[austintorn@aol.com]

[Drifter]

They are merely a relection of what they see.
Namaste` Brother

Originally Posted by austintorn@aol.com

[Profpat]

You are a poet and an artist Austin.
Drifter whether paradoxes or curiousities, they are interesting links.

Best to both of you,

Pat

[austintorn@aol.com]

[dipayankar]

Yeah, and how many Universes from one impact??? 1, 2, 3..... infinite??? How much of energy would be required for infinite creation?? Would our laws of physics hold there?? and why??

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

I think Greg pretty much nailed it when he said the lack of dimensionless particles result in dimensions...by default I would add.

The two membrane collision you mentioned, Pat, would first require the formation of membranes which I think any one-demsional collision would accomplish. So two opposing one-dimesional time directions would result in the membranes and they would contain fluctuations that would accumulate from the membranes to result in the 3-d universe you're after.

Depending upon the force of the random fluctuations of the universes, the motion would follow the greatest amplitude because it would overcome lesser amplitudes, and this would result in universal collisions which would create a continuous formation of new universes originating from the point of impact.

I'm not sure if I would buy it either.

[Profpat]

Originally Posted by dipayankar

Yeah, and how many Universes from one impact??? 1, 2, 3..... infinite??? How much of energy would be required for infinite creation?? Would our laws of physics hold there?? and why??

Hi Dipayankar;

Some great thoughts there.

If there were multiple universes I would think the laws would be the same.

The foundation of our universe is so elegantly simple; Based on two forces ( Gravity/EMR ), ( Repulsion/Attraction ), ( Action/Reaction ), ( Yin/Yang ); and yet it becomes so magnificently complex, the ability to see, hear, smell, taste, and touch our reality. The ability to be aware of all of this. From protons to galaxies, all based on two forces. I find it all amazing.

If there are other universes out there it would be my guess they would be built on our wonderful model.

Can you imagine anything more simple, or more grand?

Best to you,

Pat

[Profpat]

Hi Everyone;

I forgot to mention ( Positive/Negative ), and ( Opposites attract/Like kind repel ). I think if we start with the beginning foundations of our universe, we might better understand it as it now exist.

Best to all,

Pat

[dipayankar]

Well maybe at the subatomic level, gravity isn't attractive. (Just a gut feel)..

Originally Posted by Profpat

Hi Dipayankar;

Some great thoughts there.

If there were multiple universes I would think the laws would be the same.

The foundation of our universe is so elegantly simple; Based on two forces ( Gravity/EMR ), ( Repulsion/Attraction ), ( Action/Reaction ), ( Yin/Yang ); and yet it becomes so magnificently complex, the ability to see, hear, smell, taste, and touch our reality. The ability to be aware of all of this. From protons to galaxies, all based on two forces. I find it all amazing.

If there are other universes out there it would be my guess they would be built on our wonderful model.

Can you imagine anything more simple, or more grand?

Best to you,

Pat

[Profpat]

I don't know Dipayankar, you may be right, but it appears dark matter clusters around glaxies and do appear to have gravity. I may be wrong but I thought dark matter may be quarks, ( subatomic particles ), which didn't become protons.

Best,

Pat

[austintorn@aol.com]