Section 28 (first updated 1.22.2021)
Wormholes, Energy Inversion, and Temporal Discontinuity
The modern explanation of a wormhole describes it as a “connection between widely separated regions of spacetime.”¹ Two locations that are ordinarily distant within the spacetime fabric become connected and effectively reduced to the same point, so that the time required to travel from one to the other becomes zero.
Materialist physicists often claim that wormholes could arise when an enormous amount of energy—equal to, or exceeding, the energies found in nuclear explosions—distorts spacetime.² Two masses, through extreme gravitational force, are said to wrap spacetime into a tunnel connecting separated points.
But how can the amount of energy alone create a wormhole?
Two Inverse Magnitudes of Energy
Energy propagates along two distinct magnitudes within spacetime:
1. Macroscopic Magnitude of Energy
When a large amount of energy is released outwardly, it travels in the macroscopic dimension. Here:
- it occupies the greatest volume of space,
- in the shortest amount of time,
- it is maximally dispersed,
- and minimally concentrated.
A nuclear explosion is an example: expansion is rapid, area is vast, density is low.
2. Microscopic Magnitude of Energy
Conversely, when energy is expressed on the microscopic scale:
- it occupies the smallest region of space,
- with the greatest density,
- is maximally compressed,
- and is most intensive.
Here, within the smallest temporal window, the maximum number of events occur.³
These inverse magnitudes reveal how wormholes behave:
A wormhole does not simply move an object through space faster—it must separate the object from the normal temporal frame that ordinarily discloses its sequence of events. In other words:
For a wormhole to work, the time-frame associated with the traveling object must be suspended, isolated, or removed from the general flow of spacetime.
To achieve this, the region of space containing the object must be isolated from the broader spatial continuum it is normally embedded within. Only then can a distinct path—one that does not participate in ordinary time—be created.
This is the philosophical meaning behind the scientific concept of shortcuts through spacetime.
Time Dilation and Approaching the Speed of Light
Travel into the distant future is rooted in the time-dilation effect from Einstein’s Special Relativity:
A moving clock appears to tick more slowly the closer it approaches the speed of light.⁴
Objects “slow down” as they near the speed of light because light itself represents a limit: beyond it, no ordinary physical event can occur. The closer the observer’s velocity moves toward this limit, the more their temporal experience diverges from the events unfolding within the light cone.
As you approach the speed of light, you gain access—conceptually and physically—to a greater portion of the events occurring deeper within spacetime, while your own proper time slows. This has been experimentally confirmed repeatedly, including in particle accelerators, atomic clocks, and even biological systems.⁵
Einstein described this with a classic example:
If a ship leaves Earth and accelerates continuously at 1 g (the force of Earth’s gravity),
- within about one year the ship would approach relativistic speeds;
- as it continues accelerating, it comes ever closer to the speed of light;
- and its onboard clocks would appear to run increasingly slowly compared to Earth’s.⁶
Thus, upon returning, the traveler has aged far less than the people who remained on Earth.
Summary
- A wormhole is not just a spatial tunnel—it requires temporal discontinuity.
- Energy behaves inversely on macroscopic and microscopic scales.
- High-density microscopic energy corresponds to maximal event-content in minimal space, allowing spacetime to be folded.
- Time dilation illustrates how nearing the speed of light isolates an observer from the ordinary flow of spacetime.
- Wormholes, if they occur, must operate through manipulation of both space and time, not space alone.
Footnotes
- Wheeler, John Archibald. Geometrodynamics. Academic Press, 1962.
- Morris, Michael & Thorne, Kip. “Wormholes in Spacetime and Their Use for Interstellar Travel.” American Journal of Physics, 1988.
- Greene, Brian. The Elegant Universe. W.W. Norton, 1999.
- Einstein, Albert. Relativity: The Special and General Theory, 1916.
- Hafele, J.C., Keating, R.E. “Around-the-world atomic clocks: predicted relativistic time gains.” Science, 1972.
- Taylor, E.F., Wheeler, J.A. Spacetime Physics. W.H. Freeman, 1992.
