top of page

Dark Reality And The Travelling Cosmic Mind by SURENDRA KUMAR SAGAR

Updated: May 25, 2021

“We all live day to day completely oblivious to the fact that we’re a part of a much larger and stranger reality than we can possibly imagine.” --Blake Crouch, Dark Matter







``Perhaps nothing confounds our understanding of galaxies so much as the realization that the gas and stars that we observe constitute only a small fraction of the total mass of all large structures of the universe, from galaxies on up.``

Mitchell Begelman and Martin Rees, Gravity`s Fatal Attraction



The Universe as I see it is expanding and I expect it will keep expanding as long as the density of matter in the universe is less than a certain critical density. Scientists have worked out the value of such critical density as about 5 atoms per cubic meter of space. They have also worked out that the current density of actual matter (Baryonic matter comprising of Protons, Neutrons, and Electrons) in the universe is only about 0.2 atoms per cubic. meter of space. But if this is true then the universe should be expanding at a much faster rate than the current rate at which it is expanding. And scientists have also worked out that the current rate at which the universe is expanding corresponds to a matter density of about 4 atoms per cubic meter of space. So, what is it that makes up the difference in matter density between 0.2 atoms per cubic meter and 4.0 atoms per cubic meter of space?


We do not know. Let us call it `DARK MATTER`.


Who discovered Dark Matter?

In the early 1930s, while studying Hubble ' s observations of the Coma Cluster of galaxies, a scientist named Fritz Zwicky noted an anomaly. According to the measure of visible mass, single galaxies were moving too fast for the cluster to remain bound together. Zwicky realized that the aggregate mass of all the galaxies We could see in the Coma Cluster was inadequate, by a wide margin to prevent the system from flying apart.






Further evidence for Dark Matter lies in the fact that our galaxy Milky Way and the Andromeda galaxy, which are the dominant members of a Local group of galaxies are falling toward each other despite the fact that the total mass of the baryonic matter in the group is insufficient to prevent the impending collision of the two galaxies which could happen in 4 to 5 billion years.



WHAT IS DARK MATTER MADE UP OF?

There are several candidates ..and my favorite is `Neutrinos` .. Let me elaborate on why I think so: First off, let me provide my philosophical response to a VICTOR STENGER Blog

on `STERILE NEUTRINOS` posted on Huffington post on 14th September 2012.





THE BLOG IN PART:



``Supersymmetry has been a favourite idea among theoretical physicists for decades. It appears to be essential for any future quantum theory of gravity. A generation of young theorists has spent their careers developing the SUSY-based String theory, which they hope to be the ultimate theory-of-everything (TOE). If SUSY is falsified, it is unlikely that String theory will survive. Actually ctually, that would not be all that bad. Any TOE would mean the end of physics. One of the big questions in science today is the nature of the dark matter. For years, the favourite candidate has been WIMPs, weakly interacting massive particles. And the most popular WIMPs are supersymmetric particles referred to generically as neutralinos.

While reports that SUSY is dead are exaggerated, other options for the dark matter are currently receiving renewed attention. A recent cover story in New Scientist (September 10, 2012) talked about the role that neutrinos play in the search for physics beyond the standard model. Of particular note are sterile neutrinos, which could constitute both the ingredient of dark matter and a pointer to new physics.

(SeeNature News Vol 464, March 18, 2010).






In 1998, an underground experiment in Japan called Super Kamiokande reported the first evidence that neutrinos have mass. I played a small role as a collaborator on this experiment, my final research endeavour before retiring from the University of Hawaii in 2000.

Massless particles with spin have the feature of always spinning either in the same direction as their motion, like a right-handed screw, or opposite. Neutrinos are observed to have left-handed & that is, to spin opposite to their direction. Antineutrinos are right-handed, like a normal screw.

However, when a particle has mass it can have either helicity. It follows that neutrinos must have a small right-handed component while antineutrinos have a small left-handed part. Since these components are not observed, they may possibly be ; meaning, they interact only gravitationally. In that case, they are good candidates for dark matter. To constitute the dark matter, a sterile neutrino would have to have a mass of at least 1 keV (thousand electron-volts) and a lifetime of billions of years. These features are not ruled out by any known physics.

