Because I could see that this precessional principle of self-employment was a reasonably realistic possibility (though to the best of my knowledge never before consciously adopted and tested by others), I resolved to adopt such a course formally, realizing that there would be no human who could authorize my doing so nor any authority able to validate my decision so to do. I saw that there would be no humans to evaluate my work as it proceeded -- nor to tell me what to do next.
I went on to reason that since economic machinery and logistics consist of bodies in motion, since precession governs the interbehaviors of all bodies in motion, and since human bodies are usually in motion, precession must govern all socioeconomic behaviors. Quite clearly humans do orbit at ninety degrees to the. direction of their interattractions -- orbiting elliptically around one another's most attractively dominant neighbors, as do also galaxies within supergalaxies and all the stars, moons, comets, asteroids, stardust particles, unattached molecules, atoms, and the electrons within the atoms. All orbit their respectively most interattractively dominant nuclei of the moment. I recognized that overall interproximities vary and that Newton's law of system interattractiveness varies inversely at a second-power rate of the mathematical distances intervening as well as in respect to the product of the masses of any two considered bodies. All of the foregoing evolutionary intertransformings I observed would occasion frequently changing interdominances.
I assumed that nature would "evaluate" my work as I went along. If I was doing what nature wanted done, and if I was doing 'it in promising ways, permitted by nature's principles, I would find my work being economically sustained -- and vice versa, in which latter negative case I must quickly cease doing what I had been doing and seek logically alternative courses until I found the new course that nature signified her approval of by providing for its physical support.
Wherefore, I concluded that I would be informed by nature if I proceeded in the following manner:
(A) committed myself, my wife, and our infant daughter directly to the design, production, and demonstration of artifact accommodation of the most evident but as-yet-unattended-to human-environment-advantaging physical evolutionary tasks, and
(B) paid no attention to "earning a living" in humanity's established economic system, yet
(C) found my family's and my own life's needs being unsolicitedly provided for by seemingly pure happenstance and always only "in the nick of time," and
(D) being provided for "only coincidentally," yet found
(E) that this only "coincidentally," unbudgetable, yet realistic support persisted, and did so
(F) only so long as I continued spontaneously to commit myself unreservedly to the task of developing relevant artifacts, and if I
(G) never tried to persuade humanity to alter its customs and viewpoints and never asked anyone to listen to me and spoke informatively to others only when they asked me so to do, and if I
(H) never undertook competitively to produce artifacts others were developing, and attended only to that which no others attended then I could tentatively conclude that my two assumptions were valid: (1) that nature might economically sustain human activity that served directly in the "mainstream" realization of essential cosmic regeneration, which had hitherto been accomplished only through seeming "right-angled" side effects of the chromosomically focused biological creatures; and (2) that the generalized physical law of precessional behaviors does govern socioeconomic behaviors as do also the generalized laws of acceleration and ephemeralization.
The 1927 precessional assumptions became ever-more-convincingly substantiated by experiences -- only the "impossible" continued to happen. 1 became ever more convinced that 1 must go on developing artifacts that would make possible humanity's successful accomplishment of survival activities so much more logically and efficiently as to render the older, less efficient ways to be spontaneously abandoned by humanity. 1 resolved never to attack or oppose undesirable socioeconomic phenomena, but instead committed myself to evolving and cultivating tools that would accomplish humanity's necessitous tasks in so much easier, more pleasant, and more efficient ways that, without thinking about it, the undesirable ways would be abandoned by society. (I liked the popular 1944 song, "Accentuate the Positive, Eliminate the Negative.")
All the foregoing was, then, the precessional course 1 deliberately adopted in 1927. 1 had only the remaining days of my life to invest. It involved swift sorting out of the complex of design, production, testing, and demonstration tasks to be performed. What was the order of inherent priorities and successively overlapping interdependencies?
