From a drop of water....

[Atlan0001]

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

From just thinking about the (high energy) microcosmic micro-verse of (high energy) Quantum Mechanics a logician could infer the probability of a (High energy) macrocosmic macro-verse of (high energy) Quantum Mechanics without ever having observed one or the other.

At both ends of relativity (of observed / observable universe) in the breakdown of relativity (of the observed / observable universe) down and in, and up and out, is the (cumbersome but necessary) Planck Big Bang (Black) Hole (collapsed constant (/\)) Horizon. At once the Infinite Multiverse Universe. Again, at both ends always, all at once, the same PBB(B)H (cc (/\) Horizon, the same IMU. The elementary constituency in the set, and the set in each and all of the constituent elements of the set.

You aren't going to get rid of the Big Bang Horizon because you aren't going to get rid of the Planck Horizon. They are one Horizon, the same Horizon. We have universe domicile within the supreme Black Hole Gravitational (G) Horizon, again one Horizon, the same Horizon. It is at once the Horizon of Infinite Multiverse Universe of infinities of universes (of infinities of universe horizons). The aggregate ends up being a micro / macro quantum mechanical soup that includes gravity and a fifth force, push gravity (thus inertialess space) out of the blend -- to vacuum and high energy physics-- of infinities of hub-centers of gravity (g=x) and the infinite set (G) of them all in the PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) Horizon (G).

Thus, in reverse: From just thinking about the (high energy) macrocosmic macro-verse of (high energy) Quantum Mechanics a logician could infer the probability of a (high energy) microcosmic micro-verse of (high energy) Quantum Mechanics without ever having observed one or the other.

 

[Atlan0001]

Like a painter always doing last touchups on a painting done, I always seem to be doing at least one edit on a post even when I think I'm done with it.

 

[Atlan0001]

The (high energy) macrocosmic macro-verse of (high energy) Quantum Mechanics, whether it is recognized as such or not, or even wanted to be, is loaded to the brim with quantum weirdness.

Also the fifth force gravity (G (as I label it and recognize it as such), is the draw of PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) Horizon closed up to the rim of the universe . . . and all universes, The constant of the draw (G) of the infinite set (the infinite forest), versus (opposing) the draw of each and every hub center elementary constituent (tree) (g=x) that makes up the set (the forest). That constant of draw is all otherwise a "push gravity" to the PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) Horizon, the Horizon of IMU.... It doubles as, and means, a gravity (g=x) opposing "push gravity" to the Horizon, the fifth force (G).

The blend is a vacuum, at once Vacuum Mirror (mirroring masses, matters, and energies to two sides of the coin, to two entities opposite in charges), and filling that [Casimer effect-like] created coin of vacuum is the quantum weirdness and fundamental soup of (high energy) Quantum Mechanics. The doubling as, the effectively push/pull duality of the gravities, then in fundamental house and home with the three other forces, means unification in and of five forces.

Sheez, wake and smell the physics! Do you, can you, realize just how much higher energies are -- how much greater the mass and energy field is -- non-locally toward the infinity back of the collapsed constant of the Planck Horizon, the Big Bang Horizon, the Big Balck Hole Horizon; altogether the PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) Horizon, the highest energy field and horizon there is (thus the fastest evolutions possible as well), than they are anywhere and everywhere locally, relatively speaking that is!

 

[Atlan0001]

This thread was originally meant to be a pointer, a cyberspace wormhole tunneling -- pointing to the thread 'The Shape of String Singularity.... (the TOE)'. These [two] posts will go quantum entangled with that thread and be continued there (since pieces are already there) unless there is a compelling reason or argument not to., So, tentatively, bye to this thread.

 

[Atlan0001]

I was wrong above. This is the thread I'm going to continue on in, leaving the other '.... (TOE)'. It has just the slightest different opening gist to it and, overall, I'm not trying for a stone-monolith of thread despite the variety of sides to the universe built in that thread.

I want to continue into this thread with something I posted in another ('Time Space....') and will be deleting there:

Wrong. You are ignoring gravity (g=x) and the fifth force, push gravity (G) directly tied to -- directly translating from -- the gravitational pull (G) of / push (G) to, the infinity of multiverse universes in, of, beyond, the collapsed constant of the PBB(B)H Horizon. The universe, as a universe, expands. Ipso facto, the universe, as a universe, contracts. Parallelism.

