There are several scientific theories on this blog that I have developed periodically.
I thought of the first information theory, about the basic patterns underlying everything, in 1998. I called it "The Theory Of Primes".
I first thought of the cosmology theory, The Theory Of Stationary Space, in 2004.
I began this blog writing in 2005.
I thought of the geology theory, about the Continental Asteroids and Lines of Magma Emergence, in 2011.
I thought of "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe", in early 2016.
I thought of the final information theory, "The Lowest Information Point ", near the end of 2017.
I have been continuously adding onto these theories but I am soon to be 66 and didn't think I had any major new theories left.
What I have here is about cosmology, the fundamental nature of the universe. It has some basic points in common with the original cosmology theory, "The Theory Of Stationary Space". But this one goes off in a different direction and I consider it as a separate theory because it is possible to understand one without knowing about the other.
There is an abbreviated version of the original cosmology theory in the posting "Cosmology Theory In Diagrams", January 2024.
Remember what I am trying to do here. I am going right to the people. There is a vast amount of information that is available to everyone. With the internet, you can notice something new or think of something and easily look to see if anyone else has thought of it. If anyone can be a social media influencer then why can't anyone make scientific discoveries?
INTRODUCTION
I have written about straight lines here on a number of occasions.
"Lightning And Straight Lines", August 2025
"Straight Lines And The Shape Of The Universe ", June 2022
"Electron Dependency And Straight Lines" (compound posting), December 2021
What really is a straight line? We define it as the shortest distance between two points. But what does that mean exactly? Is there a difference between the possible "shortest" route and the lowest energy route? Lightning, like any flow of electrons, will choose the path of least resistance. But lightning bolts don't form what we define as straight lines.
We can see that light travels in straight lines. Of course it does because we define the path of light as a straight line. The reasoning about light and straight lines goes around in a circle.
We see ourselves as occupying three spatial dimensions, and one that we perceive as time. But that could be because the space of the universe is of an infinite number of dimensions and, since we cannot access dimensions, other than those that we occupy, we have to perceive the space of the universe as being infinite.
An example of this perception of infinity is pi, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to it's diameter. This is apparently something quite simple but it requires an infinite number of digits. Pi cannot be expressed in a finite number of digits. But this is because the expression of pi requires two dimensions but our numbers are one-dimensional. Unlike a square or a triangle, a circle cannot be broken down into one-dimensional straight lines so it cannot be expressed in a finite number of digits with a one-dimensional number system because a circle must be two-dimensional.
For the universe to be of an infinite number of dimensions is actually the lowest information state, and thus preferred, because it doesn't require specifying a number. The universe could actually be extremely compact, the size of an atom, but of an infinite number of dimensions so that any being of a finite dimensional order would have to perceive it as infinite.
THE "WITH US" UNIVERSE AND THE "WITHOUT US" UNIVERSE
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, as opposed to "without us".
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, although the earth is rotating and the "rising and setting" of the sun is just an illusion of our perspective. It is a "with us" view because, without our perspective, there really is no "rising and setting" of the sun.
My cosmology theory describes how Quantum Physics and Einsteins Special Theory Of Relativity, which not only contradict standard textbook physics but also contradict each other, are also "with us" ways of looking at the universe.
An abbreviated version of the original cosmology theory, as I will refer to it here, can be seen in the posting "Cosmology Theory In Diagrams", January 2024.
HOW MANY DIMENSIONS ARE THERE?
What this theory is about is another deception caused by our own nature that involves straight lines and dimensions of space. We inhabit three spatial dimensions. My cosmology theory has it that there are actually four dimensions that we inhabit, one of which we perceive as time. The reason for this is that our bodies are composed of matter and that matter consists of four spatial dimensions.
In the cosmology theory, 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. 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 specified number. This makes it the most likely number of dimensions.
HOW DIMENSIONS WORK
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 own 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 it would require two dimensions to be aware of it. It would always 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. 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 a one-dimensional being was at corner 1 of the box in the following illustration, and wanted to get to the diagonally opposite corner 2, it would have to go along the three vertices of the box, A, B and, C, indicated by the red lines. The being would be utterly unaware of the diagonal shortcuts across the box. It would see the distance to corner 2 as the length of the three vertices added together. But it would perceive it as a straight line and would be unaware of the two turns or the potential diagonal shortcut.
