he question of “evolving” and “emerging-complete” are time-based questions that, without a better grasp of T Time itself, will remain beyond us. Is it linear? No. Is it cyclical? This is what we will attempt to answer.
That said, the chicken-egg poser does not really present an
“infinite regression” problem; rather it is a conundrum.
Here, we just don’t know where to break the loop. This is the only problem we are faced with in my “more logical” model that I propose below (Figure 2).
Origin: fusion and outburst
Decreasing elasticity;
Increasing elasticity;
return to Origin
illusion of linear time
Point of maximum
As a cycle
tension reached
As an effluxion
through space
Figure 2
Time as a tensioned effluxion of space-matter
that returns to its origin or “start-point”
Carefully considered, the above is a model of both Time and the “origin” of the universe. Here, we make no attempt to link the “origin” of the universe with linear time—which supposes a Grand Beginning we roundly dismissed as illogical. In the above model, we linked it to a cyclical process instead.
A widely accepted theory that may help support my above concept is the Big Bang Theory (albeit with an admixture of the so-called String Theory). The Big Bang theory states that all matter in the universe was at one point fused into one.
29
Chapter Seven Time as a Viewed Effluxion
This results in “nuclear fusion”—what is now known to create a nuclear explosion. As the fused matter exploded from that central point, it created an ever-expanding universe.
Now, here I factor in something akin to the String Theory.
Most likely due to gravity (a phenomenon that is still little understood today), maximum elasticity is then reached by the outward expansion—as in an elastic band. When that happens the whole universe is pulled back into a single point—which then recreates nuclear fusion.
Matter then explodes once more, only to reach maximum elasticity again. In this scenario, the universe is thus “created”
and “destroyed” in an endless pulsating manner which, carefully considered, has neither beginning nor end. If this scenario holds true, it is no wonder certain ancient concepts viewed time—and perhaps Creation—as an endless loop: one that very much underpins the notion of an ouroboros: a snake eating its own tail.
“Time” and “Creation” in this scenario is reduced to an illusion created merely by the speed of effluxion of space-matter relative to a point of view. “Efflux” is the opposite of “influx” and denotes an outbound trajectory. So, for every effluxion, illusory “time” subsists in the span of the effluxion, only to reverse and a new paradigm, a new scenario, created in the next Big Bang. It can be rendered this way: a) If there was a “point of view”—a “perspective”, such as mind provides—but there was no effluxion of space-matter, (thus a pure stillness as in a photo—then change in perspective would be the only thing to which “time” applies…which
“time”, incidentally, can thus run back and forth. (In other words, when you change perspective and later return to that perspective, since nothing else has changed, you are simply going back to a former “time” and viewpoint.)
b) If there was effluxion of space but no point of view, then
“time” as we know it would not exist at all.
30
Indeed, the absence of mind (consciousness) can only mean no viewpoint—and thus no time as far as we are concerned.
An ancient mystical view thus defines Time (even “reality”), as a construct of the mind.2
This leads us to an important conclusion: for there to be
time there must be motion (effluxion)— which is especially useful if it is cyclical as in the solar cycle, the lunar cycle, and the diurnal cycle (day-night as Earth spins on its axis). Time then, defined another way, is but an appreciation of that effluxion through changes in perspective.
And fundamentally, instead of Life having evolved from basic, nebulous matter into complex, discrete structures that culminated in awareness, here is what might prove to be an uncomfortable thought. Since Sentience can conceive of— be—
anything, we, as Life, might actually be mere pockets of sentience emanating from, and connected in unseen ways to an Overarching Sentience which creates “dream worlds” that become our “reality”; an Awareness both immanent to, and transcendent over, everything we see and do not see.
Indeed, the general Creationist view is that a Power of sorts—
immanent to, or even transcending matter—and also so sentient as to be completely aware of everything, made the different environments and then created organisms that suit each particular environment. Both Science and Religion are agreed that Life could not have evolved without Awareness and its guiding impact on all matter, directing and molding it to assume shapes and propensities that enable it to survive on this Earth.
Simply put (and despite tomes devoted to the subject), the central question is speed. As currently taught, Life evolved basically by accident, and from a simple, slow beginning 2 “Kal” in Sikhism and in Hinduism is both the Universal Mind (i.e. the mind that gave birth to other less powerful copies of itself), and Time itself.
31
Chapter Seven Time as a Viewed Effluxion
chemical reactions finally produced the first proteins that eventually acquired propensity—a tendency to be selective as to what they require and absorb from the environment.
This simple propensity then slowly acquired awareness, followed by an ever-expanding knowledge base that started off Evolution in earnest, fuelled by the now-intrinsic desire to survive. Natural Selection favored the fittest, and a pivotal point occurred when human attained a certain critical amount of knowledge that triggered and facilitated an exponential rise in advancements…as is happening in our times.
Religion on the contrary, assumes initial full awareness and complete knowledge from an all-powerful being…who in some Grand Beginning “breathed” Life into watered-down copies of “himself”—including “his” Awareness—doled out to plant, animal and human souls within an organized eco-structure carefully designed to sustain Life
But, instead of sentience that developed slowly over “time”
from an illogical “Grand Beginning”, why should we not factor a Power that—per the all-or-nothing scenario we posited in Chapter Six—has all potentiality in it? And instead of thinking of that Omni-Power as a matter-like substance as would be our tendency, why not imagine the “Grand Everything” as sentience? Indeed just as our mind can “invisibly” conceive of, create and articulate anything, why wouldn’t that Power’s conceptualizations (its “dream material”) manifest anything due to the undeniable sentience-energy-matter link?
So, instead of us thinking of matter as having created sentience, why should we not think of sentience as having created matter? Indeed, the chicken-egg scenario teaches us that if we posit matter as the lead “substance” we can run into certain technical difficulties that have no answer. It is no problem, however, if the chicken—having the potential of an egg embedded in it, and the egg having the potential of a chicken in it—emerged complete like that in an already complete concept that was “dreamed” into existence…
32
Now, matter becomes very interesting when experimenting with sub-atomic particles. A major realization was that the introduction of awareness—a point of view, a perspective—
curiously affects the outcome of the experiment. It sometimes gets so eerie that the experiment itself seems to conform to expectations you harbor for that day.
Even light—unlike most particles and waves—behaves as a
particle if you test for that…or a wave if you test for that.
Much the same happens in the minute world of quantum experiments. All the minute particles seem so linked to mind that one wonders whether that subtlest of links is to be found somewhere here.
But if Mind is the Supreme Originator, why people do not ordinarily exhibit mind-over-matter capability? Why are we not able to instantly manifest whatever we conceptualize?
There is no clear suggestion in life that we don’t have this latent ability. Experiments turn out data that suggest that we have psychic ability within us. Certainly one dog had it.
Its beloved master worked far off and he would come home randomly, preferring to surprise his wife and his dog. While the wife had no clue when he would arrive, the dog would go and lie on a mat near the door expecting him, and sure enough he would eventually walk through the door that day.
If “psychic” is too much, then the ability of the cuttlefish, the chameleon and the octopus might help us bridge in our minds the mental-to-physical link through the way they can mentally affect their shape and/or color.
And with the octopus, we briefly noted that the entire body seems to react automatically to surroundings—if the octopus prefers to switch on that mode. Switched on, it is almost as if its thought-to-manifestation barrier has collapsed. This takes us to our next major consideration.
33