PC The Jungian system is based on four functions (thinking, feeling, sensation and intuition) and two attitudes (extroversion and introversion). Combining each of these four functions with the two attitudes, Jung came up with 8 personality types as follows:
 
 

Extrovert Thinking

Introvert Thinking

Extrovert Feeling

Introvert Feeling

Extrovert Sensation

Introvert Sensation

Extrovert Intuition

Introvert Intuition
 
 

Now the characteristics associated with each type have been well documented elsewhere so I will not deal with them here.
 
 

The Myers-Briggs personality type indicator - which builds on Jung’s analysis, distinguishes 16 different personalities types.

This system is based on the same four functions (sensing, thinking, feeling and intuition) and four attitudes (extroversion, introversion, perception and judgement).

One way of arriving at the 16 personality types is through permutating (i.e. arranging) functions (two at a time) one dominant and the other the auxiliary, each having either an extroverted or introverted attitude respectively.
 
 

Thus if we take sensing and thinking as the initial two functions we can obtain the following four personality types:
 
 

ISTJ (sensing dominant and introverted, thinking auxiliary and extroverted)

ISTP (thinking dominant and introverted, sensing auxiliary and extroverted)

ESTP (sensing dominant and extroverted, thinking auxiliary and introverted)

ESTJ (thinking dominant and extroverted, sensing auxiliary and introverted)
 
 

When we take sensing and feeling as the initial two types, we obtain the following four:
 
 

ISFJ (sensing dominant and introverted, feeling auxiliary and extroverted)

ISFP (feeling dominant and introverted, sensing auxiliary and extroverted)

ESFP (sensing dominant and extroverted, feeling auxiliary and introverted)

ESFJ (feeling dominant and extroverted, sensing auxiliary and introverted)
 
 

Combining intuition and feeling as the two types, the following four emerge
 
 

INFJ (intuition dominant and introverted, feeling auxiliary and extroverted)

INFP (feeling dominant and introverted, intuition auxiliary and extroverted)

ENFP (intuition dominant and extroverted, feeling auxiliary and introverted)

ENFJ (feeling dominant and extroverted, intuition auxiliary and introverted)
 
 

Finally, combining intuition and thinking, we have the following:
 
 

INTJ (intuition dominant and introverted, thinking auxiliary and extroverted)

INTP (thinking dominant and introverted, intuition auxiliary and extroverted)

ENTP (intuition dominant and extroverted, feeling auxiliary and introverted)

ENTJ (thinking dominant and extroverted, intuition auxiliary and introverted)
 
 

However when we combine from four (two at a time), six (rather than four) distinct arrangements are possible (i.e. 4C₂ = 6). Thus in terms of our functions we can also start with intuition and sensing or alternatively with thinking and feeling.

Thus combining these with the two attitudes (extroversion and introversion) we can generate eight additional personality types (two more groupings representing in each case four distinct personality types).

Therefore we should generate 24 - rather than 16 - distinct personality types.
 
 
 

Q.  So you are saying that there are eight missing personality types in the Myers-Briggs typology?
 
 

PC  Yes, this is clearly the case. The Myers-Briggs approach is based on the identification of polar opposites. Thus one is classified as either an extrovert or introvert (E or I); one is either sense orientated or intuitive (S or N); one is either a thinking or a feeling type (T or F); finally one uses perception or judgement in making decisions (P or J).

However - as we will see shortly the very essence of the eight "missing" types is the combination of these opposites in personality.
 
 
 
 

Q.  So tell us now about your revision of this system?
 
 

PC The Jungian system of types and preferences - though admittedly highly useful - is in some respects confusing. Whereas in normal language feeling relates to emotional-affective experience, Jung treats it as a rational evaluation function.

Also, intuition (which relates primarily to unconscious experience) can be explained as essentially resulting from the dynamic interaction of conscious functions.

Indeed the 24 personality types (including the 16 recognised in the Myers-Briggs personality type indicator) can actually be derived from just four aspects with two modes (i.e. functions) and two directions (i.e. attitudes).

