Chapter 33: Reality and Religion

 

From the previous chapter, I would like to state that I think that reality, in the light of the above, is a ‘co-existing’ with those around us. Not so much a predator/prey situation, but a ‘getting on with the neighbours’, which is basically the same. This is the basic problem of the world today –‘getting on with the neighbours’, that encompasses all of the family, the townspeople, countywide and internationally.

 

I would also like to point out that the Mathematics of the Mind has a trinity of operators: truth/existence/reality that act on chaos/indeterminacy to ‘pull down’ ‘patterns’ that turn out to be ourselves and our world. That is, the worlds that are suitable for us, and have the conditions that we can survive in, must come out of the multiverse.

 

From chapter 2, it was stated that the left hand side of the concept of the Philosophers’ stone was the region of mathematics, the centre column where the Mathematics of the Mind takes over from mathematics and the right hand column for the ‘softer’ sciences. This third column can now be examined through the operator ‘reality’ that is “a ‘co-existing’ with those around us”.

 

This is substantially different to what ‘reality’ means to most people until they think about it. A reality doesn’t mean that it is real, which is existence, but that we can consider on-going life to be ‘workable’ or ‘liveable’ and immerse ourselves in life without being conscious of imminent disaster, and being conscious that threats and opportunities exist, but that we are comfortable with and adjusted to deal with them.

 

Reality is the operator that makes sense of the right hand column of the Philosophers’ stone concept. In particular, as has been said before, that the Laws of Life are only the more important attractors and others can be added as necessary to ‘tighten’ the ‘picture’. Reality is part of all the Laws of Life, since as stated above, “a ‘co-existing’ with those around us” is certainly true of the family, townspeople etc., as well as the precursor of Survival of the Fittest. This operator is in line with the life of the animals (and us) and is logical and a Truth.

 

In fact, I have mentioned previously that Survival of the Fittest is an iteration and a Truth, but this iteration is not as ‘powerful’ as a mind capable of logic. Firstly, it is ‘backward looking’ and secondly, Survival of the Fittest is a mathematical/mechanical system and does not have the ‘flair’ of a logic-based system. The purpose of the Mathematics of the Mind is to present a form of mathematics that can handle logic, using the mind, and project predictions into the future. Our mind/brain uses the form of the Mathematics of the Mind, but instead of using a mind/brain for creativity, creativity is built–in through the architecture of the brain.

 

As soon as reality is mentioned, the question must be asked, ‘if I can see the tiger, the tiger must be able to see me’. It is a logical necessary that the brain of animals can’t change, as shown in chapter 12, where the eyes rewired themselves in moving into stereoscopic forward vision and not the brain, to preserve reality, and further, it is logically necessary that in the limit, organisms must be able to consume each other. So much logic is necessary for the world to function that it shows clearly that space-time is not sufficient for the ‘softer’ sciences, just as I showed that space-time in fundamental physics lead to magic and misunderstanding.

 

To restate the ideas above, the Mathematics of the Mind was derived from first principles, and, with the Rule of Life that everything becomes simpler over time, the mind/brain (of all animals, at least) appears to function in the form of the Mathematics of the Mind, which is to be expected, whilst the mind/brain provides a built-in creativity, we use the mind/brain in handling creativity in the Mathematics of the Mind. The mind/brain uses quantum mechanical induction to generate thoughts with primary context from the lobes of speech, hearing etc. that correspond to the attractors.

 

It might seem to be stretching belief, but a mind capable of measurement (and invokes the logic of measurement) can ‘access’ the universe and cause the universe to respond, probably affecting the logic of entanglement in some way. I am referring to the experiment of the photon and the two detectors that were being turned off and on. This is an indication of the ‘power’ of the mind, especially when aided by the Mathematics of the Mind to direct outcomes.

