INBETWEENNESS: A SPIRITUAL VISION BEYOND RELIGION  AND SCIENCE   

We can now ask whether it is ever possible to distinguish experience from the interpretation of it. If not, it is unclear how any experience can be said to be self-assuring. The idea that the religious experience is independent of any interpretation of it can lead to the claim that there is an underlying unity of all religions, that different religions are simply different forms of truth. If religious experience is itself universal and independent of any particular religion’s interpretation of it, then not all religions are derived from the same experience but point to a dimension of existence which is beyond religion itself. This is the spiritual realm of Inbetweenness. The spiritual is the fundamental ground of religion and each religion is a different form of it.1

 
Since the beginning of time, human beings have been trying to understand the meaning of it all.  This aspiration mainly took two paths, where some tried to accomplish such understanding through their religious perspectives and the rest joined the scientific ever developing evolution to gain such understanding.  This is not to mention that the two often clashed.    

When one carefully studies comparative religion, one cannot ignore the fact that there are many commonalities, even among seemingly distant religions, as if the source of them all is one.2 Of course, to a spiritual person, this is not news at all.  Spirituality cuts across and goes beyond religions.3 On the other side, when one examines organized religions, one cannot ignore the fact that there are many problematics.  These problematics rose due to different movements of organized religions, human-made unspiritual practices and beliefs, the long line of human-made interpretations and humanitarianism of religions.  What we have, today, is religious-less and spiritual-less religions.  As a result, the world suffers from sectarianisms, conflicts and intolerance.  Religion, today, is an institution managed by money, politics and occasionally sex.  Even God, as proposed by religions, can only exist beyond organized religions.  As a solution to such problematics, the move to spirituality was extremely necessary.          
 
The group, that chose science over religion, did not land very far from spirituality.  Science, especially physics, has been trying to acquire an understanding of what is, through finding an encompassing description of it all; unification.  Since the beginning, scientists have been modifying their understanding through different and constantly developing interpretations such as the proposition of other dimensions neighboring our four dimensional space-time continuum, the notion of warped space and the leaking gravity from one dimension to another.4 Day in and day out, this journey seems to get closer and closer to spirituality.     
 
For Isaac Newton, the journey, of an encompassing description of it all, began when Newton realized that the same force pulling apples toward earth is responsible for keeping other celestials, such as the moon, in orbit.  To put this in perspective, he described gravity, using mathematical equations, hoping to reach a picture where all is understood and unified within our immediate dimension.  Some problematics with this vision were that gravity was not the only form of energy keeping everything in place, gravity was not as instantaneous as Newton thought and the possibility of the existence of other dimensions beside ours.   
 
A further step into this journey of unification was that of Maxwell.  Maxwell’s greatest achievement is possibly the unification of the two forces of electricity and magnetism into electromagnetism.  This amplified our understanding of what the universe is and how it functions; yet other forces, such as the strong and weak nuclear forces, were still missing from Maxwell’s cosmic picture.  They, respectively, are responsible for keeping the atomic structure intact and the decaying of nuclear energy (radioactivity), which were not yet understood at the time.   
 
Albert Einstein’s journey began with the investigation of the random motions of particles, photoelectric effect of emitted electrons when light strikes certain metals and the well-known relativity theory that led to E=MC2.  Einstein’s objective, in which he spent a lifetime trying to accomplish, was to understand and unify the big picture of general relativity and the small of quantum physics.  He had to understand how gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force came as one to accomplish what we see today as cosmos.  To his credit, science has never been possibly indebted to any single scientist as much as Einstein even though he passed away without accomplishing his goal.  What Einstein proposed collapsed at the instant of the big bang where the four cosmic
forces were essentially one.   
 
Today, we encounter M-theory.  M-theory was the result of the earlier string theory.  String theory was basically developed to encompass quantum physics and general relativity.  This, of course, includes all four cosmic forces.  String theory proposed that quantum physics has been looking at particles, as the fundamental parts of existents, the wrong way.  Instead of pointy particles, it is vibrating string-like entities that are responsible for what we see today as our universe.  String theorists also suggested that these strings move and vibrate in other dimensions, which explain the disappearance of particles when they are not in the human dimension of space and time.  When different equations were solved, string theorists found themselves dealing with ten dimensions.  The results were promising but when carefully examined, that framework collapsed giving five different versions of string theories.   
 
