TIME PASSAGES, (7?) - REPETITION, Part 1
Nothing ever repeats. The good example is that history is said to never repeat - but it often "rhymes." In other words, patterns reoccur which resemble each other, but which are far from identical. This also happens in economics. In behaviour. In fact, I am intending to write a post about repetition in people and nature - both necessary, but not ever true repetition. Note: I am talking about our classical realm, and not crazy physics - that comes later.
If something were to truly repeat, where all environmental factors are identical to the earlier state, then this would not be a repetition: It would BE the earlier state. Big Ben may ring twice, but each time, the cars, and clouds, and birds, and people, and thoughts, and winds, and placement of the planet - they are all different.
In fact, as I discussed in the example of the stationary rock, in an earlier post: Even a seemingly stationary object, point, or innertial frame of reference, is not repeating itself through time. Because the environment is ever changing, including the place, direction and acceleration of the object through the universe, nothing repeats itself through time. Existence, identity, and consciousness, are not about an integrity based on continuity, but about how the illusion of continuity is maintained, partly through some continual manipulation of, or interference with, the environment. That ranges from discrete variations in weight, energy, and frequency, to dynamical perception, cognition, and digestion.
And, as I argued long ago, a clone cannot be fully identical to the original, since every identity is stamped not only by its environment, but by the unique, exact point in time and space in which it was conceived. It doesn't matter if the genetic code is exactly the same between two organisms. They were each born of a completely different time and space, and this difference continues and multiplies as time and space go forward. Any mother knows this.
There is never repetition, or duplication. There is only oscillation, or cycling. You are partly a recollection of many of the feelings of your grandparent, of your parents, of all your ancestors - but you are distinct, nevertheless, largely because you are of another time and space, a new cycle, completely convinced that you are a singular individual. Notice something here? Because there is no 100% repetition or duplication - because it is a physical absurdity - then every entity that arises assumes itself to be distinct. Ain't that astonishing? And magical? Because, again, if something absolutely repeated, then how COULD there be an assumption of a new identity? (Remember, though, we are not talking about crazy physics yet).
Observez la: Even the double helix is a cycle. A frequency. In resonance... Well, THAT'S where there is a better approximation of repetition or duplication: In the resonance of similar frequencies. This approximation of duplication is what is practiced in religious rituals, where the deep sense of mutual duplication produces a powerful mass narcissism, which assumes itself a larger, less fallible being. (Note that narcissism is inherent in the existence of any entity, to begin with. That is what I call the 'existential bias'. It is necessary to nature, and it is directly related to our discussion of the absurdity of repetition). Habit, conservatism, chants, poems, sychcronised swimming, tit-for-tat nonsense, imitative competition, aping and spirit-stealing, mocking, pretending, OCD, addiction: These all summon feelings similar to those often evoked in religious rituals.
So, there is no repetition in time. Everything in the universe is acting on everything else, and this manifests the experience of time by each/all actors, (as I have written earlier). One might say that my argument here is simplistic, based on entities as if they were all of human form, or something. But, really, I am looking as well at the subatomic scale, where the influence vis-a-vis the universe is even more intense. Time is even more-so created by the mass action of sub/atomic entities viv-a-vis the universe. And, as I have written earlier, this interaction involves something strange called the Double Paradox. (I am saying this to help tie you back into earlier thoughts).
There cannot be true repetition in time, because such would result in the original state, right? We do not think of any present state as repetition, or self-duplication - only as the present state. Absolute duplication is a vacuum that nature rushes in to deny and destroy - before it has its boots on.
However, let's not limit ourselves in that. So what if there is no absolute duplication of one moment or thing, because it would be absurdity? And so what if all time is contingent upon this restriction? There is nothing stopping us from imagining WHAT IF... What if each moment or thing is an infinite duplication of itself? It would mean nothing to the rest of the universe, or to physical measurement, right? Because there is no measuring it to be anything different. To say that a present state is an infinite regression of the same present state means absolutely nothing to science, or the outside world. It is like imagining that alternate universe may exist beyond our own: Well, what difference does it make, when none of them influence our universe in any possible way, and cannot be measured in any possible way, and are therefor COMPLETE IDEATIONS. Virtual NONEXISTENCES. Not possible to be in any meaning mind other than those non compos mentis.
However, there is this thing called BEING, which is beyond the scope of scientific measurement, and maybe even of time. What is it? We already noted that all the universe conspires to disallow any sort of complete duplication. And what follows from that is a great, infinite myriad of individuals. Well, what do these individuals need in order to think themselves better than all other entities, and so continue on in their existence? Exactly. The paradox of infinite self-duplication. Timelessness. Being, completely divorced from all other beings, can only be so by reference to its own eternity, privilege, or primacy. In fact, without this existential bias, this self-assertion response, everything else in the whole time game would be shot to hell. Time requires that each entity assumes itself to be primary, and what better way to do this than to take on the great taboo - the paradox - of infinite duplication within self? Narcissism begins at home. (Of course, sexuality plays with this towards getting a species to be infatuated with itself, so it will continue in time, and evolve).
