PrimalMinister

I ask that question because you may have never thought about it, it is a very interesting problem. But if I am right, then I actually have an answer for it, I can explain how you get the laws of the universe everywhere. Its simple, the universe extends in all directions for ever, it has and will always exist, it is immortal. The first thing is space. Space is composed entirely of tiny virtual reality machines, about the size of strings from string theory, which took collectivily make a virtual reality machine of infinite size. So a giant virtual reality machine composed of tiny virtual reality machines, each tiny machine has all the laws of the universe embedded in it. This is how you get the laws of the universe everywhere. That is space, now time. All the tiny machines follow a fixed cycle, they create reality, then they destory reality, over and over again. The absolute reality is the machines, the relative reality we see is virtual, its flicking in and out of existance billions of times a second. Each new generation of the universe is slightly different to the last, and hence everything in the universe moves slightly. All movement in the universe is governed by these tiny machines, these tiny machines are moving everything about according to the laws we know. This is what I mean by space moving things about, not things moving about space.

Ok, the reasoning, the logic. First, you have to look at current physics. Yes we know a vast amount, but there are things we don't know. The things we know are very interesting, but I find interesting the things we don't know, have no explanation for. Consequently, scientists try to turn that lack of knowledge into knowledge. For example: May have existed, implying we don't know. Despite our sophisticated knowledge, modern physics has questions it has no answers for. Its a fact, the evidence is clear, we had it wrong before and the big bang, is to me, a sign we have got something wrong again. Lots of scientists reject religion for its nonsense, then suggest the big bang, I am surprised people believe it. Yes, I know models, evidence and so on, but we had it wrong before. So there are things we don't know, for example, please answer this question with the same mathematics you expect of me. The laws of the universe are everywhere, how does science explain this, how are the laws of the universe everywhere?

Ok, thanks for the answers. Before I go into detail, I will explain the dramatic reinterpretation of the cosmos. To keep it simple, I believe the universe is, for all other purposes, a virtual reality machine, except to us, the reality it maintains, is very real. So I understand you all want mathematics, but first you have to understand the architecure of the machine. And this is where it gets tricky, if I am right, then the universe is not an accident, its has purpose, it has a reason for existing. A lot of scientists are 'well despite how amazing everything is, its just chance, luck, an accident'. So I feel as if I am going to get some flack for saying that. I have a framework for a theory of everything, not a theory of everything. So I can only discuss the framework, the details need more work. It maybe a fruitless line of study, but if it isn't, if it produces results, then I am essentially right. Its either one or the other, either the universe was created in a big bang or the universe is a virtually reality machine, it can't be both. Anyway, there are lots of good reasons to believe something like this is going on, which I am happy to discuss.

Now I am not a creationist, but I have a bit of different view, this is because believe I have a framework for a theory of everything. Now I could be wrong, fair enough, but if I am right, there is going to be a paradigm shift in physics and a dramatic reinterpretaion of the cosmos. Now we once believed the sun revolved around the earth, it is easy to think that, it feels like there earth is not moving and the sun looks like it travels across the sky. You could forgive early folk for making this mistake. It looks like the sun is going round the earth so they modelled it that way, they assumed it was that way. The thing is, someone came along and said this is not correct, something else is going on instead. Well I think I am that person for the modern day, because I believe that, despite all our knowledge, which is vast, the whole intellectual structure is based on an assumpution which is not actually what is going on. That means that while lots of physics will remain useful, it is still fundamentally flawed. This assumption, upon which the whole intellectual structure of modern physics exists, is simple. Its the notion that 'things move around space'. I believe we have done it again, things look like they are moving around space, so we have created all these models to describe this motion. Except, things are not moving around space, what is actually happening is the opposite, space is moving things around. It is just a subtle shift in perspective. So do you 'believe' things move around space?

Given that we have an environment with water, land and air, wasn't it inevitable we ended up with things swimming in water, walking on land and flying in the air? For example, evolution might produce random 'wing' designs but only the ones that are areodynamic will work, meaning wings have a certain inevitability.

But even if the universe is somehow by chance, it is still inevitable. So the quantum foam is a random universe generator, it generates universes. Prior to generating our universe it must have had the potential to generate else it couldn't have actually created it. So our universe existed as potential in the quantum foam before it even existed. Now lets say the quantum foam can generate an infinite amount of universes, given enough time (and we have eternity), it will eventually create our universe, meaning that is inevitable.

