Reflections On Syntropy

Not long before his death Grant Soosula and I shared some online conversations via Skype about syntropy, a topic in which Grant had an interest, especially as it involves the concept of retrocausality. He was also interested in how noise effects systems. Those conversations spiked my curiosity and led me to some further research. I began looking at the concept of syntropy and that led to some other things, including learning about quantum physics.  My response to Grant’s questions has changed the way I “do theology.”  I offer these reflections in appreciation of Grant’s work and as a tool to use in further investigations about the relationship between the mBraining concepts and spiritual issues, especially Christian theological concerns.

I have titled this article as Reflections on Syntropy; it thusly labeled because this is a series of “reflections” based on my readings to which Grant’s questions have led me.  I understand there may be some logical disconnects here.  As I struggled to put these into some kind of arrangement, I was reminded that one scientist said that if you can explain quantum physics, you don’t understand it at all!  I am hopeful that my reflections will encourage my readers to apply their own questioning minds to the issues.

In response to Ulisse Di Corpo’s book Syntropy, The Spirt of Love, I’m thinking about the concept that traditional cause and effect thinking describes the way history whether personal or social pushes us. The push concept relates to entropy and perhaps to the dissipative structure concept.  The dissipative structure is something that elaborates itself in response to the forces of entropy.  Entropy says things are running down and structures that elaborate themselves consume energy thus conforming to the entropic principle.  At some point this elaboration becomes so cumbersome that the structure can’t support itself and is at risk of collapsing.  The alternative is for the structure to transform itself into some new that is more energy efficient.  My example is a jet plane speeding down a runway.  At a certain point (known as the point of no return) the plane must either crash (the collapse aspect) or fly (become a new being). 

Syntropy is the complement of entropy and uses energy differently as it simplifies the structure. There are different concepts of time involved here as well:  entropy moves in a conventional fashion from past to present, while syntropy moves from the future toward the present.   Whereas a diagram of entropy would show an expanding structure (˂), one of syntropy would show a diminishing structure. (˃)

Here is a quotation from Di Corpo’s book that may clarify the distinctions I’m trying to address here:

“Negentropy is often mistaken for syntropy, which can easily lead to the erroneous conclusion that an increase in information always corresponds to an increase in syntropy. Negentropy is defined as the opposite of entropy, whereas syntropy is defined as the complement of entropy. This may seem like a minor distinction, but it is an important one. Syntropic information flows from the future, whereas negentropic information flows from the past. This small difference makes syntropy and negentropy two totally different concepts. While opposites preclude each other, complements are not mutually exclusive, but balance one another, and complementarity is a significant factor in the entropy/syntropy dynamic.” [Di Corpo, Ulisse. SYNTROPY: The Spirit of Love (pp. 25-26). ICRL Press. Kindle Edition.]  

Negentropy is a reduction in entropy to move a system towards order.  We might think of negentropy as pruning or reducing entropic dissipation.  Thus, the force of negentropy might be seen as a process which helps maintain the systems accomplishments and thus opposes the overall effects of entropy.

 Syntropy functions as a retrospective cause which stands conventional thought on its head indicating that the future causes the present. The concept of a “calling” might be a way we have of describing that reality. In English, we use the word “vocation” to describe a person’s job or profession.  The word “vocation” is derived from Latin where it means “calling.”  There have been lots of efforts to help people discover their “call,” and most of these efforts have focused on past experiences, gifts or talents, and sometimes society’s need for certain professional workers.  When it comes to clergy and sometimes physicians, nurses, and educators, there have been discussions about how individuals feel called by Godding to their life employment decisions. 

