The Numeric One, as already revealed in key 10 and key 11, is translated on the perceptual level via The Three-Dimensional form of any given object in space. In turn, The Numeric Two is translated perceptually through a relative space intermission between at least two objects in space. On the other hand, the scene is still in a haze as to how The Numeric Zero perceptually materializes. Although we’ve already introduced The Numeric Zero in the previous key, when we spoke about that nature of space and time, in this key, we shall delve further into the nature of the zero itself.
The Numeric Zero, assuming that it somehow exists conceptually, in order to possess any knowledgeable existence, it must somehow express this existence on a perceptual level. Again, no form of existence could ever surpass this Law of Gnosis. Checking to see if anything out there in The Physical Realm might resemble The Concept of Zero, it is not hard to think of space. Space seems to be the only identifiable form that could possibly resemble or reflect this concept. This is so, mainly because space projects a certain emptiness that is reminiscent of the average image of Zero-Ness.
However, Space does not reflect the absolute form of emptiness that The Zero claims. In other words, emptiness is not an inherent characteristic of space. The perceptual form of emptiness projected through space is only relative to the manner in which the dimensional physicality of objects and motions interact with the physicality of space. To put this in simpler terms, whenever there is an object in space, there is this Emptiness vs. Fullness polarity, and whenever not, the tension of this polarity eases. Hence, one could never attribute absolute emptiness to space. One could only claim a given space as relatively empty of the occupational presence of a given object x at a given time y.
Had space been inherently empty as such, then it could not possibly be emptied from a given object x at a given time y. How could that which is supposedly emptiness ever be emptied? On the other hand, The Zero projects a form of absolute emptiness that is completely intolerant to any form of fullness. On the contrary, The Numeric Zero is somehow conceptually empowered with the supremacy to negate the fullness of form (represented by The Numeric One), which is quite an opposing role to what space does in embracing The Numeric Fullness of objects within it (The Three-Dimensional Form).
From here, The Zero Possibility conceptually claims more than it could ever be. It claims some form of space that acts like some sort of a vacuum.
However, on the other hand, if space could not possibly have what it takes to account for The Zero perceptually, how could The Zero have managed to sustain such a conceptual presence, when it is negated by the very nature of space (the only form that could ever potentially resemble it in the physical realm)?
One could argue that The Numeric Oneness, even though intangible, is still somehow accounted for Perceptually through The Three-Dimensional Form of any given object in space and time, which (This Form) is, in turn, the visual mathematics of the interactivity of Light and Space with the physicality of this object. We’ve also already spoken of the Reductive Conversion method, through which The Perceiver assumably reduces and converts The Three-Dimensional Form into a numeric value as a way of accounting for its statistical particularity of presence in space and time.
However, the question still remains: what could ever perceptually account for The Vacuum that The Zero represents conceptually, knowing that space couldn’t? What could perceptually amount for the Negation power that The Zero seems to practice conceptually through negating thoughts? i.e., The Power to Negate (Vacuum) The Conceptual Fullness or Form contained within The Numeric Frame (The Thought)…
THE ZERO CANNOT POSSIBLY BE ACCOUNTED FOR PERCEPTUALLY THROUGH THE EMPTINESS OF SPACE, GIVEN THAT ABSOLUTE EMPTINESS (VACUUM) IS NOT AN INHERENT CHARACTERISTIC OF SPACE. IF THE ZERO, ON THE OTHER HAND, CANNOT POSSIBLY RISE TO THE PERCEPTUAL FULLNESS REPRESENTED BY THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL FORM OF OBJECTS THAT FALL WITHIN SPACE, THEN WHAT COULD EVER POSSIBLY ACCOUNT FOR THE ZERO PRESENCE ON THE PERCEPTUAL LEVEL?
THE ONLY POSSIBILITY REMAINING IS FOR THE ZERO TO BE SOME FORM OF A VIRTUAL EMPTINESS THAT RESIDES UNDERNEATH THE PARTICULARITY OF ANY THREE DIMENSIONAL FORM OF ANY GIVEN OBJECT IN SPACE. THIS EMPTINESS, ALTHOUGH THE PERCEIVER COULD NEVER IMMEDIATELY VERIFY IT, YET STILL, ITS PERCEPTUAL POSSIBILITY COULD SOMEHOW BE REASONED THROUGH AN IMMEDIATE CALCULATION THAT THE MIND SUPPOSEDLY ENGAGES IN AT ANY NUMERIC INSTANCE OF PERCEPTUAL ENCOUNTER. IN OTHER WORDS, IN THE VERY MOMENT THAT THE MIND REGISTERS ANY AWARENESS OF THE NUMERIC ONENESS OF A GIVEN OBJECT, THE MIND AUTOMATICALLY REGISTERS A PSEUDO AWARENESS TO THE POSSIBILITY OF THIS GIVEN OBJECT NOT EXISTING AT THIS GIVEN TIME, THIS GIVEN SPACE. THIS IS THE CORE MATHEMATICS OF DOUBT…
LET IT BE KNOWN TO YOU THEN THAT THE MIND IS INNATELY CAPABLE OF PROJECTING THE CONTEXT OF ANY CONCEPTUAL FORM (EVEN THE FORMLESS FORM ZERO) UNTO THE PERCEPTUAL REALITY, CREATING A REASON FOR THAT CONTEXT TO MATERIALIZE PERCEPTUALLY.
