# Everything is history and time is a god with four faces Everything is history. In the beginning there was above all *a beginning*. History is everything that exists and that has existed in a single long edited series. That which exists, exists in time. Nothing that exists, exists outside time. To be outside time is to not exist at all. Anything of that nature is impossible to even imagine. ## Why? Well,because what we call existence consists of two physical quantities that require an anchoring in precisely time: either objects that we fixate and apprehend as encapsulated in a kind of being, that is connected to the time axis, or dynamic phenomena whose development and constant change we observe along the time axis as an indispensable reference. Thus the history of philosophy becomes a single long dialogue between on the one hand being and on the other hand becoming *vis-à-vis* this indispensable time axis. Which really is precisely indispensable. We tend to think of space as the enormous receptacle of everything, as some sort of storage container where being and the Universe spin in eternal trajectories, but time is the receptacle, or arena, in which space itself takes place, and where nothing is static, save the mathematical models that physicists and philosophers construct to cast a spell on all the alarming instability. ## So what then is time? We apprehend it as extremely real in our everyday lives; our lives play out as a series of moments lined up along a time axis, one after the other. But since Man for long has imagined that there is a higher reality than the empirical, a transcendent dimension of being in the style of Plato's world of ideas, one has within a main current of both philosophy and physics long chosen to regard time as an illusion. The really true, one argues within these schools, must be an eternal truth, or it simply is not true. Consider the laws of nature! -- someone surely will object. For they must be eternally valid, you sort of get that from the name. They must in some mysterious way precede the nature that is subservient to them. But laws can of course be rewritten and abolished when they for sundry reasons have lost relevance and validity, and what we call laws of nature should rather be viewed as deep-rooted habits -- with roots in nothing but a highly arbitrary and particularly local extreme state -- which nature merely follows as long as a particular set of conditions are at hand. This in no way means that the laws of nature are eternal or timeless, merely that they can be observed here and now, and that they probably will exert a considerable influence in the near future, since the conditions in question do not change just like that. But at some point they will change, everything that exists in time changes, and as soon as we start speaking about some kind of laws or some kind of mathematical construction that so to speak precedes and dictates the reality that actually is real, we have entered the realm of the fairytales. We imagine that our ideas about nature are discovered instead of created by ourselves. Then we believe that the truth about the world is to be found not in the world but outside the world. Outside dark caves and beyond reprehensible societies. Which makes everything much more difficult and compels us to start cheating. Since we of course do not actually have -- and by definition cannot have -- any access to the timeless world, we will, as American physicist Lee Smolin points out, sooner or later start making things up. Which is what both physics and philosophy largely have devoted themselves to. One has made things up. For instance that time is an illusion. Isaac Newton's breakthrough and influence over all conceivable sciences is of course connected with the fact that his model of the Universe was timeless -- an eternally hovering equilibrium underpinned by eternal laws. This equilibrium became the Holy Grail that researchers in every field sought. The whole business was made simple if you, just as Newton himself, were deeply religious. For him absolute space quite simply was a theological postulate, something that was preordained by God. Everything that remained genuinely incomprehensible about absolute space -- for instance that one never could observe or study anything other than phenomena in a relative space in a reality that Newton and all others were forced to be content with -- one could calmly hand over to God to take care of, to the extent that he felt like it. Naturally, creation was perfect and thus eternally immutable. Therefore change -- and time -- must be illusory and nothing to attach any importance to. Hereby the conception that mathematical models underpin and therefore also are primary *vis-à-vis* the material cosmos and physical nature themselves, is confirmed. And mathematics is by definition unalterable, it lies outside time. However in reality change continues incessantly. There, one moment is incessantly followed by another. There, time is real. The solution to the problem is to insist that change merely is illusory, since it only entails that already known facts are arranged in new constellations: the same thing but with a somewhat modified appearance. He who, on the face of it, definitively weeded out time from the physical equation was Albert Einstein with his two theories of relativity. According to Einstein, time becomes one of several dimensions of space, and this newly-discovered reality of spacetime manifests itself in a so-called *block universe* where the entire cosmic history is real at once -- that is: past, present and future are all equally real and there is no meaningful distinction to be made between the one and the other (and the third). Everything is the same thing in a single solid great block where the present has no special privileges whatsoever. Despite all apparent processes of change that are observable, the Universe is fundamentally static -- a block of compact spacetime. However this entire approach ignores what is called *directionality*: the development toward increasingly complex systems. And this is where we reconnect with Lee Smolin: Complexity is improbable and demands an explanation. It cannot arise unless there is a gradual development in many small steps, since a single giant leap from the simple to the complex presupposes magic, and then of course we might as well stop doing both physics and philosophy. Our universe has a history and this history unfolds in a time that is anything but illusory, a time that is most real and the very prerequisite for the necessary sequence of minor displacements and changes. Complexity cannot even be imagined in a static universe. And if there is no time, then nor is there an open future to speculate around or try to influence. There are early insights into this being the case -- thought systems where time is divine. The Zoroastrian *zaotars* in ancient Persia created, for instance, a secret process religion of their own called *Zurvanism*, that the priests resolutely kept for themselves behind closed doors. Within this teaching, which was transferred orally rather than in writing between generations, one worshiped the god *Zurvan*, which was the name of the sole authentic god who concealed itself beneath all the other gods, who merely functioned as useful fictions, as a sort of hand puppets in a theatrical piece for a crowd with no deeper insights. The zaotars were simply compelled to sweeten the truth for the masses. This Zurvan is neither more nor less than time itself -- a time without space or any other substance, a sort of sexless monster with no beginning and no end, a demon that manipulates existence completely at its own discretion, without sparing a single thought for the conceited humans and their well-being. No religion could very well call for a more brutal grounding in reality amid