Archive for the ‘philosophy’ Category

Preface for Everything IS, a visual theory of everything


22 Apr
When Worlds Merge, an Abstract digital collage of the view out my front window representing worlds merging into a theory of everything

When Worlds Merge

page 4-5 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything 

I have merged my art and the art of my partner, William Solis, with my Theories of Everything.

Shrink and grow with my analogies. Classical notions of time and space must be revised in order to grasp relativity. Classical ideas of small and large must be revised to evaluate the theories I am proposing.

These ideas are not the final answer to Anything, but rather a catalyst to view Everything from different perspectives.

Purchase Book

Unified Theories of Everything


23 Apr
Abstract image representing Totalities from Everything IS, a visual theory of everything

Totalities

page 6-7 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

I have a difficult time contemplating a unified theory of the universe that does not take into consideration evolution, revolution, religion, war, love, hate, marketing trends, television, paperbacks, email and why don’t pigs have wings! Is our species studying the nuts and bolts of Everything and discovering marvelous uses for all these nuts and bolts without really having a good definition of the Totality of Everything.

I began my thought experiments by trying to make statements that apply to Everything.

Note: Jim Charlton, Southside of Chicago via Darlington, WI, who teaches social theory to graduate students in Chicago, introduced me to totalities. In a nutshell: picture all the parts of a car strewn over a field. No matter how much any individual part is studied, unless there is a bigger theory about what a car looks like and its purpose, it would be well nigh impossible to figure out what it was or put it together. It is necessary to study the concept of a car in total to understand it; the parts are only useful as descriptors of the total after the bigger picture is in place, though there might be an infinite variety of uses for the individual parts.

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

Theory of Universal Totalities, aka Queen TUT


24 Apr
Queen TUT, theory of universal totalities image of nude woman torso stretching, from Everything IS, a visual and intellectual theory of everything

Queen TUT, aka Theory of Universal Totalities

page 8-9 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

  • Everything groups and Everything ungroups;

  • Everything is or was made up of groups of other things.

These two statements represent a totality of Everything from quarks [the subatomic particles that group to create protons and neutrons, which in turn group with electrons to form atoms, which group into molecules, which group into cells, which group into organs, which group into systems, which group into individuals, which group into family, state, religion, species, ecosystem, planet, solar system, local star group, galaxy, cluster of galaxies] to super clusters of galaxies and possibly groups of universes.

Everything whose existence has been confirmed by science, groups with other things and is, in turn, made up of groups of other things.

Are we on the wrong track in looking for a unified theory of our universe by searching for the smallest building block of matter? Is the key to Everything the Group, rather than the ultimate building block?

Maybe there is no smallest unit of matter or energy and there is no largest grouping of groupings, or cluster of universes, only the limits of our technology or imagination to see smaller and larger. If there is a smallest unit of matter and energy, it is smaller than an atom, smaller even than a proton and probably smaller than a quark, so the key to Everything still appears to be in the grouping of these tiny particles.

If there is no final building block of matter or energy then the key to Everything must be in the group. Which segues to my next theory.

Note: Current theories consider electrons and photons and a host of other subatomic particles to be elementary particles, unable to be further “ungrouped,” however, current theories also hypothesize that in the first split seconds of the universe, these particles did not exist and are the end result of theoretical particles grouping due to changes in the initial state (possibly of temperature and pressure) of the universe. Current technology does not allow us to actually see quarks or electrons or photons, though, so it is possible that they are made up of smaller particles (or the vibrating loops of string theory), which could be made up of still smaller particles (or smaller loops) and so on.

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

Theory of Infinite Sentience


29 Apr
Abstract Representation of Infinite Sentience, from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Infinite Sentience

page 10-11 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

  • Sentience: a state of elementary or undifferentiated consciousness

  • Sentient: responsive to or conscious of sense impressions; aware; finely sensitive in perception or feeling

   

I would like to explore the possibility that our universe is run by Infinite Sentience from the subatomic to the cosmic. Maybe humans are not the only sentient beings on this planet, but a part of a pattern of sentience, tied to groupings, which exists on infinite levels.  

