agentquantum - // an infinite mastery, is the Force.

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

no creativity = violate other people's intellectual property. i know it's already the third time i'm doing this, but well, i like it.

His empty center rings with anger and mistrust and hungry triumph: the emotions of the World Brain, which has caught the former friend who tried to murder it.

The former friend it had trusted, and by whom it had been betrayed.

Mobile teeth like swords protrude from humps of muscle like multiple tongues, and began to circle and clash within the tentacle-ringed mouth.

Jacen can only answer with regret and sadness.

Yes. I betrayed you. I taught you to trust, and I taught you what it means to trust a traitor.

He cannot teach it forgiveness. He has not learned that lesson yet himself: there is too much he will never forgive.

The tentacles contract, drawing him into the gaping maw, and the sword-teeth close upon his flesh.

He does not recoil in fear.

He does not resist.

He does not struggle.

Instead, he opens himself. In his most secret center, that gap in his being that once fed him pain, he offers an embrace.

Into the hollow in his center, he pours compassion. Absolute empathy. Perfect understanding.

He accepts the pain he has caused the dhuryam with his betrayal; he shares with the dhuryam the pain that betrayal has caused him.

He shares with the dhuryam all his experience with the spectrum of life: the featureless whiteout of agony, the red tide of rage, the black hole of despair, the gamma-sleet of loss... and the lush verdure of growing things, the grays of stone and duracrete, the glisten of gemstones and transparisteel, the blue-white sizzle of the noonday sun and it's exact echo in a lightsaber's blade.

He shares how much he loves it all: for all these things are all one thing: pain and joy, loss and reunion, life and death. To love any is to love all, for none can exist without every other.

The Universe.

The Force.

All is one.

The Yuuzhan Vong and the species of the New Republic.

Jacen and the World Brain.

When I betrayed you, I betrayed myself. When I killed your siblings, I killed pieces of myself. You may kill me, but I will live on in you.

We are One.

And Jacen cannot tell if those words come from him to the World Brain, or from the World Brain to him, for Jacen and the World Brain are only different faces of the same thing. Call it the Universe, or the Force, or Existence: those are only words.

They are half-truths. Less.

They are lies.

The truth is always greater than the words we use to describe it.

---

Jacen was surprised by life.

The teeth of the World Brain had not closed upon him. Its tentacles had not ripped the flesh from his bones. He had not drowned in the slime pool, asphyxiating on phosphorescent goo. No Yuuzhan Vong warriors swarmed around him to drag him from the slime and carve the life from him with amphistaffs.

Instead, a bubble of air had formed around him, and tentacles had cradled him like a sleeping child, and lips had closed over sword edged teeth to touch him with a kiss.

Because he was the World Brain, and the World Brain was him, and each was everything else, and Jacen had learned that one can meet the Universe and all its irrational pain-- which means meeting oneself-- with fear, or with hatred, or with despair.

Or one can choose to meet it with love.

-Star Wars: The New Jedi Order: Traitor

Thursday, March 16, 2006

"It was my observation that on your last visit, you were angry with me. You believed that I had deliberately harmed your apprentice-- which was accurate-- though your anger was moderated somewhat when I explained my motivations."

"That's true," Luke admitted.

"Now my question is, was your anger dark? Was it an evil passion that possessed you, such that the dark side might have taken you as a consequence?"

Luke chose his thoughts carefully. "It could have been. If I had used that anger to strike out at you, or harm you, particularly through the Force, then it would have been a dark passion."

"Young Master, it is my contention that the anger you experienced was natural and useful. I caused deliberate harm-- pain and anguish and suffering, over a period of weeks-- to a young man for whom you had accepted responsibility and for whom you felt a measure of love. Naturally you felt anger. Naturally you wanted to break my thin little neck. It is absolutely natural, when you discover that a person has inflicted deliberate pain on a helpless victim, to feel angry with that person. It is equally as natural an emotion as to feel compassion for the victim."

Vergere fell silent, and Luke let the silence build.

After a moment, Vergere bobbed her head. "Very well, young Master. You are correct when you said that if you had entered my cell and struck out at me with the Force, that such an action would have been dark. But you didn't. Instead your anger prompted you to speak to me and find out the reasons for my actions. To that extent, your anger was not only natural but useful. It led to understanding on both our parts."

She paused. "I'm about to ask a rhetorical question. You need not answer."

"Thank you for the warning."

"My rhetorical question is: why wasn't your anger dark? And my answer is: because you understood it. You understood the cause of the emotion, and therefore it did not seize control over you."

