Quantum Wave Cosmology is my TOE :)

[Bogie]

I agree that there had to something around before the Big Bang, or if there wasn't a Bang, then of some localization of our universe from some origin within the larger arena, such as your overlap theory; so, then, the origin was not from Nothing, as this would be impossible. That origin could have been of the quantum fluctuations going wild, which they would do if we waited long enough, for all probabilities eventually occur, even the rare ones.

Rogue waves. They occur more frequently than some people realize. Occasionally I hear of ships at sea being hit by huge waves that came out of nowhere.

I am just finishing up the review and response to the Absolute Fundamentals thread as suggested by Lloyd and I want you to know that I will try to convey my simple QWC scenario in that response to show how the quantum fluctuations result in the wave nature of particles and arenas alike .

[Bogie]

Yeah Bogie, we're not in any dis-agreement about an eternal infinite universe, as I argued the same ideas in David's thread. Dave's original post was just a visualizing strategy, as he also accepts it as eternal, just not infinite, as to matter and motion. I see it all as eternal and infinite, yet would stress Guille's model; Force<--Energy<--Matter-->Space-->Time(the way I'm looking at this__no beginning void_just eternal infinite...), as being the most valid eternal infinite state, forming fundamental energy, from the more fundamental eternal matter of the infinite, say__non-viscous fluidic field, or at the least, existing at the same time__as I've elsewhere said, as an inseparable triadic FS(fundamental substance__matter/motion/energy...)

It may be of interest to you to read that thread, as it's only 5 pages long, since it's what some of us members had speculated at that point... It's up to you...

Just offering a point of view that's already been explored, that may be of help, or not__that's all...

I just read your second post above today, and the second paragraph sounds a lot like the small bangs theories several of us have kicked around. I also like it, but have no proof it's a viable model... We're all waiting for you to come up with the proofs...

I see why you wanted me to read through the Absolute Fundamentals thread. Several notably different things went on throughout the thread. There was the main presentation which was a scenario based on two initial conclusions by David. One conclusion is that the universe has always existed, and the other is that we cannot know for certain what the mechanics were that preceded the big bang. David’s second scenario on the nature or expansion and contraction and their destructive and constructive roles in matter formation and gravity was interesting too. Another aspect of the thread is the appearance of differing views about matters like infinite or eternal, the physics vs. the metaphysics, absolute and non-absolutes, debates about definitions, a discussion of initial states verses eventual states, and the discussion that these ideas, a TOE, has to be quantifiable, testable. I agree with much in the thread and understand the various view points.

In regard to David’s intended scenario, he and I agree on those two conclusions. He has proven how tricky it is to try to say “we don’t know” the details but we should be able to agree that the universe did not create itself from nothing and we are not invoking the supernatural.

We don’t agree on the particular scenario of course because he is dealing from the conclusion that there are many ways our existing universe could have emerged and so he might correctly maintain that a simple irrefutable scenario of vibrations occurring over infinite time under perpetual circumstances could lie at the heart of everything we observe allowing an almost endless variety of possible precedents. Not a bad conclusion.

But I flesh out the preceding conditions with my own version of a simple scenario that the universe has always existed, that it has always been mature and functioning with invariant natural laws that work with a single commodity, energy. Through self perpetuating processes at the micro and macro levels of order there have always been a potentially infinite number of hospitable environments for the iterative generation of life and the evolution of life to the level of contemplative individuals. The potentially infinite arena landscape of the greater universe defeats entropy on a grand scale.

I invoke the cosmological principle to its fullest extent, i.e. throughout an eternity, the universe has looked essentially the same, that being the arena landscape of the greater universe filled with expanding arenas that overlap, where big crunches form in the overlaps, and where limits and thresholds of energy density govern those self perpetuating processes at both the micro and macro level.

