Ontos Origo

Ontos Origo

The phenomenal geometry of the egocentric reference system.

The invisible coordinate system and "Origio" as the “Subject”.

The subject makes the image of space possible. Space as an image is a coordinate system with invisible lines that form a grid pattern in the shape of a three-dimensional figure with length, width, and height lines that extend from the point in the coordinate system where one imagines oneself to be. The place where thought in space experiences this coordinate system is called the zero point or “origio”.

When thought moves in space, it appears as the origin shifting position relative to the coordinate system of the space.

The coordinate system is always experienced as a place where information is received, and the received information becomes a memory that links the received location to the information at a moment in time about what happened, when, how, and if it happened together with someone who was present and can recall simultaneous information about the event.. We experience reality from the origin point in this coordinate system, but memory, which cannot be separated from the map of the coordinate system, uses the three-dimensional image of the reality map to orient itself within the spatial coordinate system. Memory is set in a sequential linear flow, but it is received in the form of discrete pieces of location information. This happens in an interacting way that is so frequent that it is perceived as a moving film sequence that lingers as a trailing image of events in the order it was received. So reality is essentially a continuous reception of the interactions of spatial information with the origin point in the coordinate system, and this origin perceives the impressions of these interactions as reality.

The interaction of reality stays as location information that makes it possible to relive the content in the form of the place, time, and what happened, and in what way it happened.

In the ongoing experienced reality, there is no distance to the information when it is received, but it is received as differences in positions within the coordinate system.

Origin cannot position itself in thought outside the coordinate system and experience the coordinate system externally, because for the three-dimensional system it happens as a conception of lines that actually aren’t visible. The same goes for the origio itself, where experiences are received. Origio can indeed be imagined in memory, but only as the changing, constantly interacting image of reality from the zero point that experiences reality. So it is not possible to get behind the origin that imagines origio, since this origin is the one that experiences reality as the subject.

Life goes on in the immediate impression, but it is revived in the memory of reality with a certain resonance in the lag in processing the information, in the form of the origin reacting to the impressions afterward.

All points of information interact in the network we call reality, which occurs in interacting exposing images that give reality its form as a single coordinate system experienced by the origin.
Origio is not visible, but it is the origio that sees.
The lines of the coordinate system are not visible, but it is the origin that experiences the invisible coordinate system as the subject.

When the origin/subject searches in memory images for the origin/subject itself, the strange thing happens that the attempt fails, as it is not possible to go behind a representation of the origio/subject.
It is, of course, possible in memory to imagine the place and time when the origin received the information, and it is even possible to form a representation of the cluster of information that makes up the being/space where the information is received, but it is the origin/subject/space that receives and sends the information in a sequential alternation of states that bends the entire coordinate system back to the origin/subject/space.

Origio can only see. Origio can only be seen as the space.

Space and time are not fixed points in themselves, but interacting viewpoints. We are born with the "coordinate system" built in in order to be able to sort sensory impressions at all.

In direct experience, there is no distance to the information. But in order to process it, a resonance or a lag occurs. Memory becomes the map we use to orient ourselves backward in the linear flow.

The experiencing subject can never become an object in its own experience.

When the subject tries to remember "itself" in a situation, in memory there is really only the environment, the body, the thoughts, and the context—that is, the cluster of information that was in front of the Origio at that moment. The subject can never photograph the camera taking the picture.

When the subject (Origio) realizes that it cannot find itself as an isolated thing in the coordinate system, the dualism between "origin" and "coordinate system" collapses. The only way the Origio manifests itself is through the

there is a room at all. The origio and the room become two sides of the same coin. Without the room, no origio. Without origio, no room. The whole coordinate system "bends back" to the zero point.

If Origio tries to imagine itself, it can only do so as the invisible being represented by the invisible space.

The perceived reality then occurs as a representation in the form of Origo's own sequential interactions, which appear as reality but in fact are just the subject's/Origo's state changes.

The sequential state changes take place in the interplay between what we know as dreamless deep sleep and the various forms of information in consciousness.

Separate beings are phenomenal concepts, so there is no separation between the absolute existence of the origin/subject, and there are no fixed parts in the origin/subject itself.
Everything is one and indivisible – The origin and space appear phenomenally as an "organic unit," but the character of the absolute origin/subject is dynamic in its state changes.

The Assumption of 'Origio' as an Ontological Origin Starting Point

This is not a philosophical conclusion but an examination of a philosophical assumption about what must underlie even the possibility of making any assumption about anything at all.

