“All things are one.” —Heraclitus (540-480 BC)
THE SECOND HALF of the ninth chapter of BIOCENTRISM — How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe, authored by globally respected scientist Robert Lanza, MD and renown astronomer Bob Berman, delves into the perspective of a likely pre-existent universe in an indeterminate state of formless, vibrationless wave of potential, possibility and probability — and the necessity, therefore, for a universe that accommodates and supports both life and consciousness . . . simply because of the need for an observer to collapse its wave-function and bring the universe out into particle-form reality.
This perspective was dubbed “the Anthropic Principle,” a term that emerged in the 1960’s from papers written by Princeton physicist Robert Dicke and elaborated upon by Brandon Carter in 1974. The alternative is a billiard ball model that, by mere happenstance, produced a Michael Angelo and a Amadeus Mozart. Based simply on such unlikely outcomes, intelligent design wins out over Darwin’s preposterous random selection, as well as religion’s inconceivable creation out of nothing scenarios.
Starting from where I left off in the previous post . . . .
Carter explained that what we can expect to observe “must be restricted by the conditions necessary for our presence as observers.” Put another way, if gravity was a hair stronger or the Big Bang a sliver weaker, and therefore the universe’s lifespan significantly shorter, we couldn’t be here to think about it. Because we’re here, the universe has to be the way it is and therefore isn’t unlikely at all. Case closed.
By this reasoning, there’s no need for cosmological gratitude. Our seemingly fortuitous, suspiciously specific locale, temperature range, chemical and physical milieus are just what’s needed to produce life. If we’re here, then this is what we must find around us.
Such reasoning is now known as the “weak” version of the Anthropic Principle or WAP. The “strong” version, one that skirts the edges of philosophy even more closely but clearly supports biocentrism, says that the universe must have those properties that allow life to develop within it because it was obviously “designed” with the goal of generating and sustaining observers. But without biocentrism, the strong anthropic principle has no mechanism for explaining why the universe must have life-sustaining properties.
Going even further, the late physicist John Wheeler (1911-2008), who coined the term “black hole,” advocated what is now called the Participatory Anthropic Principle (PAP): observers are required to bring the universe into existence. Wheeler’s theory says that any pre-life Earth would have existed in an indeterminate state, like Schrodinger’s cat. Once an observer exists, the aspects of the universe under observation become forced to resolve into one state, a state that includes a seemingly pre-life Earth. This means that a pre-life universe can only exist retroactively after the fact of consciousness. (Because time is an illusion of consciousness, as we shall see shortly, this whole talk of before and after isn’t strictly correct but provides a way of visualizing things.)
If the universe is in a non-determined state until forced to resolve by an observer, and this non-determined state included the determination of the various fundamental constants [elements such as oxygen, carbon, hydrogen and helium, etc.], then the resolution would necessarily fall in such a way that allows for an observer, and therefore the constants would have to resolve in such a way as to allow life. Biocentrism therefore supports and builds upon John Wheeler’s conclusions about where quantum theory leads, and provides a solution to the anthropic problem that is unique and more reasonable than any alternative. . . .
. . . . To be honest and present all views, however, it should be noted that some critics wonder whether the Weak Anthropic Principle is no more than a piece of circular reasoning or a facile way of squirming out of explaining the enormous peculiarities of the physical universe. Philosopher John Leslie, in his 1989 book Universes, says, “A man in front of a firing squad of one hundred riflemen is going to be pretty surprised if every bullet misses him. Sure he could say to himself, ‘Of course they all missed; that makes perfect sense, otherwise I wouldn’t be here to wonder why they all missed.’ But anyone in his or her right mind is going to want to know how such an unlikely event occurred.”
But biocentrism provides the explanation for why all the shots missed. If the universe is created by life, then no universe that didn’t allow for life could possibly exist. This fits very neatly into quantum theory and John Wheeler’s participatory universe in which observers are required to bring the universe into existence. Because, if indeed there ever was such a time, the universe was in an undetermined probability state before the presence of observers (some probabilities — or most — not allowing for life), when observation began and the universe collapsed into a real state, it inevitably collapsed into a state that allowed for the observation that collapsed it. With biocentrism, the mystery of the Goldilocks universe goes away, and the critical role of life and consciousness in shaping the universe becomes clear.
So you either have an astonishingly improbable coincidence revolving around the indisputable fact that the cosmos could have any properties but happens to have exactly the right ones for life or else you have exactly what must be seen if indeed the cosmos is biocentric. Either way, the notion of a random billiard-ball cosmos that could have had any forces that boast any range of values, but instead has the weirdly specific ones needed for life, looks impossible enough to seem downright silly.
And if any of this seems too preposterous, just consider the alternative, which is what contemporary science asks us to believe: that the entire universe, exquisitely tailored for our existence, popped into existence out of absolute nothingness. Who in their right mind would accept such a thing?
Has anyone offered any credible suggestion for how, some 14 billion years ago, we suddenly got a hundred trillion times more than a trillion trillion trillion tons of matter from — zilch? Has anyone explained how dumb carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen molecules could have, by combining accidentally, become sentient — aware! — and then utilized this sentience to acquire a taste for hot dogs and the blues?
