Download journey in being: new world-cosmology - Home page-

JOURNEY IN BEING
COSMOLOGY
Home
OUTLINE
Cosmology—essentials of update ....................................................................................... 2
Aims ................................................................................................................................ 2
General cosmology (06) .................................................................................................. 2
Further results in general cosmology—a miscellany. Annihilation. Recurrence and
Karma. Recurrence and Identity. Significance in being. Fact, fiction and the unending
Variety of being. Scripture and truth. The nature of death. Creation. God. The idea of
self-creation. Interaction of the elements of Being. Ghosts and ghost cosmological
systems. There are no distinct universes. The Limit of imagination (06)....................... 2
The variety of being ........................................................................................................ 2
Mechanism and explanation. Origins ............................................................................. 3
Mind as a cosmological object (06) ................................................................................ 3
Time and space (06) ........................................................................................................ 3
Status of substance as locally or practically fundamental (06) ....................................... 3
Atomism (06) .................................................................................................................. 3
Local cosmology ............................................................................................................. 3
Two Divides in the evolution of the local cosmological system (06)............................. 3
Anthropic principle ......................................................................................................... 3
Cosmology .......................................................................................................................... 3
Aims ................................................................................................................................ 3
General cosmology from ‘06 .......................................................................................... 5
Mechanism and explanation ........................................................................................... 5
Normal mechanism: incremental change from ‘06 ......................................................... 6
Further results in general cosmology… Annihilation. Recurrence and Karma.
Recurrence and Identity. Significance in being. Fact, fiction and the unending Variety
of being. Scripture and truth. The nature of death. Creation. God. The idea of selfcreation. Interaction of the elements of Being. Ghosts and ghost cosmological systems.
There are no distinct universes. The Limit of imagination from ‘06 .............................. 7
Time and space from ‘06 .............................................................................................. 10
Dominant versus multiple times and relative strength of interaction from ‘06 ............ 10
Mind as a cosmological object from ‘06....................................................................... 10
Status of substance as locally or practically fundamental from ‘06 ............................. 11
Atomism from ‘06......................................................................................................... 11
Two Divides in the evolution of the local cosmological system from ‘06 ................... 12
COSMOLOGY—ESSENTIALS OF UPDATE
Aims
To develop cosmology as the Theory of variety of being and to note that knowledge of
the variety must be implicit
To develop some results in general cosmology
To characterize the variety of being
To study the following kinds and aspects of cosmology
General / local
Mechanism / explanation
Variety / origins
Causation / determinism
Mind
Time and space
Substance and atomism
Local cosmology / divides
Anthropic principle
Other topics
To combine with Logic and quantum mechanics
To estimate the feasible and the desirable
To develop implications of the cosmology for some common cosmologies and their
relations
General cosmology (06)
…general versus local cosmology
Further results in general cosmology—a miscellany. Annihilation. Recurrence and
Karma. Recurrence and Identity. Significance in being. Fact, fiction and the
unending Variety of being. Scripture and truth. The nature of death. Creation.
God. The idea of self-creation. Interaction of the elements of Being. Ghosts and
ghost cosmological systems. There are no distinct universes. The Limit of
imagination (06)
The variety of being
The variety of being has been considered in What exists—categories of objects and
subsequent sections… that discussion may have been placed here but is more
appropriately placed in Objects
As seen in Metaphysics, study, experience and realization of variety is and must be ever
open and fresh
2
Variety is more interesting than depth
Mechanism and explanation. Origins
Mechanism. Necessity of indeterminism. Probability of incremental change (06)
Normal mechanism: incremental change (06)
Causation and determinism
Mind as a cosmological object (06)
Time and space (06)
Dominant versus multiple times and relative strength of interaction (06)
Status of substance as locally or practically fundamental (06)
Atomism (06)
Local cosmology
Two Divides in the evolution of the local cosmological system (06)
Anthropic principle
COSMOLOGY
Aims
To develop cosmology as the theory of variety of being and to note that knowledge of the
variety must be implicit
To characterize the variety of being
That an enumeration of the variety is not possible because the number of states of the
universe and the variety of kinds of being is a non-enumerable i.e. non-countable
infinity
To combine with Logic and quantum mechanics
In this narrative, Logic is the theory of possibility (the ideas of Logic and possibility
are developed in Metaphysics and in Logic where it is shown that Logic is immanent in
being and that the concept of Logic includes logic in its traditional meaning.) There
appears to be a potential to combine the ideas of possibility and variety that will yield
insight and perhaps knowledge of the variety and its structures
There is an analogy between the void of the Theory of being and the quantum vacuum.
