THE UNIVERSE AS PACKETS OF INFORMATION
Imagine a world of information packets—a world where what we label energy and mass is indeed a composition of information packets. How could we come to understand such a world?
Units of Knowledge
Think of the universe as intelligence. When we master an observation and express it mathematically and so forth, what we have really done is grasp some part of this intelligence. The intelligence, somewhat analogously to our own, is compiled of information units. We think of these units when it comes to our own thinking as units of knowledge, and we knit them together in order to understand our world and its inhabitants, including of course, our fellow human beings.
We begin our learning process in the very beginning when we draw our first breath. Little by little the information begins to accumulate and soon we experience our first appreciation for an intelligible environment. Slowly our belief in this intelligibility garners momentum until we begin to think that we might just be able to control our lives.
Intelligibility
What exactly is this intelligibility and why is it that we begin to believe we may be masters of our own destinies? It’s nothing more or less than packets of information, call it learning, that enter our compiler, our mental state, and in aggregate delivers the computation. It’s not energy, despite the fact that it may have taken what we call energy to obtain and may appear to be a form of energy when retrieved. Nevertheless, all of these units of information form our intelligence, and intelligence itself is neither energy nor mass.
So once again, just imagine a world, our world, undergirded by intelligence and knowable in certain discrete packets. How would that change our understanding? After all, isn’t this sort of thinking more consistent with what we have learned from quantum physics than the mechanical models derived from a world of shoes and ships and sealing wax? Like a holograph, any piece of which contains the information of the whole, packets of information, units of intelligence, each an aspect of a greater whole.
Intelligence Without a Brain or Nervous System
Consider this as just one form of an intelligent universe expressing itself:
"What seems to be inexplicable intelligent behavior in other species, some without any nervous system, might not be so mysterious after all if it is regarded as the operation of this broader maximizing principle. For example scientists have noted seemingly intelligent behavior in slime molds, a sort of gelatinous amoeba sometimes found in the backyard. One species, the yellow Physarum polycephalum, “can solve mazes, mimic the layout of man-made transportation networks and choose the healthiest food from a diverse menu—and all this without a brain or nervous system." 1
So is it far fetched to think of the universe in this way—as intelligence of one kind or another expressing itself in everything around us? One might argue that it’s possibly all only some algorithm that gives rise to what we call intelligence, but then again, that’s just playing with definitions. The algorithm itself may be the basis of everything we come to think of as intelligence and if so, that in no way would alter the basic proposition that packets of information are built from the algorithm and this thereby leads to what we call intelligence.
Information Packets Heal Cancer
Not long ago I had an intriguing conversation with Professor William Bengston about some of his healing work. Bengston has developed a teachable technique that heals mice of cancer. Interestingly, his method does not employ either traditional or alternative procedures such as energy healing. That said, the blood of treated mice can be used to cure mice of cancer. His work has been replicated at six different universities in more than ten replications. And again, there is no spiritual component, no laying on of hands, no vaccines, and so forth—no, his protocol calls for passing on an information packet needed by the mice to heal. Indeed, the training includes how to pass this packet on passively, that is, without forced or concentrated effort. What’s more, it appears to work as well 2 feet or 2000 miles away from the target mice. As such, the notion of energy is obviously an inadequate explanation since energy dissipates over distance.
Information packets passing between humans and mice? Why not? Ask any pet owner and they’ll tell you that their animal friends get them all the time. The fact is, very solid research has shown that dogs do know when their owners are coming home. How? Again, information units? I suggest that very many so-called anomalies can be easily understood and explained if we begin to think of our world as one constituted by units of information that build the intelligence of the universe we live in.
I’d love your thoughts on this one?
Thanks for the read,
Eldon
Eldon Taylor, PhD, FAPA
NY Time Bestselling Author of Choices and Illusions
www.eldontaylor.com
Sources:
1 The Intelligent Universe
Yes Eldon Taylor, well said. Loved the piece.
It is a curious phenomena that although our senses pick up information from what appears to be the world (universe?) around us. It's all meaningless until it's been assembled by our brain and observed by the self (mind?), which would be to say that the world is a projection rather than an observation. In one of Carlos Castaneda's books, Carlos is seeing what might be called an illusion, but Don Juan instructs him that he has momentarily created a new life form. Isn't this actually the constant process that we call "life"? A series of illusions subject to our interpretation? Great thoughts Eldon. Things to ponder as we watch our days proceed.
I see the author of linked article is James Cross
Eldon, an excellent article. Thanks for the link (just glanced at it now -- who's the author?). re your post: problem is, a self-aware universe model (which is really the only one that fits the experimental data, research etc), is too unapproachable for most (especially those in the West). Indigenous (Australian) people excepted. It's fascinating to note that decades ago, physicists had already come to a self-aware universe conclusion. e.g. (Freeman Dyson) who opined that '..consciousness is not just a passive epiphenomenon carried along by the chemical events in our brains, but is an active agent forcing the molecular complexes to make choices between one quantum state and another. In other words, mind is already inherent in every electron, and the processes of human consciousness differ only in degree but not in kind from the processes of choice between quantum states which we call 'chance' when they are made by electrons." For me, that's so straightforward, as to be inarguable. But going back aways, Max Planck, one of the founders of quantum theory, said it (perhaps most succinctly). "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." That's the crucial point -- one can't get behind consciousness (below the bottom turtle). Over the years I've had long (as in looong) discussions with many, and that's the crucial point that many cannot begin to fathom ... there is no bottom turtle. Anyway, more similar quotes from physicists (including Sir Arthur Eddington etc) at http://beliefdoctor.com/timeless-knowledge.html I draw parallels between what the physicsts have concluded with that of Australian Aboriginal beliefs (prior to European settlement).