CONTENTS
Metaphysics/ Dream Theory
Physics/ eternity: How
a Star is Created
Metaphysics/ Creationism
Metaphysics/ Dream
Theory 1992
DESCRIPTION:
. this tries presents a
theory to explain the usual religious questions:
"{ How was our existence was created? What is God? What is God's
plan for the future? }
. The really exciting aspect of this metaphysical theory,
is that it doesn't fall back on a "creator",
and it does predict the ability of civilization to survive eternally
. Furthermore,
it shows that our universe couldn't even be possible if it
weren't able to support
the eternal development of fantastic recreational games!
. In fact, God must find the technology to support us eternally, at any
cost;
so this theory should give you reason to reconsider
the meaning of business, freedom, neglect, and crime .
SUMMARY:
Try to find a logical
explanation for the universe
. If it was created, explain why the creator exists
. The Dream Theory explains existence by reversing a basic assumption
about it:
experience is the only thing that actually exists,
and physical things are all in our mind
. ( Our natural laws are still able to enforce reality
because they're operating on our experience directly
rather than on percieved objects )
. There is no void, no empty space,
nothing except the experience of anything
. Moreover, there is no independently existing creative god
or rule
with which to choose a single favorite experience such as bliss
or unawareness
. Therefore,
all varieties of experience must exist
. It is actually for lack of a creator
that there must exist an infinite variety of experiences
. This infinite variety provides the same information as no experience
at all,
so when seen collectively,
the experiences reflect what exists --the indefinite
. Because experience must exist as an infinite variety,
this forces the existence of a rule or God that can
define an infinite variety of other rules
. Only by having an infinite variety of rules
can experience be defined with an infinite variety of quality and
structure
. Therefore,
our universe or God, is a rule that must allow us to make other rules,
so we must be able to create recreational systems that impose a
totally synthetic rule apon a brain
-- ultimately with a dream sythesizer
( A synthesizer would control "dreams"
by connecting all of a brain's nerve-endings to a computer interface. )
But why synthesize what isn't recreational?
For an infinite variation in the structure of experience,
our universe includes war, crime, mental illness, nightmares, and
drugs
. An important prediction of the Dream Theory
is that some civilization in our universe
must survive eternally
. We can't synthesize an infinite number of patently novel experiences
unless each new design is allowed to eternally benefit from the special
techniques of previous synthesizers
. The Perfection Plan is a
chain of developments that will
fulfill the Dream Theory:
(1) Our natural
evolution has already developed our intelligence.
(2) The potential of intelligence in war and crime
has already resulted in a technological
evolution
. The economy and insecurity will drive a search for
robotic defenses and artificial organs
. This will inevitably provide us with a brain-robot interface,
and finally a dream synthesizer
(3) The potential for recreation in a synthetic
world is unlimited
and this inevitably leaves us in the
ideal evolution
. If the future actually holds this,
then the Dream Theory can explain why experience exists,
and how the designs in it formed
.
Introduction/ Empiricism
. If you've had any realistic dreams, it becomes apparent that our only
contact with reality is through a corresponding "dream". Now, without
considering dreams, it appears obvious that objects form our
experience. But the objects in realistic dreams are imaginary;
so, we might see that experience forms our objects.
. Empiricism is the theory that real experiences are equivalent to
dreams; all real observations must be translated from physical signals
into the same fabric that dreams are made of; the universe may or may
not live independent of experience, but experience is the only
substance that we can prove actually exists.
. Empirical observations are ones done without the use of instruments
to check the reliability of your perception. The only thing that
empiricism can surely detect is the existence of experience. However,
even with the use of instruments it cannot be proven that the world
isn't simply your dream. Even your dreams could have a world where
instruments have measurements that are consistent with eachother and
with your direct observations and predictions. There's no way to prove
you won't "wake up" from "reality".
Introduction/ Subjective Idealism
If we must always view reality in terms of
the same substance that dreams are
made of;
and, dreams can make imaginary
situations appear to be real,
then could our reality be the imaginary universe of a shared dream?