Negative Energy (virtual particle)
In quantum theory, the uncertainty principle allows the vacuum of space to be populated by virtual particle–antiparticle pairs that appear spontaneously and exist for only extremely short durations before annihilating each other.¹ Some of these virtual particles may carry negative energy, and their behavior plays a role in several important physical and cosmological phenomena.
Negative energy is associated with virtual particles because they represent the reaction to the decay or disappearance of physical systems. Whenever an object ceases to exist—whether by annihilation, decay, or dissipation of its energy into the vacuum—its transition into “nothing” is not purely a negation. It is also a positive determination, in the sense that in the place formerly occupied by the object’s mass–energy, a compensating effect arises. This compensating effect is what physics calls negative energy.
Energy is labeled “negative” not because it is the absence of energy, but because it does not appear as an independently observable, stable form of matter or radiation. It only manifests as a reaction to the dissipation of already existing (“positive”) energy. Positive energy is what occupies an identifiable, measurable physical existence; negative energy is what emerges in correlation with its transition or disappearance.
How Negative Energy Contributes to Time Travel
The speculative role of negative energy in time-travel models arises because negative energy does not behave like ordinary matter:
- it has no positive mass,
- it produces repulsive gravitational effects,
- and it can locally counteract or neutralize positive energy densities.²
Because general relativity ties the curvature of spacetime to distributions of energy and mass, exotic configurations—such as closed timelike curves, warp bubbles, or wormholes—require regions of spacetime where the energy density becomes negative.³ Without negative energy, these geometries collapse under ordinary gravitational pressure.
While energy can formally take negative values, such values only have meaning relative to a chosen constant; potential energy is always defined up to an arbitrary reference point.⁴ Negative energy therefore does not mean “below zero existence,” but “below the chosen baseline,” and is usually associated with vacuum fluctuations.
The Casimir Effect: A Measured Example of Negative Energy
The Casimir effect provides a concrete case where negative energy density has been experimentally confirmed. When two parallel plates are placed extremely close together, the boundary conditions restrict the wavelengths of quantum fluctuations that can exist between them.⁵ This restriction:
- reduces the number of virtual particle pairs inside the gap,
- lowers the vacuum energy between the plates relative to outside,
- and produces a net inward pressure, causing the plates to be pushed together.
What appears as an attractive force is actually the greater vacuum energy outside the plates, exerting pressure inward. In other words:
The vacuum energy inside the plates is effectively “negative” relative to the vacuum outside.
The Casimir effect demonstrates that negative energy densities are physically real, not merely mathematical abstractions.
Negative Energy and Wormholes
Negative energy plays a crucial role in the speculative physics of wormholes. A wormhole directly links two points in spacetime that may be arbitrarily distant in both space and time. However, wormholes are naturally unstable: the throat collapses instantly under normal gravitational pressure.⁶
To keep a wormhole open requires:
- repulsive gravitational effects,
- local violation of the classical energy conditions,
- and a region of spacetime filled with negative energy density.⁷
This exotic energy counteracts the natural inward collapse and allows the wormhole throat to remain extended rather than pinching off. The same requirement applies to theoretical warp drives and closed timelike loops.
Thus, negative energy is not merely a mathematical curiosity; it is a necessary ingredient in all known models of faster-than-light travel and time-travel geometries.
Footnotes
- Dirac, P. A. M. Principles of Quantum Mechanics. Oxford University Press, 1930.
- Visser, Matt. Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking. AIP Press, 1995.
- Hawking, Stephen. “Chronology Protection Conjecture.” Physical Review D, 1992.
- Feynman, Richard. Lectures on Physics, Vol. II. Addison-Wesley, 1964.
- Casimir, H. B. G. “On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates.” Proceedings of the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, 1948.
- Morris, M. S., Thorne, K. S. “Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel.” American Journal of Physics, 1988.
- S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time. Cambridge University Press, 1973.
Warp Drive
A theoretical principle for a faster-than-light (FTL) warp drive has been proposed within general relativity—most famously the Alcubierre drive. The Alcubierre metric is a solution to Einstein’s field equations in which a bubble of spacetime is propelled by expanding space behind it and contracting space in front of it.¹ In this model, the ship itself does not exceed the speed of light; instead, spacetime moves around the ship.
