The Open Universe In Terms Of Information*

This has been added to "The Lowest Information Point", on this blog. I withdrew the original posting that I made this week. I want to give it some more thought.

When it was first discovered that the universe had begun with a "Big Bang" and had been expanding outward from it ever since, a primal question soon arose. Was the universe "closed" or "open"?

What that is about is whether the matter of the universe will fall back together again by gravity. If we throw a ball upward, it will reach a certain height and then come back down. That means that the trajectory of the ball is "closed". If the outward momentum of the universe, from the energy of the explosion of the Big Bang, is greater than the inward pull of gravity, meaning that the matter will never fall back together again, that means that the universe is "open".

At first those who study the universe were divided, it seemed plausible that the universe would fall back together possibly to trigger another Big Bang and repeat the process, perhaps endlessly. The question was whether or not the expansion of the universe was slowing down, like a ball thrown up into the air. If it was slowing down the expansion would eventually reverse itself and the universe would be "closed".

But it was found that, not only is the outward expansion of the universe not slowing down, it is actually speeding up. That makes it certain that the universe is "open" and it's matter will not fall back together by it's mutual gravity.

One of the main points of my theory of how information works is that energy and information is really the same thing. I noticed that whether we see a process in terms of energy or in terms of information, the result always ends up the same. It is because we are made up of our bodies and our minds. If we deal with the universe in terms of our bodies, we see it as energy. If we deal with the universe in terms of our minds, we see it as information.

Another way of seeing that energy and information is really the same thing is that we cannot add information to anything without applying energy to it, and we cannot apply energy to it without adding information to it. Also we can make our lives physically easier through technology but only at the expense of making them more complex, which means involving more information. We can never, on a large scale, make our lives both physically easier and also less complex. This shows that energy and information is really the same thing.

But if energy and information is really the same thing, and we have shown in terms of energy why the universe is "open", that means that, if my theory that energy and information is really the same thing is correct, there must be a way to explain why the universe is "open" in terms of information.

Let me show how the following very simple algebraic statement shows that the universe must be "open". The statement is: x / x = 1. That means that any ratio or fraction where the same number is both the numerator and the denominator is equal to 1.

Energy and information is really the same thing. We know that the universe always seeks the lowest energy state. That is why an object released into the air falls to the ground. It involves less energy to support the object on the ground than to continue to support it in the air. It strikes the ground with an impact that has energy because that is the energy that originally suspended it in the air.

But if the universe always seeks the lowest energy state, and energy and information is really the same thing, that means that it must also seek the lowest information state. That is the point of my theory, "The Lowest Information Point", which was spun off from the three theories about cosmology and information that came before it.

If the universe sought "The Lowest Information Point" then, my reasoning went, there would be two things that it preferred. First, it would prefer what I call "related ratios" in which the denominator of one ratio was also the numerator of the other. In other words, preferring a / b = b / c over a / b = c / d. The reason is that the first contains only three points of information, while the second contains four. The first would thus be "The Lowest Information Point".

The second thing that the universe would prefer, and which is related to the first, is a square over a rectangle. Since both dimensions of a square are, by it's definition, equal, then that would represent a lower information point than a rectangle, whose two dimensions are not equal. Something defined as a square thus requires only one piece of information, while a rectangle requires two.

That is why so many ratios regarding the scales of the universe, from the subatomic to the galactic, are, as the theory shows, of the related ratio, "A is to B as B is to C". This is only three points of information, rather than four.

Consider that there are two components of the matter in the universe. 1) There is the number of different things in the universe. 2) There is the total number of all things in the universe. What "things" there are are based on the fact that most matter is made of atoms and there are a number of ways in which atoms can merge together with other atoms, and then combine to make different things.

These two components actually form the sides of a square. Well, actually it's a rectangle but it is trying to be a square because that is a lower information point than a rectangle, and remember that the universe always seeks "The Lowest Information Point".

When the universe was first formed by the Big Bang, there were only five different stable atoms that formed. Two isotopes of hydrogen, two of helium, and trace amounts of lithium. So there were countless numbers of individual atoms, but only five different kinds of atoms.

What that represented, in therms of "The Lowest Information Point", was an extremely, extremely elongated rectangle. One side of the rectangle was only five, the five different atoms, and the other side was the near-infinity of the total number of different atoms.

Ever since then, small atoms have been crunched together within stars to form many different larger atoms and all atoms have been combining together with each other to produce a wide variety of the different "things" that the universe is made of. There are now 92 naturally occurring elements, of which there are several hundred different nuclides, or isotopes. A nuclide is a stable combination of protons and neutrons.

All of these many different atoms combine with each other in near-countless ways by chemical and structural bonds, and by gravity, to form the wide array of "things" that the universe today is made of. But the total number of atoms is, of course, far reduced from what it was immediately after the Big Bang.

