Scientists study a certain subject and find the truth.
Can you explain to me your thoughts on conformal cyclic cosmology, anti-desitter spaces, and why when physicists/artists draw the universe/shape of the universe it looks like a loaf of bread or a paraboloid? What does it mean when physicists say space is totally flat? Why this? It is my impression that space is curved and possibly a sphere like thing called a torus (I’ve been told I’m delusional). This would mean the universe is much bigger than we thought. The universe can bounce back which is in line with m-theory or at least possible with some variation/version/interpretation of m-theory.
Could conformal cyclic cosmology be correct/right with m-theory? I don’t know. Why can’t CCC be correct with a spherical universe? You could have several points of where you could make several universes or chains of them in my opinion. I’ve seen the diagrams/drawings. You could have a linear chain like i’ve seen but also could have a universe split off according to string/theory/m-theory where you create the big bang. Why a linear chain of big bangs in my uneducated opinion? Is this is a subset of all possible orientations?
I’m not that great with math anymore but I’m good at abstract thinking and googling/wikipedia research aha.
Could CCC mean or lead to the understanding we live in the matrix? It seems a linear chain of big bangs is stupid…or artificial.
I believe we live in a matrix and that CCC could be right (although I have my doubts) and that it would explain the fermi paradox (no alien life) and that consciousness could travel between these linear chains of big bangs or at least some sort of information like photons or some type of particles like Tachyons IIRC.
I also think a torus could lead to our understanding we live in an artificial universe and infinity doesn’t exist at all.
1 Like
I think maths is interesting even statistics and also physics but I’m just too slow for it
I’m slow too. Some people are slower but think deeply.
1 Like
Space expands at each point at the speed of light, and the consequent densities of matter are said to create a hyperbolic parabaloid or “saddle” shape according to general relativity. That about sums up my knowledge on the matter lol. I had never heard of CCC before honestly, my understanding comes from a place of study of string theory, but it sounds very interesting to me, the idea of aeons or alternate universes being linked to subsequent big bangs, and dark matter and cosmological bacckground radiation being a link between these universes. Im going to check it out some more and get back to you, I come from a background of particle and quantum physics, which deals from the study of the very small, not the very large like general relativity and cosmetology
Anyway on the concept of infinity, it is just that: a concept. There are varying degrees of infinity, if that tells you anything. We really dont know what infinity means so we just give it a label. Infinite could mean everything and anything really. I suggest you look at number theory for more on this, its fascinating really, the interplay between zero and infinity
1 Like
IIRC, I think I believed this years ago when I was sick. I had a brief thought/delusion that a ‘light cone or something like it’ is going to revolutionize physics (which they don’t want, I guess-- that would suck). I’m not sure what a Minkowski space is…, but if we live in a simulation we could be living in a torus/sphere universe inside a cube/hypercube of some sorts. Similar to how physicists simulate stuff as well as scientists too. Can time look like a loaf of bread? What the hell is the holographic principle? Could we be living in a anti-desitter space…I saw a picture of an AdS moving with time? What about closed time like curves and stuff with this? I had a vision that AdS or whatever could revolutionize physics, which is probably not a good idea. I mean I’m stuck in a causal loop and thus closed time like curves must exist, right? I’m stuck in a loop with schizophrenia. The worst thing is not being able to work, not having a purpose, and not having motivation. Like Nietzsche said, having a crappy life and not improving it/unable to change it for eternity (no free will, apparently) is hell in a sense.
I’m just rambling nonsense…possibly delusional…I guess. haha. I mean I have memories of questioning current inflation theories (past life) and stuff. I mean I read enough to know a torus could expand and contract forever. Furthermore, you can change the shape of the universe if you are a scientist/computer simulator. The simulators don’t want us knowing this stuff.
Maybe physics is different more complex outside the simulation with more dimensions than string theory. Just a vague memory.
I think (this instant) that holographic principle is wrong because we don’t live in a hologram/black hole at all. Maybe the brain could be viewed as a hologram of sorts (matrix like the movie…). There is even a book called the holographic brain/universe or something. Could be true. But holographic principle math seems correct and related to string theory so it has some purpose. It always fascinated me and was interesting. I’m just rambling.
Eternalism theory reminds me of Christian Shephard from Lost telling Jack after he died that there is no ‘now’.
