Nothingness and chaos

[HydrogenBond]

Here is an idea that popped into my head this morning. If we started with a void such as empty space with nothing in it, there would be a uniformity with respect to nothing. Irregardess of where or when one is in this void space, it will all look exactly the same. If we added chaos or entropy to this uniform state of nothingness, then its uniformity would be disrupted and something nonuniform would have to appear.

 

If we added chaos or entropy in a linear way, the nonuniformity within the void would build in the same region of space. In other words, if the same amount of chaos was given to two anomalies, separated by a lot of distance, there would be more degrees of freedom using up some of the chaos. In the same spot, there is less entropy or chaos being used up due to the degrees of freedom offered by the separation. This would be the most efficient way to get the most bang for the buck, since no potential energy is not being waste in the enhanced entropy due to the separation. The primordial atom could form from a complete void, using only chaos, being applied as efficiently as possible.

[sanctus]

How can you/what do you mean by adding chaos in a linear way? It seems contradicting to me, chaos cannot by definition be lienear (or am I wrong?)...

[HydrogenBond]

I meant to say that chaos was added in an increasing but continuous way. It does not have to be linear, just as long as there is maximum efficiency.

 

What I would like to add to this analysis, is something that popped into my head this afternoon, connected to the gamma function of special relativity. The analysis is for fun, so don't get your hair in a bunch. Just use it as seeds for thought.

 

 

If we plug in velocity for matter, the max is at C. This causes gamma to become infinite. For giggles, I decided to see what would happen if we plugged in V>C. This amounts to using the special relativity gamma to define something traveling faster than C. At C+, the result is gamma decreases slightly below infinite, but ends up with an imaginary i due to having to solve the sqaure root of a negative number. At the velocity of (square root of 2) times C, gamma becomes 1i. This would essentially be analogous to what appears to be a stationary object, but with an i.

 

The imaginary number i is used for mathematical convenience. There is a trick that may make it possible to address V>C using gamma. This trick allows i to becomes a positive parameter instead of having it remain imaginary. This require using a tetrahedral coordinate system. In this system, the axis x,y,z,t uses tetrahedral axis, where all four axis are are plotted in 3-D space, but separated by 109 degrees.

 

 

What this does is allow the negative of any axis, to be expressed in terms of the positive values of the other three parameters. There is no negative X with this coordinate system. Negative X is a function positive (y,z,t). This might be a way to equate chaos in time and distance at V>C, using the special relativity gamma. The easiest example to see is the time parameter. If this system, going faster than C results in a square root of a negative number for the gamma of time. But in the tetraheral system, the i of the gamma of time implies positive pertubations in distance. Or chaos in time would be reflected in sort of a quantum change in (X,Y,Z).

 

With this analysis the (square root of 2) times C, has no chaos in time. It is only when we go slower than this ceiling velocity and approach C that chaos increases toward infinite. This would suggest that forming the universe from nothing, started with chaos near 1.4.14C. Chaos increased by moving toward C+, with the quantum jumps getting larger in distance as the anomolies due to chaos in a void converge into a point singularity.

 

This only gets us a primordial atom using only chaos in time. If it stops short of C+, the result is the anomaly needed for a finite universe out of nothing. To get it to expand, like it did, we need to crank up chaos in x,y,z. Chaos in X will result in the imaginary parameter affecting (Y,Z, T). This is sort of quantum velocity in a plane, which could be a circle, spiral, etc., If we do it in all three distance dimensions, we get quantum expansion in distance and time, but in an odd 3-parameter type of way. As soon as the forces of nature appear, they begin to fight chaos, sending its distribution curve back toward 1.414C. Or chaos begins to decrease as the forces creates order within the chaos. But its still remains.

 

It is interesting to ponder, since nobody can prove anything.

[wigglieverse]

You can ponder whether an "empty" space is possible anywhere in the universe. We can conceive of a bounded volume somewhere that contains absolutely nothing (in terms of energy or matter). But does it "exist"?

[HydrogenBond]

It may not currently exist. But what I was trying to do was assume we start with nothing and use some basic principles of chaos to create a disturbance in nothingness. Now we have something.

