This is being reposted because more has been added to it.
The distribution of matter in the universe, relative to space, is extremely sparse. A figure that is sometimes given is that, in the universe as a whole, there are about three hydrogen atoms per cubic meter of space. That is so sparse that the density of matter, relative to space in the universe as a whole, is nearly infinitesimal. It is probably not something that we could attach a meaningful number to.
With the expansion of the universe the density of matter overall is becoming even more sparse. But galaxies tend to collect in groups, we call ours the "Local Group". The groups are moving apart, but not the galaxies within a group. Although the density of matter within a galaxy is still extremely sparse, it is maybe a million times the density of the vast, empty reaches of intergalactic space. Not to mention that the interiors of atoms themselves are almost all empty space.
This theory that I have developed to explain the sparseness of matter in the universe offers another explanation of quantum physics. Even if we cannot effectively put a number on it the density of matter, relative to space, is information, and that information must have come from somewhere.
There is an interpretation of quantum physics, the "Copenhagen" Interpretation, that has a quantum system inhabiting all possible quantum states but then, when it is observed, it undergoes collapse into only one state. The observation itself is a vital part of the quantum interaction.
In the universe there were a nearly infinite number of arrangements and patterns that matter might have taken, following the Big Bang, but of all those possible patterns the matter of the universe took only one of them, the universe that we see today.
What do you notice here?
1) The density of matter in the universe, relative to space, is nearly infinitesimal.
2) The number of possible patterns and permutations that the matter in the universe might have fallen into is nearly infinite. But it fell into only one of those patterns, which is the universe that we see today.
Could there be a connection between those two things? The density of matter in the universe, relative to space, is information. This information had to come from somewhere. Where else could it have come from? Isn't this the most logical answer, that there must be room left in space for every arrangement of matter in the universe that might have been, but only one of those arrangements actually comes to be?
Let me state now that I have decided on the terminology "might have been" rather than "could have been" because "could" seems to imply that it should have been.
My theory is not that the universe we see is what happened, but the information of what didn't happen must still be out there somewhere whether in parallel universes or unrealized quantum states, but that the empty space must be maintained for the information of what might have happened but didn't happen and the matter of the universe that did happen must exist within the vastness of this empty space.
Could it be that there is a great number, we can designate it as P for "pattern" or "permutation" even if we cannot effectively determine it's value, that describes both the density of matter relative to the space of the universe, 1 / P, and the number of possible patterns or arrangements that matter in the universe could have taken, P?
Suppose that we are looking for a particular address on a street. The address that we have is information. It contains more information if there are more houses on the street that it is not.
Remember my definition of complexity. The complexity of a number, or the amount of information within it, is the value of the denominator when the number is expressed as a ratio or fraction. Thus 1/10 contains twice as much information as 1/5.
In a similar way the particular arrangement of all the matter in the universe is an address, one permutation among many. Having an address doesn't make any sense unless there are other addresses that it might have been. Empty space is all of the addresses that it might have been, but is not. Every bit of information that went into matter and it's arrangement in the universe might have been different. All the matter of the universe comprises one address, as opposed to multiple addresses, because it is all interrelated and has a common beginning.
If there is movement of matter in space, so that the pattern changes, it still doesn't change the basic possible number of patterns. The possible arrangements continue as lighter elements are fused into heavier ones by way of fusion in stars, but the value of P stays constant because the matter of the universe has a common origin in the Big Bang. Being other than constant would mean that information is either being lost or gained out of nowhere.
Most matter that we deal with consists of atoms. Sub-atomic particles tend to be electrically-charged, such as protons and electrons, and an ordinary atom has equal positive and negative charges so that it's overall charge is zero, although an atom can become an ion by losing or gaining an electron. The fact that the inside of the atom is almost all empty space would be a reflection of all that the atom might have been, given that atoms are the universal structure of matter that balances out positive and negative electric charges, but it became only one of these possibilities.
The vast majority of the inside of an atom is empty space. This is also one address among many empty addresses, and the empty space is information. The ratio of matter to space inside the atom is, again, a subset of P, because it involves only the inside of the atom.
Hydrogen atoms, of course, have the highest proportion of empty space, relative to matter. Heavier atoms were formed by fusion and so lost some of this information by radiation. But since the two electric charges in the universe are a given, some other structure where the two opposite charges balance out might have formed and the "empty addresses" within atoms are a reflection of this.
