`` As if - the explanation of Emergence

Implications - what else does Virtualism imply?


Jannings escapes...Cut to the chase - 1929 Film Directions - Hollywood Girl


Index


  1. Physics

Physics


What implications for mainstream Physics are there, if any, from my explanation of Emergent Space and Time?


90% of the mass in the Universe is undetectable.


The main problem with Physics is that QM and GR fail with the Big Bang, but what sort of Big Bang am I describing? [I do rather seem to have glossed over this point, leaving it for others to pick up]


Really, the theoretical physics of the Universe, and of its beginning, is a story told in a strict language, and which coheres with observations in the present. That allows us to look back in time to a point earlier than is actually observable, and so to know something of the truth of that which is unobservable, and we call it the Big Bang.


If the rules of the language change, then the way in which the story progresses changes, and we shift the goalposts to fit in with that, i.e. if we make new physics, then we can tell a different story.


Virtualism makes some wildly different claims about Existence, but like the mainstream is constrained by the present day observations. In this it is no different from MOND in its explanation of Space. MOND doesn't make any claim for why.


Virtualism says that although we experience the Universe as 3D, it is really ND, although increasing N has limited effect for higher N, because 2D and 3D geometries decrease with increasing N when N is > 5 and 7.


Photons, unless I am mistaken, are a 2D phenomenon, Gravity is a 3D phenomenon, Truth is a 1D phenomenon, Dark Matter I would guess, may be a ND phenomenon, because a 4D universe would necessitate 4 3D miniverses. Maybe that would account for a missing 75% of our apparent universe mass, leaving 15% unaccounted for.


By simple mathematics, the 4D universe has n = 3 from 4 miniverses with 3D, i.e. 4. The 5D universe has n = 4 from 5 miniverses with 4D, i.e. 5, and n = 3 from 5 miniverses with 3D, i.e. 20.


Clearly, we would require an explanation for the bleed from all those 5D miniverses not being greater than the 90% of Dark Matter.


But also, being virtual, we would need a very good reason for the other miniverses not actually being identical with our universe. The underlying metaphysical reasoning being that each miniverse would be based on the same numbers as the first, so we'd have to question are they in fact different? My instinct tells me that each miniverse instantiates the same set of numbers, but that because the issues at work are paradox and possibility, just because a miniverse is possible, that does not necessarily mean that it exists, unless paradox demands it as a resolution to an impossible situation.


Start

So, first off the Universe starts with an Everything that has wholeness, and one dimension that goes straight to its heart, it is both unity, being whole, and zero, being nothing. Both paradoxical and dual, it is in fact, in truth, two. Two sides of a coin, two nodes of a relationship that holds zero and unity apart, but holds them together.


From playing fast and loose with Leibniz' Law, we cannot fail to understand that unity is inherent in all things, also that the two sides to unity [zero and unity] are inherent in every relationship.


.



Leave a Comment

Comments

No comments yet.



Page visited 213 times