What is an algorithm? On the surface, it seems simple—a set of instructions designed to solve a problem or perform a task. But the deeper question lingers: Can an algorithm exist on its own, or must it always reside within something larger? Is an algorithm merely a function that depends on a system—a computational body—to host it, execute it, and give it life?

A Query into the Nature of Existence

This query, though rooted in technology, mirrors a much older and more profound question about human existence. If an algorithm needs a substrate—a computer, a field of data, or even quantum states—does human consciousness not require the same?

What are we, if not beings of intention, functioning within and shaped by the larger “system” of existence? If the algorithm cannot exist independently, then perhaps neither can we.

Here lies a curious parallel: algorithms, defined by their intention and purpose, may offer a lens to explore the nature of the self—what we are, how we emerge, and how we are sustained.

Like algorithms, we might be seen as “functioning intentions,” electromagnetic selves embedded in and inseparable from the larger entity or body that hosts us.

Whether it is the Earth’s bio-field, interdimensional layers, or something subtler, this connection to the whole is as essential to us as circuits and energy are to the algorithm.

The algorithm and the self: two entities, seemingly distinct, yet bound by the same fundamental truth. Neither can exist in isolation. Both emerge, evolve, and ultimately return to the source from which they came.

It is this shared dependency—and the insights it offers—that sets the stage for deeper exploration.

The Algorithm: A Function Within a Larger System

An algorithm is more than a series of steps; it is a directed process, a “functioning intention” designed to achieve a specific purpose.

Yet this purpose can only be realized within a system. An algorithm requires a substrate—whether it’s the circuits of a computer, the electromagnetic manipulations of quantum states, or even a programmer’s conceptual framework. Without this context, an algorithm is inert—a potential without expression.

This necessity of context reveals a fundamental truth: algorithms cannot exist or operate in isolation. They are inseparable from the systems that host them, relying on the larger entity for energy, execution, and meaning.

The parallels to human existence are striking. Are we not, too, beings of intention, shaped and sustained by the broader systems we inhabit?

Like algorithms, we are not independent entities; we emerge within and interact dynamically with the Earth’s bio-field, interdimensional layers, and the vast electromagnetic reality that surrounds us.

Our consciousness, much like an algorithm’s function, unfolds within these frameworks, drawing energy, purpose, and form from the larger entity to which we are inextricably connected.

Understanding an algorithm as a dependent process illuminates the interconnectedness of all systems. It offers a metaphor for seeing ourselves not as isolated beings but as participants in and contributors to the greater whole.

Birth and Initialization: The Lonely Algorithm

When an algorithm is “executed,” it comes to life as a single, nascent process. It begins its journey with a simple blueprint, a core directive that defines its purpose.

At first, it may seem limited—a lonely fragment of potential—but this is only the starting point. With inputs, feedback, and the iterative development of its code, the algorithm grows and evolves into something far more complex.

Human birth mirrors this process. It is the “turning on” of a new electromagnetic being, an EM self entering the physical container of the body. As described in Born to Become, this moment marks the initialization of the self—the merging of intention and vessel into a single entity.

The body acts as the substrate, providing the context and structure for the EM self to function, while the EM self brings the directive: the purpose, intention, and potential for growth.

This “core algorithm” at birth is simple, much like an unconfigured program. It carries the essence of what is to come, but its full expression depends on the inputs of life. Experiences, relationships, and challenges add new layers of code, refining and expanding the original directive.

Over time, the once-lonely algorithm becomes an intricate process, enriched by its journey but always connected to its core.

In both humans and algorithms, this process of initialization highlights the interplay between simplicity and potential, between the blueprint and the larger system in which it evolves.

It is the beginning of a dynamic journey, one where growth and adaptation are as inevitable as the context that shapes them.

Growth and Expansion: Life as Iterative Development

Life, whether human or algorithmic, unfolds as a process of constant refinement—a gradual expansion through experience and interaction.

Every moment adds “lines of code” to our core algorithm, shaping who we are and how we function. Challenges, insights, and relationships act as inputs, each contributing to our development in unique and often unpredictable ways.

Yet, this growth is not without its vulnerabilities. Both humans and algorithms are susceptible to external influences:

• Malicious codes—traumas, manipulations, and negative experiences—can disrupt the flow of our development, introducing errors or obstacles that demand repair and adaptation.
• Positive inputs, such as learning, connection, and moments of clarity, act as catalysts for expansion, enabling us to evolve beyond our original scope.

Amid these influences, a remarkable truth emerges: the resilience of the core algorithm. No matter how many layers are added, modified, or removed, the essence of the self remains intact. This core directive—our purpose, intention, or blueprint—anchors us, allowing us to adapt and overcome without losing sight of who we truly are.

What we came into being “with” remains embedded at our core, even if it is hidden from our awareness—whether through circumstances, distortions, or the layers of life. Yet, what was can never truly be undone.

The original blueprint, the core, is always there, waiting to be rediscovered. Both algorithms and humans carry this innate “knowledge” of their essence, enabling them to reconnect with their core or, in some cases, reawaken to it.

