rise together, Popperian thinking would make it tentative, and potentially
refutable, but in geometry, it is self-evident that this could not happen. 94 We do not
need a double blind trial, which cannot be performed anyway, to test such a theory.
Popper largely ignored the analytic and deductive techniques of science, although he
was possibly changing this in his later writings. 82 70

This kind of critique again supports the use of another method too. This is a
supplement to falsification. We propose the model that we call “Lower dimensional
feasibility, absent falsification” (abbreviated LFAF). Effectively, there are experiments
and spontaneous data that cannot be falsified but can be observed and there is research
that is feasible though not able to be observed or falsified. Also, there are situations at
higher dimensional levels that cannot be proven at the 3S-1t level because the data
does not exist or does not completely exist in 3S-1t, so we can only see pieces of a
multidimensional jigsaw puzzle. As Klein ably puts it: “Non-replicability is a signature
for higher dimensional involvement in the process under scrutiny, not a valid argument
for refutation of its significance or eligibility for scientific consideration.” 70 This is
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 50

 
where feasibility, LFAF and what may appear to be just isolated jigsaw puzzle pieces
in 3S-1t, may all have enormous application at the higher dimensional levels, where
falsifiability is a non-issue because we cannot directly and empirically demonstrate the
data in the metadimensional perspective. But we need to realize that non-replicability
is a fundamental component of the metadimensional perspective. It’s like running in a
dark maze during a raging tornado and trying to ensure the same route every time.
Experiments on psi phenomena may be the closest to this in conventional scientific
research: Replication requires the same experiment and the subtle changes do not
allow that.

Scientific Model of Feasibility and Falsifiability: LFAF Model

Because there are areas with evidence and even proof in science that cannot be
replicated, we need to consider adding to this approach in these special, ostensibly
contradictory circumstances.

The special circumstances in which the classical approach of Karl Popper in the
Philosophy of Science requiring falsifiability cannot be applied include evolution,
cosmology, new models (for example, Einsteinian General Relativity took some
years), dimensions beyond 3S-1t, models of indeterminacy, psi, entanglement and
alleged survival after bodily death.
Because falsifiability is usually limited to only 3S-1t, we propose a new model
approach to the philosophy of science. We recognize that some elements cannot be
falsified at this time in 3S-1t, yet there may be ample evidence the pieces of the jigsaw
puzzle fit in 3S-1t. This means the data may be feasible and not provably falsified by
empirical data.

We propose a model, which we call Lower Dimensional Feasibility (usually 3S-1t),

Absent Falsification (abbreviated to the more useful acronym “LFAF“). We realize
this is equivalent to using a jigsaw puzzle in 3S-1t and filling in the pieces that fit, but
this must not allow a contradiction, otherwise the data may be falsified.

We believe that science must recognize this lower dimensional feasibility with the
absence of falsification rule because it is not new. It has been used frequently before in
major areas of science when a proposition may be not falsifiable but is feasible. Three
obvious aspects are the big bang theory, evolution and distant astronomical objects.
For many scientists, these are generally accepted prevailing science, but are not
falisifiable (so they may be wrong and we don’t know that), and therefore, at least fit
into Popperian conjecture.22 Our proposed LFAF model usually relates to 3S-1t, but not
exclusively so as applying, for example, thought or mathematics, other dimensions
may obtain incomplete data from higher dimensions (and we discuss theorems to
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 51

 
demonstrate the feasibility of such incompleteness).

This is an extension of conventional thought in the discipline of the philosophy of

science. Carl Popper's theoretical self-evident axiomatic model of falsifiability in
science pervades our thinking: the posit that science must be based upon falsifiability
is very adequate for almost all 3S-1t related empirical data. Ironically, Popper’s
falsifiability axiom is untestable because it is not itself falsifiable! We posit it would be
an error to apply it alone—exclusively as the reasoning from the "self-evident". In fact,
because of extended dimensions Popper’s axiomatic approach to truth may be
incorrect: There are many obvious empirically based prejudicial examples, e.g., the
origins of hypnosis, electricity, X-rays, meteorites, sterilization preventing death,
round earth, earth revolving round the sun, Einsteinian relativity, warping of reality,
splitting the atom, and psi. Moreover, even evolution in its broadest base is not
falsifiable but it could be feasible at the 3S-1t domain —depending on one’s a priori
Bayesian prior distribution statistical calculations, although others have argued that it
would require intentionality as well, and this is statistically completely unfeasible
using Bayesian reasoning—because of this, a Bayesian “metadimensional” approach is
itself inappropriate because there is no base to scientifically argue about probabilistic
odds: “Metadimensional” is the term we have coined to describe the application of
dimensions beyond 3S-1t. The great mathematician, Bernhard Riemann recognized
this limitation in his “ND-conjecture” on the basis of his metrical doctrine, recognizing
incompatible congruent classes of intervals and thus, incompatible congruence
relations 95. Effectively, this means he recognized mathematical non-falsifiability in N-
Dimensions.

Should falsifiability of science be the single fundamental instrument of proof? If so,

this means that any hypothesis that involves more than four dimensions may be not
falsifiable in 3S-1t, and thus, become non-science. Under this dictum, many currently
accepted theories would become pseudoscience, including evolution, most of biology,
particle physics, and cosmology. Even Einstein struggled with this concept of
falsifiability until the theory of relativity was shown to account for the divergence of
the orbit of the planet Mercury from Newtonian physics and to accurately predict the
bending of light rays around the sun, measured during an eclipse. Einstein’s theory of
relativity was not falsifiable for a long time after it was introduced in 1905. Also, the
numerous models of string theory are not currently falsifiable.

By demonstrating the limitations of Popperian demands for the falsifiability of science

in metadimensional realities, we apply the lower dimensional— feasibility absent
falsification (LFAF) approach. Like single puzzle pieces in a whole, some conclusions
are feasible yet not falsifiable in the traditional sense. This is so as metadimensions
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 52

 
(i.e., D >3S-1t) cannot be directly represented in 3S-1t.

When science encompasses a theory that is not non-falsifiable within 3S-1t, feasibility
may turn out more relevant than falsifiability.
1. If the data that exists as a “jigsaw piece” in our conventional 4D (3S-1t) current
reality. This data must not have been contradicted by the best available information
demonstrated in a specific scientific discipline. We use the term "not falsified" or
“absent falsification” for this. Most non-falsified data, usually experienced in 3S-1t, is
falsifiable, but that is simply a subset of the whole of not falsified group; so feasibility
then comes in.
2. if data can be supported by some empirical base, this makes it feasible. In other
words, if there are data showing a postulate is feasible, it can be studied until definitive
tests are devised (e.g., Bell’s Theorem).
3. if the hypothesis is both "not falsifiable" yet feasible, it fits our definition of
"science".
The mathematical and logical equivalent of LFAF is non-contradiction. Contradictions
differ from paradoxes. There are several paradoxical situations in mathematicological
thinking that have proven correct despite their apparent illogicality.

Feasibility: What It Does Not Mean

LFAF refers to Lower Dimensional Feasibility, but in order to analyze that lower
dimensional feasibility there has to be appropriate empirical scientific basis for this.
For example, in John Dunne’s famous book An Experiment with Time 96, he talks
about how there is no contradiction to what he is saying and refers to the soul, free-
will, and survival after bodily death and feels that this is proven. However, he provides
no empirical data: Mentioning a concept, en passant, such as free-will and stating it is
feasible does not raise its level to “lower dimensional feasibility”. This is not an
application of LFAF.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 53

 
CHAPTER 6: THE NEED FOR A NEW PARADIGM 97
“If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts.”
Albert Einstein (attributed)

Requirements
1. Material flying away from the postulated Big Bang was somehow organized into
complex forms that maintain their forms over long periods of time. This requires an
organizing agent.
2. We can include “consciousness” in the equations describing reality by re-examining
the basic assumptions and resultant structure of science and mathematics. This requires
examining the beginning of the finite physical universe, and the beginning of
consciousness.
To be true, the key components of any TOE must allow feasible modifications from
the current conceptual, mathematical and scientific models without contradicting
fundamental knowledge (other than materialist reductionism), and must also
seamlessly reconcile with the major theoretical models and authoritative sources from
the other natural sciences and be compatible with the three major disciplines
examining concepts outside our 3S-1t conventional reality. In this manner, the laws of
nature should be universally applicable to to all scientific endeavors.
Additionally, a TOE model may need to incorporate the mathematical and empirical
relevance of:
• an extended perception of consciousness (which we’re calling “C-substrate“);
• dimensions. This requires careful definition which we apply in part with Close’s
calculus of distinctions; and a process across these dimensions—we use
“indivension”, and a content—we apply “vortices”;
• infinity, if necessary relative infinity, and incorporating zero;
• order—as opposed to the physics concept of entropy implying a natural
tendency to disorder.

Our model has arisen out of this necessity because a TOE requires no contradictions in
order to attain its feasibility without any falsified empirical data in 3S-1t. We believe
that no TOE has been developed satisfactorily before because the role of the C-
substrate had been ignored, as well as the aspects that follow, namely, extra
dimensions, and recognizing the roles of infinity and order in reality.

Linguistic Needs
We have already used new terms and special definitions of current terms.
This is a necessary and essential part of any new framework there must be an efficient
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 54

 
logical language capable of describing the interaction between conscious entities and
the reality they experience. This requires careful definition, and in some instances, re-
definition, of current concepts ensuring a lack of ambiguity and adequate
operationalization of terms.
It also requires the development of numerous new terms. These neologisms must be
necessary and perform a communication function. The new words must be chosen
carefully so that there is an easy comprehension of the new meaning. These terms or
phrases must communicate information when the English language is lacking such
description. Additionally, these terms must complement the other uses.
We develop several new, necessary terms to facilitate understanding in this new
specialty, that can be best described as Dimensional Biopsychophysics.

LFAF and Consciousness

The Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) is controversial
because of its implications. Nevertheless, the mathematics and the empirical data
strongly support the necessity for this fundamental paradigm. This paradigm may
appear presumptive given the failed attempts of the past century to achieve a TOE, but
it applies a key, fundamental difference: the obvious, but previously ignored,
phenomenon of consciousness. Essentially, this paradigm utilizes all these features and
appears to work; the others have not. The multidisciplinary TDVP model incorporates
all these disciplines into the same unified world-view. TDVP demonstrates the
essential and maintained holistic-unified triadic nature of space, time and
"consciousness". This biopsychophysical reality applies to everything from the
subatomic to the astrophysical, and has been true from the very beginning of the
cosmos.
Examining the particular example of relevance to consciousness:
1. Consciousness as an integral part of reality is feasible based on the empirical data
that has been developed, and
2. Consciousness is also non-falsifiable and has therefore, not been falsified.
3. There are not many aspects of consciousness that cannot be easily falsifiable
because data replicability is difficult or even impossible because the abundance of
variables (e.g., "experimenter effect", relative non-locality and object-subject
interaction) is far more difficult to repeat exactly as an experiment than in most fields
of science. Effectively, the same information in exactly the same circumstances never
re-occurs, just approximations and dependent on the particular circumstances, the
changed factors may be critical confounding elements to maintain reality. This
multiplicity is seen as a reflection of the transfinite in the finite.
4. The abundance of six sigma results in psi experiments indicates a high likelihood
that relevant components may lead to demonstrable falsifiability.
Re-examining the requirements for science, those aspects, which are not demonstrably
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 55

 
falsified, and yet feasible in 3S-1t, are still acceptable scientific approaches. This is
demonstrably true in the context of the C-substrate.

A Perspective Approach to Developing a Metaparadigm

The metaparadigmatic approach
The term metaparadigm describes the overriding paradigm into which all others can be
fitted. Metaparadigms reflect a worldview underlying all the theories and
methodologies of all other paradigms. In that way a metaparadigm is a theory of
everything. Given the absence of a viable metaparadigm to this point, our model of
TDVP reflects a metaparadigmatic shift.

Proofs
To raise the TDVP Theory of Everything to the status of a real metaparadigm, we
needed supporting proof. We had always maintained that this would be via
mathematics and related logic and we have introduced several mathematical proofs for
our model.

Methodology and assessing significance

Development of a metaparadigm ideally closely follows the methodology we use in
science: We look at the literature on the topic, we develop hypotheses and we test the
hypotheses by developing a proper methodology. From this we obtain results, and we
discuss those results. Our results are analyzed by
• statistical analysis or
• when pertinent by what is clinically significant (e.g., a common technique in the
Medical Sciences; one wants an antibiotic to work against a sensitive organism
not statistically but almost every time —clinically; and at times:
• Direct subjective observation because we don’t need to statistically analyze
(e.g., You’ve smelt the fragrance of perfume: You are not trying to prove that
you smelt it).
• Sometimes double-blind studies cannot be done for ethical or other reasons—
the classic story of the scientist who wants to do the double blind study of
whether going from a parachute 2000 feet above the ground will work, and of
course you have to have a control group of people not in their parachute.

Heuristic scientific approach

From our results, we draw preliminary conclusions. This constitutes a completed
research experiment testing the limited hypotheses of this research.
In the majority of cases when examining data in 3S-1t (3 spatial dimensions at a
moment in time) the data can be based on the philosophy of science idea of
falsifiability: We can reject what is wrong and we can replicate our findings with
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 56

 
another experiment. The limitations of this approach, however, are the limitations of
our conventional common physical reality being limited to experiencing 3 dimensions
of space and one point in time.
We then move to the next stage of interpretation allowing us now to further test
extended postulates based on our conclusions.
Eventually we develop a paradigm.
However, many facets of paradigms may not obey the limitations of 3S-1t stringencies.
This means they cannot be tested by applying the falsifiability alone. We have, of
necessity, therefore, introduced an ancillary technique called LFAF (Lower
dimensional feasibility—generally in 3S-1t—absent falsification) to allow for
evaluation of empirical results combined. Additionally, we apply mathematics and
logic to ensure that our paradigm cannot be theoretically refuted by contradictions and
even more so, when available, that it can be established by mathematical proof (a
contradiction is a paradox in the strongest sense; it is a statement that flatly cannot be
true under any circumstances).

Paradigms, axioms and eventually metaparadigms

Ultimately, combining all the paradigms together, the theorist and scientist may
produce a broader series of paradigms and eventually develop a metaparadigm. This
will be made up of numerous related postulated axioms, which can be unified together
and still remain viable using LFAF. The challenge is large because it has never been
done before.

Our New Paradigm: An Integrative Approach

Unlearning what we have learnt
A basic problem in developing a new theory of everything is unlearning much of what
we think we already know. Overcoming this problem requires that we go back to our
first ontological principles and re-build the entire epistemological structure of human
thought from scratch. This is a formidable task that few have any lasting desire to
undertake; and, when a new theory of everything is found, this same problem is
mirrored in the task of presenting it in a way that will persuade others to follow that
same arduous path. At the end of the arduous path from first principles, we (the
authors) found reality to be holistic. The fragmented picture painted by current science
is not a true reflection of reality, but rather a reflection of how we perceive and think
about it. In addition, except for basic physical stimuli and response, most internal
human experience is considered subjective, unreliable and unsuited for scientific study.
There is no place in the equations of the standard model for consciousness.

Beyond reductionism
We were motivated to develop a comprehensive theory that would re-unite the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 57

 
scientific paradigm with human experience. In order to be inclusive, the essential
characteristic of our new theory is integrative, in contrast to the methods of
contemporary science, which are largely reductionist. Because the new theory
presented here includes realities heretofore excluded from consideration by legitimate
mainstream science, describing and understanding it may require unlearning and re-
thinking to an unprecedented degree. The concepts below are amplified later but we
briefly discuss now the essentials of the integrative approach.

Percepts and concepts are not actual reality

The first thing we must unlearn is the misconception that we, as conscious observers,
are completely separate from that which we observe. Quantum mechanics experiments,
e.g., the double-slit and delayed-choice experiments provide empirical evidence that
the separation of the observer from the observed is perceptual and conceptual, not
actual 8. This perceived separation is the result of the limitations of our physical senses
and the conscious act of drawing distinctions. In order to understand the integrative
theory presented in this book, an acceptance and a clear understanding of the holistic
nature of reality is needed. If you can accept the idea that reality may be holistic, it is
our intent to provide you with a clear understanding of how and why this is so.

The separations of reality into distinctions of matter, energy, space, time, and
consciousness are perceptual and conceptual constructions created by the limitations of
the physical senses and conceptual choices. The matter, energy, space, time, and
consciousness of the 3S-1t world are all ephemeral distinctions drawn within the
infinitely continuous essence of reality. The separation of these distinctions, however,
even though ultimately illusory, is quite real in the 3S-1t world in which we must
operate.

Calculus of distinctions
Consistent with the ultimate holistic nature of reality, the various fields of science,
mathematics, and geometry should not be viewed as separate; they all arise from the
intrinsic logic of the substrate of consciousness and are based in the drawing of
distinctions. Their axioms, theorems and proofs, when correct, are extensions of the
primitive logic of distinctions underlying the perceptual reality of the universe. The
formal logic involves the drawing of distinctions, called the Calculus of Distinctions 8.
From this integrated point of view, we are able to see the connection between the
physical universe and human consciousness, and the connections between the infinite
continuity of the substrate of transfinite consciousness and the finite distinctions of
human consciousness, time space, energy and matter.

Re-uniting space, time and consciousness

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 58

 
The re-uniting of the physical universe with consciousness, and the subsequent re-
uniting of science with human experience, is analogous to the re-uniting of
mathematics with physical dimensions and the re-uniting of dimensions with their
roots in the logic of the calculus of distinctions. When mathematics and
dimensionometry (geometry extended into realities of more than 4 dimensions) are
integrated, we have perfect tools with which to measure the variables of extent of
space, time and consciousness, beyond which we discover a second level of
distinctions: variables of content, by which we may measure the density of matter,
energy and information within the substrates of space, time and consciousness. It
should come as no surprise, if reality is a holistic reality, to discover that there is a one-
to-one correspondence between the various types of numbers in pure mathematics
(conventional number theory) and the variables of extent and content in the
multidimensional STC substrate. It is also quite natural to find mathematical invariants
relating any reality of n dimensions to the reality extended into n+1dimensions,
allowing the logical extrapolation from one dimensional reality to the next.

As indicated by the discovery of the red shift in the light from distant stars,
consistently increasing with distance 10; 68; 98; 99 and the equations of the general theory of
relativity, the universe we perceive is expanding. Based on the occurrence of matter
and energy only in quantum units, the triadic nature of dimensionometry and the forces
of an expanding universe, application of Fermat’s last theorem explains the breaking of
the original symmetry and the prominence of spiral motions, helixes and vortices in the
dynamics of our physical universe. In a multi-dimensional triadic (STC) universe of
nine or more dimensions, all distinct objects, especially at the quantum level are seen
as variants of the vortical form. This allows the incorporation of most of the features of
string theory into the TDVP model.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 59

 
 SECTION C: KEYS TO A NEW PARADIGM
FOR REALITY
CHAPTER 7: OUR FUNDAMENTAL MODEL 100; 101
“Acceptance without proof is the fundamental characteristic of Western religion,
rejection without proof is the fundamental characteristic of Western science.”
Gary Zukav (1942, "The Dancing Wu Li Masters") 51

Towards a Logic for the Metaparadigm of TDVP

This model has been in development for over fifty years (more than 25 for each of the
two researchers). We have taken into account feedback and have recognized the need
for empiricism, mathematics and applying logic. For every concept, we have ensured
that there is both a mathematical, logical and frequently an empirical basis to justify it
by using either LFAF or falsifiability.
Historical background to TDVP
We have discussed briefly here the endpoints of our model but this did not occur
in this order: Initially we realized the need for space and time but also that our current
physical world was rarely, yet definitely violated by contradictions. We recognized the
need for a further component besides space and time, some kind of consciousness,
meaning or essence. This then was a rare but not unique model involving
multidimensionality, space-time and some kind of consciousness. Between us we had
developed two overlapping and similar models (Neppe’s Vortex N-dimensionalism 6
and Close’s Transcendental Physics 8), but these were still different and incomplete.
Neppe had recognized the role of vortices, and Close had developed the mathematics
explaining the prevalence of spiral motion, but unification from quantal spin was the
last of the final components of our TDVP model. We had realized the fundamental role
of origin, but had to resolve the period around and before the Big Bangz or any other
origin —it need not even be a finite origin but an infinite one or alternatively a process
different from the Big Bang but something else. We had to find a way to link space,
time and consciousness, and this was achieved by postulating the existence of the three
as a triad. But we still needed to understand what exactly was that triadic mechanism
and we introduced inseparability, but that was problematic because how would
dimensions be expressed? We knew there had to be an absolute incontrovertible link of
meaning with space-time dimensionality, but also that each of these theoretically had
to have their own independence. The concepts of tethering and dimensional
extrapolation allowed for this and it was also paralleled by a mechanism expressing

z
We are not by using this example arguing that the Big Bang actually happened. As indicated, this is a conjecture and
therefore, we follow here with “other”.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 60

 
itself across and between dimensions, with the vortex being the content, and the
process being indivension. Moreover, this resolved the dilemma of the number of
dimensions: They were not a constant but fluctuated in different states, and also
potentially with traits of individuals. We needed to realize the biosocial significance
but this required recognition that these traits were different dependent on which system
unit one was referring to, hence the introduction of the term “individual-unit” that
made this model into a biopsychofamiliosociocultural one. We realized there was a
need to introduce the theoretical concept of dimension into consciousness and this was
achieved through the calculus of distinctions and the application of ordinal
comparisons of extent. But our model was still incomplete: We needed to explain life,
unify consciousness and understand how the brain/ nervous system and sentient beings
link. This was accomplished by incorporating how the infinite, life and order fit in and
recognizing that there had to be a curved 3D-movement: Vortices are always in 3D and
fit that description.
The necessity for the infinite
A major breakthrough has been the recognition of the definitive need for
recognizing both the finite and infinite realities and their linkage.
“Infinity” is necessary mathematically, because the Gödel incompleteness
theorem requires it 102; 103: We could not develop a metaparadigm based on finite reality
alone, because to Gödel’s theorem that would be a closed complete system. 103; 104
Ordropy
We speculate on another theoretical motivation for infinity: The second law of
thermodynamics is based on a closed physical finite reality and deals with entropy—
the tendency towards disorder. Yet demonstrable order occurs in physical life. The
common explanation is that entropy implies greater disorder elsewhere in that closed
finite loop. But this is unproven and may be illogical. Entropy without an opposite
defies our observation and logic: Whereas, non-living physical systems in a closed
finite subreality tend towards disorder, and even the human body, tends to utilize
energy sources and move towards lower equilibrium states, continued living also is an
empirically demonstrable experience that billions of individuals can attest to—at least
that their own life exists. While physically alive, we all experience a remarkable order
and structure to life, a consciousness, and a separation of self from others. We are
ordered beings even if tendencies towards physical disorder play a role. If we were
purely entropic beings, we would die very quickly. Yet each individual knows at least,
that he or she exists. Is there truly an equivalent added disorder in the rest of the closed
loop cosmos to balance that order? A strongly motivated alternative explanation is to
explain ordered reality in living individuals, through the concept of infinite continuous
systems permeating through the closed finite discrete systems that may ostensibly
produce disorder in physical reality.
Therefore, if the finite is insufficient to explain ordropy, this strongly motivates
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 61

 
the infinite reality. Using this logic, we introduce the term “ordropy”: Ordropy is far
more than just negative entropy (negentropy). It is multidimensional (and the term
“ordropy” derives not only from “order” as in “ord” and the reversal of entropy as in
“tropy” but the “d” also refers to the N-dimensional element). The existence of
ordropy is obvious, overt, and is real, based on our common experience of life and
order. We use “ordropy” as a composite term to explain the state of order that may be
linked with the infinite and also sentient beings in the finite. Why “ordropy” not
“extropy” as a term?
We originally used the term “extropy” instead of “ordropy” (even in the first
edition of this very book). Ironically, we’re not using it now because there were other
later, incorrect definitions of “extropy” that referred to “the pseudoscientific principle
that life will expand indefinitely and in an orderly, progressive way throughout the
entire universe by the means of human intelligence and technology.” aa Our use is not
“pseudoscientific”, not limited to “life”, and not limited to the “indefinite life
expansion”. So we reluctantly have changed our term to avoid misinterpretation:
Particularly, ironic is that the term “extropy” was actually developed by one of the
authors. Dr Ed Close in his book Infinite Continuity, and he followed up using Extropy
in Transcendental Physics 8; 17!
Ordropy and the infinite
Ordropy further motivates a broader ordered reality that is not limited to a
closed complete setting. The process we call “ordropy” is far more than just negative
entropy (negentropy) because an open, infinite setting implies metadimensionality.
Entropy is applicable in a finite closed system wherein the second law of
thermodynamics is not compromised, but it does not apply in infinite open reality.
The need for such ordropy derives from existence in the infinite and conversely
because of the limitations of explaining ordered life in the finite, ordropy implies
infinity.
Therefore, ordropic order necessarily had to be in an open system otherwise the
laws of entropy would be compromised and in turn, many of the fundamental laws of
physics would be overturned. Ordropy is not only a multidimensional level, but
implies order at that infinity level— infinite dimensional reality (“metadimensional”).
In summary, the physics of entropy is inapplicable if you go infinite because infinity
reflects an open reality, and ordropy is far more than just negative entropy because it is
all pervasive, not unidimensional order.
Ordropy and life
But is there a need for ordropy? Yes, there is. The demonstrable need for
ordropy in physical life in the finite provided the correct physiology and genes
manifest at that time. The consequence is living sentient beings, and effectively the

aa
This definition is from the Macintosh Dictionary App.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 62

 
abstraction is the “life” component. We posit this derives from the infinite reality of
this existence and is accessible via ordropy. Life is the ultimate expression of this
ordropy at the infinite level.
Because it is a different life in the infinite, we call it “polife” or potential physical life,
although it still may imply an existence in the infinite. Therefore, this is an example of
the infinite interfacing with the finite.
A hypothetical refutation of TDVP
Because of the fundamental aspect of eternal life in the infinite, if it were found
that physical death was an extinction, then TDVP could be refuted because a
fundamental part of the TDVP model would be untrue.
Infinity and interfacing with the finite
Closely linked with order and life, is broader continuous flow of meaningful
information. Consciousness and meaning are still linked up with our S, T, C tethering
and inseparability at the discrete finite level and added meaning is acquired through the
infinite interfacing with the finite: The finite is just a movie frame of the broader
infinite reality—as if the order coming from metainformation can be translated into the
infinite continuous meanings of metaconsciousness. Again, this link is facilitated if one
postulates unified infinite time, with multiple dimensions of finite time all beginning at
the Origin Event.
STC Tethering
Tethering is far more than just physical linkage, per se: The various substrates are
inseparable at their source areas so that it is more than connection where space, time
and C-substrate are all tethered. They are part of the same substance effectively and
hence the term Qualits. The notation that is used is content, and the metaphor is one
container of three different dimensional forms, all mixed like chemicals, such that they
form a new chemical mixture.
Infinite continuity and finite quantal discreteness
We realized recently the need for the infinite to be continuous, and the finite to
be discrete, and we were therefore, able to apply the same model of quantum physics,
and specifically quantal meaning across the subatomic, macroreality and astrorealities
and its relationship with a continuous infinite metainformation/ metaconsciousness
reservoir. These needs have now been incorporated into our model.
Top-down tethering
In summary, we are describing reality both from the top-down (the extension of the
transfinite into 3S-1t) and from the bottom-up by dimensional extrapolation. We have
STC inseparability at both ends or in other dimensional levels of connectivity and
tethers emanate from or communicate with these sources. However, this tethering and
their sources occur at the discrete transfinite level, because it is contradictory to call
the infinite anything local. In fact, there might usually be an absence of S and T (both
approximate zero) at the transfinite level, so this reality is conceptualized as finite
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 63

 
relative nonlocality.
Quanta and discrete meaning
Metaconsciousness and quantal meaning are closely linked but in different
contexts. Metaconsciousness from an infinite point of view is conceptually continuous.
Quantal consciousness or quantal meaning is in quanta or perhaps qualits (in the
context possibly of conscits as fundamental units reflecting C-substrate) and is
discrete. This implies that there could be some kind of particle or particle wave in
relation to this meaning as well, and hence the hypothesis of a psitron or a kinetron
would be a possibility at that level. We could speculate that this discrete meaning may
not be at the quantal level per se, but potentially may even be at the subquantal level or
in dark space (these could speculatively be the same). But ultimately, applying TDVP,
the infinite and the finite subrealities interface at every level.
Non-locality in the finite; metacist in the infinite
John Bell coined the term “non-local” 105-107 to describe the strange state of elementary
particles that would have to exist between their source and the receptor, if Bohr’s
interpretations were correct. 108 We prefer metalocal, metatime, metats and metacist.
The finite is non-local, the infinite meta-local.

Table 1: New terminology applied to essence

Meta-information vs. information (limited finite, discrete)
Meta- consciousness
Meta-time, meta-timal
Meta-space, meta-spatial
Metats, metatsal
Metacist, metacistal (consciousness, information, space, time).
Also Meta-order (for “extropy” in the infinite) and Meta-life (or Po-life)
Infinite space and time.
All of space and all of time combines as a single unit, so it is not a finite non-
locality because non-local is in the context of the finite, but it is an illogical term in the
context of the infinite particularly as it refers to all of local space and all of time. This
motivates why we introduced metaspace and metatime, and combining them into
space-time, it would be “metats” (“metast” is too close to metastasis) with “metatsal”
(as adjective), if one combined the CST with consciousness as well. Additionally, we
have “metacist” and the ‘i’ could be information. (Table 1)
Effectively, although space and time could be applied in an artificial isolated
theoretical way, TDVP explicitly explains the axiom that S and T cannot be separated
from the C-substrate at the level of the tethered CST and that this manifests from our
(finite) Origin Event. This means that C-substrate (implying consciousness in some
manifestation) always exists. We speculate that that part of the CST manifesting as
Consciousness, Space or Time alone, with its vortical indivension projections,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 64

 
invariably involves manifestations in sentient beings in the C-substrate. This does not
mean that multidimensional time alone may not be vortical but the sentient being will
not register it. And the same would apply to Space, although we can more easily
conceive of the first three dimensions of space. That ultimate registration is at some
level of N-consciousness through the nervous system and the manifestation would be
through the meaning of C-substrate with the rest not existing in our standard
experiential reality. At higher dimensional finite levels, and certainly by the transfinite,
it is far more difficult for us to propose anything but finite C-substrate dimensions.
On the infinity side we have CIST, namely, consciousness, information, space
and time. The whole term essence incorporates metaspace, metatime and
metaconsciousness, but it also incorporates ordropy and life. Therefore, we can refer to
the essence as the qualities of the infinite. We need not draw any theological or
mystical allusions to this.

TDVP Revisited
Philosophy
Finally, we were able to reconcile this model philosophically as “unified
monism” and even find justification with the concepts of infinity for theologians and
mystics potentially to make interpretations, although we have not, per se, introduced
anything pertaining to a supreme being. We do not go in that direction, but we can see
how there are speculative jumps towards such conclusions. At one point, we had used
the term “guided reality” because we were trying to transmit concepts of infinity and
meaning, but we now apply the term “meaning” for a more balanced scientific
approach. In any event, guided is better called “guiding”.
Postulates and relativity
Our model then of itself generated several hundred postulates or ideas and these
have become valuable, for example the role of forces and energies, a variety of
different theorems relating to extradimensionality and even the possibility of extending
warped gravitation to other forces, effectively extending Einsteinian relativity. We
have recognized the need for relative elements and of even relative objectivity, and
we’ve been able to introduce a speculative model unifying the quantum and subatomic
supposedly objective components with the subjectivity of experience of such a model.
Essentials
We now regard TDVP as fulfilling the requirements of a metaparadigm. The
core axioms effectively separate out each component of our metaparadigm for simpler
explanation, but come together as a fundamental basic TDVP unit.
Extensions
We must not go beyond interpreting the basics, as the hundreds of speculations
may or may not be true. These include models for psi phenomena and for
entanglement.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 65

 
Given its rapidity of change over the past several months, due to further development
by the authors and consideration of peer review comments, with the same core ideas,
but greater clarity, we have little doubt that this will continue to develop. We have
briefly tabulated some of these ideas below, and then discuss them briefly, hoping this
will lead to greater refinements and new directions and ideas.
The proposed model:
We propose a model that has the following attributes: This will become clearer once
the information on which it is based is perused below but it is nevertheless, presented
here at the outset to allow a perspective of our postulates:
• There is a single unitary reality conforming to the laws of nature with both
continuous infinite and discrete finite components and a variably permeable
boundary between.
• Essentially space, time and “consciousness” are fundamentally inseparably
tethered from the event-horizon (e.g., the big bang).
• This fundamental and permanent STC inseparability has separate tethered
components. This means that S, T and C-substrates still are very closely allied in
meaning and interaction even when they are separated in finite space, time and
consciousness.
• There is a unification of what, in our conventional reality of 3S-1t, we
experience as distinct past, present and future. This means that our concept of
time is relative and requires at least a conceptualization of not one moment in
time (zero dimensions) but a linear movement across time. We further motivate
that time is likely to be multidimensional (at least two, more likely three) and
this allows for such concepts as vortical indivension, tethering and free-will to
be more easily developed.
• This could also imply that there may be something outside or beyond our
conventional standard experience of time. Because all finite realities exist in
time, this concept would need to reflect infinite realities.
• With the tethering of a fundamental “consciousness” to space and time, the
likelihood of a requisite order to reality becomes a theoretical possibility and
there is empirical data (e.g., life and its origins) to support that.
• This means that there may be another system besides physical disorder that we
call “entropy”. This is more than “negative entropy. We call this active system
“ordropy”.

Dimensional Elements in the TDVP Model

The following outlines these ideas relating to dimensions:
a. Existence has more dimensions than our conventional 3 dimensions of space and
one point in time. We use the term “meta-dimensional” for this.
b. Existence implies at minimum, the intertwining of 3 dimensions of space, at least 1
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 66

 
dimension of time and of a C-substrate. (See the section “Statistical Basis Justifying a
Paradigmatic Shift” below.)
c. Existence requires a triadic representation of the 3 substrates of time, space and C-
substrate (what we are calling S substrate, T substrate, and C-substrate) in varying
proportions making up a metadimensional existence. (Lemma based on the C-substrate
axiom below):
Our ideas also relate to the structure of these dimensions, namely, that in all of
existence from the most subatomic particle or packet to the largest astronomical level,
there is a necessary co-existence of space, time, and what we’ve called the C-substrate.
We call this CST and observe the three components of this “triadic” model. We
demonstrate this mathematically and dimensionometrically with dimensional
extrapolation and proven theorems.
Triadic CST (or SCT) and Indivension
The structure we axiomatically propose is that CST acts as a tethered unit and cannot
be totally separated in nature. This means a unified wholeness exists even at the Origin
Event: This is the Axiom of Tethered Origin (ATO), which reflects one of the
fundamental 22 axioms in our broader metaparadigm from which TTOOURS derives.
To explain this structure across dimensions we require a content, which in TDVP
involves a ubiquitous curved shape that is moving, called “Vortices”. The vortex here
is used in its broadest context. This includes very complex such as spinors, helices, and
shapes from elongated curved tubes to spheres, and movement that includes zero
movement. Vortices are thus, fundamental three dimensional ovoid movements
creating content through space-time-C-substrate.
Our TDVP model recognizes the need for a process relating to that vortical content.
This process is called “indivension” describing these fluctuating vortices moving
across and between dimensions. The term “indivension” was needed because no such
term previously existed and it was coined out of necessity.
In our TDVP model, dimensions are necessarily beyond 3S-1t. This is because not
only do a fluctuating number of dimensions of consciousness exist, but there is a solid
logic to proposing more than 1 dimension of time. A complex clarification is apposite:
The 3D element in vortices implies space, and the movement implies time. However,
this would be how we conceptualize them in 3S-1t. But they could be 3D of
consciousness or of time, moving across and within other higher level vortices or
dimensional structures, ad infinitum. Three dimensional structures could be involved at
the metadimensional level as components of a broader transfinity. This means that
vortices still have a universal applicability throughout N-dimensions.
In order to bring consciousness into the equations that describe reality, we involve it in
the definitions of our most basic terms. This is needed as the current materialistic,
physicalistic, reductionist, standard scientific, everyday 3S-1t paradigm ignores
consciousness. This may be that it is not falsifiable and cannot be easily falsified by
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 67

 
empirical data—this is illogical because it would make considerable parts of
psychology and the social sciences into “pseudosciences” because of their lack of
falsification. We accept the social sciences as legitimate sciences because it is
convenient in those contexts to understand “consciousness” as axiomatic despite the
difficulties of definition.
Whereas most physical sciences are falsifiable in almost every activity, the findings of
both subatomic physics as well as overwhelming statistical data against chance in
consciousness research sometimes require re-examinations applying LFAF.
It may well be that “indivension” reflects the projections out from the original
inseparable source of STC with tethering of space, time and consciousness. This would
explain the practical mechanisms of how tethered linkages impact also on psi,
entanglement, as well as indivension, or at least some of these. Effectively, they are
still loosely linked like the balloon on the string is connected with the hand holding it.
But this mechanism for psi is at present a tenuous and speculative hypothesis, although
theoretically the conceptual links appear to be worthy of further exploration.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 68

 
CHAPTER 8: REALITY AND SUBJECTIVITY 109
"Reality" is the only word in the English language that should always be used in
quotes.”
Unknown

Monist or Pluralist?
The TDVP model may superficially appear a materialist model because it portrays the
unification of space-time and consciousness. It therefore, seems monistic, and since
space is perceived as a substance, and time is experienced as a duration. However, it is
anything but materialistic. It is almost pluralistic in portraying a transfinite number of
individual realities all closely interwoven with each other at multisystems levels, but
that ostensible “pluralism’ is really a monism of one single natural law reality that has
components that are experienced as separate and subjective, and perceived and
conceptualized depending on the nature of the sentient being (e.g., human or even
amoeba) that experiences it.

Unified Monism and Tethering

TDVP philosophically and conceptually portrays a “Unified Monism”, an inseparable
source linkage forever for both finite and infinite subrealities. From the inseparable
source of space, time and extended consciousness at the most fundamental level of
origin separations of S, T and C occur in the tethered (looser linked) areas. Though
there are zillions of tethered projections the source unification creates a unified
philosophical unit.

Reality and Individual-units

The realities are subjectively, finitely experienced individually by individual-units
(groups, individuals, families, ethnicities, cultures, society and species——we have
used this order in this example to easily portray the “individual-unit” that makes up all
these subpopulations and all other combinations and spelling out GIFECSs). All these
individual—units experience their own subjective reality within a finite environment
of discrete events or objects or impacts. When our reality complements what others are
experiencing, approximate the individual-units of others, then we are experiencing a
“common reality“ that is perceived as actual but still is subjective. In 3S-1t, the
actualized common reality is usually experienced in finite units of every separate
individual because one conceptual endpoint of experience is through the separated
identity of each individual single brain. It may that this “endpoint” is a misnomer: the
brain acts as an integrator and executive of information, and bidirectionally with input
and output. Speculatively, the brain may even be one expression of a quantum or even
subquantal physical mechanism. The individual-unit concept is far more than each
individual brain, though the sum of these may produce a whole. Because of the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 69

 
GIFECS links (e.g., familially, sociologically and ethnically) the sum of all may be
greater than all these brains not working in unison.

Finite Bottoms-up Tethering

The tethering could be conceptualized in finite subreality, from the bottoms-up, or the
inside-out, for example, in finite reality. In our conventional 3S-1t domain, such
tethering involves a finite progression from the most miniscule subatomic subquantal
aspect through the macrophysical and astrophysical cosmological levels of both
inanimate and animate existence. At that miniscule level, we speculatively postulate a
“qualit” of any kind manifesting as an inseparable space-time-meaning with the
potentials towards mass, energy and a directed information: It is a discrete unit, and
although quanta may be the smallest such unit, this includes subquantal soup (the so-
called black space) containing directed information within that space-time elements.

Transfinite Top-down Tethering

The necessary tethering of space, time and extended consciousness (STC), may occur
at the highest dimensional levels (the discrete, countable transfinite kind of infinity).
This can most easily be regarded as top-down, or outside-in. This STC can again
impact all the “lower” dimensionalities with meaningful information because the
tethering is only in portions, not complete. Effectively, the highest dimensional
configurations do not require the lower ones to independently exist. They are closely
allied and we postulate all dimensions influence each other. However, the higher may
more easily influence the lower, because they are metaphorically able to conceptualize
the lower dimensional jigsaw puzzles.

Tethering and Vortical Indivension

There may be zillions of other areas of interfacing of that tethering and because of the
fundamental 3-dimensionality of structures, the conceptualized movement, and the
rotational elements that appear ubiquitous, this tethering manifests vortically. As every
individual unit manifests zillions of such vortices, and they interface, this effectively
creates webs of interaction of individual-units at higher dimensionalities.
This is why we developed the term “indivension”— individual-units at higher
dimensions. Some of these indivensions do not express themselves in experiential
reality, they exist just as the whole infrared to ultraviolet spectrum limit us humans to a
very small range of experiential light.

Actual Reality is Relative, Experiential Common Reality

The concept of an actual reality may initially imply materialism as the actual reality
would reflect objective physics. But it is never an actual reality that is experienced by
sentient beings. Instead of actual reality we use the term “common reality.” This is
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 70

 
experienced as one’s own existential reality. There is certainly a closeness given the
almost identical experiences of our species of space and time that it resembles a
common reality—it has perceptual input, it is integrated, it is then conceptualized with
interpretations, and this is experienced as common reality. This common reality is
almost identical for all humankind, just as our genetics are almost but not quite
identical for all humankind, or for that matter all sentient beings.

The Misnomer of “Actual”

Our initial misnomer term, actual reality, changed because it is relatively objective and
actual reality refers to “objective physics: Instead of actual reality, we therefore, use
common reality because it fits also into our idea of an individual-unit where there are
different levels of subjective reality and an individual may belong to several subjective
individual-units. We are not referring to the actual reality in the direct context of
objective physics in our 3S-1t world earthly world domain. It is only ostensibly actual
because large quantities of people can objectify it that it is still only relatively
objectified by virtue of it’s commonality. Effectively, it is experiential reality —
common reality or relative objective physical reality. This is not to deny that there is
an actual reality out there that is objective in that it exists irrespective of the observer,
but that still contains elements of consciousness or meaning even at the subatomic
level. Whether such objectivity, is truly objective therefore, could be debated as there
may be subtle dynamic variations occurring subatomically at the level of quanta or
qualits.
The ideas of perceived reality—perceptual reality, conceptual reality, and actual reality
may initially imply materialism as the actual reality reflects objective physics. But
objective physics is not truly objective: It still requires our subjective experiences and
indeed cognitive interpretations and integrations in the brain.

Commonality and Interactions

The relative subjective context and relative objectivity does not exist in the absolute
context. It is always based on perceptual, conceptual, and experiential commonality (a
principle of the Calculus of Distinctions).
In fact, even indivension of these zillions of interactions is clearly perceptual and/or
conceptual, depending on the number of dimensions that one is limited to, and these
may fluctuate depending on state and trait circumstances.

The Inanimate and the Fallen Tree in the Empty Forest

What about the so-called inanimate? The subatomic particles, the molecules, the
macroscopic objects such as bar of iron, which do not sustain any form of physical life.
Do they involve these processes? No and yes: No, in that some kind of neurological
consciousness is required in a living being to perceive, conceptualize and experience.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 71

 
But yes, in that TDVP includes a Quantum Consciousness because space and time
cannot exist without meaning. So, yes, when the sound of the falling tree is not heard
by any sentient being and the fallen tree is not seen by that sentient being as lying in
the empty forest, it still has fallen, and it still exists because S, T and C are inseparably
tethered in all existence from the origin. This “origin” reflects the finite “Origin Event“
that may very closely be linked with the infinite continuous reality where there is no
beginning.

Unified Monism Revisited

For the reason above, the unification of a single reality becomes apparent in TDVP.
This is why the equivalent philosophical model is called Unified Monism. Despite its
apparent monist qualities in its title, is not materialist nor monist in the modern sense.
If dualism now refers to consciousness, it has a dualistic element. But for the purist it
is monist and the infinite and the finite are unified as there is only one reality.

Relative Reality
The relative subjective context and relative objectivity does not exist in the absolute
context. It is always based on perceptual, conceptual, and experiential commonality.
Relative reality follows from the fact that we are accepting general relativity, in the
sense that there is no such thing as an objective reality independent of observation—
relative objectivity. The levels of appreciation reflect our perceptual afferents, our
conceptual interpretations, and further validates relative reality, objective, common
and manifest.
The reality hierarchy objectively is quantal subatomic, macroreality and astroreality.
110
Relative objectivity is reflected from the quantum level, and is expressed at all
levels, not only subatomically, but in macroreality, and in astroreality. In order to have
relative subjectivity maybe there has to be some kind of animate component as
opposed to inanimate component. Relative objectivity always uses the orthogonal
Euclidean components but there is non-orthogonality and non-Euclidean elements
when viewed from other dimensional perspectives.
We should take care of distorted interpretations: Someone interpreting
experience in a dichotomous way could make any terminology into an interpretative
problem.

Conscious Reality Closed and Open

Consciousness reflects both the open infinite reality and the closed finite reality. This
model speculatively allows both to fit together because we can translate the quantal
meaning to STC via infinite metaconsciousness. It means there is no separation of
meaning with metaconsciousness and that the ultimate integrator of conscious
awareness and responsiveness is via the central nervous system of living beings.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 72

 
The Gesher and Dynamic Freedom of Choice: Real Meaning in Our Lives
The finite and infinite subrealities constitute a single unified reality, necessarily
existing always (note the universal time element) together in all space (note the
universal space element). The question then is how does this interface take place? How
does the infinite and the finite link? If they are technically one unified existence there
is no need to link. All knowledge, all information, all existence is already there. But
the finite, animate (living) being requires a filtration mechanism, a barrier so as not to
be overwhelmed. We call this a “gesher”—a mystical (?) bridge, mystical in the
linguistic sense of interaction with physical and an infinite essence. This gesher
linkage allows incoming stimuli from the infinite and outgoing expression from the
finite. It can be narrow or wide depending on one’s needs. The infinite pervades the
finite in all ways, but the finite can influence the infinite creating an influence on total
realities that are higher. This is why we use here the term “mystical” because every
action, every thought and every concept may have some influence on the dynamic
infinite reality that may always change in the finite reality existence of our individual-
unit worlds. Therefore, there is freedom of choice because the infinite has infinite
possibilities and potential, and the real opportunity to influence reality is our special
reality. The circulating air of the infinite is not stagnant.

The “Higher” Dimensions and Essence

The extended continuous infinite is melding into the transfinite still discrete very high
dimensional finite like there is no separation. Of course, the concept of “higher” and
“lower” is linguistic alone. STC links in finite tethering from below (at the “lower”
level, the bottom-up or inside-out level) and in an infinite tethering from above, at the
“higher”, top-down or outside-in level. But all of space is present everywhere, all of
time exists within the present, all of information is available as meaning, and all order
is available across all domains as ordropy, and life potential (polife) is ready given the
correct physiology and environment. All these properties pervade the laws of nature,
and make up an infinite essence. But it’s just we do not know what laws of nature the
infinite essence of ordropic polife metacist (meta-consciousness, -information, -space
and –time) consists of. The infinite need not impact from the top-down alone, it
permeates all dimensions and directly impacts 3S-1t, our experiential, yet by the higher
dimensions, possibly beyond 3S-3T-3C going towards NC a there is lesser and
eventually only limited separation of the finite subreality and the infinite essence. The
two have become one.

Top-down and Bottoms-up

This “directionality” of “top-down” is, of course, abstract and metaphorical: We could
as easily talk about “outside-in”. Relevant, however, is the likelihood that we need to
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 73

 
apply both the top-down approach of approaching the broader reality dimensionally
“downwards” with the “bottoms-up” or “inside-out” approach relating to
accommodating our physical 3S-1t worldly needs and then moving outwards or
upwards. Effectively, many sentient beings don’t have any direction: They live purely
in 3S-1t. But if they did, they would usually begin at that individual level, approaching
consciousness in accordance with their limitations (bottoms-up). Our physical sciences
also approach reality by bottoms-up as this works well in 3S-1t physical existence. But
conceptually, as we become more aware of metaconsciousness, the need to approach
the bigger picture using “top-down” becomes more important.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 74

 
CHAPTER 9: THE C-, S- AND T- SUBSTRATES, DIMENSIONS, DOMAINS
AND DISTINCTIONS 111

“A human being is part of a whole, called by us the Universe, a part limited in time
and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated
from the rest--a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of
prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons
nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles
of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.”
Albert Einstein

Substrates
Why have we chosen the term “substrate” and not “matrix” to describe space, time and
broad consciousness?
The substrate term is better than matrix: It is non-prejudicial unlike the rectangular
matrix. Most of our model is curved and not rectangular. Also, substrate is commonly
used in chemistry, but not in mathematics and that means we are not therefore,
misusing it mathematically, but redefining it.
A matrix implies a rectangular array of values or measurements that can be 3
dimensions or even more. We had used this term initially for S, T and C matrices but
recognized its limitations including conflicts in name reflecting different concepts,
e.g., Space Matrix in String Theory 112. Therefore, we changed it. What it is really
expressing may or may not be as objectively mathematical. Nevertheless, the term
substrate expresses well our understanding about consciousness, space and time and
can be used as a dimensional substrate or simply substrate.

Other synonyms such as milieu, identity or pattern do not fit. The only one that could
is the term domain. But we already have an excellent use for domain and subdomain
and we would have needed to redefine domain there.

Substrate is the ground or origin from which something sprang.

The S-substrate, the T-substrate, and the C-substrate are all appropriate in the
mathematical sense and may assist readers who are examining our model piece-meal.
Moreover, the term “C-matrix” could have been conceived incorrectly as a single
matrix not multiple dimensions. In contrast, “substrate” is a more apposite term
because within the S, T, and C substrates, we can motivate that there are many, even
possibly, a transfinite number of dimensional substrates. This is particularly so because
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 75

 
we motivate different qualities of consciousness, each corresponding with our
definition of dimension.

Dimensions
Dimensions provide a logical, geometric-mathematical framework within which to
describe the objects and events perceived and/or conceived as distinct features of
reality.
In any reality model, there are many measurable variables;, e.g., mass, energy,
velocity, density, angular momentum, electrical charge, biological activity, information
content, etc. But these are variables involving content not extent. While they are
measurable features of perceptible reality, they are not dimensions.
The number of dimensions is equal to the number of variables of extent present. Extent
implies degrees of freedom, i.e., directions in which something can move. This is
contrasted with content which does not have degrees of freedom but can be measured
in terms of units of the constituent; a third domain, one with variables of intent refers
to determination to act but not the action itself.
Our use of the word dimension will be precisely limited to variables of extent that can
be measured and described geometrically and mathematically. Therefore, content
elements are insufficient: There must be an extent measure; often density is the
interface between content and extent describing something as per unit of the various
variables making up the extent.
We do not use the word “dimension” in its many different other conceptual ways. This
includes statistical analysis applications referring to having a “causal dimension” and a
“resultant dimension”. Nor do we use it to represent any measurable variable as a
dimension.

Dimensions as we know them

The idea of 3 dimensions of space and one extra dimension of time is logical given that
we are talking about independent co-ordinates needed to specify the things that belong
to it. Spaces with many dimensions provide a convenient way to do this, as length,
breadth, and height provide a convenient 3 dimensional fabric in this regard. 113 The
points in these co-ordinates need not be zero dimensional points. So, for example
ellipses are planar because they are conceptualized in planes. An ellipse requires 5
different numbers to specify: the 2 number of co-ordinates of the center of the ellipse,
it’s length 1 number, it’s width 1 number, and it’s angle of tilt 1 number. Now, one
could argue therefore, that an ellipse is 5 dimensional but it is not as these are variables
of content involving co-ordinates. It is a plane because there are effectively 2 variables
of extent. Even several metric measures or co-ordinates, still do not change it from the
same plane. But we therefore, cannot say that this 2 dimensional space exists in 5
dimensional space. It is a space because if we change the number representing the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 76

 
ellipse by a small amount we can get an ellipse near by that looks very similar, but we
cannot argue that it is a different distinction of extent.

Dimensions mathematically
This is very relevant from the point of view of vortices, which are 3 dimensional
spaces of extent no matter how complex the vortical representation would be in co-
ordinates. Therefore, one has to be very careful of measures. For example, in
engineering if one has stresses and strains114, you have a grid of a 100 metal girders you
have a 100 forces to work with. You could argue incorrectly this is 100 dimensions,
but effectively one really could be talking about degrees of freedom in content not
extent. Even though these things can vary independently, they can be represented as
tensors of content and they do not necessarily imply different dimensions, per se. In
genetics, we can apply “DNA space” where we still have sequences of 4 bases with
different variations, and one can extend it in terms of all possible kinds of transfinite
spaces. 114 But again, this is at a 3 dimensional double helical structures and therefore, a
vortical kind of level. Even if you have a million such sequences, you still are dealing
with 3 dimensional spaces. Moreover, the postulation of a “phantom DNA effect” 115
involving more complex space and holograms, is at this point speculative.

Euclidean dimensions and non-Euclidean space

There are mathematically 4 Euclidean dimensions but the fourth is more difficult to
represent.
Orthogonality can be easily represented in terms of 3 co-ordinate axes. However, 4
dimensional space requires an extra co-ordinate orthogonal to the other 3. It is usually
labeled w. But the length along the w axis produces 4 dimensional geometry. This is
more complex than three dimensional geometry reflecting the three degrees of
freedom. In context, this is the typical application of the Cartesian system to 3-D space
but there are 4 degrees of freedom once time is introduced.

Because of the dilemma of what a dimension is, possibly we should use the phrase
Euclidean dimension and non-Euclidean dimension. Effectively the first three space
dimensions are always Euclidean as we’re using it.
Thereafter, the imaginary dimensions of time could become non-Euclidean or
Euclidean by applying warped forces measurable relative to the observer’s CST frame,
but otherwise such dimensions of extent still have degrees of freedom that could
theoretically be measurable by applying Euclidean geometry—in the metadimensional
context, Euclidean dimensionometry. Non-Euclidean space is apparent from one
observer perspective and is perceptual at the n dimensional level but the n+1 observer
would be still seeing it as Euclidean space. The real aspects are the variables that we
use to extrapolate reality into sets of three dimensional domains. The N-dimensionality
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 77

 
is particularly applicable to the C-substrate and this substrate is invariably perceptually
experienced and directly inseparably linked with S and T. The n-dimensional reality is
embedded within n+1. At the higher level, n+1 invariably has a C-substrate.

Dimensionometry
In the context of dimensions beyond the three dimensions of physical space, the term
geometry should be replaced with the term “dimensionometry”.
The answers to the questions about the nature of reality and consciousness may lie in
understanding the extra dimensions of reality not normally perceived by our physical
senses, but indicated by the existence of forces that appear to act at a distance and the
special role of consciousness implied by the concepts of relativity and quantum
mechanics. Even though we usually conceive of our direct experiential reality as a
“domain” of only three dimensions of space and one of time, there is evidence
indicating that we actually exist in a reality of more, perhaps many more, than four
dimensions (“meta-dimensions“).
Metric: The metric is a distance between two points or from the origin to any given
point. This is the basis of algebraic analytical geometry. This is best understood by
defining and using Cartesian co-ordinates. The arbitrary orthogonality (right angled,
perpendicular orientation) of the ordinate and abscissa in three-dimensional space is
the basis for defining the Pythagorean metric. Metrics at the ratio and interval
mathematical level relate to the lower dimensions and metadimensions (possibly up to
3S -3T). However, the calculus of distinctions when involving ordinal data usually
applies to much higher dimensions, e.g., N-C.
Parangular: We have suggested a term like “parangular”. This is to use a composite
term: Particularly when one exceeds three dimensions, non-orthogonal co-ordinates
may reflect a spectrum range from almost orthogonal all the way through to parallel.
Parangular can reflect any level of angular interception. It becomes relevant in
“indivension” because vortices, vectors, scalars and tensors may meet.
Cartesian Co-ordinate: A Cartesian coordinate system specifies each point uniquely in
a plane by a pair of numerical coordinates, which are the signed distances from the
point to two fixed perpendicular directed lines, measured in the same unit of length.
These also reflect the positions of the perpendicular projections of the point onto the
two axes, and expressed as a signed distances from the origin.
Ordinal, interval and ratio: Whereas many scientific measures are exact, involving
specific measures of intervals between (interval scale) and usually including zero (ratio
scale), our discussions of higher dimensions and particularly those in the C-substrate
may reflect ordinal measures. These involve extents of change but inconsistent
differences. Psychological and medical measures commonly use ordinal data such as
None-mild-moderate-severe-profound or None-slight-great. This allows one to provide
a degree of extent for such qualities as courage, e.g., great courage versus slight
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 78

 
courage or none. It is the meaning in the C-substrate that reflects fluctuations of
ordinal measures of intensity as variables in the C-Substrate. Meaning allows a method
of differential order as a variable of extent contrasts with Information, which is the
neutral content or pattern only.

Dimensionality notation
For uniformity and ease of expression in standard notation, we will represent the
dimensionality of a reality that can be described with three dimensions of space and
one dimension of time as 3S, 1T reality, where a specific point, P1, in this reality can
be uniquely described as P1(x1, y1, z1, t1), where x1, y1, z1, t1 are specific values of the
dimensional extent variables x, y, z and t in standard units of measurement for distance
and time from an arbitrarily located zero point. In general, the dimensionality of any
space-time reality can be represented by NS, MT, where N and M are positive integers.
When not distinguishing space from time dimensions, we will use the notation D for
dimension. Thus, 3S, 1T can be expressed as 4D. An ND reality with N>4 will utilize
N variables to locate any unique point in ND reality. In general, a point, P1, in ND
reality will be uniquely described as P1(d1, d2, d3, … dN,) where the dis are specific
values of the N dimensional variables of extent.

Building dimensions
As human beings, we can directly perceive only three dimensions of space and one
point in time, and this works almost all the time in our ordinary 3S-1t reality. This is
possibly because we are unaware of other dimensions impacting on ours.
However, we can build a conceptual model of a reality of additional dimensions in a
straightforward logical manner by discovering and using invariant features that link
any n-dimensional reality or domain to an n+1 dimensional reality. Effectively, we
extrapolate from one to the other. For example: an n+1 dimensional reality always
contains an infinite number of N-Dimensional realities: A one-dimensional line (1-D)
contains an infinite number of zero-dimensional points (0-D). A two-dimensional
plane (2-D) contains an infinite number of one-dimensional lines (1-D), and a three-
dimensional space (3-D) contains an infinite number of two-dimensional planes (2-D).
Infinity is therefore, relative using this model (“relative infinity”).

Hierarchy of infinite dimensions and of infinities

This conceptualization reveals a hierarchy of infinities: When the infinite number of
points on a 1-D line, corresponding to the infinite set of real numbers, is multiplied by
the infinite number of lines that exist in a plane when you go to 2-D, a higher order of
infinity is obtained. Applying this concept of relative hierarchical countable infinity, as
one increases dimensions, the infinity is obviously “larger” than the first infinity
because every number in the first infinity can be matched with an infinity of real
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 79

 
numbers in the second, and could thus, be called infinity squared, or an infinity of the
second order. The infinity of planes in the third dimension contains the two lesser
infinities, and could therefore, be called infinity cubed, or a third-order infinity. The
infinite number of points in each dimensional domain constitutes the basic concept of a
field. The points on a line constitute a field in which each point corresponds to a
unique real number (integer or decimal fraction). The points in a plane constitute a
field in which each point corresponds to a unique pair of real numbers, and the each
point in a 3-D space corresponds to a unique triplet of real numbers. This relative
increase continues literally ad infinitum! The top-down dimensionometric approach is
relevant and one can conceptualize x dimensions more easily from x+1 or x+n
dimensions. Dimensional extrapolation is relevant, Consciousness operates, we
believe, in a Euclidean mode as this is how we conceive of it. 10 The field concept
implies a functional modulator upon the "points" in a given dimensional domain,
exerting its effect from a higher dimensional instance. 70

Metadimensionality
Metadimensional is our term referring to any dimensions beyond 3S-1t. C-substrate
can potentially be expressed as possible Higher Consciousness components in
variables of ordinal extent in qualities such as love, honor, courage, wisdom,
understanding and a wide variety of qualities relating to higher attributes.
The Higher Consciousness when linked with ordropic physical life can be used to
portray abstract qualities such as courage, honesty and determination. Whereas
conceptually possibly S=0 and T=0 at some of these higher dimensionalities, the
original STC tethering still applies at other dimensional levels. Therefore, extended
space, time, and C–substrate dimensions beyond our conventionally perceived 3S-1t,
and ultimately these finite discrete interactions can be so large (countable infinity) that
we refer to them as transfinite.

As Cantor defined it 116, the transfinite cannot really be conceived in terms of degrees
of freedom because the metric is different. As long as one has finite dimensions, one
can use DOF; but the transfinite does not allow this, and we’ve invoked the transfinite
as a source of meaningful information.
Dimensional Extrapolation relates the non-Euclidean to indivension, but top-down the
conceptions are Euclidean and any reality below that is embedded in ostensibly non-
space and time consciousness. We cannot at this point have pre-conceived concepts of
non-Euclidean space. Non-Euclidean geometry does not describe an objective reality
outside of perception or conceptualization 10. In brief, we argue that the top-down
approach may yield different information than the bottoms-up approach: What may
have been approached bottoms up using non-Euclidean mathematics, may relatively
appear Euclidean if it were approached from the top down.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 80

 
This is critical to understanding the interface of consciousness and the subquantal but
will be discussed elsewhere 10: Klein and Boyd imply a scale moving from cell to
atomic to subatomic to subquantal 71 We perceive the Primary Receptor as not
subquantal but omnipresent in both the finite and infinite, both infinitely large and
infinitely small. The subquantal focuses on the very small only, and this may be an
important interface below the Planck length 35, but the infinite may pervade and
encompass everything in between from the infinitely small to the infinitely large. The
essence is all of this in the infinite reality.

Dimensions, substrates and nesting

The substrate is the beginning of the whole concept, like nested things. We
conceptualize the 1, 2, and 3 dimensions knowing that 3 dimensions must encompass
dimensions 2 and 1 as well. By the same token, when we get to the imaginary single
time-dimension where we have 4 dimensions, it is still the same, as the three are still
nested. However, when you conceive of two or more time dimensions, then we may be
introducing parallel or adjacent existence where each one of the two dimensional lines
in the t-substrate actually has associated with it an entire independent time existence of
xyzt or 3S-1t.

The second dimension of time (T2) is the domain of infinite orthogonal extensions
originating in each point on the T1 "sequence" (T1 as nested in "All Time" T2). In this
sense, any T2 axis may be related reciprocally to an infinite number of orthogonal
"manifested worlds" projections. This T1/T2 Many Worlds construct is coupled to the
C Substrate via T3. Extending this dimensionometric process in all the conceivable
metadimensional spectra, could reach a infinite multiversal model. This brings the
possibility of Multiple World concepts into metadimensions. 70

Dimensions of content and extent revisited in practice

We have defined dimensions by variables of extent. These have metric measures. The
problem is terminology because if 10 things exist and have some kind of measures, it
doesn’t mean to say that we have 10 dimensions: These are distinctions of content not
extent so that even though we may have 10 different mechanical items with various co-
ordinates they still are not variables extent. To convert from content to extent, we have
what we are calling the “ STC density measure” (SDM) reflected as “per unit of extent
in space or time or consciousness”.

This “density“ provides a means of moving from thinking in terms of Content to

Extent variables. Content allows us to conceive of mass and energy. This applies
through everything below the transfinite. From that point we use terminology relating
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 81

 
to the ordinal dimensions because estimation is impossible intervally.

“Intent“ is the third component to “Extent“ and “Intent” in CoD. It is an aspect of

consciousness relating to motivation of volition. “Intent” when guiding may under
certain circumstances reflect this “density“ but density is far more than just intent.

Dimensional variation and indivension

Indivension is the process that allows for a merging of individual-unit realities (hence
the “indiv”) across, between and within individual dimensions (hence the “ension”
from dimension). Effectively, indivension provides a postulated mechanism that allows
for and produces common experiences, knowledge, information and interactions across
various systems units (individual, group, social, cultural, ethnic, spiritual or any other
identity).
Indivension provides for rare communications across a fluctuating number of
dimensions.
However, potential information, knowledge and meaning may exist without expression,
just as we have available more than we see, hear, taste or smell at any moment, and
only a tiny spectrum of these abilities are available for humans. This differentiates
what is potentially available from what is received and used at any point.
There is no fixed number of finite dimensions. Those who can experience higher
qualities, e.g., love, honor, wisdom have the likely trait of more finite dimensions.
This varies with individuals and individual-units because their conscious expression
varies. These can be positive or negative (e.g., love versus hate) and have an ordinal
quality and density of experience. They interface and may change to other qualities, for
example, anger converted to love via vortical indivension. Therefore, fluctuations
occur within, across and between dimensions, and may be state related (at that moment
in time) or trait related (more consistent over time).
The interfacing meeting points may be vortical, vectorial, scalar or tensor and allow for
information retrieval, apprehension, awareness, perturbation or influence.
We postulate that the infinite “contains” an essence of all qualities and it depends
which ones are specifically utilized.

Vortices in metadimensionality
Indivension is the process, and vortices provide the content for these movements.
Effectively, the indivension is the variable of extent, the vortices the content variable,
and the interfacing is the unit density of expression into metaconsciousness.
Vortical indivension plays a major role in expressing finite dimensional components
predominantly at the areas of intersection or interface. This is so because dimensions
themselves are theoretical concepts that cannot exist without each other: They are
existing effectively as a unit and what one is experiencing via these interface areas is
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 82

 
most relevant and important. These dynamic interfaces can be conceptualized in terms
of some kind of qualit interface where different qualities of dimensions can meet and
where possibly different quanta interface. 117 The “qualit” may even be appropriate at
the subquantal level, as well, reflecting a possibly infinitesimal interface but without
the limitations of “quanta”, as in the model of Klein and Boyd. 71 bb

Domains and Subdomains

In TDVP we use the word “domain” specifically to refer to a cluster of dimensions that
is being discussed or utilized in a specific context.
For example, 3S-1t is the usual description of our common reality being experienced
as humans on earth. 3 dimensions of Space (with extension) and one point (moment) in
time which implies a description purely of the present, not the past or future. If we
wanted to represent that domain it would be 3S-1T (capitalized). Similarly, it is likely
that all sentient beings experience some level of meaning and we could say the 3S-1t-
1C or even NC domain, as we don’t know how many dimensions of C-substrate exist
at that state and for that extended trait of that. specific individual-unit. We can also
refer to the multiple dimensions of C-substrate as the C-substrate subdomains or 3S-1t
could be a subdomain of 3S-1T or of 3S-1t-1C.

Distinctions
A distinction is anything with perceived or conceptualized features that distinguishes it
from everything else. A circle drawn on a plane surface, for example, distinguishes the
area inside the circle from all other areas of the plane.
Three elements are necessary to produce a distinction (abbreviated “DFC”)
• the feature or features that distinguish it (that which is distinguished),
• a background, something that the distinction is distinguished from (that from
which it is distinguished) and
• the consciousness that perceives and/or conceptualizes it (that which draws the
distinction).
Based on the definitions of three realities above, there are three types of distinctions.
To have validity in any existential reality, a distinction must be defined by at least
three types of variables: variables of intent, content and extent (“ICE”).

Dimensions and distinctions

All dimensions require variables of extent in some form, which may be interval (ratio)
or ordinal in measurement of the metric. The fundamental forces, vortices mass and
energy are dimensions of content as they do not directly involve extent of space and
time (and hence one cannot use “degrees of freedom” in that regard). However, all

bb
Quality and Chalmers’s Qualia 118; 119 is not the same as the TDVP concept of Qualit.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 83

 
variables of content have extent that may be used using the metrics of extent by
utilizing per unit measures of density.

Dimensions Conceived as Distinctions

Close’s Calculus of Distinctions (C of D): Distinctions are applied the Calculus of
Distinctions (CoD) 8; 120 modified from Brown’s Laws of Form 121. CoD can greatly
simplify the mathematics of substrate algebra by dealing with vectors, tensors,
(scalars) twistors, and vortices as multi-dimensional distinctions. This makes the CoD
especially effective for testing hypotheses.
There are three ways to differentiate distinctions, which have a relevance for reality
(see above), namely, Perceptual Distinction, Conceptual Distinction and Common
Experiential (or Actualized) Distinction (“PCE”). The differentiation is subtle as
distinctions occur in the context of reality.
In summary, distinctions therefore, have PCE reality differentiation; ICE as variables;
and also have the three essential elements DFC.

When the substrate variables of extent are space, time and C-substrate, and of content
are mass and energy, then the calculus of distinctions expression for the STC
substrates are:
R= f(S, t, m, e, c,) = ∑([ (m/S) ┐e/t]┐c/St}┐= ∑[ (ST) ┐C]┐
Where R= all reality, S= 3Dspace, t= time, m= matter, e= energy, c= individualized
consciousness and C= Primary Consciousness.8,cc

Distinctions in physics
The matter and energy of the reality we experience is comprised of actual distinctions.
These are made up of elementary actual distinctions, called quanta, which obey the
laws of quantum mechanics. Quanta might reflect "elementary distinctions" only in the
relevant S3-1t domain in which energy and mass is very important.

Distinctions and the Origin Event

If we think of the expanding universe as the reverse of a black hole, the point where
quanta of matter and energy begin to form at the end of the rapid-expansion period is
the event horizon. But we are calling the first finite events at the outset of existence—
the beginning (e.g., the big bang, theologians call it “creation”) —by a non-prejudicial
term “Origin Event“. At that point, the phenomena that make up reality do not exist
until they are registered in an irreversible way upon a “Primary Receptor or receptors”.

cc This equation is amplified later in the “Axioms that are closely related” chapter.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 84

 
CHAPTER 10: CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE NEW PARADIGM 122

“The whole drift of my education goes to persuade me that the world of our present
consciousness is only one out of many worlds of consciousness that exist.”
William James (1842 – 1910, Psychologist)

We have a minor dilemma here. Consciousness and reality are so fundamental to

our ideas that we have introduced them early knowing that the summaries in Chapters
1 and 2 allow an initial, albeit cursory perspective. We have not yet introduced our
entire new paradigm and they form enough of a unit that earlier ideas impinge on the
later, but the later again impinge on the earlier. We regard this and the previous
chapters as key to portray our TDVP concepts of consciousness and reality. In an
infinite subreality, we could superimpose these chapters upon each other but we
endeavor here still to create continuity even in our finite subreality. There may be
concepts that are not quite clear at this point, but you can return if necessary after
reading about dimensions, to the key axioms, essence, infinity and brain
consciousness. (Table 2a)

Table 2a: Subdivisions of C-substrate

Kind Abb Site Application Key
Neurologic Consciousness N-C Brain Neurophysiology (alive) End-point
Ego Consciousness E-C Brain+ Psychological dynamics Psyche
Transfinite Consciousness T-C Transfinite Higher TF dimensions Qualities
Metaconsciousness M-C Infinite Mystical-spiritual “Mystical”
=Higher consciousness H-C T-C+M-C Outside brain initially “Growth”
Quantum Consciousness Q-C Quantum Quantum physics Basic
= C-substrate C N+E+T+M+Q Paradigmatic consc. All terms
Abb = Abbreviation, Key= Key features, TF= transfinite, consc. = consciousness.
H-C and C are composites

Consciousness
C-substrate and consciousness
We have found it necessary to use a global term that is different from
“consciousness”. This is because “consciousness” may possibly be misunderstood
and/or misinterpreted and therefore, not reflect the specific meanings we have for it.
There are obvious ambiguities to the term “consciousness”: It is interpreted variably,
and in each instance, differently in each discipline. These areas include predominantly
neurology, psychology and consciousness research and philosophy. It also has a
special meaning in quantum physics.
“Consciousness” in any of these disciplines is narrower than the “C-substrate“ term
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 85

 
that we use, and it may not even be as broad even when it is used when combining all
the subspecialties above because of its metadimensional and infinite applications. This
is why it has been necessary to coin the new term, C-substrate, so we could then
contrast it with the Space and Time Substrates (S and T substrates).
We re-connect science with human experience by developing a logical framework
for a comprehensive scientific paradigm. This includes the consciousness of the
observer inherent within existence, as part of the legitimate domain of scientific
investigation.

Terminology in “consciousness”
Let us concretize the problems we encounter when using the term “consciousness” as
differently used in various specialties. We still want to use it in its specific forms in our
model. Consequently, it is necessary to clarify these differences, particularly as our
TDVP model impacts all these different areas of endeavor that use this term (as in
Table 2a).
With this basic differentiation, we move onto more detail. We suggest the
following:
* In Neurology: Neurological Consciousness (N-C) in the brain. This solidly allows for
the neurophysiological physical basis of brain functioning in sentient beings, and is the
ultimate endpoint for all other C-substrate kinds of consciousness expression while
alive.
In the brain, we refer to “clear consciousness”. There are various stages of impairment
through to coma, including in lay-terms “unconscious”. These measures relate to the
extent of awareness, and responsiveness including speech. Neurological consciousness
involves any living sentient being, live and ultimately dead (where, e.g., the brain on
electroencephalogram may reflect a flat tracing). Neurological consciousness, though
critically important in our day-to-day lives, is only relevant in 3S-1t live sentient
beings. It becomes irrelevant at other dimensional levels or in the infinite.
• * In Psychology: Ego Consciousness (E-C) (or “Psychological functioning”
involves the psychological and psychodynamic areas. E-C reflects areas pertaining
to cognition, affect and volition (drive and motivation). E-C involves another use of
the term “unconscious”—what is not manifesting directly into consciousness. E-C
also utilizes the “Preconscious” —that kind of limited awareness that is just below
the horizon of brain consciousness. And the “subconscious” is largely used
synonymously with psychological unconsciousness psychodynamics. E-C may be
induced psychodynamically but also is based on biological, social, ethnic, family
and cultural modifiers of thought and behavior. E-C in the living physical being is
strongly based in the brain and the body, but could interface informational
experience deriving outside of the brain.
* In Consciousness Research: (T-C, M-C; together H-C): These kinds of C-substrate
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 86

 
derive from outside the brain and linking with broader meaningful information (some
call this the mind). We divide this Higher Consciousness (H-C) into those involving
higher finite dimensions (the finite and transfinite domains) as Transfinite
consciousness (T-C) and Metaconsciousness (M-C) involving the linking with broader
meaningful information in the infinite domains, even the infinity of infinities.
The presence of interchange with the infinite is a core part of the TDVP paradigm.
Metaconsciousness implies an all-embracing knowledge translated into meaning. This
unending knowledge is “meta-information”. This metaconsciousness could be regarded
by mystics as a “mystical consciousness” but that would move from science to
philosophy and so is outside our main paradigm. It can be applied in Philosophy, but
could reflect the highest levels of metaconsciousness and the range all the way through
in the infinite:
It would be the mystical-spiritual link, and, to theologians, at the infinity of the
infinities the omniscience of components of all data. Such a “gradation” allows for
different levels of impacting M-C: If survival after bodily death exists, there could be
no reason why every individual would be at the same infinite level. T-C and M-C
together are characterized as Higher Consciousness. This H-C is derived independently
of the brain (but in sentient beings is almost always still integrated by it). The
differentiation of “information” of H-C from E-C may be very difficult, if not
impossible.
We recognize, too, that H-C may not necessarily be “higher in development” but
derives from data accessed beyond the brain: The broader term “collective
unconscious” or “collective consciousness” for individual-unit groups or families or
societies or ethnicities or cultures or humankind in general, is sometimes used and may
variously be explained by H-C or E-C.
Various kinds of conscious awareness exist described as “psi phenomena”, such as
out-of-body experiences (OBEs), near death experiences (NDEs), retrocognitive,
contemporaneous and precognitive anomalous cognition or “extra-sensory perception”
as well as other spontaneous, induced and experimental afferent and efferent
phenomena.
Consciousness research also involves other kinds of subjective experiences, including
Exceptional Human Experiences (EHEs), hallucinations and illusions.
* In Philosophy, consciousness is sometimes used synonymously with the “mind” and
is distinguished from the “brain” or the “body” in dualism, regarded as equivalent to
such a body in materialistic monism and such a mind in monistic idealism. This
includes a mystical consciousness. This philosophical consciousness may refer to H-C
or be broader.
*In the Physics of Consciousness, also referred to as Quantal Consciousness (Q-C)
broader meaningful information implies a “consciousness” as opposed to space and
time (and hence debates about what nonlocality, spacelessness and timelessness are).
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 87

 
Quantal may not be the best description though used here because it is the more
common way to describe such consciousness. It is possible that Subquantal elements or
“Dark Matter” (which may turn out not to be matter at all) may play a role. Q-C may
be very primitive. On the other hand, given the STC inseparability and tethering from
the subquantum through to the astrophysical, all areas of C-substrate could be
conceptualized as the building blocks of Q-C. We even use the term “Conscit” to
conceptualize the C-substrate component of Qualits (of Space—Qubits and of Time—
Chronits). Conscits may play a role as a discrete consciousness component in the
finite.
* Paradigmatic Consciousness (P-C) can reflect the spectrum of consciousness,
particularly Neurological, Psychological and Consciousness Research areas (N-C, E-C,
H-C). We recognize various “altered states” of consciousness (ASCs). These can
impact all of these areas. Neppe proposed subdividing these various ASCs 123. This
includes 10 different phenomenological subtypes including regular waking
consciousness. (See Table 2b). We seldom need to use this term, P-C because, in this
book, we refer to C-substrate.
Impacting all of the C-substrate (N, E, T, Q and P) are altered states of consciousness.
Table 2b: Neppe’s Proposed ASC Terminology Classification 124; 125
ASC type Abbrev Variations
Wakefulness WA “Normal” Wakeful Consciousness Awareness
Sleep S-ASC Hypnagogic (Gs-ASC), hypnopompic (Ps-ASC), stage (1-
4s-ASC), dream (Ds-ASC), Lucid (Ls-ASC)
Psychiatric P-ASC Psychotic, psychiatric, transitional (describe)
Lucid L-ASC Lucid hyperawareness
Induced I-ASC Ganzfeld (Gi-ASC), meditative (Mi-ASC), mystical
religious (Ri-ASC), experimental (Ei-ASC or Ei-WA)
Trance T-ASC Dissociative (Dt-ASC), focused (Ft-ASC), or clear (Ct-
ASC).
Recreational R-ASC Recreational drugs (drug should be stated)
Between B-ASC Transitional or between states, e.g., Dt-Ct--ASC
Mixed M-ASC Combinations
Nondescript N-ASC Not otherwise specified

Specialist Terminology for Consciousness

We cannot continue to use these various terms for consciousness interchangeably. We
further amplify and define these concepts briefly:
Nervous System: The core of conscious awareness and responsiveness includes the
conventional physiological description: N-consciousness (for neurological
consciousness: N-C). This is the bodily experience element (expressed in the brain in
humans) for sentient beings reflecting descriptions of the various terms for
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 88

 
consciousness.
• It may reflect, in part, an endpoint expression of conventional physiology
including neurotransmission and synaptic firing expressing itself in awareness
and responses.
• It may also be the endpoint of psychological features such as dynamics and
conditioning, which could also express itself in different realities such as
dreams.
• It could manifest relatively non-local communications from a “consciousness”
originating outside the brain, possibly from other dimensions or an infinite
subreality.
• Interpretations may be difficult and complex because it may integrate all these
source aspects. For example, C-substrate manifesting at the self-conscious
structural level of the nervous system refers to a specific kind of consciousness
involving information (knowledge) combined with understanding and meaning,
but it also includes emotion (affect) and volition (drive).
• These features may be, in part, based on psychology and psychiatry, or this self-
awareness of C-substrate could be a subset only of the broader metadimensional
and infinite metaconsciousness.
• To differentiate these different origins requires clinical acumen but is fraught with
uncertainty. Consequently, research in the area remains a challenge for the
Neuropsychiatrist, Neuroscientist, Psychiatrist and Psychologist, Behavioral
Neurologist, Clinician and Consciousness Researcher.
• Additionally, we then can refer to various levels of consciousness for any level
of impairment of consciousness. This has its own classification such as the
Glasgow Coma Scale 126. We measure responsiveness to touch, eye responses,
and cognitive responsiveness. Or we can use “clear consciousness”,
“unconscious” or “coma” to describe level of N-C. N-C, therefore, has the core
features of both awareness and responsiveness. However, we do not know what
is going on subjectively because it does not explain the origin of any “thought”,
just the perceptual conceptual or experiential result.
Psychology and social sciences: E-consciousness or E-C (for ego-consciousness).
Once we use E-Consciousness then we can go into detail relating into the various kinds
of psychological consciousnesses such as pre-, sub-, un-, collective- E-consciousness.
We include all psychosocial mechanisms such as conditioning and psychodynamics.
Consciousness sciences: H-consciousness refers to any kind of subjective experience,
afferent or efferent, ostensibly involving apprehension or perturbation outside the
brain. H-C has the transfinite (T-C) and metaconsciousness (M-C) elements.
Paradigmatic sciences: This can be applied for broader consciousness such as
meaningful information but in fact, incorporates all other areas of consciousness: This
is Paradigmatic consciousness or P- consciousness or P-C but effectively synonymous
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 89

 
with C-substrate unless we want to emphasize all of N-C plus E-C plus H-C plus Q-C.
It therefore includes:
• the consciousness sciences, particularly in our TDVP discussion;
• the biological and life sciences including neurological
anatomicophysiologicopathological elements;
• the psychological sciences across the systems spectrum of individual psychological,
family, group and social, cultural, anthropological and ethnic
• the philosophical sciences including the mysticospirituotheological components;
this is usually incorporated into Higher Consciousness, and
• the physical sciences including all the laws governing the subatomic, macrophysical
and cosmo- or astrophysical, beginning at the Quantal Consciousness levels.
• To summarize key terms: In our TDVP model, we use metaconsciousness (M-C) in
regard to continuous infinity and relative non-local conscious meaning in the finite
context is T-C (transfinite or technically higher dimension of the lower 9 so
S3T3C3. We use the broader term H-C (higher consciousness) for both.
• Our broad-spectrum term for all kinds of consciousness is C-substrate, sometimes
referred to as simply C (or in earlier versions of our model, “C-matrix”).
• If we wanted to specifically emphasize the paradigmatic nature, without the broad
implications of a substrate, this would be referred to as P-consciousness as
Paradigmatic consciousness. This broader P-consciousness includes psi and the
altered consciousness with the 10 different kinds of ASC that we have suggested
and using the broader term P-consciousness allows “normal waking” states plus
these altered states (as in Table 2). These altered states are broadly applicable in N-,
E- and C-consciousness, and must be solved by philosophers in M-consciousness
and explained by physicists in Q-consciousness. The paradigmatic sciences involve
this attempt to unify the sciences, and may be best exemplified, with respect, in our
TDVP model.
• Metaconsciousness in the infinite necessarily has the properties of being
continuous, meaningful, and having an infinite extent of all available content
information (metainformation). At the finite subreality level, this is Transfinite
Consciousness experienced at higher dimensionality levels but is necessarily
translated into our conventional experiential living paradigm of 3S-1t usual human
experience into a discrete meaning expressed though our brain. This T-C at the
finite level expresses itself as relatively non-local, and M-C at the infinite level as
an aspect of a continuous essence (infinity). The combination is Higher
Consciousness (H-C)
Paradigmatic consciousness is a combination of all or sometimes, a global term not
defining the specific, but generally, we globally refer to this kind of “consciousness” as
C-substrate or C, as opposed to S-substrate (Space) and T-substrate (Time).

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 90

 
 Consciousness as we use it is a broad paradigm. This reflects both meaning
consciousness. The non-meaningful derived potentially available, accessible content
side would be information. With the concept of metaconsciousness in the infinite as
extent, information would be the content in the infinite context.
If you apply meaning to that information you would acquire a consciousness and
that meaning is a meaning that begins at the subatomic level but includes the
microphysical and the astrophysical. Meaning could imply that quantal meaning, or
quantal consciousness or more correctly the Conscit or broader Qualit activity117
because effectively it could be in dark matter or a subquantal existence at the tiniest of
levels. It has perceptual and executive elements, not only receiving or apprehending
information but potentially manipulating or influencing objects or events. This is the
same consciousness in relation to that meaning even with neurological consciousness
—“quantal meaning” or “quantal consciousness” (or more correctly conscit meaning
and consciousness, which does not commit to discrete subatomic quanta per se) in the
nervous system.

Density in C-substrate
If mass can be conceptualized as having density, which is measured in a metric
extent, then meaning could possibly be the discrete density equivalent. Meaning in its
various cognitive, affective and volitional forms could reflect the complex scalar or
tensor per unit ordinal equivalent of extent. Meaning would be the functional
mechanism, and if some kind of guiding occurs in some way, we could speculate that
this is the “intent”, and that intent in that instance links the information content with
the consciousness extent. What is scalar in one dimension, could be tensor or vectorial
in another. Similarly there is a complex role of the 3D fabric of vortices and
indivension with these mathematical representations.
So with the simple use of prefixes like N- (neurological), E- (ego), Q- (quantum),
M– (metaconsciousness), T- (transfinite) and P- (paradigmatic) we can ensure at least
that “like” in consciousness (-C) is phenomenologically conceptualized with “like”.

C-substrate
We now focus on this P-consciousness and its broadest base, C-substrate.
The C-substrate includes all components and any of these is sufficient to be part of the
C-substrate, though living mankind could have access to all three. We amplify much of
what is above, now, to clarify, consolidate, conceptualize and differentiate.

Neurological Consciousness: N-consciousness.

This has been referred to as neurological consciousness and is that part of living
mankind exemplified by brain function.
Ultimately, in the living organism, the expression of such awareness while awake in
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 91

 
clear neurological consciousness is through the brain (CNS consciousness). It can be
expressed neurologically by three fundamental mental status components, namely,
Cognition, Emotion and Volition (CEV). These all have solid expressions through
neurophysiology.
At the end, all consciousness in the living organism goes through neurological
consciousness. This allows for perception, conception and actual or common
experiential reality (experienced as actual or objective, but still subjective for that
individual).
N-consciousness involves the awareness, integration and responsiveness to our internal
world of images, sensations, thoughts, feelings, information and higher qualities. Yet
cerebral electrical and chemical activity in the brain cannot easily explain all
components of consciousness such as qualities like honesty or wisdom. It can
correlate, but there is no causal link established. The brain appears to be necessary but
not sufficient to express neurological conscious awareness and that awareness is a
subjective interpretation. We emphasize the neurological component here as
conceivably in non 3S-1t domains there could be a conceptual description of C-
substrate not requiring an endpoint brain. For example, what happens if there is
survival after bodily death (and we will discuss the cogent supporting six sigma data in
that regard).
N-consciousness awarenesses and responses may be even minimal or in deep coma
absent. But the potential is there.
N-consciousness can be expressed in terms of the Calculus of Distinctions as the
distinction of self from everything else with a separation between. This distinction
generally has been applied to living organisms.

Ego (Psychological) Consciousness (E-C)

Extended human consciousness is postulated to go beyond the most usual
neurophysiological component of brain awareness and responsiveness. We call this
“metaconscious” and postulate that it includes the infinite repository of content
information converted into a meaning extent.
However, our broader consciousness classification also includes, E-consciousness
(E-C)—what the psychologists call the unconscious, collective conscious,
preconscious and subconscious, and this includes what the psychoanalysts refer to as
Ego, Id and Superego. E-C might sometimes include the paradigmatic altered states of
consciousness (ASCs) because major psychological overtones might occur in ASCs. E-
C even speculatively, may include what the philosophers refer to as “mind” or the
theologians as “soul” because these might, in part, anyway, play a role in these
psychodynamics.
Depending on orientation, the psychologist or neurologist could argue based on
current neurophysiology and dynamics that any form of extended awareness /
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 92

 
responsiveness state that is postulated to originate or terminate outside the sentient
being is, in actuality, an endpoint expression of a subjective reality originating in the
brain.
Such a state might well be so under certain circumstances, and could appropriately
be motivated, in some instances, based on current knowledge: Applying this principle,
the metaconscious state reflecting infinite information, knowledge and wisdom may
not be pertinent in a proportion of living human 3S-1t domain experiences. In these,
the physicalist monist would argue that this is all simply an epiphenomenon and part of
the brain, part of N-consciousness or even E-consciousness. This may work in even
99% of instances. But it does not explain how higher qualities of meaning can easily
be explained: Is honesty, courage, wisdom, understanding or love or their negative
equivalents simply an epiphenomenon of N- or E-consciousness? If so, the problem is
that no such neurological or psychological localities for such higher qualities have
been demonstrated. Indeed, it is extremely difficult to motivate localization for some
of the various components of the complex function of memory (registration, retention,
integration, cued recognition and recall) and we cannot consistently evoke specific
memories by stimulating specific brain structures.127-129
There are papers that posit that specific brain stimulations produce a “God spot” or
equivalent 130; 131 132-134, but these are very tenuous in consistency135; 136. Effectively, they
are based on premises of different stimulations, inconsistent results and, most
importantly, misinterpreting the “like with not like”. With respect, these studies are
scientifically flawed based on the premises not examining the phenomenology in
detail. 124; 125; 135-138 Moreover, based on our TDVP model and also the data we cogently
demonstrate on psi, a legitimate postulate of a partial neurological cause or of an
impacting of the psychological aspects of consciousness, still would not exclude the
probability that the metaconscious experience might derive from outside the brain: It
would just involve an N-consciousness endpoint. This awareness and responsiveness is
a consequence of outside input, not an origin of physiology or pathology deriving from
brain. The living being needs to have a brain to process metaconsciousness because of
limitations—the physical reduction valves can only appreciate a tiny proportion of all
of reality. We know this: We know the limitations of our physical senses. This is not
the whole, just at the metaphoric Platonic cave shadow analogy does not express what
is going on outside. 139 This has been a major research and theoretical area of study for
one of the authors (Neppe).124; 125; 135-138

Metaconsciousness and Transfinite Consciousness as Higher Consciousness

Whereas we certainly conceptualize metaconsciousness as relating to humans, we
postulate that it is almost certain that all life-forms could tap into it.
"Metaconsciousness" in its taxonomic use across TDVP should apply also to the
lowest degrees of bioinformation 124, and should vastly transcend the limits of physical
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 93

 
finite beings, potentially incorporating the largest “astrocosmic” (astrophysical) level,
and possibly, at the other extreme, the smallest, subquantum infinitesimal level.
Moreover, there are impacts of all forms of “consciousness” (N-C, E-C, Q-C, M-C and
P-C besides the more obvious C-C) across all these levels, ultimately expressed by the
limitations of the physical or metadimensional status of the level of perception or
responsiveness.
Metaconsciousness, at the finite level, may be particularly pertinent when extending
to “metadimensional” states. Metadimensional is our term referring to any dimensions
beyond 3S-1t. C-substrate can potentially be expressed as possible Higher
Consciousness components in variables of ordinal extent in (interfacing indivension)
qualities such an love, honor, courage, wisdom, understanding and a wide variety of
qualities relating to higher attributes.

Meaningfulness (or Meaningful apprehension and influence):

We also use the term to describe any meaningful reality. We are defining this
purely objectively without any theological meaning. Therefore, although “Guided
reality” is ostensibly a good term implying “meaning”, “guided” could have the
“baggage” of theological interpretation, and may be as provable or non-provable as
theology. Some would argue that these terms express simply metadimensional
interplays of Bohmian implicate order 140, without any theological interpretation. 94
We have used the term “guiding”, which may or may not be relevant to meaning.
Instead, by meaning we imply apprehension or awareness of objects or events at the
afferent level and perturbation or influences on them at the efferent level. This is also
incomplete, as the model has possibly incorrect cybernetic afferent-efferent, stimulus-
response implications. This is incorrect because there might be no such element (unless
S and T =0), as existence is triadic with an organismal or space-time-meaning base.
This means that the existence of any subatomic particle or a quantum packet
incorporates this meaningful reality C-substrate reality (implying a role for Q-
consciousness). In fact, meaningfulness, linguistically, is meant to be a broad
definition, and does not, therefore, necessarily only apply to living organisms.
Meaning should apply at the finite subreality level to any kind of subatomic
particle, packet or quantum or even subquantum. dd, ee
Meaningfulness would then include apprehension and influence implying, at
minimum, very basic meaning at these most primitive levels of reality.
Meaningful apprehension and influence may exist not only in the smallest components
(the STC tethering is at the most basic level), but go all the way through to the
dd
This would be so if it were demonstrated that such a subatomic aspect exhibited a deliberate change contradicting
entropic tendencies towards disorder.
ee
The subquantal infinitesimals have only one degree of freedom and hypothetically enter “combinatorials” which may
reflect incremental degrees of orderliness. This "self-organizing" principle might be applicable across the whole
metadimensional tensor spectrum 71; 141-143.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 94

 
astrophysical level. This meaningfulness could involve both the inanimate and the
animate.
When the meaningfulness is expressed in sentient beings, it is possible that at times
such higher metaconscious qualities as honesty and love are being expressed as
meaning. Therefore, meaning in the finite in 3S-1t may incorporate, in part or in whole
(we can speculate which type or both) the metaconscious, which derives from the
infinite essence.
Meaning could potentially express itself discretely metadimensionally, at higher
finite dimensional levels through to the transfinite. Again, this is a speculation, and it
may imply that meaning is the finite equivalent of the infinite metaconsciousness.
Because of the close links between N-, E-, M-, Q- and P-consciousness, we are using a
term such as C-substrate below because we want to ensure that it incorporates
meaningful reality, neurological consciousness and Higher Consciousness as well at
the complexities of psychodynamics.
Meaning may be qualitatively conceptualized at an ordinal level: There are levels of
“awareness” that are different from describing classical “levels of neurological
consciousness” such as coma, stupor, confusion or clear consciousness. Something or
someone may barely apprehend incoming stimuli. This may be relevant in the so-
called “quantum consciousness” that may occur in subatomic particles e.g. in split
screen experiments. On the other hand, there may be a range of “appreciation” of this
awareness. This hypothetically is qualitatively higher and could occur at a higher
perceptual, conceptual, integration or experiential level depending on degree of
evolution of sentient beings and might be postulated to occur also in the absence of
physical life as a purer form of consciousness awareness (as in “survival after bodily
death”). Perhaps this kind of apprehension to appreciation range is best expressed
using the term “meaning” as opposed to “awareness”.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 95

 
CHAPTER 11: METADIMENSIONS AND THE C-SUBSTRATE 144

“This blindness (or prejudice, or whatever you may call it) of logicians is indeed
surprising. But I think the explanation is not hard to find. It lies in a widespread lack,
at that time, of the required epistemological attitude toward metamathematics and
toward non-finitary reasoning. …”
Kurt Gödel 145

C-substrate Perspective
Let us now examine C-substrate in a more detailed explanatory fashion. Many of these
statements are axiomatic and could be approached top-down from the fundamental
TTOOURS metaparadigm of TDVP.

Infinite expression
The infinite level of metaconsciousness reflects a measurable qualitative and ordinal
quantitative extent (e.g., none-slight-moderate-profound). This is so as it portrays
continuous infinite knowledge, wisdom and understanding from the neutral infinite
source) of metainformation content. This cannot be metrically measured by any means
except to differentiate quality of information (e.g., colors, or specific knowledge but
not the ordinal “none-weak-strong”).

With the concept of Transfinite Consciousness as extent, information would be the

content. Applying meaning to that neutral vast infinite array of information, we acquire
consciousness. Metaconsciousness originates from an infinite essence that we postulate
also includes an all-encompassing infinite space (metaspace), a time that exists in the
past, present and future infinitely at the same moment (metatime), and potential
towards life (polife) and infinite order (ordropy). There is therefore, complete space
and time at the infinite level—metaspace and metatime linked inseparably with the
metaconsciousness.

Finite expression
In finite reality, this meaning is expressed from the subatomic level of finite reality.
Meaning might reflect components of the same discrete form from the subatomic to the
macrophysical to the astrophysical, implying a progression of density of quantal
meaning to the quantal consciousness (conscits) that may be more easily recognized in
sentient beings. This meaning could be acquired through or related to the infinite
linkage via the permeable boundaries or filtering of the infinite-finite interface: The
infinite metaconsciousness might be expressed in finite consciousness subjectively as
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 96

 
meaning in 3S-1t. The unit of density here may well be “meaning”. It is at that level
that it is translated into subjectivity by the N-consciousness of the brain in sentient
beings, but according to the STC tethering model of TDVP, it could be expressed at a
more primitive level at even the subatomic or subquantal levels.

This “consciousness” with the meaning is linked with, limited by and enhanced
through neurological networks. This produces a consciousness that has quantal
equivalents of meaning or quantal representations of consciousness in the nervous
system. The sentient may ultimately express their experiences as cognition, affect and
volition. This neurological consciousness uses the boundary sieve, barrier, filter or
permeability elements to control, limit and sometimes amplify input so as to be able to
(or attempt to) achieve optimal functioning. But N-consciousness also may distort
meta-information without the sentient being easily differentiating, for example, their
own psychological dynamics (E-consciousness) from the permeable metaconscious
data.

Triadic elements
We call our model triadic, because of our space-time-consciousness (or meaning)
reflecting different dimensional elements. We can translate triadic in the quantum
model via meaning for consciousness.

