A reminder: All of the posts in this blog are written for readers who have already read TotIs, where the concepts of TotIs and AntIs reality are carefully and thoughtfully brought to light and defined.
AntIs reality, the interpreted product supplied to the observer, exists in a subordinate position to totIs reality. Its limited access to totIs reality via the interpreted bio-sensory signals of the organism places the observer in a kind of ‘bubble’ within totIs reality, and upon which the interpreted images of reality are projected. From this antIs perspective, the interpretation of reality supplied to the observer becomes the center and basis of reality itself. With a clear understanding that we have a choice between two very different perspectives; one that we used to believe was reality and one that actually is reality, we have a powerful new platform from which to view the observers relationship with totIs reality.
This platform, allows us to shift our perspective from one where the observable universe must comport with our antIs representation of it, to one where we view the observable phenomena of antIs experience as effects of a process that remains inferior to the reality it interfaces with and, unable to transcend that process, has no direct access to its actual nature. It is from this platform, that the book TotIs, has re-framed our experience of time’s flow, using those certain results from relativity and quantum theory to illuminate the evidence for a totIs universe where times nature does not comport with our antIs experience of it, and so, show that our antIs experience of times flow is imaginary. To seek the actual nature of reality we must always seek for evidence outside of an antIs experience. The evidence for time’s flow, outside of an antIs experience, we have found, is lacking.
Is there evidence to be found, for the experience of flowing time, created by biology itself? It depends on the perspective and the platform of understanding we view the evidence from. Veronique Greenwood’s article in Quanta Magazine (“How the Body’s Trillions of Clocks Keep Time” September 15, 2015) details the current knowledge regarding the ubiquity of cellular clocks. The majority of cells in an organism’s body keep, or can we say, create, time through a complex biochemical process with the rhythmic production of specific proteins created to impel cells into specific actions following a cyclic pattern. They are described as time keeping proteins and regulate the expression of a significant portion of the organism’s genes. Evidence is accumulating that these clocks have deep effects on the organism. It’s interesting to note that there are multiple clock ‘components’ within the cells, that is, different ways for cells to ‘create’ time. Also important is the fact that there are a few cell types that lack such time-keeping ability, and those cell types are quite striking, embryonic stem cells, sperm precursors and cancer cells, to name a few. So almost every cell in the body has some type of clock mechanism.
The 24 hour circadian rhythm in mammals, it has been found, resides in a tiny locus in the brain, which scientists call the suprachiasmatic nucleus. Our central nervous system contains a 24 hour clock, the meter of time in our experience of the world around us. Do we believe the meter of a universal clock would be 24 hours? It has also been discovered that neither the brain, nor even a body, is required to create a rhythm. Individual cells will produce these proteins to express genes with their own unique ‘rhythms’. Liver cells, lung cells, most cells have clocks that both keep their own, distinct, time and react to the suprachiasmatic nucleus in the brain. These clocks are known as ‘peripheral’ clocks. Suddenly, biology, mirroring space-time, is resplendent with ‘relative’ time.
One thing seems clear, these biological clocks are central to the functioning of biology, but do they reflect how time functions in the universe itself? Viewed from the antIs platform, cellular clocks appear to be yet another manifestation of time’s arrow at work. Time’s movement, being central to our antIs experience of reality, is reflected in the cells creation of their own timekeeping ability. But we now know that these antIs results, and the knowledge we glean from them, are part of a process that is a dependent attribute of reality and not reality itself. From a totIs perspective we can imagine, without too much effort, that these cellular clocks, a direct manifestation of biology itself, will create for the organism, whether single celled or complex multi-cellular organisms, an experience of flowing, rhythmic time. It is also not to difficult to see how different organism’s, using different clock rhythm’s will experience time in a completely different way. Will the mayfly’s experience of time, in its lifespan of less than 24 hours, be the same as ours? What of the clonal Pando, a Quaking Aspen organism estimated at some 80,000 years of age? For that matter, our own experience of time’s flow is mutable, sometimes ‘dragging on’ and sometimes ‘flying by’. Some observers have even reported an experience where time ‘stops’ momentarily. Observing from the platform of a totIs reality, these biological clocks add an important bio-sensory input, coming from the deepest level of the cells themselves, to create an experience for the organism that becomes part and parcel of its antIs experience of reality. For these organism’s, the supplied experience of times flow, through rhythmic cellular function, becomes reality itself, and we are included among these organisms.