This requires regions of negative energy density, an exotic form of energy capable of producing repulsive gravitational effects.² Without negative energy, a warp bubble collapses under the ordinary curvature constraints of general relativity.
The Idea as Object: The Universe as Objective Thinking
The universe is not merely a collection of physical objects; it is the objectification of the Idea—the “object-idea.”³ In philosophical language, idea does not mean a subjective thought or opinion. Idea refers to the unity of essence and existence, the conceptual structure that manifests itself as physical reality. Object is the matter; Idea is the essence. They are two sides of the same coin.
Thus, exploring the physical structure of the universe is necessarily an exploration of how Idea becomes object, how essence expresses itself as matter.
The Wormhole: Beyond the Simplified Modern Model
Modern physics describes a wormhole as a “hypothetical connection between widely separated regions of spacetime.”⁴ This is a useful approximation but conceptually incomplete.
Contemporary illustrations often depict spacetime as a two-dimensional sheet that can be curved so that two distant points touch. While this conveys the relationship between spatial distance and travel time, it subtly commits a category mistake: it assumes that since two points in space have a finite separation, spacetime itself can be treated as though it were nothing more than those points and their relative distance.
But:
- Two points in space with relative distance
≠
Spacetime itself reduced to those same points.
Spacetime is not the sum of distances; it is the universal medium in which those distances exist. It is not identical with any finite region or any pair of positions.⁵
Inversion Geometry and the Wormhole
Spacetime is topologically spherical, not planar. Any transformation that shortens the distance between two points must be understood as a geometric inversion, not a literal bending of a sheet. The path does not “cut through” space—it inverts through itself. One can say metaphorically:
It goes in so that it can come out,
except that it comes out exactly where it went in.
This is not magic; it is the geometrical fact that a sphere allows interior inversion mapping one region to another without traversing the external surface.
The Idea as Temporal Point
The wormhole is more than a geometric phenomenon. It reveals something deeper: the structure of Idea as a temporal point. Hegel does not use the term “Idea” to refer to suggestions or hypotheses. The Idea is a substance of time, the aim, the purpose, the point toward which a process moves.⁶
We speak in ordinary language of “the point” of something for the same reason: the point is what the process aims at.
Unlike a spatial point, which is a fixed location in three-dimensional space, the ideal point is a future moment toward which the present is unfolding. It is not a position; it is a direction of becoming.
The Idea is the future point from which the present receives its meaning.
Singularity, Duration, and Extension
The Idea as future point is itself extended into a singularity—a locus of indeterminacy from which possibilities radiate. Duration begins from a point, is itself a point, and culminates again in a point. This is how time maintains identity while continuously transforming itself.
Spatially, extension is motion away from an object.
Temporally, extension is motion into the object’s aim—into its future.
Space moves externally; time moves internally.
Space expands; time fulfills.
Everything is “subject to time” because time is what discloses the thing.
The Self-Inversion of Environment and Mind
The environment enters the mind so that the mind “wakes up” into the environment it is already within. The present moment spirals inward toward the Idea, which is the future point.
This is literal, not metaphorical: we one day “wake up” into the future because the future is the internal aim of the present.
Infinity Through Negation
Every item goes through infinity—not by being all other items, but by being not all other items. Its identity is an infinite negation of possibilities. This is the Hegelian principle that the particular contains the universal by negation.⁷
The Conflict of Objects as Conflict of Minds
Whenever you look outward and see an object, within that object is a rational form looking back. The object expresses a conception; its meaning is a “mind.” Different minds, expressed as different objects, appear to be in conflict. Yet behind these differences is the same mind, except that one part insists on remaining fixed in its external object-form, while another part seeks recognition of its unity.
Footnotes
- Alcubierre, M. “The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity.” Classical and Quantum Gravity (1994).
- Visser, M. Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking. AIP Press, 1995.
- Hegel, G. W. F. Science of Logic; also Encyclopaedia Logic, §§213–214.