Metaconsciousness and metadimensionality

There are also extra elements of metaconsciousness besides simple meaning.
Metaconsciousness may not have equivalents of space or time at the finite level in
specific higher dimensions or domains: at that level, dimensional level space may
equal relative zero, time equals relative zero, but consciousness is still reflecting
meanings. So Higher Consciousness when linked with ordropic physical life can
demonstrate abstract qualities such as courage, honesty and determination. Whereas
conceptually, possibly, S=0 and T=0 at some of these higher dimensionalities, the
original STC tethering still applies at other dimensional levels meaning entanglement,
psi and rare communication transfer can occur. This therefore, explains, teleologically,
the C-consciousness elements: This may be linked up with zillions of interfacing
vortices expressing themselves as meaningful information (psi or creativity) at times,
and at other times demonstrating higher qualities (e.g., love, courage). These closely
interacting vortices could be conceptualized as metadimensional higher level “fields”
far more pervasive because of their higher dimensionality than for example,
Sheldrake’s morphogenetic fields. 27

The CST Model (C-, S- and T-substrates) We propose that none of the components
of reality can be proved to exist without the action and participation of consciousness
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 97

 
in some form. The links of consciousness with the physical reality of space-time
suggests the possibility that consciousness may be another more complex and subtle
form of the same universal substance that manifests in 3S, -1t space-time as matter and
energy, or it may be beyond substance and energy as we perceive them, existing as a
substrate outside the 3S-1t domain, yet interfacing, we postulate, continuously. We
propose that this C-substrate is as equally important as space and time, and
speculatively more fundamental. Whereas previously we spoke of space-time, we now
need to talk of the unitary space-time-C- substrates (STC substrates) as the
fundamental structure of reality.

There is the classical dilemma: The materialist physicist will note that when an apple
falls from the tree, it falls, it makes a sound, it lies on the ground and it rots.
The Idealist philosopher will argue that the subjective personal experience is what
exists and it is only when the observer (themselves) observes it that it truly exists.
This is illogical but then quantum mechanics seems illogical.

In TDVP, there is a tethering of consciousness with ST even in our usual physical

experiential domain. This means that, indeed, the apple does fall from the tree to the
ground where it rots. But it exists, it has its own consciousness, it is involved with its
own meaningful reality. There is no contradiction.

Justification of the C-substrate: Statistical demonstrations have shown a small but

profoundly significant effect in consciousness studies (more than 1 billion to 1 against
chance in nine separate endeavors!). These suggest the need for a radical alteration of
the perspective of physics because although explaining phenomena in terms of matter
and energy in space-time is usually sufficient for technological application, it does not
always explain everything and is contradicted under rare circumstances. This is why
we have proposed the need to involve a special use of “Consciousness” —the C-
substrate—at the primary level.

Higher dimensional consciousness

ASCs: Altered states of consciousness
Altered states of consciousness also can produce changes in dimensional states, e.g.,
dreams, sleep, hypnosis, meditation are all mechanisms (dimensions of intent) to allow
different higher dimensional states.
We could refer to these as “fluctuating dimensions“, or the “variability of dimensions“.
However, perhaps the term shifting dimensions for state changes and the more stable
individual units of state consciousness variations are varying dimensions.
There are variable levels of elevation / denigration dependent on nature of the sentient
being.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 98

 
Ultimately there may be a commonality of more stable varying dimensions trait in
individual-units such as groups, societies and cultures.

These fluctuations generally are linked with meaning and consciousness implying
meaningful information.
Effectively, the metaphorical “sink” of all the vast available content “information” is
coupled into the directed process of specific meaning that constitutes “consciousness”.
In the infinite subreality, this vast, unending essence of metainformation allows an
origin for the selected metaconsciousness that could involve knowledge, understanding
and wisdom.

Higher finite dimensions

Transfinite Consciousness reflecting a higher finite discrete dimensionality may have a

relative objective equivalent that would be metainformation at a higher spin breaking
through. This allows for relative perception or conceptualization. However, that is
most commonly experienced in 3S-1t in living sentient beings. But many of these
higher qualities of conscious awareness (such as love and honor) cannot easily be
explained by purely physiological cerebral mechanisms—and, for those who feel that
neurophysiology explains all, at best the explanation would be that they are only
partial epiphenomena of brain function: The rest remains unexplained. The existence
of the broader C-substrate, of Higher Consciousness and of metadimensionality
extending into the transfinite, simply contradicts the interpretations of consciousness
that imply it to be purely epiphenomena of the brain, each and every time, with nothing
being processed from the outside.

Infinite STC
Moreover, STC tethering, still implies a separation of space, time, and consciousness,
at other finite points or as part of the infinite continuity. Within our metaparadigm,
there should be a STC tethering in the infinite realm as well, but space and time might
be irrelevant in the infinite subreality because there is metaspace and metatime—the
time that exists is simultaneous over all time from the beginning (past, present and
future are the same) relative to the 3S-1t finite physical reality; the same omnipresence
(all of space existing as one vast unit of space) would apply to space. Effectively,
applying the top-down concept of the infinite continuity or of the discreteness at the
levels of the transfinite, that STC and the tethering would also imply dimensionalities
coming down. These dimensionalities would, theoretically, be so large that they are
transfinite. Hypothetically, almost exclusively, they might involve a
metaconsciousness that expresses itself transfinitely as discrete information packages
of meaning. The C-substrate dimensions reflect not only the information content of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 99

 
cognitive stuff, but reflect special qualities (positive and negative) such as love or for
that matter, honor or courage but also hatred, fear, and anger. We can convert or anger
into love, or hatred into love.

When we consider fluctuating metadimensions, and fluctuating dimensionalities of

consciousness, they can be completely transient because the state of the one can be
linked up with the other. These fluctuations would be rapid and momentary (state
changes over 1t). Alternatively, they may be relatively maintained over a stable finite
period (1T time where past, present and future, reflect the same stable structure).
Cognitive, affective and volitional functions are all critical in this regard, with similar
hierarchical consciousness requirements, though. Some, such as emotions may be more
obviously expressed to other individual-units in 3S-1t because strong affect may more
easily be observed and, indeed, evoke responses. This stimulus-organism-response
cybernetic model could be relevant in both the apprehension and influencing of events
or change, and appears to be relevant in consciousness research, such as evaluating
mechanisms for psi. 146-149

Conscious Distinctions
The most basic logical concept linking different dimensional domains to consciousness
is the drawing of distinctions by conscious entities. These “conscious entities” can be
at any of the subatomic, macrophysical and astrophysical levels. Even at the subatomic
level, the key concept finding arising from the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum
mechanics 41; 88; 150 and proven by the resolution of the EPR paradox by Bell’s theorem 86;
151
, the Aspect experiment 87 and many more refined quantum experiments, that no
reality can be said to exist without the involvement of consciousness. With the triadic
axiom, this is equally applicable at the macrophysical level where the six sigma
consciousness research data are pertinent, and at astrophysical levels, e.g., expanding
universe with ordropy and life forms despite the second law of thermodynamics.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 100

 
CHAPTER 12: INFINITY AND THE FINITE: THE MATHEMATICS AND THE
LOGIC 152

“The actual infinite arises in three contexts: first when it is realized in the most
complete form, in a fully independent otherworldly being, in Deo, where I call it the
Absolute Infinite or simply Absolute; second when it occurs in the contingent, created
world; third when the mind grasps it in abstracto, as a mathematical magnitude,
number or order type.” Georg Cantor

Substrates, Dimensions and Infinity

The TDVP model may contain 3 real substrates of space, with 3 substrates of time with
imaginary numbers as the unit of measurement. The 3rd component of C- substrate (as
a broader consciousness) is expressed as quaternions. This means that even n-
dimensions of consciousness substrates fit in the dimensional model. This is because
the quaternion concept is based on the finite, but consciousness links directly from the
infinite. S and T also are pervaded by the infinite, but C is, as indicated, appears
necessary for S and T beyond 9D and S and T both may equal zero at many transfinite
levels. Provided we incorporate S and T into the finite dimensions, they still fit into the
C of the finite component in terms of the meaning and the inseparable STC tethering.
On the other side, we have the expression of the infinite expressed as the finite with n-
dimensions of C because we are effectively obtaining as many ordropic, ordered
meaningful dimensions as we need from the infinite and it is expressing itself at the
infinite metaconsciousness level and at the finite quantal level including the CNS level.
For every timeline that is created in the T-substrate by the drawing of distinctions by a
sentient being, every one of those creates an entire universe. That means just on that
basis alone the C-substrate has to be infinite.

TDVP, Mathematics and Consciousness

The reason TDVP works mathematically is that it incorporates consciousness at
the Origin Event by necessarily drawing meaningful distinctions. This same meaning
is linked discretely throughout all STC substrates at that subatomic level all the way
through to astroreality.
A speculative mechanism could extend the current discrete subatomic model of
particle/ wave/spin components. Currently these discrete particles applied to the
“extent” distinctions and dimensions of time and space and the “content” distinctions
of mass and energy have been labeled “quanta”. We have tentatively suggested
“conscits” at the discrete consciousness / information level. Conscits with Chronits
(time) and Qubits (space) make up Qualits. These are all postulated subatomic packets
just as fermions or quarks are, and may have subdivisions. Conscits conveniently
would have an apprehension side of psitrons and an influence side of kinetrons.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 101

 
 The conceptual model of the areas in this section are reflected in Table 3.
TABLE 3: The infinite versus the finite
Infinite finite Comments
Natural law: Natural law: Perception
Experiential and non- limited to physical valve
experiential limitation axiom
Continuous infinite: Subatomic levels through
Infinite continuity macroreality and
without an end. astrophysical (cosmological)
reality in 3S-1t.
Discrete quantized qualits
influence the animate (such
as Quantum Consciousness
in the nervous system) and
the inanimate.
No quanta or qualits. Discrete finite:
Subquantum and quantum
Whole metareality common actuality is
reflecting existence at perceived as experiential
all levels.
At origin, Origin Event The Origin Event is needed
for C-substrate as otherwise
a discrete threshold for
interaction of meaning vs.
information would occur.
Infinite dimensional N-finite dimensional reality
reality (finite and transfinite)
Reality hierarchy / Quantal: subatomic,
conscious substrate macroreality, astroreality
Open infinite reality. Closed finite reality
Potential life (animate For sentient being life occurs
infinite) does not have if physiology appropriate is
infinitely linked purely potential
physiology
Life potential in the Life exists from the Origin
infinite (polife) Event. In 3S-1t, physical life
Metalife reflecting occurs when the appropriate
eternal existence and STC physiology can be
survival after bodily expressed to sustain life.
death
Ordropy: Entropy is Entropy, inanimate.
minimal or absent Ordropy predominantly in
sentient beings.
Infinite, continuous, Countable discrete finite
metaconsciousness, qualities: Qualits, Chronits,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 102
universally applicable to all scientific
reality/: Bohr— science can only describe
the reality we experience, no more and no
less 41.
Qualit finite world links with subatomic,
macrophysical and astroreality. “Qualits”
term is better than quanta (which recognize
space and time only, and do not describe
the subquantal or dark space existences.)
Qualits are influenced at all levels —
microreality through macroreality through
to the astrophysical. 117
Qualits reflecting STC
Finite great flexibility involving process-
content across dimensions.; common
actuality is experiential
No discrete threshold can be demonstrated
so origin is postulated
Dimensional Extrapolation
Quantization on all dimensional scales
through the drawing of distinctions
No discrete threshold can be demonstrated
so origin of life is postulated at the S0-T0-
C0 singularity
Life is part of that singularity. This is not a
continuum where suddenly “life” or “life
force” is inserted at a threshold event
moment or extended period such as
conception or during the first trimester or
at birth. Possible reincarnative hypotheses?
The finite and infinite linked through the
conscious drawing of distinctions
The finite and infinite linked through the
conscious drawing of distinctions
Infinite, continuous, Countable discrete finite The finite and infinite linked through the
metaconsciousness, qualities: Qualits, Chronits, conscious drawing of distinctions
ordropy, polife Qubits, Conscits
Conceptual Perceptual and conceptual Meaning
Continuous, ordinal Interval (first 6 dimensions), Rotation and Projection
Ordinal thereafter
Continuous infinity Alef zero, Alef subzero, Alef S and T may appear to be 0 at the
Consists of inseparable transfinity at highest levels transfinite levels.
STC and also tethered beyond tethering.
from top-down.
Continuity conceptual Discrete perceptual finite Thought patterns vs. quantized distinctions
infinite
Extent Content Intent may imply guiding reality or
motivation via CNS at 3S-1t level.
CIST (consciousness, Time space consciousness Dimensional tethering
information, space, may be conceptualized as
time) are complete and nonlocal
total
Potential Dimensions Metadimensionality Origin Event to present universe
Non-Euclidean Euclidean at 3S-1t Top-down, bottoms-up relative.
Metaconsciousness at Meaning vs. neurological N-C, E-C, M-C +Transfinite-C (= Higher
higher dimensionality consciousness Consciousness). Separately Q-C
Continuous Discrete quantized qualits Experiential
Non-orthogonal Orthogonal and parallels Vortical indivension from transfinite
interfacing conceptualization to finite measurement
Metatime, metaspace, Discrete series of dimensions Conscious substrate vs. dimensionometry
metalocal of STC
Top-down approach Bottoms-up approach with Also, could be regarded as outside-in vs.
transfinite Top-down inside-out respectively
Metaconsciousness top- Higher dimensions qualities Qualities can be positive and negative and
down change in state but be more stable in trait
Metaconsciousness First 9 dimensions meaning Transfinite consciousness manifesting as
lower STC inseparable and tethered discrete “qualits” particularly conscits, plus
from bottom-up chronits and qubits.
Metaconsciousness Meaningful information Quantization of consciousness
N-dimensional time, Time is multidimensional Demonstrated through dimensional
also N-dimensional likely 3 dimensional if finite extrapolation
space and N-D freedom of choice
metaconsciousness
Time is unitary: Past, Time is experienced as a Metacist: Metatime, metaspace, meta-
present,
Mathematics is sensitive to such quantum or qualitinformation,
future are all moment in linear time correlates metaconsicousness
of dynamics impinging
the same.
the C-substrate. Quantum physics also incorporates 3D-rotational spin at the quantal
level, and this is taken into account for these subatomic particles but might also be
relevant possibly in vortices: At the higher metadimensional level, this rotational spin
could also be relevant and speculatively be applied to the (3D) vortical movement
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 103

 
expression in the context of individual-units by indivension at the relative subjectivity
level. This vortical indivension allows for the higher C-substrate finite dimensions and
could be the finite translation of the metadimensionality coming from the infinite. This
model is necessary because one cannot explain indivension in 3S-1t alone: Applying
the finite subreality even at higher dimensionalities limits a conceptualization of an all-
encompassing consciousness. Consequently, infinity arises in the TDVP model as a
source of necessity. Moreover, it allows the incorporation of ordropy with
metaconsciousness as an expression of the infinite, as well as polife and also
metaspace and metatime (all together called “essence”).
C-substrate is more relevant than Space-time quantum correlates because of the
concept of relative zero, S=0 and T=0.

Ordropy and Thermodynamics

It is this infinity linked up with the order that logically has to be a direct consequence
of the infinite. Whereas the criticism has always been, “you don’t get around that
second law of thermodynamics”, you do here, because you have life. The existence of
life in the universe has to be acknowledged by even the most hardened reductionist.
But it is unexplained by any materialist model. Physiology and DNA do not explain
why life comes about, just how. The infinite is sufficient to explain the existence and
persistence of order, but the finite is not. Balancing the order of living organisms with
disorder somewhere else only makes sense in a finite physical system with
continuously active organizing forces to prevent an instant collapse to maximum
entropy consistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics, and these organizing forces are
not explained by any finite physical theory. However, if we regard the order of life or
polife itself as infinite because they are based on an infinite reality, which easily, and
potentially profoundly, if necessary, impacts every finite dimension contiguously and
also distantly, then the continued existence of both order and life is explained. Ordropy
is reflected via life.

What kind of infinity?

At this point, there is no need to invoke Cantor’s infinity of infinities 116, although this
is a useful concept in infinite regresses, this is not fundamental to, though quite
compatible with, TDVP. The concept of infinity of infinities is essential to the
Copenhagen interpretation proof of the existence of consciousness in some form prior
to the emergence of the first quanta at the big bang event horizon. Also, recognition of
infinities within infinities is a fundamental invariant in dimensional extrapolation.
Thus, Cantor’s work116 is strongly supportive of TDVP, but infinity need not be
“located” at N-dimensions plus or beyond N-dimensions because mathematically (e.g.,
parallel infinities in N-1 dimensions) infinity can be contiguous with any number of
dimensions (e.g., 3D would imply a 3 dimensional infinite component). This is a key
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 104

 
to understanding the unitary component of infinity at any level of the infinite.
Infinity of infinities in mysticism
Theologically, it would be very valuable to differentiate kinds of infinity. If one
postulated a higher being, then the “infinite” existence after survival after bodily death
could be easily differentiated from this higher being.

Mathematics, Infinity and TOEs

Our whole model is far more than just a specific TDVP unified monism presentation.
The whole model creates an integrated way of thinking in mathematics and this
actually must be the case for any TOE, not only TDVP. The mathematical inclusion of
consciousness and infinity, and the application of Gödel’s incompleteness theorem to
finite systems is what makes this a metaparadigm. Metaparadigm in this sense is
beyond a theory of everything because it has practical implications that are
mathematical and potentially testable in science.
Any comprehensive model of reality has to include infinity because otherwise we are
going to encounter both indeterminacy and incompleteness. Though the principle of
Russell and Whitehead in Principia Mathematica153 that logic and mathematics are
complete was disproved by Gödel, he disproved it in the context of finite complete
systems. 104 The infinite remains indeterminate by definition and this is quite acceptable
in any model. 102; 103 But our current materialistic scientific 3S-1t model, allows only the
existence of finite physical systems and nothing else and ignores the infinite. But let us
go beyond what our current worldview says. Only then can we discover the logic and
mathematics of an infinite reality.

Infinity
Our concept refers to the infinity of the continuum reflects the infinite reality
subdomain (or subreality) of continuity. This is as opposed to a countable infinity
including transfinity (Georg Cantor’s concept)116 which is in the finite reality
subdomain of discreteness. We use the terms “subdomain” here because the finite and
the infinite are inseparable and cannot be described separately in our TDVP model,
except theoretically.
Just as STC when described in their inseparability at the source level cannot be
subdivided into their separate space, time and consciousness components except
theoretically, when tethered the STC components can be perceived or conceptualized
as separate but they still have the tethered linking to their source, like balloons on
strings to their origin hand holding them. Similarly, when the infinite and finite interact
in a permeable boundary, they are tethered, though still with all the essence of the
infinite substrate available, and with all the meaningful information that the tethering
process is communicating.
Countable infinity versus continuous infinity
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 105

 
Infinity becomes theoretically countable as it is translated down into the objective, but
the infinity described in TDVP is continuous in the infinite subdomain.

Rules of the Finite and Infinite

The following rules derive from this:
• All dimensions exist in the same unitary existence.
• Relative objectivity incorporates the infinite and the finite.
• Space, time and consciousness exist in the infinite and the finite from the
zero-th dimension to the highest N-dimensional substrate.
• 3S-1t relative objectivity does not exist on its own, so S=0 and T= 0 may
legitimately occur at higher dimensional realms.
• The original finite singularity was S, T and C all = 0.
• This ultimate compression reflected the singularity and given the role of
meaning in STC, we postulate it may likely have been a meaningful
coincidence.
• Time in the present is a moment, and so is a point not a linear dimension, and
therefore, also a singularity with zero dimensions.
• The higher dimensions of consciousness reflect ordinal not interval metrics.
These may be associated with ratio metrics for S and T, e.g., when S=0 and
T=0.
The infinite and the laws of nature
An essential of the TDVP paradigm is that the laws of nature prevail. A second
essential is that reality has a finite subreality completely pervaded by an infinite
subreality. Are these contradictory? We do not believe they are, because effectively we
know almost nothing about the infinite subreality. Even what we have postulated in
terms of essence, with life or potential life, order, metaspace, metatime,
metaconsciousness, and metainformation, are all simplifications of this broader,
expanded, “without end” (“Ein Sof”) component 154; 155 of what infinity is all about. We
cannot even imagine infinity, except in the most rudimentary manner: Therefore, we
cannot say that it does not obey natural laws. Yet, our 3S-1t, finite limitations tempt us
to interpret anomalous events as “miraculous” or “supernatural” because they appear
inexplicable. However, when instead, we apply a broader metadimensional finite level
approach, we realize that we can simply say “we know only very little about the
infinite”. We could speculate that the infinite could imply a great natural harmony for
all of reality. Certainly, our model is consistent with this. And our TDVP model
generates important questions:
• Is there such an event as “supernatural”?
• What is a “meaningful coincidence” and when is it “just a pure coincidence”?
• Why is psi apparently such a rare event and not occurring all the time?
• What about our free-will?
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 106

 
Supernatural:
“Supernatural” is usually applied in the relative context of the 3S-1t domain. It is an
interpretation that is used when ostensibly anomalous events of unexplained type are
interpreted as unexplained by the laws of nature (and therefore, described as outside
natural law or “supernatural”).
Coincidence and meaningful coincidence:
Alternatively, we may interpret unexplained events as purely statistical coincidences,
or we may regard such events as “Meaningful Coincidences”. These interpretations are
also interpreted in our usual experiential reality of the 3S-1t domain. The first
explanation would be just a group of those statistical rare events that could legitimately
be called “statistical coincidences”. If there is a frequency to them, or a special quality
that we could not regard these as just statistically driven, in our opinion, this still might
be explained by a broader extradimensional natural explanation.
Psi:
Events might appear unusual or anomalous or miraculous because they are
manifesting in 3S-1t through the top-down mechanisms, such as through vortical
indivension. This might also explain why psi experiences appear rare in 3S-1t—
because their derivation is metadimensional, and we need to stumble upon a relevant
piece of the jigsaw puzzle in 3S-1t to comprehend or influence such an occurrence.
However, hypothetically, that rare event may just be the tip of an iceberg that could
manifest differently and frequently in another domain.
Metadimensionality, psi and vortices:
The interfaces of different vortices or the associated vector, scalar or tensor elements,
may facilitate a manifestation in the brain coupled 3S-1t domain of metadimensional
events. Technically, this would occur under certain rare circumstances, because most
living humans have not learnt a way to facilitate how such events could manifest
through that brain. The event could be apprehended perceptually or involve influence
or uncontrolled perturbation on the motor side. This would allow us to control it
somewhat within its natural law limitations. By contrast, if such vortical indivensions
were occurring within or across another domain of metadimensional STC, then the
contents of that vortex could, hypothetically, be accessible to an existence within that
domain and might not be a rare event: Psi would be a common occurrence as those
interfacing components would be far more accessible.
Laws of nature and “miracles”:
In summary, we might inappropriately conceptualize unexplained events that we
cannot easily comprehend as “miraculous”, “supernatural” or “outside natural law”.
But this interpretation could relate to our physical perceptual and conceptual
limitations of 3S-1t. However, it might be that the “miracle” is based on
extradimensional natural law. Consequently, although we cannot understand it fully
with our 3S-1t limitations, we would be able to but only if we could appreciate the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 107

 
infinite or finite metadimensionality, both of which still fit within natural law.
Infinite intent:
There is a small wrinkle, however. Such events, even when explained, may be
remarkable because of their finite timing, location and kind of occurrence: It may that
the “meaningful time, place and consciousness” (STC) manifestation would be of such
a kind as to hypothesize an infinite “intent” allowing the event to occur at that moment
in that place. For example, let’s apply a biblical example—just to illustrate, not to
debate its existence: Did the Children of Israel encounter a natural event, like a
tsunami or equivalent, to dry up the Sea of Reeds? Would that then be perceived as
miraculous, a meaningful coincidence or pure statistical chance? Scientists could
debate the causes and origins, and theologians could postulate some kind of “divine
intervention” or “broader purpose”. If we conceptualize that explanation as
“miraculous”, then it would be miraculous for us. But that “miraculous” within our
TDVP finite-infinite natural law model, still obeys the broader finite and infinite
natural laws. Yet, the timing of the event, its location and circumstances would remain
noteworthy (a “meaningful coincidence”).
Free-will:
Would an infinite remarkable event compromise our postulated “free-will”? We do
not think so because free-will is relative to our 3S-1t experience. The remarkable
“miracle within natural law” example would reflect a top-down intervention, as
opposed to the bottom-up “free-will choices” we might make in 3S-1t.

Infinity from the Top-down

The top-down approach
Infinity is most easily modeled by looking at everything from the top-down. This is
because then you can conceive of life and ordropy as reflections of what is in the
infinite essence and that they are just manifesting discretely instead of continuously in
infinite reality. In our experiential physical reality, life and ordropy are perceived and
conceptualized by sentient beings predominantly through 3S-1t. This is a key
differentiation of the finite from the infinite reflecting the continuous versus the
discrete respectively. Indeed, we cannot conceive of anything in the finite that is
actually continuous, and the basis of quantum physics recognizes this.
Discrete and continuous
Similarly, we cannot conceive of anything in the infinite that would represent the
discrete. The term Infinite Continuity 17 is a useful one and the title of a previous book
by Dr Close. Moreover, Dr Neppe similarly described a (continuous infinite) essence 6.
With respect, the TDVP model is so beautifully elegant because it reflects a key basic
assumption, possibly the truest of all: Reality is ultimately infinitely continuous; this
can be applied from the “top” all the way “down” the line from the infinite to the
finite, ultimately impacting the 3S-1t living domain. This model explains ordropy, life,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 108

 
and all that we experience. The reason why physicists haven’t come up with a true
“Theory of Everything” is because they cannot explain everything we experience
through 3S-1t alone, as that is finite, and some of what we experience are reflections of
the infinite in the finite.

Metaphenomena in the Infinite and Survival

Terminology
The use of terms like non-locality or even relative non-locality at the infinite level is
meaningless. In fact, we postulate we ought to be using the terms metaspace and
metatime: One could postulate that one of the difficulties of alleged communications
supportive of the survival of bodily death may be the profound difficulty of penetrating
the boundary between the infinite and finite: In the infinite, metaconsciousness or that
aspect of essence that is existing is in a continuous metaspace and metatime reality,
making any meaningful discrete communication extremely difficult and rare.
Effectively, a conversion has to occur across a narrow permeable bidirectional bridge
of continuous non-specific infinite information into a finite discrete meaning.
Moreover, even if some part of an individual or individual-unit consciousness survives,
other factors that could make such communications rare are shock, disorientation and
lack of identification with a finite form.
Communication
There is no reason why such communications should be easier from the infinite to 3S-
1t than from the finite 3S-1t into a specific infinite communication “vortex”. On the
one hand one could postulate that tethering at the infinite level still could occur in
survival with all of metaspace, metatime, metaconsciousness or metainformation being
relevant.
However, one could equally point to times when information interfaces in a non-
tethered manner, but applying TDVP principles, it is uncertain whether there could
ever be absolute non-tethering of the STC links in the infinite: It’s just that the
tethering that exists may not be relevant to the specific individual-units, but interfaces
of information may still allow communication by their intersections.
Also, at the finite level S may equal 0 and so may T at certain higher dimensional
levels. We speculate that a certain point, the transfinite and the infinite realities so
meld that the differentiation of continuity from discreteness becomes (literally)
insubstantial.

Mathematics
Proofs
Pertinently, we realized that to raise our TDVP theory of everything into a real
metaparadigm, we needed supporting proof. We had always maintained that this would
be via mathematics and related logic and we have introduced several mathematical
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 109

 
proofs for our model. This is why we provide the outlines of such proofs in this book
and amplify with mathematically rigorous details in our companion book. 10
Relativity of zero and infinity
All of our models are relative with respect to the reference frame of the conscious
observer. Even relative zero and relative infinity are pertinent.
For example, based on our perceptual and conceptual experiences in 3S-1t, a relevant
domain implying additional dimensions in the transfinite direction, may have S=0 and
T=0 at that level relative to the observer/ experient in 3S-1t. This is relative zero. On
the other hand, when we conceive of a level of extent and content that reflects the
infinite, we are again basing it on our sentient awareness. This is relative infinity. It is
not absolute because it is relative to our own conscious interpretation.
Dimensional zero
However, there are also entirely different elements of metaconsciousness.
Metaconsciousness itself, theoretically, does not have any relative space or time:
dimensional level space equals zero, time equals zero, but it still could reflect
meaningful information. The metaconsciousness originates from a continuous infinity
and the translation into the finite discrete meaningful information through the brain or
nervous systems makes it perceived, conceived and experienced in the conscious
awareness and responsiveness of human, individual-unit and other sentient beings.
Singularity
A finite singularity is not only a singularity of no space, or of absence of time, it is also
absence of pattern, meaning and individualized or individual-unit consciousness. If it is
a true or absolute singularity, as opposed to relative zero, with zero dimensions, it
doesn’t have a dimension of space, time, or consciousness. The consciousness comes
from the infinite and that could be interpreted as the “Primary Receptor”. This Primary
Receptor, because of the 3D nature of time, exists throughout relative time and space
even without any distinction of self.
Pythagorean elements in space
Given that we perceive only 3 spatial dimensions, we can define a 3S reality in
terms of a saturated, or infinitely continuous field of dimensional singularities (points)
in 3 orthogonal dimensions. Dimensionometrically and mathematically, it is not
possible to have another orthogonal dimension or any other kind of projection, in 3
dimensional space. This can be demonstrated in Euclidean or non-Euclidean space.
The Pythagorean theorem is simply a handy tool that can be applied in Euclidean space
to demonstrate this, but it is not the only one. We can demonstrate it with a totally
different mathematical scheme to locate points that have nothing to do with the
Pythagorean theorem, for example, by using radians.
Applying radians instead
Applying other mathematical representations like radians instead we can demonstrate
the limitations of Euclidean space to 3 dimensions. This use of radian measurement to
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 110

 
locate any point in the field of 3S simply substitutes three different parameters for the
x, y and z in Cartesian co-ordinates, using the angle subtended between a reference
line through the origin and a line from the origin to the point in question, and can
handily utilize trigonometric functions. But, whatever method we use, we still need
three parameters to describe three parameters for 3-D space. Interestingly, however,
the use of radians also implies application of such a principle in curvature of space,
which is relevant for 3S-1t.

Dimensional representation
Multidimensional scaling representations
As long as we use real numbers to represent the measurement parameters, even if we
assign one of them to a fourth dimension, we find ourselves back into 3-D space. Thus,
a form of numerical representation other than real numbers must be utilized to
represent a fourth dimension. Otherwise, all we are doing is representing a complex
manifold surface within a 3-D space. The only non-real numbers available are
imaginary numbers. Minkowski and Einstein realized that time could be included as a
fourth dimension only if represented by imaginary numbers about 100 years ago.
Accepting this and identifying invariant relationships between adjacent dimensions of
any n-dimensional reality, we can proceed to define dimensional realities (of extent)
beyond three and four.
Effectively, we do not refer beyond 3S to spatial co-ordinates, though we may list
mathematical points instead. We can therefore, analyze 22 different parameters by, for
example, multidimensional scaling 156 applying median and mean column geometry in
R22 and reflect it in a plane 2D graph. But representation of such points (ordinal or
interval) does not mean the same as 22 spatial dimensions, it refers simply to 22
parameters with variables of content that can be metrically represented mathematically
by applying an extent to them via a “density“ measure (per unit of extent).
Applying more than 3 dimensions.
Orthogonality in the representation of 3 or more dimensions is not a requirement, but
simply easier to conceptualize and represent mathematically. We find intrinsic and
invariant consistency in extent variables of groups of three represented by imaginary
and complex numbers once one goes beyond 3S. There are really only 3 spatial
dimensions. Contemporary uses of Riemann, Hilbert or other hyper-space analyses are
simply conceptual tricks used to solve certain problems (e.g., rotating 3D space using
quaternions) but they have no implications regarding space-time dimensionality.
Similarly, we maintain that folding spatial dimensions as in String Theory does not get
beyond 3D. Complex surfaces analyzed using non-Euclidean geometry are simply
being rendered Euclidean from a different perspective.
Space and time
This reasoning applies to any number of dimensions (variables of extent)
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 111

 
including time. We describe time in terms of the measurement of duration, another
variable of extent. The measurement problem in physics, especially quantum physics,
arises because of this mathematical diversity in dimensionality and the difference
between space dimensions, time dimensions, and dimensions of consciousness. Space
can be measured by ratio / interval measures. But time can only be measured linearly
by interval measures, otherwise it may require the use of complex ordinal numbers as
consciousness does.
Time as a necessary extra dimension
We can frame these different phenomena in logical and even mathematical terms. The
justifications with Minkowski’s work and relativity exist and also, strangely, with the
consciousness substrate and the laws of form: Brown 121, without any reference to
Minkowski space or any kind of space, concluded that in order to take the “form out of
the form” (to use his terminology) the only way to do that would be with what would
be with the equivalent of imaginary numbers. It can’t be space, he says, so, it has to be
time. It comes in as a necessity to continue the development of the laws of form. It is
fascinating that he saw this without reference to geometry of any kind. It appears that
Spencer Brown is not understood by most scientists and may have long given up trying
to get people to understand what he was talking about.
More spatial dimensions
Conventional mathematical physicists may argue that Pythagorean parameters (i.e.,
orthogonal dimensions) are not limited to 3 dimensions, but can be up to nine, ten or
more. However, mathematically we’ve demonstrated that even if a model of greater
than 3 multiple real dimensions is conceptualized, all points within the hypothetical n-
dimensional space can still be located with 3 Euclidean dimensions. This is a hotly
debated topic but as far as spatial dimensions are concerned there are only three. The
similarity of dimensions beyond 3 to spatial dimensions is no more than the similarity
of the imaginary numbers used for the time dimension (the fourth dimension) to real
numbers. Essentially, there cannot be more than 3 spatial dimensions, Euclidean or
non-Euclidean. There can be n-dimensions, with n reaching nine or ten, but they are
not spatial dimensions, or time dimensions necessarily.
Even if there were more spatial dimensions, following our examples that lead to
3D-vortical indivension, every non-Euclidean space is actually Euclidean from some
perspective. If that is true then we can always translate it into Euclidean n dimensional
space, just as Einstein did for general relativity. Scientists have either not recognized,
or avoided the Euclidean non-Euclidean issue, and have confused variables of content
with dimensions. The absence of recognizing the Euclidean-Non-Euclidean and extent
versus content dichotomies is a large part of the reason the other attempts at extra-
dimensional or hyper-dimensional space-time theories have failed. The primary reason
is that they have not included consciousness nor the concept of infinity as part of
objective dimensionality.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 112

 
Creative thought and the Euclidean dichotomy
To the rookie mathematician, the relativity of Euclidian/non-Euclidian dichotomy is
easy to contemplate because he will not realize that most mathematicians just accept
the assumption that Euclidean and non-Euclidean spaces are fundamentally different.
To that rookie, certain of the fundamental basics are not prioritized allowing an
advantage because it allows creative lateral thinking not constrained by conventional
concepts, and his conclusions may be either very wrong or very creative. However,
scientists may be tied to their own terminology and concepts. If this applies to us, the
proof of the pudding is in the eating. The farther we analyze the TOE of TDVP, the
more it holds together. Ultimately, the proof of the pudding (paradigm) is in the eating
(practical application).
Euclidean limitations of 3D of time
Contemplating a potentially infinite number of 3D co-existing realities, through
extra-dimensional extrapolation, if you have n dimensions, you must have an n+1
dimension in order to observe the warping of the n-dimensional reality. N+1 in terms
of our Pythagorean time, or our Euclidean time, would stop at 3. But there is no reason
why we cannot get to 3 by using this kind of logic, and yet we could go beyond
Pythagorean time into Euclidean and/or non-Euclidean realities, which may be
reflected potentially and very speculatively in the infinite. Theoretically, we can go to
as many dimensions of time as we want into a transfinite time. We have to stop at 3
dimensions of time however, if time is represented by imaginary numbers, which we
postulate is correct. This is a revolutionary idea but we argue that we can’t go beyond
three dimensions of time by dimensional extrapolation, as going beyond that redefines
the entity of time: This is so as it can no longer be represented by imaginary numbers
and it also cannot be represented by real numbers because dimensionometrically that
would return the entity to 3S. Whether Euclidean or non-Euclidean, this new entity
must contain both space and time characteristics. Algebraic number theory supplies us
with the appropriate type of number: the complex number a+bi. This space-time entity
is more than the sum of its parts.
Because it contains the tethering aspect of consciousness, we are calling it the
consciousness substrate (C-substrate) and these can be represented by quaternions, at
least from dimensions 7 to 9 of consciousness. A rigorous development of the ideas
relating to this virgin territory of S3-T3-C3 and beyond is presented in our companion
book. 10 In this, we apply mathematical dimensionometric logic. We can ostensibly
utilize non-Euclidean time (going beyond 3 time dimensions) but that would imply
warping of 6-dimensional space-time, which would produce another (seventh)
dimension. This properly should not be called “time” but “consciousness” because
time could no longer be described with a simple multiple of the square root of minus
one, but it would have to go to complex numbers. This is as different as time is from
space. We have limitations of the 3 dimensional structural limitations of time via
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 113

 
quaternion mathematics, which we relate to the complex number dimensional
equivalents of C7-9 (dimensions number 7 to 9, which we are describing in the context
of the C-substrate).
The outside in or top-down approach again.
The only way we could ever be aware of any non-Euclidean dimensional reality
is to be outside of it. Then what we have is a non-Euclidean space embedded in a
Euclidean space. A visualizable analogy is the surface of a mountain standing on a
relatively flat plain. Representing the surface of the mountain as a non-Euclidean
surface distinguishes it from the geometry of the plain, but you can still locate any and
all of the points on the curved surface of the mountain-side in 3D space. In 3D time,
just as in 3S, you can actually represent any point on any curved or weirdly shaped
time manifold conceptualized in 4D time in 3D time because attempted representation
in an additional dimension will result in being embedded in a Euclidean 7D reality, and
the 7th dimension cannot be simply space or time, as indicated.
Through indivension, dimensional embedding may relate to tethering. Tethering
can occur in those first 9 dimensions, 3S, 3T, and 3C as they are embedded with each
other in a kind of Euclidean hyper-space. Going beyond 9D, we postulate vortical
indivension where we can represent as many finite dimensions we can conceive of. We
do not yet know if this vortical indivension beyond 3S-3T-3C is equivalent to the
tethered realities up till 9D reality. In conclusion, non-Euclidean dimensionality is
postulated as relative and conceptual, while Euclidean dimensionality is perceptual but
can always also be conceptualized, just as we can conceptualize ideas even in our
regular 3S-1t subdomain.ff Because of the inclusion of the infinite through tethering,
there may be a feature of the STC substrate that transcends the perceptual and
conceptual.

Unification of the C-substrate model by dimensions.

Let’s create a speculative C-substrate model: Given that our usual physical life
experience is in 3S-1t, more correctly called 3S-1t-1C, we could conceive of
Neurological Consciousness reflecting this minimum. Our brains will function very
adequately, but without any creative spark being likely. We cannot access outside our
brain so we are restricted to our brain structures, neurophysiology and chemistry for
any thoughts.
At the next level we could conceptualize Actualization of this Consciousness. This
allows for maximal utilization of our Psychological Consciousness at 3S-3T-3C. We
can access that in dreams, or altered states potentially, or via any kind of
psychodynamics. But it does not require going outside of the brain. Our

ff
This is hinted to by the term "nagual" as used by Carlos Castaneda: It could refer to the overarching cosmic harmony,
where Euclidean and non-Euclidean" concepts are vastly transcended in the zero/infinity cyclic (self-referent) connection
point. 94
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 114

 
neurophysiology and neurochemistry still may explain it entirely. We “elevate” to
metaconsciousness—the broader consciousness—at the Transfinite level, such as 3S-
3T-NC. This is a conceptual jump involving qualities of higher thought and behavior,
such as wisdom, understanding, meaningful knowledge, courage and lovingkindness.
These are examples of transcendence of one’s consciousness. They could be for good
or bad, positive or negative. But they are discrete and ordinally measured and require
access of meaningful data outside the brain.
Finally, if we merge with the beginnings of the infinite, we could attain a taste of
infinity—possibly as a Mystical Metaconsciousness. Could it be that this “profound
level” of metaconsciousness continues infinitely higher ultimately to the Infinity of
Infinities?
Remarkably, ancient mysticism portrays this, as well: In (Jewish and Christian)
Kabbalah, our Actualization model (3S-3T-3C) is the spiritual grounded in physical
reality (Asiyah); the Transcendence (3S-3T-NC in the transfinite) reflects the Sefirot of
higher development (Yetzirah); the infinite link, the “gesher tzar” —narrow bridge —
for individuals is the Beriah (almost touching a conceptual Divinity); and finally if one
came close to that infinity of the infinities, one would have attained a closeness to
perfection (Atzilut).
Why mention all this? Simply, because a model must work at all levels. TDVP does.
And ancient wisdom that has persisted may be conceptually disregarded in science.
But we think that may be an error: We can learn from this. If our C-domains are
paralleled by the mystical, this could support our model: This is a remarkable parallel.
And it conceivably may not be an isolated example. We find similar parallels, for
example, in Vedic and Buddhist mysticism, as both of these also steeped in attaining
Higher Consciousness.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 115

 
CHAPTER 13: LIFE, ORDROPY, ESSENCE AND THE INFINITE 157

“Man is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness from which he emerges and the
infinity in which he is engulfed.”
Blaise Pascal (Mathematician, 1623 - 1662)

Infinite Continuity
Infinite Essence
The infinite is continuous and is different from finite quantal subreality. Essence is a
key theoretical portrayal of the properties of the infinite. The combination term for the
STC, “metalife” and ordropy is postulated as essence—the quality of this essence is
not defined at this point, but is the essential component to maintain life. This
combination term includes space and time as well in its five elements and is valuable
because of this exemplifying the ultimate relevance of the holistic, unified infinite
expression of reality.
Finite essence
The infinite essence interfaces through all components transmitting discrete packets to
the finite physical essence in terms of 3S-1t. We call that finite essence life and
ordropy within a finite STC (3S-1t) experiential standard reality.
The boundless ocean and the land
One metaphoric portrayal of the finite versus the infinite can still involve bidirectional
interactions but make understanding easy. We can impact reality from the bottom-up
3S-1t and therefore make a difference. Similarly, we can receive from the top-down
transfinite and infinite models and this applies most obviously to order (ordropy),
polife (metalife) and continuously to the stream of metaconsciousness converted into
the finite. Metaphorically, we could portray the infinite as a boundless, unending,
eternal ocean, and the land masses as part of the finite discrete STC realities of
individuals or individual-units. This metaphor has the advantage of emphasizing the
bidirectional flavoring of our finite-infinite existence.

Life
Life and consciousness
Life is also different from consciousness but a sentient being is able to appreciate
conscious awareness and responsiveness.gg Essence refers in the physical finite context
to sentient beings that can screen aspects of metaconsciousness dependent on level of
functional physical need, and possibly level of spiritual development. It has
gg
"Sentience" may imply a universal fundamental feature of nature, deeply rooted in Subquantum Reality. The sentient
being would therefore, not be limited to physical life forms.94
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 116

 
components, too, of space and time, just as the infinite does. But the difference is 3
dimensions of space and one point in time is experienced in our day-to-day earthly
physical standard reality, whereas space and time are all-pervasive in the infinite,
though this all pervasiveness is outside our 3S-1t and experienced as “non-local” in our
standard reality.
Metalife, polife and the infinite, and physical life.
Life at the infinite level is described as metalife. Metalife refers to eternal existence
(the immortality of eternal life). It implies necessarily survival after bodily (physical)
death, but does not express the form of survival, such as, as an individual, as a
collective consciousness, as emanations of light, or as a potential reincarnate.
One component of metalife is polife: This reflects potential physical life with the
essential characteristics to maintain physical life in 3S-1t already existing in the
essence from the finite Origin Event period. It only manifests physically when the
correct physiology and genetics are adequate. The infinite essence is not alive
physically, but may activate a vehicle such as an individual-unit, either individually or
at another systems level, e.g., groups, family, society, culture, and ethnicity.
This essence contains or is imbued with a metaconsciousness. Effectively, essence
is fundamental and inseparable in its qualities of STC, entropy and polife. It may be
that this is only experientially evoked when a sentient being is cognitively or
affectively or motivationally linked with such an essence. This requires that there is a
pathway from the infinite metaconscious to a specific finite point. This linking through
the boundary filter between the finite and the infinite involves again vortices, vectors,
scalars or tensors link with points of meeting, and that filter in the TDVP model is
bidirectional.
Sometimes the term “life force” has been used in lay terms, but we have no proof
this is a force in the usual physical sense, so we prefer to avoid such a speculation or
misnomer. Infinite order— ordropy is not limited to life, but finite physical life
manifests with ordropic elements: order is necessary in living and a consistent state of
disorder would produce death very quickly; but the persistence of life is not a
statistical toss-up: We can make longevity predictions over time and this contradicts
the second law of thermodynamics because the living should be continuously moving
toward the entropic disorder that reflects death.
Similarly, after writing about polife, we were struck by the superficial similarity to
the theological “soul”. But soul in the conventional sense is not quite what we’re
referring to. Polife specifically refers to the life potential in the infinite that may,
indeed, manifest (if this occurs, and we have discussed cogent data in this book) 12; 13; 123;
158; 159
as some form of consciousness after bodily death, but without the baggage of a
term like “soul”.
We do not even speculate here whether this structure is individual or collective, or
combinations of both, or its form. We do not hypothesize what role such “polife”
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 117

 
plays: Polife in the non-3S-1t infinite context might refer to potential to infinite
continuous consciousness in an infinite subreality but possibly limited by any
individual-unit essence. In finite reality, polife at a higher dimensional level might
reflect S=0, T=0 and C=N: However, such “existence” of a non-3S-1t-physical polife
could allow some form of connectivity implying links with 3S-1t at certain points,
given the ostensible data on such communication 123 This concept of Polife may be
more akin to the Sanskrit term atma than the English word soul.
But we do not know how this polife may then manifest: Is it, for example,
individual or collective? Does it involve different and overlapping sparks of awareness
and does this relate to an infinite consciousness? Also, polife is not a thing like a
“soul”, it is a concept of life always existing in the infinite and in the finite, from the
Origin Event of the initiation of our universe provided that life’s other physiological
requirements are met.
Polife is the conceptual base of not requiring a “soul” or “life-force” or any equivalent
to be “added” at some point like conception or after a short period in pregnancy or at
the moment of birth. Polife is always there from an origin conceptually. It does not
have physical extent, nor content, but it speculatively could have intent in the same
way as conscious meaning may sometimes play a guiding intentional role.
Life track, psi and free will
We present a metaphorical speculation, but certainly one that, given TDVP, could
reflect a broader reality: We could model our finite lives into a track in the infinite.
This would reflect our “life track” for all of our finite and infinite existence.
Potentially, that same polife of the infinite (the metalife) that was linked with our
living could continue to be very meaningful during our physical lives.
Could our infinite “life track”, indeed, be reflecting the life component of our
physical living, either “directly”— our life essence equivalent that we’re living in the
finite reality, or “indirectly”— such that the track in the infinite is impacted or
mirrored or shadowed by our physical existence? Moreover, though we are all on our
own individual life tracks, our tracks are not separated from others—we interface all
the time (this is the equivalent of or may be vortical indivension in the infinite). We are
part of those vast objective tracks of all sentient beings and perhaps even inanimate
objects. That track is reflected in STC, ordropy and metalife in our personal essence in
the infinite.
Given the data supporting psi, there is no theoretical reason in this metaphor, why
we cannot reach out near our life track and apprehend meaningful information.
Similarly, we could impact other tracks by influencing them. By this means, we have
the potential to interface zillions of other lives and objects, particularly those we
become linked to in some way. We simply move our track slightly, changing the
multidimensional direction a bit, and acquire meaningful information or perturb other
tracks. These impacted tracks, in their turn, deliver meaning (metaconsciousness) from
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 118

 
outside our track and impact us, as well as others. Similarly, we could also potentially
change our lives by modifying our finite life track as we move through our finite
existence. These changes, reflecting the infinite and the finite, imply our own free-will
and our options to modify reality—ours and others.
Effectively, as we sow, so shall we reap. This applies not only to individuals but also
to individual-units: Cultures, societies, ethnic groups, the world and even one’s
physical reality. We all influence each other, particularly if we have contact.
Extent, content and essence
Essence reflects all those distinctions of extent and content that exist as potential
on the infinite side. It includes meta-space and meta-time. In other words, it is not
space-less and time-less, but it includes all of space and all of time, and these can
manifest extent and content variables. The content variables might include forces and
mass. The extent reflects the extent of space and time, which is infinite. The major way
in which essence manifests is through metaconsciousness, in terms of imbued
metainformation with meaning, and life with order—ordropy. Order has extent, which
translated to the finite reality is transfinite, but ordropy also has content; similarly, life
has content, but also has extent. Life is more than just great order. So, essence involves
variables of extent and content, but which are holistic and therefore, infinite and
absolute but with infinities of infinities of all of the qualities of the STC plus order and
life.
Animate ordropy.
Life is, as far as we know, the ultimate reflection of order in 3S-1t, and order is
an infinite property. The animate essence manifests both infinitely and finitely and in
both ordropy is not usually separate from life. Ordropy is part of a reflection of life and
when we see order, we are seeing the potential in terms of life—polife. Some would
regard this as a mental kind of life or a mental existence. Disorder, based on entropy
and the second law of thermodynamics is finite.

Ordropy and Entropy, Animate and Inanimate

Ordropy and entropy
If there is entropy at the finite level, are there entropic components in terms of
infinity, as well? Logically, it would seem that there has to be, because one linear
aspect of the converse of ordropy would be entropy. That essence includes this order,
which is reflected in the process called ordropy. Ordropy refers to an infinite-
dimensional order, not just the linear negentropy opposing the second law of
thermodynamics implying the polar negation of that entropy. We define many kinds of
ordropy, because it is an infinite phenomenon and contained as part of the essence.
Entropy basis
Entropy is based on 3S-1t thermodynamics, and is totally compromised with the
infinite. Entropy works very well in a finite closed inanimate system wherein the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 119

 
second law of thermodynamics is not compromised because energy conservation is
preserved in the closed, finite system. Ordropy is far more than just negative entropy
because it is all pervasive order. However, ordropy is not only operating at a
multidimensional level, but at that infinity level, it reflects infinite dimensional reality.
That is where the order comes in.
Animate Essence and artificial intelligence
We posit that an overriding feature of the infinite is this animate essence. Ordropy
is fundamental to life. There is speculatively a subset of order that does not require life,
and a subset of life that does not require order, but it is not obvious what, other than
robotic machines! They are certainly not synonymous, but appear to be very highly
correlated. Such artificial intelligence systems could possibly be “pseudo-ordropic”:
They are still dependent upon the initial programming implemented by a self-
conscious human structure. They are disconnected from the metadimensional nesting
of their human creator. 94
Infinite essence
Indeed, conceptually, there might be very little in the infinite level besides this
essence. However, the essence may reflect metaconsciousness as a profoundly relevant
or overt component of infinity. There is also an infinite life element polife—potential
life—and essence could be conceived as animate as opposed to inanimate. All of these
elements are unified and inseparable infinite essence: ordropy, life, metaconsciousness
and there has to be a metatime and metaspace in the STC substrate where all existence
for all time and space are one.
One could conceive of an individual or individual-unit essences in the infinite and
differentiate it from the infinity of infinities “divinity” or highest being essence.
Content and process
Life reflects the application of ordropic order in part and therefore, reflects the
contents of the extent process of ordropy in the infinite. Other processes and contents
are relevant in other models in TDVP: For example, vortices reflect the content of the
extent process of indivension in the finite discrete reality.

Projecting Concepts of Essence

Essence, Primary Receptor and the concept of a deity
Historically, Neppe used the term “essence” as a very primitive statement at that
point when he wrote about vortex N-dimensionalism 7 but essence was not properly
conceptualized. We are able now to emphasize the enormous role of the infinite and
this may be synonymous with Close’s initial “Primary Receptor”, and what the
theologians may be calling a “creator” or a “God”. However, we don’t want to
entertain philosophical speculation here about what the infinite is all about. All of the
various theological paradigms may have been attempts to explain what we are talking
about in terminology that was limited yet would appeal to the population of the place
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 120

 
and time. The conceptualization of a creator as something like a man with a long white
beard sitting on a throne is necessarily just a metaphor. But, objectification into this
cultural context is what people could understand. It is justified culturally,
metaphorically, theologically and mystically within cultures. This is not a critique but
a different, more logical approach. It is not, however, part of the scientific approach.
An unknown great mystic once implied that masters who attained the great
cosmic consciousness could not explain it because they could only talk in terms that
their listeners are familiar with. If the mystic talks about a flower like a rose, then this
is an object that the listener is familiar with, but he may actually be describing a beauty
that exists in a higher state of consciousness that simply has no direct exact analogue in
the 3S-1t world.
We do not wish to enter that discussion here; ours is the scientific approach and
theology is not part of the scientific approach. TDVP is portrayed in broader
conceptual terms of essence without the theology. Yet, ultimately, our TDVP ideas
may play a part in the unification of science and spirituality.
Quantal Uncertainty and the theological model
How does one explain the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in regard to
Quantum mechanics and meaning? Does this reject the theological model? The
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle 45 apparently puts a dent in spiritual thinking because
of the introduction of an intrinsic uncertainty. 160 In contrast, we argue that if it wasn’t
for the uncertainty at the quantum level, there would not be a door through which
consciousness could have an effect from individual-unit consciousness on matter and
energy other than mechanically, and this would exclude free-will. 161Yet we know there
is such an influence. 162 The Heisenberg Uncertainty concept has been interpreted
differently (some would say “compromised” but we think it’s a mechanism difference,
not a refutation) by the Dehmelt/Wolfgang ion-trapping experiment 163; 164 But
Dehmelt’s experiment involved the movement of electrons from one shell to another in
subatomic decay, and we do not regard it as of relevance in our model. Certainly
Quantum Theory, prima facie, seems to have compromised any idea of something
guiding or of any mystical concept. However, quantum theory involves discrete quanta
and the infinite is continuous. We recognize, too that there have been models that
debate the uncertainty of quantum theory.
Chaos theory
Chaos Theory 107; 165; 166 is an important theory that tried to explain why quantum
uncertainty was not something that was illogical. This explains any kind of order and
extends this to the butterfly effect 165; 166. Theoretically, great variations might occur
with cascades in terms of quantal results, producing highly improbable events or
results that could not otherwise have happened. Effectively, having these enormously
large variations could theoretically produce further step-wise effects in terms of
gradients and cascades.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 121

 
We do not perceive chaos theory as a viable explanation of the persistence of order,
but it is one of the explanations against a random quantal effect. We perceive chaos
theory as a red herring that misguides people concerning what we call ordropy,
producing order by means of the hypothetical “self-organizing nature of reality.” It is
an attempt to bolster the materialistic perspective, but it is a cop-out: Nature itself
organizes, but why? Chaos theory does not answer. With a mathematical model
sometimes you have large variations in output from very small bits of input—in
modeling, when we look for these kinds of variables, we call it sensitivity analysis. 165-
167
You look at which variables make the biggest impact with the smallest input on a
model. The reason that happens is not, we argue, because of chaos: It happens because
of the complexity of the interdimensional relationships and the inability of a finite
mathematical model to mirror an infinite reality. Anyone bringing that up as an
argument for anything beyond the materialistic paradigm, may be, and most likely is,
in our opinion, totally missing the point.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 122

 
CHAPTER 14: THE INFINITE-FINITE BOUNDARY 168

“…Mind, in its use, is not static, but constantly developing. … Therefore, although at
each stage of the mind’s development the number of its possible states is finite, there is
no reason why this number should not converge to infinity in the course of its
development.”
Kurt Gödel 145

Permeable Bidirectional Filter

We postulate a bidirectional communication between the infinite and the finite.
Terms such as “barrier”, “sieve”, “permeability”, and even “bridge“ could be used.
Effectively, one creates “bridges“ in a variety of different settings. Amongst those are
the physiological settings such as the “blood brain barrier” (BBB) where there is a
barrier of permeability that is bi-directional between the brain and the rest of the body.
The BBB allows appropriate small or fat-soluble compounds to enter and leave the
brain, but it acts as a mechanism to prevent what the body deems inappropriate to
cross. When the BBB breaks down, for example when infected, it may transfer
compounds that may damage the nervous system. Similarly, there is a prolonged
membrane bridge across from the gastrointestinal tract to allow nutrition to be
absorbed into the systemic circulation but to act as a barrier for what the body
experiences as inappropriate. On the output side, the liver is the prime mechanism to
de-activate and alter chemicals.

The extreme: The infinity of the infinities

Georg Cantor’s concept of infinity was not a single unbounded area.116With the
infinite continuity in infinity, ultimately there would be an infinite “elevation”—a
greater infinity so to say, which conventional mathematics perceives as paradoxical
because calculations, when possible in Higher Dimensions, would be meta-
calculations. But the idea of an infinite regress “downward” is well known
mathematically, if only for countable not continuous infinity.

We cannot discuss links of the finite with the infinite without recognizing these
concepts. The existence of an infinity of infinities in the STC substrate isn’t
fundamental to TDVP, but it is strongly implied though it is better to use
“dimensionless” to portray such elevations. An infinite continuity would imply infinite
elevations: We do not use “dimensions of infinity” given that dimensions are finite,
discrete, extent concepts though there is supporting physics here, though implied in the
discrete context: Without the infinite descent demonstration of the consequences of the
Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, TDVP’s inclusion of consciousness
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 123

 
would appear to be arbitrary and belief driven. Nevertheless, “infinity of infinities” has
a mystical relevance too. Surely a being that supposedly survives physical death and
experiences a tiny portion of an infinite subreality domain would be at a very different
level from a postulated Divinity who would by definition possibly, be able to
conceptualize that whole domain? So there is a teleological motivation for an infinity
of infinities.

Gesher and Bridges

The metaphorical link
These are all examples of necessary physiological bridges that function
remarkably in sentient beings. We propose a special kind of bridge that may allow
bidirectional interchange between the infinite and the finite. Certainly, all of these
terms like filter, sieve, funnel, “tzimzum” (contraction), expansion, barrier and
permeability apply. We could use the word “bridge“, as well, and that would be non-
specific, and we may apply the physiological or physical ideas of barriers and sieves to
it. But this bridge may be entirely different, so we sought out a foreign term that we
could use specifically at this level. We suggest “gesher”, Hebrew for a “bridge”,
particularly referring to the special kind of meaningful bridge between the finite and
the infinite. We prefer this word “gesher” because it could create a less prejudicial
metaphorical appreciation of what we are talking about. This gesher could be narrow
(“gesher tzar”) allowing minimal connections of interfacing with the infinite; it could
be at any level such as one person or any individual-unit; and it could be applied more
broadly allowing the essence of space, time, consciousness, life and order to interface
and interact between the infinite continuous and finite discrete subrealities.

Gesher is a metaphor for an infinite range of interdimensional connectivity,

indivension and tethering interface with specific finite, discrete, N dimensional
configurations or collections of dimensions—domains. This interface might be
contextually relevant at any specific dimensional level: N, N+a or N-b dimensional
level. The endpoint could be the expression in the finite domains of discrete qualities
from the infinite essence. Usually, these discrete parts would be the C-substrate
metainformation.

Which infinity is the Gesher referring to?

Because we’ve portrayed an infinity of infinities, where is the gesher (mystical
bridge) going to or coming from? The question may be unanswerable, though
mystically one would portray most individual-units being only able to interact with the
lowest levels. So-called “heaven” may be at a higher level, but this is outside our
magisterium here: We simply do not know.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 124

 
Gesher and dimensions
Gesher is an explanatory technique for a single reality: In our philosophical
model of TDVP, called “unified monism”, the infinite and finite reflect the same
reality but from a conceptually different approach. Distinctions involve sentient beings
differentiating content, extent and intent and are discrete and therefore, are finite and,
theoretically, cannot be in the infinite: The absence of sentient beings conceptually
could imply the lack of an individual consciousness process to integrate information,
and also, the absence of any distinguishing variables of extent in the continuous
infinite would lead to the conclusion that the infinite does not have any “dimensions”
of itself. However, on the other hand, paradoxically, modifying these ideas a little, S, T
and C could reflect infinite dimensions in the infinite sub-reality. This would be so as
the distinctions might be registered in a unified infinite metaconsciousness and not
require individual consciousness. Moreover, metrics might theoretically be performed
along the ordinal equivalent coordinates within infinity and so reflect infinite
dimensions. If so, this would explain how the finite discrete reality at all its integration
dimensional levels originates through the infinite. Both explanations are likely
appropriate, because the differentiation is a semantic one depending on
conceptualizing definitions.

Gesher and different consciousness elements

At times, the gesher is more penetrable, for example during meditative states,
dreams and possibly any sleep state. The barrier may be loosened possibly with
hallucinogenic drugs in certain instances, possibly in psychopathology such as
schizophrenia 169, 170 and demonstrably anomalous temporal lobe functioning is linked
with more subjective paranormal experiences. 127 Scientific phenomenological studies
differentiating the subjective experiences reported in these states—such as the different
psychoses, dream, hypnagogic and hypnopompic realities, other altered states of
consciousness, near-death experiences and out of body experiences might clarify the
differences in this barrier between self and not-self. 124

Formal analyses may conceptualize these important 3S-1t individual differences

in humans. 124 For example, the hallmark of psychosis is ego boundary disturbance. But
that awareness is still within the brain. 2; 129, Neppe, 2009 #130; 171; 172 It is possibly associated with
misinterpretations of a reality that may be entirely based within the brain, or that it
may result in idiosyncratic interpretations of reality from the outside world, such as a
distorted metaconsciousness. 124 We do not, at this point, know the answer.

On the other hand, so-called out-of-body experiences (OBEs) and a possible

interpretative subtype, near-death experiences, are phenomenologically usually
experienced as the awareness (“center of consciousness”) being “located in physical
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 125

 
space” outside the body. 124; 125 This qualitatively involves a total shift in the ego-
boundary because it is no longer located in the brain but outside. The self experiences
itself as existing but outside the physical space and with the insightful awareness that
that is so. The OBE is phenomenologically experienced as outside the 3S-1t location of
the body. Whether this implies extradimensionality or not could be disputed:
Ultimately, the live individual still needs to relay his/her subjective experience through
their brain memories of his/her experience.124; 125
This barrier allows a filter of information coming through as physical reality. It
may be that there is usually passage through from the infinite into the finite, but that it
could be the reverse: Could it be that thoughts in our physical finite brain about
something or someone or some idea may access the infinite via this gesher (which is
not a place but an informational exchange mechanism) and allow a narrow bridge of
deliberate contact? It is unclear what this deliberate contact might be. Packets like our
speculative hypothetical “qualits” could be sources (e.g., kinetrons or psitrons that
would be discrete, wave, particles or spin communication). On the other hand, the C-
substrate may utilize different metadimensional communications implying vortical
indivension or loosening of tethering. But these are teleological speculations.

Would induced meditative or OBE states or alleged mediumistic states about a

specific deceased element facilitate this communication? Or is this gesher a
physiological artifact, a distortion of spirituality, which remains in the brain but fools
the individual? Certainly, this could be so because the psychological and the
physiological influences are very powerful, but it may not always be so: It is this
dilemma of differentiating one’s own idiosyncratic, personal and unvalidated reality
from the pathological and “normal” higher brain functioning, which is so difficult.
There could be differentiation not only quantitatively in terms of quantity of
communications with both inhibition and excitation, but qualitatively, too. This
differentiation of neuronal and supportive glial or other structure and physiology is
well recognized and may explain selective differences based on morphological and
developmental levels of different parts of the brain.

Gesher and the brain

It might speculatively be that that “gesher”, in fact, is physically equivalent to
the blood-brain barrier (BBB) in that the information transfer is directly into the brain,
via, for example, the temporal lobe, and the executive action exits via the frontal lobe.
This is unlikely though. We recognize the BBB as the means to limit or allow passage
of molecules and ions into the brain. This is a physical mechanism only. But what is
the gesher equivalent of information transfer in and out of the brain? Whatever it is
(e.g., physiology, qualits or quanta), it would imply narrow limited transfers across

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 126

 
from (and to) the continuous, unending infinite to (and from) the discrete, limited, 3S-
1t or metadimensional finite.

We speculate that communication between the infinite metaconscious and the

brain or nervous system in a finite subreality is bidirectional, not just receipt of specific
metaconscious data by the brain, but also, involving potential influences from the
nervous system. This influence may require a specific process to communicate from
the sentient being to the infinite metaconsciousness. This might hypothetically be some
kind of quantal or subquantal substrate. On the other hand, this could speculatively be
via efferent psi; The postulate of kinetrons or psitrons would obviate quantal
interpretations and implicate the broader use of qualits not quanta. One could
additionally postulate specific neurophysiological mechanisms of conversion of
neuronal data via synaptic communications to information that crosses the gesher.
Because conversion of neurotransmitters or synaptic connections has never been
demonstrated to result in thought, we do not regard this as the most likely mechanism.

The Boundary and Communication

Deliberate communication from the infinite C-substrate to a physically live
human requires communicating to and from a specific discrete finite 3S-1t domain.
We postulate this would and could be very difficult and has to go through a
bidirectional permeable boundary of a narrow gesher: Let us imagine that we think of
the deceased John Smith. By that means, we might be setting up a track through that
boundary where we “contact” an aspect of John Smith in the transfinite or infinite
substrate. John Smith has a direction to communicate because he has to align through a
general metaconsciousness to communicate to a discrete specific finite reality. But he
must convert information not only to finite meaning but handle finite space and time.
This helps clarify not only why communication of specific ideas to finite sentient
beings would be very difficult in so-called “survival after bodily death”, but it may
also, explain the limitations of creatively obtaining knowledge, understanding or
wisdom from the infinite metaconsciousness. Anything that is in the infinite and
converted to the finite requires conversion from infinite continuity into a specific
discrete phenomenon. There are an infinite number of degrees of freedom in infinity.
In the finite there are really no more than the degrees of freedom that are consistent
with the dimensionality of 3 or 4 dimensions. This really makes it comprehensible. It
also, makes it understandable that we can talk about 3S-3t, and maybe 3C, plus n-
dimensions, because communication may be much more complex dimensionally than
we can conceive of.

Smith’s communications might be easier because he is top-down compared to

bottom-up. But the top-down idea is conceptual. We could see infinity being (say) on
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 127

 
the left with the finite to the right, and the boundary between. We could move most of
infinity conceptually to the top-down side. We would then portray most of the finite
from the bottom-up: All of our scientific approaches are to a large degree the bottom-
up one, but the infinite is the top-down one.

Continuity and Discrete: Metareality and Nonlocal Reality

The important point is that even in the simplest conceptual dimensionality of
one, two and three dimensions we see the infinite continuity of infinity and the quantal
discrete component of the finite elements. We cannot therefore, just have the finite
without the infinite. The two are necessarily more than interacting all the time—
indeed, they are an inseparable whole. We have conceptualized space and time as
being zero in this finite reality (“nonlocal’ spaceless and timeless). Effectively, S=0,
T=O and at some points, C= N, which may be transfinite. It approaches the infinite but
in the finite is still discrete continuous. In fact, in an infinite world it is not space-less
or time-less, it is a holistic space and holistic time, where the two cover everything, in
all time and in all space, all at the same time (so “nonlocal” is applied differently, as
all not none, pervasive but not specifically locally located).

Infinity, holograms and the brain

In certain ways, there are parallels with the explicitly mentioned and implicately
derived order of David Bohm 140 in relation to this infinity, and it was Bohm who
recognized the reality of quantum interconnectedness 140. Similarly, Karl Pribram's
holographic sets are also drawn in an infinity concept. The translation of cerebral
function and some kind of hologram is also reflected in terms of the thinking of Karl
Pribram 173 as well as with Michael Talbot 48; 174. Talbot, like Gerald Schroeder before
him 175-177, tried to incorporate spirituality, religion and science and so illuminate
profound questions. His most popular book, The Holographic Universe, explores the
metaphysical implications that underline quantum mechanics. Following Bohm 140 and
Pribram, Talbot uses holograms to somewhat explain supersymmetry, psi, and
mysticism. However, Talbot does not directly postulate infinity. Clearly the infinite is
the most obvious component that is necessary here.

Interpreting Data
Even when there is an interface of the finite with the infinite, there is a hard time
perceiving what might come from the finite brain and what might be an infinite reality.
There is a difficulty differentiating the two that complicates interpretations.
Psychologically we refer to ego boundaries and ego boundary disturbances, and that
ego boundary has a real function from the individual unit point of view. It is not only
from an individual level, but at a greater group social, cultural, and psychological
level.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 128

 
Boundary and the Brain
The boundary between finite and infinite is likely a conversion barrier of the
continuous infinite into the discrete finite where effectively we are translating Essence
information into quanta or qualits. These quanta are translated into a succession of
serial bits of time. Neurophysiologically, the brain reveals this same discreteness.
Synaptic transmission moves in jumps in these discrete neuronal connections.

Specifically, Neppe has shown that theoretically the temporal lobe of the brain
may the great integrator of the brain and empirically proposed that dysfunction
produces disintegration, 127, 178 The temporal lobe could hypothetically reflect the main
conversion barrier between the infinite and the finite 127, 178 The temporal lobe not only
appears to be a potential window from the mind and into the mind, 169 it also integrates
incoming perceptual experience and information coming from other areas of the
brain.127

Similarly, we distinguish meaning and its relevance as fitting well into our
models of the infinite and consciousness. The discrete finite metadimensionality and
the continuous infinite and the difficulties of the permeability (boundary, barrier, filter)
between infinite metaconsciousness and meaning at 3S-1t make the situation even
more complex.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 129

 
 SECTION D: THE KEY ELEMENTS TO TDVP
CHAPTER 15: THEORETICAL MODELS 179

“The grand aim of all science is to cover the greatest number of empirical facts by
logical deduction from the smallest number of hypotheses or axioms.”
Albert Einstein

The Philosophy of Science model: A New But Necessary Synthesis

LFAF: “Lower dimensional feasibility, absent falsifiability” is a legitimate scientific
technique, often used in science and technology, especially technology, without being
identified as such.
A.) The model of feasibility without any facet being falsified is LFAF.
B.) The model of falsifiability is superior to the model of feasibility in the construction
of a TOE. This is because at the level of proof there is a negation as opposed to a
possibility. But it is limited to aspects of 3S-1t, in general.
Both models are pertinent in scientific endeavor and reflect a relative proof only.

Within this discussion are axioms and theorems in pure and applied mathematics. In
science, hypotheses are commonly tested by falsifiability when possible, but if not, by
applying the philosophy of science concept of interpreting reality that we’ve
suggested, namely, LFAF. Applying empirical data in 3S-1t as the most commonly
experienced lower dimensional domain, and assists testing for falsifiability but even
then not always (e.g., evolution). The LFAF / falsifiability evaluation may reflect
epiphenomena, and gradually this leads heuristically to building a paradigm. We
believe that this model of what is feasible and is not falsified (LFAF) is critical for
advancement in the study of dimensionometry. LFAF is generally, in practice, applied
for phenomena and results interpreted at the 3S-1t level. However, it applies not only
in the lower dimensional domains but also in all metadimensional analyses.
The equivalent of falsifiability in mathematics may be the contradiction of the basic
logic of the calculus of distinctions.
This section discusses the broader approach philosophy of science model to evaluating
Theories of Everything applying our current sciences.

Our Usual Reality

Some relevant findings are not subject to statistical analyses. They may be too obvious
using our conventional physical senses. For example, smelling a specific odor of
burning, seeing someone on the roof, or hearing a noise. This produces a subjective
perceptual reality and it is interpreted into conceptual reality by the individual based
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 130

 
on their previous and current sense-data experiences. Others may confirm such a smell
or sound in which case we talk about reality or objective reality or physical reality, but
effectively this is the common or collectively agreed upon 3S-1t higher level
interpretation of that subjectivity and may have degrees of certainty. However, these
phenomena are not subject to statistical analysis, though there are increasing degrees of
certainty relative to 3S-1t, as more individuals observe that common reality, or
alternatively, an instrument, like a computer or lab test or detector of light spectra
photography not directly available to human sensory perception may do similar non-
statistical but observational confirmations. Alternatively, some observations can be
statistically quantified such as random number generators, which may independently
find something. Therefore, reality, even objective reality is relative and this is why we
are using “common reality“ not “actual reality” because use of the term actual implies
an absolutely objective base that may or may not exist.

The Contribution of the Psychological Approach and Metadimensionality

Reality, even objective reality is relative and this is why we are using “common
reality“ not “actual reality” because use of the term “actual” implies an objective base
that may or may not exist, though the “objective” consonance is so consistent that we
can base our life and reality experience on such objectivity. But surely when several
individuals observe the same information, does that not produce objective reality? It
may be very close, even approximating objectivity by 99.999% or more in many
instances. But it still produces “common” 3S-1t reality because the final stage is
conscious experience. For example, there may be a common distortion in observation
of an event based on the individual’s expectation and this is well demonstrated in
psychological testing (observing, reporting, memory, expectation in specific higher
brain interpretations of patterns or colors, for example). We use the terms, perceptual,
conceptual and common reality. The term actual reality should not be used. This is
why we call it 3S-1t common reality or if not in 3S-1t, we could describe it as the
Common Reality at a specific metadimensional level, and this may be modeled
mathematically.

Clinically Relevant Approaches and When Statistics are Less Meaningful:

Applying the Medical Model
Let us re-examine the examples given, namely, smelling a specific odor of burning,
seeing someone on the roof, hearing a noise, and apply a medical model. Ironically,
however, even these may not appear what they could be: Episodes of burning smells
may reflect abnormal firing in the temporal lobe of the brain, seeing someone on the
roof may be a visual hallucination, and hearing a noise may again involve stimulation
of an area of the brain, sometimes the superior temporal gyrus if well formed 180; 181.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 131

 
Double blind statistics versus clinically meaningful non-blind evaluations
Similarly, in medicine, clinically relevant information may not require statistical
validation. In fact, in a double blind study, if someone responded to a Drug A 51% of
the time and yet placebo 50% then after a large sample size, a difference between the
two would be demonstrated for Drug A. But realistically to treat a patient for that
condition with Drug A would be meaningless. Instead, we would expect an almost
complete response to the specific condition requiring an antibiotic treating a bacterial
infection where the bacteria have been demonstrated to be sensitive.

We look at clinical significance, which takes into account other features such as side-
effects of the drug, and long-term secondary elements requiring management. There is
a balance in Medicine, which though often originally based on the double-blind
studies, are meaningless unless the clinically significant results are attained. 182; 183
Statistics are far more pertinent to demonstrate differences in rare events such as we
we’ve discussed in psi research, but even there spontaneous events are more
meaningful for individuals because they can personally attest to their occurrence, but
that personal attestation still may be scientifically incorrect as to origin: Psi,
pathological hallucination, coincidence, memory falsification, distorted interpretation
are all pertinent. The ultimate farce would be the parachute irony: Proving a parachute
effective requires a control of individuals jumping without parachutes! In reality, there
are medical studies like this too: Neppe 184; 185 in his Tardive Dyskinesia research, saw
such profound results from using high dose buspirone, that it would have been
unethical doing a double blind study. Instead, he resorted to a single blind patient
study, where the clinicians adjusted the dose suitably for the patient.

Today, two decades later, there is still as far as we’re aware, not a single reported
failure with this treatment provided the very high doses required are tolerated and the
indication is correct, but because there was no double blind study, it often does not get
into reviews of management of tardive dyskinesia. This is an illustration of how
medicine literally shoots itself in the foot: What may be approved because there is a
statistical difference but is clinically marginal, will invariably reach the medical
literature. But what is clinically relevant, but not statistically demonstrated, may be
ignored.

The medical evaluation paradigm

Conventionally, medicine applies history-taking eliciting symptoms. This is
fundamentally descriptive, phenomenological and subjective). The practitioner then
examines the patient eliciting objective physical signs; these are replicable by other
practitioners in that specialty producing a common reality base). Laboratory results
may then demonstrate or confirm the condition. Neppe 135; 136 points out that the next
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 132

 
confirmatory feasibility step is appropriate response to medication or treatment chosen
for these conditions. In each instance, not all features may occur—for example, the
patient may not have all the symptoms of the condition, or labs may not confirm the
diagnosis, or the expected response to management may not occur at all or fully.
Incomplete responses or data may produce a presumptive or differential diagnosis but
not a final diagnosis. Sometimes, time may assist diagnosis based on progression of the
condition. Therefore, there are the key symptoms, signs, labs, response cross-
sectionally at one point, and long-term measures over time. All are pertinent and
consolidate the paradigm of medical evaluation.

Correlations in medicine move to causality

The Neppe bidirectional (multidirectional) approaches a relative certainty in
interpretation of medical data. Neppe 135; 136 has emphasized the bidirectional causality
approach that has been prevalent in Medical Practice for centuries, yet seldom
verbalized. This application allows more definitive diagnosis as opposed to correlation:
These techniques allow for conceptual translations of the perceptual experience and a
common reality called diagnosis. Effectively, for example, diabetes has a series of
symptoms that the patient reports. On examination, the physician may find signs
compatible with the complications of the condition. On lab tests he may elicit changes
pertaining to elevated blood sugar (e.g., HbA1C above a threshold, which also allows a
metric that correlates with severity). He then prescribes a treatment for diabetes (e.g.,
medication and diet). The patient improves over time.

The Neppe bidirectional approach in medicine and phenomenology

Neppe’s approach has been to demonstrate how correlations move to diagnosis
because of the bi-directional or even multi--directional confirmations. For example,
symptoms of malaria are confirmed by lab tests demonstrating active plasmodium
parasite in the blood. That may result in a definitive diagnosis of malaria. Or the
patient has on examination; a throat that looks like it has streptococcal infection. He
responds to an appropriate antibiotic. The results in a provisional diagnosis of
streptococcal pharyngitis. On the other hand, only eliciting symptoms or signs may
utilize the correlation of it’s possible that the patient has streptococcal pharyngitis or
some other related disease. In medicine, this may be a differential diagnosis, which
means there is an uncertainty but correlative data.
Neppe has applied such an approach to phenomenology particularly consciousness and
psi research. 124

We can, also, apply such techniques in our paradigm building, especially when we can
tie a hypothesized concept into the logic of a demonstrably consistent mathematical
model, moving to higher levels of certainty, making conclusions or jumps based not
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 133

 
only on falsifiability and replicability of the more consistent (broader objective data
that we call 3S-1t reality) but on the logic of increasing feasibility of findings (where
no data are falsified using LFAF).

The Gould Magisterial Approach

Furthermore, there are times when we cannot even apply even correlative data. Such
comparisons are qualitative but not quantitative. Gould 186has separated out magisteria.
There is a major difference between the magisteria of belief related phenomena such as
in religion, and of science, which draws conclusions from facts. To Gould, religion
based on belief, and science based on drawing conclusions, are not directly
comparable. World religions such as Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and
Buddhism can be tabulated for similarities and differences. And the similarities can be
correlated statistically—as can their differences—but the ultimate judgment of value
may be subjectively based on belief.

Applications of the Statistical, Common Reality, Medical and Psychological

Models to TOEs
Therefore, some information may be empirically based but on feasibility, not falsified
by data, and may not require statistics though comparisons can be made. Indeed, in
areas such as cosmology and evolution, statistics as indicated are difficult to interpret
because what is the statistic for the null hypothesis? Similarly, sometimes a theory of
everything cannot be directly evaluated for quality although quantitative data of
differences can be elicited. From that perspective, the more common features to a TOE
can be understood, as well at the unique features. But ultimately, the translation will be
falsifiability and LFAF.

There are horses for courses. In a model for a theory of everything, a key aspect has
been testability and comparison by replication using conventional falsifiability criteria,
or applying LFAF. But prior to that Neppe 124; 125 has emphasized the need for
phenomenological analyses as one legitimate approach to applying empirical data and
by so doing helping with the analysis of multiple confounding factors. At that point the
testing reflects the adequacy of methodology applied to hypotheses. Then comes
interpretation, which we conventionally report in scientific papers under “Discussion”
of the “Results”. We then draw conclusions. In our instance, our conclusions attempt
to locate a broader paradigm that truly fits. This therefore, is a product of feedback
back and forth. The endpoint of a paradigm, which fits across many areas of endeavor,
is a theory of everything. Great refining of the multiple paradigms could rarely achieve
an ultimate statement axiom that appears generalizable. Our ATO (Axiom of Tethered
Origin) is such an axiom. The process then continues from the “top-down” re-
examining information.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 134

 
The application of information to TOEs
The process of achieving an overriding Theory of Everything, is therefore, an
extension of the current methods of science as described above and summarized below.
It is well illustrated, based on both the medical model of evaluating statistical and
clinical significance, and applying the techniques of evaluating scientific publications
in the area:
1. Empirical data analyses: These include the clinically relevant, the
phenomenological with perceptual and conceptual experience (e.g., we taste
something that tastes like garlic; based on our concepts of garlic’s taste, we
conclude it is garlic)
2. Postulation of narrow testable hypotheses.
3. This may lead, ultimately, to postulation of broader hypotheses or skipping the
narrower postulates, as there may not be any narrow hypotheses.
4. Results and analysis, by statistical, clinical, phenomenological or responsiveness
(e.g., treatment) means.
5. Discussion, emphasizing the methodological limitations and strengths.
6. Re-refining the process.
7. Drawing narrow conclusions from the data available.
8. Re-evaluating other areas and integrating these conclusions into a model
9. Combining all pertinent information in models to evaluate the feasibility of a
paradigm change.
10. Ensuring the mathematics and logic must not contain any logical contradictions.
We differentiate this from paradoxes. Paradoxes are indicators of inadequate or
incorrect assumptions. Sometimes such paradoxes are only apparent and must be
approached within the limitations of their a priori assumptions. (E.g., Gödel’s
incompleteness theorem is limited to finite reality) or paradoxes may be
perceived as such only because of being counter-intuitive as in the twin paradox
of relativity. Logical contradictions cannot be true under any circumstances.
However, when discussing metadimensionality, we may note apparent 3S-1t
contradictions, which may not necessarily be contradicted at a different
metadimensional level or in infinity. Therefore, these may be paradoxical 3S-1t
contradictions that are not so at specific or general N-dimensionality levels, for
example, time is linear and forward only in 3S-1t. Multiple time dimensions are
logically contradicted in 3S-1t but legitimate in, e.g., 3S-2t. This is a paradox
not a metadimensional contradiction. Schrödinger’s cat may be dead or alive in
3S-1t 187; 188, but if survival after bodily death occurs, in another metadimensional
realm, death becomes relative and is paradoxical, not contradictory.
11. Ultimately achieving a single, consistent statement axiom if the several
subcomponents of paradigmatic change are still justified.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 135

 
 12. The process is then continued but from the top-down to assure internal
consistency: Any paradigmatic change must continue to be consistent with the
results.

In our TDVP model, we apply these processed to ultimately develop a metaparadigm.

Our starting points were the simple essential components of our TOE: the Axiom Of
Tethered Origin is consistent with an infinitely continuous conscious substrate. This
infinity is without beginning and without end so is linked with a unified before, during
and after period, even before the even horizon. This infinity expresses itself in
consciousness, order, and an ever existing time (past, present and future being one) and
an ever existing space (which is nonlocal in finite dimensional realities), as well as a
universal life potential.

We need to postulate the need for tethering. Our changes are borne out of the necessity
of empirical evidence and experience, not convenience. And our lessons are learnt
from our previous models, as well as from the attempts by others in the areas.
A TOE is not based on belief. That would imply the magisterium of religion and faith.
TDVP or any other scientific approach is based on fact, and has gone beyond belief
reaching legitimate conclusions. Those require key ideas that have broad application
and can instead be tested through LFAF and feasibility. In our instance of TDVP, the
inseparable unification of space, time and C-substrate from the very origin is a key
aspect and yet there also needs to be independence of multiple components of S, T, and
C substrates too, though tethering at one or some points of origin is something
required. To this, was added a process (indivension) and a content (vortices) allowing
further applications in the metadimensional area and an awareness of the need for
utilizing both order (obvious but in physics, an area that is neglected) and infinity
(obvious in mathematics, but conveniently ignored as theological—which it is not
necessarily—in sciences.)

There is a consistent build up of these tethers and meeting points by vortical

indivension. Every separate component is integrated into a very large multisystems
base allowing heuristic building together of this single unit.
In TDVP, we have the specific Axiom of Tethered Origin (ATO). This leads to and
combines with several others producing the metaparadigm (and several logical
theorems that derive from there), as well as postulates, sometimes speculative. This is
one level of the heuristic hypotheses going bottom-up, and also top-down. Another is
the continual interaction of components within and between systems by vortical
indivension: Effectively, this provides for a continued meeting point of tethering
across, between and within dimensions and domains.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 136

 
The meeting points of information intersection or interface, or space or time meeting
points intersecting by vectors, scalars or tensors, may be the equivalent of TDVP’s
interfacing of information via the meeting points of vortical indivension.

TDVP: The Criteria of Scientific Correctness and the Problem of

Intersubjectivity

With our TDVP model, the broader metaparadigm is compatible, and in fact, we can
apply the overall unifying mathematical logic of the calculus of distinctions across the
various physical, biological, social and consciousness sciences, and also, across
dimensions.
Effectively, this is an extension of our idea of LFAF for scientific data but into the
metadimensional base involving several domains.

1) We require terms to be specifically defined by using known terms, and not

metaphorically unless to illustrate a concrete point (e.g., in tethering).
2) Abstract concepts should be differentiated from the concrete.
3) There should be a hierarchy of hypotheses as in our TDVP model. The fundamental
is distinguished from the more speculative, and there are degrees of certainty, which
we attempt to indicate.
4) Occam’s razor argues that the simplest explanation should be preferred if all other
components are equal 135: We argue that although Occam’s parsimony and simplicity
are excellent, coherence and logic are even more relevant. Additionally, it could be
debated what is simpler. For example, is superpsi more parsimonious than survival? In
our opinion, it is not: This is because superpsi is completely unproven to exist as an
entity 123; 159 and yet there appears to be some cogent evidence for post-mortem survival
12; 101; 123; 159
Nevertheless, there are those who would debate that issue, and then Occam’s
rule could argue for superpsi over survival, because if something is so unlikely to exist,
any potentially legitimate theory would trump it. We caution that we should be
particularly careful to use William of Occam’s rules for metadimensional data, or for
knowledge that has tenuous components. 189 In summary, we prefer coherence and
logic over simplicity and parsimony.
5) The role of internal and external consistency of concepts is emphasized by the
absence of contradictions.
6) We like to emphasize rational logic but what is logical is again sometimes
debatable. But there should be a consistency of hypothesis, methodology, results and
conclusions.

We have applied these principles with TDVP and we have been particularly cognizant
of definitions, and careful to differentiate any speculative ideas. We have tried to be
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 137

 
internally and externally consistent, simple and logical.

In TDVP we recognize the state and trait components of neurological and

metaconsciousness. We realize that altered states may even occur in individuals and
psychosocially, Individual-units may differ, and states may differ in the same unit at
the same moment depending on perception, conception and reality. Consequently
applying the three groups of three basic principles of the calculus of distinctions
(content, extent, intent; perceptual, conceptual, relative experiential actual/ common
realities); self (in the context of individual-unit as well, not self, and differentiating
border), TDVP solves this problem of differentiating (as opposed to set theory, which
looks at similarities, predominantly mathematical not consciousness, and along linear
dimensions).

In TDVP, such a model is similarly developed: Is it compatible with other models? In

what way can we look at the process and content, the state and the trait, and to what
degree? The ordinal use of metric concepts in distinctions allows C-substrate to have
various dimensions each different but interwoven by vortical indivension-- content and
process.

We therefore, recognize the need for a new Philosophy of Science, and that our current
Popperian scientific criteria are insufficient to examine TOEs.

Modern Science cannot explain many complex or borderline phenomena, though is

quite sufficient for possibly >99.9% of our 3S-1t domain reality. But it cannot explain
those phenomena that do not fit its standard paradigmatic base. Therefore, TDVP
involves a philosophy of science paradigm shift.
We realize that if we could demonstrate that empirical data are compatible with LFAF
and Popperian Falsifiability, and if TDVP were supported theoretically by
mathematicologic and theorems, our fundamental axiom becomes a more cogent
model. We argue that we have done so.

Gödel’s Theorem: The Finite and the Infinite in TDVP

A pertinent question relates to Gödel's second incompleteness theorem. According to
Gödel, if a system is consistent, then the sentence expressing the consistency of the
system cannot be proven within a finite system. To prove a complete formal
explanatory framework, requires there to be some external and more general
explanatory framework effectively going outside that system. Gödel’s model was
originally applied to peano arithmetic involving functions such as multiplication and
division in a complete finite number system, but mathematicians have generalized
from this. Close applied Gödel's theorem to quantum physics and cosmology in
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 138

 
Infinite continuity and Transcendental Physics. 8; 17 and also, Neppe developed a
similar motivation: We’ve applied this to our TDVP model, which utilizes both the
finite and the infinite. TDVP’s model necessarily incorporates infinity because Gödel’s
theorem specifically to the finite. This is why in TDVP, we necessarily postulate a
corollary including the infinite. This is mathematically and logically necessary because
without it could not be a TOE. TDVP could not be complete if it is purely finite
because of this interpretation of Gödel’s theorem of incompleteness. The inclusive top-
down approach in TDVP includes the infinite and the finite, and the interface of
infinite with finite. A purely bottom-up approach cannot include the infinite and
although TDVP allows approaches en route to its fundamental axiom that are both
bottom-up and top-down, the one does not exclude the other.

In TDVP, our metaparadigmatic model was fundamentally developed from the top-
down as a broad more comprehensive consciousness-based TOE. This top-down
approach did not initially have the limitations of what could be theoretically possible.
We were able to develop 21 related axioms, all linked with tethered origins and
unification of the discrete finite with the continuous infinite producing a unified
reality. Our metaparadigm, effectively our Metaparadigm of Triadic Tethered Ordered
Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity (TTOOURS) built from this concept, and we then
re-examined feasibility (a very important concept for metadimensionality) in the
context of known endeavors. Only then did we evaluate in detail existing theories and
so TDVP in its first and final drafts remains largely outside the framework of existing
TOEs, which are used for comparison not incorporation, and to appreciate those
components of uniqueness.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 139

 
CHAPTER 16: THE KEY AXIOMS 190

“Ethical axioms are found and tested not very differently from the axioms of science.
Truth is what stands the test of experience.”
Albert Einstein

The justification of these axioms and corollaries are in the material listed mainly in the
second companion book 10. These axioms are largely independent of each other unless
otherwise stated. Refutation of any of these axioms does not refute any other axiom or
theorem unless they are corollaries or lemmas.

The metaparadigmatic statement based on 21 underlying axioms.

We are expressing each of these axioms individually, but because of their essential
unity, necessarily more than one idea is contained into each axiom.
At times we amplify the axiom to clarify briefly.

These fundamental axioms constituting the TDVP metaparadigm can be subdivided

into”
• The Finite Related Axioms.
• The Infinite Axioms.
• The Linked Finite-Infinite Axioms.

After we have discussed these 22 axioms, we will synthesize them into the four axioms
we discussed in Chapter 1.

Finite Related Axioms

A. Axiom of Finite Unification
All of existence (space, time and C-substrates [STC]) is unified into one reality. STC
constitutes a fundamental triad.

B. Axiom of Triadic Inseparability

Components of space, time and C-substrate are inseparable This inseparability is
fundamental and ubiquitous, and occurs at all levels of nature from the subatomic
quantal to the macro-level to the astronomical levels. (This inseparability reflects all
dimensions and domains: In some space or time dimensions may be equal to zero, not
existing at that dimensional level= relative zero).

C. Axiom of CST Tethering

Space, time and C-substrate (STC) are inseparably tethered together and constitute a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 140

 
single unit. The STC triad that is inseparable at certain points may be independent of
each other at other points. Therefore, there is always a fundamental linkage of STC but
all of STC can manifest independently.

D. Axiom of Discrete Quantal Expression

Quantal meaning is expressed at all levels from the subatomic, to macroreality to
astroreality. It incorporates the biological, including the nervous system. More
correctly, as quanta are used for space and time, we have preferred Qualits, which
imply discrete expression including consciousness and information. At the nervous
system level in 3S-1t, this might imply discrete meaningful packets that we have called
Conscits. This may not be even at the quantal level but subquantal, in dark matter or
elsewhere to be determined.

E. Axiom of Vortical Ubiquity

Existence manifests ubiquitously in three dimensional curved shapes, which we
broadly call “vortices”. Quantally, these are expressed in part by spin. (Not all shapes
are vortical. Interfaces of information content, of mass and forces can also, occur via
vector, scalar and tensor communication).

F. Axiom of nervous system endpoint

Experiential living physical reality is subjectively experienced through a nervous
system. All discrete information is ultimately translated via that response. Similarly, all
low level bio-information circuitry (even at the molecular and subcellular level, such
as with cytoplasmic reactivity and viruses, and even non-biological forms of meaning
information processing in the "inanimate") may have subjective components. Such
meaning may not only be cognitive, but have volitional (drive, motivation, intention)
and affective (emotional) components. The meaning may even be exclusively affective
or volitional or combinations, and so be without any cognitive (thinking) elements.

G. Axiom of Subjectivity
Reality is expressed subjectively applying the calculus of distinctions into what is
perceived (perceptual reality), what is interpreted (conceptual reality), and what is
ultimately experienced by the sentient being (experiential reality). This is the common
(relative objective actualized, manifest reality).

"Subjective" reality (perceptual, conceptual) depends upon the " actualized "
information or meaning interplay and processing. The ubiquitous presence of this
actualized information in its extraordinarily large number of combinations (“zillions”)
constitutes a relative "absolute reality" and might even reflect a certain harmony in the
universe or cosmos. We speculate that this might be linked with the harmony one
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 141

 
postulates in the infinite subreality and therefore, may in a sense reflect at the
metadimensional level a more complex actualized reality than can be conceived of. We
could use the term “virtual” reality when conceptualizing these metadimensional
actualities from the 3S-1t perspective.

Conceptual reality involves a neurological type process in which information may be

either actively interpreted (interpretative reality) physically through neurological full
conscious understanding of the concept, or through concepts that can also form without
full consciousness as well, for example, in so-called altered states, dreams, in one’s
psychological unconscious, or even ultimately in a reflex way (so-called “motor
memory” is an example where one may have the conceptual framework of hitting a
top-spin forehand but it does not require active cogitation). Experiential reality usually
very closely resembles what is the common, manifest reality, apparently objectified
reality but this is not an absolute reality. Though this manifest reality may, at times, be
so tangible that it is almost indistinguishable from the absolute common reality, it still
is experienced at an endpoint subjective phase through the nervous system of sentient
beings constituting together billions of individual-units that have common though
necessarily limited discrete physical sensory and motor apparatuses, that allow very
similar interpretations of the objectified finite STC content of a reality.

Infinite Axioms
H. Axiom of Infinite Origin
A unified wholeness of cosmic reality occurred at or around the Origin Event. This
unified wholeness constitutes the fundamental structure of reality. Underlying the
physical universe is an infinite form of reality that existed prior to the appearance of
the first quantum. We call this the “Primary Receptor” and finitely regard it as
occurring at or just prior to the “Origin Event”. This had to exist prior to the
emergence of the first quantum from the big bang.
This axiom, though axiomatic, is supported mathematically. At the original
singularity, the concept of the Primary Receptor could speculatively be conceptualized
as infinite consciousness and therefore, S=0, T=0 and C= ∞.

This axiom is stated in the infinite and argues for the infinite. However, the finite
subreality still may reflect finite data that, ultimately, is expressed in 3S-1t. Therefore,
although there may be other explanations, we argue that one finite mechanism to
initiate our cosmos may relate to the singularity and the big bang. But this is only one
part of the broader picture because the cosmos is not just 3S-1t. The infinite origin
axiom impacts all of finite reality. This finite representation is only part of the whole
of reality because there is also an infinite subreality where we postulate it should be

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 142

 
illogical to talk about the beginning of time because of “metatime” (all of time existing
simultaneously).

I. Axiom of Holism in Space-Time Infinity

Infinity is not non-local in the sense of spaceless and timeless. It reflects the
simultaneous coexistence of all of space and all of time.

J. Axiom of Living Infinite Reality

The infinite allows for a N-dimensional living reality. This provides the basis for
physical life with the infinite providing “potential life” or polife: once the physical
apparatus is functioning sufficiently to support physical existence.
Effectively, the life potential (polife) always exists. At least one kind of physical life
exists as—our current existence as live sentient beings in the 3S-1t domain. When
biological factors are insufficient to maintain physical life, physical death occurs.
Effectively, without the appropriate physical biological supporting factors, we cannot
maintain physical life. If we cannot maintain physical living physiologically, the cells,
tissues and organs become non-functional. The endpoint of this phenomenon is
physical death: biology has been sufficiently compromised to be unable to maintain the
3S-1t components of physical life. Extending the polife model, life (or more correctly
“polife” if we’re defining life itself in the physical finite context) still would exist in
the infinite. This implies an infinite immortality.

K. Axiom of Ordropic Reality

Ordropic reality manifests not only in the closed, finite, discrete context, but also, in
the open, infinite, continuous context. The ordropic process involves far more than just
negative entropy—negentropy. This is so as the second law of thermodynamics in
space time is applicable in a closed finite system not in an open, infinite, living system
and therefore, entropy at a linear finite closed level is just one component of broader
ordropy. Invariant mathematical and dimensional relationships emanating from the C-
substrate, and S, T and C substrate linkages exist, forming the basis of the natural laws
of the cosmos. These laws are intrinsic to the STC substrate and thus, ultimately
support the persistence of ordropic patterns, information and meaning.

I. Axiom of metaconscious infinity

The infinite provides the context for an open holistic nonlocal (in space-time),
metaconscious—metainformation system.

M. Axiom of information
Information exists and is translated in individual-units (including quantal meaning)
into a broader consciousness. Cognitively this involves wisdom, understanding and
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 143

 
knowledge. This holistic information source (metainformation) translates into a
holistic broader consciousness source (metaconsciousness).

N. Axiom of Pervasive, Essential Infinity

Reality manifests in the laws of nature. These laws are not only limited to the finite but
also, have an essential, pervasive infinite component. However, we at this point, do not
know what natural laws govern the infinite essence of metaspace, metatime,
metaconsciousness, polife and ordropy, but we postulate that they are consistent with
known universal laws of nature, not only empirically in terms of demonstrable
scientific manifestations, but they may also be revealed through mathematical and
dimensional invariants, dimensional extrapolation and the application of the calculus
of distinctions.

