Information, Energy And Entropy: A Proof Of Individuality
 |
| I'm Brian Joseph Johns. That's magenta by the way, not purple. I'm not really a purple kind of guy. |
First of all, I am not a Jehovah's Witness. In fact, I'm completely an atheist and do not believe in any religion whatsoever.
I don't believe in the holy spirit either or any aspect of religion that denies a person their own individual identity and the dignity of the freedom to cooperate and collaborate rather than being forced to relinquish one's efforts for nothing, whether they be physical or intellectual in nature.
I don't believe in spirit possession, thetans or anything of that sort that takes away individual identity and creates the justification for others to steal the output of such people they choose to victimize, even erasing them altogether.
As stated, this isn't a gripe post, but I have to admit that just about every waking moment of my life, I'm subject to abuse by others in my home community of Regent Park in downtown Toronto, Ontario, Canada that denies me my own living identity. As if there were some kind of cult that denies the existence of persons, yet siphons their output from them to give to the credit of others. Worse, when I protest such treatment, I'm labeled as being schizophrenic, or addicted to crack cocaine or heroin, or labeled in some way that is used (illegally) to stigmatize me in some way so that others do not listen to me or take my claims seriously.
I am not mentally ill. I don't use, buy or sell narcotics. I am NOT John Marshall. I am not Totes Jelly. I'm not Bernard. I did however work for Ferretina Film Production Ltd from 2001 until 2004. The longest of the original employees, next to Bernard. This isn't about Ferretina by the way, but it is connected to this and likely to the attempts to deny me of my own identity and individuality. I'll be taking that on legally and with every bit of truth and revelation very soon, but for now we'll stick to this related issue without getting into that.
Despite being an atheist, I do believe in everyone's right to believe as they choose, and to act upon those beliefs where they don't violate the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights of the United Nations and in my own country of Canada, the Charter of Rights And Freedoms and the Human Rights Act.
It is unfortunate that we live in an age where our individuality and even our individual identity is being whittled away more and more by others who are apparently against human rights and individual identity altogether.
Many hundreds of years ago, perhaps over a thousand and during the dark ages, humankind set about committing one act of atrocity after another against their fellow humankind in a long string of similar atrocities that came before them. Many of those atrocities were born of superstition and belief. Many were also born of ignorance. Born of ideas based around the falsehood that some cultures are superior to others. Born of eugenic beliefs, limiting the rights of procreation based upon lineage or visible qualities of a person. Born of differences insofar as belief is concerned.
Civilization has improved every century for thousands of years, yet it still struggles on some issues, and still burns its share of witches and warlocks too. A thousand years ago, many of those labeled as witches and warlocks would be the rights activists, environmentalists, scientists and free thinkers of today. Not necessarily everyone who opposes "the system", or espouses populist values pitting rich and poor against one another, but rather, people who are unafraid of non-conformity and individuality and fearless in expressing their opinion where it doesn't coincide with the status quot.
It doesn't necessarily mean just contradicting everything and everyone in order to maintain some rule of opposites and the semblance of a contrived form of polarity. I mean if we did that, forced everyone to think in such terms, we'd all have our consciousness confined to railroad tracks. Perhaps the allegory that author Ayn Rand was alluding to in her book Atlas Shrugged?
I feel that this Monty Python skit perfectly illustrates my point in that regard, and quite humorously at that.
Regardless, individuality does not mean the inability to cooperate and collaborate. In fact, all of the best things humankind have ever achieved have arisen from collaboration and cooperation more so than forced servitude. The freedom to choose to work with others rather than being forced to relinquish one's own individuality entirely.
We were here, and so was I.
Despite the fact that there is no letter u or i in the word We, We doesn't exist without you or I. I wrote a poem about that many years ago.
The previous statement really clarifies what I meant. Of course, Nintendo had to come along and invent Wii. I still play Wii occasionally.
When people express ideas that are too profoundly liberating for society at that given time, they are often silenced. Not by the Government or the Police, though that sometimes does happen, but by society itself. That's exactly what I meant by this statement at the top of this site:
Colour symbolism: It's the only prison where the prisoners are both the prison guards and maintain the walls and bars that keep them imprisoned.
That's just one concept that illustrates my point in this post and that point is that society often espouses values that are better heard, than actually put into practice. When as a free thinker you express ideas that expose this hypocrisy, you'll understand what I mean unless others choose you to be the figurehead for free thinking and truth. In other words, its more important to some people that a specific person says something, than the person who originally pointed it out and that's because as soon as you express such ideas, being understood to be the person who expressed those ideas becomes a form of power, and a means to sway people to a particular side of the fence where there is polarity.
So when someone in history said something that changed things, the more this happened, the more that people became aware that challenging such stagnating ideas in society is a form of power and the means to iconify people. If you are part of a system whereby there is conflict between two or more sides, then having this person on your side is the means to lure others to your cause. Even if such a person is NOT a part of your side of such conflict.