The analogy is by no means full in any sense for the void contains no Law, Pattern or
Form while the quantum vacuum is not without law. The quantum vacuum and its
behavior are extrapolations of the quantum laws of this cosmological system to the idea
of a lowest manifest state of the ‘universe’ where the quotes indicate that the concept is
not identical to its use in this narrative but refers instead, roughly, to the empirically
known world. In saying that the quantum vacuum is an extrapolation it is not suggested
that there is no quantum vacuum or that there are or can be no reasonable predictions
from theories of the vacuum – quite the contrary is the case. However, what is said and
what has been demonstrated as necessarily true is that any extrapolation of the quantum
laws must fall infinitely short of application to the universe (of all being.) I.e. the depth
3
of the universe relative to quantum behavior is at least numerically infinite. That is,
there is a gap between the law of the void –i.e. the Law of the universe– that is the
concept of Logic and the theoretical behavior of the quantum vacuum. These
comments motivate and are preliminary to and will condition any development of the
analogy between the void and the quantum vacuum into an integrated account. The
comments show that any theoretical integration of void and vacuum in which the
theory of the vacuum falls out of the theory of the void will be a theory of the void as
restricted to account for the behavior of the vacuum; such restrictions may come from
the theoretical andor empirical structure of quantum theory
To estimate the feasible and the desirable
To study the following kinds and aspects of cosmology
General
Local / physical
Mechanism / explanation. Necessary and contingent mechanisms
Symmetry, stability, durability. Factors of population: frequency of origin * durability.
That the dominant population of the universe should be of near symmetric, relatively
stable systems or states (perfectly symmetric states would not decay but do not come
into being)
Variety / origins
Causation / determinism
The metaphysics implies that it is writ with infinite repetition in the universe
Anthropic principle. Population of the universe by sentient states. Question of
significance and sentience
Mind
Substance and atomism
Divides
To develop some results in general cosmology
Further results in general cosmology. Annihilation. Recurrence and Karma. Recurrence
and Identity. Significance in being. Fact, fiction and the unending Variety of being.
Scripture and truth. The nature of death. Creation. God. The idea of self-creation.
Interaction of the elements of being. Ghosts and ghost cosmological systems. There are
no distinct universes. The Limit of imagination
To develop implications of the cosmology for some common cosmologies and their
relations
Mythic, legendary and religious
Karma and scripture
Materialism and physicalism
Theories of space-time-matter. Meaning of ‘origin of time’ (that the phrase can have a
meaning that is both coherent, applicable and with application)
Life and evolution
Mind and psyche
4
Human and animal being
General cosmology from ‘06
General cosmology and cosmology are identical. I.e. in general cosmology there is no
restriction of domain or kind of being. For purposes of the present discussion of ‘general
cosmology’ it will be abbreviated to ‘cosmology’
The Void is an element of the cosmology
The principle that ‘generates’ the Variety of being is the ‘Fundamental Principle of the
Theory of Being’ i.e. the principle that the entire system of consistent descriptions is
(must be) realized
That is, not only are all possible entities realized but also realized are all arrangements of
entities, all laws, all patterns, all mechanisms of generation of generation. The
enhancement from ‘entities’ to ‘arrangements’ and so on may be understood also by
seeing the arrangements etc. as complex or compound entities
Mechanism and explanation
The general proof of the existence of form does not explain the existence of form
A proof of existence of an object or occurrence of an event may or may not show or
explain how the object came into existence and continues to exist or how or why the
event occurred
If the proof does not explain existence, a mechanism may provide the lack
A mechanism is a dynamic (distinguish Mechanism or dynamic from mechanism or
understanding of Mechanism)
If a mechanism is necessary, it is universal in its domain
If it is not necessary, a ‘mechanism’ may be impossible or possible. If possible but not
necessary the mechanism is contingent
Although a contingent mechanism of a form is not the universal or necessary genesis of
that form, it is necessary that the mechanism will sometimes be the genesis of the form
Is a separate word for contingent mechanism indicated?