Linked Finite-Infinite Axioms

O. Axiom of Communicating Relative Infinity
The infinite pervades continuously all the finite individual-unit dimensional realities
—it imbues, interfaces, impacts, apprehends, perceives, perturbs (individually and
collectively), and influences contiguously and with noncontiguous extent relative to
each dimension and domain.

P. Axiom of Fluctuating Dimensional-Distinctions

Reality manifests in ≥ 3 D space (likely 3D)- multidimensional (likely 3D) time-N-
dimensional fluctuating “consciousness” with the finite impacting from the infinite.

Q. Axiom of continuous infinity linked with discrete finity

Metaconscious continuity converts its content to quantal meaning, or more likely
qualit or conscit meaning as part of the qualit components, through the STC continuum
into 3S-1t reality. 117 Because quanta are usually referred to as the smallest discrete
elements of space-time or mass-energy-spin, “conscious discrete meaning” would
theoretically be excluded. Consequently, we use the term “qualits“ instead of quanta.
Qualits can be subdivided into what may be overlapping Chronits of time, Qubits of
space, and Conscits of consciousness. Applying the concept of the quantum, Conscits,
in turn, might hypothetically, involve discrete subatomic or even subquantal elements
of particle, force (not necessarily energy) and spin, of conscious nature.

R. Axiom of Artificiality
The presence of specific dimensions or descriptive domains is artificial in the context
of the unity of infinity but relate to theoretical imaginings or experiential
interpretation, e.g., 3S-1t finite.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 144

 
S. Axiom of boundaries
The distinction between infinite and finite requires a boundary.
These boundaries reflect self and not-self and could be synonymous with the boundary
between nervous system individuation and others. This boundary takes place at the
infinite level. We call this boundary area a “gesher” or complex, infinite-finite linking,
bridge. The gesher involves the boundary between the infinite and the space-time
metadimensions, as well as the interface at the transfinite or C-substrate levels with
indivension.

T. Axiom of metaconscious dimensional-distinctions

“Information” is not “static”, but dynamic: It is always fluctuating, metaphorically,
waves in a boundless infinite information ocean. When infinite and finite broader
information is expressed in meaning, it reflects a dynamic “broader consciousness”
(the “C-substrate”). This C-substrate has many components: The infinite
“metaconsciousness” continuous subreality combines with the discrete, finite
subreality, reflecting all of the dynamic “meaningful information” that is available.
This finite broader C-substrate reality is expressed as measurable finite variables of
extent because they can be measured directly as different “dimensions” of broader
consciousness, such as honesty, courage or love, or even negative meaningful
information like hatred or evil, or as combinations. But, unlike Space and Time, which
metrically is usually measured in discrete equal jumps (mathematically, “interval and
ratio data”), C-substrate is metrically measurable only “ordinally” (by degrees of
comparison, effectively like “slight, moderate, marked” where e.g., the interval
between “slight” and “moderate” varies, and is not an exact difference): But these
measures, nevertheless, are distinguishable— they reflect distinctions. In this case,
they describe distinctive variables of “ordinal” extent: Therefore, by definition, they
reflect “dimensions”. The “axiom of metaconscious dimensional-distinctions”
therefore describes all this: Meaningful information (C-substrate) links the infinite
with the finite; and the combined finite C-substrate ordinal distinctions of extent reflect
the dynamic, changing expressions of all the C-substrate components, namely H-C, E-
C and, in sentient beings, N-C. These are expressed as “consciousness” dimensions,
either in the first 9 STC tethered dimensions (up to 3S-3T-3C) or at the higher
transfinite dimensional levels.

U. Axiom of Relativity
All factors constituting the TDVP metaparadigm are relative, not absolute, because
they are impacted through the consciousness experience. These include the individual-
unit, dimensionality and domain, space-time-”consciousness”, subjectivity-objectivity,
the discrete-continuity dichotomy and the finite and infinite subrealities. Concepts such
as zero and infinity are also relative.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 145

 
V. Axiom of Tethered Origin (ATO)
This is a basic but also composite axiom implying a combination of the Axiom of
Origin, the STC axiom, and the Axiom of Tethering. ATO is fundamental because it
refers to the unified wholeness of Space-, Time- and C-substrates existing in finite
subreality even at the Origin Event: The “tethered origin” (ATO) allows also for
inseparability of STC at the Origin Event, and for each of the dimensions within any of
S, T and C to be separate, yet remain tethered (linked and tied to) to the Origin (the
source).

These twenty-two axioms are linked together to constitute one composite statement,
the metaparadigm.

The Four Sentence Axiomatic Metaparadigm Summary

This can be divided for clarity into four sentences creating a metaparadigm.
1. Reality involves a unified wholeness of the infinite and finite with the infinite
pervading the finite experience of STC content and extent.

2. The essence infinite reality component is without extent because it exists or

potentially exists in all space, time and consciousness, and information content.
Infinity involves the potential towards order (ordropy). Discrete elements of the
infinite are manifested in the finite. Consequently, in finite terms, infinity is
conceptualized as nonlocal (beyond space and time) but in infinite terms it involves a
metareality of all existing metatime and metaspace, existing as a pervasive
metaconsciousness and potential living, ordered subreality. Metacist is an acronym for
metaconsciousness, meta-information, metaspace and metatime.

3. The Finite reality component is fundamentally inseparably tethered from its origin
as a triad of space—time— broader descriptive “consciousness” (S, T and C-
substrates), which manifests across, between and within multiple fluctuating
dimensions.

4. This finite-infinite reality is relative to all dimensional-distinction factors, and

experienced subjectively (by individual-units) (Metaparadigm of Triadic Tethered
Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity [ TTOOURS]).

The 22 axioms together combine several axiomatic paradigms (unification, infinite-

finite, triadic inseparability, CST tethering, fluctuating communicating dimensional-
distinctions, and origin) into the TTOOURS metaparadigm.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 146

 
Then the four summary axioms provide the conceptualization for the overriding higher
level metaparadigmatic statement for the model called the Triadic Dimensional-
Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) and it is combined as follows, effectively a one
sentence rewrite of the 4 subparadigms above:

A unified wholeness of cosmic infinite ordered, nonlocal, existing—living reality

pervades a finite fundamentally inseparably tethered original triad of space—time—
broader descriptive “consciousness” (S, T and C-substrates) across, between and
within multiple fluctuating dimensions experienced relatively (by individual-units)
(Metaparadigm of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity
[TTOOURS]).

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 147

 
CHAPTER 17: DEFINITIONS: REALITY, DIMENSIONS AND
DISTINCTIONS191

“Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed
always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality—the stuff of which
physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is mind that has composed a physical
universe that breeds life and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create:
science-, art-, and technology-making animals. In them, the universe begins to know
itself.”
George Wald (1906-1997, Nobel Laureate Biologist) hh

We clarify now some basic concepts.

We define all of the terms we use as precisely as possible.
This means that the primary conceptual bases should be re-examined after evaluating
these definitions.

Definition I: Reality
The totality of all individual and collective experiences as well as finite and infinite
non-experiential realities of what exists.
One component of reality is subjective (individual or group reality): If reality is
defined as everything we experience, there are three aspects of this reality: perceptual
reality, conceptual reality, and common reality.
Definition I(i): Perceptual Reality – Reality detected by the senses of the observer.
Perceptual reality reflects the input activating quantum brain dynamics.
Definition I(ii): Conceptual Reality – Reality conceived or pictured in the mind of the
observer— based on the mental image. Conceptual reality reflects the output to
consciousness, which is beyond brain dynamics in the C-substrate.
Definition I(iii): Common (or Actualized) Reality – The quantum or subquantal reality
underlying perceptual and conceptual reality: It is made manifest (actualized) by an
action resulting in an irreversible manifestation of a pattern of effects that integrate a
consistent set of perceptual and conceptual distinctions. However, this actualization
reflects a common reality at an individual-unit level.

The three forms of reality may be understood more clearly by revisiting the Einstein-
Bohr debate, and thinking through examples illustrating the Copenhagen interpretation
of quantum mechanics, which was validated by the logic of Bell’s theorem and the
results of the Aspect experiment. (See below)

hh
Address to the Quantum Biology Symposium, 1984
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 148

 
Definition II: Dimensions
Our use of the word dimension will be precisely limited to variables of extent that can
be measured and described geometrically and mathematically.
In any reality model there are many measurable variables;, e.g., mass, energy, velocity,
density, angular momentum, electrical charge, biological activity, information content,
etc. But these are variables involving content not extent. While they are measurable
features of perceptible reality, they are not dimensions.
The number of dimensions is equal to the number of variables of extent present. Extent
implies degrees of freedom, i.e., directions in which something can move. (This is
contrasted with content, which does not have degrees of freedom but can be measured
in terms of units of the constituent; a third domain, one with variables of intent refers
to determination to act but not the action itself).
Dimensions provide a logical, geometric-mathematical framework within which to
describe the objects and events perceived and/or conceived as distinct features of
reality. In the context of dimensions beyond the three dimensions of physical space,
the term geometry should be replaced with the term “dimensionometry”. 192The answers
to the questions about the nature of reality and consciousness may lie in understanding
the extra dimensions of reality not normally perceived by our physical senses, but
indicated by the existence of forces that appear to act at a distance and the special role
of consciousness implied by the concepts of relativity and quantum mechanics. Even
though we usually conceive of our direct experiential reality as a “domain” of only
three dimensions of space and one of time, there is evidence indicating that we actually
exist in a reality of more, perhaps many more, than four dimensions (“meta-
dimensions“).
We do not use the word “dimension” in its many different other conceptual manners.
This includes, Close’s statistical analysis application of as having a “causal dimension”
and a “resultant dimension”. Nor do we use it to represent any measurable variable as a
dimension. In any reality model there are many measurable variables;, e.g., mass,
energy, velocity, density, angular momentum, electrical charge, biological activity,
information content, etc. But these are variables involving content not extent alone.
While they are measurable features of perceptible reality, they are not dimensions.
Metric: The metric is a distance between two points or from the origin to any given
point. This is the basis of algebraic analytical geometry. This is best understood by
defining and using Cartesian co-ordinates. The arbitrary orthogonality (right angled,
perpendicular orientation) of the ordinate and abscissa in three-dimensional space is
the basis for defining the Pythagorean metric.
Cartesian Co-ordinate: A Cartesian coordinate system specifies each point uniquely in
a plane by a pair of numerical coordinates, which are the signed distances from the
point to two fixed perpendicular directed lines, measured in the same unit of length.
The coordinates can also be defined as the positions of the perpendicular projections of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 149

 
the point onto the two axes, and expressed as a signed distances from the origin.

Definition III: Distinction

Distinctions are applied via Close’s Calculus of Distinctions (C of D). This can greatly
simplify the mathematics of substrate algebra by dealing with vectors, tensors and
scalars, as well as applying vortices, and a subgroup of these, twistors, as multi-
dimensional distinctions. This makes the C of D especially effective for testing
scientific hypotheses.

Based on the definitions of the elements, the variables and realities below, there are
three different conceptual qualities of distinctions:
• Distinguished, distinguished from, consciousness drawing elements (DFC)
• Intent, content and extent variables (ICE)
• Perceptual, conceptual, actualized realities (PCA)

Elements of distinction
We need to distinguish something from everything else. It could be oneself from others
with the boundary between being the psychological ego-boundary. It could be the top
from the bottom of a line. In each instance, we need to distinguish the difference.
As indicated, the three necessary elements (abbreviated DFC) to produce a distinction
are:
• that which is distinguished,
• that from which it is distinguished and
• that which draws the distinction.

Variables of distinction
Importantly, and critical for dimensionometry are the variables in any meaningful
existential reality. This distinction has at least three types of variables: variables of
intent, content and extent (ICE).

Conceptually, we classify “intent”, at times, in the C-substrate. It may or may not exist
on its own in the S and T substrates, although the intent from C-substrate may pervade
the other two. In practice, “intent” would potentially be one way in which meaningful
contextual information could be dimensionally represented, for example, by applying
the concept of density through an “infinite guiding reality”. This could theoretically
allow pure information to be converted to the C-substrate ordinal variables of extent,
and might invoke theological postulates. However, it is likely that more commonly, the
“intent” could reflect drive or intention or motivation, which may be applied
mechanistically through psychological or neurological volitional mechanisms.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 150

 
But although, “intent” could be one method of applying density, the simple physical
per unit conversion in 3S-1t is likely far more common: In that instance, without any
“intent” applied, we can use the CoD concept of “content per unit extent”. In CoD, we
have called this “density“. Through CoD density, we can convert variables of content
such as mass and energy into measurable variables of extent. We illustrate this with
two examples: mass and energy.
• Mass: The CoD “content“ component of “mass” is composed of certain
measurable aspects. But to measure mass, it requires determining the
amount of content per dimensionometric unit of extent, in this case 3S—
the three dimensions of space that we call volume. The term “density“ in
“CoD density“ derives from but is also different from the more familiar
concept of “density“ that we recognize and use in basic physics. Whereas
in physics, the density in regard to mass, equals mass per unit volume, the
CoD density effectively allows conversion of a content like mass into a
measurable extent so that it can be measured metrically in a dimensional
setting.
• Energy: Similarly, the content variable of “energy” is not measured
directly in CoD because it must be converted through several components
into extent such as distance and time (which already reflect the
dimensionometric units of extent) and also, further applying mass, as the
content example converted into the unit of extent above. Energy,
therefore, also, requires measurement by conversion to an "extent" from a
"content" by applying the “CoD density“ element involving the
dimensions of per unit time and space (as velocity has a distance and time
component, for example in e=mc2).

All dimensions are expressed in terms of variables of extent in some form. As shown
above, mass and energy are measured with variables of content as they do not directly
involve extent of space and time (and hence one cannot use “degrees of freedom” in
that regard). The same applies to fundamental forces and vortices. And as indicated, all
variables of content occupy extent that may be measured using the metrics of variables
of extent and the concept of density. Variables are measurables that, when taken
together with intent, may define a distinction. Sometimes abstract concepts are
mistaken for dimensions. For example, Cognition, Emotion and Volition (CEV) are
not distinctions, because they are concepts without dimensional variables, even though
they may involve variables of intent. Similarly, the concepts of x, y, z, of space and t of
time, or consciousness itself, are not distinctions. Such abstract concepts have no
extent, even though they may have content ranging from zero to infinity.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 151

 
Reality distinctions
There are three ways to differentiate distinctions in reality, namely, Perceptual
Distinction, Conceptual Distinction and Actual (or Actualized or Experiential)
Distinction (PCA). The differentiation is subtle as distinctions occur in the context of
reality.

Therefore, distinctions have the three essential elements DFC; have PCA reality
differentiation; and have ICE as variables.

Dimensions can be conceptualized as distinctions.

One of the authors, Edward R. Close developed the Calculus of Distinctions with
Vladimir (CoD) 8; 120 modified from Brown’s Laws of Form 121. CoD can greatly
simplify the mathematics of substrate algebra by dealing with vectors, tensors,
(scalars) twistors, and vortices as multi-dimensional distinctions. This makes the CoD
especially effective for testing hypotheses.

When the substrate variables of extent are space, time and C-substrate, and of content
are mass and energy, then the calculus of distinctions expression for the STC
substrates are:
R= f(S, t, m, e, c,) = ∑([ (m/S) ┐e/t]┐c/St}┐= ∑[ (ST) ┐C]┐
Where R= all reality, S= 3Dspace, t= time, m= matter, e= energy, c= individualized
consciousness and C= Primary Consciousness. 8; 191; 193-196

Distinctions in physics:
The matter and energy of the reality we experience is comprised of actual distinctions.
These are made up of elementary actual distinctions, called quanta, which obey the
laws of quantum mechanics. Quanta might reflect "elementary distinctions" only in the
relevant S3-1t domain in which energy and mass is very important.

Distinctions and the Origin Event.

If we think of the expanding universe as the reverse of a black hole, the point where
quanta of matter and energy began to form at the end of the rapid-expansion period is
analogous to the event horizon of a black hole. We are calling the first events at the
outset of existence—the beginning (e.g., the big bang, theologians call it “creation”) —
by a non-prejudicial term “Origin Event“. At that point, the phenomena that make up
reality do not exist until they are registered in an irreversible way upon a “Primary
Receptor or receptors”. But we refer to “Origin Event” in the finite 3S-1t context, as it
may be an illogicality to use the term in the infinite context with concepts of metatime,
or even at the higher dimensional finite levels.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 152

 
CHAPTER 18: SPECIALIZED CONCEPTUAL DEFINITIONS 197

“The more I think about language, the more it amazes me that people ever understand
each other at all.”
Kurt Gödel 102

Definition IV: The Primary Receptor

This introduces a significant paradox: What was the first or Primary Receptor?
The Primary Receptor had to exist prior to the emergence of the first quantum from the
big bang. (This is an axiom). The first receptor could not have been composed of
quanta of matter or energy because they did not exist. If this was not made up of
components of space and time, it had to be relatively non-local using our Space-time
3S-1t dimensional model. We postulate that it was made up of the C-substrate.

Life and conscious beings reflect apparent evolving complexity of reality, with a
persistence of “ordropy” (negative entropy and therefore, an ostensible second law of
thermodynamics contradiction). We, therefore, postulate that it is likely that the
Primary Receptor still exists and functions continuously in some form. This therefore,
means the C-substrate still exists.
This syllogism means we still experience a complex physical universe through a
complex physiobiopsychological self-conscious organism capable of interacting with
the universe and other similarly sentient beings.
Some would conceive of the Primary Receptor as being synonymous with an infinite
existence that at that stage (theism) and also, later (deism) interfaced with reality, and
call this “God“: This may not be God in everyone’s definition; We’re talking about
something that had to exist based on the realities of quantum physics and not
conceptions of God. That is a theological concept and our model does not extend to an
infinite omnipotence, omnibenevolence, omniscience, omnipresence or omnificence,
per se. If one used terms such as these, “omnipresence” is used to imply all of time, but
possibly all of space: A term like “omnilocal” instead may more easily confirm the
metaspace elements. These are major conceptual jumps, which we cannot prove and
are subject to belief. We make this comment to clarify the concept of “Primary
Receptor” not to directly impact theological implications (although some would
interpret this as such). Our model restricts this concept to an origin (Primary Receptor),
to an Origin Event (such as theorized in the standard model as the big bang or some
similar event), and to unitary-holistic existence across CST and that we living human
beings on earth are experiencing only a tiny portion of reality in 3S-1t, and that the
Primary Receptor necessarily implies an infinite reality. Notwithstanding,
metadimensionality can be conceived of in the finite, as well.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 153

 
Definition V: Existence
The essence of existence is actualized distinction. In order for a distinction to exist as a
meaningful, actualized reality [Definition I(c)], it must have three components:
existing perceptually, conceptually, and actually. Dr. Adrian Klein, a great Israeli
theorist of dimensionality, defines “existence” as “any xD configuration perceived
from a [x+y D] perspective.” 198 Existence is not dependent on the number of
dimensions: It may apply to any number from zero through the transfinite, and in the
essence context, to the infinite. Zero dimensions may imply a certain non-existence,
but we can still mathematically define a “point”, which therefore, exists.

Definition VI: Consciousness

The term “consciousness” is generally misunderstood and misinterpreted. In common
usage, the term is narrower than the substrate we call the “C-substrate”. C-substrate
has four major components. Each is a significant functional aspect of the C-substrate:

 Higher Consciousness implying extended human consciousness (in the infinite —

metaconsicousness, and transfinite—transfinite consciousness).
 Meaningfulness—apprehension and influence implying at minimum very basic
meaning at the most primitive level of reality from the subatomic particle or
quantum level, even subquantally, all the way through to the astrophysical
level. (Quantum Consciousness)
 Consciousness with at least minimal awareness and/ or responsiveness of the
distinction of self from everything else, in living organisms. This relates to
the neurological functioning of consciousness in the brain (Neurological
Consciousness), which links with Higher Consciousness as well as the
meaningfulness.
 Psychological Consciousness in the form of ego-changes and psychodynamics.
(Ego-consciousness).

In this paradigm, "consciousness" is used in its broadest C-substrate context, but

because it may be misinterpreted we use the C-substrate term.
Consciousness therefore, refers to all of neurological brain consciousness, Higher
Consciousness and for even the subatomic level (Quantum Consciousness), some
aspect of meaningfulness (apprehension or influence), as well as ego-consciousness
(psychological aspects).
Consciousness has components translatable into the calculus of distinctions: In that
context, consciousness could be regarded as the awareness or apprehension of the
distinction of self from everything else. Consciousness performs three functions—
drawing the distinction of self from “other”, i.e., to see self as distinct from everything
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 154

 
else; drawing distinctions in the other; and organizing these distinctions into
meaningful patterns. These distinctions can apply most easily to the human model but
it may be extended to the subatomic level and to metaconsciousness. Therefore,
phenomenologically consciousness doesn't necessarily imply awareness. At the most
elementary undifferentiated phylogenetic range this cognizance would imply a
sentience or presence, not a full blown awareness, and using the Copenhagen
interpretation of physics, a photon may just “afferently apprehend” potentially leading
to an “ efferent perturbation”.
Consciousness, cybernetically, could therefore, have either or both of two levels of
organization: Awareness of some kind, and responsiveness of some kind. To have this
stimulus (S) -response (R) component requires the third integrating “that which does”:
Psychologically, this has been referred to as the “organism” (O). So the S-O-R model
involves the 3 levels of distinction. We refer to this model of consciousness within the
“C-substrate”, recognizing that the psychological term “organism” in a far broader
way: We use it, too, to represent the boundary of any finite or infinite distinctions
including those that may not even represent sentient beings. In it, awareness,
responsiveness and organism also include zero in instances where is there is no
“awareness” or no “responsiveness” or no “organism”. This allows C-substrate to be
applied under any dimensional circumstance.
Consciousness is not purely an epiphenomenon of brain function. But brain
function is an important facet of level of awareness and responsiveness neurologically,
and therefore parts of consciousness can be an endpoint expression of brain and ego.
The C-substrate as "broader consciousness" is internally consistent across quantum
mechanics, macrophysics and astronomical levels of reality, and contribute to quantum
and consciousness dimensional fluctuations. It is as an integral part of reality and is
also, non-falsifiable.
Consciousness may involve any component of individual or individual-unit
sociologically or at its most minimal level subatomically. It may fluctuate varying
dependent on state and may include cognition, affect and volition as well as such
qualities as honor, love, bravery, strength, understanding, wisdom and knowledge.
These qualities can be measured with an ordinal metric such as slight, moderate or
marked and therefore, are variables of extent that can theoretically be applied to
dimensionometry. 192
C-substrate is broader than “consciousness”. C-substrate also includes the neutrality
of “information availability” in metaconsciousness. This information is neutral but
when it is linked with meaning, even at the minimal level manifesting subatomically it
implies a level of “consciousness”. A metaphor may be that the information can be
perceived as not registering rather like the emptiness or darkness of space. It is only
when it registers, rather like quantum consciousness or mechanics that it reflects
“consciousness”.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 155

 
 “Consciousness” is energyless and massless but the tethering of the C-substrate of
consciousness to space and time substrates means direct and immediate interaction and
the availability of knowledge distantly at a relatively non-local level.

Definition: Ordropy
The organizing function of consciousness and life creates a multidimensional order
wherever conscious life appears. Along a linear dimension this would be negative
entropy or negentropy. For simplicity, we now officially replace the term negative
entropy, sometimes called “neg-entropy” with the positive term, ordropy because it is
more complex than pure negative entropy.ii This is so as it may reflect various degrees
of order amongst different qualitative distinctions, dimensions or substrates, both finite
and infinite. It is, therefore, not linear but multidimensional. It has potential “essence”
infinite components and, we postulate, that it may be closely linked with time, space,
consciousness and life.

Definition VIII: Life

Any organized structure that can react to distinctions critical to its continued existence.
Life needs to have a direct connection with the C-substrate.
(Artificial intelligence will not have life unless it is part of the C-substrate).

Definition IX: Variables

Variables are algebraic representations of features of reality measured in units of
extent, content, or quality. At least in S and T, they form calculable metrics. They are
the components that make up different distinctions. There are three types of units of
extent: distance, time, and awareness; there are three types of units of content: mass,
energy, and information-meaning. We speculate that there may be three types of units
of quality: favorable, unfavorable, and indifferent but these can be better represented
as extent linearly as well as quality involves a very high level of complex
metadimensional integration.

Definition X: Qubit
Qubits are conceptual distinctions analogous to quanta and quarks in 3S, 3T reality.jj
Our use of it here is defined more specifically as a unitary distinction in the conscious
3C-substrate, represented as quanta in the 3S, 3T reality. Qubits, like all conceptual
units, are flexible, expanding or contracting as appropriate in the context of a thought
and or image in 3C reality. There are three types of qubits, which are conceptual
distinctions of substance: matter, energy and C-substrate (the special definition of

ii
Ordropy is associated with increase in the Kozyrev flow's time density. This appears to be an experimental evidence for
active metadimensional connectivity at the interface of the T and C substrates. 199 200
jj
The term “qubit” was coined by physicist John Wheeler and described in his discussion of “It from Bit49. 49
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 156

 
consciousness).

Definition XI: Chronit

Chronits are conceptual distinctions of time. These are flexible in 3C reality, like in the
individual 3C mind of a sentient being, but analogous to the three finite, relativistically
measurable time units in 3T reality when related to specific events.

Definition XII: Conscit

Conscits are conceptual distinctions of consciousness that occur in three types:
cognitive—logical (meaning), emotive and motivational. Outward manifestations of
these conscious distinctions are: cognitive functions, emotional feelings and volitional
acts (The adjective is “conscial”).

Definition XIII: Qualit

Qualit is the combination term for triadic C, S and T.
S is reflected mainly by particle, S and T by packets with waves or quanta or energy,
STC by Qualits implying the fundamental element.
If we want a pure term for C-substrate we have psi or maybe numinosity or maybe
influence (but influence does not need psi) or PK. We have postulated Psitrons and
possibly Kinetrons (at the influence, perturbation level).
Packet, wave and psi components of the qualit.

The equivalent of spatial and temporal in this context is conscial with the units being
qubits, chronits and conscits respectively.
Conscits have mental dimensions of cognition, emotion and volition. Conscits could
have spiritual and possibly causal (effect, influence) dimensions.

Definition XIII: Vortex

A dynamic N-D form, generally rotational. A key feature of the vortex is movement
with circular, ovoid or curved components. It may or may not expand, as the degree of
change may be zero. It may or may not be symmetrical. Note that a sphere is one form
of vortex, so is a helix, so is a spinor. These may be stationary (zero movement) or
moving or elongated.
An N-D vortical form may appear in 3S, 1T reality as a rotating ovoid shape, vortex,
helix, spiral, sphere, string, line, or almost dimensionless point. The exact shape of a
vortical form will depend upon the perspective from which it is distinguished.
Because of the occurrence of asymmetry in combined forms, as described above, and
the opposing forces of gravity, universal expansion, the strong and weak atomic forces,
electricity, and magnetism, vortical forms are also common on the macro scale;, e.g.,
spinning planets, planetary orbits, tornadoes and whirlpools.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 157

 
Definition XV: Relative Non-locality (see I. Proof, logic and illustration of N+1, N
and N-1 reality for more background):
In 3S-1t, spaceless and timeless data existence. Posited at that domain is Quantum
entanglement, e.g., as in Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox (EPR) correlations84.
The signature of a higher-D object in a lower-D reality is evidence of invisible
entanglement, or what John Bell called non-locality, now known to be a common
characteristic of elementary entities at the quantum level, including photons and
electrons. Based on the double-slit, Aspect experiment and Wheeler Delayed choice,
the LFAF allows for extra dimensions.
Given the interpretation of fields as higher-D connections (see Appendix), we regard
this action at a distance as resulting from higher-D entanglement since such an object
is continuous in the higher-D reality yet manifests discontinuously, entangled, and
ostensibly separately in 3S-1t. We also note that as the number of dimensions
increases, the connections and the way they manifest in lower-D realities become more
complex.
The introduction of at least two additional dimensions is necessary to explain the
behavior of electrons and photons. It may take even more extra dimensions to explain
the processes of perception, and the experience of conscious awareness, including the
distinction of self from other. However, this is speculative: Nonlocality is an
expression of an interdimensional interplay and does not require entanglement.
Moreover, entanglement (in the quantum meaning generally ascribed to it) may be
implemented in any dimensional window, without directly being involved in the
connectivity between the (indivension) dimensions. 200

Definition XVI: Substrate

The term we use to describe each component of the broader Space-time-C triad. There
is a space substrate, a time substrate and a special kind of substrate of “consciousness”
we call C-substrate.

Space: The dimensions of height, depth, and width (reflecting three variables of extent
with an interval metric) within which physical reality manifests.
Time: The indefinite continued progress of existence and events in the past, present,
and future regarded as a whole (reflecting a variable or variables of extent with an
interval metric)
S-substrate: The substrate of dimensions in which space exists.
T-substrate: The substrate of dimensions in which time exists.

Definition XVII: C-substrate

Allows for “consciousness” to be described without resorting to neurological,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 158

 
psychological or philosophical descriptions with the essential component as
meaningful interaction.

Definition XVIII: Domains

Domain describes any ordered combination of STC Dimensions.
Cluster of specified dimensions., e.g., 3S-1t reality is the usual physical experiential
reality we on earth: This would be the 3S-1t domain as opposed to 3S-3t –xC domain
or the N-D domain.

Subdomain
A component of a domain, e.g., the 3S-1t vortex or a specific cluster of dimensions as
parts of the larger domain cluster.

Definition X1X: Realm

Realm is the description focusing on specific dimensional combinations of STC and D
reflecting Intent. In vortex n-dimensionalism, Neppe used the world realm. Realm may
sound mystical so we use the word domain instead.
We could imply the different reality realms, but the different reality realm at the
relative objective level would be the complete unit of all the different STCs. Domain
conveys the intended meaning more easily.

Definition XX: Dimensionometry

Geometry representative of N-Dimensions, including the C-substrate. Polynomial
dimensional geometry was a similar term but did not incorporate the ordinal C-
substrate data.

Definition XXI Prime-essence

Prime-essence as a term for the original non-quantum receptor (also called Primary
Receptor).

Definition XXII: CST metric

Space-time and C-substrate all as measurable ordinal or interval quantities.

Definition XXIII: Manifold

Mathematics geometrically multidimensional shape or form: a collection of points
forming a certain kind of set, such as those of a topologically closed surface or an
analog of this in three or more dimensions. Manifold manifests in N-1 D reality
Thus, a line and a circle are one-dimensional manifolds, a plane and sphere (the
surface of a ball) are two-dimensional manifolds, and so on into high-dimensional
space. More formally, every point of an n-dimensional manifold has
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 159

 
a neighborhood homeomorphic to the n-dimensional space Rn.

Definition XXIV: Triads

We considered the term “trialism”, but this was introduced by John Cottingham 201
relating mind body and sensation so we needed a new term—hence “triad” and
“triadic”. We speculate, too, that dimensional jumps may possibly exist in these CST
units and that ultimately the dimensional increases may be predominantly or
exclusively in the C-domain. 10. 10

Definition group XXV:

i. Axiom
An important statement or concept that must be accepted as a priori because it is self-
evident and/or cannot be inferred or deduced from more basic concepts.

ii. Postulate
A postulate involves a proposition that is not proved or demonstrated but is
hypothesized to be true based on the available information. It is not at the level of an
axiom because it is not accepted a priori. This definition is ours and though some
regard “postulate” as synonymous with “axiom”, in the context of this paper we are
differentiating the two.

iii. Theorem
An important statement or equation that may be proved or demonstrated to be true by a
series of logical or mathematical steps from an axiom, or from another theorem.

iv. Corollary
A secondary statement or concept that is closely related to an axiom or theorem and
may be inferred directly from that axiom or theorem.

v. Lemma
A logical or mathematical statement that serves as an intermediate step between two
theorems.

vi. Principle
A general rule or law that is an inevitable consequence of known facts and applies to
all members of a given class of situations or circumstances.

vii. Paradigm
In TDVP, an all-encompassing, fundamental model with supporting mathematical,
logical and empirical evidence, going beyond the postulate of a “theory”.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 160

 
Definition group XXVI: Indivension Cluster
i. Indivension
Describes the fluctuating dimensions and domains in the individual-unit or a
combination of individual-units experiencing a common reality. Indivension allows for
transitory or fluctuating experiential realities and is circumstance dependent.

ii. Relative Actualization

In one individual, multiple dimensions or domains may be perceived or conceptualized
and actualized as their relative reality at that time.

iii. Tethering.
"Tethered" in the TDVP has two components:
1. a fundamental inseparable existence of the parts at the origin or source, namely,
space time and “consciousness” (STC)
2. separation of any aspect of the STC components, into tethered elements.
In TDVP, "source” or linkage refers to an inseparable linkage of the parts—space, time
and C-substrates—at some or multiple points. Useful metaphors would be the
umbilicus linking the fetus to the mother yet the fetus being independent too; the ship
being moored and the moorage being the tethered part; staples holding down a series
of papers; the roots of the STC tree being common but the branches being separate; the
balloons being held in hand by strings that tether to the source (hand) but potentially
interfacing with each other.

Tethering may be different at different dimensional or domain levels (“Relative

tethering”). Tethering may appear tight, loose or even slight. It cannot be that there is
absolutely no tethering but it may appear so at a particular dimensional level.

This tethering leads also to very fluid vortical three dimensional separations of the
various levels of individual-units by indivension, whereby interfacing and interacting,
and movement across, between and within dimensions occur.

Tethering theoretically could occur at a “dimensional distance” where there may be no

apparent direct link across individual-units. In that instance, one could argue that it is
indeed a distant, remote phenomenon or that it the ostensible remoteness is relative to
the specific dimensions involved in the domains being examined.

Tethering is fundamental and the inseparability occurs from the event-horizon (e.g.,
the big bang). This allows for the unified wholeness of cosmic reality. (Metaparadigm
of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity [TTOOURS]).
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 161

 
iv. Relative Tethering
Open components may be linked at the source in 3S-1t conventional reality domain,
but not source linked at different dimensions, though tethering will still occur as there
is relative tethering at other dimensional levels.

v. Individual-unit
An individual or unit such as a group, society or culture who share specific
information.

vi. Dimensional fabric

Separation of the STC unit into separate space, time and C-substrate components (as
when the tethering is loosened allowing each component to reflect itself separately, but
still in an entangled way).

vii. Ethicospirituobiopsychofamiliosociocultural systems approach

Describing the ethical, spiritual, biological, psychological, family, social and cultural
systems approach, or components of these reflecting individual or various collective
approaches, with each reflecting a broad dimensional variable of extent and, in this
context, implying any systems approach including subgroups, military, political,
economic or other collective or individual variables reflecting part of the C-substrate
of metaconsciousness.

viii. State specific

Reflecting a specific finite state of Transfinite Consciousness at a 3S-1t moment in
time. This can be broad waking, various stages of sleep or any other ASC.

ix. Trait dependent

Reflecting a broad maintained distinguishing quality or characteristic, typically one
belonging to a person or an individual-unit This is particular relevant when referring to
C-substrate.

x. Altered states of consciousness (ASC)

Reflecting an altered state of metaconsciousness. This translates into any state specific
state besides regular 3S-1t waking reality, and may reflect various variables of extent
in different dimensions.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 162

 
 SECTION E: SPACE, TIME AND
CONSCIOUSNESS

CHAPTER 19: RATIONALE FOR DIMENSIONS BEYOND 3S-1T 202

“Man's mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimensions.”
Oliver Wendell Holmes (Physician, 1809 - 1894)

Historical Base for the Existence of Dimensions Beyond 3S-1t

Minkowski
Historically, the feasibility of the idea that reality includes geometric dimensions
beyond 3S was disputably implied by Albert Einstein when he developed the Special
Theory of Relativity in 1905 203. He suggested a metric with four variables x, y, z and t,
creating a unique 4-D reference frame). However, the fourth dimension was not
specifically mentioned in his 1905 paper nor in the related paper where each system
has its own matter-energy (e=mc2). The credit for describing time as a fourth
dimension should therefore, go to Hermann Minkowski 23 developed the mathematics
needed to describe 4-D space-time, but with some assists: Minkowski, in fact, drew
heavily from the work of several other great scientists before him—Poincaire, Hilbert,
[his former student] Einstein himself, Lorentz, Maxwell, Gauss and Helmholtz) 28.

Einstein
Einstein’s first reaction to Minkowski’s contribution was that it was an unnecessary
mathematical sophistication. It wasn’t until 1915, when he was working on the General
Theory, that he used these terms and discussed the mathematics of four-dimensional
space-time. He then embraced the idea for General Relativity, published in 1917, and
this re-awakened a broader awareness of a fourth dimension. Effectively, Einstein's
special relativity with its non-preferential frames of reference upheld the absolute void
context, but Einstein's general relativity with 4-dimensional space-time curvature
swung the pendulum back toward an underlying "plenum" or pattern in basic reality in
the space-time metric 204.

Historically, too, Theodor and Oskar Klein independently derived the equations of
electromagnetism and gravity by representing 5-dimensional paradigms. 202

Newton
Newton’s laws describe how the force of gravity varies with distance, but not how a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 163

 
physical force is effectual across empty space with no mechanical connection. General
relativity revealed that gravity is not an attraction across a distance but the effect of the
warping of the dimensional structure of the space-time continuum by relative mass.

Where is the involvement of consciousness?

But relativity did not involve any kind of “consciousness”. Was there an early link of
quantum frames of reference with consciousness? Indirectly, yes. The idea of
consciousness having such a relationship is not new. Even in 1929, Alfred North
Whitehead posited that quantum mechanics perceived the universe as a process of
events, at least some of which are imbued with a mental quality ("throbs, or occasions
of experience") 205; 206. However, this was ignored for many years. There are now
parallels with the modern view of Abner Shimony 207 to the extent that Chalmers calls
this a "psychophysical law." 208.

There are various descriptions of a fundamental quantum sea, vacuum, foam or spin
network. These have been used to describe underlying space-time geometry. This
could be speculatively relevant to the understanding of consciousness 204.

The Theorem of Dimensional Extrapolation

An extension of this idea through a process of what we call “the Theorem of
Dimensional Extrapolation” leads to the hypothesis that all forces that act over
distance in three-dimensional space (3S) are the results of the interaction of additional
dimensions with 3S-1t. This idea will be developed further in the companion book 10.
Applying this concept to the other fundamental forces of nature, we discover the
existence of additional dimensions.

Additional fundamental forces, such as the strong and weak atomic forces and electric
and magnetic forces producing the phenomenon we call light, and likely the postulated
expansion of the universe force with gravitation, all are involved with resulting
dimensional warping and attendant extra dimensions, and are seen as the natural results
of distortions in the space time continuum. Each force is integrated into the picture as
the result of the progressive bending or warping of the continuum. This provides a
clear and straightforward demonstration of the metadimensionality of reality in space-
time and is amplified further in our companion book, Space Time and Consciousness.
10

Statistical Basis Justifying a Paradigmatic Shift

To be accepted as feasible, hypothetical models require justification and our models
are justified below. The tests justifying a new paradigm are based on already
demonstrated empirical data emphasizing the need for re-examining the role of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 164

 
“consciousness” and also our unidirectional perspective of time only moving linearly
forward.

Justification for a new paradigmatic model lies in the discoveries that:

1. In special relativity: An observer’s perceptions of physical reality (space, time,
matter and energy) vary depending upon the observer’s relative velocity and position
relative to concentrations of mass.

2. In quantum physics, specifically in the double slit and delayed choice experiments:
A real link between the conscious decisions made by the scientist and the outcome of
the experiment is demonstrated.

3. In consciousness research: There are at least nine excellently research-based six

sigma findings in consciousness research, of which six are extraordinarily well
researched. Six Sigma refers to the statistical distribution of being six standard
deviations beyond the norm. This is extraordinarily rare and when we refer to a six
sigma finding, we’re saying that applying so-called frequentist statistical approaches,
at minimum, the finding would be about one in a billion or more against this being
purely a chance result—technically, applying one-tailed probability statistics, six
sigma reflects a right tailed probability value of 9.866*10-10.

When we refer to nine independent research areas of consciousness research that

achieve six sigma results, we are almost certainly referring to nine different kinds of
studies reflecting results that are so against them happening by chance, that these
results may be unparalleled in scientific endeavor. Moreover, these results are all
thought to reflect similar mechanisms described by one underlying broadly defined
term in consciousness studies, called “psi”.

Essentially, psi refers to consciousness research phenomena that are in some

kind of way afferently apprehended or acquired, or motorically perturbed or
influenced. In more common terms, “psi” is a blanket generic term for phenomena that
cannot be explained by applying our physical senses or motor apparatus or extensions
of that technology such as ultraviolet or infrared detection. Effectively, psi cannot be
explained without significant modification of our current standard 3S-1t model.

Psi can be looked upon cybernetically, with a sensory side (sometimes called
“extrasensory perception”) and a motor side (sometimes called “psychokinesis”).
However, we find these terms prejudicial because this input-output cybernetic model
might imply an artificial and inaccurate dichotomy. Psi in layperson terms refers to
“psychic phenomena”, in parapsychology it may refer to “paranormal phenomena”,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 165

 
and in cognitive psychology it is sometimes referred to as “anomalous experiences”—
when we may be dealing with experiences that may turn out to reflect “normal
experiences”, or alternatively, “exceptional human experiences”.

Every one of the nine six sigma areas pertaining to psi phenomena has
developed over many years of Consciousness Research. They exemplify carefully
studied major examples in this discipline. But they describe only the statistical side:
There is a great abundance of comprehensively investigated studies and cogent
research in other areas relating to psi, such as dreams, as well as thousands of
remarkable spontaneous cases. Many of these phenomena simply do not fit the fabric
of our current physicalistic worldview of three dimensions of space and one point in
time reality.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 166

 
CHAPTER 20: CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE BRAIN 209

“Reading, after a certain age, diverts the mind too much from its creative pursuits.
Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of
thinking.”
Albert Einstein

The Need for Proper Controls

Our perceptions, conceptions and exposure to common though still subjective reality
could easily flood us. We have far more information than any conscious mind could
process. Moreover, our nervous system allows for remarkable learnt behaviors
including the unconscious extras such as cognitive patterns, inferring and deducing,
and creativity, plus all learnt new reflexes or patterns (bike riding; tying a tie; playing a
musical instrument; responding directly to a trained tune). If we allowed all this input,
we would easily be overwhelmed. We need the proper filter, ignoring what should be
ignored, and appreciating what should be recognized. These are direct elements that
our brain without any psi functioning can explain, and in fact, is expert at.

Information Versus Consciousness and the Brain

When information becomes meaningfully loaded we are referring to that as
metaconsciousness. We are accessing that information through some source of
communication, and that communication is invariably what Stephan Schwartz 210 has
called the opening to the infinite. We are allowing this metacommunication to open up
to the infinite, but it is also opening up to realities within our own brain because we
posit that our brain functions as a filter in part and more than a filter to the infinite
where it sieves by permeability those relevant awarenesses which we allow. Our brain
might be that same infinite boundary, that impermeability/permeability that allows us
to function and not be overwhelmed by the information that is irrelevant, but it also
allows us to experience special selected pertinent information and distinguish when it
is needed. There is a two way passage between the barriers of the infinite and the
finite. The brain must handle all incoming information, integrate and juggle executive
expression and it needs to adjust. Teleologically, communication is far more reliable
when we use spoken or written language, or when relying on various cognitive,
affective and volitional interactions (including non-verbal expressions). These may
occur both at the levels of awareness, and also, in automatically learned responses.
However, if we relied for survival in our society on purely psi phenomena,
communication would likely be more elusive and also seldom directly validated by
others, and consequently would apparently be more unreliable.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 167

 
Meaning in C-substrate
What is the meaning that is implied in the consciousness that individuals experience in
the 3S-1t context? Is this qualitatively and quantitatively different from the meaning
that is implied in such qualities as honesty, truth, justice, courage, love, or a negative
one—which may be a continuity of love or quite separate—hate? In other words, is
this a qualitative difference or is this the same meaning we are referring to throughout?
We are uncertain of the answer, though we very tentatively posit that it is the same
unified meaning because everything is unified—and this means Higher Consciousness
at both finite and infinite levels contains all meaningful information: But we cannot
conceptualize this in our 3S-1t experience. We utilize a very limited amount of the
infinitely available information, not all of the information: Our “axiom of physical
reduction valves” points out how we are limiting incoming data to what we can utilize
or understand. But this axiom also, has a self-growth implication because the
development of bidirectional higher consciousness leads potentially to actualization,
transcendence, growth and development of self or of individual-units, even cultures,
and ultimately there may be progression towards the individual-units finite/infinite
development, possibly implying more higher dimensional awarenesses and a closer
perception or conception of the sublime realities or of the infinite. These are the
different elements.kk

Is Psi Always on Call?

Psi, relative nonlocality (they may be synonymous) and metaconsciousness, ultimately
require the brain to be the endpoint integrator of limiting itself to finite discrete
information. And most of the data the brain is perceiving, integrating and then
executively expressing involves day-to-day functioning. It is well explained by
appropriate physiology and psychology. We do not need to invoke psi.ll
The brain is more than a superb computer and does an excellent job in ensuring what is
necessary, available, accessible, handleable and not overwhelming for each individual.
The brain, when normal and healthy, ensures we function optimally with maximal
beneficial utility.

It is conceivable that psi may always be one of those options that exists but manifests
into full conscious awareness only sporadically and often unpredictably spontaneously.
However, certain established protocols can demonstrate it, if not consistently, certainly
via the statistical deviation from what is expected. We differentiate psi information or
expression that may be rare, from a phenomenon that may exist all the time, just as our

kk
We could speculate that psi may partially circumvent this filter. The postulate of an inactive filter may be tested in a
comatose state, or in the data relating to survival of bodily death.
ll
It could be argued that psi plays an enormous but unrecognized role in day-to-day life. Until such time as this can be
demonstrated, we will apply Occam’s razor in this regard.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 168

 
senses of smell, taste, vision and hearing are continually on call, even though they may
be screened out and ignored. Is psi part of what is normally screened out?

Recognizing psi: The difficulties

But even if psi was persistently available in the background, there is little wonder we
have difficulty distinguishing veridical psi from psychological and neurophysiological
distortions.mm
Even more so, our SPEs (subjective paranormal experiences) 211 are peculiarly
idiosyncratic. We do not have any base to objectively validate an individual possible
psi experience unless there are others who experienced the same reality at that time (a
relative rarity), or there is demonstrable instrumentation (e.g., fMRI) showing a
simultaneous endpoint expression (epiphenomenon), or we are able to statistically
quantitate the uncertainty of what is happening (in, for example, a controlled lab
setting or database).

Ego-boundary distortions and psychopathologies

Moreover, sometimes we have a breakdown of this system. Psychopathology results.
One aspect of this pathology, may be ego-boundary disturbance. And one component
of this ego-boundary disturbance may be incorrect delivery of relative nonlocal data
into the brain. The endpoint is our intermingling with perceptual, conceptual subjective
experience: We simply, at times, can’t establish whether the origin is psi or is
endogenous physiology or psychological adaptations. And the endpoint expression
neither confirms nor denies the veridicality of our experience or its origins, and this
applies to SPEs too.

Future Research on the Interaction of the Brain with the C-substrate and Special
Skills
One research approach is to examine the exceptional cases, such as truly remarkable
memories, where a rare group of individuals appear never to forget any information. Is
this from within the brain or from accessing through that permeable sieve barrier,
one’s metaconsciousness, recording like a camcorder, all events forever. We can
approach what should most have been long forgotten and try to understand why it is
not, and yet what limitations occur. This might give us a great deal of insight into
Higher Consciousness because conventional brain function is limited in its
explanations.
Also, we could look at states of coma or anesthesia where events happen that are not
easily explained. Of course, this area is linked up in part with NDE research.

mm
Veridical psi refers to psi phenomena that are demonstrable in both content and process.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 169

 
Brain Epiphenomena
The brain may be part of the machine allowing the information to work. For example,
the car has an engine but there are several other necessary components to make it
move, one of which is a driver. The brain synthesizes, analyzes and integrates
information, while also, providing, controlling, or at least facilitating cognition, affect
and volition that allows one to function—an endpoint expression. But is that sufficient
on its own? If so, why can we not demonstrate how honesty, love, or beauty is
appreciated?

We see the epiphenomenal resultnn, but not the initial component.

Current Limited Explanations for Consciousness

Explanations pertaining to reducing consciousness to several alternative methods have
been insufficient:
• neurotransmitters, neuropeptides, or electrochemical firing.
• quantum physics extended to a living macroreality with minute
microtubules inside nerve cells creating quantum effects that might
produce consciousness.
• computer modeling ultimately expressing consciousness emerges from the
complexity of the brain's processing. Certainly a chess computer can beat
a world champion but it is not conscious, just fed all the reasonable
options and still consulted by humans.
• chaos theory cannot explain inherently increasing order.

There is mild support for consciousness beyond the brain. For example, the body's
ability to heal itself 172. However, the data are still limited, though sometimes cogent,
and therefore, controversial. We do not currently know, using our conventional
scientific paradigm, how consciousness occurs. We know about correlations, not
causal links.

Sorting Out Confounders

Let’s examine a few issues here: Animal experiments even when carefully controlled,
could be attributed to experience of body language cues plus differential sensory acuity
(compared with the human’s physical sensory limitations, e.g., in olfaction). After
controlling for this, what remains is a modest statistical effect. We still need to
understand why psi does not occur all the time, as we cannot compare it’s effectiveness
nn
Epiphenomenon is here used as the endpoint visible expression, but does not imply causality (as opposed to teleology).
It is not used in this book in the context that consciousness originates at any physical level and it is just the expression of
such consciousness. It is used therefore, in the linguistic context of a secondary effect or byproduct that arises from but
does not causally influence a process, for example, it would be a symptom in Medicine. It is never used here to imply a
mental state reflecting purely a byproduct of brain activity.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 170

 
with live speech communication or for that matter, electronic assistants like phone
ringers in phone telepathy experiments.

Solutions?
We know the brain is necessary for expressing active conscious awareness but
conceivably consciousness exists in the infinite without any necessary brain: The
sound is in the forest despite being heard. Essence is infinite, but ultimately our
experience as sentient beings is expressed in the finite.

We motivate here that the TDVP model provides a fruitful explanation for
consciousness. One large clue is data obtained by the various studies on psi. Based on
the data that has been obtained on psi, the current reductionistic brain paradigm is
insufficient to explain consciousness. Psi, when demonstrable, may manifest
correlatively with epiphenomena such as fMRI or correlate with symptoms. But, psi
does not obey the inverse square law, and is relatively non-local in the 3S-1t context.
Moreover, psi phenomena may ultimately express itself in space-time, but it is
inherently linked with the C-substrate.

For a paradigm shift to occur, ostensible anomalies must be demonstrated that cannot
be explained by conventional current scientific methods. Furthermore, legitimate
attempts to explain those anomalies must occur, that are not refuted. The paradigm
shift in consciousness must include known data. Besides psi, we list the numerous
inconsistencies above, for instance entanglement, evolution, life, lower dimensional
incompleteness, and consciousness itself. However, the current explanations are
inadequate.
We apply the paradigm shift, which our metaparadigm TDVP appears to constitute to
establish how well it fits these models. We believe it gives greater insight without
refutation to each and every one of them. By using our metaparadigm for TDVP, C-
substrate can be portrayed as part of the infinite STC essence ultimately expressing
itself in a reality.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 171

 
CHAPTER 21: TOWARDS THE NEW PARADIGM: LFAF AND TDVP MODEL
212

“Einstein's space is no closer to reality than Van Gogh's sky. The glory of science is
not in a truth more absolute than the truth of Bach or Tolstoy, but in the act of creation
itself. The scientist's discoveries impose his own order on chaos, as the composer or
painter imposes his; an order that always refers to limited aspects of reality, and is
based on the observer's frame of reference, which differs from period to period as a
Rembrandt nude differs from a nude by Manet.”
Arthur Koestler (Author; 1905 – 1983; p. 253) 213

TDVP Motivation
With clear evidence that the C-substrate of sentient beings directly interacts with
physical reality, a new paradigmatic approach is needed. We can no longer represent
the observer as a dimensionless point with no direct interaction with that which is
observed. We need a new consciousness-inclusive paradigm, and a mathematical
framework capable of describing the total reality of conscious experience, not just the
externalized mechanical components of reality described by current mainstream
science.
To motivate the development of a TOE, such a model must not be falsified and yet be
feasible based on accumulated data in every area of endeavor. (LFAF).
Our TDVP model appears tenable in all disciplines using other natural scientific
models ranging from conventional macrophysics, quantum physics, string theory,
relativity, Copenhagen interpretation, to astronomy, chemistry, meteorology,
anthropology, genetics, physiology and pharmacology, biology and anatomy and
consciousness research. It also can be explained within the bases of philosophy and
theology.
Previous papers and a book preliminarily introduced these multidisciplinary areas (see
Neppe’s Vortex N-Dimensionalism; and Close’s Transcendental Physics).
Moreover, it is essential to be able to model areas of difficulty with mathematics and
logic.
Our model, we believe, is consistent with the actual origin of life (not DNA or
physiology but the understanding of when and how life begins).
The authors believe this paradigm may be the first paradigm to unify all areas of
science and philosophy.
a. It applies the model of feasibility/ absent falsifiability (LFAF model) when non-
falsifiability is not readily demonstrable.
b. There can be no TOE without taking “consciousness” into account. This is why
Einstein, Kaluza and Klein, string theory and its variants, Hawking and Tegmark
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 172

 
 did not succeed in this endeavor.
c. We present the logical basis of the essential elements of two plus decades of work
by each of the two scientist authors culminating in a combination unification in
the past two years, namely: The Triadic Dimensional- Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP) — The N-Dimensionometric CST Substrate Ordropic
Mathematicologic LFAF Model: An integrated space-time “consciousness”
substrate reflecting event-horizon, warping-N-Dimensional extrapolation,
extent-content-intent distinctional-C-substrate indivension, open-closed,
holistic-unified, finite-infinite biopsychophysical reality.
d. Our main title— The Triadic Dimensional- Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP)
—expresses key features: a triadic paradigm (CST is fundamental—C-substrate
of “consciousness”, S-substrate of space and T-substrate of time) It applies
metadimensionality (beyond 3S-1t) and Close’s calculus of distinctions of
extent, content and intent as the logical bases for mathematical description. Its
content involves CST communications in and through a three dimensional
vortex. This vortical movement in its broadest sense implies a moving ovoid/
arc/ circular/ spiral /helical/ curvature base. This includes zero expansion or
movement, and is across through and within various dimensions with interfaces
and interactions of theoretically infinite other vortices at varying
dimensionometric angles. The vortices may be closed or open, depending upon
the number of dimensions represented in the description.
e. Our subtitle— The N-Dimensionometric CST Substrate Ordropic LFAF
Mathematicologic Model— expresses key principles. We apply an extension of
geometry to beyond 3 dimensions —dimensionometry—and include C-substrate
in that, making it more than just dimensional metrics. The fundamental substrate
of CST implies metadimensionality. We posit an N-Dimensional model
implying infinities both in the Cantor sense of infinity of infinities116 and in the
sense of interfacing with infinity at every dimensional level. We introduce the
term “ordropy” (the opposite of entropy, but an active phenomenon of
orderliness in CST, which does not contradict the second law of
thermodynamics but refers to order in a specific system, such as life). We use
the mathematicological model of proofs with axioms, theorems and lemmas and
the scientific model of LFAF to demonstrate the empirical data.
f. Our model integrates three necessarily co-existing space, time and “consciousness”
substrates, which are linked from the start of existence (the “Origin Event“). It
applies dimensional extrapolation through warping across N-Dimensions using
distinctions of metric extent, of vortical, mass, energy content, and of C-
substrate intent, content and ordinal extent. TDVP can be applied in the closed
finite model or within an open infinite model. The whole is unified and there is
no differentiation of time, space and consciousness—past, present and future all
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 173

 
 existing simultaneously. Our model fits biopsychophysical reality at the
biological, physical and psychological consciousness levels.
g. This provisional overall full title encompasses about 33 fundamental TDVP
elements. Conceptual advances are growing by the week. Compromise of any
sub-title does not invalidate the rest of the paradigm.

TDVP and TOE

To be true, the key components of any TOE must allow feasible modifications from
the current conceptual, mathematical and scientific models without contradicting
fundamental knowledge (other than materialist reductionism), and must also
seamlessly reconcile with the major theoretical models and authoritative sources from
the other natural sciences like anatomy, anthropology, astronomy, biology, chemistry,
genetics, life sciences, medicine, meteorology, psychology and social sciences,
physiology and pharmacology. It should also be compatible with the three major
disciplines examining concepts outside our 3S-1t conventional reality: Hyperspace,
Consciousness research and Philosophy including mysticism. Our premise is that
natural laws should be universally applicable to to all scientific endeavors. The
multidisciplinary TDVP model incorporates all these disciplines into the same unified
world-view.

TDVP: What Is It?

TDVP impacts on every major scientific philosophical and consciousness discipline.
TDVP is a comprehensive multi-dimensional paradigm integrating physical and life
sciences with consciousness, applying ontological, epistemological, empirical,
heuristic natural law. Essentially space, time and “consciousness” are fundamentally
inseparable from the event-horizon (e.g., the big bang) implying a unification of what
in our conventional reality of 3S-1t we experience as past, present and future. TDVP
generates almost five hundred concepts, theorems, axioms, practical applications and
this also includes some speculative hypotheses. We show how warping of dimensions
occurs, producing an open-closed, holistic-unified, finite-infinite universally applicable
biopsychophysical reality.
We present first the key elements of our model. We then define concepts. We do it this
way so that the core components can be initially appreciated. After reading the
definitions and then the axioms and theorems we suggest you reread the fundamental
model, the theoretical sub-hypotheses, and the cogent and demonstrable, then the less
cogent hypotheses. As these hypotheses move down, the level of implication or
speculation increases. Again, certain facets of this model may prove incorrect but we
believe the core elements to have solid bases mathematically, logically and also,
empirically. At the end of this book, are major clarifications of current science based
on applications of our model.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 174

 
CHAPTER 22: STATISTICAL BASIS OF CONSCIOUSNESS RESEARCH 209; 214; 215

“The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to
me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear
of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.”
Albert Einstein

Perspective
There are several independent overt six sigma protocols in consciousness research
based on statistical analyses. Six sigma refers to six standard deviations beyond the
mean. In statistics, it is an astronomically high number with results of less than six
sigma being roughly around 1 in a billion against chance. (9. 866*10 -10; 1t)

The six that have been analyzed in detail are:

• RV: Remote viewing
• REG: Random event generator
• Ganzfeld
• GCP: Global consciousness project
• Presentiment
• Retrocognition/ precognition --- Bem protocol

Three more have further data.

• Survival and superpsi
• Staring
• Precognition
Why are these three separated from the others? The seventh protocol with six sigma
data is different, namely, data studying survival communication after bodily death
because it is difficult to quantitate. However, it generates six sigma data in individual
instances while even using impeccable highly rated cases. The eighth is listed under
“further data” because staring research has not necessarily been as impeccably
examined, is inherently difficult to do because “staring” could be regarded as having
other perceptual implications. The ninth six sigma protocol involves research in
precognition: Precognition reports are often spontaneous and difficult to quantitate,
particularly as there may be complex psychological elements existing as well: So we
refer in this instance to individual site research, which also combines into a meta-
analysis, both of which generate six sigma data.

Therefore, essentially there may be, at least, nine separate areas of independent
consciousness research (including staring and survival) that reflect at minimum 6
sigma protocols, and at least six have independent replications of the broader data
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 175

 
studied over prolonged periods (years).
Moreover, with all of these, there are independent laboratory replications.

But first let’s examine the possible implications of such statistical findings.

A Perspective to Such Overwhelming Data and to Meta-analyses

Numerous other protocols have demonstrated astronomical figures as well. Protocols
like dream ESP only overall generate meta-analytic statistics of just 1 in 75 million!
However, an earlier meta-analysis in that yielded six sigma data: It’s important to
obtain a perspective here. Meta-analyses reflect all studies, and sometimes they’re a
little different (apples and oranges but that is reasonable if they’re fruit), the studies
may vary in quality (and therefore, one has to examine top-rate solid studies too
optimally) and they may suffer from reporting of positive studies (so-called file drawer
effects). The bottom line is the techniques for such analyses have become very refined
and statistically very careful attention is paid. This is relevant because some, possibly
legitimately argue that such studies have such overwhelming implications that one
cannot use the same level of analysis as one would a medical or psychological study
where 1 in 20 against chance is usually regarded as adequate, knowing that there may
be an error 1 time in 20. This is why these absolutely amazing statistics are generated
here. Exceptional hypotheses may demand exceptional data and exists.

But there is one component that is truly remarkable. The scientist likes to replicate
data. And based on the TDVP model we’re presenting, and based on the empirical data
in the area of psi, experimental psi is a rare phenomenon. This is the nature of the
beast, just as certain findings in physics are by their natures rare. Rare events are part
of the litany of psi, and even more so, when replication occurs it becomes harder.
There is always the interaction of an extended consciousness (possibly a Higher
Consciousness that has information beyond the brain, with the neurological and
psychological elements of brain consciousness which distort information [therefore,
making predictions less reliable because psi cannot often be differentiated from the
psychological or the psychopathological experiences in the brain]) and moreover,
repetition ostensibly lowers interest and motivation, and scores fall off: This is known
as the decline effect. Add in different effects dependent on the expectations and
attitudes of experimenters and the subjects, and it is easy to see why replication of data
in consciousness research is so difficult.

This means that such remarkable statistical data based on solid, careful research is
even more cogent when it occurs, and its occurrence across eight different areas makes
it even more overwhelming.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 176

 
Even studies on biological psychokinesis are statistically significant: DMILS (Direct
Mental Interaction with Living Systems) is only relatively significant using our usual
statistical frequentist methodologies.
Other areas of endeavor such as impact of crystallization of water and studies of water
also suggest changes to our perception of reality. 216
If these were truly independent and applying the less than 1 in a billion statistic each
time, the combined data would produce a figure more astronomical than likely
anything in the cosmos. This implies solid proof of consciousness and psi phenomena.

It must be emphasized again that these are rare events. This is why studies require
large sample sizes because there are just slight deviations from statistical chance. This
explains, too, the reason 3S-1t appears to work most of the time in our usual life.

The Nine Six Sigma Protocols in Parapsychology

1.) RV: Remote viewing
2) REG: Random event generator
3.) Ganzfeld
4.) GCP: Global consciousness project
5.) Presentiment
6.) Backward precognition (Bem protocol)
7.) Survival-superpsi
8.) Staring protocol
9.) Precognition

Psi
Events, broadly called “psi events, whether they be apprehension of objects of events,
so-called extra-sensory perception, or manipulation or influence of objects or events,
so-called psychokinesis, are rare. This cybernetic afferent/efferent model may well be
incorrect because the mechanisms involved are uncertain: There may be many kinds of
consciousness with one single mechanism.

The discipline of parapsychology has developed over a century and studies psi
phenomena. Experimental psi as a phenomenon is a rare event. For example, if the
chances of something occurring are 1 in 2, and a study in psi is being done, it may be
that instead of the 50% probability, one will see a 51% or a 49% depending on the
predictions. This reflects a minimal change and therefore, does not compromise our
usual standard scientific 3S-1t paradigm.

Consciousness Research and Psi

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 177

 
An enormous amount of research on at least eight different areas of psi has generated
profoundly statistically significant results. This is despite the methodologies used in
parapsychology being profoundly more stringent than any other area of scientific
endeavor. Certainly, it is not even comparable with the physical, biological and
psychological sciences because of the great emphasis on stringently preventing sources
of leak, and trying to ensure that like is only compared with like. 124; 125

Important Principles in Psi and Consciousness: A Primer.

The multiple studies and the multiple different areas of parapsychology have generally
indicated a common pattern.
• Decline effect: For example, initially when a task is novel, the potential
for psi appears to be higher, but as the task becomes more routine, one
sees a well demonstrated, statistically demonstrable “decline effect” with
a tendency toward chance results.
• Attitudes matter: Moreover, another a well-demonstrated, statistically
demonstrable effect is that attitudes matter, and those participants, be they
“agents”, “percipients” or “experimenters” or even those “researchers”
remotely involved in that specific study, may influencing the result of the
experiment. For example, if their attitudes are a little negative, their
results may turn out negative. If their attitudes are a little positive,
statistically their results may turn out positively. This can be analyzed for
each participant and an ostensibly common pattern can be found over
time.
• Replication difficulty: Consequently, when one looks at data that has initially
produced profoundly strong results, there may be a fall-off leading to claims of non-
replicability. Effectively, one is not replicating the same study, the reason it is so
critical for “like” to be properly analyzed with “like”. And often one cannot replicate
because that experimental set-up will never occur again. In some areas of the physical
sciences, the slight variations do not matter; in the psychological sciences they do and
they are critical in the consciousness sciences.
• Repeatability: Repeatability has therefore, been a bug in
parapsychological research. But it is mainly because the experiment
cannot effectively be replicated and this is not recognized. The
experimenter effect or attitudes of various subjects, or even the broader
time frameworks (e.g., sidereal time) have produced a complex need to
analyze data phenomenologically. 124; 125 Therefore, it is difficult creating a
situation of replication per se, and so repeatability has its limitations.
• Rare events: In our 3S-1t environment, psi phenomena are rare events.
They may occur spontaneously in the great majority of individuals but
only once or a few times in their lives. Experimentally, one does not see
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 178

 
 results far away from chance so that if chance were 50% one is more
likely to see results overall reflecting 52% instead of 50% than 80%
correct in a psi experiment. This is clear because our 3S-1t ordinary
standard living on earth actually works and is predictable. We rely on our
physical senses and physical realities many, many orders of magnitude
more than the ordinary person relies on psi. Psi skills unless cultivated are
exceptions not rules.
• Large sample sizes needed: Data analyses invariably require based a large
number of data points and sometimes a multitude of studies to
demonstrate significance. Meta-analysis is therefore, important but has the
limitation of whether the studies were identical, e.g., decline effects,
attitudes.
Frequentist statistics: In lab situations, psi studies, as in other scientific disciplines rely
on statistics, usually stated as P (the probability) < 0.001. Now whereas, in most
sciences P<0.05 reflects an error only in 1 in 20 studies, the idea of psi is so ludicrous
to some that the bar is usually much higher. However, one cannot apply such a
Bayesian approach easily as one does not know what the appropriate degree of
probability would be. If one says the chances are impossible, no statistics will help: If,
e.g., the “prior odds” are set such that the alternative over the null hypothesis being
true is set at 10-20, this would reflect such a ridiculously skeptical position that
dogmatism and closed-mindedness have severely compromised the science 146; 147.
Amazingly, this was the statistic that Bem and Utts et al 143 pointed to in the attempt by
Wagenmakers et al to refute the remarkable Bem research. 146; 147(“ formally expressed
their prior skepticism about the existence of psi by setting these odds at
99,999,999,999,999,999,999 to 1 in favor of H0” 143).
• Leakage: The major difficulty in parapsychological research is not the
statistical demonstrations but their meanings. This is why these
researchers have become the most stringent in any science, eliminating if
possible (and it is experimentally) all known sources of possible
misinterpretation. Computerized records and delivery of information are
routine for example, eliminating any handling errors.
• Blind protocols: The main use of the blind protocol is not in medicine, but
in parapsychology and consciousness research so that fraud and t
experimenter or sometimes subject bias can be eliminated. However, the
assumption of a blind trial is a difficult one because research from
therapeutic intent/healing to remote viewing suggest that: all
consciousness from single-celled organisms to human beings may be
interlinked through a non-local aspect of awareness they all share”210.
Certainly, TDVP supports this linking through indivension.
• Meta-analyses: This is an essential tool in scientific investigation in the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 179

 
 social and medical sciences and now in consciousness research. It
involves combining the outcomes of well-designed and appropriately
executed research in a particular area. The methodology has become
stringent. Meta-analyses have to be performed carefully as not all studies
are of the same quality; nor do they measure exactly the same parameters.
As indicated, in consciousness studies particularly, even if one did
ostensibly replicate, there are changes because of the decline effect. This
implies that meta-analyses will produce less and less potent results as the
number of studies increases (a testable hypothesis)—even before the non-
reported studies (file drawer effect) are accounted for.
• File drawers: This “file drawer effect” makes meta-analyses particularly
difficult. Effectively, not all studies are reported and possibly there may
be more non-reporting of negative studies—although, in
parapsychological research, there is data supporting the fact that more
negative studies are reported then in other areas of science, in general.
Nevertheless, this file drawer effect has to be taken into account and there
are statistical methods to account for that based on curves and distribution
of data. Effectively, one is also looking for empty chairs that must be
properly accounted for. Therefore, meta-analyses are difficult because
whereas one would expect meta-analyses to be the combination of all
statistics because of the need to take into account all data, this is not really
so and excellent studies are mixed with poor studies.

Psi in the General Population

As an important aside, the area of subjective paranormal experience reflects events that
individuals interpret as paranormal. This is not a rare phenomenon and numerous
studies indicate that the great majority of the population report such events.211 Whereas
we can reject such SPEs scientifically based on their pure subjectivity and usually their
lack of validation, for the individual having them, it is often a profoundly changing
awareness or a source of perplexity or denial of it even being possible.
The fact that possibly four fifths of the Western population are convinced that they
have had such subjective paranormal experiences at least once in their life does argue
that such events are in fact, a normal, but individually rare, phenomenon that should be
taken into account.217
This is something we, as scientists, would prefer to ignore, but it is intellectually
dishonest not to recognize that we are dealing with a universally experienced
phenomenon, that transcends cultures, and has an inherent dimension of strong
perceived reality attached to it.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 180

 
CHAPTER 23: SIX SIGMA STATISTICAL DATA IN CONSCIOUSNESS
RESEARCH 214; 215

“Five senses; an incurably abstract intellect; a haphazardly selective memory; a set of

preconceptions and assumptions so numerous that I can never examine more than
minority of them - never become conscious of them all. How much of total reality can
such an apparatus let through?”
Clive S. Lewis (Novelist; 1898 – 1963)

Because six sigma data refer to results six standard deviations beyond the norm with
less a one in a billion (1 in 10 9) chance expectation, such infinitesimal results could
only happen by chance once every billion times. Effectively any such results are
statistically proven.

We emphasize, however, that six sigma results are not consistent for every study in a
particular group or for every meta-analysis. We use the term “six sigma” only in its
broadest sense, because it is more than adequate to prove a result if any well-
controlled, scientifically impeccable study, or cluster of studies, or overall meta-
analysis of all the studies in that specific protocol group (between pre-stipulated dates,
for example), attain six sigma data, This is then so overwhelmingly proven
statistically, that we need go no further in our statistical quest. At that point, we ask,
what does this statistic purport to measure? And when six different outstanding
protocols and possibly another two (which still involve solid scientific approaches but
are by their nature more difficult to control) achieve six sigma data while allowing for
the same mechanism—psi—then psi becomes as proven a phenomenon as any in
science or our regular experience and the object instead should be to try to understand
how, why and when, this 3S-1t rare event occurs.

By comparison, in usual psychological studies, it is acceptable to use a less than 1 in

20 statistical result against chance (in other words, p < 0.05). This means that although
there may be an assumed link for a chance result one twentieth of the time, most
scientists would regard the data as cogent. In some studies, when one really wants to
show that there is great significance, result may even reach p < 0.01 (1 in 100), and
very rarely, more by accident, a study may show a significance of p < 0.001 (1 in
1000). Let’s put this into perspective: Less than one in a thousand against chance is
very unusual in psychological experiments. Indeed, it often reflects that the sample
size was very large, possibly much too large because the same study could have been
done, e.g., with fewer subjects, or less data. This consciousness research data is in a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 181

 
different league: Amazingly, six sigma is a million times more statistically stringent
than one in a thousand (already not considered necessary and, as such, results seldom
even listed), but can, as shown below, be calculated.

It should be emphasized this is a difficult area, at times: Some of the more prolific psi
protocols accumulate so many experiments that researchers obtain truly astronomical
data such as 9 or even 12 sigma. However, some analysts may counter with selective
meta-analyses that reduce the confidence estimates. We have emphasized that the
effect size still remains small, because one is dealing with rare events: Effect size refers
to a difference from expectation that may vary depending on the units used across
experiments. Two statistical measures there are Cohen's d, and a normalized
difference, r, calculated by dividing the composite Z-score by Sqrt(N). Ertel 218 points
out ingenious modifications to this.

What is sometimes neglected, but highly relevant however, in psychological and

medical or clinical experiments is the clinical significance of the data. In other words,
if there is just that minimal chance of that event occurring, is this of any clinical
significance? It may not be. It may be that if a person has a 51% or a 50.5% chance of
a drug being successful compared with a placebo, which has a 50% chance, it is of no
great relevance to use that drug because there will be a great deal of side-effects and
the risk-benefit ratio makes its use improper.
This is where a difference occurs in parapsychological research. Only these minimal
variants are expected in 3S-1t, and so a great change statistically over a large sample
size may reflect these rare-events. Because of its rarity, the stringency must be there to
examine what it purports to examine and a century of parapsychological research has
produced exactly that, more than any other scientific endeavor7—a stringency borne
from the rare event necessity.

Six Sigma Research: Nine Types

There are at least nine different ways in which studies in consciousness research have
demonstrated six sigma results. Any one of these eight could be quite sufficient to
prove the phenomenon. six sigma is a profound result, over one in a billion. We are not
even talking one in a thousand, which is amazing and seldom do statisticians even state
results beyond that. We are talking a million fold higher than this.
The fact is these studies have been very stringent. They are broadly postulated to be
via this same mechanism, namely, psi. If one were to combine even only a few of these
nine independent results, each statistically less than one in a billion against chance,
then despite being a rare-event on any individual hit, the results become absolutely
astronomical—possibly more than all the grains of sand in the whole world. We should
bear in mind that regular psychological studies are regarded as demonstrated with
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 182

 
results of P<0.05. Here we are talking about nine groups of results fifty million times
higher in frequentist statistical stringency and some of these results in fact are at much
higher levels (e.g., staring achieving results in the trillions against chance).
These studies have indeed been performed impeccably and generated from very
stringent statistical analyses. One would expect the statistics to be lower, yet despite
that some studies, even individually, have generated the one in a billion or more
against chance results at least in one analysis. Such results are so profound they
become statistically meaningful. We must bear in mind that this kind of statistic is not
consistent and most are relatively much lower but still highly significant.
However, when one examines these results, there is a limitation: The question is
always one of the limitations of our being able to be unaware that actually some kind
of physical communication system or equivalent set up, or leakage of sensory realities,
has not occurred. Because of this, these studies have become tighter and tighter in
precautions with the attempts to become leak proof. Moreover, almost invariably there
are control studies to rule out confounding factors: These allow comparable periods of
time where any confounding limitations would be expected to statistically wash
themselves out.
We refer here to eight different areas of six sigma research. Sometimes, meta-analyses,
applying all known studies have generated much lower statistics than the first study or
studies. The reason is very simple: the decline effect, which may include the lack of
enthusiasm of researchers for replicating.
More particularly, researchers may regard the first study as very good but then the
critics will point out theoretical limitations. The methodologies then tighten and this
too may definitely have an impact on enthusiasm or ability to perform for the subjects.
The statistic then may drop a little.
The consequence is that one has to look at these studies as a whole, and looking at just
figures such as just six sigma may be misleading. However, even when one looks at
these tightened methodologies, invariably these results are highly significant, often in
the range of one in many thousands against chance or even far less frequent than that.
We briefly go through these different methodologies.

Ganzfeld
“Ganzfeld” in German means “whole field”. The Ganzfeld technique is probably the
most well researched and highly examined area of parapsychological research. It has
been independently evaluated in several psychological labs by Chuck Honorton,
William Braud and Adrian Parker in the 1970s. The Ganzfeld is a mechanism whereby
subjects are perceptually completely sealed in physical perceptions particularly in
being delivered white noise for hearing, and vision being blocked out. In many
experiments this may be in a sealed chamber, impervious to electromagnetic
communications, a comfortably seated subject gives information about a target (e.g., a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 183

 
photograph with other controls) There are various methodologies, but fundamentally
people in a Ganzfeld setting are trying to guess the appropriate answer and this is
statistically quantified by others in a blind setting. Bem and Honorton’s early studies
review reveled an effect size against chance of 1 in 48 billion219!! The modern Ganzfeld
experiment is as “as close to the perfect psi experiment as anyone knows how to
conduct.” 220. There have been many studies leading to a variety of different statistical
debates. In one instance, two skeptical critiques argued that the statistics were relevant,
but not overwhelming, yet further re-analyses of the same data set demonstrate that
even the statistics analyzed were in fact overwhelming. This is a major area of
generating amazing statistical results, particularly when one does meta- analyses and
when one combines even the most complex of these studies. For example, Storm et al
221
in their meta-analysis of 29 modern (1997-2008). Ganzfeld studies showed
enormous effect sizes (p=2.13 *10-8) The overall consistency of data collection in
Ganzfeld assists as it may be of an order of 30% higher than chance expectation. This
is simply not something that can occur by chance.

Global Consciousness Project (GCP)

The next area of six sigma data are the Global Consciousness Project (GCP). This is an
international effort involving researchers from several institutions and countries,
designed to explore whether the construct of interconnected consciousness can be
scientifically validated through objective measurements applying such as random event
generators produces a steady flow of unpredictable bits with data consisting of a
continuous stream of "trials" taken by each Egg at a rate of one per second. The project
developed from outstanding lab experiments conducted worldwide since the 1960s
demonstrating that human consciousness interacts with random event generators
(REGs) apparently "causing" them to produce non-random patterns. There are over 60
active eggs in the network, in Europe, the US, Canada, India, Fiji, New Zealand,
Japan, China, Russia, Brazil, Africa, Thailand, South America, Australia. The
hypothesis is that the instrument (the network of "eggs") will show anomalous
deviations associated with Global Events when there is widespread participation or
reaction to the event: Within minutes of a global event, many round the world will
have their focus on it. The experimental results now demonstrate that non-random
activity occurs during widely shared experiences of deeply engaging events. The
methodology used is impeccable and the data graphed. For example in the most recent
data analysis the August 1998 to February 2011 the results overall against chance are
greater than a million to one.
The main researcher currently involved has been Roger Nelson at Princeton, but he has
collaborative set ups all around the world: Attempts are being made using extremely
complex quantal type measures to see fluctuations in terms of global consciousness
associated with major events. For example, 9/11, or the millennium time, where one
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 184

 
could look at different parts of the country or the world and find differences in terms of
consciousness. Again, the results have been remarkable and combining in these results
one is dealing with six sigma type of results. (See, e.g., 222, 220). Effectively the results
indicate a small but consistent excess of deviation corresponding to the expected
deviations.
Applying the GCP concept to the TDVP model, the data shows a broader global
Higher Consciousness coherence in the broader population level of individual-unit.
Speculatively, this could occur at a higher consciousness dimension. Interestingly
some events seemed to begin shortly before specific events, e.g., 9/11/ 2001 suggesting
possible precognition. This is, again, logical given TDVP’s multi-time dimensionality.

Remote Viewing (RV)

Remote viewing is a significant variant that may have grown out of the sterile testing
environment that constituted the original Zener card extrasensory perception
experiments that JB Rhine and his colleagues were performing. But whereas these
were local experiments, generally in the same building, remote viewing involves
detailed examinations and looks at information sometimes over thousands of miles.
RV was coined by the physicists Targ and Puthoff 223.
In this context, the remote viewers have been able to find amazing objects, but more
remarkably, when one starts statistically analyzing it again one is dealing with these
people being able to portray objects, or sometimes events, sometimes current and
contemporaneous, but often, in fact in the future, sometimes just a fraction of a second
later, but, for example, where computer generated data has not yet formed in 3S-1t.
These experiments are again at a six sigma level. Replications of data overall has
involved multiple experimenters, possibly the most famous being the large PEAR lab
sample, often involving precognitive (foreknowledge) studies involving researchers
Bob Jahn and Brenda Dunne 224, where their specific study demonstrated chances of a
mere 33 million to one result!
Remote viewing is especially valuable because it can generate consistently remarkable
results from many individuals who have been trained in the techniques of RV. This
means that it is likely that psi is a quality that a significant degree of the population can
develop.
The profound results over long distances becomes highly relevant because of the fact
that psi does not appear to obey the inverse square law: Although, there are variants of
psi that seem to have psychological overlays and this may distort distant results, this is
not a physical inverse square law, just a psychological component to it. This has
relevance to the TDVP model because inverse square phenomena may be limited to
physical 3S-1t and higher consciousness may exhibit relative non-locality.
Additionally, the precognitive data requires a re-examination of the whole 3S-1t
domain as the only reality. The application of relative non-locality at a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 185

 
metadimensional consciousness may be relevant here.

Random Number Generators (RNGs)

Possibly we should have begun with this next example of six sigma data because it was
the earliest of the group: An early variant, but a profound variant all the same. Already,
way back in the 1970s one could argue that psi was totally proven due to the advent of
random number generators. Random number generators are extremely useful in terms
of communicating statistically significant psi information without any kind of sensory
leakage and where everything is electronically quantified. The attempt might be to
influence the random number generator in a particular way, just as one would be
influencing coin tosses to toss minimally more heads than tails. One can change tasks,
and one can change orientation, but effectively this is completely automated. Often
results can be interpreted as supporting psychokinesis because of the set influence of
the RNG attempted, but conversely this may support precognition knowing what to
predict. Essentially, in a meta-analysis by Radin and Nelson, the odds against chance
were far less than even a staggering one in a trillion to one—they were 1 in 1017. Their
study assigned each experiment a quality score, examined the 152 references they
found in 832 studies. 68 different investigators performed 597 experimental (of which
258 were from the PEAR lab in Princeton) and 233 control studies (which were well
within chance levels). 225, 226

Presentiment
One highly relevantly recent exciting piece of research looks at unconscious responses,
sometimes in the brain, other times in other parts of the autonomic nervous system
(e.g., heart). The most provocative is research on presentiment, because not only is this
psi research, but research where one has to change one’s perspective of time.
Effectively, this is work with precognition with the difference that this knowledge is
not even consciously made, it is completely unconscious and looks at events just
seconds before they are actually actualized. The apparatus generally is very
sophisticated and therefore, such studies are usually very expensive. The most
important physiological measures used in presentiment studies are heart rate, EEG,
fMRI (BOLD signal), and electrodermal activity (EDA). So far, all of these have
shown evidence of presentiment, so the whole body appears to be involved.
Presentiment is measured in terms of certain physiological changes in the brain, the
heart or in one’s brain waves. Communications generally involve two different
individuals, if necessary separated in different rooms, but monitored together by a
stimulus to the one which can also be recorded in the other, and surprisingly reflecting,
at times, the response seconds before. Quantitative measures include functional MRIs
or positron emission tomography (PET). Experiments have also been done in a free-
running environment. Much of the early work to that date has been well-summarized
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 186

 
by Radin and Nelson 220; 225; 226 but research continues. Testing presentiment hypotheses
in experimental research designs that are familiar to mainstream psychologists, such as
studies about learning and habituation, may encourage psychologists to better
appreciate the anomalous results and to attempt to explore presentiment hypotheses
themselves 227. However, the methodology has to take into account appropriate
techniques to perform and interpret: Harvard researchers have stumbled 5.
Presentiment research has even been done in non-humans, including earthworms! It is
interesting, as an aside, that there do not appear to be significant declines in
presentiment research, possibly because it involves unconscious measures. Essentially,
when one again does a meta analysis in terms on presentiment studies, the overall
carefully assessed statistic suggests these results happening by chance are less than one
in a hundred million billion (p<1x1017 based on 37 studies between 1978 and 2010
based on Mossbridge, Tressoldi and Utts, 2011228)! Many studies in this field of
presentiment research have confirmed what appear to be these retrocausal effects, in
which physiological arousal occurs before the stimulus 229.
Presentiment research has shown some special characteristics 227:
• Emotionally arousing visual or auditory stimuli produce stronger anticipatory
effects than more neutral ones.
• Women appear to be somewhat more sensitive to presentiment than men. Effects
of meditation are mixed.

Bem Protocol
The most recent study, which has caused consternation even while “in press”, is that of
Cornell Psychologist, Daryl Bem and his precognition/retrocognition research146, which
was impeccably done. This has been very heavily examined, as this study has been the
source of frustration for many scientists as it threatens their whole materialist edifice
may collapse. Indeed, Larry Dossey 148, has written a detailed editorial on this.
Bem’s study was an eight-year project involving more than a thousand Cornell
students in
nine separate experiments. When one analyses the studies together, the overall statistic
is astronomical against chance, about 1 in 74 billion. (Stouffer’s z = 6.66, p = 1.34—
1011 with a mean effect size (d) of 0.22). All but one of the nine experiments yielded
statistically significant results. These are so-called “frequentist analyses”, which
referees and peers regard as eminently appropriate to use in this context statistically. 147
However, “deniers” have tried to motivate instead for a Bayesian approach, though
likely inappropriate because it is difficult to establish logical prior distributions to use.
Nevertheless, Bem has demonstrated, too, the overwhelming results that would even
occur when examining his data146 applying legitimate Bayesian priors to quantify
statistically psi and consciousness research, including his own studies.147
Bayesian statistics begin with a priori measures, postulating the chances of something
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 187

 
occurring in the null and the alternative statistics. In consciousness research, if the
something is regarded as effectively impossible, and therefore, one a priori estimates
probability as about zero, this involves reductio ad absurdum. But Bayesian statistics
must apply appropriate known information: Bem, Utts et al147 point out that the “prior”
Bayesian H0 and H1 statistics must be carefully considered based on prior information.
They cannot be indiscriminately decided: In their landmark response paper, they
demonstrated how when knowledge-based priors for the Bayes’ factor posterior
probability are appropriately applied in Bem’s research146, the combined BF was
13,669 with a posterior probability of all H0 being 7.3*10-5. This is extremely strong
support for the Bem research.
Effectively, Bem’s research was a test for retroactive influence by “time reversing”
well-established psychological effects so that the individual’s responses are obtained
before the putatively causal stimulus events occur. Data were presented for 4 time-
reversed effects: precognitive approach to erotic stimuli and precognitive avoidance of
negative stimuli; retroactive priming; retroactive habituation; and retroactive
facilitation of recall. All but one of the experiments yielded statistically significant
results; and, across all 9 experiments. The methodology has varied. In one
controversial one erotic stimuli are use and the hit rate for the erotic stimulus was 53.1
percent (not the expected 50%), again reflecting the small effect size in such
consciousness research experiments and the “rare event” model, we have indicated has
to exist in the usual consciousness we experience while awake in the 3S-1t domain.
Bem found that the subjects’ bodies generated a physiological arousal two to three
seconds before the erotic picture appeared on the screen, and even before the computer
had decided which “curtain” would conceal the erotic picture. It was as if the subjects
were seeing the future, or that information from the future was perhaps traveling
backward in time to the present. In another study, using “priming” (the effect of a
subliminally presented word on a subject’s response to an image), Bem found that the
priming effect seemed to work backward in time as well as forward. In another,
students were better at recalling words that they would later type, as if reinforcement
from typing acted backward in time.

Less Usual Six Sigma Protocols

Six protocols—Bem time shift, Presentiments, Random Number Generator, Remote
Viewing, Global Consciousness Project and Ganzfeld Research—are looked upon as
the most usual kinds of six sigma protocols. However, there are two more very
relevant protocols that are more difficult to interpret because of appropriateness of
controls, namely, studies of staring and survival after bodily death. Moreover, a ninth,
precognition, appears solid in its base, but the experimental data is not as well
replicated. We could have classified precognition under the six solid six sigma
protocols, but instead we’re listing it as the ninth because the data though impeccable,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 188

 
has derived only from one main source and some subsidiary sources (which for any
other scientific endeavor would be sufficient)!

Staring Protocols
Rupert Sheldrake and others (starting with Charles Coover in 1913 230) have been
involved in Staring protocols. These are very fascinating because of the fact that again
we are not dealing with a profound effect, where if somebody stares at somebody else
under experimental conditions one is getting 80% differences. A special component of
Staring Protocols is their simple design. Staring even when set up experimentally to
avoid sensory leakage (not the same room, blindfolds), does not require sophisticated
apparatus, though it does require time and effort. There are a variety of different
experimental methods, and these experiments have gradually been tightened up
methodologically. Radin 220 reports a meta-analysis of 60 experiments with 33, 357
trials. Once again, we are dealing with small differences from chance expectation, in
this instance just 54.5% instead of the expected 50% overall. (It’s surprising this is not
higher as the figures for spontaneous staring without warning could be, we speculate,
much higher; the difference experimentally is the expectation and possibly motivation
factors). However, one examines it, the results are profoundly statistically significant.
In Sheldrake’s initial studies 27the statistics were so overwhelming that one cannot even
talk about 1 in a billion, but 1 in absolutely astronomical figures.—202 octodecillion
against chance (2*1059)
In its simplest form, the "sense of being stared at" can be investigated by means of
simple experiments in which subjects and lookers work in pairs, with the looker sitting
behind the subject. In a random sequence of trials, the looker either looks at the back
of the subject, or looks away and thinks of something else. The effect still occurs in
experiments in which subjects were blindfolded and given no feedback, showing it did
not depend on visual clues, nor on the subjects knowing if their guesses were right or
wrong, looked at through closed windows231. Studies have been in many countries and
Sheldrake’s staring work in Britain, was replicated by schoolteachers in Canada,
Germany and the United States with even more significant positive effect than in his
own experiments despite ensuring visual, auditory and olfactory clues had been
eliminated. This implies that the sense of being stared at does not depend on the known
senses 231.

Survival After Bodily Death

Finally, we have the most controversial area as well, the area of so-called Survival
Research—survival of some component of human consciousness after bodily death.
There are arguments that if data are transmitted, no matter how complex that data, that
data are not occurring from somebody who survived bodily death because logically
this may be a hypothesis that appears more improbable than just communicating by
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 189

 
psi. In fact, if there is communication, it is postulated that it is by psi, so the term
superpsi has developed as a pure theoretical construct, despite any evidence of this
actually existing. We are not here at this point going to debate whether or not this is
superpsi, which probably is simply psi, or survival. The important component is that
sometimes when data are transmitted it is of such a kind that the statistics against
chance are completely overwhelming. Such was the case in a famous so-called chess
game involving the alleged communicator, the great Grandmaster Geza Maroczy and
the world senior chess champion Victor Korchnoi.
The important point statistically here is that Maroczy was able to communicate
31 out of 31 correct answers in terms of extraordinarily esoteric data, which nobody
knew about, and where eventually a professional librarian had to be hired (blind to the
reason) in Hungary to authenticate the answer: He thought this was just for a
biography for Maroczy and did not know the purpose. Effectively, all 31 out of 31
esoteric data pieces were correct. Now, the chances of any esoteric data piece being
correct may be very low, for example, we would put the a priori prior probability at
one in a hundred or one in a thousand of guessing or knowing the data by information
means. However, even if one takes a one in two probability, one is dealing with 231, or
close to a one in two billion chance statistic. Overall, in this particular study
“Maroczy” reported 79 out of 81 correct items. 159 This again is so high that it can be
compared to all the grains of sand that are on the earth.

Precognition and Six Sigma Data

Precognition research also demonstrates six sigma data in psi research.
Precognition involves information about knowledge of the future, which is not
obtained by statistical prediction or logic. It can be studied in the lab situation with
excellent controls for any kind of information leakage, particularly as the event being
considered has not yet occurred in our current reality.
In this regard, there are two important databases: The first is a meta-analysis of
many studies, and the second is a particularly impressive study from one lab, both with
overwhelming > six sigma data.
The meta-analysis is by Charles Honorton and Diane Ferrari 232. They analyzed
research data from 1935 to 1989 pertaining to precognition. They examined 309
precognition experiments carried out by 62 investigators. 50, 000 participants were
used and there were more than 2 million trials.
30% of these studies were statistically significant whereas only 5% would be expected
to be significant by chance. The statistical significance of this meta-analysis is
overwhelming even for six sigma data: 10 20 against chance. This on its own
constitutes overwhelming evidence for a mechanism occurring that cannot be
explained by chance.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 190

 
 The single lab study comes from the Princeton Engineering anomalies research labs
in Princeton, NJ. Robert Jahn, Brenda Dunne and Roger Nelson performed 227 formal
experiments on precognitive remote perception233. Individuals were asked where one of
the researchers would be hiding at a pre-selected later time. The probability against
chance was 1 in 100 billion.
The description was accurate to the same degree whether the viewer was looking
hours, days or weeks into the future. This has implications about the concepts of future
time and the inverse square law.

Statistical combinations and independence

It would be inappropriate to now combine the nine different meta-analysis or
demonstrable studies into one mega-statistical analysis. This is so as the data should be
demonstrating the same broader phenomenon (psi). This would imply that the data is
not independent and therefore the statistics not additive. A similar argument could be
made for independent meta-analyses in the individual protocols. Yes, they are likely
due to the same base, psi, and so not independent. However, that is the main point. By
this means we are demonstrating the overwhelming statistical basis for the presence of
psi. If psi did not exist, there would be no dependence of data: they would purely be
statistical aberrations. So these interrelated nine different protocols demonstrate simply
that psi exists, and that therefore our current 3S-1t standard scientific protocol needs
rethinking.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 191

 
CHAPTER 24: APPLYING TDVP TO THE DATA ON PSI 202

“A human being is part of a whole, called by us the Universe, a part limited in time
and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated
from the rest--a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of
prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons
nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles
of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.”
Albert Einstein

We can apply psi phenomena and relatively nonlocal consciousness to TDVP:

Dealing with a real phenomenon, there are enormous implications in terms of
consciousness research because it may be that these data imply a whole different
mechanism in terms of dimensional communication. If indeed there is survival after
bodily death, this implies a whole difference in terms of space-time as well. In our
conventional standard physical world of our human living at 3S-1t, the space-time
component in relation to survival of consciousness would be described as S and a T of
zero.

We can apply the Indivension model in TDVP with interacting vortices at certain
points producing little bits of information, or more significant information: If there is a
more significant interaction, this may be via vortices, vectors, tensors, or scalars.
Mathematically meeting at a point or in any three dimensional curved angle CST is a
rare event. Therefore, psi is a rare event.

Psi will always remain a rare event in 3 dimensions of space and 1 moment or short
event in time. In fact, if it didn’t it would overwhelm. Similarly, once one enters a
broader consciousness, a metaconsciousness, there is far more interface in interaction
of such vortices because there is less tethering. This means that psi becomes a far more
common event at higher dimensions and at even further dimensions, psi is extremely
common, and a TDVP test postulate would be that the mechanism of communication
would be greater and more detailed. Because survival by definition in our general 3S-
1t domain involves higher dimensions, we would postulate that survival data would be
far higher statistically in correct hits or detail than psi in living humans.

Further applying Indivension, because survival in our conventional physicalistic

earthly 3S-1t domain would be perceived as involving 0S and 0t. It implies that it has a
higher dimensional level, or numerous higher dimensional levels so that one might be
able to move between different flexible dimensions, just as potentially one does in a
meditative state, in a mystical state, or in dreams. Consequently, the hypothesis is
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 192

 
again that data in relation to survival would produce a higher statistical generation of
psi. The only way this can be examined, however, is communications in alleged
survival to individuals or Individual-units in 3S-1t. This filtering phenomenon may
well diminish down the extent of information communication and other aspects of
dimensional consciousness such as emotionality and distortions of information may
also occur. However, these are therefore, two testable hypotheses, namely, the
incidence of psi should be rare because the vortical indivension links are spontaneous
and unusual, and the incidence of data received from alleged survival or superpsi
should be far more common.

These data are supported where reports of veridical communications may be of the
order of 77% or more234. The Maroczy example shows the extent of potential positive
data. Of course, as one moves from 3S-1t to higher, the potential in terms of difficulty
proving one’s instrumentation at an adequate scientific controlled level from a 3S-1t
perspective becomes higher. In other words, the statistics or veridical data may exist
but the implications of this data are more limiting.

Perspective on the Consciousness Statistical Protocols

There are therefore, eight different six sigma protocols in psi research and
effectively this reflects studies in metaconsciousness. Whereas one can refute one or
two, by trying to invoke fraud or poor methodologies, it is difficult to refute all of
them. As they are different, they all support each other in terms of coming to the
conclusion that we are dealing with a real phenomenon.

Bayesian Statistics
This, too, raises the debate about what Bayesian statistic would constitute a
legitimate null hypothesis. This is particularly so if it is argued that results are logically
impossible. However, quantification of what is applicable in terms of Bayesian
improbabilities and null hypotheses should be based on legitimate knowledge not
prejudice applying LFAF. At that point, the postulated impossibility becomes
inappropriate. The term is “theoretical implausibility” —the objection to use when all
else fails as some experimental findings are so counterintuitive and nonsensical they
should be rejected in principle: the earth is, indeed, flat.

One could argue that if something is falsifiable at the 3S-1t domain, then one has
some base to apply or estimate, a priori, Bayesian prior distribution statistical odds and
examine a null hypothesis. However, when something is not-falsifiable because the
factors in a metadimensional world cannot be entirely replicated in 3S-1t, then the use
of the Bayesian reasoning approach is statistically completely unfeasible. The
“metadimensional” aspect leaves just LFAF information in 3S-1t meaning that one has
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 193

 
small pieces of the jigsaw. Bayesian approaches then are inappropriate because there is
no base to scientifically argue about probabilistic odds: If one chooses impossible prior
estimates, then Bayesian methods will appear to accommodate the researcher but it
will produce meaningless, nonsensical results 146; 147. This is one reason why we have
used a “frequentist” approach to statistics, citing the six sigma data.

