If Love is defined as a physical phenom,
what’s then its number, we wonder, in physics?
An electrical loss from a long lost electron?
Is it mapped to the genes in genetics?
After guessing and going over the question,
did we notice how much love’s kinetic?
Oh Man! You map-maker, go make for Yourself
a perfection of love without all its woes.
Then please explain to each, the wealth
of the love that is found when it snows!
There are some things science just cannot know.
When science can’t give us all of the answers,
Psychology may know where it’s at.
Empirical data depends on the sensors,
a soft science doesn’t deal with all that.
If Love be then from the mental gym,
where attraction reaction’s by types
of people all packaged and in their thin skin,
it still will not tell why Love bites.
It would seem, that indeed, love is abstract.
perhaps it’s because it’s universal,
not tied to a physics, but still a fact,
part and parcel, yet still metaphysical.
Say a metaphysical should fall in a forrest,
within the margins of error, of course,
when it does hit the ground, it’s down, but not out;
a universal’s reversal still has such doubt.
It may never be known what a love’s all about.
(revised 16 December 2011)
Copyright © 2011 Marvin Loyd Welborn. All Rights Reserved.
‘If Love is defined as a physical phenom,
What’s it’s number in physics?’
Very good. That is the question.