Some comments on M Theory and "parallel" universes

[austintorn@aol.com]

If reality is eternal, it is difficult to define any concept. Also time looses significance if there is no relative motion. The only way time will have any significance is if Universes are created and destroyed.

I destroy the Earth all the time in my fiction stories… ha-ha.

Not only is reality [the one beneath] eternal, but if could not just be fixed as a single concept, having no prior time for a certain definition to be put there, but must be all possible concepts—the superposition of all possible universes, which come and go and/or recycle and return.

Suppose that the universe was a quantum event, beginning small and then inflating. So, then, could any other.

[WHY 137?]

The essence remains what will be three or maybe just two "laws" of fractal dialectics, from which the other rules are necessarily derived:

1) all material forms rotate. (therefore anything that does not rotate is not material, and further details on all that)

2) This has got to be something about viewpoints, the incompleteness of a single viewpoint, the stillness of viewpoints, but I also want some expression of opposition, polarity of viewpoints without necessarily restricting viewpoints to pairs of opposites. This second statement needs to expand the first and tie in many many consequences. The "dialectics" will ideally be expressed in this second statement

3) A statement covering recursion, fractal structures, simple bifurcations and curving dendritics whilst leaving a doorway open for neural networks, and addressing the means to denote the left or right choices - perhaps reinforcing rotation as the essence here.

i am kind of randomly mentioning disparate ideas that do I believe form a single structure, but ... there is an underlying idea that is bothering me today, in formulating all this.

Rotation appears to me the essence of our ideas of separateness, which give rise to number and quantity of course. Rotation also gives rise to skin, clingfilm, that conceptually and practically keep this separate from that.

Hello Mike

I must say I love some of your ideas about rotation, your background, and the fact you can name drop better than most.

Rotation appears to be a KEYSTONE to your ideas, as it is mine, but we are not alone, the ancestors of the Aztecs had a symbol to represent the KEY of universal movement.
And the symbol they chose implied rotation.
Not surprising what symbol they chose to represent 'rotation', this KEY can in fact be traced to the antiquity claimed by Atlantis, back to 10,000 BCE.

Any idea what that KEY symbol was Mike?
There is only ONE symbol that I know of that comes in two variations, expressing CW and CCW rotation, that is 12,000 years old, which we can further trace back to a KEY fret glyph dated 23,000 BCE.

The answer to those queries can be found here:
http://2012forum.com/forum/viewtopic...6919&start=105

namaste

[dipayankar]

The branes, what are they made of? What would be the dimensions? 2D or 3D? If 2D, then do they not have any width? What would they be made of so as to generate so much energy to give birth to an entire Universe??

Wy be so skeptical about multiple universes. Take an mile and reduce it into feet and this into inches and keep reducing the system eventually there will be an infinite number of different sized units. Interrestingly taking an inch adding 1/2 inch then 1/4 then 1/8 and so on will equal 2 inches even though an infinite number of divisions are necessary to do so. Doesn't this seem to suggest that the number of universes are infinite?

Maybe a time-line makes our world and in our world a leap in time of a specific duration is our existence while other worlds may be of other durations?

[labelwench]

How is it, that we may conceptualize that which we have not experienced, as in parallel universes, unless there is some parallel within nature, which our mind is able to base such a construct upon.

What in our experiencing, gives us the 'raw data' for such modelling by our mind?