I’ve heard about string theory for some time now, but I’ve never taken the time to learn more about it until now. I basically spent a good few hours watching free videos online, and now I’m telling you about what I did. You’re in for a treat.

First, you might find it interesting to watch these two YouTube videos on the first ten dimensions. They are great illustrations of the concepts found in the first chapter of Rob Bryanton‘s Imagining the Tenth Dimension (book, website). If you get lost after about the 5th or 6th dimension, don’t worry – I did too. Re-watching the later parts helps with understanding a little better, though.

Then comes the better part. If you have time to kill, watch NOVA’s 3-hour The Elegant Universe series on string theory and why it’s such an amazing prospect. There actually used to be only ten proposed dimensions, but after five different string theory ideas were introduced, all with very different math, Edward Witten came along and proposed an eleventh dimension to unite all these ideas.

It’s interesting to note how the strings in string theory actually closely resemble Laozi’s ancient idea of a Dao. If I didn’t hate math so much, I think I’d love to be a string theory physicist.

Pi can always be described as the ratio 3.14. A circle’s circumference will always, just helplessly, be a little greater than three times its diameter. An equilateral triangle will always have equal sides and three angles of 60º. The three angles of all triangles will always add up to 180º. A wave’s frequency will always be inversely proportional to its wavelength. Gravity will always be proportional to the masses of the two objects. A physicist would be able to give you a whole slew of constants and physical relationships that most people haven’t even heard of. These are all bits and pieces of what I like to call the “definition” of nature.

Of course, these numbers are only mere representations of nature. I hope my main idea isn’t obscured by this. The important thing is that there exist (∃) features in the universe that are constant and everlasting.

So that’s the idea of this “unchanging Universe” — sort of a single defined constant, from which all other constants and entities come from, that drives everything. (Not to be confused with Lucas’ Star Wars “force.”) To complement yourself with the universe, you likewise need to make yourself unchanging — or rather, revert back to your unchanging, natural self. In a word, based on my most recent theories, this would be summarized in the word “harmony.” No harmony, no oneness. I don’t think that one needs much explaining, but I’ll use a quick example. Water is polar; oil is not. Water and oil are immiscible — they are not harmonious, thus they cannot become one.

At least at the present, I think that a huge facet of reverting back to this natural, unchanging self is the lack of emotion. What?! Yeah. That’s a pretty big one that can take more than a lifetime to master. My reasoning for it kind of has a circular logic. If you understand the ultimate Universal Truth, you naturally won’t have emotions — because every happening in your life you would know to be small and insignificant; you’d have a deep understanding of cause and effect, and nothing would ever be of any surprise to you. You’d know everything. Past, present, future. Everything that has been, is, and will be, you would know. Because you understand the Truth, which is the “constant” or “equation” to ultimately everything.

That being said, reacting emotionlessly to everything in life will help you realize the ultimate Universal Truth. It forces you to look at the big picture, at how insignificant your life, the planet in general, or even this galaxy, is. (Not to be depressing.) If your roommate gets drunk and pees on your textbook the week of finals (personal experience), reacting without emotions will allow for the best outcome possible for all parties.

The 清靜經 says, 「大道無情」— the great Dao has no emotion (more). If we are to return to our essence, where we come from, then we must return to this Universal state. This “state of heart” is known in Buddhism as nirvana, and perhaps in many other religions as “going back to Heaven.” Except I think the concept of “going back to Heaven” has completely lost its original true meaning. I believe that when you reach true harmony with the Universe, you create a Heaven on Earth for yourself. You don’t need to wait until after death to go to a “Heaven.” In fact, the so-called “Heaven” is a void, anyway (more on that later), so if you can’t make yourself happy in a “Heaven on Earth,” then you can’t expect to be happy in the “Heaven” after death either. This is the same reason some people might think that their lives seem to be like a “Hell on Earth.” They have too many emotional and physical attachments that weigh them down — that’s what it always boils down to. And if you believe in a life after this one, that’s probably what it would be like too — a hell. Because your essence hasn’t changed.

