deckchairs and a cup of tea

Er...

 

You can’t begin with an er...

 

Oh. In that case allow me to rewind.

 

Granted.

 

The time wheel effortlessly starts spinning backwards, as in anticlockwise.

 

You seem to have overdone things, Martin.

 

Yes, I’ve never been good at managing time.

 

I would have helped if you had asked.

 

True, but I didn’t ask so here we are, somewhere in the distant past.

 

Er...

 

I thought you said one can’t begin with an er...

 

I did, but that was before you rewound time to... wherever we are.

 

Zero point.

 

Zero point? You mean before the universe came into existence?

 

Technically, yes.

 

Technically? You mean this is but a technicality?

 

Yes, well, the universe isn’t quite all it’s made out to be.

 

I beg your pardon?!

 

As well you should, note taken, now kindly stop interrupting me – I have work to do.

 

Er… ok.

 

So here we are, dear subscribers – in a time before time, in a place before place, at or perilously close to zero point. You may be asking why I saw fit to come here, and the truth is I don't really know. It was a whim that I didn't suppress, that I simply acted upon.

 

Incredible, Martin, and at the same time freaky.

 

Yes, I agree, bro. Well, now that we’re here we may as well rearrange the deckchairs.

 

I beg your pardon, Martin, er...

 

Yes?

 

What deckchairs are you taking about?

 

Imagination is nine tenths of the law.

 

It is? Not possession?

 

Well, not exactly, but the idea’s more or less accurate. Deckchairs. Quit prevaricating. Just do it.

 

So I just need to imagine them?

 

Absolutely.

 

And what will that achieve?

 

Progress.

 

Progress?

 

Yes, Frank, we’ll see what’s next.

 

Oh.

 

Because without a next we're not really going anywhere, are we?

 

Good point, Martin. So I’ll just get imagining then.

 

Excellent, and while you're at it I'll pour myself a cup of tea.

 

Frank, to be honest, isn’t terribly good at imagining things, still less deckchairs, but he recollects deckchairs on the Titanic being rearranged even as the ship was going down and that takes him into a rather interesting realm of thought and fiction, while Martin noisily slurps a rather elegant Chinese cup of tea.

Er... I think I'm done Martin.

 

Let’s see... Martin brushes a speck of dust off his lapel, or that's what he seems to be doing when, in fact, he's reactivating Infinity Drive. Martin and Frank both now see the deckchairs being absorbed into a kind of field or dare I say – entity.

 

Is it a black hole?

 

Not exactly Frank. I call it Infinity Drive. It’s where your thoughts, in this case, your deckchairs, are the input which Infinity Drive is able to utilise in order to rearrange things accordingly, from this starting point.

 

Er... Ok...

 

Good, I'm glad we've cleared that up.

 

But what things, Martin?

 

Oh, things in general.

 

Things in general?

 

Precisely.

 

Er... I hate to badger you Martin, but what exactly do you mean by “things in general”? It’s rather vague, if you don't mind me saying.

 

Say away, Frank, all you like. No harm in speaking your mind.

 

Well?

 

Oh, I meant literally things, as in all things, in general, as in throughout all reality.

 

Oh! So you mean to say your Infinity Drive can take my feeble thoughts about deckchairs on the Titanic and rearrange everything in existence around them?

 

Yes Frank, that's about right.

 

But that's absurd.

 

Yes, I agree entirely. Absurd is indeed what it is.

 

Then there must be some kind of mistake, or misunderstanding?

 

None whatsoever.

 

But you yourself admit it’s absurd.

 

Indeed, I cannot deny it.

 

Then what’s your meaning, Martin?

 

Really Frank, I'm surprised at you. My meaning is simple and explicit. It’s “absurd” because any discussion of infinity, or what Infinity Drive is able to do, immediately falls into that category known as absurdity. There's nothing I can do about it. Infinity is incompatible with what we consider to be rational thought, or reasonableness.

 

It is?

 

Entirely, yes. It appears to be irrational or absurd, as indeed it is, to all intents and purposes, and yet that does not stop it from being true.

 

You mean to say that this little speck of dust you brushed off your lapel, which you referred to as Infinity Drive, is able to rearrange the entire universe from Big Bang to the present moment, without batting a proverbial eyelid?