Maybe things happen because infinite numbers of decisions are being made by infinite numbers of sentient entities coming from infinite grouping and size perspectives—infinity to the power of infinity.  

Purchase Book 

Purchase Greeting Card

The Perspective Horizon


11 May

Abstract image of The Perspective Horizon, from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The Perspective Horizon

page 12-13 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

I call these infinite perspectives the perspective horizon. We all sit in a different position on this perspective horizon and are only able to see those entities that are within our own specific range. This perspective horizon extends infinitely in all directions.What is the fundamental, underlying principle of a tapestry? Are the micro-fibers more important than the overall pattern of the tapestry? Are both absolutely fundamentally equal from their individual places on the perspective horizon? The pattern can be used on different mediums; the medium of the tapestry can be used for different patterns. Can we imagine an entity for which the medium is critical but the pattern is invisible…a blind person? Can we imagine the opposite?

Even if we allow the vibrating strings of String Theory [Note: According to String Theory, protons and neutrons are made of quarks under which sit vibrating strings of varying, possibly infinite, frequencies in ten dimensions (nine spatial plus time), maybe creating a waveparticle duality between the quark and the string. Electrons, photons and other subatomic particles would also be strings. The grouping of these wave loops would lie at the bottom of Everything according to this theory.] to be the smallest unit of sentience, rather than just as small as we can currently theorize, that unit doesn’t necessarily describe the whole any better than any other point on the perspective horizon, as the perspective horizon remains infinite. All points (of view?) on it are exactly in the middle as each point would be surrounded by infinities.

Does every person, place, thing, political point of view, religion, or other ideology, work choice, reading choice, past time choice, fashion choice, relationship choice carry its own validity from its own particular unique place on the perspective horizon? Maybe no place on this perspective horizon is any more special than any other place on this perspective horizon. Maybe nothing is more fundamental than anything else. Could the study of food or dance or ants or cells all show us patterns that help us understand the totality of our universe every bit as well as the study of fundamental particles or of the cosmos?

Purchase Book 

Purchase Greeting Card

Evolution


24 May
Abstract representation of evolution with big apple in center from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Evolution

page 14-15 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

I first ambled down this mental trail while thinking about Evolution. Evolution at the level of multi-celled creatures seems very obvious. A zebra looks too much like a horse; we look too much like other primates; dinosaurs look too much like reptiles, etc. for me to doubt it.

However on the microscopic level, that moment when life was created from the primordial stew of non-living molecules…how did that happen? One minute there were non-living molecules floating around, the next minute they grouped into one-celled living creatures? How?

How did these one-celled creatures turn into multi-celled, sentient me? What is the mechanism? At one time there were only one-celled creatures, which bonded together to form multi-celled creatures, which began to act as one creature, which eventually emerged a consciousness. How does that work? What law of nature made that consciousness happen? The Weak Nuclear Force? The Strong Nuclear Force?  Gravity? Electromagnetism? The Laws of Thermodynamics?

Maybe we’re asking the wrong question. Just like in a murder mystery, maybe we need to look for motive. Maybe WHY they grouped is more relevant to Everything than HOW they grouped.

Purchase Greeting Card

Purchase Book

Part of the Pattern


24 Jul
Face coming out of wall with candle blown out, representing patterns in everything from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Part of the Pattern

page 16-17 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

As a thought experiment, let’s reverse current philosophy that the Human Species has the only known sentient beings. Let’s not make humans part of the rule by removing our sentience (as in the philosophies that bring out our “animal heredity”), but rather by granting sentience to Everything Else.

If the one-celled creatures of which I am made were sentient (and still are) and bonded together in much the same way that humans form families and cities and states and countries, to form organs and circulatory systems and other sentient entities, then there is no need for anything new to emerge. Human culture would be evolution up close and personal. Culture wouldn’t Group out there all by itself as a human phenomenon. Just as one geographical area may become the energy producing area, or classical music center, or grain producing or wool producing area or city, so organs may have developed, specializing in digestion or respiration or hearing or sight.