If we lived in the observed expansionist warp-space universe, we'd observe a contracting warp-space universe. But we live in the paralleling contracting warp-space universe -- in, on, the other side of the coin -- and therefore observe an expansionist warp-space universe. One expanding (warping) to "nowhere," expanding (warping) into "nothing." A mutually canceling combo-universe, that in its cross-canceling combine, is therefore actually, really, going nowhere! At least not explosively / implosively.

You are ignoring the fact of two dimensions to time, Hawking's universal (T=0|1 (unity) (fbb2 (0|1)) "Grand Central Station" of the Mulitverse Universe (of the [infinity absolute] of the universes (u) / of the [infinity absolute] of universe horizons (h)) 'Time', and Einstein's (t=x) 'spacetime'.

Time at the speed of light 'c' = 0|1 (unity ((+/-) 300,000kps = (+/-) 1 = 0-point)) per Hawking's illustration is (T=0|1 (unity)).

(And in this above, I just now, via my own shorthand (skip) shortcutting, figured out, realized, too, Sean Carroll's description -- from 'Something Deeply Hidden' -- of the what, the how, and the why of a certain brand of "string." Which means I was short one string-cord to a three-string cord, rather than an, to me unnatural, two string cord as I had it, "self-similarity" of instrument. Yeah! And that string-cord third dimension closing the system gives me my fourth dimension of 0 (0-point (portal)) opening the system (giving me what dimensionality I was forcing before)!!!)

Time at the speed of light 'c' = +300,000kps per Einstein is (t=x (t = chaos (anarchy))).

The physic of 'finite' is the virtuality of Relativity, the subjective 'relative' of observed and observable universe.

The physic of infinite ([infinite (infinitesimal) / infinitesimal (infinite)], ultimately one and the same infinite) is the unobserved and unobservable objective 'absolute'.

There are many more spokes than one spoke, including many more kinds of spoke, connecting the hub horizons (h) to the rim 'Horizon' (h) of the multiverse universe (u) and universes (u): Connecting the hub Horizon (h) to the rim horizons (h) of the multiverse universe (u) and universes (u). The tree is, and all the trees are, in the forest; the forest is in the tree and all the trees. Or think 'set' and the 'elementary constituency' of the set.

It's an Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe (U).

 

[Atlan0001]

The above rather than warp-space could be warp-time, if it weren't for that Horizon of [Past | Future] / [Future | Past]]. "back to the future," and "the future is the past, the past is the future." Two arrows of time pointing exactly in opposite directions to exactly the same Horizon that happens to be both past and future, according to the merger of [expansive] pointers -- [one to past | one to future] -- to one single [expansive] pointer pointing in one single direction [past (future) | future (past)].

A 'turning unity' is also known as a 'universe'.

 

[Atlan0001]

"Light in a gravitational field" slows and/or speeds up, I read, as if light were something separate from the gravitational mirror mirroring histories, light time histories, across space and time at a constant of 'c'. I'm not talking an acceleration (including deceleration) speed of the local gravity field, I'm talking something different, a universally mirroring special effects of a universal gravitational mirror (including 'Gravity's (G) 'Mirror'). Light, regarding its speed, reacts to the mirror mirroring not to the gravity field or any wave of gravity.

The gravitational mirror mirrors at one speed and one speed only, the constant of 'c'. The single-sided 2-dimensional only frame of histories, the physics of "histories," light time "histories" (light time "information"), on the pass-through of both sides of the single-sided 2-dimensionality is graviton singularity and quantum entanglements or Hawking radiations!

I know I've confused you. To illustrate though what I mean, stand up and turn in place looking into the space-time as you turn in place, as if you were, which you are illustrating, a crossroads of information. The front of a single-sided 2-dimensional frame of information (history), and the nothing of the backside is the front of yet another single-sided 2-dimensional frame of information (history), always, always! a multi-dimensional or multi-side (differential) inside-out (rather than outside-in) holographic frame of light time information (histories plural!).

Rather than being on the outside looking into Hawking's many-sided particle, which is at the same time many differing particles, this moves it to relativity . . . you in turning 360 degrees in place move it to relativity proving Einstein's mind's eye trip to the speed of light to have been erroneously wrong, rather erroneously 1-dimensional . . . thus wrong (you just took the mind's eye trip yourself, only really!). This is the relative equivalent of being on the inside looking out of Hawking's many-sided particle to many different worlds of information (histories). But it is, as you saw, never fixed. It is ever changing, a holograph (hologram) from the inside out, never frozen, ever changing at the speed of light, the constant of 'c'.

