5-Dimensional Universe by Vijay Mohan Gupta

Steve

Space does not physically exist would have been a better answer! Only physically existent phenomena exist.

Paul

Vijay

You do not need to meditate. This is science. We know of physical existence because we (and all sentient organisms) receive a component of it (aka light, noise, vibration, etc). Just the same as a brick wall does. That results from the interaction of two other components of physical reality, one of which we denote as the reality (which really means the physically existent state we are trying to discern) although all these phenomena are a reality (ie they physically exist). All this is independent of sensory detection. The sensory systems have just evolved to take advantage of this. Put the other way around, if you wiped out all sentient entities, then there would still be a physical reality, it would just be void of sentient organisms, until such time as they re-evolved.

Space is an attribute of physically existent phenomena. That is, all there is: stuff (technical word!), and we are stuff.

Paul

Interesting posts to both of you.

courses of meditations now Mr Gupta. :) have you seen in your contemplations , the beauties of this Universe, if yes, do you see also that we loose our contemplations.So how can be an universal mind and soul if we cannot contemplate all the creations.The earth is became a sad ecosystem where the interactions are chaotical.How can be the serenity of an universal soul when we see these sad realities around us.Have you listened the cries of children of Africa? if yes you have an interesting compassion.:) to be or not to be , that is the question after all , isn't it ?

Mr Reed, indeed you are right , my answer is short.Iam going to develop a little for you.let's begin with the BB.And its diffusing of light and matter and space. Imagine now that a pure sphere of light without rotation.Infinite in its pure universality.Now imagine a fractal of this sphere, with a specific serie.Finite furthermore.And so specific volumes.Now imagine a pure multiplication of this fractal without rotation giving a pure space in expansion.The rotations imply 1 the mass and its stability inside the universal sphere(indeed all this fractal and its fractals are inside this suniversal sphere)and 2 the hv and its linearity.The space, it, is WITHOUT ROTATION.So indeed you are right, it is not a physicality but in fact you are false because this space is inside this physicality.

So now, you can correlate with the pression, the volume, and the mass and the temperature.Indeed the density can imply a contraction after a critic mass.the expansion is just a step of our evolutive specific space time.The rotations so are the keys like the volumes of entangled spheres in their pure finite serie of Uniqueness(see the fractal cited above about the singularities !!!)

Hope it helps :)

don't hesitate to ask details .

Regards

Steve

I do not have the capability to question whether what you have said is correct or not. I operate at the generic level, which might look simple, but can be incisive. 'Wood for the trees' is the phrase. My point was simply that space does not physically exist. Physically existent phenomena do. Space is a conceptualisation of that, not an independent existent entity. Specifically, it is a conceptualisation of the relative shape/size of any given physically existent phenomenon (ie its spatial footprint), because we conceive of the 'occupation' of 'spatial points'. So there is intrinsic space (ie shape/size) and extrinsic space (ie difference between defined phenomena.

Now, it may be that there are two fundamental genres of physically existent phenomena, one of which is generically called 'space'. But, it comprises of 'something'. This is my point in general, we must start viewing physical existence in an ontologically correct way, ie that which corresponds with how reality occurs.

Paul

Vijay

An intriguing and very original view, which I agree has important consistencies with my own model as well as demonstrating that the most fundamental assumptions are not beyond question. Certainly naive in places, but the opposite to naive is often 'indoctrinated', and there is quite enough of that.

I must confess I did struggle to absorb some parts, and was concerned abut others. For instance A model with ourselves at the centre of the universe was what Galileo's greatest advance helped us partly escape from. However we still need another conceptual step away to see the universe holistically. I fear any model that assumes us at the centre of anything is thus retrograde. It is a 'way of thinking'.

Modern western thinking will describe the position of 'a tree' as would a US student or GI.; "It's 200 paces thirty degrees to my left, east of south." A holistic description would be "It's 20m west of the last bend in the river". We view the universe the first way, which is quite useless in any absolute terms. When we understand the CMB axis of flow, the motion of our local group with respect to that, and the galaxy within the group, our arm within that, and the sum within the arm, etc etc, and what such as CMB 'frames last scattered' imply, only then may we be able to start seeing and understanding the bigger picture.

But that does not disqualify the rest of your concept, which I applaud, including matter as energy. I don't see that Georgina's view of energy as motion motion precludes that in any way, because matter all is also state of motion.

Finally I wonder what predictive power or success it may have had if any, at resolving anomalies etc. Of course as an astronomer I have rooted out many ignored aberrations not 'made public'. I refer to some in my essay. As the point of new theory is to resolve issues it is by that it must be judged. Have you evaluated any yet? I do see it as perhaps offering a valuable route around the problem of ether in peoples minds. It is ignored that the Higgs field is essentially of the same category!

Peter

Hello from Belgium,

Mr Gupta,

I am understanding. But you know, the real aim of a real searcher is to accept the truth. In fact , the most important probelm inside the international sciences community is this vanity.And you know what Mr Gupta? It blocks and decreases the velocity of evolution.Because simply people prefers continuing on their false roads.Just for what Mr Gupta ? I accept always a rational work, and I critic always sincerely.But why people does not accept the rational and ddterministic critics? have you an other explaination that this vanity , you Mr Gupta. You know it exists people who merits to be recognized, for their works, their years of works !!! and it exists people who insists on their false roads.They do not evolve in fact, they just try to be recognized.

The aim is not to add irrational works, but to analyze correctly our pure 3D SPACE TIME ,I am repeating, 3D.

You know Mr Gupta, you must differenciate what is our pure determinsitic universe and its vectors

and on the other side the pure philosophy implying a false vectorial causality. You cannot consider the dimensions like you make it in fact.

I just critic with a sincere heart. We are not here to take gloves when we speak about our deterministic sciences. That said, I found your reasonings intresting in a pure philosophical point of vue, spiritual even.

You know I am also an universalist, but I am rational about our causes , vectors, scalars , dimensions,laws, .....

Mr Reed,

Space is simple and complex, we are still far of our walls, but we approach all days. I see the space like cited above.The lattices, them at the quantum scale, are interesting in my humble model of spherization Theory.Because they disappear in the perfect contact , considering all entangled spheres of the serie of uniqueness.It is logic because we begin from the main central sphere, the most important volume. If the space and the mass and the light are the same when they do not turn , so it is relevant when we consider the rotations and the volumes.The proportions appear.If the light turns in the other sense than gravity.So we can understand why the light is in straight line, linear. The codes, at my humble opinion are mainly inside the singularities of this mass, the complementary due to the coded light like a pure information become relevant. It is complex this polarization m/hv.What I find very relevant is that the universal fractal of uniqueness implies a perfect contact where the lattices between entangled spheres disappear.The space becomes very relevant in this line of reasoning.But can you say that this space does not exist really physically speaking? This space has properties and is under our universal 3D spherical laws. But I admit that it is not simple all this puzzle about the space, cosmological and quantical !

Can we check this space ? can we contract the cosmological space between two spheres ? Our technology is young still.

Best Regards to both of you .

Hello Mr Gupta,

I am sorry but you cannot utilize the dimensions like that. The energy and the time have their laws. I don't see why you insist on these things.

The extradimensions are just a play of mathematics. Never these maths are rationally correlated with physics.Because the rotations are in 3D at all scales.

I am sorry but I don't agree with the whole of your reasoning. That said I find your spirituality interesting and sincere. But is it sufficient for real rational correlations with our pure deterministic physics.

I don't understand why you say that "This makes picophysics a deterministic theory "

You know, I don't see in the rational books ....extradimensions??? So why people insists on these false sciences, is it a fashion from several teams of some universities ? If yes, I suggest that they learn real foundamental sciences and their pure determinism like you say.

Regards

Vijay

Re 1st para. No they have not. This is not to say it has all been done properly. But the reality we can scientifically establish is only what we can know of it, using due process. The elephant is not in you head, or in light, we just know of it, via a physical process, at the front end. The processing of physically received input gets more convoluted, unfortunately.

Paul

Good morning dear Mr Gupta,

You continue with a superimposing of irrational dimensionalities. The time is a constant of evolution, irreversible , indeed correlated with the entropy in increasing. But these parameters are not dimensions like vectors.

If the geometrical algebras are inserted with the biggest rational determinism. So we have correct superimposings. But if these algebras are utilized without sense and reason for a kind of business from pseudo scientists.So you shall understand why this world is sick.Just beause these persons , vanitious and frustrated, insist on their stupidities for a kind of notoriety and business. In fact , it is not scientists, but businessmen, it is totalkly different.Their tools are the strategies and the pseudo sciences and the psudo competition for their travels paid by who ? a conference here for their own vanities and for eating.And who paid ? It exists real innovators and it exists the pseudo full of hate and full of pseudo sciences. These systems imply the chaos Mr Gupta.And they ionsist furthermore , just for this monney and the travels. What a world , but we evolve !