Interest in sterile neutrinos has also been piqued by several hints in neutrino experiments and astronomical observations. None are sufficiently significant, however, to claim a discovery.

In any case, over 20 experiments are now planning to search for evidence of sterile neutrinos. For all you could want to know about sterile neutrinos, including details on each of these proposals, see the draft of a white paper under preparation by over 200 physicists. As someone who worked on neutrino physics and astrophysics for 30 years, I'm delighted to see neutrinos continue to be a crucial factor in our understanding of nature.`` I tend to agree with Victor Stenger Regarding `Susy`… I think its verification will require huge costs and fiscal limitations may come in the way for further research on the subject, coupled with the fact that there is good chance of its falsification.

On the other hand, research on Neutrinos may be worthwhile. I have glanced through the `White paper` referred in the blog, Its rather complex. The task at hand is to squeeze the complexity…and so I look into the part that I can understand, and which is relevant:

I refer to a para on `EXTRA FORCE`






`` Consider that 96% of the energy density of our Universe today resides in mysterious dark matter and dark energy, neither of which are comprised of standard model particles. It looks as if there are some hidden sectors ie fields that have not yet been discovered due to the extreme feebleness of their interactions with the fields of the standard model. Such sectors are ubiquitous in string-based constructions and theories with extra dimensions, and it is possible

that the answer to the dark matter and/or dark energy puzzles resides in a hidden sector, which contains one or more light fermions that manifests as a sterile neutrino or neutrinos that can mix with the neutrinos of the standard model. If such a hidden sector also contains at least one light boson which couples to the sterile neutrinos, sterile neutrino cosmology can be altered as well, in some cases alleviating the cosmological tension between more than one additional ultralight

states or reconciling a large neutrino mass with cosmology or even contributing to dark matter or dark energy`` . Now I get philosophical. If there is a hidden sector that can explain the 96 %, then why not a hidden sector hat can explain the `AWARENESS` of this 96 % and the `AWARENESS` of its interaction with the 4 %..

Why not a hidden sector that can explain `Mind and awareness`

Back to Neutrinos:






The number of neutrinos that leave the sun every second and travel in all directions is so huge that even if we identify a restricted location such as a human body…about a trillion of them pass through that human body every second. About how much time would a neutrino - moving at the speed of light - take to travel a dstance about 15cm ie ..remain inside my body… I guess it can be worked out as 5 X 10^ -10 secs. Now if a trillion of them are to pass through my body every

second…it can be worked out that at any given instant of time ( about as short as lanck time) ..about 500 neutrinos are inside my body. But they all pass by ..none of them is a permanent resident.

Back again to philosophy ( ie Physics when understood)



But the `Mind` that is contemplating all this is a permanent resident, at any given instant of time it is interacting with about 500 neutrinos, and then the same mind interacts with the next 500, and so on. And it’s the same mind that interacts with the atoms and molecules of the body through which the neutrinos pass through. Without this `Mind` I (inclusive of my brain ) am just an inanimate object, and the `I` in me gets its unique identity due to the unique sets of interactions of the rest of the universe on me, nothing more than that. Now I correlate this with something I read in the book `The large, the small, and the human mind` by Roger Penrose

``In some sense the `Physical world` emerges out of the `Mental world`. Then there is the third world called the `World of culture`. Could it be that the mental world is in some way emerging from the Physical world, and somehow culture arises out of `mentality`. Philosophers may not like the idea. They may ask the question : `How could our feelings, our perception of redness, or of happiness have anything to do with Physics?

What about the `Platonic` world that tells us that there are mathematical concepts required to describe the Physical world. There is a feeling that these mathematical constructions are already there, and there is also the feeling that they are products of the human mind. ``

Next, there is the question about `Human consciousness`, should we think about it in terms of scientific explanation. ? Roger Penrose is of the viewpoint that we should, and I am inclined to agree.

With all this I end this response by reiterating that any `TOE` is incomplete if it does not take into account `Mind and consciousness`, that it's Physics that deals with the subject and that the end of physics is nowhere in sight.


