"If you analyze it closely you will, I think, find that it is just a little bit more than a collection of single data (experiences and memories), namely the canvas upon which they are collected. And you will, on close introspection, find that what you really mean by ‘I’ is that ground-stuff upon which they are collected." [Schrödinger, Erwin (1992-01-31). What is Life? (Canto) Cambridge University Press]
The next fertile undiscovered frontier of science is the study of how the individual (you) naturally inhabit this universe. This topic speaks to the really interesting question of how any life, you, came to be where you are in the form that you are. Consciousness, self-awareness, sentience are evolved attributes had by very few forms of life in earth’s ecosystem, yet all are just as alive in nature. Such attributes cannot be relevant to either nature’s fundamental implementation of life, to being alive, or to experience. Experience may be enhanced by these attributes as they evolve in more complex hosts or species, but the phenomena which establish an instance of life likely bring no experience at all.
The position-of-view (POV) as described by the LINE hypothesis is implemented by a fundamental property of nature called natural entanglement. This process produces the POV which localizes you in your space-time, whether you have five, one, twenty, or no senses. Regardless of what or where one's living form may be in this universe. Effectively one's POV is the target for all of the sensory information we call experience. Any beings lifeID is temporarily localized to its host body by the naturally occurring entanglement between its physical host such as one's cell(s) together with a non-relativistic form of matter called metamatter (in Hilbert-space). The POV of each individual can be represented mathematically by its unique wave function. This wave function is a unique solution of state for the individual in space-time and is the term missing from many of our quantum mechanical solutions. The POV is nothing less than the mathematical representation of a living being.
In life, the POV brings no experience but only that which may have an experience. In nature, a POV is the mathematical representation of a lifeID established either by the entanglement of a single cell to metamatter, or alternatively by the heterodyning of multiple entanglement cells (EC) to metamatter. If you are in fact alive then your composite lifeID and its position-of-view together constitute your being regardless of your physical state, form, condition, or location in space-time. If the entanglement hypothesis accurately depicts the reality in this universe and the entanglement molecule exists, then it represents the most fundamental physical component of life as we know it. Like the Top-Quark, or the Higgs, the Ether or DNA, the entanglement molecule may someday be isolated and identified either in the cell or in the environment. or not. Either way, we may learn something along the way.
To date, the most promising structure yet discovered which displays some of the features and functions consistent with those predicted by the LINE hypothesis for the entanglement molecule (EM), while perhaps falling well shot of complete equivalence, is the Fenna-Matthews-Olson (FMO) complex. This photosynthetic antenna complex is the naturally occurring molecular structure responsible for the photosynthetic non-classical conduction observed in living plant cells via natural entanglement. In green algae, it operates to overcome the otherwise inefficient latency of classical mechanisms which would result in a devastating loss of anti-entropic information needed from sunlight for the continued evolution of viable hosts on this planet.
Likewise, a similar natural entanglement antenna complex describes the predicted entanglement molecule which instantiates the living individual to available hosts wherever they may emerge in this universe. This Entanglement is between the living hosts (cells) and a form of matter (metamatter) in Hilbert-space made accessible only by the non-locality, non-relativistic reach of natural entanglement. It is indeed a true testament to the amazing ingenuity and flexibility of nature that such an implementation is not only possible but naturally emerges, for life may not exist without it. This instantiation mechanism is the most plausible solution to the conundrum of individuality in this universe posed by the LINE scenario.
If the entanglement molecule indeed predated the cell then, structurally if not functionally, it must be of a different design than the FMO complex. The FMO is a protein-based structure assembled from complex amino acids and likely evolved within the cell here on earth or planets nearby. To predate the cell the EM must permit natural entanglement by utilizing a more fundamental elemental design. The entanglement molecule may be one with which we are already familiar.
The hypothesized entanglement molecule, a primordial arrangement of atoms, naturally establishes a shared information state with a form of matter hypothesized to exist outside of our space-time in Hilbert-space. Today it is suspected that gravity is as weak as observed in our space-time because it too exists partially or mostly outside of our space-time. However, gravity-like all known standard-model forces is governed and constrained by the laws of relativity and its' effects are therefore limited at or below the speed of light in this space-time. Therefore, changes in the suns’ gravitational influence, for example, take 8 minutes to reach the earth just as does the suns’ light. The only phenomenon known to science that demonstrates behavior that essentially subverts the current laws of relativity is entanglement, a type of quantum coherence. Natural entanglement is quantum entanglement implemented by natural structures like the Fenna-Matthews-Olson (FMO) complex or by the hypothesized entanglement molecule and is utilized in nature to great effect. Life is one such effect.