 

Yes.

 

And I'm supposed to take it on trust?

 

No. How you take it is entirely your business. I merely answered your question in good faith. Infinity does not do things by half measures. It's all or nothing as far as infinity is concerned, and the speck of dust on my lapel is neither here nor there because Infinity Drive does not fit into the perceptional framework we refer to as 3D reality or this “universe”.

 

Then how do we know whether it's just something you've imagined?

 

The pudding, Frank.

 

The pudding?

 

Yes, Frank, the proof is in the pudding.

 

So you mean that if you’re telling the truth reality is now going to be noticeably, quantifiably or qualitatively different from what it was previously.

 

Should be Frank, yes, if your deckchairs were sufficiently well imagined.

 

Well I can't claim I did a great job, Martin. It's hardly my forte imagining deckchairs. I was more focused on the Titanic and the plight of those passengers and employees who were so close to their tragic demise.

 

Yes, very empathetic of you, dear Frank, but don't worry, I’m quietly confident that Infinity Drive was able to look through the mists of your imaginings and find whatever it needed to rearrange, whatever needs rearranging in reality.

 

Like what?

 

No idea.

 

But why do you even imagine things need rearranging, Martin?

 

Well, people in 3D reality are trapped in a world of things, straight lines, intersections, inertia and entropy. Their eye, you might say is off the ball of infinity and focused more or less exclusively on things, on coping, making ends meet, squaring the circle of moment with the implacable march of matter, of fact, of fait accompli, little suspecting that they are trapped on one side of mind, on the outer side, so to speak, little suspecting that the other side is accessible through imagination, through breath and consciousness, whatever that may or may not be.

 

Er... And you mean to say that physical reality can be superseded by this inner side of the circle, and that your Infinity Drive is somehow able to access it?

 

Well, that seems to be what I’m saying, though one never knows with words.

 

 No? Why not?

 

Because words are stuck on the outside of things, attempting to describe things using things, denoting and representing things to the best of our ability yet never quite succeeding – more or less guaranteed to fail, though not without worth or merit in trying to do what can't really be done.

 

Oh! You mean they can never succeed?

 

Well generally, yes, they’re always slightly out of tune, or ever so slightly displaced.

 

And there's nothing we can do to rectify this?

 

Do? We can feel it and be aware of it, and from time to time try the alternative.

 

The alternative? The other side?

 

That’s right. The inside, so to speak, where words are wholly absent or redundant.

 

Oh. A silent world of pure intent?

 

Well, that sounds very grand but one doesn't really perceive it as silence.

 

No?

 

No. We seem to be telepathic and these frequencies can be “heard”, in a manner of speaking.

 

So what about the universe? Can we see if it’s the same as it was before we tried this experiment?

 

Sure. Let me switch off my telephone.

 

Martin tosses his telephone into a void which seems to be waiting for the phone as it flies through the air, then vanishes.

 

You just threw away your phone, Martin? Isn’t that rather extravagant?

 

In for a penny, in for a pound, Frank. If I'm right about things, if Infinity Drive has done the trick then they'll be a perfectly good replacement phone waiting for me on the other side of the dividing line.

 

Er... Ok.

 

Energy cannot be created or destroyed.

 

So they say.

 

So anything I do here, outside normal reality, is equivalent to something that happens in a dream.

 

Except that we're not dreaming, Martin.

 

True, but try telling that to the telephone, or matter in general.

 

Huh?

 

As far as they’re concerned we’re offline, otherwise known as dreaming.

 

You could have fooled me!

 

Well yes, déjà vu ’n all that. But let’s see what happens if you mark yourself here on this side. Here, let me chop off one of your fingers.

 

Frank screams in terror.

 

No? Ok, well your hair?

 

So you have to?

 

How else are you going to test the hypothesis and be convinced?

 

Ok, you can cut my hair if I can cut yours.

 

Sure.

 

Half an hour later...

Now we just need to step back into regular 3D reality.

 

But how?

 

I think we should use the Titanic to complete the circle.

 

Do we have to?

 

No, but it’s probably the best option at this moment.

 

Ok. I hope this isn’t going to be too horrendous.

 

Er... It’s an imagining. Here goes – you apparently work on the Titanic and you are rearranging the deck chairs. Then it goes down and sadly you drown.

