An off-the-wall diatribe about advanced physics or if you prefer:

time is the measurement of change; time is not the cause of change


we exist in the here & now
all else is either history

or that which may or may not be

how humans think the universe operates has absolutely no impact on how the universe does operate

(Disclaimer: I am neither a scientist or mathematician. Am simply an observer, realist and writer of words. What is written below is speculation by a poorly trained layman. Everything written below may very well be nonsense and a waste of time. The reason for this offering is that I have come to a conclusion that there is a true symmetry to our existence. The little that I have come to understand about advanced physics seems to contradict that symmetry.)

Quantum physics and superstring theory have begun to confuse me. Of course considering that my observation is that the only time that actually ever exists within any point of our universe is the present moment, this should not be all that surprising.

Along with a lot of other humans, I was fairly certain that Albert Einstein nailed it when he came up with E=mc2 . Being more a visual than numeric person, the more I have considered this equation, the more I have come to believe this means that all elements of the universe have potentially changeable states. Energy may become matter. Matter may become energy. Matter being the point at which at least 2 particles of energy may combine to form particles of matter with all of this occurring at a specific temperature within a specific volume (quanta) of space. Increasingly however, I have begun to wonder where that space has come from. Doesn't seem the space was there when everything was a highly compressed singularity. If my limited understanding of quantum physics makes any sense that would mean space was a product of the resulting interactions of what we choose to call particles. This would seem to indicate that what we like to view as existence is the continuing generation & maintenance of that "space". In which case space may indeed be little or nothing but it is a universal factor which defines almost everything (black holes seemingly being 1 anomaly.


existence is not driven by time; time is driven by existence


too often we become lost in trying to find answers to questions we have defined without going back to check that the question actually made sense in the first place

Moving beyond E=mc2 seems to me that those particles which form atoms and energy waves are capable of existing as almost pure energy or pure mass.  The condition of the particle basically depends upon the particle’s energy state. All forms of particles essentially being capable of variable energy states. An energy state dictating how much space a particle is able to occupy.   The amount of potential energy contained with a certain quantum of matter is the mass of that object times the speed of light squared. However any matter which travels at the speed of light has essentially become a base particle independent of the rest of the matter to which it was originally closely connected.  This leads me to the conclusion that when particles have a measurable mass, those particles are essentially at rest and are connected to other particles to form matter of one form or another ranging from individual atoms to complex entities. When the particles are accelerated to the speed of light, the same particles are no longer matter but are energy waves. When the particle transitions from that which we choose to deem as matter to that which we choose to deem as energy, we have the same particle but it is in a different state.  In an extreme state, such as particles within a black hole, the particle occupies almost no space and is effectively pure matter. At the other end of that extreme if those particles are converted x-rays as a photon, the particle attempts to occupy all of space.  Therefore existence would seem to essentially be an enormous number of particles occupying/creating a defined volume of space in different states (essentially each individual particle attempting to occupy a specific amount of space).  A universe of particle interaction if you will.  Particles being immensely flexible building blocks and space being the medium these particles use to create form.


Ask not what is matter rather ask from whence comes space


Increasingly I have begun to feel that what is missing in the human understanding of our universe is space. We seem to view space as but the nothingness which exists between the base particles which we humans have always been focused upon. Are we somehow missing the real picture? If space is actually a by-product of the particles which began interacting during the period of we see as the big bang, then space obviously isn't nothing. Space would be the realm of particle interaction (and as I understand it this is the basic premise of much of today's quantum physics. But what if we've got it wrong. What if space was nothingness pulled in from what was outside of the boundaries of our original singularity? What if space is continuing to be pulled into our universe (or rather or universe is continuing to occupy that which was outside of an empty accretion disk)?  More and more, I am coming to believe that the key to further understand our universe actually lie in understanding the true nature & source of space (or what we like to think of as nothingness).


innovation is normally a matter of thinking differently about the same old uncertainties

About 3 years back began to do a little reading on string theory. At the time was struggling to understand the definition and functions for quarks and bosons (quantum physics). The idea of 10 different dimensions seemed to almost immediately fall apart for me with the introduction of time as the fourth dimension. I simple cannot understand how a unit of measure for change can be classified as a dimension.  Where it really began to fall apart is idea of time travel, myriad types of strings, filaments of energy, quantum gravity.  I could buy that particles were constructed like strings or threads.  Time, mass, energy, gravity, etc all begin to appear to be human concepts constructed to describe the immense complexity of particle interactions and states and not real structures within existence.


