Physics of Ideas - Occupation of Space

Howdy, and welcome to the second post of the mini-series, Physics of Ideas. This one centers around an idea's occupation of space in our mind. It is a touch more abstract than the first post but interrelates. I hope you enjoy!

Many may recognize the phrase no two objects can occupy the same space at the same time. I did some research into this, and it turns out to not be a true law of physics but one inferred from the concept of the Pauli exclusion principle. Austrian physicist Wolfgang Pauli states that two or more identical particles with half-integer spins cannot occupy the same quantum state within a quantum system simultaneously. These particles are known as fermions and include electrons, quarks, and neutrinos. I’ll use an electron example to explain. If we have a Helium atom (since it only has two electrons in the same orbital), and one electron is spinning in an upward motion, then the other electron must be spinning in a downward motion to avoid the occupation of the same space at the same time. Another way to think about this is if you visualize two balls being thrown at the same velocity and time and one is thrown underhand and the other is thrown overhand, there is a point in time where the two balls are at the exact same height, but because they are spinning in opposite directions the two balls do not touch. However, if you threw both balls overhand in the same fashion, they will hit one another once they reach the same height because they are spinning in the same direction.

The other portion of the Pauli exclusion principle is that particles with integer spins, bosons, are not subject to this; they can occupy the same space at the same time. An example of a boson is a photon, think light from a laser beam.

I’d had an initial thought from the first concept before I started researching. I was thinking about how no two objects could occupy the same space at the same time in relation to ideas in our minds. I wanted to explore the concept of negative thought loops and the possibility of inserting another idea in that would combat the existing negative idea and create something different. It got me thinking, could two ideas occupy the same space at the same time? Or is it that they never exist in the same space, but instead tug and pull, fighting each other for the right to occupy, but one never remaining victor for too long. I now have further thoughts on this after researching the Pauli exclusion principle. My thought is that like fermions, no two ideas can occupy the same space. Only if they are “spinning” in opposite directions, or counters to one another, could they exist simultaneously but not occupying the same space at the same time. The one idea or thought could be viewed as positive and another as negative, like thinking you’re an amazing person and a bad person (important clarification that the ideas being "positive" or "negative" are not to resemble the charges of protons and electrons but represent the "spinning" in opposite directions of the ideas). These reverberate and interact with different neural pathways in our minds depending on what they “light up”. This would lead to them never occupying the same space but instead alternating until one is chosen over the other as the drawn conclusion.

So how is a conclusion drawn? If no two ideas can occupy the same space at the same time, then how is one ever settled on? And why do we experience such turmoil while our minds are sorting out this conclusion? And further, how do we combat negative thought loops if no two ideas can exist in the same space?

I believe the conclusion is drawn through the frequency of which an idea is thought and the experiential evidence that backs up that idea. Let's say the idea is I'm acceptable as I am. The more often this idea is thought, the more readily believable it becomes. The more often you experience circumstances where people accept you, the more readily believable the idea becomes. Now, let's throw in an opposite idea where you believe you are unacceptable. These ideas are tied to the concept of acceptance like the electrons tied to the Helium atom. Anytime the concept of acceptance is brought to mind, the two countering ideas spin in their opposite directions fighting to occupy the space that leads to a conclusion. In that moment, there is a choice in whether to interact with the idea you are acceptable or the idea you are unacceptable (for more detail, refer to Choices - an adventure in thought). But wait - what if the thought you are unacceptable is a negative thought loop initiator. What if it is next to impossible to focus on anything beyond what makes you unacceptable? Would then the conclusion be drawn that you are unacceptable? In that moment, yes.

However, an idea being thought will remain being thought at the same frequency unless acted on by an unbalanced force, or an experience that disrupts the frequency. So what if we inserted into that thought loop the idea that rainbows are full circles. What happens then? Likely, the mind would begin questioning this new thought and it would act as a momentary reprieve, yes a slight distraction, for you to be able to shift out of the question of acceptance. Then, use your energy to create space for yourself in the moment through grounding externally with your senses. This will bring you out of the mental experience of the thought loop and into the physical experience of your body. If you attempt to contradict the idea you are unacceptable with an example of being acceptable, the mind will throw at you an example of being unacceptable to counter the responding thought in an equal and opposite way; thus, continuing the thought loop. This is why you can't think yourself out of a negative thought loop but must engage with your external experience in a way that connects you to what is real and not what is in your head.

To explain the turmoil we experience when sifting through the opposing ideas in our minds, I think of whirlpools. The opposition of something against another thing creates a great draft that violently swirls. In the case of whirlpools, it can be produced by ocean tides or rivers flowing against rocks or other debris. For our inner turmoil, it's the "spinning" of the opposing ideas that are charged with different emotions that play a role in how our body is feeling. Thinking back to the third law, the equal and opposite reactions of the opposing ideas each have an emotional weight tied to them. These emotions likely differ based on what the idea is telling you. For example, if an idea is telling you you're a likeable person, you're likely happy, but if an idea is telling you you're unlikeable, you're likely sad. The emotions interact with us through physical sensations, and the differing emotions bring different sensations to the body. Not having stability in how the body feels creates turmoil of the mind.

If no two ideas can occupy the same space at the same time but instead alternate in their occupation of the space, then it is possible through frequency of thought and experiential evidence to draw a conclusion in which one thought holds the space.

Let me know your thoughts on this theory.

Much love <3

Jenn

...Or are they like bosons and should be treated like a wave over an object, which then would allow them to occupy the same space at the same time. Brain movement is measured through waves but are ideas more similar to waves or objects? I view them as objects of thought but thoughts move like waves so is it similar to light? Light behaves in a wave-like manner but is also viewed as a stream of particles. We shall see how this theory evolves ;)