To the theory of existence of the Universe, main paradox

Assume the color black is the qualitative equivalent of a null or Ø. Just as the quantitative value of Ø is equivalent to two opposing numbers (+1) + (-1), the qualitative value of BLACK is equivalent to three opposing colors MAGENTA + CYAN + YELLOW. All of the opposing sub-elements must be present in precisely equal proportion in order to reciprocally balance each other and maintain a null value.

Consider for a moment that possibly nothing DOES exist - and everything is made of it.

This is actually Newton's law taken a step further.
Instead of every action having an equal and opposite reaction
For every value there exists an equal and opposite value

Even equations require their elements to be equal on opposite sides of the argument. It is the very BASIS of logic.

THoR

Matter is the structure of space.

The existence of Universe isn't so problematic, as it appears. While we have no explanation for the formation of Universe from virtually nothing, we have no apparent limitation for the number of dimensions inside of our Universe. This is the infinity, which is not apparently constrained by any causual mean and it can explain the apparently infinite mass and energy density of Universe. For example, every easy and harmonic motion appears wild and chaotic, when projected from sufficient number of dimensions to our 3D space.

When somebody will ask for the reason of infinite dimensions, we can always answer: Why not? Why should be the number of dimensions constrained? If single meaningful parameter describing our Universe can be infinite without problem, I believe, the "causual" explanation of the rest wouldn't be so big problem for our clever math formalists...

This post has been edited by Zephir on Apr 29 2007, 09:57 AM

Ideas already for a long time have appeared:
Effect of engineer Jarkovskogo (1844-1902)
http://vivovoco.rsl.ru/VV/JOURNAL/NATURE/11_04/EFFECT.HTM

..."If the ether is material gas as though it was elastic and thin, nevertheless it should show known resistance to movement <…>. Meanwhile, one of the exact sciences, astronomy, proves to us incontestably, that similar delay in movement of heavenly bodies is not noticed at all ” [1, с.249]....

WHEN EINSTEIN WAS ASKED ABOUT GOD HE SAID: THERE HAS GOT TO BE SOMETHING BEHIND ALL THAT ENERGY.

MITCH RAEMSCH -- LIGHT FELL --

a problem of creation and CREATOR (GOD) do not exists
universe is a-temporal
see more

http://blog.hasslberger.com/2007/05/atempo...ravitation.html

This post has been edited by amrit on May 15 2007, 12:34 PM

hey good point there buddy....."why not?"

but hey Zeph, when one is trying to imagine the physical structure of these dimensions---how would one do this?

tell me where im going wrong here...i have different ways of thinking of these parallel universes....

first way is size.....size and distance.....ant and dinosaur you know?

the second way is..... like radio waves?

but i dont understand how matter can be of different frequencies in the same point, but totally undetectable? or ARE they detectable?

If we could detect their structure, what are some theories on what it may look like or be?

The physical interpretation is always the hard nut of every theory. After all, this is why we have many brilliant theories, like the relativity and quantum mechanics, but because the consistent physical interpretation of these theories is still missing, these theories are mutually incompatible in wide range of parameters. This is the moment, where the AWT can take place and when it can reconcile all the existing theories by Newtonian dynamics of multi-particle system.

Well, and the very same situation repeats at the moment, we'll try to extrapolate the AWT further. It's evident, the AWT leads to the infinitely dense and energetic Aether, which makes trouble from causal point of view. We simply cannot imagine any meaningful process, which would be able to create all these recursive structures of black holes inside of another black hole from scratch by Newtonian dynamics, just God.

The concept of projection of Universe through nested dimensions can explain partially all these myriads of particles. Such concept simply says, we are simply observing the Universe as being composed from many fast moving particles, because the Aether is inhomogeneous like etched or bumpy glass, or foam. Any object behind such foam becomes fragmented into many tiny images, like by observing a source of light through diamond cut. And every subtle motion of such source will result in wild sparkling of the decomposed image, therefore the very same model is able to explain both the number of particles, both their energy. You can found some reminiscences of this model in Bohm's-Pribram's/Aspect's holographic model of reality. So we can see, the Aether model AWT just reconciles the existing principles with Newtonian dynamics, again. Such conceptual agreement can serve us as a clue, the proposed explanation is correct, it reflects the reality properly. Because at the moment, some concept cannot be reconciled with other concepts, which are describing the reality properly (at least from some perspective or narrow range of parameters), we are facing the violation of the correspondence principle problem.



By another words, the inhomogeneous particle structure of Aether can create the illusion of inhomogeneous particle structure of Universe by itself - well, at least up to certain level. Because just a few inhomogeneities can create many images by multiplications. After all, this is why the soap foam appear white, not transparent, despite of being formed by transparent water.

From the above follows, the physical interpretation of dimensions by AWT is very simple. The dimension is the direction, in fact, in which some matter/energy can move independently, while not changing its energy content with respect of another directions/dimensions. For example, by moving of some objects along water surface the potential energy doesn't changes, until the object dips bellow or above surface. We can see, the dimensions is serves here as a directional constraint of motion. And because the water surface is formed just by density gradient of some matter, the dimensions are just the density gradients of Aether. The same gradients, which can decompose the image of reality into many particles. So we can see, from certain perspective, the dimensions can create itself, everything else is just an illusion of reality.

