• [deleted]

  • Post #8

Dear James,

In fact I came to my idea of the ultimate limits of our 4-d Universe while studying articles about what happened before the big bang, there we encounter the Planck Scale, after that nothing is anymore measurable , you enter the Multiverse (like in the Kaluza-Klein proposition and Calabi-Yau, only my approach is not mathematical because I think we cannot describe a "fifth" dimension with the senses and means we have available), the singularity of the so called BB is no longer present it becomes a point in the Multiverse.

I applied the same reasoning to a black hole, for there also we have to approach the untill now accepted singularity, but there we will meet the same problem of the Planck Scale (perhaps gravity becomes as strong as other forces, and infact GR predicts : any experiment with enough energy to probe the Planck Lenght must nececerrily form a black hole in the process (FQXi Blogs : Topic : The planck Scale : Gravity's ultimate limit, blogger Mark Wyman))

In fact we meet at every point (not only the high energy points in black holes) in sace/time the Planck scale, so our Universe surrounds or forms a hologram around or in this what I call Quintessence.

So the connection is clear it is a full yes but not only for the supermassive Black Holes but for every quantum in our Universe.

Yes Jim, the what you call "recycling" is a process that is infinitely taking place in the Multiverse (Quintessence), once after the Planck length we enter there where there is no more causality no more determination, time is no more like an arrow, every moment existing in our 4-d Universe originates from there, here it will "Pass", there it is "eternal?". The what you call Big Bang is a timeless happening (moment). Perhaps the word recycling is not right and do we have to back to Hermes Trismegistus who wrote already in his Emerald Tablet : "The Formation of the Microcosm is in the accordance with the Macrocosm", on the lowest scale you meet the highest scale, apply this to the eternal time moments of the Quintessence et voilà...

If you dare to think a little further then you can solve a lot of questions by applying this view, but I know it is only one of the bunch and the real Truth is I thinnk not to find here.

I also read your essay, which is very readable, on page 5 you yourself also give the border of our Universe and the follow up is going to the Big Bang and the SMBH, the analog site of our Universe that gives the idea of continuum, in my opinion is caused by our consciousness, a consciousness that is able to handle infinities that in our 4-d world can not exist because of the limits we live in (see posts above).

So Jim thanks for your attention and Good Luck in the contest. (I will rate you too).

Wilhelmus.

  • [deleted]

  • Post #9

Wilhelmus, this is a very thoughtful and philosophical essay. I like the idea that the ways we can join the stars to make constellations is similar to the arrow of time, perhaps you were thinking of Feynman diagrams too.

good luck

    Thank you Philip,

    Thinking of Feynman Diagrams and then drawing them are two different things, thinking of them is the best way of interpreting because our consciousness can deal infinities, and those infinities infact are the basis of those diagrams isn't it, so when you say thinking of you are quite right.

    Furthermore it is also the that the ideas of Gerard 't Hooft (my fellow countryman) about holographics were an inspiration (he also created the Feynman-'t Hooft gauges).

    sorry for my late answer

    congratulations with your score

    Wilhelmus

    a month later

    • [deleted]

    • Post #11

    W

    You asked me to comment, but you know what I'm going to say!

    The only 'wall' that exists is the limit of our ability (including non-humans) to experience entities. Nothing exists unless we can experience it (either actually or on a logically inferred hypothetical basis). The maximum we could potentially experience of any given entity is dependent on the capacity of the medium conveying the experiential information to differentiate reality. What lies 'beyond' experience is a matter of metaphysical conjecture and irrelevant for scientific endeavour. We do not create our reality, we experience it, albeit since the process of experience involves a number of interferences, these have to be reverse engineered in order to establish the original state that existed independently of us. Time is the experience of change (both in terms of sequence and rate). In sight experience, the rate of change is interferred with by relative speed (ie distance). The concept of time is a measuring tool, it is not an intrinsic dimension of our reality. Our reality is three dimensional.