We claim to be the only creature to have built structures as elaborate as our skyscrapers or our devices that allow us to conquer the skies and the sea. Consider that the one-celled creatures of which we are made, created us, creatures millions of times larger than they are (as a city is thousands or millions of times the size of an individual); creatures with eyes (Hubble telescopes?) that are able to bring back images and report these images to the rest of the colony; creatures with ears (satellites?) that are able to bring back sounds and report them to the rest of the colony, etc.

I feel very strongly that I have free will (at least now and then); do the members of the colonies that make up my inner cosmoses feel the same way?

Purchase Greeting Card

Purchase Book

Adam and Eve


30 Jul
Abstract image with two apples on giant billboards representing Adam and Eve from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Adam and Eve

page 18-19 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

I have been dissatisfied with the current explanations of how humans emerged from non-sentient primates. The religious evolutionists propose that God blew the spirit into man. The scientific emergence theories seem to have the same breath happening, it’s just paced differently—it takes place over a much longer period of time.

But what did that first glimmer of sentience look like? What was it made up of? What is it made up of today?

If Everything is sentient and always was sentient, then there is no need for this breath of spirit or emergence of sentience. The spirit was always here. The sentience was always there. Everything is spirit/sentience.

Purchase Greeting Card

Purchase Book

Time Passing


02 Aug
abstract image with clock in the middle on a tombstone passing through dimensions, representing time passing from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Time Passing

page 20-21 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

I am offering for discussion the theory that the vast colonies of microbes, bacteria and other entities of which we are made, combined for the same reasons that humans combine: they made decisions; they are still making decisions; our cities are making decisions; galaxies are making decisions; the atoms that combined to form molecules and the molecules that combined to form DNA were and ARE all making decisions.

No clockwork universe in my world!

Purchase Greeting Card

Purchase Book

The Anthropomorphication of Science


15 Aug
The Anthropomorphication of Science, an abstract representation from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The Anthropomorphication of Science

page 22-23 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Anthropomorphize: to attribute human form or personality to something that is not human.

I would like to remove the “naughty science” ban against anthropomorphizing that has constrained human science from Newton to the present. Humans seem especially unable to anthropomorphize that which is either too small (a photon, a molecule, a virus) or too large (a star, a galaxy, a cluster of galaxies). Why? This simple change in our thinking would put us into a pattern that repeats endlessly…grouping, disassembling and regrouping.

These thoughts allow religion, philosophy and art to be compatible with science. Are we the cultural, artistic, political, technical…achievements of our inner cosmos? Are we creating other entities through the groupings involved in our own cultural, artistic, political, technical… achievements?

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

The Grouping Thing


01 Sep
Abstract image representing all things grouping from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The Grouping Thing

page 24-25 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

I’m not trying to minimize the intellect or achievements of our species, but rather to remove all the prejudices that put us outside the rules that we apply to Everything Else. I am not being euphemistic when I compare groups of bacteria combining to form organs that work in concert with other groups of bacteria that perform other work to form creatures that group together to form cities (or beehives or coral reefs), which perform a specific function within a larger entity, say, the state.

I theorize that the process is the same. If it is the same process, what can we learn about evolution by studying the development of cities? What can we learn about the groupings of galaxies by studying the Portuguese Man Of War?

If there is no final building block of matter and the group is Everything, then maybe this grouping thing is equivalent to gravity [the attraction of all matter to all other matter]—it exists between every piece of matter and maybe that is the level on which entities are formed. Maybe we can only perceive the groupings that our senses are designed (engineered?) to see.

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

Molecular Highways


02 Sep
abstract image representing microscopic molecular highways and highways from space, from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Molecular Highways

page 26-27 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The smaller we look, the more mechanical the process is bound to appear because the details are washed out. A highway from a certain distance in space disappears, as we zoom closer it looks like a line, then it begins to take on width and direction, then height, then personality and diversity.