Luke thought for a moment. "It is your contention, then," he said, "that to understand an emotion is to prevent its being dark."

"Unreasoning passion is the province of darkness," Vergere said. "But an understood emotion is not unreasoning. That is why the route to mastery is through self-knowledge." Her tilted eyes widened. "It's not possible to suppress all emotion, nor is it desirable. An emotionless person is no more than a machine. But to understand the origin and nature of one's feelings, that is possible."

"When Darth Vader and the Emperor held me prisoner," Luke said, "they kept urging me to surrender to my anger."

"Your anger was a natural response to your captivity, and they wished to make use of it. They wished to fan your anger into a burning rage that would allow the darkness to enter. But any unreasoning passion would do. When anger becomes rage, fear becomes terror, love becomes obsession, self-esteem becomes vainglory, then a natural and useful emotion becomes an unreasoning compulsion and the darkness is."

"I let the dark side take me," Luke said. "I cut off my father's hand."

"Ahhh." Vergere nodded. "Now I understand much."

"When my rage took control, I felt invincible. I felt complete. I felt free."

Vergere nodded again. "When you are in the grip of an irresistible compulsion, it is then that you feel most like yourself. But in reality it was you who were passive then. You let the feeling control you."

---

Then Luke invited Jacen to sit by him. "I'd like to hear your ideas on the Yuuzhan Vong," he said.

"Vergere would be the one to ask," Jacen said.

"I have asked her. But I'd like to ask you. Their immunity to the Force aside, are the Yuuzhan Vong so very different from us?"

Jacen considered. "No. They have a tyrannical government, and their religion is absolute poison. But they're no better or worse than humans would be if we were raised in their system."

Luke looked at him. "Do you hate them?" he asked.

"No." Jacen's answer was swift and very certain.

"Why not?"

This time Jacen had to think. "Because," he said finally, "it would be like hating a child for being raised badly. It's not the child's fault, it's the parents'. I could hate the leaders who made the Yuuzhan Vong what they are, but they're long dead, so why waste energy in hatred?"

Luke rose and put a hand on Jacen's shoulder. "Thank you, Jacen," he said.

"I... understand them," Jacen said.

Luke seemed startled, his mind inward. "You do not hate, because you understand," he murmured.

-Star Wars: The New Jedi Order: Destiny's Way

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

there is no emotion; there is peace.

you know what...
but nevermind.

we should all strive to be happy; because ultimately, that's all that we're made for.
but what makes us happy? how do we be happy?
many things make me happy, some more than others.
right now, the thing that i think would make me happiest of all, in time to come, would be complete understanding.

but why? in truth, i do not know. all i know is that it is the answers that i seek, it is the answers that drive me, it is the answers that can provide me with any measure of true and lasting happiness, regardless of what kind of answers they are. and why is that so? because answers make me happy. but why? because the greater understanding i have, the greater power i have, and thus, the greater control i will have? perhaps. but why would control make me happy? because, with ultimate control, i'll even be able to control my own happiness? by controlling all the factors that could possible contribute to my happiness, be they minor or major, i'd be able to make myself completely and perfectly happy? but is ultimate control ever possible? is perfect happiness ever possible? no. then hey, what's the point? why not let's all be totally submissive and let us gain happiness from the total lack of control? sorry, i'm just not made that way. no other way to explain it. so i'm just a control freak, then? well, if you think about it in abstract terms, perhaps so. ultimately, the only reason for my continued existence is happiness. the only way to increase my happiness is through controlling of many factors that determine happiness. the most efficient way of increasing control is through understanding. and i should always pick the most efficient way, because my lifespan is limited and i want to achieve the maximum possible happiness in the minimum possible time. why do i want to achieve the maximum possible happiness? because i am just made to want to achieve the maximum possible happiness, period. it would be, i guess, a rather selfish way of what many would choose to define as a "fulfilling life". but then again, who isn't selfish? everybody is, for selfishness is the only means through which happiness can be obtained. the only difference that matters is your personal definition of "sense of self". hm.. i guess if it were possible for someone to expand his sense of self to encompass the entire universe, then he would be in effect controlling everything, and he would be ultimately happy. oh, and as an added bonus, he could be considered as "selfless" at the same time, because if his "self" is everything.. it doesn't really make much sense to even define his "self" as something that is seperated from the external world, is there? nope, there isn't. which kinda explains why the jedi think that selflessness is the way to go. because ultimate selflesness would result in ultimate happiness which would result in one becoming one with the Force. but that's kinda paradoxical, cos if the Force is everything (ok i know that according to star wars canon it isn't supposed to be everything, but i choose to redefine it as energy, which is everything so don't argue), then once he expands his sense of self to encompass everything, he would already be one with the Force and be completely happy at the same time. yeah, so no real causal link there... once you are one with the Force, you will be completely happy. cool, so now i've discovered the secret to being completely happy.

