After escaping concentration camp in Heungnam, North Korea in 1950, Dr. Sun Myung Moon wrote the book, Ideal of the Circular Garden of Harmony. This text, lost during the Korean War (1950-53), was re-written as Original Text of the Divine Principle and eventually translated into English as Exposition of the Divine Principle (EDP) in 1996.
As you will see, the “Circular Garden of Harmony” refers to the underlying harmonious circular structure of the cosmos, the “garden,” at the elementary level.
In my previous AU Blog article in November 2016, “The Science of Spiritual Life and Death,” I stated there exist in the Principle theory unsubstantiated, or at least unverified, claims. In this article, I state this in relation to the Four Position Foundation specifically as the so-called foundation of the life of all beings.
What is the foundation of the life of all beings? What proof do we have that the Four Position Foundation is the fundamental foundation of all physical beings, all spiritual beings, and even God?
For example, theoretical and experimental particle physicists might ask to show how the Four Position Foundation applies to the plentiful assortment of elementary particles that make up the cosmos at the smallest scales. But do we have a model for that? We do. It’s the Four Position Foundation.
I’m not referring to a vague model into which we roughly fit some broad concepts like only plus and minus, but discovered forces and particles and their interactions in a mathematical structure that works. It must be a mathematical structure because, according to the Principle, one aspect of God’s nature, the Logos, the blueprint of the cosmos according to the theory of the Principle, is mathematical.
The Four Position Foundation
In Exposition of the Divine Principle, the fundamental structure of the cosmos, or garden, is called the Four Position Foundation (4PF).
Diagrammatically, the 4PF is usually expressed two-dimensionally as in the image below. Although — and as can be understood by descriptions of it in the Principle textbook as well as in numerous online presentations such as this lecture by Kevin McCarthy and video by Michael Callaghan — the Four Position Foundation is highly multi-dimensional.
The Four Position Foundation is so named because it is “the fundamental foundation for the life of all beings” and composed of four unique positions: the origin, subject and object partners, and their union.
As such, we should find the 4PF manifest at the elementary level of the cosmos. The areas of science that deal with this are called theoretical and experimental particle physics. Also, according to the model in the Principle theory, if the 4PF exists it must have four unique and inter-related positions.
As in the previous linked videos and in the following quotes, if the Four Position Foundation exists, it must exhibit circular and spherical motion both in the interactions between its constituents and as a whole.
“Although there are moments when the two levels of circular motion [around each constituent’s own axis and around other constituents within the 4PF] may happen to have orbits on the same plane, in general, because the angle of revolution [of the object partner] around the subject partner is constantly changing, this circular movement becomes a spherical movement.” (EDP)
“The universe exists in three dimensions as, governed by the same principle, its elements engage in spherical movements.” (EDP)
Furthermore, the 4PF, while being an object of incredible mathematical precision and logic, is perhaps most intriguingly an object of deep and profound beauty.
“When the circular movement of the subject partner and the object partner on a single plane becomes a spherical movement in a three-dimensional orbit, the dynamism and creativity of the universe unfolds. Variations in each orbit’s distance, shape, state, direction, angle, force and velocity are manifest as the beauty of creation in its infinite variety.”
If the 4PF exists as described in the Principle theory, it must be inherently beautiful beyond description.
I have laid out only a few of the conditions available which we can use to help identify if the 4PF is a model in theoretical particle physics. It must:
- be operational at the fundamental, elementary level of the cosmos;
- have four unique and inter-related positions;
- exhibit circular and spherical motion between its constituents and as a whole; and,
- be an object of ultimate mathematical logic and pure beauty.
There are probably more points we could consider, but I’ve included a few I’m aware of which I consider to be most important for the purpose of identifying a candidate among models in theoretical particle physics that fits the model and structure of the 4PF as the fundamental blueprint of the cosmos and of the life of all beings.
