|Posted on Thursday, October 10, 2019 - 09:18 am: |
When we first launched the online discussion forum called Human Café we had no clear agenda in mind. It was to be an open discussion ‘to make a better world’ in a free flow of ideas. Within a couple of years we found the discussion gravitating towards an inquiry into whether there can be a Theory of Everything (TOE), one that would be universally encompassing incorporating all the known ideas, both scientific and religious, to better philosophically understand how works the universe.
In time we realized there were two conditions in universal existence that spanned an infinite totality. One was electro-magnetic energy, that light and radio waves were ubiquitous to all existence; and the other was gravity, which potential spanned infinity. This was a starting point in our search for TOE, so we placed these as a baseline for inquiry.
Very soon we focussed on a known dictum, that energy equals energy in all its forms, from work energy to electromagnetic energy, to quantum energy including Einstein’s famous E=mc2 (first postulated by J.J. Thomson), that adjusted for International Units could be written as a continuous equation
(Em•c = hc/lambda = h/lambda(eomo)^1/2 = mc^2= (Bm)c^2 = E energy in Joules) so all energy was shown as equal. We called it the Axiomatic Equation, as it was axiomatic that energy is universal in all its forms. This equation did not include gravity, only all spectrums of e.m. energy. Though gravitation potential could also fit into this equation, we treated it as something separate.
But it was the equation of Einstein’s E=mc^2 made equal to Prince Louis De Broglie’s E=hf, (E equals Planck’s constant times frequency, where f=c/lambda; also called Planck-Einstein relation, which is same as E=mc^2=hc/lambda) quantum equation that became of special interest, which when rewritten became an equation for mass: m=h/c•lambda=1, where mass m was made equal to one. Now standing back from it, it appeared we might have a way to rewrite this as: (h/c•lambda)+ g = m = 1 (2002). This simple algorithm became more interesting, because as explained then, we were integrating infinities with infinitesimals (zero•infinity=1 template), so that the largest integers were times their inverse, so together when placed one against the other we got one, what we had set for mass. However, what was missing from this energy cum mass interrelationship was gravity, which is separate. Therefore, to include it back into the equation we added it in, taking the smallest infinitesimal we could find (as opposed to the largest being infinite gravity, to bring it to unity) which was a dimensionless number of proton-to-proton gravitational constant: g=~5.9e-39. Now we had something we could work with, and this was the true starting point of integrating universal gravity into the universality of electro-magnetic energy.
I should mention that in the background of these discussions was a phenomenon I had called ‘interrelationship’, an idea developed a couple of decades earlier. This abstract idea actually started the whole line of inquiry into the Theory of Everything, since interrelationship is foundational to how the universe is an interrelated totality. This foundational idea states that all energy, all matter is interrelated to infinity, both geometrically in a matrix of interconnections, and through time preceding these connections. Nothing exists of its own without being interconnected to everything else. All things are subject to this matrix of interrelationship, because they cannot be any other way. If you think of any one thing as a product of the state of everything else, to infinity, then nothing can be other than as the ‘pressure’ of everything else had allowed it to be, in time. Therefore, from an infinity of interrelations forms as image at totality that then defines what each thing is. And what is that? It is itself! From infinity is definition of each thing in the universe, from quantum to galaxies, each having an infinitely interrelated identity to be itself, including us. From that seminal idea of interrelationship also came the idea of a totally interrelated universe, enabled with life and consciousness, that it all reverts back to energy. This was the foundational idea behind our TOE sought after, which then led to other discussions, which in the fractal nature of interrelationship led to permutations of what it all means, culminating with our place in the universe, our Who.
So this was where we were (2003) in formulating a universal idea of Energy that would span all of the interrelated totality of existence, in effect, our TOE. In exploring further our Axiomatic Equation, we settled on the accepted value for E=mc^2, which is E=90 peta joules, as a baseline value for one kilogram of mass (m=1 kg on Earth).