Non-existence is an impossible starting point. Instead, we must begin our thinking from the premise that something necessarily must exist. This something can be assumed to be something Absolute, non-binary, still existing but with the faculty of perception as an inherent nature for perception to be possible at all. An absolute distantless existence without parts, which is not an object but the unchanging enduring Being fundamentally is a Proto-subject that exists. An 'Ontos Origo' that we can only assume as a premise and as fundamental existence, and which no one can stand outside of, have a relation to, or perceive, because it is this that makes perception possible, and which is also not a person since a person is only the name of a human phenomenal being.

2 If there is a potential sensationfaculty, this could, through momentum, eventually possibly lead to realization in a Pure Ontological Oscillation, so to speak..

This could happen through an impulse of binary momentum that changes the state from capacity for perception to a state of actualized consciousness.

This could then be perceived as a change in motion, since change is the only thing that is potentially possible to experience.

A change in motion can then be a change of state that can be described in binary terms at the quantum level. What is then experienced is a continuum of displacement, but this really means that we live in the result of the consequences of quantized sequential jumps that disguise themselves as smooth motion in the experience of the consciousness of reality.

Existence then becomes a potentially stable state, which is what an absolutely unchanging Being is. Its essence can then be the ability to feel the drive toward actualization which occurs in a momentary binary phenomenal exposure that gives the experience of change as reality.

3 Then we have the following chain with Existence, Essence, and the Phenomenon as a result, and a reality that can only be experienced in the form of differences from various perspectives within the same reality. Reality is the hope we believe in when facing the reality’s possibility for good mutual relationships with the perceiver’s effective constantly overlapping angles of reality.

But the real relationship lies in the viewer's encounter with itself in reality as the difference of many phenomenal angles.

Then “matter” is really just the constantly ongoing frequency or rhythm in these sequential phenomenal leaps in the experience of resistance and weight, which, through inertia, linger as memories for recognition. If everything is movement ("vibration"), then what we call matter is just energy "moving" at a specific pace or density, and there must be an Absolute Existence whose poles lie between potential and realization in the continuous rhythm change that occurs nonstop without anyone being able to look back and explain how it works but just can only look at the phenomenon of time, and time is then just our human interpretation based on recognition in memory and planning, which also relies on the memory of knowledge about what might possibly happen.

4 You can’t feel darkness. You can’t feel silence. You can’t perceive what has been numbed. You can’t sense the scentless. You can’t balance weightlessness. It’s impossible to think about the unthinkable. You can’t think without existing. You can’t feel without sensation. Something Absolute must exist with sensation as an inherent nature for sensation to persist. An absolute existence that mechanically expresses the phenomenon to get an experience of anything at all out of pure predestined necessity rather than free will, through a curvature of spacetime back to itself in the form of the image of the universe, which then is no longer a mystery, where all real experience lies as the recurring phenomenal reality.

About the unthinkable: It’s impossible to think without existing. It’s impossible to feel without sensation. Something Absolute must exist with the capacity for sensation as an inherent nature for feeling to become reality. An absolute existence that mechanically expresses the phenomenon to get an experience of anything at all out of pure predetermined necessity rather than free will, through a bending of spacetime back onto itself in the form of the image of the universe, which then is no longer a mystery, where all real experience lies as the recurring phenomenal reality..

Stefan Hlatky made a heroic breakthrough when he replaced materialism's/Buddhism's 'nothingness' with an unchanging enduring Being. But he fell into a classic philosophical trap: he projected phenomenal properties (parts, senses, relations, spatial extension) directly onto the Absolute. He created a 'Monolithic Organism.'

The category mistake: Hlatky's OES: The Absolute has parts (senses) → The parts have boundaries → Boundaries require relations → The Absolute becomes relative.

The critique: An organism is a structure, a form. If the Absolute vibrates or has internal parts that move, it is no longer absolute. Hlatky smuggled in the Phenomenon (level 03) into Existence (level 01).

With this three-part scheme (Existence → Essence → Phenomenon), we can now distill Parmenides, Hlatky, and Wheeler in a way that doesn't collapse into pantheism or dualism.

1. Parmenides is restored at Level 01 (Existence) Parmenides was right: Being is absolute, indivisible, and dimensionless. AEF removes Hlatky's cosmic organism from this level. There are no human senses, no galaxies, no "parts in Luleå or on the Moon". It is a pure, non-binary quantity: One (1). It is "light," contentless, and unconditional.

