Iseason's progress

[iseason]

Hi guys

I prefer to see this as a continual work in progress , since even recently, closer approxamations have been discussed via forums like this.

My view is that of a singular measure of energy being responsible for all we see. The standard ' thermodynamics and conservation ' models say this in current thinking. There is some difficulties that I have discussed in forums that current science tends to go around rather than tackle head on. One of these is Infinity/finite universe.

You cannot have an infinite universe. This is completely impossible because we can measure it's parts. We cannot know the measure from one end and the other because we cannot get there , but we can say that it is finite because if it were not , there could be no varience that could be measured. Every part of space would be exactly the same.
The way we view reality is via a "timeline measuring system". That is where we find the problem. We use term to describe energy. But avoid the nature of the energy.

Try it. Try to see space without time and motion. (you cannot)
Try to see motion without space and time (you cannot)
Try to see time without Space and motion, again (you cannot)

Each of these is a measurement of energy, but not energy itself. I followed potential down to first cause. Knowing that if I did so that it must be singular and indivisible. I decided it had a value of one. Of course I had trouble when I decided to move anywhere, because singular cannot become two objects of energy. So I went to the other end.

Universal, I gave the value of one or "whole". Despite not knowing the measure I could reasonable say that the universe is Whole. It has all the energy that ever was and all the energy that ever will be. Added to that is a conciction that it is finite.(see above).
If the universe is finite , then time,space, motion and energy are also finite. Armed with this I have seen that each "occurence " of energy (smallest indivisible) must equal the spacial quantity. In other words , for conservations sake, each has a value of one. Universal and smallest.
If this is the case, the smallest measure of energy (that we can find) is in fact a compression of the energy that originally filled the area of space, when it was evenly dispersed. This is a picture of "chaotic universe".

I used the word "compressed" to describe the Smallest measure of energy. This was to paint a picture only. The true form is "ordered". and opposes "chaotic".
Simple logic allows order to occupy much less space than chaotic. The big bang is the first (and only picture ) we had of "ordered space" which was not 'time dependant'. Time is used as a structure to ensure motion covers all of the pathways of space during "re-expansion" of space into the vaccuum left when order was created.

Without Chaos, The particle has no resistance against it , because it is the only thing in the vaccuum. If you we able to snapshot the universe (and could see it ) there would only be one unit of energy present. It does not occur in the same place at the same time and in fact does not occupy the same position in space twice...ever. We see motion because we see in a timeline fashion,but the occurrence order is not time dependant and occurs in the manner best suited to balancing the universe.

This would mean that the order would be .

beginning....end
Beginning...middle...end
beginning...middle...middle....end
So it beginns at the start AND end of time, but must straddle all time to keep balance .

Thoughts
Iseason

[dleviwing]

iseason;
I think you should realize that time is only needed to perform a measurement of an objects motion through space. Time is only a concept that requires a physical motion reference as a standard in order to communicate any observed motions of other physical objects in the universe between creatures of limited intelligence. Your confusion seems to be with the paradigm of reality that you are using.

If you’re going to use the term “energy” as an entity then you must do a better job of defining it. In science “energy” should only be used as a measured term and not an autonomous entity; this problem already exists in our current standard model. Some of us have resolve what you call “1” as being a “fundamental substance” with only absolute physical properties like bonding and motion within an absolute infinite void.