Thoughts about the Universe

This is a bit indulgent but I am supposed to be a sci-fi writer so here’s some scientific thinking:

There is a problem in modern physics that doesn’t seem to want to be solved. That is, the incompatibility between Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. String Theory and M-Theory are our best attempts to unify quantum mechanics and gravity (don’t ask me how), but there are a couple of things I don’t like about String Theory.

The idea String Theory hooks you with is elegant and easy to understand: that all sub-atomic particles are in fact all manifestations of the same tiny “strings”, but the strings vibrate at different frequencies giving the different particle properties that we see at the macro level. Then it gets trickier: the strings actually are only one dimensional (what the?) and they vibrate in eleven dimensional space (they’re taking the piss). What’s more, dimensions 5 to 11 are too small to see. They are “curled up” apparently – tinier than atoms (what do they take us for?).

Somehow I don’t think Einstein would have liked the theory because it is impossible to imagine. It is unsatisfactory because it is impossible to conceive of those 11 dimensions (although it is fascinating to try). It is similar to the problem I have with the big bang theory as it stands, which states that everything started from an insanely tiny point in space that was insanely dense that exploded in a Big Bang and has been inflating ever since. I mean you cannot imagine all space and time being compressed to a tiny point because you immediately start thinking about a little dot in, well, an empty space. But the empty space is not supposed to have existed before the Big Bang, because all space and time supposedly came from that little dot. My intuition tells me that if a theory cannot be properly imagined then it must be bollocks.

My dad, John, got me thinking when he described a theory he has about all this. I can’t do it justice here because I don’t understand all he was telling me, but some of his ideas were something like this: The matter in galaxies was not all created in the Big Bang, but is in fact generated continuously by the galaxy. At the centre of most galaxies is a super-massive black-hole, which according to hawkins, are not completely black – they radiate something or other. These black holes, in my dad’s theory, are actually made of antimatter and so repel the ordinary matter that it creates. The black hole will “weigh” roughly the same as the matter it creates, and so if you add all the matter and antimatter from a galaxy together (i.e. the stars and the super-massive black hole in its centre) you get nothing. Well, actually you will have a little more antimatter because the stars will have radiated heat and light and since E=mc squared the energy loss means some mass loss. So the repulsive force slightly outweighs the attractive pull of gravity (from all the stars) and so over millions of years you get the spirally shape of the typical galaxy. Of course, if you believe this theory then the entire big bang model is put into question. Fred Hoyle’s steady-state model becomes more attractive.

Anyway, I think this idea is very elegant, that galaxies are kind of fundamental and self-sufficient. John Webber has an explanation of what is going on at the quantum level too. Again, these words are only an interpretation of what he told me. His idea is a bit similar to string theory in that the most fundamental “thing” is something that has a variable property to evoke the different particles of matter that we observe in experiment, electrons, protons and so on. But he evokes a model reminiscent of the old “ether”, which is interesting. Now, the ether was proven not to exist a long time ago, but this idea is not the ether, only something similar. I would like to call it the “mesh” instead of the ether. The mesh, like the old ether, is something that exists everywhere, and everything that exists exists in the Mesh. The mesh is a three dimensional grid of points, and each point has a value. It could be modelled in a computer as a 3d array of integers, where empty space is a 3d array where all the values are zero. The 3 dimensions of space and 1 dimension of time that we experience is not the same as the Mesh but are isomorphic with it, just like a running computer program is not the same as the code, but is isomorphic to it. A running computer program is a manifestation of the code running on the machine. Our reality is to the Mesh as a running computer program is to the code. If you alter a line of code in a program you might change something in the running program, like the colour of some textual label on the gui or even cause a bug. If you alter a value in the mesh you could cause a particle to change into another particle in reality, or perhaps trigger some nuclear reaction.

How does the mesh help to explain anything? Well for one, perhaps it gives some idea as to why the speed of light might be constant, because perhaps the speed of light is isomorphic to the speed with which value changes ripple through the mesh. In Einstein’s theory of general relativity (which of course I am not questioning because it has been proven by experiment) the speed of light is constant but gravity and/or relative velocity alter one’s perception of the passage of time and the perception of space. In other words space and time is “curved” by gravity. I’ve never been happy with this description. It curves with respect to what? If we have the Mesh, we can say that space and time curves with respect to the Mesh.

