My new ideas about gravity and anti-matter...

Aug 31, 2021
26
14
35
After thorough contemplation, I have new ideas about gravity and anti-matter.

Gravity: gravity is elasticity of the spacetime (including matter and anti-matter) or, in other words, the tendency to return to the natural state of infinite density also called initial singularity. Remember that Universe had size smaller than atom. That initial singularity had inifinite density and energy. In order to counter the annihilation with anti-matter, Nature had to differentiate and re-combine between opposing particles and to introduce force which will expand the Universe. The purpose of expansion is twofold: 1) to spread opposing particles as one of the countermeasures against annihilation and 2) to make more of space for galaxies. This force is dark energy. But! There is something that resists the expansion. What could that be? Well, the gravity of course. The tendency to return to the initial singularity. The tendency to withdraw Universe back to the smaller than atom size. Elasticity of the spacetime.

Compare Hooke`s law and Hubble law:
a) Hooke - the force (F) needed to extend or compress a spring by some distance (x) scales linearly with respect to that distance.
b) Hubble - galaxies are moving away from Earth at speeds proportional to their distance.

Resemblance is striking, don`t you think so too? Spacetime acts like a spring. The more you stretch it the more it pulls back. Therefore, the gravity is nothing else than mere elasticity of the spacetime (including matter and anti-matter). Why do particles attract each other? They want to cancel each other. Why can`t they? Because of the differentiation, re-combination and laws of physics Nature made in order to counter the tendency to annihilate.

Universe is based on logic. Every action has reaction. The splitting of initial singularity into the two contrary things (proton and anti-proton from which everything else was further derived) resulted in tendency to withdraw into initial state of uniformity.

How did initial singularity came to be? You have to read my contemplations about nothing and no-time before the Universe. I have explained that nothing and no-time have certain characterics: infinity and eternity. Nothing is infinite, no-time is eternity. Why? Because that is exactly opposite to the everything which is always limited, expanding further, and time which is always finite, striving towards. Both are always restricted. Hence, if everything and time are always restricted then the opposites are boundless. YES! Nothing has infinite volume! No-time is eternity! When you comprise infinity and eternity you get initial singularity from which point you proceed, step by step, with the creation of the Universe.

I will prove that nothing is infinite: take a cup and a spoon, Grab nothing with the spoon and put it in the cup. How many spoons of nothing can you put in the cup or how many times can you repeat this procedure? Infinite spoons or infinite amount of the repetitions. Nothing has infinite volume. There is practically no limit for the volume of nothing.

I will prove that no-time is eternity: take a stopwatch without the notion of the time units. Erase hours, minutes and seconds. Not just from the stopwatch but remove the time concept entirely from the reality. There is only an empty circle on the stop-watch. Start the stopwatch and wait until it executes one full circle, or half-circle or any angular momentum. How long will you wait? Eternity. Because there is no-time to be measured. You will never reach even the fragment of second. No-time is eternity. Wait and see. ;-)

Now try to express that infinity and eternity in one formula, in only one logical term. What you get? You get initial singularity having infinity and eternity as its logical precursors. From that initial singularity you can proceed with the creation of the Universe.

Anti-matter: until this moment, in my previous threads and posts, I have stated two solutions.

1) One is that primordial and supermassive black holes serve as a dumping areas for the anti-matter. This conclusion arise from the fact that black holes have anti-gravity or negative mass. Gravity is, never fully accomplished attraction, between particles manifesting on the 4d surface of the spacetime. When it pulls inside of the fabric of the spacetime it becomes anti-gravity. In same manner, matter that is on the 4d surface of the spacetime fabric is positive mass. Mass that falls under the fabric of the spacetime is negative mass. That is why scientist say that the total energy of the Universe is zero. Summ of positive mass and negative mass, or gravity and anti-gravity, is zero. I argue that every supermassive black hole exactly counters the amount of the mass in each of the respected galaxies.

2) Anti-matter is embedded into the matter and dark matter. This is accomplished with the wide set of counter measures, like differentiation and re-combination, and introducement of the physical forces.

This is my new idea and third solution for the absence of the anti-matter...

3) After the initial singularity splitted into the proton and anti-proton, both having equal mass but opposing charge, majority of the mass was extracted from the anti-proton actually leaving new form of the particle called electron and the first atom called Hydrogen. The extracted mass without charge became neutron.