Socioeconomic precession by environment-controlling artifacts was a strategic course that obviously could be steered only by maximum reliance on our intuitive sensibilities, frequent position determination and course correcting, plus constant attendance upon the thoughts evolvingly generated by our commitment and its moment-to-moment, experience-produced new insights into the relative significance of the whole family of evolving events. It involved swift recognition and correction of all errors of judgment. It required being always "comprehensively considerate."
* * *
As navigational aids and "high-seas life-preserving devices" wisely to be employed in sailing such a course in heretofore-uncharted socioeconomic seas, 1 have patented everyone of what seemed to me to be strategically important items amongst my inventions, and have done so as they occurred in all economically relevant countries around the world. This has cost threefold any and all royalties ever accruing to those patents. 1 did so for the following reasons:
Having no academically earned scientific degrees 1 could not qualify for membership in any scientific societies and could therefore not publish my discoveries officially in their journals. I found that filing of patent claims established an equally valid scientific record of my discoveries and inventions. The preamble texts of patent claims are often philosophically and historically enlightening. Of necessity they are meticulously specific in respect to the technological means of practical realizations of the inventions.
The worth of a patent, however, is not established by the merit of the invention but by the expertness with which its claims of invention are written. Almost anyone can obtain a patent from the patent office. What history has shown to be socioeconomically important is whether those claims can survive in the highest court trials of patent-infringement cases. Vast knowledge of the precedents in court-decision history and of the patent strategy of great corporations is essential in the writing of the claims.
While a U.S.A. patent can be obtained for less than $200, a patent that the great corporations' patent attorneys see no way of circumventing re- . quires expensively expert professional services. Added to this is the cost of world-around major nations' patent coverage (which foreign patents must be applied for and obtained because every country can now air-deliver their inventions into any other country within less than a week, in contradistinction to a six-month water-delivery lag in 19(0). This world-around patent coverage cost about $50,000 in 1975 (it was $30,000 in 1950) for obtaining each world-protected, probably court-sustainable, infringement-defying patent.
In every instance I sought the services of those lawyers most widely acknowledged to be the champion patent attorneys of that moment in the specific category of my type of inventions.
From time to time during the half-century since I first obtained a patent, the patent attorneys of more than 100 of the world's most powerful corporations have called upon my patent attorneys to obtain a license under one or more of my patents. In everyone of these instances, phrasing his statement in varying ways, the visiting powerful corporation attorney has said to my attorney (usually as a flattering, but truthful, "one-professional-to-another," off-the-record remark), "Of course, the first thing my client asked me to do was to find a way of circumventing your client's patent, but you have written your claims so well that I was forced to advise my client to procure a license under your patent if indeed he wished to engage in the invention's manufacture without exposing himself to almost certainly devastating infringement expense."
That statement discloses two truths. The first is that big business, which now makes its major profits out of know-how, deliberately steals know-how wealth whenever possible; the second is that if I had not taken out patents, you would probably never have heard of me nor would you have learned that an independently operating little individual, starting penniless and creditless, had indeed succeeded in inventing what I, as the half-century "Guinea Pig B" -- the test-case individual -- have been able to accomplish.
My half-century experience also discovered the natural, unacceleratable lags existing between inventions and industrial uses in various technical categories, which occur as follows: in electronics -- two years; aerodynamics -- five years; automobiles -- ten years; railroading -- fifteen years; big-city buildings -- twenty-five years; single-family dwellings -- fifty years. Clearly these lags have consistently characterized the lengths of gestation periods in the different arts with which I was concerned. In the case of most of my inventions the gestation lags have been far greater than the seventeen-year lifespan of patents in those arts. Patents in the forty-five- to fifty-year invention- gestation-rated single-family-housing arts are financially worthless. I took out many patents in these arts, however, because it was in the field of human-life protection, support, and accommodation that the worst socioeconomic problems existed.
