Fundamental to the Implicit Cosmology is the idea that reality consists of Source, aspects of source and the expression of Source and its aspects. Seeing Source as the “top life fields” and its aspects as “life field,” then this is a discussion about the natural influences limiting association amongst fractals. The core concept in this essay is that a life fractal must have the same or similar perception about the nature of reality as the field with which it associates. As is discussed in other essays of this series, perception is a function of how the Perceptual Loop produces an image of reality.
For most people, treatment of this subject began by describing the substance of reality, generally referred to here as “etheric,” in terms of energy. The Handbook of Metaphysics even has a chapter dedicated to energy, and included an illustration showing an etheric energy spectrum showing possible relationships of increasingly subtle expression of the psi field, as parapsychologists refer to this concept today. The New Age and religious literature is full of references to energy as spirit energy, spirit and various predecessor name for psi such as od, chi or orgone energy. Strong points of view are expressed about the nature of this energy with some arguing it is electromagnetic and others arguing it is not propagated at all. Parapsychologists generally stay out of the arguments but neither do they provide meaningful, learned guidance.
In the study of Instrumental TransCommunication, a lot of time by researchers has been spent looking for the etheric-physical interface: if the physical is an aspect of the greater reality, then the physical must be a product of the greater reality, logically making physical energy in some way a product of the etheric. In that view, the ATransC website includes articles that explore the idea that etheric fields are precursors to electricity .
As I developed the Implicit Cosmology, it gradually dawned on me that the problem with the way I was defining it was that I was using an earth-centric model. In fact, the more useful model is soul-centric in which the formation of reality is in response to intention acting on perception. To say that in another way, the Implicit Cosmology is a foundation model and details such as how thought causes formative fields to order reality into ideoplastic objects that are experienced as solid tend to fall into the noise.
Given that there is some form of source from which reality has evolved, then there is a substance of that source from which reality is formed. This substance is addressed here as a conceptual material which is compliant to the expression of intention to form an imagined aspect of reality; an object of reality which comes into existence as the expression of personality.
This substance is referred to here as the etheric. Early efforts to discuss this substance usually involved use of the term “etheric energy”; however, while “energy” is conceptually the right term, it is too quickly associated with physical energy. It is important to maintain the understanding that this substance is better thought of as “mind stuff” than as physical energy, so the phrase, “etheric energy” is being set aside in favor of “etheric” which is usually described as “etheric field.” It is reasonable to think of reality as the etheric, etheric space or a hierarchy of clustered etheric fields.
With that said, the etheric is the matrix of reality. It is proposed in the Implicit Cosmology that this substance is differentiated according to intention to form various aspects of reality. It is also proposed that the greater reality can be thought of as the top organizing field. Further, that “within” reality are nested fields produced as various parts of the collective of life has sought to experience and understand the nature of reality. The physical universe is an aspect of reality and one of those nested fields.
While that is a lot to comprehend, the one point that is needed for this discussion is that between the source of reality and a personality which seeks to understand reality, there is a continuum of characteristics defining etheric space. This continuum ranges from its original state, which is the initial expression of Source, to whatever personality has expressed as personal reality. The change in characteristic of the etheric from Source to personal reality constitutes a change in character which adheres to the rule of association described in this cosmology as the Principle of Agreement:
Personality must be in perceptual agreement
with the aspect of reality with which it will associate.
Not enough is known about the nature of the etheric to speculate what changes in its nature as it is differentiated by personality. Until more is known, “perception” is used in this cosmology to denote its distinguishing characteristics.
In the physical, “states of mind” can be identified which, when compared to other states of mind, might be very different. For instance, being a New Yorker is very different from being a ranch hand in the West. In a conceptual sense, one cannot be the other without changing state of mind. Here, “state of mind” is synonymous with perception, and it is correct to say that a New Yorker and a western ranch hand are probably not in perceptual agreement.
The Etheric and Organizing Principles
The existence of organizing principles (some call them “Natural Law”) is a fundamental tenet of many systems of belief. The assumption is that there are rules which govern the behavior of everything in reality. Further, it is assumed these rules are everywhere the same (universal) and cannot be violated (immutable).
An equally long-held assumption of many belief systems is that personality (usually soul or spirit) experiences a progression in maturity from the relatively naive personality to the very mature. Further, it is thought that the purpose for this progression is in response to an inherited imperative to experience, understand and “return” this understanding to “the source.”
The two beliefs are contradictory, in that Natural Law requires that it never changes and “returned understanding” requires that the source is still learning. If it is learning, then the nature of its emanations will change accordingly. Current research suggests that personalities do experience a progression and that this progression results in a change in the energetic characteristics of personality. This concept is supported by the emerging understanding of etheric fields and the concept of “informed visualization.”
