005: my thoughts on cosmology.

i don't know how i found out avbout cosmology, i just remember reading the wikipedia page 
intently and then finding a free book on quantum physics and being obsessed...

( x minute read).

a thought by india southgate.

cosmology refers to the metaphysical study and investigation into why we exist. creation stories to situate ourselves within our purpose and values have been integral to all cultures across the globe and has been successful in making our experience of time that little bit more manageable. as humans, i think it is in our nature to question why we are here, yet the only thing that sets us apart from all other curious fauna is that we supply language to our discoveries and we make it very obvious that we do that.

the study of cosmology asks, 'how did we get here?' and creates a chronological framework in increments from the big bang to the existence of life on earth (aka you and i). this timeline focuses on what events occurred at what stage and what implications this had on the progression and expansion of space and time. ther term was first used in english by thomas blount in 1656 to mean 'a speaking of the world', making this the first instance in history when english was inherently ever poetic.

cosmology has been the topic of many different thinkers. from esoteric madmen to religious scholars, and all of us are asking, 'why are we here? what is our purpose?'. i am interested in the multiplicitous cosmological stories that we have created throughout history and geography to rationalise our existence as well as ideas about consciousness and sentience because i think it will be a balm to my existential dread. you too may be asking yourself, 'well how did i get here?' in a beautiful house with your beautiful wife, cosmology will let you know.

(listen to my cosmology playlist while you read!!)

cosmology!!

theories on how we got here (and what i think is likely)

i think we can accept many parts of the universe as being objectively truthful though we may not directly experience it here on earth. ideas such as the expansion of space, light shifts, the parameters of time, the decay of stars, the transference of energy and other concepts (like many aspects of science) can be extrapolated to events we already experience. for example, if you have ever watched the clouds, the wispy precipitation/ gas mixture can be seen travelling in one direction and changing as they go on a sort of fractal level- the changes on a small level amount to perceptible changes on an obvious and large level. the wind is something we cannot see that moves clouds and carries pollen in its trajectory in a similar way that the forces of space move comets. although both forces are invisible and built from miniscule atoms, we cannot deny that they are important.

in the same way, the decay of stars can be likened to surrendering a message in a bottle to the sea and someone receiving it - there is evidence of the writers world in the decay of the paper and they style of the bottle and hopefully the time and handwriting style of the message inside that conveys many hints that situate the world of that writer in our history, but we cannot write back anymore. their world is not there. we all experience time but in differing ways based on our cultural upbringings, stage of life or whatever substance we are on, but the fact we cannot go back in time (yet) apart from in memory is the same.

the unpredictable predictability of science is what we can thank for meteorological phenomena. i imagine that there are layers of rules and equations and calculations that come into play to produce these events. i often wish to see the maths in action. the predictable unpredictability of the human mind is what we can thank for some of these historical cosmologies...

i find that the main unifying faults of some cosmologies that i find less believable are that there is an idea that the world is perfect, a denial of basic concepts or the intentional obscuring clear cosmological potholes. although, untrue postulations about the form of the earth divide my attention. some like the jain cosmology state that the earth is shaped like a man with his arms akimbo and his legs the same which i find acceptable within the bounds of reality as it seems to be figurative and spiritual-based. although i struggle with the concept and function of religion it seems to have intentional meaning. however, the babylonians fall upon the other side of my division for inventing the flat earth theory. the earth is very obviously not flat. have you ever seen a hill? kate bush hasn't.

perseids (thoughts on time)

do animals know why we are here?

my theory

final thoughts...

(if you have any thoughts or corrections, please let me know on my guestbook!)

date started: 09 may 2025

date finished:

updates: none