Of course, such model has still many causal problems, but it's the first attempt to generalize the AWT outside of energy and matter concepts and Newtonian dynamics constrains. We even don't know, whether such explanation allows to avoid all the energy/matter, which can be seen in the Universe, or just a part of it, if any.

This post has been edited by Zephir on May 19 2007, 09:48 PM

By my opinion, the AWT is not very opened to the abstract concept of two or more parallel Universe at the same place, living inside of independent slices of reality, as described in the Greene's books. The parallel Universe of string/M-theory appears to be the same illusion, like the Everetts concept of many universes. If nothing else, such view is dualistic to the monoteistic Universe: if we admit the existence of more Universes, we should consider the possibility of infinite number of Universes - this corresponds the concept of infinite path integrals of Feynman. At this moment we see, the parallel Universe concept is just a formalism, which follows from the existence of many inertial particles inside of our Universe, so we can consider the nearly infinite number of mutual interactions between them. But if we will consider the Universe as a giant fermion, the existence of many parallel Universe violates the Pauli's exclusion principle.



If you'll consider the Universe as a boson, such interpretation is possible, but you should always consider some universal environment for both Universes, they will not never fully independent, but connected via common mass/energy density. For example, if we try to imagine the current Universe generation as some black hole, siting in another Universe, it's rather difficult to imagine both such black holes at the same place. You can imagine a pair of merging black holes which will undulate like the quantum waves of hybridized particles, but they will always mutually influent each of other - they're behaving rather like the entangled components of the single Universe, not the truly independent parallel Universes.

This post has been edited by Zephir on May 19 2007, 11:37 PM

How the Big Bang has appeared - it was brane collision of merging of droplets?

As you probably know, by AWT the Universe is formed by black hole, sitting inside of another more dense one. As the density of Universe increases, it becomes smaller and more close the classical physical singularity, i.e. the black hole concept.



While by string theory the Universe has been created by brane collision, which is pretty close to the mutual collisions of Aether fluctuations, inside of Aether foam. We can imagine, whenever such density fluctuations will intersect, they will initiate the formation of new density gradients in this place, because of locally increased Aether density.

Conceptually both these models are quite similar, but they're dualistic/supersymmetric as well from certain perspective: the AWT models assumes the infinite initial curvature of Universe (tiny droplet fusion), while the string theory concept is based on the idea of intersection of subtle and flat foamy density fluctuations (i.e. the "branes").

The true can be somewhere in between, if we imagine the fusion of Klein bottle surfaces, where the subtle density fluctuations are forming the surface of this manifold at the same moment. By another words, here's a way, how to describe the condensation of Universe both from outside, both from inside perspective at the same time and to unify the duality concept of physics into single one by such way.

Conceptually such model corresponds the black hole formation inside of our Universe (see the animation on the right). The shape of dark matter foamy fluctuations can be considered as a result of intersecting spheres (droplet merging with positive curvature), both the intersection of subtle foamy fluctuations with negative curvature at the same time. If we consider, the current generation of Universe is formed by black hole too, it's quite probable, the Big Bang has occured by the very same way, like the formation of black holes inside of our Universe.

If something appears similar, it often means, it's the very same artifact, just being observed from different (space and/or time) perspective. Well, a sort of reincarnation, just on the Universe level...

This post has been edited by Zephir on May 20 2007, 12:27 AM

ok....so where is the real stuff going on?

size doesnt matter?

i dont quite get it?

things are infinitely small and the bubbles make them look big? are we in the bubble? why?

i dont get it Zeph....can you speak metaphorically...

amigo

Zeph, Ok, ive been trying to understand.....AWT

so the universe is a big structure of aether....and energy is....

what amigo?

let me see if you guys like this link...

it says

" As laboratory research documents the behavior of plasma.........
In these cases, popular speculations based on pure mathematics are no longer useful."

speculations based on pure mathematics are no longer useful....


what do you guys think?

The energy can be somewhat virtual quantity. If we observe a slowly rolling button inside of kaleidoscope, we can observe many dazzling particles moving wildly. The inhomogeneities of Aether are creating an illusion of fast motion of many small particles, which we are calling the energy. The reflection and refraction effects can multiplicate the path of energy spreading substantially, while creating an illusion of space and time for us.

Why not, if they're handled as a speculations. It can be even quite inspiring sometimes. We can consider the mathematic as a sort of consecutive logic, while the Nature alternates the consecutive determinism of surface waves with the parallel chaos of many particles. While the intuition was necessary for development of many theories, it was usually replaced by formal approach, until it the conceptual limits of theory was reached. The theoretical physics is facing infinities during development of many theories - this is a signature of the need of new intuitive approach.

This post has been edited by Zephir on May 22 2007, 06:35 PM

This is how the big bang happened.
See "Relativity, New Theories etc / The Reality of Negative Matter"