The Chicken or The Egg

[Nobody]

My pleasure.

I thought I did respond to your question on uniform distribution, but I'n sure not clearly. I have a hard time expressing my pictures in words.
It's pretty much based on that SLAC experiment back in 1997 I believe, but continued and repeated today, that implies matter is created from light - photonic interactions creating massive particles/antiparticles and of course vice-versa. I say that the absolute void is prime, based on my premise of the impossibility of a universe existing within a non-existent exterior, but since it is unchangeable in the literal sense, it is essentially eternal. This idea bothered me for a while, that there could be a sense of reality that doesn't really exist - more that the impression of solidity can arise from nothing, until I realized that all things are made of light and that light doesn't exist in and of itself - it's sort of like a relativity yardstick.

We have to change a few views though regarding relativity when focusing on absolute light. If we consider that massive particles annihilate to release massless photons, and that photonic interactions create matter, we can perhaps envision from an absolute void there can be an infinite number of non-dimensional points representing both the point of annihilation for particles and the point of origin for the creation of photons. This, importantly imo, happens more nowhere instead of your proposed everywhere because, again, there can be no literal place in particular. Also, annihilation and creation are instantaneous - the moment anti/particle pairs are created is the same moment they annihilate with "neighboring" particles. Anything and everything that can possibly be created is created and destroyed at the same time - sort of like a strobe light that flickers on and off only at an infinite rate of speed.

Now, out of those scenarios is this particular universal state in which we "exist," yet, as noted above, existence, all of it, has already been annihilated. There is something preventing this realization, and that is "time." We can say that the infinite number of scenarios that arise in the form of massive particles, eventhough from the standpoint of light they don't exist, create fractional time increments between 0 and 1 - 0.001-0.0000~1, etc.. Reverting to the strobe light, in a binary fashion, both on and off would be continual; or like the painting analogy, all conceivable pictures would be painted upon a blank canvass if it was covered with white paint - white, containing all possible colors. This particular universe represents one particular picture that persists to exist according to the laws that govern it, in static increments like a movie, where I said probablistically because effects are based on probable outcomes from various causes.

The other thing being the mind, which is not "our" mind, but the genetic code which governs our sense of reality. There is only a possible sense of reality relative to light. The variable frequencies you mentioned, overlapping, which create matter also create relative time dilation and hence distance properties, don't really exist absolutely. Built into this particular universe is a type of DNA structure that records necessary information to allow the picture to continue temporarily; yet, further, absolute nature would then "know" all-possible outcomes of all universal states and would have the capacity to create a non-decaying universe that is undetectable at this range of frequencies.

"Three dimensional space is expanding, not space within three dimensional space is expanding. All of it is moving further away. You, me, the guy on Plant X, we all are moving further apart (forget local motions for now), but we are not moving into anything because it happens everywhere."

If you could elaborate on the above a bit, it doesn't make sense to me. I had understood that three dimensional space is said to be expanding, but there would be no everywhere before the proposed initial expansion; or if the proposition is that it has always been expanding, in order for there to be any literal movement whatsoever, there would have to be a place to allow for that movement.

Thanks.

[Mr. Nobody]

"Three dimensional space is expanding, not space within three dimensional space is expanding. All of it is moving further away. You, me, the guy on Plant X, we all are moving further apart (forget local motions for now), but we are not moving into anything because it happens everywhere."

Without observational information to the contrary and living within the closed system that needs "outside" confirmation to be consistant (Goedel's incompleteness theorem), I don't know how else to describe expansion other than by its effect of apparant matter dilusion without violation of the first law of thermodynamics (potential energy towards infinite or 0).

This has been fun.
Thank you

[Nobody]

Mr. Nobody,

I hear ya, and thanks to you as well.

Observational science will always be left in the dark due to its limitations, comparable to inferring the only light that exists would be that of the visible light of the EM spectrum. I think the mind can go where the accelerators, microscopes, telescopes, etc. can't go, in order to draw logical conclusions based on extending relevant information extracted from empirical evidence.

[protheory]

so both the chicken and the egg were always here...no one was 'first'...

I've been reading this thread and this is my answer to the question "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

The Chicken and the Egg

Introduction

No single answer seems to be any more correct than its opposite.

Chicken

The chicken creates the egg.

Egg

The egg creates the chicken.

Impossible

We have the impossible question of which came first.

Contradictions

Each separate answer seems to contradict the other.

Summary

The chicken cannot exist before the egg.

The egg cannot exist before the chicken.

The Problem

Which came first the chicken or the egg?

The Answer

Accuracy

To be totally accurate we need to realise that there are three simultaneously possible answers to this question.

Proof

The idea that we could singularly and unchangingly prove one of these answers to be any more "accurate" than another is "inaccurate" so to speak.

Three

Three answers accounts for the three simultaneous potentials within everything.

Answers

1. The chicken came first.

2. The egg came first.

3. The chicken and the egg both came first (neutral).

Simultaneously.

Am I wrong?

I simultaneously oppose, agree with, and neutralise all criticism ad infinitum.

My point is literal.

There is no point creating a theory of everything that doesn't work.

As some posters have already commented here, we could argue/discuss/debate the whole "but which came first" question forever but in my own opinion there is no more "accurate" answer than another, so to speak.

Pro theory which proposes the simultaneous possibility for three potentials at all singular times and moments of relative observation.