What I find interesting is that there is a particle that is overall neutral in electric charge and balances out the negative and positive charges. This particle is the neutron. But neutrons are not primary particles. They are formed by crunching an electron into a proton, known as K-capture.
Furthermore neutrons exist only within atoms, if a neutron is alone outside an atom it will break down into a proton and an electron in an average of about 15 minutes. This is because a compact neutron does not maintain all of the "empty addresses" representing the many forms that the primary zero charge structure might have taken while an atom, with all of it's internal empty space, does.
One obvious thing about matter that might have been different is the equal, but opposite electric charge on an electron and a proton. We describe this charge either as -1 for an electron or +1 for a proton. But, had the universe been different then this charge might have been different. If the charge was greater then atoms would likely have been more massive and less massive if the charge was lesser.
The density of matter, relative to space, within galactic groups could also be a subvalue of P, in a way similar to within the atom. The universe is expanding but the expansion is the vast galactic groups moving away from each other. The density within galactic groups is relatively constant, the Andromeda Galaxy in our Local Group and our galaxy are actually moving closer to each other. The subvalue means just the density of matter in the space inside our Local Group, and the number of possible patterns that matter could have taken of which only one became reality, of only our Local Group of galaxies once it formed.
There can only be such a subvalue of P in a unit of space that has become partially independent of the rest of the universe in how the matter in the unit is arranged. If we wanted to determine the subvalue for the earth, for example, we would have to go back to the star that preceded the sun which scattered it's matter across space in a supernova. Our determination would have to involve how that star formed, and what it's P subvalue was.
At any rate the density of matter in space is information, and this information must have come from somewhere. There is some number that describes the density of matter in space, which I am calling P, even if we cannot effectively determine what that number is.
It isn't information if there was no possibility of it being different. That which is comprises information but to be information it must be set against that which isn't, so that which isn't is also information, and information cannot just be lost. Information is what is set against the background of what might have been but isn't.
For something to be somewhere else in the universe it would have to have been something else. The empty addresses must be there to represent what might have been but wasn't.
The only thing that makes sense to me as being the source of the density of matter in space is the reciprocal of the total number of possible arrangements that matter could have taken, and that number I refer to as P. The one that it took is the arrangement of matter that we see in the universe today.
My cosmology theory, "The Theory Of Stationary Space", has it's own explanation for the sparseness of matter in space, that matter is one dimension, of the two dimensions of the original two-dimensional sheet that was dispersed among four dimensions of the background space. The other dimension of the sheet was released as energy, in what we perceive as the Big Bang.
But these two answers are different ways of expressing the same thing. The more dimensions of space there are, relative to the one that became matter, the more "things that might have been" there will be.
Not only is there space that must be empty because it represents the "empty addresses" of "things that might have been", there must also be a universe of patterns that go unmanifested. We have geometric forms, such as squares, cubes, circles, spheres and, triangles. But there must be many others that are not manifested because the matter of the universe never fell into those patterns.
This applies not only to geometric forms but also to the basic patterns of the universe that we saw in "The Theory Of Complexity". There could also be missing numbers that might have been manifested but we cannot imagine because they never get manifested by the matter of our universe.
I am presuming here that the one thing that might not have been different is that the universe is compromised of two electric charges, negative and positive. In my cosmology theory empty space consists of a checkerboard of alternating negative and positive changes, in multiple dimensions. These two charges are why there are two opposite directions in each dimension of space. If there were three opposite charges there would have to be three opposite directions in each dimension. This theory here is about arrangements of matter in space, rather than the space itself.
There are two basic sets of quantum theories.
There is the "collapse" scenarios, such as the Copenhagen Interpretation, where any quantum system exists in a multitude of quantum states until it "collapses" into only one state upon being observed. The observation is a vital part of the quantum interaction.
Then there is the "many worlds" scenarios. In this way of looking at quantum interactions there is no "collapse" into one quantum state but there must be unseen parallel universes so that what might have happened, but didn't happen, in this universe must happen in another universe. Basically there can't be anything that could have happened but didn't happen, because what didn't happen is information also and information cannot just be lost.
There is also an idea by the physicist Richard Feynman called the "Path Integral". What this says is that what happens is to take everything that could happen and add them all together.