    I suspect all theories can be merged via a proces of correction, if everyone properly distinguishes between what is an intrinsic characteristic of our reality and how we intefere with it when experiencing it. That is, eliminate a number of metapysical assertions that are masquerading as objective statements under the guise of complex maths purporting to represent our reality.

    Paul

    3 months later

    • [deleted]

    • Post #12

    Dear Wil,

    You are absolutely right about consciousness. Science can only answer how things work, but cannot answer why do they exist. Only I or conscience knows why, because of love to create. We are experiencing the singularity of conscience and are able to express it.

    Universal I or singularity or conscience is the absolute truth and is the cosmological constant.

    If universe is the meaning of understanding of one's surroundings, then it is created with every birth and destroyed with every death. Universe is in a steady big bang state. Multiverse is just multiple interpretations made by bodies and minds of the conscience (soul or singularity). What one perceives of self (soul) is not the same as another, this is the multiverse with in the universe or singularity that we live in.

    S=BM^2 (S-Soul, B-Body, M-Mind)

    Truth is simple, accepting it is not.

    Love,

    Sridattadev.

      My dear Sri (do you mean Illustrus or just Mr ?)

      Thanks for your post, you say "created with every birth and destroyed with every death", this is true when we look at the causal deterministic universe that we are "living" in, before birth there is no conscioussness and after death in the causal universe there is no more individual consciousness, but ... in the Total Simultaneity that I propose all the moments and places are simutanuesly presnet,it is the non causal "everything", you can compare it with "the center of everything where there is absolutely nothing and the center of nothing where there is absolutely everything" (thanks for your article). So in fact all the moments we survived are eternally present, but the word eternally has no meaning here.

      Change the word Big Bang for "Origin", an origin is not a unique mement it is for every causal consciousness a special moment in Total Simultaneity.

      For mankind Love and Hate come from the same source...

      keep on thinking free

      Wilhelmus

      • [deleted]

      • Post #14

      Dear Wilhelmus,

      You are absolutely right by saying that "for mankind Love and hate come from the same source". But a wise man knows it is better to be loving for sustaining the existence of his kind. As a realized human, I am just another father of 3 kids trying to share the knowledge of the absolute truth I experienced with in and importance of love for continued sustenance of human life.

      Universal I or conscience or absolute or singularity or god is of everykind and has no begining and no end, its origin is beyond human comprehension so is its end, simply put it begins where it ends. As a human we can experience this singularity in our heart and know that it exists and its nature is Total Simultaneity as you have expressed. This truth is inherent in each one of us and has been expressed by several spiritual teachers like Lord Krishna, Moses, Jesus, Lord Buddha, Prophet Mohammed, Shirdi Sai, Guru Nanak and many more all along in different ways. I am just trying to convey this simple truth to all the scientific community, which is trying so hard to understand the reality of the universe and In the process creating complex theories of the inherent simple truth and getting lost in virtuality. It is time for our human kind to wake up from this virtuality (entangled intelligence) and experience the absolute self and live in love and peace.

      Love,

      Sridattadev.

      I derive an equation for consciousness in my Essay (Eq. 1), which in technical english states that 'consciousness' is: consciousness is sometimes a wave that not observed whether detected or not, and always the result of an observation of a detection of a particle.

      Nobody cared then, nobody cares now, and nobody will care in the future when I do the same, but will derive another equation for C, using results [in technical English] from the LHC. They will continue not to care as I equate this new equation to the one mentioned above from the essay. And still caring less, they will ignore the fact that when these two derived equations are equated, the result will be an equation in which the classic young's double-slit experiment is expressed in terms of said LHC results, and vice versa. All with no mention of consciousness, which is required [at some point] in all human experimentation/interpretation. At that point, some may start to care. Enough to steal my idea, have a laugh at my non-professional attempt and develop it further. Then it's back to the not caring. Maybe I should just stop taking it personal i'm being ignored in these threads and that my essay is so bad (apparently) it's not even worth acknowledging. Adeiu!