We pointed out the small deviation from the expected chance results that are often
attained in consciousness research, and another reason for this rare event phenomenon
is the fact that the end-point result is expressed in feasibility in 3S-1t only. Despite the
exact circumstances of research never being replicable, for example, experimenter and
subject attitudes, and emotional states at the time will vary and these play a critical role
and even local sidereal time may play be relevant, and therefore, could confound, there
still should be other factors that will ultimately dilute out these confounders.

The Bem work has caused enormous consternation because finally conventional
materialist scientists cannot refute it besides illogical Bayesian arguments. 146; 147 Their
whole carefully constructed edifice may suddenly collapse. The wall of mud will leak.
Dossey has written a carefully crafted editorial on this 148.

In conventional physical, biological and psychological research these factors wash

out rather quickly and easily. However, in consciousness research, these factors are
prime: They are the key factors because consciousness with space and time is so
impacting. This means that large sample sizes are needed to counteract the apparently
small deviation of data from chance, which has been aggravated because confounders
are not taken into account.

Consequently, studies require large sample sizes to tease out these remaining
differences. Fortunately, the progress over the past three decades, particularly, have
allowed researchers to demonstrate, usually via meta-analysis, frequentist type
statistically significant results that can still accumulate over to 1 in a billion against
chance. This is, in fact, what has so far happened in at least six and possibly all the
nine areas of consciousness research listed.

Speculative Application to a Consciousness-Dimensionality Model, Specifically

TDVP
The demonstration of psi phenomena across several different levels of examination
means simply that psi exists in one form or another.
For those flat-earthers, yes, the earth is flat: It is just awful to be required to unthink all
one has thought before. But that is required for anyone who is scientifically
appropriate. An objective, open-minded skeptic trained and experienced in the area
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 194

 
who examines the data, must come to the legitimate conclusion that psi is a proven
phenomenon and move on from there. Nonetheless, there are pseudoskeptics who do
not know the area, or who make a professional living out of debunking scientifically
solid information that cannot be explained in any way other than psi. In other
disciplines, this would be equivalent to someone with a second grade education
debunking the findings of a leading expert PhD in his area of expertise, simply because
they did not like the discipline or could not understand the results, or were being
scientifically inappropriate: It should not happen in that instance. And nor should it
happen in consciousness research of any kind.

The great CD Broad summarized this: “Anyone who at the present day expresses
confident opinions, whether positive or negative, on ostensibly paranormal
phenomena, without making himself thoroughly acquainted with the main methods and
results of the careful and long-continued work may be dismissed without further
ceremony, as a conceited ignoramus.” 235

Statistically, there is solid proof of a consciousness that is non-local in the context

of our conventional 3 dimensions of space, 1 point in time reality. These
overwhelmingly large statistics prove that these phenomena are real. They have
required large sample sizes because they are rare events experimentally. But their
rarity in the experimental 3S-1t domain does not obviate their existence. Moreover, by
their very existence, the staid insistence by many in the scientific and philosophical
community in a materialistic reductionist existence is falsified and becomes not
feasible when dealing with such realities. Also, the absence of null results fails the
feasibility of the physicalistic paradigm in these areas.
All of these examples of consciousness effectively may relate to the meaningful reality
of the C-substrate or of metaconsciousness.

A Model of Psi Applying TDVP

An explanatory model is needed but a broad well-documented model has not been
demonstrated to explain all of psi.
• Applying the TDVP model, psi implies some kind of connecting impact.
• Further, applying the model of indivension and vortices it may be that these
connections relate to higher dimensional consciousness phenomena intersecting
and interacting across individual-units (individuals or clusters; human or other
animals or even inanimate objects). The TDVP model proposes a mechanism for
psi.
• The TDVP N-Dimensional indivension mechanism explains the rarity in 3S-1t
domain as one goes higher and higher dimensionally. It may be that there is
more and more impact in terms of such communication of consciousness type
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 195

 
 information at the higher dimensional levels of consciousness (e.g., deep high
level passive meditative at or active meditation [“hitbonnenut”] states), reaching
levels like “samadhi”, compared with lower levels of consciousness (e.g., maybe
dreams).
• The impact of psi may vary depending on the kind of “receptor’ involved because
possibly more individual-units can be influenced but only to a limited degree.
Additionally, so-called “psychic” individuals, statistically, may be more sensitive to
metaconscious awareness than those who are less “psychic”, and possibly some
animals might have a different response to metaconscious awarenesses than humans.
• At the subatomic level, the delayed choice experiments in Physics may reflect
entirely different consciousness mechanisms such as just a communication of
consciousness involving some kind of meaningfulness or information delivery
or influence.
• The broader tentacle of reaching many conceivably could relate to potentially
higher fluctuating dimensional vortices. However, at these higher levels, the influence
on a much lower dimension, e.g., 3S-1t, may be less than an immediately higher C-
substrate dimension. Speculatively, higher C-substrate dimensions in the transfinite
range, such as artistic appreciation or specific moral behaviors may not be as easily
demonstrated as events that involve day-to-day realities. 27; 236
• It is probable that higher dimensionalities contain aspects that appear “non-
local” for an individual experiencing the 3S-1t reality. This is a relative non-
locality of space and time in 3S-1t. This is brought about because only pieces of
the metadimensional jigsaw puzzle are experienced through our limited physical
senses. This leads events or experiences which don’t fit 3S space or 1t time to be
interpreted as “beyond time and space” or “timeless and spaceless”, when they
reflect only our physical limitations in 3S-1t. The interface, influence or
apprehension of information with 3S-1t events or objects may well be less while
experiencing our conventional 3S-1t standard domain than would occur if we
were able to experience higher dimensional consciousness.
• 3S-1t as a “lower’ dimension may effectively be several dimensions of
consciousness from the higher consciousness dimensions.
• The parallel may be apposite with the various forces (gravitation and expanding
universe are very weak, yet extend large distances; strong and weak subatomic
forces impact very locally but are relatively more powerful).
• Just as space and time have their own forces and packets, e.g., leptons and
hadrons, such psi communication could speculatively be by some kind of
different particle, for example a postulated “psitron” or a “kinetron”.
• The use of such data from consciousness research is critical when evaluating
hyperspace, string theory, and higher dimensionalities. As soon as any kind of
Higher Consciousness is postulated, the consciousness that is occurring at that
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 196

 
 higher level is, by definition, metaconsciousness, because we have defined
neurological consciousness (N-C) as the limited information that one is
obtaining from within the brain in terms of awareness and responsiveness. N-C
appears to be a valuable evolutionary control. This is so because if people did
not have this control or filtering mechanism, there would be so much incoming
information that individuals would be unable to handle it. They need to be able
to filter data and integrate it sufficiently within their own functional limitations.
This prevents them from becoming sensorily or even motorically overwhelmed.
In other words, the process of perception, conception, and actualizing reality is
far more controlled for the living being in the limited neurophysiological closed
brain system. However, N-C might not be a necessary component of information
and meaning access when decoupled in an infinite reality (e.g. in survival, in
coma).
• This way individuals can have control over their cognition, the emotion, and
their volitional functions, with the cognitive and the emotional functions that
relate specifically to N-C and also psychological elements of consciousness (E-
C). Ultimately, their neurophysiology is an expression of their behaviors. But it
is far more complex than that because of metaconscious elements that might
intrude.
• Emotional functions are extended in Higher Consciousness and brain
consciousness: It also includes higher developmental attributes such as courage,
love, and determination, zeal to perform, and the development of creative skills.
These are areas that have some limitations in terms of many individuals’
performances, and at the highest levels are regarded as exceptional human
experiences, a term that can also be attributed to psi.
• Although the data on psi phenomena cogently suggest that they do not obey the
inverse square law or any other ST limitation of locality and time, this is not
entirely proven because psychological components may correlate with nearer
distances. 237 Nevertheless, this strong likelihood of relative nonlocality in psi, is
one reason why one can posit that, if there are underlying phenomenal aspects
such as packets of psi, a spaceless, timeless component, such as a psitron or a
kinetron, could exist. If so, this could allow for communication between
dimensional levels. Effectively, it could be that the vortical motion and
indivension patterns of the metadimensional communications are a similar but
purely non-physical C-substrate form or force. If so, this could be at the Qualit
level and would utilize the “conscits” of psitrons and/ or kinetrons—these would
be different from “qubits” of quantal space and “chronits” of quantal time.
Whereas, these postulated packets of consciousness, conscits could similarly
reflect the level of the quantum, disputably they could be reflecting an even
lower level involving postulated subquantum infinitesimals 71 or alternatively,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 197

 
 “dark space”. The tethered link of STC might further lead us to speculate that
the C-substrate is intimately linked with all of 3S-1t content such as mass and
energy, and that, indeed, all ST events may actually be reflections of C-substrate
dynamics.

A New Model for Psi: Applying Specifically Vortical Indivension Interfaces of

TDVP
Psi has been proposed to occur when vortices interface with each other or through
vector, scalars or tensors connecting. In TDVP using the vortical indivension model,
this is not a random process. Psi involves a situational component making it far more
common in situations of emotional, cognitive and volitional familiarity and linkage
and conversely may be repelled by situations that are against these principles., e.g.,
love may be more conducive than hate, common cognitive understanding more
conducive than entirely different interests. Therefore, there are environments for psi
and this appears to be supported in both spontaneous psi descriptions as well as psi-
linkage in experimental studies. Psi in this model is not an anomalous process: It is a
communication skill potentially available to all, and its non-recognition on a daily or
even hourly, might relate, in part, to it being filtered out, not recognized or so admixed
with other information and meaning from the neurological and psychological settings,
that it becomes unreliable as compared with, for example, the precise language of
speech.

Effectively, the data suggests that individuals who are linked psychologically,
familially socially, culturally, or in other ways might be more likely to experience
potential psi linkage. 27; 217; 238-243. This fits well with intersecting vortical components or
contents that interface and therefore, provide a fruitful link of the interface of vortical
indivension with subjective psi experience. This is so as information content in
vortices is at least, in part, within the C-substrate, and this has the meaningful reality or
meaningful components. Therefore, people who are in love, identical twins, mother-
child relationships, siblings, or people who are very close in other ways may very well
be interfacing far more at this N-dimensional level than otherwise. Consequently, the
psi relationships of people with connectedness are far greater. Such connections may
be at any of the dimensional levels or qualities of the C-substrate: Emotional links may
be profoundly relevant, but also, cognitive links are highly important, too, so that the
coincidental meeting of individuals with the same ideas, or the emphasis of the same
concept across several different meeting points (e.g., learnt behavior, patterns
becoming easier, same scientists investigating information at the same time) also is
explained by such interfaces.

Therefore, the mechanisms of interfacing at a vortical indivension level provides a

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 198

 
coherent model for the occurrence of psi and connectedness.
1. Connectedness
It explains connectedness in its broader base. Psi is not a random process. It is
based on the meaningful elements of C-substrate interfacing in the living with S and T
(note mass and energy are end point contents); Space and time reflect multiple
variables of extent with metric measurements and hence dimensions.

2. Rarity
It explains the rarity of the phenomenon in the context of “rare” events.
Rarity, semantically, we suggest may be an acronym for rarity: "FIR"—not only of
"frequency" (very unusual event) but also "intensity" (e.g., how much it can be
differentiated from the underlying noise) and "robustness" (which must take into
account variations even in subjects, experimenters and other conditions).

All three of these factors imply “rarity” of psi. Consequently, for example, small
changes to a random distribution would require a statistical demonstration of
differences from the control. "Rare" here implies small changes to an overall larger
picture. That is "rare" because it is not "obvious" —like clinically significant
phenomena: In the medical model "clinically significant" evaluations and responses
don't require statistics: We can see dramatic changes occurring consistently in a
particular intervention almost every time we try that intervention (e.g., the person has a
streptococcal throat infection; we give an appropriate antibiotic; in almost every case
we will see that infection get better) or the features of a condition are so consistent that
we can make diagnostic predictions (e.g., the person's fasting blood sugar is 160;
diabetes now by definition is 126 or above; we regard that result as clinically
significant for diabetes). Now in both instances previous statistical analyses may have
been involved in initial validation of such information. In the medical model, rarity
would imply small deviations from those expectations (e.g., side-effects in less than
1%, or it may be a rarity based on extent of change, though the event may be slightly
different expectation).

The rarity in vortical indivension could be expressed as connectedness or psi. The

occurrence of these manifesting as rare events relate to describing them in terms of
threshold intensity or frequency or robustness: Interfacing vortices or vectors across or
between or within dimensions may be occurring almost all the time, but the
registration of relevance in most instances would be insubstantial. Some events, such
as well-done presentiment studies, may show changes that are highly significant when
separating these parameters. But the fact that they need statistical demonstration of
presence argues against their being phenomena which we see in clinical significance
“on a more probable than not" basis. Something that is clinically very reliable in day-
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 199

 
to-day communication is speech, which is why we use it far more than psi in direct
interaction, although there still may unconscious psi processes motivating it.

3. Psi conducive and repulsive phenomena

Vortical indivension could potentially interface many psi–conducive elements.
These include possible linkage of the psychosocial, of interest and of understanding, of
emotion, influence, drive, motivation and thinking, and of environmental elements.
Each of these may allow greater convergence of vortical interfaces within and across
dimensions. Therefore, there are many aspects that may attract and repel psi and
ostensible meaningful coincidences could be reflecting not only just points of vortical
interface, but significant joining or marked interaction of vortices allowing for
commonality of experience. There is much that is “submerged” —not expressed—in
these “zillions” of vortical indivensions, yet that remains meaningful. Every action,
every individual, and every individual-unit influences others and may change the
“track” of not only individual existence, but ultimately impact on all other realities,
however, minimally.

Some vortices may influence reality more profoundly than others because they
create a larger web for the reality. Could it be that this book might ultimately influence
the concepts of millions of others because they would be interpreting the this model
within the fabric of their own previous thoughts. The merging of the new with the old
would make a difference: Even if this broader model is wrong, it still could
provocatively impact their thinking, philosophy or ideas by stimulating new ideas:
Each of us touch the concepts of others, and sometimes profoundly.

4. Improbability of the superpsi hypothesis

This, also, explains the illogicality of the theoretical precept of “superpsi” usually
invoked as an all-encompassing, all-embracing extended psi without limits and
invoked as an alternative to survival after bodily death. The problem is there does not
appear to be empirical support for any instance of superpsi in the absence of survival
communication data. Moreover, using this model of vortical indivension, psi occurs
fundamentally as rare spontaneous events. A century of research has demonstrated
this. This is why we require statistical validations because of this fundamental
property. Superpsi would imply either a control of these rare events or greater
collections of complex psi events together or of such a kind that it would appear to
need to be more common: But we have no supporting data.

5. Learnt skills
Support for the model of formative causation: Sheldrake with his morphogenetic
fields suggested that a repetitive new learnt skill might become increasingly easier to a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 200

 
certain point. Effectively the closeness and connectedness of an idea or skill creates a
more extended clustering and greater accessibility to the underlined vortices, almost
metaphorically like tuning into a radio station in 3S-1t.

6. Decline effect
Once routinized, an initial psi or connectedness event, loses the enthusiasm and
emotional investment and cognitive attitudes. This change leads to the well-known
“decline effect” in parapsychology.

7. Apprehension and influence

“Psi” involves either an afferent or efferent loop: afferently, event information or
space-time data may be acquired, perceived or apprehended (so-called “extrasensory
perception”—“ESP”); or efferently, psi involves influence or perturbation without
physical interventions (i.e. so-called “psychokinesis” or PK). Psi may occur
spontaneously or experimentally, or be induced. Applying vortices, we postulate that
experimental psi would require directedness to a limited number of vortical
interactions and so should be less common than spontaneous psi. Similarly, non-
directed, non-specific contacts of individual-units (e.g., individuals, groups, or even
global consciousness) should be more frequent than actively influencing or acquiring
specific data or information.

8. Psychoneurological influences
Ultimately all psi is expressed through the brain, as the significant neurological
filter, barrier and permeable unit for metaconsciousness. It is also an endpoint in
sentient beings for STC tethering of data, at all size levels, quantal through
astronomical. This means there will be some distortion of these mechanisms.

Vortices being ubiquitous also manifest biologically (e.g., levorotatory chemicals,

helices in genetics) 244; 245 and the linkage of information though expressed physically in
the brain, may still have components of the vortical indivension interfaces at other
dimensional levels. The endpoint is the human brain trying to utilize information
appropriately and maximally.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 201

 
CHAPTER 25: PSI AND ENTANGLEMENT 246

“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as
they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”
Albert Einstein, "Geometry and Experience", January 27, 1921

Psi and Its Role

Entanglement
However, another second explanation against total quantum randomness relates to
Schrödinger’s entanglement and the work that has followed. We recognize the
relevance of entanglement and have used the Copenhagen interpretation of Physics in
interpretations of these difficult to explain events.

Entanglement at the quantum level is linked with the “non-locality” of the Copenhagen
Interpretation, which is a subset of the entanglement we refer to. But it is an important
part because it demonstrates what we are calling relative non-locality. Tethering
through the interpenetrating series of dimensional realities is relevant here.
METACIST (pronounced “meta-kissed” not “cyst”) is a useful infinite term within
Essence.

The consequence of the Copenhagen interpretation of physics 41 could be the postulated

role of meaning and consciousness, that spooky action at a distance, quantum
weirdness, and consolidated empirically by the French Aspect research 87, and the
Geneva studies 85; 86; 247. These have shown that this entanglement can operate instantly
over a great distance. Another study that said this might just be a question of timing
has been refuted. 248; 249 Scientists examined relative time applying the concept of a craft
going in two directions to demonstrate that this was not entanglement but just a time
effect. But they failed: They weren’t able to demonstrate this and this, in turn,
reinforced the idea pertaining to a consciousness as an important player. 160
We interpret entanglement as a subset in the Copenhagen Interpretation, but also, it is
far greater in our model because we are looking at tethering through interpenetrating
realities.

Psi and rarity

Psi argues against complete quantum indeterminacy yet is often neglected in the
conventional sciences despite being possibly the most relevant area. Psi demonstrates,
however, the six sigma data on slight influences on random number generators and
also, on the global consciousness project. These explain ostensible uncertainty
elements possibly having some meaningful relevance as well may be a non-
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 202

 
randomization result as reflected by the intentional influences. We expect these
influences to be rare and not profound and they are. We recognize this rarity via the
model of vortical indivension. The why is because it is all connected to the original
consciousness substrate.

Entanglement and psi: Are they the same?

Superficially, entanglement and psi appear to be similar, as entanglement may be the
outward manifestation of the C-substrate of the dimensions of space time. We do not
regard the two as synonymous but they may be closely related. Is the global
consciousness project, or the random number generator data reflecting psi or
entanglement or both?

Dean Radin in his book Entangled Minds 220 certainly implies a major link or that they
are the same. Certainly, the entanglement of particles that originate in the same
quantum event is the outward manifestation of the connection between the various
substrates evoked by w the C substrate, or even the transfinite substrate impacting
down to the 4 dimensions of 3S-1t space-time that we experience. Entanglement is not
easily understood by physicists. This is so because it is action at a distance, it’s non-
locality, it is quantum weirdness, it’s a spooky effect, and it is merely the surface
manifestation of what we are talking about. It might even be the epiphenomenon, so to
say.

Historically, perhaps we have been looking at it absolutely upside down from the
bottom-up trying to apply materialistic science. Everything that we see material may,
paradoxically, be epiphenomenal to the consciousness substrate. The STC tethering
may be unified even at the top-down level: It is not limited to finite 3S-1t-1c reality.
The TDVP model implies that many of the aspects that we experience as material may
ultimately be epiphenomenal with “essence”, at times, being primary. And essence is
the reflection of the infinite expressed as metaconsciousness, life, ordropy, metaspace,
and metatime.

The rarity of psi and language

"Rare" is a relative term. Our physical communication systems apply speech. Such
language has been proven to be reliable and consistent. Regular, coherent and common
linguistic experience may be a more valuable evolutional criterion in our living
physical 3S-1t reality. This is so because one can directly and uniformly apply the
same, broadly consistent common experiences of others—though these "experiences"
are still individually idiosyncratic because of their subjectivity perception, conception
and expression.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 203

 
What about psi below awareness?
On the other hand, we frequently do not need to directly apply psi in our living
physical 3S-1t reality because it is a relatively unreliable, spontaneous, less predictable
mechanism and therefore, in common use, by comparison, psi appears to be rare. But
it might not be rare, in fact. It may be ubiquitous, but its expression in our living 3S-1t
reality experience makes it appear not to be easily and consistently apprehended in
awareness in our neurological consciousness such that we can reliably go about our
business just with psi but not with concepts or/ and language. "Consciousness" here is
qualified to avoid the misinterpretations of its non-qualified definition. Similarly, we
distinguish meaning and its relevance as fitting well into our models the infinite and
consciousness. The discrete finite metadimensionality and the continuous infinite and
the difficulties of the permeability (boundary, barrier, filter) between infinite
metaconsciousness and meaning at 3S-1t make the situation even more complex.

Yet, we don't know what influences are occurring at other levels below neurological
conscious awareness.
Indeed, so much is automatic in terms of our functioning (cardiac, respiratory and
other vegetative functions) that we take them for granted but can demonstrate them
physiologically. And then there is the wealth of psychological functions, too, many of
which are expressed subconsciously.
So though a speculation, it is still a distinct possibility.

Psi in everyday life

Rarity is relative to other communication in 3S-1t: The majority of the population
report it subjectively 127; 181; 211; 242; 250, and some might report their frequency of psi as
overwhelmingly common though that kind of report itself might be rare. They’re
reporting what they are consciously aware of.

Psi expression may be a relative rarity for the ordinary person in ordinary
circumstances in our current 3S-1t physical reality. But a large variety of parameters,
such as milieu, circumstances and
ethicospirituomysticobiopsychofamiliogroupsociocultural factors in our
subatomicmacrocosmoreality expressed electrochemically via the nervous systems of
living sentient beings in 3S-1t may produce enormous fluctuations. Given the correct
circumstances of these individual-unit variations, psi might be common. We have
applied some complex words here, but we’re suggesting broader systems that are
unified and this unification of complex systems may emphasize this point.

The relevance of psychological parameters, and our model of "individual-units” fits

this. The psychological interface is enormously relevant in the frequency of psi. In
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 204

 
TDVP, we recognize "fluctuating dimensionalities" and the major parameters are the
physiological and psychological limitations of brain functioning, and the positive (and
negative) transcendence of the various individual-units, such as the self, groups, ethnic
identities, families, societies and cultures.

We could even postulate that those in specific helping professions, who positively use
psi in their everyday practice, may be more successful in their endeavors than those
who do not. Ditto for other professions, and certainly for the development of new
creative ideas.

We should differentiate “psi’ as a phenomenon and the data that results. Certainly psi
delivered data may be rare, because there is no need for it all the time. But psi might be
operating all the time though is used when there is a need or in an experimental or
natural setting of inducing psi, e.g., meditation, remote viewing.

Psi beyond 3S-1t

Moreover, let's go beyond 3S-1t. It is possible to at least postulate that psi is the most
important afferent-central-efferent, relative non-local mechanism that exists and that
psi occurs ubiquitously at both the finite and infinite levels, though is not always
expressed in individual-unit subjective reality.

In the Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) model, we've tried

to link the occurrence of psi at the levels of the physical, psychological, life and
consciousness sciences. It explains the rarity of psi, how variations may occur at
spontaneous and experimental levels and the needs for a systems approach, the
differences between the perceptual and the conceptual, and the roles of consciousness,
metadimensionality, ordropy, life and infinity.

Psi and vortical indivension

The rarity of psi fits very well the ideas of interfacing, vortical indivension, rare event
theory, tethering and possibly entanglement. The explanatory "process" is called
indivension, and the “content“ relates to interfaces of vortices, vectors, scalars and
tensors.

Applying the Calculus of Distinctions we can distinguish percepts, concepts and

experiences as well as subjectivity and relative objectivity.
In TDVP, fluctuating vortical indivension utilizes the subjective experiences, the
commonality of relative objectivity of “zillions” of interfacing vortices, the awareness
that perceptual and conceptual phenomena are differently expressed.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 205

 
Entanglement and Quantum Correlations
A complex re-think about nonlocality and psi
Let us re-examine the issue of entanglement using complex information derived from
cutting edge science in the area. This argues for the relevance of entanglement, for its
likely link with the relative nonlocal and that it is not synonymous with subatomic
equivalent of psi: If that is so it may be that other conscits may still be relevant.

Bell, Copenhagen and beyond

In the Bell test experiments, which play an important role in understanding the nature
of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox, quantum entanglement plays the central
role. The violation of Bell's inequalities rules out local hidden variable theories which
attempt to restore the realism. This is in the context that definiteness of the outcome in
a single measurement cannot be ensured by using a supplementary variable along with
the wave function, which cannot be obtained in the standard Copenhagen
Interpretation of quantum mechanics in its various formulations. 41

Support for the Copenhagen interpretation began with Freedman and Clauser251 but the
work was in a single room, and although the research was outstanding scientists still
wanted to ensure that there were no loopholes relating to local explanations.
The most serious loophole is the detection loophole, which means that particles are
not always detected in both wings of the experiment. It is possible to "engineer"
quantum correlations (the experimental result) by letting detection be dependent on a
combination of local hidden variables and detector setting. This is a reason why the
work by Nicolas Brunner and Nicolas Gisin at the University of Geneva is very
relevant because it has been even harder to refute the conclusions of the outstandingly
performed Aspect experiments 87. The Geneva Bell test experiments showed that
distance did not destroy the "entanglement". Light was sent in fiber optic cables over
distances of 11km (1998) and then later 50 kilometers (2007) before it was analyzed.

Furthermore, in 1998, Innsbruck researchers led by Anton Zeilinger with Gregor

Weihs conducted an ingenious experiment that closed the "locality" loophole,
improving on Aspect's of 1982 252. The detector was made using a quantum process to
ensure that it was random. Their results violated the so-called CHSH inequality by
over 30 standard deviations with the coincidence curves agreeing with those predicted
by quantum theory. 108 The Gisin group 85 86 247 also looked for coincidence probabilities
on a three three-dimensional (qutrit) system. They showed the inequality was violated
when each observer measures two noncommuting observables (this may be relevant in
TDVP where three dimensional measures are used as a unit in dimensionometry).
Moreover, time synchronies do not explain such phenomena. 249

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 206

 
What allows entanglement?
Statistically, given ideal circumstances, all of the subatomic particles like photons
could exhibit entanglement. In theory, any two particles that have ever interacted, are
entangled forever and this entanglement has infinite or transfinite range. In practice,
however, such an entanglement is lost in the “noise” of multiple combinatorial
entanglements. Therefore, the detection of an "entangled" state requires that there be
something that establishes a link between the properties of the particles, such as a
conservation law that must be jointly obeyed by the two particles. Moreover, after the
first measurement on an entangled variable, the entanglement vanishes from the
observable universe. It still remains in the mathematical representation of the system,
but it only affects unobservable quantities. (Unobservable quantities, such as the
complex phase, are part of the mathematical "hardware" needed to calculate observable
quantities correctly). Since the usual environment is rife with interactions, all particles
are entangled in the usual expectable environment without any kind of noise
extraction. In general, though, the entanglements will not be of the observable types.
The minimum entanglement observed in most research given the noise that exists
could be zero.

Entangled particles cannot be regarded as nonlocal per se but there may be a nonlocal
relationship between some of their properties. Entanglement does not require
nonlocality per se: what it rules out is the combination of locality plus realism—the
notion that particles are actual "things" with innate properties of their own. Physicists
sometimes prefer quasi-mystical ideas to preserve locality at the expense of realism
and this approach comes closet to coherence is in arguments that quantum mechanics
is a theory about our knowledge of the world rather than a theory about the world.
Many physicists apply naive realism and would rather accept nonlocality, but this is
not entirely true.

The role of precognition

If we accept the cogent evidence for phenomena like precognition, locality becomes
untenable. Therefore, we would have no impediments to the preference for realism. In
fact, the Leggett inequalities, a somewhat improved extension of the Bell inequalities
253
, are frequently touted as having ruled out nonlocality and forced the acceptance of
nonrealism. The Leggett inequalities (from Anthony James Leggett) are a related pair
of mathematical expressions concerning the correlations of properties of entangled
particles. The inequalities are exemplified in terms of relative angles of elliptical and
linear polarizations. They are fulfilled by all physical theories that are based on certain
non-local and realistic assumptions that may be considered to be plausible or intuitive
according to common physical reasoning. 254

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 207

 
The role of time
However, Leggett's assumptions in deriving those inequalities specifically ruled out
the backward-in-time nonlocality that consciousness and time researchers are
accustomed to dealing with. 249; 253; 255 Therefore, nonlocal, realistic theories are
appropriate and supported by precognition.

The Leggett inequalities are violated by quantum mechanical theory. 249; 253; 254; 256
The results of an experimental test in 2007 by a team directed by Anton Zeilinger
showed agreement with quantum mechanics rather than the Leggett inequalities for a
broad class of theories. 257 The Leggett related work is probably the most important
theoretical advance, though the inequality refutation doesn't quite accomplish the task
of absolutely proving nonlocality though with precognition, it could be argued that it
did. The Leggett–Garg inequality is always violated on the microscopic quantum
mechanics scale. 253

Revisiting nonlocality
Establishing nonlocality is based on significant supporting data. The original
experiments confirmed that entangled particles violated the Bell formulas.
Nevertheless, there was still an "out" for those insisting on "local realism": 254 The
experiment was slow enough that information about the detector settings could
propagate from one end of the apparatus to the other long before the photon
measurements could take place. This meant that a purely local process could,
technically, be carrying the information the particles needed to "make up their minds"
about how to be measured. There were no particular candidates for what might carry
such information, but the communication was possible in principle.

Aspect refuted these local-realist ideas by randomizing the choice of detector settings
on extremely short time scales. This made it such that there was no way before the
measurement was complete that any light-speed-limited signal could carry information
about the outcome of detector A over to detector B (or vice versa). 103; 104 Technically,
extending the causal gap to miles does nothing to make the demonstration of
nonlocality more rigorous: It simply tests the QM prediction that EPR correlations
don't weaken with distance—which they don't.254 But such research has been done to
consolidate the previous work.

Is entanglement “observable”?
Brains have evolved to extract meaningful patterns from huge amounts of noisy data.
Yet that ideal extraction may not be the state ideal for psi. Interpretations might be
complicated by “observable” entanglement apparently vanishing at the first meaningful
measurement “interaction” with the environment. Technically, this “observation” is not
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 208

 
strictly true as the "measurement" is an interaction that correlates a particle state with a
macroscopic state of a "measuring instrument" such that different values of some
variables of interest are associated with macroscopically distinguishable states of the
"instrument". This basic interaction should not be different from any other quantum
interaction: This is why the so-called "quantum Zeno effect" works even though
nobody's actually watching the lasers. 254

Sifting through the entangled complexity

When an entangled particle interacts with "the environment", its state has become
correlated with some jumble of 6x1023 grams of material in the "environment" that
have not been carefully configured to amplify single-particle states to macroscopic
levels. The single bit of entangled information is still there somewhere but it's buried
in “zillions” of bits of noise. However, since, in principle, every interaction entangles
the participating particles, the "environment" also contains as many bits of
entanglement information as it has particles -- jumbled, disorganized and unprepared
information that we don't know how to sort out or to read, and that is statistically
indistinguishable from random noise. Learning to sort out that concealed information,
though, might enable an organism to know something about what's going on
somewhere beyond the reach of its normal senses, and so could have considerable
survival value if it could be done at all. 254

Filters, signals and psi

Entanglement can't be used to send signals, if current theory is correct. Entanglement
as a mechanism for psi, even if the huge noise-filtering task is possible in principle,
would be limited to things like knowing what sort of "random" events happened
elsewhere, because all entanglement tells you is that this assortment of random particle
states here correlates with that assortment of random particle states somewhere else.
This is not valuable except for the fact that nature is full of processes that are
sensitively dependent on initial conditions, so this kind of correlative information
might inform us that the puma decided to go hunting on side A of the ridgeline rather
than side B, or let us know whether the snowfield up the hill is two flakes below or two
flakes over the critical point for avalanche instability. 254

Leggett or Einstein?
Besides Einstein's famous "God does not play dice" objection to quantum mechanics,
there was Einstein's still more fundamental objection that the moon is still there when
nobody looks. If the violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality can be demonstrated on
the macroscopic scale, this would challenge even this notion of realism. 254

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 209

 
CHAPTER 26: TIME AND FREE-WILL 193; 258

“The illusion of the passage of time arises from the confusing of the given with the
real. Passage of time arises because we think of occupying different realities. In fact,
we occupy only different givens. There is only one reality.”
Kurt Gödel 259

Time Multidimensionality
Time is particularly difficult in terms of conceptualizing multidimensionality.
Scientists for a century have tried to talk about time. For us to approach
multidimensional time is a challenge. Yet, we can tentatively demonstrate it with
mathematical evidence for 3 dimensions of time-- both algebraically, geometrically; by
inseparable tethering structurally; and by origin, infinite, essence and metatime. There
might be limitations to 3 dimensions specifically.

Linear Time
Our experience is of a finite time-line. We know that this moment, the present, is a
singularity with 0 dimensions. Linear time involves one dimension of time reflecting
the individual’s past, present, and future. This involves discrete moments in time that
moves forward all the time. Linearly, it involves a past, present, and a future. We can
represent fluctuations suddenly in a plane with waves of time technically reflecting
alternative routing and alternative directions. We can access the past very easily on the
VCR, in newspapers, by memory, in movie, and possibly through retrocognitive
awareness. We can access the future by logical predictions or via precognitions: With
predestined precognition one cannot modify anything. The future seems to move
inexorably with us having no part in our future except via learning to plan for the best
options. We look at this linear time-line helplessly or with the serenity that we can
only impact through logic our best attempts.

Subjectively this linear time might be curved. This is so because we interpret

subjective time differently. For example, our estimate of the duration of some dreams
may be very different from objective clock based reality. If this so we are actually each
experiencing two dimensions—our own subjective one and our clock one. And
everyone else is, therefore, producing an infinite number of dimensions, but we’re not
aware of them because we experience our time as a linear though maybe wavy
progression and we could argue that actually we’re experiencing just our own
individual world realities and should not be calling these variable rates of time
different dimensions.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 210

 
Absence of Choice
Without choice, however, we have one single un-modifiable direction and that linear
direction of time might be curved, so we could be conceived as 2 dimensional. But
with freedom of will we have a hypothesis that is difficult to test. We have different
routing, different directions and waves or curvature. With the original non-choice we
therefore, get to 3 dimensions even individually. Even more so, collective time is a
cultural phenomenon and may be measured akin to a Turing Apparatus, in this
instance, a 3D- clock. That collective commonality of time we could argue would be
another dimension. Yet, we cannot go beyond 3D-Euclidean space so can we in time?
Our collective commonality of space, exists with our own individual collective space
because we have our percepts and our concepts. We likely could not get beyond 3
dimensions by using collective time.

Estimation of the Future

We can also access the future mathematically by estimation. At a simple level, if
somebody is walking 16 steps and we know how long it takes from step a to step, we
can project, but only with some degree and not absolute certainty, that ¼ of the way
through the individual would have, e.g., completed the fourth step. However, because
this produces the whole indeterminacy components in terms of velocity and space, we
can make logical predictions in the future but only with some statistical likelihood.
Linear time usually might be mathematically interval or ratio in nature, e.g., clocks or
VCRs, or dates in newspapers, but examples of memory or precognition may not be
interval but ordinal in nature 260.

Time Seriality and Infinite Regress

John Dunne 96pointed out the paradox of such a series of moments and their timing. We
could, if we were an observer outside such time, time the time accurately with a clock,
and we could repeat that repetitively, until therefore, we could produce an infinite
regress. He contradicts himself arguing this is not infinite and we can understand why:
This is not a continuous infinity but a countable one—hence transfinite. Therefore,
Dunne’s infinite time dimensions appear to apply the logic of the Cantorian model of a
transfinite series of numbers in finite reality 116, which in this instance would be a
discrete, countable infinity. However, applying the calculus of distinctions, this is not
“infinite dimensions” of extent, they are instead “infinite dimensions of content” with
each reality parallel or parangular to each other in a non-Euclidean existence. Dunne’s
descriptions are esoteric and very difficult to follow, even after reading his theory and
book several times. The major difficulty is the mixture of science with, not even
speculation, but ideas that are stated as fact, yet are clearly not facts.

This kind of model involves observers outside a box and is a theme Neppe used in his
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 211

 
initial N-dimensional vortical paradigm 5-7; 261 5-7; 261. It can be one way to apply infinity,
but in a way it would be meaningless.

More generally, the absence of free-will simply produces a philosophical helplessness,

a fatalism of inaction. But complete free-will in 3S-1t would imply no learning of
psychological, social or theological behaviors. It must be relative to one’s experience.
Therefore, more correct terminology is potential freedom of choice: Here we can
potentially act by overriding our learnt and genetic predispositions.

Dunne and Multidimensionality

Dunne’s basic thesis relates to demonstrating “serial reality” of time. Translated into
TDVP finite terminology time is occurring in discrete periods and discrete points: It is
moving from one period to another, and we can demonstrate that we can experience
information pertaining to the future, in the present time. Therefore, Dunne’s main
hypothesis relates to the fact that time is not a moment in time, but a single dimension
of time with it occurring in a series of discrete events. As indicated, his further
examining different observers observing time from the outside, transfinitely produces
an “Infinite Regress”—the observer observes other time, then the next observes their
observation, ad infinitum. This allows Dunne to talk about “multidimensional time”,
but it is always “serial”—like electricity jumping from node to node. The other
difficulty is how he defines concepts such as “seriality” and series. Yet this model of a
different kind of multidimensional time —different times in observers in parallel, or
regressive time jumping from one observer to another like a serial electrical current
should be examined in the TDVP context.

Infinite regress and Dunne’s parallel time in the TDVP context

How would we explain Dunne’s “infinite regress” concept applying the TDVP model?
Because “regression” implies jumps from one Time variable to another, it produces
different dimensions of extent each involving “conscious” observers outside the box.
This means the observers become transfinite. We propose that thinking about these
Time dimensions in isolation is incorrect because it produces purely time domains.
Transfinite Time dimensions alone cannot exist alone because by necessarily
impacting an observer, they impact “Consciousness”. The key therefore is a “Time-
Consciousness regress” not a “time infinite regress” alone: The transfinite Higher
Consciousness dimensions have “Time” playing only a subordinate role. We,
therefore, can describe it as NC- (0-N) T (where N in T may be any of 0 or imaginary
through to transfinite numbers). Space may or may not be relevant in this context.
Moreover, this will vary by the domain (series of dimensions) conceptualized: Space
and Time could easily appear relatively nonlocal so S=0, T=0 or they may be SN-TN-
CN. However, the C may fluctuate in dimensional quantity (fluctuating dimensions)
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 212

 
and cannot be 0.

Parallel time in the TDVP context applying Dunne’s concepts.

Dunne critiques anything pertaining to “parallel time” happening at the same moment,
yet implies that each person lives in his or her own particular universe. If this were so,
then this does involve tens of different dimensions of Time as these are content
variables. The density of such events may be converted to different Time Variables of
Extent paralleling themselves depending on actions and thoughts, and modifying
themselves through choice implying three time dimensions. However, these could
reflect only the first three time dimensions in the first nine STC levels. Beyond that,
the TDVP model necessarily requires time be part of “metaconsciousness” in the
transfinite.

Free-will Implies Three Finite Time Dimensions

If there is such a thing at that finite level of freedom of choice and freedom of will, this
means we can actually meaningfully, at least to a limited degree, control our future.
This for many, including ourselves is philosophically satisfying and a philosophical
necessity. Now freedom of choice may not occur at the infinite level because time,
space, and consciousness all exist as a unit and therefore, ultimately the infinite regress
could look similar but the “routing” to such infinity for any individual-units may be
necessarily different, because we would have chosen which way to go.

However, paradoxically, if any individual has free-will as opposed to predestination,

the logical consequence is to posit that he is experiencing not only the second
dimension of time, but necessarily the third dimension of time, as well.

Effectively, by asserting free-will, you are making a choice. This is not just a parallel
reality choice based in a second action linked up with time progression into the future.
It is therefore, not just another parallel linear time line but it is a plane because it has
impacts on everything else: It changes the actions of others, be they finite animate
individual-units and on finite inanimate objects. That choice therefore, links up with
others, producing a density, because we have our initial linear time, and our new
choice, which impacts on others. This creates a 3D component. Applying TDVP, we
describe the variations of impacting others vortices by vortical indivension. No man is
an island entire of itself! 262 That choice necessarily has a certain curvature or planarity
because of fluctuations: This reflects something that is a plane plus a line. This
contrasts to absence of choice, a certain fatalism, because then the linearity (which
may technically be curved one way but experienced as a single time-line) has it is its
own kind of manifold—its own kind of movement through a curve—producing one
reality of predestination without free-will.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 213

 
Of course, again we would have an infinite regress. Technically, as Cantor would
describe it, we would have an “infinity of infinities” 116 at the continuous infinite level
of reality. But this would still constitute metatime.

How would an infinite regress affect free-will? Free-will may be relative, and in this
context relative to the 3S-1t domain. The depth of time is consonant with the potential
for choices and free-will. However, that free-will could be linked with C-substrate
metadimensional manifestations that may be tethered with our apparent 3S-1t -1C
domain of time and C-substrate. Using this explanation, free-will occurs in individuals
in the apparent 3S-1t. This is because they are not really living in 3S-1t but in, at
minimum, a 3S-3T-1C or even 3S-3T-NC. This allows individuals to manifest their
free-will choices in 3S-1t without contradiction. Free-will in any domain might not be
free-will in another domain. However, if one combines the infinite and allows for
meaningful interventions at that level, any finite metadimensionality should
theoretically reflect some level of free-will. This is not complete free-will because it
must conform to higher dimensional elements as well and must be part of the broader
order of reality.

Clock Reality and Ordinal Time

However, in 3S-1t physical standard reality, our second and third dimensions of time
are logically ordinal not interval if they exist (and they do if philosophically we can
make choices). In other words, if we made a different choice via free-will, then the
choice went into a different direction, and we can’t measure that time as interval
moments of time with a clock because such a clock would be purely subjective. We
can only measure the gradual directions and possibly the end-points but the exact
timing is indeterminate—effectively, we cannot locate and predict the velocity (or
density) of the new time experience unless we are occupying that specific dimensional
clock and we cannot appreciate all three time dimensions at the same time.

Time and Consciousness and STC

At the end of those choices, consciousness manifests or may be conceived or not
experienced as those extra dimensions, although time might have components of that
consciousness, just as space does. If in a dream, you dream about a place and a
duration of time, is that a consciousness dimension, or is it a time dimension or is it
space? This is an example of STC in our TDVP all inseparably tethered together at a
higher dimensional level, but manifesting individual tentacles of one or more
dimensions of space, time and consciousness that are theoretically separated by
vortical indivension and manifesting, for example, as entanglement or psi.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 214

 
Time, Minkowski, Quaternions and Imaginary Numbers
In retrospect, the idea of space-time of Minkowski26 has been dramatically extended:
TDVP may have succeeded when others did not because of the recognition of the
needs for multidimensionality, extended consciousness, ordropy, life, infinity,
tethering, content / process (vortical indivension), origins and a supporting
mathematical model as well as applications of LFAF and falsifiability, the empirical
methods of science and the calculus of distinctions.

The model of dimensional extrapolation impacting a fourth dimension and involving

imaginary numbers compared with Minkowski’s 1D imaginary time is relevant to a 3D
model. Moreover, mathematically, Pythagorean and Gaussian co-ordinates would put
the projected ostensible fourth dimensional point back into 3 dimensional time
somewhere unless imaginary numbers are used to measure time.
Until all of these were incorporated our metaparadigm was incomplete and not
justified.

Are There Other Motivations for Three Dimensional Time?

We list a few of these briefly and without comment here.
• Physics: 3 dimensions of time are based on the concept of warping.
• Consciousness: The unified STC demonstrates S=3. Therefore, at the tethered
area, T must be 3 in lower dimensional reality
• Psi: If free-will exists, then time is necessarily multidimensional. Free-will
reflects the second and because of density of impacting other individual-units a
third time dimension: Choice implies a further linear wave so a plane—2d. Only
free-will demonstrates another time dimension.
• Archetypes of actual time? This could be debated both in terms of existence and
implications: Memory and precognition all reflect 1 dimension. “Akashic
records”, if they exist, may reflect parallel or parangular time but not necessarily
in non-linear dimensions. On the other hand, these “records” might not reflect
time but purely consciousness.
• Thought experiment: Time will be passing at different rates on the sphere and
the plane. We can calculate the relativistic time distortion and establish points
defining a time-line for each dimensional world. Thus, there are two time-lines
that coincide only when the clock on the sphere is exactly in the plane. In this
case, time can be represented by two lines crossing at a single point. Two lines
crossing define a 2S plane. Thus, time is, in this case, two-dimensional, and this
is a 3S, 2T reality. If not, is it in a further dimensional reality because there are
more than two time solutions? (Multiple alternative realities present in each
individual-unit. But terms such as “many-worlds”, “many universes”,
“alternative realities” are not mathematical as they may not necessarily imply
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 215

 
 worlds or universes or multiverses. Therefore, a term like “co-existing reality”
could be used as less prejudicial. “Co-existing” is often referred to as within 3S-
1t, but it could be applied to any dimensional representation and even the
infinite because it is not specific. However, reality may not be co-existent or
parallel, because it is relative to the domain, and also because it can be
ultimately unified. Hence, we prefer to use our neologism “parangular”.
• Relativity: Passage of time as measured by atomic clocks is ultimately tied to
light speed. So if light is slowing down, so is time. This is a dance that we refer
to as Relativistic time.
• Origins: The time singularity is this moment in time. T=0.
• Logic: All populations parallel to these linear dimensions reflect a third.

Alternative times reflect infinity. Seriality by infinite regress reflect infinity.

The remarkable mathematician and mystic, JHM Whiteman, supported the idea of
multidimensional time. This was not only based on Eastern mysticism 263, but uniquely
this scientist and polymath had more carefully documented deliberately induced
subjective experiences 264 than possibly anyone else ever265. His complex writings
examined hierarchical potential versus actuality, structures in physics, and the
implications for multidimensional thinking of such subjective experiences. 70; 266-268.
Whiteman also described three levels of time 269:
1. He used “T”, more broadly than we use it in TDVP where we reflect passage of
time. Whiteman describes this as the interior causation of a potentiality field that is set
up or modified by interference with the field through a force such as gravitation or
psychokinesis. Time T is more structural or spatial, a “plan” that can be accessed in the
right state, potentiality from which one can read off past or future, although the plan is
not completely fixed. This allows for the intervention paradox. But the “plan” is
largely fixed.
2. He used “t”, like we use it in TDVP, to reflect this moment in time, but also
recognizes this as passage of time. Whiteman describes this as the actualization or
manifestation of a not necessarily physical space-time reality; and
3. Whiteman’s third “dimension” (different from our use of dimension as space-like
variables) was the term τ (“tau”) and this reflected intelligible structure and means.
Unlike T, τ is mechanical and unalterable, what one might compare to collapse of a
wave function once the actualization has been triggered. But neither T nor τ are
measurable: This is only possible with the actualized t as in clock-time, and so
becomes measurable “passage” of time.

Interestingly, Whiteman’s three variables of time, were combined with the three spatial
dimensions of length, breadth and height. Of course, we draw this triadic distinction in
TDVP and link the initial three dimensions of T-substrate and C-substrate with the S-
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 216

 
substrate. Finally, Whiteman recognized the relevance of objective and subjective
time, of the data on psi, of non-physicality, the laws of nature, quanta 266, hierarchies
and universality. 268-271

Time Density
The “density“ of that choice could be through a consciousness expressed in terms of
the time. It is impacting others with the same different kinds of linearities and their
own special vortical expressions in 3D reality. Free choice reflects all coming together.
It ultimately expresses a 3 dimensional time in one way at the same time perceived or
conceived as conscious finite experience with an extent of discrete time because it is in
moments.

But also, this time consciousness can express an N-dimensional time in another
domain, because metaconsciousness reflects both conscious infinite experience
because if we move to N-dimensional time the dimension beyond 3 hypothetically may
not be pure time but time consciousness.
It experientially will not have any effect on the time lines that are experienced my 3S-
1t individuals.

Parallel Dimensions and Universes and the Use of Parangular

The term “parallel dimensions“ is a misnomer. They are not necessarily parallel:
Indeed, they may be anything from orthogonal to parallel and at any angle—
parangular—some intersect other dimensions and this is why we have intersections,
e.g., via vortical indivension. There is a literature on parallel universes, but parallel
universes do not necessarily imply parallel dimensions. Parallel in this sense was
initially used in an inexact manner and has just been perpetuated. It was never intended
to mean that all of the dimensions of say two universes reflect the consequence of the
drawing of distinctions of two universes whose dimensions were parallel.

Parallel universes are whole sets or whole domains. In fact, parallel in the literature of
Everett 272 and other people who use that to understand quantum physics, refer to it as
just a stratagem because even if parallel universes exist they don’t interact, and if they
did they would do so in a way that we would never detect. They were using it in rather
a loose manner—here’s a universe and here is another one. While they may be very
much alike they are not co-existent.

Our model requires interactions involving all of reality: Such interactions enhance and
diminish individuals, groups, families, societies, cultures and ethnic identities. We are
never the same when interacting or meeting others and the same applies even not only
to sentient beings but also to the so-called inanimate world. Everyone changes
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 217

 
everyone and everything else.

Congruent realities may be momentary with timelines crossing. To become totally

congruent would be like cloning, in effect. Two consciousnesses with the same
congruent timelines would mean the same consciousness and logically, two physical
should not have exactly the same consciousness.

We suggest defining a new word so we don’t need to use the word parallel, an
unfortunate choice of words by somebody many years ago to describe the situation
where a decision or the drawing of a distinction by a conscious being causes the
universe to split into “parallel universes”. Similarly, the phrase, many worlds exists,
yet using another term like angular (where angular can be anything from parallel to
orthogonal) may be logical. We propose the term parangular, and we’ve used the
phrase individual-unit dimensions to reflect that parangularity has subjective
components.

What If We Could Appreciate 3T and Therefore, 3S-3T?

A conscious entity in the rare state of being aware of the finite S3T3 so 6-D continuum
would be enormously advantaged in awareness but not be in an omnipotent,
omnipresent position of being aware of all of the timelines, all the pasts and futures of
all individuals as this is necessarily linked with the infinite. This distinction can be
drawn applying an infinite number for time and space but not for finite time.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 218

 
CHAPTER 27: THE MATHEMATICS OF TIME AND CONSCIOUSNESS 273

“How indeed could one think of expressing metamathematics in the mathematical

systems themselves, if the latter are considered to consist of meaningless symbols
which acquire some substitute of meaning only through metamathematics?”
Kurt Gödel 145

Mathematics is Needed for Paradigm Shifts

Paradigm shifts generally require mathematical modeling. Copernicus 274 challenged
the geocentric worldview, demonstrating the sun, not the earth, was at the center. This
allowed the movements of the planets to begin to make sense. Yet it was only when
Newton formulated his laws of motion 275, providing a mathematical explanation for
the planetary motion, that the new paradigm became generally accepted. New
mathematical tools were also needed for relativity and quantum mechanics. This is
why we emphasize mathematics in our model. We have found several explanatory
concepts very useful, including quaternions.

Quaternions Historically
Quaternions 276 are a number system that extends the complex numbers. They were first
described by Irish mathematician Sir William Rowan Hamilton in 1843 277. They have
been applied to mechanics in three-dimensional space. Hamilton defined a quaternion
as the quotient of two directed lines in a three-dimensional space or equivalently as the
quotient of two vectors. Quaternions can also be represented as the sum of a scalar and
a vector.

One common view of William Hamilton was that of a mad Irish mathematician locked
in a room with food slid under the door while he worked. The quaternions to
mathematicians were primarily a historical note. The concept initially evoked great
excitement, but then vector analysis eclipsed it by becoming more useful, expressing
the same concept Hamilton was trying to address with quaternions. The reason there
was so much excitement in the peer or math circles back in the late 1800s and early
1900s was because quaternions were the first ever, at least if not the only,
mathematical system that included a subset as a ring in the fields as algebraic rings.
Both the finite and the real number, imaginary and complex numbers are identified in
quaternions. A ring is defined as a set with two binary operations.

Quaternions regained some life in the computer age where they form a four-
dimensional associative normed division algebra over the real numbers, and thus, also
form a domain. They therefore, have relevance in computer modeling.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 219

 
The binary operations would link the concept to the calculus of distinctions because
COD has two primary equations: 1.) ┐┐= ┐ and 2.) ╗=. These will be the operations
that can be used to show the distinctions for the perfect ring as a part of the field of
complex numbers.

Multidimensionality and Quaternions

When thinking about the various types of numbers that were appropriate as units for
dimensions, we refer to multidimensional realities. Real numbers and imaginary
numbers are subsets of complex numbers.

Without quaternions, in the ST substrate, we have xyz and i: three real and one
imaginary.
With quaternions, the quad part is because it is 4 dimensional: however, it reflects
three imaginary components and one real. The 3 time dimensions could be the ijk of
the quaternion. However, we have cast the quaternion as the unit of consciousness
because it is complex and simple imaginary numbers suffice as time units.
Theoretically, superficially, from the time side, S space could be imaginary and T
could be real. However, this will not work because the product of two quaternions is
non-commutative 278 — the product of two quaternions depends on which factor is to
the left of the multiplication sign and which factor is to the right. Therefore, it is
unlikely we could interchange space and time with space being imaginary and time
being real but we do not need to. The quaternion is like a reflection of one real and
three imaginary numbers, and using that concept adapted to the TDVP model, we
encounter a unique different application for the t-substrate. Quaternions are more
logical than imaginary numbers alone as we have six dimensions, three real and three
imaginary: xyz and ijk. However, we can also or alternatively cast the quaternion as
the unit of consciousness because it is complex and simple imaginary numbers suffice
as time units.

Quaternions are mathematically appropriate to represent consciousness units as we

have six dimensions, three real and three imaginary: xyz and ijk. Contained within the
C-substrate are complex numbers and these are expressed as quaternions. Complex
numbers fit in well because of the three dimensions of time (3 real space plus 3
imaginary time). We apply this to “consciousness” implying consciousness has closely
tethered components of space and time in those first nine dimensions (3S-3C-3T). The
beauty is that the quaternion fits so beautifully mathematically. Applying complex
number units in the form of quaternions for the C-substrate is a perfect match. 3S, 3T,
3C as the first nine mathematical dimensions are all closely linked with 3S represented
by real numbers, 3T represented by imaginary numbers, and 3C is represented by
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 220

 
complex numbers.

S and T-substrates and Mathematics of Quaternions

Though quaternions fit in the 3S-1t, they are unnecessary because 3S-1t is
conceptualized as relatively objective experiential reality. Quaternions become more
appropriate as we move into the subjective level.

When you really examine quaternions with the “parallel or intersecting” universes
reflected by 3 dimensional time, the quaternion reflects the whole substrate for the T-
substrate, and effectively the substrate for the 3S-3T. What one really has is a 6
dimensional domain, and that is because quaternions allow us to have the 3S-3T
embedded within the ijk domain. Quaternions are a mathematical tool that work well to
fit the 3 dimensional C-substrate time substrate dimensionality into an overall 9D
substrate that includes the 3S-1t and consciousness, as well.

The priority here would be 3 dimensions of space, completely represented by the field
of real numbers, and then the imaginary numbers of the complex ijk quaternion would
represent 3T. Therefore, space is limited to 3 Euclidean dimensions because any
attempt to project orthogonally out of 3D space using a real number metric will put
you right back into 3 space, and a projected imaginary 4th dimension of space does not
exist in Euclidean space, but does properly represent time, as demonstrated by
Minkowski and Einstein. If you portray the dimensional structure of S and T
mathematically, and instead of thinking of T just in terms of 3 dimensions with i as the
square root of minus one as the time unit, think of it as the quaternion with the ijk—
still the same thing, but it is a way of putting it into a consistent mathematical
formulation.

Dimensional Extrapolation and the STC Substrate

The processes of dimensional extrapolation and the warping of the 4D space-time
continuum (3S-1t) by fundamental forces reveals additional dimensions beyond 3S-1t.
Projections into the fifth and sixth dimensions are achieved successfully in the field of
imaginary numbers, but when attempting to project into the seventh dimension, we
encounter a problem analogous to the one that occurred when attempting to extrapolate
beyond the third dimension of space. Any projection out of the sixth dimension using
real or imaginary numbers will put you right back into either the field of imaginary
numbers or the field of real numbers, i.e., space-time. To project into the seventh
dimension, a different type of number must be employed. The type of number that
works is a complex number of the form a+bi, where a and b are real numbers and i is
the square root of minus one.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 221

 
Notice that complex numbers contain elements of both space (real numbers) and time
(imaginary numbers), just as consciousness (in mental images) contains elements of
both space and time. This is completely consistent with one of the invariants of
dimensional extrapolation: an n-dimensional reality contains all domains of
dimensions < n.oo

The Relativity of Dimensional Scales

At this point, it is appropriate to ask: What is the nature of each of the dimensions
beyond the first four (3S-1t)? Dimensions 5 and 6 exist within the field of imaginary
numbers. Since they are fully defined by, and measured with imaginary numbers, they
could be called “time-like”. In fact, when we return to this from the “top-down”
approach in the STC substrate, we find that we can identify elements of human
experience that relate to a second and third dimension of time. Why are we not
normally aware of the three dimensions of time? Even though the basic unit of
measurement is the same (i) for all three, their magnitudes are very different. The first
dimension of time is the one in which our experience of the instant we call “now”
exists as only an instant on a vast timeline. This time dimension is occasioned by the
opposing forces of gravity and universal expansion. These forces act over galactic and
cosmic distances. The forces occasioning the other two time dimensions could
speculatively be the strong and weak sub-atomic forces, which act over extremely
small distances. Thus, the extent of all three time dimensions (3T) are not perceptible
to human senses, which are fine tuned to earth-scale dimensions.

Quaternions - the STC Mathematical Link

We have seen mathematically that dimensions beyond the first six (3S-3T) have to be
represented by complex numbers. It turns out that quaternions involve complex
numbers of the form a+bi+cj+dk, where i 2 = j 2 = k 2 = -1 provide the perfect
mathematical tool to link space, time and consciousness (S, T, and C).

STC and NC Dimensions Re-translated Into Mathematics

Mathematically, we can demonstrate that as long as you are in time dimensions,
measures of dimensionality can be expressed as multiples of the square root of minus
one, but the minute you go beyond the 3rd time level, you have to move to complex
numbers, which means it has elements of time and space. Effectively, the first 9
dimensions are likely S3-T3-C3 and more correctly, three levels of each rung, because
of the CST inseparability, so effectively 1.STC- 2.STC-3.STC. This conceptualization
fits well with S being real numbers, T being imaginary and C being complex. These
are all unified mathematically via quaternions. STC inseparability at the tethered level

oo
The detailed mathematics of this process of dimensional extrapolation will be presented in the companion book 10
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 222

 
is a perfect model for the first 9 dimensions.

But, additionally, we conceptualize higher dimensional levels. This would involve the
discrete potential transfinite domains beyond these first 9 dimensions. We could call
these “the greater 10th dimension” (coincidentally there are 10 dimensions in String
Theory but these are very different: Strings usual involve dimensions of space, no C,
and just 1 T). However, given that each quality of metaconsciousness such as
“wisdom” or “courage”, can be ordinally measured as variables of extent. This is
reflected by the potential to separate the tethered S, T, and C, which will then be able
to communicate back to any of STC, implying N transfinite (ordinal) dimensions.
Given S and T, as above, necessarily mathematically would require at least part of the
C to go beyond 9 dimensions. C should always exist without or with S and T linked to
it. So our model could be S3, T3, NC or it could be S3 or more, T3 or more, C3 plus to
NC, which provided these are discrete, all but 9 are transfinite dimensions.
Speculatively, if the discrete transfinite could merge into the infinite, these
“dimensions” would become infinite. But this would be artificially so as the “discrete
countable” transfinity would need to be reflected on the “continuous infinite”
subreality. Our concepts of Dimensional Extrapolation in our companion volume,
Space, Time and Consciousness amplify this.pp The transfinite dimensions might
constitute a remarkable link with not only the infinite, but with the lower 9 S, T and C
dimensions, as well.
Also we could speculate that each “dimension” which at that transfinite level may be a
multitude of partial and complex dimensions, mathematically negative and positive,
and not necessarily integral, has its own metaphorical tentacles too—effectively
reflecting the tethered communication that we can conceptualize in individual sentient
beings, or any level of individual-units. The process involved would be indivension
and the content would be 3-D vortices that interface, interchange and interact across,
between and within dimensions.

C-substrate, STC and Quaternions: The Link

Therefore, consciousness or discrete meaning applies complex numbers to imaginary
and real numbers representing Time T and Space S respectively. We do this by
applying real 3-D S and then imaginary 3-D T and together these numbers shift into
complex numbers utilizing quaternions in terms of reflecting consciousness combined
with space time. Moreover, this is the mathematical demonstration that they are
inseparably linked. Logically the first 9 dimensions are 3S-3T-3C. We can represent

pp
Georg Cantor introduced the critical concept of “Arithmetic Cardinality” in this “countable infinity” where transfinite
equations and pairs closely reflect “ ‫א‬0.” This suggests a closer relationship with the “continuous infinite”, but this concept
is somewhat different from the transfinite dimensions we’re referring to here. See our book, “Space, Time and
Consciousness”.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 223

 
the first 9 dimensions by metric intervals of space and time, and corresponding
consciousness. Beyond 9 dimensions we cannot: That is fundamentally different
because of the non-representation of more than 3 dimensions of space and time.
Effectively, we may have produced the mathematical 3S-3T-NC model because of the
tethered linkage.

Quaternions and C-substrate

We therefore, use mathematics creatively to reflect on the C-substrate proper. In the
3S-1t, C could be conceived of as unity and described in terms of real numbers, but it
could be a complex entity just as well. It could theoretically be one of the three of S, T
and C substrates—yet all of them co-exist together. The appearance of consciousness
in extrapolated dimensionality may be the ultimate case of the whole being greater
than the sum of the parts. Moving into the C-substrate, ijk are all imaginary
components of the quaternion, allowing for 3 imaginary components, making
quaternions the link between S and T, where the quaternion is a 4-dimensional system.

One of the primary uses of the quaternion has been the rotation of computerized
images in 3 dimensional space, 1 dimensional time. The potentiality of applying
quaternions to more dimensions of time has been overlooked because three-D time has
not been an expected or even heard of concept in the history of physics. So, when
instead of interpreting the quaternion as just a way of expressing a physical rotation in
3S-1t, we can portray it as actually representing the 3 Time coordinates in the T-
substrate. Consequently, it works as a link. If you look at the mathematical symbolism
of it, the T-substrate is a reflection of the S-substrate. The C-Substrate is a reflection of
the previous two, the S and the T. That is exactly what we have in consciousness. In
mentally visioning concepts and situations, we portray a reflection of the dimensions in
the S and T substrates in the multiple consciousness dimensional substrates.

Consciousness and Complex Numbers

These ideas pose a key question: Does that complex number have elements of
consciousness as well? This is relevant because if we are just saying that that complex
numbers involves elements of 3 sets of quaternion imaginary numbers plus 3 sets of
real numbers, then the quaternion imaginary numbers are reflecting 3 D- time and the
real numbers are reflecting 3D- space (or, unlikely, vice versa if it turns out they’re
non-commutative but as quaternions are non-commutative, it may matter). But if that
is so, those complex numbers, too, reflect a whole that is more than its parts if it is
more than the space and time together and has consciousness, too.

We have posited this is so using mathematics. But we can also apply CoD as the
measure of 3S-3T levels alone is purely theoretical as the CoD requires consciousness
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 224

 
to perceive, conceive and experience. Additionally, we therefore, never can talk about
6 D of 3S—3T, we require 3S-3T-1C and likely 3S-3T-3C at minimum so this is
dimensionally higher.

3S-1t or 3S-1t-1c as our basic physical experience

Moreover, the link of essence from the infinite to the finite is contiguous and available
all the way from zero to infinity. So even 3S-1t is a misnomer: In our living reality, we
might be 3S-1t-1c or even 3S-1t-nC at minimum where subjectively n can be any digit
other than 0. Infinity permeates the whole structure of the substrate of the S, T, and C.
So, while at the first six levels at least, you can’t measure it, this doesn’t mean that it
isn’t there. It is not going to show up in the measurement of space or the measurement
of time, but it is there nonetheless. It isn’t until you look at it from the top-down that
you can conceive of this model.

Support for 3 Dimensions of Time and Extensions: Some Complex Speculations

1. Time as a moment is a singularity. Linear time may be planar. Free-choice is 3D
finite. The moment experienced is in 0 dimensions. Linear time in an individual
involves the past, present and future, e.g., memory. Because of curvature or waves of
time, we have, at least, planar dimensions. But what could have been (ending as one
alternative being free-will = choice) provides for different parangular routings
(directions). Therefore, we get to at least 3 finite time dimensions because the resultant
collective time is at least 2 dimensions added to the first.

2. Interestingly the poet WB Yeats, recognized gyres of time. Intriguingly, the way it
was described was really vortical time, which is 3 dimensional.

3. There are an infinite number of 3-D co-existing realities. But N+1 stops at finite 3
time in the 4-D space-time continuum. By dimensional extrapolation, we can imagine
a 5-D continuum, a time plane, with an infinite number of time lines contained in it,
and in a 6-D continuum with an infinite number of time planes, comprising a 3-D time
domain.
Non-Euclidean time produces another dimension but possibly called consciousness,
but pure time cannot be described beyond ijk

4. In his Laws of Form, Spencer Brown pointed out that time comes in as a necessity to
continue the development of the laws of form. This is interesting given that this
preceded the calculus of distinctions yet Brown already conceived of multidimensional
time.

5. The Non-Euclidean time and space is entirely embedded in Euclidean space. But
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 225

 
locating numbers in curved space, we can represent any point on a curve or manifold
of Euclidean space. Conception involves imagining, conceiving and can include
infinite continuity. Perception involves experiencing as discrete finite elements.

Conceiving of Euclidean reality in 3S-1t

The first 9 D of 3S, 3T and 3C may be the tools of Pythagorean Euclidean
representation or any other (such as, radians or other mathematical representations in
Euclidean space). This we call conceiving of the potential Euclidean reality in 3S-1t.

One measurement problem is the switch in dimensionality.

Beyond 9D, the awareness transcends the perceptual and conceptual producing a
potential transcendent reality moving into the transfinite, which we measure by ordinal
not interval variables of extent. There may also be a potential Euclidean reality, even
there. Potential realities may be co-existent and intersect in one on one binary set
theory. This is a simplified representation of multidimensionality in two dimensions,
though.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 226

 
 SECTION F: THE THEORY BEHIND TDVP
CHAPTER 28: AXIOMS THAT ARE CLOSELY RELATED 279

“I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details.”

Albert Einstein

Several axioms are closely linked but not directly part of the TTOOURS
metaparadigm (pronounced “Tours”) itself.

The Subparadigmatic Axioms

1. Postulate axiom of STC dimensions
When S, T and C manifest independently, they manifest as specific dimensions, and
there are likely three fundamental dimensions of space, more than one dimension of
time, and likely N-dimensions of consciousness, with N potentially infinite——these
dimensions manifest from the infinite. Expression of space, time and C-substrate
cannot be as single substrates except in finite theoretical modeling.

2. Axiom of STC domains

When dimensions are experienced or described with a particular pattern, this is
referred to in clusters called “domains”.
Our standard experiential domain in scientific realities is based on three dimensions
of space and one point in time, called 3S-1t. However, based on the above axioms,
there cannot be a separate 3S-1t per se in existential reality, because there is always a
C for C-substrate, but it is a convenient way to conceive of this standard domain even
though it must be 3S-1t-nC, with n=1 at minimum. There is always the inseparable
tethering of space, time and C-substrates, even at the most subatomic, qualit or
possibly subquantal levels.

3. Axiom of Relative Zero

In some domains, S and T may equal zero and not manifest. This constitutes relative
zero. Theoretically, C-substrate can approach zero at the lowest quantal or subquantal
level, where information and minimal meaning almost meet. This allows for the three
dimensional axiom (STC) to always be represented in any domain, e.g., S0, T0, Cn. qq

qq
It may be that in finite reality there is a source or content for such minimal information producing a potential extent of
meaning. One possible source may be the subquantum infinitesimals (this is different from postulating subquantum
“emptiness”. 280
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 227

 
4. Axiom of Potential Life
Life in potential form always exists (polife), even at the Origin Event as part of this C-
substrate. This life is reflected in the infinite and is closely linked in mental form with
the metaconsciousness. This does not require physical life.

5. Axiom of Physical Life

Physical life in our physical earth reality (experienced in the 3S-1t-1c domain) occurs
when the always existing potential for life, manifests as sufficient to fill the necessary
S and T requirements. In Biology, this is perceived as a necessity fulfilled by genetics
(e.g., DNA) and physiology.

6. Axiom of Interfacing of Extent and Content

Space, time and C-substrate are distinctions of extent and involve interval or ordinal
metrics and are therefore, potentially expressed as dimensions. Mass, force (including
all forms of energy) and information are distinctions of content and not expressed as
metrics except via density within 3 or more dimensions of extent, and are not of
themselves dimensional.
Content interfaces closely with extent by occupying volumes defined by three or
more dimensions.

Subsidiary, but Closely Related Axioms: Linked Infinite/Finite

Very closely related is the composite Axiom of unified, holistic, simultaneous existence.
7. Axiom of simultaneous existence is pertinent because it directly follows from the
above.
Existence occurs at an N-Dimensional level simultaneously (was, is and will be). The
infinite reality is time irrelevant. Time in a physical standard 3S-1t domain is a shadow
expression of this infinite subreality that incorporates three dimensions of time.

8. Axiom of unified existence

Existence occurs at an N-Dimensional level as unified existence, implying a monistic
paradigm. There is no separation of mind and body, nor are they the same. The base of
C-, S- and T- substrate pervades all finite existence. The infinite inextricably impacts
at all levels of the finite.

9. Axiom of holistic existence

Existence occurs at an N-Dimensional level as a whole. All of C-, S- and T- substrates
constitute a whole pervaded by the infinite.
Together these three axioms combine to form the Axiom of unified, holistic,
simultaneous existence).
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 228

 
Relevant But Somewhat Speculative Are the Seven Axioms of infinite-Finite
Boundary Communications
10. The Axiom of Distinction Existence
The essence of existence is differentiation: Some things can be said to exist only if it
has a feature or features that differentiate it in some way from the rest of reality, and
there is a conscious entity drawing the distinction. This is the basis of the concept of
distinction, and the concept of ordropy (negative entropy). Distinction thus involves
three elements: the distinction, the background from which it is distinguished, and the
conscious entity drawing the distinction. A distinction without these three elements
would be meaningless.

11. Axiom of distinctions

The boundaries between finite and infinite are recognized in the calculus of
distinctions and in the psychological sciences for individuals. Such a boundary can be
at any systems level of the individual-unit.
Inanimate objects also require boundaries ranging from the non-living
macrophysical to the subatomic to the astrophysical. These boundaries are the discrete
finite differentiations of subatomic particles from each other, of atoms, of molecules,
and of structures.

12. Axiom of permeability

The expression of interchange across and between infinite and finite reality varies
dependent on the boundary permeability. Some factors hypothetically may assist this
permeability such as dreams, meditation, hallucinogenics, temporal lobe anomalous
functioning, psychosis, alleged mediumship.

13. Axiom of protection

The boundary impermeability allows protection from overwhelming incoming
metaconscious input

14. Axiom of Communication Ease

It is easier communicating information chunks from the infinite to the packets or
qualits of the finite than via the reverse. But this relates to the broader picture
(metaphor: The light of the sun covers a broader area); similarly, the infinite or
transfinite or higher dimensions emanate lower dimensions more easily than going
upwards but it would be a more general rather than specific emanation (the continuous
to many components of the discrete).

On the other hand, paradoxically, the 3S-1t or lower dimensional finite domains are
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 229

 
already discrete. That might be easier initiating such communication via the finite
discrete to a specific potential component of the infinite because it would imply a
specific discrete track allowing a focus to “shoot for” as the endpoint of specific
communication to an individual or individual unit would be received in discrete qualits
(reflecting, we propose, mainly the subgroup of chronits). Could it be that this is a
mechanism for psi communication? The specific person or object is provided a specific
link via passage from the discrete to the continuous, reflecting the finite-infinite
pathway: This then allows definition of the reverse bidirectional track from a specific
continuous communication to the discrete.

15. Axiom of Communication Complexity

Communication between the finite and infinite is complicated by the need to convert to
specific 3S-1t-nC in finite reality from N-S, N-T, N-C infinite reality. Therefore,
theoretically, any communication at the post-mortem survival level would be complex
requiring conversion of information transfer across S, T and C dimensional substrates.

16. Axiom of Top-down Communication

It is easier transmitting information from the top-down than the bottom-up. These are
theoretical concepts. The infinite and the higher finite dimensions, metaphorically,
include the top-down influences on low dimensional finite elements. The lower the
dimensional element, the broader the influence on a range of many different units.
However, on any specific qualit, or individual, the overall impact would be weaker.
The metaphorical parallel, here, would be the different energy forces: Gravitation
impacts broadly; but it is far less potent than the very tiny range of the Strong Forces,
which impact only initially subatomically. However, with the infinite there is a holism
so that these weak individual impacts may, nevertheless, be translated into meaningful
patterns once one reaches finite dimensionality.

Infinite
17. Axiom of metaconsciousness qualities:
The metaconscious manifests with more than neutral information knowledge. It also
incorporates as part of the information meaning innumerable positive and negative
values. The positive values kabbalistically include examples not only the cognitive
wisdom, understanding and knowing, but also emotional ones such a might or courage
and loving-kindness (or separately love and kindness) and volitionally as splendor or
acknowledgment or glory, victory or eternity, and foundation or drive all expressed as
a culminating holistic quality or kingship. These various qualities are abstractions and
can be innumerable.

Finite
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 230

 
Clarification of axioms of relevance but not essential for this model.
18. Axiom of Individual-units
Metaconsciousness may manifest at any dimensional level existence, and there are no
physical life limitations beyond 3S-1t. Individual-units express themselves subjectively
as mental life implying varied levels of individuality or group existence. Because of
this, the phrase Axiom of Individual-units is used to refer to the domains of
metaconscious existence, which may occur individually or at the various collective
levels or subcomponents (such as biological, psychological, familial, group, social,
cultural, collective spiritual or mystical).

19. Axiom of Metaconscious State and Trait

Metaconscious subjective experience may manifest differently at different moments
even in individual-units. This is State manifestation. A trait manifestation refers to the
maintained condition over a period producing greater stability than states.
Because “state” refers to a condition at that moment, it is very different from “trait”
which refers to a maintained persistent structure over finite time in 3S-1T: They are
conceptually very different (compare the parallel of current mental status with
personality structure). However, using another comparison, "states" could be
conceived as subsets of 'traits" (implicated orders of C substrate integration
components linked in 1T). The stability of traits vs. states would their higher
implication level in the individual C-Substrate set, thus "states" would be more 1T
sensitive than "traits".

20. Axiom of Physical Reduction Valves

Our senses are constructed to narrow down our focus to the parts of finite reality we
deal with (e.g., a small visual and auditory spectrum). In physiology, the nervous
system acts as an information and biochemical-electrical filter, maintaining a
homogeneity and preventing an overwhelming flood of data. But this also limits
metaconscious wisdom, understanding and knowledge. It reflects a developmental
level of consciousness.
Scientific limitations (e.g., instruments) often begin from this limitation level, but
still reflect limited information at the physical standard 3S-1t level. There are more
domains of information and ordropic manifestations than can be measured in our
conventional 3S-1t.

21. Axiom of abstracted C-substrate dimensionality

In addition to those finite dimensions that can be interpreted within the nervous system
relating to cognition, affect and volition, higher level qualities may reflect different
theoretical dimensions of the C-substrate and are measurable ordinally (e.g., great
compassion vs. no compassion vs. even a negation of compassion). This implies the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 231

 
possibility of negative C-substrate dimensions, and its fluctuations across dimensions
with different states and individual-units.
We have indicated an ordinal spectrum of qualities and this may be more dependent
on where we define relative zero (a temperature parallel would be absolute zero in
Kelvin and yet -273 degrees in Celsius). However, there are also qualitative aspects:
Just as darkness may be conceptualized as absence of light, or cold as absence of heat,
is evil, for example, just absence of good? We propose that such C-substrate
dimensions might be complex and even what appears a unidimensional variable may
be linguistically regarded as such, but actually, using other language communication,
may be multidimensional. Therefore, possibly love is not just an opposite of hate, but
each has its own multidimensional spectrum.

Several other mathematical -physics speculative axioms exist:

22. Axiom of Three Dimensional Manifestation
Any subdomain of the universe requires three dimensions for an existential reality to
exist as content within a domain. This is a dimensionometric axiom. Therefore, space
is assessed in three dimensions; if there are more than three dimensions, the first three
are fundamental and increase as units of three. Time is at least three dimensional, and
so is C-substrate. If there are more dimensions than 3S or 3T or 3C, they manifest in
threes in the finite subreality.

23. Axiom of Forces and Dimensional Increase

Forces allow for the manifestation of further dimensions. In S and T these forces are
energetic, in C-substrate these forces are non-energetic.

24. Axiom of Holistic Continuity, Corollary to the of Origin

Einstein’s relativity taught us that matter and energy are simply different aspects of the
same composite essence. Similarly, the pervasiveness of consciousness throughout all
space and time leads to the conclusion that space, time and consciousness are all
aspects of the same composite essence. Reality consists of three domains of extent: the
STC-substrate, measurable with variables of extent, three aspects of substance: matter,
energy and individualized consciousness, measurable with variables of content, and
three aspects of Primary Consciousness: dimensionality, substance and mind,
measurable with variables of extent, content and intent, respectively. This can be
expressed mathematically by the CoD expression:
R= f(S, t, m, e, c,) = ∑([ (m/S) ┐e/t]┐c/St)┐= ∑[ (ST) ┐C]┐
Where R= reality, S= 3Dspace, t= time, m= matter, e= energy, c= individualized
consciousness and C= Primary Consciousness. Note that R in this expression is a
function of seven variables, four of extent and three of content. This expression could
be rewritten as a function of at least twelve variables, six of extent, three of content,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 232

 
and at least three of intent when we show through dimensional extrapolation and the
calculation of the dimensionometric metrics that there are three dimensions of space,
three dimensions of time, and three or more dimensions of conscious extent. This is a
mathematical expression of the nested nature of the S and T domains within the C-
substrate. On the other hand, possibly a purer equation would not mix extent, intent
and content in the first place. This equation, however, is an expression of the
integration of all aspects of reality through the over-arching ordropic influence of
consciousness, and may indicate that there is a link between extent, content and intent
that we have not yet fully understood.

25. Axiom of mathematical dimensional reality

The first nine theoretical dimensions of reality reflect potential Euclidean reality: up to
S3, T3, C3 because they reflect the mathematics of three tethered inseparable
dimensional substrates when described in Euclidean space. This involves perceptual
(experienced as discrete finite elements) reality interchanging with the conceptual
(imagining, conceiving, continuous) reality. Thereafter, beyond 9D, the perceptual and
conceptual are transcended, and this reflects potential non-Euclidean transcendent
reality of ordinal variables of extent with transfinite dimensions. “Euclidean” is a way
of looking at things, not a characteristic of reality.

26. Axiom of fundamental three dimensional space

There can only be three dimensions of space mathematically. Even what appears to be
a fourth dimension can only be represented in three dimensional Euclidean space.

27 Axiom of fundamental multidimensional time

There is mathematical (algebraic Quaternion; geometric and logical justification) for
multidimensional time, likely three dimensional time.rr

28. Axiom of consciousness

Conscious reality is continuous and infinite expressed as metaconsciousness. In the
finite realm, it is expressed discretely at finite level as meaning. This meaning
combined with the transcendent conscious reality is integrated and limited by the
physical nervous systems of sentient beings.

rr
There is mathematical (algebraic Quaternion; geometric and logical justification for multidimensional time, likely three-
dimensional time. (STC inseparably tethered: As S=3, T=3; Pythagorean or other geometric representations are 3
dimensional; algebraically, quaternions imply three imaginary numbers, ijk.
Logically, a time moment = Singularity = 0D; past, present and future reflect linear time =1D; different routings proposed
= s waves and distortions = curvature into a second dimension; multiple co-existent individual-units realities = infinite
time, but state, finite events limited to 3 as non-Euclidean time produces another dimension possibly consciousness as it
cannot be represented by quaternion imaginary numbers.
Laws of form: Time comes in as a necessity to continue the development of the laws of form.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 233

 
CHAPTER 29: QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT: A BRIEF PERSPECTIVE 281-283

“In Einstein's theory of relativity, the observer is a man who sets out in quest of truth
armed with a measuring-rod.
In quantum theory he sets out with a sieve.”
Sir Arthur Eddington (Astrophysicist; 1882 - 1944)

What Is It?
Quantum entanglement refers to a property of the quantum mechanical state of a
system. when two or more objects in the system are linked such that the quantum state
of any of them cannot be adequately described without full mention of the others, even
when the individual objects are spatially separated. Quantum entanglement was the
key controversy formulated in the Einstein- Podolsky- Rosen (EPR) paradox 84. They
used a thought experiment that demonstrated an apparent inconsistency in the quantum
mechanics theory. Because of the relativistic light-speed limitation of information
transfer, Einstein felt it was illogical and derided entanglement as "spukhafte
Fernwirkung" or "spooky action at a distance".

The word “entanglement” was developed by Erwin Schrödinger, who realized the
importance of the concept 187 188. It has become the characteristic trait of quantum
mechanics that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of physical thought. It
led to Bohr’s “Copenhagen interpretation” of quantum mechanics.

Violating Bell’s Inequality

In 1964, John Bell demonstrated that Bohr’s quantum theory was not compatible with
one of the key assumptions of deterministic science, the principle of locality 83. He
calculated an upper limit, known as Bell's inequality, on the strength of correlations,
for any system obeying local realism; he showed that if Bohr was right, the limit would
be violated. Bell's theorem has important implications for physics and the philosophy
of science, because when the first definitive experiment was performed 87 it indicated
that quantum theory must violate either the Principle of locality or of counterfactual
definiteness.ss
In conjunction with the experiments verifying the quantum mechanical predictions of
Bell-type systems, Bell's theorem maintains that certain quantum effects travel faster

ss
Some think that Counterfactual Definiteness may no longer be a valid reference point after Dehmelt's experimental
“canceling” of the Heisenberg Quantum mechanical prohibition. 163; 164 However, Dehmelt’s experiment involved the
movement of electrons from one shell to another in subatomic decay, and is not relevant here.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 234

 
than light, and so limits the class of tenable 'hidden variable' theories to the non-local
variety. Bell's Theorem is now the collective name for a family of results, all showing
the impossibility of a Local Realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. There are
variants of the Theorem with different meanings of “Local Realism.”

Historically, neither John Bell nor Bell’s theorem proved the existence of quantum
entanglement. In fact, Bell 105 believed that Einstein was right. “While imagining that I
understand the position of Einstein, as regards the EPR correlations, I have very little
understanding of the position of his major opponent Bohr.” Even after the Aspect
experiment 87, he preferred David Bohm’s idea of implicate and explicate orders 140,
retaining Einstein’s “hidden variables” positiontt. “I think that conventional
formulations of quantum theory (the Copenhagen interpretation), and of quantum field
theory in particular, are unprofessionally vague and ambiguous. Professional
theoretical physicists ought to be able to do better. Bohm has shown us a way”.

The Entanglement Paradox

Essentially, the term “entanglement” was used as an explanation of the violation of
Bell’s inequality, but no one knows exactly how entanglement works. There are many
postulates for the mechanism of entanglement. Amongst them are Radin’s implied link
with psi 220, and Klein’s Subquantum Model which postulates that quantum
superposition and quantum decoherence effects run under retrocausation-sensitive
informational determinants and are stored and carried at the deepest levels of the
subquantum regime supplying the mechanism for quantum entanglement 280.

Our (VN, EC) preference at this point is not to try to localize where “entanglement”
occurs, though the subquantum regime could be relevant, but, alternatively, so could
field theory. We perceive as more relevant explanations applying extra dimensions,
without resorting to a particular locus such as subquantum or morphogenetic fields.
The TDVP model is non-restrictive of location or field: It is a metalevel above that, so
that demonstrations of the justification of subquantal infinitesimals or some kind of
field not only do not refute it, but, instead, support the TDVP model. The TDVP
concept recognizes the relevance of STC tethering and the continuous infinite
communication and interfacing with finite vortical indivension processes.

Entanglement is, however, experimentally testable, and there have been numerous
tests, pioneered by Stuart Freedman and John Clauser in 1972 251.
However, Alain Aspect's experiment in 1982 in Paris was well-controlled and designed
and became the key early study of its kind. This was the first experiment using

tt
Albert Einstein Introductory Remarks at the Naples-Amalfi meeting, May 7, 1984.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 235

 
polarization analyzers with two exit channels, thus, realizing the theoretical scheme in
the third step of the argument for Bell's Theorem in Section 2, was performed in the
early 1980s with cascade photons from laser-excited calcium atoms by Aspect,
Grangier, and Roger 87. The outcome confirmed the predictions of quantum mechanics
over those of local realistic theories more dramatically than any of its predecessors —
with the experimental result deviating from the upper limit in a Bell's Inequality by 40
SD.

A number of physicists went to great lengths to refute it but it became recognized in

the scientific community as the first rigorous experiment confirming the Copenhagen
Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Essentially, it seems that elementary particles
(quanta of energy or mass) do not exist as localized objects flying through space but
are “smeared” probabilistically over all space between the source and the receiving
point (eye, particle collector or photographic plate) and do not become a local physical
reality until they’ve impacted on a receptor.

The most serious loophole is the detection loophole, which means that particles are not
always detected in both wings of the experiment. It is possible to "engineer" quantum
correlations (the experimental result) by letting detection be dependent on a
combination of local hidden variables and detector setting. This is a reason why the
work by Nicolas Brunner and Nicolas Gisin at the University of Geneva is very
relevant because it has been even harder to refute the conclusions of the Aspect type
experiments. The Geneva Bell test experiments showed that distance did not destroy
the "entanglement". Light was sent in fiber optic cables over distances of 11km (1998)
and then later 50 kilometers (2007) before it was analyzed. Furthermore, in 1998,
Innsbruck researchers led by Anton Zeilinger with Gregor Weihs conducted an
ingenious experiment that closed the "locality" loophole, improving on Aspect's of
1982252. The detector was made using a quantum process to ensure that it was random.
Their results violated the so-called CHSH inequality by over 30 standard deviations
with the coincidence curves agreeing with those predicted by quantum theory. The
Gisin group 85 also looked for coincidence probabilities on a three three-dimensional
(qutrit) system. They showed the inequality was violated when each observer measures
two noncommuting observables. This may be relevant in TDVP where three
dimensional measures are used as a unit in dimensionometry.

The entanglement paradox has been verified experimentally respectively in tens of

experiments. Quantum entanglement defies explanation for physicists who have not
looked at consciousness as a consideration. Because the circumstances of such tests
always seem to have at least one minor logical loophole, it is still possible to question
the validity of the results but it is becoming harder and harder.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 236

 
STC Inseparability and Entanglement

Relative inseparability
Now, if there are direct link-ups with C-substrate, space and time, it could be that these
three substrates are only relatively inseparable. They are inseparable from each other
only at the certain points of origin (perhaps where the metaphorical string is tied, the
knot, the umbilicus) and insertion (in a closed system at the other end). This allows a
finite, closed model where in between C, S and T are separated into their own
dimensional fabrics.

Resolution of the dimensional fluctuation dilemma and the vortical and three D model
How does one resolve this? Resolution may well be related to STC being indeed
indivisible, but only at a certain point in the dimensional fabric. Being tethered to the
metaphorical umbilicus may reflect when there is an ultimate collapse in one singular
component. Effectively this is a singularity, a moment in time, space and
consciousness where STC is completely inseparable. Yet it could expand markedly and
when it does, though it could be tethered at an end, in any position or in multiple
positions. Thus, tethering can be represented by other metaphorical components too,
such as the ship being moored and the moorage being the source of the tethered part;
staples holding down a series of papers; the roots of the STC tree being common but
the branches being separate; the balloons being held in hand by strings but potentially
interfacing with each other; besides that umbilical linkage of baby to mother.

One could use the parallel of the strings that are playing a musical instrument that are
vibrating. Indeed, this is one comprehensible metaphor in string theory where the knot
would be at the umbilicus. However, the vibration is not a two dimensional planar
vibration, or linear just in one direction, it has to always be three-directional. This
supports the model of the vortex and the necessity of triadic representations of
dimensions beyond 1 or 2. This ultimate maximum expansion point in this three
dimensional vibration is expansion to a sphere: That expansion to a sphere would, in a
way, reflect the center of the vortex— but not necessarily because of the necessary
asymmetries (as in FLT). The string theory paradigm is apposite but a three-D
paradigm, not a simple 2-D vibrating string, but 3-D vortex. Of course, in both TDVP
and string theories, one does not stop at 3-D but the descriptive model in TDVP is
triadic in 3-dimensional jumps at metadimensionality. (Note too that the metaphorical
strings used here may be a similar metaphor to “String theory“, but we are using a
different vibrating string metaphor not one that relates to a miniscule tiny string as in
string theory).

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 237

 
Differing Metadimensionality: Hyperspace and strings versus TDVP
All of metadimensionality, we contend, is not explained by string theory, folding or
other strings. Hyperspace effectively refers to a finite number of dimensions beyond
3S-1t and usually implies multiple dimensions of space, but usually one dimension of
time without consciousness (although Sirag 284 has recognized this need). This is very
different from TDVP, which involves the finite and the infinite, but it also involves the
need for multidimensional time and only 3 dimensions of finite space, and transfinite
C-substrate.

So, on the one hand we have STC tethering with the inseparable source at its end, a
singularity at an umbilicus, and at another point we have a sphere, which may or may
not be symmetrical and represents part of this vortical metaphorical vibration. Further,
if we have these spheres and the vortical vibration is occurring, we could theoretically,
also apply this to the C-substrate at that mystical or spiritual level and argue therefore,
that survival after bodily death, or higher level of attainments in C-substrate or
meditative or dream state, all could be reflecting different variables of extent at the C-
substrate level, all vibrating, yet tethered at zero points. This implies that at different
dimensions or in different domains as collections of dimensions, reality is experienced
differently. Therefore, it means that in one individual, there may be multiple
dimensions or domains perceived or conceptualized and even for that individual-unit
actualized because that is their reality—relative actualization. Moreover,
circumstances might vary for an individual so that the dimensional numbers or
domains may vary with circumstances or 3S-1t events.

Without implying that such states exist scientifically, we utilize a spiritual or mystical
metaphor, just as we did comparison of the “umbilicus” and the “vibrations” and the
“strings”: An individual attaining the very high so-called spiritual levels (e.g., variably
described philosophically or mystically as Samadhi or Chaya) may be fluctuating into
states of consciousness that are not usually attainable equivalent to profoundly high
dimensionality but always at that finite level with the potential to go higher —from N
to N+1 dimensions. It may be that the ultimate mystical or spiritual level is that state
achieved even at the Primary Receptor, infinite level, which kabbalistically reflects a
spiritual unification beyond yechida 285. Each of these are ordinal metrics of extent and
therefore, dimensional.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 238

 
CHAPTER 30: INDIVENSION: A NECESSARY NEW CONCEPT286

“Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last
analysis, we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”
Max Planck.

Counting Dimensions
How many dimensions are appropriate using the TDVP model?
Our standard current scientific model begins with 3S-1t. Based on C-substrate, our
TDVP model requires at minimum, initially, at least 3S-1t-1C to include the C-
substrate. Our model further motivates that there could be 3 dimensions of time: This
makes 3S-3t-1C.uu

Then by using complex numbers for C-substrate, we could argue that it is 3S-3T-3C
(using the same linked three dimensional model for each substrate) or even N-C
applying N-Dimensions in the C-substrate level of meaningful consciousness. That
implies 3S-3T-NC. There might potentially be more than 3D space, or 3D time,
applying the speculative principles of three-dimensional incremental increases. This
allows for 3S and 3T not necessarily being final for S and T. Such a postulate would
not easily allow for e.g. an 11D reality, and TDVP, unlike String Theory does not
require more than three dimensions of space.

Yet, it could also even be argued that there is only one dimension, the CST dimension,
but this would conform to our definition of a unified domain. This would be semantic
and our definition of dimension is different from the Unified Monism idea of one
unified reality: Reality encompasses dimensions, but exists fully at a metalevel beyond
that which is perceived by finite conscious beings.

But what do we regard as a dimension in the C-substrate?

There are added dimensional considerations. The C-substrate involves meaningful
apprehension and possibly meaningful perturbation of objects or events (even at the
subatomic level), and a more easily qualitatively defined “consciousness” implying
consciousness or awareness of events or objects and responses of influence or
manipulation.

Consciousness might imply not a single but numerous different but linked variables of
extent. Broadly, consciousness could be linked up not only with CEV (cognition,
uu
The 3t in this instance could be small case, because the individual may not realize he is experiencing a 3t equivalent in
that moment of time. So his experiential reality would be 3S-3t-1C not yet 3T.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 239

 
emotion, volition) referring to consciousness at a mental level, but possibly other
aspects are relevant from a mystical or spiritual or developmental point of view
including modifications of Sefirot concepts such as knowledge, understanding,
wisdom, kindness and loving-kindness, bravery, beauty and purity of character, pursuit
of actualization, actualization, appropriate justice and honesty, transcendence of self,
building blocks and planning, as well as love, intimacy, and qualities of improvement
of the spiritual aspects of physicality, plus further C-substrate dimensions relating to
these cognitive volitional equivalents.

C-substrate might also impact time and space, with time-space modifications of what
in the 3S-1t domain we refer to as “cause and effect”. These different levels of C-
substrate would be required to be ordinal variables of extent: Qualities such as love or
transcendence or valor are not absolutes, but relative and have gradual ordinal
measurable components. On the other hand, information is content alone, and
therefore, not a variable of extent. Information cannot be a dimension, just as mass
cannot be.

Our definition of further dimensions requires these variables of extent as building

blocks and there may be an indefinite and very large number of such variables. These
are not stable in number but will vary by the individual and for any specific
circumstance. Therefore, there may be a varying number of dimensions experienced by
an individual or individual-unit:
• in different states (specific moments) or
• between individual-units, given that they have different traits.
Indivensional communications would also vary with these state-trait differences
leading to the concept of fluctuating dimensions. There may be an indefinite or very
large number of such variables, and these may not be measurable for everyone, or for
any specific circumstance. This means that there may be a varying number of
dimensions participating in the definition of any specific indivensional window.

Additionally, the fluctuations may be the extent values pertaining to each of the
major dimensions or their implicated subdimensional levels.
We may not be able to stipulate exactly how many dimensions everyone has, or for
that matter, how many every subatomic particle has. However, it could be argued that
the particle variation involving indivension should not fluctuate very much as the
qualities above may reflect essential experiential characteristics only of living
organisms with consciousness. This is in contrast with particles, packets, qualits or
quanta which may have inseparable STC tethering, but should exhibit no or very
limited special qualities that would be associated with significant variance in their less
tethered components. This is because fluctuations appear mainly dependent on the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 240

 
varying experiences of the Individual-units (e.g., individuals, families, societies,
cultures, organs, bodily systems, scientific orientations) and the individual specific
circumstance (e.g., meditation in humans, possibly nuclear fission subatomically).

These fluctuations, in their turn, are dependent on vortical indivension

communications. Because of such indivension potentials, the dimensions and, more
specifically, the C-substrate dimensions could and would fluctuate experientially
depending on state and trait and subatomic particles may not exhibit such variance of
state and trait (though the Quantum Consciousness model could imply that they vary as
much being the units for higher sentient beings). But the fluctuations would be relative
and not absolute, giving a new appreciation of the relative aspects of perception,
conception or actualization of realities and the broader role of the calculus of
distinctions, and these are dependent on the ability of the sentient being to experience
such phenomena in metaconsciousness.

There are not a static number of dimensions

There appears to be a serious problem in regarding dimensions as static. This is
illustrated by problematic situations:

• A simple, everyday, universal human experience example is dreams. Are the

dimensions of dreams the same in a specific individual as during waking reality?
• An individual is in an altered state of consciousness: That person perceives a
different reality in meditative states, and likely under the influence of
hallucinogenics, or while in coma.
• What about alleged survival after bodily death? The problem is simply that if
there is survival after bodily death, it must still fit our TOE model. Yet under
those circumstances, what happens to space and time? It could be argued that
space and time at the relative conventional experiential physical 3S-1t
perceptual substrate would be translated into a post-mortem 0S-0T in that
standard model domain, but at a higher dimensional level there could be link-
ups with space and time, perhaps introducing concepts such as vibrations,
strings, superstrings, branes or other metadimensional or hyperspace
representations. This 3S-1t post-mortem perception would reflect relative non-
locality, as it would appear timeless and spaceless.

The scoffer would simply ignore the data: “No dreams are relevant to physical science,
only to psychology and anything that happens involves just different mechanistic
physiological processes as waking reality. We do not need to introduce a new variable
of extent with a different kind of consciousness.” Furthermore,

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 241

 
“And who is concerned about hallucinogenics? This is purely an expression of aberrant
brain function producing psychopathology. And would any serious scientist entertain
the ridiculous idea of alleged survival after bodily death?”

This one is more difficult, however, because a century of psychical research has
produced what many who have studied the area intensely, with training, and
objectively, regard as extremely cogent data supporting the hypothesis of survival. We
can point (like in other consciousness research areas) statistically to six sigma data
against chance 159.

But the issue at hand here, is even if one totally rejected this, we would still be faced
with an imaginary theoretical idea: The individual looking in from another higher C-
substrate dimension—would he experience an absence of S and T (in other words zero
dimensions) in at least one of the higher C-dimensions?). We are still dealing with
variables of extent and perceptual realities being interpreted conceptually however, one
looks at it, and a TOE must answer the bell to this dilemma.

