Modern physics is confusing. There is the ordinary "textbook" physics and then there are two newer branches of physics, Relativity and Quantum Physics. What is so confusing is that these two newer branches contradict ordinary textbook physics but all three branches of physics can apparently prove by experiment that they are correct.
A basic presumption in science is that we have an unbiased view of the universe, that we can completely rely on our measurements and observations. My theory is that we do not have an unbiased view of the universe. We are part of the universe ourselves and see it as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are. With most sciences this may not make a difference but when dealing with the basic nature of the universe it does make a difference.
What this brings us to is two ways of looking at the universe. There is the "with us" universe and the "without us" universe. A simple example is the sunrise and sunset. While it is convenient to express the times of sunrise and sunset we know that what is really happening is that the earth is turning. We perceive the sun as rising and setting only because of our perspective on the earth. So sunrise and sunset are the "with us" way of looking at it and just seeing the earth as turning is the "without us" way.
The reason that Relativity and Quantum Physics contradict, and cannot be explained by, ordinary textbook, or Newtonian physics is that we are seeing our own nature reflected back at us, but in two different ways. There are actually two separate theories of Relativity, by Albert Einstein. Here I am referring to the first one, the Special Theory.
One of these ways is, as described in my cosmology theory, that the subatomic particles composing matter are actually strings in four dimensions of space. We see them as particles because we can only access three of these dimensions. Our consciousness is moving along the bundles of strings that compromise our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light. This is why, in Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, the speed of light is absolutely sacrosanct and time, mass and, distance all revolve around it.
The other way, also described in the cosmology theory, is that electrons are one of these one-dimensional strings in four dimensions that we perceive as particles in three dimensions. All of the information that we get about the universe around us comes from some of these electrons being knocked out of their orbitals by electromagnetic waves. This causes some special effects but it is our own nature being reflected back at us. As one example electromagnetic radiation consists of two-dimensional waves. The one-dimensional electron string absorbs one of these dimensions. This leaves a "particle" of light, which we call a photon, and is why light has both a wave and a particle nature.
I won't go into detail about the cosmology theory here but an abbreviated introduction to the theory is the posting "Cosmology Theory In Diagrams". The full text of the theory is "Cosmology Theory Illustrated With Diagrams", both January 2024.
Special Relativity and Quantum Physics not only contradict classical textbook physics, they also contradict each other. The great dividing line between the Special Theory of Relativity and Quantum Physics is the speed of light. In Relativity the speed of light is sacrosanct and everything else revolves around it. But in Quantum Physics the speed of light isn't even a factor at all. Quantum physicists can show that information moves instantaneously between a pair of entangled photons, no matter how far apart they are, without being bound by the speed of light.
Our understanding of the universe has long been held back by our presumption that we have an unbiased view of the universe. It goes back to the apparently obvious conclusion that everything in the sky revolves around the earth, including the sun. A real understanding of how the universe operates was not possible until some outside-the-box thinking brought the realization that the earth revolved around the sun and in no way was it the center of the universe. The earth-centered universe was a "with us" view.
What I want to add is a third way that our own nature gets in the way of our understanding the universe. This does not necessarily mean that our view of the universe is in error. It is just that there is a "with us" way and a "without us" way of looking at the universe. Just as it is not an error to say that the sun rises and sets. This third deception caused by our own nature involves dimensions of space.
We inhabit three spatial dimensions. My cosmology theory has it that there are actually four dimensions, one of which we perceive as time. The reason for this is that our bodies are composed of matter and that matter is scattered over three, four including time, dimensions of space. What are actually strings of matter in four dimensions we perceive as particles because we can only see in three dimensions. What we perceive as time is our consciousness moving along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light.
In no way does that mean there couldn't be more than these three spatial dimensions. But we would be completely unable to access or detect anything in these outer dimensions. We are in three dimensions, actually four including the one we perceive as time, because our bodies are composed of matter that is scattered over that many dimensions of space. But why should the dimensions stop there? If there can be four dimensions then why couldn't there be five, and then why couldn't there be six, and so on?