THE MIND PROJECTS THE CONCEPTUAL ZERO OUTWARDS UNTO THE PERCEPTUAL REALITY, CREATING A REASON FOR IT TO PERCEPTUALLY MATERIALIZE THROUGH A VIRTUAL EMPTINESS (A VACUUM) THAT SUPPOSEDLY RESIDES UNDERNEATH ANY FORM OF NUMERIC FULLNESS IN SPACE.
IT IS AS THOUGH ANY GIVEN OBJECT IS SOMEHOW VACUUMED INTO APPEARANCE BY THE SPACE UNDERNEATH IT, OR AS THOUGH THE SPACE UNDERNEATH THE OBJECT IS SOMEHOW VACUUMED BY THE OBJECT’S PHYSICALITY INTO DISAPPEARANCE…EITHER WAY, THE PERCEPTUAL END RESULT IS THE OBJECT’S UNDENIABLE PRESENCE IN SPACE, WHICH FOREVER STANDS AS A GROUND BREAKING PROOF TO THE ILLUSIVE NATURE OF THE NUMERIC ZERO VS. ONE POLARITY…
HOWEVER, NOTE FOR NOW, THAT THIS THREE-DIMENSIONAL VACUUM THAT SUPPOSEDLY ACCOUNTS FOR THE ZERO ON THE PERCEPTUAL LEVEL, CANNOT HOLD ON ITS OWN IN SPACE INDEPENDENTLY OF THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL FORM OF A GIVEN OBJECT X IN SPACE X1 TIMEX2 ETC… IT REPRESENTS A GHOSTLY FORM THAT IS FOREVER DEPENDANT ON THE PARTICULAR PHYSICALITY OF THE ACTUAL FORM IT SUPPOSEDLY RESIDES UNDERNEATH. IN ESSENCE, WHENEVER THERE IS A THREE-DIMENSIONAL FORM BEING ACCOUNTED FOR NUMERICALLY, THERE IS THE SAME EXACT FORM BEING REVERSELY DISCOUNTED FOR BY THE SAME NUMERIC LOGIC (BEING PERCEPTUALLY NEGATED IN THE VERY WAKE OF ITS PERCEPTUAL PRESENCE). WHENEVER ANY GIVEN OBJECT IS PERCEPTUALLY REGISTERED WITHIN THE NUMERIC 1 CONTEXT, IT IS IMMEDIATELY DEREGISTERED WITHIN THE NUMERIC 0 CONTEXT.
ALWAYS KEEP IN MIND, HOWEVER, THAT THE ZERO IS PERCEPTUALLY CALCULATED AND NOT IMMEDIATELY PERCEIVED. IT IS THE FORMLESS FORM THAT PROJECTS OUTWARDS FROM THE MIND UNTO THE PERCEPTUAL LEVEL, AND THEN BOUNCES BACKWARDS UNTO THE MIND (FOR LACK OF ANY PERCEPTUAL EVIDENCE), ENGAGING THE MIND BACK IN A CALCULATIVE PROCESS. THROUGH THIS VICIOUS CYCLE THAT EXHAUSTS THE MIND, BACK AND FORTH, THE ZERO NOURISHES AND SUSTAINS ITS DECEPTIVE POSSIBILITY (THROUGH FURTHER MYSTIFYING THE MIND OVER ITS IDENTITY AND SIGNIFICANCE). IT IS LIKE A VICIOUS CYCLE THAT BOUNCES BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN CONCEPTUAL FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN AND PERCEPTUAL DOUBT OF THE KNOWN (THE IMMEDIATELY OBVIOUS) WHICH, ONCE IT DEVELOPS TO A SEVERE PSYCHOLOGICAL LEVEL, IT GROWS MORE AND MORE BEHAVIORALLY SELF-DESTRUCTIVE, LEAVING ITS BEASTLY MARKS ON THE TABLET THE SOUL. LIKE FIRE, IT CANNOT BE RESISTED OR NEGATED THROUGH THE ZERO (ITS OWN NEGATORY POWER), IT COULD ONLY BE PUT DOWN BY THE SUBSTANCE “FROM THE FOUNTAIN OF THE WATERS OF LIFE”
…………GNOSIS OF THE ETERNAL ONE WHO IS BEYOND THE NUMERIC 1 VS. 0 POLARITY…
MORE ON THE ZERO:
AS ALREADY REVEALED, IN ORDER FOR THE ZERO TO CLAIM ANY PERCEPTUAL POSSIBILITY (AT ALL), IT WOULD HAVE TO ASSUME THE VIRTUAL POSSIBILITY OF A GHOSTLY FORM THAT HYPOTHETICALLY RESIDES UNDERNEATH THE ACTUAL THREE-DIMENSIONAL FORM OF THOSE OBJECTS AND IS ONLY IDENTIFIABLE THROUGH IT. HENCE, THE VERY SAME FORM THAT SUPPOSEDLY AMOUNTS FOR THE NUMERICAL PRESENCE (THE 1-NESS) OF A GIVEN OBJECT SUPPOSEDLY ALSO AMOUNTS FOR THE NUMERIC ABSENCE (THE 0-NESSS) OF THAT SAME OBJECT. THE PERCEPTUAL ZERO OF A GIVEN APPLE X (IN SUCH RESPECT) WOULD BE AN IMAGINARY GHOST-LIKE APPLE X (COMPRISED OF VACUUMED SPACE X), WHICH SOMEHOW SOLICITS THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL EXTREMITIES THAT SUPPOSEDLY ACCOUNT FOR THE APPLE’S NUMERIC PRESENCE, ONLY TO REPEL AND DENY THIS PRESENCE. IT IS ALMOST LIKE THE NEGATIVE OF A PHOTO…
Space, according to this image, is similar to thought, comprised of a solid substance carved hollow by those ghost-like objects that are supposedly molded from vacuumed space. This sounds absurd, doesn’t it? What is even more absurd is that zero-ness, on one hand, is conceptually built upon the assumption that Space = Emptiness, and yet this emptiness is completely reliant on the fullness of the objects in space to materialize at any perceptual level. It is also treated like an actual object or a particular fullness of form comprised of emptiness of that same form, which is logically impossible.
Timeless Plotinus, in his Marvelous Enneads, alluded to this delusive identity of zero-ness in his definition of The Metaphysical Evil. He defined such evil as:
“The Form of Not-NESS (NEGATION) clutched on to things…”(The Enneads of Plotinus)
“The delusive Absence of Form in the wake of its obvious Presence…” (The Enneads of Plotinus)
In other words, Timeless Plotinus compares The Zero to a Unknowledgeable Form that derives its elusive identity from Knowledgeable Forms. It solicits the Numerical Possibility generated from the identifiable selfhood of forms in order to claim some form of an identity for its selfless selfhood.
As to why Plotinus associates the nature of Zero-ness to the nature of Evil: Zero-ness is anti-gnosis (self-destructive). It sustains its delusive presence through utilizing a particular Object’s Form for the ultimate purpose of Denying this very form that is supposedly granting it with its presence and sustenance. This pattern of behavior, in itself, translates the meaning of self-destruction, i.e., to use that which makes you alive for the sole purpose of killing it. To use knowledge for the sole purpose of spreading ignorance. etc. Sound familiar? While, an object’s obvious presence cannot be denied or negated perceptually, it could be doubted conceptually, and this is exactly what zero-ness translates into: DOUBT. Doubt is born from the womb of a Spiritual Fear of The Unknown, which harnesses its presence cognitively through the possibility of The Unknown materializing physically. This possibility is perceptually impossible; however, it is somehow made possible by The Numeric Context, which rules the perceptual experience.
Anything that conceptually emerges as Numerically 1, is be repelled by The Numerical 0. In reality, Space, from where The Zero perceptually fortifies its conceptual presence, could not possibly reflect a repelling emptiness as such. Space embraces objects and not repel them.
We’ve already examined the perceptual possibilities of The Zero. We are yet to delve deeper into its conceptual status of presence. If The Zero is somehow perceptually associated with a Ghostly Form in Physical Space that assumes The Three-Dimensional Form of any particular object, what could possibly account for The Zero inside the Mental Space (Time)?
This shall be revealed in a later introduction to morphe. What has been revealed so far in the key is introductory to Fifth Science. In fact, and with all due modesty, it is but the ABCs to Fifth Science. Once the morphe of Fifth Science is exposed, you shall be exposed to The Hidden Powers of Your Mind; you shall see exactly how the key fits inside the Lock to open The Door of Space and Time.Follow