Skip to main content

What if the smallest thing was also the biggest thing?

This is a chapter from my fourth book called When hunger yearns

As they say, there is no question too big or too small to ask. I was eating my usual dinner of raisin bran and milk and this Physics question popped in my head. What if the smallest thing was also the biggest thing? From a Maths perspective, what if infinity and zero are the same thing? A sort of duality. A counterintuitive proposition. It's one of those thought experiments that does not make sense but makes sense at the same time. It is not for me to have a definitive and comprehensive answer but to spark my curiosity. I had time to sleep on this question. I am wide awake on a Tuesday morning and my goal as I do the laundry is to take this big question and package it into a small chapter and place it in a small corner of the internet that may one day be the cornerstone of a big idea.

Asking what if challenges us to think outside the box. To see beyond the obvious. To use our imagination. To simplify and translate our notions into forms that can be digested by others. To appreciate that things may not be as they seem. To make sense out of nonsense. One way I can help to visualize what I am thinking is what if I take the smallest particle of matter and put it under the most powerful microscope? I would be looking at the universe from the outside and if I used the most powerful telescope I would be looking from the inside. I would be looking at myself looking at myself.

There could be more than one way to think about this. Would being in a simulation make sense of this? A single point source of energy that can be either on or off but changes state so quickly to make up all the bits of the universe. Everything in the universe past, present and future can be seen through a single window. Each snapshot of the window can be represented with bits. The smallest the window can be is a pinhole. Everything can be seen through a pinhole. In Trinidad there is a rude saying that goes "small pin does chook hard”. It is a double entendre which is French for "double meaning". There are several concepts we can use to compare the duality of the question. Here are some other perspectives. A chain is as strong as the weakest link. The smallest things make the biggest impacts. To answer the biggest questions we have to answer the smallest questions. The biggest problems are felt most by the people with the smallest means. The word small contains the word all. The i in the word big contains a dot.

I don't know how to relate this to the discussion but I recently watched this video called "Why the i's have it". Have you noticed that ping pong, tick tock, zig zag and flip flop all have the word with the i first. We could easily say flop flip but we do not. Many things are often about perspective and we often hear that "it's all relative". The smallest thing to me might be the biggest thing to an ant. Thinking of the big bang theory - the biggest thing which is our universe was once the smallest thing. While showering last night I came up with another way to imagine an answer to the question. Imagine that there is only one smallest entity that is everywhere at the same time doing everything. How does this compare to the theory of everything? Where does string theory fit in with this thought? Plenty to think about and more than could be written even in the biggest book. I want to conclude this chapter with this common saying. To the world you may be one person but to one person you may be the world.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Google Pay in Trinidad

Update : It is prepaid and credit cards not debit. Linx on facebook said that the Linx machines do not fascilitate Google Pay.

The success of failure

It is 358am and I have decided to write. Context matters. Our context matters when we write and read. We could read the same thing and get different meanings. Definitions matter also. We may define things differently. For example, what is success? What is failure? Also, do I just define success and say that anything that is not success is failure? What about something like the success of failure? What does that mean? My friend Chatty tells me that this is something writers, philosophers, and even scientists keep rediscovering: meaning is not fixed—it is negotiated by context and definition. Life is a stew of success and failure and in between but never one or the other. We see what we are looking for and things become what we see. This reminds me of something I came across online, "Whoever looks for the good qualities in others will acquire all good qualities within himself," from Habib Umar Bin Hafiz. Do you look for failure or success within others? Take context as the lens...

Kindance

It is 250am and I have decided to write. Today is Friday. Fridays are the best days of the week. Of course I do not have a topic to write about. I was scrolling through facebook and one post said "In any season we can always plant kindness". Then a nearby post said "My Lord has always been kind to me". It is nice to give and receive kindness and do not forget to be kind to yourself. Imagine if kindness was actually kindance like guidance. My friend Chatty says that if kindness were kindance, it would be more than a good deed — it would be a gentle form of guidance. Kindance would lead the heart toward compassion, encourage goodness without force, and show that sometimes the softest acts can point us in the strongest direction. I was scrolling through youtube and I came across a video that said that "Life has always been unfair". That is one way to look at it. Another way is to consider that this life is just a test and stepping stone for the other life. Ma...