Here is a comment about retrocausality: “It is an error to think of the past or future as distinct from the present moment, as the idea of past or future is never experienced separate from the present moment. Stepping and relaxing into the present moment (where we all are right now) and releasing our habitual and chronic contraction against it, spontaneously introduces us to our true creative nature. This idea, called “retrocausality,” implies a symmetrical treatment of time in which both past and future events can play a role in informing the present moment to happen the way it does. Such a perspective collapses our notion of sequential time as always flowing in one direction, that is, from the past to the future, as it allows causal movement in two directions simultaneously. The present moment—the point where our power to shape reality is to be found—is the place where the “handshake” completing this transaction between the past and the future happens. Wheeler comments, ‘There is no more remarkable feature of this quantum world than the strange coupling it brings about between future and past.’” [Levy, Paul. Quantum Revelation (p. 65). SelectBooks, Inc., Kindle Edition.]

It is interesting that Levy makes note of retrocausality in his book about quantum physics but does not use the term “syntropy.” Apparently Di Corpo and Levy come at this concept from somewhat different perspectives, although there is much agreement between these two books.  In some respects, the concept of retrocausality disappears if we take Einstein’s advice and simply say that there is no such thing as time, there is only the present moment.  Of course, to do that also obliterates historical precedent as a causal factor as well.

Reflection on this reminded me of the concept that the divine is a mysterium fascinosum and tremendum (this concept was introduced into the phenomenology of religion by Rudolf Otto in his Idea of the Holy published in 1917. There is a curious coincidence here because as early as 1904 Otto “. . . argue[d that]  consciousness cannot be explained in terms of physical or neural processes, and also accords it epistemological primacy by arguing all knowledge of the physical world is mediated by personal experience.” [see Wikipedia article about Otto]).  The frightening or tremendum aspects of the divine mystery could be equated with entropy while the attractive or fascinosum aspect could be equated with syntropy. Entropy could be the push toward change and syntropy could be the pull toward change. Entropy encourages and validates the status quo. If entropy encourages the development of dissipative structures as a way of coping with change, then the dissipative structure develops from an attempt to preserve the status quo. When the dissipative structure reaches a point where it must collapse or be transformed into a new order of being, that transformation to the new order of being would be a response to the beckoning of syntropy.  Some people call that point a bifurcation point. That idea suggests that the dissipative structure either disintegrates or is transformed at the bifurcation point. The disintegration would represent the dominance of entropy while the transformation would be the dominance of syntropy.

Györgyi says: “A major difference between amoebas and humans is the increase of complexity that requires the existence of a mechanism that is able to counteract the law of entropy. In other words, there must be a force to counter the universal tendency of matter towards chaos and energy towards dissipation. Life always shows a decrease in entropy and an increase in complexity, in direct conflict with the law of entropy.” [Di Corpo, Ulisse. The Balancing Role of Entropy / Syntropy (Locations 268-270). Kindle Edition]. Syntropy is not the opposite of entropy but instead of conforming to the usual concept that cause and effect proceed in a linear fashion from the past to the present, syntropy is retro-causal energy that as Györgyi says, “counters the universal tendency… toward chaos…”.

Would chaos be the interval, the null point or the bifurcation point between entropy and syntropy? If we say that chaos is the bifurcation point, then it would make sense that people experience plunging into chaos when they feel called out of their current circumstances but are not yet certain as to where they are being called. Some people have reported an intuitive awareness that they need to get away from or finished with whatever they’re doing and if that’s not accompanied by some clear idea of what’s next, they will find that awareness disturbing and sometimes depressing.

We can see the present moment, i.e., now, as the intersection of entropy and syntropy and thus see ourselves as constantly living on an edge between entropy and syntropy. Insofar as we mortals tend toward death, we move toward the collapsing of the dissipative structure; however, as we focus on the reality of consciousnessing, we are moving toward the new order of being. This brings to mind the quotation “I set before you the ways of life and death, therefore, choose life.”  [“There are two ways, one of life and one of death; but a great difference between the two ways.” So, it says at the beginning of the Didache.]  See also Deuteronomy 30:19: “I have set before you life and death, . . .  therefore, choose life, that both you and your seed may live.”