This is where Einstein was wrong (though not completely wrong!), and others were wrong in other ways, including some people on this very forum. I know that 360 degrees gyroscopically of uniform information arrival to, meeting at, a 0-point center point crossroad (and to an infinity of such crossroads) confirms the constancy of the speed of light to 'c', whether anyone else sees why or not! It froze [photo]graphically for Einstein looking outside in, it does not freeze for me looking from inside out. Nor does the universe of information, of histories, implode on me in gravity. Differing sides of information, differing worlds of differing histories, differing light time histories, at the speed of light incoming to center from 360 degrees gyroscopically cancels out implosion of mass and energy at the center, at the center point clock, of Hawking's "Grand Central Station" which divides out into an infinity of clone "central stations" of his "Grand Central Station."

 

[Atlan0001]

This, from me in another thread and post applies and belongs:

Look at any light time history (light time information) et all. It will tell you immediately that the constant of the speed of light, 'c', is the only straight-line information from there to here in the universe. The line of information within, every line of history within, every line of light time history within, will tell you that . . . line straight ('c') as straight-line can get ('c') and forthwith. The proof is [in] the pudding, as the saying goes.

 

[Atlan0001]

I thought I'd go ahead and try to explain a little more something else I see and talk about a lot. Which is the unobserved and unobservable sub-stratum microcosm of Quantum Mechanics below (so to visualize) the virtual or relative universe (aka world) and a co-existing hyper-stratum macrocosm of the same Quantum Mechanics existing above (again, so to visualize) the same virtual or relative universe (world).

The two levels of zoom in the Zoom Universe of Chaos Theory are repeatable and repeat to infinity, ultimately reducing the base two. So do the two levels above of unobservable microcosm and macrocosm Quantum Mechanics and the observable virtual or relative universe.

The thing is, you might never recognize that sub-state of the microcosm to also be the hyper-state of the macrocosm. In transferring from one state to the other you have to end up translating one thing into a thing in the other: To wit, the Planck Horizon into the Big Bang Horizon and back. Eighteen levels, I've read, of microcosm into (-/+)14-billion years, 14-billion light years of macrocosm . . . and back. And so on, one entity translating into another entity.

The finale of this particular post is that to go down and into [high energy] micro-verse could very well translate into going up and out, to traveling up and out, to colonizing and conquering up and out into an equally [high energy] macro-verse. Energy is the essence of an expanding -- expansive -- frontier state. Money, wealth, prosperity, survival, [is] the token of energy. You get those positives in an opening system. You get nothing but negatives, such as entropy, in an isolated and closing system.

What in this last paragraph above is a tangent that comes naturally to one with a lifelong interest in history, histories, frontiers past and future, and the natures of differing things that translate, and transfer, well.

 

[Atlan0001]

I brought this post over from elsewhere since it applies, yet again, to my own picture and modeling:
-----------------------
Oh, universes expand and, concomitantly, contract, for a net physic of zero regarding both . . . a net physic of going "nowhere" into "nothing." At least not via internal, integral, expansion (one side of a coin of universe) and contraction (the other side of the same coin of universe). And gravity (g to x-finite, and G to infinity's collapsed constant (/\) of 'Horizon' (h)), are responsible for both sides of the coin and coins. Two gravities, two forces of gravity, one observed and realized to the inside (g) and one observed and realized to the outside (G) (though not realized as such since most physicists do not recognize infinity to exist at all, much less regarding more or less independent bubbles (plural) of universes (again plural), and the overall collapsed constant (/\) of Horizon (singular)). Five forces existing altogether, (G) being a duality of pull and push gravity (depending upon how it is "observed" (from that side (pull), the infinity Horizon side, or this side (push), toward the Horizon, of the direction of the wave)).
----------------------

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

 

[Atlan0001]

Go inside-out for the proof not outside-in:
Look to any single-sided 2-dimensional frame of light time history (light time information) at all. It will tell you immediately that the constant of the speed of light, 'c', is the only straight-line vehicle of information from there to here (time-line vehicle) in the universe. The timeline of information within, every timeline of history within, every timeline of light time history within, will tell you that . . . line straight ('c') -- as a straight-line can get ('c') -- and forthwith. The proof is [in] the pudding, so to speak and as the saying goes.

Light cone - Wikipedia

The timeline in the illustrated light cones above, their perfect mirroring of [past >|< future] coincides with the constant of the speed of light 'c', proving, confirming the Horizon ('h') constancy of ('c').

 

[Atlan0001]

Following up on post #11 above, the straightest lines to be navigated and traveled by any powered-vehicular (self-accelerating / decelerating) traveler in the universe would be by way of wormhole tunneling the universe. There are plenty of references to, and illustrations of, wormholes around on the net, showing a straight line, a tunnel or wormhole, through bends or folds of whatever rounding there is of space-time.

