Wednesday, May 28, 2008

My's full of stars!

Say what you will about leadership, wisdom, charisma, and character, you just aren't truly great unless you get something named after you. Preferably something big and important, and hopefully more than one something. Abraham Lincoln has a city; George Washington has a state; Christopher Columbus has a country; Amerigo Vespucci has two continents. All these pale, of course, in comparison to Princess Andromeda, who somehow managed to snag an entire galaxy.

Well, it should be pretty self-evident that Paul Burns is a greater human being than any of these people; and so it is with great pride that I announce today that the Multiverse has officially been renamed "Paul Burns."

The Multiverse is, of course, the set of every universe in existence, comprising the totality of all matter, antimatter, and energy, every dimension, all numbers real and imaginary, all planes of being, every quantum fluctuation, every aspect of space and time, every entity rational and otherwise, and, basically, everything that has or will ever exist or could ever exist in any way, without any exception whatsoever.

This is a very exciting step for the Burns campaign, and of course we want nothing else than to bask for a month in the light of its wonderful, wonderful glory. However, the sad truth is that even for an act as straightforward and sensible as naming the entirety of existence after a U.S. presidential candidate, there are naysayers. Below, we debunk a few of their arguments.

This is completely stupid.


Paul Burns doesn't deserve this.

Oh really? May I remind you that Hudson got a bay named after him, and he wasn't even from around there. When it comes to the Multiverse, Paul Burns is a native!

The entirety of existence shouldn't be named after a person.

Oh really? And what should we name it after? A word?

It'll be confusing. When we say "Paul Burns," how will we know whether we're talking about the presidential candidate, or the sum total of all conceivable realities?

You have to base it on context. For example: "Paul Burns has my vote for president in 2008." Clearly this refers to the human being. Sets of universes are not eligible for the presidency. "Paul Burns contains all matter that has ever existed, or could ever exist." This probably refers to the Multiverse, which also has the property mentioned. "Paul Burns is super awesome!" Here we have some ambiguity. You might respond with something like, "I agree, but out of curiosity, are we talking about the presidential candidate, or the indescribable conglomeration of an infinite number of infinities?"

How can you name something after something else that's already inside it?

Now you know.

If this is what we're calling the Multiverse now, then forget it. I'm leaving.

Oh? And where would you go? To some elaborately constructed hypothetical location carefully designed to lie outside of our arbitrarily defined framework for the Multiverse? Well, too bad for you that any such construction would by mere virtue of its hypothetical nature lie inside the confines of the Multiverse based solely on the inherent vagueness of its aforementioned, broadly inclusive definition! Ha! Ha ha! Ah, hahahahahahahahaha!!!


Be sure to tune in again tomorrow, when we'll discuss alternatives to the death penalty!

1 comment:

Amerigo Vespucci said...

Okay so basically guys I think this is kind of unfair