So, lets step out of time into the New Age garbage, and consider that infinity-of-self may not be such a wrongful notion. Even an atheist may premise himself or herself upon this self-primacy, while arguing that only the time-realm is of substance. I.e., there is no eternal or infinite. Can we say the atheist is so denying his own infinite/eternal? No. Because who is to say that the present state has anything to do with infinite self-duplication? All we know is that there is narcissism in the universe, and a whole lot of paradox to set neighbour against neighbour, as is the way of endless individuality. Again, from the timewise perspective, there is no such thing as infinite self-duplication. No need for it. Doesn't show up on the books. If something wants to deny it, all the more power to it, and all the more chance the rest of religious society will attempt to stomp it out. I am diverging into descriptions based on alternate arms of the Double Paradox. None need exist in concordance with any other. Any or all may exist together. Or none...
So, I have told you that infinite duplication of self means nothing in the conventionally measured universe, but it can mean something in the spiritual sense, to some. Some may say, ridiculously. But, to some, the spiritual sense is the only sense, and that is fine, too. Why? Because it takes all approaches to evolve a universe. And, all approaches are within the very nature of the universe, so.
Note: An infinite duplication of self (Atman) is by definition beyond time, timeless. One might say it is eternal, another might say it is absurd, and both may be judged to be right or wrong, depending on the politics of the day.
What difference does it make in the real world? In the real world, what we seek are approximations of similarity. So, we seek people who are kindred. We are KIND to them. Because they are like us, in this way or that. Part of our search is governed by DNA, fgs. Nothing wrong or unusual about that. We love our mates, but we love our kids even more. Timewise. All of this is a function of the determination of a shared timeline. It also leads to war. As if we are not self-similar enough, we have to kill millions, and destroy the planet. Just goes to show how unrefined, or amoral, the whole scheme of the universe really is. Yes, it got the hang of banging planets together, but, as far as life goes, I don't think the universe has this as a top priority. Cooperation? Civilisation? Peace? Not necessarilly something the universe loses sleep over.
Or, maybe it does. Listen. A universe which sports every one of its beings as individuals... And a universe that allows for, at least, the concept of spirituality... And a universe, cruel as it is, which pushes life to live and live despite all betrayals by GOD... And a universe which is, for the most part, very very cold and peaceful... And a universe which allows for quantum entanglement, psychic phenomena, and bizarre synchronicity, (see Origami Universe)... And a universe which sports LIFE ITSELF... And which does indeed allow for change and evolution... And self-contemplation... And which does not protest too much when local conditions give rise to instances of Cooperation? Civilisation? Peace? - Then, I think, the universe does not take sides, but sits back and watches with amusement. Self-amusement. Like God in whatever testament, this player we call the universe... It is us. We are it... Make of it what you will...
If something were to truly repeat, where all environmental factors are identical to the earlier state, then this would not be a repetition: It would BE the earlier state. Big Ben may ring twice, but each time, the cars, and clouds, and birds, and people, and thoughts, and winds, and placement of the planet - they are all different.
In fact, as I discussed in the example of the stationary rock, in an earlier post: Even a seemingly stationary object, point, or innertial frame of reference, is not repeating itself through time. Because the environment is ever changing, including the place, direction and acceleration of the object through the universe, nothing repeats itself through time. Existence, identity, and consciousness, are not about an integrity based on continuity, but about how the illusion of continuity is maintained, partly through some continual manipulation of, or interference with, the environment. That ranges from discrete variations in weight, energy, and frequency, to dynamical perception, cognition, and digestion.
And, as I argued long ago, a clone cannot be fully identical to the original, since every identity is stamped not only by its environment, but by the unique, exact point in time and space in which it was conceived. It doesn't matter if the genetic code is exactly the same between two organisms. They were each born of a completely different time and space, and this difference continues and multiplies as time and space go forward. Any mother knows this.
There is never repetition, or duplication. There is only oscillation, or cycling. You are partly a recollection of many of the feelings of your grandparent, of your parents, of all your ancestors - but you are distinct, nevertheless, largely because you are of another time and space, a new cycle, completely convinced that you are a singular individual. Notice something here? Because there is no 100% repetition or duplication - because it is a physical absurdity - then every entity that arises assumes itself to be distinct. Ain't that astonishing? And magical? Because, again, if something absolutely repeated, then how COULD there be an assumption of a new identity? (Remember, though, we are not talking about crazy physics yet).
Observez la: Even the double helix is a cycle. A frequency. In resonance... Well, THAT'S where there is a better approximation of repetition or duplication: In the resonance of similar frequencies. This approximation of duplication is what is practiced in religious rituals, where the deep sense of mutual duplication produces a powerful mass narcissism, which assumes itself a larger, less fallible being. (Note that narcissism is inherent in the existence of any entity, to begin with. That is what I call the 'existential bias'. It is necessary to nature, and it is directly related to our discussion of the absurdity of repetition). Habit, conservatism, chants, poems, sychcronised swimming, tit-for-tat nonsense, imitative competition, aping and spirit-stealing, mocking, pretending, OCD, addiction: These all summon feelings similar to those often evoked in religious rituals.
