COSMIC SYNCHRONICITY
Posted by anthonynorth on July 1, 2008
Many people believe in the existence of higher consciousness in the universe, yet we’re often told that such concepts are unexplainable. I’m not sure this is true. Could we rationalize such a thing?
In my essay, The Mystical Seven, I showed how the ‘law of large numbers’ could be applied, at least philosophically, to such a concept. Stated simply, the law indicates that greater order manifests the greater the number of things involved.
I applied this to the universe.
I argued that it could allow greater order in the clusterings of existence, working up from the individual, the species, the planet, the solar system, galaxy, the island universe and the universe itself.
However, it is maybe time to take this concept a little further. Now, I am not talking about an ‘intelligence’ or ‘rationality’ as we understand it. Rather, could higher consciousness be simply a ‘process’ underlying reality?
What can we say about the concept?
Well, such a consciousness would suggest an interlinking of everything in the universe. Further, as it would be on an information level, we could argue that all information in the universe would be within it.
We would have, in effect, a universal database of all thought and action. Bringing back the ‘law of large numbers’, could the process ‘access’ such information in such a way as to be analogous to an internet search engine?
What would be involved in creating greater order?
We could say that it would involve a process we presently understand as coincidence. Consider a ‘lower’ order of consciousness – the person, for instance – wanting to access the system.
A key word would be applied, and the search engine would throw up possibilities. This is coincidental arrangement of information, yet behind it has been a spark of intelligent input to the system.
We’re often told we live in an information universe.
If this is so, and such a system could be applied, then the coincidental arrangement of information could actually be coincidental arrangement of events, thought or action in the universe itself.
The possibilities here are many. For instance, much of the paranormal could be applied to such a system. But most importantly, the system could actually sculpt the universe as it goes along. Consider input at the planetary level actually formulating the hard reality we experience as the planet.
Further implications can be seen in the ‘basic design function’ used in computing. This function is a simple instruction to a program. The program then evolves new programs to carry out a specific function requested in the initial design function. Intelligence has thus been inputted into a conceptual process.
Hence, such a higher consciousness would be essentially mathematical, without intelligence or reason behind it. It merely exists to be used and adapted by intelligences at a lower level of order.
A further implication of the system would be that knowledge would no longer be of an explanatory nature, but creative – which does, of course, agree with ideas in particle physics concerning reality being created from an observation.
Of course, this is exceptionally speculative. But the reality is, it is untrue to say that a ‘system’ of thought cannot be used to attempt explanation of higher consciousness.
© Anthony North, July 2008
BEYOND THE BLOG 
Brian said
This actually makes senses Anthony. The premise behind computers has always been that data clumps together and can be accessed by key words. The next leap in computers, if it ever happens, is the idea of quantum computers based on the premise that every answer and every question exists somewhere already.
Higher consciousness cannot be grasped directly but only through evidence and observation.
Twilight said
“Consider input at the planetary level actually formulating the hard reality we experience as the planet.”
“Hence, such a higher consciousness would be essentially mathematical, without intelligence or reason behind it”
I like it, AN!
As I read the above two sentences, two words jumped into my head – 1. astrology and 2. Sacred Geometry.
Maybe you are re-discovering something of which the ancients were somehow aware!!
insomniac said
I like it, too.
The more we apply the information processing model to our machine universe, looking for the feedback loops and control mechanisms, the more intelligent it all appears.
cheers,
jim
anthonynorth said
Hi Brian,
Quite. And it works perfectly for the paranormal. If we think of Jung’s Synchronicity and meaningful coincidence, then our hopes, fears, etc, input the system as a basic design function, and attracts coincidences. A paranormal event thus becomes a manipulated cluster.
Similarly with a scientific theory. Something is observed. The mind of the experimenter plays a part in the observation. If his confidence is defined enough, and it isn’t too far away from existing knowledge, he’ll get the result he wants. Repeatability defines it even more, and as consensus reality kicks in, increasing the order mathematically, the theory creates the reality.
Hi Twilight,
Thanks for that. The ancient sciences – and religion in general – were an important part of my theorising. How could so many conflicting systems be believed in? The above allows a consensus reality to form around any belief. Hence, they are all true, yet none of them are.
It also implies that science and religion are basically the same thing. Only the methodology is different.
Hi Jim,
Very true. Mindst you, we’ve got to be wary of using the word ‘intelligence’ as being part of the system. Rather, higher consciousness becomes a kind of universal tool. The intelligence comes from whatever level in inputting.
Comedy Plus said
You just went way too deep for me this morning. Can someone show me where the coffee pot is? Have a great day Anthony. 🙂
anthonynorth said
Hi Sandee,
This is maybe my problem. I drink tea 🙂
SandyCarlson said
You have me thinking with this one:
A further implication of the system would be that knowledge would no longer be of an explanatory nature, but creative – which does, of course, agree with ideas in particle physics concerning reality being created from an observation.
