From a drop of water....

[Atlan0001]

Remonstrating:

"Creation" is a physic in its own right at all levels of it, including universes! And it has been, is, and will be, in play at all times . . . for all time (NOT "Once upon a time")! It's only a matter of seeing its 'WHAT' (the 'WHAT' (what, where, how, why) of it)! Everything has some kind of "origin," some kind origination (some kind of "genesis") and they, all, could be pyramided, in superposition, to a stereotypical singularity point of pyramidical apex useful in its superposition composition for overall cosmic immortality.

 

[Atlan0001]

Liking, with my interpretation copied over for addition:

Pointer is to Gibsense's 'Hubble Tension' post #9:

Hubble Tension

We know the difference between the calculated methods to determine the Hubble Constant is called the Hubble Tension. The Hubble Tension implies that our current models of the universe might be incomplete. It could indicate new physics beyond...

forums.space.com

======================

(My response copied over for reasons already in posts in this thread and probably to come....)
~~~~
Newton's (edited here) apple is falling into an open / opening system accelerating in expansion, as observed from the perspective of the apple (until it runs smack into some barrier of quantum / classical physics!

The ship, the traveler, is racing at acceleration into an open / opening system accelerating in expansion, as observed from the perspective of the ship, traveler, until it, they, run, if they run, smack into some barrier of quantum / classical physics.

The light cone is expanding into an open / opening system at the ['linear'] constant of the speed of light ('c') accelerating in expansion (E=mc^2) of the forefront ring / sphere of cone....

Self-similar fractal zooms structure of universe. Inverse square law. Embedded time reversal. Newton's three laws of motion. Gravitational waving. Constant of "Big-'G'". Emergent SPACE (hyperspace; subspace; warp space; entangling, including quantum entangling, space ("wormhole" or "jump" space); soliton space....), entangling, including quantum entangling, concurrent REALTIME NOW instant (t=0).
~~~~

Exceptions, (T=1)....

To be continued.

cont'd....

 

[Atlan0001]

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

Reminding(!):

The universe is flat, "Flatland!" In how many directions of observed SPACETIME? In every possible direction! . . . In how dimensions? In every dimension of a 4-dimensional 2-dimensional 1-dimensional 0-dimensional quadrilateralized spherical cube ('Menger Sponge') and framed surface canvas ('Sierpinski Carpet' / 'Mobius Strip') and line-string (((+1) (-1)) = 1/0)....

Strong interaction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.... and monopole-point-singularities (1(+|0|-), 2(-|0|+), 3(+|-|0), 4(-|+|0), 5(0|+|-), 6(0|-|+)) of horizon universe!

In how many horizon universes? Infinities!

 

[Atlan0001]

With black holes you get time reversal! Energy (E=mc^2) is always 0-point . . . universe.

With closed (closing (contracting)) systems you get time reversal! Entropy (E=mc^2) is always 0-point . . . universe.

Energy is NOT inertial . . . NOT the fundamental force and laws of "inertia"! (Entropy is NOT inertial . . . NOT "inertia"!)

More of me being counterintuitive! All of the above inclusive, the (youthful young) Frontier Universe's "Call of the Wild!" --> **("Aim at heaven (the heavens), you get Earth thrown in. Aim at Earth you get neither." -- C. S. Lewis. The parenthetic is mine.)**

Well, come to think of it, fusion / fission is not so counterintuitive after all. Not even the double and triple quick . . . and vastly more and greater!

 

[Catastrophe]

A Study in Scarlet: Important Quotes Explained | SparkNotes

Explanation of the famous quotes in A Study in Scarlet, including all important speeches, comments, quotations, and monologues.

www.sparknotes.com

Atlan, do not misunderstand me, as I am a great fan of Conan Doyle, but I am not sure that this is one of his best quotes.

His example about inferring the Atlantic from a drop of water also implies that deduction requires imagination and not merely cold, mathematical thinking.

Is imagination always a good thing in deduction? I can see where it fits into this character. Holmes "is" no ordinary "man". He "is" (as a character) an extraordinary detective, and solves cases by his evident "genius", but this is a (very good) work of fiction.

Conan Doyle uses this rather double-barreled attribute to emphasise Holmes's unique character. It works for Holmes because he is lucky enough to have Conan Doyle making sure
he is always correct. I am not advocating cocaine, but maybe Holmes' addiction helped his "imagination" in solving cases? (Aided and abetted by Conan Doyle).

Atlan, I am not criticising Holmes, or his author, but I am just wondering about the character invented here, and how we are, perhaps, meant to view him (according to his creator). I have the complete works, and have read all the Sherlock Holmes stories more than once. They have provided me with great enjoyment, which gives me all the more reason to be interested in the character.

I would be very interested to hear your take on this

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

Catastrophe,
Don't mix up "analysis" (mechanically taking in and sifting the cold hard facts and points) with "deduction" (here getting into imagination (getting into reasoning from analysis)). Both Einstein and Hawking, among others, if memory serves me well enough, alluded in their musings to the fact that good deduction went hand in glove with a good imagination.

