What do you think?
Rate this book
Ontological Mathematics: How to Create the Universe
This book explains how the entire universe can be created using just two nothing at all, and the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR), thus providing the universe most compatible with Occam’s razor, the law of economy of explanation. The PSR exists ontologically as mathematics, defined by Euler's Formula (aka the Mind Equation, the Soul Equation, the God Equation).
The universe is not made of non-analytic, scientific "strings". It is made of analytic, mathematical sinusoids, hence has an exact answer.
Ontological Mathematics – compatible with scientific rationalism and idealism in preference to scientific empiricism and materialism – will usher in the ultimate intellectual paradigm shift, as we transition from the limited human senses to absolute reason and logic.
This is the final book in the God Series, the comprehensive study of the revolutionary subject of ontological mathematics. See also the Truth Series by Dr. Thomas Stark.
The universe is not made of non-analytic, scientific "strings". It is made of analytic, mathematical sinusoids, hence has an exact answer.
Ontological Mathematics – compatible with scientific rationalism and idealism in preference to scientific empiricism and materialism – will usher in the ultimate intellectual paradigm shift, as we transition from the limited human senses to absolute reason and logic.
This is the final book in the God Series, the comprehensive study of the revolutionary subject of ontological mathematics. See also the Truth Series by Dr. Thomas Stark.
483 pages, Kindle Edition
Published November 13, 2015
17 people are currently reading
49 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 20, 2021
I respect you, but there's one key thing I don't agree with.
I respect nearly everything you've written in this book series. However, there is one thing I don't respect, and I'm not going to be politically correct about it. I honestly don't give a flying F what people think of me at this point, because I am a particular manifestation of the universal archetype of the "hermit", so what I say will probably not have an impact on the earth at large until after my death. So don't get your panties in a bunch over this review.
The holos-dependent concept that sex is the answer to enlightenment and not love is a very mathematically testosterone-driven point of view. It will only ever resonate with monads who link to masculine avatars. It will NEVER resonate with monads who identify with femininity to some degree, and if you want more females on board with your movement you're going to have to comprehend what I'm typing here. It involves demonstrating cognitive empathy with those monads linked to avatars that are very unlike your own, so I know it's not easy as an NT male with masculine biochemistry and thick boundaries of mind.
I hope you NT males reading this book series someday have a PROPER experience with an NT female. I don't think those phallus-licking NT females who hang out with males because it's "less drama" are representative of all of us, to be quite frank. I prefer hanging out with females because they encourage and nourish my subjectivity and my intellectual prowess rather than objectifying it. They are the reason I ended up as intelligent as I am today. If it were up to males, even well-meaning intelligent ones, I would have been nothing. Perhaps someday in the far future when there are more NTs, including NT females, you will comprehend what I mean.
I respect everything you wrote, Mike Hockney. However, when it comes to pressuring monads linked to biochemically feminine avatars to adopt a masculine approach to sex and relationships, I cannot abide by this. I have this issue with Morgue as well.
I cannot help but notice an interesting logical contradiction; that there's a lot of pressure on women to "not be like men" but when it comes to casual sex, women are expected to adopt a biochemically masculine approach because it's "sexy" for males when women do so. Feminine traits that aren't "sexy" for males should be eliminated, but the ones that are "sexy" for males should stay. Women should integrate masculine traits that make them kinky for men, but should diminish the masculine traits that make them "like men" and sexually unattractive.
Yeah, screw all of this noise. I have my own concepts regarding gender that do not fall into liberal non-binary ideology nor conservative masculine ideology.
I respect everything you wrote, but since so many people scream "how high, daddy?" Whenever they are told to jump, I have to use my own wings and fly on my own terms. I respect everything you wrote, but PLEASE respect women when they approach sex in a loving, feminine way. It's part of the divine feminine, whether you males like it or not. Not all femininity is about being sexy for men or being understood by men, just as the same is true for masculinity in regards to women. I apologize, but I cannot jump on board with this apathetic edgelord BS and repress my emotional range for the sake of being "sexy".
I respect nearly everything you've written in this book series. However, there is one thing I don't respect, and I'm not going to be politically correct about it. I honestly don't give a flying F what people think of me at this point, because I am a particular manifestation of the universal archetype of the "hermit", so what I say will probably not have an impact on the earth at large until after my death. So don't get your panties in a bunch over this review.
The holos-dependent concept that sex is the answer to enlightenment and not love is a very mathematically testosterone-driven point of view. It will only ever resonate with monads who link to masculine avatars. It will NEVER resonate with monads who identify with femininity to some degree, and if you want more females on board with your movement you're going to have to comprehend what I'm typing here. It involves demonstrating cognitive empathy with those monads linked to avatars that are very unlike your own, so I know it's not easy as an NT male with masculine biochemistry and thick boundaries of mind.
I hope you NT males reading this book series someday have a PROPER experience with an NT female. I don't think those phallus-licking NT females who hang out with males because it's "less drama" are representative of all of us, to be quite frank. I prefer hanging out with females because they encourage and nourish my subjectivity and my intellectual prowess rather than objectifying it. They are the reason I ended up as intelligent as I am today. If it were up to males, even well-meaning intelligent ones, I would have been nothing. Perhaps someday in the far future when there are more NTs, including NT females, you will comprehend what I mean.
I respect everything you wrote, Mike Hockney. However, when it comes to pressuring monads linked to biochemically feminine avatars to adopt a masculine approach to sex and relationships, I cannot abide by this. I have this issue with Morgue as well.
I cannot help but notice an interesting logical contradiction; that there's a lot of pressure on women to "not be like men" but when it comes to casual sex, women are expected to adopt a biochemically masculine approach because it's "sexy" for males when women do so. Feminine traits that aren't "sexy" for males should be eliminated, but the ones that are "sexy" for males should stay. Women should integrate masculine traits that make them kinky for men, but should diminish the masculine traits that make them "like men" and sexually unattractive.
Yeah, screw all of this noise. I have my own concepts regarding gender that do not fall into liberal non-binary ideology nor conservative masculine ideology.
I respect everything you wrote, but since so many people scream "how high, daddy?" Whenever they are told to jump, I have to use my own wings and fly on my own terms. I respect everything you wrote, but PLEASE respect women when they approach sex in a loving, feminine way. It's part of the divine feminine, whether you males like it or not. Not all femininity is about being sexy for men or being understood by men, just as the same is true for masculinity in regards to women. I apologize, but I cannot jump on board with this apathetic edgelord BS and repress my emotional range for the sake of being "sexy".
Displaying 1 of 1 review