11: FIELDS

Fields are forces of influence; electrical, conceptual, unknown, or otherwise

Synopsis: Fields carry and transmit information. Fields are fractal and can be made of fields. Tholonic fields are similar to morphic fields. Consciousness is a field. Ideas, concepts, and beliefs generate fields. Review of field and meta-field research. Review of data storage and transmission if field information. Relationship between consciousness and gravity. Reality as field-memory. Encoding;/decoding of field data.

Keywords: fields, morphic fields, tholonic fields, ideas, telepathy, ESP, matrix, memory, engrams, dark-matter, gravity

We know a lot about fields already, so it is reasonable to examine fields in general based on what we have learned. For example, if we use the concepts used in electricity, we can speculate the following as a starting point.

• A field is composed of two parts that are always perpendicular to each other . One part, the electric field, is the result of potential energy or the position of the charges, and one part, the magnetic field, is the result of kinetic energy, or the movement of the charges, so we have a concept of a “potential field” and the “kinetic field”. The electrical field is created by voltage (potential), or charge, and exists even if there is no movement of energy. The magnetic field is created by current or amperage (kinetic) and only exists where there is a flow of energy.
• Potential fields can perform “work” as they can change the state of matter. This is based on the fact that electrical fields can alter the speed and direction of matter.
• Kinetic fields (may) carry information and cannot perform work as they do not affect the state of matter. This is based on the fact that the state of matter, such as its speed and direction, is unaffected by a magnetic field. Because we have stated that information is data plus energy, which implies movement, and because the kinetic field is the result of the movement of energy, we can suggest that the kinetic field contains information.
• These fields transmit energy through waves. We say this because electrons are not the energy itself but the medium through which energy is transported. So, where is the actual energy? It is in the field that surrounds the medium, such as a wire. These energy fields travel through the electrons in the wire, not on them, at the speed of light. It’s similar to how waves are created when you drop a rock into the water. The waves travel outward at some speed, but the water molecules are not traveling outward at that speed; rather, they are just bobbing up and down due to the energy wave traveling through the water. In this example, electrons are like water molecules, water is like the electromagnetic field, the container of the water is like the wires, and dropping a rock is like flipping the “On” switch.
• The transmission of energy requires a disturbance to the fields. Just as the rock in the above example created a disturbance in the water by transferring energy, the transference of energy by closing a circuit causes a disturbance in the electromagnetic field. In the case of electricity, the waves always travel at the speed of light, unlike the water waves, which move at a speed relative to the size and velocity of the rock. This is because there is no matter to factor in with electromagnetic fields.
• The material used to conduct these fields can be any material that responds to the energy carried by the field. Energy causes things to move, and it will always seek to dissipate/balance itself in those things. This is that “path of least resistance” stuff again. If it is easier to move an electron in a copper wire than it is to move an electron in nitrogen-filled air, then that is what it will do, and that is why wires work. The energy itself, including any information it may contain, is carried in the electromagnetic fields, and the wires are used to direct the flow of those fields. Fields don’t need wires as they can travel through the air, water, or even space, but controlling and directing the fields in these mediums is challenging. This also applies to the energy of ideas and concepts and their conductive medium, the mind.
• The conductive material is simply a means to move the energy and is not altered (much) by the energy (within the limits of the capacity of the material). When electricity moves through a wire, the electrons only move about 1/10 of a millimeter per second in DC. In an AC, they jiggle back and forth 60 times a second.
• Fields contain embedded fields. The idea is derived from the observation that a magnetic field can exist with the movement of local energy. For example, a static magnetic field can be created by the movement of subatomic particles (electrons, protons, neutrons) called spin. Everything is magnetic, but in most substances, the direction of the spin of these particles is 50/50, half spinning in one direction and half spinning in the opposite direction, so the magnetic fields balance each other out. In some metals, like iron, all the particles spin in the same direction, creating an imbalanced magnetic field. The attempt of this imbalanced field to balance itself creates the magnetic fields we see in magnets, planets, and elsewhere. We call this an embedded field because it is a field that exists on a more fundamental level than that of electricity. Even when there is no magnetic field on the circuit level, there are countless magnetic fields at the subatomic level.

The most important point is that energy travels via fields. This is true even in the case of electricity, even though “common sense” tells us the energy is traveling through the wires. Wires simply allow for the direction of the fields. When we use Ohm’s or Newton’s laws, we describe the relationships caused by fields. Even mass itself can be described as a product of field interactions if we consider waves as the result of energy traveling through a field (which is how quantum mechanics defines it). In fact, mass itself may simply be a measure of the energy of a wave.¹

Key 72: Fields are the context for the energy that creates waves, and everything is a wave.

With all the above in mind, let’s explore tholonic fields.

If tholons are forms of information, we come back to the question, “Where is this information stored?” This is a question that has been pondered for ages. One example would be the somewhat Buddhist concept (in that it was coined by a Buddhist in 1884 but adopted by other beliefs) called the Akashic Records which is said to be “a compendium of all human events, thoughts, words, emotions, and intent ever to have occurred in the past, present, or future”. This might be a bit ambitious for our purposes, but the idea is essentially the same… that of a ubiquitous, timeless, non-physical record of (at least) all aggregate thought forms. If we claim that this also describes the thologram, where and how does it store this data?

Let’s review…

We claim that the original source of energy is primal Awareness and Intention, and as such, Awareness and Intention are properties of existence. This is consistent with some current scientific models, especially in light of the experiments that have shown an inextricable relationship between reality and awareness. Although there is much discussion these days about consciousness and reality, Archibald Wheeler, one of the mega-heavy-weights of quantum mechanics, a colleague of Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr, a mentor to many of today’s Leading physicists, and the man who chose the name “black hole,” was perhaps the first modern scientist to prove that awareness is required to bring the Universe into existence.

As Wheeler put it:

No phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.² We are participants in bringing into being not only the near and here, but the far away and long ago.³

Towards the end of his life, he said he had only enough time left to work on one idea: that awareness shapes not only the present but the past as well.

We already have the proof of awareness causing waveforms to collapse into particles, as we can see in the split-slit experiment.

Briefly, this split-slit experiment shows that electrons act like particles when observed, and when not observed, they act like waves. The act of observation forces the electron waves to be perceived as particles. It’s not that the electrons are waves that turn into particles; it’s that the electrons are wavicles, both particles and waves at the same time, but the act of observing them, of introducing awareness into the context, changes the context and scope of the expression, which then alters its instantiation. It was stated earlier that the archetype of something and its instance is the same thing in different contexts. Here, an electron’s “wave” quality is the archetype, as it defines its field and probabilities. Once the field interacts with another field, i.e., is observed, its context changes.

It’s like the difference between having credit and making a purchase. Having credit means you have the potential to buy something. If you are in a shoe store, there is a high probability you will buy shoes. You may have the idea to buy red shoes (the archetype you have in mind), but you don’t know exactly what red shoes you will buy until you are holding a pair in your hands (the instance of the archetype) and the transaction is approved.

We also have evidence of how awareness can (possibly) change the reality of the past as well, as demonstrated in Wheeler’s delayed-choice experiment⁴. In addition, Penrose wrote an entire book on cognition and reality (The Emperors’ New Mind). He even came up with a term to describe the awareness/reality continuum: the Orch-OR⁵, or orchestrated objective reduction, which attempts to explain how consciousness and reality are intertwined. The idea of reality being a product of awareness is not at all “fringe” and hasn’t been for some time.

There is also another possible field effect of awareness that is fascinating and holds tremendous potential. It’s the phenomenon called the Shared Death Experience (SDE) and the related After Death Communication Experience (ADCE).

An SDE is described as:

An experience in which loved ones, caregivers, or people in the proximity of the dying person experience one or more sensations of an emotional, visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, and telepathic nature that appear to be shared by a dying person’s transition.

Don’t think Quiji Boards and Séances; think serious research by professional organizations such as the peer-reviewed journals “American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Care” and”Journal of Near Death Studies” as well as universities, rehabilitation counselors, and psychologists around the world^6,7,8,9.

Without getting into the research’s supporting details, several characteristics of an SDE and/or ADCE suggest it may be an effect of field induction where the inducting energy field is the field of awareness. As the word implies, induction is the “ability of one field to induce or influence changes in another field.”

If we look at fields tholonically, each tholon has its own instance of awareness (consciousness), intelligence, and field, and that field is a parent field within which the child tholons, with their own subfields, are created. Thus, every field, at every level, influences and induces fields in its proximity to change in some way and to some degree.

We noted how the movement of energy can create magnetic fields. These magnetic fields are a form of energy, so just as the movement of electricity can form a magnetic field, so too can a magnetic field form electricity. This applies to tholonic fields, such as fields of awareness and intention, suggesting that the movement of intention can induce changes in awareness, and changes in awareness can induce movement of intentions. No energy (or A&I) is being created, just changed from one form to another. We can see this in our daily lives by examining how our intentions and awareness constantly interact. My intention to read a book will induce my awareness towards reading that book. When my intention to read is reduced, my awareness will drift away from reading. Awareness and intention exist together, just like electricity and magnetism.

Applying this to the thologram, at the “top” we have an elementary field, which exists between the 1^st two poles created by the primal dot and which have the properties we have labeled Definition and Contribution, and which instantiates in various forms depending on their context. Every child field is induced by its parent (and ancestors and peers), and the parent is induced by the child (and all descendants and peers). Accordingly, the thologram is one large field of ever-embedded fields, all inducing one another, all of which are expressions of primal awareness, all interacting with and dependent on one another.

There are many legends, stories, and theories, ancient and modern, attesting to the power of awareness. We won’t get into them here other than to say that if reality and awareness are intertwined, then it would be reasonable to expect that just as reality has an effect on awareness, awareness can affect reality, especially as awareness is an integral part of reality and not simply an effect of evolutionary causes. This is easier to accept when speaking of human awareness, but how does this associative relationship manifest in other instances, such as plants, rocks, planets, and elements, all of which are some expression of primal awareness?

Morphic-Fields

As late as the 1950s, some scientists and most people in general thought that plants and even animals were little more than biological machines and that outer-space was just a bunch of hot and cold balls floating around according to Newtonian and Keplerian laws. Since then, we have discovered that plants have “feelings”, monkeys can form sentences and talk about their emotions, and the Universe is not only a lot bigger than we thought but there may be countless parallel versions of them. We have seen how everything is connected in one way or another, at least on the quantum level - to name a few changes to our worldview. We are moving ahead in our thinking and understanding at an incredible rate.

Sadly, some of the old guard is a tough bunch that is doing their best to keep us from making progress, not unlike the 9^th century Archdiocese. Take the long-time editor of Nature magazine, John Maddox, who stated, regarding Rupert Sheldrake’s book on morphic-fields:

[his book] is the best candidate for burning there has been for many years. Sheldrake’s is not a scientific theory. Sheldrake is putting forward magic instead of science, and that can be condemned, in exactly the language that the Pope used to condemn Galileo, and for the same reasons: it is heresy.¹⁰

Yes, he actually cited Pope Paul V’s condemnation of Galileo as a defense on the grounds that heresy is the real crime. This sounds eerily similar to “swarming with worms of heretical perversity.”