 

I do?

 

Yes, but don’t worry, it was just a past life so not entirely real, though it left memories and a certain aversion to swimming in the sea.

 

Oh.

 

Now here goes.

 

Martin shoves Frank backwards into story and both of them find themselves in medias res...

 

Er, what the heck’s that meant to mean?

 

In the thick of things.

 

And?

 

And Frank drowns rather horribly mid-Atlantic but notices another part of himself imagining /remembering all the above, and not unsurprisingly gravitates to that part.

 

OMG! Talk about intense! I can taste the salt water. I think I'm going to be sick.

 

Easy does it, Frank.

 

Frank takes some very deep breaths and slowly comes to, looking around, feeling green to the gills.

 

That was real, Martin, wasn’t it?

 

As real as this.

 

I actually died!

 

Well, you actually remember dying, but on the other hand you're not dead, so what gives?

 

Er... And my hair?

 

Well, look at mine. Is it still a mess?

 

No.

 

Yours neither. Martin takes his phone from his pocket, examines it.

 

So we were dreaming?

 

Apparently so, unless infinity connects both sides of “never the twain”

 

Never the twain shall meet?

 

Indeed.

 

In which case, your Infinity Drive...

 

Well yes. The mind boggles.

 

I wonder if anything else has changed in this world? Frank starts looking at things critically as a buyer might examining a used car from a dodgy dealer before making a purchase.

 

Well, the very act of looking at things critically and suspiciously already alters the balance, Frank. You’re no longer taking things for granted the way you did, are you?

 

Indeed.

 

You’re allowing gaps and anomalies in the fabric of reality to be detected, where previously you wouldn’t’ve.

 

I...

 

Unsettling, isn’t it?

 

I feel like...

 

Nothing is quite certain any more.

 

Yes.

 

Frank sinks to the ground, overpowered by the feeling of loss, bereft of a trusted buttress –  the assumption that everything was real and coherent...

 

Awooooo! Like a wolf howling to the moon. Awooooo! And Mother Nature, the illusive Field, herself alive if we be, pricks up her ears and answers to all who have ears to hear, silently to those who do not, with a speck of dust materialising on Martin’s pristine lapel.

 

0=1

heartrendingly

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Floyd and Dee discuss things

 

So it doesn’t actually exist?

Does anything?

 

Very funny, Dee.

 

No, but seriously – for something to exist it has to be beheld by you or me – it has to fit into our living world order – or whatever you want to call it.

 

I don’t agree, Dee. A house, a tree, a mountain – they all exist regardless of whether you or I are able or willing to see them.

 

Ok. I registered my doubts and concerns, and that will do at present. It’s a moot point, Floyd. We take our conscious awareness for granted because it’s all we’ve ever known, and because it seems to be unable to influence or affect the world we’re constantly in the process of apprehending, yet something tells me this consciousness thingy we’re so careless of is way more important than we realise. Something tells me it’s the difference between theory and practice – that in some way it actuates things – lifting them into a mind realm they wouldn’t otherwise be part of.

 

A mind realm? Is that how you see our reality?

 

Well, isn’t that what it is? It’s more than bricks and mortar, isn’t it? It’s reality as opposed to space-time-ality.

 

Ah – I think I see what you’re getting at.

 

In reality things exist – but only when they’ve been observed or registered here in reality by anyone able to do so.

 

And what about animals? Are they able to do so?

 

I don’t know. I guess so, yes – but really – I don’t know. Does it matter?

 

Well, it would be nice to know.

 

I agree – lots of things would be nice to know – but knowing more things, or too many things – locks you even further into the mind-clamp of matter – whereas consciousness itself doesn’t necessarily know things.

 

No?

 

Not necessarily.

 

Er… how do you mean?

 

It can, and perhaps should as much as possible – take in or register things – without trying too hard to “know” them, or fix them into a rigid order of things, definitions and interlocking hierarchies.

 

Er…

 

If we can tread lightly – mentally – and see things less as “things” and more as representative of an underlying quantum order – which isn’t thing based at all – which flows, fluctuates, flashes in and out of existence – or in and out of rival or opposing states, then we avoid the trap of concreting ourselves into one version, one state of matter.

 

Oh.