Was it the Big Bang or the Phenomenal Expansion?


The need to develop a theory to describe the subatomic evolution of our universe is understandable.  However if  matter and energy are interchangeable as specified in Einstein’s formula (E/C2=M) are not those particles participating in an atomic structure the same as particles traversing the universe as waves. The key to all of this would seem to be understanding the structure of elemental particles themselves not how we human chose to quantify and classify particles.  Photons exhibit both particle and wave properties. Photons are deemed to be energy particles.  If energy may change into matter (and vice versa), then would seem to me whatever makes up photons, makes up everything else (but in a different bonding configuration and energy state).  Would seem that whatever a base particle(s) happens to be, those particles would have to have a be capable of creating all that exists. Beside what we humans term all classes of matter and energy, these particles would need to be capable of adapting themselves to whatever conditions are created by other particles.  It seems rather doubtful based upon the general direction quantum physics and superstring theory are headed based upon increasing classifications of dimensions that base particles are going to be identified any time soon.


Science is the fuel which drives the human future


But maybe physics is headed in the wrong direction in trying to created a unified theory for our universe. It would seem that what brought forth the Big Bang/Expansion (pick your term) was the creation of space. It would seem that which is causing our universe to continue to expand is the continued creation of space. Where did/is that space coming from?


What we see of the universe are but reflections from different places & times

Our image of the universe is as unique as our place within it 


Although I really like the sound of "space-time continuum", maybe we have it wrong. Time is simply a unit of measurement which humans have derived to measure rates of change. What allows change to occur is the interaction of subatomic particles. These particles always have an attraction for each other.  This attraction is controlled by each particle's own energy state. This energy state determines how much space particles/particle configurations are able to occupy.  Once particles bind with other particles, the sum often becomes greater than the individual parts. The momentum, oscillation rate and spin of the entities seem to have an impact upon the particle’s state. The proximity of other particles and the energy state of those particles has an impact on the particle. The passage of time has no impact on the particle.


the universe is never stable but it does have a constant rhythm


The fact that time is variable based upon the acceleration of the object being used as a reference point from which to measure time is an indicator that the human concept of time is misleading. Using time as reference point seems unwise. Time is a result of human measurements. That measurement is of change. Change being the altering relationship of matter & space. The task it would seem is establishing a reference point based upon the fundamentals of matter-space relationships.


the universe is a state of continual changing conditions; time is a measurement of the amount of that change not the rate of change

Then there is the issue of space itself and the myriad questions raised by space.  Space is nothingness. Space creates what we humans classify as dimension.  Space is as much a part of us as matter.  There is no height, width and depth without space. What is a standard volume of space?  Everything is a matter (pun intended) of how space & particles interact. What is the role of space within atoms? What impact does space have upon energy particles? How much space existed prior to the big bang?  If space is actually nothingness, has space been created by particle interactions?  Is space the cause of energetic particles eventually cooling and becoming matter?  Is space the glue which holds our universe together? 


There is not only the emptiness between other cosmic object which we humans like to think of as space. There is also the space which is bound within elements, atoms, atomic particles. This space is what seems to define the universe. From when has it come?


Our universe seems to be more a matter of condition than cause

Perhaps we have the elements of what we like to call our observable 4-D universe confused. We like to think of length, width, depth (these 3 defining volume or space) and time. All humanly defined terms made possible by sub-atomic particles.  Would seem that what is of importance in regard to particles is their numbers within a specific volume of space (density) at a specific temperature/spin/momentum (energy state).  Based upon these conditions particles change states and may bond with each other to form new physical states with different characteristics and occupy a varying amount of space.  These states remain in effect until a new energy state and density dictates a different arrangement.  The universal configuration essentially driven by more or less particles occupying the base boundaries of an object; be it a hydrogen atom or the entire universe. The more energetic each base particle, the less connected these particles are. The less energetic the particles become, the less space they occupy. Seems to me that most of the characteristics desired to be understood by advanced physics may simply be described as the effects of a group of particles in various energy states existing within a finite space. Time (rate of change), momentum, color, gravity, electromagnetic charge/flow would all be effects of the configuration of these particles and their energy state rather than being inherent to a specific particle's nature. In a nutshell, the base particles moving to higher energy state is which causes the particle to attempt to occupy more space.  The changes which these particles are undergoing is that which is modifying space.  The basic particles are capable of bonding to other particles under the proper conditions with the resulting object having characteristics which may be vastly different from those which individual particles are able to produce on their own. This would seem to indicate that particles once bonded are more concerned with maintaining that bond and the interaction with the other bonded particles than what is taking place outside that bond until such time as a more massive or energetic object appears. Those same particles have the ability to reduce the amount of space surrounding any bonded object through the attraction of surrounding particles with denser objects (clumping of matter / gravity).  


it’s less about the amount of matter than the volume of space between matter

Another aspect of our universe for which we do not seem to account is that every base particle which existed at the what humans deem to be the beginning of universal time remains connected. All of those particles, though in varying energy states and bonded in varying configurations to other particles are not only still connected but driven toward closer connectivity (lowering temperature and greater density). Without other interaction, the normal path of particle progression appears to be from a higher to a lower energy state with space providing the reduction of energy.  A difference in a particle's state transition driven by cooling would be the amount of space which each particle is capable of occupying. What makes this a non-linear process (and seems to toss out the idea that time is of importance to these particles) are the interactions taking place with other particles/particle compositions in different energy states.


​universal order is the process of particles & particle configuration sorting themselves into the most sustainable configuration


Much of the astrophysics community seems to have become lost in the search for dark matter & energy. This is understandable as the currently accepted models of the universe are based on the existence of much more dark matter & energy than we are currently able to detect within the observable universe. Perhaps the models are wrong or perhaps the key to this misunderstanding is the limit to what is currently observable. Dark matter & energy are the antithesis of the portion of the universe in which we exist. If our form of matter & energy were formed in the same universal instant as dark matter & energy and these objects are at odds with each other would it make sense than if there were no other stronger forces at play during that instance that those objects did their best to separate from each other? Might not that separation at this early instance of our universe result in dark energy & matter being in a portion of the universe which we simply are not able to observe?


Gravity appears to be no more or less than the universal drive of matter to reduce space

When it comes to gravity, perhaps we already know all that we need to know about the basic elements; we simply have not put the factors together in a proper cohesive arrangement. We know that particles in a lesser-energy state seek to move closer to each other based upon their current particle density.  By moving closer the amount of space between particles is reduced. We know an object on planet earth has a different weight than on the moon. This would appear to be due the moon containing a lesser number of particles than our planet contains.  The moon also impacts a much smaller volume of space than the planet earth impacts just as planet earth impacts a much lesser amount than our sun. Hence at an equivalent distance from each of these objects, the more massive solar bodies have a greater attraction to less massive particle configurations than does our moon. This would seem to indicate that the volume of space between concentrations of particles might be what dictates the force we like to refer to as gravity. The ability to generate and maintain space being a primary property of matter. Space being the variable which dictates the attraction of all matter to other matter (gravity). Black holes being an engine which creates spaces and drives the expansion our universe.


without beginning or end, one universe, always in motion those infinite parts, forever connected yet moving apart

Momentum of both the attracted and attracting object varies the attraction. Only compositions of a specific mass ratio are impacted by particle attraction.  This would basically throw the search for a graviton out the window as the characteristics desired of a graviton would already exist in particles making up any object in a lesser energy state intent upon occupation of a specific amount of space. To me this would seem to indicate that any particle which we classify as having mass has an inherent property of knowing where the closest more massive grouping of particles is located. This may possibly imply that particles contain what we consider to be intelligence or perhaps this is simply a feature of all particles remaining connected and desirous of maintaining equilibrium with similar particle configurations.


whatever gravity is/isn't, directly relates to the ratio of #matter to #space. The larger that ratio (more matter), the greater the gravitational impact .

Until we fully understand gravity, theorizing about anti-gravity is a waste of time. Reducing the impact of gravity would appear to be a matter of particle/particle configurations reaching a high enough energy state that the need to occupy available space is greater than the need to connect with other particles.  Evaporating bodies of water on our planet perform anti-gravitational activity all of the time. If you want true anti-gravity, take a look at starlight. Takes some really serious gravitational mass to have any effect upon light which was produced by a sun (or any man-made source).  Takes some very energetic particles to produce light. The amazing thing seems to be that all particles are capable of either configuration. The universe is eternity's greatest alchemist.


