Fielder's choice

I have a very tentative and preliminary comment about the theories linking zero point energy field (ZPF) to quantum physics (as in the works of Lynne McTaggart and Erwin Laszlo). It seems reductive to talk about "The Field" as being ultimate Oneness. In mathematics, the concept of infinity exists but there can be multiple infinities, different types of infinity. Similarly, "the Field" could simply mean a type of field rather than an ultimate Oneness in and of itself: a unified field, not the unified field. In all the theorizing by "New Age" writers and physicists, we have not gotten to the point where consciousness is ontologically linked to the physical world. Consciousness may be seen by McTaggart and others as an intentional agent that affects physical reality, but I do not think we have a "real" physical phenomenon at all until consciousness witnesses it. In this interactivity of subject, object, and epistemological process, creation unfolds out of itself which includes the containment field of the space-time matrix that hosts the "matter." The constituents of creation mechanics thus include the consciousness principle, but the oneness of consciousness itself cannot necessarily be postulated as a priori. Like the quantum particle, its existence is contingent on a complex acausal interaction that simultaneously brings physical reality into being, observes it, completely inhabits it, and finally becomes it. However, when I say "consciousness itself" I do not contradict the multiplicity of consciousnesses which recreate the universe in each of their separate dimensional existences. As in samkhya philosophy, the monads of consciousness, the purusas, are points of individual cosmic existence, each of them self-existent onenesses that do not cross-reference.
Ultimately a more advanced theory of time is needed to unravel the spectrum of Oneness Fields. McTaggart posits "everything in the future already exists at some bottom-rung level in the realm of pure potential, and that in seeing into the future, or the past, we are helping to shape it and bring it into being, just as we do with a quantum entity in the present with the act of observation" (Lynne McTaggart, The Field, p. 173). This viewpoint, as advanced as it may seem, privileges present time unnecessarily. In considering time's trajectory from past to future to be an advancement from more concrete (historical) to more abstract (uncertain and probabilistic), the present becomes simply a moving point along that line. I think we are dealing more with a staging platform which can accommodate all the known temporal states (past, present, and future manifesting something like solid, liquid, and gas) simultaneously through the lens of multiple consciousnesses, existing simultaneously in parallel universes, and ultimately resolving, if at all, in a multiverse that can support completely contradictory laws of nature. Recent research in cosmology may be pushing us in the direction of resolving quantum theory not as a unified field but as a vast warehouse of scrolled fields, each speaking its own language and each contained in its individual jug.

When it changed

Something happened this week while people were distracted by the Presidential election. It had to do with the election, but it was really about what was happening down in the foundations of the structure.

Something was changing. Minds were changing. Hearts were changing. Time itself was changing.

Remember in Ray Bradbury's story "A Sound of Thunder," where the traveler back in prehistoric times accidentally steps on a butterfly and thus when he comes back to the present everything has just gone terribly wrong. A fascist is elected president, when in the reality that the traveler left, that wasn't going to happen.

In 2000 AD, time went off the rails. A fascist was elected president through a succession of dirty tricks, and a host of bad things happened that wouldn't have if the popular choice had won: 9/11. The Iraq War. The banking collapse and stock market crash.

None of that was in the original plan. Who stomped the butterfly that caused the wrong path to be taken?

Then this week, we witnessed a miracle. The train of time that had jumped the rails, gone unaccountably wrong, somehow jumped back on! It took an act of collective consciousness and will, one that it seemed impossible could happen. And yet the impossible did happen, so things changed again. Away from the hell scenario that we were being ushered into by the smiling pink-skinned people who adorned themselves in flag colors.

I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that the impulse threatening us has been murderous in nature. Mostly they are content to poison our food, poison our minds, and bleed us dry. But in their dreams I think they would love to just randomly, casually, shoot us down and pile up the bodies.

What intense relief I feel. Not that it's over; it's never over. This battle is in the cards as long as there are atoms in the universe. But at least the man doesn't have his thumb on the scales any longer. How long has it been in the history of this planet since time got redeemed? Well, I think it just happened again.

The shape of quarks to come

NOTE: The following information has been superseded by itself, as scientific knowledge is by definition subject to constant revision. Thus anything that is said henceforth may be regarded as an illustration of quantum foam, in that the breakdown in structure it implies is embedded in the very structure of what is being said at the moment. This inherent self-referentiality and paradoxicality thereby temporarily converts qubikuity into a postmodern blog, for better or worse.
Someone mentioned quantum foam the other day as a pleasant-sounding thing, and I agreed that if you ordered a cosmic cappucino, you would definitely want it with lots of quantum foam.
Quantum foam refers to the miniscule scale where physical reality breaks down from the level of solid objects into complete immateriality. This is said to be at the incredibly tiny Planck length, or 10(-37) cm. The smallest bit of matter we know of is the quark. Now, I have been googling around to find out what a quark looks like. My guess is that it is not round like a tiny billiard ball. Anything that is on the verge of being dissolved into quantum foam is unlikely to be so regularly shaped. Furthermore, they are unlikely to be hard like billiard balls as well. My guess is that they have a spongy surface, rather like green cheese as in the case of the surface of the moon.
Of the six types of quarks (up, down, top, bottom, charm, and strange), the smallest is the up quark. The up quark is also known as a first-generation quark. By comparison, the bottom quark is quite large, but then it pops in and out of existence for only a micro-instant. Evidently, on that level, size doesn't really "matter."
For your edification I have found a picture of a bottom quark, again by googling. This is as accurate as present-day science can render it.

