maybe atoms

Does
gravity affect
everything? My first thought
was that it does, ultimately. Without it,
the universe would be full of lifeless drifting stuff
of who knows what,
maybe atoms?

Is gravity
the cause of
everything’s shape
and is affecting everything?
Yet, does it have an effect on the process
of understanding something?
Or ideas of any kind?
Or feelings?

Is gravity
everywhere? Is it
always stronger or weaker? 
And do all things naturally adapt to it?
Is that what
we have
done?

Had the
earth been larger,
wouldn’t its creatures
have more muscles
and stronger
bones?

Advertisements

doing is everything #2

Try to think of something which is not part of an action or process. Even ideas which take up no space are doings.

Existing, dying, decomposing, our remains being processed and used again and again by the earth are all doings.

It’s amazing to think even a small rock appearing to be doing nothing is composed of an unspeakable number of quivering energy units. We quiver too like the rock and are not aware of it.

What would being aware of the quivering be like?

It might have a sweetness about it and might feel like being loved by sensing all the atoms of one’s own body merged with all atoms existing. If so, how could such an astounding thing happen?

Maybe by finding a way to fully discard our identity at least for a while which is an adventure into new territories say the sages from the East. 

We are energy through and through and are mobile. So what are we doing with this mobility besides not being dead?

To
become
energetic must
one be energetic? Even
doing nothing is everything?

the great diversity

Is it that total diversity is the only fixed thing? Is the idea that each thing is somehow different from all other things probably true but still at bottom a belief — a theory that can never be proven beyond a shadow?

Is trying to prove total diversity a crazy adventure? Is the answer yes because every thing in the universe would have to be examined and recorded and compared with everything else in existence? What about the tools that it would take to measure the biggest and smallest of things?

And isn’t there then the impossible problem of all the measuring tools needed for each category of objects to be measured having to be exactly the same? Then who will measure the measuring tools to make sure they will yield correct results, etc.? Since all of that is impossible, we would be left with having to create one super tool to measure everything.

What about the tool problem again and the huge crew of robot operators needed to keep the super tool calibrated and free from wear? Let’s say all this happens and off the tool goes on its impossible task and billions of years later it reports back to say that the “diversity belief” now should read … “No two things are exactly alike at the same time. But this too has to be investigated.”

So, why not use the standard idea? Isn’t it probable enough from what’s been observed so far that no two things are exactly alike? No. Well yes if you have to have it be easy. Can all quarks be different from all other quarks and can all of the atoms of the same element be different too? What about energy? Is all energy the same at its simplest? Are all viewpoints unique? Of course language is tricky and slippery.

Is there no end to exactness in the real world? And if we have to have it, doesn’t it create one impossible situation after another? Is it that physical exactness has to be relative and if so where does the real non relative form of exactness reside — the type that’s the same no matter whose mind it’s in?

Do we live in a self-created area thinking mostly about the tips of the edges? Are all-or-nothing thoughts natural mental traps which automatically blur the vast middle ground? Are we all part of the great diversity?