A New Infinity - 1

A New Infinity?

A new definition of infinity puts some long-pondered questions

in a new light, and provides a startling look at reality.
c 2020 by Peter Francis Dziuban

Abstract

Surprisingly, something extremely important—and revealing—concerning infinity has been

largely overlooked. This article discusses a “new” definition of infinity that deserves more

thorough investigation by scientists, mathematicians and philosophers.

The term infinity as generally understood today, is for the most part derived from, or related

to, finity. Traditionally, infinity has been considered as an endless finity, or as an indefinite

finity, or an unlimited finity. The point is that, in almost every case, this traditional infinity

starts with finity, and infinity is said to be an endless or indefinite version of that.

In contrast, there is another, entirely different definition that can be found in the root or core

meaning of the word itself. In-finity. The prefix “in” is usually taken to mean not. But watch

what happens when the meaning of not is pushed just a bit further, to also mean no. On this

basis, infinity does not mean an endless or indefinite finity. It means no finity whatsoever.

Perhaps the best way to summarize the distinction is to say that the traditional infinity in

some way always involves or co-exists with number, with measurement, with size, with finity—

even if that finity is extended beyond the capacity of human thought to grasp. In contrast, the

“new” infinity has nothing to do with finity—but is still undeniably present and real, as will be

shown. It is an infinity that is not merely, as the Greek philosopher Plotinus said, “beyond

number,” but preclusive of numbers. That’s the key. It is an infinity that leaves no possibility of
A New Infinity - 2

mathematics—yet which may answer some of the deeper mathematical questions.

This article does not attempt to provide an historical analysis or challenge the utility of the

other “infinities” as they are currently understood in finite human experience, especially in

mathematics. This is simply an examination of infinity when taken to mean no finity

whatsoever. Not only does this infinity not co-exist with any finity; it is, again, preclusive of all

finity. It is an infinity that, itself, is All. It leaves no finite form or quantity—not even any finite

mental forms, thus no finite thinking, or attempts at verbal description—yet we do our best under

the seeming finite limitations of words and thoughts.

While one cannot think or mentally grasp what this infinity is, one most definitely can think

about what such an infinity means, and what its implications are. It provides an entirely new

basis from which to consider Life’s biggest questions, and offers a startling new look at what

might be called ultimate Reality.

What is infinity?

Generally speaking, it traditionally has been assumed that infinity refers to an extreme

amount. As said above, it has been assumed that infinity is essentially an endless finity—a

never-ending extension of counting or measurement, whether in the direction of bigness, or

smallness.

While this is an oversimplification, one concept of the traditional infinity is often explained

thus: you start with a finite number, say, the number 1—and you always can add another 1 to it.

Then you have 2, and you can add another 1, which makes 3, and so on, endlessly. Another

example would be the size of the stellar universe, which, some theorize, may extend endlessly—

light year after light year, into measurable physical space.

A New Infinity - 3

At the micro level, we go in the direction of smallness. We say “infinitesimal,” referring

to that which is endlessly divisible. Instead of adding a 1 forever, you divide 1 in half. Then you

take half of one of the halves. Then, at least theoretically, you always can take half of that half,

and so on, endlessly—and that, supposedly, also is infinity.

However, it can just as readily be argued that none of this is necessarily true. From

another perspective, infinity really is not an endless finity.

To see why, first consider what is meant by finite.

Finite comes from the words finire or finis, meaning finish, or end. If something is finite,

it is possible to determine where it ends or begins. That which is finite has some type of limit or

boundary; it has a measurable, observable form or amount. You can in some way quantify it, or

otherwise size it up. Of course, the realm of finity is the realm of humanity and the physical,

material universe, and also the realm of science. That which is finite, observable and

measurable, is the workplace of the scientific method.

To bring out the contrast, now look closely once more at the word infinity.

It has been staring us in the face the entire time, but we haven’t seen it.

In-finity.

Since the prefix in- means no, or not, then in its most basic root meaning, infinity actually

can be said to mean no finity.

In its purest, simplest meaning, infinity is not a big, endless finity.

No finity means precisely what it says—no finity whatsoever—and that’s the all-

important distinction that needs more scrutiny.

On this basis, infinity is not an endlessly large quantity. It’s no quantity.

Defined in this way, infinity doesn’t mean endless counting; it means no counting.
A New Infinity - 4

Infinity is not extremely long measurement; it is the absence of measurement. Infinity, no-finity,

is the complete absence of amount, size, and all quantifying. Infinity is not even an endlessly

repeating loop as often symbolized. Infinity is the utter non-occurrence of all finity—having

absolutely no observable, measurable form.

Infinity also is the complete absence of time. Infinity does not mean forever in time.

Infinity, no-finity, can involve no time-processes—for any amount of time would be measurable,

too.

Regardless of what we all may have been taught, there’s no getting around it. This is

what in-finity or no-finity literally means.

Again, we have traditionally always started out with finity, and assumed infinity is an

endless version of that. What if it’s not? What if true infinity is entirely different? We always

have attempted to combine or mix finity, which means measurable—with infinity, which means

measure-less. That’s impossible.

