Saturday, June 6, 2009

Here, Kitty-kitty!

Kitty

Another Saturday morning and all is right in my little corner of the universe…or is it?

Is it, for one thing, my little corner of the universe? How is this corner defined? If this is the only thing I’ve ever known, wouldn’t my view of the universe be skewed? What if what I think of as my little corner of the universe (hereinafter called MLCOTU), is not the way things really are, and what if all around me, the universe is going to hell in a hand basket?

Is the universe, as I perceive it, the only universe there is? If it is, would that mean that my perception of MLCOTU is universal? Would an ant, crawling about on the ground of MLCOTU, see things the same way I would? Would it think that all was right with the universe, too?

All these universes, existing at the same time – assuming the ant and I each have a concept of time and that those concepts are exactly the same – begs the question, which one is real?

What is reality? Is it concrete, absolute, irrefutable? Is it situational, in the eye of the beholder, shifty, unimportant?

My mother grew up with the understanding that some things were set in stone: the sun rose in the east, set in the west; the earth orbited the sun; the atom was the smallest unit of measure in the universe.

Then, she worked on the Manhattan Project, briefly, and helped do some of the research that led to the first atomic weapon developed here on this planet.

Her reality changed when that first atom was split, even though she was unaware of the precise moment that occurred. For her, the paradigm shift took place when news of the bombing of Hiroshima reached her ears. Then, again, when she realized her part in that catastrophe, even though her part in the drama had been miniscule.

What happened to the universe she knew when it ceased to exist for her? Did it live on as a parallel reality for her metaphysical doppelganger?

Do parallel universes exist? Do we create our own realities?

Yesterday, I spent my book-budget on three small volumes I thought would add more to my life than if I bought my intended purchase, Martha Stewart’s Cupcakes. I bought them not because I would be getting three for the price I would have paid for hers (that was a plus – icing on the cupcake, so to speak), but because I was seduced by the titles: 50 Mathematical Ideas You Really Need to Know, and its counterparts, 50 Philosophy… and 50 Physics..., et cetera. I believe there are ideas worth learning about, and I have been on a quest to learn as many of them as possible before I die. (Some publisher saw the likes of me coming, and came up with titles that not only drew me to that shelf in the store, but made me plunk down my hard-earned, hard-saved money for these three books.)

I spent a couple of hours in my favorite coffee shop skimming through the books. Time slowed down and became wobbly, like gelatin. My reality was shifting before my very eyes, then back again because what I read was still being digested…or was that because of the pastry I was munching upon while reading?

At some point, long after I returned home, my brain cried out, “Enough, already!” I went to bed and dreamed of Alice’s Cheshire cat in a multi-dimensional box full of constantly shifting portals into other multi-dimensional, theoretical boxes -- and images from high school science classes of the atomic bomb blasts. The God Particle became an article God wrote for Playboy magazine. In the interview section of that issue, God sounded like Bill Cosby, talking to Noah about building a boat. I saw my mother – rather, multiples of my mother – through what must have been honeycomb glasses: rows and rows of tiny Evelyns in tiny hexagonal compartments, all the same, yet each one different from the other because each existed in a separate ‘reality.’

Maybe the dream wasn’t the result of reading the books. Maybe it was because of the anti-histamine I took so I could breathe easier and sleep more deeply.

I liked Saturday mornings better when it was just birdsong and breakfast odors wafting through the backdoor screen. After breakfast, I think I’ll tackle the chapter in the mathematics book on Latin squares. It’s supposed to provide me with the secret to solving Sudoku puzzles.
(c) 2009 Martha McLemore

10 comments:

Zhoen said...

I do sudoku to help train myself to see numbers better. Works.

Have you seen any of James Burkes, The Day the Universe Changed? Terry Pratchett worries at this theme a lot, too.

The Crow said...

Good morning, Z:

Yes, I watched almost all of the Burkes episodes, and loved them! I must see if they are available on CD/DVD.

We just watched Pratchett's "The Hogfather" a couple of nights ago. I like the way his mind works, and his sense of humor. I must visit the library to see what else of his I can find.

:)

Deedee said...

Makes the brain hurt, doesn't it? I've been reading about quantum physics lately and it's fascinating, but it can be tough to fathom. I suspect that our little corners of the universe appear as such, so the mental stress won't become overwhelming.

The Crow said...

Deedee:

Around 11:30 last night, my brain hurt so bad I gave up and went to bed. However, it was interesting reading until my brain cried "Uncle!"

Maybe there are some things I'm not meant to understand...not in this dimension, at least.

:)

The Joined up Cook said...

I do sudoku as a kind of brain workout.

When it comes to the universe; whether there are parallel versions; whether what we experience is real or some great imaginary thing or...........well it's never ending.

I think the brain hurts when you try too hard to understand.

When I realised that I could never understand, only accept, I found that my imagination could get its head around some of the concepts.

I sometimes wonder if there is a parallel world/universe for every possible combination of events; in other words, countless, numberless versions of what we are experiencing; where the word trillion would be inadequate and meaningless.

When people talk about 'A Parallel Universe' I think they miss the point.

If it's possible for one or two or three to exist why not numberless versions?

Nature/the creator has no concept of 'limit' in the way we humans have.

What a wonderful and thought provoking post Martha.

L'Adelaide said...

fascinating...I remember when I first really got what it meant that there was space between every atom and therefore, there was a possibility to see through everything and that was how the lamas and great teachers of tibet put there handprints into stone and walked through walls....it boggles the mind...if any of the above makes any sense at all ;)

only my doppelganger on the other side knows for sure I suppose

thanks for a great brain buzz...

The Crow said...

John/AWB:

I presume there is an endless number of possibilities for alternate realities, because each human, alone, is a myriad of variables. All else being equal, seems there would have to be a 'reality' for each of those variables.

Reality is limited by our imaginations. Science, too, to some degree. Take that bit about splitting the atom. When Mama was in high school, she was taught that it couldn't be done. Yet, in her lifetime, not only was the atom split, but the weapon/technology that leveled Hiroshima and Nagasaki evolved into nuclear energy/weaponry, and it was harnessed for a multitude of peacetime applications.

Splitting the atom wasn't impossible, it just hadn't been done by man yet, and his understanding of how the universe worked was still limited at that point.

So, if we didn't see how nuclear fission could be 'real,' how many other wonders exist (even as I type this) that we haven't even considered?

Owww...my brain hurts, again.

:D

The Crow said...

Linda:

You are welcome for the brain buzz. Mine feels like gingerale fizziness when I reach that point. Must be too many synapses misfiring.

:D

susan said...

Scientists act as though taking things apart is the thing to do - in a certain sense, it is - to see how the gears work. But taking stuff apart tells us nothing about what it is. If you begin with the prejudice that everything about anything is mechanical and spiritless, that's what you'll find. We don't have to automatically call up intelligent design to talk about the issue. We already made ourselves from next to nothing (no-thing is a lovely concept) so why not take the next thought step that as we conceive of something new it springs into being somewhere? My vote is for terma, boddhisattvas and I still hope to meet some Elves.. or maybe I have. We're certainly not concrete beings.

The Crow said...

Susan:

That sounds like an argument in support of our creating our own universes, which I think we must do, on one level, being creatures with imaginations.

I googled terma, for I don't know what it means, and was lead into a fascinating 'universe' of Buddhism. I bookmarked those pages for later viewing. Thanks, Susan!

:)