Life/Existence/Universe EXISTENCE/UNIVERSE For years I lamented my lack of control, especially the lack of control over my own body: I cannot change the shape of the eyeballs in my head in order to improve my eyesight; I cannot grow taller; I cannot grow a single tooth to replace one I might lose. Then I realized that communication is the most important thing in existence and that I do, indeed, have a great deal of control. If each human being is thought of as a single brain cell, then the brain of the human race comprises six billion cells. This worldwide brain, each cell able to communicate at the speed of light, continues to grow, evolve, experiencing, experimenting, recording. Thus, I have the sum of human knowledge at my fingertips. And so, being pat of this super brain, can therefore improve most aspects of my appearance by visiting the appropriate specialist. (Pride in one's appearance should not be equated with vanity. Without a little pride one would very soon become smelly, probably diseased - eventually a burden on society. Besides, a little pride shows respect and affection for one's fellow man). From this first principle of existence one derives "contrast". One must communicate with something in order to exist - even if it's only with one's little toe! Hence communication gives rise to contrast. Contrast implies "change". From this one extrapolates the simple equation: Contrast - change - emotion = Existence. Although I have read little in the way of science and philosophy, because of the derivation contrast - change - emotion I cannot agree with Einstein's contention that no material body can travel faster than light. I believe a vehicle can be tempted into velocities greater than the speed of light through the "donkey and carrot" principle (self -propelling). There is no reason for the intellect to assume that every physical action in they universe must be the result of force. It seems to me that the mandala of a "flyingsaucer" portrays the ideal form for an interstellar vehicle. The base of such a craft revolving in order to disrupt the communications continuum (gravitons) and its apex containing a small mass to attract the otherwise perfectly balanced vehicle. Smoke and flame is a primitive form of propulsion! Einstein's prohibition on velocity is too constraining. But I do not advocate license. For law is the essence of Existence. The laws of physics, not substance, precipitate emotions and create form. II Principle: Law It follows from my rejection of Einstein's prohibition that I must also reject his explanation for gravitation. And I do so for the simple reason that there is no up or down in space. One cannot deny "curved space", it's almost self-evident. For example, a heavenly body is condensed energy, its atmosphere is a more tenuous form of energy, and its radiation a yet more subtle form of energy. Thus space (energy) curves around, so-called, solid bodies. However, such a configuration does not explain gravitation. There is no such thing as empty space…starlight proves it! But even if one were to imagine space as a fabric and a ponderable body as being on space rather than in space a potential satellite would never be able, in any mechanical sense, to engage in orbital motion. Not even if one were to allow for a closer proximity of ponderable bodies upon such a fabrication. No, a more "sensible" interpretation is required. As there is no up or down on a sphere in space an object doesn't "fall", and as there are no strings attached an object is not pulled. And, as far as I'm aware, a comet's tail never precedes it. Nor is the tail of a comet, to any noticeable degree, ever angled from its trajectory. Therefore an object is not pushed. Motion through space is volitional. In fact, intelligence - sensitivity, like magnitude and formation, is dependent on function and objective. There is not such a thing as an insensate "lump". And so the only distinction I make between an organism and a pebble on the beach is one of degree. (A careless workman will "fall" from the roof of a house, despite his vehement protestations, as surely as a tile). Wherefore emotion, not mathematics, is the foundation of the universe. Mathematics is inclined to be exclusive. Emotion is universal. Indeed, to create a universe one would only need to appreciate proportion. Thus, so far: communication-law-emotion. The laws of physics are a necessity. For he who can do all things has nothing. Hence, existence is a finite universe with infinite potential. Finite in every sense as in for instance the limited range of one's perception of colour - in order to be able to communicate more effectively with other members of one's specie. One can of course, project one's self, in imagination, beyond the universe and visualize it scintillating in the distance. But such a conjuration only succeeds in expanding the universe. It remains one universe: the visionary - the scintillation - the medium of communication. It also remains a finite universe. There is No beyond, No darkness, No space (for even an expanse of perfectly empty space is something). No form. Nothing. Somewhat like a mind which is momentarily blank! A finite universe is omniscient and therefore omnipotent. There being no barriers, no opponents. Irrespective of how far man travels through space, the universe