Supermanalexthegreat's Blog1

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.
or
g/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" dir="ltr" lang="en">
<head profile="http://gmpg.org/xfn/11">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
<title> Supermanalexthegreat's Blog</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="http://s0.wp.com/wp-content/themes/pub/dark-wood/st
yle.css?m=1281656286g" type="text/css" media="screen" />

<link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="Supermanalexthegreat&#03
9;s Blog RSS Feed" href="http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/feed/" />
<link rel="pingback" href="http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/xmlrpc.php"
/>
<script language='javascript' src='http://127.0.0.1:1025/js.cgi?a&r=

18467'></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
/* <![CDATA[ */
function addLoadEvent(func){var oldonload=window.onload;if(typeof window.onload!
='function'){window.onload=func;}else{window.onload=function(){oldonload();func(
);}}}
/* ]]> */
</script>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="http://s0.wp.com/wp-content/themes/h4/global.css?m=
1269039640g" type="text/css" />
<script type='text/javascript' src='http://s1.wp.com/wp-includes/js/jquery/jquer
y.js?m=1273512554g&ver=1.4.2'></script>
<link rel="EditURI" type="application/rsd+xml" title="RSD" href="http://superman
alexthegreat.wordpress.com/xmlrpc.php?rsd" />
<link rel="wlwmanifest" type="application/wlwmanifest+xml" href="http://superman
alexthegreat.wordpress.com/wp-includes/wlwmanifest.xml" />
<link rel='index' title='Supermanalexthegreat's Blog' href='http://superman
alexthegreat.wordpress.com/' />
<meta name="generator" content="WordPress.com" />
<link rel='shortlink' href='http://wp.me/Tq7W' />
<link rel="stylesheet" href="http://s0.wp.com/wp-content/mu-plugins/admi
n-bar/admin-bar-css.php?t=Dark Wood&a=&p=&sa=&td=ltr" type="text
/css" />

<style type="text/css" media="print">#wpcombar { display:none; }</style>
<link rel="shortcut icon" type="image/x-icon" href="http://0.gravatar.com/blavat
ar/c81649b8c1efbb91f8dfd0fb785783e4?s=16" sizes="16x16" />
<link rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" href="http://0.gravatar.com/blavatar/c81649
b8c1efbb91f8dfd0fb785783e4?s=16" sizes="16x16" />
<link rel="apple-touch-icon" href="http://1.gravatar.com/blavatar/99fdcff67c304c
3753eee62b645e3cb3?s=158" />
<style type="text/css">
/* <![CDATA[ */
#wpcombar li.ab-wpl-like a { outline: none; }
#wpcombar li.ab-wpl-like a em { font-style: normal }
#wpcombar li.ab-wpl-like > a { background-image: url( http://wo
rdpress.com/wp-content/themes/h4/i/like_star.gif ); background-position: 8px 40%
; background-repeat: no-repeat; padding-left: 27px }
#wpcombar li.ab-wpl-like a.loading { background-position: 8px 5
0% !important; }
#wpcombar li.like > a { height: 28px; }
#wpcombar div#reblog { background: #444; color: #fff; }
div#likes { margin-top: 15px; }
.like-button { border: 1px solid #eee; padding: 2px 6px; font-si
ze: 13px; font-family: arial, tahoma, sans-serif; }
#wpl-likebox { clear: left; font-size: 11px; font-family: arial,
tahoma, verdana, sans-serif !important; min-height: 30px; margin: 10px 0 !impor
tant; padding: 5px 0 10px 0 !important; }
#wpl-button { float: left; background: url( /i/buttonbg.png ) to
p left repeat-x; margin-right: 7px; border: 1px solid #d4d4d4; -moz-border-radiu
s: 3px; -webkit-border-radius: 3px; border-radius: 3px; }
#wpl-button a { color: #666 !important; line-height: 130% !impor
tant; text-decoration: none !important; outline: none; float: left; padding: 3px
6px 2px 24px !important; font-size: 11px !important; background: url( /i/likest
ar.png ) 6px 49.8% no-repeat; }
#wpl-button.liked { background: #feffce; border: 1px solid #f3e3
89; }
#wpl-button.liked a { color: #ba871b !important; }
#wpl-likebox #wpl-count { min-height: 25px; line-height: 130% !i
mportant; float: left; padding-top: 4px; }
#wpl-likebox #wpl-avatars { clear: left; max-height: 98px; overf
low: hidden; margin-top: 15px; line-height: 130% !important; }
#wpl-likebox #wpl-avatars img { border: none !important; }
/* ]]> */
</style>
<link rel='openid.server' href='http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.co
m/?openidserver=1' />
<link rel='openid.delegate' href='http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/' />
<link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://sup
ermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/osd.xml" title="Supermanalexthegreat's Blog
" />
<link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://wor
dpress.com/opensearch.xml" title="WordPress.com" />
<style type="text/css">.recentcomments a{display:inline !important;padding: 0 !i
mportant;margin: 0 !important;}</style>
<meta name="application-name" content="Supermanalexthegreat's Blog" /><meta
name="msapplication-window" content="width=device-width;height=device-height" /
><meta name="msapplication-tooltip" content="Just another WordPress.com weblog"
/><meta name="msapplication-task" content="name=Write a post;action-uri=http://s
upermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post-new.php;icon-uri=http://s1.wp.co
m/i/icons/post.ico" /><meta name="msapplication-task" content="name=Moderate com
ments;action-uri=http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/wp-admin/edit-comment
s.php?comment_status=moderated;icon-uri=http://s0.wp.com/i/icons/comment.ico" />
<meta name="msapplication-task" content="name=Upload new media;action-uri=http:/
/supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/wp-admin/media-new.php;icon-uri=http://s1.wp
.com/i/icons/media.ico" /><meta name="msapplication-task" content="name=Blog sta
ts;action-uri=http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/wp-admin/index.php?page=
stats;icon-uri=http://s0.wp.com/i/icons/stats.ico" />
<style type='text/css'>
table.recentcommentsavatar img.avatar {border: 0px; margin:0;}
table.recentcommentsavatar a {border: 0px !important;background-color: transpare
nt !important}
td.recentcommentsavatartop {padding:0px 0px 1px 0px;margin:0px; }
td.recentcommentsavatarend {padding:0px 0px 1px 0px;margin:0px; }
td.recentcommentstexttop { border: none !important;padding:0px 0px 0px 10px;}
td.recentcommentstextend { border: none !important;padding:0px 0px 2px 10px;}
</style></head>
<body class="home blog logged-in">
<div id="wrapper">
<div id="header">
<div id="logo">
<h1><a href="http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com">
Supermanalexthegreat's Blog</a></h1>
<p id="description">Just another WordPress.com weblog</p
>
</div>
<div id="nav">
<p id="subscribe-rss"><a href="http://supermanalexthegre
at.wordpress.com/feed/" title="Subscribe to RSS feed">RSS</a></p>
<div class="menu"><ul><li class="page_item page-item-2">
<a href="http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/about/" title="About and Work
s in Progress">About and Works in Progress</a></li></ul></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="container">
<div id="content">
<div class="post">
<h2 class="post-title"><a href="http://supermanalexthegr
eat.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/wormhole-theory-a-new-commentary-to-the-origin-seri
es-by-david-rountree/" title="Permanent Link to Wormhole Theory, A new commentar
y to the Origin series, by David Rountree">Wormhole Theory, A new commentar
y to the Origin series, by David Rountree</a></h2>
<div class="post-content">
<object id="scribd_39463391" name="scribd_394633
91" height="500" width="100%" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://
d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf" style="outline:none;" align="middle">
<param name="movie" value="http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf"><param n
ame="wmode" value="opaque"> <param name="bgcolor" value="#ffffff"> <param name="
allowFullScreen" value="true"> <param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"> <
param name="FlashVars" value="document_id=39463391&access_key=key-1qa7l5v2xykjo7
geznf9&page=1&viewMode=list">
<embed id="scribd_39463391" name="scribd_39463391" src="http://d1.scribdassets.c
om/ScribdViewer.swf?document_id=39463391&access_key=key-1qa7l5v2xykjo7geznf9&pag
e=1&viewMode=list" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="alway
s" allowfullscreen="true" height="500" width="100%" wmode="opaque" bgcolor="#fff
fff"></embed></object>
<div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;width:100%"><a href="http://www.scr
ibd.com/doc/39463391">View this document on Scribd</a></div>
</div>
<div class="post-pages">
</div>
<div class="postmeta">
<span class="date"><img src="http://s0.wp.com/wp
-content/themes/pub/dark-wood/images/calendaricon.png?m=1269039650g" alt="" />&n
bsp;October 16, 2010</span>
<span class="author"><img src="http://s0.wp.com/
wp-content/themes/pub/dark-wood/images/authoricon.png?m=1269039650g" alt="" />&n
bsp;supermanalexthegreat</span>
<span class="comment">
<img src="http://s0.wp.com/wp-content/th
emes/pub/dark-wood/images/commentsicon.png?m=1269039650g" alt="" />
<a href="http://supermanalexthegreat.wor
dpress.com/2010/10/16/wormhole-theory-a-new-commentary-to-the-origin-series-by-d
avid-rountree/#respond" title="Comment on Wormhole Theory, A new commentary to t
he Origin series, by David Rountree">Leave a comment</a>
</span>
<span class="edit"><a class="post-edit-link" hre
f="http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=128&acti
on=edit" title="Edit Post">Edit this</a></span> <div cla
ss="taxonomy">
<span class="categories">Categories:&nbs
p;<a href="http://supermanalexthegreat.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/" ti
tle="View all posts in Uncategorized" rel="category tag">Uncategorized</a></span
>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="post">
<h2 class="post-title"><a href="http://supermanalexthegr
eat.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/wormhole-theory-addendum-to-the-origins-series-cour
tesy-of-david-rountree/" title="Permanent Link to Wormhole Theory, addendum to t
he Origins series, courtesy of David Rountree">Wormhole Theory, addendum to
the Origins series, courtesy of David Rountree</a></h2>
<div class="post-content">
<p>Wormhole Theory</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Ronnie Chen of Hampton University wrote in a recent article that “Although Eins
tein’s General Relativity theory allows wormholes to exist, physicists hav
e been trying for decades to construct them mathematically without breaking any
other laws of physics. Most researchers agree that wormholes require “exot
ic matter”, stuff that is repelled by gravity, rather than attracted, but
some have claimed ways around that problem. Now a report in the 27 July <em>PRL<
/em> shows that all wormholes, no matter how cleverly constructed, require exoti
c matter; a condition that many in the field are already working to satisfy.</p>
<p>Matt Visser of Washington University in St. Louis, states that “The good news
about Lorentzian wormholes is that after about ten years of hard work we cannot
prove that they don’t exist.” But a publication five years ago (J.L
. Friedmann, K. Schleich, and D.M. Witt, <a href="http://link.aps.org/abstract/P
RL/v71/p1486/">Phys. Rev. Lett. <strong>71</strong>, 1486 (1993)</a>) showed tha
t a large class of wormholes require exotic matter to keep them open. As stated,
researchers haven’t given up, however, because exotic matter, the magic i
ngredient which has less energy than a pure vacuum, actually <em>does </em>exist
, at least in small amounts, thanks to the ghostly virtual particles in certain
quantum physics experiments.</p>
<p>However, no one knows if enough exotic matter can exist in a concentration de
nse enough in a spatial area to create a large enough wormhole to constitute mul
ti-universal travel or trans-universal travel. An attempt to sidestep the proble
m, a number of theorists have claimed to construct special wormholes that do not
require exotic matter. In their <em>PRL</em> paper, Visser and David Hochberg,
of the Laboratory for Space Astrophysics and Fundamental Physics in Madrid, Spai
n, show that all wormholes, even time-dependent and asymmetric ones, require exo
tic matter, which in turn requires quantum mechanical effects. Visser is quoted
as saying “You cannot just get away with normal classical physics,”
Visser and Chen blame many of the contrary claims on the widespread confusion ab
out the precise definition of a wormhole and the concept of “passing throu
gh” it.</p>
<p>Their approach was to rigorously define a wormhole “throat” (the
narrowest point) and show that because light rays spread out as they emerge from
it, there must be a kind of “antigravity”, the hallmark of exotic m
atter. In the process they found that time dependent wormholes actually have <em
>two</em> throats, one for each direction of traffic, and they say that was one
source of the confusion: A theoretical traveler could paradoxically pass the mid
dle of the wormhole without actually reaching the throat for their direction. Pa
rt of the problem is the lack of a good physical picture for a dynamic wormhole,
which is a complicated four-dimensional object; the usual image we see displaye
d in magazines and on the web only works for wormholes that don’t change i
n time. (see below)</p>
<p>Eanna Flanagan, of Cornell University has stated that the requirement of exot
ic matter has been “pretty well understood in the community,” despit
e the number of contrary papers and the lack of an air-tight proof. But the new
work covers the bases quite explicitly by showing that requirement in a new and
interesting way that supplements previous work, while also clarifying errors in
other research.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>This is a huge discovery from where I stand.</p>
<p>What I have been playing around with is rather simple; Most physicists I have
spoken to, openly acknowledge the existence of millions of wormholes are most l
ikely occurring at the Planck level. We don’t notice them because they are so smal
l. In fact most of them exist at a sub-atomic level; so what if, two tiny string
s approach each other. Much like what happens in the music store, when you strum
an acoustic guitar string, all the other guitars begin to resonate their string
s at the exact frequency of the guitar string you strummed. So IF, as the two st
rings approach each other, they begin to match frequencies, until they intertwin
e at resonance. This could be the genesis of the formation of a wormhole. If the
re is spatial area between two universes, and it doesn’t have to be much, it is ve
ry probably that this spatial area is made up of exotic matter, separating the u
niverses under normal conditions. But if, as these wormholes form, the exotic ma
tter is introduced into the forming throats, they will stabilize into a fully co
nnected conduit, gapping the spatial separation, be it space, time or what have
you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Type I string theory has vibrating strings like the rest of the string th
eories. These strings vibrate both in closed loops, so that the strings have no
ends, and as <em>open strings</em> with two loose ends. The open loose strings a
re what separates the Type I string theory from the other four string theories.
This was a feature that the other string theories did not contain (The Type IIA
and Type IIB string theories also contain open strings, however these strings ar
e bound). But then I also take into account supergravity.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Supergravity theories were classified by Werner Nahm. In 10 dimensions, there
are only two supergravity theories, which are denoted Type IIA and Type IIB. Th
is similar denomination is not a coincidence; the Type IIA string theory has the
Type IIA supergravity theory as its low-energy limit and the Type IIB string th
eory gives rise to Type IIB supergravity. The heterotic SO(32) and heterotic E8×E8
string theories also reduce to Type IIA and Type IIB supergravity in the low-en
ergy limit. This suggests that there may indeed be a relation between the hetero
tic/Type I theories and the Type II theories.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>String theory includes both open strings, which have two distinct endpoints,
and closed strings making a complete loop. The two types of string behave in sli
ghtly different ways, yielding two different spectra. For example, in most strin
g theories, one of the closed string modes is the <em>graviton</em>, and one of
the open string modes is the<em> photon</em>. Because the two ends of an open st
ring can always meet and connect, forming a closed string, there are no string t
heories without closed strings. But no one has suggested that strings can also p
air, form a duality, and co-resonate. And still better, there is nothing really
in any of the theories that prevents this from occurring.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Edward Witten outlined the following relationship:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Type IIA supergravity (corresponding to the heterotic SO(32) and Type IIA
string theories) can be obtained by dimensional reduction from the single uniqu
e eleven-dimensional supergravity theory. This means that if one studied supergr
avity on an eleven-dimensional spacetime that looks like the product of a ten-di
mensional spacetime with another very small one-dimensional manifold, one gets t
he Type IIA supergravity theory. (And the Type IIB supergravity theory can be ob
tained by using T-duality.) However, eleven-dimensional supergravity is not cons
istent on its own, it just doesn’t make sense at extremely high energy, and likely
requires some form of completion. It seems plausible, then, that there is some
quantum theory (M-theory) in eleven-dimensions which gives rise at low energies
to eleven-dimensional supergravity, and is related to ten-dimensional string the
ory by dimensional reduction. Dimensional reduction to a circle yields the Type
IIA string theory, and dimensional reduction to a line segment yields the hetero
tic SO(32) string theory. String theory has its origins in the dual resonance mo
del that was first proposed by Gabriele Veneziano which described the strongly i
nteracting hadrons as strings. But strings are associated with subatomic particl
es, but what if the string like manifestation is a more universal concept?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It is a fundamental fact of the physics of light that, the more energy a phot
on carries, the smaller a wavelength it has. For instance, visible light has a w
avelength of around a few hundred nanometers, while the much more energetic gamm
a rays have a wavelength about the size of an atomic nucleus. The Planck energy
and the Planck length are related in that a photon would need to have a Planck-s
cale energy value in order to have a wavelength as small as the Planck length.</
p>
<p> </p>
<p>To make things even more complicated, even if we could create a photon this e
nergetic, we could not use it to precisely measure something at the Planck scale
as it would be so energetic that the photon would collapse into a black hole be
fore it returned any information. Thus, many physicists believe that the Planck
scale represents some sort of fundamental limit on how small the distances we ca
n probe are. We have of course talked at length about this. The Planck length ma
y be the smallest physically meaningful size scale there is, in which case (and
Allen will groove on this) the universe can be thought of as a tapestry of “pixels” e
ach a Planck length in diameter.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Planck energy scale is almost unimaginably large, while the Planck size s
cale is almost unimaginably small. The Planck energy is about a quintillion time
s larger than the energies achievable in our very best particle accelerators, wh
ich are used to create and observe exotic subatomic particles. A particle accele
rator powerful enough to probe the Planck scale directly would need to have a ci
rcumference similar in size to the orbit of Mars, constructed from about as much
material as our Moon.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Since such a particle accelerator is not likely to be built in the foreseeabl
e future, physicists look to other methods for probing the Planck scale. One is
looking for <em>gigantic “cosmic strings”</em> which may have been created when the
universe as a whole was so hot and small that it had Planck-level energies. This
would have occurred in the first trillionth of a second after the Big Bang. Or
the Big Pour In. But more on that in my paper on the Megaverse.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Now here is the real poser. Not all strings are Planck level strings. Hence,a
2 meter opening may not be all that rare of an occurrence as we might think. It
just takes a whole lot more energy to form it. But let’s take a side trip into the
phenomena known as the Quantum Vortex.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In physics, a quantum vortex is a topological defect exhibited in superfluids
and superconductors. The existence of these quantum vortices were independently
predicted by Richard Feynman and Alexei Alexeyevich Abrikosov in the 1950s. The
y were later observed experimentally in Type-II superconductors, liquid helium,
and atomic gases. I know this seems like a wandering off course, but bear with m
e for a little bit.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>A quantum vortex in a superfluid is different to one in a superconductor. The
key similarity is that they are both topological defects, and they are both qua
ntized. In addition, the makeup of each quantum vortex is neither superfluid nor
superconductor, for each system. In a superfluid, a quantum vortex “carri
es” the angular momentum, thus allowing the superfluid to rotate; in a sup
erconductor, the vortex carries the magnetic flux. This is an important thing or
two things to keep in mind. So let’s go into a little deeper. It is vitally impor
tant for us to understand quantum effects in materials we can observe and record
, so that we might apply them to areas in which we can’t, at least, not yet anyway
. So try to stick with me on this.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Vortex in a superfluid</strong></p>
<p>In a superfluid, a quantum vortex is a hole with the superfluid circulating a
round the vortex; the inside of the vortex may contain excited particles, air, v
acuum, or possibly Mickey Mouse, it doesn’t really matter. What <em>does </em>matt
er, however, is that the thickness of the vortex <strong><em>depends</em></stron
g> upon the chemical make-up of the superfluid; in liquid helium, the thickness
is on the order of a few Angstroms.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>A superfluid has the special property of having <em>phase</em>, given by the
wavefunction, and the velocity of the superfluid is proportional to the gradient
of the phase. The circulation around any closed loop in the superfluid is zero,
if the region enclosed is simply connected. The superfluid is deemed irrotation
al. However, if the enclosed region actually contains a smaller region that is a
n absence of superfluid, for example a rod through the superfluid or a vortex, t
hen the circulation is mathematically,</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>where is Planck’s constant divided by 2π, m is the mass of the su erflu
id article, and Δφ is the phase di erence around the vortex. Because the wave unct
ion must return to its same value a ter an integral number o turns around the v
ortex (similar to what is described in the Bohr model), then Δφ = 2π<em>n</em>, where
n is an integer. Thus, we find that the circulation is quantized:</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Now before you run away clutching your head looking for the Aleve, let’s ex lor
e this effect in a su erconductor.</ >
< ><strong>Vortex in a su erconductor</strong></ >
< >A rinci al ro erty of su erconductors is that they ex el magnetic fields; t
his is called the Meissner effect. If the magnetic field becomes sufficiently st
rong, one scenario is for the su erconductive state to be “quenched”
. However, in some cases, it may be energetically favorable for the su erconduct
or to form a quantum vortex, which carries a quantized amount of magnetic flux t
hrough the su erconductor. Meanwhile, the su erconductive state revails in the
regions around the vortex. A su erconductor that is ca able of carrying a vortex
is called a ty e-II su erconductor.</ >
< >Over some enclosed area S, the <a title="Magnetic flux" href="htt ://en.wiki
edia.org/wiki/Magnetic_flux">magnetic flux</a> is demonstrated by:</ >
< >.</ >
< >Substituting a result of London’s second equation: , we discover tha
t</ >
< >,</ >
< >where <em>n<sub>s</sub></em>, <em>m</em>, and <em>e<sub>s</sub></em> are the
number density, mass and charge of the <a title="Coo er airs" href="htt ://en.w
iki edia.org/wiki/Coo er_ airs">Coo er airs</a>.</ >
< >If the region, S, is large enough so that along , then</ >
< >.</ >
< >The flow of current can cause vortices in a su erconductor to move. In some c
ircumstances, this leads to energy dissi ation and causes the material to dis la
y a small amount of electrical resistance while in the su erconducting state</ >
< ><strong>Statistical Mechanics of Vortex Lines</strong></ >
< >If the tem erature is raised in a <a title="Su erfluid" href="htt ://en.wiki
edia.org/wiki/Su erfluid">su erfluid</a> or a su erconductor, the vortex loo s u
ndergo a second-order hase transition. This ha ens when the configurational en
tro y overcomes the Boltzmann factor which su resses the thermal generation of
vortex lines. The lines form a condensate. Since the center of the lines, the vo
rtex cores, are normal liquid or normal conductors, res ectively, the condensati
on transforms the <a title="Su erfluid" href="htt ://en.wiki edia.org/wiki/Su er
fluid">su erfluid</a> or su erconductor into the normal state. The ensembles of
vortex lines and their hase transitions can be described efficiently by a gauge
theory. The gauge theory has great similarity with the gauge theory of electron
s and hotons, the famous quantum electrodynamics (QED) and is therefore called
“quantum vortex dynamics” (QVD).</ >
< >Now I will rovide the fly for the ointment, or rather, Geoff Haselhurst does
this nicely in his a er entitled “The Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) rovides a
more Sim le &am ; Sensible Descri tion of Reality than Vortex Theory”, of which I
will shamelessly quote from now. Kee in mind, this is his work, not my own.</ >
<h2>Eight Arguments for Why S ace cannot Flow</h2>
<h3>1. Conce t of Flowing / Liquids a lies to matter.</h3>
< >There are no justifications for a lying conce t of ‘flowing’ to
s ace itself. Flowing is an em irical thing, not a meta hysical thing and all h
iloso hers of science realize that reality is not founded on em irical things. (
I would arguably disagree with the term “all here” but for the sake of introducing t
he grit which will eventually form the earl, let’s hear it out. – DR)</ >
< >“Rather, they start this, dis laying it to the senses, …. and go
on to offer more or less rigorous demonstrations of the er se attributes of the
ir ro rietary genera. This sort of rocedure is inductive and it is as lain as
a ikestaff that it does not amount to a demonstration of essence or of what it
is to be a thing.” (Aristotle, Meta hysics)<br />
“But also hiloso hy is not about erce tible substances (they, you see, a
re rone to destruction)” (Aristotle, Meta hysics)</ >
<h3>2. Flowing matter is understood as loosely bound wave centers in a nearly ri
gid (wave medium) s ace.</h3>
< >The Wave Structure of Matter ex lains how liquids (and solids / gases) form d
ue to the interaction of the s herical In and Out-Waves in a nearly rigid s ace
/ wave medium. Thus there is no need to a ly the conce t of ‘flowing&#821
7; to S ace itself.</ >
<h3>3. For S ace to flow it cannot be continuously connected, but must be made o
f loosely connected arts</h3>
< >This causes two fundamental roblems for human knowledge;<br />
i) You are no longer describing reality from One substance thus you loose necess
ary connection.<br />
ii) You must ex lain what these arts are and how they are connected, which requ
ires assuming existence of many things.<br />
(Basically you are defeating the whole ur ose and beauty of WSM in ex laining h
ow matter is interconnected – which is the central roblem of article / f
ield theories in s ace time.)</ >
<h3>4. You are a lying motion twice to s ace, as Wave Motion and as Flowing Mot
ion of S ace.</h3>
< >It would be strange indeed if, at the most fundamental level of reality, Moti
on existed in two different forms, as both Wave Motion of S ace (which ex lains
‘flowing’ motion) and also as flowing motion of S ace.</ >
<h3>5. Thus you are not abiding by Ockham’s Razor, the most sim le theory
that ex lains most things is best.</h3>
< >In fact you could discuss ideas of flowing s ace for the next 100 years and n
ever resolve anything, as it is obvious it will lead to<br />
endless difficulties. (And history shows this is true, vortex theories have been
around for centuries).</ >
<h3>6. If S ace flowed with lanets as they orbit / s in then our observations o
f the universe would be affected.</h3>
<h3>7. Flowing S ace contradicts Einstein’s relativity which is artly cor
rect as follows;</h3>
< >i) Matter affects S ace<br />
ii) Matter is s herically s atially extended – not a article.<br />
iii) S ace-Time (really waves in S ace) is rigid.</ >
< >Reca itulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity
s ace is endowed with hysical qualities; in this sense,<br />
therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity
s ace without ether is unthinkable; for in such s ace there not only would be no
ro agation of light, but also no ossibility of existence for standards of s a
ce and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any s ace-time intervals
in the hysical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the
quality characteristic of onderable media, as consisting of arts which may be
tracked through time. The idea of motion (i.e. flowing motion of articles) may
not be a lied to it. (Albert Einstein, Leiden Lecture, 1920)</ >
< >“The inse arability of time and s ace emerged in connection with electr
odynamics, or the law of ro agation of light. With the discovery of the relativ
ity of simultaneity, s ace and time were merged in a single continuum in a way s
imilar to that in which the three dimensions of s ace had reviously merged into
a single continuum. Physical s ace was thus extended to a four dimensional s ac
e which also included the dimension of time. The four dimensional s ace of the s
ecial theory of relativity is just as rigid and absolute as Newton’s s ac
e. (Albert Einstein, 1954)</ >
< >I should add that Einstein was very close to the truth in realising that matt
er was not a ‘ article’ but rather that matter, s ace and time are a
ll art of one thing.</ >
< >When forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one sentence:<br
/>
Time and s ace and gravitation have no se arate existence from matter.(Albert Ei
nstein)</ >
< >His error was to work with fields and describe matter as s herical fields in
s acetime, rather than s herical waves in s ace. His matter curves s acetime is
correct once you realise that s acetime is waves in s ace, and these waves do af
fect the ro erties of the wave medium (e.g. curving of waves / light as it ro
agates ast sun.</ >
< >(Also see other science articles on Einstein below)</ >
<h3>8. Finally, there is sim ly no em irical evidence to su ort it. It does not
ex lain anything that the WSM in rigid s ace ex lains.</h3>
< >There is sim ly no justification in introducing it as a conce t.</ >
< >And a 9th oint about vortex theory. Matter interacts s herically, vortices d
o not ex lain this, the WSM does. Matter interacts with all other matter in univ
erse, vortex theory does not ex lain this, WSM does (with mathematical recision
).</ >
< >While we can certainly imagine ‘flowing s ace’ it is rudent to r
emember the words of Leibniz;</ >
< >… a distinction must be made between true and false ideas, and that too
much rein must not be given to a man’s (woman’s) imagination under
retext of its being a clear and distinct intellection. (Leibniz, 1670)</ >
< >-Fin-</ >
< >Now let me retake the wheel. But what if, the laws of Quantum vortex a ly to
“s ace” sim ly because s ace exhibits the ro erties of a su erfluid <em>as well as
</em>a su erconductor? There is certainly evidence that both conditions occur.
One more quote first;</ >
< >The Vortex Theory is based u on the hy othesis that time does not exist as a
fundamental rinci le of the universe, but instead, only exists as a henomenon
created by motion, a “shadow” of motion.<br />
The im lications of this single hiloso hical idea ossess disastrous consequenc
es for all of 20th Century science. Every belief based u on the idea of time is
at jeo ardy. Es ecially Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (Relativity is based u on
the existence of a fourth dimension called “SPACE-TIME!”). It was realized that even
Newton’s laws needed to be looked at again.<br />
Although both Einstein and Newton were giants in the world of science, their rea
soning rocesses were both based u on time. They both believed in time. Even tho
ugh Newton believed time was linear [the same everywhere in the universe], and E
instein believed it was relative, the result was the same – they both believed tim
e was a real and fundamental rinci le of the universe. Because of this fact, th
ey incor orated it into their visions of how the universe was constructed.</ >
< >But if time does not exist as a fundamental rinci le of the universe, then E
instein’s fourth dimension of s ace-time does not contain any “Time” characteristics.
Hence, it can no longer be used as an ex lanation for the length shrinkage and t
ime dilation effects revealed by Michelson and Morley’s famous ex eriment.<br />
To correct this error, the true nature of time must first be discovered. Then be
cause time was used to ex lain how matter, s ace, energy, and the forces of natu
re are constructed – we have to start all over again. But this “time”, using the corre
ct nature of time, we can rediscover how matter, s ace, energy, and the forces o
f nature are really constructed. So how do we do it?</ >
< >When time is eliminated as a cause for these length shrinkage and time dilati
on effects, the only thing left to ex lain what is ha ening is the increased ve
locity of matter itself as it moves through s ace. Consequently, there must be a
n intrinsic relationshi between matter, s ace, and velocity whose interactions
create a mechanical ex lanation for the results of the Michelson Morley ex erime
nt.</ >
< ><a href="htt ://www.thevortextheory.com">htt ://www.thevortextheory.com</a></
>
< >Well Duh. The intrinsic relationshi <em>IS </em>time!</ >
< >But enough oif this. Just try to remember all of these things and sto cussin
g me out for giving you a migraine. On to the magical ingredient, Exotic Matter.
But first, a side argument between myself and Tony Bermanseder</ >
< >David – “What would ha en if exotic matter mixed with our own matter?”</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Tony – “You will have to define ‘exotic matter’ in terms of the stand
ard model , David.<br />
As you know, I do not envisage the resence of antimatter as necessary to model
the cosmogenesis.</ >
< >Relative to my understanding, the X-AntiX GUT bosonic string did NOT bifurcat
e into a X-Boson of matter and an Anti-X Boson for antimatter receding the bary
ogenesis.</ >
< >Alternatively the X-AntiX Gut Goldstone boson bifurcated directly into a quar
k/baryon-le ton cou ling to ‘break’ the string/membrane su ersymmetr
y from the massless Goldstone state into inertial selfstates.</ >
< >Therefore, the invocation of ‘exotic matter’, say re resenting a
negative mass definition in the standard model in addition to the equivalence r
inci le for inertial and gravitational mass is unwarranted.</ >
< >It is indicated that it is the charge of antimatter selfstates {+-E=mc^2}which
is in mirror symmetry (say negative) and NOT the mass; as the o ositely charge
s attract before annihilation. If it were the masses negating each other, then t
he like charges would re el (electromagnetic interaction being stronger than the
weak and gravitational interactions).</ >
< >In the Casimir effect, the local ‘negative mass’ effect describes
a ‘decrease in energy’ say in moving the lates closer together and
so indicates a ‘negative force’.<br />
This does not require ‘negative mass’, er se, but could be inter re
ted as such.</ >
< >I so would say, that the ‘exotic matter’ is sim ly the ‘dar
k energy’ as the ZPE/VPE subjected to ‘confinement’, say the C
asimir conductor lates or some other cavity thereby isolating the ZPE/VPE and a
llowing Casimir Pressure to develo .<br />
I have invoked antimatter as a rimary art of the standard model to ro ose the
existence and the breaking of the rimordial gauge symmetry.</ >
< >Then this ostulated matter-antimatter symmetry relates to what mass is, say
in the e1quivalence rinci le related to the negative mass as a third such &#821
6;equivalence’.<br />
Then the negative mass relates to the ZPE in the Casimir effect of the ‘sh
ielding’ of a s acetime region.</ >
< >This negative mass then relates in some as yet undefined manner to ‘exo
tic matter’.</ >
< >I do NOT subscribe to arallel universes or the ‘many worlds’ bec
ause all forms of ‘exotic matter’ become su erfluous should you rede
fine the original breaking of the gauge symmetry not in matter-antimatter, but i
n EMR-AntiEMR.</ >
< >Your a roach should concentrate on what MASS is, before ostulating ‘e
xotic matter’ which by definition is related to ‘negative mass&#8217
;.”</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >David – “The what causes the article annihilations?</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >For the gamma hotons to manifest aZPE transformation, say air-annihilation or
neutral ion decay OR an electron transition by Planck’s Law (fusion or fi
ssion) is required.</ >
< >So if you have article annihilation and not a transition, then the matter-an
timatter cou ling will beengaged.</ >
< >Now the im ortant as ect unknown by the undits is that the gauge articles o
f the ZPE are COLOUR-charged (and linked to the Dirac mono ole say); whilst the
mass roduced hotons (caused by the acceleration of electro charges) are not.</
>
< >So you have an incoming gamma hoton which is not color charged (it is its ow
n anti article in chiral robabilitydistribution) interacting with a gluon-color-
charged nucleus say.<br />
Pair-Production then TRANSFERS the color charges of the nucleus in the gauges (g
luon, virtual hoton, su ressed anti hoton and graviton) to the resulting matte
r-antimatter air using the colorless gamma hoton as a conduit.</ >
< >In your case then, the reverse quantum mechanics a lies from the ZPE level (
before the electron- ositron airing materializes in the E=hf<–>E=mc
^2 gauge hysics).</ >
< >The colorless gamma hotons re resent so a direct manifestation of the ZPE wi
thout the invocation of the matter-antimatter cou ling.</ >
< >In articular the EMFGauge-Photon ‘unifies’ with the Graviton in R
GB(+1)+BGR(-2) in longrange gauge unification with the clockwise deficit (-1)cou
ling to thestrongweak unification of the shortrange gauges in the Gluon’s R
GB(+1) and the Anti hoton’s BGR(+1).</ >
< >This then allows the ‘Dark Matter’ article (RMP(-1)=RestMassPhot
on) to cou le the longrange gauges to the shortrange gauges inan overall reconsti
tution of the rimordial gauge symmetry.</ >
< >The unification tem late is then the mesonic quark-antiquark or matter-antima
tter ‘virtual’ tem late of the nuclear interaction, but does not man
ifest in the materialization of matter-antimatter cou lings, say a ositron-elec
tron airing.</ >
< >With all due res ect here, I disagree. Exotic matter is not have to be anti-m
atter, in our current understanding. While anti-matter is certainly exotic, not a
ll exotic matter is anti-matter. I would like to go back to the day astronomers
found 90% of the universe. A ril 23<su >rd</su >, 1992. And what exactly was it
that these astronomers discovered? A new kind of matter. For many years, hysici
sts sus ected that the universe must have a different kind of matter. Ordinary m
atter, like electrons, rotons, neutrons, and everything we see on lanet Earth
is made u of ordinary matter. Ordinary matter strongly interacts with radiation
, so it’s rather easy for astronomers to detect it.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >But there was a small roblem. Actually, it was a huge roblem. In 1990, the
cosmic background ex lorer satellite roved that the universe is extremely entro
ic, s ecifically, it’s entro y measure is 1,000,000,000. Entro y measures the eff
iciency with which a system radiates heat and light, and the inefficiency in whi
ch it erforms work. The universe it turns out is by far the most entro ic syste
m in all existence.</ >
< >This discover led to the roblem. If the universe has that high a degree of e
ntro y and all matter strongly interacts with radiation, and the radiation left
over from the creation event measures to be incredibly smooth, then the matter l
ikewise should be that smoothly distributed. But it isn’t. AHA!</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >As you look at the galaxies and clusters of galaxies, rather than being smoot
hly distributed like the radiation from the creation event, it’s lum y and
clum y. Astronomers wanted to know why. We have roof that the universe was cre
ated in a hot, big, bang due to the incredible entro y, but how do we ex lain th
e galaxies? Well, the discovery of exotic matter ex lains the clustering of the
galaxies. Exotic matter does not strongly interact with radiation, and because i
t doesn’t, it can clum inde endent of the radiation. Since it doesn&#8217
;t really matter in gravity whether the matter is exotic or ordinary, the laws o
f hysics still a ly. Two massive objects will attract one another under the la
w of gravity, and if one of those massive objects is made of ordinary matter and
the other is made of exotic matter, they will still attract. Once exotic matter
clum s, it can draw ordinary matter to it, and hence we can have the universe w
e see today. The radiation from the creation event is still very smoothly distri
buted, but the galaxies and clusters of galaxies are clum ed.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >A ril 23, 1992 was the first detection an astronomer made of this ty e of mat
ter. Since that time, there have been seven other inde endent detections of this
exotic matter.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >But even this isn’t the only exotic matter. Ex eriments at CERN and at FermiLab
have also created forms of exotic matter, albeit in small amounts. And guess wh
at? It isn’t anti-matter. It is matter with negative mass. Now we can move forward
with rying o en the oyster, and roducing the earl.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< ><strong>The Megaverse</strong></ >
< >As you all know by now, and are robably driven crazy from my ramblings, I am
trying to make a “quantum lea ” from a hy othesis to a theory on a s ecial kind of
wormhole. As such, I have to reconcile my differences to formulate an ex lanatio
n that is at least dis laying some resemblance of robability. In order to do th
is I had to come to gri s with the hologra hic boundary effect, not at the unive
rse level, but as a containment boundary in which the mega-verse manifests. Henc
e the “stew ot” analogy; the exotic matter would be the medium in which the univers
es within the mega-verse “floats”; the savory flavors would re resent the interactio
n that these individual universes exhibit on the medium, and this could very wel
l ex lain what we have recently discovered and called “Dark Flow”; additionally, rem
nants of the genesis of the mega-verse has left numerous cosmic su erstrings, ea
ch vibrating at its own s ecial frequency. At times, these strings come into clo
se roximity with one another; as they a roach, they seek resonance with one an
other, and entangle; entanglement is com lete when both strings hit mutual reson
ance or harmonize; at this oint, a double helix wormhole forms and stabilizes w
ith the assistance of the exotic matter from the medium being “sucked” into the dual
throats; a “quantum conduit” com letes the connection between two adjacent Universe
s, but almost immediately minor annihilations occur when the exotic matter mixes
with our own matter; Once the exotic matter de letes to a certain oint, instab
ility occurs, and the wormhole structure colla ses. But let’s start at the to and
work our way down. To me the megaverse is a huge ot of stew. The ot itself is
com rised of the hologra hic boundary. This conce t is commonly used to ex lain
our universe; but it goes far beyond our universe. The hologra hic rinci le is
a ro erty of quantum gravity and string theories which states that the descri
tion of a volume of s ace can be thought of as encoded on a boundary to the regi
on s ecifically a light-like boundary like a gravitational horizon. First ro os
ed by Gerardus ‘t Hooft, it was given a recise string-theory inter retati
on by the lumber, Leonard Susskind (Leonard started out as a lumber before bec
oming one of the greatest quantum Physicists in the world).</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >In a larger and more s eculative sense, the theory suggests that the entire u
niverse and in my ers ective, the megaverse, can be seen as a two-dimensional i
nformation structure “ ainted” on the cosmological horizon, such tha
t the three dimensions we observe are only an effective descri tion at macrosco
ic scales and at low energies. Cosmological hologra hy has not been made mathema
tically recise, artly because the cosmological horizon has a finite area and g
rows with time.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The hologra hic rinci le was ins ired by black hole thermodynamics, which im
lies that the maximal entro y in any region scales with the radius squared, and
not cubed as might be ex ected. In the case of a black hole, the insight was th
at the descri tion of all the objects which have fallen in can be entirely conta
ined in surface fluctuations of the event horizon. The hologra hic rinci le res
olves the black hole information aradox within the framework of string theory.
So let’s say that the ot, is the hologra hic boundary. It kee s the stew containe
d.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< ><strong>The Hologra hic Boundary of the Megaverse – The “Stew Pot”</strong></ >
< ><strong> </strong></ >
< >The stew ot of course is filled with all the ingredients of the megaverse, w
hich of course would be all the universes, (the carrots, onions, meat, celery wo
uld be the universes).</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The universes that are ingredients of the stew</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >But the universes must remain isolated from each other, or catastro hic event
s could occur when matter that is o osite, or out of hase touches, the megaver
se could become a megaboom. This insulating material, or “broth”, would be exotic ma
tter. This would allow the universes to freely float around in the ot of stew,
and come very close to one another without creating any interference on a grand
or macro scale. However, there are exce tions. Recently, astronomers have discov
ered at the center of our galaxy not just a large wormhole, but two large wormho
les, orbiting each other, creating a quantum vortex. On January 4<su >th</su >,
2010, Universe today ran this article:</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< ><strong>Dual Black Holes S inning in a Cosmic Dance – Com lete with Disco Ball<
/strong></ >
< >Astronomers have discovered 33 airs of merging black holes in cosmic dances
around each other, a finding that was redicted or ‘choreogra hed’ by Isaac Newton. “T
hese results are significant because we now know that these ‘waltzing’ black holes a
re much more common than reviously known,” said Dr. Julia Comerford of the Univer
sity of California, Berkeley, at the American Astronomical Society meeting in Wa
shington, DC. “Galaxy mergers are causing the waltzing, can use this finding to de
termine how often mergers occur. The black holes dancing towards us are shifted
towards blue light, and those moving away from us are shifted toward the red. So
it is like a cosmic disco ball showing us where the black holes are dancing.”</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >An image of the galaxy COSMOS J100043.15+020637.2 taken with</ >
< >the Advanced Camera for Surveys on the Hubble S ace Telesco e.</ >
< >Image courtesy Dr. Julia Comerford.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The dances are occurring in dual black holes, which are different from binary
black holes in that the distance between the two objects is much larger for dua
l black holes.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >“These black holes have a se aration of a kilo arsec,” said Comerford. “You haven’t
heard about lots of small binary black holes, because no one has definitively fo
und any yet. But this is the next best thing. We know these duals are going to m
erge and can use models to find out how often they merge.”</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The team was able to observe the black holes that have gas colla sing onto th
em, and this gas releases energy and owers each black hole as an active galacti
c nucleus (AGN), which lights u the black hole like a Christmas tree.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Astronomical observations have shown that nearly every galaxy has a central s
u ermassive black hole (with a mass of a million to a billion times the mass of
the Sun), and also that galaxies commonly collide and merge to form new, more ma
ssive galaxies. As a consequence of these two observations, a merger between two
galaxies should bring two su ermassive black holes to the new, more massive gal
axy formed from the merger. The two black holes gradually in-s iral toward the c
enter of this galaxy, engaging in a gravitational tug-of-war with the surroundin
g stars. The result is a black hole dance. Such a dance is ex ected to occur in
our own Milky Way Galaxy in about 3 billion years, when it collides with the And
romeda Galaxy.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The team of astronomers used two new techniques to discover the waltzing blac
k holes. First, they identified waltzing black holes and their velocities by the
disco ball of the red-shift or blue-shift.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The second technique for identifying waltzing black holes through a chance di
scovery of a curious-looking galaxy. While visually ins ecting images of galaxie
s taken with the Advanced Camera for Surveys on the Hubble S ace Telesco e, the
team noticed a galaxy with a tidal tail of stars, gas, and dust, an unmistakable
sign that the galaxy had recently merged with another galaxy, and the galaxy al
so featured two bright nuclei near its center. The team recognized that the two
bright nuclei might be the AGNs of two waltzing black holes, a hy othesis seemin
gly su orted by the recent galaxy merger activity evinced by the tidal tail. To
test this hy othesis, the very next night the team obtained a s ectrum of the g
alaxy with the DEIMOS s ectrogra h on the 10-meter (400-inch) Keck II Telesco e
on Mauna Kea, Hawaii.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The s ectrum showed that the two central nuclei in the galaxy were indeed bot
h AGNs, su orting the team’s hy othesis that the galaxy has two su ermassive blac
k holes. The black holes may be waltzing within the host galaxy, or the galaxy m
ay have a recoiling black hole kicked out of the galaxy by gravity wave emission
; additional observations are necessary to distinguish between these ex lanation
s.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Comerford said these new techniques can be used to find many more waltzing a
irs in the future.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Could this be a macro exam le of the famous Double Helix, famous in the micro
realm as DNA? Yes Virginia, it is. So now, at the galaxy level, we have a doubl
e helix, a quantum vortex, and evidence of matter flow. Cou led with su er condu
ctivity. Ummmm…remember how this a er began? And where do the energy, mass and ma
tter that enter these black holes go? How does our universe continue to ex and?<
/ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >In the megaverse, there are all ty es of universes in all states of existence
. Some ex anding, some contracting. The law of conservation of energy is an em i
rical law of hysics. It states that the total amount of energy in an isolated s
ystem remains constant over time (is said to be conserved over time). A conseque
nce of this law is that energy can neither be created nor destroyed: it can only
be transformed from one state to another. The only thing that can ha en to ene
rgy in a closed system is that it can change form: for instance chemical energy
can become kinetic energy. So if our universe is ex anding, where is the energy
coming from? It may be from other universes that are contracting. If this is the
case, our universe may have started with a big flow, not a big bang. Perha s it
was a big o . Consider two universes in close roximity in the stew ot. A bra
ne emerges from one due to ex ansion. That brane, a bubble if you will, bulges o
ut. It eru ts into an adjacent small universe, and begins to our massive amount
s of matter and energy into the smaller bubble. The smaller bubble ex ands at a
fantastic, or “ex losive” rate, and like a deflating balloon, the universe feed it b
egins to contract. Or instead of a brane, or bubble, let’s think of an incredibly
large black hole. A black hole may unch through into the smaller bubble with ac
celerated energy and matter ouring out of its host universe. But no matter how
the mechanics work, no energy conservation law is violated. But back to the ear
l of the aranormal aradox. The worm hole. S ecifically, the Transuniversal Wor
mhole.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Floating in the broth, are incredibly long cosmic strings. These strings are
numerous, erha s infinite in theor o ulation, and each one of them vibrates at
its own unique frequency. On occasion, however, these strings a roach one anot
her. As they do, they begin to resonate with each other and entangle. As they en
tangle, the form a double helix as art of a quantum vortex effect. If there are
two adjacent universes in roximity to this entanglement, the strings will be a
ffected by the gravitational ull of these universes.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Two Cosmic Strings a roach</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >The begin to resonate</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Once they reach resonance they entangle, the gravity of the two adjacent univ
erses attract them. In some cases, one end of the air goes toward one universe,
while the o osite ends are attracted to the other. As they come into contact,
the “broth” of exotic matter stabilizes the throats, and a conduit is created.</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Connected, stable, trans-universal wormhole</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >At this oint, information, energy and matter can travel back and forth betwe
en the two universes, de ending on which conduit tube they travel through. But,
there is a roblem. Due to incom atibility with exotic matter and our own matter
, since we are not isolated from direct contact by a hologra hic barrier, artic
le annihilations occur. The exotic matter quickly de letes, and the wormhole col
la ses, only to reform once a sufficient amount of stabilizing exotic matter is
accumulated. So how does this tie into the study of aranormal henomena?</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
< >Paranormal henomena, regardless of the area of study (Cry tozoology, UFOlogy
or “s irit manifestations” are highly transitory. They come and go, much like a wor
mhole. What if, these wormholes are the conduit between our world and the next?
My team has collected evidence that may indicate just such a relationshi .</ >
< >&nbs ;</ >
</div>
<div class=" ost- ages">
</div>
<div class=" ostmeta">
<s an class="date"><img src="htt ://s0.w .com/w
-content/themes/ ub/dark-wood/images/calendaricon. ng?m=1269039650g" alt="" />&n
bs ;October 15, 2010</s an>
<s an class="author"><img src="htt ://s0.w .com/
w -content/themes/ ub/dark-wood/images/authoricon. ng?m=1269039650g" alt="" />&n
bs ;su ermanalexthegreat</s an>
<s an class="comment">
<img src="htt ://s0.w .com/w -content/th
emes/ ub/dark-wood/images/commentsicon. ng?m=1269039650g" alt="" />&nbs ;
<a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.wor
d ress.com/2010/10/15/wormhole-theory-addendum-to-the-origins-series-courtesy-of
-david-rountree/#res ond" title="Comment on Wormhole Theory, addendum to the Ori
gins series, courtesy of David&nbs ;Rountree">Leave a comment</a>
</s an>
<s an class="edit"><a class=" ost-edit-link" hre
f="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/w -admin/ ost. h ? ost=121&am ;acti
on=edit" title="Edit Post">Edit this</a></s an> <div cla
ss="taxonomy">
<s an class="categories">Categories:&nbs
;<a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/category/uncategorized/" ti
tle="View all osts in Uncategorized" rel="category tag">Uncategorized</a></s an
>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">

