Esoteric Science / Exoteric Science; a Philosophical Comparative:
Q. Do you really believe that Science can explain the reality that is described by and experienced via religion (in general) and its adherents. [Not his exact words but those to the same effect]
A. I believe Philosophy can explain it, there is no mystery as to how the cosmos works when one looses all pre conceptions about what we "think" we "know", and instead apply a completely philosophical understanding, albeit including the current ages technological understandings for the purpose of analogy. Therefore by exploring all of the available data; philosophical, theosophical<i.e. the study of religion/mysticism/shamanism, and scientific both mainstream and alternate, the perception seeker is guaranteed to gain the broadest scope of reality...whereby the mystery is in the unfolding of ones path. Ones joy so to speak is unpredictably unfathomable when saturated with the ineffable presence of the infinite one, understood as a single continuous flash of compressed intuitive wisdom i.e. the epiphany of all epiphanies.
Maths is useful in many ways in everyday life, and more relevantly on track with our currently "uncommon topic"[speaking in context of the Note I had posted on FB], had Math not been devised we would not know of Phi. thus I would not have written that paper. Numerological reduction is but one way of using maths, it just so happens to be the one that is useful where Esoteric Science is concerned. If you read the paper again carefully [addressing my acquantance], you will find that what I am addressing is the unquantifiable constant of infinity (source) which is what all things are derived from. If infinity (source) is infinite it has no end there fore because all things exist within and in some way attached to source, they must therefore be in some way infinite as well. Its only that they are relativity equal by comparison that they appear finite. The finite illusion separates us form the awareness of source. If we can understand logically that we are infinite then that is one step to attaining enlightenment. Experiencing it on the other hand is another thing all together.
Psychedelics and meditation etc. have shown countless individuals over the span of human existence what infinity feels like. Some attained this awareness as a self sovereign constant, such as Krishna, Buddha, Christ etc.
Now consider this, when we have lots of things compacted into different scientific models and understandings it tends to fragment our minds into incompatible thought patterns i.e. science is like a religion and teaches people to accept 2 conflicting concepts which proliferate into the outer psyches perception i.e. internalised mapping of their orientation in the cosmos. For instance the idea that we are whirling around the sun and through the galaxy at unfathomable speeds due to a "LAW" of gravity, which falls apart at the quantum level and cos people believe that gravity falls apart at quantum level it therefore cannot be a LAW. So believing in gravity as it is described and simultaneously believing in God and or quantum physics as it is proliferated by mainstream ideals will set up at least 2 conflicting belief patterns (its no different than a Christian holding to the bible and at the same time praising Allah)
_______________________________________________________________________
In a universe which is based on one fundamental constant which is fractal, you would expect that Gravity and all other forces blend/overlap into one another as they progress down the scale. Thus there is cohesion between Gravity and the quantum level. However scientists can't identify it cos they are extending their undeveloped perception/intention (spiritually speaking) with the use of external devices. You cannot see "GOD (i.e. ultimate source consciousness)" in action, if you do not believe in it.
One must be in receptive resonance to the possible implications of the whole rather than assuming sceptical scrutiny via limited opinion as most scientists do, if they so wish to see the cohesion of the One Unified "Law". Many say I will believe it when I see evidence, but that will never happen because first one must entertain the notion of the possibility before they can begin to experience first hand evidence of it. This means being open minded about the concepts and assuming them as true without evidence, this approach is not to be confused with blind faith. Blind faith is blind, there is no evidence to begin with and one who follows blindly does not question what they learn to believe is true. If they adhere to blind faith they will not change their mind even if direct experiential evidence is never yielded. This is not saying that there aren't religious adherents who have experienced direct evidence of the mysterious and miraculous, however what they must remember is that this doesn't make every word in their scriptures true. The perception seeker on the other hand assumes the notions of a holistic reality to be true without having any agenda to defend, thus because they do not seek to prove anything to anyone but themself they release themself of the overburdenous pressure that seeking evidence for approval instils. This is why blind faith is parried by an equal measure of doubt, for if one does not know for a fact that what they believe is the entire truth they cannot believe in it without a shadow of doubt. Essentially belief in and of itself is one side of a dualistic disposition which automatically invites its counterpart, the presence of doubt. If one believes strongly enough they can keep the doubt at bay, this can happen easily if many believe the same thing, but that doesn't change the reality if the belief is in fact grounded in fallacy. Conversely the perception seeker holds the signature of intent that states to the mysterious "I know that if the cosmos is holistic in nature and I don't doubt for a minute that it will yield itself unto me if this is indeed true, then whilst I trust that this is so rather than believing it to be so I will come to know first hand that it is because my position is free of doubt.
Because all is consciousness then one who so observers the workings of "GOD" under the circuitry i.e. that which is beyond the level of everyday natural perception, whilst entertaining the currently mainstream quantum physics model which does not gel with Einsteinian/Newtonian physics. They will see dis-coherence because their frequency of resonance is not aligned with the whole thus a reflection of what they project as their own abstract sceptical scrutiny is what they perceive.
Yet people are expected to believe in both because they work (which they do relative to what they deal with) but they do not fit together as a unified theory. They are two purely left brain concepts of the cosmos which are in conflict in the wider perspective. They do not help us understand the cosmos as a whole and they use loads of left brain activity to comprehend i.e. ridiculously large equations that you have to study at Harvard University or somewhere to comprehend, along with being totally confined to mental processes in which practical thought experiments are near impossible to perform.
______________________________________________________________________
Whilst it is true that religion and ancient cultures in general have devised infallible ways to get grounded in heart centred consciousness, (so long as according to them you stick by their one method), they still have conflict in their various world views. Science has been born as a result of the conflict of religion.
So science serves as a mediator between seemingly hard facts "knowledge (of which itself in areas, is questionable)" and the various versions of blind faith. However many scriptures demand that one adheres to their "proclaimed scriptural science's" i.e. Flat Earth cosmologies are common through out all religions as well as shamanistic/indigenous culture too. Tho some religions changed their scriptural Science's "interpretations" over time, take for instance the Hindu's who at one time believed the Earth to be a disk which sat on top of a giant elephant which sat on top of a giant tortuous, hence the expression " its turtles all the way down" as an infinite rebuttal when asked " what does the tortuous sit on top of?"
In ancient times it was easier for individuals to have faith in a given religion, as the science's were equally as simple in comparison with the overall "advancements [read as: complications]" of the current scientific paradigm. The more complicated and non-unified various Science's have become, the more fragmented the logical perceptual processes of the psyche have become.
Psychedelic drugs and meditation/prayer have the potential to liberate oneself form the hold of left brain logical belief systems. Psychedelics are an external tool and thus not a means to an end, they serve as stepping stones to access knowledge of ones highest potential. Many religious adherents admit that they only feel the spirit of the divine in full swing during mass, it isn't coincidence that the term "mass" in religious prayer/ceremony is ironically pointing out the reality of a mass collective consciousness which responds to prayer, or rather individuals make themselves receptive to divinity via the collectively localised reinforcing effect of belief practised in mass situations. This is also synonymous with the fact that Quantum Physics has been the only field of Scientific endeavour which has yielded - albeit non-mainstream, holistic explanations of the way consciousness works and interacts with its reality, pointing toward the notion of a collective mass consciousness.
________________________________________________________________________
In light of these notions one can understand that based on the complications of science, and the subsequent waning lack of faith in the original stance of the scriptures. That the fragmented logical centres of which the majority of the population have been conditioned to believe (both intentionally and unintentionally by established science) have influenced polarisation of the mass collective psyche, with incomplete and conflicting models. This is also a direct cause and effect result of the opposite situation of the ancient past whereby the right brain centres dominated the collective psyche, however the belief of many different deities and/or agnostic faiths (i.e. Buddhism) created fragmentation of the collective heart centre of humanity. Therefore it will only be through the explanation of the unified cosmos via Esoteric Science; a combined effort of Science/metaphysics and Religion/theosophy that equalisation in the mass collective can occur.
These concepts are divergent yet overlapping, simple to grasp but lengthy in articulation. Very little mind bend maths needs to be know in order to comprehend, but plenty of cognitive bending of the current incomplete mind frame will occur until it wraps around into a complete whole.
One can easily (so long as you read slowly and patiently, (some may need to revise it once they read through it once) grasp what I have written) And thus entertain the notions I have put forth as a means to replace the finite assumptions of current mainstream Ideas.