That leads me to stress, again, that nothing physical is everlasting. Everything physical has a beginning and an end. Nothing tangible lasts forever. If you come to understand this, then it’s a huge leap forward in getting yourself to resonate with the Universe. When you realize this, things start to fall into place in the big picture. No confusion, no frustration, things are just the way they’re supposed to be.

One of my all-time favorite quotes is an ancient Chinese proverb:

未曾生我，誰是我。
生我之後，我是誰？

(loose translation:)
Before I was born, who was I?
After I was born, I am who?

It wasn’t until a few months ago that I truly came to understand this. Before your entry into this physical, mortal world, there was no “I.” It doesn’t exist, because there’s only one Law, one Essence, one Nature, of the Universal Truth. Everyone is a part of it — there is no “I.” But after you’re born in this physical world, a lot of people start doing some soul searching, trying to find who the “I” is. Everyone feels the need to find their way around life. What’s life’s true meaning, they ask? Why am “I” here? People get lost in the physical world because they start to look at things from the perspective of “I,” and not from the view of the Universal harmony. The physical and emotional attachments that our bodies are susceptible to are to blame.

It is my belief that life has no true meaning (again, not to be depressing) — it’s just Nature taking its course. But if you make your life have a meaning, it can have a meaning. Your life’s meaning is what you make it. But you are in fact here in this physical world merely because of Nature taking its course. There’s no simpler explanation.

A favorite story of mine is 莊子 (Zhuangzi)’s dream of a butterfly. He dreamt that he was a butterfly — but when he awoke, he couldn’t figure out whether it was him dreaming of a butterfly, or if the butterfly had just gone to sleep right when he woke up and is now dreaming of him. This calls to mind a Western adage: “Life is but a dream.” Most of us will live to be at most 100. Some of us, myself included, won’t want to live that long. Little do we know that we’ve been around for an infinite time period, and that these 100 years mean nothing in the big picture. We are physics. We are chemistry. We are macroeconomics. We are universal constants. We are all a part of everything. We just need to awaken to it, just like 莊子 awakened to his butterfly.

[qjj]

天下皆知美之爲美。斯惡已。皆知善之爲善。斯不善已。故有無相生、難易相成、長短相較、高下相傾、音聲相和、前後相隨。是以聖人處無爲之事、行不言之教。萬物作焉而不辭、生而不有、爲而不侍、功成而弗居。夫唯弗居、是以不去。

All in the world recognize the beautiful as beautiful; herein lies ugliness.
All recognize the good as good; herein lies evil.

Therefore:
Being and non-being produce each other;
Difficulty and ease bring about each other;
Long and short delimit each other;
High and low rest on each other;
Sound and voice harmonize each other;
Front and back follow each other.

Therefore the sage abides in the condition of wu-wei (無為, unattached action),
And carries out the wordless teaching.
Here, the myriad things are made, yet not separated.

Therefore the sage produces without possessing,
Acts without expectations,
And accomplishes without abiding in his accomplishments.

It is precisely because he does not abide in them that they never leave him.

Translation was modified from Charles Muller‘s original work. (BTW, look how concise ancient Chinese can be! Love it.)

In the True world, there is no good or bad. Everything is relative. What’s good to one person may be bad to the next. What’s to say flunking out of high school is bad, if it helps you find you who you really are? Who says all millionaires are happy? If it rains, you can’t have your picnic, but the plants will flourish, and you’ll have water to drink. And so, there’s an intricate balance of yin and yang that we can all truly come to appreciate when we stop making ourselves the center of the universe, and start thinking of the self as just a tiny bit of it.

real is Nothing
nothing is real
what’s real is what’s Not

Capitalized words include “Nothing” and “Not.” This site is based upon the idea of an “infinite zero.” ‘kay, enough of that for now — let’s move on.

