THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE: JOHN GODOLPHIN BENNETT'S AND OTHERS' SEARCH FOR A UNIFIED VISION OF REALITY

By Professor Dr. Tan Man-Ho

(An excerpt from the original work, Real World Views, Book 15, by Professor Dr. Tan Man-Ho entitled, "The Dramatic Universe, Black Holes and Wormholes, Post Imperialist Era, International Networking and Health Exercises" December 1983 ~ December 1986 Discourses, Chapter 1, Section B & C: "The Dramatic Universe: John Godolphin Bennett's Search for a Unified Vision of Reality"; "The Universe Systematics of Natural Philosophy," pp. 8~64)

Krishnamurti	Gurdjieff	Hegel	Marx	Engels	Ouspensky	Einstein
Minskowski	Weyl	John Godolphin Bennett			Heisenberg	Caldirola

B.  THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE: JOHN GODOLPHIN BENNETT’S AND OTHERS' SEARCH FOR A UNIFIED VISION OF REALITY

Matter, its dialectics and more:

“…P.D. Ouspensky quoted Gurdjieff as stating that everything is material, but that ‘the concept of materiality is as relative as everything else’ – from P.D Ouspensky, “In search of the Miraculous", p. 86, Quoted from J.G Bennett’s "Dramatic Universe" pp. 52-53.

Engels wrote, “Thus the materialist outlook on nature rests today on a much firmer foundation than it did in the previous century.” [Dialectics of Nature p. 198]

Gurdjieff’s doctrine of Reciprocal Maintenance is by no means new.  Engels’ “Dialectics of Nature”, p. 231, has already revealed its truth.

“Reciprocal action is the first thing that we encounter when we consider matter in motion as a whole from the standpoint of modern natural science confirms what Hegel has said, that reciprocal action is the true causa finalis of things.” (Engels)  Reciprocal maintenance involves reciprocal actions!

Gurdjieff’s doctrine and thought is in essence independent of ‘Marxism’, an independent line of thought even higher and more subtle.  Great minds cannot differ much and are often complementary in contribution with minor petty differences on the way.  So is esoteric religion.

J.G Bennett’s limitation of “dialectical thinking” is justified for criticizing old vulgar dialectics only.  The dialectics which falls in the hands of Hegel, nay more Marx and Engels, is by no means a branch of other kinds of higher philosophical dialectical materialism as reflected partly in the ‘Dramatic Universe’.  J.G Bennett has brought dialectics of nature to a level which requires consideration.  Dialectical materialism is not destroyed in the proper sense but grows with consciousness to a true vision of the real world as it is and in its becoming.

I come to the section on the limitation of perception.  Sense organs are evolutionary forms of the motion of matter.  Therefore, if they are not developed to a definite level, they perceive none of the external world.  Even if they are sense organs!  In an epoch when sense organs have yet to exist, the reflection of the world cannot be the same as that when evolution of the organic has reached the stage of material-reflection.

J.G Bennett’s criticism on the defects of dialectical thinking deserves some attention.  He conceives dialectics as a thing not undergoing changes in the hands of Plato, Hegel and Marx.  Marx inversion of Hegel’s dialectical idealism, in place of dialectical materialism is already a certain change on the dialectical ideas.  Dialectical ideas or thinking has never been defective but insufficiency, since its embodiment is all and everything; dialectics is a result of the natural outcome as all the sciences progresses.  All the laws of dialectics are ‘stolen’ from the elate of the sciences.  The natural sciences and other sciences as they reach a higher development show a definite reality which we called dialectics.  Engels’ dialectics of nature if it is really studied by J.G Bennett will change his thoughts over dialectics or at least make a reconsideration of his own concept of dialectics.  Dialectics under the hands of Marx and Engels is a revolution to the old dialectics which is not devoid of defectiveness.  When J.G Bennett speaks of dialectics he has in mind only some of the old Plato.  Hegel not even Marx speak of ‘old dialectics suffered in the hands of Hegel’.

Natural philosophy in its ultimate development is dialectical philosophy.  The old dialectics in so far as it is metaphysical dialectics deserves a place in the museum of thinking.  The new dialectics which breaks through the boundary of the old reflects just the same old thing, the dialectical truth in it.  Dialectical process produces a path of discontinuities in its own continuity and the octave laws control it.

The opposition of mathematics with religion is quite obvious.  From the standpoint of the increatibility and the indestructibility of the quantity of motions, which is the deep rooted conception requisite to obtain the correct solutions to physical problems involving quantities, is the criterion for this irreconcilability of religion and mathematics.  Physical mathematics involving the quantities of motion cannot allow any “creation” of quantity of motion out of nothing.  Should this be allowed as with religion, there we can have creatibility and destructibility of motion.  Thus because K.E (kinetic energy) can “disappear” and P.E (potential energy) can be created from it, the moving object under gravity cannot possess any equation (a connection of transformation) such as K.E = P.E gained loss.

Conversely, if this is true, then religious ‘genesis’ must be abandoned, for in this equation no destructibility or creatibility of motion is allowed.

This book ‘The First and Last Freedom’ by Krishnamurti may be called the destruction of destruction and stealing the good old bones from the destroyed ones in place of the new, which in turn must be destroyed.  He therefore gave evidence to what we probably call dialectics.  [A Reflection of the book, ‘The First and Last Freedom’ by Krishnamurti]

J.G. Bennett’s ‘The Dramatic Universe’ has essential agreement with “The Dialectics of Nature” written by Engels and published in 1934.  It is uncertain whether he has read Engels’ Dialectics of Nature, and should he have read it, he may be further supported from this work.

Engels stressed the great feats of scientific discovery, especially the law of transformation of energy.  In the ‘Dramatic Universe’ one can find this statement, written in June 1956 on the ‘Preface’ by J.G. Bennett:

“As we become increasingly aware of the laws that govern the universal transformations of energy we shall change our altitude towards our value system also. An important element in this revaluation must be the abandonment of human aesthetics and earth-bound theologies. All that exists, great and small, is concerned in the search for values, and we men must accept the fact that our little schoolroom, the earth, is not the centre of the universe.”

The parallelism is very obvious here.  No one should deny this.  But to suddenly turn round and criticize the inadequacy of  “dialectics” (he means dualistic naïve understanding of the dialectics) as J.G Bennett has done (see p. 25) and to replace dialectics by a different term which is supposed to be higher does not at all destroy the essence of dialectics in the brains of more conscious individuals.  The sum total of J.G Bennett’s system is fundamentally what modern dialecticians have regarded it as an exposition of the dialectics of nature.  Thus J.G Bennett continues to reaffirm the validity of the dialectics of nature, despite his opposition to the “old dialectics” of Hegel, and other pre-Marxist dialectics.  J.G Bennett saw only “Marxist dialectics” but as such may only (or may not) noticed the “dialectics of nature”.  He was indirectly accomplishing the dialectics of nature, without conscious of the fact that some works along this path had already begun.  Thus Engels’ ‘Dialectics of Nature’ was further confirmed and expanded by J.G Bennett into the complete exposition.

The law of octave is determining and driving the forces of dialectics and trialectics.  The bigger picture of trialectics is that dialectics is the two distinct forces of a trialectics which are more visible and immediate because they are opposites, and opposites are most visible to humans especially, till we are third force blind.  So it is natural for our consciousness to become aware of dialectics first before trialectics.

It is my conviction that the science under the red influence will undergo tremendous transformation, since the reds are seriously scientific and atheistic and never to yield to any unscientific guess works or abstract theories.  Marxism-Leninism demands a scientific approach to all kinds of problems.  It is never a barrier to genuine sciences; it is not in the service of abstracting the natural sciences or ‘idealizing’ the natural sciences as with the mediocre idealists.  However, independent natural sciences can grow well anywhere in the world too!

Material reflection, Jiddu Krishnamurti and stillness:

The function of mind or idea-production, is controllable, just like the movements of the hands and feet for working.  In the childhood stage the function of the mind is not easily controllable, just like the process of learning to walk, etc.  It is only in the adult stage that idea-production is “totally” controllable. Too much thinking leads to exhaustion of the process of idea production and therefore leading to poor confused idea-products.  When the process of idea production has stopped, the conscious variation prevails, this is the silence or the quietness or the nothingness of the mind, (as Krishnamurti calls it).  But it does not mean that it is good or what not for the negation of this is non-silence i.e. idea-production, i.e. thinking, idea-products which arises as a result of the historical evolution of the nervous system in the highest biological species is inevitably a puzzle since man begins to find that there is a thinking, imaging and idea producing function of his own mind.  He must therefore regard this as something “real” something perceptible.  Show the union, especially that of imaging, is a reflection of fantastic pictures, then the underdeveloped consciousness has reason to fear them, for they just comes into their heads, uncontrollable.