The two modes are the cognitive (rational) and the affective (emotional) respectively. The two directions are the external (objective) and internal (subjective) respectively. Combining these two modes and two directions yields four functions.

The cognitive mode in an external direction is the thinking aspect. The corresponding mode in an internal direction is the judgement aspect (i.e. reason applied to subjective decisions).

The affective mode in an external direction is the perception aspect. The corresponding mode in an internal direction is the feeling aspect.

So we now have four aspects. Each permutation or arrangement of these four aspects (taking all four at a time) gives a distinct personality type.

In mathematics 4P₄ = 24, so 24 such permutations or configurations are possible thereby giving 24 personality types.
 
 
 

It would be very helpful in what follows to picture the four functions as the corners of a square.

The horizontal lines represent functions of same direction (and differing mode).

The vertical lines represent functions of differing direction (and same mode).

The diagonal lines represent functions both of differing direction and differing mode.
 
 
 

We can now use this diagram to derive three distinct groups (comprising in each case 8 personality types) giving 24 in all.
 
 

Each permutation (or arrangement) of aspects gives a distinct personality type. The first represents the dominant, the second the auxiliary, the third less developed and the final the inferior aspect.
 

Q.  What are the characteristics of the first group?
 
 

PC The first group is the horizontal and includes those personality types with the two principal aspects of same direction (and differing mode). Because unconscious intuition is based on the dynamic interaction of opposite directions, relatively little is generated by these types. They operate very much out of the conscious process. As they are thereby most firmly rooted in actual reality they can be mathematically termed the "real" types. These indeed correspond to the sense types in the Myers-Briggs typology. The following are the eight types (with corresponding Myers-Briggs designation).
 
 

 P+T+F-J- (ESFP)

P+T+J-F- (ESFJ)

T+P+F-J- (ESTP)

T+P+J-F- (ESTJ)

F-J-P+T+ (ISFP)

F-J-T+P+ (ISFJ)

J-F-P+T+ (ISTP)

J-F-T+P+ (ISTJ)
 
 

The dominant and auxiliary functions are of the same sign (Equally both the less developed and inferior functions are of opposite sign). When the dominant and auxiliary functions carry a positive sign we get extroverts; when negative we get introverts.

Again in terms of the Myers Briggs type indicator all of these personalities (by definition are S types).

If the dominant function (in my classification) is affective (F or P) then in terms of the 3rd letter (in Myers Briggs) we get F; if dominant function is cognitive (T or J) we get T (in Myers Briggs).

Finally if the third letter (in my classification) is affective (P or F), then the final letter in Myers-Briggs is P; otherwise (if T or J in my classification), it is J in Myers Briggs.
 
 
 

Q.  What about the second personality group?
 
 

PC The second group is the vertical which includes those personality types of differing direction (and same mode). When dominant and auxiliary aspects are well balanced much intuition can be generated through this fusion of opposites. As these tend to operate so much out of the unconscious they are more flexible and creative being interested in the potential for changing reality. They can be accurately described in mathematical terms as the "imaginary" types. These correspond to the intuitives (N) in the Myers-Briggs typology.

Again these are the corresponding eight types (with Myers-Briggs designation).
 
 

P+F-T+J- (ENFP)

P+F-J-T+ (ENFJ)

T+J-P+F- (ENTP)

T+J-F-P+ (ENTJ)

F-P+T+J- (INFP)

F-P+J-T+ (INFJ)

J-T+P+F- (INTP)

J-T+F-P+ (INTJ)
 
 

The dominant function here will decide the overall direction of experience. If the dominant function (on left) is positive, then we get an extrovert; if negative we get an introvert.

Because dominant and auxiliary are (by definition) of opposite signs we get intuitives (N in Myers Briggs) in all cases. If the second auxiliary function (on left) is cognitive (T or J), the third letter in Myers-Briggs is T; if auxiliary (on left) is affective (P or F) then third letter (in Myers Briggs) is T.

Finally if third letter (on left) is positive, then we get P for fourth letter (in Myers Briggs).