Subjective Idealism is the
theory that our collective experience is the only substance that
actually exists, and that perception of a universe is merely the result
of a system of rules that act directly on the experience.
We can neither prove nor
disprove that the universe is imaginary; since, by analogy, if several
video displays are showing camera views of the same universe, and the
ideal computer is capable of simulating the same views, then how could
you distinguish camera images from a computer image? Why must we
conclude that a real model was recorded by camera, if a computer could
have simulated the same "camera" signals?
The Dream Theory
By using subjective idealism
as a hypothesis, the Dream Theory is allowed to explain the creation of
the universe in terms of the origins of experience:
. Assume that experience is the only thing that actually exists, and
physical things are all in our mind. (Our natural laws are still able
to enforce reality because they're operating on our experience
directly.) Also assume that there is no creator to select a particular
type of experience.
. Thus,
experience cannot simply exist as nothingness because there is no
creator to select that experience. There must exist an infinite variety
of experiences. This infinite variety provides the same information as
no experience at all, so when seen collectively, the experiences
reflect what exists --the indefinite.
. Because experience must exist as an infinite variety, this forces the
existence of a rule that can define an infinite variety of other
rules. Only by having one rule can a prticular indefinite stream
of experience be created. Only by having an infinite variety of
perceived environments can experience be defined with an infinite
variety in quality and structure. For an infinite variation in the
structure of experience, our universe would need more than our natural
environment even with war, crime, mental illness, nightmares, drugs,
and dreams. It must support an eternity of synthetic experiences.
. But in order to keep the synthetic designs from repeating themselves,
there must be a civilization that survives eternally to insure the
infinite progression of synthetic design. Thus, we must be able to
create recreational systems that impose a totally synthetic rule apon a
brain, ultimately, with a dream sythesizer. (A synthesizer would
control "dreams" by connecting all of a brain's nerve-endings to a
computer interface.) Also, our universe must create new stars as old
ones expire, and we must be able to travel to them eternally
. The Dream Theory can be disproved only if we find some
inherent limitation that either prevents any civilization from evolving
eternally, or that doesn't provide the technology for a dream
synthesizer. The proof of the Dream Theory depends on a prediction
about the nature of all future experiences (it predicts that some
civilization will survive eternally and find recreation by being
submerged in totally programmable synthetic rules), so there is always
some chance that this theory doesn't fit the observations.
All For Naught
Why isn't there nothing?
I couldn't fathom how a creative god -- a system of rules --
could exist without itself being created
. many religions use our undeniable existence
as proof that a creator exists;
and sure enouph, my beliefs left me with the conclusion
that there should be nothing more than a null experience in a
void universe
. even when I simplified my inquiry with the hypothesis that Experience
is the only thing that exists,
I still couldn't fathom how experience in a void could be
anything but null (unawareness).
My imagination was being
hindered by that mind's interpretation of the Law of Sufficient Reason
(it states: everything happens for a reason; ie, reality follows
rules,
or:
A unique state is the result
of a particular system of
rules).
This is logically equivalent to saying,
unique state implies unique rule
. the following contrapositive
form of that sentence
is another way of saying the same thing:
not unique rule implies not unique state
In a metaphysical context, the contrapositive form is more relevant
since the Dream theory is assuming that no particular system of rules
exist:
without a particular system of rules to determine behavior,
all states are possible
. So, why isn't there nothing?
. Experience could maintain a definite null state if there were a
creator to choose that particular state;
but, a creator simply doesn't exist
. This is a stupendous result !
. The fact that we exist as a myriad of different experiences is
actually proof that the God we know was not a creator
. rather, our God or rule was created by the metaphysical requirement
that
the infinite variety of states must be defined by some rule -- any rule
--
and that rule is what we call god.
A nonexistent rule (or God)
would be nonspecific about the definition that it imposed on experience;
and, since "nothingness" is a specific state,
the only way to have no particular definition is to exist as
everythingness
-- an infinity of definite states that collectively say nothing
in particular
. Such an experience would contain a denial of every affirmed condition;
so when all the states are considered collectively,
the experience has really remained indefinite about the existence of
any particular condition
. everythingness is the only
experience available
if there is no creator or an existing universe to select values.