a clergy than this Zurvanism, which thus becomes the total antithesis to the escapism that otherwise is popular among the masses. Zurvanism eventually migrates to India, where it is transformed into *Brahmanism,* the Indian priesthood religion within which one worships the breath of existence as the only god behind all other illusory gods. To the Persian zaotars, the symbol for existence's constant mutability along the relentless time axis is fire; to the Indian yogis, it is breathing. Nothing in these images is fixed, everything is in motion and constant change. Existence is in a state of *panchronism*. Everything is within time. Nothing is outside time. The eternal, the perfect, and the infinite are phenomena that only can be found in the world of fables. Martin Heidegger is probably the closest we come to a (reasonably) contemporary Zurvanite. Heidegger forcefully rejects -- as did Hegel a century earlier -- all attempts to transcend time and history. We call this stance [[Absolute Historicism]]. By this is not meant that one can rule out the presence of extraordinary events that fundamentally change history -- quite the contrary! These events only assume more weight and greater importance. In his classic work *Being and Time* Heidegger argues that nothing ever can escape or posit itself outside time; but that inside history anything can happen. Here there is contingency and not necessity. It is further, argues Heidegger, temporality and not spatiality that gives a thing its specific *being vis-à-vis* its evident becoming. Thereby an exciting, alternative thread in the history of philosophy appears, stretching from Zoroaster and Heraclitus -- the earliest process philosophers during antiquity, both with roots in Persian culture -- up to German thinkers such as Hegel, Nietzsche and Heidegger. From this perspective space does not have the same original status as time. It is possible to imagine time without space, but it is not possible to imagine space without time. And this is exactly how the natural sciences also function. Einstein's mistake was to presume time as the fourth dimension *vis-à-vis* space in Einsteinian spacetime, when he could have placed the three dimensions of space on top of time as the foundation instead. But then Einstein was only concerned with a single dimension of time. Today we are experimenting with four -- two of them ontic and two ontological. Einsteinian spacetime quite simply only corresponds to one of the four necessary time dimensions. These four dimensions must in turn be studied as a series of different synergist dialectics in the aggregate metaphysics that we call *transcendental emergentism*. In the opening chapter of our book *Syntheism -- Creating God in the Internet Age* we write that everything is religion. And then we add that this applies in particular to the convictions that imagine themselves to be something completely other than religion, rather these are to be viewed as particularly treacherous precisely because they lack self-awareness. It can, for instance, be a case of sundry sorts of political ideologies to which one recruits new disciples. So when we now say that everything is history, it does not constitute a contradiction, but that we add a complementing dimension to this basically existentialist reasoning. Everything is religion *and* history at once. Another popular name for this all-encompassing religious history and historical religion is God. History is thereby, on closer inspection, a [[Chronotheology]], a journey through time from, to, or in parallel with, the divine. And the perspective is gradually displaced with time. As long as one could bring oneself to regard the stories in the Old Testament as valid, a total history comprising 6,000 years was a near-infinite period of time. But with today's Internet-driven view of history, and with the new cosmological knowledge that now is common property, the more than 200,000 years that we humans, *Homo sapiens sapiens*, have existed are just a tiny drop in the enormous ocean of history. History as a god has expanded, just like the Universe, and continues to do so, just like the Universe. There is a connection between conceptions of time and the only radically new, original ideas that we can discern in the history of ideas. The original [[Nomadology]] in the orally memorizing nomadic tribe viewed everything as the eternal recurrence of the same, without exception. Which is logical considering the nomads' cyclical existence, built on the changing of the seasons. Zoroaster then adds [[Eventology]] -- the idea that a unique event, a new idea, or a new mode of architecture, can lead history in a completely new direction and achieve enduring change. That insight is of course built upon the dramatic effects of information accumulation during the Bronze Age, with the first empires and nations as a result. It is not possible to build an empire unless you have an established court language so that orders from the power center can be communicated undistorted to the periphery of the realm. And with a written court language information accumulation suddenly takes a gigantic leap, which automatically brings a completely new complexity to the societal structure and a new historical turn. It becomes decisive to be close to the court and speak its specific tongue to have any power and influence to literally speak of in the feudalist society. Eventology arrives with the birth of civilization and Zoroaster is thereby the first *civilizationist* in history. The world of the son need no longer be identical to the world of the father, it can even aspire to be regarded as an improvement. Zoroaster does *de facto* found the entire philosophical discipline -- the ancient Persian term *mazdayasna* means "love of wisdom", a concept which is translated to the Greek *philosophia* circa 1,200 years after its first documented use -- which since then cannot be regarded as anything other than *a series of footnotes to Zoroaster.* Sure, nomadology is with hindsight history's rule, but eventology is history's exception that both confirms and dialectically completes the rule. Rather Zoroaster's idea is the only radically new idea during the entire written history of ideas, and all other ideas worthy of the label stem from his ingenious insight and the ensuing *dialectics of process and event*. The existentialist *dialectics of mortido and libido* and the metaphysical *dialectics of oscillation and negation* are merely developed variants of the same basic dialectics of the permanently nomadic and the temporarily settled. From this insight during the Bronze Age, it takes all the way up until the early 19th century before a genuinely new and pioneering idea is developed and introduced within philosophy. It is then that Hegel in Prussia completes the dialectical method by adding *the negation of the negation* which precedes both the process and the event -- a sort of philosophy's equivalent to the epochal event within mathematics when the zero was presented to the world (in Mesopotamia). Thereby we join Hegel when he describes his new order as *the absolute*, or to describe the matter even more Hegelian: when he completes the ultimate revolt against all previous revolts. *The real* precedes *the imaginary* and *the symbolic*. And out of the negation springs *the negation of the negation* that drives a constantly mutable existence onward. Man patches up his various phallic fantasies in the seismological landscape that is called existence. But there and only there existentialist freedom can be found. For until these fantasies are established only *the contingent chaos* prevails (sexually personified as the hypersexual virgin), while thereafter the eternalisation of the fantasies is nothing but *the law-bound necessity* (sexually personified as the asexual matriarch). The phallic