If third letter (on left) is negative the fourth letter (in Myers Briggs) is J.
 
 
 
 

Q.  Most intriguingly what are the characteristics of your "new" personality group?
 
 

PC The third (unrecognised) group is the diagonal which includes those personality types both of differing direction and differing mode. These find it particularly difficult to find a centre of being around either a (conscious) sense or (unconscious) intuitive based approach and are driven - in reaching integration towards the mid-point or centre of personality which connects both. As successful integration relates directly on this spiritual centre they can be referred to mathematically as the infinite or "transfinite" types orientated to the transparent or empty fundamental ground of what essentially is.

They can alternatively be described as the "complex" types reflecting the balancing of personality characteristics that are diagonally opposite (in both mode and direction).
 
 

From one perspective this personality group - with mature development - is the most simple of all, successfully balancing polar inclinations that exist with both the "real" and "imaginary" groups.
 
 

Thus they are primarily neither extroverts nor introverts as such but rather centroverts. Thus in place of the E/I classification in the Myers Briggs we now have C for all 8 types in this group.

Likewise they are neither sense nor intuitive orientated but rather mystical (i.e. spiritual in a direct experiential way) Thus we can replace the S/N classification in the Myers Briggs with M for the 8 types.

Again these types operate directly from neither feeling nor thinking as such but rather volition (i.e. the direct capacity of the will). Thus T/F can be replaced with V for the group.

Finally they neither display perception nor judgement but rather a more balanced attitude in what be called discernment. Thus P/J can be replaced here with D.

So in a fundamental manner all 8 types of this third diagonal group share the same personality type which represents the golden mean as between the opposing tendencies of the other groups. (CMVD).
 
 

However just as these types (from this primary integrated perspective) are "simple", equally from a secondary perspective they are "complex" combining - in the same personality - opposite characteristics.

We can list these eight types as follows (giving the corresponding Myers Briggs types).
 
 

P+J-T+F- ENFJ and ISTP

P+J-F-T+ ENFP and ISTJ

J-P+F-T+ INTP and ESFJ

J-P+T+F- INTJ and ESFP

T+F-P+J- ENTP and ISFJ

T+F-J-P₊ ENTJ and ISFP

F-T+J-P₊ INFJ and ESTP

F_-T₊P₊J- INFP and ESTJ
 
 

In a primary sense these are all centroverts. If first letter i.e. dominant aspect (on left) is positive, in terms of Myers Briggs we get a secondary extrovert (with strong shadow introvert personality characteristics); if first letter (on left) is negative then we get a secondary introvert (with strong shadow extrovert tendencies).

Again in a primary sense, all these types are (potentially) mystical. Because dominant and auxiliary functions are of opposite signs, in secondary terms they are all intuitives (N) with strong shadow sense (S) tendencies.

All - in a primary sense - are volitional (operate through the will). If the dominant function (on left) is cognitive (T or J), then in a secondary sense (in Myers Briggs) we will get T as our 3rd letter; if dominant function (on left) is affective (P or F), then on Myers Briggs we will get F as 3rd letter. Again in each case these are strongly counterbalanced by opposite shadow tendencies.

Finally in a primary sense all these types use discernment as a preference.

The third function (on left) if cognitive (T or J) in a secondary sense will lead to the choice of J as 4th letter (in Myers Briggs); if third function (on left) is affective (P or F), then in a secondary sense will we have P as final letter. Once more these are counterbalanced by opposite shadow tendencies.
 
 

When a high level of integration is achieved, well developed characteristics in the personality will also exist that literally shadow those presented at face value.

At low levels of integration, these opposite characteristics lead to considerable confusion and a lack of any coherent self identity. Putting it another way, such personalities are especially sensitive to their shadow selves. This is why the development of a strong spiritual centre is so vital for true integration to be achieved. It is to this group that the lines from Dryden especially apply.
 
