The Culture Is I-God II
Numbers and/or Symbols
What are Numbers and Symbols? Every number is infinite!
What are numbers, and symbols? Every number is infinite, because of the accepted idea of a number as not being a thing in itself, but merely a term in a series homologous in character.
All orthodox mathematical argument is based on definitions involving this conception. For example, it is fundamental to admit the identity of four plus three with three plus four.
Supreme Mathematics and or the Book of Life presents an altogether different conception of the nature of numbers.
Mathematical ideas involve what is called a continuum, which is, superficially at least, of a different character to the physical continuum. For instance, in the physical continuum, the eye can distinguish between the length of a seven-inch stick and a six-inch stick, but not between those, which measure respectively one thousand miles and six inches, and one thousand miles and seven inches, though the difference in each case is equally one inch. The inch difference is either perceptible or not perceptible, according to the conditions. Similarly, the eye can distinguish either the seven-inch stick or the six-inch stick from the one of one inch and a half. Nevertheless, we cannot continue this process indefinitely; we can always reach a point where the extremes are distinguishable from each other, but their mean from neither of the extremes.
Thus, in the physical continuum, if we have three terms: Asiatic, Born, and See, Asiatic appears equal to Born and Born to See, yet See appears greater than A. Our reason tells us that this conclusion is an absurdity, that we have been deceived by the grossness of our perceptions.
On the above grounds, modern thinkers have endeavored to create a distinction between the mathematical and physical continua; yet it should surely be obvious the defect in the way our new teachers have or organs of sense working, which is responsible for the difficulty, in us seeing the true science of numbers, this shows that our method of observation debars us from appreciating the true nature of things by this new method of observation, I say new because 479 years ago we did not see things in this light, it almost as if we went from sunlight to moonlight, it is not the same light.
Supreme mathematics is a continuum and the character of such is that we can continue indefinitely with the process of division between any two mathematical expressions forever without interfering in any way with the regularity of the process, or creating a condition in which two terms become indistinguishable from each other. The supreme mathematics is not merely a question or series of integral numbers with meanings, but rather is of other types of numbers inside of the equations that are produced by building on each degree. Which like integers, express relations between existing ideas, yet are not measurable in terms of the numbers that we have learned in European schools so today.
The Europeans teach numbers in measurable terms such as series. However, in reality, numbers are themselves parts of a continuum of their own, which makes them each a series of themselves, which interpenetrates the series of integers without touching it, at least in the physical form for they must be seen in the mind's eye.
See the tangents of angles made by the universal flag of the five percent cycle, from coincidence to perpendicularity, increase constantly from zero to infinity. We see this in integral values that are found at the angle of 45 degrees in the long and short points, where we see the unity of eight in him or her. It may be said that there is an infinite number of such series, each possessing the same property of infinite divisibility.
The 22 points also angle differing by one degree each from zero to 22, we just do not see the zero as zero for it is under the science of 360, and any number can be divided into 360 degrees. So on ad infinitum.
A short digression is necessary. There may be some who are still unaware of the fact, but the mathematical and physical sciences are in no sense concerned with the absolute, only with the relations between observed phenomena and the observer who are the children, not of today but some 70 years from now. The statement that the acceleration of falling bodies is thirty-two feet per second is only the roughest of approximations at best. In the first place, it only applies to the planet earth.
As most people know, on the moon the rate is only one-sixth as great. But, (born that universal truth) even on the planet earth (see 110th degree in 120 lessons) it differs in a marked manner between the poles and the equator because of the vortex, and not only so, but it is affected by so small a matter as from a valley and a mountain, also see your Actual Facts.
It is inaccurate to repeat an experiment. For the exact conditions, never recur. You cannot boil water twice over. The water is not the same, and the observer is not the same. When the European states are sitting still, we forget that we are whirling through space with vertiginous rapidity (see the 1-40). Considering that there is much truth in supreme mathematics as the earlier teachers of this science taught, the expectation of finding this truth in the five percent nation of Gods and Earths was the last thing they would have thought.