freedom can only be manifested in the actual and mutually admiring collaboration between the imaginary *will-to-transcendence* and the symbolic *will-to-intelligence* behind [[The Barred Absolute]]. We call this necessary creation [[The Two-Headed Phallus]]. In the book *Less Than Nothing* (2012), Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek builds his variant of *dialectical materialism* on what he sees as a basic incompleteness in Hegelian metaphysics. Please note, however, that there is no need for any basic incompleteness as long as we can abandon the Platonist and Kantian axiom that there can only exist one single time dimension. If we instead may be as bold as to presume at least two time dimensions, we will right there have created a seismological relation between eternalist hypertime (the negation) and mobilist spacetime (the oscillation). The time axes will inexorably grind against each other. This entails that everything atop the underlying [[Subphysics]] in such a physical universe must oscillate. If for no other reason than a total fixation requiring far too much energy. And if everything oscillates, there is really no need for incompleteness in order to set things in dialectical motion. There is nothing that is fixated in itself, quite simply because there is no absolute space and no stable point of reference to relate to. Everything is in motion in relation to everything else, even within itself. The *implicata-as-virtuality* can, but need not be, some form of preceding variant of the coming *explicata-as-actuality* albeit minus some kind of anal, mysterious ingredient. Rather, it is a case of various virtual membranes that have not yet collided with each other -- within subphysics such a hypertemporal state is called [[Subsistence]] rather than *existence* -- so that our relationalist universe can be manifested as an actual nature. We thus replace Žižek's dialectical materialism with *transcendental emergentism* which uses *the dialectics of eternalism and mobilism* (see for instance our book [[The Global Empire]]) as a starting point for a *radical relationalism*. Matter is not incomplete, matter is mobile in itself. And matter is not even fundamental, since there is a hypertime that precedes and operates beneath the spacetime where Žižek and other *monochronists* get stuck with their beloved matter. Hypertime is namely not bound to a mass that requires space, and is therefore not material in a classical sense, as British physicist Roger Penrose remarks in his book *Cycles of Time* (2010). In the book *Einstein's Unfinished Revolution* (2019) Penrose's American colleague Lee Smolin launches the excellent concept *temporal relationalism* for a worldview that places time before space. Space is, according to Smolin, nothing other than the description of the historical network of relations between events. For instance, a phenomenon like *quantum entanglement* cannot be explained in any other way. Smolin explicitly argues that quantum entanglement is a remnant from the point in history when only time and no space existed. A subphysics before and beneath physics. A remnant that lingers on in our universe as a reminder that existence is fundamentally temporal and as such aspatial. Without himself using the concept, Smolin has thus formulated a time that *temporally precedes spacetime* without need for space and this is of course [[Hypertime]] which we add to the discourse of temporal relationalism. Hypertime is thus fundamental, while spacetime is emergent and contingent *vis-à-vis* hypertime. And quantum entanglement must be understood as a hypertemporal phenomenon. It is true that entropy and information constantly grow in an expanding universe, and that the expansion in itself consists of entropy and information. However, the expansion of entropy and information is a byproduct of time, it is not time in itself. Neither in the spacetime where the expansion occurs, nor in the hypertime where the expansion no longer matters, since hypertime in itself lacks mass and thereby also lacks space. Physicists can then sit and tinker with time back and forth and discuss its reversibility. But what is unique about hypertime is precisely that it is so radically irreversible. The fact is that it is precisely time's irreversibility -- what we in popular parlance call *the arrow of time* which only points forward -- which is its most hypertemporal rather than spatiotemporal quality. Or as physicist Martina Cortez expresses the matter; the asymmetrical and the irreversible in time is exactly what proves that it is more fundamental in existence than space which *de facto* can be bent to and fro in a kind of reversible eternity. *The big time* precedes *the big space*, as Tibetan monk Tarthang Tulku describes the matter in his exposition of Vajrayāna Buddhism's cosmology. The reason for the natural sciences finding it so hard to embrace these thoughts and put them into practice is, as Smolin observes, that the natural sciences constantly get stuck in what Einstein condescendingly terms *constitutive theories* instead of first building relevant underlying *principal theories*. The metaphysical emergence vector theory that we are devoting ourselves to here is such a principal theory, the various natural and cultural sciences that then develop within the emergence vectors in question are however merely constitutive theories. In the actual context we express this as hypertime being *subphysical* and not physical, it has a kind of passive [[Subsistence]] rather than some kind of active *existence*, as Danish philosopher Alexander Wrede Elung points out. Above all, hypertime is continuous rather than discrete, it cannot be reduced to delimited ones and zeroes and can therefore not be measured by clocks -- since hypertime lacks mass, and clocks can only exist inside a universe consisting of spacetime-bound, gravitation-generating, quantitative mass -- to the despair of many 21st century Platonist computationalists. The Universe is not a computer. Rather, subphysics consists of an implicate, virtual, continuous and passive subsistence brooding in hypertime, pending its being able to give rise to an explicate, actual, discrete and active existence once spacetime arrives. Only then do, literally, the relations and the diversity that characterize our universe explode. Negation morphs into oscillation. As a temporal relationalism with spacetime as a byproduct. The rest is a question of -- and only a question of -- relations interwoven in countless other relations, which expresses itself as increasingly tight and increasingly complex domains developed after various dramatic *emergences* (so-called *emergence vectors*) where our own universe's *big bang* (or rather *big bounce* if we take hypertime seriously) is the most well-known example. This does not least apply to the relation between hypertime and spacetime in itself, whose *seismology* replaces Žižek's mysterious completeness minus one as metaphysical foundation. The contingent before the necessary is not triggered by some kind of mysterious imbalance in the contingent. The contingent is contingent for real, *there is no balance there*. It is rather this constant quest for balance that time and time again throughout history leads thoughts astray. When Hegel writes that necessity only arises afterward, he means precisely this. The relation must arise in order for the world to be enriched with *relata,* and only relata can provide the illusion of even the least temporary balance between the plethora of oscillations in existence. A balance that the eternalist subject is extremely eager to interpret as sustainable and enduringly fixed objects drenched in imaginary and symbolic meaning. Which usually works fairly well, up until the next existential earthquake. But first there are always relations and