This alone should paint a pretty clear picture that modern science, for all its breakthroughs in understanding and progress, has become a modern-day religion in the hands of the truly dogmatic that seem to be in charge all too often. Dr. Richard Feynman himself noted this when he stated:

We live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television, words, books, and so on, are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science.¹¹

So, why are the modern-day version of Tomás de Torquemada (Grand Inquisitor in the Spanish Inquisition of the 15^th Century) and his ilk impaling the venerable and brilliant Rupert Sheldrake on the spikes of modern mainstream scientific dogma? Well, it seems that Sheldrake, a Cambridge professor who studied at Harvard, was onto something with his Morphic-Field Theory, and it rattled their cage. Perhaps they feared that the “worms of heretical perversity” would begin to devour the carcass of their failing scientific worldview.

Sheldrake’s Morphic-Field Theory, which he described in his 1981 book, A New Science of Life, posits the existence of organizing fields which are systems that self-organize, create structure, and have patterns. Morphic-fields are not a type of mass nor an energy but are organized by energy. This would make it a pattern or structure. Morphic-fields are described in the same way as holarchies in that they are made up of parts, which are, in turn, parts of wholes themselves. At each level, the morphic-field supports the structure of its whole and organizes its parts.

Morphic-fields described (in 50 words):

…located invisibly in and around organisms, and may account for such hitherto unexplainable phenomena as the regeneration of severed limbs by worms and salamanders, phantom limbs, the holographic properties of memory, telepathy, and the increasing ease with which new skills are learned as greater quantities of a population acquire them.¹² ~Rupert Sheldrake

A more complete description is as follows:

A morphic-field is a field of energy that imposes patterns on otherwise random or indeterminate patterns of activity. Morphic-fields transmit information via morphic-resonance, which is the influence of previous structures of activity on subsequent similar structures of activity organized by morphic-fields. Morphic-resonance has the capacity to store and transmit information and therefore it can act as a memory bank for any self-organizing group, such as self-organizing systems; molecules, crystals, cells, plants, animals and animal societies. Each member of a group can contribute and draw from this memory bank. ~ excerpt from Rupert Sheldrake’s letter to John Horgan, writer for Scientific American^13,14

The idea of morphic-fields was an epiphany that Sheldrake had in 1971 as a way to explain how living things knew how to grow when that information was not stored in their genes.

The first known example of a morphic-field test goes back to 1920, long before Sheldrake came up with his theory, when Harvard professor William McDougall proved that children of mice that have learned a maze could navigate the maze much faster. After 20 generations of maze-running mice, the next generation could run the maze 10 times faster than their pioneering ancestors. As genetics could not account for this transference of knowledge, it must have been something else; something science didn’t know about. To investigate this mystery, a team in Edinburgh set out to prove McDougall’s test was pure poppycock. Unfortunately for these researchers, their 20^th generation mice knew how to reach the target on the first try.

They had no idea of morphic-fields back then. If they did, they would have known that the Edinburgh mice benefited from the knowledge of the Harvard mice, even though they were thousands of miles apart, thanks to the intra-species transference of information via the morphic-field/morphic-resonance. There have been many other examples like this over the last 100 years.

On a more human level, we can see how Leibniz and Newton both came up with the concept of calculus at the same time, and cubic equations, considered to be one of the most significant milestones in mathematics history, were simultaneously discovered by Nicola Tartaglia and Scipione del Ferro in the 16^th century.

The way this morphic-field information is transmitted is via morphic-resonance, according to Sheldrake. All members of a group that share a morphic-field have access to the morphic-field info because they naturally resonate with that field, not unlike how we can pick up radio waves when we have a crystal that resonates with the transmission frequency. Dogs share information with dogs, humans with humans, etc., but a bond between a dog and a human creates another morphic-field they share. Sheldrake shows examples of this in how dogs know when their owners are coming home and start waiting for them by a door or window.^15,16

Because of their ability to transmit data across time and space, morphic-fields have been considered for communication in long-distance and interstellar travel^17,18. Morphic-fields may also be capable of creating self-organizing systems within AI.

Much more research is needed in morphic-field and morphic-resonance, but this is slow in coming in the current environment.¹⁹ Others have been working on similar ideas, such as theoretical physicist Lee Smolin, with his concept of the principle of precedence²⁰, which states that the history of measuring a particular quantum event will determine (or affect) the future measurements of that same event when it is measured. Unfortunately, unlike the world of physics, biology has become more dogmatic in the 20^th century.

A small but hugely significant detail is that morphic-fields originate outside of space-time. They exist in the realm of thought, awareness, or consciousness (or all 3). As we currently understand, information cannot travel faster than the speed of light (in 3D reality), but does this apply to awareness? According to the tholon model, no, it does not, because reality and the Universe is Awareness, and Awareness is 0-dimensional, and therefore transcends the limitations of space-time. However, consciousness, a contextual instance of Awareness, may well be limited by space-time. Perhaps all we need to do to transcend space and time is to become ONE with the 0-dimensional singularity of infinite Awareness and Intention. How hard could that be (assuming we don’t vaporize ourselves by plugging into the source of pure energy)? This might explain how, as Buddha claimed in the Majjhima Nikāya scripture, he could remember all his lives going back 90 eons (with 1 eon being the solar system’s lifespan). In the meantime, there has been some research on awareness and morphic-fields²¹, but it’s scant, and the results are far from clear-cut.

Beyond the Body

Many people believe that one’s consciousness can, with practice, travel outside of the body and this physical reality. This is typically called an Out of Body Experience (OOBE) or Astral Projection. Mainstream science is not a fan of this idea. Scientific American suggests that OOBEs are caused by inner ear problems²². This view, although not surprising, is troubling, considering that some real research on OOBEs²³ has shown extraordinary evidence, such as a subject, while out-of-body, being able to read the letters “P = 10^-5” or “25132” that were written on a remote piece of paper ²⁴. Practitioners have reported faster-than-light, instantaneous “travel”, which would be possible in the 0-dimensional space of Awareness.

In the world of metaphysics and parapsychology, there is the concept of “soul travel” or “astral projection”, which is a practice where the consciousness of the practitioner can, via their “souls” or “astral body”, disassociate from their physical body. While Western thinking dabbles in entertaining such possibilities, mainstream thought is that such experiences are a form of a dissociative, depersonalization, or neurological disorder. Eastern thinking is quite different, probably because the Buddhist scriptures that explain this phenomenon quite specifically have been accepted for thousands of years. For instance, here is a paragraph from the discourse of “The Eight Knowledges” extracted from the Majjhima Nikaya written by Buddha between the 2nd and 3rd century BC.

When their mind has become immersed in Samadhi like this, they wield the many kinds of psychic power; multiplying themselves and becoming one again; going unimpeded through a wall, a rampart, or a mountain as if through space, diving in and out of the earth as if it were water, walking on water as if it were earth, flying cross-legged through the sky like a bird, touching and stroking with the hand the sun and moon, so mighty and powerful, controlling the body as far as the Brahma realm. ~Buddha²⁵

The discourse goes on to describe many more seemingly impossible and miraculous phenomena. From the tholonic perspective of consciousness, such abilities are possible and inevitable. If consciousness is a contextual instance of Awareness, then changing one’s context will change how Awareness will instantiate. Humans have the ability to intentionally alter their context. We do it all the time through meditation, competition, investigation, exploration, education, and several other ways, including physiological and neuropharmacological means. With a bit of effort, research into these new areas of understanding can be found, but, in general, science is not well equipped to study the mechanics of awareness or any non-material phenomena.

Fields of awareness, such as morphic-fields and tholonic fields, while being able to instantiate in the material world, are not limited to the restrictions of the material world, and it is inevitable that we, as instances of awareness, will discover them.

Key 73: Tholonic and Morphic-fields can transmit and store information.

Key 74: Tholonic-fields are not limited by time and space.

Tholonic-Fields

The idea that morphic-fields can be formed as a result of a self-organizing system, as Sheldrake describes them, is limited to systems that exist and systems with real-world instances, such as species, societies, etc. Ideas exist and are self-organizing, so why wouldn’t morphic-fields apply there? Well, they would, but with a difference. In the morphic-field model, the instantiated members of a specific morphic-field are receivers and transmitters of information within that field. Therefore, the reception and transmission of information among the member of the morphic-field depend on the contextually limited abilities of the members of a morphic-field, such as a species. There are over 200,000,000 species of life on the planet, suggesting that at least that many morphic-fields are interacting with each other in some manner. Suppose we applied the morphic-field model to ideas as archetypes not limited by their instances. What is receiving/transmitting information within and in-between the morphic-field that ideas are a member of?

Sheldrake implicitly answers this question by describing the morphic-field as “organizing fields which are systems that self-organize, create structure, and have patterns”. This description is that of a form of intelligence. Therefore the morphic-fields that share a morphic-resonance or morphic-cloud are capable of transmitting and receiving between themselves, not only with their instances. Tholonically speaking, this would also mean that the archetypes, the tholons, are also both transmitters and receivers of information.
The tholonic view also considers the material reality to be a contextual expression of an archetype. In the morphic-field model, humans, dogs, and ants are forms of life that resonate with fields. In the tholonic model, humans, dogs, and ants are those fields in a material context.

The morphic-field theory attempts to explain why and how ideas simultaneously spread across a morphic-group, such as humans or lab rats. Morphic-fields are also capable of inter-group communication, such as between humans and dogs, as cited in Sheldrake’s book “Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home”.

In the tholonic view, these same phenomena exist between tholonic archetypes, and these tholons/archetypes can directly communicate without having to go through any of their instances. That interaction can also include negotiation via cooperation and/or conflict or result in a redefining or contributing of both archetypes. Tholons can battle, form alliances, trade, aid, lie, extort, and even destroy other tholons. This understanding better explains the wasp/roach or honeybee/human relationship and sheds light on everything from religion to economics.

At the time of this writing (August 2020), within the social arena, which includes economics, politics, government, culture, civil rights, and so much more, we are seeing some extraordinary movement of tholonic activity in the social realm as a result of the global pandemic and subsequent lock-down, itself a creation of a tholonic intention, which will alter all aspects of society. As the activity increases, a wider array of tholons will be contributing to the cause and effect of the situation-at-large to the point where concepts unrelated to health, government, and economics will come into play and be changed in ways we may not be able to imagine. Of course, what we are seeing today is itself a child of the changes that have been happening for hundreds and even thousands of years. It might seem obvious that events like famine, war, or disease would be very disruptive. While that is true for us poor human instances, on the tholonic level, they are business-as-usual. Far more disruptive (on the tholonic level) are the new classes of tholonic archetypes that never existed before and are changing reality. A few examples of the many emerging archetypes might be:

• Global communications (19th century)
• Quantum/Relativity theory (Early 20^th century).
• Logical Machines (1869)
• Access to space (1924).
• Nuclear science (1906)
• Digital information (1948).
• Genetic engineering (1970s).
• Artificial Intelligence

These are just some of the changes that have, and will, permanently and radically alter the direction of growth for many archetypes and their instances, and consequently, the fabric of reality and our understanding and perception of it.

