Quantum Wave Cosmology is my TOE :)

[melanie]

.

Read about ... Hyperdimensional Nebulae: Cubes in Space and the 2012 Case

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/st...-the-2012-case


Just sharing .......

[Bogie]

.

Read about ... Hyperdimensional Nebulae: Cubes in Space and the 2012 Case

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/st...-the-2012-case

Just sharing .......

How little we really know .

[Bogie]

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.

OK, I am wondering if the TOE has to stop short of invoking new physics. I don’t think that should be so but I do think that any new physics must be a clear way forward and in the case of QWC the new physics that I come up with gets me there. It is simple, fits with existing science, and solves a problem that current physics cannot solve, i.e. it answers the question, “What caused the Big Bang”.

Now let me qualify my use of new physics to say that I have no expectations that the physics that I need to invoke to make QWC work is at all likely to be what it takes to solve the TOE puzzle. I just know that it is a way forward for my one narrow view of cosmology. As I showed by way of a link in my last post, there are a whole lot of scenarios and if you read them you may not find any new physics boldly proclaimed. So if they don’t invoke new physics and if they say they have a way forward with their alternative cosmology, then I haven’t become aware of any consensus and I’m sure there is no accepted TOE yet. But if the final TOE does need new physics I don’t claim that the physics that I need as a way forward with QWC is the right new physics or the right application of it.

End of disclaimer.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

I'm not ignoring you Bogie, I'm just waiting for you to state your, what you call, New Physics... Btw, cosmology's always been a favorite field of mine, and no, I admit to having no ToE, and neither does anyone else on the Quest__So, please state your ideas__But also, realize you haven't solved the FS vs. FE problem yet, either... If you think your New Physics solves this also, please state that also...

OK, I am wondering if the TOE has to stop short of invoking new physics. I don’t think that should be so but I do think that any new physics must be a clear way forward and in the case of QWC the new physics that I come up with gets me there. It is simple, fits with existing science, and solves a problem that current physics cannot solve, i.e. it answers the question, “What caused the Big Bang”.

Now let me qualify my use of new physics to say that I have no expectations that the physics that I need to invoke to make QWC work is at all likely to be what it takes to solve the TOE puzzle. I just know that it is a way forward for my one narrow view of cosmology. As I showed by way of a link in my last post, there are a whole lot of scenarios and if you read them you may not find any new physics boldly proclaimed. So if they don’t invoke new physics and if they say they have a way forward with their alternative cosmology, then I haven’t become aware of any consensus and I’m sure there is no accepted TOE yet. But if the final TOE does need new physics I don’t claim that the physics that I need as a way forward with QWC is the right new physics or the right application of it.

End of disclaimer.

[Bogie]

I'm not ignoring you Bogie, I'm just waiting for you to state your, what you call, New Physics... Btw, cosmology's always been a favorite field of mine, and no, I admit to having no ToE, and neither does anyone else on the Quest__So, please state your ideas__But also, realize you haven't solved the FS vs. FE problem yet, either... If you think your New Physics solves this also, please state that also...

Thank you Lloyd. I hope that you take my disclaimer as distancing myself from claiming I have solved anything. I'm clear about QWC being speculation, without proof, without advocates other than me, and unlikely to be of any impact on the TOE. I look forward to discussing the FS vs. FE and understand that discussion has to take place after the basic speculations and definitions of my cosmology are posted. I don't fully grasp yet how to conduct that discussion.

New physics of QWC: I have already mentioned that I consider energy to be an infinitely fine commodity. This is no simple concept for anyone to accept or to immediately grasp, and I only invoke it because it is necessary to make “energy density” an important scalar that governs limits and thresholds of the processes of quantization. Energy density simply means that the energy commodity can be compressed by those processes, i.e. while energy is in the form of matter. From that energy commodity, energy can be quantized allowing the presence of matter in quantum increments and allowing mass to continually emanate gravity. In a universe that has always existed in full mature working order, those processes and their limits and thresholds have always been in place and operating.

There is an as yet unobserved new state of the energy commodity called the dense state. This state is unobserved because it can only come into play under the level of energy density that can only be produced in a big crunch at the macro level and in the high density spot phase of the quantization process at the micro level.