The primary processes of the scenario are arena action at the macro level and quantum action at the micro level. Arena action defeats entropy by gathering old galactic material caught up in overlaps of expanding mature arenas full of billions of galaxies into crunches and restoring its usefulness by negating the matter back into useful energy under the most extreme gravity. It proposes that once the maximum possible energy density is reached within a given crunch, matter ceases to function for lack of space. When matter ceases to function then gravity also ceases which leads to the failure of the compression of that particular crunch and results in the burst of that energy into expansion; an newly expanding arena within the landscapes of the ever existing greater universe.

Quantum action allows the presence of matter and gravity through an ongoing process at the micro level that works essentially the same way that arena action works at the macro level. The difference is in the scale at which the two quantization processes operate. At the micro scale a single proton (three quarks) might contain a huge number (a billion, a trillion?) of tiny quantum increments of energy in a never ending process of burst, overlap, collapse (to the maximum energy density limit), burst, expand, overlap, etc. At the macro scale the equivalent of a single proton would be a huge number (billions, trillions?) of gigantic arena increments of energy of which our known expanding “universe” is but one arena.

The wave nature of both the macro and micro environment is made up of arena waves (expanding arenas) at the macro level and the quantum waves (expanding quanta) at the micro level. The wave nature of expansion at both levels results in overlaps of expanding quanta at both levels. The overlaps result in the collapse of the mater and energy in the expanding waves into big crunches at the macro and “high density spots” at the micro level. The collapse at the macro level culminates in the cessation of gravity and the burst, and the quantum collapse at the micro level culminates of a “bounce” off of the unattainable limit of infinite energy density.

Remember that it is difficult to describe any scenario in one or even just a few posts so the above scenario will sound like gibberish without all of the supporting detail (and poking fun at myself, detailed gibberish later).

I’d would like to hear your critique of David’s Absolute Fundamentals thread to see how it compares with mine, and would luv to read any scenario that you might support.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Bogie, I'm not being critical__I'm just being thorough...

Originally by Bogie:
Arena action defeats entropy by gathering old galactic material caught up in overlaps of expanding mature arenas full of billions of galaxies into crunches and restoring its usefulness by negating the matter back into useful energy under the most extreme gravity. It proposes that once the maximum possible energy density is reached within a given crunch, matter ceases to function for lack of space. When matter ceases to function then gravity also ceases which leads to the failure of the compression of that particular crunch and results in the burst of that energy into expansion; an newly expanding arena within the landscapes of the ever existing greater universe.

Due to Guille's model; Force<--Energy<--Matter-->Space-->Time, imo, it's impossible for energy to exist as a separate reality. Energy can only exist as an attribute of Matter in Motion... Dave agrees with this also, thus is why we both agree about a FS being absolutely required to be eternal__he stating its finiteness, and I stating its infinity...

As I've highlighted above in your quoted text, matter can not go 'back into useful energy', because it didn't and can't come from energy__energy comes from FS Matter in Motion__A simple modal necessity of the universally grounded logic involved... You further state 'matter ceases function for lack of space', but what is energy if not the most infinitesimal state of Matter...? Logic requires something of FS to exist to be describable at all, or you're left with a metaphysical ghost, that don't exist. No-one's logic can describe the shape of energy__thus, no math can be done on it, as there's absolutely no place to place the vectors, or derive the quantity/ies of force/s__except in imagination space, which is impossible of reality, without some sort of infinitesimal FS Matter to measure, to draw the borders and quants of space, for vector mechanics to function, to describe a real physical Universe...

You further state above about a 'burst of that energy into expansion', and I'd have to ask; "Where in all of science does one ever witness a burst of energy into expansion...?" Is it not in reality, a burst of energy from the expansionary explosion of the underlying initial matter involved, such as gasoline or plutonium/hydrogen, etc., as in gas-bombs and H-bombs...? The energy is simply our scientific measurement of the fundamental matter substance expanding, we simply call energy, as that's the measurement of the forces involved to do the work of the initial substance. Where in natural science can you give, of any sort of energy exploding__without its underlying fundamental matter, being the real source of the explosion/expansion, and subsequent measure of the forces of energy working on instruments, etc...?

