Posts Tagged ‘The Universe’

Ejecta

Thursday, October 8th, 2015

I don’t fully understand the specifics of string theory, I’ll admit.
However.
I do believe that our current understanding of physics (and our near-term potential understanding of physics) is strongly limited by our perceptions,
and therefore by how we build our instruments.
I’m having a difficult time articulating this, but I can see it.
Imagine an infinity mirror
where each reflection is altered by one item
or degree
until at some point, instead of seeing yourself, you’re seeing William Randolph Hearst, or a cat, or nothing, or a star.
Each reflection changing incrementally.

Now, take that example
(it’s a 1-dimensional example)
Take that 1-D example
and make it 3-D
so that there’s a reflection continuously in every direction
and each one is incrementally different
in spheres, or shells.
Now imagine that each reflection represents a unique state of the universe at a particular point in time.
And imagine an infinite volume, wherein every place you stand is a slightly different state of the current universe.
The farther you go from where you are, the more different the universe is.
You have a hyper-time-space.
(This is not exactly on topic
I realize)
But you, the person Tim, exist in a fuzzy cloud in this hyper-time-space.
There’s a finite volume of hyper-time-space in which Tim¬†exists
and it’s fuzzy at the edges
because at a certain point, you’re no longer Tim
you’re someone else, or nothing.
(well, something like that)
Parallel universes, essentially
in a hyper-universe
which in turn is part of it’s own hyper-hyper-universe
all the way up to infinity
all the way down to infinity
all the way left to infinity
all the way right to infinity.
Now.
Take that concept.
You see patterns repeating in nature
all kinds of patterns.
Slight variations, each in their own domains.
There’s physics: it describes physical things.
There’s physics’ (prime), that describes the physics of the hyper-time-space
and physics” and so on.
I do not think that physics is the only set of universal laws.
It’s the only set that describes physical things, yes
but I think there are analogs to physics.
Different branches on the fractal
that describe things that are not physically measurable
not physically observable.
We have loaded words to point to these things, but I don’t like them
so I won’t use them.
But, for example
Every mass has a gravitational field.
Every molecule has an electromagnetic field.
The equations describing these things are essentially the same
different physics sub-branches on the fractal.

Now image a thing that is unquestionably alive
a plant
a dog
and imagine they have a (for lack of official terminology) life field
analogous to electromagnetic fields
that have similar equations (if you had an analog to math to describe them).
So the life field is to the electromagnetic field as the other-but-not-physics is to physics
and that’s one example.

And so my point is
that string theory, or any other grand unifying theory, is great and wonderful and helpful, but at the same time only addressing a finite aspect of the infinite universe.

 

The Universe