2013 Update To Esoptrics' Try To End The Notion Of The Continuum & The "Absurd" Math It Begets

For at least 2,500 years now, one of the most—if not the most—hotly, widely, and often contested issues is the notion of the continuum. It’s a notion which looks upon time, space, locomotion, and change as continuous, which is to say it implies there is no limit to the smallness of the smallest segment of each. Thereby, it necessarily invokes the notion of in¬finite divisibility. The latter then demands mathematical conclusions so mani¬festly self-contradictory, they boggle the mind no less than does the notion of a square cir¬cle. No won¬der, then, they move many a renowned thinker, such as John Locke and David Hume, to proclaim those conclusions “absurd”. See my quotes from them on pages II & VIII. The existence of the continuum is by no means a scientific fact: It can¬not be con¬firmed by observation. Human technology is nowhere close to being able to prove by obser¬vation that there is no limit to the smallness of the smallest segment of ei¬ther time or space or locomotion or change. For example, it cannot be observed that an object moving 1 cm. per sec. is also moving 10–40 cm. per 10–40 seconds. That involves meas¬ure¬ments ex¬ceedingly far below what tiny levels science can currently probe. Even if science could, would that prove empirically it’s also moving 10–googleplex cm. per 10–googleplex se-conds? Whether or not there is any kind of change below c. 10–18 sec. cannot be confirmed by ob¬servation. As widely known and admitted as that is, the vast majority of history’s think¬ers—whether philosophers or scientists—have most adamantly clung to, and still cling to, the notion of the continuum. Most, if not all, do so on the grounds that it is so powerfully im-plied by what we do observe, only a mindless fool would deny it. For 2,000 years, Geocen-trism’s defenders (and until c. the 16th century, the vast majority of thinkers were such de¬fenders) hurled the same charge at those tiny few who dared to suggest Earth is a sphere orbiting the Sun. Going by what one’s sense images imply is risky business. Some might add that, so far, no one has ever come even re¬motely close to devising a cosmological theory obviating the need for continuous time, space, locomo¬tion and change. Esoptrics now ends that lack and does it most impres¬sively. How is it able to do so? It has uncovered thru introspection (i.e.: Philosophy’s methodology), and hands the world, a series of God-given coordinates utterly unlike any of the man-made ones ever pre¬viously known to history. Instead of coor¬dinates which are as continuous time, space, lo¬comotion, and change supposedly say they must be (i.e.: per the minds of sense ex-peri¬ence’s addicts), Esoptrics gives the world God-given coor¬di¬nates dic¬tating how time, space, lo¬co¬motion and change must be microscopically—namely: not ac¬tually di¬vided or divisi¬ble be¬yond 7.201789375×10–96 sec. for time and change & 7.34683969×10–47 cm. for space and locomo¬tion. Esoptrics thus re¬places Science’s (i.e.: Em-piricism’s) a posteri¬ori coordi¬nates (i.e.: ones coming into play after, and prompted by, our sense experiences of time, space, lo¬como-tion and change) with Philosophy’s (i.e.: intro¬spec¬tion’s) a pri¬ori ones (i.e.: ones coming into play before, and producing our sense experiences of time, space, locomo¬tion and change). Exactly what does that mean? Here’s my pre¬limi¬nary elaboration: Since the start of humanity’s quest for intellectual advancement, the vast majority of thinkers have assumed that the coordinates whereby we demarcate objects from one an¬other cannot be, unless, first of all, those objects are spatially (say physically, if you prefer) extended, which is to say their internality—no matter how tiny the segment of it—neces¬sarily, and by its very nature (i.e.: inherently), includes the 3 spatial dimen¬sions of physical length, width, and depth as they necessarily occupy different locations in space—some¬thing (ex¬actly what is not clear) which itself necessarily, and inherently, includes physical length, width, and depth in its internality no matter how tiny the segment of it. Esoptrics reverses that and insists neither space nor its occupants—at their tiniest level—are really ex¬tended in the above inherent manner; they merely imply otherwise to the senses of those ig¬norant of any other way for particles and areas of space to be outside of one another. They can do that be¬cause, first of all, each ultimate has from God—and only as long as God pro¬vides it—a unique set of 7 a priori co¬ordinates giving each ultimate an internality (i.e.: in¬ternal con¬tent = es¬sence) to which logi¬cal dimensions, logical location, and a 7-way logical se-quence are inherent. So unique is each God-given internality and what’s inherent to it, each ulti¬mate really is separate and distinct from all the rest without any of them having any trace of physical length, width, and depth and without any one of them being outside of the oth¬ers in any¬thing having physical length, width, and depth. As far as physical length, width, and depth are concerned, neither the Universe as a whole nor any of what’s in it—regardless of what that might be—has any trace of such physical di¬mensions and, therefore, is physically infinitesimal (i.e.: physically dimension-less); but, because every ultimate thing in the Universe has logical dimensions, not a one of them is logically infinitesimal (i.e.: logically dimensionless). Such they are as long as God wills God’s 7 a priori coordi¬nates to instill those logical dimen¬sions from out¬side those ul¬ti¬mates. Those logical dimen¬sions, though, are more than sufficient to make every ulti¬mate fully distinct from, fully sep¬arate from, and fully outside of, all the other ul¬timates in the Universe. Such holds true even as those 7 God-given a priori coordi¬nates make the Uni¬verse’s ultimates sometimes logically concen¬tric and sometimes not. However illogical it may seem to sensation limited minds, divinely devised logi¬cal separation is so effective, it excludes all need for any other kind. Separation, then, is not the effect of 3-dimensionality, space, spatially extended things, spatial di¬mensions, or dif¬ferent locations in space. It’s the other way around: Those factors are the ef¬fects of what’s inherent to the unique logically ex¬tended internality continuously given to each and every ultimate by God’s 7 a priori coordi¬nates. They are not effects in the sense of illusions and hallucina¬tions. They are effects just as real as the fiery result of igniting gasoline. For, God’s coordi¬nates make the ultimate units of space and matter so really outside of one an¬other, they—though individually devoid of every trace of spatial extension—really do collec¬tively add up to 3-dimensional shapes de¬spite producing such “only” as effects. In sum then: Some (scientists in particular) say the coordinates by which we distin¬guish for ourselves between object and object are a posteriori with regard to spatial dimen¬sions and time (i.e.: subsequent to them and, thus, a result dictated by them) and are the only coordinates we can know. In other words, for them, physical length, width, depth and 3-dimensionality must always and everywhere be inherent to the internal¬ity of every one of the Universe’s truly real realities, or there’s no way to tell them apart and no way for them to be separate from one another. Esoptrics says physical length, width, depth, and 3-di¬mensionality are never actually in¬herent—and ever only mistakenly inferred to be inher¬ent—to the internal¬ity of each of the Uni¬verse’s ul¬timates. Still, they are separate, but by having coordinates by which they dis¬tinguish them¬selves from one another—namely: the logical dimensions and loca¬tions incessantly imparted to them from the outside by those 7 God-given coordinates ever a priori to spa¬tial di¬mensions and locations (i.e.: prior to and pro¬ducing them). More im¬portantly, those 7 divine coordi¬nates can be known by us.