Analog, you're not alone. I believe all that you say, even that, like Jimbo also says, that a different size or amount of fundamental stuff, energy in his case, could still work, like say that protons were larger or smaller. Plus, having all eternity give infinite chances for success.
I was just wondering if it was all good luck at that point and from then on. If not, then combining Nobody's, Huck's, and the guy who wrote 'Deep Time' can give an answer as to why.
Uh -- Ohh .... if Austins with you ... sounds like I'm alone ... lol
__________________ 'Blondie says I must hate all Brunettes. I'll try, but if I can't ... I'll love them both' ... graffiti on Tavern wall, Pompeii, circa AD 70.
Greybeard, you were already with me, and I'm with analog. We are part of the eternal golden braid of reason. Ha-ha.
Just thinking about the luck of asteroids coming, although some day they would have, and stuff like the fine-tuned constants.
For example, what if there was not enough of the FS to accomplish anything, though it's still likely that 'try and try again' would eventually suffice, but what was 'trying', if anything.
As I said in my other post. To a substance such as this, volume is irrelevant and infinitaly proportional. It isn't the volume/size that's important; it's the resolution at which motion acts upon the whole, and that is defined by the amount of elapsed motion (i.e. time) since the beginning of our current asymmetrical state.
I don't think everything and all potentials happened at an instant (which is my understanding of NOBODY's ToE), as that would be unnecessary to something that can create its own internal importance, knowledge, logic, etc. The fact that it's happening guarantees that abstract concepts such as this will emerge, as they too must have a physical foundation within and are merely a currently uncomprehensible resolution of moving substance. There is truly nothing "out of this world".
btw: There's no luck in a deterministic framework. It is what it is.
__________________
Disclaimer: *The above statements are my opinion only and shouldn't be taken as factual. Read at your own risk*
Last edited by analog; 09-14-2008 at 10:06 PM.
Reason: added btw:
Nobody got caught up in the wondering of how anything could even be real, and almost got there by having 'nothing' differentiate itself into 'virtual' stuff that was still not real, but acted as so, but since 'nothing' is really not there at all, he had to admit a 'something' that was like a potential to differentiate.
Then he went into the gloom and doom of determinism, seeing all as a replay as a 'dream' of what already happened in an instant.
I see determinism differently, as it it the only way possible, for achieving anything by making random decisions would go nowhere fast. It might only work, say, if one didn't really care about which of two similar shirts one should wear, although here there was still probably a subconscious slight preference.
More later about the Deep Time guy and what I get from Huck and what I thought of.
I can go either way on the idea of having infinite 'time' to get a workable universe or having some acceleration of the process.
So, anyway, some, if I read Huck correctly, think that the events leading to the current success of the universe were too rare to be likely. Also, that like determinism, if it is something that had to lead to us, got some kind of head start.
As a something can not come from nothing, since 'nothing' is just not empty space, a misnomer, it is not there at all in any way—that means that something was forever; however, why it worked so well is still kind of a concern, although we may have been lucky that it was not inert and so could amount to us.
We also note that the quantum realm appears to have things in superposition, but, of course, that might be false.
But, if it's not, Huck indicates that all possible universes could have been evolving in superposition (neither a nothing nor a real something), ours 'collapsing' like the quantum might when our ancestors reached consciousness. This, too, is what the 'Deep Time' guy hinted at, but didn't flesh it out as well as Huck or as Nobody (in a slightly different way, but more or less the same idea).
So, then, a third way is that a 'potential' was around forever and so then there is less worry about how our FS could have had a good combinatorial nature and why the universal constants are what they are.
From then on, it is the same as analog lays it out. Many humans, though, yet propose the irrational, which is that what they or others could imagine using only their imagination without any objective proofs even conceivable to be looked at, then even getting angry if a contrary idea is suggested that does have facts.
....In the stepping out of the universe in its expanding nature or expanded nature by somehow being there, there would have to be a place where the universe we are in now had not reached yet to effect that space and we would in such a place of nothing no not this universe "where" except as a place we came from. Relativity perspectively speaking thus.
The place would be cold if nothing there or hot if was there.