The rope

a skinny rope

hanging in space
attached to nothing

supports the weight of moons
heavy planets
eclipses
and sorrow

all air lifts
feet dancing up the aerial path
mind takes wing and
who can gainsay this
light quintessence

the rope could

pull it down and the curtain opens

The way it is

We are in thrall, no doubt, to unseen forces which may be human, alien, or a combination thereof. Their existence behind the scenes, pulling the strings, determining our lives in ways great and small, is well documented. Most people now accept the fact of a secret conspiracy that has existed for centuries and has led to control by a few of the world's riches. What gives them this degree of domination over people's lives? Their ability to control people's minds.

The project of dumbing down humanity, endemic in history for generations, has been going especially well of late. The PTB (Powers That Be) have discovered how to subvert our belief systems so that whenever we act in what we conceive to be our own interest, we are in fact doing the bidding of the impersonal power elite whom we unwittingly serve. Our accustomed basis of ethics and rationality lies in we believe about ourselves. We see ourselves as good. Our unconscious sees us as evil as a corrective and so they are at war with each other. Both are deluded.

This inner war that is fought every second in every cell in the body between the anti-entropic forces of life and the free radical forces of death finds its reflection in human conflicts and in the works of the imagination, which depend upon standards of opposition. The binary split which creates such dynamics of evolution and change in biological systems and cultural histories is terrifying and forces our minds into paralysis. It is as if we deny the reality of struggle all about us, in favor of the negligent peace of a separated mental stance. This fact is food for the PTB. It enables them to feed us on images of warring divinities, driving us to distraction, while their banquet tables are laden with the spoils of our feverish labors.

Now that I have spilled the beans, so to speak, about the aforementioned (Trigrammaton), your belief system may never be the same again. For that destructive act I may be labelled a terrorist, but hopefully not yet a martyr. To avoid that fate I must go underground, to Pellucidar. You will receive my next dispatch from an overheated room somewhere in the back of my imagination.

Waking

the sleeper wakes
into a dream
and from there wakes
into a series of dreams
where waking is but a vision of light

morning is broken
the shards of the day fall back
into the theatre of night
where plays are endlessly enacted
and the stage is but a stage
for future performances

stop counting time
play the music to its own beat
you will yet be able to take your exit
when the early dawn
wraps itself around your feet

Puzzling the will

The will to live. It's a good thing, so we think. In fact, isn't there a judgment about people who do not have much of a will to live? I'm not just talking about people who are driven to suicide, but those who live carelessly and let themselves lapse into ill health, or who simply underutilize their resources and live less fully than perhaps they ought? It speaks to our own will to live, somehow offending the norm of the entire human community in which we find ourselves. We are all here equally under the circumscription of the body and the senses, and "the heart-ache and the thousand shocks that flesh is heir to." And we all have to daily exercise that will muscle in order to have the determination to stick with it. You can't get out of it that easily, we say to our less willful brethren. Suck it up already!

But the question I would pose is: whose will is it really? Who wants us to live? Is it even ourselves? How do we know some alien race has not bred us to inhabit this planet, and somehow needs our life force to exercise itself for a certain number of years in order to benefit them energetically somehow. Some variation of The Matrix, in other words. How do we know our will is our own? How do we know we are not simply being manipulated by some bioenergetic device to maintain our existence here, unthinking, unquestioning?

Of course, it could be God's will. In which case it would be all right to obey it. You don't want to piss off God, after all.

It could also be some evil force. That is what the gnostics believed, and they were pretty much synonymous with the early Christians. Not that they thought we should all go "off" ourselves in protest, but they definitely saw us benighted humans as living in prison. The Black Iron Prison, modern day gnostic Philip K. Dick calls it in Valis.

So whether it be God's will that we feel impelled to continue inhabiting this mortal frame, or that of some less benevolent force, we must acknowledge the possibility that this "free" will of ours is an illusion, even in the intimate matter of survival. We have been heavily conditioned, to be sure, to think that we have free will, because it is very useful for "Them" to have us think that way. What a con! We think that our will is our own, so of course we will follow it unquestioningly.

When Hamlet was ruminating about "to be or not to be," he might have been grappling with this very issue:

But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered Country, from whose bourn
No Traveller returns, Puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have,
Than fly to others that we know not of.
Thus Conscience does make Cowards of us all...

It is generally agreed by Shakespeare experts that the "conscience" Hamlet refers to here is not our modern meaning of conscience, i.e. "doing what's right," but something more akin to consciousness. Specifically, consciousness of our unconsciousness, which we are afraid of. In the case of what is on "the other side," it could be worse than what we've got here. (Although that seems hard to believe, if you've listened to any of the Republican debates.)

They want us to think we have power and that the highest expression of it is our own "free" will to live. Never mind that we have no idea how we got here and generally have no concept of having consented to it. Did they drug us, cajole us with promises of lots of sex and sensual pleasures, or simply tell us everything and anything that we wanted to hear to get us to take out an 80-year mortgage on this big-ass piece of fleshly real estate?

Don't fear the unconscious. Fear what you know. Doubt how you know it. Question everything. If there's any reason we're here, it's to find the truth. Don't blow it.