 

"Great wits are to madness near allied

And thin partitions do their lines divide"
 
 
 

Q.  Can you know clarify the holistic mathematical rationale of your classification?
 
 

PC  There is a fundamental logic underlying my four aspects of understanding. They can be simply expressed as the four "complex" co-ordinates corresponding to the circle of unit radius (i.e. the cross within the circle with the horizontal line representing the "real" x axis and the vertical line representing the "imaginary" y axis). If we take the objective external direction of understanding as positive, then the subjective internal direction - in relative terms - is negative. Likewise if we take the cognitive (rational) mode as "real", then again - in relative terms - the affective (emotional) mode is "imaginary". This is the basis of so many mandalas which deeply symbolise integration of the psyche. We can now give a coherent mathematical reason as to why this in fact this is the case. The four aspects of understanding - from which all personality types are derived - can be simply obtained from obtaining the four roots of unity. In this sense all understanding is simply a reduced expression of unity.

This also helps to explain the limited nature of most of our actual experience of the world. Properly interpreted all four aspects are equally important and at the appropriate "high" level of understanding are fully unified. However each of our 24 personality types is built on a certain specialisation around two aspects only,

Thus the "real" group attempts to unify with dominant and auxiliary aspects of the same direction (and opposite mode).

The "imaginary" group attempts to unify with dominant and auxiliary aspects of the same mode (and different direction).

The "transfinite" group finally attempts to unify with dominant and auxiliary aspects of differing mode (and differing direction).

However true integration requires that all four aspects be properly differentiated and then combined in a dynamic harmonious fashion. In a direct sense this is the task of transpersonal spiritual development. It is to this we now turn.
 
 
 
 

Q.  You believe that one's personality type is especially relevant to the manner of transpersonal development. Can you briefly elaborate on this important point?
 
 

PC It would be helpful at the onset to outline the major "higher" levels of psychological development. For convenience we can list four i.e. the linear (gross realm), the circular (subtle realm) the point (causal realm) and the radial (non-dual reality).
 

In our Western culture, personality development rarely goes significantly beyond the rational linear level and is based on a high level of specialisation of the conscious mind.

The first "real"group are most firmly rooted in the conscious world. Integration for this type would normally not entail radical transpersonal development. They fit in too well with accepted conventions and are less prone to serious existential questioning.

Specialisation of the linear level is largely completed by early adulthood. Further growth would essentially entail achieving a more moderate and flexible approach to understanding and the cultivation of what might be termed "vision logic". Though this does not rule out authentic mystical experience, for the "real" group, the rational (linear) paradigm is likely to remain the predominant means of interpreting reality.
 

For the second vertical group the most fundamental feature is that strongly developed structures are of the same mode but of opposite direction. Thus someone, for example, with perception as the most developed structure, will tend to have the opposite affective structure of feeling as the main auxiliary. There is likely to be far more directional switching here, especially if both structures approach equal strength. This entails that that the (positive) conscious information of one structure, is continually negated through unconscious switching to the other. This in turn means - that if co-ordinated - far more spiritual fusion or energy is likely to be developed, thus rendering experience very intuitive in character.

Such types are likely to be less well adapted to the world. There is always an underlying conflict as between their own unconscious tendencies and the prevailing cultural paradigm. However, if resolved this tension can be very creative.

With their intuitive vision, they are not so much interested in actual reality but rather the creative potential for changing reality.

Integration for this group, requires going significantly beyond the linear level into the circular level. Otherwise, unconscious potential will never be properly realised, remaining untrained and unduly instinctive and immature.
 

The third - and least recognised - is the diagonal group.

The defining characteristic of this group is that the two main structures are both of opposite mode and opposite direction. Thus for example, someone with the cognitive structure of reason, strongly developed in an external direction, will have the affective structure of emotion, also well developed in an internal direction.

Whereas the first group can identify (directly) with the conscious process, and the second group (directly) with the unconscious process, this group can do neither. Not surprisingly there is likely to be a considerable identity crisis involved.

At one end of the spectrum, many with unresolved psychotic problems who have failed to achieve integration, belong to this group. At the other end some of the greatest mystics, who after a long painful struggle to achieve psychic harmony also belong to the same group. Resolution of the existential problem here is likely to be more demanding than with the other groups. In fact, the answer depends especially on authentic spiritual development. In other words it is the third essential process that is now especially relevant for integration.