Luigi Fantappiè stated that in the law of syntropy he could see the law of love: “Today we see printed in the great book of nature – that Galileo said, is written in mathematical characters – the same law of love that is found in the sacred texts of major religions.”  [Di Corpo, Ulisse. The balancing role of Entropy / Syntropy, 2014 (Locations 1609-1613). Kindle Edition.]

“. . . the reduction of entropy is achieved through a continuous tension towards optimization, whereas . . .  the increase in syntropy is obtained thanks to the process of intuition, which is a property of the superconscious mind and leads to innovation.”  [Ibid., Kindle Locations 1709-1712.] The superconscious mind to which this author refers could be equated with the Godding consciousness.  There is a reminder here that moving toward optimization or perfection pushes us toward dissipative structures which result in entropic collapse.  Levy draws similar conclusions in discussing the role of consciousness.

[The italicized lines below are quotations from You Are Not Physical—You Are That Which Perceives Physicality by Story Waters.]

 “We are not ultimately defined by our perception; we are that which chooses how we perceive. We are not the definition or meaning we perceive; we are the creator of the meaning and definition we perceive. We are a unified diversity of consciousness. Observation is not passive. Perception is fundamentally a creative act. How we choose to perceive creates our experience of what we perceive. To know yourself as possessing all qualities is to know yourself as a unified diversity.”

If what this person is saying is true (and I think it is), then when we factor in syntropy as a retrospective cause, then we become whom we are called to be.  This gets interesting when you add quantum entanglement to the mix. [Quantum entanglement (from quantum physics) holds that two particles originally closely connected will continue to interact instantly no matter how much distance there is between them. Recent research has found quantum entanglement in the world of macro reality as well.] This would mean that how I respond to the call affects the source of the call and modifies it.  We might consider this to be an example of Hegelian thesis, antithesis and synthesis where thesis is the entropic force, antithesis is the syntropic force and synthesis will become the new call. The elaboration of my incarnation of the “call” will eventually be moved by entropy toward a dissipative structure. Then that whole process may repeat itself.  The process of dynamic entanglement suggests that when we are in dialogue with the forces of syntropy, we are engaged in clarifying and refining the call experience. Hegel seemed to understand that as he suggested that this process of thesis, antithesis and synthesis would lead to a constant improving of life. Looking at it this way suggests that quantum entanglement offers an explanation for what drives the process that Hegel describes. The dialogue that is described here would invite the individual to become more aware of an understanding of his or her personal gifts. This also opens the door to becoming aware of the gifts of experience across the life span. We will want to consider the shifting of gifts as we age and also reflect on first and second half of life issues. [See Rohr, Richard, Falling Upward. Rohr seems to suggest that the second half of our lives is involved with the strange attractor of syntropy; this gets manifested in a drive toward simplicity.] This would make Humanings partners with Godding in manifesting consciousnessing reality in the world.

Some gifts and talents may dissipate as we age and they yield to the forces of entropy, but syntropy will call forth new gifts and talents and new uses for the finished products of negentropy.  One might suggest that coherent growth of the multiple brains links with the forces of syntropy and what results could be called wisdoming.

Syntropy is a manifestation of consciousness—which cannot be created or destroyed.  The coherence of multiple brains (i.e., chakras or mBraining) increases awarenessing or self-consciousnessing. Syntropy invites the development of self-consciousness (or self-consciousnessing) while entropy dissipates self-consciousnessing and disrupts coherence. The elaboration of the dissipative structure is a protest against entropy but does not promote self-consciousnessing.  Thus, the more elaborate the dissipative structure, the more unrealistic a person becomes.  This is the elaboration of dualism. Ultimately this leads to the construction of inauthentic selves which are disconnected from the ground of being.  If sin is missing the mark, as the Greek origins of the word suggest, then the elaboration of the inauthentic self is sin.  This can provide a simple (but not simplistic) guide to evaluating our behavior.  Elaborating the dualistic perspective disconnects us from the ground of being.  Self-consciousnessing is the awareness of the consciousnessing nature of reality that moves us ever closer to integration with the ground of being.