When people recognized such power, they realized that socially, they could literally take anything from anyone and attribute it to a completely different person, while denying the individuality and identity of the person who initially spoke up.
Maybe they were possessed. Maybe they were being remotely controlled by your more powerful team. It doesn't matter what the explanation is that would justify taking from someone else their history and identity, as long as enough other people believe it. So it doing this doesn't even require truth at all. It just requires a convincing enough effort to fool enough people into believing it, and you can resign one person's efforts and history to that of another person, especially if it would benefit a particular side of a conflict.
Some explanations of this nature that result in this sort of thing operate according to the symbolism of colours. If I come up with a great idea, and I wear a white shirt while I walk around outside, there are some ideologies that operate under the premise that I'll lose that great idea and that it will float off of me and stick to everyone wearing black. This symbolism is not a delineation of skin colour, because nobody has black skin and nobody has white skin. So put that idea away. We all have different skin colour from one another. All of us at the most minute of levels, so we're all unique in that way.
Consider that in order for us to gain knowledge through the symbolism of colours, that the information related to that knowledge must be contained in light, because colours are simply different wavelengths of light, or at the quantum level, they're the distribution of different probabilities relating to their possible position and momentum. When light hits our shirt, it interacts with the atoms of our shirt, knocking photons from the atoms in numbers and frequencies that equate to the colour of the shirt. Those photons then continue (forever), possibly hitting the optic nerves of other onlookers and are interpreted by our sensory and cognitive organs to become perceived as what we visualize as colour.
When the light hits out shirt, there is no transmission of information between our body and the shirt or the reflection created that results in us seeing the shirt as a particular colour (or shade). So you could say that it is very highly improbable that any information contained in our memory has somehow become copied and transferred to the light reflecting off of our clothing and eyes to imbue some kind of hidden information transmission between people based upon the symbolism of colours.
That's one assertion, that holds a scientific basis in objective truth that could at some point in the near future and possibly even now be proven in repeatable experiments.
Another fact is that even if there was information somehow encoded from our memory into the reflected light that hits our clothing and eventually the eyes of others, that our eyes or bodies have no means of information decoding for such encoded information within light. Consider that we are bombarded every single day by light from many different sources. One of the biggest sources of light is our nearest star, Sol. The Sun.
Consider that the process of nuclear fusion that powers the sun and creates the light that reaches us after the photons have made a precarious journey taking ten thousand years to reach the surface of the sun from the source of fusion, finally to make the last 8 minute and 26 second trip to the surface of the Earth at the speed of light, that sunlight too must have information encoding as well related to the process of fusion. The information however would be akin to a giant random number generator. Nearly perfect random noise. In other words, from every star whose light makes it to the surface of the Earth, we're exposed to random noise resulting from the production of that light.
So we're exposed more so to random noise than we are encoded information, though that seemingly random noise has meaning to Astronomers because it reveals details about the nature of these stellar furnaces, but for the rest of us, its just a light frequency and "light" noise (and vitamin D too).
So if light did in fact, carry information that our bodies could somehow decode and use to expand our knowledge (other than photosynthesizing vitamin D from the Sun), we are exposed to far more noise than we are meaningful information at the level of human consciousness. That means that the light noise is far more "loud" than the allegedly meaningful information encoded in light by our bodies that allegedly enables us to absorb the ideas, history and consciousness of other people according to the colours of clothing that we wear and our eye colours. It would be like standing beside an ignited SpaceX Falcon rocket engine, and trying to listen to a quiet lullaby playing on a tiny pair of speakers.
So that is another scientifically feasible assertion that such an idea is nearly impossible, but even that much proof isn't enough. So lets go the route of information theory to bury this thing once and for all.
Consider that maybe, amongst this stellar light noise, that there's something that sparks thought or the gleaning of some hidden information and that it arises as a result of the randomness of light noise.
This light noise is an expression of probability. That is, it contains every wavelength of light, and that each of those wavelengths could be considered a component of information. Like the letters of the alphabet. In fact, if you took the alphabet, and equally distributed it across all of the frequencies of this light noise in such a way that the presence of that frequency, would spit out that letter, then we could theoretically see if there's any meaningful information in that noise. The way we'd recognize any meaningful information is by way of the formation of identifiable patterns. Not necessarily any words or sentences, but just strings of patterns of letters that defied the idea of randomness.
Now, if you believe that somehow in this randomness, that the universe might cause the production of information or some kind of spark in our minds or consciousness that results in ideas, creativity or even our own predetermination, then that should be reflected by some form of pattern in the letters we've applied to represent each of the frequencies of light.
Sure, we'd see information related to the spectrum of light coming from stars, relating to the process of fusion and the elements that stars are composed of and the elements that are a byproduct of fusion, but no other discernible or meaningful pattern would emerge (unless you were an Astronomer or Physicist).