It was said earlier that this new infinity has no relationship to finity—yet there is a

reference to finity in its very definition as “no finity”—which certainly sounds contradictory. It

also could be argued that the designation of infinity as no-finity is a “negative” definition, in that

it uses finity as a reference point and says infinity is not that. It implies infinity only can be

known relatively, and thus requires the existence of finity.

On the other hand, infinity could be called One, All, Wholeness, Absolute, and other

terms, which are not negative. However, even these are somewhat relative because they are

conceptual and in the realm of words. Unfortunately, the only way infinity can be discussed here

is by using words and thoughts. This is like trying to play the game of the Absolute on a relative

field; attempting to convey the Absolute, but being forced to use words and thoughts, which are
A New Infinity - 5

tools of the relative. So we do our best under the seeming limitations of relative words.

Because it has been accepted that infinity is a vast extension of finity, it naturally has

been assumed (particularly in mathematics) that the two states co-mingle—but on this new basis,

they do not. No-finity and finity cannot be mixed. If using the traditional definition of

mathematics, one might assume the finite could be a subset of, or included in, the infinite. Yet

that which has absolutely no finity, cannot be inclusive of finity. They are mutually exclusive.

The earlier examples of infinity as endlessly large or small refer to extremes, yes. And

these may be beyond the capacity of human thought to fully grasp. However, such an endlessly

ongoing finity is vastly different from no finity whatsoever. To endlessly add or endlessly divide

still involves the finite, for these involve at least some degree of finite measurement or amount.

That is not the same as utterly measureless, amount-less. Infinity, no-finity, has no degrees of

finity.

It would be naïve to mentally dismiss this because it seems trivial, or feels like semantic

nit-picking. Understandably, there may be a reluctance to drop the old notion of infinity because

this new definition now competes with a long-accepted concept used in our mathematical,

scientific, and philosophical thinking.

But—what if the only thing that has been taken away is a misconception, an obstacle in

thought—and now a door has opened to many exciting new insights?

The value and excitement of this new infinity, or un-finity, is that it indicates a sudden

new alternative to endless finity—a new vantage point, or platform, so to speak—from which to

think about big questions. It enables one to step completely outside the box of finity and “see” or

discern from an entirely new perspective. This new infinity also clearly, undeniably, indicates

another realm or reality, one that exists entirely independent of the world of finity. In one sense,
A New Infinity - 6

it’s as if this infinity were the “ultimate monism,” yet is eminently practical because it appears to

embrace or include endless forms of finity.

Sudden insights about stubborn questions

Here are just a few examples of how a definition of infinity as measureless provides a

new way to view some of our toughest, long-pondered questions.

Does this new infinity answer the long-standing question of whether the stellar universe

is finite or infinite? 1 Yes. It does clearly show that the stellar universe is finite, due to its being

partly measurable. It makes no difference that the universe appears to be expanding endlessly in

size; that does not mean it is infinite. Were the universe truly infinite, there would be nothing

that could be measured at all—not even partly (on that basis there wouldn’t even be a stellar

universe). Unceremoniously, this long unyielding question is answered not by making another

dramatic scientific discovery about the universe. The answer comes from an entirely different

direction—simply from a wider-perspective definition of the word infinite.

As infinity has no measurement whatsoever, infinity therefore is size-less.

As infinity is size-less, it cannot be true of a stellar universe that appears to be expanding,

because expansion deals exclusively with an increase in measurable size. The universe may

appear to extend endlessly in space, and perhaps without a border, but that means it would be

endlessly or indefinitely finite—which is a far cry from no finity whatsoever, or infinite. One

always could measure the universe’s extension in finite portions, no matter how far the extension

were to go, and regardless of the universe’s shape and borders (or lack thereof).

It could be argued that a new definition of infinity merely changes the terminology—but

1
Janna Levin How the Universe Got Its Spots (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ 2002) pp. 1-15.
A New Infinity - 7

still doesn’t address the issue—whether the universe extends endlessly or not. Now, rather than

wondering if the universe is infinite, we wonder if it’s endlessly finite. (Infinity actually answers

that question in a new way, too, as will be shown later.)

This brings up an essential distinction. The finite sense of endless and the infinite

meaning of endless are as different as night and day. The finite sense of endless means an

extension or continuum, a partly measurable quantity or size that continues forever, without

ending the extension. In contrast, the infinite meaning of endless is no extension at all. The fact

that infinity has nothing to measure, no measurable extension in the first place, is the same as

saying infinity has no finite beginning. As infinity has no beginning, then it certainly can’t have

an ending. In this sense, infinity is both endless and beginning-less.

There is a similar distinction for the infinite meaning of measureless. It does not mean

that which is so large, vast or boundless that it is immeasurable. It means having nothing to

measure in the first place.

When going in the micro direction, the universe is finite and not infinite for the same

reason. The universe is finite because it could be sub-divided into countless portions of finite

size. In contrast, the fact that infinity has no size or amount, leaves no size that could be divided

and sub-divided.

Infinity, having absolutely no size, no amount, is by definition, indivisible, irreducible.