It is a small step from here to presume that with even a little understanding of reality, the tholonic model could easily “predict” future discoveries. This has already happened to some degree. In one of the numerous cases of self-learning AI, the AI agent scanning only the words (which are themselves tholonic archetypes) of documents combined the concepts of “chalcogenide”, “optoelectronic”, and “photovoltaic applications” to create a new concept of a thermometric archetype that the AI identified as CsAgGa₂Se₄²⁶. That was in 2009. In 2012, that compound was discovered.

While both competitive and cooperative dynamics between tholonic archetypes are sustainable, cooperative dynamics tend to be more stable and enduring over time. Crucially, this principle operates across multiple scales simultaneously—what appears as competition at one level often manifests as cooperation at a higher level. The wasp-cockroach relationship mentioned earlier perfectly illustrates this: while competitive and lethal at the individual level (the wasp parasitizes individual cockroaches), it is cooperative and beneficial at the species level (the wasp selectively removes weaker, slower individuals, thereby strengthening the cockroach gene pool over evolutionary time). This exemplifies a fundamental tholonic dynamic where the child tholon (individual cockroach) contributes to the stability and resilience of the parent tholon (cockroach species) through what appears locally as destruction but systemically as refinement. We see this same multi-scale pattern in energy systems: nuclear fission, being fundamentally a destructive or separating process (splitting atoms apart), is relatively easy to achieve but requires constant control and produces hazardous waste, making it less sustainable long-term. Nuclear fusion, conversely, is a constructive or integrating process (combining atoms together) that mirrors the sun’s energy production and is far more challenging to achieve but promises virtually limitless, clean energy with minimal waste—a far more stable and sustainable solution. This reflects a fundamental tholonic principle: systems built on integration and cooperation, while often requiring more initial energy to establish, ultimately create more stable, efficient, and sustainable patterns than those based primarily on separation and competition, even when that “cooperation” emerges from seemingly antagonistic interactions at lower scales.

Ideas

The natural ordering resulting from the movement of energy is obvious (we hope). For this to apply to ideas, we would have to accept that ideas themselves use, transmit, or transform energy. There are 2 arguments to support that they do.

• An idea cannot exist in a state of total nothingness. If an idea exists, then it must do so somewhere on the spectrum of some duality. Therefore, it must have some kind of energy passing through it.
• An idea or concept has coherence, or low entropy, and represents a product of “work” or the movement of energy, which produces fields and oscillations of that energy’s movement.

Key 75: Tholonic-fields are the fields generated by the movement of energy through an archetypal concept that has been discovered or created.

Morphic-fields are the instantiations of tholonic fields as expressed by the instantiations of that archetype. This brings us back to the question: how and where is all this information that is being accessed stored? How does a tholon know the limits of its scope? How does it access the information needed to inform its intelligence? How does it “remember” context or “learn”?

The first place to look for an answer is in the manner that tholonic instances have devised to store and transmit information, and the obvious choice of instances is humans. Let’s look at how humans store the information we have collected from the conceptual world. We may discover analogous processes that apply to tholonic and morphic fields.

And how do we store that information? We invent an abstract symbolism, apply meaning to it, call it language, use that language to record those symbols, and then, most importantly, teach our children how to decode them. This shares some similarities with the process the honeybirds have developed and maybe even the dopamine-injecting wasps. However, the difference is that they do not (appear) to have a way of recording or sharing their collective knowledge as humans do. Perhaps this is because humans have lost touch with this information field, as suggested by Jaynes, so they had to invent their own techniques like writing, talking, the Internet, cloud storage, etc. Perhaps we may not be aware of the symbolism being used by our field intelligence to collect, store, and transmit information, or maybe we are aware of it but don’t know how to understand it. Because we do not know or have not been taught how to recognize or understand these symbolic messages, we have to assume they could exist anywhere and everywhere.

Key 76: We don’t know what we don’t know.

Let’s look at some of the more likely candidates of how and where we might find and access this field intelligence.

Telepathy, ESP, or Something

Can we describe this field intelligence as some sort of telepathy? And if so, do we even have any evidence that telepathy exists?

The idea of telepathy has been around forever, but modern science insists it is all pseudo-science hogwash, right?

Not exactly. Not only is there a mountain of evidence to support its existence^27,28,29,30 and even a drug named after it, telepathine³¹, but the (technology-enhanced) telepathy business is booming!

• Many research projects developing telepathic processes and products.^32,33,34
• U.S. military (DARPA) developing telepathy-based weapons.³⁵
• Elon Musk, Facebook, and others developing telepathy-based tools.^36,37,38,39
• Google’s neuroprosthetics (brain augmentation nanobots^40,41) will, according to their director of engineering, Ray Kurzweil, not only result in human hybrids by 2030⁴², but will “make us godlike”⁴³ (we are assuming these godlike powers include telepathy, ESP, and more).

While it’s true that a lot of research and development in telepathy is based on technology-induced telepathy, such as “neural clouds”, which will be indistinguishable from current data-clouds, it is still driven by the idea of telepathy. In other words, we believe telepathy is a phenomenon that can be improved upon.

Sheldrake has a lot to say supporting the existence of some sort of telepathy in the documentary “Scientific Evidence of Telepathy: Documentary.”⁴⁴

Russel Targ, a former physicist at Stanford Research Institute and author of “The Reality of ESP: A Physicist’s Proof of Psychic Abilities”, has experimented with telepathy and ESP for some time now. He shows⁴⁵ that the scientific evidence for ESP is statistically more substantial than the evidence that aspirin helps reduce stroke. The aspirin test was so statistically significant that the trial had to be called off because it was considered unethical to continue giving test subjects placebos in light of the overwhelming evidence they had collected before the test was even completed. I know it’s a rhetorical question, but why are we not seeing this revolutionary telepathy/ESP research all over the news? The evidence is compelling enough to accept that telepathy, in some form, is a thing.

The umbrella “or something” category can cover quite a bit of territory, including lesser-known applications of our sensory-processing skills, such as the ability to smell personalities and emotions^46,47 or, if you’re a woman ovulating, your superhero-like ability to immediately recognize gay men and hidden snakes⁴⁸ (the elongated, legless, carnivorous reptiles, not the metaphorical type, although I suspect research would show significant results for the latter as well). Some humans have a visual sense 100 times more sensitive than the average person.⁴⁹ What of the extensive intrinsic nervous system in the heart comprised of clusters of neurons sufficiently sophisticated to qualify as a heartbrain? Certainly, that must contain some sort of sensory processing abilities.

Perhaps the most overlooked yet strongest sense we have is what we call our gut sense. Considering that our gastrointestinal tract contains 95% of our body’s serotonin, has its own nervous system, and is filled with trillions of microbes sending terabytes of information to the brain every millisecond, microbes that are 100 times in number than the cells in the rest of the body and 10 times the number of cells in the brain, all of which having a significant impact on the brain,⁵⁰,⁵¹ one would have to consider the gut as a powerful organ with its own senses.⁵² Knowing this, perhaps we should start considering what microbes we are exposed to at birth that so dramatically affect our brain growth. Those born under natural conditions are exposed to the microbes of their natural surroundings. How do C-section births and exposure to the microbes of hospitals, urban dwellings, and processed food alter our brain and gut development?

What about the sense that allows blind people to detect a person’s emotions in a photo?⁵³ What sense was activated by the practice of merpati putih (“white dove”) in Mary Yogamaatha, the 9-year-old Indian girl who demonstrated at the 2015 Business Advocacy summit at Capitol Hill in Washington D.C. that she could read blindfolded using only her third eye?⁵⁴ How do we use the 6 additional senses identified by researchers at Harvard Medical School?⁵⁵

Our model of 5 senses is quaint, at best, and that is being generous, especially considering it was proposed over 2,000 years ago by the same philosopher, Aristotle, who held back physics for centuries with some of his completely inaccurate ideas about such things as gravity that were proven wrong 1,600 years later by Galileo, and atoms, which were theorized by Leucippus and Democritus 100 years before Aristotle declared the idea as nonsense (just as he rejected the arguments of Philolaus, 470 - 385 BC and the “so-called Pythagoreans” - his words - that Earth, and the entire Universe, revolved around a ‘central fire’). Why do we persist in holding on to such antiquated ideas about something so fundamental to our understanding of ourselves, society, and reality?

Perhaps what we call some forms of telepathy or ESP are quite natural consequences of senses we have that we don’t know or believe we have or choose to ignore. Just look at some of the fantastic senses of some insects and animals as an example of the abilities of their genetic machinery:

• Buzzards can see small rodents from three miles away.
• Bees have a ring of iron oxide in the belly to feel magnetic fields and have eyes that see polarized light.
• A cockroach can detect movement 2,000 times the diameter of a hydrogen atom.
• Elephants have a hearing range of 1 to 20,000 hertz and can also hear with their nose and feet.
• The shark has special eyes that can see electricity.
• When you look at the sidewalk, you see cement and dirt, but that same sidewalk tells a bloodhound of someone who has walked there eight hours ago, what the soles of their shoes were made of, and what brand of cigarettes they smoked.
• Dolphins see sound waves as 3D images.

Key 77: Transcendental or extrasensory forms of communication exist.

We can’t leave the subject of “Telepathy, ESP, or Something” without at least a nod to those institutions that have done more research on the subject than any other in the world (outside of the Soviet Union). Who are these pioneers of expanded consciousness? The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and Stanford Research Institute (SRI). Unfortunately, the millions of dollars spent on their research into telepathy, ESP, and remote viewing was classified (until recently) and had nothing to do with bettering the human condition. Of course, they were seeing how such abilities could be used as weapons of war and espionage. From 1972 to 1995, there were several federally funded projects dedicated to this task with code names like “Senate”, “Gondola Wish”, “Grill Flame”, “Center Lane”, “Dragoon Absorb”, “Project CF,”, “Sun Streak”, and ultimately “Stargate”.

So, why did they stop their research in 1995 (assuming they did stop the research)? Even though they achieved stunning levels of success, the error rate was too large to be used as a weapon, and (thankfully) their weapons of war and espionage needed to be 100% reliable and as close to 100% accurate as possible.

Fortunately, many of the documents from these projects have been declassified. By the looks of their test results, there is absolutely no question they achieved not only miraculous results but created a revolutionary model of reality that apparently worked!

Here are some excerpts from the declassified file CIA-RDP96-00789R001300010001-6 titled “Coordinate Remote Viewing (Theory and Dynamics)”⁵⁶ (Images recreated from original for clarity, but not complete. See original.):

Somewhere, perhaps in the unconscious mind, there exists what we label “The Matrix”. The Matrix knows no boundaries and has no limitations – it contains all information about all things. It could be thought of as omnipotent or you could think of it as a database etc.

The Matrix has within it “Patterns” – think of these as points within a 3 dimensional box (see illustration #2). the “patterns” within the Matrix each poses and radiates their own energy. This energy is emitted in the form of a signal or “signal line” which is peculiar to that specific pattern.

This “pattern” has other names by which it is known – it can be referred to as a “Thought Ball” or as a “Gestalt”. A Gestalt can be described as “The Pattern” and all of its associated patterns (see Illustration #3).

Note: “Gestalt”, by definition, refers to the form or shape of something and suggests that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. In this context, it refers to patterns made up of patterns. Its origins go back to 1912, in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, where psychologists Max Wertheimer, Wolfgang Köhler, and Kurt Koffka proposed the concept in their “Experimental Studies of the Perception of Movement” (“Experimentelle Studien über das Sehen von Bewegung”).