will accommodate him. Continuos creation. Creation is simply a continuation through the process of change. For communication-law-emotion are one and interchangeable, like that other trinomial: energy-matter-space. III PRINCIPLE: OMNIPOTENCE The foregoing is certain. For there is only one certain knowledge, and that is the knowledge of one's own emotions. Even if the laws of physics change Existence will still experience. One might describe matter as being the sub-conscious part of the mind; (a reasonable analogy might be the autonomic nervous system which is a delegated authority). Or one might describe matter as being the letter of law and the conscious mind as being the spirit of law. Communication-law-contrast/change/emotion = Existence/Universe: Omnipotence. One might say science knows how, philosophy knows why and God knows … what? Which brings me to my penultimate point: What is God? If we are primitive we will invest God with lineaments, usually human. (If there were such a God there could only be one God. More than one such God might lead to chaos or stalemate. God's equal and identical? Superfluous). We then presume that man is made in God's image without first considering whether or not God's form is fixed. If God's form is fixed, unalterable, then God is not omnipotent. If God's form is not fixed then man is not made in the image of God. Is God external to creation? Illogical. If God is communicating with the universe, in a way, it's all one universe. Did God create infinity? If space has a beginning it cannot be endless. Infinity cannot precede God. God is eternal. Moreover, a preceding infinity would render God impotent and ignorant. But as "space", even empty space, is something, then infinity would have had to be created. It is impossible to create "infinity". Irrelevant. If God is eternal creation is meaningless. It follows that God is creation itself, the universe. Consequently infinity needs to be equated with eternity. Which brings me to my final point: What is time? Apart from obvious questions, such as what did God do before creation? In which direction does time flow? What is time made of? One must ask: What times time? God? God is omnipotent. Time, thereby, is "surplus to requirements." Self-regulating? That principle could be imbued just as easily in every object. "Time, of itself and by itself, flowing like a stream". Inconsequential. The simple answer is time is emotion. To sum up: For God to exist God would have to experience - (contrast-change-emotion). Now, as it's possible for omnipotence to conceive of an impossible task it transpires that God/Universe can be both omnipotent and impotent, omniscient and ignorant, existent and non-existent at the same instant. I could say "divinity" is the focal point of every entity. Or, as I believe Jung called it, "thecollective unconscious." Or, as Einstein reputably described it "the unification of the manifold." But because of the paradox inherent in omnipotence the relevance of Existence/Universe devolves upon "I" myself. Communication (space) - law (energy/matter) - contrast-change-emotion (time) = Existence. To end my thesis I will take the liberty of amending one of Shakespeare's sonnets, appending my own ten-penny piece. A decad, so to speak! "Cupid laid by his brand, and fell asleep. Anon, the young God Cupid smiles
from sleep. And while two hot springs feed the plashy pool, To bloom eternally. Though from this date, P.S. It's not money that makes the world go round
- it's enthusiasm! God is not thing but everything. To believe in an individual, another creature - A something somewhere playing God is naive in the extreme. We are still primitive when it comes to religion (like our rockets). As for angels with cumbersome wings: Haven't they heard of levitation? You are God and I am God. Every Jill and Tod is God. Every pebble on the beach , every star still out of reach, every tussock, every sod. To think it otherwise is odd! God is a co-op without co-ordinates. For reason is needed to organize it all, ensuring contrast - change - emotion. Imagine if one managed to eliminate every other life form on earth thinking it would be perfect with nothing in the world but clones of oneself. There would still be building and machines of course. I don't like spiders very much, not care for roach or fly. But if my world was only sweet I think that I would die. Talking of building and machines, how little appreciated it all is. We walk out on a summer's day barely acknowledging the labour of our fellows in creating those thousands of buildings and miles of road. In order to pre-empt demolition gang with ball and chain platitude "the majority of people would disagree with you" I append the following few lines: Democratic principles are fine but the majority verdict is not always correct. The majority of people being fallible on certain issues due to ignorance. Consider homosexuality often called unnatural by the media (manipulation of the masses). But if it's done it's natural. Biology shows us that many different speci engage in homosexuality - so far discovered, five different taxonomical orders. In the American South West there is an all-female race of lizards. They reproduce parthenogenetically. The female lizards gain (as human females are capable of doing) sexual, satisfaction by rubbing