Holistic Mathematics - Type 3 Integration (Part A)

Introduction

Q We now come to the holistic mathematical interpretation of H3.

Could you place this in the context of the earlier interpretation of H1 and H2?

PC The understanding associated with H3 is extremely subtle entailing the refined interpenetration of a pure intuitive spiritual state with highly dynamic bi-directional structures of form.

Integral 1 appreciation (associated with H1) is based on Type 1 complementarity. This mainly relates to the two-way interdependence of the horizontal polarities i.e. exterior and interior (and interior and exterior) within a given level. In holistic mathematical terms these polarities are represented as opposite ends of the horizontal line diameter that intersects the circle (on both sides) and are interpreted in a "real" (i.e. directly conscious) fashion.

Integral 2 appreciation (associated with H2) is based on Type 2 complementarity. This incorporates the vertical i.e. whole and part (and part and whole) with the horizontal polarities.

Though the vertical polarities can equally be represented in straight-line terms (as opposite ends of the vertical diameter though the centre of the circle) they are interpreted - relative to the horizontal - in "imaginary" (i.e. indirectly conscious) terms.

So in dynamic terms, understanding entails the continual interaction of conscious and unconscious. Whereas the conscious is manifested unambiguously in direct "real" terms (as local phenomena) the unconscious expresses itself indirectly in an "imaginary" paradoxical fashion (where phenomena represent holistic symbols of ultimate meaning).

The dynamic transformation of all holons entails the interaction of "real" (conscious) and "imaginary" (unconscious) understanding requiring interpretation based on Type 2 complementarity.

However the understanding of H3 is simultaneously both more simple and complex than H1 and H2.

As a state it is very simple in that it is based on an extremely pure form of spiritual awareness.

As a structure it is equally very complex.
Not alone can we now interpret - in a fully scientific fashion - the interdependence of "real" (conscious) and "imaginary" (unconscious) understanding (as at H2) but now we can formally include the dynamic interdependence of both of these aspects with Spirit (which is central to both).

As we shall see the precise nature of this relationship is "complex" in mathematical terms (i.e. as the holistic interpretation of the two diagonal line diameters of the circle - representing the diagonal polarities - which intersect the circumference in opposite quadrants horizontally and vertically).

The truly remarkable fact is that these diagonal lines (representing the square root of both i and – i) have dual interpretations that are - quite literally - both simple and complex in mathematical terms).

Geometrical Interpretation: Analytic

Q Can you first of all establish the dual interpretation of these diagonal lines in standard analytic terms?

PC Once again we have two diagonals (which are drawn at an equal distance from both horizontal and vertical lines).

The first diagonal bisects both the UR and LL quadrants. The second diagonal bisects both the UL and LR quadrants.

So these lines are in diagonally opposite quadrants. (Alternatively this can be expressed by saying that these quadrants are opposite to each other in both horizontal and vertical terms).

Now in simple algebraic terms the first diagonal (in the UR and LL quadrants) represents the two roots of i (i.e. the square root of - 1).

These roots are k(1 + i) and k(- 1 – i) respectively (where k = 1/square root of 2)

So in geometric terms these "diagonal" roots have - in absolute terms - equal "real" (horizontal) and "imaginary" (vertical) magnitudes as the co-ordinates of the end points of the line.

The second diagonal (in the UL and LR quadrants) represents the two roots of - i.

These roots are k(- 1 + i) and k(1 – i) respectively illustrating again the absolute equality of real and imaginary magnitudes.

Q I can see that this illustrates the complex nature of the "diagonal" roots. How do you establish the equally valid simple aspect?

PC The well known Pythagorean Theorem is of special relevance here. Again this states that in any right-angled triangle the square on the hypotenuse = the sum of squares on the other two sides.

Now in each quadrant of the circle we have right-angled triangles formed through the intersection of horizontal, vertical and diagonal lines. (In this context the diagonal represents the hypotenuse). See illustration.

Because the magnitudes of the (real) horizontal and (imaginary) vertical lines are similar (in absolute terms) the sum of the squares of these magnitudes = 0.

Therefore the magnitude of the diagonal lines (in each quadrant) = 0.

Thus the diagonal lines have dual explanations both in simple terms where the magnitude = 0 and in corresponding complex terms where the co-ordinates are both real and imaginary (and of equal magnitude in absolute terms).

