My ultimate theory on the universe

[Gem]

Originally Posted by georgeTmaxwell

So if space is constant density and it is expanding, this suggests that there is a wall of space venturing into not space. So what is not space?

gTm
.

It's what I fondly call 'the not'.

Originally Posted by Gem

The density of space is constant, and it is expanding 'space' we are talking about, and that's a bit of an oxymoron, because things aren't expanding into space, space is expanding itself.

Time is a secondary concept. We measure time through a change of state occurring. If there is no change then no time passes. Time is secondary to change.

If we look at the universe from the perspective of light, the amount of time passing between a light particle emission and light particle absorption is instantaneous (in the reference frame of light). If it were not instantaneous then there would need to be a state change within the light particle to register time passing, and there isn't. If no time passes, no distance is traversed and the point of emission is adjacent to the point of absorption.

Similarly Space is a secondary concept. There cannot be space without something occupying it. Space IS density of energy. There is no point in space where there is no energy present.

We can't reason about quantum mechanics and the structure of the physical universe using concepts grounded in human experience! We see an empty room and call that space. We can fill that room and space doesn't change it just gets filled. This is human perception. It doesn't work for the physical universe. We try to bolt our concepts onto the universe and we get silly things like conceiving of a vast infinite emptiness that matter occupies. But there's no way to measure or interact with emptiness. This is just a concept. We measure space through energy changes, speeds of light, temperature, etc. etc. Nowhere in the interaction with space is there any kind of emptiness, it is full. Density is primary and our measurement of space is secondary .

[hybrid]

Originally Posted by Gem

Things move furthur apart so we say space is expanding, but space can't really be becoming a lighter density, only that mass remains the same but in a larger space, so we really say the overall density of matter in the universe is lessening, which is not less matter, but more space.

it takes energy to expand space. or if i may say that space is a form of energy, matter is also a form of energy. so if this energy is being transformed to space, it got to get it somewhere. the engine that propels space expansion is the black hole and the fuel is the matter that is being suck into it in the middle of galaxies and superclusters

Originally Posted by Internal Queries

and then the little boy falls out of bed and wakes up.

hahahahaa. lol

Originally Posted by mattie

I’m not sure I agree w/ collapse, but the general idea may have some merit.

Some say that we continue expanding until we reunite w/ the energies we call God or the Universe. At that time we have the option to deconstruct our energies to experience the creation process anew. ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ Our scientists are discovering that new galaxies are evolving & dying all the time.

What we see as a collapse is probably just a renewal cycle for the energy. Energy never dies, it just changes form. We may not yet perceive what happens w/ the energy but that is irrelevant to the energy!

While I don’t agree w/ Hawkins about everything, I do about his saying that black holes don’t lose information. For black holes think about geometric configurations such as torus & mobius strips. What we see as disappearing into a black hole may well be instantly reappearing on another level or dimension where we can’t perceive it as a new star being created. It may be transferred to a new galactic creation in our own Universe by an energetic method about which we are unaware.

Exactly. When I say collapsing I envision it's like a balloon filling up, then let the air out with your fingers and it contracts, but never loses information. Just goes back to the "All Knowing" Unmanifested. Then in order for the All Knowing Unmanifested to know itself, it sees a universe opposite to it in order to experience The All knowing. Like two universes on a membrane. They collide on the 11th deminsion, then Again there is the 'Here' and 'there' and neither. Another universe is born.

Originally Posted by hybrid

none. those are just educated guesses. big crunch, big bounce, death heat. depending what parameters you used to model the universe. these are speculative thinking that could be based on wrong presupposition.

what evidence shows is that space is not empty, indivisible, irreducible, varies in density.

but it is utter nonsense to think of space will contract to a singularity and leave in its trail a non space that this space used to occupy.

it's far more logical to think of space as infinite and eternal, provided space is thought of as some medium of waves like an aether or higgs field and not as naked emptiness. and it only appears empty to us becasue of its high frequency, so it doesn't interact with our sense organs.

I see this in a vision. Science has come to the conclusion on "The Theory of Everything" is that that the "Big Bang" was created by our universe in form of unmanifested like a membrane. That membrane is the 11th deminsion. Our universe possibly collided with another on the 11th deminsion as in ripples giving birth to our universe. It fits with me, because "space" is no-thing, so it was never created. In order for Space to be there must be two reference points in order for space to be. Without that there is nothing, nothing at all. Not space, or anything. Just All Knowing.

Originally Posted by georgeTmaxwell

So if space is constant density and it is expanding, this suggests that there is a wall of space venturing into not space. So what is not space?

gTm
.

In order for space to be there must be two points. So space is no-thing. It never was created. Without space there is nothing.

Originally Posted by Topology

There is no point in space where there is no energy present.

How can this be known?
.

Originally Posted by Gem

It's what I fondly call 'the not'.

Exactly Gem!

Originally Posted by moke64916

In order for space to be there must be two points. So space is no-thing. It never was created. Without space there is nothing.

So if in one place there is space and in another nothing, then the line between cannot be constant.

This thread has a few different opinions which makes it hard to follow sometimes :)