This is the last of the revised sonnets, from here on out it’ll be new sonnets.

god soliloquy

When young & waif like with a library,
i thought, without the help of any books, about
particles organized by seeing, the actions of unconscious
design, detecting indecisiveness in roundabout ways,
the up-until the observation starts— & if before the Big Bang,
if before is even a place we can begin, such a soup
of indecisive particles existed in suspense, on the cusp
of their creative being, what observed then, to bring
to light that fatal crunch of energy, catapulting stuff the speed of light
300,000,000 metres per second a 1000 trillion degrees
which i don’t even know how to write in 0s?
i was looking for God—  now, neither the quest-
ion, nor answer meithers me much. i don’t appreciate the Universe,
God, or even science for making me less curious.

Posted by:DPM

DPM is an idea-logue (sic) and object-oriented speculative realist, attempting to be response-able in an irresponse-able society.

8 thoughts on “god soliloquy

  1. Particularly like those indecisive particles, what they got up to when no-one was there to observe them 🙂 . That’s theories for you. Still I hope the sun rising in the morning theory continues to hold.

      1. To be sure we’re on the same wavelength (hahaha), you’re talking about photons passing individually through one of two slits (as you would measure), but the pattern of detection on a screen shows diffraction with peaks and troughs as if each photon went through both slits at once–quantum/electromagnetic wave behavior. I have some experience in aspects of quantum physics but the following is just my opinion:

        There is no mystery–each photon is indeed a wave but when it interacts with detectors it “condenses” to a single photon particle. Many people call this the effect of the observer and early ideas about that in QM are still most widely believed, although they are nonsense. The key difference between the quantum world and the macroscopic world is that the former has virtually no direction in time and the latter does, and that direction comes from all the minute influences of the real world: sound, light, vibration, radiation that effectively destroy the phase of the quantum waves, and hence condensation.

        An even more puzzling example is the neutron spin flip experiment, until you think about it the way I just described, and Schrodinger’s cat in the box hypothetical experiment is almost universally misinterpreted, even in Wikipedia. I’ve explained it on my blog “the cat in the box paradox.” Sorry, hope you’re still awake Daniel 🙂 .

      2. You joker, wavelengths, haha. Yes, very much awake. i’m interested in many things, but i don’t believe anything & i like to think no particular set of ideas defines me as a person, they used to, but i realize society & life is too complex for a person to choose a fixed set of ideas (give or take a few) which define them & they then defend as if they are defending their life, it seems so stupid & i mean this for anything science, books, poetry, politics, soap operas, whatever.

        Yes i’m talking about that in the poem. Back in my idealistic days, i was genuinely looking for God in knowledge. When i read of Milton visiting Galileo in prison whilst in Italy, despite it being frowned upon & him being warned not to, i realized, though no document exists as to what they spoke about, that Milton wanted to talk about whether Galileo might have seen God through one of his telescopes. So i started looking in everything. After understanding the wave/particle idea it struck me that if consciousness affects the form of matter then what was the consciousness that witnessed the matter that triggered the Big Bang— this sort of logic was acceptable to me, as Lucretius would use the microcosm to explain the macrocosm, so to me, if the double slit experiment is essentially where we can see matter in its benign then created state, it is obvious we need to ask why did the Big Bang not need consciousness, so i thought only a God could exist before anything, i also read the Rig Veda, which explains about Prajapati, who not being so much a God but an entity (for want of a better word) that the Gods were born from & also where creation came from, though not a creator, essentially a figuration for explaining no one can ever know, which i thought humble.
        As i say in the poem, none of this concerns me much, i’m quite pleased with the overall density of this theory, though it is complete crap.
        So condensation happens because the ‘real world’ influences of light etc, are essentially different to the conditions of the quantum world? i’m just trying to understand your point, as it seems to me that the quantum world is this world at a level so microscopic it can’t really be seen.
        Hope you’re still awake after that diatribe.

      3. Yes, Daniel, wide awake, but unfortunately not as awake as the Buddha. I think the pursuit of the truth as you described your endeavors is a noble and honorable one, wherever your search leads you. Anyway, a little more explanation of my QM thoughts before the big bang.

        So the basic idea is that the observer is not the key even though it’s true that the observer must influence the experiment: it is “independent incoming influences” whatever they may be. And it’s not that the microworld is essentially different, it’s a continuous transition. For example I speak and sound waves travel, pressure waves, bumping molecules, collision cross-sections that can be analyzed by QM, but the phase effects in all the QM probability waves are averaged out and it is very much easier to use a higher level statistical theory to describe it: the kinetic theory of gases. Going the other way, if we can stop or substantially reduce this incoming energy we can have macroscopic QM: for example, liquid nitrogen temperature superconductors, with less incoming and the QM wave phase holding at the very low temperature. (It’s a simplification but that’s one key aspect.) I won’t go through the half-dead cat in the box 🙂 , very similar and on my website anyway.

        When I think about god(s) and the big bang it’s actually kind of like your thinking. So for me it’s time, which seems to arise from the incoming influences and is a property of this universe starting “after” the big bang. So if there is an observer, that observer is outside time. Also omnipotence is a common attribute of deities and that seems to imply outside time. Finally, we talk about “consciousness” or at least an entity that is in some sense like us.

        So a question I’ve been thinking about is can consciousness or indeed life exist without time? But before I solve that one I’m going to have a glass of chard hahaha. Thanks for giving me the chance to rant a little, Steve

      4. Glad to give you space to “rant”, but i’m afraid you lost me at “phase effects” after that i was trying to think of onomatopoeia for snoring, haha. i’m kidding. i wish i understood it more, i’ve tried, a little, but to be honest, i’m not practical smart, i’m pretty stupid actually, just good at considering & trial n’ error, which doesn’t really work in science, so i just learn what i can.
        i do understand what you’re saying about omnipotence though. i like the question of whether consciousness can exist outside of time, that’s a big question & one that would certainly dredge up some answers to a few things perhaps.

      5. Thanks Daniel, actually you’ve helped me if I ever write this up. It needs an explanation of what phase is and why it makes QM what it is. I should have realized that, so I get the dunce cap 😉 .

Discuss Below

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.