Q Has the interpretation of these diagonal lines any relevance in conventional scientific terms?

Yes, they are very important in Relativity Physics – where they are referred to as null lines. They also play a key role for example in Twistor Geometry (associated with Roger Penrose) which has been suggested as a possible starting basis for String Theory.

However the full philosophic appreciation of such notions requires a holistic (rather than analytic) interpretation.

We can use null lines (as conventionally interpreted) to explain a very important (and mysterious) feature of (physical) light.

What would it be like to travel on a beam of light? Einstein asked himself this question and eventually realised the astonishing answer that from its own perspective (i.e. travelling at light speed) that a beam of light travels an infinite distance in zero time. In other words it "travels" continually in the present moment. So time does not pass for light (within its own frame of reference).

However this poses very big philosophical issues for Physics, which have not yet been addressed.

To say that light travels an infinite distance in zero time is to concede that strictly it has no finite meaning (in this context). In other words it points to an infinite (or transfinite) dimension that has traditionally been considered the realm of metaphysics.

However the clear implication here is that a satisfactory philosophical explanation of the behaviour of light requires that we incorporate both domains (physics and metaphysics). Alternatively it means that we must incorporate spiritual with physical reality.

Before leaving this point I think it is important to stress that the conventional interpretation of light as a null line that travels an infinite distance in zero time, represents just one valid perspective i.e. linear, as to its nature.

We could also give a circular perspective which is equally valid by saying that light (potentially) is present everywhere at the same time. Now this is very important when we come to establishing the complementary relationship of physical with spiritual light.

It is customary when speaking of spiritual light to express its nature from the circular perspective.

However correctly speaking, physical and spiritual light have both linear and circular interpretations respectively.

Thus from a linear perspective we can say that physical light (from its own frame of reference) travels an infinite distance in zero time. We could say this is the definition of light as structure.

However we can equally say from this perspective that spiritual light (within its own frame) "travels" an infinite distance in zero time (again representing the definition of light as structure).

Likewise we can correctly say - from a circular perspective - that physical light (within its own frame) is simultaneously present everywhere at the same time.

In other words it represents the pure potential for existence (not yet phenomenally realised). We could refer to this as the definition of light as a pure state.

In corresponding fashion we can correctly say - from a circular perspective - that spiritual light is simultaneously present everywhere at the same time. In other words it represents the pure actualisation of existence (beyond phenomenal manifestation). Again we could refer to this definition of light as a state.

(Of course as always we can switch the frame of reference so that - relatively - physical light is viewed as pure actualisation and spiritual light as pure potential for existence!)

Now we can perhaps see here that one of the key problems in terms of the integration of physical and spiritual domains is the failure to realise that each can be defined as both structure and state.

However conventionally the physical domain is scientifically interpreted in finite terms (as structure) without recognition of the corresponding infinite interpretation (as a state).

In reverse fashion the spiritual domain is generally - ultimately - interpreted in transfinite terms (as a state) without adequate recognition of the corresponding finite interpretation (as structure). In other words the immanent (physical) is not properly incorporated with the transcendent (spiritual) aspect.

However - as I repeatedly stress - in experiential terms, structure and state (and state and structure) are dynamically interdependent.

So I am demonstrating therefore how this necessary interdependence can be adequately interpreted in a proper holistic scientific manner paving the way for consistent integration of physical and spiritual domains.

Geometrical Interpretation: Holistic

Q Can you now explain how the holistic interpretation throws much greater "light" on these issues?

We have already raised one rather puzzling - and ultimately truly mysterious - feature of the nature of light. However light possesses some other very strange properties, which we can now effectively explain through the "complex" holistic mathematical interpretation of the diagonal lines.

For a considerable time, physicists were perplexed as to the dual nature of light, which seemed to manifest itself in two ways (i.e. as waves or particles).

Given the unambiguous either/or nature of conventional science, disputes raged as to which was the correct interpretation. Then eventually - with the rise of quantum mechanics, - it was finally accepted that both are correct. So light has an inherently complementary nature as both waves and particles

However we can explain this apparent anomaly quite easily in (dynamic) holistic mathematics terms.

