Mike Hockney

The cleverest people in the world are those most capable of making the least expected connections between apparently disparate things. This book explains how light, life, mind, souls, causation, motion, energy, ontological mathematics and ontological reason are all synonymous.

Are you one of the rare few capable of seeing the light? Can you see the hidden mathematical order beneath the Grand Illusion presented to our senses? Only those on the verge of Enlightenment have any hope of understanding ontological mathematics, the science of the soul, the science of the unseen light of the Universal Mind.

There are two kinds of intellectual: Philosophers and Sophists. The former seek the absolute truth while the latter seek the "practical" truth that brings them worldly prestige and success.

The Philosophers develop positions that rely on the highest intelligence and are as far removed as possible from the "common sense" of the mob. The common herd hold Philosophers in more or less complete contempt. The greatest Philosopher of all was Leibniz, a man unknown to the general public, and relatively obscure even within intellectual circles.

Any theory - any theory at all - that begins with false assumptions will produce false results. Therefore, the most fundamental task of all is to examine and get right the assumptions that underlie a theory. How do science's fundamental assumptions stand up to scrutiny? Science falls apart at a particular aspect of existence that can be defined exactly - at singularities. The whole logic of science collapses when singularities are encountered. This is fantastically problematic for science given that black holes are centred on singularities, photons are singularities, and the whole of the Big Bang Universe came from a Singularity.

What, ontologically, are singularities? Descartes gave us the answer hundreds of years ago. Singularities are minds, and from that single fact, science is turned on its head. Mind does not come from matter; matter comes from mind.

If a scientific materialist were asked to sum up his belief system, he might reflect exactly what Richard Feynman, a pope of science, said: "If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generation of creatures, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words? I believe it is the atomic hypothesis (or the atomic fact, or whatever you wish to call it) that all things are made of atoms - little particles that move around in perpetual motion, attracting each other when they are a little distance apart, but repelling upon being squeezed into one another. In that one sentence, you will see, there is an enormous amount of information about the world, if just a little imagination and thinking are applied."

Science is about the mundane, visible world. Religion is about the transcendent, invisible world. Atheists believe that science is the only way to explain the world. Agnostics think it's the best way. But is science actually a system of explanation at all, or merely a good problem-solving tool and method that achieves practical success in the observable world? Isn't science, like God, in need of an explanation? What is its ontological and epistemological basis? What limitations does it have? How does it define "Truth"?

"The problem is not to find the answer, it's to face the answer." - Terence McKenna

At school, you are taught "science". You are not taught the history of science, so you have no idea how science came to be the institution it now is. Above all, you have no idea that science is a vast, rigid system of dogmatism and ideology, an inflexible paradigm, an incomplete and inconsistent set of heuristic fictions, a quasi-religious faith that, on behalf of scientific empiricism, explicitly opposes philosophical and mathematical rationalism.

One hundred percent of scientists think that Einstein's special theory of relativity is correct. One hundred percent of scientists are wrong. Isn't that astounding? Why is it so hard for scientists to see the blatant errors in Einstein's logic?

Are you a ghost or a machine? You don't need to be a superstitious believer to support the side of the ghosts. In this book, we will show that the ghost side has two faces: Mythos and Logos. The Mythos version of ghosts is laughably silly ... just read the Torah, Bible or Koran to discover how preposterous and irrational it is. The Logos version, on the other hand, is the most rational position you can possibly arrive at, that of hyperrationality, expressed through pure, ontological, monadic mathematics.

"Without mathematics we cannot penetrate deeply into philosophy. Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics. Without both we cannot penetrate deeply into anything." - Leibniz

In intellectual history, perhaps nothing has been more misinterpreted than Gödel's incompleteness theorems. Stephen Hawking, adopting the popular misconception, said, "Thus mathematics is either inconsistent, or incomplete. The smart money is on incomplete."

This book is about the titanic struggle for the soul of mathematics, and reflects two immense battles in which mathematics is immersed to this day.

Where is your mind located? How does it interact with your body? When your body dies, does your mind die too, or does it have an afterlife? That's the mystery of existence. If humanity cannot answer these questions once and for all then it has no understanding of reality.

The answer is not going to be something obvious. It will require some great conceptual leap, hitherto unforeseen by almost all of humanity.

The ancients believed that a person was a reflection of the cosmos. A person had a body and a soul, and so did the cosmos. Is that a silly Mythos, or can it be intellectually defended?