So, there is no repetition in time. Everything in the universe is acting on everything else, and this manifests the experience of time by each/all actors, (as I have written earlier). One might say that my argument here is simplistic, based on entities as if they were all of human form, or something. But, really, I am looking as well at the subatomic scale, where the influence vis-a-vis the universe is even more intense. Time is even more-so created by the mass action of sub/atomic entities viv-a-vis the universe. And, as I have written earlier, this interaction involves something strange called the Double Paradox. (I am saying this to help tie you back into earlier thoughts).
There cannot be true repetition in time, because such would result in the original state, right? We do not think of any present state as repetition, or self-duplication - only as the present state. Absolute duplication is a vacuum that nature rushes in to deny and destroy - before it has its boots on.
However, let's not limit ourselves in that. So what if there is no absolute duplication of one moment or thing, because it would be absurdity? And so what if all time is contingent upon this restriction? There is nothing stopping us from imagining WHAT IF... What if each moment or thing is an infinite duplication of itself? It would mean nothing to the rest of the universe, or to physical measurement, right? Because there is no measuring it to be anything different. To say that a present state is an infinite regression of the same present state means absolutely nothing to science, or the outside world. It is like imagining that alternate universe may exist beyond our own: Well, what difference does it make, when none of them influence our universe in any possible way, and cannot be measured in any possible way, and are therefor COMPLETE IDEATIONS. Virtual NONEXISTENCES. Not possible to be in any meaning mind other than those non compos mentis.
However, there is this thing called BEING, which is beyond the scope of scientific measurement, and maybe even of time. What is it? We already noted that all the universe conspires to disallow any sort of complete duplication. And what follows from that is a great, infinite myriad of individuals. Well, what do these individuals need in order to think themselves better than all other entities, and so continue on in their existence? Exactly. The paradox of infinite self-duplication. Timelessness. Being, completely divorced from all other beings, can only be so by reference to its own eternity, privilege, or primacy. In fact, without this existential bias, this self-assertion response, everything else in the whole time game would be shot to hell. Time requires that each entity assumes itself to be primary, and what better way to do this than to take on the great taboo - the paradox - of infinite duplication within self? Narcissism begins at home. (Of course, sexuality plays with this towards getting a species to be infatuated with itself, so it will continue in time, and evolve).
So, lets step out of time into the New Age garbage, and consider that infinity-of-self may not be such a wrongful notion. Even an atheist may premise himself or herself upon this self-primacy, while arguing that only the time-realm is of substance. I.e., there is no eternal or infinite. Can we say the atheist is so denying his own infinite/eternal? No. Because who is to say that the present state has anything to do with infinite self-duplication? All we know is that there is narcissism in the universe, and a whole lot of paradox to set neighbour against neighbour, as is the way of endless individuality. Again, from the timewise perspective, there is no such thing as infinite self-duplication. No need for it. Doesn't show up on the books. If something wants to deny it, all the more power to it, and all the more chance the rest of religious society will attempt to stomp it out. I am diverging into descriptions based on alternate arms of the Double Paradox. None need exist in concordance with any other. Any or all may exist together. Or none...
So, I have told you that infinite duplication of self means nothing in the conventionally measured universe, but it can mean something in the spiritual sense, to some. Some may say, ridiculously. But, to some, the spiritual sense is the only sense, and that is fine, too. Why? Because it takes all approaches to evolve a universe. And, all approaches are within the very nature of the universe, so.
Note: An infinite duplication of self (Atman) is by definition beyond time, timeless. One might say it is eternal, another might say it is absurd, and both may be judged to be right or wrong, depending on the politics of the day.
What difference does it make in the real world? In the real world, what we seek are approximations of similarity. So, we seek people who are kindred. We are KIND to them. Because they are like us, in this way or that. Part of our search is governed by DNA, fgs. Nothing wrong or unusual about that. We love our mates, but we love our kids even more. Timewise. All of this is a function of the determination of a shared timeline. It also leads to war. As if we are not self-similar enough, we have to kill millions, and destroy the planet. Just goes to show how unrefined, or amoral, the whole scheme of the universe really is. Yes, it got the hang of banging planets together, but, as far as life goes, I don't think the universe has this as a top priority. Cooperation? Civilisation? Peace? Not necessarilly something the universe loses sleep over.
Or, maybe it does. Listen. A universe which sports every one of its beings as individuals... And a universe that allows for, at least, the concept of spirituality... And a universe, cruel as it is, which pushes life to live and live despite all betrayals by GOD... And a universe which is, for the most part, very very cold and peaceful... And a universe which allows for quantum entanglement, psychic phenomena, and bizarre synchronicity, (see Origami Universe)... And a universe which sports LIFE ITSELF... And which does indeed allow for change and evolution... And self-contemplation... And which does not protest too much when local conditions give rise to instances of Cooperation? Civilisation? Peace? - Then, I think, the universe does not take sides, but sits back and watches with amusement. Self-amusement. Like God in whatever testament, this player we call the universe... It is us. We are it... Make of it what you will...