That which has no quantity in the first place, simply cannot be divided or reduced—and

this is the true meaning of irreducible. Only in-finity, no-finity, is truly indivisible or irreducible.

The true irreducibility of infinity puts new light on science’s long-sought “last irreducible

particle.” Irreducible really does not mean achieving reduction up to a certain point, beyond

which one can go no further. Why? That still involves some reduction—which is entirely
A New Infinity - 8

different from true irreducibility, which means having nothing to reduce.

As long as one is dealing in the realm of finity, there is no such a thing as a “last”

reduction, because one always could take half of that half—at least theoretically. Whatever

particle or quantity one is speaking of, potentially it could be reduced again. At the current time,

it appears at the quantum level that there are discrete units incapable of further reduction. But

who is to say some subsequent discovery won’t be made? The very fact that one is dealing with

finity would indicate one can go on reducing endlessly.

Infinity is a synonym for being

A new definition for infinity as absolutely measureless may be semantically or

technically correct—but is it really important? Science, for example, deals entirely in numbers

and measurement—of matter, time and space.

So of what value is a new infinity that has nothing to do with measurable matter, time or

space? The new infinity’s value is that it is all that is truly present.

More importantly, only infinity is present.

The world of finity, of measurable matter, time and space, never is truly present.

Recall the point made earlier—that infinity not only has no physical size or length—

infinity has no length in time. The implications of this are fascinating, the more one sees what it

means.

Again, infinity does not mean forever in time, or unaffected by time—but is the utter

absence of time. Infinity is the preclusion, the non-occurrence of time, and any time-processes,

because any amount of time would be measurable. The fact that infinity is the absence of time,

or is time-less, makes infinity synonymous with being, that which is present, or what could be
A New Infinity - 9

called the present.

You can conduct your own thought-experiment of sorts as you think this through.

Infinity is identical to being because just as infinity has no time measurement, neither does

being.

Being means having existence, or present. Being means is.

In the definition of being, or the present, or is, there is absolutely no provision for any

passage of time. Being, which is a state of pure is, doesn’t involve so much as a nanosecond of

was or will be. The word was means no-longer-being, and will be means not-yet-being—neither

of which even remotely resembles being.

Being is strictly present tense only—wherein time doesn’t occur.

Being is the absence of time, exactly as infinity is the absence of time.

One also notices that, just as being never is time—time never is being.

On the level of the observing human mind, it seems as if time never stops passing,

flowing, moving on. Physics tells us that time functions relative to the one that is observing

time. More recent developments indicate that time may not even flow. Regardless, in the

everyday world, that which the human mind experiences as “time,” by its very definition, is not

the present. Time never seems to stop moving or passing on, to be, to be what is, to be present.

Time is inseparable from a past, what-is-not-present-anymore, and a future, what-is-not-present-

yet. Time, and everything that appears to occur in its flow, is literally what-is-not-present.

The point is this: as time itself never is present, all phenomena that supposedly occur and

are observed in time, equally never are present.

It would appear that every last particle of the observable stellar universe, even at its

smallest level, seems to function and have its basis in constantly moving, never-present time.
A New Infinity - 10

Even at the level of energy, every bit of the universe appears to be vibrating, moving; it never

stops passing on in time, or not-being, to genuinely be. It means the entire phenomenal universe

never is present. What’s more, it takes time to observe the universe. The entire functioning of

the very human thinking, sensing mind that claims to observe that universe equally has its basis

only in never-present time. The entire activity of the mind equally never is present.

Only being is present.

A doubting thought may come, “Don’t tell me the things that my mind senses in the

universe aren’t present or aren’t being. I sense this page right now. I sense the planet earth right

now. I see it now, and I even could reach down and touch it now—so don’t tell me the page, the

earth, and all those sensations aren’t genuinely present.”

Look more closely. For anything in your entire universe, the moment you sense it by

way of a visual image, a tactile feeling, or any other sensation—what’s really happening? Those

particular sensations are constantly shifting, changing and passing on, never to return again. It

seems each sensation is instantly replaced by another new visual or tactile sensation, and another,

and another, non-stop.

They’re like the moving frames of film in an old-style movie projector. The specific

image and sense of touch that you had of this page a few seconds ago are gone, already having

been replaced by the fleeting image and touch being experienced at this moment in passing time,

and on and on. This applies to every thing that is sensed in the universe—including the entire

spatial universe itself. None of it ever stops moving on, or not-being, to be. In its essence, it all

would be a state of vibration, always moving or passing on in time. All of it always is fleeting,

passing away, and not being—or being “not.” Shocking as it may sound, the entirety of the

“universe” would be just so much non-presence!

A New Infinity - 11

Again, only being is truly present.

Being does not really co-exist with time, though it seems to

Interestingly, if one starts out with the typical human presumption that there is time, one

assumes there are both time and being. In contrast, when one starts or perceives from the

perspective of being, one can see that there are not both being and time!

From the standpoint of being, being does not co-exist with time, non-being.

There is only being. Why?

There is absolutely no point at which being can be said to stop being, and where another

state, one of time or not-being starts. Think it through—how could not-being start? It’s a

contradiction. Not-being can’t start or get its foot in the door anywhere because it’s not being. It

literally doesn’t exist; it can’t occur. Only being can be—and it is alone in its presence.