BACK AGAIN TO NEUTRINOS

Unlike the photons, which are massless it is possible that neutrinos have a non-zero mass. If they have the right value for their mass based on the total number of neutrinos (and antineutrinos) that exist, they could conceivably account for 100% of the dark matter. Now let me do some calculation on what the right value should be - or near about - of the mass of neutrinos in order for them to qualify as 100 % contributors to dark matter. To do this I need to corelate the subject with the rate of expansion of the universe. For the universe to keep expanding at the current rate the amount of matter available in the universe should not exceed about 4 atoms per m^3 of space in the universe. But we know that the amount of normal matter is only about 0.2 atoms per m^3 of space in the universe. So, for the neutrinos to contribute the remaining 3.8 atoms per cubic. meter, it appears that the total mass of all the neutrinos is about nineteen times the combined total mass of all the protons, neutrons, and electrons in the universe. Now how many protons are there in the universe? I take this figure as about 3.0 x 10^80 (As suggested by Arthur Eddington). The mass of each proton is about 1.672 x 10^-27 kg .So the total mass of all the protons in the universe is about 5 x 10^53 kgs. The number of Electrons is the same as number of protons, the mass of each electron is about 9.11X 10^-31 kg, hence the total mass of electrons is worked out as about 2.8 x 10^50 Kgs . The number of Neutrons is about 0.5 x10^80 and their total mass = 0.5x 10^80 x 1.675 x10^-27 = 0.8 *10^53 Accordingly the total mass of available matter in the universe (excluding dark matter) is about 3.8 x 10^53 Kgs.Which means the total mass of dark matter (neutrinos) is about 19 x 3.8 x 10^53 kgs ie about 7.3 x 10^54 kgs. Mass of each neutrino is neglible but not zero. I take it is about 0.6 x 10 ^ - 36kg

That makes the number of neutrinos - should they be considered as exclusive members of the dark matter club - as about 4.8 x 10^90

WHERE DID THE NEUTRINOS COME FROM?

They came from Supernovas. With just two minutes left in the life of the star, there was a stupendous struggle against gravitational collapse and neutrinos were created in phenomenally large numbers .. Probably of the order of 10^57, and they escaped through the star into space leaking energy into space thus not permitting energy to support the star against collapse.

Leaking Energy Into Space …

This is interesting to me …


Let us corelate this with some other aspect of this `Dark Realty` .. Let us call it `Dark Energy`

DARK ENERGY

``There had to be some unknown and mysterious energy out there in the cosmos pushing everything apart, fighting against Gravity.  What could this powerful energy be?  Why had it never been seen before?  What generates it, and where was it hiding?  The theorists’ extraordinary conclusion was that this unknown energy came from the very vacuum of space``.  (Universe & Cosmology & Laws & Gravity & Space & Dark Energy)  Horizon: From Here to Infinity, BBC 1999 Given below my conversations with the scientist Louis. A. Del. Monte in response to his blog .. ``Dark Energy Explained - A New Theory `` on Huffingtonpost (Louis. A. Del.Monte is an award-winning Scientist and author of the book

``Unravelling the Universe`s Mysteries)





THE BLOG IN PART:


If we think of galaxies as masses, we can postulate: To exist, they are removing energy from the vacuums that surround them. We know from Einstein's famous mass energy equivalence (E = mc^2), that removing energy is equivalent to removing mass. This suggests that as the mass/energy density decreases, the gravitational attraction within the vacuum decreases, which in turn causes the vacuum to expand. This still leaves two questions:

1. Why are the galaxies furthest from us moving away the fastest? My thoughts: Those galaxies are the oldest. Therefore, they have removed more energy from the vacuums that surround them, causing the vacuums to expand faster than the speed of light. There is no physical law that prohibits space expanding faster than the speed of light.

2. Why doesn't the space inside a galaxy expand? My thoughts: A galaxy contains

dark matter, which acts as glue, and allows a galaxy to act like a single mass.


I recognize it is a speculative theory, but it has roots grounded in Einstein's special theory of relativity, Minkowski space-time coordinates, and experimental time dilation data. It fits all the observed data, and it does not violate any physical laws.