I am not saying there is an intelligence behind our actual universe, I am saying there is one behind Laurance Krausss theory that is 'making it so' through his will alone becaucse there is no scientific explanation for why, only how. The why is not explained by the creator (Laurance Krauss), he says it will accord to quantum mechanics, and so his will is done, thats it. I am not saying there is an intelligence behind the universe, I am saying there is an intelligence behind Laurance Krauss's theory. As I said above, he explains how the foam will accord to quantum mechanics, but not why, how he is going to make it so. He just says it will accord to quantum mechanics and his will is done with no explaination on why it should accord to quantum mechanics, at present the only thing making it so is his will, he says it will accord to quantum mechanics and his will is done. It sounds like something to me. I know science doesn't know, this is my point, yes we have a vast amount of knowledge, it looks like we have it nearly worked all out, but there is a mystery. I have analysed that mystery of why, or how it is actually going to made so, and I have a logic that potentially explain the why, how it is so. My idea, simple as it is, with a bit of imagination, could explain the why, the how it is so. You are not exactly explaining what is wrong with my logic. Ok, so it is chance that things are the way they are, but that only applies at the point of creation, not after the point of creation, after the point of creation fixed laws apply, these are not random, by chance.

Look, I looked at the universe from nothing, where it actually comes from a quantum foam. This quantum foam still has the same mystery our universe does. He explains that the quantum foam will evolve according to rules, with no explaination as to why it is going to accord to those rules. In Lawrance Krauss theory a universe from nothing, the only explaination is the will of the creator, and I don't mean God, I mean Laurance Krauss, he is the creator of the universe (the one where it comes out nothing) and his will makes the quantum foam evolve time, not quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is the design, not the implementation, it explains the how, but not the why, this is fact. This is the mystery of physics.

On one hand we clearly have knowledge, a vast amount, and I am not disputing all of it, just some it. Most of this stuff I am disputing and introducing is surrounded by 'we dont know'.

I am not just opposing for the sake it, as it is become clearer, science has no idea what underpins everything. Science hasn't got a clue what is going on, it doesn't know. Well somebody told me, in this thread, there was no space or time before the big bang. Who do I believe? It doesnt' matter anyway, despite all our knowledge it appear we have no idea how the universe actually works. This is why I asked for the official story, the authorative answer.

I thought the universe kept expanding until it expriences a heat/freeze death?

Yes, I know. On one hand you know, and on the other you don't. Which one is it? Ok, so what is the [whatever] story, from beginning to end?

Ok... So that is the offical story? After you said there was none.

I don't know what sciences story is exactly, all I want to now is what happens, from beginning to end. What is the official story?

It doesn't matter, the main central logic doesn't change, all the different universes are still based on some law. The problem is you are taking a philosophical approach to the question where I am taking a technical approach. You say I have a problem of infinite regression, but I don't, our current models do. First, I am told reality came into being with the big bang, I was told it was branes knocking together, then no its nothing existed before the big bang, now the universe came out of quantum foam, what did the quantum foam come out of? I assume there is some law underlying it all? To go from no law, to some law is impossible, there has to be some foundation.

Of course we do, thats why we have laws. Throw a ball up, it comes down according to gravity, that law is being enforced, somehow.

No, it is a framework for a theory of everything, not a theory of everything. I think there could be problems with both of them, I don't know enough to say what might be incorrect about them. Maybe the universe did come into being via a big bang as described, I accept I could be wrong. But every fibre of my being tells me something is not quite right with it. This is worsened by the fact I have my own ideas about the universe and believe (I could be wrong) that I have read the mind of God. What I mean by this is, is that God doesn't roll dice. I don't believe in any God, but the universe, I believe has a design, a profound and sublime design, its not chance, its not a random accident. That is my own personal belief, I can't prove it at this stage. Now I may not have *the* solution to a perplexing problem with physics, but I have *a* solution and it could be, there is a chance, that it could be *the* solution. I am intelligent enough to know this.