With reference to Type 2 complementary (in the holistic mathematical interpretation of the four quadrants) we saw that that the (particular) object and (general) dimensional phenomena of reality are - relatively - "real" and "imaginary" with respect to each other.

Thus the positing of a (particular) object phenomenon in "real" (conscious) terms implicitly requires a corresponding negation of the dimensional background (in space and time) which is then projected as "imaginary" (in unconscious terms).

In like manner the positing of a (general) dimensional phenomenon in a "real" (conscious) manner implicitly requires a corresponding negation of background objects, which are thus rendered "imaginary" (in an unconscious manner).

Therefore in dynamic experiential terms, we implicitly posit objects (as "real") by negating their corresponding dimensions (which are then projected indirectly into consciousness as "imaginary"). Likewise we implicitly posit dimensions (as "real") by negating corresponding objects (which then likewise enter consciousness in "imaginary" terms).

So once again what is defined as "real" or "imaginary" in dynamic interactive terms is purely relative depending on context.

However as well as objects and dimensions, we have physical forces.

Now the important clue as to the holistic mathematical interpretation of physical forces is the important recognition that they simultaneously combine both objects and dimensions (as the means of establishing dynamic interaction between both aspects).

Therefore when we come to philosophically interpret the nature of light we must therefore recognise that it has dual characteristics (representing dimensions and objects respectively).

It is perhaps easier to initially identify the wave aspect of light with this (general) dimensional characteristic. So such waves express how light travels through space and time.

The particle aspect then - in this context - represents the (specific) object characteristic (which is manifested as "point" particles).

Now when we view light within its own frame of reference (i.e. travelling at light speed), both the "real" and "imaginary" aspects are simultaneously combined.

However because the very measurement of phenomena entails a degree of separation with respect to either aspect, this "complex" interpretation of light (simultaneously as waves and particles) has no phenomenal meaning and is identical with the alternative "simple" explanation of light as null lines = 0.

Thus the holistic mathematical interpretation of the diagonal lines (representing diagonally opposite polarities) provides a perfect explanation of the nature of light both as to its "complex" and "simple" expressions.

In other words light - in its inherent nature - simultaneously combines both its dimensional (wave) and object (particle) characteristics (which are "real" and "imaginary" with respect to each other). This is the "complex" interpretation of light.

Equally because light - again with respect to its inherent nature - has no phenomenal existence (as objects) in space and time, it thereby travels an infinite distance in zero time.

So this latter aspect represents the "simple" interpretation of light.

In dynamic terms both aspects ("simple" and "complex") are simultaneously implied by each other.

However in the realm of phenomenal manifestation "real" and "imaginary" aspects must be to a degree separated.

Therefore when we focus in "real" terms on the object characteristic, light manifests itself as point particles. Here the dimensional aspect (as wave) is separate and "imaginary".

When we focus in "real" terms on the dimensional aspect, light manifests itself in wave form with the object aspect - as particles - separate and "imaginary".

Likewise corresponding with this phenomenal observation (with respect to both aspects) light now travels in finite (rather than infinite) terms.

Because the inherent nature of reality is indeed mathematical in this fundamental sense, the holistic interpretation of the diagonal polarities provides the perfect philosophical explanation of the very nature of light (both with respect to its manifest and unmanifest characteristics).

However it does not end here. By extension the same kind of explanation can be used to explain the fundamental nature each of the physical forces leading to an integral TOE.

Q Are you saying therefore that the three other forces can be treated in the same manner?

PC Yes! Natural light as we know is a manifestation of the electromagnetic force. We also have the gravitational, strong (nuclear) and weak (nuclear) forces.

Now in each case, these four forces represent different manifestations of the manner through which object and dimensional phenomena are enabled to interact.

So what I am proposing therefore is that - in terms of the ultimate nature of reality (i.e. as potential for existence) - we can represent each of the four forces as diagonal lines in the four quadrants.

Therefore each force has a dual holistic mathematical explanation both as a "simple" state (representing pure potential for existence) and an inherently "complex" structure representing complementary object (particle) and dimensional (wave) aspects.

Unified Field Theory: Holistic Mathematical Interpretation

Q This is quite amazing! You seem to be saying that the fundamental nature of the four forces - and by implication - the fundamental nature of physical reality can be perfectly expressed in holistic mathematical terms?

