An Idea

[Fredrick]

You point to the same aspect, Max, of alternative universes: we can consider it for fun, but there cannot be a consideration for it in science. We have absolutely no indication that the universe spins, and according to me the information that the universe is flat denies that it spins. Only when using fantasy can we conjure the possibility.

Still, if we indeed go there and state that the universe somehow spins, it does not deliver anything extra. Because, if the universe spins, then within the largest of spins there is then a situation of matter that does not spin at that largest level of the universe. We would know if matter had a spin within the largest levels. Matter only spins at the truly local levels.

Up to now, I considered it a theoretical possibility, Max, but I am certain this aspect must be taken into consideration for the ToE; the ToE must deliver the framework for what we observe, not what we can conjure. The no spin of the contents of the overall level in whatever way conflicts with the wide variety of spin at the local levels, and this shows a two ground level for the universe. As said, the overall level shows outward motion.

[austintorn@aol.com]

With nothing around it,
We can’t spin it,
But if we did it,
We wouldn’t notice it.

Fredrick gets the Nobel prize
For the nothing of space surprise;
I can’t refute it, or I’m not wise.

[Max™]

I don't point to alternative, I point to other.

They're just as real, only in a different place.

[Felix Schrodinger]

Merry Christmas from me and my friends

Felix

http://www.toequest.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/453

[Mikal]

And the putty tats...purred in unisom...."a very, purry, furry christmas...."


Mikal

[Fredrick]

I don't point to alternative, I point to other.

They're just as real, only in a different place.

That is a good distinction, Max. I don't know if you can get away with it, though, because you still need to explain the dual conflicting levels within one concept that spin/no spin prescribes to our universe's local and overall level. For our ToE, we cannot move on to anything other, until we have dealt with what we have for sure here. If here is not well established, then the term other has no good, no actual reference point.

I do believe in art for art sake, and I do believe that not everything needs to have reason, and I consider fun a very important ingredient in the human experience. Yet I don't want to see a blueprint for a building that looks like something Picasso created; I am not going to sit in a car that has a steering wheel that decides for me where to go next. I think it is important to have an open mind, but I am not going to have an open mind, just for the sake of having an open mind. These are all indeed possibilities that I nevertheless reject, because there is no deeper need for them. It is like scientists having the universe come out of an empty set that only exists in mathematics. If you state what amounts to a very significant universal other, you must provide reason.

Right now, I am convinced you cannot provide a reason for other that is also not the same reason for here. I believe here is as good of a (plural) place as we can find, and definitively worth it (especially when we collectively stop making a mess of it every now and then).

Without spin at the overall level, there is no reason to move on to other; everything we need to consider is found in this single universe (itself a place of plural distinction). We should admit we find ourselves only inside our own spin. The overall picture of the universe is one that is different from the local experience that contains spin; the overall movement is outwardly. With the lack of connection between the whole and the parts, there can be no crunch nor bounce to our universe.

I do have an open mind for anyone who can provide reason for another universe to exist that is not identical to the reason why our universe exists or arguments that show there is a fully established connection between the whole and the parts.

[Max™]

This universe is full of holes.

A hole in a universe will cause it to unravel.

The parameters and structure of spacetime within this universe cause it to behave as a very prolific black hole factory.

I'm quite certain that a black hole is related to a universe, as a seed is to a fruit.

This universe was once contained within a seed, which should have been within a fruit.

As a universe expands and grows old, it spreads its seeds over immense distances, and then the fabric of its spacetime dissipates, and it's daughters unfurl.

This universe had a mother, there is no logical reason to expect that we arbitrarily find ourselves at the beginning of a chain of universal life cycles, rather than at some point in the middle of that chain.

The highly developed manner in which this universe produces black holes suggests some sort of evolutionary behavior, which we see all the way down to the smallest scales within this universe, why should it stop at the largest scale of a universe.

This universe will not leave just one daughter when it dies, so why would it make sense to assume it has no sisters elsewhere in the entropic sea?

