Letter 2: Can You See The Picture

In the previous letter, I stated that my life journey is to discover and comprehend the truth, and these two things (discovery and comprehension) are different. Therefore, as we discussed discovery in the first letter, I want to next cover comprehension. In so doing, I will utilize a topic that is fundamental to my theories: What is matter made of?

 

This is one of the basic questions of science and consequently, there is much information available for discovery. The concept is simple: How many times can you split an object until you reach the point that it can no longer be divided? A rock can be broken into smaller rocks, which can be broken into gravel, sand and dust. If this process is continued you will eventually reach the point where you have the individual atoms that make up the rock. However, this is where things become interesting, because peering into these tiny objects reveals that atoms are not solid matter at all. Instead, they are areas of near vacuum space wherein much smaller particles (protons, neutrons and electrons) exist in a manner that makes the atom “appear” to be solid. So what about protons, neutrons and electrons? Are they the fundamental building blocks of matter? Nope. Science has found that the same thing is true for at least the protons and neutrons. They are likewise areas of near vacuum space occupied by much smaller particles called quarks. Now, the next question is obvious, isn’t it? What are quarks and electrons made of? Well, we don’t know because science does not presently have technology capable of identifying these particles; they are too small. However, evidence exists indicating that quarks and leptons (an electron is a type of a lepton) are likewise made up of much smaller particles that exist in a manner that makes them “appear” to be solid when they are not. So, the world has been searching and searching for centuries to find what the fundamental building block of matter is, but so far, they have found nothing but vacuum space that somehow appears to be solid.

 

Now, let’s leave the sub-atomic world and look at matter from the other end of the spectrum, outer space, focusing on one of the items found there, black holes. Black holes are areas in the universe where matter is so dense that it exhibits a gravitational force strong enough to prevent all things, including light, from escaping. It is commonly believed that a black hole forms when a star becomes too large and collapses as it dies under its own gravitational force, and that this process causes whatever the star is made of to collapse into an ultra-condensed form with staggering density.

 

I once had the density of a black hole explained to me in a spitball kind of way, that if you had a ball of black hole material, it would be one million times smaller than the Earth yet it would weigh one million times more than the Earth, or it would have a density one trillion times higher than the Earth. From this we learn that matter is at least 99.9999999999% pure vacuum space, and we’re talking about heavy metals in this scenario. What about us? The Earth has a density approximately 5.5 times higher than the human body. So, considering ourselves, if we could collapse our bodies down into personal black holes, we would be at least 5.5 trillion times smaller than we are now.

 

Now, let’s take this information and return to the topic of comprehension. What is to be comprehended from it? What does it mean about you and I? Again, I chose this topic deliberately to lay the foundation for my theories, but for now, think about it. What is it regarding our existence that is to be comprehended from these truths?

 

Comprehension is the ability to process truth into a useable form. It is the ability to draw the correct conclusions from what you have discovered. However, comprehension is different from discovery in that it cannot stand on its own. Discovery can happen singularly, but in order to comprehend, the connecting truths that surround the discovery must also be known and used correctly to formulate a conclusion. This is why the Circle of Truth is so important. It is needed to make truth useful. Thus, in order to accurately comprehend anything, the truth on the matter and all of the surrounding truths (or at least as many as you can get) must be known. This requires a willingness to follow one truth to another without bias, agenda, or preconceived notions, and this brings me to a critical point I want to cover.

 

I stated that I would present theories regarding our existence that have never been published before. Well, why is this? Why am I, an average Joe, the one doing this? Part of the answer is because only recently has science discovered information sufficient to put the puzzle together. However, I believe the main reason is because far too many people are caught up on sides of the argument. What argument? The classic one, between religion and science.

 

What I will present in these letters is nothing more than obvious conclusions that are derived from a review of the full circle of available truths. Thus, anyone could do it. However, as far as I know, no one has and I believe it is because of prejudice. Too many are caught up in the argument between science and religion and they refuse to consider all of the available data. Why? Because some of the pieces of the puzzle lie on the other side of the isle and trust me, it takes truth from both sides to complete the picture.

 

In the next letter I will begin to paint it.

 

Until then,

 

Joshua

Reviews

[Livana Lowell]

Dear The Joshua Letters,

One thing you must consider is your audience because that shapes the whole perspective of this piece. If you are writing for a mature audience interested in science and philosophy ideals and possesses pro knowledge of certain terms, then you've got it down pact. However, if you are seeking to inform and teach, then you must look at your diction carefully. I am taking physics now and am a philosophical person, so I find this somewhat intriguing.

I must say I agree with A.L. Allen. Analyze this piece and find a way to make it more...how can I say it...relate-able. Try breaking this up because I saw room for breaks. Remember, you begin a new paragraph when talking about something new or perhaps, just giving the reader a chance to breathe and take in all this information.

In addition, I agree with Meghan because saying you got it from some physics text book is not credible to the reader. That's just like saying you heard it from the horse's mouth. Bibliography is proof and evidence so that if the reader decides to research the same thing. The reader can come up with the same thing you are trying to convey and see your view.

Otherwise, this was interesting to read and maybe I'll have something to discuss with my physics teacher when we return from break, lol.

Thank you for sharing.

Sincerely Livana Lowell (LL)

[i.am.cathartic]

Brilliant. vividly brilliant this is. clever and very objective yet intruiging. :D

it's plain fun to read them.

[Coffee Vampier]

Joshua,
I had not read the last two paragraphs I must say that how you pulled it all together was done quite eloquently.

~Alice~

[Jvl narasimharao]

It is really a thought provoking letter

[Epipsychologist]

I found this understandable. I assume you're writing for an audience interested in philosophy and space/time, who easily comprehend the idea of subatomic particles being incredibly far apart compared to the space they take up. Also, This is the clearest explanation of black holes that I have ever read. I could never imagine the sort of funnel on a flat plane. Good thinking.

[Shep]

Can wait to see or read your findings. I only hope that you proceed with as much caution and care as you have shown so far.

[Meghan]

One quick thing I must point out: if you do plan on publishing this (and even if you don't), you should probably list your sources instead of mentioning "some quantum physics site". You could create a bibliography at the end of your work, which would probably be a more organized and efficient way of crediting your sources. Anyway, wow, this is deep. It's difficult for me to comprehend such heavy and intellectual topics. I commend you for this, though... I honestly can say that I am (or was) not deep and profound enough to even consider the topics you bring up. That last paragraph is essential to this letter; it helps tie everything together. Good luck!

[A. L. Allen]

Oohh, my head hurts. There's a lot of really deep stuff in here, and I'm not sure if I can grasp it all. Maybe if you made your analogy something more relate-able; something a little bit closer to home. Most people aren't going to necessarily study all the finer details of atoms and vacuum space and black holes, so you may lose quite a few people as they read. I get that you're trying to convey that total comprehension is a complex thing, but you go into so much detail that your momentum and real purpose for this chapter is lost.

My suggestion for you would be to maybe shorten this a little bit, or find terms that are more common, but can still convey the enormity of comprehending something in its entirety.

Other than that, I still find your insights very interesting, and I'm curious to see where you take this.

[Tai Ryens]

Interesting. Though I cannot focus much on the electrons, neutrons, protons crap, its still an interesting addition. That's just me though, I never bother with science unless it's to study why a flower can grow or crap like that. You still did manage to keep my attention long enough until the end, and I congratulate you for that.
Nice job.