Karma and free will from the point of view of Unified Theory

How does Unified Theory think about Karma and Free Will?

@Nassim @Wiliam_RSF @Olivier

The feedback feed-forward dynamics of the holofractal spacememory field explains karma exactly, what information / actions you feed into the information network of the entanglement nexus of spacetime will shape what situations / experiences are “fed-back” to you. The Sacred Laws of Karma are pre-scientific descriptions of the mechanics of the universe.

Free Will is a little more nuanced; obviously you make choices every moment, however these choices are not really free as they are ultimately shaped by the limiting factors of your circumstance. The only real choice you can make that is completely free of external factors is how you chose to feel about or react to a given situation. Free will is also based on the idea that the future is “unformed”, however we know that time in this sense is illusionary, there is no past, present, or future: there is only one timeless now. So you never make a decision that has not already been made, although time being a persistent illusion, we still have to go through the motions of making the decision.

So there is free will, because feelings make difference in the looping feedback (forward feed back). For example, You may feel covid-19 is a thread, and destroy everything , so You scared and follow the path of old paradigms, but on other hand You may feel there is a chance to change the future for better and feeling so , one may direct attention other way, like a laser beam pointing on disc or holographic universe ?

Whether there is free will depends very strongly on how ‘free will’ is defined. We might say that free will is an agent’s ability to make a decision completely free from external factors and in a manner that is completely in-determinant to outside observers (a free will agent’s choice cannot be predicted). We, as humans, seem to satisfy these criteria. However, it could be argued that if there were an infinitely large computer that could perform an infinite number of calculations it could in fact predict every choice we will ever make before that choice is even made. And in fact, there is an infinitely large quantum computational engine, and that is the universe. So from the largest perspective, a choice we make at any given moment was already known by the universe (not even factoring in that all spacetime coordinates are already existing, so from a global perspective a choice was never made).

Since we very rarely experience the universe as the universe (said somewhat jokingly), to us free will is very real, and in this sense it is valid—because we are the agents that must make decisions without knowing the future spacetime coordinates (which already exist) that our choices will lead us to.

Very much so, this is a critical time where we can chose to feel or react negatively to the situation, or we can chose to feel or react pro-actively and utilize it as an opportunity to do things in a better way—and certainly whichever choice we make (exercising our agency of free will) it will very strongly determine what future we experience.

Thank You William :slight_smile:
I remember some time ago I saw (yt) an experiment with a resonance scanner connected to the man’s brain indicating what choice the man involved in experiment will do prior this man realized he has made the decision. The difference between brain activity and the realisation of man’s “will” was …6 seconds -means by that the machine “knew” about human’s choice base upon certain brain activity.
The choices were very simple, however. It was like to pick this or that colour.
The conclusion was that it’s how the human’s brain works, but maybe, on the deeper level You describe, that was how loads of different factors establish human choice long before one realize even need, or “will” to choose. Either way, in my opinion it points that human being stretch far beyond so called “will”.
On the other hand one may point how easy it might be to manipulate human’s choices. Well, there’s always “other hand” to choose, right? :wink: