Quantum Mechanics, issues with the Trinity, and the Problem of Hell

It's been a while. But I wrote something long that I don't want to lose, so I figured I'd put it here.

Wave–particle duality: a theory of quantum mechanics (not physics) that states that all particles exist as both waves and particles at the same time, and the observation causes them to “appear” as one or the other. Think of Schrodinger’s cat: considered both alive and dead inside of the box until someone comes along to open the box and observe the results of the experiment. Once the observer is present, the cat (or particle) falls out of superposition (all things at once) and takes the characteristics of only one state.

When we look at this theory in light of the “Trinity problem,” we can begin to accept that something could exist as one thing and three things at the same time, even if we don’t fully understand how it’s doing that. Just because it falls out of the realm of our human experience, it doesn’t mean it’s impossible. If we truly believe that we serve a God of the impossible, then to say that it could be both (that God/Jesus/Holy Spirit are at once three completely separate beings and one unified entity) would be to put limitations on His ability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality

The evangelist pastor who had the revelation about Hell was Carlton Pearson. He was at one point the pastor of Higher Dimensions Family Church (which saw a Sunday morning attendance high of 5,000 people), but was denounced as a heretic by the Joint College of African-American Pentecostal Bishops. He’s since become associated with something called “New Thought,” which is a little more extreme, including in its tenants that sickness originated in the mind, and other pseudo-spiritual doctrines.

However, the doctrine that he first became associated with after his separation from Higher Dimensions is called Christian Universalism, which says that all beings will be reconciled to God (called Universal reconciliation). It doesn’t downplay sin, but says that people will have to face some sort of penance for their sin, possibly in the form of a “period of finite punishment similar to a state of purgatory.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlton_Pearson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Universalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_reconciliation

The Mrs. and the Mistress

I love tracing words through history. Oftentimes, the meaning of a word (or, in this case, an abbreviation) changes so drastically from one generation to another that the original and modern meanings are completely different. In the case of Mrs. being used as an abbreviation, the original word from which is derives is still very much alive. But there's a reason we don't typically hear it unabbreviated in its true form.

When you see "Mrs." written out, or when you address someone and say the abbreviation, what do you say? If you're like most of us, you say "missus," or "misses," depending on the vernacular. However, if you've ever paid attention, there's no "r" in either of those words. So, where does it come from.

Mistress.

I immediately thought of Anna Karenina, for obvious reasons.

Now, that doesn't mean you've been calling married women whores all this time. Mistress used to stand for "a woman who has authority, control, or power, especially the female head of a household, institution, or other establishment," and in fact still does according to the dictionary. But that's not the meaning most people associate with the word. In our modern American society -- which seems to be obsessed with extramarital affairs -- it means "a woman who has a continuing extramarital sexual relationship with a man." So, with that definition embedded in our culture, it's no wonder we have gotten out of the use of calling women "mistresses." 

The origin of the word mistress comes from mister, and it's a simple jump to take from one to the other. So, it makes sense that a "mistress" is the female version of the title of respect. And when people abbreviated the true words, the abbreviations made sense: Mr. and Mrs. Now, however, with the stigma we've attributed to the word -- ever since it fell out of favor in the 14th century and ultimately gained its unfortunate denotation in the 15th century -- we've turned out backs on the truth in this case.

But you can't quite get away with using "Miss" as a way of circumventing the awkward alternation: "miss" also derives from "mistress." So, no matter how hard you try, you're going to deal with perception and connotation. 

Which is kind of how life works, isn't it?

-JJ

Bananas Create Antimatter

Yep. Every 75 minutes.

As we all know, bananas are rich in potassium. Personally, I learned this fact from the classic movie, "Honey, We Shrunk Ourselves." I'll spare the details, but they give a kid a banana because he's low on potassium. Thus, just like the number of feet in a mile (5,280) and the longest word to every appear in an English dictionary (Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis), this fruit fact lodge itself in my brain, destined to be used only in social situations and in the unlikely occurrence that I might find myself on a game show one day.

Anyway, for the facts. For every 1 million atoms of potassium, there are about 100 atoms of Potassium-40, an unstable, decaying isotope. As it decays, it releases positrons, the antimatter counterpart of an electron. But don't worry, a black hole isn't going to open up in your mouth when you bite down on a banana (as history has proven). Nor will it begin a universe-destroying chain reaction between antimatter and matter that science fiction loves to throw into doomsday scenarios. The antimatter particles quickly react with nearby electrons and annihilate. So, no need to store you bananas in an underground cellar with yard-thick concrete walls.

-JJ

Nature Finds A Way

I'm not sure of the source, but judging from the desolated looking buildings in the background, I can only assume this picture was taken by someone in the post-apocalyptic future we're heading towards and sent it back in time (via Reddit) as a warning. 

I know I often jokingly say the line in the title of this post, a line from the awesome Jurassic Park (the movie), but it's true. No matter what we as humans do to this precious planet we're on, it will find a way to bounce back. God takes care of this place just as much as He takes care of its passengers. Unfortunately, we take the wonder around us for granted, assuming that we can put in the minimal amount of effort to look after it (and often, no effort at all). But how long before it revolts and takes the beauty back? 

