Home | Community | Message Board


Everything Mushrooms
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Offlinerelativexistance
"beads, bees!?!?beads ....BEADS!!!"
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/08/04
Posts: 1,778
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
could the universe be all one?
    #3506680 - 12/16/04 12:19 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

According to current knowledge, energy cannot be created nor destroyed. This leads to the argument that there is a finite amount of energy within our universe.

Now this is where it starts to get confusing, according to Fick's laws of diffusion things of higher concentration diffuse to areas of lower concentration. Therefore it can be said that the same is true with energy considering the following situation. if you put two objects together, one object hot and the other cold, the cold object cannot make the hot object even warmer. The hot object will warm the cold object, thereby transferring energy from higher concentration to lower concentration. What is happening is one system is becoming more organized, while the other is becoming less organized.

Following this logic if energy must be transfered from higher concentration to lower concentration and apparently energy is conserved and constant, then eventually over infinite time the energy of the universe will move to a constant level and energy transfer cannot occur.

Now assuming at the beginning, which must exist by this logic because without it no energy would ever have transfered because it has always existed and will always remain constant; there was an area which contained all of the energy in a chaotic unorganized manner and it was diffused out into space such that it will occupy areas of lower energy concetration. Now what would these areas be? Would they be empty space, which so far would be the best explaination of minimal energy? The thing is even empty space has some energy within it considering outerspace and the fact that light still flows throughout it. Assuming that light actually exists within our space and light is a form of energy, anywhere light can be visible has energy. Now could space just be the existance of energy because from what we know there can be no absolute lack of energy within our space? it is just impossible for such for example getting to absolute zero and even in places where visible light doesn't exist, there is electromagnetic radiation of the nonvisible spectrum provided matter exists. Thereby the lack of energy would be the lack of matter and lack of light. This cannot exist though because no matter how far you travel in the universe you would have to be in line with an energy and thereby energy is reaching you and energy exists therefore the universe exists.

The transfer of energy in a universe with a beginning would suggest the lack of existance. This lack of existance cannot exist within our world as it is proven by the above. This would mean that if the universe is expanding, as thought by some, that it is expanding into the nothingness and creating more of our universe. This somewhat contradicts the idea that the universes energy will level off to a constant level at infinty as i posed before because the energy will be always creating more universe and therefore the universe can never be totally equal in energy because it is constantly expanding.

Also the suggestion of a beginning implies the possibity of an end, since there once existed nothingness at the beginning it has to be possible that nothingness could exist again and that it is not an impossibilty.

I was going to get into black holes and how there supposed existance is somewhat paradoxical to the existance of the diffusion of energy of higher concentration of energy to lower, since they are considered infinitely massive meaning they would have to have infinte energy,which also contradicts previous statements; but how their point of high energy attracts mass which is mass. It would be like the cold object heating up the hot object for example, but i'll try not getting into that.

Finally, sorry about this rant but i think i finally made up my mind on these possibilities. I think there could be two hypothetical situations which could exist.

The first i can describe best by this situation, imagine an infinitely long string, which is existance as we know it and the lack of existance cannot exist within this universe, well sort of. There is a disturbance in this string at a point. Actually maybe the string doesnt even exist until the disturbance is caused. Anyways the disturbance which is energy is then transfered along the string in waves and the string is vibrating. It starts out with a certain amplitude and transfers its energy along the string with the amplitude decreasing as more energy is transfered across. Each vibration the energy/amplitude gets smaller and smaller and keeps going to infinity. Eventually almost all of the energy is entirely transferred off and at the initial point it as if there was no energy at all because it has all transferred away. Thus the end of the disturbance. However the flaw in this is that that energy always has existed because even as theamplitude has gone to 0 assuming 0 can exist, there is still energy transfering down this string at a point infintely far away.

Now the other idea i was thinking was that in fact distance cannot actually exist. We only perceive that we are seperate from everything else, whereas we are truely all interconnected and we create this perception of distance and difference. Such as i am sitting next to a light. This light is transferring energy to me from its light while I am also transferring energy to it from my mass in forms of other electromagnetic radiation other than light. We must simultaneously interact with one another, i cannot give it energy without it giving me energy. Now say there is a bug on the opposite side of the light which is directly out of my line of sight, the light completely blocks our views of each other. That bug is transfering its energy to the light, the light transfers its energy to the bug, i transfer my energy to the light which indirectly infers that i am transfering energy to the bug and the bug is doing the same with me. Thats an oversimplified example, but you could then look at it as I am directly one with you. One as in we are interacting right now, im sitting here transferring energy to the floor which transfers it to the earth which then transfers it to you and so on. Now I say that we are one as in how is it not possible for me to absorb more energy from the light or the bug if i had the ability to do so by own will. With the light it can be seen physically as i alter the current going through it with a simple mechanical alteration in the switch. All energy is the same and by this we are all the sharing and connected all of the time. This also can deal with perception, if such an ability to transfer by will implies that there is an acceptance of existance. This acceptance shows the connection between what is perceived and what could exist.

