The Universal Vortical Singularity

[PoPpAScience]

Hence then in all probability the Universe will stop accelerating totally and fall back into itself (due to gravity). This way we will have an end to the Universe. So the Universe is not eternal.

As I have said many times in this forum without any response, is that the mapping of galaxies already defies inflation theory. It amazes me how everyone ignores that galaxies are moving in every direction as they are being drawn into bigger vortexes of attracting centres. How does a galaxy defy the speed of inflation and move in the opposite direction toward an attracting centre. Why do people ignore the mapping of galaxies showing the Universe looking more like an evolving foam, then anywhere near an inflating raisin bread.

It defies all Logic to believe in inflation theory. The only Logical thing to believe in is, that there is a Infinite substance that is being transformed into vortex form by motion. Every vortex becomes part of a larger vortex, and every large vortex becomes part of an even larger vortex. This will go on for Eternity!!

This is an evolving Universe that is always becoming more then it was before, but in form only. I believe because of centripetal force there will always be new form, and thus no end to this evolving Universe.

"Infinity (substance) will always be for Eternity, and because of centripetal force there will always be vortex form creating centrifugal forces that create complexity."

[austintorn@aol.com]

"Infinity (substance) will always be for Eternity, and because of centripetal force there will always be vortex form creating centrifugal forces that create complexity."

Yes, if it happened once that we know of, there's no reason why it couldn't keep on happening, for there seems to be nothing special about our time. A kazillion years have passed and there is a universe sitting here, so, then, same for in between and ever after.

Dark energy/matter/inflation seems to be pulling out way in front and ahead.

[dipayankar]

I was reading about the foam Universe, but you need an inherent binding force to keep the foam together.

As I have said many times in this forum without any response, is that the mapping of galaxies already defies inflation theory. It amazes me how everyone ignores that galaxies are moving in every direction as they are being drawn into bigger vortexes of attracting centres. How does a galaxy defy the speed of inflation and move in the opposite direction toward an attracting centre. Why do people ignore the mapping of galaxies showing the Universe looking more like an evolving foam, then anywhere near an inflating raisin bread.

It defies all Logic to believe in inflation theory. The only Logical thing to believe in is, that there is a Infinite substance that is being transformed into vortex form by motion. Every vortex becomes part of a larger vortex, and every large vortex becomes part of an even larger vortex. This will go on for Eternity!!

This is an evolving Universe that is always becoming more then it was before, but in form only. I believe because of centripetal force there will always be new form, and thus no end to this evolving Universe.

"Infinity (substance) will always be for Eternity, and because of centripetal force there will always be vortex form creating centrifugal forces that create complexity."

[PoPpAScience]

I was reading about the foam Universe, but you need an inherent binding force to keep the foam together.

We do have an "inherent binding force", its called substance that is Infinite in nature. One can not see the Universe as it really is, if they are stuck on the fantasy of an 'exploding singularity'. There was a disturbance to "Infinity for Eternity" that was at rest, that came from a "zero point" at the centre of "Infinity for Eternity". One can then look to Vincent's UVS model for most, of the rest of the story.

[dipayankar]

Hi Pop I would rather say that gravity is the binding force. Even UVSS would say that I presume...

We do have an "inherent binding force", its called substance that is Infinite in nature. One can not see the Universe as it really is, if they are stuck on the fantasy of an 'exploding singularity'. There was a disturbance to "Infinity for Eternity" that was at rest, that came from a "zero point" at the centre of "Infinity for Eternity". One can then look to Vincent's UVS model for most, of the rest of the story.

[G_burnett]

Starbucks morning thought ...I think gravity is a "catch all" term for "so much more" interactions and structures that the use of the word may become obsolete.

kind regards graham.

[PoPpAScience]

Starbucks morning thought ...I think gravity is a "catch all" term for "so much more" interactions and structures that the use of the word may become obsolete.

kind regards graham.

I was just thinking along the same lines within the last hour Graham.

I think the word gravity is a good "catch all" word for the "Well effect" caused by "Centripetal Force". What should and will become obsolete is the idea of a particle causing gravity. I also think, as you said, "so much more" is at work. But I think that the "so much more" is the many "Centripetal forces" caused by the vortexes within vortexes that make up all "form". Also, I think that the only counter effect to gravity is "centrifugal force". This is how I see things right now anyway.

[G_burnett]

I was just thinking along the same lines within the last hour Graham.

I think the word gravity is a good "catch all" word for the "Well effect" caused by "Centripetal Force". What should and will become obsolete is the idea of a particle causing gravity. I also think, as you said, "so much more" is at work. But I think that the "so much more" is the many "Centripetal forces" caused by the vortexes within vortexes that make up all "form". Also, I think that the only counter effect to gravity is "centrifugal force". This is how I see things right now anyway.

Yes I am posting the visuals to the Gravity paper soon on this and noting the vortex effect having axial event wobble in he electron.
As the polar state in the torus axial pictorial does not change as a south or north pole but as a sine or cosine variation of the same charge value of positive or negative core point singularity .. one can see the picture.
the scribe visual of the tube having the motion in the tube of the energy is creation of the boundary of containment = MF.

this translates to a frame drag in the whole body having spin.

In the visual of the held electron and not above whole having motion then the scribe is singular linear and the holding field became the perpendicular field ... My axiom one is for the held version yet is expandable to the non held electron.

there is a certain lack of clarity in the Feynman wave visual ww as the wave is a pulse of negative or positive forward value dimensional and this is important in the dance .. in less then two years i have rid myself of ponder of smashing for dancing and gravity for .. dimension of energy density motion cyclic ... hmm maybe the burnett effect perhaps.

either or forces you describe may better be in a view of wave pulse or wobble of the y-axis relative to containment. .. you will see in a few where i am going in this ( ihope) as I will post the visual one and two with no define of two till later or tomorrow as it sort of give the clarity on it own in the causal effect predictable to the variation of wave state and direction applied turning of the torus for example on the x-axis.

Thank you for the reply
Kind regards graham

[G_burnett]

[spacedout]

I was reading about the foam Universe, but you need an inherent binding force to keep the foam together.

If gravity is holding things together what is the cause of gravity? Bending space means nothing to me how is this done?