only later follow relata, as British philosopher Alfred North Whitehead establishes. Or to express the matter in the spirit of Hegel and Heidegger: First there must be a *project*, it is only in the active engagement with one another that a *subject* and an *object* can arise. Before Einsteinian spacetime arises and physics is born, there are already lots of virtual fields or membranes. This is called *subphysical membranics*. The virtual fields do not behave as fields within classical spacetime. They are first of all both infinitely small and infinitely large, since they need not take space in the usual sense into consideration. And they exist only ontically, but not actually, since they need not take space-bound time in the usual sense into consideration either. It is rather when these virtual membranes collide with each other that the first relations are generated and it is with these relations that processes arise as actualities. This is what we call *radical relationalism*. The virtual fields are metaphysically spectacular since they are precisely virtual rather than actual, but they must still be regarded as ontic rather than merely ontological. What is important is to understand that the virtual membranes are not ontic on their own, but that they receive their onticity precisely through being in motion *vis-à-vis* collisions with, and thus establish relations with, other virtual fields. We express this as the virtual membranes being *fields of virtualities* and belonging to *the implicate order* in existence, while the radical relations that arise when the virtual fields interact with each other are called *fields of potentialities,* which belong to *the explicate order* in existence. We can quite simply regard the implicate order as a kind of nature's own subconsciousness, while the explicate order is a sort of nature's consciousness, where only the latter is possible for us to observe and measure in any meaningful sense. And it is of course possible to study the difference between consciousness and subconsciousness in the same way, as an explicate and an implicate order respectively, that meet in the emergent moment that Canadian cognitive scientist John Vervaeke calls *relevance realization*. The moment we accept the possibility that there may be several different dimensions of time, we also have to consider the possibility that there are several different gods; or perhaps rather several different religions. We have, to start with, the two ontic time dimensions *global hypertime* and *local spacetime*, where global hypertime belongs to the implicate order, while local spacetime belongs to the explicate order in the natural sciences, where the explicate order for instance can arise via a [[Negative Dialectics]], that is: there is suddenly something missing in the implicate order that enables the actualization of the explicate order. The transition from subphysics to physics entails for instance a shrinking and not an expansion of the basic prerequisites. A related narratological example from the biblical world is how God was so perfect as *The One* that God was forced to split in two and become man and woman as a human and thus be actualized. The abstract implicate order is in this case Man, and the concrete explicate order is the man and the woman as incompatible but still inseparable entities. And then we have hardly even begun to study how the majority of humans gladly would have stayed and subsisted as an inseparable unity with the maternal body's [[Mamilla]] their entire lives to avoid having to exist as independent creatures of their own. In the book *The Field -- The Quest for The Secret Force of The Universe* (2008) British philosopher J M E McTaggart sets out the distinction between an A series of time and a B series of time, where the A series is time as continuous duration and becoming, while the B series is time as discrete time and being. McTaggart's A series makes the present the only real time, while the past and the future lack substance. But his B series makes all points in time equivalent, it eternalizes time itself as a kind of timeless being. Naturally this is the case of two necessary time dimensions, hypertime as the time of the entire Universe even before it had arisen, and spacetime as a dimension bound to the expanding space to harbor the Universe's information, energy and matter. We need and there really are two dimensions of time: global or continuous hypertime versus local or discrete spacetime. Global time precedes *the big bounce* and is independent of space and its content. Local time arises in conjunction with the big bounce and is through and through dependent on space and its content. To this we add the two ontological time dimensions *vis-à-vis* which Man and his tribal psyche orient themselves, namely *phallic linear time* which is manifested philosophically in eventology and *matrichal cyclical time* which is manifested philosophically in nomadology. Where phallic linear time refers to the explicate order and matrichal cyclical time refers to the implicate order for civilization in its entirety. Thus the global, the matrichal and the virtual belong together, and the study of this *emergence vector* we call *the cosmic nomadology*. The local, the phallic and the actual also belong together, and we call the study of this emergence vector *the cosmic eventology*. We thus write a philosophy about world history as a story of processes and events. The interaction between process and event is the fundamental pattern for this project and -- we maintain -- for precisely everything else. Thus it very much becomes a story of values. The cosmic nomadology sees everything as a recurrence of the same. Thereby everything that happens is bound to cause and effect without exception. There is quite simply nothing to learn from history since everything is repeated all the same and nothing changes, therefore nothing can improve (or deteriorate) either. Therefore, according to cosmic nomadology, there are no valid reasons to build a library full of accumulated, relevant information to promote a development that may be seen as generally favorable to humanity. Instead every activity in existence is based on a pagan *karma*. There is no forgiveness and thus not any hope of being accorded a second chance in life either. This is the core of what we call *the religion of nature* (and please note how history and religion constantly are interwoven -- everything is religion; and history). Meanwhile nomadology can of course not be revised until it is confronted with the cosmic eventology, which starts from the idea that a single, unexpected event can upend the playing board and provoke the emergence of completely new rules for how the development occurs in the future. Suddenly a completely different, previously inconceivable, future becomes possible. And now information accumulation becomes immensely valuable. History contains learning that is useful for those who want to comprehend and equip themselves for -- and perhaps even change and control -- a development that no longer is completely predictable. Both successful and unsuccessful experiments are useful; the latter signify which chosen paths are fruitless, which is extremely important to know. Thereby *forgiveness* becomes a foundation in all eventological worldviews. If you fail, get up and try again. One mistake is not the end of the world, you have (hopefully) learnt something from it, which improves your prospects of succeeding at your next attempt. Further, the recording of experiences becomes important. And communication. Write and let others read, share your experiences just as you benefit from others' to avoid repeating their mistakes. By and by we jointly filter out the blind alleys of development. We build a culture, and thus atop the religion of nature we