I've already a few times before described three different ways it might be described now and someday actually traveled.

The first and longest way is pointing the ship straight at the planet- or star- or galaxy-light destination in the universe and having to make continuous course corrections as the accelerating ship ascends the [future]-timeline of the bends of light time past (history) frames, a 1-dimensional travel ascending up [into] the light time frames.

The second is knowing where your destination will be when you want to get there and ignoring the light's false location of your destination leading it the location it will be at when you can get to that location earliest, a rendezvous with it in a location neither you nor it are presently in in the universe.

The third is a possible combination the second way and the medium traveled. In planetary travel possibly going into, traveling into, interstellar space by the shortest possible route to it (perpendicular to the equator of the solar system) and arcing back into the (generally disk shaped) solar systemic disk for a meeting with your destination at the point where you will both be when you both will get there. This route also applies to travel of a galaxy, first out of a solar systemic disk by the shortest route to the next medium, perpendicular into the interstellar medium, then travel out of the galaxy by the shortest route into the next medium, perpendicular into the intergalactic medium, arcing back into the galaxy to your target destination at a point you will both be when you can and want to get there.

The above is the three ways I currently figure wormhole tunneling would actually work for internally powered (acceleration / deceleration) travel of interplanetary and interstellar space. No matter what, as I see it, getting the most inertialess the fastest way possible, if possible. The traveler will basically ignore the light route and make the destination come to him at the rendezvous point as he travels to it. The light appearing direct route is nothing more nor less than a detour, the long way around stern-chasing the target (chasing the target from the rear) in both space and time, but principally from the rear in time (like trying to chase light from the rear)!

Now, intergalactic travel...?

 

[Atlan0001]

I edited in something I consider important to what I'm trying to convey into the last paragraph of #12 above.

 

[Atlan0001]

Following up quickly on both posts #12 and #13 above:

In cutting the curve it will be very much like a slipping of spacetime mass energy drag of inertia like an electron slipping, rising, to a higher energy state from a lower energy state in quantum mechanics. Remember what I said before about translation and transference from subspace microcosm of quantum mechanics to hyperspace macrocosm of the same . . . or better yet the equivalence of the two states the sub-space and the hyper-space. Going up and out into the one, if and when done right, will be the equivalent of going down and into the other. The more the 1-d direct timeline into the universe's 2-d light time frames can be slipped, the curvatures cut, the more the warp bubble of space (aka the wormhole tunneling of spacetime) works for the traveler.

 

[Atlan0001]

It is the oddest thing about the above posts #11 on. That the traveler in space can fix his coordinate position well enough by the surrounding star fields for navigation purposes but can never know his momentum through space except as an outcome of his traveling to someplace he has been before. Spacetime frames traveling at the speed of light 'c' can never be positioned in anyway at all, per the principle of uncertainty, because their momentum through the spacetime-lines is known only too precisely.

See the illustrated light cone once more:

Light cone - Wikipedia

Turn it sideways from up-down to left-right and put the traveler as the point in the center point of flatland space traveling from left to right the light cones constantly refreshing because they are never not there to refresh. The traveler is always at the equatorial crossing between past=future light cones, always descending, fast, into the past in one light cone direction, and always ascending, equally fast, into the future light cone in th other direction of travel, which is "back to the future," since he is always riding in the middle of a self-mirroring of observed (observable) descending [past (future) | future (past)] ascending light cones. His rate of occupying (warp-bubble) space in crossing the revolutionary divide of light-time histories (of physical information) will be a matter of the principle of uncertainty. As I said before, the traveler can estimate his coordinate positioning per the enclosing star fields reasonably well, but he simply can't possibly deal in his momentum within all the ever-increasing, ever enlarging, ever expanding, warp-bubble of spacetime he is occupying all at once as he accelerates through and across spacetime. Eventually he will have to contract -- shrink -- all his expanded warp bubble occupation of spacetime, all at once in decelerating toward his destination [future]-point of [space], altogether, [spacetime].

Never once, though, did he depart his center point position in the flatland of space in that illustrated mirroring of light cones, left to right and/or up to down. His speed through that pre-existing field-grid hologram of [past | future] could have been infinite (it would certainly be "uncertain") but at all times staying locally centered between those two preset light cone horizons, that as horizons of universe stay with him regardless. Thus, he measures the horizon of the speed of light always the (absolute) constant 'c' = (+/-)1 (unity) = ((+/-)300,000kps).

