“Well it just goes to show you,” remarked physicist and popular author Brian Greene bearing his trademark don’t-cha-know-it grin, “the universe still has a few tricks up her sleeve.”
Scientists around the globe are just beginning to grasp the significance of what is “perhaps the first great scientific discovery of our young century.” Published in last month’s issue of Science under the technical title “The Same Difference Theory: Why We Are All The Same, But Different,” the new findings represent the culmination of over a decade of interdisciplinary research, encompassing everything from neurophysics to psycho-neurophysics, to physical neurology.
“In essence the finding is quite simple” notes principal author Harold Kim, “What our research shows is that we are all the same, but with one subtle caveat…we’re also different.”
The theory is being hailed by many as a viable solution to the Boltz-Heimann question: “if we’re all good people then why is there so much sadness in the world?” (more formally stated as G-People’ = Sadness * The Goodness of Others…or Does(it)? The titular “it” in question being none other than the Lefebre statistic!). “If this is indeed the case,” says Green “these findings will fundamentally alter the way we perceive ourselves and others…bringing us one step closer to unlocking the secrets of the ‘love particle.’”
It’s a bold claim, and one that many scientists, such as Doug Berkland of Blockbuster Video, will admit still has them scratching their heads. “Well if we’re really all the same, then how come we fight wars,” argues Doug, “but then again, there is that whole ‘we’re also different’ part of the theory too. But now if that’s the case what to make of mismatched cross-cultural friendships…unless…maybe that’s where the we’re all same part comes back into play. But then what about the ‘we’re different’ thing again! Whew, I need a break!”
pop-physicist Brian Green taking a smile break at a particle physics 'nar
Like most great scientific breakthroughs, such as Schrodinger’s “Everyone is Connected Theorem,” Einstein’s “Love = Kindess * Effort ^2,” and Fermi’s “Everything in Moderation…Including Moderation!” Kim’s discovery is a total mindfuck, with implications and counter-implications philosophers will no doubt spend decades sorting out. “Us scientists are historically poor interpreters of our own work,” notes the secondary author Goeff Taylorson. “We come out with these esoteric postulates like ‘oh we’re all the same but different’ or ‘life’s a journey,’ but really it’s up to the greater scientific community to help translate these findings to the public.”
Taylorson admits that this will not be an easy task. “We as scientists have an obligation to pass our wisdom on to our children which, as Pascal proved in 1651, are our most precious, wonderful resource. Sometimes the greatest scientific feat of all is putting a theory in words that even a 5 year old can understand. For now same-difference is just something to be appreciated, like a great work of art, or a satisfying shit.”
But it’s not all peaches and cream and turkish delight within the scientific community. Fug Cradzle, sciency type and author of the new book “The Difference Theory: Why We’re All Different and That’s That!” has been an outspoken opponent of the theory since day one. “A world where we’re all the different and the same? Is that really a world you want to live in? Imagine if somebody told you you were actually the same person as Hitler, as Moussolini…as George Bush! Kind of makes you drink doesn’t it? I mean—drink. I mean—I’m gonna start drinking now. You guys can hang around if you want but it’s probably going to get a little awk—”
No Comments so far ↓
There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.