What all of this combining amounts to is the universe trying to turn the original rectangle into a square, because it would be "The Lowest Information Point". The total number of atoms have been far reduced, since the Big Bang, but the total number of different things, from the original five different stable atoms, has been far increased. The universe has come a long way in it's progress toward being a square, which it is seeking because that is the "Lowest Information Point".

If the concept of the "closed" universe was correct, the matter of the universe falling back together by gravity, that would fulfill the square because, with all of the matter together in what would be one massive black hole, there would only be one object and thus only one different type of object, which would be a perfect square.

Given the algebraic formula at the beginning, it would be simply 1 / 1 = 1.

If the nature of matter was that the original small atoms were unable to combine together into larger atoms, and then into other things from there, then there would have to be a "closed" universe and the matter would have to fall back together in order to close the inevitable square that is "The Lowest Information Point".

But what happened, in terms of energy, was that, as smaller atoms were crunched together in stars into larger atoms, some of the energy of position in space, which is also information, was transformed into electromagnetic radiation, which is why stars shine. Since electromagnetic radiation like this does not exert gravity on matter, there is not enough gravity to pull the matter of the universe back together.

In terms of information, since the nature of matter makes it possible for few different smaller atoms to be combined together into many different larger ones, and then for those to be combined into very many different "things", the universe is able to gradually pull the original very elongated rectangle toward being a square. Since the two sides of a square are equal that means that, no matter what the number of different things and total number of things ends up being, which means that everything will be different from everything else in the universe, they will equal 1 when expressed as a ratio.

This is because, once again, x / x = 1. Thus the universe can be "open", it does not have to be "closed" to get to the square.

WHY THE EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE HAS TO BE SPEEDING UP, IN TERMS OF INFORMATION

To use a familiar example from computer technology, suppose that we have six bits and twelve empty spaces. Each bit can fill one of the empty spaces, but the bits are identical and indistinguishable from one another. This gives us 4,096 possible permutations of bits in empty spaces. Each empty space would be either full or empty but, since the bits are identical and indistinguishable from one another, it would not make a difference which bit was in which space.

Now suppose that we consolidate our six bits together so that they are distinguishable from one another. One bit we will leave as it is, and call it "One-Bit". We will combine two bits together and call it "Two-Bit". We will combine the other three together and call it "Three-Bit". Although we have fewer bits than before to put in the twelve empty space, three bits instead of six, the bits are now distinguishable from one another, and this adds information.

But even so, our consolidation of the bits would mean a net loss of information. Having the three distinguishable bits to go in the twelve empty spaces would give us 3,960 possible permutations, in contrast with the 4,096 with six separate but indistinguishable bits.

What this is a model of, of course, is matter in empty space. The bits are atoms and the empty spaces are space. The original six identical bits represent the original hydrogen atoms in the universe. The consolidated bits represent the heavier atoms that come from the nucleo-synthesis that takes place by fusion in stars.

There is one solution. In our simple example of bits in empty spaces, one way that we can maintain the same level of information is to increase the number of empty spaces as we consolidate bits together. The same number of bits in more empty spaces represents more information because it gives us more possible permutations, and that is how information is represented.

We may not be able to see it locally, but the universe must be expanding to accommodate the increasingly manifested information of what was but is no more and of what could have been but isn't. 

Radiation Upon a Moving Particle Being Given Perpendicular Acceleration*

Here are two more things that are explained by my cosmology theory, and which show that it has to be correct. This has been moved to the compound posting on this blog about the cosmology theory, "The Theory Of Stationary Space".

RADIATION UPON A MOVING PARTICLE BEING GIVEN PERPENDICULAR ACCELERATION

Here is one of those questions in science that does not seem to have an explanation. When a charged particle, such as an electron, is moving, and we accelerate it in a perpendicular direction to it's motion, by use of a magnetic field, the particle will emit radiation. It will not emit radiation when it first begins moving, only when it is already moving and is accelerated in a direction that is perpendicular to it's motion.

This brings us to that age-old one-word question: Why?

We know that moving charged particles emit radiation if their motion is slowed by interaction with other charged particles. This is known as bremsstrahlung, or braking radiation.

The reason for this is straightforward. There is energy in the motion of the particle and if this motion is slowed, there is excess energy that has to go somewhere, and it is released as radiation.

We also know that energy is released as radiation during stellar fusion, which is why stars shine. Small atoms are crunched together by the heat and gravity in the center of the star into larger atoms. The nuclei of larger atoms have proportionally more neutrons, relative to protons and electrons, then the smaller atoms which they were crunched together from.

