A Rational Cosmology: What the Universe is and is Not

Essay V

This is Essay V of Mr. Stolyarov's series, "A Rational Cosmology," which seeks to present objective, absolute, rationally grounded views of terms such as universe, matter, volume, space, time, motion, sound, light, forces, fields, and even the higher-order concepts of life, consciousness, and volition. See the index of all the essays in "A Rational Cosmology" here.

From its ancient Greek roots, the word "cosmology" means, "study of the universe." This is an extremely broad and fundamental designation, as cosmology is, indeed, extremely broad and fundamental, too broad and fundamental, for that matter, to be categorized as a mere branch of physics. Yet what is meant by this term, "cosmos," or "universe"? What is it exactly that cosmology studies?

"Universe" means "everything that exists."

The word "universe" derives from the Latin universum, meaning "the whole world," that is, "everything." The term "universe" does not denote an entity, however. It is the sum of all entities that exist. It is not a "whole" in the sense that a person, a planet, or a star is a "whole."

As a matter of fact, it would be absurd to state that Chicago, Quasimodo, a telescope, and a hippopotamus compose some inextricably whole entity. It follows that it would be even more absurd to state that Chicago, Quasimodo, a telescope, a hippopotamus, and everything else compose some inextricably whole entity. Nevertheless, it seems that, the more absurd a notion is, the greater credibility it has in the eyes of certain contemporary empiricist-positivist cosmologists, who constantly refer to the universe as if it were some totality acting in unison.

Nor is the universe a quality. I cannot have "universe" in the same manner as I have color, or shape, or mass. Nevertheless, the term "universe" pertains to me as it pertains to everything else that exists. It encompasses me and everything else that exists.