[I’m throwing out lots of ideas and questions here that I hope to clarify in later postings.]

 What if it’s not how we got to be us, but our unique configuration that determines our unique consciousness?

 So, does the shape, independent of anything else, determine our unique perspective?

 The above idea might make sense, since, if the same self-organized, origin-based criticality (For example: the same universe created both of us, and we may have evolved into similar configurations) each of us might be driven to filter out some behaviors, and/or to act out others.)

[The slower the flow rate in our nearly 2-dimensional expanding boundary, the more alike are the crests that emerge. We don’t know how information is conducted between crests, but the Energy Equation and its experimental outcome tell us that the smaller the incremental changes, the flow rate, the more similar are the crests (us?) but also the less robust. If our universe is seen to expand abruptly, then it will have an early rapid unstable flow. In our 2-D experiment that results in crests that differ greatly and that are robust in complexity (have a better chance for a language of consciousness to arise).]

Do the troughs represent byproducts of slight changes that create slightly different individuals? When one finger is resorbed, that may only happen from that one finger’s perspective. Maybe the remaining fingers that survive are interconnected in some way to an original root or origin. [If that is so, then pure conduction of the flow is not the mechanism, since information in such a situation can only transfer perpendicular to the boundary (only happening at the unstable crests, that are blocked from other crests by the intervening stable troughs.]

 Or, perhaps, all throughout our radial duration we are resorbed and re-initiated, giving us the opportunity to see the world through many perspectives. Each finger may grow farther than the original, continue to function in it’s own subjective time.  Perhaps what we think of as living is a successive dying. [This idea emerges from a discontinuous universe.]

 That means, eventually, we no longer live in an objective 100% Here and Now reality (or did we ever?) but in an improbable reality.

 1. Improbable time events may consist in shorter snippets or sequences of events, like dreams. When people say they die and go to Heaven, perhaps they are thinking of this dreamlike world we experience in lucid dreaming. I’ve been there a few times. Very few, but I remember a feeling of well-being even if events were somewhat strange.

 

2. So, perhaps, from our limited viewpoints, we all think we look and act differently, but what if we’re really one another? Perhaps that’s what gives us natural empathy.

 

3. Could a natural empathetic perspective die with abuse in one’s early life?