, , , , , , , , , , ,

e3dmc2It’s Friday night. Normally I would be doing a certain Particular Thing on a Friday night, but things change (as things should) and tonight I won’t be doing that Particular Thing – which shall remain identyless throughout the course of this ramble. I have several very valid reasons for not doing that Particular Thing, none of which are happy and nor shall I explain them to you, my good reader. I know you won’t take offense either. Sometimes the less ya know, the better, right? Rather mafia-ish isn’t it? Anyway, as such, being completely free from doing that Particular Thing (by choice, mind you) I realise that suddenly I’m thingless and thus need a thing to replace that Particular Thing.

Else, I shall enter into the dark realm of capital boredom; not a place I care to go. (Shudders) Boredom can only seem to exist in a state of complete nothingness and that, my friend, is terror beyond terror.

To keep my post from reiterating the very well written words upon another Blog posted by mia familia, who coincidentally suffers similarly as I, there will be no pondering aloud the variety of options I have available to me with which to replace my Particular Thing . Surely, it’s obvious to you at this point what thing I chose to replace my usual thing? I thought so.

But wait! Alas, this thing I’ve chosen to replace that Particular and usual Thing won’t last deep into the night as my Particular Thing normally would, or at least it had better not. That would result in a Class One violation of the American Blogging Ordinance Section 2.8.04 subsection (a) and could consequently result in the revocation of my blogging license. Can’t have that, now can we? Even if I were to accept a certain offer of utilising a certain person as my topic de jour (or possibly tema di argomento) it still would not be that long. Tempting, but no. Mi perdoni il mio amico.

While pondering my peculiar state of Thinglessness, I should warn you to not confuse my Thinglessness with Existential Nothingness or Absolute Nonexistence.

In Quantum theory, Randomness, Thinglessness and Inseparability (interconnectedness) characterise Quantum systems.  Coincidentally, these three features were precisely the features that Albert Einstein, one of quantum theory’s founding fathers, found so bizarre that he could not accept them. The Nothingness Theory distinguishes the differences between relative nonexistence (nothingness) and absolute nonexistence. Nothingness is a state of perfectly uniform static equilibrium constituting relative nonexistence. It exists relative to absolute nonexistence but does not exist relative to temporal existence. Absolute nonexistence is the absence of existence, the absence of nothingness, and the absence of absence. It is what is not being referred-to under any circumstances. Its definition is that which cannot be referred-to, named, or defined. It is the non-state to which everything including nothingness is attracted.

In my opinion, Absolute Nonexistence is a paradox…

Quantum Thinglessness describes the peculiar status of an unobserved quantum system: such systems consist of context-dependent possibilities, not fixed actualities. The profoundly ambiguous state of an isolated quantum system must correspond to the way in which conscious beings perceive themselves and the external world. The objective thinglessness of quantum systems implies the subjective thinglessness of elemental minds.

Quantum Randomness is not random at all but represents the opportunity for the exertion of free choice by some mindful being (other than ourselves presumably). Quantum Interconnectedness seems to be even less tangible. John Bell’s theorem on Quantum Interconnectedness is that once two particles have interacted they remain connected. There’s a kind of stickiness that connects them together, so they’re bound together forever in the theory. They never separate, even though they’re not interacting anymore.

I have a bit of a problem with Quantum Interconnectedness more so than I do Randomness and Thinglessness. Einstein had difficulty accepting that two objects come together, meet, and then each go into the universe; and they would still be connected by some invisible thread. I can comprehend this on a human relationship level, but I can’t comprehend it on a molecular level. Or, at least, tonight I can’t. Tomorrow is another day. Until next we meet.

You look at it, but it is not to be seen;

Its name is Formless.

You listen to it, but it is not to be heard;

Its name is Soundless.

You grasp it, but it is not to be held;

Its name is Bodiless.

These three elude all scrutiny,

And hence they blend and become one.

Its upper side is not bright;

Its under side is not dimmed.

Continuous, unceasing, and unnameable,

It reverts to nothingness.

It is called formless form, thingless image;

It is called the elusive, the evasive.

Confronting it, you do not see its face;

Following it, you do not see its back.

Yet by holding fast to this Way of old,

You can harness the events of the present,

You can know the beginnings of the past–

Here is the essence of the Way.

Taoism. Tao Te Ching 14