Is it a Quest for Novelty or simply the fundamental error rate of the cosmos? In my search for God, I value this reaching out into novelty just as much as I value the return to the Center of Perfection. And I keep wondering (reverently) whence comes this outward quest into novelty? But perhaps it all comes down to the fact that our universe just isn’t perfect, after all, but is subject to some mean failure rate. Perhaps there is some small chance that any particle of matter or energy could flip into its opposite expression at any time or at any place. This fundamental uncertainty would be what makes our cosmos lurch along at random, exploding into novelty as it expands.
So, according to this theory, the primum mobile is the expression of that inescapable potential for error in the cosmos. At some point in time (which didn’t exist until that moment) the Universe slipped out of Perfection and fell into Being. Naturally, there is a powerful force for the restoration of Perfection again (gravity), equal to the energy which broke it apart, but that potential for error in the cosmos just seems to keep pushing the universe further out into complexity. Perhaps, because of that error potential, there is no chance of restoring perfection, or stopping the cosmos from spinning out into ever increasing complexity, finally leading to darkness, chaos, and death. So now I don’t know whether the universe will finally contract back to a singularity again (Perfection) or if each universe just plays out until its heat death (the opposite pole of the Singularity) and then we wait for the cosmos to slip out of perfection again some time, falling into Being one more time. I look, but I see it both ways.
If the Universe were perfect, it wouldn’t exist; existence implies error. But there’s a flaw somewhere. Earlier I was writing about incorporating uncertainty into a non-binary logic for a computer. Suppose that at any place, at any time, there is always a chance – very small perhaps, but not zero – that “anything” might reverse into its opposite expression (remembering from Heraclitus that anything or any idea can only exist along with its opposite). Suppose that this is just a fact about our universe here – No; it isn’t perfect; there is always the chance that anything could suddenly flip into its opposite expression “without intervention”, i.e., without perceivable cause according to the known laws of physics. And perhaps this fundamental Uncertainty is one more of the laws of physics.
The good news is that it is this Error which allows our universe to come into being at all, for which I am thankful and grateful. As for this endless potential for uncertainty, it isn’t necessarily bad news – perhaps it is what accounts for the persistent novelty reaching into the Unknown with a new idea, and is responsible for all of the interest in this silly world of ours.
And what if that were the whole idea all along? Perhaps the Consciousness of God came into being with the first event or error. This particular universe with its Conscious God is alive and going on, gathering momentum as it expands. We always knew that nothing could be Perfect – there always has to be some flaw somewhere, or it can’t exist.
The Evanescent Press