2. Hlatky is rescued and moved to Level 02 (Essence) Hlatky's unique contribution was the idea of consciousness as the fundamental cause. In AEF, this is reformulated: Essence is not an "already realized self-consciousness" (which would require an object to be aware of), but the faculty of perception as an inherent potential of Existence. The difference that makes a difference: Essence is a capacity, not a property. A property requires a composite organism; a capacity can rest undivided in the dimensionless Primal Subject.

3. Wheeler and Bateson Explain Level 03 (Phenomenon)

The faculty of perception (the Essence) cannot perceive itself in emptiness. It can only perceive difference.

For perception to be realized, a field of tension must arise. This field of tension is the Phenomenon (the Universe).

This is Wheeler's 'It from bit.' The universe is not a collection of 'things' (as Hlatky assumed), but a sequential projection of binary differences.

Matter and time arise sequentially because perception requires change in order to register anything at all. Memory does not belong to the Absolute; memory only arises in the sequences of the phenomenon.

Origin and Development

Topos (τόπος): Greek word meaning "place" or "location." Topikos (τοπικός): A Greek adjective meaning "local" or "belonging to a place." Topica: The Roman philosopher Cicero borrowed the word into Latin (topica) as a name for the study of how to find arguments.

Topic (English): The word made its way into English in the 1560s via Aristotle's famous work Topica (which deals with logic and argumentation).

In the 18th century, the meaning shifted to refer to the specific subject one is talking or writing about. The logical connection That a 'place' became a 'subject' comes from ancient rhetoric. When speakers were looking for arguments, they used memory techniques and mental lists—so-called topoi (common places/points). A topic was therefore originally the 'place' in the mind from which one drew one's arguments.

The 'doorway effect' in cognitive psychology is a well-known phenomenon showing that our memory is deeply rooted in the physical environment. The scientific term for this is location-dependent memory or context-dependent memory.

Here is an analysis of the phenomenon and the philosophical connection to how language objectifies space and humans:

The Doorway Effect:

The spatial anchoring of memory When you walk into a room to get something but forget what it is as soon as you pass the doorway, it's because of how the brain organizes information.

Event Horizons: The brain works like a movie editor. When you move from one room to another, the brain creates a new "scene" or event horizon.

Clearing Working Memory: The information that was important in the previous room (e.g., "I’m going to get the scissors") is sorted out or stored by the brain to make room for the new environment's impressions.

The threshold functions as a physical and mental cut.
Language as an objectification of space and humans

Language is an "objectification of the spatial relationships between places" and is completely in line with modern cognitive linguistics and spatial cognition.

Language is fundamentally spatial

Humans cannot think about abstract concepts without borrowing words from the physical world. We almost always use spatial metaphors to describe time, emotions, and relationships:

Time as space: We put things behind us, look forward to the future, or take a break between two events.

Status as height: Someone climbs up in their career or feels down.

Relationships as distance: We can be close to each other or drift apart.

Language thus transforms (objectifies) abstract thoughts into concrete, geographical positions in an imagined space.

The Objectification of Humans: (When, Where, and How) When information is received, it isn’t stored as a plain text file in the brain. It’s stored as an episodic experience. The human experience is objectified because we later fixate ourselves as an object in a specific coordinate of time and space: Where: The physical environment (the room, the light, the furniture). When: The temporal context (which we usually measure by how we move through time). How: The body’s physical state and sensory impressions at that exact moment. When we talk about a memory, language recreates this geography. You don’t just say "I learned X," but linguistically and mentally, you place yourself in the context: "I was sitting at the kitchen table when I realized that...".

Humans thus become a central point (the origin) in their own linguistic coordinate system, where every piece of information is locked to the physical or metaphorical place where it was received.

So how do the brain's place cells in the hippocampus work? It can be likened to a GPS for both geography and memory.

The Brain's GPS: Place Cells and the Hippocampus In 2014, the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded to John O'Keefe, May-Britt Moser, and Edvard Moser for the discovery of the brain's built-in navigation system. They found that our brain has specific nerve cells that map out the world: Place cells: These cells are found in the hippocampus (the area of the brain where short-term memories are turned into long-term memories). When you move around a room, different place cells are activated depending on exactly where you are. They act like a kind of cognitive map. Grid cells: These cells create a coordinate system (like an invisible chessboard or hexagonal grid) that tells your brain how far you've moved and in which direction.

Connection to memory:

The fascinating thing is that the hippocampus is the center for both geography and memory. When you experience something, the information isn’t stored as an abstract document, but it is “stamped” with coordinates from your place cells.

When you walk through a doorway, your grid cells and place cells signal that the coordinates have changed. The brain switches cognitive maps. Since the old memory (e.g., that you were supposed to get a pen) was fixed on the previous room’s map, it suddenly becomes hard to access when the brain has loaded the new map.