How any possible natural random process could mix those molecules in a blender for a few billion years so that out would pop woodpeckers and George Clooney? Can anyone conceive of any edges to the cosmos? Infinity? Or how particles still spring out of nothingness? Or conceive of any of the many supposed extra dimensions that must exist everywhere in order for the cosmos to consist fundamentally of interlocking strings and loops? Or explain how ordinary elements can ever rearrange themselves so that they continue to acquire self-awareness and a loathing for macaroni salad? Or, again, how everyone of dozens of forces and constants are precisely fine-tuned for the existence of life?
Is it not obvious that science only pretends to explain the cosmos on its fundamental level?
By reminding us of its great successes at figuring out interim processes and the mechanics of things, and fashioning marvelous new devices out of raw materials, science gets away with patently ridiculous “explanations” for the nature of the cosmos as a whole. If only it hadn’t given us HDTV and the George Foreman grill, it wouldn’t have held our attention and respect long enough to pull the old three-card Monte when it comes to these largest issues.
Unless one awards points for familiarity and repetition, a consciousness-based universe scarcely seems far-fetched when compared with the alternatives.
We can now add another principle:
Fifth Principle of Biocentrism: The very structure of the universe is explainable only through biocentrism. The universe is fine-tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around. The universe is simply the complete spatio-temporal logic of the self.
SEEING THE UNIVERSE INTO BEING
This entire consideration around the theme of a life-centered and participatory universe takes me back to a line in the Creation Story as recorded in the Book of Genesis of the Old Testament Bible: “And God saw the light, that it was good.” If one were so inclined, as I am, one may consider the possibility that this quantum phenomenon of wave-to-particle transformation has been operative since the Beginning. The phrase “And God saw” is repeated several times in the Genesis Creation story.
Is this perhaps the key to how Elohim, the conclave of God Beings who ventured forth into the deep dark void of space to create a “Home among the stars,” created the world “out of nothing”– or no thing — but rather from out of the “void”– or perhaps the “darkness” that was “upon the face of the deep?” Perhaps even a Quantum Source-Field of the unformed essences of all possibilities and probabilities? Kind of makes one think twice and critically about what we were taught in our religious upbringing.
For instance, what was the length of a “day” in Genesis? According to scholarly biblical time-lines I’ve come across, a cosmic day in Genesis is 25,872 earth years. This brings the total six days of Creation to 155,232 earth years — then God rested from His work for another cosmic day of 25,872 years. It’s been surmised that we are living today in the last years — perhaps decades — of the 13th Day of Creation, some 336,336 years since the creation of light on Day One.
[For my numerology friends, this resolves out to a 6 (3+3+6+3+3+6 = 24 = 6), the number for bringing forth or coming forth — perhaps the coming forth of angelic beings on Earth in an apocalypse of Light, a truly privileged historic time to be living on Earth.]
It all boils down to this one Eternal Moment, doesn’t it? For, since time is just an idea in our minds, an aid for measuring forward movement through space, another illusionary concept, and the “past” exists only as coded memory engrams in our collective unconscious mind, everything that has happened since Man’s creation on the Sixth Day is happening NOW in human consciousness. The planet has simply been turning on its axis giving us countless days and nights since the eternal NOW dawned in Eden. In this light, let’s revisit the story in Genesis.
ALL OF CREATION FLOWS OUT FROM LIGHT
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And God said Let there be light. And God saw the light that it was good.”
What was the origin of the light? The simplistic answer is “Well, God made it.” But how? My conjecture is that a super nova exploded spewing electromagnetic energy along with star debris out into the cosmos, the raw material for creating solar systems and planets. “And God saw the light that it was good.” Another word for “good” is “complete.” Each day of creation came to a point of completion before the next creative cycle was initiated. Then God separated the light from darkness, day from night. That completed the first day’s work. The operative word here is “saw,” indicating observation by the Creator Beings.
In a second cosmic day the firmament of Heaven was created, separating the “waters above the Heaven from the waters below the Heaven.” Water is the womb of living forms and the first of the Four Forces. Our world was conceived in and brought forth out of water.
During a third cosmic day, the seas were created by the waters under the Heaven gathering into one place . . . and the dry land of Earth “appeared”— from out of the waters under the Heaven. The Heaven came before the Earth. That’s the Divine Order of Creation.
The Earth appeared — dropped down out of its pre-form wave state in the Heaven and into its particle state of physical form. And God “saw” the Earth that it was good, complete, and out of the Earth appeared grass and seed-bearing herbs and trees, and all living things, including the physical body of Man.
All of the above emerged from its invisible pre-form wave state as God saw, observed, the light and all else that was created from light. And that action of seeing collapsed the wave function of light and activated the particle function of light, therein making available the positively charged atoms and negative life essences by which our world was created. Makes perfect sense to me.
Any thoughts? Until my next post — on the convenient illusion of space and time,
Be love. Be loved.
Comments on: "A “Goldilocks’ Universe” Part 2 . . . . Created With Light" (2)
It’s a little difficult for me to wrap my mind around all of this, but if I could that might diminish its validity.
🤣 I did attempt to summarize it in my own words, but found the task too arduous. I hear you loud and clear. 🥰