April '24
Social media, gravitational collapse, and dating apps
7.3.89 (SILS MARIA) by Gerhard Richter
Social Media (and self control)
Social media is as polarizing as politics these days. At the root of which, there are two extreme responses.
There are those whom entire life revolves around their online profile (as well as the profile of others). These are the stereotypical strawmen for the argument against social media and its dictates. These people are hooked. Addicted. Death scrollers and influencers alike. Locked in a tight spiral between crafting an image of themselves that is both genuinely their own as well as fashionably self conscious — an attempt at making your perceived life more glamorous.
Then there are those whom reject social media entirely. They look upon the aforementioned society with disdain. Rejecting the affluence of social media in our modern Gilded Age and villainizing it entirely. Deleting all social media and taking to the streets to proclaim how much better their life has become as a result.
Now I ask, whom is right? And this is where I’d like to make the “moderate” argument (which honestly sounds like a cop out now that I say it aloud).
For years, I’ve fallen into the camp of “social media is the bane of human existence” and this was rooted in my own relationship with said technology (and the lack of willpower thereof). But as I’ve gotten older, and attained a greater degree of self-control, I find myself swaying back towards a more moderate stance.
Consider this. If you can’t spend five minutes on Instagram checking life updates from friends — without it turning into 2 hours of doom scrolling — is that a fault of social media? Or your own?
It’s like the old saying goes, everything in moderation. If you don’t have the willpower to limit your social media time, then sure, deleting it entirely is the logical next step. But don’t disdain others for it. That’s throwing stones while living in a glass house.
Gravitational Collapse
Gravitational collapse is known as “the contraction of an astronomical object due to the influence of its own gravity, which tends to draw matter inward toward the center of gravity” [1]. In other words, gravitational collapse occurs when an object in space grows too large and the force of its own gravity causes it to collapse in on itself.
What’s really interesting about this astronomical process, is that gravitational collapse is the fundamental mechanism for structure formation in the universe. Both the creation of stars and black holes follow this process (just in reverse order).
Consider the creation of a new star. Clouds of gas that exist throughout the universe will remain in equilibrium as long as the kinetic energy from the gas’s pressure remains in balance with the potential energy of its gravitational force [2]. However, when a cloud of gas grows too large and does not retain enough gas pressure to refute the internal force of its increasing gravity, it will collapse in on itself to form a new star (which is nothing more than a denser form of this collection of gas).
The photograph above was taken by the Hubble Space Telescope in 1920 and consists of dense clouds of interstellar gas which are in the process of creating new stars (which is why they are so aptly referred to as the Pillars of Creation).
Now consider the process in reverse. When a star reaches end of life, and has burned through its internal kinetic energy, it will follow a similar process (and collapse in on itself). However, the result is very different:
We can see outlined above that average sized stars collapse into “white dwarfs” and massive stars collapse to either “neutron stars” or black holes. Whether a massive star becomes a neutron star or black hole after gravitational collapse depends on its size. According to the Tolman–Oppenheimer–Volkoff limit, if a star is roughly double the mass of the Sun, no known form of cold matter can provide the force needed to oppose it’s gravitational contraction once started (which will continue unopposed until a black hole is formed) [3].
In short, gravitational collapse is responsible for the creation—and likewise demise—of our universe’s fundamental astronomy. And like most of things in nature, it comes down to a very simple relationship. In this case, gas pressure and gravity.
References
Dating Apps
Dating apps have a myriad of issues, one of which is the sheer multitude of options. When you see dozens, if not hundreds, of attractive men or women in the span of a couple hours of swiping, it becomes difficult to commit. Likewise, when you match with someone, whether the conversation is proceeding apace or begins to fizzle out, there’s nothing stopping you from chatting it up with some other cutie a swipe and two taps away.
Now, this isn’t a hit piece on dating apps (enough has been said on that topic already). Instead, let’s brainstorm a better alternative. Consider the problem just described:
Too many options
No reason to commit
How can this be solved outside of physically approaching someone in the real world and asking them on a date? (lol, who even does this anymore :p)
Picture this. A new dating app that appears on the surface to be just like any other. You make a profile with pictures and a modicum of self interests, and swipe left and right until you find someone who catches your eye. Now, this is where the key difference is going to be. Instead of “liking” or “matching” with this person — you are responsible for proposing a date. There is a pop up box where you select a coffee shop, restaurant, etc and enter a date and time. Maybe you even include a little message “Hey X — looking forward to meeting you!” From here, your proposal gets reviewed by the opposing party. They can either accept or reject. If they accept, you now have a date on the calendar. No small talk. No ghosting. No bullshit. You show up on the day and time and meet for a (hopefully) pleasant encounter. Now, that’s not to say your date will actually show up. (I’ve actually had this happen by the way, met someone at a coffee shop and we exchanged numbers and were supposed to meet for a beer after work and she never showed.) That said, this predicament could be solved using a “feedback mechanism”. At the end of every date, you and your partner must each leave feedback that includes whether they showed up, whether their profile was accurate, etc etc. This data would ultimately feed back into your “dating score” which is visible on your profile and can be used by potential partners to gauge your authenticity.
This was just something I was kicking around a while back with some buddies over a few beers. In the event that some executive over at Tinder or Hinge reads this and creates a new dating app — you’ve been warned. Let the record state that this idea is my intellectual property :D
Some Literature
I'm an anywhere-but-here-bound highway
You're a 'round-here long gravel driveway
But, oh, you know, if I had it my way
The hometown girl in your heart
Would get to gettin' gone
- Bailey Zimmerman (Get to Gettin' Gone)Thanks for reading my Substack! Feel free to share if you’d like. And don’t pledge me any money. Seriously. I just appreciate your time.