 

[Atlan0001]

By the way once more, fbb2 0|1 (unity) is primal / fundamental binary base2, 0 (null- or non-unity) and/or (+/-) 1 (unity), plus (+) and minus (-), parity. There are two universes positive energy matter and negative energy anti-matter, always blended, always blending, always paired particle to particle, wave to wave, string to string, Flatland to Flatland, and so on, almost always balanced; 'Casimer effect-like three dimensions, three plate 'Flatlands', but deadly, at once potentially quite useful, where and when crossing the divide of Mirror (they are mirror energy and matter) and become unbalanced.

It's an Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe (U), each and every universe (u) of the MULTIVERSE Universe, integrally multiverse. There are no external sub-dimensional or extra- dimensional "sterile" universes. There are "sterile" conditions, thus dimensions, here and there to the universe, to the universes, but no "sterile" universes. Sorry but the immortal traveler will just have to travel forever through the infinity of horizons, horizon to horizon, to horizon, of the space and time of the same infinity of universe (infinities of universes), always observing evolutions coming at him, or going away from him, always from and to the same Big Bang (Black Hole) Horizon in the same distant location he will always be a 'point-singularity' centered between. Centered between light cones of [past (future) | future (past)] equally descending time [past} and ascending time {future], for a net measurement of 'c' -- 360 degrees of it left-right, up-down, locally -- eternally.

 

[Atlan0001]

I hope no one gets the wrong picture or idea about the "null- or non-unity" I mention above in above post #16. It ultimately means the "graviton singularity" as in 0-point (portal) singularity. "0-point!" A most useful little ghost that graviton 'singularity' "that is there but isn't there" (that can't and won't be observed).

 

[Atlan0001]

So, back to [pasts | futures] . . . and SPOL:

Again, as Gen. Patton is said to have said, "Brevity may be the soul of wit, but repetition is the heart of instruction": (It seems regularly necessary to recount.)

A = Observers, including their clocks, in rest, or preferred, frames.
B = Observer travelers, including their clocks, or simply objects at a distance (all objects are moving in some way or other at all times in the universe, including universes themselves with the sole exceptions of Infinite Multiverse Universe and (collapsed constant) PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) Horizon . . . and, [infinite / infinitesimal mass singularity | infinite / infinitesimal well (hole) (void) (vacuum)] at the speed of light (universal constant) 'c' = primal / fundamental 0|1 (unity)).
{+H} = Horizon (future (14 billion years))
{-H} = Horizon (past (14 billion years))
p = past
f = future
o = observed / observable
u = unobserved / unobservable
<< = slow, or slower than, SPOL
>> = fast, or faster than, SPOL

Distance (expanded or expansive)
1) {+/- H}(AB){-/+ H}
2) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop < Bop{-H} > Buf{+H}.
3) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop << Bop{-H} >> Buf{+H}
4) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop <<< Bop{-H} >>> Buf{+H}
5) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop <<<< Bop{-H} >>>> Buf{+H}
6) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop <<<<< Bop{-H} >>>>> Buf{+H|
(Reality, including the real clock and real clock time being later in time, being farther away in space and time(!) than you think! Then you observe! "Aop/Bop" is the earlier time (toward the past Horizon (-H), thus the slower clocks)! "Auf/Buf" the later time (toward the future Horizon (+H), thus the faster clocks)!)

Distance (contracted or contractive)
1) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop >>>>> {+H}Buf <<<<< Bop{-H}
2) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop >>>> {+H}Buf <<<< Bop{-H}
3) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop >>> {+H}Buf <<< Bop{-H}
4) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop >> {+H}Buf << Bop{-H}
5) {+H}Auf | {-H}Aop > {+H}Buf < Bop{-H}
6) {+/- H}(AB){-/+ H}
(Reality, including the real clock and real clock time still being later in time, being closer in space and time(!) than you think! Closer than you observe! "Aop/Bop" is still the earlier time (toward the past Horizon (-H), thus still the slower clocks)! "Auf/Buf" still the later time (toward the future Horizon (+H), thus still the faster clocks)!)

 

[Atlan0001]

I redid the above because it is as if I had never done it in the first place to some here who cannot believe that there is a universe existing that they cannot "observe." The real spacetime traveler -- and his real spacetime clock -- will travel into that universe, effectively faster than the speed of light as the observer would observe if he could do so (seeing doppelgangers of the traveler and the traveler's clock, but widening, or shrinking, in distance, in both space and time, between them and between clocks) and, thus in reality the traveler, will not be observed to do such a travel ahead of the speed of light as the observer observes the speed of light to be when arriving to him. It is effectively fast time travel into the future light cone ("Buf") whether going or coming, a future that stays quantum entangled with the observer's time travel into the same future ("Auf").