So what might be the origins and structure of the entanglement molecule? For starters, it is most likely to be one of a finite number of known interstellar molecules. These are molecules formed from stellar or interstellar processes rather than within ecosystems. There is a good chance that whatever the structure of the entanglement molecule may have been prior to the emergence of life on earth it may since have been transformed here on Earth to be incorporated into cellular structures such as in the DNA molecule or in the FMO complex. Much of the DNA molecule remains unknown to modern science and is sometimes referred to as DNA dark matter. This suggests that, like interstellar dark matter, DNA dark matter is also undefined. Nonetheless, this significant unknown portion of the molecule most influential to earth-life must be of primary interest in the search for the entanglement molecule; But what to look for? For guidance, I tend to begin my scrutiny with the structure of the FMO complex. This photosynthetic antenna complex is the naturally occurring molecular structure responsible for the photosynthetic non-classical conduction observed in living plant cells via natural entanglement. In green algae, it operates to overcome the otherwise inefficient latency of classical mechanisms which would result in a devastating loss of anti-entropic information needed from sunlight for the continued evolution of viable hosts on this planet, cross-referenced with types of known primordial molecules. Today, in our quest for life, we tend to search only for molecules that support our current understanding of the implementation of life in this universe, which are molecules that comprise the biological structures we can readily identify, this is of course as it must be. However, there may be a more effective approach.
This alternate approach requires an understanding of the instantiation of life by natural entanglement and the subsequent development of technologies based on its principles such as a conceptual entanglement telescope. Such a telescope would reveal areas of dense natural entanglement present in living entities throughout this universe in a manner similar to the way non-optical telescopes illuminate matter. Properly designed QE detectors when exposed to the open sky will permit us to see life throughout the universe as bright star-like spots of complexity. Each such spot reveals, not the density of matter at those locations, but rather the immensely concentrated density of information complexity present in living entities at those locations, complexity which exists in much greater density in living entities than in non-living ones. In nature how does the influence and density of informational complexity encoded in living entities compare to that of inanimate matter?
Our most powerful computing systems programmed with our best models running non-stop for months can barely model the folding of a basic protein. Step this concept up to the full expression of a complex protein not to mention the Ribosome which is the tiny factory that builds proteins in living organisms, step that up all the way to modeling a living bacteria, etc. This informational concentration of DNA and its systems, regardless of how we define them, is potent to the mathematics and therefore to the state of nature and each instance is a multiplier of this mathematical potency. Each instance is each DNA strand in each cell that has ever been created in the four-plus billion years that DNA has existed on Earth. Put in these terms you can begin to appreciate how earth life has contributed to nature as a very potent mathematical factory contributing to balancing the existential formula.
On the other hand, we are much more capable of modeling a star like our Sun or even a black hole which we all know are both physically much larger than a DNA molecule or a Ribosome or your cat. As I'm sure you can see size doesn't matter in this regard. Likewise, complexity can be deceptive to the human eye but is well defined in mathematical terms. The reason we are more able to model a Star is because the processes that implement a star and inanimate entities, in general, are far simpler in mathematical and informational complexity than those that define a protein to a bacteria. Modeling a star is only a few orders of magnitude more difficult than simulating the aerodynamics and thermodynamics of the Space shuttle. Simulating even single bacteria is far, far more complex.
The true measure of any species’ cognitive maturity is engendered by the accuracy of what it knows or believes it knows about its own living condition.
For decades it has been understood by modern science that far-reaching relocation and travel within this universe is fundamentally and practically prohibited by natural mechanisms, fantasies to the contrary notwithstanding. As is often the case, however, nature presents the solution to the problems it creates. Placement and relocation of the individual within this universe is a mechanism that must have been in place long before the evolution of living biological hosts like the cell.