The way that the dense state comes into play has to do with the idea that matter requires a particular amount of space per quantum of energy to function. At the levels of energy density possible in a big crunch, that level is exceeded. That restricts the space available per quantum of energy and the process that maintains the presence of mass ceases to function. That process that is halted is called quantum action and it is responsible for refreshing the presence of mass once every quantum period, (a period so short is it immeasurable). Also a part of the same process is the emanation of gravity waves from mass which also occurs once every quantum period. The process of quantum action has phases that allow the process to be perpetual as long as the energy density remains within the functional range. This process is going on within particles with mass, but the way that larger particles and groupings interact is also a function of energy density. The functioning of mass slows down as the energy density of the mass approaches the limit. In a big crunch when the energy density exceeds the functional range, mass ceases to function and gravity ceases. Effectively, for the energy that is negated from matter, time stops.

Exactly how the cessation of the mass function and the cessation of gravity effects the big crunch is open for debate, but in my way of thinking it will have several effects. First of all dense state energy will begin to accumulate at the center of the big crunch and the effect will be very gradual because the accretion into the big crunch has plenty of old galactic remnants to keep a positive gravitation field in place and pulling in remnants from the parent arenas. But as the accretion continues, the core of negated matter, i.e. dense state energy would get bigger and bigger.

The dynamics of the intersection of two expanding arenas causes the overlap to effect more and more of the galactic content of the two arenas while at the same time there are as yet unaffected portions of the parents that are still moving away from the overlap space based on their expansion momentum. The accretion of galactic remnants into the crunch reaches a peak and then declines. This slowing of accretion coupled with the gradually increase of the negated core allows the total gravity of the crunch to reach a point where the core negates matter faster than accretion adds matter to the crunch. This is the point of critical capacity and marks the point of no return, i.e. the impending failure of the gravitational field that has served to contain the dense state energy.

A sequence of events is triggered at this point that leads to the burst of the big crunch and the release of the core of dense state energy.

[melanie]

We are not our bodies, we are energy.
We are electromagnetic beings, sending out electromagnetic waves that come from our thoughts and emotions.
Every thought we embrace has it's own frequency, bringing back to us exactly what we send out.
98% of behavior is stimulus/response, conditioned unconscious intentionality, until you become aware.

Everything in the universe including you, are energy waves and vibrations at a subatomic level.

We are all connected in this invisible Quantum Field which is an unlimited power source.

When the waves and energy are observed, they form particles which make up everything in the Universe.
You are the Observer.


"He who looks outside, dreams; he who looks inside, awakens."
Carl Jung

[melanie]

How little we really know .

"To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge."
~ Copernicus

[labelwench]

From Copernicus to Copernicium.......addles my mind, lol.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernicium

We quantify and qualify the pieces, yet the whole eludes us, or at the least, it eludes me.

[melanie]

We quantify and qualify the pieces, yet the whole eludes us, or at the least, it eludes me.

Knowing any-thing is what creates a knower. A centre in which the knowing is apparently housed.

The 'knower' cannot know that there is no knower .. to know that .. would need a knower.

There is only the knowing .. The knower and the known emerge from within the split mind.
They are conceptual overlays .. the dream of separation.


The Knowingness,and the I-am-ness are opposite sides of the same coin.
they are antithetical,and can never become each other or even see each other....and yet, they are the same.

Any talk of a doughnut hole .. has to be about the doughnut....

'You' are the known, and the known cannot know, for one very good reason....

[labelwench]

Knowing any-thing is what creates a knower. A centre in which the knowing is apparently housed.

The 'knower' cannot know that there is no knower .. to know that .. would need a knower.

There is only the knowing .. The knower and the known emerge from within the split mind.
They are conceptual overlays .. the dream of separation.


The Knowingness,and the I-am-ness are opposite sides of the same coin.
they are antithetical,and can never become each other or even see each other....and yet, they are the same.

Any talk of a doughnut hole .. has to be about the doughnut....

'You' are the known, and the known cannot know, for one very good reason....

Of course.

When one is but a part of a greater whole, one does not have the vantage point to view oneself within the broader structure.

One can sense, and perhaps visualize what such structure and one's place may appear as, yet there can be no such measurable proof or test.

No need to 'know' or 'see'.

I 'is', for the present moment, and that suffices.