The traveler isn't being witnessed (if that were even possible) to slow down in time, not really, he is being witnessed by the observer to travel into the [past] light cone in going away . . . and into the future light cone, the observer's light cone oncoming to the observer. If there were two observers, as I said before, one on Earth witnessing the traveler to travel away from him, and one on Mars witnessing the traveler to be coming to him, the two would split the traveler and the traveler's clock, in two. The Earth observer observing the traveler and his clock to be slowing down in time going away from him into the past of Mars he always observes "at a distance" from Mars; the Mars observer observing the traveler and his clock to be speeding up in time oncoming to him from the past of Earth he always observes "at a distance" from Earth.

The real spacetime traveler will be both out front of the Earth observer's observational game, and out front of the Mars observer's observational game. But there is still only the one real spacetime traveler and clock out front (thus effectively traveling faster than the speed of light to both observers) and he and it aren't observed, aren't going to be observed, by either the Mars or the Earth observer while in transit (though eventually he will meet the Mars observer at Mars).

Will you understand "at a distance" from . . . and where you've seen or heard that phrase ("at a distance") of physics, that phrase of relativity, before? You've got to expand the dimensionality of your mind to see the true dimensionality in your mind's eye of what is really going on. Forget the 1-dimensional picture that has been impressed upon our minds for over a century.

 

[Atlan0001]

I'm trying another diagrammed example of the last two posts above with "Buf" emitting light in transit, first toward point A, Earth, and second toward point A, Mars:

<< (direction of travel
>> (light's direction)
1) << Buf in transit emits light at SPOL>>>|-----the gap----| Bop>>>A (Earth).
The traveler (Buf) is farther away from A (Earth) than he is observed (Bop) to be by the Earth observer.

2a) << Buf direction of travel toward Mars, point A.
2b) <<<< (light's direction)

2a) A (Mars) ---the gap---|<<< Buf in transit emitting light at SPOL (position at time of observation).
2b) A|<<<<<<<<<<<SPOL<<<<<<<<<<<Bop at instant of light emission by Buf.
The traveler (Buf) is closer to A than he is observed (Bop) to be by the Mars observer.

2a and 2b are on two levels because there is no interference and the emitted light shot away from Buf at speed 'c' and arrived at A (Mars) at speed 'c' though showing Bop to be farther away from the Mars observer than Buf really is.

SPOL, as shown, is precisely 'c' in all of the above. Time splits out in levels, dimensions, of time . . . warp- or hyper-spatially dividing.

There is equivalency in and to quantum mechanics. Though relative, the actual real of 'relativity' that is, this above follows that equivalency to a tee.

------------------------------

"If I had eight hours to cut down a tree, I would spend seven hours sharpening my ax." -- Abraham Lincoln.

 

[Atlan0001]

Sometimes trying to get "stability" right, and explain it right, can be real problem for stability. For an electron stability is the higher energy state, or as Sean Carroll might put it in 'Something Deeply Hidden', the "observed" state of it; the particle and position state, if I read him right.

I've claimed for long now the most stable state of a "Cosmic All" state is the highest energy state of them all, cumbersome though it is, all at once the Planck Big Bang (Black) Hole (collapsed constant / cosmological constant (/\) / [past |future] constant) Horizon. Again, just in case you lost it in the simplicity of the preceding described entity, the highest energy state of them all is the most stable state of all stable states. And of course it is integral with its elements of (infinite (infinitesimal) / infinitesimal (infinite / infinity) absolutism, c = 0|1 (unity), G = 0|1 (unity), h = 0|1 (unity), T = 0|1 (unity) .... where '0' is (null unity (0-point (portal): the primal / fundamental entity of the open, and opening, system)). It's really very simple, fundamental binary base2 0|1, plus parity bit, is. You can't possibly go below (above) and/or above (below) it in space. You can't possibly go before (after) and/or after (before) it in time. Now that is stability.

And don't forget its quality of Mirror mirroring, such as mirror energies (positive / negative) and mirror matter / anti-matter.

 

[Atlan0001]

I keep pressing the constant of the speed of light (horizon) being [+300,000kps |0| -300,000kps] or (+/-)300,000kps to '0' and equal to '(+/-)1'. It is (+/-) infinity 'absolute', in no way finite 'relative'. It is the horizon housing, the set, of all infinities of finite relative elementary constituent momentum, velocity, in all the infinities of horizon of the universe (in all the infinities of universes).