A family is close from the first generation to second to third, but from the fourth generation, the distance expands quickly. After 100 generations all detail of the early generations is smudged into a pattern—part of the mass migration of Angles or Saxons or Celtic peoples or Huns or Goths or, as we zoom further out in space-time, mammals or air breathers or carbon-based units.

We speak of family dynamics and corporate personalities—maybe they really are independent entities, but much too coarse grained from our perspective to be readily identified as such—the forest and the trees!

Are nuclear forces akin to family ties, hometown pride, patriotism, religious fervor, i.e. are they the gravity/grouping thing on a subatomic perspective? Do our methods of studying subatomic particles by smashing them together in particle accelerators cause some type of political upheaval that creates tremendous energy?

Purchase Book

Cosmic Nipple in the Corner of My Bedroom


17 Sep
abstract blue painting representing a breast in the corner of a cosmic bedroom from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Cosmic Nipple in the Corner of My Bedroom

page 28-29 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

To make the pattern complete, a new sentience must be created with every grouping, even a group of two…again, think gravity. If it doesn’t start adding a new sentience at two, what critical weight—and exactly what would we be weighing—would need to be reached to create that new sentience? We’d be back to emergence.

We have all experienced the different dynamics between hanging out (grouping) with one friend and then adding another friend to the mix. Is each grouping a different entity?

I picture the gravity groupings much like Einstein’s gravity fields: a multi-dimensional grid that warps where there are objects that are within the scope of my perspectives, but which would appear to warp differently to other entities coming from other perspectives. An entity grouping the size of a quark would not easily notice the warp our sun makes in the grid; an entity the size of the galaxy would not easily notice the warp I make in the grid. We are embedded much too deeply in our universe to notice the warp other universes make in the grid.

If there is no final building block of matter, the warp in the grid IS the sun, the human, the quark…. The warp itself would be the entity, which would be the intersection of other groups of entities. This grid is another way of picturing the perspective horizon.

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

Original Cosmic Nipple in the Corner of My Bedroom


20 Sep
original image which was close to the image painted on my ceiling

Cosmic Nipple in the Corner of My Bedroom

This is the original Cosmic Nipple…the one that I painted on the ceiling in the corner of my bedroom. The interesting part about this is that it was painted before I started writing my theories…though I was already thinking of them, so maybe it isn’t so odd. It seems to represent the multi dimensional grid that warps this way and that, depending on one’s position on the perspective horizon.

I have also created many checker boards that are warped and abstracted from the original grid in much this same way. It could be argued that the game of checkers is an abstracted version of war or conquest. The terrain of a real war is much more complex and has been abstracted to a board game. I am now taking that simplified abstraction and creating something more abstract and more complex. A wave of reality turning into a wave of abstraction turning into a wave of reality turning into a wave of abstraction.

Purchase Nickel and Dime Checkerboard book.

Yellow warped checkerboard from Nickel and Dime Checkerboard book by Sarah Curtiss
Red and black warped checkerboard from Nickel and Dime Checkerboard book by Sarah Curtiss of Grace Art Group
Black and blue warped checkerboard from Nickel and Dime Checkerboard book by Sarah Curtiss
Sky blue and iron gray warped checkerboard from Nickel and Dime Checkerboard book by Sarah Curtiss
Pink, purple, blue, gray and black warped checkerboard from Nickel and Dime Checkerboard book by Sarah Curtiss

Gravity Crusades


20 Sep
abstract image representing gravity as the decisions of infinitely tiny societies from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The Gravity Crusades

page 30-31 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Are we in a place in history comparable to the times of Copernicus and Galileo? In their respective times and places, the Earth with humans ruling it was at the center of Everything and larger than Everything Else. We are now used to the idea that we are ruling a small planet in a large galaxy in a universe of galaxies. However, we still think our configuration is the center of intelligent life. Out of all the multitude of groupings of matter that we know exist between the subatomic and the cosmic, between the small and the large, our size is the only presumed place where intelligent life could evolve?