but then again, that is indeed rather hard to do. and i am just some stupid nubcake. so i think, for all practical reasons, i should just concentrate on increasing my understanding first before i even start on expanding my notion of the self. yeah... there is no ignorance; there is knowledge. there is no death; there is the Force.

but sometimes, one just feels like giving up. oh well. at least you'll succeed in a parallel universe, eh?

Thursday, March 02, 2006

a really random mish-mash of thoughts inside my head right now, foremost amongst which is the thought that rene descartes has a really messed up kind of worldview. anyway, i was just thinking about the nature of causation, and since i think i'm getting sick of structuring my essays to the point where they can be as persuasive as possible, i think i'll just write down whatever i think.

what is the nature of causation?

What do we mean by: a causes b?.
.: if a, then b.
is it possible that in the natural world, all microscopic sequences of events are tied in such a way that A <=> B? like the deterministic nature of particle physics experiments, perhaps?

according to quantum physics and the uncertainty principle...
A might not necessarily result in B (only high probability gradient)... A might result in B' instead
Also, there could be other events which could conceivably result in B, albeit with very low probability... such as A'=>B?

however, through statistical analysis of very large sample sizes, we are able to determine that there is a general trend of A <=> B. when the sample size tends to infinity, so would the probability that A <=> B tend to 1.

so it seems that the only principle undermining our ability to guarantee a definite link between the occurences of A and B is the uncertainty principle.

but even given that, is there any "logical" explanation why A <=> B? or have we reached the foundations of our knowledge about the physical world? like how 1 + 1 will always give you 2? are these the most fundamental physical laws of the universe, then?

actually, given the discrete nature of time itself, there is no reason for the "contemporary" definition of a "causative link" to exist. since time is discrete in nature, not continuous, and divided into many small indivisible quanta of time, which are incidentally the Planck's units of time, what would a singular event such as A have to do with the subsequent event in the next time quanta at all? for they are seperated by the indivisible gap in time! strictly speaking, there is absolutely no continuous form of interaction between event A and event B at all. event b is simply almost always placed next in line after event a on the timeline, and likewise, event a will almost always precede event b on the timeline. almost, because of the uncertainty principle. however, if we were to suppose that a certain event c shares the same kind of one-one relationship as shared by events a and b, and another event d with event c, event e with event d... and so on... we could eventually come up with a series of events that would connect the first event in the universe (the big bang) to the last event (big crunch/big rip/big yawn/whatever). it would be as though all these interconnected events are in fact actually a single matrix of events, a single fourth-dimensional event, if you will, that are merely seperated in time.

it would seem, then, that the ultimate and most fundamental set of rules that govern the very workings of our universe would be the nature of the relation between any two successive events. if we were to be able to derive what exactly it is that would make any particular event y succeed any particular event x, and likewise, what is it that makes any particular event x precede any particular event y... we could theoretically plot a graph showing the probability gradient of any and all events happening in our universe across all points in time, from the time of the first event to the time of the last event. as for now, our current knowledge of particle physics already allows us to do the same with fundamental particles such as quarks, hadrons, mesons and leptons. given specific knowledge of an event in relation to a specific particle, for instance, given knowledge of the particle's instantaneous velocity/momentum/location (which is impossible to derive all at once due to uncertainty principle), one could then predict with a high degree of accuracy the same specific traits that would be present in the subsequent event that would occur in relation to that same particle, i.e. the subsequent instantaneous velocity/momentum/location/whatever. And the reason why we are unable to do the same thing with all the other macroscopic and microscopic events occurring in our universe right now is because our knowledge of all the other particles in the universe, as well as how they interact with one another, is in itself far from complete.