Entanglement and TDVP

So can TDVP explain entanglement more clearly? We believe it can. Entanglement
appears a puzzle, but is a puzzle if one looks at 3 dimensions of space and 1 point in
time. It makes no sense because it appears non-local: it is relatively spaceless and
timeless because it cannot be expressed in our conventional 3S-1t dimensions of space
and time.

The solution may be to invoke higher dimensionality. By doing so, what appears
incomplete can be extrapolated by dimensional extrapolation at a higher level.
Suddenly, the points that are spread in what may appear a random or indeterminate
manner become less random and more determinant not in 1 more dimension, but
across dimensions. This requires a model to intrude across fluctuating dimensions in
terms of individuals, individual-units, and even subatomic structure: Indivension is the
process, and vortical fluctuation across dimensions is the content.

Fields have been posited by others, but the fields are generally within one dimension or
one “world” framework. The fields imply inherent structure. Here one is not dealing
with an inherent structure, because each and everyone of these STC tethered
components, be they time, space or consciousness, or be they expressed as mass,
massless, energy, or energyless in the ST domain, have components pertaining to
meaningful information in the C domain. These links are linked through the content of
vortices across fluctuating dimensions.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 242

 
Vortices and Spin, Indivension and Tethering
Spin
Examining the standard model of subatomic physics, every one of the subatomic
particles, exhibit certain properties: far more than mass (including 0), but also charge
implying energy and possibly dimensions, and also spin.

Spin, we propose, is the direct quantal (or possibly subquantal) link of the model of
vortical movement expression. That spin can also possibly be applied to dimensional
rotations. Spin and movement therefore, reflect different dimensions, whether by
warping rotation or some three dimensional string 287or other hyperspace mechanism.

The essence of this is the spin, and we can translate spin back to subatomic particles.vv
However, it is noted that the physicist’s concepts of spin is rather esoteric: it is not
really spin, just a name related to how all the types of subatomic particles are made up
of quarks that have to have fractional spin and so forth. If there is an analogy it may be
only vague or unclear one correlates the mathematics involved.

Vortical implies we now have our spin because we have curved movement. This is
now translated from what is perceived or conceptualized as relative objectivity or
relative subjectivity–the common descriptive experience versus the personal one.

Indivension and vortices

Indivension—individual or individual unit dimensions—has different dimensions and
fluctuates: Tethering at that macro-level effectively utilizes different vortices. These
are based on the rotational movement—the spin. This model links up the quantum
model —the relative objectivity model —with a relative subjectivity model at a
broader level.

Charge, dimensions and forces

The other component is “charge“ reflecting energetic forces. If there are both negative
and positive dimensions or fractional dimensions, spin could be translated into vortical
rotation, and charge including 1/3 or 1/2 charge might be ultimately applied in terms of
dimensionality or energy. We could possibly translate force quantal-wise in terms of
charge.

vv
The complex mathematical theorem, Noether's first theorem, time translation symmetry gives conservation of energy;
space translation symmetry gives conservation of momentum; rotation symmetry gives conservation of angular
momentum, and so on. It is based on 3S-1t and should not apply in the metadimensional configurations (vortical
indivension windows exhibit multiple vectors of freedom). This theorem only applies to certain classes of theories and in
its original version it applies to theories described by a Lagrangian, and the Euler-Lagrange equation would require
rewriting to accurately represent metadimensional spin. 288
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 243

 
Energies and forces
There is one more aspect to this, and that is the idea of energies. We have seen how
there is a warping of space-time in relation to gravitation. Gravitation is one form of
energy. In electromagnetism, electricity and magnetism could under certain
circumstances, be orthogonal (for example, in the propagation of light) but may not
necessarily be so; this might imply that there could be potentially a warping at two
different directional levels implying two different dimensions.ww There is no reason for
orthogonality in warping and indeed if metadimensionality is non-Euclidean,
orthogonality may be impossible.

Warping of dimensions
We have postulated these different forces relate to warping, and each force implies a
new dimension. If we have C-substrate warping, then dimensional variables of extent
such as love can warp realities: It could possibly influence other variables of extent
and hence other dimensions, either from the C-substrate, or even (like all C-substrate
dimensions), the S and T dimensions. But at this point, the warping of dimensions
bringing about dimensional extrapolation to further dimensions is speculative though
intriguing enough to warrant a chapter in our companion second book, Space Time and
Consciousness10.

ww
Some scientists, though using terms like electromagnetism still, would at another level separate out electricity and
magnetism because they are sometimes orthogonal—effectively when the (electrical) force moves forward, the field [like
the magnetic filings] moves at right angles [right hand rule]. Separately, there is good data for a direct opposing force of
the expanding universe working at the same astronomic level as gravitation.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 244

 
CHAPTER 31: INDIVIDUALS AND SOCIETY: A UNIFICATION OF
DIFFERENT CONSCIOUSNESS MECHANISMS 289; 290

“Those who have a 'why' to live, can bear with almost any how.”
Viktor Frankl (1905-1997, Psychiatrist) 291

States of Consciousness and Dimensionality

Altered states of consciousness and higher dimensions of consciousness
Individuals living in our 3S-1t reality can experience altered states of consciousness
(ASCs), sometimes induced (e.g., by meditation). These last a specific finite moment,
several hours or longer. He/she might then be able to experience some of the transfinite
or metadimensional higher consciousness attributes, and by so doing, transiently
perceive or conceive of higher dimensionalities within his/her domain of current
experience.

The individual’s experience of an ASC or of multiple altered states of awareness might

therefore allow for these temporary shifts to and across higher levels of dimensionality.
This, in turn, could also potentially create several kinds of more optimized
circumstances to attain information or influence reality, or effectively, to elevate
oneself mystically or spiritually.
These elevations to different awareness levels might be very uncommon, limited in
expression, unstable, or incomplete, and may reflect varying information depending on
the extent of intrusion or experience of the different consciousness dimensional levels.

A mechanism for acquisition of psi

Reaching across dimensions might explain how information becomes more conducive
to psi acquisition or expression. Hypothetically, if this could be performed at will, it
should make such events less rare. The information would be available through the
interfaces of multiple dimensions: An atmosphere for psi would be created when the
interface of vortices, vectors, scalars or tensors would allow a new availability of such
meaningful information (consciousness). Two levels of mechanisms of afferent
acquisition or efferent expression may occur, resulting in ostensibly different kinds of
psi phenomena:

• The individual (or individual-unit) apprehends or perturbs data or events, and so

non-specifically impacts reality through the nervous system, but not consciously
neurologically (e.g. via a bodily awareness, like a gut feeling, or autonomically).

• Alternatively, the individual (or individual-unit) either appreciates that data or

events, or influences them or both, and in this way, more specifically impacts
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 245

 
 reality at a neurologically conscious level of “knowledge” or higher level of
meaning.

Revisiting Tethering: Closed or open? Finite or infinite?

Why tethering may be important in metadimensional consciousness
Let’s examine a different but very related aspect in the appreciation of dimensions,
namely the role of “tethering”. We emphasize tethering here, because it is a major
concept expressing how consciousness is linked to our finite space and time realities.
It, therefore, is a key to appreciating how the apparently separate but actually tethered
components link back to their STC source, and how feedback by vortical indivension
loops, windows or interfaces for any specific individual experiential reality may allow
greater information transfer. This is so because, effectively, there is a direct link with
the inseparable STC origin of reality, even when consciousness is manifesting at a
specific dimensional level.

Different amounts of tethering

There is no definite requirement for the inseparable links of STC to be only tethered
(like an umbilicus) at one end. It could be tied together at both ends like the knots of a
string. This model reflects again, a potential sphere or arc, but in a metaphorical
hammock, effectively, creating a closed circuit. Alternatively, the link could be
anywhere or multiple, not necessarily at the ends. These closed components could
imply finite subreality because they have ends, as opposed to the infinite subreality,
which by definition is without end.

Different dimensions of tethering

The tethering may or may not be appreciated purely within 3S-1t-NC. It could also
conceivably involve tethering at other dimensional levels. Would linear time
precognition involve linkages to current STC via 3S-1T-NC tethering? Or could free-
will hypothetically with 3S-2T-NC or even 3S-3T-NC also impact through tethered
communication? (The 2T versus 3T differentiation could be because the second time
dimension may be reflecting multiple individual-units but not necessarily the
volumetric guiding of free-will.)

Relative tethering
The apparent open circuit tethering, with either one linkage or zero STC linkages
specifically in 3S-1t conventional reality domains, may therefore reflect tethering at
other different dimensional levels: Relative tethering. This open component might also
imply infinite realities or meaningfulness in each individual or individual unit of
consciousness with further tethering either being transfinite or not occurring at all in
the finite reality. At the finite level, it could be reflecting tethered elements and
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 246

 
potential vortices at different social, familial or cultural levels, for example. We have
dynamic bidirectional (and possibly multidimensional) shifts from the finite to the
infinite, from the closed and open, and these would all be relative to the experient.

The finite is not always closed; the infinite is not always open.
Technically, there might be no reason why the finite could not sometimes also be open
with a linkage only at one end (at that metaphoric umbilicus). Conversely, the infinite
could have an infinite extent, but within that infinity there could be every variety of
linkage, including closed linkages with multiple STC inseparable links (could the
metaphor of waves in an ocean apply here?). This closed and open status is logically so
in both the finite and the infinite, because they are all relative to the individual-unit.
Therefore, closed and open, and finite and infinite do not directly correspond one-on-
one to each other, but the relationships conceptually are likely to be highly correlated.

The implication of such linkages might be even more important for the tethered areas.
This is so as these tethered areas would still exhibit great links to their sources, and
this would allow a mechanism to transfer information and particularly meaningful
information (consciousness) to individuals and individual-units at the 3S-1t domain,
and also to emphasize further the extreme potential for variability in such transfers of
key data.

Individual-units and systems theory

A consideration here is: Who is experiencing all this? This introduces another facet of
relative to what or whom? In the social sciences, we realize the relevance of “Systems
Theory”. There is a linkage, too, across every level of individual-unit so that “relative”
also contains many levels.

This is why we apply compound words here, and elsewhere. Compound words more
easily allow comprehension of and, indeed, realistically reflect the unitary nature of
Systems Theory. The psychological interfaces with the sociological and with families,
and with the ethics and the spiritual, for example, can more easily be seen to all play a
role in the complex interactions of individual-units. To emphasize this point, we
deliberately, first, combine all these corresponding individual units into a simple
compound term, the ethicospirituobiopsychofamiliosociocultural approach.

Perception as Individual-units: The Role of the Social Sciences

The individual and the individual-unit
Moreover, each individual’s reality may interact and interface with other realities of
individuals or individual-units. The individual-unit can now be understood to reflect a
specific component of the broader Social Science system and therefore each individual
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 247

 
necessarily is linked with many individual-units.

Application in extended social science systems theory

We could, therefore, apply an extended social science systems theory to each and
every combination of ethicospirituobiopsychofamiliosociocultural reality136. Each of
these constitutes individual systems units, so referring to the individual consciousness
may indeed be individual systems at the social or cultural levels, for example. The use
of “experient” here implies that these different systems are not necessarily an
individual. We have used the term “individual-unit” for this.

Psychofamiliosociocultural model: idiosyncratic percepts or concepts

Let us add one more additional key component: The individual-units (experients) are
experiencing an intensely idiosyncratic reality. This is their perception of reality, and
sometimes their perceptions and interpretations of that concept, and it may not relate to
the actuality of what is happening “objectively” in the “common reality” that combines
(say) 99.99% of experiences arising from these mechanisms and is regarded as
“objectified”. The reality may reflect a multiplicity of events that are happening
relative to that experient, but may have mainly common elements with others (society
or culture) or the rare very idiosyncratic perceptual or conceptual realities. During our
sentient physical existence, it appears very difficult to conceive of a common reality at
the metadimensional level, far beyond 3S-1t. This is because we only experience 3S-
1t and we do not have the antennae/sense data to go beyond what 3S-1t is
experiencing. We are in the Platonic cave with shadows.

The “multifaceted” multiple systems approach to metadimensionality

Whereas it is easy to regard the
biophysiopsychofamiliosocioethicosprituomysticocultural levels as each individual-
units (biological, physiological, psychological, familial, social, ethical, spiritual,
mystical, cultural), given that C-substrate also begins at the quantum level, we could
also regard individual-units across the various levels of the physical sciences, namely,
quantomacroastronomophysicochemicoelectrical describing the various levels of
comparative size, namely, quantal, macroreality and astronomical, within the fabric of
the physical, chemical and electrical ostensibly inanimate aspects to reality. These
inanimate physical science descriptions are linked with the various animate systems.

Therefore, one could talk about

quantomacroastronomophysicochemicoelectricalbiopsychofamiliosocioethicosprituom
ysticocultural individual-units. Each system description could be used individually or
in any combinations in vortical indivension. Of course, the various qualities of
consciousness such as honesty, bravery, determination, wisdom can also fit well and
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 248

 
this is why the full term would add consciousness in the form of “conscio”, namely:
conscioquantomacroastronomophysicochemicoelectricalbiophysiopsychofamiliosocioe
thicosprituomysticocultural. Superficially, this may appear to be a meaningless
compound word. But it is anything but a meaningless compound word: It is truly
unified and meaningful: It reflects the unification of sociocultural systems theory.

The common “multifaceted” systems approach to individual units

The emphasis with such multifaceted terms is, indeed, on meaning itself, and the ways
in which every one of these levels of various systems impact consciousness and reality.
These compound and complex words allow an appreciation of the unitary aspect of
reality from the smallest to the largest of all phenomena. Moreover, they allow us to
integrate the inanimate with the animate finite systems. The common thread is the
application, presence and sometimes involvement of vortical indivension and
individual-units in our finite reality.

Indivension, Vortices, and Systems Theory

Indivension revisited in an individual unit systems context
It seems that there had to be a way to describe how individual-units interact across
dimensions. This required a new word to describe the fluctuating dimensions and
domains in the individual-unit or a combination of individual-units experiencing a
common reality. This word allowed for transitory or fluctuating experiential realities
and relates to individual-unit, dimensional distinctions and domains. This is why the
compounding of the two key concepts here, “individual” and “dimension”, make up
the word “indivension”.

Vortical metadimensional realities

The experiential realities in metadimensions (discussed during this book) are
necessarily in non-Euclidian space. This is so because realities are not orthogonal or
parallel. Vortices are the usually tethered content that may interface: They move in
every kind of direction and are not equal in size, shape or dimensionalities. We
postulate they can go up, down, across, inside or outside the STC substrates. This
movement across, between and within dimensions and the crossing of these different
vortical windows, allows for the process of indivension.

The metalevel of individual-unit vortical indivension

Every social and physical system above is critically important for the individual, or
more correctly, for that level of individual-unit finite reality being experienced in a
specific domain (like 3S-1t or 3S-1t-NC). Moreover, every system involves vortical
indivension at a higher metalevel than others have individually hypothesized: For
example, two relevant models as Theories of Everything involve the communicating
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 249

 
field theories (e.g. Sheldrake’s morphogenetic fields and formative causation 27) and
“subquantal infinitesimals” (e.g. the model of Klein and Boyd 71). These may be useful
explanations but at a lower theoretical level. These authors have demonstrated that data
has accumulated supporting both these kinds of models.

Top-down versus bottoms-up revisited

But because the (amorphous?) process of indivension with the content of vortices can
be incorporated into these “lower” conceptual models, Vortical Indivension would,
also, be automatically empirically supported when these field or subquantal, or for that
matter any other structural model, is empirically supported. The demonstrable merging
and meeting of these models with science, therefore automatically incorporates TDVP
and vortical indivension. However, the converse does not apply because fields or
subquanta cannot be put into metadimensional vortical indivension. It’s a case of the
top-down models being easier to access the lower level bottoms-up models, than the
reverse.

Unified systems theory and compound words

Our compound word reflects the profound unitary merging and interfacing of
numerous relevant systems and theories, and the inseparability of all of these in the
context of individual-unit influences. We could add other lengthier compound concepts
such as geographicoeconomomilitaropolitical,xx to the fourteen fundamental systems
inanimate-animate systems above. However, these, or other specific systems prefixes,
do not as directly reflect the interchange of individual-units in vortical indivension.
Nevertheless, they could certainly be combined as secondary elements. The message is
unification of information, consciousness and interchanges across numerous different
individual-units, across, between and within dimensions by a seamless, amorphous
process (indivension), using equivalently amorphous curved movements that can
intrude anywhere and across dimensions (vortices).

“Multidimensional”, multifaceted common individual-unit reality

We could have introduced the term “multidimensional” here to illustrate the
multifaceted elements of the various systems. Indeed, social scientists may use the
term “multidimensional” in Systems Theory, but not in the same context of
mathematical dimensions—an important distinction because what social scientists
refer to as “dimensions”, for example of the personality, is very different from our
specific mathematical definition. “Multidimensional” in the social sciences does not

xx
Therefore one could extend this concept even more with four or more extra systems, and appropriate adverbs (-ly) and
nouns (-ness) but it is not necessary: 107 or with these, 109 or 111 letters is sufficient. The 144 letter compound word
Conscioquantomacroastronomophysicochemicoelectricalgeographicoeconomomilitaropoliticobiophysiopsychofamiliosoc
ioethicosprituomysticoculturalness is unnecessarily descriptive
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 250

 
involve multiple different dimensions in the context of our definition of dimensions as
variables of extent. Therefore, we apply a far better social science term, namely
“multifaceted” reflecting the different facets and interchanges that occur across
different systems of reality.

States and traits and the individual-unit

At the simplest level, the same individual at different times may exhibit different
“states” of consciousness with different qualities, for example, during meditation,
dreams, waking, and dissociation. This will be combined with his/her biological,
family, social, cultural, ethnic, religious, mystical and spiritual appreciations of his/her
finite living reality, and put in the context of his/her physical inanimate quantal,
macroscopic and astronomical reality, across the physical, chemical, and electrical
levels—the broader, more consistent “traits”. This is why for each individual, there
are potentially zillions of individual-units all interfacing and allowing for the most part
a common reality, which is experienced as objectified.

Calculus of distinctions applied

The important component here is that there may be perceptual, conceptual, and
experiential calculus of distinctions components in relation to realities, and these
distinctions might fluctuate, particularly at the level of the C-substrate, but also in
terms of any kind of dimensionality, domain, “world” or reality experience.

Materialism or Metadimensionality? Two models

The key importance of tethering for dimensions, C-substrate, and survival:
1. Materialism: If STC (Space-Time-Consciousness) were inseparably linked at all
times, without any kind of separate tethering of components, then because all of STC
could exist physically together, a very tight, indivisible and inseparable central core
with nothing else could reflect the local unified structure of all of physical materialism
including STC: Then, Consciousness could simply be an epiphenomenon of space-
time, without independent existence. The materialist (3S-1t with no C) could then
adequately explain events: Physical death would be a final, logical extinction and all
mental or mystical processes (including “consciousness”): It could simply be explained
as a product of the brain and the body.
2. Metadimensionality: If distant spinning vortical consciousness movements impacted
that central core from above (“top-down”) or outside (e.g., by rotation) that could
reflect:
• extra dimensions of C (3S-1T-nC or 3S-nT-nC), and therefore metadimensionality;
• independent “consciousness”, separate from space and time;
• separate S, T and C tethered channels “entangled” to that core at a distance;

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 251

 
• communications between and across dimensions (e.g., C with S and T)
(indivension);
• and the potential for extended survival of “consciousness” after bodily death.

This latter metadimensionality model portrays TDVP: it is more than 4D (>3S-

1t) as C exists, necessitates tethering ± entanglement (? same), C-substrate
communicates with space and time via individual-unit “consciousness”, and it
potentially survives physical death: Applying LFAF, the “survival” hypothesis (and
there is supporting data for this.12; 101; 123; 159 234) strongly supports TDVP because it
demonstrates the independence of C-substrate from S- and T-substrates, and any
(infinite) communications exemplify tethering.

These relationships involving metadimensionality, indivension and vortices in

individuals or individual-units are complex: Communications of information and
meaning (across and between numerous connecting dimensions) involve subjective
distinctions of self, consciousness and reality. In Space, Time and Conscousness10, we
will explore these relationships more extensively in our discussions of
dimensionometry and the calculus of distinctions. But briefly, dimensions are
primarily conceptual: at any moment, there could be as many dimensions as we could
conceive of. Each dimension could be perceived metrically —measurable either
intervally or ordinally. These conceptions and perceptions are determined by our
experience attained through zillions of individual-unit realities. These relationships
could last a moment in linear finite time if the state was very variable, or they could be
maintained over some period of time, reflecting a more stable state.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 252

 
CHAPTER 32: FLUCTUATING DIMENSIONS 290

“No man is an island entire of itself.”

John Donne, 1572-163, Poet 262
Fluctuations
Fluctuations occur in relation to dimensions, generally C-substrate dimensions.
Fluctuating wave particles fit well into the idea of indivension. The fluctuation
produces combinations of meaningful linkage of information because information is
meaningful at that C substrate level, and always linked with S and T.

Vortical Indivension
In vortical indivension, the content is vortical. The process is indivension allowing
fluctuating across, between and within dimensions and interfacing between them.
Vortices are at a higher level than fields per se because any field theory can be reduced
as one explanatory alternative to vortices. Vortices are empirically derived from
nature, and mathematically justified by extension of Fermat’s Last Theorem,
Pythagorean interaction, and extending a modeling of General Relativity with warping
beyond four dimensions.
The term “indivension” was needed because an equivalent concept did not exist.

Consciousness Transfer
Meaningful information can arise via 2 mechanisms: Either the meeting points
interface or entanglement occurs via the meaningful information links that existed at
the inseparable STC tethering level. These may or may not be the same: Indeed, the
tethering may or may not be a mechanism for entanglement. Tethering could therefore,
be a functional linkage implying entanglement. Effectively, the vortical indivension
meeting points may also reflect a tethering.

Meaning and random fluctuations

Fluctuation seldom implies a totally random fluctuation phenomenon.
We regard dimensional fluctuations as meaningful. They may be something initiated
from the bottom-up by the finite animate sentient being or from the infinite either by
contiguity across any finite dimension or conceptually from the top-down.

State
Dimensional fluctuations depend on the state of consciousness. For example, we have
obtained inspirations waking up from sleep in the middle of the night with some new
ideas about something we were mulling about. This could reflect a link of our
metaconscious infinite linking with the finite. This could be easier to obtain in a milieu
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 253

 
of what could at that moment be a favorable altered stated of consciousness. So, one of
the components in terms of fluctuating is obviously, state.
The altered state could allow the experience of realities in the finite that otherwise
one could not experience, and these could be very meaningful. The number of
dimensions could fluctuate because, for example, a state is lost after waking or
completing meditation.

Accessing the Metaconscious

Additionally, conceptually there may be a meeting point of the tentacles moving out
from the inseparable STC tethered portion. This would usually be by design, but could
be accidental leading to incidental acquisition of (psi) information: Though it seldom
has a completely random element, it could be random in terms of the unexpected
intersections of consciousness vortices. Much more commonly, we posit, that vortices
fluctuate and meaningfully meet at specific points producing meaningful information
availability at 3S-1t. So, this is fluctuating and allowing the ability to access the
metaconsciousness.

Metaconsciousness and Fluctuations

Metaconsciousness can be interfaced at every dimensional level. It is conceptually
more than meta-information, which does contain meaning, individual-unit knowledge,
wisdom or understanding. Information is a bare component that requires processing in
the sentient brain to register for neurological consciousness awareness. Consciousness
implies not just information coming through because it always has a meaning, and it
almost always has an affect—an emotionality. It very often has an intention and relates
to information or communications that have been primed, thought about, puzzled about
or desired. It is not something that is just coming through because it is randomly there.

Traits
The word fluctuating may be conceptually difficult. Consequently, we apply other
terms instead—varied in traits; shifting in states: Sometimes, the word varied instead
of fluctuating works particularly in a more consistent trait—a trait is a maintained
structure of a specific individual-unit implying a consistency of dimensionality.
Otherwise, the term shifting allows conceptualization, particularly in these changing,
sometimes oscillating states of consciousness.

Quality and Quantity

Movement across dimensions reflects the different state and trait fluctuations
producing different quantities and also qualities of C-substrate dimensions.
This is a key point: There are various levels of elevation of the self (individuals
humans) or of any kind of individual-unit be it ethnic, cultural, groups, families or
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 254

 
social that one can achieve.
Conversely, there are also levels of denigration. The metaphor is the hell-heaven or
good-evil dichotomy but without the heaven or hell of theology. Effectively, there are
different ways in which we can access information that becomes meaningfully loaded
(metainformation) and even when this is finite, the vortical indivension interfaces with
the infinite knowledge.

No Man is an Island Entire of Itself

Given the infinite element there is no fixed locality and this concept of a “barrier” is
very broad. It is far more than information or meaning. One can apply this at any level
of Individual-Unit: individual (any object—inanimate or animate—with any sentient
being), group, family, social, cultural, ethnic, theological; or psychological or
psychopathological interfaces. And there can be numerous interfaces. Such a
barrier/sieve/ filter /strainer/ funnel/ sponge yy may restrict or allow permeability of
influence across humans such that every man influences everyone else and the
controlling factor is how much to allow. Someone who is “sensitive” (in any sense)
may be overwhelmed by the amount of data coming in and may feel intense likes,
dislikes or experience marked influences by another; a psychiatrist may deliberately set
up a barrier in relation to such ego-boundaries to prevent being overwhelmed. The
terms “empathy” and “sympathy” may metaphorically use this kind of mechanism.
Such data may be neutral, positive, negative or have mixed components. The
separation is part of the individuation that is necessary psychologically and
physiologically for adequate living.
That information hypothetically could invariably be linked-up with intuitive
wisdom, understanding, and knowledge. But it is also linked up with all the different
good and bad emotional and volitional components.

The Brain and 3S-1t

The brain and nervous system also has a more obvious and less controversial function:
It is linked in 3S-1t-NC with (organically based) physiological and neurological states
and it also integrates psychological dynamics that may distort the information.

All of these therefore, include fluctuation, which is generally obtained intentionally

though theoretically could occur purely by accident, as in some dreams. Fluctuating
non-random information may be rare and variably meaningful.

yy
Interestingly, within a minute of writing this section, VN received the following email content: “There are four types
among students who sit before the sages: a sponge, a funnel, a strainer and a sieve.” (One commentary argues that it is
the “sieve” that is best: It allows the flour dust to pass through yet retains the fine flour”. He retains the essence of his
studies and the ability to focus on the heart of the matter and to ignore the rest.) 292 We are more pragmatic—horses for
courses. Meaning involves intentionality and all of these characteristics can be valuable or a hindrance depending on the
discrete circumstances.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 255

 
CHAPTER 33: THE BRAIN, PHYSIOLOGY AND ITS “CONSCIOUSNESS” 293; 294

“The brain is a computing machine connected with a spirit.”

Kurt Gödel 145

Brain Interaction
The physiology of the brain along with the rest of the nervous system and the general
physiology of the body is very precise. It is remarkable, and it allows actions. Every
one of those components, be they measured at the atomic, molecular,
neurotransmitters, or anatomical areas, are all linked up at any point in 3S-1t with
space, time, or consciousness. The living nervous system comprises the major
functional components of the vehicle used by consciousness for interaction with the
physical universe.

The purpose of this interaction is to bring ordered patterns and meaning into a physical
universe that would otherwise be chaotic tending rapidly toward maximum entropy.
The reason for this interaction is the desire of our physical brain consciousness to
perceive, conceive and actualize the reality experience itself.

The Bergsonian Filter

Henri Bergson295 theorized about a filter of the brain: Individuals filter out irrelevant or
overwhelming information from other consciousness or sources. Some call this the
“Bergsonian filter” and it often is understood as a mechanism to filter psi and limit
information to appropriately useful input: Breakdown of this filter mechanism would,
theoretically, allow potential psi to be received.

In this sense, the organs of the individual physical vehicle (usually specifically the
central nervous system) act as filters or reduction valves to allow consciousness to
focus and experience a limited amount of reality as meaningful phenomena. The body,
driven by the variable cognitions, emotions and volitional elements interacts with
macro-reality through physical mechanisms.

We postulate that the brain, however, is the link to higher dimensions of

consciousness: It interacts subconsciously with physical reality on the quantum level
and is capable of developing abilities to interact more fully with the hierarchy of
physicality and consciousness through the perceptions of additional dimensions. These
abilities might be rare, at this point, in the history of our world. Effectively, we see the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 256

 
filter as one aspect and prefer selective permeability, where necessary information can
be received and the organism has some control over the choice of allowing or filtering
data from the outside.

Metaphorically, the brain, in this way, would be like computer RAM (random active
memory being used at that time). This reflects specific functioning in N-C that is being
utilized, as opposed to the broader hard drive that is not really the brain at all, but
reflects all of metaconsciousness.

Windows Into Metaconsciousness

We posit that ours is an adaptive brain: a filter of overwhelming Higher Consciousness
impressions and an expansive brain allowing one to intrude into wider Higher
Consciousness like the so-called unconscious. Our definition of consciousness has
three components and it’s unified.

In this context, the temporal lobe and possibly the frontal lobe are playing the roles of
being “windows into the mind” 169. By allowing these windows, one is not only
perceiving the negative of the Bergsonian filter, but the positives coming though, of
brain physiology.

There has to be a mechanism by which information is integrated appropriately: This

means not only excluding the irrelevant (filtering is one component of that) but
bringing together the relevant: That integration of information is not only bringing
together into a meaningful whole all incoming perceptual information from seeing,
hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and our sense-data, but also information that is
coming through from psi. It is not only perceptual reality but it is also integrating
information coming through from the rest of the brain—effectively, including as one
small component, conceptual reality at a conscious level. This is the function of the
temporal lobe of the brain.

The Temporal Lobe

When the temporal lobe does not function properly, we talk about temporal lobe
dysfunction and a variety of different possible temporal lobe systems and non-specific
symptoms, and sometimes seizures result. On the other hand, that same temporal lobe
is still the integrator, par excellence. Paradoxically, sometimes the ostensible
malfunction of the temporal lobe allows greater experiences of other realities in Higher
Consciousness through psi. This has been well demonstrated in the work of Palmer and
Neppe 296, 128, 189 in so-called temporal lobe epileptics or people with temporal lobe firing.
The converse has been demonstrated too127. SP Experients have more temporal lobe
symptoms. There is a phenomenological linkup here that is profound and has been well
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 257

 
demonstrated in the work of Neppe and on subjective paranormal experients, so-called
“psychics”.

Neppe has been able to show that the symptoms of temporal lobe dysfunction are
different from those of subjective paranormal experiences. Yet, the subjective
paranormal experients have more temporal lobe systems and vise versa, and patients
with temporal lobe conditions have more subjective paranormal experiences.
So, the reciprocal applies, and this is a very strong reciprocal in medicine because this
is how medicine does it. A person has malaria, they have the symptoms, and you can
diagnose it based on the symptoms of malaria. Then you do a blood test and then can
justify the malaria. Alternatively, you can do the blood test and pick up the malaria and
later on the person can develop the symptoms. So, there is this two-way directionality
in terms of looking at causal links as opposed to just associative links. The same thing
applies here in terms of brain.

Because the temporal lobe of the brain might be a window into the mind, it neither
confirms nor denies the veridicality of that metaconsciousness. We have not used that
word ‘mind’ either, but effectively that word mind is our metaconsciousness.
Motor psi expressions or consciousness may not be temporal but frontal lobe because
this is more an executive function, it may be frontal lobe135, 297.

Unconscious Bodily Metaconsciousness?

Depending on the developmental level, humans, and possibly animals, might
experience part of the tethering through expressing itself in so-called “intuition” or
“bodily experiences” and the “gut feeling”. These may not necessarily be expressed in
full awareness in N-consciousness, but psychologically or somatically only. How then
does the neurological consciousness—higher brain functions—comprehend this
situation? What role does the rest of the brain have? In this kind of instance
specifically, is the brain purely a filter of information coming through from the Higher
Consciousness or is it trying to integrate information from many different sources,
unsure what is correct, uncertain what is a guess, and insecure as to the certainty of
origin?

It could be all of these or none depending on the specifics and the exact
interpretations. These instances of only a nagging certainty that something is afoot
could be reflecting the permeating boundary between self and not self, possibly
paralleling the interface between the finite and the infinite, or potentially expressing
information that is interpreted as relevant and important, but may be endpoint
expressions of what is purely neurochemically or psychodynamically based. This is an
excellent example of the interface between neuroscience and psi, and of the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 258

 
phenomenological interaction of the psychological with the subjectively paranormal. It
illustrates how important it is to study this area.

Differentiating the Brain Consciousness or Unconsciousness from

Metaconsciousness
If information is apprehended from metaconscious sources, that information needs to
be registered, processed and integrated into brain function. One likely area as indicated
is the great integrator of the higher brain, the temporal lobe, and for output elements,
motoric influences may involve the great executive, the frontal lobe. A century of
psychology has demonstrated the relevance of psychodynamics, of unconscious ego-
defenses, of the complexity of the human personality, and of the admixture of
consciously and unconsciously motivated human behaviors and ideations.

This makes differentiating what may be metaconscious (be it the Jungian collective
consciousness, or a repository archive of information, or a limited excessive different
reality usually filtered by an otherwise overloaded brain) from central nervous system,
particularly brain, information, very difficult, and often impossible. It is easy to
assume the reductionistic base of everything arising from the brain, and it is only the
contradictions (the tiny, rare events that we’ve noted that do not make statistical or
spontaneous sense) that gives rise to wonder whether the Higher Consciousness is
playing a role. But the fact is that those tiny rare events are so overwhelming
statistically (and for many spontaneously) that we have to take them into account if we
want to practice objective science. And if they are acknowledged, it may often be
impossible to differentiate a reality that cannot be authenticated but may exist, from a
limited psychological or neurological brain experience 124; 169; 293; 294.

Neppe128; 135; 136; 169; 178; 189; 296 has written extensively on this topic and has emphasized
perspectives such as taking the whole context of the individual into account, situational
information, outside validations, nontoleration of psychotropic medications and taking
into account all details in uncovering this profound challenge.

Consciousness and Information

The TDVP Axiom of Tethered Origin begins at the level of consciousness not at the
level of information as even the quantal interpretations of physics implies a certain
meaning exists, and these data are supported by the existence of psi and the hypothesis
that meaning and numinosity involve psi conducive states.

If the tethering were purely space, time and information, we might need to establish a
threshold at which that information becomes consciousness. As it happens, this would
imply a linearity and realistically the distinctions are different: Consciousness is a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 259

 
distinction of extent, and has an ordinal metric, information involves a content and the
metrics linked with it are consciousness.

Consciousness does not begin at the cutoff point of a certain ordropic state: If this were
so, it would require further proposals and justification relating to this. For example,
does consciousness or, for that matter, life itself, begin at conception, some time in the
first trimester, or at birth. Our fundamental metaparadigm reflects that is was always
there, that there is an infinite and a finite reality, and that the level of consciousness
began at the very origin of all. Moreover, this is not just information, but meaningful
information even at the most subatomic of levels. This is based, too, on the
interpretations of physics implying a certain meaning exists, supported by psi.
It does not begin at the cutoff point of a certain ordropic state, and this requires further
proposals relating to this: The animate versus the inanimate begs the question of the
threshold of change, how and why.

Both empiricism and logic drive the original Consciousness component.

Information remains content, consciousness involves a meaning that is an intent.
Pan-consciousness is the process with meaning as opposed to content of pan-
informationism and these form part of the broader unified monism.

There are those such as Stephan Schwartz 298, who separates out an Informational
Domain from the Mass-Energy Domain aspect, and Eva Lobach, who conceives of a
triad of mass-energy-information.299 While these differentiations appear logical on the
surface, they may not quite fit conceptually. This is so as by applying the calculus of
distinctions, mass, energy and information are classified as distinctions of content not
extent. Their metrics of content are measured the extent of the consciousness
distinctions, and space and time are involved with mass-energy. It is difficult or
impossible to conceive of energy without space and time, and mass is converted into
energy. The more fundamental measures / metrics are the extent of space-time.
Similarly, information is a content of relevance, but we apply a measure of extent to it
by using meaning, at which stage there is consciousness.

Also, the model of consciousness can allow space and time, if necessary, to both equal
the metric of relative zero at specific higher dimensionalities. This avoids the paradox
of possible absence of space and time, for example, in post-mortem survival. Also,
theoretically, too much information without any meaning would imply consciousness
as equal to a zero metric. At the lowest levels of inanimate object, e.g., subquantal, this
may be close to zero, but the ATO specifically implies consciousness existing at least
minimally, even at the Origin Event.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 260

 
 SECTION G: THE MODELS BEHIND TDVP
CHAPTER 34: CALCULUS OF DISTINCTIONS 195

“A set is a Many that allows itself to be thought of as a One.”

Georg Cantor

The Axioms of Finite-Infinite Interaction

Effectively, several common-sense axiomatic assumptions may allow a perspective of
transfer between finite and infinite subrealities. The axioms of barrier, penetrability
between finite and infinite, the axiom of continuity of the finite and of discreteness of
the finite implying quanta are relevant but again these are not key to this TDVP model
but convenient explanations that we cannot prove. The conversion of the continuous
metainformation source in the infinite to meaning involving infinite wisdom,
understanding, and knowledge on the one side, and this conversion to meaning,
however, primitive, at the lowest level, at the other finite side, at the quantal level. So,
there is interconvertibility with infinite metaconsciousness and finite meaning. It is not
separated. The ultimate endpoint that is separated is that filter, but the filter is actually
the filter between the infinite and the finite reality, and not necessarily the direct filter
from outside into the brain. The two may at times be synonymous.

Self Versus Not-self

This difference is very important and very relevant because this is the differentiation
from “the self” from the “not self” in the Calculus of Distinctions. This is implied in
terms of infinite versus finite realities. The “self” here may be any kind of “individual
unit” and therefore this differentiation may be complex, as it is self at one level, and
not self at another. There is also the question of separation of the self versus the
collective consciousness, post-mortem, because when one conceives of infinite reality,
the merging would be that of whole space (all of space; metaspace) and that of whole
time (all of time; metatime “simultaneously”).

This theoretically could be interpreted as one real reason for difficulty in

communication post-mortem with a living individual, for example. Not only is it the
shift of consciousness, but also it is the shift through the vacillating ego boundary
component, and the shift in relation to the aspect of being able to communicate from a
continuous infinite essence through some kind of defined, discrete, space-time-
meaning barrier. The ultimate actualization and expression of reality is at the finite and
not the infinite level.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 261

 
Table 4 is a speculative portrayal of some key concepts separating variables of content
(what it contains; the “stuff”) from variables of extent (the measurable elements) and
related dimensions.

TABLE 4: Distinctions and Dimensions

Level distinctions
Intent Extent Content
Always relative, never Realty Distinctions: Observer Reality: relative
absolute perceptual (afferent) / conceptual objective/ common/
(interpretive), Experiential actual/ manifest
(response)
C-Substrate patterns Reality dimensional domains Complete unit of all
differential STC
3-D density Space / time Mass / energy/
9-D density Space- Time-Consciousness Mass / energy (force) /
thought/events/memory
Expanding Meaning (consciousness) Information / pattern /
(massless/ energyless/ spinless) ordropy
Warped space-time / Dimensionality / fields Forces / energy
action at a distance /
Charge / magnetic flux?
C-Substrate patterns Dimensional manifestations Spin / electromagnetic
(vortical movement expression) radiation / gravity
Rotation /strong and weak forces
Conscious drawing of Indivension produces Fluctuating wave /
distinctions combinations of meaningful particles / frequency
linkage of information via
entanglement and meeting points
interfacing.
Wholeness Tethering produces Finite/ Infinite particle/
entanglement wave
C-Substrate patterns Reality Distinctions: Observer Reality: relative
perceptual (afferent) / conceptual objective/ common/
(interpretive), Experiential actual/ manifest
(response)
Indivension Exists in relative subjective Does not exist in
context absolute context
Infinity of Infinities Real number/ Imaginary number/ Substrate / discrete
Complex number / Quaternions / phenomena / quanta
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 262

 
 continuity / infinity
Reality realms (was domains) Complete unit of all
differential STC
(substrate)
N-Dimensional Reality Transfinite Consciousness at Meta-information at
N→∞ higher dimensionality higher spin break-
through vs. neurological
patterns and strange
attractors
Potential Animate Inanimate
Projection Non-orthogonal Non-Euclidean Orthogonal Euclidean
Mathematics
Number Fields Real number/ Imaginary number Space/ time /
Complex number to consciousness
Quaternions/ infinity transfinity
Geometry Non-Euclidean and Euclidean Euclidean
Dimensionometry N -Dimensional All content is three
dimensional or more
Universal Structure N -Dimensional Space is necessarily 3
dimensional
Dynamics Time is multidimensional most Events
likely three dimensional
Interface with C- Consciousness parallels time Thoughts, memories,
substrate and space but also draws higher images
ordinal dimensional structure

Density
Distinctions of extent describe and measure space, time and consciousness. Therefore,
they can be reflected as different dimensions because extent variables can metrically
be measured either intervally or ordinally. Distinctions of content describe and
measure mass, energy and information. For example, the distinction of extent
reflecting a measure of space is paralleled by the distinctions of content reflected, for
example, by mass. Mass-energy or force cannot be dimensions because they are not
variables of extent: We use the term, force instead of energy here, so that potentially
(and speculatively) we can apply this content to consciousness (C-substrate).

This can be translated into space extent only indirectly via an equation: Though mass
and energy are measurable metrics, they are distinction of contents because ultimately
they are metrically measured through space-time via the ratio of density. Density is a
mechanism measure of the amount of mass, energy or information in a given STC
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 263

 
domain, and is therefore, the mechanism to link distinctions of content to extent.
Distinctions of content are related to extent through density—the amount of mass,
energy or information per unit space, time or consciousness. The content is indirectly
measured by an equation, e.g., y per unit.

The relationship of extent and content is a relevant one. Logically, the best way to
conceive of content is via density. Extent can be reflected in dimensions. Content is
conceptualized as “containing”: for example in space, content is essentially mass. But
mass is closely related with density (unit per volume gives density and weight)
implying a mechanism linking the two (possibly an intent). Energy has components of
both space and time in its content.

Time contents may reflect events that are more than two dimensional in time zz because
of the commonality of experience. Conceptually, this commonality is expressed by the
3-D vortical indivension fabric, which we postulate, would commonly have a
component in C-substrate, and when discussing time dimensions, it would
conceptually be a 3-T time element, in this instance. Mathematically, we have
demonstrated how logical it is to reflect both 3D time and 3D space. This allows for
density measurements, necessarily as 3D experiences.

Relative density is the relative expression of content in extent. The operational

definition is the amount of content per unit of metric extent.
• Mass is obvious in that regard. Density differentiates the light from the heavy of
the same size.
• The content of energy in 3S-1t in physics is applied by flux density: the amount
of energy—the amount of force—conveyed through a unit of extent per unit of
extent. The flux density, for instance of a magnetic field, is a measure of the
strength of the field, a density in a sense neither extent of content, but it really
relates content to extent.

The analogous unit would be intensity of the conscious quality. The extent of
consciousness is ordinal — we can measure it as the intensity, but it is more than
intensity (see how 260).

Intensity is the quantitative extent. But there is a qualitative element. This reflects the
different dimensions of consciousness. That quality difference reflects the number of
dimensions, and the intensity reflects that ordinal component.
As we “ascend” the ladder in the hierarchy of dimensionality it becomes subtler and
zz
2D Time would constitute a “time plane” as opposed to 1D Time being “linear time”. Could 3-D time then be
conceptualized as a “time volume”?
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 264

 
more complex. It is very simple at the 3S-1t level, but even there not so simple, as still
there are analogous terms.

Density could be regarded as the boundary variable, the third component in the
distinction. Perhaps that relative component is the intent in some components of the
calculus of distinctions, for example, theoretically a guiding of reality content implying
an intent. Intent would be one of those boundary conditions linking content with extent
but does not apply to other boundaries, e.g., density. And if so, would meaning without
guidance imply that intent within the substrate? Would the same apply for density?
Could ordropy be a mechanism or functional explanation or a distinction of intent?

Density is, therefore, not only a spatial concept in terms of extent, but it also has a time
concept, and maybe a consciousness concept. We are talking quanta but translated
across STC these become qualits reflecting the composite term for qubits of space,
chronits of time and conscits of consciousness. Qubits, chronits and conscits may each
have their own packets or particle-wave components so still are generic terms.
Perceptual reality is quantized into finite discrete wave-particle-packet components of
qualits.

We therefore, have different elements that are relevant packets or waves at the STC
levels. If we kept quanta, we would have to describe this purely at the quantum
physical level though quanta certainly may be qubits or sometimes chronits. If there
are meaningful quanta in the Copenhagen sense, they are qualits and there may or may
not be separate conscits as particle/ waves like psitrons or kinetrons.

Distinctions of Intent
Content and extent are fundamental distinctions. Distinctions are relevant in
consciousness, and besides extent and content, there is the intent, which might be quite
different.

It may be that intent could be applied as a theological concept for “guiding” or

“guided” meaning. Intent, as portrayed theologically, could imply infinite guiding, but
it could also neurologically derive from the finite, for example, working though
physiology and the psychology of volition. Intent would then be perceived as
mechanistic and include functionality. Mathematically, depending on
conceptualization, it could include mechanisms such as density translating the content
of mass into the extent of space per unit, but we think that would confound the
concept. Whereas intent can be a mechanism or a functional way to produce content,
the converse does not apply. The use of Intent appears to be more controversial and
less relevant than content and extent so an alternative term, which is more embracing,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 265

 
may be more valuable. But the concept of God is a philosophical explanation. Belief is
separate from the scientific method.

Calculus of Distinctions and Set Theory

The Calculus of Distinctions has a derivation from Spencer Brown’s Calculus of Form
but on the other hand it has some early parallels with Georg Cantor’s Set Theory 116, a
great contributor in similar areas to ours. Set theory examines non-dimensional, non-
consciousness similarities. It did not include imaginary numbers or negatives. COD
evaluates differences, including at the metadimensional extradimensional and
transfinite levels, and relates to consciousness.

The conceptual relationships are extremely important in the context of the Calculus of
Distinctions—there is great relevance to distinguishing percepts, concepts and
experiences as well as subjectivity and relative objectivity.

COD could, we posit, be further applied by metadimensional diagrammatic

representations, and portraying the differentiation and integration potential of the
shared, interfacing, and differing components of indivension windows. It would apply,
too, to the top-down and bottom-up metadimensional models, by reflecting not only
the static diagrams, but also the dynamic representations of multiple representations of
vectors, scalars and tensors. These speculations are likely linked closely, too, with the
model of dimensional extrapolation.

An attempt to portray Space, Time and some kind of Consciousness on the Venn
diagram of Set Theory (as attempted by Sirag) 300, produces an incomplete portrayal:
Set Theory involves a one on one binary model and is too limiting. It was not applied
to multiple dimensions, just representing them in two.
The Calculus of Distinctions goes beyond what Set Theory does in that regard. Instead
of just applying binary algebras, we utilize another basic element, expressed
mathematically as imaginary numbers.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 266

 
CHAPTER 35: THEOREMS 17; 192; 193; 245; 301; 302

“The essence of mathematics lies in its freedom.”

Georg Cantor

These concepts reflect mathematics and symbolic logic.

Besides the data discussed in this book, further justification of these theorems, lemmas,
postulates and principles are in our companion book. 10
These theorems, postulates and principles and lemmas are largely independent of each
other unless otherwise stated. (Refutation of any of these axioms does not refute any
other axiom or theorem unless they are corollaries or lemmas.)

The Theorem of (Extra) Dimensional Extrapolation

There are invariant dimensionometric features linking S, T and C substrates. These
allow extrapolation upward from one dimension to the next. The bending of an N-
Dimensional reality, (e.g., a line or plane) requires the action of a force from outside
that reality, implying the very real pre-existence of an (n+1) D reality.
Defining the fourth dimension as time conforms with the Principle of Dimensional
Extrapolation because linear time exhibits the invariant feature that it contains an
infinity of 3D realities. This is, in itself, an internal validation of the consistency of
dimensions beyond 3D.

Theorem of Lower Dimensional Discontinuity (or Incompleteness)

(a converse to dimensional extrapolation). Higher” dimensional qualits (“world”
experience) are expressed incompletely in lower dimensions. Most commonly this is
expressed as an incomplete jigsaw puzzle in, e.g., 3S-1t, where only feasibility pieces
are available. This could also be called a theorem of discontinuity: An N-Dimensional
manifold when wrapped onto N-1 reality is reflected as discontinuous in that N-1
reality. As Carlson states: "any one-to-one mapping between spaces of different
dimensionality must be discontinuous in that a continuous path in one space maps into
a broken path in the other.” 303
This is mathematically (dimensionometrically) proven because a continuous curve is
projected as broken in a “lower” dimensions of space.
This reduction of dimensions would be the dimensional reduction theorem or it is
called the topology theorem.
This could also be called the Theorem of N-Dimensional manifold: A manifold when
mapped onto N-1 reality is reflected as discontinuous in that N-1 reality:
Manifolds continuous in dimensional M has discontinuity in <M dimensions.
Dimensions mapped onto n-1 dimensions will be discontinuous. This has been proved
as a theorem in topology: Manifolds that are continuous in N dimensions are
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 267

 
discontinuous in dimensions < N. Consequently, traces of an object in an (n+1) -
dimensional reality appear in an n-dimensional reality.
Together or separate theorem or lemma:

Theorem (Principle) of Tridimensional Warping of Reality

Warping of reality (time, space and C-substrate) occurs in three dimensional elements
once one has attained three dimensions. (It can only be unidimensional if there are
static systems or if time is unidimensional: Bend, warp, distort).

 Bending of an n-dimensional reality is the result of two opposing

linear forces
 Warping of an n-dimensional reality is the result of two or more
sets of non-parallel opposing forces. In this context, even the
stretching of a zero-dimensional point into a 2-D line is a subset of
warping.
 Distortion of an n-dimensional reality is a general term denoting
any bending or warping that results in a non-Euclidean n-
dimensional reality.
 In this context, even the stretching of a zero-dimensional point into
a 2-D line is a subset of warping.

The time domain (T) is more dynamic and subtler than the space domain (S), and
warping of ST into C-substrate elements produces a domain subtler than the time
domain.
This implies three D for each of space and time and at least 3D for C-substrate. This
applies even to 0, even in one dimension.

The Theorem of Parallel N-1 Realities and Further N-D Realities

Perceived from the standpoint of N+1 dimensions, there are infinite parallel lines at the
N dimensional level and a further N Infinite parallel lines (or, more precisely,
configurations) in the N-1 dimension, Because of these parallels, the first infinity at
N+1 is larger than the second at N dimensions, ad infinitum, when approaching from
N-Dimensions. This can be applied in analysis of signals, electronic engineering, with
light propagation, as well as in mathematics.
Theologically, it could be seeing only the embroidery in reverse and producing
confusion, yet in the full infinite reality, all the embroidery is visible.

Principle of Vortices Being the Ubiquitous Universal Shape

Given multidimensional systems, motion becomes spiral. Vortices are three
dimensional moving shapes consistent with warping due to non-parallel forces and our
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 268

 
proof of asymmetry using Fermat’s last theorem. The FLT proof of asymmetry at the
quantum and atomic level applies for all n >2 implying prevalent asymmetry in all
dimensions beyond 2. 301 The exception of the case when n= 2, explains the flat orbits
of planets and moons and the rings of Saturn, etc. The expansion of this equation
beyond the FLT limits into An + Bn + Cn= Dn reveals special exceptions for certain
specific integer values of A, B and C where symmetry prevails. The directional nature
of the forces in additional dimensions manifesting as fields, combined with the natural
prevalence of asymmetry creates vortical movement in 3S-1t. Therefore, mathematical
appreciation of the potential ubiquity of vortices would be through Fermat's last
theorem (FLT). Because there is proof, this is a theorem but it does not prove it is
fundamental per se, hence we call it an axiom. It is also a lemma and principle,
following on the principle of tridimensional warping of reality.

Circle
The vortex is not only the most ubiquitous form in nature. It is also the most natural.
At its most basic level the circle portrays the simplest form in the universe. Vortical
forms range from raindrops, to tornados, from tree trunks to planets, stars and
subatomic particles. Even the earliest form of home and sacred sites (10, 000 years
ago) have been found to be circular. 304
And yet, what about the square? This exquisite form is not natural except with
exceptions such as pure crystallization. Yet, the simplest squares derive from circles.
The ends of two perpendicular lines drawn through the center of a circle produce a
square. And yet, it is the square that symbolizes our measurements both practically and
in theory. It is these angles that have allowed enormous progress. We no longer need
circular homes. 304

Pi
Fundamental to circular shapes is the concept of π (Pi). This is the transcendental
number reflecting the ratio of the circumference to the diameter. The mathematics is
closely related to the concept of circularity. It too, may reflect the ubiquity of the round
shape and its related mathematics. Yet the geometrical mathematical relationship of
the circle to the square is fraught with difficulty unless we add π as the constant. And
even more so, π is abundant also in mathematics and nature even in situations not
directly related to the circle. Examples abound like the probability that two integers are
relatively prime (do not have common factors) is 6/π2; the same formula reflects the
probability of seeing two sticks picked up at random in a large rectangular orchard
without any other getting in the way is again 6/π2. Even the ratio of favorable to
unfavorable tosses of needle of length d landing on a line in a plane surface rules by
parallel lines d units apart is 2/π. 4 Pi is also closely related to other transfinite numbers
such as e. 304
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 269

 
Lemma of Dimensional Falsification Impossibility
We cannot falsify beyond the dimensional expressions one is dealing with.
Complete verification or falsification of phenomena related to an (n+1) dimensional
reality by observers in an n-dimensional reality is generally not possible because all the
details of the (n+1) -D reality are not available to the observer in the N-D reality. Only
incomplete pieces are accessible and the data are often not repeatable, verifiable or
falsifiable, though occasionally individual components can be falsified. The existence
of additional dimensions is indicated by LFAF through extrapolation of the general
theory of relativity backwards to 3S-1t. The involvement of consciousness is strongly
indicated in quantum mechanics, relativity and psi research: Prior to relativity, the
observer was represented as a single point with no direct involvement, but with
relativity, what the observer perceives is dependent upon his dynamic physical
conditions. And at the quantum level, the experimenter is part of the experiment.
If there were no organizing factor of consciousness, the continual operation of the
second law of thermodynamics would sabotage any accidental evolution of the seeds
of ordropic order before they could get very far. There is good evidence to show this
using strong feasibility arguments. The probability of an explosion creating complex
structures by pure accident is virtually zero. It is far more likely that a tornado moving
through a junkyard will construct a Boeing 727 plus pilots, passengers and luggage. 10

Lemma of Lower Dimensional Indeterminate Feasibility Assessment

All data in e D or e+g D cannot be reflected completely at e-1 D or less. This is why
only incomplete pieces are accessible and the data are often not falsifiable, though
individual components can be falsified. The observer is dependent upon several facets
of his state.

Lemma of Open Ordropic Systems

If the second law of thermodynamics operated all the time in a closed system, then
ordropy would be sabotaged at the consciousness level. As there is solid evidence
biologically of ordropic processes, this implies a system incorporating this: This can be
achieved through a more open system including consciousness. (We believe this
lemma to be true). Open systems may if necessary require the infinite, although not
proving it. Ordropy in the infinite is more than unidimensional negentropy.

Pythagorean Theorem (PT) Extension to 3 Dimensions and Applicability Beyond

For conscious beings with senses limited to the perception of 3S-1t, spatial dimensions
are limited to three. Calculating the distance (the metric) between two points, the
Pythagorean theorem (PT) can be applied to three spatial dimensions but not more:
Extending Pythagoras into 3 dimensions is easy to visualize. But as long as one is
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 270

 
using the same units, one cannot escape the three dimensions even though one attempts
to extend it into a fourth dimension.

This is so as additional dimensions are non-real numbers: We can compute the metric
of the fourth departure as described by three dimensions even in that fourth point. The
fourth dimension is necessarily represented by an imaginary number. Minkowski used
the square root of minus one as a meaningful metric in a four-dimensional continuum.
Minkowski realized that to move into the fourth dimension one needed a different kind
of number otherwise one cannot escape the field of real numbers. It is not therefore,
just a convenience but a necessity (as discussed in Dimensionometry below).
Proof using Cartesian coordinates:
While the PT is introduced and proved in 2S, it is step-wise applicable to 3S, 4D, and
beyond in the calculation of the metric (dS) in n-dimensional Euclidian space:
For 2 dimensions, d2S2= dx2 + dy2, where d is the distance from the origin (0, 0) of a
Cartesian coordinate system to a point P(x, y). This distance is commonly called the
“metric”. Departing orthogonally from the point P to a new point, Q(x, y, z), in 3D, the
new metric, d3S, the distance from the origin to Q, is calculated using the Pythagorean
theorem again as:
d3S2= d2S2 + z2
= dx2 + dy2 +z2 for 3 D, and similarly,
d4S2= dx2 + dy2 +z2 – (ct) 2 for 4D Minkowski space. (See Appendix.)
This, however, is a special application used to describe electrodynamics, i.e., the
propagation of light. In general, we have:
dnS2= dx12 + d x22 + d x32 + d x42 + … + d xn2
where the x’s are the measurable Cartesian coordinates in each dimension.

The Theorem of Metadimensionality Requiring Non-integers, Imaginary or

Complex Numbers
Fermat's last theorem demonstrates how asymmetry arises even at a quantum
Pythagorean level. In number theory, Fermat's Last Theorem (FLT) states that no three
positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation an + bn= cn for any integer value of
n greater than two. When n= 1, an + bn= cn is immediately solvable with an infinite
number of integer solutions, representing the symmetric fundamental operation of
addition. When n= 2, there are specific integer solutions known as Pythagorean
triplets, allowing the symmetric combination of square areas. But when n= 3 or above,
there are no integer solutions. This can be shown to apply to the combination of any
two symmetric volumes, including quantum volumes, because the constants of shape
factor out of the equation. We discuss elsewhere in book proof in Symmetry,
Dimensionometry And Asymmetry.
The proof of FLT confirms the fact that there are no solutions for An + Bn= Cn where n,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 271

 
A, B & C are integers when n >2, but, since the PT works for non-integer, imaginary
and complex number A, B and C, it can be used to calculate the metric for dimensions
beyond 3D. In addition, fractional values of n may have application in domains beyond
4D.
There are an infinite number of integral solutions of the Fermat equation when n= 2.
(If a and b are positive integers and b >a, we can generate an infinite number of integer
solutions [X, Y, Z] with [a2+b2, 2ab, b2-a2]). Examples: For b= a+1 and a= 1, 2, 3, …,
(X, Y, Z) = (3, 4, 5), (5, 12, 13), (7, 24, 25), … Therefore, rotational symmetry for a
particle composed of two symmetric entities in a two-dimensional reality is not
necessarily broken. This may result in symmetric flat (planar) spirals like the rings of
Saturn, orbits of planets, etc. This is because as you approach the plane one has a
tendency towards symmetry. Note that there are rare (but an infinite number of)
solutions to the cubes when using three variables, e.g., beginning ([3, 4, 5]= [6]).
These rarities may have profound implications for subatomic particles like quarks,
their usual asymmetries and may explain why elements are distributed as they are in
the Periodic Table. This is an interesting area for further research.
The application of Fermat's last theorem (FLT) demonstrates how asymmetry arises at
the quantum level. In the FLT equation, n is the indicator of dimensionality, because
A2 describes an area, A3 describes a cube, and so on. In number theory, Fermat's Last
Theorem states that no three positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation an +
bn= cn for any integer value of n greater than two. N=1 (x+y=z) is immediately
solvable. as are the equations for squares but not cubes. So this introduces the
asymmetry of the combination of symmetric volumes. We have tested and found that a
modification of FLT also applies to three or more variables in three dimensions (with
rare exceptions;, e.g., those postulated below relating to quark combinations), and x or
x+1 variables in x dimensions still cannot allow for an integer solution. Because we
cannot have integer solutions beyond 2-D, we must factor out constants of shape or
dimension forming an asymmetric object or volume or mass using the same units.
Considering Fermat's equation for each exponential integer (n) as a specific equation
of interest yields solutions in 1D and 2D that provide us with a trivial real number
theorem for 1D, and the Pythagorean theorem for 2D.

Theorem of Pervasive Multi-level Tridimensional Distinctions

The mathematics of triadic realities is demonstrated by Pythagoras triangular extension
and in physics can be illustrated by mass-energy-C, and astrophysical, macrophysical,
quantal realities, plus the rapid expansion period of the big bang, It lays the foundation
for the basic and pervasive triadic nature of reality, the origin of dimensionality and
ordropy-entropy

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 272

 
CHAPTER 36: POSTULATES AND PRINCIPLES 305

“In mathematics, the art of proposing a question must be held of higher value than
solving it.”
Georg Cantor

The Postulate of Three Fold Quark Combinations

This postulate of three fold quark combinations is testable and should allow
explanation using Fermat’s Last Theorem. Not all N-Dimensional objects made up of
two or more elementary particles are necessarily asymmetrical. If, for example, we
consider three spherical particles combining to form a fourth, by the same process
described above, we arrive at the equation:
X3 + Y 3 + Z 3 = Q 3
There are an infinite number of case with (X, Y, Z, Q) all integers, e.g.,: (3, 4, 5, 6).
27 + 64+ 125= 216
If the volumes of quarks are found to be integral multiples of the Planck volume that
satisfy the equation X3 + Y3 + Z3= Q3, we have the explanation of why quarks are only
found in combinations of three, and the hadrons formed by them are symmetrical.
This mathematical demonstration explains why, even though, by Occam’s razor, the
most basic building blocks of physical reality are perfectly symmetrical, macro-reality
is only occasionally and approximately symmetrical.

Principle of Dimensionometric Explanation of Forces Acting at a Distance

The proof of this theorem ties into the postulated rapid expansion period of the big
bang, the origin of dimensionality (see Dimensionality below) and it lays the
foundation for the basic and pervasive triadic nature of reality: Three dimensions are
necessary and sufficient to describe any domain of N-D reality and N-1 realities have a
descending infinity of existences.
Evidence of the connection of two or more objects separated by “empty” space in an
nD reality, is actually evidence of the connection of the objects in an additional
dimension. What we’ve been calling a “field” (evidenced by action at a distance)
could actually reflect evidence of the existence of extra-dimensions.

An illustration, would be, for example, the gravity wells created by massive objects in
Einstein’s theory of relativity, often demonstrated in two dimensions by placing a
heavy spherical object on a rubber sheet, can more accurately be described
geometrically by adding an extra dimension, because when a 2S object (e.g., a
rectangular plane) is warped, it becomes a 3S object. Similarly, when a 3S object is
warped, it becomes a 4D object.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 273

 
A clarification: Field has been relevant in discussions in other consciousness and
interacting ways beyond the usual physical context. In that regard, the outstanding
model of Rupert Sheldrake’s morphogenetic field stands out.27

With the CST inseparability at the point of tethering, we do not need to postulate per
se, a morphogenetic field or entanglement, as the influences that occur across
ostensibly unrelated information or events, is clarified by the theorem of lower
dimensional incompleteness and the link translated by the theorem of dimensional
extrapolation. Both models can involve mechanisms to explain previously unrelated
events (either as morphogenetic fields or as indivension influences upon 3S-1t).
Extradimensional extrapolation of individual-units creates links ranging from the
limited immediately linked subatomic to the broader cosmic realities, and from the
individual through every kind of social group. Therefore, the impacts of
morphogenetic fields may be secondary not primary, and some experiments devised to
“demonstrate” Sheldrake’s formative causation and morphogenetic fields could as
easily demonstrate indivension influences (e.g., Neppe’s kindling test236).

Effectively, the concept of vortical indivension is a versatile one, reflecting a metalevel

higher than other models. Consequently, the explanations that fit these other models,
would also fit the model of vortical indivension; paradoxically, though, their
refutations would not refute our TDVP (and specifically, here) vortical indivension
model.

Principle of Non-Euclidean Dimensional Representation Approximated through

Euclidean Substrates (space, time, C-substrate)
In non-Euclidean geometry, multi-dimensional manifolds (complex shapes) do not
map directly onto any N-Dimensional Euclidian system. This principle of Non-
Euclidean dimensional representation is approximated through Euclidean substrates
(space, time, C-substrate). In his book “Relativity, the Special and the General
Theory—a Clear Explanation that Anyone can Understand”, Einstein 306 states that
applying Gaussian coordinates in N-Dimensional space can approximate non-
Euclidean problems using Euclidian substrates. Einstein demonstrated this, though
focusing only on the fourth dimension, time.

Principle of Non-Euclidean Space-time 4D Continua are Actual, Not Only

Perceptual and Conceptual
If, in Minkowski’s four-dimensional space-time continuum, the fourth dimension unit
of measurement, t, was replaced by ict, where i= the square root of minus one and c=
the speed of light, then propagation of light between two reference frames in relative
motion to each other could be described by the Lorentz transformations of space and
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 274

 
time coordinates, preserving the constant speed of light with respect to both static and
moving reference frames. This principle that can be extended to N-Dimensions.

Corollary of Pythagoras’s Theorem Being Only True for Euclidean Spaces

I.e., spaces that have not been warped or bent. PT assumes dimensional orthogonality
for ease of calculation. Non-Euclidean space dimensions are not “orthogonal” in the
sense just referred to: However, one can draw orthogonal lines that intersect at 90
degrees, but both can be curved: An example is the surface of the earth.

Postulate of Indivension Tethering

The C, S and T substrate domains are inseparably tethered to each other at certain
points. At other points, they are apart, like three-dimensional vibrating vortical strings.
This allows communications to occur across space, time and C-substrate (the metaphor
of the electron rotating round a dense atomic nucleus impacting that density). C-
substrate is particularly involved with that vortical type movement producing
ostensible “entanglement”. This tethering involves individual-units allowing a 3S-1t
reality that is impacted by fluctuating metadimensional levels.

The Postulate of TOEs Requiring Infinite Reality

TOEs must by definition incorporate the stability of consistent mathematics and cannot
be incomplete. Gödel's second incompleteness theorem shows that if one particular
arithmetic truth system cannot prove is the consistency of the system itself. This
applies to closed finite systems. If one extends this to any closed metric system then to
demonstrate consistency one needs to be outside the system. 103; 104 This implies a
corollary of an open infinite system. It does not necessarily prove that an infinite
system may be complete but LFAF is applied. The infinity may be any kind of infinity.

Rare Event Theory Postulate

C-substrate phenomena manifest in S and T as rare events that appear discontinuous,
random or unexplained in 3S-1t. If one can control C-substrate events they may not be
rare and this is particularly so beyond 3S-1t-1c. Rare event theory involves a
mathematical conceptualization of events: So, e.g., 53% vs. 50% may not be rare in the
context of curvature of space (which is even more rare) but requires statistical
calculations to demonstrate global presence.

Postulate that Rare Events Are Linked to Interfacing Vortices, Vectors, Scalars
and Tensors
We postulate this based on the infrequency of psi and its possible occurrence when
vortices, vectors, scalars and tensors interface producing meaningful apprehension or
perturbation of events across or within domains.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 275

 
Postulate of At Least 9 Dimensions
The warping of 6D space-time, evidenced by the existence of the fundamental forces
of nature, and the Principle of Dimensional Extrapolation implies their existence.
There are at least three additional dimensions, and those dimensions are the
dimensions of C-substrate. ZN The general framework of our paradigm is that of an N-
Dimensional continuum, where N is at least nine, based on the existence of known
fundamental forces that manifest as measurable fields exhibiting different
characteristics. (See Dimensionometry below).

Postulate of Dimensional Representation is Based on the Fundamental Forces of

Nature
Each dimension has a fundamental force, which is intimately involved with the
variable of extent that allows for the dimension to occur. Bending or warping of space-
time continua by the fundamental forces (the controversial “expansion of the universe”
vs. gravity, electromagnetic radiation, strong and weak sub-atomic forces) indicates
and reveals additional dimensions.

Space-time, or any N-Dimensional reality, is warped by universal forces.

Postulating the idea that each of the fundamental forces of nature creates dimensions
beyond 3S helps us to explain and understand the reality we experience, we are
justified in doing so: It is feasible, if not directly verifiable or falsifiable but there is no
falsified data here. Therefore, LFAF applies. (See Dimensionometry below).

Corollary of Dimensional Warping

The warping of dimensions explains apparent action at a distance in a direct and
logical manner. (See Dimensionometry below).

Corollary of Double Warping Distortions

By logical extension, distortions in more than one direction, (e.g., the orthogonal
distorting forces of electromagnetic radiation) should give rise to more than one
additional dimension. (See Dimensionometry below). If our hypothesis that all the
fundamental forces that seem to exhibit action at a distance are actually phenomena
that can be explained as effects of the warping of the mass-energy space-time
continuum is true, then every directional force, like electrical charge or magnetic flux
indicates a separate warping of the continuum.

The propagation of radiant energy is generally thought to be caused by the alternating

action of electric and magnetic fields. A moving electrical charge creates a magnetic
field, and a magnetic field produces a current in a conductive medium, moving at right
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 276

 
angles to the direction of the lines of force in the magnetic field. This is illustrated by
the simple “right hand rule”. If the fingers of the right hand are curled around the
conducting medium, say a copper wire, then the flow of current is in the direction of
the outstretched thumb, at right angles to the lines of force of the magnetic field. aaa In
this sense, electrical and magnetic force fields are orthogonal. Thus, radiant energy
issues forth in straight lines from the source to infinity, but each and every line is
orthogonal to the electromagnetic force field that generates it at each point along the
line of propagation in the continuum. Here we have a triad of potential and actual
motion with the alternating electric and magnetic fields orthogonal to each other at
every point, and the motion of the resultant radiant energy orthogonal to both.

Corollary of Euclidean / Non-Euclidean Perceptual Experience

Whether a continuum is perceived as Euclidean or non-Euclidean depends upon the
state of consciousness of the observer with respect to the number of dimensions he or
she perceives. This is a corollary to t the Principle of Relative Dimensionality (See
Dimensionometry below).

Postulate of Non-Euclidean Spaces or Domains are Conceptual and Not Actual

The perception of a particular region depends upon the dynamic state of the observer.

Postulate of Perceived Different Dimensionalities

In two different dimensionalities or domains, each observer sees his own world as
Euclidean and the other’s world as non-Euclidean. Both observers are correct as “the
perception is the reality”. (See Dimensionometry below).

Postulate of Worlds with Additional Dimensions

Inhabitants of worlds with additional dimensions would see our perceptions as limited
and distorted by the extra dimensions that we call “the fundamental forces of nature”.
The nature of the conscious perception of reality depends upon the number of
dimensions perceived.
It is a mistake to assume that there is a rigid set-in-stone reality out there, totally
independent of the functions of consciousness.

Postulate of C-substrate Warping Additional Dimensions

If we postulate forces impacting the C-substrate as well (e.g., psitrons or kinetrons
which are massless, energyless and do not obey in 3S-1t the inverse square law) then

aaa
For example, there are 81, 000 references to this on Google! For basics see: http://www.answers.com/topic/left-hand-
rule; or see diagrams
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=electromangetism+right+angles&qpvt=electromangetism+right+angles&FORM=
IGRE
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 277

 
such forces could also warp dimensions.

Corollary of Postulate of C-substrate Warping Higher Dimensions

Using the paradigm of the first 3 dimensions being real integer space, the next three
being imaginary number time, and the following 3 at least being complex numbers
then these may involve distorting by psitrons (globally both afferent or efferent) or
impact via kinetrons. (This a speculation in TDVP: Whereas there is no reason why C-
substrate should not involve timeless, spaceless packets of force packets/ particles like
psitrons or kinetrons or both, it is inessential to our model).

Postulate of Initial Symmetry Then Asymmetry

The initial symmetry of zero space suggests that the expansion was naturally
symmetric during the rapid-expansion period of the “big bang“. (This is verified
empirically by COBE data.) This initial symmetry prevailed through the expansion to
one and two dimensions to three dimensions, where interfacing with the Primary non-
quantum Receptor Field caused matter, energy, and subsequently, asymmetry, to form.
(See the proof of prevalent asymmetry using Fermat’s last theorem). (COBE= Cosmic
background explorer).

Postulate of Distinction Singularity

We see the big bang as Primary Consciousness drawing a distinction within its own
awareness, expanding from a zero-point dimensional singularity. (Note that “zero” is
not the same as “nothing”).

Postulate of the First Distinctions

The beginning of the universe and reality as we know it was not an explosion in
nothingness, but the drawing of the first distinction of self from other by an innate, pre-
existing intelligence in the 3C-substrate which acted as the Primary Receptor, bringing
the first quanta of matter and energy out of the big bang potential into existence in ND
reality.

Postulate of Infinite Qualits in 3S-1t

Moving conceptually from zero-S to 1-S, to 2-S and to 3-S, within the STC substrates
there are an infinite number of 3S-1t “qualits”.

The Principle of Infinite Coexistence

The Principle of Infinite Coexistence refers to the coexistence of the infinite with the
finite. It is a corollary to the converse of Gödel’s incompleteness theorem where the
infinite is necessarily involved in a TOE. Is it logical to postulate that infinity can
interact with the finite and dimensions? Superficially, finite N-dimensionality may not
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 278

 
imply infinity because N-dimensionality is already dealing with a finite number of N-
roles But this thinking is incorrect simply because the infinite is not part of the finite.
The infinite is separate from the finite. The essential part of this principle is that the
infinite can interface with all dimensions at a finite level. Using the fundamental
TDVP axiom, there is no logical reason why some kind of Primary Consciousness or
primary STC cannot interface. Such a Primary Receptor of Consciousness is
necessarily outside finite dimensions so infinite. There appears to be no fundamental
contradiction between having N-dimensional realities that are finite and infinity
because they are two different concepts, which may interact in a meaningful sense. The
two are logical and appropriate together.

Principle of Different Experience

In processing information and turning it into knowledge and understanding, we deal
with the three defined distinction aspects of reality: perceptual reality, conceptual
reality and common reality. Because of the dynamic nature of reality, these are rarely
identical.

The Principle of Relative Dimensionality

The experience is referential to the dimension fabric of the experient or that dimension
being examined in a thought experiment by extrapolation of dimensions.

Postulate of Perceptual Consciousness and Warping

If an N-Dimensional reality is warped by a fundamental force, the warping will be seen
by a conscious entity experiencing an n+1 dimension reality as warped or non-
Euclidean. But a conscious entity whose perception is limited to n dimensions, (as we
are to 3S-1t) will not be directly aware of the warping. Because the entity's perception
is limited in such a way that he cannot see beyond n dimensions, he will experience his
reality as Euclidean.
Thus, perceptual and conceptual reality are relative. A conscious being's experience is
a creation of the perceptual and conceptual images in consciousness (See
Dimensionometry below).

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 279

 
CHAPTER 37: MAJOR MATHEMATICAL AND LOGICAL ADAPTATIONS 307

“What I assert and believe to have demonstrated in this and earlier works is that
following the finite there is a transfinite (which one could also call the supra-finite),
that is an unbounded ascending ladder of definite modes, which by their nature are not
finite but infinite, but which just like the finite can be determined by well-defined and
distinguishable numbers.”
Georg Cantor

Mathematicological Models used in TDVP:

These include or amplify a very large number of ideas. Many of these are discussed
in detail in our later books, that follow, such as Space, Time and Consciousness.

The key mathematical models

Certainly the most important mathematical models include
• Pythagorean theorem used in demonstrating that three-dimensional space being
the maximum dimensional spatial metric.
• Close’s calculus of distinctions 8 with dimensions of extent, content and intent
applied to STC, dissimilarities and across dimensions
• Fermat’s last theorem with 3-d or greater space 308; 309 3 used in reflecting
asymmetry, and also demonstrating 3-d vortical realities.

The next level of mathematical applications

• Doctorow’s Rare Event Theory 310 demonstrating the rarity of apprehending or
influencing information from the C-substrate to S and T substrates.
• Einsteinian general relativity 25 demonstrating warped curvature of space time
and extending beyond orthogonality and an extra time dimension.
• Minkowski space 26 utilizing square root of minus one in time dimensions
(imaginary numbers) with complex numbers being used in the C-domain.
• Theorem of dimensional extrapolation (moving to higher dimensions) and
lemma of dimensional incompleteness (moving to lower dimensions).
• Gödel’s incompleteness theorem in finite closed reality 103; 104 extended to the
requirements of an infinite reality for TOE to exist.
• Cantor’s set theory 300applied to similarities and one to one correspondences
• Spencer Brown’s laws of form 121 from which Close’s calculus of dimensions
was adapted.
• Cantor’s infinite of the infinite 116; also Hilbert space 17 applied to infinity
• Euclidean applications in 3-D space or below;
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 280

 
 • Non-Euclidean and Gaussian mathematics in >3-D.
• Extension of Popperian falsifiability 22 to include feasibility in the absence of
falsification (LFAF) in science.

Futher mathematical applications.

These are still very relevant:
• Alfred Evert’s mathematical model of vortices. 311
• Penrose’s spinors 312
• Riemann in his N-Dimensional manifolds 313 and later Hilbert 17 tried to relate
generalized subsets; amplified to include mathematical separation of space and
time.
• Euclidean Newtonian perspectives delineated with the non-Euclidean
dimensionometries.
• Gauss and Riemann’s multidimensional manifold onto a Euclidean area from
non-Euclidean perspectives.
• Bell’s inequality theorem applied to the theories and empiricism 86; 87 of Young,
Aspect 87, Wheeler 88 plus the EPR and Copenhagen interpretation 41 with Bohr
debate in the consciousness context 150.
• Real numbers (space), imaginary numbers and quaternions 277 (time) and
complex numbers (C-substrate) applied to dimensionality.

Major Physicist Mathematical Applications:

We apply the mathematical concepts derived from physicist models including:
o Einstein (numerous) 25; 47; 84; 88; 150; 252; 314,
o Planck quanta 35,
o volume and fundamental equations,
o Schrödinger probabilistic wave equation 188,
o Heisenberg uncertainty 45 and questions about its mechanism. 45; 162; 164 bbb

bbb
We do not consider Dehmelt’s experiment an invalidation of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, only a questioning of
the mechanism of the quantum tunneling of electrons in atomic structure. A general invalidation of Heisenberg’s
uncertainty principle would come up against the hundreds of examples in practical applications, like cell phones, where
Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle works perfectly well.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 281

 
 SECTION H: THE THEORY OF
EVERYTHING
CHAPTER 38: PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS OF TDVP 315

“I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details.”

Albert Einstein

Monism and Dualism: A Short Perspective

Philosophy of mind is a branch of modern analytic philosophy. It studies as a central
issue the mind-body problem—the relationship of the mind to the body, the nature of
the mind, mental events, functions and properties, consciousness and its relationships
to the physical body, including the brain.

Dualism and monism are the two major schools of thought that attempt to resolve the
mind-body problem. Philosophically, Monism argues that there is unity in a given field
of inquiry: For example, the universe is really just one thing, despite its apparent
diverse variability. Monism argues that mind and body are not ontologically distinct
entities. Dualism denotes a state of two parts, and is now used to imply some kind of
existence of both mind and matter.

Both have ancient derivations. Monistic Western philosophy began 2500 years ago
(Parmenides) and was later modified by the 17th century rationalist Baruch Spinoza.
Dualism has ancient proponents in Plato, Aristotle and Hindu philosophy. René
Descartes in the 17th century formulated an attempt at trying to find the link of mind
and brain.

Continued scientific progress in physics, consciousness and neurobiology has partly

clarified but not resolved some of these issues because contradictions have arisen (as
discussed). This has led to continued arguments about how subjectivity, objectivity,
meaning, reductionism, intentionality and neurological and psychological states and
properties can be explained while applying the laws of nature. Many scientists and
philosophers have apparently swept any contradictions under the carpet because the
contradictions imply unthinking what they have thought and accepted before.

Monism in philosophy can be defined according to three traditional kinds:

1.Idealism, phenomenalism, or mentalistic monism holds that only mind is real.
Physical reality, as we experience it, does not exist. Idealists, therefore, maintain that
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 282

 
the mind is all that exists and that the external world is either mental itself, or an
illusion created by the mind. Bishop Berkeley 316 developed one classical kind of
Monistic Idealism. A variant is panpsychism. This philosophy views all matter as a
having a mental aspect, or all objects having a unified center of experience.
2. Neutral monism argues that both the mental and the physical can be reduced to some
sort of third substance, thing or energy. Neutral monists adhere to the position that
there is some other, neutral substance, and that both matter and mind are properties of
this unknown substance. They are two sides of the same coin.
3.Physicalism (or materialism) is the overriding current scientific paradigm
maintaining that only the physical is real, and that the mental or spiritual can be
reduced through the physical. Materialistic monism (also called monistic materialism)
conceives of the global unity of matter with “one” comprehensive cosmos and the parts
produce all origins and resultant reality effects. Physicalists argue that only physical
entities exist, and the mind will eventually be explained and reduced within these entities.
Variations o
f physicalism include behaviorism, type identity theory, anomalous monism
and functionalism.

These reductive physicalists, therefore, argue that all mental states and properties will
eventually be explained by physiology. The most extreme are the eliminativists (such
as Dennett 317 who maintain that certain classes of mental states do not exist). Some
argue that there is no coherent neural base for many everyday, poorly defined
psychological concepts like belief and desire, since behavior and experience should be
judged by biological reductions, and even pain and visual perceptions may not exist.
This viewpoint is extreme and, we believe, irrational itself.

A more logical neurophysiological perspective is functionalist monism: the mind

reflects the behavior of the brain 318; 319. The most prominent example is the Identity
Theory, which says that mental states are brain states. A variant is functionalism: a
mental state can be whatever provides mental functionality, and this is irrespective of
anatomy.

Non-reductive physicalists are separate groups who argue that although the brain is all
there is to the mind, the predicates and vocabulary used in mental descriptions and
explanations are indispensable, and cannot be reduced to the language and lower-level
explanations of physical science.

So the questions remain unanswered. For example, if consciousness is an

epiphenomenon of matter, is there an evolutionary function for consciousness and is
there a meaning to life? What pertinence is there to the experience of our acts in
consciousness, or is our worldview purely deterministic?
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 283

 
Most modern philosophers of mind have adopted either materialism or neutral monism
applying either a reductive or non-reductive physicalist approach. They maintain that
the mind is not something separate from the body and these approaches have impacted
sociobiology, computer science, evolution and neuroscience.

There are many alternatives, for example, the perception of consciousness or mind as
an emergent component of the physicalism. One recent attempt has been Peter
Strawson’s emergent physical process or Realistic Monism 320. This is a metaphysical
model because the structural features of our thought about the world, and thus, about
reality are defined. This has linguistic elements, too, as the various concepts that form
an interconnected web, represent a portion our common, shared, human conceptual
scheme. Conceptions of basic particulars are variously brought under general spatio-
temporal concepts. His son, Galen modified this philosophy into a Realistic
Physicalism 321; 322 as a version of Panpsychism. It assumes that “awareness” is a
fundamental property of "matter" just like charge and spin are. The ontology is not that
mind is the interface between the physical “meat” and awareness, but that all matter
has at least the potential for awareness built in but this proposes a whole new property
of matter. Like most of the “monistic” philosophies Chalmers’ “hard problem” of
mind-brain is eliminated 118; 119 Dualism and interactionism is removed, and so is
Eliminativism and Emergentism is unnecessary. However, the harder problem of
explaining, for example, alleged survival after bodily death is not solved by these
materialist models. Moreover, the aspects of meaning of life, any evolutionary function
to consciousness, if inanimate objects have any kind of “awareness: (not a big problem
because it could be argued that would be a “stretch” at best), psi phenomena, and the
links of how any micro-consciousness of brains translates to a macro-consciousness
are all unexplained. Realistic Physicalism also holds that free-will is fundamentally
impossible irrespective of determinism.

There is possibly a fourth kind of monism that may in part fit into the “idealism” area,
namely, Theological Monism.
Theological monism could support the one God view and have many manifestations in
different religions but usually implying terms like unitary, eternal, unchanging,
infinite, ineffable, immanent, transcendent, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent,
omnificent, omnibenevolent, incorporeal, emanating divine reality responsible for all
matter, energy, time, space, awareness and essence in this Universe. Stoics taught that
there is only one substance, identified as God. One variant is pantheism. This monistic
view describes only one Being: all ostensible aspects of reality are appearances, modes
or identical with that one being. A related term is panentheism implying God is in all
things, neither identical to, nor totally separate from all things. 323 This might imply that
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 284

 
God is in ourselves and personal, yet allowing creation: In a way, there is a parallel
with God being tethered to all through STC, but us having a separate existence too and
hence free-will. If one speculates that meaning involves some kind of “guiding”
infinite element, we could argue that panentheism is part of the whole tethered ATO.

Other variants exist for example some Chassidic thought argues that God is an absolute
unity, constantly present with sustaining power and essence within nature, but even
within Judaism such views are criticized as pantheistic. Some Jewish thought then
considers God as transcending all physical, created things and as existing outside of
time (eternal). Maimonides in his Guide to the Perplexed saw God as the First Cause324.
We point this out because our TDVP concepts motivate these points: First Cause for
Close’s concept of Primary Receptor 8 and this infinite component transcends the finite
N-Dimensions of STC substrates, and the variant of panentheism from the ATO.

We will introduce below in the TDVP philosophical basis a new kind of monism:
Unified Monism.

Dualists adopt a non-physicalist position. This challenges the notion that the mind is a
purely physical construct. There are two main kinds of dualists:

1. Substance Dualists who argue that the mind is an independently existing substance
2. Property Dualists argue that the mind is not a distinct substance. The mind
constitutes a group of independent properties that emerge from but cannot be reduced
to the brain.

Most consciousness researchers regard themselves as dualists because they argue there
is a mind or consciousness and given their physical experience and the contradictions
they have noted they cannot resolve such thought by monism. We believe we can.

Unified monism as part of the TDVP model: The Philosophical basis of TDVP
A common attitude is that if there is such a “thing” as mind that is separated from brain
or body or physical substance, then this would imply the philosophical model of
dualism per se. The most classical kind of dualism is René Descartes’s Dualism (so-
called Cartesian Dualism). In fact, the perception of existence under a single mode
(monism) is sometimes understood to contradict findings such as mind being separated
from body.

The most common philosophy of monism is “materialism or physicalistic monism"

and the far less common kind of monism that argues there is nothing material and
everything is in our minds, even our individual minds reflected in “idealism monism”,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 285

 
e.g., as propounded by Bishop Berkeley 324 appear to contradict the idea of any
separation of mind and body.

Then come ideas close to our own where there is the recognitions of mass, energy and
consciousness as with a modified Spinoza philosophy where everything that exists is
part of the creator 325 There is a triadic perspective recorded in mystical tradition, but
our unified monism has important differences from, for example, Spinoza or Sefer
Yitzirah or Vedic Mysticism. It is also quite different from any postulate that mind is a
completely separate entity. Descartes felt the mind was linked through the pineal gland
of the brain.

Our TDVP model provides another optional alternative explanation. TDVP does not
imply any kind of separation of mind from body or brain. It does however, recognize
that some aspect of space-time event or identity in 3S-1t earthly domain may =0 but
not necessarily be so in another "set of dimensions" (which we call "domains"). This is
one example of when we use the term "relative zero".

In fact, TDVP is effectively unified monism because space, time and consciousness are
necessarily tethered together—tightly, loosely or even only slightly. However, by
tethering, they're always linked but can also exist with their own dimensional
properties via a content-process we call "vortical indivension". We do not need to
invoke an area of “interaction” such as the pineal. And the temporal lobe, for example,
may be an area of neurological integration including metaconscious and possibly
quantum conscious information with neurological consciousness but this just allows
such awareness and responsiveness to be available to the living organism and brain.

It is remarkable that both Neppe and Close quite independently developed the same
philosophical concept, effectively referring to Unified Monism, even though it did not
exist and we are only now defining this new philosophical model!

In its earliest iteration, long preceding TDVP, from two decades ago, Neppe (1996;
starting formally from 1989 and informally earlier than that) had called his
model Vortex Pluralism because of its N-Dimensionality261, 169.However, in the early
21st century, he realized that his N-Dimensional model was clearly monistic because
when applying infinity, the model transforms from a closed finite N-dimensionalism
plural components to an open, both finite and infinite, N-Dimensional unifying
monism7. At that point, this N-Dimensional vortical model allowed a unification of
science with empirical data, philosophy and mysticism. To this earlier model, we have
now added tethering from the onset and clarified the role of consciousness. We also
integrated mathematics (e.g., Close’s mathematical Pythagorean, Fermat,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 286

 
Extrapolation and Distinction additions, and Neppe’s Gödel modification and
Incompleteness ideas). This philosophical position can at this time truly be described
as a “Unified Monism“.

The philosophical basis of Close’s development of Transcendental Physics 8 is also

monistic because it is based on the single a priori assumption of infinite continuity
which posits that all things, including consciousness, are connected. This means reality
is unitary, exemplified by when consciousness is actually included in the basic
equations of science, meaning arises. Moreover, philosophically the ultimate purpose
of existence is the realization of the unity of everything in Primary Consciousness 3.
This philosophical position can also be described as Unified Monism.

Dimensionally, unified monism could be interpreted as inspired by Spinoza, Sefer

Yitzirah and Vedic mysticism or related to Lanza, because it has some links with all. In
reality, we developed our ideas independently, and only secondarily recognized the
similarities with these philosophies. We perceive consciousness as far more than an
inherent part of matter and energy, and far more than an extension of wave and particle
dualism, turning reality into a triad including consciousness (the STC triad).

Our TDVP model has created such a reformulation right there. We use, as indicated,
space-time-C-substrate as a fundamental triadic building base using “consciousness”
below in its broadest C-substrate sense.

Our conclusion summarizes this view: “The views …reflect a paradigm shift.
Henceforth space by itself and time by itself and consciousness by itself are doomed to
fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of tethered union of the three from the
very beginning will preserve an independent identity.”

Unified monism implies the direct ongoing link of awareness and matter, applying the
indivension process, the fluctuating dimensional vortical content, the dimensional
interval and ordinal metrics, extending Einsteinian principles, interfacing scalars,
vectors and tensors and recognizing the brain, Higher Consciousness and meaningful
realities. Unified monism can be applied to any kind of consciousness and reality.

Unified monism does not mean that consciousness is separated from matter as this
implies a form of dualism: The tethering of space-time and C-substrate does not imply
mind and body are separated: The separation is a conceptual not actual distinction: The
level is conceptually much earlier than mind versus brain or body. As a clarification,
through the drawing of distinctions, first the distinction of self from other, and then
through the drawing of distinctions in other, timelines of experienced events are
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 287

 
created in N-Dimensional reality. This consciousness-based approach is facilitated by
the introduction of a pre-arithmetic mathematical procedure for describing the reality
we experience in terms of distinctions. 196; 307; 326; 327

This change in perspective to a unifying monism is particularly because space-time and

the broadest consciousness (which we carefully define as C-substrate) were seen
as tethered together.
This may be the key idea separating it from possibly all other previously proposed
philosophical models. TDVP allows us to logically explore not only empirical data but
apply mathematical principles and theorems, it does not contradict mysticism
thousands of years old, and it is amazing how 500+ ideas naturally flow from this
presumption.

Clarifying Monism and Dualism in Its Modern Context

Using the term “unified monism” needs another clarification. In current philosophical
discussions, the term "monism" is rarely used. The two terms most used are
"materialism" and "dualism", the latter often being used to mean "not materialism".
The term "monism" is used in two very different ways: it can mean (i) there is only one
kind of thing or it can mean (ii) there is only one thing. A materialist usually believes
(i) together with the belief that there are many individuals of that kind; an idealist like
Berkeley believes (i) together with the assumption that many such individual minds
exist. These individuals are "atomistic monists".

In contrast is the mystical view (e.g., Spinoza): There is only one individual, God or
Substance, and everything else, lives and moves and has its being in God. But, Spinoza
rejects a God that manifests Himself as the Attributes, of which mind and matter
(extension) are the only two that we humans are acquainted with. Thus, Spinoza is not
a monist in the sense of (i) above, since his system posits infinitely many dimensions
to God's being, each dimension constituting a distinct "kind".
In the mind-body debate, the more important distinction today may be to differentiate
atomism or atomic monists, where causation goes bottom-up, and holism (or holism),
where causation flows top-down. Our Unified Monism clearly has the Holism element,
and we use a top-down approach.

By tethering, S-, T- and C-substrate are always linked. However, they can also exist
with their own dimensional properties but they always have a relative source/ other
connectivity.
But unlike most monism, Unified Monism is anything but a reductionism to the
physical, or an epiphenomenalism of consciousness expressed by the physical, or an
idealism of consciousness without physicalism, it is a true unified monism.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 288

 
CHAPTER 39: THE PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVE OF MEANING AND
CONSCIOUSNESS 328

“General philosophy is a conceptual study, for which method is

all-important.”
Kurt Gödel 102

Primary Consciousness
In TDVP, we speculate on the role of the Primary Receptor (also called Primary
Consciousness). We have posited a period encompassing the Origin Event, possibly
applying time as experienced in 3S-1t a moment before the event horizon of the Big
Bang, and speculated that a kind of consciousness was available prior to space and
time and mass and energy. This began immediately before what we’re calling the
Origin Event of the big bang. However, this Primary Receptor / Primary
Consciousness is a philosophical idea linked with the infinite. Nevertheless, this
Primary Consciousness at the Origin Event is somewhat equivalent to what others have
loosely called “God“ but without any theological attributions.

Philosophically, too, we illustrate below how to resolve the ostensible dilemma of the
model of “unified monism” that TDVP implies if there were a Primary Consciousness,
and we want to ensure that TDVP’s philosophical perspective in its Axiom of Origin is
not unexplainable using the various arguments for a higher being.

We therefore, examine below the three main existing models for the existence of
“God“ based on origins of our universe or its continued development.

Cosmological Argument
The so-called The Cosmological Argument, or cosmological interpretation of
theology, postulates that God precedes all, and is the maker.

This is also called “First Cause”, and argues that because the cosmos exists, it must
have come from somewhere. The cosmological argument argues for the existence of a
first cause, or an uncaused cause to the universe, and is often used as an argument for
an unconditioned or supreme being, usually then identified as God. It is known as the
argument from universal causation, or the argument from first cause, or the causal
argument, or the argument for existence.
The cosmological argument recognizes infinity in that every finite and contingent
being has a cause and a causal loop cannot exist. The causal chain cannot be of infinite
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 289

 
length, therefore, some kind of Primary Consciousness or first cause must exist. The
universe requires an explanation, and God is that explanation.
The Big Bang theory is sometimes called the Kalam Cosmological Argument.
Whatever begins to exist has a cause and the universe began to exist and therefore, the
universe had a cause. It is an argument from contingency.
The cosmological argument implying God is not a scientifically proven cause, and
does not necessarily imply religious monotheism and scientific analysis.

There are 3 basic variants to this Cosmological Arguments, all with subtle important
distinctions.
• in causa, the causality argument:
• in esse, the inessentiality argument: The essence argument, is like lighting a candle
or liquid in a vessel. Not only does a candle produce light in a room in the first
instance, but it’s continued presence is necessary to continue the illumination. If the
light ceases, the candle then would cease. This fundamentally argues for a
continued presence of a God (the Maimonides and also, Aquinas’s theism) as
opposed to God existing initially but having no role with ordinary people
(Aristotle’s deism)
• in fieri, the becoming argument:

The critiques of the cosmological argument

David Hume and Paul Edwards have critiqued the cosmological argument. Their
argument is the so-called Hume-Edwards principle. 329 Essentially, the notion of an
infinite causal regress may be felicitous, and David Hume and later Paul Edwards have
criticized the cosmological argument as who made God, and who made the thing that
made God, and an infinite regress until we get to God made itself, If there are other
universes the same problem applies—who made those aliens who occupied the earth?
This cosmological interpretation is always an infinite regress.

Interestingly, quantum mechanics undercuts this argument because the infinite regress
becomes finite, stopping with the first quanta impacting the Primary Receptor, which
does not have a beginning in space-time. This concept of a necessary Primary Receptor
based on the fundamental concept of quantum mechanics was developed by Close in
Transcendental Physics, Chapter 2: “The Final Receptor”. 8

Teleological Argument
A second “God argument” is the Teleological Interpretation postulated by St Thomas
Aquinas. This explains functionality and causality of events over time. For example, it
is posited that for evolution to have occurred and for our existence and life to have
continued, one needs a meaningful interpretation. This is discussed in some detail, in
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 290

 
the remarkable writings of Gerald Schroeder. 175-177 The problem here is the Bayesian
interpretation of what is the statistical probability. This is illustrated by arguments on
the “anthropic principle” 330 of, if we humans are one of the only groups in the whole
universe that survived (are living), we might perceive that absolute rarity as
statistically impossible,* but meanwhile we don’t know how statistically impossible it
really is because we cannot define a zero or null hypothesis statistic. This argument
“from design” has been supported by Isaac Newton, who argued that the entire cosmos
was supported by the same universal laws. Latterly, Robert Lanza has pointed out how
precise and remarkable the universal constants are. However, the teleological argument
cannot easily be justified universally because it would be based on Bayesian statistics
and it depends on how one estimates probability of our existence coming about in a
vast cosmos. There we rely extensively on Dr. Bernard Carr330 whose detailed and
definitive analysis shows how difficult it is to appreciate whether or not key areas such
as the fundamental constants and the pyramidal complexities all came about by chance
and we relook at the tiny variants that would have not only not allow life, but not allow
existence on earth. The teleological model is one example of the feasibility model.
This area is important and complex. and a section immediately below has been devoted
to the “strong anthropic principle”, the fundamental constants, ordropy and TDVP.
Essentially, we find that TDVP allows significant insights and is valid either way.