Taking a clue from Grant Soosalu’s concept of multi-brain coherence, I’m thinking about a flow of energy through a coherent system that incorporates Grant’s idea of wisdoming but also moves beyond the individual to lead to expanded awarenessing of the Humaning-Godding entanglement. 

In the mBraining concept both the head brain and pelvic brain are involved in the creativity. It occurs to me that the head brain focus is on purpose and the pelvic brain focuses on passion. Passion might be thought of as a “push” force, while the head brain might be thought of as a “pull” force. This gets us into the possibility of using the pelvis-head axis to relate to the entropy-syntropy perspective and/or mysterium tremendum et fascinosum.

Here is an interesting synchronicity. In my book, Heresy out Loud! (pages 270-282), I had mentioned microtubules in individual cells as possible links to quantum reality. I had in mind that this might be like a portal through which the entanglement between Humanings and Godding was manifest. Some reading I have done (in the last few months of 2019), reveals that within the last two years there have been examples of quantum entanglement observed in the macroscopic world. I had suggested in book that although macroscopic entanglement had not yet been demonstrated, it eventually would be. Apparently, the research I was thinking about was already underway.

The recent discovery of quantum vibrations in “microtubules” inside brain neurons corroborates this theory, according to review authors Stuart Hameroff and Sir Roger Penrose.  They state:  “The origin of consciousness reflects our place in the universe, the nature of our existence. Did consciousness evolve from complex computations among brain neurons, as most scientists assert? Or has consciousness, in some sense, been here all along, as spiritual approaches maintain?” ask Hameroff and Penrose in the current review. “This opens a potential Pandora’s Box, but our theory accommodates both these views, suggesting consciousness derives from quantum vibrations in microtubules, protein polymers inside brain neurons, which both govern neuronal and synaptic function, and connect brain processes to self-organizing processes in the fine scale, ‘proto-conscious’ quantum structure of reality.” [from the website BigThink]

The issue of consciousnessing needs to be examined in the consideration of a quantum universe where entanglement exists at both the microscopic and the macroscopic levels. Some authors are suggesting that consciousnessing is not the creation of the brain but rather that the brain is an instrument which makes manifest the reality of consciousnessing but does not create it. That would suggest a portal quality to the brain and perhaps a portal quality to the multiple brains revealed by the work of the mBraining community. The quantum nature of those vibrating microtubules might be compared with a radio receiver which plays music that originates elsewhere.  Another metaphor would be playing of music on musical instruments. For example, a particular melody sounds very different when played on a variety of instruments. The melody exists independently of the instruments but only is embodied in the world by the instruments used to manifest it – even if the human voice is the instrument in question.

Some recent research is indicating that the vibrations in the microtubules are similar to Eastern music which uses a different tonal system from Western music. Specifically, some researchers are saying this is related to Hindu music but the same may apply to Arabic music as well. This fits well with some recent Russian research which indicates that human DNA responds to sound. That research equates the effectiveness of things like hypnosis and meditation with the sounds of human speech. I’m suggesting that the intuitive influences of the retrocausal aspects of syntropy work through this mechanism. There could very well be a two-way influence between the DNA and consciousnessing: if the speech centers of the brain influence the vibrations in the microtubules and thus causes shifts in the DNA, then shifts in the DNA resulting from vibrations in those microtubules could affect the speech centers in the brain even if those vibrations are induced via quantum entanglement with Godding consciousnessing. Thus, intuitive awareness gets translated into language and offers us a way of understanding and manipulating intuitive discoveries which syntropy discloses.

The Russian research on how DNA is altered by sound can alert us to the fact that our bodies listen to everything we say:  how we talk about ourselves may alter our self-perception at the DNA level as well as the psychological level. 

