SELF-REFERENCING SYSTEMS AND THE RELATIVE ZERO, Noel Huntley, Ph.D.

Consciousness can be observed to operate in quantum states, meaning it manifests whole, holistic, gestalt perceptive frames, whether there is a sharp point-like focus or there is a uniform spread. Moreover, these states of consciousness rapidly switch from one focus to another, giving the impression of continuity, time and the presence of gradients. Nevertheless, consciousness can become fixated, or be specifically hypnotised. It then forms a closed, self-referencing system. This is what we are interested in: self-referencing systems. The parallel concept for this in technology, that is, machines, is 'closed systems'. We shall come back to this.

Where does the idea of zero come into all this? In effect, a self-referencing system has given itself a zero context at its boundaries---at its interface with any greater system within which it resides. In fact as far as the self-referencing system is concerned there is nothing outside itself---hence the use of the term zero.

When we design a meter to take measurements we put a zero on the scale which acts as the reference for the quantitative evaluation by means of numbers on the scale or dial---say, for example, 4 or 5 units of measurement. We always set the pointer to zero before measuring and we then assume this is an absolute zero. Clearly it is zero for our immediate reality but it will only be relative to the environmental set-up. How do we know it isn't a zero reference with respect to some greater context? For example, are the physical constants of science really constant? What about Einstein's General Relativity---doesn't this resolve any doubt here? Scientists will find that the existing Relativity is part of a larger one, but it is set up as is all physics and mathematics so that the self-referencing system appears to be the only one.

Let us give an analogy which just happens to be similar to ones that are given in describing Relativity but here we are revealing the larger relativity (one fractal level higher). Consider a train compartment. In this case we have a smooth running coach and the blinds are down. There is no evidence of not only motion of the carriage but no evidence that there is any existence beyond the interior of the compartment.

If we measure velocities of, say, simple hand motions from side to side we will think these results are absolute (remember, this is only an analogy and 'velocity' is a suitable metaphor). If we wish to take the velocity measurement a little more literally, it means we have measured the velocity relative to the boundaries of our system---the compartment---which we take as zero. (Note that in our real universe we normally measure velocities relative to our planet, which is taken as stationary, or measure our planet's motion relative to 'fixed' stars.)

In the train compartment we do not realise that the boundary of our system---the walls, floor, roof---are an interface to a larger system which we may peek at for a moment through a crack in the blinds. Clearly if we measure the velocity of the same hand motion from the larger perspective---outside the train---the result will be different. Thus the first result was relative and not absolute. Similarly, physical constants of science will be found to be relative values.

The reality within the train compartment is a lower fractal dimension and the greater 'outside' reality is a higher fractal. Are there more? Yes, it would not be logical to consider only two, but we are getting ahead. More examples must be given to enable the reader to grasp this subject. As a contrast so that the reader develops a broad view of this concept and assimilates the extensive, in fact, all pervasive scope of this concept, let us give a qualitative example.

We can all perceive when another person is prejudiced or biassed, since we are outside the 'system'. But the prejudiced person dramatising a self-referencing system can't see this. They generally can't step outside of themselves to reset the programme; that means, connect the data up to a new context---the greater perspective in which the irrational relationships become obvious. They are in a kind of hypnotic trance.

Consciousness, however, always has the potential to step outside itself (the lower level), since it is fractalised, as is everything natural---see articles on fractals. The self-referencing system in the above example of the prejudiced person will zero out the bias, meaning the person will be unconscious that their evaluation (behaviour) is based on unconscious irrational data. In the case of the train compartment example, the contribution in the measurement made by, or provided by, the larger context or outside (the train) view, will be zeroed out if the occupants of the compartment are only aware of the interior. The self-referencing system will judge all unknown contexts as zero. Let us give more analogies. The see-saw example is a good one.