Even if you had a computer spit out the letters and punctuation that represent these frequencies of light, and let it run for a few billion years, it wouldn't produce more than a few words of meaningful English which brings me to my point. That for there to be any such information somehow encoded into randomness, there has to be a pattern that we could distinguish as having some form of complexity in regard to information. Even if you let this computer run, spitting out the representation of incoming light as mapped to the alphabet and punctuation, you'd still end up with nothing more than maybe a string of two, possibly three words. Billions of years.
The reason is that information has structure that defies randomness. For instance, in any given page of written English, we have a series of probabilities for the occurrence of letters, because not all letters appear equally in English or any language for that matter. The symbols of Chinese do not equally appear in any written Chinese text. They too have probabilities and probability that defies random occurrences is exactly what information is. Information breaks the rules of the fact that any letter can occur in any written line of language, and any truly random system as a result CANNOT produce more than a few words in a run, even given billions of years. So you'll never end up with William Shakespeare's complete works or even the first sentence of Charles Dicken's A Tale Of Two Cities.
That's actually a mathematical proof and this is something that is built into the universe at the most fundamental level.
That doesn't mean that on a nice day that you won't feel inspired (or not). It just means that there is no hidden system of information transmission between human beings that is based upon the colours that we wear and the light (or darkness) between, other than psychology and sociology.
One Last Possibility
That doesn't however rule out other possibilities that would expose the possibility of collective consciousness or something close to it.
You see, our bodies are constantly in a state of electro-chemical communication via our nervous system and as is expressed by Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism, a current passing through a conductor produces an electromagnetic field, and an electromagnetic field passing through a conductor produces a current.
Now considering that our nervous systems are a cesspool of information relating to our bodily processes (such as hormone production, homeostasis and many functions involving the brain), that would mean that our bodies emit a magnetic field that contains all of that information encoded within the field. It would also mean that the similar magnetic fields of others could affect our body, both beneficially and detrimentally, especially where such benefit and detriment involved the alteration of hormone production.
However, our bodily biomagnetic field would be very tiny and of little power, but it also remains one of the last frontiers of study about the human body and could be the key to unlocking understanding of phenomenon. Current theories suggest that our brains are hardwired for individuality and that our brains take advantage of the Quantum properties of the universe. In this case, collective thought would be an invasive process and would arise as a side effect of Maxwell's equations and the laws of electromagnetism, possibly coupled with Quantum Physics concepts like entanglement and non-locality.
Study in this area could also bring light to the possibility that crowd psychology is actually an emergent property of the combination of the biomagnetic fields of all involved in such a crowd, and that crowds or groups actually collectively take on the characteristics of an individual, and can be psychoanalyzed as such, helping to predict violence from such crowds.
If such groups attacked solitary individuals, then might it be possible that such methods could be used to radicalize victims to violent behaviour or sudden attacks? There is certainly much evidence to support this idea given the number of violent outbursts and mass shootings over the last two and a half decades, coupled with social ideologies that involve mass stalking and mass harassment. In most cases, the decision to act out with violence is the triggering of the body's fight or flight syndrome. An aspect of our hormone production and physiology that has evolved over a very long time to help us in situations where our ancestors needed to benefit from strength, endurance and even anger more so than logic and reasoning in order to survive sudden threats. In such a situation, it could be said that we truly lose our control and that we are acting on instinct alone rather than free will.
Finally: Lies And The Social Aspect
One last possibility to consider is that when a large group of people decide that you are no longer yourself, who is right? It is possible for a bunch of people to gang up on one person and deny them their own identity. I mean corruption operates that way regardless of which side of the fence you're on. When any group of people conspire to deny an individual of their own identity and truth, that could be said to be corruption and even organized crime. This seems to be a very common aspect of modern society and one that is ever growing.
I mean if a large group of people had been perpetuating a lie for a very long time, how much incentive would there be to overturn that lie, especially if it involved someone's freedom? The more people involved in such a lie, the less likely it would be exposed.
So replacing my identity with that of other people seems to be along that degree of extremity. Its a lie and the more people that take part in it, the harder it is from which to liberate one's self. I'm certain this sort of thing is happening to others as well.
In the former version of this post, I ended it with a long winded rant. The result of harassment by some people in my community and my neighbours, some of whom are a part of the cult responsible for such activity.
In the interest of credibility's sake and so this post is taken seriously, I trimmed that rant from the post, though I did mean what I stated. What I am speaking of here is likely happening to a lot more people, so I'd prefer that it reflects that aspect as I'd like to see us freed from such abuse and identity denial. I mean its not like I'm possessed by a disembodied spirit or affected by the colours of clothing that I or someone else wears, or something of that nature. Really, it comes down to how we're treated as people and individuals.
I could have sat down yesterday and written several chapters to one of my books, but I chose not to because I don't social reward abuse and the abuse I experience doesn't come from the Government or law enforcement or anything of that nature. Consider it to be more like a group of people on the sidelines attempting to rile up two frustrated dogs in order to have them fight one another, as a form of social entertainment. The corruption of which I speak, is the social ideology that allows this to happen and to continue unchecked.
I'll continue my writing some other time soon.
Brian Joseph Johns