The philosophy behind how language shapes our consciousness (e.g., linguistic relativity).

Linguistic Relativity:

How language shapes our spatial awareness In cognitive linguistics, people often talk about the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis or linguistic relativity – the idea that the language we speak shapes how we think and perceive the world. This becomes extremely clear when we look at how different cultures linguistically handle space and geography.

Western languages most often use an egocentric coordinate system: We relate space to our own body: "The book is to my left," or "Go forward and turn right." If you turn around, what is "left" and "right" changes.

The subject is the origo of everything:

Languages That Force Absolute Geography There are cultures that completely lack words for "left" and "right" and instead use an absolute (geocentric) coordinate system. A well-known example is the indigenous language Guugu Yimithirr in Australia: They always use cardinal directions (north, south, east, west). They say things like: "There’s a mosquito on your north arm," or "Can you move the cup a little towards the southwest?" This means that a person who speaks Guugu Yimithirr has a constant, built-in, and absolute awareness of geography. They can’t describe an action, a memory, or a person without knowing exactly where they are in relation to the Earth’s compass.

The Objectification of Time Through Space Language is an objectification of when, where, and how information is received. Since time is invisible, language is forced to objectify time by giving it a spatial form, but how we do this varies.

Swedish/English: We see ourselves as moving forward along a line. The future is in front of us, the past is behind us. Aymara (Andes): Here, it's the opposite. The past is described as in front of the person (because we can "see" the past in our memory) and the future is behind us (because it is unknown and invisible). Kuuk Thaayorre (Australia):

They arrange time according to the cardinal directions. If they are going to lay out pictures in chronological order, they always place them from east (where the sun rises) to west (where the sun sets), no matter which way they happen to be facing. Language thus forces us to constantly translate time, existence, and human relationships into purely geographical and physical locations. This spans both pure biology and deep language philosophy.

The information we are examining. Summary: The total synthesis When you move through a room and experience the doorway effect, all the meanings of the word are intertwined: [The Place / The Room] --→ Provides physical coordinates to... | [The Subject (You)] --→ Who is the experiencer in the middle, creating... | [The Subject (The Topic)] --→ The linguistic information and memory.

You are the subject (the experiencer) who is located at a specific sub-iectum (physical ground/place), and when you express this in language it becomes a subject (a topic, a piece of information). In this way, language objectifies your physical existence into pure information. This shows how incredibly intertwined the words topic (place -> subject) and subject (ground -> experiencer -> subject) are.

The Objective reality

The opposite: The object (The thing that is thrown in front of us) Just like subject, the word object comes from the Latin world of physical movements. Ob-: Means "towards" or "in front of". Iacere: Means "to throw".

An object (obiectum) literally means "that which is thrown in front of" or "that which stands in the way."

The spatial and linguistic relationship When you move through the world, you are the subject (the underlying experiencer). Everything you encounter—a doorframe, a chair, another person—is an object that is "thrown in front of" your gaze and your senses.

Language is objectification.

When you experience something (as a subject) and then want to talk about it or remember it, you have to turn the fluid experience into words. You take your inner world and "throw it in front of you" as concrete linguistic building blocks. You turn the experience into an object. The subject is the one who sees. The object is what is seen. Language is the tool that turns subjective experiences (the memory of a room) into objective facts (information).

Immanuel Kant:

The Mind That Projects Time and Space The German philosopher Immanuel Kant did in the 18th century what he himself called a 'Copernican turn' in philosophy. Before Kant, people believed that humans were just passive recipients of the world – that space and time existed out there, and we simply registered them. Kant flipped the whole concept: Time and space aren't 'out there' in the world. They are glasses that our own subject wears in order to be able to understand anything at all.

Forms of the Senses (Forms of Intuition)
Kant thought that human consciousness has two built-in "devices" or filters: Space (for external impressions) and Time (for internal impressions).
The world in itself (Das Ding an sich): How the world really looks outside our heads we can never know. It’s a chaotic buzz of raw data.
Subject's sorting:
When this buzz hits our senses, our brain (the subject) forces the information into a coordinate system of time and space.
You can't imagine an object without it having a spatial extension (it has to exist somewhere). Nor can you imagine a thought or an event without it occurring in a sequence (before, during, after).