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. It 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. Because to be aware of it would require three dimensions.
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 or the possible diagonal shortcut 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.
Remember the Pythagorean Theorem. In a right triangle, which is a triangle with one right angle, the squares of the two legs, added together, is equal to the square of the diagonal. This is usually expressed as C squared = A squared + B squared. The theorem works in multiple dimensions.
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 perfectly 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 our reasoning around in a circle because we will always see light as moving in a straight line.
Light, as described in the cosmology theory, consists of two-dimensional waves, while we can see three dimensions of space. What that means is that we can see light coming from different directions but must always see it as a straight line. We define a straight line by light but the truth is that we are incapable of seeing light as anything other than a straight line due to our limited dimensional order.
WHAT IS ENERGY?
What exactly is energy? There is no real answer as to exactly what it is. There is the rule that energy can never be created or destroyed, but only changed in form. We could say that energy is the ability to change the order of things. But that still doesn't tell us exactly what it is.
There is a relationship between distance and energy. We know that there is a limited amount of energy in the universe, relative to space, because the universe always seeks the lowest energy state. The default form of a gravitational mass is the sphere, because it has the lowest surface area per volume.
This shows the relationship between distance and energy. We can also see this relationship in the Inverse Square Law. Light from a greater distance is dimmer because it must expend more of it's energy to cross the distance.
I conclude that energy is related to dimensions and the most basic definition of energy is that it can facilitate a change in dimensions. It takes energy to move an object over a distance. But what is interesting is Newton's Law of Motion. An object in motion will continue in motion, unless acted on by an outside force. This can only mean that no energy is required to move an object, as long as there is no change in dimensions. This must mean that energy is the ability to change dimensions.
Light, having energy, can change dimensions, although we are dimensionally-incapable of perceiving it as moving in anything but a straight line. But it requires energy for it to change dimensions. That is why we see it's energy decreasing with distance, as per the Inverse Square Law. But it is not really decreasing with distance, remember Newton's Law of Motion that an object in space in motion will continue indefinitely without losing any energy.
The energy of light decreases as it changes dimensions. We can only perceive it as distance in a straight line because of our limited dimensional order, as explained above. Dimensions of space form squares and the law that describes the behavior of energy by light over distance is the Inverse Square Law.
But no matter how much energy we have, it doesn't change our dimensions at all. We still perceive the same four dimensions, three of space and one of time. We can see the space of the universe but can only see it as three 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 as three dimensions. We can only see the right angles between all of those dimensions, except for three, as straight lines.
We can see the vastness of space but only "along the inside edges" of the box, as in the cube in the illustration above, 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.
HOW BIG IS THE UNIVERSE, CONSIDERING THE DIMENSIONAL FACTOR?
Instead of our universe of an infinity of distance in three dimensions we may well live in a very compact universe, but consisting of an infinite number of dimensions. What we think we see as an infinite distance in three dimensions could really be a short distance but in an infinite number of dimensions.
If we consisted of an infinite number of dimensions ourselves then the universe might appear to us as a very confined, even claustrophobic, space. But it may be that it only seems infinite because it consists of an infinite number of dimensions while we are of a very limited finite number of dimensions.
SHORTER DISTANCES WITH MORE DIMENSIONS
To explain what I mean about how the distances in the universe might really be a short distance, but over an infinite number of dimensions, let's consider a cube with dimensions of one meter.
The distances across the cube increase if we increase the number of dimensions traversed. Crossing one dimension of the cube the distance is one meter. Crossing a diagonal of the cube, so that we are traversing two dimensions, the distance is 1.414 meters which is an increase by a factor of the square root of 2. If we cross the cube from one diagonal corner to the other, traversing three dimensions, the distance increases to 1.732 dimensions which is an increase over the one-dimension distance by a factor of the square root of 3.
