Friday, May 12, 2006

sub-atomic particles for the masses

what if we're not a bunch of distinct little whirly bits circling and clinging to each other, plunging through the air/water/space around us? quantum mechanics seems to suggest that sub-atomic "particles" pop in and out of existence all the time, creating and destroying themselves and their opposites in a semi-erotic flashdance that produces localized mass/energy we can measure. despite this, the idea of the enduring single atom has persevered, sweeping the apparent discontinuity of matter under the rug.

Sure the atom has been a useful idea, and continues to be one to this day for some people i'm sure. But thinking of myself and the world around me as a bunch of tightly packed spheres doesn't do much for me on a daily basis, t'be honest.

All these ideas we have about how reality works are just models in the end; tools to give us broader ranges of ability in our interactions. So i have to ask, "what's the atom ever done for me?" unlike Yahoo Serious I can't split an atom, or grab one, or see one, or interact with one in any way really. Feels like my range of ability is as narrow as ever. (quiet you).

so i think about it for a bit and it occurs to me, what if we're more like figures you might see moving across a scoreboard at your favorite sports event. We see the figures, in 2d, as they dunk on each other and demand that we charge at things, but we also understand that the figures are just patterns of lights turning on and off on a 2d grid. the quantum model has our particles appearing and disappearing constantly, and showing up in different places, so maybe we're not moving our atoms from one place to the next through whatever medium du jour, we're just turning on potential particles on a 3D grid.

Well it seems like the implications of this new model would be massive, and potentially useful in day to day life, but it's tricky. First, what is changing the particle pattern? Who's running the scoreboard? In our case, it seems straight forward: we are, through our consciousness. But we aren't living in a vacuum, there's already stuff in all of the places that i want to be, so it has to get out of the way when i'm appearing. The air around me has to have it's particles appear in he space i've chosen not to be in, and how would in know where that space is, or how to make itself appear there. well, one way to explain it would be to think of all forms of matter/energy as possessing a certain type of consciousness, or will, and to suggest that all the different forms of consciousness are interacting and communicating with each other.

whoa. so i'm like talking to the wind when it blows by me, and what i feel as a rush of breeze on my skin is really my consciousness talking with the ancient mind of the earth?

hold it, not quite yet. but maybe, yeah. what do i know.

still, there's much more to explore here before we all accept the oneness of the grid. What about when things get destroyed for example. Where was the communication there? Well, i say in my voice of pure conjecture, maybe that's when one will dominates another, or when one consciousness isn't flexible enough to move. what would that mean for day to day life? Could we dodge bullets with an open mind? Walk on water if we were accepting enough?

To be sure it leads to some interesting ideas that i think are worth exploring, and hypotheses in need of testing. The latter is the important part and i'm still working on what i think would be suitable experiments. I walked down the street and tried to keep in my mind the sense of appearing and disappearing with each movement, and it felt very odd; a new sensation, and a pleasurable one. So put one on the board for the grid. grid one, enduring atom zilch. But i like to run up the score, so if you have any ideas on where to go with this next, leave a comment or send me a message.

No comments: