demented walnut

Alright, I've been thinking about this for a bit, but I'm tired so it might come out a bit bumpy. That and for some reason something is making this high pitched sound that's giving me a headache. <----someone needs attention

Anyway. I was thinking about the universe and how we think it is constantly expanding outward right? Also, how we try and simplify or justify or explain (choose a word that fits) our existence by saying one of two things 1) It just happened 2) It was God's will. Pretty much anything that tries to prove our existence falls underneath those two categories.

I'm trying desperately to see around these two perspectives. 1) Because we might be missing something so obvious, it is literally in our face 2) I'm tired of hearing these two things coming up whenever I ask someone, "Why are we here?"

Maybe it's because I'm tired of cliche, like "It's not you, its me" excuse, which is a paradox, or at least feels like one. Anyway. I guess what I'm trying to get at is what if we create our existence? What if we're floating around and all of a sudden we're like "Hey, I'm bored, I need a body so I can stop being a cloud of atoms" and voila situations are created and we are "born." So in essence, when we die, is pretty much when our soul, or unconcious decides, "Well, enough work for today, I'm gonna go on vacation." And we vacate into space and continue expanding the universe with our conciousness. But that doesn't answer the question of why, does it? No. It's more like scientology. Damn it.

Ok. So let's try and explore some middle ground between the two. There are a bunch of arguments, just none of them are coming to mind right now. I can think of "Our conscience defines our environment and our unconcious defines who we are." But I don't really know how to fit that in to all this. Well, ok. Human beings are above all anything insecure and fragile. I don't care how strong emotionally or mentally or physically, someone or something can kill you and you have weaknesses or things that bug you on a basis, but not enough to really be defined in your head as an insecurity. Although, if you accept your insecurities, in essence you can defeat them because you know what they are, but that's something else. Basically people are fragile. We need parental guidance throughout our entire lives. We get it from parents, grandparents, siblings, friends, people, everywhere. Some people use God, other people use a system of morals. Whatever the case, we need a tangible belief or idea and we need goals. If you want to do nothing, in essence, it could be considered, your goal is to do nothing. We define ourselves through language, ideas, and our immediate environment. I just realized I'm on a completely different topic than I started on, but I guess this is more of a rant. I guess what I'm saying ultimately is, when do we grow up? Not just individually, but as a species. I've watched the maturation of Gods throughout history due to the classes I'm taking. I've watched civilization crumble and rebuild itself to no where near its former glory. If you ask me, our high point was 2000 years ago, when there were a lot less of us and everyone knew how to take care of themselves, drink wine and relax. Nevermind persecutions, not being able to walk outside at night because you'd be killed by thieves, or not having the internet. But seriously, people are around today that don't have those things, or do worry about those things, and they get by. But I guess, what I'm ultimately poking with a stick is, what if we're wrong? I don't agree with people saying we're the most intelligent animal on the planet. We're the most destructive, or creative, but not intelligent. Not by a long shot. You can justify this with we have rockets, can go to the moon, build structures blah blah blah blah blah. But when it all boils down to, who is intelligent enough to create a balance with their environment so their civilization can survive and adapt to changes and continue on? We don't create a balance with our environment, we change it to fit our needs. Anyway, back to the bigger picture, or smaller picture, I guess. Our purpose. Our creation. Our universe.

We're really tiny compared to the universe. I think if the universe were the size of the planet Earth (it could be for all we know) we would probably be so tiny, entities that would be the size of us in the proportion of the Earth, would not even know of our existence.

See what I'm saying? I'm saying there are things that we don't see because of a number of reasons. 1) We don't know where to look. 2) How can we percieve beyond our senses? 3) My mind just passed wind and I lost train of thought

But think of it like this, most people think the smallest particle is an atom. I know, because of physics and chemistry, there are smaller pieces that make up an atom. Now I know there are things that make up the pieces of an atom, but what makes up those pieces? Matter of fact, what makes those pieces pieces? Now lets go outward, to change the size. What if what makes those pieces, those super tiny pieces is so infinitely huge, it appears to be extremely small beyond perception? I know you'll probably be saying, that's not physically possible, but when you think about it, the only universal law, is to some degree the physics of light and gravity. The only two things that exist in space, besides the vacuum, but when you think about it, maybe that's just things rolling down hill at a very fast pace or is pulled away from the object by much larger objects at a very fast pace. I'll get back to that thought. And really, we only know enough about gravity within our planet's system, on the planet itself, and how things react to other celestial bodies. We can sling shot things from planet to planet. Anyway. What if something is also so infinitely huge, it appears to be non-existant? Could happen right? We can't see the edges of the universe, we just assume they're there. We, humanity's scientists, listed oxygen as one of the last periodic elements. Kind of like a fish doesn't know it's in water type thing.

Ok. Another thing I suppose that ties in with all this. Holes. A hole by almost definition is the absence of something where it should be. At least, that's my definition of a hole. You have the hole in a donut. Does it actually exist? Yes, because if it didn't, there would not be a term for it, or perhaps it doesn't exist, because it is not actually composed of anything substantial, except what passes through the area. But if air can pass through the hole in a donut, does that not mean, something is creating an area in which matter travels through or is it matter itself?

So an absence of substance is almost a substance itself. At least this is where my brain is taking me at 1:30 in the morning after 5 hours of sleep. No, that doesn't make sense. Sure it goes along with the so large it appears non-existant, or infinitely small, or something so small appears infinitely large. But it doesn't make any sense. None of it. Whatever, make what you want of all this.