Theory on the Universe

Homepage Forums Metaphysical Theory on the Universe

20
Avatar of Gizmodo
Gizmodo (@gizmodo)05.24.2012 at 3:25 pm

In my philosophy class we were on the subject of logic and I believe it was Descartes who said that humans don’t have an imagination, we can only take different parts of different things and combine them to ‘create’ something new as an idea. I completely agree with this because I have yet to imagine something that isn’t bits and pieces of other things.

I started thinking about this idea a lot. During my shrooms trip I posted earlier I started thinking, ‘Well if our ideas are only ideas made up of other ideas, then those ideas couldn’t have been completely new either and are made up of other ideas…and those ideas are made up of other ideas etc etc until you get to the single simplest idea.

So the idea of lets say an iPod, is made up of the idea of a screen…and all the things beneath the screen. The idea for a screen, and all the things beneath the screen that make an iPod work, come from ideas of simpler things and you can keep getting simpler and simpler ideas that make up the next idea.

It’s made up of thousands of cells and atoms (that are like ‘ideas’) that put in place just right make up the person that you are. (Just another example, but here’s where the mind blowing begins).

If we work backwards…basically rewind time, we just saw the entire creation of technology, the human race, earth, the moon, our universe…that’s built off of ‘ideas’ that came before it until you get to one single idea (like a proton/electron) and if you duplicate that ‘idea’ you get something completely new (add atoms you get a molecule). Those ‘ideas’ slowly started making the universe that we know today one ‘idea’ at a time.

But right before that first ‘idea’ there was nothing and that ‘idea’ just popped into existence…

-That idea is our universe-

Our universe is just an ‘idea’ that somebody thought of. But because nobody can just think of the complexity of the universe as a single idea, it build upon itself and grows into what we call the universe today.

Any idea you think of, is something that now exists in this, or a different, universe. You can think of something that happened at the beginning of that universe, the middle of the universe’s existence, or towards the end. Since time doesn’t matter in the whole ‘idea’ of a universe, the newly created universe creates it’s past and future around the idea you just created. This gives us an infinite amount of universes and helps the multiverse theory.

I just want to know who was the person who thought of our universe…and would this mean that our entire universe is just an idea in somebody’s head?

20 votes, posted 05.24.2012 at 3:25 pm
+

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Avatar of Gizmodo
Gizmodo (@gizmodo)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@sonofsaul, Well think on a microscopic level. We have a finite amount of different types of atoms. But we can make up an I finite amount of different things with them because we can add them together as many times as we want. Not just one hydrogen atom plus one oxygen. But 2 hydrogen atoms with one oxygen and 2 with 2. 3 with 2. 3 with 3. Add other atoms too and this becomes an infinite amount of different things

+
Avatar of Christian Chavez
Christian Chavez (@sonofsaul)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@gizmodo We have a finite amount of types of atoms, and we have a finite amount of atoms period. Matter in this universe is not infinite, it is limited, so I can’t just use more atoms than are in existence. If I’m building with any material its impossible to construct something with more material than exists. If theres only enough steel in the world to create a million skyscrapers, I cant just build 2 million. The matter Im working with is limited, and therefore so is my ability to create with it.

+
Avatar of Nightowl
Nightowl (@nightowl)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@sonofsaul, you only have a partial understanding on that of which you speak.
Finite and infinite are complimentary and one cannot be without the other.

In finite matter, there is indeed a fixed number of atoms currently.
However that number is always changing. Stars constantly deconstruct and re-form new ones.
This means the number of atoms in the cosmos is infinite, as there is no limit to the potential, or how many there Can and Will be.

Think. It’s obvious with a little thought. How did all the atoms get here anyway? Did they come here from somewhere else? Is there a cosmic stash of just a certain number of atoms that has to be brought into our universe from elsewhere?

No. Everything is infinite, finite is a complimentary illusion of this spacetime moment.

