In building a model of how consciousness might develop, we assume that there is an “Implicit Order” (as described by David Bohm in “Wholeness and the Implicit Order”) and a “What Is” or an “Explicit Order” as described by J. Krishnamjurti (in his various works).


FOR OUR SPECIFIC EXPERIMENT–SEE “THE EXPERIMENT” UNDER MENU IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER OF THE HOME PAGE. Place a droplet of water on a surface and it will bunch up, take on the shape of a half sphere. That’s because water molecules are cohesive, partly meaning they have high surface tension in air. The water …


For something to exist, like an experience of awareness, part of an apparent continuous consciousness, there must be a relationship across at least one boundary (one difference in potential, or at least one signal/transfer of information). A relationship exists when we sample our environment and it responds to our sampling (the same can be said …

The Changing Climate of The Implicit

The idea here is that we can never know what is behind our observations, since, perhaps, we live in, as John Archibald Wheeler calls it, a participatory universe, the universe of the observer. Observers who sample at their RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW then process the results, generalize about them, and give them meaning, only to “stash them …

Anniversary Post/Summary

    This post is for those who, for whatever reason, through the Facebook platform decided to congratulate Union of Opposites website on its one-year anniversary.   On this site, we posit that there exists an Implicit World (Bohm’s Implicit (see Wholeness And The Implicit Order) a WIBWI: What Is Behind What Is), a nondescript …


  [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, …

Dimension: Change in Space and Time

[A quick review of SAMPLING: When one system relates to another across a boundary, they are said to be in relationship. They interact by co-sampling information that comes to them across their boundaries from the other system.   Each system has a way of detecting the other system, and the information that transfers between systems …

Focusing, Imaging, and Configuration

When starting from the human side, the spiritual side, the side of the mind in working our logic—when we talk about life, death, and what may, or may have existed before life and after death—we must consider the three words that are title to this piece.

From the scientific language, the philosophy growing from our fluid experiment, we are brought to the realization that Krishnamurti’s “What Is,” the virtual reality of our minds, is where we exist and that we become aware of reality from birth by representing our boundary, our difference, our change, our sampling of “What Is Behind What Is” and then generalize that information into the fleshed-in, virtual world of our minds, the multifaceted world we call “What Is.”

We say that the boundary we represent seems to condense or collapse out of “What Is Behind What Is,” each time we reach out to sample it.

The question important to me is not “Do we exist after death?” nor is it “Are we aware of our existence?” but “What happens to the configuration, the boundary, that was uniquely us, after we die?”

The conclusions we hope to come to will be that no matter how improbable, all perspectives exist, just not always here and just not always now. They live on, perhaps until the time two or more such perspectives can collapse across a boundary to create the essence of an existence, an existence in the here and now. The awareness of awareness (How we become watchers instead of simply responders).

But what is the nature of perspectives as they statistically and momentarily bump into and separate from one another? What causes them to hook up in the first place? (For those possible answers, see menu items “Sampling and Statistics” and “Space and Time.”)

So, our main question might be “If we cannot know the nature of What Is Behind What Is—how it operates in the arenas of the before and after lives—how can we possibly predict the chances of a before life or after life based on this life? (the one we’re in the process of constantly sampling in the here and now)

As an analog our expanding-droplet experiment can tell us what is possible to describe using our mathematical language (solutions to the general energy equation) that illuminates both the change in energy across a boundary and the experience of that change, The Flow.

Here and Now: 100% Probable

To discover how experimentalists, as observers, generalize anything about their worlds, visit the Sampling and Statistics topic under the MENU on the RHS of this HOME page.

Basically, all anyone can sample is what is Here and what is Now. That seems obvious, but is it? When we reach out in any number of ways to sample our universe, what if nothing is there? Is there nothing because there really is nothing to be sampled? Or, is there nothing only because it is not right here, but somewhere else. It is not here because, it exists, but not now, not at the moment we tried to sample it.

We all know when we interact with anything that it exists. But does it exist if we attempt to sample it, as it eludes us?

If every time we sample something, we find it, then we say it is 100% probable. What we don’t always say is: it’s 100% probable here and now.

But what happens when it isn’t here and now? What are its chances, or its likelihood of existing then?

Many times we categorize such improbable events as nonexistent or figments of the imagination, especially in scientific inquiry where they need to be reproducible–able to be sampled over and over again. For how long?