So the universe could be, and likely is, consisting of much shorter distances than we perceive, but over an infinite number of dimensions. If there was a cube that was one meter square, but of an infinite number of dimensions, the distance from one diagonally opposite corner would have to be infinite, since the square root of infinity is still infinity.
Since we are incapable of perceiving any more than our own three spatial dimensions the distances across the universe will always seem to us as infinite distances in three dimensions, and with light always moving in straight lines, even though the distances may actually be short but in an infinite number of dimensions.
Just like the two-dimensional being in the sheet, which would always see itself as moving in a straight line across the sheet, we would be utterly unaware if our three dimensions of space were somehow "bent" relative to the higher dimensional background space. We could be moving in a curve, or even zig-zagging, when we are sure that we are moving in a straight line.
WHY IS MATTER OF FOUR DIMENSIONS?
Joining this to my cosmology theory explains why our dimensional order is of four dimensions. The beginning of the universe is explained in that theory so I won't go over it here. There are two electric charges, negative and positive, and everything in the universe, both space and matter, is composed of these electric charges. The basic rules of electric charges is that opposite charges attract while like charges repel. Energy can, to some extent, overcome these basic rules.
An alternating checkerboard of negative and positive charges, which is the lowest energy state, forms empty space. If energy overcomes the attractive force between opposite charges then it forms waves in space, that we refer to as electromagnetic radiation. It is so-called because it disturbs the electric balance of space, which ordinarily balances out to zero.
If energy overcomes the repulsive force between like charges then it forms matter. This is why the fundamental particles of matter, such as electrons, have an electric charge. They are a bundle of like charges held together, against their mutual repulsion, by energy. This energy within matter shows up as the Mass-Energy Equivalence, which gives matter it's mass. If we react matter and antimatter together, this is released as a burst of energy and the electric charges rearrange themselves back into the alternating checkerboard of empty space.
Because space is composed of these two electric charges, there must be two opposite directions in each dimension of space. In our three spatial dimensions we refer to these as up and down, left and right, and backward and forward.
This means that two squared equals four means that there are four possible combinations of the two charges, positive-negative, negative-positive, negative-negative and, positive-positive. This is why our dimensional order is of four dimensions, one of which we perceive as time. The internal energy of matter, plus the attraction between the nucleus and the electrons of atoms, gives the matter of which we are composed an order of four dimensions.
My cosmology theory has our four-dimensional order as fixed, and it was not necessary to go beyond that for the purpose of that theory. But, while we are confined to a four-dimensional order by the nature of the matter of which we are composed, that can be changed by energy and that is what energy does. The energy within matter, the Mass-Energy Equivalence, changes the dimensions of space by overcoming the repulsive force between like charges, because the dimensions of space are composed of electric charges. The energy in electromagnetic waves also changes the dimensions of space, by overcoming the attractive force between opposite charges.
We can access the whole universe, it's Infinity of dimensions, but only see it as four dimensions. Energy is what enables us to "turn a corner" of the dimensional cube described above, and change our dimensional set. We cannot be aware of a change in our Dimensional Set but are aware of the expenditure of energy.
Again, it requires energy to move matter but once it is set in motion in space, as described in Newton's Law of Motion, no more energy is required and it will continue on indefinitely, unless acted on by an outside force. That is because there is no more change in the dimensions.
Electromagnetic radiation, such as light, is emitted in the dimensional order of the matter that produces it. But the energy within it enables it to "turn corners" of the dimensional cube described above. However, it requires an expenditure of some of it's energy to do this. This is why light gets dimmer with an increase in distance. It gets dimmer according to the Inverse Square Law because light is two-dimensional while space is one-dimensional.
THE SCALE OF HYDROGEN ATOMS
So then just how big is the universe, considering that we perceive it as infinite because it is of an infinite number of dimensions? How big is the universe in our four dimensions? There must be some kind of clue and that actually brings us to our final question here.
Matter is formed of atoms and the most basic atom is a hydrogen atom, one electron in an orbital around one proton. All heavier atoms are formed from fusion of hydrogen atoms. The hydrogen atom is the basic unit of compound matter, formed of a combination of particles, in the universe.
