What’s drifting into your windows?
Our earth has layers of atmosphere that function in various ways, much like the membrane of a single cell, protecting, nourishing and defining its world from others. Just like our bodies are mostly made up of nonhuman cells, the atmosphere of our planet too is mostly comprised of things other than oxygen, nitrogen or other elements we are familiar with.
Carrying the human body analogy further, suppose the earth’s crust is mostly made up of foreign matter and debris. The overall mass of non-earth material could be pretty impressive, indeed.
If dimensional membranes could be compromised to allow access between them, perhaps our dimension is mostly populated by beings from other dimensions. Those rifts in the membranes may be drifting to different areas of our world, unwittingly inviting tiny visitors like viruses and bacteria, along with, perhaps, other things!
Drifting windows.
What a concept! Brings to my mind the concept of fractals.
Assuming for a moment that your notion is true, it boggles my mind to think what could be “winking in” and “winking out” of our dimension, perhaps mostly completely outside our senses or technology – and yet making an effect nonetheless. The question then becomes, “What effect(s)?”
Further, it might be quite possible “beings” from other dimensions could be carrying out “business as usual” within their own little “other dimensional bubble” here – meaning the rules of our dimension might not apply to them when they are here. Could explain quite a lot – like why some UFO’s, for example, can make nearly instant 90 degree turns at extraordinary speeds. Or why they suddenly appear and then just as suddenly disappear. They’re not breaking the rules – they’re abiding by them, or rather, theirs!
I like the notion of multidimensional contact – except that it might be extremely difficult to prove or even find evidence to support it. I mean, how does one go about finding evidence for something that doesn’t exist anywhere in our universe?
Like String Theory and Religion that require some faith without supportive evidence, the notion of multidimensional travelers is a nice, elegant solution to a difficult scientific question: do ETs exist? While your solution is tough scientifically, I do like the notion even it it is not provable (hey! I’m not provable!!).
And maybe someday some scientist with some moxie will step up to this theoretical plate and hit the proverbial ball out of the proverbial park – probably into another dimension!!
Hehehe! The funny thing is… theoretical physics is what we have now to rely on and probably will until we have the ability to connect with other dimensions in a more meaningful way.
Just because scientific theories are often considered true, doesn’t mean the results of experiments aren’t being influenced by an interplay between dimensions. We tend to attribute to 3rd dimensional reality what our authorities tell us to believe.
Not that long ago, diseases of any kind were thought to be curses from God or Gods. Such concepts sprang from religious zealots who used fear as a way to control the ignorant believers. Now we attribute most of what causes disease to natural interactions of earth’s inhabitants. The tiniest of creatures here that can either benefit or destroy life. We’ve come a long way towards understanding the physical world and give the spiritual reality a break.
I have no doubt that diseases will increase as hostile conditions, such as air and water pollution, continue to exist. I think getting involved in positive actions like clean up and lifestyle change will make a difference.
I hear you about theoretical physics – as though theory is as good as proof – oh, like religion! Where science shines is when theories are held as notions rather than as fact. For example, I’ve heard it many, many times: “According to Einstein…” as though referring to Mr. Einstein makes what they are saying somehow true simply because “Einstein sed so.” Rubbish!
Science posits a theory or hypothesis based on observation – theories are notions that should be held lightly in a frame of “I wonder if…” rather than in a frame of “this is so, therefore…” Real science then seeks evidence/observations to contradict the theory. In other words, real science seeks to DISPROVE; and where a theory cannot be disproved, it is held lightly as “possible” even when such may well be extremely improbable – and all subsequent theories based on the original theory are regarded as “controversial” or “unsure” – rather than as fact.
Seeking to prove a theory “true” is NOT science – it is justification. And we’ve seen the results of this kind of pseudo-science (lots of stake burnings, the destruction of the Mayan libraries, and the advent of the Dark Ages in Europe and elsewhere come to my mind immediately).
Collecting corroborating evidence for a theory is still good science as long as the theory is held as theory rather than truth. The theories of evolution and relativity can probably never be disproved per se. Nevertheless, even the overwhelming mass of corroborating evidence vs the dearth of contradictory observation is still not enough to make either theory anything more than theory.
Unfortunately, I see a lot of justification and little science in science nowadays. When we pile theories upon theories upon theories, we can sometimes forget that they are theories. And just because somebody in authority says something is so does not make it so. For example, just because Einstein believed and could mathematically prove that nothing can travel through space faster than light does not make it so – and yet, just about every theory of astrophysics is based on this “fact”.
What I really like about your theorizing is that you keep it fluid – you don’t settle on any one theory as “truth” – you treat your theories as notions that can ebb and flow with evidence and observation. It could be perceived that you are wishy-washy about your ideas – oh, well – good science will look that way because of the very nature of good science.
Bad science will always look like certainty. So far, I’ve not seen much certainty in any of your writings. I really like that.