What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

tonylang

Registered Senior Member
The LINE Scenario: A Thought Experiment;

Earth is gone. Complements of some natural occurrence, you name it. Perhaps a primordial black hole or giant rogue planet that happens to be passing through this solar system which sends the Earth into direct collision with Jupiter. Or perhaps there is an immense solar flare that perturbs Earths' orbit, sending our magnificent crucible for life careening into the sun. Result? All that you, and I, and your pet otter were, every cell and every DNA molecule, every atom that was on, or in the Earth, is now ionized nuclear fuel within the sun. The Darwinian evolved chemistry and biology that many fall back upon to describe life on Earth, particularly human life, has ceased to exist in this solar system. Along with its thermodynamically described chemistry and biological processes once used to describe the entirety of Earths' ecosystem.

Additionally, imagine if you will that there is life elsewhere in this universe. Let us imagine there exists at least one other evolved ecosystem (ECO-2) capable of hosting Darwinian life. Different from Earth but governed by the same laws of physics and biology and thermodynamic processes that manifested Earths' ecology. This planet orbiting a viable star may be located anywhere in this universe since the laws of physics are expected to be consistently applied throughout. Also for this anecdote, let us say that this other bastion of life is some 10 billion light-years from Earths' sun. A distance so vast it would take much longer than the age of the big-bang to relativistically travel that distance, assuming, of course, there were any classically defined remnants of ones' biology left to make the journey.

The question becomes; could you or I or any individual formerly hosted by Earth's ecology ever find oneself a part of ECO-2s' ecology? Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could at some point find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2, just as we were born on Earth to species indigenous to Earths' ecology? If one adheres solely to the classically understood, thermodynamically described, relativistically constrained mechanisms to explain life writ large then you are forced to say no, and in so doing you would necessarily be Earth and human-centric as one discounts the rest of the cosmos. Because in nature, what is possible here is necessarily possible elsewhere, ergo; if you can live here, you can live anywhere. And yet, clearly, some aspect of what biologically, thermodynamically, chemically, defined ones' singular existence on Earth, must relativistically (Below the speed of light) travel to bridge the unbridgeable distance between your last physical location, Earths' solar system, and ECO-2s'.
 
You mean could humans live elsewhere in Universe? Sure why not?
Your reply is appreciated. No, I mean; Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could at some point find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2, just as we were born on Earth to species indigenous to Earths' ecology? The point of the thought experiment is; Earth and all Earth-life gone.
 
Last edited:
This would seem ostensibly to be a religious question, and not one for which science would offer an answer. By that I mean that it is asking about some sort of reincarnation on ECO-2 by an ex-inhabitant from Earth. This is not science. It postulates a "you" that is more than, and separate from, the collection of atoms, molecules etc, that science concludes we are made of. You even answer your own question with regard to science.
Yet this is the science section of this forum.

Or is your question simply whether an atom from earth could ever find its way 100-billion lightyears away?
 
The proposal being made is that if you can live in one viable habitat, i.e. Earth, then the very laws of physics that guide our scientific method demand that you can also live in any other viable habitat i.e. ECO-2 in this universe. Ergo; Earth is not special, at least not that special. The distance factor (10B LY) is the interesting bit. How can one be naturally reinstantiated (born) elsewhere regardless of distance and with no physical travel (no comets or spacecraft or photons from Earth can reach ECO-2)?

The trouble most will have with this realization is one's individuality has always been misperceived to be instantiated by one's host form, one's species. However, the atoms and molecules that compose your body, is a part of the current indigenous ecosystem, Earth or ECO-2. The demand this realization makes upon all cognizant living beings is the acceptance of the abstraction of one's current host form (body) from your universally mobile position of view (POV), one's individuality. This implies the universal mobility of individuality and demands a natural, scientifically describable mechanism for its implementation. Earth's, ECO2's and all viable ecosystems and their individuals are in perpetual motion through space. Velocities and distance between viable habitats and their indigenous host forms, great or small, are thereby relative and necessarily inconsequential to the instantiation of individuality.
 