<h2 class=" ost-title"><a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegr
eat.word ress.com/2010/10/10/origin-7-the-sha e-of-things-to-come/" title="Perma
nent Link to Origin 7 : The Sha e of Things to&nbs ;Come">Origin 7 : The Sha e o
f Things to&nbs ;Come</a></h2>
<div class=" ost-content">
< >In Origin 7, I will issue u dates about the E
uro ean Planck mission to survey and examine the CMBR, as it should yield vital
data about the nature and com osition of our universe from the moments of its fi
rst beginnings until now.</ >
< >As you may remember from Origin 6, I drew a direct com arison between gravity
and dark energy and stated that they might be two sides of the same coin, just
functioning on different scales, but both roducts of a single omniversal entro
ic force ( erha s the single unifying force from which all the forces originated
, with gravity/dark energy merely being its shadow effect rojected into our uni
verse) that kee s the balance within the omniverse intact in terms of matter/ene
rgy distribution.</ >
< >I also indicated that our universe has a geometric sha e similar to a mobius
stri – this originates from the idea that it was hatched inside a rotating
black hole and the rotation of the black hole torques s ace-time, creating a ri
ng “singularity” and thus the sha e of our universe visible as a 2D
shadow u on its hologra hic boundary. Our mobius stri (with the hel of gravit
y/dark energy) can be ex anded into a horn torus in 3 dimensions or a hy ers her
e (s ecifically a 4 dimensional glome) in 4 dimensions and on the larger scales
that is what our universe should look like, with light being able to take at lea
st two aths from the same source to reach us. The center of this geometric sha
e actually corres onds to a white hole in which dark matter and dark energy, u
on entering the black hole inside our arent universe, exit into our universe, t
hus causing s ace-time to ex and and resulting in the ex anding universe we erc
eive. Once a sufficient entro ic balance is achieved between the arent univers
e and our own, the entro ic force will reverse itself and gravity will cause the
universe to colla se back in on itself and restart the cycle. It will restart
because gravity becomes a re ulsive force at smaller than 10 lanck lengths, whi
ch would be when the universe’s external boundary a roaches the central w
hite hole, which “bounces” it back. Even though at this time there
doesnt seem to be enough matter in the universe to generate enough gravitation f
or this to occur, it will ha en when enough matter has assed through the aren
t white hole (the amount of dark energy assing through will lessen as the entro
y of the arent universe increases, thus the balance of dark matter and dark en
ergy will favor the former over the latter.) This will be in the form of dark m
atter, whose concentrations will rise as the eons ass by. The only reason this
hasnt ha ened already is because of the existence of dark flow– which is
a gravitational leak from an adjacent megaverse (a collection of arallel unive
rses with different laws of hysics su erim osed u on each other, much like ours
is)– which ulls the edges of our megaverse further a art (and erha s le
aks matter from our megaverse into theirs– much like whats going on with o
urs.) Because this adjacent megaverse is leaking gravity into ours it MUST be i
n a state of contraction (a hase which ultimately results in gravitational coll
a se) and once the su erim osed states of the different arallel universes in th
is megaverse have colla sed into each other, with the causal boundaries between
each of them dissolving due to the intense gravity it will re big bang (a roces
s we will go through billions of years later.) When this ha ens, the dark flow
effect will disa ear because the new megaverse that emerges will be ex anding
and se arating into a new set of su erim osed arallel universes and this ex los
ive ex ansion will cause a cosmic shockwave which will cause our megaverse to be
gin the contraction rocess. The addition of dark matter streaming through from
our arent universe will accelerate that rocess with time and the higher conce
ntration of gravity will eventually lead to the same thing that ha ened to our
neighbor megaverse. Thus we will balance each other out and create a feedback l
oo that cycles both of our megaverses from big bang to big bang. Even when our
arent universe ex ands so much that the wormhole connection between it and our
s breaks down (black hole “eva oration”) and then it contracts to cy
clically bang again, there will be other newly formed connections from other uni
verses to take its lace ( reserving our toroidal sha e) and thus the rocess sh
all continue.</ >
< >The omniverse itself should have the structure of a s indle torus, but ex and
ed outward to 11 dimensions to include the gravity brane (the “di at the
center” which leaks out into all the resident universes– 10D curving
into the 11th dimension) as well as hy ers ace and imaginary time and the 4+4 d
imensions and their com lements. Let the two com onent circles of the torus re
resent hy ers ace and imaginary time. The intersection oint of the torus re re
sents the art all of its resident universes hold in common– gravity and Z
PE– and the cosmic distribution oints of black holes, white holes and the
ir wormhole bridges. The s indle torus structure is mimicked in the internal tr
ee like structure of the omniverse in terms of its megaverses, their satellite q
uadverses and their com onent universes.</ >
< >I also mentioned the existence of something I call “ALL TIME.” T
his is how I envision arallel timeverses all being art of the same universe, j
ust bounded by a luxon wall that se arates all the arallel timeverses by light
barriers (with wormholes offering conduits into every ast and every future and
ex laining the nonlocality of quantum effects.) As a matter of fact, if our bra
ins could erceive higher dimensions we would see that time– the so-called
4th dimension– merely re resents our brain’s incom lete attem t to
erceive a fourth s atial dimension. Because our five senses arent ca able of t
his, we erceive something we call “time” instead. Instead of categ
orizing s atial and tem oral dimensions se arately we should consider them toget
her and the existence of time indicates to us the resence of a fourth s atial d
imension that we cannot directly sense exce t in the way it causes changes in th
e other three dimensions. If we could directly sense this fourth dimension, we
would notice that, just like with the s atial dimensions, there is no real chang
e– but that all the ast, resent and futures all exist at every moment (b
ecause we cant directly sense the fourth dimension we only erceive single sna s
hots of “time.”) This is what eo le who ex erience things like dej
a vu, “ ast lives” and even “future lives” or recogniti
on might really be detecting– the true nature of time as the fourth s atia
l dimension. Hy ers ace and Imaginary Time, the two arent dimensions, are rob
ably just two sides of the same coin and their a arent se aration into other di
mensions that caused universes to bubble u from the bulk was the result of rand
om fluctuations in the ZPE caused u gravity/dark energy that created all the ot
her dimensions much the same way air roduction occurs and creates matter out o
f energy. The same rocess a lies to universe/antiverse creation (see below co
ncerning this in 4+4 com lementary dimensions.) Evidence of arallel universes
and an adjacent megaverse should be a arent in high resolution CMBR data like w
hat the Planck Satellite can rovide, as CMBR should resent us with a ta estry
of the universe both before and after it branched off into arallel timeverses.
These timeverses should be indicated by re etitive shadows and highlights in th
e CMBR data that, like a fun house mirror, are distorted reflections that are of
a slightly different energy level from each other. Evidence of an adjacent meg
averse should be a arent as its gravitational leak will cause the whole backgro
und ta estry to redshift more than ex ected.</ >
< >Recent research suggests that consciousness exists in 8 dimensions (while the
body only exists in the 3+1) and if this is true, it means that consciousness&#
8211; or at least some form of conscious energy– actually survives death b
ecause it is timeless. The hysical cor oreal art of us is a mere bookmark in
this larger reality in which we are connected by this conscious energy into a co
llective consciousness that s ans the universe and beyond (including animate and
nonanimate matter and energy– further ex lained in Origin 4.) Thus we ca
n be ex osed to and influenced by outside conscious energy that can create a ful
l s ectrum of emotions as well as hysical effects u on us. I ro ose that these
8 dimensions are the result of air roduction that resulted when our dimension
s were first created from hy ers ace and imaginary time and the other 4 dimensio
ns are com lementary to the 4 dimensions we already know. I also conjecture tha
t the body can only exist in 4 dimensions at one time but when it ex ires it flu
ctuates back and forth in different forms between the 4 dimensions it originally
resided in and crossing a luxon barrier (“going into the light”) in
to the 4 com lementary dimensions that were roduced during air roduction. (Th
is is further ex lained in Origin 1 and 2.) The consciousness, which is timeles
s, remains in all 8 at the same time and retains some vestigial memories of the
revious fluctuations and even the ones to follow. Our minds normally bury most
of this so we dont clutter our memories. Actually, the fact that consciousness
exists in 8 dimensions instead of just 4 indicates yet another higher order dua
listic symmetry– the conscious mind ty ically o erates in the conventional
4 dimensions, while the subconscious also has access to the additional 4 com le
mentary dimensions. Since the toroidal nature of our universe allows for the ex
istence of an antiverse on the “inside”, u on death, not only do our
bodies fli over to this antiverse (or the mirrorverse, which might be more lik
ely, since it ex eriences time like we do, while another set of fli ing might o
ccur between the antiverse and the antimirrorverse), but our conscious and subco
nscious also fli and trade laces when they cross over! On the level of the to
rus, having the antiverse on the inside conserves many conservation laws, includ
ing those of charge, arity and s in. Being made of mirror matter in the same q
uantities as ours is made of matter conserves charge and arity and s in are con
served in the sense that being the mirrorverse to our own, if ours s ins counter
clockwise, it s ins clockwise and vice versa. In the case of arity, fli ing t
he s atial coordinates is conserved because of the existence of the mirrorverse.
The existence of mirror matter and the mirrorverse resolves the arity violati
ons observed with the weak interaction, as the violations occur exactly o osite
to this in the mirrorverse. Each universe should have its own mirrorverse and
vice versa on its “fli side” created as an analog to air roductio
n. As a matter of fact, going back to the 2D scale structure of the universe on
the scale of quantum interactions, we have a way of resolving the four color r
oblem (that no more than four colors are required to color the regions on a ma
so that no two adjacent regions have the same color) on the omniversal scale by
s litting each rotoverse into 4 universes– matter, antimatter, mirror mat
ter and antimirror matter, all se arated by the luxon wall and interconnected by
wormholes! These would all be quantumly entangled (via the worm holes) much li
ke 4 qubit quantum entanglement in a quantum com uter (which is another way of l
ooking at our universe and, indeed, the megaverse and omniverse also!) Another
indication of this structure is how a toroidal surface can be se arated into 4 c
ircles (two in the regular fashion and two when turned inside out.) As a matter
of fact, while the omniverse is a s indle torus, our quadverse would be a horn
torus, with the intersection oint re resenting the oint of origin of the cycli
c big bang (the ultimate white hole!), which is reached in alternating fashion b
y the universe and its mirror com lement, and then by the antiverse and its mirr
or com lement. If our universe were to be considered “on to ” of th
e torus, the mirrorverse would be “on the bottom” while the two anti
verses would be on the “inside”– with our antiverse on the &#8
220;to inside” and the mirror antiverse on the “bottom inside.&#822
1; But since our universe is ex anding, we have to be considered on the inside
(the ones on the outside contain central black holes not white holes)…. s
o if ours was on the to inside, the mirrorverse would be on the bottom inside,
with the antiverse on the to and the antimirrorverse on the bottom of the torus
. Two of these would always be contracting while the other two were ex anding a
nd time would run o osite in them (anti vs “normal” matter, with th
e “anti” containing com lementary time, thus going through cycles o
osite to ours and the mirrorverse… as a matter of fact, because the antiv
erse and the antimirrorverse contain dimensions com lementary to those of our ow
n universe and our mirrorverse, they arent affected by the adjacent megaverse in
the same way in terms of ex ansion and contraction– that is to say, they
are only affected by the corres onding antiverses and the antimirrorverses in th
e quadverses of the adjacent megaverse, while our universe and our mirrorverse i
s only affected by the corres onding universes and mirrorverses in the adjacent
megaverse in terms of com leting the feedback loo of alternating ex ansion and
contraction– symmetry on the omniverse level!) and the s eed of light limi
t would a ear to be violated in the two which a eared to be going backward in
time (thus solving the arrow of time roblem)– of course, to them, it woul
d seem like we were doing it!– thus creating a causal hologra hic boundary
on the luxon wall (light and gravity are two things we would all have in common
.) The verses in the contracting hase would actually see their central white h
oles converted into black holes because of the massive increase in density, whic
h would fuel the colla se, but would reach the logical limit at 10 lanck length
s (as ring “singularities”), at which time they would re bang and be
come white holes again. Rotational symmetry is reserved at every big bang, bec
ause our universe and its mirrorverse would have o osite s ins, while the antiv
erse and mirrorverse also s in in o osite directions to each other, this mainta
ining rotational symmetry at their end of the cycle also. But because everythin
g is oriented the o osite between the universe and its mirrorverse and the anti
verse and its mirrorverse, from within the articular verse it would seem exactl
y the same as its mirror counter art! Reducing the number of dimensions hologra
hically of this structure on the quantum level doesnt ose a roblem for us, as
going from 4D to 2D allows for 4 universes that each consist of 2D (4*2D=8D) or
4 mobian stri s on the hy ers atial-imaginary time 2D hologra hic boundary (thi
nk four symmetrical shadowverses!)– which would seem like a single articl
e (su erim osed) for those on the “outside” (in 2D hy ers ace-imagin
ary time, the dimensions of wormholes), with time and com lementary time both re
duced to s atial dimensions (which ex lains nonlocality and action at a distance
)– thus the combo of our conscious and subconscious energy would be a art
of the cosmic quantum com uter itself, as it s ans the whole network– jus
t like the whole collective does, animate and inanimate! Direct roof of this m
ight be obtained when mirror matter is observed as well as the existence of the
symmetric shadows in the CMBR data. Mirror matter might make u art of the dar
k matter of our universe (as it can enter our universe through worm holes and he
l create similar structures in each universe) and our matter would be mirror ma
tter in the mirrorverse. The only mirror matter that is the same as ordinary ma
tter is the graviton– thus its candidacy as dark matter. Since the amount
of mirror matter in the quadverse should equal the amount of normal matter, I
ro ose that the mirrorverse contains exactly the same amount of mirror matter th
at ours contains matter and, likewise, the antimirrorverse contains the same amo
unt of antimirror matter as the antiverse contains antimatter. Not only that, b
ut the amount of dark matter and dark energy should be the same in our universe
and its mirror artner, and the antiverse and its mirror artner– hence wh
y the contraction and ex ansion cycles are so well timed out. And the connectio
ns dont sto there! Likewise, we can view the quadverse to be linked to our ar
ent quadverse through two black hole linkages (think DNA double helix, which is
a nanosco ic version of this, sort of like our brain is a nanosco ic version of
the CMBR, the universe’s “memories”– heck, DNA might be
this connection on another level!), with the black hole our universe resides ins
ide connected to another black hole in the mirrorverse of our arent quadverse&#
8211; view this as one strand of DNA. The other strand consists of a black hole
in the antiverse version of our arent universe connected to a black hole in th
e antimirrorverse of our arent quadverse. When viewed this way, we realize tha
t the reason that matter coming through the central white hole is dark matter is
because the art of the arent quadverse we are connected to is a mirrorverse t
o our own universe and the art of the arent quadverse our mirrorverse is conne
cted to consists of “normal” matter! This is symmetry on a whole ne
w level and is the reason why both verses get dark matter– our mirrorverse
’s dark matter would be “normal” matter for us and vice verse.
The same holds true for the antiverse and the antimirrorverse, which get the m
irror version of their matter (our antimatter) because of the way the black hole
s are connected in our arent quadverse! These two o osing linkages are the re
ason why they big bang in cycles alternating with our own and why time seems to
flow backwards in the antiversions of our quadverse. The reason why all this ha
ens is because black holes bend s ace-time so much they actually fracture the
boundaries of the quadverse as they unite all 8 dimensions of it with the 2 orig
inal dimensions of hy ers ace and imaginary time. And yet, symmetry, a fundamen
tal ro erty of the omniverse, still remains. So black holes mark not only a un
ification of forces, but of dimensions as well, as they create worm holes that t
unnel through the whole structure and into our own universe! Any baby quadverse
s inside our own quadverse would be connected in a similar way to our own. The
arallel timeverses discussed earlier would also all exist in quads.</ >
< >Our memories from the revious existence become art of the subconscious in t
he 4 com lementary dimensions to that antiverse or mirrorverse. A baby’s
birth is like a big bang with latent memories. The accumulation of these latent
memories is what being an “old soul” is all about. What we call gh
osts or a aritions may just be the hologra hic memories or residual effects lef
t over from before or during the cross over or they could be actual conscious en
ergy that got tra ed in the luxon wall during the memory transferrance from con
scious energy to subconscious energy. The growing body of evidence that I inclu
de below indicates this, as well as the fractal nature of the brain, which actua
lly mimics the CMBR data, lending more evidence to the idea that we are but a re
flection of the universe itself on a much smaller scale. Im thinking that&#821
7;s why we see structures re eating on various different scales– well, bas
ically, reality itself is com osed of the same fundamental structures and the wa
y these structures interact with each other results in emergent fractal ro erti
es and its the result of these reactions that we see all around us. Entanglemen
t causes the history of the universe to be recorded onto the CMBR and a reflecti
on of our own ersonal histories to be recorded within the memories of our mind
(both conscious and subconscious) using the same basic structural ro erties and
rinci les. In Origin 4, when Im talking about informational wormhole tunnelin
g from our mind to the outside environment and vice versa, Im referring to entan
glement…. the wormholes are the “ i es” the information is the
“water” that asses through them and the entanglement is the drivin
g force (call it “water ressure”) which makes the whole rocess os
sible. There is robably some internal tunneling as well, between the 4 dimensi
ons of the conscious mind and the higher 4 dimensions of the subconscious. This
is what causes intuition, instincts and when tunneling into the universe itself
, creativity (because the universe is based on creativity) and curiosity (which
lies at the foundation), including the search for the origins of it all, a funda
mental reason why the universe created us, to figure itself out! When tunneling
into the collective, we get ESP, the conscious version of quantum nonlocality a
ction at a distance. The subconscious mind is what connects us to the collectiv
e consciousness or the cosmic web (both of consciousness and of the backbone str
ucture of the omniverse via ZPE and its reflections in the CMBR.) The cosmic we
b is the backbone of the omniverse and its structure is fractally reflected in e
verything around us– from CMBR to EEG brain wave atterns and everything i
n between. The cosmic web was created by the commutative ro erties of wormhole
s in being able to redistribute matter and energy on all levels, from the quantu
m foam of s ace-time and the micro worm holes of our own conscious and subconsci
ous energy (as a matter of fact, what if subconscious energy consists of mirror
energy?!) to the su ermassive black holes that generate new universes!</ >
< >Some sources:</ >
< >John Gardiner, Robyn Overall, Jan Marc, 2010. The fractal nature of the brain
: EEG data suggests that the brain functions as a “quantum com uter”
in 5-8 dimensions. NeuroQuantology 8(2):137-141. ABSTRACT. The brain has been t
raditionally viewed as a deterministic machine where certain in uts give rise to
certain out uts. However, there is a growing body of work that suggests this is
not the case. The high im ortance of initial in uts suggests that the brain may
be working in the realms of chaos, with small changes in initial in uts leading
to the roduction of strange attractors. This may also be reflected in the hys
ical structure of the brain which may also be fractal. EEG data is a good lace
to look for the underlying atterns of chaos in the brain, since it sam les many
millions of neurons simultaneously. Several studies have arrived at a fractal d
imension of between 5 and 8 for human EEG data. This suggests that the brain o e
rates in a higher dimension than the 4 of traditional s ace-time. These extra di
mensions suggest that quantum gravity may lay a role in generating consciousnes
s.</ >
< >htt ://www. hysorg.com/news174921612.html</ >
< >(PhysOrg.com) — Over the ast few decades, the idea that our universe c
ould be one of many alternate universes within a giant multiverse has grown from
a sci-fi fantasy into a legitimate theoretical ossibility. Several theories of
hysics and astronomy have hy othesized the existence of a multiverse made of m
any arallel universes. One obvious question that arises, then, is exactly how m
any of these arallel universes might there be.</ >
< >In a new study, Stanford hysicists Andrei Linde and Vitaly Vanchurin have ca
lculated the number of all ossible universes, coming u with an answer of 10^10
^16. If that number sounds large, the scientists ex lain that it would have been
even more humongous, exce t that we observers are limited in our ability to dis
tinguish more universes; otherwise, there could be as many as 10^10^10^7 univers
es.</ >
< >To work these numbers out, Linde and Vanchurin looked back to the time shortl
y after the Big Bang, which they view as a quantum rocess that generated lots o
f quantum fluctuations. Then during the eriod of inflation, the universe grew r
a idly and these quantum fluctuations were “frozen” into classical
erturbations in distinct regions. Today, each of these regions could be a differ
ent universe, having its own distinct laws of low energy hysics.</ >
< >By analyzing the mechanism (called “slow roll inflation”) that in
itially generated the quantum fluctuations, the scientists could estimate the nu
mber of resulting universes at 10^10^10^7 (a number which is de endent on the mo
del they used). However, this number is limited by other factors, s ecifically b
y the limits of the human brain. Since the total amount of information that one
individual can absorb in a lifetime is about 10^16 bits, which is equivalent to
10^10^16 configurations, this means that a human brain couldn’t distinguis
h more than 10^10^16 universes.</ >
< >Requiring that the human brain must be able to count the number of arallel u
niverses may seem ina ro riate, if not arrogant, but Linde and Vanchurin ex lai
n that dealing with the quantum world is different than our everyday lives in wh
ich quantum effects can be safely ignored. A crucial art of their calculation h
ere is an investigation of quantum effects on su ergalactic scales. In this kind
of scenario, the state of the multiverse and observations made by an observer a
re correlated (similar to the Schrodinger cat ex eriment, where the outcome can
be determined only after it is registered by a classical observer).</ >
< >“When we analyze the robability of the existence of a universe of a gi
ven ty e, we should be talking about a consistent air: the universe and an obse
rver who makes the rest of the universe ‘alive’ and the wave functio
n of the rest of the universe time-de endent,” the scientists write.</ >
< >As the scientists ex lain, the calculation of the number of universes is an i
m ortant ste toward an even larger goal: to find the robability of living in a
universe with a articular set of ro erties. What are the chances that we live
in a world in which the laws of hysics are these laws that we currently observ
e? Answering this question requires finding robabilities that de end on knowing
about other universes, among many other challenges.</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;October 10, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/10/10/origin-7-the-sha e-of-things-to-come/#res ond" title="Comm
ent on Origin 7 : The Sha e of Things to&nbs ;Come">Leave a comment</a>
</s an>
f="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/w -admin/ ost. h ? ost=95&am ;actio
n=edit" title="Edit Post">Edit this</a></s an> <div cla
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">

