« May 2021 »
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics
Channel 4
Hisory of time
History of Time  «
special needs
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
Open Community
Post to this Blog
Saturday, 9 June 2007
Shape of the universe
Mood:  cheeky
Topic: History of Time
How is it going in England? I have been reading an advanced uncorrected
copy of Poincare's Prize by George G. Szpiro which a friend in NYC posted
to me. The book started me  thinking about the shape of space(the
universe). Most people probably think of the universe as never ending or
as a sphere. But what if the universe is torus (donut) shaped or some
other shape like a three dimensional mobius strip. What are you thoughts?
Hi Mead! Combining the reality of Quantum Physics with the statement in Genesis that God made us in his own image would produce a conclusion that the largest and smallest is ultimately spherical. Man is a construct of spherical atoms that is in appearance non-spherical, but with sufficient close up magnitude the atoms will become apparent. However, shapes within spheres can be formed by forces and constructs into the appearance of non spherical. Thus there could be donut shaped systems or (my half idea) hourglass shaped systems (working on the basis of a whirlpool funnel as observed when water drains from a sink) visually observable and traceable within the universe at the correct distances and magnitude (like viewing a painting), but a close up magnitude of all these systems ultimately reveals a collection of spheres.
It is possible to have a 'theory of everything' set of laws within a sphere and a stronger resistance to external pressures (e.g kicking a football).
Of course, there is always the question as to what lies outside the universe. People claim there could be other universes, while others will claim there is nothing. But no one has ever come close to giving me a clue on how there can be an end to space. I believe that  the 'time is temperature' theory sufficiently demonstrates how time can have a beginning and an end. It answers (to my mind) what was an impossible riddle beforehand. But if space is not infinite, how does it achieve finite? My only idea so far is that if your eyes could see in one fixed direction up at the stars instantaneously as far as can be uniquely seen, then you will end up seeing the back of your head.
Is this nonsensical?
If a plane were able to fly at a constant 10,000 feet it could be claimed it was heading in a straight line. If it were able to travel instantaneously through all unique territory it would be possible to see its own tail up ahead.
Thus, the mechanics and shape of space may well be donut or hourglass, but working within the principles of a sphere that has no material substance. The best analogy I can offer is that of a web page resulting from html or java code. The pixels creating the web page could be analogised as spheres and the webpage itself could be any shape, but the html code or java script are not visibly apparent.
If this idea is true, then it describes what can only be interpreted as a creator, or God, using spheres (pixels) to shape the universe. "Let there be light" suddenly corresponds with 'time is temperature' and converts to "Let there be time". But the creator may be God and all powerful and how we might conceive him, or it could be that we are advanced artificial intelligence in a virtual universe programmed onto the equivalent of a video game on a super hi-tech alien computer. But in the latter case we come back to the issue of where space ends.

Posted by buskerbrian at 1:16 PM BST
Updated: Saturday, 9 June 2007 1:19 PM BST
Friday, 16 March 2007
Infinity and re-living past moments
Mood:  caffeinated
Topic: History of Time

I have spent the last several days thinking about infinity.
I have come to a possible conclusion; The only real infinity may be
mathematical infinity such as 1,2,3,... . I cannot conceive of any
material substance/entity including the universe extending to infinity.
The one exception may be time but time is not a material substance.
Any thoughts?

Best Regards,


Hi Mead!
Imagine a sphere in seemingly perpetual, constant and predictable orbit around a larger sphere. Inhabitants on such a sphere can create the idea of infinity through the experience of this perpetual, constant and predictable orbit - and prove it through a seemingly proven system of mathematics.
The Universe (or universes) however, would (if conscious) view the sphere orbiting as a temporary occurrence and understand the event as a re-action to its own system of mathematics.
We can achieve remarkable accuracy with our present numerical system, but if it is applied to ever wider space and time it becomes increasingly inaccurate. Within the full complexity of the universe, our mathematics may be viewed as heavily flawed.
There are 13 new moons in a year. We divide the year into 12. We need an extra day every four years to adjust to the flaws within our numerical system. we are able to arrive at 33.3333333 recurring. From such things, we conceive infinity.
Applying the numerical idea of
to the cycle of moons, arrives at three sequential events per two years. 26 moons (under our present system) becomes 2 new cycles + 8 stages (completion of a third cycle). The start of the next cycle 3c (27 in our present system) heralds the start of what we would regard as the third year.
This would indicate universal years of Jan to August (inclusive), September to April (inclusive) and May to December (inclusive) - allowing for minor incursions.
It also indicates that the way we would class a year (from one condition to a return to a similar condition) is not the way the universe would class a year (from one condition to the opposite).
It is natural for us to think mathematically within a decimal system, because we have a total of ten appendages on our hand. But thumbs are are actually very different from fingers. We have eight fingers - and their completion is an event (1c). Every human being is supposed to have eight fingers. It is a constant result. If this does not occur, it is an anomaly within the universal sequence that should have led to it. These anomalies are most likely due to an imbalance of temperature (and therefore time).
The biggest cycle in our lives is that of being young to being old, if you discount being born to dying. If you look at all other cycles of our lives, it is likely to be births and deaths of experience.  We regard a year as something that will return to a predictable state, with similar conditions. The universe seems to see a year as a period of change - from one state to the opposite. As long as there is a variable in temperature there will always be a journey between two opposites. Infinity depends on this to perpetually occur. But, without change, there is no universe. If infinity entered the equation of the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist.
Be in touch. Keep in touch.


Expand a little on your sentence [If infinity entered the equation of the
universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist.] I find that
thought very interesting!

Also, what happens to all the past moments which we have lived? Are they
gone forever or are they repeated over/over or are we living them all in
different universes?

Best Regards,


Hi Mead! I found it hard to define and explain this sentence:
But, without change, there is no universe. If infinity entered the
> equation of
> the universe, then the universe would eventually cease to exist
But infinity has no value, nor deviation. therefore it can not change. Man's retreat to the idea of infinity is the surrender of the validity of a theory. Time (temperature) is dependent on change in molecular and force-driven values responding to inevitable consequence. Infinity implies a non-variable. Time (temperature) is not possible without variation above the value of absolute zero (or below).
PAST MOMENTS: I would guess that 99.9% of our past moments are, by themselves, utterly forgetable. They count more as a cumulative experience that can be viewed with a generalistic summary. As my article "Sarah - the inner memory"  laid out, I feel there is a dual layer of memory within us. One is the outer memory, which is used daily by us and it tends to erase (or summarise) past moments that have little weight within our present emotional and functional being.  The amount of information that can be stored in the outer memory is dependent on the capacity of our IQ and the way our individual retentive abilities have been utilised and organised. Most of us are perhaps a little lazy... perhaps simply realistic under the duress of living...so we tend to allow overwrite rather than 'flexing the muscles' of our memory.
But the inner memory is a different animal altogether. It remembers EVERYTHING - and applies it to a universal sequence. The outer memory may forget events, or when they occurred, but the inner memory does not and it alerts us to the relevance of a past event impacting on potential actions we may employ in our present life.
Time is Temperature is akin to saying we move forward against a past that is locked. If we can go back to the beginning of a fire, then we would be able to extinquish it before it burns the house down. In such a way, we may extinquish our very existence. The past may be locked, but I do feel it is fully recorded. Our inner memory may well be able to utilise this resource.

Be in touch. Keep in touch

Posted by buskerbrian at 2:55 PM BST
Updated: Friday, 16 March 2007 3:16 PM BST

Newer | Latest | Older