The Cryptomathematical Universe
Alan Guth believed that the universe bubbled up out of a pre-universal singularity. During a short moment, all the forces and building stones of matter were one. When the Higgs-field symmetries started to break up, followed a hot expansion
Computerized image of a particle interaction with the Higgs Field
The Higgs Field is an energy field that exists everywhere in the universe. The field is accompanied by a fundamental particle called the Higgs Boson, which the field uses to continuously interact with other particles. As particles pass through the field they are “given” mass, much as an object passing through treacle (or molasses) will become slower. Mass itself is not generated by the Higgs field- the creation of matter or energy would conflict with the laws of conservation. However, mass is “imparted” to particles from the Higgs field, which contains the relative mass in the form of energy. Once the field has endowed a formerly massless particle the particle slows down because it has become heavier. If the Higgs field did not exist, particles would not have the mass required to attract one another, and would float around freely at light speed.( source; the simple Wikipedia)
Shortly after the Big Bang, the Higgs-field became super cooled and got blocked. This resulted in a false vacuum with latent energy, called false not to confuse it with the empty space. Following insights, already developed by Einstein in his General Relativity Theory, such a pseudo-vacuum would cause a repulsive force, resulting in a short period of swelling up, were by the area that would become our visible universe, exploded. When the Higgs-field instead of exploding, coagulated, can it be possible that this created parallel universes, divided by energy fields that are dividing the universe into different domains. The swelling up scenario would also explain the whereabouts of the monopoles; they got scattered over the universe during the explosion.
If there were things happening before the Big Bang, then they don’t have any influence upon what’s actually happening. We don’t have to take into account their existence because they don’t have any consequences for our observations. We can postulate that time started with the Big Bang because previous times are undefined
The Universe is governed by four fundamental forces; Gravity, Electromagnetism, Weak Core Energy and Strong Core Energy with the space-time as background.
Image of the space-time curvature that causes gravity. The central idea of general relativity is that space and time are two aspects of space-time. Space-time is curved when there is gravity, matter, energy, and momentum. The links between these forces are shown in the Einstein Field Equations. One equation in General relativity is E=mc^2, and there are many more (source the simple Wikipedia).
Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity describes gravitation as a consequence of the curvature of space-time. The gravitational force that two objects exercise upon each other can very nearly be calculated by Newton’s universal gravitation law.
Einstein’s relativity theory described where gravity is coming from by applying a couple of basic principles and was long time challenged by the Quantum Mechanics Field Theory, till the Grand Unified Theory (GUT) created a frame where they could coexist.
Quantum Mechanics is the part of physics that can explain why all electronic technology works as it does. Thus QM explains how computers work, because computers are electronic machines. But the designers of the early computer hardware of around 1950 or 1960 did not need to think about QM. The designers of radios and televisions at that time did not think about QM either. However, the design of the more powerful integrated circuits and computer memory technologies of recent years does require QM. The base of QM is the Schrodinger Equation and is up to now the most accurate theory of how subatomic particles behave. It defines something called the wave function of a particle or system (group of particles) which has a certain value at every point in space for every given time. These values have no physical meaning, yet the wave function contains all information that can be known about a particle or system. This information can be found by mathematically manipulating the wave function to return real values relating to physical properties such as position, momentum(mass times velocity), energy, etc. The wave function can be thought of as a picture of how this particle or system acts with time and describes it as fully as possible.
The wave function can be in a number of different states at once, and so a particle may have many different positions, energies, velocities or other physical property at the same time (i.e. “be in two places at once”). However, when one of these properties is measured it has only one specific value (which cannot be definitely predicted), and the wave function is therefore in just one specific state. This is called wave function collapse and seems to be caused by the act of observation or measurement. The exact cause and interpretation of wave function collapse is still widely debated in the scientific community.
Image of a wave-particle duality
It is also a more general theory of quantum gravity and is an area of active research. It postulates that the gravitational force is mediated by a massless spin-2 particle called the graviton and hypotheses that gravity could have separated from the electronuclear force during the grand unification period.
Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces of the universe and is approximately 10−38 times the strength of the strong force, 10−36 times the strength of the electromagnetic force, and 10−29 times the strength of the weak force. As a result, gravity has a negligible influence on the behavior of sub-atomic particles, and plays no role in determining the internal characteristics of daily matter. Nevertheless, gravity is responsible for causing the stars to form constellations, the planets to orbit the stars, the internal heating up from the stars and for various other phenomena observed throughout the universe. That is because gravity is the only force acting on all particles, has an infinite range, is always attractive and never repulsive and it cannot be absorbed, transformed, or shielded against.