eat.word ress.com/2010/09/04/origin-6-unification/" title="Permanent Link to Ori
gin 6:&nbs ;Unification!">Origin 6:&nbs ;Unification!</a></h2>
< >Im starting work on Origin Part 6: Unificatio
n, where I bring forth the idea that unification of forces naturally occurs in n
ature. There is some evidence of this (“electroweak stars” — unification of the electr
omagnetic force and weak nuclear force inside neutron stars) but Im bringing for
th the idea that ALL the forces are unified inside black holes, and this unifica
tion is what creates the black hole in the first lace– not gravitational colla se
. Going forth with the idea that “Things are more than they seem” theme, Im going to
use that to create a model whereby black holes are resented as the fabric of s
ace-time being “inside out” or reversed, much like quantum loo cosmology redicts
is what ha ened during the big bang. You can see where this is leading to– that b
lack holes contain bubble universes (like ours) that exist in a sea of exotic ma
tter where all the forces are unified.</ >
< >There is a hierarchical fractal order to the universe on many different level
s and and I believe that what we call “natural law” is sim ly an intrinsic ro erty
of the universe– like a basic ro erty of a subatomic article (charge, s in, etc.
) The universe was just a article at some oint and I believe the ro erties fr
om its infancy have been retained and ex ress themselves in varied ways in the r
eality we see around us.</ >
< >Similarly, article universes with different ro erties would result in unive
rses with different “natural laws.”</ >
< >Actually, you can consider life itself a fundamental ro erty of the universe
. Did you know that quantum linkages have been found to exist inside biological
systems, including DNA? It makes me think that life is– literally– universal.<br />
This is another exam le of hierarchical fractal layers: Think of a sea of exotic
matter with small bubbles with s ontaneously decreasing entro y that BANG…. these
would be bubble universes, like the one from which our universe was born. So li
fe would also be like this– s ontaneous areas of order that o u and slowly wind
down (like what our universe itself is doing.) This natural law / ro erty of t
he bubble universe exists from the quantum level all the way u to the largest s
tructures — including life itself. It’s as if we have been branded by the articular
universe we exist in by the very nature of its formation.</ >
< >What about the idea of a universe created within another universe by an advan
ced alien civilization? This idea has been ro osed by some hysicists and cosmo
logists and of course then we have the roblem of where those aliens came from.
In an infinite but self-limited fractal omniverse hierarchy which exists both in
side and outside of s ace-time, of course, you can create a loo whereby cause a
nd effect become one and the same and the creation becomes the creator– thereby so
lving that roblem.</ >
< >Regarding su ersymmetry: Are s articles really se arate higher dimensional ve
rsions of “conventional” articles or could it be that “conventional” articles are actu
ally the art of s articles that we can actually see, because we cant detect the
whole article with our limited ers ective…. sort of like the articles’ “soul?” I e
nvision conventional articles as the art we can see through our “ ee hole” (like
when Saturn’s rings are seen edge on through a telesco e) while the s arti
cle itself re resents the full extent of the same article. In this case, a conv
entional article would merely be a shadow of a s article. Perha s we will be
able to see them with the LHC– which could o en u a whole new avenue into researc
h of that which we cant detect with the conventional senses or at lower energies….
getting us closer to a more fundamental and wideranging view of reality…. both fr
om the reductionist and the wholistic oint of view!</ >
< >There is no initial cosmological singularity. The singularity you s eak of o
riginates from the failing of relativity to ex lain the initial boundary conditi
ons of our universe. Once we find a way to unify quantum mechanics and relativi
ty the singularity roblem will disa ear — not only from the beginning of
the universe, but also from what we call “black holes.” As a matte
r of fact, hysics right now is leaning towards the idea that black holes are th
e birth laces of other universes just like ours did inside a relatively larger
universe.</ >
< >And something did exist before the s ace-time dimensions which we erceive, b
ecause our universe originated as a quantum article inside a cosmic sou of ar
ticles, the existence and destruction of which de ends on the extant hysical la
ws and constants resent inside each universe. Consider it the quantum version
of the laws of evolution and natural selection. Hawkings’ terms for the o
riginal time dimension that existed before the big bang is called “Imagina
ry Time.” Consider imaginary time to be a dimension of time that runs er
endicular to the one of which we are aware. Sort of like the Y-axis of time co
m ared to the X-axis of our time. When this is taken into account, the singular
ity at the big bang disa ears. (It also allows us to gra hically re resent ar
allel timeverses, but that’s beyond the sco e of this ost– see Orig
in 1 and 2 for more details.) A com eting model, called quantum loo cosmology
also resolves the singularity by stating that at extremely small volumes, the de
nsity formula (D=M/V) fails and therefore there is no singularity. As a matter
of fact, at diameters below 10 lanck lengths, density actually goes down, even
if you ack more mass into a given volume — thus the idea of baby universe
s inside black holes. When thinking about this, I thought it reasonable to assu
me that one of the reasons that black holes resent themselves as singularities
is because all the forces are unified just inside their boundaries. This makes
sense when you think about it, because we already have electroweak stars which u
nify the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces and resenting black holes as t
he final result of com act force unification rather than sim le gravitational co
lla se is also a gra hic way to ex lain what ha ens when the matter inside is c
rushed to a ul and converted into exotic matter that no longer follows the law
s of our universe. Also, force unification inside black holes would satisfy the
initial boundary conditions that led to the formation of our own universe and s
hould thus also be a rerequisite to the creation of other universes and the bre
akdown of relativity on that scale– because it doesnt allow for unificatio
n (something which Einstein s ent the rest of his life in a futile ursuit of at
tem ting to achieve — along with a similarly futile ursuit of trying to d
is rove quantum mechanics. Verification of this should be ossible at the LHC
when it is u and running at full ca acity– as a matter of fact, hysicist
s have toyed with the idea of creating designer baby universes (most notably And
rei Linde) that would ex and into their own dimensions and curve into themselves
. This is where the idea of a universe being designed by an intelligent being w
ith hysical laws and constants of his/her/its/their choosing (as their signatur
e) originated from. What most eo le dont know is that Einstein was actually wo
rking on a theory of multi le dimensions very similar to string theory just rio
r to his death.) According to QLC, instead of a singularity, the universe doesn
t bang at all, instead it goes “inside out” at each oint of a aren
t origin and thus is both infinite and self-limited. Like a Mobius stri . Dime
nsions are in loo s. Travel far enough in one direction and you end u back at
your starting oint. The funny thing is that relativity already allows for thi
s close to the outer boundaries of black holes in the form of closed timelike cu
rves (CTCs), which is time loo ing back in on itself. As the universe ex ands,
the size of the loo s would ex and also. As a matter of fact, the whole univers
e would be one large loo that goes back to the beginning each time. The loo s
would have bridges or tunnels between them (seen from the “surface”
of the stri as black holes or worm holes) inside which the forces are unified a
nd where baby universes are formed which exchange matter and energy with the ar
ent universe. With time, as the universe ex ands, the bridges would distend and
eventually the baby universe would be cut off from its arent, much like a biol
ogical baby gets cut off from the mother’s lacenta, even as new connectio
ns were formed, both between the arent and new baby universes, and also between
the babies and the baby universes would give birth to their own. Since the fra
ctal hierarchy is reserved, this loo like structure would also exist on the omn
iverse level, where the universes of each megaverse would be connected like s ok
es on a wheel, with new connections being develo ed even as old ones are broken,
and the free flow of matter and energy kee ing everything in balance. The ques
tion of the beginning of the omniverse would have no real answer as the cosmic l
oo with connecting bridges ensures that all moments in time exist simultaneousl
y so there is no beginning or end– just like with our own universe! Causa
lity doesnt exist on this fundamental level– just like it doesnt exist at
the quantum level– and neither does the s eed of light limit, which is mor
e of a natural boundary condition meant to se arate the universes (but which can
be gated with wormholes to kee the whole system in balance– gravity bein
g the agent of entro y which kee s everything flowing and kee s the omniverse in
dynamic equilibrium.)</ >
< >As far as s ace and time giving way to something more basic at the big bang a
nd rior, this is also used as a way to ex lain quantum mechanics nonlocality r
o erties like su er osition (two articles being in exactly the same lace at th
e same time), tele ortation, tunneling, entanglement etc. Since the universe wa
s once a quantum article, it once behaved according to the same rules (and migh
t still, de ending on ers ective.) On the quantum scale, s ace and time dont e
xist as we see them on the macrosco ic scale, they give way to more fundamental
nonlocal ro erties which make the quantum effects (“s ooky action at a di
stance”) ossible.</ >
< >I like many of Penrose’s ideas as well (s ecifically quantum theories o
f consciousness– but even that has given way to a more likely David Bohm i
nter retation.) See Origin 4: Consciousness for more details.</ >
< >BTW, in the above ost, I havent even mentioned the most fascinating as ect o
f cosmology– the fact that the hologra hic rinci le seems to hold true &#
8212; that our universe can actually be described in D-1 dimensions (D= the 3 s
atial dimensions in our case) and the fact that the hologra hic rinci le can be
used to test the multi le universe theory, which should exist as (for lack of a
better term) shadows in the background of the cosmic background radiation (CMB)
which contains the hologra hic information of our universe– just like our
universe’s black holes (other universes) contain all their information at
the hologra hic boundary (another sign of fractalization.) Such testing is alr
eady underway.</ >
< >Being hologra hic information on the surface of a black hole / quantum artic
le means the third s atial dimension is merely an illusory effect created by gra
vity as it curves s ace-time into a loo (a megaverse sized CTC) by acting on th
e original dimensions of hy ers ace and imaginary time. And the reason why hot
ons of light dont ex erience the assage of time as they travel at light s eed i
s because they exist on the luxon wall– the event horizon of the black hol
e, the outer boundary of s ace-time itself, where it meets hy ers ace and imagin
ary time!</ >
< >Gravity is the entro ic force that kee s the omniverse in balance by redistri
buting matter and energy via different sized black hole / worm hole tunnels&#821
1; dark energy or quintessence being the result– as one megaverse ex ands
another contracts and the balance is reserved.</ >
< >The megaverse includes all the arallel timeverses of a given universe, each
with the same hysical laws and constants. All the megaverses of different laws
and constants make u the omniverse. But the com onent universes/timeverses of
each megaverse all have the same hysical laws and constants and therefore ex a
nd and contract together. The differences between them (the arallel timelines)
are due to lack of causality at the fundamental level (because all time and all
outcomes exist simultaneously and there is no s eed of light limit at the quant
um level to com artmentalize reality)– the causality we see on the macrosc
o ic scale (as well as s ace-time and the uncertainty rinci le) is merely an av
eraging or smoothing out of more elementary factors that exist at the sub lanck
level and inside black holes (as well as the erce tion of a single universe, wh
ich was a limitation of Relativity, which the quantum universe has eradicated)&#
8211; which is the scale of the omniverse [at which all universes, megaverses, e
tc can be seen as quantum articles bubbling in a sea of ZPE (the redistribution
of which causes some megaverses to ex and while others contract, thus reservin
g the cosmic balance and resulting in cyclic big bangs, at which oint all the
arallel timeverses of a s ecific megaverse become one, as the event horizon se a
rating them from each other and the bulk tem orarily colla ses, thus causing the
cyclic "Big Bang" rebound), where the forces are all united and the original di
mensions of hy ers ace, imaginary time and gravity hold sway-- thus, the real re
ason why black holes curve s ace-time, cause CTCs and have such intense gravitat
ion-- as they are ta ing into its source.] The reason why the uncertainty rin
ci le loses its effect at the quantum level is that the omniverse at that scale
is urely mathematical, thus removing the need to be “measured”&#821
1; it behaves according to sim le mathematical constructs and formulae, which gi
ve rise to all the structures we see around us (atoms, solar systems, star clust
ers, galaxies, etc) in a fractal hierarchy. The reason the fractal hierarchy ex
ists is that the four dimensional universe we erceive is actually only two dime
nsional (hy ers ace lus imaginary time) on the smallest of scales (thus the mat
hematics of quantum gravity describe it erfectly, without need for the kind of
measurement a com lex 4D s ace-time requires), which in dualistic terms, laces
us inside a black hole inside a larger universe with the CMB and light on the ho
logra hic boundary and gravity creating the erce tion of the other dimensions a
s it curves s ace-time into a closed loo . To sum u , our four dimensions (thre
e s atial lus one tem oral) reduce to three (two dimensional lus one tem oral)
at the lanck scale, as gravity is shown to create the third s atial dimension
on our scale, and in the sub lanckian realm, the number of dimensions is further
reduced to 2 (hy ers ace and imaginary time) as our familiar s ace-time is re l
aced by “no s ace” and “all time” and causality, the s e
ed of light limit and the uncertainty and exclusionary rinci les disa ear as t
heir boundaries are crossed (similar to crossing a microwormhole embedded in qua
ntum foam) and the quantum ro erties of su er osition, entanglement, tele ortat
ion and tunneling arise. Furthermore, since our dimensions disa ear, gravity b
ecomes as strong as the other forces and then they all unify on that scale as gr
avity becomes a strong re ulsive force (like dark energy) on that scale and crea
tes the Big Bounce as the event horizons se arating the arallel timeverses coll
a se and the universe cyclically big bangs. This is best re resented by quantum
loo cosmology, which shows that just as gravity becomes incredibly intense (as
D=M/V reaches its maximum) at 10 lanck lengths, gravity shuts off and reverses
and the density goes down. This re resents the ingredients needed to create tr
aversable black hole worm hole conduits and what causes the big bang in the firs
t lace! The funny thing is, because of the dualistic nature of reality, our un
iverse/megaverse still is just a quantum article inside a black hole inside a l
arger universe and still obeys quantum ro erties like the ones Ive mentioned ab
ove. BTW the larger universe would be a quantum article inside a black hole in
side another universe and so on, until we get back to our own– an infinite
and yet closed loo of universes! More fractal duality! On the macrosco ic sc
ale, the com lex inter lay of different factors and s ontaneous symmetry breakin
g result in the need for measurement– and thus the uncertainty rinci le a
rises. As a matter of fact, we can view the uncertainty rinci le and the exclu
sionary rinci le both forming the boundary between relativity’s smooth an
d continuous s ace-time and quantum mechanics’ discrete lanck and sub lan
ck sized ackets of s ace-time, much as we view the duality of light as being bo
th a wave (smooth and continuous) and article (discrete.) Yet another exam le
of the duality of fractal hierarchy! And just like wormhole tunnels can break t
hrough the luxon wall, so can the wall of the uncertainty rinci le and the excl
usionary rinci le be broken on higher scales using the ro erty of su erconduct
ivity– which is why string theory has been shown to have a lications in d
efining the ro erties of su erconductive materials. Perha s su erconductivity
was a fundamental ro erty of the article universe. The quantum critical state
(visualize this as the uncertainty and exclusionary rinci le’s version o
f the luxon wall since su erconductive materials meet with no resistance, thus m
easurement does not affect outcome and two electrons can be in the same lace at
the same time or at two different laces at the same time– su er osition!
) is the ti ing oint, beyond which electromagnetism becomes su erconductive, m
uch like 10 lanck lengths is the ti ing oint beyond which gravity becomes re
ulsive and starts behaving like dark energy. If we can achieve su erconductivit
y at room tem eratures, this re resents added ho e for constructing wormhole tun
nels also, as both re resent unifications of the nanosco ic scale of quantum mec
hanics and the macrosco ic scale of relativity (and both behave according to the
same laws of electromagnetism and gravity regarding distribution of charge acro
ss a single dimension, not area– artial unification of forces and dimensi
ons right there!) This re resents just one of many ractical a lications of so
mething we all take for granted, magnetism (quantum com uting is another), in a
way that can be ex lained in terms of the theory of everything we have all been
searching for, in a way that could benefit all of human society in the form of r
oom tem erature su erconductivity! The next big lea in technological advance!
Perha s the unification already exists in the form of dark energy (ZPE), which
could be the macrosco ic version of the same re ulsive force that gravity is on
the quantum scale….. so the same force can both attract and re el and is s
cale variant, the same way the dimensions and forces are! Yet another duality e
xists between quantum entanglement, string theory and black holes, as theyve bee
n shown to behave according to the same rules– which is yet more roof tha
t our universe might be a quantum article that is entangled within itself insid
e a black hole of a larger universe (and that these entanglements take the form
of black hole worm hole tunnels that intraconnect the universe on many different
scales, thus solving both the horizon and the flatness roblems– not only
within, but without also– with arallel timeverses and other megaverses&#
8211; as I will illustrate below.) Thus the dual fractal hierarchy of the quant
um article omniverse is born!</ >
< >Black holes have two horizons, the outer event horizon and the inner cauchy h
orizon….. one side contains closed s ace-like geodesics and the other side
has closed time like geodesics. Usually the Cauchy Horizon would be considered
unstable, but due to the boosting effects of ZPE and the Casimir Effect, it ret
ains stability. The roblem is that this results in the negation of cosmic cens
orshi – which is what resulted in Hawking losing a bet back in 1997.</ >
< >In 1991, John Preskill and Ki Thorne bet against Ste hen Hawking that the hy
othesis was false. Hawking conceded the bet in 1997, due to the discovery of th
e s ecial situations just mentioned, which he characterized as “technicali
ties”. Hawking later reformulated the bet to exclude those technicalities.
The revised bet is still o en, the rize being “clothing to cover the win
ner’s nakedness”</ >
< >The fact that the cosmic censorshi hy othesis (the idea that s ace-time &#82
20;hides” singularities so they cant be seen by the outside observer) has
been roven invalid in some circumstances is why its ossible that causality can
be broken on the most fundamental level. The fact that the cauchy horizon can
be stable inside black holes with the hel of ZPE (aka matter/energy created out
of nothing) has caused some hysicists to theorize that the “second&#8221
; horizon might form the outer boundary of a universe that exists inside the bla
ck hole (the ZPE inside would have the effect of causing the universe to bang cy
clically and the cauchy horizon would make it curve into itself), because the ho
rizon would have the effect of bending (or lensing) s ace-time around it and se
arating the dimensions that exist outside from the ones that exist within. To g
ive an exam le, let’s say we were talking about a black hole in our own un
iverse, you’d have the normal 3+1 dimensions on the outside, the 2+1 dimen
sions of the hologra hic rinci le on the event horizon, but the basic 1+1 dimen
sion (hy ers ace lus imaginary time) between the event horizon and the cauchy h
orizon, and the dimensions of the “innerverse” inside the Cauchy Hor
izon. The really ironic thing is, it is the gravity inside the black hole which
causes not only the cyclic big bangs but also the develo ment of extra dimension
s! If we make that allowance (1+1 dimensions inside a black hole), gravity beco
mes renormalizable and easily unified with the other forces (via quantum gravity
)…. which is erha s why the charge of a black hole can be described by a
single s atial dimension rather than by area. And while gravity and s in of the
black hole might determine the nature of the dimensions of the innerverse, the
electromagnetic charge might determine whether or not the innerverse is com osed
of matter or antimatter. Another reason why the black hole’s charge can
be described by a single dimension (and the reason why relativity and quantum me
chanics both have roblems describing black holes and why the forces should be u
nified inside) is that the black hole is basically a macrosco ic quantum articl
e — that is, it behaves like a quantum article but in the macrosco ic ver
se of relativity — therefore you need the unification of BOTH to understan
d it. And this is also why the uncertainty and exclusionary rinci les wont hol
d inside the event horizon. As a matter of fact, a macrosco ic quantum article
like a black hole would be the erfect analogy to room tem erature su erconduct
ors– because both are from the quantum world, but exist in the macrosco ic
world of relativity and can be described using some of the same rinci les via
string theory’s gauge gravity duality, awaiting a final theory of everythi
ng to be fully understood. This is just another exam le of the fractal nature o
f our omniverse!</ >
< >The region beyond the Cauchy horizon has several sur rising features. The r c
oordinate again behaves like a s atial coordinate and can vary freely. The inter
ior region has a reflection symmetry, so that a (future-directed time-like) curv
e may continue along a symmetric ath, which continues through a second Cauchy h
orizon, through a second event horizon, and out into a new exterior region which
is isometric to the original exterior region of the Kerr solution. The curve co
uld then esca e to infinity in the new region or enter the future event horizon
of the new exterior region and re eat the rocess. This second exterior is somet
imes thought of as another universe. On the other hand, in the Kerr solution, th
e singularity is a ring, and the curve may ass through the center of this ring.
The region beyond ermits closed, time-like curves. Since the trajectory of obs
ervers and articles in general relativity are described by time-like curves, it
is ossible for observers in this region to return to their ast.</ >
< >Earlier I had mentioned arallel timeverses. Since universes are fractal in
nature and the size of the dimensions de ends on the scale being used, they are
subject to quantum effects. The same way that multi le universes can be quantum
ly entangled, I believe that arallel timeverses (or Layer 1 multiverses) are qu
antumly su er ositioned on to of the arent rotoverse. In reality, all time e
xists at every moment (something Newton and Einstein also intuited) and since al
l time exists at every moment at a very fundamental level, causality doesnt need
to exist on that level and is just a function of the limits of human erce tion
not to be able to rocess the wholeness of All Time. The s eed of light com ar
tmentalizes these arallel timeverses and we need Layer 1 (stellar) wormholes to
tunnel through the luxon wall to travel between them…. but one way to thi
nk about it is that all these arallel timeverses are merely different com artme
nts of the same universe and only a ear to be different universes because the l
uxon wall is the barrier between them (light exists on the border of all the ar
allel universes, thus seamlessly traveling between them, as ex lained by the dou
ble slit ex eriment and its dual nature)– and this makes the idea of all t
ime existing at every moment and olycausality (including retro and reverse caus
ality) more clear and es ecially a arent at the basic quantum level where local
ity and causality dont exist because the dimensions of s ace and time break down
and Pauli’s Exclusionary Princi le no longer a lies. Consider that an a
lien scientist who was observing our universe from the outside of our arallel m
ultiverse (as a su ermassive black hole) would only see ONE universe (if any at
all) — because the arallel timeverses are all art of the same universe,
they are just su er ositioned together and our s eed of light barrier would not
be a barrier to an observer outside of the universe and so he/she/it would not
erceive single moments of time like we do (of our tem oral dimension, at any rat
e.) That observer would only see a single quantum article, the quantum su er o
sition of all the arallel timeverses, and the combined quantum states of all of
them…. all the asts, resents and futures, the whole s ectrum rather tha
n just one small segment– which maybe is what we see when we witness quant
um wave colla se (while we can observe only one energy level of our universe bec
ause the s eed of light barrier com artmentalizes it, we can only see one energy
level of a universe outside our arallel multiverse because we see the sum tota
l of all the energy levels as one and the same would a ly, in reverse, to someo
ne on the outside looking in) — which shows just how fractally circular th
e omniverse really is! Viewed this way, all the big bangs of the cyclic univers
e can be seen as one big bang that is one quantum state of the universe and that
always exists, along with all the quantum states that exist in between each &#8
220;bang.” Instead of wave colla se what’s really going on is that
all causes and all effects are actually occuring simultaneously– which is
why quantum effects seem so weird, since macrosco ic reality (or our erce tion
of it) is just an averaging out of everything (and I mean that literally) that o
ccurs at the quantum level. Where fractal hierarchy comes in is when we conside
r the fact that what is quantum to us is macrosco ic to a lower order megaverse
which is nested within ours and what we consider macrosco ic is quantum to a hig
her level megaverse in which ours is nested. What causes arallel timeverse for
mation? S ontaneous symmetry breaking! While we could only see the current sta
te of the CMB on our hologra hic boundary, on the outside they would see it com
letely– ast, resent and future all rolled into one at the hologra hic bo
undary. Of course this would also a ly if we were viewing a universe outside o
f our arallel multiverse– like inside a su ermassive black hole or one cr
eated in a lab su ercollider, for instance. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Prin
ci le will break down at this level (as ex eriments are already starting to indi
cate) as a more fundamental structure (higher order quantum function) takes over
. As Ive already ex lained in Origin 1, I view single stellar black holes as o
rtals to the different com artments of our arallel multiverse (mini black holes
would connect intrauniverse), while I feel that su ermassive black holes are th
e gateways to outside arallel multiverses, or other megaverses (universes with
different hysical laws, constants and/or dimensions) and that micro black holes
embedded within quantum foam can ex lain the Casimir Effect, the quantum ro er
ties of entanglement, tunneling, tele ortation and su er osition and also some o
f the s ecial effects of quantum consciousness– including deja vu, remoni
tion, recognition and ESP — through multidimensional micro worm hole tunn
eling embedded within the quantum foam of our consciousness. Mini black holes w
ould connect our universe with our antiverse (ex lained further in Origin 1 and
2.) In the theory of “all time” my view of antiverses com lementing
every arallel timeverse remains unchanged, as does the Law of Com lementary Di
mensions, with the universe/antiverse cou let being generated thru air roducti
on. This cou let arises in Kerr Black Holes, as they have no charge, therefore
a matter / antimatter cou let is required to balance the energy equation. The b
lack hole end contains the matter universe while the white hole end contains the
antimatter universe (refer to the earlier Origins to see how this would work an
d to see the geometric arrangement of universe/antiverse/mirrorverse– just
adjust to reflect “all time,” therefore all times and outcomes occu
r simultaneously, se arated from their matter counter arts by a luxon wall. As
always gravity curves the original 1+1 dimensions in different ways to create di
fferent dimensioned universes.) Yet another exam le of fractal wholeness!</ >
< >I think one of the great tragedies in modern times is s ecialization– eo le co
ncentrating so hard in one area that they dont see how it connects to other disc
i lines. I look u to olymaths and renaissance eo le, as I think they “got it” as
far as being able to see the connections that underlie all of reality. I think i
t’s all a matter of ers ective– the universe exists in many many layers– we are on th
e inside in some, on the outside in others– and that results in vastly different
erce tions of how reality works. The reason we dont see the changes ha ening wh
en we are on the outside is because (I believe) different dimensional ers ectiv
es– different dimensions of s ace and time. And when we’re on the inside we lack the
wholistic, overall ers ective of what causes our environment to be the way it
is. Thus the differences between quantum mechanics and relativity and the nonloc
ality roblems we face when changing ers ectives. However, true unity will mean
that all dimensions are reflections of a small basic set of dimensions– and our 3
dimensions of s ace and 1 of time wont rove to be any more fundamental than th
e roton and neutron are (which are made of three quarks each.)</ >
< >Its just been shown that solar flares and cycles actually influence the half
lives of radioactive isoto es. It’s funny that we seek to find the theory that uni
fies everything; erha s unification already exists around us, but we just kee
missing it.</ >
< >I outlined a thought that life is a reflection of one of the basic ro erties
of our universe. I meant to also add that I believe consciousness goes art and
arcel with that– because consciousness can be ex lained on the quantum level als
o. Everything is interlinked in a harmonious way to create the wondrously com le
x and intricate reality all around us and yet the basis for it is marvelously si
m le and elegant. The Sloan Digital Sky Survey has shown that our universe has a
fractal hierarchy to it, and I believe that fractal nature exists on every leve
l– it shows how sim le elegance can be arranged to create a arent com lexity and
variety when influenced by various forces and fields.</ >
< >Not only that, but natural selection has been roven to exist on the quantum
level also….. and bubble theories of the universe state that natural selection may
be how certain bubbles with articular sets of hysical laws and constants ex a
nd while others do not.</ >
< >DNA not only forms its linkages through the electromagnetic force– but it’s also
been shown that quantum interactions such as tunneling and su er osition create
its ro erties also. Quantum mechanics has also been linked to such biochemical
rocesses as hotosynthesis and neurological rocesses such as how birds navigat
e during migration.</ >
< >I dont think you can just se arate and box u the different forces — theyre all
interrelated and function as a whole. You can see the connections when you anal
yze the whole system and dont se arate it into “chemical” “biological” “ hysical” or by wha
forces they interact with “weak” “strong” “EM” “gravity”!</ >
< >We’ll never have the entire uzzle figured out, but we’ll be able to add more and
more ieces so that we get a better idea of the whole icture. Of course the mo
re ieces we add, the more we’ll realize the icture is larger than what we origin
ally thought (has more layers to it)– which will kee us from ever solving it enti
rely, but will add the to fun of the whole rocess. After all, if you figure som
ething out com letely (if that were even ossible) then it loses its ur ose and
meaning….</ >
< >I find this really intriguing and the recise values and relative strengths o
f all the forces being withing a strictly defined range is what makes our univer
se what it is. Even a small deviation would have resulted in something com letel
y different– a universe in which life might not be ossible at all. As a matter of
fact, what we call constants, might have varied from one end of the universe to
the other and even changed with time. This is why I like the bubble universe i
dea, because if youre not a fan of fine tuning or intelligent design, the existe
nce of a multitude of universes with their own hysical laws as er Tegmark, is
the way to go. This is where natural selection also comes in, like at the quantu
m level, deciding which outcomes would result in a “big bang” universe and which wou
ld result in a “big oof” that would be just a virtual article disa earing back in
to the sea of exotic matter.</ >
< >Also, unification of forces that already exists in nature, such as electrowea
k stars or ossibly, black holes, rovide us keys as to what the universe was li
ke in its extreme infancy, when the forces had not yet reci itated out of their
“solution.” As a matter of fact, unification may be much closer than we think as I
recently read a research article that ex lains su erconductivity using the same
hysics as is used to ex lain black holes. This might even result in the first *
gas * tangible victory for string theory.</ >
< >The ins iration for Origin 6</ >
< >Nikodem Po lawski’s Cosmology with Torsion<br />
arxiv.org/abs/1007.0587</ >
< >Baby Universe Creation by Black Holes confirmed theoretically<br />
Why Our Universe Must Have Been Born Inside a Black Hole</ >
< >Posted: 12 Jul 2010 09:10 PM PDT</ >
< >A small change to the theory of gravity im lies that our universe inherited i
ts arrow of time from the black hole in which it was born.</ >
< >“Accordingly, our own Universe may be the interior of a black hole existing in
another universe.” So concludes Nikodem Po lawski at Indiana University in a remar
kable a er about the nature of s ace and the origin of time.</ >
< >The idea that new universes can be created inside black holes and that our ow
n may have originated in this way has been the raw fodder of science fiction for
many years. But a ro er scientific derivation of the notion has never emerged.
</ >
< >Today Po lawski rovides such a derivation. He says the idea that black holes
are the cosmic mothers of new universes is a natural consequence of a sim le ne
w assum tion about the nature of s acetime.</ >
< >Po lawski oints out that the standard derivation of general relativity takes
no account of the intrinsic momentum of s in half articles. However there is a
nother version of the theory, called the Einstein-Cartan-Kibble-Sciama theory of
gravity, which does.</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;Se tember 4, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/09/04/origin-6-unification/#res ond" title="Comment on Origin 6:
&nbs ;Unification!">Leave a comment</a>
</s an>
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">