EXTRACTS FROM CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SCIENTIST LOUIS A DEL MONTE


SKSAGAR:

The concept of `vacuum energy` acting as `dark energy` that drives the expansion of the universe is interesting. Roger Penrose has discussed this subject in great elaboration in his latest book `Cycles of Time``


Meanwhile I have a few questions:

You have indicated that Dark Matter is within the galaxy and forms a sort of glue making the galaxy as one mass, and that dark energy (or vacuum energy) is surrounding the galaxy, is expanding and carrying/driving the galaxy away.  Is there a dividing (imaginary and invisible of course) surface that separates the galaxy from its `outsides` ? Is there a friction between the two?, Is there no dark energy (vacuum energy) within the galaxy?



Louis. A. Del. Monte

Dark matter is concentrated within and around galaxies. There is no dark matter between galaxies. There is no sharp dividing line that separates the dark matter within and around a galaxy from the rest of space. I hope this addresses your question.




SKS:

You say that : ``There is no physical law that `prohibits` space expanding faster than the speed of light``, But in my view : ``There is none that `permits` space expanding faster than light`` Lets talk `inflation`…the cosmological one.. Was it the `vacuum energy` that caused a rapid increase in the size of a certain scale factor ?


``The inflation of the scale factor meant that a small, smooth spatial region of the universe expanded exponentially to encompasses a volume that would grow to become larger `TODAY` then the size of the observable universe. In the process of expansion, the spatial geometry became flat`` .. `New Physics`, edited by Gorden Fraser.

Now from the standpoint of `The Important role of consciousness, and my understanding that the universe is a designed ( even simulated ) one, let us discuss `threadbare` as well as with wide open minds. At first let me put all the cards on the table ie, all the complications and the complexities that need to be addressed with each one of the various concepts proposed by the various Scientists (or Engineers ..whatever) :

1) INFLATION : Consider the word `TODAY` in Gorden Fraser`s Para (actually the para is by W.L.Freedman and E.W.Kolb) … For us on the Planet Earth `TODAY` corresponds to about 13.7 billion years since the big bang and we say with our highly advanced, and at the same time highly limited understanding of the subject, that sometime during the first second (between 10^ - 36 secs and 10^- 32 secs to be precise), after time zero of the big bang, the universe inflated to a size (Radius) of 10^`z` metres, where `z` is about 28.  Now imagine someone living on a certain planet orbiting a certain star in a certain galaxy which is about 12.3 billion light years away. Consider that I am looking at him now, its obvious that his universe is only about 1.4 billion years old. For that someone, if he or she is writing a book on Cosmology, `TODAY` corresponds to only 1.4 billion years since the big bang, and in his description of `Inflation` `z` will not be 28 ..rather it will be closer to 27. In the same way, for someone ahead of us in the deep future z` will be greater than 28.

What then was the true extent of the inflation with regard to the volume encompassed?....Was Einstein`s special relativity actually violated by the `entities` that travelled with the `inflation`?...

Or can we say that `special relativity – in respect of giving an upper limit to speed of light - ` is not violated, in the same way as in Quantum entanglement when we say that entanglement takes place instantaneously but no information can be sent faster than at speed of light ? Or is this value of `z` a measure of the consciousness of an observer as well as a measure of his coordinates in time and space at the time of his observation ? Or is the concept of `Inflation` itself somewhat misconceived?, and should we now look at some other explanation for the homogeneity of the universe ?


Or can we say that `There is indeed a physical law that `prohibits` space expanding faster than the speed of light`?

LADM: Hi Sagar, you have raised many excellent questions. It will be difficult to answer all of them, but here is my view.

First, two points:

1) Most of the scientific community agrees that there was an early inflation of the universe, consistent with its enormous size (observable part is about 93 billion light years in diameter) versus its age (about 13.7 billion years).

2) The scientific community agrees a mass (or energy) cannot exceed the speed of light in a vacuum.

Based on the above, we have only two alternatives. 

1) The laws of special relativity did not apply in the early universe, or 2) It was space that inflated faster than the speed of light.

