[mkirkpatrick]

As this universe is all a product of mind,thought made manifest so to speak.then it would seem that the centre would be in the mind of the one from whence it came,and as that great mind is also ominipresent then the centre can really be anywhere you want it to be,it really matters not.houghts are things so the ancient axiom says,and those things just happen to be you and I,and all the rest of manifestion,one great thought,with many minor ones,looking ror attention.
Upon a Membrane of liquid consciousness we exist and have our being.is not that a comforting thought to centre on?

kind regards,michael

[hiren]

Well nothing also means something and something can means nothing. As zero is nothing but still its something. We are all confused in nothing, something, everything. whether universe is from one of this or from all of this.

But my imagination says all we see or feel or invents is something thats we are also madeup of and still there is lots of thing around us that we cant see or feel or invents because we are not made up of that thing. Now nothing can be for us for all that thing that we are not made up of and for them vice versa. and for all that thing we are made up of are meant everything to us. So complete nothing does not exists.

[zeroca]

My computer was broken down, so I lost the time:

Originally Posted by dleviwing

Is your theory attempting to solve this anomaly of the standard BB model?

My theory appeared in my mind long before of the moment I heard about the BB theory, so if I used the term BB, it was only for people to guess what I was talking about. I offer my own theory;
It's a big problem for me to explain just the concept - something from nothing, but I always try my best to do it.

Originally Posted by dleviwing

I also have a problem with something from nothing concepts. (Standard Big Bang model)

I also have a problem with something that always existed concept...

Originally Posted by dleviwing

Motion is an absolute quantity of any physical system. The sum total of uniform and random motion of a system is equivalent to "Absolute Motion";

It wasn't to no purpose I asked you about absoluteness of motion: I practiced for 10 years the system named by me "Active zero" and it is based on motion of universe (absolute motion - call it so if you wish), and absolute motionless nothingness.
I'll try to explain it briefly:
To illustrate the point let us imagine the universe in the form of the room (gravitation of the earth is ignored), that's full of small balls (the room-the universe, small balls-bodies, having mass). The small balls differ from each other in mass, solidity, proportions..., and all of them make sort of regular movement, each of them has it's trajectory and kinetic energy. Let's imagine, that all of them are united with one another by the thread (each of them to adjacent one and so on. . .), (exactly all bodies are connected with each other by "invisible thread", as they are separate parts of a single whole). Each small ball affects next one, but doesn't affect or affects very little on an infinitely distant small ball. They seem to be thrown about in the room without control (all bodies in three-dimensional space of universe), but in case of fastening of one of them to the ceiling, i.e. to the immovable basis, the movement of every rest small balls (that's to say, without exception, even indefinitely distant ones) will be conditioned by fastened small ball. Their kinetics will change to harmony (i.e. each body will start to move with a minimal loss of energy like a drop of water, that "tries" to take a rounded shape during free fall) and if the fastening of a small ball ("fastening" of the whole universe through the one body) is continuing during the time, every rest small balls will strive to take up its natural place i.e. ultimately will move with the speed and trajectory, that will be the most suitable for their parameters (mass, capacity, consistence . . .).
One can compare the above with electrolyte: until the system isn't turned on, all ions move sporadically, but after its turning on each ion "knows where to go" according to its charge, and at a speed, succession and trajectory in accordance with their other parameters.
Immovable basis is nothingness. Any of bodies, even body of the human can be the "fastened small ball", only it should be connected (fastened) with an immovable basis (nothingness). (I do not explain here how to do it).
So the absolute motion of universe can be conditioned by one of its immovable part.