Now came a new idea that perhaps Energy is not the same for all planets, as they are at different distances from our Sun. So this led to my speculations, that if we integrated solar radiant energy (e.m. related) with its orbital energy (gravity related) for each planet, we should get different energy levels for each planet. This I did, using Earth’s equivalent 90 peta joules as a base value, and in so doing discovered the planet Energies (vs. Earth’s E=9e16J) were on a curve: Energy was related to 1/AU^2 distances from Sun. Closer into the Sun, planet energies were higher, while farther they were lower. Worked out further, using the basic equation h/c•lambda= 1m-(g), we were able to figure relative proton mass for each planet’s Energy computed, which led to E' = hc/(lambda)(proton m) = [1(kg'/kg)-(g')pi^2] c^2, as a basic expression incorporating both proton mass and the prorated g dimensionless constant (2005). Not surprisingly, the proton mass followed the AU^2 paradigm. But something else happened that led to an exciting discovery. If we multiplied the proton gravity constant by c^2 and pi^2 we got a value very close to the square of Newton’s gravity=G^2, which taking square root yields G=7.24e-11 m^3kg^-1s^-2 (vs Earth’s known 6.67e-11, Earth’s interior heat was a lowering factor), so something wonderful opened up: the gravity constant Newton’s G grew at a steady rate of about 1G per AU with distance from the Sun. (At Mars G was about 1.5, at Jupiter about 5, etc.) How surprisingly amazing was that? It suddenly opened up a whole new universe, from the one we had with an assumed universal constant of Newton’s and Einstein’s gravity G, where energy and gravity were inversely proportional. Then surprising things started falling into place like tumblers in a lock.
Using Boltzmann’s constant, we were able to match the microwave background of the universe (CMB), using the gravity-G conversion to show the universal, intergalactic gravity is about 3.4e-6 G; while the Hubble constant comes in at about 0.35e-6 G, if assuming deep space cosmic light is gravitationally redshifted line of sight passing through cosmic hydrogen and dust. MOND became understandable, same as the Pioneers anomaly could in part be explained by variable-G. The gas giants in our solar system, their orbital regions being in higher G, per Equivalence, were better able to aggregate lighter molecules and thus grow larger than their inner rocky planet neighbors inhabiting lower G. Small planetoids like Pluto could sport large atmospheres in their high G orbits; while Saturn moon Titan, a tenth of Earth’s mass, could sustain a large atmosphere ten times taller than ours. Comets swinging out to the Kuiper belt (and Oort cloud) would accumulate more mass in higher G, then release this mass in sublimation as they approached the inner solar system. Planetary spin, per the Axiomatic equation, could be powered by a tiny black hole in the planet’s warm interior (vs background cold space) in a reasonable way. And galactic centers powered by a massive black hole made sense, as all the light energy of ambient stars canceled on a point, releasing massive gravity-G. There were other findings, such as Mercury’s precession was a transference of the Sun’s angular momentum at perihelion. Cold Dark matter is in very high G, making it invisible to the light spectrum, and cold plasma and dust clouds in high G collapsing into star combustion. All these started making sense in a variable-G universe, where deep space gravity clocks in at about 3.97e-7 G, where even GUT begins to make sense at that level. Were we edging closer to our TOE?
These discoveries, still anecdotal at this point, left us stunned, I personally felt overwhelmed. What was happening to our Cosmology? I remember reading works by Paul Davies and thinking ‘could our cosmology be wrong’? Can Einstein’s relativistic universe, based on light c as a standard ruler, be but an observational protocol? Is his General Relativity incomplete? We had never thought of doubting Einstein’s brilliant mind. These were disturbing thoughts. If distant cosmic light is a gravitational redshift (line of sight) in a higher G interstellar space, then isn’t an expanding universe an optical illusion, that there is no space expansion? Does this invalidate the Big Bang? Was there now possibility of harnessing interactive G with onboard inertial drive? Our minds were reeling, that perhaps everything we believed in our Cosmology was wrong! All that remained was to measure Newton’s G away from Earth’s known value, like pulling on a string untying a Gordian cosmological knot, and everything would fall into place. That’s where we were then, this is where we are now.
If we live in a totally interrelated universe, then the way we see this universe, and ourselves in it, must change. We no longer live in a detached Cartesian universe, but one that hugs us intimately, its interrelated reality defining every part of itself, including each one of us, and is able to create life. If this reality is a biofeedback loop, then we are living in a self defining Living Universe, where life is endemic to it. We should find life in all its forms throughout the Cosmos. We as intelligent human beings endowed with consciousness are equipped with our minds to interact with this universal reality to better have this interactive reality work with us, rather than we against it. That means we must individually be free to be ourselves in how we manifest this reality in our lives. And that means our definition as free and conscious human beings must be mindful of our natural human rights, if we are to ‘have the mind’ (Habeas Mentem), to be a Who within an interactive living reality. This is the threshold on which we now stand, where a question on the ‘theory of everything’ opened up whole new consciousness vistas of our human being. Interrelationship spanning an infinite universe in real time is the key to how works the universe, where our understanding of relativity is but a subjunct of its reality. And then, once we understand, the Universe will open its living eye upon us, to let us explore its infinity in places we had never been before, and wonder.
I thank you for your attention.
PS: I could not have come to these conclusions and findings without the help of many who had contributed their thoughts to the HumanCafe discussions, though any mistakes in my understanding I humbly submit were my own. To name a few, Col. Edward Chesky, Mohideen Ibramsha, Jim White, also Israel Sad, Nelson Zink, Isaac Cavaliero, Mikhail Shapkin, John Tsang, Sushil Yadav, Carl Schmidt, John Duffield, Michael Stransky, Vlad Parkhom, Wayne Hodges; some were only known by their handle, Aladim, Naive, Davet84, WJ, Ron, G-man, Anon, Sextus, Brother Michael, Claude, Amar, Kevin, Scheptik, Le Chef, Bradley, Mark, eV, and many others who wrote but wished to remain anonymous. There were kind advisors from outside these boards who gave input, not always in agreement, Dr Anthony Smart, Bill Chapin, Dr Dimitri Kirillov, Ray Raines, Dr Vladimir S. Netchitailo, Hugh Lawrence, and others. We may have opened a chink into the fabric of the universe, and perhaps now explore it in ways we never thought before. To all thank you!
Ivan Demian Alexander
|Posted on Friday, February 26, 2021 - 07:44 pm: |
Can an idea know itself?
Is there a time an idea can ‘know’ itself? No, not anymore than the world wide web can know itself, nor can artificial intelligence know itself, no matter how complex. That would require self consciousness, which is beyond its ability. For an idea to know itself, it would have to transcend its limitations as a closed system, no matter how sophisticated. To know itself it must reach out into the universe without limitation.
Perhaps the most comprehensive monolithic idea created by man is Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. It is based on sound premises, has integrity in self consistency, studied intellectually by countless minds in the past century, and confirmed observationally. Light does bend around large gravitational bodies, clocks do slow under acceleration, and time is observed variable from different reference frames. These relativistic protocols have been tested to virtually proffer proof. But the idea, though elegantly self supporting as a totality, is nevertheless a closed system. Theoretically under Relativity, if one starts motion in one direction in the universe, they would ultimately return to their starting point from an opposite direction, as space time curves back on itself. So it is a closed system. However, it is a system understood intellectually by many, enough to have ingrained itself into a world consciousness of what it is. Relativity had reached critical mass so to have achieved world acceptance as a monolithic, self sustaining idea, it made itself a quasi-consciousness within the mind of the world.
If Relativity was able to connect not only to human minds but also to a universal reality, meaning it was not a closed system, then it might have been a candidate for an idea that can ‘know itself.’ However, that is not the case, since its infinities are rationalized into a self contained system. This leaves it within the circle of its construction, like a bubble that is entirely independent of what is beyond its domain of applicability. The beautiful and elegant mathematical construct of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is self referential, but not likely self-knowing, nor conscious, though ‘conscious’ at the world state of mind of its acceptability; it had been accepted. This could be said of any mathematically derived theorem or philosophical system. Newton’s laws, Maxwell’s electricity, Planck’s constants, Gauss probabilities, Euler’s mathematics, all have a self-consistency and are monolithic bodies of construction. Yet they are not self-conscious in any way but having been accepted by the conscious understandings of many of the world’s intellects. No, to be an idea that can know itself, it needs to be more than merely self consistent and monolithic.