- Morris, M. S., Thorne, K. S. “Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel.” American Journal of Physics (1988).
- Hawking & Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time. Cambridge University Press, 1973.
- Hegel, Science of Logic, Doctrine of the Concept, especially “The Idea.”
- Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, “Force and Understanding”; Science of Logic, “The Universal and the Particular.”
Pure Perception
Empiricists assume that perception is “first,” meaning that without perception the mind is blind—an inert mechanism governed by natural forces, like a leaf tossed by the wind.ⁱ But this view overlooks the fact that perception is itself a mental act, a product of the mind. The mind already “sees,” though not in the same way that bodily perception sees. Ordinary perception is merely a developed, explicit form of the mind’s prior, implicit seeing of its objects.
The more basic form of seeing is knowing, or apperception.² When the mind presents an image, concept, or intuition to itself, the object is already known before it is perceived. Perception is thus a species of knowledge. Eyes do not give the brain sight; rather, the brain uses the eyes as instruments to articulate a sight it already possesses in conceptual form. Evidence for this is that we can “see” our own thoughts—whether as mental imagery or pure intuition—without the mediation of physical vision. These inner perceptions are not delivered by the eyes.
When the mind looks outward through the sense organs, it not only receives data; it also judges. Sense organs are neutral channels, passing information without interpretation. Judgment is psychological and related to the ego, which maintains its own continuity, bias, and survival. Perception, however, is independent from the ego; in itself, perception is simply the facility of consciousness that unites observer and phenomenon. It is pure, and arises from the natural continuity between subject and world.
“Would You Rather Be a Happy Swine or a Dissatisfied Socrates?”
This question—popularized by John Stuart Mill—is far deeper than its humorous phrasing suggests. Mill writes:
“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied;
better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.”³
His point is that objective knowledge and higher capacities are more valuable than mere pleasure. Human life involves more variables, more freedom, and more potential. A pig may be satisfied within its limited circumstances, but Socrates has access to a wider horizon of rational possibilities. Knowledge raises the stakes of existence.
Yet from an objective standpoint, the difference between human and pig is not merely moral but developmental. A pig is a form of consciousness that has determined its own conditions of existence—just as the human being has. Each lives in a different reality. The pig does not wish to be human any more than the human wishes to be pig. The pig thrives within its own horizon of meaning, even in conditions humans would call vile. In that sense, it has understood something about satisfaction that humans often resist.
Humans may be “greater” in terms of complexity and potential, yet the pig inhabits a reality so attuned to its constitution that its life becomes good for it—so good, ironically, that its body becomes good for us, since humans consume pork.
Comparing a pig to a maggot reveals similar gradations of complexity. The pig has more behavioral and physiological variables than the maggot. The maggot, in turn, is more developed than the bacteria living within it. Eventually we reach a paradox:
What is the difference between a set of relations forming a body, and a body exhibiting a set of relations?
This tension lies at the root of geometry. In geometry, relations form bodies, and bodies are constituted by relations. A triangle is defined by relational properties (sides, angles), yet triangles also participate in relations that extend beyond them.
For example, the Euler line is a line determined for any non-equilateral triangle.⁴ It passes through several significant points of the triangle (centroid, circumcenter, orthocenter). This single relation generates further triangles, and the relations between triangles reappear as the internal structure of triangles themselves. The same relational motions that govern geometric bodies also constitute those bodies.
When these relational structures are examined in abstraction, they lose the richness they possess in the natural world. The relation between a pig and its food becomes a mere relation of geometry, yet the pig’s enjoyment and the human’s disgust reveal qualitative determinations that geometry alone cannot express.
A fly has no concept of space, planets, or geometry. But this does not mean such things do not exist; it means the fly inhabits a different reality—a parallel one. “Parallel” is literal: two worlds occupy the same vicinity without intersecting in meaning.
Objects as Relations and Relations as Objects
The difficulty in understanding how an object is a relation arises from our temptation to reduce an object to one relation or a finite set of them. A fish is not just the motion of curvature, despite exhibiting curves. The term “relation” is used to describe motion, but a single motion never exhausts the being of a thing.