If there are these infinite groupings—the gravity groupings—then there has been time for intelligent groupings to evolve on infinite levels along the perspective horizon between the infinities of sub-sub-sub-atomic and the infinities of universes.

Are we ready for a new paradigm in science where humanity’s role is not elevated above the rest of the universe (infinite universes?), but is smack in the middle of its infinite infinities, just like Everything Else?

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

Inner Cosmos


30 Sep
Abstract image representing an inner cosmos from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Inner Cosmos

page 32-33 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Just as most cells do not survive outside of their organ, most humans are no longer able to be picked up from their cities and dropped off in the middle of Desolation Wilderness and expect to survive. Organs are not generally able to survive outside their body, nor are most cities able to live independently any more. If all lines of communication were cut off from San Francisco, we would not be able to survive. The city is dependent on outside sources for food and water, energy and clothing. Maybe our highways and transportation systems developed the way they have for the same reasons that our veins and arteries developed the way they have.

Is war like the liver dropping bombs on the kidneys? Is apathy like the lungs saying they don’t give an expletive deleted if the folks in the heart are starving? If we are all the same entity on infinite levels, then when we allow other creatures to suffer aren’t we really creating suffering for ourselves?

When humans colonize a new area, they immediately start grouping (e.g. by family, products produced, religion) and immediately start creating trails for communication between the groups. Cancer does much the same when it groups into tumors and creates a vascular system within a tumor to attach to the blood supply. All cancer cells apparently have this ability to create blood vessels (trails?) to attach to the blood supply. Most humans also appear to have trail-blazing capabilities.

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

Infinity in a Nipple


11 Oct
Abstract representation of infinity from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Infinity in a Nipple

page 34-35 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Let’s take our thought experiment further by erasing all the lines in the shifting sand that we have made between living matter and non-living matter; between plant and animal; between reptile and mammal—categories that were created by us and that have fuzzy lines between them: is a virus living? all mammals bear their young live and nurse them, except the platypus….there are always exceptions because we made up the rules. The rules don’t exist in and of themselves. If there is even one creature identified which does not fit wholly in one category or another, then there is no real line, just man-made categories. Are we driven to databases? Or are we just following Queen TUT’s patterns of grouping by grouping our data?

Now that those lines are erased, let’s back up to before there were one-celled creatures. Would the pattern then be the same? Did/do atoms group together into molecules for symbiotic or parasitic reasons or just for fun or because the atoms next to them were grouping? Or for any of the multiplicity of reasons that political systems rise and fall?

Did molecules follow the same pattern to form DNA strands, which attracted some other types of molecules for some other reason—like the large fish that have the smaller fish clean parasites off of them, perhaps—to form cells, which formed colonies which began to act in concert and became unable to act independently which then hung out in bunches of colonies which became shoals or bee hives or ant colonies or organs or cities or galaxies, the members of which are also not able to live independently any more?

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

A Closer Look


13 Oct

Abstract representation of the camera zooming in from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

A Closer Look

page 36 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

When the camera zooms in a different pattern appears.

Purchase Book

A Closer Look by Someone Else


13 Oct

abstract representation of the camera zooming in by someone else from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

A Closer Look by Someone Else

page 37 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The pattern changes when someone else in a different location on the persepective horizon is holding the camera.

Purchase Book

Infinite Diversity


18 Oct

Abstract image with big apple representing infinite diversity from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Infinite Diversity

page 38-39 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Rather than evolution being run by random “mistakes” in the splitting and re-forming of DNA strands, perhaps it is the result of infinite other societies making decisions to improve their lot in life, one-up their neighbors or just react to their own current marketing trends and family values: societies of subatomic material, societies of molecules, societies of bacteria, societies of humans, societies of universes.

At no one time can any prediction be made with 100% accuracy because it may be a day when the cells in the butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon made a different plan. Only patterns can be traced, and even then, only the patterns that are available to our senses. Have we within us infinite sentient beings to which we are the universe, the god and the weather—flurry of tornados caused by refried beans eaten by the cosmos?