In 1927 the American Institute of Architects journal published a plan for a single-family dwelling they felt to be an optimum single-family dwelling under the improving technical circumstances of 1927 -- it included electric refrigeration instead of the old icebox, oil-burning furnaces instead of human- shovel-stoked coal furnaces, etc. Concerned with my accelerating ephemeralization, I inventoried all the design fixtures of that optimum single- family dwelling -- its floor area, its volume, the number and placement of its windows, the number of lumens of light admitted, all of its plumbing and wired facilities, its insulation, etc. -- and then I calculated its complete weight, including all of its pipes and wires out to the city mains. It weighed 150 tons.
Then, using the most advanced aircraft-engineering techniques and the highest-performance aluminum alloys, etc., I designed a dwell-in-able environment control of the same volume and floor area that in every way provided facilities and degrees of comfort equal to those of AIA's optimum 1927 single-family dwelling. My aeronautical-engineering-counterpart single- family dwelling weighed only three tons -- a fact that I proved seventeen years later when, incorporating all logical interim technological ,-improvements, we built that aircraft-engineering prototype in Beech Aircraft's plant in Wichita, Kansas.
This three-ton to 150-ton (1/50th) weight ratio of the difference between the technical capabilities of the aircraft versus the home-building arts clearly confirmed the reasonability of my working assumption that the accelerating ephemeralization of science and technology might someday accomplish so much with so little that we could sustainingly take care of all humanity at a higher standard of living than any have ever experienced, which would prove the Malthusian "only you or me" doctrine to be completely fallacious.
Having committed myself to precessional existence, I now focused all my effort for the rest of my life on applying the highest science and technology directly to the realization of human livingry.
Most of my inventions have come into public use long after my relevant patent rights have expired. Some of them have not yet come into public use but will do so fifty years after their 1927 invention and thirty-two years after the seventeen-year patents have expired. This has not mattered to me since I did not take out the patents to make money but only to document and demonstrate what the inventive little individual can accomplish, and to prove documentably the socioeconomic existence of such unique industrialization lags.
For instance, my mass-producible one-piece bathrooms that are now in mass production in West Germany and are· fabricated as I planned, with glass-fiber-reinforced-polyester-resin, are almost exact visual-form replicas of the sheet-copper and aluminum prototypes I developed, installed, and thoroughly tested and proved at the United States Bureau of Standards, Hydraulic Division, in 1937-38, having first designed one in 1927- -- ll of which, as designed, had to wait until the glass-reinforced-polyester-resins plastic industry had been developed, there being a half-century gestation period in the home-improvements art.
Paradoxically, the truly luxurious West German one-piece bathrooms are now about to be made obsolete by the combined effectiveness of my fog-gun self-cleaning device and my dry-packaged and hermetically sealed and mechanically- carried-away-and-packaged toilet device, which altogether eliminate all wet plumbing and do away with the need of piped-in-and-away water and water-borne wastes. The amount of water needed' by the fog gun is less than a pint per day per family. All water for our advanced dwelling machine will be brought to the dwelling in quantities equal to milk and fruit juice consumption.
Now that I have proven that an individual can be world-effective while eschewing either money or political advantage-making, I do my best to discourage others from taking patents, which almost never "payoff" to the inventor. My patent taking was to effect a "bridgehead" accreditation to more effective employment of humanity's potentials.
My half-century experience in the foregoing experiment makes me feel certain that if I had developed any of the inventions to make money or to aggrandize self, I would have failed to do either, as have so many thousands failed when committed primarily to self-advantaging. I frequently hear from only-to-self-committed individuals who lament with pathetic self-conviction that others are trying to steal their inventions, wherefore they don't dare to disclose to anyone, while perversely yearning to profit by what to them is invention. Very often, unknown to them, prior disclosures of the same invention "idea" exist.
Ideas are easy to come by; reduction to practice is an arduous but inspirationally rewarding matter.
I have discovered that one of the important characteristics of most economic trends is that they are too slow in their motion to be visible to humans. We cannot see the motion of the stars, the atoms, a whirling airplane propeller, the growth of a tree, or the hour or minute hand of a clock. In the latter case we can see only the movement of the second hand. Humans do not get out of the way of that which they cannot see moving. As with the electromagnetic spectrum, most of the frequencies and motions of Universe are ultra or infra to man's sensorial tunability.
