Excerpt from the "Almost Comprehensive Guide to Theoretical Mishaps, Temporal Oddities and Other Slightly Inconvenient Phenomena", 2nd edition, revised but not necessarily improved.
Continuum
noun | /kənˈtɪn.ju.əm/
A seamless progression in which things are apparently connected, even if they pretend otherwise.
Often used in physics, philosophy, and interdimensional rescue missions.
Warning: Continuums may appear fractured when observed from inside.
Side effects may include déjà vu, regret, and the sudden realization that causality is optional.
No matter who you ask, everyone nods knowingly when the word “continuum” comes up. And then they secretly google it. So it's time to shed some light on this semantic gray area.
The controversy: physics vs. psychology
There is no consensus among scientific experts on what a continuum actually is – except that it is somehow... connected.
Position A: The physical continuum
Represented by Prof. Dr. Marianne Kernfeld, expert in relativity theory, among others:
“The continuum is a fundamental concept in physics – especially in space-time theory. It describes the uninterrupted structure in which matter, energy, and events move. In other words, without a continuum, there would be no connection between cause and effect – and no coffee stains that logically spread from the cup to the blouse.”
From this perspective, the continuum is a kind of “invisible fabric” that connects time and space – and thus also our reality.
Position B: The psychological construct
Defended by Dr. Rebekka Stanz, philosopher and cultural scientist:
“The so-called continuum is a mental model that people use to squeeze the chaos of life into a halfway meaningful sequence. Who says there has to be a logical order to things? Maybe we experience everything at once – but our brains simply sort it out in sequence for fear of being overwhelmed.”
From this perspective, the continuum is nothing more than a mental safety railing – like chapter numbers in a novel: artificial, but reassuring.
Is there a both-and?
Some voices (including a confusing number of sci-fi authors and surprisingly relaxed quantum physicists) suggest that the two perspectives are not necessarily contradictory.
Perhaps the continuum is both an objective phenomenon and a psychological construct – like a mirror that only exists because someone looks into it.
“What if the physical continuum is the stage – and our perception of it is the script?”
asks Dr. Harun Bell, a border crosser between neuroscience and theoretical physics.
“Or to put it another way: what use is the structure of space-time if no one lives in it to experience it?”
This raises uncomfortable but fascinating questions:
Can this be explained using coffee or tea cups? ... no, that's not the question, although ...
If we actively shape our perception of time and context, what happens when someone falls outside the grid?
If reality and sequence are not objective, how do we find out what “really” happened?
And are we then still passive travelers through the continuum—or its unnoticed architects?
Whether the continuum is the backbone of the universe or just a nice thought to help you get up in the morning—in Continuum, the third volume of the No Brainer trilogy, it is put to the test. Physically, emotionally—and definitely not linearly.
Kommentar hinzufügen
Kommentare