Pages

Saturday, July 27, 2013

How much of e-hologram theory is really new

As the name implies, e-hologram theory derives from existing models.  It can even be said to be a discussion of existing models, but that might be slightly disingenuous.  This has been set out in earlier blog entries, but this idea of novelty or repetition is worth looking at because the differences have a great deal to do with gaining control over what Einstein and Hawkins (and others) would call the universe and what e-hologram theory would call time.
An analogy (maybe an unfair analogy) would be to say that the Einstein and Hawkins model would have you trying to rope an entire corral if you wanted to control it, while E-H theory (e-hologram could easily use Einstein-Hawkins although that would be a little unfair to those discussed otherwise who contributed to the initial formulation of hologram theory) would have you trying to throw a rope around a clock standing in the center of the corral.  This is really the crux of the difference.  Einstein and Hawkins (to a less extent perhaps) are stuck with a singularity (Einstein's prediction of black holes and Hawkins and Penrose's singularity before time) and then a universe.  Einstein actually touched on the E-H theory when he stated that time only existed to give linearity (see the quote in earlier blogs). 
The difference is then one of the "misapplication of time".  H-P theories (or P-H theories if you would) saw the singularity, but then get lost in Einstein's "space-time".  They failed to see that time might exist in a different form in the singularity and that what we experience as "space-time" does not have to take us out of the singularity. 
The evidence (discussed in earlier blogs and in slightly more detail in E-Hologram Theory, the textbook coming soon) is overwhelming that the singularity not only exists, but that you can get to it from many locations in the universe (assuming you can travel at some multiple of the speed of light to get there before your starve or run out of oxygen).  In fact, at least at the center of each galaxy you have an opening to the singularity, regardless of how far apart they are.
This, in turn, suggests (actually screams it rather loudly for anyone listening) that we are not out of the singularity except by perception.  Separation by dimension is therefore only useful for Newtonian observations.  We obsess on Newtonian observations only because everything we do relies on those, without them we'd be in the singularity. 
This, in turn, suggests (screaming perhaps even louder) that dimensions are merely an illusion caused by something.  In order to measure dimensions (as the math discusses earlier) you have to "move" along them which implies time.  In earlier models, this movement is taken as a given to some extent or another.  It is accepted.  In the P-H theories you have 1) the singularity (without time or with a different time) and then you have 2) the big bang, space & dimension with time as we understand it.  This is an equivalent of e-hologram theory "at the transition" point.  Where the two begin to separate is in the acceptance of P-H models of a "post singularity" universe.  Early E-H theory also looked at this, but it is counter-intuitive.  How do you have zero distance between the centers of galaxies (the black holes in the middle) when the galaxies are so darned far apart?  The answer has to be that either the black holes go to different singularities (why bother with such a complicated universe?) or that they all go to the same one (whoops, no distance).   I wouldn't rule out different singularities (or near singularities if you run out of math getting to the middle of the black hole); but it makes for a pretty poor model of the universe compared to a simple, elegant one (elegant only because it's simple) where you can "strip" dimensions from space and have everything go to the same place. 
This in turn suggests (maybe the universe continues to scream) that dimensions may be stripped with time which in turn says that dimensions come from time by virtue of the fact we have to travel along them using time to experience them.  Since all space (matter, what is called vacuum and energy) relies on dimension, everything becomes time and since this means that dimensions are illusionary, we can find that there is no "post singularity" P-H universe, but merely a singularity where time has begun projecting the dimensions by some process which is referred to as burning, uncoiling, etc.
Now "worm-hole" math does suggest that we may move through singularities between different points in space and this blog is on "what's really new".
All this "screams" that E-H theory is not really "new", but is merely the final surrender of all the artificial constructs that the other theories come back to.  We no longer "force" there to be multiple wormholes to different points in the universe (we have better observations now then when those theories were formulated) and we don't have to have a post "big bang" universe with time.  We keep our little singularity, thank you very much.
Singularities (which E-H theory would scoff at since there is only one) are best defined as places of infinite curvature (see the infinite series discussions previously) so that dimensions sort of fold in on themselves and cease to exist by this.  Again, the difference with E-H theory isn't actually different from this at all, but merely states that this is a function of time curving in on itself (coiling and uncoiling of time) which is only experienced as three dimensions (the number 3 is used only to help you Newtonians understand this, the number of dimensions of uncoiling time is relatively unimportant to the fundamental theory).
P-H look to a very dense singularity.  It is infinitely dense, perhaps.  Perhaps changes to "pashaw" in E-H theory.  There is zero density because mass and energy disappear with dimension.  We have an infinitely light, infinitely small singularity because there is neither mass, nor energy, nor space.  Worse still, as indicated above, the observed universe is "screaming" this at us.  There is nothing unobserved in E-H theory, no hidden energies, no "beyond" the universe as we observe it.  It's just time.  Getting back to our original analogy, you lasso time, you lasso everything!   That is what's different about E-H theory in a nut shell.   Now that doesn't stop me from cooking breakfast every morning, but it does mean that I've already cooked breakfast before I start in the singularity and that to one extent or another I'm still in the singularity (along with Hawkins and Penrose and Einstein and YOU, theoretically) a place which would be pretty crowded with all of us in there together except that there is no space, no dimension to separate us, no time to separate us.  This gives rise to how time comes to exist as a circular argument which is covered in great detail in earlier blog entries and remains on the planks from which we will ultimately be able to understand and control time.  This single steering knob, the clock that is lassoed in the corral where everyone has been casting their ropes explains the difference of how much (or how little if you would) is really new.  And it doesn't even matter whether it's new or not, who can tell with all that screaming, anyway?
This is not to suggest that anyone is wrong or that there is any originality in E-H theory.  It derives from what is already out there, it doesn't contradict math, it does mean that not only should be study time more carefully, but that our studies of virtually everything else have been a study of time.  We are looking at the smoke to study fire and once we begin to actually study the flame we gain a different understanding of the same science.

No comments:

Post a Comment