All Created God
Another argument for the
existence of divinity is the undeniable order that our universe
provides: how else could our system of natural rules be chosen without
a divine creator? However, rather than look at the rule, assume that
the only things that really exist are the patterns formed by the rule
into experience. The essential question then is this: has there been
some order or consistency about the pattern layed into experience? Now,
after the experience of illnesses, nightmares, and an eternity of dream
synthesizers, there must be an infinite variety about the patterns, so
that no choices have been made. Natural laws routinely guide our
experience in the twentieth century, but the patterns they make in
experience are no more "natural" than patterns made by synthetic laws.
If our physical laws can support a dream synthesizer, then nightmares
and mental illness may even disappear.
The Dream theory
hypothesizes that it was actually for lack
of a creator
that our universe mirrors an eternally constant, heroically ordered
system
. without a creator to define a universe,
the experience must exist as everythingness in order to
correspond to the indefinite condition;
and since the Experience must
exist,
it must also induce our natural law as a means to define the
states
. If no particular definition was induced,
then there would be no definite states,
and thus no way to express the indefinite with a continuum of
definite states
. Thus, "everythingness" created God,
the natural law.
Finite & Constant
Without finite and constant
natural laws, we would be unable to predict reality and build a dream
synthesizer
. And, then our synthetic scripts couldn't progress eternally
. The synthesizer is required to generate an infinite variety in the
structure of experience;
and, infinite variety is required to provide experience with an
indefinite value
. therefore,
the Dream theory predicts that either our natural law is finite and
constant,
or there is more than one physical universe
. However it's highly unlikely that the rule for defining indefinite
experience would be so complex,
when a single universe could do the job.
Physics/
eternity: How a Star is Created 1992
DESCRIPTION:
. our universe provides solar power eternally?
this article rejects the Big Bang
theory and explains the
principle of thermal energy
to support the Steady State theorem .
[1] Physics, 2nd ed. Kane.
[2] American Journal of Physics 26(9) 1958 p(600..)
[3] Time Magazine 1988-89
[4] The Big Bang Never Happened, 1991. Lerner.
[5] Introduction to Plasma Theory
Introduction
It is assumed that this universe
was designed to sustain experience eternally (see Metaphysics);
and, that experience will eternally depend on life; and, that life will
eternally depend on solar energy.
It is known that each star has a finite life ( 1 - 100 billion years
). Therefore, the universe must eternally give birth to new stars.
The Steady State Theorem
MacMillan -- the first to suggest the Steady
State theory -- didn't offer any suggestions for observing
the superiority of his theory over others, like the Big Bang,
"yet it does stand as a bold and pioneer statement of a theme that now
has a firm even though somewhat heretical place in cosmological
speculation".[2]
--By invalidating the Big
Bang theory, it could appear heretical to the scientific
community. At first glance, it appears that a universe without
beginning or end can't be created by God, making such an assertion
heretical to the Church. However, time is a creation, just like
physical space is. Before the creation of a universe there would be no
such thing as time, and it is conceptually impossible to create time at
a particular time! Thus, regardless of whether God created objects at a
particular time, the universe of time and space must have been created
without beginning or end.
MacMillan is reminded by the
darkness of space that star light must get consumed in the process of
forming new hydrogen. He viewed the universe as being infinite
and eternal, with galaxies uniformly distributed. He postulated
that no natural process can proceed eternally only one-way; it must be
reversable.[2] If an eternally uniform star system radiates
energy by destroying mass; then to reverse this, new stars must
somehow be created as others are consumed. There must be a
natural reallocation of the consumed mass by an energy-to-mass
conversion.