We must learn how to control the process of production of idea-products.  This struggle to use conscious control to idea-production is to safeguard against fearful images which arises as a result of a confused head.

On Jiddu Krishnanmurti’s life focus:

What can one be talking about, if he does not take into consideration of material reality?  Is he not a masked idealist?  His philosophical thought does not rest on a materialistic basis Krishnanmurti’s work is scientifically unverifiable because it concerns life’s intellect, emotions, practice, social and spiritual elements.  Any philosophy which rested from this standpoint will not expand the contents about matter and discusses no laws of matter, energy or science.  Needless to say, there are important aspects of his work which cannot be abandoned, although there are many parts which he was subjective.  Dale Carnegie and Krishnanmurti have just this feature – it is masked idealism, who is going to justify such assertion, “A man who prays does not know love.”  Natural sciences have, hitherto, provided such an immense data of matter or reality that no genuine theoretical pieces, philosophy or specialized, can ever be realistic, therefore materialistic, if they do not set out from such factual departures.

It is a wonder why mental revolution cannot take place through books, through any organization.  One can find such a statement, “The point is that as the crisis is of an exceptional character to meet it there must be revolution in thinking; and this revolution cannot take place through another, through any book, through any organization.” (P. 147)

A Reflection on Jiddu Krishnamurti’s Thought:

1.    “We must look at the mind as it is and not as it should be.”  The First and Last Freedom by J. Krishnamurti, p. 115

2.    “It is only when we know how to love each other that there can be co-operation, that there can be intelligent functioning, a coming together over any question.  Only then is it possible to find out what God is, what truth is. Now, we are trying to find truth through intellect, through initiative – which is idolatory. Only when you discard completely, through understanding the whole structure of the self, can that which is eternal, timeless, immeasurable, come into being. You cannot go to it; it comes to you.”

Such a book has a preaching and good for life understanding but introduces no laws of nature.  Its inner process is based on subjective liking, that is, it is simple, smooth, twist and turn with a high degree of freedom.

It begins premises from abstract definitions and meanings; pay no heed to materiality.  That is why there is a style in his philosophical system.  This book is pure critical reasoning of reasoning “gratification” by thought means.  Should the mind suddenly bend to move along the path of science, then such a system will take on a different style.

This book is idealistic even mask idealistic, in the final analysis.  This system of thinking is not a system arising out of a man who is subjected to the “determination” of the productive forces of society.  The philosophy is not a philosophy due to the “wear and tear” of real material clashes with the produces.  Such a philosophy is nice and consoling but cannot be a philosophy working people whose real life consists of the fight with nature and society.

“Infilling with meanings of meanings, tits for tats!”

The most “dangerous” point concerning this book is its swift sliding over very complicated reality.  It subjective propulsion is not conditioned by reality, by matter.  But ease of the thinking process!

The silence of the mind is approaching god; right, but insofar as you are not a worker who works 9 hours a day and 6 days a week and is subjected to the ferocious machineries of modern society.

3.    “If you do not think in terms of words, if you do not use words, can you think? Thinking comes into being through verbalization.” p. 250

4.    “When the mind is not thinking in terms of words, symbols, images there is no thinker separate from thought, which is the word. Then the mind is quiet, is it not? Not made quiet, it is quiet.” p. 252

The silence something may not just simply come for it requires changed practical-physical activity to destroy that silence.  When Krishnanmurti speaks of the silence of the mind, which corresponds to “the temporary empty facet of the mind,” he has no idea of the physical factor which renders the existence as such.  He does not know that the electricity (brain-wave) and energy variation is also involved.  The importance of theoretical struggle is also reflected in Krishnanmurthi’s work.

He wrote, "That is, revolution in society must begin with the inner, psychological transformation of the individual. Now if there is a social revolution, that is an action with regard to the outer structure of man, however radical that social revolution may be its very nature is static if there is no inward revolution of the individual, no psychological transformation.”

Negative thinking is the highest form of understanding.  That is to understand what is creative thinking, we must approach the problem negatively, because a positive approach to the problem which is that you and I must become creative in order to build a new structure of society will be imitative.  To understand that which is crumbling, we must investigate it, examine it negatively not with a positive system, a positive formula, a positive conclusion.

“We must look at the mind as it is and not as it should be.”

On the thoughts of Krishnamurti:

We must recognize that his idea of revolution is continuous revolutions not a revolution once attained is stopped immediately. (See p. 25-27 of his book)

Consider this statement, “A mind that wishes to understand a problem must not only understand the problem completely, wholly, but must be able to follow it swiftly, because the problem is never static.”

Krishnamurti wrote “We want to go beyond, because we are tired of this endless routine, this mechanical pursuit of sensation; so the mind projects the idea of truth, of God; it dreams of a vital change and of playing a principal part in that change, and so on and so on.” But is the projection of idea by the mind, not an image or idea products as enunciated in the philosophical manuscript on material-reflection”  Are they not sensable also?  (See p. 101 of his book)

Fundamentally not a materialist, there are material accuracies beneath idealistic terminologies.

Liberal – while we recognize militant materialism, Krishnanmurti had a liberal attitude to various species of thought.

Images and idea-products are perceptible – this is already mentioned in “the philosophical manuscript of material reflection”.  The material-reflection has ignored the subjective portion of consciousness – the so-called conscious kind.  In “awareness” he (Krishnamurti) wrote, “… most of our activities are unconscious.”  P. 95 Thus AR-RP-PA (Appearancial Reflection – Reflex Product – Practical Activity) is the most common and dominant form of the circulation of consciousness.  Idea-products and other phenomena consciousness is second.

In Krishnamurti’s function of the mind one can find this statement: “When you observe your own mind you are observing not only the so-called upper levels of the mind but also the unconscious; you are seeing what the mind actually does, are you not ?”

Krishnamurti's work is about mind and consciousness, and his philosophy is centered on this approach of observation and explaining them as they are - in the subjective, and in our inner world.  His objective outside world is narrated as his subjective inner world, he therefore observes his minds as phenoumena objects like any other mind observing scientists.

Extraterrestrial Origin of Man:

Now this theory of the antecedent of man from another planet or stars and that the antecedents were more advanced than man is mere speculation.  We are being made aware that the man-octave here on Earth is a branch of another biocosmic octave that comes to Earth to breed and grow.  How they come to Earth is through the assistance of their very advanced sociotechnocosmic spacecrafts that came to Earth once upon a time.  They come with the option of bringing some experimental biological seeds of various stages of development to cultivate them on the surface of mother Earth.  This kind of creative view is quenched before it can ossify.  What is meant by the scientists is UFO technocosmic beings doing the work to place Homo sapiens sapiens and even other seedlings on mother Earth millions of years ago. So there you are the life beings now living here in abundance!  But what is also possible is Order from the Absolute to cosmic transfer of coded instruction by the octave laws of the cosmoses to plant the seed of biology to mother Earth’s surface to allow for the development of the biocosmic octave (Darwinian Evolution) and the sociotechnocosmic octave.

Now, gentleman, for a species from another star to land on the earth will require very sophisticated brain and very developed means of transport (technocosmic spacecrafts). And the physiology as well as the anatomy of such a species may be more adapted than the most modern man of today.  Observation and monitoring of experimental outcome by these beings “similar” to ourselves would have to be continuous or periodic and we should be able to see them with more and more UFOs coming this way along the technosociocosmic octave of the inter-solar-intergalactic dimension.

The laws of nature will be known in their brains, as early as their lost in the planet earth.  Historical records of the progress of man only tell us that the laws of nature were by no means known to “us” at that time and so at that time we were “stupid” and here we are also advance at that time since the species which we are a member of is more advanced than the 1975’s species.  Herein, lies the contradiction.  Unless one thinks in terms of a motion which proceeds from the higher to the lower species, which itself is unthinkable, there is bound to be this contradiction.