This is clear only when starting from the premise of being, and not time—something that

time-based human thinking never does. And shouldn’t one start from the premise of being and

not time—since only being is being, is present, to be a valid premise?

In response, Post-modern philosophers may cite the binary or dual nature of mind or

thought, wherein every so-called absolute term can be said to have an opposite. It would be

argued that being is not alone, but can be said to have an opposite, non-being. That may seem to

be true conceptually, in the realm of thinking, but not in actuality. Such binary arguments hold

good for many aspects of the dual realm of mind (hot/cold, dark/light, etc.) but not for being. To

say non-being can be some kind of opposite would be a perfect contradiction, because if non-

being could have such a status, it would exist as such, and thus wouldn’t be non-being.

The Newtonian view of time, which was accepted for centuries, said that time moved at a
A New Infinity - 12

fixed, absolute rate. This later was refuted by Einstein, who demonstrated that time doesn’t

move at a fixed rate, but seems to move at a speed that is relative to the speed of the one who is

observing time.

From the premise of being, one now can see that time is not relative. Time takes on an

“absolute,” status again, but in a new way. From the standpoint of being, time is absolute in that

it absolutely never is present. From the premise of being, time isn’t relative to anything because

in being, time never occurs!

Another inevitable conclusion this leads to is that, just as infinity has no measurable size,

being has no size. Just as infinity has no spatial measurement, neither does being.

There is absolutely no space or dimension in being, in the present. Being, the present, is

not present at all points in physical space. Being does not “fill” or occupy space. Why?

If there were space in being, it would be possible to move from point A here, to point B,

over there. But movement would involve time—of which there is none in being. The instant

one has movement in time, one has left being. To speak of movement in space, thus time, is to

speak of what-is-not-being, instead of what-is-being.

Pure being, the present, is the absence of time, which also is the absence of measurable

space or dimension. In other words, being is present as infinity.

This new infinity forces us to redefine what is called “the present”—which is typically

assumed to mean “everywhere present” or being present at all points in space, all points of

dimension. The infinity that the present, pure being, is, involves no space, no dimension. Most

emphatically, this infinite-present, pure being, is not the same as “presentism.” Presentism is

described by some philosophers as meaning a sliver of time, a momentary or fleeting “now-

instant,” in time’s flow from past to future. The infinite-present is not sandwiched between past
A New Infinity - 13

and future time. As only the infinite-present, pure being, is what is being, and is the absence of

time, then it does not permit or co-exist with any time. Thus the infinite-present is not between

past and future, but is the utter preclusion of past and future, all time.

That which is truly present—being, infinity—involves no time, no space, no matter, no

change. As being is timeless, spaceless, quantity-less—then being, like infinity, is irreducible.

So, being makes clear that the last, truly irreducible “something” we’ve been seeking isn’t a

quantum particle, string, or other form, but is being, itself.

The fact that infinity, being, is measureless and timeless, of course means it is

unobservable and un-test-able—and therefore unacceptable in scientific experimentation. But

being’s infinity undeniably indicates an ever-present state, vastly different from never-present

time and finity. The infinity of being is clean and simple—an eternal absolute standing present

outside of time, cause and effect. Infinite being never wavers or varies, never is random—rather

than a finite state of incessant change and variability in which everything is relative to everything

else.

Could infinity and being be synonyms for reality?

The infinity of being also puts new light on what could be called reality.

The un-finite nature of being cannot be dismissed or ignored when it comes to discerning

reality. Ever-elusive as being seems, science should not leave it completely out of consideration

just because being isn’t observable or measurable, and has no form. Where is it written that

reality must have a finite form?

If one ignores being—in fact, if that which truly is being is not one’s starting point or

premise—it can only mean one is dealing with that which is not being. To deal with that which
A New Infinity - 14

is not being (that which is time-based), would be dealing with that which never is truly present.

If something never is truly present (all time-based, finite phenomena) and has no real

being—how could it honestly have any connection to reality? That which has no true presence,

no present-ness, could not be reality.

To be reality, reality at least has to be.

Not to belabor the point, but if something isn’t specifically present, if it isn’t really being,

then it certainly isn’t being real. Whatever the “ultimate reality” of life or existence is, doesn’t it

have to truly exist and be present?

There is a definite reason why being up until now has had no significance to the human

mind in its conduct of science. It is because science is all about proving, and there is nothing

observable, measurable, knowable or provable about being’s measureless infinity. Being has no

provable finite form. Meanwhile, the thinking, sensing human mind is entirely finite, and deals

only in finite form. So, to the sensing mind, in which everything has a form, being’s absence of

form makes being “invisible” to the mind. To the sensing mind, it seems formless being is

“nothing” or non-existent—thus scientifically useless.

Now put the shoe on the other foot. Exactly what is the credibility of the very thinking,

sensing mind itself that declares being to be useless? That very mind itself senses, thinks, and

functions only in time, only in non-being—thus it would be the mind’s entire activity that never

is present. How can a thinking, sensing mind whose activity never really is, legitimately set

itself up as the judge of what really is?