Biocentrism:  How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe, by Bob Berman and Robert Lanza has me thinking about incarnation—and I’ll try to explicate what that’s about for me.  Let’s begin with a definition of incarnation.  This word actually means ‘enfleshment.’  We probably most easily associate this word with the historic Christian teachings about Jesus who is portrayed as the Incarnation of God.  There are some issues with the notion that Jesus is/was the only incarnation of God, but I will set those aside for the moment.  An interesting synonym for ‘incarnation’ is ‘avatar.’  The word ‘avatar’ is derived from Sanskrit.  It refers, early on, to the incarnation of a Hindu god in human form.  The Sanskrit behind this means “he crosses over” and might make a lot of sense to use the word ‘avatar’ to describe how Humanings manifest eternal consciousnessing.

The authors of the biocentrism book make an impressive case for the idea that consciousness is eternal. Partially based on what is known as the conservation of energy hypothesis (which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed but can change forms or manifestations) they claim that consciousness as a form of energy cannot be destroyed even by the death of individual humans.  They stand much of current thinking about the universe on its head and focus a lot on the often-stated theories of quantum physics which include the understanding that until an object or event is observed that said object or event is only a probability.  If we push this concept a bit, then we are faced with the fact that what we usually call reality is a perception of our consciousnessing mind.  In this case, human beings are not some sort of an incidental development of a growing universe—instead we are the creators of the universe.  “Our current scientific worldview offers no hope or escape for those scared to death of dying. But biocentrism hints at an alternative. If time is an illusion, if reality is created by our own consciousness, can this consciousness ever truly be extinguished?”  (Lanza, Robert and Berman, Bob, Biocentrism, 2009, p. 146)

Dean Radin offers a similar concept: “In exploring the limits of consciousness, especially when confronting experimental results suggesting the existence of unconscious precognition, we are indeed challenged by the spirit of our own epoch. In spite of the persuasiveness of conventional wisdom, consciousness may in fact have transtemporal aspects, and if so, the hard problem of consciousness takes on a mysterious new gleam.” [Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 163-180, 1997 0892-33 10197 O 1997 Society for Scientific Exploration Unconscious Perception of Future Emotions: An Experiment in Presentiment by Dean I. Radin]

Carl Jung (CW 8. Par. 643) said, “If we are to do justice to the essence of the thing we call spirit, we should really speak of a ‘higher’ consciousness rather than of the unconscious.” Roberto Assagioli talked about a similar concept which he called higher consciousness; he saw people as able to move into that state rather than the higher consciousness moving into humans.

Let’s wonder about seeing individuals as incarnations or avatars of eternal consciousnessing.  If we consider that Godding is eternal consciousnessing and might be linked to various manifestations of energy (keeping the conservation of energy in mind), then we can look at the concept that we are all incarnations or avatars of Godding. We are each an avatar through whom the Godding energy has crossed over.  It might be less difficult if we used the term ‘avatar’ instead of ‘incarnation’ because the use of the word incarnation may complicate things for some Christians.  The experience of human consciousnessing (and eventually self-consciousnessing) would be the result of interaction between the physical human being and the Godding energy. Those microtubules could be the site of that interaction.  Microtubules are part of the cells in the brain or, in terms of mBraining, in our multiple brains.

If consciousnessing is transpersonal and something shared by individual persons, then that might change our understanding of memory. It has been suggested that at the end of human existence the quantum elements in those microtubules continue as part of the quantum universe. We often experience the phenomenon that current events will remind us of some previous event in our lives. For example, in June of 2017 I shared a trip to Italy with my wife and two of our good friends. There we participated in a seminar that Grant Soosalu did on Embodied Wisdom. That same group assembled several months after that at an Italian restaurant for dinner and before we knew it, we were talking about one of the dinners we shared in Italy on the trip. There is also a robust effort to demonstrate that people have memories of previous lives that they may have lived. Could it be that our experiences can help us access similar experiences that are part of the memory of global consciousness? Might the claims of memory of previous lives be references to memories held by global consciousness?