The electromagnetic force is a kind of physical interaction that occurs between electrically charged objects and usually manifests into the form of an electromagnetic field. It plays an important role in determining the internal properties of most common everyday objects. Matter takes its shape as a result of intermolecular forces between individual molecules in matter. Electromagnetic waves mechanics bind particles into orbitals around atomic nuclei to form atoms, which are the building stones of molecules. Processes involved in chemistry arise from interactions between the electrons of neighboring atoms, determined by the interaction between electromagnetic force and the momentum of the electrons.
In traditional electrodynamics, electric fields are described as electric potential and electric current in Ohm’s law, magnetic fields are associated with electromagnetic induction and magnetism, while Maxwell’s equations describe how electric and magnetic fields are generated and influence each other by charges and currents.
The establishment of the speed of light based on properties of the “medium” of propagation (permeability and permittivity), led to the development of special relativity theorem by Albert Einstein. At high energy the weak force and electromagnetism are unified. During the making of the universe, during the quark epoch, the electroweak force split into the electromagnetic and weak forces.
The weak interaction causes the radioactive decay of subatomic particles and nuclear fission and the theory of it is sometimes referred to as quantum flavor dynamics (QFD), but is best understood in terms of the electro-weak theory (EWT).
The weak interaction is caused by the emission or absorption of W and Z bosons. The known fermions (particles that have half-integer spin) interact because of the weak interaction. Either a fermion is an elementary particle (ex. the electron), or it can be a composite particle (ex. a proton). The weak force has only a short range because the masses of W+, W−, and Z bosons are each far greater than that of protons or neutrons. The force is called weak because its field strength over a given distance is mostly several times of magnitude less than that of other fundamental interactions of nature.
The strong nuclear force is only effective at a distance of a femtometre and ensures the stability of ordinary matter, as it confines the quark elementary particles into hadron particles such as the proton and neutron, the largest components of the mass of ordinary matter. Most of the mass-energy of a common proton or neutron is in the form of the strong force field energy; the individual quarks provide only about 1% of the mass-energy of a proton.
It’s function is to bind protons and neutrons together into atoms and is called the nuclear force . It is the residuum of the strong interaction between the quarks that make up the protons and neutrons.
It composes most of the energy that is released during the breakup of a nucleus and is used in nuclear power plants and fission nuclear weapons.
What we call empty space is in fact an enormous background upon which these four forces paint in golf like vibration the Universe.
To understand the Universe, Isaac Newton created a mechanical methodology that still has a great influence on reductionism opinions in contemporary science. Just lately we began to see ourselves as an information process. Since language is the most important tool that we use to transmit information, is it impossible for an individual to give an impartial description that supersedes the limitations of his language. So the universe is something that we invent; into the Jewish culture there goes a saying that states that with every person that dies, a universe gets destroyed.
To conclude this chapter, I want to list the five most important issues that thwart our understanding of the universe;
- De limits of my language are the limits of my world. Linguistically research has already established that some languages serve better certain purpose that whatever other language does. You have to see a language as a huge computer program; they all have their specializations. So has linguistically research for example established that the Navajo language would be the best language for discussing nuclear physics, there are 56 different ethnic groups in China but all of them can READ Chinese because it’s alphabet is a logographic one (most languages have a phonetically alphabet), the amount and complexity of tunes that a language uses has climatically atavistic roots, etc…
- Were Newtonian physics teaches us that the components are important, demonstrated Wiener the importance of the patterns that connects the components to each other. This refers to the Gestalt aspect of a given subject. It comes also to expression into the holistic approach that medical science develops in treating diseases.
- Another problem is the mystery of the missing magnetic monopoles. Recent research has led to new theories for the existence of magnetic monopoles. In this context scientists are working at a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) who postulates the existence of a magnetic monopole particle. In most quantum field theories the majority of the particles are unstable, but the GUT predicts the existence of a particle called the dyon, whose basic state is a monopole, and who’s stable because there is no simpler topological state to decay to. They came to existence as a side effect of the freezing out of the early universe. During research with the superconducting quantum interference device, there have been observations made of monopole events, but the problem lies with the fact that the events cannot be reproduced. Novikov, a Russian astrophysicist, claims that the black holes are entrances to an Einstein-Rosen bridge (a nontraversible wormhole) and could contain magnetic monopoles .
