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).)

 

[Atlan0001]

Still rethinking and redoing certain pieces of my picture modeling:

Seven fundamental forces:

1.) (+/-) Electro-Magnetic Force (-\+)
2.) (+|-) Weak Force (-|+)
3.) (->) Strong (nuclear) Binding Force (<-)
4.) (<-) Dark [Push-Energy] Force (->)
5.) Force of Inertia (to include supposed impossible equal but opposite inertia-less-ness)
6.) Force of 1-d String Vibration (entangling concurrent REALTIME NOW instant (t=0))
7.) Life Force (Force of Animation)

To be cont'd....maybe!

 

[Catastrophe]

Atlan,

We agree that there is "good imagination".
Can we agree that there must be, ipso facto, bad imagination?

Bad imagination would be something like a sound, logical argument being contaminated by unsupportable 'flights of fancy'?

For example, Newton, whilst formulating his laws, suddenly tried to consider the effects of goblins pushing and pulling the planets around? Perhaps in the context of outer (then unknown) planets causing inexplicable motions

You see where this could lead? Just a polite question.

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

Cat,

"And, who knows? The horse might sing."

 

[Catastrophe]

Cat,

"And, who knows? The horse might sing."

Can we agree that there must be, ipso facto, bad imagination?

Any thoughts?

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

Any thoughts?

Cat

Well, Cat, you asked for it! "There never was a good war, or a bad peace."

 

[Catastrophe]

Atlan,

Can we agree that there must be, ipso facto, bad imagination?

Well, Cat, you asked for it! "There never was a good war, or a bad peace."

Oh. I thought that would be easily agreeable.

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

The universe has built in curvatures for many different reasons. Light follows these curvatures rather than ignoring them (it isn't very smart). What it means is that the reality of distances, positions and velocities and so on, will never be what light tells us it is. Light lies to us telling us that it has drawn lines to things in the universe, at all distances, straight away from us . . . straight away from all distance observers. And in a straightaway to any distant objects and events observed, we can measure both observed distances and the constant of the speed of light to be accurate and not distrust curvature to distort the speed of light reading to the distant event. That the event will either be closer or further away than light is telling it is . . . or different, too, in some other way, particularly if the light passed through some almost transparent particle dust . . . aka, now, a returning virtuality of ether (aether) that might slow light or change other aspects of it, changing the picture the observer will get from it either slightly or greatly.

 

[Atlan0001]

I had to go back and edit #613 to read, ("6.) Force of Vibration", to realize all the multi-dimensionality of "TIME" (the what of its origination). "SPACE" was easier since I realized gravity is not a force but is vector infinities of directions and magnitudes, the fractal zooms structure of universes (see #609, "Eye of the Universe" video).

TIME, though, despite what some people have already said down through the ages, and the two dimensionalities I've come up with myself, was more difficult to come up with as to ever continuing origination. In my own mind's eye, I had to pin it down to a [timeless] constant of 'original' "vibration" (t=0) as one original (fundamental constant) force (being possibly a Trojan combination of other forces).

 

[Atlan0001]

It has been said, including right here on the forums, that it would take infinite energy to transit space -- to warp space -- at a constant acceleration. I believe just the opposite, that space itself will allow travelers traveling under constant accelerations to build up bubbles of soliton waves then surf those waves with need for only lessened constant energy thrust requirement.

Science fiction, such as Star Trek, had constant powering warp drives but never imagined surfing the universe within any build up of soliton waves literally carrying them, and their "observable universes," through tunneled shrunken spaces and times (with much less, to even less, internally supplied energy and thrust requirement than they started with)!

 

[Atlan0001]

Universes observed older than observed universes:

Tiny bright objects discovered at dawn of universe baffle scientists

A recent discovery by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) confirmed that luminous, very red objects previously detected in the early universe upend conventional thinking about the origins and evolution of galaxies and their supermassive black holes.

phys.org

Energy splitting, divisions out, of universes, maintaining more discrete quanta conservation of unities, in space and time does happen. New generations, and even newer generations of universes oncoming, mixed up with old generations, and even older generations of universes gradually in process of giving way for them, can happen.

Very, very, slow motion big bang universes overlapping, overlaying, mixing and matching with, equally very, very, slow motion big crunch universes. Both being endless asymptotic running constants of the 'Mirror Horizon'.

 

[Atlan0001]

Ad #622:

"Very, very, slow motion big bang universes overlapping, overlaying, mixing and matching with, equally very, very, slow motion big crunch universes. Both being endless asymptotic running constants of the 'Mirror Horizon'."

Möbius strip - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

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

Altogether, furthering a hub, so to speak, of many spokes I've worked up over time.

 

[Atlan0001]

It seems always, "Once more into the breach!" ("Brevity may be the soul of wit but repetition is the heart of instruction." -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.):

The "many worlds (many universes (u) and/or multi-verse) theory is not 'mainstream'!" many say. Oh, I think it is considered very mainstream by the discerning lower and higher dimensional thinkers who refuse to deal in mediocrity.

That "very mainstream": The divisions, the null unity, the quantum finite "discrete quanta" of the microcosmic at small (to the infinitesimal) modeling of the macrocosmic at large (to the infinite) known by a discerning few as the complex and chaotic 'individualistic' realm of "quantum physics."

Fundamental Binary Base2 ('0' (Q(DQ)) and/or '1' (Unity)), plus the Trojan dimensionality:
**(((+1) (-1)) = 1/0)**
**(((W+) (W-)) = SF/EM)**
**Fundamental force and (timeless) constant of 'original' "vibration (string vibration)" (entangling concurrent REALTIME NOW instant (t=0))!**
------------------------------------

Just in case you're still around, more "piffle" . . . more of the "counter intuitive":

Strong ((nuclear) binding (-->||<--)) Force = force wake 'set' and 'reset' of fractal zooms' (gravitational (magnitudinous)) structure of universes to fundamental binary base2's '1' (-->|Unity|<--) = entropy = c^2 = time reversal!

 

[Atlan0001]

Two of the four Planck units are, in my picturing and modeling of the Universe (U), are essentially collapsed cosmological constant (/\) Planck (BB) 'Mirror Horizon' constants, c=1 (unity) and G=1 (unity).

Thus for 'c':
c=1=(c=300,000kps=1).
c^2=c=1 (1^2) (300,000kps^2 = 300,000kps = c =1 . . . period).
c^3=c=1 (1^3) (300,000kps^3 = 300,000kps = c = 1 . . . period).
And so on (technically to infinity in distance and magnitude (square the mass, square the energy . . . but only relatively speaking . . . universes divide into infinities of quantum-discrete quanta (though NOT -- though NEVER! -- relatively speaking)))!