The E8 Lie Group as the Four Position Foundation
In his physics paper, An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything, published online in November 2007, theoretical particle physicist Garrett Lisi introduces a mathematical construct known as E8 as the potential unifying structure of all known forces and elementary particles in the cosmos. As such, E8 purportedly is:
- operational at the fundamental, elementary level of the cosmos
E8, in its complete form cannot be seen or even drawn. It is the largest and most complex of the five exceptional Lie groups (pronounced “Lee”), containing four subgroups related to the four fundamental forces of nature: the electromagnetic force (mediated by photons); the strong force (which binds quarks); the weak force (which controls radioactive decay); and the gravitational force (enabling attraction between large-scale objects). E8 has:
- four unique and inter-related positions
A Lie group, including E8, is a mathematical shape that is a collection of circles that twist around each other in a specific pattern. In Lisi’s E8 theoretical particle physics model, each circle represents the orbit of a unique elementary particle. Each elementary particle revolves on its own axis while rotating in its orbit and also interacting with those of other elementary particles that are represented in E8 by circles. E8:
- exhibits circular and spherical motion between its constituents and as a whole
The largest and most complex exceptional Lie group, E8 is considered by many to be the most beautiful structure in mathematics. New Scientist refers to the universally appreciated beauty of E8, in reporting its first discovery in natural physical systems, crystals, in 2010. In his first TED Talk in February 2008, Lisi describes the beauty of particle physics relating to E8 but without using the math, which makes it much easier to understand; I recommend his video, An 8-Dimensional Model of the Universe. E8 is:
- an object of ultimate mathematical logic and pure beauty
I find it compelling that first Lisi was independently building an algebraic structure based on known interactions of elementary particles and then later discovered that this same structure already exists in mathematics and their values match.
It is also compelling that the characteristics of the four positions in the 4PF in relation to a family are similar in nature to the characteristics of the four fundamental forces when applied to the 4PF in relation to a family.
Electromagnetism, in the origin position, is God’s position. In the Principle theory, human beings are described as image manifestations of truth (logos) who are composed of the dual characteristics of mind and body. It also describes that this logos is the fundamental blueprint of God’s own structure and function. According to this speech by Dr. Moon, the relationship between a person’s mind and body is one of 90 degree angles.
God, whose image is the model for our own, likewise is composed of dual characteristics that interact with each other at 90 degree angles, at least as a pre-existent prototype, since God’s realm is prior to and independent of time and space. Electromagnetism is a composite body of the dual characteristics of reciprocal electrical and magnetic energy that move together at 90 degree angles to each other. God is often referred to as a being of light and light is electromagnetism.
The strong and weak nuclear forces, in the subject and object partner positions, are also comparable. In fact, strong and weak are explicitly mentioned in Exposition of the Divine Principle as subject and object partners. In relation to the family, these subject and object partner positions correspond to husband and wife, though this is not to say the wife is inherently weak, which we clearly understand from our studies of the Principle.
Lastly, gravity is the force that enables objects with mass to attract one another. The pattern is that objects with less mass tend to be attracted to objects with more mass. If we were to imaginatively compare mass with love, we could say that the union position is the child’s position which is attracted to and reciprocates with the parents’ positions (subject and object partners) and God’s position (origin), which are positions with greater mass or love.
While the above diagram is a broad illustration of how the fundamental forces fit into the 4PF, each position indeed involves a lot of math. For more detail, I encourage you to read Lisi’s paper.
Further compelling for me is that Lisi’s model correctly predicted the constituents of the Higgs boson particle which, at the time of publication of his original paper, was yet undiscovered.
My purpose is solely to introduce readers to what, in my opinion, is the real Four Position Foundation as discovered in theoretical particle physics. I have other points to introduce regarding the E8-4PF model, including how it intrinsically, mathematically implies the existence and function of spiritual particles, forming the spirit world.
E8 is not only a diagram. Rather, it is an actual phenomenon. For example, E8 has been observed being produced by physical systems, crystals, as stated earlier in this article.
E8 has also been digitally mapped, an incredible feat. To understand the magnitude and complexity of E8, the human genome, containing all genetic information of a cell, is less than a single gigabyte in size. The result of the E8 calculation, however, is sixty gigabytes in size.
I have included numerous links in this article because this is a topic that requires a lot of study in order to begin to understand it. Unificationists, however, in my opinion, through our education of the Four Position Foundation in the Principle theory, are in a better position to more readily understand E8. What do you think of E8?
Lisi has an interactive elementary particle explorer on his website, with which you can explore all known and some unknown elementary particles and their interactions as aspects of the geometry of E8.