With a half-century of experience in prognosticating based on the rates of change of my ephemeralization and acceleration curves, I am firmly convinced that I can see clearly a number of coming events, and I am therefore vitally eager that people should not be hurt by the coming of these events, particularly when I can see ways in which it would be possible not only for them to avoid hurt but even to prosper by and enjoy what now seems to me to be inevitable.
Much that I see to be inevitable is unthinkingly opposed by various factions of society. Reflex-conditioned society, facing exclusively toward its past, backs up into its future, often bumping its rump painfully but uncomprehendingly against the "potential-wealth coffers" of its future years' vastly multiplying capability to favorably control its own ecological evolution and the latter's freedom-multiplying devices.
My recitation of self-disciplines may suggest that all I had to do was to conceive of the discipline and institute it, whereas the fact is that my previously conditioned reflexes frequently contradicted my intentions, while circumstances beyond my control converged so powerfully as to divert me from my intended self-disciplines. It has taken constant disciplining and re-disciplining to get myself under control to a productively effective degree.
Throughout the first half of my last fifty-two years of severe reorientation of my life pattern -- in which I determined to give up forever the idea of "earning a living" for my family and self while depending entirely on ecological precession to provide the critically needed material, tools, and monies to carry on the work -- my friends and family and my wife's family and friends would say that I was being stubbornly treacherous to my wife and daughter in not attempting to "earn a living." Thus goaded, I would from time to time accept a job that was proffered me by some friend, and for the moment all these friends and family were relieved and delighted. In each instance, however, all my grand strategy would languish and things would go wrong until, for one reason or another, I jumped off the deep end again and recommitted myself to the unfunded comprehensive program of solving problems by environment-modifying artifacts produced with the most advanced scientific and technological means. Then everything would go smoothly again.
By and large I seem to have made more mistakes than any others of whom I know, but have learned thereby to make ever swifter acknowledgment of the errors and thereafter immediately set about to deal more effectively with the truths disclosed by the acknowledgment of erroneous assumptions.
I don't want a reader of this chronicle to think that I am anything other than what I am -- an average healthy human being with all the attendant weaknesses and vulnerabilities. What is important is that the reorientation of my life and the criteria of its conduct did render such an average human being more effective than under conventional circumstances.
There is one, as-yet-unmentioned, comprehensively overriding commitment that I made before developing all my already-recounted disciplines and commitments, especially to the principle of precession, whereby I gained complete release from the concept of earning a living for my family and myself and gained, as well, the day-to-day practical physical implementation of all my artifact-inventing and reduction of the latter to physical demonstration.
I have deliberately kept this all-important commitment to the last. If it had not come first in my life pattern however, it is quite possible that I might not have had the insights that led to all the intercomplementary resolutions and self-discipline.
* * *
My definition of the word believe means to accept an explanation of physical phenomena without any experiential evidence. At the outset of my resolve not only to do my own thinking but to keep that thinking concerned only with directly experienced evidence, I resolved to abandon completely all that I ever had been taught to believe. Experience had demonstrated to me that most people had an authority-trusting sense that persuaded them to believingly accept the dogma and legends of one religious group or another and to join that group's formalized worship of God.
I asked myself whether I had any direct experiences in life that made me have to assume a greater intellect than that of humans to be operative in Universe. I immediately referred back to my good education in the sciences and my directly experienced learning of the operation of a plurality of physical laws -- such as the interattraction of celestial bodies, varying inversely as the second power of the arithmetical distances intervening -- which laws could only be expressed in the purely intellectual terms of mathematics, which plurality of laws always and only related to eternal relationships existing between and not in anyone of the interrelated phenomena when considered only separately. None of the eternal and always concurrently operative laws had ever been found to contradict one another -- ergo, they were all designedly interaccommodative like a train of gears. Many also were interaugmentative. I said that when we use the word design in contradistinction to randomness, we immediately infer an intellect that sorts out a complex of potentials and interarranges components in complementary ways -- ergo, human mind in discovering a plurality of these only mathematically expressible eternal laws, all of which are interaccommodative, is also discovering the intellectually designed scenario Universe, whose designing requires the a priori eternal existence of an intellectual integrity of eternally self-regenerative Universe. I said to myself, I am o'erwhelmed by the only experientially discovered evidence of an a priori eternal, omnicomprehensive, infinitely and exquisitely concerned, intellectual integrity that we may call God, though knowing that in whatever way we humans refer to this integrity, it will always be an inadequate expression of its cosmic omniscience and omnipotence.
