I was watching a video on Astrum's YouTube channel today. The host, Alex, discussed Stephan Hawking's theory that black holes would release energy over time. The release of energy over time would inevitably cause a reduction in a black hole's mass and, over time, explode. The rate of energy released would increase, getting faster and faster, as the black hole shrinks. The black hole would instantaneously explode in a burst of unimaginable size at a critical point, then vanish altogether. Using Quantum theory, we can explain how this is even possible. A quantum field is what scientists call a fundamental field of "something" in the nothing. Without it, scientists theorize that light wavelengths would not be able to move in an S pattern through the black hole. Some theories suggest that several quantum fields overlap and cover every patch of the universe. Continuing in Alex's video, he explains how matter can actually "...just pop up into existence." When this happens, the matter (1) that appears out of nowhere is balanced by anti-matter (-1) for a short period of time until they cancel each other out (=0) and both vanish again. Without getting too bogged down on this topic, my point for today's discussion is twofold. The first is that everything in the universe, including you and me, must be in balance to function properly. Second, despite the monumental size and gravitational pull of a black hole, they release energy to function, thereby consuming their own resources, which ultimately forces them to eventually collapse.
Truthfully, I am just able to wrap my head around this topic. Realizing these two points, I was daydreaming about ways to use this knowledge to my advantage and apply it to life. As Alex explained the information in the video, I realized that everything around us- the entire universe, all exists in balance. Understanding how our universe operates is a tool in developing systems in unison. If these are fundamental processes of how everything around us functions, don't you think we should go with the flow instead of pretending we humans know best? History has shown that humans mistakenly believe they know what's best, that they know all there is to be understood, and then we run face-first into a brick wall. Despite the hubris, let's take some time to expand on these two points.
This discussion may remind you of Sir Issac Newton's laws of physics. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. From this basic understanding of physics, we can see that everything in the universe has its foundation on what I will call the Law of Balance. You cannot have one state of matter without another. So you have matter and anti-matter, light and dark, hot and cold, exorbitance of one generation replaced with frugality of the successive generation. What if we take this concept of balance and apply it to human societies. In the case of government, the sole purpose of this organization would be to maintain balance amongst its community.
The Law of Balance, in this instance, means the group of elected people would only intervene to administer a balancing force on a particular area. Maintaining the commons is a perfect example of this concept. To get a more in-depth understanding of this, I recommend checking out Mr. Greer's post on the subject before continuing.
The Tragedy of the Commons, explained by Garrett Hardin, shows that if left to one's own devices in a capitalist economy, everyone will use as many resources as possible to maximize their own personal gain. These actions are unsustainable— i.e., out of balance. In contrast, Adam Smith argued that the pursuit of self-interest works out to everyone's benefit, but this denies reality. Mr. Hardin knew that to protect the common's; there would need to be steps taken to conserve. Noble Prize winner Elinor Ostrom steps in to offer further assistance on adequately maintaining the commons. Mr. Greer encourages his readers to explore her writings on the subject but goes on to sum up her ideas:
"You preserve a commons by setting up formal limits on its use and penalizing and excluding people who try to violate those limits."
In Mr. Greer's example, he used a small community that decided collectively that each family would be allowed to graze two cows on the commons' land. If anyone violated this agreement, on the third strike, the other townspeople banished the offender and then ate the offending owner's cows. We can see "...how this changes the dynamic. By creating a formal limit on the use of the commons and assurance of enforcing the limit, no one pays the costs in exchange for someone else's benefit. Furthermore, they have a robust personal incentive to help enforce the limit. Ostrom points out, the best way to maintain a commons is to leave it in the hands of the locals, rather than trying to enforce compliance with the dictates of a distant government." Once again, I encourage you to check out Mr. Greer's article on the subject as he dives deeper into the realm of the commons on the topic of human communication. To summarize his piece:
"The essence of a workable commons is that they are open only to those who abide by the rules that maintain them."
If a person does not want to abide by the rules made by a common culture of the local community, they are no longer allowed to participate. In the case of Mr. Greer's article, he discusses open communication amongst people in a society. If a society has access to freedom of information and communication, that society will flourish on every level "...history shows that the more freely people can choose the content of their verbal expressions, the more society flourishes according to every metric you care to measure."
Greer's thoughts make me wonder then if honesty, peace, humility, justice, faithfulness, love - basically virtuous living, is the very foundation of what we could consider "good." Applying this idea to our discussion, "good" is homeostasis. The ideal balance of people living in a society. When most of the community values education, the rule of law, personal freedoms, environmental conservation, the outflowing result is prosperity.
We see quite the opposite today. The grotesque wealth disparity, broken social mobility, injustice, environmental destruction, population explosion, lawlessness, and resource extraction will reverse drastically to balance the obscene extravagances we see today. This is the Law of Balance, and it is never going away. Keep in mind; however, the universe is not limited to human time scales, so it does take a while to balance back out.
The powers of the current age can try as much as they can to push back with all their might, but it will only create an equal reaction that will wipe them out completely. Attempting to control the outcomes only makes the pushback worse. Look at the maniacal control that the eugenics/Davos/managerial crowd are attempting now. Their thirst for power by any means will blow up spectacularly in their faces. This is a wonderful thought, but I believe it's important to consider that we may also get burned as well. We are a part of this world, too, aren't we? That is why it is important to build resilience to maintain balance in our lives with the natural world as best as possible.
Unfortunately, we cannot single-handedly stop their malevolent agendas, so it is best to make plans to weather the push back coming. Their unrelenting obsession with genetically altering life (human, plant, animal, microbes), manipulating the weather, controlling all human beings, creating unprecedented inequalities, and suppressing reality will snap back so devastatingly that we may enter an incredibly long dark age. Once again, the harder the entitled managerial classes push to continue their agendas, the harder the push back will be.
The human project is not a straight line into infinity. It is a complex web of connections. Seeing connections in all things is the premise of Permaculture as well. Understanding that all things in the universe are connected helps direct your mind into authentic balance with yourself and the world around you. We are not separate from the universe; we are interconnected. What are your thoughts on what I would term the Law of Balance? How would you design your life or a potential organic system of governance?