PC Yes, though perhaps we should clarify the nature of this explanation!

Firstly, what I find so compelling is that this holistic mathematical interpretation of a unified field theory of reality (e.g. matter, dimensions and forces), is - quite literally - a reduced expression of oneness i.e. the holistic philosophical explanation of successive roots of 1 (that lead to the three fundamental polarities with respect to the interpretation of phenomenal form).

Secondly, it constitutes an integral - rather than an analytic - interpretation (Strictly, an analytic interpretation has no relevance with respect to the ultimate nature of reality).

Thirdly, from a dualistic perspective it is inherently completely circular and paradoxical implying that its formulations have no fixed (i.e. rigid) phenomenal meaning.

Thus the proper appreciation of such paradoxical structure requires a very pure level of contemplative spiritual awareness as a state (consistent with the full development of H3)

Fourthly, because this is as integral explanation, the physical is ultimately fully interdependent with the corresponding psychological aspect of reality. So equally this holistic mathematical formulation serves as a unified field theory of psycho-spiritual reality.

This entails that we can establish a consistent complementary interpretation of the ultimate nature of (psychological) reality (as spiritual goal).

(And because as always we can switch polar frames of reference, this requires an equal facility to understand these relationships in reverse mirror fashion i.e. where the psychological aspect is the source and the physical the goal of ultimate reality.
Put another way this requires the ability to freely switch both immanent and transcendent directions in experience).

Finally, the scientific interpretation here of the ground nature of reality constitutes - in terms of a TOE - what I refer to as a closed integral model.

In other words it points to a consistent formulation in terms of key paradoxical circular symmetries of the fundamental structures of reality (that coexist with corresponding ineffable awareness as a state).

However actual phenomenal reality equally entails - in varying dynamic configurations - an asymmetrical interpretation (though always in a necessary relationship to the key circular symmetries consistent with ultimate reality).

A truly open integral approach, which equally implies open differentiation, is then synonymous with - what I refer to as - a radial approach.

And just as we have distinguished three types of integral understanding (i.e. Integral1, Integral 2 and Integral 3) equally we can establish three types of radial understanding (i.e. Radial 1, Radial 2 and Radial 3).

Q You say that the ultimate nature of physical reality can be considered both as source and goal of reality and that likewise the ultimate nature of psycho-spiritual reality can be considered (as source and goal). Can you illustrate this a little further?

PC Though there is always a necessary interaction between both aspects we can - in dualistic terms - look at development either from the perspective of self (in relation to reality) or alternatively reality (in relation to self).

When considered in merely psychological terms (with respect to self), vertical development will be considered in hierarchical fashion as moving from physical to mental and ultimately to spiritual realms.

Here the ultimate source of reality is conceived in physical terms and the ultimate goal in corresponding spiritual terms. So ultimate realisation for the self is then understood as a transcendence of matter (as pure Spirit).

However - in relative terms - this direction is reversed when we now take a physical perspective (with respect to reality).

Ultimate realisation is now understood in a physical manner i.e. where the universe realises its own inherent nature as Spirit.

So here, this ultimate attainment of reality is understood as the making immanent of Spirit in pure matter (i.e. that can now perfectly mediate its inherent essence).

Though there are important exceptions (e.g. Teilhard de Chardin) probably too much attention is placed in mystical literature on spiritual realisation with respect to the aspect of the (psychological) self.

It is equally important however to emphasise the process through which nature (as physical reality) itself evolves through development to realise its inherent nature as Spirit.

Therefore any hierarchical ranking of the physical and spiritual aspects of evolution is purely relative (depending on context).

With balanced development each stage represents not only "higher" psychological awareness (in the spiritualisation of self), but equally "higher" physical awareness (in the spiritualisation of matter).

With balanced mystical development both the self (in relation to reality) and reality (in relation to self) co-evolve in complementary fashion. Therefore through spiritual realisation both the (individual) self and all created reality realise their common destiny in an ineffable embrace (where both aspects become identical).

Just as both self and reality (as interior and exterior aspects) are equally involved in balanced mystical development, likewise both part and whole (as individual and collective aspects) are likewise involved. So development necessarily takes place with respect to each of the quadrants.

Therefore properly speaking, full spiritual attainment for an individual person likewise represents a triumph for wider collective society (whose common spiritual destiny is mediated through this special individual).