Natures’ means of populating this universe, not only with naturally evolved biological forms but also with naturally instantiated individual POV’s, is likely the only answer to Humankinds' dreams of far-flung interstellar or intergalactic relocation. Once we master the elements of reinstantiation of the individual we will see that our bodies are not required for relocation of the individual within this universe. True to nature's design the host body is always left behind. Relocating only the individuals’ position-of-view is the only viable means of moving through a vast universe permeated by a Higgs field. Controlling the instantiation of life will permit us a degree of influence and self-determinism we do not have when nature handles one's instantiation.
In theory, with the proper understanding and technologies, one could instantaneously, selectively reinstantiate to available preferred hosts in any viable ecosystem, located anywhere in this universe. It is preferable if not likely that this would one day become a round trip endeavor, but until then it would serve as a means of assuring one's continued participation in the human experience on or near one's current ecosystem. Also, although controlled instantiation may not preserve the individual’s endearing qualities such as memories, personality, or behavior it does, however, offer some degree of control over one’s prospects for life which some may regard to be better than none at all. Any advanced species that share this universe with us will no doubt already understand this.
Since ancient times humankind has felt endeared by certain properties, skills, or talents observed in the living forms all around us. Properties that are misconstrued to be fundamental identifiers of life and of all living beings, properties such as mobility, voice, speech, sight, memory, and biology as we know it.
The reason Thomas Edison could so enthrall spectators with his newly designed speaking device, which he dubbed the phonograph, is due to humankind's hitherto engrained, evolved, or learned, and largely subconscious understanding that a voice, for example, is the sound of a living being's soul. Although consciously many people knew better, nevertheless it wasn’t until they were able to actually witness the spectacle of a clearly inanimate device producing a voice did the rewiring of people’s minds and the accompanying enlightenment take place. So it was with self locomotion or mobility of inanimate objects which also took some getting used to by our not so distant ancestors, as did light detection describable as sight, so too with the introduction of retrievable memory and such surprising spectacles exhibited by inanimate nonbiological devices.
Then there is life. Today we have a much more detailed description of biology and its chemistry than did our forbearers. Nonetheless, we perhaps more than ever, continue to see nature’s implementation of life as we did those other skills, as a feature indigenous to and expressible only by the biological forms we currently see around us. With the exception of life, it is only the encroachment of our synthetic, non-biological technologies upon these formerly cherished skills and talents that have helped us to see nature’s true design. In so doing we now realize that these functions are not exclusively properties of living beings or of biology but rather examples of utilization and manipulation of more basic properties of nature such as temperature and pressure, light, chemical, electromotive, and ponderomotive forces, friction, entanglement, etc.
However, where life is concerned, and taking no example from the past, we continue to cling to the misconception that life is not a skill or talent comparable to speech or memory, a property that similarly evolved here on earth in biological form. Instead, we define life by the observed biology and chemistry of the forms we see around us. This is akin to defining speech, communication, memory, or vision by the description of your eyes, or larynx or neurons and their chemistry, or by the design of Edison’s phonograph, or by the intricate electrical designs of the cell phone. Life too is an evolved capability with a natural implementation abstracted from any particular biology or chemistry we may see around us. In nature, life has a fundamental implementation based on natural entanglement via a molecule that may have existed in nature long before life emerged, a molecule like so many others utilized by the cell to exceptional effect, the entanglement molecule. A molecule that may also be utilized in synthetic, perhaps non-biological, forms to create an independent genesis of life.
No matter how detailed or convincing the illusion of life may become in its implementation, for example in an android or computer or even in a biological entity, despite what your eyes may urge you to believe, each continues to be a non-living entity absent natures fundamental mechanism of life. An essential mechanism provided via natural entanglement between the properly implemented entanglement molecules within living cells located in this space-time with metamatter in Hilbert-space which together produce each unique living individual’s position-of-view (POV) and lifeID. This is the essential mechanism that permits any viable form to host an individual like yourself or your pet otter anywhere in our space-time. It is how you are where you are right now. It is the natural anti-entropic mechanism that permits any viable planet or species to host your life. By this hypothesized definition even the most convincingly implemented appearance and behavior of an entity not naturally entangled in this way will continue to be an inanimate entity. In contrast, a handheld brick such as a calculator instantiated by natural entanglement to establish a POV, despite all appearances, this unconvincing brick would in fact be a living being.
The day will shortly arrive when we are confronted as we previously have been, with a new implementation of entities that meet all of the aesthetic and behavioral misconceptions we now harbor about life, or alternatively ones that show no traditional evidence of life what so ever, absent an understanding of the true determinant of life natural entanglement, we will be ill-prepared to tell the difference.