MacMillan pointed out that
the Second Law of Thermodynamics is true only within the context of
physical systems of a small, constructable scale; he used the example
of water that flows in only one direction until it evaporates and
recondences.[2] The main point of the Second Law of
Thermodynamics is the impossibility of constructiing a perpetual
machine. Any time that energy is used for work, there is some
loss by radiation, and this loss of energy cannot be regained without
using more energy. At a certain super-galactic level the universe
is indeed a perpetual machine. In fact, in 1988, we discovered, for the
first time, what appears to be the birth of a new star.[3]
Plasma Cosmology
By 1961, observations showed
that electromagnetic (EM) waves lost energy as they travelled great
distances, so that their frequency became less, and their wavelengths
became longer. In more distant objects, the longer, radio-length waves
were always more common [4](p148). At first, astronomer Hubble found
that the dimmer a source was, the more its energy wave was carried by
the longer wave lengths. The longest visible light waves are red, so
this effect is called the Hubble Redshift. Now, another possible cause
for the longer wavelengths could be the Doppler effect. If the source
is moving away from us quickly then it takes longer for a full
wavelength to be absorbed, and this is equivalent to absorbing a longer
wavelength.
Thus, the Redshift could have been from either:
(1) the universe is expanding, so everything is moving away from
everything else, including earth, or
(2) the EM radiation loses energy as it travels intergalactic distances.
In the senventies, Tulley and Fischer developed another way to
determine the distance of other stars, so they could confirm that
distance causes a red shift. [4](p18) This contradicts the Big
Bang theory that the universe is expanding about us.
ElectroMagnetic Relationism
Relationism is the doctrine
holding that relations exist as real entities. EM Relationism is
an extension of MacMillan's Steady State theory. EM Relationism not
only explains how energy can be transferred without "ether" or "time
contraction" but also explains how new stars can be formed eternally.
EM Relationism claims that energy travels between objects through
separately existing string-like entities that connect each mass to
every other mass. These EM entities are not stable without carrying a
wave of some definite length, and rather than be completely still they
are converted into mass. This sort of mass is then subject to the laws
of plasma cosmology, where they become the starting point of star
regeneration.
EM entities run through each mass in all directions and maintain their
location relative to that particle; thus, rather than one ocean
of ether particles, each mass drags around its own infinite volume of
EM entities. Since these strings have no mass, this drag is effortless.
EM entities are infinite in length, and transfer energy indefinitely.
But if each EM entity is owned by a particular mass, then are your
waves importing or exporting? We can see pictures of distant stars that
no longer actually exist, so we must exclusively own the strings that
give us energy. However, an object will always radiate the same amount
of energy regardless of the degree to which it's surrounded by
importers; unless every object is completely surrounded by other
objects! Space does look empty, but we can not hope to see what is
infinitely far away. I need to do some experients. EM Relationism could
be off, but the focal question is, what makes the universe create new
stars.
Einstein's Special Relativity theory explained how photons and
other EM radiation could defy newtonian mechanics after it was proved
that space was't filled with ether (a collection of particles that can
propogate waves). EM Relationism theory claims that space is filled
with EM entities (a collection of "waves" or strings that can propogate
"particles" or photons). While Einstein's theory correctly states that
energy and mass are different forms of the same substance, this result
does not depend on his Relativity theories. EM Relationism can explain
photon travel without metaphysical notions such as "contracted time".
The relativity formula is derived from the light clock experiment. That
experiment is a stick with a light source on one end and a reflector on
the other. When the light is reflected, then a sensor next to the light
source responds by sending out another pulse of light. This is like the
routine of pitcher and batter who would always hit the ball to the
pitcher. It keeps time like a clock because it measures the speed at
which the ball can travel. If the clock is moving perpendicular to the
direction of its stick, the ball has obviously moved through more air,
even though the relative distance has remained the same. Now because of
this, relativity will tell you that the ball has actually travelled a
greater distance. However, the experiments confirm that the ball has
travelled the same distance because it still produces the same volleys
per minute. So relativity will then tell you, with a straight face,
that the distance was greater, but it was shortened by a time dialation
that occurs whenever things move past you too quick. Relativity must be
assuming that light is a wave that is propogated through an ocean of
ether. According to EM Relationism, the EM entities were already
connecting the light source to its reflector, and the wave that was
propogated over that entity travels the same distance regardless of
whether the clock is still, or accelerated.
