A violent universe that we just don't understand

We don't know what our universe is made of.
But we know that it's a quite violent place. Galaxies collide. Our milky way are going to crash into the Andromeda galaxy.
We are literary made of the stoft from an exploding supernova.
As we know our planet is a quit violent planet too.

Animals eat other animals. Vulcanos have arrut0tioens, Tsunsmis and iceages, and now a coming greenhouse effect.

We should be happy to have lived in quite peaceful time.

But we humans are not peaceful at all.
We are animals that slaughter other animals, and treat them like slaves.

We are totally changing the surface of the Earth.

Change is maybe the most important word here, everything is changing and in an flux.

Can there be some good in this?

well, as Heracleit said, War is the mother of everything, change makes new form to arrive.

But we should be careful to say to much of the big things.

We know just something about 4 % of the universe. The rest is black matter and energy.

Here Neil deGrasse Tyson explains;




His explanations of dark energy is quiet dramatic; its parts of a parallel universe.

And if he he right, what is then dark energy, the phenomena that makes the universe expand?

Well no one knows. But what about if it's a kind of life from the parallel universe. Maybe life that wants to have contact....

I don't say that it is so, just that it can be so.

What we know is that the universe we live in are violent and changing.
So we are very lucky to be alive in this time and on this planet.

Let's try to keep it that way...


















Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more