If the first group is "real", relating to actual reality, and the second "imaginary", relating to potential reality, this group is aptly defined "complex" (i.e. both "real" and "imaginary") relating to essential reality. The paradox is that a high degree of true simplicity finally underlines integration of this inherently complex personality type. It primarily involves neither conscious or unconscious understanding as such, but rather that point (i.e. will), at the centre of being itself, which unites both.

For someone belonging to this group, therefore full integration is likely to involve moving beyond both linear and circular levels into the point level.
 
 

The key determinant of whether some will go on to the radial level - representing the most complete level of personality development - depends essentially on whether the two weaker aspects can be developed sufficiently to counterbalance the two strong aspects (dominant and auxiliary). This necessarily entails a lengthy period of intense exposure to the "shadow" side of one's personality.
 
 
 

Q.  Because integration for your vertical and diagonal groups involves "higher" levels of transpersonal development are you implying that these personalities are superior?
 
 

PC No, not all. I would be very opposed to any form of elitist categorisation on these lines.

Remember the classification of personality types is neutral as regards talent or intellectual ability. Most "successful" people will actually belong to the "real" group. For example leaders successfully running governments, businesses etc. generally belong to this group and can display a wide range of abilities. Indeed as this group finds a grounding easily in actual reality, they can often find their niche early in life subsequently developing in an extensive direction (with multiple interests).

Highly creative individuals will often belong to the "imaginary" group. However they can experience difficulties finding a satisfactory resolution as between the demands of society and their own inclinations. Too often they fail to get their act together and do not realise their abilities.

The truly mystical types belong to the "diagonal" group. Though possessing the potential for the highest level of integration, personalities of this type are most prone to their shadow selves (and psychological illness). Properly understood many of the great saints faced a stark dilemma in having to achieve a high level of spiritual integration to avoid falling into mental illness.
 
 
 

Q.  Indicate now how your classification of personality types can lead to a "new" psychological interpretation of dimensions?
 
 

PC There is a fascinating - if unappreciated connection - as between our profile of personality types and the dimensions of space and time.

To his great credit Jung was deeply conscious of this potential link with physical reality and saw his four functions as - in a fundamental sense - mirroring the four dimensions of space and time in physics. Unfortunately the conventional world-view of three dimensions of space and one of time is one of broken symmetry. Jung came very close to accurately expressing the true four-dimensional "complex" symmetry of space-time with his classification of two rational functions (thinking and feeling) and two irrational functions (sensation and intuition).

In my own mathematically "complex" reclassification, we have - in relative terms - two modes ("real" cognitive and "imaginary" affective) and two directions ("positive" external and "negative" internal). In this system the four functions are (in relative terms):

Real (positive) = thinking

Real (negative) = judgement

Imaginary (positive) = perception

Imaginary (negative) = feeling
 
 

Now, equally these four functions represent the "complex" symmetric aspects of space-time. In other words we have two dimensions of space (one positive, one negative) and two dimensions of time (one positive, one negative). Thus we can rewrite our scheme as follows:

Time (positive) = thinking

Time (negative) = judgement

Space (positive) = perception

Space (negative) = feeling
 
 

In other words we literally create space and time in experience through the interaction of all four aspects.
 
 

Now in pure symmetry time and space cancel out in the experience of the eternal and immediate present which can be represented by the binary structures as 1 and 0 (i.e. both fullness and void).

However in terms of broken symmetry each personality type experiences space and time differently. Thus each personality type represents a unique configuration of space-time.

In the original Jungian profile of personality we have eight distinct types.

This - combined with the implicit binary structures - leads to 8 + 2 = 10 such unique configurations.

In our modified version of the Myers-Briggs we have 24 personality types which when combined with the implicit binary structures gives 24 + 2 = 26 unique configurations.

Thus when we look on dimensions psychologically in this new way - as representing unique (reduced) configurations of the 4 complex poles of space-time, we ultimately obtain 10 or alternatively 26 dimensions of space-time.
 