Ontological Argument
There is a third interpretation of creation, namely, the Ontological Interpretation of
theology.
The ontological interpretation of God is exemplified from St Anselm of Canterbury in
the 11th century in his Proslogion and later Aquinas who modified that version. Anselm
argues that God has to be the greatest thing ever conceived. Therefore, there can be no
greater aspect that can be perceived because it would be absurd that there would be
anything greater than the greatest thing that was conceived as this could go on ad
infinitum if there was something greater. in the 17th Century, Renee Descartes also
used similar arguments. (E.g., 5th meditation) His proof demonstrates the existence of
God from the idea of a supremely perfect being, arguing that if there is such a
supremely perfect being that lacks existence, then there would be a triangle interiorly
whose sum did not add up to 180 degrees. (Ironically, in non-Euclidean physics, this
exactly is what happens). But if we conceive such a supremely perfect being then we
must conclude that such a being exists. Aquinas's version proceeds from the meaning
of the word "God, " by definition, God is a being a greater than which cannot be
conceived. Descartes' argument is grounded in two central tenets of his philosophy —
the theory of innate ideas and the doctrine of clear and distinct perception.
Essentially, the critique is that this is not analyzable and therefore, impossible to
demonstrate perfections that may turn out to be incompatible. Moreover, to Immanuel
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 291

 
Kant, the linguistic attribution of what “is” is relevant. In any event, this ontological
interpretation is irrelevant to TDVP because the Primary Consciousness is not
postulated to have any “omni” elements including Anselm’s omnipotence.

If S, T, and C-substrate is existing, has existed, and will exist, and this is all outside
time (t), it implies infinity, and it implies a thing that may or may not exist that is
outside that box. The Spinoza perception of this quality, this thing being in all beings
has been interpreted as God and Pantheistic, but it also is not far from the fundamental
existence of a consciousness within all things. And as all those things in 3S-1t certainly
have space and time, there is the STC component there. Ironically, this is also so in
Kabbalic Mysticism, which therefore, implies consciousness-like qualities in all things.
Our C-substrate goes beyond the animate to the inanimate, and also includes subatomic
particles.

A New Explanation: Our Proposed Infinity Model of the Axiom of Origin.

Even if the existence of every member of a set is explained, the explanation is
necessarily outside the set and the existence of that total set is not necessarily
explained because it is argued that the whole chain needs to have a cause. In our TDVP
model, applying the infinity of infinities of Cantor 116, there is no mathematically
logical reason for not having an infinity of infinities. It does not matter in TDVP if one
is talking about Big Bang or infinite universe theory or continuous creation of some
kind of steady state theory.

Philosophically, we can best resolve the dilemma of “unified monism” that TDVP
implies by arguing that the Primary Consciousness that is supported by the Calculus of
Distinctions examining Consciousness itself and recognizing a pre-mathematical
logical differentiation between what exists and others, can most easily be explained by
arguing metadimensionally. This means that Primary Consciousness may also be
associated with Space-time extent and Mass-energy content. However, that Space-time
in 3S-1t may equal zero, though not necessarily in other dimensions. This still does not
resolve the philosophical arguments or explain cosmological origins, essences and
becoming, but it does not require any further axioms to be invoked.
This infinity is different from the Infinite Regress of the ontological argument. This
infinity is based on Dimensionometrics not on infinities in 3S—1t. The infinity that is
proposed here is not a regressive infinity and given its major role just before the event
horizon of the Big Bang or equivalent (even a continuity), space can equal zero and
time can equal zero within those finite realities, which in any event based on an
extension of our axiom of origin, all existed at the same time anyway when we view it
from our linear time reality. Importantly, Primary Consciousness, with or without
space and time, implies relative zero in the 3S-1t earthly domain. It does not imply
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 292

 
God as commonly conceived.

The TDVP Position

In TDVP, the postulate of a Primary Consciousness as the Primary Receptor alone is
purely speculative, even though quantum mechanics requires a Primary Receptor. It is
not necessary to the fundamental axiom of TDVP because the fundamental axiom
states that “space, time, and C-substrate are fundamentally tethered from the origin”.
Therefore, if the C-substrate exists even a nanosecond beforehand this, it would add in
a further axiomatic requirement: If the C-substrate and Primary Consciousness are one
and the same, then
The S and T domains come into existence with the first distinction of matter/energy at
the Origin Event. Again, at this point, this is pure speculation and might be revisited
and further explored in our second book: Space, Time and Consciousness: The
Tethered Triad.

We cannot completely justify the logic of the ontological argument because we do not
speculate philosophically about the powers or attributes of Primary Consciousness,
other than the fact that it fills the role of Primary Receptor. The infinite regress
argument of a cosmology is also bothersome unless we evoke infinity and dimensions
outside 3S-1t in which case it becomes relative only to that sentient being experiencing
it, and equivalent to the observer outside the box looking in from above. STC (space,
time, and C-substrates) tethering, ab initio, still requires an explanation of origin in 3S-
1t. In 3S-3T, however, there is no such requirement since all events co-exist there, and
thus, there are no beginnings or endings, only change.

The cosmological argument challenges the nature of time, but time disappears in the
Wheeler-DeWitt equation331. TDVP proposes more than one time dimension and
relative timelessness in the 3s-3T in contrast with the Standard Earthly Domain of 3S-
1t.

In the Big Bang theory all dimensions came into existence at the start of both space
and time, so that it would be logical therefore, in STC to have S, T, and C coming into
existence at that point. If the Big Bang theory is correct, the expansion of the universe,
at least initially is a logical consequence. In our model, all time (t) in past, present and
future, all exist at one moment of 3T time. Thus the question of what existed “before”
becomes moot. With the Standard Model, on the other hand, there is always the
problem of what occurred before the Big Bang, including the scenario of the collision
of so-called membranes to give the cause for the Big Bang: Where, for example, did
the membranes come from?

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 293

 
In 1948, Hoyle and his colleagues, developed an alternative to the Big Bang theory
postulating an infinite universe theory, or continuous creation theory in its modern
form. 332 This theory, if true, does not affect TDVP’s basic axiom of STC tethering
because TDVP involves both the finite and the infinite.

Nevertheless, it is important to note that in Vortex N-Dimensionalism, Neppe does not

raise up the issue of any kind of Primary Consciousness. Primary Consciousness, in
this model, is derived directly from Close’s Transcendental Physics only, and the
question of the attributes and qualities of Primary Consciousness is deliberately left
open. The important point is that for the first quantum to come into existence, a
Primary Receptor is required, and some form of conscious substrate is the only feasible
receptor that could conceivably organize the quanta received into ordropic order before
they could disappear again in conformance with the natural tendency of virtual quanta
to return to maximum entropy as reflected in the second law of thermodynamics. This
Primary Consciousness is not necessarily omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.
The Primary Consciousness certainly is not given attributes such as good—
omnibenevolent—because it is not necessary to assign attributes to Primary
Consciousness in order to develop a logically consistent model.

We see no contradiction in having the whole unified monism model, S, T, and C

existing before, during and after the big bang. This is so because T is timeless in the
context of our 3S-1t standard domain.

The assumption taken by most philosophers, however, is that something produced the
STC substrate, which would imply a certain omnificence. This postulate is an
unnecessary speculation in TDVP. Even if we revert back to the source STC-Substrate
as from its origin, and ask: What produced the STC-Substrate?

There could always be the cosmological component of production, but the attribution
of an omnipotent God is unnecessary. We could say that we don’t know because “I
know only that I exist”, as Descartes famously describes. But beyond that, the
circularity of origins remains cosmologically, teleologically and ontologically as long
as we are limited to 3S-1t. However, this is not circular, because applying the infinite
in the TDVP model that we are proposing, we can justify the STC substrate source
without contradiction: Time is excluded because the infinite has metatime (and is
common, too, to the Klein-Boyd Subquantal model).

TDVP and These Models

Essentially, the temporal origin of the cosmos is a paradoxical mystery, and likely not
scientifically soluble even with LFAF. It becomes merely philosophical. But none of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 294

 
these models contradict or falsify TDVP’s basic TTOOURS metaparadigm
(Metaparadigm of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity) or
the necessity of a primary non-quantum receptor. Moreover, there is significant
feasibility support for TDVP in the context of the origins of everything:
• The ontological argument is irrelevant to TDVP because it implies special
characteristics for a supreme being.
• The feasibility- teleological anthropic model strongly supports TDVP in most
variants and in the absence of an anthropic explanation; TDVP is not refuted by
it.
• The cosmological origins do not require invoking a deity per se, though
supporting a Primary Consciousness that may be initially independent of Space-
Time (effectively S=0 and T=O in 3S-1t) or involve the initial tethering of STC.
• And our proposed infinity model is part of TDVP and allows even other options
for the origin of the Universe or Cosmos but does not refute TDVP’s axiom of
tethered origin. Applying LFAF, and the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum
mechanics, there is significant overall feasibility and no falsification.

As further clarification, one key TDVP axiom, that of “original tethering” (also called
“tethered origin”) (ATO) allows also for all of the dimensions of the N-Dimensionality
to have originated at the Origin Event. And because of this, anything prior to the
Origin Event would be speculative indefinitely and require evoking infinity. The
essential contradiction others encounter is applying 3S-1t specifically.
Assuming a linear one-way time, which is not the case in TDVP, leads to necessary
contradictions. But we strongly and critically motivate for multiple dimensions of time
in TDVP. Once that principle is grasped, many questions become irrelevant.
Essentially, we explain the Origin Event based on relative aspatial, and relative
atemporal reality, in the equivalent of our experiential four-dimensional (3S-1t) reality.
The concept of infinity becomes extremely important here. It means conceiving
beyond dimensions, outside that box to the infinite, potentially an infinity of infinities.
The concept is again a unification, a merging of the finite with the infinite, and a
monism in its truest terms. Hence “unified monism” is justified. Semantically, one
could argue dimensions could extend by definition to the infinite: Our definitions of
variables of extent make the infinite “beyond dimensions” because it does not have a
metric. Infinity is beyond extent because it is continuous not discrete.

We now discuss possibly the most cogent of the scientific debates in the area.

The Strong Anthropic Principle, the Fundamental Constants, Ordropy and

TDVP
Revisiting the Anthropic Principle
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 295

 
Although the term “anthropic” derives from the Greek word for “man” 333, most of the
arguments pertain to life more broadly in general (the “life principle”) 330. The simplest
version is the so-called “weak anthropic principle” which is no more than a logical
necessity334. This accepts the constants of nature as given and then shows that our
existence imposes a selection effect on when (and where) we observe the Universe.

Does TDVP support the fundamental constants?

A TOE should be able to explain physical concepts such as the fundamental constants
relating to the forces of physics. Does TDVP support the presence of these
fundamental constants? We believe that it does, and it does so irrespective of whether
the strong anthropic principle is invoked, although its invocation is more direct support
for C-substrate, and in some explanations, metadimensionality, time
multidimensionality and ordropy.

Physical life pre-requisites

This discussion is complex: In order for life to exist, there must be carbon, and this is
produced by cooking inside stars. The process takes about 1010 years, then supernovae,
scattering the newly-baked elements throughout space, where they may eventually
become part of life-evolving planets 335. Since all the forms of life we can envisage
require stars, this suggests that life can only exist when the Universe is aged about ten
billion years. Paradoxically, the very hugeness of the Universe, which, cursorily, may
reflect insignificance, might be a prerequisite to human existence.

The question arises about how to explain this life. The “Strong Anthropic Principle“
points out the remarkable constants that exist and the necessary relationships between
the couplings of these constants. These constants are dimensionless numbers that
characterize the strengths of the fundamental forces of nature and other physical
quantities, which are necessary in order for observers to arise. Some of these
relationships are remarkably “fine-tuned” and do not seem to be predicted by standard
physics 330. The first set of fine-tunings involve the four dimensionless coupling
constants. These were taken to be S ~10 for the strong force, EM ~10−2 for
electromagnetism, W ~10−10 for the weak force. and G ~10−40 for gravity.

The data are there, but the why of their occurrence is problematic. Carr330 discusses this
area in possibly the most detail ever. He illustrates this with particularly striking
anthropic examples that include:
1. How tunings associated with the existence of stars with convective and radiative
envelopes reflect a most striking coincidence because of the high power of ᾳ involved.
The ultimate relationship ᾳ G ~1020 is satisfied numerically but physics does not
explain why this relationship should pertain.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 296

 
2. Carbon is a prerequisite for our form of life. A famous anthropic tuning illustrates
how the generation of carbon in the helium-burning phase of red giant stars via the
triple-alpha reaction occurs: two alpha particles first combine to form beryllium and
this then combines with a third alpha particle to form carbon. However, the beryllium
would decay before interacting with another alpha particle were it not for the existence
of a remarkably finely-tuned resonance in this interaction 332. Hoyle’s paper prompted
nuclear physicists to look for the resonance and they then found it as predicted
anthropically!
3. The variations in oxygen and carbon production in red giant stars vary with the
strength and range of the nucleon interactions. But the nuclear interaction strength
must be tuned very precisely to at least 0.5% if one is to account for this 336.
4. Carr330 points out the crucial role of eleven fine-tunings in the evolution of the
Universe involving the various key steps in the history of the Big Bang. He indicates
the remarkable various anthropic fine tunings associated with each of them.

The key question therefore, is why does this occur? Does this imply something beyond
pure physical coincidence? Each explanation below can be explained by the TDVP
model.

1. Teleologically, this could reflect the existence of a higher being influence who
tailor-made the Universe for our benefit330: The theological application of the term
“strong anthropic principle”, would then imply that the Universe was created by a God
or Supreme Being or Primary Receptor as in “speculative TDVP”, with the purpose of
creating life. But teleology is only one of several possible explanations.

2. Wheeler 337 proposed that the Universe does not properly exist until consciousness
has arisen: This Universe is described by a quantum mechanical wave-function, and an
impact on a receptor is required to collapse this wave-function. If consciousness
collapses the wave function, once the Universe has evolved consciousness, the Big
Bang could originate bringing the world into existence. 49; 88 But we do not know if
consciousness really does collapse the wave function—according to Wheeler, this is
far from certain.

In TDVP, C-substrate exists at the quantum level from the beginning. This means that
collapsing of wave functions may not be pertinent to the veridicality of our model, but
the Wheeler explanation could provide an adequate mechanism for TDVP’s (Axiom) of
STC being tethered from the origin.

3. The third possibility invokes very many multiverses, all with different (possibly
random) coupling constants. Some of these multiverses could be physical and Rees 338
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 297

 
points out these constants would have to be contingent on accidental features of
symmetry-breaking and the initial conditions of our universe, and would occupy a
specific point in some multi-dimensional space of coupling constants to be anthropic.
Alternatively, later astrophysicists may determine each universe has a unique constant:
In that context, there would be no room for the Anthropic Principle as any fine-tunings
could be regarded as coincidental or “worlds” could have different physical laws or
different mathematical foundations where only some of these can permit anthropic
relationships339. However, Smolin 340speculates that it’s far more likely that each
universe should have properties like our own—our universe would be typical. This
may imply support for the strong anthropic model. If so, the explanations relating to
TDVP apply in the Multiverse context.

4. Top-down cosmology is another possibility: Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog

of CERN, proposed that the universe's initial conditions consisted of a superposition of
many possible initial states, only a small fraction of which contributed to current
conditions. 341 According to their theory, it is inevitable that we find our universe "fine-
tuned" as the current universe "selected" only those past histories that led to the present
conditions. This top-down cosmology provides an anthropic explanation for why we
find ourselves in a universe containing matter and life, without the necessity of
invoking the existence of a multiverse.342 This hypothesis does not directly refer to any
kind of consciousness, but it does not contradict our TDVP model.

5. Carter 343 has argued that the earth may be the only site of human life within our
cosmological horizon because of the remarkable coincidence that the time for life to
arise on Earth seems to have been comparable to the cosmological time. In our
opinion, this does not require any strong anthropic principle, but would imply that
there is no other life anywhere else in the universe or multiverse, and it introduces
debates about other life in other worlds. If we are the only world in all universes or
multiverses, then there is no need to find any contradiction of the fundamental
constants and TDVP, though the postulate of C-substrate, although not refuted, would
not be necessary.

6. Some higher-dimensional theories expect the (so-called) fundamental constants to

vary in time, even in our Universe. This is so as constants should be related to the
variable size of the dimensions, and this would be expected to change during at least
part of the Universe’s history, and be dependent on the compaction of such
dimensions. This model therefore, could postulate that there would be varying sizes of
the fundamental constants, and that they would be relative to the number of
dimensions. For example, if we had three-dimensional time, the constants that depend
on time— and they all do—must vary. TDVP recognizes multidimensional time,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 298

 
which means that there would be variable constants relative to the specific dimensions
of time.
In TDVP, we postulate warping of S, T and C substrates to achieve dimensional
extrapolation. This does not specifically address size and compaction. Moreover, we
have not complicated our TDVP model by introducing folding as necessary (as it is in
many kinds of String Theory). On the other hand, folding is not exclusionary, and this
would allow easy vector or tensor movement across dimensions via indivension.
Therefore, the fundamental constants are well explained by TDVP because
metadimensionality, multidimensional time and quantum consciousness all support
their existence. But the fact that these are invoked, supports the strong anthropic
principle as experienced in our 3S-1t domain.

Ordropy, Expanding Universe and the Big Bang

We now examine ordropy in the context of the Big Bang Theory examining this
anthropic perspective, specific constants and priorities of a possible pervasive
consciousness as this is particularly relevant to TDVP.

Pyramids of complexity and yet stability

Carr 330 points out how the Big Bang theory explains the so-called “Pyramid of
Complexity”, introduced by Reeves344. This pyramid ranges at its (larger) base and very
early on from quarks alone, all the way eventually through to complex life at its top in
much narrower and later time. These structures arise because processes cannot occur
fast enough in an expanding Universe to maintain equilibrium. If they could, then each
force would always form its most stable objects (e.g., the stability would turn all nuclei
into iron [applying the strong force], all atoms would be noble gases (applying the
electrical force), and all matter would turn into black holes (via gravity). All variety
would be lost and there would be no life. However, the disequilibrium entailed by the
rapid expansion of the Universe prevents this. In TDVP, the support for the expanding
universe and the fundamental asymmetry that is mathematically demonstrated, is
pertinent.

Higher Organization Entropy

However, Carr 330 argues that Reeves’s Pyramid of Complexity can only arise in a
small subset of all the universes. The structures at the pyramid bottom (e.g., quarks,
atoms) are stable and need large amounts of energy to destroy them, but those at the
top (levels of life complexity) are more fragile. Carr suggests the term “complexity
principle” is better than “anthropic principle” and recognizes they must be constantly
maintained by exchanging energy with the outside world. These life structures must
extract information from the world. Because the second law of thermodynamics
requires that this process is inevitably accompanied by the release of entropy, the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 299

 
higher organization must be explained. We have call this higher organization ordropy
in TDVP. Carr points out that information extraction may allow for continued
existence near that peak of the pyramid (in life forms), particularly as there is life
competitiveness as a living population grows: Evolutionary survival produces
mutations, ultimately leading to the complex central nervous systems of humans, and
this further allows for greater efficiency in survival. 338; 345.

Which one is the epiphenomenon?

This concept of complexity is relevant in TDVP as the C-substrate permeates
meaningful complexity: The metaconsciousness implies acquisition of information,
and in TDVP, we could argue that the increased complexity in evolution may
inevitably and rapidly lead to brain consciousness. This turns around the usual concept
in physical materialism of consciousness reflecting an epiphenomenon of brain
functioning; here, consciousness is facilitating the complexity of the brain.

Moreover, the possibly the Higher Consciousness level (could this be a so-called
“mind” in the philosophical sense?) may facilitate the increasing evolutionary
complexity of life that links with evolving life over billions of finite 3S-1t time years.
This would be an example of the unification of the C-substrate: Quantum
consciousness, neurological consciousness, metaconsciousness and life: Effectively,
despite the vehement argument against anything but an unguided evolution, it still may
be difficult to explain evolution as a purely chance phenomenon. Schroeder 175-177,
Penrose 46, Collins 346, Lanza 347and Laszlo 348 all recognize the difficulty with the purest
evolution hypothesis of an unguided progression based on Darwinian “survival of the
fittest”.

Also, Carr 330further supports this view as he shows in the Big Bang theory, how the
history of the Universe reveals an increasing rather than decreasing degree of
organization. Without violating the second law of thermodynamics, modern physics
explains that heat death can be avoided because local pockets of order exist at the
expense of a global increase in entropy. If the Universe continues to expand forever,
intelligent beings may be able to delay their disintegration indefinitely349. This model
explains the presence of “ordropy” as defined in TDVP. We know order does occur—
just look at the remarkably ordered component of the complex state of complex human
life. TDVP postulates that a universal existence or life happens as part of the infinite
and the appropriate physical (genetic and physiological) characteristics need only be
present for it to manifest as physical life.

A terminological aside on consciousness concepts

As an aside, we mentioned “mind”. Various terms have been loosely used in different
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 300

 
scientific and theological endeavors. They are difficult to define, and carry specific
meanings for different individuals. What is “thought", "mind", "intellect", "subtle
matter", “subtle energy”, "soul", “intuition" or “spirit”? Even more controversial are
"physical field", “mental life”, "mental energy or forces". In TDVP, we have steered
clear of these terms other than “consciousness” which has been defined carefully to
ensure clarity of our concept and “state”, which we have used in the context of a
maintained condition in the state-trait dichotomy.

Philosophy and Meaning

Degrees of meaning
Although consciousness or meaning is one of three initial inseparable triadic
components, we do not regard subatomic particles, as possessing the same level of
meaning as, e.g., molecules, and a molecule would have less meaning than a stone. At
a certain point, this increase of complexity allows sufficient DNA and physiology for
the extent of complexity to become an organism. The animate is expressed as a CNS
consciousness-possessing system in the first place. We postulate that ordropy increases
within advancing living systems, but not necessarily at a proportional linear rate:
Ordropy may change along, across, between and within several dimensions, and
certainly may influence all of space, time and C-substrate. The potential for life exists
even at the finite origin event, and it becomes expressed simply because the DNA
encryption and physiology allows that potential for life to be expressed. Consequently
philosophically, there is increasingly meaningful organization, with the animate having
a consciousness, however, primitive in a nervous system, and the higher developed
human or possibly equivalent, e.g., dolphins or other animals, having greater
meaningful organization in metaconsciousness.

More than just “panpsychism”

If one referred purely to the “consciousness” and meaning and guiding reality, one
could argue this model is panpsychism, but this is just one component. The complexity
and changes can relate to changing any of the consciousness, space and time metrics:
The extent metrics of space and time imply a content of mass and energy, and
consciousness implies a content of information. In the living organism (animate being),
energy in the life form is expressed through physiology, mass is produced by caloric
food, and yet these, too, are not random processes, but reflect different orders of
ordropy showing the multidimensional elements.

Consciousness not information at the finite beginning

In TDVP, ab initio, C-substrate ascribes meaning to the tethered STC domains. This is
so because space, time and consciousness are unified and inseparable from the very
beginning of finite subreality. On the contrary, the idea of initially just having
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 301

 
information alone without consciousness, and then later on that information becoming
converted to what would be a very primitive degree of consciousness could not work.
This is because it would both complicate the model unnecessarily and raise up new
issues, and require new models. The difficulty of information alone becoming
consciousness appears two-fold:
• Its conversion would require a certain threshold for consciousness. At what
point? And why? And how is that attained? What circumstance would make that
threshold phenomenon active? Is the conversion from the information content to
the meaningful extent sudden or gradual? How is the conversion justified? What
model could one then use? And what happens initially to the extent variables of
time and space because what are they tethered to initially? Our TDVP model
would be severely compromised.
• The presence of the calculus of distinctions makes the logic behind
“consciousness” as extent and “information” as content clearer.
“Consciousness” has its “intent” of meaningful information, and by default it
has its “content” of information that simply exists. However, the beginning of
finite existence (Origin Event/ Big Bang/ Event Horizon) could not involve just
information because that would reflect a variable of content and not extent.
What would be the extent?
In the TDVP model, there is no contradiction because no new threshold interaction
or extent/content distinction is needed. This is because consciousness simply exists
at the start of the finite time of the origin. The C-substrate is extent from the
beginning implying meaningful qualitative information and information is always a
content without any imbued meaning. Moreover, at the infinite level, the C-
substrate of metaconsciousness is part of that infinite essence that exists over all-
present time and all-extending space, and the metainformation is the content that
can be imbued with meaning.
On the other hand, as one goes up the evolutionary scale, the quality of the meaning
experience changes and it is very different for sentient (living) beings than for
subatomic structures, molecules or inanimate objects.

Philosophy, Purpose and the Infinite

Our infinite reality choices
These lead to imaginative and wonderful speculations. Let’s just imagine, one more
time.
Could it be that we utilize our brain alone as the ultimate common endpoint in terms of
our unique expression of consciousness? Or is there something outside the brain,
possibly in that infinite subreality that relatively objectifies some of our choices?
Could it be that such choices derive from our metaconsciousness and we translate them
into discrete meaningful pieces?
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 302

 
Could it be then that not only some of our choices are infinite, but also that these
choices create a track for ourselves?
Is it possible that such a track of memories or of dreams or streams of consciousness
without physical life may totally supplement or distort what we are perceiving as
finite, objective reality that can be recorded for all time? It is almost like that recording
is recording in a particular fabric sometimes of 3S-1t, and sometimes even a 2S-1t
component where we are not seeing that depth of space perception—it’s just a picture.
Or maybe it’s 3S-3T-NC reflecting all our time choices and all those choices of others,
possible or actualized, within the fabric of the most intense weaving of meaning and
extended consciousness and higher attributes like beauty and love, and courage and
honor, and transcendence of self melding with a higher infinite.

Our own idiosyncratic reality? The ultimate speculation

There is one strange, subtle, and outlandish component to objective reality. If we talk
about common reality and we realize that there is a consciousness and an awareness to
it, could it be that what we are perceiving as common reality in the context of
objectified events that have been translated into our own perceptual, conceptual, and
experiential interpretations, is, in our subjective experience, valid at the finite level 350.
But, at the infinite level, it is a direction that we have chosen or been assigned, like a
finite dream, pre-assigned to a track, a specific trace that has happened, that traces
across this metacist, whole broader infinite continuous existence but along our own
particular pathway. Others may experience slightly different or very diverse pathways
in this broader fabric that we call reality and in the finite level multidimensional time.
This would be so because we impact others and we share and interface with “zillions”
of vortices. This concept has similarities to the ideas of Parallel Realities or Worlds.
We in this scenario, certainly make what we reap! And this becomes just a tiny track in
the Infinite Subreality.

Approaching solipsism through the infinite

Could it be that this is why we are literally making our own reality, not only at the
infinite level, but also converting it to, or pervading into, or permeating through the
finite level? This implies that what we are experiencing in terms of this broader
objective life is our broader, perceptual, conceptual, experiential life: This life may be
far more unique than we would think when we try to objectify it, and in fact, possibly
throughout we could be changing tracks too—we call this free-will.

But, of course, this is just a thought, just a question; and a radical though remarkable
and unproven speculation. We, in effect, make our own reality at the finite level, and
this creates traces at the infinite level, of one specific actualized reality in an infinite
number of possibilities. These traces should involve the C-substrate and therefore free-
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 303

 
will is linked with both T- and C-substrates and occur in a S-substrate context in finite
reality.
A philosophical model with some similarities is solipsism: only one’s own mind
is sure to exist and knowledge of anything outside one’s own specific being is
unjustified, and the external world and other beings are unknown. The speculation
above is quite different though because it never denies the existence of others.

Individual traces in infinite reality

The awareness that there may be individual traces of one’s physical life recorded
within the infinite, raises a question that some philosophers take seriously: We have
carried through an aspect of our destiny and given its uniqueness, we’re tracing a
particular pattern within the infinite. This could speculatively be consonant with
TDVP, and may imply an extreme level of individuation. We are following our "trace"
as a specific metadimensional individual pattern. Our 3S-1T track is our “free-will”
direction of its implementation, within the confines of the other natural laws.
This pattern would, in its more extreme version, be so subjective that we could create
it— just as we might have a role in creating and even controlling our dreams.

Would this be a possible logical way to approach the infinite in TDVP? Because
we do not even know what the infinite laws of nature imply, we certainly know little
about this whole unending expanse of nothingness or potential that may reflect the
infinite subreality. So we cannot begin to answer such questions.

Rejecting solipsism
But personally, we cannot go this route of absolutely defining all aspects of our
solipsist reality. This is not because we have scientific or mathematical justifications in
favor or to the contrary. It is simply because if we did think solipsistically, in the
context of our controlling reality in all its complexity and beauty, it would imply, to us,
a level of arrogance that would be extreme. It would imply that we have the powers of
a divinity.
Because we regard ourselves as ordinary people, we reject solipsism for this
reason. However, it might be possible for us to be able to mold our individual
existence through our freedom of will: Our consequent actions would then be
paramount, and, moreover, given our TDVP portrayal of the infinite possibilities of
existence, it would not be a great jump for us to postulate that we may be able to create
traces of our life in all forms—possibly even our thoughts and impacts on others—
through the infinite. This implies our impacts on many other beings, which fits well
with the model of zillions of interacting vortical indivension windows.
This impact on others could also conceivably be like some kind of maintained
dynamic memory and, in this context, may, initially, be quite independent of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 304

 
neurophysiology, reflecting the C-substrate. It might then, ultimately, be secondarily
expressed in the brain. 2; 136; 193; 294

Rejecting Panpsychism
Panpsychism 316refers to the philosophical perspective that all matter has a
mental aspect, or that all objects have a unified center of experience. In variants, like
Whitehead’s Panexperientialism 351, entities have the raw experience of basic
awareness (“phenomenal consciousness”) but not higher level cognition, and in
Panprotoexperientialism 351 all entities have non-physical properties that are precursors
to any kind of phenomenal consciousness in even a latent, undeveloped form but again
are lacking conscious awareness.

TDVP also does not apply Panpsychism per se. TDVP comes close because
there is a pan-informationism or pan-consciousness or pan-C-substrate element with
the most primitive level of “meaning’ in inanimate objects or even subatomic particles.
But that “meaning” is part of the tethered STC reality, not part of space or time itself.
Space and time are different from each other, and so is C-substrate. They reflect
discrete entities and may even have their own particles, forces and spins at that
subatomic level.

The order level of meaning is very low at the level of stones or subatomically,
but the informational order exists to a limited degree. We at one point were using the
term “guided”. However, “guided” is a potentially misconstrued term because English
has no other alternative, and we do not want to portray necessarily a passivity that is
guided or a theological entity who does the guiding. Similarly, our TDVP model
regards the STC tethering as relevant, but it does not commit to a subquantal or
morphogenetic field or any other reality causing this. TDVP involves meta-reality, the
broader picture above the other specific models, and those models of others, such as
that of Klein and Boyd, or of Sheldrake, may explain certain data, but that same data
can be also applied at that higher metareality level of TDVP. 27; 71
“Meaning” may be a better term than “guided, ” or even “guiding” implying at
the basic subatomic level the most basic meaning involving potentially apprehending
or perturbing of objects, events or information. This is very close to information
delivery, not consciousness, per se, and very different from atoms or stones acquiring
metaconscious realities compared with live beings. However, one speculation would
be to regard “meaning” as a C1 extent variable, and “guiding” as more volumetric as a
C3 extent. 352
However, by virtue of the order component even in the subatomic levels, might
this imply ordropy playing a role at all levels? Entropy is demonstrably relevant for a
whole closed finite thermodynamic system, but could such factors as sheer beauty of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 305

 
nature, or even of man built artificial structures allow a semblance of ordropy beyond
the linear energy equilibrium of entropy?

Meaning does not necessarily imply the deliberate continuity of finite and
infinite but the term “guiding” could. Therefore, “guiding” is speculative and not
fundamental to TDVP. However, in TDVP, the pan-information or pan-consciousness
is just part of the bigger picture of the triadic tethered union of Space-Time and C-
substrates, with their separate extensions. Consequently, Unified Monism incorporates
pan-informationism, but it also incorporates the pan-consciousness necessarily as
meaningful information is transmitted at origin.

Meaning and purpose

The purpose of our being alive in 3S-1t might be living to the fullest extent in finite
reality. We cannot conceive of infinite, but we pervade into and from the infinite. Our
function may be to improve the discrete components of our present finite conscious
reality, and we may be ideally placed to do so as our physical existence may
approximate an ideal biological setting for success. Psychologically, we may see a
hierarchy from working through psychopathology, to self-actualization to
transcendence of self. Possibly that self-transcendence is where we attain higher
dimensions and this may be one reason why there is a fluctuating number for each
individual or individual-unit.

We speculate that sometimes transcending performance at that finite level could

allow the interaction of these higher levels of dimensionality. This would produce a
unification and an appreciation that can allow some extent of intruding into the
infinite.

But, certainly, at the end of it all we do not have that overwhelming power
implied by controlling not only all of our destiny, but all of the infinite itself. That
would be far more than we can conceptualize, conceive, experience, or even
understand. It would be like having a driver that had no clue how to manage his
machine.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 306

 
CHAPTER 40: PERSPECTIVE: DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS OF
TDVP VERSUS OTHER TOES.ccc, ddd, 353

“The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of
verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us.”
Paul Valery, 1895 (Philosopher, 1871 - 1945)

• How is the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) model

distinguished from other Theories of Everything (TOEs)?
• What other TOEs share certain characteristics with TDVP?
• And in what ways are the concepts found in TDVP unique?
In this chapter, we address these areas.

1. Essentially, TDVP is not only a TOE: it is a complete mathematical-logical,

empirical paradigm for reality covering physical, biological and psychological
sciences. (We do not know of any other comprehensive paradigm like this).

2. TDVP involves s a major paradigm shift because of its great scientific and
philosophical implications. It can apparently be applied to all disciplines. This is
unique. Some TOEs with similar bases, e.g., CST or multidimensionality can be
applied to some (but none to the life sciences, for example). So this is unique.

3. TDVP has demonstrable mathematical and empirical supporting data. It has a solid
mathematical and logical foundation, is empirically feasible using LFAF in the
physical, biological, social and consciousness sciences, it forms its own philosophical
model, and is mystically compatible with some traditions (e.g., Kabbalic and Vedic).
This is unique.

4. “Consciousness“ is far more broadly defined (We do not know of any other
comprehensive definition like this with the three elements of any of meaningful reality,
brain consciousness and metaconscious). This is unique.

5. The tethering of CST from the Origin Event is unique. Mysticism sometimes
perceives this but does not allow the freedom away implied in content by vortices and
in process by indivension. This is unique.
ccc
TDVP: Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm. TOE: Theory of everything
CST: "consciousness", space, time. 3S-3T-NC is 3 dimensions of space, 3 dimensions of time, N dimensions of "C-
substrate".
ddd
This perspective gives the broad bones allowing a greater insight into TDVP. The next section, 21. Tabulation of
Relevant Theories of Everything’ compares them in some detail and we then discuss each model briefly.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 307

 
6. CST being ubiquitous in all things from the subquantal thought to astrophysical may
have been mystically implied, but not so rigorously defined.

7. The Primary Receptor with the concepts of relative infinity: We do not know of any
other scientific, non-mystical paradigm like this that recognizes an infinite receptor, ab
initio. Of course, this is conceptually and philosophically basic to most religions.

8. The calculus of distinctions provides an important logical mathematical link of C-

substrate. This was developed by Dr. Close, is unique to TOEs and is necessary to
allow the model to have a logical consistency particularly in applying C-substrate to
dimensionality 196; 202. This is unique to TDVP.

9. Individual-units and indivension is a critical concept. This allows the freedom of C-

substrate differences so that it becomes a new major biopsychosociobiological
contribution and explains the role of the individual or group units. It also provides an
adequate model for key ideas such as entanglement in relative non-locality,
morphogenetic fields, quantum field theory, and aether theory or any other content
model. This process provides a model explanation for parapsychological research and
consciousness studies. This is unique, although it has some similarities to what Carr
describes as Transcendental Field Theory. That in its turn links with Marshall,
Smythies and Whiteman. The unique difference in TDVP is the individual-unit
existing in both state and trait contexts involving fluctuating dimensions even in
individuals. Indivension can be at any level, animate or inanimate.

10. An explanation of life. This effectively is a new epiphany. Life, as an essential

aspect of the STC substrate, has always been present and physical life is simply based
on the necessary requirements of physiology and DNA. This is unique.

11. The numerous theorems particularly extradimensional extrapolations and parallels

and their variants, with dimensionometrics. This is unique.

12. Vortices are an important structural element. This is unusual in this context and
integrated with the first scientific dimensionometric model and mathematical
demonstration. Whereas others have seen the utility of vortices, our applications in
TDVP across dimensions as Transdimensional Vortices is unique. Fundamental is
curvature (as compared with Smythies tesseract).

13. The conception of the past, present and the future all existing simultaneously in the
infinite subreality from the Origin Event: Because everything is simultaneous in the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 308

 
infinite subreality of metatime and metaspace, this is before the Origin Event and after
the end of existence too. These become infinitely synonymous.eee
Ultimately, at minimum there is a 3S-3T-3C reality but there may be more dimensions
of time and space than 3, and almost certain it is 3S-3T-NC. Some models conceive of
this using time and space alone (e.g., Hawking) but STC is unusual in science though
not in mysticism.

14. Other relativistic concepts including relative zero, relative non-Euclidean space-
time, relative dimensionality, and relative non-locality. These again are
groundbreaking ideas, when taken together.

15. The idea of N-Dimensions varying with each individual-unit and yet impacting
with infinity at any step. This is unique.

16. The definition of dimension in the context of the calculus of distinctions as

variables of extent. This is unique.

17. The strength of the TDVP model is, at first pass, based on two major principles;
• Applying external validators including applying mathematicologic and empirical
data.
• Ensuring internal consistency of the TDVP inner construction by applying
Popperian falsifiability and LFAF at the testing level, ensuring that the
TTOURS metaparadigm is applicable.

18. We then apply repetitive passes to TDVP: We repeat this process to establish more
feasibility at each turn. We also allow moving away from certainty to speculation. We
then use empirical tests again to demonstrate and support hypotheses by falsifiability
or by LFAF again. In a way, this becomes an ever-expanding model, incorporating
more and more of the paradigm, until TDVP becomes a metaparadigm. This way
valuable criteria are developed, some more general for all TOEs, and some unique for
TDVP.

19. The success of the TDVP model is dramatic when looked at quantitatively. As
below, TDVP scores 39/39 and no other TOE besides our previous Neppe and Close
models, score above 19/39 (none conform to half the criteria stipulated).

eee
We add the following clarification from Klein: “I see in this fragment, a brilliant extreme reference to the Singularity's
pre- and post- manifestation forms on its own pluriversal axis. The self-replication of the non-manifest singularity is
nevertheless asymmetrical, as the STC manifestation results from the primary distinction implemented inside the
singularity itself (between its non-manifest essence and its manifestation potential) – while the "end-phase" is reached by
the dimensional collapse as a panentropic result of inherent metadimensional dynamics. This applies to the finite
Universal subsets on the high-degree infinite pluriversal connective line.” 352
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 309

 
CHAPTER 41: TABULATION OF RELEVANT THEORIES OF EVERYTHING354

“First comes thought; then organization of that thought, into ideas and plans; then
transformation of those plans into reality. The beginning, as you will observe, is in
your imagination.”
Napoleon Hill (Author, 1883-1970)

Criteria for Consciousness or Dimensional TOEs or Related Models

Historical perspective
Scientists and philosophers have proposed numerous “theories of everything” (TOEs).
We have indicated that we dislike the term intently. This because “TOE” is imprecise
and ambiguous. Consequently, some may misinterpret what we are saying within the
fabric of Theoretical Physics (the original “TOE” use). They may then try to explain
all unknown content mysteries e.g. esoteric specific angles as part of the TOE. This is
an old usage of TOE. We’re referring to something quite different: Models based on
“processes” not “content”. These are best described as “paradigms”, and if these
paradigms have a universality across the sciences, we use “metaparadigms”.
However, because we are comparing what others have conceptualized as TOEs in
this broader sense, we will still use TOEs here, though really referring to paradigms
(modern use “TOEs”) in the comparison. Which paradigms do we choose to compare?
Given that these TOEs necessarily must be scientifically broad and not just based on
abstract concepts, we have chosen all the well-known and also some esoteric models
that incorporate space and time directly and involve the finite. Occasionally, because
of their fame, we have included others, such as those of Gould and Langan. All
recognize the fundamental laws of nature—not therefore theological ideas, although
some focus more on the phenomenological philosophical models, e.g., Lanza,
Smythies. We recognize there are other philosophical and linguistic or
neurophysiological or biopsychosocial TOEs, but these have their own narrow range,
and do not fall under the scope of this discussion. We added the current Standard
Scientific Reductionist Paradigm as a baseline comparison.

Methodology and selection criteria

The criteria we have, may be perceived as self-selected as they appear post-hoc.
However, we cannot think of any criteria that are legitimate that we have not included
and few criteria could be debated as unnecessary to a TOE when using the criteria of
consciousness, dimenensionality, infinity and order. Nor have any other criteria been
raised by referees and our vast numbers of readers pre-publication. Therefore, we
believe that the results as tabulated below reflect a reasonable perspective of the
power, validity, value and ubiquity of the TOEs compared. Moreover, the further
subdivision into three (general, specific, and unique) allows group sub-analyses, yet
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 310

 
the order of the TDVP results and its predecessors (VNDP and TP) remain unchanged:
They still are far ahead.
Nevertheless, the criteria derivations were when accessible sent to the developers
(or with Kabbalah and Vedic mysticism, the representatives) of all available authors.
The results strongly motivate for the powerful breadth of TDVP as a TOE and a
paradigm shift: Remarkably TDVP scores a full (16+11+12=39) or 39/39. This would
be required for a real TOE because it cannot afford exceptions.

Applying universal constructs

We also used a post-hoc empirical approach. If certain criteria occur commonly in
several TOEs these are regarded as basic criteria to this kind of TOE. These criteria
could be argued to be somewhat universal for major TOEs and the “Specific” and
“Special” columns developed gradually out of necessity and feedback.
Given that we list 24 different TOEs, arbitrarily it is useful to require at least 7 in a
criterion to be regarded as common (8 was the lowest figure in Table 5 in the General
group and 12 of 16 included criteria involving 10 or more TOEs). These are reflected
under categories. Of those criteria scoring below 7 across the 24 different models,
some should, prima facie. be regarded as required criteria, for example, paradigms.
One could critique a TOE that does not have theorems so theorems are so regarded as
well. We believe measures pertaining to distinctions, e.g., perceptual versus actual
versus conceptual are important and we’ve been liberal in scoring theories that just
recognize different kinds of perceptual realities as opposed to the real but is
nevertheless, special to our model in its full form so we are scoring it as amongst the
almost unique. We have created a subtotal table (=) to score these common ones. The
TDVP model has unique elements and the object is to fit the laws of nature not
linguistic or theoretical debates of what is universal. If it were all there, there would
have been a universal TOE already. The fact is there was not. That was because certain
criteria which are universal may not have been incorporated, e.g., all of
“consciousness”, dimensions, infinity, ordropy (already our models and their
precedents become the only models that have this). Add in origin, tethering and life
and this becomes unique though they must obey the laws of nature (which may involve
recognized universal criteria). TDVP has been borne out of necessity based on the
empirical needs and confirmed mathematically.

Specific criteria; the example of the triadic element

We debated whether the triadic element should be in the more fundamental scoring,
but it involves a certain unique idea. TDVP and our earlier models (in less developed
form) and Kabbalah all specifically look at the triad of space-time and consciousness
as a unity. Other models such as Hoffman, uses mass-energy-consciousness /
information, and this is also Spinoza type thinking. Note that this triad is only well
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 311

 
defined in TDVP and Kabbalic mysticism; in the others it is vague only. However, a
recognition of “consciousness” as relevant to time/space or mass/energy is quite
common and occurs in 11 of 24 models.

Universality of certain results

In our initial, prima facie, examination of TOEs, we speculated that certain criteria
would be somewhat idiosyncratic and not applicable to the general scoring criteria.
These were: Meaningful Reality of some kind (g), Origin at source (O),
multidimensional time (T), Ordropy (x). Yet these items all scored respectively. (∆
reflects the commonality of ≥10). This suggests some universality to proposing these
concepts.
Sometimes determinations for the comparisons were neither clear to us, nor our
referees. To ensure feedback opportunities, this table was sent to 14 of the 24 authors
(or consultants, including the context of the mystical TOEs) of this model and they did
not modify any criterion, either in their own theory or that of someone else.
When uncertain, we inserted a question mark (?) (but still scored it as 0). This is
often because the items are somewhere in between or may claim something in part or
show minimal elements or alternatively, we have not been able to establish that the
criterion is fulfilled or in the case of esoteric mystical models, were not well clarified.
It is certainly possible that we are missing a √ despite our best efforts or that a score
could be debated, e.g., a? to - or to √. But referees have not raised these issues either.
Also, checkmarks or positive scores (√) do not reflect quality, e.g., Indivension is a far
more sophisticated concept than field for process; even more so, a string of
mathematical formulae as in TDVP may have been scored the same here as just the
mathematical mention of something, when in fact, there are over fifty mathematical
formulae in TDVP and a metric of quantization of information would further
demonstrate differences. The TOE that had the most “?” was Kaballic Mysticism (11),
not surprising because of its close similarities to TDVP, though beginning at the
mystical and being short on the sciences.

Applying Table 5
But Table 5 still gives a reasonable index for comparison. TDVP as expected scores
a maximum. In fact, at this point, the only TOE it competes against is making itself
better.
However, it is somewhat tautological because the criteria we have deemed important
may not be the criteria that others deem important, and models such as those of
Sheldrake and Watson, are very exciting and directed towards a level of completeness
that none others besides TDVP competes with: But they have their own special
qualities.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 312

 
The most complete TOE by a landslide
There is a great difference between even the second placed older VNDP of Neppe6
and similarly that of Close’s Transcendental Physics (TP)8 in that tethering and
indivension were not delineated. Neppe’s VNDP contained the key concepts of
fluctuating dimensional extension values in individual-units, and communication
across dimensions and essence so may be argued to be a paradigm shift without the
mathematics; Close’s contained the calculus of distinctions and some theorems and
proofs (these have been amplified).
At their best, these factors limited these models, and the profound paradigm shift in
TDVP in all the sciences and also covering mathematics and philosophy, makes it
qualitatively profoundly superior to even the original models of Neppe’s VNDP and
Close’s TP.

Using a level playing field

Moreover, even eliminating the nine idiosyncratic or unique components in the
TDVP model—and there is no reason to do so as those distinguish TDVP and its
uniqueness—the order does not change. This supports the postulate of TDVP’s
overwhelming superiority when applying quantitative criteria. This is so even when
only using logical universally derived criteria and without applying any criteria that
may be perceived as contrived or advantageous for TDVP as a TOE. Therefore, when
referring to TOEs with either “consciousness” or “dimensions”, TDVP is far superior
qualitatively to any other model. In any event, no reader or peer reviewer has criticized
the unique criteria for TDVP and therefore these appear appropriate, anyway. Scoring
12/12 on “Special” with no other model (besides our own—Neppe’s VNDP) scoring
more than 2/12 demonstrates the uniqueness of the TDVP model even more.
We’re using the term “TOE” in its general usage: We prefer the terms “paradigm”,
“metaparadigm” and with major multidisciplinary changes in thinking, “paradigm
shift”.

Understanding the data

The object of this tabulation exercise is to provide key features common to many
and see where the TOE models differ, to understand the limitations of models, and to
amplify their strengths. Our models began with our preceding ideas involving VNDP
and TP. They were very useful initial models, but incomplete and these tables
demonstrate that.

Requirements of a real TOE and metaparadigm

The baseline, which is the current Standard Scientific Materialistic Reductionist
paradigm, scores 13th of the 24. It reflects a reality that is explained maybe 99.9% of
the time, has mathematics, language and theorems, but does not accept dimensionality
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 313

 
or psychology, nor does it explain physiology as part of the key model. On the other
hand, a real TOE should fit all the criteria that are necessary for it to explain
phenomena. With respect, based on our experiences where more than two hundred
readers prior to publication received this, and the daily feedback we received, and
applying the above tabulations and criteria, it appears that TDVP is a very solid model.
If there were universal criteria that would be useful which is why TDVP is separated
into several sections.
Although it scores maximum even in the General Section of 16 criteria, there are
several TOEs that score close to that. These may suggest the direction of thinking is
similar. However, it is the TDVP’s specific, but still common components, which
already far outstrip any other model, and furthermore, the unique elements that follow
still fitting the laws of nature, that make it a practical paradigm shift. It is the not
linguistic or theoretical debates of what is universal (as in, for example, Langan’s
ideas). If a TOE already had all these details, then there would already have been a
universal TOE. The fact is there was not. That was because all the universal criteria
needed incorporation, e.g., all of “consciousness”, dimensions, infinity and ordropy
(already our models and their precedents become the only models that have this).
However, in addition, concepts that are not in many TOEs appear key, such as initial
origin, tethering and life. Because together these are unique, we use an added criterion
that they must obey the laws of nature.

Does it work?
The criteria we’ve deemed important may not be the criteria that others deem
important, but the endpoint is “does it work?” TDVP appears to work. It scores a full
39/39 when applying all the general, specific and special or unique criteria that
reviewers and ourselves deemed necessary for a TOE. No other TOE besides our
models, scored into the 20s out of 39. Even if the scoring can be criticized, TDVP is so
far ahead of any other TOE that it is a front-runner to be used as a standard for the
future. This is particularly so as the previous models on which it was based, rather
expectedly, are second and third.

The uniqueness of TDVP

We briefly emphasize the more subtle but significant differences apparently unique
to TDVP. This allows a perspective on not only the quantitative ordinal comparisons
here, but also the profound qualitative difference between TDVP and all the other TOE
models:
• tethering of STC or of reality: This is the major theoretical advance in TDVP
because it allows an ease of explanation of information that is unparalleled; this
requires a specific triadic pattern from the origin of finite reality and pervading
the infinite;
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 314

 
 • fluctuating dimensions in different individual-units (traits reflecting differences
between individuals or groups etc.) or even the same individual-unit under
different circumstances (states); these allow dimensional jumps by individuals
or individual-units and allow for differences between individual-units. We are
not dealing with a fixed 10, 11, 26 or 9 dimensional reality as in various String
Theories—the metadimensionality in TDVP emphasizes extra time, and
particularly, C-substrate dimensions, not space.
• communication across dimensions and conceptualization of these into domains
(multiple dimensions conceptualized together). This allows for the interactions,
transmission and reception of metainformation and metaconsciousness across
individual-units, and across time and space; and this is done via Vortical
Indivension, as a meta-conceptual idea, higher, for example, than Subquantal or
Field Theory models.
• application of perceptual, conceptual and experiential actualized distinctions
defining and applying the latest more complete form of Close’s Calculus of
Distinctions to our TDVP model: This allows C-substrate to be defined ordinally
as dimensions194. COD is contained in Close’s TP in an earlier developmental
form;
• the conceptualization of life potential as always existing and physical life in
finite reality occurring when the correct physiology exists: This reverses the
concept of the beginning of physical life requiring something extra to be added
at conception or another point in the life cycle;
• the concept of infinite subreality interacting with and also permeating the finite
subreality as part of the structure of complete reality;
• the concept of a discrete finite versus a continuous infinite reality;
• this infinite element allows for ordropy as multidimensional order (not just the
opposite of a unidimensional entropy);
the reality beginning at its onset in finite reality, with “consciousness” meaning already
tethered to space and time, and yet at an infinite level, a simultaneity of time and an
omnipresence of space, and an all-pervasive content of information transformable into
meaning.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 315

 
Table 5. Comparison of Paradigms for Reality (“TOEs”). General (/16); Specific (/11); Special (/12) (Total /39).
Table 5. General Specific Special
au Ti e m c i p M Q H S π R h B D + P g1 O ¶ © T x q L § n N d 2 a f F ∞ £ µ ¢ 3 † ≠ C j 3 =
id 11 12
CN td √ √ V √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 16 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 39
V
Ne vn √ - V √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 15 - √ √ √ - √ √ - √ √ - 7 √ √ - √ - √ - - - - - √ 5 27
Fc
Cl tp √ √ n √ √ √ √ √ √ √ - - √ √ ? 13 √ √ ? √ √ √ √ √ √ - √ 9 - - - √ - - - - - - - - 1 23
-
Ka sh √ - √ √ √ - √ - √ √ √ √ - √ √ 12 √ √ √ √ √ - - - - - - 5 √ √ - - ? - - ? - - - - 2 19
√
DB io √ √ √ ? √ √ √ √ √ √ √ ? - - - 11 - - √ ? - √ √ √ √ ? √ 6 - - √ - - - √ - - - - - 2 19
Q
KB qf √ √ Q √ √ √ √ √ √ - √ √ - √ - 13 - √ √ √ √ √ - - - √ - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 19
en
Wa te √ - √ ? √ ? √ √ √ √ ? √ - √ ? 11 √ - √ - √ √ √ - - - ? 5 - - - - √ - - - - - - - 1 17
√
TC bt √ √ √ - √ √ √ √ √ √ - ? √ √ - 12 - √ √ - √ √ - - √ ? - 5 - - - - ? - - - ? - ? - 0 17
Fc
Sh fc √ - M - √ √ √ √ - - √ √ ? √ √ 11 - √ √ - √ √ - √ - - 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 16
T
Ca tf √ √ T - √ √ √ √ ? - - - √ √ - 10 - √ ? √ - - - √ - - - 3 - - - - √ - - √ √ - - - 3 16
?
Ve uf √ √ √ √ √ - √ ? ? √ √ √ - ? √ 11 √ √ ? √ √ - - - - - - 4 ? ? - - ? - - - - - - - 0 15
-
Lr bc √ - - √ √ √ √ - √ √ √ √ - - ? 9 √ √ √ - √ - √ - - - - 5 - ? - - - - - - - - - - 0 14
Pc
Sm cd √ - P √ √ - √ √ √ - - - √ √ √ 11 - - - √ - - - - - - - 1 - - - - √ - - √ - - - - 2 14
-
SS ss √ √ √ √ - √ - - √ √ - - - - - 7 - - √ - - √ √ √ √ - - 5 - - √ - - - - - - - - - 1 13
-
Lg ct √ √ - √ √ √ √ - - √ - - - - - 7 √ ? √ - √ √ - - - - √ 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 12
√ 0 1
Ag qa √ ? √ ? √ √ √ √ √ √ √ ? - - ? 10 ? ? ? - - ? - - - ? - - - - - √ - - - - - - - 11
√
Wi ko √ - - √ √ - - - - √ √ - - - √ 7 √ √ √ - √ - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 11
-
Ho cr - √ ? - √ √ √ - √ - ? √ - - - 6 √ ? - √ - - - - - - √ 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 9
af
Ll ak √ - A ? √ ? √ √ - √ √ ? - - ? 7 √ √ - ? - - - - - - - 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 9
-
Sir ch - √ √ √ √ √ - - - √ - - √ - - 7 - - - √ - - - √ - - - 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 9
V
Ev ap √ √ V - √ √ - √ √ - - - - - - 8 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 8
√
Ha mi √ √ - √ - √ - √ - - - - √ - 7 - - - √ - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 8
-
Str mt √ √ √ - - √ - √ - - - - √ - - 6 - - - √ - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 7
-
Go no ? - - - - - - - √ √ √ - - - - 3 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 3
au Ti e m c i p M Q H S π R h B D + P g1 O ¶ © T x q L § n N d 2 a f F ∞ £ µ ¢ 3 † ≠ C j 3 =
4 2 12
= ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ 9 9 9 8 16 ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆ 7 6 6 4 5 11 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 39

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 316

 
Legend
_________
General criteria (16 items)
These are scored as a general subscore (G1) reflecting the most usual criteria for TOEs.
These may involve specific hypotheses but common across several TOEs (≥9 instances) so
included in the broader TOE scoring. One exception was =8, psychological but was
found, post hoc.(∆ = in 10 or more categories) “?” reflects insufficient classification to
ensure it fulfills the required criteria, - is when it does not and √ when it does.

e = Regarded as a theory of everything (generally by the author or by others)

m = Mathematics is significantly a core part of the model, not just en passant.
c = Content, e.g., vortices (V), subquantal (Q), non-quantum receptor (NQ), morphogenetic
fields/ formative causation (M), transcendental fields (T), phenomenal spaces (P), Akashic
field (A). or (Af)
i == Infinity (this involves either continuous or countable infinity as a principal concept)
p = Process to communicate: ID = Indivension or equivalent (cross dimensions,
biopsychofamiliosociocultural), FC Formative causation, phenomenal consciousness (PC).
M = Consciousness/ Mind/ Information
Q = Quantum level
H = Human level
S == Structure, e.g., Vortices, fields etc.
π = thinking; philosophical translation defined to mind-body model
R = Meaningful reality of some kind
h = history of core mystical concept over millennia
B = Life Sciences, biology (principal concept)
D = Dimensions beyond 3S-1T
+ = 3 elements: Space / Time (or Mass-energy)/ Consciousness (or Information)
P = Psychology and social sciences (principal concept)
__________

Specific: Special qualities common to several TOEs including TDVP (and so excluded from
the TOE broader scoring; second subscore (S2) reflects 11 items)
The following additional 11 criteria are special to some TOEs and were developed, in part,
during referee feedback. This has been called “Specific Hypotheses” as they’re specific
to many models. Nevertheless, they so pervade several TOEs, that they’re included in
the broader TOE scoring. (6 items have ≥10 instances; and all items show at least 4
TOEs with that concept).

Some could have been defined under general because ≥9 TOEs showed the criterion, but this
differentiation was post hoc. The “Specific” header still reflects fundamental and broad
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 317
 criteria because so many theories still list this. (∆ = in 10 or more categories).

O = Origin at source /beginning/ Origin Event/ around the big bang or before or infinite.
¶ = Evolution as an important part.
©=Paradigm — more than a Theory of Everything this causes logical change in model in that
area if accepted. (if applied, this results in a logical change in models in that discipline.)
T = multidimensional time
x = ordropy
q = uniqueness
L= Linguistic (the development of necessary new terms as a core part of the model)
§= Theorems/proofs (mathematical; demonstrable)
n new Generation of 100s of ideas/ postulates demonstrated
N = explanation of consciousness mechanisms within neurophysiology (principal concept)
d= distinctions (minimum: perceptual and actual or conceptual; not necessarily CoD)
____________

Special criteria based on feedback (= 12 items)

These criteria reflect pertinent elements but which were not initially shared by more than three
theories (with re-evaluation one criterion—infinity—was shared by a fourth. With the gradual
development of TDVP, further coherent, consistent, feasible, and logical elements required
comparison.

a = across dimensions (being able to communicate across metadimensions); this includes

indivension, which is a specific case of communication and interfacing points or vortices
across dimensions
f = fluctuating dimensions (states of consciousness; variation across individual-units)
F = feasibility measure
∞ = Infinity-finite interaction
£ = Consciousness qualities (specifically taken into account in model as dimensions)
µ = Metaparadigm: overriding paradigm impacting the major disciplines of science:
consciousness, life, physical, psychological sciences
3 == STC tethering (a fundamental and inseparable component of space-time-C-substrate
being unified, and yet being able to extend separately in their own dimensional
expression).
¢ = Continuous- discrete as fundamental part of model
† triadic patterning (specific e.g. tethering)
≠ =Interval and ordinal metric data (allowing CoD of consciousness)
C dimensions of consciousness
j dimensional jumps
____________
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 318
g1 = total general
s2 = total specific
S3 = total special
= = grand total

Au = Author, Ti = Title of theory of everything or equivalent

Models:
These 24 models are summarized in their key forms, alphabetically, as follows:
David Bohm (db): Implicate-Explicate Order (IEO). 1980. 140
Thomas Campbell (tc): “My Big TOE” (MBT) (bt). 2007. 355
Bernard Carr. (CA) Transcendental Field Theory (TFT) (tf). 2008. 345
Edward R. Close (Cl): Transcendental Physics (TP). Starting in 1985, parts published in Infinite
Continuity 1989 and in Transcendental Physics 1999 and 2000. 8
Alfred Evert (Ev): Typology of Aether-Motion-Pattern (ap) (AMP) 311
Amit Goswami (AG) Quantum Activism (QA). 2006. 356
Steven Jay Gould (go) Nonoverlapping Magisteria (NOMA); 2001 186
Stephen Hawking (Ha): Many World interpretation (mi). 2010. Variants from 1996(357; 358).
Don Hoffmann (ho): CR, Conscious Realism, 2006. -2008 359
Kabbalic mystical model (Ka) ancient reflecting Judaic tradition particularly Sefer Yitzirah. 154
Adrian Klein /Neil Boyd (kb): Quantum Field theory subquantum integration approach. 2010. 71
Chris Langan (Lg): CTMU Cognitive theoretic model of the universe. 1998. 360
Robert Lanza (Lr): Biocentrism (BC) 2004. 347
Ervin Laszlo (Ll): The Akashic Field TOE (AK) 2009. 348
Vernon M Neppe / Edward R. Close (cn): Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm
(TDVP)
Vernon M Neppe (Ne): Vortex N-Dimensional Paradigm (VNDP /VND). (1989, presented
1996).
Rupert Sheldrake (Sh): The theory of formative causation. (FC) 1981. 27
Saul-Paul Sirag (Sir): Consciousness and Hyperspace. 1993. (HS) 300
John Smythies (cd): (Consciousness) Material Dualism. Modified considerably from 1956. 361
Standard Materialistic Reductionistic Scientific Model (SS) 2012.
String Theory (Str): Numerous individuals; including MT; 1984 Green and Schwarz used; M
theory in 1998 as date but many others.
Vedic mystical model (Ve): no official name, but “unified field” ancient reflecting Eastern
religious tradition
Ken Wilber (wi): Kosmos TOE. 1995. 30; 362
Don Watson (wa): enformy; TES; Theory of Enformed Systems, 1998 to 2005 (en = enformy)
2005 363

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 319
 These comparisons largely speak for themselves. We have compared these twenty-four
major models, namely, those of Bohm, Campbell, Carr, Evert, Gould, Goswami, Hawking,
Hoffman, Kabballic mysticism, Klein and Boyd, Laszlo, Lanza, Langan, Sheldrake, Sirag,
Smythies, Standard Scientific Model, String theorists, Vedic tradition, Watson, Wilber, and
previous models by Neppe and Close. We also later comment on De La Sierra and Leibniz.

These criteria are all demonstrable in Table 5. However, they reflect only the qualitative
differences. Quantitatively, the difference may be far greater, for example, the fifty theorems
and the several hundreds of ideas generated by the TDVP model. Effectively, this means that
the difference is far more vast than just the presence or absence criterion for a particular
criterion: Quantitative measures reveal even more profound differences.

These reflect qualitative comparisons of TOEs based on 39 carefully chosen characteristics,

chosen for relevance and different broad screening parameters. These were added to once our
initial paper was sent to referees, so that although necessarily retrospective, because the TOEs
already existed, they do incorporate a consensus of criteria. TDVP as expected scores a
maximum. In fact, at this point, the only TOE it competes against is making itself better.
However, it is somewhat tautological because the criteria we have deemed important may not
be the criteria that others deem important. Nevertheless, the criteria derivation were sent to the
developers (or with Kabbalah and Vedic mysticism, the representatives) of all available authors.
TDVP, as expected for a real TOE, scores a full 39/39. This would be required because to be
an all-embracing TOE once cannot afford exceptions.

Not surprisingly, the older models on which TDVP were based easily come in second and
third scoring highly at Neppe’s Vortex N-Dimensionalism (15+7+5) or 27/39, and Close’s
Transcendental Physics (13+9+1) or 23/39. However, both of these models leave out key
features making the combination TDVP profoundly more powerful. For example, tethering, at
origin, fluctuating dimensions and triadic relevance were major breakthroughs in TDVP. Vortex
N-dimensionalism (VND) particularly—Neppe’s earlier model—could be criticized because it
did not have demonstrable mathematics and theorems, and ignores the calculus of distinctions.
Close’s earlier Transcendental Physics (TP) model needed to impact the biological and social
sciences and needed mechanisms across dimensions. And both VND and TP needed to have
specific hypotheses to empirically validate and mathematically prove.

In TDVP, we approach this problem in some detail in this book and in its sequel (Space,
Time and Consciousness). However, radical though logical new ideas are difficult to
demonstrate: Einstein’s relativity involved ideas where technology had to catch up: We had to
wait until the science could handle the theories. However, with TDVP, even technological
advances may be insufficient: Until such time as recognition of feasibility in 3S-1t becomes a
key and appropriate scientific method in approaching metadimensionality, C-substrate and the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 320
infinite, TDVP may languish scientifically. Objectively, TDVP may be decades ahead of
conventional thinking in this regard, and it requires a new legitimate Philosophy of Science
approach to data: Lower dimensional feasibility, absent falsification (LFAF) is the key.

In this regard, it is interesting that models that are not scientific but mystical and have
endured for millennia have scored so well. For example, Kabbalic Mysticism scored 19/39
(12+5+2 with 11?) the highest besides TDVP, VND and TP. Moreover, Vedic Mysticism
scored 5/39 (11+4+0) —it might actually score higher than that, though even with less stringent
scoring it should not score higher than Kabbalah because the fundamental bases of Vedic
thinking are different— consciousness is interpreted differently and it is not triadic.

However, in both Kabbalic and in Vedic thinking, it is difficult clarifying many areas as there
are ambiguities in the philosophical interpretations and great linguistic differences. It is difficult
scoring philosophical ideas and metaphor. These models are also particularly difficult to score
because of the limitations of their scientific validation, and their origins being esoteric mystical
not scientific. This is why Kabbalic Mysticism has been scored with so many question marks
(?) —the information is simply not validated or clearly developed. In esoteric sources, you find,
for example, references to vortices, and though one does not interpret dimensions as TDVP
does, there are the ten Sefirot (of consciousness), and there is even an interpretation of what
could be called tethering, and implications of infinite time. But in TDVP, our criteria began as
scientific conceptualizations with lack of ambiguity.

The mystical models are also in evolution e.g., in Vedic mysticism, it appears the mathematics
was worked out much later. We have not yet analyzed Sufic or Tantric or Sankhya philosophy,
but the closest mystical model to TDVP (with its unification of the STC triad) appears to
Kabbalah, so these should score <19/39.364-369

In Table 5, we compare the several remarkable TOEs which contain outstanding original ideas:

• Klein and Boyd’s Subquantal and Quantal field model, which is the highest scoring of all the
TOEs other than the TDVP and previous Neppe and Close models and Kabbalic mysticism.
This model has enormous potential but was not developed yet in its finer points and most
closely resembles TDVP in its broadest perspective. It scores a very creditable (13+6+0) or
19/39.
• Watson’s TES (11+5+1) or 17/39 is very different, and
• Sheldrake’s Morphogenetic Fields (11+5+0) or 16/39 is possibly the most known model, but
not developed as a TOE although still scoring remarkably.
• Carr’s Transcendental Field Theory (10+3+3=16/39) partly closely resembles TDVP
• The lengthy model of Campbell at 12+5+0=17 or 17/39 has attracted some interest.
• Lanza’s Biocentrism (9+5+0) or 14/39 is highly relevant,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 321
• Smythies Material Dualism (11+1+2) or 14/39 combines neurophysiology and dimensions.
• Langan’s CTMU (7+5) at 12/39 (which some perceive as the most esoteric of the TOEs but
one that is not really a TOE relating to consciousness itself).
• Goswami (10+0+1) and Wilbur (10+1+0) follow at 11/39.
• Not far behind and also exciting models, in themselves, are those of Hoffman and Laszlo’s
Akashic Fields (9/39) and
• Sirag’s model of the same score (9/39) has great qualities, despite not even being a TOE.

These results, however, essentially and strongly motivate for the powerful breadth of TDVP
as a TOE and a paradigm shift. These qualitative results for TDVP are even more dramatic
when looked at quantitatively in the TDVP context. For example, there are fifty different
mathematical theorems in TDVP, yet this is the only scientific TOE that utilizes theorems
(other than Carr who mentions theorems en passant).

Moreover, the fifty new definitions and concepts in TDVP were not even qualitatively
measured. Other TOEs have, at most, a few new concepts yet TDVP generates nearly six
hundred new ideas, some solid, some empirically based, some mathematical and logical, some
speculative but with many being testable, either now or some time in the future.

The most unique aspects of TDVP is the tethering, yet allowing independence of S, T and C
substrates, the fluctuating dimensions, applications of the calculus of distinctions and a
workable new philosophical model called “unified monism”.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 322
CHAPTER 42: CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE EARLIER CLOSE AND NEPPE THEORIES
OF EVERYTHING AND RELATED MODELS 370

“Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot
understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices, but honestly
and courageously uses his intelligence and fulfills the duty to express the results of his thought
in clear form.”
Albert Einstein 371

These models are compared in some detail. We begin first with the current TDVP and the
earlier Neppe and Close models. We then follow with detailed key information comparing the
most similar Theories of Everything or Related Models.

The choice of these models has been based on our knowledge of the TOE area.
If we missing any that are relevant here, we have done this inadvertently.

Current Close and Neppe (Neppe and Close): Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP)
This has already been discussed in detail.
TDVP is far the most comprehensive “Theory of Everything“ that we know of.
It has been preceded by many other TOEs individually that have similar ideas.

However, it is also unique in certain areas.

Indivension is an overriding concept as is the Calculus of Distinctions.
This has allowed mathematicologic metrics and allows all postulated tests for any “field”
theories, such as Sheldrake’s, and also Subquantal ideas (such as Klein’s) to also apply to
TDVP.
Table 5 indicates how it is complete in every major comparative category.

Additionally, TDVP also has the most precise definitions, we believe, of C-substrate
(consciousness) and dimensionality and introduces Indivension.
It, also, is the first TOE to explain Life and for this reason alone the others fail as TOEs.
This is why TDVP involves a paradigm shift because it changes all of reality perception: It is
truly groundbreaking, in that regard and fully warrants being regarded as the first metaparadigm
amongst the TOEs: It impacts all scientific endeavor—the physical, biological, consciousness
and
TDVP was not derived from any of these models. It was derived from first principles, and as an
offshoot of the models of Close as exemplified in Transcendental Physics and of Neppe as
originally in his Vortex Pluralism, which he then perceived as an all encompassing monistic
paradigm and renamed it the Vortex N-Dimensional Paradigm (VNDP). However, we
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 323
acknowledge particularly the genius of Saul-Paul Sirag, and a discussion specifically on
complex hyperspace and spinors that VN had with him circa 2007.

Neppe: Vortex N-Dimensional Paradigm (VNDP)

This information is derived from the two key papers by Neppe on Vortices. VNDP derives from
a model developed in 1989, and presented publicly first in 1996.
We have abstracted the major features. Neppe’s Vortex N-Dimensionalism Paradigm (VNDP)
has now been eclipsed by TDVP of Neppe and Close. However, many of the ideas are similar.
The major difference is though much on vortices as described reflects Indivension, the full
mechanism was not yet developed.
Additionally, VNDP did not have STC tethering per se, a mechanism for life, and did not have
any of the mathematics and theorems.

In VNDP, Neppe proposes a radical, new paradigmatic shift from the current numerous mind-
body theories to the Vortex N-Dimensionalism Paradigm (VNDP). This was previously called
Vortex Pluralism (VP) but VND is a misnomer because the VND paradigm essentially is not
pluralistic but reflects an all-encompassing N-Dimensional monism, of which the mind and
body dilemma is but one component. The VNDP reflects part of a grand universal design and
this model obeys the laws of nature.
VNDP has two essential components, namely, N-Dimensionalism and the fundamental role of
vortices.

N-Dimensionalism may involve three fundamental elements:

1. N-Dimensional space tending towards infinity, but not necessarily like the infinity of Hilbert
space. This may be modeled on a gradual process of diminishing “density / mass” in infinite
dimensional vortices impacting, impinging, repelling and intruding at and through specific
vectors or points, which can be partly conceived of using an imaginary observer. Simplistically,
the paradigm of an infinite number of variably shaped and moving vortices allows the subject to
experience their reality at specific defined points in an N dimensional universe.
2. Time in our usually experienced universe is one point in time. There is no reason why time
should not be all encompassing as well and N-Dimensional as opposed to linear (future to past).
3. Essence is the third necessary component though the most difficult to describe. There may or
may not be “energetic” elements but not limited to or different from the energies generated by
space and time. There may be informational and communication elements that cannot be
directly translated into space and time. And these may reflect a “conscious” awareness,
responsiveness and integrated understanding. There may be linguistic elements. All of these
combine into an essence of being possibly reflected in life or existence and reflecting a
“conscious” kind of reality. This “essence” may be an inessential part of the model because it is
not easily portrayed and it may not be an essence, per se. However, awareness, responsive and
interaction of this consciousness may be more essential.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 324
Superficially such space time elements can be perceived as non-local but the non-locality is
relative only, to the absence of experience of higher dimensions (in the sense that 6>5>4.>3 so
6 dimensions is higher than 3).

Vortices appear fundamental to nature and every area of scientific endeavor. Vortices can be
regarded as circular or ovoid movement including zero (or absence) of movement. Vortices are
hypothesized to occur not only within recognized dimensional frameworks, e.g., our 3
dimensions of space and 1 point in time but across dimensions allowing communications
between N-Dimensions of space and time. It is possible that vortices may be part of the
“Essence“ above involving Life, Information, Communication and Energy (LICE).

Numerous sub-hypotheses logically follow or may at least be postulated from the paradigm but
are not essential to VNDP's validity. Consequently, their disproof or invalidation of any such
hypothesis does not disprove the VNDP.

This model of VND should be evaluated using current knowledge from every known model of
reality ranging from the natural scientific models ranging of conventional quantum physics, to
string theory to vortex atomic theory to mathematics including rare-event theory, and
holograms and calculus, to other physical sciences such as astronomy, chemistry and
meteorology, to the social sciences including psychology, the unconscious, anthropology and,
sociology, to the medical life sciences including genetics, and biology, physiology and
anatomy. However, three major disciplines deal with extra dimensions and possibly with shapes
or energies outside our earthly realm: Parapsychology, Theology and Philosophy. The last is
discussed in these papers; the first two are subjects for later papers.

The difficulties of proof of information are raised. Mathematical and cosmological models of
non-falsifiability exist. Some of this is not falsifiable because we can only use 3S-1t to do so
and N- dimensionality makes it impossible. VNDP impacts on both the infinite and finite with
existence having ultimately an infinite number of dimensions.

In developing the VNDP model, Neppe utilizes another approach: He demonstrates the
fundamental ubiquity of vortices in nature in numerous different sciences. Therefore, the
feasibility that the vortex shape is shown and no data contradicting it is demonstrable. In its
broadest form, the vortex shape range from spheres to profound elongation of the three
dimensional into almost a linear appearance. Its basic components of curvature are sometimes
symmetrical, sometimes asymmetrical; sometimes circular, sometimes elliptical or an arc or
portion of a warped reality; the vortex may be expanding or contracting or remain the same
homogeneous size like a helix. The other essential property of the vortex is movement,
however, the movement can include real positive and negative and imaginary and complex
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 325
numbers, as well as zero. And when perceived in multiple dimensions, an observer can perceive
zero velocity in one dimension but not another.

There appears to be support from the various disciplines: Amongst these are two theories in the
Physics/ mathematics domain that particularly support facets of this theory, namely, Rare-event
theory and Atomic Vortex Theory. The concepts and body of knowledge of Parapsychology are
tenable. Theological frameworks such as Kabbalic mysticism are applicable. Psychological
models of extended consciousness fit potentially fit this framework.
Furthermore, this model of Vortex Pluralism appears tenable in other areas as well using other
natural scientific models ranging from conventional quantum physics, string theory and
relativity, to astronomy, chemistry, meteorology, anthropology, theology and biology, genetics,
physiology and pharmacology, and anatomy. VNDP may be the first paradigm to unify all areas
of science and philosophy. However, in the original VNDP, Neppe realizes it would be
extremely difficult to find formal scientific tests to test this hypothesis. This is what we have
done in TDVP.

Close: Transcendental Physics

Close’s Transcendental Physics grew out of the conviction that consciousness had to be
introduced into the equations of modern physics. The basis for this was contained in Dr. Close’s
earlier work Infinite Continuity, published in 1989. Using the calculus of distinctions, adapted
from George Spencer Brown’s Laws of Form and the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum
mechanics, Close’s paper the Case for the Non-Quantum Receptor, presented at Tucson II,
Toward a Science of Consciousness in 1996 became the basis for a mathematical proof by
infinite descent of the necessity of a non-quantum receptor both in human consciousness and in
the emergence of matter from the big bang, This proof was published in the book
Transcendental Physics, in 1997.

Transcendental Physics was written for the informed layperson with most of the mathematics
presented in appendices at the back of the book. Much of the book is historical narrative, tracing
the development of the ideas of Einstein, Bohr, Schrödinger and Heisenberg and the conflict
between the determinism of relativity and the basic probabilism of quantum theory. By focusing
on: the importance of the observer in both relativity and quantum physics, the book reveals the
indicators of a new paradigm. The aim of the author was to raise the public awareness of the
emergence of a new paradigm; one that brings consciousness and deep spirituality back into
science and restores a sound metaphysical basis for all scientific inquiry.

Concepts coming out of Transcendental Physics were seen to align perfectly with Dr. Neppe’s
Vortex N-Dimensional Paradigm (VNDP). And new concepts, including mathematical and
geometrical theorems, demonstrations and proofs were motivated. The two theories were
complementary; and the combination of the two is greater than the sum of their contents.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 326
CHAPTER 43: CONTRIBUTIONS OF PREVIOUS THEORIES OF EVERYTHING OR
RELATED MODELS: KEY THEORISTS AND COMPARISONS WITH TDVP. 353; 372
“Anybody who has been seriously engaged is scientific work of any kind realizes that over the
entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.' It is a
quality which the scientist cannot dispense with.”
Max Planck

Sheldrake’s Formative Causation

Dr. Rupert Sheldrake’s model 27 has not formally been perceived as a TOE. But it is a brilliant
compilation of information working into a viable model to the extent that the New Scientist
journal held a competition in 1983 for a model to test this theory and one of the winners was
Neppe, who also devoted a full journal that he edited to Sheldrake’s work. This is why we
include it here.

Sheldrake postulates "Morphic (Morphogenetic) fields" within and around a morphic unit,
which is organizes into as characteristic structure and pattern of activity. This morphic field
underlies the formation and behavior of morphic units, and can be set up by the repetition of
similar acts or thoughts. A particular form will tune in via morphic resonance, into its already
established specific morphic field and use the collective information through the process of
morphic resonance. There is psychological archetype support from Carl Jung and using Vedic
akashic records. Memory-traces are related and "non-local" in time and space.
Morphic fields are the universal database for both organic (living) and abstract (mental) forms.
Ultimately, the morphic fields stabilize. Morphogenetic fields contain the information necessary
to shape the exact form of a living thing and may also shape its behavior and coordination with
other beings.

Sheldrake's is an example of what is currently (incorrectly in our opinion) regarded as

unfalsifiable because, using a process akin to LFAF, it is testable. He proposes that the process
of morphic resonance leads to stable morphic fields, which are significantly easier to tune into.
In this way, simpler organic forms self-organize into more complex This model allows a
different explanation for the process of evolution itself, as an addition to Darwin's evolutionary
processes of selection and variation. 27; 236; 373.

Sheldrake’s formative causation implies that as one learns certain patterns they become easier.
This appears initially contradicted by the decline effect we see in parapsychology,
consciousness, and psychological research. However, one must take into account the whole
picture. The whole picture relates to boredom, frustration, no feedback, people not being as
enthusiastic. In other words, the whole methodology of the experiment has changed.
Consequently, although one sees a broader decline effect, it does not mean to say that this rules
out formative causation where like a radio receiver one is tuning into a new event and one can
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 327
more and more easily tune into a new event.

Applying formative causation to TDVP, vortices impact at certain points via indivension of
individual-units. This impacting could be attuned to being like a radio receiver, imprinting
itself. We can understand this impact because of the natural asymmetry in metadimensionality.
This in and of itself limits the aspects of formative causation potentially because one would
expect identical imprints and here one is seeing asymmetry. However, again one must look at
the data in relation to formative causation. We are not dealing with a 100% model, not like
speech communication. Instead, we are still dealing with statistically relevant rare events,
although not as rare as psi because hypothetically this may involve a higher dimensionality. The
higher realities, therefore, will have a broader influence on lower dimensions, such as 3S-1t,
although to a lesser degree of influence on a specific event.

However, given several of these components of vortices interfacing, certainly formative

causation could be useful. Effectively, indivension intersects across realities and across
dimensions and these fluctuating dimensions are highly relevant. As indicated, they can occur
as a state phenomenon within individuals or individual-units, such as small groups. such as in
dreams or in some kind of mystical state or meditative state. Alternatively, they may persist as a
trait consciousness phenomenon persistent over time at a certain dimension or collection of
dimensions (domain) in metaconsciousness. One hypothetical example has been survival after
bodily death, another example is of a state phenomenon such as a subjective near death
experience of out of body experience.

The content is vortices or maybe morphogenetic fields or some kind of transcendental fields. It
is the content as this is what it contains. It is not a dimensional extent, it is like mass. However,
there is a process that is occurring. The process that we postulate is an advancement on one that
was not worded specifically in relation to vortices, but has been around for many years in
Neppe’s model, and that is Indivension. Indivension also always allows movement across
fluctuating dimensions.

The process that Sheldrake has postulated is formative causation, though asymmetries and
decline effects limit formative causation, which we postulate could only be one of several
possible mechanisms. Therefore, formative causation is not a necessary mechanism for our
model to be true, however, if formative causation is illustrated, it would be a sufficient
illustration to allow our model to be further supported by LFAF.

The TDVP model differs from Sheldrake’s model in that it traces the origin of morphic fields to
the N-Dimensional hierarchy of the C-substrate, and the origin of the C-substrate to the reverse
event horizon of the big bang or any other kind of Origin Event. This explains why the morphic
forms are vortical in nature. It also relates rare events, such as verifiable psi phenomena to the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 328
dynamics of vortical forms and multiple dimensions.

Carr: Transcendental Field Theory

The models of Carr and Smythies below are both based on previous models involving the
earlier suggestions of C.D. Broad 374and H.H. Price158. Dr. Bernard Carr is a prominent
Cambridge mathematician and his 2008 model comes from a basis in cosmology and physics. It
also relies on the thinking of the South African mathematician, mystic and consciousness
researcher, Dr. J.H. Michael Whiteman. Like Smythies’ one, it proposes the links between
consciousness and higher dimensions of space-time.

Carr recognizes that physics regularly undergoes paradigm shifts and a new paradigm must
assign a central role to consciousness as there are indications that this is a fundamental rather
than an incidental feature of the Universe. Carr also emphasizes the ostensible difficulty of fully
reconciling matter and fields: Matter usually refers to solid objects (like bricks) which are made
up of atoms, which themselves comprise fundamental spin-half particles called fermions (e.g.,
quarks and electrons). However, physics also describes the fields through which matter
interacts, these corresponding to integer-spin particles called bosons (e.g., photons, gluons and
gravitons). It also incorporates concepts like the quantum mechanical wave function and higher
dimensions, which are very remote from the ordinary mundane reality of classical physics. Carr
recognizes, like Smythies does, the critical role of any sort of percept, which is not associated
with or derived from the ordinary physical world, and therefore, the difficulties of terms like
“mind” and ‘non-physical ’ in stressing the link with the laws of nature.
His model of ‘Transcendental Field Theory’ links with M-theory, in String Theory and
recognizes the need for a higher-dimensional model that involves fields.

Carr’s ‘Universal Structure’, a higher dimensional reality structure or information space, is the
container of all perceptions or experiences (be they physical or non-physical). This arises in
physics as a natural extension of general relativity, but philosophically with ‘perceptual, ’
‘phenomenal’ or ‘psychic’ space. Carr recognizes the geometrical aspects of this theory and the
limitations (as we do in TDVP) of portraying higher dimensional components into 3 spatial
dimensions, citing Dr. Ian Stevenson. However, similar to our TDVP model, that nexus may be
considerably expanded in a higher dimensional description (e.g., two lines which are
disconnected in a lower-dimensional space may be connected in a higher-dimensional one).
Thus, while one has a distinct identity at the level of t1, one may be connected with other
consciousnesses at the level of t2. From this perspective, telepathy may be the manifestation of
the higher-dimensional connection between two people, and experiences of mystical unity may
reflect some more universal connection. This also links to the notion of survival, since it is
natural to associate survival space with memory space in this picture 375. Carr’s model
amalgamates physical space with various types of mental space.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 329
Dr. Carr’s proposal is similar to that of Smythies, except that it places more emphasis on the
relationship between the phenomenal spaces associated with different consciousnesses. Like
Broad, he argues that physical and phenomenal space must be contained within a single higher-
dimensional space. In Smythies’ model both physical and phenomenal space are real but
intersect in some way.

Similar to TDVP, Carr recognizes the need to allow for non- Riemannian metrics. He interprets
this as possibly some higher-dimensional embedding space — yet the world we experience
remains 4-dimensional. He suggests in Universal Structure of an extended notion of time. A
multi-level time perspective relates to the problem of identity and explains how there can be
many manifestations of a single unitary consciousness. By comparison, this component has
broad similarities to our postulated minimum three time dimensions in TDVP, and also the
concepts of state and trait process of indivension with the content being vortices. Both models
differ from the ‘serial time’ approach of J. W. Dunne 96, who also invoked an extra dimension to
explain the flow of time and used this to explain precognition and applied an infinite regress of
time effectively postulating N dimensions, although TDVP recognizes N-Dimensional domains
which fluctuate individually.
Applying the concept of “embedding” is also relevant to TDVP, dimensions and tethering. Just
as we cannot really separate a two-dimensional domain from the three-dimensional domain in
which it is embedded—we can only separate them conceptually—S, T and C cannot be
separated at their sources. The concept of “tethering” is a conceptual way of expressing the
very real universal connection of S, T and C through dimensional linking, a connection which is
perceptually fragmented by the limitations of the physical senses of conscious individual-units.

In his “Transcendental Field Theory” (TFT), Carr proposes fields more extensive than the usual
physical ones (similar to Zöllner’s ‘transcendental physics’ of 1879).376 Fields are combined
with higher dimensions and quantum effects, and he assumes all interactions can be interpreted
geometrically and TFT should be able to explain the interaction not only of physical objects but
also of hyperphysical (what we are calling “metadimensional”) ones. It is a logical endpoint to
the approaches previously proposed by Marshall, Smythies and Whiteman and Beichler, who
recognized that the existence of the 5th dimension means that the mind necessarily extends
beyond the brain. 70; 330; 377-380 Carr recognizes the relevance of this kind of model implying a true
paradigm shift affecting all of science and culture. We agree.

The TDVP model differs from Carr’s TFT model in that it applies Neppe’s fluctuating ND
vortical interfaces to explain the interaction of consciousness with reality on different
dimensional levels. The TDVP paradigm shift also introduces ordropy as a more comprehensive
term, as well as indivension as a logical basis for the relative and personal nature of individual
conscious entities.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 330
Ultimately, TDVP presents a model that reflects the big picture: The broader top-down
approach to space, time and consciousness. This may, consequently, allow conceptualization of
new priorities—it allows for lateral thinking. For example, one could speculate that the Higgs
Boson, the so-called “God Particle”381, may have a broader relevance than particle physicists
think. Could this or another particle or property be tied into the C-substrate, and more
legitimately linked with some kind of Chronit? Could the search be less for a particle, or a
wave, and more for that third elusive component, not yet characterized but within the C-
substrate?
The inseparability of Time, Space and Consciousness Substrates cries out for such a hypothesis.

TDVP: A metalevel higher than Field Theories.

Essentially, TDVP is a metalevel above TFT or any other Field Theory, including subquantal 71
and morphogenetic fields 27. Most importantly, TDVP’s N-dimensional top-down approach
includes the transfinite and infinity. It, therefore, subsumes field theory, because these “fields”
involve a “content” at lower dimensional levels. Whereas some field theories, such as Carr’s345,
recognize metadimensionality as relevant, most do not invoke extra dimensions, trying to
explain the “fields” within 3S-1t or 3S-1T.

The higher dimensional model is a critical part of TDVP subsuming Field Theories and models
because it is a metalevel higher. This implies that whatever empirical or theoretical data is
demonstrated in these field models, they would, likely, also be applicable to TDVP—for
example, the data already supporting morphogenetic fields, for example, could be applied to
support TDVP, as well. However, the limitations of specific Field Theories might still be
overcome by TDVP, because there might be higher level explanations.
In addition, there are several important secondary reasons for “field theories” to be explained
within the TDVP model:
• TDVP flexibly incorporates into its model any fields involving multiple lower
dimensions because of fluctuating ordinal dimensions in the transfinite.
• Field models do not include infinity. This means that any finite model can be
incorporated into the infinite subreality of TDVP.
• TDVP’s C-substrate allows for a metalevel of consciousness.
• Most field or multidimensional string theory and field models ignore consciousness (the
obvious exceptions are the models of Smythies 378, Carr 345 and Whiteman 268).
• TVDP applies a flexible process (indivension) allowing a content (vortical fluctuations)
within, between and across dimensions. Vortical indivension subsumes fields.
• TDVP allows for a social context (individual units) making it far broader than models
that are based on physical fields alone.
• The subsuming of fields in TDVP is supported by other complex explanations to be
discussed in Space, Time and Consciousness: These could include variable force fields
manifesting, inter alia, as warping of dimensions.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 331
 • Mathematicological demonstrations support TDVP being a metalevel higher and by so
doing incorporating Field Theories:
o Close’s calculus of distinctions allows the ordinal metric for the C-substrate.
o The lower dimensional incorporations are sometimes explained by dimensional
extrapolations to lower levels and the converse increases in metadimensionality.

Smythies: Theory Of Material Dualism

We invited Dr. John Smythies to contribute a short précis of his excellent Material Dualism
theory, which serves as a philosophical model on a basis of clinical neurology and
neuroscience. Smythies’ model (1956 and 1994) precedes Carr’s chronologically and is based
from a clinical neurology and neuroscience perspective. 361, 139å
Smythies’s major aspects are consciousness in the context of topological phenomenal space and
use of a tesseract (effectively an orthogonal 4D cube, not therefore, the curvature of a vortex). It
also involves vectors and connections, and it recognizes psi and individual participation in a
common 3D domain, but conceptualizes, too, the relevance of clusters of N-Dimensional
consciousness models. He recognizes the great thinker, Leibniz and compares Jourdan’s model.
He also recognizes a variant of vortex, however (as in the Ehrenhaft phenomenon, described
above). This offers a method of testing the theory experimentally, and it could also be used for
testing the vortices in TDVP.

We quote from Smythies 382 as follows.

• “Phenomenal consciousness”, contra Descartes, may be observed to have a complex
structure. One part contains entities (or events if time is included) i.e., visual and somatic
sensations—the latter making up the ‘body image’ of neurology—and images, that are
located and extended in phenomenal space. The other part (i.e., auditory, olfactory and
gustatory sensations and images) contains entities that are located, but not extended, in
phenomenal space: plus the unextended Self or ‘Observer’.
• 3D phenomenal space (A) and 3D physical space (B) are different cross-sections of a
higher-dimensional space. The topological model for this is a tesseract, not a cube. The
human organism has a part in B—the physical body—as well as a part in A—the
consciousness module as described in (I). A and B are connected by causal relations
called psi-gamma (afferent) and psi-kappa (efferent). These may be represented by
vectors in 4D. In Smythies’s model the physical body is located in one cube of the
tesseract and the consciousness module, that includes the body-image that we experience,
is located in another cube of the tesseract. The psi vectors run from a point in cube A to a
point in cube B. Psi normally focuses on the brain but has a penumbra that allows for
clairvoyance and telepathy.

We (Neppe and Close, and also Klein) regard the tesseractic (geometric) approach to
metadimensionality as extending Space beyond 3D as contradicting the assumptions both of the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 332
TDVP and Subquantal models. Psi does not require extended space, we posit, but elements
pertaining to Vortical Indivension interfaces and these may reflect Time and C-substrates. 352
Thus, the N-Dimensional material universe has a common 3D domain (currently regarded by
physics as “the” universe), as well as a number of private 3D domains called Higher
Consciousness modules. The relationship between one person’s consciousness module and
another person’s consciousness module remains to be determined.fff

The currently fashionable brain-mind identity hypothesis (IT) (metaphysics masquerading as

science) is impossible because it violates Leibniz’s Law of the Identity of Indiscernibles.
Cartesian Dualism gives an inaccurate account of phenomenal consciousness. Material Dualism
ties up a number of loose ends in the neuroscientific account of consciousness: it is just as
important to give a true account of what the brain does not do, as well as of what it actually
does.
In ordinary perception the Self is aware of its sensations constructed by TV-like representative
mechanisms. For example the eye functions like a TV camera, the brain like the electronic
mechanism used in digital TV, and the visual field in consciousness like the screen of the TV
set. In the NDE state reported by Jourdan the Self leaves body-image, and vision is no longer
constrained to focus on the ordinary visual field. Instead it now can focus directly on the
physical world, now observed from a 5D perspective (including time) (as explained in detail by
Jourdan)383

Klein and Boyd: Subquantum Integration Approach

Klein in Israel and Boyd 71 in the USA have motivated subquantal or other sub-quantum
infinitesimals in non-local space (a database supports this subquantal “emptiness” which may
not be empty or may be dark space). Their new Subquantum Integration Approach demonstrates
how they have very actively researched the literature, and very creatively substantiated their
very complex model based on empirical data that is little known in general but has been
demonstrated nonetheless. Effectively, in their model, the subquantum is assumed to co-
existentially accommodate proto-units for matter, energy and information. Information and
mass are thereby brought onto an equal ontological footing, in the subquantum domains. The
basis of their model is the Nobel winning, Fractional Quantum Hall Effect. This suggests the
further divisibility of the quantum domain, which was previously considered an irreducibly
fundamental component of nature. Drs. Klein and Boyd provide data supporting subquantum
potentials evolving in the “Prime Radiation Substrate“.71 These result in organizing functions
able to interfere with classical local determinacy chains, operating at the quantum levels of
randomness inherent in space-time-like matter configurations, leading to highly complex
representational patterns, linked to their phenomenal correlates in macroscopically detectable

fff
Postulating parallel 3D "consciousness modules" aligned "beside" the fundamental 3S3T leads to a vastly paradoxical, asymmetrical
and inconsistent concept as compared both to TDVP or SQ models. It boils down to a not self-consistent and a not empirically
functional fiction. 352
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 333
systems. Their model has significant experimental evidence.
They recognize Quantum Potential (Quantum Field Theory) as a superluminal Sub Quantum
Information-carrying aether. This allows interaction with matter and physical forces at well
defined Space-time positions effectively producing information content into our observable
world modulating the event potential. 71 They describe matter as an n-degree entanglement state
of SQ complexity. They describe an absolute void with a lack of matter equal to a space-time
sequence resulting in information in its nascent, non-aggregative form (the Sub quantum
plenum). Implicated layers of increasingly subtle pre-quantum domain may be organized in
complete worlds of the kind our current standard physical universe is, but ranging till its own
"absolute void" as a transition state to the next implication level of reality.
The pre-quantum tenets rely upon experimentally testable assessments. Klein and Boyd assert
and upside-down epistemological approach for the primary determinism that Information
structures have upon their physical counterparts. 71

Their views are perfectly consistent both with conventional empirical treatment of space-time
defying representational variables, and their causal primacy upon Quantum implementation
systems of their content, in the integral range of their polyvalent manifestation.
A defined endless time vector allows ab initio existing inherent resonance links in any
subquantal subtlety domain to turn into fluxes and organization effects leading to sequential
entelechial self-contended worlds. These primeval harmonic SQ resonances are the very pattern
of their overarching cosmic harmony, the source of all conceivable manifestation and
interconnectedness. Communication is via subquantal communication
Klein and Boyd have motivated this in their new subquantum integration approach.

Klein, after examining our current TDVP model, points out “the Subquantum Model is a
‘Unified asymmetric monism’, implying Bohm's implicate orders of reality, and thus the
particular ontological essence of Information in its non-tethered variant to the triadic STC
tensor. Consequently, all manifestation (virtual or actual) in the Subquantum Plenum is
originating in the over-arching cosmic harmony contended in a potential form in the pre-
distinctional null-singularity”. 143
The Klein-Boyd model cannot be done justice to here. If it is correct, it could possibly still fit an
additional component of our model of indivension providing a possible field using the smallest
of reality elements.

Evert and his Typology of Aether-Motion-Pattern

Alfred Evert has developed a Typology of Aether-Motion-Pattern311. Evert’s ´ aether has any
kind of ´granules´ assumed to be minimum small ´sub-quantum-particles´. He postulates that all
aether is connected, there are no gaps within and everywhere the medium is likely ´hard´. His
portrayal of the aether closely resembles vortices and so overlaps with TDVP, in that regard.
Wider swinging should exist within that ´resting´ Free Aether. He postulates that the principle
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 334
of intensive movement at the middle is inevitable characteristic of motions within gapless and
partless aether. That motion-pattern is contrary to many motions of our experienced material
world, where, e.g., all wheels are moving most fast at the rim.
He postulates there is only one aether-substance and no second material-substance (like
elementary- or sub-elementary-particles or any kind of substantial matter). Indeed all material,
spiritual and mental appearances exclusively are different motion pattern of aether within the
aether. Above this, nothing solid is wandering through space. Only the characteristic features of
motion-structures are forwarded through the stationary aether (just like ´sound´ wanders
through resting air).
He proposed that particle-less and gap-less aether any motion should be possible. Based on
strong mutual interdependence of synchronous motions, the aether can not move unrestricted
(like, e.g., particles can move within gases or also previous aether-granules could move - if
there would be great distances between). Within the gapless aether however, only a restricted
number of motion-patterns in principle can exist with compelling necessary structure-features,
like upside mentioned as typology of aether-movement pattern.
The high degree of mutual interdependence is the essential reason for limited bend-ability of
the aether.
Whereas the model may be brilliant, it is not easy to fully appreciate and it is difficult for us to
classify in the TOE framework. Much of this is theoretical and because the ideas are very
different from conventional physics, it is difficult at this point to take seriously.
However, his vortical model is well developed and it is interesting to see the ubiquity of the
vortex even in a hypothetical aether.

