There are some things that have been dancing around my head; ideas about puzzles, perceptions and perspective and the translation of concepts. Several years ago, my son, at age 7, watched a program on Nova about string theory, and in one sitting, completely grasped the concept, and came and told me about it. He explained it in full to me.
My understanding of what he explained is basically that within every inch of space that I can see and even that which I cannot see, there are hundreds, maybe thousands of individual strings that connect one to another. These strings are molecular or maybe even micro-molecular, and make up everything that is.
That’s the extent of my understanding of what he told me, even though my son explained much more than that. But my mind took it in another direction, and I developed a cube theory. I saw, in my mind, something along the lines of a giant a mini magnetic cube, but containing millions of tiny magnetic balls within it.
This giant cube made up space as we know it at an earthly level. It has height, depth, width, breath. All of us, individually, occupy a one of these magnetic balls; our own tiny mini world within the world; and we interact or come into contact with each other as our magnets cause our worlds to to.
This giant cube is constantly turning and moving in all different directions, and it is always moving and interacting with other magnetic balls as well. Everyone is in a different world on a different level, and moving in a different direction according to where they are at, and where they perceive they should be, or, where they think they should be going.
Some appear to be going up, some down, some sideways, some backwards, but the giant cube keeps turning and moving, so that picture keeps changing. Since the giant cube is constantly in motion, from an outside perspective, the levels are always in constant flux. No level is better or lesser than; none is higher or lower. All are just in a different place, and all are functioning as well as being affected by the interactions or connections with any other cube on either of the six available sides of connection, no matter how brief that connection may be.
Those who, a moment ago, appeared to be going in one direction, now appear to be going in another, and these changes are based upon the movement of the giant cube, and the decisions of those within the worlds within the magnetic balls. Which of the six points of interaction has initiated a change of mindset? What information did they gather as a result of that interaction and how did that information affect their mindset and sense of direction? How might that change of mind, or interaction with one person affect their interactions with any others?
The cube has six walls or points of contact. Your receptors will be processing incoming information based mostly on what you see, and what you hear; and sometimes on what you smell and what you feel from those six points of contact. What you feel may not involve direct contact, but perhaps intuition, or what you sense from another, and may even involve a more emotional base of evaluation.
From your perspective, which would be based on your stored core of information, you make decisions on accepting or rejecting that incoming info. Your magnet ball’s direction will then change as a result of just one decision. Likewise, all of your interactions with other magnetic balls will initiate a potential change in direction based upon where they were, or, their perspective, and the info they received from their interaction with you; and the subsequent decision they made as a result.
Again, we are all part of one whole, and how we relate to each other matters. I write this, not as one who has conquered her inefficiencies in this area, but as one who is learning still. For example, I could take a puzzle of say five thousand pieces and distribute it among 196 people. Each would have roughly about 25-26 random pieces of the puzzle.
Now, this action alone would connect all of these different people because even if their pieces did not interact with everyone’s, just the fact that they are all part of the same puzzle connects them. The fact that their pieces connect with some people’s pieces and not others still connects them with those others via the connections with the some. So this then would make everyone connected.
There are going to be those that have part of the frame of the puzzle, and those that have only the pieces from inside the frame, yet all, coming together will piece the many into one. Ever try to construct a puzzle without the frame? It may be possible (depending on the puzzle design and number of pieces), but it certainly takes longer and is a lot more challenging.
Usually, the frame pieces are the first sought and put together, so that an idea of the concept can be seen. This allows a glimpse of possible related images in the remaining pieces, so that the one trying to piece it all together has an idea of where to start and what direction to go in; even if they don’t know what the entire picture looks like. Therefore, those that have frame pieces would be building the foundation; the framework of that puzzle; and would share similar values which is why they would be connected or connecting to each other.
Just as in the analogy of the cubes; they were all held together by a central uniting force, which in that analogy, was the giant Magnetic ball cube as well as the actual walls of the mini balls which contained their individual life force and environment. Without the central uniting force of the magnets holding everything and everyone together, there’d be a lot of mini balls floating about in space without any measure of control of themselves or their destination, and certainly without connection and a sense of direction.
Individually, they don’t have the complete concept; which is based on joining one with another. The foundation of the puzzle would remain incomplete, but together, they construct a strong foundation, and a unified force.
It takes a lot of time for these pieces to connect because first of all, they have to find like minded connections that have a similar magnetic pull. Now if we are talking about a standard flat table puzzle, the mainframe is usually the first part that connects. As soon as those connections are made, everyone on the inside is going to run towards the mainframe to see if they connect with it in any way. If they find that they cannot make a direct connection, they are now wandering in a sea of pieces trying to find a like piece that coincides with their piece.
The only way to organize this chaos is for those with mainframe pieces to come together and lead those without. The mainframe pieces have to initiate contact by seeking pieces with an essential constituent part that relates well to each main frame piece. Again, the relating would be the “connective tissue” so to speak, that connects each part to each other, and helps each person with that part connect.
It’s all about relationships, interconnecting; and the only way for that to happen is to find something relatable, because we all have something in common, no matter who we are or where we are from. We all have a piece of the puzzle, even if we don’t directly connect to each other, or are on opposing sides of the puzzle. Therefore, we can all learn from each other via our overall connectedness.