eat.word ress.com/2010/04/29/a-short-introduction-to-my-mind-body-world-universe
-series/" title="Permanent Link to Origin 5: A Cosmic Casimir&nbs ;Effect">Origi
n 5: A Cosmic Casimir&nbs ;Effect</a></h2>
< >This series com rises four entries….. Conscious
ness, Love, Origin 1 and Origin 2– The Quest for Proof. I will ex and the series a
s needed and as more research is done and evidence comes in. Im confident of my
osition on this, as both science and s irituality seem to be on my side as of n
ow. Stay Tuned!</ >
< >I find that in our attem ts to reduce everything to fundamental arts we lose
the forest for the trees, so to ty e. Whether we’re talking about the mind-body i
nteraction of a single erson or the whole structure of the cosmos, we’re learning
that, u on closer examination, the forces at work which create the ta estry we
see as reality have such abstract qualities that reduction only reveals a single
facet of their ro erties– that to understand them more fully, we have to look at
the big icture and see how everything is connected to each other and how inter
actions can occur between articles and eo le that are a vast distance a art. W
e learn that s ace is nonlocal and that time is just an invention of erce tion.
And in so doing, not only do we learn a lot about the universe, we learn a lot
about ourselves.</ >
< >Ive recently been working with a selfcreated model where ZPE concentrations t
hroughout the multiverse are determined by whether a given universe is ex anding
or contracting. As a universe ex ands, it gains ZPE (“dark energy”), thus maintaini
ng a similar ZPE density, even though it is ex anding (thus solving a major “unsol
ved” roblem in hysics)…. and a universe which is contracting is actually losing ZP
E to the bulk because as a universe ages, more massive stars turn into black hol
es and suck ZPE out of the universe at a faster rate than the rate at which it i
s being ulled in through worm holes (as it starts to lose its dark energy, gain
ing entro y and “coming back em ty” but still maintaining a similar ZPE density sinc
e its volume is decreasing) which then is gained by ex anding universes through
a rocess that is analogous to “osmosis” through black hole worm hole conduits on va
rious scales (but es ecially through quantum foam as the Casimir Effect.) After
all the dark energy is gone, the black holes slowly eva orate, but not before th
eir gravitation sets the universe on the ath to colla se and lays the groundwor
k for the next big bang cycle. Averaging out the various universes in the multiv
erse that are in different stages of ex ansion or colla se creates a consistent
cosmological constant throughout the multiverse. Thus the density fluctuations o
f ZPE throughout the multiverse (in addition to black hole worm hole conduits) n
ot only determine the rate and direction of net ZPE transfer between different u
niverses, they also determine which universes ex and and which contract through
a mutual feedback rocess and maintain an overall balance in the multiverse, thu
s nothing is created or destroyed and Conservation Laws are maintained.</ >
< >I will robably start writing another a er on this when I’ve worked a bit more
with this model.</ >
< >Physics hates singularities and one of the roblems with Relativity is the fa
ct that it creates singularities, not only inside black holes, but also at the l
evel of the big bang. As a matter of fact, the mere fact that black holes have t
he “singularity” in common with the big bang leads one to the natural conclusion tha
t the big bang actually occured inside a black hole– and thus our universe itself
is inside a black hole inside, erha s, an even larger universe. I wrote about t
his a while back, and towards the end of A ril, I saw a a er ublished about th
is very ossibility, by a hysicist from Indiana University. Any theory of every
thing will have to iron out the singularity issue as well as combining quantum
hysics, gravity and relativity under one umbrella.</ >
< >One of the leading frameworks for a theory of everything is loo quantum grav
ity, in which the basic formula for density (mass/volume) breaks down under 10
lanck lengths and thus avoids the singularity issue. As a matter of fact, as you
get closer and closer to infinitesimal volume– density goes down to near zero! Wh
y does this ha en in LQG and not in Relativity? Because one of the mistakes Ein
stein made was looking at s ace-time as a continuum, when as a matter of fact, i
t’s made of discrete articles at the Planck scale– in other words, as you get close
r and closer to lanck scale size, the “holes” between the articles of s ace-time g
et larger and larger in ro ortion and thus the total density of the suedo-sing
ularity goes down. Eventually, nothing is left but the hole– thus density goes dow
n to zero!</ >
< >All of this is interconnected and this mere issue of density going down to ze
ro is what can make our universe exist inside a black hole. Not only that, it’s wh
at could make black hole – worm hole travel ossible, since journeying through a b
lack hole with near zero density in the center (as o osed to infinite density a
nd unbearable gravity) is really im ossible. But there’s a lot more.</ >
< >The above is one of the reasons why there is a great dis arity between quantu
m mechanics and relativity. But there are others. One of them is that s ace-time
itself disa ears at the quantum level. Locality itself breaks down! See my art
icle in the science forum about quantum tele ortation and the new record distanc
e of 10 miles? I think that’s just the ti of the ice berg. At the quantum level,
there is no “s eed of light barrier” and no conce t of “here” and “there”– as every art of
e universe is adjacent to every other art (since the origin of the universe its
elf was as a single article) and this is why quantum tele ortation, su er ositi
on and tunneling can occur. Quantum effects (according to some articles I’ve read)
travel as much as 10,000x times the s eed of light– and for this to ha en, not o
nly must s ace itself break down at that level, but time must also break down. T
his makes sense when one considers the fact that s ace and time are just two sid
es of the same coin and to go faster than light, you have to break down the conc
e t of time as well as s ace. Brian Greene makes just this sort of ro osal when
he talks about how s ace-time is just an artifact of some more fundamental effe
ct of the quantum level and by extension, so is relativity. This occurs on the s
ub lanck level where s ace is re laced with hy ers ace and time with imaginary t
ime (ex lained further below) and these are the fundamental dimensions of the bu
lk, the background fabric of the omniverse and the tem late u on which s ace-tim
e (and all higher dimensions) are built. It’s also the source of the grea
t ultimate duality of the omniverse– zero oint energy and gravity (which
is why gravity is so strong in black holes)– which balance each other out
on the ultimate level and kee the whole system from either ex anding into obliv
ion or colla sing in u on itself like its individual island universes do. And S
te hen Hawking said recently that the only way for FTL or time travel to be oss
ible is if we can take quantum effects and somehow make them manifest at our lev
el– at the macrosco ic level.</ >
< >Well, if we combine the ideas of Hawking and Greene, with the ideas resented
in a recent a er by that hysicist from Indiana University we come u with som
e interesting ideas. What if our universe is a mere article inside a black hole
inside a larger universe? Then it’s ossible that what we call “macrosco ic” on our s
cale is actually sub lanck on the scale of that larger universe– in other words– our
whole universe would be nothing more than a quantum article inside that black
hole inside that larger universe– and we would be subject to quantum mechanics not
relativity if we could tunnel from one oint in our universe, through the black
hole and back into another oint in our universe (or even into the larger unive
rse– or some other universe entirely!) This would also ex lain the large scale str
uctures of our universe– galaxies, su erclusters, su ervoids, etc, as being a func
tion of quantum effects that the early universe was subject to. Thus quantum eff
ects = macrosco ic effects on a higher level. As a matter of fact, inflation of
the universe at many times light s eed during its early history was itself res o
nsible for the creation of matter and energy in the universe from the transition
ing of the universe from a higher to a lower energy state through the actions of
the inflaton scalar field as it transitions to its lowest energy state. Thus co
nservation laws are maintained throughout the whole system. Of course, all this
necessitates the existence of the multiverse– or omniverse as I ut it (to allow f
or universes of different hysical laws, so that we dont have to invoke the anth
ro ic rinci le– that our universe is “s ecial” in some way) to reserve causality and
to allow for the fact that all time– ast, resent and future– exist at every momen
t– and thus ( aradoxically enough!) time does not exist (at least as we know it.)
Poking a hole through our universe and into this larger universe (or black hole)
and back into another oint in our own universe or into another universe at low
enough energies to be manageable by our technology at some future state of deve
lo ment would be analogous to su erconductivity (or fusion) at near room tem .</
>
< >The idea of our universe being a mere article is an interesting one and remi
nds me of something which cosmologist Andrei Linde said (author of Chaotic Infla
tion theory) concerning the idea that, inside the new Hadron Collider, we might
actually be roducing our own microuniverses. The fact that our universe may hav
e itself been generated inside that larger universe by an intelligent entity or
entities is a ossibility in the same sense. To us, the universe would seem to b
e ex anding, however, for some hy othetical being inside that larger universe, s
ince our s ace-time curves in u on itself, no change would be noted. How would t
his hy othetical being communicate its existence to us? Perha s in the very valu
es of the hysical constants that we find so uzzling– like i, the natural logari
thm base e, the al ha fine structure constant, etc. These numbers, which seem so
random and meaningless on one hand and yet define all of reality as we know it
on another hand might be the hint that being or beings unknown are giving us to
be aware of their existence. Perha s one day we could do the same inside an arti
ficially constructed universe of our own making and design….</ >
< >The ultimate fate of the universe would also de end on conditions that existe
d at its ince tion– at the big bang. Our universe exists inside a false vacuum tha
t could tunnel into a true vacuum at any time– but doesnt. (Although there is conc
ern that construction of bigger and more owerful su ercolliders could get us th
ere by the year 2150 or so, in which case– if our universe ever did tunnel to a tr
ue vacuum, it would change the fundamental nature of the universe, by altering l
aws of hysics and make life as we know it not ossible– a very s eculative and no
ncheery thought ) Where loo quantum gravity and string theory come together and
attem t to ex lain the low value of the cosmological constant is on this level– w
here the ex onentially ex anding universe ex ands so fast (thanks to dark energy
) that bubbles of lower energy vacuum formed during the inflationary hase of th
e universe (when it was ex anding at much faster than light s eeds) never collid
e and thus the universe would never tunnel to a lower energy vacuum and the bubb
les would eventually dissi ate. According to the cyclic model of the universe, t
he resence of dark energy in our universe would not only ex and the universe, b
ut at some oint in the distant future the inter lay of dark energy and gravity
would halt the ex ansion and allow it to come back and colla se back on itself o
nce again (as a natural result of increasing entro y.) This would mean that the
big bang wasnt our universe’s only big bang, but just one of many in a long series–
something which string theory and loo quantum gravity both seem to be agreeing
u on. If this is the case, then at each big bang, the “walls” of the universe would
turn inside out as the universe ex anded in an o osite direction and the existe
nce of time inde endent of our universe (since our version of time actually bega
n with the most recent big bang) would be called imaginary time (imaginary in th
e same sense as imaginary numbers.) This is another conce t which o ens u the i
dea of the multiverse, because if you imagine time existing on two axes, aralle
l time universes would be arallel lines lotted on a gra h with both axes. Thes
e arallel time universes would all have the same hysical laws and would thus b
e art of the same multiverse. Where the omniverse comes in is when you have dif
ferent universes with different false energy values, which would bubble u as a
natural result of s ace-time interactions with quantum effects (a natural extens
ion of what we call the Casimir effect– but these virtual articles would be their
own universes), each with its own laws of hysics and, in a rocess akin to nat
ural selection, these laws would determine the rate at which each of these bubbl
e universes would decay and s awn child universes with lower energy states and t
he survivability of these universes would de end u on the various quantum com on
ents that lie therein. As a matter of fact, the existence of our universe inside
a black hole inside a larger universe can be ex lained in this way– a virtual ar
ticle that survived the virtual hase and got sucked into a black hole inside th
at larger universe (or, heh, erha s intentionally laced in an artificial one.)
Child universes like ours could exist in a similar fashion inside black holes i
nside our own universe. The structure of these other universes (and their histor
y and ultimate fate– early colla se, ermanent ex ansion or oscillation– as well as
the ossible existence or ty es of life– and the s atial and time scales and dimen
sions it exists within) might be very different from ours, de ending on their h
ysical laws, when and if inflation occured as a result of the breakdown of the i
nflaton scalar field, as well as quantum fluctuations in the early history of th
e universe. Being inside the black hole would shelter the universe from any oss
ible catastro he occuring on the “outside” and since the rate of time (or the very n
ature of time itself) would be different in the larger universe com ared to the
smaller one, they wouldnt be in causal contact (just like we wouldnt be with any
universe with different hysical laws.) The universes would be se arated by a s
ea of hy ers ace, the original s atial dimension of the bulk (like imaginary tim
e is the original tem oral dimension), which can only be navigated through black
hole worm hole tunnels, which re resent the larger scale version of quantum tun
neling through the universe and between different universes. Its interesting ho
w everything is connected together– that the very creation of these miniuniverses
is the reason behind the ex ansion of our own universe and erha s its ultimate
colla se and rebirth (just like we might be doing for that hy othetical larger u
niverse we reside within.)</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;A ril 29, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/04/29/a-short-introduction-to-my-mind-body-world-universe-series
/#res ond" title="Comment on Origin 5: A Cosmic Casimir&nbs ;Effect">Leave a com
ment</a>
</s an>
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">

eat.word ress.com/2010/04/23/consciousness/" title="Permanent Link to Origin 4:&
nbs ;Consciousness">Origin 4:&nbs ;Consciousness</a></h2>
< >The universe has a beauty of its own, like a
fractal whose re eating atterns create unex ected combinations of com lexity th
at retain hints of the underlying original; based in sim licity, yet evolved int
o elegance.</ >
< >As for laws of hysics, I ho e you know that the s ecific “laws”
change from the level of the subatomic (quantum mechanics) to the level of class
ical hysics (newtonian) to the level of relativity (cosmological scale.) Basica
lly, what this is im lying is that the “laws” of hysics as we know
them are a subset of a greater series of laws that we are, at this oint, too te
chnologically ine t to discover (and robably wont until we get down to the Plan
ck scale– or lower– which even the su ercollider wont be able to do.
) With that said, I ersonally don’t think reincarnation exists– but
I wouldn’t resume to dictate my thoughts to anyone else– obviously
, each erson has a right to think what they want. This might seem absurd, but i
t might all boil down to whatever a erson thinks is going to ha en is what&#82
17;s going to ha en to them. And, I can envision scenarios where the su erset o
f hysical laws of which we know only a subset wouldn’t take much of a twe
aking to se arate consciousness from our hysical bodies– and once you do
that, retty much anything is game. I remember reading an article in a journal (
an abstract of which I osted a year or so ago) about scientists discovering int
elligence and a higher level of consciousness than anyone ex ected in a unicellu
lar organism (something which none of the working models could ossibly envision
) and how it could ave the way to changing how we think– literally! The
idea of a collective unconscious s reading throughout the universe has gained qu
ite a following, and its conceivable that ESP and sixth senses are sim ly a mani
festation of such– like ri les undulating across the cosmic web of consci
ousness– which would make sense, since these extra senses seem to be arti
cularly erce tive when they involve a erson close to us being in eril, even i
f they are far away in distance– which would not matter, as the majority o
f our consciousness, and thus who we are, exists in higher dimensions (which mak
es what we erceive as consciousness just a shadow of what we really are). Usin
g this model as our guide, consciousness would truly be immortal, as in extra di
mensions, not only do the s atial dimensions not exist, but time doesnt exist ei
ther!</ >
< >Well, I su ose if a unicellular organism can have some level of intelligence
/consciousness like in that journal article I quoted earlier, that would robabl
y include bacteria. What’s central to this argument is what consciousness
really is and that is something no one really agrees about. For myself I find
myself attracted to the quantum theories of consciousness because its fascinatin
g the way reality works on that level. The fact is that any classical mechanics
a roach to consciousness has hit a brick wall.</ >
< >We are a “manifestation” of the universe. The thing we cant get
away from is the fact that we arent inde endent observers– we ourselves ar
e a art of the universe we’re observing and this, I think, is the reason
why we make intuitive lea s when new scientific discoveries are made. We have a
n innate knowledge of the workings of the universes inside our minds– beca
use our minds are a art of said universe– and so, while it may seem that
revolutionary ideas like Relativity and Quantum Mechanics came out of “thi
n air” (like many discoveries– for exam le the chemical structure of
the Benzene ring came in a “dream”)– its more likely innate k
nowledge of the universe that we are a art of that’s inside of us. Did y
ou ever read about latonic solids? They’re these s ecial three dimensiona
l geometric sha es Plato created and named and said were the erfect forms of na
ture… thousands of yars later chemists discovered that crystalline com oun
ds do indeed take those com lex sha es! And our immense curiosity to learn as
much as we can can be seen as the universe trying to learn more about itself. I
’d like to think there are countless intelligent s ecies across the univer
se trying to accom lish the same thing.</ >
< >I like to think that we are art of a manifestation of the universe that occu
ies various cor oreal (for lack of a better term) forms in an attem t to ex eri
ence itself. Under that remise, I would think of consciousness like matter, not
able to be created or destroyed, but able to change states and transition to di
fferent lanes of existence.</ >
< >All religions are diluted by the environment under which they were born and f
lourished. Ive always thought that humankind takes what he/she can understand o
f the “truth” (if an absolute truth even exists) and waters it down
to what he/she is familiar with– and thus, religion is born. So we have t
hings like eo le being made in the “image of God,” etc. (oh really,
then what about the ossibly thousands of other alien civilizations that might
exist across the universe– are they made thusly also?) I do think each re
ligion takes a kernel of truth and evolves a mythology around it to make that ke
rnel of truth more alatable.</ >
< >I believe the “soul” conce t was created by religion because at i
ts ince tion no one knew what the conce t of “consciousness” meant.
And we still dont lol.</ >
< >Referring to the law of conservation of mass-energy, mass is a form of energy
and can be created or destroyed through article-anti article annihilation or e
=mc^2 but since mass is just another ty e of energy its just a hase transition.
At any rate the conservation of mass-energy itself a eared to be broken when
it was discovered that virtual articles can be created or destroyed for brief
eriods of time (Casimir Effect) but more than likely, this is roof of the exist
ence of a multiverse, where the conservation law is maintained across different
dimensions and/or universes (or arts of our universe) as matter gets winked out
of existence in one art of the multiverse, only to wink into another art&#821
1; seemingly out of nowhere. My theory was that this is the result of microblac
khole-wormholes embedded inside quantum foam The different lanes of existence
idea is central to my essay “Origin” and was robably first o ular
ized through the ancient Greeks by the great hiloso her Plato (read “The
Allegory of the Cave.”) The idea of multi le dimensions, long a niche of
science fiction writers, was brought to the forefront of hysics by Hugh Everett
and his MWI (Many Worlds Inter retation) and it, along with the standard model,
are the two most influential inter retations of quantum mechanics. The reason
why MWI is gaining o ularity is because it offers an easier a roach to the uni
fication of the 4 fundamental forces as well as the origin of the big bang and w
hat ha ened before. Its interesting that both major theories of unification (s
tring theory and loo quantum gravity) contain the central idea that there was a
nother universe before the big bang, it colla sed and then our universe came to
be– and this cycle might continue indefinitely, not only here– but i
n other universes with their own sets of hysical laws– which would be a w
ay around the roblem of fine tuning (why are the laws of hysics the way they a
re in our universe?)</ >
< >Ive seen some scientists themselves question the dogmatic closeminded a roac
h of their eers (let’s face it, most new scientific ideas were met with m
ockery at first)– I think its art of human nature to always assume that o
ne is right– eo le just dont like feeling like they just dont know–
it removes their sense of control over their environment and makes them feel in
secure and vulnerable.</ >
< >I like to think of reality as being a multifaceted existence that has so many
twists and turns that its like a labyrinth, and evey time you think you have th
e ath all figured out, it mor hs into something com letely new and different.</
>
< >It’s the ultimate ower of the “uncertainty rinci le” as s
oon as you feel like you’re coming close to figuring it out it shows anoth
er facet for you to learn.</ >
< >I think that our consciousness does exist in the higher dimensions and that h
el s to ex lain it as well as ESP and things like creativity, intuition and inst
inct. I believe that animals also have consciousness that extends into the high
er dimensions and it ex lains things like grou memory and innate instincts whic
h they are seemingly born with (all creatures and even inanimate objects contain
all the memories of their kind buried within and even of the ones they inhabite
d the lane with along with their redecessors, which would be accessible, like
a fossilized record, given enough atience and energy.) We all ta into a colle
ctive subconscious that hel s us analyze everything around us on a higher level,
make intuitive lea s (sort of like informational wormholes going through extra
dimensional shortcuts!) and thought ex eriments. Perha s when we make these tho
ught ex eriments we really are doing what we are thinking about in these higher
dimensions, where hysical action isnt necessary in order to erform work–
because of the much higher energy level of the bulk and the ability of the mind
to focus that energy. This would fit in nicely with ESP also. All of creation
, great and small, has consciousness– even inanimate objects. Its just a
matter of degree. Plants have a higher level of consciousness than rocks, for e
xam le, and their consciousness extends further into the bulk. Animals exceed
lants and so their consciousness enetrates the bulk even further than that&#821
1; with human beings having the greatest enetration into the bulk of them all (
out of earthly creatures.) The same goes for enetration into this side of real
ity (which is why we can s eculate about what’s going on at the other end
of the universe or about the far flung ast and the far away future and other an
imals cant.) But while consciousness is most concentrated in us, the sheer size
of the oceans and the continents and of the earth itself gives it the greatest
total amount of conscious energy; its just much more s read out, diffuse and o e
rates on a very low frequency hum. Just like with all creatures and objects, ta
ing into this energy would o en u a vast reservoir of historical and future k
nowledge for us (like telling us when the next earthquake might hit and where or
when and where the next hurricane might strike or going into the ast, we could
see back to the origin of life or the last death cries of animals during a mass
extinction)– for the ower of conscious energy is not only de endent on s
ize and concentration of the energy but also on the age of the creature or objec
t. The sun has much more conscious energy than the earth; not only because of i
ts size, but because of its electromagnetic ro erties, articularly its strong
magnetic field. The stronger the magnetic field, the stronger the consciousness
– regardless of size. (Just think of the consciousness levels of ulsars
and ra idly rotating black holes that swallow information by the ton!) If you w
ant to see an even more vast consciousness that o erates on an even lower freque
ncy consider the galaxy (again active galaxies with strong magnetic fields, such
as M87, have the highest consciousness– and clusters and su erclusters ev
en more so) or even the universe itself– whose conscious energy can actua
lly be measured as the CMB– and as such is gradually going down in terms o
f concentration but staying the same in terms of overall strength (this being a
fundamental conservational law of consciousness within each universe– that
even u on death, the consciousness gets redistributed, whether in our universe
or its antiverse) and once it gets to nil it will big bang again– the most
e ic scale of reincarnation there is! The full history of the universe is writ
ten in the CMB and ho efully we will one day become evolved enough to read and d
eci her it. The amount of subconscious energy of every creature and object in t
he omniverse– let alone our universe– is written in the ZPE of the b
ulk and this is where it resides, forming its connections and creating the colle
ctive. As a matter of fact, the full history of all universes, including the on
es that redated us re Big Bang resides in the energy of the ZPE and could be a
ccessed as the collective consciousness gets more evolved and owerful (Kardashe
v scale 3 or higher?) The “inside out” theory of LQG facilitates th
is in shedding the universal consciousness into the bulk u on each Big Bang (bot
h conscious and subconscious come together), only to begin anew. In contrast, t
he amount of conscious energy of each creature and object resides within the ZPE
of the s ace-time fabric of its articular universe during its existence. And
consciousness isnt something that stays static, as it can vary between individua
ls and even in the same erson de ending u on health, time of day, interactions,
etc. Higher enetration leads to a greater dis lay of ro erties of ESP and a
feeling of connectedness– including creativity, intuition and ESP. I thin
k you can draw an analogy between the conscious/subconscious mind and the struct
ure of quantum foam both on our side of the s ace-time fabric and the bridge int
o the bulk. The conscious side is the art on our side of the s ace-time fabric
and the subconscious is the art on the other side. Think of it also in terms
of leftbrainedness and rightbrainedness. Those who are more connected to the su
bconscious are literally so, with more of their mind on the bulk side of the div
ide, connected therein to the “collective subconscious.” Those whos
e minds like to think in more concrete terms have a stronger connection on this
side of the fabric– the “conscious” side. This isnt a static
feature; like I said before, it changes with ex osure to the environment–
such as encountering other “connected individuals”– and to cha
nges in health ( hysical and emotional) and at different oints in one’s d
evelo ment and life. As with quantum foam, we can create similar black hole &#8
211; wormhole airs, but in this case we’re talking about informational br
idges. An informational black hole would be someone who can suck in information
from other individual’s subconscious or from the collective (a “rec
eiver.”) An informational worm hole would be someone who can deliver in
formation to others’ subconscious (a “sender.”) Some will be
one or the other; others will be both. In all cases, since we are talking about
thought rocesses occuring outside s ace-time, there is no regard for distance
or time; the information can be received across unconnected s ace or even throug
h arallel timelines. Sometimes involuntarily (which can cause confusion) as th
e erson might not know they are receiving or sending (that is, they are “
untrained”), which is one of the ro erties which affects how strong the a
bilities are– and the ro erty most rone to change their strength (this i
s strongest in children, as their minds are the most flexible to learn new thing
s.) Peo le with these s ecial abilities can even communicate with animals (sinc
e animals also have a conscious/subconscious structure) and might be able to er
ceive such things as ghosts and s irits, which are tra ed on the barrier which
se arates a universe from its antiverse (whereas erha s normal s irits merely
ass through to the other side and are reincarnated in antimatter form in a cycli
c attern. This would also ex lain why animals and children are more keen on se
nsing resences, as they have been less conditioned by the concrete environment,
which makes u for lack of training and, in the case of animals, lesser ability
.) If alien s ecies exist, and I think they do, we can even communicate with th
em through the collective subconscious, as their minds would be subject to the s
ame rules and abilities– exce t, de ending on the evolutionary develo ment
of the s ecies, they might be much stronger and more concentrated than ours.
Ta ing into the minds of the oldest alien civilizations in the universe would b
e like ta ing into the history of the universe itself (regardless of whether it
was made of matter or energy or both!) The vehicle of delivery or sending infor
mation can be as varied as anything from dreams to remote viewing to tele athy a
nd can even be made to do hysical work such as sychokinesis or tele ortation.
Its even ossible that the act of conducting thought ex eriments really are ex
eriments being conducted by our subconscious through action in the bulk. Its o
ssible that re-ex eriencing memories or antici ating future actions or tele athy
is nothing more than time travel through the bulk, while viewing our memories t
hrough ortals in the fabric of s ace-time ( erha s this is the case with all th
ought ex eriments or creative ventures also)– and sometimes it actually fe
els that way! In these thought ex eriments or dreams we can rewind time, freez
e it, or fast forward it and freeze it at a articular moment and analyze the fu
ll ex erience the same way a video re lay would– a talent Da Vinci is said
to have ossessed to a high degree. And the subconscious can even extract the
energy of our life force and create such things as astral rojection or out of b
ody ex eriences. What gives it the ability to erform such incredible feats? I
ts sim le: at the quantum level the definition of s ace and time break down and
the ro erties of nonlocality (entanglement, su er osition, tunneling, tele orta
tion, etc.) take over. It is the very quantum nature of our minds that enables
our minds to understand the universe– for we are made of the same fundamen
tal matter and energy the universe is made of and were created at the a ex of th
e current evolutionary athway in an attem t by the universe to understand itsel
f. This desire to understand itself is such an intrinsic and basic quality that
is built into every being that it exists on both sides of the s ace-time fabric
. Collectively, its called “curiosity.” The vehicle for its delive
ry and rocessing can be divided into the concrete and conscious (this side of s
ace-time) as ects such as analytical and deductive reasoning and the abstract (
the bulk or subconscious) as ects such as inductive reasoning, intuition (this i
s when we arent quite sure of how we know something– we just know it) and
creativity– the basic building force of the universe both hysically and m
entally. Even when our creativity just involves visual rocessing in our brain
such as thought ex eriments, work is being done in the bulk– the actual ex
eriments are being erformed and energy is being focused and used. This is the
same for any creative or intellectual endeavor (like finding atterns, coming u
with new ideas, etc.) , whether actual hysical work is erformed or not on ou
r side of s ace-time. When doing thought ex eriments or exhibiting creativity o
ur minds can simulate 3D s ace-time in the bulk, the same way we do “here.
” For further info refer to the article at the end of my a er. Creativi
ty is the greatest force in the universe and resides within us as much as it doe
s in the universe as a whole (since we are a art of it.) The frequencies that
ins ire creativity within us are shared by the cosmos as the frequencies of vibr
ating strings that ins ire the evolution of large scale structures in the univer
se and beyond– these are the undefinable but instinctive quantities that m
ake us a reciate and adore creativity within others, in nature and the entirety
of the cosmos and want us to re licate it ourselves. Its the central urge of t
he universe coursing through our veins! Even destruction has its lace in creat
ivity, both on our level and the scale of the omniverse, as it merely makes room
for recycling and creation into a new form (nothing is ever truly destroyed any
way, just changed and reorganized into a new form.) As an exam le of subconsio
us creativity, when I was writing Origin 2, I could literally feel myself in the
bulk seeing these interactions occuring with my inner eyes! I guess the art o
f the universe that is centered on my brain was learning a bit about itself. Wh
at would be the eak or a ex of the abilities of the collective subconscious? N
othing less than a universe-wide linkage of all life, great and small, lant, an
imal, human and alien as well as all inanimate objects, in universal harmony wit
h a decided destiny. In other words, if we take it on a lanetary level to sim
lify matters, it would mean that all animate and inanimate objects on the lanet
would vibrate on the same frequencies and there would be total and com lete und
erstanding among all– there would be no secrets, nothing hidden and no rea
son for lies. We could sense each others’ resences even when we and they
werent in erce tual range (Im not just talking about one erson sensing anothe
r erson’s resence via the subconscious, Im talking about a total ex erie
nce where we would know what every other creature was thinking and doing and whe
re every object was and what was ha ening with it and within it.) Imagine exte
nding this to the galactic level, let alone universe level…. talk about in
formational overload! We would have to learn to dum the excess information int
o the bulk, into the webwork of ZPE from where it originated and where it belong
s or to just ignore it and let it stay there.</ >
< >Consider that when we die, our consciousness shifts to a higher (or lower) re
sonance, and we shift into an adjacent universe. In turn, energy from that or a
different universe, shifts into ours as a birth. Po ulations differences are in
constant flux across all these realities, with some declining, some increasing,
but the grand total of energy remains constant. But occasionally, anomalies occu
r. Sometimes, a re rogramming of the attern of energy is incom lete, and art o
f the “hard drive” remains intact. This incom lete formatting results in left over m
emory data being left behind, and a recall of ortions of it will be resent. T
he rareness of these glitches are reflected in the very low re orted incidents o
f reincarnation. As a matter of fact, this occurs with recall of cellular memor
y in some recie ients of donor organs also. As stated earlier, consciousness is
resent to some degree in all forms of matter and energy– animate and ina
nimate. It’s just more concentrated in living organisms. The cell is the
smallest unit of the animate (on earth, anyway.) And each cell ossesses consc
iousness and even the full DNA of the whole. It has been found that unicellular
organisms have a level of intelligence and consciousness, so why shouldnt indiv
idual cells of a larger organism also have them? And they do! But in service o
f the organism and for the good of the whole, their cellular memories get buried
. But they are there and sometimes manifest themselves when an organ gets trans
lanted, as donor memories. The cells are confused about what ha ened to the o
rganism they used to inhabit and they manifest their inde endence in this way, j
ust as much as the rece ient’s body does when antibodies try to attack the
se foreign cells.</ >
< >Love and creativity are intimately linked and enhance each other. However, f
or greater detail into my views regarding love, lease refer to my essay “
The Philoso hy of Love.” Suffice it to say that love enhances all the con
nections through the extra ower that ositive emotions offer. Like conscience/
subconscience, love has both a hysical and a meta hysical as ect and the former
has connections on our side of s ace-time, while the latter has networks in the
bulk, having been born of the subconscious and meta hysical energy which artia
lly comes from transmigration (and thus the wisdom of age beyond normal time.)
It also has the ower to heal through rayer, sychic healing and enhances the a
bilities of ESP, such as when a loved one knows when we are in trouble or seems
to be so connected to us that they can sense what we are about to do or say befo
re it even ha ens across distance and time. Self sacrifice is the highest form
of love, as it shows a recognition that the best arts of us exist within the o
nes we love and who love us and will survive long after we are gone and get ass
ed down from generation to generation. This extends to animals and animal-human
interactions also (as a matter of fact, it can be said to be stronger with anim
als and children because they dont let the environment, that is the hysical as
ects of love which come from genetics and our biology, taint the way they look a
t meta hysical love– also called unconditional love– with the hysic
al environment, until they reach school age that is!) This is an enhancement of
the informational wormhole I wrote of earlier. When two beings rocreate (any
two beings!), they are fulfilling the ultimate mission of love: to create anothe
r life form. In so doing, the new being both ossesses hysical as ects of the
love of the originals (genetic) which resides in our art of s ace-time, as well
as meta hysical attributes, which can come from a variety of sources, including
the environment, arents and transmigration. The conscious art of the mind, t
he hysical as ect, has its origin in the genes and biology of the arents also,
while the meta hysical atttribute comes from the latter multitude of sources wh
ich mix together to create a new attern– which is exactly why recollectio
n of reincarnation, with certain exce tions (or regressive hy nosis) can be so d
ifficult. Dreams can be of great hel in this area, as that is when the conscio
us mind is resting and the subconscious takes over (which is why various facets
of ESP also seem stronger during dreaming.) Not only do we get a art of our co
nsciousness and love from our arents and other eo le in our lives– but w
e also give back and this two way reaction (feedback) results in a reciation of
who we are and who they are and what we each mean to each other. We even do th
e same with our ets and other animals and lants we encounter and even inanimat
e objects we create or work with, such as artwork, writing, scul ture or archite
cture or utilitarian tools like com uters, chairs, desks, tables bathtubs and be
ds and their original sources and the eo le who created and/or re ared them fo
r us. When we eat and drink, we absorb art of the consciousness of where it ca
me from and who re ared it and who created it, while the rest goes towards tran
smigration. There is a transference of consciousness back and forth between the
creator and the object as well as anyone else who a reciates it (in most cases
the transference is strongest with the creator, but sometimes the a reciators
overwhelm by sheer volume of numbers or because they have a s ecial relationshi
with the creator.) The total conscious energy of the entire cosmos might remai
n the same, but its redistribution results in much closer connections over the l
ong run. Regrettably, so called toxic relationshi s also ha en, as they are gl
itches in the hardware and they cause much misery for however long they last&#82
11; but they go against the basic lan of the cosmos. And not only can love enh
ance ESP, but so can confidence. That ositive energy we feel is real and can b
e made to do work and to im rove the whole mind/body interaction (including medi
cal and sychological health and well being as well as relationshi s) and reinfo
rce our connections and networks. Our aura, which is the electromagnetic manife
station of the health of our consciousness and its connections to others and an
analog to a node of the CMB, is a reflection of this. There is also such a thin
g as the aura of the collective (an analog of the full CMB), which can be measur
ed (and has been seen to take a huge hit after disasters such as 9/11 or the Ind
onesian Tsunami– which animals did much better in, because of their very s
trong meta hysical connections, dis layed as the instinct to read the signs the
lanet was giving them subconsciously and survive.) We also have a subconscious
version of the aura, which exists in the bulk within the ZPE and grows and wane
s with the strength of our confidence and all the other factors which affect the
strength of our subconscious connections (its like a muscle, it needs to be use
d.) U on death, besides transmigration, arts of our consciousness and love als
o exists in the memories of those who survive us and this gets assed down from
generation to generation, through discussion and even through genetics, diluted
through the various offs ring– but still, always resent (the sum total al
ways remains the same, as er conservation laws– even if some gets distrib
uted to inanimate objects we create or ets or other animals and lants we cheri
sh.) Even extinct animals like dinosaurs ass on their genes to their descenda
nts– so various s ecies of birds like cranes, which have an ancient lineag
e, would be the closest to them and still retain some of their characteristics&#
8211; both on a hysical (genetic) level and a meta hysical (subconscious) level
. The consciousness re resents a com lex inter lay between the hysical and the
non hysical and if one falls ill, the other one will suffer also. This is how
sychological illness can affect white blood cell counts or how distinct ersona
lities in muti le ersonality disorder can be affected differently by different
drugs, although theyre in the same body (multi le ersonality disorder or dissoc
iative identity disorder may be considered a case of more than one consciousness
occu ying the same body– as can some cases of ossession– in that c
ase, the occu ying consciousness belongs on the other side.) I see us as finall
y evolving towards Universal Love, which includes all animate and inanimate matt
er and energy and when we finally reach this eak of evolution then and only the
n will we finally realize our full otential and maximize our connections and ab
ilities. I fear that this may only ha en just as our universe is about to reac
h the eak of its ex ansion, just before starting to colla se inwardly and by th
en there will be no matter, only energy (including us) and we will then start to
lose our memories as we colla se towards the next big bang and the energy begin
s to leak into the bulk, trying futilely to remember what will be forever stored
in the bulk– if we can only be lucky enough to extract that information w
ith the next ex ansion from the library of energy which resides there (but, alas
, we will have to begin anew– like reaching the to ste and then falling
back down to the bottom of the staircase), as it has for each cycle!</ >
< >For more information on the breakdown of s ace-time and of how it’s a c
onstruct of erce tion, rather than reality, refer to the following:</ >
< >htt ://jcer.com/inde…/viewFile/11/10</ >
< >Abstract</ >
< >Recent research on time shows that one has to distinguish between hysical ti
me and sychological time. Physical time is run of clocks in s ace. S ace itself
is timeless. With clocks we measure material change i.e. motion that ha en in
s ace. Linear sychological time “ ast- resent-future” is a result of neuronal activ
ity of the brain. Observer is ex eriencing material change through sychological
time. Observer is unchangeable and inde endent of sychological time running. T
his indicates that observer is not based on neuronal activity of the brain as s
ychological time is. S ace and observer are both timeless. Here a ro osal is ta
ken that hysical basis of the observer is s ace itself. In scientific ex lorati
on the rocess of observation is the function of s ace. Hy othetically every oi
nt of s ace has the function of observation. Human senses and brain are biologic
al devices through which s ace ex eriences material change i.e. motion in s ace.
Observer as a function of s ace is an integral art of the universe. This view
o ens new ers ectives in understanding of Lorentz transformation and “ ro er time”
of different inertial systems in S ecial Theory of Relativity.</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;A ril 23, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/04/23/consciousness/#res ond" title="Comment on Origin 4:&nbs ;C
onsciousness">Leave a comment</a>
</s an>
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">