their sex organs together. Expert opinion? For hundreds of years it's been known by naturalist that many insects guide and protect their young. But scientists refused to acknowledge it. And " Bodies in space stood still. It was space itself that expanded faster than light" People just don't want to think. Even when things are under their nose. Most people believe that plants are senseless. Yet toadflax deposits its own seed by searching for a crack in the wall; balsam uses explosive; dandelion, parachute and sycamore, helicopter. When a bee changes the pitch of its wings the genitan ( Africa) releases its pollen. Most impressive of all: The Acacia ( South America) provides its ant defenders with barracks, nectar and food parcels. At the tips of its leaves it produces parcels of protein which fit neatly into a pouch beneath the larval jaws. In return the ants deter browsing animals, rival plants, etc. Symbiosis. Instead of thinking people prefer to let science decide for them. But much science is achieved through trial and error and not logical deduction. In 1909 Paul Ehrlich discovered a compound of arsenic which cured syphilis. It was the six-hundred-and -sixth compound he had tested. The wheel. Invention? No, Discovery: The full moon. A log rolling downhill. Even genii can get it wrong: Einstein dismissed the idea of splitting the atom or obtaining power by applying his own equation. Splitting the atom was an accidental discovery, as was electricity. And today many educated people believe that evolution means progression - evolving to a higher or superhuman state. Not so: Evolution does not mean progression but adaptation. People once believed that the earth was flat, simply because they didn't ask themselves a few elementary questions, e.g. why we have a crescent moon - left and right crescents. Probably the simplest question they could have asked themselves : if the world is flat (they firmly believed that if a ship sailed to the horizon it would fall off the edge) why doesn't the water fall off? Discount any notion of the pancake having a lip for a ship has a keel, and it doesn't rain everyday. Majority opinion? No, think for yourself. Einstein stated that imagination is the most important thing. Patently obvious isn't it? After all, without ideas you wouldn't know which way to turn. Like a bicycle put out of the house. Space has the potential to become matter. For space is not empty. Starlight proves it: "E= MC 2 " If matter is energy what is energy? Energy is intelligence. Why form? Different forms give rise to contrast….change…emotion, therefore Existence/Universe. Edge of the universe? Nonsense! Where would half the radiated energy of a material particle at the edge of the universe travel to? The universe is finite with infinte potential. There being no barriers. No injunctions, no competition, there is nothing beyond. For even an expanse of empty space is something. There is only continuous creation. When you're there then it's there. Until you are there the beyond is simply like a mind that is momentarily blank. No space, not darkness, no beyond, nothing. The smallest particle is another nonsense. If the omega particle, in a mechanistic universe existed, how would it communicate? It could not receive/absorb other particles, being the smallest, likewise it would be unable to transmit. It would have no deformation factor. No glue. It would be an insensate entity, useless. As mountains would have to be made of these omega particles it would be like trying to make a billiard ball out of marbles. As for the beginning of the universe. There was none. Time is emotion. Of course clocks are useful, as are yardsticks and spatial directions. But there is no up or down in space, nor left or right. It's relative. A singularity exploding to create the universe is illogical. An aggregate (in a material sense) cannot be infinitely small. Come to think of it what does infinitely small mean? It sounds meaningless. God is a co-op without co-ordinates. A Brief Commentary By J.W. Comment: Are we talking physics or psychical research? Are scientists exploring electrons & quarks or poltergeist and ouija boards? Logic suggests to me that there cannot be an omega particle, so scientists invent 'ghost' particles. How convenient. Physicists are getting themselves into a terrible mix trying to make concrete! Black Holes Comment: If a black hole came into being it would not exist indefinitely. Either the territorial imperative between particles would cause it to explode, or if it condensed further, the big crunch would eliminate 'form'. No form no gravity. The star would then evaporate and settle as a faint glow. (The vanishing point of material form?) The descriptions of entropy mentioned are man-made. In a natural context the result is simply change. Temperature Comment: If the early universe was hot why do different regions have different temperatures? If it expanded from a singularity it should be uniform… A muddy balloon of finite size will still have regions containing more spots than other regions. No matter how much you blow it up. No, a 'lumpiness' cannot be a singularity. Even in a belief system there cannot be two bodies of equal size infinitely small. There can not be two infinities. Ultimately, infinity is meaningless. From the simplest organisms to intelligent