The world of internet dating requires that you expose yourself to a lot of potential matches. That is its beauty as well as its curse, because one thing that becomes apparent very quickly is that we match some people’s energy field better than others. With some people you feel a spark and with others you don’t, and it’s hard to put a finger on what makes that happen or not. The spark has become something of a fascination for me.
I know that my physical body has particular likes and dislikes. There is a certain look that sets me all aflutter. Sometimes another woman will look at a man who I think is handsome and say, “Not at all,” so I know that my particular likes are very subjective. Subjective to what?
Some think that our biological programming for self-preservation makes us search for mates who are genetically similar to us. The shape of our mate often matches the shapes of our relatives.
Others believe that women are looking for mates outside their gene pool because this will produce healthier offspring. For example, it has been shown that women prefer a man’s smell that is not like their own. The assumption is that she chooses a different smell as a way of selecting genetic diversity.
For whatever reason, most of us have a physical “type” that we are attracted to. When we see it we feel a spark.
But we are more than just a physical body. We also have an energetic body that extends from us and becomes activated when other people are around. When we find an energy body that we really like, we feel ours respond. When we find one we don’t like, we are repelled.
Any discussion of the energy field that surrounds us is very subjective because we can’t actually prove that such a thing exists. Most of us know through personal experience that it exists, but it can’t be duplicated or tested with the scientific method. Therefore our personal energy field is a subjective force, some have even called it a cognitive force, and that’s a difficult realm for science to explore.
Whether our energy field is “good” or “bad”, positive or negative, really depends on who is looking at it. What one person finds to be good another might find to be bad. There is nothing about my personal energy or anyone else’s that is definitive. Everything depends on the perspective from which it is viewed. If this explanation resembles the perception puzzle of quantum physics, it is no surprise, is it? The closer we get to the truth, the more we realize how subjective the truth is.
Personal energy is a subjective force, but that doesn’t mean that none of our objective principles apply to it. I think the principles of electromagnetism apply to it very well. Thinking about my personal energy and your personal energy as real forces that we simply don’t know how to measure yet helps me understand why we behave the way we do.
The “spark” that we get when we meet someone with the right body, or the right mind, or the right attitude is our recognition of energy compatibility. What I mean by energy compatibility in the physical sense is that the positives and negatives match up, the harmonics of the waves are in synch, and the frequency is at the same pitch. When waves of energy are in harmony they converge and become stronger. When the waves are not in harmony they become destructive. It is very much like electromagnetism.
When I am sitting across the table from someone and trying to get to know them on a date, I’m not thinking about the electromagnetic experience we are having, but I sure am feeling it. The difference between someone I “click” with and someone I don’t is quite noticeable and it may depend on whether our energy fields are compatible.
In physics an energy field, or electric field, is naturally created around electrically charged particles and this field can exert a force on other electrically charged objects. Since I know that I am composed of billions of electrically charged particles in my cellular makeup, it must be that I also create an electrical field around my particles. I produce my own energy but I am also influenced by my interactions with other people and their energy fields.
I have an image in my mind of what the energy body might look like. I don’t think it is one ball of energy, but countless balls of energy that are held together in what appears to be a single mass. Each ball interacts with the others to create a cohesive energetic shape. Each of those balls holds a particular kind of energy (be it emotional, physical, mental) and carries with it a charge that varies throughout time. Our energy body is quite dynamic and the charges can change. Whether that charge is electrical or magnetic is somewhat unimportant.
Electricity and magnetism go hand and hand, so if I am an energy field I must also be a magnetic field. A simple explanation of Maxwell’s theory of electricity is that if you have an electrical field you will also have a magnetic field, and vice versa. Einstein took it further in his theory of special relativity and stated that a magnetic field and an electric field are just two perspectives of the same thing. What appears to one observer to be an electric phenomena may appear to another observer to be a magnetic phenomena. Special relativity blends electricity and magnetism into a single, inseparable phenomena called electromagnetism. So, we can talk about electrical fields or magnetic fields, but we are basically talking about the same thing.
As far as we know, every object is affected by the presence of a magnetic field, but some materials react more strongly than others. Humans, therefore, are not immune to the presence of someone else’s magnetic field but we would expect to react more strongly with some than others.
The magnetism of an object depends upon its electron configuration. In most cases, electrons want to pair with electrons of opposite charge so that their net magnetism is zero. Electrons are somewhat unstable when they are alone and they like to pair up, just like humans.