For they are rashly wrong and we have provided it for the ineluctability of laws of mathematics constituted a guarantee of the coherence of truth from the Father to his sons and daughters with this same mathematics. Some did not see the light, ran to other nations, and ran from the high science of this Nation for the lower or lesser light of religion and economics of these older nations.
The truth of that statement supra, depends, consequently, on that the hypothesis that our minds bear witness to truth when we hear or see it. We the true and living have seen them leave this light thinking they are going to the light only to end up in the dark. Just as the insane man may be unable to think that, he is not the victim of mysterious persecution. We find no reason for believing him. Mathematical truths do not receive universal consent.
It is elaborate and tedious training to persuade even a few people whom we have taught of the simplest theorems in Geometry. There are very few people living today in my time who are convinced of the power of the universal 5% Nation of Gods and Earths or they would not have left this nation for other Nations, those who never knew us are not at fault, and those that did, are just lost such as a planet that leaves its solar system. It is not a reply to this criticism to say that all men can be convinced if they are sufficiently trained, for who is to guarantee that such training does not warp the mind?
But when we have brushed away these preliminary objections, we find that the nature of the statement itself is not, and cannot be more than a statement of correspondences between our ideas. In the example chosen, we have nine ideas: those of supreme mathematics, of supreme alphabets, of twelve jewels, of student enrollment, of English C lessons number one, of the one to fourteen, of the one to forty, facts, and solar facts. None of these is more than ideas.
Each one is meaningless until it is defined as corresponding in a certain manner to certain other ideas. We cannot define any word whatsoever, except by identifying it with two or more equally undefined words. To define it by a single word would constitute tautology. Not only is all argument confined within a vicious circle, but also so is the definition of the terms on which any argument must be based.
It might be supposed that this reasoning could make all of the nation’s conclusions impossible. What we should do is investigate the ultimate validity of our Father's teachings and see the truth for what it is and that is that the original man is the God of his self, and that is a fact. No other nation teaches that the way we do, and no other nation can say they do, most call themselves everything but God.
Therefore, can we rely on water boiling at 100 degrees centigrade? Although, for mathematical accuracy, water never boils twice running at precisely the same temperature, and although, logically, the term water is an incomprehensible mystery to the 85% we understand it to be wisdom and or the woman who is the womb of man, this is why we are in the water for nine months from knowledge to Born.
Now let us return to our axioms: those two straight lines cannot enclose a space. It has been one of the most important discoveries of supreme mathematics, that this statement, even if we assume the definition for the various terms employed, is strictly relative, not absolute; and that common sense is impotent to confirm it as in the case of the boiling water. Here is a simple analogy. We are accustomed to asserting that we go from New York to Morocco, a form of expression that assumes that those countries are stationary, while we are mobile. Nevertheless, the fact remains equally true that New York left us and Morocco came to us. Because in either case there is no implication of absolute motion, for the course of the earth through space is not taken into account. We implicitly refer to a standard of repose which, in point and fact was taught by the European to us when we were but a child, yet we do not know it exist, for to say that 120 is very near correct in conjunction with the Bible is an axiom in and of itself.
When comparing Musa of the 120 and Moses of the Bible, when looking at the story from a viewpoint of say Khemet, then the people from that school of thought would say that the story never happened, so time and place are relevant only when u move from one lesson to the other or from one school of thought to another. When I say the chair is sitting still and remains stationary, I mean only stationary concerning the house and myself.
For, in reality, the earth’s rotation has carried it over one thousand miles, in a matter of hours, so that very near correct is an axiom. Such as water boiling at about 84 degrees centigrade at a height above sea level for let us not forget the original conditions of Celsius.
All we can expect of any statement is that it should be coherent about a series of assumptions that may or may not be true or false for all are very near correct and arbitrary. It is commonly imagined, by those who have not examined the nature of the evidence of 120 lessons, which our experience as men and women in this nation furnishes a criterion by which we may determine which of the possible symbolic representations of the sun seven moons, and star is the true one. More than one nation has used these symbolic representations of the universe.