If there it may be cold with all there, at absolute rest.
We then would be point zero have started a reaction by our very presence.
If it was dark matter or anti matter we would be at ground zero.
either of or the scenarios it does not explain why.
so lets not go there.
Lets try looking at the multi dimensional start. Oh I did that already.
Reaching absolute condensed state, what happens? Alignment, not singular pole but two pole alignment ...oops there goes maxwell turning over in his grave ... two pole mass AND singular pole mass ... dark matter and new math or just turning the electron back wards in spin sort of thing? ... and with alignment comes ? ? ? right, attraction and repel on such a scale proved by the total chaotic loss of most of the mass of the universe till more recent looks at the right areas of space where by the curvature of light around these areas we know where it is now ... lets not go there either.
CAn I ask a question? What would Aether be made of? Can it have mass???
Quote:
Originally Posted by analog
Hey Greg,
Though it isn't possible, what would we see if we had an absolute position outside of the universal volume of Aether; whereby our measuring stick wasn't relative to the internal interactions going on at all times and scales?
We would be watching the universe evolve as a whole, as it defined time, and the resolutions at which it interacted at.
From this perspective, what would we see if we viewed the experiment mentioned above? We recognize humans as seperate from the whole; due to our senses being in-tune at this resolution, and we have no clear definition of thought.
Therefore, I'm saying that if we recognize all of the above mentioned constituents of the experiment (e.g. observer, particle, instrument, etc.) as all evolved patterns of interacting matter; interacting within their parameters of motion, and we also viewed the abstract concepts (e.g. knowledge, thought, focus, etc.) present within that same larger volume of current interactions not as seperate entities, but rather different types of material interactions going on at different resolutions, that they would all equal a part of the whole; merely interacting as it was intended.
From our current relative perspective within the universe, we see it as an experiment through which the uncertain nature of our universe was revealed; whereby even that concept is a physical pattern of something which goes forth and affects other volumes at other times, but from the outside observer with the absolute measuring stick; he just saw interacting matter in motion at different stages of universal evolution; with no face or name or personality or uncertainty.
I definately agree with Dave's science, as to what the knowledge pattern emerging from that interaction/experiment implied to the observer, which represents the limits to which we are able to calculate the absolute interactions of our world; due to us being emerged within it and subject to the same parameters as the rest of the universe particle; and it is for this reason that I say that only a philosophy (such as this one) could ever truly bring an emergent pattern of deterministic understanding into play within this world of interaction. What is understanding in a material evolving world; if not an deterministically emergent pattern of matter in motion at a smaller scale than the analog which it is representing, as it moves something else?
CAn I ask a question? What would Aether be made of? Can it have mass???
I would step up to the plate and say at absolute rest Aether would have matter outside of transient form perception and yes then determinable as matter with mass, but from the yin and yang of all ... it would not be at rest in alignment with MF and GF effect later (what ever that is) so the concept of absolute rest may be a mute point of conception going in and out of absolute but never absolute at rest ... unless you have zero point theorem platform of perspective ... as one looks further in to anti matter or dark matter the trend seems to be that dark matter is condensed cold matter with mass and GF potential effect as light is curved around it and anti matter is not dark matter but matter of opposite nature to matter and they annihilate each other to energy form and creation of matter .. a hot event.
I am leaning toward the perception of dark matter and anti matter in mass in an aether event of magnitude where we would percieve a big bang having taken place ... so postulated there may be more then just one that has created our universe of varied magnitude and it may be eternal ... perpetual in nature ... beyond our universe even greater universes ...
In the small of things such as the proton with the missing mass calculating the Quarks mass and having a discrepancy of numbers there can be only one reason, there is other mass but not as a particle but as a fluidity existence medium the quark is in transient form immersed in. ... like water in a balloon and the marbles the quarks ... what is the composition of the medium? ... the proton itself paradoxically being agitated by the quark to expanding perception of more mass from what would be a true state of absolute rest or zero point event +/- one of condensed state ... but I am probably all wrong and there will be this imaginary God particle found.
but I am probably all wrong and there will be this imaginary God particle found. 
Linear Mode