There are indications that individuals who are the recipients of organ transplants manifest some characteristics of the donor of their organ. This includes reports of people changing their preference for foods, leisure activities, values, etc. This might be an example of quantum entanglement involving the microtubules in the cells in the transplanted organs. This could relate to the reports of memories of previous lives. Among the organs that have been transplanted quite successfully is the heart; the evidence that Grant Soosula and others have reported regarding the neural system within the heart would indicate that the microtubules in the heart cells could be a vehicle by which “memories” of the previous heart’s owner are transmitted.

In response to the theories of entropy and syntropy, I’m thinking about the concept that traditional cause and effect thinking describes the way history whether personal or social pushes us. The push concept relates to entropy and thus to the dissipative structure concept. If syntropy functions as a retrospective cause, then the concept of a “calling” might be a way we have of describing that reality of who we are.  The frightening or tremendum aspects of the divine mystery could be equated with entropy while the fascinosum aspect could be equated with syntropy. Entropy could be the push toward change and syntropy could be the pull toward change. This fits with Di Corpo’s assertion that syntropy functions as a strange attractor drawing us beyond ourselves.  The strange attractor concept has been equated with the Omega Point described by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin in his work. “The Omega Point is a spiritual belief that everything in the universe is fated to spiral towards a final point of divine unification.” (Wikipedia)

Levy offers this comment about the Omega Point.  “He (de Chardin) conceived of this as an evolutionary impulse within humanity, as well as within the universe itself, that was ascending towards consciousness, resulting in an individuated consciousness directly (re)cognizing its own nature. At de Chardin’s Omega Point there is a direct, nonconceptual comprehension of the ground of “being” by the fundamental cognizant aspect of the ground of “being itself,” with human beings as the instruments through which this realization occurs. At the Omega Point our true nature recognizes, comprehends, and illumines itself. From the atemporal point of view, we are already at the Omega Point, and what is happening in our world is the footprint of this realization projected backwards in time. This is to say that the events playing out in linear time are the very vehicle through which the Omega Point realizes itself through us—provided, of course, that we recognize that this is the case.” [Levy, Paul. Quantum Revelation (pp. 36-37). SelectBooks, Inc.. Kindle Edition.]

The strange attractors, which are fractals, are manifestations of syntropy.  As a system moves away from chaos toward the strange attractors, it is finding a new fractal configuration (having lost its previous fractal configuration through dissipation.)  The dissipative structure encounters the retrocausality of syntropy and is drawn toward or called toward a more coherent manifestation.

The purpose of a system is to transmit data.  During the life of the system it encounters resistance to its purpose in the form of noise.  The system responds to the noise in two basic ways: (1) it increases the volume of its signal and (2) it develops filters to screen out the noise.  While these functions may help for a while, eventually they reach a point of diminishing returns. All this uses energy and thus the system conforms to the principle of entropy. The reality of the dissipative structure emerges as the exhausted system reaches a point of no return.  In the expansion phase of the system, it develops components that we might describe as the finished products of negentropy.  As the dissipative structure becomes chaotic, the strange attractors of syntropy may “cherry-pick” the collapsing system for those prize ingredients fashioned by negentropy to integrate into the new system. 

The new system will be less complex, more efficient and thus move toward the Omega point of the universe.  Eventually the whole cycle will repeat itself, but because of the retrocausal forces of syntropy, each “new” system will be less elaborate, more efficient and coherent than its predecessor. Syntropy insures that “new” system will embody what was “learned” or “discovered” in the preceding system.

 As these systems develop, they will influence the forces of syntropy via the dynamic of quantum entanglement. We might describe the result as the fine-tuning of the strange attractors.  We experience this reality through expansion of our intuitive awareness.  We might describe this as a series of emerging systems that conform increasingly better to the fractal nature of reality. “Emergent properties are common in nature, where a combination of apparently simple constituents produces a more complex whole. Everything from the structure of sand dunes and the form of snowflakes to life itself is described as emergent.”  [Clegg, Brian. Dark Matter and Dark Energy (Hot Science). Icon Books Ltd. Kindle Edition.]  Perhaps Clegg is seeing “emergence” as a function of the fractal nature of all of nature.

