Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: yet another tin pot bbt lol

  1. #1 yet another tin pot bbt lol 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    44
    abstract

    yet another big bang theory. nuff said.


    proposal

    the universe is expressed by, or an expression of, pure number: it’s counting upwards from 1, or into increasingly smaller fractions of 1.

    or: the universe is an expression of the number count we represent in standard English as 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13... all the way through to 10 to the power 40960000000000000000000 or whatever number we’d be at now if time was just an upward count from 1, or a count derived from 1 being divided into increasingly finer fractions.


    the universe is expressing or an expression of the numbers 1 to 1/(∞-1)


    Universe/Time = 1/(∞-1)




    further

    space, energy and mass are emergent properties of the pattern coding potential of high count numbers – 10 to many powers at a guess.

    this pattern encoding is expressed at higher magnitude powers of number in objects interacting through a polydimensional space


    testing

    if the hypothesis is correct, there should be correlations between:

    a) data encoding potential of number at increasingly higher counts

    and

    b) high energy proto-particle interactions and anomolies.

    specifically there would be anomolies indicating that the size ratio between us and early particles was slowly changing over time.

    i predict that the smallest particles would very slowly be getting bigger, relative to us over time, as we both became smaller relative to the universe at different rates.

    further, the rate at which our size changes relative to protoparticles will be a function of the rate of expansion of the universe.
    ___

    references

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
    http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/lloyd2/lloyd2_p2.html this latter's just an example of the data coding potential, although the paper cited uses Hydrogen atoms as bit points, whereas this one reckons that any and every co-ordinate in a single dimension is a bit point


    implications

    our universe began when something crossed the event horizon of a black hole. at that point time stopped for the something, but its dimensions began to stretch. the only thing we can know from our perspective is that is was something.

    in our reality, we experience this as time (and other 'higher' dimensions) being stretched in a stable set of physical dimensions

    the other important impkication is that the particles produced at the LHC are discreet sets of fractions of parts of the universe. we can never know the exact fraction they are due to the ongoing count of time.

    we can know what fractions they are relative to us but this ratio will be changing over time, how fast i don't know (although i'm hoping it's real slow lmao)

    i postulate that the Higgs' Boson is the difference between what we can know about a particle (relative to us) and what we can't know (relative to the universe)
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    shoot me down lol


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: yet another tin pot bbt lol 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Did you forget your medication this morming ?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    44
    yeah but it didn't work so i had yours too lol.

    but why not eh? our universe is everything that exists in our reality, so it's 1 universe.

    all the bits of the universe are just that - bits of it, fractions of it.

    it doesn't expand, it divides more finely.

    and then emergence kicks in.

    (and then so do all them meds lmao)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 lmao why not? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    44
    So why not?


    The universe is 1 thing.

    At the instant of the big bang the only bit of data available is: universe = 1

    There hadn’t been enough time to express any greater complexity

    If time divides the universe into 2 discreet sets (the bit that is here now and the bit that is here then) then the potential complexity is doubled.

    The more the universe is divided by time, the more complexity it is possible to express.

    Dimensions become possible, even necessary, as ways for the fractions of the universe to interact as they are separated (they must retain their 1 whole, or it ain’t the universe is it?)

    As the universe divides into finer and finer fractions, it becomes increasingly possible for the fractions to interact in increasingly complex patterns

    Dimensions emerge [technical term lol] as a result of the increasing complexity

    Sets of fractions group together, finding efficiency in behaving as discreet sets within larger sets.

    The fundamental interactions emerge

    _______________

    U/t = 1/(∞-1)

    U = Universe, sum of existence

    t = total time quanta that have ‘elapsed’ since big bang

    (∞-1) = right now. The total set of natural numbers it is possible to have described in the time between the big bang and now.

    Don’t forget – infinity’s right in front of us (and if you don’t believe me... come back tomorrow lol).

    So reality is infinity (potential, or possibility) minus 1 (quanta of time)
    _______________

    One of the implications if the theory’s correct... is that our universe began when something crossed the event horizon of a black hole.



    Here's a link to a diagram showing a little of what I mean. It's from a paper by someone at Arizona University: http://dannyburton.files.wordpress.c...s-an-stuff.doc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    To my eternal shame and consternation your suggestions actually make some kind of sense.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    44
    Beginning with Paul Dirac in 1937, some scientists have speculated that physical constants may actually decrease in proportion to the age of the universe. Scientific experiments have not yet pinpointed any definite evidence that this is the case, although they have placed upper bounds on the maximum possible relative change per year at very small amounts (roughly 10−5 per year for the fine structure constant α and 10−11 for the gravitational constant G). [admittedly it were a wiki]

    ohai.

    teh tee oh ee

    PREDICTS AND ACCOUNTS FOR THIS

    From John D. Barrow 2002

    [An] important lesson we learn from the way that pure numbers like α define the world is what it really means for worlds to be different. The pure number we call the fine structure constant and denote by α is a combination of the electron charge, e, the speed of light, c, and Planck's constant, h. At first we might be tempted to think that a world in which the speed of light was slower would be a different world. But this would be a mistake. If c, h, and e were all changed so that the values they have in metric (or any other) units were different when we looked them up in our tables of physical constants, but the value of α remained the same, this new world would be observationally indistinguishable from our world. The only thing that counts in the definition of worlds are the values of the dimensionless constants of Nature. If all masses were doubled in value you cannot tell because all the pure numbers defined by the ratios of any pair of masses are unchanged.
    number is the fundamental building block of the universe...

    proposal

    Universe/Time = 1/(∞-1)

    where T is the cardinal of U, and ∞ is an implied future potential value of >1

    note: this is a testable hypothesis: the equation works. it works. god damn but it works... LINKY
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 mathematical constructivism 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    44
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constru...mathematics%29



    Statement 1: i didn't even realise this existed.

    Statement 2: it's consistent with teh theory's predictions.



    Comment on statement 1: this shows I'm not exactly great at maths (but then I never claimed to be, being no good at maths is why I came here looking help. It turns out that word means something different here too *shakes head in disgust*)

    Comment on statement 2: considering I'm no good at maths, teh theory still deduced a mathematical truth from first principles...

    ahem

    teh theory 3 - 1 kneejerks. (teh theory conceded a penalty, after tripping itslef up in the 6-yard-[definitions]-box.)



    srsly tho.



    number is the fundamental building block of the universe...

    proposal

    Universe/Time = 1/(∞-1)

    where T is the cardinal of U, and ∞ is an implied future potential value of >1

    note: this is a testable hypothesis: the equation works. it works. god damn but it works... LINKY
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •