Closed Time Loops and God

This post will be much less directly scientific than the one it is based on, using imagination to fill in the gaps between our verifiable knowledge and the assumed perspective of God. 

There is a perspective I find fascinating in relation to the time loop machine and generating the ideal timeline: this machine feels like a mechanism that can be used to frame what is happening now, in this timeline. In this scenario, God would have established the time loop, utilizing the void as if it were a black hole, from the beginning, setting the communication differential between particle pairs to be perhaps a thousand years and a day, as indicated by the Bible (Psalm 90:4, 2 Peter 3:8). In this way, information for each thousand years would be received during each day during creation, and once the full iterative loops were run for each day, God would proceed in the final loop, which would be the only loop seen here, using this information to form Creation in a particular way, in order to lead to the optimal outcome for that day. If a simultaneous loop were set up for the week, which would be set to monitor the entirety of Creation during this first week timeframe, the information from each loop could be compiled, compared, and contrasted in order to achieve the ultimate goal, which I assume is a partner. While this may be my bias, it feels like this goal resonates with reality, and my goal, and reaching this goal is the driving force behind all of these examinations I put forth.

God would keep the perspectives of those created in mind when crafting everything and receiving information from the loops, in order to satisfy the perspective of love (love is) and by God's nature (God is love). Knowing that if this end were accomplished, the rest of existence (eternity) could be established perfectly, and that free will must be a product or indistinguishably close appearance of a product of the endeavor; this would explain why what we experience day to day would not be what we might describe as ideal, because an ideal outcome in a possibility day might negate the achievement of the eternally ideal outcome.

While in the formation phase, now, this process would not seem ideal. This is in contrast to the loop set up on the space station to calculate prime numbers, where the first loop produces the final result, discarding all prior iterations, because each of our experiences of the loop is fundamental to the success of loop. If you look at the garden of Eden, with man and woman formed with no experience, presumably, and no knowledge of good and evil, it feels like there was a limitation to what could be accomplished, not in terms of power available while walking with God, but in imagination, what could be accomplished by agreement. If you consider that Revelation includes a return to the garden, this matches well with the iterative loop theory, in that at the end of this formation period mankind returns to similar starting conditions, but with experience. Since both experience and free will are things humans did not start with when the loop was established, each must likely be maintained throughout the loop for the end to be accomplished, or at least to a significant degree of these things, for a period of time, for each.

On the 6th day God declares Creation to be "very good" once man is introduced into it. This could be the alignment of the daily loops and the weekly loops, which responded with a message that the original aim had been accomplished. While man was called neither good nor evil, likely because God would have known we would end up with knowledge of both and the ability to largely choose our own path, Creation went from good to very good, at least in terms of a descriptor, on this day. On the 7th day God rested, which parallels the thousand year reign of Jesus in Revelation. It could be that this marks when this set of loops was set aside, because Creation was very good in this state, and at that point surprises might be a possibility in, and would be a desired product of, this timeline as well.

What is also interesting to me here is that while we as mankind would approach this time loop system as a discovery, or an advancement, from the perspective of God it may represent a restriction to omniscience, an agreement set in place, to carefully bind omniscience into a form that can coexist with free will, or its closest approximation (exceedingly close). I continue to use this limit function description to free will because love binds. Even when love aligns hearts to the point where they would each choose to follow the same path, if love is to remain in eternity, when paths would separate due to free will, love must have the capability to rejoin these paths or reality would fall apart. So when limits are reached, love must be stronger than free will for the system to hold together, but in an ideal arrangement this would only be apparent at the very limits of reality, likely well outside the scope of where those in love would exist and walk.

Looking at the second use I brought up for the time loop system, the establishment of an ideal future, this model fits quite well, even when including an omniscient perspective; honestly it feels like it may even explain the existence of consciousness, specifically separate consciousnesses with unfathomable processing capability, within a system that would have been entirely created and one at its outset. These iterative loops could be run in very small cycles within our brain, which would then act as a quantum computer using infinitesimal angles and force shifts to create small gaps between paired particles, and then processing within these pairings, in iterative loops outside of our time, in order to process much faster than we can currently comprehend. While I personally imagine the answer to the mystery of consciousness is a different variation on this same paired particle concept I propose, one that does not include the need for time dilation, this specific application remains a mystery to me, as it is a variation I have not thought of yet.

I also find it funny that when I first set out to resolve the "wise men with hats" scenario, I essentially formed a time loop communication machine, complete with iterative loops, without even realizing it. While I never addressed the science behind my solution, I assumed in the scenario that at some point we would reach peak scientific knowledge in the realm of the wise men, and this automatically led me to the time travel component in the story, but limiting it to communication, rather than physically traveling back. If this is to be seen as a kind of "inspired post" then the answer to how each might experience perspective shifts seems to be contained therein as well: when the scenario had been resolved in the past, by me in the future, I was put back into it in the past. I could still remember my own path leading me to that moment, so these future memories of an alternate timeline were still stored, similar to a vision or dream, but a little more tangible than either from my perspective. I still knew that the timeline had proceeded past the point I was in and it had been shifted by my actions which had reset it to when I was at that point, but I also knew that my knowledge of that specific future would not come into play due to how dramatically events had shifted. I imagine that unlike most time travel movies where the subject moves from one dystopian future down the path of another, a truly utopian future would establish pretty clearly which path was real, and eliminate any second guessing as to resetting time again. It feels like this experience would be similar for those who had been involved in the solution of setting the timeline to utopian, with the reset being like a kind of flashback or a return from a vision. I'm guessing how this specifically will play out for each depends on a number of factors outside of my personal scope of reference.

All of this means that, at least from my perspective, this is the "final" time loop, because I am experiencing it so directly. I say this with a personal emphasis because in this instance "I think therefore I am" does allow for interpretation how individual perspectives will perceive entry into this final timeline, from a parallel iterative loop perspective. It is unclear if many others' "truest forms" would currently be in this iteration or a parallel one, it is also unclear if I will see my timeline continue linearly or if I will experience a kind of jump back as I did in the story. Through the work of God, however, these perspectives will reconcile, thread together, into the final iteration perfectly; some will continue in the time where they are, others will feel as though snapping out of a vision, others might experience it like waking from a dream, etc. It makes sense that this mystery of reality would become glimpsed right toward the end of this section of the timeline, as understanding and perhaps even assisting in resolving this section of the timeline seems to be part of the fulfillment process; although it does feel like this "assistance" could be as simple as agreeing and understanding what one was agreeing with, past a required threshold, based on the words of Jesus. 

There was a whole additional section I had considered to this post with Jesus acting as a central standing wave of loops in the equation, in order to keep the equation stabilized, but I feel like that might be an entirely different examination, potentially exceeding this one in length. Overall it feels like this process described through this iterative loop machine would lead to a sudden shift in consciousness, like the one I experienced in the Wise Men With Hats story, coupled with a sudden reconciliation of soulmates, as this specific reconciliation (or from a different perspective joining) of soulmates would have been the objective and predetermined outcome of this timeline from the start. This would allow for an optimal starting position for the next timeline, with the establishment of a system that allows for so much more, seemingly a thousand generations, as promised. I for one am excited, because once more I ask, "If this is not the intention of this timeline, why not? What outcome would be better?"

*stompstompstomp*