Random Thoughts On The Miracle Of Life - 9/3/23

Weapons of Mass Bloviation I try to keep politics out of all these letters, but part of my motivation in writing them is to capture this unique point in time as things are changing so rapidly—basically snapshots of our world during this tumultuous phase. That being said, I have to acknowledge the current dysfunctional machine that seems to consume so much of our time and attention every election cycle. We seem to be losing our ability to have a common sense discussion and our society has never been more polarized, at least in my lifetime. I sincerely hope we can find a way to recognize the things that are really important, particularly for our kids and grandkids, and act accordingly. There are a lot of issues requiring our focus and it seems we’re like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burns… Okay, rant over. Meanwhile, take a look at this: "To grasp the reality as it has been revealed by this technology, we must magnify one of these mechanisms a billion times until it is twenty kilometers in diameter and resembles a giant airship large enough to cover a great city like London or New York. What we would then see would be an object of unparalleled complexity and adaptive design. We would see around us, in every direction we looked, all sorts of robot-like machines. We would notice that the simplest of the functional components were astonishingly complex pieces of machinery, each one consisting of about three thousand atoms arranged in highly organized 3-D spatial conformation. We would wonder even more as we watched the strangely purposeful activities of these weird machines, particularly when we realized that, despite all our accumulated knowledge of physics and chemistry, the task of designing one such machine that is one single functional mechanism would be completely beyond our capacity at present.” That is a description of a human cell by biochemist Michael Dutton. I replaced the word cell with mechanism. And that’s just a basic description of the biological starting point on which the exponentially more complex systems are built that become fully developed humans resulting in our capacity for consciousness. The miraculous science of our current known existence doesn’t stop there. There’s more…much more. Think about the fact that we, as fully developed humans, are riding on a giant rock spinning at 1,000 mph, while simultaneously hurtling through space at 67,000 mph around the sun, teetering back and forth on its axis along the way. Oh, and by the way, our solar system as a whole is orbiting the center of our galaxy, the Milky Way, at 500,000 mph. It takes about 200 million years for our solar system to make one complete orbit around the galaxy. That means that since the time dinosaurs first roamed Earth, we have probably made approximately one galactic orbit. Spinning and hurtling through space at unimaginable velocities while sipping Starbucks and arguing about politics—I mean, who’s driving and what could go wrong? Most of us have probably heard all this over the years and obviously it’s not something that we think about on a daily basis. But I always like to go back to these realities as a reference point when entertaining the enormity of what we inevitably don’t know. And, my sense is we’ve probably only scratched the surface. The reason I brought this up is to emphasize the fact that our very existence is unfathomable and something that nobody can fully comprehend. We read about our physiology, hear the numbers about how fast we’re moving through space—but the magnitude of it is impossible to fully absorb. This is the main reason I’m drawn to speculative fiction, particularly at this point in time. Attempting to integrate what we know to be fact and extrapolate what may be ahead seems inevitable for those of us who’re pre-wired to explore such things. I get a lot of email from people who’ve read the Impermanent Universe Trilogy who want to discuss some of the themes. This is fun for me since I’ve always said those books are more philosophical than science based and the discussions with readers are always enlightening and thought-provoking. Since many on this mailing list have probably read the books, and those who haven’t probably never will at this point, I’m going to have some spoilers in this discussion. One of the central themes in the IU books is an exploration of Simulation Theory, the idea that our reality is made up of a very advanced artificially generated simulation. Rather than write a basic summary, here’s a short description from one of the main characters in the first book: “Tess, our lives, our world, everything that makes up what we think we know, is…to some degree, illusory. The only reality is the fact we all, you and I and every other thing, are part of a complex, for lack of a better word, system.” She wanted to tell him that didn’t sound very earth-shattering after having watched what she thought was a dead man walk onto a stage and proceed to reveal she was standing in the middle of an elaborate illusion. “Of course, Anton.” “And what if I substituted the word system with simulation?” Tess wasn’t sure if she had heard the words correctly. “I don’t understand what you’re saying. Are you speaking in hypotheticals?” She felt the jet bank gently to the right and increase its altitude. Both Gurkha guards were seated in the aft compartment, but she saw them briefly glance up until the jet stabilized. “Think about the state of technology forty years ago. Computers from that era seem laughably primitive today. Our phones are thousands of times more powerful than the earliest supercomputers. A simple video ping-pong game on a black-and-white screen was considered something of a marvel. Today, we have virtual reality, augmented systems that seem so real that once immersed then removed, our