This is a follow-on to my post of Sat 04 6:38a, partially repeated above (with edits) for easy reference.Greylorn Ell wrote: Let me briefly define the term Absolute Miracle as an event, state of being, or combination thereof that cannot possibly be explained, not even by a hypothetical omniscient God. Christ clearly knew the paranormal technology needed to perform actions seen by men as miraculous, but since he knew how to perform them, they were no more miraculous than an anthropologist visiting primitive tribes with a Zippo in hand-- or even better, an old handgun.
We are all required to accept the reality of at least one Absolute Miracle. It is that anything whatsoever exists.
Non-existence of anything seems the most natural state of being. If nothing existed, no one would be around to wonder why. The non-existent universe could stay non-existing forever without being troubled by non-existent philosophers wondering why it does not exist.
It is only the existence of something-- our own selves, the planet we live on, or the bird that shit in my face this morning when I went outside and gazed up at the sky-- that causes us to consider the universe. However they came to be, that universe and our own minds are the consequence of a deep-level miracle, an Absolute Miracle.
The need for an Absolute Miracle (A.M.) is implicitly recognized. Christians and other religions have their omnipotent God. Scientists have co-opted Christian beliefs, dropped the God-concept, and merely renamed them-- the Big Bang, and biological abiogenesis. Every version of the Absolute Miracle has this in common:
One single thing or entity that contained all the laws and physics principles necessary to create our universe always existed, without cause, and about 13.5 billion years ago it got to work. No one knows why. What might have prompted a God who existed forever to suddenly create a universe? What might have triggered cosmology's micro-pea/singularity to explode? Such questions cannot be answered without introducing an outside force-- a second Absolute Miracle.
So, let's assume that for the universe to fire up, two miracles are required.
This presents another question. There is a mathematical theorem that I know of but cannot replicate, which declares that if the state of something within a given space can move, there must be a space at least one dimension higher into which it can move.
Simple analogy: A theoretically two-dimensional sheet of paper lying flat atop a 2-D table-top. Imagine picking up one end of the paper and curling it upward, off the desktop surface. This requires a third space, a 3-D space into which the paper can curl.
By non-rigorous analogy, if our two hypothetical 3-D spaces are to interact and change, they must exist within a 4-D space containing them. This concept is not important to our current level of discussion and is presented so that any drunk mathematicians who found this stuff late at night, by mistake, will not immediately write these ideas off after their morning coffee.
So why not start at a different place? Three Absolute Miracles:
This event would not compare to the hypothetical Big Bang and would not instantly create all the matter in the universe. It would not create any matter at all, not a quark, not a neutrino, not a single structured particle of the sort that atomic physicists describe.
- A space containing raw, unformed and unstructured energy. It is defined by the Three original Laws of Thermodynamics-- straight-up classical physics. This is an open, unstructured space. I'll borrow a term from recent astrophysical research and call it "Dark-energy" space."
D.E. space manifests a single force, defined in physics as the "Second Law of Thermodynamics." This is a settling, stabilizing force. It's job is to maintain D.E. space in its original unstructured form and to keep it at the lowest possible temperature, Absolute Zero, as defined by the Third Law of Thermodynamics.- A highly structured, tightly-wound space with a potential for intelligence that cannot be realized within the space itself. It's job is to keep itself tightly wound.
Imagine an old wind-up clock whose owner has been told that the clock will tick down to the time of his death, and no tick can be undone. Fearful of death, he keeps the clock with him at all times, his fingers grasping its winding-handle, holding it tightly, preventing the spring from unwinding and the clock from ticking. When asleep he puts the spring-winding handle in a vise.- Suppose that the force internal to dark energy is the perfect counter-force to that which holds Aeon space together.
Finally consider the possibility that dark energy and Aeon space exist within a super-space, and collide.
It would, however, break up Aeon from its tightly bound form into myriad tiny components, beons, no longer integrated into Aeon, but perhaps striving to return to that bound state as natural forces do their work. This will be forestalled by dark energy, as much a counterforce to beon as beon is to it.
The collision between Dark Energy and Aeon space changes a quiescent universe into a potentially active, busy place in which non-conscious beons interact unconsciously with some dark energy. The change comes when at least two beons develop rudimentary forms of consciousness. They become the entity that we now conceive of as "God."
Greylorn
I assume that at least two beons are necessary to develop consciousness, because humans do not develop consciousness without the assistance of others. I prefer the notion that three beons were involved, perhaps because of my religious history, but I've noticed the number "three" coming up throughout these considerations and beyond, beginning with the structural stability of triangles and extending into the structure of life at the microbiological level (e.g. codons).
A method of communication between them would have been necessary. I propose that dark energy provided the medium for exchange, and mathematics their common language, beginning at 1+1=2. It is the only language that exists independently of any mind's invention. Meanings expressed in mathematics cannot be redefined to suit the outcome of a conversation.
My term for the first consortium of intelligent and self-aware beons is, of course, Geon.
At some point during or after their development of consciousness, Geon might notice the existence of other beons, but quiescent and non-conscious. Would they not endeavor to change that state, to awaken those beons? If the quiescent beons have a strong consciousness potential, this might be easily accomplished by the equivalent of a high-level hello.
(These notions are similar to religious lore about the creation of the angels. Except in this version they were awakened or brought to consciousness, rather than created.)
Next I envision a hierarchical procedure for introducing unconscious beons to intelligence and self-awareness similar to those used in human societies. Geon has done their work for the time being, and after becoming bored with the same job, angels or whatever the next hierarchy might best be named, will pass it down the line. As lower levels of beons are reached, everyone will become bored with the job of waking them up.
Who might represent these lower levels of beon? Take a guess, and if you need assistance I'll rent out my mirror.
Suppose for the sake of discussion that Geon desires to bring all beons to intelligent consciousness, and that neither they nor anyone else wants to put in the repetitive work involved. What do humans do when faced with accomplishing repetitive tasks? We build factories and fill them with machines to do the job.
Hence a short introduction to the purpose behind creation: The human body/brain is a mechanism engineered to connect with one beon and feed it enough sensory information to awaken it, with the ideal result that upon the body's demise, beon will be able to maintain consciousness without further biological and environmental support.
Yep, there's more.
Greylorn
