As I’ve written before, my Jewish-born parents wanted me to find my own god. Somehow, I think they might have been hoping for an afterlife.

Dad was in business and developed some of the first business math. Mom was a beautician, the creative type, but also a lover of nature. My father was brought up with a parochial background. He was a chaplain in The Navy during WWII. And he loved to read, or discuss, Bible stories with us at the kitchen table. There was only us three.

The reason I think they were concerned with what death and the afterlife is was because they were never introduced to the spirituality of Christian thinking (that promises an idyllic afterlife for believers). My parents asked me within a month of their separate deaths, now more than 20 years ago, what I had discovered scientifically about who or what God was.

I became this scientific generalist and modern-day natural philosopher through my education, reading, conversations, and thoughts. But when my parents asked me about God, I hadn’t thought independently on the problem long and hard enough. So, I couldn’t tell them. Even if they were alive today and asked me the same question, I’m not sure that I’d tell them what I learned. So, be aware that what I am going to reveal about the universe I live in (my personal cosmology) might only work for me, or for a time. More, and more complex, information about this topic will change the ideas put forth here. The science will change by us more deeply understanding the meaning of the mathematics we use to describe parts of our universe and its behavior. [And, please note, the most ephemeral aspect of our universe (that we believe consists of FORM and FUNCTION) is our individual EXPERIENCES (from our own PERSPECTIVES) that cannot all be measured and evaluated simply.]

There are those who put out equations online to show they understand the workings of our universe. I am reminded that the words (FORM and FUNCTION) are not really the actual universal form, function, or experience of our universe. They are simply descriptions of what we’ve sampled out there, or in here.

When I began chatting with someone who was well read in Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Theory, and The Quantum Realm (of high energy physics), they tell me that the universe starts out being the least entangled and that’s what they call ORDER. Then I asked them what would they call the chaotic realm (or realm of chaos)?) To these high energy folks, my realm, the realm of heavily entangled viscous fluids (and the solid, liquid, and gaseous states of matter) is pure CHAOS.

I could not believe what I was hearing. How can the crystalline structure of a diamond, or the periodic table showing the valences of atoms be chaotic? To me, they were condensed from the cosmic soup, highly structured: what I might call self-ordered critically structured. How can those who follow the entropic theory of the quantum realm believe anything so totally backward? I’m a child of and published in self-ordered systems like unstable, unsteady source flows between different viscous fluids. Now, it looks like, all of a sudden, I’m being asked to throw all that understanding of the cosmos out.

Of course, something else we scientists might seek while looking for the ultimate, is the ultimate in our own thinking behavior: CONSCIOUSNESS. So, this post is going to describe the simplest form that the life cycle of our universe might take and, next, we’ll try to apply it to human consciousness, if that’s possible.

Before there was the beginning of our EXPLICIT universe there was a POTENTIAL universe. Physicist David Bohm wrote a book about it called, THE IMPLICATE ORDER. Now what did he mean by that? He could design fluid experiments to show that things can be encoded invisibly in the fluid (implied) rather than the explicit/condensed/encrypted/entangled universe we are familiar with (through sampling and creating models that fit the resulting data).

So, what is the potential universe made up of? High energy physicists through atom and particle smashers (cyclotrons and colliders) are aware that any of the smallest of particles do not necessarily exist for any duration. Many particles that form and degrade into smaller particles might be named VIRTUAL particles. They are particles of extremely short durations, or no duration at the pressures and temperatures tested in the colliders. Before our universe began to expand, everything was an instantaneous energy pathway (between cause and effect). The temperatures, speeds, and sizes of the near zero-massed particles was so great that all there was were nearly instantaneous energy pathways. They were a part of a boundary of our universe in time. As our universe cooled, pathways may have expanded, allowing connection to solutions/existence in time.

All pathways, as far as we know (in our universe), existed. But the paths existed in both space and time and were not always stable (they came together and then appart in time, not lasting for very long durations in space or time).

So, let’s first look at what some simple things in our potential universe (of virtual particles) will first condense or collapse into. What was the first entanglement like?

Entanglement

For those studying the quantum realm of the explicit (realm of what exists and can be sampled in our universe), they start out with the invisible, statistical, enfolded, implicit virtual “particles,” before they manifest themselves (or are able to be detected or sampled).

So what we might think of as pure energy out there, in the potential universe without light, might be labeled dark energy. Of that energy, when the universe cools enough the virtual energy packets begin to follow pathways to their matching pair. It’s kind of like one particle that spins one way is somehow linked (maybe in another dimension) to another particle out there that spins opposite to itself.

