Pertinent to mapping the obvious below: who would ever expect to have anything–other than a number of limbs–in common with the comedian David Mitchell ? Yet I admired his courage here & loved this–
-
as if Leonardo da Vinci had painted a speech bubble on the Mona Lisa in which she explained her state of mind
And, on knowing everything about a lot of pretend facts, from a fan identifying her/himself as Cragglerock comes this sad below-the-line admission–
-
knowing the ins and outs of how everything works leaves you a lot more hollow than you thought you would be when you were first desperate to find out those things
Then again, the ins and outs turn into mysteries of their own. Or as one expert’s just said: “If we do not have causality, we are buggered.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/sep/22/faster-than-light-particles-neutrinos
Exciting, isn’t it?
Don’t you love the media. First they announce the end of causality, then five paras down tell you it might not be ending after all. I read about this yesterday in Nature or somewhere. Even the guy at OPERA has his doubts–that’s why they threw it open to their peers. Why are people so desperate about this ? Not that I give a bugger, obviously, with my long-held views about causality in & out of fiction. As long as it doesn’t turn out to be part of some ghastly fantasy wuuurld we’re all in, in which case I’m killing myself.
The uncertainty may be uncertain.
http://neutrinoscience.blogspot.com/2011/09/arriving-fashionable-late-for-party.html
But strange things are happening, like never before, etc.
http://wipwapweb.com/image_cache/previews/4c6d011495a21-bear.jpg
What we talk about when we talk about photographs of bears.
“If we do not have causality…” Psychologist Dr Daryl Bem claims to have found evidence of precisely that in his paper ‘Feeling the Future.’ Unlike other studies of it’s kind it was designed from the outset to be repeatable. Time will tell…or will it?
Cragglerock is wise. Wondering leaves more room to dream than knowing.