 

As then we, perhaps, become enslaved by our own mind's obsessive need to fix things in place – starting with ourselves.

 

Wait a minute – we don’t fix ourselves in place – what nonsense is that?

 

Don’t we?

 

No. We’re flexible. Some of us, at any rate do yoga – physical and mental yoga.

 

Great! But the mind – or the rational mind, if you like, has needs of its own – and if we don’t keep the balance between the things of physical reality – and the non-things of the quantum field more or less in balance – then we’re almost guaranteed to get locked in place. Like cement.

 

I don’t see why.

 

Correct. No one ever does unless they’re tuned into the quantum field – in which case they see how humanity is desperately trying to avoid the other.

 

?

 

What Milan Kundera calls the “unbearable lightness of being”.

 

Milan who?

 

Never mind, Floyd. He’s a writer, or was. He’s probably passed by now.

 

Oh.

 

Anyway – back to what I was saying about space-time.

 

Yes. It’s ridiculously arrogant of you to claim that you know better than all the greatest scientists of the last hundred years.

 

Yes, I agree. But that doesn’t alter the fact that space-time, as such, does not or cannot exist.

 

Groan! No one’s going to believe you, Dee.

 

And what? Since when did I need mass approval. Besides, this is a private conversation.

It is?

 

To the extent that any conversation can ever truly be private.

 

Precisely. Your quantum field puts the kibosh on things like privacy, does it not?

 

Well, yes, privacy doesn’t really mean much if everything and everyone are linked by a quantum field that has little or no respect for so called space, or time, for that matter.

 

Which is precisely why this is all a big mistake.

 

Look Floyd, I understand your difficulty, but we can’t spend the rest of humanity locked in Cartesian or Newtonian space. They were great while we were exploring the mechanisms of 3D reality, but they are now anachronistic.

 

Er… I’m not sure I fully understand the difference between Cartesian and Newtonian space, Dee – but in any case, they both recognized that there are dimensions which exist like a grid and which can’t just be ignored or circumvented.

Yes, that’s sufficient.

 

But how do you propose we can now just consign 3D reality to the dustbin of science?

 

Well, not the dustbin, Floyd. Each generation builds on the findings of the past. We had to really test the limits of space – the rules, if you like – in order to figure out discrepancies and vulnerabilities.

 

Like a hacker trying to get in to a protected system or site.

 

Yes. Hackers have to be smart. They look for vulnerabilities and doing so they get a better understanding of how things really work. But hackers are not the only ones.

 

No? How about burglars.

 

Yes. They do the same – but so do inventors, like the guys who were risking life and limb to get mechanical planes into the air at the end of the 19^th century, and the beginning of the 20^th. They were defying the scientific beliefs of the day – working on a hunch – determined to prove that machines heavier than air could get airborne no matter what the scientists thought and claimed.

 

Ok. So you think you can navigate gaps or corridors between normal space or time?

 

Yes, of course we can, in fact, we’re probably doing it already at the atomic level without even knowing how.

 

We are? I’ve never seen atoms flipping from one side of the universe to another.

 

Well let’s take it one step at a time, Floyd. 

 

ok

 

At the atomic level you are a vast agglomeration of atoms – like a nebula. You don’t have a body as such.

 

Ok.

 

Something somehow holds that agglomeration of atoms together – firstly – and secondly – enables them to move “together” – as a body, as one.

 

Well yes – we obviously have a body, or are a body so it goes without saying – a body by definition has to be able to hold together and move accordingly.

 

Yes, but understanding this process at the atomic level is fraught with difficulty.

 

I don’t see why.

 

Yes, because you take it for granted – thinking as you do from the level of a single body.

 

Well that’s because our body is real, Dee.

 

Yes, it is – meaning reality enables us to think and act at a higher or larger macro level. Reality allows this automatically so we give almost no thought to the complexity or impossibility of what it actually involves.

 

Complexity? Impossibility? I simply flex my muscles and move my arm, or my leg.

 

Simply, yes, within 3D reality – but at the atomic level 3D reality doesn’t really exist. There are just atoms which are somehow aligned or connected but as for moving them with muscles – there’s no such thing. The atoms are not themselves subject to muscular forces of contraction.

 

Then what moves the atoms?

 

Good question. We haven’t really given it much thought, have we?

