In a class I took earlier this summer, I learned a thing or two about possible worlds as they relate to literary theory. Being new to literary theory, I am really glad I picked possible worlds theory on which to do my presentation. Most literary theory makes me gag with its disgusting pretentions, but possible worlds theory (along with the more gentle forms of theory, like narratology) seem to be more direct products of literature, and less about critical readers forcing their thoughts into the mix.
Possible worlds theory basically suggests that works of literature act as pnaws (possible non-actualizable worlds). Theorists view works of fiction as constructs of our actual world, which, of course, they are. However, some theorists (such as Umberto Eco with theater and Mihai Spariosu with literature) discusses the ways in which fictional constructs can work backward from a pnaw to influence the actual world. For example, a writer tells the tale of some poor character who suffers greatly the injustices of a fictional world. In our actual world, readers come to recognize these injustices, and begin looking for ways to prevent them in the actual world. In this way, authors can and do shape the future of the world by actualizing possible future worlds that might not have been actualized otherwise.
Well, naturally, the same could be true of blogs. If people didn't blog, then the readers of those blogs might not have the significant effect on the world that they do. In the process, they are actualizing possible future blogospheres. In every instant, only one blogosphere can be actualized from the infinite possibilities, and right now, you are experiencing one unique blogosphere taking shape. And again right now. And again right now... ad infinitum et nauseum.
Alright, so the last part about possible blogospheres was semi-sarcastic, but the rest of the post about being really stoked about possible worlds theory... yo, that shit has already been way actualized, biatch!!!