 

The analysis for faster than C is being presented for jollies. But maybe it can lead to some practical uses. It might be a way to correlate chaos. I would like to extrapolate the model beyond the (square root of 2) times C. If we hypothetically went faster than that limit, the gamma function begins to become less than 1. There is also i due the negative square root. But we can deal with that using the tetrahedral system.

 

The implication of the special relativity being less that 1, is that instead of time dilation were get time expansion and instead of distance contraction we get distance expansion. Also the odd relativistic mass affect causes the total mass to get smaller instead of larger. In practical terms, the chaos is occurring is below or inside the stationary reference. What this sort of describes are the forces of nature, where mass is dropping. It is not really chaos, in the normal sense of entropy, but negative chaos-entropy. Or it may be a type of subparticle chaos that causes the superstructure, of the substructure, to behave in an attractive way.

 

Although the practical limit of velocity is C, in this for giggles model, velocity can theoretically go all the way to infinite. If you plug this in, gamma approaches 0. If one could hypothetically travel at infinite speed, one could get to the opposite side of the universe in an instant, while remaining in stationary reference. It would be sort of a special relativity affect seen by a C reference, while remaining in stationary reference. This sorts of describes the infinite distance affect of gravity. Although the gravity can only propagate at C, the field, which has already propagated a long time ago, and is affecting matter at long distance, is sort of wired into the stationary reference that is propagating today. In a sense, what is propagating today at C is vitually hooked all the way to infinity. It would sort of need an infinite velocity, to explain, if it wasn't all hooked up.

 

There is a simple way to explain V>C plugged into gamma. Relative to a C reference, where infinity is pulled into a point, v=infinite for example, would sort of be implicit of staying in the C reference while using a microscope on the point, so we can make it look like it is infinite. It is still a point in C reference and therefore all hooked up. The microscope allows one to see the continuous hook up when it is magnified. Or virtual chaos in the C reference, all occurring simulatantously, when microscoped down into stationary reference, can cause distant affects that appear to exceed the speed of light, without the speed of light ever needing to exceed C in the C reference.

 

Let me give an example, say we have a tiny drop of pond water that is 0.1CM. We take a microscope to focus on a bacteria. We are still in the lab but our precieved reference is now at the scale of the bacteria. We may even need to slow down the film, so we can see its little paddles moving slow enough where we are able to see the type of motion. If you look long enough, this become the new stationary reference. Another scientist, messing with you ,pokes a needle into the sample. Now this looks like he has lightning fast reflexes, even though it is slow.

 

There is another aspect of chaos, connected to the three dimensions of time, where the tetrahedral coordinate system becomes (d,t1,t2,t3). If you look at force, the distance parameter is called d. If position is not important, the distance variable only requires 1-D. In other words, no matter where two objects are relative to each other in 3-d space, if the separation in distance is the same, the force will not change. The (x,y,z,t) is useful to help up describe where the objects are in space-time. This gives us one aspect of chaos. But if position is not important, for batches systems, than something can be learned using the chaos within time-space. I know this sounds odd, but let me show what I mean.

 

Say we had an object in motion, such as a baseball. If we took at photo of the object, we would stop the object in time. If the shutter speed was too slow, the photo would contain motion blur. This motion blur will create an indeterminancy in distance because of the poor photo. At the same time, although time is stopped, the motion blur gives us a feeling of motion even though there is no time elapsing. It is stopped in time, but still has a sense of motion, which sort of implies time still acting. This affect is the first dimension of time and it reflects potential energy. The stopping of time, with respect to velocity is connected to stopping the second dimension of time. The baseball in 2-d time has motion as velocity and potential energy. It we only look at it in 1-d time, the velocity is stopped, but the motion blur implies potential energy giving it time.