normal reality momentarily appears manufactured.” Tess smiled and poked his shoulder with a finger. “Are you real?” She was only half joking. “Yes. I am real. As real as you and everyone else here. I realize this is difficult to absorb. Open your mind. I believe you have the capacity to understand it all. Think, Tess, of what technology will look like in ten years. In one hundred. At some point, we will create a simulation that is indistinguishable from what we currently call reality. And think about this: If the universe has existed for billions of years, what are the odds this hasn’t happened already? What are the odds we are not currently living in an advanced simulation?” “You mean…like some video game?” “A simple way to look at it, but accurate enough. But powered by technology beyond our comprehension. Generated by advanced computers the size of planets or solar systems. Even galaxies. Consider the possibility that humanity evolved to a point it no longer resembled us. No longer had anything at all in common with us. How hard would it be for such entities to recreate multiple universes representing an unlimited number of scenarios?” Now I won’t go into the whole explanation of Simulation Theory, but will only say that there are some very big thinkers who believe it’s not only possible, but probable. Elon Musk places a 99% probability that it’s a foregone conclusion. Even Stephen Hawking was a proponent. It’s not my intention to convince anyone one way or another but only to offer it as an interesting thought experiment. The question I get from many is whether or not I believe Simulation Theory is contrary to religion. My answer is no, I don’t think so. In some ways, I believe it actually reinforces the concept of one creator and anyone who makes it to the end of book three should assume that. As I’ve said in past newsletters, in my humble opinion, the human race is entering the most explosive period in our history and as new facts and realities emerge, we’ll all be faced with making decisions within constantly changing paradigms. Okay, enough of all that… Throw Down Boy When I was a little kid, we lived in Denver, Colorado for around two years. During that time, nearly all television programs and every other movie was a western. John Wayne ruled the box office and TV shows like The Rifleman, Wanted Dead or Alive (with a young Steve McQueen), Paladin, Have Gun—Will Travel, Rawhide (with Clint Eastwood), Bat Masterson, and many more filled our ancient black and white TVs during prime time. Even many cigarette commercials had western themes, the most famous being Marlboro and its iconic Marlboro Man, complete with the original soundtrack from the movie The Magnificent Seven. Living in Colorado where a lot of these fictional stories were set only added to the mystique. My dad had several record albums that contained the theme songs of popular shows at the time and I can still replay them in my mind. That era died off, replaced over the years with less violent, goofy comedies and cop dramas. The shows mentioned above were relegated to memories from the past. That is until cable and streaming TV. Now those shows are accessible on a variety of venues and have been for a long time, some free, others for a minimal price. While exploring our seemingly infinite number of new internet channels since cutting the cable chord, I recently ran across a network specializing in some of those ancient cowboy operas. And, for the first time in several decades, I revisited the past. It was fun, kind of like jumping in a time machine. And even though all of them are fairly formulaic and simple, some still hold up pretty well. There’s the usual build-up to a confrontation and good always prevails. Most of the protagonists are men of morals but capable of putting on their predator faces and opening a can of whoop-ass on the overly confident bad guy who always seems surprised as he realizes the consequences of poor behavior just prior to his impending demise. Some of the heroes have unique firearms, the toy versions of which I owned back in the day, like McQueens sawed off rifle that he rapidly flipped to chamber consecutive rounds when in a critical fight. All of the heroes exude steely, quiet confidence. After a couple of shows from a time long past, I realized watching through my current psychological lens all these years later probably wasn't such a great idea. Seeing the clunky fake sets and stilted dialogue was diluting the richness of what I experienced as a kid. My young imagination had filled all the holes, expanded the world in which the story took place and created a depth of emotion that couldn’t be duplicated today. Those are ghosts that need to stay in that era. Even though I only remembered bits and pieces from various shows, the glow of the experience has stuck with me on some subconscious level. I don’t want to lose that. But I did start thinking about my favorite western movies. After much internal debate, here are my top three, in no particular order. Each is very different, unique in its own way and it wouldn’t be possible for me to rank one over the other: Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid—The movie that made Robert Redford a superstar and resurrected the western genre at the time is one I’ve watched more times than I can remember. Co-starring Paul Newman, I can’t think of a film from any era that had more star power. Both Newman and Redford are legitimate movie stars on a different level from today’s contemporary actors. This might be the first male buddy movie and one thing that makes it so good is how the main characters interact. There’s lots of fun, particularly watching Sundance’s prowess with a pistol, and some moments of comic relief; even a love interest, played by the luminous Katherine Ross who was in a string of hits during that era. Written