Imagine a plank balanced on a fulcrum with a person seated on either end. The characteristic motions of the plank are governed by the fulcrum---this is the zero point. If we consider measuring the amount of rocking of the plank, that is, the amplitude, this measurement references the context of the still point of the fulcrum. We can imagine this is a complete and closed system: such as this third dimension or even an environmental set-up in which rigorous scientific methodology is being applied. The results will appear absolute. But if we now realise that this first fractal system, the plank, fulcrum and persons, is on the end of a larger plank and fulcrum, with persons on the other end, then our new zero reference is the second fulcrum. The first fulcrum is now moving up and down. We see that the result of the measurement made in the first system will now be different when we reference the context of the second system and the new zero (fulcrum). Thus the first zero was only relative. Similarly for the second fulcrum and so on to a complete system. The fractals do not continue indefinitely just as a twig on a tree is connected to a larger branch, which in turn is connected to a still larger branch and so on, but completes in the full integration at the tree trunk.

On the subject of trees, a further example could be a bough of a tree moving in the wind. The twig on the end traverses the longest arc. Let's call the twig the first fractal. Then the twig is connected to a branch---the second fractal---which in turn is connected to a larger branch---the third fractal. Each incrementing fractal moves less than the previous one. Thus we could say that the twig is not 'aware' beyond itself, that is, of the second fractal and higher, and it will regard its own motion relative to its connection to the second fractal, which it takes as zero (motion). Thus the twig in this analogy only experiences its own minimal movement but which in fact is being carried by the accumulation of the other motions of the branches.

The human arm is a similar system. The joints give us the fractal levels. If we imagine arm motions where all joints---shoulder, elbow, wrist and fingers---are active, we know from results achieved in experimental psychology that the fingers have their own learning patterns; the wrist has its own learning pattern, plus the fingers; the elbow has elbow, wrist and finger learning patterns, and the shoulder joint has them all. Thus the fingers, say, moving on a keyboard, have their own closed self-referencing fractal level. They can only move up and down and are not 'aware' of being dragged to one side by, say, the shoulder action. Learning can't pass up the hierarchy from fingers to shoulder; only down. See other fractal articles and instrumental technique.

The twig is also a good analogy for human consciousness, which is connected to the second fractal level, the 'soul', and so on. The human consciousness is only aware of its third dimensional activities, and not its greater fractal selves. Owing to excessive negativity on this planet the connection between human fractal and soul fractal is weak and thus the human consciousness is extremely vulnerable to the creation of a closed, self-referencing system.

We may now see how our meter may only be referencing a relative zero. Our objective scientific methodology creates a closed, self-referencing system. The observer/observed relationship is an interdependent one---it is context dependent. Only relative results can be achieved. Our so-called constants are merely values which reference the interface (boundary) between one system and the next, which because there is no awareness of the larger (next) system or dimensions, the reference is automatically zeroed out.

The formulation of scientific data reaches its limit in the very objective set-up it creates. The conditions of objectivity set up an experimental reality involving devices and experimental arrangement, designed on the basis of objective knowledge---all with emphasis on 'seeing is believing'. Such a set-up predetermines what nature will reveal to us. This system will self-reference, forming a closed environment. Compare the first see-saw, referencing the fulcrum as a zero or the twig only 'aware' of its own movement. The more objective we make the elements of the experimental environment the more consciousness denies its participation, but, nevertheless, it is connected like the dog chasing its own tail. It creates a closed system. To reveal perpetual motion one must create knowingly, or accidentally, a 'leak' out of the system. The first see-saw and its relative data is violated by finding a link out of the first system to the next (fulcrum).

This level of scientific methodology will give us the constant of the velocity of light, Planck's constant, the conservation of energy, etc. but will automatically fail to incorporate features outside the first system. The more positive and thorough the experimental set-up, the more it will be limited to its own context and not even a glimmer of the next fractal level will be present. However, in using the train analogy, if we get a glimpse of the passing environment through the gap in the blinds, our internal observations are changed since one has in effect stepped outside the system. Intuition and imaginative states of mind interacting with the first objective environment may cause a different selection of data to occur (a change in selection of probabilities), and the experimentalist may find he or she obtains a different result, which note, may to their great frustration not be reproducible. The 3D objective environment was, unknowingly, modified and the 'desirable' hidden influence (on the first fractal from the greater system) removed; that which is not part of the established formalism.

For example, the non-graduate scientific pioneer is more likely to design a set-up in which a normally closed Newtonian, non-perpetual motion device has a flaw in it in which certain unknown elements of the design are manifesting an open-system characteristic, with the subsequent anomaly of, say, the production of extra energy---and the potential for perpetual motion.