 

What this simply means is that each personality type experiences space and time in a unique fashion. Thus a dimension in this sense refers not to space and time (as separately considered) but rather to a unique configuration (i.e. permutation) of all four aspects.
 
 
 

Q.  So full personality integration would require all 10 (or alternatively 26) "dimensions"?
 
 

PC  Yes, this is true. Of necessity everyone uses all to some degree. However usually one - or at most two aspects - tend to dominate. The other aspects remain inferior and misunderstood frequently breaking into consciousness through projection.
 

Now as I have already explained those personalities of the third "diagonal" group are particularily sensitive to the projected "shadow". Thus full development for this type requires differentiating all four aspects to a considerable degree. At the later stages of the point level this task approaches completion. So all dimensions are now considerably fused. The "real" conscious and "imaginary" shadow personalities now approach integration.
 

So the 26 ways of organising dimensional qualitative reality now equally represent 26 ways of organising phenomenal (quantitative) reality. As we have already seen objects and dimensions are "real" and "imaginary" with respect to each other.

Thus dimensions can be looked on as shadow (i.e. imaginary) objects. Likewise objects can be viewed as shadow dimensions. Thus reality (real) and its shadow (imaginary) now mutually reflect each other.

Thus saying that reality has a shadow counterpart is just another way of saying that reality is dynamically "complex" with "real" and "imaginary" aspects.
 
 
 

Q.  All of this has a bearing on Superstring Theory. Can you explain how this is so.
 
 

PC  Yes this represents an excellent example of what I term vertical complementarity (where "low level" physical reality is reflected in "high level" psychological reality).

So just as we have a "high-level" psychological understanding of space-time, we equally have a complementary "low-level" physical understanding relating to material reality.

Once again ultimately physical reality can be represented in symmetrical terms by the four "complex" poles of space-time. In original binary terms this represents pure nothingness or alternatively pure fullness (i.e. the potential for all actual existence).

Now in the material physical world of broken symmetry, these four poles can be permutated (four at a time) to give unique (reduced) configurations of space-time. Combining these configurations with the implicit binary dimensions, we can therefore represent the world as comprising 10 (or alternatively 26 unique dimensions).

This is intimately tied to the Theory of Superstrings which - in some respects - promises to provide the most satisfactory mathematical model of the fundamental nature of physical reality. One of the most puzzling features of this approach is that it requires moving away from conventional 4 dimensional space-time.

One of the earlier versions seemed to work successfully only in 26 (24 + 2) dimensions, whereas recent versions seem to work best in 10 (8+2). Though mathematically satisfying, such an approach seems highly non-intuitive (judged by conventional criteria).

However if we accept that such dimensions actually represent unique configurations of the original 4 (symmetric) poles of space-time then suddenly it all makes great sense.

The dimensions to which Superstring Theory apply can be simply expressed as differing configurations of the same four aspects of space-time (with each configuration representing a unique dimension). The standard explanation of "compactification" is unsatisfactory. This states that the "extra" dimensions are curled up in incredibly small regions of space and invisible in the conventional four dimensions. The true problem here is this rigid insistence on four dimensional space-time which so dominates physics. Simply redefining a "dimension" in more dynamic terms (as a unique configuration of the four polar aspects of space and time) solves this dilemma.
 

There are deep and remarkable connections as between the standard analytical approach and this holistic mathematical treatment of Superstrings. Modular functions are especially relevant in terms of the analytical approach. These functions describe a four dimensional hyperspace defined in the upper right quadrant of the complex plane (i.e. where space has two real and two imaginary dimensions). These modular functions possess remarkable symmetry features.
 

Now in holistical mathematical terms I define space in complementary qualitative

"complex" fashion with two "real" and two "imaginary" dimensions. (However because this is a dynamic approach, space here has both positive and negative directions). This - as I have so often stated - provides the appropriate way for understanding the dynamic symmetries of nature.

So here we have a good example of the comprehensive mathematical paradigm at work

where "real" quantitative and "imaginary" qualitative aspects complement each other.