Last edited:
No, I mean; Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could at some point find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2, just as we were born on Earth to species indigenous to Earths' ecology? The point of the thought experiment is; Earth and all Earth-life gone.
If I understand Robert Hazen, it depends on the mineral distribution and planetary climate conditions that evolve the type of emergent life. A planet similar to earth would probably produce a similar ecology and life-forms. As for human type of intelligence, that may be more problematic.

IMO, human intelligence was not a result of normal and gradual evolutionary processes, but from a "chance beneficial genetic mutation", that yielded an extraordinary result. If we look at the normal evolutionary trajectory of our great ape cousins, it seems that humans are much smarter that we need to be. And there is the drastic mutational event that fused 2 chromosomes in our common ancestor that produced chromosome 2 in humans not too long before we split off and left the forest.

Note: Of all hominids, only humans have 46 chromosome and have complex "extraordinary" intelligence (chance mutation). All other great apes have 48 chromosomes and have comparable simple but "sufficient" intelligence (evolution via natural selection).

Earth life forms can't even live everywhere on Earth.
I think that is underestimating the variety of life on earth. There is life in even the most inhospitable local conditions, from deep ocean, to deep earth, to deep air, it seems that all local conditions host living organisms.
Witness: extremophiles, which require a extreme environment, and tardigrades, which can survive the greatest variety of strange environmental conditions, including space!

Life in the upper troposphere
However, in a recent study believed to be the first of its kind, researchers used genomic techniques to document the presence of significant numbers of living microorganisms – principally bacteria – in the middle and upper troposphere – that section of the atmosphere approximately 8–15 km above the Earth’s surface.
www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/2308-life-in-the-upper-troposphere
 
Last edited:
The proposal being made is that if you can live in one viable habitat, i.e. Earth, then the very laws of physics that guide our scientific method demand that you can also live in any other viable habitat i.e. ECO-2 in this universe.
This seems to be begging the question: a viable habitat is, by definition, one that is capable of supporting that which is deeming it viable. So from a purely intellectual point of view, humans can live in any viable habitat on the basis that "viable" means being able to support life. So, sure, if ECO-2 is capable of supporting human life then it is, as defined, capable of supporting human life.

However, if by "viable" you mean "capable of supporting life in general" then your assertion is clearly false. Humans could not live on earth more than 550 million years ago. The atmosphere would not support our existence. Yet life had existed on this "viable" habitat for hundreds of millions of years.
Ergo; Earth is not special, at least not that special.
That does not follow from what you have stated. Or at least remains unexplained as to what you mean by "special" which would make this perhaps not the non sequitur it currently seems.
The distance factor (10B LY) is the interesting bit. How can one be naturally reinstantiated (born) elsewhere regardless of distance and with no physical travel (no comets or spacecraft or photons from Earth can reach ECO-2)?
And now you're back into either religion, or simply unscientific meandering. Either that or maybe you're still not wording your question adequately. Perhaps you've forgotten about biology, and how "life" procreates?
The trouble most will have with this realization is one's individuality has always been misperceived to be instantiated by one's host form, one's species. However, the atoms and molecules that compose your body, is a part of the current indigenous ecosystem, Earth or ECO-2. The demand this realization makes upon all cognizant living beings is the acceptance of the abstraction of one's current host form (body) from your universally mobile position of view (POV), one's individuality. This implies the universal mobility of individuality and demands a natural, scientifically describable mechanism for its implementation. Earth's, ECO2's and all viable ecosystems and their individuals are in perpetual motion through space. Velocities and distance between viable habitats and their indigenous host forms, great or small, are thereby relative and necessarily inconsequential to the instantiation of individuality.
Care to actually explain what you're trying to say, 'cos at moment it just seems like unscientific word-salad? Sorry.
 