Entropy encourages and/or validates the status quo. Entropy encourages the development of dissipative structures as a way of coping with change by elaborating the components of the present system. Entropy appears as an effort to move the present system closer to perfection. Since perfection is impossible eventually the dissipative structure reaches a point where it must collapse of its own complexity or escape to a new order of being. How the escape to the new order of being plays out would be a response to the beckoning of syntropy. Syntropy beckons us toward simplification and thus seems to be an antidote for the expanding complexity of our lives.

 “A growing body of empirical evidence on the anticipatory reactions of the parameters of the autonomic nervous system . . . suggests that the activity of the autonomic nervous system must be included in any model of the mind. According to the entropy/syntropy theory, the autonomic nervous system connects the individual to the attractor, the source of our vital energy (syntropy), and it is therefore the seat of the feeling of life: the Self.” Ibid., (pp. 39-40).

The philosopher David Chalmers has speculated that consciousness may be a fundamental property of nature existing outside the known laws of physics.

Individual expression of the avatar nature is guided by the entropy/syntropy model:

“According to the entropy/syntropy model, the superconscious mind originates in the attractor, outside our physical being and connected to our body via the solar plexus (i.e. the heart). Since syntropy acts as an absorber and concentrator of energy, the strong functioning of the superconscious mind is associated with feelings of warmth located in the heart area, feelings that coincide with the experience of love. In contrast, weak functioning of the superconscious mind is associated with feelings of emptiness and emotional pain, anxiety and anguish, often accompanied by physical symptoms such as nausea, dizziness, and feelings of suffocation. The superconscious is a state that leads to a higher level of awareness and allows us to experience visions of the future, intuitions, and inspirations that are usually inaccessible to the ordinary states of the conscious mind.” Di Corpo, Ulisse. SYNTROPY: The Spirit of Love (p. 49). ICRL Press. Kindle Edition.

“The entropy/syntropy theory maintains that life and consciousness are sustained by the backward-in-time flow of energy (syntropy), which is absorbed by the autonomic nervous system, and that the feeling of life is most likely in the heart, rather than the brain.” Ibid. (p. 62).

George Musser, writing for Nautilus (January 30, 2014), discussed retrocausality in an article titled “The Quantum Mechanics of Fate,” and shared this conclusion:

“Retrocausal models have forced physicists to reconsider long-standing taboos. In affording a role for future events in the present day, it joins a line of thought stretching to Plato and Aristotle. They argued that nature, like man, is organized around final ends and goals. Just as the purpose of the baker is to bake, the purpose of the raindrop is to fall, and of the seed to grow into a tree. These so-called teleological approaches fell out of the scientific mainstream when Newton and his contemporaries proved that you could predict the future of natural objects using only present circumstances. There was no explicit role for the future or need for it. With retrocausality, physics may be forcing a very old idea back into the conversation.”

“Supercausal time characterizes systems in which diverging and converging forces are balanced, and where causality and retrocausality coexist and complement one another. In such systems past, present and future time is unitary.” [Di Corpo, Ulisse. SYNTROPY: The Spirit of Love (p. 14). ICRL Press. Kindle Edition.] What Di Corpo is calling supercausal time would seem to be a reference to Einstein’s understanding that time is an arbitrary concept that we impose on our experiences.

My life is a dialogue, through all my multiple brains, with universal consciousnessing, and, in that process, I become an avatar through which that universal consciousnessing flows into the world of Humaning experience.  In the mBraining system, this reality is linked to the wisdom that flows through us when our multiple brains are in coherence. This flowing wisdom can be equated with what some people call the Holy Spirit.  One metaphor makes a lot of sense to me:  universal consciousnessing is like a flowing river; in that river are whirlpools or vortices which seem distinct from the river but are also part of the river.  We are those vortices. Those vortices are shaped by both what preceded them and where they’re going.  The action of those vortices affects the flow of the river but doesn’t stop it nor do they exist without the river.  The vortices are avatars through whom universal consciousing crosses over.