No one really knows the answer. My judgment is that space expanded faster than the speed of light. This judgment is consistent with the accelerating universe we observe today, which my blog post addresses.

SKS: For all practical purposes the big bang with all the activities associated with it – including inflation – is still in a state of superposition. Its wave function (I mean the `Probability wave` function) has not been collapsed as yet. Will it be collapsed any time in the future, I should think so, If it really was such a stupendous show - as it is made out to be by all and sundry - it could not remain a performance to empty stalls. The designers must have made sure that in course of time it will be witnessed by the consciousness of the observers of the future.

But it has not been observed so far.




So when you say that the size of the observable universe is about 93 billion light years in diameter, what exactly is implied? Does it mean we can observe regions which are say 20 billion light years away, which means we can look back 20 billion years into the past and enroute somewhere we can pierce thru the big bang itself. Surely the capacity of telescopes could not have been a constraint, we have observed Supernovas that happened billions of years back in much detail, why not a few percentage point extra capacity and the big bang should have been observed clearly considering the enormity of its magnitude. But the truth is.. it is not observed so far.

What then is the explanation?

Perhaps:

a) The size of the observable universe is limited to the age of the universe in terms of light years which works out as about 10^28 meters radius. 

b) Beyond this we cannot see no matter how great may be the capacity of our telescopes, as that would mean going back into time beyond `Time zero` into a different universe altogether or may be to a previous aeon of our own universe, or maybe the main show of the big bang took place in a black hole from which light could not escape at all. 

c) Or maybe the big bang was caused by some sort of a phase transition in the last stages of the previous aeon of our universe. This required a huge violation of the second law of thermodynamics in bringing about a comprehensive change in entropy from an infinitely high level to a near zero level. Perhaps the Super consciousness of the previous aeon played a part in this transformation.

d) Perhaps the massless photons of the last stages of the previous aeon were not getting bored at all, they were always upto something, getting together and forming a `Super consciousness’. Designing the new universe with brand new and refined constants and then switching on the big bang.


LADM: To answer your question regarding the observable universe: “In Big Bang cosmology, the observable universe consists of the galaxies and other matter that an, in principle, be observed from Earth in the present day—because light (or other signals) from those objects has had time to reach the Earth since the beginning of the cosmological expansion.

The Big Bang is the most accepted theory of the evolution of our universe. It has some problems, which I discuss in my book. However, it is not in a state of "superposition." It is widely accepted by the scientific community.

SKS: You are abs right, the big bang and inflation cosmology is very well understood and accepted by the Scientific community, but it has not been physically observed – through a telescope that can look at a region 13.7 billion light years away - nor adequately explained so far. As for inflation, it cannot be tested as the energies involved are too high and well beyond the experimental reach of our accelerators. When I say `The big bang` has not been adequately explained, it is implied that an appropriate ` PHYSICAL CAUSE` has not been determined ( which is by and large acceptable to the scientific community) so far, of which the `EFFECT` is precisely what happened at all the various stages of the big bang, not just the first second of it. 

And that `physical cause` Even if it happened just Plank time before the Previous Aeon ended, must not violate any law of Science, and it is further assumed that all the laws of Science which are applicable in the present universe were also applicable in the previous Aeon. 

Now what can be that possible `Physical cause` that explains it?

What can be that `Hidden variable`?

Let us ask Eugene Wigner, then John Wheeler, and put all the cards on the table and see what Consciousness and finally Super consciousness can do to `switch off` one Aeon of the universe and simultaneously `switch on` another : 

Eugene Wigner`s philosophy: It is the consciousness of the mind itself that acts as a hidden variable that explains the collapse of wave (phenomena).

In Wigner`s own words: 

``The result of an observation modifies the wave function of a system. The modified wave function is, furthermore, in general, unpredictable before the impression gained at the interaction has entered our consciousness: it is the entering of an impression into our consciousness which alters the wave function because it modifies our appraisal of the possibilities of different impressions which we expect to receive in the future. It is at this point that the consciousness enters the theory unavoidably and unalterably.``

John Wheeler goes one step further and feels the consciousnesses of the future can even collapse the wave functions of the past, vide his concept of the `Self excited circuit, which in turn is deducted from his `Delayed choice thought experiment`


Though I am an ardent fan of John Wheeler, I think this one is a bit too farfetched, and difficult to comprehend. But this is a queer universe, and anything is possible.