I am quite on David's side on most of this, but neither of us have come to agreements as to the 'prime mover' status of the universe, and this is maybe where you come in, as we need the discussion of the 'prime mover' to take place__as it's the true mystery of all forces' actions, which I happen to state is naturally hydrodynamic, at wave-frequency/thermodynamic limit...

Let me know what you think about our dis-agreements as to FS vs FE, as I and Dave see it as a necessary FS(fundamental substance) and you evidently see it as a FE(fundamental energy...)

I can't see where this gap of interpretation is resolvable, unless you have a solution I've not heard of yet__But these absolute fundamentals have to be addressed first, imo...

Can you explain mechanically how your fundamental energy explodes/expands/inflates__or whatever, as to its basic 'prime mover...?'

[labelwench]

A question from the peanut gallery.

Could the Fundamental Substance have the potential to become either of Mass or Energy, depending if it elected to initiate in a clockwise or counterclockwise direction?

Of course that still begs the question of why or what would cause the initiation, yet still, it is a thought scampering across the screen that is my mind.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Aaah, that which we do not yet know, is such a wonderful mystery...? Hypothetically thinking, if I be a Universe, how do I know what is clockwise or counter-clockwise, before first stationary reference point...? Looked at from opposite ends of wave travel, they both be opposite states, just as galaxies__some say they rotate clockwise, while others say they rotate counder-clockwise__kinda observer dependent__Like, which side of the galaxie one is on, as observer... Know what I mean...?

A question from the peanut gallery.

Could the Fundamental Substance have the potential to become either of Mass or Energy, depending if it elected to initiate in a clockwise or counterclockwise direction?

Of course that still begs the question of why or what would cause the initiation, yet still, it is a thought scampering across the screen that is my mind.

[austintorn@aol.com]

THE LARGE FROM THE SMALL

It has been said that galaxies
Owe their origin to quantum jitters
Suffusing space, enlarged.

Galaxies are nothing
But quantum mechanics
WRIT LARGE across the sky.

It gives me shivers, butterflies,
The willies, the creeps, collywobbles,
The heebie-jeebies, jitteriness,
And the jim-jams just to think about it.

[austintorn@aol.com]

THE COSMIC SUBWAY LINE

While the universe has no potential bounds,
Perhaps the largest a local object can be
Is just before it collapses into a black hole;
The smallest would be of the Planck scale;
So, maybe black holes take in the energy
And transfer it back to within the Planck space.

I have to admit that I made this up.

[labelwench]

THE COSMIC SUBWAY LINE

While the universe has no potential bounds,
Perhaps the largest a local object can be
Is just before it collapses into a black hole;
The smallest would be of the Planck scale;
So, maybe black holes take in the energy
And transfer it back to within the Planck space.

I have to admit that I made this up.

No need to admit it.

Some things are verifiable....

In essence we all 'make things up' from the aggregation that takes place in our brain as it transposes the data of sensory input.

[Bogie]

Bogie, I'm not being critical__I'm just being thorough...



Due to Guille's model; Force<--Energy<--Matter-->Space-->Time, imo, it's impossible for energy to exist as a separate reality. Energy can only exist as an attribute of Matter in Motion... Dave agrees with this also, thus is why we both agree about a FS being absolutely required to be eternal__he stating its finiteness, and I stating its infinity...

As I've highlighted above in your quoted text, matter can not go 'back into useful energy', because it didn't and can't come from energy__energy comes from FS Matter in Motion__A simple modal necessity of the universally grounded logic involved... You further state 'matter ceases function for lack of space', but what is energy if not the most infinitesimal state of Matter...? Logic requires something of FS to exist to be describable at all, or you're left with a metaphysical ghost, that don't exist. No-one's logic can describe the shape of energy__thus, no math can be done on it, as there's absolutely no place to place the vectors, or derive the quantity/ies of force/s__except in imagination space, which is impossible of reality, without some sort of infinitesimal FS Matter to measure, to draw the borders and quants of space, for vector mechanics to function, to describe a real physical Universe...