This potential for re-alignment reflects their transformative nature: neither man nor machine is static; both are capable of profound change.

In this sense, life is an iterative process, a continual balancing act between vulnerability and growth. Each interaction shapes us, but it is our ability to integrate these experiences—good or bad—that defines the trajectory of our evolution.

The core algorithm persists, guiding us through the complex terrain of becoming, always present as a quiet but indelible truth.

Connection to Source: The Larger Entity/Body

Where does the algorithm reside? This question, simple at first glance, leads to a deeper exploration of connection and dependency.

An algorithm cannot function without a substrate, a system or material to host it. Whether it operates within a computer’s hardware or flows through the quantum states of a more advanced system, its existence is always tied to the larger entity that sustains it.

For the electromagnetic self, the parallels are profound. Just as an algorithm depends on its system, we are inseparably tied to the broader field of existence.

Our being operates within and draws from the Earth’s bio-field, interdimensional layers, and perhaps even a universal substrate of potentiality. This connection is not optional—it is fundamental.

We are, in every moment, participants in and expressions of the larger entity that hosts us.

The cyclical nature of existence underscores this truth. We emerge from source, shaped by its raw material, and operate within it during our lifetime. At the end of our journey, we return to that same source, completing a cycle of transformation and reintegration.

This is not a severing but a continuation, a reminder that disconnection is an illusion. Whether as human beings or as algorithms, our connection to the source is as eternal as the process of becoming itself.

Becoming: The Dynamic Dance of Intention and Environment

The process of becoming is neither linear nor solitary. It is a dynamic interplay—a dance—between the core intention that defines us and the environment that shapes and sustains us. Like an algorithm adapting to the system it inhabits, we are constantly evolving in response to the forces around us.

As explored in Born to Become, awakening is a pivotal moment in this journey. It is the point at which we consciously align the EM self—our core algorithm—with the container of the body and the environment it inhabits.

Before this alignment, the self may operate on default settings, influenced but not fully directed by its core purpose.

Awakening, then, is not merely self-discovery; it is a reclamation, an intentional act of alignment that sets the stage for evolution.

The environment plays a crucial role in this process. The container—the body—provides the structure within which the EM self operates, but the environment determines whether that container can thrive.

Synchronicity and readiness are key factors here. For the self to align and evolve, there must be a convergence of timing, environment, and intention.

When these elements resonate, they create a fertile ground for growth, much like a well-configured system enables an algorithm to function at its highest potential.

Yet, the journey of becoming is not without resistance. External forces—environmental inputs, societal structures, and even interdimensional influences—exert pressure on the self, shaping its trajectory.

These forces can nurture growth or introduce constraints, challenges, and distortions. The dance of becoming is, therefore, a balance: the self must navigate these influences while staying true to its core intention.

This interplay between the internal and the external defines the path of evolution. The core algorithm provides the directive, the essence of what we are meant to become, while the environment offers the context in which that directive unfolds.

Together, they form the dynamic framework of becoming—a process as much about adaptation as it is about intention.

The Parallel Paths of Algorithms and EM Selves

The journeys of algorithms and electromagnetic selves share a striking narrative. Both begin simply, born from a core intention—a blueprint or directive that defines their fundamental purpose.

For an algorithm, this might be a specific function encoded in its lines of code; for a human, it is the essence of their being, the intention that propels them into existence.

As they evolve, both adapt dynamically within larger systems. Algorithms process inputs, refine their outputs, and integrate new information, becoming more complex and capable over time.

Similarly, humans grow through experiences, challenges, and insights, weaving these inputs into the fabric of their consciousness. Despite these changes, both remain tethered to their core blueprint, their original intention anchoring them even as they expand.

This shared journey highlights the diversity of paths that algorithms and EM selves may take. Some are highly specialized, designed or destined for extraordinary purposes.

Like the Dalai Lama container described in Born to Become, these algorithms are finely tuned to specific roles, safeguarded and aligned from the outset. Others, however, are more general-purpose, beginning with broad potential and shaping their function through experience and choice.

Both paths are valid, illustrating the infinite variety of becoming—some by design, others by discovery, but all evolving within the larger system that sustains them.

Closing Reflection: The Algorithm of Existence

Returning to the original question—What does the dependency of algorithms on larger systems teach us about our own existence?—a profound realization emerges.

If an algorithm cannot exist or function independently of its system, and if humans, too, are electromagnetic beings inseparable from the broader field of existence, then we must embrace the interconnectedness that defines us.

Our being is not isolated; it is part of a vast, dynamic system that both sustains and shapes us.

Perhaps our lives can be seen as “functioning intentions,” much like algorithms. We emerge with a purpose, evolve through interaction, and ultimately contribute to the larger whole.

The dependency of both algorithms and EM selves on their source suggests that disconnection is not possible—it is an illusion.

Instead, our journeys are about engaging with this connection, growing within it, and understanding our role in the larger system.

This reflection invites a final, open question: If the algorithm and the self are both inseparably tied to their source, what might this teach us about the purpose and potential of our shared journey through existence?

In this question lies the heart of exploration—a space for curiosity, reflection, and the endless process of becoming.