A necessary mechanism has a probability of 1
A contingent mechanism may have probability so close to one –as far as is known– as to
be normal or practically necessary
If an event has a necessary mechanism, the occurrence of the event entails the mechanism
as prior or cause or determining
A contingent mechanism of an event is templated by a necessary mechanism
If a contingent mechanism has a high probability it may be labeled causal but the terms
quasi-causal or quasi-deterministic are better
The normal may be labeled causal but the terms quasi-causal or quasi-deterministic are
better
5
Mechanism. Necessity of indeterminism. Probability of incremental change from ‘06
The ‘original’ mechanism of generation is variations (required by indeterminism) from an
initial state and selection i.e. relative duration of Existence i.e. relative stability of those
variations that are self-adapted i.e. near symmetric. That is the mechanism is that of
variations and selection of relatively stable states. Perfect symmetry is infinitely unlikely
i.e. is not arrived at but if it were realized it would be ‘frozen’ i.e. would remain
unchanged (except for the ‘intervention’ of indeterministic elements from without e.g. the
Void – which is not truly without.) The initial state relative to which (further) generation
is considered may, according to context, be the void, the ‘first’ state of manifest Being, a
normal cosmological system (defined earlier and explained further below,) earth just
before the origin of life, life at any point in its history, living forms just before the advent
of consciousness (as has been seen in the discussion ‘Mind,’ it is more accurate to say
‘just before the emergence of acute consciousness,’) life just before acute imagery, before
free imagery, before the symbol and before the free symbol (defined later under ‘Human
being,’) and cultural change
As described, the generic mechanism is identical in the foregoing cases. On account of
the differing initial states, the manifest details of the mechanism vary. For example, in the
case of life, genetic structure and replication are involved and in the case of sexual
species, sexual reproduction is involved as well. More primitive cases do not involve
reproduction although there may perhaps be mechanisms of replication that are more
primitive than bio-genetic replication. I.e. although the idea for variation and selection
may come from biology, the biological case is not taken as paradigmatic
The justification of the universality generic mechanism for the origin of novelty is as for
the outline of the justification in the case of life that was given earlier in ‘Logic.’ The
mechanism of indeterministic variation and selection is necessary when the ‘end’ result is
too complex to originate deterministically from (contains elements not determined by)
the initial state
Normal mechanism: incremental change from ‘06
The argument for Necessity does not specify whether the ‘path’ from initial to end state
occurs in a single step, in large steps or incremental. The argument was that incremental
change is (perhaps in most circumstances) colossally more likely than single or large
steps. Even though the normal mechanism is, in any instance, only more likely, there
must be instances of its occurrence (this follows from the fundamental principle of the
Theory of Being and, similarly, even though single step change to a more complex state
is unlikely, that that shall occur is also necessary. While an incremental explanation of
complexity was given, incremental change though far more likely, is not necessary and
there must be instances of large single step change even if generally unlikely and even if
absent from a given cosmological system)
The ‘normal mechanism’ is implicated in all the examples stated above e.g. from the
Void to first manifest being, from early manifest being (which has at least some normal
characteristics if relatively stable i.e. if more stable than the Necessary ephemera that
emanate from the void) to normal cosmological systems and so on
6
Further results in general cosmology… Annihilation. Recurrence and Karma.
Recurrence and Identity. Significance in being. Fact, fiction and the unending
Variety of being. Scripture and truth. The nature of death. Creation. God. The
idea of self-creation. Interaction of the elements of Being. Ghosts and ghost
cosmological systems. There are no distinct universes. The Limit of imagination
from ‘06
Some properties of the Universe as a whole follow from the natures (properties) of
‘being,’ ‘Void,’ ‘universe.’ Any entity including the manifest universe or a normal
cosmological system is capable of annihilation at any time. In general, annihilation may
be spontaneous even if unlikely. In the normal case the annihilator system evolves from
the void and since it must match the nature of the system to be annihilated, annihilation is
unlikely: it may be said that, roughly, the likelihood of annihilation ‘by’ an external and
normal annihilator is that of a single step origin of the system (which is much less than
the odds of incremental origin.) The more complex the system the more unlikely is
annihilation
Every event, every normal system, every realization of a consistent description, recurs
infinitely in Time and space i.e. and more accurately over the manifold of being (subject
to the requirement that a description of the recurrence should also be consistent.) Such
recurrence may in certain cases be interpreted as karma
Every individual recurs. As was seen in discussing Identity, such recurrence has
significance in being only when the discrete consciousness (the consciousness of the
discrete individual) merges in a more comprehensive consciousness. ‘Jesus Christ is risen
from the dead’ occurs in countless cosmological systems (excepting evidence to the
contrary this means that the possibility on this earth is Necessary but not that the
occurrence was necessary, probable, or given)
The laws of science, the articles of religion, the depictions of Art and literature including
fiction, the extreme fantasies of imagination are realized (except for logical
contradiction.) Every possible (i.e. non contradictory description of a) state (of affairs) is
realized i.e. the Universe is one of unending variety that infinitely exceeds any given
description or imagination – any science or art or fiction; it includes the unimagined
though not (perhaps) the unimaginable
The story of the Bible is realized in one domain, the Koran in another, and some
combination in a third (what is realized in each instance is some consistent account of the
scriptures.) Thus the contradictions of Bible versus Koran are actual only if literally
applied to the same domain e.g. this world. While this gives support to literal
interpretations it does not justify application to this world or cosmos. The ‘moral’
significance of the scriptures must include the non-literal – even though the literal
interpretations are realized in some domain of the manifold of manifest being; the moral
significance requires this possibility. Jesus Christ is risen and rising from the dead in
countless sub-domains; this necessary fact lends no credence to rising from the dead on
this earth except that it is not impossible i.e. its negation is not certain. The Theory of
Being is implicitly ultimate with regard to breadth; however, even its explicit breadth is
infinitely greater than is that of the traditional understanding of science, Faith, myth, art
and fiction
7
The ‘Jesus Christ is risen from the dead’ is fundamental to Christian Faith. Some
interpreters assign non-literal meanings to the articles of religion; one assigned
significance has been that the rising from the dead points to human ignorance of the
nature of death. From recurrence, every individual recurs infinitely in the manifold of
being. From the Theory of Identity, meaning is given to the individual recurrences as they
merge into an Identity that spans the otherwise isolated occurrences
If a creator is external to the Creation, the Universe (All Being) has no creator. The origin
of manifest being from the void may be described as a process of creation but it is one
without an original or external creator. One part of the manifest universe may ‘create’
another part. However, it is reasonably clear that creation of a formed cosmos by an
external agent is much less likely than ‘intrinsic’ formation by mechanisms (variation and
selection.) It is possible, however, that one part of the manifest universe may condition
the creation and ongoing formation of another. It is perhaps empty to talk of ‘God’ since
the word evokes specific images, meanings, and supernatural powers. Still, to insist on
avoiding reference to all Power whatsoever because certain historical and religious
thought may be in contingent error is, as is insistence on reifying such reference, to
assign excessive weight to human preoccupation. Any ‘God’ is part of the universe and
may be implicated in the creation of another part e.g. a cosmos but there is no god outside
the universe and the entire universe was not created by any god. The entire universe may
be found in different degrees of manifestation – including absence of manifestation;
however, the universe is not created – can not be created by an external agency because
nothing is external to the universe
The era of scholastic philosophy saw a variety of definitions or conceptions of ‘God’ e.g.