In this cosmology, “Organizing Principles” is used instead of “Natural Law.” The organizing principles are thought to evolve with Source’s increased brought by the progression of its aspects. As such, there should be a gradual change in character of the etheric as personality progresses from “local” aspects of reality to Source.
With these basic organizing principles in mind, all else should be considered local organizing rules. For instance, the Natural Law referred to as balance is probably constant and immutable for the physical aspect of reality, but it may have no relevance in the greater reality. In fact, its validity beyond the physical should be considered indeterminate at this time.
The etheric energy exists as perception based on worldview and organizing principles. The nature of the energy is poorly understood. To say that it appears to be independent of time and space as it is experienced in the physical is only to describe the local characteristics of etheric energy. How it behaves beyond the physical is much more a matter of speculation. Thus, it will have to be enough for now to simply call it etheric energy.
The information represented in etheric energy can best be described as the formative information represented by associated morphic fields. That information is based on informed visualization and the creative process.
The governing principles represent rules by which the energy responds to intentionality and manifests as fields. These rules should not be considered principles of Natural Law, as they also represent the unique character of energy in its associated aspect of reality. An example might be that reality on the “other side” of the “veil” is more conceptual than in the physical. Also it apparently more readily responds to intentionality than it does in the physical.
An important result of the embedded nature of governing principles is that they result in a naturally occurring partitioning of reality based on the differences in characteristic from one aspect of reality to another. In other words, there is no rule of authority on high dictating that a personality cannot go some “place” in reality. It is the energetic nature of the personality which limits its mobility. That, in turn, is under the direct control of the personality. See the Creative Process.
Examples of Inherited Principles
This is part of a plot of the Mandelbrot Set discussed in the article on imaginary space. The plot is made by selecting every point in the field as the beginning factor “C” and repeatedly calculating the formula, Z n+1 = Zn2 + C where Z0 = C while using the new result for “C” until the result either approaches infinity or stabilizes at some number less than infinity. The black area is referred to as the “Apple Man” fractal and represents regions plotted when the formula does not go to infinity. The colors are assigned to represent the relative number of iterations that can be made for each point before the calculation reaches infinity.
In effect, each point in the three-dimensional space is defined by the formula and the way the formula is calculated. (This compares to the creative process.) Based on the characteristic of this imaginary aspect of reality, an object of this reality (represented by a point in the X, Y, Z field) is only stable (able to inhabit) in the areas represented by the fractals. This is determined by the beginning point in the calculation which would be comparable to personality’s maturity, which is in turn, based on alignment of worldview with nature.
An interesting aside is that the fractals represent “attractors” toward which an imaginary personality is drawn as it seeks stability. The top fractal (right) might be likened to the source. While personality might be stable for a time in one of the lesser fractals, it is inevitably attracted to the top fractal.
Consider the three automobiles shown here. All three were “modern” when they were first introduced. What is considered modern is a function of worldview, so it can be seen that the prevailing worldview has changed from the 1903 Ford to the current day.
In the Trans-survival Hypothesis, a change in worldview represents a change in the energetic nature of the personality and related objects of reality. The design team for the 1903 car could not have designed a 2012 car. Ignoring the lack of technology, the designers probably could not have conceived of one. As a morphic field, the concept of a car in 1903 was a relatively immature field as compared to the current version. Thinking of a morphic field as a “habit of nature,” then that habit has evolved as people’s sense of beauty has matured.
The idea of an evolving morphic field suggests that evolution of designs, at least, represents a forward evolution that includes retro-compatibility since a modern designer should have no problem replicating a 1903 car.
All of this goes to the argument that understanding evolves. While a concept may be constant, how it is expressed evolves as worldview evolves. In the same way, energetic agreement is an expression of how concepts are explained to people. For instance, in the late 1800s, Spiritualists commonly described their etheric guides as Indians. Today, it is more common to identify a guide as a respected scientist or teacher, depending on the worldview of the medium. It is probable that both are the same personality fulfilling the same purpose, but American Indians were often seen as guides in the 1800s, while contemporary people are more immediate for people today. Someone like Albert Einstein is energetically more compatible with people today than is someone like Silver Birch, an important guide in early Spiritualism.
So it can be seen that the prevailing worldview of society evolves so that a person of today is considerably more mature than a person in the late 1800s.
Geology: The prevailing worldview of a community also represents an energetic nature. For instance, a person raised in rural Kansas would likely find life in downtown new York City a challenge, and of course, visa versa. There is a difference in the characteristic of energy associated with different parts of physical space just as there is in etheric space.