It does not have the spread of either 300,000kps or 600,000kps in the (+/-) that it, that 'c', might look as if it does on the face of it. Rather it runs c^1, c^2, c^3, c^4 .... keeping it!

The quantum entangled two sides, (+)1 and (-)1, it appears to be out of the single horizon that is the 0-point "observer" observing, isn't the whole of the multi-dimensional multiverse picture, or probably even the real picture rather than virtually relative. The other side of the picture is that the "observer" is the one quantum entangled, all at once, on both sides (+) and (-) of the one horizon constant of the speed of light 'c'! only "observing" it to be on both sides (+/-) of him the observer! I've captured, diagrammed, that particular picture more times than once (though mostly for the traveling traveler observer).

 

[Atlan0001]

Basic, essential to the gist of the twin paradox. The what and why of what it is:

".... The other option is that quantum mechanics represents a violent break from the way we have always thought about physics before, shifting from a view where the world exists objectively and independently of how we perceive it, to one where the act of observation is somehow fundamental to the nature of reality." -- Sean Carroll, 'Something Deeply Hidden'.

".... where the act of observation is somehow fundamental to the nature of reality."

The above is the heart of the "twin paradox," and is fundamentally the heart of Special Relativity, if not, maybe, General Relativity too. Physicists' merger of reality to observation into a naked singularity of the two, instead of keeping the two objectively separate and independent of one another. Except for certain probabilities in quantum mechanics, and one other, the real world, the real universe, is not the one "observed!"

The real world, the real universe, the unobserved and unobservable real, will always be somewhere out front in the future, to far, far, out front in the future, of the one observed. So, it will also be with the twins [and their clocks] of the "twin paradox." The only exceptions being the certain probabilities Sean Carroll alludes to (I'm narrowing that "world" down!) in quantum mechanics and the PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) ([past | future] meshed) Horizon of the Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe.

 

[Atlan0001]

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.
---------------

Infinite (infinite (infinitesimal), infinitesimal (infinite), infinity of ..., infinities of ...) is an absolute in nature and physics rather than a relative such as 'finite'. It is the absolute of 'non-local' rather than 'local', the absolute of 'unobservable' rather than 'observable'.

It is more than symbolic, more than its symbol, the twisted doughnut ring; the twist circling in on itself. As an absolute it is one of the constants in nature and physics, possibly THE constant in nature and physics: Its value: [primal / fundamental] binary base2 '0|1' ('0' and/or '1'). The absolute of top and bottom, up and down. The absolute of outside and inside. The absolute of 'unity' and 'null unity'....

It is the infinity and infinities of 0-point (portal) 'singularities', and the infinite set of the infinity and infinities of singularities, THE 'Naked (0-point (portal)) Singularity', the 'absolute' -- one of the few in the PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) Horizon -- of 'G'.

The speed of light constant 'c' = (+/-)1 = (+/-)300,000kps is not linear, however [(+)300,000kps |0| (-)300,000kps may seem to be. I've explained and described a few times why it isn't linear. Rather it powers c^1, c^2, c^3, c^4 (as well as, quite possibly, at once, c^-1, c^-2, c^-3, c^-4) ..., a stable absolute, a stable constant, ('c') that keeps its base stability:

1) A probable what of the warp-space-bubble of spacetime.

2) A possible why (at the very least) of electrons' lower energy to higher energy and back . . . foam-wave rounding up-down to point-particle duality.

3) The volume breadth and depth of light time history, histories, spacetime and spacetimes, in each and every Flatland frame of light time history (the 3- and 4- (inclusive of 0-), dimensional ([past (future) | future (past)]) light cone painting done on all of the infinities of Flatland's single-sided 2-dimensional canvases).

4) The possible physic behind and ruling the [expansion / contraction] (thus to "nowhere" into "nothing") physic of the multiverse of universe and universes....

I repeat:
Infinite (infinite (infinitesimal), infinitesimal (infinite), infinity of ..., infinities of ...) is an absolute in nature and physics rather than a relative such as 'finite'. It is the absolute of 'non-local' rather than 'local', the absolute of 'unobservable' rather than 'observable'.

It is more than symbolic, more than its symbol, the twisted doughnut ring; the twist circling in on itself. As an absolute it is one of the constants in nature and physics, possibly THE constant in nature and physics: Its value: [primal / fundamental] binary base2 '0|1' ('0' and/or '1'). The absolute of top and bottom, up and down. The absolute of outside and inside. The absolute of 'unity' and 'null unity'....
---------------

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

"Brevity may be the soul of wit, but repetition is the heart of instruction." -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.