 

If we seek a ‘point’ of ‘consciousness’, I believe that consciousness is the addition of ‘partial’ related memories caused by quantum mechanical ‘induction’ of action potentials of nearby dendrites leading to cascades of ‘bits’ of past memories and this can occur with very few nerves. Perhaps people should be looking for the size or type of mind that can cause the universe to react with it. That would not be a consciousness, but a connectivity, a ‘growing up’ or ‘maturity’, but, we can answer that question. It has to be an animal that uses a tool, and quite a number of animals and birds do use tools in feeding, but these are macroscopic, and so the answer is possibly only those people doing quantum mechanical experiments. But this can be taken further, that the brains of all animals are using quantum mechanics in their consciousness and thus must be part of entanglement and interconnected, but then we have previously said the EVERY particle contributes to the entanglement, and that must be the final answer.

 

This leads to the question of the ‘extra-normal’! It seems from the above that all matter is interconnected. There are reports that people experience extra-normal messages etc., but whilst these might be possible, the logic of reality tells us that if it became ‘sufficiently powerful’ and ‘sufficiently widespread’, a change in reality could occur and the ‘extra-normal’ would become the ‘normal’. The Rule of Life is an ‘in the limit’ Rule, and the ‘extra-normal’ may come to pass! If it does, it would cause massive extinctions, as animals adjusted to new competitive pressures. On the other hand, humans are farmers and do not hunt, and so would not ‘force’ changes to prey’s mind to counteract our ‘second sight’.

 

“A ‘co-existing’ with those around us” is powerful because it is fundamental! What more could one ask for! It contains the seeds of contentment. It means working with people to be the colour that they want to work towards, to have children brought up in stable environments, and so on. ‘As a general rule – with lots and lots of exceptions, including Bill Clinton and Barack Obama – children raised by single parents tend not to do as well in life as children who grow up with two parents. Even after researchers control for socio-economic factors and other variables, it turns out that children from two-parent homes get better grades in school. They’re healthier and better-adjusted emotionally. They have more satisfying social lives and engage in less antisocial behavior. They’re more likely to attend an elite university and less likely to go to prison.’ (Willpower: rediscovering the greatest human strength, Roy F. Baumeister and John Tierney, p 208)

 

If “ ‘co-existing’ with those around us” is so powerful, can we turn it into a new religion? I have read that the Golden Rule, which states to ‘do unto others as you would have them do unto you’ is a ‘religion’ for some people. The Golden Rule is an action plan based on the simpler and more fundamental statement “ ‘co-existing’ with those around us! Looking at chapter 18 (Finding God through One Religion), I suggested that the religions could be ‘condensed’ to a core that all religions can agree is applicable to their particular religion and the areas in dispute would be clearly marked. This would be a first step in amalgamating religions.

 

The inference made in that chapter was that the basics of the major religions were effectively the same for Jews,Christian and Islam. As an example, the 10 Commandments ALL have at their core the message: “‘co-existing’ with those around us”. There is even a place for the God of Truth/Existence/Reality, although the idea of a Trinity might have to be accepted, because we don’t have a suitable wide-reaching word. The only thing missing is the ‘will to change’ but change is being forced on us by Global Warming, over-population etc. If no politician or statesman is equal to the task, there is the Forever Club that could occur through popular pressure.

 

A quotation was given earlier that stated that all tribes have a ‘creation myth’ that tells from where they arose as a people, and this requirement suggests that some sort of religion is necessary, especially as it states what is required of members in the way of behaviour within the tribe. In fact, this is saying that a ‘religion’, or ‘set of laws’ is logically necessary to every group because it tells how the group is to function. Every family and group must have a set of ‘relationship’ laws to be able to function together and that relationship is none other than reality, or “a ‘co-existing’ with those around us”. This shows how ‘powerful’ that this operator is! Coexisting with those around us operates at ALL levels!

 

The Rule of Life applies to all things and in particular to religions and what is surprising is how easily the derivation of a ‘religion’ is when derived from first principles, but also, how the world’s religions ‘match’ this derived religion. It should be remembered that as reality is a forward-looking indicator and Survival of the Fittest is backward-looking, these two concepts apply to the established religions with some surprising results. This will be the subject of the next chapter.

 

There is not much to be said that hasn’t already been said, but, whilst the churches do a good job, they could do better. It is a question of leadership, as many of the problems have been addressed (to some extent) here, in this book.