Naturally invasive scenarios such as this don't reveal questions posed by individuals, but questions posed by nature. Such scenarios essentially ask; how could it be otherwise? Such questions reveal their own answers to any species sufficiently developed to comprehend and honestly confront them. The point of this scenario is the inescapable conclusion that each individualized instance of life must involve a non-classical, non-local, relativistically unconstrained, scientifically describable, naturally recurring component. This individualizing phenomenon must exist separately and distinctly from any local physical form and must be definable by some discretely quantifiable property of nature with degrees-of-freedom much greater than that of matter. Such a mechanism may also not be indigenous to this universe but instead is native to the underlying Hilbert-space, or 'Metaverse' if you will. This need for non-locality is necessary to instantiate individuality not just on Earth while it exists and is viable, but also within the systems and galaxies of this vast Higgs constrained universe, and throughout nature.

The only life that has ever existed on Earth is the living cell, in all of its forms. The aspect of being and individuality had by a single living cell is that which defines all life, no more and no less is required. This aspect, which instantiates the first person being of a single cell as a living individual every bit as alive as any multi-cellular creature, is the position of view (POV). All of the skills and talents that tend to distract from this fact are only emergent features of the host form. Beneath it all is ones' POV. In this universe, there isn't one implementation of life for mammalian forms and another for insects, and yet another for vegetation or microbial forms of life. Nature is an efficient system of cause and effect, and life is one holistic effect. It isn't my intention to change anyone's' mind on this topic. Rather, to expose open-minded readers to a new and practical way of thinking about a very old, perhaps the most personal of all ideas known to humankind. The recognition of a unique and scientifically plausible description of how nature governs not only species but the individual, you. There is a very good chance, as is often the case with such invasive ideas about nature that I and everyone who reads this volume would be long gone before either the capability or the courage to prove or disprove the LINE hypothesis is achieved. However, every first step is worth taking.

The natural processes that implement life are the same for the cell as it is for the bacteria as it is for a fruit fly as for a human being. It is folly for us to think we could only experience life in this very temporary, randomly emerged bipedal primate form. Further, your cells and molecules come and go continuously over the course of your lifetime. Nonetheless, you remain you. Then there are the other trillions of living individuals in millions of different forms all around us coming into being and going out of life continuously. I realized that the only form we need to consider in this regard is the single living cell. The answers that are true for the cell are the answers that apply to all life.

Furthermore, you and I and your pet octopus and every living cell are instances of life, each a temporary instantiation of some natural, empirically definable phenomena of nature. This instantiating phenomenon must have the relativistically unconstrained reach to establish individual life (you), biological or perhaps otherwise, on any planet orbiting any star or indeed in any viable environment in the cosmos or in existence where viable hosts may emerge. It is a tragic mistake to feel that this describes something that could not possibly be natural, but must be supernatural. While, as usual, natures' genius is a practical and ubiquitous, even if a bit unfamiliar implementation. There is a phenomenon known to science for some time that meets all of these requirements: Quantum Entanglement (QE). Einstein called it spooky action at a distance. Today we play with it in the lab as a mere tech curiosity. It is the most plausible mechanism by which individuality is universally instantiated.
 
The only life that has ever existed on Earth is the living cell, in all of its forms.
True, but life began from just atomic interaction, that begat molecules, that transmuted into organic molecules that combined to form cells, etc.


IMO, a dynamical environment produces more variation than a relatively static environment.

In all dynamical environments, interactive processes create variations, which then are selected for durability or in the case of living systems ability to produce offspring.

It seems to me that mathematical divergence in a dynamical environment are causal to the appearance of evolutionary processes. Consider that according to the laws of chaos an initial tiny change can result in major change over time.

Seems to me, this entire evolutionary phenomenon is described with chaos theory.
In chaos theory, the butterfly effect is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic non-linear system can result in large differences in a later state. wiki

Based on the formation of known minerals, life is an inevitable result in a dynamic environment.
 
Last edited:
The only life that has ever existed on Earth is the living cell, in all of its forms.

"Cell" is a bit vague. It is also rather nebulous what you define as "living. " RNA world may have existed for time without cells, also viruses and viroids?
 
Today the world generally unites in a communal pride in the seminal achievement of Neil Armstrong, as the first among humankind to set foot on a cosmological body other than the Earth. In this achievement, we acknowledge the triumph of the human spirit, and intellect, to measure, understand, manipulate, and control the laws of nature, to implement a mobility of the living form through space-time, unlike any that had previously been achieved. Humankind, as a species, like many other hosts for life in Earths' ecosystem, has evolved a basic mobility of individuality implemented via our host forms functions and structures. This local mobility is evolved for movement through direct contact with the environment. Legs, wings, fins, flagella, are some of the means by which the physical mobility of the living individual is achieved by species on Earth. Additionally, humankind has realized great utility in further extending this basic capability with technology. Thus the mobility of individuality on human scales has been enhanced by wheels, airframes, engines, and rockets. Our thoughts often do not extend, or associate, this mobility of our physical form with either the local or universal mobility of our position of view. That is the mobility of our individuality. We have a very limited scope of extrapolating many of the implementations around us, natural or otherwise, even those that we conceive and develop ourselves, to a context greater than our immediate utility and practical concerns. However, with the accomplishments of NASAs' Apollo missions humankind has extended its reach beyond our usual scope. In so doing, we have opened a new realm of mobility of individuality that must be addressed and understood. Not only in technological terms but also for what the movement and relocation of Neils' position of view (POV) to the Moons' surface say to us, as individuals, about our living circumstances in this universe.


We take as a foregone conclusion that life can exist anywhere in this universe so long as the resources needed to sustain it are present. This is a very complacent assumption despite the likelihood that it may very well be so. It is not too surprising that we make this assumption; after all, there are no examples to the contrary in any Earth or near-Earth environment. In fact, one of the underlying tenets of our present-day scientific method, as implied by current measurements of the fine structure constant states that the laws of physics are upheld everywhere in this universe. This consistency offers a reasonably good basis for our certainty. Nonetheless, life can be quite complicated and has many requirements and influences that are well understood, yet perhaps there are other factors critical to life yet to be discovered. We know that most Earth life depends on proper sustenance (energy), water, oxygen, temperature, and pressure levels to be maintained at least in the near term. We also have a long-term need for gravity or an equivalent force. Nevertheless, life, as we know it, may yet have some undiscovered intrinsic dependency on properties in or near the area around Earth or around the Sun. Mission planners acknowledged this possibility when they sent the first-ever Earth life into space onboard a captured V-2 rocket on February 20, 1947. These original astronauts were a group of fruit flies, insects being as good a representation of Earth life as any other. This first volley into the unknown environment outside the Earths' atmosphere was extremely dangerous. Not just in terms of the technological or known dangers inherent to extraterrestrial space due to its lack of the known required resources mentioned earlier, but primarily because space could have proven to be fundamentally incompatible with a living entitys' instantiation, its being. So how do we know for near-certain that individual life can exist anywhere in this universe?


Interestingly, the best evidence to date for the universal mobility of individuality presented itself when Neil Armstrong pressed his boot into the soft silt of the moons' surface. Neil Armstrong surviving his "giant leap for mankind" suggests that life as we know it is not utterly dependent upon any resource intrinsic or unique to the Earth, or the very local space-time around it. For example, we could have evolved with a dependence on Earths' unique magnetic field configuration or on Earths' specific gravitational field intensity, or some other completely unknown and unrecognized property of either Earth itself or the space near to the Earth. If this was indeed the case the crew of Apollo 11, and the fruit flies before them, could have tragically de-instantiated, ceased to live, once they passed some threshold, or boundary, somewhere between the Earths' surface, and the moons' surface. Perhaps once the spacecraft passed some critical flux level in Earths' magnetic field, or once the Earths' gravitational field dropped below some essential level. Each of the unsuspecting astronauts, human or fruit-fly, could have simply extinguished. Immediately, or gradually, like light bulbs whose electric current had been turned off. Perhaps their molecular bonds could have just dissipated due to some unknown property of space. There may yet remain some irreproducible property of our sun unknown to us that is critical to sustaining Earth life. After all, Earth life has never been tested beyond the suns Helios-spheres. Presumably, each of these needs could ultimately be overcome and provided for by technology.


Nonetheless, the amazingly profound statement suggested by Neil Armstrong surviving his first step on the moon isn't only that we can overcome the technological hurdles of space travel, but rather that nature in this universe, permits individuality to exist elsewhere, and likely everywhere. That not only the physical form, but the individuals' first-person position of view (POV), that is, ones' being, ones' natural entanglement, ones' instantiation, is indeed mobile in this universe, and perhaps throughout nature. Neil Armstrongs' giant step for mankind suggests that the individual POV can exist not just where it was instantiated, where it entangled its host form, but quite likely anywhere in this universe due to the unrestricted instantaneous universal ubiquity of natural entanglement. On the other hand, the irreversibility of extinction and evolution, together with relativistic constraints, mandate that the individual cannot be instantiated, or rendered universally mobile by the physical forms, made of local collections of atoms in this universe, because unlike NASA, nature does not use spacecraft for the universal mobility of the individual.


Comprehending the reality of ones' living circumstances begins with the realization that Neal Armstrongs' first step on the surface of the moon, or perhaps Yuri Gagarins' first orbit around the Earth, or that the intrepid voyage of those first insects, demonstrated that the mobility of individuality exists in this universe. Mobility not defined by locomotion or travel of your current host form but by a fundamental property of nature with degrees of freedom much greater than that of matter. Realize that the instantiation of any individual, ones' position of view, may be hosted anywhere in space-time by any viable environment which happens to emerge naturally or artificially on any planet orbiting any star. These convenient environments also include the living hosts we refer to as; species. The obstacles presented by travel, involve the movement of the matter based components of the instantiated individual through expanses of space-time, small or large. Nature, in its implementation of life, circumvents this issue by implementing only the mobility of the POV. The component of the individual, which is temporarily instantiated by natural entanglement to a locally available form. Ergo, in nature, the physical host, the species, is always left behind.
 
The point of this scenario is the inescapable conclusion that each individualized instance of life must involve a non-classical, non-local, relativistically unconstrained, scientifically describable, naturally recurring component. This individualizing phenomenon must exist separately and distinctly from any local physical form and must be definable by some discretely quantifiable property of nature with degrees-of-freedom much greater than that of matter.

What evidence/logic can you provide that an imagined scenario will provide a conclusion which is inescapable? This sounds like metaphysical conjecture, especially the bit about our individual consciousness "naturally recurring"? Reminds me a little of Nietsche's notion of eternal recurrence. Also, what do you mean by "individualizing phenomenon must exist separately and distinctly from....local physical form"? Ghost in the machine? Soul stuff? Rupert Sheldrake morphic fields?? Sounds like some sort of Platonic essence that you have just conjured here, again without evidence. I wish you could speak a little more plainly on the philosophical position you're taking, instead of cloaking it all in sciency-sounding word salad.
 
The proposal being made is that if you can live in one viable habitat,
When you say "you" you are referring to the entity that is alive here on Earth. For ease of discussion, let's say me, DaveC426913.

There is no other Dave426913, here or elsewhere. Even a duplicate collection of atoms - in every configuration the same as mine - is not actually me. Except in fanciful stories and philosophies.

How can one be naturally reinstantiated (born) elsewhere regardless of distance and with no physical travel (no comets or spacecraft or photons from Earth can reach ECO-2)?
One can't.

The trouble most will have with this realization is one's individuality has always been misperceived to be instantiated by one's host form, one's species. However, the atoms and molecules that compose your body, is a part of the current indigenous ecosystem, Earth or ECO-2. The demand this realization makes upon all cognizant living beings is the acceptance of the abstraction of one's current host form (body) from your universally mobile position of view (POV), one's individuality.
Non sequitur (it does not follow).
How exactly does anything in the first sentence "demand" the realization of anything in the second sentence?

This implies the universal mobility of individuality and demands a natural, scientifically describable mechanism for its implementation.
Afraid you're not there yet. These are a string of non sequiturs.
Also, I'm pretty sure "the universal mobility of individuality" is something you made up, so it doesn't objectively "demand" anything more beyond the flared logic chain above.
 
[...] The question becomes; could you or I or any individual formerly hosted by Earth's ecology ever find oneself a part of ECO-2s' ecology? Is the nature of life in this universe such that one could at some point find oneself naturally born to ECO-2 in the form of a species indigenous (present or future) to ECO-2, just as we were born on Earth to species indigenous to Earths' ecology? [...]

The radical possibility of an individual -- or our whole observable space itself -- being replicated elsewhere via all possible configurations being exhausted and redundancy commencing, would rest on whether there's anything to some of the spins on the eternal inflation scenario. Which is an offshoot of generic cosmological inflation. Since having duplicates in monstrously distant regions seems pretty much impossible to verify, it's really a philosophical matter.

Similar with speculations about people who would be only semi-parallel to ourselves. Albeit they might, on superficial perusal of the idea, seem more [extravagantly odds-wise] likely than "perfect" body duplicates leading "identical" lives.

Level One multiverse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#Level_I:_An_extension_of_our_universe

Also:

https://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/multiverse.pdf

EXCERPT: "Inflation in fact generates all possible initial conditions with non-zero probability, the most likely ones being almost uniform with fluctuations at the 10^−5 level that are amplified by gravitational clustering to form galaxies, stars, planets and other structures. This means both that pretty much all imaginable matter configurations occur in some Hubble volume far away, and also that we should expect our own Hubble volume to be a fairly typical one — at least typical among those that contain observers.

A crude estimate suggests that the closest identical copy of you is about ∼ 10^10^29 m away. About ∼ 10^10^91 m away, there should be a sphere of radius 100 light-years identical to the one centered here, so all perceptions that we have during the next century will be identical to those of our counterparts over there. About ∼ 10^10^115 m away, there should be an entire Hubble volume identical to ours.
"

- - - - - - - - -

Can the known particles and interactions explain life? (Ethan Siegel)
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/...particles/

KEY POINTS: At a fundamental level, a human being is made of only a small set of quantum particles, bound together through just four fundamental interactions to create all of known reality. That includes some phenomena that are incredibly complex, including those of consciousness, intelligence, and sentiency. How odd is it that these particles and forces fit together so precisely as to enable conscious beings like us to exist? It's a cutting-edge question, but one that we're closer than ever to answering definitively.

EXCERPT: If the laws of physics were so different that we couldn’t have come into existence, we never would have arisen to find these things out. Alas, we only have the one Universe, with the rules and limitations that it possesses, to study. Until we either find another, or discover precisely why and how our Universe has the rules and laws that it does, questions such as “Do the rules that our Universe plays by have a cause or a designer?” will firmly remain outside of the realm of science: beyond what it’s possible to know...
_​
 
What is life? The universal mobility of individuality (UMI) principle suggests that individuality is form and location agnostic. Life is the instantiation of individuality by any viable host form (i.e. single cell) in any viable habitat in this universe. Individuality is the temporary instantiation of a uniquely quantifiable degree of freedom of space to establish an individualized position of view (POV). The POV (individuality) in each living host, functions as an antenna, a target for telemetry gathered and produced by ones viable host form located in any viable perpetually transient habitat (Earth, Moon, Mars, ECO2) in space-time.
 