The basis of this is that the environment changes according to the spectrum of consciousness. The subjects of psychotronics and radionics are examples in which because of the above reasons, results may not be reproducible by all investigators---often the same person. In some circumstances, the conscious observation itself may cause the system not to work in that way. It is easy to see why strict objective conditions stifle ESP and paranormal energies. If the activity is allowed to operate without analysis it may work. Paranormal energies are outside the first (3D) system and our stringent, scientific, objective conditions determine the frequency range---the lower one. Similarly, understanding of art (and music) can only occur when analysis is not taking place---and in fact when the attention is out of focus. Such conscious and intellectual analysis will quantum reduce the holistic (unified) aesthetics of the art to the particle level---phase correlation to phase randomisation, to use a quantum physics expression.

When we set objective standards we create a 'zero' from which to judge anything or measure anything. Collective agreement and programming sets the 'zero' and we don't know there is already a bias in our judgement. We could take a negative situation---the state of the society, or supposing everyone was a thief---and use this as an objective standard to evaluate behaviour. This becomes programmed and embedded. As stated previously, when programmed there is a self-referenced system which zeros out the bias or prejudice, and everything seems normal.

Whenever we judge a standard we put a 'mark' on an imaginary gradient scale ranging from 'good' to 'bad', and use this as the context---the zero---by which to make the judgement. The point chosen (usually subconsciously) is a relative interface between 'good' and 'bad' and is a zero mark for judgement of how many degrees of 'bad' if it is on the 'bad' side of the mark, or how many degrees of 'good' if it is on the 'good' side of the mark.

Returning to the problem of the closed systems of scientific methodology, are we therefore saying that experimental conditions shouldn't be rigorous---that one should be sloppy with the design, etc? In our present condition, there is no satisfactory answer. We have strayed so far from a correct balance between subjectivity and objectivity, or the symbiosis between knowledge and consciousness. As knowledge expands, it should not have veered unduly towards the objective but retained an ideal ratio with subjectivity. By this, we mean there should have been an increasing recognition (in evolution) of the role of the mind, and its power and participation in the environment. Now we have the unsatisfactory situation in which a pioneer with lack of strict adherence to scientific and experimental protocol is more likely to make the really valuable discoveries. Note that when they are made they are suppressed.

Science hasn't established that there are (macro) dimensions within dimensions forming a hierarchy of frequency spectrums (scalar wave). It is a little like living in a box, the first fractal, which is within the next fractal, a larger box and so on. There must always be correct alignment between adjacent fractal levels, between contextual strata, otherwise chaos will result. Our sector of the universe appears to be designed on the basis of twelve main divisions or dimensions. The DNA is said to have the potential for 12 strands, and we have many existing 'twelves', such as the notes on the musical scale. However, note that we should have been using base-12 for mathematics, and not decimal, that is, base-10. This itself will cause results, significant numbers, physical 'constants', of science and mathematics to be out of alignment with our environmental dimensional structures. The '10' configuration will not fit into the '12' of nature for a natural resonance and synchronicity, and for a proper progression of discoveries towards a harmonic science. Similarly, distortions in the mind will cause chaos and insanity.

Let us finalise with another analogy, in particular, to show us a mechanistic interpretation of synchronous activities and which also shows how the interface between different levels or loops should zero out for correct alignment. We have the example of the production of the television image. The electron beam of the cathode ray tube is focussed into a sharp point. It strikes the screen at the top left corner, creating a fluorescing spot of coloured light, then moves across, horizontally. When it reaches the right side it jumps to the left just below the previous line and continues to do this 615 times until the whole screen has been traversed. Then at the bottom right corner it returns to the top left corner and begins again. One may notice that we have 615 smaller loops---the horizontal lines---inside a larger loop, which brings the spot back to the beginning. It may be seen that the points of return must be precise. At the end of the lines there is a synchronous pulse applied which returns the spot for each line, and then there is a second synchronous pulse which returns it for the whole picture. If these pulses were out of phase the picture would go into chaos. The loops must be zeroed, that is, aligned at the precise time.

Since everything is made up of flowing energy and under continuous creation, it must be precisely structured in the above manner, whether it is coordination of the fractal joints of the human arms, or the dimensional organisation of the universe, following a base-12 code.

SUPPRESSION OF INNER SPACE, Noel Huntley, Ph.D.