This means that electrons must be crunched together into protons, to form neutrons. This is exactly what happens and the process is known as K-capture. But the electron in an orbital had orbital energy before it was captured, that it wouldn't need as part of the neutron, and that energy had to go somewhere. It was released as radiation, and that is why stars shine.

We can see then that a release of radiation is to eliminate excess energy. There is the same process that makes up one of the three forms of radioactivity, alpha, beta and, gamma. Large atoms, heavier than iron, are crunched together from smaller atoms only by the release of energy when a large star is actually in the process of exploding as a supernova.

But some of these heavy atoms are less-than-stable. They gradually give off either particles or radiation in order to seek a more stable configuration. If they give off radiation, it is of very short wavelength and is known as gamma rays.

So we can see that the emission of radiation is due to excess energy. But why would a charged particle that is already moving give off radiation if it is accelerated, by a magnetic field, perpendicular to the direction in which it is already moving, but it doesn't give off any radiation when it begins moving in the first place?

This radiation is called either synchrotron or cyclotron radiation, and it actually has told us much of what we know to be going on outside of black holes. But it just doesn't seem to make sense, and actually doesn't make sense in the universe as we see it.

The answer as to why a moving charged particle would emit radiation when it is accelerated in a direction perpendicular to it's motion is actually explained by simple geometry. But it requires the model of the universe as described in my cosmology theory, detailed in the compound posting on this blog "The Theory Of Stationary Space".

We are really in four-dimensional space, one of which we perceive as time. What we see as particles are actually strings aligned mostly in the same direction in space, the one that we perceive as time. Whenever we look out in space, we are looking in a direction that is perpendicular to the direction in which the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains is aligned.

Velocity of a particle or object is simply that it is bent or aligned at an angle in space relative to the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains, which we perceive as particles. All three spatial dimensions are at right angles to our time dimension. So if we accelerate a "moving" charged particle, which is a bundle of strings that is already aligned at an angle to us, we are actually adding a right angle to it's motion.

What that forms, in four-dimensional space, is a right triangle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_triangle#/media/File:Rtriangle.svg

Side b, the base of the triangle, represents our time dimension which is the direction that the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains is primarily aligned.

Side c, the diagonal of the triangle, represents the alignment of the accelerated particle which we perceive to be in motion because our consciousnesses are moving along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light.

Side a, the height of the triangle, represents the acceleration that was given to the particle when it was already in motion.

What matters here is that the diagonal of a right triangle is shorter than the two legs put together. Since the moving charged particle is actually a "diagonal" in four dimensions of space, because it is moving, the fact that the diagonal is shorter applies to it.

The initial energy of the particle's motion and then the acceleration in a perpendicular direction forms a right triangle. But the "motion" of the particle, if it could be seen in four-dimensional space, would be a diagonal across that right triangle because, in my cosmology theory, what we see as motion is actually the string or bundle of strings aligned at an angle so that it's distance from us changes during the motion of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains in the dimension of space that we perceive as time.

Because the diagonal of a right triangle is always shorter than it's two legs combined and the legs represent energy, first to get the particle moving and then to accelerate it in a perpendicular direction, that means that there must be excess energy when the particle is accelerated in the perpendicular direction. That is why energy is released when a moving charged particle is accelerated, by a magnetic field, in a direction perpendicular to that in which it is already moving.

No radiation is released when the charged particle is set in motion to begin with because it would then just be a string at an angle to the alignment of our time dimension. There would be nothing to define a right triangle so that the alignment of the particle would be shorter than the two legs of the triangle combined and there would thus be energy of velocity to be released as radiation.

But this explanation, which makes perfect sense, is correct only if my cosmological theory is correct.

ENERGY RADIATED IS FOURTH POWER OF OBJECT'S ABSOLUTE TEMPERATURE

On the day that I came up with the beginning of this cosmology theory, I was wondering what time actually was but there was no real answer anywhere. The realization suddenly came to me that there must be a dimension of space that we cannot see, a fourth dimension, but that we perceive as time.

So many other unexplained things suddenly began to fall into place? We can measure the speed of light with precision but had no idea why it is the speed that it is. Of course, matter is really strings if it occupies four dimensions and this is the speed at which our consciousnesses move along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains, and is why Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity revolves around the absolute invariability of the speed of light.

The next thing to fall into place was the radiation from the Big Bang. We can receive this radiation but it does not come from any one direction. It seems to be coming at us from all directions in space. But how can this be if the Big Bang took place in one location, and the universe is expanding outward from that location. We should be able to easily see in which direction in space the Big Bang occurred.

Of course, there must be four dimensions on of which we perceive as time. We see the Big Bang as being the beginning of time but it's radiation seems to be coming from us in all directions in space. That is because the direction in space to the Big Bang is really the dimension that we perceive as time. How simple.