“Cognitrons” are a pattern product, created by the interaction between neurons and synapses – after either a physical or emotional event. Cognitrons exist in the unconscious mind and can exist as separate patterns or as clusters of related patterns (see Illustration #3)

Note: “Cognitrons” might sound more like a giant alien Autobot commanded by Optimus Prime in the unending battle against the evil Decepticons, but the term comes out of the field of Biological Cybernetics and refers to “A self-organizing multilayered neural network”⁵⁷. The cognitron has also given birth to the neocognitron, a hierarchical layering of cells specifically dedicated to pattern recognition⁵⁸.

As an aside, personally, I strongly suspect that The Wachowskis Brothers (The Wachowskis Sisters after 2013), being the Edge Lords that they are, were familiar with this document when they were choosing the name for their 1999 movie “The Matrix” that questioned the nature of reality. Perhaps it was even a source of inspiration. Compare the descriptions above:

The Matrix knows no boundaries and has no limitations – it contains all information about all things. It could be thought of as omnipotent, or you could think of it as a database, etc.

… with the (much more dramatic and plot-driven) description Morpheus gives to Neo:

The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

More to the point, this model has concepts and led to results that are shared with the thologram.

The difference is that the thologram is a self-organizing/self-replicating homogeneous/holistic process where the instances exist within the tholon. The “matrix” is heterogeneous processes that connect instances which appear external to the receiver and does not appear to be self-similar/self-replicating.

There is so much evidence⁵⁹ collected by the CIA, INSCOM, DIA, and SRI under the most stringent conditions and so much anecdotal evidence from legitimate sources that it is difficult to imagine any legitimate scientist not taking it seriously, but many do not.

Clues

Telepathy or otherwise, it’s a safe bet to say that some form of transcendental or extrasensory form of communication exists, and this might be a way to access tholonic data. It’s the specifics of it that seem to be elusive. Proving such a thing is similar to asking me to prove that Australia exists. I know many people from Australia, I can find Australia on a map, and I know of Australian politics and history. Still, all of that is anecdotal, as I have never been to Australia. If you asked me to prove Australia’s existence by the strictest scientific standards, I could not without actually going to Australia. All I could say is I have a lot of evidence from trustworthy sources. A real-world example of this same question is, “Is there life after death?”. I have never died, so I can’t say, but many thousands of people have died and returned with detailed reports of the “other side”, and trusted sources have investigated this phenomenon, and all agree, yes, there is life after death⁶⁰. Therefore, from a rational perspective, it would be no more reasonable to deny the existence of the “other side” in light of the evidence than it would be to deny the existence of Australia.

This is the literal definition of an axiom, which is “A principle accepted as true without proof”. Examples of scientific axioms are “Every effect has a cause, and every cause has an effect”, “Reality can be understood through reason”, “The Universe is knowable”, “The Universe is governed by immutable laws”, “A shared physical reality exists for all local observers”, to name just a few of the many. None of these are provable, but they are assumed to be true. Ironically, the word “axiom” is synonymous with “faith” (but sounds much more “sciency”). The underlying foundation of both axioms and faith is trust. In a way, science is the ultimate conspiracy theory, as it only makes sense if everyone accepts the unprovable axiomatic truths that science depends on. On the other hand, faith requires no acceptance other than one’s own. One might even consider the scientific definition of “real” to be axiomatic, as, while there may be proof, that doesn’t make it true; it only makes it acceptable, as we pointed out in the “cow in the field” problem.

Analogs

What mechanism does transmitting and receiving among animals, humans, plants, and rocks? After all, they, too, have a form of awareness and intelligence. Their collective mind? Their energy fields? Their physical structure?

Dawkins suggests that memes are the non-genetic manner in which information is passed on. He also strongly disagrees with Sheldrake’s morphic-field hypothesis. Unfortunately for Dawkins, memes cannot explain test results that morphic-fields can. Additionally, morphic-field theory not only has room for memes but can explain a way that memes can spread, so Sheldrake: 1, Dawkins: 0.

We don’t need to know the specifics of what is being transmitted just yet. Let’s consider the how by looking at how we humans have learned to send and receive information.

When you want to send something somewhere, how is that done? Maybe you use a postal service or your computer network. In either case, you are collecting the information and delivering it not to the final destination but to a service or infrastructure that does the delivering. This is the case with radio, television, electricity, and even nature if we consider how seeds, an instantiated form of information, can be transported around the world via air, water, hiking boots, animals, and, in the case of mushrooms spores and viruses, intergalactically via meteors and space-wind. These “seeds” are not only carriers of DNA but possibly information or messages from off-world intelligence, according to some researchers⁶¹, including Dr. Francis H. C. Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA, who, in his paper, Directed Panspermia⁶², hypothesized that DNA originally arrived from space.

For example…

It is easy to imagine applying the well-developed telecommunications model that we currently use, called the Open Systems Interconnection model, to a model of information-sharing among various forms of intelligence.

To be clear, we are not saying that this is how it works, nor are we saying this is not how it works. We suggest that we might find new perspectives if we apply the models we have developed based on natural laws to things we do not yet understand. In this case, for example, we see that the physical body and intelligence are at the opposite ends of the pyramid, implying that the brain/nervous system is more of a receiver/transmitter rather than a generator, as creating new information requires intention, cognition, and intelligence. This is a radically different concept than the current mainstream and antiquated idea that the mind, consciousness, and intelligence must arise out of brain activity. Other successful models we currently use today could also be applied to things we do not yet understand, at least as a starting point of investigation.

Still, none of this addresses the specifics of where the information is stored or transmitted from.

Collective Memory

The idea that a field intelligence is in some way an extension of the idea of the collective mind or collective consciousness was formalized to a great degree by Carl Jung’s idea of a collective subconscious and collective memory, although it may be more accurate to describe the idea of a collective unconscious as a primitive understanding of field intelligence. This is still a very fertile area of research across many disciplines.⁶³

Sadly, no theories explain where and how long-term collective memories are stored. In the West, the idea of collective memory has been around since the early 20^th century French sociologist Maurice Halbwachs coined the term. His hypothesis on how collective memory was stored and transmitted is extremely unspecific but generally depends on human-to-human transmissions, similar to Dawkin’s theory on spreading memes. Given that Halbwachs was a student of Emile Durkheim and a devoted Marxist, one has to question his entire premise of a “collective”, especially in light of his laughably ridiculous claim that human memory can only function in a collective, and then goes on to give examples of his hypothesis of collective memory by comparing the “collective memory” of the bourgeoisie, religious and the working class, which may be a valid example, but is highly myopic and undoubtedly contaminated by confirmation bias. Still, he did coin the term, even if his premise was infected by a virulent and parasitic ideology (not unlike the Emerald Wasp).

Current thinking still revolves around cultural expression as the primary way collective memories are transmitted; dance, stories, monuments, etc. These are certainly reinforcing factors, but this idea alone cannot explain Man’s collective memory of “the whole history of the human race”, as Jung claims the source of our fear of fire, falling, and social status, to name just a few. Some of these memories are epigenetic/genetic, such as being born with the fear of loud noises, which comes from the memory that loud noises are generally a harbinger of something that’s bound to make life more difficult, but can all our collective memories be stored in our DNA? Perhaps that is what the 75% of our junk DNA holds (recently upgraded from the previous 98% junk), or perhaps we don’t yet understand its function. Maybe the junk DNA is more of an antenna than a transcoder? We have no idea, but whatever it is, could it account for storing “the whole history of the human race”? This seems very unreasonable.

One place worth exploring is where and how these patterns exist in the epigenetic transmission of experiences and memories passed on to descendants. Why epigenetics? Because epigenetics appears to be one of the more effective ways contextual information is learned, stored, and passed on. In one of the classic test cases, the descendants of mice trained not to like the smell of cherry blossoms had an aversion to the scent of cherry blossoms⁶⁴. Rather than altering the genetic code, epigenetics describes how a gene expresses itself, showing how how DNA can be modified by non-genetic stimuli, like fear, love, environmental preferences, and even dreams, suggesting that what we inherit may go far beyond the human traditional genetic traits.

It will be exciting and informative to see how the Information Age will alter our collective consciousness, memory, and tholonic archetype⁶⁵, as its effect will be as profound as the discovery of fire.

Engrams

Another candidate is how the brain creates and stores memories. We have developed the concept of an engram, which is how biochemical and biophysical processes store our response to external stimuli. The engram, first described by German Zoologist Richard Serman in the early 1900s, was based on what he called the mnemetic principle, which states that the imprint made in the nervous system (including the brain) can, when stimulated by external stimulus, reconstruct the experience. This is a very holographic idea in that holograms reconstruct imagery by illuminating a previous record of that imagery. The images below demonstrate how the “memory” of the image of a 3-dimensional cat can be stored on a 2D surface of holographic film, but looking at the film, we would have no way of knowing that there is any information there, let alone the information that describes a 3D cat.

As it applies to memory, an important technical detail regarding holograms is that many images can be recorded on top of each other, each with a different angle of illumination. All those images can be reconstructed simply by changing the angle of the hologram when viewing. This is why and how a holographic memory cube the size of a small closet (5m²) can store every word ever spoken or written by all humans.⁶⁶

This imprint, or “mnemetic trace”, so named after the Greek muse of memory “Mneme,” is also a precursor to Dawkins’s “meme,” as the meme is a cultural version of an engram.

The 50 years of research following Serman’s hypothesis of the engram boils down to, for our purposes:

1. memories are not localized but are instead distributed within functional areas of the cortex and
2. memory traces are not isolated cortical connections between inputs and outputs.⁶⁷

Might we see these same characteristics in our collective memory technology, otherwise known as the Internet? Perhaps. Decentralized and distributed information networks, such as Bitcoin’s Blockchain, TOR (The Onion Router), and IPFS (Interplanetary File System), are probably early stages of such a thing. The irony of the Internet is that when DARPA originally developed it, it was designed to be much more decentralized than it is today to the point where it could withstand a nuclear attack and continue operating. Today, much of the decentralization has been removed by those with the authority to change the Internet to fit their preferences. Most authoritarian governments, and England, have Internet kill switches⁶⁸. Allegedly, the U.S. had one installed during the Obama administration, but we’ll never know for sure as the U.S. Supreme Court said the government is not required to confirm or deny the claim. This is not surprising given that memory is what connects the past to the present and determines the direction of the future, so whoever controls memory, personal or collective, controls the past, the present, and the future.

Suppose we extrapolate these ideas when looking for how field memory works. In that case, we might want to start with the presumption that field memory is decentralized and distributed within the medium of the field. What and where is this medium? Anywhere there is energy, as the field is energy. However, when referring to the context of instances as opposed to the pure archetypes, the instances themselves would be a part of the medium. Field memory is not stored as discrete quanta of information but rather as an organized pattern of otherwise dis-integrated “particles” of information, which we refer to as data. Were we to see this data alone, it would appear as chaos. When seen from a different perspective, decoded or “re-stimulated”, it may appear as information.