As all mind activity never is present, where does that leave you? It would seem there is

more to you than just finite sensing and thinking that occur in time. Apparently, being must have

something to do with you—as evidenced by the fact that this reality of being can somehow ring
A New Infinity - 15

true to you right here, now, as these pages are being read. The only one being present to whom

being can ring true is being itself—so being must in some way be you.

Time certainly can’t know there is being. If you were nothing but the constant movement

of a sensing, thinking mind in time’s never-present flow—nothing but a time stream—you would

have no awareness, no reference point for being, and this would be unintelligible to you. It is

only against the backdrop of being, or an unchanging eternal presence, that all time-phenomena

can be seen as non-presence.

It is thanks entirely to being that one is not limited to the level of time and form that

appear to the sensing human mind. The fact that being is infinite, present outside of time and

form, doesn’t “wipe you out.” It indicates there is something about you that is truly eternal,

immortal. Suddenly, the thinking, sensing mind isn’t the only game in town.

It is not possible to take up the discussion in this brief article—but the difference between

being and the mind is the same as the difference between infinity and the mind. All mind-

activity and mental phenomena of thinking, sensations, emotions, would be finite. All time-

activity of the mind would be a constantly changing process. The infinity of being is a

changeless presence.

Every experience of the sensing mind—all of its sensations, all its measurements, even

all its thoughts and conclusions—all occur in time and are finite. As all mind activity is finite, it

is in some way potentially quantifiable; thus all mind activity is potentially reducible to data. If

you were limited to only the level of the mind, then you, too, would be part of the data itself!

How can data discern anything about other data? Data doesn’t know anything.

To say pure infinite being is timeless and preclusive of all finity—seems especially

paradoxical. After all, it requires finite time and finite words to even say there is no time, no
A New Infinity - 16

finity. It takes time even to come to a realization that there is no time. So how is all this

Absoluteness of infinity, being, “being known” if there is no time, no finity? The answer lies in

where one identifies oneself—with the thoughts and sensations of the would-be time-based

thinking mind—or identifies as infinite being, sometimes also referred to as pure Awareness.

Certainly, there is Awareness being aware right here, now, as these words are being read. The

issue is, does one identify merely with the would-be thoughts, sensations and other forms one

seems to be aware of; or does one identify as pure Awareness Itself, which is formless? From

the standpoint of pure Awareness as It is being, it’s instantly clear that this is a very different

type of Self, as compared to the thinking, sensing mind.

From the standpoint of Awareness, it doesn’t take any time for Awareness to be Self-

aware. Pure Awareness itself never changes, never varies. Change only seems to occur among

the “contents” of Awareness; the many forms one appears to be aware of.

One might also ask: “How is it possible to say with certainty that being is reality? An

‘ultimate reality’ is one of the things science and philosophy are still seeking. We won’t know

what reality is until we’ve found it.”

To say we have not yet found, or do not yet know what reality is, actually is saying

something else. It’s saying we haven’t been able to give reality a form.

We have not been able to observe, measure, or otherwise point to reality as if reality were

something finite, a last irreducible particle, or even a mathematical theory. We have not been

able to say, “Aha, there reality is.”

Whether one expects “ultimate reality” should have an incredibly small subatomic form,

a mathematical form, or even a mental, theoretical form—to say reality has not yet been found, is

saying no form has been found.

A New Infinity - 17

Is it too radical to ask, “What if reality has no form?”

That certainly would explain why reality hasn’t yet been found in some form.

There is no such form to be found!

The more you pursue that seemingly strange thought, the less strange it sounds. While

some may claim we are not yet able to say what reality is, it can be said with certainty that

reality is.

Again, by definition, in order to be reality, reality has to really be. So it can be said

with certainty that reality must be that which is being. It simply is not consistent or intelligent to

say that what-isn’t-being, or what is not truly present, is reality.

The fact that reality must be being—means being itself is literally what reality is. Only

being itself can be that which is being. That means the nature of being is equally the nature of

reality, for they are the same. So, to discern what is true of being, is to discern what is true of

reality, since they are the same.

The fact that being has no measurable form, means reality has no form. Being, thus

reality, is the absence of time—and this shows in another way why reality has no form. In

timeless reality, no time passes in which anything could be formed or observed! No time passes

in which any form could be discovered—or ever have been considered un-discovered!

The fact that being, reality, is formless means just that—completely without form—so

being cannot be given even a mental form; one cannot form an idea or concept about it. Do not

feel frustrated because you cannot mentally grasp or conceptualize being. You’re not supposed

to. Yet being remains changelessly present.

Stop reading and just be still for a moment. Don’t think. Notice that you are simply

aware, simply being. Notice, too, how this pure Awareness Itself has no form. It would be only
A New Infinity - 18

the things one seems to be aware of, such as words on this page, or the hand holding this page, or

thoughts, have a form. Notice also that this pure Awareness, by Itself, never is moving, never

changing. It is always present tense. Can any amount of thinking make this Awareness go away,

not be present? Thinking and sensing, mind activity, seem to constantly move, but never pure

Awareness. It is being.