We are vast colonies of bacteria and microbes. At what point did these vast colonies gain their own sentience as one being? Did sentience emerge over time or did the entire sentience form from the first two in the group, becoming a stronger and stronger image as more were added. The process is in various stages (or densities or granularities) all around us, from the Portuguese Man of War (which is actually thousands of individual creatures acting in concert) to coral reefs, beehives and ant colonies, shoals of fish, herds of antelope, armies of men.

If the process is similar—never the same, of course; Infinite Sentience requires Infinite Diversity: it’s not just snowflakes!—on all levels, what might that tell us about the cosmos? We see that stars group into galaxies and groups of galaxies form clusters and even clusters of galaxies gather together in SUPER clusters. The Theory of Infinite Sentience extends Sentience to the cosmic level. Are galaxies cells in the much larger grouping we call our universe? Are they quarks in the still larger groupings of super clusters of universes?

Purchase Book

A Piece of the Puzzle


20 Oct

abstract representation of humanity as a piece of everything from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

A Piece of the Puzzle

page 40-41 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

What is happening when two people report the exact same incident differently? Each individual person’s micro cosmos (using information provided by DNA) that built either the telescopes (eyes) or the media reporting the information back to the colony (the brain), is, as would be expected of a society, different in every one of us. Not, however, so different that we can’t trace the roots or heritage of the entire colony to a certain extent—like tracing the movement of the Celtic people across Europe to Ireland and then Scotland—or watching a family nose or smile pass from generation to generation- –or recognizing that the two people are describing the same event.

Could DNA truly be just a series of non-sentient molecules, which makes mistakes every time it replicates, some of which are successful “mutations” (a really negative word for something so incredible), but most of which are not? How can something with no decision-making capabilities make mistakes?

Or is DNA an infrastructure for proteins, the body’s worker bees? Is the splitting and reforming of DNA controlled by individual proteins making individual decisions? Is DNA the database of available data and the protein the programmer manipulating the data? Are our individual hair or blood or skin or eye cells the end report produced by these programmers?

Popular application software is always operated in ways not even considered by its developers. Sometimes this is a positive, certainly for the user who has discovered the shortcut. Sometimes this is a negative, causing some instability in the program, data or document that is not discovered until huge problems arise. Is this similar to an uninformed decision by a DNA molecule, or by the protein expressing it, creating a negative mutation?

If the process of DNA replication is built on the decisions of the molecules and atoms (and infinite other even smaller entities to lesser and lesser degrees) involved, it would be impossible to believe that it could ever be exactly the same twice…which appears to be the case. Infinite Sentience would predict that it would never be the same twice. Infinite Sentience predicts Infinite Diversity.

However, if, as current scientific paradigms would have me believe, on some elemental level all particles are identical, how is it possible that we have infinite diversity on all other levels? If all the bricks are identical, should there not be at least two snowflakes alike?

Purchase Book

Babel


22 Oct

abstract representation of the diversity in mankind from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Babel by William Solis

page 42-43 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

original painting by William Solis is for sale: 24×36, gold frame, oil and gold leaf

It has been said that humans are the only creatures that question the structure of the universe, have a morality, and produce art, music and literature. It has been said that we are the only creature that is aware of our impending death. How do we know these things? Has anyone questioned a giant redwood to see if they are aware they will one day die? With a 2-4,000 year life-span, they are probably just becoming, in one generation, aware of the massive invasion of the planet by the human species.

Do we know that ants don’t string scent molecules together to form great works of art from another ant’s perspective? Do we know that they don’t produce fantastic music on some wave too low or high or weak for our ears or technology? We certainly know that ants hunt, farm, and make war. Morality must be a species-related characteristic, as what could be more evil to an ant than me with a can of RAID in my hand?

Do we know that the sun is NOT singing a choral song in light waves with the rest of the galaxy? Do we know that bacteria don’t disappear into our noses or mouths and pop out the other end purposefully or stay and colonize, as we would if we were able to disappear into a wormhole and pop out in another universe?