Modulation

Another model to look at might be the way we transmit information by modulating the amplitude or frequency of a wave, similar to how TVs, radios, and acoustic modems work. If we accept the idea that all energy moves in cycles and waves, including the energy of ideas, then perhaps those waves are also modulated in some way with information. As suggested earlier, there are waves we either don’t recognize or don’t consider as waves. For example, is it possible that the “waves” from the “cycles” of the moon or the Arctic Tern could be “modulated” to carry information? It sounds crazy, but we know that brain waves encode information (possibly rules of behavior⁶⁹) as time codes⁷⁰, that light can store quantum memories⁷¹, and that the same waves we use for communication are the same waves that have filled the entire Universe since the Big Bang⁷². Since the discovery of gravitational waves, we have also been looking into how we can transmit information in that medium ⁷³. Is it possible that these waves are modulated with information, making the waves both the carrier of information as well as the storage medium? Considering how little we know about the Universe, Reality, and Everything, these “crazy” ideas may not be that crazy.

Like my grandmother used to say, “when you can’t find something, you need to look everywhere.”

Dark-Matter

One candidate is dark-energy/dark-matter.

Before I describe this idea, I want to make it very clear that I am not a cosmologist, physicist, or scientist of any kind, so this idea may be ridiculously naive and laughable to anyone who is knowledgeable on the subject. That said, let’s give it a whirl.

Dark-energy occupies 70% of the known Universe, can’t be directly observed, and emits no light or energy. Dark-matter occupies another 25%, and the measly remaining 5% is the matter we can see. Dark-matter can have dark-electrons and dark-protons, and there is even dark-chemistry (and maybe dark-tholons, like the virtual ones?). dark-energy also produces dark-electromagnetism and dark-electricity. Dark-matter does not interact with “regular” matter. In fact, there are (believed to be) dark-galaxies, which is the galaxy of dark-energy/matter superimposed on a galaxy of “regular” energy/matter. In short, everything that exists has a “dark” clone that we can’t detect. What better medium than dark-energy is there that could collect information from every scale of reality?

Dark-matter/energy is not just some weird thing we kind of guess is there. Evidence suggests it forms the structure of the entire Universe. Still, all we really know about dark-matter is that it exists, exists everywhere, and interacts with gravity, one of the 4 fundamental forces of energy. This makes gravity the nominee for how the information is transmitted between dark-energy and the “regular” energy of our reality. Perhaps some entanglement is involved with dark-energy, allowing information to travel faster than the speed of light.

Dark-energy is quite elusive, as we can’t detect it or measure it, but we can see its effects in the expanding Universe, as dark-energy seems to be continually being created (like some sort of dynamic memory system that keeps expanding to accommodate the exponentially increasing storage requirements of an expanding Universe?). Perhaps there is a relationship between extrasensory phenomena and dark-matter/energy in some way?

Has anyone tested this? I have scoured the Internet looking for such research and could find nothing. However, I did run across this very interesting post from one of the senior members of Cambridge University’s Institute of Continuing Education, who posted the following:

Subject: Can quantum dark-energy explain telepathy?

Telepathy and quantum entanglement seem to match each other in that a communication connection exists, but no tangible connection. Could there be a hitherto unknown dark-energy particle produced by electrical impulses in the brain? Could it be that entangled particles of this dark-energy are shared? If a plasmon circuit in the brain creates patterns of these dark matter particles, based on thoughts and ideas, do people with the shared particles share the same patterns of thoughts and ideas? How long-lived are these particles, how long do they maintain patterns, and what might be the mechanism for transfer? These particles may be exchanged through quantum molecular tunneling, allowing a brain to transmit them outside of the head, and a person with a corollary quantum molecular tunnel for reception to readily receive the particles. Persons sharing close and personal spaces may be more likely to transfer these particles to each other such as twins, relatives, friends, and even enemies. It may be that these particles are long-lasting and this may allow objects to be imbued with the dark particle patterns, allowing a sensitive to read a person through the object. It may be that wherever a transmitter goes the location they were at is imbued with thought patterns of their experiences. The implications of such a mechanism for telepathy imply this process may be amplified by electronics to increase the strength of transmission and reception. It also implies that we could control electronics through the use of telepathy.⁷⁴

There were no replies.

In June 2019, University of Portsmouth, U.K, physicist Melvin Vopson published a paper titled “The information content of the Universe and the implications for the missing Dark-Matter”⁷⁵, wherein he details the “The mass-energy-information equivalence principle”. The gist of this theory and principle is that not only is information the 5^th form of matter, but what scientists have been erroneously referring to dark-matter is this 5^th form of energy!

This theory is not mere speculation. Vopson has performed tests that anyone (with the proper equipment) can replicate. And what do the tests show? Information has a tiny, tiny amount of mass; 2.91×10^-40Kg/bit, exactly. Applying that value to the size of DM in the Universe results in 2.59×10⁸² bits of information. This is quite close to the 10⁸² atoms in the Universe, as mentioned earlier.

If dark-matter is actually information, the 5^th form of matter, then certainly this is the most likely candidate for where all this field information is located.

How does this theory fit into the tholonic model? Surprisingly well!

The similarity between the 3 properties of both is astounding. You can see the formulas follow Newton’s laws, and, in tholonic fashion, the qualities of ÷ define the 2 corners of the CD spectrum, and that of × define the CD spectrum itself. It also aligns such that mass is the child of the N-source, which implies that mass is the instance of energy, which we know is true. Why are the values of energy, mass, and infobit mapped to the sides of the tholon and not the N, D, C corners? Because this is the holarchic, not the tholonic format, as explained in chapter 7, “Structure”:

The primary reason the properties of movement and energy are the key points in a thologram rather than the instantiated elements, as in the holarchy, is because movement and energy are consistent at every level of creation.

Mass and infobits, in this case, are more like instances than they are like the flow of energy, at least in relation to the formulas that defined their existence. Even energy can be an instance in this context if we consider it to be an instance of the prime N-source of A&I. In practice, it doesn’t make a big difference which way they are aligned as the same patterns emerge.

The reader has probably noticed that the kTln(2) equation can be replaced with the E from E=mc². What is that equation? It represents the kinetic energy at a certain temperature (the kT part, the Boltzmann Constant applied to temperature because higher/lower temps mean higher/lower kinetic energy). The ln(2) represents the exponential growth or decay over time (remember from chapter 8, “Instances”, that ln(x) allows you to plug-in growth/decay and get the time it would take to reach amount x). In short, kTln(2) is another way to say E for a specific context (of time and temperature).

Related, in some way, is the fact that information is carried in the magnetic part of the electromagnetic field and that the magnetic field only exists if there is a movement of energy. If infobits have energy and mass, according to Vobson, and information is data+energy, according to the tholonic model, then information must create some kind of field. Can infobits be induced with such a field, like how a magnetic field can create a movement of electric charges via induction?

This idea that information has mass is also in line with the concept that energy alone is undetectable, unusable, and meaningless if it does not interact with some thing, even if that thing is another form if itself (such as mass as energy). Information, being data+energy, is a form of energy, therefore, if information has no interaction with some thing, it is also undetectable. Is the tiny mass of information the result of an information waveform collapse? Are there other forms of information? Can mass be considered a denser form of information? There are man questions, but we can easily prove that information can not be detected in the absence of mass. In this way we can at least say that information acts like it doesn’t exist until it is detected.

If information has mass, and information is growing exponentially, then at some point, due to the conservation of energy, the Universe will be nothing but information. Vobson believes this concern has some weight (literally) as he predicts an information catastrophe in about 350 years when the number of bits of information exceeds the atoms of Earth, which is around 10⁵⁰, and the power to sustain those bits will be 15.5×10¹⁵ watts, more than the total planetary power available today. In 500 years, information will account for half of the world’s weight.⁷⁶

Gravity

Roger Penrose also suggests that quantum gravity and how it relates to quantum state reduction, or the collapsing of a waveform, i.e., the instantiation of a tholon, is the source of consciousness⁷⁷. If the tholonic idea that awareness is the source of existence, then this suggests that consciousness is not only the byproduct of awareness, but it is also an integral part of the instantiation of tholonic patterns as consciousness serves as the expression of awareness necessary to complete the instantiation.

Geometrically speaking, while the infinitely expanding self-similar trigram is a result of the primary 3 states created by A&I, as previously shown, for it to instantiate into a 3D tholon, it requires the 4^th composite white dot to collapse into the tetrahedral thologram. Consciousness is an instance of awareness and, as such, is composed of all 3 primary dots, e.g., subjective awareness, objective awareness, and the awareness of where they meet.

In the quantum world, it has been theorized that awareness of, or observation of, a waveform causes it to collapse or decohere into a measureable form. Given that we also theorize that it is gravity that causes waveforms to collapse[], can we speculate that awareness and gravity share this same ability to some degree, or that Awareness instantiates as quantum gravity?

If this were the case, than consciousness and gravity appear to be two instances of the same pattern or tholon within two different contexts and, therefore, we might expect to find a 4^th particle representing gravity, a graviton. In fact, science has speculated that such a particle exists; they just haven’t found it yet. There is also some scientifc thought that speculates that “the global wave function are the true carriers of awareness.”⁷⁸!

Gravity and consciousness both exist as fields, and both are fundamental to existence. If we accept the theory of the Big Bang that mass was created by the infinite gravity of the 0-dimensional singularity, then gravity may be the first instance of A&I which created matter. As gravity is concentrated via matter, what is it that concentrates consciousness in our material reality? As matter is an instance of energy, could energy be an instance of Awareness?

Considering gravity and awareness are both ubiquitous fields that created and binds the entire Universe, it seems like an excellent candidate for exploring field memory.

Is there anything to suggest that gravity and consciousness are two instances of the same expressions in different scopes? Yes, there is.

Let’s look at another one of Newton’s formulas that describes the gravitational force: , where F is the gravitational force in newtons, g is the gravitational field as it applies to two different masses, and S is the separation between those two masses. And yes, it also looks just like Ohm’s law for resistance , which, if consciousness and gravity are the same archetype in different contexts, might shed some light on the nature and functioning of consciousness.

If we do the math, we see that Newton’s formulas can be applied via Ohm’s law, and by doing so, discover that G, the gravitational constant, and voltage, are the same archetype.

• G→V (volts): The gravitational constant, which is measured in newtons, equates to volts, or the pressure of energy inherent in all mass in the form of gravity. G is measured as 6.67×10⁻¹¹ m³ kg^-1 s^-2 (newtons per cubic meter per kilogram per-second/per-second).

Using the same math, we can apply the following associations as well:

• g →P (power): The + equates to power, transference of energy over time.
• F→R (resistance): The force of gravity equates to resistance. This value is the speed at which things fall, so 9.87 m/s² here on Earth.
• S→I (current): The the distance between observer and observed equates to current, or the strength of energy. As the distance lessens, the force increases, as S and F are inversely proportional. Note: The terms observer and observed are the actual technical terms used, and not terms used here to add validity to the tholonic theory that reality itself emerged from the primal observer, the 0-dimensional concept of A&I, and the observed, the first creation of the A&I.

There is another correlation as well. The limits of an electrical circuit are defined by the amount of charge, or current (amps), allowed to pass through a system at any given moment. This is typically controlled by a fuse. In the E=mc² equivalency we saw previously, it is c, the speed of light, that defines the limits of the system we call the Universe, but unlike amps, c can never change. Here, in the gravity example, the defining limit of the system is S, the distance between two fields. So, let’s replace the equivalent of c (which is I) with distance (S) and see if there is a reasonable correlation between gravity and consciousness when applied to Newton’s 2^nd law and tholons?

For example:

Separation (S): The separation in the context of consciousness is the first separation, that of subjective (observer) and objective (observed), so we will correlate the separation of the two masses with these two perspectives.

Awareness (A): The initial blue dot, the N-source, of the tholonic trigram is the first instance of awareness and also correlates to force, potential, or volts, so we will correlate the gravitational constant to the N-source and the 1^st state of awareness.

Consciousness (C): As we mentioned before, what we are calling consciousness is an instance of awareness, more specifically, an instance of the awareness of a tholonic archetype. This firmly places consciousness in the position of the child N-source, which correlates with electrical power (P) and the gravitational field (g). This N-state of consciousness emerges within the spectrum of separation and mass, which are perfect examples of instances of the primal concepts of nothingness and somethingness. This places the consciousness (C), as in instance of Awareness (A), along the spectrum defined by S (separation, nothingness) and M (mass, somethingness).

Mass (M): We are left to correlate electrical resistance with the force of the gravitational field for a specific mass. This fits, especially when we realize that this force’s limiting and defining qualities hold everything in the Universe together and in its place. Mass is the source of gravity, or if we accept the theory that the infinite gravity of the singularity created mass, then mass is an instance of gravity.

For the question at hand, what this means is that if there is such as thing as a universal data-store of all the instances of Awareness, then we will find clues to its existence in the differentiation of, or relationships between, instances of consciousness and mass.

This attempt to quantify consciousness and awareness may sound very esoteric or even seem ridiculous to some, but more and more evidence suggests that consciousness is a force of nature and as such, has quantifiable properties.

An example of directly applicable evidence comes from an article written by theoretical quantum physicist Swati Nigam entitled Gravity As Conscious Force To Resolve Quantum Gravity⁷⁹, wherein she states:

According to current science, there is a missing connection between general relativity and quantum mechanics concepts of physics, which is needed to unify them into one, to conceptualize a unified field theory.

The article then goes on about the nature of the problem, ultimately concluding that consciousness itself is an additional force to the 4 forces of the Standard Model, a 5^th force, and one that solves the challenges of the unified field theory in its attempt to unify general relativity with quantum mechanics. Dr. Nigam goes on to say:

Thus, we can use the term “conscious force” for gravitational force… Conscious force is gravitational force, which is the unidentified 5^th force. This force is a synonym for gravitational force, works just like it on all matter entities, irrespective of their nature or position in space, both in macro or micro worlds.

If Awareness and its instances of consciousness are a fundamental force, then it has a field. Might that field hold clues to field memory, perhaps similar to how the memory in the brain might be a neuronal activity-associated magnetic field? ^80,81 In any case, there seems to be a strong correlation between consciousness, gravity, dark-matter, and information.

Limits of Consciousness?

This idea that there might be a relationship between consciousness and gravity raises another question: if observation is required to collapse a wave function, can we define consciousness as that which can observe?

First, let’s hear what Werner Heisenberg has to say about what observation means

Of course, the introduction of the observer must not be misunderstood to imply that some kind of subjective features are to be brought into the description of nature. The observer has, rather, only the function of registering decisions, i.e., processes in space and time, and it does not matter whether the observer is an apparatus or a human being; but the registration, i.e., the transition from the “possible” to the “actual”, is absolutely necessary here and cannot be omitted from the interpretation of quantum theory. ~Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, p. 137

And by “registering decisions”, he means any sort of recording of effect that is the result of interacting with the cause, as long as that recording is a time-irreversible process. This recording separates all that is possible from all that is, or the Definition from the Contribution. This would imply that if one atom were altered due to interacting with the wave function, it would collapse into a particle, so even a rock could be an “observer”. It turns out that the act of observation is more analog than digital, meaning the more something is observed, the more effect it has. In a recent experiment⁸² it was shown that:

…the greater the amount of “watching”, the greater the observer’s influence on what actually takes place.

So, a rock might be able to “observe”, but perhaps its “observation” would have only a tiny effect on reality. The experimenters built a machine with variable observation strength levels, and it would be very interesting to measure the observational strength levels of different forms of instances. Are there stronger observational powers than what we humans have? This is unknown (I think), but what is known is that machines alone have enough observational ability to collapse a wave⁸³. I wonder how this will apply to intelligent machines and AI. Will they be able to collapse things that we don’t even know to exist?

With this in mind, it might be useful to think of awareness as a wave function, a sea of “possibilities”, but consciousness as the “actual” instance of a collapsing wave of awareness. This would support the idea that everything that exists potentially has a consciousness, but weak “observations” will produce weak wave function collapses, a weak instantiation of consciousness. It would also suggest that the most “observation” that has ever occurred was at the moment of the Big Bang when everything was “observed” by everything in the 1 trillion-degree ball of super-plasma. Over time, observation decreases until no thing can “observe” anything else (that is, if the Universe continues only to expand). In this way, the Universe’s ability to “observe” acts like entropy; the lower the entropy of the Universe, the more it could “observe”. As entropy increases, the less it “observes” until it becomes completely “blind”. If nothing is observed, nothing collapses. Like the tree that collapsed in the woods, if no one hears it, it is irrelevant whether it made any sound or not. Everything is just a wave function of potential when nothing can be observed. Perhaps the Zen-like fate of the Universe is not the Big Crunch, Big Freeze, or Big anything… it just becomes irrelevant wave functions of possibility.

Structured Memory

Another possibility as to where this information is stored is structure itself. It has been claimed that the structure of water can hold memory. Although this claim has not been sufficiently tested by any means, there is at least some evidence to suggest it might be valid. Dr. Emoto has been the most public in his claims that water holds memory and presents many examples and theories, but none of his work has been thoroughly tested by scientific standards. (Note: I felt it was necessary to subject his tests to scientific study, but I have come to understand that such testing will guarantee unsuccessful results regardless of the validity of his experiments due to the nature of science as we currently understand it).

There is quite a lot of information available about Emoto’s work, so I will not repeat any of it here. However, Dr. Dean Radin, who has an impressive list of honors and a history of serious scientific work, did perform a “Double-Blind Test of the Effects of Distant Intention on Water Crystal Formation”⁸⁴ and reported very significant results (P=0.001). Dr. Radin has published a number of similar studies.

Speaking only for myself, one of the more compelling pieces of evidence I have seen comes from the experiment where 4 students created 4 drops of water, all from the same source. The image above shows the experiment results where a different student created each set of 4 drops.

This experiment was performed by Dr. Brend Kröplin and his team, which makes the results all the more valid, as Dr. Kröplin not only received his Ph.D. in the hard sciences (his thesis was on the elastoplastic stability of steel bridges), but he was also dean of the Institute for Statics and Dynamics of Aerospace Structures of the University of Stuttgart as well as the winner of the Körber European Science Prize, which resulted in a 1.5 million Deutschmark contract to produce high altitude (20km) communication equipment. This puts him very high on the “trusted sources” list.

Even if this is not bulletproof evidence (similar to the existence of Australia for anyone who has never been there), it is enough to raise the question. In addition, this test was also conducted using different types of flowers. According to the testers, the resulting patterns in the drops of water resembled the patterns of the flower. Tholonically, this is precisely what we expect to see, as energy patterns create the instance of the flower.

Another source that supports the idea of water holding information is Jacques Benveniste, a French immunologist who worked at the Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM) in 1988, who published a paper in Nature concluding that the configuration of molecules in water was biologically active even in the absence of the elements that caused that configuration. The homeopathic community immediately picked up this “water memory” as proof of its efficacy, even though it did not really apply to homeopathy.

While skeptics and institutional authorities can easily brush off Emoto’s work due to its lack of rigorous analysis, Benveniste’s work could not.

Nature magazine editor John Maddox (yes, the same person who promoted the burning of Sheldrake’s book on the grounds of heresy, as well as claiming the Big Bang theory is “philosophically unacceptable” and that there was “no need to panic about AIDS”), prefaced the Nature article with an editorial comment entitled “When to believe the unbelievable”, which admitted: “There is no objective explanation of these observations”. That sounds like a begrudging admission, but it was more like a temporary retreat in preparation for the next offensive.

Nature did not want to publish the paper, holding its release for 2 years while awaiting independent confirmation from impartial laboratories in Israel, Italy, and Canada, who reported an observable biological effect.⁸⁵

After the paper was published, there was an explosion of meltdowns from the scientific community. In response, Nature demanded that the experiment be repeated under conditions controlled by an ad-hoc selected team of its own, which included (and this should shed some light on their not-so-hidden intentions) the famous illusionist, pseudo-science enemy, and occasionally dishonest James Randi, plus Maddox himself and a malpractice investigator.

The Nature team did, in fact, find the same results as Benveniste, but with one fascinating exception: the effects of the tests disappeared when the laboratory members did not know if the water sample had been treated or not. One could claim the results were then biased based on this knowledge, but this would presume these hand-picked independent researchers were secretly fudging the data. If they were not, then the implication is that simply the awareness of the state of the water samples was enough to affect the test results. According to the tholonic model, being aware of something is sufficient to instantiate it to some degree, like a tholonic version of observational powers. In any case, this was sufficient for Nature to publish a report on this methodological flaw in Benveniste’s experiments and officially called “water memory” pseudo-science⁸⁶, and published an article calling the entire idea “delusional”⁸⁷ (written by, of course, Maddox, Randi, and Walter W. Stewart, who has been “been sharply condemned by other scientists who question [his] qualifications as self-appointed [guardian] of scientific integrity and who believe [he has damaged] reputations on the basis of flimsy evidence often self-righteously presented with an innuendo that suggests greater wrongdoing.”⁸⁸). Case closed.

Or so they hoped, for not long after Benveniste’s paper, The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) decided to look into his work. In their words:

These data seem particularly important because they further enrich the immense achievements of molecular biology. They also suggest the development of new modes of transmission of genetic messages (transmission, transduction, teleportation, etc.).

Fortunately, they did not invite Maddox or Randi to be a speaker. Instead, they invited the Nobel Prize-winning discoverer of HIV, Luc Montagnier, who, much to the skeptic’s dismay, stunned many fellow scientists years earlier with claims that DNA emits weak electromagnetic waves that cause structural changes in water that persist even in extremely high dilutions… which is not exactly water-memory, but very close. As new evidence appears, Montagnier has gone on to say that “More scientists are becoming convinced [of water-memory] by the data”.

OK, that was a long-winded bit of history there, but it shows the resistance to new ideas and the real possibility that water-memory exists.

But I am not a scientist, so I don’t have to worry about what the editors at Nature or dubious debunkers think, so I can hypothesize the following: If the structure of water can hold memory, does this mean that the structure of other things can also hold memory? Can the thologram itself hold memory in its mega-meta-structure? If we claim that the structure of our material world is but an instance of that structure in the thologram, then we would have to say “yes”, and that then opens the door to the idea that all structure, in every corner of the Universe, might be a memory store. Perhaps certain structures are better suited to hold certain types of memory. More exciting is the possibility that the mechanism to access this memory, and the knowledge it implies, is simply becoming aware of it. This last part is trickier than it sounds, as we don’t know what we don’t know, so how do we know what to become aware of?