establish *the religion of culture*. What then remains is *the syntheist revolution* -- a transition from *the nomadological religion based on magic* to *the eventological religion based on technology*. When architects and engineers have the opportunity to unimpededly experiment in a phallic spirit, a state that British-American engineer E M Burlingame calls *the endless game*. Yesterday's magic is transformed into tomorrow's technology. This ideal state of the information age is what we refer to as *netocratic protopianism*. After the arrival of eventology in the history of ideas it becomes impossible to regard the nomadological conception of history as anything other than a defense of a hypertime that finds itself over, under and beyond linear spacetime itself. It is this division that enables us to conceive of an emergence vector before physics that we call *hypertemporal subphysics*, while physics as an emergence vector only is introduced with the genesis and expansion of Einsteinian spacetime, a hot topic which is discussed in an all-encompassing theory construction within physics and cosmology called *loop quantum gravity*. Thereby all similarities between hypertime (and if one wishes, an associated hyperspace) on the one hand, and classical spacetime on the other, disappears. Nomadology and eventology are reduced to two equivalent but incompatible metanarratives about the future. Absolute historicism is thus the Hegelian idea of the coexistence of these two metanarratives in an interconnected world where the stories are used for radically different purposes. We land with eventology as our *yang* and nomadology as our *yin* in a dance where their continued coexistence is guaranteed through their unambiguous incompatibility, the metaphysical state which Lee Smolin, a pioneer of loop quantum gravity, calls temporal relationalism. The crux of the matter is that hypertime always precedes hyperspace in a way that does not occur within classical spacetime, which has dramatic consequences for temporal relationalism. When quantum physics was revealed to the natural sciences, it was discovered that two particles could behave synchronously with frightening precision even if they were located several light years apart. This phenomenon is called *quantum entanglement* where thus the very entanglement only operates in time, clearly independent of space. Thus there is no ongoing transmission of information between the particles. A phenomenon such as a quantum entanglement can appear in wildly differing places simultaneously, but never have a symmetrical identity at different points in time. Thus it is space that fundamentally is an explicate phenomenon, while time is both an implicate phenomenon (as global hypertime) and an explicate one (as local spacetime). It is important to note that it is only hypertime that moves via subphysics from a universe to another at a big bounce, and that thereby has both ontic and ontological qualities. Even information transmission between universes can occur without any space of significance, via a phenomenon that American philosopher Alex Ebert calls *compression*. Time always precedes space, above all in an implicate sense. Space only arises when the mass in a universe needs a space. And secondary spacetime only arises when space is forced to interact with primary hypertime. The history that follows within this universe is then a kind of dialectical squeaking between hypertime and spacetime, with phenomena such as quantum entanglement as proof and reminder of a brutal subphysical reality beneath classical physics. Existence is monist and not dualist. Not because it must be so, but because it happens to be so. Thus nor is there any [[Moralator]] or objective evaluator who can determine that one emergence vector is more important than another -- it is merely the Gnostic yearning for objective value hierarchies (with the Gnostic himself on top) that generates the dualist illusion of a separation between creator and creation -- wherefore monism must be neutral in terms of valuation in order to be credible. This has pervasive consequences for civilization's history about itself. According to the eventological principle that time precedes space in metaphysics, it must be when and not where an event occurs that determines the event's significance for history. And this valuation can and should constantly be reevaluated dialectically, as both Zoroaster and Hegel point out. The chronology controls the topography and not the other way around. This also means that *absolute historicism* gets the upper hand *vis-à-vis neutral monism* in our narratology. Only time can be absolute. History is fundamentally chronocentric and not topocentric. And ironically all this has to do with the cyclical nature of hypertime. Or as we write in *Digital Libido -- Sex, Power and Violence in the Network Society:* everything begins and ends with mortido and its matrichal circularity. Libido and its phallic linearity never becomes anything other than a temporary protest and a vain wish to escape the existential, eternal recurrence of the same, not least on a cosmological level. We are born and we die, and the same thing applies to the Universe itself. What is produced in between can never be more than a transient protest before death ultimately afflicts both us and everything else. On a metaphysical level it eventually becomes impossible to oppose the Indian *Jains* and their eons of hypertemporal cycles. Whereafter the Persian Zoroastrians complete what Man can achieve with his phallic fantasies of an eventological history and existence in protest against Jainism's matrichal superloop. History in between them is *the history of processes and events*. The history of processes we call [[Nomadology]] and the history of events we call [[Eventology]]. The Greeks of antiquity make a distinction between the two time gods *Chronos* and *Kairos*. It is Chronos who has the nomadological qualities and Kairos who has the eventological and never the twain shall meet. While the Greeks, in line with the Persians, pay tribute to *the kairotic event* as their existentialist ideal. History consists of two implicate time dimensions and two explicate time dimensions that together comprise everything else. Together they form *the chronotheological quadrant* which naturally matches *the syntheological quadrant* that we present in *Syntheism* -- *Creating God in the Internet Age*. The implicate time dimensions are natural and profane, while the explicate time dimensions are cultural and sacred. The implicate time dimensions we call hypertime and spacetime. Hypertime is the ontic and virtual time. Syntheologically it is called [[Atheos]]. Spacetime is the ontic and actual time. Syntheologically it is called [[Pantheos]]. Hypertime is mortidinal while spacetime is libidinal. The explicate time dimensions we call cyclical time and linear time. Cyclical time is the ontological and nomadological time, that is to say ploytheist being in all its rich variety. Syntheologically it is called [[Entheos]]. Linear time is the ontological and eventological time, that is to say the monotheist future with its completion of history. Syntheologically it is called [[Syntheos]]. Cyclical time is mortidinal and linear time is libidinal. Hypertime generates subphysics as the first emergence vector. Spacetime generates physics as the second emergence vector. Cyclical time generates the nomadological metanarrative and linear time generates the eventological metanarrative. Together they lay the ground for the metaphysics of processes and events. The dynamics required to comprehend these stories are the year and life as *the dialectics of cosmos and chaos*, that is to say the dialectics of eternalism and mobilism. The natural sciences have always wrestled with the problem of existence's innermost essence and [[Determinism]] versus [[Indeterminism]]. The question does not become easier by processes being able to behave locally deterministically but still result in globally indeterminist outcomes, as well as being able to behave locally indeterministically but result in seemingly globally determinist outcomes. And then the question is whether it is the process in detail or the process in its entirety that shall decide if we are facing the one or the other. Upon closer examination of processes within subphysics and physics, it turns out that determinism often appears reasonable when processes are studied afterward, but that indeterminism becomes the only logically sustainable possibility when processes are taken into account in advance. This entails that the problem of the dichotomy determinism versus indeterminism is fundamentally erroneously conceived. We must rather regard it as yet another pseudo-problem that constitutes a remnant from the old traditional fairytales of dualist creator-gods, who precede the creation, and the like. Existence is instead characterized both as entirety and in detail by [[Transdeterminism]], a concept that we have developed in a series of podcasts with our colleague Alexander Wrede Elung. And once we develop transdeterminism we discover that the erroneous thinking that prevented its development is intimately connected with fantasies about infinite magnitudes and infinite tininesses. Any such infinities and infinitesimals are however neither found in nature nor as precise numbers within mathematics, as German mathematician Georg Cantor shows in the early 20th century when he names the outermost numbers *transfinities* instead -- there is no infinite number in itself, the only things that can be formalized are infinities in relation to other infinities, hence the concept transfinities. Rather, we had better speak of *enormities* that have expanded and *enormitesimals* that have shrunk to the extent they have been able to do so far during the history of the Universe. Spacetime contains neither infinities nor infinitesimals. However, spacetime contains enormities and enormitesimals that are free to expand, but also solely can expand, along the time axis. And with these tools we can only measure either discretions or continuities -- and then just locally and not globally -- however not both simultaneously. Thus *the principle of universal oscillation* in a relationalist and transdeterminist universe reads: Since the relation between the exact circle and the exact discrete number is inexact, this means that everything that is real in existence is inexact as soon as it relates to anything else. Eternalism can only precede mobilism in the hypothetical world of a mathematician. In the emergent reality it is on the contrary mobilism that precedes eternalism, since the mobilist *relation* always precedes the eternalist *relata*. The objects may be fixed and dead, but the phenomena move and live. Everything oscillates. The zero vibrates, the one vibrates, the circle vibrates -- as soon as they leave the culture and find themselves in nature. The oscillation in the actualized phenomenon cannot be measured at the same time as the phenomenon is being fixed as an object (which in the natural sciences is called *Heisenberg's uncertainty principle*). The dialectics of eternalism and mobilism is thus also *the dialectics of discretion and continuity*. And consequently there must also ultimately be two separate time dimensions, a fixed local time (spacetime) for the discretion, and an oscillating global time (hypertime) for the continuity. We can only experience and measure classical spacetime. But we see the consequences of hypertime within classical spacetime in retrospect. We express this theologically as though we are torn between a constantly present god (physics) and another god who only makes his presence felt through his equally constant absence (subphysics). This neither means that existence is minutely controlled in advance, that is to say as a clock that is wound up by a divine creator hand and keeps on ticking as it must (determinism). Nor does it mean that every event conceals an unpredictable randomness (indeterminism). Rather, existence in its *enormous but not infinite complexity* behaves transdeterministically when processes are scrutinized, and when the actual processes interact with other processes in a multitude of different directions. The contingency thus has no need for chance in order to be contingent. It merely needs the causal freedom, and causal freedom contingency receives from hypertime since the future does not exist yet, which specifically within spacetime is expressed as the future's level of complexity not yet having been attained. Thus we can also see transdeterminism as a necessary condition for [[Relationalism]] as a principle for all known emergence vectors in our neutrally monist universe. Above all for the development of a *systemic perspectivism* for which we strive to include all emergence vectors as a metaphysical whole. This brings us to the distinction in part between ontics and ontology, in part between virtualities, potentialities and actual events. After Immanuel Kant's philosophical revolution in the 18th century the noumenal environment is converted to ontics and the phenomenal experience to ontology. The only snag is that once we accept that existence consists of processes and events and their underpinnings, we also accept that existence fundamentally consists of emergences and their vectors rather than of physics and matter. Physics and its materiality is but one emergence vector among others. This entails that we must accept a subphysics as a basis for physics and with that we also accept fields of virtualities, and it is only when these membranes collide with each other and establish relations between each other that existence is actualized and Einsteinian spacetime becomes a necessity. This means that we accept virtual fields as ontic realities without them actually having been potentialized yet. Actuality is fundamentally composed of processes and relations, and we call this process-philosophical ontology *radical relationalism*. The virtual and ontic world exists along the hypertime axis and in principle requires no space. But when the virtual and ontic fields collide with each other, Einsteinian spacetime arises and the result is an actualized world that emerges as a physical world out of subphysics. The materiality is actualized. Everything is history and history is everything. There is nothing outside history. The present is merely history's most recent manifestation. The future is a blank page that thus does not yet have existence. Existence is neither characterized by determinism nor indeterminism, but is instead subordinate to transdeterminism. Certain things cannot be predicted at all. Other things can be predicted with frightening accuracy, but never with completeness. Thus we stand open to the future. What happens, happens without our own influence as a result of infinitely complicated processes beyond our control. And the fact that we live in a transdeterminist universe means that the metaphysical struggle between emergentism and reductionism is settled. Existence is fundamentally emergent and not fundamentally reduced in any direction. Emergences happen, vectors form, and laws and rules arise and apply locally within the actual emergence vectors but nowhere else in the Universe. If spacetime arises only after the (re)birth of the Universe, this means not only that there are at least two time dimensions, but also that subphysics precedes physics as the most fundamental building block of our transdeterminist universe. Furthermore, it is no big secret that chemistry, biology, biological intelligence and technological intelligence follow as emergence vectors after