      Oh yeah, almost forgot. While we are all concentrating fiercly on not caring about my threads or essay, it's worth mentioning that in the same essay, I derive equations for each of Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. If I had more time, I would manipulate those equations and transform them into one equation, where all three laws are represented. The technical english interpretations would speak of each law in terms only of the other two laws. If you love I. Asimov (or even the field of robotics which he invented), this would be a fascinating result. And a great source of plot ideas for future 3 laws books, incidentally. OK, go back to not caring. And I'll try to care just a little less too.

      Law I: A robot may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a h.b. to come to harm...

      F = 1 = R(1-I)H+JHI

      for example. see essay for def. of symbols.

      Good morning to you Tommy,

      Sorry for my late reply but I expected that all the new posts would be at the end of this blog.

      I have read with much interest your essay, you are very much trying indeed to make equations, these equations however contain one item that seems to me difficult to accept as a "unit", being the SOUL.

      The human being has "consciousness" as have other beings, the consciousness of mankind is a DIFFERENT one from other species, even in the time line you would be able to detect a form of consciousness in mineral objects, only changes there do not occur in the human rythm of heartbeat, when we look at the Universe as a whole it can have also a rytm that could indicate a (for us) superconsciousness, perhaps we can also call this SOUL, what is in a name ? So in so far we agree, but I cannot understand why we have to put this in a formula, first of all I don't think that we are talking measurable quanta , mankind is trying always to UNDERSTAND its relative reality and in order to do so invents tricks as equations, formula's , dimensions etc (I am doing the same inmy essay, therefore you call it ESSAY), but we will never be able to come to a full understanding in our 4-D causal deterministic universe.

      In your interpretations you pose that consciousness is always the result of an observation , in order to observe you ha

      Sorry I struck the wrong button...

      So in order to observe you have to be conscious, otherwise ..... We are entering here a spiral thought that can go on in infinity, we can solve this problem by accepting that consciousness is quality in our universe that (see my essay) goes further then our 4-D causal deterministic universe and allows for example humans to have a connection with the T.S. (Total Simultaneity) in order to form a understandable causal life-line.

      In this way of thinking (I do not say it is the truth but only one of the many ways that we can try to understand, because the final truth is not existing) we can also understand other forms of consciousness with different time lines , constituted from different material as the baryonic particles (dark matter, anti matter) etc.

      You mention : "the Universe of all mathematics, where all of the Universe of Reality is contained as apart of this greater Universe", well here we both say the same, again what is in a name, your mathematics (that include infinities) are a form of non causal thinking, the same as in my Total Simultaneity. Causal Time is the effect that gives a meaning to our consciuosness of the subjective reality.

      You mention : "the infinity of the anlogue we are living in NOW." If we were living in the infinity the NOW moment could not exist because we would never be able to reach it in a causal way, our world in my opinion is surrounded by limits, like the Planck Length and time, the infinity is in our consciousness because of the fact that it can "feel" the other fifth non causal dimension.

      In your post you say that your ideas may be used by others , I would be proud if others would become a better man by using my ideas, the FAME is of no importance, isn't it so that all our ideas and inventions are based on the ideas and inventions of others who were thinking before us ?

      I look forward too your answers

      keep on thinking free

      Wilhelmus

      8 days later

      Good Morrow Wilhelmus:

      Dank u vriendelijk, Wilhelmus. How' s Nederland? Ik zou zo willen bezoeken als u kon helpen? Uw commentaren waren divers en enigszins beknopt bij verscheidene punt. U bent duidelijk hartstochtelijk over u verhandeling. Dank die voor hij inspanning mijn poging eigenlijk om te lezen nemen. Het zou het begin van vrij verreikend iets kunnen zijn. En zal zo van u. Ik verheug me op het lezen van het. En ernstig, ive nooit aan scandanavia? kreeg een kleine ruimte voor een couupleweken. lol? voorzien van een netwerk here.give me tijd en voor u verteren om met contact te onderbreken. NetherLand@QuantumWidgets.com zullen aan me voor bepaald... krijgen thanx opnieuw

      6 days later

      I am using the Planck length as a base of non causality.