Every living entity possesses an entangled position-of-view. This axiom emerges from an understanding that nature must have only one implementation for life no matter what that entitys' visible appearance or structure or placement in space-time may be. This may eventually prove to be true only for earths’ particular genesis of life, but such an amendment would need to await our discovery of another unique genesis of life which demonstrates a non-entanglement-based implementation. Until then it remains prudent to assume that this natural entanglement is pervasive throughout nature. To the outside world, each instantiation of any individual is a different unique instance of life, however to the individual, ones’ first-person position of view is a singular and ongoing phenomenon of experience or the lack thereof, regardless of form or location of one's host. Persistent, retrievable memory spanning multiple instantiations is likely to be a very rare occurrence in living hosts. Nonetheless, nature provides a limited storage reserve of anti-entropic cellular state information imprinted in metamatter during the course of each instantiation, each lifetime. This information is accessible to any emerged hosts for life which utilizes natural entanglement to metamatter to instantiate a living being. It is hypothesized that the genesis of life in any ecosystem is bootstrapped by this universal cloud-storage reserve of anti-entropic cellular state information, and is made accessible by the entanglement molecule in a manner metaphorically similar to how a transceiver (ham-radio) may make information accessible to someone lost in the middle of a remote expansive desert. It is probable that the longer an individual’s lifespan the greater the influence of this stored imprint upon one's reinstantiation prospects is likely to be.
This may be the basis, the justification for species loyalty. Premise; is there any reason for any individual during any given instance of life to be loyal to one's current species besides a conscious immediate circumstantial need to survive? Many species demonstrate some partiality to their current species or host form. Why is this the case? Given that without the LINE hypothesis most believe with varying degrees of certainty that ones’ current being will eventually cease to exist and this will be an eternal condition. However, the LINE hypothesis mandates that there is a certainty of continued life, but not a certainty of form. Further, the LINE hypothesis describes a mechanism that may influence one's reinstantiation prospects whereby the amount of imprinted familial metamatter in existence (entangled by family members with similar cellular DNA) positively biases one's prospects of reinstantiating into one's recent family line and thereby into one's recent species. How so? Cellular Natural entanglement is facilitated by any metamatter which is more similarly imprinted to the cellular state of the host cell(s) seeking entanglement. This is essentially a tuning relationship. Think of tuning a transistor radio to a specific electromagnetic frequency to receive a specific radio station that is broadcasting at that same frequency. Likewise, a cells’ internal state which is largely dictated by its DNA and immediate circumstances is essentially a tuned entity.
So too is metamatter which has been imprinted over the course of a lifetime by cells of similar DNA and entanglement frequency (QEF). Compatible hosts and metamatter will therefore become more likely to engage in a natural entanglement relationship. Stem-metamatter is essentially un-imprinted metamatter and will therefore display no predisposition, or bias to entangle any specific host. In other words, stem-metamatter will entangle any available viable host regardless of its form. If an individual’s metamatter is permitted to revert to a stem condition this suggests that this individual which has few or no compatible hosts in existence in the form of offspring or familial relations, therefore, has a statistically smaller probability of entangling a host from its former family line and an increasing probability of eventually (over time) entangling non-familial hosts in its former species. Further, with longer spans of time spent unentangled (dead, uninstantiated, not alive), this would increase the probability of entangling a host increasingly dissimilar to one’s previous host.
This natural implementation sheds some light on the demonstrated motivation of living individuals throughout Earth's ecosystem to procreate often at the expense of all else. Why should Mr. Zebra seek to preserve its current species? He isn’t really; Mr. Zebras’ DNA is in fact seeking to increase its chances of entangling similar metamatter by spreading copies of itself far and wide and in so doing it increases the individual’s, Mr. Zebras’ chances of reinstantiating into its current form. Any individual zebra or lion or ameba or human tends to subconsciously exercise this behavior even if it means eliminating any or most of its current species. On occasion, this drive is seen to be partial to siblings and such but is largely self-serving. Seen from the outside, and in the absence of the understanding provided by the instantiation of life hypothesis, this behavior appears to be some sort of social loyalty of Mr. Zebra to zebras as a species, and is often described by a situational narrative or cognitive dedication to family and so forth. The truth is a more fundamental reality of natural cause and effect.