Artificial Intelligence is great at analysis . . . and lousy at deduction (that which is un-observably beyond the "observable universe," one might say).
------------------------

From an expanse of macrocosmic universe, a logician could infer the possibility of a microcosmic verse without having seen or heard of the microcosm. Infering the possibility of a "Mandelbrot set."

 

[Classical Motion]

From the measurements I have read, and the evidence that I have seen, I deduce that light is not a wave, but an intermittent sawtooth acceleration ramp of EM field density, being emitted as a chunk with a 1/2 period duration and length at the speed of c. Without relative motion the timing duty cycle is 50%. Motion of the emitter can only change the dead time between emissions. Not the length of the emission. A inverted duty cycle shift.

How's that for imagination?

 

[Atlan0001]

From the measurements I have read, and the evidence that I have seen, I deduce that light is not a wave, but an intermittent sawtooth acceleration ramp of EM field density, being emitted as a chunk with a 1/2 period duration and length at the speed of c. Without relative motion the timing duty cycle is 50%. Motion of the emitter can only change the dead time between emissions. Not the length of the emission. A inverted duty cycle shift.

How's that for imagination?

Fifty-percent, at most, of the universe, as the "observable universe," is what you get as any object recedes away from any observer. Concomitantly, fifty-percent, at most, of the universe, as the "observable universe," is what any observer observes (any observer gets) of any object oncoming to him until an asymptote closes at the observer.

The time and timing of the "observable universe" is slower than the REALTIME NOW objective reality of the universe. The speed law -- the observed speeds -- of the universe at a distance, the [at a distance] "observable universe", is the law of '1/2'. What? How? Why?

Hubble Tension

We know the difference between the calculated methods to determine the Hubble Constant is called the Hubble Tension. The Hubble Tension implies that our current models of the universe might be incomplete. It could indicate new physics beyond...

forums.space.com

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

"Communication across the revolutionary divide is inevitably partial." -- Thomas S. Kuhn.

 

[Atlan0001]

Relativity starts breaking down at the edge of (emergent) SPACE, and with the break down of relativity comes the buildup of entropy . . . a buildup of complexity and chaos toward the collapsed cosmological constant (/\) Planck (Big Bang) Black Hole (Big Crunch) 'Mirror (mirroring) Event Horizon' . . . the buildup in mass-energy density toward the smoothest (Chaos Theory), highest mass-energy superposition superstate, so to speak, there is at the 'Horizon'! To many, the Horizon of Nothingness', Nowhereland', and 'reversed time'!
The "Big Crunch" is not a gravitational state (gravity being vectors of directions and magnitudes (fractal zooms universe structure))! In the microcosm of quantum physics it is state of the fundamental strong (nuclear) bonding (binding) force. In either case (in both cases), '1' (unity (universe)). Maximally similar to the Casimir force and effect as the fundamental force regarding non-force gravity's vector zooms structure's base 'set' . . . the force behind fractal gravitational zooms (vectors (magnitudes)) constant reset to a base self-similarity (emergent SPACE):

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

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCpLWbHVNhk

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

"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." -- 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet', by Arthur Canon Doyle.

 

[Atlan0001]

Quoting an edit I did to post #608 (to add in a pointer to elsewhere) for what I've now seen as a kind of law!

"The time and timing of the "observable universe" is slower than the REALTIME NOW objective reality of the universe. The speed law -- the observed speeds -- of the universe at a distance, the [at a distance] "observable universe", is the law of '1/2'. What? How? Why?"

Hubble Tension

We know the difference between the calculated methods to determine the Hubble Constant is called the Hubble Tension. The Hubble Tension implies that our current models of the universe might be incomplete. It could indicate new physics beyond...

forums.space.com

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

 

[Catastrophe]

Catastrophe,
Don't mix up "analysis" (mechanically taking in and sifting the cold hard facts and points) with "deduction" (here getting into imagination (getting into reasoning from analysis)). Both Einstein and Hawking, among others, if memory serves me well enough, alluded in their musings to the fact that good deduction went hand in glove with a good imagination.

Would we agree that what Conan Doyle gave Holmes good imagination?

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

Would we agree that what Conan Doyle gave Holmes good imagination?

Cat

Agreed!

Merriam-Webster:
Logic: A science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration: the science of the formal principles of reasoning.

Infer: 1.) To derive as a conclusion from facts or premises.... 2.) GUESS: SURMISE.

NOT from Merriam-Webster!
Helmuth von Moltke -- "A strictly logical conclusion, such as madmen are liable to arrive at after starting from radically wrong premises, ...."
---------------------------

"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...." -- 'Sherlock Holmes: A Study in Scarlet', by Arthur Canon Doyle.

"Infer"! (INFER the POSSIBILITY of....) (INFER POSSIBILITY (infer possibilities).)