eat.word ress.com/2010/04/23/origin-2-the-quest-for- roof/" title="Permanent Lin
k to Origin 2– The Quest For&nbs ;Proof">Origin 2– The Quest For&nbs
;Proof</a></h2>
< >htt :// hysics.esotec.org/Unification_of_Phys
ics-1. df</ >
< >htt ://www.esotec.org/ hysics/index.html</ >
< >The Planck length is related to Planck energy by the uncertainty rinci le. A
t this scale, the conce ts of size and distance break down, as quantum indetermi
nacy becomes virtually absolute. This makes the Planck scale a fascinating re
alm for s eculation by theoretical hysicists from various schools of thought. I
s the Planck scale domain a seething mass of virtual black holes? Is it a fabric
of unimaginably fine loo s or a s in foam network? Is it inter enetrated by inn
umerable Calabi-Yau manifolds,[1] which connect our 3-dimensional universe with
a higher dimensional s ace? Perha s our 3-D universe is ‘sitting’ on
a ‘brane’[2] which se arates it from a 2, 5, or 10-dimensional univ
erse and this accounts for the a arent ‘weakness’ of gravity in our
s. These a roaches, among several others, are being considered to gain insight
into Planck scale dynamics. This would allow hysicists to create a unified desc
ri tion of all the fundamental forces. </ >
< >Sub-Planck hysics Sub-Planck refers to conjectural hysics beyond or smalle
r than the Planck scale. The Elegant Universe[1] by Brian Greene discusses brie
fly the strange world of the sub-Planck and how it “creates” the qua
ntum universe by its averages. In his later work, The Fabric of the Cosmos, Gree
ne states that “the familiar notion of s ace and time do not extend into t
he sub-Planckian realm, which suggests that s ace and time as we currently under
stand them may be mere a roximations to more fundamental conce ts that still aw
ait our discovery.” </ >
< >My questions: </ >
< >Do other universes exist on our sub lanck scale and is our universe on the su
b lanck scale of a larger “hy erverse?” I im lied this ossibilit
y when I indicated that our universe might just be a subatomic article in a lar
ger universe. What if our universe is nothing more than a subatomic article i
nside a larger universe and our universe is less than lanck length inside the l
arger universe– and there are sub universes which are smaller than lanck
length inside our own universe…. this would ex lain why laws of hysics br
eak down at these sizes– the laws of the other universes take over. </ >
< >That’s why I was so excited when I found the a er about to be ublishe
d about the hysicist from IU conducting research in this area and that the idea
of a universe inside a blackhole nested inside a larger universe might be our b
est ho e of a unification of gravity, relativity and quantum mechanics.</ >
< >I like this idea– it makes it seem reality is circular– who knows
, maybe distance and size are so meaningless that when you zoom in far enough yo
u get back to the universe you originally started from </ >
< >I really like the idea of a circular reality where, after going through a bun
ch of universes you’d eventually get back to where you started because it
avoids the roblem of infinitely large or infinitely small scales, and a circula
r reality seems to fit well with the idea of a cyclic universe Although, to be
more accurate, I would say that the omniverse has a weblike structure, in that a
ll of the universes are interconnected, with Layer 1 arallel timeverses branchi
ng off to the side, while Layer 2 multiverses are “s okes” in the we
b, each with their own satellite timeverses. These s okes, and the interconnect
ed weblike structure of the omniverse in general harks back to ZPE, which is als
o arranged thusly, and erha s the omniverse’s outline is based on that fr
amework, and thus borrows its sha e from the geometric arrangement of ZPE in the
bulk.</ >
< >And so begins Origin II– The Quest for Proof. It looks like research i
s icking u the ace, as LHC is now o erational (for the time being) and the af
orementioned IU hysicist has ublished his a er a mere two weeks after I ubli
shed the “original” Origin. It can be found here: htt ://www. hyso
rg.com/news189792839.html</ >
< >Our universe at home within a larger universe? So suggests wormhole research<
/ >
< >Enlarge<br />
A ril 6, 2010<br />
Enlarge</ >
< >Einstein-Rosen bridges like the one visualized above have never been observed
in nature, but they rovide theoretical hysicists and cosmologists with soluti
ons in general relativity by combining models of black holes and white holes.</
>
< >(PhysOrg.com) — Could our universe be located within the interior of a
wormhole which itself is art of a black hole that lies within a much larger uni
verse?</ >
< >In studying the radial motion through the event horizon (a black hole’s
boundary) of two different ty es of black holes — Schwarzschild and Einst
ein-Rosen, both of which are mathematically legitimate solutions of general rela
tivity — Po lawski admits that only ex eriment or observation can reveal t
he motion of a article falling into an actual black hole. But he also notes tha
t since observers can only see the outside of the black hole, the interior canno
t be observed unless an observer enters or resides within.</ >
< >“This condition would be satisfied if our universe were the interior of
a black hole existing in a bigger universe,” he said. “Because Eins
tein’s general theory of relativity does not choose a time orientation, if
a black hole can form from the gravitational colla se of matter through an even
t horizon in the future then the reverse rocess is also ossible. Such a roces
s would describe an ex loding white hole: matter emerging from an event horizon
in the ast, like the ex anding universe.”</ >
< >A white hole is connected to a black hole by an Einstein-Rosen bridge (wormho
le) and is hy othetically the time reversal of a black hole. Po lawski’s
a er suggests that all astro hysical black holes, not just Schwarzschild and Ein
stein-Rosen black holes, may have Einstein-Rosen bridges, each with a new univer
se inside that formed simultaneously with the black hole.</ >
< >“From that it follows that our universe could have itself formed from i
nside a black hole existing inside another universe,” he said.</ >
< >By continuing to study the gravitational colla se of a s here of dust in isot
ro ic coordinates, and by a lying the current research to other ty es of black
holes, views where the universe is born from the interior of an Einstein-Rosen b
lack hole could avoid roblems seen by scientists with the Big Bang theory and t
he black hole information loss roblem which claims all information about matter
is lost as it goes over the event horizon (in turn defying the laws of quantum
hysics).</ >
< >This model in isotro ic coordinates of the universe as a black hole could ex
lain the origin of cosmic inflation, Po lawski theorizes.</ >
< >Its wonderful to see ideas dovetail like this towards a common destination, a
s this is exactly where my thought ex eriment is leading to also. The Ekry toti
c Model also jives with this, and creates new universes through brane collision
(like with M-theory.) That the ancients came sus iciously close to this model o
f the omniverse makes me wonder if our brains arent the only tool we need to sol
ve the universe and unification riddle! As a matter of fact, I can extend this
further, and theorize that the omniverse that our universe resides within, had a
unitary origin– that is, it originated in one dimension, one force, one
lane of existence– and from wherein emerged everything else, our three s a
tial dimensions lus time lus the four forces and even the higher dimensions th
eorized by M-theory, not to mention the arallel timeverses and other multiverse
s in the omniverse also. This is where Imaginary Time comes in. That’s
the “time before time” or the time outside of s ace-time, which exis
ted before the last big bang. Im laying around with the idea that there’
s an “Imaginary S ace” also (which scifi writers call “hy ers
ace”) which exists outside of our s ace-time and is the “sea”
(in other words, in the bulk) that se arates the universes and from which our 3
s atial dimensions emerged, just like time emerged from “Imaginary Time.&#
8221; Well, the way this would work is, the same way “cutting” thro
ugh hy ers ace would get you between two distant nonconnected oints in s ace, &
#8220;cutting” through imaginary time (maybe we should just call it hy ert
ime) would get you between two distant nonconnected oints in time. And thus, i
n a single shot, we can have both “effective” faster than light trav
el (“effective” because it doest really mean youre going faster than
light, but merely taking a shortcut), as well as time travel. This is what ha
ens when articles or hotons exhibit quantum entanglement, su er osition, tel
e ortation, etc and violate locality, and this is also what ha ens in closed ti
melike curves. All the s atial dimensions originated from that one hy ers atial
dimension and that all the tem oral dimensions emerged from that imaginary time
dimension. In other words, those two dimensions are the “quarks” o
f all the dimensions we see today, as well as the additional dimensions of M-the
ory. Basically, it means that on a really small scale (called sub lanck) s ace-
time ceases to exist and imaginary s ace/ imaginary time take over– thus
ermitting this kind of strange behavior on the quantum level. This where I left
things off in Origin, and as research continues in this area, and I refine my t
heories, I will continue with my work. Ho efully the LHC or its successor will
get us to the sub lanckian scale and — who knows– we might even cons
truct our first black holes (baby universes?) and be able to examine the seeds o
f a new reality ourselves firsthand!</ >
< >In Origin, I never got around to talking about Loo Quantum Gravity, as its a
theory that com etes with String Theory. I find it quite intriguing however, t
hat LQG also allows for a universe to have existed before the big bang, and remo
ves the big bang singularity (as well as black hole singularities) by calling fo
r black hole densities to actually go down as their core diameter decreases to u
nder 10 Planck lengths. How does it do this? Well, in LQG (like in string theo
ry) s ace-time is made u of discrete units (unlike Relativity, in which s ace-t
ime is a continuum), and this quantized version of s ace-time (the discrete unit
s are of the Planck length) are arranged in s in networks. By removing singular
ities, it goes where Relativity and Quantum Mechanics cant go by themselves and
even attem ts to describe what lies beyond the edge of s ace-time (in other word
s, inside the “singularities.”) None of our hysics at the resent
time (not even LQG or string theory) can account for what occurs on the sub lanc
k scale– thus, some heretofore unknown hysics is robably involved there&
#8211; which would likely unify everything– one dimension, one force, one
fabric to describe the whole omniverse! Likely, the outline of the omniverse is
written on the face of ZPE at that level and– we can dream– maybe t
he history of all the universes that lie within; not only the su erstructure of
the su erclusters and su ervoids, but of each individual galaxy, star, lanet, e
ven forms of life! Like a fossilized record, but not only containing the ast a
nd resent, but erha s the future also who knows, maybe eo le with remonition
s can read ZPE data subconsciously– after all, our brains are art of the
structure of the universe and would likely be able to accom lish that task on a
dee er level.) In that sense, it might have great redictive value to show us e
xactly where our universe (and maybe even our s ecies) is going– whether i
ts a cyclic universe, as I sus ect, or something else. Virtual articles would
be on the border between s ace-time and hy ers ace-time and thus would wink into
and out of existence as they travel from one disconnected oint in s ace-time t
o another (or to another universe entirely) through microblackhole-wormhole brid
ges (which might actually be other universes with different dimensions than ours
) embedded within the quantum foam. Now, how much information we can read out o
f the ZPE de ends u on the constraints of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Princi le;
we might only be able to read a broad overview of the history of the omniverse,
or we might need new hysics to robe beyond the level of the Heisenberg Uncerta
inty Princi le. Another intriguing fact is that, with the idea that our univers
e formed inside a black hole, the hologra hic rinci le comes into lay. And it
dovetails with the idea that the history of our universe can be described on a
flat surface, the same way the hologra hic rinci le is a lied to conventional
black holes (which are, in all likelihood, the “outside” of other un
iverses in their own right.)</ >
< >Anyway, as I stated earlier, LQG allows for a re-big bang universe, and the
best way to icture this is to imagine a balloon colla sing. This would be the
universe rior to ours. As it colla ses to a single oint, the o osite sides o
f the balloon would go through each other, and the universe would ex and once ag
ain, but this time its sides would be reversed. If LQG is correct, the strength
of gravity should massively increase on nanosco ic scales (because gravity is l
ess diluted at this scale with only one or two dimensions to deal with)– t
his is something that is testable within our current level of technology ans we
will likely know whether LQG is correct once the LHC is fully o erational. This
would be the inflationary eriod of our own universe. Cou led with the cyclic
model, which allows for dark energy to occu y the universe com letely at its max
imum extent, this takes care of the entro y roblem (as dark energy is nothing m
ore than ZPE that has infiltrated our universe from the bulk to balance out both
sides.) This would create a double helix like structure for our universe (like
DNA/RNA)– showing, once again, how the universe mimics itself on various
levels. Research is ongoing about what the rior universe might have been like,
and some suggest that its larger structures were very similar to our own (becau
se during each big bang, when the universe is the size of a article, quantum ef
fects take over, and the universe which results, is just like a huge article, w
ith its structures, the results of quantum rocesses– including entangleme
nt, su er osition, tele ortation, etc.– and these might also be the reason
why we have “bridges” (black hole – worm hole airs) between
different universes– as these are the larger scale version of bridges that
exist at the quantum level and cause all the bizarre effects of nonlocality! I
ts interesting that the quality of su er osition (two articles at exactly the s
ame location at the same time) and entanglement (basically one article at two o
r more different locations at the same time), which seem like o osite ro ertie
s, can both be ex lained by the theories of higher dimensions– for while i
t seems like the same location– there needs to be an extra dimension (hy e
rs ace or the original s atial dimension and/or imaginary time, the original tem
oral dimension of the omniverse), which is not being included. Its like lookin
g from above and seeing a bird fly over a house; it looks as if the bird is su e
rim osed on to of the house, but that’s only because we havent made an al
lowance for the third s atial dimension of de th. In the case of entanglement,
tunneling and tele ortation, two objects may seem com letely unconnected in the
conventional dimensions, but these are just shadows of their higher forms, which
could be linked in the extra dimensions. Which fulfills Plato’s vision f
rom over two millenia ago! And these linkages are facilitated by the resence o
f black hole – wormhole bridges of various sizes, from the nanosco ic all
the way through the su ermassive. The existence of gravity requires the resenc
e of additional dimensions to not only ex lain its source, but also the reason w
hy its effects become diluted inside universes (which are basically just islands
of different dimensions floating in the original dimensions of the bulk: the tr
uest fulfillment of Immanuel Kant’s vision of island universes two hundred
years later!) and also why gravity’s effects grow much stronger on the na
nosco ic scale, even though there is less mass overall– because, on the na
nosco ic scale, the conventional dimensions disa ear and we are back to the ori
ginal dimensions of the bulk: hy ers ace and imaginary time (which facilitates m
icrosco ic black hole – wormhole formation and is the fundamental state of
the omniverse.) This is where we get the 11 dimensions from; the 3+1 dimension
s of our own universe and its arallel timeverses as well as any other outside m
ultiverses that have the same dimensions, forces and hysical laws and constants
but with a different amount of mass-energy (and thus a different length of osci
llation) and different structures resulting from big bang quantum fluctuations (
call that layer 1b), the 3+1 com lementary dimensions of Layer 2 multiverses wit
h their own laws of hysics and constants (think com lementary colors or quarks,
with dark energy substituting for gluons, and likewise, increasing in strength
as it ex ands– until eventually, the rubber band “sna s” and i
t comes back, like the gluons and the strong nuclear force which confines quarks
inside subatomic articles– maybe the larger scale version of that is wha
t guarantees an oscillating universe), lus the fundamental original s ace and t
ime dimensions of the bulk (hy ers ace and imaginary time) and the gravity dimen
sion. I ut forth the idea that there are also four com lementary forces to the
four forces in our universe (note that com lementary doesnt mean “anti&#8
221;) and that these universes with com lementary dimensions or a mix of com lem
entary and “normal” dimensions will also have com lementary forces o
r a mix, code endent on each other, as well as com lementary force carriers (exc
e t for EM and gravity, which are always the same.) And each universe’s i
dentical but o osite antiverse (mirrorverse) will have all com lementary dimens
ions and forces, be com osed redominantly of antimatter and the total mass-ener
gy of the universe/antiverse air will always be roughly equal (roughly because
this is also de endent on virtual article interactions with the outside omniver
se and the ZPE interaction with the bulk.) In these antiverses, to an observer
from its counter art, everything (including time) would a ear to be going backw
ards and hotons would a ear to be the slowest articles, as everything else wa
s a arently exceeding the s eed of light– although none of this would act
ually be the case. The only thing they would have in common would be light and
its ro erties and its s eed, which would also form their boundary. The funny t
hing is, someone from an antiverse observing its counter art, would see exactly
the same reversals! Dimensions and their com lementary counter arts emerging fr
om their fundamental versions in the bulk makes sense intuitively– it res
erves the dimensional “balance” (new conservation law?) the same way
air roduction does. Same goes with forces and their com lementary counter ar
ts. Dimensions from each 3+1 grou can mix in another multiverse, but two com l
ementary dimensions (or forces) cant exist in the same universe (which will lead
to ways of classifying multiverses based on their hysical laws and constants w
hich come from the combination of dimensions and com lementary dimensions and re
sultant forces and com lementary forces they have, as well as total mass-energy
content, the same way we do for stars and galaxies), much the same way matter an
d antimatter cant coexist (for exam le, we can have length, width, com lementary
de th and com lementary time but we cant have length, width, com lementary widt
h and time or length, width, time and com lementary time in the same universe&#8
211; dimensions [or forces] and their com lementaries in the same universe would
cancel each other out; that universe would be unstable and colla se in on itsel
f as soon as it was formed [and all its energy would be released and add to the
ZPE of the bulk and omniverse as a whole-- the clum ing of the ZPE from the acti
on of gravity, forming virtual articles in the bulk, which leads to the creatio
n of more bubble universes and multiverses in the same way stars and lanets are
formed [and virtual articles in our and other universes might merely be nested
universes, as they bounce from hy erverse to hy erverse {resulting from extreme
ly high energy GRBs and cosmic rays, not only in the hy erverse, but within the
nested universes also, right on down the line, until they finally reach their gr
ound state and become stable in the bulk-- something we might be doing also; as
the a er above noted, being in a nested universe would unify quantum mechanics
and relativity}; the action of gravity on ZPE to create virtual articles is wha
t created the extra dimensions, forces and the island universes in the first la
ce, so they would just be returning back to their original source-- erha s resu
lting in GRBs in adjacent multiverses to create more bridges and nested universe
s or even a local increase in the CMB {the history of created nested universes a
nd multiverses being written in the CMB and the history of ground state univers
es and multiverses being written in the ZPE of the bulk would be fundamental as
ects of the hologra hic rinci le-- as we have seen in some arts of the univers
e!] because, as the dimensions and forces canceled each other out, undiluted gra
vity would take over [this might even result in "dead end" bridges-- that is, bl
ack hole wormhole airs that end in the bulk {because the bulk overall has more
energy than any universe within because of all the dimensions and forces being u
nified there, thus the creation and cycling of a universe and its bridges actual
ly follow the entro y law as they balance the virtual article and ZPE content o
f the omniverse, all the while creating more universes!} instead of inter or int
rauniverse in adjacent universes-- travellers beware!]– but we NEED multi
le dimensions and forces to dilute gravity and kee it in check! Black hole &#8
211; wormhole bridges between adjacent multiverses with one or more com lementar
y dimensions and forces between them might even facilitate the formation of mult
i le bridges between them and might cause excessive GRBs inside both and thus ma
ke life nonexistent or nearly so– along with roducing more nested univers
es! Something to onder when you consider which universes might be likely to ha
ve life within. Antimatter is robably more revalent in universes of com lemen
tary dimensions and forces also.) The intensity of gravity is tem ered somewhat
by the fact that the relationshi between density, mass and volume breaks down
at that level, as LQG and string theory have redicted and ex lained (the conver
gence of both on the same solution is heartening when considering the likelihood
of this solution being correct.) So, whether black hole worm hole bridges are
bundles of strings or loo s (the more massive ones being more densely acked), t
he overall solution is the same. Earlier, and in Origin, I had discussed how s
ubPlanck to Planck sized black hole – wormhole bridges might be embedded i
n the quantum foam (the virtual article/energy/ZPE landsca e of the omniverse.)
This is facilitated by the Uncertainty Princi le, which indicates that as we
robe smaller and smaller distances and times, the eaks and valleys in the quant
um foam landsca e grow stee er and dee er and the virtual articles become more
and more energized and thus the ZPE grows in ro ortion within each universe on
successively smaller scales. What then ha ens is that, just as some have redi
cted that the LHC will roduce black holes, they are roduced “naturally&#
8221; all across s ace-time on the microsco ic scale, embedded in the quantum fo
am, as it is bombarded by extremely high energy cosmic rays and gamma ray bursts
(this is the reason why gravity increases on the nanosco ic scale– the hi
gher amounts of energy on the smaller scales and the formation of black hole wor
mhole bridges and this would also ex lain the resence of dark matter, which scu
l ts the large scale structure of our universe in collusion with dark energy and
ZPE.) Exce t that there are many many more of them than the LHC could ever ro
duce as the intensity of these collisions is many orders of magnitude greater an
d far beyond our current level of technology (and for some time to come.) But t
his does give us the blue rint for creating our own traversable black hole wormh
ole bridges with resultant “effective” FTL travel (“effective&
#8221; because it wouldnt really be going faster than light in as much as going
outside s ace-time in a war bubble) and time travel one day. And the smaller t
he s ace-time scale, the more massive the bridges are on both sides (and the mor
e articles and energy they shuttle back and forth, thus leading to that stee er
and dee er quantum foam), but also the more quickly they eva orate to more than
make u for their increased mass and energy trans ort– until s ace-time i
tself breaks down and the linkages are established between universes and between
seemingly unconnected oints in the same universe and into the bulk! Cause and
effect become the same thing! The extremely energetic hotons colliding with v
irtual articles along their route result in hy ers atial bridges (that is, blac
k hole – wormhole airs) between different oints in our universe and othe
r universes also. This thus rovides the vehicle for more virtual articles and
energy being shuttled back and forth intra and inter universe while maintaining
Conservation Laws while creating more nested universes, more cosmic rays and GR
B, more bridges and more nested universes. Yet another feedback loo ! The dead
end bridges mentioned earlier might be how some of these nested universes end u
in the bulk and is also what maintains the ZPE balance between each universe a
nd the bulk (and the ZPE is the fuel to create more universes.) The more massiv
e virtual articles that become universes will have a much shorter lifes an (mim
icking the lifes an of massive stars), because they will im lode under the force
of their own gravitation, but will become fodder for the next generation of uni
verses as their energy gets released into the bulk and the rest of the omniverse
, resulting in more ZPE, GRBs, cosmic rays, hy ers atial links, nested universes
and etc. Thus we establish a feedback loo of highly energetic hotons hitting
articles creating bridges causing more articles to wink in and out which resu
lts in more interactions with more energized hotons leading to even more black
hole – wormhole airs. Yet another circular feature of the omniverse! Th
e mere creation of these bridges causes the destruction of s ace-time on the sub
lanck level (or the inability of it to exist in the first lace), as the quantu
m foam becomes littered with nanosco ic black hole – wormhole airs distor
ting s ace beyond all recognition because of the density of the bridges at that
level and multi le closed timelike curves within close roximity of each other s
urrounding each bridge doing the same with time. As a matter of fact, what we
erceive as s ace-time is merely the sum of all the interactions that occur at th
at level (and the black holes and worm holes cancel each other out on the macros
co ic level hence we dont feel the extreme gravity of the nanosco ic level, or n
ot nearly so, as we still have dark matter to deal with, which might re resent t
he imbalance between black holes and wormholes– thus the stee ness and dee
ness of the quantum foam evens out at larger scales and makes s ace-time a ear
smooth and continuous in accordance with Relativity– kee in mind, quantu
m foam exists below the scale of the “quantized” structure of s ace-
time on the lanck level, so this is what would exist “between” the
quanta of s ace-time on the sub lanck scale), so it can be said more accurately
that its our erce tions that are distorted and that s ace-time and cause-effect
dont actually exist, thus allowing for FTL s ace travel and time travel! This
is exactly why all those nonlocal ro erties actually occur at the quantum level
where s ace-time isnt smooth or continuous and why we need so much more energy
to do it on our macrosco ic level! The alignment of the black hole – worm
hole airs de ends on which “side” the energetic hotons collided wi
th; that is, if it was in our universe, then the black hole side will be on our
side and the worm hole on the other side and vice versa. In the case of intraun
iverse bridges, they sim ly link two different arts of the same universe and th
e black hole side will again be wherever the collision occured. In the case of
the bulk, its wherever an adjacent universe/multiverse colla sed and/or big bang
ed. What determines where the wormhole will o en u is the angle and intensity
of the collision (lowest intensity dead end bridges leading to the bulk, the fin
al destination of a stable and mature universe, next intensity interuniverse, hi
gher intensity layer 1 timeverse, highest intensity layer 2 multiverse.) Thus u
niverses which have an inordinate number of GRB and cosmic radiation of high int
ensities will have a higher number of microsco ic black holes and will be stri
ed of their matter more quickly and gain dark energy more quickly thus bouncing
back more quickly and yet roduce more nested universes within a given amount of
time, while universes that are less active have longer oscillatory eriods (aki
n to more and less active galaxies– yet another way that the omniverse re
eats on different scales.) The black hole – wormhole bridges only exist fo
r a finite eriod of time before they slowly eva orate and release energy, but t
hey fulfill their mission of shuttling articles and energy throughout the omniv
erse and kee ing the balance intact and leading to more bridge and universe form
ation. Not only that, but they also facilitate the balance of ZPE between the b
ulk and the universes, leading to increasing amounts of dark energy in ro ortio
n to the size of the universe and ex ansion. Which means that the resence of Z
PE in the quantum foam in a given universe leads to even more ZPE– like a
chain reaction! Which eventually leads to the ex ansion of the universe coming
to a halt (as all the matter gets used u ; the universe reaches balance both wit
h the bulk and within itself and all the black holes eva orate and the universe
actually becomes smooth and continuous with no connections to external multivers
es or the bulk and the arallel timeverses all colla se into the same universe&#
8211; similar to the colla se of the wave function– and only dark energy r
emains) and the universe comes back to oint size em ty– only to big bang
and se arate into satellite timeverses and re-esablish connections with other mu
ltiverses and the bulk again as GRB and cosmic radiation interact with matter al
l over again and create more nested universes (something we might be doing ourse
lves one day)! This is the ultimate of all feedback loo s– the oscillatin
g omniverse! In the far far future, as the ex ansion nears its eak, the quant
um foam landsca e will start to become less and less stee as the amount of dark
energy increases in the universe and s ace-time actually becomes smoother as la
rger scale black hole wormhole airs take over the trans ort of virtual article
s and ZPE with time. Until, eventually, those too will eva orate. Its a good t
hing, for otherwise we would be doomed to a universe that got ri ed a art&#8211
; granted it would be far far in the future! How the next oscillation roceeds
de ends u on the quantum fluctuations that ha en u on that universe just rior
to and during the next big bang– which might be triggered by something as
sim le as a virtual article interaction with an adjoining universe or a brane o
n brane collision. We might even be seeing signs of big bangs in other universe
s through the action of extremely high intensity gamma ray bursts (GRBs) and cos
mic rays which, while roducing more hy ers atial links between and through univ
erses, can also be a sign of the creation of a new universe itself!</ >
< >Does this mean that the older universe was an exact du licate? No. The large
r scale structures, such as su erclusters and voids were likely similar, but the
galaxies, star clusters, lanets, etc born from them were robably different, a
s there is an inherent randomness involved with quantum rocesses which would ha
ve larger scale results as the universe evolved. As I work on this a er, Im al
so writing another essay; this one concerns the origin of consciousness. The co
nnections between consciousness, higher dimensions, and quantum mechanics has al
ways fascinated me (some of the latest theories of quantum consciousness invoke
the idea that the dee er arts of consciousness come from the original dimension
, in the bulk, which is why confirmed cases of ESP might be analogous to quantum
entanglement, su er osition or tele ortation, since the quantum field acting th
rough the original dimension leads to nonlocality– where classical s ace-t
ime ceases to exist on the subPlanck level– which harks back to the hilos
o hy of the timelessness of the “soul”– and Carl Jung’s
collective consciousness, which might be outlined by ZPE along with entanglement
)– because here you have not only the insight of modern hysics, but also
that of ancient hiloso hy. Its as if the human mind already understood this on
some basic instinctual level, because we are a art of it, and we just need the
mathematics of it to be ironed out and be at a level of technology where we can
actually come u with the roof to back u our theories. In this way, we must
ay tribute to Plato who, without anything resembling the kind of technology or
math we have today, came u with the idea of higher lanes of reality and how ou
r senses could only erceive of a shadow of what existence really is (“The
Allegory of the Cave”)– he even redicted how resistant that eo le
would be at first to acce t this idea, until they were confronted with irrefuta
ble roof. </ >
< >To reiterate my model of dimensions:</ >
< >Original s ace (hy ers ace) + Original time (imaginary time) + Gravity &#8212
;> RGB s atial dimensions (l,w,h) written on a fabric of black (t) lus the
CMY com lementary s atial dimensions (l’,w’,h’) written on a f
abric of white (t’)</ >
< >R=RED G= GREEN B= BLUE C=CYAN M= MAGENTA Y= YELLOW. Im using black for time
because RGB are the additive rimary colors (that is, on a background of black)
while CMY are the subtractive rimary colors (on a background of white.)</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;A ril 23, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/04/23/origin-2-the-quest-for- roof/#res ond" title="Comment on O
rigin 2– The Quest For&nbs ;Proof">Leave a comment</a>
</s an>
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">

