1.1. Generalities

According to theories relating how Homo sapiens, one of the first identified humankind, has evolved in society and to my deduction where Homo sapiens ancestors were living in a complete loneliness, it seems that the move from living alone to living in society came naturally to seek protection against predators and the harsh conditions to survive.
Then we know the story from this prehistoric period to nowadays societies. Today, the societies are composed from multiple micro societies, specifically the family. What triggers me to write this thought is that on top of seeking protection, humans need to develop the goal of successful communication to "survive" in the society.
We just mentioned the two reasons why humans want to live in group: protection and communication. If we put the reason protection aside and we focus on communication.
When a human meets another human for the first time they have to communicate using signs and sounds. Moving on the time spectrum, communication has been developing in a lot of different ways.

Summarising my point above: before humans needed to communicate to achieve protection. Today humans need to achieve protection "and" communication, the connector "and" is critical in my explanation.

Humans are now used to live in society and they talk to each other. They are accustomed to live together since their birth. When suddenly, a human is finding "itself" alone, he has lost all his references linked to living in society and he can suffer from this new situation. With time, the human will develop new habit and will become used to this new loneliness state. His capacity of adapting has always impressed me.
However, nowadays a human can be lonely in a society which is paradoxical. This paradox creates challenges for the human to adapt and generates behaviour which contradicts a state of loneliness or a state of society..

The question to answer is why does human need to communicate? The obvious answer is to deliver a message to other people, making sure he is understood and finds a certain satisfaction. I would like to analyse in more details the second point "finds a satisfaction". I don't really know where this analysis will end as I do not have a specific plan and anyway I do not think there is an end but a start, always a start.
So, finding a satisfaction when communicating requires two entities: the person who triggers the communication, let's call it the "sender" and the entity or the person receiving the message from the sender, let's call it: the receiver. In order to be satisfied, the receiver should show something to the sender. If the receiver shows nothing, then we are in the paradox of being lonely in the society, consequently not satisfactory.
The question to ask is what kind of thing the receiver is sending to the sender in order for the latter to be pleased or content? Is it something like an acknowledgement? What is it?
Let's try to provide an answer and extrapolate.
If the receiver acknowledges positively the sender then the latter is satisfied. It means that communication relies on how we think we are perceived from others. This means that we are driven by our relationships with others which is fundamentally different from the human living alone, who is driven by the survival aspect.
When the human decided to live in society, he did not need to survive anymore as life became easier. In a certain way he has reached his objective and should be satisfied. Instead, another objective has been created which translates as getting satisfied when communicating.

To summarise:
The human leaving alone during the prehistoric period has one objective: surviving. For analogy below we will call the human: an entity.
The human leaving in society has one objective: communicating. The society has become an entity and has one objective: surviving. In this evolution a new entity has been created which is the society.

The question I have is once the human has managed to live in society because he wanted to survive, why he was not satisfied then and felt the need to create another objective as the survival objective was transferred to the micro society.

Let's try to work on a simulation which could give some clues on why the "communication" objective was created.
Suppose a human meets another human at the prehistoric era and there is a huge storm. The first human X runs in a cavern nearby where the second human Y is already sheltered. Y does not do anything except watching X. X does the same, watching Y. When the storm ends, X leaves the cavern and Y follows. They do not talk but they communicate by attitude, signs and sounds. Y showing X that he wants to be with X. In terms of objectives, both try to survive and keep up the communication. When they find easier to survive at two rather than one, a micro society is created. The micro society has now a survival objective whereby X and Y need to maintain this society through communication.
What does it mean? It means the human finds it is easier to reach its objective with someone else and transfer it to the micro society. Unconsciously, he has created a "communication" objective. If the human failed to communicate then he failed to survive as well because he transferred this objective to this micro society, so he needs to adapt again to live alone and it will take time.
We will come back on this unconscious objective transfer a bit later as I would like to go one step further with our micro society of two humans (let's call it society2)
Suppose these two humans attack a beast and struggle to win because the beast is too strong. Suppose another human who was around help them to win against the beast. After the fight they decide to stay together creating a micro society of three people (let's call it society3). Society3 could have the survival objective, society2 could have an objective of communicating with the third human and each human has a communication objective to make sure Society2 and Society3 objectives are reached. It becomes a process without an end and the complexity is increasing. Nowadays, we can imagine the complexity of our societies.

The conclusion of this thought is as follows:
To achieve a goal (let's call it goal1) an entity (the human for example and let's call it entity1) creates unconsciously another entity (the micro society for example, let's call it entity2) which will take over goal1. Entity1 has unconsciously transferred goal1 to entity2 and has generated another goal (goal2) to keep the connection between entity1 and entity2.

Following this previous thought, I would like to explore this unconscious transfer in more details.
Let's make a detailed simulation to understand.
Suppose there is a storm happening, the first human (let's call it human1) runs to the cavern to seek protection while the second human (let's call it human2) is already sitting there, watching the land pouring with rain. Suddenly lightning bolts strike the area and Human2 is very scared of the thunderstorm. He crouches to the end of the cavern.
The cavern is about three meters long, two meters wide. The cavern allows for two people to rest comfortably. Human2 sits at the back of the cavern and covers his face with his hands, as he is scared.

Human1, caught in the storm runs fast and spots the cavern and decides to shelter inside. He reaches it and stops at the entry one meter in, avoiding the rain and standing up.
One minute elapses without both humans noting each other, the storm is deafening.
Suddenly, human1 turns his head to the back of the cavern to inspect and perceived human2 sitting with his head in his arms. Human1 emits a neutral sound, not aggressive as he feels confident that human2 could not hurt him in this harsh environment. Human2 subsequently raises his head and emits a neutral sound acknowledging human1 presence. Thirty seconds later, human1 reiterates his sound behaviour and human2 as well. A certain form of communication is taking place and this interaction lasts for a few more minutes with moments of silence until the storm ends.
Then Human1 decides to leave the cavern and Human2 follows. The communication by sound continues punctuated by silent moments until they help each other against an animal. When the animal is down, they share it and the connection between them becomes stronger.