Hmm. So it's a book?

Excerpt from an overview of it on Barnes and Noble:

"You are not your physical form or any of its talents, skills or capabilities. You are as are every other living entity on or off of this planet, a very real and universally mobile and immutable aspect of nature that requires no mysticism or supernatural manifestations. The question is; what are the actual physics that mediates how you naturally instantiate on any particular randomly emerged viable habitat for life, among the untold number of planets which can emerge either naturally or artificially, regardless of the distance between them? As is often the case, when we ask the right questions, nature and science present the correct answers."​

It would require more than just the conventional magnitude of "untold planets" in order for the possibility of reiteration to arise. The latter would arguably need a cosmological existence that was near-infinite, thereby statistically facilitating multiple variations of an _X_ arising somewhere.

But that accordingly would make an "archetypes" hypothesis superfluous. A generic form or complex configuration of _X_ would merely be an idea or category that we abstracted from all the plural instances of a specific _X_ human. Which we'd actually have no access to or way to verify, due to the unimaginable distances between the replications. IOW, a language or symbol mediated idea that was erroneously or unnecessarily reified as some kind of "Platonic form" -- treated as responsible for both the mutable and the identical physical instantiations of _X_.
_
 
Last edited:
The LINE "Life Instantiated By Natural Entanglement" hypothesis presents perhaps for the first time, a practical scientifically plausible hypothesis for the natural implementation that governs the instantiation of the living individual as a being distinct from the evolution of that beings current species.

The hypothesis in summary:

The most fundamental element of life is a molecule called the Entanglement Molecule (EM). This molecule composed of normal baryonic matter manifests the unique property of prolifically establishing a natural teleportation channel, which is a shared quantum coherent state, a quantum entanglement connection (QE), with a hypothesized form of matter called metamatter. Metamatter is composed of an undiscovered type of particle that necessarily resides entirely beyond this space-time, in Hilbert-space or the metaverse if you will. Metamatter is as essential to life as dark matter is to galaxy formation. Entanglement molecules in this universe are at all times entangled to particles of metamatter in Hilbert-space. It is their natural state to do so. Metamatter, as is possible with any natural entity having only subtle degrees-of-freedom within this space-time, is not subject to locality or relativistic constraints and so, via this QE connection, is non-classically, instantaneously accessible to entanglement molecules (EM) everywhere in this universe.

These entanglement molecules and metamatter are the Alice and Bob endpoints of each isolated, naturally occurring, QE connection established within every living cell that has ever existed. An entanglement molecule once arranged from its constituent atoms, not unlike the molecules in the ferrite magnet in a transistor radio, is instantly sensitive to available, uninstantiated QE degrees of freedom (DOF) of the QE spectrum, or quantum entanglement frequencies (QEF). It is the QEF that define the unique natural teleportation channel upon which to entangle available metamatter. Such isolated pairings existed on Earth for eons, and in this universe, for even longer before the naturally occurring circumstances arose, on Earth, and perhaps elsewhere, to provide a sphere of molecules that could be described as an early cell wall. Not all entanglement molecules were likely to encounter a cell wall, but those that did, enclosed by this barrier, obtained the benefit of an extra level of protection. This enclosure allowed them to develop beyond the typical. This basic entanglement relationship is the most fundamental manifestation of life. It establishes the position of view (POV). Over time other types of molecules joined with these proto-cells sometimes to their mutual benefit, sometimes not. Those that added no benefit or diminished the proto-cells survival prospects would not survive.

