By peeling their layers of complexity away, all things in Nature can be reduced down to the events by which they will be found to have originated, and then developed, and continued their existence. This is logically and physically true through time’s farthest reaches into the past, and so we can quite safely assume it to be a rule: Events constitute the primary component of all that exists.

Though not a concept with any kind of physical presence, time, itself must answer to the rule for it to be true. While recognized to persist in a linear fashion, the nature of time is such that it seems to move in all directions at once. My self-appointed chore, here, is to help you understand why that is not so, and why it seems so. Bear with me, please. This may make your brain hurt. If so, I apologize with a reminder that exercising, when destined to form new tissues, is known to cause pain.

Time, we get told, began with the Big Bang, was created by a god named God, or in some other way had a beginning. It satisfies a human need to think that, but does not have to be true. It seems just as satisfying to say that time began at infinity, and is more likely true. For most of infinity into the past, only time and space were present in an endless void. Space may be described as an empty place, and time as the dimension of its span. The length of that dimension being infinity effectively means time and space have no beginning or end. Can you tell why to the inevitable argument, “But, it has to have had a beginning somewhere!” Why? Because everything else does? Really? Time rolled on so that everything else could exist. Entire universes could have come and then accelerated into the void without our ever gaining any awareness of them.

That space has no real existence does not stop us from being aware of it. We know about space, not because somebody frightened us into believing it, but because it exists where nothing else occupies the void. Likewise, as a one-dimensional phenomenon, we cannot accredit space time as real. Our awareness of time arises from the fact that nothing is frozen into place, and that humanity has learned to enumerate the sequences of events occurring during the tiny segments we occupy.

To say that events constitute the primary component of all that exists means that existence began when something happened. The first particle of existence had to appear with nothing present but time and space. A god named God was there? Nobody can describe a reasonable scenario where such a complex entity would appear out of nothing, that does not equally as well describe a beginning with no gods involved. With only two components to work with, it should be easy to figure out how things began to exist. Add an inexplicable third component, the inevitable question remains unanswered: “Where did that come from?” Or, in biblical terms, “From whence ariseth that?” so we can have properly poetic Shakespearean all around.

Think about the First Law of Thermodynamics: [1]Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed.

Think also of what it takes to have an event: 1. An object to be involved, and 2. A source of energy to get it going.

It takes little effort to find stories (and some philosophical writings) about [2]time warps. [3]Space warps are harder to find, and the material seems irrelevant to this study, as it deals with light bending around galaxies and large planets that were not there during the era we’re dealing with. With only space and time to work with, we need to gain an understanding of their effects upon each other. An event occurred when 1. Time spanned the void; or 2. The pressure induced by passing time induced a warp in space; 3. With nowhere to go after crossing the void, time bent and so became two-dimensional.

Of those three choices, only number two shows a potential to generate energy from the clashing of our two entities. Space warps involved would be minuscule to us, the pressure applied on space by time diminutive, the one- or two-dimensional effects sub-microscopic. No fully-formed world would hurtle forth bustling with life, air to breathe, water to drink, food to eat, apples to cause sin… According to some mathematical geniuses, strings formed. We can guess they represent the material form of the energy released as an effect of the warping pressures of time against space. We are walking new ground, here. Nothing I have read anywhere offers much of a description of the process that generates strings.

Strings, described as helixes, must be the smallest three-dimensional objects in existence. Each action to produce a string is an event. Now, we start to get complicated. Hold off on the aspirin until you know how this is going to affect you. It’s your head. Mine has already been through it. My doctor told me never to take another aspirin if I want to stay alive.

Enter Processes:

A process begins when two or more events combine to produce a repeatable, predictable result. Merriam-Webster defined it as “something going on,” whereas an event is “something that happens.” That strings combine to form the smallest submicroscopic particles presents us with the earliest process, and then things must have escalated from there to start forming atoms and molecules. In natural events from this point on, processes began joining other processes in increasingly complex configurations from which sprouted all the stars, planets and things we so familiarly see around us.

Enter Systems:

A “harmonious arrangement or pattern” of parts dedicated to a recognizable purpose gets labeled as a system. The parts might be inert bodies circling a planet or star, any identifiable combination of events, processes and lesser systems working together as a system, or as parts of a more complex system. The universe presents us with the most complex system of we can presently gain awareness; galaxies and star systems occupy middle ground, while our proud and arrogant selves share the bottom middle with piss ants, maggots, and fleas. The bottommost systems occupy the least complex layer. Therefore (least to most complex):

Micro/Submicro Realm

Strings, quarks, atoms, molecules and other components of the universe too small to be seen with an ordinary microscope; also, ultramicroscopic

Macro Realm:

People, houses, cars, dogs. Ponies, flowers, cold beer, all else with which we share an environment.

Cosmological Realm:

The stars, black holes, galaxies, the structural components of the universe

Multiverse Realm:

Hypothetically possible universes beyond, but including, this one, considered as a unit.

We know a lot more than we used to, a lot more than even the most studious person can keep up with. Anyone avoiding information must necessarily feel lost and threatened as the world passes them by. Those who thrive by purposefully feeding them misinformation that promotes their anger, errant concern, and worry about resolved issues surely know they are doing harm to the very people who support them. That said, be sure that any errors on this page will get pounced onto by those who know better, and even more so by the spreaders of misinformation who run across it. I will make corrections if I feel convinced things will be set right. I have no other interest in it but to serve The Naked Truth the finest way I can.

-Notes:

[1] http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/biobookener1.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics

    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/conser.html#engfun

[2] http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/other-shows/videos/other-shows-time-warp-videos.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warp (not much showing here, but links to other pages)
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/time+warp (a definition)

[3] http://www.space.com/21015-space-warp-galaxies-citizen-science.html
    http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2013/130508.html

    http://www.nbcnews.com/science/engage-astronomers-need-your-assistance-detect-space-warps-1C9834636

    http://news.yahoo.com/why-warp-drives-arent-just-science-fiction-150255793.html

[4] http://superstringtheory.com/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

    https://physics.stanford.edu/people/faculty/leonard-susskind

    http://www.briangreene.org/

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465092756/lloydwhitling-20
Peter Woit’s book critical of string theory.

 

Advertisements