But hydrogen atoms are of a precise size. Why are hydrogen atoms as big as they are? We could answer that it is a reflection of the amount of opposite charge on it's proton and electron. But that brings us to why is that charge as much as it is? It must reflect something fundamental about the universe.
My conclusion is that the scale of a hydrogen atom reflects the wavelength of the original radiation from the Big Bang. This is an extremely short wavelength but the addition of waves to each other over time would result in longer wavelengths. But this just leaves us with a different form of the original question, why is this wavelength the scale that it is? It must reflect something fundamental about the universe.
Our description of dimensions here gives us our answer. A hydrogen atom is unlimited in scale. It actually fills the whole universe, but only four dimensions of the universe. Multiply that by the infinite number of dimensions and the scale of the hydrogen atom becomes an infinite universe.
CONCLUSION
All of this will make no difference at all to most people going about their daily lives, or in any branch of science other than cosmology. Seeing the universe as an infinity of three-dimensional space is fine, just like seeing the day in terms of sunrise and sunset.
But what underlies my approach to cosmology is the realization that we rely on our own measurements and observations in trying to understand the universe around us. We have to understand that we are part of the universe, and we see it as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are. A lot of what we see is actually due to our own nature and perspective, what I call the "with us" universe. The way to really make discoveries about the universe is to find our way outside ourselves so that we can see the "without us" universe.
What this theory here does explain, that I cannot see explained anywhere else, is why the scale of the hydrogen atom, which is the most fundamental of atoms, is what it is.
It also gives a clear definition of what energy is, the ability to change the dimensional order of space. There is internal energy in matter, what we refer to as the Mass-Energy Equivalence, and that is because, in my cosmology theory, matter is a concentration of like charges from space, held together against their mutual repulsion by energy. This is why, according to Newton's Law of Motion, a moving object in space will continue in motion with no additional energy input. It is because there is no change in the dimensional order.
You consist of millions of spatial dimensions but each original hydrogen atom is of only four dimensions. That causes you to see the world around you as being of four dimensions, perceiving one as time, and requiring energy because energy is required to change dimensions. Light is a two-dimensional wave and you have three spatial dimensions. This means that you can see light coming from different directions but can only see it as a straight line. Your world is three spatial dimensions and light moving in straight lines but that is an illusion of your dimensional order.
Remember the fundamental principle of my approach to cosmology. We have to realize that we are part of the universe and we see it as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are. So many answers to unanswered questions fall into place once we understand that. We are used to the idea that we can completely rely on our own measurements and observations.
THE UNIVERSE OUTSIDE OURSELVES
What the Theory Of Infinite Dimensions is really about is ourselves. We are used to thinking that, in science, we can completely rely on our own measurements and observations. That might be fine for other branches of science but to really understand the nature of the universe we have to understand that 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.
So much of what we see about the universe doesn't make sense and that is because we are seeing our own nature reflected back at us and have to "get outside ourselves".
People in ancient times were fascinated by the night sky, and put a lot of time into watching and studying it, but didn't understand it. Everything seemed to move around us. The sun lit the earth and moved around it once a day. The moon also seemed to be lit by the sun but went through it's cycle of phases once a month, even though it rose and set as the sun did.
Then there were all of the stars in the sky. Some believed that there was a canopy, with light beyond it, and stars were holes in the canopy. But then why did the patterns of the stars, called constellations, gradually change, going through a cycle that lasted a year? Why did several stars seem to "wander" among the other stars? They wandered at different rates to each other but stayed to the same path across the sky.
It was so fascinating and intriguing but no one could explain it. It just didn't make sense.
THE EARTH IS NOT REALLY THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE
Then a flash of insight came. What we needed to do was to get outside our earth. We were putting complete trust in what our senses were telling us and it was our own earth that was in our way.
It all fell into place. The earth was not at the center, as it seems to us, the earth actually moved around the sun in one year. This explained why the patterns of the stars change over the course of a year.