LADM: Thank you for your comments. Again, you raise extremely insightful questions, and make excellent points. I ' d like to add three points to your post.  First, there is no accepted theory as to what caused the Big Bang. I have put forth a hypothesis in my book, Unraveling the Universes Mysteries," Second, we do not know what scientific laws applied at the energy levels associated with the Big Bang. As you pointed out, we are unable to duplicate those

energy levels with todays science.

Third, I discuss the problems with the Big Bang theory in my book and on my YouTube channel. The major issues are the initial inflation of the early universe and the almost complete absence of antimatter in the universe.

As a note: Eugene Wigner was a chemical engineer, Nobel Prize recipient in Physics, and made numerous significant contributions to physics and mathematics.

SKS: Agree with the points made.

Regarding Absence of antimatter, in my view this is a consequence of one of the constants of nature provided at the time of programming by the Super consciousness, viz ` That at the time of the big bang, One in about 30 million Quarks would not find its Anti quark, and thus escape annihilation, which means ll the matter available in the universe is made up of this surplus number of quarks, and it also ensures absence of anti-quarks. If this ratio had been higher - than one in about thirty million, matter density would have been higher and may not have

permitted expansion of the universe.



BACK TO PHILOSOPHY

Regarding Inflation, this can be dispensed with, by assuming that the previous Aeon ended with a size that permits Homogeneity, and by considering that the big bang was a phase transition that converted `something` into `temperature, radiation, energy , etc, whatever it was that came with the big bang.



All that remains to be answered is, what was that `something`? What do you and I know?

But that Super consciousness knew. Perhaps it was `itself` Perhaps I am wrong.

Thank you Louis.


END OF CONVERSATION WITH LADM


There is however not yet a proper explanation of why the vacuum should possess an energy with the complex property of `negative pressure`, even though in quantum theory there is a precedence for vacuum energy arising from virtual particle-antiparticle pairs. But there is a large scale mis-match between the amount of energy thus acquired and that which is just sufficient to blow the cosmos apart.

In principle this is precisely the mismatch between Quantum Theory and the relativity based cosmic space time model, which needs to be reconciled, and for that we have to wait till a perfect understanding of Quantum Gravity is achieved, till such time we may have to consider the topic of Dark Energy as a work in progress.

There is no doubt however that cosmic expansion of the universe is caused by the Dark Vacuum energy and this is predominantly the main contributor ( perhaps 75 %) to the overall energy-density of the universe. It does not however contribute towards matter- density for which I believe the main contributors are Baryonic matter (protons, neutrons, electrons) and Dark matter (Neutrinos).The former contributing about 5% and the latter 95%. So, it looks like there is Dark Energy that is driving the expansion of the universe and there is Matter ( mostly Dark) that is restricting the expansion to a reasonable limit which is just about right ( As per the Designer`s requirement) to : 1) Prevent

the tearing away and bursting apart of the universe and 2) Prevent the collapse of the universe on itself in a big crunch. In other words .. just about right for Life and onsciousness to exist and flourish in the universe.

BUT THERE IS A PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED



This leads to an Endless universe lasting more than 10^100 years since the Big Bang. And in this long period of its existence, Life and Consciousness can exist only within the Stelliferous era, where Stars are shinning, and that may not be more than about 10^15 years since the big bang. But the dark energy will continue to drive the universe via the Degenerate Era, the Black Hole Era and The Dark era to lead the universe towards perpetual nothingness … no energy… no light ... no life … no warmth ... nothing but perpetual and irrevocable stagnation with massless photons and gravitons doing nothing at all - except getting bored. And this goes on forever and ever, from age (say) 10^15 years, to age (say) 10 ^100+ years, since big bang. 

Imagine, in such a scenario, that life and consciousness existing only in one unit oftime out of nearly 10^ 85 units of time . Does this make any sense at all ? Some Scientists might say : Is making sense a requirement that the Universe must

Some Scientists might say : Is making sense a requirement that the Universe must consider ?