1 Like
Maybe they’re open timelike curves? Instead of ruinning/bumping into myself, they’re transferring my soul/consciousness. I’ve had a couple decent lives, but most were terrible or I remember the hell like ones more. They’re more salient. It gets rid of the paradox. No paradoxes. Consciousness can survive wormholes and death. I wonder if an Ai/quantum computer is doing it to me.
more on OTCs:
1 Like
Who likes Taylors Series and convergence? Calculus 2 was tough but its beautiful how sequences of numbers can contribute to understanding computer algorithms:
1 Like
I do. Community college skipped it. I had to learn through coursera. I am on part 2.
1 Like
Thats a shame. Good on you for learning it now though! Like I said number theory is not my strong point so naturally neither are sequences or sums. But its a great tool for scientific computer algorithms so Im learning it again now so I can extrapolate data from large matrices, such as those found in neutronics in reactor physics. I love it but I still have a lot to learn!
1 Like
Ya it was a shame, but I guess that’s how I did so well. We did learn calculus but it wasn’t at an advanced level like at MIT or something. I took the easiest professor and we didn’t have a lot of options. We still learned stuff but whatever. I like Taylor series a lot. It makes math more beautiful. I stopped at the end of part 2 on coursera from univ. of penn. The professor who taught it is super smart and talented. I recommend it for anyone.
1 Like
You might want to look at Coursera’s Stanford Algorithms course. My friend took it and learned a lot. It didn’t necessarily help him get a job but it taught him some stuff. If you have a math background like in real analysis, it should be doable and if you have programmed a lot.
1 Like
Thats a good idea! I want to know more so I can make my programs as efficient as possible. I want to write a piece of code to calculate neutron density in a reactor for my masters thesis!
Thanks for the resources man
1 Like
Anyone hear of laplace approximation? Im using it to simulate a nuclear reactor and I have no idea what Im doing lol but its fascinating
Being a high school dropout, I hardly know any math, and I too, like insidemind mentioned, have no physics education. But in my spare time I did manage to independently discover the Special Relativity(SR) phenomena, and then independently derived the SR mathematical equations, including the Lorentz transformation equations.
1 Like
I have poor math skills. Apparently studies show that those who aren’t good at it are just lazy.
1 Like
@OTRA Thats good that youre learning about special relativity, its really hard for even me to wrap my brain around so good job! Thats really impressive that you were able to derive the Lorentz Transformations yourself, I couldnt do that, I’d probably screw it up somehow lol
@Cici2 Arent you getting a masters in Physics Education? You must be pretty good at math to do that! I think everyone can learn to do math, you just have to be passionate about it. Plenty of people arent and thats fine, but there is so much beauty in how these equations describe the world!
1 Like
I haven’t practiced or studied math in years. One thing I always found a little interesting is how 1/3rd in decimal form is 33.3333333 and from a quick google search it is a repeating decimal. Have we truly not solved 1/3rd in decimal form? Can 1/3rd even be split equally? When will anyone achieve the perfect circle? If it is finally achieved could that make a form of matter incredibly strong? What about a perfect sphere? Could that be the key to time/space travel, and if so, could it have been aliens?
Heh sorry couldn’t help myself about that last part, I just always remember that show Ancient Aliens, there’s always that, “And if so, (could it be possible blah blah blah aliens visited)?” On almost every single episode.
We should bring out quantum computing for that stuff. Hopefully it doesn’t take millions of years to calculate 42 at the end of 33.3333333, that would be too good to be true.
1 Like
Heh to further elaborate on the humor in my other post if 42 are indeed the final decimals of 33.33333 then holy crud, maybe the answer to life could be 42. Biologically 1+1=2 and in some strange way the universe works for known humanity, a baby can pop out of two so therefore 1/3rd could be baby, expansion, and the answer to life. Pooof… mind is blown.
1 Like
Haha that would be great if 42 were at the end of .3333333, if only for the Hitchhikers reference! Theoretically, the 3’s extend infinitely, so it is literally impossible to calculate it to the end. Same with pi, there is a an infinite number of decimals, so no matter the precision you calculate it at it will only be an approximation. Thats why a perfect circle or sphere is impossible to create, it only exists in nature, such as a black hole.
Im no good at number theory so take this with a grain of salt lol, I especially suck at proofs, QED.
1 Like