But there was something that planted the seed of the idea that there might be four spatial dimensions in my mind. It was the question as to why an object with heat in space will radiate energy that is in proportion to the fourth power of it's absolute temperature. I didn't understand why it would be the fourth power. It should be proportional to the number of spatial dimensions. If there are three spatial dimensions then it should be to the third power.

The Stefan-Boltzmann Law in physics is that an object in space at a given temperature will radiate heat and other electromagnetic energy, such as light, if it is hot enough. In an idealized black body the energy radiated will be in direct proportion to the fourth power of the absolute temperature of the object.

A black body means an object that absorbs all of the electromagnetic radiation falling on it and reflects none. Absolute temperature means measured from the coldest possible temperature, which is absolute zero. This is the temperature that is so cold that all molecular motion has stopped, since heat is defined as the kinetic energy of atoms and molecules. Absolute zero is -459 degrees Fahrenheit or -273.16 degrees Celsius. The Kelvin scale uses Celsius degrees but starts at absolute zero so that the melting point of ice is 273.16 and the boiling point of water is 373.16 degrees Kelvin.

(Note-This means that, in terms of proportion, a scorching hot summer day is only about 15 percent warmer than a frigid winter day. The reason for our temperature comfort zone is that we are so dependent on the liquid range of water. You may notice that this proportion is about the same as the difference, relative to a complete circle, of the lean of the earth's axis 23 1 / 2 degrees toward the sun in summer and away in winter).

Let's review what the "fourth power" of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law means. A straight line is said to be one-dimensional. If we add another straight line, in a perpendicular dimension, that gives us a square. If each line were ten meters long, that would give us 10 x 10 = 100 square meters. A square is defined as being to the second power, because the number is in the equation twice, which is why it is indicated by a small "2". If we add a third straight line, perpendicular to the other two, that gives us a cube. Just as a square means to the second power, a cube means to the third power. 10 x 10 x 10 = 1,000 cubic meters.

The fourth power would just be adding another ten to this, 10 x 10 x 10 x 10. This means that if a black body object were emitting radiant energy at a temperature of 300 degrees Kelvin ( 26.84 degrees Celsius), it would emit only .687 times as much energy when it cooled to the freezing point of water at 273.16 degrees Kelvin ( 0 degrees Celsius).

But now the question here is why it would be the fourth power. We can see that the object is three-dimensional, and thus would be radiating into three-dimensional space. But three dimensions is to the third power. How could a warm object possibly be radiating energy to the fourth power?

But what if my cosmology theory is correct? We are really in four dimensions of space, the fourth being what we perceive as time? That would mean that particles, such as electrons, are really strings in four-dimensional space, that we can only see one moment at a time, and time is the movement of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains. The absoluteness of the speed of light in Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity is explainable simply as that is the speed at which our consciousnesses move along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains.

This would mean that velocity is actually an angle of a bundle of strings, relative to the directional alignment of bundles of strings that are at rest, and this direction would be the dimension at right angles to all three of our spatial dimensions. That would mean that a moving object would have a time dimension that would not be exactly the same as an object at rest, or one moving at a different velocity.

Remember that heat is defined as the kinetic energy of moving atoms and molecules, meaning that all atoms and molecules in an object are moving, unless the object is at a temperature of absolute zero. A moving charged particle emits electromagnetic radiation when it is either accelerated in a perpendicular direction to it's motion by a magnetic field or is slowed by interaction with another charged particle.

Ordinary atoms overall are not charged, their charges balance out to zero, but the electrons in orbitals are negatively-charged and they interact with electrons in other moving atoms. This is where the radiation comes from that a warm object emits. The interactions between electrons in orbitals of different atoms cause their respective atoms to slow, which means the object cooling, and radiation is emitted as a result because the energy that was formerly in the motion of atoms and molecules has to go somewhere.

But the more dimensions there are, the more interactions there will be between moving atoms and the faster the object will emit radiation. If you drive straight ahead on a flat area other cars may intersect with you from the sides, this would be two dimensional. But if you could drive in three dimensions, or fly, so that other cars could approach you both from up and down as well as from the sides, you would intersect with many more cars than you would in only two dimensions.

Atoms and molecules in an object with any heat are moving and since, in my cosmology theory, motion is actually the angle of a string or bundle of strings in the four dimensions, that means that the fourth dimension being the one in which the strings are aligned is different if it is in motion, as well as different for different velocities of motion. That means that energy is radiated into the fourth dimension as well, even though energy is always radiated at right angles from a string or bundle of strings.

This is why the Stefan-Boltzmann Law states that the energy radiated by an object is directly proportional to the fourth power of the absolute temperature of that object. My cosmology theory is correct and there are four dimensions over which the matter of our universe is scattered.