Look, we know the universe evolves according to laws (which you seem to think by keeping telling me I will somehow understand further) but we don't know why (at this point you could say its Gods will). This to me is a problem looking for a solution. You may say its philosophy but if you examine the problem further the question becomes this: We know the universe evolves according to laws, we know the laws are enforced, but we don't know why/how they are enforced. This is a problem looking for a solution. I have studied the facts and the theorys and was encouraged to think for myself. When phycists say there was no time or space before the big bang, I just cant believe that. And we had it wrong before, we thought the sun revolved around the earth. I have a framework for a theory of everything, not a theory of everything, I am not claiming to have the things you say I don't have. Its quite literally the beginning of this hypothosis, it needs more work for sure. But what I do have is interesting, even if you don't see it yet. I brought Einsteins quote imagination is more important than knowledge because of the lack of imagination in the answers. Stephen Wolfram showed that simple processes can have complex outcomes, it doesn't take a lot to get complexity, I think underlying the complexity of the universe is essentially a simple process. The question is, can this simple process account for all we see around us, and even at this early stage there is a possibility that it can, considering all a theory of everything has to do is explain the movement of all things.

So our universe has an edge, beyond which other universes exist? And inbetween them there is quanutm foam? You see some times I feel like the kid in the crowd who shouts the king is wearing nothing when he is supposedly garments of the finest material. Some things physicts say, I just can't believe. Maybe the big bang happened, maybe I am wrong, but personally, I can't accept it. Somehow the logic is no where near as elegant as the equations.

These two statements seem to contradict each other, if there where other big bangs before this one, that implies things where changing and therefore time. And how can this quantum foam be fluxulated if there is not time, if its changing, there is time.

Because you have to look at what we dont know and try to make it into something we know, knowledge. We know the laws of the universe are everywhere but we don't know why, embedding all the laws of the universe in cells (like a tv, holographic plate, tile based world) would explain how to get the laws of the universe everywhere, it may not be *the* explanation, but is *an* explanation. For sure it needs work, but there are reasons for it being so. What we know, our knowledge is all good and well, but it is the unknown that requires imagination.

Its not guess work, the are good reasons for thinking along the lines that I am thinking. I have not just randomly come up with it. There are things science doesnt understand, when people are being honest they say 'we don't know'. That means we don't have the knowledge. Science, scientists, say that, that is why they also say the universe is mysterious, because we don't know everything, So the quantum foam, this existed prior to the big? What happened to this quantum foam when the universe came into being? Did the quantum foam exist for an infinite amount of time prior to the big bang? And if there was no universe prior to the big bang, what was this quantum foam in exactly?

So I throw a ball in the air and by chance it falls to the floor according to gravity, that doesn't make sense. If there was a element of chance every once in a while the ball wouldn't come down, it would continue going up. But its not chance, the same thing happens repeatedly, the ball comes down according to gravity. Where is the chance? At the point of creation? Do you mean there is a chance the universe, at the point of creation, could go this way or that way or whatever way, and by chance it goes our way? Is that what you are talking about when you talk about chance? I should stick with my guns, there is no point me believeing the big bang, lots of people all ready do. The modern world tells us diversity is good, I have original thinking and there is a *chance* I am right. I said it is just a framework for a theory of everything, not an actual theory of everything, there are just some good reasons for thinking along these lines.

Ok, in this hypothetical universe, the first laws is that space is composed of immortal cubes. What sort of laws govern that? Well I have described reality as coming in and out of existence, that reality, like a film or tv show is a series of stills strung together to make a sequence. So reality in this context is a sequence of shifts from one state to another. Its evolving, it creates a generation of reality, then destroys it, the next generation of reality is slightly different from the last, and so on and on, this is movement. All movement in the universe is governed by this slight shift occuring again and again, so the universe (spacetime) is constantly moving everything about. Spacetime, as I have expressed, is moving everything about according to laws I don't yet fully understand, but I know I only have to account for this slight shift to have a complete theory of everything. Yes, this is all speculative and so on, maybe I am right and this is how the universe actually works, or I am wrong, it doesn't really matter. What is interesting about it, is it is a fresh way to look at how the universe works, it needs work for sure, but for so little, you get quite a lot.

Ok, let take this one step at a time. Lets look at the first super law, this is that space, which is infinite in space and time, is composed of cubes, all identical, that cannot be created or destroyed, are eternal, immortal. What sort of laws would enforce that? You don't need to enforce it with another set of laws, its just a simple fact. No I don't require a container, the purpose is implied. Fuck it, I think the purpose is for life. But life is a whole other discussion, its probably best to keep it to physics.