- Gravitational effects induced by coupling via superconductivity. In 1992, a Russian material scientist named Dr. Eugene Podkletnov claimed that he had found an antigravity effect while working with a team of researchers at Tampere University of Technology in Finland. They made a device that caused an anti-gravitational effect by using a ring of superconducting ceramic (Yttrium-barium-copper oxide) spinning at 5000 rpm. An above the rotating dish suspended object showed a variable weight loss from less than 0,5% to better then 2%.
- The only model that can successfully deal with the existence of parallel realities is, in analogy with the seven dimensional nature of the human psyche, also of a seven dimensional nature.
“This actual world of what is knowable, in which we are and which is in us, remains both the material and the limit of our consideration (Schopenhauer).”
Where the fantasy takes it over from science;
It is suggested in the Maharajagar that the only language that probably could express a comprehensive model of the universe would have to be R’lyehian. R’lyehian is a fictional language created by H.P. Lovecraft and appears in many of his stories. R’lyehian is written in R’lyeh Glyphs, a hieroglyphic lettering system which was brought to earth by the spawn of Cthulhu. It has been described as consisting horizontal word bars that the letters hang down from. It has also been compared to Naacal. This language makes no distinction between nouns, verbs, adjectives, and other parts of speech. Verbs have only two tenses: present and not-present, while time is perceived in by the users of this language as a non-linear phenomenon. Next to the five traditionally recognized methods of perception (taste, sight, touch, smell, and sound), R’lyehian contains words for two additional senses; perception of electromagnetic fields and the flow of time.
The universe of the Maharajagar consists of three main components;
- The 4 dimensional time-space continuum that is called The Materium. This is the universe as we know it.
- The VOID. Could best be described as the Noosphere; a postulated sphere or stage of evolutionary development dominated by consciousness, the mind, and interpersonal relationships. The Noosphere – literally, “mind-sphere” or Earth’s mental sheathe – is a word and concept jointly coined byÉdouard Le Roy, French philosopher and student of Henri Bergson, Jesuit paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and Russian geochemist, Vladimir Vernadsky, in Paris, 1926. At the root of the primary definition of noosphere is a dual perception: that life on Earth is a unity constituting a whole system known as the biosphere; and that the mind or consciousness of life – the Earth’s thinking layer – constitutes a unity that is discontinuous but coextensive with the entire system of life on Earth, inclusive of its inorganic support systems. In the Maharajagar it’s populated by all kinds of psychic identities such as angels, demons, gods, etc…It is also postulated as the medium that connects two wormholes in the time-space.
- The Labyrinth Dimension: An alternative reality who’s geography is loosely based upon Lovecraft’s Dreamland. It exists somewhere in the tension field between The Materium and The Void. It is a reality where locations have to be expressed in 7-dimensional coordinates since the flow of time is not running in a linear fashion and the four elementary forces that govern the reality are creating so called shadow ways and places. Events that occur in the Labyrinth Dimension and the Materium influence each other as communicating vessels.
The ultimate postulation of the universe in the Maharajagar is that the All is a projection of informational modulated energy waves emanated by a cosmically horizon on the time-space continuum.
9 thoughts on “The Universe in my Writing”
The mysteries of what is knowable and what is not remains sublimely poetic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Human knowledge, in my vision, evolves to a fusion point between art and science.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Regarding some points mentioned under your issues which thwart our understanding:
1) I find Schopenhauer, in the aphorism given, to be entirely wrong, basically diametrically opposite to the truth. We know via thoughts and thinking, and these things, this media, is not material. The very process by which Schopenhauer arrives at his quote is not material. To think it is is to introduce a tangle of confusions.
2) I disagree also about the limits imposed by language upon thinking and knowing. Thought is higher than language. One can, and I have, experience the intimate reality of this in working one’s way through a purely mathematical observation. From there, it is merely a a matter of persistent unbiased observation and practice to see that the same is true for any deeply conceptual thinking.
Physics is interesting, and apparently engrossing for some. But it does not study the universe. It merely studies an aspect of it. Only prejudice and wish fulfillment permits physics enthusiasts to proclaim that they are unveiling ultimate reality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I thank you for your thoughts and interest. However I would like to clarify some of my stances;
1. Your first remark touches the problem of epistemology; subject and object are not given, but appear as the ideas of a subject. What exists is what someone experiences and knows. What CAN exist is what someone CAN experience and know.
