the god particle

I recently watched a new documentary about the neutrino particle on NOVA titled the ghost particle. Apparently the neutrino has been misbehaving. Or so it seems to us. It doesn’t fit the standard model perfectly, it has mass and it has alibis. Scientists have now stopped trying to figure out how or why it doesn’t fit the standard model and starting to poke it to show more of its colors. There will come a time, after enough poking around and seeing the neutrino do it’s dance, when we will have a different model showing how the neutrino fits in. And it won’t be just because of the neutrino. The standard model doesn’t account for gravitational interaction either.

The argument is, we as humans are always trying to see where the buck stops, who’s in control, what’s the explanation for all this, and so it goes. Therefore, we come up with a theory for how things fit in. Various religions have their own theories. Science has it’s quest for the ultimate Grand Unified Theory. Philosophers have straddled both science and religion and who knows what else to come up their own grand philosophies. There’s even a favorite of mine, the chaos theory with ties into fractal geometry and duality.

Yes sir, we’d like to believe that there’s an end of the line. We sorta think there was a beginning of the line although we may argue amongst each other about what or where exactly that was.

I’m not a scientist, I haven’t been trained as one. I’m not much of a theologist either. I, like many of you out there, am a bit confused. Therefore, to swim through the confusion and keep my head above water, I have also come up with my own way of figuring things out. I am perfecting my own philosophy. And like everybody else with their theories, I am ready to argue for my theories any time. In fact, I’ll probably jump to an occasion to spout my theories to anyone who’s willing to listen, and for that matter, to those who aren’t.

Sadly, the jumping-to-occasion phenomenon, applies to all. To scientists and theologians alike. Imagine a hundred people with hundreds variations of some dozen core theories. Multiply that by 70 million. That’s how many we are. That’s how many variations we get and that’s how many possible arguments we have. Quite a few of us, most of us in fact, will let go of our theories or stop arguing about it in the face of a stronger and more opinionated few. Most of us even follow their lead. Some theories become so strong in their hold among the people, that they become memes that survive through generations of people and civilizations and arguments and wars and destruction. The major religions are memes. Even science is a meme. The idea that there is a provable, repeatable explanation of how we come to be and the belief in that idea.

My question, a strand of my own philosophy, is this: will we ever stop? will we continue formulating and propagating memes to an unseeable generation in the future. Or is there so much unpredictability that the quantification of that “so much” is itself unpredictable. Are things changing and reformulating so much that there is no one god particle? The god particle at any instant is liable to transform into something else entirely.

Situations and circumstances may change but the underlying diversity, unpredictability and un-oneness of things is the only meme that’s stable. Our human society will be chaotic. A seething mass of unpredictable societal behaviour. There will never be one religion, one way of government, one morality, one grand unified theory, one god, one god particle or one ring to rule them all.

That gives me a little bit of comfort. It allows me to believe that anything is possible and that everything is a hack. The whole freaking universe is one big hack. Hack away, believe in your hacks and smile. Have a little fun. That’s what we’ve been doing after all.

update: the large hadron collider is coming online soon in geneva.

update: the god particle has been found.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “the god particle

  1. I am a Christian–of the Pentecostal variety–and certainly don’t claim to have all the answers. There are just too many questions. I do have faith, though, and our 84 year old charming neighbor, an agnostic, said to me once, “I envy your faith.”

    Well, said, I believe. I cherish my faith, my heritage, and my teaching.

    I pray blessings on you and that you will find your way.

    Shirley Buxton
    shirleybuxton.com
    writenow.wordpress.com

  2. Thank you for the blessings. Your feedback is taken in good faith.

    I cherish my heritage as well. I just question blind faith. If we are to believe that there is a god and we are his/her creations, then we’ve been given brains good enough to think through issues logically and not to blindly believe in something, throwing away the use of all our logical and/or intellectual faculties.

    If we do so then we’re not that different from other species of animals. By that token, do we know whether other species of animals have blind faith in an abstraction such as god? And one would argue, if they don’t and we don’t then we’re all the same anyway so why not believe in god because we’ve been given the ability to make a choice. And so it goes. It’s circular.

    It’s circular because it’s two different ways to live a life, one with complete faith, and one with reason. They are diametrically opposite. It’s a matter of choice.

    I admire your faith and your capacity for faith just as I do other people in my circle of friends and family. Admiring something doesn’t necessarily equate to wanting something.

  3. I am tremendously enjoying reading your blog and will comment more later, when I have extra time. In a friendly way, I must now challenge your statement that lives lived–one with complete faith, and one with reason, are diametrically opposite. Not so. I believe I have both faith and reason, specifically citing it being unreasonable to think our world merely evolved, without the direction of a creator. The thought of such a magnificent world as this coming into existence without a master-mind is preposterous–at least to my way of reasoning.

    Thank you for your encompassing and open attitude and for the opportunity to have you spout at me.

    Shirley

  4. I don’t disagree that you can’t have both as long as there is awareness that they are opposing views. Some of the best minds in history have had both faith and reason and have tried all their life to reconcile the two. The very act of trying for reconciliation is a good example of reason. And I applaud the effort wholeheartedly. I’ve learned a lot from their examples.

    cheers 🙂

  5. A major component of faith is the acknowledgement that one may be unable to document the inerrancy of his belief, and yet, have full confidence in the truth of said belief.I will end my day’s delightful conversation with you by citing a poem, whose author is unknown to me.

    “When you have come to the edge of all the light you know,
    And are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown,
    Faith is knowing one of two things will happen:
    There will be something solid to stand on,
    Or you will be taught how to fly.”

    Let us all stand…or fly.

    Goodnight.

    Shirley

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s