If you would like to explore the concept of Pro theory further please see my thread http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-t...heory-com.html

Thanks, and I look forward to an interesting discussion of this topic with you all.

PRO

[protheory]

I have also written answers to the paradoxes "Is this a question?" and Russell's Paradox, I posted about the latter in the relevant toequest thread.

My paradox page can be found here if you're interested... http://www.protheory.com/Paradox%20Answers.htm

PRO

[Nobody]

I think it's a kindergarten question for a reason. The DNA required to create the first chicken has to be contained in the egg, and the DNA is the result of imperfect replication - mutation.

[protheory]

I think it's a kindergarten question for a reason. The DNA required to create the first chicken has to be contained in the egg, and the DNA is the result of imperfect replication - mutation.

Hi Nobody, I'm Pro, pleased to meet you

I understand your point about DNA and what's more I almost agree, it seems perfectly logical doesn't it.

The thing is though that my theory proposes to be a TOE and it also proposes three simultaneously possible theoretical potentials so in answer to your question I state three potentials plus the opposite plus neutral.

I'm sorry if this doesn't seem to make any real "sense" but in answer to this I would claim that my theory "makes sense, doesn't make sense, plus neutral simultaneously ad infinitum."

If you're still confused I have a thread about Pro theory located here... http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-t...heory-com.html

Regards.

PRO

[protheory]

Sorry if my post there seemed a bit matter of fact, I was just trying to explore the concept through my own ideas, I hope I didn't seem rude or anything

[humanbydefault]

Interesting question...

Unfortunately eggs are not an absolute monopoly of the chicken race. Eggs are present in viruses and other species which means that the "reproductive system" was already tested by nature in much ancient species.

I believe that a continue evolutionary process brougth the present chicken into our days from a more ancient type of bird. Reptiles also reproduce throught eggs as you know too.

The key point in all this is: "Who is running the show?" It is all the cumulative series of random events resulting in what we see today around us... or is it "someone or something" doing this from scratch?

Sometimes I have the same feeling that we are part of a huge but highly sophisticated EXPERIMENT started a long long time ago. According to the way things develope across time It doesn't seems as if there was a "super mind" [a mighty God] with all the answers to all the questions. Instead I look at the evolution "drama" as a constant and endless testing performed by what I decided to called "the universe" assuming the universe as a holistic concienceness... As a human body does not make sense without their parts> brain, head, heart and muscles. This huge and powerful "being" made out of energy and mass is capable of "create" changes in the very program of what we call physics entities: energy, mass, space and time. Just as the DNA is programmed to develop as it shuffles its genes at random in order to adapt and survive, this incredibe "moster universe" could promote the existence of new races and beings with adapting qualities in the search for EXCELLENCE.
As I see it, the universe itself is trying to be better and adapt to a change that is forced by the elapsing of time [something it can not exert control over.]
I can imagine that the "creation" and evolution of the human specie allowed the "universe" itself to meditate with an independent body and a mind of its own. I can imagine that we [as human] GAVE "him" eyes, harms and language to express its powers in words. We were its most perfect product so far... Throughout the secrets of our biology the universe is able to analize, compare different behavioral patterns and choose the one it "fits" to its purposes. I believe that we [humans] are responsible for makling "IT" understand the value of compassion and sacrifice and not the other way around. If God were as powerful as the bible said, Wouldn't be easier to "HIM" to transform every one into good souls in the matter of seconds?
The fact is evidence of the contrary. If you may feel much confortable by calling "GOD" to this "entity" who created us and the rest of the cosmos... Fine! I have nothing against that, what puzzles me is that your "GOD" seems to be judging and learning as time goes on. Animals kill for food, just as romans used to send humans to fight with lions for fun, the violence used to be assumed as logical and enjoyable. Humanity has been learning a great deal as time goes on... as we move into the future GOD is also mutating its nature into a new one too.
The theory of everything is not a mystery for "it" [or for "him"?] It is the language we need to find out what separate us from the final words. "IT" needs to find out and test new ways [using only the limited senses and mental or intelectual capacity we humans have] to convey the coordinates to find the secrets of all the secrets.
I concluded long time ago that if there was a prior civilization [somewhere in this vast universe] with the knowledge we seek out every single day in our labs the experience needed to the "transfer" would have been available to us by now throughtout those earlier experiences with primitive species like us. We are alone in this universe and we are the eyes and the only hope this universe have to find the final answer not even "IT" knows:

"DO WE ACTUALLY EXIST OR IT IS ALL AN ILLUSION?"

HUMANBYDEFAULT

[humanbydefault]

If my theory about the "go ahead" given by the universe to allow our primitive human existence as a way to "see" and "feel" how life "feels" as it could be expereince in the surface of a planet turns to be true, we are safe as long as we remain "useful."

It is also possible that our obsesion for discovering the theory that could explain everything from the beginning is not an integral part of "IT's" plans for us...
Remember this: "IT" already knows all the answers we seek out to find, It shouldn't be in its interest to look for something IT already knows a long time ago, so what could be what IT expect from us?
Exploring the concept of love for example? That's so human and weird to IT that may deserve a chance before total extermination. Could we prove to IT that we are capable of much more than making cold calculations?

The bible is full of pasages about human behavior, love and hate, but it does not fill pages with an obsesion for discovering theories and scientific breakthroughts... why?

Religious people affirm that God knows everything, but why God does not want us to go deeper into its secrets? The question could be answered if my theory were correct... Don't you see it that way?

HUMANBYDEFAULT