2. The modernist credo is that what cannot be linguistically expressed, can be communicated through music, visual art or mathematics.
3. I agree with you that an encompassing metaphysics that could give a meaningful direction to a rethinking of the nature of the reality, has to have a wider scope than natural physics.
Hi, you are welcome to my thoughts & thanks for yuors as well.
Regarding (1) we have a sort of terminology problem, though of course epistemology is a core issue for everything else. To say that what EXISTS is equal to what someone experiences and knows is to channel the meaning of the word ‘exists’ into a jargonistic realm. Certainly my experiences and knowledge is different from yours or those of anyone else. To enforce this definition would be to create independent bubble realities in which our own individual epistemic experiences hold sway. This is not what people mean, or more important what they are thinking of, when they employ the term ‘exists’. This very example points to the fallacy of the exclusive dependence of knowledge (thinking) upon language. I doubt you meant this, in fact. You must mean something else. So your thoughts are not conveyed, in this instance, by your language. Because thinking is higher than language.
Another angle to approach this Schopenhauer quote is to ask why he includes “and the limit of our consideration”. Does he believe there is a hard limit to the possible reach of our knowledge? Is he speaking individually or collectively? For me, the route towards extending previously imagined natural limits to our individual spheres of knowing is to turn the focus of our considerating upon this considering process itself: to think about thinking.
2) I do not see any reason to have confidence in the ‘modernist credo’. Do you?
3) not only an encompassing metaphysics. An encompassing, authentic and pragmatic knowledge.
Introspection is a key concept in epistemology, since introspective knowledge is often thought to be particularly secure, maybe even immune to skeptical doubt. Introspective knowledge is also often held to be more immediate or direct than sensory knowledge. Both of these putative features of introspection have been cited in support of the idea that introspective knowledge can serve as a ground or foundation for other sorts of knowledge. I don’t like the limitations that 20th century philosophers have imposed upon themselves; just to think about thinking. Luckily I see an increasing amount of universities adding a philosophy chair to their different faculties in order to come again to a more coherent worldview.
2. But their is indeed a logical fallacy in the way I’m expressing my thoughts. I believe that only way to integrate all or knowledge is through mathematization, while I hold that visual art and music can contribute to a more intuitive understanding of this process.
3. As we both know, a solid metaphysics is the frame whereupon all further knowledge rests. Not everyone will be able to understand the finesses of the mathematics needed to unify all unify our knowledge. Metaphysics can give them tools to integrate this worldview, change their perception and thus give direction to their daily activities. You don’t have to be a car mechanic to be able to drive a car.
LikeLiked by 1 person
on 1), surprised you are seeing this trend regarding philosophy within academia, for I am seeing much bemoaning about the narrowing of the field into irrelevant tighter speculations against narrowed previous speculations. And these observations are coming from inside the field itself.
2) and 3)… more serious attention needing to devoted to a newer metaphysical foundation – yes. but unclear to me that mathematics forms such a basis, in fact I doubt it. math more like a doorway to convince oneself that there is an aesthetic quality inherent in the truthfulness, perceivable, and underlying the world fabric… two legs of the tripod: truth and beauty, leaving aside for the moment the goodness. perhaps it depends upon what you mean by mathematization.
One also might be a splendid mechanic witha deep insight into the thought of ‘car’: why it works, how it does, it’s spiritual reality. Yet you might be a poor or hopeless driver. COming nearer to truth requires coming at it from every possible angle, which involves schooling ourselves to disregard favoring our most cherished angles. Hence the virtue come in to the picture… hence the goodness can be perceived.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In the part of the world where I’m living, the trend of adding a philosophy chair to each faculty, has been initiated about two decades ago. It’s also no secret that in some departments there reigns some aversion towards everything that reeks after mathematics or natural sciences with their standards of proof.
In your last argument you get into the issue of pedagogues being poor parents because of wanting to apply the latest educational trends into the upbringing of their children, with disregard of principles based upon common sense and tradition.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s interesting to know, and I would count it a positive academic development.
I do not purposefully get into the parenting/common sense issue you describe, though perhaps you see some possible connection. Not the thrust of my argument.
LikeLiked by 1 person