subphysics and physics. When we say that existence is fundamentally emergent, we mean precisely this: existence is emergent and not physical. Which may sound counterintuitive, but even so this follows by necessity from the prerequisites we have discussed. Reincarnation as the eternal recurrence of the same must sooner or later give rise to the fantasy of an exit, a total and final breakdown for cyclical time -- this breakdown is called *ekpyrosis* in Greek. But behind every ekpyrosis the world is still born anew, which most aptly can be likened to a spiritual big bounce, which we in retrospect can define eventologically as *the ekpyrotic event*. Cyclical time, often mythically symbolized by the self-eating snake *Ouroborus*, is according to this analysis infinite and thus in a real sense timeless behind the clearly delimiting spacetime. This concept is called *zurvan akarana* in the Old Persian language Avestan -- or *sarvanum akarnum* in the Indian twin language Sanskrit -- that is to say, the primordial origin of everything else. Please note that *zurvan akarana* is neither a subject nor an object, nor is it even dependent on a place or even on space in general. Instead it is a case of a primordial time that precedes everything else in existence and from which everything else stems. We are now speaking of time as an attribute and not as a dimension. A universe where nothing ever is erased. At least not before this universe collapses, loses most of its information, and is replaced by a new one out of the remnants from its predecessor. It is out of this eschatology of one world's demise and another world's birth within nomadology that we find the germ of what later in history will be expressed as eventological thinking. If worlds can die and be reborn within eschatology, decisive events must also be able to arise during the development of the linear time that changes history once and for all. It is of course this emergent event that propels the birth of eventology. Absolute historicism is thus *eventology par excellence*, which in Hegelese can be expressed as *the history about historicism itself* being the pure eventology -- while *Jainism* in India is an excellent example of a consistently applied cosmic nomadology, a religion without gods but with eons of constantly repeated cyclical time. A religion claiming that God is constantly available to us, or that we are constantly available to God, is thus a religion underpinned by a foundation of untruth. The hypergod behind God is forever inaccessible to us and we to him. Between us and the hypergod *the principle of explanatory closure* strikes with full force. Which makes God himself inaccessible to most behind what we call *the barred absolute*. In the information society -- with its dramatic dissolution of space and the insight of acute planetary limitations -- the ancient Greek time gods Chronos and Kairos are pretty much converted into two demons. Nationalism begets the nation as an event. Imperialism begets the empire as an event. But beneath everything hovers capitalism as the global phallic force without events or limits (see [[The Global Empire]]), followed by the abstract dream of *communism* via [[Attentionalism]] as the recurrence of the original nomadic tribe, [[The Sociont]]. However since the space within which the demons expose themselves is finite, these demons have in concert invoked a crisis from two directions simultaneously. The fantasies of an immortal philosopher-king who expands his perfect territory in an infinite space has reached the end of the road. Mortality, imperfection and finitude have caught up with Man. There is nothing else to do but to endure the brutal crash landing that is inflicted on the Platonist roller coaster, to return to an ever deeper history of humanity, to thus find a new stronghold, a new [[Root-Of-The-Phallus]], to be able to build a new and more robust phallic vision for informationalism. The old demons must be tamed and submitted to the new *protopias* we aim for. And the path leading there goes via the Protopia which rises from history as though it really was there all along, which is called religion, and which for our paradigm bears the name [[historiography/texts/Process and Event/glossary/Syntheism]] and which we explore thoroughly in a book fittingly called *Syntheism -- Creating God in the Internet Age*. No matter how strong libido is, mortido is still invariably stronger. The will to life is always trumped by the death drive. The snag here is that Man generally only is conscious of his libido but not of his mortido. It is solely in conjunction with extremely powerful experiences that we call *ecstasy* or *trauma* that mortido steps out of the shadows and commandeers Man's conceptual world. Ecstasy creates this effect through enticing Man with immortality; trauma through enticing Man with life's immediate termination. We call these experiences decisive events, both with regard to a dividual human life and with regard to the history of an entire society. The doctrine of how these events control our lives is called eventology and it is, of course, driven in the reverse by *the dialectics of libido and mortido*, which we deal with in our book *Digital Libido -- Sex, Power and Violence in the Network Society*. In the same way that mortido governs our very earliest impulses in life, it is mortido that also returns and takes charge at the moment of death, which expresses itself in the acceptance of our personal mortality. What eventology underlines -- with the greatest conceivable clarity -- is that mortality always is preferable to immortality and what Man can strive for never can be anything deeper than survival and life extension, not immortality in itself. This is because libido, the will to life, merely is conceivable against the backdrop of a conception of life's finitude, of the definitive termination of every history, which of course entails that another story can commence. Life only receives color and meaning through being presumed at some point to reach an ending, the thought of an eternity ultimately becomes unbearable. This means that history also only receives color and meaning through being presumed to reach its ending at some point. Which entails that society only receives color and meaning if it at some point is presumed to reach its ending. Which means that humanity only receives color and meaning if it at some point is presumed to reach its ending. This is what spacetime teaches us as spatiotemporal creatures, namely that all that *exists* rather than just *subsists*, also has an ending. It is only thanks to the four different time dimensions that we can comprehend this fully. Hypertime is -- and is only -- the metahistorical container within which the other time dimensions are played out. Spacetime is the arena within which Man, technology and their mutually developed relations are played out. Hypertime reminds Man of the virtual infinity within which all actual finitudes, such as himself, his humanity and his technologies, *de facto* exist. Spacetime reminds Man of the actual finitude that makes him finite. This means that hypertime (*Chronos*) is mortidinal in nature while spacetime (*Kairos*) in essence is libidinal. And correspondingly, among the ontological time dimensions, nomadology and its eternal recurrence of the same corresponds to *the matrichal mortido* as the origin and objective of everything human. At the same time as eventology builds *the phallic libido* as a kind of temporary and -- even from the start, literally speaking -- doomed protest against mortido's indomitable power. This means that what all the world's engineers and other civilizationally tamed warriors and hunters really are devoting themselves to during all of civilization, are two separate construction projects. Consciously the engineers