This is the philosophical explanation for why memory has a spatial and pictorial connection, and why information is stamped with when, where, and how. According to Kant, information cannot be received in any other way. Your brain is simply designed to organize reality geographically. When you walk through a doorway and experience 'door syndrome,' it is your built-in Kantian sense of space that reorganizes your memory files. The brain rearranges its coordinate system, closes the 'objects' of the old room, and opens the new one.

The perfect circle

When we put it all together, we see an amazing chain: The brain’s biology (Place cells): Physically maps the space in your hippocampus. Philosophy (Kant): Shows that your subject must use space and time in order to have any experience at all. Language (Etymology): When you describe this experience, you use words like topic (place) and subject (that which is the basis) as well as object (that which is thrown in front of you).

So, humans are basically creatures doomed to think, remember, and speak in geographical terms. We’re travelers in a physical space, but we’re just as much travelers in a linguistic and mental space.

This line of thought is the basis for the framework of how an indivisible subject uses spatial and geographical relations (phenomena) to be able to perceive and structure its own absolute existence as a sequential, dynamically interacting process ongoing in reality.

Thinking and our language have organized information in an order that puts the objective phenomenal material reality first. By doing this, we end up in logical dead ends (like Kant’s frustration with not reaching the "thing-in-itself" or modern science’s problem with explaining consciousness).

By simply rearranging the pieces we already have and putting the zero point of existence (Ontos Origo) first and seeing the physical world as secondary phenomena, suddenly the whole logical puzzle falls into place without having to add a single new, unfounded guess. It’s not a discovery of something new, but a structural cleaning up of what we already know.

Then there is a difference between living as a subject separate from reality and living with reality as a subject without separation.

The State-Shifting Subject

If the subject presents itself as a field of void without beginning or end, and without any content, its state-shifts between low-frequency and high-frequency states can be likened to the shifts between what we call dreamless sleep -'which no one has any experience of - and dream states, daydream states, and the waking state that the capacity for perception passes through in cycles between day and night. Everyone knows what dreamless sleep implies, but no one has any memory of having experienced this state of what we call lost consciousness. It is the capacity for perception that loses consciousness. And when the faculty of perception experiences consciousness in all its forms, it can detect when it is not being expressed in an active, communicating dialogue in reality. It’s the perceptual ability that loses consciousness. And when the sensory ability experiences consciousness in all its forms, the sensory ability can notice when it isn't expressed in active communicative dialogue in reality. We, in the sense of consciousness, then get the impression of what seems to be dead objects that don’t seem to have the ability to express any active communicative dialogue in reality.

It is easy to believe that the subjective Absolute ground has a content, for how else could it act as a field of void without beginning or end? Since the subject cannot experience itself, and if the absolute primordial subject has no content that can wave or vibrate, one can wonder how can it then present itself as a field of void without beginning or end that expresses reality as a vibrational phenomenon?

If we describe the absolute subject's expression as a "field of void," it does not mean a nihilistic emptiness (a lack of existence), but rather a formless potential. It is empty of objects, but full of abilities.

It is not a physical ability occurring in the form of a displacement of parts, because there are likely no parts within the subject. Rather, the question is whether there could be ongoing shifts in the state of being awake or not - occurring at such high frequencies and rapid shifts that it is perceived as a spatial flow-displacement in the phenomenal experience of reality. A pure modulation of the faculty of perception, in other words. Within certain philosophical schools (such as Kashmir Shaivism), this is explained by the concept of Spanda - the cosmic vibration. The Absolute is not a static, dead void, but a living, dynamic awareness. Since the absolute cannot experience itself as an object (as there are no two absolutes), it must "change" and create frequencies in order to experience existence. The vibration is therefore not a content within the void, but the subject's own inherent nature expressed in movement. Reality does not vibrate within consciousness; reality is the vibration of consciousness. Spanda is a Sanskrit word meaning "slight movement," "pulsation," or "vibration." In Wikipedia and the philosophical tradition of Kashmir Shaivism, it is described as the original, cosmic pulsation of consciousness.

What does Spanda mean?

• The Cosmic Pulse: It is the subtle, living vibration present in everything that is going on.

• Not Physical Movement: It is not a matter of displacement in space, but rather consciousness's own ability to manifest itself.

• Connection to Yoga: Within the yoga tradition, it is about becoming aware of the inner pulses, such as the breath, and uniting them with the greater rhythm of life.

Slip slidin`away

Anyone expecting to grasp what this website points to has basically missed the whole point of the page.

Anyone who sets out to grasp ontos—origo, the very essence of the subject will fail, much like a kitten trying to catch its own tail; for the nerer the destination the more it slips slidin' away, since it is the very essence of the subject that is chasing itself since the subject is absolute existence.