Thanks, Anthony.
anthonynorth said
Hi Sandy,
Many thanks. This is what it is all about. Stretching imagination, whilst retaining rationality. Thinking about concepts – asking: what if?
insomniac said
Howdy Anthony,
I’m not at all wary of calling it intelligence. I know that our present world view tries to ignore system wide intelligence, but i don’t think there is anything else we can call it. The way i look at it, DNA is a code, an abstract representation of physical reality. We don’t have any other concept to go to that can manipulate abstractions. To me DNA infers intelligence by its very existence.
At any rate, there are certainly different levels of intelligent action going on. And certainly the paranormal is perfectly normal within this model of reality.
cheers,
jim
anthonynorth said
Hi Jim,
I see your point. And I wouldn’t try to deter you from such a view. Personally, I try to steer away from the idea of absolute intelligence within such a ‘system’, but that’s just how my idea of it formulates.
I personally have problems with ‘intention’ if the process is a tool. Rather, a mathematical bias towards order, as my ideas suggest, is simply a process. But as I often say, I could well be wrong.
insomniac said
Howdy Anthony,
Who knows, mathematical bias might be as good a description as any. Besides, is there a right or wrong to a point of view? It is what we have to work with.
cheers,
jim
anthonynorth said
Good morning Jim,
Points of view vary widely, and there’s certainly nothing wrong with yours. Don’t get me wrong. There was no criticism here. More a case of my own methodology creeping in.
I restrict myself to a particular way of working. First, I look at as wide an area as possible to try to identify patterns. Second, I look at what knowledge is presently accepted and then attempt to nudge it on just a little.
The idea behind this is not, so much, to ‘explain’ a subject, but show how knowledge can be advanced, hopefully taking the accepted knowledge structure with it – rebuild the consensus, as it were.
And here lies my wariness concerning ‘intelligence’ in higher consciousness. We live in material, sceptical times. And we immediately lose any hope of taking present knowledge with us. Intelligence may well lie in higher consciousness – I certainly accept the possibility – but it is too much a leap for the modern scientific approach to take.
insomniac said
Howdy Anthony,
Yes indeed, a fine morning, thanks.
Your methodology works for me. We are both looking at the same reality with an eye for the anomalies. The paranormal, religion, the occult and science all have a common explanation. It shouldn’t be so hard for intelligent animals like us to figure it out, should it? 🙂
It helps to use as many perspectives as we can muster. Like you said, the more things, the more order is possible.
I agree with the concept that the informational aspect of matter acts like a super-relational database. That’s the way it seems to work. It also functions as a universal communications system, connecting everything to everything else. Neither is intelligent, in and of itself, but the queries, instructions and commands that they routinely carry can be nothing else, can they?
Looking forward to more stimulating discussion.
cheers,
jim
anthonynorth said
Hi Jim,
I’d certainly agree with that, with intelligence within the input. Certainly works for me, and I look forward to our next discussion, placing intelligence in the net, as it were 🙂
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
This post is coming from ‘left’ field.
If the “Creator” determined, in the beginning, that the only way for the Cosmos to move upwards/grow was to use a mathematical bias towards order as a process (read tool), freedom of will probably fits in here as well, then “stand” back and announce, “Let There Be Light!”, lets call these four words key words, a spark of intelligent input (intention) has been added to the system.
The Golden Mean is possibly a prime example of a mathematical bias towards order.
Please accept my humble congratulations on another great post.
anthonynorth said
Hi Chris,
Thanks for that. And I like the way you put it there.
Tony A said
If it is interconnectedness that we are looking for, have you read: ‘The Holographic Universe’ By Michael Talbot. And
I had it in my mind that all particles in the universe were ‘in touch’ with each other somehow, as proven by paired photons, split, separated but still interacting at a huge distance.
anthonynorth said
Hi Tony A,
I think the defining theorist here is physicist David Bohm, and his idea that the universe bends upon itself to such a point that, at an information level, every part contains the whole.
alexjc38 said
Another excellent post, Anthony, and plenty of food for thought. Re The Holographic Universe, I agree with Tony, it’s a fascinating book. I’m trying to remember whether Rupert Sheldrake has ever used the hologram metaphor to illustrate his morphic fields theory? I can’t recall whether he has or not, but it would seem an apt model for what he is describing.
anthonynorth said
Hi Alex,
Thanks for that. It is indeed a fascinating book. As for Sheldrake, I don’t recall him ever using this model. But I may be wrong here.
Mindst you, Sheldrake is a scientist, so would he move too far away from his own field?
An excellent, courageous scientist, by the way.
Chris said
Hi Anthony,
I haven’t read ‘The Holographic Universe’ yet, but I’m going to (thank you Tony A).
The thought that immediately popped into my mind was “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” ‘A state reached when the total value of a system exceeds the combined worth of each individual component of that system.’