We are referring to the denial of the presence of an 'inner' space underlying our materialistic external 3D world and the suppression of all significant knowledge relating to it.

To give the reader a simple picture or analogy, imagine looking down on the ocean, of which the water is not clear, and only the surface can be seen. Realise a considerable depth below this surface, noting the potential presence of multifarious activities or events in the ocean depths.

Science and educational knowledge generally, is similarly only observing the 'surface' (3D) of the universe and environment. That is, we look at the ocean (universe, etc.) and believe it is just the surface—which manifests effects only from the depths (inner space). This should be sufficient to condition the reader, where needed, to realise how elementary human knowledge is and how vast inner (higher) space is.

The reader unfamiliar with dimensions will note that the hidden 'inner space' under the ocean's surface is easy to visualise, but will ask where the real inner space is. Unfortunately our 3D perception and linear consciousness does not allow us to detect directly this inner space, which goes inwards at every point in space and would require at least an additional dimension of perception.

Are there any well-established examples of inner space? The blackhole phenomenon is well accepted in modern science and considerable research has been conducted into the nature of blackholes. Thus the reader can try to picture a hole in space which goes inwards, not along any of our three dimensions. This also applies to wormholes, and scientists speculate that these holes may link directly with other universe planes or curve back into our universe at some great linear 3D distance, but giving an almost instant connection through the inner-space pathways (wormholes).

Some physicists have speculated that our space is riddled with mini-blackholes (energy going inwards) and mini-whiteholes (energy coming out—such as the energy of a star but also the nucleus of an atom giving the positive charge). Thus we need at least an extra dimension of space to explain such phenomena.

We are showing that there is space which we can't perceive (with our limited frequency spectrum of consciousness). Also that there has been an inevitable degree of recognition of an inner space (blackholes) but where these ideas are seen as forming an underlying structure to external 3D space the acceptance ceases; closing the lid on 3D effects only, as being complete, even absolute rather than relative to its context (of 3D). Even the quantum reality of quantum physics is relegated to a fictional product of mathematics.

Let us take as an example of the type of subtle control that is occurring over knowledge. Maxwell's electromagnetic equations, the rockbed of electromagnetics, are taught in university physics and mathematics; one may wonder how many professors realise that these equations being taught are not the original ones of Maxwell. It is fairly well known, essentially outside academic circles, that physicists Gibbs and Heaviside removed from these equations the quaternions or scalar-wave terms—very much with the approval of Hertz.

The scalar terms have been refered to as expressing 5D etheric waves that are non-vector, and are oscillating electrostatic potential energy waves, which are longitudinal. The terms left untouched in the equations being taught today are the transverse Hertzian electromagnetic vector terms, very much detectable in our 3D space. Gibbs and Heaviside simply couldn't see the point of the additional scalar terms underlying the vector EM terms, since current physics formulations were supporting a 3D closed system and seemingly successsfully, and already precluded the possible role of these original terms since the existing premises of physics had no part for them; not recognising that they were supposed to elevate established scientific models to a higher order. At a deeper level, however, this does not imply it was entirely a mistake to remove the terms—meaning it is part of the ongoing suppression of inner-space reality.

Let us briefly digress to a contrasting example within religion, in particular, Christianity. The Bible reveals that Jesus used the word 'within' frequently, of which the proper meaning is not being taught to day; for example 'The Father within'. This concept of 'within' does not mean something intangible or lacking in existence, substance or dimension, or even a science. Ironically, however, it does mean atheists are correct; there is no (external) God. Thus again the role of inner space, which relates to inner consciousness, remains hidden.

Now going back to the scalar wave. It extends dimensionally beyond 3D, for example, it can wave in time, and affect 3D time. The frame of mind giving rise to the removal of the scalar terms from Maxwell's equations is of the same negative motivation which the great Nicola Tesla encountered early last century. Tesla, undoubtedly the father of electricity, whose name was removed from anything academically educational, discovered the real nature of radio transmission—not even taught today. At that time the German scientist Hertz was gaining recognition after his success in transmitting radio signals from one room to another. Tesla had realised that electromagnetic waves, which are transverse (sometimes referred to as Hertz waves today), attenuated too rapidly to transmit information over great distances. Tesla discovered that the longitudinal scalar wave was the underlying carrier wave for significant distances. Even though Hertz waves are detected around transmitters and receivers it was the scalar wave, propagating mainly through the ground and on the surface, and capable of pair coupling into EM Hertz waves, that was the dominant cause of radio transmission.