The "real" aspect provides the quantitative analytical (rational) interpretation of space-time.

The "imaginary" aspect provides the corresponding qualitative holistic (intuitive) interpretation of the same space-time.

Physicists will readily admit that they have no real understanding of the dimensions of Superstring Theory. This is due to the lack of a coherent holistic element in mathematical understanding. However once we supply this missing element we can give a surprisingly simple yet intuitively satisfying explanation of what these "dimensions" actually mean.

More importantly - in my opinion - it demonstrates the power of the holistic mathematical notion of vertical complementarity. Through this the psychological world of "personality types" and the physical world of "particle types" are now seen to be intimately connected.
 
 
 

Q.  Can you develop these connections any further?
 

PC  Yes. As you will recall I defined my "personality types" in terms of three groups.

The first horizontal "real" group involve personalities of differing mode and same direction.

The corresponding "real" group on the particle side would be the fermions (e.g. matter particles such as protons, electrons etc.)

The second vertical "imaginary" group involves personalities of same mode and same direction.

The corresponding "imaginary" group on the particle side would be the bosons (e.g. radiation such as photons where opposite directions coincide).

The third diagonal "complex" group involves personalities of differing mode and differing direction.

The corresponding "complex" group on the particle side would be the superstrings (where bosons and fermions can no longer be identified separately).
 

The linear level is the domain of the horizontal personality type. Likewise the linear level is the domain of the horizontal particle type (i.e. fermions readily exist at this level).
 

The "higher" circular level is the domain of the vertical personality type. Likewise the "lower" circular level is the domain of the vertical particle type (i.e. bosonic activity is more evident at this lower level of reality).
 
 

The "higher" point level is the domain of the diagonal personality type. Likewise the "lower" point level is the domain of the diagonal particle type (i.e. superstrings).
 

Now at the "higher" psychological point level, objects and dimensions are highly differentiated with respect to each other. At the "lower" physical point level, objects and dimensions are highly undifferentiated i.e. confused. This state is what I refer to mathematically as prime structures.
 
 
 
 

Q.  Can you elaborate on this point ? What do you mean by prime structures?
 
 

PC Again this starts from the notion of a prime number in mathematics.

Now a prime number (e.g. 7) is one with no factors (other than itself and 1). A prime number is thus strictly a one dimensional number.

All other natural numbers (i.e. composite) are obtained from a unique combination of prime numbers. Thus 6 = 2X3 is two dimensional (i.e. has two factors). It therefore has both horizontal (quantitative) and vertical (dimensional) aspects

Prime numbers therefore are the basic building blocks of the number system.
 

Now we can look on phenomenal reality in dynamic complementary fashion.

Natural (i.e. composite) phenomena - starting with observable particles such as fermions and bosons) - are obtained from a unique combination of prime elements. These prime ingredients in fact are the superstrings.

Now just as a prime number involves the separation of quantitative and qualitative aspects and is one dimensional, a superstring - in complementary fashion - involves the confusion of quantitative and qualitative aspects and is one dimensional.

Thus at the level of the superstrings we cannot meaningfully separate particles from background dimensions. As the observation of particles is always in the context of a background of space and time, superstrings cannot be directly identified. In a true sense the dimensions are contained within the superstrings.
 

Now the standard interpretation of superstrings in many ways is quite similar. They are viewed as tiny one dimensional objects which vibrate with varying frequencies (i.e. interact with their dimensions) to produce the observable phenomena of nature.

However the interpretation is too linear.

Clearly a one dimensional object has no phenomenal meaning (in the conventional sense). Therefore diagrams explaining the splitting and joining of strings cannot be taken literally and are misleading. Also even though it is meaningless to try and isolate superstrings as in any way separate from dimensions this is what the standard approach seems to attempt.

This leads to an interesting problem. Superstring Theory predicts "two worlds" - the "real" world of particles and an identical "shadow" world where these are invisible.

When placed in a dynamic context this is easy to explain.