There is a constant which runs throughout the entire universe: Now. All of the universe exist only in the Now. This instance is all that ever exists throughout the universe. All else is a thought or image which is but part of that Now. Now is. Now shall always remain.


Space matters


If space itself is particle state, there may also be a link between black holes and what is seen as the current acceleration of the universe. The center of galaxies is inhabit by massive black holes. Those black holes crunch enormous quantities of matter & pump out radiation in the process. Do those black holes also crank out space particles. Space particles which currently increase the separation between galaxies? Black holes/singularities being both the initial and existing creators of space. Space particles which might explain Steven Hawking's contention then when a black hole has no more matter to process that black hole simply evaporates via Hawking Radiation.  Black holes which having run out of matter as fuel having turned that all matter into space & radiation.  

Which would seem to indicate that black holes/singularities are cosmic engines. Perhaps even the engines which have made our entire universe as it is possible.


everything within our universe is recycled particle configurations

I am aware of the special theory of relativity and cannot argue with the base assumption that velocity which light travels in a vacuum is the same for all observers regardless of the motion of the light source. This basically means to me that human measurement tool known as time changes based upon the propulsion and direction which the observer is travelling. Photons emitted by a source at a specific wavelength always travel at the same velocity. What is going to change is the observer’s perspective on distance because of length contraction. From the perspective of the particles making up the wave which is the photon, what is important is the binding/characteristics with other particles making up the photons and the motion created by the need to occupy vacant space. If the photon runs into a blocking set of particles, either the photon is reflected in a new direction or is absorbed by the body in its path. As an observer, would seem fine to use our conceptual measuring stick of time to better define the action of photons. However, this measuring stick (time) has no impact upon that photon. That which impacts the photon is other particles with which it is contact and the space which it is occupying.


every particle in universe is connected. understanding those connections may be required to understand particles

Just as the photon, what really bends me the wrong direction is this statement: that the laws of physics are invariant in all inertial systems. Frankly I don't believe there is any such thing as an "invariant" except within the human mind.  Everything within the universe is changing every cosmic instant due to particle interaction. Not one particle of the universe remains in the exact same state/location for even a nano-second. Frankly it would seem that we should be in search of a universal constant which defines this rate of change within like environments. We strive to understand the universe through understanding that which creates matter and energy when it may be possible that what matters in our universe is how nothing/space is, has & will be created. 


Space/nothingness being absorbed into the original singularity seems to be what began this iteration of our universe. More space being absorbed is what is causing our universe to expand. The amount of space/nothingness which any object occupies defines it.

Rather than asking ourselves from whence everything came, perhaps the question should be from whence comes nothingness/space? The answer to this question may not only solve the riddle of from whence/why our universe began to expand but by well define what the ultimate future of our universe will be.

From my perspective, the state of the particles within a specific space are that which define the laws of physics within that space. Within a singularity what we want to define as gravity (another measuring stick) is paramount when particles within a designated volume at a very low energy state are examined.  When that same number of particles are in a much larger space at a temperature exceeding 10 trillion degrees are observed, you can basically throw what we chose to think of as gravity out the window. This is because those same particles which had been desirous of moving close to each other (pure matter state) have suddenly been driven to occupy as much space as possible (close to pure energy state). No question that time/gravity/any of our other measuring sticks are important for understanding.  All of these measuring components are relative to the state of the particles which are being observing. That which we are observing is only capable of acting within the constraints of the conditions (occupied space, temperature, spin, momentum) within its own occupied area and reacting to the actions of other particles bordering it. Particles act or react to the state of other particles. The rate at which activity occurs (time) may be of interest to an observer, but does not lead to any change of condition for observed particles.

Although particles/particle compositions may have vastly different characteristics, all the particles still remain connected (or they simply would no longer be part of our universe). That which we deem to be gravity would be related to the need for particles to connect with particles constructs of greater density freeing space and allowing the conservation of energy state.  Lighter particle arrangements being prone to connecting with other particles with similar densities. The more massive (denser) a bonded particle configuration, the more attraction that entity has upon other less massive particle compositions, causing a less massive objects to begin moving toward the source until a state of equilibrium is reached (merged with the attracting body, residing upon the attracting body’s outer layer or in some form of orbit around the attracting body). In this action lighter particle configurations may be displaced as the lesser mass moves toward the greater. Without any impact from particles in vastly different energy states, all masses seek to reach a state of equilibrium which will assist in allowing them to maintain their current state.