And in such a scenario as described above…if `making sense` is not a requirement, then life and consciousness was just an accident. There was never a designer, No Anthropic Principle, Just the second law of thermodynamics, Entropy at its infinite maximum, there is no way, and no one, to change the direction. That’s it.

Do we accept that? No, we cannot. Even to be aware of it, we need consciousness, and all that consciousness is concentrated in the tiny first region of time, up to 10^15 years stage.

HOW DOES THE INTELLIGENT FIELD RESOLVE THE PROBLEM?


But first .. what exactly is an INTELLIGENT FIELD


This is my universe .. I am all in all .. My consciousness is the stage on which the universe is performing .. and here is my understanding of the subject :

1.The essential material reality is an Intelligent Field.

2. The field obeys the principle of special relativity and quantum theory.

3. The field links the quantum with the classical.

4. The intensity of the field at any point is a measure of the Information

in the field.

5. The field looks for a biochemistry to give itself consciousness to

understand itself.

6. There isn`t anything else.

There will be a separate discussion on `Intelligent Field`. Here let me concentrate on the subject of `INFORMATION IN THE FIELD`



 ``The universe is a computer, but a quantum computer whose bits are qubits (quantum bits). Every molecule, atoms, and elementary particles register bits of information. Every interaction between those pieces of the universe process that information by altering those bits. That is, the universe computes. The universe began computing from its start, and what it computes is itself`` … Seth Lloyd


``Information and energy play complimentary roles in the universe, energy makes physical systems to do things. Information tells them what to do. The primary actor in the physical history of the universe is Information`` ..Seth LLoyd

Now, the most important question: Who is the controlling authority .. is it Matter and energy (MAE) or is it Mind and Consciousness (MAC) ?

In my view it cannot be the former as in that case it will proceed towards the Degenerate, Blackhole and Dark eras of deep future and carry the Mind in these zones of time where it cannot obtain consciousness. So it looks like, mind and consciousness (MAC) is the primary player and has complete control over matter and energy (MAE).

Three possibilities considered here:

1) MAC on reaching a state of Super consciousness prepares a comprehensive program with beautifully designed mathematical constants and then switches on the computer at the appropriate time and ushers in the next big bang…and after trillions of years…the next…and so on …a cyclic phenomenon.

2) There is only one universe where lives are lived in different regions of time. The mind keeps traveling to different regions of time (within 10^ 20 years after big bang stage ) and space ..entangling with biochemistries… and getting consciousness…and remains mostly in the Stelliferous era. This is the most likely possibility.

3) Sometime in the deep future the galaxies will get so far apart…they will have no influence on each other, each will be like a universe in itself, matter density will be enough for gravity to take control and they will start collapsing on themselves towards their black holes at the centres. But there will be time enough for Superconsciousnesscenters to feed the necessary constants and press the appropriate buttons and at least achieve a somewhat controlled explosion of the black hole.

Take your pick…


CONCLUDING THOUGHT:



There is `SOMETHING` that controls nature. We don`t have to call it `SOMEONE`

No harm will be done if we call it ``THE TRAVELLING COSMIC MIND`` BACK ONCE MORE TO THE NEUTRINOS It is said that the speed at which the neutrinos travel could be a wee bit faster than

the speed of light. There was a blog `CERN: LIGHT SPEED MAY HAVE BEEN EXCEEDED BY SUBATOMIC PARTICLES` By the Scientists Frank Jordan and Seth Bornstein, on Huffington Post dated 22nd September 2011. The scientists went on to say that Einstein`s theory may be sent to the bonfire.

My comments on the blog:

There are many reasons that may have led to the expectation that neutrinos may travel a wee bit faster than light, such as:

1) Even in a vacuum, creation and annihilation of particles/anti particles goes on all the time which may cause some obstructions to the photons of light, but none to the neutrinos.

2) Speed of light may not be a true constant of nature, but changes value as the universe evolves, but there may not be any change in the speed of neutrinos.