Because superstrings - dynamically - are equally prime "particles" and "prime" dimensions, in reduced static terms we can view them alternatively as particles (with dimensions fixed) or dimensions (with particles fixed). This latter interpretation refers to the "shadow" universe predicted by the theory.

However just as in psychological terms ones persona and shadow are complementary aspects of the same personality, likewise in physical terms the universe and its shadow are complementary aspects of the same reality.
 
 
 

Q.  To be consistent with your principles of horizontal complementarity, there should be a psychological counterpart in experience to this reality. Is this so?
 
 
 

PC  Yes this is one of the most remarkable applications of horizontal complementarity.

There is a fascinating connection as between the meaning of the word "prime" in holistic mathematics and "primitive" in psychology.

A prime structure can be defined as the confusion of the quantitative and qualitative aspects of reality. Equally this could be expressed as the confusion of the horizontal and vertical; the confusion of "real" and "imaginary"; the confusion of objects and dimensions; the confusion of parts and wholes.

In other words at this level these aspects have no clear separate identity.

Now this is what defines primitive infant behaviour. Here fleeting instinctive impulses are at one and the same time the expression of qualitative whole desire (unconscious) and quantitative part phenomena (conscious). However because of the high level of confusion, neither is clearly distinguishable. Thus neither the dimensions of space and time nor the phenomenal objects which they contain can achieve any permanence. However these primitive interactions gradually lead to the emergence of natural phenomena in space and time.
 

Thus in holistic mathematical terms the (psychological) instinctive behaviour of the early infant involves prime objects (confused with prime dimensions).

Remarkably this directly complements (in horizontal terms) the (physical) behaviour of superstrings where equally involves prime objects (confused with prime dimensions).

However it requires the "higher" understanding of the vertically complementary point level to properly interpret the nature of this "lower" level reality.
 
 

So just as we can interpret the fundamental ground of reality (physically and psychologically) in terms of qualitative binary numbers, equally we can interpret the next "lowest" level in terms of qualitative prime numbers. Ultimately all other levels of reality can be interpreted in terms of the appropriate qualitative numbers.

Thus the holistic structures of reality - physically and psychologically - at all levels can be precisely explained in terms of qualitative numbers.
 
 
 

Q.  Can you know briefly summarise your findings.
 
 

PC The original Jungian classification of personality types has eight distinctive types.

The Myers-Briggs revision has 16 types. However it can be easily shown that there are eight "missing" personality types. So the full system has 24 types.

This extended personality profile can be easily translated in holistic mathematical terms and classified as three distinct groups with "real", "imaginary" and "complex" types.

The personality group one belongs to, in general terms determines the subsequent manner of transpersonal development.
 

Each of the 24 personality types can be interpreted as representing a distinct arrangement of four polar co-ordinates representing space and time. Each configuration of space and time represents a unique dimension. When combined with the universal binary "dimensions" (1 and 0), this leads to 26 (24+2) or alternatively 10 (8+2) "dimensions".

This simply entails that each personality type experiences space and time in a different manner.
 

Using vertical complementarity, there is a fascinating connection here with the "lower" level physical reality of superstrings. In like manner dimensions represent unique permutations or configurations of the four 4 polar co-ordinates of space and time.leading to 26 (24+2) or alternatively - in more general terms - 10 (8+2) dimensions.

These configurations simply arise due to the fact that by definition the four aspects of space and time cannot yet be successfully separated. Thus a "dimension" necessarily involves a combination of all 4 types.
 

Thus psychologically at the "high-level" we have unique personality configurations (representing subjective experience of space-time). In complementary terms at the physical "low-level" we have unique particle configurations (representing the objective nature of space-time).

Superstring theory therefore represents these fundamental "objective" organisations of "broken" space-time. They closely mirror Jung’s theory of personality types representing - in experience - fundamental "subjective" organisations of the same broken space-time.
 

Holistic mathematics can also throw valuable light on other issues - such as "shadow" matter. It also precisely defines in qualitative number terms both the - highly interrelated - "objects" and "dimensions" - which superstrings represent - as prime numbers.
 
 

  Return to Science of Integration