 Perhaps subatomic particles are oscillating strings as suggested by string theory. Each string being capable of oscillating and occupying/creating space based upon proximity to surrounding particles. Each string driven to find equilibrium and connectivity to other particles (gravity).  The challenge would then seem to be understanding if there are limits to the amount of space and corresponding oscillation rate of which a single subatomic particle is capable.

We do not live within a universe in which there is an impenetrable boundary between absolute low and absolute high temperatures.  Based upon testing by DOE and Stony Brook, it appears that our universe is a closed loop temperature system. It would also seem that every element of our universe, including singularities, have a flash point at absolute zero. When matter reaches absolute zero (having become more and more conductive and dense) a boundary will be reached in which the associated matter becomes superconductive/fluid and almost immediately passes to a state of an infinitely high temperature (all matter converts to base particles with terrific energy levels). Would seem to me at this point particles have simply run out of any surrounding space to occupy and are in direct contact with each other without any space as a buffer. Particles immediately become excited by this closest possible proximity to other particles and energize.  As these energized particles seek to conserve their energy, some of the particles combine to form more complex elements. Seems like a possible formula for the creation of what we humans deem to be existence or if you prefer a universe in which particles are able to interact and create their own realities.


the universe seems to be a swarm of particles driven toward merger but not always happy after merger occurs


Dark Energy & Dark Matter are the invisible behemoth in the model which is the current human view of our universe.  What if the dark energy/matter element is nothing more than a figment of human imagination? A convenient fiction created to support our current view on the universe. There is no question that what humans are unable to see/detect within the universe is clouding our understanding. My opinion has become that understanding the unseen/nothingness which is space may serve our theories better than dark energy/matter. The human inability to see/detect all of the universe appears to be the big stumbling block at this point. What if we are only able to see but a small fraction of what is our universe? What if dark energy/matter are nothing more than the portion of the universe which humans are currently unable to detect?

If we were to attempt to construct a chart of our observable universe’s development there would be a continuous number of particles occupying a specific volume of space with an overall density and temperature (energy state). What matters locally is the number of base particles within a particular volume of space at any given time and how these particles are arranged. Those elements would then produce what we humans measure as space, time, temperature, color, gravity, electric charge...

Now that I have walked this far out on the crackpot plank, I shall continue onward.  Current theories on subatomic particles are particularly confusing.  Are there 18 or 20 of them? Why are some particles only contained within matter while others currently exist only as energy? What happens to them when they are not within their assigned state? Seems to me as if all these particles were conceived simply so that subatomic particles will follow previously devised rules not because particles or particle constructs have been seen to act in this manner. Seems as if we are constantly forgetting that particle(s) create the rules. These base particles (or particle) must be able to exist at both an infinitely high and an infinitely low energy state.  These particles must be capable of moving between states (and likely this matter/energy state business is another human definition). These particles must be capable of new and varied configurations based upon temperature density and their ability to bond with other particles and form new objects.  Frankly would seem to me that we would be better served trying to understand how these particles operate in various energy states than trying to fit them into rules which we think ought to apply.  Whatever these base particles are, they are extremely powerful.  These particles have the ability to form suns, galaxies and space.  These particles are that which allows our conscious state and the advancement of organic life.  These particles are not really interested in what rules humans think that they ought to be following. These particles are both ageless and timeless with what appears to be an intuitive understanding of how to combine to form & improve upon complex objects. These particles are that which provides existence.

We seem to know that both density and temperature are closed loop systems.  What we do not know is whether that which we deem as the entire universe is closed loop. As it appears billions of singularities have formed within our observable universe are those objects capable of reaching particle density/temperature thresholds and becoming their own universe?  Are the original high energy particles which speed out of our universe in the first stages ever capable of being pulled back? Hopefully at some point in time we will begin to become focused upon finding answers for such question than fiddling around try to factor human concepts such as time into the equation.  The reality is that what these particles are capable of producing is quite likely beyond anything we will be capable of imagining in our life cycles.

