My Universe

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » My Universe

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

dkane75
 
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 07:57 pm
This is my attempt to describe the fundamental nature of the universe as intuitively as I possibly can. This is the highly condensed version which I don't expect you to fully understand. Whatever you don't get, just ask me, and I'll be happy to elaborate! [In my universe, none of these things exist: 1) caused gravity, 2) Electromagnetic radiation, 3) a "Big Bang", or 4) Einsteinian Relativity.]


1. Size: Finite. We can say that it is infinite just because we don't know how large it is. In other words, it is indeterminably large. The other use of the term, infinite, meaning of "absolute extent" does not make much philosophical sense. It is more of a language game than a meaningful concept.

2. Shape : A continuous volume. This means that all points in the universe are surrounded by other points. There is no "edge". No points are priviledged. Think about the 3-D equivalent of the surface of a sphere. There is no way to visualize this shape. If you were to shoot a beam of light into empty space, it would theoretically hit you in the back after many, many ages!

3. Substance: My universe is composed of an extraordinarily dense, yet extraordinarily fluid dynamical medium.

4. Gravity: This is the fundamental action of the substance of my universe. In other words, gravity is not caused. We can think of gravity as being a spontaneous 4-D pressure that is directed radially inward towards a single point. Just think of this in terms of being in a 2-D universe. To a 2-D being, a 3-D force will seem to be instantaneous. That is, the force will be able to operate on many points in 2-D space all at once. (I know this is a badly worded explanation. I will post more detailed explanations later.)

5. Atoms and Electromagnetism: Atoms are fundamental units of spatially bounded pure energy, and they are created via the intense pressures within gravity fields. They consist of a shell (electrons) and a core (protons and neutrons). We call the main force that keeps the shell and the core together: magnetic attraction. When the shell is forcefully separated from the core, it naturally seeks to come back into stability. The act of coming back into stability is called electric current. Electric current is nothing other than the substance of the universe passing through itself at extremely high speeds, leaving a magnetic field in its wake. (The strong and the weak atomic forces should also be included in this section. They are also "binding forces" that keep atoms together.)

6. Light: When the structure of an otherwise stable atom is fundamentally altered, it lets out an extraordinarily intense amount of energy. The energy is released tangentially to the surface of the atom. This leads to indefinitely propagating, ever enlarging transverse waves of energy that move through the medium of the universe until the energy is fully absorbed by the surrounding atoms. [Note that light energy is different from electric current because light waves do not involve net motions of the substance of the universe. Energy waves are simply transfers of pure kinetic energy, and not of substance itself.]


Bottom line: My universe is a indeterminably large, continuous volume that consists of an extraordinarily dense and fluid substance. Gravity is the fundamental action of the universe that creates spatially bounded units of pure energy called atoms. Electricity and magnetism are functions of an atom's tendency to find its state of most stable configuration. When atoms are fundamentally altered, its internal energy escapes into the surrounding medium in the form of ever-expanding transverse waves.
 
Vasska
 
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2008 03:35 am
@dkane75,
It's great to see other people busy with this subject and to ignore some of the scientific ideas for the sake of experimentation. However I find your universe to raise more questions than other explanations;

You state that size is finite, has an ending (that we just don't know yet) and does not grow. At point #1 and point #2 you state that everything that reaches the end of the universe (which it will eventually do, since it is finite) starts at the beginning again (The light beam). Also at point #2 you state that all particles, or points as you call them, are surrounded by other points. If you accepted Einstein's relativity this would prove right, otherwise it will not, so why deny the law of relativity


Gravity is completely random according to point #4, but please elaborate on whether this randomness gravity is forever focused at one point or temporary?

At Point #5 you state that atoms are the effect of gravitational pressure, however if the whole universe is build up from atoms, which is our current scientific believe, doesn't that mean there must be gravitational pressure in the whole universe?
 
dkane75
 
Reply Mon 31 Mar, 2008 05:27 pm
@Vasska,
Nice questions. Thanks.

No, just like the surface of a sphere, my universe does not have a spatial ending. If you are talking about time, that is a different question entirely, and to attempt to explain it very quickly is impossible. In a word, the temporal extent of my universe is: 1. However, this 1 is not just any 1. As you can see, it is unit-less. We can discuss this idea more if you want.

When I talk about Einsteinian relativity, I am referring entirely to the notions of length contraction and time dilation. Again, my reasonings for my disagreements with relativists are extensive. I would just say that a critical reading of Relativity: The Special and General Theory by Einstein reveals many logical "irregularities".

Every gravity field in my universe consists of a singularity. This is a point of unimaginable density and smallness. No gravity fields are permanent. They come and go with no rhyme or reason. You can think of gravity fields as the inhalations of God, if you wish.

I don't know anyone who says that the universe is "built up from atoms". Some say that atoms exist within the space of the universe. You have to think about energy, too. Regardless, pretty much everyone says that atoms have mass and therefore atoms have gravity fields of their own.

In my universe, however, gravity is an entirely cosmic force that creates matter (contains energy), destroys matter (liberates energy), and structures vast regions of the universe.
 
Vasska
 
Reply Tue 1 Apr, 2008 02:49 pm
@dkane75,
dkane75 wrote:
Nice questions. Thanks.

No, just like the surface of a sphere, my universe does not have a spatial ending. If you are talking about time, that is a different question entirely, and to attempt to explain it very quickly is impossible. In a word, the temporal extent of my universe is: 1. However, this 1 is not just any 1. As you can see, it is unit-less. We can discuss this idea more if you want.


So your universe does not end but is finite if i understand you correctly? I did not say anything about Time, but please elaborate on the unit-less.


Quote:
When I talk about Einsteinian relativity, I am referring entirely to the notions of length contraction and time dilation. Again, my reasonings for my disagreements with relativists are extensive. I would just say that a critical reading of Relativity: The Special and General Theory by Einstein reveals many logical "irregularities".
I'm not familiar enough with Einsteins laws to discuss it's irregularities.

Quote:
Every gravity field in my universe consists of a singularity. This is a point of unimaginable density and smallness. No gravity fields are permanent. They come and go with no rhyme or reason. You can think of gravity fields as the inhalations of God, if you wish.
I know what singularity is, but find it hard to imagine that we've got so much singularity around to make gravity work. If gravity fields are not permanent how come that we don't lose it on earth, or even in our entire Solar system. If you say that this temporary state can be millions or even billions of years before devolving i haven't mentioned this.

Quote:
I don't know anyone who says that the universe is "built up from atoms". Some say that atoms exist within the space of the universe. You have to think about energy, too. Regardless, pretty much everyone says that atoms have mass and therefore atoms have gravity fields of their own.
Than what are we build of? Maybe I've got a problem with creating a fine line between what is based on atoms and what's not. But as far as i have learned everything (at least on earth) is composed of atoms.

Quote:
In my universe, however, gravity is an entirely cosmic force that creates matter (contains energy), destroys matter (liberates energy), and structures vast regions of the universe.
I can find myself in this theory, but don't know where to fit it in completely. I'm still learning about how the universe has been composed according to (modern science).

I think it's better for you to also post this theory on the more scientific forums on the internet. This is a philosophy forum and even though Science and philosophy can be big friends at times, we still don't know enough about it to argue about the universe in the way you do. Also nobody except me is replying to your thread, and even I am asking simple questions for i don't know much about it yet. (I just started reading books about it just before you posted your thread).
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » My Universe
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 12/04/2023 at 03:08:56