We presuppose the line of evolution to be from another star, that as portion of this evolutionary species, the highest and most advanced portion has managed to roam the surface of the earth, and at the same time seen on the earth a manifold diversity of the organic world, of which the highest is the ape.  This second line of evolution, the one put forward by Darwin is thus “rejected.”  The first line of evolution is considered the genuine one.  And thus a new speculation has being accepted – the Theory of Evolution.

One has this choice, to accept a well-established theory which has been supported by evidence, or to accept a hypothesis, a mathematical probability which is not supported by any evidence as yet.  Moreover, historical backwardness of the primitive man on the earth, only prove the fallacy of the speculation for we know a species from outer space who is superior can never find our Earth with a powerful and advanced means of communication and transportation.  Certainly, remnants of such realities are bound to be carried forward to the future generation, which is not revealed by the written history of mankind hitherto.  The similarity of ape and man provides the highest of all speculation about the origin of man, for the transition to man on the Earth itself is more probable than any other speculation.

In terrestrial evolution man proves to be in the highest peak of the evolutionary process, of the autonomic world, the spear-head of this process.  In cosmology, he may not be; should these spear-head meet, the essence of their embodiment may not be the same.  We have hitherto, possessed evidence for the descendant of man from a structure called ape.  So it is for the advocators for the other theory to find another structure of “ape-like nature” to support their speculation perhaps God or perhaps aliens.

Origin of Man from the Cells’ Own Inner Development:

The cells do not ‘pile’ themselves from a remembrance of their code alone, but also on the “stage of environmental necessity” which the cells are compelled to posit themselves.  The science of DNA and the mappings of such a relation are important to the technology of cells activities.  It is impossible to presuppose a genetic theory without an actual technological motion of cells.  As to why the cells are to take such structure is the question of greatest interest?  Genetic theory is important on inner cell processes and phenomenon.  The cell’s environment also plays an important part.

The activities (functions) of the cells as external and internal activities play a part in the shaping of the perceptible form and quality form of a given organism.  Typically genetic traits cannot move, cannot resolve and transfer itself within the organism, but only to do them in conjunction with space and time and within the mitotic flow for which the cells are its outer boundary.

By keeping secret the works of Marx, Engels,  Lenin, and other theoreticians, as is with the nationalities, the bourgeois science has posited itself into a difficult situation.  The success of Marxist-Leninist partly of China has resulted in a great advancement in science.  The contribution of the technical and scientific knowledge of the Chinese was at once felt during the rapid year of our observation.  The conclusion has been sincere; they were scientists of the 20^th century whose influences have help the future.

Existence according to J.G. Bennett based on Class or Set Theory:

 On J.G. Bennett’s division on existence, he wrote:

“We may start to systematize our conclusions by dividing existence into three great domains of sub-animate, animate, and supra-animate existence; we can search for a series of entities that have an equipotent structure. The result of this search is to demonstrate that there are twelve principal levels of existence, each characterized by a specific relationship of the three fundamental modes….

Within each of the twelve levels there are gradations distinguished by the degree of completeness with which the characteristic properties of the level are exemplified.

The primary divisions turn upon the relative dominance of one of the three modes as against the others."

A.    HYPONOMIC DOMINANT

The basic hypothesis of physical existence

∫There is a class of entities dominated by the hyponomic mode, and therefore essentially passive in all their relationships both inner and outer.∫

B.   AUTONOMIC DOMINANT

The basic hypothesis of animate existence

∫There is a class of entities dominated by the autonomic mode and therefore able to maintain a balance of reconciliation between their inner and outer relationships.∫

C.   HYPERNOMIC DOMINANT

The basic hypothesis of Cosmic Existence

∫There is a class of entities dominated by the hypernomic mode and therefore able to act as originating active sources for external relationships.∫

Within each of these primacy divisions there are four families distinguished by the level of hyparchic existence possible for them.

Each level is equipotent.

A. 1. Unipotent Entities - Existential Indifference

A. 2. Bipotent Entities - Invariant Being

A. 3. Tripotent Entities - Identical Recurrence

A. 4. Quadripotent Entities - Composite Wholeness

First Transitional Hypothesis - Active Surface

B. 5. Quinquepotent Existence - Self-renewing Wholeness

B. 6. Sexipotent Existence - Reproductive Wholeness

B. 7. Septempotent Existence - Self-regulating Wholeness

B. 8. Octopotent Existence - Self-directing Wholeness.

Transitional Hypothesis - Biospheric Wholeness

C. 9. Novempotent Existence - Sub-Creative Wholeness

C.10. Decimpotent Existence - Creative Wholeness

C.11. Undecimpotent Existence - Super-creative Wholeness

C.12. Duodecimpotent Existence - Autocratic Wholeness

One can see his statement,

“According to the principle of relatedness, every event must be the resultant of three independent forces. We should therefore, expect to find that all existence will disclose three independent components standing to one another as affirming, denying and reconciling elements of a triad.”  (The Dramatic Universe, p. 190)

In essence this is no different from the dialectics, the trialectics and the octave model of the universe.

He wrote,

“In setting up this universal scheme, we must not forget that we remain within the limitations of the phenomenal world. The three modes of existence have been defined in factual terms, no discrimination of value have been introduced. In the progression of the categories from wholeness to autocracy, we have not gone beyond the intuition of what existence comprises – we have to go further in order to seek an answer to the questions why and whither. In the next book * we shall apply the results so far obtained to a systematic survey of all the data of natural science – that is, of the world of fact.”

The second book thus consists of the survey of the data of the natural sciences.

J.G Bennett himself by pushing forward all the specialties of sciences is a champion of dialectical materialism under a different terminology. In essence, he himself makes us more convince of the validity of the materialist dialectics.

Eternity-blindness as J.G. Bennett has said, is worthy of consideration since, there is fundamentally no such thing as self-identicalness of a thing.  In time nothing is equal to itself, at any moment.  In relative motion, both the measured and the measuring things changes correspondently and thus the magnitude of the measured object appears to be the same but actually, both the “length of the ruler and the length of the object” has contracted in the direction of relative motion.

Friedrich Engels was by no means blind to this; he was by no means eternity-blind.  He wrote “this is so very correct that it does not follow from the continual rising of the sun in the morning that it will rise again tomorrow, and in fact we know now that a time will come when one morning the sun will not rise.”

J.G. Bennett wrote further, “These we find in the hypernomic, autonomic, and hyponomic worlds.”  This he intends to extend this “dialectics” into the universe because to him the universe is just abstracted as that, just as the abstraction of matter from all and everything material.

A.1. Unipotent Entities (Existential Indifference)

For example,

(a)   Sciences of generalized geometry – Metrical geometry is excluded.  Refer mainly to space.

(b)   Sciences of classical dynamics and pure – or gibbsian–thermo-dynamics.  Refer mainly to time

(c)   Statistical sciences – including the theory of probability and generalized field theory.  Refer mainly to eternality.

(d)   Semantic analysis, arithmetic, logic and the theory of cyclicity.  Refer mainly to hyparxis.

Dramatic Universe, P. 193, line 4, one can see:

“No less, however, does our experience assure us that what endures also decays and perishes.”  This cannot be abandoned by any Marxist-Leninist. (Reference: The dialectics of nature, p. 35)

J.G. Bennett wrote, “The framework sciences are simple and primitive. They are built upon the common-sense generalizations that mankind has always made in the process of reducing phenomena to knowledge.

A.2. Invariant Being – Bipotency

He wrote, “There is a class of occasions in which entities behave as if they were exempt from mutual interaction and were self-identical and invariant with respect to all four determining-conditions.”  The four determinations are x, y, z and t.

“Invariant Entities are self-identical under all the framework conditions. It is indeed remarkable that so restricted a mode of existence should be found to correspond to such an important group of phenomenon as the motions of the celestial bodies and classical electro-magnetism.

We can therefore say that all phenomenon to which the laws of classical dynamics and electromagnetics apply belong to the bipotent level of existence defined by this hypothesis.”

He wrote further, “Bipotency can also be called ‘polar existence’ and it is therefore the level most directly associated with the division of energy into two forms – potential and actual.”

What can J.G Bennett be visualizing is but the dialectics bipolar existence!  But what is most important is simple dialectics will certainly apply to this bipolar existence.  His work appears to “be a step-stone” to further elaborate and expanded dialectics of nature in a concealed manner.  And even the authorities, the “enemies” of dialectics may be confused by him.