Now, let us suppose we can create an idea that is self-creating, which also connects to infinity in an open system. Could that idea, once understood and accepted by a critical mass of the world’s intellect, become an idea that knows itself? This is no idle speculation, because as all these pages have shown, such an idea fits neatly into the concepts of ‘interrelationship.’ In a universal reality where all is interconnected to infinity and nothing can be other than as the pressure of everything else, from infinity, had allowed to be as an identity of itself, then the resulting system is one that is both self-referential and connected to all existence. This is an open system that is predetermined by its interrelationships, but at the same time indeterministic by its emergent effects from its totality of interconnectedness; in each instant it is new. The idea is monolithic, supporting itself on a basic premise of three points in space, which metamorphoses into a definition of universal identities, living identities, mind consciousness, and human liberty. All these work together as one complete philosophy of mind, what we humans with mind consciousness can come to understand though the idea forms itself. Perhaps this is key, that the idea of a basic interrelationship, three points in space, can grow to encompass all of existence, and from that infinite totality it redefines in emergence every point of itself. As Bruno had said, “infinity has no center, and yet everywhere is its center.” If that emergent totality product is then taken as ‘mind’, then does it not satisfy the conditions of a ‘self-knowing’ idea? This idea has no center, but everywhere to infinity is its center. Starting with three, interrelationship is the principle, the mechanism for spanning infinity. Therefore, in a living universe this idea of interrelationship takes on a life of its own, as a separate and independent idea of existence. And if so, once it is understood and accepted by human minds, it takes on a self-consciousness in the world. When all is considered, a self-knowing idea spanning infinity means the universe is conscious as a totality. Does it mean the universe is consciousness?
Again, this is no idle claim, that an idea knows itself in a kind of self-consciousness. Ideas connecting to infinity are not entirely new. For example, nearly all religions had at heart a concept of infinite, all knowing, all powerful Deity that is both in the heavens and on Earth. Such ideas had propelled human civilization and advancements in their own way by making humanity conscious of something that is eternal and outside itself. Their sacred religious texts may or may not be monolithic and self-referenced, but they did have the power to awaken a critical mass of human beliefs, which in turn gave power to these beliefs in ways we could not understand; they persist still after thousands of years and affect lives of their believers. That the world is gradually shifting away from faith based beliefs to a more rational secularism is in fact evident, an inevitable evolution, but also that the power of belief is losing its value, as a decrepitude of moral decay sets into our civilization. Are we happier for it? Humanity’s consciousness seems to need to believe in something bigger than itself, or it becomes rudderless. Hence with the advent of secularism came the siren calls of Marxism, Utopianism, and Mao, Castro, Pol Pot, etc., not to mention Stalin and Hitler, with disastrous effects. We seem to need to be connected to an idea that is all inclusive and monolithic, even infinite in our minds and being, if we are to find happiness in this world. That is a monolithic idea, and one that is interconnected reasonably.
Still, a new idea that has the potential to ‘know itself’, once understood by a critical mass of the world, is not one that seeks populism, for that would negate its universality, but exist of its own. Therein lies a paradox. Once an idea is adopted by humanity, it then becomes theirs; while a self-knowing idea is not theirs, but its own universal. This is a critical point, that interrelationship cannot be publicized or contained as a new universal idea, certainly not a religious idea. Rather, it must find its roots in the world on its own, its role unforced by our human faultiness of reason. In effect, this is an idea that, if self knowing, will find its own way in the world, likely one heart and one mind at a time. But when this process reaches a critical mass, a self knowing idea connects infinitely, which brings into reality the powers of emergence that such infinity projects. In our consciousness we are always on the leading edge of emergence. Therefore, though we only speculate on what the power a self-thinking, self knowing idea-philosophy can be, it appears to become a whole new plane of awareness, worldwide, a whole new power we had never known before. It is in the power of being still. If so, let it be healing to all the ills and errors we as a humanity had done. Then we would have merged our minds with those of the stars. As an idea, the universe knows itself. But there is more, still so much more. We have just scratched the surface not knowing how much more there still is. Being is consciousness, and a Planet awakens.