In a subsequent article, I hope to introduce my theory on how quantum information, the Logos, gets from the so-called singularity (God?) into the cosmos, and directs energy to form all the diverse elementary particles observed in experimental particle physics. Indeed, this is a major missing piece of both cosmology as well as religious theory: how does God actually create the cosmos through the Logos? I believe I have discovered answers and appreciate reader feedback.♦
James M. Powell, from the UK, is co-founder of the research organization S.T.A.R.S. (Sincerity and Truth for the Advancement of Revolutionary Science), which aims to prove through science: that God exists; that the spirit world is real, and; that True Parents’ Blessing changes the physical lineage. He has been blessed with Elona (from Albania) since 2009. Read more about James’ projects on his website and contact him via his Facebook page.
Graphic at top: An E8 Petrie projection.
Two points might be helpful:
First: Focus on heart as the center. In terms of personality, it is soul (will, subject) and mind (intellect, object) interacting centering on heart to produce the perfect personality. That the heart is the center means that the purpose of the interaction is happiness.
Second: In terms of the family, it is husband and wife interacting centering on the wife. The purpose of the interaction is the happiness of the wife (the heart).
Also in terms of the family, it is father (the soul, will) and children (mind, intellect) interacting centering on the mother. The purpose of the interaction is happiness of the mother.
When the heart is happy, the soul is joyful — and the world is perfect.
Another point is this: the theory of everything is the human body, the image of God.
“Another point is this: the theory of everything is the human body, the image of God.”
Thank you for this 🙂
Thank you for your application of the Four Position Foundation to quantum “string theory.”
The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory is a book by Brian Greene originally published in 1999, which introduces string and superstring theory.
An exploration into a new (re-imagined) method of understanding the words of True Parents, is the two-stage development diagram; it links two four-position foundations (diamonds) with a connecting 90 degree right angle. This double diamond chain can be repeated several times. UT / DP offers many examples of how this two-step diagram can be used to explain interrelated ideas and in process concepts.
Another way of looking at the diamond is through sentence diagrams that segment a sentence into constituent parts — subject, verb, object and P’s — predicates or prepositions. Subject on the left. Verb at the upper point. Object on the right. P’s on the lower position. Rules of logic or accepted correlations between the four positions have to be made for the sentence to have comprehensive meaning. Rules of good faith, logic and reason are used to separate statements of belief, fact and fiction. Thus, words (dictionary) through the correlation of experience become a unified comprehensive body of knowledge (encyclopedia).
This is not an application to string theory. String theory is dead. Please watch the TED Talk video linked in the article: “An 8-Dimensional Model of the Universe.”
Thank you for your other thoughts. I will pay consideration to them.
As it seems that you’ve correlated love with Higgs boson, both are outer bases to the inner bases of heart and principle.
I correlated love with mass “imaginatively”. But I think mass is different from the Higgs field and bosons since mass is a result of interactions with the Higgs and not the Higgs itself.
Heart and purpose can each be the centre of both the Inner and Outer Developmental Four Position Foundations. Whereas Principle, or Logos, is the result of the Inner Developmental 4PF which then gives rise to a New Body or Created Being through the Outer Developmental 4PF.
Unification Thought states that forming energy which forms particles and creates material, and acting energy which acts upon all things and causes give and receive action, are both the unity of physical energy and the force of love. It also states that the force of love is contained in Prime Force and Universal Prime Force. So it’s not a problem to imaginatively compare them, I think.
Further, the Higgs is a scalar field which means it has no spin. The DP states that God has no mode of existence, that is, no motion. So I’m curious if the Higgs is the symbolic manifestation of God at the centre of the physical 4PF. I might have thought that this would be the photon since light is referenced in relation to truth and love especially in some Holy Songs, but Heart is the Centre of both these. So what is representative of Heart? Higgs?
I’m looking forward to your next comments. Thanks, Robert!
To add clarity to your thought, several inner base/outer base and maintaining purpose/developing purpose (co-relative 4PF) chains would have to be diagrammed. Contact me here.
First, I really appreciate your particle-based approach rather than the substantive ontology of traditional Western thought. It has ramifications all through theology. For me, making this change in perspective from substances to particles is the key step to bringing science and religion together without completely distorting the science.
I have heard of Lisi’s work, but not really investigated it. It seems to me to be a symbolic (albeit mathematical) representation of existing elementary and force particles, much as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s system of isospheres is also a symbolic, rather than actual, representation of particles. There are lots of potential questions, but these come to mind first:
Does the E8 group deal with gravity based on particles?; i.e., does it propose some form of graviton? And if so how does it reconcile relativity with particles?