Indeed it is the growing deep realisation of this collective aspect that often inspires the greatest mystics in the final stages of development to become intensely active in spreading the "good news" to others.

Psychological Aspect

Q Can you now explain the complementary understanding of the diagonal lines as a scientific means of interpreting the ultimate goal of development (in terms of pure spiritual awareness)?

PC With Integral 2 understanding we saw that perceptions are the psychological counterpart of (physical) object phenomena; likewise concepts are the psychological counterpart of (physical) dimensions.

To posit perceptions in "real" (conscious) terms we must dynamically negate their corresponding concepts which are then projected in an "imaginary" (unconscious) fashion; likewise to posit concepts in "real" (conscious) terms we must dynamically negate their corresponding perceptions which are likewise projected in an "imaginary" (unconscious) fashion.

In this way the interaction of perceptions (with concepts) and concepts (with perceptions) implicitly takes place in experience through continual switching as between their "real" and "imaginary" aspects (though in practice the dynamic nature of this process is often greatly restricted) .

However with Integral 3 interpretation we can now incorporate Spirit directly with both conscious and unconscious understanding.

This means that the purest degree of spiritual awareness requires that dynamic switching as between conscious and unconscious (and thereby "real" and "imaginary") aspects of experience takes place simultaneously in an instantaneous manner. This in turn requires that any remaining dualistic rigidity of a phenomenal kind be eroded. (Such attainment however can only be approximated rather than achieved in any absolute fashion!)

The diagonal lines in each quadrant perfectly demonstrate this situation.

In holistic mathematical terms, these lines represent the most fundamental polarities as form and emptiness (in diagonally opposite quadrants).

Because conscious and unconscious understanding are phenomenally mediated through the primary cognitive and affective modes, Integral 3 understanding entails that both aspects be maintained in dynamic balance with each other (in all 4 quadrants).

Once again there are two ways of appreciating these diagonal lines (which dynamically imply each other).

From the perspective of form they represent (in each of the quadrants) the holistic mathematical interpretation of the four complex roots of unity i.e. k(1 + i) and k(- 1 – i) in the UR and LL quadrants; and k(- 1 + i) and k(1 – i) in the UL and LR quadrants (where k = 1/square root of 2).

From the perspective of emptiness they represent (in each of the four quadrants) the corresponding holistic interpretation of the "simple" i.e. null lines = 0.

So when "real" (conscious) and "imaginary" (unconscious) understanding - as structures of form - are perfectly reconciled - through instantaneous dynamic switching as between the cognitive and affective modes - then pure spiritual awareness, as a state of emptiness results (relating directly to the primary volitional mode).

Q Can you now explain this as spiritual "forces" that are fully complementary with physical forces?

Just as a physical force establishes a connection as between object phenomena and corresponding dimensions, a spiritual force establishes a similar connection as between their psychological counterparts (i.e. perceptions and corresponding concepts).

Thus spiritual intuition must to a degree lubricate all phenomenal understanding before it can acquire coherence and meaning.

Now ultimately there is just one spiritual force (as a pure ineffable state) just as there is one physical force (likewise as its pure ineffable state).

However in terms of asymmetrical phenomenal expression in the world of form, this spiritual force - like its physical counterpart - manifests itself in four ways (i.e. in each of the quadrants).

Traditionally these "forces" have been recognised as the transcendent and immanent aspects of Spirit (with each having both exterior and interior expressions).

Now if we arbitrarily fix the diagonal line in UR quadrant with the exterior expression of the transcendent aspect then the corresponding line in the LL quadrant will represent the interior expression of the immanent aspect.

The diagonal line in the UL quadrant will represent the interior expression of the transcendent aspect with the corresponding line in the LR quadrant representing the exterior expression of the immanent aspect.

Like its physical counterpart (within its own frame of reference as a state of emptiness), spiritual light "travels" an infinite distance in zero time. Alternatively we can say that spiritual light is (actually) everywhere in the present moment. This provides the "simple" conventional view of Spirit.

However again - as with its physical counterpart - from the perspective of form, spiritual light can be given a "complex" interpretation (with equal "real" and "imaginary" aspects).

In other words in dynamic experiential terms, Spirit must necessarily be mediated through the interaction of form. Thus the purest level of mediation requires that no restriction remains (through rigid phenomenal attachment) as between the interaction of the "real" (conscious) and "imaginary" (unconscious) appreciation of form.

When this is the case, instantaneous switching (as between both aspects) is approached so that phenomena of form ("real" and "imaginary") no longer appear to even arise in experience and one continually experiences a pure level of spiritual awareness.

Thus the "simple" and "complex" interpretations of the diagonal lines - as both emptiness and form - directly coincide with each other.

However it is important to keep stressing that this coincidence is always to a degree relative and never finally attained in absolute experiential terms.

Q Can we extend this complementarity to say that spiritual light - though phenomenal manifestation - has both wave and particle aspects?

PC Indeed we can and this represents a very fruitful means of understanding.

We are in fact here engaging in a special form of integral scientific understanding.

The very basis of integral science is that the physical and psychological domains are ultimately fully complementary.

Therefore an intellectual interpretation that is properly integral seeks to explicitly demonstrate the manner of this complementarity as between both domains.

And what is truly wonderful is that this complementarity everywhere reveals the same basic mathematical structures (with a dynamic interpretation).

Thus the holistic intellectual appreciation of integration in scientific terms (as one important aspect of understanding) can greatly assist the task of spiritual integration in overall experiential terms.

So in dynamic integral terms we are no longer dealing with the physical and psychological domains as somehow separate (as in traditional analytic approaches).

Rather we are dealing with an inherently dynamic appreciation of their complementary nature as psycho-physical (or alternatively physico-pyschic) reality.

This by seeking to use a common scientific language of terminology with respect to both aspects we more easily appreciate their truly interdependent nature.

Thus from one perspective we can reveal remarkable new layers of psychological understanding (though reference to complementary physical structures) or equally from the opposite perspective remarkable layers of physical understanding (through reference to psychological structures).

The more readily we can do this the easier it becomes to further "see" into the inherent complementary nature (and ultimate identity in Spirit) of all facets of the Kosmos.

So here we are using a physical notion (i.e. the wave/particle duality of physical light) to demonstrate that it has an equal - though not properly recognised - validity in terms of spiritual light.

The wave/particle duality of spiritual light simply refers to the fact it manifests itself in phenomenal terms in either a transcendent or an immanent fashion.

So if in this context we identify the wave with the transcendent aspect, then - relatively - the particle will then be identified with the immanent aspect.

Once again, with respect to its own frame of reference (as a pure ineffable state) the wave (i.e. transcendent) and particle (i.e. wave) aspects of spiritual light simultaneously coincide (so that neither can be separated in phenomenal terms).

Thus when both the "wave" and "particle" aspects directly coincide (cancelling each other as separate) the "complex" perspective of form (as structure) is thereby identical with the "simple" state of emptiness (as state).

(This again is directly implied by the holistic mathematical interpretation of the diagonal lines!)

However in an asymmetrical phenomenal context, the wave (transcendent) and particle (immanent) aspects necessarily separate. Therefore the wave (transcendent) aspect is posited in "real" terms (as conscious) through dynamic negation of the corresponding particle (immanent) aspect which is thereby rendered "imaginary" (as unconscious).

In like manner the particle (immanent) aspect is posited in "real" terms (as conscious) through dynamic negation of the corresponding wave (transcendent) aspect (which is now rendered as "imaginary" and unconscious).

So the transcendent and immanent aspects of spiritual light are mediated through phenomena by a dynamic interactive process of positing and negating (i.e. inclusion and exclusion).

Black Holes and the Dark Night

Q You believe you that there are remarkable structural similarities as between the physical phenomenon of "black holes" and the mystical phenomenon of the "dark night". Can you explain this and show how it establishes a greater understanding of the nature of both physical and spiritual forces?

PC The black hole phenomenon is associated with a massive intensification of the (physical) gravity force through an implosion of matter.

This implosion of matter in turn is caused by the erosion of its dimensional (spacetime) framework.

The mystical "dark night" phenomenon - especially in its starkest expression described by St. John of the Cross - equally entails a massive intensification of the (psychological) gravity force through an implosion of (psychic) matter.