[subversion]

Originally Posted by dleviwing

Just like riding in a car, everything in the car has the same quantity of motion as the car even though the quantities of matter are different. Movement inside the car only changes how the motion is distributed by the matter of those objects. Our vehicle is the universe; everything in the universe has the same quantity of motion; thus "Absolute".

but if somebody starts moving around in the car, it doesn't detract from the motion of the car, thus absolute motion is not conserved

[dleviwing]

Zeroca;
It requires an enormous effort to comprehend the current Standard Models both perceptually and mathematically. Once this effort is accomplished however, it provides the means to express your thoughts in rigid conceptual concepts. Though I can follow your ideas, I don't think they will meet the criteria of a science paper.
Best wishes;
Dave

[dleviwing]

Originally Posted by subversion

but if somebody starts moving around in the car, it doesn't detract from the motion of the car, thus absolute motion is not conserved

sub;
To move around in the car as you say, requires you to make physical contact with some part of the car and thus will momentarily cause a disturbance in the way the Absolute motion of the car is distributed just as it will change the distribution of your absolute motion.
Absolute motion = Random motion wave function + Uniform motion.
When uniform motion increases, random motion decreases and thus the wave function is shorter.
Why do you think conservation laws actually work?
Because we can't change the total quantity of motion in any system.

[subversion]

Originally Posted by dleviwing

sub;
To move around in the car as you say, requires you to make physical contact with some part of the car and thus will momentarily cause a disturbance in the way the Absolute motion of the car is distributed just as it will change the distribution of your absolute motion.
Absolute motion = Random motion wave function + Uniform motion.
When uniform motion increases, random motion decreases and thus the wave function is shorter.

I thought the absolute motion was determined by the speed of the car? THe motion of inside occupants does not effect the motion of the car. Let me ask you this, when you flail your arms around in the car, producing uniform motion, specifically what random motion is decreasing?

Originally Posted by dleviwing

Why do you think conservation laws actually work?
Because we can't change the total quantity of motion in any system.

sure we can, just convert some mass to energy. Example, explode an atomic bomb and you get more motion in the system then you had before.

[mkirkpatrick]

There is no beginning and no end,so how then could you have a center!Simple.
you cannot,the universe exists within the mind of the One,and that one has
no center that anyone I know,knows Of!Ifone was very self-centered then it
may be found there!


kind regards michael.

[dleviwing]

I thought the absolute motion was determined by the speed of the car? THe motion of inside occupants does not effect the motion of the car. Let me ask you this, when you flail your arms around in the car, producing uniform motion, specifically what random motion is decreasing?

Sub;
The car and everything in it represents the universe and all that is in it. When you refer to waving your arms, you are acting on the absolute motion of you as a system. The change in how you have redistributed your motion does not affect the total quantity of motion in you as a system nor in the total quantity of the car and its contents as a system.
The universe as a system has "absolute motion". Each object down to the smallest unit of structure within the universe has this same quantity of motion. Only the unstructured state of matter can be viewed as having different quantities of motion and that is only due to the fact that we are only viewing a part of the universe system. This is the same as only looking at the wave function motion of a particle – it is only a part of the system being looked at.
The total quantity of motion of a system is always a fixed absolute.

sure we can, just convert some mass to energy. Example, explode an atomic bomb and you get more motion in the system then you had before.

Angular momentum defines what constitutes a unit system. The smallest system is defined by Planck's mass constant. If we destroy this unit and disperse the matter into the universe as EM, we have not added motion to the universe, we have only changed how absolute motion is distributed and the quantity of matter that contributes to the space of the universe.

You are but one of the blind wise men describing your elephant.
Best wishes;
Dave

[mkirkpatrick]

When there is no beginning and no end,where everywhere streaches out into
infinity,it does sound alittle absurd to talk of middles!I suppose that the mind
has difficulty in grasping the idea of the eternal,of foreverness without boundry.
The very concept of endless expanse is mind boggling,however if we persist and
think this thing through,we do finally conclude that this must be so.If then there
is no beginning,no end,then it follows that there is no middle,or centre!
This very idea reminds me of the story of the two little fish,who come across a
larger fish,who says to these two little ones,I have heard talk about something
called Water-could you tell me where I could find It?


kind regards michael.