Heisenberg once said "I believe that the existence of the classical "path" can be pregnantly formulated as follows: The "path" comes into existence only when we observe it."

From this train of thought that idea could possibly apply to the two above ideas, they could even be related or could even both be false and mean nothing. However that idea could be seen in the string in that as the string is infintely small in energy at one point, energy doesn't exist because it cannot be perceived. It doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, just that it cannot be seen so therefore it doesn't.

It could also explain the possibility of a god. God perceived existance and therefore bam it does exist because god existed and with one existance, other must exist.

I don't know im just confused now I cant even remember what this rant was supposed to be about really. Either way I apologize if you read this and expected something to come out of it. What do you think the universe is and if you agree with a certain view how is it that you agree?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDivided_Sky
Ten ThousandThings

Registered: 11/02/03
Posts: 3,171
Loc: The Shining Void
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: could the universe be all one? [Re: relativexistance]
    #3506812 - 12/16/04 12:49 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Could the Universe be all seperate things? Can anything exist completely on its own, without other causes or factors?

Also consider this, perhaps time is not linear, but is an infinite timeless structure. Like driving across the surface of the earth, there is no end nor beginning.


--------------------
1. "After an hour I wasn't feeling anything so I decided to take another..."
2. "We were feeling pretty good so we decided to smoke a few bowls..."
3. "I had to be real quiet because my parents were asleep upstairs..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinerelativexistance
"beads, bees!?!?beads ....BEADS!!!"
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/08/04
Posts: 1,778
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
Re: could the universe be all one? [Re: Divided_Sky]
    #3507002 - 12/16/04 01:31 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Divided_Sky said:
Could the Universe be all seperate things? Can anything exist completely on its own, without other causes or factors?

Also consider this, perhaps time is not linear, but is an infinite timeless structure. Like driving across the surface of the earth, there is no end nor beginning.




Interesting point I like that analogy with driving across the surface of the earth. Let me ask you this though, do you believe time to be existing with a dependency on something else? I mean so far we understand time as able to be slowed or sped up, but not completely stopped or reversed only constantly progressing.

Now that I think about it what do you view time as, often I have this picture in my mind that time is just events that have occured and that somewhat follows what you said it being viewed at as linear. Or is it just the rate at which observable events occur within a frame of reference?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDivided_Sky
Ten ThousandThings

Registered: 11/02/03
Posts: 3,171
Loc: The Shining Void
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: could the universe be all one? [Re: relativexistance]
    #3507152 - 12/16/04 02:06 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

To me time is the x axis, nothing more. It is a dimension, not a force or a motion. The Universe is formed of endless cause and effect. Time is the structure that connects cause and effect together linearly, but it's overall structure need not be a straight line. It is very possible that the way we experience time, as a one-at-a-time linear progression may be only a product of how our brains decode reality. It seems likely to me that everything exists at once so time is more like a space or a surface.


--------------------
1. "After an hour I wasn't feeling anything so I decided to take another..."
2. "We were feeling pretty good so we decided to smoke a few bowls..."
3. "I had to be real quiet because my parents were asleep upstairs..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDNKYD
Turtle!

Registered: 09/24/04
Posts: 12,326
Re: could the universe be all one? [Re: Divided_Sky]
    #3507245 - 12/16/04 02:44 AM (11 years, 11 months ago)

You know when you hear about somebody going into space, far away from earth and then returning? How they will see that only a few years will have passed, but on earth 100+ years or something will have passed. I liken time to a sphere. Like divided_sky said, there is no beginning or end. If earth is the center of the sphere when you leave for space, it will complete a rotation much faster than you will at your part of the sphere.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Implications of the Big Bang Origin and Fate of the Universe
( 1 2 3 all )
Source 3,942 41 09/08/04 01:01 AM
by gettinjiggywithit
* Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
OrgoneConclusion 7,790 127 10/19/07 01:48 PM
by fireworks_god
* Time as a displacement of energy. recalcitrant 689 9 05/15/03 03:12 AM
by Rhizoid
* Energy
( 1 2 3 all )
Gomp 3,064 56 08/17/05 05:03 PM
by redgreenvines
* Linear Reincarnation through time? Mystic_Cannibal 749 3 04/02/07 07:03 PM
by Icelander
* unable to reconcile circular with linear Zekebomb 1,296 15 03/05/05 05:19 PM
by redgreenvines
* The Fall, Atlantis, Wormwood, Energy Anonymous 716 1 11/29/01 08:34 PM
by Timeleech
* how do you see energy?
( 1 2 all )
Monkah 2,477 32 01/16/03 11:46 AM
by ShrewDigsby

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
447 topic views. 1 members, 9 guests and 10 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
SoulSpeciosa Kratom
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.066 seconds spending 0.002 seconds on 14 queries.