+
Avatar of skel
skel (@skel)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@gizmodo, this is the same as my thought but in much grater detail

life is belief of information for so long as some thing exist’s it is real. the only thing that can stop an existence is a collective of people who chose not to have belief, ending its existence, for the human mind has the power to make anything, hence to make it “exist”

what if i was to tell you that up is down, black is white and right is wrong. so long as you believe then this is so

+
Avatar of Ian
Ian (@ipman)1 year, 10 months ago ago

Richard Feynman once said that the double-slit experiment contains “the ONLY mystery.” In the delayed-choice experiment, which takes the double-slit experiment one step further, what we do in the present has an irretrievable influence on what we can say of the past. Possibly, the past may have no existence except for our recordings of it in the present. When we observe something, we create it, essentially. So think about the universe for a moment, and perhaps the entire universe, being self-contained and having no “outside observer,” was created by intelligent beings (humans) by the simple act of observing it. This participatory universe, starting with a “Big Bang”, gave rise to beings such as ourselves, who in turn viewed the atoms of the Cosmic Background Radiation, and gave rise to the Big Bang itself. It’s a self-excited circuit!

To quote Buddha, “All we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything.”

Note: If you haven’t heard of the delayed-choice double slit experiment, look it up! You might have a better understanding of what I’m saying. I read about it first in John Gribbin’s book “In Search of Schroedingers Cat: Quantum Physics and Reality.” It’s a little dated, but still a great read, especially as an introduction to quantum physics.

+
Avatar of Fluxface
Fluxface (@fluxface)1 year, 10 months ago ago

Just have a cool documentary tips that dips its feet in this area. BBC – Secret life of chaos

+
Avatar of
Anonymous (@)1 year, 10 months ago ago

I agree with Hawkins and his theory that combines the theory of relativity and the theory of quantum mechanics. If its true that a black hole (a dip in space due to gravity that causes passing objects to be drawn in) can “suck” things in then the opposite, that it can push things out, must also be true. Thus explaining the big bang theory. The universe was started by a reverse black hole. Is this true? Who knows. You should go on YouTube and type in “Hawkins universe” and watch all 5 parts. Extremely mind blowing. Let me know what you think.

+
Avatar of The_truth_is_
The_truth_is_ (@sirensetmefree)1 year, 10 months ago ago

This is a great thread. Very interesting. I’m really enjoying the replies…

Although, I find it a bit unnerving that no one here seems to think the laws of causality are of any importance, or at least no one seems to be mentioning them. The idea that something that exists now caused something that exists in the past is a bit more ridiculous the more you think about it. Backwards causality makes no sense in a forward-moving time “worm.” And even if you accept that time is relative, that doesn’t change the property of time as being forward-moving. Time, even relative to those stuck in a black hole, is forward moving, even if it is infinitely slow. And in hyperspace, time relative to our space-time is still forward-moving.

I find it extremely difficult to accept this sort of epistemic idealism because it requires a priori ideas of objects for objects to exist, but we can so obviously measure the reverse: our ideas are based on experiences, not the other way around.

As for the argument presented earlier about 1′s and 0′s, there couldn’t be a more obvious use of the fallacy of composition propped out in front of me. Reducing them to such integers only shows a false sense of understanding. The equivalent would be looking at a computer’s motherboard, knowing what chemicals went into creating it, and then saying, “I KNOW HOW IT WORKS! MWUAHAHA!”

No. That doesn’t cut it. It is not a very deep understanding of the universe to know that everything is reducible to mathematical speculations. It’s actually very high-school fundamental knowledge kind of thing. http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png

And knowing the basic functions of those mathematical speculations doesn’t make you any more an astronomer or physicist or chemist or biologist or psychiatrist or psychologist or philosopher.

+
Avatar of Ian
Ian (@ipman)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@sirensetmefree In regard to causality, when something that exists now causes something that exists in the past, who’s to say the past is really the past? We experience time as “forward” moving, an increase in entropy if you will, but maybe time itself is beyond past, present, and future, or really has no bearing whatsoever! In a self-excited circuit, it’s practically an endless loop. If that makes any sense haha.
However, in regards to my previous post about humans observing the universe and signs of the Big Bang, and therefore creating it, it’s not necessarily that we “created” it, and perhaps I should have used different semantics, as much as we caused it to be real. A collapse of Schroedinger’s wave function, as it were, gave a tangible quality to our reality.

+
Avatar of Eric
Eric (@blankey)1 year, 10 months ago ago

I would say it is not “God” or a single entity that came up with this but rather it is a collection of all of the pure consciousness that surrounds us constantly and is a part of all of us. It is this same consciousness that is allowing us to look through the lens of this flesh vehicle for a limited time on Earth. Perhaps, once we die we return to this state of pure energy/consciousness…? Anyways, getting off topic..