Earth was just one of the planets that appeared to "wander" among the stars at different rates, but kept to the same path across the sky. The path was the orbital plane of our Solar System, which we see as the Zodiac, and the planets moved at different rates because they were at different distances from the sun. The moon moved around the earth while lit by the sun, causing us to see it in different phases. All of the countless stars in the sky could be presumed to be more or less like the sun, except much further away.
This new view of the universe was nothing less than revolutionary. Our senses told us that the earth is at the center and all else moves around us. A basic presumption in science is that we can completely rely on our measurements and observations. That may be true for other sciences but not for cosmology. The challenge is finding our way outside our own perspective.
This isn't the only way that we see the universe as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are. There is also the issue of color. We see things in colors that do not really exist outside of ourselves. Colors are just the way that our eyes and brains interpret different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation and so much of what we see, from the blue sky and white clouds and snow to the blue sea, are optical illusions.
But today we are in another situation where we can observe and discover so much, yet it doesn't seem to make sense and is so difficult to explain.
RELATIVITY AND QUANTUM PHYSICS
The past 120 years or so has brought two new branches of physics that have gotten a lot of attention and attracted a lot of brilliant minds. Relativity was introduced by Albert Einstein. There are two separate theories, the Special Theory of Relativity from 1905 and the General Theory of Relativity from 1915. General Relativity explains how gravity curves space itself and an object that is in orbit or falling is actually moving in a straight line, but through curved space.
Special Relativity has the speed of light as absolutely sacrosanct and everything else revolving around it. Nothing can move faster than the speed of light because an object's mass increases as it approaches the speed of light and becomes infinite when it does reach it. Time slows down, and then stops, for one approaching the speed of light. The length of a spaceship approaching the speed of light would appear to get shorter, as seen by a stationary observer, until it's length appeared to be zero at the speed of light.
The other new branch of physics is Quantum Physics. This appears to have a lot of high-tech practical applications, such as very high-speed computers and tamper-proof communications. In Quantum Physics the observation is a vital component of any interaction. Uncertainty is part of the quantum realm and we cannot be sure of anything until it is observed. Two photons can be "entangled" so that they share a quantum state and even observing one photon will automatically show up in the other one, making foolproof communication a possibility.
Aside from these two new branches of physics there is still the "classic" textbook or "Newtonian" physics.
The trouble with all of this is that both Relativity and Quantum Physics are completely contradictory of classic textbook physics. How could ordinary physics explain how an object's mass approaches infinity as it nears the speed of light or how the outcome of an experiment is affected by whether or not the experiment is being observed?
Not only are the principles of Relativity and Quantum Physics completely unexplainable by ordinary physics, they are also incompatible with each other. The dividing line between Special Relativity and Quantum Physics is the speed of light. In Relativity the speed of light is sacrosanct. Nothing can ever move faster than it 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 two entangled photons, no matter how far apart they are, without being bound at all by the speed of light.
These three branches of physics all contradict each other but yet the veracity of all three can be shown by experiments. How can this possibly be?
DARK ENERGY AND DARK MATTER
That is just the beginning of the modern cosmology mystery. We are told that about two-thirds of the universe consists of a mysterious "dark energy" that drives the expansion of the universe. It has long been known that the universe is expanding but it was thought that the expansion was slowing down. In 1998 two separate scientific investigations both found that, not only is the expansion of the universe not slowing down, it is actually speeding up.
The majority of the remaining third of the universe is said to consist of "dark matter", which cannot be seen or detected except by the gravitational effect that it has on ordinary matter. This makes "dark matter" just about as mysterious as "dark energy".
Finally the remaining few percent of the universe is the everyday matter that we are familiar with.
THE FIRST COSMOLOGY THEORY
We are learning so much about the universe, and how it works, but what we are learning doesn't make sense to us. It is almost like we are back before we found our way outside the earth, and presumed that the earth was at the center and everything went around it. Humans were fascinated by what was in the night sky but it didn't make any sense.
Could it be that there is something else that we have to find our way out of? What if we have to find our way outside ourselves before what we observe about the universe and the way it works makes sense?
