..a
glass of water. But after a few kilometres of uphill a rest was definitely called
for so we glided in with all the grace of our combined one hundred and thirty-two
years could muster. Which was limited.
So there we sat outside on the sunny veranda, two OMILs (Old Men In Lycra),
Doug with his latte and vanilla slice and I with a black coffee and a hungry
expression chatting about the ephemera of life. A venerable utility pulled up
below us on the slope and a slightly less venerable gentleman got out and then
almost immediately shouted in horror as his car started to roll down the slope
towards a parked BMW. With a convincing appearance of speed Doug and I skated
down the steps on our low traction riding shoes and, with a mighty effort, managed
to restrain the run-away Datsun without giving ourselves a hernia. It was touch
and go for a moment but eventually, after much thanks and self-congratulation
handbrakes were secured, cars confirmed undamaged, thanks given all round and
life went back to normal.
Whereupon I asked the question ‘What if we hadn’t decided to stop
for a coffee?’ Would the Ute still have run down the hill but, this time
unrestrained, hit the BMW? Was the driver destined to forget the handbrake whether
we were on the veranda deck or not, or had our being there somehow influenced
events so that only if we were there would the handbrake be forgotten. We pooled
our collective intelligence for a moment and said almost as one, ‘Don’t
know’. We could have said ‘Dunno’ but didn’t. Anyway
because of our presence the world was less complicated, nobody rang insurance
assessors, wondered how they would do without transport in the school holidays
or gave work to a telephone operator in the Philippines - who now has no job
because call volumes weren’t great enough on that day: the universe went
on less troubled towards an inevitable heat death sometime in the far, far,
far distant future.
Subscribers to the theory multiple universes will say that that in their model
both events happened, each leading to different galactic states some of which
diverge for ever and others that converge back together, perhaps under the gravitational
weight of history or amateur speculation. Some things make a difference and
others don’t – at the time you probably don’t know unless,
like John Wilkes Booth’s shooting of President Lincoln, it is of blatantly
obvious significance. But the existence and potential nature of John Wilkes
Booth was based on the coming together of two particular gametes from British
Shakespearean actor Junius Brutus Booth and his mistress Mary Ann Holmes sometime
in Maryland around August 1837 - just one of many thousands of alternatives
that may have been different had Mary Ann been standing on her head, facing
east or thinking of England.
But all this is remarkably human-centric hypothesis, a metaphorical extension
or interpretation of quantum mechanics that asserts the objective reality of
the universal wavefunction and denies the actuality of wavefunction collapse.
Does it apply at the aggregated level of human beings? Who am I to know? Given
that it should apply to all energetic matter, not just homo sapiens, the cascading
number of possible universes would tend towards infinity.
Given that the fact that the existence of neutron stars is denied by the fact
that if a cupful of a neutron star weighs around 200,000,000,000,000 kilos then
I would have dropped it on my foot then somebody surely would have obviously
noticed a very large number of alternative realities that weren’t Canberra.
But my own collapsing wavefront, the desire to cycle faster and my slightly
excessive weight has led me to the work of Dr Michael Mosley and the so called
Fast Diet. The Fast Diet means that for two days of the week, preferably non-consecutive,
I eat no more than 580 calories. Which is not much and the omnipresent hunger
is interesting but more a psychological than a physical issue. Now I am normally
scornful of both diets and dieting but am prepared to give this one a go –
despite its current popularity and hype. Normally when something appears on
an America Breakfast TV one normally runs for cover and not just because of
the unintended irony. It is meant to be good for other elements of health such
as elevated cholesterol but, as my doctor assures me that this and other tests
show that I am excellent health, this is not why I am doing this.
It has the endorsement of some other cycling friends who were as sceptical as
I about these matters but who have looked at the scientific evidence and the
positive results that it has had for them and given it the thumbs up. What’s
not to like about a regime that starves you two days a week and gives you free
rein every other day? We shall see, and I’ll keep you posted.
My intention is to lose about seven kilos which should see me around the 68
- 70 kilogram mark. For those still in Imperial measurement this is around eleven
stone and is apparently close to my ideal weight
The logic goes like this: my bike complete with tools, spare tubes and water
bottle weighs approximately 11 kilograms. The bike with a fully clad me on top
weighs 87 kilograms all of which have to be moved uphill against the force of
gravity and there is a lot of uphill where I live. I could spend thousands of
dollars on lighter equipment auto-claved in carbon fibre by toothless Inuit–Yupik
in distant Alaska and end up being much poorer but not significantly lighter
………… or I can reduce my own mass at pretty much zero
cost. How much easier to go up hills should that be?