Another, less serious, take on the photo: How cool would it be to camp out on a floating island that resides in the hull of a burned out ship? I feel like there's a book there. (Or that there has already been something similar written I just haven't found it yet.)

-JJ

Book Review: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers

Review: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers

I had been told by a friend that I should read "What Is the What," another novel by Dave Eggers. However, while perusing a local used bookstore, I came across this, the only Eggers book that I had seen in a used bookstore. I was intrigued. First, it was an Eggers book, and second, the title: it seems brash, headstrong, and overconfident. 

Much like the main character, Eggers himself.

"A Heartbreaking Work..." is an autobiographical work about Egger's young life, right before and after his mother and father die of unrelated cancers, and Eggers takes over the role of guardian for his younger brother. The relationship that they have -- and that is portrayed in the book -- is complicated, nuanced, and finds itself as the central motivations for almost everything that Eggers does. It essentially defined his life, and it rears its head at the worst moments (during job interviews, while he is with women, when he's just trying to have a normal life with friends in a bar). And yet, the bond between them remains one of the strongest familial relationships that I have encountered in a while. Their dialogue is perfect, their interactions are perfect, and I don't think I could imagine a better representation of brotherly "love" outside of the "real world."

But what really had me hooked with this novel is the writing style. Eggers writes effortlessly. I've said that before about authors, but it has never been more true than for this writer. The words seem like the most perfect portrayal of the conversational style of a well-educated person who knows exactly how to say what he wants to say, even if it's simply rambling frustrations over various situations. Punctuation never halters the reading -- something that I intend to study and steal for my own writing -- and the style is all his own, enviable but unattainable. 

And if there was ever an example to look to for how to write stream of consciousness, then this is it. I can barely stand Faulkner's SoC writing because it's dense, overly complicated, and tends to ramble off topic for far too long before returning to any semblance of a point. And I get that that's kind of the point. It's supposed to be the accurate portrayal of the thoughts in a character's head as they occur. But without some sort of structure, the written thoughts become too convoluted for their own good. But with this work, Eggers strikes a near perfect balance between rabid fire, punctuation-less representations of thoughts, and truly important and interesting plot-centric moments. 

Another aspect of the work that I loved was the post-modern self-awareness that works its way through every aspect of the novel. Chapters break away from the plot to include moment of self-aware introspection (sometimes about the act of writing the book itself), and Eggers messes with the form just enough to break barriers that I have not seen broken in any other work I've read so far. The interview portion near the middle of the work is absolutely brilliant.

To sum: this work certainly deserved to be Time's Best Book of the Year for 2000.

That doesn't mean, though, that I loved everything about it. I understand that he was looking for accuracy in his speech, his thoughts, and the interactions with the other characters, but there is simply too much profanity. I can handle swearing to a point -- and you could call most incidents of this in the novel "natural" or "realistic" -- but it was too much for my tastes. I read past them, of course. It's entirely possible to sweep one's eyes over certain words without reading them in that inner voice that we all have when we read. But sometimes it became a bit of a hassle when certainly there could have been some alternatives.

Profanity aside, this work only made me want to search out Eggers' other works even more. I have a feeling I'll be haunting the "E" portions of the "Fiction" sections of used bookstores for a while until I get something else from this man.

4/5

-JJ 

Small, Sad Update On Oldest Man =(

I had no idea that when I wrote the short piece about the oldest people alive, and then updated that piece with a followup about Jiroemon Kimura, the oldest living man (whose birthday was last month), that I would be coming back so soon with more news about this 116-year old marvel. 

Unfortunately, I am, and for the worst reason: Jiroemon Kimura died Wednesday. 

Fortunately (if there is a fortunately to death), you can't say that he didn't live a long, fruitful life. The size of his family alone is a testament to that fact: seven children, 14 grandchildren, 25 great-grandchildren, and 15 great-great-grandchildren. Sixty one people are alive simply because this man lived, and now many people around the world know his name. His notary may simply be because of his age, but his positive outlook on life is just as worthy of mention. According to the report, Jiroemon attributed his longevity to "always looking up towards the sky," adding, "That is how I am."

Wise words from an old, happy man.

-JJ

Short Post #3: Retronym

Retronym

To sum: A retronym is the act of giving a new name (usually just by adding an adjective) to an old term or item in order to differentiate it from a new version of the old term or item.

Example: Acoustic Guitar. Originally, all guitars were acoustic. But then came the new, louder kid on the block: the electric guitar. So, to differentiate, a new term was coined; or, rather, the adjective "acoustic" was added so that there wouldn't be any confusion.

Read also: Analog watch. Watches were around before the digital watch, but we had to give a new name to the "old" style to keep them separate.

It's interesting to think that a retronym gives an old item a newer name than the new item that physically came into being after the old item! It's confusing and wonderful.

Gotta love English (or any language for that matter).

-JJ