Do we know that viruses are not involved in inter-galactic trade and that we are not storage bins for their currency of bacteria along their vast trade routes? It seems as likely that we would have inner body experiences as out of body experiences.

Purchase Book

Change


27 Oct
abstract representation of change from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Change

page 44-45 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The process of feeding and caring for a body can be equated with that of feeding and caring for a society. Give a body everything it needs to stay healthy and eventually it will still fail and die. Sometimes it will fail and die young, even though it was given all it should have needed to stay healthy.

Wealth and prosperity bubble through an empire, rising out of the masses to concentrate in a few at the top who become more extravagant in their abuse of power and form extreme situations for those at the bottom. Something then happens to change the strength of the state, either internal or external war, possibly, or just a drifting in of outsiders and a drifting out of insiders, until the empire collapses.

I see the same pattern in fashion. The codpieces (hairstyles; skirt lengths….) get more and more extravagant until they reach some critical point and the fashion collapses. I discover curry and eat so much of it that I can no longer bear the smell. What’s going on? Why do animals get larger? Is nature a size queen? Do some of the fantastic designs of nature exist for the same reason that individuals take fashions to the extreme…like boys’ pants getting larger?

Purchase Book

Gravity: Everything Groups


05 Nov
abstract image representing gravity from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Gravity: Everything Groups

page 46-47 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

[Gravity, a definition: The attraction of all matter to all other matter which curves spacetime by an amount based on the mass of an object and its movement in relation to the frame of reference of the measurer.] 

Does Gravity = tendency to group and add more and more to group until

Purchase Book

Entropy: Everything Ungroups


05 Nov

abstract image representing entropy from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Entropy: Everything Ungroups

page 48-49 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

[Entropy, a definition: the tendency of all systems to break down and evenly distribute the energy between the system and the system’s surroundings. The reason a cup of coffee cools is attributed to entropy evening out the heat energy between the cup of coffee and the surrounding air; the reason an ice cube melts is attributed to entropy evening out the heat energy between the ice cube and the surrounding liquid.]

Entropy = group becomes dysfunctional for large enough numbers to leave and eventually be followed by others—singly and in groups—until original group has dissipated?

Purchase Book

Complex Adaptive System


11 Nov
image of a woman who used to be a man, representing a Complex Adaptive System from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Complex Adaptive System

 

page 50-51 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything 

Entropy is the tendency of a system to go to its most probable state: entropy does not have a probability of happening; rather, it is the process of the probable occurring. If 10 molecules of air are released into a vacuum box, there are more chances (the odds are better) that five will end up on one side and five on the other side (an even distribution of energy) than any other possible combination of the molecules. 

Entropy almost makes me want to drop the entire theory and base the universe solely on probabilities. Did a certain percent of San Franciscans switch from croissants to scones simply because once the scone was brought to our attention we were driven by entropy to even out the playing field between scones and croissants? Does entropy explain the desire to do something different than the previous generation? To rebel against or ungroup from their values or fashions or art or lifestyle? 

Maybe it’s the other way around: Maybe the desire to follow a new lead accounts for entropy; like the desire to try new things and then have everyone you know try them too. Maybe ungrouping doesn’t really exist—maybe it’s just the flip side of a new grouping. When we ungroup from one value/fashion/point of view/etc., we re-group toward some other value/fashion/point of view. Maybe entropy is just our word for the decisions to ungroup and regroup that are ultimately made by Everything in every situation. 

Purchase Book 

Purchase Greeting Card

Quantum Fashions in a Theory of Everything


19 Nov
Abstract image representing fashion in the quantum world from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Quantum Fashions

page 52-53 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

We combine together in various groups that last for varying times but always eventually collapse (entropy). One person starts a new fad, which is followed by more and more people until it reaches a certain point and then breaks down and disappears under the weight of new fads.

A human body begins with an incredible organization of cells doing new things and other cells following the direction of different leaders until a human is formed (much like an empire). It changes gradually over time until it finally collapses, the methods of communication between various parts of the empire crumble, the roads become impassable, the strength of the army gone.

