If
our Universe is not infinite, what exists outside of it? What is the
definition of nothing? Is the nothingness infinite? Is there
such a thing as a meter outside of our Universe? Does time exist
outside of our Universe?
In
order to answer these questions, we must have a clear understanding
of what time and distance are. Mass, length, and time are the
dimensions we use to describe and quantify all that we see happening
in our Universe, and if we don't know what they really are, or have
made false assumptions about what they are, then in Isaac Newton's
words: “A man may imagine things that are false, but he only
understand things that are true, for if the things be false, the
apprehension of them is not understanding.”
Isaac Newton
How
then do we determine what is true and what is false? We start by
making preliminary assumptions about something that appears to always be true, and then by observation we see if it is ever
not true.
Up
until the twentieth century, we did not question what time or
distance measurements were. We did not understand why these things
were, but we thought that a meter could be precisely defined by the
length of a piece of metal that was held at a constant given
temperature, and that time could be defined on this earth by the swing of a
pendulum of given length in a stationary environment. We made the
assumption that these things were always constant and consistent throughout
the Universe. Then Albert came along and made the preposterous claim
that the movement of matter through a
distance in space with time is not independent, and the velocity affects
both the passage of time in that space and even affects the mass
properties of the matter being moved. Those claims, when
observations were made to confirm them, changed our thinking about
what time and distance measurements in space were. We now call it
space-time. But we are still in the dark about what these things
really are and how they exist. Answers to the questions I
posed at the beginning of this paper are not so clear when we really don't know what space and time are.
So,
how do we distinguish those things which are true from those which
are false or only partially true? The answer is, we look for things
that are in disagreement with what we believe is true. In this
sense, nothing is ever proven to be true unless there are never any observations that can be made to disprove it. Even at that, we might not be able to say what we believe is unconditionally true though. We would also have to prove that there are no other possible ways in which what we observe can be
happening other than the way we think they are happening for it to be absolutely true.
Mathematical
formulation of physical behavior can be useful in describing and
predicting the actions that we see, but it is only a model of the
behavior. Remember that mathematics is only a mind tool that helps
us to understand the behavior of things, and is not the cause of any
physical existence or its behavior. Mother Nature acts independently
of our will and reason.
In
order to advance our knowledge, we have to rely on our imagination
and creativity to come up with new ways of how things can exist when
we see that there are problems with our current thinking on how
things work. Once conceived, we can proceed with the work of trying
to find ways to disprove the new ideas. A wise man once said, “The
biggest mistakes are made in the beginning.” And certainly, if you
made a false assumption in the beginning of an investigation, and you
base all of your work around that, then the “proof” of
what you claim to be true, based on that assumption, comes tumbling
down when that foundation pillar is knocked out. But that doesn't
mean that all of the work of characterization and defining the
behavior is wasted. It just means that what you have been observing
is happening in a different way than you thought. All of that work
can be applied to disproving the new idea if it is not the whole
truth. In this way we can advance our knowledge and understanding if
it is done objectively and without political bias. (There are some
scientists, especially in academia, who are strongly political, and
they do a great disservice to the advancement of knowledge. The
cause of this is arrogance, and its intent is to establish superiority
and control over others. This goes way back, even to the time of
Plato and Democritus. )
So
with this prelude, I am going to present my imaginative vision of
physical existence, and answer the questions I posed at the beginning
of this paper.
Is
the Universe infinite, and if not, what is outside of it? Is
nothingness infinite? My belief is that the Universe is finite,
mainly because it couldn't expand if it was infinite. Finite means
that it has bounds beyond which nothing that we can relate to in our
Universe exists. That's not to say that there may be things existing
that we cannot detect with our Universe bound abilities though. If
the Universe is finite, then the nothingness outside of it cannot be
quantified, implying that it could be infinite. The logic of this
is, if our Universe has limits then there are no limits on how much
there can be of non-Universe. Of course this cannot be proven or
disproved because it is outside the bounds of our reality.
Well
then, if our Universe is finite, what defines its boundaries and what
is the Universe made of? The Universe encompasses all that we
experience in our physical reality; time, space, energy, forces,
matter … , but it does not encompass the spiritual; logic, reason,
consciousness, intellect, and the software of life. I distinguish
here the adaptive evolutionary software of life from the physical
host that it resides in. The spiritual parts, and life, are not
directly bound to the Universe. The spiritual and physical cannot
directly affect each other. The physical Universe and its laws is
not the cause of life, and life or associated spiritual parts cannot
change the physical behavior of the Universe.
What does the physical Universe consist of, and how do all of the
things we see, exist? Here is my vision of what the physical
Universe is:
- The Universe consists of a fixed quantity of only one type of thing. I will call these things “Space Bubbles”. These bubbles all have identical properties, but are individual and consist solely of their own space bubble material that is invisible to us. The bubbles cannot share their portion of Universe space with any other, and all of Universe space must be occupied by these bubbles and their bubble material. No voids of non-universe space is allowed in our Universe. Vacuum space bubbles are the least dense bubbles and have unity mass. Matter space bubbles occur in clumped groups which have a higher density than the vacuum space which gives them the property of mass, and the density ratio is proportional to the mass of the matter.
- Each bubble has a creative source of its own bubble material within it that is forcefully expanding it against the bubbles surrounding it. This creative expansion action of the bubbles, and their interaction with each other, is the cause of all the properties of the Universe, and ultimately is the cause of all physical existence. In other words, I am saying that the Big Bang never was, and that the Universe is in a constant state of creation due to the creative expansion within all of the space bubbles.
Now
if Albert Einstein's statement about the connection between space,
time, matter and gravity was deemed preposterous and caused tremors
in the academic ranks, my statements will no doubt cause an
earthquake of absurdity and a fiery volcano of ridicule in such
places! But since all of our observations are based on dimensions of
time, distance/space, and mass, and these things are all a function
of the space bubble expansion in order to observe it, the burden will
be on the skeptics to disprove my idea of existence. I have shown in
my book how all of what we observe can be caused by the bubble
expansion, but there can be no proof to show that it is correct. We
can only find that it is incorrect by observations that are in
disagreement with it. In order to disprove it though, time, mass,
distance, energy, etc. will all have to be redefined in the new terms
of an expanding Universe. We cannot use the existing definition of
what they are now because the current assumption of what they are is
wrong in my view. It will be up to others to show why the Universe
cannot exist in the way I propose, and to confirm that the actions we
see cannot be happening because of them.
To
those with an open mind and a humble heart, and those who are on a
true quest for the truth of our existence, here are some meaningful
things for you to consider! You can take what already has been learned about the behavior of the Universe from those who have preceded you, and with this new insight of how the Universe could be existing, explore the possibility of coming to a better understanding of what we are.
I have written a little book about this called “Are We Just Bubbles? An Alternate View of Existence” and there is more detail in how this all works if you are interested. They are available on Amazon or Lulu publishers on demand.
Dan Bowlds
Interesting
ReplyDelete