Existing things that we perceive with our senses are composite bodies that derive from complex relationships of many parts (particles). DP’s description of the Four Position Foundation primarily deals with relationship between these types of complex beings. At first glance, the E8 group does not seem to deal with composite beings as a consequence of actual relationship between parts (particles) such as we find in DP. So does it really describe relationship itself in a way compatible to the way relationship is described in DP? Or is it just symbolic of the particles themselves without relationship and more complex bodies? Your mapping of the four interactions to the Four Position Foundation seems not quite DP. In identity maintaining situations, for example, the union of relationship is always a composite body that combines subject and object into a larger and more complex whole — and if we apply that pattern to your mapping it would require us to regard gravity as the combination of strong and weak nuclear forces — something I would be reluctant to do.
It is interesting that the group proposes unknown particles. Has there been any suggestion that these could comprise dark matter particles? Could they be demonstrated or does the group predict their properties? Personally, I have not been attracted to the idea of spiritual particles, but would be open to a workable new idea. I have preferred an emergent concept of being where both physical and spiritual worlds/beings emerge in the different types of relationship between particles.
Thank you. Yes, I would like to see the need for religion pass and be replaced by a clear and correct understanding of our cosmos based in heartistic science.
Lisi’s E8 theory predicts gravitons, which are embedded into E8 via a process known as triality and using a different form of gravity than is usually used.
Taking the human being as the model for all things as is customary in applying the Principle theoretically, in the case of human biology, genetics, children inherit DNA from their parents in proportions according to their biological sex. Further, the epigenetic expression of those genes differ based on numerous other factors. Are we to say that gravity is simply the union of two forces, or is it something more complex than that?
I may be wrong and perhaps the content of my article is just a point in the right direction. I simply ask people to keep their options open and to seek absolute truth through this.
Lisi’s E8 theory predicts a second set of elementary particles that exist in an “inner space” and which are perpendicular to those in our physical space. Interesting! I hope to write more about this in an upcoming article.
I hope this answers your questions. Please send me an email. I will be happy to collaborate with you.
I’m not trying to unify religion with science, because science will continue forever whereas religion will not. Actually, I do my best to keep religion (Bible quotes, etc.) out of my publications… though they do serve as a source of direction on occasion. But if by religion you mean spirituality then, yes, that I’m doing. I don’t consider the Principle book a religious text because if the Bible quotes are taken out of Principle of Creation it can be read as a science book, and I mostly ignore the Bible quotes.
Lisi’s theory predicts gravitons. They embed into E8 via ‘triality’, using a different form of gravity than is normally used. Please watch Lisi’s TED Talks video and the Through the Wormhole documentary for more information.
It is clear to me now from some of the comments made below that I need to correct some points about my description of my theory and how. I’m grateful for this feedback and will publish an updated paper on my website. I’m not interested in opinion, but facts and predictions.
I agree that my mapping of the four interactions is not quite DP. A few other commenters here as well as on Facebook and in private email, noted the same concern. But I am not concerned because I will change it. This is part of the learning curve. I now understand where I need to make corrections and am very grateful for the feedback.
I don’t think any of the particles are dark matter particles. I haven’t heard Lisi say that, but I just may not have seen that content.
Further, Lisi’s theory predicts a second set of elementary particles that form an “inner space” and which are perpendicular to the physical particles that are in physical space. I hope to write about this in a future article.
Thank you for this remarkable and insightful paper on a complex God.
“Teilhard de Chardin’s ontology provides us with a much needed revision of the basic ontology underpinning Western religion. He provides us with the conceptual bridge needed to bring science and religion together into one unified system of thought, which also is one of the goals of Divine Principle. Moreover Divine Principle itself is completely compatible with his thought in its particle-relational understanding of existing beings. This bridge arises naturally from a conception of existing beings as complex composite beings based on many levels of relationships between particles within a being. When updated with Abrams’ thought and the developing science of complexity, we have a powerful platform from which to develop Divine Principle as a religious thought that can speak to the contemporary mindset.”
“Though speculative, this type of thinking gives us a very different view of God. We find a complex and intimate God composed of many parts and inextricably connected to us and all things, where we participate together with God regardless of race, gender, or even religion. Participation does not even depend on belief.”
