It's not really fair to say that an F-series (fibonacci series) yields the current universe. That does appear to be part of a single variable algorithm, but the persuasive look of randomness should bother everyone. How coudl a relatively simple algorithm give rise to something as complicated as today. How can I explain it? Well, the easiest way to explain it is to say that if you took a photograph of the entire universe, that would be a lot easier to imagine. If you still can't get your hands around it, think about the alternative. A zillion monkeys randomly typing it out on a zillion typewriters (that's randomness). Still no good? How about a spontaneously generated all knowing god who follows specific rules that he doesn't even need to follow? The idea is that you're being stupid. A foundational algorithm that builds on a very few specific rules is so much more likely that the only real problem is the background in which the algorithm exists. But if you're looking for spirituality, that's whereyou can find it, in g-space.
It's time to talk about what happens when we stop blowing expansion into the Freeman Balloon Universe. This is another way of ignoring dimension, which models fairly well on the actual universe which has none.
There are so many things based on misconception. For example, the reasons that photons leave stars but not black holes. The idea that black holes fall into a singularity is a odd little trap (double entendre) and one which I fell into originally. Only when I noticed they were moving with the rest of the universe did I realize the mistake. So why no photons? It's pretty simple, they are not trapped, they are compressed out or into the higher compression state. This doesn't stop black holes from attracting light, however or space. In fact, time dilation requires that space be compressed in the proximity to any object with sufficient mass, even ct4 scale materials which are exponentially less dense than black holes. A side note-the idea of miniature black holes making up dark matter is so absurd that it is absurd. All ct5 states are exponentially more dense that ct4 states, it just works out that way. Anything else would be unstable. It might be created in a laboratory but as soon as the compression forces were removed it would break up and it would only be dense ct4, not ct5.
Now some of you are going to cling to black holes of the type in The Einstein Hologram Universe and that is my wrong turn also. Since it remains possible (if outrageous) that book remains in print and you're welcome to read its misleading pages and who know it may be right. Because the AuT universe doesn't give a crap. It makes me point out the way that things really work for its own purposes and it can snuff me out (or you out) whenever it takes a mind to and if its going to happen in the next 10 minutes, that was also the case 50 billion years ago.
That 13.7 billion year ago start to the universe is utter nonsense since x wasn't large enough for even ct4 to exist in it's present form at 13.7 billion years from the true start. Note you have all the information to do that but, you are correct, it wasn't in the book. That was my mistake. It is, however, in this blog (the spreadsheet allowing you to determine how much information is in the universe from the 16 billion expansion universe that we're in (note it may be 50x13.7 billion years too,but I'm going with the shorter time till I have a minute to unravel the post). Whatever the age, it's based on AuT theory, not the nonsense that is spouted by the kinderphysic community.
At full compression, the "big bang" suggests and explosion, but there is no explosion, although some force changes the compression of the universe. What is it?
This is an anti-gravity defined by the fact that an inflection point has been reached where a net inward movement is suddenly replaced with a net out ward force.
This transition will continue according to our estimates for either 16 billion years or 50x14 billion years when the next inflection point is reached.
What is the anti-gravity? It appears that there is a net feature. It currently nets where antigravity is greater than gravity for the entire universe, although for locations where gravity predominates, higher ct states, there appears to be something quite different. As a matter of fact, the fact that we see so much gravity indicates that we are approaching an inflection point sooner rather than later. When that happens we'll see a contracting universe.
There has been a very slight observed increase in gravity of the earth tied to meteor impacts and the like, but do we know that to be the case? It's a slow process, the conversion from expansion to contraction and occurs at such a small level it might be hard to see and may be impacted by the relative stability of the states, that is ct4 states and ct5 states may change slower than ct1-3 states, that is the net anti-g and g for space, photonic and wave energy may change more quickly and even more often. It is worth looking at more, but I have a bike ride to tdo this morning.
ct1 forms a matrix, possibly around the non-linear state (o,1,1-the zero).
The expansive force is around us, perhaps because it is "outweighed" by gravity it appears invisible or perhaps doesn't appear at all, but as the universe shifts and the air goes out of the Freeman balloon model, perhaps it will become predominate in some way and we will see it pushing against and apparently ever increasing gravity with just a different spin.
Space may change itself. instead of an average of 0,1 it might be 1,1.
However, it is more likely the case that gravity itself changes over time. It will take 16 billion (the short time frame) years for gravity to change from "net anti-gravity" to "net gravity" in this model. Now it could be that the transition will take 50 times as long for this change.
However under either it is possible under that spiral theory that gravity has changed so little during the 10,000 years of sort of recorded history that having seen 10,000/16 billionth of a change has not been noticed or it could be that the features of space might change to increase the apparent gravity there while it remains locally unchanged in compression states.
The possibilities are exciting and not quite endless.
I'm just saying, it's a powerful concept, a powerful memory, a bike waits for me, a little motivational music...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToP82VUjrNU&list=RDToP82VUjrNU#t=0
No comments:
Post a Comment