Certainly, at the most basic level, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is something everyone has in common, but perhaps is prioritized differently according to variations in environment and values. That priority of value will skew our individual perspectives, so that although we may have mastered a mainframe concept that fits in the big picture, it will certainly not flow or connect with all the other pieces because of where we are in the puzzle.
It is our values that set us apart, and move us together or away from each other. This is what strains the connection chain, because we judge each other based on our values yet we are all essentially the same. What we truly value becomes evident under the most dire of circumstances, when all the distractions and pretenses are gone, and life gets excruciatingly real.
The puzzle designer knows this well, because he created the entire picture and each piece in it. No pieces are of different size or value. All are the same, they just have different functions in the picture and different types of connection points. Once the first few connections happen in sections of the mainframe, the puzzle often takes on a life of its own, with certain quadrants developing faster than others and spreading out into other quadrants, helping them to get connected.
Yet, the further the connections move from the mainframe, the more their connections become diluted; their pieces don’t follow the same colors or patterns initiated in the mainframe. They branch off into new segments of color or concept within the overall framework of what the puzzle represents. Some areas have lighter hues and some have darker, the proverbial yin and yang of the puzzle, yet all parts are a necessity of the whole.
Some of the concepts in the individual images don’t mesh from one side to the other, yet as a whole, it is a complete picture. By the time this puzzle is completed, there will be comparatively, a handful of pieces that have a direct or indirect connection to the mainframe, and the vast majority will have absolutely no connection at all.
But what is the binding force? It is the relationships. That is the glue that holds the entire puzzle together because that is what binds all the pieces/parties together into one image of connection, a complete picture. All pieces have a part of the whole, and not one piece, in and of itself, can complete the picture. It requires pieces from all sections to complete the picture.
Again, I reiterate that there is a foundation, and that foundation provides the framework of what is supposed to be. It is then, the authority that guides the assembling of the completed whole, but it is not without connections to sections and pieces that, separately, may have a different scope and perspective of what the picture is that represents the completed puzzle.
If one were to evaluate the puzzle by use of a graph; viewing it either from a horizontal or vertical perspective; from top to bottom, or from side to side, one could say that there were several levels, due to piece placement, to the puzzle itself.
Does the puzzle get put together from top to bottom first? Or do we start from one side? Does the framework get pieced together first, and then we work on one corner in a diagonal direction? Or, do we try to find each row and column that fits the framework, and work row by row until we end up at the furthest inside point at completion?
Just as there are many ways to construct the puzzle, there are many perceptions as to how the entire picture is supposed to look, and what the end result will be? Thus, there are many levels of understanding to interact with in the construction of the big picture. However, all of these “levels” are part of the picture, just as much as the light and dark, yin and yang; opposite sections of the puzzle still all fit somewhere as part of the big picture.
They may not agree, as in, their connection points may not match and be a perfect fit, but all are included, and they are still connected indirectly via the other pieces that lie between them. The difference lies in the individual journey to their connection within the big picture. Even if their perspective, role and function is different than another piece in the big picture, they are all still part of the whole, and they still have the same value in the big picture.
This concept reminds me of that kid’s cartoon my son’s into, Sonic the Hedgehog, and the 7 scattered gems power that he has to find. Each gem has a part of the secret and a part of the power, but one of them is the authority over all, and governs all, and is the main source of the power. All are unified under the authority of the one.
I hope I’m being clear, and I hope you are following me on this and at least some have understood my point. The 5k I chose in the puzzle analogy was random. However, the 196 was not. That number represents the number of countries there are in the world today.
So now, view the puzzle pieces as individuals with concepts and ideologies from each culture. Each of these cultures has their own concepts of the mind-spirit-body connection as well as their own concepts of connection to their surroundings, whether nature or the earth or the “universe.”
There is a framework that was established long ago, but many have strayed away and many are just unaware. There are too many other things in the culture to distract. Some have just forgotten, and some have never heard of it. Yet, there are some that are in tune to that part of the puzzle that has the potential to connect or lead them, directly or indirectly to the foundation; that connects them to the whole, the mainframe concept, and thus, to the creator of that concept.
Some are seeking it. Some don’t want to believe that there is a puzzle maker who created the big puzzle and can guide them in connecting to the whole. They choose to believe that all the individual pieces formed themselves without a guiding force and source of direction that would form and color them to fit into the whole big picture.
Some believe that they can access the completed picture without the framework. They’ve grasped a few of the concepts that are relative to the framework, but they want to operate them without the frame, and this leaves an incomplete picture, thereby creating a corrupted image due to the lack of cohesion.
If, in your perceptions, you fail to see the connectedness of all of us, then this negative perspective will permeate everything in your life, leaving more puzzles without answers, like questions on the reasons you are experiencing pain. Lack of emotional connection is an element of pain on a spiritual, soul and body level. Your world is incomplete without those magnetic connections; the key is to be authentic to who you are, so that your magnet draws like-minded people to you, and enables those connections.
Right now, if we looked at the world in this manner, and people as a whole, there are groups and pieces just floating in the middle with no connection to the mainframe at all, as well as a lot of individual pieces that are seemingly islands unto themselves. Yet, they are still a part of the whole, we are still all connected, whether we agree on concepts or not.
The connections may not be directly relevant or relative, and yet all the pieces are the beloved creation of the puzzle maker. Hopefully, we can all improve our connectors and connections by considering others more.