Unlike Relativity, EM Relationism starts from the question, "how is
eternal solar energy supported". There are two physical laws
supporting the theory that new stars will always be forming, and
always have been,
(Law 1) Nuclear theory:
energy and mass are never destroyed, but converted into the other.
(Law 2) Thermal Radiation theory:
matter always radiates its energy at a rate proportional to its
absolute temperature (if temperature remains constant, then it's
absorbing as much as it radiates). If it isn't absorbing any
radiation, then it will reach an absolute temperature of zero.
Also the Hubble Redshift insures that as waves travel infinitely they
lose all energy. [4](p18)
The EM entities radiate energy from their particle until its
temperature reaches absolute zero. As the temperature decreases,
most of the radiation is released at longer wavelengths; so it's
predicted that an absolute temperature of zero would result in the
radiation of energy having an infinite wavelength.
Also,
the Hubble Redshift insures that EM radiation from surrounding sources
cannot add radiation from arbitrary distnces. This means that without a
source of solar energy nearby, any place in the universe will
eventually be as devoid of energy as the last time a galaxy was born
there.
As stars in a region become exhausted, the seas of EM entities
grow calmer as radiation is emitted in longer lengths. Also, their
wavelengths fall longer with distance. When the length of a last
EM wave approaches infinity, the EM entity has failed to define its
wavelength; so, it must exist as something that doesn't have a
wavelength! The resulting energy-to-mass conversion creates a
Gravitational (G) entity that is very unstable.
These G entities combine into more stable nuetrons, and this gain
in stability releases enormous amounts of thermal energy. Energy is
needed by a particle to maintain its structure, which gives it the
quality of mass. When the particles group together, they are
forming a single structure that requires much less energy than the many
individual structures needed. The energy that was no longer
needed for maintaining structure is now free to cause the erratic
motion is known as thermal energy, and percieved as heat.
The process of creating thermal energy causes the neutron to
separate into a positive proton and a negative electron, and these are
the constituents of plasma. Plasma is the fourth state of matter:
just as gas is super-heated liquid, plasma is super-heated gas.
Particles in a plasma are charged, and their kinetic (motion) energy is
high enouph to maintain that charge (difference in electrical
potential). Unlike a gas, a plasma is electrically conductive and
affected by magnetism. There are an equal number of positively charged
( ions ) as there are negatively charged ( electrons ). [5] An ion is a
molecule that has fewer electrons than protons (protons have a positive
charge). An energy-to-mass conversion will create the mass, and
the subsequent stabilizing process will bestow it with the emmense
energy needed for a plasma state.
Lerner's Plasma Cosmology [4]
When a current flows through a plasma, it must assume the form of a
filament in order to move along magnetic field lines. The flow of
electrons thus becomes force-free: because they move exactly along the
lines of a magnetic field, no magnetic forces act on them. The axis of
galactic spiral is one such filament. Electrons along the center of the
filament flow in straight lines, producing a spiral magnetic field
along which outer electrons can flow. The outer electrons, in turn,
flowing in spirals around the filament, produce the straight magnetic
field lines on the axis along which inner electrons flow.
When working with electromagnetism, certain key variables do not change
with scale --electrical resistance, velocity, and energy all remain the
same. This means that plasma acts the same at the galactic level as at
the laboratory level, only the rate of activity is proportional to its
size. For instance, if plasmas are fired at high speed toward each
other in the laboratory, they pinch and twist themselves into the
shapes of spiral galaxies. Both theoretical studies and computer
simulations had shown that any plasma with sufficient energy will
create vortex filaments, that form thick dense ropes. These filaments
will grow until they became self-gravitating: gravity will then break
them up, producing blobs of plasma spinning across the field lines of
the huge filaments. This, in turn, will generate inward flowing
currents that will produce a new set of filaments, thus repeating the
cycle, spinning an ever finer web of matter.
The first filaments will be dozens of supercluster chains. Each
of these will be composed of thousands of galaxies which contain
hundreds of billions of stars. At each stage the inward-flowing
currents and the backgound magnetic field will brake the spinning
plasma, allowing further contraction of the protocluster, protogalaxy,
or protostar.
