It is improper and specially improper to draw any conclusions from the universe that are objective, the very criteria of the universe imposes that upon us, the presumptuous assumption that we can harness the laws of universe doesn’t work for the universe it works for us, and only for us.
Once we recognize this axiomatic maxim what advantage is there in it? The relationship of things to us becomes truly independent of our judgment and we can allow for our bias which has been what we have so definitively attempted to subtract with objective logic. Once we are aware that the math and the experiments live to serve us and are not in themselves universal laws, then we can liberate ourselves from absolutes which ponderously have only hitherto serve to imprisons us in the bastion of individualism, which is nothing more than a representation of a profound self entanglements.
A new world view is being demanded from us not even by us, but by the tired ideas which have exhausted their own creative energies and are now circling around the axis of their origins. It is not the catechism taught by the academics that is corrupt, it is that its time has come and gone, and the ideas themselves are tired of being called to represent all of humanity in dialectical cathedrals which loop eclecticism.
Repetition is always harsh even to a dull observer, the myriads and abundance of economists and hamlets is a decisive reckoning sign that their clock has stoppeth. We can try to continue to foster new generations onward and into the universe with our cults of self, capital, democracy and freedom of speech, but they will not believe the ideas of their parents, they will not believe in them because they are not theirs to believe.
Quantum is impressive, so what! String Theory wow unto thee, your father has abandoned thee.
How far can a mother reach unto her children and their progeny before there is only .00000000000001/2 of her in them? Is it so far that our ancestors will recoil and the future will tremble? Does forward momentum surpass the weight of its own history? You may never know the full answer to this question, surmise then, if there was a beginning does the beginning get to touch the end too. Will Adam and Eve die when the species dies? The question is reflectionary, when we blow up Buddha statues created hundreds of years back does that mean that the past has been breached? Indeed it feels like an entire connection to us has been blocked, someone blew up a portion of our world, the world that through analogy and rock fortified our experience as a humanity. If our species dies out because we keep on breaking the bonds with our history then Adam and Eve will die too. Jesus and Confucius and culture allow for the consistency that death punctuates. A mother will never have a zero relationship to her progeny and their posterity. We can always make that assumption, because it makes sense that origins pursue descent, and more, we can not make sense out of an absolute disconnect between Adam and Eve and us.
But of course we should try to make sense of that disconnect and even believe it because it is the more difficult thing to believe. Serial relationships are easy to connect, this is why we have such a difficulty calculating and working out parallel computing and the more interesting quantum computing. Serial connections are automatic by nature, parallel relationships are not that complicated because in the end they are multiplied serial relationships, they have become complex because instead of making them truly parallel we have opted to take a serial process and divided it, and cross it over and re-cross it over into a serial parade so as to administers a single serial process in parallel; whereas the parallel world would rather simply administer entire processes in parallel; and quantum that doesn’t believe in time and space but rather in instances of observation and acceptance, more difficult to believe and virtually impossible to conceptualize through modern logic, doesn’t bother to administer sequence. Our problem in comprehending quantum is that it is too independent of cause and effect, distance and time.
This is because it is the disconnect that makes sense to quantum, it is the disconnect that doesn’t make sense to us. People write code in qbits but they haven’t got a clue why it works. They suppose connections, they suppose happenings, they amass probability factors, create material functions addressing witnessing observations which become digital annotations, but we are far from uniting that divide, and more troubling it is doubtful that we will “need” to unite that divide because the only circumstance that demands unity is logic. Maybe we didn’t come from our parents, maybe our parents didn’t birth us, maybe we did not give them and choice and actually from afar manipulated the consequence of our birth upon mostly an unwilling. Maybe life doesn’t have a sequence, maybe there was never an Adam and Eve, they were only two, so doubtful, maybe we spontaneously came into existence by will of desire; by some magnification of an abhorrence or a reaction to nothingness, maybe the nothingness gave us up so us to diversify, so as to not be itself, so as to deny the absolute nature of its being, maybe the nothingness was so entangled with itself that it created us to undo its Gordian knot, we are then the discontented disconnect of an entangled self.
RC
No comments:
Post a Comment