Fields, Probability Swarms, and Gravity

Another way to think of a body is as a kind of “field” of influence, though ultimately I think that “fields” like “matter” are part of the same misunderstanding. They are like the “body” and “spirit” split of a wrong world view. To say that the body, or more accurately the fact-experience of a body, is a probability field, probably sounds highly bizarre, because the brain has conditioned us to have a natural affinity for “simple realism.”

The concept of a “field” was created in materialism because the physical world view first held that there were these entities of simple realism called physical objects that occupied a defined position in space and time. Unfortunately, these objects, being formally separated in such positions, could not interact with each other by any sensibly describable means in terms of yet more objects, so the concept of “field” was born…basically an unphysical like physical influence that is said to extend across “space.” In reality of course, this concept is no less “physical” than the “matter” that is supposed to occupy these fields, and has the same problems.

The concept of a field, imo, is a misunderstanding of a function of influence in possibility space. This is perhaps best illustrated by the hardest example, which paradoxically also turns out to be the easiest example when we discuss it in this new way.

Under gravity, in usual language, we are familiar with the idea that an object is attracted towards the center of the earth. Expressed in other language, what this *means* is that the object undergoes a motion in possibility space that moves it closer to the center of the earth’s probability swarm.

As we have described a “body” (whether it is a human body or the “body” of the earth) as a kind of “topology in possibility space” with a dense center and rarefied surround, it becomes much easier to understand what gravity actually is.

Let’s say we have a rock out in “space” somewhere further out than the position of the moon. Using certain quantified language, we can say, on our terms, that there is (for example) a 20% chance that this rock can (at those spacetime coordinates) be considered a legitimate part of the earth as a simple object, and hence as belonging to its probability swarm. If we move it closer to the earth, say closer than the moon, we would have to up that figure, because we have moved closer to the center of the earth’s probability swarm. We would now have to say, for example, that there was a 35% or 45% chance that this rock could be considered as part of the earth as a simple object, and hence as part of its swarm.

And thus for that rock so for us, as we see it, on the “surface” of the earth. We too are part of its possibility swarm and hence add to that swarm, as I mentioned earlier skewing the entire swarm at least a little bit and thus altering the figures our asteroid would be exposed to at the given spacetime coordinates.

Moreover, our rock at height H above the earth’s surface can be taken to occupy a certain “ring” or “shell” in the earth’s probability swarm. In probability space, it can be said to be exposed, at its position, to an unbalanced influence to be understood as “greater probability in the direction towards the center of the earth” and “reduced probability in the direction away from the earth’s center” Bear in mind that what “the center of the earth” really means, in our terms, is the most densely populated region of its probability field (i.e. in terms of world-lines).

Thus our stone or asteroid object, at height H, moving towards the earth’s center and thus a moment later recorded at height “H - 1,” is moving towards a denser cluster of world-lines defining the core region of the earth’s probability swarm. The probability that it will be found closer at time T + 1 is *by definition* more in the direction of the earth’s center, thus, as it moves in that direction, it becomes *progressively more likely* that it will next be found closer still, and this is what gravity actually is.

Considering our own human bodies, as probability swarms, they also have a lot METAPHORICALLY in common with the idea of gravity wells. “Light” (i.e. empirical consciousness) is “trapped” within them and cannot escape their “horizons”except under exceptional conditions of “escape velocity.” Consciousness is *mostly* under the influence, illusion, or entrainment of space-time-local perception habits. Once you are “inside” such a well, it is no longer just a nontrivial matter to emerge from one. It takes an unusual measure of “effort” or “energy” to override the deep influence of the well. It’s like trying to push a ball bearing up out of a bath tub: there needs to be a “force” at least equal in intensity to the force of the well itself....whether this force be named "drugs," "out of body experimentation" or "death."
Last edited: