One single drop of mercury - in all of its dulled metallic sheen bobbing and weaving around in a glass of water. Immiscible. No matter how much vibration, shaking, heating. And so, un-anchored, the droplet floats around. Wandering. Wondering.
Whence you introduce another droplet of mercury, they will find each other. They will still wander around. But anchored in each other.
In my mind, that is why everyone needs to be tethered. To something. Religion, football, literature etc. One or more of these. It provides for a faux base, a foundation on which a social circle is defined - actions, behaviour, interactions. And this is the passport, apparently, to go on and do other things - explore, capture, own. The cycle repeats.
I wonder however - if two humans can be tethered in each other? Like the mercury droplets - free floating in a glass of water, but as one entangled system. Their nature is all the definition they need to exist and help provide the catapult for the other, to go forth and develop. Of course, the assumption here is, they are still surrounded by water. Is it too much of a stretch to use this analogy for humans? Maybe the paradigm of human life, that is defined by the will to propagate and prosper, has very little tolerance for such entropy.
Whence you introduce another droplet of mercury, they will find each other. They will still wander around. But anchored in each other.
In my mind, that is why everyone needs to be tethered. To something. Religion, football, literature etc. One or more of these. It provides for a faux base, a foundation on which a social circle is defined - actions, behaviour, interactions. And this is the passport, apparently, to go on and do other things - explore, capture, own. The cycle repeats.
I wonder however - if two humans can be tethered in each other? Like the mercury droplets - free floating in a glass of water, but as one entangled system. Their nature is all the definition they need to exist and help provide the catapult for the other, to go forth and develop. Of course, the assumption here is, they are still surrounded by water. Is it too much of a stretch to use this analogy for humans? Maybe the paradigm of human life, that is defined by the will to propagate and prosper, has very little tolerance for such entropy.