All this creation procedures and steps necessarily bring out question why it is happening. Why nothing didn`t stay nothing forever? It did. IT DID! Nothing, which has quality of being infinite in volume, existed for no-time, which has quality of being eternal in duration, as explained earlier. The nothing existed for an eternity! What is next? What comes after that? Initial singularity. Imagine it this way: you are on the null step of the staircase. Right? What is before the first step? Null step, obviously, and how long can you stand on the null step. As much as you want, hypothetically the whole eternity but not a bit longer than that! You can not wait longer than eternity! In the other hand, you can wait less than eternity not doing any change to the eternity itself because eternity do not need two linear vectors, past and future, but only one to be eternity still. What is next logical step after the null step? First step, first atom. Then second step, second atom. Etc.

How can we understand nothing and no-time? First, we must understand initial singularity. How to do that? By perfectly understanding Universe, all laws of physics and all characterics of particles, and making exact computer simulation reversing it backwards to the initial singularity. Or by exploring black holes. Most of the scientists always think in the contemporary environment. I ask: what equipment or what precision of measuring shall we have in 20, 50, 100 or more years? Much more sophisticated and it will make us able to reach and explore black holes. Perhapse one day we will be able to observe inside the black holes, deep down to the bottom, with enhanced telescopes and calculation methods not leaving the Earth.

One day, my friends, one day we shall know the secret of the black holes singularity. Then we will be proficient to contemplate what happened before on the Universe level. For now, you can regard my thoughts as pure science fiction with little actual science involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theglassisempty
Aug 14, 2020
555
103
1,060
Blackholes are not described by "singularities" but by their "event horizons." Those event horizons can be as large as paralleling bubble universes (verticality up and out from us), having outland gravity, toroidal or ring gravity, the gravity constant of infinity and infinities, as well as, and opposed to, its constituency of inland gravity (the infinities of gravities down and in to the infinitesimal)

It isn't the ascent up and out into infinities of macro-macro blackhole-like event horizons that is really interesting to me (I've described such-like enough times, the singular dimensionality of horizontal and vertical universe dimensions merged into third and greater dimensionality -- then becoming simply "paralleling universes"), it is the descent down and in into infinities of micro-micro blackhole-like event horizons that is truly interesting. The descent of gravities' event horizon(s) into quantum gravity (quantum gravities) and on down and in into each compartmental, and compartmented, space-time into the infinities of infinitesimal universes (the [horizontal-vertical] merger into greater dimensionality down and in then also becoming simply "paralleling universes").

It is the fractal self-similarity of the gravitational event horizons (the very opposite type of physicality to stars and other singularities) that counts; not the singularities (the always dead center point(s) of an infinite Universe). I'm always looking for the result third dimensionality and entity of two forever opposing gravities each being inseparably constituent to the other, the inside and the outside. You might call it unending eternal micro and macro quantum fluctuation, disturbance, perturbation, motion, animation.... because the constant of gravity is outside / inside of gravities and will never flatten to any smooth equality with them. That is exactly what it universally opposes in facing and opposing itself (inside and outside (gravity and anti-gravity gravity (no other difference between the two than positive and negative influence))).

It is the third dimension of "push" resulting from -- existing up and out of -- counter-dimensionally to, two exactly opposing pull dimensions of "pull" that interests me most. Almost a Casimir-like Effect, only in exact reverse (the two opposed Casimir plates doing their thing being the two opposed gravities doing theirs -- both actively attractive and [turned-coat-to] repulsive using exactly the same force two-opposed-sided). Merger is an impossibility between the base two, but the force look and conversion of the third dimension to a "push" dimensionality of the two facing, simultaneously opposite, dimensions of "pull" gravity is the look and action of accelerating expansion due to either "push" energy or "push" force. There could easily be more than one cause behind this one effect. Infinity, and infinity's reduction to at least two invincibly based ('1') constants (reducing to '1'), has too often been refused as even existing, much less being meaningfully powerful and explanatory constants.

A black hole's event horizon exists as it does because it is both positive sided and negative sided. The center ring horizon of the event horizon may draw anti-matter out of matter, initiating some terrific Armageddon, but the blackhole itself is not an anti-matter universe. No universe is a naked singularity of matter or anti-matter. It is both positive and negative mattered in one. The Universe doesn't care about which is which, or our choice of which is which. The grand total of mass-energy in the Universe is mathematically calculated to be exactly '0' with '1' left over (I added in "with '1' left over" *(and I could have easily forced it on into (+/-) '1' , but that is like doing (+/-) 300,000kps, it ends in the same base binary '1' ('0' then being 'uncertainty', as in the 'principle of uncertainty' : "Velocity" then being the third dimension out of the base '2'))).
 
