Quanta of Virtue and Sin

(by Dlanorrenrag*)

Quanta of Virtue and Sin:

ORIGINAL SIN: If a “perfect-imperfection” began with a crack in meta-symmetry, it may be better to conceptualize emergence out of original creative instability, rather than out of original sin. Regardless, within our “eternal-present,” we have no choice but to make choices.

WHAT IS THE QUANTA: So far as we may best conceptualize, may “God” be like a Holistically Discrete Quanta --- being perfect-for-availing-the-imperfect, by alternating: between perfect wave-potential and perfect particle-specificity; between omniscience and omnipotence?

CONSERVATION OF INFORMATION VS. ENERGY: Perhaps God functions all-knowingly (conservation of information) and all-powerfully (conservation of energy and stored energy) --- but only in alternating cycles or sequences of quanta or time. When “The Universal Quantum” presents only as wave potential, it is not presenting power; when the Quantum presents only as particle specification, it is not presenting knowledge.

GODLY FLEXING: While God fully knows context, God is not fully collapsing or exercising power; while God fully collapses or exercises power, God is not fully knowing context. While learning context, God sacrifices power; while exercising power, God sacrifices learning.

HEARTBEAT OF GOD: In short, God is both omniscient and omnipotent, but, in meta-time, not simultaneously. God’s consequent uncertainty correlates with God’s capacity for learning and being entertained. As we may not simultaneously measure or control both the location and the direction of a direct expression of quanta, neither may God simultaneously measure or control both God’s knowledge and God’s power. Rather, God’s cycling of knowledge vs. power may be analogized in respect of a “Heartbeat of God.”

TIME: For Cycling-God, chronological sequences may consist in cycling among aspects for expressing one universal Quantum wave --- the Quantum wave cycling in discretely alternating sequence with one universal Quantum particle.

DIVISIBLE VS. INDIVISIBLE: Should time be conceptualized as being “digitally” divided into discrete cycles for universal Quantum flux, even though time is experienced as continuous --- in respect that: the wave function, as such, does not experience a break in time for the particle function; and the particle function, as such, does not experience a break in time for the wave function?

ANTICIPATORY FEEDBACK AND VIRTUAL PARTICLES: Because the Synchronizing-Universal-Quantum flexes alternatively between wave potential and particle specificity, it “learns” at an immeasurably discrete break between each manifestation of a particle. Thus, a particle may often appear to have “anticipated” or reacted in advance to an emerging or morphing change in systemic aspects that are near, entangled, or encompassed with it. Such advance reactions may sometimes manifest measurably, as with “virtual particles.”

INTERCONNECTIVITY AT A DISTANCE:

It is sometimes objected that there cannot be any meta-interconnectivity, because immense distances between objects and galaxies preclude any meaningful, significant, measureable, or even theoretical connection. It is also objected that quantum entanglement could not support meaningful empathy or interconnectivity at a distance, because it appears information may not simultaneously be exchanged in respect of such entanglement.

Regardless, such objectons overlook an obvious potential “explanation”: It is possible that our universe presents to each perspective a different holographic interpretation, albeit, one that constitutes a faithfully consistent translation to each perspective of a common underlying holistic Quantum.

ITERATIVE TRANSLATIONS: That is, each of us may be experiencing our own holographic interpretation of the one Quantum Universe. At holistic level, there may not be any “real” distance (or space-in-itself) between us. It may be that apparently distant objects are experienced or interpreted as being outside our field of influence because our holography does not avail to us an interpretation for supporting such influence. It may be that such “distant realms” are merely repetitive iterations or translations of nearby aspects with which we do experience interaction and influence.

“Distant objects,” when constituting repetitive interpretations or logarithmically variant functions of our own experience, would not be interpreted as interacting causally with us, but only iteratively. In other words, they may be entangled with us, but at such a “distance” that no transmission of information could reliably demonstrate the entanglement. Such state of affairs may be requisite to support our holographic interpretations of boundless “space.”

SYNCHRONICITY OF EXPERIENCE: For another example, our own brains and bodies may not, in themselves, author their own thoughts or acts, but experience or interpret thinking, willing, and acting --- as sponsored by an ongoing synchronization in respect of Holistic Quantum. This need not diminish us. Rather, it may elevate awareness of our constituting holographic perspectives of one Holistic I-ness (i.e., God).

INDIVISIBILITY OF ETERNAL-PRESENT: Is the “holographic-eternal-present” indivisible, much as the One Quantum is indivisible --- for indivisibly expressing both a wave aspect of potentiality and a particle aspect of specificity? May the Quantum wave function be expressed on one side of “one meta-coin,” opposite a side upon which is expressed the Quantum particle function? May each side of the coin flux, to present to holographic context in otherwise indivisible time?

INDIVISIBLE PERSPECTIVES: May there be just one “real” indivisible Meta-Quantum, which, for “entertaining” Itself, expresses infinite variety of holographically indivisible appearances of Itself? May all that we experience and measure empirically consist of indivisible appearances, illusions, or epiphenomena --- all causally derivative of a synchronizing Meta-Mind or Will of the One Quantum, which avails a holographic parameter-charge-potential, in respect of which each of us, as derivative representation of Will, appreciates choice and interaction?

RELATING VIRTUE AND SIN: “Virtue” and “sin” may relate to aesthetic, empathetic respect or appreciation of each person --- each for the other, and each for That-Which-Interconnects us with our experiences and choices --- within an alternating current of parameter-charge-potential availed for all perspectives.

CIVILIZING ETHOS: Insofar as Holistic God is source for opportuning holographically indivisible experiences of aesthetics and empathy, may words such as “virtue” or “sin” reasonably stand for extolling or upbraiding us, in respect of moral heroics or cowardice? May virtue and sin reasonably be re-conceptualized, re-assimilated, or made relevant to civilization --- to relate to our “eternal-present” --- rather than to absolute or final judgment?

ETERNALLY PURSUING FULFILLMENT: Civilization necessitates means for assimilating and inculcating communicable, shared moral values. “God” avails as source for each of us --- in humility, respectfulness, and receptiveness --- to meditate and pray to, for moral strength and insight. In seeking moral validation, we may hope to inspire moral strength or remorse --- to “save” our efforts in eternal pursuit of such ever-morphing resonances, harmonies, aesthetics, and empathies as we may best intuit to fulfill us.

ENTERTAINING CONTEXT: Context correlates with fuzziness in interpretation. Yet, free of context, there is no clear-revelation or absolute science-of-perfect-virtue or sin. There is no objectively real standard against which one event or person can be judged virtuous-in-him/her/or/itself while another is judged sinful-in-him/her/or/itself. Rather, there is eternal morphing of context --- for entertaining and availing us with parables, stories, and experiences --- for our eternal resolving, in order to pursue moral fulfillment.

BORG-UTOPIA: To legislate or force upon human civilization a one-size-fits-all system of minutely detailed sharia or socialistic rules of conduct, irrespective of evolving contexts, is to fashion for humanity a morally fascist strait jacket. No reasonable human being, scientist, sociologist, or theologist should condone Borg-utopian causes or jihads.

SOUL OF AMERICA: The soul of America, and the genius of American civilization, has consisted in establishing constitutional protection for fundamental human liberties, protecting the Constitution by checks and balances, and protecting all by respecting a broad assimilation of Judeo-Christian ethics for pursuing enlightened empathy.

DANGER TO AMERICA: For America to lose its respect for godly based moral empathy would be for America to lose itself. There is no “scientific” substitute.