A basic presumption of science has always been that we have an unbiased view of the universe, that we can completely rely on our measurements and observations. But what if we don't have an unbiased view of the universe? What if 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? This might explain why we have learned so much about the universe but it makes so little sense.
To begin let's start questioning things. We live in three spatial dimensions, and time is often considered as a one-way dimension. Time is another thing. It is so fundamental to us but what actually is it? I had never seen a plausible explanation of what time actually is.
What if time is really another dimension of space that we can't access at will? This would mean that all of the matter we can see must have another dimension to it. Matter can change or move around over time but it still exists. What if matter actually consisted of very long strings in four-dimensional space, which we perceive as particles, such as electrons, because we can only see in three dimensions? The scientific community did have a lot to say about "string theory".
If we consist of strings, rather than particles, then the strings must be aligned in this fourth dimension of space that we cannot access, and this is why we cannot access it. This provides a simple explanation of what time actually is, the movement of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains in the spatial dimension that we cannot access at will.
A clue that there is more going on regarding dimensions is the leftover radiation from the Big Bang, which began the universe. If we live in three spatial dimensions then we should be able to pinpoint the direction in space that the radiation from the Big Bang is coming from. But we can't, it seems to be coming at us equally from all directions. What that indicates is there is another spatial dimension that the site of the Big Bang is located in. Since we perceive the Big Bang as having taken place in the past, this indicates that our time is really another dimension of space.
Electric charge is obviously very important in the universe, matter consists of charged particles like electrons and protons. But what exactly is space and matter? We know that space and matter must somehow be composed of the same basic constituents because matter and antimatter will disappear into empty space after being reacted together, after releasing a burst of energy. The conclusion is simple. Space consists of alternating negative and positive electric charges in multiple dimensions.
Matter, or antimatter, is a concentration of like charges held together, against their mutual repulsion, by energy. This energy is what gives matter it's mass, as described by the well-known Mass-Energy Equivalence. It is also behind Einstein's famous formula, E = MC squared, which means that a small amount of matter contains a lot of energy.
This provides a neat explanation of what gravity is. If the two electric charges are equal then the basic rules of electric charges, that opposite charges attract while like charges repel, must also be equal. If matter consists of like charges held together, against their mutual repulsion, by energy then that must leave a net attractive force associated with matter. There is indeed a net attractive force, it is what we refer to as gravity. Many disagreed with Einstein that gravity is related to electromagnetism but this shows that he was correct.
The alternating charges of space usually balance out to zero but electromagnetic waves are so-called because they disturb this underlying balance. Just as matter is the overcoming of the repulsive force between like charges by energy, electromagnetic waves are the overcoming of the attractive force between opposite charges by energy. The near-infinitesimal Planck's Length shows up in all manner of physics formula because it is the size of one of these fundamental electric charges.
What about the speed of light? Why is the speed of light what it is, rather than some other speed? If we don't even know why the speed of light is what it is how can it be so sacrosanct in Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity? If this is what time is then our consciousness must be moving along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains at some certain speed. What if that speed was the speed of light and that is why it appears as so important?
If the bundle of strings comprising an object is aligned along the fourth dimension of space, that we perceive as time, the object will appear as at rest. If the bundle is bent at a right angle, the maximum possible angle, we will perceive the object as moving at the speed of light as our consciousness rushes past us at that speed.
So this explains what the Special Theory of Relativity is. Time is relative, hence the name, but the speed of light is absolutely constant. This is utterly different from "textbook" physics but it turns out that time and the speed of light are within us. Relativity is not "wrong" but we see it because of what we are. To make sense of it we just had to get outside ourselves.
What about quantum physics? To make sense of that we also have to get outside ourselves, but in a different way. Since we live in four-dimensional space that means electrons are really strings, rather than particles as we perceive them. The only way that we learn about the universe is through electromagnetic waves and the only way we can receive those are through their effect on electrons. I refer to this as "Electron Dependency".
An electron is a one-dimensional string. An electromagnetic wave is two-dimensional. Upon interacting the electron must absorb one dimension of the wave. We refer to the remaining dimension as a "photon", a particle of light. This is why an observation is part of a quantum interaction, it necessarily absorbs one of the two dimensions of the wave.