In fact in the early days of this research, Tesla in his enthusiasm for scientific truths took the long trip from the U.S. to Germany to meet Hertz. When returning, Tesla recounted on the train his immense regret of the visit. His enthusiasm had blinded him to the deflating effect his knowledge and convictions, regarding the role of scalar waves, would have on Hertz.

Nevertheless, as we know today, Tesla's theory was rejected by the obstinate and controlled academic community and Hertz received full accolade for his work to the degree that his name became the unit of cycles per second.

Science is cleverly rigged to ridicule any phenomena beyond the external-world or 3D spectrum. If we use the analogy given in previous articles of the dog chasing its own tail, the observer being the dog's head, observing its tail as apparently objective and separate from its head, in fact, part of the environment or universe, we can see that greater truth about the tail can be obtained via the 'subjective' inner-space connection of the dog's head, linked (physically) through the body to the tail. Similarly we observe the environment as objective and external to us, but in fact our consciousness is linked to the environment through inner space which is basically all mind anyway.

Science struggles to continue its denial of all such phenomena: ETs who exist and operate in these other spectrums of inner space; all spiritual phenomena; religion's evil spirits; the energies of the paranormal; ESP, etc. The human consciousness is a spectrum of frequencies, like a wave band, and functions in a similar manner to the antenna on the roof. When selecting a channel for the television, an adjustment is made to the tuning circuit and the antenna resonates with a particular wave band or spectrum of frequencies which now creates the television picture. Change the channel and the wave band selected by the antenna changes and we have a different picture. Similarly if we changed our consciousness frequencies we could tune into a different spectrum of inner space and perceive a different reality there.

This should be elementary physics or at least serious speculation based on existing verifiable knowledge. Why do we call it 'inner space' if it has its own objectivity? Our 3D as it exists today would be manifesting about the maximum objectivity if we were to measure the coefficient of objectivity (objectivity + subjectivity = 1; as objectivity decreases, subjectivity increases). The average person has no awareness of their inner roll in participating in their environmental existence.

Let us attempt to convey an understanding of this by using a simple analogy. Figure 1, in going from (a) to (d), shows increasing amounts of inner space, that is, increasing subjectivity and therefore decreasing objectivity. The figures are intended to follow up on the dog/tail analogy but with a little more clarity. Figure 1(a) depicts the 3D external-world observed phenomena, showing the simple surface, or linear connection between observer and object. Mainstream physics operates at this level. The observer can only know about the object by transfer of information across 3D space (the arrow between them).



Now Figure 1(b) includes a structural feature of consciousness, showing the inner-space condition. Figure 1(b) illustrates that a second order of information about the object, superimposed on the normal and aware linear transmission, is being expressed by the observer (the direction of the arrows might be considered both ways). This may occur via intuition.

Similarly Figure 1(c) and (d) show further higher orders of information representing greater development, awareness, or evolution of the observer. The increasing orders are increasing degrees of 'subjectivity' or mind linkage. This 'pyramid' of dots in Figure 1 should be imagined as infinitely dense and extended. The actual inner consciousness will extend through these fractal and collective levels, ultimately to their source.

It is interesting to note the way the macro-level of existence reflects the same physics principles as the micro-level and vice versa. The above configuration in Figure 1 is also the essence of how the learning pattern functions in skills (see articles on skills/physical mobility), in particular, in transducing 4D nonlinearity into linear 3D sequences.

If point A wasn't unconscious to the observer it would enable the observer to know completely the object below by means of A and lower orders of connecting information. We are not saying that humans could perceive these higher orders while in our 3D frequency spectrum (our world), though if they could they would already have left this quantitative dimension and 'ascended' to a higher realm—higher degree of the fractal matrix.

Figure 1(a) would give maximum objectivity (which in the limit is linearity) but (d) would give maximum subjectivity (nonlinearity in the limit). Between these two extremes is the gradient. But as the reader can see, the linearity is an illusion since the hierarchy behind it—Figures (b) to (d)—exists always but is unconscious, manifesting apparent objectivity. 'Objectivity' is synonymous here with 'unconscious' (the unconscious connection to the object). As one shifts from Figure 1(a) to (d), comprehension goes from external to within (inner space).