A.3. Identical Recurrence

“There is a class of occasions in which entities behave as if they were exempt from any but reversible interactions and were subject only to cyclic changes in their inner constitution.”  To wit, the vibrational system of gases in kinetic theory.

A.4. Composite wholeness

“There is a class of occasions in which entities enduring in time behave as if subject to both interaction and change and yet remain wholly passive in their inner and outer relationships.”

“When commensurate with the scale of our own existence, composite wholes are the familiar ‘things’ of our common experience. In general, composite whole have a limited extension in space and a limited endurance in time, but a very large store of potentialities in eternity.  Composite wholes rely for their existence upon a superabundance of potentialities that enable them to undergo modifications that are relatively small compared with their total existence.”  Such a view is based on perception of objective reality.

He wrote, “Quadripotence is the characteristic mode of hyponomic existence in which an entity can actualize by reason of its own constitution, but cannot draw upon its environment to restore its own togetherness.”  Thus a crystal, a book, a stone, etc. cannot draw upon its environment to restore its own togetherness.  This is not the case with living things.  There is interior and exterior interaction but no reflection.

His range of composite wholeness is from helium nucleus to the greatest cosmic structures.  He wrote, “Composite wholeness ranges from the helium nucleus to the greatest cosmic structures. Atomic nuclei are degenerated quadripotent entities in so far as they lack spatial presence. True composite wholes begin with molecular complexes such as we find in the crystallite or micellar structure of solids. From this narrow base they spread out to include all kinds of material objects, in so far as these are studied from the point of view of primary stability and secondary change.”

The transitional hypothesis of Active Surface:

1.    The inertness of hyponomic entities.

2.    Living organisms react selectively to their environment.

There is no free potency in these entities, motion or interchange of hyte prevails continuously.

He wrote, “There is a class of occasions in which entities behave as if their wholeness were maintained by a pattern of potentialities that enable exchanges of hyte to take place across their boundary surface without loss of identity.”

He wrote also, “In this region we encounter situations in which there is interchange of hyte, but no free potency. Interchange is something more than the migration of hyte from one region to another; it is the transfer of ordered groupings in such a manner that the energy and entropy balance is shifted in favour of one region at the expense of another, for this to occur there has to be a bounding-region across which the interchange takes place.”  Perceptible examples are colloid which satisfy the hypothesis.

The significance of proteins is obvious here.

He wrote, “The hypothesis of active surface is satisfied by entities, such as the protein and nucleic acids, that have an eternal pattern so rich in potentialities as to enable them to exert an organizing influence upon their environment. Such entities, though not living, are nevertheless different in nature from the wholly passive composite wholes. They are invariably colloidal in character and exemplify the immense significance of active surfaces in the transition from the hyponomic to the autonomic world.”  (See p. 200 “The Dramatic Universe”)

This subtle view is in great similarity with the dialectics of nature written by Engels.  He wrote, “Life is the mode of existence of protein bodies,” (see the Dialectics of Nature, p. 301)

J.G. Bennett foresaw the colloidal properties of the organic.  He wrote, “The visible world about us is mainly built up from the aggregation of colloidal particles – crystalira structure are far less important than colloids.” (p. 200)

Biturcation of hyte leads to 2 directions, one, universal hyponomic existence and, two, universal autonomic existence.

B.5. Self-renewing wholeness:

“There is a class of occasions in which the duration of existence in time is prolonged by the renewal of potential energy at the expense of the environment.”  Also “for this property to be manifested, the entity must have a minimum extension in space.”

Qualitative transformation leads to discreted-ness.  Thus, “according to the principle of structure, there must be discontinuities in the transition from one quality to another.”  “The hypothesis of self-renewal asserts that there are entities that exchange energy and matter with their environment in such a way as to maintain their potentiality in the midst of change.” (cf. E Schrodinger, What is Life?  p. 72)

J.G. Bennett:  “Self-renewal prolongs existence but cannot perpetuate it, for sooner or later the power of assimilation and transformation breaks down and the living tissue dies – renewal delays, but does not overcome death.”

B.6. Reproductive Wholeness

Hypothesis of reproductive wholeness

“There is a class of occasions in which self-renewing entities can reproduce outside their own surface other entities similar to themselves.”

For example,

1.    Cells – not viruses for they cannot do so when isolated from a cellular host.

2.    Unit cellular plants

3.    Metazoa

Active volume and active surface:  The cell has not only two-dimensional surface properties, but also a three-dimensional inner structure; that is, an active volume.

“The cell can be called the ‘atom of life’, for it occupies a position in the autonomic series roughly corresponding to that of the atoms in the hyponomic series.”

And even in the autonomic series the atoms do not perish – a justification of the laws of negation of negation.

B.7. The self-regulating wholeness

“There is a class of occasions comprising entities able to maintain and regulate a functional balance within their own enclosed surface or skin.”

“Individualism (of cell or organism), properly speaking, begins with self-regulation.  Even the freely moving protozoa animal is not individuated.  Through the member are often scattered over great distances and not connected by any functional organism, the species is nevertheless the whole upon which the protozoa animal depends.”

Individuated man, social man, is subjected to historical materialism.  There is a functional depends of men and therefore potencies for the history of the human social organism, i.e. historical periods - primitive, ancient, capitalist, socialist, and communist.  This J.G Bennett’s concept of potency is the qualitative nodal line for the level of hyte motion.

B.8 Self-directing wholeness

The hypothesis:

“There is a class of occasions characterized by the presence of self-directing entities able consciously to choose between alternative lines of actualization in time.”

Also, “A self-directing entity can foresee and influence such occasions, whereas the simple organism adapts itself only to stimuli immediately present.”

“The possibility of free choice represents the highest achievement of autonomic existence.”

The transitional hypothesis of the biosphere:

The hypothesis of biospheric wholeness:

“There is a class of occasions in each one total living whole is associated with the active surface of a planet.”

Biospherology – a new branch of science.  The concept of great biological orders, he wrote, “The great biological orders that represents the functional organs of the biosphere, develop, flourish, and disappear over periods of many millions of years.”

On the dialectics of biosphere, he wrote, “The data paleontology and paleo-botany suggest very strongly that the whole of organic life on the earth has passed through successive periods of activity and quiescence, and of degeneration and rebirth, that are reminiscent of the life cycle of separate organisms.”

“It has been suggested by Ouspensky that the biosphere (successive periods of biosphere) has a life of two and a half-million years; that is, thirty thousand time the life of man.”

Octopotent ~ eight-fold structure

Septempotent ~ seven-fold structure, etc.

Consciousness ~ is the endpoint in biosphere.

“The biosphere must always be distinguished from the planet upon which it exists.  It may be regarded as the final and highest manifestation of organic life, but it is at the same time the transition to a higher form of existence that is beyond life altogether.”

Species, planets, stars, galaxies and the visible universe.  “Each of these species marks a level as definite as those that we have found in the study of the lower orders.”

We see from this the application of the theory of sets on nature is accomplished.

What J.G. Bennett concerns himself is over materiality (its order) not just order of consciousness.  He had written, “As we place life upon a higher level in the hierarchy of existence than thinghood, so we must be prepared to concede to cosmic existence a higher order of consciousness than is possible for any form of life.”

Thus consciousness in J.G. Bennett’s mind has undergone an alteration of meaning.  This consciousness becomes energy – just like in “material-reflection” consciousness is energy.  Unless one is awakened over this so-called “consciousness” beyond life in his supra-animate consciousness.

“The hypothesis of hypernomic existence requires, therefore, the conception of supra-animate consciousness; that is, a mode of togetherness that does not depend upon the vital characteristics of self-renewal, reproduction, self-regulation, or even self-direction.”

Thus a nervous system is not required for thinking (for the advent of consciousness).  And the universal motion may be conscious motion.  Ad absurdum!  And so the meaning of consciousness must change.  Consciousness is a property of organic life only within this frame of reference.

The planets, the stars, the galaxies can never become conscious of anything ….. The universe is homogenous and isotropic – hyponomic to biospheric (autonomic) order can be found in the other “regions of the universe”.  Are we the cells, of the universe, wherein the universe is a conscious being?  We do not know but J.G. Bennett thinks it may be true.  That’s why he has a special category of Hypernomic existence.