Last edited:
Aug 31, 2021
26
14
35
Blackholes are not described by "singularities" but by their "event horizons." Those event horizons can be as large as paralleling bubble universes (verticality up and out from us), having outland gravity, toroidal or ring gravity, the gravity constant of infinity and infinities, as well as, and opposed to, its constituency of inland gravity (the infinities of gravities down and in to the infinitesimal)

It isn't the ascent up and out into infinities of macro-macro blackhole-like event horizons that is really interesting to me (I've described such-like enough times, the singular dimensionality of horizontal and vertical universe dimensions merged into third and greater dimensionality -- then becoming simply "paralleling universes"), it is the descent down and in into infinities of micro-micro blackhole-like event horizons that is truly interesting. The descent of gravities' event horizon(s) into quantum gravity (quantum gravities) and on down and in into each compartmental, and compartmented, space-time into the infinities of infinitesimal universes (the [horizontal-vertical] merger into greater dimensionality down and in then also becoming simply "paralleling universes").

It is the fractal self-similarity of the gravitational event horizons (the very opposite type of physicality to stars and other singularities) that counts; not the singularities (the always dead center point(s) of an infinite Universe). I'm always looking for the result third dimensionality and entity of two forever opposing gravities each being inseparably constituent to the other, the inside and the outside. You might call it unending eternal micro and macro quantum fluctuation, disturbance, perturbation, motion, animation.... because the constant of gravity is outside / inside of gravities and will never flatten to any smooth equality with them. That is exactly what it universally opposes in facing and opposing itself (inside and outside (gravity and anti-gravity gravity (no other difference between the two than positive and negative influence))).

It is the third dimension of "push" resulting from -- existing up and out of -- counter-dimensionally to, two exactly opposing pull dimensions of "pull" that interests me most. Almost a Casimir-like Effect, only in exact reverse (the two opposed Casimir plates doing their thing being the two opposed gravities doing theirs -- both actively attractive and [turned-coat-to] repulsive using exactly the same force two-opposed-sided). Merger is an impossibility between the base two, but the force look and conversion of the third dimension to a "push" dimensionality of the two facing, simultaneously opposite, dimensions of "pull" gravity is the look and action of accelerating expansion due to either "push" energy or "push" force. There could easily be more than one cause behind this one effect. Infinity, and infinity's reduction to at least two invincibly based ('1') constants (reducing to '1'), has too often been refused as even existing, much less being meaningfully powerful and explanatory constants.

A black hole's event horizon exists as it does because it is both positive sided and negative sided. The center ring horizon of the event horizon may draw anti-matter out of matter, initiating some terrific Armageddon, but the blackhole itself is not an anti-matter universe. No universe is a naked singularity of matter or anti-matter. It is both positive and negative mattered in one. The Universe doesn't care about which is which, or our choice of which is which. The grand total of matter-energy in the Universe is mathematically calculated to be exactly '0' with '1' left over (I added in "with '1' left over" *(and I could have easily forced it on into (+/-) '1' , but that is like doing (+/-) 300,000kps, it ends in the same base binary '1' ('0' then being either 'velocity' or 'uncertainty', or both))).
not the singularities (the always dead center point(s) of an infinite Universe)

I wouldn`t agree that singularities are "dead". Whole Universe was created from a singularity which means that a lot of things is going on in there until they burst.

A black hole's event horizon exists

Actually, event horizon does not exist in physical sense. What exist are areas before and beyond. Event horizon is an imaginary line between those areas. Very thin line and it can not be referred to as something but only as an inconspicuous separation. Think of it as an edge of the swimming pool. You either stand on the edge or fall into the water. There is nothing intermediate between those two states yet the separation is distinctive. Someone can argue that balancing is intermediate state. No it is not because when you balance you are still standing on the edge. Hence, event horizon is just a concept, it does not really exist. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: theglassisempty
Aug 14, 2020
555
103
1,060
You -- in your post #3 -- misread what I said. I never said singularities are "dead." I said all of them, all points, are "dead center points" of the infinite Universe (U) (aka (in my opinion) the 'Big Mirror'), meaning exact center of the infinite Multiverse Universe (Hawking -- "Grand Central Station" / Grand Central Clock / duality of Multiverse-Universe).

I say that the "event horizons" of blackhole, all the way to the "Event Horizons" of universes (the apex-of-pyramid dimensionality of Planck Big Bang (E) | Big Crunch (M) | Big Vacuum (C^2)), exist. We, our planet, our star, our galaxy, are singularity within one looking far out to the inside of the horizon, even as we look inside to the outside of the horizons of more local, more relative blackholes. There was recent article on the possibility of blackholes having unlimited possibilities of extent, capable of expanding even as the universe expands (though I disagree completely with that "capability" because I, for just one of several I've read, see that they are already there (extended vertically, in both directions of verticality, to infinity)).