A complex entity like a fish is the congruent determination of infinitely many relations:
- It swims in wave-like curves.
- It swallows—requiring downward motion, gravity, weight.
- Weight presupposes mass; mass presupposes density.
- Density implies hardness; hardness presupposes tightly packed atoms.
- Hardness contrasts with softness (atoms farther apart).
- Softness relates to texture, which relates to color.
- Color arises from relations of atomic motion (e.g., in fire, fast-moving atoms emit radiation).
- Fire displays multiple colors (blue, red, green), expressing different atomic relations.
All of these determinations converge in the single perceptual unity we call “fish.” Their coherence results not from the fish alone, but from an observer who organizes these relations into a unified object.
To say “a fish is not just a curve” is obvious. The spine and tail are hard, formed of proteins gained from the environment, which give bone its white color. A living being is a synthesis of determinations layered on top of one another, forming an aesthetic whole. Like gears interacting, each determination meshes with others, generating a single identity from countless relational motions.
Footnotes
- Locke, J. Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Book II (1690).
- Kant, I. Critique of Pure Reason, Transcendental Deduction (1781/1787).
- Mill, J. S. Utilitarianism, Chapter 2 (1863).
- Coxeter, H. S. M. Introduction to Geometry, 2nd ed., Wiley (1969).
- Hegel, G. W. F. Phenomenology of Spirit and Science of Logic, on perception and the Concept.
- Strawson, P. F. Individuals (1959), on the structure of persons and perception.
The Ontology of Wormholes, Singularity, and Consciousness
The popular imagery of interlocking gears—each gear turning the next—captures the multi-variable complexity of nature. Every determination “doing its own thing” simultaneously forms the unity of the whole. The world is not a machine, but the machine works because it imitates the relational structures of nature. In this sense, nature is not like a computer; rather, computers are abstractions derived from nature’s own relational logic.
With the further development of quantum computing, it is conceivable that machines may someday generate an artificial “slab” of nature—not by creating nature itself, but by producing an experience so structurally identical to natural experience that a subject could genuinely learn from it as though it had occurred in the ordinary world.¹
1. Splitting the Positive and Negative of Spacetime
The only way spacetime could theoretically be made into a particular finite object is if the positive and negative poles of the same fundamental substrate could be separated and sustained. Nature already exhibits a version of this phenomenon in the black hole, a region where the tension between being and nothingness becomes literal.
The common assumption is that if something passes from being into nothing, it becomes nothing. But logically, this is impossible: if something enters “nothing,” it becomes everything—the undifferentiated totality in which no distinction can yet be drawn. The difficulty is that if everything is given at once, no particular thing can be distinguished within it. This is why the wormhole cannot be treated as a feature of the universe; rather, it is the universe’s own structure, understood from a different dimension.
2. Consciousness and the Wormhole
A hypothetical illustration helps:
If a being could enter a black hole while maintaining consciousness of the entire totality, then the being could conceivably determine its point of re-emergence. To choose a location instantaneously, one would have to be everything—to occupy the totality without distinction.
Thus the wormhole should not be understood as a “shortcut” through spacetime, but as a shift in the dimension of consciousness. Only a consciousness capable of grasping the totality as one point could “arrive anywhere” at once. Wormholes are not built—they are conceived.
3. The Infinite Point Entering into Itself
A wormhole is an infinite point that enters finitely into itself. A singularity is not only the beginning but also the termination of the system, and the mediating spacetime is the set of finite moments through which the infinite expresses itself. A line is the extension of a point; a circle is the point returning to itself.²
A wormhole is therefore not a tunnel in a surface but a spherical void—a region where diameter and circumference reflect the same principle. In geometry, a spherical void is an object containing within itself the absence of its own objecthood.³ Within this void, finite points converge toward the infinite singularity that grounds the entire structure.