He himself recognized the flow in this “consciousness”.  He wrote, “The assertion that planetary existence stands above the level of life is difficult to grasp and hard to accept. We can scarcely conceive consciousness otherwise than associated with living organism in some respects analogous to our own – to suppose that there can be an even greater intensity of consciousness associated with a body like the earth seems implausible.”

He wrote, “The apoleritical pattern of the planet must be fuller than that of the biosphere, and must, therefore comprises not less than nine distinct levels. The ninth category expresses our intuition of the universal pattern, but not freedom of creation.”

C.9      The hypothesis of sub-creative wholeness.

“There is a class of occasions in which entities can exert an affirming force towards life without being themselves independent wholes.”

For example,  planets, earth included.

He wrote, “Planets have inner qualities of stability and permanence that enable them to support the transformations of autonomic existence in the biospheres.”

C.10    The hypothesis of creative wholeness.

Stars are “atoms” of the hypernomic tetrad.

99.85% of mass – in sun.  The most important object here!

“There exist a class of occasions in which entities atomic in nature exercise a free creative power within their own presence.”

Heliology – study of suns

Planetology – study of planets.

Sun as the object of study in this category.

C.11    The hypothesis super-creative wholeness.

Galaxy as the main subject of study. Unity of stars in pattern form pattern of galaxy.

‘There is a class of occasions in which entities – not themselves autocratic – are nevertheless manifestations of the supreme affirming power.

C.12    The hypothesis of autocratic wholeness.

The universe is therefore “matter” – there is no difference in essence.

He wrote, “The universe, as we know it, cannot be infinite, but this does not mean that there is no existence beyond any attainable limit of human knowledge. We cannot, for example, either assert or deny that time had a beginning, but we can say that the universe as we know it may, at some time in the past, have been very different from what it is now.”

The Dynamic World:

1.   The representation of the natural order:

(i)   We can find the following:  The inexhaustibility of phenomena.

(ii)   The language of mathematics has little or no value for the description of fact, and yet we recognize in it the remarkable power of relating and unifying subjective experience and objective reality.”

(iii)   Recognizes qualitative quantity – the unity of quality and quantity.

The representation of the natural order is in terms of mathematical language.

“Geometry is the science that studies framework without reference to existence.”  Dramatic Universe, p. 240

It is three dimensional (at most).  Time, independent becomes non-independent and thus we have 4 dimensional geometry – Minkowski and Einstein’s restricted theory of relativity. The equations enunciated can have four-dimensions:

For example,  ds² = dx²   + dy² + dz²  - c² dt² ……….

1. Positive value for right-handside the manifold is Euclidean ~ space-like

2. Zero for right-handside ~ ds is a null interval

3. Negative ~ time-like

4. ds ~ interval

5. “Had there been cross terms of the form dxdy and manifold would have been of the Riemanian type adopted by Einstein in his treatment of general relativity.” P. 242.

This equation is for 4 or 5 dimensions?  What is an Eternity?

“The need for a six-dimensional geometry can be grasped if we relate it to three conservative properties common to hyponomic situations in general.

The first of three is the constancy of the velocity of light in the absence of matter, irrespective of the motion of its source.  This, as Minkowski showed, requires a four dimensional representation manifold (x, y, z, t Continuum or octave notes do, re, mi // fa Continuum).  There is secondly, the conservation of energy, mass, and charge that require a five-dimensional scheme (x, y, z, t, a Continuum or octave notes do, re, mi // fa, so Continuum) to allow for accelerated motions.  Thirdly, there is the conservation of angular momentum, or spin that is independent of the other conservative properties and require six-dimensions (x, y, z, t, a, h Continuum or octave notes do, re, mi // fa, so, la Continuum) or even seven-dimensions (x, y, z, t, a, h, E Continuum or octave notes do, re, mi // fa, so, la, ti Continuum)   for its complete representation.”  And a final Ultimate Complete Representation with a  (x, y, z, t, a, h, E, E_∞  Continuum or octave notes do, re, mi // fa, so, la, ti // do Continuum).  Intervals are denoted as '//' and exist at mi-fa and ti-do or are called mi-fa interval (or or Newtonian Separation) and ti-do interval (or Apokrisis).  Both bend the octave of dimensions due to acceleration/retardation at the mi-fa interval between Observer (O) and Observed Body (P) and acceleration/retardation at the ti-do interval between Observer (O) and the Observed Eternity (Q) and Observed Hyparxis (H).

Scientific view:  “The self-imposed task of the scientist is to reduce the confused data of serial-experience to an orderly system.”

Religious view: “The separation of fact from value is only a provisional expedient to simplify the first stage of the scientist’s work. Heisenberg, Eddington, Schrödinger, de Broglie and other great mathematicians and physicists of the present century have realized that pure science leads to a doctrine of values that is very close to revelation.”  (Cf Werner Heisenberg, Philosophic Problems of Nuclear Science, trans, F.C. Hayes (London, 1952) p. 71 :

“The core of science is formed to my mind, by the pure sciences which are not concerned with practical applications.”

A good ethics is one which must arise out from science.  Aesthetic too is not indifferent to this conviction.  By universal observer is observation which is higher and free from eternity blindness.

Motion:

“Although this form of description (only the larger body attracts the small body) is customary, it runs counter to the conviction that there can be no influence without connection; that is, action at a distance.

He wrote further, “It would preferable to say that there is no interaction at all, and this is the assumption that we shall make in the study of unconstrained motions.” Thus in mechanics, we have made such an assumption.

“Kinematical science is the study of unconstrained relationships.”

The simplest motion is noticed here.  He wrote, “The body that moves changes its position but remains itself. This is the simplest observation of the natural order and, by fixing our attention upon it, we arrive at the motion of ‘invariant being’ that enters our second existential hypothesis. A body that moves and yet remains itself is bipotent.  From this bipotentiality arises the relativity of motion, for it separates, as polar opposites, the observer and the body observed in motion. On the science of dynamics he wrote, “The science of dynamics studies the occasions in which there are these three kinds of connectedness and no others.

(i)   Ideal rigid connectedness

(ii)  Flexible connectednes or ideal plasticity,

(iii)  Ideal non-connectedness or total absence of mutual constraint."

Fitzgerald concluded, from Michelson and Morley’s experiment, that a moving body must contract in the direction of motion. Einstein and Minkowski, explained this conception of length, without disturbing the basic conception of physical rigidity.

On Relative Rigidity and Quasi-rigidity:

“Hermann Weyl raised fresh problems by suggesting that the metrical structure of the world itself might vary from place to place, and that this variation might be the source of electro-magnetic phenomena.  If this were so, it would follow that measuring rods – although in the physical sense approximating as closely as could be desired to the requirement of perfect rigidity – might, nevertheless, change both size and shape when transferred from one place to another.  The property whereby the body that is rigid by all physical tests may change in length in moving from place to place was called by Weyl “the relativity of magnitude.”  He suggested that “The same certainty that characterizes the relativity of motion accompanies the principle, of relativity of magnitude”, and added: “We must not let our courage fail in maintaining this principle, according to which the size of a body at one moment does not determine its size at another, in spite of the existence of rigid bodies.  But unless, we are to come into violent conflict with fundamental facts, this principle cannot be maintained without retaining the conception of infinitesimal congruent transformations; that is, we shall have to assign to the world besides its measure-determination at every point also a metric relationship. Now this is not to be regarded as revealing a “geometrical” property which belongs to the world as a form of phenomena but as being a phase-field having physical reality.  Hence, the fact of the propagation of action and of the existence of rigid bodies leads us to found the affine relationships on the metrical character of the world which lies a grade lower.”

Predictions:

The “bending of light” observed at the eclipse of 1917 – attributed to Einstein’s theory.

“A quasi-rigid body is functionally rigid but existentially plastic.”  “We shall use the term ‘quasi-rigidity’ to denote the property of material objects which makes them appear to an eternity-blind observer as remaining unchanged in shape and size, whether the motions with respect to the observer and to one another be constant or accelerated.”

Earlier scientist Newton, Kepler, etc. were blind to the fifth dimension – eternity.