To overcome string theories’ problematics, physicists turned to super-gravity theory, which was an earlier view that was discounted.  The result was an additional eleventh dimension.  When different equations were solved after adding the eleventh dimension, what thought to be five different string theories turned to be all different variations of the same thing.  In fact after considering the eleventh dimension, the very ontology of strings changed.  As a result, membranes came into being.  M-theory now plays a role where the idea of parallel universes is not fictional any more.
 
Taking M-theory further, physicists can now explain what caused the big bang and penetrate its singularity where all forces were essentially one.  Membranes are proposed to be rippling violently and continuously moving entities that bang against each other all the time.  Of course, since they are not totally flat, continuously rippling and vibrating; they bang against each other touching different points at different or same times.  Each two banging points create different packs of energy, so to speak, at different or same times.  The big bang was the result of one of these slamming ripples and what we have today, as our universe, is its result.  Of course, this connotates the fact that there are other neighboring universes that are created the same way at the same or at different times as our universe.  This also implies that time did exist beyond the moment of singularity and that singularity is a mere start only of this universe of ours.  What is on this side is an expansion in the space-time continuum and so is the other side.  Now, physicists have concluded that the moment of singularity is a penetrable tunnel, so to speak.                       
 
 When it comes to Quantum Physics, there is the mystery of wave-particle duality as described by physicist Richard Feynman.  According to many physicists, atomic objects sometimes behave as point-like particles and other times behave like waves spread over space in time.  The question of when each takes place, according to those physicists, depends on whether the atomic object is observed or not.   
 
Unobserved photons, for example, are waves of possibilities spread in space and time but the second they are observed, they are collapsed into particles of manifestation.  Some questions, now, come to mind.  What kind of an act is the action of observation and why would such an act cause such results?  Physics, as science with mathematics as its language, failed to provide the answer, therefore, I would like to make the move to metaphysics.  This is due partially because metaphysics is not limited by the language of mathematics and its symbols and partially because metaphysics is beyond physics.      
 
 First, I would like to assume that waves and particles are the same entity.  They both are energy.  This means that when physicists talk about a wave that collapsed into a particle, they are actually speaking of the same entity that went through two different forms.  The only difference is that when unobserved, waves exist as mere tendencies.  They are states of becoming.  On the other hand, when observed particles exist as point-like particles; they are reality manifested, tendencies realized and actualities rather than possibilities.  They are states of being.   
 
 The act of observation is an act of consciousness.  Unobserved waves are an unconscious of states of becoming.  Observed particles are conscious of states of being.  The degree of awareness on the part of the observing being is in relation to the degree of consiousness.  Awareness and consiousness are different variations of the same entity just like waves, particles, energy and matter also are.  Awareness is a product of the brain and consiousness is a product of the mind.  Brain and mind are two different variations of the same entity, just like ice and water.  Everything is energy including mind, brain, consiousness, matter, awareness, water, ice, you and me. Everything is different because there are different degrees of energy, different degrees of movement and vibration.  From another view, the observer and observed are one and the same.  Both are particles of energy vibrating to be!  Simply put, the action of observation is a relationship between both the observing consiousness and that which is observed.  This relationship is reciprocal and not necessarily symmetrical.5
 
 To answer the second question of why the act of observation would result in the collapse of the wave function to what is viewed as a point-like particle, we need to understand what took place during the act of observation and even before it.  Waves (particles) dance longing to meet their antiparticles.  An unobserved waving electron, for example, dance in tendencies longing to reach its ultimate state of being, which is meeting its antiparticle; the positron.  The reason for that is its negative charge.  The negative charge of an electron pushes it to seek its antimatter partner to reach a state of harmony, unity or the singularity in which it originally started from.   
 
 During the act of observation, the observing consiousness calls the wave (electron) into being (particle).  The observing consciousness cuts, what could be a journey of hundreds of light years through tens of galaxies of the observed particle, short into what is now a probability rather than a further possibility.  Basically, it is easier for the electron to be satisfied with what could be of 60% certainty rate that its positron exists right here and now rather than 20% certainty rate that its positron might exists in space X  in time X millions of light years away.  This strength of probability depends mostly on the observing consiousness especially to its degree of awareness.  An observer’s degree of awareness and certainty during an experiment in a physics lab is not the same as that of an observer living everyday life during a road trip, for example.  The idea of a wave collapsing is normally more possible to the first, which dictates the strength of a probability of a wave actually collapsing.  Simply, the degree of actuality of an event taking place depends on the observer or more generally the participator.   
 
 The rest, of course, happens at the instant of the wave collapsing into a particle of manifestation.  The observing consiousness, being energy itself, forms the relationship that the wave originally was longing to accomplish.  The result is the manifestation of the now particle within this dimension, rather than the supposed possibilities and tendencies of waves taking place within the unobserved next dimension.  Now, the particle of manifestation is observed in this dimension and is dead (zero or very small possibility) within what seemed only to the human mind as a totally another separate dimension of void.   
 
 What makes sense of it all for Sunnie D. Kidd is Inbetweenness.  Inbetweenness is the encompassing all-pervading field where all existents are spiritually connected.  This field is the cosmic connection of it all where existents spontaneously move and vibrate to participate through spiritual reciprocal relationships.  The themes of Inbetweenness are the cosmic connection of it all, movement and vibration, spontaneity, constant change and participatory.6 Inbetweenness is the cosmos of possibilities where all acquires itself through spiritual interactions.   
 
 Inbetweenness is not a religion nor does it profess any regulations. With Inbetweenness, each existent is its own most possibilities. Ontologically, Inbetweenness does not segregate the self and the other; both are spiritual existents.  Axiologically, Inbetweenness does not enforce any rules.  Spontaneity, naturally and dynamically, yields the possibilities of dos and don’ts of self-government with the ontology of Inbetweenness as its first regard.  Harming another is harming oneself; helping another is helping oneself.
 
 With Inbetweenness, ethics and values do not only exist due to their mere enforcement.  In fact, if they are enforced, they are useless.  This may go against the current system of life and even takes it out. The system proved; with all its governments, judges, laws and law enforcement agencies; that it’s not at all sufficient.7 Self-government, when it comes to Inbetweenness, is the result of understanding that everything we do or, even, do not has immediate consequences on everything else.  
Let us discuss the themes of Inbetweenness.  First, Inbetweenness is the cosmic connection of it all.  This is not a statement of superior philosophy or divine religion; it is a statement of inclusion.  Inbetweenness is the spiritual that moves and vibrates which is all and all is it. With Inbetweenness interaction is possible and all is connected through relationships.  There is no clear cut distinction where we end and where the cosmos begin.  We came from it and we go back to it, a pattern of movement.  Simply, all life forms and even death are different variations or degrees of energy.  What gives the illusion that water, for example, is different from humans is the degree of movement and vibration of each existent.  This is unity and connectedness beyond race, religion, political borders and colors.
 
 Even particles and waves are the same.  Just because a wave moves and vibrates differently from a particle does not exclude either from being energy.  The statement that particles are point-like entities does not seem to be sufficient.  There is no such an entity that is totally 100% point-like entity; otherwise, it would be energy that is totally 100% still.  Making such a statement is absurd.  It is just a sensual illusion and a way of description.  A particle vibrates and moves differently from a wave; possibly less intensely.  Due to this cosmic connection, any disturbance within this chain will impact the wholeness of it all.   
 
 The second theme is movement and vibration.  Movement and vibration is a way of being that gives the distinction or observable variation to existents but does not in any way separate them from each other.  Water and ice, for example, exist undividedly as parts of the cosmos, even though; they tend to have distinct properties.  It is their degree of movement and vibration that makes them what they are and also keeps them in relations to the rest of the cosmic wholeness.  To say, something exists but does not move nor vibrate is as saying that it actually does not exist.  Moving and vibrating is every existent’s way of being.   
 
 The third theme is spontaneity.  Let us in understanding this theme refer to Daoism.  The word Dao (Tao) means The Way.  It is the way of things.  The Dao of the cat, for example, is the cat’s way of being out of its own bliss, so to speak.  This is even beyond the existential notion of choice.  Spontaneity is beyond choice.  Choice is cognitive.  Spontaneously being is intuitive.  Choice is the product of awareness.  Spontaneity is the product of consciousness.  The later is a fuller way of being.  A particle, for example, spontaneously longs for its antiparticle.  This longing comes out of its way of being.  A female, as another example, longing for a male companion (love) is a way of being.  It is an act of consciousness.  It is the Dao of humans.  It is spontaneous and intuitive.  The decision of marriage, on the
other hand, is an act of choice.  It is cognitive.  It is human-made.   
 
 All existents when acting spontaneously place the value on their way of being.  Therefore, there is no such thing as materialism, conflict nor, even, happiness or misery.  This is due to the notion that choices yield consequences but it is spontaneity that yields one’s being.      
 