beings? Comment: Define intelligence. Ducks can walk on land, swim in water, fly through the air and they don't have to put clothes on in winter and take them off again in the summer. Bird brain? They cannot build machines like us - they don't have hands! As for alien forms of intelligent life in the universe, it's a waste of space if there are none. On the other hand all that space may be for homosapiens to explore. Eventually, after we colonize other planets, our children will adapt to their new environment and through the process of evolution themselves become alien. Comment: The numbers racket … if a material point exploded to create the universe it must have been a particulate to begin with. Thus it could not have been infinitely small…'Disorder' is a relative term. A pulverized sugar cube is subjective. Time Travel Comment: It would be difficult to make a killing on the stock market because everything would be reversing in time, including the time-traveller's brain/mind/memory, e.g. if a time-traveller saw a coin on the ground by the time he saw the individual who tossed it the time-traveller's memory of the coin on the ground would have been erased:
If you want to go back in time watch an old movie! Hypothetically speaking, suppose that one's body and brain remained unaffected by time travel. Linear Time: Two friends walking along a path. Some distance behind another person is walking along the same path in the same direction. Upon impulse one of the friends decides to travel back in time in order to review a particularly revealing facial expression of his walking companion. When the time-traveller chooses to stop his retrograde motion to scrutinize that erstwhile expression at that precise moment the person that was walking behind now fills the exact spot that his friend previously occupied - time marches on. Or he could crank the whole world back but then he too would be back where he started! Or consider this: A wave travelling down a rope could be construed as a particle changing position in space. Each crest and trough in the rope the particle's location - everywhere at once! A body moving through space cannot have position, and vice versa. But to go from A to B takes time. Divide that time to infinitesimal and the body in question is always on the point of moving. Thus if every action was (i.e. its negative) subsequently and permanently frozen in aether, so to speak, a diorama might ensue. The time-traveller would be unable to interact, e.g. go back and murder his father before he was born. But in order to view those ghostly images of the past he would have to travel back one year in one minute - half a million units per minute. To prevent himself from being overwhelmed by a backlog. All to glimpse a specific event which took place at a precise location a year ago. Two-dimensional objects do not exist (the third dimension of this line is the thickness of the ink). Events happen from all directions. The time-traveller going back to last year would therefore have to leaf through half a million superimposed ghostly images of a specific location (even at only one recording per minute). While he is doing that life goes on and so he is missing what is happening in the present. He would become a spectator, never a participator. Anyway, the argument is academic for time is emotion. Time travel? Yes: Memories and dreams. The most important question was not asked by Isaac Newton, Einstein or Hawkins but by Everyman. As Shakespeare put it, "To be or not to be - that is the question." Hamlets Soliloquy. Act III. Science or Religion? Science: 'To know.' They don't. Electricity? 'Electron.' Electron? 'Energy! Energy? " As far as the propositions of mathematics refer to reality they are not certain". Einstein. "There will always be 'yes-no' questions in mathematics which cannot be decided by people." Godel. "The whole of mathematics is about nothing." John Von Neumann. "Mathematics, the loss of certainty." Kline. "Quantum mechanics is like politics, different people arrive at different conclusions." Religion Who made God? What is God made of? Where is God? Was God's mind a blank before creation or did he sit thumb twirling in empty space? Why did it take an omnipotent God six days to create the world? Were the dinosaurs a mistake? Furthermore, how could a God burn one of his children in hell for all eternity? I could not do it. No matter how sick or evil that child was. No one could do it - if only because boredom would eventually curtail the desire to torture. Yet, people worship this maniac God, this psychopath! All religions are contradictory, and mostly just plain silly: Egyptian Book of the Dead, The souls of the dead enter the hall of judgement. If the deceased has the names of the 42 presiding judges inscribed on his tomb his sins will be forgiven and he will emerge into the light. Comment: Chiseller! In the Persian cult of Mithras the central figure presides over his own last supper before being crucified and rising from the dead three days later…Zoraster (Born E.Iran) was born of a virgin, according to scripture, by Mazda the creator. Likewise Pythagoras and the Chinese sage Lao Tzu. Kabbalah: "God created man in order to perceive himself." Comment: ? Kabbalah: "There is no absolute truth." Comment: Non sequitur. Consider Solipsism. And if