Stephen Hawking says there's no theory of everything


What follows is an original writing by me ... (where the rocks come from) 
Physicists today have constructed two models of "the universe." These are the theory of the very big (Einstein's theory: e=mc2) and the theory of the very small (known as Quantum Mechanics). These two ideas both "prove" themselves correct, experimentally; however, many physicists believe that they both cannot be right because they seem fundamentally at odds with each other.

 

Quantum theory explains the two nuclear forces and electromagnetism, but it does not yet explain gravity. The two-slit light experiment shows that the basic particles of our universe do not seem to exist (except as a wave function) until they are first measured. According to the theory, matter and energy can (and do) appear spontaneously out of the vacuum of space-time. This is called quantum fluctuation. When a particle comes into existence, so does an anti-particle (possibly in some parallel "negative" universe instance). The pair effectively cancel each other in the grand scheme of things. Particles appear to travel in waves (meaning they can follow multiple simultaneous paths) unless they are interrupted by being observed. Under observation, each particle somehow transforms from a wave and "chooses" a single physical incarnation creation path. The chosen path is determined by something called "entanglement". Our particular universe is fractal. Its nature is toward "order" in that the parts like to join, and remain in large "groups". Entanglement is just a way of representing groups of particles that want to continue to behave together, as a group. The group behaviour pattern manifests itself when one of the group's particles is observed. Here is a simplistic example of real-world entanglement: suppose what you wanted was to create a product of some sort. You found that by mixing two or more verified methods for achieving the same goal (creating a product in this case), that goal's chance of being realized would likely improve. The odds that are weighted in your favour for a potential future increase. The two methods have become entangled that way because you referenced them both. Sub-atomic particle potential may work the same way. In other words, the push to follow one random future vs. some other random future is being made by those entity-group(s) in charge. They can choose from all possible universes that parallel the current one at each instant of time. The act of choosing the product's group for coming into existence makes it so. Before the choice, everything is just a probability.

 

Einstein's theories explain gravity. They show us that the universe started as a "point" in which all matter and energy once resided. This point exploded as the "big bang" that created all galaxies, stars, planets and (eventually) people. Einstein showed us that matter and energy are, just different incarnations of the same thing, and that matter and energy have an interesting effect: they cause space and time to curve. It is the curvature of space-time that we perceive as gravity. 

 

Einstein's curvature theory accurately predicted the orbit of planet Mercury. Note there is no provision for either matter or energy to "wink-in" or to "wink-out" of existence under Einstein's models. One form can change into the other, but the total amount of matter and energy in the universe remains constant. Because our universe is expanding with apparently not enough mass to cause a future gravitational collapse, and also because there is only a constant amount of total energy, it is assumed that particles will spread themselves out over ever greater areas until the virtual heat death of the entire universe is assured. Think of these rules as our physical laws.

 

So here is the problem: relativity and the quantum theory are precise opposites. How can they both be correct? Now the paradigm shift: try to imagine absolute nothingness. no space, no time, just pure nothing. Next, consider that even the idea of nothing implies that there could potentially be an idea for its opposite. The idea is just a potential and does not have (or need) any basis in reality. So in our universe of nothing, there exists a potential. A potential for not-nothing is itself something. This is how we get to something from nothing: the route of potential. It is enough. Each potential is a single bit of information. Now imagine that all perceived particles are not real, and instead actually only potential not-nothings. These not-nothing potentials could be followed using an imaginary observation manner wherein each new "configuration" follows from an arbitrary set of imaginary physical laws. Think about it. All possible universes would create themselves. Time would create itself, as time is only the act of moving from one choice to another, inside the largest manifesting group of potentials. The number of simultaneous starting potentials and their imaginary potential movement patterns would define each universe's structure and form transition (s). Notice that each state of any potential universe pattern has infinite potential next states; however, only a subset of those could exist as cohesive universes, just like ours. Cohesive-group universes can only exist when every potential next-state follows the same state change rule set (ie: the "physical laws" for that universe must remain constant). 

 

Consider: each "history" for every particle(potential) must cascade based on the previous particle(potential) history state, which must cascade on the previous-previous state, and so on and so on.

 

Think of it this way, particle groups seem to become intertwined in a way that appears as if the actions of one affect all the others in that group at the same instant; however, what is happening is that the group potential has a "choice" that exists outside of time. Because the choice itself forms a path to the future that our particular particle group's "universe" chooses to create, that choice affects which entanglement groups the particle is a member of. Everything is just "potential", and it is the choice that forms what we perceive as time; each pattern being completely defined by its potential-particle-group's "previous entanglement state" (i.e.. the particle group's history, where "history" itself is only defined as a potential-path of possible choices.) The "followed" path manifests itself to us as the perception of current external "forces" acting on what we perceive as a particle. To us, it appears as if each particle takes the "easiest physical path from here to there". Each particle potential appears to create the particle's "next state" by apparently forcing the particle to appear to declare its creation path. So particles seem to more or less define themselves at the moment of observation. 


But realize they have to because we are "inside" time. If you can get that one point, you've got it. For us, each moment appears to hold multiple potential futures; however, in reality, it hosts only the one potential future that is possible once the observation is made.

 

This is where time comes from. If you missed it, here it is again: The choice itself is time. Time is an imaginary data path along the infinity of any potential group's imaginary state changes. The apparent cooperation of particle groups in determining their "next state" is an illusion that follows any time thread wherein each potential's next potential state matches the potential's entanglement state. Infinite universes exist. You might imagine a "big bang" in the universe with only 1 or 2 particle-potentials. Our universe has lots and lots of particles, so heat-death-potentials take a lot of state movements. By using this model, both relativity and quantum mechanics are shown correctly; so is string theory (each potential represents a string - a single "bit" of information). Nothing is actually, truly "real", yet simultaneously the potential itself also makes every possible history (and future) exist, so in a sense, everything is real too. So is the glass half full or half empty? 


We do see a damn good illusion of reality perhaps caused by being too close to the problem, not to mention also being trapped in a single-threaded time continuum. Note that time does not need to be single-threaded. In the multiverse, other times are just special cases of other universe configurations. So, travelling "back" in time doesn't create a paradox. Also, there is an interesting implication with repeating universe incarnations. 


Because everything is just a cascading potential there is nothing to stop our pattern from repeating itself. I suspect that every time you follow a potential-universe creation path where for every "choice" made, each particle selects only choices that are consistent with what we think of as "physical laws" and where the initial number of starting "potential particles" is identical to the number of particles observed in our universe, then inside the set of potential futures, you will find a repetition of our history, exactly. Meaning that this universe, our world your life and my life can repeat exactly like this... forever and ever and ever. There is no way out. You create your heaven or hell.

CREDIT TOE: pure nothing yields everything, always.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

WHAT DO BLIND PEOPLE SEE WHEN THEY DREAM?

FIVE SIGNS YOUR LIFE IS ABOUT TO UNDERGO A RADICAL SHIFT

Theology unnecessary, Stephen Hawking tells CNN