Black holes are extremely interesting from a scientific perspective but perhaps we should be just as interested in the great voids.  Likely there is as much information to be garnered from the voids regarding the properties of the elemental particle(s) as we are likely to find in studies of black holes. Perhaps such studies will allow determination of how the occupancy of space causes particles to eventually lose energy.

Time is a human construct which is used to quantify space and distance.  Time is not a real entity.  Reality exists in only one instance in every location throughout the universe: now.  Time is the measure of change occurring within this instance.   That which is real are the particle(s) which make up every substance, those particles’ ability to create space and their interaction with each other (temperature, density and configuration within a specific volume of space).  My opinion is as long as physicists are insistent on treating time and other human measurement concepts as real entities in the search for the nature of subatomic particles, they are on a wild goose chase.  The forces which physics has come to rely upon, the concept of space and time were all created by base particle(s) and the ability to interact with each other and occupy space.  What is important to those particles is their proximity and relationship with other particles. Everything else is a result.

Of course if any of my concerns are valid for our reality, we live in a universe with seems much less exotic than the models proposed by superstring theory, particularly in regard to dimensions and time travel. On the positive side however if any of the above is correct, we live in a universe in which the base particles can be brought together to form anything within the limits of the total number of particles which are available within any given volume of space based upon those particle’s energy state.  Including any and all forms of being.


every particle within the universe remains connected; the human challenge is detecting & understanding those connections

Did space exist prior to what humans now classify as the Big Bang or has space simply been the byproduct of particle interactions?  Do particles themselves trigger interaction or does something in specific particle constructions produce specific actions?  The structure of particles and their ability to interact likely define the very nature of our universe.  


humans experience time; the universe experiences change
__________________________________________________________________________

The organic creation of atomic particles in particular is stunning (and may be the primary indicator that particle state and space are controlling factors in any particle’s ability to transform into larger and much more intricate compositions). The mystery lies within the complexity organic particles are able to create, which in turn create modified versions based upon further adaptation.   Are conscious beings such as ourselves an extension of such particles drive to create more and more complex structures?  One small solid mass yielding incomprehensibly diverse forms of existence.

Human beings on planet Earth are such a small part of the universe that most of what can be known in this area is pure conjecture based upon our limited ability to observe and experience anywhere beyond our own limited environment.  RNA and DNA being the local  patterns for organic life.  Whether or not genetic pattern transfer works anywhere else within our universe is pure conjecture.  There are many possibilities.   Perhaps there are advanced beings made from various forms of plasma/methane/silicon bases which are operating on a plane which we simply cannot imagine.  Maybe Earth contains the only conscious life forms in our universe.   Whether our species shall ever find universal truth in this area remains but a possibility.  

________________________________________________________________________ 


Opinions:

  • this beginning of the universe was a big expansion not a big bang
  • the universe may be much larger than we project
  • understanding the creation of space is the key to understanding our universe
  • dark energy/matter are the modern equivalent of the hand of god
  • time is the human measuring stick of universal evolution
  • we observe only a portion of the universe but how large is that portion
  • the universe provides only what is, what was/ what will be are human conjecture​
  • the smallest elements of the universe are what drive existence
  • what we humans classify as science may well be the native intelligence of our universe
  • the movement of the universe requires a tremendous amount of energy
  • black holes are the engine of the universe
  • scientific law should describe what the universe is not what humans wish it to be
  • If this beginning of the universe started as an immeasurable concentration of particles without space, space quite likely is a product of those particles interacting.The resulting expansion of our universe being a direct result of that interaction. This would seem to indicate those particles continue to generate space & remain connected. What has resulted is an inflated universe within which we now exist.


What an incredible universe! What an interesting existence! 

spirituality is developed not bestowed; seek to expand your spiritual being through knowledge


all that was, still is 
all that has been/shall be is modification
​movement and change are the universal constants
time is a human contrivance
without movement everything flies apart
adapt to change or be consumed by it
we exist because the universe exists
in the end all that humans may really accomplish is the continuation of humanity


progenitor of #eternity
beyond beginning or end
ever a unique composition
the #universe endures as the vehicle of #change

mathematics is the quantification of reality
physics is the explanation of reality
religion is the justification for reality
philosophy is a recipe for dealing with reality
the universe defines reality
change provides reality