 

[Atlan0001]

I've never liked the use of the descriptive term "quantum foam" as one way to see the wave-side structure of wave=particle. If I can think first about it I will never use that descriptive term, "quantum foam," again! It is divisive of the microcosm and macrocosm which should never have happened at the smallest and largest scales. And which I have fought against forever it seems.

I've been reading about "cloud" structures in the macrocosm here and there and got to thinking about the foam / wave structure in quantum mechanics. Microcosmic higher energy point-particles, I understand, are [instantaneous-with-"observation"] or near instantaneous jumps, transformations, evolutions, of microcosmic lower energy foam-wave (cloud) structures . . . And higher energy galaxies and stars and other macrocosmic structures, are relatively less instantaneous transformations, evolutions, of macrocosmic lower energy cloud structures. Not low energy, I would suppose, but lower energy cloud structure that energizes, jumps to, transforms to, evolves to. higher energy more stable galactic, star, and other such structure.

I think, which I've long thought without putting them together in my mind's eye, that the two cloud structures, macrocosmic and microcosmic, are in fact two sides, one relatively sub-spatial // one relatively hyper-spatial lower energy cloud structured (thus less stable) // higher energy (thus more stable) . . . " of a single coin. Well, the two sides are actually both sub-spatial and hyper-spatial but what the heck, I'm in a hurry at the moment....

Think about it.
------------------
"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

 

[Atlan0001]

"From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other...." -- Arthur Canon Doyle, 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet'.

From a microcosmic cloud (a quantum cloud (a wave)), a logician could infer the possibility of a macrocosmic cloud, and clouds, without having observed one 0-point (portal) graviton singularity or the other.

 

[Atlan0001]

It just keeps on impinging upon me. When the Webb scope showed us those distant more and/or less mature galaxies I had a big smile on my face because I had predicted just that before the Webb ever opened to show us what I had predicted (right here on these forums as well as elsewhere).

I also said there are two levels of Horizon in that distance. Essentially an above and a below the [line] of that Horizon. Two dimensions of the Horizon. The Horizon above the line, it is exactly as I constantly define it, the PBB(B)H (cc (/\)) ([past (future) | future (past)]) Horizon. The Horizon below the line, well, the horizons of the universe, including the more or less mature galaxies, just go on to infinity below the line of Horizon . . . The infinities of universes just go on to infinity. Now, suddenly, the microcosmic cloud (quantum cloud (quantum wave (quantum wave function?!))) / macrocosmic cloud and clouds, essentially the same clouds, are in my mind's eye, pictures and modeling, as well. Cloud Horizon . . . The hyper-spatial clouds, micro and macro, all at once within the hyper-spatial 'Cloud', and the 'Horizon' of all horizons. Illustrated (cloud to particle, and wave (wave function) to "observed" higher energy particles and back) right in front of me in Sean Carroll's 'Something Deeply Hidden' and I immediately see macro-verse clouds going to higher energy galaxies and stars and back!

 

[Atlan0001]

I've become an absolutist in stating most of my views because I read absolutism . . . such as Creationism from out of an absolute and literal single-sided 2-dimensional "nowhere" and "nothingness" . . . coming from so many astronomers and physicists. A naked singular closed system (no open system side of the coin, thus no possibility of opening system to it) that would have absolutely closed -- would have absolutely swallowed itself up -- instantaneously to [never was], [never could be].

I deal in a PBB)B)H (collapsed constant (cosmological constant /\) ([past | future]) Horizon of an Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe. No absolute, no literal, single-sided 2-dimensional (finite!!!!) Creationism involved.

Even Sean Carroll in his book, 'Something Deeply Hidden' . . . following in the footsteps of the likes of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking, hints at professional and sycophant amateur minds sunk into (fixed finite) stone. And always having their proofs to prove their stone absolute, stone literal, singled-sided 2-dimensional wall of Creationism. I've done a picture, made a model, that does the same thing without flat Creationism. Of course, they would tell me that my most telling problem is back it with infinity, and infinities. An infinity absolute! An absolute of 'infinite' (infinite (infinitesimal) / infinitesimal (infinite) / infinity of.... / infinities of....), rather than a stone-monolith of 'finite' and no 'infinite' to it whatsoever (because, apparently, it's something they can't handle)!

Oh well. I'll stick with my own picture and model. It's serving me very well now, and as I proceed deeper into reading such material as 'Something Deeply Hidden', I find more independent parallels, to some close near parallels, out there today and over the years, to parts of my own picture and modeling of the biggest (smallest) and smallest (biggest) coin of universe.