This may seem an unfamiliar manner of describing this well-known mystical phenomenon so let us explain further as it is the very task of task of integral science - as I define it - to make explicit the inherent complementarity of both aspects.

l remember once being greatly struck by an account of St. John's "dark night" experience that he would have died of grief if God had not supported him with his grace.

Now the word "grief" has very close etymological connections with "gravity"

Indeed though we use many important words frequently in both a physical and psychological context we generally fail to appreciate their deep complementary meaning.

For example the word light can be used as we have seen in a physical context to represent one manifestation of the electromagnetic force.

However the word has several connotations - physical and psychological - which when probed can be deeply revealing as to its true nature.

For example when we say in physical terms that a person is light this implies "not heavy". And remember it is gravity that determines "heaviness". So an astronaut on the Moon, due to the relative lack of gravity on its surface, would weigh much "lighter" than on Earth.

This immediately suggests that perhaps there is a complementary meaning as between these two physical notions.

Now let us look at these words in a psychological context.

If I go on my holidays I might take "light" reading with me. This immediately suggests something superficial (i.e. lacking in depth).

"Heavier" reading material i.e. more grave or serious would therefore imply a greater degree of psychological depth. This again suggests that "light" and "gravity" are likewise opposites in psychological terms (with complementary interpretations to their physical meanings).

Now in psycho-spiritual terms the manifestation of spiritual light is customarily associated with the immanent aspect (though ultimately all such polar designations are arbitrary).

In this context immanence represents the revelation of light mediated through the surface features of phenomena.

However transcendence is the opposite of immanence and implies a going beyond such surface features to discover the hidden depths of phenomena.

In this sense the transcendent aspect (in a spiritual integrative context) is directly associated with the psycho-spiritual manifestation of the gravitational force.

So when we refer to the formal mystical writings of St. John of the Cross we can perhaps appreciate that they represent an extreme in terms of the transcendent spiritual aspect of integration.

The most intense experience of the "dark night" is associated with St. John's passive night of the spirit. What this entails is an automatic purgation (i.e. dynamic negation) of the deepest conceptual structures of personality.

Because conceptual structures provide the psychological means though which we experience dimensions, the consequent severe negation of such structures leads to a dramatic collapse or implosion in space and time (in psychological terms). Thus any remaining rigid phenomena  become extremely compressed in an ever-shrinking dimensional environment causing considerable anguish and an intense inner feeling of suffocation (representing spiritual death).

Now grief as we know is associated with loss. With the loss of someone especially close, the fundamental conceptual structures of our existence can be threatened causing severe questioning and inner erosion (through dynamic negation).

So the actual experience of grief literally represents an increase in psychological gravity, which is brought about through a compression of one's psychological dimensional framework causing an inner deepening of experience.

Thus the existential experience of a severe "dark night" crisis in many ways represents a dramatic intensification of this normal grief process. Here an extreme degree of dimensional erosion can take place very quickly causing immense psychological distress and a profound sense of loss.
With the great mystics this process culminates in a (psychological) singularity - or centre - free of spacetime rigidity (where creation is now reborn in an enhanced new life of pure spiritual awareness).

Q So you are saying that the gravitational and energy (i.e. electromagnetic) forces are diagonally opposite in holistic mathematical interpretation?

PC Yes! This is true in both the physical and (complementary) psychological interpretations (where the gravitational corresponds with the transcendent and the energy force with the immanent aspect of spiritual development respectively).

However the unity of these two forces only applies to their "simple" ineffable state which in "complex" structural terms corresponds with the simultaneous interpenetration of both wave and particle aspects (with respect to both forces).

So clearly in the simple ineffable state (with respect to the ultimate source and goal of the Kosmos) we cannot separate gravitational and energy forces in structural terms.

However where asymmetrical phenomena are concerned the forces necessarily separate (with respect to both their physical and spiritual manifestations).

Other Forces

Q What about the other two forces? Where do they fit in physical and psychological terms?

PC It might be fruitful to start here with the spiritual manifestation of the forces (which can then suggest a very interesting physical consequence).

The transcendent force can manifest itself in either an exterior or interior fashion.

Therefore if the UR quadrant designates the transcendence (from an exterior aspect) the UL represents transcendence (from an interior aspect).

Likewise the immanent force can manifest itself in either an exterior or interior fashion.

Therefore if the LR quadrant designates immanence (from an exterior perspective), the LL quadrant designates immanence (from an interior perspective).

