By William Markiewicz
As the universe is one, then in the beginning everything had to concord. Anything that doesn't fit in our current sphere of knowledge we can reject or, with a more open mind, relegate to the mysterious beginning of everything. Two enigmas that I've pondered before come to mind: a) some unexplained hypothetical manifestations like karma, premonition, synchronicity, and b) the elementary structure of matter.
Let's start with those "hypothetical" ones that we call 'karma', 'premonition', 'synchronicity', without knowing what we're really talking about. We live in our time-space parcel. The 'psychics,' if we accept their abilities, transcend the time-space parcel because they perceive the total fabric of the universe. Nothing happens unprovoked; this axiom is immutable. Then nothing changes in the all-encompassing fabric of the universe. If, at some primordial level, everything has to concord (because the universe is one), then the unrolling of the universal story from big bang until now had to have one simple start, charged with the potential development of present complexity. For a detective, simpler elements that evolve into complex pathways may contain elements leading "from the thread to the spool" and vice versa. So, why not consider all present and future complexities as inevitable from the very start? All systems that compose the universe -- physical, chemical, psychic -- have a common origin; so everything holds together, though too abundant to encompass with thought and vision. The good existential detective could, not through science but intuition, trace the story of the universe. For this detective, the past would be revealed as a discernable pathway leading to the present and future. I can then accept premonition and intuition as the ability to follow the everlasting historical traces of the unity and the beginning of the universe.
There are basically two kinds of synchronicity: one not accepted by everybody, the second one seemingly proven in labs. The first, accepted by Jung, links synchronicity to premonition. The second one, apparently observed in laboratories, then physical, may represent manifestation of a quantum leap through distance. Apparently when an animal learns something in one laboratory it may be transmitted to other animals at the other end of the world. How can a tendency jump through space? Where/what is the bridge? Why does 'simili similibus' attract? As for karma, also recognized by Jung, like synchronicity it's carried like leaves floating on a river. If synchronicity refers to the collective, the karma interests mostly individuals. How does this all-encompassing river distinguish our individual karmas? It doesn't have to; the leaves carried by the river remain individual. What is this river? Maybe in the future we'll get some glimpse. The current of this river is not of our dimension. It transcends the notion of time. Here, everything happens in our three dimensions; 'there' (eternity) everything appears static, no visible current because everything is forever settled, predictable, repetitive. Here, everything is submitted to time, which gives the impression of existing current.
As for the enigma of matter: we can measure, describe, use; it doesn't bring us closer to learning about its intime essence. Quanta lead us to smaller and smaller dimensions; the ultimate particle doesn't seem to exist. There is no measure for 'quality' which remains an eternal enigma.
Infinite existence is composed of finites. Non-structure doesn't exist. Less structure would be soup.
Infinity can be analysed in finite segments, which at one level unite into some 'order', 'meaning'. What in fact would be the limit of infinity? How can it exist? Perhaps existence is a limit within itself. What exists cannot exist as something else, which is the definition of its limits. Existence is the limit proper to the fabric of the universe. The old axiom declares: "God cannot create a mountain on which He cannot climb." Double impossibility is somehow the limit of the universe. Black is not white, God (real or conceptual) cannot build His own limits.
'Because things are what they are' -- can we go beyond this statement? Is consciousness the cement that binds the unconnected as the quanta theory claims? Then how? Does consciousness build, connect, or both? We don't have a clue. Mathematics handles quantity; how can quantity fill the gap between observer and observed? How can consciousness handle molecules at a distance? Handle or create? We need to grasp how it acts -- but what on what? Too many unknowns without an equation. 'Strings', or whatever, is the structure of matter and what can help us to know the structure of something if we don't know what it is? Can we reach quality through quantity or its geometry? Mathematics ignores quality; for it nothing exists but order with no substance. But substance exists. We don't escape paradox. We have freedom of mind, which allows us to track through the infinite void but space will not give the answer, nor will time.Back to the index of the Vagabond