But what none of this really takes account of is space, particularly the concentration of matter in space. The sparseness of matter in space is information, and information must have come from somewhere. The question is not only why the arrangement of matter in space is what it is but also why the concentration of matter in space, it's sparseness, is what it is.
What I am stating here is that the present arrangement of matter in space is one of many "addresses" that might have been but weren't, and matter is concentrated in space in such a way that the "empty addresses" of things and arrangements of things that might have been but weren't must be preserved, because they are part of the information of what is.
What I refer to as an "address" here is not a particular location but the particular arrangement of matter in the entire universe. The density of matter in space should be a vital part of quantum physics and neither of the sets of quantum theories takes this into account.
FAR OUTER MATHEMATICS
The patterns and mathematics that are not manifested by our universe but might have been manifested if the universe had been different are what I refer to as "Far Outer Mathematics". Here is an explanation of what I mean.
We use mathematics to describe the world around us. To be able to describe something using mathematics we must completely understand it. Once we do we can do all kinds of useful calculations because everything we know operates by the same mathematics.
But we do not have unlimited capacity to understand the world around us. Our minds have a certain complexity and we can only understand that which is less complex than our minds. Anything that is more complex than our minds we would not be able to understand enough to apply mathematics to it because we would have to be "smarter than ourselves", which is impossible.
Somewhere out there is a formula that describes everything that you do. You cannot access it because it deals with your mind's own complexity and this would require you to be "smarter than yourself", which is impossible. But yet this unseen formula must operate by the usual mathematics.
This is what I refer to as "outer mathematics", mathematics which must exist but which is beyond our grasp because of our own limited complexity. All of textbook mathematics is "inner mathematics", which is within our grasp.
But aside from this set of "outer mathematics" there must be a still more distant set of outer mathematics. As stated we use mathematics because it effectively describes the world around us. But what if that world, actually the entire universe, had been different?
The matter that all except particle physicists deal with is made of atoms. We could say that atoms are "exclusive" so the mathematics that works for us uses numbers and has the basic operations; addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, exponents, roots, etc. What I mean by "exclusive" is that atoms, and the matter that is composed of them, does not come into existence spontaneously and stays as it is until something changes it.
The numbers that we use have no real existence until they are manifested in some way. There is no such thing as the number six that we can see but we see it whenever we have six of something. But any number must exist whether it is manifested by anything or not. Consider the number 37,683,992,651,801,384,161,079,177,209,184. Let's refer to this number as "W". It may be that nowhere in the universe is this number manifested anywhere, but it is still just as much a number nonetheless because it could potentially be manifested. Just as a parking space still exists whether or not there is a car in it.
The mathematics that we use, both inner and outer mathematics, works for us because the matter that we deal with is as it is, matter could be said to be "exclusive". This means that more than one set of matter cannot occupy the same space at the same time and matter cannot come into existence out of nothing. But what if matter, or the entire universe, was completely different?
There would still be mathematics that described it although it would be completely different from the mathematics that we are using. If matter, or whatever that universe was made of, was non-exclusive then there would be no reason for the addition, subtraction and, so on that we use. If that universe was somehow immeasurable or unquantifiable mathematics might express the effect that it has on the living beings rather than what it is actually made of.
Mathematics is inevitably related to scarcity, of not having everything that we need or want and of having to labor to get what we don't have or build what doesn't yet exist or get to somewhere other than where we are. Have you ever noticed that there is no mention of mathematics in Heaven? In Heaven we will have everything we want so why would we have any need to calculate?
The universe of atoms, electric charges and, electromagnetic radiation that we have is just one of an infinite number of possibilities that the universe could have been. It is like rolling dice. The numbers that came up are our universe. The numbers that didn't come up are all of the universes that never physically existed, but yet these numbers still exist.
But the mathematics, completely different from our own, that would have described them must nonetheless still exist. Just as we saw with the number "W" above, a number still exists whether it is manifested or not and the mathematics, which we cannot begin to imagine, of every different universe that never actually existed must also still exist.
This is what I refer to as "Far Outer Mathematics". It is the mathematics of would-have-been universes and physical realms that do not even use the same basic operations as the mathematics that we use. What we could call "Near Outer Mathematics" is, as explained above, mathematics that would use the same basic operations but is beyond our reach because we could not completely understand something whose complexity is greater than our own.
