Karma And The Infinite Chain Of Causality
If every living thing, every grain of sand on the beach, every star in the sky is linked by a web of causality, and one could comprehend that web in its entirety down to the movements of the sub atomic Higgs-Boson particles, would it be enough to enable one to see where all the currents are leading and foretell the future, or perhaps change it?
From a scientific point of view, space and all it contains is dynamic and in constant motion. The Uncertainty Principle of particle physics defines a limit to the precision with which certain physical properties of a particle, such as it’s momentum (m) and position (p) can be simultaneously known especially when factoring in velocity (v). If electrons, using the atom as a model, are in constant motion around a proton, then its logical to hypothesize that even smaller as yet to be identified particles are also in continual flux. Realistically, one could only identify a cloud of potential locations defined by the path of an electron or smaller particles traveling around a gravitational focus. Even then, the scope of possible locations at any given moment does not necessarily have to be symmetrical since gravitational forces can vary in the space within the cloud.
This is one of the main reasons why most contemporary scientists discount the possibility that it would be feasible to transport an individual from one place to another. On the other hand, it still leaves open the possibility that future discoveries, as yet unknown, may very well prove its validity as much as the many scenarios envisioned in Science Fiction that have eventually become the basis for science fact without ever mentioning Star Trek.
Gene Roddenberry’s inspiration for the transporter came from The Fly, the 1958 horror film that starred Vincent Price, David Hedison, Patricia Owens and Herbert Marshall. It was directed by Kurt Neumann with a screenplay by James Clavell and George Langelaan. The plot surrounds Dr. Andre Delambre (Hedison) who is doing research on a matter transporter model he calls the disintegration – reintegration device. In the film, he creates two large sized chambers to further his experiments on humans, but in an impulsive decision, he uses himself as the first human subject. This is a common and tragic mistake that scientists make when they become impatient with slow progress, considering it too meticulous. They intentionally skip some important steps and the results are often monstrous. In this case the worst possible scenario occurs when a fly is trapped in the same chamber with Andre when he transports himself to the other chamber. When the experiment is complete Andre has the head and arm of the fly, and the fly has the head and arm of Andre.
Roddenberry admittedly used this approach to get the actors from the Starship Enterprise to the alien planet primarily to save money and spend more time developing the plot, but he left it to the writers and the science consultants to explain the mechanics of how the transporter could actually work.
In order to successfully transport someone, scientists would have to not only be able to plot every particle and the space between the sub atomic entities contained within the individual but also anticipate the position (p), velocity (v), momentum (m) and direction of each of them, including the space between the space. This, if properly calculated, would allow them to predict their location in time and space when reintegrating them during the transporter process. Otherwise, the living web and its components would be thrown into chaos when materialization occurs.
The metaphor of the disintegration – reintegration device in The Fly suggests that the person would have to be disintegrated before being reconstituted since one of the basic principles of physics is that matter can neither be created or destroyed, although some scientists are finding evidence that a sub-atomic particle can exist in two places at the same time. This has still yet to be proven, but what would happen to the soul during this process? a valid question as we move from science into Philosophy, Metaphysics and Theology.
It’s important to note here that in the East, cause and effect and karma are one and the same. There is no distinction between these concepts except that the west is hesitant to acknowledge the eastern terminology because it had become associated with the New Age Movement of Transcendentalism that was intimately associated with psychedelics during the counter culture movement of the nineteen sixties.
According to eastern philosophy, there is no concept as good or bad karma. Rather, its just energy that we subjectively define as positive or negative depending on whether it causes happiness or pain and suffering. However when we look at the karmic events retrospectively, something that results in pain can often lead to new ways of thinking and behavior that can result in a change in the foundation of thought and an evolution in consciousness which is ultimately a positive thing.
When wondering about causality, unexpected variables may be encountered. If it could be possible to anticipate the relationship between cause and effect early enough for it to be possible to make adjustments along the way by opening the door for free will to predict the outcome, would that alone make sense when it comes to anticipating the future? I wonder about that. It would still not guarantee that a specific future would occur or that it would unfold in a predictable manner. The flaw of this hypothesis is that it fails to consider that things rarely occur as a linear outcome of one cause leading to one effect. More likely, there are multiple causes that evoke numerous effects that in turn leads to other causes that becomes yet another karmic response as part of the infinite chain of causality.
Another insurmountable consideration is that in order to comprehend the entire web of causality one would have to presuppose that the individual would have to be conscious of the microcosm and macrocosm of everything that exists simultaneously with full awareness. In other words, one would have to be God, or at least have God potential in them.