In my previous post I raised the potential perspective that consciousness, as a living process, was one that may work by influencing the smallest living parts of the human being, the cell. Of course, cells are not specific to humanity but are evidenced in most other forms of life on Earth, so they are to me, a natural contender for being part of the mechanism that consciousness uses to manifest itself here on Earth. As I have mentioned before, as an engineer by trade, I am motivated to construct mechanisms and processes that both explain and demonstrate the transformation of energy (particles, waves, etc) into different forms. By creating and working with these processes we develop the ability to make better informed judgments by working from a basis grounded in proven and evidenced facts.
The matter of consciousness is one that can be most perplexing. We know it exists because the results are evidenced in all of us. Yet, because of earlier attempts to define its purpose through the teachings, writings and theological frameworks of human religions, it has been subjected to different interpretations that were solely the results of second, third or multiple parties interpretations of experiences they were not part of. This is, in my opinion, the great failing of the religious frameworks that are based upon the writings of person(s) of dubious historical fact.
Therefore, the reader will find that my own approach is one that seeks to develop a workable framework that has enough basis in fact or evidence to be usable for people to develop their own experiences without the need for an “overseer” to translate and define those same experiences. If the framework has basis in demonstrable facts, then the results of using this framework provides that person with a basis to develop their own experiences knowing that other people may also be gaining the same or similar experiences (hopefully).
Therefore, my own viewpoint and motivation is one that seeks to remove the need for a third-party interpretation and to place in the hands of the individual, the framework with which to both develop and correlate their experiences. Some of my conjecture will prove to be challenging and I am happy to respond to any and all questions about what I am proposing.
Using my previous conjecture that consciousness may provide the cell, or even the bacteria present in us and all other living matter, with a potential interface for the absorbtion of this consciousness, I now turn my attention to the possible contenders for the transportation of this consciousness. In the universe we know as being based in our present reality, there are four known forces. As far as everyday living for humanity is concerned, the electromagnetic force would appear to be the most obviously influential one. The electromagnetic force is responsible for the transportation of light and heat, probably the two most physically evidenced properties experienced by humans.
As we progress in scientific areas, we are now (probably) living through a part of human history rich with potential for advancing our understanding of the known cosmos, overturning centuries of both misinformation and just plain wrong concepts of what actually represents reality. One of those concepts was best described by the old adage “I’ll believe it when I see it with my own eyes”. We now know that what we see with our own eyes is provided by the electromagnetic force yet we do not know the process, fully, to describe how light, hitting the surface of the eye, is transformed into the usable information perceived by the brain. What we do know, from recent work, is that the range of light humanity can actually perceive only represents 0.0000000001% of the total light spectrum. “I’ll believe it when I see it with my own eyes?” actually, I don’t think I want to restrict myself that much thank you!
The electromagnetic force is also responsible for the delivery of the heat of the Sun, necessary for the majority of life on Earth. Therefore, it is probably the most directly experienced force as far as everyday living is concerned. Does this, therefore, make it the favourite for being the carrier of consciousness? I would suggest not and will develop my thoughts.
Two other forces are the weak and strong nuclear forces. The processes and purposes of these forces are not well-known at this time and would appear to be involved in the workings of particles and protons in the very small-scale of the quantum mechanical world. One thing these forces share in common though, is they are evidenced as being present in the known universe and at predictable strength. One of the consequences and suggestions of the M-brane scenario is that the observed universe, now that it has been observed and confirmed as being essentially flat, restricts interactions with this universe through the available dimensions of that same universe. A flat universe, therefore, restricts its dimensions to left and right, up and down (limited) and forward and back. It is also been suggested that space / time may represent a fourth / fifth dimension, but either way, these forces are restricted by the nature of a flat universe.
This also lends itself to the speculation that this flat physical universe acts as a restricting factor on these three forces, tying them to a predictable magnitude of both size and power. Therefore, if one is of the opinion that consciousness is not tied to this physical universe, but permeates other realms of existence or other (brane or other) universes, I would contend that this very nature of consciousness rules out the three forces discussed. If these forces are limited by our flat physical universe, I would suggest they are not good candidates for the transportation of consciousness.
Therefore we turn our attention to the last known force, that of gravity. Gravity is a force that has been the thorn in the side of physics for most of the time it has been known to science. It is speculated to being a major player in the formation of the universe (creating the conditions for the singularity of the Big Bang theory to develop) but unlike the other three forces, its relative strength is not proportional as is thought it should be. This weak force of gravity (proportionally) therefore, has meant that rather than deal with the consequences or reasoning of why this should be, physicists have actually chosen, in a lot of instances, to take gravity out of a lot of their theoretical equations and indeed, it is only possible for a lot of these very same equations to work without the disproportional influence of gravity. Upon learning of this course of action, I couldn’t help but think of the child who, not wanting to hear what it’s parents were trying to say to him / her, stuck their fingers in their ears singing La La La at the top of their voices! If we don’t see / hear it, it doesn’t exist!
However, for the purpose of this piece, the actual properties of gravity, especially using recent scientific speculation, lends itself to presenting the case as a potential part or full transporter of consciousness. This may not be as instantly outrageous as it appears at first sight. As we have speculated, one of the properties of consciousness is its apparent ability to transcend the physical and influence the non physical. Current scientific speculation into the many worlds or universes theory speculates that the existence of these other worlds / universes is only detectable by using the force of gravity. Gravity, it has been suggested, is so weak here, because it is the only one of the known forces that has the properties to pass through our universe and into another one. It has further been speculated that if we could use gravity in the same way as we use the light properties of the electromagnetic force, this would give us a window into these alternative worlds / universes. In short, it presents one of our best means to verify, at this time, the existence of other universes.
This speculation, therefore, may lead one to conclude that the properties of gravity are not dissimilar to those of consciousness, using our current understanding of what actually constitutes consciousness. It would appear to possess the same qualities as consciousness, to transcend both the physical and non physical (or scientifically, the non proven) yet has a direct influence in both creating the conditions of both the formation and continuation of the physical universe. It would also appear to be central to mechanisms observed in black holes, contenders also for potential viewpoints into alternative universes.
So, if we take the leap and suggest that gravity is a possible contender for the transporter of consciousness, we have a possible means by which this consciousness is experienced by humanity. We could not exist on this planet without the effect of gravity weighing us down and thus preventing us from spinning off into the vacuum of space. It is felt by each and every one of us in a direct way.
If therefore, gravity may be the mechanism by which consciousness is “delivered” to the Earth, part of the function of the physical body may be the transference of this consciousness (which may actually be a constituent of gravity) into the biological processes of the human body. Therefore, the human body (and indeed, most other biological bodies known and possibly other forms of existence speculated at currently ) may well be viewed as conduits for an energetic transference of this consciousness from its “raw” state present in gravity, into a different state transformed by the biological body. The term transmutation springs readily to mind here. There is not a part of the Earth or indeed our solar system (and further, I would suggest there is good evidence to suggest no part of our known universe) that is not subject to gravity and if one takes the viewpoint that there is not one part of creation that is not subject to consciousness, the similarities are striking. The human body, the conduit, may be a transmutation device that realizes the potential of consciousness through the biological processes inherent in all of humanity. Other lifeforms may also demonstrate this transmutation effect to a greater or lesser extent.