Cosmic assumptions

[Guest guest]

The prevailing scientific view is based on appearances; their attendant theorys orchestrated to to explain the things seen. Measureable and testable though they may be, some even approaching elegance as in Kepler's law of planets sweeping out equal areas in equal times, they are still approximations and devices to explain the things seen and are only lawful to explain them within their own framework. I've read much of ancient cosmologies and am somewhat disappointed in that none of these modern renderings incorporate a deeper dimensionality into the cosmos but attempt to explain its ideas within the conventional scientific view of the same. There is evidences that in fact the universe has a four spatially dimensioned character to it. If you accept this possibility then you must accept that a larger circle can be contained seemingly within a larger one. Depending on where you are looking from will determine what you see and so far modern astronomy's view is constrained by observations taken along this latitude; too close to the nearer ring to see it and looking laterally along the surface of the outer and interpreting the results within a rather inflated myopic view. "The Inside Dope" a book I'm writing attempts to transcend these views. I'm interested in enlisting a proficient mathematician and/or artist whom can depict the universe from a 4 plus, spatially dimensioned view. Please contact me at stcwrnrw@aol.com if interested in exploring the 'real world.'