String Theory and Dimensionalities

String theory involves another multidimensional perspective.
The series of theories is particularly complex, but have in common the theories of
multidimensionalities.
Initially, in the 1920s and 1930s, Polish Theodore Kaluza and Sweden’s Oscar Klein’s theory of
5 and later 4 dimensions existed384; then 26 dimensions were hypothesized, then varying string
theories of 10 dimensions were suggested, then time was added making eleven –M theory385,
and recently with a second time dimension was hypothesized producing a twelfth dimension—
the F-theory of Vafa circa 1997386. String theory supports pluralism although it has not been N-
Dimensional per se.

The fundamental premise of string theory is that the basic objects in nature are not point-like,
but rather string like. This requires all of gauge quantum field theory, supersymmetry and
gravitation to produce a unified theory.
String theory sometimes uses parallels such as musical instruments to make it more
comprehensible. In string theory, elementary particles observed in particle accelerators could be
thought of as the "musical notes" or excitation modes of elementary strings. As in guitar
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 335
playing, the string must be stretched under tension in order to become excited. The strings in
string theory float in space-time, and are not tied down as in a guitar. Nonetheless, they have
tension387.

The string tension in string theory is denoted by the quantity 1/(2 p a'), where a' is equal to the
square of the string length scale. Combining quantum gravity, the average size of a string
should be extremely tiny, near the length scale of quantum gravity— the Planck length, about
10 -33 centimeters. Current or expected particle physics technology is too large to test
hypotheses dealing with objects of such infinitesimally small sizes. 388

Table 6: Perspective of String Theories

(from (http://www.superstringtheory.com/basics/basic5.html)
Type Space-time Details
Dimensions
Bosonic 26 Only bosons, no fermions means only forces, no matter, with both
open and closed strings. Major flaw: a particle with imaginary mass,
called the tachyon
I 10 Supersymmetry between forces and matter, with both open and
closed strings, no tachyon, group symmetry is SO(32)
IIA 10 Supersymmetry between forces and matter, with closed strings only,
no tachyon, massless fermions spin both ways (nonchiral)
IIB 10 Supersymmetry between forces and matter, with closed strings only,
no tachyon, massless fermions only spin one way (chiral)
HO 10 Supersymmetry between forces and matter, with closed strings only,
no tachyon, heterotic, meaning right moving and left moving strings
differ, group symmetry is SO(32)
HE 10 Supersymmetry between forces and matter, with closed strings only,
no tachyon, heterotic, meaning right moving and left moving strings
differ, group symmetry is E8 x E8

Some highlights of modern string theory history:

(based on Figueroa-O'Farrill)
1984—Green & Schwarz—anomaly cancellation:
After the first revolution, five perturbatively consistent superstring theories, living in a ten-
Dimensional space-time.
1994 —Seiberg & Witten— supersymmetric gauge theories
1994—Hull & Townsend —string dualities.
Today: the search is for an intrinsic description of M-theory.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 336
String theories are classified according to loops strings – closed or not, and particle spectrum
including “fermions”, which require a special kind of symmetry called supersymmetry- for
every boson (particle that transmits a force) there is a corresponding fermion (particle that
makes up matter). Supersymmetry relates the particles that transmit forces to the particles that
make up matter. The parallels of unusual mass energy relationships with VP are drawn. 388
We can extend this to sub-atomic physics and quantum physics with enormous periods of space
emptiness in our conventional three-dimensional universe anyway, interfacing with points -
sub-atomic particles - at a time level, all again with ovoid, occasionally irregular, motion
implying a relativity of perception of observer, which only then makes reality logical.
Already string theory is up to twelve dimensions with a variant including two dimensions of
time386. Is there a reason why there should not be a dimension beyond the maximum number of
dimensions discovered as calculations at each of the previous maximum number, e.g., ten,
needed another dimension, e.g., eleventh, to explain them appropriately. This should then
continue ad infinitum.
String and Superstring theories are but modifications of an approach to mass/energy extended
from a disconnected 3S-1t domain and assuming self-contended and self-originated shapes and
energies. Although pioneering multidimensionality, this relates to space, not time and
consciousness, and so is largely irrelevant both for the TDVP and Subquantal models.

Hawking: Many-worlds Interpretation and Dimensionalities

The great contemporary physicist, Steven Hawking29; 357; 358, and others such as Everett in 1957 272,
66; 67
support the interpretation of many worlds with an infinite universe. (MWI)
MWI is only one of several competing theories in Quantum Mechanics but if it is true it may
imply immortality. Moreover, it may imply parallel universes.ggg 339 In this regard, the Tegmark
Quantum Suicide experiment can prove that the experimenter does not experience death, but
that cannot be objectified to anyone else. 389. However, MWI rests on several premises
continued by Hawking and his co-author, physicist Leonard Mlodinow 358 where, they describe
the concept of “multiverse’ in their M-theory, a conglomeration of several theories, and
concludes as we do that
• multi-dimensionality exists,
• everything and every time exist simultaneously, and have from the outset.

This component is similar to TDVP, but our model defines out N-D extrapolation, vortices,
distinctions, three-dimensional time, the Primary Receptor, indivension, life and ordropy.
Hawking’s MWI differs fundamentally because consciousness is denied (not even in their
index) and their position is still in the dead end of physicalistic materialism: From this point of
view, human beings are fortuitous arrangements in the debris of the expanding physical

ggg
The Tegmark QSE at a closer scrutiny applies only in the Space-Time Quantum regime, while disregarding Quantum decoherence
sources that may be present in hidden variables originating both in C-substrate as well as retrotemporal vectors beyond T1 (amply
described both in the TDVP and Subquantum models). 352
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 337
universe, brought into being by a self-organizing feature intrinsic to physical matter and energy,
implying, that the belief in anything beyond the physical is fantasy. Hawking and Mlodinow358:
“There is no way to remove the observer -- us -- from our perceptions of the world. In classical
physics, the past is assumed to exist as a definite series of events, but according to quantum
physics, the past, like the future, is indefinite and exists only as a spectrum of possibilities."
Our TDVP model is based, inter alia, on copious evidence demonstrating the existence of psi
phenomena, but not invoking the supernatural, as well as analyzing the evidence and logic
pointing to the existence of an all encompassing, ever-existing primary form of consciousness
that gives meaning to physical, psychological and mystical experience, and really explains why
there is something instead of nothing.

Langan’s Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe (CTMU)

Christopher Langan's well-reasoned and detailed TOE is entitled the Cognitive-Theoretic Model
of the Universe360. Our TDVP model though approached entirely differently, has some striking
similarities to Langan's very sophisticated model. The similarities, however, were developed
skeletally in our model before CMTU in 1998. (Dr. Neppe was first presented in 1989; and Dr.
Close similarly published his model prior to 1998 in 1996 and 1997 8).
For example: In Langan's CTMU, he mentions how the real universe has always been
theoretically treated as an object, specifically as the composite type of object known as a set. He
argues that an object or set exists in space and time, but reality does not. Tautologically, the real
universe by definition contains all that is real, therefore, there is no "external reality" (or space,
or time) in which it can exist or have been "created". This approach is very different to our
TDVP, which links space and time to consciousness.
• Furthermore, Langan points out how the universe is not the sum of its parts, as these parts
exist solely within a space-time manifold identified with the whole and cannot explain
the manifold itself 360. He points out that “this rules out pluralistic explanations of reality,
forcing us to seek an explanation at once monic (because nonpluralistic) and holistic
(because the basic conditions for existence are embodied in the manifold, which equals
the whole). Obviously, the first step towards such an explanation is to bring monism and
holism into coincidence."
• Neppe called his original Vortex Dimensional Model, “Vortex Pluralism” referring to the
N-Dimensions as pluralistic 5. However, within years he recognized that it was Monistic
6; 7
(just as Langan does 360) and incorporates all of reality (a whole). Therefore, we both
recognize the Monistic and Whole component of existence as well.
• Langan also applies topology (containment). So do we: We apply 3-D vortices in TDVP.
Langan applies Cantor's set theory; we apply a great advancement of this: Close’s
calculus of distinctions allowing us to develop a mathematical model of distinctions of
consciousness leading to different dimensions.
• Langan sees the cosmos as dynamic; in our Indivension model, we see dimensions as
fluctuating dependent on state and individual-unit.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 338
 • Langan uses mathematical topological mapping. In TDVP, we use some 50 plus
theorems, many of which we have developed, but essentially, many relate to
dimensionometry.
• Langan uses the word "God". We speak of the Origin Event and the Primary Receptor, as
a non-prejudicial term.
• Langan’s CTMU recognizes the roles of zero and infinity, just as TDVP does, but TDVP
uses concepts of relative zero and relative infinity.
• Langan's emphasis is different "Reality Theory". However, in TDVP, one major element
involves the distinctions of different kinds of Reality, namely, perceptual, conceptual,
experiential (PCE); variables of intent, content, extent (ICE); distinguishing features,
distinguished from, consciousness drawing the distinction (DFC).
• Langan's "spirituality" is one component in our consciousness and N-Dimensionality
models. He recognizes the need for some kind of meaningful intelligence in evolution.
• In TDVP, we recognize the fundamental tethering of reality at the STC level, but we go
beyond that with our concepts of Vortical Indivension, fluctuating dimensions and
explanations of life: Theoretically, aspects of information in indivension may not be
relevantly tethered because the sentient being may not be involved, just the merging of
several interdimensional windows.
But there are major differences too. Langan’s emphasis is different 360. He regards his Cognitive
Theoretic Model of the Universe or CTMU, can be regarded as a supertautological reality-
theoretic extension of logic.

Laszlo The Akashic Field TOE

The philosopher, Ervin Laszlo has been an extremely prolific writer and an outstanding thinker.
In his 2004 book, Science and the Akashic Field 348 : An Integral Theory of Everything posits a
field of information as the substance of the cosmos 348. Much of his model derives from Sanskrit
and Vedic traditions and he applies the "Akashic field" or "A-field" term for "space" and he
utilizes cosmic memory refers to a universal field. Dr. Laszlo postulates a "quantum vacuum" as
the fundamental energy and information-carrying field that informs the Metaverse (collectively,
all universes past and present) 348.
As in our TDVP model, László motivates conscious life-forms and informed evolution solving
several problems that emerge from quantum physics, especially non-locality and quantum
entanglement. In TDVP, there is the initial tethering of C-substrate with S-substrates and T-
substrates. Laszlo’s concept of the preconditions has some similarity, but without the tethering
of all reality.
Laszlo posits that our universe is so fine-tuned to the creation of systems of higher and higher
orders of complexity, differentiation, and integration, that such a universe would have come
about by chance is astronomically improbable. According to quantum cosmology, some 1 x
10500 (1 followed by five hundred zeros) universes could exist physically, but only a handful
could give rise to life. Therefore, our life-supporting universe brought about by a random
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 339
selection from this enormous set of possible universes is a still almost impossible, but far, far
more improbable than that living species would have come about by random mutations. The
solution to evolution he feels requires highly harmonized and coordinated processes in all its
domains. He also applies Rudolph Steiner’s models of spiritual-scientific methodology 151; 348

Lanza and Biocentrism

Physician and biologist, Robert Lanza has proposed a model of Biocentrism. This recognizes
the primacy of consciousness features in the work of Descartes, Kant, Leibniz, Berkeley,
Schopenhauer, and Bergson. Dr. Lanza postulates, like Smythies does, that “space and time” are
forms of sense perception rather than external physical objects. In this way there is a similarity
with our model of Close’s calculus of distinctions and percepts of reality 196. Lanza 347, like
Laszlo 348 and ourselves, recognizes the extreme unlikelihood of the Cosmos arising purely by
chance and the continued elements that seem to have maintained our survival on earth. Lanza
and Berman have mentioned that 96 percent of the universe is comprised of dark matter and
dark energy 347, the nature of which is a mystery, and this may imply that materialistic scientists
are ignorant of 96 percent of their subject matter including non-local manifestations of
consciousness about how the universe does or does not work.
Dr. Lanza recognizes the profound implications of how exact the dozen constants in physics
must be to allow the world and consciousness to exist. 347 However, this raises the controversy
of the anthropic principle. The anthropic principle states that when speculating about causes of
the universe's properties, humans should take into account the conditions necessary for them to
exist. If a suitable universe does not evolve intelligent life, then there would be no observers to
notice that fact.
This anthropic principle can be strong or weak.
The “strong anthropic principle” recognizes that an infinite number of universes could produce
every possible combination of initial properties and only those universes with exactly the
correct density (or fundamental constants in this context) for forming galaxies and stars would
give rise to intelligent observers such as humans 92. Therefore, such constants could simply be a
reflection of our own existence."
The "weak anthropic principle" requires no speculation on multiple universes, or on the
probabilities of various different universes existing instead of the current one, because it
requires only a infinite universe so that everything could potentially exist.
Debate ensues as to the relevance.
Bernard Carr and Martin Rees390 argued that the anthropic principle is entirely post hoc because
“it has not yet been used to predict any feature of the Universe” 390.
But they point out that these “strong anthropic principles” are not vacuous or trivial arguments
and these reflect how strong the relevance is to determine the remarkable exactitude of the
physical constants and features of our Universe. They point out that the “weak anthropic
principle” cannot just be resolved by “just a simple selection effect”.
Ernan McMullin 391 argued that "the weak Anthropic principle is trivial, and the strong
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 340
Anthropic principle is indefensible." Therefore, many physicists and philosophers of science do
not consider the principle to be compatible with the scientific method.
Moreover, there are other ways that such principles can be interpreted, including theologically,
which muddies the waters because of the multiple interpretations of the anthropic principle.
Lanza’s model does not really recognize space-time in the way we have portrayed it, but
certainly involves sense-perception. In a way there are elements of both dualism and idealism
philosophically.
Lanza's theory of biocentrism has seven principles. 347
1. What we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness. An "external"
reality, if it existed, would by definition have to exist in space. But this is meaningless, because
space and time are not absolute realities but rather tools of the human and animal mind.
2. Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined. They are different sides of
the same coin and cannot be divorced from one another.
3. The behavior of subatomic particles, indeed all particles and objects, is inextricably linked to
the presence of an observer. Without the presence of a conscious observer, they at best exist in
an undetermined state of probability waves.
4. Without consciousness, "matter" dwells in an undetermined state of probability. Any universe
that could have preceded consciousness only existed in a probability state.
5. The structure of the universe is explainable only through biocentrism. The universe is fine-
tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around.
The "universe" is simply the complete spatio-temporal logic of the self.
6. Time does not have a real existence outside of animal-sense perception. It is the process by
which we perceive changes in the universe.
7. Space, like time, is not an object or a thing. Space is another form of our animal
understanding and does not have an independent reality. We carry space and time around with
us like turtles with shells. Thus, there is no absolute self-existing substrate in which physical
events occur independent of life.
Lanza's Biocentrism recognizes a deterministic Universe implemented by retrocausation but
ignores its metadimensional structure and its implications, thus limiting reality to physically
manifesting self-conscious structures. 352

Laszlo and Lanza on Evolution and Reality

In a way, Laszlo and Lanza are similar. They both argue cogently for some kind of meaningful
reality in the progression of our human life existence to this time. And they both recognize how
remarkable and statistically infinitesimally improbable it is that our universe, our earth, life and
humankind exist purely by chance. They both cogently argue that the more usual standard
model of physics cannot explain why we live, and how we humans continue to persist, not
necessarily evolutionally but over a lifetime and across lives. Is there just a physical automatic
mechanism that will continue irrespective? Once the switch has been put on, does it just run
without any help?
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 341
On the other hand, many reductionist scientists apply physical materialism, and cogently argue
that these events, though apparently remarkable, are just statistical aberrations, and we humans
on earth are the consequences of this. They are anthropically easy to explain, and materialists
maintain the statistics support their views. Certainly, an uncontrolled natural evolution of the
species is a strong possibility, and would still support a physicalistic presupposition of reality. It
really depends how one sets the Bayesian statistical null set and probabilities, or even if one can
apply such Bayesian statistics, at all, to such events.
Similarly, indeed, is the physicalistic model of evolution alone without any guidance sufficient
to overcome the reality of the random selection of our world from the 10500 cosmic worlds and
the appropriate evolution of man? Maybe it is. But others including Lanza and Laszlo point out
the statistical illogicality of this argument. On the other hand, are there exceptions to a natural
but unguiding evolution? Could it be that there is a blueprint from the beginning and the rest
freewheeled from there? This is how Laszlo perceives it. And Lanza points out about 200
fundamental constants. Like TDVP, both oppose the complete accident model of the existence
of a physical reality as a blind evolution with a maintained world over billions of years, grandly
continuing as a blind cosmos which happened by pure accident and without any interference.
Where does TDVP fit this model? Like the ideas of Laszlo and Lanza, TDVP recognizes the
fundamental relevance of consciousness with space and time.
But TDVP explicitly recognizes both the source inseparability and the tethered linkages, as well
as the interchanges of the finite and infinite subrealities. These possibly have profound
philosophical implications: If every structure, every subatomic particle, and every component
of reality is fundamentally tethered to a meaningful kind of consciousness, it implies that
decisions of the most primitive kind are being made from the finite beginning and will continue.
It could be that an infinite subreality with consciousness, meaning and guidance simply
freewheels, and impacts all current events, but without any current interventions. However, in
TDVP, we posit that given the unitary elements of metatime in the infinite, with meaningful
activities impacting the finite, an active finite subreality would be far more likely than just
freewheeling. Moreover, our specific postulate of three-dimensional time further suggests free-
will. The “watchmaker” making the watch metaphor of a meaningful origin may be
appropriate, but we posit that if that watch then ran only purely automatically, without guiding
or meaning in the current finite subreality, then TDVP would make less sense. Additionally, the
specific zillions of tethers of consciousness through indivension vortices across dimensions
allowing for meaningful information, makes it more likely that the finite subreality is far more
complex than our perceived 3S-1t physical existence. Therefore, we propose that there is a
continued active interaction in our finite 3S-1t reality, which involves a freedom of choice and
meaningful interchange with the infinite. This watch may best be served by winding, and that
implies, philosophically, an ongoing purpose.

Campbell: “My Big TOE”

The physicist, Thomas Campbell has developed a very detailed and also deep and well-thought
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 342
out Theory of Everything called My Big Toe 355 (MBT). This consists of a lengthy trilogy of
books published in the 21st century. The MBT model is based on a mixture of science,
transmission of meaning and subjective paranormal experiences including his collaboration
since the 1970s with Robert Monroe, who extensively chronicled out-of-body experiences. It
has continued to develop with several others currently contributing their ideas.

Campbell’s TOE begins with the assumptions of consciousness and evolution 345. Evolution is
the fundamental process of trial and error that moves toward greater “profitability” by
increasing the quality of consciousness and decreasing entropy. Campbell regards these two
assumptions as reflecting the limitations of Einstein’s approach and he suggests why Einstein
failed to create a TOE. He regards the fundamental field as nonphysical, consisting of a
consciousness with fractals. This transcends and encompasses space-time, and is
digital. Consciousness is a form of “nonphysical energy” (but in a very different sense to
conventional use of the term “energy”) and by recognizing this, Campbell points out how
quantum mechanics may need re-interpretation in some details.
Campbell’s model has both computerized and gainful need components: He describes a
fundamental digital energy that he regards as the media of reality. Just as in TDVP, psi plays an
important role, as do the emphases on Origin Event.
The Campbell model is very complex, specialized in vocabulary and detailed. My Big
Toe involves the collection of linked “Virtual Realities of Physical Matter” and “Non-Physical
Matter types” that represent our local society in the fractally organized totality of the “Absolute
Unbounded Manifold”. One of Campbell's missions has been to return the paradigm of science
to more traditional ancient concepts of everything originating in consciousness. Consciousness
reflected in Buddha's teachings and Indian metaphysics as the origin of all that is, is exemplified
in MBT by “Individuated Units of Consciousness”.

There are some significant similarities of MBT with TDVP such as the emphasis on the unit
that is existence, the recognition of the relevance in some kind of meaningful evolution and the
origins of reality —Campbell describes the original “void”. But meaningful evolution is not
unique to either model, and is important to several theorists, such as Laszlo 339 and Lanza 338; 375
particularly. Moreover, though both MBT and TDVP recognize how important consciousness
is, the conceptualization of consciousness in TDVP appears different, and far more developed
and complete, with the awareness of the subclassifications and integration of C-substrate within
the Neurological and Psychological as well as the Higher Consciousness model. Also very
consonant for both models is communication. MBT recognizes universal communication across
all elements, “boundaries” and “divisions”: effectively over a digital “Reality Wide Web”;
TDVP utilizes “individual-units” and “vortical indivension”.

MBT treats "profitability" as an evolutionary mechanism expressed in entropic terms. This is

similar in a limited sense to Lanza’s “Biocentrism” approach 338; 375, which ignores non-
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 343
biological evolutionary pathways. Campbell’s model recognizes not only humans, but other
classes of beings with differential capabilities in an appointed administrative hierarchy.
Campbell’s TOE model appears fundamentally limited in its basics to physics and
consciousness, not emphasizing the life and the psychology models, though these are alluded to.
The concepts that are fundamental to TDVP are the concepts of metadimensionality, metatime
and multidimensional time, specifically defining ordropy across dimensions (not just as
negative entropy), origins of life, tethering and the conceptual role of reality including both the
continuous infinite and the discrete finite, as well as the transfinite. TDVP also includes
numerous mathematical justifications and theorems, plus its new monistic philosophical model
(MBT applies a variant of monistic idealism).
On the other hand, a key to Campbell’s consciousness is the “non-physical energy” (more
correctly, “whatever rule set drives the functionality of Consciousness Space”). In TDVP, we
do not perceive energy, per se, either within the C-substrate alone, but hypothetically, warping
of forces may produce new C-substrate dimensions and the STC tethering allows meaningful
information to impact on space and time. Whereas we recognize the holistic elements in TDVP,
particularly in the infinite context, TDVP does not see fractals as fundamental, because the
complete whole can be expressed in other ways. In MBT, fractals are consequences of repeated
iterative application of simple rule sets, resulting in fractal constructs.

Goswami: Quantum Activism

Retired Quantum Physicist, and prolific visionary, Dr. Amit Goswami has recently been in the
forefront of the increasing influence of scientists pertaining to spirituality. Goswami recognizes
that some quantal experimental findings are not explained, and emphasizes the primary role of
consciousness. 392-394. He has created a popular video for the layperson to describe why. He has
fashioned this in the form of morality and universal potential development and closeness to a
Divinity leaning heavily on his early Hindu background, and has been inspired in part by
philosophical ideas drawn from Advaita Vedanta395and Theosophy376. Universal consciousness,
not matter, is the ground of all existence, in congruence with mystic sages.

There are similarities of Goswami’s Quantum Activism to TDVP. Even in that context, they
reflect different perspectives, levels of detail, language and conceptualization:
• Goswami rejects pure physicalistic materialism.
• He also recognizes discontinuity—similarly, TDVP refers to the discreteness of the finite
subreality. Goswami also recognizes asymmetry based on his quantal information; so
does TDVP—this is not obvious as many paradigms regard symmetry as essential—for
example, holograms or fractals are conceptualized as entirely symmetrical.
• Goswami uses nonlocality in the quantum sense and alludes to psi research in the brain 396;
397
. He recognizes that hierarchical interactions occur. He supports this data with
empirical findings. In TDVP, we also recognize Quantum Consciousness as fundamental,
but we emphasize this as part of the STC triad. We recognize “relative nonlocality” in the
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 344
 context of dimensional domains, and are far more definitive about the very cogent 6-
sigma psi research in nine different areas. TDVP recognizes hierarchies such as
metadimensionality, individual units, influences on and acquisition of data, and
emphasizes the relative elements in that regard, dependent on the domain being
examined.
• Both recognize the influences of self on others and vice versa making it directed more to
spirituality and the potential for behavioral changes.

There are significant differences between the two models:

• Unlike TDVP, which translates philosophically to the unique model of “Unified
Monism”, Goswami’s “Quantum Activism” spins off from what is regarded as “Monistic
Idealism” but in which there is nevertheless a link with physicality. This has similarities
with Campbell’s model despite his MBT “virtual reality” language being very different.
• Goswami perceives a science of spirituality that is fully verifiable and “objective” yet he
apparently recognizes only subjectivity. His approach is largely “top-down” beginning at
God, though, like in TDVP, he does not perceive qualities of God such perfection or
omnibenevolence as part of his model. Goswami’s is a call for action—apply “quantum
thinking” – the bottoms-up component—to several societal issues. His “spiritual
economics” reflects a message of well-being and improvement of our world, but might
reflect not science but theological belief.
• TDVP also applies both the top-down and bottoms-up approach, and regards the reality
of space and time as essential and fluctuating depending on the domain. We recognize
Space and Time as essential components of the inseparable triad with Consciousness.
TDVP recognizes infinity but without emphasizing theological concepts, though moral
interpretations can certainly be made, particularly given the “infinity of infinities”.
• Goswami sees the brain as primarily made of consciousness, TDVP understands the
critical role of the brain as the integrator of both Higher Consciousness as well as
cognition, affect and volition that arise within the brain in the context of Neurological
and Ego Consciousness.
• Goswami recognizes probabilistic features and limits freedom of choice to areas
associated with conditioned choice. TDVP, too, points to Quantum Consciousness, and
therefore probabilities, but this is applied predominantly in the dimensional context and
eventually within the probabilistic infinity. TDVP’s bidirectional link of the finite and the
infinite, reflects part of the unification of the single unit, and recognizes the core
unification with the infinite.
• TDVP's Life Track allows for limited overall free will but significant and major changes
in 3S-1t and psi’s potential influence in life, effectively allows us to extend our
metaconsciousness and impact significant changes on all levels of our culture.
• Whereas Goswami uses "Collective Intentionality" from (Sheldrake's) morphogenetic
fields 27, TDVP uses Individual Units and vortical indivension.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 345
 • TDVP's mathematics is developed in far more detail, with theorems, axioms, proofs and
logical justification.
• Goswami does not utilize concepts of Ordropy, which are fundamental to TDVP in its
multidimensional context, nor does he show how life is infinite and therefore polife
allows for life in 3S-1t. However, he does not perceive physical death not as an extinction
but as a transition: But he doesn’t scientifically explain physical life or survival
adequately, instead, he applies it as a belief system of e.g., Theosophy and Indian
teachings.
• To Goswami there is no STC in the infinite, just pure consciousness possibilities. He
recognizes the physical, the vital, the mental, the “supra-mental” intellect and
the “limitless bliss state” which has some similarities though linguistically different from
TDVP. In our model, the physical is relevant particularly in 3S-1t and STC tethering is
vital. The "mental" is the N-consciousness in the transfinite and the metaconsciousness,
but S and T may be relevant, though depending on the domain, may be S=0, T=0.
Gowami's "supramental intellect" could be TDVP's Transfinite Consciousness, and his
“limitless bliss state” could reflect TDVP’s boundless metainformation, translated into
metaconsciousness in the infinite.
• To Goswami, nothing is both the subject and object of consciousness. In TDVP, the
observer plays a great role in subjective dimensional interpretations and in the Calculus
of Distinctions, and in experience of Vortical Indivension.
• Given Goswami’s idealism, there is some disconnect with his quantum activism which
would impute energy, mass, time and space are part of reality, yet, conceptually, this is
linked with the primary influence of thought on action.
• To Goswami, electrons don't have free will and don't go through free space yet Man uses
the limited moral compass of quantum physics and that can actually transform our lives
and society. In TDVP, subatomic particles effectively have some Q-C as part of STC.
However, in our model, the morality issue is not specifically addressed, but psi influence
of thought and bidirectional finite-infinite communication are critical and therefore both
guidance and morality are strongly implied, though regarded as theological, so not
specifically addressed in TDVP.

Wilber: TOE Kosmos

Ken Wilber’s writings are well-known in non-scientific circles and his TOE is very different
from any other we discuss. Wilber's philosophy has been influenced by Madhyamaka
Buddhism, particularly as articulated in the philosophy of Nagarjuna so that the Eastern
religious element seen with Laszlo also applies here. He has written several book and In his
latest book, A Theory of Everything, he crystallizes his several decades of model building into a
reality that embraces the entire Whole of all mental-physical existence (“Kosmos”) not just the
particle-physics aspect of it. His approach relates to personal and societal development and he
labels Spirit, and the progressive development of mental and physical expressions of Spirit with
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 346
ever-larger concentric circles with origin in a common center representing outward,
developmental, evolutionary movement and thereby solving a variety of Kosmic truths.30; 362
Wilber’s model, we perceive, as targeted more to actualization and transcendence of self with
the development of insights. His model of interweaving is similar, and of concentric circles if
extended to three D could be vortices of consciousness, but there is no overt dimensionality. It
may be best described as a mystical philosophy, but it does not conform to our LFAF
definitions of science.

Sirag: Consciousness and Hyperspace

Theoretical Physicist, Saul-Paul Sirag recognizes multidimensionality in the hyperspace
continuum, incorporates a consciousness into his model and recognizes the infinite. Although
his is not a TOE, this is our homage to him.

The Kabbalic Mystical Model and Vedic Tradition

Our purpose is scientific discussion not mysticism. However, it is striking that particularly Sefer
Yitzirah in Kabbalic triadic even refers effectively to the Triad of Space, Time and
Consciousness. The persistence of mystical systems over thousands of years, though quite
unscientific, still may support the ubiquity of the idea of tethered STC substrates.
On the one hand, to the conventional scientist steeped in physicalistic materialism, it is bad
enough for us to propose a model that radically alters their world view. But now we have dared
to even mention mystical models in a scientific paper! If we did not, we would be intellectually
dishonest. There is a great deal to be said for the inherent wisdom of mysticism that has
survived over millennia. Is this pure superstition? Maybe. But it could be interesting how
fundamental truths may have commonality across cultures. Indeed, if the TDVP model of C-
substrate impacting as a meaningful reality in everything, we would expect that to correlate with
mysticism.
Possibly the great 19th century psychologist, William James, in 1897 398 expressed it best:
“In psychology, physiology and medicine, whenever a debate between the mystics and the
scientifics has been once and for all decided, it is the mystics who have usually proved to be
right about the facts, while the scientifics had the better of it in respect to the theories.” 398
It may be intrinsically validating that much of our TDVP model fits even mystical philosophies
(which incidentally, we discovered only after developing our model). If it didn’t we would be
concerned. It is intriguing that other than the earlier TOEs of Neppe’s VNDP and Close’s
Transcendental Physics, Kabbalah (with Klein and Boyd’s model) scores highest in our Table 5
of all the TOEs. Is this coincidence or is it a meaningful coincidence? And it may be that the
limitations of other mystical philosophies are just based on our ignorance of their finer points.
We don’t know but are open enough to wonder.

Applying the Highest Dimensions and the Mysticism Metaphor to the C-substrate
C-substrate becomes increasingly important as one goes higher and higher dimensionally at a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 347
substrate level. Applying a commonly conceived of mystical metaphor, one refers to
“vibrations”, which become finer and finer as the “consciousness development” becomes higher
and higher. Extending this metaphoric concept, in order to have vibrations there has to be a
frequency and there has to be a spatial component.
Finer and finer vibrations imply therefore, less relevance at a space-time level as one goes
higher and higher in terms of a mystical spirituality, which may here be a C-substrate higher
level dimensionality (N+A dimensions instead of an earlier N-Dimensions); and starting at 3S-
1t, it would be 3S-1t- 1C up to (N+A) C.
Eventually, we could conceive of the extent of the space and time substrates approximating
zero at the highest kind of levels of finite dimensions. Additionally, one could argue that
consciousness (in C-substrate) at that level impacts on the lower dimensions but only very
minimally on the more distant “lower” dimensions yet asserts that minimal impact across a very
broad range of consciousness. In this way, C-substrate impacts metaphorically in an analogous
way to the impacts of gravitation and the expanding universe, which have tiny force impacts,
but act on a very broad level. This is as opposed to the equivalent of strong subatomic forces,
which would impact very strongly, but only over a tiny dimensional atomic neutron area in 3S-
1t.
Applying this metaphor further, C-substrate could be purer possibly at those very high C-
substrate dimensional levels, It has moved closer to a higher consciousness level may imply that
consciousness/C-Substrate is almost exclusive at those higher dimensional domains as S and T
may equal 0 in those domains. Beyond that, one would move beyond finite discrete dimensions
into the infinite, and that infinite may or may not be directly accessible. Ironically, too, in these
high metaphorical domains, C-Substrate at that highest level may be negligible or in infinite
terms reflect a nothingness compared with that infinite reality.
The infinite would imply potentially some kind of meaningful reality, the difference being that
the “guiding” component may range necessarily from very broad but miniscule in impacting
“force” to any combination of the above. There is no reason why the infinite may not impact
dramatically and broadly, or may be very directed onto a particular narrow “gesher”. Because it
is infinite and there are infinites in every dimension, the impact could be powerful and broad.
This mystically evokes again an idea of Primary Consciousness.
There is another component in Kabbalic Mysticism in regard to C-substrate, life and higher
dimensions: What could be regarded as the "lower" tiers of creation, such as plants, are in fact
loftier than the human being's own vital potential spark of divinity: The "lowlier" something is,
the loftier its spiritual core. Yet in Kabbalah, humankind is the most spiritual of earthly
creatures. The animal exhibits a more sophisticated vitality than the plant, and the mineral
shows no outward signs of "life" at all. Yet, the sublimity of the spark of divine life in a thing is
in converse relation to its manifest spirituality. Thus, the mineral nourishes the vegetable, both
nourish the animal, and all three sustain human life. However, only humans have the capacity to
direct the vital energy themselves and they alone have free choice. The animal, vegetable or
mineral conformity with the divine will is automatic and inevitable, and thus, devoid of moral
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 348
significance. 399.
In TDVP, C-substrate is also expressed by “meaning” in that lowest of levels, even the
inanimate. Consequently, this is similar, as is the free-will element, and the concepts of the
infinite. But the key tethering is not spelt out in Kabbalic Mysticism: It is in TDVP.

De La Sierra: Neurophilosophy of Consciousness

Dr. Angell de la Sierra has produced a number of innovative, creative writings on research in
Quantum Brain Dynamics, Process Philosophy, attractor hypotheses, psychosociocultural
perspectivism mental images, spirituality, and brain sinks. This is based on the works of John
Emlen and Walter Freeman. The conceptualization is complex but does not fit the fabric of a
theory of everything, but we pay homage to a great thinker here.
We illustrate the complexity here: “We can no longer say that the past has been but is no
longer, while the future will come to be but is not yet.” 400
“From the many sense-phenomenal objects and/or events in our immediate environment
(including memories) only a limited number of steady states of discrete, individualized neuronal
patterns (attractor basins) are set-up to respond exclusively to particular stimuli in the future.
These would activate a particular set of bulbar neurons acting as a relay switch to a
corresponding attractor basin uniquely coupled to different memory, emotional and
physiological pattern of responses (mental state). When these signals were analyzed on the
oscilloscope screen they were found to resemble chaotic systems with ‘attractor basins’.
Once it was experimentally documented that there is probabilistic nature to brain dynamics, he
concludes “we are forced to consider not just the fleeting moment we call present, the ‘being’,
as it evolves or ‘becomes’ past in transit into a potential future, but also to predict with variable
degrees of certainty its evolution into that future, the ‘becoming’ we may control: and free-will
to choose from available ‘futures scenarios’. In so doing we acknowledge an involuntary shift
away from the reductionist physical approach into the metaphysical ‘emergence’ realm of
‘process’ philosophy.” 161
This thinking derives in part from Emlen 401 who points out the difficulty of evolution in
explaining day to day to day changes, including cerebral plasticity, an emergent phenomenon
they call the “attractor hypothesis” 401. De La Sierra later built on this hypothesis in his model,
which effectively limits brain sinks that concentrate information. Moreover, Meyer cogently
points out the profound complexity of the cell and of DNA and the needs for certain biophysical
elements to be complete for them to work. This is a very potent argument against evolution
without meaning. 402 Again, this supports the model of meaning at every level of science and origin within
TDVP.

Whiteman’s Philosophy of Space and Time

We were originally going to place the extremely complex, comprehensive and esoteric work of
Prof J.H. Michael Whiteman, the late South African mathematician, mystic and musician into a
single further theory of everything. Dr. Whiteman had more than ten thousand subjective out of
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 349
body experiences 265 and wrote thousands of pages in books analyzing reality from his own
experiential perspective, as well as from his esoteric interpretations of original Eastern Mystical
readings 268; 269; 271.

However, classifying Dr. Whiteman’s contributions under our comparisons of “Theories of

Everything” is not fully appropriate because it was never claimed to be so. Nevertheless, his
major work distinguished the “physical life” and distinguished the physical life from the
multitude of other “non-physical” lives that people can experience. It impacted, therefore, on
several significant areas that TDVP discusses, namely, the subjective and the objective; life and
consciousness; and multidimensional space-time.269 Whiteman also significantly impacted psi
experiences and concepts of survival 266; 270. His writings did not directly impact order and
infinity, although they certainly implied them.

Whiteman recognized that life could be very different from how we usually perceive lives at the
moment, as people could experience it non-physically. His many pertinent books though
esoteric, will endure, and one of the authors (VN) had the privilege to interchange ideas for
many hours with this remarkable centenarian.

Gould’s Nonoverlapping Magisteria (NOMA)

Stephen Jay Gould’s Nonoverlapping Magisteria (NOMA) is an attempt to separate science and
religion yet provide a paradigm. There are two Magisteria in the fields of science and religion,
respectively. A magisterium refers to the authority of the church but Gould applies it equally to
both science and religion, though overlap and “interdigitate” “along their joint border.”
The content of these two realms deal with what we could classify as a fact and value distinction.
Science describes via empirical verification factual information and why it work in this way;
religion attributes questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not
overlap, Gould proposes a fence between the two. These two magisteria do not reflect
everything: For example, inquiry about art and the meaning of beauty does not fit either.
An interesting illustration is in Aristotle’s physics: He named his Unmoved Mover, God, but
this God was not an object of religious devotion. It served merely as the engine to crank the
motion of spheres.

Watson’s Theory of Enformed Systems (TES)

Psychiatrist, Don Watson’s original Theory of Enformed Systems (TES) is a theory of
organization itself—its origin, maintenance, and evolution. TES is founded on the posit that
there exists a fundamental, conserved capacity to organize termed enformy. By logically
following the implications of the posit that enformy is the fundamental, conserved capacity to
organize, TES explains life and consciousness as characteristics of enformed systems.
Under TES, the fundamental organizing principle is a process--enforming. Enforming, occurs
without an entity, pre-exists and is fundamental to all physical phenomena. From this posit,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 350
deductions flow, e.g., enforming creates entities, and these predict, psi, life and consciousness.
Enformism is the set of concepts that are based on the premise that organization itself is
fundamental to everything, including matter and spirit. Enformism derives explicitly from the
Theory of Enformed Systems (TES). Like spiritism, enformism holds that something non-
material is fundamental to matter, but enformism is deeper than spiritism because it holds that
organization per se is fundamental to everything, including "spirit." Enformism is also broader
than spiritism because TES provides an internally consistent, holistic model of the “SELF”. The
concept of SELF is deductively derived from the enformy posit. This entity superficially
resembles some renderings of "soul, " but is far more useful because it's well-defined and
testable. Consequently, because SELFs animate living organisms, TES eliminates the need for
undefined concepts such as "soul, " "spirit, " or "vis vitae." There's no need for a concept of
"mind, " either, because the SELF performs all the operations traditionally attributed to the
mind. That's why there's no "mind-body problem" in the TES world-view.
Under TES, connecting, connection and interconnection consist of SELFs cohering in space-
time and sharing “enformation”. Living, conscious organisms are animated by SELFs, which
are created by the enforming process. Non-enformed systems (such as robots) are not animated
by SELFs. However, as a theory of organization per se, TES does not apply only to living
systems. It applies to all natural systems, animate or inanimate.
TES explains psi phenomena. If "science" is traditional materialism and "spirit" refers to
traditional spiritism, a reconciliation of the two can't happen because spiritism and materialism
are incongruous from their conceptual roots up. Applying TES, spirit and matter are
conceptualized in entirely new ways.

Linguistically and emotionally, naming "something" creates the illusion of mastering the
unknown. This is very common in medicine. Our beliefs reside in our theories. The ideas
inherent in TES can't be interpreted in terms of any familiar world-view. Humans prefer the
certainty of fiction over the uncertainty of reality. TES also encompasses concepts such as
wisdom: Wisdom is the set of mental attributes that allows a species to adapt to make adaptive
decisions in a social context and its environments.
Such a definition must
(a) apply to all kinds of animals, and even plants;
(b) imply that wisdom entails thinking--information-processing that organizes behaviors;
(c) include abstract thought as well as sensorimotor ("concrete") thought;
(d) apply effective reality testing; and
(e) comprehend instinctive and acquired abilities.

Dr. Watson’s TES model has some similarities to TDVP. It recognizes that a TOE must be all
encompassing. It applies to psi, to life, to the animate and the inanimate. It tries to encompass
both the material and the spiritual. It recognizes the origin of things. It postulates a process from
the beginning. In ways, Enformy is not far from our conceptualization of a broader
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 351
“consciousness” that exists from the start of the Origin Event and impacts on everything
because it is fundamentally tethered to it. Also, Enformy recognizes the need for organization,
which TDVP also does in its concepts of Ordropy.

Hoffman: Conscious Realism and Multi-User Interface Theory

Don Hoffman PhD, a cognitive psychologist, recognizes on the one hand the great number of
empirical correlations linking consciousness and brain activity, particularly the experimentally
induced damage or losses or stimulation data. This demonstrates how activity in brain systems
with a high degree of information integration can easily be correlated with conscious
experience. The problem is one of cause and effect. Some material monists postulate that such
biology causes the epiphenomenon of consciousness. This has become the prevailing
neurobiological viewpoint, but it is incomplete as there are areas that are not explained. These
can be regarded as just incomplete information at this point, or ignored.
Effectively, Hoffman postulates the reverse. “Sentience is not a combination of brain events or
computational states: how a red-sensitive neuron gives rise to the subjective feel of redness is
not a whit less mysterious than how the whole brain gives rise to the entire stream of
consciousness.” 403
Hoffman 359, and also later Miller 404 motivate very powerfully why correlations in the brain
should not be regarded as causal reductionist correlations where consciousness or psychological
functions are epiphenomena. Not only should one necessarily need to establish a causal link but
it is not apparent in which direction such causality goes.
Dr. Hoffman suggests a solution to the mind-body problem is that correlations arise because
consciousness creates brain activity, and indeed creates all objects and properties of the
physical world. This can be conceived as a variant of monistic idealism but with some
objectivity as well. Hoffman develops two theses. The multimodal user interface (MUI) theory
of perception: This states that perceptual experiences do not match or approximate properties
of the objective world, but instead provide a simplified, species-specific, user interface to that
world. Perception is a multimodal user interface 359. A successful user interface does not,
usually, match or approximate what it represents but reformats it in a user-useful manner. It
simplifies, and does not match the user interface quickly informing the actions of the user and
this is entirely distinct from the represented user domains. This perceptual user interface is
effectively reformatted appropriately to the particular organism’s niche, producing an adaptive
advantage over the objective world.
Hoffman’s second idea is the related Mind-Body model of Conscious Realism. This states that
the objective world consists of conscious agents and their experiences. These can be
mathematically modeled and empirically explored in the normal scientific manner. Whereas
Hoffman’s MUI theory makes no claim about the nature of the objective world, Conscious
Realism does. Conscious realism proposes the answer to the question of what the universe is
made of. Conscious realism asserts that the objective world, i.e., the world whose existence
does not depend on the perceptions of a particular observer, consists entirely of conscious
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 352
agents. It therefore, is a non-physicalist monism. What exists in the objective world,
independent of perceptions, is “a world of conscious agents, not a world of unconscious
particles and fields” which are not themselves fundamental parts of the objective world.
Consciousness is the fundamental and arises from complex interactions of unconscious matter
and fields. Consciousness arises first; matter and fields depend on it for their very existence.
The terms “matter” and “consciousness” function differently for the conscious realist than they
do for the physicalist. Dr. Hoffman understands that physicalists’ TOEs are always incomplete
because of their failure to recognize that consciousness had to be present from the beginning,
although his argument for this appears to be purely heuristic. By contrast, TDVP is solidly
based on the Copenhagen interpretation, and the logic of infinite descent.
Hoffman realizes the links of conscious perceptions and distinguishes it from actual reality. In
this way there is a similarity to a limited version of the Calculus of Distinctions. Hoffman’s
conscious realism with MUI construction of perceptual reality is original but his ubiquitous
conscious agents seem poorly defined.

Leibniz: Topological Space, Totalities and Monads

We have mentioned the German rationalist philosopher and mathematician, Gottfried Wilhelm
Leibniz (1646-1716) only briefly yet many of the ideas that he developed have created the
environment for many of the scientists above 405. He recognized that space was relative and
debated the issue with Newton. He also developed what we now call topology. We introduce
him briefly here because some of the TOEs above are based on his conception of substance. He
recognized something beyond the totality of contingent things. He also described space and
time, as real only insofar as they symbolize real differences in substances, but illusions to the
extent that space or time are taken as a thing in itself, or spatial/temporal relations are taken to
be irreducibly exterior to substances, or extension or duration are taken to be a real or even
fundamental property of substances. This is similar to Einstein’s view of space and time. He
referred to “monads”, which means it is one, has no parts and is therefore, indivisible and
described how time, like space, is an illusion.

Bohm: Implicate and explicate order (IEO)

We did not previously detail the ideas of the great theoretical physicist and creative thinker,
David Bohm.140 This was because Bohm’s ideas were not central to our theme and we
developed our model entirely without Bohm.
However, based on feedback we have had, we amplify his concepts of Implicate and Explicate
Order in the Second Edition. This is the case because once one gets beyond the linguistic
idiosyncrasies of both models, some aspects of Bohm's model are similar to TDVP.
Consequently, we delineate here briefly a comparison of TDVP with David Bohm’s 1980
model.

Bohm’s implicate order is a metaphysical entity where nothing is fundamentally separate or

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 353
autonomous, and therefore recognizes the whole.
Primacy is through the undivided whole which is all things including particles and the abstract.
The implicate order is responsible for matter and energy as well as consciousness (which belong
to different categories under his scheme). Therefore, there is a triad similar to TDVP. As
opposed to TDVP, these components are all enfolded, and material particles are derived from a
deeper order—in TDVP, there is no deeper order: STC exhibit primacy.
Bohm’s explicate order is unfolded. It is contained within all the implicate orders. Therefore
Bohm posited that a TOE on the nature of reality is theoretically possible.

Bohm distinguished true reality as different in some way from the reality we perceive.
Therefore, he recognized individualized distinctions, which has some similarities to the concept
of “individual unit”.
Bohm also recognized the hidden variable theory of theoretical physics recognizing that other
components were possible. This could parallel what TDVP postulates to be the models of
“Qualits” including “Conscits”.

There are both superficial and striking similarities to Bohm's implicate and explicate order
(IEO) and our TDVP model. This is illustrated by Bohm’s IEO remarkably high score on our 39
qualitative criteria. He scores (11+6+2=19/39). These are equal to the high “TOE” scores of
Kabbalah and the Klein-Boyd model but lower that our own models (originally Neppe’s Vortex
N-dimensionalism model scored 27/39 and Close’s Transcendental Physics 23/39; when
combined and amplified into TDVP, the Neppe-Close model scored a maximum at 39/39).

Both TDVP and IE0 models have the unification emphasis, the components of covert elements,
the awareness of the limitations of some basic theoretical physics and the recognition of the
major role of vortical movements or equivalents. Both are aware of mathematicophysics and the
need to go beyond current thinking.

Bohm introduced vortices that reflect patterns within a continuous flow (holomovement).
Interestingly, these vortical models were developed entirely separately by Bohm and Neppe-
Close. Both recognize the "flowing movement" element. In TDVP these are specifically called
vortices, Bohm's are holomovements. In TDVP, vortices are the content, the process is
indivension. There apparently is no Bohm equivalent for indivension but it is described.
Certainly Bohm utilizes the flow patterns in vortices and recognizes the stable continuous flux
and flows without sharp separations or independence. This has some similarity to indivension,
but indivension introduces the whole biological and psychological dynamic as well as psi
across, between and within fluctuating dimensions

However, even within these similarities there are important differences: For example, Bohm’s
model has more in common with current mathematical physics than TDVP does. TDVP has a
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 354
foundation in the calculus of distinctions, so that our mathematical description of reality
coincides with certain aspects of current mathematical physics, but not with others. We regard
the mathematical-logical-dimensionometrics in TDVP as more basic and comprehensive than
anything previously produced. Bohm's model of folding is more akin to our TDVP recognition
of multidimensionality and the metadimensional (beyond 3S-1t). TDVP has no need for folding
or curling up of dimensions, because with the ongoing development of “dimensional
extrapolation” and the mathematics of this process, there appears to be greater clarity on
indivension, non-Euclidean geometry and fractal geometry. Moreover, the calculus of
distinctions (in TDVP) may be controversial, because it may perceive the view of
mathematicians and physicists on non-Euclidean geometry and fractal geometry as apparently
incorrect or misleading.

But there are also significant differences, including the fundamental premises.
The fundamental premises that are very different include:
• Most importantly, in TDVP, we recognize the pre-eminent relationship is more than just
between space and time: There is no space and time on its own without C-substrate (the
extended consciousness). Bohm does not apply triadic STC, nor fundamental inseparability
or tethering. It does not go beyond four dimensions.
• The Bohm model also does not integrate or recognize metadimensionality, fluctuating
dimensions, dimensional jumps or dimensions of consciousness, the transfinite, tethering or
origins, and ordinal and interval data needs. Even where there are peripheral interpretations
of any of these, they are certainly not in any form resembling TDVP.
• Whereas IEO distinguishes the implicate and explicate, it does not apply the calculus of
distinctions context and, instead, makes its own differentiation.
• Bohm recognized a non-denumerable infinity of field variables at the quantum level and
postulated sub-quantum realities, whereas TDVP recognizes the unity of the infinite and
finite subrealities.

For Bohm, there is the enfolded implicate order where space and time are not dominant
and an explicate unfolded order. These may only reflect undefined, vague similarities to
someone imaginatively applying TDVP because ultimately both reflect a whole. However, in
TDVP, existence is fundamentally a unified whole, and there are neither divisions between
space, time and "consciousness" (C-substrate) nor with the finite and the infinite—despite both
being subrealities, they are indivisible from each other, even in the concepts of infinite space
and time. Therefore elements such as life, order, free-will and movements across time have
special implications for finite living and physical existence.
Whereas Bohm recognized implications for the psychosocial and the biological
particularly the brain and consciousness, and realized these were relevant, there were no true
integrating elements in his mathematico-physical model. This recognition creates a deeper
order, but it is different from the TDVP order because indivension is so fundamental. Also in
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 355
TDVP, there is no distinguishing of finite and infinite implying tracks in the infinite can be
expressed in the finite. Essentially, Bohm’s model is paradigmatic as it is physically based, yet
the TDVP model literally qualifies as a metaparadigmatic model as it has direct links and
implications for all the ethicoconsciobiopsychofamiliosocioculturalphysicochemical systems.
Similarly, whereas Bohm postulated how thought and brain function could obstruct direct
conscious contact with reality, there was no direct integration of the different elements of
consciousness outside and inside the nervous system, as there is in TDVP.
To Bohm, consciousness is in the brain, and manifest in memory. TDVP recognizes the
endpoint expression of consciousness in the brain. TDVP also specifically separates a higher
consciousness (transfinite and metaconsciousness with links in the infinite), a neurological
consciousness (as a final common integrator and expression in the nervous system and with its
own biochemical, electrical and the complex interface with the psychological consciousness).
All are one as they are inseparable in the sentient being. TDVP also recognizes that because of
the STC tethering fundamentally there is an equivalent of a Quantum Consciousness (as pointed
out the discrete qualit is more than the discrete quantum; and also recognized possible
continuous subquantum infinitesimals which may be linked with the infinite). Bohm’s concept
of consciousness vaguely implies links with TDVP, but is still firmly rooted in time and space
or alternatively in the implicate order.
Bohm certainly effectively draws distinctions between every facet of reality. Bohm
recognized the concept of “hidden variables” in what may have been four dimensions. In
TDVP, finite and transfinite dimensionality plus infinity are conceptually integrated within
reality and consciousness. Bohm does not approach the concepts of STC inseparability and
tethering (the most fundamental single axiom of the whole TDVP model), extended
consciousness yet translated through the nervous system in the living, and the most fundamental
aspect of life.
Bohm's model does not integrate the fundamental role of infinity within all existence, and
consequently does not address multidimensional ordropy (order), N-dimensionality of
consciousness, and the origin of physical life and possible infinite existence.
In TDVP the objective and subjective are directly integrated into the model. Bohm certainly
implies this in his implicate and explicate elements.
Amongst other similarities with some relative differences are:
• In both models, phenomena are not reducible to fundamental particles and laws describing
the behavior of particles. More generally, Bohm emphasized non-reduction to any static (i.e.
unchanging) entities, whether separate events in space-time, quantum states, or static entities
of some other nature. In TDVP, we recognize the discrete finite and the continuous infinite.
Within the discrete finite, we realize the relevance of particles and waves, and the
significance of quanta. But given that “quanta” do not recognize Consciousness, we use the
term “qualit”. 117 In TDVP, we recognize the limitations of the finite. But we go beyond that:
the infinite continuity is necessary in our model of Space, Time and Consciousness. There is
no equivalent in Bohm.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 356
• TDVP goes beyond Cartesian metrics certainly, and also recognizes the ordinal in the
transfinite (as does Georg Cantor). 116
• Both recognize that nothing is fundamentally separate or autonomous.
• Both utilize parallels from a mathematical physics perspective.
• Both recognize the abstractness of statistics and variables. In TDVP, we recognize the
fundamental initial base of the Calculus of Distinctions which allows us to utilize variables
of extent and content, and occasionally intent, and apply ordinal as well as interval metrics,
particularly with the transfinite. In TDVP, the base is empirical data and recognizing that
that is usually inductive, we also utilize the deductive in mathematics. Both Bohm's model
and TDVP go beyond the usual (explicate) representations of algebra. TDVP also utilizes
dimensionometry (N- dimensional geometry).
• Both recognize the limitations of a moment in time. In TDVP, we develop a detailed model
of multidimensional time, and this extends to infinity, to "tracks" of finite existence in the
infinite and to precognition and retrocognition. Bohm also recognized time that went beyond
moments. 140
• It could be argued that there is no need for psi to Bohm though his concepts of hidden
variables and metaphysical recognitions may imply this. Bohm does not integrate core
mystical concepts, nor have aspects of the philosophical thought persisted over
millennia. However, he does appear to have been versed in Vedic thinking.

Because there are linguistic differences, interpretations of these factors could peripherally
be made, but certainly not in any form resembling TDVP. For example, Bohm's extra
dimensions, if conceived of that, are “hidden”, but discoverable.
Philosophically, David Bohm’s IEO could disputably be regarded as dualistic because of
the dual implicate and explicate components and the non-materialistic metaphysical elements,
yet he focused on the concept of hidden variables and was a firm believer in materialistic
determinism, though inherently anti-reductionistic. (His thinking is “Ontological Holism”). By
contrast, our TDVP model is monistic, but recognized the flaws of materialism, reductionism
and idealism. Philosophically, TDVP reflects “Unified Monism” as it unifies STC. However,
these philosophical models are both simplifications as they both recognize the whole, and both
deny the current physicalistic materialist paradigm. Bohm’s model was influenced by ancient
Krishnamurti and Vedanta philosophy 364 and mystical concepts. If anything, post hoc, we
discovered that TDVP has a similar Triadic STC component to Kaballic Sefer Yitzirah. 140;155; 406

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 357
CHAPTER 44: TDVP: A UNIFIED PARADIGM SHIFT 407

“The idea that everything in the world has a meaning [reason] is an exact analogue of the
principle that everything has a cause, on which rests all of science.”
Kurt Gödel 102
The Paradigm Shift
The most important goal of science is a deep understanding of reality. The deeper and more
complete our understanding, the better our chances of survival and growth as a species and as
individuals. A review of the history of science reveals slow growth punctuated by occasional
relatively sudden leaps in understanding called paradigm shifts. During the periods of slow
growth the attitude is: “We know what reality is, we only have to fill in the details”. But science
as we know it has always been incomplete. The important paradigm shifts, like the discoveries
of Newton’s laws of motion, relativity and quantum physics, have occurred when, in the
process of filling in the gaps, phenomena that contradicted or could not be explained by the
existing paradigm were found.

New paradigms always open new vistas revealing aspects of reality that were either only
dimly perceived or totally unexpected prior to the advent of the new paradigm. Overall, science
moves forward most rapidly when the details of various studies and disciplines are integrated
into a larger, more consistent picture.

The standard scientific physicalistic paradigm involving 3S-1t alone has not integrated
relativity and quantum physics, and it does not adequately explain quantum observations and
various psi phenomena. Nor does it adequately explain, some scientists argue 175; 177, an unguided
evolution, and the states of order reflected in life, or the phenomenon of physical life itself.
Whether the brain can fully explain all facets of “consciousness’ simply as epiphenomena of
underlying physiology can be strongly disputed. In the past, scientists have not associated psi
phenomena with quantum phenomena, yet they both defy explanation in much the same way:
They both exhibit connections over time and space without the normal physical mechanisms
found in other phenomena and the rare event ostensibly anomalous behaviors invoke the
possibility of a unified mechanism.

Revisiting a Key Area: Consciousness

Numerous key ideas have sprung from the TDVP model: Dimensions and Consciousness
with ordropy, tethering of CST, indivension, fluctuating dimensions, and the varying relative
components. All of these fit into our model well and we believe can be unified.
• Our approach, therefore, has been to investigate the areas of contradiction and
incompleteness and the various documented phenomena that are not explained by
the current paradigm. We identified one common element in these phenomena as
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 358
 “consciousness”.

Consciousness has been defined in a broad sense of encompassing three key

components.
• First is brain related awareness and response, which also facilitates the processing
of cognitive, affective and volitional functions (CEV) plus in humans (and possibly
other animals) such higher qualities as love, courage, meaning, knowledge,
understanding, wisdom, and spirituality. The physical senses, the autonomic
nervous system, the central nervous system and the brain are the major functional
components of the vehicle used by consciousness for interaction with the physical
universe. Brain consciousness is a property of all living beings.
• Second is the extended, more collective reality from which information and
knowledge could be apprehended and influenced—metaconsciousness—where the
contradictions and incompleteness could be resolved and corrected by applying
this new consciousness-based metadimensional paradigm, which by definition
therefore, extends beyond 3S-1t. Extended consciousness is a property not only of
all living beings, but of all informational existence and knowledge.
• Third is a meaningful awareness and responsiveness in all particles or packets even
at the subatomic level. This meaningful consciousness exists in everything living
or dead, animate or inanimate from the subquantal to the macrophysical to the
astronomical. It pervades the cosmos. Therefore experiments at the double slit
photon level implying meaning, or experiments on influencing plant cultures
would all support TDVP.
• Fourth, because Space and Time and Matter and Energy are inseparable from
meaning, the likelihood of some level of meaning in evolution would support the
TDVP model.
• Fifth, proof of psi phenomena. As psi demonstrations (currently 6 sigma in 9 areas)
increase in strength, so does the support for the feasibility of TDVP. Even more so,
as a further extension, support for survival after physical death significantly
supports TDVP.
• Sixth, field models such as the proposed Morphogenetic Fields of Sheldrake27,
given that they are at a lower level of validation than TDVP, would also
demonstrate feasibility.
\
Paradoxically, the refutation of any of these does not refute TDVP as it is a metalevel
higher. However, alternative hypotheses of feasibility and falsifiability would need to be
invoked. The essential element is to demonstrate a broader consciousness and to justify the
feasibility of this not only in a broader dimensional reality, but ultimately with the equations
describing this reality. We have done this in this book by applying, inter alia, a new
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 359
consciousness-based mathematical tool called the calculus of distinctions (elaborated in more
detail later.10) The extra mathematical theorems add to this, too, such as the application of other
relevant theorems revealing asymmetry in motion, and the existence of additional dimensions.

The Process of Indivension: The Content of Fluctuating Vortices

There needed to be a process of interaction, interface and communication across and within
these dimensions. This process we defined as “indivension’. There needed to be a content in
which this process could take place, one broader than just a field in one dimension. This content
involved vortices: We applied these vortical motions in all their varied manifestations as the
primary underlying form content of all reality. Vortices fluctuate across and within dimensions
as individual-units (individually, or as groups, or as even subatomic units) through the process
of indivension, creating an enormous web of interacting and interfacing vortices with “zillions”
of other individual—unit vortices. In this way, information is shared, and meeting points
created via vortical intersections, which may appear to be vectors, scalars or tensors depending
on the dimensional interfaces. Such meeting points (in a way singularities) or vortices (3
dimensional) allow psi and entanglement to manifest at the 3S-1t level of our usual human
earthly domain living. Vortices exist within the S-, T- and C-substrates therefore, impacting
space, time and consciousness. Moreover, we realized that the vortices need to have a
fundamental link with all of Space, time and consciousness and this came about through the
STC tethering that exists in all objects from the subatomic to the astronomical and from the
beginning of the Origin Event, be that the Big Bang or other event.

The Unified Basis

The explanation of previously unexplained phenomena should rest in a unified theoretical
basis. Inter alia, three lines of evidence support the need for a new paradigm, namely:
• extensions of special and general relativity using dimensional extrapolation;
• interpretations of entanglement or relative non-locality in the paradoxes of quantum
mechanics; and
• consciousness research, including the solid scientific data, which has been achieved by a
century of research into psi, and the numerous different ways psi can manifest in
consciousness.

We propose that psi and consciousness have been unified, and that is a major step.
If these three bodies of evidence can be explained by one underlying possible unitary model,
then the TDVP paradigm is, indeed, a unifying paradigm. Alternatively, it could be that each of
these is independent. We clearly rely on empirical data to support TDVP. This includes
quantum meaning. Recently and notably, in six double-slit optical experiments, Dean Radin
demonstrated a possible role of consciousness in the collapse of the quantum wave-function 408.
This is a significant major finding. However, it greatly threatens the physicalist materialist
edifice: The critic could opine that “consciousness” is an unfounded, unnecessary, superfluous
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 360
addition.409 But, the accumulating data on quantal level meaning motivates for a real finding.

Our explanations might variably allow added awareness of the fundamental elements of
quantal functioning with meaning. They might also provide explanations for dimensionality, psi
and/ or entanglement of meaningful reality and/ or consciousness at its tethered core.

Radically, we have even posited relative warping of forces and manifesting by extrapolation
to higher dimensions. This therefore, provides further secondary components to our unified
STC model of space, time and C-substrate, all necessarily being inseparably tethered together—
tightly, loosely or slightly—but always linked together as fundamentally as time and space are.
The rarity of the events of relativity and quantum mechanics and also the rare events of psi
phenomena are all explained within the framework of the TDVP model: But this rarity may be
domain dependent, and particularly striking in our subjectively experienced 3S-1t domain.

We have necessarily invoked two components to our model:

1. metadimensionality as extra dimensions explain why the level of 3S-1t is
incomplete; and
2. vortical indivension, because the indivension process allows for connections across
fluctuating dimensional realities and fluctuating domains. These too may be, rare
events.
These models could allow an explanation of what could be entanglement at a distance. This
distance does not need to be identical on both sides because one is dealing with a 3-dimensional
fundamental triadic reality in consciousness, in space, and in time, and these contribute to
potentially higher dimensions, which are almost always (unless in rare instances) asymmetrical.

The Ultimate Unification

In summary, space, time, and consciousness in the context of S, T, and C-substrates always
exist together, each and every time. This means that any kind of quantal mechanical action, or
action at any level, exhibits all three of these.

We find that the integration of dimensional structure, vortical form and the drawing of
distinctions, and the organization of those distinctions into meaningful patterns, constitute the
actual nature of our reality. The patterns of vortical distinctions created by consciousness out of
consciousness are tied together or tethered at the point in STC dimensionality where quantum
and psi phenomena meet. We hypothesize that greater awareness of this connection, implying
the integration of all phenomena, will facilitate the further development of this real theory of
everything. In this merged unification of our TDVP paradigm, we can also show that it would
be consistent for entanglement to originate from the tethered STC substrate, and similarly, psi
phenomena are fundamental jumping points. Psi manifesting precognitively and possibly
retrocognitively, not only contemporaneously, could imply possible extra time dimensions.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 361
 We have further proposed an extension to TDVP, whereby warping of the gravitational
dimensions in General Relativity using dimensional extrapolation include other energetic forces
and possibly C-substrate dimensional forces (e.g., non-energetic or different “energetic” ?). By
applying models of metadimensionality, the inconsistent, incomplete entanglements of 3S-1t
and the rare transitory or incomplete events picked up or influenced by ostensible psi, become
more detailed or complete when applying three-dimensional vortical indivension (justified by
Pythagorean and FLT theorem modifications). Furthermore, by applying the Calculus of
Distinctions, specifically variables of extent (interval metrics in S and T substrates, ordinal in
C-substrate) to the limits of an N-Dimensional reality, the next stage for a metaparadigm must
be infinity—otherwise it would be incomplete (modified Gödel’s incompleteness theorem).
Our model incorporates some key features. It logically suggests some hypotheses that may
or may not be true or which have not yet been tested. The key elements of TDVP relate to STC
tethering, metadimensionality, distinctions, and vortices. The first suggestive level reflected in
our subtitle suggests the possibilities of N-Dimensionality, as well as order in living organisms.

At the next level of speculation, we tentatively suggest models of how to extrapolate

dimensions, and the roles of infinity and unifying of reality. Whereas we attempt to apply
mathematical and physical data, and to utilize theorems, while supporting the feasibility of the
broader model, it does not prove that exact model. This is why we have separated the primary
aspects of our hypothesis from secondary elements. We have used a paradigmatic shift and the
major jump in ideas that flow from it will ultimately take several hundred scientific papers to
evaluate some of this data and they will still be sources for debate.

Importantly, the refutation of any single concept does not refute the model, only that single
concept. That becomes a building block to re-assess the status, and part of the heuristic
structure of a related or modified model. All theories are open to modification, reflecting a
living basis, applying LFAF to each avenue.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 362
CHAPTER 45: SOME ANSWERS TO THE PREVIOUSLY UNEXPLAINED 410

“The important thing is not to stop questioning.”

Albert Einstein

We asked some questions at the start showing the demonstrable limitations of the standard
model of 3S-1t, and how it is incompatible with the features below. Let us now re-examine
these features that have challenged the standard scientific model of 3S-1t, and evaluate whether
the TDVP model should allow compatibility even in those areas in which the standard model
has failed.

• Entanglement
The model of quantum entanglement fits well within the concepts of relative non-locality. We
can better appreciate concepts pertaining to infinity including in space and time, it may be
intimately related to psi, and it particularly may have pertinence in the contexts of tight, loose
and slight tethering. Entanglement allows one explanation to demonstrate interconnectedness of
meaning and it could, speculatively, even have relevance for vortical indivension across,
between and within dimensions.

• Psi
The data for psi is overwhelming and we have shown a model for psi within TDVP. It is rather
ironic that pseudoskeptics keep denying the existence of psi despite the presence of
overwhelming statistical data in that regard.

• Lower dimensional incompleteness

We have demonstrated how we need to have higher dimensions and infinity for our model to be
complete. Inter alia, if we regarded all of reality as purely based on three spatial dimensions and
one point in time, then there could be no “meaning”. If we extended “meaning” to a fifth
dimension (variable of extent) of consciousness, we still could not explain completeness (which
requires infinity) or asymmetry in nature, nor the incompleteness of awareness in the limited
3S-1t-1C reality of sentient beings. We could hardly conceive of higher realities, nor could we
explain distortions of time, such as precognition. We would need to sacrifice either free will or
precognition, but not have both. By contrast, a metadimensional reality of extra time and
consciousness dimensions explains why “bad things happen” in 3S-1t, and is, to boot, supported
both mathematically with proofs and inductively with scientific empiricism.
We simply cannot explain all of existence using 3S-1t-1C alone. The extra dimensions are
borne out of necessity. We need to make sense of reality: We can with extra dimensions,
infinity, order, and meaning. And we can empirically justify this inclusive “process of
everything metaparadigm” by applying feasibility to the small jigsaw puzzle pieces of the
results found in our very restricted experiential 3S-1t-1C domain reality.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 363
 • Evolution
Debate exists as to whether or not evolution could occur without meaning. We argue that it
could not, not only statistically quantitatively but quantitatively based on the complexity
required at several steps including cellular. But where did the meaning come from? The TDVP
model supports this meaningful evolution model and the meaning comes from the original STC
tethering. The whole model we have developed relates to a “consciousness” that has a finite
origin at the beginning, and is also part of (for want of lacking vocabulary) an eternal infinite
without beginning or end.

• Life
The origin of life has been a mystery. How it occurs and why it occurs has been uncertain. The
TDVP model explains life not as “beginning at a certain physical moment” or “requiring an
insertion of a new substance (soul or the like)”. Instead, “life” is always there: Life exists in an
infinite reality whereas the reality of our physical life existence is limited to a restricted 3 S-1t.
The TDVP model of infinite essence includes life from the origin. It allows for an explanation
of how life begins. Life “always” exists. But the limited finite physical life exists only when the
correct physiology and (genetic) messages can function to sustain physical life. Life exists
before and after the physical, and eternally in the infinite. This obvious statement may never
before have been scientifically postulated, yet if this is true (and it is supported, e.g., by cogent
evidence like survival after bodily death), it alone would be a profoundly important insight.

• The Standard Physics Quantum Mechanics Model has limitations.

We look at this again below briefly:
Subatomic Particles and the Current Paradigm: Can They Now Be Explained? Speculations
We amplify this area, though it is the most difficult challenge of all.
Possibly we have clarified some of the contradictory data in this book, though the whole area is
far too nebulous and complex to explain in detail, and remains controversial.
Essentially, we know there are limitations to the conventional scientific subatomic paradigm.
How would the awareness of any of consciousness, psi, and extradimensionality involve a way
to explain some of these limitations? This is a deliberately broad question, and, additionally, we
know that the definitions of these concepts are under dispute as well, but let’s look at a broad
answer.

• In explaining the current subatomic fundamental standard model of quantum mechanics,

the macrophysics and astrophysics may involve a contradiction before reaching the
Planck’s scales. Consciousness may be a link because of the infinite component, in that
regard impacting at every level including the cosmologic.
• We see no reason why neutrino oscillations with extra arbitrary constants and similarly,
quantum chromodynamics, and symmetry and asymmetry may not have link ups with the
extra-dimensional realities where there are asymmetries —this may be highly relevant.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 364
 • The problem of homogeneity of isotropy is linked up with cosmic inflation, but there
appear to be rules pertaining to cosmic inflation and expanding of the universe. 68 66; 67
• Different measurements of size imply that there is another component, a hypothetical
consciousness. At the finite level, it might be quanta or chronits, or qualits or conscits or
psitrons, or kinetrons, extra particles that might explain these differences. This is purely
speculative, but it is just interesting that one can utilize such ideas to try to explain such
things as asymmetry and the hierarchy problem. Conscits might be a non-measurable
phenomenon because it derives form the infinite and it is relatively non-local.
• The physical theory of everything unifying all the fundamental interactions of nature
might have been unified by extended dimensionality by applying warping of forces
producing extra-dimensionality.

Wave Particle Duality or Wave Particle Meaning? Other areas to test.

The role of waves and particles alone may be insufficient: There is more than the concept
of wave -particle duality: We believe it’s appropriate to conceive of a triadic component of
wave, particle and meaning.

How can we prove this? We postulate we can demonstrate this with an experiment
demonstrating the influence of biophotons. There have been experiments involving biological
psychokinetic influences, for example on plants and microcultures.149; 163; 411-415 We suggest,
therefore, an experimental test of the hypothesis that photons have three components: particle,
wave and meaning (or consciousness or influence). This could be demonstrated by an
experiment such as demonstrating the influences of biological impacts on photons. The photons
in a vacuum tube would be influenced by a “healer” who would in a controlled manner try to
influence the screen projections in a specific direction. Some kind of biological influence must
be shown to cause photons to behave in a different measurable fashion and this must be
replicable.hhh If this is found, it would be a groundbreaking major advance changing the whole
model of quantum mechanics demonstrating that it was triadic and not binary in nature. This is
already fundamental to TDVP. The TDVP model postulates it requires this third element,
namely, in this instance apprehension of information, implying a primitive kind of meaning.

Possibly one reason this is more obvious in TDVP is that we apply a top-down approach
utilizing metadimensionality, consciousness and infinity, where conceptually certain aspects
become clearer. Whereas TDVP recognizes the legitimacy of the bottom-up approach to

hhh
Given the impacts of the so-called Experimenter Effect 416-418on such research (this is effectively biological psychokinesis, also
called bio-PK or DMILS) such replication may not be as easy as it should be. We need to also take care that setting up a control and
experimental group may both generate statistically significant and demonstrate deviant responses even using a very high significance
requirement but not differ from each other. But still the results of the two group may be equal and not statistically different. The
classic Coover work at Stanford in the second decade of the 20th century 230 demonstrated so called contemporaneous thought
transference (later called telepathy) but was not different from contemporaneous clairvoyance. Yet both groups, despite still small
sample sizes were already overwhelmingly significant when re-analyzed later.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 365
particles, we also recognize its conceptual restrictiveness for the development of creative ideas.

Preliminary approaches to testing the TDVP hypothesis

Already Existing Pertinent Data.
What falsifiable predictions arise from TDVP? How specific are these compared with
other models of Consciousness Research? We make some suggestions below, noting these
portray only examples, and not a complete list.

The model we proposed as a necessary extension technique for philosophy of science is

LFAF (Lower dimensional feasibility, absent falsification) (see Chapter 21). Within this, the
feasibility model is still more limiting an approach than actual Popperian falsifiability.
Nevertheless, LFAF as a methodological approach is necessary for metadimensionality, for psi
and other cosmological research. Practically, if we have not falsified something, and we can
show data that it is feasible, then there is no refutation of the hypothesis. TDVP is like that.

Of course, there are direct areas of contradiction, though rare but present in our
conventional standard physical materialistic model. That model, though working in possibly
99.9% of instances, has areas of both falsifiability and non-feasibility. The difficulty in research
is we're discussing the metadimensional (i.e. beyond 3S-1t-1c) and the infinite. The only results
we have are what is directly expressed from the bottoms-up in our conventional 3S-1t
experience. This is why we apply LFAF.

We do not want to re-invent the wheel. For example, more than a century of research on
psi exists. Some of this is very solid and we point out that there are nine different areas of
Consciousness Research that reach six-sigma (roughly one in a billion against frequentist
statistical chance) results, mainly in meta-analyses. (Chapters 22-25). These results are
empirically based and, as a consequence, even positive results are inductive. (However, if one
argues for Bayesian impossibility, then setting impossible Bayes values would never prove
anything inductively. We regard that as fallacious science, so motivate frequentist approaches.

Therefore, we utilize data from Consciousness Research and the findings of

parapsychology to demonstrate feasibility and /or falsifiability of the models. Effectively, much
of the research has been done before the hypotheses were even proposed. However, the results,
though fitting the TDVP model are not unique to a TDVP explanation alone. These same results
could sometimes be appropriate to explain other models for psi. The same applies to
syncretically amalgamating information and any past knowledge from across societies, cultures
and various scientific endeavors. Yet, competing theories can sometimes and apply use the
same research results. But, no postulated models (psi or sociocultural) and also biological or
physical is anywhere as comprehensive as TDVP model, and none can claim to be
metaparadigms.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 366
 The key axiom in TDVP is that Space, Time and Consciousness (C-substrate) are
inseparably tethered. This axiom is very broad ranging: it encompasses all natural law with
reality necessarily includes finite and infinite sub-realities working as a whole at all times.

Not surprisingly, because data in psi research refutes the standard scientific materialistic
paradigm, TDVP provides a theoretical model for explaining any kind of psi.
Consequently, any demonstrable empirical research on psi, provides a testable hypothesis for
TDVP. We’ve discussed the difficulty in this research, because often there is a replicability
problem. This is possibly in part anyway, due to no two experiments ever being the same.
In all research, the C-substrate component— the “consciousness” —is always subtly different.
So for that matter is Time, which has to be regarded as a variable as well. Time moves on
inexorably. This may not matter in solid state research, but it does in subtle areas of higher
consciousness or higher dimensionality, we are not even able to replicate many experiments.
Moreover, often all we can analyze are meta-analytic trends because the data will not produce
results of 100% replication: (As in baseball) even 30% hits above chance could be remarkable
because the territory is ever changing, so one analyzes variations beyond what one expects.

Whether anything in parapsychology is falsifiable per se, is difficult, because

circumstances change and this may produce negative empirical research, even when actual psi
may be occurring. Moving targets produce such distortions.
Consequently, the empirical testing problems of falsifiability for TDVP are the same as for any
area of parapsychology or consciousness research. One is at times looking for the spontaneous
production of the dollar to prove the existence of a mint. This is therefore very difficult.

Nevertheless, TDVP neatly packages what is already known including, as indicated in

Chapters 22-25, the six sigma data in nine different areas of consciousness research. This is
better proof than we will find in almost any psychosocial research projects.

Amongst those cogent but particularly pertinent areas of psi research already discussed is
the Global Consciousness Project (GCP). 222, 220 If it were demonstrated that there was something
that could meaningfully influence what is usually a random pattern, that would be useful. And
as indicated, there, is very promising excellent GCP data so this supports the primary axiom.
“Consciousness” here apparently impacts the physical space-time 3S-1t data continuum and has
some slight (anticipatory?) time shifts in doing so too.

Additionally, the work trying to link up the brain and modifications of consciousness
with some kind of psi communication, such as presentiment research, is remarkable. However,
that would be an example of a secondary level of the hypothesis because it involves directly a
nervous system as well.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 367
 Consequently, we would still prefer to isolate consciousness without the brain, but
maintaining finite space and time. Possibly survival research fills that need, and again, we have
briefly discussed the six-sigma data in relation to communication of some kind of isolated
consciousness with living beings.

What tests would we suggest? If we were to construct a test, one experiment could be to
set up a basic investigation involving biological “psychokinesis”. This is also called bio-PK and
sometimes referred as “DMILS” (direct mental interaction with living systems). For example,
as suggested in this Chapter (45), can the path of a photon be perturbed by a biological
influence (e.g. a paragnost /psychic)? Can we compare the impact that a Subjective Paranormal
Experient would have with a Subjective Paranormal Non-experient?

The problem, however, is to exercise appropriate controls. We have mentioned the famous
Coover research in about 1913 at Stanford. 230 It involved a faux pas effectively of controlling
“telepathy” (thought transference) with clairvoyance (no sender). There was no statistical
difference between the two groups, but overall despite a small sample size, the data was
beginning to be significant. We have to be particularly careful using “control” groups in this
kind of research because “consciousness” still exists and in fact, by showing statistical
significance in both an experimental and control group, we would actually support the
hypothesis of the profound impact of broader consciousness on space and time.
Therefore, this kind of bio-PK study could directly demonstrate the key broad ranging axiom in
TDVP, provided we exercise enough care that, in effect, we recognize the equivalents of active
control and experimental groups. So, the construction of such an experiment would be
challenging. More easily, we could work, e.g., on experimental cultures and healing or
worsening. But, as discussed in Chapters 22-25, that has been done and demonstrated. So this is
already common knowledge that is available.149; 163; 411-415

Then there are several other related tests but these are one step off the major hypothesis
of inseparable STC tethering. They are not easily testable, and we can only evaluate feasibility.
1. If life after death in any form were refuted, a secondary hypothesis of TDVP is refuted.
This would not disprove that there is no STC tethering, but it would impact on the postulate of
an eternal life existence, and also possibly imply that the concept of infinity being directly
relevant to the finite, less pertinent.

2. If freedom of choice were refuted, again a secondary hypothesis of TDVP becomes

questionable. You may ask how could that be tested? We see free-will as a variant of not only
influence or manipulation of future events such that they can change (so called
“psychokinesis”) but as a subset of freedom of choice because psychological learned habits,
reflexes, temperament and instincts, and spiritual philosophies may partly determine outcome.
Choice, even if potentially free, is therefore confounded. Technically, however, work with
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 368
Random Number Generators (RNGs) could set up an excellent experimental model. But even
then, there is still the limitation: Is this truly an influence on events, or is it simply a prediction
of an event, that experimentally is deliberately manipulated to change, has changed? There is, of
course, six sigma support for RNGs (see again, Chapters 22-25).
3. If precognition or retrocognition were refuted, then a secondary hypothesis of TDVP is
refuted. Again, there is excellent six sigma meta-analytic data supporting precognition (see
again, Chapters 22-25).

4. We do not recommend one specific kind of research because it has too many variables,
and it is even difficult demonstrating that the work is being done. But just as an illustration of
the diversity of potential research in the area, there could be research involving the degree of
difficulty of communicating between the "continuous infinite" with the "discrete finite". Alleged
“mediumship” might have this relevance but we could postulate that this may be different from
completely non-directed psi communications ostensibly between sentient beings. Because we
would not know in which direction this result would be, it would require a two-tailed statistical
difference between the two groups as demonstrable numbers of “hits” might be different from
more conventional psi research. Again, such controlled research could be very difficult to
implement, and the limiting side may involve the meaning of negative data. But if such results
were interpreted, again these would simply reflect secondary hypotheses not primary ones.

5. A similar but already demonstrable kind of study would be hypothesizing that STC
tethering hypothesis implies a limited but relevant influence of C-substrate on Space and Time.
This means that psi should occur, but the hit rate would be low. Research to date, demonstrating
an effect, but a tiny one, but statistically significant, supports this. For example, well studied is
the Ganzfeld phenomenon, again another six-sigma aspect of research (see again, Chapters 22-
25) but limited when one compares numbers of hits obtained over the expected numbers of hits.
And Ganzfeld is amongst the most replicable of psi phenomena.

There may be support from other disciplines, e.g. entanglement, but one could debate its
links with psi. We have done so. (Ch. 25). There may also be a whole area of the social sciences
with experiments being potentially set up showing predictable meaningful changes in
individual-units when variables are manipulated. Now this would just involve consciousness
(C-substrate) and not necessarily psi. However, The social sciences are difficult to measure.
Nevertheless, Daryl Bem’s six sigma data research certainly supports this (see Ch. 22-25).146; 147

Similarly the work with neuroscience and direct changes (e.g., the role of neurological
consciousness in behavior) would be another fertile area. However, again the limitation is that
this can be argued to be a purely physical phenomenon based on space and time and that
consciousness is an epiphenomenon. Presentiment studies exhibit appropriate methodology and
are pertinent in this regard 220; 225; 226, 227. (again 6 sigma; see chapters 22-25), though.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 369
 There are other areas, possibly as cosmological and difficult to prove as parapsychology
is. One would be the data that has accumulated such as meaningful aspects of evolution versus
pure chance, and trying to explain discrete whole changes versus partial changes, and statistical
analyses in this regard. 10 This is, of course, a very hot potato, complicated by the religionists
interfering with the objective methodology.175-177 But ultimately, this area will evolve! But it is
particularly relevant as part of the secondary hypotheses in TDVP, because the axiom of origin
actually says that in finite reality ST and C substrates are inseparably tethered from the start (the
origin of existence, be it Big Bang or anything else).
Essentially, we're looking to test hypotheses, therefore, including past research already
done, and future research to be contemplated, that involves the physical time, space expression
of consciousness in the Consciousness, Biological, Psychological and Physical sciences. We
would have to also differentiate TDVP from models that argue that both space and time are not
epiphenomena of consciousness (as in an "idealism") or that consciousness is not an
epiphenomenon of space and time. The above suggestions do.

TDVP is a model in evolution: We do not have answers for everything. We’re not even
close. Solutions may take centuries, or may never occur in our current limited 3S-1t sentient
being reality because our 3S-1t reality prevents such intrusions. There are key elements that
may not be soluble at any point in the future.
The vast limitations of proof in biology and psychological sciences will not change. They
are based on inductive reason an order of magnitude less certain than the physical sciences,
which already are embedded in controversy. Much more needs to be done, and even then we
can never approach omniscience. The biological sciences and even more the psychological
databases are simply too tenuous to draw many conclusions, even in areas that have been
studied for decades. Inductive empirical proofs are simply at a different level from the physical
sciences, and even physics relies on inductive empiricism. We can never achieve complete
proof by even proving falsifiable scientific data, because the inductive elements limit proof and
we ultimately rely on less certainty than interpretations. Moreover, in TDVP, certain models are
even more esoteric and less subject to proof: How do we show that “life” always exists, as
opposed to times when there is no life /no existence? We can make conceptual jumps and posit
new secondary ideas such as infinity and this leads to tertiary hypotheses such as infinite life.
And even despite enormous progress in applying TDVP to the mathematicological models, we
have not yet, and likely will never prove each and every secondary and tertiary component of
TDVP. However, no theory devised by mankind ever has been, or ever will be, the final and
complete answer to all questions. At this point, the Neppe-Close TDVP, based in sound logic,
provides the most comprehensive metaparadigm with its own fully-developed innovative
mathematical language.

Practical Separation of the Levels of Hypotheses.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 370
 A linguistic element of practical relevance is why do we refer to secondary and tertiary
ideas of TDVP, and not primary ones? Primary involves the inseparable STC tethering from the
origin. Everything else is a step down.

However, secondary hypotheses reflect consequences of this axiom but are extensions.
They include new ways of looking at time, infinity in the context of consciousness, space and
time. A tertiary or further hypothesis would be based on indivension, or involve research on the
finite discrete physical life track because they require the secondary ones to be true. Other
tertiary examples would be testing the origin of physical life (the actual how not the why or the
DNA/ physiology mechanism) and the existence of ordropy (effective multidimensional and
infinite order — as opposed to the unidimensional physical tendencies to disorder of entropy).
At that tertiary level, too, we could move to the quantal or subquantal levels investigating
Qualits and specifically Conscits. Conscits and the particle wave equivalents Psitrons or
Kinetrons would then be hypothetical ideas to research.

Refutation of a tertiary hypothesis does not disprove a secondary one, and similarly
secondary hypothesis refutation doesn’t invalidate our primary TDVP axiom. A refuted tertiary
hypothesis demonstrated as false creates a dent only. However, if e.g., eternal life were not
falsified but feasibly supported by data then it would support the primary hypothesis, noting,
however, that feasibility has its own limitations in proof level: It shows only that something is
possible.

Mathematicologic approach to hypothesis testing for TDVP.

The alternative way to test TDVP is to create a thought experiment. And this is what
mathematicologic and mathematical physics may be all about. This is why we have emphasized
mathematicologic, which is based on deductive reasoning. We would hope that a mathematical
model which includes dimensional extrapolation will be more complete by the time our book
Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad is published. These theorems involve inter
alia a variant of geometry across dimensions (dimensionometry) and necessarily invoke areas of
logic as in the Calculus of Distinctions combined with other aspects of mathematics and
physics. So, this would involve a testable, replicable, deductive mathematical proof.

We raise a separate final difficult question. Even if we accept "consciousness”, how do

we ensure STC tethering is not just "consciousness" impacting Space and Time. As we see it,
essentially much of our physical reality in space and time supports STC. If we completely
separate consciousness from space and time, it creates the typical philosophical problems of
dualism or idealism, e.g., interfaces and origins. These make for less simplicity, parsimony and
reasonableness of explanations and create hypotheses beyond our current TDVP.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 371
Chapter 46: IS TDVP TRULY A THEORY OF EVERYTHING? 419

“A theory must be tempered with reality.”

Jawaharlal Nehru (1889 – 1964; Prime Minister of India)

For a Theory of Everything (TOE) to be truly a TOE, it must be feasible at every level of
endeavor. The true TOE is universal and leads to a metaparadigm. It must necessarily have the
following properties:

• It must be scientifically feasible, even when opponents don’t like the idea.
• Applying LFAF, despite active applicability to the physical, psychological, consciousness
and life sciences, it must not be falsified and it must remain feasible in all these sciences.
• It must be feasible subatomically, in macrophysical reality and cosmologically.
• It must be mathematically appropriate.
• It must form an appropriate theoretical model for philosophy, theology and mysticism.

1. The only model that fits these criteria—the model we’ve developed—is called the Triadic
Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP). Therefore, we discuss it below.

2. The TDVP model has several fundamental premises:

• The laws of nature should be universally applicable to to all reality—the finite and
infinite subrealities.
• The laws of nature are interpreted and experienced for us as humans in a finite subreality
and specifically by living humans in 3S-1t (3 dimensions of space in a specific moment in
time).
• We do not know all the laws of nature pertaining to infinity.
• The infinite subreality interchanges with the finite subreality.

3. This infinite essence expresses itself in an all-encompassing space (metaspace), an all-

present time (metatime), an all-pervasive information (metainformation) with meaning
(metaconsciousness), associated with all-pervasive order (ordropy) and existence
(potential life or “polife”).

4. The continuous infinite subreality allows for a potential, which can be translated into
specific finite discrete subreality. The potentials are expressed in tracks of finite
existence, which may make up the history of our finite existence, but effectively, an
infinite number of tracks may exist in the infinite subreality.

5. Space, time and a broader descriptive “consciousness” (S, T and C-substrates) are
fundamentally inseparably tethered from the finite origin event (e.g., the big bang)
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 372
 producing a unified wholeness of cosmic reality. (Axiom of Tethered Origin [ATO]).

6. The TDVP model is versatile, involving a process of fluctuating dimensions with

indivensions, and a content mechanism with vortices.

7. In the life sciences, the potential for life exists in the infinite subreality. In the finite
subreality, it arises around the big bang event horizon (see Definition section) or any
Origin Event in the C-substrate. Physical life becomes actualized into finite reality when
the correct genetic and anatomicophysiological markers evolve to sustain such existence.

8. There is no current TOE that fits all these criteria, other than TDVP. The essential
characteristics of TDVP include the consciousness elements of:
a. “Consciousness”. This is not unique for a TOE. Models such as those of Klein, Evert,
Laszlo, Smythies and Carr recognize the pre-eminence of consciousness and possibly
Hoffman recognizes the pre-eminence of information.
b. Consciousness as conceived of in several components: H-C as Higher consciousness, N-C as
Neurological consciousness, E-C as ego-consciousness, Q-C as Meaningful reality at the
quantal level. These together are deliberately called “C-substrate” to ensure this concept is
understood, as the conceptualization may be unique.
c. C-substrate has several subcomponents: It can be expressed in CEV: Cognition, Emotion,
Volition, which have solid expressions through neurophysiology of CNS consciousness, or it
can be expressed as possible Higher Consciousness component qualities such as love,
honor, courage, wisdom, understanding and a wide variety of qualities relating to higher
attributes or it can be expressed at its most basic level (e.g., quantal) with apprehension or
perturbation of objects or events.
d. Ultimately in the living organism, the expression of such awareness while awake in clear
neurological consciousness is through the brain (CNS consciousness; also called N-C).
However, we do not regard “consciousness” as simply being explained as an
epiphenomenon of physical evolution without resorting to some unexplained “self-
organization”. In other words, we cannot explain all aspects of consciousness and meaning
and qualities such as honesty, love and courage simply based on biochemical or electrical
processes in the brain. We cannot reduce consciousness to a reflex, a habit or an
organismal stimulus, integration and response. There has to be a level of order to it, a level
allowing separation of self from not self. Moreover, quantum physics requires that
consciousness precedes the first quantum out of the big bang.

9. The essential characteristics of TDVP also include the dimensional and distinction
elements of:
a. An N-Dimensional base. Such a base includes hyperspace and various string theories. This
requirement eliminates those models that are still based on the 3S-1t standard physical
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 373
 paradigmatic model, which explains most daily experience but does not explain the
contradictory data. ND reality with N>4 is a hypothesis. However, it is strongly supported
with logic, mathematics and empirical evidence.
b. TDVP is the only model that employs a new multi-dimensional mathematics (the calculus of
distinctions) developed specifically for the model.
c. The unification of STC substrates. The only other TOE amongst the current ones is that of
Laszlo (though it does not use tethering). Hoffman’s model uses mass-energy-information
as a basic threesome though not unified inseparably and this threesome in the calculus of
distinctions involve “content’ and not the metric of “intent”.
d. The concepts of pervasive processes are frequent in the TOE model. This includes not only
TDVP with vortical indivension, but Sheldrake’s morphogenetic fields, Carr’s TFT,
Laszlo’s akashic fields, and also seen in String theory, Hawking, Langan, Watson and
Smythies plus Klein’s subquantum. However, TDVP is a metalevel higher than these.
e. The only model that moves across fluctuating dimensions is TDVP.
f. The tethering of STC and vortical separations allowing communications between, across
and within dimensions is unique to TDVP. This is the indivension process.
g. Indivension relating to individual-units and communication both at a state and trait level.
This integrates the social sciences and allows for a fluctuating number of dimensions. This
is unique to TDVP. The concepts of pervasive processes are frequent in the TOE model.
h. The Space Substrate is at least three dimensional and represented mathematically as real
numbers. The Time Substrate is posited as multidimensional and applies the imaginary
numbers (as per Minkowski space). Because C-substrate is tethered with time and space,
the interface is likely to be represented mathematically as complex numbers (the sum of real
and imaginary numbers). Both T and C may be conceptualized applying quaternions.
i. Multidimensional time, which several have proposed, but not fully integrated, e.g.,
(alphabetically) Broad, Carr, Close, Dunne, possibly Hawking, Neppe and Whiteman.
TDVP provides a model and reason for NT, particularly including 3T.

10. The essential characteristics of TDVP also include the origin elements of:
a. The initial elements from the Origin Event or equivalent. This is comprehensible mystically,
e.g., Kabbalah and possibly Vedic philosophy, and also through Laszlo, Lanza and Watson
and possibly Campbell (“void”).
b. The unification of past, present and future. This is comprehensible mystically, e.g., Kabbalah
and also An N-Dimensional base. Such a base includes hyperspace and various string
theories. This requirement eliminates those models that are still based on the 3S-1t standard
physical paradigmatic model, which explains most daily experience but does not explain the
contradictory data. ND reality with N>4 is a hypothesis. However, it is strongly supported
with logic, mathematics and empirical evidence.
c. The integration of biology including ordropy and life. The interpretation of how life actually
begins is a unique part of the model and involves an explanation for life. A similar concept
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 374
 is implied in Watson’s enformy but is not so verbalized.
d. Conceptual linguistic elements with order are used in Langan and Watson et al, as well our
TDVP model of multidimensional ordropy and balances of entropy.
e. The role of the infinite, and its interaction with the finite, which very few paradigms
incorporate. Kabbalic and Vedic mysticism recognizes this.

11. Specific hypotheses or tests that have been proposed to support several other TOEs will
not refute the TDVP model but provide added supporting feasibility data. This great
flexibility involving process-content across dimensions allows for the applicability of the
model across numerous different disciplines and across many concepts. Consequently,
specific hypotheses or tests that have been proposed to support several other TOEs will
not refute the TDVP model but if related, at a “lower” metalevel (e.g. fields, subquantal
matrix) provide added supporting feasibility data.

12. TDVP as expected scores a maximum. In fact, at this point, the only TOE it competes
against is making itself better. However, it is somewhat tautological because the criteria
we have deemed important may not be the criteria that others deem important.
Nevertheless, the criteria derivation were sent to the developers (or with Kabbalah and
Vedic mysticism, the representatives) of all available authors (15/21). Moreover, even
taking out the 12 items involving comparisons of specific analyses, TDVP scores
maximally (of course now 27/27) and no other model approaches such scores (except the
initial Neppe and Close models).

Remarkably TDVP scores a full 39/39. This would be required for a real TOE because it cannot
afford exceptions. These results strongly motivate for the powerful breadth of TDVP as a TOE
and a paradigm shift. These qualitative results are even more dramatic when looked at
quantitatively. No other TOE besides our previous Neppe and Close models, score above 19/39.
Nevertheless, a perfect score using comparative ordinal metrics simply makes the model a
candidate for a workable metaparadigmatic shift. Tests of data already available and of
hypotheses showing absent falsifiability and feasibility dimensionally (3S-1t is most easily
researched) are critical further empirical, usually inductive reasoning based, scientific tests.
Additionally, deductive approaches using mathematics, mathematical physics and logic have
been applied to TDVP: Results are very encouraging and support this model.

13. TDVP impacts several speculative critical and fundamental ideas:

• Three dimensions of time,
• N-Dimensions of consciousness,
• cause-effect,
• cognition-affect-volition,
• ego-boundaries,
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 375
 • free-will,
• hyperspace,
• meaningful information, knowledge and awareness, understanding, wisdom and thought
and
• their influence across and interactions with subtypes of affect and volition, life, mystical
awareness, special higher qualities such as love, and causality.
• “Metaconsciousness”, subject-object paradoxes, multidimensional time-space and
numinosity, are all introduced.
• Relative non-locality, relative zero, relative time, relative infinity and even relative non-
Euclidean mathematics facilitate the interface with our current physical universe.
• An ultimate end-point is the infinite interacting with the finite even prior to the Origin
Event with a Primary Receptor.
• This produces an open-closed, holistic-unified, finite-infinite
• universally applicable biopsychophysical reality.
• Ultimately, at minimum there is a 3S-3T-3C reality (implying 3 dimensions each of
space, time and C-substrate) but there may be more dimensions of time and space than
3, and
• almost certainly it is 3S-3T-NC (implying N dimensions of C-substrate [broader
consciousness])

14. Even more so, the greater speculation of C-substrate particularly metadimensionality
reflecting extra dimensions based on Higher Consciousness forces is posited.

15. The speculative but important idea of all fundamental forces warping reality as a
mechanism to extrapolate dimensions, following on an adaptation of Einsteinian general
relativity is raised.