 

Probably because it’s unnecessary. If I can move at the cellular or body level using muscles, why should I care about how the atoms themselves do so?

 

Because without understanding the underlying atomic level you’re never going to go beyond so called space-time. You’re going to be stuck with 3D mechanics based upon an incomplete or erroneous idea of what space itself, or time actually is.

 

Erroneous? How can it be erroneous if we’re able to measure it and operate successfully within it?

 

Within the 3D metrics it’s not erroneous, Floyd – but those metrics preclude any further development. We want to get our plane into the air, don’t we? We want to find the holy grail, so to speak – which means we need to figure out what’s missing.

 

And?

 

And what?

 

What’s missing?

 

Everything.

 

Well, I’m glad it’s just a minor detail like everything, Dee. I was concerned that it might have been something unwieldy, something fundamental – but if it’s “everything” as you put it – we have nothing to worry about. Jesus wept! Have you any idea how absurd this is, Dee? You’re telling me we’ve got everything wrong, or failed to see everything – in spite of the fact that we’ve built planes, rockets, nuclear reactors and incredibly advanced computer systems?

 

Amazing, isn’t it, Floyd, the extent to which we’ve managed to advance and squeeze through or past our limitations.

 

More than amazing, Dee, it’s downright miraculous, which is why I don’t believe a word of what you’re saying.

 

It’s the same with anything – you can only get so far using a certain kind of language or platform – they all have their structural limits. A body is no exception. Very few people live beyond a hundred – and if they do they’re usually decrepit.

 

Hardly surprising, Dee.

 

Yes, but the cells in your body are constantly regenerating so why can’t you?

 

Er… I’m sure there’s a perfectly logical explanation.

 

Of course there is, but it isn’t just a human body, Floyd.

 

No? Animals are the same, aren’t they.

 

Yes, but not just animals.

 

Ok, trees, bacteria, everything.

 

Yes, but not just organisms, Floyd.

 

What then?

 

Countries, civilizations, religions, any system we are able to identify.

 

But some countries like China are thousands of years old.

 

Yes, but they only survive if they go through death and rebirth – during which millions die and their very existence is temporarily suspended. But it’s more than countries or empires – we’re talking about anything that exists – like a fiat currency, for example – none of them last beyond a fairly clearly prescribed timespan.

 

And what’s your explanation for this?

 

Well, the first thing is to make the observation – and not to simply take it for granted or ignore it.

 

Ok – you’ve made your point. You’ve made an observation which seems rather obvious to me – things decay or they become outdated. I don’t see what we’re supposed to infer from this.

 

Firstly, we need to recognise that the word “things” applies equally to both organisms and non-physical things – such as even a language, a currency, a religion or a scientific system.

 

Ok. Things both physical and non-physical, biological and non-biological. You’ve made your point, but what does it mean? What can we learn from this?

 

Don’t you see, Floyd?

 

I see exactly what you’ve pointed out.

 

Yes, but what’s the connection? What can we conclude?

 

You haven't pointed it out yet.

 

Ok. Normally we assume that things that are physical and non-physical, or things that are biological and non-biological are wildly different, do we not?

 

Yes, I suppose so.

 

Whereas, there now appears to be a commonality between them all, doesn’t there?

 

Yes, all things decay or change into something almost unrecognizably different given enough time.

 

Good. So what’s holding it all together?

 

Huh?

 

What’s the commonality.

 

The what?

 

The common denominator.

 

Er… change?

 

Well yes – change is one, or part – but change itself is a constant, given enough time – whereas we see that most things, structures or forms manage to hold together and defy change for a certain period of time, until things collapse.

 

Then what?

 

I want you to think for yourself, Floyd.

 

Well change and a certain quality of "thingness" – like an identity – that holds things or organisms together while they grow bigger and stronger, until eventually they grow so old and weak that they collapse or break up.

 

Good. Do we have a name for that quality of thingness – which gives us a flute as opposed to a piano, Mandarin as opposed to Vietnamese, Christianity as opposed to Islam?

 

Er… I can’t think of a name for it, Dee. It’s just a natural process in which something emerges from the totality of anythingness – and then becomes discrete or defined – assumes a certain kind of personality – or certain traits or features which make it readily distinguishable.