 

The third dimension of time is connected to acceleration and force. If something is accelerating it has three dimensions of time. If we freeze only the third dimension of time, it would stop accelerating and we would have only velocity. Essentially, by removing the force we remove the third time dimension from the object. Say our shutter speed for stopping the acceleration is such that it gives us a motion blur with respect to the first two dimensions of time. In this case there is velocity blur, where velocity becomes indeterminant. It is not accelerating, due to stopping the third dimension of time, but creates an affect of accelerating but without any force appearing to act. For example, a quantum jump, where the velocity changes but there is no apparent force acting in 2-D time.

 

If we go back to 1-D time or potential energy, but without 2-D time velocity or 3-D time acceleration, if we stop this first dimension of time but our shutter speed in time ,is not exactly correct, we would get a time blur. This would be an indeterminancy in potential energy. For example, a particle appearing before it exists, creates energy indeterminany.

 

The shutter speeds, that I was talking about, which cause blur in the various dimensions of time-space, are sort of the chaos affects. If the shutter speed matched the time dimension one would have a clean state, where there is little in the way of time-space indeterminancy. With the tetrahedral system and velocity greater than C, if the i is in the d or distance variable of time-space, it will pertubate 3-D time with blur. In the (x,y,z,t) another affect could occur depending on x,y, or z to create some type of 2-D movement in space that goes along with it.

[wigglieverse]

When I first saw a teacher draw a time/distance graph, I thought there was something wrong with it. Instead of a single axis for distance, I thought there should be three (which is correct, but of course you can 'slice' it so only one 'distance' or separation measurement is needed. Nonetheless I objected (not vocally) to time being represented the same way because I thought there should be three axes, and time should be represented on all three of them (not by using a separate axis). This misapprehension has been 'corrected' and I now understand how time can be represented as a line, but this 'stuck' with me I guess, because I still think time isn't really like distance (although the two are obviously connected).

[Vox]

You can ponder whether an "empty" space is possible anywhere in the universe. We can conceive of a bounded volume somewhere that contains absolutely nothing (in terms of energy or matter). But does it "exist"?

 

If we agree that in a moment when we define something as "something" at the same time we define also what is not "something" that would be then "Nothingness/Nothing" but if you name Nothing to something it will be then something.. So from my mind nothing can not be anything and can not "exist" as it would be "something". conclusion "nothingness can not be named or known, it can not exist therefore it is not as something is" something and nothing is one we only can understand and see something..due nothing is working as contrast to make something, something..And if you ask where this came from , I do not know ;-)

 

In physical terms Nothingness would be another dimension(s) which can not exist in "our world" therefore defining "our world" borderlines to Nothingness

[Rade]

This require using a tetrahedral coordinate system. In this system, the axis x,y,z,t uses tetrahedral axis, where all four axis are are plotted in 3-D space, but separated by 109 degrees.

How would antimatter respond to the added chaos of nothingness in your 3-D tetrahedral picture ? At the begin, it is believed there were equal amounts of matter and antimatter that "appeared" as result of your suggested chaos. Seems to me your hypothesis must be able to explain both matter and antimatter, and perhaps answer the question--"what happened to all the antimatter that appeared from nothingness ?"

 

Also, in another thread on "impossibilities", it was presented that there is a logical difference between absolute nothingness and relative nothingness. I would think that your hypothesis applies only to relative nothingness, as a type of expectation of matter and energy not fulfilled--does this make any sense to you ?

[Vox]

Here is an idea that popped into my head this morning. If we started with a void such as empty space with nothing in it, there would be a uniformity with respect to nothing. Irregardess of where or when one is in this void space, it will all look exactly the same. If we added chaos or entropy to this uniform state of nothingness, then its uniformity would be disrupted and something nonuniform would have to appear.

 

If we added chaos or entropy in a linear way, the nonuniformity within the void would build in the same region of space. In other words, if the same amount of chaos was given to two anomalies, separated by a lot of distance, there would be more degrees of freedom using up some of the chaos. In the same spot, there is less entropy or chaos being used up due to the degrees of freedom offered by the separation. This would be the most efficient way to get the most bang for the buck, since no potential energy is not being waste in the enhanced entropy due to the separation. The primordial atom could form from a complete void, using only chaos, being applied as efficiently as possible.

 

This? And the white being what ever needed to be and black it´s opposite ?