Just the Universally Accepted Presumptions, Ma'am
2003-06-04, 8:23 p.m.

(author's note: I don't know why this page is askew. Neither the one before nor the one after are this way. Just bear with me.)

I'm beginning to wonder whether facts actually exist. Serves me right, I guess, for picking up my latest copy of Scientific American today.

The current issue discusses the future of the Standard Model and quantum field theory-- a topic about which, though I love it dearly, I know less than I'd like. It's the math, it gets to me. Otherwise I'm sure I would have been an astronomer or physics theorist.

Anyway- among other topics in the article, it was professed that, according to calculations based on the Standard Model and its components (quarks, leptons, bosons, et al), we've pretty much got a lock on the smallest particles there are in this universe. Call me unknowledgeable in the ways of physics, call me naieve, but this appalls me to the core. OK, maybe that's a tad extreme, but it certainly affronts my skeptical nature. How can we be so sure of the full structure of our universe when we can only account for about 25% of matter in the universe with known particles, or not even be able to answer simple questions, like, "Just what is is that our universe is expanding into?"

(editor's note: he mentions 'universe' three times in one sentance, and then ends with a preposition? Egad.)

I can only attribute this line of thinking to my reading earlier today of a philosophy article in whatisthematrix.com, called 'The Matrix as Metaphysics'. It grapples with the concept of knowing whether or not one is merely a mind trapped within a matrix-like environment or within the 'real world', whether there's any real difference between the two regarding our perceptions, and contesting the notion of truth and perception in general. Heady shit.

And where does this leave my understanding? Whirling, as usual. I like to think of myself as a skeptic in the truest sense of the word. Webster's Revised Unabridged defines 'skeptic' as "One who is yet undecided as to what is true; one who is looking or inquiring for what is true; an inquirer after facts or reasons." Of course, if there are no actual facts, this process becomes difficult.

Thus my never-ending attempt to grasp at things larger than myself continues. Often my attempts are less-than-concrete, more like trying to feel the size of the world rather than actually measure it. There are two reasons I do this, I think: one, because some things are beyond concrete understanding; and two, I'm too stupid to do it with any real substance. Sometimes I really feel hindered by my own brain. It's a conundrum, but I live with it.

I think it's time to read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance again.

-- End Transmission --