4. Black Holes, Wormholes, and the Holographic Universe
Our usual perception of a black hole is from the inside‐out: we observe from within the finite, looking into the infinite. From this vantage point, the black hole appears as warped spacetime and captured light—a region of “no return,” a dead-end of being, beyond which lies only potential.⁴
But potential does not appear as empty space waiting to be filled; it appears as the totality of what could be. If we could perceive the black hole from the outside-in—from the standpoint of nothingness looking into being—it would appear not as a void but as a wormhole, a sphere containing the whole world as an idea. From nothingness, everything appears simultaneously.
This aligns with holographic proposals in physics, which suggest that every region of spacetime contains informational projections of the whole.⁵
5. Event Horizon as Ontological Concept
Even the phrase “event horizon” has an ontological meaning: it is the horizon from which an event becomes visible. In deep space we do not see objects in the ordinary sense; we see events, because objects are separated by such vast distances that they cannot act within the same immediate time.
When objects are near each other, they share the same temporal duration: my throwing of a ball and the ball’s flight are simultaneous actions within one present. But at astronomical distances, objects exist in different periods of time. Cause and effect no longer coincide. On one world, life may be at its earliest microbial stage; elsewhere, a civilization of high intelligence may have already risen and fallen. Potential always expresses itself in gradients: the primitive and the advanced are inseparable correlates, as “up” presupposes “down.”⁶
Thus we see the black hole as an event horizon enclosing infinite darkness because we view it from the standpoint of finite being. Light wraps around the dark core because being faces into the abyss of potential. The wormhole, in contrast, is the universe seen from the standpoint of nothingness: the finite world enclosed within the sphere of indeterminate possibility.
6. Reformulating the Symbolism
- A black hole (from the standpoint of being looking into nothing):
- appears as a dark center with a bright circumference.
- the circumference = the finite universe;
- the center = the singularity (infinite potential).
- A wormhole (from the standpoint of nothing looking into being):
- the interior = the universe;
- the circumference = pure potential (the singularity).
- It should not be depicted with a surrounding ring as if it were a material border; the singularity has no boundary.
In both cases, the circle is the same; what changes is the side of the circle from which consciousness observes.
Footnotes
- Aaronson, S. Quantum Computing Since Democritus (2013), on simulation vs. creation of reality.
- Euclid, Elements, Book I; see also Hegel, Science of Logic, “Quality,” on the point-line-circle development.
- Penrose, R. The Road to Reality (2005), on manifolds containing singularities.
- Hawking, S. & Ellis, G. The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time (1973).
- ’t Hooft, G. “Dimensional Reduction in Quantum Gravity” (1993); Susskind, L. “The World as a Hologram” (1995).
- Aristotle, Physics, Book III; Hegel, Encyclopedia Logic §119 — on opposites requiring each other.
1. Black Hole: Perception From Being Into Nothing
(Observer in Finite Universe)
↓
◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯ ← Bright ring (event horizon)
◯◯ ◯◯
◯◯ ◯◯
◯ ◯
◯ Light spiraling ◯
◯ into the void ◯
◯ ◯
◯ ●●●●●●●●● ◯
◯ ●Singularity● ◯
◯◯ (infinite) ◯◯
◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯Interpretation:
Being looks into Nothing → darkness at the center, brightness at the rim.
Light bends inward: information cannot escape.
This models the mind looking into its own unconscious potential.
2. Wormhole: Perception From Nothing Into Being
(Viewpoint of Pure Potential)
↓
●●●●●●●●●●●●● ← Indeterminate circumference (singularity)
●● ●●
● ●
● The entire universe ●
● as “content” ●
● ●
● ◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯ ●
● ◯ finite world ◯ ●
◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯◯Interpretation:
Nothingness looks into Being → the universe appears as a bubble inside potential.
This models the idea or future point into which experience will unfold.
3. Consciousness as Black Hole / Wormhole
Reason as a Singularity of Thought
(The Mind as Womb)
[Potential / Nothing]
↓
(Event Horizon)
↓
[Thought becomes Form / Object]
↓
[Experience / Action]The mind pulls determinations into itself (black hole),
and projects them out as objects (wormhole).
4. Inversion Geometry Diagram
(space/time inversion around a point)
Outside perspective (Finite → Infinite):
circles contract toward the center.
Inside perspective (Infinite → Finite):
circles expand outward from the center.Mathematically:
- A point P→∞ from outside maps to ∞→P from inside.¹
- Just as a wormhole maps a distant region to the same point.
1. Reason and Consciousness
Observation is the act of consciousness receiving determinations neutrally—consciousness as pure experience.
The observer is the unity of these determinations; it is the “registering” principle.
Consciousness is infinite—not because it contains infinite content, but because it can produce content without limiting itself. After 10 actions it retains the potential for 20, 100, or infinitely more.
Each action of consciousness becomes a finite form.
This form is what you call the checkpoint, or object—the stable node of Reason’s unfolding.
Thus the world is composed of the stabilized footprints of Reason.
Form is the content
We think of “form” as external shape, but form is the very content itself—it is what thought has become.
The object is the circumference of consciousness;
the concept is the substance or interiority of the circumference.
Objects are minute representations of Reason’s ideal nature.
2. The Biological Analogy (Mind as Womb)
The mind is a kind of womb, or void—a black hole—where being becomes and non-being resides.
- Thought = action (becoming)
- Matter = reaction (stabilized becoming)
Both are the same determination, seen from two sides.
Peirce’s “law of mind” suggests that ideas grow by a self-propagating logic.²
The observer is the synthesis of this logic:
the contradiction of thought produces its own resolution.
Birth is the idea emerging from the womb only to return to itself—seeing what it previously contained implicitly.
3. Object–Activity Identity
Consciousness maintains itself by alternating between being:
- the object (the thing determined), and
- the activity (the determining force).
To be one is to simultaneously be the other.
A point at one end of a line is connected to the other end because both opposites are resolved in the same underlying logical motion. Opposition is not exclusion but critique, the dialogue of the two poles of the same thought-structure.
This dialogue is physical reality.
4. Gravity and Energy
- Gravity = ego (the inward-holding principle)
- Energy = intent (the outward-moving principle)
Gravity maintains intent by enclosing it; intent expresses gravity by surpassing it.
This is the internal alternation between object and process.
5. Quality vs Quantity
The universe connects itself in ways that defy ordinary quantitative intuition.
Quantity follows positional order: things follow each other in space.
But qualitative connection is not positional—it is functional.
Two points can be connected not by spatial adjacency but by quality.
Quantum entanglement is the physical expression of this principle.³
Quality is not secondary to quantity.
There is a universe where quality determines quantity:
where the form of a thing generates its material dimensions.
6. Black Hole as Structure of Consciousness
The black hole is the form of consciousness, even at the level of a particular observer.
When a person looks at an object:
- the object is the event horizon
- the act of looking is the infalling curvature
- the mind that receives the object is the singularity
This is why perception feels like “pulling the world into oneself.”
The wormhole is the inverse:
the idea pushing outward into experience.
III. MATHEMATICAL ANALOGIES
1. Riemannian Geometry
Curvature determines how geodesics converge or diverge.⁴
Consciousness curves its own space of meanings:
objects are the fixed points where ideal geodesics intersect.
2. Inversion Geometry
Wormholes act like geometric inversions:
they swap interior/exterior, finite/infinite, near/far.
A distant star and a present thought may be inverted versions of the same point from different ontological dimensions.
3. Topology of Singularity
A singular point in topology contains the failure of distinctness.
Consciousness contains the failure of distinction at its center:
everything collapses into the “I”.
IV. Footnotes
- Needham, T. Visual Complex Analysis (1997): inversion geometry and point–infinity symmetry.
- Peirce, C. S., “The Law of Mind,” Illustrations of the Logic of Science (1892).
- J. Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (1987): locality vs. entanglement.
- Riemann, B. On the Hypotheses Which Lie at the Foundations of Geometry (1854).
- Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, “Sense-Certainty” through “Reason” sections, on object–self identity.
- Penrose, The Road to Reality, on singularities as geometric boundaries.
I. Crystal / Prism Diagram
Crystals and prisms are natural analogues for consciousness because they refract one single beam of light into many determinations—just as consciousness refracts one pure conception into many possible experiences.