Further clarification of Quasi-rigidity:

He wrote, “We can now clarify the conception of quasi-rigidity by recognizing it as the property whereby the results found by O (Observer) on triangulating a given object always prove to be the same, irrespective of the time and space co-ordinates and of the order in which O’s measurements are made.  The quasi-rigid body defined in this manner is free from deformation by any forces operating in the space-time world of the observer O.  On the other hand, O is aware that changes in level of eternity bring with them modification of the distribution of potential energy. A change in potential energy that affects one part of a body differently from another must result in a stress and, hence, in a deformation which can be avoided only by introducing some compensating changes in the inner relationships of the body itself.”

Engels dialectics of nature is by no means “totally accomplished” – although new discoveries have further confirm his exposition and trends, one must recognize the rearrangements of materials as essential.  J.G Bennett did not study the universe (matter) from a methodology totally different from the dialectical materialist method.  In fact his approach has been dialectical ~ he was picturing a dialectical universe using class theory and Hegelian dialectics.

On force-field:

“Force-fields are only recognizable by the observation of accelerated motions.” Accelerated motion can be observed from the visible work done when a locomotive move a train.  In the case of gravitation and electrical forces, no visible work is being done, but as such we can picture acceleration as an addition of increments of velocity derived from the conversion of potential into actual energy.  Minkowski showed how non-coincidence of time axes gives uniform relative motion.  Similarly, accelerations are due to non-coincidence of eternity axes.”

“The non-coincidence of a (eternity axis) leads us to ascribe potential energy to the observed body P.  It follows therefore, that in the study of these divergences we may expect to find the source of accelerated motions in general and the means of establishing a comprehensive field-theory.”

Non-coincidences can arise in one of two ways:

(a) Non-coincidence of the direction of eternity given by the orthogonal to the common space-time of O (observer) and P (observed body) with the direction of eternity for Q.  For the “private” eternity common to O and P differs from the “Public” eternity of Q.  This gives nine to gravitational fields.

(b) Non-coincidence of directions of eternity of P and O.  This leads to electro-static fields and when combined with non-coincidence of time-axes to electro-magnetic forces.

It must be borne in mind that J.G Bennett conceives a tranquil simple “old dialectic”.  He wrote, “The mental process whereby the two gives rise to a third idea that harmonizes them without destroying their separate significance is called the dialectic.”  “Dialectical thinking is certainly of a different order from that which consists in the automatic association and comparison of ideas.  Though difficult in its exercise, this form of thought is, nevertheless, extremely limited in its scope. Experience has shown that it is inadequate for finding answers to the practical problems of life, and , indeed, the great exponent of the dialectic – from Plato to Hegel and Marx – have proved unsatisfactory guides to practical life, whether private or publics.  The dialectic leads also to a defective linguistic form.” (p. 25)  The Chinese has used a dialectical cosmological model using the yin-yang principles.  The yin-yang principle is the essence of all principles and through its hexagram principles have managed to give a clearer picture of the universe.  Fragmented and formalistic explanation of our universe is helpful only if assisted by the principles of the yin-yang, dialectics and trialectics and the hexagram, octave and enneagram.

If he had noticed, Engels dialectics of nature, the Chinese yin-yang and hexagram models he would be appreciative of this discovery of the bipolar potential entities.  Yet the fourth way uses trialectics and the enneagram just like the Chinese uses the yin-yang and the hexagram to interpret the world.  The Russians uses dialectics and taxonomy classification.  It must be borne in mind that he is not familiar with newer discoveries in dialectics, that is why we see he abstracted “dialectic” with a simple notion (a correct one no doubt) then place other forms of thinking side by side with it (which is an error of method) and give equal status to the other.  He had not the faintest idea that all the other forms of thinking in motion is precisely what we called the dialectic.  Dialectics like matter is an abstraction given to the motion of the forms of thought; it rests on nothing else but this reality.  If ever dialectics becomes a “body”, alienated body of thought, then this dialectics is so much the result of dialectical motion going on in J.G. Bennett’s head.  So much is this, which we shall designate as how J.G Bennett metaphysicalized dialectics.  By preventing dialectics from moving and by isolating it from an otherness, he managed to “condemn” only the old dialectics of formal and dualistic nature.  Even the dialecticians, should be happy to condemn such backward old dialectics, which tries to isolate itself from reality.

Pseudo-dialecticians:

Where did he get his dialectics?

Quotes from J. G Bennett:

1. On Relatedness:  p. 38

All real relationships are reducible to the combination of three independent elements standing to one another as affirming, denying, and reconciling influences.

2. “The great scientist is not the one who knows the fact but the one who has the will to change it.” P. 131

Compare: The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways, the print, however, is to change.” (Marx’s)

4. Why did he use “being”?  Unable to rid, the birthmarks of Hegels’ dialecticism.

5. The categories, possibility, impossibility, actualization, necessity, etc. Are these not the categories of dialectics in Dialectical Materialism?  p. 141

6. His whole exposition of the ‘Dramatic Universe’ cannot be accomplished without dialectical thinking using the taxonomical and developmental processes.

7.    The ‘Dramatic Universe’ in the sense is the dialectics of nature for the middle of twentieth century. 

“The Dialectics of Nature” is the accomplishment of human knowledge heritage up to the end of nineteenth century.  Both have the object on the dialectics of nature.  He later cannot evade dialectical conception.  The human known heritage in the twenty-first century is the trialectics and the octave model of the world.

World of Energy:

“The nucleons are located on the absolute of the six-dimensional framework. This is the laws of all null-intervals given by ds² = dx²   + dy² + dz²  - c² dt²  - _²da² - ² dh²  where x, y and z are as usual, the three directions of motion, force, and spin axis projected into rectangular co-ordinates; t, a, and h, are time-like , aprokritical, and hyparchic intervals; and others (denoted by '_' and  are conversion factors analogous to c.”

Definitions and meanings:

1) 3 Dimensions of Space: x       y       z

(or octave note ‘do’, ‘re’, ‘mi’)

2) 3 Dimensions of Time: t = t₁       a = t₂       h = t₃

(or octave notes ‘fa’, ‘so’ and ‘la’)

3) Space-time: The separation of space and time in the Space-Time Continuum is at the mi-fa interval interval of the octave of dimensionalities

4) Apokrisis:  The separation of two levels in eternity (E and E_∞). Hence apokritical interval as the measure of such separation at the ti-do interval of the octave  of dimensionalities.

5) Hyparxis:  The condition of ableness to be one of the former determining conditions with space, time and eternity. Associated with Will rather than consciousness or function. Represented by delta-pencil.

6) Hyponomic:  The levels of existence dominated by the denying factor.  Existence below life thinghood.

7) Hypernomic: The levels of existence dominated by affirmative factor Existence beyond life.

8) Autonomic:  The levels of existence dominated by the reconciling influence. Existence comprising all forms of life.

Hyponomic, hypernomic and autonomic existences – represents the totality of the existential universe as a form of matter. The most striking proof of the dialectical constituents of the universe, passivity (hyponomic), affirmative (hypernomic) and reconcillative (autonomic).

Form and content of J.G Bennett:

P. 329 on composite Wholeness, he wrote, “Any comprehension of the transition to composite wholeness required that a clear meaning should be assigned to the sentence ‘the entity A has changed but has not ceased to be itself.” He goes on to demonstrate this from the standpoint of set theory and the mathematical theory of transformation. Thus the change of content may not cause the form or entity A to perish, to become non A. The actualized change is also a fact. Such is J.G. Bennett’s dialectical conception.

On the So-Called Five Dimensional:

1.    The ‘postulate of the absolute world’ by Minkowski delivered at the 80^th Assembly of German Scientists and physicians at Cologne on September 21^st, 1908, is that all phenomena can be represented in a single four-dimensional continuum of space-time, but the partition between the dimensions of space and time is different for every independently moving body.

Thus there is a connection of one space-time continuum with another ~ as such that the observer of physical phenomena must bear in mind that the measurements (x, y, z, t) he obtained must depend on the body which he is resting.  If he is in another independently body, his (x, y, z, t) cannot be the same as the previous (x, y, z, t).  Thus there exist a law of transformation of the space-time continuum for observation move when the observer is in different independently moving bodies.

Thus Einstein wrote, “The following question is characteristic for the entire theory of relativity: how must the laws of nature be constituted so that they are valid in the same form relative to arbitrary systems of co-ordinates (postulate of the invariance of the laws of nature relative to an arbitrary transformation of space-time).”

Thus (x, y, z, t)   (x¹, y¹, z¹, t¹)   (x², y², z², t²)

That is x = _?_ x² , the law of transformation is required. How to find _?_, with respect to chosen physical bodies, moon, earth, mars, in alpha century, etc.

2.    Fundamental axiom in elucidating “the postulate of the absolute world.”

(i) The substance of any world-point may always, with the appropriate determination of space and time, be looked upon as at rest.

(ii) Any ray of light moves with the determined velocity c, whether the ray be emitted by a stationary or by moving body.

“It is possible to make any change in the system of reference that is in conformity with the transformations of the group G_c and leave the expression of the laws of Nature unaltered.”  Minkowski, Raum and Zeit, p.79.

He does, indeed, compare the invariance of electro-magnetic equations for the group G_c with the observed phenomena:

“The concept of rigid bodies has meaning only in mechanics satisfying the group G_∞.” (Max Born, Ann. Der Physik (1909) Vol. 30.  This and other references to the conception of relative rigidity are given in notes by A. Summer Feldt on Minkowski’s paper.)

“In the special theory of relativity, relative rigidity refers only to the assumption that all systems of reference must be invariant for G_c”

“The general laws of nature are to be expressed by equations which hold good for all systems of co-ordinates: that is, are co-variant with respect to any substitutions whatever.”  A. Einstein, The general Theory of Relativity, Loc. Cit. P.117.

Heisenberg wrote in 1952:  “It must be noted that the status of the restricted general principles of relativity is very different.  The whole of modern physical theory is impregnated with the consequence of special relativity, whereas the general theory has remained an ingenious and impressive speculation that has made little contribution to the progress of physical science.”  Werner Heisenberg, Philosophic Problems of Nuclear Science (London, 1952)

“It is instructive to examine the reasons for the failure of the various five-dimensional theories to carry conviction to experimental physicists, and to enter into scientific thinking in the same way as, for example, the quantum and relativity theories have done.”  (J.G Bennett’s Dramatic Universe, p. 490)

“Einstein rightly claimed that the mathematical instrument he had created in his development of the tensor calculus gave a means of generalizing physical laws of matter so that they would fit in with the general theory of relativity.”  (J.G Bennett’s the Dramatic Universe, p. 493)

The unity and intermingling of space-time is very obvious to our perception.  Newton’s “abstracting” had split space and time as independent from all observation.

“Five dimensional theories directed primarily to the removal of contradictions in wave mechanics and quantum theory were developed by Flint.”  H.T. Flint (1) Metrical Theory in Relation to Electron and Protons.”

“It was not until later that papers began to appear in which the physical significance of the fifth dimension was related to consideration of energy and entropy. In 1942, Piero Caldirola* defines the fifth dimension in terms of the time and energy content of a system:

X₅ = T/(E +S) dt

where T = Time, E = Energy content, S = System

P. Caldirola*, ‘Meson Field Equations in Five-dimensional spaces’ Niovo Cim (1942) Vol. XIX, p.25.

Thus we have (x, y, z, t, a) conceived within a space or else Caldirola will not speak of Five-dimensional spaces.

Caldirola will not speak of five-dimensional spaces.

Concept of Meson theory is to be developed – fifth dimension (a or t₂ or octave note 'so') is 'space-like' time or plane time and is related to energy and entropy.

The sixth dimension (h or t₃ or octave note 'la') is 'volume-like' time or solid time related to recurrence and reincarnation.  The seventh dimension is related to eternity (E or the 4th dimension of time or octave note 'ti' ) of our visible and invisible universe.  The next higher octave of dimensions of the Real World is the Ultimate Infinite Eternity, E_∞

Science and materialism are the most beautiful things in the whole ~ atheism too is the most ethical, the most moral of all practice.  The data of science and materialism ends in values in morals, in aesthetics which is precisely the kind, the quintessence resting on these data.  Religion based on distortion of data has a false moral values polarized to the good and the evil omitting doubtful values of the middle neutral, and always with misplacement of evil into the good and good into the evil and ignoring ambiguities or miss using them in practice - some accurately and some inaccurately interpreted.  The inaccurate ones need alteration to conform to modern science with stable neutral moral gravity-center.

The study of material-reflection reveals the fact of the “limitation of perception” ~ the materialism which only recognizes reality from the standpoint is one-sided; the modern materialism must extend materiality into the non-perceptible world.  The non-perceptible world is fundamentally of a material nature or of energy nature.  There is an unbreachable unity of non-perceptible world to the perceptible world because events going on in the non-perceptible world have been discovered to emerge into perceptible form and vice-versa. This shows the oneness of matter, perceptible or not.  This religion has made a false assumption on the nature of the non-perceptible world – engages in unscientific fantasies. There is no otherness of matter – the otherness of perceptible phenomena is also of a material nature. So much in this.

The natural scientific way which I have used to handle the phenomenon of reflections therefore puzzling to the moments of the cunning motion of conscious kind and who fail to recognize the materiality in it.

Thinking can be controlled by the producer but as such confusion in thinking is not due to mental defect, but a feature of thinking.

“The equivalence of energy and mass could be interpreted to mean that by far the greatest proportion of the universal energy is in the form of matter, but that only a small fraction of this matter can be converted into energy that is available for transformation.”  J.G Bennett.  The mathematical expression is E = mc² – a little m gives a great amount of E.  Energy = mass x constant speed of light square.

“We have now to consider the evidence – chiefly based upon the Doppler shift or reddening of light from very distant nebulae – that the universe is expanding.”  J.G Bennett.  Is it growing like a fruit?

What about contraction possibility after expansion has ceased to be?

“When we place ourselves in a perspective where time and eternity are merged, expansion must be proceeding simultaneously with contraction, and this seems the most probable situation.”  J.G Bennett.

The randomness of stars (galaxies) in various region of the Universe due to a gain of energy from other portion of the universe leads to expansion of this region, but as such a contraction of the other region.  But in what why does the gain of energy occur?  Gravitational expansion when the energy is gained and gravitational contraction when energy is lost?  Energy which is lost from matter leads to gravitational contraction and the nebulae will not receding, but as such for it to gain energy there must be repulsion, gravitational expansion and the stars (nebulae) will be receding from one another as with the present Universe.  If simultaneity of expansion and contraction of the universe must occur then there must a “soap-bubble.”  Universe, of which the “exterior” is expanding and the “interior” is contracting.  Such will lead to a null empty energyless space center.  Such expanding material-less, energyless space is the most puzzling thing.  Unless we take for granted that the expanding center (material-less energyless space) is part of a higher potency-higher than Duodecimpotency of J.G. Bennett.  If the amount of matter can ever be a constant, 4 x 10⁴⁸ tons is sufficient to disguise in the most complicated order of forms which characterizes the structure and forms of the universe.  The existential hypothesis deals precisely with the forms which matter has appeared.

Calculations:

Granted  4 x 10⁴⁸ tons of matter or

4 x 10⁴⁸ x 1016 kg of matter =

4064 x 10⁴⁸ kg of matter

= 4 x 10⁵¹ kg of matter

excluding the existing energy in the universe not converted to matter.

We have E = mc²

≈ 4 x 10⁵¹ x (299792000)² kg ms^-1

≈ 4 x 10⁵¹(3 x 10⁸)²

≈ 4 x 9 x 10⁶

≈ 3.6 x 10⁶⁸

≈ 4 x 10⁶⁸ kg ms^-1

≈ 4 x 10⁶⁸ (energy-units)

“If all that exists is uncertain, then it is not surprising that our human life is uncertain also. If uncertainty holds away even in the operation of the Divine Will, then we can reconcile ourselves to the spectacle of human sufferings, against which we must revolt so long as we have to believe that they are a negative oasis set in a desert of perfection.”  J.G Bennett, Dramatic Universe

Polar thinking?  Is it not an exposition of old dialectical tendency?

“The fifth dimension is assumed to be space-like but “as the momentum and velocity of a particle in the fifth dimension have never been observed, they are assumed to be zero.”  J.G Bennett.

Quasi-rigidity properly so-called, or relative rigidity or relative dimensions which varies with eternity and independently moving bodies of the observer, does not destroy the concept of dialectical materialism ~ for this exposes more laws of nature and thus proves the inexhaustibility of matter.