Basically, WE are that consciousness, you, me, everyone, and everything. There is actually a large amount of scientific evidence now especially with the advent of quantum mechanics suggesting that this reality is only one VERY small fold of a much deeper hidden reality with possibly infinite folds of itself, which can unfold all the way down to pure consciousness. The idea that this is a holographic universe is an idea worth taking a look at. You will receive criticism from everywhere for it re-defines physics, but evidence is arising everywhere I look. For starters, atoms are 99.999999% empty space. Think about that for a while. Not only that, but (this is debatable —>) consciousness has an affect on matter, allowing it change from its wave form (when it is in its wave form it is everywhere in the entire universe at once..keep in mind this is one particle) to its particle form when observed with a measurement tool. Some are not sure on whether or not this is “consciousness”, but I beg to differ.

At first, I was incredibly skeptical, then I checked out a book called The Holographic Universe. I was still slightly skeptical as I like to be and how everyone should be, but now…it just seems right. Not only is my right brained, intuition self pulling me towards it, but so is my logical left brain.

+
Avatar of Eric
Eric (@blankey)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@trek79, Very, very true. I think we need to separate imagination and ideas because they are definitely two different things. They may collide every so often to help each other out, but they are separate. Perhaps, the imagination is tapping into the pure consciousness we all have inside us and everywhere, while ideas are from the brain because they have to do with this three-dimensional reality, unless of course imagination takes a stab at it and goes off.

+
Avatar of The_truth_is_
The_truth_is_ (@sirensetmefree)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@ipman, I can see that argument, but it seems to be this kind of rationality:

“You just saw a hat you really liked for the first time, and it was black. Therefore, you can ONLY say that it has been black since you saw it until now because it could have been purple right before you saw it. You didn’t experience it before that, so you can’t say it’s not true.”

Or, my personal favorite

“You had gnomes living in your ears until you checked them. You can’t prove there were no gnomes. You can only prove that there aren’t any gnomes when you check. Therefore, you have to say that there might be gnomes, they just aren’t there when you are looking.”

I think that the human mind is a wonderful thing to be able to rationalize and understand the complexity of the world around us. But, as part of that world, I think we are defined by the same laws (except for the quantum world, of course, which abides by a different set of laws that we physically couldn’t abide by). And so, if we can see how there is linear causality between things, it should be safe to assume that linear causality is the case.

Sure, it would be amazing if it weren’t that way, having to go back and see what we could change with our thoughts and creations. But it doesn’t seem that way. Even at the quantum level we see how things act differently given different events (i.e. effects as a result of causes), like how observing and electron changes its behaviors. We might not understand what the relationship does exactly, but we see that there is a cause (observation) and an effect (movement patterns). When even the quantum world works by certain laws, I see no reasonable reason to believe in things like backwards causation.

But I guess anything is possible.

+
Avatar of random chaos
random chaos (@randomchaos)1 year, 10 months ago ago

This is soo cool and i get to comment!!! Energy can not be created or destroyed…..consciousness is energy…..or as you call the initial idea. we are linear beings and therefore can only understand things in present, past or future. If we use our minds (math,logic,reason) as our sole guide we will understand the multipule possibilites are present. Take away the the mind, quite its voice and you will realise that you are one, part of the one….energy mainfested in different forms to explore the idea of this concsciousness.

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@blankey, Yes, I see the imagination as the road that connects the consciousness and the brain, as is emotion. At the consciousness end you have dreams but at the brain end the road becomes more like a simulator that applies physical laws of reality to determine the practicality of the dreams we have. But I do not see the dreams as artificial in nature, or un-real, but rather a different type of reality, one more primal. It is a reality not of the 3rd dimension, as you put it, but it is a reality all the same.

+
Avatar of
Anonymous (@)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@gizmodo, its beyond ideas. It ultimately comes down to patterns.

+
Avatar of
Anonymous (@)1 year, 10 months ago ago

Imagination does exist. Its creating probable patterns, that fit within the axioms of the contexually relevant concepts.

+
Avatar of
Anonymous (@)1 year, 10 months ago ago

Creativity and intelligence are greatly influenced by the ability to master syntax, this allows abstract manipulation of patterns as well as increased rates of pattern internalization.

+
Avatar of
Anonymous (@)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@msaracino, are you talking about Quantum Loop Gravity.