Regardless of the theory, whatever it happens to be, the morphic or tholonic field would have to be something like an electromagnetic field in a different context, as the movement of energy causes both.

Key 78: Everything that exists due to the movement of energy has a field that originates in A&I. This field is the foundation of consciousness and knowledge.

The redundant and self-similar expressions of energy can be seen in the ever more complex and integrated patterns that have evolved since all of creation began as an infinitesimally small singularity of infinite gravity, zero time, and total mass that was the seed of this Universe.

By the same token, the redundant and self-similar expressions of awareness can be seen in the ever more complex and integrated patterns that have evolved since all creation began as a 0-dimensional dot whose only property was A&I.

The claim that energy itself is a fundamental form of A&I implies that everything that exists is also a form of A&I in the same way that everything that exists is a form of energy. To be aware of something is to direct energy to some concept or idea, thereby moving energy through that pattern and the Bell curve of that archetype, which alters the norm of what and how that archetype will instantiate itself.

From the tholonic perspective, if the claim is “energy alone can’t be observed; only its interactions with other forms of energy (mass) can” is true, then it is also true that “awareness alone can’t be observed; only its interactions with other forms of awareness can”.

“Consciousness [ed: or awareness from the tholonic perspective] is part of our Universe, so any physical theory which makes no proper place for it falls fundamentally short of providing a genuine description of the world.”⁸⁹ ~Roger Penrose

Tholonic-fields exist in the realm of thought, ideas, and concepts, so any experiments that might be run probably need to be thought-based in nature. Is there any evidence that thoughts can directly alter our material reality? If the answer is yes, that might support the idea that altering archetypes in the realm of ideas has a measurable effect on the instance of those archetypes, i.e., reality as we know it. Chapter 11, “Application of Awareness”, explores some of these experiments.

Reality

What about the possibility that reality itself, the world around us, matter, everything we consider to be real, is the memory?

This is very related to the information/dark-matter section above. This idea is based on Quantum Darwinism⁹⁰, which states that of all the probable states that can exist, the states that survive do so because of support from their environment. In turn, these states that survive transfer information to the environment, altering its context and shifting the curve in its favor, thereby improving the probabilities of future similar states.

As the energy interacts with the environment around it, the range of probabilities for the many attributes of an energy particle begins to decohere, or disappear, leaving only the attributes that are most compatible with the environment, which then interacts with the environment to make the environment more compatible with the attributes. Notice the compatibility of Quantum Darwinism with the descriptions of the social equations in the section “The Meaning of Math” in chapter 8, “Instances”, and how quantum Darwinism is a perfect example of context→content →context→etc.

Reality, as we know it, is the consequence of this process of decohering the less successful possibilities of a particle’s superposition. In the end, one set of attributes dominates, and that is what we see in the reality surrounding us. In other words, reality is the living record of what worked in the past and is currently working.

In the tholonic model, each tholon has a set of stable properties. Given its self-similar structure, each tholon only needs to manage the properties that relate to its scope or exist within its spectrum, leaving the parent properties to the parents and any of the child properties to the child. Each tholon then “knows” what works and expresses this in the instances of that tholon, which is every archetypal idea and form that can exist. When we look at a thing, like a rock, we are not just seeing the evolutionary results of the tholon of a rock but also the aggregated results of all related tholons; mountain, planet, solar system, galaxy, silica, molecules, atoms, electrons, etc.

The language of reality begins with one “letter” (a tholon) of the alphabet, which becomes 3 in the next generation, which becomes 12, etc. Each of these letters is a record of what “works.”

Remember that phrase combinatorial inflation which describes the exponentially increasing number of possibilities in protein production? This is the big problem with current evolutionary thought, as there are simply too many combinations for nature to try.

In the tholonic model, these massively inflated possibilities are much simpler to navigate. We start with a duality within which a stable pattern emerges. From that stable pattern, a new duality emerges, which produces another stable pattern. For each generation, we have 3 new possible tholons from which patterns can emerge. Only stable patterns are capable of creating dualities, so unsustainable patterns never propagate. After a mere 129 generations of this process, we have produced 10⁷⁷ possible tholonic paths or combinations, but at each generation, we only needed to create one pair of parameters (we used 10⁷⁷ as that was the possible number of protein combinations with just 20 amino acids and 150 proteins… a very, very small number when compared to the actual proteins that make up life).

It is clear that the odds are stacked against a new form of a viable protein because the assumption is that the entire field of 10⁷⁷ is available. Tholonically, the entire field available is limited to a mere 3 properties, but these properties are self-similarly embedded in every succeeding generation. If a new pattern emerged somewhere around the 63^rd generation (10³⁷ combinations), then an entirely new branch of creation would emerge at a point in the tree where it will have a significant presence at the 129^th generation.

Here’s a simple mathematical example.

First, let’s look at the Bell curve again. Let’s say you perform 32-coin flips 50,000 times and plot the results.

The peak of the Bell curve will tell us the most likely result, which is that we will get heads 16 out of 32 flips, on average. We have decided we will run this test 5 times, but each subsequent time we will only use the coins that came up heads in the previous test. We end up with the following:

• Test 1 with 32 coins, 16 came up heads
• Test 2 with 16 coins, 8 came up heads
• Test 3 with 8 coins, 4 came up heads
• Test 4 with 4 coins, 2 came up heads
• Test 5 with 2 coins, 1 came up heads

So, when we run these 5 tests 50,000 times each, the chances of us ending up with 1 coin from 32 coins is obviously 100%.

Now imagine we use different coins for each test;

• Test 1, 32 quarters
• Test 2, 16 nickels
• Test 3, 8 dimes
• Test 4, 4 half-dollars
• Test 5, 2 pennies.

We start with 62 coins (32 quarters, 16 nickels, 8 dimes, 4 half-dollars, and 2 pennies) but end up with 31 coins (16 quarters, 8 nickels, 4 dimes, 2 half-dollars, and 1 penny).

If an observer were blind to the process and only knew that the final result was one penny but that you started with 62 coins, they would say there is a 2:62, or 3.2% chance of you ending up with a penny, when, in fact, you know there is a 100% chance of you ending up with a penny. That’s a 96.8% margin of error vs. a 0% margin of error.

The observer, in an attempt to replicate your success, but not knowing your process, will begin to run tests and keep notes on what worked and what didn’t. He checks these notes every time he runs a new test to ensure he is not doing something that has been shown to fail. Once he discovers your process, he can archive the failed notes and describe the method that worked. He does not need to record all the failures once he has discovered the process that works, but he does so as to pass them on to the next generation of researchers who will approach similar problems in the same bottom-up fashion.

Existence does not need to record its failures as it is the ultimate top-down approach from the tholonic perspective. From the first instance of creation, nothing progressed unless the previous process worked, i.e., new child tholons are only created from the stable patterns of the parent tholon. No reverse engineering is necessary for existence as it is an exclusively forward-engineering process. If a branch of existence fails, it will only fail up to the last successful parent. This is like saying that if all your nickels were swapped out for double-tailed nickels, then all flips after the nickels would come up as zero, killing the entire branch below nickels and preventing any opportunity for the dimes, half-dollars, and pennies. The quarters are still fine, and because you want the tests to continue to work correctly, you need to get new nickels to fix the problem.

In our example, the flipping is analogous to the energy within a tholon creating stable patterns. The experimenter is analogous to the tholonic intelligence, which includes the intelligence that “fixes” the problem when feedback is received from the broken branch (i.e., bad nickels) that modified the curve (skewed results) which resulted in a new stable pattern (good nickels). (this example may sound ridiculously trivial, but it’s the simplest example I could think of.)

In this example of an experiment, or any experiment for that matter, from the tholonic view, both the experiment and the experimenter are an integral part of the tholonic expression. There is no data without the experimenter, the observer, and if there is no data then there is no instance, only an archetype.

A simple example more aligned to the tholonic model would be how N-states emerge along the Bell curves from which N-sources create new trigrams. This idea is shown in the image on the right using a Fourier Series of hierarchical circles. By assigning a value for points on the spectrum, and a binary value representing the generation of the trigram, we can create a unique value for every point that identifies its place on the spectrum and its level. If we combine these numbers, we can create one value for the entire lineage with an extractable record of the chain of tholons and their spectrum’s value at every level. This value would then act as a memory of all the ancestors. We can see this easily in simple binary math. If we have 5 generations of numbers that double with each generation, such as 1,2,4,8,16, and we have the number 22 representing the sum of all the contributing generations, we can easily determine that only the 2^nd, 3^rd and 5^th generations contributed, because only 2, 4, and 16 can create 22. The tholons are similar in that each tholon has a fingerprint that is encoded in every one of its descendants that describes its path from the source.

This means that everything that exists is already a record of what works from the 1^st moment of creation, through every generation, up to and including the thing that exists. Life, Reality, and Everything is the warehouse of all knowledge. We just haven’t yet figured out how to decode (most of) it. We demonstrated an example of the binary qualities of tholonic counting earlier (the companion book “The Tholonic I-Ching” specifically addresses this and shows precisely how each tholon has a naturally existing binary signature). It may actually be that a thing itself is the value of that tholon.

We use numbers as data because numbers allows us to map a thing to the perfectly non-chaotic abstracted data-matrix which allows us to find patterns of order, but it’s useful to remember that a thing is an ever changing instance of archetypes in a single moment of time.

Hidden Data

This is similar in concept to the way a piece of music is the combination of many atoms of sound (yes, that’s a real thing, and it’s about 0.093 seconds⁹¹), each an aggregate of many individual frequencies. Over time, these frequencies change, resulting in “music” because we can “decode” those frequencies, thanks to the cooperative functions of our auditory cortex, cerebrum, cerebellum, and limbic system. We can also decode waves using concepts such as the Fourier Transform, which allows us to discover all of a wave’s components, but that does not mean we can recognize what information is contained in that wave. For example, there can be images encoded in frequencies that no analysis will discover unless we know what to look for, such as the image of Barack Obama encoded into sound (Image right. For more examples, see Appendix E, “Hidden Images”)

Another example of this that demonstrates some very tholonic concepts is a photo-mosaic, which is an image that is made up of other images, such as this image of Elvis that is made up of many images of Elvis. Now, imagine an image made up of many images, which are made up of many images, and so on, but instead of the patterns being that of an image, imagine the patterns as that of energy and awareness, with each image having its own intelligence and intention. While almost any collection of images can be used to create any other type of image, this is far less so when we speak of tholons, which are effectively living expressions of energy, intention, intelligence, and awareness. There are many more dimensions and constraints, such as the law of entropy, so some tholons will be more likely to form other tholons depending on the “benefits”, such as conserving energy or enhancing adaptation, to both the defining and contributing tholons.

Just for fun, here is the human eye made only from images used in this book and a bull skull in Death Valley made with blooming flowers.