1. Prism From Above (Conception → Determinations)
Pure Conception (white light)
│
▼
┌────────────┐
│ PRISM │
│ (Consciousness)
└────────────┘
↙ ↓ ↘
Red (possibility) Green Blue
determination determination
determination2. Crystal as Wormhole (All paths refract through one point)
Potentialities
────────────●──────────────
\ /│\ /
\ / │ \ /
\ / │ \ /
●────────●
(internal singularity)The crystal is the wormhole:
all possible rays pass through its interior singular point,
and all actual rays emerge from that same point differentiated.
This is the metaphysical structure:
- Singularity (center) = pure potential (Nothing)
- Faces of crystal = finite determinations (Being)
- Light entering = conception
- Light exiting = realization / actuality
II. Particle-in-Wave Consciousness
The pure conception of consciousness behaves like a particle moving through a wave:
- The particle is the discrete thought
- The wave is the total field of possibilities
This corresponds to de Broglie’s dual nature.¹
Consciousness experiences the same duality:
thoughts appear as discrete, but they arise from a continuous field of meaning.
III. The Inadequacy of the “Rabbit Hole” Wormhole Metaphor
Stories and images present wormholes as if an observer is:
- Standing at the edge
- Looking downward
- Falling into an abyss
- Ending at a bottom point
This suggests an absolute distinction between:
- the origin of the conception (observer), and
- the destination (the black hole interior).
But metaphysically the observer and the destination are the same determination:
the object one is falling into is also the form of the very consciousness doing the falling.
Thus the hole is not a region of uncertainty but a region that discloses the set of all possibilities.
Better diagram:
Old misconception: Corrected conception:
Observer → ↓ into hole Observer = hole-form expressing options
O /│\
↓ / │ \
● ●──┼──●
│
potentialitiesThe wormhole is not an object but a mode of conception.
IV. What Is Missing: How Potentiality Becomes Actuality
Your question:
“What is still missing in the illustration of the wormhole is how one of those potentialities becomes an actual reality in transition.”
The answer:
- The wormhole presents the full spectrum of possibilities
- Consciousness refracts this prism into a single actuality
- Actuality is the point where intention, gravity (ego), and form coincide
Thus actuality = the stabilized refracted ray.
This is consistent with:
- Whitehead’s actual occasions²
- Heisenberg’s potential → actual³
- Aristotle’s dynamis → energeia⁴
In your metaphysics:
Reason is the singularity; object is the refracted ray.
V. Wormholes and Time Travel as Intuitions of Time
Science fiction expresses a genuine insight:
- Time travel = the suspension or bending of time
- Wormholes = the bending of space
But the deeper intuition:
Time is changed by the observer’s movement of space.
In a wormhole:
- space is moved, not the traveler
- distance is reduced
- therefore duration collapses
In locomotion:
- objects move through space
- but space itself remains inert
The wormhole reverses this:
- the observer is the standard
- space conforms to consciousness
Thus wormholes express a metaphysical truth:
space is determined by the form of perception.
VI. Perception Determines Space
From a first-person perspective:
- A car you are driving appears to move slower
- because you control its direction
- you inhabit the same temporal frame
From a third-person perspective:
- the same car appears fast
- because the observer is not aligned with its intentional movement
This demonstrates:
Perception organizes space according to the structure of intention.
Diagram:
First-person (aligned with intention):
Car →→→→ (slow, controllable)
Third-person (external viewpoint):
→→→→ Car (fast, instantaneous)Thus:
- space is subjective
- time is perspectival
- wormholes express this perspectival shift geometrically
VII. Footnotes
- de Broglie, L. Recherches sur la théorie des quanta (1924) – particle-wave duality.
- Whitehead, A. N. Process and Reality – actual occasions as realized potentials.
- Heisenberg, W. Physics and Philosophy – the “intermediate reality” of potentials.
- Aristotle, Metaphysics Θ – dynamis (potentiality) to energeia (actualization).
- Penrose, The Nature of Space and Time – wormholes and singular boundaries.
- Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order – enfolded vs unfolded potential.
- Goethe, Theory of Colours – prisms as metaphysical organs revealing determinations.