3) Light neutrinos of mass – energy less than 1Mev may be non-relativistic now, ever since they decoupled themselves from interacting with other particles. As the lightness increases, so does the ability to travel faster. 

4) Or as some respondents have pointed out, neutrinos may go through another dimension.

BACK TO THE COSMIC MIND




I may be getting philosophical, but if you consider the mind.. it has zero mass… and that’s why it can travel at infinite speed… and may be even communicating with quantum particles that were once in contact, but now far apart, and causing quantum entanglement. And that explains how the `COSMIC MIND` can travel in `TIME` to remain forever in the `LIVEABLE ERAS` of the universe and guarantees `PERMANENT CONSCIOUSNESS` to itself and that is why it can be called the `TRAVELLING COSMIC MIND` The concept of the traveling cosmic mind is a challenging one; it is no doubt very difficult to prove but, I guess, even more difficult to disprove. I am hoping it will find acceptance among the readers. It has several positives, such as the following:

1) It does not violate any of the established principles of science.

2) It dispenses with the requirement of a multiverse theory, which requires the

existence of millions of universes, so that at least one universe has absolutely the precise mathematical constants of nature (as in this universe) so that life and consciousness will appear and then understand the universe. One universe, with all its aeons, is all that is required, in which the cosmic mind travels back and forth in time to remain forever in the Stelliferous Era

to obtain consciousness and does not proceed toward the Degenerate, Black Hole, and Dark Eras of the deep future, as there is no consciousness available there.

3) It does not require the big bang to be the time zero (i.e., the beginning) of the universe as an act of God. It assumes the requirement of a long history of several previous aeons of the universe, leading in the end to a primordial consciousness—just ontologically prior to the physical realities of the current aeon of the universe—that contained the coded information for

constructing a possible new universe. That coded information constitutes the design of the new universe, complete with all the fine-tuned mathematical constants built into the program.


4) It is in complete agreement with the current thinking (among some of the greatest scientists on the planet) that this is a simulated universe, or a quantum computer. As the scientist Seth Lloyd says, “It computes its own behavior. At first, the patterns it produces are simple, but as it processes more and more information, it produces more intricate and complex patterns, on the physical side giving rise to galaxies, stars, and planets, while on the human side, producing life, language, human beings, society, and culture.” This aspect, relating to the information theory—that information begets

information in a continuous way, and we can even consider `Information` as the definition of `Reality`.

5) It is in complete agreement with the central philosophy of `Six Words`, where the six words are “WE ALL HAVE THE SAME MIND`` It’s just that our consciousness is in the singular; it’s a traveling cosmic mind that gives us everlasting consciousness. An “intelligent field,” which is forever and always on the lookout for creating an appropriate biochemistry to give itself

consciousness, thus allows the universe to make sense.

6) It gives a meaning to the universe. Without the traveling cosmic mind, the universe would be completely meaningless; life and consciousness would exist for only one unit of time (the Stelliferous Era) out of nearly 10 82 units of time (the Degenerate, Black Hole, and Dark Eras), as explained earlier.




7) It is in complete consonance with Einstein’s relativity principle (ERP) and adequately takes care of explaining all the various “causality violation paradoxes,” which ensue as a consequence of ERP. This is explained in much detail in the chapter on “Relativity and the Cosmic Mind.”

8) It is strong and intelligent and will keep producing islands of negative entropy for lives and consciousness to flourish and understand the universe, not just for a while, but for all times to come. Without it, the arrow of time will always point to the dissolution of structure into a featureless state of maximum entropy. Indeed, the traveling cosmic mind comes to our rescue

and saves us from that bleak future.

9) It explains the concept of quantum entanglement perfectly. The mere fact that there is such a thing as quantum entanglement implies instant connectivity, and this connectivity is impossible to imagine except by the consideration of an omnipresent mind (omnipresent in time as well as

space).


Indeed, the ideas of an `INTELLIGENT FIELD` and of the `TRAVELLING COSMIC MIND` have added a significant new dimension to the quest for knowledge on Philosophy, Religion, Spirituality, Humanism, and other similar paths towards formulating an integrative view of life and the Universe.


….. ….. ….. …..


 


65 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page