Or alternatively, Synergy (def: Wikipedia: refers to the phenomenon in which two or more discrete influences or agents acting together create an effect greater than that predicted by knowing only the separate effects of the individual agents.
The Apostle Paul used the word in his Epistles (Romans 8:28, Corinthians 3:9) to illustrate a dynamic conception of human, divine and cosmic cooperation.
And I don’t even go to church!! 🙂
anthonynorth said
Good morning Chris,
I’ve approached this kind of thing in another field here
, and am presently working on a post dealing with such ’emergence’ which should appear in a week or so.
I think the concept is vital to how the universe works.
red pill junkie said
Well Anthony, I’ve read the article not twice but THRICE, and still I can’t get my head around it—maybe because it’s sunday, and I’m currently suffering from a little hang-over 😉
Maybe the part I’ve more problem visualizing is the thing about “higher counsciousness without intelligence or reason behind it”. Exactly what are we talking about here? Are we talking about the universe functioning as some kind of information processing system, but if so does a computer have consciusness?
Have a good day 🙂
anthonynorth said
Hi Red,
I think you’ve got it about right, as far as I see it. I’m talking about a simple force, no more conscious than gravity in itself – simply a tool. And then, as with the internet, intelligence and reason is inputted, just as users formulate what is in cyberspace.
As information floods into the system, maybe, through ’emergence’, something more profound results – the actual consciousness some people belive exists – Gaia, for instance. But if so, it has been input into the system that caused it, and not the system itself.
Sue Ann Edwards said
It might help to talk to one of us that has managed to expand our consciousness to the level of the “Greater Reality”. Someone who already *knows* and consciously *understands* that the ONLY reality that is Real, is the one that NEVER changes. All of our realities that DO change, are APPEARANCES only. Simply the fact that they do change, is why they are called “appearances”.
anthonynorth said
Hi Sue Ann,
I’ve studied many mystical and religious traditions, many of which say the same thing. Some ancient philosophies agree. So many voices saying the same thing, there is maybe something to it.
Sue Ann Edwards said
Hi Anthony!
It’s a matter of Awareness and looking beyond form, for it is not with our physical eyes that we see reason. Duality and polarity realities are based on concepts of separation, which gives rise to conflict. Ask ourselves, is believing in a limited unlimited intelligent? Or a impotent omnipotence? Or defining “love” as a lack of it?
Quantum physics is revealing that the observer has a definite role. Affirming ancient claims of Universal Law, that of reaping and sowing. If I radiate a negative field in consciousness, then I will attract a negative pole of experience. While if I radiate a positive field of consciousness, then I will attract a positive pole of experience.
Things are not as they appear, when are awareness is limited.
For example…”security” is a PSYCHOLOGICAL issue, therefore, can only be resolved through PSYCHOLOGICAL means. “Security” is a state of Mind. It’s absence indicates emotional issues of insecurity: self doubt related to issues of worth and esteem. Now…over the past 8 years especially, how many of us have realized this and claimed these issues as our own? And how many of us have run away into our mentality, in order to avoid facing we’ve got definite issues with our coping skills?
Or another example…such as a liar. is the issue the liar or our own gullibility?
anthonynorth said
Hi Sue Ann,
I wouldn’t put it quite in the terms you do, but if I’ve got you right, I use a similar approach in the essay below to describe how our destiny is shaped:
How To Explain Destiny
Sue Ann Edwards said
smiling…according to quantum physics, everything we perceive as “physical” is a precipitate. Ever wonder what it is a precipitate OF?
I like your article about freewill. As a Sovereign, I claim COMPLETE responsibility and accountability for the ideas in my head, the pattern in which those ideas are related together, (whether they are contradictory in concept, thus nullifying) AND the resultant emotional states those ideas, associated in those ways, produce. My emotions are mine, yours are yours, his, his, hers, hers and so forth. Nobody ELSE controls the peptide production of the hypothalumus in MY head. Or in yours for that matter.
Now the definition of Liberty is the freedom of choice while being responsible for the costs and consequences of those choices, while license is the insistence on freedom of choice while DENYING responsibility for consequences. How many of us do we observe claiming, rather then blaming?
anthonynorth said
Good morning Sue Ann,
By pure coincidence, I’m posting an essay on just what an individual is, tomorrow. It may muddy the water just a little, here.
Ryan Cowling said
“A further implication of the system would be that knowledge would no longer be of an explanatory nature, but creative – which does, of course, agree with ideas in particle physics concerning reality being created from an observation.
Of course, this is exceptionally speculative. But the reality is, it is untrue to say that a ‘system’ of thought cannot be used to attempt explanation of higher consciousness.”
Order emerging from chaotic systems could be caused by this universal creativeness at work.
anthonynorth said
Hi Ryan,
I certainly think it’s an avenue to explore, and I’d suggest that the order-inducing element of this is within math itself.