In the time of Einstein only two physical forces were properly recognised (electromagnetic and gravitational). The other two are really just internalised expressions of the main forces.

Thus the strong nuclear readily suggests itself as the interior manifestation of the gravitational force whereas the weak nuclear likewise suggests itself as the interior manifestation of the electromagnetic force.

Even the language used by physicists to describe these forces is illustrative of these connections.

Transcendence is more commonly associated with the masculine and the immanent with the feminine principle respectively.

"Strong" is likewise associated with the masculine and "weak" with the feminine principle.

Therefore in this context the strong should equate with the transcendent (i.e. gravitational) and the weak with the immanent (i.e. electromagnetic) forces respectively.

The strong nuclear force in physical terms is associated with the very powerful bonding of the (interior) particles of a nucleus.

The counterpart in spiritual terms is associated with a corresponding strong bonding of the interior elements of personality.

This interior transcendent aspect is often expressed as faith. Thus with the successful erosion of all (interior) ego attachment a powerful integral faith results which supports the personality against all outside difficulties.

The interior immanent aspect is often associated with the affective aspect in the development of spiritually inspired emotional sensitivity enabling enlarged identification with the sufferings and joys of others.

However paradoxically this implies a greater vulnerability and a willingness to be broken through compassionate involvement (resembling somewhat the vulnerable and unstable nature of the manifestation of the weak force through radioactive decay).

Conclusion

Q For Einstein a unified field theory represented the unification of matter with the known forces (electromagnetic and gravitational).

You seem also seem to be speaking in the "diagonal" understanding of H3 of a unified field theory of a very different nature. Can you elaborate?

PC Conventional scientific interpretation - though it may be significantly inspired by spiritual intuition - is based on an analytic rather than a holistic interpretation of reality.

It can therefore only seek to deal with reality at the level of asymmetric phenomenal manifestation.

Thus it has not the means to interpret the original ground state of reality (which is the true basis for all subsequent asymmetric interpretation).

Also by its very nature, conventional science seeks to separate the fundamental polarities with respect to the physical and psychological aspects of reality and therefore cannot hope to provide an integral appreciation of all aspects of the Kosmos.

What is proposed here therefore is indeed a unified field theory of a special kind, which I refer to as a closed integral TOE.

This seeks to interpret - as far as is possible using phenomenal language - the original ground state of reality (both with respect to its physical and spiritual aspects).

However because is expressed in terms of a consistent circular series of paradoxical symmetries (which have no separate dualistic meaning), their actual appreciation requires a pure level of (simple) spiritual awareness that is dynamically consistent with its (complex) paradoxical structures of form.

So a TOE (Theory of Everything) in this dynamic sense is thereby equally a TON (Theory of Nothing).

However with the unfolding of radial appreciation both the holistic appreciation of reality as to its ultimate nature can be combined with the analytic appreciation of asymmetrical phenomenal form.

This leads to a more open integral approach (which is equally more open in differentiated terms), where any interpretation is always seen as provisional continually leading to a more enlarged and deeper appreciation without limit.

However the holistic appreciation of dynamic relationships (which reaches its specialised expression at H3) remains vital for consistent interpretation of the integral aspect of radial understanding.

And remarkably all the key structures of the Kosmos are mathematical in an original holistic mathematical sense (which can literally be expressed as a reduced expression of oneness).

Furthermore their most fruitful expression is in terms of a dynamic interpretation of the binary system.

So the "real" structures of form (1) - represented by the holistic interpretation of the horizontal x-axis - have (relatively) both positive (+) and negative (-) polarities.

Likewise the "imaginary" structures of form (i) - represented by the holistic interpretation of the vertical y-axis - have (relatively) both positive (+) and negative (-) polarities.

Now the combination of both "real" and "imaginary" structures as "complex" - represented by the holistic interpretation of the diagonal axis - remarkably has an alternative explanation as null lines = 0.

Thus the four radii represented by both directions of the horizontal and vertical lines have an (absolute) magnitude 1 (two in "real" and two in "imaginary" terms).

The four radii represented by both directions of the two diagonal lines have a magnitude of 0 (alternatively of equal "real" and "imaginary" magnitude of 1).

So we have holistic balance here as between unity (1) and nothingness (0).