At the time I resolved to do only my own experientially based thinking, in 1927, the Russian Revolution, then ten years old, was beginning to cope with its survival problems by including industrialization as well as farming. In 1928 they brought into operation their five-year plans of successively most important tasks to be accomplished. Realizing from the outset that in order to organize the complete preoccupation of all their over 100 million people with the Communist party's specific planning, it would be disastrous to their efforts to tolerate the continuing presence of any other mystically higher authority than that of the Communist party -- such, for instance, as any of the great organized religions -- probably in pure expediency, the Communist party said that science, which is utterly pragmatic, proved that there is no God -- ergo, Russia, committed to omniscientific technology, was also thenceforth committed to atheism. Many intellectuals around the world accepted this "party-line" doctrine.
In 1930 Einstein, "Mr. Science" himself, published his "Cosmic Religious Sense -- the Nonanthropomorphic Concept of God." Einstein said that the great scientists such as Kepler and Galileo, whom the Roman Catholic Church had excommunicated as "heretics," were, because of their absolute faith in the orderliness of Universe, far more committed to the nonanthropomorphic cosmic God than were the individuals heading the formal religious organizations.
Since 1927, whenever I am going to sleep, I always concentrate my thinking on what I call "Ever Rethinking the Lord's Prayer." The Lord's Prayer had obviously been evolved by a plurality of deeply earnest and thoughtful individuals whose names we will never know. My latest rethinking of it follows.
I am confident, contrary to the Russian assumption that science invalidated all possibilities of the existence of God, that, as specifically argued, my following declaration constitutes a scientifically meticulous, direct-experience- based proof of God.
EVER RETHINKING THE LORD'S PRAYER
July 12, 1979
To be satisfactory to science
all definitions
must be stated
in terms of experience.
I define Universe as
all of humanity's
in-all-known-time
consciously apprehended
and communicated (to self or others)
experiences.
In using the word, God,
I am consciously employing
four clearly differentiated
from one another
experience-engendered thoughts.
Firstly I mean:-
those experience-engendered thoughts
which are predicated upon past successions
of unexpected, human discoveries
of mathematically incisive,
physically demonstrable answers
to what theretofore had been misassumed
to be forever unanswerable
cosmic magnitude questions
wherefore I now assume it to be
scientifically manifest,
and therefore experientially reasonable that
scientifically explainable answers
may and probably will
eventually be given
to all questions
as engendered in all human thoughts
by the sum total
of all human experiences;
wherefore my first meaning for God is:-
all the experientially explained
or explainable answers
to all questions
of all time-
Secondly I mean:-
The individual's memory
of many surprising moments
of dawning comprehensions
of an interrelated significance
to be existent
amongst a number
of what had previously seemed to be
entirely uninterrelated experiences
all of which remembered experiences
engender the reasonable assumption
of the possible existence
of a total comprehension
of the integrated significance~
the meaning --
of all experiences.
Thirdly, I mean:-
the only intellectually discoverable
a priori, intellectual integrity
indisputably manifest as
the only mathematically statable
family
of generalized principles-
cosmic laws --
thus far discovered and codified
and ever physically redemonstrable
by scientists
to be not only unfailingly operative
but to be in eternal,
omni-interconsiderate,
omni-interaccommodative governance
of the complex
of everyday, naked-eye experiences
as well as of the multi-millions-fold greater range
of only instrumentally explored
infra- and ultra-tunable
micro- and macro- Universe events.