One implication of Godel’s famous incompleteness theorem is that it is possible for

something to be un-provable, yet true—and that points directly at this new infinity. Infinity,

being, can’t be proven mathematically or by data, for true infinity, no-finity, exists outside of

numbers, formulas and data. Infinity also exists outside of time. Yet un-provable infinity, being,

is what truly is, or what is true. If being were not true, it would not truly be—there would be no

such thing as being—but there is.

How can this be clear, and with certainty? Not by pointing to something objective, but

thanks to the simple presence of one’s own Awareness, as it is being presently Self-aware, which

is that which truly is being. One simply cannot get around this, for if one attempts to say there is

no being, one first has to be in order to even say that.

It may seem surprising, but while this new infinity is not something that can be thought

or conceptualized, it can be consciously experienced. In a way, it can be felt. It is what pure

Awareness “feels like” to its own pure Awareness, completely absent of any content such as

thought or sensations. It is the feeling of wide-open, unobstructed existing, which pure

Awareness is when the thinking mind is silent and still. It is a state of undivided, formless, yet

consciously alive being.

In this light, infinity, reality, isn’t something one merely knows about; it is what one is.

Put it this way, could there be even the slightest inkling or notion of this thing called
A New Infinity - 19

infinity if there were not first a state of Awareness present to experience and confirm such?

Awareness isn’t aware of infinity. Awareness is infinity.

Can this new infinity be termed the true infinity?

This article presents a new, or heretofore largely “under-recognized,” infinity. It claims

to challenge the traditionally accepted “infinity” (which merely would be ongoing finity). While

both are enormously useful, the new and old are vastly different.

So, can it be said that one of the two is a more real or more valid infinity? Should this

new infinity be the real infinity, the true infinity? Is it just a difference in semantics, or

something far deeper than that?

One cannot intelligently dispute the fact that whichever infinity is going to be the true

one, or be true—that one has to truly be. It must be changeless, eternal. To be real infinity,

infinity has to really be. It certainly is not intelligent to say that an infinity that has no genuine

presence is a real, true, eternal infinity. True infinity is one that is invariable and never changes.

Therein lies the rub of the traditional “infinity.” As Cantor showed us, it varies, or comes

in varieties. Also, the traditional “infinity” never is present, as will be shown below. Could a

non-presence be a real infinity?

The new infinity is the only one that truly is present.

As mentioned earlier, as the new infinity is completely measureless, it exists entirely

independent of time—because any amount of time would be measurable. The fact that infinity is

time-less, or is the absence of time, is what makes infinity synonymous with the present. In

infinity there is no time, just as in the present there is no time.

What’s more, infinity is not merely synonymous with the present, as if the two were
A New Infinity - 20

separate things having the same qualities. Infinity is the present. The present is infinity. They

are merely two different word-labels for what is the exact, same one.

First look at it from the standpoint of the present. The present has to be what infinity is,

because only in the present is there no time, no measurement. Only in the un-dimensional

present is there no measurable time-movement through dimension or space. Infinity is identical

to the present—the absence of measurable time or measurable space, dimension. The present has

to be infinity, because if one speaks in terms of anything not-the-present, one is speaking of time,

past or future, which would be finity.

Now look at it from the standpoint of infinity. Infinity has to be the present—for if one is

speaking of infinity’s absolute measureless-ness, one can speak only of the present. Anything

other than the pure present (involving time, any amount of counting, or any space or dimension)

of course involves measurement, which is not infinity.

The present isn’t merely when infinity is—the present is what infinity is. They are

inseparable. So not only is the new infinity the only one that is present—infinity actually is the

present itself. They’re just two different words for what is the same one.

In contrast, the traditional “infinity” never is present.

The traditional “infinity,” or ongoing finity, of course consists of many; having many

involves the potential to endlessly add to, or to endlessly divide, finite amounts. The potential to

add or divide finity always involves time; it invariably is a process that occurs only in time. Any

process that occurs exclusively in time is a process that never is present. The traditional “endless

finity” can be known or utilized only in time; it would be wholly a product of, time—time which

never is present.

The only status of the traditional “infinity” is that of non-presence.

A New Infinity - 21

An “infinity” that has no changeless present-ness, no presence, cannot truly be—thus

cannot be true.

It must be emphasized that the new infinity does not supplant the old infinity (ongoing

finity) or make it obsolete in present day experience. The point is that the “new” infinity can

provide entirely new insights about our universe and the nature of an ultimate Truth or reality.

Being provides other surprising insights

In infinite being, reality, there is no space-time continuum, for being has no space, no

time.

Where there is no space, there cannot be three dimensions of height, width, depth—in

fact, no dimension at all. As there is no dimension in being, the present, there equally is no

vibration or frequency, because un-dimensional being permits no space where such could occur.

There are no waves or wavelengths, because in infinite being there is no length that a wave could

have. There is no time for a wave to move, and no energy movement out of which a wave or

frequency could be made.

Being itself has no frequency.

Why?

Being is not frequent.

Being is.

Far more importantly, only being can be.

