As well you know, gentle reader, once upon a time during my ill-spent and still quite interminable youth, I did declare that gravity is love, love is gravity and thought I was done with it. I had learned that gravity determines the shape of the cosmos, and loudly doubted that there would ever be gravitons to discover, nor waves.
When I couldn't gain traction in any learned discussion, I pretty much dropped the entire subject and have lived a long life, happily ever after as it were, and was and still shall be (though I did not wear a helmet).
In a manner desultory to some extreme, I did await further enlightenment, indulging random-seeming curiosity along my way up against a now seeming rapid decay of memory. I was quite certain that there must be some more enlightened fellow human being who would true this discourse that I'd quite given up on.
No such luck, right? We still seem on the brink of something which feels an awful lot like disaster, and I have still been suffered to exist. My estimates have been way off!
So, ever moving toward the conclusion of this fine though popular rendition of the antics of 20th Century physics, it does occur to me that I had one thing quite wrong, or rather it never did occur to me with the right spin factor. I hadn't accounted for the simultaneity of emotion.
I mean radical simultaneity of the sort which stops the cosmos, as in there is no propagation as there are no physical particles on exchange. Duh!
As I do quite vaguely recall calculus, at which I did seem to excel while not grokking a single bit of it, the method provided a means to conclude calculations which were otherwise quite literally interminable. You take terms in a mostly artificial manner to their limits and sum over the resulting near-perfect approximation.
Computers, naturally, can do the same thing for far more complex structures than does figuring on paper, and so we have a whole new branch of experimental mathematics whose solutions are rather more demonstrated than proven. Cool!
Whole worlds have been created on these combined methods, which are themselves rather equally terrifying and exciting (as though those two were in opposition). And yet mostly now we wish reality to be screened and framed, since we cannot bear the actual so-called natural gravity of it. Many even fantasize that there will be technical solutions to each and every one of our complaints, as though slings and arrows might sting for nevermore.
I scratch myself to bleeding now and wish I wouldn't.
I have declared that we are each our own cosmos, never noticing that this is but a physical reality. Conceptually, we inhabit that eternal now which is in Mom's blasted mind, who puts a smile to it as best she can. Present are all who came before and follow, distant only by space-time and memory's recession into binary squares.
I did watch with no small quantum of sadness last night as simulated mankind trumps common sense in anger at loss. Which is but a natural response to being dissed and cheated and ignored. Wrong prophet is all, wrong psychopathic channeler of rage to oversimplified conclusion. Every preacher is such a man, and so no shame in it.
And yet our knowledge of physical reality does approach love, by narrowing intervals of if-not calculus then according to some simplifying factor that we are all in it together, whether we would like to wall ourselves off in some gated portion of spaceship Earth, or no.
Still there is no human on the planet, as it was never our DNA nor measurable intelligence which distinguishes us from beastliness. It was only ever our love, which might bind us to eternity, and all those teeming others which might inhabit our cosmos but eons away, reduced to now if we would open to them. We cannot get there by ignoring those just in front of us.
Toodles then, it's off to work that I must go, though I will return to work the clarity of this utterly trivial statement when I have the time. There is still the painfully trivial calculus to make a living.