Perhaps the most startling implication of this holistic mathematical understanding of the number "4" is that it leads to a completely new interpretation of the nature of space and time (which are now understood in an inherently dynamic interactive manner).
In this holistic understanding, space and time simply represent the manner in which the two fundamental polarity sets (external/internal and whole/part) - which necessarily condition all phenomenal reality - interact.
So just as in number terms, we can maintain that the four roots of 1 (representing the reduced 1-dimensional expression of 4 as representing a dimensional number) are real and imaginary with positive and negative directions respectively, equally we can maintain the same with respect to space and time.
Thus from one valid perspective, we can say that the 4 dimensions contain two real dimensions of space (1 positive and 1 negative) and 2 imaginary dimensions (again 1 positive and 1 negative).
And because, in a dynamic interactive sense, real space corresponds to imaginary time (and real time to imaginary space) we can equally say that the 4 dimensions contain two real dimensions of time (1 positive and 1 negative) and 2 imaginary dimensions (again 1 positive and 1 negative).
Then mixing both space and time, we can say that the 4 dimensions relate to 2 real space dimensions and 2 real time dimensions (or alternatively 2 imaginary space dimensions and 2 imaginary time dimensions).
The first key point regarding this dynamic holistic interpretation is that both time and space are directly complementary with each other in both an (external) physical and (internal) psychological manner (as + and – with respect to each other).
Indeed this can be fruitfully used to explain why authentic spiritual experience is understood as related to the present moment (and only in a secondary sense with movement in space and time).
Indeed conventional experience is characterised by a considerable illusion i.e. that time possesses just one positive direction in time. One then believes that all events move forward unambiguously from past to future!
However when one reflects on the matter, all events necessarily entail the relationship as between external and internal aspects.
So from one perspective, one is directly aware of an (external) world in relation to an (internal) self; then from the opposite complementary perspective, one is directly aware of an (internal) self in relation to an (external) world.
Now when one attempts to isolate both reference frames (i.e. external and internal), time does indeed appear to unambiguously move forward in a positive direction.
So time moves forward with respect to (external) events; time equally then moves forward with respect to the (internal) self, which can observe such events.
However when we realise that both external and internal aspects are necessarily interdependent, then the movement of time now acquires a merely relative meaning.
Thus if time is viewed as moving forward with respect to (external) events, then it is - relatively moving backwards with respect to the (internal) self. Likewise if time is viewed as moving forward with respect to the (internal) self, then it is - relatively - moving backwards with respect to (external) events.
So when one is strongly aware of the necessary interdependence of both external and internal polarities, movements in time (and indeed space) both acquire a merely secondary relative validity, that in a primary spiritual sense cancel out in direct experience of the present moment.
When I initially became fascinated with Einsteins' Special Theory of Relativity, it struck me strongly that a complementary psychological interpretation could be given for his explanation of the physical nature of space and time.
In then intrigued me when I later read an account of Einstein's attempt to give a simple explanation of relativity, when he stated,
“When you sit with a nice girl for two hours you think it’s only a minute, but when you sit on a hot stove for a minute you think it’s two hours. That’s relativity.”
However Einstein is clearly referring to a psychological - rather than physical - notion of time in this quote.
So the bigger issue - which was not addressed by Einstein is how both physical and psychological notions of time (and space) can be properly integrated.
And quite simply, this requires going well beyond the classical scientific paradigm accepted by Einstein.
However it requires an even deeper realisation to recognise that in dynamic interactive terms, space and time are real to imaginary (and imaginary to real) with respect to each other.
So space and time do not exist - as in the Newtonian world view - as an empty theatre in which physical events take place.
Rather they are both continually created through the dynamic interaction of phenomena (with in turn phenomena created through the dynamic interaction of space and time).
So when space emerges (both in physical and psychological terms) in a "real" manner, then time emerges in a corresponding "imaginary" fashion (and vice versa, so that when time emerges in a "real" manner, then space emerges in an "imaginary" fashion.
In fact, the physical behaviour of space and time can be linked in a very fundamental way with corresponding psychological dynamics.
Now for convenience, I identify three primary modes (which constitute all psychological experience).
These are cognitive, affective and volitional respectively.
The cognitive can best be understood as a means of (impersonal) control with respect to reality, while the affective in complementary terms represents a means of (personal) response. The role of the volitional is then to maintain dynamic balance between both, so that they mutually can serve other in the optimum fashion. So the fullest experienced complementarity as between cognitive and affective (in a highly refined transparent experience of phenomena) is then consistent with a state of spiritual union.
Now again - though ignored in scientific terms - one can have both an affective experience of space and time (where emotional response is evoked) and a cognitive experience (which conforms directly with scientific notions).
However the very reconciliation of affective with cognitive aspects requires going beyond the "real" world of science, based merely on conscious type interpretation, to embrace both "real" and "imaginary" aspects (where conscious and unconscious aspects are recognised).
So this is precisely what is enabled in holistic terms at these "higher" levels of Band 3.
Therefore from this new dynamic perspective, both the cognitive and affective experience of space and time are now understood in complementary terms as real and imaginary with respect to each other.
So when real (conscious) experience of time (and space) is of a cognitive nature, the corresponding implicit (unconscious) experience is now of an imaginary nature.
Likewise, when the real (conscious) experience of time (and space) is of an affective nature, the corresponding implicit (unconscious) experience is now in turn of an imaginary nature.
So once again, when correctly understood in their dynamic interactive manner, the very nature of space and time is rendered to be of a merely relative secondary nature, representing the temporary phenomenal expressions of an ever present reality.
And once again, we have direct parallels in the physical world. So just as the notion of the unconscious is widely accepted in psychology (with interacting links with the conscious mind), equally a complementary situation necessarily exists with respect to the real world. So underlying the "real" world of scientific reality (based on conscious means of interpretation) is an equivalent "unconscious" of an imaginary nature, in a holistic ground that intimately relates to all phenomenal reactions. So for example virtual (i.e. imaginary) particles can freely emerge from this holistic ground of reality.
And corresponding to cognitive and affective aspects, we have control and response patterns (which again apply to all phenomena). So both real and imaginary space and time emerge in the physical world through the continual complementary interaction of control and response patterns (independence and interdependence) respectively, applying to all phenomena.
One further advance - using this holistic notion of "4" - was a Theory of 24 Personality Types where I constituted each personality type as a unique permutation of the four original holistic numbers (external and internal and whole and part).
So each personality type therefore can be seen as representing a unique configuration of the manner in which external and internal and whole and part poles are related in experience.
Each personality type thereby in turn represents a unique configuration in the manner in which space and time are related.
And I found striking parallels here with the bosonic world of superstrings (representing unique "impersonality types"). This in turns provides a far more intuitively accessible manner of understanding the multi-dimensional nature of strings (requiring more than 4 dimensions).
So in my interpretation, the "many" dimensions of string theory simply represent a certain unique configuration of the existing 4 dimensions.