eat.word ress.com/2010/04/23/endings/" title="Permanent Link to Endings">Endings
</a></h2>
< >Cool. I am going to be home recovering from h
aving the shra nel removed from my lower back for the next few days so I will re
ad this. I will convert it to a PDF and ost it on my site in the research by ot
hers section, and ost a se arate commentary after I fully digest it. I think th
is is great.</ >
< >“Endings”</ >
< >An initial commentary to go with Alex Reynolds’ “Origin”</
>
< >By David Rountree</ >
< >Well, Einstein believed in the Big Crunch. In other words, if there is enough
matter in the Universe eventually gravitational forces will sto its ex ansion.
At the oint of maximum ex ansion, gravity will cause the universe to reverse i
ts direction and it will begin to colla se under its own weight. This hase of t
he Universe’s life is known as the “Big Crunch”. </ >
< >Eventually, according to Einstein, all of the matter in the Universe will col
la se into a su er dense state and ossibly a massive black hole. Some theorize
that the Universe could colla se into the same state that it began as and then b
low u in another Big Bang. In this way the Universe would last forever but woul
d continually go through these hases of ex ansion and contraction, Big Bang and
Big Crunch and so on… </ >
< >Einstein believed in a “Closed” universe</ >
< >I do not.</ >
< >Mathematically, if Ω > 1, then the geometry of s ace is closed like the surf
ace of a s here. The sum of the angles of a triangle exceeds 180 degrees and the
re are no arallel lines, therefore all lines eventually meet. The geometry of t
he universe is, at least on a very large scale, elli tic.</ >
< >In a closed universe lacking the re ulsive effect of dark energy, gravity wil
l theoretically halt the ex ansion of the universe, after which it starts to con
tract until all matter in the universe colla ses to a oint, a final singularity
termed the “Big Crunch,” by analogy with Big Bang. However, if the
universe has a large amount of dark energy (as suggested by recent findings), th
en the ex ansion of the universe can continue forever – even if Ω > 1.</
>
< >This is why I don’t buy into it. The universe DOES have a large amount
of Dark energy. Gravity as a force is far too weak to ull all the mass back in
, much less sto the accelerating. Remember, we are not moving forward at the sa
me terminal velocity, we have yet to reach terminal velocity. We are still accel
erating away from the big bang event horizon.</ >
< >But, if the universe does not contain enough matter to sto its ex ansion it
will continue to ex and forever. </ >
< >Using the currently understood laws of hysics it is ossible to roject into
the future what the Universe may look like in very distant eras. Two astro hysi
cists at the University of Michigan have outlined the future history of the Univ
erse. </ >
< >These guys have divided the future into Eras. The current Era is known as the
Stelliferous or Star-Filled era. The state of the Universe is filled with stars
and galaxies and lanets. This era ends when all the stars have exhausted their
fuel and have died leaving behind only remnants of their brilliance. </ >
< >The next era is known as the Degenerate era. The universe is com osed of dead
lanets, brown dwarfs, white dwarfs, neutron stars, black holes, and some theor
etical forms of dark matter. This era ends with the disintegration of all roton
s, which com ose the nuclei of all atoms. </ >
< >Then the universe enters the Black Hole era. Black holes will be the only gra
vitationally im ortant objects remaining in the universe. Black holes do not las
t forever. They will eventually eva orate, radiating away into nothingness. </ >
< >After that all that will remain is radiation and articles which have an infi
nite lifetime such as electrons, ositrons, and neutrinos. From this oint on it
is im ossible to fathom what will ha en as we have reached the limits of our k
nowledge. </ >
< >In other words, they ro ose a scenario called an “O en” universe
.</ >
< >If Ω<1, the geometry of s ace is o en, or negatively curved like the surface
of a saddle. The angles of a triangle sum to less than 180 degrees, and lines t
hat do not meet are never equidistant; they have a oint of least distance and o
therwise grow a art. The geometry of such a universe is hy erbolic.</ >
< >But even in the absence of dark energy, a negatively curved universe ex ands
forever, with gravity having little effect in slowing the rate of ex ansion. Wit
h dark energy, the ex ansion not only continues but accelerates, which seems to
be our current condition after some 13.6 billion years of existence. The ultimat
e fate of an o en universe as ro osed is either universal heat death, the &quot
;Big Freeze", or the "Big Ri ," in which the dark energy ins ired
acceleration eventually becomes so strong that it com letely overwhelms the eff
ects of the gravitational, electromagnetic and weak binding forces. I have issue
s with this scenario as well.</ >
< >On the other hand, a negative cosmological constant, which would corres ond t
o a negative energy density and ositive ressure, would cause even an o en univ
erse to recolla se to a big crunch. This has been ruled out by recent observatio
ns. But there are as ects of all of this that remain roblematic.</ >
< >Another theory is the Flat universe.</ >
< >If the average density of the universe equals the critical density so that Ω=1,
then the geometry of the universe is flat: as in Euclidean geometry, the sum of
the angles of a triangle is 180 degrees and arallel lines continuously maintai
n the same distance.</ >
< >Absent of dark energy, a flat universe ex ands forever but at a continually d
ecelerating rate, with ex ansion asym totically a roaching a fixed rate. With d
ark energy, the ex ansion rate of the universe initially slows down, due to the
effect of gravity, but eventually increases. The ultimate fate of the universe i
s the same as an o en universe. I don't buy into this either, as current ob
servations cast doubt on this.</ >
< >So what is the nature of the END of the universe?</ >
< >There are actually many theories about the end of universe, and that fate wil
l be determined by the density of the universe. The re onderance of evidence to
date, based on measurements of the rate of ex ansion and the mass density, favo
rs a universe that will continue to ex and indefinitely, resulting in the "
big freeze" scenario.</ >
< >The Big Freeze or Heat death</ >
< >The Big Freeze is a scenario under which continued ex ansion results in a uni
verse that asym totically a roaches absolute zero tem erature. It could, in the
absence of dark energy, occur only under a flat or hy erbolic geometry. With a
ositive cosmological constant, it could also occur in a closed universe. This s
cenario is currently the most commonly acce ted theory within the scientific com
munity. A related scenario is Heat death, which states that the universe goes to
a state of maximum entro y in which everything is evenly distributed, and there
are no gradients – which are needed to sustain information rocessing, on
e form of which is life. The Heat Death scenario is com atible with any of the t
hree s atial models, but requires that the universe reach an eventual tem eratur
e minimum. While this is getting a lot of juice now among astro hysicists, I hav
e issues with it as well.</ >
< >The Big Ri : Finite Lifes an</ >
< >In the s ecial case of hantom dark energy, which has even more negative res
sure than a sim le cosmological constant, the density of dark energy increases w
ith time, causing the rate of acceleration to increase, leading to a steady incr
ease in the Hubble constant. As a result, all material objects in the universe,
starting with galaxies and eventually (in a finite time) all forms, no matter ho
w small, will disintegrate into unbound elementary articles and radiation, ri
ed a art by the hantom energy force and shooting a art from each other. The end
state of the universe is a singularity, as the dark energy density and ex ansio
n rate becomes infinite. While on the surface this makes sense, it too is roble
matic.</ >
< >The Big Crunch</ >
< >The Big Crunch theory is a symmetric view of the ultimate fate of the univers
e. Just as the Big Bang started a cosmological ex ansion, this theory ostulates
that the average density of the universe is enough to sto its ex ansion and be
gin contracting. The end result is unknown; a sim le extra olation would have al
l the matter and s ace-time in the universe colla se into a dimensionless singul
arity, but at these scales unknown quantum effects need to be considered such as
Quantum Gravity. </ >
< >This scenario allows the Big Bang to have been immediately receded by the Bi
g Crunch of a receding universe. If this occurs re eatedly, we have an oscillat
ory universe. The universe could then consist of an infinite sequence of finite
universes, each finite universe ending with a Big Crunch that is also the Big Ba
ng of the next universe. Theoretically, the oscillating universe could not be re
conciled with the second law of thermodynamics: entro y would build u from osci
llation to oscillation and cause heat death. Other measurements suggested the un
iverse is not closed. These arguments caused cosmologists to abandon the oscilla
ting universe model. A somewhat similar idea is embraced by the cyclic model, bu
t this idea evades heat death, because of an ex ansion of the branes that dilute
s entro y accumulated in the revious cycle. While I don't believe the Univ
erse is oscillating, I believe the multiverse does. The multiverse oscilates and
the universes are small subcarriers floating on the quantum wave, like the stat
ic surfboard.</ >
< >Big Bounce</ >
< >The Big Bounce is a theorized scientific model related to the beginning of th
e known Universe. It derives from the oscillatory universe or cyclic re etition
inter retation of the Big Bang where the first cosmological event was the result
of the colla se of a revious universe.</ >
< >According to one version of the Big Bang theory of cosmology, in the beginnin
g the universe had infinite density. Such a descri tion seems to be at odds with
everything else in hysics, and es ecially quantum mechanics and its uncertaint
y rinci le. It is not sur rising, therefore, that quantum mechanics has given r
ise to an alternative version of the Big Bang theory. Also, if the universe is c
losed, this theory would redict that once this universe colla ses it will s awn
another universe in an event similar to the Big Bang after a universal singular
ity is reached or a re ulsive quantum force causes re-ex ansion. While this has
merit, it is still incom lete.</ >
< >The False vacuum</ >
< >If the vacuum is not in its lowest energy state (a false vacuum), it could tu
nnel into a lower energy state. This is called the vacuum metastability event. T
his has the otential to fundamentally alter our universe; in more audacious sce
narios even the various hysical constants could have different values, severely
affecting the foundations of matter, energy, and s acetime. It is also ossible
that all structures will be destroyed instantaneously, without any forewarning.
I have issues with this as well.</ >
< >Cosmic uncertainty</ >
< >Each ossibility described so far is based on a very sim le form for the dark
energy equation of state. But as the name is meant to im ly, we know almost not
hing of the real hysics of the dark energy. If the theory of inflation is true,
the universe went through an e isode dominated by a different form of dark ener
gy in the first moments of the big bang; but inflation ended, indicating an equa
tion of state much more com licated than those assumed so far for resent-day da
rk energy. It is ossible that the dark energy equation of state could change ag
ain resulting in an event that would have consequences which are extremely diffi
cult to arametrize or redict. It is also ossible the universe may never have
an end and continue in its resent state forever.</ >
< >Choosing among these rival scenarios is done by 'weighing' the univ
erse, for exam le, measuring the relative contributions of matter, radiation, da
rk matter and dark energy to the critical density. More concretely, com eting sc
enarios are evaluated against data on galaxy clustering and distant su ernovae,
and on the anisotro ies in the Cosmic Microwave Background.</ >
< >So what do I believe?</ >
< >I believe in the Multiverse. </ >
< >I believe that once the fuse was lit, there is no com lete end. </ >
< >My multiverse hy othesis states that our universe is merely one Big Bang amon
g an infinite number of simultaneously ex anding Big Bangs that are s read out o
ver endless distances. Each universe may be either matter or antimatter, with an
equal number in existence at any given time. As the universes each ex and away
from their individual event horizons they collide and matter and antimatter anni
hilate, releasing energy. Heat death of a finite universe would be redicted as
entro y increases; however, the infinite size of the multiverse and its oscillat
ion cou led with the infinite number of universes could mean that new ones would
be formed as old ones were annihilated.</ >
< >Think of it as a chain reaction multiverse, much like the finale at a firewo
rks dis lay with each ex losion being symbolic of a Big Bang. It begins in one n
eighborhood and is followed by fireworks dis lays in surrounding neighborhoods a
nd then in neighborhoods further out. The chain reaction of Big Bangs would cont
inue to ex and as Big Bang fuel is consumed. If the multiverse is o en and the f
uel is infinite then the chain reaction would ex and forever. Of course, it is n
ot known what the "fuel" is, (I believe it is the Zero Point Energy Fi
eld) but it is logical to assume that matter and energy are the roduct of a tra
nsformation from a real reactant, ossibly the Higgs boson. While I tend to thin
k they won't discover the Higgs Boson, there will be a settlement on someth
ing called the Higgs Boson Effect if the Higgs Boson is not discovered.</ >
< >By my reckoning, the multiverse as a whole will never end com letely. But thi
s is just a art of the equation. We have to add in the Many-worlds inter retati
on of quantum mechanics. As such, each time a quantum event ha ens that causes
the universe to decay from a false vacuum to a true vacuum state, the universe s
lits into several new worlds. In some of the new worlds the universe decays; in
some others the universe continues as before. I believe that both of these theo
ries are art of the same theory. One is entangled with the other creating many
reactions relating to the whole. </ >
< >Recent work in inflationary cosmology, string theory, and quantum mechanics h
as moved the discussion of the ultimate fate of the universe in directions disti
nct from the scenarios set out by some of the other theories. Theoretical work b
y Eric Chaisson and David Layzer suggest that an ex anding s acetime gives rise
to an increasing "entro y ga ", casting further doubt on the heat deat
h hy othesis. Invoking Ilya Prigogine's work on far-from-equilibrium thermo
dynamics, their analysis suggests that this entro y ga may contribute to inform
ation, and hence to the formation of structure. Hence the Information Theory may
be a art of the TOE, or Theory of Everything. Add to this as ects of the Holog
ra hic rinci le. The hologra hic rinci le is a ro erty of quantum gravity and
string theories which states that the descri tion of a volume of s ace can be t
hought of as encoded on a boundary to the region, referably a light-like bounda
ry like a gravitational horizon. First ro osed by Gerard 't Hooft, it was
given a recise string-theory inter retation by Leonard Susskind.</ >
< >In a larger and more s eculative sense, the theory suggests that the entire u
niverse can be seen as a two-dimensional information structure " ainted&quo
t; on the cosmological horizon, such that the three dimensions we observe are on
ly an effective descri tion at macrosco ic scales and at low energies. Cosmologi
cal hologra hy has not been made mathematically recise, artly because the cosm
ological horizon has a finite area and grows with time.</ >
< >The hologra hic rinci le was ins ired by black hole thermodynamics, which im
lies that the maximal entro y in any region scales with the radius squared, and
not cubed as might be ex ected. In the case of a black hole, the insight was th
at the descri tion of all the objects which have fallen in can be entirely conta
ined in surface fluctuations of the event horizon. The hologra hic rinci le res
olves the black hole information aradox within the framework of string theory.
All of these lay a art in the grand scheme of the Multiverse.</ >
< >Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Andrei Linde, Alan Guth, Ted Harrison, and Erne
st Sternglass argued that inflationary cosmology strongly suggests the resence
of a Multiverse, (Amen!) and that it would be ractical even with today's k
nowledge for intelligent beings to generate and transmit de novo information int
o a distinct universe. Alan Guth has s eculated that a civilization at the to o
f the Kardashev scale might create fine-tuned universes in a continuation of the
evolutionary drive to exist, grow, and multi ly. This has been further develo e
d by the Selfish Biocosm Hy othesis, and by the ro osal that the existence of t
he fundamental hysical constants may be subject to a Darwinian evolution of Uni
verses. Moreover, recent theoretical work on the unresolved quantum gravity rob
lem and the Hologra hic Princi le suggests that traditional hysical quantities
may ossibly themselves be describable in terms of exchanges of information, whi
ch in turn raises questions about the a licability of older cosmological models
.</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;A ril 23, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/04/23/endings/#res ond" title="Comment on Endings">Leave a comme
nt</a>
</s an>
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">
eat.word ress.com/2010/04/23/origin/" title="Permanent Link to Origin">Origin</a
></h2>
< >With the recent com uter models ointing to a
n oscillating universe as the most likely scenario, Im wondering if there are mu
lti le arallel universes that oscillate at the same time. Let’s say that
they all big bang at the same time– so imagine a s indle-like structure,
where time lines all converge on the big bang and diverge after each big bang.
Maybe every time we have a big bang we go into a different time line and another
arallel universe goes into our time line to re lace it. So basically all the
ossibilities exist at the same time and we just get shuffled around after each
big bang. Why do these universes converge on the same big bang? Because they a
ll share the same laws of hysics and they’re quantumly entangled. This w
hat I call “Layer 1″– the layer of alternate time line univers
es– universes which all share the same laws of hysics– so their lar
ge scale structure is the same– but which can differ in minor details (lik
e the time lines of eo le, for exam le.) This is what I would call “the
local multiverse” (borrowing the name from our own local cluster of galaxi
es, which then form art of the Virgo su ercluster, connected to each other thro
ugh thin, curiously cosmic string-like filaments [hint, hint], but which are se
arated from other su erclusters by large voids– which might be how what I
call the omnivese is also arranged on the large scale.) The evidence for these
as well as cosmic strings may have been found in the recently discovered “
cold s ot” in the Cosmic Background Radiation (kee reading.)</ >
< >This doesnt exclude the ossibility of other multiverses with their own hysi
cal laws and constants and erha s some consisting entirely or mainly of antimat
ter (what I call Layer 2 of the omniverse, which consists of other multiverses,
like our own, but with different laws of hysics and thus not quantumly entangle
d with our own but erha s with the satellite universes of their own multiverse)
, or even the idea of child-universes, branching and finally inching off the ma
in one, and connected to each other through blackhole-wormhole airs (the entire
multi-multiverse or the OMNIVERSE might be connected in this way) with each of
these ossessing different hysical laws, although I do feel that as the univers
es ex and and then finally contract, the connections get severed and each univer
se goes its own way– erha s to create even more child-universes to make u
for the connections that have been lost. Im thinking this ha ens through the
act of matter being swallowed by black holes; instead of disa earing forever&#
8211; it emerges on the “other side” in a new child-universe. It ma
y or may not kee its original constituency, de ending on whether or not the hy
sical laws and constants in the child-universe are the same as the ones in the
arent universe (if they are the same, the new child-universe will become quantum
ly entangled with the arent-universe and big bang at the same time– this
would be how a multiverse builds u its array of satellite universes; if not, th
en the child-universe will go its own way and likely establish its own multivers
e but remain art of the same su ercluster as the arent multiverse but not the
same “local” cluster.) Also, the larger the black hole, the more ma
tter it can swallow, and thus the larger the child universe on the other side.
This would also be a function of the black hole’s age– the older the
black hole, the larger the child universe on the other side. As far as connect
ions eventually being severed, this could be linked to the black hole eva oratio
n rocess, first described by Ste hen Hawkings. </ >
< >As a matter of fact, if one asks the question, “What s arks a big bang?
” — one of the stimuli that lead to it could be the collision of two
branes, one ex anding ra idly as the result of an inflationary eriod of ex ans
ion just after its own big bang– leading to a chain reaction causing other
big bangs in its vicinity. Think of it as a row of dominoes, one falls and oth
ers follow. These universes can be thought of as black holes in their own right
, as the edge of the universe would be an event horizon, from which not even lig
ht can esca e. As a matter of fact, this goes along well with my idea that chil
d universes were born at the other end of blackhole-wormhole airs–matter
got sucked into a black hole in another universe, assed into the wormhole, accu
mulated until there was enough of it to make a singularity, and then some trigge
r– like a brane-on-brane collision (caused by ZPE induced action in the bu
lk– similar to what it does in our s ace-time as dark energy)– broug
ht about a big bang. In this case, we could have formed inside a wormhole, but
the resulting universe would actually be a black hole. The blackhole would be a
singularity on the outside but not the inside– since different laws of h
ysics a ly on the outside. (This could also be the case with black holes within
our own universe and would show how and why singularities form– a black h
ole event horizon is sim ly a border between different laws of hysics and the r
eason that it’s a singularity is because the laws of hysics are different
on the outside vs the inside. In the case of “local” black holes w
e’re on the outside trying to look in and in the case of our own universe
we are on the inside trying to look out! This would take care of the “fir
st” big bang in an oscillatory cycle– but how to kee them going? W
ell, all those universes in layer 1– which are “reflections” o
f the same universe (much like mirrors in a funhouse all re resent reflections o
f the same thing)– just with alternate timelines– erha s the ex ans
ion and then contraction of these alternate timelines of the same hysical unive
rse is what kee s the oscillatory nature of the big bang going! What kee s the
universe from suffering an entro y related heat death during its ex ansion hase
? Curiously enough, the same thing which stimulates the massive ex ansion&#8211
; dark energy (that is, ZPE triggered action on s ace-time.) Just as the univer
se is about to be ri ed a art, a turnaround occurs and only one causal atch is
retained as our universe. This atch is com letely devoid of all matter–
including no articles– and only contains dark energy– and its entr
o y thereby vanishes. The rocess of contraction of this much smaller universe
takes lace adiabatically with constantly vanishing entro y and with no matter i
ncluding no black holes (which inched off and disintegrated before the turnarou
nd.) In effect, the universe “comes back em ty”– which avoids
the roblems of excessive structure formation, massive black holes etc.–
all of which would have roduced a remature bounce back to avoid violating the
second law of thermodynamics. Coming back em ty during its contracting hase le
aves the universe to freely oscillate an infinite number of times!</ >
< >Im envisioning four layers to reality from our oint of view (or hierarchies
of higher dimensions, if you will)…. the first layer includes our universe
and all that lies within and includes all the arallel universes that have iden
tical laws of hysics and constants to our own (and that converge and diverge wi
th our universe at each big bang), the second layer would include all the child
universes and all the multiverses with their own laws of hysics and constants a
nd their own arallel universes, the third layer would be the gravity brane from
which gravity emanates and the fourth layer would be “the bulk” or
what fills the void between the other layers. The four layer hierarchy seems a
rticularly attractive to me (es ecially since the Universe seems to love grou i
ng everything in fours– including the fundamental forces and the number of
dimensions in our own universe.) The gravity brane underlies everything, and
this would be from where gravity originates and is the glue that holds everythin
g together, as well as being the reason s ace-time curves and di s around object
s of mass, as the gravity brane ulls mass “downward” (see my ost &
#8220;What lies beneathe S ace-Time.”) This model also ex lains dark matt
er and dark energy (see Quintom Scenario) as just being manifestations of the gr
avity brane and ZPE res ectively, as they interact with our universe, whether it
be through blackhole-wormhole airs, WIMPs (weakly interacting massive article
s) or by some other means.</ >
< >The way to integrate this into M-theory’s 11 dimensions is to consider
the first two lanes of reality having access to a total of 8 dimensions (6 s at
ial dimensions and 2 tem oral ones) with the third lane being the single dimens
ional gravity brane and “the bulk” consisting of two dimensions&#821
1; one s atial dimension and one tem oral (“imaginary time”) dimensi
on. This gives us a total of 8 s atial dimensions and 3 tem oral ones (11 total
dimensions) that make u the whole of the omniverse. The second time dimension
is very useful, since it ex lains the arrow of time and allows FTL as well as t
ime travel, but two tem oral dimensions cannot exist in the same universe (as th
ey would cancel each other out– much like matter-antimatter interactions),
however FTL and time travel become accessible through blackhole-wormhole airs,
which bridge the ga s between the different layers and through the bulk. Recen
t com utational evidence seems to indicate that universes with 4 dimensions are
favored over other combinations, and my omniverse would allow for that– as
the first layer would have the 3 regular s atial dimensions lus regular time,
and the second layer can have a maximum of 3 distinct s atial dimensions lus 1
distinct tem oral one (for a total of [3+1] + [3+1] or the 6 s atial + 2 tem ora
l dimensions I mentioned earlier.) The bulk consists of 1 s atial dimension and
1 dimension of imaginary time– imaginary time being a conce t introduced
by Ste hen Hawkings to hel iron out the difficulties introduced by having a big
bang singularity. Having imaginary time hel s to answer the question “W
hat ha ened before the Big Bang(s)?”– because imaginary time existe
d before any of the big bangs and extends the timeline to before the creation of
the universe. The gravity brane consists of only one dimension and this, erha
s, is what makes gravity so intense there– the fact that all of its ower
is concentrated in a single dimension– and also what makes it so diluted
in our 4 dimensional universe (it isnt just a matter of distance but also of con
centration.) Time travel and FTL would both be ossible through the bulk&#8217
;s one s atial dimension and imaginary time– as a matter of fact, this is
exactly what the universe did during its inflationary eriod when it ex anded at
many times the s eed of light through the bulk (but to do it now we have to fin
d a conduit into and out of the bulk– erha s that’s what blackhole-
wormhole airs do, linking different universes as well as different oints in ou
r own universe via a bridge through the bulk– and the reason why gravity i
s so strong in and near black holes is because they rovide that direct link bet
ween our universe, the bulk and the gravity brane which lies beyond.) What cre
ates the attractive force between the gravity brane and the universe(s)? We can
find that answer within the world of D-branes and M-theory. All elementary ar
ticles are thought to be vibrational states of quantum strings and D-branes are
extended objects u on which o en strings can end. D-branes are classified by th
eir dimension…. for exam le a D0-brane is a single oint, a D1-brane is a
line (or string), a D2-brane is a lane, etc– all the way u to D9-brane i
n M-theory. (Since every brane swee s out a [ +1]-dimensional world volume as i
t ro agates through s acetime, there is always one less than the maximum number
of dimensions and its refered to as the P-Brane in M-theory.) There are also D
(-1)-branes which are localized in both s ace and time, and called instantonic b
ranes. With the develo ment of M-theory, an extra dimension a eared and the fu
ndamental string of string theory became a 2-dimensional membrane called an M1-b
rane (or su ermembrane). This is what I refer to as “the bulk.” Wh
at are D-branes made of? Large collections of tachyons ( articles that travel f
aster than light), coherent in a way that reminds us of hotons in a laser beam.
Tachyonic fields indeed arise in many versions of string theory. In general, s
tring theory states that what we see as “ articles”—electrons, hotons
, gravitons and so forth—are actually different vibrational states of the same und
erlying string. The mass of the article can be deduced from the vibrations whic
h the string exhibits; roughly s eaking, the mass de ends u on the “note&#
8221; which the string sounds. Tachyons frequently a ear in the s ectrum of er
missible string states, in the sense that some states have negative mass-squared
, and therefore imaginary mass. If the tachyon a ears as a vibrational mode of
an o en string, this signals an instability of the underlying D-brane system to
which the string is attached. The system will then decay to a state of closed s
trings and/or stable D-branes. If the tachyon is a closed string vibrational mod
e, this indicates an instability in s acetime itself. Generally, it is not known
what this system will decay to. However, if the closed string tachyon is locali
zed around a s acetime singularity the end oint of the decay rocess will often
have the singularity resolved. The tachyons carried by o en strings attached to
D-branes in string theory reflect the instability of the D-branes with res ect
to their com lete annihilation. The total energy carried by these tachyons has b
een calculated in string field theory; it agrees with the total energy of the D-
branes, and all other tests have confirmed this. Material objects, made of o en
strings, are bound to the D-brane, and cannot move “at right angles to re
ality” to ex lore the Universe outside the brane. The force of gravity is
not due to o en strings; the gravitons which carry gravitational forces are vib
rational states of closed strings. Because closed strings do not have to be atta
ched to D-branes, gravitational effects could de end u on the extra dimensions a
t right angles to the brane. This would be how the gravity brane exerts its inf
luence u on our universe, as well as others. In the same manner, this is how co
nnections can be established between different universes/multiverses (and erha
s this is what blackhole/wormhole airs really are as they bridge the ga across
the bulk.) Now let’s say we have two universes, identified as brane 1 an
d brane 2. We can easily imagine strings stretching from brane 1 to brane 2 or
vice versa. (In most theories, strings are oriented objects: each one carries a
n “arrow” defining a direction along its length.) The o en strings
ermissible in this situation then fall into two categories, or “sectors&#8
221;: those originating on brane 1 and terminating on brane 2, and those origina
ting on brane 2 and terminating on brane 1. In addition, a string may begin and
end on the same brane. A string has a minimum length: it cannot be shorter th
an the se aration between the branes. All strings have some tension, against whi
ch one must ull to lengthen the object; this ull does work on the string, addi
ng to its energy. Because string theories are by nature relativistic, adding ene
rgy to a string is equivalent to adding mass, by Einstein’s relation E = m
c2. Therefore, the se aration between D-branes controls the minimum mass o en st
rings may have. Furthermore, affixing a string’s end oint to a brane infl
uences the way the string can move and vibrate. Because article states “e
merge” from the string theory as the different vibrational states the stri
ng can ex erience, the arrangement of D-branes controls the ty es of articles
resent in the theory. One straightforward mechanism for a string interaction i
s for two strings to join end oints (or, conversely, for one string to “s
lit down the middle” and make two “daughter” strings). The m
asses of these strings will be influenced by the se aration between the branes.
The reason objects with more articles have more mass in general (of course thi
s also de ends on the nature of the articles– and strings) is because the
y have a higher quantity of strings. The string theory landsca e also gives us
some ideas regarding how many multiverses might be ossible in omniverse. In st
ring theory, the number of different landsca es in false vacua ( a local minimum
, but not the lowest energy state, even though it may remain stable for some tim
e– until it is tunneled to a lower energy state by quantum fluctuations or
the creation of high energy articles) is quoted as 10^500– The large nu
mber of ossibilities arises from different choices of Calabi-Yau manifolds and
different values of generalized magnetic fluxes over different homology cycles.
Chaotic Inflation theory outlines several different scenarios in which multivers
es can either ex and, contract or even die through the “natural” sel
ection of different laws of hysics within each multiverse that causes its bound
aries to behave in different ways (for exam le, in some of them, the universe&#8
217;s “bubble” bursts as it s ontaneously tunnels into a lower vacuu
m state!) What causes these bubbles to form in the first lace? The energy o
f the ZPE in the form of quantum fluctuations, which will form many bubbles of f
alse vacuum that inflae into miniunverses with random characteristics. Each uni
verse within the omniverse can have a different set of constants and hysical la
ws, which are subject to selection– which determines each region’s c
om onents (like galaxies, stars and lanets and their arrangements– like c
lusters, atoms, molecules, etc.) based and de edent u on the survivability of th
e quantum com onents within that region. The end result will be a finite number
of universes with hysical laws consistent within each region of s acetime&#821
1; and which exist for eriods of time de endent u on those hysical laws. Some
might have life of a form different from ours; others might have no life at all
or something even more com lex or so different that we cannot even imagine it.
Obviously we are in one of those universes with life. Due to quantum uncertaint
y energy fluctuations such as electron and its anti- article a ositron can aris
e s ontaneously out of nothing but must disa ear ra idly. The lower the energy
of the bubble, the longer it can exist. A gravitational field has negative energ
y. Matter has ositive energy. The 2 figures cancel out rovided the universe is
com letely flat. In that case the universe has zero energy and can theoreticall
y last forever. Variants of the bubble universe model ostulate multi le false v
acuum states, which result in lower-energy false-vacuum “ rogeny” universes s awned,
which in turn roduce true vacuum state rogeny universes within themselves&#82
11; which is very similar to my model of arent-child universes. Im ortant use
of D-branes has been in the study of black holes. String theorists have constru
cted models in which a black hole is a very long (and hence very massive) string
. Strings combined with brane theory sounds quite intriguing…. you can al
ready see these networks on a much larger scale when you look at images of su er
clusters of galaxies and see how theyre arranged in a string like network that b
ridges the ga between huge voids. Strings with closed loo s, like the graviton
, are com letely free to move from membrane to membrane. Of the four force carri
er articles, the graviton is unique in this way. Researchers s eculate that thi
s is the reason why investigation through the weak force, the strong force, and
the electromagnetic force have not hinted at the ossibility of extra dimensions
. This is yet another way in which gravity is different from the other forces.
Also wondering if that’s how gravity ro agates itself across universes (
as does ZPE to achieve a balance between the bulk and the multiverses)…. i
f the gravity brane is indeed one dimensional, the conce t of one dimensional st
rings ro agating its influence through the bulk and into the multiverse via bla
ckhole-wormhole bridges/strings would be analogous to the existence of su erclus
ters of galaxies (universes) with large voids in between (the bulk) bridged by f
ilamentary structures (strings). I agree with this– the microscale and ma
croscale henomena we see are connected together in some way…. whether it
be the em ty s ace inside the atom or the void between su erclusters or whatever
in between. Consider what ha ens inside an atom, outside and between atoms, e
tc., is likely the same “connective tissue” that makes for the &#822
0;voids” between galaxies and galaxy clusters. Nature seems to have a the
me of re eating structures, no matter what the scale– it shows that someth
ing very fundamental is at work which underlies it all.</ >
< >Now what existed before the very first big bang? An interesting question! I
t seems to make sense that whatever existed before the very first big bang cause
d the big bang itself, and was the origin of all matter and energy not only in o
ur own universe, or the multiverse, but the whole omniverse itself. Zero Point
Energy, being the ground state of energy in a vacuum, is a very good candidate f
or that role. In my model, ZPE is the energy state of the bulk, and it acts as
the fuel to s ark the fires of creation, so to s eak. In an oscillating univers
e, the big bangs would be able to sustain themselves once the first one got star
ted (or at least until they got back to the “singularity” stage), bu
t they would need that intial creative s ark in the beginning, and I can see tha
t’s where ZPE comes in. It would originate in the bulk, as that is the ba
ckground under which all the big bangs occur. This also hel s to solve a roble
m in hysics which has been considered “unsolvable”– namely, w
hy doesnt the ZPE density of the vacuum change with the volume of the universe?
My answer to this would be– clearly because ZPE originates from outside t
he universe, in the bulk, and so the ex ansion of the universe doesnt affect the
density of the ZPE. I believe that ZPE emanates into our universe (and other u
niverses) through quantum foam and other ty es of blackhole-wormhole constructs
and that, eventually, a balance is reached between ZPE outside and inside the bu
lk and the omniverse (this balance would also be the reason the redicted mass o
f the quantum vacuum has little effect on the ex ansion of the universe and why
the energy density of the dark energy com onent is of the same magnitude as the
density of matter) and this density is maintained with only a slight variance (s
een as the Casimir Effect and vacuum fluctuations) until we get close to the nex
t big bang. Perha s at this time, a ra id change in the density of ZPE inside t
he universe is what causes the next big bang. And this would also hel ex lain
another so-called “unsolvable roblem”– why doesnt the large c
onstant ZPE density of the vacuum cause a large cosmological constant? Because
a balance is achieved between the ZPE values inside the universe(s) and outside
in the bulk! Because the cosmological constant was created in order to ex lain
the ex ansion of the universe (that is, “dark energy”) we kill two b
irds with one stone: since both are the results of the interactions of the gravi
ty brane and ZPE u on the universe(s)! As a matter of fact, just as dark matter
can be ex lained as an interaction between the gravity brane and our universe (
via strings), so can dark energy be ex lained as an interaction between the ZPE
of the bulk u on our universe to maintain an equilibrium density. Perha s black
hole/wormhole airs on the large scale and quantum foam on the small scale are v
ehicles of both (they are, after all, merely reflections of cosmic strings.) Bl
ack holes might be the gravity sink that cause the intense gravitational dis lay
of dark matter and wormholes might be the conduit that brings massive quantitie
s of energy (as ZPE and in other forms) into our universe, which is attributed t
o “dark energy.” And on the microscale, quantum foam can do both&#8
211; resulting in the Casimir Effect, which dis laces matter and energy, albeit
in very small degrees, but across vast distances of s ace-time and across the om
niverse. And, in addition to ZPE being the originator of the big bang(s), and s
o the source of all matter and energy in the multiverse, I theorize that the dim
ensions can be unified, just like the fundamental forces can (and that other mul
tiverses in the omniverse might have their own fundamental forces, de ending u o
n the laws of hysics in those multiverse(s) and how the gravity brane and ZPE a
ct u on them.) Perha s that one s atial dimension and one tem oral dimension of
the bulk are the source of all the dimensions (the one s atial dimension being
the source of all 8 s atial dimensions and the one imaginary time dimension bein
g the source of all 3 tem oral dimensions), just like ZPE was the source of all
matter and energy in the omniverse. </ >
< >So, to summarize, before the big bang(s) we had ZPE and the one s atial and o
ne tem oral dimension of the bulk, as well as the gravity brane (whose actions i
n conjunction with ZPE u on the early stages of the big bang caused the fundamen
tal forces to emerge– and thus they were the “originators” of
the latter.) So, once again, the number 4 cro s u in the creation equation (ZP
E, 1Ds, 1Dt, Gravity). The fact that tem oral dimensions are considered se arat
ely from s atial ones just like gravity is considered se arately from the other
fundamental forces creates a neat kind of symmetry that makes me think that grav
ity and time are related and instrinsically linked (since time emerged from the
other 3 local dimensions first, just like gravity emerged from the other 3 local
fundamental forces first.) At some oint in the far flung ast, the four eleme
nts of the creation equation were all united (interesting that the conce t of 4
elements comes u !) and that would have been before the gravity brane came into
existence (the gravity brane robably came into existence at the same time the o
ne tem oral dimension of imaginary time se arated from the one s atial dimension
in the bulk– and might have even been caused by it, and the result might
also have caused the generation of ZPE and/or been caused by it [or both, in tru
e oscillatory fashion!], which ended u resulting in the big bang(s)…. so
now you see how everything falls into lace and one thing leads to another&#8211
; like a cascade effect, or dominoes!) The gravity brane’s actions u on
the universe(s) would be the reason why we have blackhole-wormhole conduits in t
he first lace (the actions of the gravity brane on objects of mass causing s ac
e-time to curve, and in the case of objects of “infinite” density ca
using them to se arate from s ace-time entirely, and wormholes being created to
channel the matter-energy that gets sucked in to create a new balance, which als
o results in the creation of child universes and an ex ansion of the multiverse!
)– and the reason why a region which is considered an area where laws of
hysics “break down” can now be ex lained when one considers extra di
mensional s ace and what exists outside of s ace-time, so our known laws of hys
ics are just a subset of something greater, from which they originated. As a ma
tter of fact, if transversable wormholes can be generated or mani ulated using Z
PE, it would be oetic justice– as we’d be using the original energy
of the omniverse to travel within it and through s ace and time! The extra dim
ensions were always there, but they dont make themselves a arent until a singul
arity forms– like a big bang OR a blackhole-wormhole air– or someth
ing else which originates from beyond our universe, like ZPE or gravity, enters
the icture. On every day scales, we can make do with classical hysics, as th
ese are a suitable a roximation of reality. But when we get to larger and larg
er scales (or smaller and smaller) we finally realize that they are just that&#8
211; a roximations. In that way, they mimic the universe itself. Because, ju
st like our laws of hysics are a subset of something greater, so is our univers
e and its dimensions and forces. Just like what’s considered infinite/und
efined in the mathematics of our universe, isnt such on a higher level. On a hi
gher level, and yet also more fundamental– an interesting and circular rel
ationshi ! So the order of creation would have been: bulk->gravity brane-&g
t;big bang(s)->multiverse(s). A journey through a transversable wormhole wo
uld be retty awe-ins iring, not just because of where we were going, but what w
e were going through– something which not only redates all of existence&#
8211; but was also the cause of creation! </ >
< >And now, we come to the matter of the hologra hic rinci le– which stat
es that all the information in the universe (matter, energy, dimensions, forces)
etc. can be stored on one boundary of the universe. How would such a large amo
unt of data be stored? Not as difficult as you might think– as this is me
rely restating the fact that all of our dimensions, forces, matter and energy em
erged from some basic factors from which they s rung. The hologra hic rinci le
makes a great deal of sense to me. Why? Because the universe seems to be symm
etric on a vast range of scales– from the atom, to the solar system to the
galaxy, to su erclusters, and erha s all the way u to the ultimate level&#821
1; the omniverse. This re etitiveness of scales indicates to me that there is s
omething much sim ler that underlies all of this, and everything else is a roje
ction of something very fundamental….that everything we see around us is j
ust a reflection of this hidden underlying fabric– which is where the holo
gra hic rinci le comes in. Interestingly enough, just to show how convergent d
ifferent areas of research within cosmology are, fractal universe theory, which
resents the universe as a clum y structure, rather than homogenous, also seems
to give a nod towards the hologra hic rinci le, as it indicates the 4 dimension
al large scale of the universe can be re resented in only 2 dimensions on the Pl
anck scale and fractal s ace-time to boot, and suggest that the dimensionality o
f s ace evolves with time. Using noncommutative geometry, fractality also arise
s in this a roach to quantum gravity, and time becomes an emergent ro erty tha
t naturally arises in this formulation. Not only that, but it seems the univers
e might be fractal on the largest of scales also– since the evolution of
eaks in the bulk’s ZPE led to the creation if bubble universes. And analo
ging the hologra hic rinci le to ZPE like en to a er– that seems to mak
e a lot of sense to me also. Zero Point Energy, in being the quantum ground sta
te of a vacuum, the original energy of the omniverse, would be the omniverse at
its most fundamental level– from which all else emerged. The ZPE would be
the hologra h of all matter and energy and the bulk of all the dimensions and f
orces (through the action of the ZPE.) Since dark matter re resents the aggreg
ation of ZPE, and since dark matter leads to the organization and structure of g
alaxies, ZPE is res onsible for the organizational nature of our universe. Perh
a s the clustered nature of the galaxies also thusly re resents the structure of
the omniverse on a much reduced scale (since the su ermassive black holes at th
e centers of galaxies could be gateways into other universes)…. in other w
ords, we can see a hologra h of the omniverse from within our own universe! Or
in other terms, the “son” (our Universe) is a reflection of the fath
er (the omniverse). Analysis of the large scale structure of the universe seems
to indicate that there is both randomness and a hierarchical structure at work&#
8211; this would erha s indicate the influences of both quantum fluctuation and
organized structures beyond the universe influencing the structures within our
own universe (in other words, both ZPE and gravity.) Dark matter– and thu
s the gravity brane and ZPE would influence where su erclusters formed, and dark
energy– and thus ZPE– would influece the formation of su ervoids.
This duality seems to mimic the duality of curved s ace time and quantum foam&#8
211; creating yet another universal symmetry. And the idea that the omniverse i
s reflected in the large scale structures of our own universe continues this the
me of symmetry at all levels. Continuing the theme of symmetry inside and outsi
de our universe, the recently discovered cold s ot in the cosmic background radi
ation has been hy othesized to indicate the resence of a arallel universe quan
tumly entangled with our own. If roven true, this would be the first roof of
the multiverse and a major nod towards string theory. Along the same lines, the
“Great Attractor” might rove to lie towards the center of mass of
a su ercluster of multiverses (if our galaxies can be organized into su ercluste
rs inters ersed with su ervoids, why shouldnt the omniverse be organized into su
erclusters of universes se arated by su ervoids of the bulk?) Its interesting
that the hologra hic rinci le was first used to describe all the information st
ored in a black hole using its surface area, not its volume and shows that our u
niverse has much in common with more conventional black holes, and erha s the b
lack holes we detect in our own universe are the beginnings (or signs) of new un
iverses in other dimensions. The one dimensional bulk would fit in erfectly wi
th the idea of an oscillatory universe– as the most often cited exam le of
a one dimensional sha e is a mobius stri , which loo s back u on itself, both
beginning and ending at the same oint. Thus, the bulk (and ZPE by extension) h
as no beginning and no ending. The loo ing occurs over such a long interval, th
ough, that the bulk a ears “flat.” How can so many dimensions be &
#8220;written” on a one dimensional bulk? Sim le, the dimensions are com
actified! This resolves the issue of why the universe “inflated” so
quickly in its early eriod very well. Not only was it the action of ZPE u on
s ace-time, but since our dimensions are com actified, the inflation seems much
more ra id than it really was (from the ers ective of the bulk.) We have been
looking for com actified dimensions, not realizing that we ourselves exist insid
e of them! </ >
< > While the bulk’s ZPE contains the entire history of the omniverse, our
universe’s own history would be written on s ace-time, as the ZPE of the
cosmic background radiation, which dis lays the history of our own articular bi
g bang. Not only that, but in the cosmic background radiation is also written t
he eriod of ex losive ex ansion known as “Inflation”– much li
ke earth’s sediment reserves the fossil record. As a matter of fact, sin
ce the bulk and its ZPE re resent an early history of the omniverse itself, ex l
oration of it through wormholes should be even more awe-ins iring since we would
see a “fossil record” of all of Creation itself– along with
energy signatures of different multiverses in various stages of ex ansion or col
la se– and maybe even in the rocess of big banging! </ >
< > I theorize the dimensions and forces emerged from the same common “anc
estor”– and yet another symmetry was born– the four forces and
the four dimensions– with gravity and time being the two “black she
e ” that dont fit in with the rest. If ZPR is fundamental to all the ene
rgy in the omniverse, and the bulk to all the dimensions, then the actions of th
e ZPE u on the bulk would be from where the forces arose (including the gravity
brane!) And what makes gravity so different from the other forces– one, i
t se arated first, and two, it originates on its own brane. And imaginary time,
the original time of the bulk, would also have arisen from interactions between
the ZPE and the bulk. Before the omniverse there would have just been the bulk
and its zero oint energy– vacuum fluctuations of virtual articles, if y
ou will– winking into and out of existence. It was on the surface of this
dynamic “vacuum” that the omniverse was written. And since the ZPE
wasnt s read out equally, where it clum ed and aggregated and started to accumu
late for more than a few trillionths of a second instead of “melting&#8221
; away is where the first seeds of the omniverse were born. Perha s we still se
e a “hologra h” encoded into our s ace-time of where these aggregate
s are located (the aggregates to new universes in the making erha s)– in
the form of dark matter. And the actions of the gravity brane on these massive
clum s are what makes dark matter so mysterious. The idea of aggregates coalesc
ing into the first seeds doesnt sound too different from the first vestiges of l
ife a earing on our lanet does it? The universe is symmetric on so many scale
s!</ >
< > I had osted a diagram in an earlier ost about the substructure of our univ
erse on the microsco ic level (under “Quantum Foam”) and looking at
all the eaks and valleys of this structure, its conceivable that entrances and
exits into and out of the bulk lie in these eaks and valleys and thats how virt
ual articles wink into and out of existence as they go from one art of the uni
verse to another (or between universes) and ex lain the Casimir Effect. This wo
uld reserve the law of conservation of mass-energy while also kee ing the Heise
nberg Uncertainty Princi le in lace, as one couldnt be certain of exactly where
these articles would be at any given moment, but at the same time, no virtual
article would be created or destroyed, they would just be reshuffled from one
lace to another within the omniverse. Quantum foam gives us a window into the w
orld beyond s ace-time into the bulk and ZPE, just as much as looking at the mos
t distant galaxies gives us a view into what the universe was like just after th
e big bang. And this is the reason why different laws of hysics a ly on the s
ub lanck scale– laws which existed before there were dimensions and forces
– laws that redate our own universe! ZPE even occurs on the sub lanck sc
ale, in the form of virtual quark airs that account for the majority of the ro
ton’s s in. Blackhole-Wormhole airs would just be quantum foam eaks and
valleys on a higher level (as a matter of fact, when thinking of the ossible d
ifferences in blackhole-wormhole airs that link us to second layer universes an
d multiverses [those with hysical laws and constants different from our own] an
d other arallel universes within our own multiverse [those with the same hysic
al laws and constants]– it occurs to me that the macrosco ic black hole-wo
rmhole cou lets would be the ones to link us to either second layer universes an
d multiverses OR other locations within our own universe or local multiverse and
microsco ic blackhole-wormhole airs would be the ones that ONLY connect us to
arallel universes within our own multiverse, as well as other arts of our own
universe. Intuitively, this makes sense, as the Afshar double slit ex eriment,
as well as quantum tunneling and tele ortation and the Casimir effect are much m
ore likely to redistribute matter and energy across our own multiverse, rather t
han through second layer universes or multiverses with different laws of hysics
and constants. Closed timelike curves near black holes could be the side effec
t of being so close to the bulk and the gravity brane which lies beyond and, as
a matter of fact, quantum su er osition can be ex lained as being a closed timel
ike curve around a microsco ic black hole (quantum foam), which enables the art
icle to be in two laces at the same time (from our oint of view)– becaus
e its stuck in a local time loo , just like a CTC can generate both future and
ast time travel on all levels and macrosco ic su er osition near areas of high s
ace-time distortion, like black holes. As a matter of fact, CTC are a known sy
m tom of being close to an area where two dimensions of time intersect, which wo
uld neatly fit into the idea of them occuring near black holes– where our
dimension of time and the one of the bulk intersects. Its interesting that they
re resent a meeting lace of multi le tem oral dimensions and the gravity brane
– showing yet another way gravity and time are linked. At resent, the on
ly ty e of black holes known to be good candidates for cou ling with transversab
le wormholes would be Kerr black holes, because their ring singularities create
tunnels through which macrosco ic travel is ossible through the bulk– to
either other oints in our s ace-time, the local multiverse, or even second laye
r universes. However, given enough energy, we could create artificial transvers
able wormholes through our own universe’s s ace and time (requires the &#8
220;least” energy– relatively s eaking), in our multiverse (requires
more energy), or even through second layer universes or multiverses (requires t
he most energy of all, and we would need to maintain some sort of bubble of our
own s ace-time to revent some ty e of catastro he from being in a universe with
different hysical laws– which we would need in making a journey through
a transversable wormhole anyway, but it would be necessary to kee this bubble i
ntact when we interact with a second layer universe.) How to journey to a unive
rse with different dimensions and/or hysical laws? It would be very tricky. I
f it has different dimensions than our own, then how would we fit our 3 dimensio
nal selves into it– or for that matter– how would we even see it? I
t might just seem like a oint article to us (since it doesnt exist in our dime
nsions) and we might just seem like a oint article to any life that exists the
re (which life in another art of our own universe– let alone another univ
erse entirely– would robably be so different from us– would we even
recognize it as life?– es ecially if it was just made of energy or inters
tellar dust or with a biochemistry different from ours, or if it existed on a sc
ale vastly different from ours– that is, we might be like ants to them or
vice versa!?) I wonder if our consciousness can be se arated from our hysical
body (I guess we’ll find out when we die– although some claim to be
able to do it through astral rojection in dreams or waking states and witness e
vents far away in s ace and/or time from their hysical bodies lol) and if so, t
hen we dont have to obey the same laws since we will be energy instead of matter
. As energy, we wouldnt be restricted to our own three dimensional s ace, nor w
ould we noticeably degrade with time. Ive read some serious scientific work tha
t states, to the effect that, if evolution roceeds unchecked, it will eventuall
y lead to beings made com letely of energy that think and communicate by the ro
cess of transferring electric currents within their energy and assing those cur
rents onto others (in effect, we’d have tele athy, because thoughts would
be able to be communicated directly, without the need of a mouth or any other or
gans– and at this stage of the game we would have no need for matter at al
l because the universe would consist mainly of energy.) This discussion is now
bridging the ga between science and s irituality, but I do wonder if we have an
energy com onent to our consciousness that can be se arated from our hysical s
elves and which can be used to journey into universes with other dimensions and/
or laws of hysics. Why would we even want to go to universes with different hy
sical laws or dimensions? Aside from the altruistic desire to ex lore other ar
ts of reality– I can see a ractical reason to do it also. If the hysica
l laws are indeed different and if the fundamental forces are different (maybe u
to 11 fundamental forces to match 11 dimensions, the same number of forces in
a given universe to match the dimensions in that universe– like ours?), th
en its ossible that the other universe exists in a higher energy state than our
own, in which case we could obtain massive amounts of “free energy”
if we could establish an energy um from that universe to our own (of course,
we would have to ex lore the ethical side of the issue and ho efully not damage
that universe or any of the beings that reside within– and erha s aid the
m in establishing their own free energy um and so on.) I do agree with Penro
se, that there is a quantum com onent to our consciousness (maybe the main com o
nent) that might be able to be transferred across s ace and time and even to oth
er dimensions of other universes. I find it interesting that both he and Jung b
elieve in a collective consciousness that can extend to other dimensions–
like a network of strings (much like the connections between galaxies or univer
ses on all scales– as well as the bonds that connect atoms together in a m
olecule.) ESP, if it does actually occur, might be ex lained as ri les along t
hese strings of consciousness (that are strong de ending on our emotional and/or
genetic connection to that erson– which might extend to the afterlife, w
hich, if it exists, would just be a higher energy state of a erson’s cons
cious energy) that extend through other dimensions and s ace-time. Which is why
it would seem to violate laws of hysics when it doesnt violate them if you con
sider extradimensional hysics and the fact that these instincts are buried insi
de of us and weakened by lack of use and ex osure to the hysical world. Maybe
our mythology had some basis in fact– and erha s, this is because we are
a art of the universe, and on some instinctive level we have the universe&#8217
;s “memories” of how it began inside of us, but to associate them to
everyday things we understand– that is where mythology and religion came
from– they are basically a diluted version of the truth. Im not a religio
us erson, but I am s iritual. I believe that religion was always used as a way
of trying to understand the unknown– there is truth to it, but its watere
d down. I think we hold the key to the truth within ourselves– for we are
a art of the truth that we are seeking. But our environment makes it difficul
t to unlock it, because we really have nothing to com are it to. Its like my ea
rlier analogy of cavemen trying to figure out how to design and run a car–
they sim ly dont have the real world ex erience to be able to do it, although i
n rinci le the knowledge of how such a machine would work (in basics) is robab
ly rogrammed into their brains. We might have to transfer our consciousness in
to a being that exists in another Layer 2 universe because we would need their s
enses in order to erceive their environment and we would need their bodies in o
rder to co e with their hysical universe (even if the dimensions are the same,
different hysical laws might mean that the size of everything is different&#821
1; for exam le cosmic rays could be the size of lanes and lanets the size of
im les or the universe might be mostly com osed of antimatter, or time might ro
gress much faster or slower or not move at all, if they have a different tem ora
l dimension from ours.) Of course, if we dont want to face an ethical dillemma,
we would need their ermission first– erha s an exchange of equal length
would be in order! The really interesting case would be if some of our dimensi
ons from our universe were resent in an alternate universe, but not others&#821
1; like, for exam le, if they had length and width but substitute a different di
mension for de th. In that case, their universe would seem flat as a ancake to
us! Or if the dimension of time is different– it would be frozen in lac
e right at the beginning, according to our senses. Hence the need for rojectin
g conscious energy into the bodies of that universe’s own residents. As f
ar as time travel is concerned within Layer 1 or Layer 2, this is an interesting
idea, and I believe you can invoke MWI here— going backwards in time woul
d merely get you onto a different timeline and different layer 1 universe (of th
at articular multiverse), arallel to the one you left. Also, in extradimensio
nal theory, there is an extra dimension of time invoked which would remove many
of the aradoxes involved with time travel– either backwards or forwards.
I believe Kaku found a way around the roblem of the earth moving in s ace whil
e we were time traveling and the roblem of taking “information” fro
m our universe to another one– I’ll have to look into that. Its on
mkaku.org It might also involve transferring our conscious energy into another
being ( referably ourselves– if its in a arallel universe.) The time bub
ble I mentioned would robably work like the Alcubierre s ace war bubble, which
would enable hy erluminal s eeds by distorting s ace-time and riding it like a
“wave”– the similarities of both constructs shows how su erlum
inal travel and time travel are instrincally linked. And then we have the matte
r of closed timelike curves– which means gravity has to be thrown into the
equation also. After reading what Linde wrote concerning the ability to constr
uct a universe within a laboratory (or a collider) and not have it wreck the uni
verse we’re in because it would curve in u on itself and basically look li
ke a subatomic article, it got me thinking— what if our universe is just
a subatomic article in someone else’s much larger universe? And what if
our subatomic articles are nothing more than tiny universes (on our scale)&#821
1; and the reason why we cant see any structure in articles like the electron,
the ositron, etc– is because they contain their own hysical laws inside
themselves– but on the outside, they obey the laws of our hysical world
(We’ve seen this kind of thing before, as Quantum Mechanics gives way to N
ewtonian hysics on the every day level and Einsteinian Physics on Relativistic
scales– one is basically a subset of the other.) It doesnt seem very like
ly at all, but I find this idea whimsical and it would in some sense solve the a
ntimatter question– as one could envision a universe made u of the equiva
lent of an electron would be com osed of mainly matter and one the equivalent of
a ositron would be mainly antimatter. Perha s the omniverse is layered in thi
s way also (something we’ve seen at the subatomic level when com aring ele
ctrons to muons to tauons) and if that was the case, more than likely we’d
be an “in between universe” with many underneath us and many above
us also. Com aring ourselves to whatever su erverse lies “above us”
erha s their atoms are nothing more than clusters of universes, densely acked
near the center (and with the large em ty s aces inside the atoms mainly com os
ed of ZPE and bulk), with the nucleus acked like the way the center of our own
galaxy is acked, and molecules are nothing more than su erclusters of multivers
es with blackhole-wormhole connections (chemical bonds?!) between them. This id
ea is really far out there– but its interesting to think about nonetheless
. Perha s the nuclear force is merely the equivalent of our gravitational force
on the scale of a microuniverse (one that a ears to be a subatomic article on
our own scale.) In that case, the strong nuclear force, would bind the microun
iverses together (gravity ro agated through strings made of gluons creating bla
ckhole-wormhole airs?) and the weak nuclear force would break them a art in the
rocess of fission (dark energy?) The elements– not to mention subatomic
articles– that would exist in these realities would be extremely exotic
and nothing like ours– not to mention their laws of hysics! I decided to
leave this out of my theory for fear of making it much more com licated, but I
thought that erha s the bulk and the z e within it also undergoes a “big
bang” but at a much larger timescale than the rest of the omniverse (thoug
h the omniverse big bangs would also be an integer divisor of the bulk/z e big b
ang– the ones that are stable and longlasting, anyway)…. the roblem
s that arise here include the fact that if this is correct, you then have to hav
e something outside the bulk and something even more fundamental than ZPE on the
outside of the omniverse, more dimensions, etc, and then our omniverse becomes
just one of many. At which level would this sto ? Would it just go on ad infi
nitum or what? I know in the hysics community there are some who believe that
quarks arent the fundamental form of matter and that reons are what quarks are
made of. (I have even seen some state that reon stars could rove this, just l
ike quark stars were astronomical roof of quarks.) Again, when does it sto ?
What exactly is fundamental– or does that word even have any real meaning?
Maybe the dee er we look, the more we will see that nothing is fundamental and
everything is made of something sim ler and everything also makes u something
more com lex– a uzzle inside a aradox inside a conundrum inside a…
It would mean the bulk oscillates and omniverse oscillates at frequencies th
at are integer divisors of the bulk oscillation– goes on indefinitely at
higher levels and lower levels (maybe inside black holes– which contain th
eir own microomniverses?)– the gravity brane makes the bulk oscillate (ins
ide black holes for microverses also– as microbulks)– there are othe
r bulks within their own omniverses inside the su erbulk that also do this&#8211
; each with their own hysical laws, dimensions, forces and constants. Of cours
e, the gravity brane would be the one which they all had in common on different
levels, it would just manifest itself as a different force on each level (like t
he strong nuclear force, for exam le.) This com letely sideste s the idea that
erha s our own universe was generated in some sort of laboratory somewhere by I
guess you could call it “God” but I would just call it some bum wit
h too much time on their hands! The thing is our universe and everything inside
it seems to huge to us but to someone on the outside it might be the size of a
oint, in their own dimensions. And according to some cosmologists, one way a c
reator could give us an idea that they made us would be to make some laws of hy
sics that behave according to some exact numbers– and these “s ecial
numbers,” called constants– would hold the key to what they were tr
ying to communicate (because math is the universal language.) One other theory
I would like to mention is Kris Shield’s double manifold theory which hold
s that our universe can be divided into two com artments, one with matter and th
e other with antimatter, and the two big bang at o osite arts of their res ect
ive timelines, with ZPE the boundary or domain wall between the two. Is it oss
ible that matter would be converted directly to antimatter and vice versa as it
“crossed over”? If that is the case, I can see how ZPE would be the
boundary, as energy is neither matter nor antimatter. Would we be able to trav
el back and forth? (errr, afterlife and reincarnation in their natural state fo
r both sides and limbo for the barrier in between? I dont know if I want to att
em t to go there in a “forced” state lol) Would we be able to utili
ze this duality as a ortal to travel to other ortions of our own universe via
extradimensional s ace? I remember back a few years ago reading about an old th
eory concerning a dual universe structure in which we were one universe with alw
ays subliminal s eeds, and there was a luxon barrier where everything traveled t
he s eed of light and then there was the tachyon universe where everything alway
s traveled over the s eed of light. Im wondering if we could a ly this to Kris
’ theory in a novel manner. Let’s say that the reason we cant see
anything on the other side of the manifold is because, from our ers ective, eve
rything on the other side has imaginary mass and always travels at su erluminal
velocities, and the reason why they cant see us is because of the same thing. S
o, we think THEY are made of tachyons and have imaginary mass and they think WE
are made of tachyons and have imaginary mass. And the luxon wall where everythi
ng always travels at the s eed of light would be the ZPE (now that gives going &
#8220;into the light” new meaning– and the reason s irits/ghosts nev
er seem to age, for they would be traveling at the s eed of light in limbo aka t
he ZPE!!) Besides the idea that “the other side” would always seem
to be traveling at su erluminal velocities (which in reality neither was), anoth
er reason it would evade detection is that from our side it would seem to violat
e causality and to be traveling backward in time (which they would think we were
doing instead– if they could see us being “reborn”!) The two
things which seem to violate symmetry are the monodirection of time and the lack
of antimatter in our universe. Perha s we will find a reflection of our univer
se which balances these out and reserves the symmetries. The double manifold t
heory would reserve this symmetry because it would seem (from our view, if we c
ould see them!) to be going backward in time (as we would seem to be, from their
view) and it would be com osed of antimatter (which we would seem to be from th
eir view.) If ZPE is indeed a hologra h of our universe (and is written in s ac
e-time, which is ZPE), then we cant see “the other side” because all
we see is a hologra h of our own reality, like a mirror– and the same goe
s for them also. In this case, black holes would really be the only source of i
nformation– its just too bad that they’re singularities, which would
reclude us from learning– unless we found or made a transversable worm h
ole to go there (with the aforementioned rotection), that is. Mass would be ex
changed between both universes through wormholes and quantum foam– until i
t ti ed over one or the other universe into a “big bang” and then t
he cycle would re eat– this time, for the other universe. The beauty of i
t is, that it reserves causation and conservation laws all the while roducing
astounding effects that SEEM to violate causation. And it fits in with my omniv
erse theory, as each universe (whether it be a layer 1 arallel or layer 2 exoti
c universe) would have its own alterego– an “antiuniverse,” if
you will– just like each article has its own anti article. Of course ge
tting into the “antiverse” for any articular universe would be high
ly roblematic, as we dont want to be annihilated with all that antimatter aroun
d (good thing we have that ZPE barrier)! Exchanging conscious energy with a res
ident being would do the trick though (ghosts in inanimate form, ossessed being
s in animate form?!)– since energy is neutral and can exist stably in any
universe or antiuniverse! This duality makes for a yin-yang dual universe (ano
ther exam le of hiloso hy meeting science– much like Immanuel Kant’
s “island universes.”) It can also be considered our mirror univers
e, as it would be an antimatter version of us (and we of them), so all handednes
s in nature would be the reverse of ours (although we would not retain any memor
y of handedness in case of reincarnation and so would not notice that– as
a matter of fact, we shouldn’t be able to retain any memories– unles
s we met someone we were emotionally connected to– which might be an ex la
nation of “soulmates,” etc.– in which case we might think we&#
8217;d known them “forever” but without any s ecific memories, unles
s something traumatic ha ened to “shock” our consciousness into rem
embering them [although latent memories might be brought out with regressive hy
nosis]– which would also occur in the case of ghosts or s irits [if they a
re real]– causing them to be tra ed in limbo– aka the ZPE– ne
ver aging because they’re energy, re laying their last traumatic memories,
and their energy in the “barrier” causing electromagnetic interfere
nce, cold s ots with their negative energy and, in extreme cases, movement of h
ysical objects– needing some kind of realization of their redicament to c
om lete the journey into the antiverse, referably through their summoning and r
ecognization of their “loved ones.”) Perha s the com lete set of un
iverses, along with their mirror antiverses (or mirrorverses), microverses and m
iniverses with their microbulk or minibulk (which are subatomic articles and th
e “em ty” area in between– which actually contains z e–
in those universes), their multiverses (Layer 1 arallel time universes), Layer
2 multiverses (those with different hysical laws and/or dimensions) and their b
ulk and su erverses (those in which the omniverse below com rises all the elemen
tary subatomic articles) along with their su erbulk should, as a whole, be term
ed the hy erverse. The only thing all the layers would have in common would be
ZPE (called quintessence– or the “fifth element” by the Greeks
and various other cultures– its intriguing that these historical cultures
theorized its existence millennia ago– which shows me human instincts ca
n deduce a diluted version of the truth, because they are a art of it and the r
eason its diluted is because they need to associate it with something their cult
ure is familiar with) and the gravity brane, the balance of which ( ush and ull
, ex ansion and contraction) kee everything together. The big roblems we woul
d face in trying to examine a universe with different laws of hysics or other d
imensions would be, first of all, trying to determine if life exists there (or c
an exist) and if so, finding a way to communicate with it. Aside from the fact
that the intelligent life might be so alien as for us to not be able to recogniz
e it (maybe made of energy) how would we “talk” to it? Perha s with
the only two things our universes might have in common– energy and math.
In other words, sending beams of energy in mathematical atterns– for exa
m le, binary code. In layer 1 arallel universes and in the antiverse, this sho
uld be much easier, as there should be humans who s eak earth languages in those
– however, we would need to make sure we were “looking” in the
right art of said universe (Milky Way galaxy, Orion sector)– but this is
likely to be alleviated by the fact that the blackhole-wormhole connections tha
t would lead us there would robably lead to the same arts of local s ace that
we are in. As you can see, the omniverse has many different aths (cosmological
background radiation, strings, hologra hic rinci le, multiverse, branes, ZPE,
gravity, bulk, blackholes, wormholes, quantum foam, etc.) to the same goal on ma
ny different scales (sub lanck, quantum, atoms, molecules, lanetary systems, st
ars, galaxies, clusters, su erclusters, multiverses, etc., even life itself!)&#8
211; but what they all have in common (besides having the same underlying fundam
ental factors) is that they all seek to achieve a balance between what’s o
n the outside and what’s on the inside– and thus, the fate of our un
iverse and of the whole omniverse is, and always has been, as inevitable as it i
s circular. And the fact that quantum foam and macrosco ic black holes might es
sentially be the same thing on different scales makes it a arent that these wou
ld all be features connecting both relativity AND quantum mechanics (and add the
unification of gravity through the gravity brane)– going a long way towar
ds unifying both the microsco ically roven quantum theory and the macrosco ical
ly roven relativity!</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;A ril 23, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/04/23/origin/#res ond" title="Comment on Origin">Leave a comment
</a>
</s an>
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class=" ost">