+
Avatar of Eric
Eric (@blankey)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@imhotep, Wtf is quantum loop gravitation?

+
Avatar of
Anonymous (@)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@blankey, it’s a theory that attempts to encapsulate the Theory of Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, under one paradigm. I meant to refer that question to @msaracino.

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 10 months ago ago

It’s nice to use big words in an attempt to make the universe seem more complex then it actually is, it makes people who work in the field seem like the smartest people in the world, but really they just have a gift in liturature.

+
Avatar of Christian Chavez
Christian Chavez (@sonofsaul)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@nightowl, first off, I never said that infinity doesn’t exist. I would definitely agree that the two are compliments, but I don’t deny infinity. Also, what you’ve said about there being an infinite number of atoms because of the destruction and creation in stars is not necessarily true. Either the universe is constantly expanding, in which case you could make the argument that an infinite number of atoms exist by means of stars. Or the universe is like a rubber band, and at once it has reached its outermost limit it will begin to contract in on itself, in which case it will eventually collapse. If this is the case only a certain number of stars will have been created and the number of atoms is finite.

To say that everything is infinite is such a large contradict in itself and is wrong on so many levels. Think, its obvious will a little thought. No thing is infinite. No thing which exists is infinite, for anything which is infinite is cannot be bound by existence. Infinitude means unlimited, in no way having any limits, so such by saying something is a thing, or that it exists, limits it in so many ways. Infiniteness has no boundaries, so to say that any one thing, let alone them all, is infinite, is just plain wrong. To tell me that I only know partially what I speak of and not know yourself what infinity means is pretty ironic.

+
Avatar of Tobias Valdemar Broe Knudsen
Tobias Valdemar Broe Knudsen (@2bias)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@sonofsaul, you are too quick with your assumptions there. You can’t simpfly say that because the amounts of variables is finite the outcome will be as well. If you have just one number you can make infinite amounts of numbers with it – if you have 1 you can make 11 or 111 etc. so a finite amount of atoms does not mean a finite amount of ideas because even though we have only seen so many things and our minds are limited, we can still combine these ideas with themselves as many times as we like and so we can create anything.
So take a deep breath and introvert for a while – look at your comments and perhaps change your tone a bit because arrogance is not appreciated on HE your opinion does not way heavier than anyone else’s and so you should be more respectful. if not because respect is basic, then at least to save your own ass from being ridiculed by someone who knows more about something than yourself – the more you act like a know it all – the more it will hurt when you are proven wrong, so don’t get so caught up in your own opinion, because it’s no more relevant than every other opinion.

Also there is another great thread about this that i think you should all check out
certainly blew my mind a couple of times! :) http://www.highexistence.com/topic/godbrahmansourcenatureabsolute/

+
Avatar of Tobias Valdemar Broe Knudsen
Tobias Valdemar Broe Knudsen (@2bias)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@sirensetmefree, This kind of goes for you too – You seem extremely intelligent – i suggest that you give a little more credit to youself and others by letting your opinion stand alone, that is without the notion that all other beliefs are ridiculous. I’m not saying you are being rude. Just that you should be careful with assuming that you are ever right about anything.
of course we have to assume that we know something, but it’s not very nice to get caught up in who is right. so maybe you should just down tone what you are saying by adding – i think or IMO in the beginning of your post. In search of the truth it’s a pretty bad start to assume that you already know it. moreover truth is subjective, which is why you should acknowledge the value of others opinion before you propogate your own.

+
Avatar of Christian Chavez
Christian Chavez (@sonofsaul)1 year, 10 months ago ago

@2bias, it definitely wasnt my intention to come across as a know it all and I know I can come across as strong, so I’m sorry if that seemed disrespectful.
In regards to your argument, I’m gonna have to disagree. When you say that infinite things can come from finite things I think that it just not correct. Nothing infinite can come from anything finite. I think that when people try to use numbers as an example it is a bad example, for numbers are not truly infinite. Numbers are endless and not infinite. So to say that the number of something is infinite is not quite true.
Even if you were to take this stance, we as humans still could never create an infinite number of configurations and ideas as we are finite beings. In actuality I mean. In potentiality and theory it would be possible of we take the numbers of things to be infinite, but since the human race will end, at its end it will have created a massive, but still finite number of ideas.

+