If I was asked how many dimensions I thought there were I would say infinity. Specifying a number is information. Infinity is not really a number. It just states that numbers go on forever and so avoids specifying a number. This makes infinity a lower information state than any number. This makes it the most likely number of dimensions as long as there is no limiting factors in the number of dimensions.
Consider the inside of a box or room. There are three spatial dimensions, length, width and, height. But a being could only be aware of those dimensions of which it's bodily matter was composed. Let's imagine a one-dimensional being in a corner of the floor of the box. The being can only be aware of one dimension. If it wants to go to the diagonally opposite corner of the floor of the box the only way it can see is to go along the edge of the floor of the box. It would have to make a right angle turn but it would not be aware of it because that would require two dimensions. It would perceive itself as moving only in a straight line. It could not be aware of the diagonal shortcut, across the floor of the box to the opposite corner, because that also would require two dimensions.
Now suppose that the one-dimensional being wanted to go to the diagonally opposite corner on the ceiling of the box. Now it would have to make two right angle turns, although it would still perceive itself as moving in only a straight line. A one dimensional being would always perceive itself as moving in a straight line because it can only be aware of one dimension. There would again be a shortcut diagonally across the box but to be aware of this it would have to be of three dimensions.
If there were a two-dimensional being in a floor corner of the box it could take the diagonal shortcut across the floor of the box but would have to make one right angle turn, but would not be aware of it, to get to the diagonally opposite corner on the ceiling of the box.
If we, as three dimensional beings, should be in a corner of a five-dimensional box the same rules would apply. We would be two dimensions short so we would have to make two right angle turns to get to the opposite corner the most dimensions away but we wouldn't perceive it and would see ourselves as moving only in a straight line.
The distance saved by the diagonal shortcut would be the square root of the number of dimensions, presuming that all dimensions are equal. The distance of the diagonal shortcut across a square would be the square root of the distance along two sides. The distance of the diagonal shortcut across a cube would be the square root of the distance along three sides.
This can only mean that distance is a "with us" way of looking at the universe, depending on the number of dimensions occupied by the matter, relative to the total number of dimensions of space. When matter is of a lower dimensional order than the space that it inhabits the matter cannot "see" directly across space by the shortest route, the diagonal. The matter will "see" all of the space but it must "go along the edges" of the box of the dimensions of space. The matter will have to make one right angle turn, that it will not be aware of, for each dimension that it is short of the space. This going "along the edges" is, of course, longer than directly by the diagonal. The distance "along the edges" is the square of the distance along the diagonal. This applies both to the route of electromagnetic radiation radiated or reflected by the matter or light received by living beings.
In my cosmology theory an electron is a one-dimensional string of negative electric charges held together, against their mutual repulsion, by energy. This means that, if an electron could think, it would be impossible for it to be aware of more than one dimension. If an electron moves through a wire it must always perceive itself as moving in a straight line. Because anything other than a straight line must involve more than one dimension. Even though we, with our three spatial dimensions, can see the twists and turns in the wire.
What that means is, unless the wire forms a straight line, the electron would perceive the distance that it moved through the wire as being the actual distance between the ends of the wire. We would see the distance as being less because we have access to more dimensions than the electron and can see the twists and turns in the wire.
Straight lines are thus a "with us" view of the universe. If we define a straight line as the shortest route between two points then the dimensional order becomes a central part of the definition. We define a straight line by the path of light but that brings us around in a circle because we will always see light as moving in a straight line. If we look at a star the dimensional order applies to the matter of the star, and the electromagnetic radiation that it produces, applies as well as the matter that we are composed of. What that means is that a straight line is a straight line only if the dimensional set matches the dimensions that the matter occupies.
So we can see the space of the universe but can only see three of it's dimensions. There is very likely an infinite number of dimensions, because that would be the lowest information state. We see the vast distances of space but in only three of it's dimensions. We can see the vastness of space but only "along the inside edges" of the box, of an infinite number of dimensions, not directly diagonally across. The universe could actually be as small as an atom, but with an infinite number of dimensions. We have to see the vastness of space because we cannot see the vastness of it's dimensions, and this is yet another "with us" way of looking at the universe.
No comments:
Post a Comment