but will it ever be complete? it might be that there is some particular aspect about the fundamental nature of our universe that can never be observed by us mere human beings, given that our sensory and intellectual faculties cannot possibly be considered as perfect and infallible. But if given a sufficient amount of time for us humans to evolve, i believe that it is only a matter of time before human beings would be able to attain that level fo understanding about our universe. after all, just because the universe is infinite (and that is assuming that the universe is so), does not mean that the rules governing its very workings have to be infinitely complex. for if they were infinitely complex, we would never be able to figure out anything about them at all. and the fact that we have already figured out rules about our universe in certain fields of knowledge that allow us to predict future events related to those particular fields of knowledge to a reasonably high degree of accuracy, shows that there is indeed a definite likelihood that mankind, or whatever incarnation of "mankind" might exist generations from now, would be able to figure out the rules of the universe in all it's complexity in time to come. we must bear in mind, though, that just because we've worked out all the rules does not mean that we are able to totally predict, let alone control, all the events of our universe. this is due to the apparently immutable nature of the uncertainty principle itself, which not only governs the manner in which particles behave such that we can never tell with complete accuracy how they would behave in another point in time, but also governs the very evolution of the human species itself, and as such placing limits on the extent through which the human body, with all its physical limitations, would be able to control his environment.

with all that said and done, i wish to address another pertinent question: why are the rules of the universe created as such? why is the fundamental rule A like this and not like that? why does the uncertainty principle exist like it does and not in some other way? some people might say that that is evidence enough for the presence of an external, infinitely intelligent creator that must have designed the universe in a way that functions to such an elegant degree. but no, it does not require intelligence so much to create, as to make sense of what has been created. for intelligence itself is already complexity, and infinite intelligence would equate infinite complexity. if something exists that is already infinitely complex, what more is there to create?

besides, creation, by itself, is very simple, and can happen as long as there is energy in the universe out of which any kind of system can be created. Creation of complex systems, such as life, however, is comparatively far more difficult, which is why the probabilities of finding lifeforms of any kind in our known universe is indeed very low. For parallel universes where the fundamental constants might have been generated even more unfavourably, the probabilities of life occurring would be even lower.

and whatever it is that the big bang might have created, regardless of how elegant it may or may not appear to us, regardless or whether or not it makes sense to us... it does not have to be "specially tailored" in any particular way in order for events to unfold in a timely fashion. it would have to work, to "function", in some way or another in order for events to be able to unfold successively. we should not be questioning WHY it works, because whether it works in this way or that, it will "work". it works by virtue of the very definition of "work" in the sense that it allows for things to happen. as such, whether you think the manner in which it works makes sense or not, whether it's very intricate and complex or it's totally random and there seems to be no link between any series of events, the fact that something is happening, the fact that things are changing, are in a state of flux.. means that the universe is "working". "how" it is working, though, is another matter. if it doesn't work, then nothing will happen at all, and if nothing would happen at all, i.e. nothing would be moving, nothing would be passing through time, nothing would be in motion... then energy wouldn't exist. and because as far as we know, everything in the universe consists of energy at the most fundamental level, if energy didn't exist, then nothing would exist. as far as we know, energy is the only thing that permeates our entire universe. as far as we know... energy is everything. only with energy can there be concepts such as motion, space, time.. etc. etc. and because of the indubitable fact that energy does exist in the universe, since well, because energy is everything, anything that is in existence would have to be energy, energy has to work, in some way or another, in order to cause events to appear one after another, in order for motion- which in itself, is a product of time which is a product of energy, to occur. Questioning why energy works in the elegant way that it appears to be is irrelevant, as no matter how we may choose to interpret the manner in which energy in the form of an event a will result in energy in the form of an event b in the next time quanta on the timeline, such interpretations would merely be our own way of perceiving the very way in which the energy in our universe works, and as i've mentioned before, the energy in our universe doesn't choose to work in any sort of specific manner, it simply works, works because of the fact that it is energy and it will always be in motion, and it is entirely up to us how we want to interpret that sort of motion. and it is only the case that us humans, ourselves products of energy, interpret the very manner in which energy works as "elegant", "well-designed", and "complex". For it is the truth that according to our definitions, the relationships between all the fundamental particles and constants in our universe is indeed very complex, so needlessly and inexplicably and unecessarily complex that it could only have arose out of the sheer simplicty of pure randomness... out of the sheer simplicity, complete chaos and utter randomness of the big bang, where the only possible step from total simplicity in which the universe could develop was to move towards the levels of complexity that are responsible for the appearance of our universe as it is today, with all its galaxial, celestial, solar and planetary systems.

i know this entry is far from complete. i also know that i'm damn tired and need to sleep. please refer to links section under "multiverse bla bla.." for stuff written in sec1-3 for further elaboration on some of the points brought up.. that is, if you really are seriously bored and have no tutorials to do.

click for more =)