      The latest anaysis of Integral 5ESA gamma-ray observatory) places stringent new limits on the size of quantum "grains", it is replaced from 10^-35m to 10^-48m.

      These observations of "tiny twisting effects" that are due to the quantum grains , and have become detectable signals , because of the fact they are being accumulated on the very large distance are indeed important for fundamental physics, and also for the view I propose in my essay.

      The fundamental question here is "where is causality emerging", at the Planck length or below ?.

      To answer this question is not so easy. Fact : before the Integral observations, it was the Planck length, now it could be the "Integral length" of 10^-48m. In fact for the view that I proposed it is not the exact point on a line that is fundamental, every length is a scale compared to another that makes for us our 4D Universe measurable and so causal to represents an idea in our consciousness.

      The grains of space/time can and will be adjusted in their dimensinal scales when scientists are going further into the fundamental questions of reality, the idea of these grains being the limit of the causality and thus the border of Total Simultaneity will be the same.

      keep on thinking free

      Wilhelmus

        Ok, this is new news to me: where is the source of this information? That The latest anaysis of Integral 5ESA gamma-ray observatory) places stringent new limits on the size of quantum "grains", it is replaced from 10^-35m to 10^-48m. "

        C'mon W., even the LHC cannot probe to the plank length to determine whether particles are better described as points or strings. What possible detail could determine that it's 10^-48? By defininition it has to be a mathematical result. We should really wait until we can verify the nature of particles strings or points? at the plank length first, before conjecturing even further?

        In that vein, I propose that the Quantum Grain is made up of 2.5 units, each with a length of 10^-123. The reason this can be stated if that it is comfortably beyond the capability of probing, even with an accellerator the size of the known galaxy. Let's stop counting our chickens before they are even (in principle( experimentally verifiable.

        Good wishes, friend

        ...

        Good afternoon to you Tommy, nice to meet again,

        You can read the article in New Scientist:

        http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128204.200-distant-light-hints_at-size-of-spacetime-grains.html

        I fully agree with you that all our limits are relative and can be placed everywhere you want them to be, I took the Planck length because of the fact that behind this limit we cannot make any prediction, time is of no more value and so on, so for me it was the border of causality, after that was the Total Simultaneity, as a matter of fact it does not matter me at all where is this limit of causality, it is for me important that it is there.

        And as it is for now we will in the near future not be able to explore the area before the Planck length.

        The limit of causality (stargate) is everywhere around us, its exact dimension is not important, the idea is.

        keep on thinking free

        Wilhelmus

        a month later

        • [deleted]

        • Post #25

        Are we not the physical manifestation of the universe understanding itself...Does time really exist except in our perception of it..maybe what people think is the spiritual world is nothing more than other universes not perceived by us ie..Dark Matter and Dark Energy..

        • [deleted]

        • Post #26

        Are we not the physical manifestation of the universe understanding itself...Does time really exist except in our perception of it..maybe what people think is the spiritual world is nothing more than other universes not perceived by us ie..Dark Matter and Dark Energy..

        Garry, thanks for your reaction, as I wrote it is our consciousness that is the first "observer" and so causes the wave function to collapse into the particle function, so is the cause of the origin of our universe, the universe is as you mention understanding itself , it is us who cannot understand it 100%, because of the fact that we will never be able to know the whole TRUTH, we are able to observe only 5% of the matter, in our consciousness we understand infinities, that are not possible in the material 4D causal universe we live in, the other 95% can be other universes that will be undertood (also partially , when they are restricted like us) by other consciousness, thinking of them operating all together is a beautifull thought.

        keep on thinking free

        Wilhelmus