Brownian Archetypes

These images are meant to demonstrate how information can be composed of information and how any one piece of information is composed of smaller pieces and part of a larger piece. So, how can we even begin to decode such information? One thing we can do is look at how information “progresses”. The multiple generations of embedded images, or tholons, or fractal patterns, represent unique paths, or lineages, that start from one point but end up at many points. The progression of these lineages is not predictable but is not random. They are the result of expanding energy moving forward in time, diverging from one archetype and converging toward others, not unlike the Brownian movement (examples shown below).

This claim is based on the fact that Brownian and Fractional Brownian Motion (FBM) is an archetype for, and can describe, rivers ^92,93, trees⁹⁴, neurology⁹⁵, landscapes, and appears to be fundamental to all organic growth.

In all cases, the paths of growth will be determined by the basic rules:

• All movement will always seek the path of least resistance.

• Paths of least resistance will form patterns.

• Patterns form archetypes.

• Energy (movement) is always diverging (and converging?) from one archetype towards another archetype.

• All movement is an expression of energy seeking balance.

There is much more to the significance of Brownian mechanics, at least from the tholonic view, but this reasoning is well outside the acceptable limits of scientific thinking. The reader can decide whether the following it is worthy of consideration.

External forces cause the “jitters” in Brownian motion. For physical things, like amoebas and pollen, this can be collisions with other particles. For something like information, this can be “noise”, such as the small transactions of buying and selling when looking at the stock market as a whole. In general, the larger the object, the less effect these smaller influences have. A falling spec of dust will have Brownian movement, but a falling rock will not. A huge move in the market will be unaffected by small transactions. This same concept applies to energy fields, such as electricity or radio waves. We see examples of external forces affecting these fields in electromagnetic interference of solar flares, auroras, or ignition systems.

This last reference will be obscure to the under-50 readers. Once upon a time, I lived in a small rural New England town. If I had the radio on in the house and a car drove by with a poorly insulated ignition system (very common in the 60s), I could hear the ignition system sending pulses to the spark plugs as clicks over the radio. Without seeing the car, I could tell if they were going too fast for 2^rd gear or too slow for 3^rd (automatic transmissions were rare in that time and place), thereby discovering that Mrs. Brown, the 2^nd grade school teacher, was a far better driver than the Police Chief, who also owned the slaughterhouse. This “inside information” was due to field interference. Were I a mechanic, I could have used this data to make some pre-digital, data-mined, targeted sales. Today, we can hear a distant person’s voice through the interference of light and sound waves bouncing off a nearby box of tissues. In the same manner, we can learn things about the Sun based on how solar flares disturb television transmissions

If someone was aware of how fields interfere with each other, and they happened to be watching the TV transmission on October 8, 2002, which was disturbed by a solar flare 93,000,000 miles from Earth, the fuzzy dots on the screen would be telling them to bring in the tomatoes, stock up on firewood, and make sure all the flashlights in the house worked because they would also know that this field disruption can also disturb other types of fields which could result in electrical outages, crazy weather, and even earthquakes. This same reasoning applies to the thologram, as the first and largest tholon unaffected by external forces. At the same time, the tholons on the edge of creation, that boundary layer between order and chaos, where somethingness expands into nothingness, are bombarded by the external forces of the countless surrounding tholonic fields.

The difference between particles and data, instances and archetypes, is that particle movement is also affected by gravity. The smaller the particle, the more effect external forces have, and the less effect gravity has (due to air resistance). The dominance of external forces vs. gravity is well known. Note: Gravity is a real force, but not in the traditional sense of direct, classical, action-at-a-distance force between two objects.

How does gravity relate to tholons? If we momentarily accept the hypothesis previously mentioned that gravity is an instance of awareness (consciousness), then can we speculate that in the non-physical realm of tholons, concepts, ideas, etc., we would see a similar pattern but replacing gravity with awareness or consciousness? What would this tell us? We would first notice that the 1^st tholon would be all-encompassing and instantiate as pure awareness, defining the limits of all it contains. All measurements are relative to these initial limits, for example, c, the speed of light. As the first tholon is in a void of nothingness, it cannot be measured relative to anything else.

The parallel might also suggest that “large” and stable concepts, such as religious, political, economic, or ideological concepts, have a conceptual “gravitational” force, which pulls other smaller concepts into their “orbit” and perhaps absorbing them completely. And, as the singularity of the 0-dimensional dot represents the singularity of the Big Bang, which was infinite gravity, that 0-dimensional dot of A&I is like the “black hole” of concepts, ultimately absorbing all. This would explain why otherwise rational and intelligent people can advocate for dysfunctional, inaccurate, and even destructive concepts. This seemingly self-destructive behavior is tholonically compatible because, from the tholonic view, the only thing that matters is if a concept can survive. The more awareness applied to a concept, the more “gravity” it has, conceptually speaking.

Relative Archetypes and Time

This is somewhat similar to Relativity Theory, but we will not get into the details of Special Relativity, General Relativity, Lorentz Transformations, and all the other stuff that such topics inevitably lead. Instead, we will state the following: The speed of light is symbolized as c, which means that c is also the speed of causality or the speed of cause and effect.; it is the maximum speed at which any separate parts of the Universe can interact. If seemingly separate things appear to interact faster than c, then, in reality, they are not separate things, even if they appear separate in 3D reality.

How is this possible? Imagine we have a single point that is 0-dimensional. If we extend that point to a line, we have added 1 dimension and now have 2 points. If we extend the line to a square, we have 2 dimensions, 4 points, and 4 lines. Extending the square to a cube gives us 3 dimensions, 8 points, 6 squares, and 12 lines.

However, in a 2D world, we can’t see the 3^rd dimension, so all the squares that exist in the 3^rd dimension are invisible to 2D observers (image right top)⁹⁶.

Now, if we extend a cube into the 4^th dimension, we end up with 8 cubes, but 6 of those cubes require the 4^th dimension to exist, leaving 2 cubes that can be expressed in 3 dimensions (right image bottom). Therefore, in the 3D world, a 4D cube would appear as 2 separate 3D cubes. Tweak the 4D cube, and both 3D cubes will change simultaneously. Tweak either of the 3D cubes, and you are effectively tweaking the 4D cube, which will simultaneously tweak the other 3D cube.

It will appear as though there is faster-than-light communication based on the distances between the 3D cubes, but the actual distance that matters is the distance in the 4D world, as that is where the interactions occur, where the cause and effect are taking place. We can see in the image (right) that a pair of 1D points can be very far apart in 1D space while being very close in 2D space.

In the tholonic model, it appears as though 3D contexts are recursively embedded within 3D contexts. More accurately, they would be 4D contexts if we consider time as the 4^th dimension. If that is the case, then this 4D world is embedded in a parent 4D world, making this world more of an 4n-dimensional reality where n is the number of embeds between the primal context and our current context. Of course, we can ignore all but the more obvious dimensions as they don’t have any commonly perceivable effect on our reality, but maybe we can find them in the laboratories.

I doubt such a test has ever been run, but it would be interesting to know if the “spooky action at a distance” that we see with quantum entanglement is instantaneous or just faster than the speed of light, perhaps by many times or maybe a quantum physicist can explain why that is a silly question even to ask. Were c infinite, as was once believed, cause and effect would happen instantly, and all of existence would be an infinitely short and busy blip and then over.

Relativity tells us that time is not absolute and needs to change or dilateto accommodate the speed of light relative to your speed.

For instance, imagine you and your friend are on Earth. Each of you has a laser that you both turn on simultaneously. As expected, the beams will travel together at the same speed. Now, imagine you are standing on Earth, and your friend is about to pass Earth at 99.999999% the speed of light. When the both of you are side by side, you both turn on your lasers. The beams of light will STILL be traveling at the same speed together. How is that possible? Your beam is traveling at the speed of light, but your friend’s beams must only be traveling at 0.0000001% the speed of light. In fact, both beams travel at the same speed, but time for your friend is ticking much slower than time for you. The time is takes for his laser light to travel 1 light-second will take 6 hours and 12 minutes in your Earth time, but only 1 second for him as his time is very dilated, or slowed down relative to your time. In this way, the light is still traveling at 300,000,000 meters/sec for both you and your friend. What was just said about the speed of light also applies to the speed of causality.

Why are we talking about this in a chapter on fields? Because the field of gravity affects time and space. The more gravity, the slower the time. So, time goes slower when you are moving fast, or you are near gravity?

It is more useful to think of gravity and speed as two sides to the same coin that slows time. This makes more sense if we replace the concept of speed with that of quantity of movement, or just movement. The field of gravity causes movement due to gravitational force; the more mass, the more gravity, and mass is energy.

It’s been suggested that gravity and consciousness are instances of awareness in different contexts. As instances, they both have manifest expressions, but as properties, meaning they are properties of existing instances of matter. All matter has some gravity, and all matter has some consciousness, at least from the tholonic perspective. As awareness cannot exist without intentions, how is intention expressed? In the context of matter, intention is movement. In the context of consciousness, intention is will, and energy is… Being? Spirit? Sanmātra (“mere existence”)? We don’t have a word for the energy that forms consciousness, mainly because we hold the concept that consciousness is a by-product of neurology. We’ll use the word “being” for now.

This is a wild claim, but it holds up. Not only is there actual scientific research on related topics such as temporal consciousness⁹⁷, gravity and consciousness⁹⁸, intention and consciousness^99,100,101, intentions and physics¹⁰², but we can easily test this ourselves. All you need to do is spend 5 minutes eating your favorite ice cream, and 5 minutes watching a pot of water come to a boil. Which took longer?

Of course, many might rebuff that last claim with, “That’s not the same. Time didn’t really slowing time. 5 minutes is still 5 minutes”. The proof, the only proof, that supports this seemingly valid argument is the clock on the wall. But is that proof and is that argument true?

Why did it take 6 hours and 28 min to watch your friend’s laser light move 1 light-second? When we say “5 minutes is 5 minutes,” we assume there is no time dilation difference between any set of 5 minutes, but there is time dilation in our perception, our consciousness of those 5 minutes, which we can’t disregard considering were it not for our consciousness we wouldn’t be looking at anything. Our perception of time doesn’t change the clock’s mechanics on the wall any more than looking at a tree will alter how your televisions works. Still, the clock on the wall is measuring a particular form objective time in an extremely limited context.

It’s been proven many times over that past 100 years that time is relative, so there is no objective standard for time. We use atoms to get precise timings for clocks, but even these atoms don’t agree with each other unless they are at the same altitude and in the same location. An atomic clock in Peru ticks slower than an atomic clock in the Arctic because there is more gravity in Peru. So, we put an atom clock in Boulder, Colorado, and say, “This is the official time”, and then go to great lengths to make all the clocks agree with that, otherwise satellites, communications, and navigation would be a complete mess. This is why satellite’s time keeping has to be updated every 12.5 minutes. Anything that needs to be adjusted 42,048 times a year to work properly can hardly be called an objective standard of measure or accuracy. And even with this atomic clock in Boulder, the time dilation in the Universe is constantly changing due to the Universal expansion, so 5 minutes today is not the same as 5 minutes tomorrow, even though it appears the same to us because we are also changing with the expansion.

Clock-time has very little to do with actual time, as in the time element of space-time. We invented the illusion of an objective, stable time, then built our culture, science, technology, and, most importantly, our worldview around it. Thankfully, it is not going away any time soon, as it definitely has utility, but that does not mean what we call time is actually time.