by William Goldman who also created a slew of other hit films, the dialogue is sharp and each scene immerses you into that world. And even though it ends in the two protagonist’s demise, you leave with the sense they’ll land on their feet somehow, someway, maybe recycled by the universe. The real Butch and Sundance were basically a couple of wandering grifters who did rob banks and trains and did actually wind up in Bolivia. But the movie creates a couple of likable rogues with basically noble aspirations who are just trying to get by. I wonder what the real Butch and Sundance would have thought about becoming famous long after death. The movie critic Roger Ebert infamously labeled it as one of his all-time worst movies and maintained that opinion until the end of his life. But the rest of the movie-verse generally embraced the film and it became an international hit, still a classic. By the way, as I write this today, Robert Redford’s celebrating his 87th birthday. Tombstone—Man, I do love this movie. The tale of Wyatt Earp and his brothers is another timeless masterpiece and certain aspects of the film have probably been quoted by more fans than any other. Based on real characters and events, everything about this movie is perfect to me. The dialogue is steeped in slang from the era, something that adds to the sense of gravitas and pulls the audience in deeper. The actors are just perfectly cast. Kurt Russel is great as Wyatt, but Val Kilmer’s Doc Holliday steals the show. Watching Kilmer play the pale, sickly ex-dentist gun slinger who was drunk most of his waking hours is mesmerizing. His redeeming characteristic is an undying loyalty to Wyatt. Men and women can relate. The scenes where Doc Holliday and Johnny Ringo (played by Michael Biehn, another perfectly cast character) are some of the best ever to make it onto film. There’s an old adage in writing that goes show, don’t tell, and there’s a scene where Ringo confronts a drunk Holliday in a saloon, two predators about to throw down. Holliday starts to mumble in Latin and Ringo responds, also in Latin, something that elevates their characters to another level. They’re not just enthusiastic and proficient killers, but educated and intellectually advanced, speaking a language only they understand, something that adds a whole new ominous aura. They’re communicating on another plane and they’re both aware at that point that neither can exist while the other lives. Their ultimate showdown toward the end provides the gratuitous payoff the audience demands—it doesn’t disappoint. Prior to that, there’s a scene where Wyatt confronts an overly-aggressive (and much heavier) Billy Bob Thornton and anyone who’s had the experience of confronting an inappropriate bully will totally relate with how quickly his blusterous facade turns to mush. The infamous gunfight at the OK Corral is reenacted meticulously based on Earp’s personal recounting—one of the most well-known showdowns in the history of the old west. I can feel my testosterone level rising... The film was predicted to flop, even by those associated with it. Kurt Russel was one of the producers and fired the original director early on. It was withheld from critics prior to release, something that usually indicates a lack of confidence by the studio. Kevin Costner also released a Wyatt Earp based film at the same time and it was expected to dominate. That film disappointed at the box office and one of the unfortunate aspects was another great depiction of Doc Holliday by Dennis Quaid was overshadowed by Kilmer’s. I saw Tombstone on Christmas Day of 1993 with my two boys. It was an instant surprise hit and has gone on to become a cult classic. As with Butch & Sundance, I've lost count how many times I’ve watched it. True Grit—I’m not talking about the original with John Wayne and Glenn Campbell. I wasn’t really crazy about that version although it’s proved very popular over the years. My pick is the remake produced and directed by the Cohen brothers with Jeff Bridges in the lead role as Marshal Reuben J. (Rooster) Cogburn. Something about that film really resonated with me and I think in many ways it’s completely unique within the western genre. Very much steeped in the concept of the hero’s journey, a term coined by the philosopher Joseph Campbell based on the theme that originated in Greek classics, Rooster and Mattie set out into the unknown in an attempt to avenge the death of Mattie’s father. Josh Brolin plays the heavy, but he’s more nuanced than the standard villain, ruthless but slightly incompetent. Jeff Bridges’ performance is one of the most realistic and entertaining he’s had in his long and distinguished career. A young Hailee Steinfeld plays the character of Mattie and she’s really outstanding in that pivotal role. The scene at the beginning where she out-trades the manipulative horse trader is another show don’t tell moment that really embellishes the character. I also like that Matt Damon took a secondary role as the prideful Texas Ranger, LaBoeuf, a peacock-like strutting contrast to Bridges’ hound-dog Rooster. The showdown where Rooster faces several of the gang, who by then have kidnapped Mattie, is a perfect example of a competent, yet aging warrior doing what he was designed to do, completely unconcerned about the odds he faces. I like to believe there have been many men like that. I’ve even known a few. But ultimately I think what makes the film so good is that the Cohen brothers wisely decided to stick to the original book, written by Charles Portis, a very talented writer who had a great sense of creating stories utilizing dialogue that incorporates realistic nuances from the era in which his characters are set. The whole thing has a very authentic feel. Okay, long again. Please let me know your thoughts. I really enjoy your comments/interaction. Best.....VB