there are no absolutes how can one be absolutely sure that there are no absolutes. The Essenes (Jewish Ascetic Fraternity) baptized the lower classes - lepers, gentiles, the disabled and women with water. Keeping baptism by wine for the higher orders. Comment: Aristocrats? Thieves and cut-throats originally. And now with their brainless toadies and their thousands of soullets yes-men they maintain their position. But as Beethoven said: "Nobility is here and here." Pointing to his heart and his head. Confucius said nobility is a virtue not a birthright. But the human species as a whole can achieve nobility by creating a space-age ark should anything untoward threaten this planet. Thereby, not only acquiring nobility but also immortality for themselves and other earth creatures. Frankly, I think its better not to exist. Still, I don't like marmalade but I don't think people who do are mad. "Hinduism. The union of one's soul with Brahman can only be attained through contemplation and then it becomes Brahman himself." Comment: And then thinks, what the hell was all that about? A school of mystics believes that when P1 is worked out to the 50 trillionth place the numbers will stop being random, and a message from God will appear. Comment: Yeah, like get a life! An omnipotent God could prove 'His' existence by assembling the stars in the sky into a simple message using a different language every night. Around the world for as long as it takes. (Ignore the objection s of so-called sophisticates). Or is it Omnipotence LTD? Even contemplating the idea that somewhere an individual is playing God is naive - more than that, it's primitive! Tibetan Book of the Dead: Good deeds are counted out with white pebbles and bad deeds with black pebbles, then the mirror of Karma is consulted where every good and bad deed is shown. There is then either union with the light or reincarnation for the soul. Comment: One is superfluous - pebbles or mirror! "Tao ('Path.' China) Non-involvement. Peace lies in emptiness…We desire the transient things in life and yet neglect to cultivate that which is eternal - our minds… Confucius (551-479 B.C.) believed nobility was a virtue not a birthright. And pre-empting Christ: " "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." And even Oscar Wild: "The superior man understands the value of everything… The inferior man understands the price of everything." Comment: Contradictions - the sages believed that trying to reason about things was useless. Yet, Lieh Tzu, one of the great sages, states "I know through reasoning." "Cathar ('clean'). From 1208 the papacy slaughtered men, women and children in an attempt to exterminate them. Cathars believed that the world is ruled by an evil God. They claimed that the true teachings of Jesus were to be found in the "sayings" gospels. Since the world and its God were evil they forbade procreation. In France and Italy with the Inquisition, the church wiped them out in a bloody massacre!" Comment: And we called the native North American Indians savages:- Yet to the American Indian a man's word was his bond. Land was shared and his destiny determined by his respect for nature. All organized religions appear to be the same: Sufi ("wearing wool") seek Allah through music - spinning to ecstasy. A pantheistic Muslim mystical sect. 'Whirling-Dervish' They believe that all positive religions are paths to reality. Sufi mystic Al-Hallaj was executed for such blasphemy. Roger Bacon (philosopher) anticipated the laser, airplane, motorcar, etc. The church imprisoned him for such writings. It imprisoned him again in 1278 for 14 years. On his release he went back to Oxford and died shortly after." Jakob Boehme (1575 - 1624) spoke of the unity of nature. This philosopher was imprisoned by the church for trying to reconcile Protestants and Catholics. He was set free after promising never to write again." The church declared the Gospel of Thomas heretical destroying most copies. The disciples of Jesus (Jesus is reputed to have had a brother and sisters) disagreed over his real nature and even the interpretation of his sermons. In the Gospel of Thomas (Thomas means 'twin') Jesus does not prophesy the coming of God's kingdom, "Heaven is within you." According to the Gospel of Thomas Jesus warned "Trust not others, priests, politicians or prophets. But know thyself." The campaign to have the Gospel of Thomas included in the bible is opposed by the church. Heretic ("A person who has a belief contrary to the authorized teaching"). The church burned heretics at the stake. Consider the sale of indulgences. And - Pope John XII atheist and brothel keeper! Benedict IX indulged in murder and bestiality. Boniface VIII , atheist and murderer. John XXIII A pirate. Alexander VI Started murdering at age 12. Paul III Poisoned his mother and several relatives to gain control of the family inheritance. Murdered two cardinals and bedded his own daughter. Etc, etc, etc. And if you're not a Jew then read the New Testament. Matthew 10:5. KJV. Mullahs fare no better. Recently in Afghanistan when the mullahs thought that their own privileged position was threatened by reforms beneficial to the people they declared a holy war against those who proposed such changes. P.S. What remains? Quite a bit. Technology, The Arts, Sport … back to homepage |