What usually happens in the physical world is that a solitary electron will either pair up with another electron of opposite polarity or it will move into a shell of lower energy electrons where it will have a net zero magnetic effect. Now doesn’t that sound just like life to you? We either pair up with a mate or move into a shell of friends where our energy doesn’t upset the balance.
Paired electrons are required to have magnetic signatures pointing in the opposite direction (be bipolar) so that their combined magnetic field is cancelled out or neutralized. When we succesfully pair up with a mate we no longer broadcast an attractive force. We have become balanced as a pair.
An unpaired electron, on the other hand, is free to align itself in any direction.
When two materials come into contact and one of them has a strong magnetic signature, the other will align itself in opposite polarity so that the net magnetic effect is zero. This is how electromagnetic energy is balanced in the physical world. Opposites attract to create a net energy balance. I think it must be very similar in the subjective or cognitive world.
Just like our electrons, we long to be in balance and, like electrons, we sometimes leap in order to bond. The spark felt when we meet someone we really like is the equivalent of a billion electrons achieving balance at once. That is magnetism. It is the attraction factor which draws two particles together or sends them apart. Once the attraction factor is established the process becomes more electrical in nature, but initially it is a magnetic response. If we apply this to our lives we can see why we need to be attracted to someone to get a relationship started. We know the stuff that comes later is more important, but we need the initial magnetism and the electrical dynamics to get things started if we are to live in a future state of net zero.
In the physical world as we know it, magnetism is always expressed as a positive and a negative – a dipole. Even if you cut a magnet in half, you still get a dipole. There is no evidence in the physical world as we know it for a monopole – something that has only one pole. Quantum theory says monopoles should exist, but we haven’t found any evidence of them yet. The grand unification theory and the superstring theory both support the possibility of monopoles.
A monopole is therefore a theoretical particle that carries a single magnetic charge, much in the same way that a particle carries an electric charge. You can imagine how puzzling it is for physicists who can’t understand why we don’t see monopoles in the physical world when the mathematics seem so solid. Did Maxwell and Einstein have it wrong by saying that electricity and magnetism are two perspectives of the same thing? If an electrical particle can have a singular charge, why can’t a magnetic particle? And why don’t we see any evidence of it in the physical world?
What would a monopole act like? Theoretically, the mutual attraction of a north and south monopole would initially draw the particles close together. But once they got close to each other they would no longer have an attraction for each other.
That sounds very much like some of the doomed romances that people get into. The immediate attraction is quite strong, but the closer we get the weaker the attraction becomes. It makes me wonder if the elusive monopole might be within our personal energy field.
Maybe some of the packets of energy that make up our personal energy behave like monopoles. If we create a personal energy field which is based on our thoughts, emotions, and memories, and if that field is composed of discrete packets of energy that represent something specific and carry a specific charge, then maybe some of those packets or balls of energy have a single magnetic charge instead of a paired charge. Maybe the reason why we don’t see monopoles in the physical world is because they only exist in the subjective or cognitive world.
I don’t know how to tell if someone has the right energetic configuration for me except by how I feel. I am not able to see the energetic field of another person, and even if I could I would also have to be able to see my own energy field to figure out if we are a match. I know some people say they can see other people’s auras, which is a representation of our energy field, but I wonder if anyone can see their own? I suspect it is quite difficult, maybe even impossible, to view our own energy field.
I can’t see the energy lines of the earth’s magnetic field either, but there are several animals that apparently can. Pigeons, for example, have magnetite in their beak that helps them line up the magnetic pathway back home. They may also have magnetic receptors in their retinas which allows them to actually see the magnetic field lines with their eyes. There are some bacteria that line up and move along magnetic field lines. Sharks have receptors around their mouth and nose that are very sensitive to electrical changes.
If electromagnetic principles are consistent throughout the universe, then it stands to reason that they are consistent in us as well. If animals are using magnetism, we are probably doing it too but are simply not aware of it. We think our choices are in response to triggers like memories, feelings, intuition, or intellect. Those things certainly exist, but when you peel back the layers they all end up being an electromagnetic force.
The biggest breakthrough in science of this century will be the realization that our thoughts and emotions create an energy field that follows the same rules and principles of the physical world. However, it is not the same world. The cognitive world is a place all its own, a dimension that has not been explored by science. Within this dimensional world we very well may find the elusive monopole buried deep in the physics of our thought, emotions and instinct.
Now that I have that all figured out, I think I will put it out of my head for a while and simply enjoy the experience of meeting someone who creates a spark in me. I hope it is a simple spark I feel and not a monopole spark because monopole sparks don’t seem to lead to stability, but only time will tell.