You further state above about a 'burst of that energy into expansion', and I'd have to ask; "Where in all of science does one ever witness a burst of energy into expansion...?" Is it not in reality, a burst of energy from the expansionary explosion of the underlying initial matter involved, such as gasoline or plutonium/hydrogen, etc., as in gas-bombs and H-bombs...? The energy is simply our scientific measurement of the fundamental matter substance expanding, we simply call energy, as that's the measurement of the forces involved to do the work of the initial substance. Where in natural science can you give, of any sort of energy exploding__without its underlying fundamental matter, being the real source of the explosion/expansion, and subsequent measure of the forces of energy working on instruments, etc...?

I am quite on David's side on most of this, but neither of us have come to agreements as to the 'prime mover' status of the universe, and this is maybe where you come in, as we need the discussion of the 'prime mover' to take place__as it's the true mystery of all forces' actions, which I happen to state is naturally hydrodynamic, at wave-frequency/thermodynamic limit...

Let me know what you think about our dis-agreements as to FS vs FE, as I and Dave see it as a necessary FS(fundamental substance) and you evidently see it as a FE(fundamental energy...)

I can't see where this gap of interpretation is resolvable, unless you have a solution I've not heard of yet__But these absolute fundamentals have to be addressed first, imo...

Can you explain mechanically how your fundamental energy explodes/expands/inflates__or whatever, as to its basic 'prime mover...?'

There is no answer to your request that carries any weight. Yes, I have the big crunches forming and bursting, and yes, I speculate that the crunch/burst defeats entropy by taking the old tired galactic material from mature expanding arenas and compressing it using gravity.

Let me point out that you said there was no known physics that provides for energy to be negated from matter or that causes a burst of energy. I know. My case for the crunch/burst is backed by the weakest of logic. It has no basis in fact. It is just one scenario that could lead to a Big Bang. My QWC is based on that one scenario out of a large selection of possible scenarios, some of which are discussed here under alternative cosmologies.

I chose to agree with the idea that the Big Bang type of event did occur in the history of our “universe”, or arena (my term). I could have said that one of the other alternative cosmologies that we have all been reading about and following for years was the ONE. But I could not get an answer to a simple question, or at least an answer that I could grasp, “What caused the Big Bang?”

So I decided for myself to choose one preceding circumstance, that being that the Big Bang was preceded by a big crunch, and develop that idea from the bottom up ignoring all other theories that were not compatible with it or with each other.

I went on the basis that in order for a crunch to form, gravity could be utilized. I needed existing matter to fall into the crunch. I know of no physics that will slow and stop the observed expansion of our known universe, especially since it is observed that the rate of separation of the galaxies and galaxy groups is accelerating. I had to go outside the Theory of General Relativity and its three “shapes”, open, flat, and closed.

The first step beyond the “shape” of the universe offered by GR is to contemplate the possibility that whatever the cause, more than one and possibly a potentially infinite number of other Big Bang type events could have happened here and there in space and time.

If there were other Big Bangs then I would have the existing matter that I was missing. The intersection and overlap of two “parent” arenas, each originating the same way ours did, could have led to our big crunch.











So speculating on multiple big bangs (arenas), each expanding until they intersect with a similar expanding arena sets the stage for the formation of our very own big crunch.

Are you with me to the extent that you understand my speculations to this point? I said earlier that I had to employ some new physics and this is where the new physics comes in, i.e. speculation on how to form and burst a big crunch.

[Bogie]

A question from the peanut gallery.

Could the Fundamental Substance have the potential to become either of Mass or Energy, depending if it elected to initiate in a clockwise or counterclockwise direction?

Of course that still begs the question of why or what would cause the initiation, yet still, it is a thought scampering across the screen that is my mind.

I'm about to get into my version of counterclockwise clockwise speculation.