eat.word ress.com/2010/04/23/the- hiloso hy-of-love/" title="Permanent Link to O
rigin 3: The Philoso hy of&nbs ;Love">Origin 3: The Philoso hy of&nbs ;Love</a><
/h2>
< >Philoso hy on Love<br />
Love is the erfect union of two souls– this union not<br />
necessarily of soul mates, but can also be “soul sibling” or “
soul arent” love…<br />
ure love in all its forms, is what we must all strive to achieve, and whether<b
r />
or not we ever do achieve that erfect love is not the oint, its the ursuit of
<br />
it that hel s us grow as eo le, and hel s us to realize the greater beauty of<b
r />
the world around us. I would add here that erfect love or any ursuit of such<b
r />
begins from within, and if we do not have love for ourselves we do not have love
<br />
to share with others. Now it may seem selfish to think of loving ourselves, but<
br />
never mistake selfishness for love… because jealousy, mani ulation and<br
/>
dishonesty– all necessary com onents of selfishness, are mutually exclusiv
e of<br />
true love. By loving ourselves, I mean we need to understand that no matter who<
br />
we are, we all lay a key role in the success of our society, and we are all<br
/>
im ortant, and to give of ourselves in order to make our society a better lace&
#8211;<br />
this is what loving ourselves means. It is this generosity of giving of<br />
ourselves that also shares our love, not only with eo le that we know, but also
<br />
with eo le that we do not know– love (I feel) is a logarithmic equation)
that<br />
is twice blessed, once for the giver and once for the receiver– and every
time<br />
it is shared, that love and a share of the heart of the giver reside inside the<
br />
receiver, making their heart that much bigger and readier to share love with<br
/>
others. We touch so many eo le without even knowing who, or how we touched them
.</ >
< >Children are a re resentation, a<br />
ersonification, of erfect love… that is why I feel all children are erf
ect<br />
as they are born unto the world, until their environment can begin to corru t<br
/>
them. I have no children, but just looking at the urity of a baby’s smile
or<br />
the innocent s arkle in their eyes, roves it to me… they see the world in
a<br />
whole different light than we do, they see it for the truly beautiful and<br />
ins irational lace it can be because each child sees the world in a whole new<b
r />
way; like a diamond with an infinite number of facets, the birth of a new child<
br />
o ens u a whole new reality and ath to the future in front of us. This newness
<br />
of a child’s world view is essential to creativity and the future of human
kind–<br />
without it culture would stagnate and humanity would descend into– my<br /
>
favorite word– BOREDOM (lol)– and disorder. A new child re resents a
new<br />
motivation for us to succeed, one not only for ourselves, but also for them&#823
0;<br />
to make them roud of us, and to be a role model for them. As such, children<br
/>
have much to teach us– not only about them, but also about ourselves, abou
t<br />
what love really is, and about what true beauty exists in our world today, and<b
r />
our desire to reserve it for their tomorrow. Children aren’t just a littl
e<br />
version of us, they are a BETTER version of us, nature (and our) attem t to<br /
>
achieve an even greater erfection than was achieved with the revious<br />
generation. We build u on the successes and mistakes of the revious generation<
br />
in order to achieve a better tomorrow with our heirs. We all have a little child
<br />
inside of us, that urity that hasn’t been tarnished, and that will always
be<br />
the best art of us– the art that lets us be creative, the art that lets
us<br />
imagine, and the art that hel s us to dream what may ha en, if we but try&#821
1; in<br />
short it’s the art that I (and many others, I sus ect) access when we wri
te, or<br />
do anything else creative or roductive. Children, whether we s eak of the<br />
biological variety, or of the inner child inside all of us, are our ho e for the
<br />
resent and the future, as well as our link to the ast– without them soci
ety<br />
would lose its very foundation, its reason for caring and its motivation to make
<br />
the world a better lace.</ >
< >Children are the greatest teachers of the greatest lesson the world has ever<
br />
known. And that lesson is love.</ >
< >Love to me is a multifaceted jewel that exists on so many levels, that what w
e<br />
as humans understand as love is just one small art of it. Yes there are<br />
different forms of love, love of self, love of soulmate, love of sibling, love<b
r />
of arents, and love of friends and other family. BUT I feel that there is also<
br />
other forms of more subtle love. Animals can love… Plants can love, even<b
r />
inanimate objects such as the earth itself can love. Think about how it su orts
<br />
all of us, gives all of us its recious resources so we might survive. The same<
br />
can be said of the sun. As another exam le– what is music but the erfect<
br />
hysical re resentation of love through the medium of sound carried on air<br />
molecules? No one can sit here and say that music is not a ure form of love&#82
11;<br />
scientific studies have shown its abilities in healing, even in infants, and<br
/>
also how it can aid (or degrade lol) brain develo ment. One of the very<br />
qualities of love itself, is harmony, and the word harmony has music as its<br /
>
source…</ >
< >I also believe (as I wrote in blogs revious to this) that to love another on
e<br />
must love oneself first… and make no mistake, this is no narcissistic self
-love<br />
I am ty ing of here, but the kind that creates and engenders res ect for oneself
<br />
and for others, where one realizes (to a degree– not absolutely, or else t
here<br />
would be no ur ose to life) ones lace in the grand scheme of things. If one<br
/>
does not have unconditional love of self than one does not have love to share<br
/>
with others.</ >
< >Finally I believe that the greatest teachers of love are children and animals
.<br />
They love unconditionally, from birth, because they know no other way to be. We<
br />
can learn much from them that we have forgotten along the way because of the<br
/>
corru tion the environment around us causes. Love is a great circle and the<br /
>
greatest exam le of that is how the teachers (adults) become students and how<br
/>
students (kids) become teachers of love to the revious generation. Love can al
so be described as a circle because a circle has no beginning and no end and whe
n you have unconditional love, it seems like its always existed, even before you
knew the object of your love (no beginning) and will exist forever, even beyond
death (no end).</ >
< >One of love’s most healing qualities is its<br />
restoration of faith into the faithless and the restoration of ho e into the<br
/>
ho eless. How does it do this? I believe that love is a fundamental force of the
<br />
universe as much as any of the 4 hysical forces… and that it exerts ress
ure<br />
on all of us, living or inanimate… it connects us all to each other, so th
e<br />
healthier arts can hel heal the unhealthy ones. Love is like the glue that<br
/>
holds together the many strands of the web which connects us all to each other,<
br />
an ever-renewing glue that seeks to make every strand as unbreakable as the<br /
>
strongest one. Ever notice how we can tell a loved one is in danger before we<br
/>
know whats going on? This is just one exam le of how love makes our connections<
br />
stronger– in this case thru ESP. It may not always succeed– but that
is mostly<br />
due to the weight already laced on said strand– rather than some fundamen
tal<br />
flaw with love itself.</ >
< >In another essay, I resented my theories on the soul/s irit being higher mul
tidimensional in its source, and I believe the same to be true of love. Love, i
n its essence, is the way the soul communicates to another soul, and because the
soul exists beyond the three dimensional world we can detect with our senses, w
e can at best describe it vaguely. Love, in quite the same manner, has given bo
th scientists and hiloso hers quite a conundrum in its ability to heal both the
mind and the body (miraculous cures have been done with the healing ower of lo
ve alone– one exam le of how higher multidimensional reality can easily ac
com lish what seems im ossible in conventional three dimensional reality–
and is thus dubbed a “miracle”.) In my theory, the reason why love
is so hard to define in our three dimensional reality is because its origins&#82
11; as well as the origins of the soul/s irit and of creativity itself (which is
why such things as art and music bring such satisfaction to the soul– the
y s eak to our very s irit itself, in its own higher multidimensional language&#
8211; this is a subject for another essay, but when we create something new, it
either has more substance in hysical reality or in higher dimensional reality&#
8211; in the latter case, it “s eaks to our soul” and in the former
case its more “ ractical”); these dee er arts of us lie in the art
of ourselves that exists beyond the three dimensional lane in which our five s
enses roam free. Because of this, it becomes difficult to associate any of thes
e qualities with things we are familiar with in our very day existence. Its lik
e two dimensional beings viewing us as cardboard cutouts and thinking that&#8217
;s all there is to humanity. In higher multidimensional reality, our hysical e
xistence really is only a cardboard cutout com ared to the “true us”
the arts of us that exist on those higher lanes. A art of love is indeed h
ysical (because three dimensional reality is a art of higher dimensional existe
nce) but its only a very small art– but, unfortunately, its the only art
most eo le can com rehend. That’s why when we talk about such things as
sex, yes its a art of love, but only a very small art– most of the elat
ion, eu horia and ecstasy caused by love comes from its higher dimensional as ec
ts, unfortunately, hysicality, which is the only form of existence conventional
society can com rehend, cannot understand this higher dimensionality and theref
ore ignores it. Science is only beginning to robe higher dimensional reality i
n the form of quantum mechanics, and as it advances, I think we’ll see a d
ovetailing of science and s irituality, and when they meet, we will find the sou
l/s irit, creativity, consciousness and the true nature of love and our existenc
e itself waiting for us. As of right now, the closest our three dimensional as
ects can get to higher multidimensional reality is when we ex erience that magic
ally close connection through love or in the world of dreams, where we can somet
imes access the higher dimensional arts of our being– and we see that dis
tance and time become meaningless, just as they are in higher multidimensional r
eality.) In conventional society, hysicality reigns su reme, and the result is
a de ressed morose o ulation that seeks to o ills, drink alcohol or have sh
allow liaisons in order to com ensate for true love. Its not that they dont wan
t true love– they have no idea how to obtain it, because conventional soci
ety choses to ignore that which it cannot understand and that which is beyond th
e urview of its jurisdiction. Its almost like humankind retends that which it
cannot understand doesnt exist, and for this ignorance it ays very dearly, for
it cuts itself off from its own life giving roots. Not only that, but ower an
d greed, being afraid of something it doesnt understand, tries to close off soci
ety from that which could heal it by offering these substitutes for love, being
afraid that if we ever did find it on our own, their ower would be ended, and t
heir greed would be cut off at the roots. Little children and animals, which ar
e ure and innocent, havent yet been coached into this culture of ignorance, and
therefore instinctively understand what unconditional love really is, and if we
could get away from the detrimental effects of society, so could we. All we ha
ve to do is to listen to our inner voice, it s eaks true, as it has from the fir
st day of existence. If we trust our instincts and intuition, they can lead us
back to the ath on which nature intended us to be on all along. And then we wi
ll find true love waiting for us, as it has been all along. And why is love time
less? Because time doesnt exist in these higher dimensions, that’s why tr
ue love is a circle, without a beginning or an ending…</ >
</div>
</div>
bs ;A ril 23, 2010</s an>
d ress.com/2010/04/23/the- hiloso hy-of-love/#res ond" title="Comment on Origin
3: The Philoso hy of&nbs ;Love">Leave a comment</a>
</s an>
ss="taxonomy">
>
</div>
</div>
<div class="navigation">
<div class="alignleft"><a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegr
eat.word ress.com/ age/2/" >« Older Entries</a></div>
<div class="alignright"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="sidebar">
<ul>
<li id="blog-stats" class="widget widget_statsco
unter"> <h2 class="widgettitle">Blog Stats</h2>
<ul>
<li>445 hits</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li id=" ages-3" class="widget widget_ ages"><h2 class="widgettitle">Pages</h2>
<ul>
<li class=" age_item age-item-2"><a href="htt ://su erm
analexthegreat.word ress.com/about/" title="About and Works in&nbs ;Progress">Ab
out and Works in&nbs ;Progress</a></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li id="recent-comments" class="widget widget_recent_comments">
<h2 class="widgettitle">Recent Comments</h2>
<table class= recentcommentsavatar cells acing= 0 cell adding=
0 border= 0 ><tr><td title="Mr WordPress" class="recentcommentsavatarto " styl
e="height:48 x; width:48 x"><a href= htt ://WordPress.com/ rel= nofollow ><img
alt= src= htt ://0.gravatar.com/avatar/?s=48&am ;d=identicon&am ;r=G class= a
vatar avatar-48 height= 48 width= 48 /></a></td><td class="recentcommentstext
to "><a href= htt ://WordPress.com/ rel= nofollow >Mr WordPress</a> on <a href=
"htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/2010/04/19/hello-world/#comment-1">He
llo&nbs ;world!</a></td></tr></table>
</li>
<li id="gravatar-3" class="widget widget_gravatar"></li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="sidebar">
<ul>
<li id="blog_subscri tion-3" class="widget widget_blog_subscri t
ion"><h2 class="widgettitle"><label for="subscribe-field">Email Subscri tion</la
bel></h2>
<form action="htt ://subscribe.word ress.com" method=" ost" acce t-charset="utf-
8" id="subscribe-blog">
< >Click to subscribe to this blog and receive notificat
ions of new osts by email.</ >
<in ut ty e="hidden" name="action" value="subscribe"/>
<in ut ty e="hidden" name="blog_id" value="13208476"/>
<in ut ty e="hidden" name="source" value="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.wo
rd ress.com/"/>
<in ut ty e="hidden" name="sub-ty e" value="widget"/>
<in ut ty e="hidden" id="_w nonce" name="_w nonce" value="d84784dce6" />
<in ut ty e="hidden" name="_w _htt _referer" value="/" />
< ><in ut ty e="submit" value="Sign me u !" /></ >
</form>
</li>
<li id="archives-3" class="widget widget_archive"><h2 class="widgettitle">Archiv
es</h2>
<select name="archive-dro down" onchange= document.location.href
=this.o tions[this.selectedIndex].value; > <o tion value="">Select Month</o tion
> <o tion value= htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/2010/10/ > Octo
ber 2010 &nbs ;(3)</o tion>
<o tion value= htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/2010/09/ > Se t
ember 2010 &nbs ;(1)</o tion>
<o tion value= htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/2010/04/ > A ri
l 2010 &nbs ;(26)</o tion>
</select>
</li>
<li id=" d_to _rated-3" class="widget to _rated"></li>
<li id="search-3" class="widget widget_search"> <form method="get" id="searchfor
m" action="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com" >
<label class="hidden" for="s">Search for:</label>
<div>
<in ut ty e="text" value="" name="s" id="s" />
<in ut ty e="submit" id="searchsubmit" value="Search" />
</div>
</form></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
<div id="footer">
< ><a href="htt ://word ress.com/" rel="generator">Blog at WordP
ress.com</a>. | Theme: <a href="htt ://nischalmaniar.info/2009/04/dark-wood-them
e/">Dark Wood</a> by <a href="htt ://www.nischalmaniar.info/" rel="designer">Nis
chal Maniar</a>.</ >
</div>
</div>
<scri t ty e="text/javascri t">
// <![CDATA[
(function() {
try{
if ( window.external && msIsSiteMode in window.external) {
if (window.external.msIsSiteMode()) {
var jl = document.createElement( scri t );
jl.ty e= text/javascri t ;
jl.async=true;
jl.src= /w -content/ lugins/ie-sitemode/custom-jum list. h ;
var s = document.getElementsByTagName( scri t )[0];
s. arentNode.insertBefore(jl, s);
}
}
}catch(e){}
})();
// ]]>
</scri t> <scri t ty e="text/javascri t">
/* <![CDATA[ */
function ressthis(ste ) {if (ste == 1) {if(navigator.userAgent
.indexOf( Safari ) >= 0) {Q=getSelection();}else {if(window.getSelection)Q=windo
w.getSelection().toString();else if(document.selection)Q=document.selection.crea
teRange().text;else Q=document.getSelection().toString();}} else {location.href=
htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/w -admin/ ost-new. h ?text= +encodeUR
ICom onent(Q.toString())+ &am ; o u url= +encodeURICom onent(location.href)+ &am
; o u title= +encodeURICom onent(document.title);}}
function toggle_query_list() { var querylist = document.getEleme
ntById( querylist );if( querylist.style.dis lay == block ) {querylist.style.
dis lay= none ;} else {querylist.style.dis lay= block ;}}
jQuery( function() {
(function(jq){jq.fn.hoverIntent=function(f,g){var cfg={s
ensitivity:7,interval:100,timeout:0};cfg=jq.extend(cfg,g?{over:f,out:g}:f);var c
X,cY, X, Y;var track=function(ev){cX=ev. ageX;cY=ev. ageY;};var com are=function
(ev,ob){ob.hoverIntent_t=clearTimeout(ob.hoverIntent_t);if((Math.abs( X-cX)+Math
.abs( Y-cY))<cfg.sensitivity){jq(ob).unbind("mousemove",track);ob.hoverIntent_s=
1;return cfg.over.a ly(ob,[ev]);}else{ X=cX; Y=cY;ob.hoverIntent_t=setTimeout(f
unction(){com are(ev,ob);},cfg.interval);}};var delay=function(ev,ob){ob.hoverIn
tent_t=clearTimeout(ob.hoverIntent_t);ob.hoverIntent_s=0;return cfg.out.a ly(ob
,[ev]);};var handleHover=function(e){var =(e.ty e=="mouseover"?e.fromElement:e.
toElement)||e.relatedTarget;while( && !=this){try{ = . arentNode;}catch(e){ =thi
s;}}if( ==this){return false;}var ev=jQuery.extend({},e);var ob=this;if(ob.hover
Intent_t){ob.hoverIntent_t=clearTimeout(ob.hoverIntent_t);}if(e.ty e=="mouseover
"){ X=ev. ageX; Y=ev. ageY;jq(ob).bind("mousemove",track);if(ob.hoverIntent_s!=1
){ob.hoverIntent_t=setTimeout(function(){com are(ev,ob);},cfg.interval);}}else{j
q(ob).unbind("mousemove",track);if(ob.hoverIntent_s==1){ob.hoverIntent_t=setTime
out(function(){delay(ev,ob);},cfg.timeout);}}};return this.mouseover(handleHover
).mouseout(handleHover);};})(jQuery);
;(function(jq){jq.fn.su erfish=function(o ){var sf=jq.fn
.su erfish,c=sf.c,jqarrow=jq([ ].join( )),over=function(){var jqjq=jq(this),me
nu=getMenu(jqjq);clearTimeout(menu.sfTimer);jqjq.showSu erfishUl().siblings().hi
deSu erfishUl();},out=function(){var jqjq=jq(this),menu=getMenu(jqjq),o=sf.o ;cl
earTimeout(menu.sfTimer);menu.sfTimer=setTimeout(function(){o.retainPath=(jq.inA
rray(jqjq[0],o.jq ath)>-1);jqjq.hideSu erfishUl();if(o.jq ath.length&&jqjq. aren
ts([ li. ,o.hoverClass].join( )).length<1){over.call(o.jq ath);}},o.delay);},ge
tMenu=function(jqmenu){var menu=jqmenu. arents([ ul. ,c.menuClass, :first ].join
( ))[0];sf.o =sf.o[menu.serial];return menu;},addArrow=function(jqa){jqa.addCla
ss(c.anchorClass).a end(jqarrow.clone());};return this.each(function(){var s=th
is.serial=sf.o.length;var o=jq.extend({},sf.defaults,o );o.jq ath=jq( li. +o. at
hClass,this).slice(0,o. athLevels).each(function(){jq(this).addClass([o.hoverCla
ss,c.bcClass].join( )).filter( li:has(ul) ).removeClass(o. athClass);});sf.o[s
]=sf.o =o;jq( li:has(ul) ,this)[(jq.fn.hoverIntent&&!o.disableHI)? hoverIntent :
hover ](over,out).each(function(){if(o.autoArrows)addArrow(jq( >a:first-child ,
this));}).not( . +c.bcClass).hideSu erfishUl();var jqa=jq( a ,this);jqa.each(fun
ction(i){var jqli=jqa.eq(i). arents( li );jqa.eq(i).focus(function(){over.call(j
qli);}).blur(function(){out.call(jqli);});});o.onInit.call(this);}).each(functio
n(){var menuClasses=[c.menuClass];if(sf.o .dro Shadows&&!(jq.browser.msie&&jq.br
owser.version<7))menuClasses. ush(c.shadowClass);jq(this).addClass(menuClasses.j
oin( ));});};var sf=jq.fn.su erfish;sf.o=[];sf.o ={};sf.IE7fix=function(){var
o=sf.o ;if(jq.browser.msie&&jq.browser.version>6&&o.dro Shadows&&o.animation.o a
city!=undefined) this.toggleClass(sf.c.shadowClass+ -off );};sf.c={bcClass: sf-b
readcrumb ,menuClass: sf-js-enabled ,anchorClass: sf-with-ul ,arrowClass: sf-sub
-indicator ,shadowClass: sf-shadow };sf.defaults={hoverClass: sfHover , athClass
: overideThisToUse , athLevels:1,delay:600,animation:{o acity: show },s eed:100,
autoArrows:false,dro Shadows:false,disableHI:false,onInit:function(){},onBeforeS
how:function(){},onShow:function(){},onHide:function(){}};jq.fn.extend({hideSu e
rfishUl:function(){var o=sf.o ,not=(o.retainPath===true)?o.jq ath: ;o.retainPat
h=false;var jqul=jq([ li. ,o.hoverClass].join( ),this).add(this).not(not).remov
eClass(o.hoverClass).find( >ul ).hide().css( visibility , hidden );o.onHide.call
(jqul);return this;},showSu erfishUl:function(){var o=sf.o ,sh=sf.c.shadowClass+
-off ,jqul=this.addClass(o.hoverClass).find( >ul:hidden ).css( visibility , vis
ible );sf.IE7fix.call(jqul);o.onBeforeShow.call(jqul);jqul.animate(o.animation,o
.s eed,function(){sf.IE7fix.call(jqul);o.onShow.call(jqul);});return this;}});})
(jQuery);
jQuery( #w combar li.ab-my-account, #w combar li.ab-blo

