435. Before we leave this important cosmic analysis, viewed through the symbol and the interpretation of the spiral's basic energies, we will just touch on this same analysis with relation to terrestrial science. As mentioned previously, this science knows only one third of the area of the spiral for the other two thirds are actually of a nature which, as yet, lie beyond the scope of ordinary terrestrial senses. Hence the details of these two thirds are not to be found in analyses put forward by science. As the realities which exist within the known third of life's area of the spiral are in inseparable cooperation with those realities in the two unknown thirds of the spiral, it follows that, as far as science is concerned, the beings' own life and laws must remain an unsolved mystery.
      If the life-cycle or the structure of existence itself were a tree, for example, the knowledge possessed by terrestrial humanity would only extend as far as the details of its leaves, while the branches, trunk and roots would lie quite outside their knowledge. Indeed, these little "leaf-people" would perhaps even give a loud laugh if someone told them that leaves received nourishment and support through something called branches, and that these in turn were off-shoots from a common trunk which was itself rooted in an immense common source of nourishment – Earth. They would allege that such an assertion was superstition and unscientific; they would maintain that it was in the highest degree devoid of operational mathematics. That it is, however, their own so highly-prized mathematical perception which, from a cosmic point of view, is without true mathematics and thus correspondingly defective, they can, as yet, neither admit nor understand. They do not yet know that there exists no analysis whatsoever which can be completely mathematical as long as its results are not shown to have a correspondingly indispensable position in the actual cycle of life. Yet the small "leaf-people" on the leaves of our tree would still allege that their science was "mathematical" and would be satisfied in that knowledge. Anything else which might arise would have to be superstition or imagination. But considering that this knowledge does not give any explanation whatsoever about the position of the leaves on the branches nor the branches on the trunk nor the trunk being rooted in the Earth, nor does it explain the circuit of this Earth in the space of the heavens, and this space of the heavens being the consciousness of the Lord of life, time and space, nor of this Lord's identity reproduced in the individual's, or the living being's, own flesh and blood, in its own I, in its own consciousness and in its own will, then this knowledge remains quite devoid of any factors entitling it to be called "mathematical".
      Hence an analysis can only be truly mathematical when its ultimate solutions remain the same as its initial answers in a new life-cycle. The kind of mathematics taught by the small "leaf-people", that is to say, by modern science, is in reality only "local" mathematics. It gives weight only to knowledge of the ordinary material fields of physical matter and of the details of ordinary daily life. The laws of the Universe as taught by science have absolutely nothing to do with mathematics as long as they do not contain a series of solutions which signify a whole cycle. All creation or manifestation of energy in the world can only exist as a whole cycle; the Universe or life itself is thus also a cycle. A picture of the world expressed only in figures and measurements, in kilograms and pounds, in wave-lengths and velocities is not a mathematically true picture. These results cannot in any circumstances whatsoever express a complete totality. The most important facets are missing, namely those which appear as eternal "manifestations of life" or results which express and prove a "creator" behind that which is "created".
      The present day so-called scientific picture of the world lacks any definition of a true "living Something" behind movement, behind the logic of Nature and its consequent marvellous creations, manifestations and revelations. It is just as little mathematically perfect and constitutes just as illogical an assertion as saying that a chair or a table, for instance, had made itself without a carpenter. Indeed, any picture of the world where mathematics did not necessarily require a Godhead, a "living Something" underlying its constituent parts, is not a picture of the world at all and far less any kind of science. It has nothing to do either with logic or mathematics. It is itself analogous to the superstitions of our forefathers which led them to believe that all kinds of microscopic creatures, vermin, insects and the like, had their origin in dirt. A Universe with living, thinking, working beings cannot possibly be analyzed mathematically as long as these analyses do not comprise anything other than the weight of inanimate matter or exterior phenomena and consequently in no way gives any expression for the "living" itself and its immortality.
      If an analysis is to be mathematical it must express the analysis of an entire cycle. And it is just such an analysis of an entire cycle that has been set forth in these analyses of the spiral. Our description of Symbol No. 9 has been an analysis which is wholly mathematical in presentation. It constitutes a picture not merely of a fragment or a fraction of an entirety, but the entirety itself. We have seen the starting point of the basic energies, we followed their courses right through their zones of manifestation and continued through to their termination, and then we realized this termination was at the same time the releasing cause into a new zone of manifestation and thereby realized also the place of these basic energies in eternity itself, thus rendering our analysis not only mathematical but also identical with what we call "cosmic". We have seen these energies' cosmic identity as constituting an eternal activity, in other words a perpetually working link in the structure of the Universe itself. To be able to document an analysis of anything in this way – that is mathematics. Genuine mathematics then, is the same as "cosmic analyzing". But in everyday life the term "mathematics" is very often worthless. Many of the analyses which are taught under the heading "mathematics" have nothing whatsoever to do with "cosmic analysis" for in actual fact they lack both head and tail. That is to say there is knowledge neither of the origin nor of the sequel to anything after its physical dissolution. And so the analysis is not presented as an eternal activity, nor is its connection with the eternal existence of energies defined in any way. Consequently such an analysis must fall short as only a fleeting idea. It constitutes just an impermanent concept. But impermanent concepts cannot, under any circumstances whatsoever, be an expression for the whole truth. Indeed, nothing exists physically which is, in actual fact, as it appears to be. No temporal analyses, therefore, can exist as truly mathematical or cosmic; and this is especially so as there are no circumstances whatsoever in which a problem or indeed anything at all exists which does not have its origin in something previous and which will come to influence, or put its stamp on, what is to follow. The more one knows of these previous and following factors, the more fundamental or true, and thus more mathematical, does an analysis of something become, so that it may eventually reach its actual identity as perfect truth, that is its manifestation as a "cosmic analysis" when the analysing illuminates so many areas that the origin and conclusion of the thing analysed become identical in principle whereby that analysis will completely cover the whole cycle of the energies.