The energy taken from the rotation and gravitational contraction
of the object will go into the creation of the dense plasmoid and will
be released in the beams that the plamoids create as they decay. A
quasar is thus the birth cry of a galaxy, the means by which the excess
energy of rotation, which must be removed if the galaxy is to collapse,
is carried away in the form of energetic jets. Quasars expel electrical
energy with one beam of electrons that never escape the limits of the
quasar, and an opposite beam of protons that radiate radio waves by
accelerating electrons.
Once the galaxy forms, the same process at a lower rate fuels the
repetitive formation of small plasmoids at its nucleus. The process is
today generating stars in the dense filaments of the spiral arms.
I don't really understand how plasma cosmology takes us from plasma to
star creation. Conversely, Lerner doesn't seem too concerned with
taking us from empty space to plasma. I copied this bit about plasma
cosmology because it seems to have the missing piece of my puzzle. In
any case, the piece of the puzzle that I put in place is that EM waves
travel on entities that exist independently of the energy they
transfer, and without any energy to transfer, they perform an
energy-to-mass conversion. As this primitive mass forms more stable
mass, its thermal energy becomes more intense, and it finally initiates
a self-perpetuating nuclear fusion. A star is born, and it
performs the mass-to-energy conversion that keeps a strong wave in all
the nearby EM entities. After repeated fusion reactions ( and
some fission ), all the fuel has been radiated; and, the star
finally stops making waves, to make way for a new generation.
The Big Bang Theory
Our universe follows a set of rules that follow a time-in-space model
and these rules define our experience. The time-in-space model
forms a collection of expeeriences. Only the model's effect on
experience is real -- the model itself doesn't exist at all. As a
metaphysical idea, the Big Bang could refer to the theory that all
experiences exist simultaneously -- BANG -- as a single indefinite
object in a space that has no distance or time. (time, distance, and
motion are part of the model, not the reality).
As for theories in physics, plasma cosmologists have alternatives and
strong arguments for refuting the Big Bang (see [4]). Physics is our
study of how that time-in-space model works. There is no Big Bang
in physics; just an endless procession of stars living to fill void,
and dying to create it. Of course, this theory merely fits my own
observations, which are quite limited.
Metaphysics/ Creationism
1992
DESCRIPTION:
Describes how all time could
be created at once without life being predetermined. Should be of
interest to those comparing Creationism to Evolutionism. Also a study
of free will versus destiny.
SUMMARY:
Experience is a substance that either exists all at once --
indefinitely -- or not at all. But as a substance, experience exists
without place or time. The patterns that develope in the experience are
designed by a single, unified rule that we know as our universe. Such a
rule doesn't preclude a supernatural power, and such a power could use
evolution as a tool.
A space is the collection of all the possible values that a variable
could have
. The model space is all the ways to design a physics, or a
system for defining experience. The physical space is the collection of
all the places that an object could be at a particular time.
The metaphysical space is all the ways in which an Experience could be
defined indefinitely. Unlike physical space, there is no
dimension of place or time. Either the Experience is defined
indefinitely, or it is not.
Without the actual existence of time or space, the existence of
experience is an all-or-nothing thing: either a rule does define
experience indefinitely, or it does not.
When experience is viewed as a substance, it exists as one object of
infinite size that never changes. Each of us, at any given time, is
"being" part of this object.
This description makes it sound as if all the moments in history have
already happened. After all, some experience obviously already exists,
and if experience is an all-or-nothing thing, then the entire
experience must already be defined. And if all experience already
exists, then all the events of the future must have already happened,
and we are being a procession of experience with no more control than
if we were watching a movie.
But this confuses your experience with the models that designed it.
When you watch a video of real events, you might say that those
involved in making the movie really have no control in what they are
seen doing --but at the time of the shooting they certainly did.
Similarly, you are being subjected to the lives of 20th century
earthlings who were very much in control of their future. Their
universe didn't support time-travel, and destiny consisted only of the
will to survive eternally, and grow technologically --free will had a
lot of room to move around in.
