Looking for external causes to the effects we experience internally requires making an assumption about existence that is also the basis of every religion.
[transcript below video]
When you hear me say that there is no such thing as gravity, you probably think that perhaps I am not playing with a full deck. It is indeed a bold claim, but not one I make lightly, and if you give me a chance to explain, it just might make sense to you.
I do not believe that I could just float away at will, obviously the experience of being moored to the ground is undeniably consistent to human beings. When I say that there is no such thing as gravity, what I am taking aim at is the belief that some omnipresent, omnipotent force which regulates reality is preventing us from floating around all willy nilly.
Gravity was born from such an assumption, the assumption that what we experience as reality is regulated by an omnipresent, omnipotent force. In fact, the entirety of physical science is predicated on the assumption that all things are caused by a universal constant enforcer which must be obeyed. This assumption was not born of physics, but of religion.
Long ago human beings sought to explain their experiences by attributing them to a god or gods whose will could be gleaned from the workings of existence. Around 400 years ago a paradigm shift occurred in which God was replaced by an even more ephemeral causant called Nature, giving rise to modern science. However the central assumption had not changed a single bit — we still believed that some higher power was in control of everything.
Physics are just the same old religion that man has toyed with for hundreds of thousands of years, but with a depersonalized agency of causation. The concept of gravity was born from this dogmatic assumption that the causes of experiences are external to the beings which experience them.
However things get even more complicated when we examine the fact that there is not even a single concept of gravity in play.
The first theory of gravity was devised by Sir Isaac Newton, and it basically stated that smaller objects of mass are drawn toward larger objects of mass.
A few hundred years later Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity upended the classic Newtonian concept of gravity, claiming that gravity was caused by interactions between objects and space-time.
The strangest part of this is that both theories can still be applied to reach desired outcomes. If you want to build a skyscraper, assuming that Newtonian gravity is true will help you achieve that outcome. But if you want to solve cosmological problems, you will need to assume Einsteinian gravity to get positive results.
Both theories of gravity are simultaneously true, depending on what you are trying to accomplish. However, if a single omnipresent, omnipotent force is regulating gravity, then it would not be possible for two competing truths to coexist equally.
And now there have arisen further complications, as physicists are beginning to embrace the theory of quantum gravity, which is too complex to explain here. However, when assumed to be true, quantum physicists can use this new theory to reach the expected outcomes based on that assumption.
Earlier I spoke of gravity as an experience — and now I would like to point out that the experience of not floating away never feels like a mass differential, our bodies bending space-time, or whatever it is quantum gravity is getting at. Not experiencing floating around willy nilly is not the same as experiencing the effects of gravity, so even though gravity seems experientially true, it is really only true as an abstraction to explain what has never needed an explanation.
The alternative to gravity as an omnipresent, omnipotent force arises when we realize that gravity was an answer to a question which only arises as a result of assuming an omnipresent, omnipotent force which exists external to the beings asking the question. If instead we make the far more parsimonious assumption that we are the source of our experiences, which is what quantum physics is now beginning to conclude, then we need not look for an author outside of our story.
Narrativism is the idea what we experience is authored by the sum total of beings which have experience. Consciousness is the primary substance, not matter. From this point of view we can see that what we think of as gravity occurs, not because some omnipresent, omnipotent force, but because the story of our existence makes more sense if everything is not floating around carelessly all the time. Then we can see our attempts to foil that regularity as plot devices.
Hot air balloons and planes and rocket ships were devised by our collective imagination in order to progress our narrative beyond being stuck to the ground. This is the way in which evolution occurs — the story is moved along and made more complex by introducing new plot devices which overturn old limitations.
And this is why we must learn to see the limitations of our reality as of our own making, because if we realize that it us, rather than omnipresent, omnipotent forces moulding our experiences, then we will become free to create our reality without beliefs that needlessly limit our outcomes.
There are no Gods and no Masters. Reality is what we allow ourselves to create.
To excel at creating the most harmonious reality we must reject the lie of omnipresent, omnipotent forces which limit our imagination’s palette, and learn to see ourselves as creators regulated only by our own beliefs in absolute truths.
There is no such thing as impossible.
There’s no such thing as gravity.