Sounds simple enough. The staggering truth is that this absoluteness of being utterly,

completely precludes all time, and all matter and energy in reality. It is timeless, eternal,
A New Infinity - 22

immutable—incapable of change or decay. Yet it is one, whole, indivisible, irreducible—

absolutely pure. Is this not the true meaning of spirit, or that which is said to be divine?

In being, reality, there are no positive or negatively charged particles, no weak or strong

forces, no mass, and no gravity. There are no differences in material structure, for infinite being

has no material structure.

The fact that infinity, reality, is indivisible means it cannot be divided into a spectrum of

colors. In timeless being, reality, there is no such thing as a speed of light, for there is no

measurable speed, no measurable space for light to cross, and no time passing in which anything

could cross.

Is it possible that being, infinity, is synonymous with light itself? Only if light were to be

spoken of from the “viewpoint” of light itself—not how light appears according to finite human

sensory observation or calculation. To the human mind, it appears as if light consists of electro-

magnetic radiation, and traverses space at a relatively fast rate of speed.

Light would have to be “omnipresence” to be synonymous with being. Thus to light

itself, there would be only light, and time would zero out; to light itself there wouldn’t be any

human sense of time or spatial location; nor would light describe itself as electromagnetic

radiation. This may be possible, because in being, reality, there truly is no human sense of time,

no sense of spatial location, no electromagnetic radiation. Those only would be notions that the

time-based, finite sensing mind appears to use to describe its own activity—not reality, being.

The reality of being, infinity, is obviously radically different from the would-be “reality”

of finite forms that the never-present sensing human mind appears to experience in never-present

time. Again, nothing besides timeless being is truly present.

As only being is, being is all-presence, or what some might call omni-presence, the
A New Infinity - 23

divine, or “God.” But infinite being is not a divine that functions in time; it is not an omni-

presence that occupies physical space.

As being, reality, is time-less, space-less, it also means reality is not a cause. Nor was

reality ever caused, not by a god, not even by a big bang. From the standpoint of timeless

infinite being, time and space never begin. Time and space never began. Timeless being simply

is—preclusive of cause and effect, time and space. All causes and effects would involve time

processes; yet there are none in infinite being, reality. Cause and effect appear to occur only on

the level of the time-based finite sensing human mind, non-presence.

It is only the would-be finite sensing mind that seems desperate to account for cause, for

time and space. Why? Because the mind really is desperate to account for itself. In the 1700’s,

philosopher David Hume showed us there is no objective or external physical world separate

from the mind, and quantum physics today seems to substantiate it. In other words, there aren’t

both the mind’s sense of time and space, and an independently existing state of time and space—

there is only the mind’s sense of time and space. That means, without the sensing mind’s

activity, there is absolutely no sense of time or space—and without the sensing of time and

space, there is no mind activity. The sensing mind doesn’t know about time and space—the

mind literally would be time and space, or what is called space-time.

On this basis, it could be argued that what now appears to the mind as its expanding

stellar universe, actually is the expansion of thought; the seeming expansion of the mind itself—

for the sensing mind and its universe would be one and the same. Space-time and the mind are

inseparable—opposite sides of a coin, the coin of finity. Meanwhile, none of that finity is the

infinity of being.

As said earlier, it would seem there is something about you that is not finite, but is
A New Infinity - 24

present beyond the mind and space-time, and is being. This is you as pure infinite

Consciousness—distinct from everything finite you appear to be conscious of. Otherwise, you’d

be part of the finite coin, and could not now “stand apart” as changeless Presence, seeing both

sides of the coin for their non-presence. Only from a basis of timeless being, infinity, is one “off

the coin” of time and finity.

That which is indivisible need not be unified

When reality is seen to be measureless infinity, it has fascinating implications regarding

science’s long-sought unification theory.

If reality is infinity—that means all that really is, is infinity.

As reality, infinity, has no measurable size—then in reality there is nothing that is large

as compared to small. So in reality, what really is, there are neither laws of the large or laws of

the small that can be unified into a single Theory Of Everything. As reality’s infinity is

irreducible and has no parts into which it could be divided, it has no parts that ever could be

unified.

However, the new infinity provides an insight that in one way does appear to unify the

laws of large and small phenomena, and which may be worth much more investigation.

Regardless of whether large or small, the very functioning of all such laws and forces is

inseparable from a sensing mind and its time—all of which never is present. Absolutely all

observable macro and micro time-phenomena are perfectly unified in that they consist entirely of

non-presence.

What would this mean? From the standpoint of your being, which is changeless

presence, all such forces, even those heretofore considered as “positive,” might now take on a
A New Infinity - 25

new status of “negative” in that they are non-presence.

What’s more, such would-be laws and forces have no existence apart from the would-be

sensing mind that supposedly observes them. It means every calculation concerning those laws

is as much a mathematical description of the mind as it is of a so-called “objective physical

world.” This holds true in other ways, too. What does it mean that cosmic background

radiation, the supposed evidence of a big bang, is as much mental as physical? Is it time to

pursue a Theory Of Everything from the basis of mind; that the laws of the large and small are as

much mental as physical?

What is stated here about being, reality, is not subjective, not merely the opinion or

theory of an author. The fact that being is, is not a personal opinion. As there is no time in

being, reality, there can be nothing subjective or objective in reality—for all subjective and

objective experiences also would involve time, of which there is none in being. To contrast

something as subjective, with that which supposedly is objective, also would involve a

comparison between two states—and there are not two such states in irreducible infinite being—

only one.

Infinity is not one in the sense of numerical quantity (for there is no quantity), but

because infinity cannot be dual or multiple. Again, infinity, being, is all that is being, and to it,

there is no point where a state unlike itself, one of not-being, starts. Again, a state of not-being

can’t exist or start anywhere because it’s not being. The specific, absolute total presence of

being precludes the possibility of non-being—even as non-being. There is only being. It means

being, reality, has no opposite. Only the would-be, never-present sensing mind activity seems to

deal in opposites—not reality itself. Reality, then, is not binary—not a yes/no, positive/negative,

or true/false proposition. In reality, there is no opposite known as “false.” Reality only is true—
A New Infinity - 26

or what truly is.

Outside the box of finity

To come full circle, the very thing that has obscured much of the foregoing is the old

concept of infinity. The traditional “infinity” really has been just a huge extension of finity. It is

not true in-finity, the absence of all form, all size and quantity—a state of complete un-

limitation. So any scientific and philosophical thinking done on this basis never has had a

vantage point that is truly unlimited—one that is beyond or outside the limitations of finity.

Why would science, mathematics or philosophy even want such a vantage point?

Most emphatically, this is not to suggest that science should tolerate experiments outside

the range of finite measurement, for on that basis it wouldn’t be science. But there is no reason

why one cannot sometimes think from outside the realm of finite measurement—and that is the

main point of this discussion.

Although it has become a cliché, consider the expression, “Think outside the box.” Say

the box is the measurable universe of space, time, and matter, supposedly experienced by the

sensing mind. In other words, the box is finity. And remember, on this basis, a mere endless

extension of this measurable box of finity always has been mistaken for “infinity.”

So, it seemed you had an endlessly extending box, yes. But still—you always were stuck

on the level of the box. To the sensing mind, which deals exclusively in finity, it would seem

there is only box, only the realm of measurement, and no other possible state—no other valid

“perspective” or basis of knowing. Sure, you might expand the box’s size to unfathomable

amounts of light years in space—or you could shrink the box’s size to equally unfathomable

quantum extremes. But whether macro or micro, if finity is all there is as far as you are
A New Infinity - 27

concerned, then no matter how far you go, you still are restricted to the box, finity—and are not

outside it.

Only in the complete absence of finity, or in true infinity, is one free of the box.

How does one think outside the box, or rise above the endless maze of finite form—so as

to better look down inside it and more fully expose its workings? Think or “look out from” the

vantage point of infinity, which is formless, timeless. Only by starting from the infinity of being,

and not finite observations, is one outside the box. That’s nothing unusual, but perfectly normal

when simply starting with, or “looking out from” pure timeless being, pure Awareness—and not

any time-form in the finite universe the mind appears to sense.

One who perceives from a basis of timeless pure being, pure Awareness—instead of

thinking only of the finite forms known to the human sensing mind that functions in time—has

an entirely new vantage point, especially for discerning reality.

In many ways we have been trying to discover reality, or what really is—by looking only

from the viewpoint of physical senses and never-present time, or what really is not. By

definition, what really is cannot be found by way of what really is not—and that is why, up until

now, reality hasn’t been found.

One now can also see why the sensing mind never has realized that reality is infinity. It’s

because the limited mind never can know anything but finity. The sensing mind has nowhere to

go besides finity—and that’s not the mind’s fault—that’s just its nature. As said earlier, even

what the mind up until now had assumed was “infinity,” was just an extension of its same old

finity. Since the sensing mind had mistakenly assumed its endless finity was “infinity,” it

mistakenly assumed it had both finity and infinity, and assumed it had all the bases covered. It

could not know there was another alternative as far as discerning reality, so never could look
A New Infinity - 28

outside itself for another vantage point.

However, now you can discern that infinity is reality, because now you have a new

vantage point—infinite reality itself—the very pure being you are now aware of being.

It has been assumed that ultimate reality or “the ultimate Truth” requires still more,

deeper, investigation of measurable matter, time and space—of finity. No. We have been

looking in the wrong place. Reality is completely unobservable, yet ever-present pure being.

Reality never has been absent or hidden! But because timeless being, reality, is not finite

and thus cannot be sensed or thought, it is “invisible” to the sensing mind that deals only in finite

form and time.

Said another way, the mistaken identification solely with the sensing mind (instead of

pure, aware, infinite being) has always kept one looking for something apart from one’s very

Self to be reality. When all along, as pure, infinite being, one eternally is the very reality that the

mind has been seeking.

So there is a simple explanation as to why reality—the measureless infinity of being—

never has been found. It is because there is absolutely nothing finite or observable about reality

that could be found!

Reality is not supposed to be found—if by that is meant giving reality a finite form or

limit.

Reality is absolutely formless, unlimited—all made irrefutably clear by a simple, accurate

definition of infinity.