What is this Dao that you hear about? 何謂道？ (For my spiel on my preference for “Dao” instead of “Taoism,” see the FAQs.) 老子 (Lao zi, also “Lao tze” or “Lao tse”) opens the 清靜經 (Qing jing jing) with:

大道無形，生育天地；
大道無情，運行日月；
大道無名，長養萬物。
吾不知其名，強名曰道。
The great Dao has no shape, yet gives birth and nourishes heaven and earth.
The great Dao has no emotion, yet moves all heavenly objects.
The great Dao has no name, yet cultivates all things.
I know not its name; I am forced to call it “Dao.”

and 道德經 (Dao de jing, Tao te ching) with the following:

道可道，非常道。名可名，非常名。
The Dao that can be put into language is not the enduring and unchanging Dao.
The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name.

Dao is in everything. It is the universal Truth. A waterbottle works because it has its own Dao. A knife and fork can coordinate together on your plate because of the Dao they share. You need to use the bathroom every few hours because of an intrinsic reason behind the way your body works, Dao. Some of us are attracted to movies and TV shows because of a Dao behind it all.

Modern science is a subset of Dao, because it deals only in the physical realm, and all things physical are plagued by their ephemeral nature. Take our waterbottle, for instance. You might say that one particular waterbottle has a cylindrical shape with a narrow opening on one end, with a cover of some type for that opening. But everything physical has a beginning and an end. A waterbottle is born when it is made; its essence is lost when it is destroyed, somehow, sometime, somewhere. Maybe its lid falls into a gorge. Maybe it becomes cracked and can no longer hold any water. Maybe gets lost somewhere and becomes devoured by acid rain over the years.

Nothing physical is everlasting, and thus science, the study of the physical realm, can never pry open Dao, the universal and everlasting Truth. Science measures change. Everything is relative in science. It is absolutely impossible to use science to detect something omnipresent, everlasting, and absolute. (Though I do think, however, that we can use what we’ve learned from science to gain insight to how the Universe works beyond its physical aspects. I know I’ve had a lot of fun doing so.)

To illustrate, let’s return to our waterbottle example. After the waterbottle dies, I contend that there is still an essence of it that lives on. It’s impossible detect this essence with scientific methods. It is an essence that existed long before the waterbottle was made, that stays with the waterbottle throughout its lifetime, and that lingers after the waterbottle dies. This essence is what I call Dao. Sure, you could argue that this essence doesn’t exist, because we can’t detect it tangibly. Ah, but it clearly does, since can see the shape and form of a waterbottle during its lifetime! You’ll need to think beyond logic for this one.

Point: Nothing physical is everlasting. The essences of physical objects are mere subsets of the essence of Dao.

Philosophy, too, is only a small corner of Dao, because no philosophy can exist without some manipulation of language to convey the ideas behind it. Not only is language severely limiting in the scope of ideas it can express, it too is plagued by its ephemeral nature; nothing put into language is true for eternity. Hence, “The Dao that can be put into language is not the enduring and unchanging Dao” (above). This means that the study of Dao, which is a philosophy in itself, can only talk around the true Dao, because no language can be used to actually describe it. Beyond description is a Dao that can’t be put into words. It’s just an essence, something that makes things the way they are, that makes things tick. This Dao is the everlasting Truth. It is the Dao that stays true with the waterbottle even when it becomes destroyed. Complete understanding of this Dao depends completely on the individual and can only be achieved by searching within the Self.

Think about this: While Daoism is only a philosophy, philosophy is but a small subset of Dao.

Point: Language is limiting and conveys ideas that are only ephemerally true.

Dao is everywhere, in you, in me; it’s not alone, seperate from everything else. Dao is not a seperate school of thought — it’s in every school of thought. I invite you to contemplate on this as I have. It’s fun, trust me. Make yourself one with the the universe — and thus with Dao — and you can truly come to understand it.

Updated 17 Oct 2007.