When I was eight years old I asked a question of our parish priest. I figured that if anyone would know the answer, an expert on heaven would be able to answer my question. It was, “How far is space?” I had the next ready question, which was “Okay, what comes then?” But I never got to ask the second question because the answer to the first was a game stopper. My priest looked at me and said “How far is space? Well my son, that’s one of God’s mysteries.” Unsatisfied, I refused to drop the question and ended up considered a distraction by the nuns in charge of catechism and the priest. Right about that time I became what is today called a theoretical physicist, amateur of course. This is mostly because I am still asking the same question(s) today because I’ve never been given an answer I can accept.
The thing is, I’m not real fond of quantum mechanics. I know the school of thought is the current darling of pure research, but I have too much faith in nature doing things that make sense to accept the idea of a way of thinking that only works when it’s unobserved. I am not a big fan of the big bang either. Once again, I don’t think that nature makes something of nothing with an infinite fury for a millisecond before slowing to an inflation where expansion is faster on the outskirts than at its core. It’s just too science fiction for me. Most everything in nature can be referred in someway to a circle. Of some kind or in some way, a circle is involved directly or through ratio. So, in my estmation that disqualifies the big bang as out of character. However, I can imagine a sine wave representing the universe as expanding and collapsing in a cycle of infinite time. With all that said, my views on what reality itself is, I follow the same course.
I don’t hold with the idea that we are a hologram of a cosmic scale nor do I subscribe to the idea that our reality is a false construct of some kind, such as the result of the dreams of a superior being. Because nature does things in a fractal way, eg: it reduces over and over, pattern replicating pattern infinitely. And when we look at the infinitely big and the infinitely small, we find tremendous similarity. Our universe is made up of star systems that appear to be remarkably like atoms in construction. So I’m pretty sure that reality is best described as a T-shirt slogan: What you see is what you get. Reality is a set of perceptions shared by all. It’s not like the argument of evolution over creation, it’s more thinks like the land we stand on is made of dirt and water is wet. All things in the universe subscribe to the things within it, and that includes the basic perceptions shared by animal life. There are some things that I believe that opinion is irrelevant to –and that makes up my idea of reality. The fact that we perceive all of the things that take place within the reality we agree on with different prejudices and agendas I write off to human imperfection. I never said nature was perfect; it can’t be because it created the human character traits.
Were I having this discussion with my wife, it would be over by now. She would have gone off mumbling about how she hoped I didn’t talk like this on my blog because it’s so BORING and who cares about the opinions of some dude from Spokane who suffers math anxiety. She might be right, but I see no reason why I should not shake my fist at the immensity of the cosmos in with defiant opinion. This is my life long campaign: finding just how much of reality is real! Including the start and finish of me and everything around me Of course, it’s probably a bad time to ask now, what with Punkin Chunkin’ season at hand.