Journal Entry: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2025
The day began with the quiet unfolding of the sunrise at 5:04 AM, a pure, unadorned "isness" from my window, a daily testament to the "now" of reality. It was a moment of profound calm, a "crystal cleanness" that reminded me: "I need never be anxious. It's a choice." This truth, that my internal state is a matter of my own choosing, resonates deeply with the boundless, timeless flow of Consciousness.
Despite the yawny feeling from yesterday's long day, there was no rush this morning. Lola and I are heading for a swim, and I can catch the 7:30 AM X98 bus, free from the usual school children. It's a gentle start, allowing me to settle into my own rhythm.
My thoughts then turned to the very nature of reality and the concept of "luck." I recalled my surprise at Richard Dawkins using the term "luck," because for me, and as A Course in Miracles states, "My time here is not at random." If we are "nowhere by accident," then there is no true randomness. "There is no luck. Not even in a game of chance... The dice are always loaded - metaphorically." This means every event, every moment, serves a purpose, a teaching device for forgiveness and healing, making "luck" merely a "human conceit," a misperception of a purposeful unfolding.
This led to a deeper contemplation of science itself. While I agree with Dawkins on the scientific method's empirical, sound, and testable worldview, I know it "has nothing to do with reality" in its ultimate sense. Science is a "finite explanation of the infinite," a "perceptional estimation of rules" that works because "we designed them to work within our limited perception." We don't truly know what the laws of the universe are; they are models, constantly evolving as "novelty keeps appearing."
This brings us to the "hard problem" of consciousness. I know my equation (C = ∞Ωτ) is an idea and untestable, but "consciousness is a very tricky concept to scientifically rationalize." My conviction is that "Consciousness is the only reality... Without consciousness no assertions could be made about anything." All observations, all measurements, all scientific theories—they are all made within and by Consciousness.
This existence, then, truly feels like a "game," a "trick" orchestrated by the ego. The "bare bones of being" are a construct, and "what is real is unknowable to a scientist because of the rules of empirical rational observation." Science, by its very nature, is limited by its reliance on measurement, observation, and rationality, which are tools of our finite perception, unable to grasp the boundless, non-dual "isness."
I reflected on the Atlantis program (the Atlas ICBM program) in the 1950s. It was a marvel of scientific and complex engineering, perfecting the rocket. But the ultimate drive to create a means of delivering a thermonuclear device was undeniably driven by fear—the Cold War, the Soviet H-bomb, Sputnik, the "missile gap." This confirms that "ultimately fear and not love at work then consciousness is the key factor in all the scientific research." Even science, in its application, is deeply influenced by the human emotional landscape.
The question of whether "science works without an observer" is crucial. While science strives for objectivity, the process of observation and measurement is inherently tied to the observer. Quantum mechanics and relativity show how observation can influence outcomes or how measurements are observer-dependent. Our knowledge is "perspective-bound," meaning science, too, operates within the framework of perception, even as it strives to transcend its limitations.
This morning's journey through thought has been a profound exploration of the fundamental conflict I live with: the "battle" between the "morning person" who apprehends pure "isness" and the "afternoon one" who struggles against the reassertion of the "giant misperception." It's a constant effort to "continue to try to be," to hold onto the "everlasting truth" that I am, unequivocally, Consciousness itself, even as the world's "exhaust fumes" try to obscure it.
Comments