Just like Free Masons, suppose that Euclidian Geometry is conformity with Nature because the actual measurements of the interior angles of a triangle tell us that their sum is equal to two right angles, just as Euclid tells us that theoretical considerations declare to be the case, yet the first triangle that the European saw was in Asia-Minor in the state of Khemet, just as that statement can confuse because the European has taught us that Asia-Minor is Africa and that Khemet is Egypt.
Does this mean that we are so learned by the enemy and that we know no other way to the truth? The Freemasons forget that the instruments, which we use for our measurements, are themselves conceived of as in conformity with the principles of Euclidian Geometry. The fallacy should be obvious. The most ordinary reflections should make it clear that our results depend upon all sorts of conditions. If we inquire, what is the length of the thread of quicksilver in a thermometer? We can only reply that it depends on the temperature of the instrument.
We judge temperature by the difference in the coefficients of expansion due to the heat of the two substances, glass, and mercury. The divisions of the scale of the thermometer depend upon the temperature of the boiling water, which is not a fixed rate. It also depends on the pressure of the earth’s atmosphere, which varies according to the time and place to the extent of over sixteen percent. Most Europeans who talk of scientific accuracy are quite ignorant of elementary facts of this kind.
Let us look at solar facts. It is well known that the light of the sun requires some eight minutes and twenty seconds to reach the earth. Simultaneous phenomena with two bodies sun and the earth appear to be separated in time to the extent and from a mathematical standpoint, the same discrepancy theoretically exists, even if we suppose the two bodies in question to be only 93,000,000 miles apart one more remote than the other. See space, time, and the vortex of our solar system, or consider if I strike a cue ball and it moves the nine ball to the pocket, both my will and the motion have causes in the motion of the ball so to the sun moves the earth as the sun vortex is the greater part of the vortex of the earth. Therefore, what we have is a twin effect of the eternal Universe.
Now let us get back to the subject at hand, which is that every number is infinite. The fact of the matter that every number is a term in a mathematical continuum is not more an adequate definition than if we were to describe a picture as a number in the catalog. See the lessons that Lord Reveal Infinite Allah drew and see how numbers words and pictures flow. That degree he drew will teach that every number is a thing in itself possessing an infinite number of properties peculiar to itself.
I can go further, and state that any number whatsoever possesses this infinite variety of power and or refinement to transform any other number, even by the primitive process of addition. We can observe how by the manipulation of any two numbers how you can arrange them so that the result is incommensurable with either, or even so, that ideas are created of a character very incompatible with our original conception of numbers as a series of positive integers. First, we must take into account that in the eighties we were children so therefore the first nine born were children in the sixties. Adding was a simple way to get to the answers that we need yet multiplication is a higher form of adding.
There is a conclusion to all of this and it is that various considerations must be taken into account when teaching supreme mathematics. The nature of every number is a thing peculiar to itself, a thing inscrutable and infinite, a thing inexpressible in the English language yet expressible in English with the teachings of the Father as a whole and not a part. In other words, a number is living, in the proper sense of the term, a unique and necessary element in the totality of 120 lessons.
When it is said that there is no difference between numbers in this sense I think we must understand the phrase, we must examine the meaning of the word difference. The difference is the denial of identity in the first place, but the word is not properly applied to discriminate between objects, which have no similarity. One does not ask; what is the difference between a yard and a minute in practical conversations. We do ask about the difference between two things of the same kind.
Each number is unique and absolute at the same time and has a very intricate relation with the other numbers. Therefore, they are forms of presentation under which we perceive their semblances; and it is to the last degree important to realize that these semblances only indicate the nature of the realities behind the manifestations they manifest, in the same way in which the degrees on a thermometric scale indicate heat.
We may also observe that each number being absolute is the center of its universe, so that all other numbers, as far as they are related to it, are its appendages’. Each number is, therefore, the totality of the Universe, and there cannot be any difference between one infinite universe and another.
The attempt to discover the nature of things by a study of the relations between them is precisely parallel with the ambitions to obtain a finite value of infinite.