The QE connection gave surviving proto-cells something very special. It gave the otherwise inanimate molecular components on the inside of this early cell a form of intra-cellular communication. That is, the ability to interact at a distance, but more critically at that point, the QE connection gave the proto-cell the capacity to share or imprint internal cellular state information upon its entangled metamatter. Metamatter because of its extra-dimensional, non-locality and relativistically unconstrained nature essentially acts as a kind of cloud-storage for information accessible instantaneously from any location in this universe, and in any other as well. This universal cloud storage repository of information is the critical factor required to get evolution started. This natural cosmic background Bose condensate (CBBC) is what makes being possible anywhere in this universe. At that point, evolution existed only via random environmental contact between proto-cells with other structures in the primordial environment of early Earth.

Thus, the cell became natures' biological entanglement circuit. Each such entanglement pairing constitutes an instantiation of life, whether on Earth, elsewhere in this universe, or anywhere in existence. Consequently, life could now be hosted by any viable formation of cell(s) that may emerge anywhere in existence. Ones' instantiation is established at one specific QEF, a unique value of the degrees of freedom among the infinity of possible values on the quantum entanglement spectrum. A QEF that is unique in all existence to each individual and to no other, but only while that QE connection, ones' natural teleportation (LINE) channel, persists. These yet to be determined DOF's, perhaps frequency and others, on the QE spectrum, is the singular property in nature that defines each living individual. All other components of the instantiation process may change or be exchanged, but it is your QEF that positions you as the central and only target of your instantiation, of your life, and not someone else's. Change or retune ones' QEF enough, and you change the being, the individual. You are your QEF; you are not your cells or your metamatter.

It is very likely that the QE spectrum predated even the big bang. Your QEF is the immutable, the classically indestructible you. When entanglement molecules, contained within viable hosts such as the cell, located on any viable planet, orbiting any viable star, anywhere in existence, entangles metamatter at your QEF, that is where you will instantiate. That is where you will be. A place such as that is where you are right now. A place such as that is where you are likely to have been many times before your current instantiation. Places such as that are where you will inevitably reinstantiate many more times in your future. This is instantiation; this is life. You and I, and your pet otter, every insect, every cell and every organization of cells, all life anywhere in existence instantiates by this mechanism. While each cell entangles at a unique QEF, a few specialized cells in complex organisms, called entanglement cells (EC), have evolved to heterodyne, or combine their own unique QEF's. This combination of distinct LINE channels entangle metamatter at yet a different unique QEF, called a composite or emerged QEF, thus instantiating the emerged individual, you.

This composite degree of freedom called the QEF together with the metamatter it entangles is called the lifeID. No memories or behavior of the host body is carried or transferred by the lifeID. In nature, such properties are electromagnetic manifestations of the host species or vessel only. The closest cultural meme to the lifeID come via religions throughout human history having referred to this, using one word or another, as the soul. Once any QE connection is terminated, by sufficiently disrupting the cellular component (inducing death of the host vessel), the previously entangled metamatter becomes available for entanglement by other cells. However, this particular metamatter has been imprinted to some extent by its previous entanglement. Each generation of entanglement, each instantiation, each life, imprints information from both the host and QEF, to its entangled metamatter. The degree of this imprinting is yet to be determined.

This time-dependent, perishable imprinting of cellular state in metamatter becomes available to future cells that entangle this metamatter while simultaneously limiting its entanglement opportunities to cells of matching state. The passage of time decays the imprint left on metamatter causing a return to a state best described as stem-metamatter (to be discussed later in this volume). This transfer of cellular state information may impact cellular behavior and development and to the extent that this imprinted information manifests an advantage for the cell, may provide a survival benefit. This is the evolutionary mechanism used by early life that predated the development of the DNA and RNA molecules. With QE communication, ergo; life, the proto-cell became the laboratory of evolutionary innovation we see today from which emerged a great many useful cellular structures and processes, but most pivotally, a clear benefit to augment the cloud storage mechanism of metamatter with a more local, more expandable and flexible information storage mechanism which became RNA and eventually DNA. This was the birth of the modern living cell. Much is yet to be learned but the implications of this process are vast and pervasive.
 
Back
Top