Metaphor #11: A Perfect Circle


I’ve been stuck on painting the last week or so, nothing to inspire words, just pictures. But today… I had a chat with someone and some inspiration hit me.

Have you figured out now that most of this shit is just stories?

Anyways… I went to the library and got a new book, the kind of book that you can’t just go out and buy because it’s out of print and waaay overpriced.

There was this amazing philosopher, astronomer, astrologer, mathematician, and astrophysicist (back in the day when men were mavericks), Johannes Kepler — back in 1590 or something like that. I mean, this is basically the dark ages when humans regressed into these tribal mystical animals. So, Kepler worked for some king in some country (I don’t know details about his history) as the royal astrologer. This was when they used astrological signs as skymaps for understanding the rotation of the cosmos. I mean, these people were a lot smarter than people give credit for. So Kepler was trying to devise an accurate model for the solar system and was using the movement of Mars as a way to understand how celestial bodies moved in relation to each other. No one at that time had an accurate model, something mathematically “true”.

Where every other astrologer / astrophysicist had failed was in their assumption that planetary orbits were perfect circles — I mean think about that for just a second, the idea that in the natural world a “perfect circle” should exist. I mean, because of the nature of pi, we don’t even really have a real definition for what a perfect circle is, or even if it exists in the first place. If we can’t mathematically define it, it can’t be real — can it? So in reality, there is no perfect circle and everything that resembles a circle is really just a ellipse to some degree. And this would also mean that planetary orbits were a constant speed, which also doesn’t make sense. We know that planets are actually flung around by the magnetic pols of the sun, moving faster or slower depending on where they are in the orbital structure.

I think it’s a real flaw in science, the idea that sometimes the model gets mistaken for reality. It causes people to kind of box in the possibilities and forget there are other things that may be. I mean, in reality, nothing is static… dynamic is the rule. This means that no model can ever be reality because reality is always changing, the rules are always changing. Models are useful for a time, but are just models. It boils down to over generalizing. It’s so limiting…

And then the idea of a perfect circle is also just silly to me. To know the definition of pi is like trying to know the biggest number.

It’s funny, the science community really knows very little. We cannot REALLY explain the layering of all these complex systems, even for something as “simple” as a blade of grass. We don’t fully understand the atomic systems that make up the grass, how molecular systems transform into cellular systems, transforming into biological systems, and how all these layers intertwine. And how these interact with the environment through (at the very least) radio information transmission (wave biology). We cannot even explain a freaking blade of grass in it’s entirety.

And then there is the question: Who makes the green grass green?

I mean, literally speaking, a red/green color blind person like him is not even equipped with eyes/brain capable of process light information waves in the frequency ranges that “red” and “green” occur. Basically his radio is broken and his antennae cannot pick up these signals… This part of “reality” is not “real” for someone like him. Weird huh.

So, what if 95% of the population was “red/green” color blind. I wonder if the other 5% would be deemed crazy.