the most ‘perfect’ Being… and proofs of the existence of God. A proof can have no more
‘real’ significance than the real significance of the concept whose existence is
demonstrated. Proof of the existence of one conception of God does not imply the
existence of another conception. Perhaps, therefore, the question of the existence of God
is essentially an experiential endeavor; within the realm of experience, however, it may
be recognized that there may be a variety of conceptions each of which may have its own
appeal
Here, reference to the ideas ‘God’ and ‘Power’ is made to connect to human sentiment.
The foregoing thoughts would carry through also in terms of the neutral idea of power as
effect (which is not to be equated to normal causation)
Creative power is immanent in Being. If the universe is divided (in thought) into different
regions, creative power is both local and non-local; these are immanent and superposed
forms of creation. Regarding the universe as a whole, ‘creation’ is immanent
It is possible to think that the universe creates itself. However, if a creator is external to
creation then, as already seen, the universe cannot create itself. However, once there is
manifest being a given state of the universe may, until information regarding that state is
‘lost,’ condition subsequent states. While any entity may contribute to its future, full selfcreation is logically impossible. It should not be thought that the ‘creation’ (from the
void) occurs once; from ‘recurrence’ it is clear that the creation of manifest being and the
dissolution of manifest being into the void occurs repetitively without beginning or end.
Creation from the void is perhaps an inappropriate description of the emergence from the
8
void. The void does not ‘cause’ manifestation; rather, it is inherent in the void that there
is and can be no restriction on manifestation
It will be useful to carefully review the ideas of ‘creation’ and ‘creator.’ The ideas
involve first that where there was nothing there is something new and second that the
process of manifestation is causal in some sense. If a process results in no new outcome
whatsoever, the appellation ‘creation’ does not apply; if something new comes about in
the presence of an individual but the individual was not instrumental or causal in the
process the individual cannot be said to have created what is new. Since absence cannot
be causal, self-creation, as has been seen, is impossible. It has been seen that the concept
‘creator of the universe’ is logically self-contradictory; however, even if there were no
contradiction, as substance or substantial, the concept has no explanatory power for the
question ‘Who or what created the creator?’ remains unanswered. The void, however,
does not create; rather, the world manifests and un-manifests from and to the void which
is not outside the universe but is (among other things) the universe in its un-manifest
phases. The substantial and explanatory powers of the void result from relinquishing
determinism and causality. Creative power may be thought to be immanent in being;
however such ‘creation’ must involve elements of indeterminism or a-causation
A creator of the universe is a special entity, hypothesized to satisfy a need for causal or
deterministic explanation (and whose existence would entail a contradiction since the
concept of ‘creator of the universe’ requires that it be outside the universe while the
concept of the universe requires all entities.) The void is not a special entity – it is one of
the many equivalent states of the universe; explanation and substantiality based in the
void are and cannot be deterministic or causal
Every entity or element of being interacts with every other element; the strengths of
interaction vary by colossal amounts so that (at least in some normal systems) there are,
in effect, only a ‘few’ major interactions. If by ‘ghost’ is meant something that has no
interactions, there can be no ghosts; however, if a ‘ghost’ is something that interacts with
a given entity only weakly then there are and must be ghosts and ghost universes (i.e.
ghost cosmological systems. Such systems may pass through one another with only a
whispered interaction.) If there were non-interacting systems, they might be called
distinct universes (even though one ‘universe’ could never know another.) However,
because of universal interaction, there cannot be distinct i.e. non-interacting ‘universes.’