 The next theme is constant change.  Constant change, simply, is the result of the way of things. There is an endless movement and vibration that cause all existents to melt in and out of each other.  All existents have certain degrees of consciousness but not awareness.  What thought to be for years as lifeless and/or solid, a tree for example, proved to be made of the same energy as humans.  Both proved to have consciousness.  Plants, for example, tend to follow what gives pleasure as sun light, music and distant themselves from what causes undesirable results such as forming thorns instead of leaves in plants that are exposed to dehydration.  Plants do not have the same degree of awareness that humans have, on the other hand, since awareness is mostly a product of the brain and its senses.  Put simply, everything is in constant change even that which seems to be solid and still.  Here is how physicist Evan H. Walker describes the quantum process of change and becoming in regards to consciousness:
 

Consciousness may be associated with all quantum mechanical processes…since everything that occurs is ultimately the result of one or more quantum mechanical events, the universe is “inhabited” by an almost unlimited number of rather discrete conscious, usually non-thinking entities that are responsible for the detailed working of the universe.8  

 
 The last main theme of Inbetweenness is participatory.  It is advantageous to see how physicist John A. Wheeler describes the role of the participator in regards to quantum physics:  
 

May the universe in some strange sense be “brought into being” by the participation of those who participate… The vital act is the act of participation.  “Participator” is the incontrovertible new concept given by quantum mechanics.  It strikes down the term “observer” of classical theory, the man who stands safely behind the thick glass wall and watches what goes on without taking part.  It can’t be done, quantum mechanics says.9

       
Inbetweenness puts the responsibility in our laps.  If all is connected, any participation within the all will create change.  We are the creators of all changes whether good or bad.  Since all is connected, included, moving, vibrating and change causing; the chain of events that we are responsible for is endless.  A good example of that is the atomic bomb of 1945.  It has been documented that if a person goes, today, to where the bomb was dropped, in Japan over sixty years ago with a measuring device and measures the weak nuclear force (radioactivity), the gauge will prove its existence.  If that same person gets infected with cancer, today, due to such an act, it would be the responsibility of the person who dropped the bomb sixty years ago!  This, of course, is only what we can measure, having in mind that the cosmos are beyond our measurements!
 
 All existents involuntarily participate.  All is a participator.  This is due to the fact that all unwillingly move and vibrate.  Again, this is not a matter of choice.  It is a way of being since all is energy.   
 
 As a conclusion, all themes of Inbetweenness are interconnected and dynamically interdependent as articulated above.  Inbetweenness does not profess any dogmas, ethical codes or any affiliations.  Inbetweenness is the way of being of all existence.  It is already what they are; their spiritual make up.  It is something we cannot escape.  It has been, lately, recognized scientifically due to the relatively slow advancement of science.  It existed all along and has been realized by different mystics from different religious backgrounds.  It is the truth that has been called many names.       
 
Notes :           
      

  1. Sunnie D. Kidd, “Inbetweenness: The Indivisible Whole,” (superdirector.com, 1 August 2002); Cf. inbetweenness.com 2008.
  2.  Examples of religious commonalities are uncountable: Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, was prophesized by many Hindu scriptures such as the Bhavishva Purana and Samveda.  Another example is when the Quran mentions over twenty prophets, from different historic eras and societies, by name.  
  3. “Spirituality cuts across and goes beyond all religions,” James W. Kidd, Educational Psychology Lecture, Santa Rosa, University of San Francisco, 2000.           
  4. For further readings on multi-dimensionality, the weakness and leakage of gravity, see the works of Lisa Randall.   
  5. See Sunnie D. Kidd, “Dialogal Modes of Understanding,”  (inbetweenness.com 2008).  
  6. James W. Kidd, Ph, D., “Themes and the Thematic Field of the Dimensional Field Of Inbetweenness,” (inbetweenness.com 2008).  
  7. It is common knowledge that our human-made system of life has totally failed.  Crime rates are raising, wars are expanding and the only flourishing aspect of the system is the prison industry!  
  8. Evan H. Walker, “The Nature of Consciousness,” Mathematical Biosciences, (7, 1970), pp. 175-176.
  9. John. A. Wheeler, K. S. Thorne, and C. Misner, Gravitation, (San Francisco, (Freeman, p. 1273).

 

More posts by this author:

    None Found

Please follow and like us:

Co Authors :

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.