Fourthly, I mean:-
All the mystery inherent
in all human experience,
which, as a lifetime ratioed to eternity,
is individually limited
to almost negligible
twixt sleepings, glimpses
of only a few local episodes
of one of the infinite myriads
of concurrently and overlappingly operative
sum-totally never-ending
cosmic scenario serials
With these four meanings I now directly address God.
"Our God-
Since omni-experience is your identity
You have given us
overwhelming manifest:-
of Your complete knowledge
of Your complete comprehension
of Your complete concern
of Your complete coordination
of Your complete responsibility
of Your complete capability to cope
in absolute wisdom and effectiveness
with all problems and events
and of Your eternally unfailing reliability
so to do
Yours, Dear God,
is the only and complete glory.
By Glory I mean
the synergetic totality
of all physical and metaphysical radiation
and of all physical and metaphysical gravity
of finite
but non unitarily conceptual
scenario Universe
in whose synergetic totality
the a priori energy potentials
of both radiation and gravity
are initially equal
but whose respective
behavioral patterns are such
that radiation's entropic, redundant disintegratings
is always less effective
than gravity's non redundant
syntropic integrating
Radiation is plural and differentiable,
radiation is focusable, beamable, and self-sinusing,
is interceptible, separatist, and biasable --
ergo, has shadowed voids and vulnerabilities;
Gravity is unit and undifferentiable
Gravity is comprehensive
inclusively embracing and permeative
is non-focusable and shadowless,
and is omni-integrative;
all of which characteristics of gravity
are also the characteristics of love.
Love is metaphysical gravity.
You, Dear God,
are the totally loving intellect
ever designing
and ever daring to test
and thereby irrefutably proving
to the uncompromising satisfaction
of Your own comprehensive and incisive
knowledge of the absolute truth
that Your generalized principles
adequately accommodate any and all
special case developments,
involvements, and side effects;
wherefore Your absolutely courageous
omnirigorous and ruthless self-testing
alone can and does absolutely guarantee
total conservation
of the integrity
of eternally regenerative Universe
Your eternally regenerative scenario Universe
is the minimum complex
of totally intercomplementary
totally intertransforming
nonsimultaneous, differently frequenced
and differently enduring
feedback closures
of a finite
but nonunitarily
nonsimultaneously conceptual system
in which naught is created
and naught is lost
and all occurs
in optimum efficiency.
Total accountability and total feedback
constitute the minimum and only
perpetual motion system.
Universe is the one and only
eternally regenerative system.
To accomplish Your regenerative integrity
You give Yourself the responsibility
of eternal, absolutely continuous,
tirelessly vigilant wisdom.
Wherefore we have absolute faith and trust in You,
and we worship You
awe-inspiredly,
all-thankfully,
rejoicingly,
lovingly,
Amen.
* * *
In considering theology and science I think it is important to note their differences regarding familiar and not-so-familiar cosmic concepts.
It is the very essence of my thinking that, for a principle to qualify as generalizable in science, there must be no known exceptions to its reliability. Exceptionless means eternal. Principles can be only eternal.
Mathematics are eternal. Principles are mathematically demonstrable -- as manifest, for instance, in synergy. Principles are truly independent of any additional special case, time-size aspects of their manifestation. There are principles governing covarying rates of relative size-time interrelationships. That principle is manifest in E = mc2, c2 being the utterly unimpeded rate of growth of an omnidirectionally expanding light wave's surface as demonstrated in vacuo.
This also involves the mathematical principle that a system's linear dimension grows at a first-power rate, while its surface grows at a second-power rate and its volume at a third-power rate. A steel needle with an initial length of six feet and a diameter of two inches, having a "slenderness" (L/R) ratio of 36/1, is reduced to a needle three inches long with a diameter of .08333 of an inch. The six-foot needle sinks in the water. The three-inch needle floats on the water: its volume -- ergo, its weight -- has become so negligible that its surface relates only to the surface tension of the water, its weight being much less than can be supported by the atomic interattractions producing the molecular membrane of the water surface.
To demonstrate frequency in pure principle I observe painfully that I cannot put my finger through the plane of revolution of a swiftly rotating airplane propellor and withdraw it before it gets hit. Yet machine guns can be timed to fire bullets between successively revolving propellor blades. My muscle and brain cannot reflex and act that fast. I might get my finger through once but can't get it back in time. Operationally speaking, "solid" means very high frequency present in pure principle. I can see through my glasses because light moving through only one way at 186,000 m.p.s. has ample time to avoid the frequency of interference events occurring locally in pure principle.
There are no solids. There are no things. There are only interfering and noninterfering patterns operative in pure principle, and principles are eternal. Principles never contradict principles. Principles can interaccommodate one another only in noninterfering frequency ways. Principles can interaugment one another if frequency is synchronizable.
Acknowledging the mathematically elegant intellectual integrity of eternally regenerative Universe is one way of identifying God.
Everything the brain deals with relates to high-frequency thingness. Mind, and mind alone, deals with understanding the interrelationships existing only between and not in anyone principle, considered only by itself. Principles themselves are often subsets of interrelationships existing only between specific principles.
God may also be identified as the synergy of the interbehavioral relationships of all the principles unpredicted by the behaviors or characteristics of any of the principles considered only separately.
The synergetic integral of the totality of all principles is God, whose sum-total behavior in pure principle is beyond our comprehension and is utterly mysterious to us, because as humans -- in pure principle- -- e do not and never will know all the principles.
Apparently the integrity of the synergy of all synergies of all principles is continually testing its own comprehensive adequacy to accommodate all challenges in pure principle to the maintenance in pure principle of the principle of nonsimultaneous, only-overlappingly-affected, complex unity's eternal regeneration.
Realization that the foregoing may be true tends to inform humans that the introduction into Universe of humans, in pure principle, with minds operating in pure principle, capable of apprehending and objectively employing in pure principle some of the eternal principles, was courageously undertaken by God to discover whether the principle of the eternally regenerative integrity of Universe can endure inviolate despite the dichotomy of knowledge brought about by introduction into the cosmic system of humans and their minds with access to and employment of some -- but not all -- of the eternal principles. This was an experiment in pure principle to test the adequacy of the synergy of synergies of principle to cope with the sometimes perverse, egotistical, selfish, and deceitful initiatives inherent in the concept of humans in pure principle without access to the wisdom accruing synergetically only to knowledge of all the principles -- ergo, possibly capable of impairing the integrity of eternal regeneration. That may be what the integrity of God needs to know and needs to know by experimental evidence.
That is what I am thinking about in "Ever Rethinking the Lord's Prayer." It is also what I am thinking about in volume 2 of Synergetics. I think it is probably an intuitive awareness of the possible verity -- of parts or of all -- of the foregoing that makes the theologist disregard the scientist's brain-induced requirement of a cosmic beginning and ending.
All scientists have brains. Brains always and only coordinate the special case information progressively apprehended in pure principle by the separate senses operating in pure mathematical-frequency principle. Brain then sorts out the information to describe and identify special whole-system characteristics, storing them in the memory bank as system concepts for single or multiple recall for principle-seeking consideration and reconsideration as system integrities by searching and ever-reassessing mind.
Only minds have the capability to discover principles. Once in a very great while scientists' minds discover principles and put them to rigorous physical test before accepting them as principle. More often theologists or others discover principles but do not subject them to the rigorous physical-special- case testing before accepting and employing them as working-assumption principles.
Principles are eternal. Special case interactions of principles are temporal and brain-apprehensible because in pure principle we have time, which is simply the principle of potentially different relative frequencies and not of beginnings and endings.
_______________
Notes:
i. Someone suggested to me that etherealization may be a better word. However, it is disqualified for my meaning because it is founded on the no longer physically accepted concept of ether.