 

Yes, Floyd – just like an identity, really – just like a person who is slightly, subtly different from every other person – just like a snowflake – every one of which is unique until it eventually melts.

 

Well, that’s all good and proper, Dee, but I don’t see how it’s going to get your plane into the air.

 

Ah – but we now need to ask what holds these things together.

 

We do?

 

What incubates them while they’re growing and establishing themselves.

 

Er…

 

What’s the substrate.

 

No, you’ve lost me there.

 

Like a seed growing in the earth. It can’t just grow without something that holds it in place. And it needs water, warmth, then light… all kinds of inputs. So what’s the substrate?

 

I – don’t – know.

 

Ok. I disagree, Floyd. I’m sure you know exactly what it is – but you’re ignoring it because like everyone else, you take it for granted.

 

Ok – Mr Genius – what do you think I’m ignoring?

 

Reality.

 

Reality? You think reality is like an incubator or a nursery – that reality is a thing that enables things both physical and non-physical to emerge and grow.

 

Well yes, what else could it be?

 

I don’t know. It could be God?!

 

Yes, we could call it God – but then a bunch of people are going to get religious and say that it has nothing to do with science, whereas we’re trying to understand the actual process in order to be able to hack the system and get our plane into the air.

 

Ok – we’ll say reality is in some way an agent or force that enables things to grow. Happy now?

 

Well, let’s see what we’ve got. If reality is not just a name for our space-time experience as we’ve assumed – but is actually a platform or mechanism that enables us to emerge into space time as bodies or entities, and likewise bring forth all matter of things within this so-called reality, then what does this imply?

 

I – don’t – know

 

Are you sure, Floyd? Perhaps you’re doing your best not to think it through. Perhaps something in your mind desperately doesn’t want you to join the dots and see the connections.

 

Whyever would that be?

 

I don’t know – it just looks that way. I can speculate – perhaps allowing yourself to see the way things really are threatens the existence of your current system. Any breakthrough – any revolution in how we see the world, or how we see things, can wreak havoc – can bring down the existing paradigm and enable the new one to emerge.

 

So I’m afraid of change, you’re saying?

 

Maybe we all are.

 

You don’t seem to be.

 

Oh, I’m afraid of change too, Floyd – just not this one – it’s already something I’ve had to face, process and accept.

 

Maybe the fear’s a good thing. Maybe it protects me from over-rapid or premature change?

 

Maybe, but reality, if I’m not mistaken, has already shifted so positioning yourself as an inertial brake is now an exercise in futility.

 

Did you say reality has already changed? How can you know?

 

Crazy, isn’t it. If I’m right – if 3D reality is already locked in the past – if we’ve already entered a new era, as I suspect, then things that were impossible to see are going to become clearer and clearer now. The old version of reality is now obsolete, the old King is dead, long live the King – a new one is waiting to be crowned.

 

And this new one – what is it?

 

Well, reality is something we’re becoming increasingly aware of as a thing in itself.

 

O – K…

 

We’re beginning to relate to it as a field – as something which is not just neutral space-time – as something which we have to experience.

 

So back to your conscious-awareness thingy.

 

Yes.

 

And experiencing reality changes the nature of things?

 

Yes, once we realise it’s a kind of field – which we’re part of – integrally – because our conscious-awareness is not something limited to my brain, and little electro-chemical reactions therein.

 

Oh.

 

It would have to be part of the field itself – extending out beyond the thing that is me or my brain – connecting into the electro-magnetic or psycho-physical field that reality comprises, or exists within.

 

Ah – you’re admitting you don’t know which of the two it is!

 

Absolutely – I have no idea – and perhaps that’s the way it should be. You can’t know everything, Floyd.

 

No? I thought that’s what you were striving towards.

 

Striving towards knowing what I need to know in order to grow into this new reality – yes – but recognizing and accepting the limits of what can or needs to be known in order to do so. Gorging ourselves on knowledge is no different to gorging ourselves on food. There always needs to be a healthy limit – a healthy awareness and acceptance of what cannot or should not be known or said or done

 

Or eaten

 

Or eaten at this moment in time – while I’m assimilating the new forms and things because for every 1 there has to be a zero – both data and things require space or silence or emptiness in which to grow and resonate, do they not?

 

I – don’t – know…

 

 

0=1
essentially