It all has to do with boundaries, but I’m going to start with the first boundaries that form (similar to the meniscus in a straw that forms between air and water: the air appears to have a concave boundary on the meniscus and the water a convex boundary (depending on perspective): the two are paired or entangled).

So, let’s say the first virtual particles that make up the potential universe have not yet entangled enough to form solids, liquids, and gaseous, or other states of matter (like, maybe, in the subatomic vacuums of outer space). How can we find these particles? We have found dark masses/matter that diffuses itself through space. It could be that the first entanglements, like those we use in quantum computers to solve problems (through this simple entanglement), makes up the rest of the dark components of our universe (dark matter). We do not know exactly how entanglement proceeds, virtual particles finding one another through invisible/enfolded pathways, but a glimpse of the process can be seen in THE DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT.

THE DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT was once thought to be controlled, but how could it be controlled (allowing us to combine the results) when there are two experimental setups?

What I will be referring to is the setup with two slits. A single photon of light energy is shot at a target/wall with two slits. A screen behind the wall registers any light that comes through the two slits. We know that if there was one slit the light would appear on the screen opposite that slit. With two slits, an interference pattern appears on the screen. But there is only one photon shot at the two slits. We can understand how a photon can go through one slit and we can predict where that particle will land (opposite the slit on the screen). But we, as human observers, from human perspectives, think we need light coming through both slits (two photons to interfering with each other to form an interference wave).

This experiment brings us closer to how the universe behaves, sees its own behavior as opposed to how humans see that behavior (the single photon, somehow, going through both slits and interfering with itself).

CHANGE IN PERSPECTIVE

When The Double Slit was first performed, researchers thought it was a controlled experiment, so they thought their results in combining the two setups gave a faster than light result. That information about one or two slits reached the screen before the one or two slit pathways were chosen electronically. It was not that information traveled faster than light, but that the perspectives (one or two slits) changed faster than light speed (within the electronic setup).

Remember the virtual fields in the potential universe are somehow paired independent of space and time (so, from the universal early universal vacuum, they will not be able to return a 3-D spatial velocity (such space did not exist to any extent in the early universe)).

The single slit did not allow pathways that might have existed in the double. At the beginning of our universe all sorts of optional pathways to solutions (boundary solutions like the meniscus, or the single point of light of a single photon through a single slit) might exist. And depending on which pathways entangle first, that leaves other pathways filtered out from producing any possible outcome (One PERSPECTIVE eliminates all others: looking down on a roof of a house, one cannot see the front door).

CONTINUITY

The mathematics of calculus can find working solutions only if the assumption is a continuity of whatever is being modeled. Is it possible that the mind itself evolved to create the view of a continuous world? Or is our universe such that there can be no actual place within it where energy doesn’t flow (that condition might prove its continuity).

Again, the example of how pathways to encrypted/entangled solutions can be thought of as perspectives is: When we look from a helicopter down on a house, we filter out the details of the other perspectives on the house (such as the front door).

The problem we have is in SAMPLING. Once we observe or sample a pathway to a solution, all other solutions are factored out (If its of the realm of the mind and human awareness, we call it focus (we focus on one thing to focus out all other things). And when we design a machine to detect something within some range, all other solutions that do not fit in that range most probably will be filtered out and be beyond our ability to identify, or describe.

So it is with dark energy (the hot potential or initial universe that enfolded this implicate order of energy deltas, each not coming to the fore (or condensing), except when the realm or range of energy drop is experienced, probably in the work done in expanding space). We still don’t know how dark matter is formed (probably the first simple entanglements that, somehow, entangle no further).

The first entanglements probably had to do with spacetime (the work of expanding space). But little is known of how entangled pathways build on one another. From the other end of the spectrum (highly-entangled like my viscous fluid experiments), we have some form of self-ordering. But, what about the subsequent entanglements to the first condensed entangled particles? Are there any rules for subsequent entanglements or agglomerations? (Could the first entanglements not be spacetime of our own universe, but other universes that are filtered out?

Infinitesimally-massed first-entanglements can be detected in how they gravitationally affect other matter, especially matter that produces light. What method or rules govern subsequent entanglements due to our universe condensing?

[The idea of over focus and overspecification is very similar to limiting specification. In limiting specification, there are no more opportunities for further entanglement (puzzle pieces of energy to connect to the already agglomerated system/puzzle).]

Because we do not know how entanglement self-orders to produce larger and more complex agglomerations within our universe, we have to leave this topic for now. Our next topic will be potential breakthoughs in how systems with dissimilar energies see each other because of time dilation that occurs as they sample one another.