Regards

Good morning Peter,

Yesterday night, I replied thanking you for kind words and encouragement it gives me to devote time to PicoPhysics. May be I missed Submit button.

You are right; any model that assumes us at the centre of anything is retrograde. In PicoPhysics world, any model that thinks in terms of center of universe is retrograde itself. Galileo moved center from earth to near sun. The universe, he was concerned about, was sun and planets. In my childhood, I was taught this picture planets moving around sun as universe. In time of Galileo that itself was a big achievement. It made possible for Newton to conceptualize inertia and enunciate to us universe in a very different context (static, kinetics and dynamics) of inertia, force, energy as capacity to do work. We can only imagine his struggle & difficulty in accepting concept of inertia which goes against much of intuitive human learning. PicoPhysics face similar difficulty in accepting Konservation.

In Picophysics, center of the universe in a sense is the location of observer, except for this no center exists. From this center as origin, 3-D space extends in all six directions. Here we have a an unfulfilled requirement - integration of Pythagoras theorem.

3-D space is well integrated into PicoPhysics. But Euclidean Geometry still exists separate from PicoPhysics. Once we are able to integrate Pythagoras theorem into Unary law - 'Space contains Knergy' we would have covered one of the two remaining milestones.

The last milestone to cover is natural units of measure. We have plank's constant and speed of light as natural units of measure. We need a third natural unit of measure. The candidate at this time is electronic charge and Hubble's constant.

Electronic charge as natural unit of measure: Charge of electron, looks to be an ideal candidate as natural unit of measure. It exists in multiple units across whole range of particles and matter. It is not found to exist in parts (except some exceptions that will need to be addressed). However, when we look towards its usefulness it's mass - the electronic mass and radius appears to be equally significant. In this regard, hubble's constant is cleaner but intuitively much more difficult to grasp as a natural unit of measure. We have to choose between the two.

Thus PicoPhysics still requires some work to be completed, before being presented as an alternative to mainstream physics.

The objective of PicoPhysics is integration rather than prediction. However, it does have some predictions that are different from mainstream physics. One important among them is:

Inverse square law: In mainstream physics, presence of source of inverse square law fields such as charge, affects whole of 3-Dimensional space. In PicoPhysics based on infinite order analysis (infinite math - a component of PicoPhysics) does not allow that. This leads to prediction that the affect of charge can not be felt when it falls below a certain level. The same will apply for gravitation. Thus gravitation field also is contained in space as is all inverse square law fields.

The essay 5-D universe is conceived to have a judgement on acceptability of intuitively true statement 'space contains energy' as the fundamental law of nature. But we find the interpretations of E=MC2 as simultaneity equation (that we have used since 1965) is questionable. Mainstream physicist differentiates between mass and energy as exemplified by Higgs Boson as particle contributing to mass of universe.

We are encouraged by response that signifies some thinking minds were able to connect with the heading '5-Dimensional Universe'.

Thanks and Best Regards

Vijay Gupta

Vijay

"I consider, when we are not certain about the location of object, there is nothing we can know about"

Any given practical failure in the sensing process, is just that, a failure. The object certainly existed in a definite location as at a specified point, whether we subsequently can identify that or not. Physical existence is not subservient to our sensory capabilities. There was a potential to know, we failed to realise that potential.

The point here being that when we are all talking about reality, what we are really referring to is knowledge of reality, though we strive, with adherence to due process, etc, to establish the best abstraction we can achieve. Maybe in a million years, if we haven't completely ruined this planet before then, we will be getting close to knowing all there is that we can possibly know (either directly or indirectly).

Paul

Dear Mr. Vijay Mohan Gupta

I thank you for your kind and encouraging response and explanations. Physics is really wonderful and I am enjoying the fqxi discussions to meet and discuss theories and ideas with like-minded people from around the world. Many years ago I saw the work of Prof. Rati Ram Sharma of Chandigarth and he too had proposed a new ether-based physics.

To include URL in your post click "link help page" under Add New Post below. It will explain the format - but I found that deleting the "http//:" from the link added will insure it works properly. Try it before you post.

Cheers

Vladimir