That event horizon exists as a substantiality in a greater dimensionality of Universe than we appear to. We see it to exist as distant horizon in space-time, but, then, like the horizons of Earth, we could never approach it even if we could travel between universes of the Multiverse Universes. No, that isn't quite true, the "relative" event horizons of more local foreground blackholes could tear us to pieces if we close with them. The event horizon at the Planck Big Bang (the Planck / Big Bang) level of multi-dimensionality isn't relative and wouldn't be relative even we were ever able to travel between paralleling universes.

**Note**
I did an edit and correction to my end in post #2. My lowering the dimensionality made it badly misleading. Not at all what I trying to convey.... ("....but that is like doing (+/-) 300,000kps, it ends in the same base binary '1' ('0' then being 'uncertainty', as in the principle of uncertainty' : 'Velocity' then being the third dimension out of the base '2'"). I also didn't care for what I described as "matter-energy." It should have been "mass-energy" which I'm far more comfortable with in the context. So I edited it to "mass-energy."
 
Last edited:
Aug 14, 2020
555
103
1,060
On the subject of anti-matter, I've had several different views, but may be finally arriving at a conclusion.

I've always considered "stereotype" to be the anti of "type." That is what I consider anti-matter is to matter; the inherent partner that stereotypically represents the matter type; and is, of course, intrinsic to each individual of type.

So if anyone sere to ask you, "Do you really believe stereotypes exist in the real world (the real universe)?" You could come back in answer with the backing of a probable objective and subjective physic, "Sure they do; they ae the anti-matter of and to matter."

I've spent a lot of thought, upon occasion, trying to pin down 'stereotype' and 'anti-matter' without consciously realizing they probably pin down each other.

If what I say above is right concerning anti-matter, I've got a picture and model different to the one I had in a very fundamental way, though I need not go back in any way, nor change anything really of my picture and model. The difference being the infinite Universe (U) probably being the master-link stereotypical anti (the infinite anti-matter Universe (U)) of its own infinity of paralleling matter universes (u). Even if that is so, there is nothing at all I need change to my modeling. It only blends in, seamlessly, the physic of "anti" to it. (Since I have the Universe (U) anti, regarding universe (u) not being, then it's alter ego Big Mirror would also be anti, while its opposing integral infinities (the mirroring / mirrorings to infinities) would not be.)

There is a big difference, an absolute difference, between what is matter / anti-matter and what is electromagnetism-like positivity / negativity. (+/-) to (-/+) switching does not change the integrity of the makeup. The way I see it above is my attempt to place that awesomely huge difference along with placing another of the Cosmopolis's existences / realities; 'stereo' / 'stereotype'.
 
Last edited:
Aug 14, 2020
555
103
1,060
Maybe!

Anti-matter/ Stereo-matter : Template-matter : Mold-matter : Primary- or Primordial- or Primeval- or Primal-, even Virtual-, matter : and last but not least.... most of all, Memory-matter (the past (the roots) is the future (are the branches) || the future (the branches) is the past (are the roots)).... Maybe!

Universe (U) (anti-matter) to its own universes (u) (matter). Maybe! (Big Mirror (anti-matter) to its own infinities of mirroring (matter). Maybe!)

Maybe!
-----------------------------------------

In my own way, I, too, have tied gravity to space-time -- to space and/or time (to space-times || to spaces / times). Tying gravity to warp space-time (warp space-time)!

In all I've read considering the mathematical picture physicists have drawn, they left out the space in the marriage of space and time. They made space the minor, effectively the non-entity, time the major, the only real entity, instead of space and time being full equals in space-time.

In space-time, any measure of time whatsoever must be accompanied by a measurement of space. You warp time up or down, out or in, you have to warp space up or down, out or in, in exactly equal measure. Physicists, for all I've seen, don't do that. For all their talk and picturing concerning multi-dimensional Multiverse, they can't get multi-dimensional in mind regarding space-time. There would be no time stretching controversy if they actually dealt with space in the same picture with time. A space-time warp is both at once. You contract time, you contract space at the same time in the same picture. You expand time, you expand space at the same time in the same picture. Once more! You can't warp the time, as physicists do, without warping the space at exactly the same time in exactly the same picture, just as you will not warp space without warping time. It seems I am talking gravitationally.... or very gravitational-like.

There are ways to compensate locally, as with clocks in geo-synchronous orbit above the Earth, but they are still only compensations for an inability to really go truly multi-dimensional (to truly balloon up and/or down) based on a 0-dimesnional point-singularity.
---------------------------------------

It's a Multiverse Universe.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS