New TOE

[happyprofessor]

Hi, I'm Jim and I live in Worcester (Wistah), MA where I am retired from The Rat Race. Lets say I've maybe had too much formal schooling and I've quit to study at Watsamatta U. I'm male. Hobbies are mostly math, science, music, M Theory and its maths, analog electronics repair, computer hardware, poetry, art, thinking, walking, being with my wife (not really a hobby, buts it is fun), broadcast radio and Red Sox Baseball, (the only really entertaining team in the sport. They're like a box of chocolates, aren't they?). I've written and published poems, lyrics, music, union pamphlets, helped get a city ordinance changed with the ACLU's help and have written my name in the snow. I'm a genuine gar-on-teed Hippy Dippy, peacenik, dancing Boomer who will never accept authority on its lying face value. Think a lot of things should be legalized, run around in my barefeet, Carlo Rossi Sangria drinking, Irish whiskey sipping, nonsmoking and nondrug taking citizen of the world. I've been rich and I've been poor and, believe me, neither are all they've cracked up to be. I still hate spinach and I still run with scissors.
My New theory: It is called TOEI. It means "the Theory Of Everything Is", which recurses into "The Theory Of Everything Is the Theory OF Everything Is...". I do think we are getting to a singualrity. I think nearly the opposite. I think the deeper we delve the more we feed the recursive field and go around and around an around, for there is no end. It is that. It was meant to be that. Aristotelianism (sp?) has trapped into thinking one way and it is inconceivable that there is any other logical way. Listen to the Nez Perce Indians of Idaho and they will tell you how is it that they know the way it is.
Its not deductive. Its not inductive. Its not didactic. Its the Great Recurse.
I'd like to get a little constructive and friendly return. So, RSVP.

[xxyy]

what you are writing really strikes at my heart and reminds me of how there is a number in math which we specifically bothered to say "it is undefined, as it's definition." Kind of reminiscient of how we say time is "constant change," or in otherwords, a contradiction that is consistent.

Is it the redundant nature of time that you speak of? How the meaning of life is it's meaning, or how the theory of everything is the theory of everything as you say? How everything contains itself?

Is it a recursive nature, a kind of verisimilitude? Perhaps it is that time is but a pretense, nothing but a causal time-loop, whereby the universe is a quantum tunnelling object caught in the disallowed region between two higher dimensional parallel reference frames? Whereby it is the determination of will that makes it so?

Perhaps time is an artifact of the imagination, a shared hallucination that can kill. Or can bring to life. It can be created or destroyed. Just some thoughts that you inspired me into thinking.

[Mikal]

Hi Jim in Worcester...I'm Mikal, a Canadian Researcher and I'm not retired from the rat race yet...share your love of poetry and lyrics and also have published...why..I have no answer...thats just the way it came about. We share the same thoughts on the lying face value of authority. I'm in my barefeet now and also am a non-drug taking citizen of the world....I'm a rebel with a cause and typically disobey managers to help them understand I learned the art of managing, managers...the paradox throws them...smiles.

I don't have an established TOE yet...its too immense, too pondorous and kind of shake, rattles and rolls alot like Elvis used to...its all over the place and I follow its winding, curving path...that is when I'm not into my research...I'm sure this RSVP is friendly enough but the constructive is always iffy...thats okay too...such is life...


Peace Mikal

[Profpat]

Hi Jim;

You do appear to be a happy camper. At least the Red Sox broke the curse of the Babe. The Detroit Lions have some type of incurable virus.

Thinking about your continuum theory of toe, reminds me of a variation of string theory, if you accept a cyclic universe:

Singularities are avoided because the observed consequences of "Big Crunches" never reach zero size. In fact, should the universe begin a "big crunch" sort of process, string theory dictates that the universe could never be smaller than the size of a string, at which point it would actually begin expanding.

My own theory An Idea uses strings for quarks, to build the proton/neutron.

I would appreciate it if you took a look at it. It's located at:
( http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-t...2803-idea.html ) You'll have to access it through a PDF FILE or go to post # 40 at that thread. Any questions or comments can be posted there.

I am still teaching, and plan to do so until I die in class. They'll have to take me away kicking and screaming, I enjoy it that much.

Welcome to ToeQuest, Jim.

Best,

Pat

[xxyy]

Profpat,

The big crunch idea is wrong and that is because the expansion of the universe is only going to keep speeding up, not slow down. The only time it can reverse is when it expands so quickly that space time rips. This is like when positive infinity suddenly reverses polarity and becomes negative infinity, as in the definition of 1/0, or as in the flipping upside down of the planet when the poles shift. Or as in someone so moved by gladness that an actual tear drops from their eye.

More specifically, by considering the combined ramifications of quantum mechanics and general relativity we see that the arrow of time will reverse whenever two points in space, seperated by one planck distance, begin expanding away from eachother at greater than the speed of light. Nothing in physics can prevent this. Do you see?

Max Tegmark and Robert Dartwell are all trying to figure this out but I am the one who has figured it out for you all.

You are right in thinking that the universe must skip over the singularity in order to preserve inconsistencies. If you are to break the speed of light, you must leap BEYOND the speed of light. This is similar to a quantum tunnelling object and how it skips over the disallowed region, thus maintaining it's inconsistencies in structure. That is the explanation for the so-called inflation period where matter was invisible. The inflation period we know of is only half the quantum leap, the other half being on the negative side of time. The distance of this leap is dictated by the speed of light and the length of the planck second. This gives us the idea that there is a time "within" time. And thus is born the idea that the universe is a quantum tunnelling object caught in the dissallowed region between two parallel reference frames. We are at the intersection of time in other words, caught in between two worlds as it were. It is like the interlocking of two circles such that their intersections are at right angles. The implications are that the will of the universe is it's destiny, and that breaking the speed of light is not only possible, it has already happened in another time frame predicting ours. And that time frame may be a future event.

regards, xxyy

[Profpat]

Hi xxyy;

I agree the best evidence we have so far seems to point to an ever expanding universe.

The only time I know of anyTHING going faster than light speed was with Guth's theory of spatial inflation. The spontaneous response of twin particles changing spin I believe is from the interconnectedness of all things, and not that it is going faster than light. I still believe that the speed of light is a natural limit and constant.

Best,

Pat

[austintorn@aol.com]

Since everything happened all-at-once in the Timeless-Formless, our own future glory that was reached 'there' was available as a recursion reaching back and modifying all by observation to summon the right framework into being.

JIm, If you need an idea for recursion, that is it.