I understand the idea of entropy and Everything evening out based on probabilities, but is it possible that the probability factors just happen to be useful tools to measure the patterns of decisions made on infinite levels rather than the real mechanism behind entropy? Are the probability factors of entropy similar to the Nielsen Ratings or a Gallup Poll?

Is entropy at war with the individual sentient desire to group, to either try something new and lead others or follow someone else? Can Queen TUT and Infinite Sentience explain the push pull of wanting to simultaneously be noticed and not noticed?

Purchase Book

A Singularity


29 Nov
abstract image representing a singularity, such as a black hole, from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

A Singularity

page 54-55 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

The Big Bang Theory of the Creation of the Universe theorizes that all of the mass of the universe was once concentrated in one infinitely heavy pinprick that reached some critical point and exploded into our universe. The Big Bang is called a singularity, which is a state/event beyond which it is theoretically impossible to peer due to our current understanding of the behavior of light and the flow of time. It is theorized that black holes might be singularities that are creating new universes.

Is it possible that singularities occur in Everything: political systems, corporations, fashions, religions? The group reaches a critical point/mass and gives birth to something new.

Hair was ratted higher and higher until the style collapsed. Most people ungrouped from the ratted hair as soon as the fashion industry told them it was out of style and long straight hair was now In. Did the fashion industry manipulate patterns to create a singularity? We can theorize about how the one style collapsed and the new style was created, but we can’t actually pinpoint all the events that made the one style collapse or predict exactly what style will find favor with the general public next.

Can we figure out some probabilities of what happened/existed before the Big Bang by looking at patterns in other types of singularities whose event horizons we are able to further penetrate? My birth is an event in my neighborhood of the perspective horizon through which I cannot pass. I can learn a lot about the time before, during and after my birth because I can communicate with others of my species who witnessed the event from different positions on the perspective horizon. Wouldn’t this event be unfathomable to the sperm that started my life? Might an entity the size of a universe be as able to see through the event horizon of the Big Bang as we are able to look at the time before, during and after our birth?

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

The Scale of the Universe and The Light Mixer (RGB and CMYK)


03 Dec

These are two of the coolest little animations I have seen in a long time.

The Scale of the Universe

The Light Mixer

I am posting them here as they fit in more with my Theory of Everything theme than with any of my other half dozen blogging themes.

And for those of you who missed the post in Odds ‘n Ends, this is also a good science short.

A Moment of Conception


10 Dec
abstract representation of conception from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

A Moment of Conception

page 56-57 from Everything IS, a visual and philosophical theory of everything

Like the inevitable waitress with the ratted beehive left over from a previous fashion, are there particles from before the Big Bang that didn’t ungroup with the rest of the universe? Is it possible that there is something feeding this universe, like an umbilical cord from our birth universe?

It appears to be theoretically impossible to peer into the world of fashion or finance or horse racing and actually nail down all of the particulars that make one thing happen as opposed to another. Patterns, possibilities, likelihoods, unlikelihoods, yes, but the event horizon is murky. The further we zoom out in time, the more impenetrable appears the event horizon beyond which we are trying to peer. Is the event horizon just the border between one thing and another like the multitude of events that hide the exact trail of our heritage from one-celled creatures, or the events that create a religion or an empire or a fashion?

What does the fertilization of an egg look like at the atomic level? Is it similar to the computer-generated models of the Big Bang? 

On the cellular level it would appear to be a successful attack by one group on another (sperm on egg), which caused an immediate explosion of new leaders and new groups which grabbed at existing resources and followed a pattern of new groups forming from the old yet tied to each other by the bonds of the previous group until the resources and space began to get tight and the entire bunch moved as one and popped out the other side of the black hole. And another universe is born.

Purchase Book

Purchase Greeting Card

Everything IS, a Book of Questions and a Theory of Everything by Sarah Curtiss

why is everything different from everything else? does infinity diversity rule?