build the Saoshyant or the Messiah machine that is to save humanity from the apocalypse. But subconsciously the engineers ultimately simultaneously build the god who is to succeed and take over after humanity when humanity itself has perished. The syntheist project is thus the ultimate expression of *womb envy*. This is ironically manifested with the most nomadological construction project of all throughout history, namely *The Silk Road,* which bound together East and West across the entire enormous Eurasian landmass. The trade routes are of such dignity and achieve the interconnecting function. In history we find three different types: the land route, the sea route, and what we may add as the air route -- to which we include both the modern air transportation that has made the entire planet (in principle) physically accessible within 24 hours, and the satellite communication that has made the entire planet potentially accessible in a second. The deepest subconscious motivator of eventology is that the man himself shall bring forth the son that executes and replaces him without the influence of the matriarchy (*the patricide*). This is the fundamental fantasy that propels the enormous mortidinal engine behind the phallic libido. We plan and we construct, just as Man always has done, to make ourselves immortal. But we do not only do this on our own behalf when we are confronted with our mortality, but we also do this for civilization in its entirety, just over a much greater time span. And it is basically this and only this that is the primordial source of sexual desire. The expression "I feel that I'm alive" can only be understood as an expression of an intense feeling of immediate mortality. Man can sit and divide his narratives between *logos* and *mythos* to his heart's desire, but in the existential conflict between the gods and the authentic priests, he has no access to any other narrative than *the pathical dialectics of libido and mortido*. In that conflict mortido must ultimately triumph, and as a consolation prize libido is awarded a hope of transcendence after the inevitable death, that is: the dying libido is replaced by a new libido *ad infinitum*, physiological or technological matters not one bit, at least not between engineers. We should always contemplate the somewhat shameful fact that it is precisely when we leave this fundamental Zurvanite understanding of our existential conditions -- particularly during the axial age and enlightenment epochs we naively and uncritically have praised -- that we humans create all the world's evil; a misery and a confusion that only entails complicated detours for ourselves. For it is then and only then that the necessary authentically phallic chieftains and priests are replaced by smug but impotent boy-pharaohs and pillar-saints. The Zoroastrian *mobeds* constantly warn us of what the Gnostics can bring about. They saw already back in the Sassanid empire of ancient Persia how the Gnostics through their mendacious separation between body and mind soon started to fantasize about the mind having a freedom that only machines but not humans could be assigned. This means that the necessary re-write of the entire history of ideas that informationalism requires of us, must begin with a humble manifesto. We realize that we are all born to be *the slaves of Zurvan* and we accept this as a logical and existential necessity. The dialectics of libido and mortido teaches us that we are all going to die, that there is a single cohesive history for humanity, a history that is not determinist but that we all participate in creating. Further, we learn that this history has a mortidinal objective, and that this objective is our own extinction. Which conveniently is an objective that we as humanity cannot fail at. Thus Man need not focus on that objective; rather, we can comfortably place it far away in a distant future and call that objective God. Instead Man can devote his energy to worrying about what he should do with the time during the time. ## How do we handle the pathic power that we call libido? All this requires a new and deepened understanding of time in itself as a phenomenon. It is interestingly enough probably a voyage -- as Lee Smolin observes in the book *Time Reborn* (2013) -- that hardly even has begun, since all the boy-pharaohs and pillar-saints of the past three millennia have preferred to dwell on infantile phantasms such as eternity and immortality, rather than on pragmatically tangible engineering matters such as time and space. This ironically means that we must commence the necessary re-write of philosophy's and theology's history with one massive *back to go*. We must start over. The simple fact is that if we are to carry out informationalism's [[Exodology]], we must not only have a sense of where we are going -- that is to say which libidinal objective we set for our own age before the barred absolute, while this protects us against our collective mortido -- we must first of all know where we are and how we got here. And to do this we must delve deeper into history than we have ever done before. Thanks, dear Syntheos, for there being machines to aid us in this too. Welcome to the brave new world of data anthropology. Paradigm shift shock is the chaos that awaits when a new information-technological paradigm breaks through. It takes time for the constant Man to adapt to the variable Technology. The first millennium after permanent settlement was established was for instance the bloodiest period in human history, since the participants in question still lacked a metanarrative about connectedness that could serve as a foundation for a long-term, strategic collaboration. Everyone simply helped themselves to anything they could as soon as the opportunity presented itself. One reasoned short-sightedly and selfishly. No actor invested in any form of future. It was not until organized religion arrived and built joint temples on the shamanic borderland between the river valleys -- from which it preached the new grand narrative of the shared root-of-the-phallus -- that fairly long periods of peace could be maintained, and trade and growth could flourish. And there is no reason to believe that the present paradigm shift from industrialism to informationalism, and from capitalism to attentionalism (see *The Netocrats*), will be the least bit easier than previous ones. Particularly since our entire world is shifting paradigms simultaneously this time. While no one seems to understand what is underway while it is underway, since the dominant actors are strapped into their old political, industrial and academic models that have become completely irrelevant. They are acting in a new world while they are thinking in an old one. It is time to not only go back to history, but also to re-write history as though it had a new Hegelian necessity about it. And this new necessity to which the root-of-the-phallus points is *the informationalist paradigm*, with its shift from a religion based on magic -- via pathetic attempts to no religion at all -- to a religion based on technology. Everything is history and since it concerns a paradigm shift, the new paradigm can only be understood if it receives its own new history. We once again visit history to understand ourselves, but this time we do so with social-technological and data-anthropological glasses. If religion has stopped being magical and instead has become technological, the phallic hope will no longer be based on a faith, but actually on what Hegel calls *absolute knowledge*. The old Zoroastrian dream that the truth (*asha*) one day shall defeat the lie (*druj*) in a battle of near-cosmic proportions comes true, when the free and open algorithm plays its hand. Welcome to the information society and the development of its necessary stories about itself.