This also explains the much-heralded "Uncertainty Principle" of quantum physics. We can be sure of an electron's position or momentum but not both. Because the measured electron will absorb one of the two dimensions of the wave that is our only way to gain information about it.
Since the speed of light is something within us, the speed of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains, there is no reason for information not to move between two entangled photons, which share a quantum state, instantaneously. A photon can be split by a crystal but, since particles are really strings in four-dimensional space, the photons are still linked in the past dimension, and this is why information can pass between them.
What this concept of time means is that the universe is really stationary. Everything seems to us to be moving as our consciousness passes through. This means that light, and all electromagnetic radiation, is really stationary ripples in space. But it increases the energy density of space. This is an ideal explanation for the "dark energy" that pervades the universe and causes it to expand, or to appear to expand. Incredibly "dark energy" is, of all things, light. We just have to get outside our dimensional limitations to see this. Once again we have too much confidence in what our senses tell us.
More about what I call our "Electron Dependency". We are completely dependent on electrons, and the effect that electromagnetic waves have on them, for information about the universe. Most of the matter that we know consists of atoms, which have electrons in orbitals. An atom is a kind of "zero unit" of charged particles together that balance out to zero.
But who says that all matter has to end up as part of atoms? Protons and neutrons are made of quarks. These quarks are massive but don't have whole electric charges like electrons do. By "whole" electric charge I mean a charge of either +1 or -1. Quarks have charges in thirds, relative to electrons.
This means that if there were quarks in space, around ordinary atoms, we would be unable to detect them, due to our Electron Dependency, although we would feel their gravity. This concept of Electron Dependency thus provides a perfect explanation for the mysterious "dark matter". It could be quarks that never got paired up in atoms, or any other particles of matter with other than a whole electric charge.
It is like a radio station. We can only receive a radio station that the radio is tuned into. In the same way, our complete dependence on electrons for information means that we can only detect matter, other than by gravity, with a "whole" electric charge.
A few centuries ago we had to find our way outside of our earth to make sense of the universe that we saw. Today we have learned so much but have information that just doesn't seem to make sense. We are in the same situation again but this time we have to find our way outside ourselves. We have the idea that we have an unbiased view of the universe, that we can completely rely on our measurements and observations.
My cosmology 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 that attitude a door opens and things that didn't make sense suddenly do.
THE NEXT STEP
This biased view that we have of the universe, but are slow to realize how biased it is, goes further, and is what this second cosmology theory is about. Again I consider these two cosmology theories as separate, although there is a lot of common ground, because they go in different directions and it is possible to understand one without knowing about the other. This second cosmology theory is about dimensions and how, again, we see the universe as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are.
Our dimensional order affects how we see the universe. Just as in all of the above examples, we presume that we have an unbiased view of the universe and can completely rely on our measurements and observations. We see three dimensions of space and my first cosmology theory adds the fourth dimension that we perceive as time. The idea that there are dimensions that we cannot access has been around for a while.
This second cosmology theory is that the universe consists of an infinite number of dimensions, which is actually the lowest information state and thus preferred. But we cannot see them as any more than three dimensions because the matter of which we are composed is of only three dimensions. Like a hypothetical one-dimensional being in a corner of a square or box, we are incapable of seeing corners that involve more than three dimensions and can only see it as a straight line.
We see three spatial dimensions and light is a two-dimensional wave. This means that we can see light coming from different directions but can never see it as following anything other than a straight line. We define a straight line as the path of light but that is the way that we are limited to seeing it by our dimensional order.
If space consists of alternating negative and positive electric charges in multiple dimensions, as described in the first cosmology theory, then a wave of electromagnetic energy should possibly be able to change dimensions, although it would require the expenditure of some of it's energy. That is explained by the Inverse Square Law. Notice that dimensions of space form 90 degree squares and the law that governs the decrease in the energy of light over distance is the Inverse Square Law. That is because light in an infinity of dimensions can turn corners but we, due to our dimensional order, can only see it as moving in straight lines in three dimensions.