We can simplify the three object entities (isosphere, biosphere, noosphere) of Teilhard de Chardin’s model as inanimate, animate and thought. Their interaction — giving and receiving action — and their union resembles the Unification ontology. Why does participation not depend upon belief ?
Thanks for the plug, Robert. To answer your question in brief: just the fact of our birth and existence means we are participating in the universe and the processes within it. Our conscious understanding or even our belief concerning those processes do not affect such participation.
In physical chemistry, the van der Waals forces, named after Dutch scientist Johannes Diderik van der Waals, are the residual attractive or repulsive forces between molecules or atomic groups that do not arise from covalent bonds, nor ionic bonds. It can be shown that van der Waals forces are of the same origin as the Casimir effect, arising from quantum interactions with the zero-point field. The resulting van der Waals forces can be attractive or repulsive.
Perhaps Teilhard de Chardin would posit that emergent consciousness is a universal molecular (particle) characteristic resembling van der Waals (E8 group) forces. Concerning those processes our participation in the universe is not dependent upon conscious (noosphere) understanding or even our belief.
I would prefer DP-based Four Position Foundation diagrams not to have their fundamental nature altered. The ones used here just have a fuzzy heart-circulation graphic in the middle and ignore the illustration of the reciprocal dynamic of the Origin and Union and also subject and object.
Reinterpreting these things and expressing them as a generic four arrows in one-way circulation around a red heart is a slippery slope to eventually having a Four Position Foundation that is not even recognisable.
My name is Didier Guignard. I am French. My original education is as an electrical engineer (E.S.E. “école supérieure d’électricité” or often called SUPELEC). But it is only by the end of 2007 that I gained a new interest in connecting science and the Principle. This led me in 2013 to the creation of “Club Science” where I gather scientists from different fields as well as students and people who are just deeply interested into science.
Since already a few years, I was struck by the idea of the existence of the four types of interaction. But rather than associating them with a four position foundation, I looked more for a connection with the four types of love. Since these interactions are forces, I do not connect them with positions but rather with give and take actions. Then the idea is rather that universal gravitation is associated with Parent-Child relationship which is the fondamental love. Also gravitation defines the vertical line which is unique and corresponds spiritually to vertical relationship such as God to human being, Mind and Body. What is a vertical interaction in the spiritual sense? It is a stable, unidirectional and orderly relationship in which subject and object partners are similar. (God made man in His image, body ressembles the mind)
On the other hand, electromagnetism could be rather compared to love between husband and wife, it is a Yang-Yin relationship where subject and object partners are more complementary than similar. It is a very dynamic and creative relationship and can work in all kinds of “horizontal” directions and can be attractive as well as repulsive.
And to me the strong force is a purely binding force like gravitation and the weak force more connected with electromagnetism which can be as well repulsive. The strong force is stabilizing the atom while the weak force is more separating.
However, if I consider the particles associated with these four forces, I have been always struck by similarities between God and the photon. As you mentioned, the photon is the particle of light and God is often compared to light or the Sun. The Sun is not the only source of light but of heat, which respectively symbolize Truth and Love. A photon has energy but no mass, traveling at the speed of light, it is out of time although it has interactions within time. This makes the photon a perfect physical symbol of God.
But I do not think that it is easy to associate the four types of boson particles into a four position foundation. Putting the strong force and the weak force as subject and object partners creating gravitation does not seem to fit any reality. All this thinking is more intuitive than mathematical. I was always more interested in physics than in mathematics although it is fascinating to see how the physical world obeys mathematical laws. As a student, I studied a lot of mathematics, however at that time, such things as group theory applied to physics was not really taught even at the university. Therefore, I have only a vague idea about the Lie group.
I would be very interested in your comments on my writing.
Thank you for your comments. Please get in touch by sending me an email. I will be happy to collaborate with you.
I was wondering if you’ve thought about the idea of E8xE8, David Gross’s shadow universe in heterotic string theory, as a model of the physical world/spiritual world system? It would seem to contain some features which would fit very well.
And then also, I would have put gravity in the God position in the 4PF, because it is the one that remains longest when you go up in temperature or back in time in the early universe. In fact, it’s still not been possible to cause it to break off from the original superforce, which I would guess we can identify with Universal Prime Force.
Thank you, Alison.
I will be happy to collaborate with you. Please get in touch via email.