I.e. the earlier definition of the uni-verse as All Being is good in that the universe is
unitary i.e. fully self-interactive. If a map of the interactions is drawn, outside the map
there is no being but the void – although the void is the absence of being it may be
equivalently thought of as the null or zero Being
Although human knowledge of possibility is normally limited by the contingent human
powers of imagination, these do not constitute limits on possibility. A description of a
being whose contingent limits is much greater than that of human being is consistent;
such a being is necessary. (An objection to this kind of exploration of possibility is the
assertion that a description in which such a being does not occur is also possible. The
objection is invalid since such a being may occur in one cosmological system but not in
another. That such a being should not occur in any part of the universe would constitute a
law of the void and is therefore not a possibility)
9
Time and space from ‘06
Time is involved in duration i.e. in all origination even from the Void; space is involved
in distinction, extension or separation. A kind of space and Time occur in the origin of
first manifest being from the void. It is clear that space and time may not be altogether
independent; but developing a description is likely a matter of intricacy (see the section
‘Topics for investigation,’ below.) Relative to a more stable, durable cosmological
system with quasi-determinism and quasi-causation (that must occur) it is possible to talk
of the ‘origin of time and space’ for the ‘origin of time’ is an origin of a more coherent,
coordinated, dominant time; and the origin of space is e.g. as conceived in singularity
(big-bang) theories. It should be clear then, that it is not possible on account of the
Theory of Being or general cosmology to decide whether the local space-time should be
absolute or relative in character: both are possible and each occurs and must occur in
some systems
The question of the absolute versus relative character of space and time in the local
cosmos is, therefore, inescapably empirical. I.e. if deduced from a theory, that theory
must be contingent
Dominant versus multiple times and relative strength of interaction from ‘06
It is possible, therefore necessarily occurs, that two normal cosmological systems whose
structures are maintained by their local dynamics, have interactions that are much weaker
than the local forces. Thus, one cosmos could pass through another as a ‘whisper.’ Each
cosmos would have its own Time but detection of the time of the other cosmos would be
possible with sufficiently delicate instruments. The weak interactions between the two
cosmoses could strengthen and the two could become one. It is further possible that the
two times could come into coherence i.e. become one. All ‘coulds’ and ‘possibilities’ of
the previous few sentences must be realized in the Universe
In the local cosmos, the individual particles may each be regarded as having its own time.
The phenomenon of a single dominant time may have resulted from the particles being
brought into coherence or from an initial or near-initial coherence that resulted from the
conditions of formation. The phenomenon of a single time may be seen as the
coincidence of the individual times (referred to a base state e.g. absence of motion and
gravitational field.) ‘Light-speed’ would then appear to be a local constant and its
constancy would appear, even locally, to be contingent; there can, however, be no
universal speed of propagation of all interaction
The foregoing also indicates how the Theory of Mechanisms of formation may provide a
foundation for modern quantum theories and Einstein’s relativistic theory of gravitation
(the parallel between the properties of the void, discussed earlier, and the quantum
vacuum is interesting and suggestive as is the dual character of extension and duration in
the ‘origin’ of manifest being.) Obviously, these theories will not emerge of necessity
from the Theory of Being (the Void) but some further facts of the local cosmology will
be required. These thoughts provide material for the later section ‘Further investigation.’
Mind as a cosmological object from ‘06
In the section, ‘Mind,’ above, it was seen that (with justified and necessary extension in
meaning) mind is found among the primal elements of Being and that mind-as-manifest-
10
in-higher-organisms (e.g. animals) is an elaboration and layering of primal mind (it is
shown that this assertion is necessary to avoid classical and more recent paradoxes of
mind, that it is sufficient to resolve those paradoxes, and that, provided the nature of
‘primal mind’ is appropriately understood, the paradoxes and absurdities that have been
associated with ‘pan-psychism’ are avoided)
It may therefore be said, considering the entire Universe, that mind extends to the root i.e.
