Silicon Investor - Quantum Physics -- or -- Physics Revisited

[TigerPaw] Here is some evidence that our universe is formed within a collapsing singulari...

TigerPaw — 3/21/2025 12:26:16 PM

Here is some evidence that our universe is formed within a collapsing singularity.
independent.co.uk

This agrees with the notion that our existance is in the context of multiple dimensions. "we" don't go from dimension to dimension, we live in all of them at the same time just as we can be in UP-DOWN and LEFT-RIGHT and FORWARD-BACK at the same time. Eons ago some of those dimensions began to collapse. Some have already collapsed to sub microscopic size, such as the dimension that is responsible for the weak nuclear force.

Almost 13 billion years ago another dimension passed it's critical limit and began to collapse into a singularity. Astronomers have interpreted this as the Big Bang, but as with other singularizes (black holes) the collapse begins with casting off a lot of material, but then leads into an ongoing shrinkage of the very fabric of space.

We, experience this shrinkage as time passing.

Time is the phenomena of the universe transforming from a place with many many possibilities (entropy) to a place with fewer possibilities because some of those things that could happen, DID happen. That means there are fewer things that could happen in the future since the future has to remain compatible with the past.

In addition to time passing as the future degrees of freedom are reduced, as the section of existence that we inhabit shrinks, it gives the appearance that the other dimensions we call space are expanding. It would equire some special dark force pulling the space dimensions to explain an expansion, but this is the natural result of of the dimension we most closely perceive as shrinking. It's just a matter of perspective.

[TigerPaw] Random thoughts on the beginning of the universe. I was thinking about the nece...

TigerPaw — 7/17/2022 2:22:01 PM

Random thoughts on the beginning of the universe.

I was thinking about the necessary conditions for the big bang. I think that when a black-hole gets stable enough that it's angular momentum is entirely contained in a 'small area' it will attempt to reach zero mass, which it can't, so it initiates the next big bang. The 'small area' is certainly no larger than the event horizon, but may be even smaller. To get in this state the black hole has to be perfectly symmetrical (at least when measured to the vague 'small area'). It can't reach this condition if it is spinning, the surface must be so smooth that spinning no longer possible, by which I mean it is so smooth that there is no feature which could be said to be moving because every feature is just like every other one.

It's critical in this process to consider how a black hole grows. The black hole and other matter collide and merge. It is unlikely that the coalescing masses hit merge seamlessly on the first try. They will first orbit each other increasing the angular velocity of the total (at the expense of a bit of mass). This angular velocity is an indication that the black hole is not symmetrical in all dimensions. The orbit or spin is in some direction and this uneven distribution of mass prevents the black hole from achieving the (attempted) collapse. Even in the case where the mass comes together evenly, there is still other matter in the universe that will invariably tug on one side of the mass more than the other. This tug can be enough to prevent the necessary symmetry that allows the mass to collapse from all directions at once.

So, that implies another condition for a big bang is that all other mass in the universe is distant to the point that Penrose referred to as a null infinity. That is to say that any other mass in the universe is so distant that it has no effect larger than the "small amount" which is too small to prevent the ultimate contraction of the mass in question.

So, a big bang happens when when a lot of mass gets together, any remaining mass moves off far-far away and the big ball of mass can slowly quit spinning because nothing else is prodding or pushing it. When the angular momentum approaches zero then BANG.

As a followup conjecture I wonder if at the time of a big bang the mass of the black hole not only approached zero, but actually achieves zero and the bang happens in what would be negative coordinates as measured in our neck of the universe. This implies that a whole lot of mass disappears from our side of the universe. Perhaps this is the reason our universe is not only expanding, but the expansion is accelerating.

[Stan] "If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and on...

Stan — 10/10/2020 8:35:31 PM

"If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generations of creatures, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words? I believe it is the atomic hypothesis (or the atomic fact, or whatever you wish to call it) that all things are made of atoms—little particles that move around in perpetual motion, attracting each other when they are a little distance apart, but repelling upon being squeezed into one another. In that one sentence, you will see, there is an enormous amount of information about the world, if just a little imagination and thinking are applied."

~ Prof. Feynman, Caltech lecture - feynmanlectures.caltech.edu

[Stan] The day Professor Feynman, in responding to his muse, worked out spontaneous emi...

Stan — 9/1/2020 8:56:38 PM

The day Professor Feynman, in responding to his muse, worked out spontaneous emission of a black hole on a blackboard - a full year before Stephen Hawking did.

getpocket.com

[Stan] What confuses a physicist? youtube.com (direct link - 3 1/2 minutes) [youtube v...

Stan — 8/5/2020 9:19:03 PM

What confuses a physicist? youtube.com (direct link - 3 1/2 minutes)

[TigerPaw] Does Time Really Flow? New Clues Come From a Century-Old Approach to Math. Ther...

TigerPaw — 4/13/2020 8:20:10 PM

Does Time Really Flow? New Clues Come From a Century-Old Approach to Math.

There are no "real" numbers in our universe. The concept implies a number with an infinite number of digits, but the universe has been around a finite amount of time and so no infinite number has yet (and never will) fully resolve itself.

This has many implications especially for the differing descriptions of the universe in relativity and quantum physics.

[Carolyn] God remains mysterious, as He should.

Carolyn — 11/23/2019 2:36:52 PM

[TimF] But I believe there is SO much we cannot even begin to know. That much is true....

TimF — 11/23/2019 2:32:52 PM

But I believe there is SO much we cannot even begin to know.

That much is true. Probably always be true, certainly at least for a long time.

[Carolyn] It's a start. Maybe false. But I believe there is SO much we cannot even begin t...

Carolyn — 11/23/2019 1:56:14 PM

It's a start. Maybe false. But I believe there is SO much we cannot even begin to know.

[TimF] rather preliminary and uncertain right now it would seem

TimF — 11/23/2019 1:49:08 PM

[Carolyn] Fifth force of Nature? dailymail.co.uk

Carolyn — 11/23/2019 8:01:59 AM

[Carolyn] Arrow of time encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com H/T Vendit

Carolyn — 2/18/2014 11:00:39 PM

[Carolyn] Theory proving life after death dailymail.co.uk

Carolyn — 11/14/2013 11:26:31 AM