The Mesh might also begin to explain why we cannot reconcile quantum mechanics and relativity. The two theories accurately predict measurements we make with experiments but they seem to contradict one another. For example relativity allows the singularity (the point of infinite mass from the which our universe has supposedly sprung from) but this is an absurdity in quantum mechanics. I wonder if the two theories cannot be reconciled because in fact they are describing different things. Maybe when we study the very very small – matter at the atomic scale, we are actually “seeing” the Mesh. Intuition tells us that our everyday spacial dimensions, as measured by say, centimetres, can always be made smaller. You can always have 0.1 cm or 0.01 cm or 0.001 cm. When we study very tiny objects we have always assumed that the object can actually be measured using our everyday measurements. But in fact they can’t because when we study the very tiny we’re actually looking at the Mesh.

This begs the question: well which one is reality then?, the Mesh or the everyday world? The answer is that it is the Mesh which is the reality. Quantum mechanics models reality, whereas relativity only models what is projected into our human worlds by the Mesh. Or to put it another way Niels Bohr was looking at the code whilst Einstein was looking at the running program.

Advertisements

Tags: , , ,

3 Responses to “Thoughts about the Universe”

  1. Russell Says:

    How can your brain cope with all this stuff? Having two kids as well now? Since leaving Uni I think I’ve regressed to simplifying things, perhaps a little too much. For instance, i’ve now got to go and clean up a pooey nappy, which in its own way is pretty messhy (!)

  2. Don Says:

    The “mesh” can exist if the nodes of the mesh are a lattice and the object (particle) between each node is an imaginary Planck length zero frequency Neumann string carrying a quantum charge of electromagnetic gauge. Whew! That is one long run on sentence. Let me interpret the meaning of the above sentence.
    1. The lattice consists of 6 pure imaginary space dimensions, which generate the 3 real dimensions we percieve. The distance between lattice nodes is the Planck length, which makes space discrete (i.e. quantized). An object, which I call an elon, exists between each node of the imaginary lattice. The lattice has a God given structure which ensures there are 12 elons touching each node of the lattice.
    2. All elons in the lattice are moving at the speed of space (i.e. speed of light) in the direction of their long axis. There are six elons moving into each node and six elons moving out of each node. This means that there is a universal clock with a quantum tick, whereby all elons will move one Planck length from node to node at each tick of the clock. This generates one unversal dimension of time and ensures that all observers will measure the speed of light to be the same no mater what their speed is relative to any other object.
    3. Each elon carries a quantum of electric charge smeared out over its whole, albiet short length. Because the elon is moving at the speed of space (i.e. speed of light) it has the dimensional content of a thread/string/rod of magnetic flux. Therefore, at each node there is a positive magnetic monopole and a negative magnetic monopole, which is why magnets always have a north and south pole.
    4. Finally because each elon is imaginary, two or more of them must interact via their dynamic geometry to create the matter and forces we observe in “real” space. This means that much of what is “physical” is hidden from observation (because it is imaginary) and results in all the strange phenomenon we see today such as: quantum entanglement, dark energy, dark matter.
    5. The cosmological implication of elons is that they have always existed and will always exist (i.e. they are neither created nor destroyed). Matter comes about when two elons interact. The interaction of elons produces three quantum states: energy, anti-energy, and wave space (i.e. the void). This means that at the beginning of creation, all elons entered into a quantum state which produced maximal matter/energy, somewhat like having a black hole being created at each node in space. Because the natural state of elons is to tend towards wave space, this mass of matter/energy begins to “melt” at the very first tick of its creation. Instead of space expanding because of a “Big Bang”, space melts because of a “Fast Freeze”. A Fast Freeze mimicks the initial conditions of a Big Bang without all the hoops necessary to make the Big Bang work (inflation, quantum ripples in a homogeneous material). The only price that must be paid is that matter/energy must appear to disappear from the “real” universe instead of expanding away.

  3. Curved Thought And Textual Says:

    […] Thoughts about the Universe « DJ Webber, Author of Oom,'s Blog If you alter a line of code in a program you might change something in the running program, like the colour of some textual label on the gui or even cause a bug. If you alter a value in the mesh you could cause a particle to change into another particle in . In other words space and time is “curved” by gravity. I've never been happy with this description. It curves with respect to what? If we have the Mesh, we can say that space and time curves with respect to the Mesh. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: