i will agree before i begin that this is a bit-too-much corny/cheesy/cringey to admit.
let’s replace the “speed” from Special Theory of Relativity (STR) with “happiness”. STR says there is a maximum possible speed in the universe. also known as “speed of light in vacuo is same for all observers”. what i propose here: “happiness is same for everyone”.
maybe it is my confirmation bias that i seem to fully agree with having a speed limit on the universe. it makes sense. the universe is finite (its expanding). the age is not infinite. the only thing infinite are the numbers. so the speed of things should also be finite.
it also makes sense that “there is a finite amount of happiness/sadness in a person’s life”. one can not be infinitely happy or infinitely sad in one’s lifetime. this is not an attempt to normalize the sadness in my own life. every one has problems. every one wants something. even the gods that came on earth wanted something. there can only be finite happiness in this world for everyone.
i would go so far as to say it seems natural. if speed of light in vacuum is same for everyone, then happiness is also same for everyone. i am not trying to draw an analogy between speed of light and happiness. i could try but reasoning for now is finiteness of one implies finiteness of some other quantity. i am taking this axiom ansatz: in an universe, either all observables or no observables are infinite. a corollary: if atleast one observable is finite, all observables are finite. finiteness of happiness comes out naturally since speed of light in vacuum is finite.
happiness in a life is finite because the lifetime is finite. a closed integration of a finite function is always finite. happiness at any time is always finite. contrary to a popular saying “i cannot be happier”.
only a rough sketch of how a proof of the above axiom is provided. in an universe, every observable must affect every other observable in some way. therefore, if any one observable is finite, then since it affects some other observable, the other observable too should be finite. in the context of happiness, one of the other observable could be “luck”. if you are infinitely lucky, you are infinitely happy. and if you are infinitely happy, you are infinitely lucky.
let’s focus on the “for all observers” part. this needs to be stressed just as equally as the first part. it means, everyone irrespective of all the properties observes the same amount of happiness. i admit this is where the integrity of the theory is most tested. it is very hard to prove. Michaelson and Morley did an year long (?) experiment and could not measure the effect of ether. note-to-self: design an experiment (if possible) to test this theory.
but for now, we can invoke the finiteness argument to show the “for all observers”. for any two distinct observers, their happiness must be related in some way and be a function of some observables. so since happiness is always finite, even if we apply infinitely many transformations, the happiness should always be finite naturally implies the happiness is in the all the transformations at the same time. this is a similar argument used in the STR.
lastly, i will try to draw an analogy between happiness and speed of light. the dimensions of speed is length / time. what is length in the happiness space and what is time? is it fair to say the time in happiness space is same time we are familiar with? length could be accumulation of the total happiness attained so far. this needs further investigation and will be dealt with in a future post.