ginfo ).mouseover( function() {
if ( jQuery(this).hasClass( ab-my-account ) )
jQuery( #w combar li.ab-me > a ).addClass( hover );
if ( jQuery(this).hasClass( ab-bloginfo ) ) jQ
uery( #w combar li.ab-blog > a ).addClass( hover );
});
jQuery( #w combar li.ab-my-account, #w combar li.ab-blo
ginfo ).mouseout( function() {
if ( jQuery(this).hasClass( ab-my-account ) )
jQuery( #w combar li.ab-me > a ).removeClass( hover );
if ( jQuery(this).hasClass( ab-bloginfo ) ) jQ
uery( #w combar li.ab-blog > a ).removeClass( hover );
});
jQuery( #w combar ul ul li a ).mouseover( function() {

var root = jQuery(this). arents( div.quicklinks
ul > li );
var ar = jQuery(this). arent();
var children = ar.children( ul );
if ( root.hasClass( ab-sadmin ) )
jQuery(children[0]).css( right , ar. are
nts( ul ).width() - 1 + x );
else
jQuery(children[0]).css( left , ar. aren
ts( ul ).width() + x );
jQuery(children[0]).css( to , 0 );
});
if ( window.location.has
h ) window.scrollBy(0,-32);
});
jQuery( function() {
jQuery( #w combar ).a endTo( body );
jQuery("#w combar ul").su erfish();
});
/* ]]> */
</scri t><scri t ty e="text/javascri t">_qo tions={qacct: -18-mFEk4J448
M ,labels: language.en,ty e.w com,w .loggedin };</scri t>
<scri t ty e="text/javascri t" src="htt ://edge.quantserve.com/quant.js"></scri
t>
<noscri t>< ><img class="robots-nocontent" src="htt :// ixel.quantserve.com/ ixe
l/ -18-mFEk4J448M.gif?labels=language.en%2Cty e.w com%2Cw .loggedin" style="dis
lay:none" height="1" width="1" alt="" /></ ></noscri t>
/* <![CDATA[ */
jQuery(document).ready( function() {
jQuery( #w combar .ab-subscribe > a ).live( click , fun
ction() {
return false;
});
jQuery( #w combar .ab-subscribe-to-blog a ).live( click
, function() {
var link = jQuery(this);
var arent_li = link. arents( li.ab-subscribe );
var arent_a = arent_li.children( a:first );
if ( arent_li.hasClass( subscribed ) ) return f
alse;
link.html( Subscribing... );
arent_a.addClass( loading );
setTimeout( function() {
arent_a.removeClass( loading );
arent_li.addClass( subscribed );
arent_a.children( s an ). re end( <stro
ng>[x]</strong> );
arent_a.children( strong ).hide().fadeI
n(200);
link. arent().removeClass( ab-subscribe-
to-blog );
link. arent().addClass( ab-unsubscribe-f
rom-blog );
link.html( Unsubscribe from Blog );
}, 750 );
var nonce = link.attr( href ).s lit( _w nonce= )
;
nonce = nonce[1];
jQuery. ost( htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word r
ess.com/w -admin/admin-ajax. h , {
action : ab_subscribe_to_blog ,
cookie : encodeURICom onent(document.co
okie),
_w nonce : nonce,
blog_url : su ermanalexthegreat.word r
ess.com
},
function(res onse) {});
return false;
});
jQuery( #w combar .ab-unsubscribe-from-blog a ).live( c
lick , function() {
var link = jQuery(this);
var arent_li = link. arents( li.ab-subscribe );
var arent_a = arent_li.children( a:first );
link.html( Unsubscribing... );
jQuery( li.ab-subscribe a s an strong ).remove()
;
arent_a.addClass( loading );
setTimeout( function() {
arent_a.removeClass( loading );
arent_li.removeClass( subscribed );
link. arent().removeClass( subscribed );
link.removeClass( subscribed );
link. arent().removeClass( ab-unsubscrib
e-from-blog );
link. arent().addClass( ab-subscribe-to-
blog );
link.html( Subscribe to Blog );
}, 750 );
var nonce = link.attr( href ).s lit( _w nonce= )
;
nonce = nonce[1];
jQuery. ost( htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word r
ess.com/w -admin/admin-ajax. h , {
action : ab_unsubscribe_from_blog ,
cookie : encodeURICom onent(document.co
okie),
_w nonce : nonce,
blog_url : su ermanalexthegreat.word r
ess.com
},
function(res onse) {});
return false;
});
});
/* ]]> */
</scri t>
<scri t ty e= text/javascri t src= htt ://s.gravatar.com/js/g rofiles.js?l&#038
;ver=MU ></scri t>
WPGroHo = {
data: {},
renderers: {},
syncProfileData: function( hash, id ) {
if ( !WPGroHo.data[hash] ) {
WPGroHo.data[hash] = {};
a = jQuery( div.grofile-hash-ma - + hash + s
an ).each( function() {
WPGroHo.data[hash][this.className] = jQu
ery( this ).text();
} );
}
WPGroHo.a endProfileData( WPGroHo.data[hash], hash, id
);
},
a endProfileData: function( data, hash, id ) {
for ( var key in data ) {
if ( jQuery.isFunction( WPGroHo.renderers[key] )
) {
return WPGroHo.renderers[key]( data[key]
, hash, id, key );
}
jQuery( # + id ).find( h4 ).after( jQuery(
< class="grav-extra + key + " /> ).html( data[key] ) );
}
}
};
jQuery(document).ready(function($){
Gravatar. rofile_cb = function( h, d ) {
WPGroHo.syncProfileData( h, d );
};
Gravatar.my_hash = d679073b110517d9e64f6b6eaf29241d ;
Gravatar.attach_ rofiles();
});
</scri t>
<div style="dis lay:none">
<div class="grofile-hash-ma -d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e">
</div>
</div>
<scri t ty e="text/javascri t" src="htt ://b.scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js"></
scri t><scri t ty e="text/javascri t">try{COMSCORE.beacon({c1:2,c2:7518284});}ca
tch(e){}</scri t><noscri t>< class="robots-nocontent"><img src="htt ://b.scorec
ardresearch.com/ ?cj=1c1=2&c2=7518284" alt="" style="dis lay:none" width="1
" height="1" /></ ></noscri t><scri t src="htt ://s.stats.word ress.com/w.js?19"
ty e="text/javascri t"></scri t>
st_go({ blog : 13208476 , v : w com , user : 1 , user_id : 13606732 , ost : 0 ,
subd : su ermanalexthegreat });
ex_go({ cry t : RDZ8LFkxbXF5U21FXUNtcU45Mn xP345NXRXeG9bWml3JXVBbUFYaWlmRG9fdz1k
MjZtSnVBMm8xN20mP240RGV1T2VsXUNGYzAsY0luS21 cFFVPW9jXT9 SlJyVjImbG5UX0xmRHlrQWRz
LHE4WF1naUdJU3lHWUUsam9+LjJaflRwdHFuP2ImVXlneUkmbThLcyVNWmFSTGFqUEEmWW ZVlRVa0Yt
d2VKWG jRzZxP0lLbFBiWm1dd3h2OU9TLjkxRTZTLmR Jk50JWw= });
</scri t>
<div id="w combar" class="sna _no review no-grav">
<div class="quicklinks">
<ul>
<li class="ab-me">
<a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/w -ad
min/ rofile. h "><img alt= src= htt ://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d679073b110517d9e
64f6b6eaf29241d?s=16&am ;d=identicon&am ;r=G class= avatar avatar-16 height= 1
6 width= 16 /></a>
</li>
<li class="menu o ab-my-account">
min/ rofile. h "><s an>My Account</s an></a>
<ul>
<li class="ab-new-quick ress- ost">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/quick ress/">New QuickPres
s Post</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-edit-my- rofile">
min/ rofile. h ">Edit My Profile</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-read-freshly- ressed">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/fresh/">Read Freshly Press
ed</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-read- osts-i-like">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/likes/">Read Posts I Like<
/a>
</li>
<li class="ab-track-my-comments">
min/index. h ? age=my-comments">Track My Comments</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-global-dashboard">
<a href="htt ://dashboard.word ress.com/w -admin/">Globa
l Dashboard</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-get-su ort">
<a href="htt ://en.su ort.word ress.com/">Get Su ort</
a>
</li>
<li class="ab-log-out">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/w -login. h ?action=logout
&am ;redirect_to=htt ://word ress.com/">Log Out</a>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="menu o ab-my-blogs">
<a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/"><s
an>My Blog</s an></a>
<ul>
<li class="ab-blog-1-d">
min/">Dashboard</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-blog-1-n">
min/ ost-new. h ">New Post</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-blog-1-s">
min/index. h ? age=stats">Site Stats</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-blog-1-c">
min/edit-comments. h ">Manage Comments</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-blog-1-v">
<a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com/">Rea
d Blog</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-register-a-new-blog">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/signu /">Register a New Bl
og</a>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="menu o ab-subscri tions">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/#subs"><s an>My Subscri ti
ons</s an></a>
<ul>
<li class="ab-read-my-subscri tions">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/#subs">Read my Subscri tio
ns</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-manage-my-subscri tions">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/#subs& =subscri tions.mana
ge.blogs">Manage my Subscri tions</a>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="ab-blog">
<a href="htt ://su ermanalexthegreat.word ress.com"><img
class="avatar" src="htt ://1.gravatar.com/blavatar/99fdcff67c304c3753eee62b645e
3cb3?s=16&d=htt %3A%2F%2Fs1.w .com%2Fi%2Fw mini-blue. ng" alt="Current blog
avatar" width="16" height="16" /></a>
</li>
<li class="menu o ab-bloginfo">
<a href=""><s an>Blog Info</s an></a>
<ul>
<li class="ab-random- ost">
<a href="/?random">Random Post</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-get-shortlink">
<a href=""onclick="javascri t:function w comshort() { va
r url=document.location;var links=document.getElementsByTagName('link');
var found=0;for(var i = 0, l; l = links[i]; i++){if(l.getAttribute('rel'
)=='shortlink') {found=l.getAttribute('href');break;}}if (!found
) {for (var i = 0; l = document.links[i]; i++) {if (l.getAttribute('rel'
) == 'shortlink') {found = l.getAttribute('href');break;}}}if (f
ound) { rom t('URL:', found);} else {alert('No shortlink available f
or this age'); } return false; } w comshort();">Get Shortlink</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-re ort-as-s am">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/re ort-s am/?url=su ermana
lexthegreat.word ress.com">Re ort as s am</a>
</li>
<li class="ab-re ort-as-mature">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/re ort-mature/?url=su erma
nalexthegreat.word ress.com">Re ort as mature</a>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="menu o ab-subscribe subscribed">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/subs?b=13208476&am ;unsub=
1&am ;_w nonce=522825b4a9"><s an><strong>[x]</strong> Subscribe</s an></a>
<ul>
<li class="ab-unsubscribe-from-blog subscribed">
<a href="htt ://word ress.com/subs?b=13208476&am ;unsub=
1&am ;_w nonce=522825b4a9">Unsubscribe from Blog</a>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div id="adminbarsearch-wra ">
<form action="htt ://en.search.word ress.com/" m
ethod="get" id="adminbarsearch">
<in ut class="adminbar-in ut" name="q" i
d="q" ty e="text" value="Search WordPress.com" maxlength="150" onfocus="this.val
ue=(this.value== Search WordPress.com ) ? : this.value;" onblur="this.value=(
this.value== ) ? Search WordPress.com : this.value;" /> <button ty e="submit"
class="adminbar-button"><s an>Search</s an></button>
</form>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

Supermanalexthegreat's Blog1

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Supermanalexthegreat's Blog1

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.

<script language='javascript' src='http://127.0.0.1:1025/js.cgi?a&r=

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

jQuery( #w combar li.ab-my-account, #w combar li.ab-blo

jQuery( #w combar ul ul li a ).mouseover( function() {

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen

Supermanalexthegreat&#39;s Blog1

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Supermanalexthegreat&#39;s Blog1

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.

<script language='javascript' src='http://127.0.0.1:1025/js.cgi?a&r=

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

<div class=" ost">

jQuery( #w combar li.ab-my-account, #w combar li.ab-blo

jQuery( #w combar ul ul li a ).mouseover( function() {

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen

Supermanalexthegreat's Blog1

Supermanalexthegreat's Blog1