Matter as actualizes into forms results a structured universe – the existing universe. J.G Bennett’s dialectical conception saw three major division of this existential structure.  The hyponomic components, characterized by passivity of the material objects prevail everywhere in the universe.  The interior of the material objects in this component is denying, not active but passive.  We have a whole encyclopedia of such entities.  Then comes the active component, the autonomic component characterizing the whole biosphere in the various region of the universe. This animate matter has the power to reconcile with the external world.  Both the components of hyponomic and autonomic world are intermingled but as such distinguishable.  And there are with a higher creative order of the universe.  Universal pattern is what he calls it as supra-animate existence.

Such in J.G. Bennett’s dialectical structure of the universe.  Thus J.G. Bennett had exposed and confirmed the dialectically structured universe, despite of his negatively silent attitude to dialectics.

Mass increases, length decreases (quasi-rigidity) etc.  Does that affect dialectical Materialism?  Or does that confirm it for dialectical materialism insists on a very complicated inexhaustibility of connections and relatedness. The confirmation is thinkable.

On P.D. Ouspensky-Tertium Organum:

This great work, an outcome of Marxist-Engelist fermentation, has a striking similarity with ‘The Philosophical Manuscript of Material-Reflection’ which I have accomplished in the months of April – May 1975. I was greatly touched by his great accomplishment as early as 1922 (or earlier), there may be secondary contradiction but the subject matter are not completely identical. P.D Ouspensky must have used the dialectical materialist’s method in his analysis.

His subject matter is wider than “the subject matter of ‘The Philosophical Manuscript of Material-Reflection’ which deals with one aspect of the objective nature – the nervous system of man it can be generalized to engulf lower nervous system.

The agreement of thoughts and approach will be more than the minor contradiction.  This work come to my consciousness the 10^th of September 1975 and it acts as a power positing of my theoretical analysis of a particular aspect of material development of matter ~ the so-called material-reflection.

“The philosophical manuscript on material-reflection” does not analyze the so-called “conscious mind” – the most important “real subjective” of consciousness.  This I have written was to be the task of others. hence Ouspensky’s table of four forms of the manifestation of consciousness, serves this exposition of “conscious kind” – the motion of which, viz. progression of logic, moment of awareness, movements of conscious kinds, categorical progression of subjective, etc., really cannot move but transforms into lower motion of idea-products, images, etc.”

How do we therefore handle his work?  A living person is not going to stick to a system of thinking just like this but rather to evolve from it.  Further, the piece is his crystallized mental labor, a very great work indeed …… but to ‘worship’ blindly on his work is an error of method.  The most important task is to evolve from his work in a direction yet to be known.

Consider this statement of Ouspensky:

“So, according to Kant, everything that we find in things is put in them by ourselves. Independently of ourselves we do not, know what the world is like. And our cognition of things has nothing in common with the things as they are outside of use ~ this is, in themselves.  Furthermore, and most important, our ignorance of things in themselves does not depend upon our insufficient knowledge, but is due to the fact that by means of sensuous perception we cannot know the world correctly at all. That is to say, we perhaps know little, presently we shall know more, and at length shall come to a correct understanding of the world. It is not true because our experimental knowledge is not a confused perception of a real world. It is a very acute perception of an entirely unreal world appearing around us at the moment of our contact with the world of true causes, to which we cannot find the way because we are lost in an unreal “material” world. For this reason the extension of the objective sciences does not bring us any nearer to the knowledge of things in themselves, or of true causes.”

Bad unreal ‘material’ world – but that sensuous resting of the subjective is the only way the mind always rests.  The mind which does not rests on sensuous reality is not a mind resting on non-sensuous reality, but is a mind resting on the sensuous subjective projected by the mind itself – as images, etc.  Whether this sensuous world is real or unreal, but we know a bullet that enters the head makes the head see no worlds, not even material world ~ the sensuous bullet and the sensuous head ~ are the necessarily distorted unreal. ‘material’ world.  To call it real is just like calling it unreal ~ for what is real and what is unreal is itself badly understand.  Does Ouspensky think in terms of the unreal ‘material’ world?

The world just cannot be known when consciousness has not progressed to definite levels – thus there exist ‘organisms’ or beings with a higher level of consciousness.  Lower levels of perception and therefore consciousness, have lesser dimensions.

“All our positive science – physics (with chemistry) and biology – is built upon hypothesis contradictory to Kant’s propositions.”  Ouspensky’s views that “the dimensionality of space corresponds with the development of consciousness” or “He would define the fourth dimension as the fourth form of the manifestation of consciousness – the intuitional are thus more ‘materialistic’ than any materialistic view; or view of the positive sciences, who think that the consciousness is something not really important.

“Matter, i.e., everything finite, is an illusion in an infinite world.” Ouspensky (p. 118) Tertium Organum.  Thus we also get rid of 4 x 10⁶⁸ tons of matter – illusions quote from some source.

One thing about the “The philosophical manuscript on material-reflection” is that it was written without being consciousness of P.D Ouspensky’s Tertium Organum.  While I regard consciousness as energy, this had already been regarded.

“Concerning the latent energy contained in the phenomena of consciousness, i.e., in thoughts, feelings, feelings, desires, we discover that its potentiality is even more immeasurable, more boundless.”  Tertium Organum.

The dialectics of nature by Engels was read by me in the middle of 1975, at the time when the “The philosophical manuscript on material-reflection” has taken its final form.

Matter, hyte, energy are fundamentally the same.  The formless matter, the formless hyte, the formless energy must be capable of materialization.  When Engels speaks of matter, it is hyte and energy.  But in natural science, matter is the materialization of energy.  Thus the matter in Marxism and the matter in natural science is not identical in essence.  What energy is to science is what matter is to Marxism.  The most modern view of sciences is not really overthrowing Dialectical Materialism but on the contrary confirms it.

Nature is conscious, but this has a special meaning; that is to say a rubber band may be a conscious being; unless energy develops to conscious motion or very high level, we cannot think consciousness is everywhere. We are coming to a state whereby consciousness and energy becomes indistinguishable. If we regard consciousness as a special form or mode of existence of energy, that consciousness cannot be everywhere but energy will be everywhere-continues to appear into forms including therefore consciousness; thus higher consciousness is possible and nature is conscious can be possible. In old conception of conscious motion, “consciousness is conceived as an inherent only in animate beings of higher forms.” When consciousness is conceived as leveled, therefore form, then the precisely unknown energy can create consciousness in the transformation. The whole system can have a conscious side. The creativity the universe, the electrical and chemical motion in specific pattern may lead to a conscious universe – the highest form of motion of energy.

Electrochemical motion manages to find its way in the animate objects leading to a somewhat levels of conscious motion ~ so to under favorable condition or in fact already existing today such conscious motion may be there in the universe ~ we must study the pattern of electro-motion in the universe. But electricity existed everywhere in the universe so consciousness has levels – conscious in the final resort is a mode of existence of energy.

Ouspensky wrote,

“In electrical discharges, in thunder and lightning, in the rush and howling of the mind, we seen flashes of the sensuous-nervous shuddering of some gigantic organisms.”  p. 179

Thus Ouspensky sees a connection of consciousness and electricity.

Conscious motion of man and Universe (general speaking) which is the highest motion of energy is a very underdeveloped science.  The opposition to old materialism and energetics by Ouspensky is valid, but modern materialism and energetics regard consciousness as a foundation of matter and energy or consciousness appears into matter and energy – a necessary outcome of the Ouspenskian thought is by no means a real annihilation of the old, for the ‘fact’ that matter and energy can arise as soon as conscious energy appears into matter and other lower forms of motion.

Since our knowledge of animate consciousness has revealed to us of its ability to transform into lower motion – so it is also possible the conscious motion of the universe to lower into lower motion. The good example of this sample has given us an inside of the laws of motion of consciousness, the ability to transform, not only to higher consciousness but also to lower non-conscious motion – mere change of place by man or animate of material objects which they work on.

The soul cannot perish from the physical body – conscious motion cannot perish from the physical body ~ this can be so only when conscious motion continues in some forms, or even finds its way into other forms of physical body by way of transitions. Disappearing conscious motion may take a higher conscious motion.

Consciousness creates pattern and therefore motion, matter, etc. are forms of consciousness.  Matter or lower-motion is consciousness in transformed form is also obvious.  I am a conscious being but I don’t consider my teeth to be conscious too.

C.   THE UNIVERSE SYSTEMATICS OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

According to J.G BENNETT p. 221 (Dramatic Universe)