to the primal elements of Being
What is the case regarding the source or origin of mind in a cosmological system e.g. the
local cosmological system? Since mind extends to the root, there is no actual origin in the
cosmos. However, it appears that infusions of form, organization and layering are
possible. In parallel with earlier reasoning it is concluded that occasions of infusion are
much more likely than continual guidance of the local development of mind. What form
would or might an instance of infusion take? Very early in the history of the cosmos there
might be an alteration in the structure of the elementary particles that makes them capable
of higher forms of organization. Later, there might be infusions of complex molecules. It
is perhaps normally the case that such infusions are more likely than the import of well
developed being. Such considerations are of interest in tracking the history of life, of
mind in the cosmos but are not fundamental i.e. they would not be resolutions of
questions regarding origins (of life) and questions of substance (what is mind?)
(Resolutions are not needed since, in this narrative, the issues are already resolved by
more fundamental approaches but the considerations are of interest since they have been
proposed as resolutions by some writers. Such resolutions cannot be fundamental
resolutions for the distinction between this or that cosmos or this or that part of one is a
normal but not a fundamental distinction)
Status of substance as locally or practically fundamental from ‘06
As has been seen there is neither substance nor need for explanation based in substance.
However, relative to any cosmos, there may be kinds that play a local and practical role
of substance. In the local cosmos these may, perhaps, be taken to be the elementary
particles and forces (of modern physics.) For that assertion to be valid two requirements
must be satisfied, (1) that the cosmos (aspects labeled Mind and aspects labeled Matter)
has required no infusion for its formation and history and (2) the understanding that the
elements (particles and forces) are equally (primal) matter and (primal) mind. It would
then follow that life and animal-mind would be combinations, layers of combination and
elaboration
Atomism from ‘06
In an original meaning atoms (Greek atoma: things that cannot be cut… Democritus,
born c. 460 BC was a central figure in the development of an atomic theory of Being)
were indivisible fundamental particles. The idea provided an alternative to earlier
substance theories whose purpose was to understand the Variety of the world in simple
terms. To be ultimate in simplicity, an atom should have no internal structure. However,
if there is no internal structure, there can be (no explanation) of interactions between
atoms (e.g. a force field associated with an atom is either an unexplained substance or
requires structure.) I.e. an atom that is deterministic and ultimately simple can have no
(mechanism of) interaction. Atomic explanation has the deficiency that ‘stuff’ theories of
11
substance (Thales’ water, or Mind or Matter or mind and matter…) also have:
explanation terminates in the unexplained. Atomism can be seen as a kind of substance
theory. If there were no alternative, substance theories would, perhaps, be the best
possible explanation of manifest being even if not entirely satisfactory. However, in the
Metaphysics developed earlier that establishes the existence and character of the Void
there is an explanation that terminates and requires no even more fundamental
unexplained substance or entity. Metaphysical atomism faces a further problem. It
postulates novelty but is incapable of explaining further true novelty. The metaphysics of
the present narrative does not face these problems: it does not overcome them; instead, as
shown earlier, it shows them to be artifacts of a kind of explanation based in (invalid)
assumptions regarding ‘simplicity’
The atoms, elementary particles and fundamental forces of modern physics are not
intended to take on the role of metaphysical substance and (except when they are
proposed as such) in their role as nothing more than the best available explanation need
not address the issues of substance. Regarding material objects, the basic objects of
modern physics may be seen as locally and practically fundamental; although there is
speculation on their role in the locus of mind and consciousness in animal being their
actual role remains an open question (c. 2017)
Two Divides in the evolution of the local cosmological system from ‘06
Earlier in this section on cosmology a number of Divides were noted. These included the
‘first’ state of manifest being, the origin of a normal cosmological system and so on
Of these, two stand out as especially significant. (1) Origins of a cosmological system: a
coherent sub-manifold of the Universe, and (2) Origin of the free symbolic capability
These Divides, the first that marks the local cosmological system (often called ‘the
universe’ in common use) and the second that marks the origin of an especially human
form of adaptability are significant in what follows
12