Going back to our analysis, the unconscious transfer of survival objective and the creation of the new entity of the two humans taking over the survival objective depends on their random encounter and the communication. The latter is critical in our analysis where the human constantly communicates with inert entities such as stones. He also communicates with living beings such as animal or other humans or plants.
It means this constant communication in a random situation is provoking a transfer of objectives amongst entities as well as creating them.

The difference between communication and the objective of survival is that the latter is what the entity tries to achieve while communication is something the human or the entity is performing continuously like breathing. He is communicating in two ways: consciously and unconsciously. For example, when the humans met in the cavern, they were saying to each other "I will not hurt you" and that was unconscious. When they were emitting sounds, it was done consciously.
It means the transfer of objectives and the micro-society creation is coming from the unconscious and conscious communication.

Not only the human communicates with living and non-living beings from the environment, the environment itself communicates with the human. It provides responses to human senses such as smell, sound, taste and more importantly sight. The human reacts and develops new entities with new objectives. The environment and the human are provoking these interactions.
If we separate the environment and the human to understand more in details the process of communication, we may be able to find some useful conclusions.

1.2. Separating the environment

We talked about the human communicating with living beings like humans or animals or plant and non living beings such as stones. We also mentioned the human is communicating consciously and unconsciously. Let's try to go further in this thought.
Communicating could be described as interaction with the environment. It is not possible to not communicating with the environment. If the human decides not to interact, how can he do this? It is just impossible because the human body is part of the environment. If you take the example of gravity which allows the human standing on the ground, otherwise he will float in the air, we can say the world with its rules communicates with the human whether he likes it or not.
We could ask ourselves the question: is there a way of separating the human from the environment removing the communication with it? How can we achieve this process of thoughts?
We could think of a human in a void where there is no environment and he can not communicate or more precisely he does not need to communicate. What does he do? We should also remove any physical needs because it will be linked to the environment. Let's assume a body which becomes a sort of shell, sheltering pure thoughts.
As there is no environment, his thoughts are not focused on other beings either.

What do we have left? The human in a void with his thoughts which encompass so many different things. One of them is imagination.
I have to say that I am stuck, I don't know how to move forward. The difficulty of thinking of a human brain with no environment and no body resides how we can imagine this situation. What thoughts, the brain is focusing on? Usually everything is linked to the environment. If there is nothing, there is nothing to think of.
What I can do is to imagine the void with just the brain thinking. Let's try and see where we go: The void could be imagined as a dark space where small invisible cells float on the void. Randomly they combine and their combination creates an event or thoughts. We can imagine their combination has created our first planet either by physical process devoid of thoughts or by a cellular thoughtful process, cellular referred to the invisible thoughts.
Now let's try to imagine how these cells appeared which does not not seem a simple task. We could suppose the cells appeared from the explosion of a bigger element. It brings us then to how this bigger element has appeared. We could assume its formation is coming from a cellular combination to keep the same train of thoughts above.
We end up in circular cycle: big element -> explosion in a myriad of cells -> cells combination creates big element -> big element.
When you think about, this circularity is retrieved everywhere, specifically in the space with planet, stars, how they evolve in a circular manner around the sun. Fascinating how my process of thoughts could conclude to this specific, i.e. circular, state of a void and how you could deduct the evolution based on a few simple assumptions.
Going back now, we have concluded this circularity could explain the potential evolution of our universe. For each cycle, the void with its cells and its big element slowly define and design what we called the universe.
If we summarise from the beginning point by point:
- First we wanted to understand the relationship of a human in the society
- We started with one human meeting another human in the prehistoric period
- The human needs to survive and we define its first objective as the survival objective
- When the human meets another human, they unconsciously create a micro society
- The two humans in the micro society generate a communication objective in order to maintain this micro society and they transfer their primary survival objective to the micro society
- This ends up to an exponential growth of micro societies with communication objective. The overall society gets the survival objective
- We wanted to understand conscious and unconscious communication. The human communicates with its body and the physical world automatically. It is difficult to understand how communication appears or explaining it origin. We are stuck in the explanation.
- Then, we made an assumption of removing physical world and human body to explore what is left beyond which is characterised by a void and cells of thoughts moving randomly
- We conclude of the existence of a cycle: cells merge to create a big element which then explodes in multiple cells

Now, we can assume, the eternal cycle started from one element which exploded in multiple cells which after merged together into another single element which exploded again paving the path of the universe evolution.
The one element at the start could be assimilated to the theory of "Big Bang".

What do we have before the Big Bang? An eternal cycle
It becomes difficult to imagine what happened before the Big Bang. Our mind are set to think along a line of time with a start and an end. We could also think the notion of start and end could not exist where this circular cycle, unique element - myriads of cells, has always existed indefinitely.
We could say in this infinite state of this circular cycle, the definition of a cycle implies a start and an end where the unique element has been created from the combination of cells and has been terminated from its explosion.
The cycle has always existed and the origin lies in this infinity. We could imagine what, who trigger this cycle: god or gods? Then what happened before god or gods? We could try to explain the origin of something without never ending. Something will always exist after or something has always existed before.
We could conclude of the existence of an infinite cycle with period beginning and ending. From a rational perspective, that constitutes the only explanation. We just understand the infinity of our universe we live in and this represents for me the final explanation.