16. We perceive TDVP as a critically important beginning with demonstrated feasibility

through application to various fields of science, from quantum physics to the life sciences
to consciousness research. The model should evoke further research and demonstrate a
viable mathematical and scientific theoretical framework. From a simple axiom of the
fundamental tethering of space, time and C-substrates from the Origin Event, TDVP
generates about 600 different ideas.

17. TDVP may become a major contribution to the physical, biological, psychological and
consciousness sciences, as well as to mathematics, philosophy, the philosophy of science.
It impacts on the scientific linking of mysticism and spirituality. TDVP pioneers the new
discipline of "dimensional biopsychophysics".

We have been unable to find an area in which our TDVP model does not conform to the LFAF
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 376
rule. The Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) truly appears to be a
tenable paradigmatic shift.

The core axioms and points effectively separate out each component of our metaparadigm. This
includes the necessity for infinity, for the origin of everything, for tethering associated with the
absolute incontrovertible link of meaning with space-time dimensionality and the component of
order as multidimensional ordropy, and the need for ordropy as reflected in life. We speculate
this could be a mechanism or functional explanation or a distinction of intent. The same applies
for density. Intent would then be meaning within the substrate.

Our metaparadigm has not altered fundamentally since we first brought it out because our ideas
reflect the same model of our original TDVP concepts. However, the emphasis is a little
different with added clarity about time, the infinite, the top-down approach, fluctuations,
distinctions with the role of density linking content with extent.

Every one of these features is in our metaparadigm. Every axiom is fundamental but global
axiomatic groups are infinity, finity and the boundary permeability contiguously and also with
the top-down approaching the bottoms-up. The TDVP model cannot work without these two
components. But our mixed dilemma is that consciousness and meaning alone is insufficient to
imply the potential of life. Consciousness and meaning are still linked up with our S, T, C
tethering and inseparability at that finite level but life becomes part of this ordropy at the
infinite level. The key to it is also the linkage back to the Origin Event.

We’ve noted that instead of diminishing the excitement we experienced as each new version of
TDVP was distributed to our peers and earliest readers, we felt more confident that the revisions
we’ve produced are closer and closer to reality. We’ve seen how the model explains one
difficulty after another. It may be wrong, and it certainly is preliminary, but with respect, we
think that this model explains much of psi, including its rarity more than anything else that has
been proposed in the past.

A Theory of Everything requires a simple basic statement of truth that appears universally
applicable. Again, we modify Minkowski23:
“The views of space, time and a broad consciousness which we wish to lay before you, have
sprung from the soil of experimental physics, the toil of consciousness research and the
challenges of mathematics and logic, and therein lies their strength: A universality applicable
to the sciences, to mathematics, and to philosophical ideation. These views are radical, indeed,
reflecting a paradigm shift. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, and consciousness by
itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of tethered union of the

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 377
three from the very beginning will preserve an independent identity.” 23 iii

We now go one step further than our modification above of Minkowski’s famous link of space-
time and our linking of consciousness. This is so, as though it is poetic, we prefer to verbalize
our metaparadigm again in more detailed brush-strokes. Clearly S, T, and C-substrates and the
tethering are fundamental from the origin event. But we want to also emphasize the role of
dimensional distinctions, life, ordropy and infinity. Admittedly, with some difficulty, we place
this in a single lengthy metaparadigmatic but complex, and this time, non-poetic sentence.
However, by so doing, we illustrate the unification of all reality.

The Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) explains reality within the
fabric of the laws of nature. TDVP incorporates empirical and theoretical data from the
physical, psychological, biological and consciousness sciences and impacts in these areas.
TDVP is supported by precise mathematical expression and logic including the calculus of
distinctions and dimensional extrapolations. TDVP involves a scientifically derived
philosophical model of “Unified Monism”. The TDVP model and Unified Monism reflect a
unified holistic reality with an interweaving infinite continuous essence metareality. This
infinite subreality reflects an ordered (ordropic), “living”, all-encompassing space, time
and consciousness/information—pervading a finite subreality of a discrete, always
inseparably tightly tethered triad of S (space), T (time) and C-substrates (broader
“consciousness”).
This tethering provides a direct dimensional communication network and an indirect one
from afar (“relative non-locality” or “distant”) jjj . This is relative to the individual unit
involved because ultimately the experience is based on subjective observations and
consequently interpretations. These interpretations vary in domain finite space, time and
“Consciousness” (C-substrate) dimensions. There is a more “local” related interfacing
mechanism involving vortical indivension where direct interaction across, between and
within dynamic multidimensional finite realities occurs. The finite vortical indivensional
realities are always interfacing, manifesting and pervading the infinite subreality and the
finite also expresses itself in the infinite (e.g., as in “Life Track in sentient beings”), just as
the infinite influences and receives from the finite (they are always units). The tethering of
STC has always been from the finite origin of events, and without beginnning or end in the
infinite subreality. Even when S, T and C appear distinct of each other, they are more
iii
This quotation is again adapted from Hermann Minkowski, in his famous Cologne public lecture: 80th Assembly of German Natural
Scientists and Physicians. 21 Sept 1908 “The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of
experimental physics and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself and time by itself are doomed to fade
away into mere shadows and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent identity.”
jjj
It is in terms of such areas as describing time and space using our 3S-1t model despite in fact being relatively non-local in time and
space, that terminology is lacking. Distant here is not linear physical distance, just as “local” is in the context of metadimensionality.
Our language uses the metaphors of time and space and we are trying to describe information that is different still in those terms
applying “origin” and “beginning” differently, and even “order” and ordropy are very different from an ostensibly linear, physical
polar opposite with specific energy which we regard as “entropy”.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 378
 loosely still linked by the STC tether, even if only slightly kkk.
3-dimensional vortices interface within, between and across dimensions, and they are
dynamic, fluctuating over both moments in finite physically measured time, as well as over
much longer periods (e.g. millennia). Vortices provide the innumerable, interwoven content
fabric , and indivension the process of interfacing with zillions of other multiple interwoven,
fluctuating 3-dimensional individual-unit vortices. Additionally to its interwoven relative
indivension role where tethering may allow the fabric of what individual-units manifest by
vortical indivension with what (a non-random, meaningful process), tethering may allow for
ostensible “distant” transdimensional communications by the process of — individual units
interfacing across dimensions. These may be the manifestations of psi in local and non-local
contexts.
Reality is only experienced by us to a limited degree as sentient beings in our entropic
physical 3S-1t subreality domain. This is modulated through our restrictive perceptual and
responsive 3S-1t perceptual physical experience. The reality is interpreted by our living
physiological ordropic individualism and collective individual units. The reality is
conceptualized subjectively relative to our own individual-units.

This is the paradigm of Triadic Tethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity
[TTOOURS] which reflects our reality response to the TDVP model.

Let us imagine once again: Expanding our awareness from 3S-1t-1c to include at least a limited
sphere of 3-dimensional time and N-dimensional consciousness spanning the space, time and
consciousness of human history, past, present and future: What do we see? We see the giants of
science and spirituality upon whose shoulders we stand, and we see an integrated future Science
of Reality begetting a better, more enlightened humanity. Focusing down to Earth, 2012, past
the end of the long count of the Mayan calendar, and all the dire predictions, what do we see?
The world has changed. Human beings have changed, reflecting a bit more clearly the ordropy
of the Transfinite Reality. In short, the finite has changed, the infinite has not.

“Humanity has never been anything but God asleep, entertaining itself with dreams of shadow
and light, plus and minus, pleasure and pain! …Consciousness is, and always has been… There
is no separateness. I simply recognize my original state.” Edward R. Close, 1977 3

kkk
“Untethering” is a term we previously used but which we now recognize as inappropriate. By definition—axiomatically—in
TDVP, STC is always in some kind of way tethered, even if the specific circumstance may reflect only minimal tethering. Given its
relative domain locality, what is minimal in one domain, may be profound in another. Theoretically “untethering” could occur but this
would invoke a contradiction of the STC unification. Apparent untethering may appear to occur due to individual dimensional
limitations (a specific indivension situation) but complete separation would be a contradiction of STC unification.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 379
References.

1. Wang H: A Logical Journey. Boston: MIT Press, 1996.

2. Neppe VM: Cry the Beloved Mind: A Voyage of Hope. Seattle: Brainquest Press 1999.
3. Close ER: The Book of Atma. New York: Libra Publishers, 1977.
4. Pappas T: The Joy of Mathematics. San Carlos: Wide World Publishing, 1993.
5. Neppe VM. (1997). Vortex Pluralism: A New Philosophical Perspective. from
http://www.pni.org/philosophy/vortex_pluralism.shtml/
6. Neppe VM: Vortex N-Dimensional Pluralism: Scientific Empiricism, the Heuristic Approach and Natural
Law, in. 2003.
7. Neppe VM: Vortex N-Dimensionalism: A Philosophical–Scientific Paradigm and Alternative to Mind-Body
Theories, in. 2003.
8. Close ER: Transcendental Physics. Lincoln: I universe, 2000.
9. Neppe VM, Close ER: Reality Begins with Consciousness: A Paradigm Shift That Works. Seattle:
Brainvoyage.com, 2012.
10. Close ER, Neppe VM: Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com, in
press.
11. Harris K. (1995). Collected Quotes from Albert Einstein. Retrieved 8/10/2011, from
http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshire/EinsteinQuotes.html
12. Myers FWH: Human Personality and Its Survival of Bodily Death. London Longmans, Green and Co.,
1919.
13. Kelly E, Kelly E, Crabtree A, et al.: Irreducible Mind: Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century. Lanham,
MD Rowman and Littlefield, 2007.
14. Neppe VM: Prologue: The Style of Sciction, in Cry the Beloved Mind: A Voyage of Hope. Edited by Neppe
VM. Seattle, WA, Brainvoyage.com, 1999, pp. xiv-xv.
15. Neppe VM: Quakes, Vol. Revisions - 2003, 2004, 2005. Seattle, WA: Brainvoyage.com, 2002.
16. Neppe VM: Explorations in Literature: Sciction—a New Literary Genre—and a New Method of
Paragraphing—the Conversagraph. Telicom 21:2; 77-87, 2008.
17. Close ER: Infinite Continuity: A Theory Integrating Relativity and Quantum Physics. Los Angeles:
Paradigm Press, 1990.
18. Neppe VM, Close ER: Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm: Priorities. Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1201:1201; 1031-1043, 2012.
19. Kuhn T: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 1st Edition. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1962.
20. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Thirty Key Points Perspective of the TDVP (Triadic Dimensional Distinction
Vortical Paradigm): Priorities. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1201:1201;
1044-1058, 2012.
21. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Seventy Other Elements to the TDVP (Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm): A Summary. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1201:1201; 1059-1078,
2012.
22. Popper K: Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge and Keagan Paul, 1972.
23. Minkowski H: Raum Und Zeit. Physikalische Zeitschrift 10104–111, 1908.
24. Neppe VM, Close ER: Limitations of the Standard Model of Physics. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional
Creative Achievement 1201:1201; 1001-1010, 2012.
25. Einstein A: Relativity, the Special and the General Theory 15 Edition. New York: Crown Publishers, 1952.
26. Minkowski H, Lorentz HA, Einstein A, et al.: The Principle of Relativity: A Collection of Original
Memoirs: Dover, 1952.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 380
27. Sheldrake R: A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Formative Causation. London: Blond and Briggs,
1981.
28. Halpern P: The Great Beyond: Higher Dimensions, Parallel Universes and the Extraordinary Search for a
Theory of Everything. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
29. Hawking S: The Theory of Everything. Beverly Hills: New Millennium Press, 2007.
30. Wilber K: A Theory of Everything: An Integral Vision for Business, Politics, Science, and Spirituality.
Boston: Shambhala Publications, 2000.
31. Oerter R: The Theory of Almost Everything: The Standard Model, the Unsung Triumph of Modern Physics.
New York: Person Education, 2006.
32. Schumm BA: Deep Down Things: The Breathtaking Beauty of Particle Physics. Baltimore: John Hopkins
University Press, 2004.
33. Zee A: Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.
34. Peacock KA: The Quantum Revolution. New York: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2008.
35. Heilbron JL: The Dilemmas of an Upright Man: Max Planck and the Fortunes of German Science. H.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press., 2000.
36. Anonymous. (2011, June 11, 2011). Cosmology. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmology
37. Anonymous. (2011, May 1, 2011). Supersymmetry. Retrieved 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersymmetry
38. Anonymous. (2011, May 26, 2011). Antiparticle. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiparticles
39. Aczel AD: Entanglement: The Greatest Mystery in Physics. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2001.
40. Anastopoulos C: Particle or Wave: The Evolution of the Concept of Matter in Modern Physics. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 2008.
41. Bohr N: Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. Woodbridge: Ox Bow Press, 1987
42. Cheng TP, Li LF: Gauge Theory of Elementary Particle Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
43. Einstein A: Physics and Reality. http://www.kostic.niu.edu/: Monograph, 1936.
44. Fritzsch H: The Fundamental Constants: A Mystery of Physics. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific
Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, 2009.
45. Heisenberg W: Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.
46. Penrose SR, Hameroff S: Consciousness in the Universe: Quantum Physics, Evolution, Brain & Mind.
Cambridge: Cosmology Science Publishers, 2011.
47. Stachel J: Einstein's Miraculous Year: Five Papers That Changed the Face of Physics. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2005.
48. Talbot M: Mysticism and the New Physics (Revision). New York: Random House, 1992
49. Wheeler JA: At Home in the Universe. Woodbury, NY: American Institute of Physics, 1994.
50. Zee A: Fearful Symmetry: The Search for Beauty in Modern Physics. New York: MacMillian, 1986.
51. Zukav G: The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics New York City: William Morrow,
1979.
52. Anonymous. (2011, June 13, 2011). Dark Matter. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
53. Anonymous. (2011, June 4, 2011). Coupling Constant. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling_constant
54. Anonymous. (2011, June 15, 2011). Lagrangian Mechanics. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_mechanics
55. Anonymous. (2011, June 7, 2011). Quantum Chromodynamics. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chromodynamics
56. Anonymous. (2011, 13 June 2011). Standard Model. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
57. Anonymous. (2011, April 30, 2011). Planck Scale. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_scale
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 381
58. Anonymous. (2011, June 12, 2011). Matter. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter
59. Anonymous. (2011, June 8, 2011). Antimatter. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter
60. Anonymous. (2011, May 26, 2011). Asymmetry. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetry
61. Anonymous. (2011, May 11, 2011). Isotropy. 201, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotropic
62. Anonymous. (2011, May 5, 2011). Homogeneity (Physics). 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homogeneity_(physics)
63. Anonymous. (2011, June 7, 2011). Inflation (Cosmology). 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)
64. Wong SS (ed.). Introductory Nuclear Physics. New York, Wiley Interscience, 1998.
65. Henley EM, Garcia A (eds.): Subatomic Physics. Singapore, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.,
2007.
66. Guth AH: The Inflationary Universe. Reading: Perseus Books, 1997.
67. Guth AH: Eternal Inflation and Its Implications. J. Phys. A: Math. Theory 406811-6826, 2007.
68. Close ER: The Earth Is Expanding. Telicom 24:1; 20-29, 2011.
69. Close ER: Why the Earth May Be Expanding or Is Only Expansion of the Universe?. Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1211:1211; 18**-18**, 2012.
70. Poynton JC: Many Levels, Many Worlds and Psi: A Guide to the Work of Michael Whiteman
. Proceedings Soc. Psy. Res. 59:222; 109-139, 2011.
71. Klein A, Boyd RN: Toward a New Subquantum Integration Approach to Sentient Reality, in. 2010.
72. Povh B, Scholz C, Rith K, et al.: Particles and Nuclei. New York: Springer, 2008.
73. Anonymous. (2011, June 14, 2011). Astrophysics. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysics
74. Anonymous. (2011). Nuclear Physics. Retrieved June 10, 2011, 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_physics
75. Anonymous. (2011, March 21, 2011). Quantum Field Theory. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_field_theory
76. Anonymous. (2011). Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking. from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_symmetry_breaking
77. Anonymous. (2011, June 4, 2011). Physics Beyond the Standard Model. Retrieved 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_the_Standard_Model
78. Anonymous. (2011, June 3, 2011). Hypothetical Particles. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_particles#Hypothetical_particles
79. Anonymous. (2010, April 7, 2010). Extra Dimension. Retrieved 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_dimensions
80. Anastopoulos C: Particle or Wave. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008.
81. Neppe VM: Falsifiability Versus Feasibility. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement
1201:1201; 1011-1020, 2012.
82. Popper K: A World of Propensities London: Thoemmes, 1990.
83. Bell JS: On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox. Physics 1195-200, 1964.
84. Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N: Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be
Considered Complete? Phys. Rev. 47:10; 777-780, 1935.
85. Acin A, Chen JL, Gisin N, et al.: Coincidence Bell Inequality for Three Three-Dimensional Systems. Phys.
Rev. Lett 92:92; 250404-250408, 2004.
86. Tittel W, Brendel J, Zbinden H, et al.: Violation of Bell's Inequalities by Photons More Than 10 Km Apart.
Physical Review Letters 813563-3566, 1998.
87. Aspect A, P. G, Roger G: Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedanken
Experiment: A New Violation of Bell's Inequalities. Physical Review Letters 49:2; 91-94, 1982.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 382
88. Wheeler JA: Delayed-Choice Experiments and the Bohr-Einstein Dialogue, in The American Philosophical
Society and the Royal Society: Papers Read at a Meeting, June 5, 1980. Edited by Society AP, Britain)
RSG. Philadelphia, American Philosophical Society, 1980, pp. 9-40.
89. Carter C: Science and Psychic Phenomena. 1st Edition. Pittsburgh, PA: Sterlinghouse, 2012.
90. Feyerabend P: Against Method. Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge London: Verso, 1975.
91. Feyerabend P: Science in a Free Society. London: Verso, 1978.
92. Collins CB, Hawking S: Why Is the Universe Isotropic? Astrophysical Journal 180317-334, 1973.
93. Laudan L: The Demise of the Demarcation Problem., in Physics, Philosophy, and Psychoanalysis: Essays in
Honor of Adolf Grünbaum.Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science Vol. 76 Edited by Cohen RS,
Laudan L. Dordrecht, Reidel, 1983, pp. 111-127.
94. Poynton JC: Popperian Thought, in Personal communication to a closed Internet group. Seattle and Israel,
2011.
95. Grünbaum A: Geometry and Chronometry in Philosophical Perspective. Minnesota: Minnesota Press, 1968.
96. Dunne JW: An Experiment with Time. London: Black, 1927.
97. Neppe VM, Close ER: Philosophy of Science; the New Paradigm Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1201:1201; 1021-1030, 2012.
98. Owen HG: The Earth Is Expanding and We Don't Know Why. New Scientist 2227-29, 1983.
99. Eddington A: The Expanding Universe: Astronomy's 'Great Debate', 1900-1931. Cambridge: Press
Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 1933.
100. Neppe VM, Close ER: TDVP (Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm) as a Fundamental
Model. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1201:1201; 1079-1091, 2012.
101. Neppe VM: Six Sigma Protocols, Survival / Superpsi and Meta-Analysis, in. group Csd, 2011.
102. Wang H: Reflections on Kurt Gödel. Boston: MIT Press, 1987.
103. Berto F: There's Something About Gödel: The Complete Guide to the Incompleteness Theorem. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 2010.
104. Smullyan R: Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
105. Bell JS: Bertlemann's Socks and the Nature of Reality. Journal de Physique Colloques 42:C2; C2-63,
1981.
106. Bell JS: On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics 38:3;
447-452, 1966.
107. Prigogine I, Stengers I: Order out of Chaos. New York: Bantam Books, 1984.
108. Gill RD, Weihs G, Zeilinger A, et al.: Comment on “Exclusion of Time in the Theorem of Bell” by K. Hess
and W. Philipp.. Europhysics Letters 61:282–283, 2003.
109. Neppe VM, Close ER: A New Perspective on Reality. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1202:1202; 1092-1101, 2012.
110. Dosch HG: Beyond the Nanoworld: Quarks, Leptons, and Gauge Bosons. Wellesley: Peters, 2008.
111. Close ER, Neppe VM: Space, Time and Consciousness. A Linkage. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional
Creative Achievement 1202:1202; 1101 -1115, 2012.
112. Brax P. (2011). The Supermoduli Space of Matrix String Theory. 2011, from
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/411941/files/9912103.pdf
113. Gowers T: Mathematics: A Brief Insight. New York: Sterling, 2010.
114. Stewart I: The Mathematics of Life. NY: Basic Books, 2011.
115. Gariaev PP, Friedman MJ, Leonova- Gariaeva EA. (2011). Crisis in Life Sciences. The Wave Genetics
Response. from http://www.emergentmind.org/gariaev06.htm
116. Cantor G (ed.). Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers. New York, Dover,
1955.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 383
117. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Qualit Model: Extending Planck. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1208:1208; 1559-1568, 2012.
118. Chalmers DJ: Facing up to the Problems of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, University
of Arizona 2:3; 200-219, 1995.
119. Chalmers DJ: The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1996.
120. Brandin V, Close ER: The Calculus of Dimensional Distinction, in Elements of mathematical theory of
intellect. Moscow, Interphysica Lab, 2003.
121. Brown GS: Laws of Form. New York: Julian Press, 1977.
122. Neppe VM: The Broader Consciousness. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement
1202:1202; 1116-1128, 2012.
123. Neppe VM: Revisiting Survival 37 Years Later: Is the Data Still Compelling? Journal of Spirituality and
Paranormal Studies 33:3; 123-147, 2010.
124. Neppe VM: Phenomenological Consciousness Research: Ensuring Homogeneous Data Collection for
Present and Future Research on Possible Psi Phenomena by Detailing Subjective Descriptions, Using
the Multi-Axial a to Z Seattle Classification. Neuroquantology 9:1; 84-105, 2011.
125. Neppe VM: Models of the out of Body Experience: A New Multi-Etiological Phenomenological Approach.
Neuroquantology 9:1; 72-83, 2011.
126. Anonymous. (2011, June 10, 2011). Glasgow Coma Scale. Retrieved 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Coma_Scale
127. Neppe VM: Temporal Lobe Symptomatology in Subjective Paranormal Experients. Journal of the
American Society for Psychical Research 77:1; 1-29, 1983.
128. Palmer J, Neppe VM: Exploratory Analyses of Refined Predictors of Subjective Esp Experiences and
Temporal Lobe Dysfunction in a Neuropsychiatric Population. European Journal of Parapsychology
1944-65, 2004.
129. Neppe VM: The Psychology of Déjà Vu: Have I Been Here Before? Johannesburg: Witwatersrand
University Press, 1983.
130. Blanke O: Out of Body Experiences and Their Neural Basis. Bmj 329:7480; 1414-1415, 2004.
131. Blanke O, Ortigue S, Landis T, et al.: Stimulating Illusory Own-Body Perceptions. Nature 419:6904; 269-
270, 2002.
132. Persinger MA: Psi Phenomena and Temporal Lobe Activity: The Geomagnetic Factor, in. Paper, The
Parapsychological Association 31st Annual Convention, Montreal, Quebec, 1988.
133. Persinger MA: Preadolescent Religious Experience Enhances Temporal Lobe Signs in Normal Young
Adults. Percept Mot Skills 72:2; 453-454, 1991.
134. Persinger MA: Enhanced Incidence Of "The Sensed Presence" In People Who Have Learned to Meditate:
Support for the Right Hemispheric Intrusion Hypothesis. Percept Mot Skills 75:3 Pt 2; 1308-1310, 1992.
135. Neppe VM: Re-Examining Current Neuroscience Research Controversies. Aus. J. Paraps 8:2; 128-156,
2008.
136. Neppe VM: Neurobiology, Brain Reductionism and Subjective Experience, in Mysterious Minds: The
Neurobiology of Psychics, Mediums and Other Extraordinary People. Edited by Krippner S, Friedman
H. Westport, CT, Greenwood Press and Praeger Publishers, 2009, pp. Chapter 7, 129-150129-150150.
137. Neppe VM, A.T. F (eds.): Déjà Vu: A Second Look. Seattle, Brainquest Press, 2006.
138. Neppe VM: Déjà Vu Revisited. Seattle: Brainquest Press, 2006.
139. Smythies JR: The Walls of Plato’s Cave. Aldershot: Avebury Press, 1994.
140. Bohm D: Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London: Routledge, 1980.
141. Klein A: Email Discussion in Personal communication of July to VMNeppe. Seattle and Israel, 2011.
142. Klein A: Email Discussion in Personal communication of August to VMNeppe. Seattle and Israel, 2011.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 384
143. Klein A: Comments on the Subquantum Model of Klein and Boyd, in Personal communication to
VMNeppe. Seattle and Israel, 2011.
144. Close ER, Neppe VM: Dimensions, Consciousness and Infinity. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1202:1202; 1129 -1139, 2012.
145. Wang H: From Mathematics to Philosophy. London Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974.
146. Bem D: Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition
and Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100:3; 1-19, 2011.
147. Bem DJ, Utts J, Johnson W: Must Psychologists Change the Way They Analyze Their Data? A Response to
Wagenmakers, Wetzels, Borsboom, & Van Der Maas (2011). Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology:In press, 2011.
148. Dossey L: Why Are Scientists Afraid of Daryl Bem? Explore 7:3; 127-137, 2011.
149. Lounds P: The Influence of Psychokinesis on the Randomly-Generated Order of Emotive and Non-Emotive
Slides. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 59:832; 187-193, 1993.
150. Kumar M: Quantum: Einstein, Bohr and the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality. Thriplow,
Cambridge: Icon Books Ltd, 2009.
151. László E: Evolution Presupposes Design, So Why the Controversy?, Huffington Post April 15, 2010, 2010.
152. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Mathematics and Logic of Infinity Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1202:1202; 1140 -1158, 2012.
153. Whitehead AN, Russell B: Principia Mathematica: Volumes 1 to 3. London: Cambridge University Press,
1910.
154. Kaplan A: Sefer Yetzirah: The Book of Creation in Theory and Practice. San Francisco, CA: Weiser
Books, 1997.
155. Kaplan A: Sefer Yetzirah: The Book of Creation. New York: Samuel Weiser, 1991.
156. Neppe VM, Dan B: Déjà Vu Subtypes: Four Challenges for Researchers, in Déjà Vu: A Second Look.
Edited by Neppe VM, Funkhouser AT. Seattle, Brainquest Press, 2006, pp. 52-67.
157. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Infinite: Essence, Life and Extropy Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1202:1202; 1159-1169, 2012.
158. Price HH: Survival and the Idea of Another World, in Society for Psychical Research, January, 1953,
Society for Psychical Research, 1953, pp. 1-24.
159. Neppe VM: A Detailed Analysis of an Important Chess Game: Revisiting ‘Maróczy Versus Korchnoi’.
Journal Soc. Psychical Research 71:3; 129-147, 2007.
160. Merali Z: Physics of the Divine. Discover Magazine:3 (March); 48-53, 2011.
161. Close ER: Determinism, Probabilism, Free Will and the Need for a New Scientific Paradigm. Telicom
23:4; 29-37, 2010.
162. Barukcic I: Anti Heisenberg—Refutation of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Relation. AIP Conf. Proc 1327 \322-
325, 2011.
163. Yu N, Dehmelt H, Nagourney W: Miniature Paul-Straubel Ion Trap with Well-Defined Deep Potential
Well. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86:5672; 8618-8619, 1989.
164. Anonymous. (2011). The Nobel Prize in Physics 1989 Norman F. Ramsey, Hans G. Dehmelt, Wolfgang
Paul. from http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1989/dehmelt.html
165. Freeman W: How Brains Make Chaos in Order to Make Sense of the World. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences 10161-195, 1987.
166. Morris HM, Morris JD. (1997). Can Order Come out of Chaos? BTG,. 102 June. from
http://ldolphin.org/chaos.html
167. Anonymous. (2011). Chaos Theory. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory
168. Neppe VM: The Infinite-Finite Boundary. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement
1202:1202; 1170-1179, 2012.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 385
169. Neppe VM: Window into the Mind, in Man and the Paranormal. Edited by Coly L, Shapin B. New York,
Parapsychological Foundation, 1989, pp. 1-18.
170. Neppe VM: Innovative Psychopharmacotherapy Revised 1st edit (1st edition 1989) Edition. New York:
Raven Press, 1990.
171. Neppe VM: Carbamazepine in Non-Responsive Psychosis. Epilepsy International Congress, Hamburg,
1985.
172. Russell P. (2011, 6/9). Does Our Brain Really Create Consciousness. The Huffington Post, from
www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-russell/brain-consciousness_b_873595.html
173. Pribram KH: Brain and Perception: Holonomy and Structure in Figural Processing. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Asociates, 1991.
174. Talbot M: The Holographic Universe. New York: Harper Collins, 1991
175. Schroeder GL: The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom. New York: The
Free Press, 1998.
176. Schroeder GL: The Hidden Face of God: Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth. New York: Harper Collins,
1990.
177. Schroeder GL: Genesis and the Big Bang. New York: Harper Collins, 1990.
178. Neppe VM, Palmer J: Subjective Anomalous Events: Perspectives for the Future, Voices from the Past, in
Parapsychology in the 21st Century: Essays on the Future of Psychical Research. Edited by Storm L,
Thalbourne M. Jefferson, NC, MacFarland, 2005, pp. 242-274.
179. Neppe VM: Science and Theoretical Models. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement
1203:1203; 1204-1218 2012.
180. Neppe V: Symptomatology of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. S Afr Med J, 60:23; 902-907, 1981.
181. Neppe V: Non-Epileptic Symptoms of Temporal Lobe Dysfunction.. S Afr Med J, 60:26; 989-991., 1981.
182. Neppe VM: Double Blind Studies in Medicine: Perfection or Imperfection? Telicom 20:6 (Nov. -Dec); 13-
23., 2007.
183. Neppe VM: Ethics and Informed Consent for Double-Blind Studies on the Acute Psychotic. Medical
Psychiatric Correspondence: A Peer Reviewed Journal. Model Copy. 1:1; 44-45, 1990.
184. Moss LE, Neppe VM, Drevets WC: Buspirone in the Treatment of Tardive Dyskinesia. JClin
Psychopharm 13:3; 204-209, 1993.
185. Neppe VM: High-Dose Buspirone in Case of Tardive Dyskinesia. Lancet 2:8677, 1989.
186. Gould SJ: Nonoverlapping Magisteria. Natural History 106:March; 16-22, 1997.
187. Schrödinger E: Discussion of Probability Relations between Separated Systems. Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31:4; 555-563, 1935.
188. Schrödinger E: Probability Relations between Separated Systems. Proceedings of the Cambridge
Philosophical Society 32:3; 446-452, 1936.
189. Neppe VM: Why Parapsychology Is Amongst the Most Important of the Sciences. Australian Journal of
Parapsychology 5:1; 4-22, 2005.
190. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) Axioms. Dynamic
Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1203:1203; 1219 -1229, 2012.
191. Neppe VM, Close ER: What Do Reality, Distinctions and Dimensions Mean in a Consciousness Model?
Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1203:1203; 1180-1189, 2012.
192. Close ER: Dimensionometry Applied to Space, Time and Consciousness. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional
Creative Achievement 1208:1208, 2012 (In press)
193. Close ER, Neppe VM: Space, Time and Consciousness: The Tethered Triad. Seattle: Brainvoyage.com,
2013 (In press).
194. Close ER: The Calculus of Distinctions: A Workable Mathematicologic Model across Dimensions and
Consciousness. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1206:1206; 1387 -1397, 2012.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 386
195. Close ER: Close’s Calculus of Distinctions and Indications. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1211:1211; 17**-17**, 2012.
196. Close ER, Neppe VM: Dimensions, Distinctions and the Role of the Metaconscious. Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1211:1211; 18**-18**, 2012.
197. Close ER, Neppe VM: Concepts and Definitions in the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm
(TDVP) Model. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1203:1203; 1190 -1203, 2012.
198. Klein A: Email Discussion in Personal communication of June to VMNeppe. Seattle and Israel, 2011.
199. Kozyrev NA. (1967). Possiblity of Experimental Study of Properties of Time (Russian Translation: "O
Vozmozhnosti Eksperimental'ngo Issledovaniya Svoystv Vremeni". Retrieved August 2011, from
http://www.univer.omsk.su/omsk/Sci/Kozyrev/paper1a.txt
200. Klein A: Installment #6, in Personal communication to VMNeppe. Seattle and Israel, 2011.
201. Cottingham J: Cartesian Trialism,. Mind 94:374; 218-230., 1985.
202. Close ER, Neppe VM: Dimensions Beyond Conventional Physical Reality. Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1203:1203; 1240 -1246, 2012.
203. Pico RM: Consciousness in Four Dimensions: Biological Relativity and the Origins of Thought. New
York: McGraw, 2002.
204. Hameroff SR. (2011). Physical Reality and Consciousness -- Introduction. from
http://cognet.mit.edu/posters/Tucson3/Hameroff.Reality.html
205. Whitehead AN: Science and the Modern World. New York: Free Press, 1953.
206. Whitehead AN: Process and Reality. New York: Free Press, 1978.
207. Shimony A: On Mentality, Quantum Mechanics and the Actualization of Potentialities, in The Large, the
Small and the Human Mind.. Edited by Penrose R. Cambridge, U.K, Cambridge University Press,, 1997,
pp. 144-160.
208. Malin S. (2011). What Does Quantum Mechanics Imply About the Nature of the Universe? Section 7:
Physical Reality and Consciousness, from http://cognet.mit.edu/posters/TUCSON3/Malin.html
209. Neppe VM, Close ER: Consciousness, C-Substrate, the Transfinite and Metadimensions Dynamic Journal
of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1208:1208;, 2012 (In press).
210. Schwartz SA: The Blind Protocol and Its Place in Consciousness Research. Explore 1:4; 284-289, 2005.
211. Neppe VM: A Study of the Incidence of Subjective Paranormal Experience. Ppsych J of South Africa 2:1;
15-37, 1981.
212. Neppe VM, Close ER: Why Lower Dimensional Feasibility (Lfaf): Application to Metadimensionality
Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1205:1205; 1352-1360, 2012.
213. Koestler A: The Act of Creation. London: Penguin, 1970
214. Neppe VM: The Statistical Proof of Psi. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement
1204:1204; 1277-1290, 2012.
215. Neppe VM: Theoretical Basis of the Overwhelming Statistics in Consciousness Research Dynamic Journal
of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1204:1204; 1266-1276, 2012.
216. Emoto M: The Hidden Messages in Water. Hillsboro, OR: Beyond Words, 2004.
217. Hurst LA, Neppe VM: A Familial Study of Subjective Paranormal Experience in Temporal Lobe
Dysfunction Subjects. Parapsychological Journal of South Africa 2:2; 56-64, 1981.
218. Ertel S: The Ball Drawing Test: Psi from Untrodden Ground, in Parapsychology in the Twentieth Century.
Edited by Thalbourne MA, Storm L. Jefferson, McFarland, 2005, pp. 90-123.
219. Bem DJ, Honorton C: Does Psi Exist? Replicable Evidence for an Anomalous Process of Information
Transfer. Psychological Bulletin 115:1; 4-18, 1994.
220. Radin DI: Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality. New York: Simon &
Schuster (Paraview Pocket Books), 2006.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 387
221. Storm L, Tressoldi PE, Di Risio L: Meta-Analysis of Free-Response Studies, 1992–2008: Assessing the
Noise Reduction Model in Parapsychology. Psychological Bulletin 136:4; 471-485, 2010.
222. Nelson RD: Coherent Consciousness and Reduced Randomness: Correlations on September 11, 2001.
Journal of Scientific Exploration 16:4; 549-570, 2002.
223. Targ R, Puthoff HE: Mind Reach: Scientists Look at Psychic Ability. New York: Delacorte Press/Eleanor
Friede, 1977.
224. Jahn RG, Dunne BJ: The Pear Proposition. Explore:3; 205-206; 340-341, 2007.
225. Radin D: The Conscious Universe. New York: Harper Collins, 1997.
226. Radin DI, Nelson RD: Evidence for Consciousness-Related Anomalies in Random Physical Systems.
Foundations of Physics 19:2; 1499-1514, 1989.
227. Lobach E: Presentiment Research: Past, Present, and Future, in Charting the Future of Parapsychology,
Utrecht II. Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2008, pp. 16-19.
228. Mossbridge J, Tressoldi P, Utts J: Physiological Anticipation of Unpredictable Stimuli: A Meta-Analysis.
2011 (under review).
229. Braud W: Wellness Implications of Retroactive Intentional Influence: Exploring an Outrageous
Hypothesis. Alternative Therapies in Health & Medicine 6:1; 37-48, 2000.
230. Coover JE: Experiments in Psychical Research, in Psychical Research Monograph No 1, Vol. xxiv. Edited
by, Stanford University Press Leland Stanford Junior University Publications 1917, pp. 641-.
231. Sheldrake R: The "Sense of Being Stared At" Does Not Depend on Known Sensory Clues. Riv Biol. 93:2;
237-257, 2000.
232. Honorton C, Ferrari DC: Future Telling: A Meta-Analysis of Forced Choice Precognition Experients,
1935-1987. Journal of Parapsychology 53281-308, 1989.
233. Dunne BJ, Jahn RG, Nelson RD: Precognitive Remote Perception. Princeton, Princeton Engineering
Anomalies Research, 1983
234. McClain C. (2005). Varied Readings on Arizona Psychic. 2009, from
http://web.archive.org/web/20070516045041/http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/related/57187.php
235. Broad CD: Lectures on Psychical Research: Incorporating the Perrott Lectures Given in Cambridge
University in 1959 and 1960, Vol. 6. New York: Humanities Press, 1962.
236. Neppe VM: Lignocaine Induced Kindling: A Research Design to Test the Sheldrake Hypothesis. South
African Journal of Science 80:03; 105-107, 1984.
237. Neppe VM: Inverse Square Law and Psi, in email to Ed Close. Seattle and Missouiri, 2010.
238. Honorton C, Berger RE, Varvoglis MP, et al.: Psi Communication in the Ganzfeld: Experiments with an
Automated Testing System and a Comparison with a Meta-Analysis of Earlier Studies. Journal of
Parapsychology 54:2; 99-139., 1990.
239. Roll WG: Survival after Death: Alan Gauld's Examination of the Evidence. Journal of Parapsychology
48:2; 127-148., 1984.
240. Watt C, Ravenscroft J: A Study of Nonintentional Psi in a Reciprocal Helping Task: Testing Pmir. Journal
of Parapsychology 64:1; 19-32, 2000.
241. Hurst LA, Neppe VM: "Psi-Genetics": An Organic Perspective. Parapsychological J of South Africa 3:1;
54-57, 1982.
242. Neppe VM: Genes, Genetics and Heritability: Beyond Semantics. Parapsychological Journal of South
Africa 4:1; 84-85, 1983.
243. Duane TD, Behrendt T: Extrasensory Electroencephalographic Induction between Identical Twins.
Science 150:694; 367, 1965.
244. Close ER, Neppe VM: More on the Vortex. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement
1209:1209;, 2012 (In press).

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 388
245. Neppe VM, Close ER: Proposed Solutions to Complex Ideas on Vortices. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional
Creative Achievement 1209:1209;, 2012 (In press).
246. Neppe VM: The Physics of Psi: The Role of Entanglement. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1204:1204; 1291-1303, 2012.
247. Marcikic I, De Riedmatten H, Tittel W, et al.: Distribution of Time-Bin Entangled Qubits over 50 Km of
Optical Fiber. Physical Review Letters 93:18; 180503-180507, 2004.
248. Suarez A, Scarani V: Does Entanglement Depend on the Timing of the Impacts at the Beam-Splitters?
Phys.ics Letters 232:390 9-14 1997.
249. Suarez A: Nonlocal "Realistic" Leggett Models Can Be Considered Refuted by the before-before
Experiment. Foundations of Physics 38 583-589 2008.
250. Swiel DJ, Neppe VM: The Incidence of Subjective Anomalous Experience in Naive Subjects. PJSA 7:1; 34-
53, 1986.
251. Freedman S, Clauser J: Experimental Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 28:14; 938-
941, 1972.
252. Weihs G, Jennewein T, Simon C, et al.: Violation of Bell’s Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality
Conditions. Phys. Rev. Lett 815039-5043, 1998.
253. Leggett AJ: Nonlocal Hidden-Variable Theories and Quantum Mechanics: An Incompatibility Theorem.
Foundations of Physics 331469-1493, 2003.
254. Dobyns Y: Entanglement Interpretations and Psi, in. Closed-research-group. International Discussion
Closed Research Group, 2011.
255. Anonymous. (2011). Leggett–Garg Inequality. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leggett%E2%80%93Garg_inequality
256. Leggett AJ, Garg A: Quantum Mechanics Versus Macroscopic Realism: Is the Flux There When Nobody
Looks?. Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 857 1985.
257. Gröblacher S, Paterek T, Kaltenbaek R, et al.: An Experimental Test of Non-Local Realism
. Nature: 446 (19 April); 871-875, 2007.
258. Close ER: Free Will: Are We Free? Or Does Determinism and Probabilism Dominate?. Dynamic Journal
of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1211:1211; 18**-18**, 2012.
259. Rucker R: Infinity and the Mind Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press., 1995.
260. Koltko-Rivera. (2010). What Is Nominal Ration Interval? eHow, from
http://www.ehow.com/facts_7300954_nominal-ratio-interval_.html
261. Neppe VM: Vortex Pluralism, in American Philosophical Association: The Society for the Anthropology
of Consciousness. Seattle, WA, 1996.
262. Donne J: Meditation Xvii, in The Works of John Donne, Vol. III. Edited by Alford H. London, John W.
Parker, 1839, pp. 574-575.
263. Whiteman JHM: Aphorisms of Spiritual Method, Vol. 1. Gerrards Cross, U.K.: Colin Smythe, 1993.
264. Whiteman JHM: Induced Experiences, in Personal communication to V M Neppe. 2004.
265. Whiteman JHM: The Scientific Evaluation of the out of Body Experience, in Parpapsychology in South
Africa. Edited by Poynton JC. Johannesburg, SASPR, 1961.
266. Whiteman JHM: Quantum Theory and Parapsychology. J. Amer. Soc. Psychical Res. 67341-360, 1973.
267. Whiteman JHM: The Mystical Life. London: Faber and Faber, 1961.
268. Whiteman JHM: Old and New Evidence on the Meaning of Life: Universal Theology and Life in Other
Worlds, Vol. 3. Gerrards Cross, U.K.: Colin Smythe, 2006.
269. Whiteman JHM: Old and New Evidence on the Meaning of Life: The Dynamics of Spiritual Development,
Vol. 2. Gerrards Cross, U.K.: Colin Smythe, 2000.
270. Whiteman JHM: Parapsychology and Physics, in Handbook of Parapsychology. Edited by Wolman BB.
New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1977.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 389
271. Whiteman JHM: Old and New Evidence on the Meaning of Life: An Introduction to Scientific Mysticism,
Vol. 1. Gerrards Cross: Colin Smythe, 1986.
272. Everett H: The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1973.
273. Close ER: Time and Consciousness: A Mathematical Basis. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1204:1204; 1316 -1330, 2012.
274. Anonymous. (2011, June 12, 2011). Nicolaus Copernicus. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus
275. Anonymous. (2011, June 1, 2011). Newton Laws of Motion. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_laws_of_motion
276. Anonymous. (2011, June 2, 2011). Quaternion. 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternions
277. Hamilton WR: On a New Species of Imaginary Quantities Connected with a Theory of Quaternions.
Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 2424-434, 1844.
278. Anonymous. (2011, May 12, 2011). Commutative Property. 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncommutative
279. Close ER, Neppe VM: Important Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) Axioms.
Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1205:1205; 1331 -1341, 2012.
280. Klein A: Comments of Later RBC Chapters #8, in Personal communication to VMNeppe. Seattle and
Israel, 2011.
281. Close ER: Can a Quantum Physics Description of Brain Dynamics Explain Consciousness? Telicom 22:1;
36-44, 2009.
282. Close ER: The Case for the Non-Quantum Receptor, in Toward a Science of Consciousness. Tucson II,
1996.
283. Close ER, Neppe VM: Where Does Quantum Entanglement Fit the Triadic Dimensional Distinction
Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) Model Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1205:1205;
1342 -1351, 2012.
284. Sirag S-P. (1999). Consciousness and Hyperspace. from http://www.intuition.org/txt/sirag.htm/
285. Wolf L: Practical Kabbalah. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1999.
286. Neppe VM: Indivension: A Way to Process the Higher Dimensional Interface. Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1205:1205; 1361-1369, 2012.
287. Kiritsis E: String Theory in a Nutshell. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007.
288. Baez J. (2002). Noether's Theorem in a Nutshell Retrieved August 2011, from
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/noether.html
289. Neppe VM: The Biopsychofamiliosociocultural Unification of Consciousness Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1205:1205; 1370-1378, 2012.
290. Neppe VM: Moving across Dimensions: The State and Trait Variations Dynamic Journal of Exceptional
Creative Achievement 1205:1205; 1379-1386, 2012.
291. Frankl V: Man's Search for Meaning. An Introduction to Logotherapy. Boston: Beacon, 2004.
292. Rosenfeld D. (2011). Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers in the Talmud). from
http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter5-18.html
293. Neppe VM: Neurological Consciousness, Epiphenomena and Subjectivity. Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1203:1203; 1247-1256 2012.
294. Neppe VM: Where in the Brain Is Its “Consciousness”? Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1203:1203; 1257-1265 2012.
295. Bergson H: Summary and Conclusion, in Matter and Memory. Edited by. London, George Allen and
Unwin, 1911, pp. 299-332.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 390
296. Palmer J, Neppe VM: A Controlled Analysis of Subjective Paranormal Experiences in Temporal Lobe
Dysfunction in a Neuropsychiatric Population. Journal of Parapsychology 67:1; 75-98, 2003.
297. Neppe VM: The Neologism: A Personal Evolutionary Exploration. Telicom 22:2; 39-48, 2009.
298. Schwartz SA, Friedman M: A Minimal Systems Model to Account for Some Experimental Data on the
Nature and Processes of Consciousness., in Personal communication to VMNeppe. Seattle, 2011.
299. Lobach E: Mass, Energy, Information, in Personal communication to VMNeppe. 2010.
300. Sirag S-P: Consciousness—a Hyperspace View, in Roots of Consciousness. Edited by Mishlove J. Tulsa,
Council Oaks, 1993, pp. 327-365.
301. Close ER: Fermat’s Last Theorem. Close’s Proof in the 1970s. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative
Achievement 1208:1208, 2012 (In press).
302. Neppe VM, Close ER: Consciousness and the “Theory of Everything” ("TOE"). Dynamic Journal of
Exceptional Creative Achievement 1211:1211, 2012 (In press).
303. Carlson AB: Projection of N-Dimensional Surface to a Lower Dimension Looks Discontinuous /Broken, in
Communication Systems. Edited by. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1975, pp. 363.
304. Blatner D: The Joy of Π. New York: Walker, 1997.
305. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Principles and Postulates Behind the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP) Model Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1206:1206; 1409 -
1420, 2012.
306. Einstein A: Relativity, the Special and the General Theory—a Clear Explanation That Anyone Can
Understand. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 2001.
307. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Mathematicological Adaptations of the Triadic Dimensional Distinction
Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) Model Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1206:1206;
1421 -1427, 2012.
308. Aczel A: Fermat's Last Theorem: Unlocking the Secret of an Ancient Mathematical Problem. New York:
Four Walls Eight WIndows, 1996.
309. Kleiner I: From Fermat to Wiles: Fermat's Last Theorem Becomes a Theorem. Elem. Math 5519-37, 2000.
310. Doctorow O: Magnetic Monopoles, Massive Neutrinos and Gravitation Via Logical-Experimental
Unification Theory (Leut) and Kursunglu’s Theory, in Quantum Gravity, Generalized Theory of
Gravitation, and Superstring Theory-Based Unification. Edited by Kursunglu BN, Mintz SL, Perlmutter
A. New York, Kluwer Publication, 2000, pp. 89-100.
311. Evert A. (2010). 08.19. Typology of Aether-Motion-Pattern. from http://www.evert.de/ap0819e.pdf
312. Penrose R: The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. San Francisco: National
Books, 2007.
313. Riemann B: On the Hypotheses Which Lie at the Bases of Geometry (Trans. W.K. Clifford). Nature 8:May
1; 14-17, 1873.
314. Einstein A: The Born-Einstein Letters; Correspondence between Albert Einstein and Max Hedwig Born
from 1916 to 1955. New York: Walker, 1971.
315. Neppe VM, Close ER: Where Does Unified Monism Fit into the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical
Paradigm (TDVP) Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1428-1439, 2012.
316. Anonymous. (2011). Subjective Idealism. Retrieved 8/10/2011, from http://www.modern-
thinker.co.uk/4%20-%20subjective%20idealism.htm
317. Dennett DC: The Intentional Stance (6th Printing). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press,, 1996.
318. Fodor N: Spirals Unfolding. J Clin Exp Psychopathol 16:3; 225-238, 1955.
319. Putnam F: Altered States: Peeling Away the Layers of a Multiple Personality, in. The Sciences,
November/December, 30-36, 1992.
320. Strawson P: Skepticism and Naturalism New York: Columbia University Press., 1985.
321. Strawson G: Mental Reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 391
322. Strawson G: Realistic Monism: Why Physicalism Entails Panpsychism. J. of Consciousness Studies 13:10;
3-31, 2006.
323. Barua A: God’s Body at Work: Rāmānuja and Panentheism. International Journal of Hindu Studies 14:1;
1-30, 2010.
324. Maimonides M: Guide to the Perplexed (Moreh Nebuchim). Chicago: U.Chicago Press, 1963 (translation
from Hebrew); original circa 1150.
325. Curley E: The Collected Works of Spinoza, Vol. 1. Princeton: Princeton U. Press, 1985.
326. Close ER, Neppe VM: Mathematics Concepts and Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm
(TDVP). Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1211:1211; 19**-19**, 2012.
327. Close ER, Neppe VM: The Mathematics of the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm
(TDVP): Speculations. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1210:1210; 17**-17**,
2012.
328. Neppe VM: Meaning and Consciousness: Philosophical Implications. Dynamic Journal of Exceptional
Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1440-1459, 2012.
329. Pruss AR: The Hume-Edwards Principle and the Cosmological Argument. International Journal for
Philosophy of Religion 43:3; 149-165, 1998.
330. Carr B: The Anthropic Principle Revisited, in Universe or Multiverse? Edited by Carr B. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp. Ch. 5, 77-90.
331. DeWitt BS: Quantum Theory of Gravity: The Canonical Theory. Phys. Rev. 160:5; 1113-1148, 1967.
332. Hoyle F: On Nuclear Reactions Occurring in Very Hot Stars. Astrophysical Journal Suppl 1121-146,
1954.
333. Barrow JD, Tipler FJ: The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.
334. Garrett AJM, Coles P. (1993). Fractional Quantum Hall Effect. Bayesian inductive inference and the
anthropic principles. from http://css.sfu.ca/update/vol4/4.5-kirczenov.html
335. Dicke RH: Dirac’s Cosmology and Mach’s Principle. Nature 192440-441, 1961.
336. Oberhummer H, Csoto A, Schlattl HS: Stellar Production Rates of Carbon and Its Abundance in the
Universe. Science 28988-90, 2000.
337. Wheeler JA: Beyond the Black Hole, in Some Strangeness in the Proportion. Edited by Woolf H. Reading,
Addison -- Wesley, 1980, pp. 341-375.
338. Rees MJ: Universe of Multiverse? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
339. Tegmark M: Parallel Universes. Scientific American30-41, 2003.
340. Smolin L: The Life of the Cosmos. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
341. Zimmerman Jones A. (2006). Hawking and Hertog: String Theory Can Explain Dark Energy. June 20,
2006, from http://physics.about.com/b/2006/06/20/hawking-hertog-string-theory-can-explain-dark-
energy.htm
342. Ball P. (2006, June 21, 2006). Hawking Rewrites History...Backwards. Nature News Online, from
http://super-structure.newsvine.com/_news/2006/06/21/263202-stephen-hawking-rewrite
343. Carter B: Anthropic Arguments in Fundamental Physics and Cosmology, in, Cambridge2001, 2001, pp.
291-298.
344. Reeves H: The Hour of Our Delight. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman, 1991.
345. Carr BJ: Worlds Apart. Can Psychical Research Bridge the Gulf between Matter and Mind? Proceedings
of the Society for Psychical Research 591-96, 2008.
346. Collins FS: The Language of God Second Edition. New York: Free Press., 2006.
347. Lanza R, Berman B: Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True
Nature of the Universe. Dallas, Texas: BenBella, 2009.
348. Laszlo E: Science and the Akashic Field: An Integral Theory Ofeverything. Rochester, Vermont: Inner
Traditions International, 2004.
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 392
349. Dyson F: Beyond the Black Hole. Reviews of Modern Physics 51:3; 447-460, 1979.
350. Neppe VM: The Incidence of Subjective Paranormal Experience. Program, Second South African
Conference on Parapsychology, 1980.
351. Jaskolla L, Buch A. (2011). Panexperientials: Holism and Its Implications Retrieved 2/4/2011, from
http://panexperientialism.blogspot.com/
352. Klein A: Comments on the TDVP Model Final Chapters, in Personal communication to VMNeppe. Seattle
and Israel, 2011.
353. Neppe VM, Close ER: How Does the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP)
Compare as a Theory of Everything (TOE)? Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement
1207:1207; 1460-1467, 2012.
354. Neppe VM, Close ER: Comparison of the Theories of Everything Involving Consciousness or Dimensions.
Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1524-1537, 2012.
355. Campbell T: My Big TOE—the Complete Trilogy 1 Edition. USA: Lightning Strike Books, 2007.
356. Goswami A: The Visionary Window. New York: Quest Books, 2006.
357. Hawking S, Penrose R: The Nature of Space and Time. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
358. Hawking S, Mlodiow L: The Grand Design. New York: Random House, 2010.
359. Hoffman D: Conscious Realism and the Mind-Body Problem. Mind and Matter 6:1; 87-121, 2008.
360. Langan CM. (1998, Revised 2002). The Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe: A New Kind of Reality
Theory. from http://www.ctmu.org/
361. Smythies JR: Analysis of Perception. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1956.
362. Wilber K: Eye to Eye: The Quest for a New Paradigm. Boston: Shambhala, 1995.
363. Watson D, Schwartz G, Russek L: The Theory of Enformed Systems: A Paradigm of Organization and
Holistic Systems. Noetic Journal 2:2; 159-172, 1999.
364. Suhash K. (2006, Dec 28). Consciousness in Ancient India. from http://www1.umassd.edu/indic/vedic-
retreat/subhash-consciousnesskluwer.pdf

365. Sinha N: The Samkhya Philosophy. New Delhi: Hard Press, 2012.
366. Kaplan A: Inner Space: Introduction to Kabbalah, Meditation and Prophecy. New York, NY: Moznaim
Publishing Corp, 1990.
367. Scholem G: Kabbalah. NYC, NY: Jewish Publication Society, 1974.
368. Bagchi PC: Evolution of the Tantras, Studies on the Tantras. Kolkata, India: Ramakrishna Mission
Institute of Culture, 1989.
369. Nasr SH: An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines. New York State University of New York
Press, 1993.
370. Close ER, Neppe VM: Whither Transcendental Physics and Vortex N-Dimensionalism? Dynamic Journal
of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1468 -1476, 2012.
371. Einstein A: Creative Thought, New York Times, March 19, 1940, 1940.
372. Neppe VM: The Previous Theories of Everything (Toes) and Related Models: Key Theoretical Ideas
Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1477-1507, 2012.
373. Anonymous. (2011). Rupert Sheldrake. Retrieved 7/3/2011, 2011, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphic_field#Morphic_field
374. Broad CD: Scientific Thought. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1923.
375. Stevenson I (ed.). Can We Describe the Mind? (Research in Parapsychology 1980). Metuchen, NJ,
Scarecrow Press, 1981.
376. Zöllner JCF: Transcendental Physics, Vol. 3 (Scientific Treatises). London: W.H. Harrison (and 2011,
Google Books), 1879 (original) (2011).

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 393
377. Whiteman JHM: Philosophy of Space and Time and the Inner Constitution of Nature: A Phenomenological
Study. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1967.
378. Smythies JR: Brain and Consciousness: The Ghost in the Machines. Journal of Scientific Exploration
23:1; 37-50, 2009.
379. Marshall PD: Mystical Encounters with the Natural World: Experiences and Explanations. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2005.
380. Beichler JE: The Five-Dimensional Continuum Approach to a Unified Field Theory. Journal of
Paraphysics:2; 101-203, 1999.
381. Petri A: ‘God Particle’, Higgs Boson Search Area Narrowing, Cern Scientists Say, Washington Post 2011.
382. Smythies JR: Smythies's Theory of Material Dualism, in Personal communication to VMNeppe. United
Kingdom to Seattle 2011.
383. Jourdan J-P: Deadline- Dernière Limite. Les Trois Orangers and Brumblay Journal of Near-Death Studies
21:4; 201-221, 2006.
384. Van der Schaar JP. (1998). Kaluza Klein Theory. from http://www-
th.phys.rug.nl/~schaar/htmlreport/node12.html
385. Duff MJ: The Theory Formerly Known as Strings, Scientific American, February, 1998.
386. Walker G: Here Comes Hypertime [1997
Available at: http://pvanhove.home.cern.ch/pvanhove/PopularScience/NewScientist/hypertime.html.
Accessed.
387. Figueroa-O'Farrill JM. (2003). String Theory in a Nutshell. from
http://www.strings.ph.qmw.ac.uk/WhatIs/Nutshell.html
388. Schwarz P. (2003). The Official String Theory Website: Basics. from
http://www.superstringtheory.com/basics/index.html and http://www.superstringtheory.com/forum
389. Higgo J. (1998). Does the 'Many-Worlds' Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Imply Immortality?
Retrieved 7/3/2011, 2011, from http://higgo.com/quantum/qti.htm
390. Carr BJ, Rees M: The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physical World. Nature 278:5705; 605-
612, 1979.
391. McMullin E (ed.). Fine-Tuning the Universe? (Science, Technology, and Religious Ideas). Lanham,
University Press of America, 1994.
392. Faivre A: Theosophy, in The Encyclopedia of Religion. Edited by Eliade M, Adams CJ. New York,
Macmillan, 1987.
393. Goswami A. (2011). Can Science and Religion Be Integrated?, from
http://www.amitgoswami.org/category/papers/
394. Goswami A. (2011). Quantum Activism for Better Health and Healing. from
http://www.amitgoswami.org/category/papers/
395. Indich WM: Consciousness in Advaita Vedānta. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1995.
396. Achterberg J, Cooke K, Richards T, et al.: Evidence for Correlations between Distant Intentionality and
Brain Function in Recipients: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis. J Altern
Complement Med 11:6; 965-971, 2005.
397. Richards TL, Kozak L, Johnson LC, et al.: Replicable Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evidence
of Correlated Brain Signals between Physically and Sensory Isolated Subjects. Journal of Alternative
and Complementary Medicine 11955-963, 2005.
398. James W: The Will to Believe. New York: Longmans Green, 1897.
399. Jacobson S. (2011). The Kabbalah of Nutrition. Retrieved July 2011, from
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/298378/jewish/The-Eastern-Colonists.htm
400. De la Sierra AO: An Epistemontological View of Reality. North Carolina: Lulu Press, 2008.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 394
401. Emlen JM, Freeman DC, Mills A, et al.: How Organisms Do the Right Thing: The Attractor Hypothesis.
Chaos 8:3; 726-727, 1998.
402. Meyer SC: Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. Panama City, FL:
HarperOne 2009.
403. Pinker S: How the Mind Works. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1997.
404. Miller G: Mistreating Psychology in the Decades of the Brain. Perspectives on Psychological Science 5:6;
716-743, 2010.
405. Anonymous. (2001). Leibniz: Metaphysics. from http://www.iep.utm.edu/leib-met/
406. Benton CP. (2011). An Introduction to the Sefer Yetzirah. from
http://www.maqom.com/journal/paper14.pdf
407. Neppe VM: Applying the Paradigm Shift to the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm
(TDVP) Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1538-1547, 2012.
408. Radin D: Consciousness and the Double-Slit Interference
Pattern: Six Experiments. Physics Essays 25:2; 157– 171, 2012.
409. De Bianchi MS: Quantum Measurements Are Physical Processes. Comment on “Consciousness and the
Double-Slit Interference Pattern: Six Experiments,” by Dean Radin Et Al. [Physics Essays 25, 2 (2012)].
http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.0804, 2012, submitted.
410. Close ER, Neppe VM: How the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) Works: The
Unexplained Now Explained Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1518-
1524, 2012.
411. Nash CB: Test of Psychokinetic Control of Bacterial Mutation. Journal of the American Society for
Psychical Research 78:2; 145-152, 1984.
412. Nash CB: Parapsychology: The Science of Psiology, in. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1986.
413. Grad BR: The Healer Phenomenon: Implications for Parapsychology, in Research in Parapsychology
1988., Vol. 107-120. Edited by Henkel LA, Berger RE. Metuchenn, N. J., Scarecrow Press, 1989.
414. Grad B: Some Biological Effects of the 'Laying on of Hands': A Review of Experiments with Animals and
Plants. Journal American Society for Psychical Research 5995-127, 1965.
415. Saklani A: Psychokinetic Effects on Plant Growth: Further Studies, in Research in Parapsychology 1989.
Edited by Henkel LA, Palmer J. Metuchenn, N. J., Scarecrow Press, 1990, pp. 37-42.
416. Rosenthal R: On the Social Psychology of the Psychological Experiment: The Experimenter's Hypothesis
as Unintended Determinant of Experimental Results, in. American Scientist, 51, 268-283, 1963.
417. Neppe VM: The Experimenter Effect in Medical Research. South African Medical J 62:3; 81, 1982.
418. Smith MD: The Role of the Experimenter in Parapsychological Research. Journal of Consciousness
Studies 10:6-7; 69-84, 2003.
419. Neppe VM, Close ER: The Value of the Triadic Dimensional Distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP) as a
Theory of Everything (TOE). Dynamic Journal of Exceptional Creative Achievement 1207:1207; 1548-
1558, 2012.

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 395
Index using key words and phrases above
3S-1t, xxiii, xxv, xxix, xxxi, li, liii, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, Calculus, xvi, xvii, xxix, xxx, li, 17, 58, 71, 84, 92, 251, 261, 266,
17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 28, 33, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 47, 48, 51, 292, 323, 353
52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 66, 67, 70, 71, 73, 79, 80, 81, 83, 90, 92, Calculus of distinctions, xxxvii, xliii, li, 21, 26, 27, 34, 54, 59, 61, 78,
93, 94, 95, 98, 99, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 231, 238, 239, 240, 84, 130, 137, 138, 144, 152, 154, 173, 211, 215, 220, 225, 229,
241, 242, 245, 246, 248, 254, 255, 256, 264, 265, 267, 269, 270, 241, 251, 260, 265, 280, 302, 308, 309, 313, 315, 320, 322, 326,
274, 275, 277, 278, 279, 286, 289, 292, 293, 294, 295, 299, 325, 332, 338, 340, 360
328, 342, 348, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 373, 374, 379 Cantor, xxxi, li, 21, 23, 266, 280, 292, 338
3S-3T, xxvi, li, 26, 73, 224, 239, 293, 307, 309, 376 Carlson, li, 267
3S-3T-NC, li, 26, 239, 309, 376 Carr
Actual reality, xvi Carr's, ix, xxxiv, li, 27, 28, 29, 31, 291, 296, 297, 299, 300, 308,
actual realities, li 319, 320, 322, 329, 330, 332, 340, 373, 374
Affect Cartesian co-ordinate, xvii, li
affects, li Cartesian co-ordinates, 78, 111, 149
Aharonov, li Causality, xxi, li, 26, 133, 290, 352, 376
Akashic field Cause and effect, li, 41, 42, 240, 352
akashic fields, li, 317, 339 CEV, 28, 92, 151, 239, 359, 373
Altered states of consciousness, xxiii, li, 98, 162, 245, See ASC Cognition, emotion, volition. See C-substrate
Anatomicophysiological, li Chaos, xx, li, 121
Anatomy, li Charge, xxviii, li, 44, 76, 149, 243, 262, 276
Anthropic, li, 295, 296, 298, 340 Chemistry, li, 12, 39, 75, 172, 174, 325, 326
Anthropology, li Chronit, xxii, 157
anthropologies, xxxix Chronits, li, 102, 144, 157
ASC, xxiii, li, 88, 90, 162, See Altered states of consciousness Close, iii, ix, xiv, xvii, xxxiii, xxxvii, xl, xli, xliii, xlv, li, 17, 21, 23,
Aspect, li, 23, 49, 100, 235, 236, 281 26, 27, 29, 30, 54, 60, 84, 152, 280, 285, 286, 287, 294, 308, 309,
astronomy, li 313, 315, 319, 320, 323, 324, 326, 332, 338, 340, 347, 374, 375
Astrophysical, li Close’s Transcendental physics. See Close
Asymmetry Closed, viii, ix, xvii, xxviii, xxxi, li, liv, 2, 6, 15, 26, 35, 61, 62, 72,
asymmetries 102, 119, 120, 143, 159, 173, 174, 189, 197, 206, 236, 237, 246,
asymmetrical, li, 26, 271, 278 247, 270, 275, 280, 286, 305, 336, 337, 376
Atomic Vortex theory, li Cognition, li, 28, 92, 151, 373
Atoms, li cognition-affect-volition, li
axiom, lii, liv, 5, 21, 22, 27, 64, 67, 100, 102, 134, 135, 138, 139, Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe, xxxiv, li, 338
140, 142, 153, 160, 168, 227, 232, 261, 267, 269, 279, 292, 293, Collins, li, 27
294, 295, 376, 377 Common reality, xvi, xxi, li, liv, 3, 19, 69, 70, 71, 83, 131, 132, 133,
Bell, xxvi, xxviii, xxxii, li, 20, 23, 49, 53, 64, 100, 148, 158, 206, 142, 148, 161, 248, 279, 303
207, 208, 234, 235, 236, 281 Complex numbers, xxvii, xxx, xxxii, li, 20, 21, 24, 29, 111, 113, 219,
BEM, xxv 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 239, 278, 280, 281, 326, 374
BEM protocol, xxv, 175, 177, 187 Conceptual reality, xxii, li, 71, 130, 142, 148, 257, 279
Bending Consciousness
bend, xxx, li, 268, 276 Conscious, iii, xv, xvii, xviii, xxii, xxiv, xxv, xxvi, xxvii, xxviii,
bidirectional, xx, xxi, 109, 123, 124, 127, 133, 168, 247 xxix, xxx, xxxiv, xxxvi, xxxix, xl, xli, li, 1, 2, 5, 12, 15, 16, 28,
bidirections, li 34, 35, 38, 46, 64, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 224, 239, 245, 253, 254,
Big bang, li, 4, 14, 20, 23, 51, 66, 84, 104, 142, 152, 153, 161, 174, 259, 260, 263, 266, 278, 279, 289, 292, 294, 295, 307, 310,
272, 273, 278, 289, 294, 302, 318, 326, 328, 372, 373 317, 326, 347, 349, 353, 359, 364, 377
biological, xl, xlii, xliv, xlvi, liii, 7, 9, 12, 13, 15, 32, 33, 39, 76, 90, Conscit, xxii, li, 157
137, 149, 162, 174, 177, 178, 194, 231, 248, 283, 307, 320, 365, Content, xvii, xx, xxvii, xxxiv, xxxviii, xxxix, liv, 2, 4, 8, 14, 16, 18,
376, 378 19, 21, 22, 27, 28, 35, 46, 49, 54, 59, 61, 63, 67, 76, 77, 79, 81,
Biology, li, 12, 23, 29, 39, 52, 172, 174, 228, 317, 325, 326, 352, 374 82, 83, 84, 90, 91, 92, 96, 99, 102, 110, 111, 112, 118, 119, 120,
Biopsychofamiliosociocultural, 61, 317 125, 136, 138, 141, 142, 144, 146, 149, 150, 151, 152, 156, 173,
Black hole, li, 84, 152 198, 205, 211, 215, 228, 232, 240, 242, 249, 253, 255, 260, 262,
Bohm, li, 23, 128, 235 263, 264, 265, 280, 286, 287, 292, 302, 307, 308, 328, 330, 334,
Bohm's, 235 350, 360, 373, 375, 377
Bohr contents, 317
Bohr's, li, 1, 23, 48, 64, 234, 235, 281, 326 Continuous, xxi, li, liii, liv, 2, 6, 9, 13, 14, 16, 20, 21, 33, 45, 58, 61,
Bottom-up, xl, li, 73, 128, 136, 139, 230, 288, 365 63, 64, 66, 72, 73, 90, 96, 102, 103, 106, 108, 109, 110, 116, 121,
Boundary, xx, xxiv, xxvii, 66, 97, 105, 109, 117, 127, 128, 129, 145, 124, 125, 129, 136, 139, 143, 144, 158, 184, 204, 211, 214, 230,
167, 169, 204, 229, 261, 265, 377 233, 261, 267, 292, 294, 303, 378
Brain dynamics, li, 25, 349 Copenhagen, xxvi, li, 20, 23, 49, 100, 104, 123, 148, 172, 202, 206,
Bridge, li, 73, 109, 123, 124, 126, 145 234, 235, 236, 265, 281, 295, 326, 353
Bridges, xx, 123, 124 Corollary
Brown, xxxi, li, 17, 84, 112, 152, 225, 266, 280, 326 corollaries, xxiii, xxx, xxxi, li, 24, 232, 275, 276, 277
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 396
Correlations, xxvi, 50, 133, 158, 170, 206, 207, 208, 234, 235, 236,
352
Cosmological
cosmology, xxxii, li, 45, 289, 290
Countable, li
Creative
creativity, iii, xix, xxxvi, xxxvii, li
CST, 140, 146, 153, 159, 160, 173, 192
Consciousness, space and time, xvi, xviii, xxi, xxiii, li, 2, 14, 21,
23, 25, 35, 64, 67, 77, 97, 239, 274, 307, 308, 358, 361
C-substrate, xvii, xviii, xxiii, xxiv, xxviii, xxx, xxxi, xxxii, xxxiv, li,
liii, liv, 2, 4, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 35, 46, 54,
56, 63, 64, 67, 75, 78, 79, 80, 83, 84, 85, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96,
98, 99, 101, 102, 104, 113, 127, 136, 138, 140, 143, 150, 152,
153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 162, 168, 169, 171, 172, 173,
195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 203, 216, 220, 221, 223, 224, 227, 228,
231, 232, 233, 237, 238, 239, 242, 244, 248, 251, 253, 254, 263,
268, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 280, 281, 287, 288, 292, 293, 296,
297, 298, 300, 305, 307, 308, 315, 318, 323, 328, 332, 339, 347,
348, 349, 362, 373, 374, 376
CTMCognitive theoretic model of the universe, li, 27
De La Sierra, ix, xxxiv, li, 30, 320, 349
Déjà vu, li
Delayed choice experiments, li
Deniers, li
Dennett, li, 27, 283
Density, xviii, xxvi, xxx, li, 18, 59, 76, 81, 82, 84, 91, 96, 111, 149,
150, 151, 213, 214, 215, 217, 228, 262, 263, 264, 265, 275, 324,
340, 377
Dimensionometry, xvii, xxii, xxiii, li, 78, 159, 271, 276, 277, 279
Dimensions, xvii, xviii, xix, xxvi, xxvii, xxviii, xxx, xxxi, xxxiv,
xxxviii, xxxix, xlv, li, liii, liv, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16,
17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34,
36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 54, 56, 57, 59,
60, 61, 63, 65, 66, 67, 70, 71, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82,
83, 85, 94, 97, 98, 99, 101, 102, 103, 104, 106, 110, 111, 112,
113, 114, 117, 125, 127, 128, 135, 136, 137, 138, 140, 144, 145,
146, 147, 149, 151, 154, 156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162, 163, 164,
166, 173, 174, 192, 195, 196, 199, 200, 203, 210, 211, 214, 215,
216, 217, 218, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 231,
232, 233, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 246, 249, 252,
253, 254, 256, 262, 263, 264, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272,
273, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 286, 288, 292, 293, 295, 298,
299, 301, 306, 307, 308, 309, 311, 313, 314, 315, 317, 318, 320,
322, 325, 326, 328, 329, 330, 335, 337, 338, 339, 342, 348, 358,
360, 361, 362, 363, 373, 374, 375, 376, 379
Discrete, xvi, xx, xxi, liii, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 13, 14, 16, 20, 21, 33, 46, 61,
63, 64, 66, 69, 70, 73, 80, 90, 91, 96, 99, 102, 108, 109, 110, 116,
120, 121, 124, 125, 127, 128, 129, 139, 142, 143, 144, 145, 168,
204, 210, 211, 212, 217, 223, 226, 229, 230, 233, 255, 261, 262,
265, 302, 305, 306, 349
Distinctions, xvii, xxx, 7, 17, 18, 58, 71, 75, 83, 84, 92, 100, 125,
144, 150, 152, 205, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 272, 278, 292,
315, 323, 339, 353
Distortions, xxiv, xxxi, 24, 164, 169, 193, 233, 276
Domains, xvii, xxiii, xxvii, 75, 83, 159, 277
Double-slit, li
Dualism, xxxiv, li, 282, 285, 288, 319, 322, 332, 333
Dunne, xxvi, li, 29, 53, 185, 191, 211, 212, 330, 374
Ego-boundaries, li
Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 397
Einstein, viii, xxvi, xliii, xliv, li, 1, 23, 34, 41, 48, 49, 52, 54, 75, 111,
112, 130, 140, 148, 158, 163, 167, 172, 175, 192, 202, 206, 209,
221, 227, 232, 234, 235, 273, 274, 281, 282, 323, 326, 353, 363
Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox, 206
Electrochemical, li
Electromagnetism, li
Electrons, li
Elementary, li
elements, xvi, xvii, xviii, xix, xxii, xxxviii, xliii, xlvi, li, 1, 5, 6, 8, 11,
13, 14, 15, 18, 25, 29, 35, 51, 55, 65, 70, 71, 72, 76, 83, 84, 88,
90, 91, 97, 110, 116, 117, 120, 128, 132, 144, 146, 150, 152, 153,
167, 168, 173, 174, 176, 199, 202, 222, 224, 226, 229, 230, 233,
248, 256, 259, 262, 265, 268, 272, 284, 292, 296, 301, 307, 311,
312, 314, 317, 324, 325, 334, 340, 341, 362, 374, 375
Emergent, li
Empirical, li, 135
Energy, li, 151, 260, 264, 325
Enformy, li, 351
Entanglement, 202, 203, 206, 207, 209
entangled
entangles, xv, xxv, xxvi, xxviii, li, 42, 235, 237, 242, 363
Entropy, xx, li, 62
Epiphenomena, li, 170
Epistemological, li
EPR, li, 23, 48, 100, 158, 208, 234, 235, 281
Essence, xix, xx, li, liii, 73, 116, 119, 120, 129, 171, 202, 324, 325
Ethicospirituobiopsychofamiliosociocultural systems, xxiii, li, 162
Ethicospirituomysticobiopsychofamiliogroupsociocultural, li
Euclidean, xvii, xix, xxx, xxxi, xxxii, xxxix, li, lii, liii, liv, 18, 20, 21,
22, 24, 26, 72, 77, 80, 103, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 211, 221,
225, 226, 233, 244, 263, 268, 274, 275, 277, 279, 280, 281, 291,
309, 376
Evert, xxxii, xxxiv, li, 27, 28, 29, 281, 319, 320, 334, 373
Evert’s mathematical model of vortices, 281
Evolution
evolve, evolving, xv, li, 43, 341, 364
Exceptional Human Experience, li
Existence, xxii, xxiii, li, 66, 67, 141, 154, 163, 228, 229
Expanding universe, li
Extent, xx, li, 76, 81, 82, 103, 119, 149, 228, 262, 264
extrapolation. See Extradimensional extrapolation
Extropy, xvi, xix, xx, xxii, xxxii, li, liv, 61, 62, 104, 116, 119, 120,
156, 270, 295, 299, 300, 301, 312, 352
Falsifiability, xv, li, 48, 51, 138
Feasibility
feasible, xv, li, liii, 5, 51, 53, 270
Fermat, xxxi, xxxvii, 17, 20, 23, 59, 253, 269, 271, 272, 278, 280,
286
Fermat’s last theorem, li
Field
fields, xxxiv, li, 274, 278, 308, 319, 329, 330, 334, 339
Filter
filters, filtering, filtered, li, 123, 256
Finite, xvi, xviii, xx, xxvii, xxviii, li, liii, 8, 16, 22, 70, 96, 102, 106,
116, 138, 140, 144, 146, 213, 228, 229, 230, 246, 261
Finity, li
Fluctuatifluctuate, fluctuates, xxix, li, 144, 253, 255, 262, 360
Fo rce, li
Formulae, li
Fractal, li
Fractal geometry, li
Fractional dimensions, li
Free will, xxvi, li Jigsaw, li
Fundamental, xvi, li, liii, 60, 269, 276, 295, 308, 317 Kabbalic
Fundamental constants, li Kabbalically, xxxiv, li, 29, 30, 292, 307, 312, 319, 321, 326, 347,
Fundamental forces, li 348, 375
Fundamental ideas, li Kinetrons
Funnel, li kinetron, li, 157
Future, xxiv, li, 169, 211 Klein, ix, xxxiv, li, 27, 28, 29, 30, 50, 81, 83, 154, 172, 319, 320,
Ganzfeld, xxv, li, 88, 175, 177, 183, 188 321, 333, 334, 335, 373
Gauss, xxxii, li, 163, 281 Langan, xxxiv, li, 29, 319, 320, 338, 339, 374, 375
General Relativity, li, 11, 17, 51, 163, 253 Lanza, xxxiv, li, 29, 31, 287, 291, 300, 310, 319, 320, 321, 340, 341,
Genetics, li 342, 374
Geneva, li, 202, 206, 236 Laszlo, xxxiv, li, 27, 28, 29, 31, 300, 319, 320, 339, 340, 341, 342,
geometry, xxxvii, li, 18, 34, 50, 58, 59, 77, 78, 80, 111, 112, 114, 346, 373, 374
149, 159, 164, 173, 274 Laws of nature, li
Gesher, xx, li, 73, 124 Leibniz, xxxiv, li, 1, 21, 30, 320, 332, 333, 340, 353
Gisin, li, 206, 236 Lemma
Global consciousness project lemmas, xxiii, xxx, li, 67, 160, 270
GCP, xxv, li, 175, 177 Lemma of dimensional falsification impossibility, xxx, li
God, xliii, li, 93, 120, 153, 209, 227, 266, 282, 284, 285, 288, 289, Leptons
290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 297, 339, 350, 379 lepton, li
Gödel, viii, xxi, xxxi, li, 20, 23, 61, 96, 105, 123, 135, 138, 153, 210, LFAF, xv, xxiv, xxxii, xlvi, li, liii, 2, 5, 11, 12, 33, 35, 49, 50, 51, 52,
219, 256, 275, 278, 280, 287, 289, 358, 362 53, 55, 57, 60, 68, 130, 134, 136, 137, 138, 158, 172, 173, 193,
Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, li, 20, 105, 135, 278, 362 215, 270, 275, 276, 281, 294, 295, 307, 309, 327, 328, 347, 372,
Goswami, xlix, li, 29, 31, 319, 320, 322, 344, 345, 346 376
Gould, xxi, xxxiv, li, 29, 134, 310, 319, 320, 350 Life, xv, xix, xx, xxii, xxvii, li, lii, 43, 63, 102, 116, 117, 119, 120,
Gravitation, li, 244 153, 156, 228, 301, 308, 317, 323, 325, 364
Guiding, li Life sciences, li
Guth, li, 45 Limitations
Hameroff, li limitation, li, 10, 35
Hamilton, li, 23, 219 Logic
Hausdorf, li logical, xxvi, li, 60, 216
Hawking, xxxiv, li, 27, 28, 29, 172, 309, 319, 320, 337, 374 Lower dimensional discontinuity, li
Heisenberg, li, 23, 121, 281, 326 Macrophysical, li
Helices, li Magisteria, xxxiv, li, 350
Heuristic, xv, li, 56 Mandelbrot, li
Hierarchy of infinities, li Manifold
Hilbert, li, 23, 111, 163, 280, 281, 324 manifolds, xxiii, li, 159, 160
Hitbonnenut, li Meta-information, lii, 64, 263
Hoffman, xxxiv, li, 29, 31, 311, 320, 322, 352, 353, 373, 374 Metaparadigm, lii, 8, 20, 22, 56, 60, 105, 139, 146, 147, 161, 295
Holistic, xxvii, xxviii, xlvi, liv, 2, 9, 13, 22, 23, 26, 32, 33, 35, 55, 57, Metareality, xx, lii, 128
58, 59, 116, 119, 128, 143, 144, 153, 173, 174, 228, 230, 338, Metaspace, lii
351, 376, 378 Metatime, lii, 103
Hologram, li Meteorology, lii
Hyperspace, xxviii, xxxiv, li, 12, 39, 174, 238, 319, 347 Metric, xvii, xxii, lii, 78, 149
Imaginary numbers, li Minkowski, xxvi, xxxi, lii, 21, 29, 34, 111, 112, 163, 215, 221, 271,
Indivension, xxiii, xxviii, xxx, li, 19, 24, 29, 67, 70, 82, 161, 192, 274, 280, 374, 377, 378
198, 239, 242, 243, 249, 253, 262, 275, 308, 312, 317, 323, 324, Minkowski space, lii, 112
328, 338, 339, 360, 374 Model
Individual-unit, xxiii, li, liii, 162, 241, 249 models, xv, xvi, xviii, xxiv, xxxii, xxxiv, li, lii, 2, 8, 35, 36, 44,
Inequality, xxviii, xxxii, 20, 206, 208, 209, 234, 235, 236, 281 45, 51, 60, 66, 97, 131, 173, 194, 195, 198, 292, 338, 339, 347,
Infinite 364
infinity, infinities, xvi, xviii, xix, xx, xxi, xxvii, li, liii, 2, 16, 24, Monism
63, 64, 96, 99, 101, 102, 106, 108, 109, 116, 117, 120, 138, monistic, xxxii, lii, 69, 72, 282, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 306
139, 142, 143, 144, 211, 212, 228, 230, 261, 268, 275, 278, Morphogenetic fields, lii, 327
292, 302, 303, 319, 326 Movement
Influence, li movements, lii, 254
Information, xxiv, li, 79, 143, 167, 254, 259, 260, 262, 317, 325, 333, Multi-dimensional, lii
334 Multidimensional scaling, lii
Integrated, xxxvii, li Multidimensional time-space, lii
Intent, li, 82, 103, 159, 262, 265, 377 Muons
Interactions, li, 71 muon, lii
Inverse square, li Mysticism, xlvi, lii, 30, 286, 292, 307, 321, 347, 348

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 398
Mysticospirituotheological, lii Physical life, lii, 23, 228, 373
N-1 dimensions, lii Physicalist, lii
N-1 dimension, 104 Physics, xviii, xxiv, xxvi, xxxiv, xxxvii, xl, xliv, xlv, lii, 15, 23, 30,
Natural law, lii, 69, 102, 174 32, 60, 87, 139, 172, 196, 202, 215, 287, 290, 294, 313, 319, 320,
Nature, lii, 26, 122, 276 323, 326, 347, 364
N-Dimensional manifolds, xxxii, lii, 22, 281 Physiobiopsychological, lii
N-distinctions, lii Physiology, xxix, lii, 104
Negative entropy, lii, liv Pico, lii, 23
Neppe, ii, iii, ix, xiv, xxi, xxxiii, xxxvi, xxxviii, xlii, xliii, xliv, xlv, Planck, viii, lii, 10, 23, 44, 45, 81, 239, 273, 281, 327, 336, 364
xlvii, lii, 21, 29, 30, 60, 88, 93, 120, 129, 132, 133, 134, 139, 159, Polife, 118
172, 211, 257, 258, 259, 274, 286, 294, 309, 313, 319, 320, 323, potential life, lii, 117, 118
324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 330, 338, 347, 374, 375 Popper, xv, lii, 11, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52
Neppe’s Vortex N-Dimensional paradigm, lii Postulate, 24
Neurological consciousness, xviii, lii, 86 postulates, xxiii, xxvii, xxx, xxxi, lii, 24, 160, 227, 273, 275, 276,
Neurophilosophy of consciousness, lii 277, 278, 279
Neuroscience, xxxvi, lii Precognition, xxv, lii, 177, 190
NOMA, xxxiv, lii, 319, 350 Present, lii
Non-locality, xvi, lii, 64, 158 Pribram, lii, 128
Nonoverlapping Magisteria, 319 Primary consciousness, xxxii, lii
Nucleons, lii Primary receptor, lii
Nucleus, lii Prime essence, lii
Numinosity, lii Prime radiation substrate, lii
Object, lii Principle
Objective, lii principles, xxiii, xxx, xxxi, lii, 24, 26, 121, 160, 234, 267, 268,
Ockham, lii 273, 274, 276, 277, 278, 279, 295, 296, 298
Ontological, lii Protons, lii
ontologically, xxxii, 291 Provable, lii
Open, lii, 72, 102, 162, 270 Pseudoskeptics, lii
Ordinal, xvii, lii, 78, 103, 214 Psi, xv, xxiv, xxv, xxvi, lii, 15, 42, 132, 168, 171, 177, 178, 179, 180,
ordropy, xxxii, liii, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 29, 38, 61, 192, 195, 197, 198, 199, 200, 202, 204, 205, 215, 332, 361, 363
62, 65, 66, 73, 96, 100, 102, 104, 108, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, Psitrons, 157
122, 143, 144, 146, 153, 156, 173, 203, 205, 215, 229, 262, 265, Psychology, 86
270, 272, 291, 296, 300, 301, 305, 311, 314, 315, 318, 330, 337, psychological, psychologies, xviii, lii, 89, 317
344, 358, 372, 374, 375, 377, 378, 379 Psychoneurological, xxv, lii, 201
Origin Event, lii, liii, liv, 4, 6, 9, 26, 29, 33, 43, 63, 64, 67, 72, 84, Pythagoras, xxx, lii, 23, 24, 270, 272, 275
102, 103, 117, 118, 142, 152, 153, 173, 228, 260, 289, 295, 302, Pythagorean theorem, xxx, xxxi, lii, 20, 110, 270, 271, 272, 280
307, 308, 318, 328, 339, 352, 360, 373, 374, 376, 377, 378 Qualit, xxii, lii, 91, 102, 157
Ovoid, lii qualits, 83
Packets, lii Qualits, xxxi, 5, 23, 24, 46, 64, 71, 102, 103, 129, 144, 265, 267, 365
Panexperientialism, lii, 305 Quanta, xvi, lii, 64, 84, 152
Panprotoexperientialism, lii, 305 Quantomacroasronomophysicochemicalethicospirituobiphysiopsycho
Panpsychism, xxxiii, lii, 305 familiosociocultural, lii
Paradigm, xlvi, liv, 9, 372 Quantum, xviii, xxiv, xxviii, xxxiv, lii, 15, 23, 35, 45, 58, 72, 102,
paradigm shift, lii 103, 121, 158, 206, 234, 236, 300, 317, 319, 326, 333, 334, 337,
paradigms, xv, xvii, xxiii, xxiv, xxxiii, xxxiv, xl, xli, xlv, lii, liv, 349, 364
2, 5, 10, 12, 13, 14, 35, 55, 57, 85, 147, 160, 173, 205, 219, Quantum consciousness, xviii, lii, 15, 300
307, 319, 323, 324, 326, 358, 364, 377, 378 Quantum field theory, lii
Paradoxes, lii, 135 Quantum Hall effect, lii
Parallel, xxvi, lii, 217, 268, 303 Quantum mechanics, lii, 58, 121
Parangular, xvii, lii, 78, 217 Quantum physics, lii, 35
Parapsychology Quaternion
parapsychological, lii, 177, 325, 326 quaternions, lii, 233
Particle Qubit
particles, xxxv, lii, 365 qubits, xxii, lii, 156
Past, lii, 103 Radian, lii
Penrose, xxxii, lii, 23, 281, 300 Radical, lii
Perceptual, xxii, lii, liv, 84, 103, 148, 150, 152, 265, 274, 277, 279 Radin, lii, 186, 187, 189, 203
Pharmacology, lii Random Event Generators
Phenomenal consciousness, lii, 332 REG, lii
Philosophy, 39 Random number generato RNG, lii
philosophies, philosophical, xvi, xviii, xx, xxxii, xxxiii, xxxiv, lii, Rare events, xxiv, 176, 178
11, 12, 51, 65, 87, 130, 138, 174, 282, 301, 302, 325, 349 Real numbers, xxxii, lii, 220, 281

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 399
Realities, xxix, xxx, xxxix, liv, 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 14, 19, 22, 25, 39, 43, Subatomic, xv, lii, 44, 364
52, 58, 59, 61, 66, 69, 73, 79, 82, 83, 109, 111, 113, 114, 136, Subject, lii
138, 144, 150, 153, 158, 161, 167, 168, 179, 183, 195, 200, 202, Subjective, lii
210, 215, 218, 220, 225, 226, 227, 233, 241, 242, 244, 246, 247, Subquantum, xxxiv, lii, 333
248, 249, 251, 254, 257, 261, 267, 272, 273, 274, 279, 280, 287, Subreality, lii, 303
292, 305, 311, 328, 341, 361, 364 Substrate, 26, 173, 224, 294, 348
Reality, iii, xvi, xxii, xl, xli, xlvi, lii, liv, 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 20, 21, 26, substrates, xxii, lii, liv, 2, 29, 35, 75, 158, 173, 221, 333, 374
33, 69, 70, 72, 102, 116, 128, 130, 131, 134, 143, 144, 146, 148, Subtypes, lii
152, 214, 232, 262, 263, 268, 275, 312, 339, 341, 379 Survival, xxv, lii, 175, 177, 189, 300
Relative, viii, xvi, xxi, xxxviii, xxxix, 3, 6, 8, 14, 19, 21, 22, 26, 32, TDVP, xiv, xv, xvi, xviii, xx, xxi, xxiii, xxiv, xxv, xxvii, xxviii, xxx,
35, 54, 55, 64, 65, 66, 71, 72, 77, 79, 80, 90, 97, 99, 104, 106, xxxi, xxxii, xxxiii, xxxiv, xxxv, xli, xlvi, lii, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13,
109, 110, 114, 130, 131, 133, 135, 138, 140, 144, 145, 146, 159, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35,
161, 164, 165, 168, 169, 185, 196, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 46, 55, 56, 59, 60, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 72, 83, 85, 86, 90, 96, 98,
227, 238, 240, 241, 243, 247, 248, 260, 262, 264, 265, 266, 274, 101, 104, 105, 106, 109, 113, 120, 121, 123, 130, 136, 137, 138,
279, 286, 288, 292, 293, 295, 298, 299, 308, 309, 325, 330, 339, 139, 140, 145, 147, 160, 161, 163, 171, 172, 173, 174, 176, 179,
353, 358, 360, 363, 376 185, 192, 194, 195, 198, 203, 205, 206, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216,
relativity, xxii, xxiii, xxvii, xxviii, xxxi, lii, liii, liv, 2, 9, 14, 20, 220, 227, 236, 237, 238, 239, 242, 259, 261, 278, 279, 280, 285,
22, 26, 33, 106, 139, 144, 146, 147, 158, 161, 162, 227, 237, 286, 287, 288, 289, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299,
246, 264, 277, 279, 295, 376, 379 300, 301, 302, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 311, 312, 313, 314,
Riemann, xxxii, lii, 111, 281 315, 317, 319, 320, 322, 323, 324, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 332,
Roth, lii, 27 334, 337, 338, 339, 342, 347, 349, 350, 351, 353, 358, 360, 361,
Russel, lii, 27 362, 363, 364, 365, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378
Russell, lii, 105 Tegmark, lii, 172, 337
Samadhi, lii, 238 Teleological interpretation, lii
Scalar, lii Tensors, xxxi, 24, 275
Scalars, 17, 84, 117, 137, 150, 152, 192, 198, 205, 275, 287, 360 TES, xxxiv, lii, 30, 319, 321, 350, 351
Schrödinger, lii, 23, 135, 202, 234, 281, 326 Tethering, xvi, xxiii, xxx, lii, liv, 19, 20, 24, 63, 67, 69, 70, 114, 140,
Schroeder, lii, 27, 128, 291, 300 161, 162, 202, 243, 253, 262, 275
Scientific model, lii The Tethered Triad, xl, xli, 5
Self, xxx, lii, 261, 332, 333 Theorem, xxi, xxx, xxxi, xxxii, li, 20, 24, 27, 49, 59, 61, 100, 105,
Set theory, lii, 266 110, 135, 138, 139, 140, 148, 160, 234, 235, 267, 268, 269, 271,
Sheep-goat, lii 272, 273, 274, 275, 278, 280, 281, 362
Shefa, lii Theoretical strengths, lii
Shefam, lii Theory of Enformed Systems, xxxiv, 319, 350
Sheldrake, xxxiii, lii, 27, 29, 31, 43, 97, 189, 200, 274, 312, 319, 320, Theory of Everything
321, 323, 327, 328, 374 TOE, xv, xxxv, xli, xliii, xlvi, lii, 11, 38, 39, 40, 46, 56, 109, 135,
Sieve, lii 323, 339, 346, 372, 377
Sigma, xxv, lii, 177, 182, 188, 190 Theory of relativity, lii
Sirag, ix, xxxiv, lii, 23, 28, 29, 31, 238, 266, 319, 320, 322, 324, 347 Thought, xxvi, lii, 215
Smythies, ix, xxxiv, lii, 27, 28, 29, 308, 310, 319, 320, 322, 329, 330, Time, iii, xix, xxii, xxvi, xl, xli, lii, liv, 5, 29, 34, 46, 53, 64, 81, 86,
332, 340, 373, 374 90, 103, 106, 112, 143, 158, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216,
Social sciences, lii 217, 219, 223, 224, 225, 228, 232, 233, 262, 263, 264, 266, 295,
Space, iii, xix, xxii, xxxiv, xl, xli, lii, liv, 5, 13, 14, 29, 34, 46, 64, 75, 306, 317, 324, 341, 347, 349, 374
83, 86, 90, 106, 111, 112, 140, 143, 153, 158, 159, 199, 212, 223, Top-down, lii, 70, 103, 230
228, 262, 263, 266, 274, 276, 292, 295, 301, 305, 306, 317, 334, Topology, lii
336, 341, 347, 349, 353, 360, 372, 374 Trait, xxiii, lii, 162, 231
Space-time, lii, 292 Transdimensional vortices, lii
Special Relativity, xxiv, lii Triadic, xvi, xviii, xxxiii, xli, xlv, xlvi, lii, liv, 2, 9, 13, 14, 18, 20, 22,
Speculative critical, lii 26, 33, 35, 55, 67, 97, 139, 140, 146, 147, 161, 173, 205, 295,
Spinors, lii 307, 311, 319, 323, 372, 377, 378, 379
S-substrate, xxiii, lii, 75, 90, 158, 173, 217, 224 Trimath, lii
Standard paradigm, lii T-substrate, xxiii, lii, 75, 90, 101, 158, 173, 216, 221, 224
Staring, xxv, lii, 175, 177, 189 TTOOURS, liv
State specific Triadic Thethered Ordered Origin Unified Relative Subjectivity,
state, xxiii, lii, 162 lii, liv, 2, 9, 20, 22, 33, 96, 139, 146, 147, 161, 227, 295, 379
Statistical, xxi, xxv, 5, 42, 52, 56, 68, 76, 117, 130, 131, 132, 135, Watson, ix, xxxiv, lii, 29, 30, 312, 319, 320, 321, 350, 351, 374, 375
149, 168, 170, 175, 176, 177, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 190, Wave, xxxv, lii, 365
193, 199, 200, 211, 259, 275, 291, 342 Weak anthropic, lii
statistic, statistcs, xxiii, xxv, lii, 98, 134, 164, 193 Weak forces, lii
String theory, xxxiv, lii, 23, 29, 237, 335, 374 Wheeler, lii, 23, 49, 156, 158, 281, 293, 297
Strong anthropic, lii Whiteman, xxxiv, lii, 29, 216, 308, 329, 330, 349, 374
Strong forces, lii Wilbur, lii, 31, 322

Reality Begins With Consciousness 2nd Ed. VM Neppe and ER Close. Brainvoyage.com © 120904.2 b 400
 Can we find "consciousness" relevant?
Can we explain how Life actually occurs?
Can we reconcile the idea of a Higher Being with science?
Can we have Free will as well as Foreknowledge (Precognition)?

Can we regard all events and objects even subatomic particles as reflecting meaning?
Can we find order in our world even though in physics we tend towards a disorder?
Can we look at reality by starting at science and applying a new philosophy?
Can we reconcile our reality by introducing more dimensions and infinity?
Can we make a difference for us and for our broader world?
Can we explain everything in Nature?

Can we reconcile
• the quantum model with the astronomical?
• the animate with the inanimate?
• the finite with the infinite?

The answer to every one of these questions:

"Yes, scientifically, each is strongly motivated."

But how does the model developed by Drs Neppe and Close objectively compare with all the other
major models? We know that when applying appropriate scientific comparisons:
• it is far better than any other model;
• it (uniquely) scores a perfect score (39/39);
• the model is expanding in breadth, new applications, new proofs, and new evidence;
• no other "theory of everything" can explain better the process of how reality works;
• its basic axiom has successfully answered challenges from scientists and philosophers;
• it is qualitatively the most challenging so far— well justified, yet likely incomplete
Reality Begins With Consciousness: A Paradigm Shift That Works
is our the remarkable single, lengthy electronic downloadable book (in PDF and E-pub versions; Mac, PC, or
Tablet (Kindle, I-Pad, Nook) on these areas.
We are also providing too, a printed 2 book soft cover combination unit bound series Reality Begins With Consciousness—Part1:
This paradigm shift works and Part 2: The science; the theory; the justification.