The introduction of inner space would of course require new physics premises. The basis of linear fractals would be recognised to be due to the nonlinear, internal, inner-space, fractal relationships, and would be understood much better. Furthermore, zero-point energy, the turbulent energetic state of vacuum, could be considered as beyond our immediate 3D, that is, its source would be. Thus again the acknowledgement of strata beyond our 3D 'surface', giving rise to so much energy, previously considered as zero, has been delayed, or more correctly belayed.

Another excellent scientific example of a source of energy not being identified is the laser. For simplicity consider ten rays of white light. They are not in coherence (in-phase frequencies). The total power or intensity is equal to about three rays added together. However, if we make the ten rays coherent—crescents and troughs of waves in step—the power increases. But it is much greater than the sum of each ray (10)—the current scientific explanation. It is apparently at least the square of ten, that is, a hundred times. The ten rays, now in resonance, quantum regenerate a higher fractal, that is, rekindle from the virtual state Fractal Matrix gradient a more powerful vortex, which is of higher frequency and not in the visible spectrum. The ten rays of light are now sub-harmonics of this higher-dimensional vortex, of which the latter manifests in the inner space.

Further examples range into 'genuine' errors in physics but again concealing the scalar wave. Let's charge a small sphere, say, positive (electrostatic charge) and bring up a point test charge, say, negative, to measure the field charge around the sphere. The point charge reacts with a vector force towards the sphere and we say there is an electric force there. Move the test charge around the space and we identify a complete electric field E around the sphere. But do we? This is current physics. Can we assume the electric field was there before we put in the test charge. No. Science will find that the prior field is an electrostatic scalar-wave potential. Similarly for the gravitational field. Place an object in the gravitational field, but hold it there, or let it rest on the surface of the Earth, and we measure a gravitational force. But gravity is not a gravitational force unless it is acting on an object. It is a scalar field—a property of 4D and inner space.

We might add to the list that animal abilities are not placed in the category of the paranormal. (Note that appropriately mind energies are scalar.) Only methods are researched and explanations given which incorporate existing, extremely limiting materialistic 3D linear physics principles: simple magnetic-field systems around pigeons to explain their homing abilities, chemical senses to explain olfactory detection by insects over relatively considerable distances, etc.

Let us not forget the experience of improbable 'meaningful coincidences', which are relegated to random coincidences, rather than investigating theories of synchronicity (meaning something has synchronised them). There is also the discrediting scientific views on life after death, and as we have indicated, the nature of God. These are all desperate attempts to avoid inner space, extended dimensions and frequencies outside our immediately detectable spectrum.

Is there any concrete data from empirical observations that justifies the materialistic viewpoint of the academic scientist? Why is there so much emphasis on the matter or particle aspect of nature? Quite apart from the control over knowledge which is blatant on this planet, there is the genuine observation and conclusion that when the specific scientific observation is made, the particle level is revealed.

It is well known in quantum physics that the process of detection results in the particle observation, even if waves are being viewed. This comes under the wave/particle duality. Our detection of the so-called quantum reality, of phase-correlation (holistic) causes a quantum reduction from this phase-correlation to our material reality of phase-randomisation. The unity aspects are converted to the quantitative particle view, and thus science erroneously establishes that the universe is comprised of particles stuck together by forces.

There is a genuine tendency therefore to believe there is only the material particle world—even the quantum reality is considered as a product of mathematical fiction by the scientists. The structure of our immediate perception and scientific instruments are such that the world of materiality appears to be the only one. It might be realised now why scientific methodology is not compatible with the nature of paranormal, phenomena, ESP, etc. It is self-defeating. The mental and physical framework of the established experimental method will 'quantum reduce' the paranormal energies to the world of particles apparently stuck together by forces, that is, with subsequent failure of the necessary integrations and resonance for the subtle energies (of inner space) to function. This is a great irony; stupidity and the cunning deception of science's role in evaluating the paranormal.

To eliminate the infinite potential of inner space from the existence of a civilisation is like severing a twig from its higher fractals of incrementing branches going back (analogy: inner space) to their source, the tree trunk.