[austintorn@aol.com]

Holy cripes, we look to the holy skies: jeese!
The universe is but made of swiss cheese,
As our the moon must have been, no doubt,
But it’s crusty and hard from leaving it out.

Our fruits are of but the universal seed,
Of another fruit of all possibility treed.
Some sisters elsewhere from the entropic sea
Might have also been born of good probability.

[dipayankar]

Just a 'spinoff' for my thoughts. If the Universe did not spin, then dark energy would have ripped apart the Universe..

I don't think you can actually argue that the universe is or is not spinning.

[Fredrick]

Just a 'spinoff' for my thoughts. If the Universe did not spin, then dark energy would have ripped apart the Universe.

You are not providing enough reasoning to follow this assertion all the way, Dipayan. If you follow my model of the Hypothetical Units, then you can see that the actual material result is based on a self-sustained balance. In that light, the following two reasons why dark matter cannot rip the universe apart:

The universe is ripped apart already.
Matter is self-based, which makes it impossible for dark matter to rip it apart any further.

I'm quite certain that a black hole is related to a universe, as a seed is to a fruit.

This universe had a mother, there is no logical reason to expect that we arbitrarily find ourselves at the beginning of a chain of universal life cycles, rather than at some point in the middle of that chain.

And that's why the information of spin/no spin distinction is so important, Max: the overall level is grounded on different grounds than the local levels.

At the local level, your words are correct. Mother leads to offspring, daughters turn into mothers.

Yet the universe as a whole does not function that way; and the no spin provides that evidently. The whole functions differently from the parts. Within our spin, we have very established realities; at the larger level, these realities are not sustained.

The universal mother is the ripped-apart mother: she's dead. As phoenixes rising from her ashes, new mothers within this model start to occur and they can have daughters. Therefore, no spin: initial mother is dead. Spin: subsequent mothers and daughters find themselves in localized established self-sustained realities.

I am bringing this image back in to show how the self-based character of matter occurred. With the potential matter chopped up in what can be seen as cubes, positions were created that differed from each other, even though all parts came forth from the same potential matter.

The electron found itself in the worst spot possible: in between the cylinders. In stead of being made from within a single cube, it is made up of four parts of one-fourth the cube minus cylinders. It's based on grounds that are definitively not shared with the spheres.

The spheres are created based on — from within — one cube of potential matter, and one cube of potential matter only.

The CRP (Cylinder Remainder Parts) is based on two cubes, because two parts of half-CRPs found themselves right next to each other during materialization. In stead of matching themselves up with the other segment of their own cube's CRP, they went with the one right next door.

Most (close to all) of the matter in our universe is protium (hydrogen-1), which is a proton and an electron.

The proton is two spheres and one CRP, and here we find indeed the exact match of one cylinder. However, this exact match is found only in light of the spheres and CRP: each sphere is +2/3 charge (= +4/3 charge for two spheres in the proton), while 1 CRP is -1/3 charge, totaling in a +1 charge for a proton. All spheres and all CRPs agree on the cylinder, and together they establish that standard within a material reality.

This proton considers 'itself' neutral, but the electron is excluded. The electron opposes the perfect proton delivery based on the cylinder, because it is the cube that should be considered the real standard. We can therefore safely conclude that the charge originates with the outside position of the electron, or said differently: with the cube unit. It dictates the charge.

All matter in our universe is either in balance or tries to be in balance, while the correct form to revert back to potential matter cannot be established (is too complicated for the parts to perform). The dual CRP parts can never ever find all their rightful partners, the quadruple electron parts will never ever be able to all line up with their rightful parts again either; the spheres know that they have nothing to gain at all by letting go of their 'perfectly' established reality.

This doesn't mean that a static picture emerges from all this, far from. In the delivery established so far, there are too many CRPs; so outside CRPs moving into a proton creates a situation in which protons can become neutrons. Yet this can only occur and sustained when there are enough protons around to safeguard the neutrons from the electrons.

Outwardly moving, matter established a new kind of balance. Yet these are established balances for whatever is moving around in the same direction only. This is not possible — this is not occurring — for universal matter as a single whole.